Ensuring Safe Harvests. Fighting Cereal Diseases

Transcription

1 Ensuring Safe Harvests Fighting Cereal Diseases

2 TABLE OF CONTENT 1. Introduction Azoles and the Fight against Fungal Diseases Why do Farmers Need Azoles? European Legislation Serious Unintended Consequences Messages for Policy Makers

3 1. INTRODUCTION Fresh baked bread and quality pasta for low prices tend to be taken for granted by European consumers these days. We take these foods from the shelves of our local baker or supermarket with little thought of the enormous effort, workforce, and economics of modern European agriculture, which is required to produce them. The European food sector directly employs around 12 million people 1, exported around 105 billion worth of agricultural goods 2 in 2011, and provides Europeans with safe and affordable food all year round. Cereals such as wheat are amongst the most economically important crops grown within the EU. The global demand for cereals is projected to rise by 19% by 2021, but productivity is only predicted to grow by 0.7% annually 3, with even larger increases in demand expected by Ensuring that European farmers can meet future needs is one of the most important challenges we must face, not only here in Europe, but also at the global level. It is therefore vital that farmers and land managers have a broad and safe selection of tools with which to grown and protect this vital crop. Fungal diseases such as Septoria and brown and yellow rust represent some of the most important threats to the cereal harvests. These diseases infect wheat crops and can cause heavy yield losses of up to 16% of total yield 4, as well as cause disease in humans, if not adequately treated. Over the last few decades azole fungicides have been relied upon more than any other class of fungicides to combat these important diseases, and have therefore greatly contributed to the fight against loss of agricultural production. There is, however, increasing public concern regarding use of pesticides, including azole fungicides, in modern agriculture. With the growth of urbanisation across Europe, many consumers have lost touch with the dayto-day challenges faced by farmers in order to put food on our tables. This has lead to an increased suspicion of pesticides, fuelled by repeated references to certain well publicised cases, such as the use of DDT, which was removed from use in the European Union years ago. The European institutions have reacted to these concerns with a series of directives and regulations, including Regulation 1107/2009 (EC), which lays out stringent guidelines for the use of plant protection products and the Sustainable Use of Pesticides Directive 128/2009 (EC), which regulates how they are to be used sustainably. It is important for farmers, policy makers, and other stakeholders involved in the European food chain to provide affordable and safe agricultural products while responding to genuine concerns over the environment and human health. Azoles, when used according to label instructions, ensure that bread, pasta and other important high quality European foods continue to be available at affordable prices. The use of azoles is also important to reduce contamination of wheat by dangerous fungal toxins, known as mycotoxins 5, which can cause diseases in humans. 2. AZOLES AND THE FIGHT AGAINST FUNGAL DISEASES Before the advent of agriculture, humans lived in small bands of hunter-gatherers who relied on a diet of wild plants and animals. Farming, based on the domestication of plants and animals, increased food supplies and so allowed civilizations to grow and settle. Intensification of agriculture over the centuries has, in most cases, enabled farmers to continue producing sufficient food to meet increasing demand as populations have increased and societies became more affluent. This need to continue 1 Eurostat (2011). Europe in Figures Eurostat Yearbook p EU Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development. Agriculture in the European Union Statistical and Economic Information p OECD/FAO. OECD-FAO Agricultural outlook OECD Publishing and FAO. p Oerke et al. Safeguarding production losses in major crops and the role of crop protection. Crop Protection 23 (2008): p Salinari et al. Evaluation of the benefits provided by and of the effect of losing the azole class of compounds on durum and common wheat production in Italy. Horta Srl Universita Cattolica del Sacro Cuore (2012). 3

4 increasing productivity has not gone away. Indeed, the efficiency and productivity of European farmers must continue to improve in order to meet an ever-increasing global demand for food and feed while preserving essential natural resources. One of the best ways to increase productivity on the same hectare of land is to reduce or eliminate significant losses caused by the weeds, pests and diseases. Plant protection products are generally accepted to play a critical role in the technological armoury of modern agriculture 6. In the agricultural sector, azoles are used to protect cereals against fungal diseases, of which Septoria leaf blotch is the most important for Western European wheat production 7. They also provide the basis for wood preservation treatments around the world and are used as pharmaceuticals to treat a broad range of human fungal infections 8. Fungal diseases such as Septoria and brown and yellow rust are blights that can cause severe yield losses and even diseases in humans and animals. The azole class of fungicides remains one of the strongest tools for farmers to combat these threats and ensure cereal harvests. This chemical class has been widely and successfully used in cereals for over 30 years 9. The azoles represent essential tools used by farmers to protect their crops as Wheat infected with Septoria. part of Integrated Pest Management; a method of crop protection which relies on an optimal combination of natural and technological solutions to ensure healthy yields. Like other plant protection products, azoles have to be biologically active in order to inhibit or eliminate development of fungal pathogens. The use and application of these products is therefore strictly regulated under EU legislation 10 in order to ensure that there is no unacceptable risk to human health and the environment. A substantial body of official scientific studies is required to demonstrate that their use will not harm farmers, consumers or the environment, before they are approved for use in agriculture. While it is surely sensible to regulate and monitor these products carefully, we must also keep in mind that they are essential for highly productive modern farming, for feeding a growing global population, as well as maintaining the European standard of living that we have grown accustomed to. To reduce any chance that fungicides and pesticides do harm outside their targeted area or to non-targeted 6 Schmitz et al. Restricted availability of azole-based fungicides: impacts on EU farmers and crop agriculture. Agribusiness Research 27 (2011). p Schmitz et al. Restricted availability of azole-based fungicides: impacts on EU farmers and crop agriculture. Agribusiness Research 27 (2011). p Sheehan at al. Current and Emerging Azole Antifungal Agents. Clinical Microbiology Reviews 12.1 (Jan. 1999): p European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organisation. Workshop on Azole Fungicides and Septoria leaf blotch control Conclusions and recommendations. 10/16480 (2010). p. 3. 4

5 organisms, it is a legal requirement for farmers and land managers to always apply these products according to their strict labelling instructions. Furthermore, they are required to apply fungicides and pesticides in such a manner that minimizes the impact on the environment and local biodiversity 11. In addition to these regulatory requirements, farmers must account for mandatory cross-compliance within the CAP and are frequently checked on-site. The user should know from the product label where, when and under what circumstances a plant protection product may be used. Regulation 1107/ 2009 (EC), Art WHY DO FARMERS NEED AZOLES? European farmers produce a large part of the food in our supermarkets, crops for bio-energy, and help to feed European livestock. To perform these vital functions properly and ensure their own standard of living, the vast majority of European farmers rely upon use of plant protection products to combat and eliminate threats posed by weeds, pests, and plant diseases. These products are not the only means of protection and where possible, non-chemical methods should be incorporated as part of [plant] disease management 12. Azole fungicides remain one of the most important and necessary technologies for controlling Septoria and brown and yellow rust diseases in European wheat. These diseases can spread very quickly under favourable environmental conditions, and can significantly reduce yields as plants are killed or damaged. A 2004 study estimated that the loss of yields from fungal diseases in wheat is around 16% 13. Failing to deal with fungal infestations such as these would be a disaster for European farmers and consumers, as well as for the export market. There are also growing fears that the impact of climate change will increase the occurrence of fungal diseases like Septoria as European weather patterns could turn both more humid and warmer 14 ; which would provide an ideal climate for these types of fungal disease. A varied mix of fungicides, and especially the azole class, is vital to prevent the emergence and development of resistance in fungal diseases. Rather like a doctor prescribing different antibiotics, experience has shown that if farmers do not use a sufficient diversity of fungicides, fungal pathogens can develop resistance in a few seasons. Now that the new generation of carboxamide fungicides is being launched, it is important to understand that the threat of resistance development will continue, even to this new group of compounds 15. According to the Fungicide Resistance Action Committee, the risk of resistance to these new compounds is considered to be medium to 10 Schmitz et al. Restricted availability of azole-based fungicides: impacts on EU farmers and crop agriculture. Agribusiness Research 27 (2011). p European Commission and Parliament. Sustainable Use of Pesticides Directive. 128/2009 (EC). 12 European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organisation. Workshop on Azole Fungicides and Septoria leaf blotch control Conclusions and recommendations. 10/16480 (2010). p Oerke et al. Safeguarding production losses in major crops and the role of crop protection. Crop Protection 23 (2008): p Tucker et al. Climate Change, Extreme Weather Events, and Fungal Disease Emergence and Spread. NASA (2011). p Schmitz et al. Restricted availability of azole-based fungicides: impacts on EU farmers and crop agriculture. Agribusiness Research 27 (2011): p

6 Microscope image of Soy infected with rust pathogen. high, requiring resistance management 16. The use of combination products, together with azole fungicides, is an important component of resistance management strategies in order to maintain product performance. Proper resistance management would become almost impossible 17 without the availability of azoles. Next to Septoria and brown and yellow rust, Fusarium mould infections are the cause of the most severe fungal diseases in European cereal crops; they also produce toxic secondary metabolites (mycotoxins). More than 50 species of Fusarium are known to produce toxins including fumonisin, which affects the nervous system, and trichothecenes, which can cause chronic and sometimes fatal effects in livestock and humans 18. There is a strong recognition by European farmers that the use of azoles is important for maintaining current yields 19. Experts from the scientific community agree that azole fungicides are a fundamental component of Septoria disease management and also for the control of other important cereal diseases Fungicide Resistance Action Committee. Introduction and General Information. Website Schmitz et al. Restricted availability of azole-based fungicides: impacts on EU farmers and crop agriculture. Agribusiness Research 27 (2011):. p DAISIE. Handbook of Alien Species in Europe. Invading Nature. Springer Series in Invasion Ecology, Vol.3 (2009). 19 Schmitz et al. Restricted availability of azole-based fungicides: impacts on EU farmers and crop agriculture. Agribusiness Research 27 (2011): p European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organisation. Workshop on Azole Fungicides and Septoria leaf blotch control Conclusions and recommendations. 10/16480 (2010) : p. 3. 6

7 As the graphics below demonstrate, it is very hard to imagine a similarly productive and disease-free harvest without the use of azole-based products: Results of expert and farmer interviews in Poland, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany on the necessity of azole-based products 21 : Do you think it would be possible to combat the following diseases without using azole-based products? Scale: = Very easy to combat without azoles, 10 = extremely difficult to combat without azoles. Powdery mildew Rust Septoria tritici Fusarium 21 Schmitz et al. Restricted availability of azole-based fungicides: impacts on EU farmers and crop agriculture. Agribusiness Research 27 (2011): p

8 Furthermore, there is no credible alternative to the use of this class of fungicides. Should these products be restricted or banned under EU legislation, the use of carboxamides to control Septoria tritici, without access to azoles as mixing partners, could result in rapid resistance development. Learning lessons from the past, it only took four years to lose strobilurins as an effective agent against Septoria across the European region 22. The development of new fungicides requires high investments and a long development cycle; more than 200 million euros over 10 years. In the past 30 years, only two new classes of fungicide have been developed which can be used for Septoria disease control. As a result, farmers today only have limited available options. It is therefore critical to protect the few remaining fully active fungicides which can still be used to control this damaging disease and to prevent the emergence of resistance. 4. EUROPEAN LEGISLATION Due to their toxic nature, the European Union has placed strict regulations on the introduction and use of pesticides, including fungicides. Currently, the main legislative tool with regards to these products is Regulation 1107/ 2009 (EC), which specifies what is and what is not acceptable in the broad context of plant protection products. This regulation is based on the assumption that there are levels of risk which can be calculated, and which are acceptable when weighed against the benefits provided by these technologies. Indeed, as indicated below, the regulatory framework ensures that unacceptable effects of plant protection products are avoided. The safety of these products in use must be demonstrated on many levels, in order to gain approval. Regulatory dossiers which are required to meet these requirements typically contain from 20,000 to 40,000 pages of official studies, making European plant protection products some of the most stringently regulated substances in the world. Without approval, both at the EU and at the member state levels, new products cannot be sold to farmers or used on fields. 22 Schmitz et al. Restricted availability of azole-based fungicides: impacts on EU farmers and crop agriculture. Agribusiness Research 27 (2011): p

9 However, implementation of the new EU regulation 1107/2009 will make certain assessments of fungicides based on hazard rather than risk. Hazard is a specific term which is used to describe a source of potential damage, harm or adverse health effects on something or someone. Risk, on the other hand, is a term which is used to describe the chance or probability that harm or adverse health will result from potential exposure to a specific hazard. Full documentation required for a single active ingredient registration. 3.A plant protection product, consequent on application consistent with good plant protection practice and having regard to realistic conditions of use, shall meet the following requirements:... (e) It shall have no unacceptable effects on the environment, having particular regard to the following considerations where the scientific methods accepted by the Authority to assess such effects are available:... (ii) Its impact on non-target species, including on the ongoing behaviour of those species; (iii) Its impact on biodiversity and the ecosystem. Regulation 1107/2009 (EC), Art.4 In the case of plant protection products such as fungicides, it would be more logical and practical to regulate based on scientific risk assessment. Indeed, before the introduction of Regulation 1107/2009 (EC), this was the foundation of plant protection regulation for decades. However, under Regulation 1107/2009, in situation where this is no longer possible, it is even more important that the regulation is interpreted in a pragmatic way, which is proportional to evidence of potential harm. In order to be credible, any such legislation should be based on sound science, taking relative potency of different plant protection products into consideration. The current discussion regarding the definition of endocrine disruption could have a significant impact on this ongoing debate about regulation based on hazard or risk. The endocrine system uses naturally produced chemicals called hormones to regulate many functions in our bodies. These hormones have the 9

10 capacity to influence other aspects of life, including growth and development, regulation of the body s internal environment, and development from foetus to adulthood. To be classified as an endocrine disruptor, it is necessary to establish adverse effects in living organisms and that such an adverse effect is caused by an endocrine mode of action 23. In November 2009, a workshop of international experts met in Brussels to discuss the effects of dietary exposure to endocrine-active pesticide residues on food, recognising that these chemicals are increasingly being accused of being endocrine disruptors. When the evidence was examined, no substantial evidence was identified linking currently authorised pesticides (including fungicides) to harmful endocrine effects in humans 24. In the absence of a clearly defined causal link between using azole fungicides and the occurrence of harmful endocrine disruption, and in view of the essential role they fulfil for European agriculture, it could be argued that the 30-year history of use of these products provides sufficient evidence of safety to justify their continued use in agriculture. There is also quite some controversy and debate over what constitutes a harmful endocrine disruptor, and which characteristics should be used to identify these substances. While this debate continues, the move from scientific risk assessment under Directive 91/414 to hazard based regulation 25 under Regulation 1107/2009 continues to threaten use of azole fungicides in Europe. The European Commission has to address this question and to propose criteria for endocrine disruption for the plant protection regulation by December In order to meet this deadline, the Commission will have to make a formal proposal during the spring. Over the last decade, the EU has already taken many steps to ensure the health of humans and the environment. This has resulted in approximately 70% of registered plant protection products being removed from the European market; a clear example of the high standards of protection of human health and the environment set by the EU. Regulation 1107/2009 (EC) goes much further, including making good labelling practices mandatory and requiring repeated checks of application equipment, and so on. Sensible guidelines such as these will continue to have a positive impact for the European producers and consumers. On the other hand, a potential decision to heavily restrict or ban the use of azoles could have a very damaging impact on European agriculture, farm incomes and food security, without any demonstrable benefit to human health or the environment. 5. SERIOUS UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES Currently, the European Union is a net exporter of wheat, producing million tons and accounting for 21.0% of the total global production in This astonishing level of production is created on a limited area of land, with the EU producing an average yield of 5.3 tons of wheat per hectare, while the global average is only 2.9 tons per hectare 26. This is only possible due to the highly technical and advanced nature of European agriculture, the European soil and climate which is highly favourable for cereal production, as well as use of fungicides to shield wheat crops from damaging fungal diseases, such as Septoria and rust. Should a decision be made to completely ban or heavily restrict azoles on grounds of hazard-based regulation, the overall EU-27 welfare loss could amount to an estimated $ 5.6 billion 27. Further long-term losses to fungal diseases could lead the EU to switch from the position of net exporter to net importer in the long term, as well as a significant direct drop in production Schmitz et al. Restricted availability of azole-based fungicides: impacts on EU farmers and crop agriculture. Agribusiness Research 27 (2011): p Bars et al. Risk assessment of Endocrine Active Chemicals: Identifying Chemicals of Regulatory Concern. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 64 (2012): p Flynn, K. Dietary exposure to endocrine-active pesticides: Conflicting opinions in a European workshop. Environment International 37 (2011): p European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organisation. Workshop on Azole Fungicides and Septoria leaf blotch control Conclusions and recommendations. 10/16480 (2010) : p Di Tullio et al. Assessment of the Economic Importance of Azoles in European Agriculture: Wheat Case Study. Nomisma, June 2012: p Schmitz et al. Restricted availability of azole-based fungicides: impacts on EU farmers and crop agriculture. Agribusiness Research 27 (2011): p Di Tullio et al. Assessment of the Economic Importance of Azoles in European Agriculture: Wheat Case Study. Nomisma, June 2012: p

11 This would not only endanger the livelihoods of many European farmers, but also result in a corresponding rise in prices for basic foodstuffs such as bread and pasta. Furthermore, less wheat grown as feed for European livestock would mean both an increase in imports, but also an increase of pork and poultry prices in local supermarkets 29. Another negative effect of a ban on azoles would be an increased dependence on foreign sources of wheat, where regulations concerning pesticide use tend not to be nearly as strict as those within the EU. We would, in fact, be increasing our dependence on wheat produced without the same level of environmental and health protection, in order to feel more secure with our home production surely a counterproductive measure. In a time of rising global population and food prices, the EU should continue to ensure safe and productive harvests from its fields. 6. MESSAGES FOR POLICY MAKERS Fungal diseases such as Septoria and brown and yellow rust will continue to threaten European wheat production. If the best available cure for these diseases, the azole family of fungicides, is banned without the presence of a proper alternative, the EU could expect to see wheat yield reductions of over 15% [ ]which would lead to serious declines in farm net income of between 20 and 70% 30. For European wheat production, and the corresponding price of bread on European shelves, it is vital that Regulation 1107/2009 (EC) is interpreted in a proportionate and pragmatic way. The Commission and Parliament must work together with farmers, industry, and NGO s in order to ensure healthy harvests and prevent unwanted rises of the price of wheat on global markets and corresponding costs to consumers. We must be wary of overshadowing the best scientific evidence, as the regulatory consequences of identifying a substance as endocrine disrupting are severe 31. While there are so far no officially approved criteria for what constitutes a harmful endocrine disruptor or the exact risks they pose to human health, we should not jump to unfounded conclusions. Of course, the EU should maintain a vigilant watch over the use of plant protection products to balance legitimate concerns with the continued need for effective plant protection. The development of fungicide resistance in many strains of crop diseases, as well the continuing threat of newly emerging crop diseases such as UG99, a devastating strain of rust fungus which has spread the length and breadth of Africa in less than a decade, means that farmers must have access to a varied, effective and safe toolbox of measures to counter such threats. Furthermore, it is important to note that there are currently no credible alternatives to the azole product class, for control of Septoria. The azoles have consistently proven to be a powerful tool in the fight against fungal crop diseases, and it may take many years for new types of fungicides to be discovered and, be developed, and pass through the EU approval process. The FAO s estimated need of a 70% increase in global food production to feed the world population by surely means that the EU must embrace productive agriculture and the safe use of azoles, rather than pushing through regulations which could result in them being removed from the market without any demonstrable evidence of benefit for human health or the environment. 29 Schmitz et al. Restricted availability of azole-based fungicides: impacts on EU farmers and crop agriculture. Agribusiness Research 27 (2011): p Schmitz et al. Restricted availability of azole-based fungicides: impacts on EU farmers and crop agriculture. Agribusiness Research 27 (2011): p Bars et al. Risk assessment of Endocrine Active Chemicals: Identifying Chemicals of Regulatory Concern. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 64 (2012): p Food and Agriculture Organisation. Global Agriculture Towards October

12 For more information, please contact: ELO - European Landowners Organization Tel: +32 (0) ruraldev2@elo.org CREATED WITH THE SUPPORT OF BASF Tel : No part of this activity report may be reproduced in any form whether by print, photo print, microfilm, photocopy or any other means without the prior written permission of the association. All personal data contained in this publication is for the exclusive and internal use of the association. Any other use is forbidden.