specimens sent to the Fish and Wildlife Service for analysis were found to contain insecticides
in amounts s ufficient to caus e their death. The Alabama findings were duplicated in Texas ,
where a 2500-acre area treated with heptachlor lost all of its quail. Along with the quail went
90 per cent of the s ongbirds. Again, analys is revealed the pres ence of heptachlor in the tis s ues
of dead birds.
In addition to quail, wild turkeys were s erious ly reduced by the fire ant progra m. Although 80
turkeys had been counted on an area in Wilcox County, Alabama, before heptachlor was
applied, none could be found the s ummer after treatment—none, that is , except a clutch of
unhatche d eggs and one dead poult. The wild turkeys may have s uffere d the same fate as their
do mes ti c brethren, for turkeys on farms in the area treated wi th che micals als o produced few
young. Few eggs hatched and almos t no young s urvived. This did not happen on nea rby
untreated areas. The fate of the turkeys was by no means unique. One of the mos t widely
known and res pected wildlife biologis ts in the country, Dr. Clarence Cottam, called on some of
the farme rs whos e prope rty had been treated. Bes ides remarking that ‘all the little tree birds ’
s eemed to have dis appeared after the land had been treated, mos t of these people reported
losses of livestock, poultry, and household pets. One man was ‘irate against the control
workers ,’ Dr. Cot tam repo rte d, ‘as he s aid he buried or otherwis e dis pos ed of 19 carcass es of
his cows that had been killed by the pois on and he knew of three or four additional cows that
died as a result of the same treatment. Calves died that had been given only milk since birth.’
The people Dr. Cottam interviewe d we re puzzled by what had happene d in the months
following the treatment of their land. One woman told hi m s he had s et s everal hens after the
s urrounding land had been covered with pois on, ‘and for reas ons s he did not unde rs tand very
few young were hatc hed or s urvived.’ Anothe r farme r ‘rais es hogs and for fully nine mon ths
after the broadcas t of pois ons , he could rais e no young pigs. The litters were born dead or they
died after birth.’ A similar report came from another, who said that out of 37 litters that might
have numbere d as many as 250 young, only 31 little pigs survived. This man had als o been quite
unable to rais e chickens since the land was pois oned. The Department of Agriculture has
consistently denied livestock losses related to the fire ant progra m. However, a veterinarian in
Bainbridge, Georgia, Dr. Otis L. Poitevint, who was called upon to treat many of the affected
animals, has summarized his reasons for attributing the deaths to the insecticide as follows.
Within a period of two weeks to s everal months after the fire ant pois on was applied, cattle,
goats, horses, chickens , and birds and othe r wildlife began to s uffer an often fatal dis eas e of the
nervous system. It affected only animals that had access to contaminated food or water.
Stabled animals were not affected. The condition was seen only in areas treated for fire ants.
Laborato ry tes ts for dis eas e were negative. The s ymptoms obs erved by Dr. Poitevint and other
veterinarians were those described in authoritative texts as indicating pois oning by dieldrin or
heptachlor.
Dr. Poitevint also described an interesting case of a two-month-old calf that s howed s ymptoms
of pois oning by heptachlor. The animal was subjected to exhaustive laboratory tests. The only
s ignificant finding was the dis covery of 79 parts per million of heptachlor in its fat. But it was
five months s ince the pois on had been applied. Did the calf get it directly from grazing or
indirectly from its mother’s milk or even before birth? ‘If from the milk,’ asked Dr. Poitevint,
‘why were not s pecial precautions taken to protect our children who drank milk from local
dairies?’ Dr. Poitevint’s report brings up a s ignificant proble m about the conta mination of milk.
backadmin
(backadmin)
#1