A Commentary on Aerial Malathion Spraying

[Guest guest]

http://www.sptimes.com/Commentary/60898/A_toxic_reaction.html

A toxic reaction

Times staff writer

© St. sburg Times, published June 8, 1998

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----

he decision by the Environmental Protection Agency to allow aerial spraying

of pesticide over Bradenton to fight the Mediterranean fruit fly represents

a welcome change in tactics, but not in strategy. Government rightfully

thought twice before sending planes over an urban area but, ultimately, a

chemical campaign that poses underexplored risks to public health and the

environment still prevailed over a more thoughtful and long-term strategy to

protect Florida agriculture.

Spraying begins this week. It follows three weeks of chemical treatment from

the ground and the release of sterile medflies, which keeps the crop-eating

pests from reproducing. State Agriculture Commissioner Bob Crawford

fulfilled his promise, made after last year's prolonged spraying in

Hillsborough, to exhaust all alternatives to an aerial campaign. That is

part of the problem. Few alternatives exist.

Indeed, that this year's response marked a responsible departure from the

past says more about the mishandling of previous infestations than it does

reflect any new thinking on the part of government or industry. State plant

director Gaskalla put it best Thursday to opponents in Bradenton who

urged that malathion not be used. " That's not an option, " Gaskalla said.

Not an option? Agriculture officials need a reality check. Growth and

increasing public concern with continued spraying are running out the clock

on Florida's dated approach to killing the medfly. With four outbreaks

during the past year alone -- two in heavily urban areas -- people's

tolerance for malathion spraying may be reaching a breaking point, even

though agriculture is a vital part of Florida's economy.

Residents are not as sympathetic to growers' concerns as Floridians once

were. Crawford, who is elected, will have trouble building support for

spraying as long as the state lacks a host of preventive measures, from a

sufficient number of traps and inspectors to an adequate rainy day fund to

handle crop emergencies.

Crawford learned from the Hillsborough outbreak, which for his department

was a public relations disaster. So did the EPA, which hardly said boo

throughout the disorganized spraying campaign. Hopefully this new

sensitivity, on display in Bradenton, will provide the impetus for Florida

to lessen its dependence on chemical farming. The issue really is quite

simple. Advanced societies do not spray their own people. Crawford has a

choice: He can find a reliable alternative to malathion, or risk one day

hearing the news that aerial spraying -- in the government's own words -- is

" not an option. "