Regulation Breaches Condemned

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31089, 18 June 1966, Page 10

Regulation Breaches Condemned

Persons who deliberately ignored regulations governing the use of chemicals on crops and pasture should be treated as thieves by the community as a whole. Mr P. Rose, a director of Mair and Company, who is also a member of the Agricultural Chemicals Board, said during a symposium held this week at Lincoln College by the New Zealand Agricultural Chemical Manufacturers’ Federation.

The symposium was at- 1 tended by senior students at i the college, some staff mem- i bers and representatives of i interested Government departments and members of the < industry. “There are regulations 1 which restrict the period before harvest when certain ' chemicals are not to be used,” said Mr Rose. “Failure to observe these limits can only result in the tightening of regulations, or in certain cases , have a most serious effect on i the export of our primary . products. In such cases the , penalty will not fall on trans- . gressors alone, but could affect all producers and in , fact every person in New Zealand. Persons who deliberately ignore these regulations should be treated as thieves by the community as a whole. They are trying to steal an advantage on their neighbours, the livelihood of their fellow producer-, and in some cases the health of this and other communities. These are strong words, I know, but are in my opinion completely justified.” Mr Rose said that the United Nations through the World Health Organisation and the Food and Agriculture Organisation had expert committees working on the prob- 1 lem of chemical residues in food. As well various coun- ' tries had set limits on the maximum amount in parts per ‘ million of certain chemicals 1 which could be present in : food they imported. One of the common and prime targets was D.D.T., which was used extensively in this country for control of grass grub and other pasture pests. In spite of extensive research and effort no other material had yet proved to be as effective when all factors were taken into account. The effect on humans of D.D.T.

and the question of how much could be consumed by humans without any effect was the subject of much dissension among toxicologists. However, it was probably true that fairly large amounts could be consumed without any ill effects. "The point is that when limits are set for the material, as say a maximum daily intake, the maximum figure known is taken and then divided by about five to ensure maximum safety. As a consumer I have little quarrel with this but as a mem-

ber of the community of one of the largest food exporters in the world it is a matter of some concern. At present New Zealand is able to adequately meet the requirements of our overseas customers, but the whole trend overseas is for a continuing lowering of the amount permitted in foodstuffs. "While the board will continue to oppose, through the Government and its representatives overseas, any reductions that are made for political purposes—that is to say in an endeavour tO\ restrict imports by this means without appearing to infringe free trade for other international agreements—the fact remains that other international bodies are working towards lower Internationa* levels. “Other exporters such as Holland and Denmark do not have the same pasture pest problem as we do and as their usage of D.D.T. is low they wffl presumably be happy with very low D.D.T. levels In these products. All the major importers of meat will want low levels in this food. If this eventuates New Zealand will be forced to meet these Standards and I am confident that it can, but only with the co-operation of every producer in this country. You see it only needs one contaminated carcase to slip through our inspection system here and be detected overseas , to condemn, not only that shipment, but to imperil all future shipments to that market. This is why I said previously that any person who deliberately ignores withholding periods is guilly of theft by imperiling all other producers’ wealth and prosperity.” Mr Rose referred to a case

in Taranaki where a farmer sprayed a pasture with D.D.T. He had kept his cows off the area but he had left a bull grazing on it and then sent it to the works for slaughter. This bull had had a high content of D.D.T. but fortunately it was detected.

“Some may well say then, does our meat and butter con- . tain residue's, and the answer , must be yes, from time to i time. Fortunately they are . not present in quantities injurious to public health or in ■ quantities greater than our • customers will accept Occa-

sionally large quantities may occur, but they are in most cases picked up by our ever s increasing efficient testing system, with subsequent condemnation and loss to the farmers concerned. However, there is no room for complacency, and in fact now is the time for greater effort before our customers require a higher standard in every lb in every shipment, and the customer is always right.” Referring to damage to crops resulting from the drift of chemical sprays, Mr Rose said he understood that it was an instruction of the DirectorGeneral of Agriculture that his advisory officers should not be involved in litigation over such damage as this would impair their relationships with farmers as advisory officers. Even if the damage could be shown to be attributable to sprays, Mr Rose said that there was a problem of detecting where the trouble came from, and if this problem of detection could not be solved then the only way to protect the grower would be

to bring in further regulations. Most damage, he suggested, was due to carelessness on the part of someone, and if there was a greater awareness then there would be less damage. A member of the audience said that manufacturers were working on non-drift formulations and this might be a means of meeting this important problem.