A once little-known set of standards for chemical residues is having a growing impact on farmers whose crops go into the export market.
In many cases, the standards — called maximum residue levels — determine whether a foreign customer will accept or reject entire shipments of potatoes or other fresh produce. Even the introduction of a new pesticide can be delayed if a nation doesn’t set an MRL for it in a timely manner.
MRLs set the maximum amount of specific chemical residues permitted on crops. The standard generally indicates that farmers used the pesticides correctly.
Until a few years ago, Allan Landon paid little attention to MRLs.
Now, Landon, a sales representative for the Syngenta crop protection company in Idaho Falls, understands that failing to get an MRL set with a foreign trade partner can force badly needed new products to remain on the shelf. Even if they’re registered in the U.S., chemicals must have MRLs for export crops.
Knowing the latest news on MRLs has become a key part of Landon’s job.
“Now, it’s just a deal where I think the growers accept it is what it is, but it does limit some of the resources they’re able to use,” Landon said.
Many important trade partners are developing their own residue standards along with using better chemical testing methods.
MRLs can also be a weapon. Countries have been known to use MRLs to reject imports of a crop to protect domestic farmers, favor one supplier over another or as a tool for trade retaliation.
MRLs are having a growing impact on tree fruit, nuts, citrus, specialty crops and other U.S. commodities that are exported. But the potato industry is especially involved in MRL issues, as processors don’t usually segregate potatoes and potato products for specific export markets.
The timeliness of nations setting MRLs for new products is an issue with growers.
“Every new chemistry coming down the line that would be really good for us seems to end up being way late, by another two-and-a-half years,” American Falls, Idaho, potato grower Kamren Koompin said in describing how MRLs have affected his farm.
Luna Tranquility
The 2012 rollout of Luna Tranquility, Bayer CropScience’s highly touted new fungicide, was the first case in which Landon recalls that an MRL issue profoundly impacted farmers.
Luna sales were strong among the Midwest’s potato growers that year, but their counterparts in the Pacific Northwest couldn’t use it to control early blight in potatoes.
The problem: An MRL hadn’t yet been set by Japan, so the major processors told their growers they wouldn’t take any spuds treated with the product. Though just 1.5 percent of the U.S. spud crop is shipped to Japan, processors indicated they had no way to segregate spuds treated with Luna.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency had set the Luna MRL at 0.02 parts per million. The highest residue concentration detected in trials involving more Luna applications than growers would typically use was 0.016 parts per million, slightly above the default MRL Japan imposed pending approve of the permanent MRL. But processors were still unwilling to risk a rejected potato shipment. Even fresh sheds balked at potatoes treated with Luna, concerned that off-grade fresh spuds diverted for making dehydrated products could wind up in Japan.
Luna enjoyed its first widespread use on Pacific Northwest potato crops this season, following approval of a Japanes MRL.
To better address trade issues such as MRLs, Bayer named Allen Scarborough its new trade flow manager in April.
“In recent years there have been a lot of efforts by Bayer to make applications upfront as much as can be done,” Scarborough said. “When a farmer is dealing with resistance and we have a good tool coming to market, we’d certainly like to provide it in a timely manner.”
A changed landscape
It wasn’t long after the Luna ordeal that an MRL issue delayed one of Landon’s products in the Northwest, a fungicide called Elatus, which is still awaiting its Japanese MRLs.
More recently, Landon has had MRL headaches with Stadium, Syngenta’s new mixture of three fungicides applied for post-harvest disease protection. Stadium has seen limited use in Washington’s Skagit Valley, where some growers raise spuds only for North American consumption, but it’s been shelved elsewhere in the region because of an MRL challenge in Japan.
Heidi Irrig, Syngenta’s regulatory product manager, said the country has treated Stadium as a food additive because it’s applied after harvest.
“A food additive designation is even more lengthy than a regular registration,” Irrig said, explaining the process could take two to five years.
Jeff Miller, of Miller Research in Rupert, Idaho, said growers have waited eagerly for three other fungicides that have performed well in his chemical trials but have been set aside because of MRLs. Vertisan, by DuPont, finally got its MRLs set late this summer, too late for 2014 use in the Northwest. Priaxor, by BASF, and Quash, by Valent, are still awaiting MRLs. Miller is especially intrigued by Quash, shown in his trials to boost yields in the absence of disease pressure.
Countries set own MRLs
The National Potato Council hires consultants to assist with MRL issues and maintains a constant dialogue with chemical companies about upcoming releases and the export markets where MRLs should be prioritized.
NPC executive director John Keeling said his organization has worked on MRLs for several years, but increasing foreign exports have made MRLs more of an issue.
USDA trade statistics show the U.S. exported 1.6 million metric tons of potatoes and potato products in the year ending June 2014, up by 400,000 metric tons over the past five years. The value of potato exports increased during that time from nearly $1.2 billion to about $1.8 billion.
Keeling also emphasized that more trade partners are now working to come up with their own MRLs instead of deferring to standards of the U.S., Japan, or a harmonized standard set by the Codex Alimentarius Commission and used by many countries. The commission is part of the Food and Agriculture Organization-World Health Organization Joint Food Standards Program.
“It used to be OK to just register products in the U.S. Then it seemed like overnight that was no longer enough,” said Irrig, noting Syngenta recognized the need to create her position about six years ago. “The way agriculture is today we’re exporting a whole lot around the world, and we have to think during the early stages of development about where a crop is going.”
Bryant Christie, Inc., manages an MRL database for USDA and EPA that growers can use to keep tabs on MRLs for the chemicals they use — www.mrldatabase.com.
“MRLs are being required in these foreign markets where 15 years ago they weren’t,” said Matt Lantz, vice president for international market access with the company. The reason is countries are updating their food regulatory systems.
In 1999, Taiwan implemented its own list of MRLs. Japan followed in 2006. Europe consolidated member nations into a common list in 2008 and is revising its MRLs. Hong Kong implemented a list in August, and work is continuing in Canada and China. South Korea plans to set its own MRLs in 2018.
Lantz believes a change announced in Japan in May of 2013 should significantly relieve MRL problems. Japan previously required countries to set their own domestic MRL before it started work on establishing an MRL. Now, however, Japanese officials are allowing simultaneous reviews.
“The system may still take different speeds,” Lantz said, adding registrants have become extremely proactive in addressing their MRL needs.
The world’s most highly developed pesticide regulatory systems belong to the U.S. and Europe, whose guidelines are closely monitored by other nations.
The white paper
Crop Life America, the national trade association for manufacturers of agricultural protection products, recently authored a white paper to promote the importance of harmonizing MRL standards.
Ray McAllister, the organization’s senior director of international policy, said the white paper has drawn international attention. His organization also has a committee devoted to MRLs.
The paper emphasizes making the Codex system more compatible with specific countries’ wishes.
“It would be great if we could have greater international reliance on the Codex and less reason for the countries to want to pursue their own systems,” McAllister said. “To the extent that hasn’t happened, we want countries to agree on MRLs for specific crops and pesticide combinations.”
Many products that were previously ignored by the Codex system because their residues weren’t detectable at the time now require MRLs due to improved testing methods, McAllister added.
A major challenge to standardizing MRLs is that some regions face greater pressure from specific diseases than others, affecting the frequency and volume of chemical applications.
Irrig believes a Syngenta project involving the fungicide Revus, used on hops, demonstrates such discrepancies can be overcome. Though use of fungicides varies widely from region to region, her company conducted the appropriate tests, communicated the U.S. trade situation with EPA and developed a plan that resulted in harmonized MRLs for Revus at the outset in Washington state, Germany and Canada, allowing hops growers the freedom to trade around the globe.
“MRLs can have a huge impact on agriculture,” Irrig said. “Whenever we develop a product, we’re thinking of this.”
Source: www.capitalpress.com