Letter to the Editor: Btk: A Dangerous Spray

From: Helga Hoffmann <greenweb@fox.nstn.ca>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 10:07:46 -0300
To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)
Precedence: bulk
Return-Path: <sust-mar-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>

next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects


					June 12, 1998

Letters to the Editor

Btk: A Dangerous Spray

Dear Editor,
Very soon, aerial spraying with Btk (Bacillus thuringiensis
variety Kurstaki) will take place in many woodlands near
you. Have you looked at the map of the areas that are going
to be sprayed? We are assured that spraying will only take
place in "remote areas", yet there are many spraying blocks
and many people will be directly affected, through spray
drift. (There are about 150,000 acres to be sprayed in
the province, and we are told some 19 planes will be used.)

You would not think there is a problem, if you read the
mindless promotional information provided by the
government on Btk spraying, which does not even have
the semblance of objectivity. For example, 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 not that some 278 people complained about
effects of a Btk aerial spraying on their health, with 682
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?
It will diminish the birds' food supply and that of their
young. Spraying will affect the food chain, and the overall
health of the forest and its inhabitants. Spraying is an
unnatural attempt to deal with an unnatural, monoculture
forestry.

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
I have information about from 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. Are we supposed to once again just
trust the "experts"? 

There has been no public discussion of the pros and cons of
spraying with this insecticide, and no community involvement.
Where is our right to informed consent?

There is no justification for this dangerous, large-scale
spraying program

Helga Hoffmann, RN, BN

next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects