VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL
Mr. T. Wade Clegg III
No. 7 Organic Farm
P.O. Box 367
163 Wills Road
Glenoma, Washington 98336
| Re: Appeal of the November 4, 1999 denial by the Department of Natural Resources Forest Practices Board (the "Board") of that certain Petition for Adoption, Amendment, or Repeal of a State Administrative Rule, dated April 1998, filed by T. Wade Clegg III, seeking amendment of rules related to pesticides (the "Petition") |
Pursuant to RCW 34.05.330(3), I have fully reviewed your appeal
of the Petition and the relevant statutes and regulations, and
after careful consideration, hereby deny the appeal. The Board
denied the Petition in good faith after substantial review and
consideration. The actions of the Board in denying the Petition
are not such that intervention by the Governor is appropriate.
It is apparent that, as an organic farmer, you are wholeheartedly
committed to providing produce free from any chemical
contamination from whatever sources. This is evident from your
communications with the Department of Transportation regarding
roadside vegetation management and your extensive correspondence
with the Department of Agriculture. Your objective is
worthwhile, and it seems likely that your customers would
appreciate your efforts.
When an executive branch agency adopts regulations, it must do so
under statutory direction from the legislature. This was
re-emphasized specifically in the Regulatory Reform Act of 1995,
which states:
| (a) Unless otherwise authorized, substantial policy decisions affecting the public [should] be made by those directly accountable to the public, namely the legislature, and that state agencies [should] not use their administrative authority to create or amend regulatory programs; |
Accordingly, the Board was acting appropriately within its
discretion to consult with the Department of Agriculture, which
regulates the use of pesticides and which also certifies organic
farms. The letter sent to you by Mary Beth Lang of the
Agriculture Department describes that agency's reasons for
believing that current law (controlling pesticide applicator
obligations), labeling requirements, and procedures for handling
pesticide drift are adequate to address many of the issues raised
in your proposal.
You have clearly recognized the absence of statutory authority
for stronger protection of organic farms from chemical intrusion.
This is apparent from the bill "to address the needs of Organic
Farms as Highly Sensitive Areas" that you drafted and sent to
Representative Richard DeBolt on June 4, 1999. Your proposal has
not yet been considered by the legislature.
Since the legislative session has just begun, you may want to
contact Representative DeBolt to determine his willingness to
promote the legislation you suggested. I believe the legislative
process is the most appropriate avenue for you to establish the
kinds of controls and protections you are seeking for yourself
and other organic farmers.
Thank you for your extensive efforts to protect the integrity of
organically grown crops in our state.
Sincerely,
Gary Locke
Governor
| cc: | Dennis W. Cooper, Code Reviser |
| Tim Martin, Co-Chief Clerk, House of Representatives | |
| Cindy Zehnder, Co-Chief Clerk, House of Representatives | |
| Tony Cook, Secretary of the Senate | |
| John Daly, Forest Practices Board | |
| Mary Beth Lang, Department of Agriculture |