Grave Concerns Over Aerial Spraying of Dibrom (Naled) for Mosquito Control
- arthuroslund2
- Oct 2
- 2 min read
Email to CMCD
From: Christopher Reinhart
Subject: Grave Concerns Over Aerial Spraying of Dibrom (Naled) for Mosquito Control
Date: Wednesday, July 30, 2025 9:31:45 AM
Christopher S. Reinhart
881 21st ST SW
Naples, FL 34117
239.300.1000
7/30/2025
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing as a concerned citizen, neighbor, and steward of the land to formally express my deep objection to the continued use of Dibrom (active ingredient: naled) in aerial mosquito control programs. The decision to spray this organophosphate pesticide from above our homes, schools, and natural ecosystems poses an unjustifiable risk to human health, environmental stability, and the long-term trust between public agencies and the communities
they serve.
Numerous peer-reviewed studies and toxicology reports have raised serious red flags about the use of naled:
Human health risks include neurotoxicity, respiratory distress, endocrine disruption, and developmental effects in children. The EPA’s own data classifies naled as highly toxic to humans upon inhalation or skin contact, especially vulnerable populations
like infants, the elderly, and those with preexisting conditions.
Environmental devastation is equally alarming. Naled is acutely toxic to pollinators such as bees and butterflies, aquatic life, and beneficial insects. Its breakdown product, dichlorvos (DDVP), is a known carcinogen and mutagen.
Drift and bioaccumulation remain unaddressed, with chemical residues persisting in air, water, and soil long after spraying has ceased.
What makes this all the more egregious is that viable, safer alternatives exist:
Larvicidal techniques (such as Bti) target mosquito breeding sites without harming non-target species.
Biological control methods, including mosquito fish and habitat disruption, reduce populations at the source.
Community-based prevention through education, responsible water management, and natural repellents offers a far less invasive and more sustainable approach.
To continue spraying Dibrom under the guise of public safety, without transparent, informed consent and without pursuing less harmful strategies, is a betrayal of both ecological responsibility and public trust. It reflects not stewardship, but convenience, a short-term
solution with long-term costs we cannot afford to bear. Sound familiar?
We live in a time when integrity, not expediency, must guide our actions. A government that poisons its air in the name of health is one that has lost its way. I urge you to immediately halt the aerial spraying of Dibrom and engage in an open dialogue with the community about responsible, evidence-based alternatives.
This land, these skies, and our collective health are not resources to be gambled with. They are sacred and fragile to your interference. We deserve better, and so do the generations that will
walk this land after us.
Sincerely,
Christopher S. Reinhart
Comments