Growers’ Poll Finds Confusion on Malathion

A coalition of California agriculturists began an offensive Tuesday to restore confidence in the campaign against the Mediterranean fruit fly, releasing poll results that show that--while half the people surveyed in Los Angeles and Orange counties oppose spraying malathion over infested neighborhoods--three-quarters would support the program if the pesticide was proven safe.

The poll, conducted for the Los Angeles-based Alliance for Food and Fiber, contained some promising results for its sponsors, who have been alarmed by signs of mounting opposition to pesticide applications in Southern California. It found that most people are confused by conflicting information about malathion safety and could be swayed to one position or the other by what they considered reliable data.

Nearly 75% of the respondents said they would put up with the inconvenience of spraying if doctors and health professionals vouched for malathion’s safety. And 80% of respondents said they would rather endure the spraying than live with maggot-infested food.

At the same time, however, the poll found a deep resentment of the state’s aerial campaign against the Medfly. For example, 16% of those polled said they would oppose any spraying by the government even if malathion was proven as safe as pure water.

“It’s quite obvious that we in agriculture may have been somewhat naive,” said Bruce J. Obbink, who spoke at the Los Angeles Produce Terminal on Tuesday on behalf of the alliance. “There seems to be a major perception problem here.”

Obbink, president of the California Table Grape Commission, said the poll was commissioned to determine the level of the opposition to spraying and the best ways for agriculture to fight back.

Pollsters from the Wirthlin Group, a national survey research firm, interviewed 600 people in Los Angeles and Orange counties between Feb. 9 and 12.

Malathion opponents on Tuesday attacked the poll as misleading “propaganda.” Adelaide Nimitz, a coordinator of the community group Families Opposed to Chemical Urban Spraying (FOCUS), said numerous hearings and debates have been held and most groups, including the Los Angeles City Council, have decided there is no conclusive evidence of malathion’s safety.

“Since there have been no long-term health studies, no one knows that it is safe,” she said.

Obbink agreed that even an army of experts may not be able to prove to the public that malathion is safe, given the flood of conflicting information that has been released. But he added: “The biggest sin is to not do anything.”

He said the alliance, a nonprofit coalition of food producers, intends to launch an educational campaign to help dispel the confusion.

“The public is not stupid. They make tough judgments every day,” Obbink said. “It is incumbent on us to place every piece of data in front of them so they can make a good decision.”

Obbink said the agriculture industry so far has done a poor job of informing the public, especially concerning the devastation the Medfly could cause if it escaped into the San Joaquin Valley. “We have to admit we were wrong in assuming this would be a well-understood situation,” he said.

Gary Caviglia, a citrus grower in Visalia, told the news conferencethat if the Medfly became entrenched in the valley, not only would farmers suffer, but urban dwellers as well. There would be less and poorer quality fruit in supermarkets, he said. Millions of dollars in jobs and revenue could be lost in Los Angeles, where much of the state’s fruit is shipped.

Caviglia said he doubts that a permanent Medfly infestation would force consumers to eat fruit besieged by maggots, as one of the poll’s questions seemed to suggest. But he said that farmers would have to use far more pesticide --a prospect that he said many growers also abhor.

The responses to some poll questions corresponded roughly with the findings of a recent Los Angeles Times poll that found 57% of the respondents opposed malathion spraying.

MEDFLY STUDY (Southland Edition)

Selected questions from study commissioned by the Alliance for Food and Fiber on public attitudes about the Medfly. In your view, what would you say are the key environmental issues facing Southern California today?* Air pollution: 64% Offshore oil: 29% Water pollution: 22% Pesticides: 9% Population/Growth: 8.3% Waste management: 4.7% Toxic waste: 4% Malathion: 3% Medflies: 2% *Multiple responses accepted As you may know, the governor has ordered that a program be implemented to eliminate the Medfly in California. Part of this program is the aerial spraying of malathion in areas where Medflies have been discovered. Would you say that you support or oppose that program? Support: 37.7% Oppose: 49.7% Neither support nor oppose: 7.7% No opinion: 5% Respondents were asked to agree or disagree with the following statements: Given the choice, I would rather find maggots and worms in my food than put up with aerial spraying to get rid of the Medfly. Agree: 15.8% Disagree: 80.2% Neither: 3.3% Don’t know: 0.7% If the Medfly is allowed to become permanently established, it will do serious damage to farming in California and make food more expensive and less available. Agree: 74.2% Disagree: 19.5% Neither: 6% Don’t know: 0.3% If doctors and health professionals would just explain that malathion is safe, I could put up with the inconveniences. Agree: 74.8% Disagree:22.5% Neither: 2% Don’t know: 0.7%