BCPC REvIEW
Silent Spring
raises voices
Simon Varcoe reports on the opposing opinions on
the value of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring in today’s
world at a BCPC debate
A
t this year’s BCPC International congress urban customers with increased memberships of and fungicides. While this decline is, of course,
and Exhibition, a brief glance at the wildlife societies such as the RNIB and the Royal a highly lamentable occurrence, it does not in
timetable of events rapidly drew Horticultural Society. This increased promotion of itself adequately justify a second Silent Spring.
my attention to a debate titled ‘This eco-concern and eco-production, said Professor His other points concerning unsafe pesticides
house believes that Rachel Carson would not Gregory, would display to Carson that her being approved were supported by neither facts
today have written Silent Spring’. The title itself publication had sufficiently raised public awareness nor figures. It appears, therefore, that passionate
was a thought provoking proposal, but when it and has caused standards to rise significantly. statements and emotive imagery such as an
transpired that Lord Peter Melchett of the UK Soil The professor also looked forward to a future that African lady with a beef-burger on her head do
Association was to speak against the motion, my would further satisfy Carson with chemical ecology not win a debate.
interest definitely peaked. now being a prominent science in its own right.
Consequently, products such as sorghum-derived Dr Peter Kenmore’s input was, thankfully, a little
Rachel Carson’s seminal book, celebrating its 45th anti-broadleaf fungal disease chemicals and rice- more constructive as he highlighted the burden
birthday this year, has drawn praise and criticism derived monolactose that suppresses aquatic of pesticide risk that must be borne by farmers
in equal quantities since its publication in 1962 weeds will soon be on the market. in developing countries, 20% of whom report
and, as Jon Evans wrote in Agrow Magazine in poisoning and subsequently are unable to work
September, “the crop protection industry certainly Both Dr Smith and Professor Gregory concluded for long periods of time. This percentage accounts
seems confident that it has answered many of the that Silent Spring had kick-started a more specific for 60 million people per year, a significant
questions raised by Carson in Silent Spring”. It was targeting in crop protection and, though there is proportion of whom are children under the age of
with this confidence that Dr Lewis Smith, global still some way to go, Rachel Carson would today 15 a fact that would greatly disturb Rachel Carson,
head of regulatory sciences at Syngenta, and recognise the change that has occurred in the past were she still alive.
Professor Peter Gregory of the CRI, began their 45 years and would not feel the need to write it
defence of the motion. again. Instead, she would write about the global Perhaps the best arguments against the motion
rise in population and would recognise the need came from the floor, with one representative
Dr Smith’s main argument was that Carson for GM agriculture to work in cooperation with from the RSPB highlighting that bird numbers in
would not see a threat to humans or to the natural processes. general have dropped significantly, just as Rachel
environment from the use of pesticides today. Carson predicted they would in Silent Spring. Alas,
His justification for this assertion was that today’s The answering arguments from Lord Melchett and this decline can be ascribed to changes in farming
stringent regulations, overseen by stewardship Dr Peter Kenmore of the Food and Agricultural practices but pesticide use must also bear some of
programmes, are in place to ensure toxicity levels Organisation (FAO) were, unfortunately, the responsibility, having effected the food chain
will not damage the environment. Indeed, Dr disappointing. The excitement surrounding Lord of avian populations.
Smith praised Carson for capturing the imagination Melchett’s input to the debate was certainly
of the public and for raising issues that forced unfounded as he did not appear to make any The final result of the debate was found in
these regulatory bodies to come into being. It was significant arguments. He perhaps concentrated favour of the motion, with 71 for and 61 against,
at this point, however, that Dr Smith began to too much on the “bravery” and “integrity” of and while the arguments from Dr Smith and
detract from the original motion as he started to Rachel Carson and not enough on why she Professor Gregory were by no means watertight,
criticise Carson for her scientific “inaccuracies” and would have felt the need to write Silent Spring they were nonetheless stronger than the
for being “too allegorical”. again today. Indeed, his only major point was oppositions’. Were Rachel Carson to be somehow
that there has been a serious decline in the reborn today, a second Silent Spring would surely
Professor Gregory added further to Dr Smith’s initial numbers of the English partridge on his own require a much stronger defence than
argument by highlighting the growing concern of farm, which he ascribed to the introduction of DDT seen on display here.
www.agrow.com  •   December 2007 
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52