|
Spraying strawberries against botritis at 20% recommended rates. Photo: Andrew Jackson |
LEAF is a pan-European initiative, first
funded by the industry group, the European Crop Protection Association (ECPA),
but their contribution may be phased out. In the UK, funding is being taken over
by a membership scheme, including farming groups, crop protection companies,
banks, food retailers, agricultural colleges and individuals. Supporting
companies include: Barclays, British Sugar, Schering, Unilever, Co-op, Ciba, ICI,
Marks & Spencer, National Farmers Union and the Potato Marketing Board. The
Executive Committee consists of individuals from the Royal Agricultural Society
of England, ECPA, the Ministry of Agriculture, Farming and Wildlife Advisory
Group, British Agrochemicals Association and the Institute of Arable Crops
Research. LEAF employs two staff.
LEAF invites farms to join their scheme to develop ICM.
Currently there are 14 demonstration farms which could expand to 50 over the
next three years. David Buffin, of the Pesticides Trust [now PAN UK] visited two members—a
fruit farm in Hereford and an arable farm in Suffolk—to see what steps have
been taken to link the environment with farming. This article will only focus on
the pesticide input to the farming system, whilst LEAF addresses the farm as a
whole.
Farm selection criteria includes examining sound husbandry
practice; staff training and qualifications; soil fertility; pollution control;
wildlife habitats; as well as crop protection programmes. Integrated pest
management (IPM), which relates to the pest management portion of ICM, was
developed by academics in the 1950s, but has been slow to gain acceptance by
farmers. One hope is that LEAF, together with other research organisations, will
help bridge this gap.
At present only basic LEAF requirements have been produced. A
more comprehensive set of guidelines should be available later this year. In
terms of pesticides, LEAF is committed to “minimising the reliance on inputs,
such as fertilisers and crop protection chemicals by actively considering
alternatives” and “selecting and applying crop protection products (chemical
or biological) in ways which ensure operator and consumer safety and which seek
to avoid environmental damage, such as to non target species.”
LEAF has developed a self-assessment environmental audit, to
be carried out on an annual basis. This aims to increase farmers’ awareness of
all aspects of the farm management system, and may be used by several thousand
farmers. There are plans for LEAF farms to be monitored by an external
environmental audit at intervals of no more than five years. Landscape features,
wildlife habitats, management of the soil, crop protection, conservation of
energy and organisation and planning will be assessed in these audits.
Co-ordinator, Caroline Drumond, does not see a need for a
premium on food produced on LEAF farms at the point of sale to the public. There
may be some premium between the farm and, for example retailer, where the buyer
may feel it advantageous to purchase LEAF produced products. This contrasts with
the situation in Switzerland which adopted a labelling scheme to encourage IPM.
The Swiss scheme allows herbicides, but specifies no use of insecticides,
fungicides or plant growth regulators.
Fruit growing
Man of Ross Ltd is a 300 ha. fruit and arable farm
near Ross-on-Wye, Hereford, growing apples, pears, strawberries, plums, cabbage
and to a relatively small extent, barley and wheat. Andrew Jackson, the Managing
Director, thinks that the farming industry will benefit from the LEAF
initiative. “It's a question of attitude, farmers and growers will take a
different attitude to this initiative because it is something they join without
feeling cajoled into it.” He adds that “globally, having a pesticide
reduction policy is a good thing—similar to the one they have in the
Netherlands, where they are looking for a 50% cut back. But at the farm level
such a rigid programme would not be practical. Anyway, fruit growers in general
are already further down the road of pesticide reduction, compared with the rest
of agriculture.”
Pesticide Reduction
Andrew Jackson first decided to cut back on pesticide
use in the 1970s. He originally followed the inspiration of the late Edward Bals,
of Micron Sprayers, and has since cut his insecticide use to one-tenth and his
fungicide use to one-fifth the recommended rate. Reduced use is achieved by
using nozzles with a small aperture and accurately controlling the application
flow rate. “Using a Flow Master is useful because it can control the rate
according to the distance between fruit trees”. With conventional application,
the tractor may slow down or wheel-slip on a steep gradient, which would result
in over application. The Flow Master can overcome this problem. “It costs £1,500,”
says Andrew Jackson, “but it is cost effective through savings because of
lower pesticide input.” Of £1 million farm expenditure during the year, about
£90,000 goes on fertilisers and pesticides. This still represents a significant
proportion, but other fruit growers, using more pesticides, are likely to spend
proportionately two to three times more.
Non-target effects/biological control
Andrew Jackson has stopped using synthetic pyrethroids
because they kill too many of the fruit pest’s predators. He prefers to use
organophosphate (OP) insecticides as, he says, they attack a narrower band of
invertebrates. If a problem with the hop damson aphid develops, however, he will
use an OP/synthetic pyrethroid mix, as there is no alternative. OPs are
potentially hazardous to the operator and Andrew Jackson says that the spray
workers have been tested for cholinesterase levels, which were normal. He is
also concerned that, if there is a problem with apple sawfly caterpillars, the
only effective active ingredient permitted will be the organochlorine
insecticide lindane.
Pheromone traps are used to monitor tortrix and coddling moth
pest levels. Walking the fruit trees also allows for pest infestation to be
assessed, which avoids pesticide application before economically injurious
levels have been reached.
Advice from ADAS
Andrew Jackson receives regular help and advice from
the government agency, ADAS. For consultative help on pest control for his
particular needs, he thinks that, at about £1,000 a year, ADAS charges are
reasonable.
Training
Andrew Jackson believes training is essential to
ensure high standards continue, and would like more stringent legislation. He
also feels that the standards should be raised, and is critical of the
clause which exempts sprayers born before 1964 from taking a proficiency test.
Gro-Act
Gro-Act is a coalition of apple and pear growers, who
aim to produce a premium product in the safest possible manner, using crop
treatments which show care and concern for the environment. At present 70% of
fruit growers have joined Gro-Act and some have found that levels of pesticide
application as low as 12% of the recommended rate were successful.
Arable farming
The Felix Thornley Cobbold Agricultural Trust's
Stanaway Farm is an arable enterprise in Suffolk—growing wheat, linseed,
oilseed rape, beans and sugar beet—which has only recently joined the LEAF
scheme. David Cousins, of the farm management Strutt & Parker, recalls their
commitment to address low pesticide input was partly for economic and partly for
environmental reasons. In recent years, there has been more awareness of the
potential risk to the environment from pesticides within the farming community.
He cites more accurate application techniques and a narrow range of droplet size
which helps to allow a more targeted use. In general, the farm is looking to use
less hazardous pesticides. For example, Aphox (pirimicarb) is used rather than
Hostathion (triazophos), for these reasons. Stanaway Farm uses the
services of an independent agronomist consultant who helps to decide when and
what to apply, leading to a more judicious use of pesticides.
David Cousins feels that seed merchants and food processors
are becoming preferentially interested in produce from LEAF farms. “It may be
that they will start requiring an ‘audit trail’. Consignments of, say, wheat
will be processed through the chain towards the point of sale to the public,
with accompanying information outlining which pesticides have been used on the
original crop. It may therefore be that LEAF farms will be better equipped to
accommodate these changes. The added bureaucracy will be limited because
of computerised records.”
David Cousins says that the farm has received good local
publicity because it has joined the LEAF scheme, and hopes that other farms will
be persuaded to join.
Conclusions
It seems ironic that the pesticide industry should be involved in a scheme
that would appear to reduce pesticide use. However, if this encourages more
sensitive use of potentially hazardous products, then there will be benefits for
the pesticides industry because of an improved image and longer product life.
Environmentalists may welcome the LEAF initiative if there
are genuine environmental and safety benefits. It is too early to assess how
effective LEAF will be because specific guidelines are still being drawn
up—although the use of the environmental audit may encourage more farmers to
adopt ICM practices. The initial impression shows that the potential for
environmental improvement is there, but it will be a struggle realising it.
Environmentalist want to know exactly what ICM means: does it involve
significant cut-backs in pesticide use, or simply better ‘packaging’ for
pesticides?
Demonstration farms show that improvements can be made. It
will be relatively easy to find examples of good practice in the early stages.
The hard work will probably come in trying to make this relatively good practice
the industry norm.
[This article first appeared in Pesticides News No. 23, March 1994, pages 12-13]