THE Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority’s decision not to ban the use of paraquat and diquat has been welcomed by broadacre farmers, but condemned by opponents concerned about potential human health consequences.

The knockdown herbicides jointly play an important role in controlling weeds in fallow, and in pre-harvest weed control and crop desiccation, but paraquat has been banned in more than 70 countries after being implicated in neurological conditions.

The APVMA Special Gazette released yesterday outlined the phasing in of stricter controls that will reduce their maximum rate and require enclosed mixing and loading systems for all uses, and phase out their application from backpack sprayers.

APVMA chief executive officer Scott Hansen said both chemicals remain available for use with significant new restrictions on application rates and permitted uses.

“To protect users from acute exposure, new restrictions will phase out backpack sprayers and require enclosed mixing and loading systems for all uses, and enhanced personal protection equipment,” Mr Hansen said.

“Overall, the maximum rate of application on paraquat and diquat will be 231grams per hectare, when it was previously 1150g/ha.”

A higher application rate applies to technology-assisted spot spraying where application is capped at 30 percent of total area.

New registration conditions will apply to the labels of all paraquat and diquat products manufactured from today.

Existing stock will be phased out over a two-year period, allowing the industry to identify and adopt alternative weed management strategies, and prepare for the implementation of new occupational health and safety measures.

Response to toxicity risks

The APVMA said these restrictions are driven by acute toxicity risks for people handling the Schedule 7 poisons and a detailed assessment of data showing acute and chronic exposure risks to birds and mammals foraging in treated areas.

During the review process, the APVMA received 171 submissions from scientists, doctors, the agricultural industry and other interested parties.

Submissions on paraquat and diquat included a range of concerns including human health impact, farming viability and environmental impact.

The APVMA considered submissions which provided detailed scientific information or argument in line with contemporary international data requirements and test guidelines.

APVMA disputes Parkinson’s risk, but banning efforts to continue

In making its decision, the APVMA found the weight of evidence did not show that paraquat exposure through approved uses increases the risk of developing Parkinson’s disease.

However, Pesticide Action Australia executive director Josh Davis said the group is calling for an urgent review of the APVMA decision.

“Paraquat needs to be banned and we need to provide as a country, financial support – the government needs to provide financial support for farmers to transition away from paraquat.

“Paraquat needs to be banned for the safety of farmers first, their families, rural communities and the broader Australian public.”

In the PAA submission to the APVMA, Mr Davis said the human cost of the APVMA decision will be severe.

“The regulator and our government have missed an opportunity to protect the wellbeing of Australians and our environment, and slow the rise of Parkinson’s disease in Australia.

“The APMVA’s view that the weight of evidence does not show that paraquat exposure ‘through approved uses’ increases the risk of developing Parkinson’s disease, stands in stark contrast with the submissions of Australia’s leading neurologists and global experts.

Over 70 countries, as well as the state of Vermont in the USA, reviewed the same evidence linking paraquat to health and environmental harms and chose to ban it, finding there is no possible safe use of this dangerous chemical,” he said.

“The companies that manufacture and export paraquat have had it banned in their own countries, yet continue to profit from the harm it causes here.”

Mr Davis said the way the decision has been made is as disturbing as the decision itself.

“Not meeting with Australia’s top public health experts and neurologists who were calling for a ban, demonstrates how our industry-funded regulator is continuing to prioritise corporate interests and their profits ahead of Australia’s public health and national interest.

“This decision to allow the continued use of paraquat endangers not only farmers and their families, but also rural communities and the general public as we will all continue to be exposed to this toxic chemical through ongoing low level dosages in food, water and air,” he said.

Parkinson’s Australia chief executive officer Olivia Nassaris said the incidence of Parkinson’s is projected to triple by 2050, posing pressure to the health system and economy.

“This is going to be an absolute epidemic and we have to be doing something now if we are to stop it,” Ms Nassaris says.

“While we welcome the controls, including increasing PPE requirements and getting rid of backpack sprayers in favour of enclosed cabs, they simply don’t go far enough.

“The APVMA has failed not only farmers who use paraquat but all the other Australians exposed to it,” she said.

“In the 30 years they’ve been reviewing this chemical, 70 countries around the world have banned it – yet we’ve still got Aussie farmers using it every day. We’re the last to act here – and we’ve failed.”

Neurologist David Blacker, who has Parkinson’s, said the data on paraquat is overwhelming.

“Large scale studies have identified an association between paraquat and the incidence of Parkinson’s,” he said.

“Like myself, people who grew up on farms and live around places like golf courses that are using paraquat aren’t safe.”

Parkinson’s Australia is leading a campaign for the banning of paraquat – including a Change.org #Ban Paraquat petition with 20,000 signatures.

APVMA decision welcomed by GPA

The APVMA decision has been welcomed by farming and cropping groups, although the effectiveness of the lower allowed rates has been questioned.

Grain Producers Australia said it welcomed the outcome of the APVMA review, which confirmed paraquat and diquat will remain available for use in Australian broadacre farming systems subject to revised use conditions and label requirements.

Victorian grower and GPA research development and extension spokesperson Andrew Weidemann said the decision ensures grain producers have ongoing access to two critical weed-management tools that underpin minimum and no-till farming systems across Australia’s grain-growing regions.

“These farming systems have driven significant productivity gains over recent decades while reducing soil erosion, improving moisture retention, lowering fuel use and supporting more sustainable grain production,” Mr Weidemann said.

Paraquat will continue to be available for use through optical spot-spraying technologies and also continues to allow the practice of crop-topping for pulse growers, with an increase from seven to 14 days applying to the withholding period.

Mr Weidemann said the decision demonstrated the value of Australia’s independent agricultural chemical regulatory system and the strength of collaboration across the grains industry to produce a logical and science-based submission to the process.

“Australia is fortunate to have an independent, evidence-based agricultural chemical regulatory agency in the APVMA.”

Mr Weidemann said GPA had invested significant effort throughout the review process because of the importance of paraquat and diquat to modern grain-production systems.

GPA said it looked forward to continuing to work with the Grains Research and Development Corporation researcher Chris Lee-Steere and other industry stakeholders to review the full detail of these decisions.

“Our work started some four years ago when GPA engaged Applebox Insights founding director Peter Arkle to identify upcoming chemical reviews and prepare industry for these challenges, and we want to acknowledge his contribution.”

“GPA prepared a comprehensive submission in response to the APVMA’s preliminary review decisions and we will take the time to review the rationale behind today’s final determination.

“This is a positive outcome for Australian grain producers and the ability to maintain minimum and no-till farming systems is one of the great success stories of Australian agriculture,” he said.

“These systems have delivered enormous productivity gains while helping growers protect their soils, conserve moisture and reduce the environmental footprint of grain production.”

NFF will represent farmers’ interests

The National Farmers Federation said it wil take the time to carefully consider the detail of the decision and its implications for farmers and Australia’s food and fibre production.

NFF president Hamish McIntyre said farmers take their responsibility to protect people and the environment seriously.

“Without healthy people and a healthy environment, there is no food and fibre production. That’s a fundamental reality for every farm business,” he said.

“We acknowledge the community concern around paraquat, and it is absolutely critical that the products farmers use are safe for both people and the environment.”

Mr McIntyre said agriculture operates under stringent regulations, including strict restrictions on application systems, mandatory personal protective equipment, and training or certification requirements for chemical use.

Mr McIntyre reinforced the importance of Australia’s independent regulatory system.

“Decisions about agricultural chemicals are made by the APVMA, an independent, science-based regulator that assesses the latest evidence from Australia and around the world against our unique conditions.

“Farmers rely on that independent process,” he said.

“We are not scientists, but we have a responsibility to follow the rules, use products correctly, and continually improve practices as new information becomes available.”

Mr McIntyre said products like paraquat have played an important role in modern farming systems.

“Paraquat helps support effective weed management and enable practices like no-till farming, which protects soil health, reduces erosion and helps retain moisture.

“These practices are critical as farmers respond to increasingly variable seasons and growing demand for food and fibre.”

Mr McIntyre said the NFF would work closely with industry following the decision.

“No one wants to see farmers put at risk, and decisions must continue to be guided by robust scientific evidence, with clear, practical and enforceable safety requirements.

“The NFF will continue to support our members with clear, evidence-based information and ensure farmers’ interests are represented as the implications of this decision are worked through.”

The NFF’s submission to the review is available here.