Experts react to locust control methods

LOCUSTS

The Government has joined the UN's food agency and other partners in scaling up aerial spraying and ground control operations in areas that have been attacked by locusts.

The Government through the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF) has activated surveillance and rapid response measures and established a $1.35 million contingency fund to support the efforts.

The government delivered 18,000 litres each of cypermethrin and Chlorpyrifos to the sub-region spray of the locusts. However, experts doubted the effectiveness of the chemicals in killing locusts, saying they are meant to kill ordinary insects such as cockroaches and fleas.

Some reports showed that both Cypermethrin and Chlorpyrifos are harmful to useful insects such as bees and are used for killing pests such as cockroaches, fleas, termites and other smaller insects, but are not effective in killing locusts. Also, the chemicals can be harmful to human beings if exposed to large quantities.

The prevalent situation shows the negligence authorities follow internationally recognized standards while applying chemicalised elements and this is evident in the farming practices in our country. Uganda still faces a big deal of unregulated use of these insecticides, herbicides and the rest.

Evarist Magara, the Uganda representative to The Desert Locust Control Organisation of East Africa (DLCO-EA), said they had recommended Fenitrothion to the government because its negative environmental impact is very low. "Fenitrothion does not kill birds and animals, and it does not accumulate in the environment."

Even when there are challenges of those chemicals on the ground our continual use of what we know is not recommended cannot be separated from the behavior of farmers in the developing countries who continue to produce food other markets, especially in Europe can't consume

However, one question to ask is the effect that will be left by the insecticides that are being used on both people and livestock and whether the insecticides meet the standards for use in such occurrences.

As an agricultural economy, the need to increase agricultural output for increased trade and food security has always taken center stage in policy and practice discourse in Uganda.

Out of the need to increase output, one of the rising practices is the use of herbicides in Uganda's agricultural production of which their wrong use has caused us terrible losses when our exports are rejected for not meeting the recommended phytosanitary standards.

One of the widely used herbicides in Agricultural production is Glyphosate, which represents over 75% of the market for herbicides in Uganda. Amidst this, one of the least discussed topics in Trade, health and food security discourse is how harmful Agrochemicals like glyphosate negatively affect Uganda's trade competitiveness, food security and increases the disease burden in the country, especially the Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs).

Against that background, The Southern and Eastern Africa Trade Information and Negotiations Institute (SEATINI) Uganda and CEFROHT organized a National Experts Meeting on a theme "Glyphosates and Agrochemicals trade and its implication to health and food in Uganda and noted that a number of regulatory policy frameworks on regulating and banning trade and use of harmful agrochemicals are lacking.

The former, experts said should be put in place, while existing ones should be updated and implemented. "Civil Society, Farmers, Academia and Media should be mobilised to strategize on how to engage the relevant government Ministries, Departments, and Agencies on a campaign that should seek Government to issue an immediate ban on the use of glyphosate, and Glyphosate Based Herbicides (GBH) in Uganda and all internationally banned agrochemicals."

According to the Executive Director, Food Rights Alliance, Agnes Kirabo, implementation of the National Organic Food Policy and Section 18 of the Agriculture Chemicals (Control) Act 2007 to regulate the use, transport, storage advertisement and disposal of pesticides is key in ensuring food safety in Uganda.

"Despite previous efforts to understand the dangers of glyphosate and other harmful agrochemicals use and trade e.g. through experts' meetings and dialogues, the Government of Uganda has, among other issues, failed to ban the use of glyphosate and Glyphosate Based Herbicides (GBHs), which threaten and are a violation of the right to life, health, right to adequate food and to a clean and healthy environment guaranteed under Objectives XX, XXII, Articles 20, 45, 8A and 33 of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda."

Speaking during the meeting, Jane Nalunga the Executive Director NOGAMU, a body that connects farmers to the international market, notes that the Government has also failed to prevent the presence of pesticide residues in agricultural products on the Ugandan market.

This inaction by government according to Lawyer David Kabanda, the Executive Director CEFROTH, threatens the country's trade competitiveness and is a violation of the right to health, life, a clean and healthy environment and the right to adequate food contrary to Articles 20, 45, 33 (3) and 8A of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda.

It is therefore important to mobilize experts so as to strategize on a campaign that will seek to engage the government of Uganda on the need to regulate harmful agrochemicals use, given their effect on trade, health and food in Uganda.

"The campaign will also seek to engage the government on putting in place, updating and implementing (existing) regulatory policies and legislations that prohibit use and trade in harmful agrochemicals", Kabanda said.

Kabanda noted that lack of a harmonized strategy around this will result in divergent voices among CSOs which will enhance Government's inaction due to limited pressure from CSOs.