FROM:

Fifth Meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Persistent Organic Pollutants
(POPS INC-5) Johannesburg, South Africa
4 - 9 December, 2000

Native Delegation participates in Global Treay on Toxic Chemicals
Alaskans fight for poison phaseout
U.S. Natives tesitify for a Toxics Free World Dec.5th
Tribal Resolutions Demand a Strong U.S. Position on Elimination of POPs Dec. 7th
Unalakleet has adopted a resolution to ban the use and manufacture of the 12 POPs
Alaskans join global fight against spread of pollutants
from Canada "We can all win."
POPs Treaty, Dec. 11, 2000

Updates: http://www.iisd.ca/chemical/pops5/

 

NATIVE DELEGATION PARTICIPATES IN GLOBAL TREATY ON TOXIC CHEMICALS

30 November 2000

Bemidji, Minnesota - American Indian and Alaska Natives are departing this week to Johannesburg, South Africa, to take part in a United Nations international meeting on a group of life threatening chemicals called POPs - persistent organic pollutants. Starting next week, over 120 countries, including the United States, will begin their final negotiations on a global and legally binding treaty for the elimination of toxic chemicals. The final signing of the treaty is scheduled for May 2001 in Stockholm, Sweden.

Since the 1940's, more than 100,000 chemicals have been introduced globally into the environment. With mounting scientific evidence that the worst of these toxics are deadly in small amounts, travel long distances via air currents, cause life threatening illnesses, and endanger people and wildlife all over the world, the United Nations Environmental Program mandated the world governments create a legally binding treaty banning the worst of these pollutants. For example, dioxin was sited in a 1985 US Environmental Protection Agency report as "the most potent carcinogen ever tested in a laboratory." Dioxin is an unintentional by-product of industry that is still being produced and released in the US. Currently the treaty focuses on 12 of the most deadly chemicals, including PCB, DDT, and other pesticides. Dioxin and furans are also included in the treaty.

"Our tribes are disproportionately affected by these chemicals because of our cultural, physical and spiritual tie to the land," says Charlotte Caldwell, a POPs organizer with the Indigenous Environmental Network. "As a Menominee woman that resides in the Great Lakes, dioxin contaminants are poisoning our fish. Our ceremonies call for eating fish and other traditional foods. But when the fish is contaminated, so are our women and our babies." Caldwell is one of the participants attending the meeting that has been active educating tribal governmental leaders in the Great Lakes about this international treaty and the dangers of these chemicals. Scientific studies found these chemicals, even in small releases, bioaccumulate in the environment, in food sources and are transferred to the unborn fetus.

Industrialized countries and industry, including the US, Canada, Australia, and Japan have been major obstacles during the treaty negotiations. Many countries, non-governmental organizations, and concerned scientists are demanding a strong treaty that supports language to eliminate the production of these chemicals. "The US has been back pedaling on the word elimination," said Tom Goldtooth, director of IEN. "The US has been taking a position for language of reduction with a number of loopholes and exemptions. These chemicals, including dioxin cannot be managed or controlled. There is no middle ground, this is too serious of a matter that affects the health of our future generation. We demand environmental justice. World governments must support the ultimate elimination of these chemicals," Gold tooth added.

POPs tend to migrate towards colder regions of the north. POPs are trapped by the cold air and accumulate in the fat tissues of animals such as fish, seals, polar bears and human populations that live in the colder arctic regions. In some parts of the arctic, Alaska Natives are exposed to levels of POPs that exceed established standards for consumption. "Our land is a sinkhole for these contaminants," states, Evon Peter, of the Venetie tribe of Arctic Village, Alaska, who will be in attendance at the South Africa meeting. "Elimination is the only solution to stop the northern flow of these chemicals which are disrupting the delicate balance of nature here in the arctic, " said Pam Miller, director of Alaska Community Action on Toxics, based in Anchorage.

IEN will be taking to the meeting, over 40 tribal governmental and intertribal resolutions supporting the elimination of POPs. Last year at the National Congress of American Indian convention, over 250 tribes approved a NCAI resolution supporting the elimination of POPs and requesting for tribes to be consulted by the US Department of State on this international treaty. At the eleventh hour, during the past month, the Department of State attempted to have consultation with tribes in the Great Lakes and Alaska region on the POPs treaty. In both Alaska and the Great Lakes, the response of the tribes was the same - they wanted elimination with no exemptions or loopholes on POPs production.

"Our people need to be present at these meetings and speak out on these issues. These issues affect our treaty rights. What good are treaty rights if the fish and game are contaminated," says Ester Nahgahnub, elder and chair of the Ceded Territory Committee of the Fond du Lac Band of Ojibwe in Minnesota.

 

Six Alaskans are traveling to South Africa this week to make sure the rest of the world knows that toxic chemicals that aren't made in Alaska accumulate here -- in the air, water and subsistence foods.

The group -- three government representatives and three Alaska Natives -- will observe and testify at the final round of talks on an international treaty to phase out 12 of the planet's worst poisons, known as the dirty dozen. The talks will be from Dec. 3 through Dec. 9 in Johannesburg, with the goal of producing a signed treaty by May.

The chemicals to be eliminated include DDT, PCBs, dioxins and other industrial compounds known to cause cancer, reproductive problems and a weakening of the immune system. Some of those contaminants have been found in fish and other subsistence foods.

The Alaska delegates won't be able to vote but want to encourage the U.S. government team to lobby for a strong treaty. The State Department has said the U.S. negotiators are committed to an aggressive treaty and to finding a way to finance the elimination of the chemicals, but the Alaska group is concerned the U.S. team may back down on several key points.

Alaska has a big stake in the outcome because "persistent organic pollutants," as the chemicals are called, tend to travel long distances through the air and water and concentrate in the Arctic, where they take longer to break down because of the cold.

"We end up the recipients of these chemicals," said Michele Brown, commissioner of the Department of Environmental Conservation. Brown is going to South Africa as a state observer, along Jim Ayers, chief of staff to Gov. Tony Knowles, and Will Mayo, the governor's adviser on Native issues.

"The governor feels very strongly about this," Brown said. "If the most harmful chemicals are coming at us internationally, we have to make our voices heard."

Although many Western countries have banned the chemicals, other countries continue to produce and use them. One example is DDT, which is still widely used in central Africa to prevent malaria.

Alaskans want to ensure the treaty allows additional chemicals to be banned in the future. They are concerned about key definitions, such as how long a chemical has to stick around in the environment to be classified as a "persistent organic pollutant."

Pam Miller, executive director of the Alaska Community Action on Toxics, argues for a shorter time. Miller is not going to South Africa but her group is helping to pay for three Alaska Native representatives to go. They are Shawna Larson of Port Graham and Chickaloon, Violet Yeaton of Port Graham and Evon Peter of Arctic Village.

Miller said she sees the treaty as an "unprecedented opportunity to stop the northward flow of chemicals."

As many as 121 countries will participate in the talks. The United States is sending at least 30 official delegates.

At a strategy session in Anchorage on Tuesday, Brown explained to the nongovernmental representatives that the state delegates will not be able to publicly voice a position that goes against the U.S. position until the negotiations are over.

"You won't see us publicly disagreeing with the U.S. until it's over, unless it all goes fine," she said.

But they can try to persuade the official treaty delegates. The Native members, for instance, are carrying with them a sheaf of resolutions from Alaska Native and American Indian tribes.

Larson said she hopes to raise awareness about the importance of subsistence foods to Alaska Natives. "We need to shine the spotlight on the U.S. team," to make sure they support a treaty that protects Alaska, she said.

Reporter Elizabeth Manning can be reached at emanning@adn.com or at 257-4323.

U.S. NATIVES TESITIFY FOR A TOXICS FREE WORLD AT GLOBAL TREATY MEETING ON PERSISTENT ORGANIC POLLUTANTS

Johannesburg, South Africa, 5 December 2000 – Traveling from the arctic region of Alaska in the United States to South Africa, Violet Yeaton, environmental specialist for her Native village of Port Graham, called upon world leaders to negotiate a strong global treaty on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) that with hopes the treaty would completely eliminates 12 toxic chemicals that threaten the future of her village. Delegates from over 120 countries are attending the fifth and final negotiating session for an international treaty to protect the environment and human health from toxic chemicals known as POPs.

POPs pose a risk to human health and the environment. A combination of pesticides, industrial chemicals, and unwanted byproducts, such as dioxin, these chemicals last for a long time, and travel great distances to remote areas far from the source of release. POPs tend to migrate toward colder regions of the north through air and water currents. They accumulate in fat tissue and become more concentrated higher in the food chain. They are a special risk to children because they are passed through the placenta and in breastmilk, and can have a critical effect on the fetus and infant whose delicate systems are at key stages of development.

Yeaton talked about the Native village of Port Graham and the village of Nanwlek from the Chugach region, joining forces with the United States Environmental Protection Agency to conduct a study for traditional foods to be tested for contamination. The study found evidence of significant toxic levels of PCB’s, pesticides and dioxin in the fish and mammals. Her tribal members depend on the fish and mammals for food. "80% of our peoples diet is made up of our traditional foods. On an average our people eat between 12 to 15 fish meals per week. When we eat the whole fish, we consume all the concentrated chemicals," said Yeaton.

Charlotte Caldwell, POPs organizer with the Indigenous Environmental Network echoed similar concerns. A tribal member of the Menominee nation of Wisconsin, located in the Great Lakes of the United States, Caldwell testified, "My reservation is located along the Fox River and dioxin discharges from the pulp and paper mills have led to significant health impacts to our community. Many of our people still practice a traditional economy, depending on fishing, hunting and gathering for their livelihood. Our treaty rights have been upheld by the US Supreme Court, but what good are fishing and hunting rights when the fish and game are contaminated."

POPs is associated with soft tissue cancer, disrupt the functioning of the endocrine system that regulates development and growth, can damage nervous systems, cause behavioral disorders, cause increase in serum liver enzymes, cause suppression of the immune system and other health illnesses. Children are more vulnerable that adults to the toxic effects of POPs.

"It is imperative this international conference recognizes the urgency of eliminating these dioxins and other POPs globally. We must discontinue the production, incineration and chlorine-bleaching processes that create these dioxins. These discharges know no boundaries and are inherently unmanageable," Caldwell said as she finished her statement.

"It becomes crystal clear that we must be extremely proactive and vigilante to address these POPs issues," said Yeaton.

Johannesburg, South Africa, 7 December 2000 - The Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee of the United Nations Environmental Program, which consists of approximately 120 countries from around the world, is near completion of its final negotiation on an international treaty to eliminate persistent organic pollutants (POPs) in Johannesburg, South Africa this week. POPs are among the worlds worst chemical pollutants affecting human health and the environment. Arctic ecosystems and Native peoples are particularly at risk from these chemical pollutants. Sixty years ago these chemicals did not exist, today they are present in nearly every person on earth and studies show they are present at alarming levels in peoples of the Arctic regions of the world.

Through the grassroots effort of environmental educators and environmental organizations, such as the Indigenous Environmental Network, awareness of the POPs issue and the international treaty negotiations spread. Many Native American and Alaska Native tribes from across the U.S. took action by passing tribal resolutions in support of a strong U.S. position on elimination of POPs. In addition, the tribal resolutions expressed a clear position in support of inclusion of the "precautionary principle", which means when scientific evidence concludes that a new chemical may endanger human health precautionary measures must be taken to control the chemical.

A small delegation of tribal leaders and Native environmental justice workers from the U.S. met with the official U.S. negotiators on Tuesday, the second day of negotiations, to present a folder full of forty tribal resolutions. Shawna Larson, an Alaskan Native organizer with Alaska Community Action on Toxics and Indigenous Environmental Network, presented the resolutions, later stated that "she wanted the meeting to serve as a reminder of the federal governments responsibility not only to the tribes but to the seven generations to come." The tribal delegation presented the general view for ultimate elimination of POPs and inclusion of the precautionary principle found within the resolutions. Furthermore, they questioned the U.S. negotiators on how they would respond to the resolutions and what their mandate is to recognize the tribal resolutions. No clear response was given at that time.

Now, with two full days of negotiation remaining before a complete treaty is expected, there is little to show that the U.S. plans to incorporate the views found within the tribal resolutions. The U.S. negotiators are refusing to support the inclusion of "ultimate elimination" and the "precautionary principle" within articles of the treaty that would make such terminology legally binding. In defense of the position the U.S. negotiators are claiming they would support that terminology in certain articles of the treaty, but only with qualifiers such as "where feasible" which would create loopholes, weakening the strength of the treaty.

Evon Stephen Peter, from the Native Village of Venetie Tribal Government in northeastern Alaska also attended the U.S. negotiators meeting with the Native delegation. He stated that he has "doubts that the U.S. will incorporate the views of the tribes into their position and wonders if the U.S will have the courtesy to provide the tribes a formal response to their resolutions." Peter further commented that "it is important for tribes to exercise their government to government relationship with the U.S. on issues of mutual concern, including those in the international arena."

For more information:

Tom Goldtooth, IEN +011 27 82 370 1160 (mobile)
Pam Miller ACAT (907) 222-7714
Jackie Warledo, IEN (405) 878-6051

Amir Attaran's portrayal of Canada's position on global management of chemicals (DDT Saves Lives -- Dec. 5), currently being negotiated in Johannesburg, misrepresents what is going on.

Indigenous peoples from Northern Canada here in Johannesburg are replying not only to defend Canada but also to set the record straight. We do so because Mr. Attaran's widely reported views sow mistrust between delegations from the developed and developing worlds, thus undermining the efforts of us all to achieve a global convention on 12 persistent organic pollutants (POPs), including DDT.

Mr. Attaran says: "Not only is Environment Canada arguing in the Johannesburg treaty negotiations that DDT should be eliminated once and for all, it has also proposed that the treaty not include a financial aid mechanism to help poor countries finance the alternatives. Canada is alone among wealthy countries in advocating this parsimony. Such policies literally kill."

The government of Canada has pressed for a global POPs convention as have Northern indigenous peoples who have attended all five international negotiating sessions over the last two years. Many POPs used in tropical and temperate countries end up in the Arctic, contaminating the food web and subsequently Inuit and other indigenous peoples who eat traditional food.

When used to control malaria, DDT saves the lives of thousands of people every year. While phasing out the use of DDT is an objective of the international negotiations, nobody supports a ban that puts lives at risk. When this issue surfaced in negotiations in 1999, Canadian indigenous peoples said they would refuse to be party to an agreement that threatened the health of others, notwithstanding the threat of POPs to their own health.

The view of Northern indigenous peoples is also the fundamental position of all countries participating in the negotiations and all non-governmental organizations observing the debate. Any phase-out of DDT will be conditional upon the availability of cost-effective alternatives.

Mr. Attaran's contention that Canada refuses to help finance the convention including development of alternatives to DDT is demonstrably untrue. The Minister of Finance announced $20-million in his February budget for exactly this purpose. Canada was the first nation to provide such support and is effectively advocating additional financial and technical assistance to developing countries and "economies in transition" (the old Soviet bloc).

A global POPs convention will not be finalized and ratified unless both developing and developed countries conclude that it helps them. There is no alternative to a "win-win" convention, notwithstanding Dr. Attaran's view from Harvard University.

SHEILA WATT-CLOUTIER, president, Inuit Circumpolar Conference Canada,
ROBERT CHARLIE, council for Yukon First Nations, and
JOHN CRUMP, executive director, Canadian Arctic Resources Committee.

I don't think the POPs treaty would have included all the items we fought for if it wasn't for the participation and lobbying efforts of the non governmental organizations and citizens/civil society groups that attended all the INC5 sessions. In reference to United States (US) and Canada, the Indigenous Peoples delegation (Indigenous Environmental Network and Canadian Arctic Indigenous Peoples Against POPS) and people of color groups (Mossville, Louisiana) had a strong pressence and put a face to the issue that demonstrated a strong treaty must be developed.

The Indigenous Peoples from Alaska and Great Lakes negotiated text language in the Preamble text of the treaty that would bring specific attention to the POPs affects to Indigenous communities globally, as well as the Arctic ecosystem. Originally the word "Indigenous Peoples" was proposed, however, US/Canada country delegates stated they would oppose the "s" on the word people after the two countries consulted with their officials back in the states. After back and forth discussions between the IEN/CAIPAP and the US/Canada governmental delegations, the Indigenous delegation proposed the fallback would be to use the word "communities." The Indigenous Peoples did not want to set precedence with using "people" without the "s" or "population." One of the US State Department, as well as Canada delegates proposed we use "population."

The INC5 meeting in Johannesburg was difficult for all participants. John Buccini, Chair of the INC, scheduled three sessions from Tuesday to Saturday. Three sessions means a morning, afternoon and night session. There were plenary meetings, "contact" groups meetings that negotiated text language to specific areas of the treaty, and many "side-bar" meetings. It was not unusual for us to be up till 1:00 - 2:00 in the morning and having meetings again starting at 8:00 in the morning. The Chair's mandate was to successfully negotiate a treaty by Saturday. And this wasn't an easy task. The United States State Department delegation resisted throughout the INC5 on making strong language on "elimination", the "precautionary principle", etc. Some countries caved-in to the lobbying efforts of the US, but that only meant the NGO's put more pressure on other countries to stay firm on a strong treaty.

It is great we successfully got most of the language we fought for. Of course, we wished for more. Later in the week, it seemed like the industralized countries were going to get their way with a weak treaty. IPEN, IEN, and other NGO's held the line and according to the message from Karen Perry below, it paid off! Prayers were strong and answered, especially from many of our Native communities back home, who bare the affects of these invisible and silent chemicals.

IEN's work isn't over yet. Most of our work will be at the "domestic" level in the US, Canada and Mexico. Tribes and bands are just now getting educated and concerned about these POPs chemicals. We have to continue working in the US and Canada to get these countries to continue to reduce with the ULTIMATE goal to eliminate dioxin releases. There are still stockpiles of PCB in the state of Alaska. More research needs to be conducted on the affects of these contaminants on humans, traditional foods and the ecosystem.

The US and Canada now have to obtain ratification of the POPs treaty from Congress and the Parliment, respectfully. Expect some Congressional members to question the strong language in the POPs treaty. Stay tuned. It is expected the chemical industry will be lobbying Congressional leaders to not ratify the treaty.

-Tom G-

The US Indigenous delegation included the following:

Shawna Larson, POPs organizer, Alaska Community Action on Toxic, Anchorage, Alaska

Violet Yeaton, Port Graham Village Traditional Council, Alaska Evon Peters, Ventie Tribal Council, Alaska

Charlotte Caldwell, POPS organizer, Indigenous Environmental Network, Bemidji, Minnesota

Tom Goldtooth, Director, Indigenous Environmental Network, Bemidji, Minnesota

The update attached below is from Karen Perry,
Secretariat for our International POPs Elimination Network (IPEN)
of which IEN is part of.

Dear All,

At 8:22am Johannesburg time this morning (yes, Sunday, 10 December) the gavel was brought down on INC5. After negotiating for the last 24 hours straight and many hours after the deadline, the INC produced a complete, bracket-free text for the Stockholm Convention on POPs. Best of all, it is a GREAT treaty -- better than many of us dared to hope for! Twelve hours later, we're all still wondering how it turned out that way...

Starting aroung the middle of the week, and continuing right up until the late dinner break on Saturday, I think some of us believed that we might go home empty-handed, with no treaty at all...or at best, with a text that was still unresolved on the most contentious issues. Key issues like precaution and finance had the countries seemingly polarized.

But somehow, at the 11th hour (actually, I think it was AFTER that!) things suddenly fell into place, and we now have an agreement that:

• NAMES ELIMINATION AS THE GOAL FOR POPs, including for PCBs (they're in Annex A), DDT (in Annex B, but with language in the text stating an ultimate elimination goal), and by-product POPs ("...with the aim of continuing minimization and where feasible ultimate elimination.")

• OPERATIONALIZES PRECAUTION, with strong precautionary language in various forms in the preamble, objective, and in more than one place in Article F (yes, you read that correctly!)

• OBLIGES DEVELOPED COUNTRIES TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE, through the GEF as an "interim" mechanism

• STRESSES POLLUTION PREVENTION, with good language on preventing the development of new POPs, requiring materials substitution, etc.

• CONTAINS NO WTO "SAVINGS CLAUSE" (it was withdrawn in exchange for similar language in the preamble, where it carries less weight)

• CALLS FOR A "HYBRID" AMENDMENT PROCESS FOR ADDING POPs, in which countries must opt-out rather than opt-in, unless they file a declaration stating otherwise (basically, it means the US can pursue Senate ratification for each added POP without imposing a similarly burdensome process on other countries)

Although everyone here is exhausted after working 16-20 hour days all week and finishing with an all-nighter, we are all really thrilled with this outcome!

The above is just a thumbnail sketch of the issues resolved here. I hope and expect that others who have been here will post more detailed analyses of the various issues when they return to their homes and offices. I will be away from email for the next week (looking at lions and elephants here in South Africa) and out of the office for the rest of the month for an extended vacation and the holidays. I look forward to talking with you when I return.

Meanwhile, I just want to say that you have all done FANTASTIC work, and as a result, we have achieved the treaty we wanted!

Happy Holidays!!

Karen