Red Tractor has not adhered to pesticide regulations and has undermined public perceptions that the logo represents strong environmental protection, as a new report claims.
Sub Standard, a report by the Nature Friendly Farming Network with support from Pesticide Action Network UK & RSPB, stated that Red Tractor failed to set targets to reduce pesticide use, and did not require certified farmers to adopt other approaches.
The UK’s largest food standards label certifies 50,000 farmers in the UK. However, the report, published today (15 March) claimed the body was missing an opportunity to become a key player in reducing pesticide reliance in the UK.
Sub Standard highlighted a number of improvements Red Tractor needed in order to keep up to date with pesticide reduction trends. Some of these techniques include using beneficial insects to combat pests, choosing resistant crops, rotating crops often, and using biopesticides that are less harmful.
Martin Lines, coauthor of the report and farmer, and chair of Nature Friendly Farming Network, stated that Red Tractor-certified farmers found the standards to be very restrictive. Farmers want and need their support in order to work with nature, rather than against it.
Josie Cohen, head of policy and campaigns at PAN UK, said: If were to have any hope of solving the biodiversity crisis then we must move away from our dependence on pesticides.
Red Tractor standards do not limit the amount or location of chemicals that can be used. Red Tractor allows farmers to use any legal pesticide product. This is in contrast to many UK supermarkets.
Red Tractor was seen by supermarkets as a baseline standard, which did not go beyond verifying that farmers are following laws and regulations. This was in contrast to the perception by consumers that Red Tractor had more stringent obligations than non-certified farmers.
Sub Standard identified that Red Tractor could improve uptake of integrated pest management (IPM) techniques which encourage the use of as few chemicals as possible by improving access access to training, guidance and information, a move that would be seen favourably by farmers, accoridng to consultation exercies undertaken by the authors, which would not only help to improve the diversity and resilience of farm ecosystems, but also drive positive change within farm businesses by reducing variable costs.
Red Tractor should also set goals to reduce pesticide use on certified farms. This will help improve IPM.
Red Tractor spokesperson said that Red Tractor’s voluntary scheme is the foundation of British progressive farming and is responsible for ensuring food safety.
This report provides constructive suggestions for how Red Tractor standards might evolve to meet key challenges. We appreciate this contribution.
