Songs for the Earth	What's new?	Pesticide clusters	Be an RCC associate	Wildlife workforce	For animal caretakers	Resource center

		Everyone wants the best for their children and to protect them from danger. Why would anyone knowingly allow their children to be exposed to toxic pesticides when effective alternatives already exist?
			Formerly the Rachel Carson Trust for the Living Environment, the Rachel Carson Council promotes alternative, environmentally benign pest management strategies to encourage healthier, sustainable living.
		President, Diana Post, VMD	About Us - What we do and why we care...
		Please remember that migrating birds need insects to eat to survive and raise their young

		News updates!
	Carbofuran, now closer to a ban
	NEW from Rachel Carson Council - ORDER TODAY! Golf at a Crossroads Pesticides on Golf Courses - Hazards and Remedies A pocket sized (8.25 x 4.25 in.), 36 page, full color brochure Today, turf management practices on most U.S. golf courses could use a healthy dose of sunlight. Community planners, children’s advocates, environmentalists, and golfers need access to accurate, up-to-date material from the U.S. and abroad. Golf at a Crossroads provides this information. The prevailing policy in our own country involves treating golf course turf with hazardous chemical pesticides to obtain picture perfect standards set by TV tournament broadcasting. Many of the chemicals used have been associated with health problems in humans, wildlife, and the environment. Golf at a Crossroads addresses these and related topics in a head-on, sensitive and thoughtful manner. It presents the case against chemical pesticide use on golf courses and examines alternatives including the option of toxic-free turf. A golfer handing out the Crossroads brochures noted that almost everyone immediately wanted to know who “had the guts” to publicly discuss these issues. The people of Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts opted for ecologically “greener” golf when they demanded that the only conditions acceptable for a proposed new course would be to have it maintained without use of chemicals - under organic conditions. The resulting Vineyard Golf Club, as well as the Wawona Golf Course in California - both highly successful organic golf courses - are profiled in Crossroads. While playing on such organic courses, men don’t have to worry about the association of prostate cancer with pesticides, and women of child-bearing age don’t need to wonder if a chemical applied might contribute to developmental disorders of unborn children. Although Golf at a Crossroads is written primarily for a non-technical audience, its sources are thoroughly documented in an appropriate scientific fashion - with footnotes, references, and a list of recommended resources. It was written with input from golfers, golf course superintendents, toxicologists, engineers, regulators, and ecologists. Unsolicited Comments about Golf at a Crossroads A Professor: Nicely done! Model publication for environmental issues. An Environmental Advocate and Artist: It’s fantastic; really amazing; you’re to be congratulated! A Scientist: Great brochure; such a nice balance between pretty and technical. A Biologist / Toxicologist: I found it both interesting and enlightening. A Golfer: …Thank you for creating this wonderful booklet. It is effective. People get the message immediately from the picture on the cover. Almost everyone has immediately responded “who put this out?” And they automatically turn to the back cover to look at who had the guts to publicly address this issue. Additional Feedback: Keep up the great work! - Great brochure. Thank you! - Compact compendium! - Excellent! Order your copies from Rachel Carson Council by e-mail at rccouncil@aol.com or by phone at 301-593-7507. Pricing is flexible and varies with quantity. Single copies are $2.50.
	A long-time golfing fan sent us a copy of this letter directed to Golfing Associations and Golf Clubs. We hope that RCC website readers will send his and our message to those in charge of turf management at their own golf courses. August 1, 2008 Dear Fellow Golfers, It is inspiring to see national golf magazines, environmental organizations and governmental entities cultivating environmental awareness and ecological concern under the umbrella of the green movement. I believe we have a moral obligation to protect the environment and our Mother Earth from which we are all nourished and sustained. Being green in golf is not the same as being green ecologically. There is a golf course maintenance issue that is sometimes brushed under the table within the mantras of Environmental Stewardship and Integrated Pest Management. That issue is the PEOPLE who play golf and the PEOPLE who work on golf courses and the extensive use of herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides. It seems to me that we’re playing chemical Russian roulette with human lives and our ecology rather than enjoying golf under the natural imperfect conditions it was intended to be played on. I believe your Golf Association could be an inspiring example by bringing the PEOPLE factor and the ECOLOGY factor to the FOREfront of Environmental Stewardship through education, example, and promotion of healthy and natural golf course playing conditions. The PEOPLE issue is the continual exposure of golf course superintendents, workers, and golfers to pesticides, fertilizer, and chemicals in the name of achieving television golf perfection. Golf did not originate, nor was it intended to be played on, perfectly manicured turf free of every weed, bug and bare spot. Golf was meant to be played as it lies, so that the game can be both fun and appreciated in helping us develop character to deal with the realities of life. To deal with the divots, uneven lies, and the unfair bounces that life brings to us in this imperfect world. We are designed to cooperate and learn from nature instead of trying to dominate and control it. The ECOLOGY factor is the fact that a healthy earth’s ecology is required for human sustainability. Golf course superintendents are caught in a conundrum, a Catch 22, even a moral dilemma when it comes to the insanity of trying to maintain perfect turf and the practicality of protecting their jobs. They are supposed to be the guardians of a healthy outdoor environment for the game of golf. Instead we’re forcing them to turn to artificial and temporary chemical solutions which bring us the antithesis of healthy natural conditions. I believe there needs to be an awakening of awareness of golfers and club management through education, leadership, and example by independent and innovative golf organizations not subject to the influence of the chemical industry, and who are willing to question the health, safety, and sustainability of current conventional golf course maintenance practices. It’s easy to ignore the PEOPLE issue because we have no quantifiable measurement of the effects of pesticides and chemicals on golfers from the golf course. But common sense and intuitively quantifiable human observation and reasoning tells us that pesticides are made to kill living organisms. Yes, they are made to target specific organisms such as fungus, weeds, and insects. But if and when we get past our ignorance for convenience, we’ll awaken and consciously realize that Pesticides Don’t Know When To Stop Killing! The conscious or unconscious choice of ignorance for convenience lulls us into accepting what has become "conventional" golf course turf management without enough consideration for the ecological and human effects. Through my own personal health experience, talking with people, and by human observation and reasoning, I’ve felt and seen the effects of pesticides and chemicals on people on the golf course. They include, but are not limited to, eye and throat irritation, severe skin rashes, slurred speech, flu-like symptoms, and probably a higher rate of prostate cancer in men. There are more and more like me who have become physically (and ethically) sensitive to the toxic nature of pesticides on the golf course. Women and children tend to be even more sensitive. It’s convenient to remain ignorant. Then we don’t have to change and don’t have to question what has become, but never intended to be, conventional turf management practices. Current conventional golf course maintenance has been influenced by the unrealistic demands for perfection brought about by televised golf and the chemical industry. The demand for the bragging rights of green television golf perfection leads superintendents to overwater to maintain lush green turf requiring the use of chemicals to manage the self-inflicted problems of fungus, insects, and weeds. It’s a non-sustainable merry-go-round with deleterious short and long term effects. We create our own problems by working AGAINST nature. “Natural and sustainable” should be the new golf course maintenance mantra. Links-type golf courses have been sustainable for centuries, requiring less water, low fertilization and chemicals, and low maintenance costs. Links-inspired golf is the principle of working with nature, not against it. The fact that golf growth is stagnant (as many people leave the game each year as those who take it up) requires FOREsight to help grow the game. But first we must focus on sustaining the game. Society’s consciousness is being awakened out of necessity to go green ecologically. We are at the FOREfront of a new environmental awareness. A younger generation is especially becoming more aware of the environmental hazards and detrimental health effects of chemicals and pesticides. Will a younger generation choose to play golf on a chemically-sustained toxic golf course, or will they choose more natural environments for healthy outdoor exercise? Will they be able to afford the future costs of the current artificial maintenance? Do we not have a responsibility to ensure that the game of golf is sustainable so that future generations can enjoy it? Do we not have a responsibility to the game of golf to begin to return it to being played as it was intended, under natural rather than artificial conditions? I believe your Golf Association could be in a leadership position to promote education and awareness, to have the FOREsight to promote ecologically green golf courses, to emphasize the human protection factor, and to help redefine golf course maintenance to healthy and natural golf course playing conditions. I believe we are being FOREwarned by people like me who have become sensitive to the chemicals and pesticides on the golf course similar to the canaries in the coal mine. The canaries in the coal mine are yelling FORE! My hope is that the golf industry pays attention to the canaries and begins to promote natural, affordable, and sustainable golf course maintenance emphasizing human protection in order to preserve and sustain the game we’ve loved. Sincerely, a Fellow Golfer
		Legislative Alerts
	RCC comments to the US Fish and Wildlife Service about the Proposed Rules Regarding Interagency Cooperation Under the Endangered Species Act Public Commentary was extended until October 14, 2008 The phone number for checking to see if your comment was received is 703-358-2534. You must send a letter by mail, they will not accept e-mails or faxes.
	September 12, 2008 TO: Public Comment Processing Attention: 1018-AT50 Division of Policy and Directives Management U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 222 Arlington, VA 22203 FROM: Rachel Carson Council, Inc., and Dr. Stanley A. Temple RE: "Proposed Rules Regarding Interagency Cooperation Under the Endangered Species Act" [Federal Register: August 15, 2008 (Vol. 73, No. 159)], Proposed Rules], [Page 47868-47875], From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov], [DOCID: fr15au08-20] DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 402 [FWS-R9-ES-2008-0093] RIN 1018-AT50 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 402 Interagency Cooperation Under the Endangered Species Act AGENCIES: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior; National Marine Fisheries Service, Commerce ACTION: Proposed rule SUMMARY: The United Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (collectively, ''Services'' or ''we'') propose to amend regulations governing interagency cooperation under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The Services are proposing these changes to clarify several definitions, to clarify when the section 7 regulations are applicable and the correct standards for effects analysis, and to establish time frames for the informal consultation process. These proposed changes to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) include provisions that will: 1) Eliminate the fundamental requirement of the Act for independent review of any project proposed by a Federal Agency that may have an adverse impact on endangered animals or plants under the conditions provided. 2) Impose shorter time frames for any review conducted by the Services and have failure to meet the new time frames for the consulting review as grounds for automatically granting the proposed project. Rachel Carson Council, Inc., strongly opposes the passage of the above-referenced proposed changes affecting the Endangered Species Act and the manner in which it is regulated and enforced. We believe that this revision, if enacted, would seriously compromise the Act's ability to provide adequate protection to endangered species. In his "Afterword" to the 2002 edition of Silent Spring, Edward O. Wilson describes the Endangered Species Act, which in 1973 was passed by a "near-unanimous vote in Congress" as follows: In concept and effect the act is easily the most important piece of conservation legislation in the nation's history (p. 362). We consider the proposed changes to be major revisions of the Act. These revisions would, if enacted, seriously weaken the standards and rigorousness by which the ESA and its various regulations provide protection for those species deemed to be endangered - the species that the Act was created to safeguard. All of the currently proposed revisions would be contrary, in our opinion, to the original intent of the framers of the Endangered Species Act. For this reason alone we urge that the proposed regulations be defeated. These proposed revisions would seem to change the focus and procedures of the Act. They would shift much of the decision making evaluations away from the biological science based "Services", which are knowledgeable regarding botanical and zoological matters (the FWS and the NMFS), to an unspecified group of federal governmental organizations, which the proposal loosely terms "action agencies." Such a provision could empower "action agencies" to rule on the appropriateness of their own decisions regarding matters outside of their areas of legislated responsibility and/or of legislated expertise. It is conceivable that such decision-making could be impacted by the "action agencies''" desire to follow their own agendas, rather than rule impartially on the scientific merits of a given case. Instead, having trained and qualified individuals who are specialists in biology and ecology - as the regulations currently provide for - is a better course. Also we oppose the requirement in the proposed revision that would automatically grant the requested exemption to the ESA if the Services do not respond to it within 60 days (or fail to request a further 60 day extension of the time in which to respond to it). Again this suggests that the function of the ESA is to grant exemptions rather than to carefully consider the needs of endangered or threatened species in administering the provisions of the ESA. Secondly it would open the door to the granting of innumerable exemptions that could be related to underfunding the Services. We wish to pass along the following comments by Dr. Stanley Temple, in opposition to the proposed revisions to the Endangered Species Act. Dr. Stanley Temple is uniquely qualified to address this topic. His credentials, achievements, and recognition in the area of conservation and endangered species are outstanding. FROM: Dr. Stanley A. Temple The Endangered Species Act is a vital source of protection for close to 2,000 of our nation's rarest plants and animals. Ranging from green sea turtles to Santa Cruz cypress, these species are more than national treasures - they are biological resources that are often integral parts of the ecosystems in which they exist. The Bush administration's August 15 proposal would undermine the Endangered Species Act, leaving these valuable and irreplaceable resources exposed to the threats of extinction. Consultations under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act provide a crucial mechanism of checks and balances against the federal government harming an endangered species. The administration proposes to circumvent the scientific input of endangered species biologists by allowing federal agencies to decide independently whether their projects will harm endangered species - this would present a clear conflict of interest, effectively erasing the necessary barrier between scientific review and politics. The administration claims that agencies possess the expertise to assess potential ecological threats without consulting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or National Marine Fisheries Service, as is currently required. Many agencies, however, such as the Department of Transportation, have neither the scientific expertise nor the incentive to evaluate the scientific ramifications of a particular project. Recently, the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management conducted this kind of unilateral evaluation to determine the effects of wildfire prevention projects on endangered species. A subsequent evaluation by the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service revealed that about half these evaluations were neither lawfully nor scientifically valid. The proposed changes would allow these types of problems to be compounded. The existing mechanisms for inter-agency consultations work well according to every impartial review of the Endangered Species Act. The only deficiency is the underfunding of the Office of Endangered Species. Independent scientific review is a critical part of insuring that the Endangered Species Act accomplishes its stated goal of providing "a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved." Eliminating this part of the process is gravely near-sighted; our nation's diverse ecosystems provide more than habitat for endangered species. They mitigate pollution, regulate climate and provide us with countless resources. In turn, these ecosystems rely on complex interactions between the species they contain. Exposing the most vulnerable of these species to the threats that will result from the Bush proposal will endanger our ecological support system. Stanley A. Temple University of Wisconsin-Madison Stanley A. Temple is the Beers-Bascom Professor Emeritus in Conservation in the Department of Forest and Wildlife Ecology and former Chairman of the Conservation Biology and Sustainable Development Program in the Gaylord Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies. For 32 years he occupied the faculty position once held by Aldo Leopold, and in that position he received every University of Wisconsin teaching award for which he was eligible. The 75 graduate students he mentored have gone on to positions of leadership in the conservation field. Since his retirement from academia in 2007 he has been a Senior Fellow of the Aldo Leopold Foundation. He has worked on conservation problems in 21 different countries, and has been a Fulbright Scholar. He helped save some of the world's rarest and most visible endangered species. He has received the highest honors bestowed by The Society for Conservation Biology and The Wisconsin Society for Ornithology for distinguished achievements in the field of conservation; he is a Fellow of The American Ornithologists' Union, The Explorer's Club, the New York Zoological Society, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Professor Temple's service to the conservation community at large is extensive. He has been Chairman of the Wisconsin Chapter of The Nature Conservancy, and President of The Society for Conservation Biology. He has served on editorial boards or as editor of Ecological Applications, Conservation Biology, Forest Science, Bird Conservation (which he founded), and The Passenger Pigeon (among others). His bibliography contains over 330 publications. Professor Temple's career in conservation and ecology has been characterized by highly respected scholarship in conservation biology and wildlife ecology, by interdisciplinary approaches to solving environmental problems, and by energetic contributions to the conservation movement at scales from local to global.
	RCC comments on Gypsy Moth Control
	March 18, 2008 To: Senate Committee on Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Re: S.B. 920, Governor's Advisory Task Force on Gypsy Moth Control NOTE: Comments for Distribution to ALL Committee Members: I am Diana Post, a veterinarian and president of the Rachel Carson Council, Inc. located in Silver Spring, Maryland. I have been asked by the Chemical Sensitivity Disorder Association to send comments on S.B. 920, the proposal to form a Governor's Advisory Task Force on Gypsy Moth Control in Maryland. I am a Maryland resident, living in Silver Spring. At present in Maryland, there are aerial applications (via helicopters) of Dimilin (diflubenzuron) and Bacillus thuringiensis for Gypsy Moth control. I have concerns with use of the diflubenzuron-containing product due to this chemical's potential toxicity to companion animals as well as to wildlife. With respect to important constituents of the ecosystem, this chemical acts as a chitin synthesis inhibitor. Chitin is found in insect and crustacean exoskeletons and in the walls of certain fungi. At least three of the migratory bird species that return to this area feed on gypsy moth caterpillars. I have heard and or seen them along the Potomac, near Northwest Branch of the Anacostia River, and in other wooded areas. They include ovenbirds, red eyed vireos, and black throated green warblers. These birds actually treat the late in-star caterpillars in a special way - they rub them on wood appearing to try to remove the hairs (personal communication from Dr. Christopher Whelan of Wilmington, Illinois). Diflubenzuron has also been found to decrease testosterone production in chickens, in one study. A possible adverse effect on wild bird reproduction cannot be ruled out. Diflubenzuron is very toxic to crustaceans. The primary concern I have with it is regarding its potential hazard to crabs but it can also adversely impact smaller crustaceans such as the grass shrimp that serve as food for many other aquatic organisms. I have concerns for children and companion animals due to diflubenzuron's transformation products (a) 4-chlorophenolhydroxylamine and (b) 4-chloroaniline. The former (a) has been associated with methemoglobinemia in mammals, which in individuals with a genetic predisposition can be irreversible (although usually not considered life threatening in humans). The second transformation product (b) is a suspect carcinogen. Cats are much more easily poisoned by chemicals such as (a) the transformation product of diflubenzuron. Feline hemoglobin is up to 30 times more sensitive to toxics such as this than is that of dogs or humans. EPA does not include risk evaluations for pets in the registration standards for Gypsy Moth pesticides, but there are indications that cats may be adversely affected by diflubenzuron. I would hope that the interests of people, companion animals and our especially precious Chesapeake Bay wildlife will be well represented when the final membership of the Governor's Advisory Task Force is formed. Our friends and neighbors with chemical sensitivity conditions, children in their mothers' wombs, very young children as well as others required to avoid pesticide exposure, need to have representatives with medical training when advice is offered to the governor on the use of chemicals that may be sprayed from the air. As a veterinarian and a person familiar with toxicology, I would hope that the interests of vulnerable companion animals and wildlife could be represented by one or more members possessing training in animal medicine when the group is formed. I strongly recommend that medical specialists with experience in pesticide toxicology be included in the final committee.
	RCC's response to recent statements from several Rachel Carson detractors whose accusations, concerning DDT and malaria have been widely reported in the media Read the .pdf file More on DDT
	A Story of Hope: Barn owls - pest controller and peacemakers in the Middle East Click here to read the .pdf file
	Green Mantle Initiative The "Initiative" is intended to help you and your community adopt environmentally-friendly (green) practices. It provides suggestions in 20 areas with 3 action levels. The 3 levels of progressive action are: Basic, Plus, and Super. The Plus and Super levels include all actions described in the lower levels. Click to open the printable .pdf file Find out more about RCC's Green Mantle Program
	Our exciting brochures Celebrating Rachel Carson (1907-1964) In Her Centennial Year Send your mailing address to us if you would like a copy of this brochure rccouncil@verizon.net
	Others remembering Rachel May 27th Rachel Carson Day Proclamation in Maryland enacted into law May 27th Rachel Carson Day in Maryland City of Cambridge Massachusetts proclaims May 27th Rachel Carson Day Cape May County New Jersey declares May 27th Rachel Carson Day Rachel Carson Day May 27th in Illinois Town of Chapel Hill US Fish and Wildlife Service - Rachel Carson: A Conservation Legacy Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge Rachel Carson Trails Conservancy
	The National Council of Women of the United States Citation Rachel Carson, Woman of Conscience Because she is a distinguished scholar in the field of science Because she is able to communicate her specialized knowledge through her impressive literary talent, Because she has the courage to express her convictions in the face of powerful opposition, Because she has shocked men and women into an awareness of their responsibility to protect future generations, and finally, Because with reverence for all life she dedicates her extraordinary gifts to its service, Therefore, the National Council of Women of the United States is proud to cite RACHEL CARSON as the outstanding example in this country of a Woman of Conscience Presented at the Joint 75th Anniversary Conference of the International Council of Women and The National Council of Women of the United States June 19, 1963 Statler Hilton Hotel, Washington, D.C.

CD - Rachel Carson Tribute in Music!
			A remarkable celebration of Rachel Carson's life and legacy in the form of traditional American music!
			Songs for the Earth - a tribute to Rachel Carson has 17 outstanding pieces, several written exclusively for this collection. The songs were inspired by Rachel Carson's vision, and the performances were donated by their artists with a generosity of spirit that has touched our hearts.
			This wonderful CD features some of today's most beloved folk artists: Pete Seeger, Walkin' Jim Stoltz, Steve Schuch, Kat Eggleston, Bill Oliver, Tom Vincent, Betty and the Baby Boomers, Casey Neill, Dean Stevens, Cindy Kallet, Tom Paxton, MAGPIE, Tish Hinojosa, Gordon Bok, Emma's Revolution, Bob Zentz, and Josh White, Jr. The CD is a joint project involving two non-profit environmental organizations, Rachel Carson Council, Inc., and Musicians United to Sustain the Environment (MUSE). It would not have been possible without the dedicated efforts of MAGPIE. The project was funded through a grant from Eugene B. Kahn. Proceeds from the sale of the CDs will go towards furthering the work of both non-profit organizations. These are some of the best songs for the Earth we have ever heard (Greg Artzner, Magpie) CDs are $16.50 ($14 + $2.50 shipping) each, available from MUSE at www.musemusic.org

What's New?
	About Us Outreach Programs: The Green Mantle Our Wildlife Workforce Resource Center About Rachel Carson Rachel's Senses Become an RCC Associate Pesticide-Free Day - May 27 Pesticide-Free Day Pledge Alerts Pesticide Clusters 'Cide Lines Feature Articles Video Lending Library Tips for Researching Pesticides Upcoming Events Contact RCC-we've moved! Links Sitemap Hot links! USFW - Rachel Carson Grassroots - Healthy Lives Grassroots - Healthy Lawns Suburban Survival Guides A Lawn for Living New Jersey Meadowlands American Plant Food Garden Centers			Thank you! Special donations remember our loved ones Carbofuran, now closer to a ban Rachel Carson, Woman of Conscience Citation presented to Rachel Carson by the International Council of Women and The National Council of Women of the United States Book Review: What a Book Can Do: The Publication and Reception of Silent Spring Our eagerly-awaited publication is available! Wildlife at Work: Source of Wonder, Source of Strength Contact the Council office for details Spend a week at Rachel Carson's seaside cottage which so inspired her, courtesy of Rachel Carson Council! Phragmites control in Cape May, NJ - the controversy rages NJ Audubon's position // bird's use of Phragmites Pesticides Harming Frogs? Harley's Story Another beloved companion bird killed by Teflon fumes A very hot topic - DDT just won't go away... Messages from Mrs.Jean Shulz, and our favorite beagle: Snoopy only lands on Toxic-Free Lawns! Especially useful for veterinarians, kennel managers and animal shelters: 36 Insecticides Used on or around Dogs and Cats Trevor's Story An Encounter with Lawn Pesticides How YOU can make a difference in global warming Spanish! ¿Son nocivos los pesticidas que se utilizan en casas, jardines y céspedes? Spanish! Muestrario de métodos de controlar plagas sin pesticidas tóxicos Guide to Our Website - Table of Contents EPA lists copper arsenate wood preservative alternatives on the web Low-Risk Pest Control of Cockroaches Validated in Scientific Study Banned Pesticides Associated with Low Birth Weights Our Common Ground: the White House and their dogs Chatham College pledges to use IPM on campus
***					***

	We hope you joined us on May 27th for the sixth annual pesticide-free day on Rachel Carson's birthday! Take the pesticide-free day pledge!

Did you know???

Educational nature walks are often sponsored by the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission
in the Rachel Carson Greenway, rain or shine!

	Update - carbofuran getting closer to a ban
	On August 3, 2006, we thought the EPA banned the use of carbofuran. In January 2008 the EPA issued a Notice of Intent to Cancel (NOIC) registration. The EPA establishes tolerances for pesticides that may be found on foods, and can also revoke tolerances to better safeguard public health and the environment. The EPA is proposing to revoke the regulations that allow carbofuran residues in food. On July 31, 2008 it invited public comments on its carbofuran tolerance revocation proposal, due to the EPA office by September 29, 2008. EPA instructions for submitting your comments on carbofuran tolerance revocation: all comments should be identified by Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0162 Background A critical issue for Rachel Carson Council for many years has been the continued use of the carbamate insecticide, carbofuran. For over 20 years, this highly dangerous cholinesterase inhibitor has been linked to wildlife kills and to sickness in people. In recent years, we have written to the EPA objecting to requests for large-scale emergency use of carbofuran. In 2006, when carbofuran came up for another EPA review, RCC joined with other environmental groups in an intensive effort to cancel registration of this hazardous chemical, once and for all, voicing strong concerns about this pesticide's track record for killing birds, fish, beneficial insects and pollinators, as well as human illness. According to the American Bird Conservancy, deaths from carbofuran of over one hundred bird species have been documented, species such as bluebirds, robins, owls, swallows, goldfinches, ducks, woodpeckers, and bald eagles, as well as mammals and fish. In 1992, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service requested that the EPA cancel all registrations for carbofuran because carbofuran poses unreasonable hazards to birds. Using carbofuran, even according to label directions, violates the Migratory Bird Treaty Act which prohibits killing birds by pesticides, even unintentionally. We urged colleagues and supporters to remind the EPA that other, less hazardous pest control methods are available, and to insist that carbofuran must not be allowed to continue to cause untold suffering and death. Of those we contacted directly, 25% reported back to us that they had notified EPA of their opposition to the continued use of carbofuran. These messages came from the research community, from former government employees, from former legislators, students, writers, medical professionals and even from two individuals who perform public portrayals of Rachel Carson. Many included their responses, which varied in length and content. These were wonderful letters. We wish it were possible to include all the fine comments that these writers sent to the EPA. One letter stands out due to the extensive experience and compelling observations of its writer, Frank T. Kuncir, a retired US Fish and Wildlife Service investigator, which we have included below. We are deeply grateful to all those who contacted the EPA in 2006 with their concerns about the need to protect those living on our planet from this highly toxic chemical - one that qualifies for Rachel Carson's term "biocide", and need you to do so again. We also thank the EPA for their important decision to protect human health and all living organisms from this deadly chemical and urge them not to reverse the August 3, 2006 decision to ban carbofuran's use. Please personally comment to the EPA supporting the revocation of carbofuran tolerances (residues) in food: If you did not respond in 2006, you now have a second opportunity to do so. Please take advantage of it. If you have firsthand knowledge of carbofuran's negative points, tell the EPA. For more information, please contact the Council offices - rccouncil@aol.com Here are the letters from Frank T. Kuncir and Rachel Carson Council sent to the EPA before the August 3rd 2006 decision opposing the re-registration of carbofuran: 1 August, 2006 James Guillford Assistant Administrator for Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances US Environmental Protection Agency Re: EPA-HQ-2005-0162 Continued Utilization of Carbofuran on Foodstuffs Dear Mr. Guillford: I am a former criminal investigator previously employed by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Office of Law Enforcement. I have held numerous positions throughout the United States and as such, had cause to investigate the illegal take (killings) of hundreds of migratory birds, endangered species and indigenous species of wildlife as a confirmed result of exposure to the pesticide carbofuran. These were as a result of both misuse of the pesticide for predator control and other purposes, and as a routine result of proper use of the pesticide according to labeling both in its liquid and granular formulae. During the course of at least 5 years in the late 1980s, I had the necessity to focus on the results of carbofuran's proper use in Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia based on a continuum of wildlife losses that were brought to my attention by the respective state wildlife agencies, agricultural departments, extension service offices and the general public in my area of responsibility. During this time frame, I initiated field investigations which started with the planting process in which carbofuran was applied both on the surface (side dressing in cucurbits), incorporated with the seed (corn), and also injected subsurface using state of the art technology. I was limited in field searches only by limited manpower, habitat and hours available in the day to conduct after-application carcass searches. At no time during the above searches in fields where either liquid or granular carbofuran had been applied, did I find a single instance where some negative impact failed to occur to wildlife resources, whether it be to federally protected migratory birds, gallinaceous and unprotected species of bird, or mammals as a result of either primary or secondary exposure. In this area of shallow water tables, I also saw the impact of activation of the pesticide by rainfall and the wholesale killing of earthworms, insects, amphibians (frogs) and reptiles (turtles). This information, part of which were contained in criminal investigations, was provided to EPA during consideration for reregistration of carbofuran in the late 1980's by the Fish & Wildlife Service. In short, I find it impossible to conceive that the Environmental Protection Agency would even begin to consider allowing the continued use of this indiscriminate pesticide, especially in light of the hundreds of victims which have been attributed to its use in many forms and many habitats countrywide. I have also observed human impacts as a result of its use by farmers and applicators, as well as impacts to pets and non-target organisms for which its use was never intended on the DelMarVa Peninsula, on the coastal plains of Maryland and Virginia, and in the California rice paddies and alfalfa fields. I am convinced that my discoveries were only the tip of the iceberg in each of the venues in which I worked, given the nature of predation on wildlife victims and their natural tendency to seek cover when physiologically impacted. How many more victims can be tolerated in order for the documented history of this compound to be taken at its face value? Carbofuran can not be used without negative consequence to the environment and the human population you serve. Should you have questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Frank T. Kuncir Special Agent (Wildlife) retired July 28, 2006 Re: EPA Docket Number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0162 In recent years the Rachel Carson Council has had several occasions in which we have written to the EPA opposing Requests for Section 18 use of carbofuran. One of the most toxic cholinesterase inhibitor insecticides, orally and from inhalation, is the carbamate, carbofuran. EVEN WHEN USED ACCORDING TO THE DIRECTIONS ON THE LABEL, CARBOFURAN CAN BE TOXIC TO A WIDE RANGE OF ANIMALS. It is one of those being currently reviewed (with a decision due by August 3, 2006). Despite the fact that a variety of uses of carbofuran have been canceled, there are approximately 80 carbofuran products presently on the market. Carbofuran is banned in Sweden. Below are points that support our request for cancellation of carbofuran: 1. Birds: Carbofuran is so toxic to birds that its use routinely violates the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. US environmental regulations do not permit the killing of migratory songbirds or waterfowl with pesticides. A farmer following the FIFRA rules is still putting himself at risk for violating the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Ecological risk assessments revealed widespread and repeated mortality events involving carbofuran and birds. Data from adverse reaction reports validates this risk assessment. In addition to songbirds and waterfowl, carbofuran also kills raptors, including the Bald Eagle, which is both our national emblem and a threatened species. If carbofuran reregistration is allowed, there is great concern that the Bald Eagle and/or other threatened or endangered avian species would be placed in harm's way. 2. Groundwater: When pesticides get into ground water, they frequently get into surface water as well due to movement from underground to the surface as part of the hydrologic cycle - reported on by USGS in their recent publication, Pesticides in the Nation's Streams and Ground Water, 1992-2001. It should be kept in mind that carbofuran presents a danger of entering surface water as it was detected in ground water sampling according to the report, Pesticides in Groundwater Database: A Compilation of Monitoring Studies, 1971-1991, hence its danger to fish and aquatic insects. In 2006, the USGS reported that carbofuran has a half-life in streams of up to 289 days. This is significantly longer than the other pesticides most frequently detected in water according to Pesticides in Groundwater Database: A Compilation of Monitoring Studies, 1971-1991 (USGS circular 1291). 3. Government Agency Environmental Concerns: The USEPA expressed concern about the ecological effects of carbofuran on fish, mammals and groundwater ("Eco Chemical Final List," 1999). In 2006 there are concerns about carbofuran's toxicity in streams to fish and invertebrates in Pesticides in Groundwater Database: A Compilation of Monitoring Studies, 1971-1991 (USGS circular 1291). 4. Bees: Based on a 1997 Bee Kill Survey by the American Beekeeping Federation, Inc., sixty beekeepers operating 127,950 colonies in 22 states reported that bee losses from pesticides are a significant issue in their operations. A carbofuran-containing product was the pesticide most commonly identified with bee kills by the beekeepers. In March 2005 the Minnesota Supreme Court recognized a common-law duty to protect bees from pesticide poisoning when applicators have notice of foraging honey bees on the property. 5. Integrated Pest Management: Carbofuran is broadly poisonous to all insects, so that its usage virtually eliminates all methods of controlling pests with beneficial insects. Therefore, any attempts at integrated pest management become impossible once carbofuran is used. 6. Crop Rotation: The label on a carbofuran-containing-product states that no crops can be rotated with those using [this product] for at least 10 months after pesticide application. This effectively eliminates crop rotation as a possible method of reducing insect damage. Thus its usage inevitably leads to a greater necessity for pesticide application in the future. 7. Humans: Human risk assessments done for carbofuran point to an increasing number of dangers to farm workers posed by exposure to the chemical. "In a recent action an EPA advisory group criticized both the scientific and ethical components of three carbofuran intentional human dosing studies, concluding that they should not be used by EPA in its regulatory actions for the insecticide" (Pesticide and Toxic Chemical News, May 6, 2006). 8. Rachel Carson's Centenary: May 2007 was the 100th anniversary of Rachel Carson's birth. Rachel Carson expressed strong concerns about the hazardous effects of pesticides, on people as well as on the environment. Through her landmark book Silent Spring, Carson is credited with initiating the modern environmental movement, and the momentum that created the USEPA. CONCLUSION: Significantly reducing the use of carbofuran could avoid serious problems and at the same time help encourage its replacement with less hazardous forms of pest management. Less dangerous alternatives are available for use on crops for which carbofuran-containing products are now registered. If chemicals such as carbofuran continue to be available, there will be no incentive to use less-hazardous means of pest management. The decision to renew a potent pesticide is never taken lightly. However, in the case of carbofuran, potential benefits are far outweighed by the almost inevitable dangers that come with its use. Thank you for caring about this important issue. Sincerely, Dr. Diana Post, President Rachel Carson Council, Inc.

			Our Common Ground: A New Year Resolution for the First Family's Scottish Terriers
			According to the eminent veterinary epidemiologist, Dr. Lawrence T. Glickman (School of Veterinary Medicine at Purdue University): Scottish terriers have an 18 times greater risk of developing bladder cancer than mixed breed dogs. This risk is increased fourfold with exposure to phenoxy-type herbicides. Herbicide Exposure and the Risk of Transitional Cell Carcinoma of the Urinary Bladder in Scottish Terriers Government statistics report that these herbicides have been some of the most frequently used lawn chemicals in our country. Among Scottish terriers being treated for bladder cancer are the pets of a Congressman and a former Cabinet official of the Bush White House. These dogs are reported to have played on the White House lawns. Since the White House lawns and gardens are not now organic and free of toxic-chemicals wouldn't it be wonderful to begin the New Year with this Resolution: Our nation's White House lawns and gardens will be now and forever treated only organically, to be kept free of all chemical pesticides, for the health of our First Family's dogs and of all the children and citizens who will visit "their" house.
			Former First Dogs The Scottish terriers, Fala and Meggie, were beloved members of President Franklin Roosevelt's family and so were Winks, an English setter, and Tiny, an English sheepdog. President Truman's daughter had an Irish setter named Mike. President Kennedy's family had a Welsh terrier, as well as several "unique" dogs, living in the White House. President Johnson had beagles. President Nixon's family had an Irish setter, and President Ford's family included a golden retriever named Liberty. President and Mrs. Carter and their daughter enjoyed the companionship of a dog named Grits. President and Mrs. Reagan had a Bouvier des Flanders and loved their Cavalier King Charles Spaniels. President and Barbara Bush cherished their talented Springer spaniel, Millie, and her offspring. President and Mrs. Clinton and their daughter added a Labrador retriever named Buddy to their White House family. As is true with many of us and our own families, the First Family loves its dogs. It matters not whether the First Family, or any family, is Republican or Democrat, for whether a dog is a member of a Republican or a Democrat or an Independent or a "mixed" political family, love is love, and the White House dogs have given and received much love. Their environment should be healthy and free of chemical pesticides.
			A Very Beazley Christmas Because all our nation's leaders have loved their dogs, it is not surprising that this Christmas President and First Lady Laura Bush gave their special Season's Greetings to the nation, delighting children, by bestowing upon us a Very Beazley Christmas. They highlighted the cute antics and delight of their Scottish terriers Barney and Miss Beazley as they received brightly wrapped Christmas gifts, romped the White House halls, sat intently near the desk in the Oval Office, and scampered around the beautiful White House Christmas tree, sniffing at the stately fir. This videotaped Christmas greeting aired on The Today Show on Friday, December 9, and can be seen on CNN's website as well as on various other news websites. To find it, just type in: "A Very Beazley Christmas". Dogs are known for being unfailingly loyal, affectionate and trusting, like children. As our companions, they deserve appreciation and good care. This should include a healthy environment. That is why it is important this holiday season to make the decision to give the First Family's White House Scottish terriers and the ALL the children who will visit their country's "House" a special gift, a promise and a commitment that the White House gardens, and especially its spacious lawns, will always be free of chemical pesticides, and treated only with least-toxic, organic care. The dog, due to more direct exposures and susceptible physiology, is the sentinel that shows us the hazards of pesticide use. Both dogs and young children, due to children's rapid metabolism and other factors, are the ones most highly susceptible to pesticides' harmful effects.
			Snoopy, Spokesdog for Toxic-free Lawns Two years ago Mrs. Charles Schulz agreed to license out Snoopy as a "spokesdog" against the use of toxic chemical pesticides on the lawns where pets and families spend time together. She generously donated the services of the flying ace beagle to Rachel Carson Council to accompany the statement: Snoopy only lands on toxic-free lawns! Make sure YOUR yard is chemical pesticide-free for the safety of yourself, your children, and your pets. It is a fitting legacy for Snoopy's creator, Charles Schulz who cared deeply about the well-being of children and dogs.
			Best of Health to Barney and Miss Beazley, and Happy New Year to Us All! And now dear Barney and Miss Beazley, we -- Dr. Glickman, Snoopy, Mrs. Charles Schulz, the Rachel Carson Council, me, and all conscientious dog-lovers -- would like you to have as a lasting "gift," a commitment from President and Mrs. Bush that the environment of the White House lawns and gardens will be kept chemical pesticide-free for you who live there, and for all the children and dog-lovers who come to visit. Happy Holidays! ~ Nancy D., Ohio

Book Review
What a Book Can Do: The Publication and Reception of Silent Spring
When Priscilla Coit Murphy set out to examine the interaction between a news-making book and the media, she looked at the controversy that erupted with the publication of Rachel Carson's landmark Silent Spring. Published in 1962, the book revealed the hazards inherent in many of the most popularly used pesticides in America and around the world. Murphy's What a Book Can Do, probes and illuminates the underlying concerns and perspectives of those involved: publishers, editors, agents, opponents from the powerful chemical industry, and the public at large. Each of the chapters deals with the issue from a different point of view: Silent Spring and its Contexts: The Right to Know Author and Agent: Where an Author Can Call His Soul His Own Editors and Publishers: Dealing with a Super-Ruckus Opposition: How Do You Fight a Best Seller? Media: One Formidable Indictment Audience: This Ought to Be a Book Conclusion: Speaking Truth to Power Appendix: Perspectives on the Study of Silent Spring Today Silent Spring is widely regarded as having launched our modern environmental movement. But from word of its inception it was perceived as threatening by powerful chemical industry giants including Montrose, Velsicol, DuPont, Dow and W.R. Grace. Murphy follows industry influence as it reached into the halls of academia, details the manner in which public relations firms were called into action to present these companies' points of view to the public, and reveals legal steps they took in vain attempts to keep Silent Spring from being published. Despite their efforts, the book was pre-released in a serialized form by The New Yorker. It was published later that year (1962) and has never gone out of print since. Murphy reports that on the author's side, assisting her in warding off industry's powerful influence were a group of professionals, outstanding in their own right. They included Carson's agent Marie Rodell, New Yorker editor William Shawn, and Houghton Mifflin's Editor-in-Chief Paul Brooks, who was also Rachel's personal editor and friend. The efforts by Carson, Brooks and Rodell to protect Silent Spring from potentially destructive influences make a compelling story, which Murphy tells very well. Paul Brooks had hoped Silent Spring's publication would inspire widespread local interest in town halls and public meetings. Consistent with his expectation a near-record number of letters, 491, were received by The New Yorker following its appearance in a three part series. Some letter writers credited Carson with changing their status from marginalized to validated, many wrote of wanting to pass the information on to politicians and newspapers, and others strongly recommended that it be published as a book. Silent Spring's author intended its information to be useful not only to ordinary people but also to those in authority. Murphy writes that Carson represents "an aspect of American culture that places special value in the lone voice, particularly when that voice 'speaks truth to power' (to adopt a phrase from early Quakers)." Part of Carson's special strength was that she was "...beholden to no employer and no sponsor…." She captured and held the attention of the nation with the clarity and quality of her writing and the accuracy of its content. Paul Brooks, Rachel's editor, wrote this to Carson in 1962: "I have just heard that one of the chemical companies is now inserting its propaganda in the supermarket publications. A future social historian will be writing his Ph.D. thesis on the career of Silent Spring - just you wait!" With the publication of What a Book Can Do, the waiting is now over. The author is to be commended for producing such a thoroughly readable, enjoyable and scholarly work.
Review by Diana Post and Munro Meyersburg of the Rachel Carson Council What a Book Can Do: The Publication and Reception of Silent Spring, by Priscilla Coit Murphy University of Massachusetts Press, Amherst and Boston, 2005, 254 pp ISBN 1-55849-476-6
In the media
Pesticides Harming Frogs? In an article in The New York Times (6/23/2005), garden columnist Anne Raver described a farm field that had been taken out of production and planted with native grasses as part of a federal program "to keep pesticides and nitrates out of the watershed and to control erosion." She mentioned that when the field previously had been in production, frogs and peepers "had all disappeared … possibly from pesticide use." Current research supports this assertion. A number of the most commonly-used pesticides have been found to harm frogs. They include atrazine, diazinon, malathion and most recently, the herbicide RoundUp. In 2005, Pennsylvania researcher Dr. Relyea reported that RoundUp, when it was applied at recommended levels, was lethal to some frog species (Ecological Applications 2005 (v15:4)). There is an increasing level of pesticide usage around the globe. The finding that RoundUp can harm some amphibians greatly enhances the likelihood that harm from exposure to pesticides is a factor in the widespread decrease in numbers and species of amphibians. In areas where ecosystems are being preserved or restored, methods to eliminate unwanted organisms need to be chosen that do not pose a hazard to frogs.
EPA Pesticide Program Updates from EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
EPA Provides List of Alternatives to CCA-Treated Wood for Residential Use on Its Newly Reorganized CCA Web Page In response to requests from consumers regarding available alternatives to chromated copper arsenate- (CCA) treated wood for use in residential settings, EPA has made available online information about arsenic-free wood preservatives and alternative building materials. Effective December 31, 2003, wood can no longer be treated with CCA for most residential uses. Since the December 31 cancellation, EPA has received many queries about what alternatives to CCA-treated wood are available. Making this information available via the Web empowers consumers to make educated building material choices. You can find more information on these alternatives at http://www.epa.gov/oppad001/reregistration/cca/alternativestocca.htm This list of alternatives to CCA is being introduced as part of our effort to reorganize and update the CCA Web pages on epa.gov. By reorganizing the information on those pages from a chronological to a topical structure, EPA hopes to make it easier for the general public and other stakeholders to find the information they seek. The new and improved CCA page is available online at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/antimicrobials/reregistration/cca/
Trevor's Story: Report of An Adverse Effect Associated with Lawn Pesticides Trevor is a pure-bred Dalmatian whose early history is unknown.
	His story begins when he was an abandoned dog living at a shelter. A volunteer was playing ball with Trevor on the shelter's lawn. Unknown to her, the lawn had recently been sprayed with chemical pesticides. The ball rolled under a bush and Trevor dashed after it. He came out with the ball in his mouth and at that point started to have a seizure. Shelter staff then told the volunteer that the lawn had just been sprayed with pesticides and it seemed that Trevor's seizure was associated with those chemicals. A veterinarian saw Trevor and apparently agreed concerning the cause of the seizure.
The next day, the shelter staff decided that Trevor's vulnerability to seizures made him a poor choice for adoption and marked him for euthanasia the following day. As a courtesy, the volunteer was notified of this decision. She resolved to save Trevor and adopted him. Trevor's seizures have apparently abated, although today he is still considered vulnerable to adverse effects of pesticides. He is now living in an environment without chemical pesticides.
	As you can see from the photographs, Trevor has found a happy home. Trevor's owner, however is quite concerned that other pet owners do not realize that lawn pesticides may be associated with hazards to their pets. RCC has prepared a publication SNOOPY only lands on Toxic-Free Lawns! to advise pet owners of the need to protect pets from chemical pesticides. Please tell all the pet owners you know about the dangers of toxic pesticides in their lawns and gardens. Tell them about Trevor, and give them Snoopy's message. Thank you!

		RCC's Teflon Warning Needs To Be More Widely Available: An article last year in The Washington Post described the deaths from exposure to Teflon-related PTFE fumes of two parakeets. We wrote to The Post asking them to follow up on the story by making information available to their readership about our brochure A Silent Killer of Birds in our Care: Heat-Generated PTFE Fumes. We just received news of this heart-breaking incident by e-mail, indicating that beloved birds are continuing to die painful deaths from PTFE fumes due to lack of information by their owners. "I'm one of the sad owners of a bird that died from an overheated Teflon pan. You're right, it's just not worth it. His name was Harley. He was a cockatiel, my best friend. He couldn't wait till I got home from work, loved to take showers with me, loved to play chase, and hide and seek. He loved my cats and dogs, not to mention my son. He sat on my shoulder all the time, gave me.kisses, and preened my hair. The Teflon pan I cooked in overheated with my windows open. I ran with my bird to the other side of the house. I took him in the bathroom for a shower with me and he just made it to the towel bar (he used to fly to the shower curtain bar). I kept calling to him and he wouldn't come. I thought that was strange. I got out of the shower and told him to come with me and he wouldn't. I looked at him and he had his head against my wall and he was gasping and acting strange, so I went into the kitchen. When he didn't fly out to me I went back and checked on him. He was on the bathroom floor DEAD. He was still warm. I cried, screamed, hugged him, talked to him, tried to blow a little air into his nose, telling him to wake up, and cradled him. I knew he had died and I held him until he stiffened. I had to call my son to bury him. Then I looked Teflon up on the internet and almost died myself when I read what can happen to a bird. I felt so guilty. I talk to him every day and apologize all the time. I had to get another cockatiel to get my mind off Harley. I now have no Teflon whatsoever in my house. I will never forget him or what happened. I know my Harley either suffocated or had a seizure and I hate myself for this carelessness. Whenever someone buys a bird the seller needs to stress how deadly Teflon is for birds. I mean ALL sellers, from Petsmart to bird owners of all kinds. Thank you, and be careful with your precious birds." We are so sorry to hear of Harley's death. Hopefully your tragic experience will be able to save the lives of other companion birds.
		The Washington Post's article was published on December 4, 2003 under the heading "Birds' Deaths Blamed on Fumes" in which it described the deaths of two pet parakeets in Rockville, MD, two weeks earlier. One of the birds had recently been purchased from a pet store. A post-mortem examination report "indicated that toxic fumes were the most likely cause of death." The report concluded that "cooking pans with a nonstick coating were the most likely source of the fumes." That we learned of this is unusual. Seldom are causes of death of pet birds known publicly. However, since the possible cause of death might have been psittacosis (a disease that can be transmitted to humans), a post-mortem examination took place. Had this not been the case, the cause of the parakeets' deaths would never have appeared in The Washington Post. The saddest part of this story is that such tragedies are entirely preventable! As you know, our brochure, A Silent Killer of Birds in our Care: Heat-Generated PTFE Fumes addresses this topic. If this brochure had been available to the owner, these deaths most likely would not have occurred. It's that simple. It would be wonderful if RCC's information on birds' vulnerability to PTFE fumes were available at locations where birds are sold as well as in veterinary offices and animal shelters. We would like to make this happen. You can help. We need to establish an outreach program to identify and contact appropriate locations and to supply them with brochures. It is not likely that those we contact would agree to buy the brochures from us, thus the scope of the program would be limited by the funding we obtain.

Diana Post and the Rachel Carson Council thank Jean Schulz, President of the Charles M. Schulz Museum and widow of the late Charles M. Schulz, and the Peanuts organization for the use of the Snoopy illustration in our brand new flyer. We greatly appreciate the kind words and lovely sentiments in Mrs. Schulz's note of support!

Mrs. Schulz writes, Sparky (Charles Schulz) and I have always admired Rachel Carson's work. One of his last gifts to me was her recent biography by Linda Lear. All of us related to the Peanuts property are proud that Snoopy can draw awareness to an area that needs to be a focus of attention. None of us wants the health of a pet to be compromised because of a lack of knowledge of the detrimental effects of garden pesticides. I am grateful that the Rachel Carson Council is carrying on her important work.

Jean Schulz President, Charles M. Schulz Museum

		Special Donations
		In this space, we give special recognition to those individuals mentioned on contributions received during recent months, largely in response to our annual fund drive. These include present and past associates of our Council, family members, friends and others who have taken part in protecting the environment. Special donations from 2005 on were sent to us for the following individuals:
		Donations received "in Memory of" Humayun Abdulali (of the Bombay Natural History Society) Isaac Asimov Stella G. Birnberg Murray L. Bob Lee Frances Bowler Bill and Rose Buselmeier Barbara Caminati Walter H. Corson, II Jeanne V. Davis Lillian Farrell Mary Bates Griffith Rene Heidtke Ernest A. Halliday Elizabeth Lee Jens Jean Stack Jones Vincent C. Jones Erik Kaufman Paul, Rose, Jenn, and Steven Kaufman Burton Kollmer Eva Le Gallienne Dr. William Lijinsky Dorothy J. McMichael Senator Gaylord Nelson Mary Pillette Dr. Theron Randolph Ginny Rivera Edward Lee Rogers (Lee Rogers) Lin Roth Dr. Robert Rudd Jane Rynders Dorothy Seif Louise Smith St. John Smith Caroline P. Stoel W. Bruce Ward Helen King Weis August and Dorothy Wullner		Donations received "in Honor of" Terry Bayne Jeremy Delisle Ruth Fisher Matt and Terri Foosaner Ellie Goldberg Christopher Gott Billie Karel (Program Director, Toxic Free North Carolina) Linda Lear Munro Meyersburg Dr. Jane Morse Gayle Pilat Dr. David Pimentel Dr. Diana Post Q. R. Ann Rhodes Natalie Schmidt Marjorie Smigel Priscilla Stevens Lee and Martha Talbot Remembering Beloved Pets Bob Cat Claude Pooh Bear
		We want to thank especially those who made these donations and to express again how much we appreciate their thoughtful support of Rachel Carson Council and our work.
		A very hot topic - DDT just won't go away... Today, bringing back DDT has become a rallying point in certain political circles
				Recently, the American Enterprise Institute held a meeting at which they advocated the widespread use of DDT to fight malaria, even though less hazardous and less persistent alternative means of mosquito control are available. The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, (POPs) bans many chlorinated hydrocarbons world-wide but allows an exception for DDT in countries where governments request permission to use it in malaria control programs.
		DDT and Malaria According to a recent international agreement restricting synthetic persistent organochlorine pesticides, the POPs Treaty, a country may obtain permission to use DDT as part of a malaria control program. Treaty regulations are in place to help ensure that DDT would not be diverted to agricultural applications. Several aspects of the current situation merit mentioning. India has been using DDT for decades for agriculture as well as for mosquito control, and resistance has emerged. This increasing resistance to DDT is the principal cause of the resurgence of malaria in countries like India where the malaria-carrying mosquitoes are also becoming resistant to other chemical poisons. Bob Risebrough Earlier we reported on the decrease in mosquito populations in Nicaragua using low-risk methods of pest control. In Indonesia there has been a recent decrease in malaria without the use of DDT. Eritrea's use of DDT for house spraying against mosquitoes was found not to be working in reed houses due to gaps in the walls. The spraying was replaced by using insecticide-treated bed nets (10/2/02). The persistence and traveling ability of DDT is well documented High levels of DDT have been identified in India's vultures, and their populations were found to be decreasing as of 1999. Vultures and people both feed high on the food chain, and both can bioaccumulate organochlorine chemicals. Fish are considered very vulnerable to DDT. In Africa fish represent 17% of people's animal protein intake. Horned toads have been found with high levels of DDT in their blood serum within the past 10 years. A recent report on tissue samples from 900 sperm whales collected since 1990 by scientific researchers announced unexpected residues of DDT. The scientists stated: "We were surprised by the levels of pesticides like DDT found in our preliminary analysis of sperm whale tissue samples." WHO (World Health Organization) supports the use of DDT to control malaria "only when it is sprayed indoors," to minimize its impact on the environment (12/4/03).
		Looking at DDT 30 Years after the U.S. Ban
		DDT, Rachel Carson and Malaria Some people have held Rachel Carson responsible for increasing the incidence of malaria, since she alerted the world to the hazards of DDT. In fact, recently Rachel Carson has been the object of a vicious campaign of vilification reminiscent of the attacks by chemical companies when Silent Spring was first published. Attacks range from "...there has not been a mass murderer executed in the past half century who has been responsible for as many deaths of human beings as the sainted Rachel Carson" from Thomas Sowell, to "Rachel Carson has killed more people than DDT" from Sheldon Richman. These defenders of DDT have designated it as their method of choice for malaria control. The picture they paint is oversimplified, misleading, emotional and unscientific. The following points must be considered by anyone seeking the objective truth: 1) Carson believed that people should be given the science-based facts on which to decide issues that impact on public health and welfare. If, when provided with the hazard data they then decide to ban DDT or any other chemical, that should be their right as citizens. 2) In some places such as the Philippines, DDT use was stopped and malaria rates were reduced. Romero Quijano, MD 3) It does not necessarily follow that rejection of DDT by governments in various parts of the world has been due to Carson's influence. Financial, not environmental, reasons no doubt were responsible for reductions of various mosquito control practices including, but not limited to DDT. 4) A recent report on DDT toxicity linking it with reduced birth weights of infants is sufficiently troubling to give public health authorities who might be contemplating recommending it a reason to reevaluate the risks to newborns, even for malaria control programs. 5) DDT is very toxic to aquatic organisms, insects and other vital components of the natural ecosystem on which people all over the world depend. 6) Less hazardous and less persistent alternative means of mosquito control are widely available. 7) Malaria cases in Managua, Nicaragua went from 19,000 in 1996 to 1,575 in 2000 when alternative agents (B.t. israelensis and B. sphaericus) were substituted for chemical ones and workers received intensive training in biological control measures. "Zapping mosquitoes with biopesticides," Pesticide News (54), December 2001 Carson responded to those who attacked her work in "A New Chapter to Silent Spring." Here are some excerpts from that 1963 publication: "Above all, we must not be deceived by the...propaganda that is issuing from the pesticide manufacturers and from industry-related, although ostensibly independent organizations... This material is going to writers, editors, professional people, and other leaders of opinion." "It is characteristic of this material that it deals in generalities, unsupported by documentation. In its claim for safety to human beings, it ignores the fact that we are engaged in a grim experiment never before attempted." "We are subjecting whole populations to exposure to chemicals which animal experiments have proved to be extremely poisonous and in many cases cumulative in their effect." "These exposures now begin at or before birth. No one knows what the result will be, because we have no previous experience to guide us." "When you listen to the present controversy about pesticides, I recommend that you ask yourself - Who speaks? - And Why?" Carson, R.L., "A New Chapter to Silent Spring" from Bulletin of the Garden Club of America Whatever individual countries decide concerning the use of DDT or any other chemical pesticide, citizens everywhere deserve to be given relevant information on hazards and available alternative pest control methods. This was what Rachel Carson did and what the Rachel Carson Council is dedicated to continuing.
		DDT's Carcinogenicity Based on animal studies, the EPA has classified DDT as a probable human carcinogen. Tumors of the liver in laboratory rodents are associated with DDT. Lung tumors, liver tumors and thyroid tumors in laboratory rodents are associated with DDD. Liver tumors and thyroid tumors in laboratory rodents are associated with DDE. 1998 USEPA "Carcinogenicity Report" Based on epidemiological studies, the National Cancer Institute has found associations between DDT and "increased leukemia, lymphoma, pancreatic cancer, and lung cancer." p. 269, Zahm and Blair, "Carcinogenic Risks from Pesticides," Accomplishments in Cancer Research, 1992 Prize Year, JB Lippincott, 1993; personal communication with Dr. Blair, 10/9/01 DDT'S Adverse Health Effects in Humans include reduced lactation, reduced bone mineral density, and reduced birth weight. Recent research has indicated an association in humans between DDT and reduced length of lactation. "Higher maternal levels of DDE (dichloro diphenyl dichloroethane, the most stable derivative of the pesticide DDT) have been associated with shortened duration of lactation in the general populations of North Carolina." Similar results were found in Mexico. p. 504, Gladen et al., "DDE and Shortened Duration of Lactation in a Northern Mexican Town," American Journal of Public Health, v. 85, #4, pp. 504-508, 1995 Reduced bone mineral density in women may be related to past community exposures to DDT. Beard, J. et al, "1,1,1-Trichloro-2,2-bis(p-Chlorophenyl-Ethane (DDT) and Reduced Bone Mineral Density," Archives of Environmental Health, v. 55, #3, pp. 177-180, May/June 2000 Most recently, lowered birth rates in babies have been associated with DDT exposure. The birth rate data is from a paper in the July 14, 2001 issue of The Lancet. "The findings strongly suggest that DDT use increases preterm births, which is a major contributor to infant mortality. If this association is causal, it should be included in any reassessment of the costs and benefits of vector control with DDT." Longnecker, M., et al., "Association between maternal serum concentration of the DDT metabolite DDE and preterm and small-for-gestational-age babies," The Lancet, v. 358, July 14, 2001, pp. 110-114 DDT's Adverse Effects on Wildlife DDT is a broad spectrum insecticide with adverse effects on beneficial insects as well as the pests. DDT's broad spectrum activity was found to cause a resurgence of a pest insect that had been previously controlled through use of an insect predator when that predator population was reduced through use of the DDT spray. Many wild birds have died of DDT poisoning... including the American robin [deaths] associated with the use of DDT for the control of Dutch elm disease in Michigan. Earthworms, a mainstay of their diet, accumulated high concentrations of DDT and its metabolites. "As few as 11 large earthworms can transfer a lethal dose of DDT to a robin. And 11 worms form a small part of a day's rations to a bird that eats 10 to 12 earthworms in as many minutes... Not all robins receive a lethal dose, but another consequence may lead to the extinction of their kind as surely as fatal poisoning. The shadow of sterility lies over all the bird studies and indeed lengthens to include all living things within its potential range." p. 108 Silent Spring From a more recent source in 1996, Noninfectious Diseases of Wildlife, the conclusions are similar to those in Silent Spring published over 40 years ago. "Despite...die-offs that primarily affected songbirds, the major problem from DDT (through its metabolite DDE) was related to adverse effects on reproductive success and eggshell thinning of certain birds..." p. 65, "Organochlorine Pesticides" Noninfectious Diseases of Wildlife, 2nd edition, Iowa State University Press, 1996 Fish and aquatic invertebrates are very sensitive to the effects of DDT. Basic Guide to Pesticides-charts for DDT, DDD, DDE "One pond that had been treated with DDT to remove unwanted shiners remained so poisonous through repeated drainings and flushings that it killed 94 percent of the sunfish with which it was later stocked. Apparently the chemical remained in the mud of the pond bottom." p. 143, Silent Spring "(...Laboratory studies...showed that almost all fish [Coho salmon] not actually killed by exposure to low concentrations of DDT [3 parts per million] showed symptoms of blindness, with marked opacity of the lens.)" p. 136, Silent Spring DDT's Physical Properties DDT is a mixture of related organochlorines. "Technical DDT has a composition consisting of 92% DDT (various forms), 4.1% DDE (two forms), .4% DDD (two forms), and 3.5% other compounds." p. 61 "Organochlorine Pesticides" in Noninfectious Diseases of Wildlife, 2nd edition, Fairbrother et al. editors, Iowa State University Press, 1996 In addition, DDT can break down to DDE and DDD in the body. p. 126 and 127, Basic Guide to Pesticides, Briggs and Rachel Carson Council, Inc. 1992 In mammals DDT and DDE are stored in fat and their metabolism and excretion are "exceptionally slow." p. 178, Beard, J. et al. "1,1,1-Trichloro-2,2-bis(p-Chlorophenyl-Ethane (DDT) and Reduced Bone Mineral Density," Archives of Environmental Health, v. 55, #3, p. 177-180, May/June 2000 DDT has a long half life in the environment, from 20 to 50 years depending on temperature. Alhough it was banned in 1972, DDT residues are found to this day in soil samples from many areas of the U.S. DDT can be transported on the wind to places remote from its application sites. DDT can reach high levels in animal tissues due to biomagnification (the buildup of fat soluble organochlorines from food sources).
		DDT in Combination with other Organochlorines DDT present in marine mammals in combination with other organochlorines has been associated with early deaths of dolphin calves. Reif, J.S., "The effects of pesticides on marine mammals," RCC's 1998 Wildlife, Pesticides and People Conference "The best method of prevention of toxic effects of most organochlorine pesticides [including DDT] is to severely limit or ban their use." p. 64, "Organochlorine Pesticides" in Noninfectious Diseases of Wildlife, 2nd edition, Iowa State University Press, 1996 A number of biological effects in animals are associated with DDT and its breakdown product DDE. These adverse effects include the following: DDT's Immunological Effects "DDT can affect the immune system. It may induce allergic contact dermatitis in man." p. 341, Descotes, J., Immunotoxicology of Drugs and Chemicals, 2nd edition, 1988, Elsevier, NY "DDT has been found to depress certain mechanisms of the immune system. "...the prevalence of infectious episodes was significantly higher in workers [occupationally exposed to DDT] than in control workers." p. 337, Descotes "Recent data has shown an association between the early deaths of young dolphins and levels of a DDT breakdown product in combination with two other organochlorines. Also associated with DDT and DDE in combination with other organochlorines have been higher levels of illness in adult male dolphins. Reif, J., "The Effects of Pesticides on Marine Mammals," in Proceedings, Wildlife Pesticides and People Conference, October 1998 DDT's Neurological Effects DDT primarily acts on the nervous system including the brain, since it can cross the blood-brain barrier. DDT disrupts nerve transmission by affecting the permeability of the nerve cell. Signs of toxicity include twitching, tremors, convulsions, increased temperature (see Basic Guide to Pesticides, organochlorine chemical class). Levels can build up in animal tissues to reach toxic levels over days, months, or years. "DDT seems to be a potent neurotoxic agent especially for neonatal mammals. Exposure on day 10 after birth of laboratory mice to a single low oral dose of DDT resulted in a significant increase in spontaneous motor behavior (resembling hyperactivity) in the animals as adults and a significant decrease in muscarinic cholinergic receptors in the adult cerebral cortex." "The critical time for toxicity of DDT in the newly born animal seems to coincide with a spurt in growth of brain tissue." Eriksson, P., et al., "Exposure to DDT during a defined period in neonatal life induces permanent changes in brain muscarinic receptors and behavior in adult mice," Brain Research, 582, (1992) 277-281 "A similar effect could take place in very young humans possibly contributing to the recent increase of childhood behavior disorders." DDT's Effects on Reproduction and Hormones "DDT-related eggshell thinning in birds is due to inhibition of an enzyme in the shell gland. Some forms of DDT interfere with binding sites for progesterone (the hormone of pregnancy)." "DDT may interfere with androgen (male hormone) receptor binding sites." "Some DDT components can interfere with adrenal cortical functions such as production of corticosteroids." "In animals and birds, DDT can also induce enzymes that increase the body's ability to metabolize hormones thus interfering with the normal functioning of the body's endocrine system." p. 34 & 35, "Environmental Estrogens" in Noninfectious Diseases of Wildlife, 2nd edition DDT's impact on hormone activity is primarily feminization of the male but other effects take place as well. "A DDT component injected into gull eggs can mimic the action of estrogen. Colonial nesting, fish-eating birds breeding in "hot spots" of DDT contamination have shown signs of estrogenic development defects." DDT has been found to have a role in altering embryonic sexual development reducing subsequent reproductive success in the alligators of Lake Apopka, Florida. In male turtles, frogs, and mosquito fish, DDT induced the yolk protein vitellogenin normally found only in females. "Reproductive impairment of feral fish have been associated with elevated DDT in females. DDT concentration in lake trout and winter flounder have been associated with reduced reproductive success primarily due to embryo lethality." p. 36, "Environmental Estrogens" in Noninfectious Diseases of Wildlife, 2nd edition DDD, a contaminant and breakdown product of DDT, bioaccumulated through an aquatic food chain in Clear Lake (California) to reach concentrations in the bodies of resident waterfowl (grebes) up to 80,000 times greater than that of the water to which it was applied. This is possible due to the ability of this stable, fat soluble chemical to undergo biomagnification up the food chain that begins with gnats and proceeds through crustaceans and fish up to the fish-eating waterfowl. The result of this accumulation in the birds' tissues was a failure of the grebes to reproduce and ultimately their disappearance from Clear Lake. This episode is described in Silent Spring (pp. 46-50). Perhaps the most well-known effect of DDT on wildlife is its reduction of the thickness of bald eagle, osprey, and peregrine falcon eggshells and associated declines in their populations. p. 65, "Organochlorine Pesticides" in Noninfectious Diseases of Wildlife, 2nd edition, Fairbrother et al. editors, Iowa State University Press, 1996 Since the ban on DDT by the EPA in 1972, previously low populations of these birds have gradually increased in the U.S.

		Banned pesticides are associated with low birth weights in neighborhoods where they were heavily used A federal ban on indoor use of two organophosphates, diazinon and chlorpyrifos, has "significantly reduced the number of underweight babies born in neighborhoods where the chemicals had been widely used."
		At RCC, we have been trying to get our environmental message out: through letters to the editor (too oftenunpublished), through our website and other publications, and through personal responses to individuals. We have found that the public is hungry for our information. And we need to do more! If we had greater funding resources, we could Provide regular updates to our website and to our Board members Send our brochure on Teflon to pet stores, animal shelters and other relevant places Prepare articles for major publications Have campaigns exposing blatant errors of fact by anti-environmental proponents Produce an environmental news service that reflects our mission, giving a balance of issues for the general public, not just for other scientists Rally other groups to contact the EPA Promote alternatives to chemical pesticides, and Promote a sense of wonder and closeness to nature for children of all ages These are goals that we have always fulfilled to some degree. Unfortunately we have been obliged to carry them out on a small scale. With your help we can do even more!

YOU can make a difference in global warming
			GLOBAL WARMING - Close to Home Greenhouse Gases Greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and others) trap heat in the Earth's atmosphere. Since the Industrial Revolution, human activities have increased atmospheric carbon dioxide by 30%, nitrous oxide by 15% and methane by 100%. Global climate change can take many forms. As the overall surface temperature of the Earth increases, other weather changes will also occur, including an increase in the number and severity of hurricanes. In many areas, extended droughts, floods and rising sea level will make survival itself very difficult. While the exact results of global climate change are unclear, it is certain that this is an immediate threat that cannot simply be ignored. Solving the problem of global warming will require action on all levels: from individuals at the local level to the national and international community. Individual/local action is often the area where immediate change can most easily be achieved. Below are some manageable activities to combat global warming locally. For more information: USEPA Global Warming - Climate: http://yosemite.epa.gov/OAR/globalwarming.nsf/content/Climate.html Energy Information Administration - Greenhouse Gases, Climate Change, and Energy: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggccebro/chapter1.html G.R.E.A.T. Activities for Individual Action G - Gardening R - Recycling E - Energy use A - Aquatic (water use) T - Transportation These GREAT activities positively impact the environment and save you money! Gardening Plant trees; increase "natural areas"; strive to have a "sustainable yard;" retain plant cuttings / leaves on-site and compost them; plant bird and butterfly-friendly gardens. Recycling Recycle glass, metal, newspapers, cardboard, and plastic. Compost leaves, yard waste / table scraps (non-meat only). Purchase items containing recycled materials. Re-use and recycle other items whenever possible. Energy Have an energy audit done on your home; insulate your home; reduce energy use whenever possible; turn out the lights when you leave a room; when replacing appliances purchase more efficient ones that use less energy, such as Energy Star appliances; replace incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescent bulbs. Aquatic Use Use rain barrels in the yard; install water efficient toilets and low-flow showerheads; use water responsibly. Energy Star dishwashers and washing machines use less water as well as saving energy. Transportation When possible, walk or bike rather than drive to reduce car usage; try to drive smoothly using moderate speeds; give your vehicle frequent check ups; when replacing it, consider fuel efficiency and hybrid vehicles. Local Government Actions Encourage sustainable organic gardening Increase recycling effort Encourage energy audits and energy saving practices Redesign long-range plans with energy saving in mind Promote efficient and effective public transportation (bus/rail) Add bike paths to as many roads as possible Support Ecological Building Initiatives Encourage Renewable Portfolio Standards
			A Sample Petition for Addressing Global Warming on the Local Level
			We, the undersigned, call on the___________________ (insert name of your local governmental body) to address the issue of Global Warming. This phenomenon and the associated climate change can have a potential negative impact on our way of life and our actions accelerate this negative change.
			In 2004, a group of religious leaders and scientists stated, "…Global climate change presents an unprecedented threat to the integrity of life on earth, and a challenge to the universal values that bind us as human beings" (The Washington Post, 5-20-04)
			We advocate forming a Global Warming Task Force to focus on all aspects of this issue. The Task Force would serve to advise the _________________ (your local governmental body) and the community. The Task Force would be composed of persons from a wide spectrum of society including the scientific, environmental, educational, spiritual and business communities as well as lay persons. Those on the Task Force should be persons who see global warming as a real problem and a challenge. They should seek ways to better understand and slow global warming by creating enlightened public policies and encouraging citizens to take individual actions to reduce it.
			A recent survey found that "more than 3 out of 4 Americans think the Federal Government is not doing enough to address global warming… More than 4 out of 5 Americans support efforts by state and local officials to curb global warming…" (from "Global Warming & Alternative Energy: A Leadership Survey" commissioned by the Civil Society Institute and 40MPG.org, March 15, 2006)
			We are aware that the ________________ (your local governmental body) may already have some programs that work to reduce global warming, however there is a need to create a comprehensive effort, and to provide incentives for implementation.
			Signers of this petition who are willing to work on such a Task Force are placing an asterisk (*) before our names. We here include our Name, State, Zipcode, e-mail address, and Phone number.
			1.
			2.
			3.
			4.
			5.
			6. etc.
			See what some state and local action plans and task forces are already doing to help get you started in your area:
			http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar%5Cglobalwarming.nsf/content/ActionsStateActionPlans.html
			http://www.burlingtonelectric.com/SpecialTopics/climate.htm
			http://www.10percentchallenge.org/
			http://www.cleanair-coolplanet.org/

Rachel Carson Council, Inc.	PO Box 10779, Silver Spring, Maryland 20914
e-mail: rccouncil@aol.com	Tel: (301) 593-7507