Toad Lickers & Tleated Lumber

( Continued .from page 32 ) untary agreement" in February with the CCA chemical manufacturers. The agreement will restrict the use of CCA around residences and playgrounds (perhaps 807o of the present CCA market) beginning in 2004, opening rhe door for use of more expensive "alternative preservatives." These preservatives could cost consumers and builders, in rough, round numbers, an extra half billion dollars per year.

While the press has certainly sensationalized the CCA issue, the question of the safety of wood preservatives containing arsenic came originally not from the press, but from environmentalists and health advocates. The ieasoning of their argument runs like this: Some quantities of arsenic can be quite dangerous, so any quantity must be dangerous. This is like arguing, if we all jump on the bridge, it will collapse; so if little Harry jumps on the bridge, it will collapse. Arsenic, of course, under many circumstances is dangerous, as are iodine, gasoline, bleach, lye, electricity, automobiles, prescription drugs, our fellow human beings, and even fluoridated toothpaste, which carries such warnings as, "WARNING: As with all fluoride roothpastes, keep out of the reach of children under 6 years of age. If you accidentally swallow more than used for brushing, seek professional assistance or contact a Poison Control Center immediately." And this is stuff that we put in our mouth two or three times a day!

A bottle of iodine is so dangerous that it carries a scull and crossbones on its label even though, in trace amounts, iodine is a necessary nutrient. Most, if not all, prescription drugs are toxic in quantities greater than their prescribed amounts. Like it or not, dangers surround us. The only reason they don't get the same publicity as CCA is because we're so familiar with them that such scare tactics would be laughed away, while arsenic has an exotic, mysterious connotation, as in Arsenic and Old Lace or a poet's "They put arsenic in his cup / and shook to see him drink it up."

What does this have to do with toad licking? During the 1980s, the word somehow got out that one could get a hallucinogenic high by squeezing the poison glands on the heads ofcertain large toads and then licking the secretion.

Toad licking was a reporter's dream. It even beat killer bees. The press went wtld. The Weekly World News ran an article, "Rare Toad Keeps Druggies Hopping." The stuffy New York Times rcsponded with "Terror Toads." Toad licking articles appeared in Discover, Chicago Tribune, Vancouver Province, Palm Beach Post and Albany Times Union. The tv shows Eeavis and Butthectd and L.A. Law featured toad licking. A rock group changed its name to Mojo Nixon and the Toad Lickers.

As the enthusiastic press spread the word about the "new drug," near lethal cases of toad licking followed. Legislators went berserk. In Georgia, a bill was introduced warning of "the extreme dangers of toad licking becoming the designer drug of choice of today's sophisticated society."

But the toad licking story wasn't true. The press had fingered the wrong toad! They had heard some rumors about toad licking, fired up enthusiasm for the pastime by reporting about it, and had sent a bunch of comatose people to hospital emergency rooms. The trouble was that the alleged culprit, a toad called Bufo marinus, the one that the weirdos began licking, was not hallucinogenic at all. It was only very poisonous, potentially lethal. Scientists later (Please turn to page 45)

U.S. Slaps 29o/o Tariff On Canadian lmports

Unable to agree upon a deal after months at the bargaining table, the U.S. Department of Commerce plans to impose a combined 29.01Vo duty on imported Canadian softwood lumber to offset what it said were unfair trade practices.

The March 22niing set the duty at 19.347o to countervail subsidies, and at 9.67Vo to compensate for dumping lumber in the U.S. market.

"While we feel the final duty rates do not fully offset the amount of injury to the U.S. lumber industry, the decision substantiates the U.S lumber mills claims," said Rusty Wood,

Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports.

Wood added that now was the time for Canada to move toward a market driven system free of subsidies.

Deborah Burns. Southeastern Lumber Manufacturers Association, echoed Wood's sentiments: "From the beginning, all we have asked is that Canada sell its timber in an open and competitive fashion."

Some in the industry, however, worry that the duty will drive up the cost ofresidential lumber, and depress housing starts which have been at high levels since the first ofthe year.

On behalf of retailers, Garv