Steve Tvedten of Get Set, Inc.'s email to Lyndon Hawkins of the California Department of Pesticide Regulation .

Questions have been asked of the California Department of Pesticide Control since Fontana Unified School District declined to consider a pesticide free IPM program because of the Department of Agriculture's opinion about only utilizing registered pesticides to eliminate pests.  The California Department of Pesticide Regulation has remained silent and not responded to these issues:

Subject: Lyndon, Where are you taking the peopls of California?
       Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 08:23:01 -0400
       From: Rosalind Tvedten <stvedten@earthlink.net>
 Organization: Get Set Inc. (www.getipm.com)
         To: Lyndon Hawkins <hawkins@empm.cdpr.ca.gov>
 
 

Lyndon, RACHAEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #570 said in part:       Here is our situation.  We are all passengers (or crew) on a long rickety train heading south at 40 miles per hour, not rushing toward doom but steadily chugging southward toward general environmental and social destruction.  Many of us (environmentalists) are alert to the dangers and for several years we have been earnestly walking north inside the train.

As we plod from train car to train car we stop to congratulate ourselves on our progress.  We slap each other on the back or we hug, and we recount the many train-cars we have managed to pass through, thanks to our stubborn persistence.

But if we would only pause to look out the window, we could all plainly see that we are now further south than we were when we last stopped to congratulate ourselves on our progress.  Despite our best efforts, we have been unable to reverse the direction of travel.  We are all being carried southward against our will, deeply violating our sense of justice.

Maybe this is happening to us because we have spent our time engaging the conductor in conversation.  This seems like the natural thing to do.  After all, it is the conductor who sets and enforces the rules inside the train --that's what conductors do.  Furthermore, the conductor seems pleasant and intelligent, and he also seems genuinely interested in helping us make our way north through the train.  He keeps emphasizing how well we are doing, and, when we become discouraged, he urges us on, reminding us that walking northward is a noble journey, and that eventually we will get to the promised place.

Unfortunately, it has been many years since we asked ourselves the fundamental questions: what fuels the locomotive?  Who is the engineer with his hand on the throttle?  And what will it take to make him change direction?

The time is long overdue when we must ask ourselves what it would take to change our trajectory, to permanently alter our direction of travel. Even if the means for actually changing direction are not visible at the moment, we know that change is needed and has to come.

We also know that things can change quickly, unexpectedly.  But if, today, we were offered the opportunity to set civilization on a new path, most of us would not have a clear idea what to do.  We need to think this through.  We need a vision of a workable alternative to the present, a clear set of goals (and benchmarks) and some principles to guide us, if we are to make the shift whenever the opportunity presents itself.

Search for Least-Damaging Alternatives

We must insist that all reasonable alternatives be examined before decisions are made, and that the least-damaging alternative be given greatest weight.  We could certainly embed this decision-making principle in our public institutions, starting at the local level --and eventually we will have to embed this guiding principle in private decision-making as well.

As biologist Mary O'Brien says, "Our society proceeds on the assumption that toxic substances WILL be used and the only question is how much. Under the current system, toxic chemicals  are used, discharged, incinerated, and buried without ever requiring a finding that these activities are necessary."  We need to institutionalize the search for least-damaging alternatives and give priority to the least-damaging alternative once it has been identified.  --Peter Montague (National Writers Union, UAW Local 1981/AFL-CIO)

Lyndon, I noted with dismay an article in the May, 1999 issue of PEST CONTROL: that the poison applicators now have amended the San Francisco pesticide poison ban in public areas, with a caveat, that allows them to use "registered" pesticide poisons in the event of an insect infestation.  Lyndon, you know full well what this means - there ALWAYS will be an insect infestation in San Francisco's public areas, whether or not there really are any"bad" insects - there will now ALWAYS be more poison contamination.  "Registered" poisons do not "protect" people - "registered" poisons KILL people.  When will it ever (in your opinion) be legal to wash your can with soap and water in California?  Steve.