Don't worry, they won't all be about pesticides. In fact, I have been criticised for being too positive by other organic journalists! However, I've decided to 'finish it off' as it were. So I'm posting part 2 of the pesticide story here, and part 3 next. Then, let the positivity flow!

In many cases (and here with these pesticide articles) the originals were published in the Irish Examiner - various slight modifications may have been made before publication in the farming supplement.

Also, if your an academic-type, you may be interested in this:
That's a link to the new edition of the International Journal of Consumer Studies, and I've an article in it.

Finally, to to update the article below, I'll let you know that according to the editor of the Farming supplement I write for, the pesticide story isn't that bad in Ireland at present. He suggests that eutrophication of Irish water, caused more by rapid development than farming (but partly caused by farming) is more of a concern. See here

pesticides part 2:

The second of my three part series on pesticides, examines the effects of pesticides on rural areas. In particular, how pesticides damage the environment and harm people close to sprayed fields will be highlighted.

First, the good news. In Ireland, we have amongst the lowest usage of pesticides in Europe. However there is, according to the Heritage Council, �a strong spatial variation in the levels of pesticide usage in Ireland reflecting the uneven distribution of land use types�. So some areas are obviously more affected than others.

From 1965 to the present, the amount of pesticides used in Ireland has increased from 500 tonnes to well over 2000. This has led to the extinction of some plants and the corollary reduction in numbers of many different types of butterflies and moths, which are dependent on certain types of plant.

In the US, University of Pittsburgh assistant professor of biology Rick Relyea has stepped beyond the usual lab tests of one pesticide on one species. He has tested for direct and indirect effects of various pesticides in �realistic concentrations� on a number of plants and animals.

According to Relyea, "the most shocking insight coming out of this was that Roundup, something designed to kill plants, was extremely lethal to amphibians.�

Organic agriculture, on the other hand has been shown in numerous studies, to increase plant and bird biodiversity. Recently, I outlined UK research which found that birds, bats, spiders and wild plants were found in greater numbers on organic farms. This follows on from a whole range of research which makes similar claims; some endangered plants were only found on German organic farms in 1996, for example.

Some research has shown that maintaining, and not spraying hedgerows is particularly important for biodiversity. This would suggest that REPS farms are havens of biodiversity. However, according to recent research by Dr. Jane Feehan, the no-spray margins on REPS farms are too narrow. She suggested that it be increased from 1.5 metres to at least 3 metres. Research from Holland also backs up the idea of a 3 metre no-spray zone.

This �proves to be a very effective way of reducing pesticide drift to the ditch (by about 95%) and risks to aquatic organisms. �according to the Dutch research. Plant, insect and bird numbers were higher in the 3 metre unsprayed hedge zone.

It is noteworthy that a cost-benefit analysis based on the yield losses found the only crop type where the costs were too high was�sugar beet. If there�s one crop that won�t be grown in Ireland in the future, it�s sugar beet.

In the UK, the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP) has suggested increasing the no-spray margin on all fields to 5 metres, but for different reasons.

The RCEP are concerned about walkers and people living, working or attending schools near sprayed fields. Current research needs to be improved upon, to assess whether the genuine illnesses people who live near sprayed fields are experiencing are in fact caused by pesticides and herbicides.

From further afield, there are some very clear examples of pesticide drift causing serious damage to people. In California many thousands of people who happened to be close to sprayed fields have been poisoned, and many more cases are pending. In many cases, poor migrant farm labourers are the victims, as they live next to the sprayed fields.

In October, 2003, 130 people in Lamont, California were poisoned when a toxic pesticide drifted into a housing area. They were hit for two consecutive days; on the second day, roads were closed and people evacuated. Four months later, some victims said they still had headaches and breathing problems from the drift, while others claimed their children have since been diagnosed with asthma.

Following this and many other cases, the law was changed in California last year to implicate the sprayers directly in payments of damages to victims.

This helped pave the way for 84 residents of Avin county California, to be awarded $775,000 dollars in damages because of pesticide drift recently.