Benbrooke has wrong goal, cont'd

CGFI@aol.com
Tue, 8 Aug 1995 09:56:53 -0400

The evidence is mounting that subsoil biotic activity is suppressed more =
by
plowing than by herbicides -- and those are the only two choices we have =
for
controlling the weeds that would otherwise steal the nutrients from our
crops. =

=

As for my =93often-ridiculous projections and conclusions,=94 there is vi=
rtually
no debate about the reality that the world will demand at least
two-and-a-half times as much food by 2050, and the desire for high-qualit=
y
protein is likely to triple the global demands on farming resources. If =
this
food cannot be produced on our current cropland, the Third World has alre=
ady
demonstrated that it will hunt down virtually every wild creature for the=

stew pot, and then clear their wildlands for low-yielding crops in spite =
of
their low-quality soils.

I hear no concern from Mr. Benbrooke about leaving room for wildlife. Th=
e
last time we shared a podium, he was declaiming on the dangers of atrazin=
e.
I presume he knew that EPA had just raised its safety rating on atrazine =
by
seven-fold. Witih the new safety rating, a woman would apparently have t=
o
drink more than 150,000 gallons of water for 70 years to get a more poten=
t
dose than the =93no-effect=94 level in the laboratory rats. In addition=
, for
nine months of the year she would have to provide her own atrazine! Is t=
his
level of risk high enough to accept the massive destruction of wildlife?

How many million acres of wildlands is Mr. Benbrooke willing to sacrifice=
to
have chemical-free farming ? =

Dennis Avery
Director, Center for Global Food Issues
Hudson Institute