November 1997 Vol. XIV, No. 6

As Americans sit down to a Thanksgiving feast, newspapers and television remind them that not everyone is so fortunate. But there seems to be a news blackout on the fact that soon Americans may not just be asked to share their food with the hungry, but required to share the deprivation.

How could the land of abundance be turned into a land of rationing, bread lines, and food riots?

Cutting agricultural productivity by half would probably do the job.

American farmers already labor under a heavy load of regulation, as they are obliged to ``protect'' listed (allegedly endangered) species, wetlands, aquifers, and even the delicate sensibilities of suburbanites who object to dust raised by preparing the land for planting. But worse is on the horizon. The Global Energy Rationing Treaty is about to be signed in Kyoto. And the most disastrous feature of the Montreal Protocol will soon be in effect: the most critical of all agricultural chemicals is about to be banned-methyl bromide.

Methyl bromide is a broad-spectrum pesticide used in controlling pest insects, nematodes, weeds, pathogens, and rodents. The production, storage, shipping, and processing of nearly 100 crops depends heavily on methyl bromide. About 27,000 tons are used annually in the U.S. Many nations, such as the U.S. and Japan, require fumigation with methyl bromide before crops may enter domestic markets.

The Montreal Protocol, which is supposed to protect the Planet from ozone depletion, calls for a phase-out of methyl bromide in industrialized countries, beginning with a 25% reduction in 2001 and a complete ban by 2010. The United States will be affected first because Title VI of the Clean Air Act prohibits the production and importation of methyl bromide starting January 1, 2001. Legislation has been introduced by Rep. Dan Miller of Florida to lift the ban.

An Alta Vista Internet search on ``methyl bromide'' turned up 7,025 documents, a large number of them by U.S. government agencies defending the ban. Opponents of the ban are portrayed as greedy capitalists eager to poison little black babies for profit. On a number of sites, one can ``enter the Bromide Baron's castle.''

A participant in international conferences on methyl bromide, Mrs. JoAnn Stuke Diethrich, spoke at the recent Global Warming Symposium sponsored by the Society for Environmental Truth. Her third-generation family farm, the largest walnut tree nursery in the world, will be out of business without methyl bromide, she reported. She is looking at agricultural land in South America.

``There is no substitute for methyl bromide,'' she said. ``And even if God came to earth today and handed us one, it could not be registered in time.''

There are various other methods that can perform one or another function of methyl bromide for certain crops. But even with some of the better substitutes, yields are greatly reduced, she stated.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) touts the existence of numerous alternatives, such as the steam treatment of artificial soil beds used by Dutch tulip growers. Even if it were practical to install steam pipes in a hundred acres planted in tomatoes, would the global warming treaty permit the burning of fuel to make enough steam? Other methods have been shown to have only sporadic effectiveness or have been banned because of toxicity.

For the lack of better alternatives, the EPA blames farmers and industry representatives, who are not working hard enough on finding them, or who are wasting resources trying to delay the ban (see the EPA Methyl Bromide Phaseout Web Site, http://www.epa.gov/ozone/mbr/mbrqa.html.)

Activist Jean-Michel Cousteau preaches to the world's farmers at http://hookomo.aloha.net/~sos/JM_Cousteau_3_96.html: ``Before the `Green Revolution' accustomed us to high yields and low prices, agriculture was a very risky business. Swarms of pests could ruin a year's work, and if the failure of one farm was duplicated enough, famine could spread across the land.

``Then we discovered petrochemical fertilizers and organic compound pesticides, and our harvests multiplied a hundredfold.''

Users are now ``like an addict in the grip of a narcotics dealer,'' Cousteau states. They must learn to accept more risk, employ more human sweat, and spend more money. After all, methyl bromide is a ``health and safety issue'' and its use ``degrades the quality of life for farmers and society as a whole.''

``I can think of no more important health issue than the availability of an abundant, safe, and affordable food supply,'' said Mrs. Stuke Diethrich.

``I work with delegates from countries like Cuba,'' she added. ``They can't understand why the U.S. would throw away its preeminence in agriculture.''

The main pretext for the ban on this essential compound is the assertion by ``300 scientists'' that it is ``50 times more effective at destroying ozone than the chlorine from CFCs.'' The EPA claims that up to 90% of the methyl bromide used for agricultural purposes finds its way into the atmosphere.

The Methyl Bromide Working Group (http://www.sparber.com/ozone/htm) notes that up to 80% of the methyl bromide in the atmosphere comes from natural sources (oceans and biomass burning). Moreover, methyl bromide is destroyed by soil bacteria and chemical processes in the atmosphere (mean residence time about a year) and absorbed by the ocean.

This argument is completely irrelevant because there is no evidence of a net sustained downward trend in stratospheric ozone or upward trend in ultraviolet radiation at earth's surface. But again the hypothetical threat to the Planet trumps the clear and present danger from microbes, pests, and starvation.

On December 5, 1997, at 12:00 noon, the American Policy Center is coordinating a one-hour Strike for Liberty to spread the word that ``There Is No Global Warming.'' Truckers will be pulling off the road, radio stations will be playing the national anthem, and various rallies are scheduled across the land. For more information, see http://www.americanpolicy.org.

On December 15, 1997, a Conference on Sound Science and Public Policy will be held at the Airport Hilton in Phoenix from 8:00 a.m. until 2:30 p.m., under the sponsorship of the Goldwater Institute, The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC), and the Mountain States Legal Foundation. Speakers include Steven J. Milloy, Michael Fumento, Michael Gough, Richard Stroup, and Bonner Cohen (who will just be returning from the Kyoto conference). For more information, call (602)951-9200.

The 1998 annual meeting of DDP will be held July 11-12 at the Scottsdale Hilton. On Friday, July 10, special optional tours are planned: the laboratory of the Environmental and Plant Dynamic Research Group at the U.S. Water Conservation Lab (where Dr. Sherwood Idso's experiments on the effects of carbon dioxide are conducted) and the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station. Mark your calendar now!

A complete set of audiotapes of the Society for Environmental Truth meeting held in Tucson, Nov. 11, is available for $75. Videotapes are $20 each.