If you dare to mention 'chemicals' on
the internet you will very quickly attract a load of people who claim
that everything is dangerous and kills bees (it's always the bees,
never any other insect...). Speaking with these people it's all to
often the case that they are well meaning individuals who prefer to
follow their hearts than science, and while some are well informed
about the issues surrounding the use of chemicals in the garden,
others come up with some rather crazy and unorthodox 'facts' that
others then take as being total truth.
It seems we've lost our ability to
question; we can't question studies without bias any more. The
prevailing attitude amongst a decent wedge of gardeners is that all
research carried out that doesn't support the anti-chemical viewpoint
is wrong, while research that does support the anti-chemical
viewpoint is automatically right. People blame multinational
companies for using very selective information, yet then choose to
ignore studies that go against their viewpoint....
I'm not an organic gardener, and
neither am I pro-chemical. For me a chemical is a tool that should be
used with the same care and consideration as any other tool. In the
same way that you wouldn't use a strimmer to deadhead your roses,
neither is it necessary to dose a plant with insecticide every time
you see an aphid. Unfortunately it seems that few others seem to
think like me. Here, nonetheless, are four things the eco-gardeners
don't want you to know:
Research done on chemicals such as
neonicotinoids and glyphosate are aimed at agricultural usage; if you
spray a neonicotinoid onto a few aphid colonies in your garden it's
incredibly unlikely that you will cause any damage to bees unless you
spray an open flower. Farmers spray vast areas of crops with
chemicals regardless of whether or not there might be beneficial
insects around. Spot treatment of isolated colonies of pests presents
a minuscule risk, and it gets even better; if bees aren't foraging on
a specific plant then the risk is even further reduced, so spraying a
patch of weeds that aren't in flower with glyphosate, or insects on a
plant that isn't in flower, simply does not pose any meaningful
danger.
Banning neonicotinoids is great, but
does anyone really think that farmers will just shrug their shoulders
and stop spraying? No they won't; the next group of chemicals they'll
turn to is the pyrethroid group which is much less selective and will
kill all bugs. Oh and for anyone who thinks that these chemicals are
dreamt up in a lab, both are based on natural plant insecticides.
It is simply not true that a litre of
glyphosate sprayed in a garden is as dangerous as 10,000 litres
sprayed on a field; the higher the dose and the more sustained the
exposure the higher the risks. While we're on doses, there is
compelling research that shows levels of glyphosate in bread. Firstly
the doses are minuscule and you'd have to eat a lot of bread to be in
danger, but fair enough, nobody wants any type of poison in their
food. Glyphosate is sprayed directly onto grain shortly before
harvest to dry it out, hence the chemical is still present in the
grain when it's milled for flour. In your garden you would never
spray your vegetables with glyphosate, and spraying weeds elsewhere
in the garden will not magically poison your food crops.
It's not enough the say that you feel
that chemicals are harmful. To be approved any chemical product must
be rigorously scientifically tested, while few organic treatments
have ever undergone any meaningful scientific study. Various products
are sold as 'plant invigorators' and claims have been made about
their control of certain pests but these haven't undergone trials and
they aren't licensed. Fair enough, if they don't contain harmful
ingredients then who cares? My point here isn't so much about
ingredients but impressions; a lot of anti-chemical information
around is based on selective understanding of selective studies,
along with people's impressions of what is, in their hearts, right
and wrong. In the same way that you wouldn't trust a chemical
manufacturer to release research that shows their products in a
negative light, neither can you truly trust the anti-chemical lobby.
The use of chemicals in agriculture creates polarised viewpoints, and
it seems that nobody is capable of occupying middle ground. Take for
example the point I made above about chemicals in agriculture; the
'green gardening' lobby read research on agricultural practices and
then proclaim that because widespread agricultural use of a product
may be harmful it is therefore true that small scale use of the same
products in gardens is equally harmful. This is simply not true, and
yet it's the case that people spout half-truths at every turn. What
you do in your own garden is up to you, but creating fear through
misinformation isn't acceptable whether you're a vast multinational
company or an eco gardener.
So there you have four things that the
eco gardeners don't want you to know- I may add to this in the future
as things occur to me or crop up. Your garden is your own, and if you
fill it with flowers all year round and create a good ecosystem then
wildlife (good and bad) will come to you. Most gardens are fairly
self-perpetuating and won't need any intervention. I haven't sprayed
for pests and diseases in nearly 10 years, not because I'm
anti-chemical but because I'm just a good gardener, but if I did need
to treat a pest then I would do so by whatever means are necessary.
Similarly with glyphosate I will spray on the rare occasions that
it's necessary (paths and drives, but most of my work is on borders
and lawns where glyphosate isn't the right tool), but by using
knowledge and common sense I won't be creating the ecological
disaster the green gardeners claim I unleash every time I open the
weedkiller bottle. Careful and appropriate small-scale use of
chemical isn't the problem, it's massive use by agriculture, but that
won't stop this article (and others before it and others still to be
written) stirring up those who would prefer to follow their hearts
than their brains. Such a shame really; the organic gardening lobby
contains some incredibly good scientists and thinkers who could
really change the world, but until science and common sense are
allowed a voice....
No comments:
Post a Comment