WORDS BY RICHARD RENNIE
The prompt for Hamish Marr to apply for a Nuffield Scholarship came one day when he was working a paddock on his tractor, listening to an interview between a Radio NZ journalist and then Environmental Protection Agency Chief Scientist Jacqueline Rowarth.
“By the time I had got to the end of the paddock I was almost jumping out of my cab. The line of questioning was about the use of glyphosate and its supposed effects. The interviewer could not leave it alone, and I felt that because they were not getting the answers they felt they wanted, they kept at it.”
The essence of the questioning was focused on unsubstantiated claims glyphosate was linked to human health issues and whether it should be banned as a herbicide. “It struck me coming from the seed sector and appreciating how important glyphosate is to us, what the implications could be of that if we relented to pressure, and how would our industry and our farms look if this was to happen?”
It was the prompt he needed for a scholarship thesis, and he was accepted to the prestigious Nuffield programme. It demanded 16 weeks of international travel including 6 weeks of a compulsory travel tour and at least 10 weeks of independent study. By his own admission it was an extensive, demanding schedule for anyone running a family farm, married and with three young children. “But I could also see that this was an important subject, and that became even clearer as I travelled through Europe, United States, Indonesia, Asia and Sweden. All countries with the exception of Japan and Indonesia are facing the same challenges around glyphosate, and how to respond to claims about its effects.”
Hamish saw guarded governmental response to glyphosate opposition as a recognition that modern farming could not simply drop glyphosate overnight. “So governments are pretty cagey about reducing it, with the exception of Germany and France.” Those two countries have agreed to ban glyphosate use by 2023, despite arguments by farmers, agricultural science and the industry that the product was a vital tool for ensuring the viability, efficiency and sustainability of agriculture.
The ban follows claims by scientists in those countries that glyphosate has contributed to declines in insect populations. There have also been claims it contributes to cancer in humans. Campaigns to have bees in Germany have linked glyphosate to population declines, despite the product being a herbicide, not an insecticide. The decision by France and Germany comes despite EU rules preventing individual companies making such rules specific to themselves. It also came after fierce debate in the German parliament that included Germany’s agricultural minister voting in favour of extending glyphosate’s use.
“And it has been acknowledged by the Minister of Agriculture that the cost of farming will rise, and the environmental challenges will increase.” He found in the United States distrust of glyphosate tended to be linked to lingering distrust of Monsanto’s “Roundup Ready” genetically modified soybeans, canola, beet and cotton. However the use of these crops has also significantly reduced the need to use higher toxicity spray treatments like atrazine.
Hamish’s work found that compared to past means of weed control, with their high level of toxic residues and human health effects, glyphosate is a far more preferable option both for farmers and consumers. Glyphosate was and still is marketed as a very benign chemical that targets an enzyme specific to plants. It is has a very short half life in the soil meaning in New Zealand there are no issues with root absorption.
“It has a very low residue. Over 20 years ago when it was developed no one looked for it in food residues, now they do and yes there are residues there but it is a very low risk product. But this leaves farmers and the industry facing something of a dilemma about where they can use glyphosate or not.”
Hamish recounts the dictum of Swiss physician Paracelsus who said “the dose makes the poison”, in that anything is poisonous if administered in sufficient quantity. A World Health Organisation report in 2015 initially found glyphosate was ‘probably’ carcinogenic to humans, only to be contradicted a year later with a report from the same organisation stating it was ‘unlikely’ to pose a cancer risk to humans. A consulting toxicologist to the report’s taskforce said at the time the second report examined harm levels and while there was value in knowing the hazard of a substance that was not the complete picture. Hazard and exposure amount were needed to determine if there was indeed a cancer risk.
Hamish agreed. “It is all about the MRL or maximum residue level, the highest amount that is allowed in food and not exceeding them. There is as much literature out there stating glyphosate is safe as there is stating otherwise. However this has become as much a social issue as it is a farming issue. Ultimately anything will be toxic to you, if you consume it in sufficient dose.”
He believes the farming sector has the ability to adapt some practices on weed control to reduce the use of glyphosate by looking at the bigger picture. “But we have managed to replace a number of
quite horrible chemicals with one that is far lower risk. I believe a lot of people don’t understand where we have come from, people don’t know what they don’t know, and the loudest voices are so often being heard.”
It is known as a one in one hundred year chemical for its versatility and low risk status. “There is a certain irony in that if it were invented today, it would fly off the shelves because it would be a more consumer friendly fit than the alternative.” “The seed industry cannot afford to lose glyphosate, if it goes, so too does the industry. In its place are animals or commodity grains. We need to respect the importance of the product and not over use. It is a very, very complicated issue and can not be viewed as one product on one crop in isolation but more agriculture at large and the systems that
intertwine through it all.”
Now back on the farm after a hectic year of travel, study and writing, Hamish says if he was offered the chance to go again tomorrow, “I’d be gone by this afternoon!” “I was humbled to have the opportunity to take up the scholarship, and felt like an All Black of agriculture.”
“I have seen how farmers face so many of the same problems, but also learnt to appreciate how lucky we actually are here in New Zealand. We are a relatively young country, our soils have not been hammered and we have great provenance and excellent biosecurity.”