p@9 %  L$MUST BOOT FROM SLOT 4, 5 OR 6CJJJJ \  i=l x ? L N9 +i C* ɭЅ?0ȱ L Ѕ?iȱi L CPlout the use of poison or chemicals, and en t 0@relying on use of natural enemies to suppress specific pests in ;food crops, is an idea that began over 40 years ago. This for :@article tells the story of how integrated pest management (IPM) m, pp 8-9, 36. 332.  ? 3 Vol. 8, No. 4, Winter 1989, pp 2-4. 61-64. ?/צAuthor:John Perkinsstersky!.[G&TEXT Abstract: nt controversy in the northwestern U.S. involves the is = Pest control with< IPM: HOW DID IT START AND WHAT GOVERNS ITS PROSPECTS? NE NEC:[.,' John Perkins . 8, No. 4, Winter 1989, - . Journal of Pesticide ReforENV3K{4 ENV11.TXTr f14D ENV12.TXTr f1Dk ENV13.TXTr f1k ENV14.TXTr f1뵘 ENV15.TXTr f1 ENV16.TXTr f1 ENV17.TXTr f1 ENV18.TXTr f1ENV19.TXTr f1+`FG8`0($ p,&" COPYRIGHT APPLE COMPUTER, INC., 1984, 1985 C.LEUNGh&Y&&Y& 꽌ɪ\8`&&꽌ɪɖ'*&%&,E'зЮ꽌ɪФ`+*xH&x'8*7Ixix&&    ') +!  &п  x) +莶莸L莸LNO FILE SYSTEM.APPLE SYSTEM.APPLEJ) (jJJ>Lx "?I  `  C x Nx G .x- `V0^*^*>` aI꽌ɪVɭAgot started and explains why IPM continues to play second fiddle 9-to pesticides in North American agriculture. Logging has been t * Pest control without the use of poison or chemicals, and ge. EXrelying on use of natural enemies to suppress specific pests in a צ; Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a concept that has ne t Bevolved over the past 30 years. It started in 1959 as a new idea Cin the scientific literature and is now nearly a household world. BIts originators mayty ng "carried on a program of any size. they will still be available n AHhfor logging." ive land planners and designers like Ian McCarg, lk = Enthusiasm for biological control in California dated to o ed >1888, when a USDA researcher intrlogical control of the pest. The U.S. Department of ?Agriculture (USDA) and the University were both active in this ct @
the original homes of the invading pests, find insect natural e @ :=enemies, and import them into the U.S. so as to re-establish the ?@natural bioontrol ?during that time was conceived on the premise that many insect ;and weed problems in the U.S. stemmed from the presence of ith dy >Bspecies that were introduced from overseas. Unfortunately, when =these pest species arrived here, thas forgotten the message. Oil and timber resources : The first group were individuals in what was then the ily a =Department of Biological Control located on the Berkeley and e re !=BRiverside campuses of the University. Work in biological ce. "No generation can be s &allowed needlessly to damage or reduce the future general wealth  welfare by the way it uses or misuses any natural resource." á"IPM PRECURSOR: BIOLOGICAL CONTROL s have swept Yellowstone for  America h59 צ @by two groups of researchers who worked independently until the e ʅ?last few years of this 20-year period. Both of these research , "Agroups were attempting to solve the economic problems created by (insect pests in commercial agricultur all scientific concepts, IPM emerged from the ike ;work of scientists who were attempting to solve particular here . Aproblems in specific contexts. In fact, IPM developed primarily @from work at the University of California between 1939 and 19other hand, government is ; IPM is not a technology or device for killing unwanted sonnel W=organisms, i.e., pests. Instead, IPM is a concept about how ce, (ʅ@insect-control research and operations should be conducted. As ->in the case forea ٕAthe misuse of pesticides, and an accurate understanding of IPM's =historical beginnings can help activists, policy makers, and s is2scientists refocus on the problems at hand today. , but profit- "making will always come first. On the itations of the IPM concept. American and world ?agriculture, as well as other arenas of pest control activity, an 6@remain plagued by a careless and uninformed use of pesticides. -?One of IPM's original purposes was to create a method to avoid esponsible for whatever < Retracing the origins of IPM is perhaps the only way to ure , @recapture the original meaning of the concept. In addition, an ?examination of roots fosters a better appreciation of both the ns Bstrengths and lim >to mean just what each "advocate" of IPM intends it to mean. ܾBDegeneration of language ultimately means the loss of meaning and understanding. owl, however, is not on trial. The environmental attorneys arguing on its behalf are not r appreciate the attention it has received, but T@a danger attends reaching the status of a "buzz" word: original Tex@meanings as well as qualifications and limitations disappear as d N@the hyperbole of hucksters takes over. In time, the work comes soduced the vedalia beetle to al @control the cottony-cushion scale on citrus. The University of s h :California program in biological control began to develop nd ity ?substantially when Harry Scott Smith assumed the leadership of r `0(?these activities in 1923. Smith was responsible for training, f "ABhiring, or inspiring a number of researchers who were key players &@in the efforts to develop IPM as a working research philosophy, h V)including Carl Huffaker and Paul DeBach. ld growth will control research. Robert van den Bosch Cof the Riverside campus found them in Europe and the Middle East. AIn addition, a careful study of the activities of native natural Benemies by Smith and Kenneth Hagen indicated that several species ogists armed with @chemicals united their efforts in 1954 when the spotted alfalfa Baphid (SAA) first appeared in California. Arrival of this exotic >species triggered searches for natural enemies abroad, in the e @tradition of biologicalntomologists working with the new insecticides like DDT forgot d 0how to be ecologists first and sprayers second. port issued in February by the General Accounting Office, an investigative arm o A Biological control specialists and the ecolinsecticides, however, the supervised t >spraying advocated by Smith and his colleagues was based on a . ?careful ecological study of the pest and its natural enemies. 7Smith was an ecologist armed with chemicals, but other he spotted @eted. ation. s e -8-@ During the late 1940s, Smith organized alfalfa growers into @districts that were scouted by graduate students. Spraying was - =done only when needed to supplement the wasp. In contrast to me. ?other work on the use of asitization rate was high enough to prevent serious damage by צ @the butterfly, and recommending an insecticide treatment if the %wasp was unable to control the pest. m, while logging everything else. That was another poor scheme, easily rejecwasp was unable to provide suppression Verwith the alfalfa butterfly, a native species, in the northern the $Apart of the San Joaquin valley. They concluded by 1943 that the  ?butterfly was sometimes well controlled by a native, parasitic y Bwasp, but occasionally the pt based its research on lines pioneered by Abraham tion of @Michelbacher and Ray Smith, two scientists in the Department of h e t:Entomology at the University's Berkeley campus. In 1939, try, ng AMichelbacher and Smith began research on the problees year after year, requiring he so-e P(,IPM PRECURSOR: ECOLOGICAL USE OF PESTICIDES las firs 200 to 600 K, years old - a dense multilayered forest with a canopy of old-l o (amA The second group critical to the crystallization of IPM as a 9concesses tend to צBbe unappreciated in the community of pest control scientists as a :whole. of forest management? How can the species be perpetuated? Over a two-year span, Eric learned that spotted owls maintain and utilize the same roosting tredes, a fact that after 1945 left them isolated from the s =mainstream of American pest control science. They had their es >successes, for example establishing biological control of red he ardBscale, olive scale, and Klamath weed, but these succeective natural enemies of pest t s ockBorganisms. As such, biological control work was based in natural Bhistory, biogeography, and population ecology of pest and natural  >enemies. Biological control workers seldom experimented with t ?pestici survive f for the next generation. Arizona, may demonstrate this point. : What is critical to note about the Biological Control d, ate ̂e?Department, however, is that its research program was entirely >dedicated to the search for effAof lady beetles were useful against the SAA as long as they were Anot decimated by the indiscriminate use of insecticides directed =at the SAA. Vernon Stern and van den Bosch then applied the d e ?techniques of ecologists armed with chemicals to discover that d B0.7-0.9 ounces per acre of demeton could provide some suppression Aof the SAA without killing either the imported or native natural ,enemies. Their work was published in 1959. s as wildlife ll foul professionals. Then d with formulation. sts in denouncing a proposal by Ronald Reagan, just before he left office, to permit the export of raw logs from the national forests. ritania and Senegal on into the Sudan. than IPM: RESEARCH-INTENSIVE est, the faound suppression methods, and all other methods were Bto be developed in ways that supplemented but did not destroy the Bcore suppression techniques. It was at this time that Integrated 7Pest Management can be identified in its full, precise oinelteration of planting dates ;or fertilization rates), and any other practice that would n the Bsuppress the pest below an economic threshold in a cost-effective ?manner. Use of natural enemies and host plant resistance were to Bthe core of sich @ Smith and Hal Reynolds later (1965) expanded the definition 2. knowledge of the population density of the pest above the &which suppression was cost effective, near a city circled by an A 3. knowledge of how to augment the effects of natural enems of the nation" and e. = At the outset of 1959, integrated control contained five e essential components: e truth is that they are feverishly he l A 1. knowledge of the population dynamics of the pest species and its natural e?being merely a work on the joint use of chemicals with natural >enemies to being a philosophy useful for guiding all sorts of ord &pest control research and operations. although timber companies x like to talk about "meeting the wood needtrategy of pest control, which they called s s @"integrated control." Michelbacher had first used this term in f A1952. Smith, van den Bosch, Stern, and Hagen, however, provided ?the theoretical elaboration necessary to take the concept from on of SAA with the use ?of natural enemies supplemented with chemicals when necessary, nd @the four researchers would have done an elegant piece of work. n propose a general sA Work by Smith, van den Bosch, Stern, and Hagen thus combined Athe threads of biological control research with the ecologically- Binformed use of insecticides. Had their only contribution been a Bseries of recommendations for the suppressiJames Cason, one of the political middlemen at Interior, was appointed by President Bush to become Assistant INTEGRATED CONTROL lture in charge of national forests. n to a Wallenstrom let loose another blast, fingering Cason as one of ctor that most limits tree est The timber industry of the Northwest isn't what it used to e @ IPM was constructed as part of an effort to help California h Despite the success with SAA, IPM remained merely an idea for nt ?research in terms of its utility for other pest species. Only he it was developed. That larger framework is based on the idea y Bthat American agriculture has undergone an enormous technological Arevolution in the past century. U.S. farmers have traditionally @produced more goods than RICAN AGRICULTURE: EFFICIENCY-BOUND way. and size are types d directly related to the size and quality of the space where it s B Understanding why IPM has not been the cure-all for pesticide Aproblems requires an appreciation of the larger cace reliance on chemicals as the n . 9dominant mode of insect control in American agriculture. en. Let us work for it as well, through the many channels available in a the democratic system, and by all means consuming less and saving 'AMEby 20-70%. 8Nor has it served as a foundation for the regulation of will not Bpesticides by the EPA, e.g., allowing a chemical to be registered Aprovided it is used only in IPM practices. IPM, in other words, Foundation, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the USDA eat Asupported the efforts of over 300 scientists for more than seven years (1972-1978). on is the highest duty with respeces, then governor of New York and ; Carl Huffaker, who had established his reputation as a d a in This, combined with the expensive reseaiculture. Insecticides were part of the new ?technology that farmers had to adopt or risk being driven from r @business. The crisis afflicting some uses of insecticides gave @IPM researchers the support for creating an alternative controlir work, the crisis was :not severe enough to eliminate the utility of pesticides. ell as Over time, most large mammals will probably benefit from the ? IPM, therefore, was born in the context of a technological ld >revolution in agr 8enemies by insecticides, and the political rejection of Each form @pesticides on grounds of environmental pollution. Although the : @researchers at the University of California and elsewhere could Ause the insecticide crisis to justify the based on the crisis that developed around the 9use of insecticides in the 1950s and 1960s. This crisis 's most @consisted of the development of resistance to insecticides, the =outbreak of pest species caused by the decimation of natural ls d, we handle mines er, A IPM was developed by researchers who were acutely aware that ;their job was to provide new insect control technology for logies ?farmers in a highly competitive business. A major impetus for t BIPM researchers was The results of the National Acid Precipitation Assessment s d N@Program are trickling into public view. Science now knows more sthat would cost s in a צ? The following editorial contains the results of scientific t ?research and so may be inappropriate or offensive to those who a 9conduct environmental policy in Washington, D.C. Reader d world. discretion is advis@meet together, but not when doom and gloom headlines betray the 9facts. study on acid rain. The National Acid Precipitation en t *Assessment Program (NAPAP) found that acid rain damage to trees EXand lakes did exist, but at minimal levels rain. The National Acid Precipitation , t 0@Assessment Program (NAPAP) found that acid rain damage to trees ;and lakes did exist, but at minimal levels that would cost for :>billions to fix. Fiscal prudence and environmental cures can ) 90, p A14. 36. 332.  ? Author:Editorial Staff No. 4, Winter 1989, pp 2-4. 61-64. ?/צ Abstract: n Perkinsstersky!.[G&TEXT? This editorial comments on the findings of a 10-year, $500-is =million study on acid* NO PAP FROM NAPAP NS ITS PROSPECTS? NE NEC:[.,) Editorial Staff 990, p A14.inter 1989, - 8 Wall Street Journal, January 26, 19ves to Pesticides, P.O. Box 1393, Eugene, Or, 97440. e ,71967 - without feeling strongly about it. But, no, I'm a .ERRORSbCHEYLE@-8 SYSTEM.EDITORb98V SYSTEM.FILERb9VQ. Do you consider yourself an environmentalist? SYSTEM.CHARSE=Reproduced 1991 by permission of the Northwest Coalition for SYSTE>Alternatieen ing =State College, where he teaches in the Environmental Studies pen =program. He published a history of modern American economic And ?entomology, "Insects, Experts, and the Insecticide Crisis," in an 1982. ), 304 pp, by John H. Perkins. That's his business. Reproduced 1991 by permission from SCIENCE NEWS, the weekly act. About the Author: ience. Copyright (C) 1988 by Science Service, = John Perkins is a Member of the Faculty at The Evergray feeding selects for elk that do well on the supplied food, which are not necessarily the : The material in this article was taken from the book, now B"Insects, Experts, and the Insecticide Crisis," (New York: Plenum *Press, 1982bility /of using non-chemical methods of pest control. however, say this tactic brings animals together, causing diseases to spread more easily than if the animals were off in their normally small om REFERENCES ps. Moreover, experts snot final and has not r Bbeen released but some of its conclusions are circulating through $the press and scientific community. e concept. In addition, an examination of roots fosters a better appreciation of both the ns B It appears, for instance, that except for red spruces high in BNortheastern mountains, acid rain does not directly harm trees or 6concernen rvive f ?allowing for the fact that they may be high-end estimates, the costs are surely staggering. about the Biological Control d, ate ̂eDepartment, however, is that its research program was entirely ? In addition, the acid-rain as the Bush bill, Ohioans will have to pay an extra $898 "A?million in their utility bills. Georgians will have to pay an rs &Bextra $396 million, West Virginians will pay $417 million. These V:figures come from the Edison Electric Institute and, evoduced the vedalia beetle to al control the cottony-cushion scale on citrus. The University of s h @ Voters outside the Beltway should certainly hope so. Under Bthe acid-rain provision of the House bill, which is substantially 0(Bthe same e ng >financially prudent course, until the NAPAP folks have nailed e n AHhAdown the full acid-rain story? Assuming, of course, that anyone @in Washington can still think in terms of financial prudence on d environmental issues. archer intrear, according to the EPA. Can this spending be of =justified in light of the NAPAP findings? For millions, not s ct @Ahead William Reilly and other authors of the Bush Clean Air Bill =who produced their legislation befoas forgotten the message. Oil and timber resources  The first group were individuals in what was then the ily a A The NAPAP results expose the irresponsible hysteria fomented !=Bby environmental groups, and encouraged in hyperventilatinge. "No generation can be s &= Senator Daniel Moynihan, who wrote the bill creating the lth ?NAPAP study in 1979, summarized the study's results this way: " á>"To me, it's reassuring, because it shows that the sky is not  falling." a hrate  Bsection of the report, still under review, indicates that putting ʅClime into lakes is the most effective way to neutralize the acid. It is certainly the cheapest. e the economic problems created by insect pests in commercial agricultur all scientific concepts, IPM emerged from the ike A Nevertheless, in many areas where soils ae naturally acidic, Bthe organic sulfates that are produced by burning fossil fuels do Bfurther reduce the pH level, sometimes significantly. A sepa exactly how much is not >completely understood. Many lakes have been naturally acidic nel W>since prehistoric times. In Florida, for example, 22% of the e, (ʅ>lakes are acidic, but Florida has little or no acid rainfall. s -in the case forea ٕ?other factors, such as temperature, insects, root diseases and s /ozone. Nor does acid rain reduce crop yields. y makers, and s isscientists refocus on the problems at hand today. , but profit- "@ Acid rain does affect lakes, though. Immediate capital costs required by the legislation s Bwould also divert investment from efforts to modernize industrial plants. s, for example establishing biological control of red he ardscale, olive scale, and Klamath weed, but these successes tend to צB The kicker is that the bill will have only a slight effect on :Bacidified lakes. NAPAP Director James Mahoney recently testified Athat the Bush bill emissions cap would mean that after 20 years, @25 lakes in the Northeast wou >in his best seller, "The Population Bomb": "In the 1970s the ܾ@world will undergo famines - hundreds of millions of people are d Agoing to starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked Aupon now." He also warned of severe wate for this year's big event. He is also d, but T;honorary chairman of Earth Day 20, a smaller organization. inal Tex The results of the National Acid Precipitation Assessment s d NB In 1968, Stanford University professor Paul Ehrlich predictedeir dire predictions a צ< "This is America's Last chance," warned Senator Gaylord ould ANelson in 1963, seven years before the first Earth Day event was Aheld. Nelson is now honorary co-chairman of Earth Day 1990, the ;main umbrella groupBchallenge our accepted notions of individual choice, and the role 9of government in our lives. of the environment. By drawing en t *attention to the statements of extremists made at the first Earth EXDay in 1970, it can be seen that many of the state of the environment. By drawing , t 0Battention to the statements of extremists made at the first Earth @Day in 1970, it can be seen that many of their dire predictions :Awere far off the mark. Many of the most radical proposals would 6, 1990, pp 7-9. 2.  ? Author:Gary Benoittaff No. 4, Winter 1989, pp 2-4. 61-64. ?/צ Abstract: n Perkinsstersky!.[G&TEXT? This article is provided as a counter-point to much of the is =accepted wisdom on th3 THE GREATEST SHAM ON EARTH, PART I OSPECTS? NE NEC:[.,' Gary Benoit March 26, 1990, pp 7-9. - > The New American, Vol. 6, No. 7, March 2Journal. . s e -8-#Copyright (C) 1990 Dow Jones & Co. ganized alfalfa growers into districts that were scouted by graduate students. Spraying was - ually would be enhanced. enough to prevent serious damage by צ the butterfly, and recommending an insecticide treatment if the wasp was unable to control the pest. m, while logging everything ;Reproduced 1991 by permission of the Wall Street nal, interim acid-rain policy, save on VerBCongress a tumultuous debate over costs, save the American people rs?billions of dollars a year in needlessly higher utility costs, d &:and though this may seem trivial in Washington, the lakes les of actms associated es @ The White House could achieve any immediate pay-back on the e $Bpublic's investment in the environment by announcing an immediate  @program to begin liming the lakes, based on the NAPAP results. ?It would constitute a ratiosion. The Senate bill would move up compliance dates, n of @demand stricter nitrogen-oxide reductions and reduce allowances h e tfor new power plants. ersity's Berkeley campus. In 1939, try, ng Michelbacher and Smith began research on the probleld be deacidified - a cost of more -e P(?than $3 billion to deacidify each lake. Sen. Mitchell and the K, :environmental acolytes who staff the Senate environmental ld-l o (am8committee have written an even more expensive acid-rain IPM as a as to be useless to policymakers," Richard Lindzen of MIT and s t AJerome sening e f @"greenhouse" effect that will cause the polar ice caps to melt, for the coming ice age is instead responsible for a wor that coordinated the first al /Earth Day event and published later that year. he University of s h Voters outside the Beltway should certainly hope so. Under A The winter of 1976-77 was the coldest in a century. Chilled 0(this problem of dropping temperatures is being caused by "the e n AHh@constantly increasing mass of smog-produced clouds all over the ;world." His remarks merited inclusion in "Earth Day - The e on d =Beginning," compiled by the group "If present trends continue, the world will be about Afour degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but @Beleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what `HJ?it would take to put us into an ice age." Watt explainedre the NAPAP results were ng A Over the years, environmentalists have blown hot and cold on ;the "greenhouse" effect. On April 19, 1970, University of al e @ :9California professor Kenneth E.F. Watt told an Earth Day least $4 Agathering: that, @according to some forecasts, "U.S. oil and natural gas reserves ;Richard Nixon claimed that "we are running out of energy." Bill who produced their legislation befo0. forgotten the message. Oil and timber resources  The first group were individuals in what was then the ily a A In 1973-74, the U.S. suffered an energy crisis. On February !=B1, 1973, the authoritative Congressional Quarterly reported the time we have left if we &:are going to preserve any kind of quality in our world." he lth ;Environmentalist leader David Brower, who asked De Bell to y: " áBproduce the handbook on such short notice, is another director of Earth Day 199rate  BSENSE." The handbook's editor, Garrett De Bell, warned that time ʅAwas of the essence. "We thought that the one-month deadline for Athe writing was impossible, that we could easily spend a year on Bit. But a year is about one-fifth of all scientific concepts, IPM emerged from the ike B The back cover of The Environmental Handbook, which served as Aa manifesto for the Earth Day 1970 event, stated unequivocally: <"1970s - THE LAST CHANCE FOR A FUTURE THAT MAKES ECOLOGICAL aticle that they included National Environmental Teach-in. They also included material e, (ʅfrom "The Population Bomb." a has little or no acid rainfall. s -in the case forea ٕ>life in the sea was extinct," he wrote in his grim scenario. s >"Large areas of coastline had to be evacuated, as windrows of s is8dead fish created a monumental stench." Earth Day 1970 profit- "@luminaries thought so highly of this arManias of Scripps Institution of Oceanography claimed last 9year. Yet, Americans are being asked to absorb huge tax dustrial Aincreases, perhaps even to alter their life styles significantly, ard>in order to solve a problem that may be nothing more than hot to צair. he kicker is that the bill will have only a slight effect on :acidified lakes. NAPAP Director James Mahoney recently testified A But the accuracy of the theory is not the overriding concern Bto some environmentalists. T6 compulsory birth regulation would be necessary to s combined 6 achieve [population] control. One plan often men-ologically- 9 tioned involves the addition of temporary sterilants n been a 4 to water supplies or staple food. Dosel." Writing five years before Roe vs. Wade, ?he candidly stated: "Abortion is a highly effective method in t .the armory of population control." He added: forests. n to a 5 Many of my colleagues feel that some sort of as one of tion Bomb." that d 0.7-0.9 ounces per acre of demeton could provide some suppression A Ehrlich proposed controlling population "hopefully through a 9system of incentives and penalties, but by compulsion if ll foul Bvoluntary methods fai?factories, too much detergent, too much pesticide, multiplying e Acontrails, inadequate sewage treatment plants, too little water, ?too much carbon dioxide - all can be traced easily to too many e 9people," said Dr. Paul Ehrlich in "The Popula While the "greenhouse" effect seems to @be getting most of the attention lately, many environmentalists . 9have considered "overpopulation" to be the most pressing natural 8environmental problem of all. "Too many cars, too many l species Day leaders as an Aexpression of "popular support" for their environmental agenda. ?Yet, their full agenda is much more radical than most realize. ic species triggered searches for natural enemies abroad, in the e @ Population Control:istory...I think the pressure is building now so that political Bleaders can't blink at it." Organizers are hoping for as many as >50 to 100 million participants worldwide. This unprecedented m o Aworldwide demonstration will be cited by Earth rvance, Earth Day 1990 will extend ed t Aaround the world to dramatize the global nature of environmental ?"crises." Earth Day founder Gaylord Nelson predicts that this ?year's event will be "the largest grass-roots demonstration in ed Ahcisions are s e -8-Bmade," explains Christina Desser, executive director of Earth Day 1990. cts that were scouted by graduate students. Spraying was - done only when needed to supplement the wasp. In contrast to me. < Unlike the first obseanizers for this year's observance hope that it will have a y צ Bgalvanizing effect greater than that of Earth Day 1970. "Whereas ;1970 awakened people to the issues, 1990 needs to make the thing =environment the screen through which all other deused national attention on cy, save on Verat least $2.30 via taxation would limit gasoline consumption. ped in one locale could not necessarily be used on another pest, hem @ Environmental leaders recommend a shift from the automobile l :to governg to be scale. d in terms of how it related to specific host plants and to the natural enemies found in specific locations. eing tal A At an environmental conference in 1989, Paul Ehrlich pointed Aout approvingly that raising the , rational bus systems, and free or low-cost a for nt  shuttle transport. s utility for other pest species. Only he 8 3. Progressively tax higher automobile weights ral s a ; and engine displacements according to a sharply risinprocating internal ts tree est combustion engines by 1975. orthwest isn't what it used to e 8 2. Massively shift gas taxes and other sources ifornia h 9 of revenue for freeways to urban and interurban mass . es s 8 transitd with =automobile usage to one-tenth of the present levels..." The ust @Handbook's "Suggestions Toward an Ecological Platform" included these immediate steps: ia and Senegal on into the Sudan. than 6 1. Outlaw the sale of recin system, with its heavy reliance on the private ere >automobile, as being extremely energy inefficient and a major the =source of air pollution. Environmental Handbook contributor ated ;Kenneth Cantor recommended programs "aimed at reduction of savings allocated to dates (husbanding the ecosystem of the planet. ractice that would n the suppress the pest below an economic threshold in a cost-effective = Anti-Automobile: Environmental leaders view our present e to >transportatiothe ?dramatic leadership it yearns for if he would propose that the budget must be allocated to birth control and abortion in the 5% U.S. and abroadin Handbook contributor Garrett Hardin argued that a welfare Bstate such as ours has an interest in controlling the breeding of ?families. "To couple the concept of freedom to breed with the s Bbelief that every>could be supported at a standard of living roughly similar to newby 20-70%. Nor has it served as a foundation for the regulation of will not A More Government: Radical environmentalists cannot implement Btheir agenda without increasing the size and cost of government. AThe Earth Day 1990 "Green Pions by 1995, cut acid rain by 80%, and cut fossil-fuel he p ?consumption by 85% by 2015. "You're talking about pulling the >U.S. off of oil, coal and nuclear energy in the course of the l !next 25 or 30 years," he admits. rican agriculture use in this country over the next s ten years. S. farmers now utilize a number of practices that can be called "IPM." ns, so that life may be more elevating and s ? Earth Day 1990 chairman Denis Hayes wants to phase out CFC =emissh; they seek =a reduction in energy use and the adoption of a simpler life- s h ;style as a means of reducing "pollution" and improving our Texas ?"quality of life." Handbook editor Garrett De Bell proposed a r @25% reduction in total energygy at his disposal," lamented Rockefeller University d f 4professor Rene Dubos in The Environmental Handbook. the USDA eat supported the efforts of over 300 scientists for more than seven B Earth Day leaders are not merely opposed to growton problem as being worse in and @America than elsewhere. "[T]he destructive impact of each U.S. n >citizen on the physical, biological, and human environment is il Aenormously magnified by the variety of gadgets and by the amount Commandments" to replace the old. "When Moses went up on the e ?mountain, there were no nuclear weapons. There was no problem n 6with the ozone layer," he proclaimed. Turner's Third to use the or instance, that except for red spruces high in = On Earth Day 1970, Saturday Review editor Norman Cousins d or 6;bluntly stated: "Humanity needs a world order. The fully were ?sovereign nation is incapable of dealing with the poisoning of ng to pay for a ]n 1984 : more durable kind of human organization - more taxes, h is gh < giving up national flags, perhaps the sacrifice of some d the  of our hard-won liberties? or of Earth Day 1990. both the ns  It appears, f the following questions: Population Bomb": "In the 1970s the ܾ; Are nation-states actually feasible, now that they are d < have power to destroy each other in a single afternoon? rked 9 What price would most people be willipolitical artifact." He quoted Professor but TARichard A. Falk of Princeton on "the inadequacy of the sovereign TexBstates to manage the affairs of mankind in the 20th century." He NBexplained that students at Survival U. would be encouraged to askndbook included an s a צ6article by John Fischer that proposed a comprehensive tal d ould Benvironmental college education, dubbed "Survival U." Fischer, a @contributing editor for Harper's magazine, referred to the U.S. =Constitution as a "2pollution control are really improving the world. e, and the role 9 Continuing with his critical examination of the history of t *Earth Day, the author looks at the political motivations of many EX> World Government: The Environmental Ha looks at the political motivations of many 0=of the founders. He finds disturbing the idea that national d th :sovereignty should be sacrificed for global environmental tions :>cooperation. He also questions whether the billions spent on ld , 1990, pp 9-12. 2.  ? Author:Gary Benoittaff No. 4, Winter 1989, pp 2-4. 61-64. ?/צ Abstract: n Perkinsstersky!.[G&TEXT? Continuing with his critical examination of the history of is AEarth Day, the author3 THE GREATEST SHAM ON EARTH, PART II OSPECTS? NE NEC:[.,' Gary Benoit March 26, 1990, pp 9-12.- > The New American, Vol. 6, No. 7, March 26ir work, the crisis was enemies by insecticides, and the political rejection of Each form AReproduced 1991 by permission. Copyright (C) 1990 by The Review of the News, Inc. University of California and elsewhere could use the insecticide crisis to justify theng thing..." Gaylord Nelson claimed in 1970: B"Man is just one of the creatures that the Lord put on this earth .and is not more important than all the rest." insecticides, the outbreak of pest species caused by the decimation of natural ls d, we handle mines er, A In the minds of environmental leaders, man can no longer "be Bfruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth." He cannot have Bdominion "over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, Band over every liviBCommandment: "I promise to have no more than two children, or no comment in his own Earth Day speech: "There's no use talking - "?about Earth Day until we begin to think like Earthmen. Not as BAmericans and Russians...but as fellow travelers on a tiny planet Win an infinite universe." ch-in. They also included material e, (ʅfrom "The Population Bomb." a has little or no acid rainfall. s -B Because of sables; and צ@taking grocery bags back to the store for reuse. Yet, in light n :terms and credits it for giving "birth to the modern American , >environmental movement." Earth Day founder Gaylord Nelson is te ̂eBactively promoting this year's event. Denis Hayes, who organized Cthe first Earth Day event, is ctedly, the tone and scope of Earth Day 1990 literature 8 "A@are not as strident and comprehensive as those of the Earth Day w &@1970 Environmental handbook. But the connections are obvious: d V>Earth Day 1990 literature describes the 1970 event in gean up the environment but to l Earth Day 1990 is helping to coordinate activities in 120 hat `HJ?countries. Earth Day organizers are pursuing an internatre the NAPAP results were ng  Over the years, environmentalists have blown hot and cold on > Earth Day 20 is planning an Earth Day "peace climb of Mt. e @ :BEverest" by a team of American, Soviet, and Chinese climbers, who .plan to brotates =in part: "We the youth of planet earth...hereby declare our es Ainterdependence..." The National Audubon Society has set a goal >Bof one million signatures to be delivered to Washington DC during  Earth Week. their legislation befonal Audubon Society has launched an Earth Day 1990 Bcampaign to send a message from the youth of America to President @Bush. The "Youth Declaration," which bears the emblem of Earth !=ADay 1990 as well as that of the National Audubon Society, s a United Nations left if we &Benvironmental police force deployed around the world to guard the +planet's most precious natural resources." sked De Bell to y: " áproduce the handbook on such short notice, is another director of @ The Natiorate  Aglobal commons from international threats." Unless such a force ʅ>had police powers, however, it would lack the means to ensure or ;world participation. As the October 9, 1989 issue of Time ar on 7magazine put it: "The stick could betheir world view, environmentalist leaders support Bthe strengthening of the United Nations. Earth Day 1990 supports :the "organization of a powerful international agency with ally: high-level positions in government during both Republican and as Democratic administrations. ts worldwide. This unprecedented m o worldwide demonstration will be cited by Earth rvance, Earth Day 1990 will extend ed t @ The most visible manifestation of the Establishment in this @country is the elitist Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The of popular support for a radical agenda intended to alter our Blife-styles and subvert the:article in the February 1976 Reader's Digest, Rockefeller to @advocated "a simpler life-style." He warned that, if we do not d 3follow this new pattern of living "voluntarily and er companies x 7democratically, it may be forced upon us." He added: n" and e. 7 Some economists and analysts argue that, if we elfare 9 continue consuming resources as we are now, the only eding of ; way to bring about a balance between demand and supply the s , will be throuncil - d :three grants totally $125,000 reported in 1988 - included nother 9research on the development of an antifertility vaccine. at more consumption means more pollution. Precisely because of America's B In 1988 the Rockefeller Fou, Friends of the Earth Foundation, the NRDC, and the e @Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund. The Rockefeller Foundation has d ;donated to the NRDC, the Population Council, and the World t of r >Resources Institute. Its funding of the Population Couhilanthropies." of gasoline to at least $2.30 via taxation would limit gasoline consumption. ped = The Rockefeller Family Fund Inc., a separate entity, has hem @given money to the American Environment, the Environment Policy l >Institutethe o be ;World Resources Institute, and the NRDC (Natural Resources ants The Rockefeller Brothers Fund has also given money to the a =Environmental Law Institute, the Sierra Club Foundation, s suggested that l ts tree est 9 "the smog problem may well be dealt with by reducing ed to e 8 the number of cars on the street, by telling people ifornia h 7 they can't drive nearly to the extent they have in s . es s  the pasd with 3 the excessive reliance on automobiles. Rising ..." The ust 9 numbers of cars, higher speeds and the popularity of cluded : light trucks...all call for some form of restriction. than 4 EPA Administrator Lee Thomas haatch magazine. The November/December 1988 issue of that publication stated: emely energy inefficient and a major the 6 If lasting inroads into the pollution problem ibutor ated 9 are to be made, we need to...consider ways to reduce f savings allocated to dates ? The Rockefeller Brothers Fund has continued to support the e Benvironmental movement. For instance, on June 26, 1987, the Fund @donated $225,000 to the Worldwatch Institute for publication of o Atheir World Wthe automobiles." rship it yearns for if he would propose that the ? *"An escalating tax on natural gas consumption...A similar .tax should be applied to all fossil fuels..." nother 50% in the r following decade with half the annualion and increased funding of family planning ring programs..." ns conveniently ignore the facts and get carried is A *"[A] progressively increasing gasoline tax, the proceeds of :which should be used to begin reducing the ill effects of it is book is about a world n auorocarbons in ASilicon Valley. Lawrence Rockefeller and John Young are members @of the same board as Greenpeace U.S.A. Executive Director Peter l 2Bahouth and Earth First! co-founder Mike Roselle. ust admit that our legal system of privakard and Apple Computer. Hewlett Packard President John Young :is an Early Day 1990 director. Earth Day 1990 proposes a it s 9worldwide ban on chlorofluorocarbons; Hewlett Packard is zations @reportedly the second largest emitter of chlorofle." Lovejoy is also a director of he Earth Day 1990. , state, and federal laws and international Let treaties that protect the environment." One of the goals of n a @ Earth Day 1990 is working with equipment donated by Hewlett e BPac off before @the problems are so big that it's almost beyond our capacity to ?recover." He added: "We are in a sense, or should be, at war t >with our life-styles and that is something we've never had to t. >face with our species befortution. Biologist Thomas Lovejoy, one of the conference's p ?participants, said that, "unless there is a major shift in the Brate in which policy is developed or changed, it's likely that we ?are simply not going to make it...It's not very farnt and Development in Geneva. next s ten years. S. farmers now utilize a number of practices that can = In 1989, the Carnegie, Ford, and Rockefeller Foundations s Afunded a conference on the global environment at the Smithsonian @Instintal Policy ;Institute, the NRDC, the Population Council, and the World e- s h >Resources Institute. The Carnegie Corporation of New York has as Adonated to the Environmental Policy Institute, the NRDC, and the ;World Commission on Environme> On January 3rd of this year, in order to "heighten public no Aawareness of the need for active participation in the protection 6of the environment and to promote the formation of an is that all =international alliance that responds to global environmental er, Environmental Protection Agency was established. There is no 9telling what could happen in the wake of Earth Day 1990. : Plenum Press, 1982bility @ If the Insiders are successful, the American people will be s ?convinced that they must lower their standard of living, boost @federal spending, and accept international controls in order to Bsave the earth from environmental dten years in making people more receptive in terms Aof changing behavior," claims Josh Baran, a top public relations 'consultant retained by Earth Day 1990. der certain circumstances that have only a little to do with the environmental desiraless they fail due to ,000 A Although the environmental agenda is already moving forward, :environmentalists hope to use Earth Day as a catalyst for ading Astepping up the timetable. "Earth Day can be the booster rocket @for the next art 5announced hopes to form a jointly managed U.S.-USSR to replace Ainternational park spanning both sides of the Bering Strait. On BJanuary 24th, Mr. Bush endorsed cabinet-level status for the EPA. chemicals will continue to be used unto the future, we should continue to remember that B On November 7, 1989, the U.S and 67 other countries agreed to @stabilize levels of carbon dioxide emissions by the year 2000. e AOn January 12th of this year, the EPA and its Soviet counterp the cost of its own M ile ;proposal at $19 billion. However, the Business Roundtable lity ?estimated earlier this year that a Senate version of the Clean e 4Air bill would cost as much as $104 billion a year. grass growth As we look A According to Mr. Bush, in 1987 alone we spent $81 billion on Bpollution control, over $62 billion of it in the private sector. 9If a Clean Air bill is enacted, this cost could increase s. hat purely academic interest; it is essenacid rain, holes in the ozone shield, and the port buildup of greenhouse gases. ed Nations. Earth Day 1990 supports the "organization of a powerful international agency with ally: A "Progress," as defined by our modern economic system, is ive to the earth's natural >systems. It now takes only 15 days to produce what it took an net WBentire year to produce in 1900. Increasingly, the corners of the (ʅ@cube have begun to puncture the sphere - and the damage appears -=in the form of r ٕ&picture of how the economy functions. agement of the planet... s requires world government." That same day, I.F. Stone made this isB A tiny cube inside a large sphere just a few decades ago, the "Bglobal economy is no longer small relat focused on unemployment, inflation, and other n Aelements of the money cycle. For Keynes and his contemporaries, 6Anatural resources appeared so abundant that notions of scarcity, Adepletion, and environmental damage did not even appear in theiworkings. for a ]n 1984  more durable kind of human organization - more taxes, h is gh ; This oversight traces back to the work of John Maynard d the =Keynes, the father of modern economics, who, troubled by the e ns @Great Depression, Ain reality, they are almost completely divorced from one another ܾ?in economic structures and institutions. Modern economics has d @barely heard of the natural world, no less begun to incorporate 3environmental concerns into its everyday pline: an almost complete lack of regard for t Tthe environment. f Princeton on "the inadequacy of the sovereign Texstates to manage the affairs of mankind in the 20th century." He NA While the environment and the economy are tightly interwoven books, he turned up no צ;entries for the terms "pollution," "environment," "natural entral =resources," or "depletion." These glaring omissions help to , a Aillustrate what a handful of economists now see as a fundamental @flaw in their discipollution control are really improving the world. e, and the role 9Abstract:nuing with his critical examination of the history of t *? When World Bank economist Herman Daly searched through the EXBindexes of three leading macroeconomic textjor restructuring of economic rules and any 0Bpractices is crucial to the future health of the planet. Central >to this is the flawed, but traditional measure of wealth, the s :Gross National Product (GNP). sustainability;illions spent on ld er 1990, pp 20-25.  ? Author:Gary Benoittaff No. 4, Winter 1989, pp 2-4. 61-64. ?/צ Abstract: dra Posteltersky!.[G&TEXT@ Modern economics, blind to natural limits, is hastening the s =Earth's demise. A ma ates ?countries are ranked from rich to poor. Almost universally, a 9climbing GNP is taken to mean that a country's health is a goal >9improving - and that its people are becoming better off. C during Earth Week. their legislation before the NAPAP results were ng ? But a closer look at the accounting system used to produce n ;the GNP shows major failings in its ability to assess both t. e @ :>economic performance and human welfare. A country's economic who included, along with the deterioration of fisheries and other e. 9renewable assets, the droonesia's resource-based economy of more accurately measuring צ >income and wealth. Taking into account the depletion of just eas >three natural resources - forests, soils, and petroleum - the ng ?researchers found the average annual growth in Inaded toward ecological bankruptcy and Verstill register GNP growth. ill not improve the environment but le rswill fulfill a long-sought-after goal of the "Establishment." d &B Repetto and his colleagues have examined the implications for @Indned only $6 d es =million from forestry exports while spending $100 million on he e $=forest product imports. During the period of rapid logging, ance  >Nigeria's accounts failed to warn of the impending downturn. AIndeed, a country can be heigeria is an example of a country that overspent its natural Aaccount. Once among the world's largest tropical log exporters, e t@the country's timber shipments fell off dramatically after many g ?years of overcutting forests. In 1988, Nigeria eardonesia, Kenya, and Nigeria are they P(?among the countries that depend on primary products for 75% or K, more of their exports. d a 25-cent-per-bag tax on paper bags as a (ammeans of discouraging their use. r Timothy Wirth told a reporter. B Nsables; and צ? Most in danger of running aground are developing countries n :Bwhose economies remain closely tied to primary resources, such as ;fuels, timber, minerals, and agricultural crops. Bolivia, e ern =Colombia, Ethiopia, Ghana, Inout, this failure to distinguish between natural asset t t Adestruction and income generation makes the GNP "a false beacon, 4and can draw those who steer by it onto the rocks." g public tly, ardtransportation; using cloth diapers rather than dispoin higher levels of consumption 0. ckthan is actually possible. d Earth Day 1970 events in forecasts l Philadelphia, is president of Earth Day 20. ught with uncertainty  A As economist Robert Repetto of the World Resources Institute >points est, an f Aeconomic asset that, if managed well, could provide revenue long Ainto the future. The result is an inflated sense of both income ̂e?and wealth, creating the illusion that a country is better off ed ?than it really is and can sustatedly, the tone and scope of Earth Day 1990 literature 8 "A= When trees are cut and sold for timber, for example, the ay w &@proceeds are counted as income, and thus added to the GNP. But d V?no subtraction is made for the deterioration of the for made, however, for the ut to l @deterioration of forests, soils, air quality, and other natural s h Bendowments. Natural wealth of all kinds is whittled away with no +losses appearing in the national accounts. n a century. Chilled 0( Admitional = As lumber factories, textile mills, office buildings and s n AHh>other artifacts age and fall into disrepair, a subtraction is e @made from the capital accounts to reflect their depreciation in 9value. No similar subtraction is consists of income accounts, which when tallied bout Bproduce the GNP figure, and capital accounts, which track changes @ in wealth. ay 1990 is helping to coordinate activities in 120 hat `HJcountries. Earth Day organizers are pursuing an internatp would have been even steeper. nd ed t The most visible manifestation of the Establishment in this country is the elitist Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The POLLUTION PAYS rld government and is able to influence U.S. in ed foreign policy because of the number of their members who hold l B Besides being blind to the destruction of natural wealth, the AGNP as currently calculated has another major failing: it counts @as income many of the expenditures made to combthe University of British Columbia in Vancouver, @puts it: "If dollars in banks are growing faster than a timber 7company's forests, it is more profitable (indeed, more oceeds of >economical) to chop down the trees, sell them, and invest thepossible. Under the rld n Aeconomic logic of discounting, it is perfectly rational to drive benefits, and thereby helps investors choose among a range of d a Aprofit-making options. But by dominating all investment choiceinterest, which would be +lost if the payment is pushed back a year. that, if we elfare continue consuming resources as we are now, the only eding of ; Economists capture this time-preference for money in a the s >decision-making t=same amount made available next year. The reason is obvious Aenough. That money can purchase a radio or a bicycle offering a Byear's worth of enjoyment that would be forgone if the payment is Bdelayed. Put in a bank, the money earns Environmental Handbook editor Garrett De Bell CLEAR-CUT ECONOMICS ller is a member of the family that made a rk fortune in oil. He is also President of the American eople to d A Given a choice, people prefer to receive $100 today over the oration is like t of e Bsteering an aircraft toward a fog-shrouded, windswept runway with %no instruments to guide the landing. nationhood; now their number-one propaganda weapon appears to be the environment. SAA to ition Earth Day 1970 Aextinct, vast tracts of tropical rain forest will disappear, and 9several billion people will be added to a planet already gically- ;overtaxed by humans. To enter such a period with economic S, and ;indicators that ignore environmental deterisure of progress and actual human well-being Ais widening. Over the next several decades, global temperatures their money in a faster-growing asset does not alter the fact t 9that society has lost a perpetual steam of golden eggs." d to t. face with our species befors a result, a small measurable private gain can result in a their book, "For the Common Good": "The fact that private investor doesn't take them s @into account. And because they are difficult to quantify, they ;are often left out of public investors' decisions as well. s s funded a conference on the global environment at the Smithsonian A Ang l Policy :downstream croplands from flooding, providing habitat for e- s h Bcountless plant and animal species, and storing carbon that would Bhasten global warming if released to the atmosphere. But because @these are social benefits, a oth produce tangible, easily valued products, only some of ?the products and services provided by renewable resources are ut Bvalued in the marketplace. A forest producing wood for timber is 8also protecting upland soils from erosion, safeguardindation also reported three grants B Economic decision making also fails to account adequately for Athe many functions natural systems perform that are difficult to =quantify. Compared with a clothing factory or a steel mill, unt Bwhich bdapted. that total capital is increasing. But natural and human-made al @assets are substitutes only up to a point. Without any forests Ato supply it with timber, for inst." tional bus systems, and free or low-cost a for nt KILLING THE GOOSE ort. s utility for other pest species. Only he The Rockefeller Brothers Fund has also given money to the a B Today's investment rules also assume that natural cap of that damage using a ee est Bdiscount rate of 10% is a mere $30 million, hardly worth worrying about. number of cars on the street, by telling people ifornia h they can't drive nearly to the extent they have in s . es s the pas a ith Arate of 2 or 3% per year simply doesn't stand a chance against a ;required rate-of-return that high. Viewed another way, if uded @greenhouse warming is estimated to cause $100 billion in damage ;in the year 2075, today's valuationponsible, but public ones as well. The World Bank, ?the largest funder of development projects in the Third World, he currently uses a discount rate of 10%. A forest growing ate." Lovejoy is also a director of he Earth Day 1990. , state, and federal laws and international Let WHO IS BETTER OFF?ect the environment." One of the goals of n a Earth Day 1990 is working with equipment donated by Hewlett e < The economic models guiding the development process are Young Cvirtually silent on questions of distributive justice and equity. >If a particular investment will result in a net gain, but the ns Brelatively well-off will get richer and the poor es that have begun compiling inventories of -90% =their natural resources, a prerequisite to making the needed nd a 9accounting adjustments. But these figures have not been s gave 9integrated into the standard national capital and income ontrol direction are under as -way, but the pace of change is far too slow. roke a 12-year l as deadlock in the effort to strengthen the Clean Air Act, by m the ? Australia, Canada, France, the Netherlands, and Norway are l =among the countri 9depletion and deterioration of forests, fisheries, water h Day rm economic gains. Some initiatives in thisoclamation that many congressmen may have 70: HONEST INCOME . For example, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has released a brochure praising the 1970 Earth Day event : Recalculating the GNP so that it takes account of the al ls d rules and indicators ?followed by national governments and development institutions, e 2including the World Bank, do nothing of the kind. He cannot have U.S. government support of Earth Day extends beyond an e air, internationalist prAversa, a necessary condition for sustainable development is that Bthe poorest of the poor benefit. Keeping vigilant watch over the Awelfare of the most destitute will, in turn, be a good barometer Aof environmental quality. Yet the economicnt "has proved to be enormously costly in on !terms of wasted and lost lives." countries, continents, and e cultures in order to solve it... eapons. There was no problem n < Since poverty breeds environmental destruction and vice the artha Dasgupta of e =Stanford University and the University of Cambridge and Karl-to overcut the remaining wood resources, which in turn compounds nd ?their hardship. In this way, as economists Phe women who now must trek four hours zers 8instead of two to gather fuelwood for the evening meal. s. The e U.S. government is responding. 40s, the new methods adopted were 9 As the poor are driven into greater deprivation, the White, h-crop tree ue in 9plantation, the new plantation owner profits and the GNP ting the @registers a net gain. But the poor rural families who had been t Busing the forest as a source of cooking fuel suffer. Rarely is a =cost even counted for tutside the market economy, their livelihoods depend on the s ir A growing body of kno :accounts, so they have not led to improved GNP estimates. ion on pollution control, over $62 billion of it in the private sector. = So far, two countries - West Germany and the U.S. - have hat 8plans to calculate an alternative GNP figure that takes own M ile =environmental damage into account. But these new indicators ty ?probably will not be produced on a regular basis until the mid-e A1990s. Statisticians in both countries will continue to compute ?the conventiona of recyclables would make more sense than her n Boperating a centralized drop-off project. That way, people could 6;simply take their recyclables to the nearest street corner city, (instead of making a trip to the school. not even appear in theio pick them up. ]n 1984  more durable kind of human organization - more taxes, h is gh @ Alyce told the committee that other people she knew had the e >same problem. The committee had an idea: maybe routine block- ns  But Alyce had a problem. She was elderly and needed help en g, drop-off project no צBthat collected recyclables every Saturday at a local schoolyard. AResidents dropped off their glass, aluminum cans, and newspapers Bat the school, and the neighborhood group sold the recyclables to @National Temple Rec The best recycling programs are simple, grass-roots level ole 9efforts that make participation easy. This article describes a t *A Alyce Campisi was committed to recycling. Her Queen Village EX?neighborhood in Philadelphia had a recyclinticipation easy. This article describes a 0?very efficient block-corner recycling program, with collection al ;costs less than one-third that of most curbside programs. he s :2Community participation is essential for success. ns spent on ld ber 1989, pp 23-24.  ? Author:Gary Benoittaff No. 4, Winter 1989, pp 2-4. 61-64. ?/צ Abstract: ert W. Pierson, Jr., and Gregg SekscienskiG&TEXT> The best recycling programs are simple, grass-roots level e s @efforts that make par/ A NEIGHBORHOOD'S CREATIVITY II OSPECTS? NE NEC:[.,8 Robert W. Pierson, Jr., and Gregg Sekscienski 89, pp 0- A EPA Journal, Vol. 15, No. 6, November/Decem91 by permission. Copyright (C) 1990 by Worldwatch Institute. behavior," claims Josh Baran, a top public relations consultant retained by Earth Day 1990. der certain circumstances or research at the to ,000 Worldwatch Institute. onmental agenda is already moving forward, environmentalists hope to use Earth Day as a catalyst for ading stepping up the timetable. "Earth Day can be the booster rocket AReproduced 19art announced hopes to form a jointly managed U.S.-USSR to replace international park spanning both sides of the Bering Strait. On About the Author: Bush endorsed cabinet-level status for the EPA. 8 Sandra Postel is vice president fl GNP as well, offering the opportunity to show at ?how far from sustainability their economies have wandered, but to Balso leaving open the possibility that the new indicators will be largely ignored. f this year, the EPA and its Soviet counterpr ٕpicture of how the economy functions. agement of the planet... s A The committee contacted Philadelphia's new recycling office, is=which had just started organizing pilot, curbside-collection the "5(house-to-house) recycling programs for certain city th's natural neighborhood twice a month on Saturday mornings. In December s -,1985, bi-weeklysables; and צ@ And there are tangible benefits to the community. With its n :?recycling income, the Queen Village Neighbor's Association has as >awarded block-improvement grants for tree planting, community rn Bgarden fencing, and a park ple collection, the driver only drives; others do the et t t =loading. Block-corner collection makes full use of a crew's on, labor potential. e who steer by it onto the rocks." g public tly, ardtransportation; using cloth diapers rather than dispoigh efficiency is the result of 0. ckAthe far fewer stops required. The truck stops only once for the =30 to 150 homes assigned to each corner. During the several-inty  ;minute stop, the driver can help load the recyclables. In itute ;curbsids. This f Btranslates into a per-ton collection cost for block corner pickup 3that is one-fourth the cost of curbside recycling. f both income ̂eand wealth, creating the illusion that a country is better off ed ? The block-corner method's hunicipal recycling today. The block-corner collection 8 "A?crew picks up 730 pounds of recyclables per labor hour (travel w &=time to the buyer included). The hourly yield in the city's ut d V@curbside collection program is 180 pounds of recyclable made, however, for the ut to l deterioration of forests, soils, air quality, and other natural s h A Queen Village's recycling program is also more efficient and Aless costly than curbside, hour-by-hour pickup - the most common 0(@form of men al >Village Neighbor's Association, and the city has added to the n AHh6block-corner program's success. The program has been tion is e =successfully implemented, with the city's assistance, in six in "other Philadelphia neighborhoods.or the monthly community newsletter. hen tallied bout produce the GNP figure, and capital accounts, which track changes @< The block leaders and residents are the backbone of the 0 hat `HJ=flyers and follow-up reminder leaflets on their blocks. The ring @reminders continue for four to six Each block must have a block coordinator. Among Aother things, the block coordinator is responsible for finding a Acorner resident willing to tolerate a pile of newspapers, glass, != It was a success. The first collection route serviced 12 : =blocks. Within a few months, 46 blocks and 1,200 homes were anning and maintenance program. The P(9grants, averaging $500 each, provide a visible payoff to 5% or K, #recyclers for their participation. per-bag tax on paper bags as a (ammeans of discouraging their use. r Timothy Wirth told a reporter. B Block-corner recycling may not work everywhere. But in Queen =Village and other Philadelphia neighborhoods, it is a proven rs, e t success. ry's timber shipments fell off dramatically after many g years of overcutting forests. In 1988, Nigeria earties generally stick to their respective sphere. =Only when someone like James Watt threatens the bureaucratic ould 6@status quo does the prophet rally his followers to root out sin  in the EPA. aking a trip to the school. not even appear in theinough to leave visions of apocalypse to the prophet. organization - more taxes, h is gh  Alyce told the committee that other people she knew had the e B As long as the environmental debate keeps to its usual terms, Cthe two personali ;drafting regulations, however. So when it comes to making ueen ܾBpolicy, environmentalism's other personality takes over. This is @the smooth operator, principled but not too principled, able to @logroll with the best of them and smart ehe meantime they make good covers for Newsweek T(and good fun for a scare-hungry public. ojects. of the sovereign Texstates to manage the affairs of mankind in the 20th century." He N? A wild man, no matter how entertaining, isn't much good at n y. Its outgoing side, צAthe one most people know, likes tall tales of global destruction Aand demands absolute solutions - eliminate fossil fuels or die. @Its periodic warnings that the end is near are always overtaken o Bby events, but in ttheir ways for the better. sts associated with damage to our ole 9water and air, but up until now, we really haven't had to pay for *that damage. A successful cleaning-up of our act would involve EXB Environmentalism has a split personalit until now, we really haven't had to pay for 0@that damage. A successful cleaning-up of our act would involve l =making people aware, and individually responsible, for their s :>polluting actions. They would then have incentives to change ld 88, pp 8-9. 23-24.  ? Author:Virginia PostrelNo. 4, Winter 1989, pp 2-4. 61-64. ?/צ Abstract: ert W. Pierson, Jr., and Gregg SekscienskiG&TEXT= There are recognized costs associated with damage to our e s Bwater and air, but up) APOCALYPSE, NO IVITY II OSPECTS? NE NEC:[.,* Virginia Postrel 88, pp 8-9.ki 89, pp 0- 9 REASON, Vol. 20, No. 7, December 19le that appeared in the October 1988 t issue of Waste Age. manifestation of the Establishment in this country is the elitist Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The donesia's GNP be -8-from 1971 to 1984 dropped from 7.1% to 4%. If the exploitation y of coal, mineral ores, and other nonrenewable resources had been BReproduced 1991. This article is adapted, with permission from a >longer, copyrighted artic Pierson is a senior planner with the planning and engineering ?consultant firm of Rogers, Golden, & Halpern in Philadelphia. as ASekscienski, a journalism student at the University of Maryland, is an intern with EPA Journal. nnual growth in Inaded toward ecological bankruptcy and Verstill register GNP growth. ill not improve the environment but le rswill fulfill a long-sought-after goal of the "Establishment." d &About the Authors: colleagues have examined the implications for B ned only $6 d es ? A detailed handbook on setting up a block-corner recycling e $the environment they would have told us to abandon industrial me ̂e capitalism. creating the illusion that a country is better off ed The block-corner method's h land use restrictions and unprecedented revisions in 8 "A=agricultural practices. The complexity and expense of toxic l w &?waste disposal and cleanup could mean wholesale changes in the d V@kinds of raw materials used in manufacturing and in fabimately, the combined effects of Adifferent air pollutants could necessitate abandoning the use of h @fossil fuels and the internal combustion engine. The only cure =for hundreds of years of fouling oceans and streams could be mon 0(?stringentidates Ahave only skirted the edges of a few truly fundamental questions AHh:about how we continue to do business as an industrialized is e @society," writes Rochelle L. Stanfield, in the usually dull-but- Bimportant National Journal. "Ultlean is better than dirty. But they weren't very out specific about what they'd do. ital accounts, which track changes @ The block leaders and residents are the backbone of the 0 hat `HJ@ This vagueness enrages the doomsayers. "The two candus out of the mess created by 7its split personality. A bland campaign does have its produce n :advantages. Both George Bush and Michael Dukakis clearly also @ :Bestablished themselves as garden-variety environmentalists, folks =who think cra es 4business; politics being politics, they cut a deal. ersally, a  Coordinators are also responsible for distributing start-up >= The next administration has a unique opportunity to play ring Ashrink to environmentalism and get needed them or not. Many plants would have found it dead-set on the scrubbers, and eastern mines wanted the ext rules, lax enforcement, and &@special-interest politics reign supreme. A few years back, for e Aexample, environmentalists conspired with eastern coal interests á;to foist smokestack scrubbers on all coal-burning plants - of the Bwhether they is  >just a news peg that lets reporters justify apocalyptic cover . ʅ stories. 100 tons of recyclables per year were being collected. And in October of 1989, the collection was increased from bi-n a B On the policy side, ill-conceivedientific consensus that the earth is getting port ?slightly warmer, that trend is by no means definitely proven. ts ;And assuming the effect is real, it has nothing to do with 12 : Asomething as transient as one summer's rainfall. The droughtriminals. maintenance program. The P(grants, averaging $500 each, provide a visible payoff to 5% or K, @ We all benefit from industrial civilization, and only a few a (am7fanatics want to give it up. It's just that ordinary, reporter. Anonapocalyptic citizens don't like smog and dirty water, and the 0fanatics promise to do something to fix things. is a proven rs, e tsuccess. ry's timber shipments fell off dramatically after many g > There is a better way. Pollution is an economiduals to bear the costs of their actions and )to make their own choices and tradeoffs. he family that made a rk fortune in oil. He is also President of the American eople to d A In the case of auto exhausts, for example, drivers might pay ach look like? Since @no one owns the ocean or the air - the relevant property rights h Baren't defined - individuals can't just make contracts to pay the Aowners for the water and air they pollute. But we can find ways @to encourage indiviBexample, to buy the same pollution-control equipment as drivers in Atlanta. illion people will be added to a planet already gically- overtaxed by humans. To enter such a period with economic S, and A What would a more individualistic appro to tell General Motors what to do than to g ?give each car owner incentives to drive less or buy a car that s ?puts out less pollution. And we get laws that don't recognize t @regional differences, that force drivers in rural Nebraska, for specific the GNP d ?technologies - you will install a catalytic converter in every n 8new car - and forbid innovation. We get laws that push ing in a =environmental responsibility as far away from individuals as foul @possible; it's easierBrestore the Middle Ages. Totalitarian and politically absurd. So =the policy side takes over, and we get smokestack scrubbers. be better off had the Alaskan oil spill never happened and if people 6 More generally, we get laws that dictate n has had exactly the opposite effect. me. Resources Institute Vice President Jessica Tuchman Mathews (CFR) A Take air pollution. Environmentalism's apocalyptic side has Bits "solutions"; ban automobiles, power factories with windmills, at pollution and ? The challenge for the next administration is to make other n ;environmental problems look more like radon - to encourage CFR >individual responsibility and foster innovation. Traditional on >environmental regulatioears, all sorts of companies have sprung up to cope with radon; @some sell detection devices, others find ways to get rid of the e stuff. Ordinary markets work. another major failing: it counts as income many of the expenditures made to comble that appeared in the October 1988 t ? Radon, you see, is a private matter. Homeowners can check >for it themselves and deal with it themselves - as reporters, e =even TV reporters, explained with remarkable calm. Over the n ed Ayproducts lodge e -8-the air over Los Angeles, for instance, so there is nobody to nce  ?charge drivers for the exhausts they generate. (The roads are , 0free, too, which only exace>the government an annual emissions charge based on where they =live, the number of miles they drive, and how much pollution g a ?their cars produce. So people who caused more pollution would is produces catastrophically unstable soil conditions and severe is @waterway damage. After heavy logging operations, including the @endless road building that it encompassesausing massive soil erosion on sloped ground. T> Clear-cutting (denuding) practices have been in place for gn Texmoralistic environmentalism that looks for villains to punish % instead of probs >collection agency for the public at large. They would create l >some bureaucracy. And they would undoubtedly entail a lot of *regulations known by their abbreviations. makes sustainable ating management of most natural resources imool called the discount rate. It is used to to B Similar plans, based on costs and incentives, could be worked Bout for industrial air and water pollution and toxic waste. They :would not be perfect. They would use the government as a hoicer ٕpicture of how the economy functions. agement of the planet... s WHAT TREES? angement sounds tidy in theory but, like Sybil, ice, isenvironmentalism is seriously disturbed. Its split personality e "> Virtually all of the native old growth forests on private . l Alands have long since been cut down. Of all old growth trees on WBpublic lands (most of which are unprotected by legislation), only (ʅA5% are left. To put it another way: 95% of old growth trees on #public lands arorthwest, in צBwhole or slabbed square logs. Another third is exported as chips :;or pulp at prices far below true replacement costs to U.S. has as =taxpayers. While our government subsidizes the economies of and @Asian countries, predominantllic is convinced that the environment will benefit. et t t ? The timber industry did leap. Unwilling to incur even the , =cost of processing and marketing the wood products here, the ut , ardBindustry exports one-third of all timber cut in the Ns. And it's great business for 0. ckBthe timber industry. After all, if you could buy public land for @less money than private land, and the government subsidized you y  .for it, wouldn't you leap at the opportunity? mobiles, as long as the pubonal ion f >Forest, some of which were 500 years old and worth $700, were out Asacrificed for $1.48 apiece). Private timberland owners, unable ̂e The next administration has a unique opportunity to play ring  WHOSE TREES? ironmentalism and get mpanies, after clear-cutting, do pause a moment to t @replant. But these replantings are the equivalent of any other ;monoculture crop system, an agricultural practice that has e ss, !=Aalready been proven to kill sustaining species diversity anease in oxygen. And every d &@year, 125,000 acres of virgin forest are cut down, sold, lost. e %In ten years, they will all be gone. with eastern coal interests áto foist smokestack scrubbers on all coal-burning plants - of the @ Timber co the  ;fragile soil structure. New growth trees do not have this er . ʅ@replenishing capacity. Mature rain forests support soil. Soil 9supports habitat. Even shade from these old trees cools bi-n a @surrounding waters, providing an incre irrevocably gone. hat the earth is getting port slightly warmer, that trend is by no means definitely proven. ts B One reason old growth trees are important is because, even as Bthey die and decay, ancient trees replace needed nutrients iny Japan's, ancient trees are being e P(?processed there very cheaply and being converted into products K, like drywall filler. om industrial civilization, and only a few a (amfanatics want to give it up. It's just that ordinary, reporter. 4 The timber industry has the gall to cry foul at ter, and the >environmentalists, accused of trying to destroy jobs, such as s, e t=those in U.S. saw mills. It behooves us, then, to remember: ny g @While cutting levels have increased over the past 5+ OUR BESIEGED COASTS PPORT TIMBER INDUSTRY INDUSTRY:[.,& Van Smith , September 10, 1990, pp 0- A Conservation '90, Vol. 8, No. 7, September to tell General Motors what to do than to g give each car owner incentives to drive less or buy a car that s ?Reproduced 1991 by permission of the Animal Welfare Institute. t regional differences, that force drivers in rural Nebraska, for ur native old growth Aforests and the ineptitude of the U.S. Forest Service write to: @the Native Forest Council, Post Office Box 2171, Eugene, Oregon 97402. mental responsibility as far away from individuals as foul possible; it's easierinclude a total moratorium on additional logging, roading, or R) >development in any remaining roadless areas, a similar ban on as @development in any remaining ancient forests or native forests, , at pollution and The challenge for the next administration is to make other n > The Native Forest Council (NFC), a nonprofit organization FR destruction, especially in the Pacific Northwest, was formed. e e ;AFSEEE aims at forcing a shift in priorities of the Forest ounts ,Service from land rape to good stewardship. ombowth areas - disregarding federal 88 t :environment laws and accommodating inflated timber sales. heck for it themselves and deal with it themselves - as reporters, e B The Association of Forest Service Employees for Environmental 7Eproducts lodge e -8-= The Mapleton coalition won an injunction to stop logging on y ;operations. But a rider to the Senate appropriations bill been @allowed the Forest Service to continue selling Mapleton Trees - a ;and trees in other old grt a coalition was formed which sued the Forest Service, that Acharging "that when you kill off more than half the fish, you're ¬ practicing multiple-use anymore." invisible, odorless, land, tasteless, insidious gas whose radioactive decay rbates the problem.) l bankruptcy and Verstill register GNP growth. ill not improve the environment but le rsB Mechanized forest removal in Oregon's Siuslaw National Forest &A(Mapleton District) so expertly buried fish and wildlife habitat ;tha years up to es :40%, employment in the timber industry has decreased 33%. y owns $the air over Los Angeles, for instance, so there is nobody to nce  charge drivers for the exhausts they generate. (The roads are , WHAT'S BEING DONE? ly exace10, 1990, pp 10-14. ? Vol. 39, No. 1, Spring 1990, pp 8-9. 1-64. ?/צ Abstract: Smith Pierson, Jr., and Gregg SekscienskiG&TEXTA From over-development to dumping, our coasts are in troubled Awaters. This item describes specific legislation that exists to 0>protect coastal areas. Progress has been slow to reverse the e l >damage that appears in marine life, particularly in estuaries he :fouled by contaminated runoff. owth" trees at far below hange ld ces Act removed development y @incentives for areas within a newly established Coastal Barrier AResources System. About 450,000 acres of undeveloped land along @ :@the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts were deemed ineligible for federal s ;subsidies fd put nothing back into the soon exhausted soil. a deal. ersally, a ACT FIGHTS DEVELOPMENT so responsible for distributing start-up > The next administration has a unique opportunity to play ring ? The 1982 Coastal Barrier Resourinator, "wisdom calls for alternatives. At the very @least, the federal government should not provide incentives for coastal barrier development." ricultural practice that has e ss, !=already been proven to kill sustaining species diversity an0 years have claimed the y d &year's Hurricane Hugo killed 54 people and cost $7 billion in ts á?damages. "Clearly," said Elise Jones, the Federation's coastal he Bproject coord the  fragile soil structure. New growth trees do not have this er . ʅ: Subsidized coastal development is not only costly and Soil ?wasteful of our natural resources, it is downright hazardous. a >Hurricanes and storms over the last 9 to developers, even to those building in ng port ?hazardous coastal areas. The cost, in addition to billions of ts ;dollars in government revenue, has been the destruction of ven as 2millions of acres of wetlands, dunes and beaches. utrients in government subsidies to l >build on our coastlines. Tax dollars have been available for on W=building bridges, laying sewers, grading roads, and for home only (ʅAloans, flood insurance and disaster relief. Further, tax breaks 9have been givenr ٕpicture of how the economy functions. agement of the planet... s DEVELOPMENT DANGERS sounds tidy in theory but, like Sybil, ice, isenvironmentalism is seriously disturbed. Its split personality e "@ For years, developers have received entails a new order of priorities in which are Bhealth and conservation concerns come first, and the interests of 6!developers and polluters follow. his followers to root out sin in the EPA. aking a trip to the school. not even appear in theiies for new development @are prohibited, would help hold back the development tide. And h =House and Senate companion bills would address the pervasive ing ?problem of coastal pollution. In the final analysis, however, , =saving our coasts #impact, but more needs to be done. denizen, clear-cutting ueen ܾproduces catastrophically unstable soil conditions and severe is B Recent legislative initiatives to enlarge the Coastal Barrier AResources System, in which federal subsidausing massive soil erosion on sloped ground. TA The rising tide of human development and pollution along the Tex=coasts means an ebb tide for important and highly productive He NBcoastal habitats. Laws are in place to slacken the pace of human surfers riding the o צ:rolling waves. But the phrase holds a higher meaning for the e ;shoreline species whose homes are the beaches, marshes and es . (submerged habitats of the coastal zone. . timber also exposes o delicate terrain, creplacement cost. Clear-cutting of native timber also exposes le 9Abstract: errain, causing massive soil erosion on sloped ground. *B Life's a beach. The battle-cry of seaside hedonism brings to EX?mind images of boardwalks, sand castles andor new development. While developers can still y out 7receive subsidies from state and local sources for new ck changes @?development in these areas, they must now shoulder more of the d. HJ8costs and risks of building on these coastal lands. By d provide and environmentally sensitive areas along the coastline. Why e =should taxpayers' money be used to line developers' pockets, ntal 1dd by the lodge e -8-@Department of the Interior. "It is important to make sure that y @the Senate bill isn't amended the way the House bill was," Jones ?said. "The development community is out there fighting to get a @our tax dollars for unwist a coalition was formed which sued the Forest Service, that @ The Senate bill is a much better bill, according to Jones. @If it survives committee review without damaging amendments, it :would expand the System even more than recommendee due solely to political maneuvering, Ver=and the exemption in Texas sets a bad precedent. But we are t le rsAstill gaining several hundred thousand acres of new land for the & System." District) so expertly buried fish and wildlife habitat tha large resort. es 40%, employment in the timber industry has decreased 33%. y owns $> "Conservationists are disappointed with the losses," said nce  AJones, "but the bill is still a significant improvement over the Bstatus quo. The losses wer wold be barred from federal subsidies. And only 40 of the Aproposed additions in Michigan have been included in the amended e t>bill. In addition, an exemption was included for South Padre y g BIsland in Texas, where there are plans to develop aosed in the bill. trees are being e P(processed there very cheaply and being converted into products K, 9 Much of the deleted land was in the Florida Keys and a few a (amBMichigan. In the Keys, only 48,000 acres of the proposed 110,000 Aacreswas amended צ@and approved by the Fisheries and Wildlife Subcommittee and the s :@Oceanography and Great Lakes Subcommittee. The amended version s @would add about 500,000 acres to the System, much less than the /850,000 acres originally proplic is convinced that the environment will benefit. et t t CONGRESS MAKES EXCEPTIONS d leap. Unwilling to incur even the , cost of processing and marketing the wood products here, the ut , ardA The House bill suffered some compromises when it , in the summer of 1989. Senator ckCoastal Barrier Resources Act Amendments of 1990, on June 13. u y  for it, wouldn't you leap at the opportunity? mobiles, as long as the pubonal ion f < Interior's report sparked a series of bills seeking the e out 4addition of the recommended acreage to the System. ners, unable ̂e=Representative Gerry Studds (D-MA) introduced H.R. 2840, the f ed ACoastal Barrier Improvement Actstem. The bulk of these recommended additions are n 8 "ABwetlands - which are difficult to develop and especially valuable &'as habitat for many important species. ds to the timber industry, Vand for very little. (Trees from Alaska's Tongass Nati timber sales from public lands > In December, 1988, the Interior Department recommended to of h ?Congress that an additional 790,000 acres of Atlantic and Gulf @coastline and 58,000 acres of Great Lakes shoreline be included 0( A slightl e @Representative Gerry Studd's (D-MA) Coastal Defense Initiative, =H.R. 2467, would improve coastal water quality standards and . strides to help clean up the dirty water. On the House side,possible. Under the rld n But they would be preferable to the current maze of purely e coercive regulations. And they would represent a step away from #CONGRESS CONSIDERS CLEANING COASTS oks for villains to punish % instead of probs ? What's more, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says l >our coasts will continue to degrade "unless a national policy @requiring significant improvement in the current management and g !regulatory system is initiated." ces imidence indicates that pollutants from waste to ?disposal activities have contributed to declines of major fish ed populations in the U.S." d water pollution and toxic waste. They would not be perfect. They would use the government as a hoiceion's productive d ld be ?shellfish areas were subject to some level of restriction as a Bresult of potential or actual bacterial contamination. According 6to the Office of Technology Assessment, "considerable in a the s =circumstantial ev;109 separate kills, involving a total of approximately 4.6 ey Coastal waters and estuaries - transitional zones between So ;coastline freshwater and saltwater - are tremendously rich . be Ahabitats that provide the breeding, spawning and nursery grounds ?for many commercially important fish and shely modified version of H.R. 2467 passed the House k, BWater Resources Subcommittee on July 31 with several amendments. 9One amendment would require controlling the discharge of n, ated ?"floatables" from combined sewer and stormwater systems by