St. Louis County targets rising mosquito numbers
'You know, with the spring rains, we are anticipating a pretty heavy mosquito season this year,' James Sayer, supervisor of the St. Louis County Department of Health's Vector Control Center, said. They have been working diligently over the last six weeks to put larvicide in standing water all around the county.
'We typically try to get out and pretreat all the flood prone areas before the spring rains so that we try to get a handle on mosquitos before they get bad,' Sayer said.
Hot and dry conditions are typically when we see the most West Nile virus cases, but humidity doesn't hurt.
A two-pronged approach is used to try to control the problem. They get the biggest bang for their buck by using larvicide, which is the control of larval mosquitoes. They also do adult spraying with their trucks. The time at which they spray depends on what type of mosquitoes they are trying to eliminate.
Pope Leo XIV's former St. Louis residence is on the market for $1.8M
Recent heavy rains in April and for the start of May are normally not a good thing for emerging mosquito numbers. But sometimes, it can be.
'We tend to focus our control activities more on the types of mosquitoes that transmit diseases and make you sick. Those types of mosquitoes tend to be more prevalent in storm sewers and catch-basins,' Sayer said. 'So, when we get frequent rains, it tends to flush mosquito larvae out and kill them. On the other hand, those frequent rains can also tend to flush out our larvicides.'
Of course, the best way to protect yourself from West Nile virus is to protect yourself from mosquito bites.
'Long sleeves, long pants, light colors. Limit time outside during dawn and dusk and wear mosquito repellents that are EPA approved,' Sayer said.
To further reduce your property's attractiveness to mosquitos, rid yourself of any standing water on or near the property. This includes items that can hold water, like buckets, children's toys, kiddie pools, clogged gutters, or French drains.
– St. Louis County
Remove standing water where mosquitoes lay eggs
Once a week, empty and scrub, turn over, cover, or throw out any items that hold water like tires, buckets, planters, toys, pools, birdbaths, flowerpot saucers, or trash containers. Mosquitoes lay eggs near water.
Tightly cover water storage containers (buckets, cisterns, rain barrels) so mosquitoes cannot get inside to lay eggs.
For containers without lids, use wire mesh with holes smaller than an adult mosquito.
Fill tree holes to prevent them from filling with water.
Repair cracks or gaps in your septic tank if you have one. Cover open vent or plumbing pipes. Use wire mesh with holes smaller than an adult mosquito.
Kill mosquito larvae outside your home
Use larvicides to treat large bodies of water that will not be used for drinking and cannot be covered or dumped out.
When using larvicides, always follow label instructions.
Drain and turn over kiddie pools.
Kill mosquitoes outside your home
Use an outdoor adulticide to kill adult mosquitoes in areas where they rest.
Mosquitoes rest in dark, humid areas like under patio furniture or under the carport or garage.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
10 minutes ago
- The Hill
Repealing EPA's endangerment finding will cause a public health nightmare
As America faces increasing health threats from wildfire smoke, summer heat waves and rising cases of asthma and other respiratory illnesses, the last thing we need is to reverse laws that protect U.S. air quality. Yet, that's precisely what the Trump administration intends to do by proposing a repeal of a central scientific finding that serves as the basis for the Clean Air Act — legislation that has saved millions of American lives and been responsible for monumental advancements both to our environment and public health. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin announced last month the agency plans to end a long-held 'endangerment finding' that asserts carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases present a risk to human health. If that happens, it will neutralize the federal government's ability to combat climate change and enforce laws intended to protect America's wellbeing. One of those laws is the Clean Air Act. Enacted in 1970, it has been one of the most successful public health policies in U.S. history. It's credited with reducing six of the most common air pollutants in the U.S. by nearly 80 percent while saving over 230,000 early deaths and avoiding over 120,000 emergency room visits every year. It has reduced chronic bronchitis, infant mortality and prevented millions of cases of asthma exacerbation as well. These statistics aren't conjecture: They're sourced directly from the EPA's own website, the same agency now leading the charge to turn the clock back on these remarkable achievements. Zeldin's announcement claims that the reversal of the endangerment finding will 'undo the underpinning of $1 trillion in costly regulations.' But the positive U.S. economic impact from the Clean Air Act alone far exceeds this figure. By reducing hospital visits, sick days and treatment of costly respiratory-related disease, the EPA estimates the Clean Air Act has created $2 trillion in U.S. economic benefit as of 2020 — twice the amount Zeldin asserts the endangerment finding's repeal would create. Further, clean energy has proven itself to be a source of strong job creation. The Department of Energy found that jobs in renewable energy grew more than twice as fast as the vibrant 2023 U.S labor market. And the science couldn't be clearer: Clean air is critical to public health. 'Decades of research have shown that air pollutants such as ozone and particulate matter increase the amount and seriousness of lung and heart disease and other health problems,' the EPA states. Worse, those pollutants are disproportionately burdened by communities of color. A 2024 Milken Institute of Public Health study found that marginalized communities have eight times the number of pediatric asthma cases and a 30 percent higher chance of dying early from pollution exposure. That same study attributed this inequality to the close proximity many minority communities share with industrial manufacturing facilities. Imagine what those numbers would be if the endangerment finding is reversed and the U.S. can no longer enforce Clean Air Act provisions. Zeldin referred to the EPA action as 'driving a dagger into the heart of the climate change religion,' and that it would be 'the largest deregulatory action in the history of America.' But doing so will only cause greater sickness in America and inundate an already stressed U.S. health care system. Increased exposure to air pollution will result in higher numbers of emergency room visits, increased rates of chronic illness and heightened health care costs. The medical and environmental advocacy community agree greater exposure to carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas is a bad idea. Groups such as the American Lung Association, American Public Health Association, American Thoracic Society, World Wildlife Fund, along with nursing organizations and medical societies all stand in strong opposition to the EPA's proposed action. Zeldin's proposal follows another questionable deregulatory move by the EPA in recent weeks to reintroduce dicamba, a weed killer used on soybeans and cotton. Use of the pesticide was halted by a federal court last year. A 2020 study in the International Journal of Epidemiology found that exposure to dicamba was reportedly 'linked to some cancers, including liver cancer and a type of leukemia affecting the blood and bone marrow.' But the EPA has argued it 'has not identified any human health or dietary risks of concern.' The U.S. government's job is to protect America's citizens. The Clean Air Act has saved millions of lives, safeguarded our skies and proven that environmental laws and economic progress can peacefully coexist. Repealing the endangerment finding will set America on a dangerous path and put the health and welfare of every American at risk.
Newsweek
11 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Pet Owners Issued Drinking Water Warning
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Dogs could be the first to show signs of dangerous water contamination in American homes relying on private wells, a veterinary professor has told Newsweek. "We tested the drinking water from the homes of dog owners who rely on private wells and found that every sample contained detectable minerals or metals—some at levels above health-based guidelines set by the EPA [Environmental Protection Agency]," veterinary informatics professor at Virginia Tech, Audrey Ruple, told Newsweek. "Since dogs often drink from the same water sources as their human families, they may be the first to show signs of long-term exposure to contaminants like lead or arsenic," she continued. "This makes them important early warning systems—or sentinels—for environmental risks that people are also exposed to." Ruple recently co-authored a study with other researchers from Virginia Tech and the University of Washington, which found that the majority of sampled well water contained excessive levels of heavy metals, raising health concerns for both pets and their human families. Why It Matters Roughly 15 million U.S. households rely on private wells, which fall outside of EPA oversight and are not subject to federal testing regulations. The study highlights that these homeowners may be unaware of health risks lurking in their drinking water, especially for pets that often consume more water per pound of body weight than humans. What To Know Marc Edwards, a distinguished professor of civil and environmental engineering at Virginia Tech, said in an interview with Newsweek: "The lead and copper source is almost always the plumbing infrastructure, whereas arsenic and other constituents are often naturally occurring in the ground water. Consumers can often have their water tested through college extension programs, or by contacting local water testing laboratories. There are filters or treatment devices that can remove every type of contaminant." Published in PLOS Water and conducted across 10 U.S. states, the research found elevated levels of toxic metals in two-thirds of homes tested. According to SciTechDaily, 13 of the homes exceeded EPA health guidance levels for arsenic, lead, or copper. The findings suggest that dogs are exposed to similar environmental hazards as humans, yet their quicker metabolisms and shorter life spans may reveal symptoms earlier. Environmental conditions influenced contamination levels. Researchers noted that homes near fracking sites showed higher sodium and sulfur levels, while proximity to railroads correlated with increased manganese. According to DVM360, water treated using reverse osmosis showed the lowest health risks to dogs. The study analyzed water samples from 178 dogs enrolled in the Dog Aging Project, a national health study. Researchers discovered that 64 percent of private well samples exceeded health guidelines for at least one heavy metal, including arsenic, lead, or copper. All 178 samples contained detectable levels of at least some of 28 different metals tested. Co-author Leigh-Anne Krometis, associate professor of biological systems engineering at Virginia Tech, stressed to Newsweek that "this study examined private well water samples." "These are all maintained by individual homeowners and not subject to federal regulations on testing, treatment, etc. So these were not 'city' water samples," he said. File photo of a dog drinking water, taken in Saxony-Anhalt, Wernigerode, taken in August 2022. File photo of a dog drinking water, taken in Saxony-Anhalt, Wernigerode, taken in August 2022. AP What People Are Saying Co-author Leigh-Anne Krometis said: "In this small study, 59 percent of the samples returned had more than 20 ppm sodium... Salt sometimes is actually high in well water because of the presence of a treatment system that relies on ion exchange to remove nuisance elements like iron and manganese. So it's not that the groundwater is 'polluted' per se, it's actually a management decision to make water more palatable." Co-author Audrey Ruple said: "If their household uses a private well, a practical action they can take is to have their water tested through a certified lab that can check for metals like lead, arsenic, and copper. Testing is relatively inexpensive and easy to do. If contaminants are detected, installing a treatment or filtration system can reduce the risk of negative health impacts." What Happens Next The researchers plan to expand their work by analyzing the long-term health outcomes in dogs exposed to heavy metals. They believe that identifying links between environmental contamination and chronic conditions could improve both veterinary care and public health guidance. Until then, they stress annual water testing as a simple but essential step for well owners. Krometis told Newsweek: "Water is a utility we often take for granted, and many (if not most) private well owners do not realize that it is their sole responsibility to manage their system. Testing is the first step to understand whether there are things in the water that might pose a risk to themselves and their family members, furry or otherwise."
The Hill
3 hours ago
- The Hill
Pesticides test MAHA-MAGA alliance
The 'Make America Healthy Again' (MAHA) movement could be on a collision course with its Republican allies over pesticides and toxic chemicals. MAHA is strongly aligned with the Trump administration, having cheered its anti-vaccine actions and food safety reforms. In general, the movement has been deeply skeptical of Big Pharma, Big Agriculture and Big Chemical. And cracks are beginning to form. MAHA-aligned groups and influencers are particularly raising alarms about provisions in a House appropriations bill that they say will shield pesticide and chemical manufacturers from accountability — and ultimately make Americans less healthy. Meanwhile, a draft of the administration's 'MAHA report' reportedly omits any calls to prevent pesticide exposure, also disappointing advocates. 'It's obvious that there are tensions within this newfound coalition between MAHA and MAGA, and there are some big issues there,' said Mary Holland, CEO of Children's Health Defense, a group that was founded by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., considered the MAHA flagbearer. Conservatives have traditionally sided with big business, supporting fewer regulations on potentially toxic substances. Kennedy and his disciples, meanwhile, espouse stricter environmental protections, while also bucking mainstream science on vaccine safety. The disparities on chemicals and pesticides within their coalition put Republicans in the middle: Do they side with big business or health concerns? On many issues, business interests appear to be winning. The New York Times reported last week, based on a draft that it obtained, that a forthcoming iteration of the Trump administration's MAHA positions does not call for new restrictions on pesticides and describes existing procedures as 'robust.' MAHA-aligned activists recoiled. 'The MAHA draft report stating that the EPA's [Environmental Protection Agency] pesticide review process is 'robust' is the biggest joke in American history. And it's not funny. It's deadly,' wrote Zen Honeycutt, founder of the activist group Moms Across America, in a post on X. Meanwhile, a Republican-authored House Appropriations bill seeks to block pesticide labels that go beyond what the EPA uses based on its current human health risk assessment. During a markup last month, Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), who chairs the Interior-Environment Appropriations subcommittee, said that the measure says that 'states cannot require a pesticide label that is different from the EPA label.' 'The language ensures that we do not have a patchwork of state labeling requirements. It ensures that one state is not establishing the label for the rest of the states,' Simpson said, adding that his comments were meant to be clarifying for all the 'MAHA moms that are out there that are concerned about this that have been calling.' But critics say such a move could prevent the use of updated science on pesticide labels. 'This section, section 453, would basically handcuff EPA, companies and states as well as advocates to … research that could be outdated by over 15 years,' said Geoff Horsfield, policy director at the Environmental Working Group. 'The language in here … says that EPA should only update labels according to the human health risk assessment. EPA, by law, is required to do those human health risk assessments every 15 years, but they often don't complete those in time,' Horsfield said. 'The way the law works currently is states have the power to do additional addendums, and that's where you see, say, a state requires an additional setback so that you can't spray within 250 feet of a school, or you're required to wear additional types of [personal protective equipment],' he continued. 'Those types of restrictions are usually included in a label addendum, and those types of changes and those types of tweaks would be essentially prohibited by this language.' MAHA opponents have particularly expressed concerns over the implications that barring such labeling could have on the ability to sue pesticide companies over inadequate labels. 'Having no access to courts is absolutely devastating and, in my view, unconstitutional,' said Holland, with Children's Health Defense. 'I'm very distressed by this idea that this administration might, for 2026, establish liability protection.' Democrats likewise pushed back on the provision. 'This rider would effectively gag our public health agencies, preventing them from updating labels or rules to reflect new evidence of cancer risks from pesticides,' Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) said during the markup. 'This bill is a big middle finger to cancer patients.' Also causing controversy is another provision related to 'forever chemicals,' toxic substances that have been linked to illnesses including cancer and have become widespread in the environment. The measure seeks to bar the EPA from enforcing a draft report that found that food from farms contaminated with these chemicals may pose cancer risks. Lexi Hamel, a spokesperson for Simpson, said in an email that the bill 'prohibits funding from implementing, administering, or enforcing the current draft risk assessment due to the major technical flaws in the assessment.' But she said it does not block the EPA from 'continuing to work on identifying ways to clean up PFAS and keep communities safe' and that an amendment changed the bill so that it no longer blocks the agency from finalizing its findings. In a follow-up statement shared through a spokesperson, Horsfield said the provision is still a problem. 'The risk assessment will still have to be implemented and enforced,' he said. 'The draft risk assessment will need teeth … Allowing EPA to finalize the draft risk assessment, but preventing them from implementing it is an exercise in futility.' MAHA activists have slammed both provisions, saying in a letter to President Trump that GOP support for the measures is 'unconscionable.' However, Tony Lyons, president of the MAHA Action PAC, said he does not blame Republicans for pesticides in the environment. 'I don't think that this is something that comes from the GOP side. I think that this is a case of the Democratic Party looking to blame Republicans for it,' Lyons said. While the pesticide issues have generated some sparks between MAHA and MAGA, the administration has taken a number of other actions to also reduce restrictions on the chemical industry more broadly. Trump himself exempted from environmental standards more than 100 polluters, including chemical manufacturers, oil refineries, coal plants and medical device sterilizers. The EPA, meanwhile, has put chemical industry alumni in leading roles and has said it wants to loosen restrictions on emissions of various cancer-linked chemicals. Asked about Trump's move to exempt polluters from Clean Air Act rules, Holland said 'there's clearly tensions' within the GOP coalition. 'Those factions, if you will, more protective of corporate and more challenging to corporate, are both striving to get the president's ear, and I don't think they've come to a complete, sort of settlement agreement,' she said.
