http://www.organicconsumers.org/blm.htm

Note: Public comment period ends Jan.9,2006

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has proposed to apply massive amounts of pesticides to public lands in 17 Western states. The BLM claims these pesticides need to be applied to forests, rangelands and aquatic areas in order to reduce the risk of fire and slow the spread of invasive weeds. Under the proposal 932,000 acres would undergo chemical application in 17 western states, including National Monuments and National Conservation areas.

An integral part of this proposal involves aerial spraying of toxic pesticides, which increases negative impacts on non-targeted vegetation, wildlife, and people, including recreationists, tourists, and native peoples (pesticide application areas include Alaska, where native fishing and plant gathering is widespread).

The pesticides that would be used include persistent and mobile chemicals, including known developmental and reproductive toxins. The list of pesticides includes 4 new chemicals and 14 other pesticides, including 2,4-D, bromacil, chlorsulfuron, diquat, diuron, fluridone, hexazinone, teburthiruon, triclopyr, and picloram. The proposal would also allow the use of "new chemicals that may be developed in the future."

Fortunately, the proposal also includes an analysis of possible outcomes of using nonchemical means of managing these areas and offers an option (Option C) wherein traditional methods of vegetation management are used on public lands, not the use widespread application of toxic chemicals.

Take action now and submit your public comment in support of Option C of the Bureau of Land Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement.

Note: Public comment period ends Jan.9,2006



Subject: Comment on BLM Programmatic EIS for pesticide Vegetation Treatments in 17 Western States

Brian Amme, Project Manager

BLM, P.O. Box 12000

Reno, NV 89520-0006

Mr. Brian Amme,

I have reviewed the Bureau of Land Management's proposal for pesticide applications to public lands in western states. I am urging BLM to choose Option 3 (C) in its proposal, wherein alternative control methods, other than pesticides, would be used. As a user (and citizen owner) of these public lands, I am deeply concerned with allowing such a large use of pesticides on public lands, including National Monuments and National Conservation areas.

An integral part of this proposal involves aerial spraying of toxic pesticides, which increases negative impacts on non-targeted vegetation, wildlife, and people, including recreationists, tourists, and native peoples (pesticide application areas include Alaska, where native fishing and plant gathering is widespread). Although the proposal claims care would be taken in applying the pesticides in a controlled manner, these chemicals are known to drift much further than anticipated and cause unexpected health and ecological impacts. The pesticides that would be used include persistent and mobile chemicals, including known developmental and reproductive toxins.

U.S. biologists, ecologists and wildlife managers have a vast array of alternative vegetation management tools to choose from, without having to resort to applying toxic chemicals to our public lands. Please choose Option 3 (C).

*********I am also interested in pursuing a public hearing concerning the persistent contrails, also known as CHEMTRAILS, which I have documented for over 5 years. Public awareness must be raised on all these issues to avoid further human experimentatiuon and wanton, irresponsible weapons testings on unsuspecting American Citizens.

Thank you for your care and consideration,