BISMARCK, N.D. -- Opponents of a new North Dakota law, which places restrictions on suing companies over asbestos exposure, say time is running out for screenings ahead of the changes.

The new law goes into effect August 1, but labor unions and veterans groups urged anyone who thinks they were exposed to asbestos should schedule a screening before July 15.

Landis Larson, president of the North Dakota AFL-CIO, said a screening before the deadline would give them enough time to be covered under the old statute if they feel they have a legal case, allowing court proceedings to take shape if needed.

He added it will be a whole new ballgame this fall.

"You basically can't sue unless you have cancer now," Larson pointed out. "But it also put a whole bunch of procedural roadblocks in front of those people to make it almost impossible for them to get any kind of compensation while they're still alive."

Supporters of the law say it will weed out fraudulent claims, and push those who are able to demonstrate an illness caused by asbestos to the front of the line.

The material, linked to mesothelioma, had a large presence in various products and buildings between the 1940s and 1990s, as well as U.S. Navy ships. It eventually led to scores of legal settlements for victims.

Jim Nelson, president of the North Dakota Veterans Legislative Council, said he believes he was exposed to asbestos while serving in the Navy during the Vietnam War.

Nelson has been told his breathing problems were caused by smoking, but noted there are barriers for veterans to getting an asbestos-related diagnosis. Nelson asserted the new law doesn't help.

"Listen to your constituents and forget about the big bucks," Nelson stated. "That's what it's all about; it's about the big business."

Nelson and others speaking out against the law emphasized it can take decades for symptoms to surface.

They see adding roadblocks to compensation as an insult to those suffering, especially when they are older, but the law sailed through the Legislature by wide margins and was signed by the governor in April.

MADISON, Wis. -- Wisconsin policymakers are looking to provide more aid to towns and cities faced with contamination cleanup of so-called "forever chemicals," but opponents say it comes with a stipulation which could hurt municipalities struggling with toxins.

Assembly Bill 392 would create a grant program for local governments to address Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS), found in a range of consumer products, as well as firefighting foam.

However, if a city were to accept a grant, it would be blocked from taking legal action against those responsible for the contamination.

Rep. Katrina Shankland, D-Stevens Point, said another potential fallout concerned her.

"It may also prevent our Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources from taking enforcement action against those polluters under the state's environmental remediation law," Shankland explained.

Both scenarios were detailed in a memo issued by the nonpartisan Wisconsin Legislative Council at Shankland's request.

Those in support of the GOP-led bill, including the Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce (WMC) group, claimed it would protect businesses from frivolous lawsuits. Research has shown exposure to PFAS chemicals can result in a range of health issues, including cancer.

Shankland raised concerns the bill comes at the same time the WMC is suing the state over its remediation law. She argued now is not the time to be stripping away tools as more cities discover possible contamination sites.

"Without resources from the state to help them test, to help people know what's in their water, and then to remediate any contamination and prevent future contamination, our state would be in the dark," Shankland contended.

According to the Department of Natural Resources, there are nearly 50 known PFAS sites spread around the state. Meanwhile, the bill recently won Assembly approval, and could be considered by the state Senate this fall.

CONCORD, N.H. - This spring, pollinator gardens are gaining popularity - but some well-meaning gardeners may not realize they could be harming the species they're trying to protect.

Plants sold at many retail nurseries to attract bees and butterflies actually contain pesticides that can kill or sterilize pollinators.

Aimee Code, pesticide program director at the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation urged consumers to ask questions before they buy.

"To make sure that we're doing the right thing for those pollinators," said Code, "it's worth going to your nursery and asking them, 'Are you using neonicotinoids on these plants? Do you talk to your supplier about their practices to protect bees?'"

You can find a tip sheet with other questions to ask on the Xerces Society website. They also have a guide for nurseries on how to repel pests without using harmful pesticides.

A 2019 study from the University of New Hampshire found 14 bee species native to the Northeast are in decline, including yellow-banded and rusty patch bumblebees that were once common.

Lowe's and Home Depot did stop selling plants grown with neonicotinoids, but conservation groups want them to go further and ban other types of pesticides as well.

Code said shoppers should ask for organically grown plants, and be willing to accept them - even if they have a few blemishes.

"Consumers want perfect plants that appear fully healthy, so any little nibble, any little 'off' color concerns the consumer," said Code. "And that actually leads to pretty heavy pesticide use in the nursery industry."

A 2014 study from Friends of the Earth tested plants across the country and found pesticide residue was ubiquitous - not only on farms, but at parks, gardens, nurseries and even wildlife refuges.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- As the spring gardening season gets into full swing, groups fighting to save bees and other pollinators are asking nurseries and consumers to avoid plants grown with harmful pesticides.

Some pesticides are sprayed on, but others are systemic and poison the nectar.

Sharon Selvaggio, pesticide program specialist at the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, said gardeners may end up harming the pollinators they're trying to protect, so they need to ask questions before they buy.

"What we want is for people to go to their nursery and say, 'I want plants that are free of pesticides that might harm pollinators,'" Selvaggio urged.

Xerces has published a tip sheet for consumers on what to ask, and another for nurseries on how to offer bee-safe plants.

More than a quarter of all North American bumblebees are nearing extinction. And the Western Monarch butterfly population has plunged more than 99% since the 1980s, a situation experts blame on pesticide use, climate change and destruction of habitat.

Sarah Hoyle, also a pesticide program specialist at Xerces, co-authored a study in 2019 which tested native milkweed across the Central Valley for pesticides because it is a host plant for monarch caterpillars.

"Pesticides were really ubiquitous, kind of everywhere we looked," Hoyle reported. "Home gardens, parks, agricultural lands and wildlife refuges. We were finding the pesticides were present and really all too often at lethal levels."

Kendra Klein, senior staff scientist at the nonprofit Friends of the Earth, said her group published a report in 2014 called Gardeners Beware, and later secured commitments from Lowe's, Home Depot and other nursery chains to stop selling plants grown with neonicotinoids and other harmful pesticides.

"These are pesticides that are highly, acutely toxic to bees and other pollinators and are known to be a driver of what some scientists call an insect apocalypse, major declines in pollinator insect populations around the world," Klein explained.