Milk DCD free

Ministry of Primary Industries tests have confirmed no traces of DCD in milk since November.

“MPI and the New Zealand dairy industry have conducted voluntary testing of New Zealand dairy products to build a comprehensive picture of the presence of DCD in New Zealand’s milk supply,” MPI Director General Wayne McNee said.

The tests have found no traces of DCD in milk collected from New Zealand farms after mid November 2012.

“We are releasing the core findings of the testing today to be as open as we can be with our markets and customers, despite the fact that the quantities of DCD found in our dairy products creates absolutely no food safety risk whatsoever,” Mr McNee said.

With the co-operation of the dairy industry, nearly 2000 samples of dairy products have been tested from all the major dairy companies.

Testing has specifically targeted dairy products using milk collected during the New Zealand spring last year from the less than five percent of dairy farmers who used DCD on pastures. Results have been coming in as recently as last week.

As expected, minute traces of DCD have been found in various dairy products already in the supply chain from a variety of companies. However, there remains no food safety risk – all traces have been significantly below the European Commission’s daily intake level for DCD.

“Importantly, tests on products made from milk collected from farms after mid-November show no traces of DCD at all,” Mr McNee said.

“These findings confirm our expectations. We have informed markets of them.”

There never was a food safety issue.

The problem was there was no international standard for DCD but the tiny traces found in some milk products late last year were well below the EU standard.

There was a perception problem but the prices have continued to increase in Fonterra’s GlobalDairyTrade auctions since the announcement traces of DCD were found.

This shows that markets weren’t concerned, in spite of some opposition politicians attempts to manufacture a scandal.

It’s also a vote of confidence in New Zealand’s very high food safety standards and a reminder of why maintaining them is so important.

Traceability counter to horsemeat scandal

The introduction of the traceability for New Zealand sheep and beef hasn’t been universally popular but the horse meat scandal in Ireland and the UK shows how important it is.

With New Zealand beef traceable under the National Animal Identification and Tracing (NAIT) scheme, Federated Farmers believes the current horsemeat scandal in Europe provides an opportunity for NAIT to deliver on its value-add promise for our farmers.

“The horsemeat scandal in Europe provides an acid test for the NAIT concept of traceability,” says Jeanette Maxwell, Federated Farmers Meat & Fibre chairperson.

“Europe was held up as the gold standard for traceability but in reality, it is New Zealand that now has one of the most rigorous systems on earth.

“I know Kiwi beef farmers are shocked by the almost daily revelations that stretch from Ireland to Romania. We keep asking how systems designed to ensure traceable meat there could have broken down so spectacularly.

“Aspects of European meat procurement resemble something out of an Ian Fleming novel.

“While our beef exports to the European Union are small, at over 12,000 tonnes, it is a lucrative market worth $149 million in 2011/12. This uncertain climate regarding European beef must surely make our traceable beef stand out; especially at the premium end.

“It is time for the NAIT value-add promise to deliver for farmers and don’t we need it. It may also be a golden chance to cement ‘NZ Inside’ European premium processed food products too,” Mrs Maxwell concluded.

NAIT has added effort and costs to production. The horse meat scandal might prove its worth.

Consumers will be even more anxious to know where their meat comes from now. NAIT makes it easy which provides an opportunity for New Zealand beef.

Rural round-up

Variation 6 roll out:

Variation 6 is now being rolled out to the lower Waikato and West Coast catchments by the Waikato Regional Council.

It confirms the requirement that all dairy farms taking more than 15 cubic metres of water per day for milk cooling and shed washdown purposes require a resource consent. 

Farmers have until January 1, 2015 to take advantage of the special grandparenting rules made available to them in the variation. 

Farmers who were taking more than 15 cubic metres a day for dairy shed wash down and milk cooling as at October 2008 will generally have the amount taken in 2008 grandparented providing they meet a range of conditions 

These conditions include applying for a consent by January 2015, developing a riparian management plan and excluding stock from waterways. . .

Loyalty key to 50 years as agent - Sally Rae:

When Robin Gamble turned up to work at National Mortgage as a fresh-faced school-leaver, little did he know he would still be in the stock and station industry 50 years later.

But luck and loyalty had proved to be a great combination in half a century with the same company, he said.

There might have been a few mergers over the years, adding a few different coloured ties to his wardrobe, but he still considered that he had worked for the same company, now PGG Wrightson, he said. . .

Workshop on biofarming – Sally Rae:

Joel Salatin, described as an American biological farming guru, is running a two-day workshop in Wanaka at the end of the month.

Mr Salatin hails from Polyface Farm in Virginia’s Shenandoah Valley, a family-owned, pasture-based, local-market farm which produces beef, pork, poultry, rabbits and forestry products.

It has become internationally known for promoting the importance of buying healthy, locally grown food. Initially, the farm could not support one salary but now it has annual sales of more than $US1 million. . .

Passionate breeders hang in – Sally Rae:

Ram breeders who have stuck with the sheep industry are the ones who are ”pretty passionate about it”, Min Bain believes.

He and his wife, Lisa, with children Lochie (13) and Danielle (10), farm at Waitahuna West, near Lawrence, and breed Romney, Dorset Down and Romdale rams.

He was among nine ram breeders at the Southfuels Farmarama in Lawrence last week, which was an increase on previous years. . .

Farmlands CRT merger one step closer:

The boards of CRT and Farmlands, recommending a merger of their societies, have attracted overwhelming shareholder support to take the process to its next stage.

The CRT shareholder meeting in Christchurch on Tuesday completed the first of two shareholder votes required to approve a merger with those in favour accounting for 85.5% of the vote, exceeding the threshold of 75% of votes necessary to proceed.

CRT chairman Don McFarlane said he was very pleased with the outcome. . .

Stop horsing around with our food:

Wellingtonians who buy their meat direct from the farm have nothing to fear from recent stories of horse meat being found in UK food.

UK’s Aldi and Tesco supermarkets and Burger King have all been in the food spotlight recently with significant traces of horse meat found in beef products they sell.

Greytown farmer Julian Downs of Rannoch Meats believes New Zealanders have plenty of opportunity to know where their food comes from. “Forty years ago we all had access to local producers, and that still exists today. There’s plenty of markets and ways to buy direct.

“It’s different in the UK, where cities are enormous and the countryside is unknown to many people says Julian, but more and more people are wanting to know more about what goes into their food.” . . .

Protection, subsidies incentivise meat cheats

The discovery of horse meat in burgers in Ireland has been followed by news that up to 100% of meat in some lasagne came from horses too.

Liberty Scott points out that protection and subsidies incentivise the meat cheats:

This is fraud, and should be treated as such.  However, secondary to this are the market distortions created by the Common Agricultural Policy.  Meat moves freely and tariff free within the EU.  However, the EU imposes strict quotas on beef from outside the EU, such as a limit of 1,200 tonnes a year from New Zealand.  It also imposes a 20% tariff within that quota.  Although it allows outside quota beef in, it must have a tariff of around 100-250%.  All NZ beef imported into the EU must meet strict labelling and traceability conditions, unlike the subsidised EU beef.

 

There are obvious pressures to source cheap beef for low priced products, but the EU Common Agricultural Policy prevents this by propping up inefficient producers in the EU.  The quotas on imports should be abolished immediately, and tariffs abolished, so that beef can be imported at low cost and high quality.  It wont stop fraud happening, but reduces the pressure to substitute real beef for cheap alternatives due to trade protectionism.

EU residents pay higher taxes to subsidise inefficient producers and consumers pay more for food, some of which is of lower quality, because of tariffs and reduced competition.

Horse meat is widely eaten in Europe so it might not be a food safety issue though it does call into question the effectiveness of strict food labelling requirements.

Whether or not it’s a food safety issue though is no excuse for fraudulently labelling horse meat as beef. However, there would be a lot less incentive for this if the EU had freer trade with countries outside its borders.

Rural round-up

ECann Rakaia River recommendation accepted:

Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee says the Government has accepted Environment Canterbury’s recommendation to change the water conservation order that covers the Rakaia River.

The change will allow TrustPower to release water from Lake Coleridge for irrigation when the river is low, increasing the reliability of the water supply.

“Environment Canterbury’s report and recommendation is a good example of both environmental considerations and the needs of the farming community being taken into account,” Mr Brownlee says. . .

Why wash clean linen in public – Alan Emerson:

Farming is certainly in the mainstream media. 

Most outlets are covering the DCD saga and they weren’t helped by some woolly statements from the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) and Fonterra.

I thought the two fertiliser co-operatives, Ballance and Ravensdown, handled the issue well, with their media releases being factual and unemotive. Both withdrew their DCD product and that, in my opinion, should have been the end of the story.

The issue is simple – DCD is safe. It has been around since the 1920s and used in its current form since 1981 and that is the problem.

Because it isn’t a new product but an adaption of an existing chemical, it is not classified under the international Codex Alimentarium. For that reason there is no minimum or maximum allowable level.

The problem is technical and procedural – it is not a chemical or health issue. Googling DCD you can identify all the many countries using it. You can also read glowing references about the product’s ability to increase yields in tomatoes, wheat, barley, rice and grass. . .

Lessons learned on managing perception – Alan Williams:

THE DCD issue has thrown up some lessons on how to manage market perceptions when the debate gets away from the science, Ministry for Primary Industries deputy director general (Standards) Carol Barnao says.

MPI’s risk assessment team discovered quickly there were no food safety concerns from traces of DCD found in whole milk powder, but the time taken for action was seen by some people as too slow and the presence of an unexpected compound was linked with tainted food in some markets.

More than three months passed between Fonterra’s product testing and the withdrawal from the market of the fertilisers containing DCD.

If there had been food safety concerns action would have happened much sooner, Barnao said.

Working groups were set up as soon as MPI was alerted in early November but it took time to complete the testing methodology and the why, when, and how of what happened, she said. . .

Happy to break new ground - Hannah Lynch:

Primary industries might be getting a new minister, but it’s in the associate role where a woman will be getting to make a mark for the first time. Hannah Lynch reports from Parliament.

The first woman appointed to a ministerial role in agriculture is not afraid of bringing a touch of femininity to the job, revealing she wears high-heeled boots on the family farm. 

Jo Goodhew has just been made Associate Primary Industries Minister in a Cabinet reshuffle that elevated the previous associate, Nathan Guy, into the main role.

“It is exciting but it is part of the general trend we are seeing where women who have the right skills are doing anything,” Goodhew said. 

“Women are going into roles that were previously held by men but now it’s just recognition that if you have got the skills it doesn’t matter what gender you are.”  . . .

MyFarm expanding to sheep and beef farms – Hugh Stringleman:

MyFarm intends to use its farm ownership syndication model for sheep and beef farms as well as dairy farms.

It put together one sheep and beef farm syndicate in 2010, for Kaiangaroa farm east of Taihape, and during this year will offer several more.

MyFarm director Andrew Watters would not specify the locations but gave parameters for the suitable properties and regions.

They would be mainly sheep-breeding and lamb-finishing properties, with beef cattle only additional. . .

Farmers Preparing to Steak Their Claim :

Farmers across the country are selecting their entries for the 2013 Beef + Lamb New Zealand Steak of Origin.

The competition to find the country’s most tender and tasty steak is entering its 11th year and is keenly contested nationwide.

Beef + Lamb New Zealand CEO, Dr Scott Champion, says the competition is taken very seriously and winning has become a badge of honour.

“The Steak of Origin rewards farmers for their efforts and showcases the skill in the New Zealand beef farming industry,” says Champion. . .

Freshman Sire Highlights Final Day of Karaka 2013:

New Zealand Bloodstock’s 2013 National Yearling Sales Series has drawn to a close today at Karaka with the final 212 yearlings of the Festival Sale concluding a bumper seven days of selling that has seen a total of 1021 lots traded for $72,387,700.

For the third day in a row Westbury Stud’s first season sire Swiss Ace (Secret Savings) provided the top price of the day, this time it was the colt at Lot 1353 from the four-time winning Stravinsky mare Poetic Music bought by Rogerson Bloodstock for $95,000.
1353 web
Top lot of the day the Swiss Ace colt (Lot 1353) purchased by Rogerson Bloodstock for $95,000

“He was the nicest horse here today and he proved that because he was the top lot of the day.

http://www.fwplus.co.nz/article/alternative-view-why-wash-clean-linen-in-public?p=6

Petty politicking feeds perception problems

Opposition MPs are supposed to oppose the government but in trying to score points against the MPI, Labour’s agriculture spokesman Damien O’Connor has gone far, too far:

Fonterra chief executive Theo Spierings has torn strips off Labour agriculture spokesman Damien O’Connor for, he says, endangering the whole of the New Zealand dairy industry with “drastic” allegations relating to traces of a benign chemical, DCD, found in some powdered milk.

O’Connor issued a press statement alleging a cover-up of the DCD findings in September to allow the Fonterra Shareholder Fund float to occur unimpeded in November.

“If you do those allegations, you better come with some evidence,” Spierings told BusinessDesk. “What you are doing here is not just a Fonterra issue, it is a New Zealand issue. You are attacking your key sector of the country.

“I’m sorry. I get a little bit emotional about it. I don’t like this kind of attitude,” said the recently appointed Dutch ceo, who said O’Connor risked undoing three days’ intensive work, including Prime Minister John Key, with international investors and media. The issue got out of control internationally when a Wall Street Journal article questioned the safety of New Zealand milk.

 Spierings is deeply offended by O’Connor’s attack, and scathing of WSJ’s use of a local journalist he claims was “filling in for someone” to kick the issue into international prominence.

He defends Fonterra’s process once it found DCD, a nitrate inhibitor used to curb greenhouse gas emissions from farming, in tiny quantities in milk powder last spring, saying the first thing considered was whether it got “a green tick on food safety.”

It did. DCD levels were 100 times lower than standards in the European Union. In other parts of the world, no standards exist.

With a “dark green” tick on food safety, the company had “a little bit of time” for collective action with fertiliser companies, telling them they must either manage the DCD issue with farmers or have Fonterra tell farmers to stop using it in the meantime, while international standards were sorted out.

The manufacturers, Ballance Agri-Nutrients and Ravensdown, withdrew fertilisers containing DCD voluntarily, a fact not notified publicly until late last week.

“We are coming with answers and telling the truth,” said Spierings.

FSF units took a small hit early in trading, falling as much as 9 cents to $7.14, as international investors digested the information Fonterra sent on the issue.

The biggest risk for Fonterra would be if one country were to decide to impose even a brief, precautionary ban on milkpowder imports, which constitute a large proportion of Fonterra’s $14.5 billion annual export revenues, said Andrew Bascand, managing director at Harbour Asset Management in Wellington.

“To date, there’s been no market there’s been that sort of reaction. Fonterra appear to be on the front foot handling it. The commentary from our Chinese agents says they feel comfortable with where are at.”

Bascand said any weakness in the FSF price caused by the issue would be seen by some investors as a buying opportunity. The units were sold at IPO last November for $5.50. They listed at $6.60, and have risen above $7 since.

Spierings rubbished O’Connor’s claim the DCD issue was hushed up ahead of the listing, the largest equity event in New Zealand stock exchange’s history for at least a generation.

“If there had been a public health or safety issue, we would have disclosed,” Spierings said.

The range of elements being tested in milk was constantly expanding as testing was becoming more sophisticated. Where there was no public health risk, Spierings argues against mandatory immediate disclosure because of the volume of disclosures that would create.

“We should not need to disclose in our whole business things we want to improve,” said Spierings. “It would get (to be) a zoo. We could not run the company.”

O’Connor’s media release was headlined hard sell after milk taint hushed up.

It not only questions the integrity of Primary Industries Minister David Carter, the MPI and Fonterra, it undermines are very, very high food safety standards.

This is not a health or safety issue it’s a marketing and perception issue.

O’Connor’s petty politicking has the potential to do far more damage not just to Fonterra but to New Zealand’s hard-earned and well-deserved reputation for food safety.

The trade-weighted increase has increased in the first two GlobalDairyTrade auctions this year. This week’s auction will give an indication of whether the perception of problems has affected demand for our products.

Reputation relies on trust

The announcement that traces of DCD have been found in milk is concerning but the way it has been handled is exemplary.

There is no food safety risk but the two fertiliser companies which use products with DCD have immediately suspended sales.

This media release from Ravensdown explains the issue:

Ravensdown announces today that, with immediate effect, it is suspending the sales and application of its eco-n product which contains DCD.

“The reputation of New Zealand as a quality food producer is as important to us as it is to our farmer owners. So it is reassuring that both the MPI’s and our own peer-reviewed research shows there are no food safety issues with DCD or eco-n,” comments Greg Campbell Ravensdown Chief Executive. “What’s changed is that last year, organisations like the US Food and Drug Administration added DCD to a list of substances to test for. This, combined with increasingly sophisticated scanning technology now presents a possible trade risk. Given the risk to NZ’s dairy export reputation, Ravensdown has taken the initiative and is suspending the single product which uses DCD for this calendar year.”

“As DCD has been used safely around the world for 30 years, there has never been a set of international standards around maximum residue level in food products. Because no standard exists for DCD, no detectable presence is acceptable. And because zero detection of DCD cannot be guaranteed, Ravensdown has taken the responsible, voluntary step to suspend its use while the trade issues are resolved,” added Greg.

In December last year, the Ministry for Primary Industries initiated a working party to assess the use of dicyandiamide (DCD) on farm land. The working group comprises representatives from MPI, Fonterra, the Dairy Companies Association of New Zealand and fertiliser companies Ravensdown and Ballance.

The working group was set up after testing on whole milk powder detected the occasional presence of low levels of DCD coinciding with the times of the year that the product is applied.

DCD, which is applied to pasture in autumn, winter and spring, has been used to reduce nitrate leaching and greenhouse gas emissions in New Zealand for nearly a decade.

“Though this news is disappointing for the 500 customers who use eco-n, the potential risk demanded decisive and pre-emptive action ahead of the autumn application season,” said Ravensdown’s Greg Campbell.

Even without eco-n, Ravensdown continues to help farmers lift their production and lower their environmental footprint. The farmer-owned co-operative does this through whole-farm testing, nutrient management planning and advice plus precise fertiliser application.

“We continue to help farmers produce top quality food and do all we can to support New Zealand’s export story in a complex world of international trading partners and regulations. We’ll be foregoing sales of eco-n, which makes up about 1% of Ravensdown’s annual revenues, but we are a 100% farmer-owned co-operative concerned with the long-term future of the rural sector,” added Greg Campbell.

“In the long-term, mitigating nitrate leaching is vital for sustainable New Zealand farming. The effectiveness of nitrification inhibitors like DCD is well proven and helps farmers in the face of stricter requirements being imposed on them. So we’ll be looking to the Ministry for Primary Industries through the working party to initiate the potentially-lengthy process of seeking a new international standard to recognise DCD. This would then specify a level or maximum residue which New Zealand dairy exporters and producers could work below,” concluded Greg.

Ballance’s media release says more research is the key:

More research is the key to developing nitrification inhibitors which help farmers reduce environmental impacts while meeting potential international trade requirements, Ballance Agri-Nutrients Research and Development Manager Warwick Catto said today.

His comments follow the voluntary suspension of sales and application of the nitrification inhibitor dicyandiamide (DCD) on farmland in response to the detection of the occasional presence of low levels of DCD in dairy products. Both major fertiliser co-operatives have announced the suspension until further notice.

“We still have every confidence in the potential for nitrification inhibitors to play an important role in helping New Zealand farmers to operate within nutrient loss limits.

“While our nitrification inhibitor product DCn has been a small part of our portfolio we remain confident that continued research will result in the development of a nitrification inhibitor solution which delivers environmental benefits, meets international requirements and is supported by robust science.”

Mr Catto said Ballance had not sold DCn since July 2012 and had not promoted its use on pastures since late 2010. This means that only a handful of Ballance customers have recently used the product. As a precautionary measure Ballance will not reintroduce any DCD-based products to the market until the potential international trade issue of milk residues is mitigated.

Ballance ceased sales of DCn in early spring 2012 to review the product and its applications, and incorporated it into its $32 million research and development programme aimed at reducing nutrient and greenhouse gas losses through more efficient fertilisers and next generation nitrification inhibitors.

“This is in line with our science-based approach and emphasis on continual evolution of our product and service offerings to meet the needs of New Zealand farmers.

“Our research is partially funded by the Ministry for Primary Industries through their Primary Growth Partnership and our work on nitrification inhibitor developments will take into account potential international trade concerns regarding residues in milk products,” says Mr Catto.

Mr Catto says that Ballance strongly supports all moves to protect New Zealand’s reputation for quality food and believes that all products used in food production must be backed by sound science and ongoing research.

Fonterra backs the suspension:

“We have been assured by New Zealand’s regulatory authority – the Ministry for Primary Industries – that there is no food safety risk.  However, DCD residues in agricultural products may present a future trade issue,” said Managing Director Co-operative Affairs Todd Muller.

“Although DCD was a promising option for reducing nitrate leaching, it is critical that New Zealand’s trade reputation is preserved.  The voluntary suspension is the responsible approach in the absence of any internationally agreed standards for DCD residues in food,” said Mr Muller.

Fonterra will participate in a working group set up by the Ministry for Primary Industries to examine what the suspension means in terms of the future use of DCD in farming, including the impact on water quality requirements.

Not all countries have the strict regulatory and testing standards for food safety that New Zealand does.

Some countries that do test food might hide results that didn’t suit them.

The companies have acted correctly in promptly suspending sales of products with DCD.

It’s about trust.

New Zealand relies on our reputation for high standards of food safety and that reputation relies on trusting that everything possible is done to keep food safe and taking a precautionary approach, even as in this case, there is no risk to consumers.

Products with DCD, a nitrification inhibitor, have been applied with fetiliser to pasture and forage crops to target urine, dung and fertiliser emissions. They can improve water quality, reduce production of the greenhouse gas nitrous oxide and increase pasture growth.

If it uses our brand it must meet our standards

New Zealand’s reputation for safe food is one of the reasons it is attractive to Chinese dairy companies wanting to build infant milk formula plants here.

Fran O’Sullivan writes that the  Chinese are eager to milk NZ brand and that does come with a risk:

At issue is whether the Government needs to take clear steps to ensure the Chinese companies do live up to the powerful New Zealand brand image and make abundantly sure that their infant formula products are kept free from contamination at all steps in the supply chain from the milk supply through to the factory then on to the supermarket shelves, and whether they also need to place clear strictures on just which companies can use the attributes of the New Zealand brand in China. . .

I am not opposed to foreign investment in processing in New Zealand for export. Nor am I opposed to New Zealand companies producing or processing in other countries.

But I am concerned about any risk that might pose to our brand.

New Zealand food is trusted for very good reasons – the way it is produced and the regulations which govern its production and processing.

That makes the New Zealand brand very powerful and it must be safe-guarded.

If food is produced here by a foreign company or somewhere else by a New Zealand one and uses our brand it must meet our standards.

Food security differs from food security

Is New Zealand concentrating on food safety when there’s more to be gained by concentrating on food security?

 “I was stunned to learn what we know as Food Security is defined by the World Bank as Food Safety.  It may sound like semantics but it carries a huge implication for our agricultural producers and exporters,” says Letitia Isa, a student of Massey University Executive MBA programme.

“This simple but fundamental misapprehension may see New Zealand jumping ever higher but illusionary hurdles.  Instead of higher standards boosting returns, they may in fact be eroding them for almost no financial gain.

“When the World Bank says Food Safety they are not talking stainless steel, the National Animal Identification and Tracing Scheme or the Emissions Trading Scheme.  What the World Bank means is how New Zealand can contribute to the feeding nine billion people by 2050.

“That carries with it a powerful but different policy message.

New Zealand has a well deserved reputation for food safety but the premise that we are jumping unnecessary hurdles isn’t new.

Ever-stricter requirements for food safety have been used as non-tariff barriers for years.

When my farmer was in London in 1982 he visited the Smithfield market and was appalled by the low standard of hygiene there when the EU was requiring such high standards in our freezing works which provided a lot of the meat.

“New Zealand can feed some 24 million people according to the University of Waikato’s Professor of Agribusiness, Jacqueline Rowarth.  The United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organisation says developed countries need to increase output by 70 percent to do their bit.

“It might sound provocative, but we need to seriously weigh the cost-benefits of adopting polices that do not generate tangible revenue at the farm gate, or increase production. While European supermarkets seem to be a de facto political and policy benchmark, are ever higher compliance costs worth it?

“It may sound counter intuitive, but perhaps quantity does have a quality all of its own.   A simple metric maybe if a policy adds a dollar of cost, does it produce well over a dollar of added revenue at the farm gate?

“Moreover, are our other policy settings, particularly around Genetically Modified Organisms, retarding New Zealand’s ability to do its fair global share?

“Certainly, the way the World Bank defines Food Safety needs to become central to New Zealand policy formation.  If not, we risk unprecedented global disorder that New Zealand could not escape,” Ms Isa concluded.

It would be stupid to jeopardise our reputation for food safety, especially in the higher-paying markets which are more likely to be concerned about quality than quantity.

However, if we can also increase the quantity of food we produce and still ensure it is safe to eat without the unnecessarily high hurdles some markets require we might be able to do our bit to help the world’s hungry while simplifying compliance, reducing the costs of production and increasing returns.

Desperate and stupid

While the sinking of the Rena  and the impact on the Bay of Plenty economy was getting headlines, the far more serious impact of PSA on kiwifruit orchardists was largely under-reported.

People lost not just crops but their whole orchards. Jobs have gone, livelihoods have been destroyed and with them have gone many retirement plans.

Desperate circumstance demand desperate measures, but injecting vines with antibiotics was not just desperate, it was really, really stupid.

Zespri spokesman Dave Courtney said about 40 growers were referred to the ministry and “a majority of them will be in the Bay of Plenty region”.

Mr Courtney said Zespri tested every kiwifruit orchard in New Zealand and 99 per cent were cleared for exports.

But about 0.5 per cent – about 500,000 trays – of this year’s harvest would not be sold as a result of the misuse of streptomycin.

They would be destroyed through mulching.

Mr Courtney said Zespri made it “very clear” to growers that injecting vines was not permitted and there would be consequences for any fruit found with residual antibiotics at harvest.

“It was very well advertised through the industry. However, some people didn’t follow the rules and that’s what has happened here.”

All farmers, be they raising livestock or growing crops, ought to know about what can and can’t be used on their produce.

Injecting vines  didn’t just endanger their own crops. Had it not been discovered it could have done great harm to the industry and New Zealand’s reputation for food safety.