
Farmworkers, community leaders and environmental advocates gathered in Visalia to protest the use of the pesticide 1,3-Dichloropropene (1,3-D or Telone) and demand stronger regulatory protections from the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR). The rally, held outside a public hearing on proposed regulations for the chemical, highlighted the disproportionate impact of pesticide exposure on Latino and immigrant communities in the San Joaquin Valley.
Organized by Californians for Pesticide Reform (CPR) and other environmental justice groups, the event brought together voices from across the region to call for stricter limits on 1,3-D, a soil fumigant linked to cancer, Parkinson’s disease and other serious health issues. The pesticide, commonly used on crops such as strawberries, grapes, almonds and walnuts, has been banned in 34 countries and most of Europe due to its dangers, yet remains widely used in California.
A Call for Justice and Science-Based Regulations
Angel Garcia, co-director of CPR, opened the rally with a powerful statement: “We are here as an act of resistance, an act of opposition to the exposure of cancer. We are here with families, communities, allies and organizations from different parts of the San Joaquin Valley.
“We want the state to hear what the communities are concerned about. We want protection against pesticide 1,3-D in alignment with what the scientific experts in the state say it should be.”
In 2022, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) issued a lifetime cancer warning threshold for 1,3-D of 3.7 micrograms per day. Breathing air contaminated with just 0.04 parts per billion (ppb) of 1,3-D exposes farmworkers and adjacent communities to 3.7 micrograms per day.
Dow Chemical, the manufacturer of 1,3-D, argued with the OEHHA that the no-significant-risk level for 1,3-D should be 50 micrograms per day, the equivalent of breathing air concentrated with 0.56 ppb of 1,3-D. Dow Chemical is the same company that mass-produced the cancer-causing fumigant Agent Orange during the Vietnam War.
One of the speakers said that she lost two family members to Dow chemicals. Her mother lost her life due to pesticides while working in the fields and her brother was a victim of Agent Orange while fighting in Vietnam.
Chemical corporations such Dow Chemical have been destroying families for generations.
On Jan. 1, 2024, the DPR implemented its new regulation for 1,3-D use regarding residential bystanders, setting the target exposure level at 0.56 ppb—allowing for 14 times more 1,3-D in the air than the state’s official lifetime cancer risk threshold, and aligning perfectly with Dow Chemical’s stated desire.
Nayamin Martinez, executive director of the Central California Environmental Justice Network, echoed these concerns, emphasizing the widespread harm caused by 1,3-D. “This pesticide damages the environment, the land, the water and the health of our communities,” she said.
“It causes skin irritation, nausea, vomiting, migraines, depression, liver damage and more. Prolonged exposure is the most dangerous because it causes cancer. Why are there 34 countries that have already banned this pesticide, but it is still used here?”
Martinez also pointed out the racial disparities in pesticide exposure. “1,3-D is used in Latino and immigrant communities at 10 times the rate of white communities. The 25 counties where this pesticide is most used are majority Latino. This is environmental racism.”
The Hearing: A Platform for Community Voices
The rally preceded a public hearing held by the DPR to gather input on proposed regulations for 1,3-D. Inside the hearing, farmworkers, advocates and community members shared personal stories and scientific evidence to urge the DPR to adopt stricter protections.
Sandra Garcia, a farmworker with 35 years of experience, spoke about the devastating impact of pesticide exposure on her family and colleagues. “My mother died from pulmonary cancer. My companions also died; I saw them die. I haven’t seen much change in all these years.
“I want to see how you are educating or helping farmworkers to protect themselves from these pesticides. If not in the field, it’s on the road, or the children are getting sick. We need to protect our workers.”
Bianca Lopez, executive director of the Valley Improvement Project, criticized the DPR for failing to follow scientific recommendations. “The DPR has ignored the legal limit of four parts per billion set by the OEHHA and instead chose 56 parts per billion. How did they get away with that? The science must drive our regulations, not racist politics.”
The Human Cost of Pesticide Exposure
Felipe Perez, the mayor of Firebaugh, shared his harrowing experience with pesticide exposure. “At 13 years old, I was exposed to pesticides. It’s not a good story. You feel like you’re burning up, and there’s nothing you can do.
“In areas where we don’t have good medical attention, people die the most because of pesticides. These pesticides are not destroyed; they are transformed, and we, the rural workers, suffer the most.”
Soraya Ceda, a resident of Fresno, highlighted the impact on children. “I have a son who has asthma, and pesticides have caused him to have asthma. Many farmers are suffering from cancer. We have to stop this for the good of our communities.”
A Broken System: Double Standards and Corporate Influence
Advocates also criticized the DPR for creating unequal standards for farmworkers and residents. “The DPR has two different assumptions about the levels that cause cancer within one regulation for the same pesticide,” Lopez said.
“Farmworkers are only protected from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., but children and residents are exposed 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.”
Mark Weller, an advocate with CPR, called out the influence of corporate interests. “Dow Chemical gets more money, and communities like this get more cancer. It’s environmental racism, plain and simple.”
A Call for Change
The rally and hearing reflect the urgent need for stronger regulations to protect farmworkers and rural communities from the dangers of 1,3-D. Advocates called for a uniform standard of four parts per billion, in line with the OEHHA’s recommendations, and an end to the double standard that leaves vulnerable populations at risk.
An attendee emphasized the importance of solidarity. “We must support our environmental justice colleagues, our civil rights colleagues and all those who are under the oppression of unequal distribution of these pollutants. The people on the front lines, the ones who suffer from pesticides and toxic pollution, need our support. They deserve higher protections from California.”
As the public comment period continued until Jan. 24, advocates urged the DPR to listen to the voices of those most affected by pesticide exposure and to prioritize public health over corporate profits. The agriculture industry has had decades to make changes that would benefit farmworkers and consumers but have sacrificed our health for their profit.
Nothing Is Set in Stone
When it comes to these regulations, the DPR encourages people to reach out and share their thoughts and concerns. The regulations it is planning can be changed and are supposedly influenced by input from our communities.
A spokesperson for the DPR at the public hearing stated, “Well, I’ll just take a step back and again, why we’re here today, is to hear from the community. And we want their comments and we want this feedback and all of that participation and engagement does inform our regulatory structure and regulatory actions. And so it’s really valuable and important that we’re hearing those voices here tonight.”
The DPR also encourages farmworkers to report pesticide violations to their county agriculture commissioners—something you can do anonymously if there is fear of retaliation.
Contact CPR (pests@pesticidereform.org) to report pesticide violations and learn more about the movement against dangerous pesticide use.