JUDGE IN COLOMBIA HALTS SPRAYING OF DRUG CROPS

BOGOTA -- First came farmers' complaints about skin rashes and destroyed
banana groves, for which they blamed American-supported aerial spraying
to destroy coca and heroin poppy crops. Then the governors of four
southern provinces, galvanized by constituent complaints, went to
Washington and Europe to lobby for alternatives.

Now, a judge here in this Andean capital has ordered a suspension of
aerial spraying with the herbicide glyphosate. These actions, taken
together, represent the growing grass-roots opposition among some groups
to the spraying in Colombia and the resulting challenge to American drug
policy, whose centerpiece here is the intensive spraying to destroy
illicit fields.

Farmers and their supporters contend that glyphosate, the
American-manufactured chemical used in many pesticides and the one most
widely used in the eradication program here, is hazardous, an assertion
that American and Colombian officials reject.

The ruling on Friday to stop the spraying came as the pace of
American-supported spraying of illicit drugs was set to pick up
dramatically. Bankrolled with a $1.3 billion American aid package
approved last year, crop-dusting aircraft are to spray newly found coca
and poppy fields across Colombia.

On Friday, three of the first 16 UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters arrived
from the United States, transports that are to move Colombian anti-drug
troops on dangerous missions to regions where drug crops are protected
by rebel or paramilitary fighters. In September, Colombia will also
receive the first batch of 14 new aircraft to be used for spraying, to
add to the 12 currently in use.

Colombia has huge acreage dedicated to growing illegal crops. At the end
of last year, American analysts estimated that there were 336,000 acres
of coca, far higher than earlier estimates. The United Nations, using
different methodology, put the amount even higher for last year's major
growing season -- 402,000 acres, it said in a briefing last week.
Growing heroin poppies is also increasing, experts say, though the
poppies cover just several thousand acres.

"It's quite possible we've underestimated the coca in Colombia," Anne
Patterson, the American ambassador here, said last week. "Everywhere we
look there is more coca than we expected."

Crop dusters have sprayed about 125,000 acres of coca already this year,
including about 75,000 acres in the coca-growing heartland of Putumayo
and Caqueta provinces, along the Ecuadorean border. Ms. Patterson said
she was confident that, with the new planes and escort helicopters, a
"break-even point" could be reached in the next 18 months.

It was unclear, however, what long-term impact Judge Gilberto Reyes's
ruling on Friday, issued in response to a petition by indigenous groups,
would have on those plans.

A spokesman at the American Embassy said aerial spraying, which was
being conducted over Narino and Cauca provinces in southwestern
Colombia, had been temporarily suspended "while experts examine the
legal basis of the court decision." The decision does not say whether
the ban is immediate or if it applies to the entire country or just to
Indian lands.

The ruling asked President Andres Pastrana's government to provide
documentation showing what officials know about glyphosate and its
effects on people and the environment as well as the legal framework
that entitled the government to carry out the spraying. Indigenous
leaders contend that the government is obligated to consult them before
spraying near or on their land and that it never has. A final court
ruling is expected in about 10 days, following the government's response
to the judge's questions.

Still, for the divergent groups that oppose spraying -- regional
politicians, farmers, Indian groups, environmental advocates and human
rights workers -- the judge's decision was viewed as a victory.

"This is one of the most important moments for us," Armando Valbuena,
president of the National Indigenous Organization of Colombia, said in
an interview on Saturday. "The six governors of the south and the
Indians and others are saying to the president, 'Please suspend the
fumigation because there are other alternatives instead.' "

The farmers and their supporters, including some members of the United
States Congress, believe that spraying should be replaced by a program
of voluntary eradication that would provide subsidies for farmers who
replace coca and poppies with legal crops. Such programs are under way
in various provinces, but critics say the subsidies are too small and
the programs have been poorly planned.

Parmenio Cuellar, governor of Narino, where coca cultivation has
increased with the heavy spraying in nearby Putumayo, said the
government must offer a comprehensive assistance program that offers
infrastructure, services like education and health care and markets for
crops.

"We are not against eradication, just the fumigation," said Mr. Cuellar,
who with the governor of Cauca, Floro Tunubala, is visiting Washington
this week to brief lawmakers and policy analysts on the issue.

"We believe eradication should be done through accords with the
community so they can eradicate with the support of the state," said Mr.
Cuellar, a former senator and minister of justice. He said current
programs "deal with the moment, but not with the root of the problem,
the poverty."

Supporters say this type of eradication program will work, given time.
But Colombian and American officials say fumigation must play a central
role in eradication efforts. Officials say most illegal crops are grown
on industrial-sized plots, not on small farms, which opponents of
spraying dispute.

"Manual eradication has a role to play, but given the amount of coca and
poppy cultivation in Colombia, it can be only part of the solution,"
said Ms. Patterson. She said this type of eradication in areas of
large-scale production where rebels are active would be "too dangerous
and -- frankly -- it's too expensive."

Supporters of spraying are also fending off assertions that glyphosate
has caused a variety of serious maladies in areas where spraying has
taken place. Directions on glyphosate products like Roundup, which is
marketed in the United States, warn users not to apply the product in a
way that will cause contact with people "either directly or through
drift."

Those concerns, coupled with the mixing of glyphosate with other
chemicals without knowing the possible effects, have prompted prominent
officials like Eduardo Cifuentes, the Colombian human rights ombudsman,
and Carlos Ossa, the nation's general comptroller, to call for a
suspension of spraying. It has also prompted calls for hearings in the
Colombian Senate over the issue of spraying and has galvanized
opposition among some lawmakers.

American officials respond that glyphosate is approved for use in the
United States and that 85 percent of the glyphosate used in Colombia is
used for agricultural purposes, without complaint.

But with protests reaching a fever pitch, the United Nations Drug
Control Program last week called for international monitoring to
determine the safety of spraying and the extent of inadvertent spraying
of legal crops. Ms. Patterson said the United States is devising a broad
study that would compare the health of 500 people in a region that has
already been sprayed with that of 500 people of an area that has not.

"There are a lot of studies out there, but the problem is that they come
from people who have certain interests," said Klaus Nyholm, chief of the
United Nations Drug Control Program in Colombia. "We have seen some
things that are sure to be exaggerated, but there are some that likely
have some merit."