Who should be responsible for drone sprinkler sprinkler adjacent to the pond?

编者按：无人机喷洒的农药导致邻近藕塘减产，一家地边种植的树木遮挡了相邻地块农作物的阳光，铺设排污管道因要经过邻居家门口遭到阻挠……近年来，随着The promotion of new types of agricultural cultivation and the increase in newly rebuilt houses in farmers, and farmers' production and common adjacent relationship disputes in life show a growth trend. In order to maintain the safety and stability of the rural society and promote the establishment of a harmonious and friendly neighborhood relationship, this newspaper has tapped a typical case from the grass -roots courts to explain relevant laws and regulations in the form of case interpretation, and guide farmers to reasonably solve neighborhoods in accordance with the law and reasonably solve adjacent relationships in accordance with the law. dispute.

"This year, the pond has at least 1,000 kilograms per acre." Recently, Liu Honglin, a grower in Suqian City, Jiangsu Province, said happily in front of his tattoos. It was the season when the lotus root was excavated, but this was the first harvest year that Liu Honglin saw in the past three years. Liu Honglin's Lugang was damaged by the drone of a cooperative to the neighboring rice fields, and the lawsuit was more than a year. After two appraisal and multiple trials, the court found the facts and judged the cooperative to bear the liability for compensation. Liu Honglin recently received a compensation for 216,000 yuan, and the pond also resumed his vitality.

The application scenarios of drones in the field of agricultural production are becoming more and more extensive. From sowing, fertilization to medicine, drones have improved the planting efficiency of farmers while saving human and material resources, but it also brings new problems. When the drone spraying drugs causes damage to the adjacent growers, how to determine the causal relationship between damage and sprinkler? How to calculate the loss? How can the parties defend their rights in encountering such violations? Recently, the reporter interviewed the judge of the People's Court of Sucheng District, Suqian City. As an example, the above cases were interpreted in detail.

Case: UAV sprinkled in rice fields to sprinkle the neighboring ponds in rice fields

Liu Honglin's Pond is in a depression in a village in Daxing Town, Suyu District, Suqian City. He divided the pond into the north and south districts, separated by mud dam in the middle, nearly 60 acres of each area. A small road is separated from the road, and there is a rice field cultivated by the village cooperative. At the end of June 2020, Liu Honglin discovered that the leaves and leaves were rolled and withered. At that time, it was the busy season. There were often drone operations in the rice fields next door. Liu Honglin suspected that the disaster caused by the drone was caused by the disaster. "The more closer to the rice fields of the rice fields, the more withered. The farm leaves far away from the far away are dry a few days away, and the symptoms will occur later." Liu Honglin said.

Liu Honglin took a photo of the lame leaves with his mobile phone and left evidence. In July of the same year, he went to the Agricultural and Rural Bureau of Suyu District to apply for identifying the cause of the atrophy of the leaf. The bureau issued an appraisal show that it was caused by the analysis of non -invasive diseases and pests based on the symptoms of lotus root victims; combined with the victim's description and local agricultural operation and meteorological data analysis. Liu Honglin said that after the appraisal, the leaf leaf continued to wither. In the end, the lamb and leaves in the southern district had a condition. He took a photo with his mobile phone for more than a month to record the whole process.

The person in charge of the cooperative acknowledged that they used drones to sprinkle medicine on June 22 of the same year, but insisted that the operation had no effect on Langtang. Liu Honglin introduced, "After a few months, although Lao Ye has grown again, the growth of lotus root has been greatly affected. It is small and different. There is no excavation value and heavy losses."

Focus: Is there a causal relationship between drones sprinkled with drugs and lotus ponds?

In order to recover justice, Liu Honglin sued the cooperative on the grounds that the drone sprayed drugs caused property damage and asked the cooperative to pay the losses such as the rent, fertilizer, and the wages of workers. The focus of the case is whether there is a causal relationship with the loss of the drone and the losses of the pond.

In 2021, the People's Court of Sucheng District opened several trials on the case. The cooperative stated in court that the hand -operated drone spray herbicide with urea particles. The height of the aircraft operation is not more than 4 meters, the actual operation height is 1.5 meters, and the edge of the rice field is 14 meters away from the pond. Enter the pond.

Ye Chunhua, the organizer of the case and the judge of the People's Court of Sucheng District, said, "The low -end position of the downtown in the paddy field has a low -end position. The possibility of floating. "

According to Ye Chunhua, in accordance with the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of Laws on Environmental Infringement Responsibility Disputes on Environmental Infringement Liability", environmental infringement, as a special infringement, implements the rules of presumption of causality, that is, in environmental pollution liability Among them, as long as the pollutants have discharged substances that may cause property damage, the property of the parties is damaged. The provision of evidence that the infringer provides evidence that the pollutants discharged by the sewage and the damage are related, that is, the establishment of the cause and effect is established. There is no causal relationship between pollution behavior and damage. The pollutants can proof. The pollutors must prove that there is no causal relationship between their behavior and damage, so as not to bear the liability for infringement.

"From the plaintiff's evidence, it can be determined that the co -drone of the cooperative has sprayed herbicides, and there are losses in the ponds. The identification shows that the loss of the pond is caused by the drug. Although the cooperative also provides evidence such as on -site photos, handwriting testimony, etc. The relationship between overturning pollution and damage. "Ye Chunhua said. The court finally confirmed that there was a causal relationship between the damage of the drone sprinkler and the pond.

Damage: How to identify the results of the two identification?

At the end of 2021, in order to further prove the damage of Langtang, Liu Honglin applied for judicial appraisal, and the court commissioned the Salt City Academy of Agricultural Sciences to conduct judicial identification of the losses of the lotus root involved in the case. The appraisal report issued by the appraisal stated that the loss of lotus root reached 59.56 acres. According to the normal yield of the same type of lotus root in the same type, the average output of 1125 kilograms per mu involved in the case was estimated. After market research, the average wholesale price during the listing of lotus root at that time was about 4.5 yuan per kilogram. After considering the reduction of production, the cost of artificial and other costs also decreased. It is estimated that the economic loss involved in the case was more than 250,000 yuan. The partner said that the appraisal did not recognize the identification. They believe that after the incident, the Agricultural and Rural Bureau of Suyu District went to Langtang to conduct an accident appraisal, and the scope of victims described was about 50%and the degree of victim was 30%-50%. The appraisal of the Yancheng Academy of Agricultural Sciences was made after the accident, and the results were contradictory with the report of the Agricultural and Rural Bureau of Suyu District.

In order to verify the relevant situation, the judge visited the leader of the appraisal expert group of the Agricultural and Rural Bureau of Suyu District. Later damage was a dynamic process. Because the parties did not apply for loss appraisal in the future, the appraisal team did not follow it.

Ye Chunhua introduced, "Environmental infringement and consequences have the characteristics of lurking, sustainability, broadness, and complexity. Entering the water body under the influence of wind and wind speed, and the water body has certain liquidity, spreading the scope of drug harm. We believe that the accident appraisal of the Agricultural and Rural Bureau of Suyu District has identified the cause of the accident, which is the loss of damage to the Yancheng Academy of Agricultural Sciences. The appraisal report provides a basis. The area of ​​loss and the degree of damage shall be based on the appraisal of the Academy of Agricultural Sciences of Salt City. "In the end, the court judged that the cooperatives would compensate Liu Honglin more than 250,000 yuan.

Admissions: How to defend the right of drone sprinkler sprinkle?

Liu Honglin said that after the court's decision, the person in charge of the cooperative went to him many times, and the two parties finally reached an agreement of compensation of 216,000 yuan. At present, Liu Honglin has received compensation in full. "In fact, for the two years of loss and the cost of defending rights, this compensation is not much. My biggest gain is not to get compensation, but the other party will no longer be willful when using drones in the future."

However, the environmental infringement caused by drones sprinkled. Liu Honglin introduced that this year he heard that similar infringements happened in the neighboring village again. "After the drone sprinkle the medicine, the beans in the field next door are not long." The reporter checked the relevant cases and found that in recent years The cases of farmland and Lao Tang have been reported many times.

Ye Chunhua said that agricultural production is regional, seasonal and periodic. After farmers are infringed, if the time to miss evidence is missed, it may cause it to prove that the damage is existed and the rights to defend their rights are in trouble. Farmers who are infringed should take pictures and videos as soon as possible, find relevant departments to identify evidence in time, and leave first -hand information. If the conditions are allowed, you can also use notarization to confirm the evidence. "On the occasion of the plaintiff, a large number of live photos were retained in time, providing conditions for the second judicial appraisal, and laying the foundation for finding the facts."

At the same time, Ye Chunhua suggested that it is best to ask professionals to operate or guide the use of drones. It should foresee the adverse consequences of factors such as wind direction and pesticide fluttering, and take certain protective measures to avoid improper operation and cause disputes. (Farmers Daily · China Agricultural Net reporter Li Jing)

- END -