-Caveat Lector-
Operation Eradicate
Kurt Kleiner
FLORIDA'S LAW ENFORCEMENT agents destroy about 100 000
marijuana plants every year. And that's just 20 per cent of the estimated
total grown there. Many of the crops lie deep in the Everglades, where
there is dense vegetation to camouflage them and alligators to deter
inquisitive state officials. But last April, Jim McDonough, director of
Florida's drug control policy, decided to get tough. He suggested spraying
the Everglades with a fungus that would kill off the marijuana but leave other
plants untouched.
When the story appeared in newspapers in July, it enraged
environmentalists and provoked a lawsuit from a pro-marijuana group.
Some critics described it as a form of biological warfare. The St
Petersburg Times urged that the "killer fungus" should not be released. And
several months before the story broke, David Struhs, secretary of the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), had expressed
fears that the fungus would mutate and attack other plant species.
McDonough's suggestion was based on research into biocontrol funded by
the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), aimed at finding a cheap and
environmentally friendly alternative to herbicides. The Florida office of drug
control policy now says both the media and the DEP had misunderstood
McDonough's proposal. He never suggested actually spraying the fungus
over the swamps, the office maintains, but merely wanted to test it in a
quarantine facility in Gainesville. Indeed, the DEP has since sanctioned this
proposal, but according to Albert Wollermann, the office's lawyer, there are
no immediate plans to go ahead with the tests.
Selective killers
The Florida eradication scheme may have been shelved, at least
temporarily, but the USDA continues to spend $23 million a year on
research into biocontrol agents that would selectively kill coca plants, from
which cocaine is derived, and opium poppies. And some of those are
poised to move out of the greenhouse and into the open.
Biocontrol of weeds is certainly not a new idea, but in the past it has usually
involved insects. The use of a fungus is not, however, unprecedented. For
the last 25 years, researchers have had varying degrees of success in
trying to control rush skeletonweed (Chondrilla juncea), which affects wheat,
with a fungus called skeletonweed rust (Puccinia chondrillina).
The fungus at the centre of the Florida row is a variety of Fusarium
oxysporum. Fusarium species infect the vascular system of a number of
plants, from bananas to wheat, causing them to whither and die. The
Florida scheme was based on work carried out by a researcher at
Montana State University, Bozeman, called David Sands, who suggested
that this particular variant would be lethal only to cannabis.
Sands did initially have a grant from the USDA to look at using Fusarium to
control marijuana. But when he approached the Florida state government it
was as head of his own company, Ag/Bio Con. The USDA says it stopped
funding his research a few years ago, when lab tests showed the fungus
was only marginally effective against cannabis. "The results were
mediocre," says Eric Rosenquist, leader of the USDA's international
programmes, who oversees the agency's funding for narcotics biocontrol,
"If it's that mediocre in the greenhouse, it's unlikely to work in the field."
Sands would not speak to New Scientist. But his company continues its
research in this area. And recent evidence suggests that he has improved
the technology. Before the story broke in July, John Masterson, director of
the Montana office of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana
Laws (NORML), received an anonymous e-mail informing him of the
Florida proposal and the Montana research. He promptly phoned the
university, which confirmed that the research was taking place. But it
refused to say more, explaining that its policy was not to disclose results
before publication. NORML sued, and in August, before any judgment was
handed down, the university began to release documents relating to the
research. In some, Sands discusses patent applications he has made on a
process for "virulence enhancement" of bioherbicides. It's not clear what
this enhancement consists of, but in a letter he says that he developed it
after USDA funding stopped.
In the meantime, the USDA is collaborating with the UN on a programme at
the Institute of Genetics in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. They hope to use the
Pleospora papaveracea fungus to control opium poppies. But its main
effort is concentrated on another variety of Fusarium oxysporum that
attacks coca plants.
This fungus was discovered accidentally when it wiped out a test plot of
coca being grown in Hawaii. Since then, USDA researchers have worked
on manufacturing large amounts of the fungus in a form that is easy to
store. More importantly, they have assured themselves that it will attack only
coca plants. Since most pathogens evolve with their hosts, they can often
survive only in that host. This selectivity can be confirmed in the lab by trying
to persuade a fungus to infect first close relatives of the target plant, then
progressively more distant relatives, until researchers are convinced no
other plants will be affected. "We've done host specificity studies," says
Rosenquist of the anti-coca fungus. "We're convinced of its safety. We're
actually at the point now where we couldn't go any further in the
greenhouse."
In the case of cannabis, even the most rigorous host specificity studies will
not reassure some people. If the anti-cannabis fungus is now more
effective, it could spell disaster for farmers who grow industrial hemp.
These varieties of Cannabis sativa end up as vegetable oil or fibre and can
be grown legally because they are low in delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol
(THC), the active component of cannabis.
Masterson points out that Montana, where some of the work on the fungus
has been done, borders the Canadian province of Alberta, where hemp
has been grown industrially since 1998. If the fungus somehow spreads to
fields in Alberta, it could damage the legal crop.
"For the hemp industry, it would be devastating for the fungus to get out,"
says Douglas Brown, a director of the WestHemp Cooperative in
Vancouver, British Columbia. "There would be millions of dollars of losses.
If this fungus is looking for Cannabis sativa, it's not going to differentiate
between high-THC and low-THC varieties."
And even if the fungus stays put, it could destroy wild cannabis that has
adapted to conditions in the areas where it is released. Losing the wild
plants could make it harder to breed hemp with the traits future farmers will
need, says Brown.
But Rosenquist says the real question is not whether a fungus will spread
uncontrollably, but whether it will work at all. "The biggest problem with
classic biocontrol is when you release it into a complex ecology," he says.
"What may work well in one place may not work in another."
So the next step for the USDA will be to convince the government of one of
the coca-producing nations--such as Peru, Bolivia or Colombia--to let field
experiments take place there. But Pat Mooney, executive director of the
Rural Advancement Foundation International in Winnipeg, says using
biocontrol agents against narcotics crops is "agricultural terrorism,"
especially if it is done without the consent of the target country.
And according to The Miami Herald, some Peruvian farmers think that this
has already happened. They have accused the US of testing an anti-coca
fungus that has since spread to bananas, yucca and tangerine crops.
Rosenquist denies this. And he stresses that work won't start without
permission from the country concerned. But even with the country's
consent, says Mooney, it's dangerous. "The solution to narcotics is not just
to destroy the crops. It's a fundamental social problem, and it's not going to
be solved by a silver bullet from an airplane."
>From New Scientist, 11 September 1999
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Wingate
California Director
SKYWATCH INTERNATIONAL
Anomalous Images and UFO Files
http://www.anomalous-images.com
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
