Table 1 summarizes the results of the analyses. The figures are expressed in micrograms of DDT/gram of moist tissue (mg. of DDT/g. of tissue). The numbers indicated do not include specimens secured in 1961 and 1962, which postdated these analyses. Some of these were mentioned in the Cranbrook report (Wallace et. al., 1961), but were not included in the 67 birds from the Cranbrook area.

OTHER SPECIES

The Cranbrook study (Wallace et. al., 1961) included 17 additional DDT-contaminated species not included in Table 1. These are appended here for convenience in showing a summary of species known from analysis to contain DDT. All of the analyses are of specimens obtained in 1961 or earlier.

Red-shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus), (1); Marsh Hawk (Circus cyaneus), (1); Pigeon Hawk (Falco columbarius), (1); Yellow-shafted Flicker (Colaptes auratus), (2); Downy Woodpecker (Dendrocopus pubescens), (1); Wood Thrush (Hylocichla mustelina), (1); Hermit Thrush (Hylocichla guttata), (1); Blue-gray Gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea), (1); Ruby-crowned Kinglet (Regulus calendula), (1); Black-throated Green Warbler (Dendroica virens), (2); Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), (1); Rose-breasted Grosbeak (Pheucticus ludovicianus), (3 analyzed, 1 negative); Pine Siskin (Spinus pinus), (1); American Goldfinch (Spinus tristis), (2); Rufous-sided Towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus), (1); Slate-colored Junco (Junco hyemalis), (2 analyzed, 1 negative); Chipping Sparrow (Spizella passerina), (1).

DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

The data in this report indicate that the use of DDT in various spray programs affects many species of birds. DDT is both persistent and widely available to ground-feeding, bark-foraging, foliage-gleaning and seedeating birds. In most cases, birds reported with tremors or convulsions contained high levels of DDT in the various tissues examined.

It may be noted that some species of birds have held up well even in heavily sprayed areas. For instance, from a dozen or so Blue Jays (Cyanocitta cristata) found dead or dying following various local spraying programs both on and off campus, four were tested. Two specimens were negative (including a young Blue Jay reportedly dying with tremors) and the other two contained DDT. Evidently at least some of these birds are able to exist in a heavily sprayed area without accumulating detectable residues. Persistent local Blue Jay populations also suggest that this species is fairly resistant to DDT, or else it is usually able to avoid ingesting lethal amounts.

Similarly, numerous Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) and Common Grackles (Quiscalus guiscula) have been available for examination, but not in proportion to the numbers exposed to DDT. Both species have held well, or even increased, in heavily sprayed areas. Apparently the birds are resistant to DDT, either by the ability to avoid or excrete it, or by being able to adjust to it by getting it at a slower rate.

up

Mourning Doves (Zenaidura macroura) have been reported “sick”

and several were found dead on campus in the spring of 1959. However, the "sick" doves did not appear to have typical. poisoning symptoms. Of the two tested, one was negative and the other had low levels of DDT in the heart, but none in the other tissues examined.

For some other species, the few specimens turned in or reported may not be indicative of the numbers affected. Black-capped Chickadees (Parus atricapillus) and White-breasted Nuthatches (Sitta carolinensis), formerly common on campus, virtually disappeared after initial spraying operations. Only two chickadees and two nuthatches were analyzed (three other nuthatches were reported dead or dying but not retrieved). The test on one chickadee failed but the other chickadee and both nuthatches had fairly high levels of DDT in most of the tissues examined. Possibly many of these small birds are overlooked or else they move to new areas in search of food.

Nearly all tests to measure levels of DDT in predatory birds have failed. The results obtained suggest that the birds are able to convert most of the DDT into its metabolites and, therefore, the original accumulation of DDT is masked (Wallace et. al., 1961). The Screech Owl (Otus asio) analyzed in this study was reported with characteristic symptoms of poisoning; DDT was recovered in the breast muscle and heart, but not in the brain or liver.

Since it is impossible to analyze all of the birds turned in from sprayed areas, those reported here represent but a small portion of the birds which were available during the period of this study. For instance, more than 40 other species of birds from sprayed areas in southern Michigan were obtained, but not analyzed. It seems probable, from the results of analyses already made, that many of these additional species would also contain

DDT.

SUMMARY

More than 90 species of birds were reported dead or dying following the use of DDT in various insect control programs in southern Michigan in the late 50's and early 60's, but (except for robins) only small samples were analyzed for residues.

Besides robins, some 50 birds representing 25 species were analyzed and the distribution of DDT in various tissues (brain, heart, breast muscle, and liver) is presented in a table. Including previous studies, the senior author has now analyzed 216 birds (excluding 86 experimentally poisoned subjects) representing 50 different species. Of these, 181 specimens of 38 species were found to contain at least some DDT. These represent nearly all food-habit types: aquatic birds (ducks), fish-eaters, bark-foragers, foliage-gleaners, budders, seed-eaters, as well as the better known terrestrial types such as robins.

Limited tests on soil, grass, leaves, bark and earthworms collected in the vicinity of sprayed elms indicate the widespread availability of DDT to birds and other wildlife.

LITERATURE CITED

Barker, R. J. 1958. Notes on some ecological effects of DDT sprayed on elms. Jour. Wildl. Mgmt., 22: 269-274.

Bernard, R. F. 1963. Studies on the effects of DDT on birds. Publ., Museum, Mich. State Univ., Biol. Ser., 2(3): 155-192.

Schechter, M. S., S. B. Soloway, R. A. Hayes, and H. L. Haller. 1945. Colorimetric determination of DDT. Ind. Eng. Chem., Anal. Ed., 17: 704-709.

Wallace, G. J., W. P. Nickell, and R. F. Bernard. 1961. Bird mortality in the Dutch elm disease program in Michigan. Bull. 41, Cranbrook Inst. Sci. 44 pp.

- Wisconsin State University, Superior, Wisconsin, and Department of Zoology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.

Senator HART. Representing the Sierra Club, Mrs. Kathleen Bjerke. STATEMENT OF MRS. E. LEROY BJERKE, THE MACKINAC CHAPTER, SIERRA CLUB, ANN ARBOR, MICH.

Mrs. KATHLEEN BJERKE. Senator Hart, Mr. Meserve, Mr. Webber, Friends: I am Kathleen A. Bjerke, from Midland, Michigan. I am a chemist. I am a citizen who is deeply concerned about the present immense threats to our environment and to our very survival. I am here as a representative of the Mackinac chapter of the Sierra Club, a 900member, statewide group, with headquarters in Ann Arbor, Post Office Box 2085. (The national headquarters of the Sierra Club are at 1050 Mills Tower, San Francisco, California, 94104.)

The Sierra Club's overriding belief and concern is "not blind opposition to progress, but opposition to blind progress."

As an example, we fully support your legislation, Senator Hart, to establish the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. Developers threaten this magnificent national resource with imminent destruction. We thus believe that every Michigan Congressman should join you in sponsoring this proposal and in urging Congress to enact it this year.

Senator HART. I almost wish you had not said that, because when you were finished, I was going-without identifying your support for the Sleeping Bear Dunes-to state on the record what a magnificent contribution the Sierra Club, and the Mackinac chapter in particular, makes.

Mrs. BJERKE. You are very kind. I think Virginia Prentice, chairman of the Mackinac chapter, deserves a great deal of the credit for that.

Senator HART. But now my compliment will be simply thanking somebody for supporting a specific bill.

Mrs. BJERKE. In regard to the subject of today's hearings: the Sierra Club has frequently voiced its opposition to the use of chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides and has consistently been concerned about the detrimental effects of pesticides on the environment. We of the Mackinac chapter state our position here today because we believe that many people continue to be blind to the dangers of pesticides.

Knowledge of these dangers surely is not new. I quote from an article entitled "DDT-the Atomic Bomb of the Insect World," written by C. H. Curran and appearing in the November 1945 issue of Natural History (the magazine of the American Museum of Natural History, vol. LIV, No. 9):

For three years we have been waiting impatiently for the release of the sensational, world-renowned insecticide known as DDT. Today we can buy all we want of it. Now that we have it, what are we going to do with it? Are we going to use it wisely to control a certain number of pests for which it is particularly suited, or are we going to use it indiscriminately and possibly damage the life of our planet quite seriously? DDT is amazingly good-but it is also dangerous. If improperly used, it might actually prove more devastating to man's economy than the atomic bomb.

These questions, raised 24 years ago, apply equally today, both to DDT and to the many other pesticides available to us.

The complexity of our world dictates that in order to make wise decisions when considering any issue affecting the quality of our environment, we must be particularly astute, and we must have a keenly developed ecological conscience. Four major factors must be taken into account:

Perhaps one of the most important things we must do is to acknowledge the complex and vital relationship between man and his environment. It is not sufficient to quote or consider only the direct effect of pesticides on man and exclude consideration of the effects on the wildlife with which we cohabit this earth. To me, this reflects a false conceit. "We must love and care for our earth, not tear it to pieces," * for as the world goes, so goes man.

It appears that mankind is courting disaster by burning the ecological candle from both ends. He threatens to destroy himself through overpopulation, and he threatens to destroy his environment through exploitation, overdevelopment, and mismanagement of natural resources, effecting rapid, massive, and often irreversible changes. In mid-August of this year, I attended the two and one-half day symposium at Corvallis, Oreg., on the "Biological Effects of Pesticides in the Environment." Two slides in particular jarred the conscienceone showing the exponential trend of our population implosion, the the other showing the thin-shelled and shell-less eggs in the 1969 nests of brown pelicans on Anacapa Island off the California coast; Dr. Hickey stated earlier that this is unquestionably a DDT effect. These are but two examples of "blind progress." It is frightening to me that man continues to place himself in the position of bearing virtually full responsibility for the extinction of certain species, and possibly eventually his own.

Conversely, we applaud the concern of Richard A. Falk, Professor of Politics at Princeton University, who on September 15, 1969, told the Congress that the Federal Government should declare a "State of Environmental Emergency" as a dramatic act "needed to induce quickly a greater public awareness of the magnitude of the problem.

It should be obvious, however, that ecological awareness is not enough. Decisions relating to our environment must be made on the basis of reliable and extensive research into the effects, whether beneficial, harmful, or "neutral," of every possible alternative. These decisions must reflect, not political or emotional appeals, but a clear understanding of the facts. In the case of pesticides, we must be particularly careful in analyzing the potential effects. I read just yesterday in the latest issue of National Wildlife (October-November, 1969) of an ironical situation in a village in Borneo. A chlorinated hydrocarbon, variously reported as dieldrin or in this article as DDT, was used:

DDT was used in a mosquito control program. Soon roofs of natives' huts caved in as they were being eaten by caterpillars which had not absorbed much DDT but whose predators, the wasps, had been killed by it. The DDT was then brought indoors to kill houseflies. This it did, but it also infested little lizards that ate the flies. Cats which ate the lizards died in such numbers that rats began to invade the village, bringing threat of plague. So cats had to be flown into the area to restore the balance DDT destroyed.

The Reverend Harry C. Meserve, Grosse Pointe Unitarian Church, at an address in Midland, Mich., on Sept. 28, 1969.