by BETTER FARMING STAFF
When the three-hour meeting Tuesday in London wrapped up, at least one farm leader expressed some optimism that not all was written in stone for the province’s proposal to reduce the use of neonicotinoid-treated corn and soybean seeds by 80 per cent by 2017.
“There is still room for flex in this,” said Peggy Brekveld, Ontario Federation of Agriculture vice-president, from Thunder Bay. “And we’d like to be part of the conversation.”
Brekveld was left with the impression that the farmers who attended recognized there was an issue that needed to be addressed. But they also recognized that evidence-based research was needed.
The majority of participants in Tuesday’s London meeting had ties to agriculture and at least half of those attending were crop farmers or beekeepers, from as far away as Guelph, Grey County and the Thunder Bay district.
Each of the 120 people who had registered to attend the London Ontario session — the first of three in-person public consultations — were asked to complete questionnaires. There was a question-and-answer session following a presentation, break-out round table discussions of the issues and, at the end, summaries so everyone in the room could hear issues and insights being raised.
Brekveld questioned why the province did not take more time to monitor the progress of the province’s bee health working group’s 13 recommendations to decide if they were working effectively before deciding on proposing regulation. The working group “was a broad community effort,” she noted.
Others praised the regulation but noted it did not go far enough.
One beekeeper said the province’s discussion paper failed to touch on the different ways bees might be exposed to neonicotinoids.
Another beekeeper, David Schuit, whose apiary is near Elmwood in Grey County, wanted to know if there had been any study on the effect of the chemical on human health.
One of the most common concerns raised inside and outside of the meeting was that the initiative was proceeding too quickly.
In a press conference before the meeting, Conservative agriculture critic Toby Barrett, and Lisa Thompson, Conservative critic for environment and climate change, noted that the meetings came too soon after the announcement of the regulation and were not numerous enough.
“They’ve made it really tough for farmers to come forward,” said Thompson, asserting that many farmers are still in the fields getting crops out.
Jodi Koberinski, marketing director of the Organic Council of Ontario, agreed the meetings were hastily arranged and poorly orchestrated but added that the comment period was 60 days.
In the breakout sessions, three of 14 discussion tables concluded that the goal of reducing neonicotinoid-treated soybean and corn seed by 80 per cent was impractical, the timeline was too short and the integrated pesticide management practices needed to support the change were lacking.
A fourth table agreed that the timeline should be extended and a fifth table proposed the regulatory proposal be rejected outright. That table’s occupants – which included Art Schaafsma, a University of Guelph professor who has been involved in studies addressing the issue, partially funded by the province – called it “heavy handed.”
Among the several recommendations raised during the round table discussions were:
- Make untreated seed more accessible by allowing it to be replaced if it doesn’t grow, as is the case with treated seed, and lowering its price
- Extend the control to all crops that use neonicotinoids and also control its use in gardening products
- Create more habitat for bees by using unused land, such as along roadsides, underneath wind farms or municipal lands
- Obtain consensus about best management practices for beekeeping
- Conduct more research into alternative pesticides to determine options
- Explore new technologies and give them the time to develop.
Other sessions take place Dec. 11 in Toronto and in Kingston on Jan. 14. Online meetings take place on Dec. 10 in English and Dec. 15 in French. Those intending to participate must register in advance at: http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/pollinator/meeting-reg.htm
The comment period closes January 25, 2015 but Klose noted a draft regulation will be posted for comment, and that another round of consultations will be held.
July 2015 is the target to implement the regulations, in time for the 2016 season. BF
Comments
Just a thought. Bees die or go missing for a number of reasons. Sometimes its disease, sometimes its environmental or other reasons. But bees are little creatures and if dead bees were on my field, I would not notice. Bee farmers would notice the bees not returning to the hives though. On Dec. 30, 2011 there was a large solar flare and the next day reports of large numbers of birds "falling from the sky". Big birds dead on the ground were noticed. There seems to be a connection between solar flares and large groups of animals, birds, fish dying at one time. Is it possible solar flares have something to do with bee deaths but the bees are so small its hard to find that evidence? Not to understate pesticide contamination, but are there other reasons for the bees disappearing? If we don't get the right reason for the bee problem, can we fix the problem? Just a thought.
You can find articles about bee deaths reduction if you look for it.
I am somewhat fascinated with all the publicity surounding this issue.
I will acknowledge that these products do add a small amount of yield increase and/or yield protection.
I am not in any sort of panic over this issue as many others are. The sky is not falling.
IMHO, the panic over this issue has to do with the underlying issue that farmers and/or farm groups have become accustomed to farm policies/regulations that have an inflationary effect, yet this regulation is deflationary, and many are having difficulty with that aspect of it.
Raube Beuerman
Post new comment