Rational Agriculture

Readers of this blog will have seen a previous posting on the report of the UK Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution regarding the effect of pesticide spraying on bystanders (Crop spraying no problem for bystanders). The eminent members of the Commission, having been lobbied hard by activists (and, to be fair, a number of people who quite genuinely believe that pesticides are the root cause of their health problems) decided, in the complete absence of evidence of harm, to recommend a 5 metre buffer zone between spraying of fields and neighbouring properties.

The independent Advisory Committee on Pesticides has now given its response: see today's BBC report Row over risk of farm chemicals. In particular:

'While agreeing with some of the recommendations made in the report, Professor David Coggon, chair of the ACP when the response was written, said the committee strongly disagreed with the recommendation of placing a five metre buffer zone alongside residential property to protect against possible adverse health effects.

"We agree that there is scientific uncertainty, but we think a buffer zone is arbitrary and a disproportionate response to the uncertainty," he told the BBC News website.

The ACP committee argues there are already wide margins of safety built into the current regulatory system, but says the RCEP failed to take these into account when writing its report.'

So, the government's official advisory committee on pesticides thinks the RCEP is talking out the back of its head. You might hope that would be the end of the story. Sadly, I don't think so.