Recently, I recalled marine biologist Rachel Carson in a column. When she published Silent Spring in 1962, she was accused of everything. The book, sadly still relevant today, presented background information and testimonies on the impact of DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) and other pesticides on fields in the United States. The fight against insects had side effects: it killed birds and mammals and made people sick.

 

It was a controversial work. It sparked a fierce smear campaign led by agricultural unions, chemical giants such as DuPont and Velsicol, and government authorities.

 

Dwight Eisenhower's Secretary of Agriculture, Ezra Taft Benson, asked her to “get married and shut up.” Business leaders cried out, “So what if insects have been here long before humans? Their survival over the millennia only proves their ability to adapt to any environmental threat. They will also adapt to insecticides.”

 

They accused her or being against economic development and wanting to ruin farmers and businessmen. She was trying to protect people by talking about sustainability, when the concept didn't even exist yet.

 

Carson died of cancer just two years after publishing Silent Spring.  She withstood attacks from the agricultural and chemical industries. She also faced opposition from small producers.

 

Her work was not in vain. She revealed the ravages of “harmless” agricultural spraying, exemplified by birds dying after feeding on contaminated seeds and insects.

 

In 1972, the United States banned DDT. Many countries followed suit. Chile's turn came in 1984 with Resolution 639 of the agriculture ministry.

 

But when she published her book a decade earlier, the government had a different opinion. In 1959, thousands of hectares in Michigan were sprayed to control the Japanese beetle infestation. One of the most dangerous chemicals at the time, Aldrin, was used.  It was cheaper than DDT.

 

Although it was recognized as poison (it was used to kill insects!), the population was told that no precautions were necessary. The Federal Aviation Agency stated that these were “risk-free operations” and the Detroit Parks and Recreation Department said that “the spraying is harmless to humans and will not harm plants or pets.”

 

But reality was stubborn. As were the environmentalists. Carson quotes her neighbor, Ann Boyes: “The first indication that the people were concerned about the spray was a call I received on Sunday morning from a woman who reported that coming home from church she saw an alarming number of dead and dying birds. The spraying there had been done on Thursday. She said there were no birds at all flying in the area . . . she had found at least a dozen [dead] in her back yard.” 

 

Page after page, Silent Spring exposed the damage that chemicals were causing to wildlife, domestic life, and human health.

 

You don't have to travel 60 years back in time or thousands of miles north to notice it, though.

 

Stand on any busy street in Santiago or another large Chilean city and try to hear birds chirping.  Read the Aysén press to learn how animals are dying and people are getting sick because of a tailings dam in Alto Mañihuales while the authorities downplay the situation.  Notice how dead whales are found near salmon farms from time to time.

 

How much research is the Chilean government and business sector doing on the impacts of main productive activities on biodiversity and health?  Such research may exist, but it is not as widely publicized as the contribution to GDP, employment, and the economy, which is touted daily as part of the miraculous development model. It's not for lack of resources. There is simply no will. Or rather, it is not part of the business. 

 

Carson says of the research at that time:  "Although funds for chemical treatments arrived in endless streams, the biologists of the Illinois Natural History Survey who were trying to measure the damage caused to wildlife had to work under financial constraints. In 1954, only $1,100 could be allocated for the employment of an agricultural assistant, and no special funds were provided in 1955."  She doesn't mention it, but perhaps the argument was that the money allocated to this research could have been used to build homes and pave roads.

 

This is the Chilean Congress's mantra when discussing the budget. This mindset is the basis of the recently approved Sectoral Authorizations Act, which undermines environmental protection, enforcement, and research on the impacts of biodiversity.