|
 After intense debate, the EU this week cleared U.S.-developed
glyphosate for another five years despite concerns that the most
widely used pesticide in the world can cause cancer.
EU rules allow France to unilaterally ban the substance, however, an
approach Macron has decided to take. He has given farmers and
researchers three years to come up with an alternative.
"Three years is too short," said Herve Fouassier, 45, who runs a
200-hectare farm in Loiret, south of Paris.
Like French farm unions, Fouassier does not believe a solution can
be found in time.
"We are ready to hear the wishes of society which wants less use of
crop protection products, but give us a little time to adapt," he
said, standing in a mustard field treated with glyphosate.
French crop growers said this week even five years is insufficient
time because there is currently no alternative economically and
environmentally viable alternative to the weedkiller.
Glyphosate was developed by U.S. chemical maker Monsanto under the
brand Roundup. It is now off-patent and marketed worldwide by dozens
of other chemical groups including Syngenta and Dow Agrosciences.
Glyphosate's worldwide success is linked to its low cost; farmers
can kill weeds by spraying the chemical on their fields instead of
plowing the soil several times to remove weeds.
It has also attracted gardeners, public park managers and railway
operators, intent on getting rid of unwanted grasses. It is so
widely used that manufacturers say glyphosate covers a third of
French farmland.
Concerns about its safety emerged when a World Health Organization
agency concluded in 2015 that it probably causes cancer.
Other groups, such as the European Chemicals Agency, have since
disputed those findings, saying there is no evidence linking
glyphosate to cancer in humans. But worries persist.
[to top of second column] |
ISOLATED
In rocky soils or where weeds are deeply rooted, farmers say it
would be too hard to do without it and that fields would have to be
left fallow. Farmers must wear a protective mask, apron and gloves
when spraying the chemical.
They also fear that if a cheap alternative is not found before the
deadline, France will be isolated in the EU, where competitors will
be allowed to use glyphosate for another two years, and against
larger producers such as the United States or those in Latin
America, where it is widely used.
The ban could cost the French grains sector 1.1 billion euros ($1.3
billion) and 900 million euros for wine makers because of lower
yields and exports, polling firm Ipsos found in a study commissioned
by glyphosate makers.
Marc Leprince, 34, who manages a 210-hectare farm in the Beauce
grain region, is less concerned.
He grows half of his output following organic rules and the rest in
conventional farming, all without using glyphosate.
Leprince uses long crop rotations, increased varieties and weeds
mechanically and manually, techniques which increase costs. But he
believes it's worth it for his own health and that of consumers.
"What consumers must realize is that food will be more expensive
because costs linked to these techniques will need to be reflected
in the price of the end products," he said, referring to the likely
impact of the glyphosate ban.
(Reporting by Sybille de La Hamaide; editing by Luke Baker and Jason
Neely)
[© 2017 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2017 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 |
