Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
Instead, the company relied upon a combination of clean seed material
and fallowing to control populations of R.similisthroughout the 1960s.
94
Continued problems with plant uprooting and the rising costs of fal-
lowing—aprocessthatinvolvedleavingsoilsoutofproductionforatleast
two years and treating them with herbicides—prompted United Brand
scientists to reinitiate nematicide trials in the early 1970s. Experiments
conducted in Honduras revealed that applications of DBCP increased
bunchweightsandreducedlossesfromuprooting.Nevertheless,research-
ersconcludedthatthevalueoftheincreasedoutputdidnotoffsetthecosts
of the treatment. Instead, they recommended propping as a less expensive
alternative to DBCP on farms where uprooting was serious. However, in
Costa Rica and Panama, where rates of nematode infestation were much
higher than in Honduras, United Brands began applying DBCP in 1973.
95
StandardFruitbeganusingDBCPonacommercialscalein1967,after
field tests conducted in Honduras indicated that its use increased yields.
Researcher Henry Muery wrote that average bunch weights on Stan-
dard Fruit's Coyoles farms increased from 70 pounds to 90 pounds be-
tween 1967 and 1971.
96
The positive effect that DBCP had on fruit weights
promptedsomeformerStandardFruitfieldworkerstorefertothenemati-
cide asabono (fertilizer).
97
In Honduras, the company first applied DBCP
through overhead irrigation systems. Working twelve-hour night shifts,
laborers applied the product at the rate of 4-6.7 gallons/acre.
98
Cantalisio
Andino, who worked part-time mixing DBCP, said that his skin regu-
larly came into contact with the chemical: ''I didn't take many precau-
tions because the man [supervisor] never told me, 'Be careful, this stuff
is poison.'''
99
Other laborers remembered being repeatedly exposed to
DBCP-laced irrigation waters.
100
In the words of one former applicator,
''We didn't take care of ourselves, we didn't use any protective clothing
or gloves, nothing.''
101
Neche Martínez recalled being issued safety equip-
ment, but maintained that it was not always foolproof: ''they gave us
glovesandmasksbutinspiteofthesemeasures...peoplealwaysbecame
ill, maybe two or three workers would vomit and have diarrhea.''
102
Irrigation workers were not the only plantation residents potentially
exposed to DBCP. When pruning crews entered farms in the early morn-
ing, they invariably brushed up against wet banana leaves and walked
through puddles filled with the previous night's DBCP-laced irrigation
water. DBCP, along with other pesticides and fertilizers, ran into drainage
canals where they killed a variety of fauna (including fish, shrimp, opos-
sum, and skunks) whose corpses could be seen floating in the ditches dur-
ing the early morning hours.
103
DBCP also drifted over company-owned
