Macphail Woods Articles
Fish Kill Action Plan heavy on education, light on action

Fish Kill Action Plan heavy on education, light on action by Gary Schneider

The report of the Action Committee on Agricultural Runoff Control has been released with great fanfare. The committee, appointed by government in response to the spate of fish kills over the summer, was made up of representatives from various government departments, the agricultural industry, chemical companies and the PEI Wildlife Federation (added after public outcry). It promised swift action to prevent fish kills from happening in the future. "The Action Committee believes that even one dead fish is one too many and that this can - and must - be prevented in the future." Just what people wanted to hear. But what of the actions? When you really look at them, what is promised and will they work? Look for yourself:

Section of an Island Stream.

• Federal and provincial governments should strictly enforce the regulations of the Environmental Protection Act, the Pesticides Control Act and the Fisheries Act. Given the number of fish kills this summer, the proof will be in the pudding will anyone get charged this year? Government investigations are ongoing. but if no one is charged this season, its hard to say why anything will change next year.

• All potato growers should be encouraged to implement by this fall the 10 m buffer zones already legislated as the law for April 2000. The report also recommends that the implementation date for the 50 m conservation zone should be changed from April 2001 to August 2000, after consultation with the industry. The Round Table on Resource Land Use and Stewardship already had recommended stronger actions and that they be legislated. History has shown that the careful farmers not causing many problems will be quick on the uptake while the minority who refuse to change will not follow this "encouragement."

• The province should amend the Property Tax Act so that farm land owned by non-bonafied farmers would be taxed at the farm rate if the property had an Environmental Farm Plan with the Action Plan implemented. A great idea.

• The potato industry should adopt a code of practice, including a minimum three year crop rotation. Sound too good to be true? It is. Even if an excellent code were to be developed, if a farmer were not in compliance it would be a neighbour or other concerned citizen who would have to bring it up with the Farm Practices Review Board. No government employee would actually check rotations or be able to charge those not in compliance. And since development of the code is to be primarily by the potato industry and government technical staff, with support from the Eastern Canada Soil and Water Conservation Centre, we have no assurances that the code will stop future fish kills.

• Every potato farm should complete an Environmental Farm Plan and implement the Action Plan. The Farm Plans can be helpful but there seems to be a lack of action. The Farm Plans must be completed by April 1, 2000 but there is no timetable for implementing the accompanying Action Plan.

• The potato industry should implement a pesticide risk reduction strategy based on Integrated Pest Man- agement principles. More 1PM workshops for potato growers will be a help if they are well attended.

• Funding should be available to growers for soil conservation practices. No dollar figure has been attached, but this will certainly help.

• The Department of Transportation and Public Works, in cooperation with farmers and watershed groups, should manage flows from fields to minimize impact on watercourses. Another good suggestion.

• More research should be conducted across the whole spectrum of pest management. Increased knowlegde in a variety of areas would be useful, but sometimes study can just delay action. For example. we ve known for years that a three-year rotation is the minimum for sustainable potato production. yet no action has followed.

• The Department of Agriculture and Forestry should allocate resources to programs and services in support of the organic and low input food sector. This will be the one to closely monitor -how much goes out and to whom.

• The Crop Protection Institute should accelerate research into products which have reduced impact on aquatic life. A good idea, except the concern of course is that these are the very same people that brought us these "safe" products already.

• The Pest Management Regulatory Agency should put a higher priority on the registration of crop protectants with lower toxicity and more specificity. For most of us, its disappointing they haven t been doing this all along.

• Environment Canada should imrove their accuracy with respect to potential for localized heavy rainfall. Given their resources. Environment Canada is probably doing the best they can. so I don t see this as helping prevent the majority of pesticide runoff.

• Potato growers should be aware of the details of the fish kills how they could have been avoided. Though the meetings attracted growers farming 80%. of the potato acreage. that still leave many who didn t attend. I also know that some people in attendance still feel it was a one-shot weather disturbance.

• Growers and owners of the suspect fields should be contacted and offered advice and assistance. This has been done - a good and obvious thing to do.

• There should be initation and continuing communication between the potato industry and environmental organizations. In some ways this only reinforces the government (and to a large degree the media) perception that its "farmers" versus "environmentalists" . Many people. and certainly our river systems; were negatively affected by a small group of potato farmers and government s lack of action: We'll be keeping a close eye out on this one.

• A pesticide toxicity ranking assessment should be carried out to identify risk to aquatic life by December 1999. If the assessment identifies a pesticide which presents an unacceptably high risk to aquatic life, its use should be discontinued. Its worrisome that the toxicity ranking is being developed only by government and industry people. This is another one worth watching closely, since one of the main culprits of the summer, azinphos methyl, is responsible for half the fish kills in the U.S. and is still in use here.

• The Potato Producer's Association should hold workshops on soil conservation, pesticide toxicities, etc. across the province. A good step.

• High risk watersheds should be identified and information used to complete Environmental Farm Plans and counselling farm operators. Another good educational step.

• Awareness/education programs for farm workers should incorporate information on soil tillage and pesticide application practices that conserve soil and protect water resources. Another good educational step.

• Land owners who rent land for row crop production should be informed about their responsibility for soil conservation and be provided with Model Farm Leases. Another good educational step.

• Farmers should be encouraged to actively participate in existing watershed groups. Another good educational step. especially if the intent is to protect and improve the environment.

That's the long and short of it - long on education and short on action. If this was two years ago. this might be a good first step. Unfortunately, we are way beyond first steps. Our rivers need continued public concern and support from farmers, aquaculturists and tourist operators. This in turn will ensure that govermnents legislate mandatory rotations, adequate buffer zones and a reduction in potato acreage, while seriously supporting organic growers and pesticide reduction.

REPORT OF ACTION COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURAL RUNOFF CONTROL October 1, 1999

The Action Committee on Agricultural Runoff Control was established in late July by the Minister of Agriculture and Forestry and the Minister of Technology and Environment. The Terms of Reference for the Committee were to: 1. understand the facts of fish mortalities in Island streams (in mid-summer, 1999) and 2. identify the steps required to reduce the risk to aquatic life.

Web development and maintenance by Chris Martin.