.
Feedback

New London’s Silent Spring

A half-century ago, Silent Spring raised the alarm of pending environmental devastation. Some of the book’s evidence came from right here in southeastern Connecticut.

The year that is rapidly drawing to a close marks the 50th anniversary of the publication of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring. The controversial book, now considered a classic, introduced many Americans to the dangers of synthetic pesticides and herbicides and sparked a national debate that led to Congressional hearings and bans on chemicals such as DDT.

Silent Spring, often credited with setting in motion the environmental movement, details the chilling side-effects of poorly-regulated and often unquestioned use of chemicals in cities and towns across the country — including New London.

In the book, Carson makes two specific references to the area. One recalls an instance in which “trees within the Connecticut Arboretum Natural Area were seriously injured when the town of Waterford sprayed the roadside with chemical weed killers in 1957.”

The Connecticut Arboretum is now the Connecticut College Arboretum; according to its website the name was changed by current Arboretum Director Glenn Dreyer when he joined the staff in 1988.

The Arboretum, which abuts the border of New London and Waterford, began as a small teaching garden in 1928 and now comprises 450 acres of woods, trails, and native plants.

Carson describes the impact of the 1957 spraying on the Arboretum’s trees. “Even large trees not directly sprayed were affected. The leaves of the oaks began to curl and turn brown, although it was the season for Spring growth. Then new shoots began to be put forth, and grew with abnormal rapidity, giving a weeping appearance to the trees. Two seasons later, large branches on these trees had died, others were without leaves, and the deformed, weeping effect of whole trees persisted.”

In another section, warning of the dangers of spraying along rural highways - which she calls “the senseless destruction that is going on in the name of roadside brush control” — Carson cites the observations of botanists Richard H. Goodwin and William A. Niering, published in the Connecticut Arboretum Bulletin in 1959.

Goodwin and Niering, both professors at the College and one-time directors of the Arboretum, termed the destruction of native shrubs and flowers a  “roadside crisis.” Of their findings, Carson wrote that “azaleas, mountain laurel, blueberries, huckleberries, viburnum, dogwood, bayberry, sweet fern, low shadbush, winterberry, chokecherry, and wild plum are dying before the chemical barrage. So are the daisies, black-eyed Susans, Queen Anne’s lace, goldenrods, and fall asters, which lend grace and beauty to the landscape.”

The Arboretum’s collections still include most of the species that were threatened by the spraying Carson decried in 1962.

Connecticut College’s ties to Silent Spring go deeper than these brief passages. The school’s Linda Lear Center for Special Collections and Archives holds the archive of Carson biographer (and Conn College graduate) Linda Lear, who wrote introductions to all of Carson’s books, as well as other collections relating to environmental studies.

The New London-Waterford area is not the only Connecticut location mentioned in Silent Spring. The town of Greenwich is also named as a place adversely affected by the spraying of chemicals.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from New London Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
John Martin May 19, 2013 at 02:42 pm
Of course, you are assuming that the government fund managers would be responsible. So far, this hasRead More been far from the case. The Federal government has plundered Social Security for decades, the teacher and state employee funds have been systematically looted. Of course they want to open this up to anyone with dollars in their pockets. I am not opposed to a program like this - in fact, economies of scale using voluntary contributions in a well-managed plan could be quite beneficial. If the government is going to be allowed to administer the program, there needs to be stringent safeguards, the funds must be untouchable, and there should be swift and significant consequences for mismanagement. Oh, but wait - this is Connecticut. Of course people will find their dollars funding the 'progressive' agenda with no regard for the state's fiduciary, legal, and moral obligation to the contributors.
Kathleen Mitchell May 19, 2013 at 10:45 am
If I read this correctly and, if not, I'm sure someone will correct me, the highlights of this billRead More are (1) It's designed for workers "who do not have access to a retirement plan through their employer" (2) "workers can take their investment with them as they move from job to job." (3) "whatever administrative costs are associated with the plan are charged to the participants themselves, not Connecticut taxpayers." I haven't read the bill yet but I don't see anything in this article by Richard Waselik regarding an employer contribution or match so what is the problem?
Sue P. May 19, 2013 at 10:20 am
Richard, Are you the same Richard that sent a letter to the city council when you became concernedRead More that people that did not work for the city long enough were contributing to the pension plan? I think I have a copy of it somewhere. I think you were concerned that people were getting vested and they were not suppose to be yet.
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 07:44 am
Pretty funny Spencer. But you don't want a museum there. You need something that generates taxes.Read More Museums are mostly non-profit thereby not generating any taxes. I know you were being funny. I was disgusted to read the developer couldn't show financial backing.
Kathleen Mitchell May 17, 2013 at 05:47 pm
Who would haveever thought of Wasp Spray? When you get the case of spray, be sure and drop a can offRead More at my house;>)
Jeff Brown May 17, 2013 at 03:46 pm
Good article, gonna have to pick up a case of wasp spray!
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 12:34 pm
Barbara, I agree with you. But it is probably a lot easier to get an illegal social security numberRead More than we would know. There are two ways of looking at this issue, but my resentment is that I have to pay for them.
Barbara Crocker May 17, 2013 at 07:52 am
But for state aid they would have to have a Social Security number. Bending and breaking laws isRead More how they got here in the first place. The fact that elected officials condone and encourage these laws to be broken is the biggest problem that I have with this whole debacle. "Undocumented residents" place a burden on all of us, and take jobs that could be worked by legal residents. Employers hire illegals (yes I prefer calling them what they are, to hell with being politically correct) because it saves them money, not because "no one else would work these jobs". This is a slap in the face to all of our ancestors who came to this country and followed the rules to become citizens.
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 06:51 am
The way things have been going in the eastern part of the United States, as long as the illegals areRead More not breaking the law criminally (motor vehicle is different), they are not arrested for being illegal. Its the illegal immigrants who break the law, such as the large drug bust recently in the papers. As long as they are minding their own business, they get a pass. The only problem I have with illegals is their rush to get on state aid, food stamps, etc. I don't think we should have to support those that choose to live in this country illegally. Becoming a US citizen is not cheap. It is expensive, but it is something that they must work for.
Spencer May 16, 2013 at 04:42 pm
Perhaps because people who vote continue to vote the same way they have for years--and expect to getRead More different results when they do so?
Carol Haley May 15, 2013 at 05:05 pm
Sounds like a bunch of goobledygook to me. And Sue, the Democrats being divided isn't anything newRead More as well as the backstabbing and bs. It's been going on for years. That is one of the reasons I changed to independent a long time ago. I'm presently a Democrat, but changing back to independent as soon as I can get down there.
Felicia Hendersen May 15, 2013 at 09:00 am
Bravo Sue P. And Kathleen I changed the word from "her" to "his". Why shouldRead More people not question the motives of the city council president?
Sue P. May 15, 2013 at 08:53 am
Glad to here that Felicia, I sure hope that you are who you are and not the HE I was told you are.Read More Now is the time to work together and not pick each other apart like the Administration is doing to the Democrat Town Committee.You should see how divided they are and all the back stabbing and bickering that goes on. I say stay clear of that group.
William Desmond May 14, 2013 at 12:47 pm
I must say this has created quite a stir!
Luis Smart May 14, 2013 at 07:04 am
I agree Richard argyle sweaters would have really made it. It is really sad Michael Passero has goneRead More to the dark side and has aligned himself with the administration rather than the people of the city. The one time high vote getter will be all done in November.
Richard Cranium May 13, 2013 at 10:26 pm
I think it is pretty funny although they should be wearing argyle vest sweaters!