As federal regulators try to figure out how to dispose of 7,886 tonnes
of lindane-treated canola seed, Zenneth Faye has a suggestion.
The Foam Lake, Sask., farmer thinks the seed should be buried.
“I’m saying let’s bury it, half an inch deep on two million acres,” he
said in an interview from his farm last week.
The fate of canola seed treated with the controversial insecticide is
in the hands of the federal government’s Pest Management Regulatory
Agency.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
It could allow the seed to be used, or it could order that it be
disposed of by burying it in a landfill or burning it.
Last November, the Canola Council of Canada asked the federal agency to
allow treated seed currently held in warehouses under brand names such
as Vitavax RS and Foundation to be planted this growing season.
“We want the PMRA to grant approval for seed companies to sell and
growers to use lindane-treated seed for 2002,” said Jo Anne Buth, the
council’s vice-president of crop production.
The inventory of treated seed would take up about 2.7 million acres,
representing between 25 and 30 percent of anticipated 2002 canola
acreage.
Buth emphasized that the canola council is not requesting that any new
lindane-treated product be put on the market.
PMRA spokesperson Chris Krepski said the agency is considering the
request and will announce a decision as soon as possible.
“I’m not in a position to discuss the pros and cons of the proposal,”
he said Feb. 13.
Lindane-treated canola was voluntarily withdrawn from the market by the
Canadian canola industry in December 1999 after the United States
Environmental Protection Agency ruled that lindane-treated crops would
not be allowed across the border.
The industry agreed there would be no further use of the product after
July 2001, while Canadian and American authorities conducted a joint
scientific review of lindane’s safety. That review is to be completed
within the next couple of months.
The canola council’s request has broad support from grower
organizations in both Canada and the U.S., as well as the seed industry
and lindane manufacturers.
Buth said that even though the withdrawal was originally sparked by
complaints from U.S. canola growers, they don’t oppose the proposal to
plant it in 2002.
“There is some seed out there and the U.S. understands it would take a
bit of time for it to go through the system,” said Buth.
She said the canola council believes steps can be taken to limit the
amount of lindane-treated seed that might enter the U.S.
Faye, who has been involved in the lindane issue as chair of the
Saskatchewan Canola Development Commission, said it would cost millions
of dollars to bury or burn the treated seed, a cost that would
inevitably be borne by producers.
He added that Canadian growers are willing to live without
lindane-treated canola in the future as long as the rules are the same
on both sides of the Canada-U.S. border.
Faye cautioned growers that if approval to plant the seed is granted,
they should be sure to have germination tests carried out, since the
inventory is up to two years old.
The fate of lindane has been complicated by legal action taken by
Crompton Corp., a U.S.-based lindane manufacturer, against the PMRA and
the government of Canada. Buth suspects that may explain why it has
taken the agency so long to respond to the council’s proposal.
“Once something like this gets into litigation, it becomes a lot more
complicated,” she said.
Crompton issued a News release
news last week saying it supports the
council’s request and promising that a decision to allow planting in
2002 would not be used in any legal action.
