{"id":18357,"date":"2025-03-23T15:00:00","date_gmt":"2025-03-23T21:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/gemstatepatriot.com\/blog\/?p=18357"},"modified":"2025-03-24T10:23:02","modified_gmt":"2025-03-24T16:23:02","slug":"ariel-spraying-is-not-optional-in-gem-county","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/gemstatepatriot.com\/blog\/ariel-spraying-is-not-optional-in-gem-county\/","title":{"rendered":"Aerial Spraying is not Optional in Gem County"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Just how dangerous are these pesticides<\/em><\/strong>?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Last Spring, my family gave up on gardening. Having been blocked from opting out of Dibrom – the pesticide released via airplanes contracted by the Gem County Mosquito Abatement District – we realized our efforts to grow clean, affordable produce had become futile. My son took down the stakes for our beans and my daughter ripped out spent plants that had been so beautiful in the previous season.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But what about Idaho Title 39? It states that property owners can “be excluded from treatment” and that “the abatement district shall refrain” when an individual has opted out. If we maintain this lawful option, why does the annual opt-out form allow relief from ground spraying but not from aerial adulticides? Instead, it states, \u201cDue to the nature of the aircraft, those located within the treatment block may NOT be excluded from these treatments.\u201d GCMAD\u2019s Manager has echoed the sentiment: \u201caerials cannot be opted out of.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Concerned residents have been unable to get answers. Commissioner Bill Butticci instructed us to contact the GCMAD Board, stating the commissioners “have no authority<\/em> over them.\u201d Yet emails to the GCMAD Board went unanswered and efforts to speak to them in person were stonewalled.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We were not without progress last year, however. GCMAD finally released more product and safety data sheets on their website. The nine different products listed (at time of publishing) – including active ingredient Naled – may have been previously unknown to some residents. (I remember when I thought they \u201conly\u201d sprayed Permethrin and consequently welcomed treatment myself.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But after studying the patterns on our land post-application, something seemed off. We\u2019d notice a slight reduction in mosquitos for a few hours but what struck us was the wider ecological impact: dead dragonflies, dead aquatic insects, dead frogs, dead birds, dead bees. And the \u201cfittest\u201d mosquitos, it seemed, would be back in full force the next day to keep breeding. In his report, \u201cImpact of Naled (Dibrom 14)\u2026\u201d – a long-term study tracking the use of this pesticide – JJ Howard relayed his findings that the total mosquito population increased 15 fold after 11 years!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The safety data sheet for Dibrom notes it is \u201cvery toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects\u2026toxic to fish, birds and other wildlife\u201d and \u201chighly toxic to bees.\u201d<\/strong> Perhaps we should be asking whether this strategy isn\u2019t counterproductive to its stated goal\u2014at least in the long term? Knocking down mosquitoes for a half day, sure, but potentially taking all of God\u2019s natural, free and non-toxic predators with them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What if instead of spraying questionable products purchased from mega corporations which conceal the vast majority of their ingredients as proprietary – GCMAD considered cleaner, cheaper and more sustainable alternatives? Trialing bat boxes, garlic products and wider community education about best practices. In fact, in private meetings, Johns himself confirmed that \u201cbats work\u201d and his own employee reported that one large landowner who opts out of treatment has had great success employing garlic as a deterrent. Instead of threatening landowners as \u201charborers,” perhaps officials should focus their attention on rampant overgrown vegetation found widely on neglected County land.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Inquiries to commissioners about the inability to fully opt-out weren\u2019t countered by legal merits but instead with the threat of West Nile virus. Serious for people? You bet. Horrible for horses? Definitely. But prolific in Gem County or even in Idaho? Nope. According to the CDC, Idaho only recorded six human cases statewide – and zero deaths <\/em>– in 2024.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Shouldn’t we focus on the prevalent threats when seeking to allocate our precious tax dollars in a way that does the most good? The \u201cGem County Cancer Profile,\u201d indicates we averaged a higher cancer rate than the state and the state averaged higher than the country from 2018 to 2022! While valid concerns about contagions should not be dismissed, we must recognize that the elephant in the room is suffering from chronic disease, not West Nile.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As noted by the Environmental Working Group, EPA approvals often lag behind research, failing to remain up-to-date with science or recognize correlations between environmental toxins and chronic disease. If DDT were approved today – who would use it? Trading our own due diligence for the assurances of government bureaucrats is a grave mistake though often we don’t realize the consequences until it\u2019s too late.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Efficacy and potential hazards aside, fundamental property rights hang in the balance. The legislature has codified law mandating our right to opt out. \u201cShall refrain\u201d stands without qualification and therefore means no quads, no trucks, no drones, no airplanes and no trespassing! If those of us living in abatement districts across the state don’t actually stand for our rights now, then the Gadsden flags and gun clutching were all for show.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Cited Sources<\/p>\n\n\n\n