Pesticides Study Pushed Interior backs s t e p - u p in research on effects o f pesticides on wildlife JLJILLS in Congress to step u p research on effects of pesticides on wildliFe are getting strong support from the Department of the Interior. Assistant Secretary Ross L. Leflier, in letters to» Sen. Warren S. Magnuson (D.-W^ash.), chairman of the Senate C o m m i t t e e on Interstate and Foreign C o m m e r c e , and Rep. Herbert C. Bonner (D.-N. C ) , chairman of the House C o m m i t t e e on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, tags existing programs as "inadequate^" applauds any measure that w o u l d increase the scope of such research. But Interior asks that no specific appropriation be made in any new legislation. "The research program shoiild be permitted to expand on a logical basis T h e two bills in the h o p p e r , S. 1575, sponsored by Sen. Magnuson, and H.R. 5813, sponsored by R e p - Lee Metcalf (D.-Mont.), both call for nearly S2.6 million for further studies on pesticides effects; present legislation authorizes only $280,000. So fer, no hearings have been scheduled for cither bill. ^ W i d e s p r e a d Usage. Wholesale value of pesticides used in the U. S. jumped from $40 million in 1£>40 to c - o q n ï-riiîliri- :.·» i c w > .
1Q7.
ΛΛ,,1Λ
οΛΛ
use passing the hillion dollar mart T ap plied at rates in excess of one-Cfiiarter pound per acre may kill fish a n d other aquatic life; two pounds per acare will kill birds, and five pounds can kill some mammals. Other insecticides have acute toxicity ranges of 15 to 2 0 O times that of D D T . Last year. Congress passed a bill directing Interior to studv effects of pesticides on wildlife, and appropri ated $280.000 for the job. I nterior says it plans toxicity studies o n more than 200 basic pesticides. Also 20
C&EN
JUNE
2 9,
I 9 5 ^9
planned: residue studies, field a p praisals of long range effects, and dis semination of findings so that less haz ardous materials can be developed. While Interior says $280.000 is too slim a b u d g e t , it isn't anxious to h a v e a sudden shower of dollars thrust u p o n it. T h e program can't expand fast enough to justify it. No sum should b e appropriated n o w , says Leffler. Rather, let Interior ask for funds through nor mal channels as the need develops.
New CBW Policy Urged Chemical a n d biological warfare agents are s t r o n g deterrents to future wars. But they have no deterrent value unless the U n i t e d States tells the world that it has C B W agents and proposes to use them as it sees fit. So said Maj. General William M. Creasy (U. S. A.Ret, ) to the House Committee on Sci ence and Astronautics. Creasy, for merly chief of the Army Chemical Corps, is now vice president of the Lummus Co. Under p r e s e n t policy, the U. S. will not use C B W agents unless an attacker uses them first. But, Creasy says, w e might not get the c h a n c e to retaliate. Present policy provides no u r g e n t reason to push research on finding n e w and better C B W agents. A new national policy, publicly an nounced, ίο use C B W agents w h e n necessary would provide strong motiva tion for boosting spending to find b e t t e r C B W agents, Creasy says. If we h a v e a "decent sized" program, new develop ments in nerve gases and psychochemicals (lysergic acid derivatives) may b e ready for major battlefield use in five1 or 10 years. Creasy calls the present Chemical Corps research b u d g e t - a b o u t $45 million annually—"miniscule," says at the present pace battlefield use of new C B W agents is "an infinite time away." Creasy blasts the present policy of keeping information on C B W under wraps. " T h e only result of this policy is to keep information from the Ameri can people." Creasy would remove all barriers to p u b l i c discussion of C B W . CBW can b e as deadly as atomic warfare, Creasy told the committee, b u t it can also be more h u m a n e . CBW agents can b e tailored for specific situa tions to kill an enemy's will to fightarmies could conquer without killing. Successful development of C B W agents "opens up n e w vistas of controlling people without being there."
After the Α-Bombs Hit Congress last w e e k w a s s e t t o take a look at w h a t would h a p p e n if an ag gressor launched a "limited"' atomic at tack on the U . S. More t h a n 30 experts w e r e scheduled to describe to t h e Joint Committee on Atomic Energy's S u b committee on Radiation t h e effects of the Α-attack in terms of blast a n d ther mal effects, radiation, a n d fallout— with special emphasis on fallout. W h a t ' s the purpose of t h e hearings? To stir up interest in civil defense. Said subcommittee c h a i r m a n Rep. C h e t Holifield, "Considerable confusion ex ists in the public mind as t o t h e prob able effects of nuclear weapons a n d their aftermath in the event of w a r . Part of the apathy in the U. S. civil defense effort may be traced t o igno rance of the true effects of radioactive fallout." Principal goal of the hearings: to describe the biological effects of the nu clear attack. No attempt was m a d e to consider such problems as the over-all impact of nuclear war on the nation's economy, specific recovery measures, or h o w well industry could spring back into operation after the attack. l· P a t t e r n . To keep all t h e esti mates of d a m a g e on a c o m p a r a b l e basis, the committee spelled out t h e details of the hypothetical attack. Xhe commit tee picked October as the time of at tack. Reason: T h e aggressor would have harvested the crops a n d stored them in fallout-proof Ijins beforelaunching the attack. To get the fall out distribution, the actual w e a t h e r pat tern across the U. S. on Oct. 1 7 , 1958, was used. In the committee plans, t h e aggressor would drop bombs r a n g i n g from 1 to 10 megatons, split equally between Abombs and H-bombs. T h e comraittee also assumed the aggressor would drop bombs on U. S. bases overseas and the U. S. would mount a retaliatory attackon the aggressor's homeland. Bombs dropped on the continental U. S. would total 1453 megatons; bombs dropped outside the U. S. would total 2500 m e g atons. In the U. S., the committee estimated that 566 megatons w o u l d fall on 70 critical target areas—industrial com plexes, population centers, a n d com munications centers. Estimates also call for 168 megatons to fall on 21 Atomic E n e r g y Commission installa tions, and 719 megatons on military bases.
