CFA commends Health Canada’s decision on neonicotinoids

CFA commends Health Canada’s recent decision to allow the continued use of clothianidin, imidacloprid and thiamethoxam (neonicotinoids) for use in canola seed treatment and greenhouse vegetables. Both of these uses do not pose unacceptable risk to pollinators.

 

It is extremely important for farmers to have timely access to new products for pest management in order to remain competitive on the global market. The Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) ensures that these products meet Canada’s strict regulatory requirements.

 

However, CFA feels that this decision process has highlighted major issues with the PMRA’s approach to product re-evaluations. While many farmers have critical field data that showed reduced risk from proper applications of pest products, they were unable to submit this data due to an overly strict submission window. This data is critical to show how a measured use of pest products prevent undue environmental harm.

 

Equal consideration of field-data and government analysis creates a balanced scientific approach that helps guide discontinuance of harmful products when unacceptable risks are detected.

 

The decisions also raise concern over the consideration of best-available science. Specific to these products, it is the understanding of agricultural stakeholders that eastern water data were used to estimate western exposure risks for aquatic invertebrates. The real-life cropping profiles of these species are distinct. As such, there is concern that the risk thresholds chosen were based on highly conservative laboratory data that were not consistent with real-world observations.

 

CFA supports the Canadian government’s recently proposed amendments to the pest product review process in Bill C-97, the Budget Implementation Act. These amendments would allow the Health Minister to determine which Special Reviews of products are triggered by decision made in other OECD countries. Currently, these reviews are triggered automatically whenever an OECD country bans a product, even if that product is already under re-evaluation. Reducing this duplication of effort should allow PMRA to focus on input provided through their Agricultural Stakeholder Engagement Unit.

Video: Evolution of Beef Cattle Farming

The Clear Conversations podcast took to the road for a special episode recorded in Nashville during CattleCon, bringing listeners straight into the heart of the cattle industry. Host Tracy Sellers welcomed rancher Steve Wooten of Beatty Canyon Ranch in Colorado for a wide-ranging discussion that blended family history and sustainability, particularly as it relates to the future of beef production.

Sustainability emerged as a central theme of the conversation, a word that Wooten acknowledges can mean very different things depending on who you ask. For him, sustainability starts with the soil. Healthy soil produces healthy grass, which supports efficient cattle capable of producing year after year with minimal external inputs. It’s an approach that equally considers vegetation, animal efficiency, and long-term profitability.

That philosophy aligned naturally with Wooten’s involvement in the U.S. Roundtable for Sustainable Beef, where he served as a representative for the Colorado Cattlemen’s Association. The roundtable brings together the entire beef supply chain—from producers to retailers—along with universities, NGOs, and allied industries. Its goal is not regulation, Wooten emphasized, but collaboration, shared learning, and continuous improvement.