0
Home
News
Directory
E-newsletter
Magazine
Events
Data
AgReport
Subscribe
New Zealand EPA demands higher standard of pesticide science
Jul. 22, 2014
New Zealand's Environmental Protection Authority is stepping up its requirements for a higher level of scientific evidence regarding the safety and effects of new pesticides before considering them for approval.
The decision follows an International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) review of research into systemic pesticides that concluded a group known as neonicotinoids posed a serious risk to birds, honey bees and other pollinators, and a wide range of invertebrates, including earthworms. The international analysis of 800 peer-reviewed scientific reports has confirmed fears of beekeepers throughout the world that long-term exposure to systemic pesticides at low, non- lethal levels could be harmful to bees and a factor in declining bee populations overseas.
In response to questions from NZ Farmer, EPA communications staff said the IUCN task force took the unusual step of publicising its conclusions before publishing its study.
"When the study is published, the EPA will be able to review the information and assess its relevance to New Zealand," it said in a written response.
However, in line with overseas regulators in the US and Europe, the EPA said: "We are updating our requirements of applicants seeking our approval to allow new pesticides to be used in New Zealand. We are demanding a high level of scientific evidence about the safety and effect of such products before considering them for approval."
The EPA says New Zealand already has similar restrictions in place on foliar treatments, prohibiting the use of neonicotinoids and other harmful insecticides on flowering plants or in areas where bees are foraging.
Recently the EPA said it declined an application for a seed treatment product where the applicant was unable to demonstrate that it could be used safely in relation to bees.
Recently the EPA said it declined an application for a seed treatment product where the applicant was unable to demonstrate that it could be used safely in relation to bees.
Source: stuff.co.nz
More from AgroNews
Change
Hot TopicSubscribe
| Subscribe Email: | * | |
| Name: | ||
| Mobile Number: | ||
Comment
0/1200
NEWSLETTER