DDT MISHANDLED WHEN NOT BANNED

There have been reports too numerous to mention about the banning of DDT coinciding with a rise in malaria deaths in the Third World. It would appear however that the relationship between the two events has not been straightforward in at least some cases. One of my more dedicated readers has drawn my attention to this academic journal article (PDF) which reviews the use of DDT in India. As is occasionally mentioned, Third World countries were exempted from the ban at their own discretion and it appears from the article that India already had its own DDT factories so continued to use it. After some years, however, the mosquitoes developed resistance to DDT so it was that resistance which caused malaria to rebound in India rather than the banning of DDT.

The real problem behind the malaria resurgence, then, was the quite criminal bureaucratic incompetence of India's socialist government in allowing resistance to develop. As the article says:

"Coverage rates are too low. To be effective a DDT spraying programme must cover a high (>90% of structures) portion of the targetted area. However India historically has undersupplied its spraying programme. For example, a study by NMEP reported that during the period of MPO from 1977 to 1984, insecticide spray (DDT, HCH, Malathion) could cover only 40-60% of the targetted areas."

Note that again: It is not only DDT which has been grossly misused in India but also the main alternative chemicals, HCH and Malathion. So it is getting to the point where NOTHING will kill an Indian mosquito.

So it seems to be bureaucratic incompetence rather than the Greenies that is reponsible for India's continuing malaria problem -- and the same seems to be true in Sri Lanka. Whether that applies in other countries, however, I have no information at this stage. Moral of the story? If the Greenies don't get you the socialists will!





A BILLION DOLLARS IS NOT ENOUGH FOR TOADS

After all, the money will only come out of the pockets of home buyers and who cares about them? They're rich!

Protecting the endangered arroyo toad in California could cost $1 billion over the next 10 years, the federal government says. The price tag includes purchasing land for toad habitat, delays in getting development projects through environmental regulations, and altering construction projects to minimize harm to toads, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service analysis says. About $937 million of the cost would fall on the real estate industry. "Some of the estimated costs already are occurring due to the listing of the arroyo toad and protective measures in place as a result of the listing," the Fish and Wildlife Service said. "These costs include lands set aside for toad conservation to compensate for loss of toad habitat, and measures needed to protect the toad while construction is ongoing."

The gravel-colored arroyo toad -- bufo microscaphus californicus -- lives in rivers with shallow, gravelly pools adjacent to sandy terraces. The adult toads burrow into the sand during the day and emerge at night to eat insects. Once found in streams from San Luis Obispo County to Baja California, the arroyo toad has been driven from an estimated 75 percent of its former range by human activity, federal officials say. Those include dams, farming and urbanization, and the introduction of non-native predators like rainbow trout and bullfrogs. The toad was declared in danger of extinction in 1994....

Representatives of the building industry, which has argued previous economic studies have underestimated the costs, said they had not yet reviewed the latest study and could not comment.

The analysis is coming out at a time when the Fish and Wildlife Service is taking comments on a revised plan for the designation of critical habitat for the arroyo toad. After originally proposing nearly 500,000 acres for critical habitat, the Fish and Wildlife Service has reduced the latest proposal to 95,655 acres, from Santa Barbara County to San Diego County. More than half of the acreage is in private hands....

Because of the toad's endangered status, 3,000 acres along Little Rock Creek in the Angeles National Forest have been closed to off-roaders, fishermen and campers since 1999.... The size of the proposed critical habitat is not large enough, according to the environmental group Center for Biological Diversity. The organization is examining the proposal to determine whether it will pursue legal action against it.

More here

***************************************

Many people would like to be kind to others so Leftists exploit that with their nonsense about equality. Most people want a clean, green environment so Greenies exploit that by inventing all sorts of far-fetched threats to the environment. But for both, the real motive is to promote themselves as wiser and better than everyone else, truth regardless.

Comments? Email me here. My Home Page is here or here. For times when blogger.com is playing up, there are mirrors of this site here and here.

*****************************************