A SCIENTIFIC researcher who has become a passionate opponent of glyphosate in recent years due to concerns over its impact on human health says an agriculture sector without the herbicide is possible but will require significantly more public sector investment.
Matt Landos, director of the Future Fisheries Veterinary Service, acknowledged the difficulties in transitioning the sector away from the popular product, but said there were promising results with techniques such as agro-ecology, which advocates a shift away from a narrow band of crop rotations and the use of natural enemies rather than pesticides.
The concept means an increased focus on integrated weed and pest management systems.
“At present, we are barely spending a dime, on looking for non-chemically dependent agricultural solutions, along the lines of agroecology,” Dr Landos said.
He said the long-term focus needed to be on doing away with dangerous herbicides, but in the short-term said working to reduce chemical application rates would be a good start.
“Glyphosate is bad, but the alternative chemical options are worse, with hard to control drift in some products, such as 2,4-D ester, and links to serious human health impacts such as Parkinson’s Disease,” he said.
“And from an environmental point of view cultivation is also bad in terms of landscape stability and soil retention.”
“This is where a totally different solution is needed, which can only be found with substantial research effort.
“Huge change is possible, but it does require investment, and here lies the role of governments.”
Other non-herbicide weed management techniques showing some promise in trial work includes projects using steam to kill weeds and Victorian-based research into a microwave-based weeding system.
In the interim, Dr Landos said work could begin on projects that could dramatically minimise pesticide usage.
“Take something like sensor technology, we’re getting some great results with that, viticulturalists now can reduce volumes of use by 40-50% using sensor technology.
“It would not take too much money, around $300,000 to get research done on a similar type sensor system adapted for tree crops with a goal of a similar sized drop in pesticide use.”
He said he was part of a group of organisation in Queensland looking to get funding for research into using sensor technology on tree crops.
“It can substantially reduce chemical application costs without a loss of efficacy,” he said.
The sensor technology is also used in broadacre cropping through products that sense chlorophyll and only switch the spray nozzle on when there is a weed present rather than operating continuously.
In broadacre cropping there has also been success with research funded by the Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC) with the Harrington Seed Destructor, which is a harvest weed seed control measure.
It works by destroying weed seeds at harvest time, reducing the seed burden and has worked successfully on a commercial scale.