The European Union’s highest court has rejected Bayer’s bid to overturn a European law which heavily restricted the use of bee-harming pesticides. In 2013 the European Union banned neonicotinoid, or ‘neonic’ use on bee-attractive crops. In 2018 the ban was extended to use on all outdoor crops, including annual arable crops, cereals and horticultural crops.
The General Court decision, released Thursday, is welcomed by the Soil & Health Association. This decision follows a prior bid by Bayer and Syngenta which had also failed to overturn the law.
The regulation relates to the ‘neonic’ insecticides clothianidin, thiamethoxam or imidacloprid; and applies to foliar sprays, soil treatments or seed treatments traditionally used in the growing period following winter.
Bayer’s appeal primarily argued that the European Union had not applied the precautionary principle properly and should have instead, engaged in a comprehensive risk assessment.
The precautionary principle is used when science has identified that an activity produces potentially dangerous effects, but where uncertainty remains about the extent of the risk.
The General Court of the European Union rejected Bayer’s argument, stating that an ‘exhaustive risk assessment cannot be required in a situation where the precautionary principle is applied, which equates to a situation in which there is scientific uncertainty’.
The Soil and Health spokesperson for pesticides, Jodie Bruning stated ‘This is an important finding. When we have technologies such as pesticides, interacting with environmental or human health, the decisions we take must very often be precautionary. Harm that results in death, or the dying out of a species often occurs as a result of multiple indirect effects. For honeybees, pesticides and environmental stressors interact. Over time this harm adds up to reduce resilience, causing honeybee deaths.
‘The precautionary principle is important, because there is very rarely a single ‘smoking gun’ which can be traced and then blamed, for bee die-offs or colony collapse. We know that these insecticides last a long time in soil and water. We know they harm baby bee development, and impair flight as well as navigation. We can see that neonics reduce the capacity for bees to protect themselves from pathogenic viruses and the varroa mite.’
‘Recent testing shows we have concerningly high levels of neonics in New Zealand soils. We don’t have scientists paid long-term to research the health effects of neonics, so we don’t have scientists who can inform policy. Our farmers are buying unlabelled seeds, even for flowering clover. Farmers and orchardists do not know that the treatments they use are banned for outdoor use in the European Union.’
‘Because our scientists lack a mandate to research both human and environmental health effects, and the New Zealand Environmental Protection Authority relies on industry data to make safety claims, we have no authoritative expertise here. We are completely out of touch with best European practice.’
‘While the precautionary principle is only weakly applied in New Zealand, yet it has become a very important tool used by the European Union to protect environmental and human health.’
Vic Barret talk 2018
/in Association Meetings and Events, VideoVic Barret talk
Kelmarna Gardens talk from Julie Keats
/in Association Meetings and Events, VideoWe hear from Judie Keats of Kelmarna gardens
Submission of the Soil & Health Association on definitions for gene technology and new breeding techniques
/in SubmissionsThe Soil & Health Association welcomes the opportunity to submit on this proposal to revise and update the definitions in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (the Code) for ‘food produced using gene technology’ and ‘gene technology’, to make them clearer and to better reflect existing and emerging genetic technologies, including new breeding techniques (NBTs)
Read our full submission here.
Soil & Health joins call for immediate action on farming emissions
/in Farming, Media Releases, OrganicsThe Soil & Health Association is joining other environmental groups calling for immediate action to tackle farming emissions.
Consultation on the government’s draft Emissions Reduction Plan closes today and environmental groups are united in calling for stronger action.
“It’s unacceptable that agriculture, our largest emitting sector, is the least developed and most poorly explained aspect of the Emissions Reduction Plan,” says Jenny Lux, organic farmer and deputy chair of the Soil & Health Association.
“Too much emphasis is put on finding new technologies. Let’s use the tools we already have. More can be done, and sooner, by supporting a faster transition to regenerative organic farming.
“The Emissions Reduction Plan needs to identify a pathway to transform agriculture, with clear direction and support for immediately available solutions like organics.
“Pricing farm emissions is the key government policy right now, and for this reason agriculture must enter the Emissions Trading Scheme from 2022.
“Limits on synthetic nitrogen and imported feed are also needed as signals that we need to change our farming systems.
“Ultimately the New Zealand Government must adopt a target for increasing regenerative organic production.
“Organics have global recognition as a low-emission and environmentally friendly farming system. International markets are moving quickly to increase organic production to reduce emissions and because global consumers are voting with their wallets.”
Our submission on the Emissions Reduction Plan is available to read here:
https://soilandhealth.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Emissions-Reduction-Plan-submission-Soil-and-Health-November-2021.pdf
Submission of the Soil & Health Association on the Emissions Reduction Plan
/in SubmissionsOur submission focuses on agriculture and organic waste and states that more can be done, sooner, by supporting a faster transition to regenerative organic farming.
Emissions from organic waste and from agriculture can be reduced through conversion of farming to regenerative organic systems alongside better organic waste collection and processing for composting and soil-building.
To do this the government needs to prioritise support for existing available solutions such as organics rather than focusing on new technologies. We agree that rural extension services, research and better waste regulation are key tools to deliver this change.
Read our full submission here.
2021 AGM of the Soil & Health Association
/in Association Meetings and EventsRead the minutes and review reports presented to our 2021 Annual General Meeting.
Glyphosate risk assessment urgently needed
/in Glyphosate, Media ReleasesThe New Zealand Environmental Protection Agency’s call for information on the use of glyphosate in Aotearoa is a missed opportunity to properly risk assess the substance says Jodie Bruning, spokesperson for the Soil & Health Association.
Today the EPA extended the process for a second time. Submissions were due to close today but now close on October 22nd.
“The NZEPA is delaying. This call for information should be integrated into a genuine risk assessment of glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicides sold and used in this country.
“Government is moving to review glyphosate because it knows that glyphosate causes health and environmental damage. But the major users of glyphosate will fight strongly to keep hold of it.
“On behalf of the thousands of New Zealanders who want action to reduce the harm from toxic agrichemicals we’re making this submission as part of the call for information.
The key points in the Soil & Health Association submission are:
“Further delays to this process are unacceptable and we need to get on with the formal risk assessment,” says Bruning.
ENDS
EPA Call for Information on glyphosate, September 2021
/in SubmissionsSummary of our submission
A GLYPHOSATE RISK ASSESSMENT IS NEEDED URGENTLY
We welcome the opportunity to respond to this Call for Information on glyphosate.
We submit that Aotearoa New Zealand urgently needs a genuine risk assessment of glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicides (commercial products containing glyphosate and other chemicals) that are being sold and used in this country.
New Zealand has never conducted a risk assessment of glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs). This Call for Information effectively delays the long overdue risk assessment of GBHs
This delay pushes back appropriate regulatory measures that might be enacted as a response to risk assessment to protect health.
SURVEY OF COUNCIL USE OF GLYPHOSATE
Our submission includes survey information collected from territorial and regional authorities around the country about their current use of GBHs.
This survey demonstrates both the widespread use of GBHs and the increasing community pressure to eliminate GBHs
THERE ARE KNOWN HEALTH RISKS FROM GLYPHOSATE
There are known health risks of GBHs to humans, domesticated animals, and to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife.
We provide evidence of these risks our submission document.
Given its widespread use, producers and consumers cannot be confident they’re avoiding GBH health risks under the current regulations.
We urge the government to take a strict precautionary approach.
GLYPHOSATE USE LEADS TO INCREASING HERBICIDE RESISTANCE
Herbicide resistance – including resistance to GBHs – is a growing problem globally and here in New Zealand.
Herbicide resistance is leading to the use of several different herbicides together or in rotation.
Farmers and growers (conventional as well as organic) are increasingly seeking safe non-chemical weed management options.
Organic producers are able to successfully employ a range of non-toxic methods of weed management, reducing herbicide resistance pressure
ECONOMIC RISKS OF GLYPHOSATE-BASED HERBICIDES
International demand for safe, healthy food is strong and growing. Our international markets are extremely sensitive to pesticide residues.
For example Japan has rejected New Zealand honey imports this year due to glyphosate residues.
SOIL & HEALTH’S GLYPHOSATE PETITION
We need our Government to hear our concerns, and to that end have established a petition. For further information, and to sign the petition, please see here.
Supporters of our petition are calling on the government to:
OUR FULL SUBMISSION
Included in our submission are
Bayer Fails to Overturn European Ban on Bee-Harming Pesticides
/in Farming, Food, Health, Media ReleasesThe European Union’s highest court has rejected Bayer’s bid to overturn a European law which heavily restricted the use of bee-harming pesticides. In 2013 the European Union banned neonicotinoid, or ‘neonic’ use on bee-attractive crops. In 2018 the ban was extended to use on all outdoor crops, including annual arable crops, cereals and horticultural crops.
The General Court decision, released Thursday, is welcomed by the Soil & Health Association. This decision follows a prior bid by Bayer and Syngenta which had also failed to overturn the law.
The regulation relates to the ‘neonic’ insecticides clothianidin, thiamethoxam or imidacloprid; and applies to foliar sprays, soil treatments or seed treatments traditionally used in the growing period following winter.
Bayer’s appeal primarily argued that the European Union had not applied the precautionary principle properly and should have instead, engaged in a comprehensive risk assessment.
The precautionary principle is used when science has identified that an activity produces potentially dangerous effects, but where uncertainty remains about the extent of the risk.
The General Court of the European Union rejected Bayer’s argument, stating that an ‘exhaustive risk assessment cannot be required in a situation where the precautionary principle is applied, which equates to a situation in which there is scientific uncertainty’.
The Soil and Health spokesperson for pesticides, Jodie Bruning stated ‘This is an important finding. When we have technologies such as pesticides, interacting with environmental or human health, the decisions we take must very often be precautionary. Harm that results in death, or the dying out of a species often occurs as a result of multiple indirect effects. For honeybees, pesticides and environmental stressors interact. Over time this harm adds up to reduce resilience, causing honeybee deaths.
‘The precautionary principle is important, because there is very rarely a single ‘smoking gun’ which can be traced and then blamed, for bee die-offs or colony collapse. We know that these insecticides last a long time in soil and water. We know they harm baby bee development, and impair flight as well as navigation. We can see that neonics reduce the capacity for bees to protect themselves from pathogenic viruses and the varroa mite.’
‘Recent testing shows we have concerningly high levels of neonics in New Zealand soils. We don’t have scientists paid long-term to research the health effects of neonics, so we don’t have scientists who can inform policy. Our farmers are buying unlabelled seeds, even for flowering clover. Farmers and orchardists do not know that the treatments they use are banned for outdoor use in the European Union.’
‘Because our scientists lack a mandate to research both human and environmental health effects, and the New Zealand Environmental Protection Authority relies on industry data to make safety claims, we have no authoritative expertise here. We are completely out of touch with best European practice.’
‘While the precautionary principle is only weakly applied in New Zealand, yet it has become a very important tool used by the European Union to protect environmental and human health.’
Japanese glyphosate scare highlights lack of regulation in New Zealand
/in Campaigns, Food, Glyphosate, Health, Media ReleasesA blasé approach to glyphosate regulation in New Zealand threatens our international reputation and poses a risk to New Zealand consumers, Soil & Health Association spokesperson Jodie Bruning said today.
“Japanese authorities have now rejected five shipments of glyphosate-contaminated honey from New Zealand’.
“New Zealand needs to take glyphosate contamination seriously. The International Agency for Cancer has recognised glyphosate as a probable carcinogen. Bayer, the producer of Roundup, has already paid over NZ$15 billion NZD to nearly 100,000 individuals around the world who developed cancer after being exposed to glyphosate-based herbicides.
“We support Apiculture New Zealand’s call to have a national conversation.
‘We believe the New Zealand government can adopt a more nuanced approach to glyphosate. This is not an all or nothing conversation. Farmers can still have access, but glyphosate can be more cautiously regulated to ensure premium exporters don’t get nasty surprises like the honey exporters have received with these rejected shipments.
Controls have been placed on honey exporters by MPI following Japan’s announcement that glyphosate residue had been found above the allowable limit. Jodie Bruning says these controls are necessary, but continue to place the burden of responsibility on the honey industry.
“It’s not the beekeepers or honey industry’s fault that glyphosate regulation in New Zealand is so poor.
“We don’t have prudent controls on the use of glyphosate in New Zealand and it’s time we realised that consumers who care about food, care that it is not contaminated with a probable carcinogen.
“Glyphosate is a contaminant and a health risk. Whatever we do to protect our export markets will ultimately protect our freshwater, our soils and our families.