 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
FISHERIES MANAGEMENT & LEGISLATIVE REPORT
by Tom Fote
FISHERIES MANAGEMENT & LEGISLATIVE REPORT
by Tom Fote
(from Jersey Coast Anglers Association December 2000 Newsletter)
Rather than repeat myself, just read
the summer flounder column. If that doesn’t
give you indigestion, I doubt that anything will. However,
if you still don’t need Pepto Bismol, check out the column on the balloon launch.
Following
is a letter reprinted from the Fisherman Magazine, 11/2/2000. If you ever wonder if the battles are worth it,
just read this letter.
Dear
Mr. Barrett,
That special day
was finally here again, the Governor’s Annual Surf Fishing Tournament. All the preparations the week before –
fishing poles, bait, tackle boxes and lunch. It
was hectic, but well worth it. I couldn’t
wait to go but I hated getting up sooo earrrly for the two-hour trip to Island Beach State
Park. We had lots of gear to pack up, but we
were off by 3 a.m.! I was hoping the weather
would be as good as last year when I placed second in the Jr. Boys Division. I prayed to the sea gods secretly, but I think dad
did, too.
At the beach, we
had to lug all our gear to Pavilion 2, and
that was pretty far! I took a quick rest
during registration, and then the fun began. Dad
says that being on the beach at first light is as good as it gets. He’s right!
An hour into the tournament, I felt a nibble.
I thought it was a sea robin but I reeled it in anyway. I saw something flop! I figured it was only 16 to 17 inches. Well, was I surprised when I found out I had
reeled in Flukezilla!!! God of all fish! It was 22 ¾ inches and weighed 4 ½ pounds on the
scale at Betty & Nicks! From that point
on I took it easy, I caught a great fish.
I wanted to say
“Thanks” to all the people who make this tournament possible especially Governor
Christine Whitman. Dad and I look forward to
this event every year because it’s “Our Special Time” to fish together and
have some fun. By the way, my mom screamed
for joy and my little brother said it was radical!!!!
Jason Jayanaty/A
Governor’s Cup Winner
The preliminary data generated by the
Marine Recreational Fishing Statistical Survey (MRFFS) for the 2000 recreational summer
flounder fishery was recently disseminated. Anglers
from North Carolina to Massachusetts supposedly caught roughly 16 million pounds, a huge
increase over 1999. The fact that the
fishery is growing is good news for anglers and the sportfishing industry, but here’s
the bad news. If the preliminary figures hold up after review, we are well over our catch
limit of 7.4 million pounds. Next year, the
recreational harvest limit will not be expanded as expected because of a lawsuit by
environmental groups it will be reduced to 7.1 million pounds. What this means is a
possible reduction of well over 50% from the 2000 recreational harvest limit will be
required in 2001. In addition to the 50+% reduction, we may be required to pay back the 8
million pound overage that appears to have occurred this year in 2001.
I can already hear some people saying
the easiest way to pay back the overage is to simply keep the recreational season closed
for all of 2001. I’d like to see what the negative economic impact of such a move
would be. Can you imagine the lost revenue to the states of Massachusetts, Rhode Island,
Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia and North Carolina? This
is the fishery that drives recreational fishing participation for a good portion of the
year in most of these states. Beyond the economic impacts, how would such a move affect
the quality of life of the millions of people who enjoy fishing for and eating summer
flounder throughout its range?
I could appreciate such a drastic
move if we were dealing with an endangered species or a fishery balanced on the verge of
collapse, but that is certainly not the case. The real problem is that the fishery has
expanded so dramatically that we can’t seem to place enough restrictions on fishermen
to meet the artificial targets set in the plan. In
less than ten years in New Jersey we have gone from no bag limit and a size limit of 13
inches and no closed season to bag limits of 8 fish per angler with a size limit that
varies from 15-1/2 and very restrictive seasons. All
states have seen the same thing happen. And
we still cannot control the catch which has expanded five-fold since the early 1990s. All
surveys indicate that overall participation in the fishery has not expanded to any
significant degree, yet anglers are catching more and bigger fish every year. Could the stocks be in better shape than what NMFS
is estimating??
We are dealing with a rapidly
expanding fishery, all the evidence needed to indicate it’s time to relax the
regulations, and yet we are still strangling anglers with a harvest limit that has not had
a significant increase in over six years. The stocks are growing at an incredible rate.
The age structure has been expanded with more large fish and just more fish than have been
seen in twenty years and we expect recreational fishermen to be able to restrain their
catches artificially to meet a threshold that appears impossible.
The problem does not exist
exclusively with the recreational sector, although the recreational overages are far more
visible because of the public nature of the MRFFS survey. Commercial trawler fishermen,
who also have an equally important stake in this valuable fishery, have been telling
managers for the past three years about discards occurring at an alarming rate unheard of
in the history of the fishery. They report that regardless of what kind of fish they are
targeting they can’t get away from all the summer flounder and they are being forced
to throw back hundreds of thousands of pounds of legal size, saleable fish. Most discards
are thrown back dead because the regulations prohibit commercial fishermen from landing
them. This is further evidence of a stock that is expanding and is underestimated using
current statistical models. Unfortunately, we
see the glaring overages being reported by the recreational sector, but the overwhelming
majorities of commercial discards go unreported and never enter into fishing mortality
estimates of the plan. This is unfortunate for everyone involved. JCAA has question whether the present form of
fisheries models can deal with a stock that is recovering faster than expected.
In summary, we anticipate serious
problems with next year’s recreational catch limits.
However, we have one advantage. Unlike
tuna, which impacts on about 15,000 permit holders, or the commercial swordfish catch,
which impacts about 400 boats, fluke is the number one recreational fish from North
Carolina to Massachusetts. There are easily
500,000 boats and millions of anglers who fish for fluke.
The National Marine Fisheries Service and environmental groups who are
plaintiffs in the lawsuit would be foolish indeed to alienate all of these people. We need to let them know that we will not allow
them to use legal technicalities to destroy this recreational fishery. JCAA will be meeting with recreational groups and
reaching out to the environmental community. We
would like to avoid this “disaster in the making” for recreational anglers and
the recreational fishing industry. Here’s
how you can get involved. Write to your
congressmen and the National Marine Fisheries Service to explain how important this
fishery is to you. Demand that the National
Marine Fisheries Service revamp their models and develop a system that accurately reports
the current stocks. On November 29th
the Atlantic Marine Fisheries Service will meet in Warwick, Rhode Island. There will be a Summer Flounder Technical
Committee Meeting on December 4th and there will be a joint meeting of the
ASMFC and the Mid-Atlantic Council from December 12th and 13th. I will be sending email alerts. If you are not on the email list, send your email
address to tfote@jcaa.org.
I was surprised and outraged to
discover that funeral homes around the nation were capitalizing on Veteran’s Day and
the public sentiment for a World War II Memorial to promote their own businesses in a
totally inappropriate and environmentally damaging manner.
They were promoting visits to their funeral homes as people came to donate
$5.00 for a balloon launch with a $5.00 matching donation from the funeral home. These balloons were launched nation wide on
Veteran’s Day. What a way to honor
veterans! I went to the launch at Huddy Park
in Toms River to protest this blatant commercialism at the expense of our veterans and the
environment. As a disabled Vietnam veteran, I
was uncomfortable protesting at a Veteran’s Day event. However, the veterans in attendance were
supportive and clearly understood why the balloon launch was inappropriate. The VFW leaders in attendance were also fishermen
and shared my dismay. I was delighted that
many parents brought their children to honor our veterans but was concerned that the
balloon launch sent the wrong message. We can
only hope that this concern is shared nation wide and these balloon launches are not
repeated. My letter to the press in included
below. If you are a veteran, contact your
local funeral parlor and your local veteran’s organizations and let them know how you
feel.
11/11/00
Many JCAA members are veterans. At our association meetings, we have members who
have served in our armed services from World War II to the present. We are concerned about veterans needs and support
the creation of a World War II monument. I
am a disabled Vietnam veteran and believe I speak for many veterans. While we support the creation of a World War II
monument, we believe there are better ways to raise money.
We know that balloon launches have a serious detrimental impact on the
environment. Turtles and many other marine
species confuse the balloons for food. Once
they ingest a balloon it clogs their intestines and they die. The same thing happens to land-based species. Birds and other animals mistake the balloons for
food, ingest them and die. We have known this
for years. Advertising the use of
biodegradable balloons gives people a false sense that the balloons will not harm the
environment. The balloons take some time to
degrade and they remain dangerous throughout that period.
Schools and organizations have stopped having balloon launches for this
reason. We cannot believe that in Ocean
County, where a concern for the environment is paramount, we would choose to honor our
veterans in such a negative way.
Many of our public and private
buildings have signs demanding an end to ocean dumping.
A vast majority of our citizens support clean ocean efforts. This balloon launch is clearly ocean dumping at
its worst.
Thomas
P. Fote
Legislative Chairman JCAA &
NJSFSC
Through the NJPTRG Law & Policy
Center, researchers, organizers and attorneys conduct special projects, craft public
policy proposals, and conduct outreach around key public interest issues. Here is a report
on efforts to improve public health and environmental protections for the state’s
waterways.
Organizing thousands of people to
attend a single event related to environmental protection is not a common occurrence.
However, for the Federation of New Jersey State Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs
(NJSFSC) and Jersey Coast Anglers Association (JCAA) it happens regularly at trade shows
and hearings on hunting and fishing policies. NJPTRG and leaders of these organizations
saw the potential. If we could join forces to protect the environment and specifically New
Jersey rivers, streams and estuaries, we could accomplish something that has not been done
before.
Adding to the importance of the
project, NJSFSC and JCAA has 75% of their membership in South Jersey, the fastast growing
area of the state, and are facing some of the most severe environmental pressures.
“Just as we started this unique
partnership, the DEP has proposed new Water Quality and Watershed Management Planning
Rules (WQWMP). The timing was perfect. As fishermen, we are very concerned about the
impact on sewage treatment facilities and over development on our rivers and streams,”
stated Tom Fote, Legislative Director, JCAA. “We are especially concerned that the
proposed rule would allow sewage plants to dump 300 million gallons of additional
pollution into New Jersey’s waterways without any analysis of its impact,” he
added. “The coalition has already had an impact on clean water policies in the state.
Together, we have conducted extensive outreach to a range of South Jersey consistencies on
water quality issues, including contacting and activating 162 South Jersey organizations,
working with over two-dozen state legislators and numerous local leaders and mayors,”
stated Sam Boykin, Field Director, NJPIRG. The coalition worked closely with the Sierra
Club and the New Jersey Environmental Federation among others.
Due to public opposition, the
Governor recently extended the public comment period for another 30 days ending now on
October 3, 2000.
“This is a long term project,” stated George Howard, Executive Director, State Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs. “We expect the project to continue over the next several years as the DEP will propose several new regulations culminating in 2007 with the completion of the federally required clean up plans for all of the state’s polluted waterways.”
Last
month we discussed the problems that are inherent in indiscriminate spraying for the West
Nile Virus. For your information, we have
included part 2 of the article. At the last
JCAA meeting, we decided to write a letter to Governor Whitman expressing our concerns
about this type of spraying. We also have
signed on to a joint letter with environmental groups to further express our concerns and
make recommendations. Both of those letters
are included below. Please send your own
letter on this topic to Governor Whitman.
From Rachel’s Environment & Health Biweekly #710-October 26, 2000
Environmental
Research Foundation
P.O.
Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403
Fax
(410) 263-8944; E-mail: erf@rachel.org.
As we saw two weeks ago (REHW #709),
West Nile virus (WNV) appeared in the U.S. for the first time in 1999.** WNV was previously unknown in the Western
Hemisphere, but it has now spread to seven states, most recently North Carolina.[1]
Carried by mosquitoes that can infect humans, this virus often produces no symptoms at all
but can sometimes lead to serious illness. In some cities, public health authorities have
responded by spraying entire neighborhoods with pesticides intended to kill mosquitoes. These mass pesticide sprayings pose threats to
human health and do not necessarily reduce populations of disease-bearing mosquitoes.
Experiences with another
mosquito-borne virus, eastern equine encephalitis (EEE), indicate that pesticide sprays do
not necessarily achieve the desired effect. For example, a 1997 study looked at trends in
populations of CULISETA MELANURA, the mosquito primarily responsible for transmitting EEE
among birds. Over a period of eleven years,
Cicero Swamp in central New York state was sprayed fifteen times with one insecticide and
once with another. Instead of declining, the population of CS. MELANURA grew fifteen-fold during this period. The
study suggests that the pesticides may have altered the ecological balance of the swamp,
killing organisms whose presence would ordinarily help limit the CS. MELANURA
population.[2] In general, spraying can kill fish and other natural mosquito predators,
and repeated spraying can produce pesticide-resistant mosquitoes.[3]
Pesticides meant to kill flying
insects are often applied as an ultra-low volume (ULV) spray. ULV spray equipment creates
tiny pesticide droplets that can remain aloft for long periods and, due to their light
weight, readily drift away from the target area. Scientists have estimated that less than
0.0001% of ULV pesticide sprays actually reach the target insects.[4,pgs.18,22] So for
every droplet that reaches a mosquito, hundreds of thousands more droplets circulate
pointlessly in the environment.
Effective mosquito control uses
knowledge of mosquito ecology to minimize opportunities for human exposure. One important
tactic is reducing mosquito breeding habitats. CULEX PIPIENS, also known as the northern
house mosquito, has been the principal though not the only mosquito species transmitting
WNV in the U.S. in 1999 and 2000. CX. PIPIENS breeds readily in standing water found in
places like wading pools, birdbaths, puddles, ditches, and standing surface water from
septic systems. [5] Its typical flight range is a quarter to a half-mile. [6] This means
that a mosquito that bites you on your front porch may well have hatched in your back yard—and
that you and your neighbors can have a direct effect on local mosquito populations.
On a community level, guidelines for
effective mosquito control include:
** Do not use “adulticides,”
or pesticides meant to kill adult mosquitoes.
** Focus on controlling mosquitoes in
their immature forms: eggs, larvae, or pupae. Stock ponds and other bodies of water with
mosquito-eating fish, and keep waterways clean so that fish and other mosquito predators
can survive. In some cases, it is appropriate to use bacterial larvicides or mechanical
controls such as vegetable-based oils that smother mosquito eggs floating on the surface
of the water. [3] Mechanical control of adults may be an option as well. Traps exist that
may attract and kill mosquitoes over areas of up to an acre. (See, for example, www.mosquitomagnet.com.)[3]
** On a municipal or county level,
set up a system for citizens to report standing water near their homes. [7]
** Establish monitoring programs to
pinpoint where mosquito-borne diseases are occurring. Monitoring can rely both on trapping
mosquitoes and on “sentinel birds,” such as chickens, tested regularly for signs
of infection. [3]
** Continuously evaluate the
effectiveness of all mosquito control measures.
** Make sure the public knows what
people can do at home to minimize mosquito exposure and eliminate breeding sites. Public
health education is a good investment of resources and will pay off better than quick-fix
expenditures on chemical sprays. ^Here are some steps individuals can take around their
homes: [8]
** Get rid of any unnecessary items
on your property that can hold stagnant water, such as old tires.
** Empty water from buckets, toys,
and containers, and store them in places where they will not collect rain.
** Drill holes in the bottoms of
recycling bins and any other containers that must be kept outdoors.
** Drain the water from birdbaths,
fountains, wading pools, plant pots and drip trays twice a week.
** Check for other ways water may be
collecting around your house, such as puddles beneath air conditioners.
** Clean out your gutters and fix
gutters that sag or do not drain completely. Check for areas of standing water on flat
roofs.
** If you have a swimming pool,
outdoor sauna, or hot tub, make sure rainwater does not collect on the cover.
** Clear vegetation and trash from
any drains, culverts, ponds or streams on your property so that water drains properly.
** Keep grass cut short and trim
shrubs to minimize hiding places for adult mosquitoes.
** Eliminate standing water in your
basement.
** To minimize the likelihood of
being bitten inside your house, make sure window and door screens fit properly and replace
outdoor lights with yellow “bug lights.”
** To avoid being bitten outdoors,
wear hats, long sleeves and long pants in the evenings, when mosquitoes are most active.
Insect repellents can help, but some
of them are dangerous. Products containing
the pesticide DEET should be avoided. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
acknowledges fourteen cases in which individuals reported seizures associated with
exposure to DEET. Twelve were children, three of whom died. [9, pgs. 22-23] DEET can also
interact with other chemicals to produce severe toxic effects on the nervous system, and
may have played a role in Gulf War Syndrome (see REHW #498 ). Based on existing
information about DEET’s health effects, EPA determined in September 1998 that the
labels on some DEET-containing products were misleading. Under EPA’s new
requirements, it is illegal to label DEET-containing products as designed for children or
“safe for kids.” However, EPA chose to allow a grace period of more than four
years during which products with old labels can be sold [9, pg. 41], so stores can still
sell products with misleading safety claims.
Many essential oils derived from
plants have insect repellent properties, and some plant-based formulations provide
protection from bites. [10] CONSUMER REPORTS magazine says a product called Bite Blocker
is effective for 1 to 4 hours. [11] With all insect repellents, it is worth minimizing
your exposure. Treat clothing, rather than skin, whenever possible, and wash off
repellents with soap and water after returning indoors. ^If WNV has not yet appeared where
you live, you may want to get ready in case it appears next year. You can start now to
educate your town, city, or county officials about pesticide hazards and encourage them to
develop a comprehensive non-chemical mosquito control program. It makes sense to contact
these officials during the winter, when they are not under pressure to act quickly.
^Find out whether your city or town
already has a mosquito control program, and try to identify an individual in your public
health department who is responsible for mosquito-borne diseases. Ask whether the department has a written plan for
responding if infected birds or mosquitoes are found in your area. ^This could also be a
good opportunity to find out about and work to eliminate “nuisance” mosquito
control programs, in which routine spraying is carried out with no public health
rationale. ^Finally, you may wish to raise
awareness about the links between global warming and emerging infectious diseases. Because
global warming creates opportunities for tropical diseases to spread or move northward,
the appearance of WNV in the U.S. may be a harbinger of things to come. If your
municipality has a program to reduce emissions of “greenhouse gases” such as
carbon dioxide, talking about links to WNV could help jumpstart the program or give it new
publicity.
^Paul Epstein of Harvard Medical
School’s Center for Health and the Global Environment argues that the spread of
mosquito-borne diseases like WNV is aided by several phenomena associated with global
warming, including mild winters, hot summers, and drought.
The “globalized” economy and increasing international travel also
create new opportunities for exchange of diseases across regions. According to Epstein, back-to-back weather
extremes in 1998 and 1999 probably encouraged the proliferation of WNV and the mosquitoes
that carry it. In a recent article in SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN he writes, “The mild winter
of 1998-99 enabled many of the mosquitoes to survive into the spring, which arrived early. Drought in spring and summer concentrated
nourishing organic matter in their breeding areas and simultaneously killed off mosquito
predators, such as lacewings and ladybugs, that would otherwise have helped limit mosquito
populations. Drought would also have led birds to congregate more, as they shared fewer
and smaller watering holes, many of which were frequented, naturally, by mosquitoes.”[12,
pg. 54] Later in the summer, heavy rain created new mosquito breeding opportunities.
Higher temperatures also tend to increase mosquito activity and accelerate the
reproduction and maturation of viruses within their bodies. [12, p.52]
^As communities make decisions about
WNV, public officials must be prepared to talk frankly about the uncertainties they face. For example, it is not acceptable to provide ample
information on risks associated with WNV while withholding parallel information on the
toxicity of pesticides used to combat mosquitoes. As always, our ability to make good
decisions depends on honesty about scientific uncertainties combined with open public
discussion of the full range of alternatives available to us.
· Rachel Massey is a consultant to
Environmental Research Foundation.
** Thanks to
Audrey Thier of Environmental Advocates (www.envadvocates.org)
for helping clarify several points in this issue.
[1] “West Nile Virus Found in
North Carolina,” REUTERS, October 20, 2000.
[2] John J. Howard and Joanne Oliver,
“Impact of Naled (Dibrom
14) on the Mosquito Vectors of Eastern
Equine Encephalitis
Virus,” JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN
MOSQUITO CONTROL ASSOCIATION Vol.
13, No. 4 (December 1997), pgs.
315-325
[3] For information on resistance and
alternative mosquito control measures, see Environmental Advocates and others, “Toward
Safer Mosquito Control in New York State,” January 2000, available at http://www.envadvocates.org/public_html/temp/
mosquito.htm.
[4] David Pimentel, “Amounts of
Pesticides Reaching Target Pests:
Environmental Impacts and Ethics.”
JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS Vol. 8, No. 1 (1995), pgs. 17-29.
[5] “Mosquito Control In and
Around the House,” fact sheet available at http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~insects/sompam.htm;
“Mosquito Control in Maryland,”
fact sheet available at
http://www.mda.state.md.us/mosquito/progdesc.biology
[6] “Biological Data on 25 Common
Species of Mosquito Found in
Coastal North Carolina,” North
Carolina Public Health information
site, http://www.deh.enr.state.nc.us/phm/Pages/Biology.hm
[7] For one example, see http://www.erie.gov/
standing_water_form.phtml
[8] See U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, “Mosquitoes: How to
Control Them,” available at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
citizens/mosquito.htm and “West
Nile Virus: The Facts,”
available at http://www.erie.gov/west_nile_virus.phtml
[9] U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Office of Prevention,
Pesticides, and Toxic Substances.
“Reregistration Eligibility
Decision (RED): DEET,”
Washington, D.C.: US EPA, September 1998,
EPA publication 738-R-98-010.
Available at http://www.epa.gov/
oppsrrd1/REDs/0002red.pdf
[10] Mark S Fradin, “Mosquitoes
and Mosquito Repellents: A Clinician’s Guide,” ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE Vol.
128 (June, 1998), pgs. 931-940. See www.acponline.org/journals/annals/
01jun98/mosquito.htm.
[11] “Buzz Off,” CONSUMER
REPORTS Vol. 65, No. 6 (June 2000), pgs. 14-17.
[12] Paul R. Epstein, “Is Global
Warming Harmful to Health?”
SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN Vol. 283, No. 2
(August 2000), pp. 50-57.
The Honorable Christine Todd Whitman
State House
P.O. Box 001
Trenton, NJ 08625-0001
Dear Governor Whitman:
As the active mosquito season of 2000
draws to a close, government officials, mosquito commissions, and the public will be
asking hard questions about the effectiveness of West Nile virus control measures. There is no system in place to collect adverse
reactions to the pesticide spraying in either human or wildlife populations, particularly
fish.
New Jersey is fortunate in that it
has ongoing, year round county-based mosquito control efforts to reduce populations and
monitor for disease. This is done through eliminating breeding sites and using larval
controls in detention ponds and ditches. Larvaciding
is considered to be the most effective way of stemming mosquito borne diseases. Adult mosquitoes are more difficult to control. In the absence of infected mosquito populations
and without a clear demonstration that pesticides will check disease transmission, over
reliance on aerial and ground spraying can do more harm than good especially when spraying
is done over open water.
Pesticides cannot tell good organisms
from bad, and effects on fish and beneficial insects like bees, butterflies and other
pollinators are a concern. It is time for the
Agricultural Experiment Station of Rutgers University to revise their recommendations for
mosquito control to reflect “ least toxic” integrated pest management methods. If pesticides are determined to be necessary, the
least toxic ones should be chosen and deployed based on mosquito population monitoring
information.
Environmental monitoring of fish and
waterways needs to be conducted. Long Island
lobstermen have noticed a significant decline of lobsters in the Long Island Sound
following last year’s West Nile virus spraying of malathion and pyrethroid pesticides
in New York. In New Jersey, low levels of
malathion have been detected in surface waters by the USGeological Survey and by the NJDEP
Pesticide Control Program in a very limited sampling survey. More sampling is needed of both waterways (ponds,
streams, rivers, bays and ocean) and fish and shellfish tissue for pesticide residues from
mosquito spraying.
The JCAA is committed to working with
county mosquito commissions, local and state officials to make sure that citizens in the
future will have the right to know about pesticide spraying, accurate health information
about West Nile virus, and the assurance that “least toxic” methods are being
employed. The public should be educated on
mosquito and pesticide avoidance procedures to avoid exposure to both. We urge your response to our request for
evaluation, enhanced monitoring especially of fish and wildlife, “least toxic”
methods, and improved notification regarding West Nile virus control efforts.
Sincerely,
Tom Fote
Jersey Coast Anglers Association
American Lung Association of New
Jersey
Children’s Health Environmental
Coalition
National Center for Environmental
Health Strategies Jersey Coast Anglers Association
NJ Environmental Lobby
NJ
Environmental Federation
NJ Chapter, Sierra Club
November 17, 2000
The Honorable Christine Todd Whitman
State House
P.O. Box 001
Trenton, NJ 08625-0001
Dear Governor Whitman:
As the active mosquito season of 2000
draws to a close, government officials, mosquito commissions, and the public will be
asking hard questions about the effectiveness of West Nile virus control measures. Important issues that must be addressed are
advance notification of residents when pesticides are to be dispersed through their
neighborhood by truck spraying or by aerial application and even more important, the
decision-making process about whether to deploy broad scale adulticide spraying at all. Data collection on both the value and adverse
effects of the pesticides used for mosquito control, as well as on the prevalence and
virulence of the virus, is central to evaluation of any mosquito management and disease
response program. Such data should be made
fully available to the public.
During the efforts to control
mosquitoes to battle the unprecedented West Nile virus, the public’s right to know
about the potential health effects of pesticides being sprayed in their backyards and
parks has fallen through the cracks. Neither
the county nor municipal agencies cooperating in this effort have clearly defined
responsibilities when it comes to providing the most basic public notification of the
spraying. Such information is critical to the health and safety of our children and the
elderly, those with asthma, allergies, and persons with chemical/multiple chemical
sensitivities as well as people with neurological, immunological, or other health
problems. In addition, there was no
system to collect adverse reactions to the pesticide spraying in either human or wildlife
populations, particularly fish.
In late August, the NJ Environmental
Federation and the American Lung Association of NJ did a random survey of towns in Bergen,
Monmouth, and Middlesex Counties where mosquito commission were conducting town-wide
pesticide fogging for adult mosquito control.
Town-wide adulticiding with Scourge
(resmethrin) was conducted in 67 municipalities in Bergen County, 16 in Monmouth County,
and 3 in Middlesex. County, Union and Hudson Counties. While many towns made heroic
efforts to get notification to the public by direct mail or flyers, most lacked basic
information about the health effects of the pesticide being applied. Three Monmouth County towns, Shrewsbury, Keyport,
and Atlantic Highlands did include information on pesticide health effects in their mailed
or hand delivered fact sheet.
New Jersey is fortunate in that it
has ongoing, year round county-based mosquito control efforts to reduce populations and
monitor for disease. This is done through eliminating breeding sites and using larval
controls in detention ponds and ditches. Larvaciding
is considered to be the most effective way of stemming mosquito borne diseases. Adult mosquitoes are more difficult to control. In the absence of infected mosquito populations
and without a clear demonstration that pesticides will check disease transmission, over
reliance on aerial and ground spraying can do more harm than good.
Surprisingly, some counties are still
using Malathion, an organophosphate, for adult mosquito control, in addition to the
pyrethroid pesticide Scourge. Both pesticides
act as nerve poisons and can have reproductive effects as well. While mosquito pesticides are applied at low
rates, for some individuals, especially children and those already sick from chemical
exposures, they could be risky. These
pesticides cannot tell good organisms from bad, and effects on fish and beneficial insects
like bees, butterflies and other pollinators are also a concern. It is time for the Agricultural Experiment Station
of Rutgers University to revise their recommendations for mosquito control to reflect
“ least toxic” integrated pest management methods.
Children
are more vulnerable to the effects of pesticides due to their immature nervous and immune
systems and their more frequent contact with ground surfaces to pesticides. No one knows what cumulative or synergistic
effects can occur when one kind of pesticide exposure is combined with other pesticide
exposures from food, water, lawn care, indoor applications for fleas, etc.
If pesticides are determined to be
necessary, the least toxic ones should be chosen and deployed based on mosquito population
monitoring information. Then a deliberate effort should be launched by towns to notify
people of the proposed application, the precautions to take, and the potential adverse
effects of the pesticide if exposed. A
record needs to be kept of reports of adverse reactions to the pesticide, as well as
reports of incidences of the West Nile virus in humans, birds and horses.
Environmental monitoring of fish and
waterways needs to be conducted. Long Island
lobstermen have noticed a significant decline of lobsters in the Long Island Sound
following last year’s West Nile virus spraying of malathion and pyrethroid pesticides
in New York. In New Jersey, low levels of
malathion have been detected in surface waters by the USGeological Survey and by the NJDEP
Pesticide Control Program in a very limited sampling survey. More sampling is needed of both waterways ( ponds,
streams, rivers, bays and ocean) and fish and
shellfish tissue for pesticide residues from mosquito spraying.
The undersigned organizations are
committed to working with county mosquito commissions, local and state officials to make
sure that citizens in the future will have the right to know about pesticide spraying,
accurate health information about West Nile virus, and the assurance that “least
toxic” methods are being employed. The public should be educated on mosquito and
pesticide avoidance procedures to avoid exposure to both.
We urge your response to our request for evaluation, monitoring, “least
toxic methods", and improved notification regarding West Nile virus control efforts. Please respond to Jane Nogaki, NJ Environmental
Federation, 223 Park Avenue, Marlton, NJ 08053 (phone
856-767-1110).
Sincerely,
Amy Goldsmith, NJ Environmental
Federation
Mary Lamielle, National Center for Environmental Health Strategies
Cc: Robert C. Shinn, NJDEP Commissioner, Christine Grant,