To the editor:
More than 1,700 people have signed a petition opposing Oregon Department of Forestry approval of aerial application of herbicides on private forest lands adjacent to South Beaver Creek and its tributaries.
Thanks to laws written by chemical industry interests, this spraying may be legal but it is by no means appropriate or safe. Herbicides, like homicides and all pesticides, are intended to kill, and contrary to industry propaganda, are indiscriminate in their effects on all living things, not just a few “target” plants.
They are poisons that can be transported from the sprayed areas into nearby surface waters, poisoning wetland and stream plants and animals, and people via drinking water. Herbicide-caused impacts to any of those organisms could adversely affect the outstanding natural areas and game resources associated with South Beaver Creek and, downstream, in Beaver Creek. Additionally, the drinking water provided by Seal Rock Water District, is sourced from Beaver Creek.
Can ODF with any degree of honesty say that independent, peer-reviewed studies have found that the products to be sprayed are safe and not carcinogenic, teratogenic, mutagenic, or hormone-altering? Can ODF with any degree of honesty say that such testing has been done not only on the active ingredients of each product but also on the total components including so-called “inert ingredients”? Can ODF with any semblance of honesty say that such testing has been done on the combination of all products to be sprayed?
I doubt ODF can answer any of those questions honestly without admitting that none of that independent testing has ever been done. The EPA may register those products, but as the U.S. Forest Service was told emphatically by the U.S. Appeals Court long ago, EPA registration is so lacking in valid testing that the Forest Service could not rely on registration as any indication of safety. The Forest Service has consequently managed our national forests very successfully without herbicides since 1984. (Save Our Ecosystems v. Clark Nos. 83-3908 et al. (9th Cir. January 27, 1984)
For the Oregon Department of Forestry to rely on EPA registration is as unacceptable as it was for the Forest Service.
The Oregon Department of Forestry should at the very least admit its willful ignorance of the effects of herbicides on all life forms, and honor our right to grant or withhold our informed consent to being exposed to untested poisons.
— Carol Van Strum/Five Rivers
Thank you for sharing the very clear and experienced voice of a survivor of USFS “testing” using Agent Orange over forests in our own country after having been declared “too toxic and harmful” when it was used in Viet Nam. The military stopped using it five years before the end of the war but surplus stored stateside found its way to timber lands and not just in Oregon. Sandra Steingraber a biologist and expert on illness caused by toxic exposures discovered in classified documents that Agent Orange had been sprayed on forests at the headwaters of the Mississippi River near Park Rapids MN. No wonder the white pines were not germinating and regrowing after trees had been harvested then sprayed. It’s long past time to end the reign of harms from disinformation that serves only to justify using toxic chemicals in ever growing amounts as a means of growing trees . Why not work in partnership with the wisdom of nature who has refined systems for growth of robust trees over millenia? Why not recognize the value of wealth is nothing compared to health and vitality, of living well? THat all beings play essential roles in a balanced ecosystem – and that includes humans. We’ve been destructive far too long and must own our mistakes and make better choices. Like Protecting Beaver Creek!
Thank you Carol for your hard earned knowledge and perspective here. Seems like we have to keep creating the same wheel, over and over. The transient nature of new homeowners and part-time residents makes it harder to organize and fight these very powerful organizations. But we’re still trying.