Another Spring
In September 1962 Rachel Carson published the classic and revolutionary Silent Spring denouncing the indiscriminate use of pesticides and their effects on environment and humans. The classic adjective attributed to her work comes from the inevitable reference that is made in studies related to impacts of human action on nature. In turn, the revolutionary character of the work stems from its fundamental role in banning the use of dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane (DDT) and other pesticides, and in the beginning of the environmental movement and environmental protection institutions in the United States.
Carson’s seminal work was applauded as a thorough investigative report detailing the immediate and hereditary effects of pesticides. The difference in absorption rates and levels of accumulation between animal and plant species, provide the propagation of effects in the food chain and the possible genetic inheritance. These elements, richly pointed out by Carson, would be the cause of the extinction or death of several birds thus causing the spring silence.
Discussions on the subject have resulted in a gradual ban on the use of DDT in several countries since the 1970s. In Brazil, the banning of DDT was gradual, beginning in 1971, with registration of the last purchase in 1991 and complete ban only in 2009 .
After 55 years Silent Spring the dilemmas related to man – nature relationship continue to produce discussions. However, it is observed that silence is gradually replaced by the sound of the fury of the winds and seas, by the whisper of air pollution, by the buzzing of insects increasingly resistant to the chemical poisons popularly used, by the agonizing groan of endangered species and by the disjointed voices of politicians and ordinary citizens, environmentalists or not. The innumerable and undeniable transformations of intensity of climatic events are interpreted in a contradictory way by different groups. Some view such events as arising from unrestrained and unbalanced exploitation of natural resources and thus seek cooperative solutions among countries to minimize the impacts of human activities, ensuring a safer and more comfortable life for future generations. Others consider the same events to be natural and unavoidable, unwilling to adopt measures that may adversely affect economic performance. Paradoxically, economic aspects are also the most dissonant and contradictory.
On June 1st, 2017, the United States announces its break with the Paris Agreement, built after long negotiations between several countries that finally recognized the need of for compromises in favor of a common good: to ensure a lower global temperature increase. A few months later the country is suffering from hurricanes that had cost hundreds of billions of dollars.
On the other hand, Brazil, also a signatory to the Paris Agreement, is warned by Norway about the inefficiency of its environmental policy and neglect of deforestation, resulting in a cut of 50% of the Norwegian resources destined to the Amazon Fund. A reduction of almost U$ 35 million. In spite of the loss of resources, less than a quarter later it is announced the extinction of an environmental reserve of 47 thousands of km2, located in the same Amazon area, liberating it for mineral exploration that will certainly entail demographic imbalance, water pollution and deforestation, among other harmful environmental impacts.
And so, next to the 2nd anniversary of the disastrous environmental crime in the Rio Doce caused by SAMARCO company, we are expecting another spring. However, it is observed that it is not nature that silences, but it is humanity that is deaf to its cries, groans and moans.
Telma Teixeira. RHIOS September 2017 (translation from portuguese by Leila FONTOURA)
Read other texts by Telma Teixeira