Eco Hvar

Insect spraying: rethink needed

The campaign to eliminate mosquitoes through routine insect spraying is not working! And it's dangerous. We at Eco Hvar are asking for change.

Insect spraying: rethink needed

INSECT SPRAYING ON HVAR

From Jelsa Council: "The insect spraying programme, as a means of protecting the population against infectious diseases is carried out in order to eliminate mosquito larvae, thus removing the possibility for mosquitoes to develop and multiply, in this way reducing damage to the environment and people" (e-mail, 11.08.2017.)*

WHY WE ARE WORRIED

Infectious diseases like Dengue and West Nile Fever are extremely rare in Croatia1,2,3,4. Despite this, insect spraying in the form of 'fogging' against adult mosquitoes is carried out on Hvar three times during the high summer tourist season, and there are separate actions against mosquito larvae and flies at various times throughout the year.

The insect control actions have been carried out for years without adhering fully to the regulations laid down by the County Public Health Institute: 

i) for the fogging, dangerous chemical pesticides are spread all over the environment;

ii) the very serious possible adverse effects of the pesticides have not been advertised; 

iii) little or no use has been made of environmentally-friendly alternatives to poisons;

iv) there is no public education about pest control;

v) warnings about the 'fogging' actions are totally inadequate;

vi) the routes taken by the 'fogging' vehicle are not made public;

vii) the fogging spraying has been done without regard to the vineyards, olive groves, orchards and vegetable plots alongside the roads, so that substances which are not authorized to be used on plants enter the food chain nonetheless (see 'Pesticides, Laws and Permits' for more details about authorizations);

viii) the larvicide and fly control measures are not publicized at all;

ix) at local level, it seems that the poison spraying programme is not under strict supervision and control, as it should be according to the regulations;

x) it seems that no-one at local or national level is monitoring the effectiveness and possible ill-effects relating to the spraying programme: despite regular insect suppression measures, every year there are increasing numbers of mosquitoes, as they become resistant to the poisons used 5,6,7; at the same time, there has been a visible significant decline in numbers of birds. bats, and beneficial insects. Monitoring of invasive mosquito species was started in Croatia in 2016, but since then it has been limited in scale, and there has been no monitoring of any kind on Hvar, to our knowledge.

2011: Warning to beekeepers, Croatian Beekepers' Association, but such warnings have been patchy over the years

DETAILS OF THE POISONS

POISONS USED: In 2012, two pyrethroid insecticides were used on Hvar for the 'fogging', a combination of Permethrin and Cypermethrin; in 2014, the spray used across the Jelsa Council area was Permex 22E (active ingredients Permethrin and Tetramethrin, in combination with a synergist, Piperonyl Butoxide); in 2015 Microfly (Cypermethrin),and Twenty-one (Azamethiphos) were used against flies; in 2017, fogging in the Hvar Town, Stari Grad and Jelsa rtegions was carried out using Permex 22E, while Cipex (Cypermethrin). Microfly (Cypermethrin) and Muhomor (Azamethiphos) were used against flies around the rubbish bins and rubbish dumps. Azamethiphos is an organophosphate, the others are pyrethroids. The combined effects of such chemical pesticides on environmental and human health are not known

Pyrethroids8 are dangerous poisons 9,10,11. Each of the poisons is dangerous in its own right, not only for insects but for other living creatures. In 2017, overnight 'fogging' took place in June, July and August. The street spraying is indiscriminate, spreading poison over houses, terraces, gardens, fields, and any hapless humans or animals who happen to get in the way. 

ABOUT THE INSECTICIDES USED IN THE JELSA COUNCIL AREA, 2017

Cipex - active ingredient Cypermethrin12 (pyrethroid). Cypermethrin is very toxic to cats13, bees, aquatic insects and fish, and to a lesser degree to birds. In humans, Cypermethrin poisoning can give rise to numbness, burning, loss of bladder control, vomiting, loss of co-ordination, coma, seizures, and (rarely) death 14,15,16. It is classified in the United States as a possible cause of cancer17.

Permex 22E- the two active pyrethroid ingredients of Permethrin and Tetramethrin. Permethrin 18,19,  comes in many different formulations, some more poisonous than others. It is highly toxic to bees, sea organisms, fish20 and other animals21. It is also poisonous to cats22. The possible ill-effects on humans are considered less dramatic than those of Cypermethrin, but it can cause neurological damage23,24, as well as problems in the immune and endocrine systems. It can have a particularly bad effect on children, and the American Environmental Protection Agency classified it as a potential carcinogen in 2006.25 Given their known ill-effects on aquatic life-forms, pyrethroids must not be used near water sources. Also Permethrin is not allowed on places where animals forage for food.

The EPA registration document for Tetramethrin (2010)26 classified it as a potential human carcinogen, and identified it as extremely toxic to bees and aquatic organisms, including fish and aquatic invertebrates. It can cause dizziness, breathing difficulties, coughing, eye irritation, gastrointestinal upset, blisters and skin rashes. The EPA document stated that: "Tetramethrin is used by individual home-owners or industrial / commercial property owners, in individual, isolated areas, and in small amounts as opposed to wide scale uses (i.e., for agriculture or mosquito abatement by public authorities)." 27 For this reason, they did not test the effect of Tetramethrin on drinking water. Tetramethrin is not supposed to be used on or near foodstuffs27.

The synergist Piperonyl Butoxide in Permex 22E carries harmful effects of its own, as it is highly toxic to aquatic life, with long-lasting effects (ECHA infocard)

Microfly - active ingredient Cypermethrin (see above, under Cipex).

Muhomor - active ingredient Azamethiphos28, an organophosphate poison which is not on the list of insecticides approved in the European Union.29,30. The instructions state that it should only be applied to target surfaces, and not sprayed in the air. Muhomor AZ was the product used for spraying around dustbins and rubbish dumps on Hvar in 2017. It is a water-soluble insecticide designed to eliminate flies in stalls for cattle, calves, horses, pigs, and chickens31. It is mostly used in enclosed spaces. As at September 2021, it was not on the list of products authorized by the European Chemicals Agency.

INSECTICIDES USED IN THE HVAR TOWN AREA, 2017

According to the published Programme of Measures for Compulsory Pest Control 2017, published by the Town Wardens' Office, five pyrethroids were listed for use in the summertime 'fogging' actions: Cypermethrin, Deltamethrin32, D-Phenothrin33, Permethrin and Resmethrin34 (p.9, table 2 in the Programme). Phenothrin is especially toxic to cats35, bees36 and aquatic organisms37. Resmethrin is particularly poisonous to fish, also to birds, and is potentially harmful for humans38. It has been banned from sale in the United States since 201539.

BEES: All the poisons named here are toxic to bees. As long ago as 1998, Permethrin, d-Phenothrin and Resmethrin were included in a list of insecticides known to be particularly harmful to bees, with effects lasting even some time after application40.

RE THE WARNINGS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. We are talking here about very dangerous substances, yet warnings are minimal: Jelsa Council places a letter from the firm which carries out the poison spraying on the Council's public notice boards. Stari Grad announces it on its website. There is no warning through the media, nothing via the Tourist Offices. Beekeepers are not given special warning, even though they stand to suffer loss. The warnings are not given in any language other than Croatian, even though the spraying takes place during the high season when Hvar is teeming with foreign tourists.

Local citizens and visitors have the right to be fully informed about the spraying programme. There should be public announcements, detailing the substances to be used and their possible adverse effects; the complete map of the route the 'fogger' will take; the method of administering the spray; and the precise timing of the action.

Local authorities which order the 'fogging' actions are duty-bound to inform local inhabitants and guests through all available channels, and in all relevant languages.

Public warning - but did anyone notice?

CONCLUSIONS

The insect suppression programme as carried out on Hvar over the past few years is potentially damaging for human health, also for animals, birds, non-target insects and the environment. The programme is not achieving its aims. The way in which it is being carried out is irresponsible. not transparent, and on many counts unacceptable.

WE RECOMMEND:

Given that the risks of infectious diseases from mosquitoes are small, while the risks of spraying poisons over public areas are much greater, the current programme of summer spraying should be stopped as a matter of urgency, and alternative methods of controlling unwanted insects should be explored, as allowed for in the Regulations governing compulsory insect control.

A tactic: poison companies use cartoon images to mask the serious risks from mass insecticide spraying

© Vivian Grisogono MA(Oxon) 2017, amended September 2021.

* Original: "program dezinsekcije kao mjere zaštite pučanstva od zaraznih bolesti provodi se kako bi se suzbila ličinka komaraca te uklonili uvjeti za razvoj i razmnožavanje, a time smanjila šteta za okoliš i zdravlje ljudi."

FOOTNOTE: For more details about the pesticides used on Hvar, their possible adverse effects, and up-to-date information on their EU approval status, see our articles 'Pesticides and their Adverse Effects' and 'Pesticide Products in Croatia'. For an explanation of the approvals processes in the EU and Croatia, see 'Pesticides, Laws and Permits'

POISON SPRAYING ON HVAR: REFERENCES

1. Gjenero-Margan, I., Aleraj, B., Krajcar, D., Lesnikar, V., Klobučar, A., Pem-Novosel, I., Kurečić-Filipović, S., Komparak, S., Martić, R., Đuričić, S., Betica-Radić, L., Okmadžić, J., Vilibić-Čavlek, T., Babić-Erceg, A., Turković, B., Avšić-Županc, T., Radić, I., Ljubić, M., Šarac, K., Benić, N., Mlinarić-Galinović, G. 2011. Autochthonous dengue fever in Croatia, August–September 2010. Eurosurveillance, 16 (9).

2. Pem-Novosel, I., Vilibic-Cavlek, T., Gjenero-Margan, I., Kaic, B., Babic-Erceg, A., Merdic, E., Medic, A., Ljubic, M., Pahor, D., Erceg, M. 2015. Dengue virus infection in Croatia: seroprevalence and entomological study. New Microbiologica, 38, 97-100.

3. Barbić L, Listeš E, Katić S, Stevanović V, Madić J, Starešina V, Labrović A, Di Gennaro A, Savini G. 2012. Spreading of West Nile virus infection in Croatia. Veterinary Microbiology. 159(3-4):504-8.

4. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. (Provides regular updates on the spread of communicable diseases in Europe)

5. Weill, M., Lutfalla, G., Mogensen, K., Chandre, F., Berthomieu, A., Berticat, C., Pasteur, N., Philips, A., Fort, P., Raymond, M. 2003. Comparative genomics: Insecticide resistance in mosquito vectors. Nature 423: 136-137 (8 May 2003)

6. Owusu, H. F. Jančáryová, D., Malone, D., Müller, P.. 2015. Comparability between insecticide resistance bioassays for mosquito vectors: time to review current methodology? Parasites and Vectors 8: 357

7. Aguirre-Obando, O. A., Pietrobon, A. J.. DallaBona, A. C., Navarro-Silva, M. A. 2015. Contrasting patterns of insecticide resistance and knockdown resistance (kdr) in Aedes aegypti populations from Jacarezinho (Brazil) after a Dengue Outbreak. Revista Brasileira de Entomologia 60:1 94-100 (January–March 2016)

8. EPA Information Sheet. 2016. Pyrethrins and Pyrethroids. (information on the use of pyrethrins and pyrethroids as insecticides, the current reevaluation of this group of pesticides in registration review, and previous assessments, decisions, and risk mitigation efforts.)

9. Beyond Pesticides. 2001. chemicalWATCH factsheet: Synthetic Pyrethroids.

10. Walters, J.K., Boswell, L.E., Green, M.K., Heumann, M.A., Karam, L.E., Morrissey, B.F., Waltz, J.E. 2009. Pyrethrin and Pyrethroid Illnesses in the Pacific Northwest: A Five-Year Review. Public Health Reports 124 (1): 149-159

11. Ingram E.M., Augustin, J., Ellis, M.D., Siegfried, B.D. 2015. Evaluating sub-lethal effects of orchard-applied pyrethroids using video-tracking software to quantify honey bee behaviors. Chemosphere 135: 272-277

12. TOXNET Toxicology Data Network (U.S.National Library of Medicine). Cypermethrin.

13. PARASITIPEDIA.net. updated 2017. CYPERMETHRIN, safety summary for veterinary use.

14. Cornell University, (Extoxnet). 1993. Pesticide Information profile: Cypermethrin.

15. PubChem Open Chemistry Database. 2005. Cypermethrin.

16. Aggarwal, P., Jamshed, N., Ekka, M., Imran A. 2015. Suicidal poisoning with cypermethrin: A clinical dilemma in the emergency department. Journal of Emergencies, Trauma and Shock. 8:2 123-125.

17. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs. 2016. Chemicals Evaluated for Carcinogenic Potential. Annual Cancer Report.

18. World Health Organization. 2006. "International Program on Chemical Safety, Environmental Health Criteria 92: Permethrin."

19. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. "TRI Explorer: Providing Access to EPA's Toxic Release Inventory Data."

20. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. August 2009. Permethrin Facts.

21. Hoffmann, M., Meléndez, J.L., Ruhman, M.A., 2008. Risks of Permethrin Use to the Federally Threatened California Red-legged Frog (Rana aurora draytonii) and Bay Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis), and the Federally Endangered California Clapper Rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus), Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris), and San Francisco Garter Snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia). Environmental Fate and Effects Division Office of Pesticide Programs, Washington, D.C. 20460

22. International Cat Care. Permethrin Poisoning in Cats.

23. U.S. Centers for Disease Control (ATSDR). 2003. "Toxicological Profile for Pyrethrins and Pyrethroids."

24. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006. "Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for Permethrin."

25. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2007. Permethrin & Resmethrin (Pyrethroids), Toxicity and Exposure Assessment for Children's Health. TEACH Chemical summary.

26. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2008, revised 2010. Reregistration Eligibility Decision Document for Tetramethrin.

27. Thoreby, E. (author), Williams, M.M. (editor), Lah, K. (updater) 2011. Tetramethrin. Toxipedia.

28. Scottish Environment Protection Agency. Azamethiphos. Scottish Pollutant Release Directory.

29. University of Hertfordshire. Azamethiphos. Veterinary Substances Database.

30. Pesticides Action Network (PAN) Europe. 2006. What substances are banned and authorized in the EU market?

31. Muhomor. 2017.  Muhomot je insekticid topiv u vodi. Djelatna tvar: Azametifos u koncentraciji 10%. Genera, Jedna komapnija za Jedno zdravlje.

32. PubChem, Open Chemistry Database. 2017. Deltamethrin.

33. PubChem, Open chemistry Database. 2017. D-Phenothrin.

34. US EPA Archive Document. 2007. Permethrin and Resmethrin (Pyrethroids). TEACH Chemical Summary.

35. Parasitipedia. 2017. Phenothrin: safety summary for veterinary use.

36. US EPA. 2008. Reregistration Eligibility Decision for d-Phenothrin.

37. WHO/FAO 1994. d-Phenothrin. WHO/FAO Data Sheet on Pesticides no.85.

38. PubChem Open Chemistry Database. 2017. Resmethrin.

39. US EPA. 2011. Permethrin, Resmethrin, d-Phenothrin (Sumithrin®): Synthetic Pyrethroids for Mosquito Control.

40. Alabama A&M and Auburn Universities. 1998. Protecting honey bees from pesticides.

back to top
You are here: Home poisons be aware Insect spraying: rethink needed

Eco Environment News feeds

  • Bibles, bullets and beef: Amazon cowboy culture at odds with Brazil’s climate goals

    As the first climate summit in the Amazon approaches, a gulf is opening between what the area’s farming lobby wants, and what the world needs

    Yellowstone in Montana may have the most romanticised cowboy culture in the world thanks to the TV drama series of the same name starring Kevin Costner. But the true home of the 21st-century cowboy is about 7,500 miles south, in what used to be the Amazon rainforest of Brazil, where the reality of raising cattle and producing beef is better characterised by depression, market pressure and vexed efforts to prevent the destruction of the land and its people.

    The toll was apparent along the rutted PA 279 road in Pará state. Signs of human and environmental stress were not hard to find during the last dry season. Record drought had dried up irrigation ponds and burned pasture grass down to the roots, leaving emaciated cattle behind the fences. Exposed red soil was whipped up into dust devils as SUVs and cattle trucks sped past on their way between Xinguara and São Félix do Xingu, which is home to both the biggest herd on the planet and the fastest erasure of forest in the Amazon.

    Continue reading...

  • How the truth about supermarket salmon is being hidden – video

    Salmon is often marketed as the sustainable, healthy and eco-friendly protein choice. But what you may not realise is that most of the salmon you buy is farmed, especially if you live in the UK, because Scottish salmon producers are no longer required to tell you.

    Josh Toussaint-Strauss finds out why it is important for consumers to know where their salmon comes from, and examines the gap between the marketing of farmed salmon and the reality for our health, the environmental and animal welfare

    Continue reading...

  • I’m obsessed with coastal wildflowers: they look so delicate but thrive in tough conditions

    From the rock sea-spurrey, which appears to grow out of solid rock, to the slender centaury that lives on a landslip, these plants exist where they do for good reason

    I first encountered coastal wildflowers when I was 11. I was visiting my grandmother’s friend in Devon and a lady said: “Here, dear,” and dug up a clump of Warren crocuses – a rare plant that, at the time, was only thought to grow in the seaside resort of Dawlish Warren. She gave them to me to grow in my garden at home. But of course they didn’t grow away from the sea.

    That was when I realised there was something special about coastal wildflowers. They fascinate me because, as well as being beautiful flowers, they often grow in tough locations. Take the rock sea-spurrey: a delicate little plant that appears to grow out of solid rock, such as a crevice in a cliff base. It can put up with being splashed with sea spray and baked by the summer sun. And yet it seems to thrive in that difficult, harsh environment.

    Continue reading...

  • Like the Ritz for wildlife: the joy of recreating Britain’s ancient hedges

    Up and down the country, volunteers are coming together to plant more of these nature-rich reserves

    The 30-metre ridge runs across the moor near Yar Tor on Dartmoor, one of several faint lines that crisscross the land like aeroplane contrails. Although the open moorland looks wild, we are standing on some of the UK’s oldest farmland. These ridges, called reaves, are the ghosts of farming’s most wildlife-rich legacy: hedges.

    “These reaves sadly have no function today other than to delight us. Or some of us,” says ecologist Rob Wolton. But Dartmoor’s reaves are the skeletons upon which more recent hedges were built: hundreds of thousands of miles of them. After Ireland, the UK is believed to be the most hedge-dense country in the world, and Wolton says the majority of them are more than 280 years old. Recent laser scanning shows England has enough hedges to wrap around the world almost 10 times. They are, by far, the country’s biggest nature reserve, which is why community groups, farmers and charities are rallying together to plant hedges of the future that will offer the same support to wildlife as the ancient hedges of the past.

    Continue reading...

  • April heralds return of migratory birds to UK – unless the weather turns cruel

    Unsettled weather, rain and winds have in some years stopped birds returning from winter in Africa in their tracks

    Despite TS Eliot’s famous reworking of the opening lines to Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, April is not usually the cruellest month, weather-wise. For birders, it sees the welcome return of the majority of long-distance migrants from their winter quarters in sub-Saharan Africa – including warblers, flycatchers and chats, along with those masters of the air: swallows, martins and swifts.

    Both we and the birds hope for clear skies and soft southerly winds, allowing these global voyagers to safely cross the Channel to Britain.

    Continue reading...

  • UK government report calls for taskforce to save England’s historic trees

    Exclusive: Ancient oaks ‘as precious as stately homes’ could receive stronger legal safeguards under new proposals

    Ancient and culturally important trees in England could be given legal protections under plans set out in a UK government-commissioned report.

    Sentencing guidelines would be changed so those who destroy important trees would face tougher criminal penalties. Additionally, a database of such trees would be drawn up and they could be given automatic protections, with the current system of tree preservation orders strengthened to accommodate this.

    In 2020, the 300-year-old Hunningham Oak near Leamington was felled to make way for infrastructure projects.

    In 2021, the Happy Man tree in Hackney, which the previous year had won the Woodland Trust’s tree of the year contest, was felled to make way for housing development.

    In 2022, a 600-year-old oak was felled in Bretton, Peterborough, which reportedly caused structural damage to nearby property.

    In 2023, 16 ancient lime trees on The Walks in Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, were felled to make way for a dual carriageway.

    Continue reading...

  • Map reveals residential wood-burning hotspots in England and Wales

    Researchers analyse energy performance certificate data to identify areas with potentially high particle pollution

    Burning wood at home adds more particle pollution to the UK’s air than all of the vehicles on its roads, but there is very little information on where this burning takes place and who is most affected.

    To address this knowledge gap, researchers have produced the first high-resolution map of wood burning in England and Wales.

    Continue reading...

  • Kicking up a stink: row over sewage pollution blighting Cape Town’s beaches

    Campaigners say authorities should be doing more to clean up waters around city of nearly 5 million people

    On a clear summer’s day in Cape Town, the Milnerton Lagoon was serene, reflecting the bright blue sky and Table Mountain. But there was an unmistakable stench, and up close, the water was murky.

    A few hundred metres away, adults and children played in the water as it flowed into Table Bay. On the boardwalk, a sign read: “Polluted water: for health reasons, swimming and recreational activities are at your own risk.”

    Continue reading...

  • ‘All of his guns will do nothing for him’: lefty preppers are taking a different approach to doomsday

    Liberals in the US make up about 15% of the prepping scene and their numbers are growing. Their fears differ from their better-known rightwing counterparts – as do their methods

    One afternoon in February, hoping to survive the apocalypse or at least avoid finding myself among its earliest victims, I logged on to an online course entitled Ruggedize Your Life: The Basics.

    Some of my classmates had activated their cameras. I scrolled through the little windows, noting the alarmed faces, downcast in cold laptop light. There were dozens of us on the call, including a geophysicist, an actor, a retired financial adviser and a civil engineer. We all looked worried, and rightly so. The issue formerly known as climate change was now a polycrisiscalled climate collapse. H1N1 was busily jumping from birds to cows to people. And with each passing day, as Donald Trump went about gleefully dismantling state capacity, the promise of a competent government response to the next hurricane, wildfire, flood, pandemic, drought, mudslide, heatwave, financial meltdown, hailstorm or other calamity receded further from view.

    Continue reading...

  • ‘No fish, no money, no food’: Colombia’s stilt people fight to save their wetlands

    Illegally diverted rivers, seawater and poorly managed building projects have polluted the Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta. But the Unesco site has a vital role to play in fighting climate change

    From the porch of her family home in Nueva Venecia, Magdalena, Yeidis Rodríguez Suárez watches the sunset. The view takes in the still waters of the Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta wetlands. Pelicans dip their beaks into the lagoon, ripples breaking the glassy surface. Distant mangroves turn from green to deep purple in the dying light.

    The 428,000-hectare (1,600 sq mile) expanse of lagoons, mangroves and marshes in Colombia has been a Unesco biosphere reserve since 2000. Yet, for Rodríguez, 27, the natural abundance is little more than an illusion.

    Continue reading...

Eco Health News feeds

Eco Nature News feeds

Copyright © 2025 Eco Hvar. All Rights Reserved. Developed by Orion Informatika.