James Hutton Institute report calls pesticides ban threat to UK food security

A report by scientists at the James Hutton Institute has stated that the European Union’s plan of blacklisting up to 40 chemicals will lead to an overall drop in farming income of £1.7bn.

The institute has voiced the report as a response to a report commissioned by the National Farmers’ Union (NFU), the Crop Protection Association (CPA) and the Agricultural Industries Confederation (AIC).

The report also claims that the ban will lead to a drop of around 50% in the yield of some crops. Production of crops such peas, carrots and apples in the UK will be affected by this move.

The European parliament voted for stricter controls on the use of pesticides in 2009. It had suggested the ban on several chemicals declared harmful to human health.

However, the theme leader of Controlling Weeds, Pests and Diseases research at the James Hutton Institute Ian Toth claimed that such a move would mean that a chemical would be banned even if it was deemed to be hazardous only at levels many times higher than would be used in practice.

The report alleges that one of the biggest issues of the ban would be its impact on agricultural output. Toth said: "We currently import just under 50% of our food into the UK and crop yield reductions due to reduced use of pesticides will almost certainly increase that reliance in future. Ironically, many of the crops that we import from countries outside the EU will have been produced using the very chemicals the EU has targeted for reduction."

Stating another disadvantage, David Cooke from the James Hutton Institute said: "The agricultural industry uses pesticides out of necessity and if some products are banned others will be used in their place. The same amount of a more limited repertoire of products is thus applied. This loss of active ingredients increases the risk of pest resistance towards those remaining."

The institute has been working on ways to tackle crop pests and pathogens to reduce dependence on pesticides. Several methods including better targeting of chemical applications, resistant crops and biocontrol through integrated pest management (IPM) are in the pipeline.

However, Toth further added: "There’s no way we can replace the use of many important pesticides in the short period proposed by the EU. While we all want to protect people, animals and the environment, we also need food and have to be pragmatic about how that food is produced.

"Looking to reduce pesticide use is an important way forward, but we do also need to be careful not to remove the very tools that for decades have been essential for producing our food before viable alternatives become available."

Scientists at the airport feel that the solution for this problem is to find alternatives to the pesticides earmarked for reduction which would include the development of new, safer and more environment-friendly pesticides, continuing efforts to develop new methods.

---

Image: The ban on several pesticides are claimed to damage crop production in the UK. Photo: courtesy of antpkr/freedigitalphotos.net.