Are herbicides getting a bad rap?

By Sandy McKellar
Tree Frog Forestry News
February 5, 2020
Category: Special Feature
Region: Canada, Canada West

Neil Hughes, Crystal Chadburn and Len Ritter

This panel of two experts was asked, “Are herbicides getting a bad rap?”. Moderator Chrystal Chadburn with the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development introduced the speakers and moderated the panel. The first to take the podium was Dr. Len Ritter, a professor of environmental toxicology at the University of Guelf and Chair of the Council of Canadian Academics Expert Panel on the Integrated Testing of Pesticides, evaluating the testing strategies used to assess and regulate the risk of pesticides to humans and the environment. With these credentials he walked the audience through the many studies and proclamations that governments and research bodies have done on glyphosate.

An engaging speaker, he pointed out times when research and/or governments quoted suspect statistics or used poor math when reporting on herbicide exposure and incidents of cancer. Explaining that hazard is not synonymous with risk, and that without exposure, you only have risk, not hazard, he demonstrated with clear graphics that the levels of chemicals present in our environment are not high enough to be hazardous. Although data does show an increase in cancer diagnoses, Dr. Ritter demonstrated that the population dynamics show a larger older demographic, where incidence of illness is higher with age, and at the same time, better diagnostic tools for cancers (including some that rarely cause death) are adding to the statistical data. It sounded like Dr. Ritter indeed felt that herbicides (when applied correctly) are getting a bad rap.

Neil Hughes, RPF, a forest establishment leader with the Resource Practices Branch in the Ministry of Forests followed Dr. Ritter with a demonstration of the effectiveness of herbicides in forest regeneration. He said one of the biggest criticisms he hears is that these chemicals are eliminating deciduous trees from the forest inventory. However, analysis has shown that at least 15% of the forest cover after application remain deciduous. A more pressing concern is the effect of glyphosate on the mammals and the soil microbes in the food chain. Where ungulates browse on herbs that have absorbed chemicals they pass them along to their predators. Hughes says he sees the focus moving from the impact on humans to the impact on the animals in direct contact. More investigative work will be required to expose the answers.

 

 

Read More