Pesticides in the UK

A report of the Pesticides Forum

on the impact and sustainable use of pesticides

The 2016 report

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 2 of 42

Contents3 Introduction

4 Chair’s foreword

5 Executive summary

6 Forum activities in 2016

7 Review of activities supporting the UK National Action Plan

7 Part 1: Training

8 Part 2: Sales

9 Part 3: Information and awareness raising

11 Part 4: Inspection of application equipment

12 Part 5: Aerial application

13 Part 6: Measures to protect the aquatic environment

and drinking water

16 Part 7: Reduction of risk in specific areas

17 Part 8: Handling and storage of pesticides and treatment

of their packaging and remnants

18 Part 9: Low pesticide input management, including

Integrated Pest Management (IPM)

21 Part 10: Indicators

22 Annex 1: Indicators

42 Acknowledgements

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 3 of 42

IntroductionWelcome to ‘Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides’, the Annual Report of the Pesticides Forum.

About the Pesticides Forum

The Pesticides Forum (‘the Forum’) was set up in 1996 to bring together a range of organisations with an interest in pesticides and the impacts of their use. It represents stakeholders with differing views about pesticides and how the impacts of their use should be addressed. More details about our member organisations are on the Forum’s website.

Since 2013, the Forum has played an important role, supporting the government’s UK National Action Plan for the Sustainable Use of Pesticides (Plant Protection Products). We provide a forum for stakeholder interaction discussing key issues and this Annual Report helps to monitor delivery of the Plan against a number of indicators.

This Report outlines the work of the Forum in 2016 and details of key objectives of, and progress in delivering, the National Action Plan (NAP). Data and charts illustrating progress and trends in many of the indicators are this year included in the Report, rather than published in a separate PowerPoint presentation.

The Report has been compiled from a wide range of sources and no part of the text should be taken to represent the views of the member organisations, either individually or collectively. If you have any comments or views on this Report please contact me:

Tracey Ware, Secretary to the Pesticides Forumc/o HSE, Chemicals Regulation DivisionGround Floor, Mallard House, Kings Pool, 3 Peasholme Green, York, YO1 7PXemail: pesticides.forum@hse.gov.uk

More information about the Forum’s work: copies of meeting papers, presentations and minutes of proceedings are available on our website.

Previous years’ reports: our 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 annual reports provide more detail on the NAP’s key priorities, regulatory and non-regulatory/industry incentives and R&D activities. Reference to these reports may help to show the extent to which pesticides are being used in a sustainable fashion.

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 4 of 42

Chair’s forewordWelcome to the 2016 edition of the Pesticides Forum’s annual report

I was asked to take on the role of Chair following a review of the working and membership of the Forum to ensure it can better support government action to promote more sustainable pesticide use. The role of Chair will, in future, be rotated between non-government Forum members. I have so far chaired the Forum’s October 2016 meeting and am looking forward to future meetings.

The format of our annual report has changed this year. Graphs, charts and maps have been re-introduced in an annex. For the last couple of years, these had not been included, but made available as a PowerPoint presentation, which was published on our website. There will not be a presentation accompanying this report.

There have been two recent significant legislative changes that this and future reports will seek to capture/reflect. The first was the ending in November 2015 of the so-called ‘Grandfather Rights’, when users of professional pesticides were required to hold a recognised specified certificate. The second was the introduction on 26 November 2016 of a requirement for application equipment in use to have been inspected and certificated by that date.

Reflecting the first of these, the Forum’s indicators for 2016 include, for the first time, the number of specified certificates issued to professional users.

One key element of the training requirements is that they do not make training compulsory, but rather that they ensure that all professional users, distributors and advisors have access to appropriate training, both initial and additional, so that they can acquire and update knowledge as appropriate. Industry has responded and voluntarily provided and/or encouraged Continuing Professional Development (CPD). Both elements are reflected in our indicators.

On the requirement for application equipment inspection, we expect that data will be available during 2017 demonstrating its impact, and we intend to present this in next year’s report.

It has been reassuring to learn that Defra intends to issue a revised and updated Code of Practice for the safe use of pesticides in 2017. We also understand that the Department intends to publish a refreshed National Action Plan (NAP) outlining the developing approach to the sustainable use of pesticides. This will give a clear steer for the Forum going into 2017 and beyond.

I would like to thank the Forum’s Secretariat and member organisations for their support for our activities, and welcome the new member organisations who will help us work towards our aim to maintain stakeholder oversight of the NAP and provide advice that allows the government to monitor progress of the Plan and develop it further. All this ensures that our meetings and documents such as this report reflect full and careful consideration of issues relating to pesticide use.

Stephen Jacob, BASIS Registration Ltd

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 5 of 42

Executive summaryThe indicators in this Report suggest that pesticides are being used in an increasingly sustainable fashion as a result of government, industry and other bodies working collaboratively.

New legal requirements have resulted in a large increase in the number of pesticide users holding formal qualifications demonstrating that they have knowledge in the safe use of these chemicals. Increasing numbers of users are participating in Continuing Professional Development schemes, demonstrating commitment to keeping their knowledge and expertise up to date. They are supported by professional and well-trained distribution and advisory industries. The users, distributors and advisors are in turn assisted by organisations such as the Voluntary Initiative and Amenity Forum which provide practical and clear guidance on how to best use pesticides. Farm Assurance Schemes and the Amenity Assured Standard provide a framework within which the guidance can be applied.

The new legal requirements also created a requirement for pesticide application equipment to be tested on a regular basis. The data in this Report suggest that the impact of this requirement had been relatively modest, reflecting the fact that industry-led approaches have been successful in embedding such practice within agricultural and horticultural practice.

There are areas for improvement or where better data/information can inform our understanding of how pesticides are being used and the impact they are having. Key needs include: reducing pesticide pollution of water; improving practice within the amenity sector (though it is important to note, in this context, the significant progress which has been made by the Amenity Forum in raising awareness of the principles of sustainable use); and promoting integrated approaches (while recognising the importance of identifying practical measures).

We would, ideally, like certainty that the data/information on: the impacts of pesticides on human health is as robust as possible (we know that this is an issue which has been considered by the UK Expert Committee on Pesticides and is being reviewed by the government); how to assess the uptake and impact of integrated approaches (which an OECD (the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) Working Group is currently considering). We recognise that there are likely to be significant resource implications associated with generating the necessary data/information and that all organisations have a responsibility to apportion funding appropriately and proportionately.

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 6 of 42

Forum activities in 2016We met twice in 2016, in April and in October. In 2016 a review was concluded into the way we worked and our membership. New arrangements were put in place to ensure that the Forum can best support development and delivery of, particularly the priority areas of, the National Action Plan (NAP) and reflect emerging priorities and issues. Our new membership includes increased representation from the research and training sectors and water supply industry.

At our April meeting we invited designated awarding bodies to inform the Forum of their training programmes, obtain feedback, and identify potential new training requirements. The discussion highlighted the importance of including the protection of water in the training syllabuses, and potentially addressing variations in issues in the different regions of the UK.

We also receive regular updates from the Amenity Forum, which has an important role improving practice in a key sector of pesticide use. We considered: the Amenity Forum’s continued successes in increasing its stakeholder engagement, profile, communication and lobbying; a communications project, which produced the ‘GetMoving’ initiative; improved guidance on integrated control and the development of an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) template for the sector; and a new best practice note for internet selling.

In relation to agricultural use of pesticides we considered: the Voluntary Initiative’s (VI) work on stewardship of herbicides used to grow oilseed rape and control black-grass and other weeds in arable rotations; the ‘OSR Herbicides? Think Water’ campaign; the integration of messaging with other initiatives to ensure consistency and avoid duplication; how VI activity/schemes were supporting the sustainable use of pesticides, including the promotion of IPM through development of IPM Plans (IPMPs) (which it is reviewing) and sprayer testing requirements; and the use of ‘BeeConnected’, a web-based tool enabling farmers to inform beekeepers of planned insecticide applications (we heard how approximately 650 users signed up in the first month).

We ensured we were kept updated on/engaged with government activities: contributing to the review of the UK NAP; learning of the UK’s key role in the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) indicators work (securing recognition of the Pesticides Forum’s approach to indicator work); hearing of an initiative to further promote IPM uptake and greater use of low-risk products; and, finally, contributing to an update of Defra’s Code of Practice for the safe use of pesticides.

Protection of water remains a high-profile and important aspect of our activities. We receive regular updates from Defra and the UK environment agencies. We heard that a Defra priority was to work with water companies, supporting them towards meeting their objectives on quality of supply, and that a UK Water Industry Research funded project had been useful to identify risk areas for metaldehyde. Defra was intending to issue a public consultation in 2017 on measures to address metaldehyde pollution of water.

The presentations from our meetings are available on our website.

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 7 of 42

Review of activities supporting the UK National Action Plan

Part 1: Training

Key priorities

� That pesticide users, distributors and advisors (and those who cause or permit the use of pesticides) continue to have access to high quality initial and on-going training in sustainable pesticide use.

� That there is a particular emphasis on improving the training available to those in the non-agricultural sectors.

Overview

Effective training is fundamental to delivering sustainable pesticide use. It helps those who store, use, distribute and/or advise upon the professional use of pesticides by making them aware of hazards and risks and the importance of: maintaining equipment; protecting more sensitive environments; adopting good handling and storage practice; and controlling pests, weeds and diseases in an integrated way. It also helps society to maximise the benefits of pesticide use, whilst minimising the risks associated with the use of these chemicals.

Although the deadline for the need to obtain a specified certificate was November 2015, the City & Guilds’ grandfather rights conversion course was still available in 2016, and will be available until the end of 2017. This will give those who had them the time to obtain a recognised specified certificate. Some will choose to complete the full training programme, as has happened over the time the conversion course has been available, evidenced by the increase in uptake in 2014/15.

The information presented in Annex 1 demonstrates that legal requirements for all users of professional pesticide products to hold a ‘specified certificate’ has had a significant effect on the number of users holding a formal qualification related to safe pesticide use. Another legal requirement for those selling pesticide products to have a sufficient number of qualified staff available at the point of sale has had a similar impact.

Significant and gradually increasing numbers of operators continue to engage with Continuing Professional Development (CPD) schemes. We consider this important given the speed of change in technological and scientific understanding and the regulatory environment in which they are operating.

Indicators

See part 1 of Annex 1, pages 22 and 23.

Further information

Pesticides Forum annual report 2015, pages 7 and 8.

NRoSO BASIS City & Guilds Lantra Awards

List of recognised awarding bodies and specified certificates

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 8 of 42

Part 2: Sales

Key priorities

� That distributors have a sufficient number of appropriately-trained staff available at the time of sale to advise on managing the risks from use of pesticide products.

� That amateur products are sold with information enabling users to store, apply and dispose of products safely.

Overview

As we have previously observed, users of pesticides in the amateur and amenity sectors may require additional guidance, particularly on handling, storage and disposal practice. The law requires those who sell pesticide products to have a sufficient number of suitably qualified staff available at the time of sale to provide advice to purchasers of pesticides on the use, safety instructions and risks and how they can be managed. Distributors/retailers can store significant quantities of pesticides – it is, therefore, important that they are carefully managed.

The distribution part of the supply chain is divided into two parts.

� Distribution of professional pesticide products. This is generally done by specialist retailers. Certification of storekeepers, store inspection and Continuing Professional Development schemes are provided by BASIS Registration Ltd. A combination of new and previous legal obligations and market demands has resulted in a highly professional sector. The BASIS store inspection scheme records over 99% compliance with the required standards. It is estimated that there are approximately 613 such stores in the UK.

� Retail of amateur products. This is generally done by outlets such as garden centres and DIY stores but can include other retailers such as supermarkets. Qualifications for staff in this sector are largely provided by an e-learning course developed by the Horticultural Trades Association in conjunction with the Crop Protection Association. One retailer has developed its own version.

The indicators presented at part 2 of Annex 1 suggest that distributors of professional pesticide products are retaining a commitment to engage with Continuing Professional Development through the Nominated Storekeepers scheme. Of particular interest is the increasing number of staff passing the Amenity version of this scheme.

The indicators also show that a significant number of those involved in the retail of amateur products have undergone training in response to new legal obligations. What these data do not show is the differing approaches of businesses with multiple outlets involved in the retail of amateur products. Many adopt a model of training a relatively small number of staff and providing advice by a centralised system (for example telephone helplines); others appear to have trained all their staff.

Indicators

See part 2 of Annex 1, pages 23 and 24.

Further Information

Pesticides Forum annual report 2015, page 9.

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 9 of 42

Part 3: Information and awareness raising

Key priorities

� That the public has access to accurate and balanced information on pesticide use and its impact.

� That there are systems for gathering and reporting information on pesticide poisoning incidents and that information gathered in this way is acted upon appropriately.

Overview

To understand the extent to which pesticides are being used sustainably, it is important to consider the overall messages that emerge from the full suite of indicators available, and not to focus on any single piece of information/data in isolation. This Report plays a role in helping to understand the implications of pesticide use.

Information relating to areas of particular public interest is presented in part 3 of Annex 1:

� pesticide residues in foodstuffs; � the impact of pesticides on animals and wildlife; and � potential human health poisoning incidents.

The general picture that emerges from these data is a steady but low level of failure to comply with statutory maximum residue levels (MRLs) in foodstuffs and a gradual downward trend of reported incidents, either of pesticides poisoning of wildlife or having an adverse impact on human health.

It is important to view these data in context. For example, the programme which monitors pesticide residues in foodstuffs includes an element of targeting produce more likely to contain residues. It also monitors different foodstuffs each year and as analytical capability develops a greater number of pesticides are sought in each food sample. The data are not, therefore, representative of the overall quality of foodstuffs in the supply chain and care should be taken comparing data on a year-by-year basis.

The indicators relating to poisoning of wildlife and adverse impacts on human health are drawn from investigation schemes based on reports from members of the public. Consequently, it is probable that these data under-report the number of incidents. The government is aware of this and reviewing the arrangements relating to this aspect of the pesticide control regime.

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 10 of 42

Wildlife Incident Investigation Scheme (WIIS)

Investigations by HSE and other enforcing authorities of cases reported into WIIS in 2015 have led to two successful prosecutions in 2016, under the Health and Safety at Work Act as well as under the Plant Protection Products (Sustainable Use) Regulations 2012. One involved the poisoning of a peregrine falcon with carbofuran; based on the evidence obtained, a person was found guilty of storing a pesticide without an authorisation which resulted in a fine of approximately £400 including costs and a victim surcharge. In the other, aluminium phosphide was misused by untrained, unsupervised workers. There were two charges under the Health and Safety at Work Act and the accused was fined approximately £20 000 including costs and victim surcharge.

Research and Development

‘Prospective Investigation of Pesticide Applicators’ Health’ (PIPAH) study. PIPAH is a long-term study to investigate whether there is evidence of a link between working with pesticides and health, to identify any risks, and target the appropriate controls. Established in 2013 and run by HSE’s Health and Safety Laboratory, an annual study newsletter publishes progress updates on the work. By the end of 2016, there were over 5700 members of the study.

Indicators

See part 3 of Annex 1, pages 24 and 25.

Further information

Pesticides Forum report 2015, pages 10 and 11.

Defra Expert Committee on Pesticide Residues in Food (PRiF)

Wildlife Incident Investigation Scheme (WIIS)

Human health surveillance schemes: PIAP; PIPAH;

Human Health Enquiry and Incident Survey (HHEIS): latest results

Enforcement monitoring

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 11 of 42

Part 4: Inspection of application equipment

Key priorities

� That pesticide application equipment is formally tested on a regular basis.

� That regular testing of application equipment was undertaken as widely as possible ahead of legal requirements coming into force in November 2016.

Overview

Regular testing and certification of pesticide application equipment helps to reduce the risk of pollution from, for example, worn or incorrectly attached pipes and hoses, partially-blocked nozzles or poorly calibrated systems. From November 2016, lawful use of all application equipment in use, other than knapsacks and hand-held, was only permitted if it had passed an inspection. The Voluntary Initiative and Amenity Forum have been raising awareness of these requirements amongst operators.

The data presented in part 4 of Annex 1 show that under a previous industry-led scheme there has been an initially rapid, then more gradual increase in the number of machines tested each year by the National Sprayer Testing Scheme (NSTS). An important driver for this was Farm Assurance Schemes requiring annual testing of application equipment (data are presented showing the percentage of growers in such schemes). Data for 2015/16 suggest that the impending legal requirements resulted in an increasing number of operators having their equipment tested (17 283 tested). We estimate that there are around 20 000 to 25 000 machines potentially requiring testing. However, industry intelligence suggests there is a move towards greater use of contracting so the number of machines which will require testing prior to use will be fewer than this.

Virtually all of the machinery included in these figures is for use in agricultural and horticultural situations. Whilst we do not have good information on machinery in the non-agricultural sectors (particularly amenity) that may require testing, it is probable that there are a substantial number of machines that will require testing before they can lawfully be used. The contrast with agriculture may reflect the fact that the amenity sector has no equivalent of Farm Assurance to drive this best practice. We note that the Pesticide Usage Survey is intending to gather information on machinery in the amenity sector in 2017.

One issue the Forum is continuing to monitor is the accessibility of testing for farmers in remote locations such as upland areas. This is of particular interest to governments in Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland who are working with the NSTS to ensure that this is not a problem. It is reassuring to see that the number of sprayers tested in 2016 in Northern Ireland increased by around 180%, in Scotland by 37%, and in Wales by almost 70%.

Further information

Pesticides Forum report 2015, page 12.

NSTS AEA

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 12 of 42

Part 5: Aerial application

Key priorities

� That applications for aerial spraying operations are assessed appropriately and permitted or denied in accordance with the relevant legislation.

Overview

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is the UK authority designated to establish the conditions in which aerial spraying may be carried out, and the competent authority for assessing and permitting applications to undertake aerial spraying.

Aerial spraying of pesticides is usually confined to control of bracken in upland areas. Ground-based methods of control, such as crushing, are used where it is safe and appropriate to do so. However, in many cases the topography and scale of control necessitates the aerial application of a pesticide. Only one product, containing asulam, is authorised for this use. The authorisation has been granted annually on an emergency basis by HSE following careful consideration of an application from a group of stakeholders. The emergency authorisation helps the UK to deal with bracken problems while an application for EU approval is being considered.

Just a handful of companies undertake aerial spraying in the UK. Before carrying out any aerial spraying, the company must notify HSE of its proposed operations and secure a permit for the jobs. Aerial spraying companies are diligent in adhering to these requirements. HSE permits the operations provided a range of conditions are met. Where spraying takes place in, or close to, conservation areas, Conservation Authorities conduct additional checks. Careful consideration is given to permitting this operation and specific conditions may be imposed to assess medium to longer term impacts.

Work to develop alternative (ground-based) methods of control and to test the suitability of other products for bracken control is on-going.

The chart in part 5 of Annex 1 on page 27 shows that the number of permits issued has been around the same for the last three years. The latest data from the Pesticide Usage Survey on aerial application are for 2015. These show that 1934 hectares were sprayed in England, 2269 hectares in Scotland, and 1256 hectares in Wales. There was no aerial spraying in Northern Ireland that year.

Further information

More information on Protected Areas, Areas/Sites of Special Scientific Interest (ASSIs/SSSIs) and Natura 2000 sites can be found in part 7 (pages 52 and 53) of our 2012 Annual Report.

Pesticides Forum annual report 2015, page 13.

Bracken Control Group website

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 13 of 42

Part 6: Measures to protect the aquatic environment and drinking water

Key priorities

� That we understand which pesticides are identified as polluting water and the routes by which this pollution occurs.

� That pesticides detected in surface water, groundwater and drinking water do not pose a risk to human health or the environment, or lead to failure to comply with the requirements of legislation.

� That effective action is taken to prevent or reduce the pollution problem identified, working with relevant stakeholders to ensure positive socio-economic impacts.

� That accidental spillages, which can result in substantial adverse impacts on aquatic ecosystems are minimised.

� That efforts are undertaken to improve the standards of practice of infrequent pesticide users.

Overview

Ensuring that pesticide use does not cause environmental damage or compromise our ability to meet the requirements of water quality legislation is a priority area of the UK National Action Plan.

Even careful, authorised use of pesticides can result in residues being detected in surface waters, groundwaters and tap water supplied to consumers. These surface waters, groundwater and tap water must comply with statutory quality standards established for chemical substances. The fact that even tiny amounts of pesticides are detected, or that there is a rising trend in detections can, potentially, result in the UK failing to comply with EU water quality legislation. It should be emphasised that the limits for pesticides in water set by law are lower than guidance levels to protect human health; therefore the fact that a limit has been exceeded does not necessarily mean that there is a risk to human health.

The indicators presented in part 6 of Annex 1 contain details of both the extent to which pesticides detected in surface waters and groundwaters create a risk of non-compliance with water quality legislation, and pollution incidents. Collection and preparation of these data is resource-intensive so they are not updated every year.

The main pesticides which result in water quality standards being compromised are metaldehyde (used for slug control) and herbicides used to protect oilseed rape crops. They are understood to reach water mostly by drainflow when applied in wet autumn periods. In 2016 the Forum heard of work done under industry product stewardship campaigns to help reduce the risk of these pesticides reaching water. We understand that Defra is also considering whether further action is necessary to address this issue.

The importance of metaldehyde in meeting water quality standards is reflected in the information regarding pesticide pollution incidents. Metaldehyde is difficult to remove from raw water used to supply consumers by normal treatment processes. Water companies may be required to shut down supply from the polluted source when the extent of contamination is sufficiently severe.

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 14 of 42

One thing to note is concerning the detection of mecoprop and mecoprop-P. Some methods cannot distinguish between these stereo-isomers. Mecoprop is no longer approved, whereas mecoprop-P is approved.

Substantiated category 1 and 2 pollution incidents, involving agricultural and non-agricultural pesticides

England

In 2015, the Environment Agency (EA) investigated five serious incidents (Category 1 and 2) involving plant protection products entering a watercourse. The sources of pollution were not traced in all cases, but from the information available all five have been attributed to agricultural activity. It should be noted that the EA will not capture all pesticide incidents, only those that are reported to it, or those it becomes aware of through catchment investigations.

Summary information on the five agricultural incidents, all of them involving metaldehyde:

� In September 2015, pumped intakes to Rutland Reservoir from Tinwell (River Welland) and Wansford (River Nene) were closed as a precautionary measure due to elevated levels of metaldehyde being detected. Anglian Water Services catchment officers carried out farm visits in the areas concerned, but no specific issues or sources have been found or are suspected. It was determined that this was a diffuse pollution incident caused by heavy rain in catchments following application of slug pellets on arable farms. (Category 2)

� Again in late September 2015, Anglian Water Services identified significantly elevated levels of metaldehyde, six times the prescribed concentration value, and they deemed it necessary to close the raw water intake at Sproughton, an intake that goes into Alton Reservoir. The intake was closed for approximately two weeks until the level of metaldehyde present dropped to below Drinking Water Directive levels. (Category 1)

� In early November 2015, routine Anglian Water Services monitoring identified a number of abstractions with high levels of metaldehyde that needed to be closed in the short term to protect supplies. The closing of the various river intakes prevented Rutland Water exceeding the maximum level of metaldehyde in the Drinking Water Directive. (Category 2)

� The intake to Ardleigh Reservoir was closed by Anglian Water Services for four days in early November 2015 because of elevated levels of metaldehyde in the abstracted water. The levels were below the Drinking Water Directive standards and the closure was precautionary. (Category 2)

� In November 2015, the Pitsford Intake from the River Nene to Pitsford Reservoir was closed for three days because metaldehyde levels were above the Drinking Water Directive limit, detected as part of routine monitoring. (Category 2)

This is a big drop in the number of incidents compared to the previous year (21) when there had been a marked increase in the number of incidents related to metaldehyde being reported.

These data only represent those incidents reported to the EA where the source is confirmed or suspected to be related to a pesticide. Prior to 2016, some water companies voluntarily reported drinking water abstraction closures (mainly because of metaldehyde) as incidents and the approach was inconsistent. For 2016, the EA has implemented a new and nationally consistent approach with water companies when reporting abstraction closures as incidents. This will make

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 15 of 42

the direct comparison of 2015 and 2016 difficult but will help with the assessment of trends in the future. Even when an incident is reported it is sometimes not possible to ascribe a particular cause or pesticide type involved with certainty.

Wales

A level of asulam which exceeded the drinking water standard was detected by Dwr Cymru Welsh Water at a small spring source public supply in Carmarthenshire in September 2015. Investigations determined that there had been aerial spraying of bracken in the catchment of the spring. Whilst the contractors had taken normal precautions before spraying, the vulnerability of the spring was not fully understood and asulam entered the groundwater and the spring following heavy rainfall. The source was closed temporarily and replaced by tankered water. No other environmental impact was noted. The incident was classified as significant because of the closure and, in accordance with Natural Resources Wales (NRW) protocols, a warning letter was issued to the contractors. (Category 2)

Scotland

There was one serious incident involving pesticides investigated by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) during 2015. In July 2015 a sprayer crashed and overturned on an access bridge which crosses over a river, spilling its contents; 200 litres containing the insecticide thiacloprid and the fungicide mandipropamid. SEPA does not necessarily capture all pesticide incidents in Scotland, only those reported to them or those that come to light through their normal work. Note: This is the second year we have received a return from SEPA; no serious incidents were reported for 2014.

Further information

Pesticides Forum annual report 2015, pages 14 to 28.

2015 England RBMPs https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/river-basin-management-plans-2015

River Basin Management Plans – Environment Agency guide to accessing data and information (December 2015, published January 2016)

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/500634/RBMP_Guide_to_accessing_data_and_information.pdf

Wales: River Basin Management Plan Protected Areas Register http://naturalresources.wales/media/676156/protected-area-register.xlsx

Welsh Water weed wiper partnership http://www.dwrcymru.com/en/WaterSource/MCPA-Weedwiper.aspx

Voluntary Initiative http://www.voluntaryinitiative.org.uk/

Catchment Sensitive Farming (CSF) https://www.gov.uk/guidance/catchment-sensitive-farming-reduce-agricultural-water-pollution

Using Pesticides: http://www.sruc.ac.uk/downloads/file/2284/using_pesticides

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 16 of 42

Part 7: Reduction of risk in specific areas

Key priorities

� That the particular challenges of pest control in public spaces and conservation areas are understood, and risks and use of pesticides in these areas minimised accordingly.

� That industry bodies continue to play a key role in developing and promoting best practice measures and disseminating advice when pesticides are used in public spaces.

Overview

Some situations of pesticide use have been identified as carrying a potential for risks to people or to the environment. The UK has strict legislative requirements to protect, for example, conservation areas and recently treated areas accessible to agricultural workers. Further action under the National Action Plan is focussed on public spaces. Improving the practices of pesticide users in the amenity sector is a particular priority under the National Action Plan.

Our understanding of the amenity sector is constrained by the data available to us - only recently have regular surveys of the sector been incorporated into the Pesticide Usage Survey programme. The picture emerging from this work corresponds with anecdotal evidence and industry intelligence indicating that the perception of the risks associated with pesticide use and degree of adoption of good and best practice measures does not match that in other sectors (such as agriculture). This statement has to be qualified by noting the extremely diverse nature of amenity pesticide use and it is appropriate to acknowledge that some parts of this sector operate at the very top end of best practice. We note that there will be an amenity Pesticide Usage Survey in 2017 and await the results with interest. We intend to include its findings in the next edition of this Report.

The Amenity Forum (comprised of manufacturers, distributors, contractors, professional bodies, water companies) plays a key role in preparing and promoting guidance on sustainable pesticide use for the sector. We receive regular updates on their work. In 2016 they continued to develop and refresh guidance (for example, on internet selling; counterfeit products; handling and storage; public areas and notification; and integrated control), and launched an innovative ‘GetMoving’ campaign to help raise public awareness of the importance of this sector.

Information on Protected Areas, Areas/Sites of Special Scientific Interest (ASSIs/SSSIs) and Natura 2000 sites can be found in Part 7 (pages 52 and 53) of our 2012 Annual Report. This suggests that the impact of pesticide use is responsible for only a very small proportion of conservation areas being designated as in unfavourable condition. Information on conservation areas is available for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Indicators

See part 7 of Annex 1, page 32.

Further information

Pesticides Forum reports: 2014, pages 32 to 34; 2015, pages 29 and 30.

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 17 of 42

Part 8: Handling and storage of pesticides and treatment of their packaging and remnants

Key priorities

� That practice in the handling, storage and disposal of pesticides is done to high standards in both the professional and amateur sectors.

� That guidance relating to best practice is available for professional users in all sectors.

Overview

Good handling, storage and disposal practice help to ensure pesticides are used sustainably. It is extremely challenging to obtain detailed and robust information on the range of pesticide handling, storage and disposal practices given the variations that are likely to exist between individuals and the fact that individuals will operate differently in particular situations.

The indicators we have selected for this part of the report are designed to capture the extent to which:

� farmers are complying with basic legislative requirements on the use and storage of pesticides (storage of authorised products and use in accordance with the product label, including use of buffer zones where appropriate). These data are drawn from inspections carried out by government to assess entitlement to farming subsidies. Penalties are levied on a sliding scale against the subsidy claimed depending on the severity of the failure to comply with legal requirements.

� operators are demonstrating an appreciation of more sustainable ways of managing pesticide waste, in this case by creating biobeds to dispose of waste.

The charts in part 8 of Annex 1 on pages 32 to 33 suggest there is an overall growing appreciation of more sustainable ways of safely managing pesticide waste and a high degree of compliance with the laws relating to the use and storage of pesticides.

Amateur sector

Improving the practice of users in the amateur sector is another priority area in the UK National Action Plan. Our previous work highlighted the importance of emphasising that amateur users dispose of pesticides and packaging in an appropriate fashion. HSE has carried out a pesticides user habits survey in September-October 2016, with results to be published in 2017. We will include the findings and an analysis of the results in the next edition of this Report.

Further information

Pesticides Forum report 2015, pages 31 to 33.

Cross compliance: The Farming Advice Service, Cross compliance (England), Scottish Government, Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (DAERA) Northern Ireland, Natural Resources Wales

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 18 of 42

Part 9: Low pesticide input management, including Integrated Pest Management (IPM)

Key priorities

� That low pesticide input management systems continue to be developed, promoted and taken up by users of professional pesticide products.

� That awareness of the general principles of IPM increases and that they are adopted, as appropriate, by professional users.

� That an effective range of non-pesticide and integrated approaches to pest, weed and disease control be developed and is made available.

� That the systems which are adopted emphasise growth of a healthy crop with the least possible disruption to agro-ecosystems and encourage natural pest control mechanisms.

Overview

There are good reasons to promote low pesticide input pest management, including IPM. The declining availability of pesticide products and continuing emergence of pest resistance means that there are additional practical drivers for those who use, or cause or permit the use of, pesticides to consider a range of products and techniques for controlling pests, weeds and diseases. Although virtually all pesticide users undertake some form of management consistent with aspects of integrated control, more needs to be done to develop a range of cost-effective tools and techniques and ensure pest, weed and disease control is done in a fully integrated fashion.

It is difficult to obtain clear and robust information on the extent to which IPM is being used (as it requires site- and time-based decisions to be made) and the impact the adoption of such approaches is having (a range of factors will affect, for example, the state of the environment). We know that all pesticide users who have been trained in recent years have been taught about the importance of controlling pests, weeds and diseases in an integrated fashion (see part 1 of Annex 1 on pages 22 to 23).

Part 9 of Annex 1 of this report contains information on:

� Biopesticides. This provides an indication of the availability of alternatives to ‘conventional’ pesticides;

� Organic production. This provides a measurement of the area of land in organic production;

� Use of IPM Plans (IPMPs). This provides an indication of the amount of land farmed by operators conversant with the principles of Integrated Pest Management;

� Bird populations. This provides an indication of the condition of the wider environment, though it should be noted that many factors, other than pesticide use, will impact on bird populations; and

� Adoption of measures within agri-environment schemes. This provides an indication of farmers’ willingness to prioritise the adoption of measures that can mitigate the impact of crop inputs.

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 19 of 42

The indicators show:

� Modest increases in the number of biopesticides. They account for approximately 10% of active substances approved for use in the UK and less than 1.5% of authorised products;

� Use of biopesticides on approximately 17 000 hectares (ha) of land. This represents approximately 0.02% of the treated area;

� A medium-term decline in the amount of land farmed organically (however, there is a slight increase in the area in-conversion);

� A modest increase in the area of land covered by IPMPs and equivalents; � A long-term decline (the rate of which is much reduced in the medium-term) in bird populations; and

� The area of land in agri-environment scheme options which provide food and wildlife resources, and mitigate the impact of crop inputs on arable farms.

Further information

Pesticides Forum report 2015, pages 34 to 43.

LEAF http://www.leafuk.org/leaf/home.eb

ADAS http://www.adas.uk/

Wild Bird Populations in the UK 1970 to 2014 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/471745/UK_Wild_birds_1970-2014__2_.pdf

GWCT https://www.gwct.org.uk/

International Biocontrol Manufacturers’ Association (IBMA) http://www.ibma-global.org/

Natural England https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/natural-england

Natural Resources Wales (NRW) https://naturalresources.wales/splash?orig=/

Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) http://www.snh.gov.uk/

NFU http://www.nfuonline.com/home/

Voluntary Initiative - IPM FAQs

Conservation grade/fair to nature farming

LEAF sustainable farming review (replaced LEAF audit on 1 December 2014)

Amenity Forum http://www.amenityforum.co.uk/

Defra Organic farming statistics

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/organic-farming

Northern Ireland farming statistics 2015

https://www.daera-ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/publications/dard/stats-review-2015-final-amended.PDF

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 20 of 42

Agri-environment links

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/countryside-stewardship-scheme-overview-infographic

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/countryside-stewardship-get-paid-for-environmental-land-management

Scotland: https://www.ruralpayments.org/publicsite/futures/topics/all-schemes/agri-environment-climate-scheme/

Investigation of the impact of changes in pesticide use on invertebrate populations (NECR182) http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/4858366522818560

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 21 of 42

Part 10: Indicators

Key priorities

� That indicators enable everyone to understand where, why and how pesticides are being used. Taken together, all the indicators in this Report should provide an objective measure of progress towards meeting the objectives of the National Action Plan.

� That the analysis of the messages emerging from indicator data/information is explained in a clear and easily understood fashion.

� That our suite of indicators is used to identify both priority items, such as active substances, crops, regions or practices requiring particular attention, or good practices in sustainable pesticide use.

Overview

This Report has been designed to provide an overview of where, why and how pesticides are used and the impacts of this use. We have selected a range of data and information that helps to do this and have highlighted any strengths and/or limitations in our approach.

This part of the Report contains information on pesticide use, areas of cropped land and use of pesticides on key crops (focussed this year on oilseed rape). It helps to provide some context for the data and information contained elsewhere in the Report.

In our 2013 Annual Report (pages 70 to 75) we explained the background to the indicators we include. It is important to note that pesticide usage is closely correlated to cropping patterns and is also subject to seasonal variation in response to weather conditions, and the introduction of new active substances with lower application rates. Around 71% of the land area in the UK is used for agriculture.

The data show: overall pesticide use in 2016 remained steady; the area of cropped land remained almost unchanged, at 4.67 million hectares; and the changes in pesticide use on oilseed rape, our focus crop this year.

Indicators

See part 10 of Annex 1, pages 38 to 41.

Further information

Pesticides Forum report 2015, pages 44 to 46.

Defra June Agricultural Survey https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/579402/structure-jun2016final-uk-20dec16.pdf

Fera Pesticide Usage Survey https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/index.cfm

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 22 of 42

1.2 NRoSO membership

� National Register of Sprayer Operators (NRoSO) membership indicates the number of pesticide users undertaking Continuing Professional Development.

� The drop in membership in 2014/15 numbers was mainly caused by those with ‘grandfather rights’ being inactivated on 26 November 2015.

� The requirement, from 26 November 2015, for users of professional products to hold a specified certificate explains the rise in membership the following year.

Source: City and Guilds

1.1 Recognised specified certificates

� This indicator reflects the number of pesticide users who have undergone basic training.

� Training is modular; everyone undertakes a foundation qualification. Users must then be trained in elements relating to the type of application equipment they will be using.

� Since ‘grandfather rights’ exemption from holding a certificate of competence ended in November 2015, fewer users than expected took the ‘grandfather rights’ conversion course, and many opted to undertake full training instead.

Source: Awarding bodies

Part 1: training

Annex 1

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 23 of 42

2.1 BASIS Nominated Storekeeper (NSK) / Amenity Storekeeper (Amenity NSK) training: number of passes

� This qualification is relevant for distributors of professional pesticide products.

� It requires storekeepers to operate best practice in store design and management and undertake continuing professional development.

� Stores are audited regularly by BASIS. The audits indicate a high standard of compliance with the scheme standards.

� 6944 are qualified storekeepers in NSK and Amenity NSK. � 1317 (18.9%) held the Amenity NSK qualification. � Note the 50:50 split for Nominated Storekeepers in 2016.

Source: BASIS

Part 2: sales

1.3 BASIS: membership of registers

� Register membership indicates the number of advisors and amenity users of professional pesticide products undertaking continuing professional development.

� The smaller than expected increase in membership of the Amenity Register is due to the fact that some amenity users are signing up to the Professional Register.

� The growth in Professional Register membership can be attributed to merging FACTS members onto the BASIS Professional Register and is a one-off event.

Source: BASIS

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 24 of 42

3.1 Consumer protection: compliance with MRLs

� 627 UK and 1334 non-UK samples of fruit and vegetables were tested in 2015.

� One UK and seven non-UK samples were referred to the Food Standards Agency (FSA) as there were concerns about the potential risk to the health of people eating those foods.

� Increased non-compliance in 2015 reflects: detection of chemicals which are regulated as both pesticides and biocides but also used to disinfect potted food products; and technical exceedances of MRLs set at the limit of determination.

Source: HSE

Part 3: information and awareness raising

2.2 Amateur pesticide products – training for retail staff

� These qualifications are awarded to retail staff following completion of a training module and successfully passing a test.

� The large increase in 2016 reflects the fact that a single multiple retailer appears to have trained all members of its staff, and that another launched its own qualification.

Source: Horticultural Trades Association/Homebase/Wilko/Wyevale

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 25 of 42

3.3 Pesticides incidents investigations in Great Britain: 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2016

� The chart reflects investigations undertaken by HSE in response to allegations of ill-health and symptoms as a result of pesticide exposure.

� HSE categorises incidents as either ‘alleged ill-health’ or ‘other complaints’ (general misuse of pesticides).

� Reports of GB ‘alleged ill-health’ incidents are referred to the Pesticides Incidents Appraisal Panel (PIAP).

� PIAP categorises these incidents as either ‘confirmed’, ‘unconfirmed’, ‘likely’ or ‘open’. The chart shows the outcome of the GB investigations.

� The data do not include complaints investigated in Northern Ireland (none were upheld in 2015-16).

Source: HSE

3.2 Wildlife Incident Investigation Scheme (WIIS): UK

� The majority of cases involved poisoning of birds, mammals and other wildlife.

� Cases in 2015 include 17 involving honeybees, one involving feral bees and one involving bumble bees.

� Pesticides were: the cause of death in three bee cases; detected but not the cause of death in eight cases; not detected in seven cases.

� Neonicotinoid pesticides are screened for in all bee cases. They were detected in four (21%) cases, but were not the cause of death.

Source: WIIS

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 26 of 42

4.2 Membership of crop assurance schemes on holdings sampled in the United Kingdom Pesticide Usage Surveys (PUS) (to 2015)

� Membership of crop assurance was assessed in PUS surveys on outdoor vegetable and edible protected crops in 2015.

� The percentage of holdings with crop assurance remained at similar levels to those recorded in 2013.

� PUS reports are available at https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/index.cfm

Notes to chart:n = number of farms surveyed.‘Orchards’ include apples grown for dessert and cider production. The level of crop assurance is normally higher for dessert apples.

Source: Fera Pesticide Usage Surveys

4.1 User practice: National Sprayer Testing Scheme (NSTS) (number of sprayer tests)

� NSTS tested 17 283 machines in 2015/16. � Tests were split between:

� England (15 001); � Wales (358); � Scotland (1660); � Northern Ireland (264)

� In addition, 791 micro-granular applicator tests and 54 fogger tests were conducted.

Source: VI

Part 4: inspection of application equipment

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 27 of 42

5.1 User practice: Aerial applications

� Only one product, containing asulam, was authorised for aerial spraying to control bracken in 2016 and was again granted on an emergency basis.

� Of the 209 permits (including seven jobs updated from 2015) issued in 2016, 49 were for jobs in England, 104 in Scotland and 56 in Wales.

� No applications were received for Northern Ireland.

Source: HSE

Part 5: aerial application

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 28 of 42

6.1 England

� There is no update to the surface water or groundwater classification. � The maps in the 2015 annual report match what is current in the

River Basin Management Plan. � The Environment Agency has provided a slightly revised map of the

Surface Water Drinking Water Protected Areas (DrWPAs).

Note: accessibility tip – zoom on image for a clearer view.

Source: Environment Agency (EA)

Part 6: measures to protect the aquatic environment and drinking water

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 29 of 42

6.2 Scotland

Surface water bodies not currently meeting Water Framework Directive (WFD) Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) for pesticides

No EQS breaches were found during 2015.

Intensive, targeted monitoring took place in some Priority Catchments:

� 10% of SEPA’s analyses detected residue(s). � 53 different active substances were found in 509 samples taken; the top five identified (by frequency) were: - linuron (235 samples) - mecoprop-P (199 samples) - oxadixyl (136 samples) - boscalid (126 samples) - metazachlor (124 samples)

� Of these, oxadixyl is no longer approved (withdrawn in 2003).

Surface Water Drinking Water Protected Areas

Six of the 516 surface water DrWPAs in Scotland were identified as being at risk of deterioration from pesticides (2015 monitoring results).

This represents 1.2% of all such areas in Scotland.

Source: Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 30 of 42

6.3 Scotland

Groundwater bodies failing WFD objectives due to pesticides

Three groundwater bodies are currently assessed as failing ‘good status’ due to pesticides in 2015. One of the failures is for atrazine, the other two are for simazine. These active substances are no longer approved for use in the EU.

Monitoring at sampling locations during 2015 (377 samples) detected 52 active substances above the limit of detection. The top five active substances identified (by frequency) were:

� oxadixyl (69 samples): no longer approved (since 2003) � simazine (60 samples): no longer approved (since 2007) � atrazine (48 samples): no longer approved (since 2007) � linuron (32 samples) � epoxiconazole (28 samples)

Overall, less than 3% of the analyses carried out by SEPA for groundwater resulted in the detection of a residue.

Forty-four results exceeded 0.075 µg/l (this is the concentration that denotes a risk of breaching the 0.1 µg/l limit). Of these, 0.2% of analyses threatened to exceed the 0.1 µg/l limit. Active substances detected most frequently were:

� oxadixyl (10 samples): no longer approved (since 2003) � simazine (6 samples): no longer approved (since 2007) � bentazone (6 samples) � atrazine (4 samples): no longer approved (since 2007) � mecoprop-P (3 samples) � bromoxynil (3 samples) � fenuron (3 samples): no longer approved (since 2007)

Source: SEPA

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 31 of 42

6.6 Substantiated category 1 and 2 pollution incidents, involving agricultural and non-agricultural pesticides

England:In 2015, the Environment Agency investigated five serious incidents (Category 1 and 2). All involved metaldehyde.

Scotland:SEPA investigated one serious incident in 2015. An overturned sprayer spilled 200 litres of insecticide and fungicide into a river.

Wales:One category 2 pollution incident was reported in 2015, involving the bracken control herbicide asulam.

Source: Environment Agency (EA), Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA), Natural Resources Wales (NRW)

6.5 Northern Ireland

No new data are available.

6.4 Wales - 2015 monitoring results

Surface Water Drinking Water Protected AreasOf a total of 131 surface water DrWPAs, 25 were identified as being at risk due to pesticides.

Surface Water Bodies not currently meeting WFD Environmental Quality Standards for PesticidesData for 2015 were reported in the Pesticides Forum’s 2015 annual report, on page 19.

Groundwater bodies failing WFD objectives due to pesticidesThere were no failures of groundwater bodies due to pesticides in the latest groundwater WFD classification round.

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 32 of 42

8.1 Number of registered biobeds and biofilters

� Biobeds and biofilters offer a solution for ensuring pesticide losses to surface and groundwater are minimised.

� In England and Wales site operators installing biobeds or biofilters must register a waste exemption with the EA or NRW. This is because treatment of pesticide washings in a biobed or biofilter is a waste management activity.

� Similar but separate arrangements exist in Scotland, where exemptions must be registered with SEPA.

� In England and Wales the exemption lasts three years, whereas in Scotland it lasts 12 months.

� The increase in 2013 reflects the work undertaken by regulators and industry to promote uptake.

Source: SEPA, NRW, EA

Part 8: handling and storage of pesticides and treatment of their packaging and remnants

7.1 The Amenity Forum’s activities in 2016

� 2016 annual conference was the largest yet (197 registrations) � 12 free updating workshops were held across the UK in 2016: 9 in

England (294 attendees); and one each in Scotland (35 attendees), Wales (62 attendees), Northern Ireland (NI) (41 attendees). This was the first event in NI.

� The ‘GetMoving’ campaign: � #AmenityMatters; @Amenity Forum; � ‘edugraphic’ documents eg ‘Why It Matters’; � video eg ‘The Misery of Invasive Weeds’; � public information eg ‘Football’; � industry advice eg ‘Professional Lawncare’.

� Best practice notes, eg Internet selling; Counterfeit products.

Part 7: reduction of risk in specific areas

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 33 of 42

9.1 Cumulative numbers of active substances and products approved as biopesticides in UK (2003-2016)

� Dates included are: � 2003: date of the pilot exercise; � 2006: biopesticide scheme started; � 2008 to 2016.

Source: HSE

Part 9: low pesticide input management, including Integrated Pest Management (IPM)

8.2 Number of penalties levied for cross compliance breaches found during inspection in 2015 (SMR 10) (Proper use of Plant Protection Products)

� England: 400 inspections, 19 failed. 47 penalties were levied. � Scotland: 234 inspections, 14 failed. 14 penalties. � Wales: 167 cross compliance inspections took place; no breaches

were identified. � Northern Ireland: 264 cross compliance inspections were carried out.

No breaches were identified.

Source: HSE

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 34 of 42

9.3 Area of organic and in-conversion land use and crops in UK

� In 2015, the United Kingdom had a total area of 521 thousand hectares of land farmed organically, down from 549 thousand hectares in 2014. Permanent pasture accounts for the biggest share of the organic area (67%) followed by temporary pasture (18%) and cereals (8%).

� Cereals, vegetables and potatoes, and other arable crops have all declined since the late 2000s, mirroring the fall in the land area farmed organically since 2008.

� The area in-conversion expressed as a percentage of the total organic area rose slightly in 2015, the first rise since 2007. The percentage in-conversion in 2007 was around 23%, but was down to 3.95% in 2015.

Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/organic-farming-statistics-2015

9.2 Biopesticide usage in the UK recorded during Pesticide Usage Surveys in 2016 (on usage in 2015 and where area treated is over 100 hectares)

� Not all uses are captured in PUS surveys; forestry, ornamental crops, hops and mushrooms are excluded from the surveys.

� Crops surveyed in 2015 were outdoor vegetable crops and edible protected crops grown in the UK in the 2014/15 season. The surveys covered:

� 36% of the total area of outdoor vegetable crops grown. � 52% of the total area of edible protected crops grown.

Source: Fera Pesticide Usage Surveys

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 35 of 42

9.4 Integrated Pest Management Plans (IPM Plans)

� IPM Plans (IPMPs) were introduced in 2014 and are required for membership of crop assurance schemes, such as Red Tractor. They include cultural techniques of pest, weed and disease management and measures to protect water and other features.

� The chart shows the area covered by IPMPs as well as LEAF and conservation grade farming, which meet the IPMP requirements.

� Number of Voluntary Initiative IPM Plans (VI IPMPs) completed by region (1 April 2015 to 31 March 2016):

� England 10 829 � Scotland 372 � Wales 116 � Northern Ireland 59

Source: VI

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 36 of 42

9.7 Chick-food index (CFI)

� Changes in the four chick-food indices, measuring food resources for corn bunting, grey partridge, yellowhammer chicks, plus the generic CFI, show much year-to-year variation, reflecting annual weather patterns.

� Long-term modelling revealed significant declines in grey partridge, yellowhammer and the generic CFIs of 45% to 75%, and a decline in the corn bunting index of 25%.

� From 2010, the corn bunting CFI averaged 0.64 or 64% of that in 1970, grey partridge CFI averaged 0.47, the generic index 0.33, and the yellowhammer index averaged 0.19. There is still a need to increase management directed at chick-food invertebrate resources to recover them to levels seen in 1970.

9.6 Populations of all bird species in the UK

� No new data

9.5 Populations of selected farmland bird species in the UK

� No new data

Source: Defra/RSPB/BTO/JNCC

Source: Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust (GWCT) http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/4858366522818560

Source: Defra/RSPB/BTO/JNCC Note: ‘spp’ = species

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 37 of 42

9.9 Areas of different agri-environment options used by farmers on arable farmland: Northern Ireland

� Agri-environmental schemes are managed in Northern Ireland schemes under the Rural Development Programme. � In 2015, some 305 000 hectares or 29% of farmland was registered in an agri-environmental scheme in Northern Ireland compared to 35% in 2014.

The percentage area of farmland under agreement decreased in 2015 because of the numbers of agreements reaching the contract end point.

9.10 Areas of different agri-environment options used by farmers on arable farmland: Wales and Scotland

� No new data are available.

9.8 Areas of different agri-environment options used by farmers on arable farmland: England

� Environmental Stewardship (comprising (Organic) Entry Level Stewardship (ELS) and Higher Level Stewardship (HLS)) closed for new entrants in 2014. In July 2015, its successor scheme, Countryside Stewardship (CS), commenced with new agreements starting in January 2016.

� Note that the last 5-year agreements under ELS will continue to be ‘live’ until 2018 and those in HLS until 2023.

� Grass margins and arable field corners were very popular in ELS, where there was free choice of options required to meet a points threshold.

� The arable field corner option is no longer available in CS, although grass buffer strips are. However, through the Wild Pollinator & Farm Wildlife Packages, there has been much greater encouragement of options that deliver key resources (ie year-round food supplies and places for nesting/shelter) for wild pollinators and farmland birds, such as wild bird seed mixture, nectar mix and floristically-enhanced margins.

Source: Natural England (NE)

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 38 of 42

10.1 Estimated annual pesticide usage for all crops in Great Britain/UK (tonnage of active substance applied)

� Different crops are surveyed each year. � In 2015, the crops were:

� outdoor vegetable crops � edible protected crops

� It is important to note that pesticide usage is closely correlated to cropping patterns, and is also subject to seasonal variation in response to weather conditions and the introduction of new active substances with lower application rates but with similar amounts of activity.

Source: Fera Pesticide Usage Surveys

Part 10: indicators

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 39 of 42

10.3 UK pesticide average inputs per crop (including soil sterilants)

� The new data are from 2015 surveys on onions, parsnips and Brussels sprouts.

� In comparison to Brussels sprouts there is a higher input of herbicides on both onions and parsnips. Repeat low-dose inputs of herbicides are used on onions and parsnips to keep the crop clean throughout the season. Brussels sprouts receive ‘pre-plant’ and immediately ‘post-plant’ applications to clean the crop, and then rely on the crop to out-compete weed seedlings.

� Soil sterilants are now used on a limited range of crops, including strawberries and some vegetables. For strawberries the move to the use of substrate systems, such as bags and troughs, has also removed the need for soil sterilants.

Source: Fera Pesticide Usage Surveys

10.2 Cropped areas in the UK (2004-2016)

� Croppable land consists of cereals, oilseed rape, potatoes, other arable crops, horticultural crops, un-cropped arable land and temporary grass.

� The three most popular crops grown in the UK are wheat, barley and oilseed rape.

� The area of wheat has fluctuated slightly, from 1.99 million hectares in 2004 compared to 1.82 million in 2016.

� The area of barley had declined considerably over past years, but increased in 2016 by 2.0% to 1.1 million hectares.

� The oilseed rape area has increased from 500 to 579 thousand hectares between 2004 and 2016. However, the oilseed rape area has decreased for the last four years after reaching a record high in 2012 of 756 000 hectares.

Source: Defra

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 40 of 42

10.4 UK pesticide average inputs for oilseed rape (OSR)

(see chart on this page)

10.5 UK pesticide usage on OSR (charts on next page)

� Fungicide inputs have increased since 2010. In part, this could be because of higher usage of metconazole (it has both growth regulator as well as fungicidal properties). However, it could also be due to mounting disease pressures since 2010.

� Insecticide usage also increased in 2012 and 2014, and was mostly foliar application. These increases are likely to be associated with increasing insecticide resistance in Cabbage Stem Flea Beetle. It will be interesting to see the results of the 2016 arable survey which will show insecticide usage following the restrictions on some neonicotinoid seed treatments.

� Herbicide applications also increased on OSR, with a 68% increase in the use of glyphosate between 2012 and 2014 and an increase from 1513 hectares treated with clethodim in 2012 to 132 513 hectares treated in 2014. Reasons for the usage of both herbicides included black-grass control.

Source: Fera Pesticide Usage Surveys

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 41 of 42

Pesticides in the UK: The 2016 report on the impacts and sustainable use of pesticides Page 42 of 42

AcknowledgementsFront cover image:

LED-lit crop production technology

Image kindly provided by Phillip Davis, LED4CROPS, Stockbridge Technology Centre

http://www.led4crops.co.uk/

http://www.stockbridgetechnology.co.uk/

http://www.linkedin.com/company/stockbridge-technology-centre

https://twitter.com/STC_Ltd

Maps:

Pages 29 and 30

© 2017 Scottish Environment Protection Agency. Some features of this map are based on digital spatial data licenced from the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, © CEH. Includes material based upon Ordnance Survey mapping with permission of H.M. Stationery Office, © Crown Copyright. Licence number 100016991.