EU chemical ban hits yields

17 Aug, 2015 02:00 AM
Comments
3
 
Some parts of Britain are expecting to lose as much as 40pc of their potential canola production

THE crop protection industry is praising Australian regulatory commonsense as European canola production plummets this year, courtesy of a populist political decision to ban a seed dressing widely used to protect the young oilseed crop and cereals from insect attack.

The current European Union oilseed rape harvest is expected to be down about seven per cent.

The UK is likely to be among the countries worst hit by the 2014 European Commission's "precautionary ban" on neonicotinoids which are arguably the world's most widely used insecticide family.

"Neonic" products have a chemical make up similar to nicotine and have been used since the 1990s, mostly in low concentration seed coatings.

Bayer CropScience and Syngenta brand names common to the farm and garden market include Confidor, Gaucho and Cruiser, but the companies became the focus of a vehement environmental campaign which blamed neonics for an apparent decline in European bee numbers.

One minister in David Cameron's UK government reportedly received 85,000 emails denouncing the administration's attempted opposition to the EU ban in 2013.

Control options limited

Some parts of Britain are expecting to lose as much as 40pc of their potential canola production (worth about $1.4 billion last year) thanks largely to the lack of control options against cabbage stem flea beetle which lives in hedgerows and moves into germinating crops to chews off the cotyledon as it emerges.

The flea beetle is widely resistant to alternative pyrethroid spray treatments.

Resistance is also widespread among aphids which spread turnip yellows virus in canola and other brassica crops.

Cambridgeshire graingrower Russell McKenzie at Huntingdon, who grows 750 hectares of crops including 200ha of canola, said some farmers had sprayed pyrethroids and other insecticides five to nine times without achieving proper protection.

He was therefore cautiously welcoming an "emergency" regulatory decision in the past few weeks exempting the counties of Cambridgeshire, Bedford, Hertfordshire and Suffolk from the bans (subject to tight usage conditions) when next season's crops are sown in coming months.

Syngenta's regional director of Europe, Africa and the Middle East, Andrew Guthrie, said the neonic ban had left farmers resorting to foliar catch-up spray strategies using chemistry released up to 30 years ago.

Significant opportunities to promote sustainable crop management using minimal chemical product at a highly effective stage in the protection cycle had been by-passed.

"Environmentally the old products are still fine, but these regulations have effectively pushed farmers to use more grams of active ingredient compared with what they used when they had a seed treatment option," said Mr Guthrie, who began his career in Australia.

"And it has to be sprayed, so you end up with stuff moving between plant rows or the chance of drift into neighbouring fields."

The European ban was an "acute real life example of the absence of sound science driving decision making at a political level" - and a warning to other countries which might take their lead on environmental issues from Europe.

Interestingly he said Nordic states, which encouraged the European neonicotinoid moratorium and were known for the strong environmental forces within their political ranks, had also been notable for applying for concessions against the bans.

"Unfortunately the ban has not resulted in any apparent decline in problems associated with European bee populations, yet in Australia, where neonics use has continued after careful consideration by regulatory authorities, there's no evidence of bee colony collapse," Mr Guthrie said.

Australian system 'robust'

Australian Croplife executive director, Matthew Cossey, said while environmental activists had argued the bans affected just one chemical option, they interfered with the whole integrated pest management regime which extended the judicious use of proven products and avoided resistance build up in pest populations.

He praised the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority for independently assessing the case for a neonicotinoid ban and standing up for its continued use.

"The Australian system is very robust," he said.

"The regulator has a legal obligation to talk about and examine all the product data, without influence from outside agendas, including environmental activists who use lack of community knowledge about farming and chemistry to fuel their campaigns."

Mr Cossey said the EU bans followed claims by French scientist Mickael Henry who now conceded his experiments may have overdosed bees with neonics, and he had "no real clues" how much insecticide bees encountered in the field.

Back in the UK Mr McKenzie said bees and neonics were still emotive topics and as public perception contributed to the ban decision, "rather than the limited available data", farmers must be seen stringently adhering to the rules if they were allowed exemption to use products later this year.

"We'll have to show how important this chemistry is and what can be achieved if it's handled properly."

Page:
1
FarmOnline
Andrew Marshall

Andrew Marshall

is the national agribusiness writer for Fairfax Agricultural Media
Date: Newest first | Oldest first

READER COMMENTS

Lainey
17/08/2015 10:57:12 AM

And if they could use GM technology they would increase there yields another 40% and have sustainable use of chemicals> All good just means they will import more product to eat from places like the US and Australia.
wtf
18/08/2015 3:53:37 AM

Isn't it odd that without Neonics the only options are chemicals developed 30 years ago, sound familiar? I find it very strange with all the analysers and financial rewards for new chemistry discoveries (eg deathcap mushroom, asteroids, etc) that have occurred in the last 30 years and nothing new on the market. I guess its like the use of CRISPR to avoid mulesing, wonder if PETA has shares or friends in the company who benefit from these patents.
Dunoz
1/09/2015 10:26:45 AM

No point in arguing for GM in Australia. I'm a farm kid doing a law degree, in particular studying Marsh v Baxter, and have found that all GM opposers have to do is mention of Monsanto and heads start shaking. Never mind scientific fact, anything to do with Monsanto must be evil...

POST A COMMENT


Screen name *
Email address *
Remember me?
Comment *
 

COMMENTS

light grey arrow
I'm one of the people who want marijuana to be legalized, some city have been approved it but
light grey arrow
#blueysmegacarshowandcruise2019 10 years on Daniels Ute will be apart of another massive cause.
light grey arrow
Australia's live animal trade is nothing but a blood stained industry that suits those who