OCR Text |
Show Page July Fourth Neil Sumsion No to DDT! Independence Day - July Fourth was American Independence Day. A day that sparks emotional feelings in every red blooded American. This day we celebrate. We do so in recognition of the fact that no other nation has ever enjoyed greatness, freedom, opportunity for all, in the same measure. In what other country can a laborer save enough money to travel around the world on vacation. Where in the world do the people have such an abundance of high quality food? What country has more cars, televisions, indoor plumbing, and the like and available to all? Where in the world do all citizens have educational opportunities paid from public funds and college training well within the reach of most who would continue their education. So many successful and great leaders of the nation and industry got a start from a small farm where opportunities for the industrious are unlimited! America isn't great because of an overabundance of natural resources. It isn't because the people are born wiser and more intelligent. The success which has made America the envy of the world stems from the principles embodied in the U.S. Constitution. Recognizing the hand of God in establishing.the constitution and government of this land, "In God We Trust" was inscribed on our coins and currency. So long as men live and support and defend the principles that have made us great we will continue to prosper. However, prosperity is capable of destroying mans capacity to work, and fight for what is right. Even to work for what he eats and enjoys. ' and Politicians, many justify expending the private citizens resources, taken by taxation on hard earned income, for purposes of helping the poor. Initially the idea seemed very humanitarian. "A nation so rich can surely give of its abundance to help the needy," many thought. Soon there were more "needy", until it is now anticipated that more than 10 percent of the nation's population will soon be welfare recipients. Not to say anything of those on social security or other subsistence type nonproductive incomes. Then there are additional thousands if not millions whose incomes are paid from taxes. This doesn't necessarily mean the jobs are unimportant, it merely begs an answer to the question "What happened to all of the producers?" Soon there will be more tax eaters than tax payers. On April 19, 1775 the instructions that Captain Parker gave to his Minute Men when it seemed apparent that independence could not be achieved by conference are significant: "Stand your ground, don't fire unless fired upon. But if they mean to have a war let it begin here." The war that ensued risked and destroyed property and many lives and even many of the "signors" never lived to enjoy the liberty they sought. It is not a time to fire guns at the "kings men" but it is time to "stand your - V do-goode- rs, ground." John Adams declared "If it be the pleasure of Heaven that my country shall require the poor offering of my life, the victim shall be ready . . . But while I do live, let me have a country, or at least the hope of a country, and that a free country. But whatever may be our fate, be assured . . . that this Declaration will stand. It may cost treasure, and it may cost blood; but it will stand, and it will richly compensate for both." He further said that on anniversaries of the Declaration's acceptance, the people "will shed tears, copious, gushing tears, not of subjection and slavery, not of agony and distress, but of exultation, gratitude and joy." The liberty enjoyed here in America, whether you be farmer, professor, laborer or industrialist, can only be preserved if good men and women do all they can to give support to good government and take willingly the responsibility of citizenship. Eternal vigilance is indeed the price of freedom. And if that meaning is hard to understand it can be more simply stated. It requires blood, lives and money to maintain these great ideals that have been cherished in America for nearly 200 years. Are you doing your part? 1972 July Utah Farm Bureau News 2 i i It must be another year full of politics. In UPI story, reporting the results of seven months of testimony, Examiner Edmund M. Sweeney said, testimony failed to prove allegations that DDT causes severe environmental damage. The evidence in this proceeding supports the conclusion that there is a present need for the essential uses of DDT. There has been proof that on balance with the benefits, the present essential uses of DDT ... do not create an unreasonable risk. Information about DDT, otherwise reported as a result of the testimony, quoted Mr. Swenney as saying, there seems to be little question of the far ranging public health and welfare benefits from DDT, historically. Those that would ban all use of DDT because of the possibility of some damage to man, the evidence of which is said to consist of the results of a few experiments with animals, would do well to compare such skimpy evidence of risk with the ' proof of the benefits which DDT has bestowed on mankind. In other testimony, Jesse Steinfeld, Surgeon General of the United States said, In my opinion, the evidence presented demonstrates a continuing need to pursue the truth as to the fact of DDT as a carcinogen for humans . . . Really, it cant seriously be contended that the fact that DDT has NOT been proven NOT to be carcinogenic in man, is a logical basis for advocating a complete ban on all future uses ... On the contrary, people working in close contact with DDT seem to contract cancer with less frequency that those who are not exposed to it, well-document- ed i I I, if r i according to Chicago Daily News Service. All the testimony and apparent conclusions from the lengthy hearings, would suggest that the only reason for dropping DDT is that there may be a danger. With all of the enormous amouht of demonstrated benefits over the years, showing the beneficial effects of DDT, it overwhelms the human imagination to try reconciling the conclusions with the banning decision. But now Mr. Riickelshaus, Director of EPA, says in banning DDT that the potential danger far outweighs the benefits. is presented: Environmental groups say the And now the follow-u- p switch-ove- r ought to be easy because the transition has been going on for some years. This may be all well and good. A change will naturally take place and other pesticides and controls will be used as better methods appear on the scene. But when the only method of controlling certain pests is banned in desperation, other chemicals and procedures will be tried, and as has happened, more toxic chemicals are used. It was the chemical ethyl parathion which caused four deaths and 10 cases of illness in the tabacco fields on North Carolina and elsewhere in 1970, when DDT was banned for use on tobacco. It was the gypsy moth that last year defoliated over 2 million acres, double the acreage from the previous year, and six times more than in 1969. DDT had been effective in control of this serious pest. The question is simply how long will citizens stand by and allow wisdom and good judgement to be set aside in view of the overwhelming evidence for political expediency-- or whatever the reason! i i a i It's The Law New laws have been proposed in the Midwest and some have passed. For example, in Iowa, a law was passed last year that gives soil conservation officials in Iowa power to force landowners to adopt conservation practices. In the past, conservation has been a voluntary management decision left to landowners. If landowners now fail to adopt conservation practices, they will be subject to fines up to $500, a jail term or both. The law provides that government agencies or others having interest in property being damaged on lands, other than their own, may file a complaint against the owners of the land on which erosion is occurring. The owner is notified and an investigation begins. If it is determined nuisance that a real erosion exists, the district commissioners will order the . landowner to establish or maintain such practices as will prevent the erosion. These controls must start before six months from the time the order was issued and be completed within 1 year. Cost sharing funds are available. Before the program can get too far into operation, conservation personnel will have to establish soil loss limits for each county in the state. occurring, and the and necessity feasibility of control. Above all, it will be important that each landowner, on his own, do what he can to prevent any conditions that would deplete his soil or do damage to his neighbor. damage Published each month by the Utah Farm Bureau Federation at Salt Lake City, Utah. Editorial and Business Office, 629 East Fourth South, Salt Lake cents per year to memCity, Utah, 84102. Subscription price of twenty-fiv- e bers is included in membership fee. Second Class postage paid at Salt Lake City, Utah UTAH FARM BUREAU Elmo W. Hamilton, - FEDERATION OFFICIALS Riverton Jay Child, Clearfield V. Allen Olsen Neil D. Sumsion S. President Vice President Executive Secretary Editor DIRECTORS: A. Alton Hoffman. Smithfield; William Holmes, Ogden; Jack Brown, Grantsville; Edward Boyer, Springville, Kenneth Brasher, Huntington; Jerold Johnson, Aurora; Arlond Kawkins, Hurricane; Mrs. Willis Whitbeck, Bennion, Stanley Jackson, Ogden. tr K i is t f If Utah decides to propose such action to control erosion, it will be necessary for concerned property owners to get involved in laying the groundwork. Hearings will likely be held to establish the extent of UTAH FARM BUREAU ffTlNEWS ' L i r i I t I |