Judge Rejects San Bernardino’s Attempt to Halt Aerial Spraying of Malathion

The city of San Bernardino lost a court bid Friday to stop aerial malathion spraying when a Superior Court judge rejected the city’s claim that pesticide spraying threatened a host of endangered species within its borders.

San Bernardino City Atty. James F. Penman argued that at least 11 endangered animals and plants, including the orange-throat whiptail lizard and the western yellow-billed cuckoo, could be harmed if the state went through with its plan to apply pesticide over portions of the city Friday night.

But San Bernardino Superior Court Judge Ben T. Kayashima sided with the state’s attorney, who argued that there was no evidence any of the endangered animals lived within the spray zone.

The state argued that even if there were endangered species in the city, malathion in the small quantities used in aerial spraying posed no hazard to them or the residents of the neighborhood.

Meanwhile, in San Diego County, a new aerial spraying campaign was ordered for 16 square miles in the city of El Cajon, which has become infested with the Medfly’s kin, the Mexican fruit fly.

Henry J. Voss, director of the state Department of Food and Agriculture, announced that the city would be sprayed three times beginning May 21 and then treated with the release of millions of sterile Mexflies, which are used to breed the pest out of existence.

On Thursday, Voss had ordered aerial spraying for 10 square miles in Compton, which has also been infested with the Mexfly. The spraying has been tentatively scheduled to begin May 15.

The San Bernardino suit, which was filed Wednesday, was at least the seventh filed since the current Southern California Mediterranean fruit fly infestation began last July.

The plaintiffs have included the cities of Garden Grove, Westminster, Huntington Beach, Los Angeles, Pomona, Azusa and Alhambra, as well as the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group, and Pasadena resident John Poole.

None of the court challenges has managed to stop aerial spraying, although some, such as the Los Angeles suit, are still pending.

San Bernardino City Councilman Tom Minor, whose district lies in the 34-square-mile spray zone, said he was disappointed but not surprised by the decision.

“I knew we would lose,” he said. “No one else has won. I don’t know why we should.”

Minor said he is uncertain now what the city can do to prevent spraying, given the state’s wide-ranging powers during a Medfly eradication campaign.

“They can do what they want,” Minor said. “I’m sure we’re stuck with this spraying.”

Minor said calls from residents opposing the spraying have poured into his office since the state’s spray campaign was announced last month.

Penman said he intends to recommend to the City Council that it continue its fight against spraying, possibly by taking the issue to federal court.

San Bernardino had managed to avoid the flights of helicopters that have rumbled through the night sky over Los Angeles and Orange counties, where the spraying has sparked noisy demonstrations, lawsuits and a host of local ordinances against the state’s aerial campaign.

San Bernardino was drawn into the Medfly eradication program because of the discovery of three Medflies over the past month and a half.