Re: CONFESSIONS

Tony & Moira Ryan wrote:
> 
> Charles Dills wrote:
> >
> > >...................What I am concerned about is the unbridled, and
> > >in my view very largely
> > >unnecesary use of chemicals in the general environment, ........
> >
> > +++++--------------
> >         Surely you realize that I agree with you on this. I don't
> > believe "unbridled use" can come from reading the label and using it
> > as specified and for the specified purposes.
> 
> Hi Chas
> It is good to find we are in basic agreement. One of the big problems
> still seems to me that of persuading a large proportion of the users to
> do just what you stipulate and use these chemicals as per instructions.
> In my estimation there are two very major groups of problems in this
> regard. The first group pertain to the ordinary gardener who  firstly
> makes very little effort to find out what his problem is and often
> applies the wrong remedy anyway (I have more than once found someone
> using an insecticide for a fungus disease and vica versa).
> 
> Very often also they will apply a "protective" spray where none is
> warranted because that problem never or rarely hits their particular
> area. One example of this was a man in my neighbourhood who sprayed his
> tomatoes with copper oxychloride eight times each season to protect
> against Late Blight. As it happens blight apppears in this part of the
> country only when exceptional climatic conditions occur (about once in
> 20 years) - I know, as I successfully grow my tomatoes without any
> spraying in all normal years. What that continual rain of copper has
> done to the life in his soil, both the worms and the smaller workers, I
> dread to think. Mind you, one cannot entirely blame John/Jane citizen,
> when almost all non-organic gardening books, inspired no doubt by the
> chemical companies looking to increase their profits, have extensive
> tables of spray regimes involving  "protective " spraying.
> 
> As to overuse, I have for instance, seen an account of the problems
> facing some US towns due to Diazinon contaminating their water supplies.
> This was ascribed entirely to its use on suburban lawns. The amounts
> used are apparently quite fantastic. I can't lay my hand on the
> reference just now, but I saw somewhere that the quantity applied
> throughout the country annually represented several pounds (?5) for
> every citizen (man, woman and child). I can't imagine this can be
> anything but a vast overkill.
> 
> There is also that general view among the scientifically illiterate that
> if " one spoonful does a good job, two will be even better"
> 
> In my opinion the only wise course is for government intervention to
> eliminate the vast majority of the "cides available to the general
> public as is already being done in some European countries. If their
> experience is anything like mine, in a few years when nature reasserts
> itself they will scarcely notice the lack.
> 
> The other problems relate to the professional growers. There is probably
> not so much overdosing as such (their expenses are pretty horrific
> already) but because of the vast acreages often involved the
> applications are not always as precise as they might be and many cases
> occur where the entire neighbourhood shares in the application willy
> nilly.
> 
> Even if all precautions are taken to protect the operators actually
> applying the sprays, there can often be severe passive contamination of
> neighbours and there are some well-documented and hair-raising accounts
> of people who have suffered actual health breakdowns traced to this
> cause.  I think in any case familiarity does gradually breed contempt
> and growers may easily become casual about protecting themselves. This
> seems to be
> indicated is the serious increase in cancer problems in  NZ farmers
> over the last few years.
> 
> One must also take into account the appalling position of many people
> working for the multinationals in third world countries, who use very
> dangerous sprays (often already banned in first world countries) with no
> instruction or protection, as a result of which their very lives are at
> hazard and at the very least they soon become so incapacitated they can
> no longer work. A recent horror story was of sprays being applied to tea
> bushes in Sri Lanka a few minutes before the pickers reached them. (not
> very nice for the consumers either, we have taken to orgnically produced
> tea as a result, even though considerably more expensive).
> 
> Even when applied exactly according to instructions, sprays may not
> always cause minimum disruption of the ecosystem. Many of the older ones
> in particular are very broad spectrum and kill far more than the
> intended pest, including helpful organisms which would otherwise hold it
> in check. Such a material is pyrethrum, once beloved by organic growers
> because it is not harmful to most warm-blooded creatures, but it is very
> broad-spectrum indeed in its destruction of insects, and consequently
> has now fallen out of favour. As I understand it many modern
> formulations are much more finely focussed, but this proves their
> downfall as any resistance in the population of the particular pest
> rapidly sorts itself out so that soon the chemical is no longer
> effective and something new must be thought up. This is no doubt what
> you had in mind in your first posting and it certtainly guarantees
> continuing employment to the chemists, I guess!
> 
> >         I believe I said that money was at the base of the misuses.
> >         I think we pretty much agree basically. I'm just not ready
> > to be categorical and throw away all chemicals. After all, even the
> > natural products are chemicals. Salt made in the laboratory is
> > indistinguishable from that from the ocean or the salt mines of
> > Siberia. (Except of course for trace impurities which the laboratory
> > one probably does not have!)
> 
> I think only the most fanatical of organic thinkers would want to
> dispense with all chemicals. I for one still use copper or sulphur (but
> sparingly and only occasionally) and sodium bicarbonate against powdery
> mildew. If I had a severe ant problem I would almost certainly not
> hesitate to use borax baits. I also now and again use Neem oil when my
> codling moth problem escalates. Neem is a rather narrowly-focussed
> insecticide which disrupts the development of insects at the larval
> stage, it will not directlty affect any adult insects present. It is
> also safe for human contact, being actually used in toothpaste in India.
> If too much resistance has not developed to Bt due to the very
> irresponsible experiments in GE, that is another pretty specific
> insecticide, also affecting larval forms, but actually differentiated
> into several strains affecting different groups - Lepioptera, beetles
> and mosquitoes.
> 
> The main difference in organic thinking is to use in preference
> non-chemical means of control, the simplest of all being washing pests
> off their host. Other possible stratgies include studying the timing of
> crops  to avoid major pest outbreaks, use of physical barriers, lures
> and trap crops (the latter sometimes local weeds), encouragement of
> beneficial predatory insects by planting their preferred food
> plants..Only if these do not bring the desired level of control might a
> chemical spray be contemplated.
> 
> With fungal diseases a whole new protective spray technique is emerging
> based on manure or compost "teas". These are effective in greatly
> reducing many, but not all, categories of fungus pathogens and can
> achieve levels of control acceptable even for commercial operations..
> They apparently depend at last in part on live organisms in the "tea"
> which are antagonistic to the pathogen's spores. I don't think anybody
> has yet properly elucidated the mechanism but it is presumed they either
> form a barrier to spores settling on the leaves or attack them as they
> germinate.
> 
> While many farmers would not be at all keen to take on the demands of a
> fully organic regime, there is a distinct move among some to practise
> IPM (integrated Pest Mangement) which is a sort of half-way house, where
> better understanding of pests and diseases allow alternative methods of
> control to enable reduced and more carefully directed use of sprays,
> This is certainly a step in the right direction.
> 
> Moira
> --
> Tony & Moira Ryan <theryans@xtra.co.nz>
> Wainuiomata, New Zealand. (on the "Ring of Fire" in the SW Pacific).
> Lat. 41:16S Long. 174:58E. Climate: Mediterranean/Temperate

-- 
Tony & Moira Ryan <theryans@xtra.co.nz>
Wainuiomata, New Zealand. (on the "Ring of Fire" in the SW Pacific).
Lat. 41:16S Long. 174:58E. Climate: Mediterranean/Temperate
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index