next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects
Below is a post-script to the Btk struggle this summer.
It's an article I wrote on July19/98, under the heading
"Btk Spraying No Solution", and which just appeared
in the Bluenose Tribune, Vol. 3, No. 1, under a different
heading and sub-heading. (The Bluenose Tribune is
distributed free in the metro Halifax area.)
For those of you who may have missed it, there was an
article in the Chronicle Herald on August 13th, entitled
"Moth problem worse than thought", which said that
large numbers of moths have been detected in other
areas of the province such as Hants County, Yarmouth
area, etc. The sprayers are also already talking about
next year's spray program. So the struggle will continue!
Helga Hoffmann
* * * * * * * * * * *
Btk Spraying Goes Ahead - Residents Ignored
All three Provincial Parties endorse spraying while other
countries and provinces acknowledge health hazard.
Aerial spraying with Btk (Bacillus thuringiensis variety
kurstaki), a live bacterial organism, has been taking place
now for several weeks in many woodlands of central, eastern
and northern Nova Scotia. The commercial name of this spray
formulation is Foray 48B. We are told the spraying is
necessary because of the presence of large numbers of white-
marked tussock moth caterpillars, affecting commercially
important wood, particularly balsam fir. Not the overall
health of the forests is the concern, but the economic
interests of the pulpwood industry, which relies upon this
particular tree species.
We are told by government officials that the spraying is
only taking place in "remote areas," where not many people
live. Yet there are many spraying blocks and people are
directly affected, through spray drift. We ourselves, living in
rural Pictou County, have had planes and helicopters flying
overhead very frequently in the past three weeks, as they go to
and from nearby spray sites. (About 150,000 acres are being
sprayed, and many planes and helicopters are being used.)
We are told by provincial officials, supposedly looking after
our health and the environment, that spraying will not do any
harm. The information provided by the government on Btk
spraying does not even have the semblance of objectivity.
We are not told that in BC, in April of this year, the
Environmental Appeal Board ruled that there should be NO aerial
spraying in the Victoria area, because "there is a risk to the
health of children, people of all ages who have allergies,
asthma, and other respiratory ailments, people with immuno
deficiencies, chemical hypersensitivities, and the elderly. It
also poses an unreasonable adverse effect to the environment
(non-target species)."
We hear that Foray 48B was "safely sprayed in New
Zealand", but are not told that some 278 people complained
about the effects of Btk aerial spraying on their health, with
almost 700 specific symptoms reported, as well as a high level
of psychological stress.
Spray proponents say that Btk does not affect non-target
species. This is false. It affects ALL MOTH AND BUTTERFLY
CATERPILLARS, not just the tussock moth. Some
examples are monarch butterflies, tiger swallowtails, and
cinnabar moths. And how about birds that feed on caterpillars?
Spraying will affect the food chain, and the overall health of
the forest and its inhabitants.
We hear that Btk is a naturally occurring bacterium. Not so.
Foray 48B is a manufactured product. It can include
contaminants from the production process, and it does include
chemical "inerts". We are not allowed to know what these inerts
are, because they are "trade secrets". Past inerts in Foray 48B
according to journal articles, have included sodium hydroxide
(lye), sulfuric acid, phosphoric acid, methyl paraben and
potassium phosphate. The provincial entomologist has refused to
give out the composition of the current formulation of Foray
48B.
The media seem to also promote the spraying. They are very
attentive to the clamours from woodlot owners wanting to be
sprayed, yet they are mostly silent about the harmful effects
of Btk. And affected woodlot owners, even though aware of the
effect Btk can have, close their eyes and minds to the harm
being done. Economic considerations seem paramount.
Unfortunately the political parties all seem united in wanting
the spraying, including the supposedly more environmentally
aware NDP. Charlie Parker, the natural resources critic, in the
name of being a voice for the small woodlot owners, even asked
for more spraying: "It appears very few private woodlot owners
are getting the protection they want."
There should have been an independent scientific assessment
of the environmental and health effects of the spray. A pre-
spraying inventory, and a post-spray comparison is needed.
(But not by anyone linked to any provincial government
departments or the pro-spraying industrial lobby.). A non-
sprayed control area would show, that for example in our area,
right now the tussock moth caterpillars have almost disappeared.
Does this mean that the population is already collapsing due to
natural causes, such as parasites?
Where is the community involvement in deciding to go ahead with
such a spray program? Where is the public discussion of the pros
and cons of spraying with this insecticide? Where is our right
to informed consent?
Spraying is a misguided attempt to deal with a problem caused
by unnatural, monoculture forestry. It is one more nail in the
coffin of a truly sustainable forest.
Helga Hoffmann
next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects