Chavez Makes His Point

At the urging of doctors and friends, farm-labor leader Cesar Chavez will end his long fast sometime in the next few days. Whether or not one agrees with the tactics that he uses to promote his United Farm Workers union, Chavez’ decision to eat again is reassuring in light of medical opinions that the 61-year-old organizer is endangering himself by abstaining from food.

Chavez began fasting July 17 to protest the use of certain pesticides on California table grapes--pesticides that union officials claim endanger both farm laborers and consumers. The UFW is engaged in a boycott of table grapes, its third in 25 years, to pressure growers into renewing labor contracts that have lapsed in recent years. Not surprisingly, union officials and spokesmen for agriculture disagree on how effective the latest boycott has been. But there is no doubt that the publicity that Chavez got as a result of his fast helps promote the boycott.

But the issue that Chavez has raised with his fast, the alleged dangers of pesticides on agricultural products, is more problematic. Clearly agricultural production in California and elsewhere would not be as high as it is without the use of modern agricultural techniques, and that includes the use of chemical pesticides. Over the years shippers, marketers and consumers of produce have learned to deal with the potential hazards that such chemicals pose. Usually they are applied so long before produce is sold and consumed that a simple washing in clean water will eliminate any possible aftereffects.

But the hazards that these chemicals pose to the people who harvest crops is much more direct. Every year state agriculture officials must investigate dozens of incidents in which farm laborers complain of respiratory problems, skin rashes and other health problems caused by exposure to pesticides. Such incidents are especially common in table-grape fields, where workers must handle the fruit by hand. So the issue is real, and Chavez, as the leader of a farm union, has the right to raise questions about it.

Congress has before it legislation that would address some of the problems that Chavez has highlighted. Some pesticides used on American crops came onto the market before the passage of current laws requiring more rigorous testing to detect health hazards. The new bill would require that all those pesticides be tested; those that failed could no longer be used. The bill, which would also strengthen federal pesticide laws in other important ways, has been stalled because of controversial amendments. But there remains some hope that the House Agriculture Committee might consider a core bill without the amendments in early September. One way in which both Chavez and California growers could assuage concern about pesticides on produce is to support that bill.