The issue of legality is an important one to consider, stresses Stuart Staples, Technical Manager for Scotts Professional, adding that fines and insurance problems might arise if operational guidelines are not followed. Area sales managers would generally advise councils on what products could and could not be mixed. “However, contractors are taking more of a lead on this, but we would know what products are compatible legally and chemically.” “Advice from the Pesticides Safety Directorate (PSD) states that there are only two approved types of tank mix - convenience and positive. In order to make a recommendation for either type of tank mix, additional data or information is needed by the PSD to give label approval for the tank mix.
If the tank mix is not approved by the manufacturer, there is no guarantee of performance or safety of the resultant mix, he stresses. “For the convenience tank mix, the supplier must be able to produce a Compatibility Assurance Statement to show that the two products can be safely mixed. If there is a claim of improved or similar efficacy by tank mixing, or improved or similar efficacy with reduced rates of one or more of the active ingredients, this then becomes a Positive Tank Mix. If this is being recommended as an approved mix, he continues, “additional efficacy data must be on the label to back up these claims”.
If a tank mix is recommended as an approved mix and used without the above data, “this could be illegal and will have implications for insurance liability”.
The PSD has stated that, if a company is recommending reduced application rates, it would request that the company produces data to back the claims made, he concludes. New ways of formulating
mixtures, ready made for end
users, are taking the industry in a new direction, however. “A tank mix should be undertaken to enable a better job to be done,” believes David Senior, technical manager for Vitax Amenity, which supplies a range of chemicals, fertilisers and application equipment to the industry. “The method is far more common in agriculture where it is used to tackle a specific problem. In amenity, there is little point in tank mixing two products with similar modes of action.” “Products are increasingly being formulated and packaged as a mixture of different chemicals, whose actions have been tested thoroughly and whose effects have been evaluated. Bringing such mixtures to market is the way forward.”
The Amenity Forum has been one of the key players in the recent EU thematic strategy talks, with the clock now ticking for the industry to meet the targets set to come into force in two years’ time. “The hope for us is that we’ll be able to continue using pesticides responsibly in the future. What we don’t want is prohibition of pesticides,” insists Allbutt. The overall results have been welcomed by industry leaders who feel a national action plan, to bring in a coherent strategy to reduce pesticides use, was needed. The latest EU targets will mean both the amenity sector and local authorities will have to be more sparing with what products they use, keeping waste to a minimum. Tank mixing could well be a good way of carrying out a number of tasks in one application and, Allbutt believes, despite the potential risks involved, councils are in a good position to successfully reintroduce mixing more widely. “We have the leading amenity industry in the world, and a number of major chemical manufacturers who are more than willing to offer guidance and advice to those who want to get the best out of tank mixing, and not fall foul of its pitfalls.”
CPA launch two explanatory
pesticide booklets
THE Crop Protection Association (CPA) have produced two booklets aimed at demonstrating the benefits of pesticides to the community
‘Amenity Best Practice’ looks at pesticide use in the community, safety and legislation and explains why pesticides are used. It features comment from Eddie Seaward, Head Groundsman at the All England Lawn Tennis Club, and Gordon Moir, Director of Greenkeeping at St. Andrews.
“An introduction to plant protection products” explains the huge benefits these products offer. It explains how products are brought to the market and the stringent self
regulation within the industry. It also details how the quality and supply of our food would be seriously affected, and how much extra land would be required if plant protection products were to disappear.
Both booklets are designed to educate the public on the benefits of pesticide usage.
Richard Minton, of the CPA’s Amenity Group, said “Everyone is a beneficiary in one way or another, whether playing sport on well presented and maintained sports pitches, walking on weed free pavements or travelling on the road and rail infrastructure. If we are to maintain the quality standards we currently enjoy, adopting ‘Best Practice’ remains the number one priority for all those involved in the application of pesticides.”
“This means using pesticides as part of an Integrated Pest Management programme, ensuring all legal requirements are met and minimising risk to human health and the environment is achieved.”
“Over recent years we have seen many products withdrawn from the amenity market - we cannot afford to lose any more. Failure to meet the targets set by the Sustainable Use Directive or the standards laid down in the Water Framework Directive could lead to further product withdrawals, restricted use or even a total pesticide ban. This would prove catastrophic to the road and rail infrastructure of this country and devastating to all the sports played on natural surfaces. The result would be: pavements and rail lines covered in, and damaged by, weeds; football pitches, golf courses, cricket grounds all covered with weeds, pests and diseases. Alternative methods of control are not as effective and, invariably, a lot more expensive.”
“The amenity industry has a duty of care to ensure the safe use of pesticides for the long term future; it can no longer bury its head in the sand and think this threat from Europe will go away. The standards have been written, the targets have been set, and everyone using pesticides must meet and achieve them.”
Both booklets are available in PDF format from
www.cropprotecion.org.uk
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132