Pesticide hit only workable with genetic solutions

Last week’s announcement that the EU biodiversity strategy is to force a 50% reduction in pesticide usage will sound alarm bells across the crop sector here and it should also be of concern to grassland farmers. This is a huge ask in terms of a reduction level. It is also set to target specific actives that are known to carry a higher risk to the environment.

This level of reduction would threaten the ability of many producers to continue in business. We have been fine-tuning fungicide use rates for years and is it against this background that a new use target would be set?

One thing that seems likely from a scheme like this is that it could effectively put a limit or constraint on any possible crop area increase in future

So far, we know little about how this might operate. Will it be based on a type of national quota measured as the tonnes of active used across the country or might it come down to a crop category or even an individual farm? What point in time would be used as the base line – an historic year or a time span?

One thing that seems likely from a scheme like this is that it could effectively put a limit or constraint on any possible crop area increase in future. That would further increase the charge against the ‘Irishness’ of our food exports using higher and higher volumes of imported feedstuffs.

This reduction proposal increases our need for genetic solutions to help reduce the need for aphicides and fungicides, in particular.

A simple target might be genetic BYDV tolerance in spring and winter crops

It might make some sense if the proposed usage reduction ran alongside the use of genetic solutions provided by genetic engineering. But, as of now, this important technology is not allowed in the EU.

CRISPR technologies have a potential to offer real, but as yet unproven, genetic alternatives to help reduce pesticide inputs. A simple target might be genetic BYDV tolerance in spring and winter crops. To have access, this would eliminate a whole lump of insecticide use in this country.

Other potential benefits would be robust mildew resistance, improved tolerance to septoria in wheat and rhyncho, etc, in barley. Improved genetic resistance might not eliminate the need to use fungicides against these diseases, but even moderate resistance might remove one spray or take the pressure off rate.

Weeds and herbicides must become a greater focus of IPM as we can do more

Without access to this technology, the removal of half our chemical input could be disastrous for many growers. Integrated pest management (IPM) measures will always be needed, but most are using these already to help reduce infection pressure. Weeds and herbicides must become a greater focus of IPM as we can do more.