From: Michael Greven
Columbus
Thank you to The Republic and Mark Webber for printing the article “Environmentalists question use of herbicides.” I also appreciated Carl Leinhoop providing his input. That said, we should all note a few very important things, some of which Leinhoop referenced.
1. Chemical applications on personal property: Regrettably, the folks at Monsanto have lied through their teeth, like big tobacco did for years, about the harmful effects of smoking. Roundup, and similar products, are sold in ridiculous quantities, and Roundup is being applied everywhere you look.
The telltale brown or bare ditchbanks, herb free driveways, brown ground cover surrounding mailboxes or fencelines are all clear indicators of its application. The active ingredient, glyphospate, is a carcinogen according to many experts. Without a doubt Monsanto has its own “experts” who will tell a different story. Common sense tells us that anything that kills that effectively cannot be good for our bodies or our health. We like our green, weed-free lawns and hassle-free fence lines, and are willing to turn a blind eye to the truth. That is a mistake.
2. Chemical applications by utilities, railroads and government organizations: I am old enough to remember the be-all, end-all pesticide: DDT. It was advertised as safe and effective. Well it was effective, killing nearly anything that it got in to. But safe? Far from it! It took scientists understanding the crash in the California Condor population to fully realize how dangerous DDT really was.
It took years, but DDT was finally removed from the marketplace in the U.S. Today we are using different chemicals, but they have the same labels: safe and effective. Nonsense. Utilities, railroads and government organizations are using herbicides on an unprecedented scale to clear right of ways. Before, these areas were mowed. Now, you see huge swaths of brown where the chemicals have been sprayed to kill everything that is green that doesn’t quite match the desires of who ever made the chemicals.
Carcinogenic? Yes! There is no value in this application and it is an unsustainable practice for the environment. This is a clear case of cost cutting where the decision has not been made with all factors being considered, namely cost, impact on the environment and impact on people.
On Nov. 3 an article was published titled “Rural America’s own private Flint: Polluted Water too Dangerous to Drink.” This article focused heavily on some of the dangers associated with nitrates and farm chemical run off. We all know farm chemicals and livestock waste pose significant challenges to the health of rivers and streams, and I would like to think farmers in our community are doing what they can to mitigate that. The article is worth reading. Here is the link: nytimes.com/2018/11/03/us/water-contaminated-rural-america.html.
Our government officials need to work to ensure that what we do is safe today and will not adversely impact the environment for our children and grandchildren. Period.
