Author Archives: Anthony

April 2024: Pesticides in Australian (NSW) Frogs. Pesticides: Brodifacoum, Dieldrin, Heptachlor, DDE, MCPA, Fipronil Sulfone

We found pesticides in a third of Australian frogs we tested. Did these cause mass deaths?

https://theconversation.com/we-found-pesticides-in-a-third-of-australian-frogs-we-tested-did-these-cause-mass-deaths-228194

April 30 2024. Jodi Rowley, Damian Lettoof

Scientific Report: Here

Image: Jodi Rowley

In winter 2021, Australia’s frogs started dropping dead. People began posting images of dead frogs on social media. Unable to travel to investigate the deaths ourselves because of COVID lockdowns, we asked the public to report to us any sick or dead frogs.

Within 24 hours we received 160 reports of sick and dying frogs, sometimes in their dozens, from across the country. That winter, we received more than 1,600 reports of more than 40 frog species.

We needed help to investigate these deaths. We asked people across New South Wales to collect any dead frogs and store them frozen until travel restrictions eased and we could pick them up for testing. Hundreds of people stepped up to assist.

What could be causing these deaths? Aside from the obvious suspect, disease, many people wondered about pesticides and other chemicals. One email we received pondered:

Maybe a lot of these Green Frogs that are turning up dead have in fact died from chemicals.

Another asked:

Is there any relationship between chemicals being used to control the current mice plague in Eastern Australia and effects on frogs?

In our newly published research, we detected pesticides in more than one in three frogs we tested. We found a rodenticide in one in six frogs.

Pesticides have been shown to be a major cause of worldwide declines in amphibians, including frogs and toads. In the case of the mass deaths in Australia, we don’t believe pesticides were the main cause, for reasons we’ll explain.

What did the research find?

As soon as travel restrictions eased, we drove around the state with a portable freezer collecting these dead frogs. We began investigating the role of disease, pesticides and other potential factors in this awful event.

We tested liver samples of 77 frogs of six species from across New South Wales for more than 600 different pesticides. We detected at least one pesticide in 36% of these frogs.

Our most significant discovery was the rodenticide Brodifacoum in 17% of the frogs. This is the first report of rodenticides – chemicals meant to poison only rodents – in wild frogs.

We found it in four species: the eastern banjo frog (Limnodynastes dumerilii), green tree frog (Litoria caerulea), Peron’s tree frog (Litoria peronii) and the introduced cane toad (Rhinella marina).

How did these poisons get into frogs?

How were frogs exposed to a rodenticide? And what harm is it likely to be causing? Unfortunately, we don’t know.

Until now, frogs weren’t known to be exposed to rodenticides. They now join the list of non-rodent animals shown to be exposed – invertebrates, birds, small mammals, reptiles and even fish.

It’s possible large frogs are eating rodents that have eaten a bait. Or frogs could be eating contaminated invertebrates or coming into contact with bait stations or contaminated water. Whatever the impact, and the route, our findings show we may need to think about how we use rodenticides.

Two pesticides detected in frogs were organochlorine compounds dieldrin and heptachlor. A third, DDE, is a breakdown product of the notorious organochlorine, DDT.

These pesticides have been banned in Australia for decades, so how did they get into the frogs? Unfortunately, these legacy pesticides are very stable chemicals and take a long time to break down. They usually bind to organic material such as soils and sediments and can wash into waterways after rain.

As a result, these pesticides can accumulate in plants and animals. It’s why they have been banned around the world.

We also found the herbicide MCPA and fipronil sulfone, a breakdown product of the insecticide fipronil. Fipronil is registered for use in agriculture, home veterinary products (for flea and tick control) and around the house for control of termites, cockroaches and ants. MCPA has both agricultural and household uses, including lawn treatments.

What are the impacts on frogs?

There’s very little research on the impact of pesticides on frogs in general, particularly adult frogs and particularly in Australia.

However, from research overseas, we know pesticides could kill frogs, or cause sub-lethal impacts such as suppressing the immune system or malformations, or changes in growth, development and reproduction. Pesticides are considered a threat to almost 700 amphibian species.

Unfortunately for them, frogs do have characteristics that make them highly likely to come into contact with pesticides.

Most frog species spend time in both freshwater systems, such as wetlands, ponds and streams (particularly at the egg and tadpole stage), and on the land. This increases their opportunities for exposure.

Second, frogs have highly permeable skin, which is likely a major route for pesticides to enter the body. Frogs obtain water through their skin – you’ll never see a frog drinking – and also breathe through their skin.

Our findings are a reminder that frogs are sensitive indicators of environmental health. Their recognition as bioindicators, or “canaries in the coalmine”, is warranted.

Frogs and other amphibians are the most threatened group of vertebrates on the planet. More research is needed to determine just how our use of pesticides is contributing to ongoing population declines in frogs.

So, were pesticides the major driver of the mass frog deaths in 2021? We don’t believe so.

We didn’t detect pesticides in most frogs and the five pesticides detected were not consistently found across all samples. It’s certainly possible they contributed to this event, along with other factors such as disease and climatic conditions, but it’s not the smoking gun.

Our investigation, with the help of the public, is ongoing.

4/3/24: Individual fined over Hazelbrook Creek Crayfish Kill. Pesticide: Bifenthrin

Individual fined over Hazelbrook Creek crayfish kill

04 March 2024

The NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) has fined an individual $8,250 for allegedly causing the death of a large number of crayfish in a tributary of Hazelbrook Creek in the Blue Mountains last August.

The EPA has issued two penalty notices after its investigation found nearly 40 litres of the diluted pesticide Bifenthrin accidentally spilt on the driveway of a private property which eventually flowed into the stormwater system, causing a major crayfish kill along 600 metres of the creek.

The pesticide was detected in water, sediment, and crayfish samples collected from the impacted creek. Bifenthrin is commonly used for general pest control, such as termites, spiders, ants, and cockroaches and is highly toxic to crayfish and other aquatic organisms.

EPA Executive Director of Regulatory Operations, Jason Gordon said the pollution incident was preventable and had major consequences.

“The individual had the opportunity to clean up the spill to prevent further harm but failed to do so,” Mr Gordon said.

“While we are pleased the person responsible came forward on their own accord, we are committed to holding individuals accountable for actions that endanger our precious ecosystems.

“The misuse and mishandling of pesticides can have devastating impacts on our waterways, which are home to animals like the Giant Spiny Crayfish.

“This unfortunate incident serves as an important reminder of responsible pesticide use and handling practices to safeguard our waterways and ecosystems.

“All individuals and businesses are urged to handle chemicals carefully and to ensure that all measures are taken to prevent spills and contamination.”

The two fines relate to breaching the Pesticides Act 1999 and the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 for harming a non-target animal and polluting waters.

Individual fined over Hazelbrook Creek crayfish kill

The NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) has fined an individual $8,250 for allegedly causing the death of a large number of crayfish in a tributary of Hazelbrook Creek in the Blue Mountains last August.

The EPA has issued two penalty notices after its investigation found nearly 40 litres of the diluted pesticide Bifenthrin accidentally spilt on the driveway of a private property which eventually flowed into the stormwater system, causing a major crayfish kill along 600 metres of the creek.

The pesticide was detected in water, sediment, and crayfish samples collected from the impacted creek. Bifenthrin is commonly used for general pest control, such as termites, spiders, ants, and cockroaches and is highly toxic to crayfish and other aquatic organisms.

EPA Executive Director of Regulatory Operations, Jason Gordon said the pollution incident was preventable and had major consequences.

“The individual had the opportunity to clean up the spill to prevent further harm but failed to do so,” Mr Gordon said.

“While we are pleased the person responsible came forward on their own accord, we are committed to holding individuals accountable for actions that endanger our precious ecosystems.

“The misuse and mishandling of pesticides can have devastating impacts on our waterways, which are home to animals like the Giant Spiny Crayfish.

“This unfortunate incident serves as an important reminder of responsible pesticide use and handling practices to safeguard our waterways and ecosystems.

“All individuals and businesses are urged to handle chemicals carefully and to ensure that all measures are taken to prevent spills and contamination.”

The two fines relate to breaching the Pesticides Act 1999 and the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 for harming a non-target animal and polluting waters.

12/2/24: Scientist Warns Pesticides Harming Native Wildlife

Scientist warns pesticides harming native wildlife

Feb 12 2024 by Alec Smart. https://manlyobserver.com.au/scientist-warns-pesticides-often-help-invasive-species-while-harming-wildlife/

A distinguished scientist is among numerous animal welfare specialists warning that native fauna on the Northern Beaches, including possums, bandicoots, lizards and birds, are being indiscriminately killed by second generation pesticides.

Furthermore, far from reducing invasive pests, toxic baits and sprays may actually be enabling them to proliferate.

Toxicology expert Edwina Laginestra is a wildlife carer with Sydney Wildlife Rescue. She is also renowned for her considerable knowledge on a range of wildlife-related subjects. These include her detailed research papers on toxicology and sustainable land use; a scientific assessment on the impact of the Harbour Tunnel Beaches Link on groundwater and the endangered bat colony at Burnt Creek, Balgowlah; and sensible animal welfare advice, such as what to do when you find a baby bird on the ground.

Edwina explained to Manly Observer how relying on pesticides, instead of modifying human behaviour, is what enables ‘pest’ species like introduced rats to proliferate.

“We provide perfect habitat for unwanted black and brown rats by removing native vegetation, having loads of food sources and providing lots of hiding spots in our junk. Yet we don’t provide food for natives to compete. We don’t really think about how a system works.

“The best way to manage rodents would be allow the raptors to do that – the kookaburras, the owls, even magpies. But we remove the trees they nest in, and of course we are now killing them too, by baiting the rats [they feed on].”

Pesticides don’t decide what dies

Pesticides consist of herbicides, insecticides, fungicides and rodenticides. These poisoned baits, pellets and sprays are used to target ‘vermin’ (mice, rats, rabbits, foxes, etc.) and weeds. However, they filter into the natural environment and through the food chain to kill non-target species.

When sick animals come into your care, and you have diagnosed they’ve been poisoned, is it relatively easy to identify whether the toxicity is caused by pesticides?

“It’s not always easily determined,” Edwina revealed, “as some internal bleeding from major impact (e.g. a car) will also have white extremities and bleeding out from orifices. But usually with cars there are other signs of impact – pain, head injury, concussion.

“When you get in an animal with very white paws and nose and gums, then that’s very likely rat bait. They are also easy to handle, with their flight-and-fight response [resistance to capture] gone. They may also have swelling in face and gasping for breath. They can also have spotting (bleeding from capillaries)…”

She continued, “That’s the rodenticides… There are different types of rodenticides; the anticoagulant ones like warfarin (1st generation) and brodifacoum (2nd generation) both prevent blood clotting, so the victim bleeds to death. There are also non-coagulant rodenticides including strychnine and zinc phosphide, but they are not approved for general public use.

“For herbicides, the symptoms are very different. They usually have foaming at the mouth and often paroxysm [seizures]…”

FGARs and SGARs

Rodenticides are usually formulated as baits with attractive flavours – such as fish oil or peanut butter, or meats, grains and fruits, depending on the target creatures – to more effectively lure the species that eat them.

Rodenticides come in a number of different forms; some, such as the anticoagulants (that are popular with the public and favoured by councils), prevent the blood from clotting, causing a slow death through internal haemorrhaging.

Anticoagulant rodenticides are divided into two main groups: FGARs and SGARs.

According to the Federal Government-run Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA): “First-generation anticoagulant rodenticides (FGARs) are referred to as ‘multi-dose anticoagulants’, meaning that rodents must consume these baits for several consecutive feedings to consume a lethal dose.

“FGARs break down in rodents quicker than second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides [SGARs], so there is less chance of secondary poisoning occurring in non-target animals if they eat rodents poisoned with an FGAR.

“There are 3 FGAR active constituents currently registered for use in Australia: warfarin, coumatetralyl and diphacinone…”

Edwina summarised how FGARs work. “First generation rodenticides may take multiple doses to kill a rodent – so if only a nibble was taken once, it is possible the animal could recover, but they’d be slower and sicker and for any prey species that isn’t a good thing. Also if they do suffer impact, then they may well bleed out as the blood can’t clot quick enough.

“For the SGARs I doubt they’d survive without intervention.”

According to APVMA, SGARs are significantly more dangerous in the natural environment.

“Second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs) are referred to as ‘single-dose anticoagulants’. A lethal dose can be ingested in a single feeding, making SGARs substantially more potent than FGARs. SGARs are slower to break down than FGARs and pose a higher risk of secondary poisoning to non-target animals.

“There are 5 SGAR active constituents currently registered for use in Australia: brodifacoum, bromadiolone, difethialone, difenacoum and flocoumafen…”

Possum rescue

Recently, Edwina took custody of a newly-born possum whose mother had died in unknown circumstances. Two days after coming into care spots appeared on his belly – a sure sign of rodenticide poisoning – which then identified what killed his mum.

“We had reports someone had been baiting possums intentionally when this one was found, his mum already dying…”

The young male was given massive doses of vitamin K, which enables the blood to clot and can reverse the effects of anticoagulants.

Edwina revealed, “We also had to treat him for pneumonia. He was 3 months in care as I also needed to give him physiotherapy and climbing room to get his muscle tone back before he was eventually released.”

She added, “A lot of rescues I do have been homeowners spraying for ticks, but poisoning their resident ringtail possum instead.”

Lobbying Council

At an Ordinary Council Meeting held on Tuesday 18 October 2022, Edwina addressed Northern Beaches councillors on the hazards of using SGARs to control vermin.

The following month, on 2 November, Council’s Parks and Recreation department sent her a written confirmation that “SGARs are used by Council to control rat infestations in a number of locations around the Northern Beaches,” adding that they will consider “how we may be able to phase out use of SGARs by staff, contractors and tenants on land owned by the Council.”

Can councils, including Northern Beaches, effectively reduce their spraying of herbicides to replace them with ‘environmentally friendly’ alternatives, without harming wildlife?

“A while back Integrated Pest Management (IPM) was a thing where you had to consider what you were spraying, and when,” Edwina replied. “But it takes brains and patience and actually looking at what you have. That isn’t popular for anything large-scale. They work on timetables, and if that includes removing all the new tips on food trees [that sustain wildlife] and cutting down branches in spring, that’s what we get.”

She continued, “I’m sure they do spray ‘environmentally friendly’ chemicals like pyrethrin, but at the same time they don’t provide alternative foods for native birds and animals, because they never actually think about it…”

Sydney Wildlife Rescuehttp://www.sydneywildlife.org.au

Scientist warns pesticides harming native wildlife

Feb 12 2024 by Alec Smart. https://manlyobserver.com.au/scientist-warns-pesticides-often-help-invasive-species-while-harming-wildlife/

A distinguished scientist is among numerous animal welfare specialists warning that native fauna on the Northern Beaches, including possums, bandicoots, lizards and birds, are being indiscriminately killed by second generation pesticides.

Furthermore, far from reducing invasive pests, toxic baits and sprays may actually be enabling them to proliferate.

Toxicology expert Edwina Laginestra is a wildlife carer with Sydney Wildlife Rescue. She is also renowned for her considerable knowledge on a range of wildlife-related subjects. These include her detailed research papers on toxicology and sustainable land use; a scientific assessment on the impact of the Harbour Tunnel Beaches Link on groundwater and the endangered bat colony at Burnt Creek, Balgowlah; and sensible animal welfare advice, such as what to do when you find a baby bird on the ground.

Edwina explained to Manly Observer how relying on pesticides, instead of modifying human behaviour, is what enables ‘pest’ species like introduced rats to proliferate.

“We provide perfect habitat for unwanted black and brown rats by removing native vegetation, having loads of food sources and providing lots of hiding spots in our junk. Yet we don’t provide food for natives to compete. We don’t really think about how a system works.

“The best way to manage rodents would be allow the raptors to do that – the kookaburras, the owls, even magpies. But we remove the trees they nest in, and of course we are now killing them too, by baiting the rats [they feed on].”

Pesticides don’t decide what dies

Pesticides consist of herbicides, insecticides, fungicides and rodenticides. These poisoned baits, pellets and sprays are used to target ‘vermin’ (mice, rats, rabbits, foxes, etc.) and weeds. However, they filter into the natural environment and through the food chain to kill non-target species.

When sick animals come into your care, and you have diagnosed they’ve been poisoned, is it relatively easy to identify whether the toxicity is caused by pesticides?

“It’s not always easily determined,” Edwina revealed, “as some internal bleeding from major impact (e.g. a car) will also have white extremities and bleeding out from orifices. But usually with cars there are other signs of impact – pain, head injury, concussion.

“When you get in an animal with very white paws and nose and gums, then that’s very likely rat bait. They are also easy to handle, with their flight-and-fight response [resistance to capture] gone. They may also have swelling in face and gasping for breath. They can also have spotting (bleeding from capillaries)…”

She continued, “That’s the rodenticides… There are different types of rodenticides; the anticoagulant ones like warfarin (1st generation) and brodifacoum (2nd generation) both prevent blood clotting, so the victim bleeds to death. There are also non-coagulant rodenticides including strychnine and zinc phosphide, but they are not approved for general public use.

“For herbicides, the symptoms are very different. They usually have foaming at the mouth and often paroxysm [seizures]…”

FGARs and SGARs

Rodenticides are usually formulated as baits with attractive flavours – such as fish oil or peanut butter, or meats, grains and fruits, depending on the target creatures – to more effectively lure the species that eat them.

Rodenticides come in a number of different forms; some, such as the anticoagulants (that are popular with the public and favoured by councils), prevent the blood from clotting, causing a slow death through internal haemorrhaging.

Anticoagulant rodenticides are divided into two main groups: FGARs and SGARs.

According to the Federal Government-run Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA): “First-generation anticoagulant rodenticides (FGARs) are referred to as ‘multi-dose anticoagulants’, meaning that rodents must consume these baits for several consecutive feedings to consume a lethal dose.

“FGARs break down in rodents quicker than second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides [SGARs], so there is less chance of secondary poisoning occurring in non-target animals if they eat rodents poisoned with an FGAR.

“There are 3 FGAR active constituents currently registered for use in Australia: warfarin, coumatetralyl and diphacinone…”

Edwina summarised how FGARs work. “First generation rodenticides may take multiple doses to kill a rodent – so if only a nibble was taken once, it is possible the animal could recover, but they’d be slower and sicker and for any prey species that isn’t a good thing. Also if they do suffer impact, then they may well bleed out as the blood can’t clot quick enough.

“For the SGARs I doubt they’d survive without intervention.”

According to APVMA, SGARs are significantly more dangerous in the natural environment.

“Second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs) are referred to as ‘single-dose anticoagulants’. A lethal dose can be ingested in a single feeding, making SGARs substantially more potent than FGARs. SGARs are slower to break down than FGARs and pose a higher risk of secondary poisoning to non-target animals.

“There are 5 SGAR active constituents currently registered for use in Australia: brodifacoum, bromadiolone, difethialone, difenacoum and flocoumafen…”

Possum rescue

Recently, Edwina took custody of a newly-born possum whose mother had died in unknown circumstances. Two days after coming into care spots appeared on his belly – a sure sign of rodenticide poisoning – which then identified what killed his mum.

“We had reports someone had been baiting possums intentionally when this one was found, his mum already dying…”

The young male was given massive doses of vitamin K, which enables the blood to clot and can reverse the effects of anticoagulants.

Edwina revealed, “We also had to treat him for pneumonia. He was 3 months in care as I also needed to give him physiotherapy and climbing room to get his muscle tone back before he was eventually released.”

She added, “A lot of rescues I do have been homeowners spraying for ticks, but poisoning their resident ringtail possum instead.”

Lobbying Council

At an Ordinary Council Meeting held on Tuesday 18 October 2022, Edwina addressed Northern Beaches councillors on the hazards of using SGARs to control vermin.

The following month, on 2 November, Council’s Parks and Recreation department sent her a written confirmation that “SGARs are used by Council to control rat infestations in a number of locations around the Northern Beaches,” adding that they will consider “how we may be able to phase out use of SGARs by staff, contractors and tenants on land owned by the Council.”

Can councils, including Northern Beaches, effectively reduce their spraying of herbicides to replace them with ‘environmentally friendly’ alternatives, without harming wildlife?

“A while back Integrated Pest Management (IPM) was a thing where you had to consider what you were spraying, and when,” Edwina replied. “But it takes brains and patience and actually looking at what you have. That isn’t popular for anything large-scale. They work on timetables, and if that includes removing all the new tips on food trees [that sustain wildlife] and cutting down branches in spring, that’s what we get.”

She continued, “I’m sure they do spray ‘environmentally friendly’ chemicals like pyrethrin, but at the same time they don’t provide alternative foods for native birds and animals, because they never actually think about it…”

Sydney Wildlife Rescuehttp://www.sydneywildlife.org.au

7/7/23: Are Queenslanders Microdosing on Weedkillers in their Drinking Water?

https://www.foe.org.au/are_queenslanders_microdosing_on_weedkillers_in_their_drinking_water

Are Queenslanders “Microdosing” on Weedkillers in their drinking water?

The answer to this question, is probably yes depending on where you live.

Pesticides in waterways are a common occurrence. Pesticides can wash off land particularly during rainfall events. If a community’s drinking water supply is located on a waterway downstream of where these chemicals are applied, there is a risk that the water could contain pesticide residues. Pesticides can also pollute groundwater. Some communities rely on bore water for drinking water. Pesticides can also move on air currents through a phenomenon called spray drift and end up in water supplies.

If the water supply offtake is connected to a water treatment plant then it is likely that pesticides in the source water, if present, will be significantly reduced or even eliminated by the treatment process employed. Powder Activated Carbon (PAC) is a relatively common method of reducing (but not entirely eliminating) pesticides in water, but not every water treatment plant will use PAC and standard water treatment facilities are not successful in removing pesticides. Once the treated water leaves the water treatment plant it is transported in the reticulation network to customer taps.

Original photo taken 8 Jan 2006 by Nick J

The number one concern of water authorities however are the dangers of micro-biological contaminants in the raw water which if found in the reticulated system can cause very serious health problems.

A number of other chemicals and substances can also be present in the raw, treated and reticulated water. Some chemicals are added at water treatment plants, such as chlorine, which in turn can create disinfection by-products. Pipes and plumbing can also have residues of heavy metals such as lead. Pesticides are generally regarded lower down the list of concerns for water authorities.

Another complicating factor is pesticide testing. This is costly with some samples costing hundreds of dollars each. To regularly test for the suite of possibly hundreds of pesticides used within a catchment around the year is an extremely costly exercise. As a result, some water authorities restrict their pesticide testing to once year or in some cases not at all. To add to the problem, in Queensland, local councils (often cash-strapped) are generally responsible for guaranteeing (and testing) safe drinking water to residents. Pesticide testing may be a low priority.

Users of pesticides are also under no obligation to inform the local council exactly what they are spraying. The more agriculture in a catchment, the higher the chances of pesticide runoff. Many of the catchments in coastal northern Queensland have large amounts of land devoted to crops such as sugarcane and bananas. Pesticides such as Atrazine can be used up to 3.3kg/ha in sugarcane, which may not sound like a lot, however pesticides can impact on water supplies less than parts per billion*, so it does not take alot of chemical to tarnish a water supply. (*One part per billion is equivalent to one drop in an Olympic size swimming pool). Many farms have also been established in high risk/runoff locations making relocation or retirement of farms unlikely.

Pesticide Reporting Portal

That being said, some of the most thorough pesticide testing in Australia has been conducted by the Queensland Government over the past decade. The Pesticide Reporting Portal provides a wealth of information on pesticide detections in a number of Queensland waterways, with a particular focus on waterways that flow into the Great Barrier Reef.

By accessing information from the Portal, over 72,000 pesticide detections from 39 current locations have been sighted by FoE. The amount of data in some cases stretches back to 2011. From these 39 locations, FoE determined that only 7[***] of the current testing locations were located in domestic water supplies.

These included: The Haughton River at Giru (just downstream from the towns offtake), the Pioneer River at Dumbleton Weir Mackay (the offtake to Mackay’s drinking water), the Fitzroy River at Rockhampton (near Rockhampton’s offtake) and Comet Weir (near the small town of Comet’s drinking water supply). The portal gives a unique insight into pesticide contamination of Australian waterways.

The timing of testing varied between these locations ranging back to 2011 for the Pioneer River (5647 positive samples) and Comet River (1628 positive samples), 2017 for the Haughton River (871 positive samples) and 2014 for the Fitzroy River (1976 positive samples). The testing also found 874 positive samples in the Burnett River (Bundaberg) from August 2017.

(*The city of Bundaberg sources drinking water from the Burnett River and bores. The location where the Queensland Government testing is conducted takes place 5km downstream of Branyan Water Treatment Plant offtake. The Government also have a testing location on Spliters Creek which flows into the Burnett River about 1km downstream of the Branyan WTP offtake. Nevertheless, testing of 6 water reservoirs at Bundaberg by the local council has revealed the presence of pesticides. Reservoirs fed by bore water have tested positive for the herbicide Bromacil.  A number of other Reservoirs are supplied water from Sun Water (eg The Gooburrum Main Channel sourced from Burnett River feeds into the Vecillios Road Reservior) and pesticides have also been found in these reservoirs. Sunwater also use the herbicide Acrolein to control weeds in their channels).

(*The town of Ingham relies primarily on bore water, however the town can draw from the Herbert River as an alternative. Queensland Government testing has recorded almost 2400 pesticide detections in the Herbert River since August 2011. The testing location appears to be in close proximity to the Water Treatment Plant. 23 pesticides have been detected with the most frequently detected being Diuron, Imidacloprid, Atrazine and 2,4-D. Of the 12 bores at Ingham, local council testing has found traces of Atrazine in 5 bores and Imidacloprid in 9. Imidacloprid is a neonicotinoid insecticide with no Australian Drinking Water Guideline).

(*The town of Innisfail relies on drinking water from the Johnstone River. Queensland Government testing has recorded over 760  pesticide detections in the North Johnstone River since February 2012. The current Queensland testing location at Goondi is a couple of kilometres downstream from the Innisfail offtake. 16 pesticides have been detected with the most frequently detected being Imidacloprid, Diuron and 2,4-D. Local Government testing has found traces of 6 pesticides in the Innisfail raw water supply with the most frequently detected being Imidacloprid. The highest detection being 0.23µg/L).

Bundaberg: Approximate location of the Branyan WTP marked with wavy lines. Queensland Government testing points marked with blue pins. WTP samples therefore would not be ‘influenced’ by Spliters Creek. Spliters Creek flows into the Burnett River upstream of the Qld Govt Bundaberg/Burnett River testing site. The Burnett River site is also well downstream of the WTP offtake but will be influenced by whatever is washing down Spliters Creek and Bundaberg itself. Spliters creek pesticide samples were dominated by Metolachlor, Atrazine and 2,4-D. Branyan WTP over the past few years has recorded detections of: Atrazine, Hexazinone, Metolachlor, 2,4-D, Dalapon and Tebuthiuron at levels averaging 0.07% of Australian Drinking Water Guideline levels.

Four different water supplies

To standardise the test results the following graph looks at pesticide detections from four water supplies (excluding Bundaberg, Ingham and Innisfail) since October 2017. The graph shows that in terms of total pesticide amounts detected by the Queensland Government tests, Diuron and Atrazine were the biggest problem chemical for the Pioneer River at Dumbleton Weir Mackay, with Tebuthiuron being most problematic for the Fitzroy River Rockhampton and Comet River at Comet Weir. Atrazine and Tebuthiuron were the most frequently detected pesticides at Giru over the 5 ½ year period.

The graph below shows that the largest pesticide detection volumes of the Haughton, Pioneer, Fitzroy and Comet Rivers over 5 ½ years were detected in the Pioneer River at Mackay, followed by the Comet River, Fitzroy River and Haughton River. This shows that in terms of drinking water and risks associated with pesticides, Mackay would appear to be the standout.

The graph does not provide insight into what chemical loads have been coming down the Pioneer River for many years. Out of 16,500 tests carried out by the Queensland Government at Dumbleton Weir on the Pioneer River between 2011 and 2023, 34% were positive for pesticides. Of these tests 92.7% of samples tested positive for Diuron and 87% were positive for Atrazine. What this means is that almost every sample of water taken from Dumbleton Weir will contain Atrazine and Diuron. The average level of detection of both was around 0.5µg/L, well under the Australian Drinking water guideline for both herbicides (20µg/L), but 5 times higher than the European Guideline and for Atrazine 5 times higher than the level required to cause issues with hormones.

Of the 39 waterways tested for pesticides over the past decade average levels in the Pioneer River came in at 11th in the waterways tested for across catchments flowing into the Great Barrier Reef.

Atrazine has been found to cause hormonal changes in amphibians at 0.1µg/L. It is banned in Europe.  There are no Australian drinking water guidelines for Fluroxypur, Imidacloprid and Tebuthiuron. In fact FoE found in 2016 that 41% of pesticides detected in Australian waterways do not have Australian Drinking Water guidelines.

Atrazine Diversion

Non-legally enforceable guidelines for many agricultural chemicals and other substances in drinking water are set by the National Health and Medical Research Council. Safe is debatable term. To determine safe levels of pesticides, human testing is not allowed, so testing is conducted on animals. For Atrazine the No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) was based on a 2 year study of rats. This amount was then divided by 100 which incorporates a factor of 10 for interspecies extrapolation and 10 for intraspecies variation. An estimation of body weight of a 70kg male drinking 2L of water a day is also included in the calculation to determine ‘safe’ dose.

Are impacts on the endocrine system and other issues concerning long term low level exposure to pesticide included in these estimations? The guidelines also do not take into account impacts from mixtures of low levels of chemicals, where synergistic effects may occur. Are these effects included in the 100 ‘safety factor’? If so how?  It’s also interesting to note that the Australian drinking water guideline for Atrazine (set 12 years ago) is 20µg/L. In Europe, pesticides have a drinking water guideline of 0.1µg/L. In the United States the drinking water guideline for Atrazine is set at 3µg/L and long term exposure above this level is linked to cardiovascular system or reproductive problems. The Australian guideline prior to 2011 was 40µg/L.

Australian scientists have recently called for Atrazine to be withdrawn in Australia for its effect on male fertility.

Other studies have stated: “Current regulatory levels for chronic exposure are based on no observed adverse effect levels (NOAELs) of these LH alterations in rodent studies. Atrazine has also been studied for its effects on the central nervous system and neurotransmission. The European Union (EU) recognized the health risks of atrazine exposure as a public health concern with no way to contain contamination of drinking water. As such, the EU banned atrazine use in 2003. The United States recently reapproved atrazine’s use in the fall of 2020. Research has shown that there is a wide array of adverse health effects that are seen across multiple models, exposure times, and exposure periods leading to dysfunction in many different systems in the body with most pointing to a neuroendocrine target of toxicity.”

The following graphic reveals some of the complexities grappling researchers studying impacts of Atrazine and its metabolites.

Source of this graphical representation

Local Government to the Rescue?

In terms of impacts to drinking water, the Queensland Government test data can only surmise what is potentially ending up in consumer taps. It is highly unlikely that local Government authorities were testing their water treatment plants at the time that the Queensland Government was doing their monitoring. Some councils monitor for pesticides on an annual basis. Others test every few months using grab samples which really only give a chemical amount for an instant in time. Generally speaking if the grab tests show a level of pesticide at a level above the drinking water guidelines, further testing and management protocols should apply.

To try and ascertain what is being detected by Queensland local government, some of the information is published in various council Drinking Water Quality Management Plans which in some cases are published annually. After wading through a number of these plans it was determined that 12 shires published pesticide test results at some time over the past decade. There are however 77 local government areas in Queensland, so the scale of the issue is probably much larger than acknowledged.

Looking at the regional council data, FoE found over 1000 pesticide detections with a maximum detection average of 0.98µg/L. The 1000 test results however included samples taken in raw water, treatment plant water and reticulated water. Once the reticulated water samples were isolated a total of 204 positive detections in reticulated water supplies were found. The maximum detection average level in reticulated supplies was 3.9µg/L. It should be highlighted that there was a general lack of consistency in what defined treated as opposed to reticulated water. The numbers were also skewed by the Mackay incident of Feb & March 2013 where both Diuron and Atrazine were detected at the Nebo Road treatment plan at almost 20 times higher than the Australian Drinking Water Guideline (or 3900 and 3500 times higher than the European Guideline). It is unclear what amounts of Atrazine and Diuron ended up being consumed in Mackay as a result of this incident, but if this incident is removed from the spreadsheet the maximum pesticide detection average in reticulated water drops to 0.265µg/L.

Average detection levels in comparison to the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines for pesticides with guideline levels was 39.68%, once again including the 2013 spike of Atrazine and Diuron at Mackay. If the 2013 Nebo Road WTP incident is removed, the average pesticide detection level is 1.97% of current Australian Drinking Water Guideline Levels. 1.97% of guideline levels does probably not warrant much attention from water authorities, as there will be other chemicals found at much higher levels in water supplies which will take priority.

Friends of the Earth produced a report in 2017 looking at pesticide detections in Victorian water supplies for the years 2007-16. That report found that the average pesticide detection in mostly raw water was 0.46µg/L, with the average pesticide level in comparison to Australian Drinking Water Guidelines was 0.98%.

Source: Mackay Regional Council Drinking Water Quality Management Plan 2013/14. How was the community notified about this incident. What amounts of Diuron and Atrazine ended up in reticulation? What areas of Mackay had the highest levels and for how long? Were there health impacts eg pregnant women?

The most positive test results according to various Drinking Water Quality Management Plans, from raw, treated and reticulated local council samples came from Western Downs Shire (274), followed by Bundaberg Shire (177), Mackay Shire (164), Banana Shire (149), Central Highlands Shire (127), Burdekin Shire (99), Flinders Shire (36), Hinchinbook Shire (33), Issac Shire (20), Cassowary Shire (14), Maranoa Shire (14) and Tablelands Shire (13). There was little consistency across these shires in terms of reporting data with some conducting testing one year, but then not following up the year after. Some of the test results were published, with others not.

19 separate pesticides were detected by local government testing, with Atrazine and its metabolites making up 49.5% of all detections, followed by Metolachlor 13.2% and Tebuthiuron 11.3%.

Interestingly there was no positive samples for Rockhampton. Whilst the Fitzroy River doesn’t seem to have the same pesticide loads as the Pioneer River at Mackay, the lack of positive detections is possibly explained by a lack of testing for pesticides used within the Fitzroy catchment by Rockhampton Shire. It is unclear whether the council actually test for the main pesticides found in the Fitzroy River by the Queensland Government namely, Tebuthiuron, Metolachlor, Atrazine, Terbuthylazine, 2,4-D, Simazine, Fluroxypur etc.

From FoE’s assessment approximately 300,000 people in Queensland in approximately 12 shires have been exposed to pesticides in the drinking water over the past decade. The main concern areas being Mackay, Marian, Bundaberg, Ayr, Home Hill, Giru/Cungulla, Ingham, Biloela, Capella, Comet, Prairie, Baralaba and Jandowae.

It is likely that similar results would occur in many other regions of Australia.

The Queensland situation appears to be quite serious, particularly if one also factors in ecological impacts of application of pesticides. European guidelines suggest that any pesticide detection >0.1µg/L in a water supply need to be investigated by authorities to understand the source of the pollution and to try and stop the pollution occurring. Queensland Government testing suggest that the 0.1µg/L level was breached over 27,000 times over the past decade. Investigators would be hard pressed to find the source of the pesticides, considering their widespread use throughout Queensland.

Top ten detections of pesticides in Queensland domestic water supplies according to Council water quality management plans.

Location Pesticide Council Supply Amount (max) Australian Drinking Water Guidelines =1
Nebo Road WTP Feb 2013 Diuron Mackay Treatment Plant 390µg/L 19.5x
Nebo Road WTP Feb 2013 Atrazine Mackay Treatment Plant 350µg/L 17.5x
Prairie 2017/18 Heptachlor Flinders Raw 0.371µg/L 1.237x
Tinnaroo Park 2016/17 Thiometon Tablelands Raw 4.3µg/L 1.075x
Biloela Bore 2017/18 Dicofol Banana Raw 3.2µg/L 0.8x
Biloela 2017/18 Dicofol Banana Potable? 3.2µg/L 0.8x
River Park Res. 2019/20 Fipronil Bundaberg Raw 0.55µg/L 0.785x
Baralaba Jan/Mar 2015 Dicofol Banana Treatment Plant 2.9µg/L 0.725x
Jandowae Bore 2 27/9/16 Dieldrin Western Downs Raw 0.2µg/L 0.667x
Jandowae Bore 2 28/1/15 Dieldrin Western Downs Raw 0.2µg/L 0.667x
Jandowae Bore 2 29/7/15 Dieldrin Western Downs Raw 0.2µg/L 0.667x
Jandowae Bore 2 4/11/15 Dieldrin Western Downs Raw 0.2µg/L 0.667x

8/11/23: An Impossible Dream. Sustainable Pesticide Management in Great Barrier Reef Catchments

https://www.foe.org.au/why_pesticide_regulation_in_queensland_continues_to_fail_its_waterways

An Impossible Dream. Sustainable Pesticide Management in Great Barrier Reef Catchments?

In July 2023 FoE published a blog on pesticides in Queensland water supplies based on over 70,000 pesticide detections listed on the Queensland Government’s Pesticide Reporting Portal between late 2011 (in some locations) to March 2023. That blog attracted some media interest, including newspaper and radio, as well as hundreds of visits to the Friends of the Earth Australia website.

This blog is a follow up and looks at the potential ecological impact of pesticides flowing down rivers and creeks into the Great Barrier Reef (GBR). The blog will not discuss impacts of pesticides on the GBR but rather hopes to facilitate a better understanding of what is flowing into the GBR.

FoE argues that rather than tolerating Moderately Disturbed 95% ecological default guidelines (DGV’s) “previously known as trigger levels”, the Queensland Government, should be pushing for Slightly Disturbed/High Ecological 99% DGV’s in all waterways flowing into the GBR World Heritage Area. Unfortunately though, for many waterways flowing into the GBR they have historically been treated as little more than agricultural drains. It appears that in many locations this sad reality will continue into the indefinite future.

Whilst ecological guidelines can be useful indicators to the health of waterways, it could be argued that the guidelines themselves allow a “green light” for polluters to keep polluting waterways at supposedly “safe” levels. It also means that obvious failures in regards to pesticide labels, which supposedly don’t allow for water pollution, but actually do, are pushed aside and are rarely addressed.

The other glaringly obvious problem is that DGV’s exist for only a small fraction of pesticides used in Australia and that reviews for existing DGV’s occur rarely or not at all. For example in relation to  Atrazine, which represents the highest by quantity pesticide detected in GBR catchments, it has not had its DGV reviewed for almost a quarter of a century!!!

A major hindrance is that what may seem like the “greenest” course of action, is an entirely different proposition in the “real world”. This is especially the case if historical aspects of farm locations are taking into account and if one ignores the major economic contribution that agriculture makes to the Queensland and national economy. Eg Sugar is Australia’s second largest commodity crop after wheat, worth about $2bn/year. How many sugar users are aware of the ecological problems associated with the sugar cane industry? How is an equitable balance achieved?

FoE has determined that 22,492 breaches to Slightly Disturbed/High Ecological 99% DGV’s and 7,288 breaches to Moderately Disturbed 95% DGV’s occurred between late 2011* to March 2023 in testing across 39 locations. (*the actual amount is probably much higher as testing did not occur in many locations under several years after 2011).

Key ecological issues in relation to the health and Queensland rivers and waterways relate most significantly to the ongoing mismanagement of: Metolachlor, Diuron, Imidacloprid, Diazinon, Chlorpyrifos, Metsulfuron Methyl, Tebuthiuron, Imazapic and Atrazine.

87.2% of the 39 waterways sampled, breached 99% DGV’s for at least one pesticide, across the time period when all testing (including negative results) occurred. In some locations these breaches would have occurred relatively continously over a 11-12 year period and may have included up to eight pesticides.

33.3% of waterways sampled, regularly breached 95% DGV’s over the same period of time.

The most pesticide detections occurred at Barratta Creek at Northcote north of Ayr.

The highest volume of pesticides detected occurred at Sandy Creek at Homebush (south of Mackay), followed by Barratta Creek.

The highest average pesticide detection was at Coochin Creek, south of Beerwah.

Coochin Creek also recorded three* pesticides breaching the 95% DGV averaged out over the decade of pesticide testing at that location. (*including ‘sporadic and very high’ detections of Diazinon and Chlorpyrifos).

The Proserpine River at Glen Isla, Sandy Creek at Homebush and Coochin Creek all had 8 pesticides regularly breaching 99% DGV’s.

Arguably the waterway suffering the worst peaks in pesticide pollution was the Welcome Creek at Gooburrum, mainly because of excessively high detections of the insecticide diazinon.

This ongoing pollution represents a continuing failure of existing pesticide labels and farm management practices to stop toxic pollutants entering waterways and the GBR and an embarrassing failure of pesticide regulation in highly sensitive catchments that flow into a World Heritage Area.

 

Quick Overview

*Note that pesticides refer in this blog to herbicides, insecticides and fungicides


The graph represents a summary of all of the 72,000 pesticide detections, sourced from the Pesticide Portal based on type of chemical. (Please note that most locations did not have testing results going back to 2011). The ten pesticides most frequently detected were: Diuron, Atrazine, Hexazinone, Imidacloprid, 2,4-D, Metolachlor, Imazapic, Fluroxypur, MCPA and Tebuthiuron. The ecological guideline levels of these pesticides however varies considerably. For instance the 95% DGV for 2,4-D is set at just over 1200 times higher than Diuron. The 99% DGV for 2,4-D is 4.6 million times higher than the guideline level for Diazinon, meaning that although 2,4-D was detected many times more frequently than Diazinon, the potential impacts of Diazinon can be far more serious.


This graph highlights detection averages across all 39 locations. This is the cumulation of all detections as a whole, not catchment by catchment. Catchment totals vary significantly.  The highest average detection levels across the 39 locations were for Atrazine, Bromacil, Diuron, 2,4-D, Fluroxypur, Metribuzin, Metolachlor and Tebuthiuron.


In terms of pesticide loads entering waterways that flow into the GBR, Atrazine dominates, followed by Diuron and 2,4-D. However, Atrazine detections at locations such as Barratta Creek (north of Ayr) and Sandy Creek (south of Mackay) contributed over 50% of Atrazine and Diuron loads.

With regards to the Queensland data that FoE has accessed, 24 pesticides were tested for over 39 locations. The detections of the pesticides varied on where the samples were taken and were determined by what crops were grown in the various catchments. For instance, sugarcane will use different pesticides than bananas and vegetable crops may use a variety of different pesticides. In fact horticulture appears to pose the most risks (eg Coochin Creek, Welcome Creek, Don River etc) through use of insecticides such as Diazinon and Chlorpyrifos. Detections also varied on how far away samples were taken from the agricultural practice. Samples taken closer to agricultural areas will generally have higher levels of pesticides detected than sites kilometres downstream where significant dilution of pesticide load will occur.

Image above: The Don River at Bowen has seen very high levels of the insecticides Chlorpyrifos and Diazinon. The area is the largest producer of winter vegetable crops in Queensland. The industry is worth about $650million/yr. Tomatoes, capsicum, mangoes, cucurbits, beans and corn are the main commodities. Since testing began in 2017, 400 pesticide incidents have been recorded in the Don River with an average detection level almost 166 times higher than the 99% ecological trigger level. This high level is largely due to numerous detections of the insecticides Chlorpyrifos and Diazinon. DGV’s for both insecticides are exceedingly small, 0.00003µg/L and 0.00004µg/L (parts per billion). What restrictions or label changes have been implemented to stop this pollution occurring? Both Chlorpyrifos and Diazinon can also be used as insecticides in commercial and industrial areas as well as commercial turf, however in the Don River situation, it is apparent that the main residential and industrial areas are well east of the sampling location.

Ecological guideline levels for pesticides

Guideline levels for some pesticides and other contaminants are listed in the ANZECC Guidelines. The Draft Guideline Values (DGV’s) are an attempt to set levels for contaminants in a way that protects the majority of species in freshwater and marine waters. In very simplistic terms if a waterway is already degraded (eg an urban waterway) it is assumed that some species loss has already occurred.  The guidelines therefore allow for higher levels of contaminants in more degraded waterways than those that are pristine and where species loss has not been impacted. The highest DGV/trigger level afforded by the ANZECC guidelines are 99%, followed by 95%, 90% and 80% for the most impacted waterways. The guidelines also reflect the fact that some contaminants are more toxic than others to a range of aquatic organisms. The more toxic the substance to aquatic life, the lower the guideline level. Generally, these guidelines are not legally enforceable and they are regarded as being a generic starting point for assessing water quality.

The ANZECC default guidelines for Metsulfuron Methyl (below) for example were not established until 2021, with Queensland proposing guideline levels as early as 2017. Prior to this, few would have “batted an eyelid” if Metsulfuron Methyl was detected in waterways at any level. (Note that µg/L refers to parts per billion). The Queensland proposed guideline is also higher than the ANZECC DGV.

ANZECC Toxicant Default Guideline Value for Aquatic Ecosystem Protection – Metsulfuron Methyl
99% 95% 90% 80%
0.0037µg/L
0.018µg/L 0.048µg/L 0.18µg/L
0.0047µg/L (Qld)
0.025µg/L (Qld)
0.069µg/L (Qld)
0.28µg/L (Qld)

The problem becomes even more concerning when one realises that:

Approximately 12% of pesticides detected in Australian waterways have DGV’s with 43 pesticides having DGV’s. 88% of these pesticides had guidelines in 2000 with only 5 pesticides receiving default guideline levels since 2000 and all of these occurred after 2020. Meaning no updates or new chemicals listed between 2000-2020!!!

State Governments can also set their own guideline levels and in terms of Queensland this is the case, as 11 of the 24 pesticides tested in the GBR catchments for are not listed under the ANZECC guidelines. These are covered in: “Proposed aquatic ecosystem protection guideline values for pesticides commonly used in the Great Barrier Reef catchment area: Part 1 (amended)”.

Queensland also has guideline levels for four pesticides also listed under ANZECC guidelines, namely Metolachlor, Metsulfuron Methyl, Simazine and Tebuthiuron. It was difficult to determine which guidelines the Queensland Government uses in relation to these four herbicides. The Pesticide Reporting Portal uses ANZECC Guidelines with the provision that “Low Reliability Default Guideline Value. Subject to Revision. King et al (2017a) provides higher values the will form the basis of revised draft guidelines to be submitted to the National Water Reform Committee (NWRC) for endorsement as Australian and New Zealand water quality guidelines).” In terms of this blog, guidelines used for these four herbicides have been the ANZECC guidelines.

Graph represents differing 99% trigger/DGV levels for Slightly Disturbed/High Ecological Value waterways. The scale is in parts per billion and is on a scale from Diazinon 0.00003µg/L (lowest) to 590µg/L for Haloxyfop (highest). Glyphosate is not included in the Pesticide Portal testing regimes in Queensland, but has been added here to show its relatively high ecological trigger level (180µg/L) which incidently is 6 million times higher than the 99% trigger level for the insecticide Diazinon. Glyphosate has also been included in the graph due to it being the most frequently used herbicide in Australia and the pesticide that is receiving the most media attention. It figures then that the lower the guideline level the more risk that if that chemical enters a waterway, the more potential problems occurring.

You definately don’t want Diazinon entering any waterway. But it regularly does, with 479 detections across numerous GBR catchments! Note that Diazinon has the lowest DGV and is closely followed by Chlorpyrifos with a guideline level of 0.00004µg/L. Both of these organophospate insecticides are lethal to many aquatic species. The lowest guideline level for a herbicide is 0.0037µg/L for Metsulfuron Methyl. As mentioned previously, Metsulfuron Methyl did not obtain an DGV until 2021. Were Metsulfuron Methyl labels updated, by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) to incorporate the new guideline levels, by either reducing the amount of herbicide allowed to be used or restricting the use of Metsulfuron Methyl in high risk areas?


Graph shows differing 95% DGV’s for Moderately disturbed/agricultural ecosystems which is how the Queensland Government defines a large expanse of Queensland (including waterways that flow into the World Heritage Listed, Great Barrier Reef). As explained previously, these levels are set higher than 99% DGV/trigger levels. eg for Diazinon the 95% DGV level is at 0.01µg/L or 333 times higher than the 99% DGV level. Glyphosate’s 95% DGV is set at 320µg/L (77.8% higher) than its 99% DGV. 95% DGV’s then allow for higher levels of pollution than what would be expected for 99% DGV’s.

It telling that pesticides with higher DGV levels, (eg Haloxyfop, Glyphosate, 2,4-D) will rarely be exceed the guideline level. This controversially includes Atrazine which has a 95% DGV of 13µg/L. It seems odd that Atrazine has such a high DGV, but not surprising when one realises that many pesticides were granted these guideline levels almost a quarter of a century ago and have not been changed since then, despite a huge body of research implying alot of ecological problems associated with Atrazine, including this 20 year report published a year after the ANZECC guideline was granted.

From assessing pesticide data up to March 2023 from the Pesticide Reporting Portal, it is possible to calculate however many breaches there have been the ANZECC DGV’s, both by location and type of chemical.

It’s clear that the largest number of breaches are associated with the following pesticides. In the 39 catchments, Metolachlor breached the 99% ANZECC DGV 5610 times, Diuron 4907 times, Imidacloprid 4147 times, Imazapic 2173 times, Atrazine 1603 times, Isoxaflutole 1109 times, Metsulfuron Methyl 941 times, Hexazinone 862 times and Ametryn 430 times.

In terms of the 95% DGV, the most exceedances were for Diuron 2750 times, Imidacloprid 2161 times, Metsulfuron Methyl 596 times and Metolachlor 559 times. It should be understood that a breach of the DGV may only last for a short period of time, particularly after periods of heavy rain. These rainfall events will produce a flush of contaminants which will become more diluted the further away from the source of the pollution. However, the data also suggests chronic ongoing issues of pesticides in waterways.

If label rates are working, why are these pesticides ending up in waterways and frequently exceeding ecological guideline levels? Could it be that if further restrictions were placed on the rates that these chemicals could be applied, many would not be viable?

The labels themselves can present contradictory information, Eg the label for Metolachor states: “DO NOT apply to waterlogged soils DO NOT apply if heavy rains or storms that are likely to cause run-off are forecast within 2 days of application DO NOT irrigate to the point of run-off for at least 2 days after application… In Northern Queensland, application must be made to moist soil and rainfall or irrigation should occur within 24 hours of application.” How is rain and heavy rain defined? At what rate of rainfall does Metolachlor not enter waterways?


In terms of what percentage of pesticide detections breached 95% ecological guidelines, it is clear that Metsulfuron Methyl is a major problem (see graph above). Also note that although Metsulfuron Methyl did not have as many detections (<1000), it is the highest in terms of percentage of detections that breached the ecological guidelines due to its very low DGV.  Other key problem chemicals, in terms of 95% DGV’s include: Fipronil, Diazinon, Chlorpyrifos, Imidacloprid and Diuron. As a regulator how do you address stopping widespread water pollution without reducing label rates or cancelling pesticide registration entirely?


Clearly the most problematic pesticides in terms of 99% DGV’s are Diazinon and Chlorpyrifos. The above graph reveals that the average Diazinon detection was a whopping 762 times higher than the 99% trigger level, with Chlorpyrifos at 727 times the 99% trigger level. 11 pesticides had average detection levels equal to or above the 99% DGV. Metsulfuron Methyl 27.2 times,  Metolachlor 22.8 times, Tebuthiuron 10.9 times, Diuron 4.9 times, Imidacloprid 3.2 times, Imazapic 2.8 times, Isoxaflutole 2.3 times, Fipronil 1.5 times and Atrazine 1 time. (Ametryn came in at 12th at 96% of the 99% DGV). Is this the major reason why the Queensland Government will not tolerate 99% DGV Slightly Disturbed/High Ecological Values across swathes of farmland draining into the GBR? Current pesticide mis-management across most GBR catchments makes attaining the 99% DGV an ‘impossible dream’.

Pesticide use is essentially a licence to pollute areas off-site of application, sometimes at levels that are exceedingly high. Tracking the source of the pollution is not easy, particularly if a number of users have applied the same chemical near the same time as each other. Yet what efforts are really underway to resolve the problem?

Could it be that for the pesticide to remain effective they need to be applied at levels which will knowingly pollute waterways. Waterways therefore become ecological ‘sacrifice zones’ which ‘magically’ will be diluted downstream. Any reduction in usage rates, could render the viability of the pesticide ineffective. If this is the case, then unique waterways providing habitat for a myriad of species are still being regarded as being little more than agricultural drains, that pesticide users are allowed to pollute with impunity. Flooding and poor location of farms, where farms were originally located in high risk and inappropriate locations only increases the problems and makes the issue more difficult to solve.

With the lower (and less ‘rigid’) 95% ecological DGV/trigger level used for moderately disturbed ecosystems, Metsulfuron Methyl (5.6 times) higher than 95% DGV) is the pesticide with the highest average detection level above the ANZECC guidelines. Chlorpyrifos 2.9 times, Diazinon 2.3 times, Diuron 1.7 times,  Imidacloprid 1.4 times and Fipronil 1.1 times also had average detection levels above the 95% DGV. These pesticides appear to be of key concern in moderately disturbed ecosystems, with four being insecticides. It is obvious then that users of these agricultural chemicals in a third of GBR catchments struggle to even meet the 95% guideline level.

Welcome Creek at Gooburrum (above) located north of Bundaberg recorded levels of Diazinon 36,000 times over the ANZECC 99% DGV in March 2021. At the same time, Chlorpyrifos was detected at 500 times the 99% DGV, Imidacloprid at 67 times the DGV and Fipronil at 10 times. 8 different pesticides were detected at the same time.  Average levels of Diazinon over March to April 2021 were almost 16,000 times over the 99% DGV. Welcome Creek probably comes in at the worst performing of all the waterways draining into the GBR. How can this ever be regarded as sustainable and ‘responsible agricultural’ management? No investigation into the source of the pollution was apparently followed up. Why?

Coochin Creek (above) just south east of Beerwah. Cocktails of chemicals including synergistic effects are ignored by regulators. Eg taking a random date such as 2.15pm the 8th of May 2022, Diazinon was recorded at 4600 times over the ANZECC 99% DGV in Coochin Creek. If this wasn’t bad enough Chlorpyrifos was detected at 3500 times the DGV at the same time, with Metolachlor at almost 18 times the DGV, Diuron at over 11 times the DGV and Atrazine at three times the DGV. 10 pesticides were detected at the same time! These chemical cocktails are not isolated and appear to be the norm. How are the synergistic impacts of a cocktail of chemicals factored into ecological guidelines?

Sugarcane country: Barratta Creek (above), north of Ayr in centre of image, with Burdekin river on left and Haughton River on the right. The highest levels of Metolachlor detected in Queensland occurred in the Barratta Creek at almost 1200 times the ANZECC DGV in June 2015. Baratta Creek has recorded over 7000 pesticide detections since 2011, including high levels of Atrazine and Diuron. Nine separate pesticides were recorded in Barratta Creek at the same time in early 2023.

Locations


A map of Queensland showing the 39 locations of pesticide sampling locations that FoE sourced from the Pesticide Portal. Average distance from the coast (excluding two locations near Comet) is ~10km, meaning greater potential impacts on the GBR. White pins indicate a location where pesticides were detected, but the average level detected over varying time periods did not exceed 99% or 95% DGV’s. Yellow indicates sites where pesticides breached the 99% DGV and red pins indicate sites where both the 99% and 95% DGV’s were exceeded.


In terms of 99% DGV ecological impacts over the entire length of time when testing occurred (inlcuding zero detection samples),  the key problem in some catchments appears to be application of Metolachlor, Diuron, Imidacloprid, Diazinon, Chlorpyrifos, Metsulfuron Methyl, Tebuthiuron, Imazapic and Atrazine.

Imidacloprid, Diuron, Metsulfuron Methyl, Diazinon and Chlorpyrifos appear to be most problematic in terms of 95% DGV’s.

FoE had accessed ~307,000 pesticide tests via the Pesticide Portal. Almost 72,000 of these tests were positive for pesticides, meaning that around 23% of all samples were positive across 39 locations. Positive detections in comparison to all samples were highest at Barratta Creek at Northcote 49.4% and lowest at the Normanby River 0.8% positive.

The following table helps explain why it is important to understand the issue based on catchment by catchment data, as pesticide use can vary significantly depending on the location and the crops grown.

Top Ten Locations  Positive Detections as % of all Detections Most Frequently Detected Pesticides
1. Barratta Creek at Northcote 49.4% Atrazine, Diuron, 2,4-D
2. Sandy Creek at Homebush 47.1% Diuron, Hexazinone, Atrazine
3. Proserpine River at Glen Isla 39% Hexazinone, Imazapic, Diuron
4. East Baratta Creek at Jerona Road 38.7% Atrazine, Diuron, Imazapic
5. Coochin Creek at Mawsons Road 34.8% Diuron, Bromacil, Ametryn
6. Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump 34.1% Diuron, Atrazine, Hexazinone
7. Mackenzie River at Rileys Crossing 30.7% Tebuthiuron, Metolachlor, Atrazine
8. Murray River at Bilyamo 28.8% Hexazinone, Atrazine, Diuron
9. Moore Park Drainage at Moore Park 28.7% Atrazine, Diuron, 2,4-D
10. Comet River at Comet Weir 28.4% Tebuthiuron, Metolachlor, Atrazine

 

Top Ten Locations Average pesticide detection level (µg/L)
Positive Detections as % of all Detections
1. Coochin Creek at Mawsons Road 0.6 34.8
2. Fairydale Drainage at Norton Road 0.59 22.9
3. Barratta Creek at Northcote 0.59 49.4
4. Sandy Creek at Homebush 0.55 47.1
5. Proserpine River at Glen Isla 0.45 39
6. Moore Park Drainage at Moore Park 0.39 28.7
7. Comet River at Comet Weir 0.33 28.4
8. Welcome Creek Gooburrum Road 0.28 24.3
9. Yellow Waterholes Creek 0.26 25.1
10. Mackenzie River at Rileys Crossing 0.24 30.7

The following table sheds some useful information based on locational data. What it shows is that 87.2% of waterways flowing into the Great Barrier Reef where pesticide testing occurred breached 99% DGV’s over the time period that those pesticides were tested for. 33.3% of waterways regularly breached 95% ecological trigger levels over the same time period. These averages included negative detections.

Note that although the insecticides Diazinon and Chlorpyrifos are listed at some locations with very high average detections, these averages are ‘skewed’ due to the incredibly low 99% trigger levels for both chemicals. These averages may in some instances be due to a handful of detections only a very short time period, meaning that the impact of the chemicals would be short lived (but intense). It should also be noted that although the dates listed showed that when pesticide data was sourced from the Pesticide Reporting Portal, some of the 24 pesticides may not have been tested for at that particular date, with a variance in frequency at some locations between pesticide test regimes.

99% and 95% ANZECC Draft Guideline Values (DGV’s) for specific pesticides based on all detections and locations. Highest levels detected.

Location (Red indicates major problems)
Date of Testing
 Average detection in comparison to 99% guideline Average detection in comparison to 95% guideline
Normanby River at Kalpowar Crossing January 2021 – March 2023 Metolachlor detected at 17% of DGV over time period.
Daintree River at Lower Daintree October 2017 – March 2023 Diuron detected at 12%, Imidacloprid 10.8% and Metolachlor at 10.1% of DGV over time period. Imidacloprid detected at 4.8% and Diuron at 4.2% of DGV over time period
Mossman River at Bonnie Doon October 2017 – March 2023 Metolachlor detected at 2 times DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 84.9% and Imidacloprid at 69% of DGV over time period. Imidicloprid detected at 31% and Diuron at 30% of DGV over time period.
Mulgrave River at Deeral November 2013 – March 2023 Metolachlor detected at 2.2 times DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 76.6% and Imidacloprid at 33% of DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 26.6% and Imidacloprid at 14.7% of DGV over time period.
Russell River at East Russell January 2014 – March 2023 Diuron detected at 1.2 times DGV over time period. Metolachlor detected at 65.9% and Atrazine at 55.9% of DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 42.7% and Imidacloprid at 27.9% of DGV over time period.
North Johnstone River at Goondi February 2012 – March 2023 Imidacloprid detected at 1.1 times DGV over time period. Diazinon detected at 57.6% of DGV over time period. Imidacloprid detected at 48.5% of DGV over time period.
Johnstone River at Coquette Point December 2015 – March 2023 Imidacloprid detected at 98.9%, Diazinon 79.7%, Diuron 69% and Metolachlor 54.3% of DGV over time period. Imidacloprid detected at 44% and Diuron at 24% of DGV over time period.
Tully River at Euramo February 2011 – March 2023 Diazinon detected at 16.6, Diuron 1.6 and Imidacloprid 1.5 times DGV over time period. Metolachlor detected at 84.7% of DGV over time period. Imidacloprid detected at 68.5% and Diuron at 56.6% of DGV over time period.
Herbert River at Ingham October 2011 – March 2023 Metolachlor detected at 1.3 times DGV over time period. Imidacloprid detected at 88.63% and Diuron 70.9% of DGV over time period. Imidacloprid detected at 39.4% and Diuron at 24.7% of DGV over time period.
Murray River at Bilyana November 2018 – March 2023 Diuron detected at 4.4, Imidacloprid 3.2, Metolachlor 3.2 and Imazapic 1.2 times DGV over time period. Hexazinone detected at 67.3%, Atrazine 48.5% and Isoxaflutole 37.8% of DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 1.5 and Imidacloprid 1.4 times DGV over time period. Hexazinone detected at 18.9% of DGV over time period.
Black River at Bruce Highway February 2018 – March 2023 Tebuthiuron detected at 23.7% and Metsulfuron Methyl 13.1%  of DGV over time period.
Ross River at Aplins Weir Headwaters February 2018 – March 2023 Tebuthiuron detected at 16.4% of DGV over time period.
Haughton River at Giru Tailwater August 2018 – March 2023 Metolachlor detected at 10, and Tebuthiuron 6.5 times DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 57.2% and Imazapic 45.5% of DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 19.9% and Metolachlor 18.3% of DGV over time period.
East Baratta Creek at Jerona Road August 2017 – March 2023 Metolachlor detected at 6.5, Diuron 2.7, Isoxaflutole 2.1, Tebuthiuron 1.7, Atrazine 1.2 and Imazapic 1.1 times DGV over time period. Metsulfuron Methyl 52.9% and Ametryn 52.7% of DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 93.1% and Isoxaflutole 31.2% of DGV over time period.
Baratta Creek at Northcote August 2011 – March 2023 Metolachlor detected at 19.5, Diuron 8.7, Atrazine 4.4, Isoxaflutole 2.9, Diazinon 1.8 and Metsulfuron Methyl 1.5 times DGV over time period. Imazapic 88.6% and Ametryn 65.1% of DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 3.02 times DGV over time period. Isoxaflutole detected at 42.4%, Metolachlor 35.6% and Metsulfuron Methyl 31.5% of DGV over time period.
Burdekin River at Home Hill October 2011 – March 2023 Tebuthiuron detected at 3.4 and Metolachlor 1.2 times DGV over time period.
Don River at Bowen March 2017 – March 2023 Chlorpyrifos detected at 175, Diazinon 121.3, Metolachlor 12.3, Metsulfuron Methyl 3.8 and Tebuthiuron 1.7 times DGV over time period. Metsulfuron Methyl detected at 78.1%, Chlorpyrifos 70%, Diazinon 36.4% and Metolachlor 22.7% of DGV over time period.
Proserpine River at Glen Isla December 2016 – March 2023 Metolachlor detected at 23, Diuron 9.5, Imidacloprid 8.5, Imazapic 6.5, Hexazinone 2.6, Chlorpyrifos 1.5, Atrazine 1.3 and Diazinon 1.1 times DGV over time period. Isoxaflutole deteted at 58.2% of DGV level over time period. Imidacloprid detected at 3.8, and Diuron 3.3 times DGV over time period. Hexazinone 72.2%, Imazapic 56.9% and Metolachlor 42.1% of DGV over time period.
O’Connell River at Caravan Park January 2014 – March 2023 Metolachlor detected at 2.2, Imidacloprid 2.2, Diuron 1.8 and Imazapic 1.4 times DGV over time period. Atrazine detected at 45.1% of DGV over time period. Imidacloprid 97.3% and Diuron 63.5% of DGV over time period.
O’Connell River at Staffords Crossing September 2016 – March 2023 Diuron detected at 3.2, Metolachlor 2.5, Imidacloprid 2.4 and Imazapic 1.3 times DGV over time period. Tebuthiuron detected at 85.4%, Metsulfuron Methyl 62.6%, Hexazinone 46.3%, Atrazine 35.4% of DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 1.1 and Imidacloprid 1.06 times DGV over time period.
Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump Station September 2011 – March 2023 Diuron detected at 5.8, Metolachlor 2.9,  Imidacloprid 2.1 and Imazapic 1.3 times DGV over time period. Atrazine detected at 65.3%, Hexazinone 38.7% of DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 2.04 times DGV  over time period. Imidacloprid detected at 91.6% of DGV over time period.
Sandy Creek at Homebush September 2011 – March 2023 Metolachlor detected at 42.3, Diuron 16.7,  Imazapic 8.8, Imidacloprid 6.4, Isoxaflutole 2.4, Atrazine 1.9, Hexazinone 1.5 and Metsulfuron Methyl 1 time(s) DGV over time period. Ametryn detected at 57.1% of DGL over time period. Diuron detected at 5.8 and Imidacloprid 2.9 times DGV over time period. Metolachlor detected at 77.2%, Imazapic 76.9%, Hexazinone 42.7% and Isoxaflutole 34.8% DGV over time period
Plane Creek at Sucrogen Weir November 2017 – March 2023 Metsulfuron Methyl detected at 3.4  times DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 85.4%, Imazapic 47.7% and Metolachlor at 35.5% of DGV over time period. Metsulfuron Methyl detected at 69.4% and Diuron 29.7% of DGV over time period.
Fitzroy River at Fitzroy River
October 2017 – March 2013 Tebuthiuron detected at 30.3, Metolachlor 14.7 and Chlorpyrifos 2.7 times DGV over time period.  Tebuthiuron detected at 27.5% and Metolachlor 26.8% of DGV over time period.
Mackenzie River at Rileys Crossing December 2016 – March 2013 Metolachlor detected at 55.8, and Tebuthiuron 34.2 times DGV over time period. Metsulfuron Methyl detected at 88.9%, Diuron 60.3% and Terbuthylazine 39.6% of DGV over time period. Metolachlor detected at 1.02  times DGV over time period. Tebuthiuron detected at 31.1%, Diuron 20.9% and Metsulfuron Methyl 18.3% of DGV over time period.
Comet River at Comet Weir October 2011 – March 2023 Metolachlor detected at 53.8, and Tebuthiuron 27.9 times DGV over time period. Metsulfuron Methyl detected at 82.8%, Atrazine 69.7%, Imazapic 56.1%, Terbuthylazine 44.3% and Simazine 42.1% of DGV over time period. Metolachlor detected at 98.3% and Tebuthiuron 25.4% of DGV over time period.
Kolan River at Booyan Boat Ramp October 2017 – March 2023 Metolachlor detected at 2.7 times DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 61.4% of DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 21.3% of DGV over time period.
Kolan River at Barrage January 2020 – March 2023 Metolachlor detected at 3.8 and Diuron 1.1 times DGV over time period. Imidacloprid detected at  43.7% and Imazapic 27.6% of DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 39.3% and Imidacloprid 19.4% of DGV over time period.
Fairydale Drainage at Norton Road November 2019 – March 2023 Metsulfuron Methyl detected at 31.6, Metolachlor 3.2, Imidacloprid 2.7, Diuron 1.96 and Atrazine 1.3 times DGV over time period. Ametryn detected at 41.3% of DGV over time period. Metsulfuron Methyl detected at 6.5 and Imidacloprid 1.2 times DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 68.3% of DGV over time period.
Moore Park at Moore Park Road November 2019 – March 2023 Diazinon detected at 83.3, Metsulfuron Methyl 77.9, Chlorpyrifos 43.3, Metolachlor 4.4, Imidacloprid 3.7 and Diuron 2 times DGV over time period. Atrazine detected at 97.4% of DGV over time period. Metsulfuron Methyl detected at 16 and Imidacloprid 1.7 times DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 70.7% of DGV over time period.
Welcome Creek at Gooburrum Road December 2020 – March 2023 Diazinon detected at 1647.9, Chlorpyrifos 28.1, Metolachlor 23.7, and Imidacloprid 15.9 times DGV over time period. Fipronil detected at 77.8%, Imazapic 54.3% and Diuron 41.9% of DGV over time period. Imidacloprid detected at 7.1 and Diazinon 4.9 times DGV over time period. Fipronil detected at 56.2% of DGV over time period.
Spliters Creek at Henkers Road November 2019 – March 2023 Diazinon detected at 34.6, Metolachlor 6.5, Metsulfuron Methyl 5.4, and Imidacloprid 1.01 times DGV over time period. Imazapic detected at 68.5% of DGV over time period. Metsulfuron Methyl detected at 1.1 times DGV over time period. Imidacloprid detected at 45.1% of DGV over time period.
Burnett River at Quay Street Bridge River
September 2017 – March 2023 Metolachlor detected at 9.3 and Tebuthiuron 5.6 times DGV over time period. Tebuthiuron detected at 55.7% and Diuron 22.5% of DGV over time period. Metolachlor detected at 16.9% of DGV over time period.
Yellow Waterholes Creek at Dahls Road November 2019 – March 2023 Chlorpyrifos detected at 47.2, Metolachlor 33.3, Metsulfuron Methyl 9.7 and Imidacloprid 4.8 times DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 70.1% of DGV over time period. Imidacloprid detected at 2.1 and Metsulfuron Methyl 2 times DGV over time period. Metolachlor detected at 60.8% of DGV over time period.
Elliott River at Dr Mays Crossing November 2019 – March 2023 Chlorpyrifos detected at 27.9 and Metolachlor 9.6 times DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 91.2% and Tebuthiuron 58.2% of DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 31.7% of DGV over time period.
Stockyard Creek at Wallerawang January 2020 – March 2023 Diazinon detected at 27.1 times DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 83.7% of DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 29.1% of DGV over time period.
Gregory River at Jarrets Road October 2017 – March 2023 Metolachlor detected at 7.6 and Diazinon 1.2 times DGV over time period. Diuron detected at  70.3% and Metsulfuron Methyl 36.3% of DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 24.5% of DGV over time period.
Mary River at Churchill Street October 2017 – March 2023 Metolachlor detected at 5.8 times DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 61.7% and Metsulfuron Methyl 35.8% of DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 21.5% of DGV over time period.
Coochin Creek at Mawsons Road January 2013 – March 2023 Chlorpyrifos detected at 551.4, Diazinon 543.6, Metolachlor 25.2, Diuron 9, Ametryn 1.7, Bromacil 1.5, Simazine 1.5 and Atrazine 1.1 times DGV over time period. Metsulfuron Methyl detected at 41.4% of DGV over time period. Diuron detected at 3.1, Chlorpyrifos 2.2 and Diazinon 1.6 times DGV over time period. Bromacil detected at 67.7%, Metolachlor 46% and Ametryn 37.8% of DGV over time period.

Summary of above table. Although Prosperine River, Sandy Creek and Coochin Creek all had the most individual chemicals breaching the long term 99% DGV, Welcome Creek possibly takes the ‘award’ of the most polluted agricultural waterway, in terms of DGV exceedences relating to the misuse of Diazinon. Coochin Creek appears to be the biggest problem area in terms of long term breaches to 95% DGV’s, although Coochin Creek was impacted by short term spikes in detections of Chlorpyrifos and Diazinon.

 Waterways with highest pesticide levels in comparison with 99 and 95% DGV’s
Location Date of Testing
Breaches to 99% DGV
Breaches to 95% DGV
Proserpine River at Glen Isla December 2016 – March 2023 8 2
Sandy Creek at Homebush September 2011 – March 2023 8 2
Coochin Creek at Mawsons Road January 2013 – March 2023 8 3
East Baratta Creek at Jerona Road August 2017 – March 2023 6
Baratta Creek at Northcote August 2011 – March 2023 6 1
Moore Park Drainage at Moore Park Road November 2019 – March 2023 6 2
Don River at Bowen March 2017 – March 2023 5
Fairydale Drainage at Norton Road November 2019 – March 2023 5 2
Murray River at Bilyamo November 2018 – March 2023 4 2
Pioneer River at Dumbleton Pump September 2011 – March 2023 4 1
Welcome Creek at Gooburrum Road December 2020 – March 2023 4 2
Spliters Creek at Henkers Road November 2019 – March 2023 4 1
Yellow Waterholes Creek November 2019 – March 2023 4 2
O’Connell River at Caravan Park January 2014 – March 2023 4
O’Connell River at Staffords Crossing September 2016 – March 2023 3 2
Fitzroy River at Fitzroy River October 2017 – March 2013 3
Tully River at Euramo February 2011 – March 2023 3
MacKenzie River at Rileys Crossing December 2016 – March 2013 2 1

 

Screenshot from Australian Pesticide Map showing pesticide detections throughout Queensland, are concentrated along the coast with highest amounts of detections in and around Brisbane region.

For more information regarding this blog contact anthony.amis@foe.org.au

16/10/23: Tasmanian Government Downplays Pesticide Monitoring

https://www.foe.org.au/tasmanian_government_now_flying_blind_on_pesticide_monitoring

Tasmanian Government “Downplays” Pesticide Monitoring?

A recent Right to Information request with TasWater, has raised concerns regarding pesticide monitoring in domestic water supplies in Tasmania. TasWater was punctual in responding to the request, with the process only taking 32 days, however the information provided leaves more questions than answers.

Trevallyn Dam, located 5km west of Launceston’s CBD. What was the source of the Atrazine that was detected in the Dam on August 8 2018 and were the public informed? Why was there no investigation to identify the source of the pollution?  Was the entire dam contaminated? If so for how long?

Information requested from TasWater included results of all pesticide monitoring in Tasmanian water supplies between 2016 to 2023. TasWater provided 149 positive results, between Feb 2016 and August 2018 only. No information was provided for the past 5 years, which is odd considering that between 2013-2018, pesticide detections averaged 29 per year. It seems implausible that detections immediately ceased in August 2018, just 22 days after Tasmania’s most serious pesticide in a domestic water supply incident (ever?). That occurred in Launceston’s Trevallyn Dam on August 8 2018, when the herbicide Atrazine was detected at 27µg/L (27 parts per billion), 35% higher than the Australian drinking water guideline. The last TasWater positive detection occurred on August 30 2018 at the Macquarie River at Longford. Since then there apparently have been no pesticide detections in Tasmanian water supplies. Really? What’s going on?

To put the Trevallyn Dam incident into some context, pesticide breaches to the ADWG’s (Australian Drinking Water Guidelines) are relatively rare events. FoE has recorded only 27 such incidents throughout Australia. The Trevallyn Dam incident is the 22nd most “serious” in relation to Australian drinking water guidelines. In terms of the infamous herbicide Atrazine, levels detected at Trevallyn Dam were the 6th highest recorded in an Australian water supply. Interestingly, the levels were 270 times higher than European Guidelines (any pesticide detection >0.1µg/L is regarded as a breach and is supposed to be investigated to determine the source) and 9 times higher than equivalent Atrazine guidelines in the United States.

The drop off in TasWater detections can partly be explained by TasWater themselves. According to the RTI letter from TasWater dated 4/10/23, “TasWater now test for 21 pesticides on a quarterly* basis. The pesticides are: 2,4 D, Alpha-cypermethrin, Atrazine, Dimethoate, Boscalid, Chlorpyrifos, Chlorothalonil, Clopyralid, Cyanazine, Glyphosate, Dicamba, Haloxyfop, Hexazinone, MCPA, Metribuzin, Metsulfuron methyl, Pendimethalin, Prometryn, Simazine, Sulfometuron-methyl, Terbacil. “For the period 1 January 2016 – 1 September 2023, TasWater carried out over 53,000 tests for pesticides. In 149 cases, pesticides were detected”.

(* Note quarterly means once every three months or only 1.12% of days per year).

This could imply a 0.28% chance of detecting a pesticide, with a 0.002% chance of detecting a pesticide above Australian Drinking Water Guidelines. Perhaps the cost of testing outweighed the information gained from such testing? Perhaps funding for the tests has gone elsewhere? Perhaps TasWater have actually substantially reduced or eliminated pesticide testing in most catchments entirely? It appears to FoE that they have indeed decreased testing by at least 50%+ from what had occurred prior to September 1 2018.

According to TasWater on August 14 2018 (6 days after the Trevallyn dam incident!!!): “Historically, we have had few detections of pesticides and therefore the only time we would test for pesticides within the distribution network as if we are undertaking a specific investigation or whether we have had pesticide detections in the source water (raw water) above historical levels (i.e. if we notice a change)…We have a comprehensive water quality monitoring program that is routinely reviewed and to date we have not identified pesticides in our systems above (or approaching) the health limits in the ADWG.”

The RTI data also reveals that at some locations in 2016 (eg Bothwell, Bridport, Tunbridge) TasWater appear to have tested fortnightly at some times of the year. It is also entirely plausible that many locations were not tested at all.

TasWater can’t be entirely be blamed for not wanting to embark on more strenuous and frequent pesticide testing.  Nine years ago the Tasmanian Government raised eyebrows by axing their decade-long pesticide testing program conducted by the Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment (DPIPWE). The program was axed just when results started revealing the highest amounts of pesticides. Up until that time, it was the most comprehensive pesticide testing regime in Australia. TasWater are mainly concerned about monitoring domestic water supplies. It would appear that the bulk of Tasmanian waterways, similar to the rest of Australia (outside of GBR catchments in Queensland), remain untested for. Why?

Pesticide detections were dominated by the herbicide MCPA, almost all of which occurred in 2016. 2018 detections however were dominated by the herbicides Sulfometuron Methyl and Metsulfuron Methyl.

Apart from the incident at Trevallyn Dam, the most serious raw water incidents, at 30% of the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines, occurred in 2018 in raw water at Pats River Weir Whitemark (Atrazine at 6µg/L), Cornwall in an unnamed stream (Metsulfuron Methyl 12µg/L) and Lake Barron Creek Weir, just upstream of National Park east of Mount Field National Park where Simazine was detected at 6µg/L. The small community of Lake Barron, on Lake Barron island recorded an MCPA detection of 11µg/L in 2016 (27.5% of ADWG), Cannes Hill Reservoir near the community of Whitemark recorded Atrazine at 3µg/L (15% of ADWG) and MCPA at 5.3µg/L (13.25% of ADWG) in 2018 and 2016. Also of interest was the contamination of all 5 bores at Lady Barron with the herbicide Clopyralid with levels in one bore at 180µg/L.

In terms of supplied water (coming through customers taps), an MCPA detection of 2.7µg/L in March 2016 (7% of ADWG) occurred at Whitemark Depot, and two detections of Metsulfuron Methyl of 2µg/L (5% of ADWG) at Herrick Reservoir in May 2018 and another of 1µg/L (2.5% of ADWG) in June 2018. Other water supply detections at Bridport, Lady Barron Police Station, Prospect Vale, Launceston, Bothwell and Longford were below 1% of the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines.

Whilst the most frequently pesticide detected was MCPA, 20 detections of Sulfometuron Methyl occurred over a 43 day period between April 30 and June 11 2018. According to FoE records, the only detections of Sulfometuron Methyl in domestic water supplies in Australia occurred in Tasmania during this period, with the highest levels 75µg/L recorded at Adventure Bay on Bruny Island on 25/5/18. Sulfometuron Methyl is registered for use in commercial and industrial areas and rights of way such as roads, powerlines and telephone lines). How did this herbicide impact so many water supplies over a 6 week period? There are no drinking water guidelines for Sulfometuron Methyl.

Tasmanian pesticide detections recorded mainly over the past 30 years from a number of sources according to the Australian Pesticide Map. ~89% of all detections are located in the northern half of the state.

31 different locations recorded pesticide detections between 2016-2018, with the most occurring at Bothwell (16), Tunbridge (11), Whitemark (11), Bridport 10, Gladstone 10, Lady Barron 10, Cornwall 8, Yolla 8, Herrick 7 and Trevallyn Dam 7.

Although communities such as Bothwell and Tunbridge may have recorded the most detections of pesticides, many of their detections were low in comparison to drinking water guideline levels. By accumulating all detections as a percentage of ADWG’s, it becomes apparent that the highest risk location for breaches to ADWG’s was Trevallyn Dam, due mainly to the Atrazine incident of August 2018. These events are however sporadic and to be a major concern for water authorities, events would have to be ongoing and above ADWG’s.

Potential Environmental Impacts

Drinking water is the main focus of TasWater’s testing regimes. However there is another aspect that has to be considered, and that is the ecological impact to species within the waterways themselves. Ecological guideline levels are generally much lower than drinking water guideline levels. Ecological impacts of toxicants in waterways are explained in the ANZECC Guidelines, which specify guideline/trigger levels for a number of pesticides. The ANZECC guidelines do not cover all pesticides. In fact FoE found in 2017 that ~11% of pesticides detected in Australian waterways, had ANZECC Guidelines and that only 3.5% of pesticides registered for use in Australia had ANZECC guidelines. Most of these guidelines date back to 2000, although a handful of pesticides have been granted guideline levels since 2020, the most notable, in terms of Tasmanian waterways being Metsulfuron Methyl.

In simple terms, toxicants have 4 trigger levels specified under the ANZECC Guidelines. High quality environmental streams, eg those with little environmental degradation warrant the highest protection level of 99%. This means that a toxicant entering such a waterway has a guideline level that supposedly will protect 99% of the species within that waterway. The more degraded the waterway, the less species protection. In many degraded urban streams for example the ecological trigger level will be 80%. Guideline levels are therefore are much “stricter” the more pristine the waterway. For example for Metsulfuron Methyl the 99% trigger level is 0.0037µg/L. The 95% trigger level is 0.018µg/L, the 90% trigger level is 0.048µg/L and the 80% trigger level is 0.18µg/l, 48 times higher than the guideline in pristine waterways.

State’s then define what level of protection is warranted for waterways throughout their areas of jurisdiction. National Parks and high conservation value areas would warrant the highest level of protection, whereas slightly to moderately disturbed waterways (eg agricultural areas) generally warrant a 95% trigger level. Deriving ecological guideline levels can be an extremely complicated undertaking. Generally speaking pollution events may also occur over a short duration, during flood events, where “pulses” of contaminants may enter waterways for a limited time period.

In terms of 99% and 95% trigger levels, by the far the most breaches to ecological guideline trigger levels relate to detections of Metsulfuron Methyl. All detections of Metsulfuron Methyl breached both the 99% and 95% trigger levels implying that this particular herbicide is of most concern regarding the ecological impacts upon waterways in Tasmania. Although MCPA was the most frequently detected herbicide by TasWater testing, only 8% of MCPA samples breached ecological guidelines. Metsulfuron Methyl is used on pastures, rights of way, commercial and industrial areas and forest plantations.

95% trigger level pesticide breaches 2016-2018, based on TasWater pesticide test regimes. 90% of breaches occur in the north of the state, with the majority in the north east of the state, including Launceston.

Curries Dam, drinking water supply for George Town and popular fishing location near centre of image. Tamar River and George Town/Bell Bay on the left of image.

TasWater recorded a detection of the organophosphate insecticide Chlorpyrifos at the Curries River offtake of 1µg/L in August 2017. Chlorpyrifos has an exceedingly low 99% guideline level of 0.00004µg/L. This means that the detection of this insecticide at the Currie River was 25,000 times above the 99% ecological trigger level and ten times the 95% ecological trigger level. The same location also recorded Metsulfuron Methyl in May 2018 at 67 times the 99% trigger level and almost 14 times the 95% trigger level. What was the source of the Chlorpyrifos and Metsulfuron Methyl? Why was an investigation not carried out? TasWater’s main role is to provide safe drinking water to consumers, the ecological impacts of toxicants in water supplies is not apparently the agencies priority. Was the EPA informed?

Average levels of the 18 Metsulfuron Methyl detections across Tasmania were 65 times higher than the 99% trigger level and 12 times higher than the 95% trigger level. The most detections occurred in the states north west at Yolla (Dowling Creek). Metsulfuron Methyl was detected over a two month period in 2016 at an average of nine times the 99% trigger level and almost two times the 95% trigger level at Dowling Creek.

Metsulfuron Methyl only “gained” an ecological guideline level in 2021, meaning that when the herbicide was detected by TasWater in 2016 and 2018 barely anyone would have “batted an eyelid“. It also appears that the recent guideline levels have not led to any restrictions of the Metsulfuron Methyl label, despite the exceedingly small ecological guideline level. Pesticide labels specify what amounts of the particular chemical can be sprayed on specific crops and land uses.

Any heavy rainfall events that occur after recent spraying can lead to offsite pollution events. This is particularly the case when many hectares of land in logged plantations for example are left exposed with limited vegetation to lessen soil and pesticide movement off site. If TasWater testing picked up many breaches to ANZECC guidelines in their limited testing regimes in 2016 and 2018 what is going on in terms of Metsulfuron Methyl pollution in other waterways throughout the state since then? No data No Problem?

In terms of the Tasmanian detections in an Australian context, based on FoE pesticide records.

Atrazine: Lake Trevallyn 8/8/18 27µg/L. Australia’s 6th highest detection of Atrazine in a domestic water supply and 22nd highest detection of any pesticide in a domestic water supply. (Atrazine Australian Drinking Water Guideline 20µg/L. ANZECC trigger levels 99% 0.7µg/L, 95% 13µg/L).

Chlorpyrifos: Curries River 10/8/17 1µg/L: Australia’s 2nd highest detection of Chlorpyrifos in a domestic water supply. (Chlorpyrifos Australian Drinking Water Guideline 10µg/L. ANZECC trigger levels 99% 0.00004µg/L, 95% 0.01µg/L).

Clopyralid: Lady Barron Bores 14/12/16 22-180µg/L: Australia’s 5 highest detections of Clopyralid in a domestic water supply and in any water source. (Clopyralid Australian Drinking Water Guideline 2000µg/L. No ANZECC trigger levels).

Dicamba: Lady Barron 7/5/18, Whitemark 7/5/18, Cornwall 8/5/18 0.6µg/L – 0.7µg/L: Australia’s 3rd, 4th and 5th highest detections of Dicamba in a domestic water supply. (Dicamba Australian Drinking Water Guideline 100µg/L. No ANZECC trigger levels).

Hexazinone: Ringarooma WTP 3/7/18 9.5µg/L. Australia’s 4th highest detection of Hexazinone in a domestic water supply. (Hexazinone Australian Drinking Water Guideline 400µg/L. ANZECC trigger levels 99% 0.31µg/L, 95% 1.1µg/L).

MCPA: Lady Barron 2/3/16 5.3µg/L. Australia’s 2nd highest detection of MCPA in a domestic water supply and 4th highest detection in any water source. 11µg/L. Whitemark 2/3/16. (MCPA Australian Drinking Water Guideline 40µg/L. ANZECC trigger levels 99% 1.4µg/L, 95% 1.4µg/L).

Metsulfuron Methyl: Australia’s 9 highest detections of Metsulfuron Methyl in domestic water supplies. 8/5/18 Cornwall 12µg/L (max) highest detection in any Australian waterway. (Metsulfuron Methyl Australian Drinking Water Guideline 40µg/L. ANZECC trigger levels 99% 0.0037µg/L, 95% 0.18µg/L).

Simazine: Lady Barron Creek Weir 26/7/18 6µg/L. Australia’s 5th highest detection of Simazine in a domestic water supply. (Simazine Australian Drinking Water Guideline 20µg/L. ANZECC trigger levels 99% 0.2µg/L, 95% 3.2µg/L).

Sulfometuron-methyl: Australia’s 10 highest detections of Sulfometuron Methyl in Australian domestic water supplies and Australian waterway. 25/5/18 Adventure Bay 75µg/L (max). (Sulfometurn Methyl has no Australian Drinking Water Guideline and no ANZECC trigger levels).

For more information or to make a tax deductible donation contact anthony.amis@foe.org.au

2021: Central West NSW (Narromine region) Vegetation testing. Pesticides: Multiple

September 2022: Meeting - Nature Conservation Council (NCC) and EPA

Pesticide tests in Narromine region

Overspray - Specific Questions:
Will the EPA share the data already collected under the pilot chemical monitoring program being conducted in the Central West?

The EPA has prepared the attached Fact Sheet (Tab 5) that is being finalised for uploading onto the EPA website.
What compounds does the EPA test for when taking a vegetation sample?
Samples were collected on 71 occasions between February and June 2021 and were tested for approximately 600 pesticides, including a wide range of herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides.
Pesticides detected in the bulk deposition samples were atrazine (detected on nine occasions), carbendazim (detected once), ethephon (detected twice) and simazine (detected once). Pesticides detected in vegetation samples were atrazine (detected twice), diuron (detected twice), ethephon (detected once) and glyphosate (detected once). Most of the detections were for widely used pesticides. Ethephon is the only one of the chemicals detected which is primarily used on cotton. Ethephon was only detected on two sampling occasions.

September 2022: Meeting – Nature Conservation Council (NCC) and EPA

Pesticide tests in Narromine region

Overspray – Specific Questions:
Will the EPA share the data already collected under the pilot chemical monitoring program being conducted in the Central West?

The EPA has prepared the attached Fact Sheet (Tab 5) that is being finalised for uploading onto the EPA website.
What compounds does the EPA test for when taking a vegetation sample?
Samples were collected on 71 occasions between February and June 2021 and were tested for
approximately 600 pesticides, including a wide range of herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides.
Pesticides detected in the bulk deposition samples were atrazine (detected on nine occasions),
carbendazim (detected once), ethephon (detected twice) and simazine (detected once). Pesticides detected in vegetation samples were atrazine (detected twice), diuron (detected twice), ethephon (detected once) and glyphosate (detected once). Most of the detections were for widely used pesticides. Ethephon is the only one of the chemicals detected which is primarily used on cotton. Ethephon was only detected on two sampling occasions.

January 27 2024: Menindee Fish Kills. Pesticides: Several

Menindee fish kills: inconsistent pesticide levels sparks calls for review of water testing methods

Experts call for review after two sets of water samples from the Darling-Baaka River reported by the state’s top scientific bodies contained different results

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/jan/27/menindee-fish-kills-pesticide-levels-testing-darling-baaka-river

Experts are calling for more sensitive water-quality testing in the Darling-Baaka River amid concerns that pesticides could be contributing to poor conditions, blue-green algae blooms and fish deaths.

It follows two of the state’s top scientific bodies publishing test results from water samples taken near Menindee in far western New South Wales which contained inconsistent results.

 

Testing conducted on behalf of the NSW chief scientist, on samples collected in August 2023 as part of an independent review into the deadly fish kill event in March in which 30m fish died, found low levels of some pesticides. Separate testing led by the NSW Environment Protection Authority did not detect any pesticides, despite collecting samples at similar locations and during the same month as the chief scientist’s testing.

The testing for the chief scientist was conducted by Charles Sturt University. It detected several herbicides including atrazine, simazine, terbuthylazine, tebuthiuron, metolachlor, clopyralid and fluroxypyr.

Atrazine, simazine, tebuthiuron and metolachlor are no longer approved for use in the European Union and have been classified by the European Chemicals Agency as being “very toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects”, but they are still approved for use in Australia.

The NSW deputy chief scientist and engineer, Dr Darren Saunders, said the CSU testing was commissioned due to requests from the community and the independent review’s need for further data.

The CSU report said the herbicide levels were “consistent with agricultural land-use in the area” and recommended ongoing monitoring. Two pesticides, tebuthiuron and metolachlor, were found to have exceeded the 99% species protection level in Australian and New Zealand guidelines for fresh and marine water quality, which signifies a concentration estimated to be toxic to 1% of organisms in that aquatic environment. Both were below the 95% value, which the EPA tests for.

In contrast, the NSW EPA said it had not detected any pesticides of a reportable level in any routine testing of the river which had been conducted since the fish kill in March. This included its results from August, when the CSU samples were also collected.

‘A cocktail of pesticides’

Dr Matt Landos, an adjunct associate professor at the University of Queensland and director of Future Fisheries Veterinary Service, said the results showed “seriously concerning” levels of herbicides, which could produce “an elevated risk of ecological harm occurring”.

Landos said the guidelines did not consider the cumulative impact of “a cocktail of multiple pesticides” on the aquatic ecosystem.

He said that while the mass fish deaths at Menindee were attributed to low oxygen levels, the potential contribution of pesticides should also be investigated, alongside other issues like excessive nutrients from agricultural run-off.

“Pesticides were likely one of several contributors harming the ecosystem, particularly upstream, making the water that flowed to Menindee vulnerable to produce near-zero oxygen conditions,” he said.

Landos said pesticides, even at low levels, could modify the aquatic food web by “selectively harming sensitive organisms” such as algae and allowing more tolerant species to predominate.

“This is what’s happening in the Murray-Darling,” Landos said. “And the most tolerant organisms, as it turns out, are cyanobacteria, or blue-green algae.”

He said blue-green algae blooms could impair the ecological function of the river by creating volatile dissolved oxygen conditions, where oxygen levels rapidly rise during the day “due to extreme photosynthetic activity” and then plummet overnight.

“The bigger the biomass of algae, the more oxygen they’re going to require in that water body to keep everything alive,” he said. “If the bloom is too dense, it will suck the oxygen level down far too low and it can in fact cause mortality even to the algae.”

Landos said it was concerning that the EPA testing and CSU testing had produced such different results, and called for a review into the “sensitivity” of the testing methods.

The EPA told Guardian Australia its results were valid and its testing did not show any concentrations which exceeded the reporting limits. It said those limits were “well below the 95% guideline values” and consistent with best practice under the laboratory standard used by the Department of Climate Change, Environment, Energy and Water.

In April, the EPA announced its testing had “ruled out a pesticide pollution event” after the results came back negative for more than 600 pesticides. It has since reduced the frequency of pesticide sampling “following consistent zero results” from multiple testing rounds, including its results from August.

A spokesperson for NSW EPA said the organisation’s testing methods “are sensitive enough to detect concentrations of ecological significance”. They added that results below that limit “have a high uncertainty, are not meaningful and reporting them is not appropriate nor consistent with analytical best practice”. They also suggested the CSU results were inconsistent, as the published report was amended in December.

“The reporting limit is the lowest concentration that can be reliably measured,” the EPA said.

They also said that exceeding the 99% or 95% default guideline values “does not indicate an actual impact, rather that further investigations are warranted”.

Vincent Pettigrove, a professor of aquatic pollution at RMIT, said while the guideline values provided an indication of whether the chemicals of interest were at concentrations which may cause environmental harm, there were no national guidelines for “the majority of pesticides registered for use in Australia”.

He added that the ecotoxicological tests used to derive the guideline values for pesticides “are often short-term acute tests and do not account well for chronic long-term exposures”.

“I believe that the impact of pesticides on fish is more likely to be more subtle from chronic exposure that may reduce the viability of populations.”

Pettigrove said the guideline values were for one chemical and therefore “unable to consider the total effects of a mixture of chemicals”. For example, the triazine herbicides detected in the CSU study had a similar mode of toxicity, “so their combined effect should be considered”, he said.

 

Menindee fish kills: inconsistent pesticide levels sparks calls for review of water testing methods

Experts call for review after two sets of water samples from the Darling-Baaka River reported by the state’s top scientific bodies contained different results

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/jan/27/menindee-fish-kills-pesticide-levels-testing-darling-baaka-river

Experts are calling for more sensitive water-quality testing in the Darling-Baaka River amid concerns that pesticides could be contributing to poor conditions, blue-green algae blooms and fish deaths.

It follows two of the state’s top scientific bodies publishing test results from water samples taken near Menindee in far western New South Wales which contained inconsistent results.

Testing conducted on behalf of the NSW chief scientist, on samples collected in August 2023 as part of an independent review into the deadly fish kill event in March in which 30m fish died, found low levels of some pesticides. Separate testing led by the NSW Environment Protection Authority did not detect any pesticides, despite collecting samples at similar locations and during the same month as the chief scientist’s testing.

The testing for the chief scientist was conducted by Charles Sturt University. It detected several herbicides including atrazine, simazine, terbuthylazine, tebuthiuron, metolachlor, clopyralid and fluroxypyr.

Atrazine, simazine, tebuthiuron and metolachlor are no longer approved for use in the European Union and have been classified by the European Chemicals Agency as being “very toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects”, but they are still approved for use in Australia.

The NSW deputy chief scientist and engineer, Dr Darren Saunders, said the CSU testing was commissioned due to requests from the community and the independent review’s need for further data.

The CSU report said the herbicide levels were “consistent with agricultural land-use in the area” and recommended ongoing monitoring. Two pesticides, tebuthiuron and metolachlor, were found to have exceeded the 99% species protection level in Australian and New Zealand guidelines for fresh and marine water quality, which signifies a concentration estimated to be toxic to 1% of organisms in that aquatic environment. Both were below the 95% value, which the EPA tests for.

In contrast, the NSW EPA said it had not detected any pesticides of a reportable level in any routine testing of the river which had been conducted since the fish kill in March. This included its results from August, when the CSU samples were also collected.

‘A cocktail of pesticides’

Dr Matt Landos, an adjunct associate professor at the University of Queensland and director of Future Fisheries Veterinary Service, said the results showed “seriously concerning” levels of herbicides, which could produce “an elevated risk of ecological harm occurring”.

Landos said the guidelines did not consider the cumulative impact of “a cocktail of multiple pesticides” on the aquatic ecosystem.

He said that while the mass fish deaths at Menindee were attributed to low oxygen levels, the potential contribution of pesticides should also be investigated, alongside other issues like excessive nutrients from agricultural run-off.

“Pesticides were likely one of several contributors harming the ecosystem, particularly upstream, making the water that flowed to Menindee vulnerable to produce near-zero oxygen conditions,” he said.

Landos said pesticides, even at low levels, could modify the aquatic food web by “selectively harming sensitive organisms” such as algae and allowing more tolerant species to predominate.

“This is what’s happening in the Murray-Darling,” Landos said. “And the most tolerant organisms, as it turns out, are cyanobacteria, or blue-green algae.”

He said blue-green algae blooms could impair the ecological function of the river by creating volatile dissolved oxygen conditions, where oxygen levels rapidly rise during the day “due to extreme photosynthetic activity” and then plummet overnight.

“The bigger the biomass of algae, the more oxygen they’re going to require in that water body to keep everything alive,” he said. “If the bloom is too dense, it will suck the oxygen level down far too low and it can in fact cause mortality even to the algae.”

Landos said it was concerning that the EPA testing and CSU testing had produced such different results, and called for a review into the “sensitivity” of the testing methods.

The EPA told Guardian Australia its results were valid and its testing did not show any concentrations which exceeded the reporting limits. It said those limits were “well below the 95% guideline values” and consistent with best practice under the laboratory standard used by the Department of Climate Change, Environment, Energy and Water.

In April, the EPA announced its testing had “ruled out a pesticide pollution event” after the results came back negative for more than 600 pesticides. It has since reduced the frequency of pesticide sampling “following consistent zero results” from multiple testing rounds, including its results from August.

A spokesperson for NSW EPA said the organisation’s testing methods “are sensitive enough to detect concentrations of ecological significance”. They added that results below that limit “have a high uncertainty, are not meaningful and reporting them is not appropriate nor consistent with analytical best practice”. They also suggested the CSU results were inconsistent, as the published report was amended in December.

“The reporting limit is the lowest concentration that can be reliably measured,” the EPA said.

They also said that exceeding the 99% or 95% default guideline values “does not indicate an actual impact, rather that further investigations are warranted”.

Vincent Pettigrove, a professor of aquatic pollution at RMIT, said while the guideline values provided an indication of whether the chemicals of interest were at concentrations which may cause environmental harm, there were no national guidelines for “the majority of pesticides registered for use in Australia”.

He added that the ecotoxicological tests used to derive the guideline values for pesticides “are often short-term acute tests and do not account well for chronic long-term exposures”.

“I believe that the impact of pesticides on fish is more likely to be more subtle from chronic exposure that may reduce the viability of populations.”

Pettigrove said the guideline values were for one chemical and therefore “unable to consider the total effects of a mixture of chemicals”. For example, the triazine herbicides detected in the CSU study had a similar mode of toxicity, “so their combined effect should be considered”, he said.

 

7/1/24: Insect apocalypse: Call to restrict pesticide ‘more toxic than DDT’

Insect apocalypse: Call to restrict pesticide ‘more toxic than DDT’

Tim Baylars 7/1/24. https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/insect-apocalypse-call-to-restrict-pesticide-more-toxic-than-ddt-20230630-p5dknk.html

Noticed fewer moths fluttering around outside lights in the evening or that butterflies seem less frequent visitors? Or that your car’s windscreen remains clearer of the haze of dead flies after a long journey than it used to? Part of the problem appears to point towards the use of a range of pesticides called neonicotinoids which Australian authorities are accused of being slow to regulate.

Ecologist Francisco Sanchez-Bayo from environmental sciences at Sydney University pulled together 100 long-term studies of the global fortunes of insects. He concluded that worldwide an average 37 per cent of species were declining, while populations of 18 per cent were increasing – those were agricultural herbivores and nuisance pests. Aquatic insect communities like mayflies, midges and sedges were even worse off: 42 per cent of species were declining and 29 per cent increasing.

The review threw up some interesting highlights. In northern NSW (Murwillumbah, north of Byron Bay), sampled for butterflies over 23 years, the overall abundance of 21 species declined by 57 per cent due to human disturbance.

Changes among 46 butterfly species in a peripheral urban landscape near Melbourne studied since 1941 found 36 to 48 per cent of species declined since 1981.

In Denmark, a small farmland area was sampled using the “windscreen splash” method between 1997 and 2017. Overall abundance of flying insects that crashed car windscreens declined 97 per cent along a 25 -kilometre road.

Sanchez-Bayo said: “In the 1990s, when I used to go to the Macquarie Marshes [north of Dubbo] to do research, as anyone who drove for a few hours to the countryside at that time would know, you had to stop to clean the windscreen. You don’t have to do that any more.

“In the case of Melbourne, the number of butterflies declined due to urbanisation, they were common years ago, but now they are just disappearing. We are talking about global declines, in Finland, Indonesia and the Amazon, everywhere. There is massive abuse with pesticides and other chemicals, fertilisers and so on which have contaminated the environment affecting mainly aquatic insects.”

One particular branch of pesticides, the neonicotinoids (also known as neonics) are used to treat seeds before planting and are claimed to increase crop yields. Scientists are now comparing neonicotinoids with DDT, of which the devastating effects on wildlife were revealed in the 1960s.

Roger Kitching, on the conservation committee of the Australian Entomological Society, says DDT affected vertebrates, particularly birds, but now, equally, insects deserve to be a major cause for concern due to their part in the food chain.

“The substitution of the range of earlier pesticides for the current generation of neonics and others is particularly bad for insect fauna,” he said. “These pesticides are systemic, that is they act from within plants, they are persistent, water-soluble and are very general in the species they target.

“When insects decline in ecosystems there are knock-on effects because of their roles as bird food, pollination vectors, plant munchers and so on – even though neonics do not impact vertebrates directly they have measurable impacts through these food-chain effects.”

In June, US ecologist Mike Miller, who works for Wisconsin’s Department of Natural Resources, told a fly-fishing podcast that he had found neonics in randomly selected waterways throughout the state. He said a lethal dose of neonics the size of a sugar grain was enough to kill 125,000 honey bees.

“One of those little paper sachets holds between 3 -4 grams of sugar and the comparable amount of neonics is enough to kill 600 million honey bees,” he said. “Neonics are thought to be 7000 times more toxic than DDT.”

The podcast host, fly-fishing guru Tom Rosenbauer, said: “It seems like in the past 10 years or so you hear so many fly-fishers complaining that the hatches [of insects] aren’t what they used to be. There seems to have been a dramatic decline in insects since neonics became popular.”

Miller’s comments were based on a scientific paper by ecologist Dave Goulson published a decade ago, called An overview of the environmental risks posed by neonicotinoid insecticide. Goulson, now at Sussex University, said 5 grams was enough to kill half of 1.25 billion bees and leave the other half just alive [known as an LD50 dose].

“While that figure is accurate, the levels of neonics found in the environment are pretty low and a bee would have to consume several CCs [cubic centimetres] of nectar to get a lethal dose, which it might do in its lifetime, but not in a morning,” he said. “The evidence we have is that bees are probably consuming less than a lethal dose, but that doesn’t mean that we can all breathe a sigh of relief that all is well.

“There is evidence that sub-lethal doses can seriously mess up the bees in a whole bunch of different ways – reduce their fertility, their ability to navigate and their resistance to disease. If their disease-resistance is knocked out by exposure to a pesticide, and then they are exposed to a virus transmitted by the Varroa mite, then there are many people who believe it does explain why bee colonies are collapsing.

“For an aquatic insect, you are not drinking the pesticide, you are bathing in it. The evidence is that anything over about 1 part per billion in a stream, which is the level which is commonly exceeded, it is enough to be impacting on aquatic insects when they are exposed to it 24/7.”

Asked if he felt Australia was behind other countries in regulating neonics, he added: “That would seem to be the case, the European regulators are pretty slow to act, but they thought the evidence was sufficiently compelling five years ago to act, and lots of other countries have followed suit in various ways. Within the developed world, Australia would appear to be at the tail end of the queue to do something about neonics. To ignore the evidence, I think, is probably foolish.

“There is a perception that we banned the really nasty pesticides years ago, we got rid of DDT and modern pesticides are better, but in some senses modern pesticides are much more dangerous because we have invented compounds that are far, far more poisonous to insect life, it means less of them has to go astray, into rivers or whatever, to do harm.

Australian scientists have also found imidacloprid (a neonicotinoid) in the catchment area of the Great Barrier Reef and the reef lagoon. Professor Michael Warne at the School of the Environment, University of Queensland in a research study of 6500 samples from 14 Great Barrier Reef catchment areas found the average concentration of imidacloprid was 0.051 µg/L (micrograms/litre) between July 2009 and June 2017. That concentration is 2.5 times higher than that found in a study of Dutch rivers, which led to an annual decrease in insectivorous bird populations of 3.5 per cent.

In a paper published a year ago, Warne wrote that within the Great Barrier Reef catchment area that imidacloprid was used to control canegrubs in sugarcane and the banana weevil borer in banana crops. He said that in a not yet published work by UQ and Department of Environment and Science suggests the risks from imidacloprid since 2017 may have stabilised or decreased, in part through education programs conducted in collaboration with some industry groups.

But he said: “There are many water samples where the concentration exceeds the proposed Australian and New Zealand water quality guideline for ecosystem protection from imidacloprid.”

Imidacloprids were restricted by the EU in 2018. In June last year, New York State moved to pass the Birds and Bees Protection Act, a first-in-the-nation bill to rein in the use of neonicotinoid pesticides. The Natural Resources Defence Council said in a statement: “Neonics are linked to massive bee and bird losses that impact food production, contaminate New York water and soil, and create human health concerns, especially with recent testing showing rising levels of neonics in 95+ per cent of pregnant women from New York and four other states.”

Pesticides use here is governed by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA). It updated its website page on neonicotinoids in May and lists six neonics approved for agricultural use in Australia. It published a report in 2014 and then announced a review in 2019. It states three of the six neonic pesticides used here were restricted in April 2018 in the European Union to greenhouse use only.

A spokesperson for the APVMA said in a statement: “The APVMA commenced its review of neonicotinoids in 2019 to allow for the consideration of new scientific information about risks to the environment, and to ensure safety instructions on products meet contemporary standards.

“Based on the statutory timeframes, the review is due to be completed in August 2023. The APVMA anticipates publication of proposed regulatory decisions during 2024 and has assigned additional resources to chemical review activities, including the use of external scientific reviewers to progress reviews as rapidly as possible.” However, there has been no update to the statement last May.

The authority was subject of a damning independent report in July which said it was “concerning that a number of chemical reviews have been ongoing for over 20 years”. It said the APVMA appeared reluctant to take compliance and enforcement action against industry.

Recent changes to the APVMA’s staff profile following the relocation of its offices from Canberra to Armidale in 2019, “has most likely impacted corporate knowledge, workload, and work capacity. Only a small proportion of previous APVMA staff relocated”.

Sanchez-Bayo said the APVMA was way behind schedule. “We are behind in many ways and how long it will take them to come up with a final decision we don’t know,” he said. “It is under-resourced and behind the times.

“My understanding is that the APVMA does not have enough staff, they are not properly trained in these issues, there has been a lot of turnover in the last few years. They are not producing the results they are expected to produce.”

Eddie Tsyrlin, a freshwater ecologist and waterbug taxonomist, estimates that as many as to 2000 species of freshwater invertebrates could have already been lost.

“The Ecological Safety section of Safety Data Sheet [for neonics] states that ‘these chemicals are very toxic to aquatic organisms, may cause long-term adverse effects to the aquatic environment’.
“For the adequate protection of Australian fish and invertebrates, testing needs to be done on pollution-sensitive and common species of freshwater invertebrates occurring in streams as well as in still waters. These could be mayfly and stonefly nymphs and sensitive species of midges.”

Insect apocalypse: Call to restrict pesticide ‘more toxic than DDT’

Tim Baylars 7/1/24. https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/insect-apocalypse-call-to-restrict-pesticide-more-toxic-than-ddt-20230630-p5dknk.html

Noticed fewer moths fluttering around outside lights in the evening or that butterflies seem less frequent visitors? Or that your car’s windscreen remains clearer of the haze of dead flies after a long journey than it used to? Part of the problem appears to point towards the use of a range of pesticides called neonicotinoids which Australian authorities are accused of being slow to regulate.

Ecologist Francisco Sanchez-Bayo from environmental sciences at Sydney University pulled together 100 long-term studies of the global fortunes of insects. He concluded that worldwide an average 37 per cent of species were declining, while populations of 18 per cent were increasing – those were agricultural herbivores and nuisance pests. Aquatic insect communities like mayflies, midges and sedges were even worse off: 42 per cent of species were declining and 29 per cent increasing.

The review threw up some interesting highlights. In northern NSW (Murwillumbah, north of Byron Bay), sampled for butterflies over 23 years, the overall abundance of 21 species declined by 57 per cent due to human disturbance.

Changes among 46 butterfly species in a peripheral urban landscape near Melbourne studied since 1941 found 36 to 48 per cent of species declined since 1981.

In Denmark, a small farmland area was sampled using the “windscreen splash” method between 1997 and 2017. Overall abundance of flying insects that crashed car windscreens declined 97 per cent along a 25 -kilometre road.

Sanchez-Bayo said: “In the 1990s, when I used to go to the Macquarie Marshes [north of Dubbo] to do research, as anyone who drove for a few hours to the countryside at that time would know, you had to stop to clean the windscreen. You don’t have to do that any more.

“In the case of Melbourne, the number of butterflies declined due to urbanisation, they were common years ago, but now they are just disappearing. We are talking about global declines, in Finland, Indonesia and the Amazon, everywhere. There is massive abuse with pesticides and other chemicals, fertilisers and so on which have contaminated the environment affecting mainly aquatic insects.”

One particular branch of pesticides, the neonicotinoids (also known as neonics) are used to treat seeds before planting and are claimed to increase crop yields. Scientists are now comparing neonicotinoids with DDT, of which the devastating effects on wildlife were revealed in the 1960s.

Roger Kitching, on the conservation committee of the Australian Entomological Society, says DDT affected vertebrates, particularly birds, but now, equally, insects deserve to be a major cause for concern due to their part in the food chain.

“The substitution of the range of earlier pesticides for the current generation of neonics and others is particularly bad for insect fauna,” he said. “These pesticides are systemic, that is they act from within plants, they are persistent, water-soluble and are very general in the species they target.

“When insects decline in ecosystems there are knock-on effects because of their roles as bird food, pollination vectors, plant munchers and so on – even though neonics do not impact vertebrates directly they have measurable impacts through these food-chain effects.”

In June, US ecologist Mike Miller, who works for Wisconsin’s Department of Natural Resources, told a fly-fishing podcast that he had found neonics in randomly selected waterways throughout the state. He said a lethal dose of neonics the size of a sugar grain was enough to kill 125,000 honey bees.

“One of those little paper sachets holds between 3 -4 grams of sugar and the comparable amount of neonics is enough to kill 600 million honey bees,” he said. “Neonics are thought to be 7000 times more toxic than DDT.”

The podcast host, fly-fishing guru Tom Rosenbauer, said: “It seems like in the past 10 years or so you hear so many fly-fishers complaining that the hatches [of insects] aren’t what they used to be. There seems to have been a dramatic decline in insects since neonics became popular.”

Miller’s comments were based on a scientific paper by ecologist Dave Goulson published a decade ago, called An overview of the environmental risks posed by neonicotinoid insecticide. Goulson, now at Sussex University, said 5 grams was enough to kill half of 1.25 billion bees and leave the other half just alive [known as an LD50 dose].

“While that figure is accurate, the levels of neonics found in the environment are pretty low and a bee would have to consume several CCs [cubic centimetres] of nectar to get a lethal dose, which it might do in its lifetime, but not in a morning,” he said. “The evidence we have is that bees are probably consuming less than a lethal dose, but that doesn’t mean that we can all breathe a sigh of relief that all is well.

“There is evidence that sub-lethal doses can seriously mess up the bees in a whole bunch of different ways – reduce their fertility, their ability to navigate and their resistance to disease. If their disease-resistance is knocked out by exposure to a pesticide, and then they are exposed to a virus transmitted by the Varroa mite, then there are many people who believe it does explain why bee colonies are collapsing.

“For an aquatic insect, you are not drinking the pesticide, you are bathing in it. The evidence is that anything over about 1 part per billion in a stream, which is the level which is commonly exceeded, it is enough to be impacting on aquatic insects when they are exposed to it 24/7.”

Asked if he felt Australia was behind other countries in regulating neonics, he added: “That would seem to be the case, the European regulators are pretty slow to act, but they thought the evidence was sufficiently compelling five years ago to act, and lots of other countries have followed suit in various ways. Within the developed world, Australia would appear to be at the tail end of the queue to do something about neonics. To ignore the evidence, I think, is probably foolish.

“There is a perception that we banned the really nasty pesticides years ago, we got rid of DDT and modern pesticides are better, but in some senses modern pesticides are much more dangerous because we have invented compounds that are far, far more poisonous to insect life, it means less of them has to go astray, into rivers or whatever, to do harm.

Australian scientists have also found imidacloprid (a neonicotinoid) in the catchment area of the Great Barrier Reef and the reef lagoon. Professor Michael Warne at the School of the Environment, University of Queensland in a research study of 6500 samples from 14 Great Barrier Reef catchment areas found the average concentration of imidacloprid was 0.051 µg/L (micrograms/litre) between July 2009 and June 2017. That concentration is 2.5 times higher than that found in a study of Dutch rivers, which led to an annual decrease in insectivorous bird populations of 3.5 per cent.

In a paper published a year ago, Warne wrote that within the Great Barrier Reef catchment area that imidacloprid was used to control canegrubs in sugarcane and the banana weevil borer in banana crops. He said that in a not yet published work by UQ and Department of Environment and Science suggests the risks from imidacloprid since 2017 may have stabilised or decreased, in part through education programs conducted in collaboration with some industry groups.

But he said: “There are many water samples where the concentration exceeds the proposed Australian and New Zealand water quality guideline for ecosystem protection from imidacloprid.”

Imidacloprids were restricted by the EU in 2018. In June last year, New York State moved to pass the Birds and Bees Protection Act, a first-in-the-nation bill to rein in the use of neonicotinoid pesticides. The Natural Resources Defence Council said in a statement: “Neonics are linked to massive bee and bird losses that impact food production, contaminate New York water and soil, and create human health concerns, especially with recent testing showing rising levels of neonics in 95+ per cent of pregnant women from New York and four other states.”

Pesticides use here is governed by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA). It updated its website page on neonicotinoids in May and lists six neonics approved for agricultural use in Australia. It published a report in 2014 and then announced a review in 2019. It states three of the six neonic pesticides used here were restricted in April 2018 in the European Union to greenhouse use only.

A spokesperson for the APVMA said in a statement: “The APVMA commenced its review of neonicotinoids in 2019 to allow for the consideration of new scientific information about risks to the environment, and to ensure safety instructions on products meet contemporary standards.

“Based on the statutory timeframes, the review is due to be completed in August 2023. The APVMA anticipates publication of proposed regulatory decisions during 2024 and has assigned additional resources to chemical review activities, including the use of external scientific reviewers to progress reviews as rapidly as possible.” However, there has been no update to the statement last May.

The authority was subject of a damning independent report in July which said it was “concerning that a number of chemical reviews have been ongoing for over 20 years”. It said the APVMA appeared reluctant to take compliance and enforcement action against industry.

Recent changes to the APVMA’s staff profile following the relocation of its offices from Canberra to Armidale in 2019, “has most likely impacted corporate knowledge, workload, and work capacity. Only a small proportion of previous APVMA staff relocated”.

Sanchez-Bayo said the APVMA was way behind schedule. “We are behind in many ways and how long it will take them to come up with a final decision we don’t know,” he said. “It is under-resourced and behind the times.

“My understanding is that the APVMA does not have enough staff, they are not properly trained in these issues, there has been a lot of turnover in the last few years. They are not producing the results they are expected to produce.”

Eddie Tsyrlin, a freshwater ecologist and waterbug taxonomist, estimates that as many as to 2000 species of freshwater invertebrates could have already been lost.

“The Ecological Safety section of Safety Data Sheet [for neonics] states that ‘these chemicals are very toxic to aquatic organisms, may cause long-term adverse effects to the aquatic environment’.
“For the adequate protection of Australian fish and invertebrates, testing needs to be done on pollution-sensitive and common species of freshwater invertebrates occurring in streams as well as in still waters. These could be mayfly and stonefly nymphs and sensitive species of midges.”

2022/23: One of worst years for spray drift (New South Wales).

Ag bodies act to minimise spray drift this summer

Grain Central Dec 4 2023

COTTON Australia, Grain Producers Australia and GrainGrowers are urging growers to take appropriate action to avoid a repeat of last year’s devastating spray-drift incidents.

The 2022-23 season saw one of the worst years on record for spray drift with some farmers suffering millions of dollars’ worth of lost production.

Last year in the Macintyre and Balonne regions alone, producers lost considerable amounts to spray drift.

Cotton Australia CEO Adam Kay said last year’s impact was widespread, with farmers reporting moderate to severe spray drift incidents on the Darling Downs, in St George district, Dirranbandi, Mungindi, Gwydir, Lower Namoi, Walgett and the Macquarie Valley.

“We need a whole-of agriculture response to minimise the impact of off-target drift,” Mr Kay said.

“It’s not just cotton growers who are suffering extreme hardship when drift from others impacts their crops, but grain growers and other farmers are being hit hard during spray season and there is no one-fix solution.”

The potential for another major spray drift season depends on numerous factors including the practices of growers and contractors applying chemicals and the conditions prevalent of the time of application.

There is the potential for greater damage if spraying occurs under “hazardous inversion” conditions, most commonly occurring at night, when cold air is trapped near the ground and spray droplets can remain suspended in the air for hours and can travel many kilometres beyond the intended target.

Past spray drift events have indicated that some people are not applying in accordance with approved label instructions, or that the label instructions for some products may need review.

Mr Kay said last year Cotton Australia joined forces with other agricultural groups, the Australian Government registration authority and supply regulator of agricultural chemical products, the APVMA and enforcement agencies to highlight best practice and warn about the implications of non-compliance.

“We also called for more boots on the ground, so all stakeholders could see action was being taken to crack down on those doing the wrong thing and support those impacted. I’m pleased to say that the regulators appear to be listening.”

NSW EPA’s executive director regulatory practice and services Steve Beaman said the EPA would not t hesitate to take action against anyone spraying pesticides irresponsibly or deliberately causing harm.

“We’ve got around 15 investigations under way in Griffith, Narromine, Carrathool, Moree, Forbes, Warren and Yallaroi – we’re looking at people who may be operating without a license and others who are spraying in the kind of weather where pesticides are likely to drift and cause damage,” Mr Beaman said.

“The harm is really serious – we’ve seen farmers lose more than a year’s income just from someone spraying recklessly.

“It’s devastating and it’s got to stop.”

Mr Beaman said the EPA was hopeful that with increased education and compliance, this season will be a better one.

“We’re reminding all pesticide users to carefully follow the label instructions for each chemical, store their chemicals safely and keep accurate and up-to-date records of spraying activity for three years.

“There’s so much technology available to tell you what the weather’s doing and when it’s safe to spray. The message is simple – if you’re in any doubt, don’t put it out.”

Grain bodies take action

With summer weed-spraying coming into focus, GPA and GrainGrowers have urged members to brush up on best practice and make use of available resources.

To assist this, GrainGrowers will soon launch a grower-focussed online hub, which seeks to provide growers with up-to-date resources on spray-drift management, including a new video training series.

GrainGrowers CEO Shona Gawel said the grains industry was committed to meeting the challenge and minimising issues by ensuring best practice is always followed.

“The majority of growers take their land-stewardship responsibilities very seriously and follow procedures that allow them to spray weeds effectively and efficiently and in a way that protects the surrounding environment,” Ms Gawel said.

“Knowing what to do, checking your conditions, and considering your neighbours by notifying them of your spray plan are three simple steps to follow.”

Given the spray drift damage earlier this year, both bodies have thrown their support behind a proactive, national approach to stop it from happening again.

GPA southern grower director and RD&E spokesperson Andrew Weidemann said it was critical to manage spray drift properly and be vigilant with application to ensure growers can maintain access to critical on-farm tools that help drive productivity and sustainability.

Mr Weidemann is also the independent chair of the National Working Party on Pesticide Application, established in 2010 to conduct targeted research relating to spray drift and inform the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority’s policy on spray drift.

He said most growers did the right thing most of the time and followed product labels, but complacency on application was not an option.

“Spray drift is an ongoing challenge for industry, and there have been substantive investments in practice improvement, training and education opportunities and technology to reduce off-target incidents from spray application and improve stewardship, but there are no excuses,” Mr Weidemann said.

GPA northern director Matthew Madden said growers and their representative groups recognised a strong and effective regulatory system was needed to protect the majority of growers who were compliant and did the right thing, but offenders needed to be “weeded out” with penalties.

“We need a system that protects those operating within the rules and penalises those putting other growers at risk, with non-compliant activities.”

GrainGrowers’ online spray drift resource hub will soon be released, and will feature a commissioned video series and links to resources available from GPA, GRDC, and others.

Source: Cotton Australia, NSW EPA, GPA, GrainGrowers

Ag bodies act to minimise spray drift this summer

Grain Central Dec 4 2023

COTTON Australia, Grain Producers Australia and GrainGrowers are urging growers to take appropriate action to avoid a repeat of last year’s devastating spray-drift incidents.

The 2022-23 season saw one of the worst years on record for spray drift with some farmers suffering millions of dollars’ worth of lost production.

Last year in the Macintyre and Balonne regions alone, producers lost considerable amounts to spray drift.

Cotton Australia CEO Adam Kay said last year’s impact was widespread, with farmers reporting moderate to severe spray drift incidents on the Darling Downs, in St George district, Dirranbandi, Mungindi, Gwydir, Lower Namoi, Walgett and the Macquarie Valley.

“We need a whole-of agriculture response to minimise the impact of off-target drift,” Mr Kay said.

“It’s not just cotton growers who are suffering extreme hardship when drift from others impacts their crops, but grain growers and other farmers are being hit hard during spray season and there is no one-fix solution.”

The potential for another major spray drift season depends on numerous factors including the practices of growers and contractors applying chemicals and the conditions prevalent of the time of application.

There is the potential for greater damage if spraying occurs under “hazardous inversion” conditions, most commonly occurring at night, when cold air is trapped near the ground and spray droplets can remain suspended in the air for hours and can travel many kilometres beyond the intended target.

Past spray drift events have indicated that some people are not applying in accordance with approved label instructions, or that the label instructions for some products may need review.

Mr Kay said last year Cotton Australia joined forces with other agricultural groups, the Australian Government registration authority and supply regulator of agricultural chemical products, the APVMA and enforcement agencies to highlight best practice and warn about the implications of non-compliance.

“We also called for more boots on the ground, so all stakeholders could see action was being taken to crack down on those doing the wrong thing and support those impacted. I’m pleased to say that the regulators appear to be listening.”

NSW EPA’s executive director regulatory practice and services Steve Beaman said the EPA would not t hesitate to take action against anyone spraying pesticides irresponsibly or deliberately causing harm.

“We’ve got around 15 investigations under way in Griffith, Narromine, Carrathool, Moree, Forbes, Warren and Yallaroi – we’re looking at people who may be operating without a license and others who are spraying in the kind of weather where pesticides are likely to drift and cause damage,” Mr Beaman said.

“The harm is really serious – we’ve seen farmers lose more than a year’s income just from someone spraying recklessly.

“It’s devastating and it’s got to stop.”

Mr Beaman said the EPA was hopeful that with increased education and compliance, this season will be a better one.

“We’re reminding all pesticide users to carefully follow the label instructions for each chemical, store their chemicals safely and keep accurate and up-to-date records of spraying activity for three years.

“There’s so much technology available to tell you what the weather’s doing and when it’s safe to spray. The message is simple – if you’re in any doubt, don’t put it out.”

Grain bodies take action

With summer weed-spraying coming into focus, GPA and GrainGrowers have urged members to brush up on best practice and make use of available resources.

To assist this, GrainGrowers will soon launch a grower-focussed online hub, which seeks to provide growers with up-to-date resources on spray-drift management, including a new video training series.

GrainGrowers CEO Shona Gawel said the grains industry was committed to meeting the challenge and minimising issues by ensuring best practice is always followed.

“The majority of growers take their land-stewardship responsibilities very seriously and follow procedures that allow them to spray weeds effectively and efficiently and in a way that protects the surrounding environment,” Ms Gawel said.

“Knowing what to do, checking your conditions, and considering your neighbours by notifying them of your spray plan are three simple steps to follow.”

Given the spray drift damage earlier this year, both bodies have thrown their support behind a proactive, national approach to stop it from happening again.

GPA southern grower director and RD&E spokesperson Andrew Weidemann said it was critical to manage spray drift properly and be vigilant with application to ensure growers can maintain access to critical on-farm tools that help drive productivity and sustainability.

Mr Weidemann is also the independent chair of the National Working Party on Pesticide Application, established in 2010 to conduct targeted research relating to spray drift and inform the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority’s policy on spray drift.

He said most growers did the right thing most of the time and followed product labels, but complacency on application was not an option.

“Spray drift is an ongoing challenge for industry, and there have been substantive investments in practice improvement, training and education opportunities and technology to reduce off-target incidents from spray application and improve stewardship, but there are no excuses,” Mr Weidemann said.

GPA northern director Matthew Madden said growers and their representative groups recognised a strong and effective regulatory system was needed to protect the majority of growers who were compliant and did the right thing, but offenders needed to be “weeded out” with penalties.

“We need a system that protects those operating within the rules and penalises those putting other growers at risk, with non-compliant activities.”

GrainGrowers’ online spray drift resource hub will soon be released, and will feature a commissioned video series and links to resources available from GPA, GRDC, and others.

Source: Cotton Australia, NSW EPA, GPA, GrainGrowers

6/12/23: Woolgoolga (New South Wales) Water Pollution, Pesticide Offences

EPA inspects North Coast farms for pesticide practices

06 December 2023
 
https://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/news/media-releases/2023/epamedia231206-epa-inspects-north-coast-farms-for-pesticide-practices
 

The NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) is undertaking a series of pesticide compliance campaigns in the North Coast region throughout summer to ensure farmers are complying with environmental laws.

EPA Director of Operations Steve Orr said EPA officers will be inspecting intensive horticultural farms in the Woolgoolga region near Coffs Harbour and further north near Ballina to check for appropriate pesticide use, storage, record-keeping and wastewater management.

“Our inspections coincide with the summer growing season to ensure that crop-growers are always using pesticides responsibly to protect the environment and local waterways,” Mr Orr said.

“This campaign is building on previous work done with the intensive horticulture industry to reduce the potential impacts of pesticides from these activities.

“Since 2021, we have carried out more than 40 inspections of horticultural farms in the Woolgoolga region, resulting in 15 penalty notices, 7 official cautions, 8 formal warnings and 14 advisory letters issued for a range of water pollution and pesticide offences.

“We are following up with some of those farms we had previously visited to ensure that operators have taken adequate steps to improve their practices.

“This includes requirements for some growers to upgrade their wastewater capture and irrigation systems as well as their pesticide storage areas.

“We are also using intelligence to identify farms that we have not previously visited, so that a wider range of growers are reminded of their obligations under the Pesticides Act.

“We will continue to work closely with councils, industry and grower associations to increase awareness of pesticide regulations and how to spray safely this summer.”

EPA officers will provide resources and hear from local farmers about their pesticide use, as well as checking pesticide storage areas, water management and record-keeping practices.

For more information about preventing pesticide misuse in horticultural farms, see: https://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/your-environment/pesticides/preventing-pesticide-misuse/campaigns-investigations/intensive-horticulture-and-protected-cropping

To find out more about the EPA’s compliance campaigns in the Woolgoolga region, see: https://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/your-environment/pesticides/preventing-pesticide-misuse/campaigns-investigations/woolgoolga-compliance-inspections

EPA inspects North Coast farms for pesticide practices

https://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/news/media-releases/2023/epamedia231206-epa-inspects-north-coast-farms-for-pesticide-practices

The NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) is undertaking a series of pesticide compliance campaigns in the North Coast region throughout summer to ensure farmers are complying with environmental laws.

EPA Director of Operations Steve Orr said EPA officers will be inspecting intensive horticultural farms in the Woolgoolga region near Coffs Harbour and further north near Ballina to check for appropriate pesticide use, storage, record-keeping and wastewater management.

“Our inspections coincide with the summer growing season to ensure that crop-growers are always using pesticides responsibly to protect the environment and local waterways,” Mr Orr said.

“This campaign is building on previous work done with the intensive horticulture industry to reduce the potential impacts of pesticides from these activities.

“Since 2021, we have carried out more than 40 inspections of horticultural farms in the Woolgoolga region, resulting in 15 penalty notices, 7 official cautions, 8 formal warnings and 14 advisory letters issued for a range of water pollution and pesticide offences.

“We are following up with some of those farms we had previously visited to ensure that operators have taken adequate steps to improve their practices.

“This includes requirements for some growers to upgrade their wastewater capture and irrigation systems as well as their pesticide storage areas.

“We are also using intelligence to identify farms that we have not previously visited, so that a wider range of growers are reminded of their obligations under the Pesticides Act.

“We will continue to work closely with councils, industry and grower associations to increase awareness of pesticide regulations and how to spray safely this summer.”

EPA officers will provide resources and hear from local farmers about their pesticide use, as well as checking pesticide storage areas, water management and record-keeping practices.

For more information about preventing pesticide misuse in horticultural farms, see: https://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/your-environment/pesticides/preventing-pesticide-misuse/campaigns-investigations/intensive-horticulture-and-protected-cropping

To find out more about the EPA’s compliance campaigns in the Woolgoolga region, see: https://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/your-environment/pesticides/preventing-pesticide-misuse/campaigns-investigations/woolgoolga-compliance-inspections

11/12/23: Spray Drift Investigations New South Wales

“It’s got to stop”: Spray drift hits NSW cotton farms

By Christopher Kelly | 11 December 2023

https://www.ragtrader.com.au/news/it-s-got-to-stop-spray-drift-hits-nsw-cotton-farms

Over 1000 hectares of cotton crops have already been impacted by spray drift in New South Wales, pushing growers, agronomists and industry leaders to call for vigilance.

Summit Ag agronomist Emma Ayliffe has visited three farms between Lake Cargelligo and Condobolin in Central West NSW, reviewing three separate incidents ranging from minor damage to severe.

“Some of the crops have been hit hard, but the positive is that it’s only early days and they may recover, avoiding a total loss,” Ayliffe said. “We were hit hard last season, and we are all sick of it. It’s got to stop. 

“We can’t afford a repeat of the damage and if everyone uses the tools and resources available, this can all be avoided.”

There have also been reports from Griffith and near Moree with Cotton Australia (CA) regional managers concerned that conditions may lead to an escalation of damage and further incidents. 

The reports, combined with the recent rains boosting weed growth, indicate spraying activity is about to ramp up significantly.

CA policy officer for stewardship Doug McCollum said there is a perfect storm brewing.

“With hot conditions, growers might be tempted to delay spraying during the day to avoid evaporation and instead spray at night. 

“Unfortunately for growers, the inversion conditions are mostly prevalent during nighttime and that could lead to unintended drift over a large area.”

In New South Wales the EPA has signalled they won’t hesitate to take action against anyone spraying pesticides irresponsibly or deliberately causing harm. 

They have stepped up site visits with recent pesticide campaigns in Moree, Narrabri and Walgett, and are undertaking active investigations in Carrathool, Forbes, Griffith, Narromine, Moree, Warren and Yallaroi.

McCollum urged all those spraying their crops to fully utilise preventative tools to help prevent millions of dollars’ worth of lost production, including Weather and Networked Data (WAND) towers and SataCrop.

In March this year, both the Grains and Cotton Research and Development Corporations in conjunction with Goanna Ag, confirmed all 100 Weather and Networked Data (WAND) spray hazard identification towers were up and running stretching from Emerald in Queensland to the Victorian border.

Over 2,000 cotton and grain growers and spray operators have registered to use WAND towers to identify whether a hazardous inversion is present. 

Meanwhile, SataCrop can map all crop types, including cotton, grains and tree crops. Growers log in and plot the location of fields they have planted with different crops each season, allowing others to review the site when planning spray applications to see the location of potentially sensitive neighbouring crops.

“It’s fantastic having these tools and this year if people use them, remain vigilant around spray and wind conditions, and strictly adhere to the instructions on the label then we can avoid tens of millions worth of damage,” McCollum said.

“The vast majority are doing the right thing and those who flagrantly break the rules can expect to be caught.”

“It’s got to stop”: Spray drift hits NSW cotton farms

By Christopher Kelly | 11 December 2023

https://www.ragtrader.com.au/news/it-s-got-to-stop-spray-drift-hits-nsw-cotton-farms

Over 1000 hectares of cotton crops have already been impacted by spray drift in New South Wales, pushing growers, agronomists and industry leaders to call for vigilance.

Summit Ag agronomist Emma Ayliffe has visited three farms between Lake Cargelligo and Condobolin in Central West NSW, reviewing three separate incidents ranging from minor damage to severe.

“Some of the crops have been hit hard, but the positive is that it’s only early days and they may recover, avoiding a total loss,” Ayliffe said. “We were hit hard last season, and we are all sick of it. It’s got to stop.

“We can’t afford a repeat of the damage and if everyone uses the tools and resources available, this can all be avoided.”

There have also been reports from Griffith and near Moree with Cotton Australia (CA) regional managers concerned that conditions may lead to an escalation of damage and further incidents.

The reports, combined with the recent rains boosting weed growth, indicate spraying activity is about to ramp up significantly.

CA policy officer for stewardship Doug McCollum said there is a perfect storm brewing.

“With hot conditions, growers might be tempted to delay spraying during the day to avoid evaporation and instead spray at night.

“Unfortunately for growers, the inversion conditions are mostly prevalent during nighttime and that could lead to unintended drift over a large area.”

In New South Wales the EPA has signalled they won’t hesitate to take action against anyone spraying pesticides irresponsibly or deliberately causing harm.

They have stepped up site visits with recent pesticide campaigns in Moree, Narrabri and Walgett, and are undertaking active investigations in Carrathool, Forbes, Griffith, Narromine, Moree, Warren and Yallaroi.

McCollum urged all those spraying their crops to fully utilise preventative tools to help prevent millions of dollars’ worth of lost production, including Weather and Networked Data (WAND) towers and SataCrop.

In March this year, both the Grains and Cotton Research and Development Corporations in conjunction with Goanna Ag, confirmed all 100 Weather and Networked Data (WAND) spray hazard identification towers were up and running stretching from Emerald in Queensland to the Victorian border.

Over 2,000 cotton and grain growers and spray operators have registered to use WAND towers to identify whether a hazardous inversion is present.

Meanwhile, SataCrop can map all crop types, including cotton, grains and tree crops. Growers log in and plot the location of fields they have planted with different crops each season, allowing others to review the site when planning spray applications to see the location of potentially sensitive neighbouring crops.

“It’s fantastic having these tools and this year if people use them, remain vigilant around spray and wind conditions, and strictly adhere to the instructions on the label then we can avoid tens of millions worth of damage,” McCollum said.

“The vast majority are doing the right thing and those who flagrantly break the rules can expect to be caught.”

2023 December: Spray drift Griffith & Carrathool

'Spray drift an issue': EPA visiting farms in Griffith, Carrathool

Dec 13 2023: https://www.therural.com.au/story/8457509/epa-increases-farm-visits-in-wake-of-spray-drift-reports/

Following reports of spray drift in the area, the EPA is increasing farm visits around Griffith and Carrathool.

‘Spray drift an issue’: EPA visiting farms in Griffith, Carrathool

Dec 13 2023: https://www.therural.com.au/story/8457509/epa-increases-farm-visits-in-wake-of-spray-drift-reports/

Following reports of spray drift in the area, the EPA is increasing farm visits around Griffith and Carrathool.

2020: South Ballina (NSW). Pesticides in water and oysters

South Ballina Richmond River (NSW) Jan - March 2020

Pesticide occurrence in a subtropical estuary, Australia: Complementary sampling method
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123084

Pesticide Concentrations in Water

Atrazine 0.35ug/L, Diuron 0.51ug/L, Hexazinone 0.51ug/L, Metolachlor 0.33ug/L

Pesticide Concentrations in Oysters

Atrazine 0.13 ng/g/w, Diuron 6 ng/g/w, Fluproponate 2.3 ng/g/w, Fosetyl Aluminium 14 ng/g/w, Hexazinone 1.16 ng/g/w, Iprodione 0.74 ng/g/w, Metolachlor 0.18ng/g/w, Pebulate 8.5 ng/g/w, Propargite 15.9 ng/g/w, Prothiofos 1 ng/g/w, Vernolate 1.4 ng/g/w

South Ballina Richmond River (NSW) Jan – March 2020

Pesticide occurrence in a subtropical estuary, Australia: Complementary sampling method
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123084

Pesticide Concentrations in Water

Atrazine 0.35ug/L, Diuron 0.51ug/L, Hexazinone 0.51ug/L, Metolachlor 0.33ug/L

Pesticide Concentrations in Oysters

Atrazine 0.13 ng/g/w, Diuron 6 ng/g/w, Fluproponate 2.3 ng/g/w, Fosetyl Aluminium 14 ng/g/w, Hexazinone 1.16 ng/g/w, Iprodione 0.74 ng/g/w, Metolachlor 0.18ng/g/w, Pebulate 8.5 ng/g/w, Propargite 15.9 ng/g/w, Prothiofos 1 ng/g/w, Vernolate 1.4 ng/g/w

2020: Empire Vale 2/Richmond River (NSW). Pesticides in water and oysters

Empire Vale 2/Richmond River (NSW) Jan - March 2020

Pesticide occurrence in a subtropical estuary, Australia: Complementary sampling method
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123084

Pesticide Concentrations in Water

Atrazine 1.73ug/L, Diuron 2.98ug/L, Hexazinone 1.34ug/L, Metolachlor 1.31ug/L, Propazine 0.03ug/L

Pesticide Concentrations in Oysters

Atrazine 0.52 ng/g/w, Benomyl 0.12 ng/g/w, Chlorpyrifos 0.37 ng/g/w, Diuron 0.49 ng/g/w, Fluproponate 9.3 ng/g/w, Fosetyl Aluminium 15 ng/g/w, Iprodione 1.2 ng/g/w, Metolachlor 0.38ng/g/w, Pebulate 11 ng/g/w, Propargite 15.8 ng/g/w

Empire Vale 2/Richmond River (NSW) Jan – March 2020

Pesticide occurrence in a subtropical estuary, Australia: Complementary sampling method
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123084

Pesticide Concentrations in Water

Atrazine 1.73ug/L, Diuron 2.98ug/L, Hexazinone 1.34ug/L, Metolachlor 1.31ug/L, Propazine 0.03ug/L

Pesticide Concentrations in Oysters

Atrazine 0.52 ng/g/w, Benomyl 0.12 ng/g/w, Chlorpyrifos 0.37 ng/g/w, Diuron 0.49 ng/g/w, Fluproponate 9.3 ng/g/w, Fosetyl Aluminium 15 ng/g/w, Iprodione 1.2 ng/g/w, Metolachlor 0.38ng/g/w, Pebulate 11 ng/g/w, Propargite 15.8 ng/g/w

2020: Empire Vale 1/Richmond River (NSW). Pesticides in water and oysters

Empire Vale 1/Richmond River (NSW) Jan - March 2020

Pesticide occurrence in a subtropical estuary, Australia: Complementary sampling method
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123084

Pesticide Concentrations in Water

Atrazine 0.48ug/L, Diuron 0.08ug/L, Hexazinone 0.02ug/L, Metolachlor 0.55ug/L

Pesticide Concentrations in Oysters

Atrazine 0.14 ng/g/w, Chlorpyrifos 0.27 ng/g/w, Fluproponate 4.8 ng/g/w, Iprodione 1.35 ng/g/w, Metolachlor 0.21 ng/g/w, Pebulate 14.2 ng/g/w, Propargite 7.9 ng/g/w

Empire Vale 1/Richmond River (NSW) Jan – March 2020

Pesticide occurrence in a subtropical estuary, Australia: Complementary sampling method
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123084

Pesticide Concentrations in Water

Atrazine 0.48ug/L, Diuron 0.08ug/L, Hexazinone 0.02ug/L, Metolachlor 0.55ug/L

Pesticide Concentrations in Oysters

Atrazine 0.14 ng/g/w, Chlorpyrifos 0.27 ng/g/w, Fluproponate 4.8 ng/g/w, Iprodione 1.35 ng/g/w, Metolachlor 0.21 ng/g/w, Pebulate 14.2 ng/g/w, Propargite 7.9 ng/g/w

2020: North Creek/Richmond River (NSW). Pesticides in water and oysters

North Creek/Richmond River (NSW) Jan - March 2020

Pesticide occurrence in a subtropical estuary, Australia: Complementary sampling method
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123084

Pesticide Concentrations in Water

Atrazine 0.05ug/L, Metolachlor 0.08ug/L

Pesticide Concentrations in Oysters

Atrazine 0.13 ng/g/w, Benomyl 0.13ng/g/w, Chlorpyrifos 0.37 ng/g/w, Fluproponate 9 ng/g/w, Fosetyl Aluminium 12 ng/g/w, Iprodione 1.07 ng/g/w, Metolachlor 0.14 ng/g/w, Pebulate 8.3 ng/g/w, Propargite 13.6 ng/g/w,  Vernolate 1.1 ng/g/w

North Creek/Richmond River (NSW) Jan – March 2020

Pesticide occurrence in a subtropical estuary, Australia: Complementary sampling method
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123084

Pesticide Concentrations in Water

Atrazine 0.05ug/L, Metolachlor 0.08ug/L

Pesticide Concentrations in Oysters

Atrazine 0.13 ng/g/w, Benomyl 0.13ng/g/w, Chlorpyrifos 0.37 ng/g/w, Fluproponate 9 ng/g/w, Fosetyl Aluminium 12 ng/g/w, Iprodione 1.07 ng/g/w, Metolachlor 0.14 ng/g/w, Pebulate 8.3 ng/g/w, Propargite 13.6 ng/g/w,  Vernolate 1.1 ng/g/w

2020: Fishery Creek/Richmond River (NSW). Pesticides in water and oysters

Ballina NSW 2478, Australia

Fishery Creek/Richmond River (NSW) Jan - March 2020

Pesticide occurrence in a subtropical estuary, Australia: Complementary sampling method
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123084

Pesticide Concentrations in Water

Atrazine 0.1ug/L, Diuron 0.06ug/L, Metolachlor 0.17ug/L

Pesticide Concentrations in Oysters

Atrazine 0.11 ng/g/w, Diuron 0.28 ng/g/w, Fluproponate 4.5 ng/g/w, Fosetyl Auminium 20 ng/g/w, Iprodione 0.59 ng/g/w, Pebulate 11.1 ng/g/w,  Vernolate 1.1 ng/g/w

Fishery Creek/Richmond River (NSW) Jan – March 2020

Pesticide occurrence in a subtropical estuary, Australia: Complementary sampling method
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123084

Pesticide Concentrations in Water

Atrazine 0.1ug/L, Diuron 0.06ug/L, Metolachlor 0.17ug/L

Pesticide Concentrations in Oysters

Atrazine 0.11 ng/g/w, Diuron 0.28 ng/g/w, Fluproponate 4.5 ng/g/w, Fosetyl Auminium 20 ng/g/w, Iprodione 0.59 ng/g/w, Pebulate 11.1 ng/g/w,  Vernolate 1.1 ng/g/w

 

2020: Emigrant Creek/Richmond River (NSW). Pesticide in water and oysters

Emigrant Creek/Richmond River (NSW) Jan - March 2020

Pesticide occurrence in a subtropical estuary, Australia: Complementary sampling method
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123084

Pesticide Concentrations in Water

Atrazine 0.15ug/L, Benomyl 0.02ug/L, Diuron 0.09ug/L, Metolachlor 0.13ug/L

Pesticide Concentrations in Oysters

Atrazine 0.23 ng/g/w, Diuron 0.37 ng/g/w, Flupropinate 1.7 ng/g/w, Iprodione 0.6 ng/g/w, Pebulate 13 ng/g/w, Propargite 1.1 ng/g/w, Vernolate 0.16 ng/g/w

 

Emigrant Creek/Richmond River (NSW) Jan – March 2020

Pesticide occurrence in a subtropical estuary, Australia: Complementary sampling method
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123084

Pesticide Concentrations in Water

Atrazine 0.15ug/L, Benomyl 0.02ug/L, Diuron 0.09ug/L, Metolachlor 0.13ug/L

Pesticide Concentrations in Oysters

Atrazine 0.23 ng/g/w, Diuron 0.37 ng/g/w, Flupropinate 1.7 ng/g/w, Iprodione 0.6 ng/g/w, Pebulate 13 ng/g/w, Propargite 1.1 ng/g/w, Vernolate 0.16 ng/g/w

 

14/12/23: Cocktail of pesticides found in Richmond River, including chemical banned in 2006

'Cocktail of pesticides' found in Richmond River, including chemical banned in 2006

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-14/illegal-chemical-among-pesticides-detected-in-richmond-river/103222592

Tests have revealed the presence of a "cocktail of pesticides" – including traces of a chemical that was banned almost 20 years ago – in a major New South Wales waterway and the wild oysters that inhabit it.

The data was collected in 2020-21 and the results of the Richmond River study were published in the Journal of Environmental Pollution this week.

Southern Cross University marine science professor Kirsten Benkendorff said 21 different pesticides were detected in the river near Ballina.

The researchers found more pesticides in the wild oysters than in the water.

There was an average of nine different pesticides detected in individual oyster samples.

Dr Benkendorff said the concentration of several pesticides exceeded safe environmental guidelines.

"There was a whole cocktail of pesticides in oysters and the water," she said.

"It's a serious concern of the health of the environment and potential consumer safety."

The fungicide benomyl, which has been illegal to use since 2006, was also detected.

"It is a really big concern to have found a banned pesticide in our water here — we don't know who is using it or why," she said.

"It's a pesticide with a pretty short half-life, so it's not something that has been hanging around in the environment for a long time."

Some of the pesticides identified in the report are used for roadside weed spraying and for maintenance of playing fields.

Most of the chemicals detected in the study are registered for use in the production of sugarcane.

"It demonstrates there is a range of different sources of pesticides, even when we consider agriculture as the main focus," Dr Benkendorff said.

Cane industry blindsided

The testing revealed high levels of the herbicides atrazine and diuron were detected in March 2020 at a testing site near a cane drain at Empire Vale, south of Ballina.

NSW Canegrowers chairman Ross Farlow said it was difficult to work out the exact source so long after the event.

"It's almost four years now since that data was collected and you would have to wonder why the data has been sat on and held and not flagged at the time," he said.

"If there was an issue of alarm, why wasn't it raised with the agricultural industries across the floodplain and something could have been investigated immediately?"

Australian Macadamia Society chief executive officer Clare Hamilton-Bate said two of the 21 chemicals were registered for macadamias.

One is the fungicide tebuconazole, the other is iprodione; which she says isn't used due to residue limits in key export markets.

"We have flagged our disappointment that there was no consultation and, it would appear, little agronomic knowledge of what is used in the macadamia industry," she said.

Water quality in the Richmond River has been a matter of concern for many years.

A 2015 University of New England study gave the river a D-plus health rating.

Aquatic veterinarian Matt Landos said he was not surprised by the results.

"We haven't reformed our regulation of pesticides to make them safe," he said.

"The detection of benomyl shows the product is still in use and someone is using that product illegally."

Oysters 'should be safe'

The Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) is responsible for reviewing and approving pesticides up to the point of sale.

The NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) regulates the use of pesticides.

An EPA spokesperson was not available for an interview, but said in a statement that the agency welcomed the work done by Southern Cross University and took the misuse of pesticides and their potential impacts seriously.

The EPA has commenced a compliance campaign targeting horticultural farms near Emigrant Creek.

The report authors are calling for further pesticide contamination research higher in the Richmond catchment, as well as in other estuaries.

Co-author Amanda Reichelt-Brushett said she did not want to put people off eating their oysters.

"They should be safe if you have bought them from a good farm," she said.

Richmond River oyster grower Geoff Lawler said he was concerned but not surprised that pesticides were found in the estuaries.

He said his commercial oysters were tested in 2020, the same year as when this research was carried out, and found to be pesticide-free.

"We're controlled by the NSW Food Authority, they apply the Food Standards Act," he said.

"If there was any problem they would have simply prevented us from harvesting."

‘Cocktail of pesticides’ found in Richmond River, including chemical banned in 2006

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-14/illegal-chemical-among-pesticides-detected-in-richmond-river/103222592

Tests have revealed the presence of a “cocktail of pesticides” – including traces of a chemical that was banned almost 20 years ago – in a major New South Wales waterway and the wild oysters that inhabit it.

The data was collected in 2020-21 and the results of the Richmond River study were published in the Journal of Environmental Pollution this week.

Southern Cross University marine science professor Kirsten Benkendorff said 21 different pesticides were detected in the river near Ballina.

The researchers found more pesticides in the wild oysters than in the water.

There was an average of nine different pesticides detected in individual oyster samples.

Dr Benkendorff said the concentration of several pesticides exceeded safe environmental guidelines.

“There was a whole cocktail of pesticides in oysters and the water,” she said.

“It’s a serious concern of the health of the environment and potential consumer safety.”

The fungicide benomyl, which has been illegal to use since 2006, was also detected.

“It is a really big concern to have found a banned pesticide in our water here — we don’t know who is using it or why,” she said.

“It’s a pesticide with a pretty short half-life, so it’s not something that has been hanging around in the environment for a long time.”

Some of the pesticides identified in the report are used for roadside weed spraying and for maintenance of playing fields.

Most of the chemicals detected in the study are registered for use in the production of sugarcane.

“It demonstrates there is a range of different sources of pesticides, even when we consider agriculture as the main focus,” Dr Benkendorff said.

Cane industry blindsided

The testing revealed high levels of the herbicides atrazine and diuron were detected in March 2020 at a testing site near a cane drain at Empire Vale, south of Ballina.

NSW Canegrowers chairman Ross Farlow said it was difficult to work out the exact source so long after the event.

“It’s almost four years now since that data was collected and you would have to wonder why the data has been sat on and held and not flagged at the time,” he said.

“If there was an issue of alarm, why wasn’t it raised with the agricultural industries across the floodplain and something could have been investigated immediately?”

Australian Macadamia Society chief executive officer Clare Hamilton-Bate said two of the 21 chemicals were registered for macadamias.

One is the fungicide tebuconazole, the other is iprodione; which she says isn’t used due to residue limits in key export markets.

“We have flagged our disappointment that there was no consultation and, it would appear, little agronomic knowledge of what is used in the macadamia industry,” she said.

Water quality in the Richmond River has been a matter of concern for many years.

A 2015 University of New England study gave the river a D-plus health rating.

Aquatic veterinarian Matt Landos said he was not surprised by the results.

“We haven’t reformed our regulation of pesticides to make them safe,” he said.

“The detection of benomyl shows the product is still in use and someone is using that product illegally.”

Oysters ‘should be safe’

The Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) is responsible for reviewing and approving pesticides up to the point of sale.

The NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) regulates the use of pesticides.

An EPA spokesperson was not available for an interview, but said in a statement that the agency welcomed the work done by Southern Cross University and took the misuse of pesticides and their potential impacts seriously.

The EPA has commenced a compliance campaign targeting horticultural farms near Emigrant Creek.

The report authors are calling for further pesticide contamination research higher in the Richmond catchment, as well as in other estuaries.

Co-author Amanda Reichelt-Brushett said she did not want to put people off eating their oysters.

“They should be safe if you have bought them from a good farm,” she said.

Richmond River oyster grower Geoff Lawler said he was concerned but not surprised that pesticides were found in the estuaries.

He said his commercial oysters were tested in 2020, the same year as when this research was carried out, and found to be pesticide-free.

“We’re controlled by the NSW Food Authority, they apply the Food Standards Act,” he said.

“If there was any problem they would have simply prevented us from harvesting.”

 

8/12/23: Over 1000ha of Cotton Crops in NSW hit by Spray Drift

Over 1K hectares of cotton crops in NSW, Australia hit by spray drift

8 Dec 2023

https://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/cotton-news/over-1k-hectares-of-cotton-crops-in-nsw-australia-hit-by-spray-drift-291774-newsdetails.htm

More than 1,000 hectares of cotton crops have already been impacted by spray drift in Australia’s New South Wales (NSW) with growers, agronomists, and industry leaders fearful that a perfect storm may result in significant damage unless all sprayers do the right thing.

Agronomist Emma Ayliffe, from Summit Ag in Griffith visited three farms between Lake Cargelligo and Condobolin in Centra West NSW, reviewing three separate incidents ranging from minor damage to severe, Cotton Australia said in a press release.

“Some of the crops have been hit hard but the positive is that it’s only early days and they may recover, avoiding a total loss. We were hit hard last season, and we are all sick of it. It’s got to stop. We can’t afford a repeat of the damage and if everyone uses the tools and resources available, this can all be avoided,” Ayliffe said.

There have also been reports from Griffith and near Moree with Cotton Australia (CA) regional managers concerned that conditions may lead to an escalation of damage and reports. The reports, combined with the recent rains boosting weed growth, indicate spraying activity is about to ramp up significantly.

CA policy officer for stewardship Doug McCollum said there is a perfect storm brewing, and everyone needs to take extra precautions given the extreme conditions. “With hot conditions, growers might be tempted to delay spraying during the day to avoid evaporation and instead spray at night. Unfortunately for growers the inversion conditions are mostly prevalent during nighttime and that could lead to unintended drift over a large area.”

In New South Wales the EPA has signalled they will not hesitate to take action against anyone spraying pesticides irresponsibly or deliberately causing harm. They have stepped up site visits with recent pesticides campaigns in Moree, Narrabri and Walgett, and are undertaking active investigations in Carrathool, Forbes, Griffith, Narromine, Moree, Warren and Yallaroi.

McCollum urged all those spraying their crops to fully utilise the full complement of tools, including Weather and Networked Data (WAND) towers and SataCrop this season to avoid spray drift, enabling the rapid detection of hazardous conditions and inversions, potentially preventing millions of dollars’ worth of lost production.

In March this year both the Grains and Cotton Research and Development Corporations in conjunction with Goanna Ag, confirmed all 100 WAND spray hazard identification towers were up and running stretching from Emerald in Queensland to the Victorian border.

Over 2,000 cotton and grain growers and spray operators have registered to use WAND towers to identify, in real time, whether a hazardous inversion is present helping their decision to spray, or more importantly when not to spray.

WAND is a spray drift hazardous weather warning system that provides real-time weather data for growers and spray operators. Utilising remote sensing capability and new proprietary software, the towers provide growers and spray contractors with a two-hour forecast of weather data that is updated every 10 minutes.

SataCrop can map all crop types, including cotton, grains and tree crops. Growers log in and plot the location of fields they have planted with different crops each season allowing others to review the site when planning spray applications to see the location of potentially sensitive neighbouring crops, the release added.

“It’s fantastic having these tools and this year if people use them, remain vigilant around spray and wind conditions, and strictly adhere to the instructions on the label then we can avoid tens of millions worth of damage,” McCollum said. “The vast majority are doing the right thing and those who flagrantly break the rules can expect to be caught.”

Over 1K hectares of cotton crops in NSW, Australia hit by spray drift

8 Dec 2023

https://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/cotton-news/over-1k-hectares-of-cotton-crops-in-nsw-australia-hit-by-spray-drift-291774-newsdetails.htm

More than 1,000 hectares of cotton crops have already been impacted by spray drift in Australia’s New South Wales (NSW) with growers, agronomists, and industry leaders fearful that a perfect storm may result in significant damage unless all sprayers do the right thing.

Agronomist Emma Ayliffe, from Summit Ag in Griffith visited three farms between Lake Cargelligo and Condobolin in Centra West NSW, reviewing three separate incidents ranging from minor damage to severe, Cotton Australia said in a press release.

“Some of the crops have been hit hard but the positive is that it’s only early days and they may recover, avoiding a total loss. We were hit hard last season, and we are all sick of it. It’s got to stop. We can’t afford a repeat of the damage and if everyone uses the tools and resources available, this can all be avoided,” Ayliffe said.

There have also been reports from Griffith and near Moree with Cotton Australia (CA) regional managers concerned that conditions may lead to an escalation of damage and reports. The reports, combined with the recent rains boosting weed growth, indicate spraying activity is about to ramp up significantly.

CA policy officer for stewardship Doug McCollum said there is a perfect storm brewing, and everyone needs to take extra precautions given the extreme conditions. “With hot conditions, growers might be tempted to delay spraying during the day to avoid evaporation and instead spray at night. Unfortunately for growers the inversion conditions are mostly prevalent during nighttime and that could lead to unintended drift over a large area.”

In New South Wales the EPA has signalled they will not hesitate to take action against anyone spraying pesticides irresponsibly or deliberately causing harm. They have stepped up site visits with recent pesticides campaigns in Moree, Narrabri and Walgett, and are undertaking active investigations in Carrathool, Forbes, Griffith, Narromine, Moree, Warren and Yallaroi.

McCollum urged all those spraying their crops to fully utilise the full complement of tools, including Weather and Networked Data (WAND) towers and SataCrop this season to avoid spray drift, enabling the rapid detection of hazardous conditions and inversions, potentially preventing millions of dollars’ worth of lost production.

In March this year both the Grains and Cotton Research and Development Corporations in conjunction with Goanna Ag, confirmed all 100 WAND spray hazard identification towers were up and running stretching from Emerald in Queensland to the Victorian border.

Over 2,000 cotton and grain growers and spray operators have registered to use WAND towers to identify, in real time, whether a hazardous inversion is present helping their decision to spray, or more importantly when not to spray.

WAND is a spray drift hazardous weather warning system that provides real-time weather data for growers and spray operators. Utilising remote sensing capability and new proprietary software, the towers provide growers and spray contractors with a two-hour forecast of weather data that is updated every 10 minutes.

SataCrop can map all crop types, including cotton, grains and tree crops. Growers log in and plot the location of fields they have planted with different crops each season allowing others to review the site when planning spray applications to see the location of potentially sensitive neighbouring crops, the release added.

“It’s fantastic having these tools and this year if people use them, remain vigilant around spray and wind conditions, and strictly adhere to the instructions on the label then we can avoid tens of millions worth of damage,” McCollum said. “The vast majority are doing the right thing and those who flagrantly break the rules can expect to be caught.”

21/11/23: Yorke Peninsula (South Australia) 26 reports of spray drift. Pesticide: Overwatch (Bixlozone)

Spray drift: not on our watch

Yorke Peninsula Country Times 21/11/23

Prompted by its investigation into 26 reports of off-target impacts of the herbicide Overwatch on Yorke Peninsula, Primary Industries and Regions South Australia says it will crackdown on non-compliant use of agricultural chemicals.

PIRSA biosecurity executive director Nathan Rhodes said the reports had come from throughout YP, including Alford, Balgowan, Edithburgh, Kulpara, Moonta and surrounds, Maitland, Minlaton, Port Vincent, Point Turton, Tiddy Widdy Beach, Wallaroo, Warooka and Wool Bay.

Overwatch damage has also been reported in the Mid North at Snowtown, Balaklava, Hart and Manoora.

No complaints or reports have been received from outside these two regions.

PIRSA has referred the reports to the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority but has not yet received feedback.

Manufactured by FMC Australia, Overwatch is a pre-emergent herbicide which is applied during seeding time in April/May to control annual ryegrass and some broadleaf weeds in broadacre crops.

Mr Rhodes said PIRSA has a renewed focus on preventing drift of any agricultural chemicals by ensuring chemical users comply with mandatory instructions.

“Users identified to not be following mandatory label instructions can expect PIRSA to use the strongest possible regulatory enforcement options, which include prosecution,” he said.

Most of the reported damage was to garden plants in townships, often some distance from cropping paddocks.

“Damage is considered likely to have resulted from a combination of use during hazardous inversion weather conditions and/or application practices resulting in unacceptable production of fine droplets with a higher potential to drift,” Mr Rhodes said.

“Spray drift damage is highly visible for Overwatch — with some plant species being particularly susceptible to very low amounts of Overwatch drift — as the bleaching symptoms are easily observable.”

PIRSA contacted crop producers across YP believed to have used Overwatch in 2023, largely based on their location near reported damage, but this did not imply they were the source of the damage, he said.

No evidence was found by PIRSA to indicate the users checked during the investigation had contravened mandatory label instructions.

“All producers interviewed by PIRSA were aware of the potential of Overwatch to produce visible symptoms on non-target vegetation and were concerned about it, with one farmer choosing not to use the herbicide again due to this off-target damage risk,” Mr Rhodes said.

More training to stop spray drift

“Overwatch is a relatively new herbicide product and has a unique mode of action that enables it to control some weeds that are not well controlled by other herbicides,” PIRSA biosecurity executive director Nathan Rhodes said.

“This makes it useful where weed resistance to other herbicide groups has developed.”

It is expected Overwatch will be used again in 2024, and PIRSA is working with Grain Producers SA to improve awareness and training for chemical users.

FMC head of development Geoff Robertson said the company had shared information with PIRSA during the investigation.

He said many factors — such as soil, nutrition, environmental conditions and use of other agricultural chemicals — can also cause plant symptoms which may be mistaken as signs of contact with Overwatch.

FMC has provided chemical-user training over the past three seasons and will run another series of workshops in 2024, Mr Robertson said.

These will be held at Crystal Brook on February 27, at Paskeville on February 28 and at Minlaton on February 29.

Mr Robertson said Overwatch does not pose any threat to human health when applied in accordance with label instructions.

“APVMA and the Department of Health determined that Overwatch has a very low toxicity profile,” he said.

“If any small amount of spray drift was to contact drinking water collection areas or fruit in nearby fields, the risk would be extremely low due to its very low toxicity to humans.”

Spray drift: not on our watch

Yorke Peninsula Country Times 21/11/23

Prompted by its investigation into 26 reports of off-target impacts of the herbicide Overwatch on Yorke Peninsula, Primary Industries and Regions South Australia says it will crackdown on non-compliant use of agricultural chemicals.

PIRSA biosecurity executive director Nathan Rhodes said the reports had come from throughout YP, including Alford, Balgowan, Edithburgh, Kulpara, Moonta and surrounds, Maitland, Minlaton, Port Vincent, Point Turton, Tiddy Widdy Beach, Wallaroo, Warooka and Wool Bay.

Overwatch damage has also been reported in the Mid North at Snowtown, Balaklava, Hart and Manoora.

No complaints or reports have been received from outside these two regions.

PIRSA has referred the reports to the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority but has not yet received feedback.

Manufactured by FMC Australia, Overwatch is a pre-emergent herbicide which is applied during seeding time in April/May to control annual ryegrass and some broadleaf weeds in broadacre crops.

Mr Rhodes said PIRSA has a renewed focus on preventing drift of any agricultural chemicals by ensuring chemical users comply with mandatory instructions.

“Users identified to not be following mandatory label instructions can expect PIRSA to use the strongest possible regulatory enforcement options, which include prosecution,” he said.

Most of the reported damage was to garden plants in townships, often some distance from cropping paddocks.

“Damage is considered likely to have resulted from a combination of use during hazardous inversion weather conditions and/or application practices resulting in unacceptable production of fine droplets with a higher potential to drift,” Mr Rhodes said.

“Spray drift damage is highly visible for Overwatch — with some plant species being particularly susceptible to very low amounts of Overwatch drift — as the bleaching symptoms are easily observable.”

PIRSA contacted crop producers across YP believed to have used Overwatch in 2023, largely based on their location near reported damage, but this did not imply they were the source of the damage, he said.

No evidence was found by PIRSA to indicate the users checked during the investigation had contravened mandatory label instructions.

“All producers interviewed by PIRSA were aware of the potential of Overwatch to produce visible symptoms on non-target vegetation and were concerned about it, with one farmer choosing not to use the herbicide again due to this off-target damage risk,” Mr Rhodes said.

More training to stop spray drift

“Overwatch is a relatively new herbicide product and has a unique mode of action that enables it to control some weeds that are not well controlled by other herbicides,” PIRSA biosecurity executive director Nathan Rhodes said.

“This makes it useful where weed resistance to other herbicide groups has developed.”

It is expected Overwatch will be used again in 2024, and PIRSA is working with Grain Producers SA to improve awareness and training for chemical users.

FMC head of development Geoff Robertson said the company had shared information with PIRSA during the investigation.

He said many factors — such as soil, nutrition, environmental conditions and use of other agricultural chemicals — can also cause plant symptoms which may be mistaken as signs of contact with Overwatch.

FMC has provided chemical-user training over the past three seasons and will run another series of workshops in 2024, Mr Robertson said.

These will be held at Crystal Brook on February 27, at Paskeville on February 28 and at Minlaton on February 29.

Mr Robertson said Overwatch does not pose any threat to human health when applied in accordance with label instructions.

“APVMA and the Department of Health determined that Overwatch has a very low toxicity profile,” he said.

“If any small amount of spray drift was to contact drinking water collection areas or fruit in nearby fields, the risk would be extremely low due to its very low toxicity to humans.”

2016/20: Whitfield drinking water supply. Pesticide: MCPA

Whitfield Drinking Water Supply

25/10/16: Whitfield Raw Water Tank MCPA 0.03ug/L

2018/19: Whitfield Triazine and triazineone herbicides 0.01ug/L

2019/20: Whitfield Organophosphate pesticides 0.04ug/L

 

Whitfield Drinking Water Supply

25/10/16: Whitfield Raw Water Tank MCPA 0.03ug/L

2018/19: Whitfield Triazine and triazineone herbicides 0.01ug/L

2019/20: Whitfield Organophosphate pesticides 0.04ug/L

2012/22: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga. Pesticides: Atrazine, MCPA, Simazine

Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga Drinking Water Supply

15/11/12: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP Atrazine 0.01ug/L

13/6/13: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP Atrazine 0.03ug/L

13/6/13: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP MCPA 0.04ug/L

13/6/13: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP Simazine 0.04ug/L

25/7/13: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP Atrazine 0.01ug/L

30/7/15: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP Atrazine 0.04ug/L

30/7/15: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP Simazine 0.03ug/L

28/7/16: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP Atrazine 0.05ug/L

28/7/16: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP Simazine 0.04ug/L

2019/20: Yarrawonga Phenoxy herbicides 0.04ug/L

2020/21: Yarrawonga Phenoxy herbicides 0.06ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.15ug/L

2021/22: Yarrawonga Phenoxy herbicides 0.06ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.07ug/L

bicides 0.07ug/L

Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga Drinking Water Supply

15/11/12: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP Atrazine 0.01ug/L

13/6/13: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP Atrazine 0.03ug/L

13/6/13: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP MCPA 0.04ug/L

13/6/13: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP Simazine 0.04ug/L

25/7/13: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP Atrazine 0.01ug/L

30/7/15: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP Atrazine 0.04ug/L

30/7/15: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP Simazine 0.03ug/L

28/7/16: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP Atrazine 0.05ug/L

28/7/16: Lake Mulwala, Yarrawonga WTP Simazine 0.04ug/L

2019/20: Yarrawonga Phenoxy herbicides 0.04ug/L

2020/21: Yarrawonga Phenoxy herbicides 0.06ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.15ug/L

2021/22: Yarrawonga Phenoxy herbicides 0.06ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.07ug/L

2012/22: Wodonga Creek, Wodonga. Pesticides: Multiple

Wodonga Creek, Wodonga Drinking Water Supply

8/11/12: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap Atrazine 0.02ug/L

8/11/12: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap Diazinon 0.01ug/L

8/11/12: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap Hexazinone 0.02ug/L

8/11/12: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap Malathion 0.02ug/L

8/11/12: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap MCPA 0.01ug/L

5/6/13: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap 2,4-D 0.03ug/L

5/6/13: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap Triclopyr 0.02ug/L

23/10/13: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap Simazine 0.04ug/L

26/10/16: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap Simazine 0.04ug/L

26/10/16: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap 2,4-D 0.01ug/L

26/10/16: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap MCPA 0.01ug/L

2018/19: Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.01ug/L

2019/20: Phenoxy herbicides 0.03ug/L, Sulfonylurea herbicides 0.03ug/L

2020/21: Phenoxy herbicides 0.01ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.01ug/L

2021/22: Wodonga Carbamtates 0.01ug/L, Organophosphate Pesticides 0.21ug/L, Phenoxy herbicides 0.03ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.04ug/L

Wodonga Creek, Wodonga Drinking Water Supply

8/11/12: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap Atrazine 0.02ug/L

8/11/12: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap Diazinon 0.01ug/L

8/11/12: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap Hexazinone 0.02ug/L

8/11/12: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap Malathion 0.02ug/L

8/11/12: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap MCPA 0.01ug/L

5/6/13: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap 2,4-D 0.03ug/L

5/6/13: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap Triclopyr 0.02ug/L

23/10/13: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap Simazine 0.04ug/L

26/10/16: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap Simazine 0.04ug/L

26/10/16: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap 2,4-D 0.01ug/L

26/10/16: Wodonga Creek P.S. at tap MCPA 0.01ug/L

2018/19: Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.01ug/L

2019/20: Phenoxy herbicides 0.03ug/L, Sulfonylurea herbicides 0.03ug/L

2020/21: Phenoxy herbicides 0.01ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.01ug/L

2021/22: Wodonga Carbamtates 0.01ug/L, Organophosphate Pesticides 0.21ug/L, Phenoxy herbicides 0.03ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.04ug/L

2012/22: Wahgunyah (Murray River, Victoria). Pesticides Atrazine, Terbutryn, MCPA, Simazine

Wahgunyah: Murray River at tap at inlet to treatment plant

8/11/12: Atrazine 0.01ug/L

25/7/13: Atrazine 0.03ug/L

25/7/13: Terbutryn 0.01ug/L

24/10/13: MCPA 0.01ug/L

30/10/14: Atrazine 0.01ug/L

27/10/16: Simazine 0.04ug/L

2020/21 (Wahgunyah): Phenoxy herbicides 0.02ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.03ug/L

2021/22 (Wahgunyah): Organophospate Pesticide 0.43ug/L, Phenoxy herbicides 0.05ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.1ug/L

05ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.1ug/L

Wahgunyah: Murray River at tap at inlet to treatment plant

8/11/12: Atrazine 0.01ug/L

25/7/13: Atrazine 0.03ug/L

25/7/13: Terbutryn 0.01ug/L

24/10/13: MCPA 0.01ug/L

30/10/14: Atrazine 0.01ug/L

27/10/16: Simazine 0.04ug/L

2020/21 (Wahgunyah): Phenoxy herbicides 0.02ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.03ug/L

2021/22 (Wahgunyah): Organophospate Pesticide 0.43ug/L, Phenoxy herbicides 0.05ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.1ug/L

2013/22: Oxley (Victoria). King River Offtake. Pesticides: MCPA, 2,6-D, Triclopyr

King River at Oxley Offtake

12/6/13: MCPA 0.07ug/L

23/4/14: 2,6-D 0.01ug/L

28/4/15: Triclopyr 0.04ug/L

27/1/16: Triclopyr 0.03

2021/22: Phenoxy Herbicides 0.49ug/L, Triazine or Triazineone Herbicides 0.07ug/L

King River at Oxley Offtake

12/6/13: MCPA 0.07ug/L

23/4/14: 2,6-D 0.01ug/L

28/4/15: Triclopyr 0.04ug/L

27/1/16: Triclopyr 0.03

2021/22: Phenoxy Herbicides 0.49ug/L, Triazine or Triazineone Herbicides 0.07ug/L

2018/22: Moyhu Drinking Water Supply (Victoria)

Moyhu (Victoria) Drinking Water Supply

2018/19: Phenoxy herbicides 0.02ug/L, Triazine & Triazineone Herbicides 0.02ug/L

2019/20: Phenoxy herbicides 0.04ug/L, Sulfonylurea herbicides 0.02ug/L

2020/21: Phenoxy Herbicides 0.06ug/L, Triazine & Triazineone Herbicides 0.06ug/L

2021/22: Carbamate Pesticides 0.06ug/L, Phenoxy Herbicides 0.01ug/L, Triazine & Triazineone Herbicides 0.03ug/L

 

Moyhu (Victoria) Drinking Water Supply

2018/19: Phenoxy herbicides 0.02ug/L, Triazine & Triazineone Herbicides 0.02ug/L

2019/20: Phenoxy herbicides 0.04ug/L, Sulfonylurea herbicides 0.02ug/L

2020/21: Phenoxy Herbicides 0.06ug/L, Triazine & Triazineone Herbicides 0.06ug/L

2021/22: Carbamate Pesticides 0.06ug/L, Phenoxy Herbicides 0.01ug/L, Triazine & Triazineone Herbicides 0.03ug/L

2018/22: Dartmouth drinking water supply – Carbamate + Triazine Pesticides

Dartmouth Drinking Water Supply

2018/19: Phenoxy herbicides 0.02ug/L

2019/20: Phenoxy herbicides 0.03ug/L

2020/21: Phenoxy herbicides 0.11ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone Herbicides 0.03ug/L

2021/22: Carbamate Pesticides 0.01ug/L

Dartmouth Drinking Water Supply

2018/19: Phenoxy herbicides 0.02ug/L

2019/20: Phenoxy herbicides 0.03ug/L

2020/21: Phenoxy herbicides 0.11ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone Herbicides 0.03ug/L

2021/22: Carbamate Pesticides 0.01ug/L

2016/22: Corryong Drinking Water. Pesticides: Benomyl, Terbufos

Corryong WTP raw water tap

24/10/16: Corryong WTP raw water tap Benomyl 0.01ug/L

24/10/16: Corryong WTP raw water tap Terbufos 0.02ug/L

2021/22 Corryong Phenoxy Herbicides (most likely 2,4-D or MCPA) 0.02ug/L

Corryong WTP raw water tap

24/10/16: Corryong WTP raw water tap Benomyl 0.01ug/L

24/10/16: Corryong WTP raw water tap Terbufos 0.02ug/L

2021/22 Corryong Phenoxy Herbicides (most likely 2,4-D or MCPA) 0.02ug/L

2012/22: Lake Hume at Bethanga Bridge, Bellbridge. Pesticides: MCPA, Simazine, Atrazine

Lake Hume at Bethanga Bridge, Bellibridge

8/11/12: MCPA 0.01ug/L

14/10/15: MCPA 0.01ug/L

12/10/16: Atrazine 0.01ug/L

12/10/16: Simazine 0.05ug/L

12/10/16: Terbufos 0.01ug/L

2018/19: Triazine & Triazinone Herbicides 0.01ug/L

2019/20: Phenoxy Herbicides (most likely 2,4-D or MCPA) 0.02ug/L, Sulfonylurea Herbicides 0.03ug/L, Triazine & Triazinone Herbicides 0.01ug/L

2020/21: Phenoxy Herbicides (most likely 2,4-D or MCPA) 0.02ug/L, Triazine & Triazinone Herbicides 0.06ug/L

2021/22: Phenoxy Herbicides (most likely 2,4-D or MCPA) 0.04ug/L, Triazine & Triazinone Herbicides 0.05ug/L

 

Lake Hume at Bethanga Bridge, Bellibridge

8/11/12: MCPA 0.01ug/L

14/10/15: MCPA 0.01ug/L

12/10/16: Atrazine 0.01ug/L

12/10/16: Simazine 0.05ug/L

12/10/16: Terbufos 0.01ug/L

2018/19: Triazine & Triazinone Herbicides 0.01ug/L

2019/20: Phenoxy Herbicides (most likely 2,4-D or MCPA) 0.02ug/L, Sulfonylurea Herbicides 0.03ug/L, Triazine & Triazinone Herbicides 0.01ug/L

2020/21: Phenoxy Herbicides (most likely 2,4-D or MCPA) 0.02ug/L, Triazine & Triazinone Herbicides 0.06ug/L

2021/22: Phenoxy Herbicides (most likely 2,4-D or MCPA) 0.04ug/L, Triazine & Triazinone Herbicides 0.05ug/L

2012-22: Reserve Basin at Inlet to Beechworth. Pesticides: Benomyl, 2,6-D, Terbufos

Beechworth Drinking Water Supply

Reserve Basin at Inlet to Beechworth

25/9/12: Benomyl 0.03ug/L

23/4/14: 2,6-D 0.01ug/L

25/10/16: Terbufos 0.01ug/L

2018/19: (Beechworth): Triazine and Triazinone Herbicides 0.04ug/L

2019/20: (Beechworth): Carbamates 0.01ug/L, Triazine and Triazinone Herbicides 0.03ug/L

2020/21: (Beechworth): Carbamates 0.01ug/L, Phenoxy Herbicides 0.02ug/L, Triazine and Triazinone Herbicides 0.03ug/L

2021/22 (Beechworth): Carbamates 0.01ug/L, Phenoxy Herbicides 0.02ug/L, Triazine and Triazinone Herbicides 0.01ug/L

 

Beechworth Drinking Water Supply

Reserve Basin at Inlet to Beechworth

25/9/12: Benomyl 0.03ug/L

23/4/14: 2,6-D 0.01ug/L

25/10/16: Terbufos 0.01ug/L

2018/19: (Beechworth): Triazine and Triazinone Herbicides 0.04ug/L

2019/20: (Beechworth): Carbamates 0.01ug/L, Triazine and Triazinone Herbicides 0.03ug/L

2020/21: (Beechworth): Carbamates 0.01ug/L, Phenoxy Herbicides 0.02ug/L, Triazine and Triazinone Herbicides 0.03ug/L

2021/22 (Beechworth): Carbamates 0.01ug/L, Phenoxy Herbicides 0.02ug/L, Triazine and Triazinone Herbicides 0.01ug/L

2018/23: Myrtleford (Victoria) Water Supply. Pesticides: MCPA?, 2,4-D?

Myrtleford (Victoria) Drinking Water Supply

2018/19: Myrtleford Drinking Water Supply. Phenoxy Herbicides (probably 2,4-D or MCPA) 0.04ug/L

2019/20: Myrtleford Drinking Water Supply. Carbamates 0.01ug/L, Sulfonylurea herbicides 0.03ug/L

2020/21: Myrtleford Drinking Water Supply. Phenoxy Herbicides (probably 2,4-D or MCPA) 0.48ug/L

2021/22: Myrtleford Drinking Water Supply. Phenoxy Herbicides (probably 2,4-D or MCPA) 0.03ug/L

2022/23: Myrtleford Drinking Water Supply. Phenolic Compounds  0.14ug/L

 

Myrtleford (Victoria) Drinking Water Supply

2018/19: Myrtleford Drinking Water Supply. Phenoxy Herbicides (probably 2,4-D or MCPA) 0.04ug/L

2019/20: Myrtleford Drinking Water Supply. Carbamates 0.01ug/L, Sulfonylurea herbicides 0.03ug/L

2020/21: Myrtleford Drinking Water Supply. Phenoxy Herbicides (probably 2,4-D or MCPA) 0.48ug/L

2021/22: Myrtleford Drinking Water Supply. Phenoxy Herbicides (probably 2,4-D or MCPA) 0.03ug/L

2022/23: Myrtleford Drinking Water Supply. Phenolic Compounds  0.14ug/L

 

2012/23: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah. Hexazinone, 2,4-D?, MCPA?

2012/16 Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah

7/11/12: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.03ug/L

4/6/13: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.03ug/L

30/7/13: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.02ug/L

21/1/14: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.04ug/L

29/7/14: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.02ug/L

28/1/15: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.04ug/L

29/7/15: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.02ug/L

26/1/16: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.03ug/L

29/7/16: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.02ug/L

2018/19: Yackandandah, Drinking Water Supply Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.03ug/L

2019/20: Yackandandah, Drinking Water Supply Sulfonylurea herbicides 0.04ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.03ug/L

2020/21: Yackandandah, Drinking Water Supply Phenoxy herbicides 0.17ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.03ug/L

2021/22: Yackandandah, Drinking Water Supply Phenoxy herbicides 0.03ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.03ug/L

2022/23: Yackandandah, Drinking Water Supply Phenolic Compounds 0.03ug/L

 

2012/16 Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah

7/11/12: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.03ug/L

4/6/13: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.03ug/L

30/7/13: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.02ug/L

21/1/14: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.04ug/L

29/7/14: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.02ug/L

28/1/15: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.04ug/L

29/7/15: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.02ug/L

26/1/16: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.03ug/L

29/7/16: Nine Mile Creek, Yackandandah, Hexazinone 0.02ug/L

2018/19: Yackandandah, Drinking Water Supply Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.03ug/L

2019/20: Yackandandah, Drinking Water Supply Sulfonylurea herbicides 0.04ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.03ug/L

2020/21: Yackandandah, Drinking Water Supply Phenoxy herbicides 0.17ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.03ug/L

2021/22: Yackandandah, Drinking Water Supply Phenoxy herbicides 0.03ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone herbicides 0.03ug/L

2022/23: Yackandandah, Drinking Water Supply Phenolic Compounds 0.03ug/L

2013-2019/23: Walwa (Victoria) Murray River. 2,4-D, Atrazine, MCPA, Triclopyr

Walwa Drinking Water Supply (Murray River)

3/6/13: 2,4-D 0.01ug/L

3/6/13: Atrazine 0.02ug/L

3/6/13: MCPA 0.02ug/L

3/6/13: Triclopyr 0.03ug/L

North East Water FoI

2019/20: Phenoxy herbicides 0.02ug/L

2021/22: Phenoxy herbicides 0.13ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone Herbicides 0.04ug/L

2022/23: Phenolic compounds 0.12ug/L

 

h East Water Drinking Water Quality Report 2022/23

Walwa Drinking Water Supply (Murray River)

3/6/13: 2,4-D 0.01ug/L

3/6/13: Atrazine 0.02ug/L

3/6/13: MCPA 0.02ug/L

3/6/13: Triclopyr 0.03ug/L

North East Water FoI

2019/20: Phenoxy herbicides 0.02ug/L

2021/22: Phenoxy herbicides 0.13ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone Herbicides 0.04ug/L

2022/23: Phenolic compounds 0.12ug/L

 

2013 + 2019/23: Tallangatta Drinking Water Supply. Pesticides: MCPA + 2,4-D

Tallangatta Drinking Water Supply

11/6/13: 2,4-D 0.01ug/L

11/6/13: MCPA 0.01ug/L

24/7/13: MCPA 0.02ug/L

2019/20: Sulonylurea herbicides 0.03ug/L

2020/21: Phenoxy herbicides 0.02ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone (most likely Atrazine, Simazine or Hexazinone) 0.03ug/L

2021/22: Phenoxy herbicides 0.06ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone (most likely Atrazine, Simazine or Hexazinone) 0.02ug/L

2022/23: Phenolic compounds 0.14ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone (most likely Atrazine, Simazine or Hexazinone) 0.1ug/L

 

 

Tallangatta Drinking Water Supply

11/6/13: 2,4-D 0.01ug/L

11/6/13: MCPA 0.01ug/L

24/7/13: MCPA 0.02ug/L

2019/20: Sulonylurea herbicides 0.03ug/L

2020/21: Phenoxy herbicides 0.02ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone (most likely Atrazine, Simazine or Hexazinone) 0.03ug/L

2021/22: Phenoxy herbicides 0.06ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone (most likely Atrazine, Simazine or Hexazinone) 0.02ug/L

2022/23: Phenolic compounds 0.14ug/L, Triazine and Triazineone (most likely Atrazine, Simazine or Hexazinone) 0.1ug/L

 

2018/23: Bright Drinking Water Supply. MCPA or 2,4-D

Bright Drinking Water Supply

2018/19: Phenoxy Herbicides (most likely MCPA or 2,4-D) 0.52ug/L

2019/20: Carbamates 0.01ug/L, Phenoxy herbicides 0.7ug/L, Sulfonylurea herbicides 0.03ug/L, Triazines & Triazineones 0.01ug/L

2020/21: Phenoxy Herbicides (most likely MCPA or 2,4-D) 0.24ug/L

2021/22: Phenoxy Herbicides (most likely MCPA or 2,4-D) 0.06ug/L

2022/23: Phenolic compounds 0.12ug/L

North East Water Drinking Water Quality Reports

/23

Bright Drinking Water Supply

2018/19: Phenoxy Herbicides (most likely MCPA or 2,4-D) 0.52ug/L

2019/20: Carbamates 0.01ug/L, Phenoxy herbicides 0.7ug/L, Sulfonylurea herbicides 0.03ug/L, Triazines & Triazineones 0.01ug/L

2020/21: Phenoxy Herbicides (most likely MCPA or 2,4-D) 0.24ug/L

2021/22: Phenoxy Herbicides (most likely MCPA or 2,4-D) 0.06ug/L

2022/23: Phenolic compounds 0.12ug/L

North East Water Drinking Water Quality Reports

2018: Herrick (Tasmania). Metsulfuron Methyl, Sulfometuron Methyl

Herrick Reservoir (Tasmania)

29/5/18: Herrick Reservoir - Supply. Metsulfuron Methyl 2ug/L

29/5/18: Herrick Reservoir - Supply. Sulfometuron Methyl 4ug/L

11/6/18: Herrick Reservoir - Supply. Metsulfuron Methyl 1ug/L

11/6/18: Herrick Reservoir- Supply. Sulfometuron Methyl 2ug/L

11/6/18: 11 Gladstone Road, Herrick - Supply. Sulfometuron Methyl 2ug/L

RTI Application

 

11/6/18: Herrick Reservoir. Sulfometuron Methyl 2ug/L

Herrick Reservoir (Tasmania)

29/5/18: Herrick Reservoir – Supply. Metsulfuron Methyl 2ug/L

29/5/18: Herrick Reservoir – Supply. Sulfometuron Methyl 4ug/L

11/6/18: Herrick Reservoir – Supply. Metsulfuron Methyl 1ug/L

11/6/18: Herrick Reservoir- Supply. Sulfometuron Methyl 2ug/L

11/6/18: 11 Gladstone Road, Herrick – Supply. Sulfometuron Methyl 2ug/L

RTI Application

29/5/18: Herrick – river offtake (Tasmania). 2,4-D, Sulfometuron Methyl

Herrick (Tasmania)

29/5/18: Raw Water Offtake Tasman Highway Herrick. 2,4-D 0.09ug/L

29/5/18: Raw Water Offtake Tasman Highway Herrick. Sulfometuron Methyl 2ug/L

RTI Application

Herrick (Tasmania)

29/5/18: Raw Water Offtake Tasman Highway Herrick. 2,4-D 0.09ug/L

29/5/18: Raw Water Offtake Tasman Highway Herrick. Sulfometuron Methyl 2ug/L

RTI Application

2018: Mathinna (Tasmania). Metsulfuron Methyl, Sulfometuron Methyl

Mathinna (Tasmania)

8/5/18: Intake, South Esk River, Mathinna. Metsulfuron Methyl 2ug/L

8/5/18: Intake, South Esk River, Mathinna. Sulfometuron Methyl 3ug/L

5/6/18: Intake, South Esk River, Mathinna. Metsulfuron Methyl 2ug/L

5/6/18: Intake, South Esk River, Mathinna. Sulfometuron Methyl 32ug/L

Mathinna (Tasmania)

8/5/18: Intake, South Esk River, Mathinna. Metsulfuron Methyl 2ug/L

8/5/18: Intake, South Esk River, Mathinna. Sulfometuron Methyl 3ug/L

5/6/18: Intake, South Esk River, Mathinna. Metsulfuron Methyl 2ug/L

5/6/18: Intake, South Esk River, Mathinna. Sulfometuron Methyl 32ug/L

8/5/18: Scamander (Tasmania). Dicamba, MCPA, Metsulfuron Methyl, Sulfometuron Methyl

Scamander (Tasmania)

8/5/18: Scamander River Raw Intake. Dicamba 0.3ug/L

8/5/18: Scamander River Raw Intake. MCPA 0.07ug/L

8/5/18: Scamander River Raw Intake. Metsulfuron Methyl 5ug/L

8/5/18: Scamander River Raw Intake. Sulfometuron Methyl 2ug/L

RTI Information

Scamander (Tasmania)

8/5/18: Scamander River Raw Intake. Dicamba 0.3ug/L

8/5/18: Scamander River Raw Intake. MCPA 0.07ug/L

8/5/18: Scamander River Raw Intake. Metsulfuron Methyl 5ug/L

8/5/18: Scamander River Raw Intake. Sulfometuron Methyl 2ug/L

RTI Information

2018: Cornwall (Tasmania). Metsulfuron Methyl, Sulfometuron Methyl, Dicamba, MCPA

Cornwall (Tasmania)

8/5/18: Unnamed watercourse. Metsulfuron Methyl 12ug/L

8/5/18: Unnamed watercourse. Sulfomethuron Methyl 19ug/L

8/5/18: Intake, Cornwall Fanshaft. Dicamba 0.6ug/L

8/5/18: Intake, Cornwall Fanshaft. MCPA 0.05ug/L

8/5/18: Intake, Cornwall Fanshaft. Metsulfuron Methyl 2ug/L

8/5/18: Intake, Cornwall Fanshaft. Sulfometuron Methyl  11ug/L

8/5/18: Intake, Cornwall Fanshaft. MCPA 0.07ug/L

8/5/18: Intake, Cornwall Fanshaft. Sulfometuron Methyl  9ug/L

RTI Application

Cornwall (Tasmania)

8/5/18: Unnamed watercourse. Metsulfuron Methyl 12ug/L

8/5/18: Unnamed watercourse. Sulfomethuron Methyl 19ug/L

8/5/18: Intake, Cornwall Fanshaft. Dicamba 0.6ug/L

8/5/18: Intake, Cornwall Fanshaft. MCPA 0.05ug/L

8/5/18: Intake, Cornwall Fanshaft. Metsulfuron Methyl 2ug/L

8/5/18: Intake, Cornwall Fanshaft. Sulfometuron Methyl  11ug/L

8/5/18: Intake, Cornwall Fanshaft. MCPA 0.07ug/L

8/5/18: Intake, Cornwall Fanshaft. Sulfometuron Methyl  9ug/L

RTI Application

2018: Wayatinah (Tasmania). 2,4-D, Dicamba, Metsulfuron Methyl, Sulfometuron Methyl

Wayatinah (Tasmania)

30/4/18: Wayatinah (Tasmania) 2,4-D 0.12ug/L

30/4/18: Wayatinah (Tasmania) Dicamba 0.2ug/L

30/4/18 Wayatinah (Tasmania) Metsulfuron Methyl 5ug/L

30/4/18 Wayatinah (Tasmania) Sulfometuron Methyl 6ug/L

RTI application

Wayatinah (Tasmania)

30/4/18: Wayatinah (Tasmania) 2,4-D 0.12ug/L

30/4/18: Wayatinah (Tasmania) Dicamba 0.2ug/L

30/4/18 Wayatinah (Tasmania) Metsulfuron Methyl 5ug/L

30/4/18 Wayatinah (Tasmania) Sulfometuron Methyl 6ug/L

RTI application

2017: Curries River Tasmania. Chlorpyrifos, Metsulfuron Methyl, Sulfometuron Methyl

Curries River  - Tasmania

10/8/17: Curries River Raw Sample Point Chlorpyrifos 1ug/L

8/5/18: Curries River Raw Sample Point Metsulfuron Methyl 1ug/L

8/5/18: Curries River Raw Sample Point Sulfometuron Methyl 3ug/L

Curries River – Tasmania

10/8/17: Curries River Raw Sample Point Chlorpyrifos 1ug/L

8/5/18: Curries River Raw Sample Point Metsulfuron Methyl 1ug/L

8/5/18: Curries River Raw Sample Point Sulfometuron Methyl 3ug/L

2016: Yolla (Tasmania). MCPA, Metsulfuron Methyl

Yolla (Tasmania) - Dowling Creek

15/3/16: Yolla (Dowling Creek) MCPA 0.12ug/L

15/3/16: Yolla (Dowling Creek) Metsulfuron Methyl 0.07ug/L

5/4/16: Yolla (Dowling Creek) MCPA 0.03ug/L

5/4/16: Yolla (Dowling Creek) Metsulfuron Methyl 0.12ug/L

19/4/16: Yolla (Dowling Creek) MCPA 0.03ug/L

19/4/16: Yolla (Dowling Creek) Metsulfuron Methyl 0.09ug/L

4/5/16: Yolla (Dowling Creek) Metsulfuron Methyl 0.04ug/L

31/5/16: Yolla (Dowling Creek) Metsulfuron Methyl 0.02ug/L

Yolla (Tasmania) – Dowling Creek

15/3/16: Yolla (Dowling Creek) MCPA 0.12ug/L

15/3/16: Yolla (Dowling Creek) Metsulfuron Methyl 0.07ug/L

5/4/16: Yolla (Dowling Creek) MCPA 0.03ug/L

5/4/16: Yolla (Dowling Creek) Metsulfuron Methyl 0.12ug/L

19/4/16: Yolla (Dowling Creek) MCPA 0.03ug/L

19/4/16: Yolla (Dowling Creek) Metsulfuron Methyl 0.09ug/L

4/5/16: Yolla (Dowling Creek) Metsulfuron Methyl 0.04ug/L

31/5/16: Yolla (Dowling Creek) Metsulfuron Methyl 0.02ug/L

2016: Lady Barron (Tasmania). MCPA, Clopyralid, Dicamba, Metsulfuron Methyl, Sulfometuron Methyl, Simazine

Lady Barron (Tasmania)

2/3/16: Police Station (supply) MCPA 0.22ug/L

2/3/16: Bore Pump Station (raw) MCPA 11ug/L

7/5/18: Bore Pump Station (raw) Dicamba 0.7ug/L

7/5/18: Bore Pump Station (raw) Metsulfuron Methyl 2ug/L

7/5/18: Bore Pump Station (raw) Sulfometuron Methyl 4ug/L

Lady Barron (Bores)

14/12/16: Bore 1 Clopyralid 180ug/L

14/12/16: Bore 2 Clopyralid 74ug/L

14/12/16: Bore 3 Clopyralid 35ug/L

14/12/16: Bore 4 Clopyralid 55ug/L

14/12/16: Bore 5 Clopyralid 22ug/L

Lady Barron (Tasmania)

2/3/16: Police Station (supply) MCPA 0.22ug/L

2/3/16: Bore Pump Station (raw) MCPA 11ug/L

7/5/18: Bore Pump Station (raw) Dicamba 0.7ug/L

7/5/18: Bore Pump Station (raw) Metsulfuron Methyl 2ug/L

7/5/18: Bore Pump Station (raw) Sulfometuron Methyl 4ug/L

Lady Barron (Bores)

14/12/16: Bore 1 Clopyralid 180ug/L

14/12/16: Bore 2 Clopyralid 74ug/L

14/12/16: Bore 3 Clopyralid 35ug/L

14/12/16: Bore 4 Clopyralid 55ug/L

14/12/16: Bore 5 Clopyralid 22ug/L

2023 September: Crayfish Kill at Hazelbrook (NSW)

EPA Identifies Pollutant Behind Major Crayfish Kill

The NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) has identified the pollutant which caused a major crayfish kill in a tributary of Hazelbrook Creek in the Blue Mountains last month. 

According to the EPA media statement, released today, initial lab testing has found the insecticide Bifenthrin in water, sediment, and crayfish samples collected from the impacted creek.

"Bifenthrin is commonly used for general pest control, such as for termites, spiders, ants, and cockroaches and is highly toxic to crayfish and other aquatic organisms," the EPA statement said.

"The EPA investigation into the source of the Bifenthrin pollution is being finalised.

"Herbicides used by Blue Mountains City Council to control weeds, such as Glyphosate, have been ruled out as the cause of the crayfish kill and Council is not a subject of the ongoing investigation."

Blue Mountains City Council Mayor Cr Mark Greenhill said "I know many of our staff and volunteers were really hurt by fake claims on social media suggesting our people may have somehow been responsible.

"The opposite is true. Apart from assisting the regulator in the current case, our people dedicate themselves to keeping our waterways clean and protecting the wildlife within.

"To those who think it is a source of personal aggrandisement to suggest possible blame without any evidence, this should be both an embarrassment and a salient warning.

"I await the outcome of the EPA's investigation."

After hundreds of dead Giant Spiny Crayfish were discovered in a tributary of Hazelbrook Creek by a tour guide in August, Council worked closely with the EPA on an investigation into the incident.

The Giant Spiny Crayfish, a local native species, face many dangers from runoff, pesticides, habitat destruction and illegal use of traps in Blue Mountains swamps and waterways.

Council will continue to monitor the recovery of freshwater crayfish and other aquatic macroinvertebrates at Hazelbrook Creek, as part of ongoing waterway health sampling programs.

EPA investigating insecticide as possible cause of crayfish kill at Hazelbrook

September 12 2023: https://www.bluemountainsgazette.com.au/story/8337913/epa-investigates-insecticide-as-possible-cause-of-crayfish-kill/

The Environment Protection Authority (EPA) believes insecticide pollution may be the cause of a crayfish kill at Hazelbrook.

"The EPA has narrowed its investigation to the immediate vicinity of the Horseshoe Falls catchment and believe the impact on crayfish may have been caused by insecticide pollution," they said in a statement on September 4, adding that test results are still being finalised.

Blue Mountains mayor Mark Greenhill has ruled out any actions by council staff or bushcare volunteers contributing to the incident following uninformed speculation on social media.

 

"I can confirm that no actions by BMCC (Blue Mountains City Council) staff, or our dedicated bushcare volunteers, contributed to the water pollution event that precipitated the crayfish deaths in the Horseshoe Falls catchment," he said on September 6.

"Council and its people had absolutely nothing to do with this event and some recent commentary to the contrary on social media is false, irresponsible and unfair.

"Council staff were devastated by the discovery, and have been working to improve catchment health and water quality for over two decades across the city."

The EPA is continuing its investigation into the crayfish kill in a tributary of Hazelbrook Creek on Wednesday, August 23.

A tour guide discovered the dead Giant Spiny Crayfish. A later inspection by council staff found up to 1000 of the crayfish either dead or dying, extending at least 600m downstream from Oaklands Road/Hall Parade at Hazelbrook.

 

EPA Identifies Pollutant Behind Major Crayfish Kill

The NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) has identified the pollutant which caused a major crayfish kill in a tributary of Hazelbrook Creek in the Blue Mountains last month.

According to the EPA media statement, released today, initial lab testing has found the insecticide Bifenthrin in water, sediment, and crayfish samples collected from the impacted creek.

“Bifenthrin is commonly used for general pest control, such as for termites, spiders, ants, and cockroaches and is highly toxic to crayfish and other aquatic organisms,” the EPA statement said.

“The EPA investigation into the source of the Bifenthrin pollution is being finalised.

“Herbicides used by Blue Mountains City Council to control weeds, such as Glyphosate, have been ruled out as the cause of the crayfish kill and Council is not a subject of the ongoing investigation.”

Blue Mountains City Council Mayor Cr Mark Greenhill said “I know many of our staff and volunteers were really hurt by fake claims on social media suggesting our people may have somehow been responsible.

“The opposite is true. Apart from assisting the regulator in the current case, our people dedicate themselves to keeping our waterways clean and protecting the wildlife within.

“To those who think it is a source of personal aggrandisement to suggest possible blame without any evidence, this should be both an embarrassment and a salient warning.

“I await the outcome of the EPA’s investigation.”

After hundreds of dead Giant Spiny Crayfish were discovered in a tributary of Hazelbrook Creek by a tour guide in August, Council worked closely with the EPA on an investigation into the incident.

The Giant Spiny Crayfish, a local native species, face many dangers from runoff, pesticides, habitat destruction and illegal use of traps in Blue Mountains swamps and waterways.

Council will continue to monitor the recovery of freshwater crayfish and other aquatic macroinvertebrates at Hazelbrook Creek, as part of ongoing waterway health sampling programs.

EPA investigating insecticide as possible cause of crayfish kill at Hazelbrook

September 12 2023: https://www.bluemountainsgazette.com.au/story/8337913/epa-investigates-insecticide-as-possible-cause-of-crayfish-kill/

The Environment Protection Authority (EPA) believes insecticide pollution may be the cause of a crayfish kill at Hazelbrook.

“The EPA has narrowed its investigation to the immediate vicinity of the Horseshoe Falls catchment and believe the impact on crayfish may have been caused by insecticide pollution,” they said in a statement on September 4, adding that test results are still being finalised.

Blue Mountains mayor Mark Greenhill has ruled out any actions by council staff or bushcare volunteers contributing to the incident following uninformed speculation on social media.

“I can confirm that no actions by BMCC (Blue Mountains City Council) staff, or our dedicated bushcare volunteers, contributed to the water pollution event that precipitated the crayfish deaths in the Horseshoe Falls catchment,” he said on September 6.

“Council and its people had absolutely nothing to do with this event and some recent commentary to the contrary on social media is false, irresponsible and unfair.

“Council staff were devastated by the discovery, and have been working to improve catchment health and water quality for over two decades across the city.”

The EPA is continuing its investigation into the crayfish kill in a tributary of Hazelbrook Creek on Wednesday, August 23.

A tour guide discovered the dead Giant Spiny Crayfish. A later inspection by council staff found up to 1000 of the crayfish either dead or dying, extending at least 600m downstream from Oaklands Road/Hall Parade at Hazelbrook.

Blue Mountains City Council later won an award in 2019 for its efforts to protect Wentworth Falls Lake and Jamison Creek from stormwater pollution and other threats posed by urban runoff.

2019: Double Crossing Creek, site 6, Coffs Harbour NSW. Pesticides: Multiple

2019: Double Crossing Creek - Coffs Harbour (NSW)

2019 Summer Autumn Site 6

Imidacloprid 0.02ug/L, Dimethoate 0.02ug/L, Methomyl 0.02ug/L, Terbutyrn 0.1ug/L

Investigating pesticide and heavy metal distribution from water and sediments near expanding horticultural activities in the Coffs Harbour NSW Region.

Melanie Taylor, Dylan Laicher-Edwards, Shane A. White, Rebecca Woodrow, Tiago Passos, Christian J. Sanders 2022. Final Report Coffs Harbour City Council Environmental Levy Program. Southern Cross University National Marine Science Centre

2019: Double Crossing Creek – Coffs Harbour (NSW)

2019 Summer Autumn Site 6

Imidacloprid 0.02ug/L, Dimethoate 0.02ug/L, Methomyl 0.02ug/L, Terbutyrn 0.1ug/L

Investigating pesticide and heavy metal distribution from water and sediments near expanding horticultural activities in the Coffs Harbour NSW Region.

Melanie Taylor, Dylan Laicher-Edwards, Shane A. White, Rebecca Woodrow, Tiago Passos, Christian J. Sanders 2022. Final Report Coffs Harbour City Council Environmental Levy Program. Southern Cross University National Marine Science Centre

2019: Double Crossing Creek site 5, Coffs Harbour (NSW). Pesticides: Multiple

2019: Double Crossing Creek - Coffs Harbour (NSW)

2019 Summer Autumn Site 5

Imidacloprid 0.06ug/L, Dimethoate 0.02ug/L, Methomyl 0.02ug/L, Terbuthylazine 0.01ug/L, Terbutyrn 0.19ug/L

Investigating pesticide and heavy metal distribution from water and sediments near expanding horticultural activities in the Coffs Harbour NSW Region.

Melanie Taylor, Dylan Laicher-Edwards, Shane A. White, Rebecca Woodrow, Tiago Passos, Christian J. Sanders 2022. Final Report Coffs Harbour City Council Environmental Levy Program. Southern Cross University National Marine Science Centre

2019: Double Crossing Creek – Coffs Harbour (NSW)

2019 Summer Autumn Site 5

Imidacloprid 0.06ug/L, Dimethoate 0.02ug/L, Methomyl 0.02ug/L, Terbuthylazine 0.01ug/L, Terbutyrn 0.19ug/L

Investigating pesticide and heavy metal distribution from water and sediments near expanding horticultural activities in the Coffs Harbour NSW Region.

Melanie Taylor, Dylan Laicher-Edwards, Shane A. White, Rebecca Woodrow, Tiago Passos, Christian J. Sanders 2022. Final Report Coffs Harbour City Council Environmental Levy Program. Southern Cross University National Marine Science Centre

2019: Double Crossing Creek Site 4, Coffs Harbour (NSW). Pesticides: Dimethoate, Methomyl

2019: Double Crossing Creek - Coffs Harbour (NSW)

2019 Summer Autumn Site 4

Dimethoate 0.02ug/L, Methomyl 0.02ug/L

Investigating pesticide and heavy metal distribution from water and sediments near expanding horticultural activities in the Coffs Harbour NSW Region.

Melanie Taylor, Dylan Laicher-Edwards, Shane A. White, Rebecca Woodrow, Tiago Passos, Christian J. Sanders 2022. Final Report Coffs Harbour City Council Environmental Levy Program. Southern Cross University National Marine Science Centre

2019: Double Crossing Creek – Coffs Harbour (NSW)

2019 Summer Autumn Site 4

Dimethoate 0.02ug/L, Methomyl 0.02ug/L

Investigating pesticide and heavy metal distribution from water and sediments near expanding horticultural activities in the Coffs Harbour NSW Region.

Melanie Taylor, Dylan Laicher-Edwards, Shane A. White, Rebecca Woodrow, Tiago Passos, Christian J. Sanders 2022. Final Report Coffs Harbour City Council Environmental Levy Program. Southern Cross University National Marine Science Centre

2019: Double Crossing Creek Site 3, Coffs Harbour (NSW). Pesticides: Imidacloprid, Methomyl, Terbuthylazine

2019: Double Crossing Creek - Coffs Harbour (NSW)

2019 Summer Autumn Site 3

Imidacloprid 0.24ug/L, Methomyl 0.08ug/L, Terbuthylazine 0.02ug/L

Investigating pesticide and heavy metal distribution from water and sediments near expanding horticultural activities in the Coffs Harbour NSW Region.

Melanie Taylor, Dylan Laicher-Edwards, Shane A. White, Rebecca Woodrow, Tiago Passos, Christian J. Sanders 2022. Final Report Coffs Harbour City Council Environmental Levy Program. Southern Cross University National Marine Science Centre

2019: Double Crossing Creek – Coffs Harbour (NSW)

2019 Summer Autumn Site 3

Imidacloprid 0.24ug/L, Methomyl 0.08ug/L, Terbuthylazine 0.02ug/L

Investigating pesticide and heavy metal distribution from water and sediments near expanding horticultural activities in the Coffs Harbour NSW Region.

Melanie Taylor, Dylan Laicher-Edwards, Shane A. White, Rebecca Woodrow, Tiago Passos, Christian J. Sanders 2022. Final Report Coffs Harbour City Council Environmental Levy Program. Southern Cross University National Marine Science Centre

2019 Double Crossing Creek Site 2 , Coffs Harbour (NSW). Pesticides: Imidacloprid, Terbuthylazine

2019: Double Crossing Creek - Coffs Harbour (NSW)

2019 Summer Autumn Site 2

Imidacloprid 0.05ug/L, Terbuthylazine 0.03ug/L

Investigating pesticide and heavy metal distribution from water and sediments near expanding horticultural activities in the Coffs Harbour NSW Region.

Melanie Taylor, Dylan Laicher-Edwards, Shane A. White, Rebecca Woodrow, Tiago Passos, Christian J. Sanders 2022. Final Report Coffs Harbour City Council Environmental Levy Program. Southern Cross University National Marine Science Centre

2019: Double Crossing Creek – Coffs Harbour (NSW)

2019 Summer Autumn Site 2

Imidacloprid 0.05ug/L, Terbuthylazine 0.03ug/L

Investigating pesticide and heavy metal distribution from water and sediments near expanding horticultural activities in the Coffs Harbour NSW Region.

Melanie Taylor, Dylan Laicher-Edwards, Shane A. White, Rebecca Woodrow, Tiago Passos, Christian J. Sanders 2022. Final Report Coffs Harbour City Council Environmental Levy Program. Southern Cross University National Marine Science Centre

2019 Double Crossing Creek, Coffs Harbour. Pesticides: Multiple

2019: Double Crossing Creek - Coffs Harbour (NSW)

2019 Summer Autumn Site 1

Imidacloprid 294ug/L, Dimethoate 12.8ug/L, Methomyl 5.6ug/L, Pyrimethanil 0.09ug/L, Terbuthylazine 0.02ug/L, Terbutyrn 0.46ug/L, Triadimenol 1.5ug/L, Malathion 0.47ug/L.

Wet Season: Omethoate 0.12ug/L

Investigating pesticide and heavy metal distribution from water and sediments near expanding horticultural activities in the Coffs Harbour NSW Region.

Melanie Taylor, Dylan Laicher-Edwards, Shane A. White, Rebecca Woodrow, Tiago Passos, Christian J. Sanders 2022. Final Report Coffs Harbour City Council Environmental Levy Program. Southern Cross University National Marine Science Centre

2019: Double Crossing Creek – Coffs Harbour (NSW)

2019 Summer Autumn Site 1

Imidacloprid 294ug/L, Dimethoate 12.8ug/L, Methomyl 5.6ug/L, Pyrimethanil 0.09ug/L, Terbuthylazine 0.02ug/L, Terbutyrn 0.46ug/L, Triadimenol 1.5ug/L, Malathion 0.47ug/L.

Wet Season: Omethoate 0.12ug/L

Investigating pesticide and heavy metal distribution from water and sediments near expanding horticultural activities in the Coffs Harbour NSW Region.

Melanie Taylor, Dylan Laicher-Edwards, Shane A. White, Rebecca Woodrow, Tiago Passos, Christian J. Sanders 2022. Final Report Coffs Harbour City Council Environmental Levy Program. Southern Cross University National Marine Science Centre

2016/18: Lake Trevallyn, Tasmania. Atrazine, MCPA, Prometryn

Trevallyn Dam/Lake Trevallyn

17 May 2016: South Esk Trevallyn Dam MCPA 0.02ug/L*

11 August 2016: South Esk Trevallyn Dam MCPA 0.26ug/L

11 August 2016: South Esk Trevallyn Dam Prometryn 0.03ug/L

30 August 2016: South Esk Trevallyn Dam MCPA 0.11ug/L

8 September 2016: South Esk Trevallyn Dam MCPA 0.09ug/L

17 November 2016: South Esk Trevallyn Dam MCPA 0.09ug/L

TasWater Pesticide Data by system v4 2016/17

8/8/18: There was a detection of a pesticide (atrazine – 27 ug/L) above the ADWG health limit on 8 August  2018. This was the first detection of atrazine in Lake Trevallyn since sampling for pesticides began in  2015.
An error occurred with the laboratory notification process which resulted in this exceedance not  being highlighted, and therefore there was no immediate resample. However, there have been no  detections of atrazine in any samples since August 2018.

TasWater Annual Drinking Water Quality Report 2018-2019 Section A Summary

*RTI application

ater Quality Report 2018-2019 Section A Summary

eport 2018-2019 Section A Summary

Trevallyn Dam/Lake Trevallyn

17 May 2016: South Esk Trevallyn Dam MCPA 0.02ug/L*

11 August 2016: South Esk Trevallyn Dam MCPA 0.26ug/L

11 August 2016: South Esk Trevallyn Dam Prometryn 0.03ug/L

30 August 2016: South Esk Trevallyn Dam MCPA 0.11ug/L

8 September 2016: South Esk Trevallyn Dam MCPA 0.09ug/L

17 November 2016: South Esk Trevallyn Dam MCPA 0.09ug/L

TasWater Pesticide Data by system v4 2016/17

8/8/18: There was a detection of a pesticide (atrazine – 27 ug/L) above the ADWG health limit on 8 August  2018. This was the first detection of atrazine in Lake Trevallyn since sampling for pesticides began in  2015.
An error occurred with the laboratory notification process which resulted in this exceedance not  being highlighted, and therefore there was no immediate resample. However, there have been no  detections of atrazine in any samples since August 2018.

TasWater Annual Drinking Water Quality Report 2018-2019 Section A Summary

*RTI application

July 17 2023: No sign of Gouldian Finches in Ord Valley

Three years with no sign of endangered Gouldian finches in Ord Valley prompts environmentalists' concern

July 17 2023: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-17/gouldian-finches-disappear-in-ord-valley-but-thrive-elsewhere/102602092

When nearly 10,000 hectares of land was approved for clearing on the fertile soil of the Kimberley's Ord Valley, protecting an endangered population of tiny birds was a key government stipulation. 

Now, a little more than a decade on, there's no trace of any Gouldian finches in the habitat that was carved out as a refuge for them.

Western Australia's Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development's 2022–23 monitoring report shows no breeding activity recorded in any of the 137 artificial nest boxes installed to replace the finches' natural hollows lost to the clearing.

It marks the third consecutive year without a sign of the small, seed-eating birds in the 11,000-hectare Weaber Plain environmental buffer.

Jaru man and environmentalist Donny Imberlong hadn't seen the environmental buffer site for years. When he returned, he was disappointed.

"This habitat is slowly becoming sterile," he said.

He pointed to the range of introduced vines and shrubs that were dominating the native ground cover and the old trees that were losing their leaves, an indication of spray drift.

"It's evident that the country around here is becoming sick," Mr Imberlong said.

According to Gary Fitt, chief executive of Save the Gouldians, the story is different 100 kilometres north-west of Kununurra's Ord Valley, around Wyndham, where the volunteer group surveys the endangered species each year.

"Last year, we saw the biggest numbers of Gouldians that we'd seen since 2008," Dr Fitt said.

"So it's surprising that there don't appear to be any in that area now. That's disappointing to see."

Up and gone?

Dr Fitt said that the birds likely migrated to a new home where they could find more suitable conditions.

"Gouldians are a highly mobile finch," he said.

"They're likely responding to a combination of environmental factors."

Those factors could be poor fire management, overgrazing or a weak wet season, although the last two were unlikely given the region's recent strong summer rainfall and the lack of cattle within the protected area.

Head east about 200 kilometres to Bullo River Station, where wildlife photographer Col Roberts assured ABC Radio Darwin that Gouldian Finches could be found in the thousands.

"I did a count of about 10 waterholes there and counted over 2,000 Gouldians," Mr Roberts said.

He questioned the current nature of their decades-old endangered listing under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.

"They did suffer a decline [in numbers], but they are well and truly on the way back," he said.

Reworking attitudes towards conservation

The Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development said they would continue to monitor the nest boxes, including those that they moved in late 2022 to more desirable locations, flagging this as a potential explanation for the lack of nesting.

"Routine, ongoing buffer management measures include removal of any cattle that find their way into the buffer area, maintenance of fencing and firebreaks, weed control, and restriction of access to the buffer area," DPIRD said in a statement.

But for Donny Imberlong, this effort is treating the symptom, not the cause.

"It does seem like a lot of these conservation buffers are islands in the middle of exposed farmland which, if I was a tiny little finch, I wouldn't be game to fly across to," he said.

"All the farmland here is fragmenting the habitat corridors that allow the animals to move freely between the hill ranges and the connecting plains country."

Mr Imberlong believes the process of allocating land to environmental buffers, then later managing that land, needs to be reviewed.

"It's a very colonial way of looking at these conservation areas, that idea that you just lock up an area of land and let nature look after itself," he said.

"Removing humans altogether from the equation isn't right, especially here where humans have been part of the environment for such a long time."

Three years with no sign of endangered Gouldian finches in Ord Valley prompts environmentalists’ concern

July 17 2023: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-17/gouldian-finches-disappear-in-ord-valley-but-thrive-elsewhere/102602092

When nearly 10,000 hectares of land was approved for clearing on the fertile soil of the Kimberley’s Ord Valley, protecting an endangered population of tiny birds was a key government stipulation.

Now, a little more than a decade on, there’s no trace of any Gouldian finches in the habitat that was carved out as a refuge for them.

Western Australia’s Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development’s 2022–23 monitoring report shows no breeding activity recorded in any of the 137 artificial nest boxes installed to replace the finches’ natural hollows lost to the clearing.

It marks the third consecutive year without a sign of the small, seed-eating birds in the 11,000-hectare Weaber Plain environmental buffer.

Jaru man and environmentalist Donny Imberlong hadn’t seen the environmental buffer site for years. When he returned, he was disappointed.

“This habitat is slowly becoming sterile,” he said.

He pointed to the range of introduced vines and shrubs that were dominating the native ground cover and the old trees that were losing their leaves, an indication of spray drift.

“It’s evident that the country around here is becoming sick,” Mr Imberlong said.

According to Gary Fitt, chief executive of Save the Gouldians, the story is different 100 kilometres north-west of Kununurra’s Ord Valley, around Wyndham, where the volunteer group surveys the endangered species each year.

“Last year, we saw the biggest numbers of Gouldians that we’d seen since 2008,” Dr Fitt said.

“So it’s surprising that there don’t appear to be any in that area now. That’s disappointing to see.”

Up and gone?

Dr Fitt said that the birds likely migrated to a new home where they could find more suitable conditions.

“Gouldians are a highly mobile finch,” he said.

“They’re likely responding to a combination of environmental factors.”

Those factors could be poor fire management, overgrazing or a weak wet season, although the last two were unlikely given the region’s recent strong summer rainfall and the lack of cattle within the protected area.

Head east about 200 kilometres to Bullo River Station, where wildlife photographer Col Roberts assured ABC Radio Darwin that Gouldian Finches could be found in the thousands.

“I did a count of about 10 waterholes there and counted over 2,000 Gouldians,” Mr Roberts said.

He questioned the current nature of their decades-old endangered listing under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.

“They did suffer a decline [in numbers], but they are well and truly on the way back,” he said.

Reworking attitudes towards conservation

The Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development said they would continue to monitor the nest boxes, including those that they moved in late 2022 to more desirable locations, flagging this as a potential explanation for the lack of nesting.

“Routine, ongoing buffer management measures include removal of any cattle that find their way into the buffer area, maintenance of fencing and firebreaks, weed control, and restriction of access to the buffer area,” DPIRD said in a statement.

But for Donny Imberlong, this effort is treating the symptom, not the cause.

“It does seem like a lot of these conservation buffers are islands in the middle of exposed farmland which, if I was a tiny little finch, I wouldn’t be game to fly across to,” he said.

“All the farmland here is fragmenting the habitat corridors that allow the animals to move freely between the hill ranges and the connecting plains country.”

Mr Imberlong believes the process of allocating land to environmental buffers, then later managing that land, needs to be reviewed.

“It’s a very colonial way of looking at these conservation areas, that idea that you just lock up an area of land and let nature look after itself,” he said.

“Removing humans altogether from the equation isn’t right, especially here where humans have been part of the environment for such a long time.”

2013/2023: Coochin Creek at Mawsons Road (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Coochin Creek at Mawsons Road

2956 pesticide detections between Jan 2013 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 367 detections of Diuron between Jan 2013 and Feb 2023. 6.6ug/L (max 18/3/19). 0.7222ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 38 detections of 2,4-D between Oct 2014 and Feb 2022. 0.24ug/L (max 2/2/18). 0.0611ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 357 detections of Ametryn between Jan 2013 and Feb 2023. 2.2ug/L (max 9/10/18). 0.1283ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 350 detections of Atrazine between Jan 2013 and Feb 2023. 12ug/L (max 19/2/21). 0.7794ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 367 detections of Bromacil between Jan 2013 and Feb 2023. 12ug/L (max 18/1/20). 2.4389ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 175 detections of Chlorpyrifos between Jun 2016 and Oct 2022. 0.83ug/L (max 6/5/22). 0.0313ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: 153 detections of Diazinon between Jun 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.42ug/L (max 9/10/18). 0.0306ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 1 detection of Fluroxypur 1/1/22 0.05ug/L

Haloxyfop: 319 detections of Haloxyfop between Jan 2013 and Feb 2023. 3.9ug/L (max 16/3/19). 0.2139ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 315 detections of Hexazinone between Apr 2013 and Feb 2022. 1.2ug/L (max 19/11/19). 0.098ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 12 detections of Imidacloprid between Oct 2015 and Oct 2021. 0.14ug/L (max 4/8/16). 0.0294ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 99 detections of MCPA between Jan 2013 and Oct 2022. 0.62ug/L (max 10/3/20). 0.0443ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 230 detections of Metolachlor between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 9.9ug/L (max 6/5/22). 0.3382ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 8 detections of Metribuzin between Jan 2020 and Feb 2020. 0.15ug/L (max 19/1/20). 0.07125ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 17 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between May 2013 and Oct 2022. 0.09ug/L (max 28/10/15). 0.0311ug/L (av.)

Prometryn: 1 detections of Prometryn 31/5/23 0.01ug/L

Simazine: 134 detections of Simazine between Apr 2014 and May 2022. 34ug/L (max 28/2/20). 0.8095ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 4 detections of Tebuthiuron between May 2015 and Feb 2022. 0.02ug/L (max 4/2/22). 0.01325ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 10 detections of Triclopyr between Jan 2013 and Jan 2021. 0.26ug/L (max 3/5/16). 0.101ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Coochin Creek at Mawsons Road

2956 pesticide detections between Jan 2013 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 367 detections of Diuron between Jan 2013 and Feb 2023. 6.6ug/L (max 18/3/19). 0.7222ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 38 detections of 2,4-D between Oct 2014 and Feb 2022. 0.24ug/L (max 2/2/18). 0.0611ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 357 detections of Ametryn between Jan 2013 and Feb 2023. 2.2ug/L (max 9/10/18). 0.1283ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 350 detections of Atrazine between Jan 2013 and Feb 2023. 12ug/L (max 19/2/21). 0.7794ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 367 detections of Bromacil between Jan 2013 and Feb 2023. 12ug/L (max 18/1/20). 2.4389ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 175 detections of Chlorpyrifos between Jun 2016 and Oct 2022. 0.83ug/L (max 6/5/22). 0.0313ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: 153 detections of Diazinon between Jun 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.42ug/L (max 9/10/18). 0.0306ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 1 detection of Fluroxypur 1/1/22 0.05ug/L

Haloxyfop: 319 detections of Haloxyfop between Jan 2013 and Feb 2023. 3.9ug/L (max 16/3/19). 0.2139ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 315 detections of Hexazinone between Apr 2013 and Feb 2022. 1.2ug/L (max 19/11/19). 0.098ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 12 detections of Imidacloprid between Oct 2015 and Oct 2021. 0.14ug/L (max 4/8/16). 0.0294ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 99 detections of MCPA between Jan 2013 and Oct 2022. 0.62ug/L (max 10/3/20). 0.0443ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 230 detections of Metolachlor between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 9.9ug/L (max 6/5/22). 0.3382ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 8 detections of Metribuzin between Jan 2020 and Feb 2020. 0.15ug/L (max 19/1/20). 0.07125ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 17 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between May 2013 and Oct 2022. 0.09ug/L (max 28/10/15). 0.0311ug/L (av.)

Prometryn: 1 detections of Prometryn 31/5/23 0.01ug/L

Simazine: 134 detections of Simazine between Apr 2014 and May 2022. 34ug/L (max 28/2/20). 0.8095ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 4 detections of Tebuthiuron between May 2015 and Feb 2022. 0.02ug/L (max 4/2/22). 0.01325ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 10 detections of Triclopyr between Jan 2013 and Jan 2021. 0.26ug/L (max 3/5/16). 0.101ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2017/2023: Mary River at Churchill Street, Maryborough (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Mary River at Churchill Street, Maryborough

855 pesticide detections between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 146 detections of Diuron between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.39ug/L (max 20/12/18). 0.069ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 67 detections of 2,4-D between Oct 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.24ug/L (max 5/2/10). 0.0566ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 5 detections of Ametryn between Oct 2017 and Nov 2021. 0.04ug/L (max 23/11/21). 0.02ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 101 detections of Atrazine between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.47ug/L (max 17/12/18). 0.1007ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 29 detections of Bromacil between Oct 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.2ug/L (max 18/3/19). 0.0645ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: 5 trace detections of Diazinon between Oct 2017 and Nov 2021.

Fluroxypur: 13 detections of Fluroxypur between Oct 2017 and Feb 2020. 0.15ug/L (max 7/2/20). 0.0877ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 89 detections of Hexazinone between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.13ug/L (max 23/2/18). 0.0281ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 59 detections of Imazapic between Oct 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.12ug/L (max 17/10/17). 0.0271ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 7 detections of Imidacloprid between Oct 2017 and Nov 2019. 0.06ug/L (max 4/11/20). 0.0329ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 7 detections of Isoxaflutole between Oct 2017 and Mar 2019. 0.07ug/L (max 17/12/18). 0.0514ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 23 detections of MCPA between Oct 2017 and Feb 2022. 0.1ug/L (max 17/12/18). 0.023ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 153 detections of Metolachlor between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.82ug/L (max 17/12/18). 0.0654ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 11 detections of Metolachlor between Jan 2018 and Nov 2021. 0.03ug/L (max 15/11/21). 0.245ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 2 detections of Metribuzin 16/10/17. 0.05ug/L (max and av.)

Simazine: 53 detections of Simazine between Oct 2017 and Dec 2021. 0.2ug/L (max 26/4/19). 0.0259ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 36 detections of Tebuthiuron between Oct 2017 and Feb 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 10/2/20). 0.0236ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 48 detections of Triclopyr between Oct 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.23ug/L (max 8/2/20). 0.1027ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Mary River at Churchill Street, Maryborough

855 pesticide detections between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 146 detections of Diuron between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.39ug/L (max 20/12/18). 0.069ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 67 detections of 2,4-D between Oct 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.24ug/L (max 5/2/10). 0.0566ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 5 detections of Ametryn between Oct 2017 and Nov 2021. 0.04ug/L (max 23/11/21). 0.02ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 101 detections of Atrazine between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.47ug/L (max 17/12/18). 0.1007ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 29 detections of Bromacil between Oct 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.2ug/L (max 18/3/19). 0.0645ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: 5 trace detections of Diazinon between Oct 2017 and Nov 2021.

Fluroxypur: 13 detections of Fluroxypur between Oct 2017 and Feb 2020. 0.15ug/L (max 7/2/20). 0.0877ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 89 detections of Hexazinone between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.13ug/L (max 23/2/18). 0.0281ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 59 detections of Imazapic between Oct 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.12ug/L (max 17/10/17). 0.0271ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 7 detections of Imidacloprid between Oct 2017 and Nov 2019. 0.06ug/L (max 4/11/20). 0.0329ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 7 detections of Isoxaflutole between Oct 2017 and Mar 2019. 0.07ug/L (max 17/12/18). 0.0514ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 23 detections of MCPA between Oct 2017 and Feb 2022. 0.1ug/L (max 17/12/18). 0.023ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 153 detections of Metolachlor between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.82ug/L (max 17/12/18). 0.0654ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 11 detections of Metolachlor between Jan 2018 and Nov 2021. 0.03ug/L (max 15/11/21). 0.245ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 2 detections of Metribuzin 16/10/17. 0.05ug/L (max and av.)

Simazine: 53 detections of Simazine between Oct 2017 and Dec 2021. 0.2ug/L (max 26/4/19). 0.0259ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 36 detections of Tebuthiuron between Oct 2017 and Feb 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 10/2/20). 0.0236ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 48 detections of Triclopyr between Oct 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.23ug/L (max 8/2/20). 0.1027ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2017/2023: Gregory River, Jarrets Road (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Gregory River at Jarrets Road

959 pesticide detections between Aug 2017 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 143 detections of Diuron between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.53ug/L (max 7/2/18). 0.106ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 79 detections of 2,4-D between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 23/11/21). 0.1819ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 60 detections of Ametryn between Oct 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.12ug/L (max 16/10/17). 0.0188ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 138 detections of Atrazine between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 1.5ug/L (max 4/10/17). 0.1742ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 73 detections of Bromacil between Oct 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.38ug/L (max 24/11/21). 0.0555ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 3 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Mar 2019 and Oct 2022.

Diazinon: 14 detections (13 trace detections) of Diazinon between Dec 2017 and Oct 2022. 0.01ug/L (max 8/1/22).

Fluroxypur: 39 detections of Fluroxypur between Oct 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.46ug/L (max 22/11/17). 0.1203ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 24 detections of Haloxyfop between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.4ug/L (max 23/11/21). 0.0508ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 31 detections of Hexazinone between Oct 2017 and Feb 2020. 0.09ug/L (max 14/10/18). 0.0177ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 50 detections of Imazapic between Oct 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.09ug/L (max 23/11/21). 0.0216ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 69 detections of Imidacloprid between Oct 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.33ug/L (max 22/11/17). 0.0526ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 7 detections of MCPA between Feb 2018 and May 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 8/1/22). 0.02ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 151 detections of Metolachlor between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 1.9ug/L (max 22/10/22). 0.1134ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 3 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Mar 2018 and Apr 2018. 0.28ug/L (max 30/4/18). 0.12ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 22 detections of Metribuzin between Oct 2017 to Feb 2023. 0.07ug/L (max 11/3/18). 0.04ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 30 detections of Simazine between Oct 2018 and Feb 2013. 1.5ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.1003ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 15 detections of Tebuthiuron between Oct 2018 and Dec 2022. 0.07ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.0253ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 8 detections of Triclopyr between Oct 2017 and Dec 2021. 0.35ug/L (max 3/10/17). 0.11ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Gregory River at Jarrets Road

959 pesticide detections between Aug 2017 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 143 detections of Diuron between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.53ug/L (max 7/2/18). 0.106ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 79 detections of 2,4-D between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 23/11/21). 0.1819ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 60 detections of Ametryn between Oct 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.12ug/L (max 16/10/17). 0.0188ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 138 detections of Atrazine between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 1.5ug/L (max 4/10/17). 0.1742ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 73 detections of Bromacil between Oct 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.38ug/L (max 24/11/21). 0.0555ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 3 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Mar 2019 and Oct 2022.

Diazinon: 14 detections (13 trace detections) of Diazinon between Dec 2017 and Oct 2022. 0.01ug/L (max 8/1/22).

Fluroxypur: 39 detections of Fluroxypur between Oct 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.46ug/L (max 22/11/17). 0.1203ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 24 detections of Haloxyfop between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.4ug/L (max 23/11/21). 0.0508ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 31 detections of Hexazinone between Oct 2017 and Feb 2020. 0.09ug/L (max 14/10/18). 0.0177ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 50 detections of Imazapic between Oct 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.09ug/L (max 23/11/21). 0.0216ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 69 detections of Imidacloprid between Oct 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.33ug/L (max 22/11/17). 0.0526ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 7 detections of MCPA between Feb 2018 and May 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 8/1/22). 0.02ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 151 detections of Metolachlor between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 1.9ug/L (max 22/10/22). 0.1134ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 3 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Mar 2018 and Apr 2018. 0.28ug/L (max 30/4/18). 0.12ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 22 detections of Metribuzin between Oct 2017 to Feb 2023. 0.07ug/L (max 11/3/18). 0.04ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 30 detections of Simazine between Oct 2018 and Feb 2013. 1.5ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.1003ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 15 detections of Tebuthiuron between Oct 2018 and Dec 2022. 0.07ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.0253ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 8 detections of Triclopyr between Oct 2017 and Dec 2021. 0.35ug/L (max 3/10/17). 0.11ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2019/2023: Stockyard Creek at Wallerawang (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Stockyard Creek at Wallerawang

465 pesticide detections between Nov 2019 and Mar 2023

Diuron: 68 detections of Diuron between Feb 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.43ug/L (max 2/3/20). 0.1212ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 31 detections of 2,4-D between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.59ug/L (max 2/12/20). 0.1035ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 45 detections of Ametryn between Nov 2021 and Jan 2023. 0.17ug/L (max 11/3/22). 0.0522ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 48 detections of Atrazine between Feb 2020 and Mar 2023. 0.56ug/L (max 17/11/21). 0.1508ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 61 detections of Bromacil between Feb 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.73ug/L (max 4/12/21). 0.2138ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 1 trace detection of Chlorpyrifos 24/5/22.

Diazinon: 13 detections of Diazinon between Nov 2021 and Oct 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 23/7/22). 0.0077ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 13 detections of Fluroxypur between Feb 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.41ug/L (max 3/12/22). 0.1231ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 8 detections of Haloxyfop between Feb 2020 and Oct 2022. 0.04ug/L (max 20/10/22). 0.025ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 14 detections of Hexazinone between Nov 2019 and Dec 2022. 0.02ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.0114ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 39 detections of Imazapic between Feb 2020 and Mar 2023. 0.06ug/L (max 2/3/20). 0.0254ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 43 detections of Imidacloprid between Feb 2020 and Oct 2022. 0.12ug/L (max 8/3/22). 0.0319ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 9 detections of MCPA between Nov 2021 and Oct 2020. 0.06ug/L (max 22/5/22). 0.0256ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 45 detections of Metoloachlor between Feb 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.25ug/L (max 21/10/22). 0.0462ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 1 detection of Metsulfuron Methyl 22/10/22. 0.04ug/L

Pendimethalin: 2 detections of Pendimethalin between Jan 2022 and Jul 2022. 0.03ug/L (max 22/7/22). 0.03ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 14 detections of Tebuthiuron between Nov 2021 and Feb 2022. 0.03ug/L (max 31/1/22). 0.0129ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 10 detections of Triclopyr between Feb 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.34ug/L (max 10/2/20). 0.138ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Stockyard Creek at Wallerawang

465 pesticide detections between Nov 2019 and Mar 2023

Diuron: 68 detections of Diuron between Feb 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.43ug/L (max 2/3/20). 0.1212ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 31 detections of 2,4-D between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.59ug/L (max 2/12/20). 0.1035ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 45 detections of Ametryn between Nov 2021 and Jan 2023. 0.17ug/L (max 11/3/22). 0.0522ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 48 detections of Atrazine between Feb 2020 and Mar 2023. 0.56ug/L (max 17/11/21). 0.1508ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 61 detections of Bromacil between Feb 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.73ug/L (max 4/12/21). 0.2138ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 1 trace detection of Chlorpyrifos 24/5/22.

Diazinon: 13 detections of Diazinon between Nov 2021 and Oct 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 23/7/22). 0.0077ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 13 detections of Fluroxypur between Feb 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.41ug/L (max 3/12/22). 0.1231ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 8 detections of Haloxyfop between Feb 2020 and Oct 2022. 0.04ug/L (max 20/10/22). 0.025ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 14 detections of Hexazinone between Nov 2019 and Dec 2022. 0.02ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.0114ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 39 detections of Imazapic between Feb 2020 and Mar 2023. 0.06ug/L (max 2/3/20). 0.0254ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 43 detections of Imidacloprid between Feb 2020 and Oct 2022. 0.12ug/L (max 8/3/22). 0.0319ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 9 detections of MCPA between Nov 2021 and Oct 2020. 0.06ug/L (max 22/5/22). 0.0256ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 45 detections of Metoloachlor between Feb 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.25ug/L (max 21/10/22). 0.0462ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 1 detection of Metsulfuron Methyl 22/10/22. 0.04ug/L

Pendimethalin: 2 detections of Pendimethalin between Jan 2022 and Jul 2022. 0.03ug/L (max 22/7/22). 0.03ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 14 detections of Tebuthiuron between Nov 2021 and Feb 2022. 0.03ug/L (max 31/1/22). 0.0129ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 10 detections of Triclopyr between Feb 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.34ug/L (max 10/2/20). 0.138ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2019/2023: Elliott River at Dr Mays Crossing (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Elliott River at Dr Mays Crossing

991 pesticide detections between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 110 detections of Diuron between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.54ug/L (max 11/1/22). 0.1127ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 68 detections of 2,4-D between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.36ug/L (max 25/22/21). 0.0626ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 44 detections of Ametryn between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.06ug/L (max 8/1/22). 0.0222ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 101 detections of Atrazine between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 0.98ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.2809ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 16 detections of Bromacil between Feb 2020 and May 2022. 0.04ug/L (max 26/5/22). 0.0281ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 8 detections of Chlorpyrifos between Oct 2021 and Jan 2022. 0.07ug/L (max 24/11/21). 0.0271ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: 3 trace detections of Diazinon between Feb 2020 and Oct 2022.

Fluroxypur: 59 detections of Fluroxypur between Feb 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.49ug/L (max 22/10/22). 0.1544ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 41 detections of Haloxyfop between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.08ug/L (max 4/12/22). 0.0471ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 75 detections of Hexazinone between Nov 2019 and Nov 2021. 0.05ug/L (max 19/11/19). 0.0224ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 81 detections of Imazapic between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.06ug/L (max 28/10/22). 0.0229ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 63 detections of Imidacloprid between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.11ug/L (max 24/7/22). 0.0387ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 3 detections of MCPA between Nov 2021 and May 2022. 0.16ug/L (max 26/5/22). 0.06ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 107 detections of Metolachlor between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 11/1/22). 0.1279ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 94 detections of Metribuzin between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 1.7ug/L (max 22/10/22). 0.1161ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 38 detections of Simazine between Mar 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.95ug/L (max 30/11/21). 0.1971ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 56 detections of Tebuthiuron between Nov 2019 and Feb 2022. 0.13ug/L (max 15/6/20). 0.0354ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 25 detections of Triclopyr between Mar 2020 and Oct 2022. 0.31ug/L (max 27/11/21). 0.1596ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Elliott River at Dr Mays Crossing

991 pesticide detections between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 110 detections of Diuron between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.54ug/L (max 11/1/22). 0.1127ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 68 detections of 2,4-D between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.36ug/L (max 25/22/21). 0.0626ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 44 detections of Ametryn between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.06ug/L (max 8/1/22). 0.0222ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 101 detections of Atrazine between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 0.98ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.2809ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 16 detections of Bromacil between Feb 2020 and May 2022. 0.04ug/L (max 26/5/22). 0.0281ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 8 detections of Chlorpyrifos between Oct 2021 and Jan 2022. 0.07ug/L (max 24/11/21). 0.0271ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: 3 trace detections of Diazinon between Feb 2020 and Oct 2022.

Fluroxypur: 59 detections of Fluroxypur between Feb 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.49ug/L (max 22/10/22). 0.1544ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 41 detections of Haloxyfop between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.08ug/L (max 4/12/22). 0.0471ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 75 detections of Hexazinone between Nov 2019 and Nov 2021. 0.05ug/L (max 19/11/19). 0.0224ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 81 detections of Imazapic between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.06ug/L (max 28/10/22). 0.0229ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 63 detections of Imidacloprid between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.11ug/L (max 24/7/22). 0.0387ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 3 detections of MCPA between Nov 2021 and May 2022. 0.16ug/L (max 26/5/22). 0.06ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 107 detections of Metolachlor between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 11/1/22). 0.1279ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 94 detections of Metribuzin between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 1.7ug/L (max 22/10/22). 0.1161ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 38 detections of Simazine between Mar 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.95ug/L (max 30/11/21). 0.1971ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 56 detections of Tebuthiuron between Nov 2019 and Feb 2022. 0.13ug/L (max 15/6/20). 0.0354ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 25 detections of Triclopyr between Mar 2020 and Oct 2022. 0.31ug/L (max 27/11/21). 0.1596ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2019/2023: Yellow Waterholes Creek (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Yellow Waterholes Creek

839 pesticide detections between Nov 2019 and Jan 2023

Diuron: 87 detections of Diuron between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.54ug/L (max 8/1/22). 0.0922ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 72 detections of 2,4-D between Nov 2019 and Dec 2022. 2.2ug/L (max 5/12/21). 0.1701ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 8 detections of Ametryn between Jan 2021 and Dec 2022. 0.29ug/L (max). 0.06ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 55 detections of Atrazine between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 1.9ug/L (max). 0.2813ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 12 detections of Bromacil between Jan 2020 and Mar 2020. 0.07ug/L (max). 0.04ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 7 detections of Chlorpyrifos between Nov 2021 and Dec 2022. 0.24ug/L (max). 0.0386ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: 3 trace detections of Diazinon in Dec 2021.

Fipronil: 4 detections of Fipronil between Nov 2021 and Oct 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 26/11/21). 0.0075ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 49 detections of Fluroxypur between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.3ug/L (max 25/11/21). 0.1129ug/l (av.)

Haloxyfop: 71 detections of Haloxyfop between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 1.6ug/L (max 23/11/21). 0.118ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 13 detections of Hexazinone between Jan 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.45ug/L (max 14/5/22). 0.0838ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 38 detections of Imazapic between Jan 2020 and May 2022. 0.14ug/L (max 21/2/20). 0.0311ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 118 detections of Imidacloprid between Jan 2020 and Jan 2023. 2.7ug/L (max 13/5/22). 0.2847ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 55 detections of MCPA between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 1.1ug/L (max 23/11/21). 0.1182ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 105 detections of Metolachlor between Jan 2020 and Jan 2023. 3.2ug/L (max 21/1/20). 0.381ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 40 detections of Metribuzin between Jan 2020 and Jan 2023. 4.4ug/L (max 21/1/20). 0.669ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 31 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Feb 2020 and Dec 2021. 0.65ug/L (max 18/2/20). 0.1658ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 10 detections of Simazine between Jan 2020 and Feb 2022. 0.3ug/L (max 20/1/20). 0.121ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 25 detections of Tebuthiuron between Jan 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.06ug/L (max 23/1/23). 0.018ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 46 detections of Triclopyr between Jan 2020 and Jan 2022. 6.2ug/L (max 25/2/20). 1.0809ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Yellow Waterholes Creek

839 pesticide detections between Nov 2019 and Jan 2023

Diuron: 87 detections of Diuron between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.54ug/L (max 8/1/22). 0.0922ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 72 detections of 2,4-D between Nov 2019 and Dec 2022. 2.2ug/L (max 5/12/21). 0.1701ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 8 detections of Ametryn between Jan 2021 and Dec 2022. 0.29ug/L (max). 0.06ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 55 detections of Atrazine between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 1.9ug/L (max). 0.2813ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 12 detections of Bromacil between Jan 2020 and Mar 2020. 0.07ug/L (max). 0.04ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 7 detections of Chlorpyrifos between Nov 2021 and Dec 2022. 0.24ug/L (max). 0.0386ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: 3 trace detections of Diazinon in Dec 2021.

Fipronil: 4 detections of Fipronil between Nov 2021 and Oct 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 26/11/21). 0.0075ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 49 detections of Fluroxypur between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.3ug/L (max 25/11/21). 0.1129ug/l (av.)

Haloxyfop: 71 detections of Haloxyfop between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 1.6ug/L (max 23/11/21). 0.118ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 13 detections of Hexazinone between Jan 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.45ug/L (max 14/5/22). 0.0838ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 38 detections of Imazapic between Jan 2020 and May 2022. 0.14ug/L (max 21/2/20). 0.0311ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 118 detections of Imidacloprid between Jan 2020 and Jan 2023. 2.7ug/L (max 13/5/22). 0.2847ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 55 detections of MCPA between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 1.1ug/L (max 23/11/21). 0.1182ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 105 detections of Metolachlor between Jan 2020 and Jan 2023. 3.2ug/L (max 21/1/20). 0.381ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 40 detections of Metribuzin between Jan 2020 and Jan 2023. 4.4ug/L (max 21/1/20). 0.669ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 31 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Feb 2020 and Dec 2021. 0.65ug/L (max 18/2/20). 0.1658ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 10 detections of Simazine between Jan 2020 and Feb 2022. 0.3ug/L (max 20/1/20). 0.121ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 25 detections of Tebuthiuron between Jan 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.06ug/L (max 23/1/23). 0.018ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 46 detections of Triclopyr between Jan 2020 and Jan 2022. 6.2ug/L (max 25/2/20). 1.0809ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2019/2023: Spliters Creek at Henkers Road (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Spliters Creek at Henkers Road

777 pesticide detections between Nov 2019 and Mar 2023

Diuron: 19 detections of Diuron between Feb 2020 and Sep 2022. 0.12ug/L (max 14/2/20). 0.0368ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 58 detections of 2,4-D between Feb 2020 and Mar 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 9/2/20). 0.2221ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 2 detections of Ametryn in Feb 2020. 0.01ug/L (max 11/2/20). 0.01ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 73 detections of Atrazine between Dec 2019 and Mar 2023. 0.99ug/L (max 12/2/20). 0.2208ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 8 detections of Bromacil between Mar 2020 and Jun 2020. 0.03ug/L (max 3/5/20). 0.2063ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 4 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Feb 2020 and Aug 2022.

Diazinon: 11 detections of Diazinon between Nov 2021 and May 2022. 0.13ug/L (max 5/4/22). 0.0218ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 43 detections of Fluroxypur between Feb 2020 and Mar 2023. 0.42ug/L (max 27/2/22). 0.1491ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 48 detections of Haloxyfop between Feb 2020 and Mar 2023. 0.39ug/L (max 12/6/22). 0.0948ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 85 detections of Hexazinone between Nov 2019 and May 2022. 0.38ug/L (max 19/11/19). 0.0776ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 87 detections of Imazapic between Nov 2019 and Mar 2023. 0.21ug/L (max 10/2/20). 0.0655ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 83 detections of Imidacloprid between Feb 2020 and Mar 2023. 0.67ug/L (max 5/4/22). 0.1379ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 9 detections of MCPA between Feb 2020 and Mar 2023. 0.02ug/L (max 7/2/22). 0.0156ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 87 detections of Metolachlor between Feb 2020 and Mar 2023. 0.49ug/L (max 26/11/21). 0.1447ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 47 detections of Metribuzin between Feb 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.52ug.L (max 10/2/20). 0.1196ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 20 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Apr 2021 to Feb 2022. 0.5ug/L (max 26/6/21). 0.23ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 55 detections of Simazine between Feb 2020 and Apr 2021. 1.9ug/L (max 10/2/20). 0.1389ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 27 detections of Tebuthiuron between Dec 2019 and Mar 2022. 0.03ug/L (max 10/2/20). 0.0111ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 11 detections of Triclopyr between Feb 2020 and Nov 2021. 0.13ug/L (max 10/2/20). 0.0745ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

 

Spliters Creek at Henkers Road

777 pesticide detections between Nov 2019 and Mar 2023

Diuron: 19 detections of Diuron between Feb 2020 and Sep 2022. 0.12ug/L (max 14/2/20). 0.0368ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 58 detections of 2,4-D between Feb 2020 and Mar 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 9/2/20). 0.2221ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 2 detections of Ametryn in Feb 2020. 0.01ug/L (max 11/2/20). 0.01ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 73 detections of Atrazine between Dec 2019 and Mar 2023. 0.99ug/L (max 12/2/20). 0.2208ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 8 detections of Bromacil between Mar 2020 and Jun 2020. 0.03ug/L (max 3/5/20). 0.2063ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 4 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Feb 2020 and Aug 2022.

Diazinon: 11 detections of Diazinon between Nov 2021 and May 2022. 0.13ug/L (max 5/4/22). 0.0218ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 43 detections of Fluroxypur between Feb 2020 and Mar 2023. 0.42ug/L (max 27/2/22). 0.1491ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 48 detections of Haloxyfop between Feb 2020 and Mar 2023. 0.39ug/L (max 12/6/22). 0.0948ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 85 detections of Hexazinone between Nov 2019 and May 2022. 0.38ug/L (max 19/11/19). 0.0776ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 87 detections of Imazapic between Nov 2019 and Mar 2023. 0.21ug/L (max 10/2/20). 0.0655ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 83 detections of Imidacloprid between Feb 2020 and Mar 2023. 0.67ug/L (max 5/4/22). 0.1379ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 9 detections of MCPA between Feb 2020 and Mar 2023. 0.02ug/L (max 7/2/22). 0.0156ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 87 detections of Metolachlor between Feb 2020 and Mar 2023. 0.49ug/L (max 26/11/21). 0.1447ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 47 detections of Metribuzin between Feb 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.52ug.L (max 10/2/20). 0.1196ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 20 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Apr 2021 to Feb 2022. 0.5ug/L (max 26/6/21). 0.23ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 55 detections of Simazine between Feb 2020 and Apr 2021. 1.9ug/L (max 10/2/20). 0.1389ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 27 detections of Tebuthiuron between Dec 2019 and Mar 2022. 0.03ug/L (max 10/2/20). 0.0111ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 11 detections of Triclopyr between Feb 2020 and Nov 2021. 0.13ug/L (max 10/2/20). 0.0745ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

 

2019/2023: Welcome Creek at Gooburrum Road (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Welcome Creek at Gooburrum Road at Moore Park

1073 pesticide detections between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 45 detections of Diuron between Dec 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.36ug/L (max 31/12/20). 0.0664ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 24 detections of 2,4-D between Dec 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.28ug/L (max 12/11/21). 0.0977ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 45 detections of Atrazine between Nov 2021 and Feb 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 27/1/22). 0.2282ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 14 detections of Bromacil between Mar 2021 and Jun 2022. 0.11ug/L (max 6/4/21). 0.055ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 3 detections of Chlorpyrifos between Mar 2021 and Jun 2022. 0.08ug/L (max 12/1/22). 0.033ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: 24 detections of Diazinon between Mar 2021 and Jan 2022. 1.1ug/L (max 16/3/21). 0.1833ug/L (av.)

Fipronil: 16 detections of Fipronil between Mar 2021 and Nov 2021. 0.13ug/L (max 16/3/21). 0.0563ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 46 detections of Fluroxypur between Dec 2020 and Feb 2023. 1.7ug/L (max 9/3/22). 0.3958ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 61 detections of Haloxyfop between Dec 2020 and Feb 2023. 1.3ug/L (max 12/11/21). 0.1482ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 9 detections of Hexazinone between Dec 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.03ug/L (max 18/4/22). 0.0144ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 35 detections of Imazapic between Nov 2021 and Feb 2023. 0.28ug/L (max 9/3/22). 0.0497ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 80 detections of Imidacloprid between Dec 2020 and Feb 2023. 4.3ug/L (max 12/11/21). 0.8651ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 21 detections of MCPA between Dec 2020 and June 2022. 0.36ug/L (max 30/12/20). 0.0995ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 77 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2020 and Feb 2023. 5.2ug/L (max 13/5/22). 0.2297ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 15 detections of Metribuzin between Dec 2020 and Jun 2022. 1.7ug/L (max 9/3/22). 0.4633ug/L (av.)

Pendimethalin: 1 detection of Pendimethalin 15/11/21 0.02ug/L

Simazine: 1 detection of Simazine 27/1/22 0.01ug/L

Triclopyr: 1 detection of Triclopyr 31/12/20. 0.06ug/L

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Welcome Creek at Gooburrum Road at Moore Park

1073 pesticide detections between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 45 detections of Diuron between Dec 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.36ug/L (max 31/12/20). 0.0664ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 24 detections of 2,4-D between Dec 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.28ug/L (max 12/11/21). 0.0977ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 45 detections of Atrazine between Nov 2021 and Feb 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 27/1/22). 0.2282ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 14 detections of Bromacil between Mar 2021 and Jun 2022. 0.11ug/L (max 6/4/21). 0.055ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 3 detections of Chlorpyrifos between Mar 2021 and Jun 2022. 0.08ug/L (max 12/1/22). 0.033ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: 24 detections of Diazinon between Mar 2021 and Jan 2022. 1.1ug/L (max 16/3/21). 0.1833ug/L (av.)

Fipronil: 16 detections of Fipronil between Mar 2021 and Nov 2021. 0.13ug/L (max 16/3/21). 0.0563ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 46 detections of Fluroxypur between Dec 2020 and Feb 2023. 1.7ug/L (max 9/3/22). 0.3958ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 61 detections of Haloxyfop between Dec 2020 and Feb 2023. 1.3ug/L (max 12/11/21). 0.1482ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 9 detections of Hexazinone between Dec 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.03ug/L (max 18/4/22). 0.0144ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 35 detections of Imazapic between Nov 2021 and Feb 2023. 0.28ug/L (max 9/3/22). 0.0497ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 80 detections of Imidacloprid between Dec 2020 and Feb 2023. 4.3ug/L (max 12/11/21). 0.8651ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 21 detections of MCPA between Dec 2020 and June 2022. 0.36ug/L (max 30/12/20). 0.0995ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 77 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2020 and Feb 2023. 5.2ug/L (max 13/5/22). 0.2297ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 15 detections of Metribuzin between Dec 2020 and Jun 2022. 1.7ug/L (max 9/3/22). 0.4633ug/L (av.)

Pendimethalin: 1 detection of Pendimethalin 15/11/21 0.02ug/L

Simazine: 1 detection of Simazine 27/1/22 0.01ug/L

Triclopyr: 1 detection of Triclopyr 31/12/20. 0.06ug/L

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2019/2023: Moore Park Drainage (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Moore Park Drainage at Moore Park

1073 pesticide detections between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 86 detections of Diuron between Nov 2019 and Apr 2021. 5.4ug/L (max 25/10/20). 0.2952ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 139 detections of 2,4-D between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 11ug/L (max 5/2/20). 1.0549ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 26 detections of Ametryn between Apr 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.74ug/L (max 13/4/20). 0.0992ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 144 detections of Atrazine between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 5.8ug/L (max 10/1/22). 0.7337ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 63 detections of Bromacil between Apr 2020 and Feb 2023. 2ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.2283ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 14 detections of Chlorpyrifos between Jan 2020 and Jun 2022. 0.06ug/L (max 6/1/20). 0.0193ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: 10 detections of Diazinon between Nov 2021 and May 2022. 0.07ug/L (max 9/1/22). 0.039ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 79 detections of Fluroxypur between Nov 2019 and Jan 2023. 2.8ug/L (max 8/1/22). 0.3015ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 29 detections of Haloxyfop between Feb 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.55ug/L (max 31/1/21). 0.0789ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 28 detections of Hexazinone between Mar 2021 and Feb 2023. 0.28ug/L (max 13/11/21). 0.0514ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 24 detections of Imazapic between Mar 2021 and Dec 2022. 0.11ug/L (max 13/11/21). 0.0437ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 128 detections of Imidacloprid between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 16ug/L (max 20/2/22). 0.2225ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 9 detections of Isoxaflutole between Nov 2021 and Jan 2022. 0.14ug/L (max 13/11/21). 0.0733ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 19 detections of MCPA between Feb 2020 and Nov 2022. 4.1ug/L (max 20/6/22). 0.2584ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 97 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2019 and Jan 2023. 0.39ug/L (max 1/12/21). 0.0589ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 54 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Nov 2019 and Dec 2022. 9.8ug/L (max 4/11/19). 0.8322ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 1 detection of Metribuzin 9/2/20 0.03ug/L

Pendimethalin: 9 detections of Pendimethalin between Nov 2021 and Apr 2022. 0.46ug/L (max 8/1/22). 0.1089 ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 8 detections of Simazine between Dec 2019 and Jan 2022. 0.09ug/L (max 9/1/22). 0.0325ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 88 detections of Tebuthiuron between Jan 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.91ug/L (max 4/2/21). 0.0876ug/L (av.)

Terbuthylazine: 17 detections of Terbuthylazine between Nov 2021 and Mar 2022. 0.77ug/L (max 12/11/21) (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Moore Park Drainage at Moore Park

1073 pesticide detections between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 86 detections of Diuron between Nov 2019 and Apr 2021. 5.4ug/L (max 25/10/20). 0.2952ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 139 detections of 2,4-D between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 11ug/L (max 5/2/20). 1.0549ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 26 detections of Ametryn between Apr 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.74ug/L (max 13/4/20). 0.0992ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 144 detections of Atrazine between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 5.8ug/L (max 10/1/22). 0.7337ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 63 detections of Bromacil between Apr 2020 and Feb 2023. 2ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.2283ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 14 detections of Chlorpyrifos between Jan 2020 and Jun 2022. 0.06ug/L (max 6/1/20). 0.0193ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: 10 detections of Diazinon between Nov 2021 and May 2022. 0.07ug/L (max 9/1/22). 0.039ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 79 detections of Fluroxypur between Nov 2019 and Jan 2023. 2.8ug/L (max 8/1/22). 0.3015ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 29 detections of Haloxyfop between Feb 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.55ug/L (max 31/1/21). 0.0789ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 28 detections of Hexazinone between Mar 2021 and Feb 2023. 0.28ug/L (max 13/11/21). 0.0514ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 24 detections of Imazapic between Mar 2021 and Dec 2022. 0.11ug/L (max 13/11/21). 0.0437ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 128 detections of Imidacloprid between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 16ug/L (max 20/2/22). 0.2225ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 9 detections of Isoxaflutole between Nov 2021 and Jan 2022. 0.14ug/L (max 13/11/21). 0.0733ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 19 detections of MCPA between Feb 2020 and Nov 2022. 4.1ug/L (max 20/6/22). 0.2584ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 97 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2019 and Jan 2023. 0.39ug/L (max 1/12/21). 0.0589ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 54 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Nov 2019 and Dec 2022. 9.8ug/L (max 4/11/19). 0.8322ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 1 detection of Metribuzin 9/2/20 0.03ug/L

Pendimethalin: 9 detections of Pendimethalin between Nov 2021 and Apr 2022. 0.46ug/L (max 8/1/22). 0.1089 ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 8 detections of Simazine between Dec 2019 and Jan 2022. 0.09ug/L (max 9/1/22). 0.0325ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 88 detections of Tebuthiuron between Jan 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.91ug/L (max 4/2/21). 0.0876ug/L (av.)

Terbuthylazine: 17 detections of Terbuthylazine between Nov 2021 and Mar 2022. 0.77ug/L (max 12/11/21) (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2019/2023: Fairydale Drainage at Norton Road, Moore Park Beach. Pesticides: Multiple

Fairydale Drainage at Norton Road

877 pesticide detections between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 149 detections of Diuron between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 7.1ug/L (max 4/5/20). 0.1677ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 137 detections of 2,4-D between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 66ug/L (max 3/2/21). 1.9342ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 65 detections of Ametryn between Nov 2019 and Nov 2022. 0.9ug/L (max 25/10/20). 0.0749ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 140 detections of Atrazine between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 7.3ug/L (max 24/1/21). 1.0362ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 9 detections of Bromacil between Nov 2021 and Dec 2021. 0.09ug/L (max 25/11/21). 0.0433ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 3 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Feb 2020 and Nov 2021.

Diazinon: 2 detections of Diazinon between Mar 2020 and May 2022.

Fluroxypur: 38 detections of Fluroxypur between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 1.3ug/L (max 21/11/21). 0.3216ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 76 detections of Haloxyfop between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 1.9ug/L (max 1/12/22). 0.2116ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 3 detections of Hexazinone between Feb 2020 and Nov 2021. 0.62ug/L (max 21/11/21). 0.2267ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 2 detections of Imazapic between Nov 2021 and Sep 2022. 0.24ug/L (max 21/11/21). 0.14ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 57 detections of Imidacloprid between Feb 2020 and Dec 2022. 15ug/L (max 20/2/22). 0.3744 ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 1 detection of Isoxaflutole 21/11/21 0.4ug/L

MCPA: 7 detections of MCPA between April 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.04ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.0257ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 97 detections of Metolachlor between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.45ug/L (max 31/12/20). 0.044ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 60 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Nov 2019 and Dec 2022. 2.7ug/L (max 27/4/20). 0.3102ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 6 detections of Metribuzin between Feb 2020 and Mar 2021. 0.12ug/L (max 9/2/20). 0.055ug/L (av.)

Pendimethalin: 8 detections of Pendimethalin between Feb 2020 and May 2022. 0.3ug/L (max 7/3/22). 0.095ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 14 detections of Simazine between Jan 2020 and Feb 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 5/2/20). 0.0193ug/L (av.)

Terbuthylazine: 1 detection of Terbuthylazine 21/11/21 1.8ug/L

Triclopyr: 2 detections of Triclopyr between Feb 2020 and Nov 2021. 0.28ug/L (max 10/2/20). 0.19ug/L (av).

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Fairydale Drainage at Norton Road

877 pesticide detections between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 149 detections of Diuron between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 7.1ug/L (max 4/5/20). 0.1677ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 137 detections of 2,4-D between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 66ug/L (max 3/2/21). 1.9342ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 65 detections of Ametryn between Nov 2019 and Nov 2022. 0.9ug/L (max 25/10/20). 0.0749ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 140 detections of Atrazine between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 7.3ug/L (max 24/1/21). 1.0362ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 9 detections of Bromacil between Nov 2021 and Dec 2021. 0.09ug/L (max 25/11/21). 0.0433ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 3 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Feb 2020 and Nov 2021.

Diazinon: 2 detections of Diazinon between Mar 2020 and May 2022.

Fluroxypur: 38 detections of Fluroxypur between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 1.3ug/L (max 21/11/21). 0.3216ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 76 detections of Haloxyfop between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 1.9ug/L (max 1/12/22). 0.2116ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 3 detections of Hexazinone between Feb 2020 and Nov 2021. 0.62ug/L (max 21/11/21). 0.2267ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 2 detections of Imazapic between Nov 2021 and Sep 2022. 0.24ug/L (max 21/11/21). 0.14ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 57 detections of Imidacloprid between Feb 2020 and Dec 2022. 15ug/L (max 20/2/22). 0.3744 ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 1 detection of Isoxaflutole 21/11/21 0.4ug/L

MCPA: 7 detections of MCPA between April 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.04ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.0257ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 97 detections of Metolachlor between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.45ug/L (max 31/12/20). 0.044ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 60 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Nov 2019 and Dec 2022. 2.7ug/L (max 27/4/20). 0.3102ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 6 detections of Metribuzin between Feb 2020 and Mar 2021. 0.12ug/L (max 9/2/20). 0.055ug/L (av.)

Pendimethalin: 8 detections of Pendimethalin between Feb 2020 and May 2022. 0.3ug/L (max 7/3/22). 0.095ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 14 detections of Simazine between Jan 2020 and Feb 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 5/2/20). 0.0193ug/L (av.)

Terbuthylazine: 1 detection of Terbuthylazine 21/11/21 1.8ug/L

Triclopyr: 2 detections of Triclopyr between Feb 2020 and Nov 2021. 0.28ug/L (max 10/2/20). 0.19ug/L (av).

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2019/2023: Kolan River at Barrage, Avondale (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Kolan River at Barrage

425 pesticide detections between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 59 detections of Diuron between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 0.96ug/L (max 19/11/21). 0.1947ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 46 detections of 2,4-D between Feb 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.4ug/L (max 19/11/21). 0.1015ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 63 detections of Atrazine between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.74ug/L (max 26/2/23). 0.072ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 13 detections of Bromacil between Feb 2020 and Mar 2020. 0.27ug/L (max 25/2/20). 0.1323ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 12 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Feb 2020 and Nov 2021.

Diazinon: 4 trace detections of Diazinon in Nov 2021.

Fluroxypur: 6 detections of Fluroxypur between Feb 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.16ug/L (max 28/11/21). 0.105ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 16 detections of Haloxyfop between Nov 2021 and Feb 2023. 0.17ug/L (max 9/1/22). 0.0456ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 25 detections of Hexazinone between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.17ug/L (max 12/12/22). 0.0164ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 44 detections of Imazapic between Feb 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.1ug/L (max 10/2/20). 0.0286ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 45 detections of Imidacloprid between Feb 2020 and May 2022. 0.19ug/L (max 14/11/21). 0.0604ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 6 detections of MCPA between Nov 2021 and Oct 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 30/10/22). 0.0283ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 74 detections of Metolachlor between Feb 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.31ug/L (max 25/2/20). 0.0558ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 1 detection of Metsulfuron Methyl 9/3/22 0.02ug/L

Metribuzin: 5 detections of Metribuzin between May 2022 and Dec 2022. 0.07ug/L (max 30/6/22). 0.04ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 5 detections of Tebuthiuron in Dec 2021. 0.03ug/L (max 11/12/21). 0.018ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 1 detection of Triclopyr  25/10/22 0.1ug/L

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Kolan River at Barrage

425 pesticide detections between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 59 detections of Diuron between Nov 2019 and Feb 2023. 0.96ug/L (max 19/11/21). 0.1947ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 46 detections of 2,4-D between Feb 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.4ug/L (max 19/11/21). 0.1015ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 63 detections of Atrazine between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.74ug/L (max 26/2/23). 0.072ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 13 detections of Bromacil between Feb 2020 and Mar 2020. 0.27ug/L (max 25/2/20). 0.1323ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 12 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Feb 2020 and Nov 2021.

Diazinon: 4 trace detections of Diazinon in Nov 2021.

Fluroxypur: 6 detections of Fluroxypur between Feb 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.16ug/L (max 28/11/21). 0.105ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 16 detections of Haloxyfop between Nov 2021 and Feb 2023. 0.17ug/L (max 9/1/22). 0.0456ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 25 detections of Hexazinone between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.17ug/L (max 12/12/22). 0.0164ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 44 detections of Imazapic between Feb 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.1ug/L (max 10/2/20). 0.0286ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 45 detections of Imidacloprid between Feb 2020 and May 2022. 0.19ug/L (max 14/11/21). 0.0604ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 6 detections of MCPA between Nov 2021 and Oct 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 30/10/22). 0.0283ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 74 detections of Metolachlor between Feb 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.31ug/L (max 25/2/20). 0.0558ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 1 detection of Metsulfuron Methyl 9/3/22 0.02ug/L

Metribuzin: 5 detections of Metribuzin between May 2022 and Dec 2022. 0.07ug/L (max 30/6/22). 0.04ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 5 detections of Tebuthiuron in Dec 2021. 0.03ug/L (max 11/12/21). 0.018ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 1 detection of Triclopyr  25/10/22 0.1ug/L

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2017/2020: Kolan River at Booyan Boat Shed (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Kolan River at Kolan Booyan Boat Shed

332 pesticide detections between Aug 2017 and Jun 2020

Diuron: 39 detections of Diuron between Oct 2017 and Mar 2020. 0.71ug/L (max 22/2/18). 0.1574ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 22 detections of 2,4-D between Oct 2017 and Mar 2020. 0.23ug/L (max 2/1/18). 0.0782ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 8 detections of Ametryn between Oct 2017 and Oct 2018. 0.16ug/L (max 28/11/17). 0.0437ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 58 detections of Atrazine between Oct 2017 and May 2020. 0.75ug/L (max 22/2/18). 0.0896ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 19 detections of Bromacil between Oct 2017 and Mar 2020. 0.23ug/L (max 17/10/17). 0.0684ug/L

Chlorpyrifos: 4 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos in Feb 2020

Diazinon: 4 detections of Diazinon between Nov 2017 and Apr 2020.

Fluroxypur: 12 detections of Fluroxypur between Oct 2017 and Feb 2020. 0.19ug/L (max 2/1/18). 0.1ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 36 detections of Hexazinone between Oct 2017 and Mar 2020. 0.3ug/L (max 2/1/18). 0.0369ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 28 detections of Imazapic between Oct 2017 and Mar 2020. 0.13ug/L (max 22/2/18). 0.0304ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 18 detections of Imidacloprid between Oct 2017 and Mar 2020. 0.17ug/L (max 13/2/20). 0.0539ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 4 detections of MCPA between Feb 2018 and Feb 2020. 0.06ug/L (max 28/1/20). 0.0275ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 47 detections of Metolachlor between Oct 2017 and Jun 2020. 0.47ug/L (max 2/1/18). 0.06ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 14 detections of Metribuzin between Oct 2017 and Mar 2020. 0.2ug/L (max 22/2/18). 0.0507ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 10 detections of Simazine between Oct 2018 and Dec 2018. 1.1ug/L (max 14/10/18). 0.181ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 8 detections of Tebuthiuron between Oct 2017 and Nov 2018. 0.02ug/L (max 13/11/18). 0.125ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 1 detection of Triclopyr 3/1/18 0.05ug/L

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Kolan River at Kolan Booyan Boat Shed

332 pesticide detections between Aug 2017 and Jun 2020

Diuron: 39 detections of Diuron between Oct 2017 and Mar 2020. 0.71ug/L (max 22/2/18). 0.1574ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 22 detections of 2,4-D between Oct 2017 and Mar 2020. 0.23ug/L (max 2/1/18). 0.0782ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 8 detections of Ametryn between Oct 2017 and Oct 2018. 0.16ug/L (max 28/11/17). 0.0437ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 58 detections of Atrazine between Oct 2017 and May 2020. 0.75ug/L (max 22/2/18). 0.0896ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 19 detections of Bromacil between Oct 2017 and Mar 2020. 0.23ug/L (max 17/10/17). 0.0684ug/L

Chlorpyrifos: 4 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos in Feb 2020

Diazinon: 4 detections of Diazinon between Nov 2017 and Apr 2020.

Fluroxypur: 12 detections of Fluroxypur between Oct 2017 and Feb 2020. 0.19ug/L (max 2/1/18). 0.1ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 36 detections of Hexazinone between Oct 2017 and Mar 2020. 0.3ug/L (max 2/1/18). 0.0369ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 28 detections of Imazapic between Oct 2017 and Mar 2020. 0.13ug/L (max 22/2/18). 0.0304ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 18 detections of Imidacloprid between Oct 2017 and Mar 2020. 0.17ug/L (max 13/2/20). 0.0539ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 4 detections of MCPA between Feb 2018 and Feb 2020. 0.06ug/L (max 28/1/20). 0.0275ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 47 detections of Metolachlor between Oct 2017 and Jun 2020. 0.47ug/L (max 2/1/18). 0.06ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 14 detections of Metribuzin between Oct 2017 and Mar 2020. 0.2ug/L (max 22/2/18). 0.0507ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 10 detections of Simazine between Oct 2018 and Dec 2018. 1.1ug/L (max 14/10/18). 0.181ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 8 detections of Tebuthiuron between Oct 2017 and Nov 2018. 0.02ug/L (max 13/11/18). 0.125ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 1 detection of Triclopyr 3/1/18 0.05ug/L

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2016/2023: MacKenzie River at Rileys Crossing. Pesticides: Multiple

MacKenzie River at Rileys Crossing

1606 pesticide detections between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 95 detections of Diuron between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023. 1.6ug/L (max 8/12/17). 0.1113ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 110 detections of 2,4-D between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.62ug/L (max 31/3/17). 0.0833ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 6 detections of Ametryn between Dec 2016 and Mar 2017. 0.0006ug/L (max 30/3/17). 0.0004ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 188 detections of Atrazine between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023. 3.2ug/L (max 17/10/17). 0.2152ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 1 detection of Bromacil 23/8/22. 0.03ug/L

Chlorpyrifos: 2 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Oct 2017 and Jul 2022.

Diazinon: 4 trace detections of Diazinon between Mar 2017 and Dec 2018.

Fipronil: 3 detections of Fipronil between Dec 2022 and Feb 2023. 0.02ug/L (max 1/2/23). 0.0167ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 135 detections of Fluroxypur between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 14/1/23). 0.2109ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 76 detections of Haloxyfop between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023. 0.62ug/L (max 6/12/17). 0.0541ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 50 detections of Hexazinone between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023. 0.12ug/L (max 7/11/17). 0.0198ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 63 detections of Imazapic between Mar 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.21ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.0322ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 19 detections of Imidacloprid between Mar 2017 and May 2022. 0.43ug/L (max 11/2/20). 0.0426ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 36 detections of Isoxaflutole between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.64ug/L (max 1/12/22). 0.0788ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 34 detections of MCPA between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 1.3ug/L (max 13/5/22). 0.0674ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 191 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023. 5.4ug/L (max 17/1/22). 0.5376ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 32 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023. 0.09ug/L  (max 16/3/19). 0.0225ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 7 detections of Metribuzin between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.46ug/L (max 19/10/22). 0.1014ug/L (av.)

Pendimethalin: 4 detections of Pendimethalin between Feb 2020 and Oct 2022. 0.07ug/L (max 20/10/22). 0.0425ug/L (av.)

Prometryn: 22 detections of Prometryn between Dec 2016 and Dec 2022. 0.22ug/L (max 15/10/17). 0.0311ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 123 detections of Simazine between Dec 2016 and Jun 2022. 1.6ug/L (max 14/5/22). 0.0903ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 219 detections of Tebuthiuron between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023. 4.2ug/L (max 14/2/22). 0.6849ug/L (av.)

Terbuthylazine: 158 detections of Terbuthylazine between Dec 2016 and Dec 2023. 8.3ug/L (max 1/12/22). 0.2363ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 26 detections of Triclopyr between Mar 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.67ug/L (max 16/3/19). 0.1153ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

MacKenzie River at Rileys Crossing

1606 pesticide detections between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 95 detections of Diuron between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023. 1.6ug/L (max 8/12/17). 0.1113ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 110 detections of 2,4-D between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.62ug/L (max 31/3/17). 0.0833ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 6 detections of Ametryn between Dec 2016 and Mar 2017. 0.0006ug/L (max 30/3/17). 0.0004ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 188 detections of Atrazine between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023. 3.2ug/L (max 17/10/17). 0.2152ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 1 detection of Bromacil 23/8/22. 0.03ug/L

Chlorpyrifos: 2 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Oct 2017 and Jul 2022.

Diazinon: 4 trace detections of Diazinon between Mar 2017 and Dec 2018.

Fipronil: 3 detections of Fipronil between Dec 2022 and Feb 2023. 0.02ug/L (max 1/2/23). 0.0167ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 135 detections of Fluroxypur between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 14/1/23). 0.2109ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 76 detections of Haloxyfop between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023. 0.62ug/L (max 6/12/17). 0.0541ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 50 detections of Hexazinone between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023. 0.12ug/L (max 7/11/17). 0.0198ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 63 detections of Imazapic between Mar 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.21ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.0322ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 19 detections of Imidacloprid between Mar 2017 and May 2022. 0.43ug/L (max 11/2/20). 0.0426ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 36 detections of Isoxaflutole between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.64ug/L (max 1/12/22). 0.0788ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 34 detections of MCPA between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 1.3ug/L (max 13/5/22). 0.0674ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 191 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023. 5.4ug/L (max 17/1/22). 0.5376ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 32 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023. 0.09ug/L  (max 16/3/19). 0.0225ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 7 detections of Metribuzin between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.46ug/L (max 19/10/22). 0.1014ug/L (av.)

Pendimethalin: 4 detections of Pendimethalin between Feb 2020 and Oct 2022. 0.07ug/L (max 20/10/22). 0.0425ug/L (av.)

Prometryn: 22 detections of Prometryn between Dec 2016 and Dec 2022. 0.22ug/L (max 15/10/17). 0.0311ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 123 detections of Simazine between Dec 2016 and Jun 2022. 1.6ug/L (max 14/5/22). 0.0903ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 219 detections of Tebuthiuron between Dec 2016 and Feb 2023. 4.2ug/L (max 14/2/22). 0.6849ug/L (av.)

Terbuthylazine: 158 detections of Terbuthylazine between Dec 2016 and Dec 2023. 8.3ug/L (max 1/12/22). 0.2363ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 26 detections of Triclopyr between Mar 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.67ug/L (max 16/3/19). 0.1153ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2017/2023: Plane Creek at Sucrogen Weir (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Plane Creek at Sucrogen Weir

1072 pesticide detections between Jan 2017 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 103 detections of Diuron between Nov 2017 and Jan 2023. 1.7ug/L (max 8/1/19). 0.1778ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 136 detections of 2,4-D between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023. 1.5ug/L (max 8/1/19). 0.1882ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 6 detections of Ametryn between Feb 2018 and Jan 2021. 0.07ug/L (max 31/12/10). 0.0267ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 101 detections of Atrazine between Jan 2017 and Feb 2023. 5.3ug/L (max 8/1/19). 0.3901ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 72 detections of Bromacil between Oct 2017 and Mar 2021. 1.5ug/L (max 9/12/18). 0.1385ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 4 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between May 2022 and Dec 2022.

Diazinon: 10 trace detections of Diazinon between Jan 2019 and Jul 2022.

Fluroxypur: 69 detections of Fluoroxypur between Jan 2018 and Jan 2023. 1.1ug/L (max 28/2/22). 0.2093ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 147 detections of Hexazinone between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023. 1.6ug/L (max 8/1/19). 0.1486ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 96 detections of Imazapic between Dec 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.46ug/L (max 26/11/21). 0.0479ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 43 detections of Imidacloprid between Feb 2018 and Jan 2023. 0.62ug/L (max 27/11/21). 0.0909ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 28 detections of Isoxaflutole between Dec 2017 and Nov 2021. 0.17ug/L (max 30/12/20). 0.0554ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 61 detections of MCPA between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.78ug/L (max 30/1/17). 0.0803ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 25 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.15ug/L (max 6/12/17). 0.032ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 82 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.18ug/L (max 17/2/20). 0.0408ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 4 detections of Metribuzin between Jan 2020 and Feb 2020. 0.21ug/L (max 15/2/20). 0.08ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 1 detection of Simazine 8/1/19 0.02ug/L

Tebuthiuron: 11 detections of Tebuthiuron between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.07ug/L (max 1/12/22). 0.029ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 73 detections of Triclopyr between Nov 2017 and Jan 2023. 2.3ug/L (max 17/2/20). 0.2309ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Plane Creek at Sucrogen Weir

1072 pesticide detections between Jan 2017 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 103 detections of Diuron between Nov 2017 and Jan 2023. 1.7ug/L (max 8/1/19). 0.1778ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 136 detections of 2,4-D between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023. 1.5ug/L (max 8/1/19). 0.1882ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 6 detections of Ametryn between Feb 2018 and Jan 2021. 0.07ug/L (max 31/12/10). 0.0267ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 101 detections of Atrazine between Jan 2017 and Feb 2023. 5.3ug/L (max 8/1/19). 0.3901ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 72 detections of Bromacil between Oct 2017 and Mar 2021. 1.5ug/L (max 9/12/18). 0.1385ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 4 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between May 2022 and Dec 2022.

Diazinon: 10 trace detections of Diazinon between Jan 2019 and Jul 2022.

Fluroxypur: 69 detections of Fluoroxypur between Jan 2018 and Jan 2023. 1.1ug/L (max 28/2/22). 0.2093ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 147 detections of Hexazinone between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023. 1.6ug/L (max 8/1/19). 0.1486ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 96 detections of Imazapic between Dec 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.46ug/L (max 26/11/21). 0.0479ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 43 detections of Imidacloprid between Feb 2018 and Jan 2023. 0.62ug/L (max 27/11/21). 0.0909ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 28 detections of Isoxaflutole between Dec 2017 and Nov 2021. 0.17ug/L (max 30/12/20). 0.0554ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 61 detections of MCPA between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.78ug/L (max 30/1/17). 0.0803ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 25 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.15ug/L (max 6/12/17). 0.032ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 82 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.18ug/L (max 17/2/20). 0.0408ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 4 detections of Metribuzin between Jan 2020 and Feb 2020. 0.21ug/L (max 15/2/20). 0.08ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 1 detection of Simazine 8/1/19 0.02ug/L

Tebuthiuron: 11 detections of Tebuthiuron between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.07ug/L (max 1/12/22). 0.029ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 73 detections of Triclopyr between Nov 2017 and Jan 2023. 2.3ug/L (max 17/2/20). 0.2309ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2016/2023: O’Connell River at Staffords Crossing (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

O’Connell River at Staffords Crossing (Qld)

1740 pesticide detections between Sep 2016 and Jan 2023

Diuron: 209 detections of Diuron between Sep 2016 and Jan 2023. 10ug/L (max 29/12/19). 0.3703ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 170 detections of 2,4-D between Dec 2016 and Mar 2020. 6.4ug/L (max 31/1/17). 0.4534ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 3 detections of Ametryn between Mar 2017 and Jan 2019. 0.02ug/L (max 11/1/19). 0.0074ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 203 detections of Atrazine between Sep 2016 and Jan 2023. 6.9ug/L (max 31/1/17). 0.3677ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 40 detections of Bromacil between Nov 2017 and May 2020. 2.6ug/L (max 24/4/19). 0.4222ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: 6 detections of Diazinon between Dec 2016 and Feb 2019. 0.0018ug/L (max 22/3/27). 0.0004ug/L (av.)

Fipronil: 3 detections of Fipronil in May 2017. 0.0013ug/L (max). 0.0008ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 65 detections of Fluroxypur between Dec 2016 and Jan 2020. 1.3ug/L (max 25/3/18). 0.1909ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 28 detections of Haloxyfop between Jan 2017 and Feb 2018. 0.14ug/L (max 30/1/17). 0.0191ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 244 detections of Hexazinone between Sep 2016 and Jan 2023. 3.8ug/L (max 29/12/19). 0.1771ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 215 detections of Imazapic between Sep 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.49ug/L (max 11/1/19). 0.0655ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 207 detections of Imidacloprid between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 2ug/L (17/12/16). 0.1711ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 12 detections of Isoxaflutole between Jan 2017 and Jan 2019. 0.26ug/L (max 11/1/19). 0.0327ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 93 detections of MCPA between Sep 2016 and Feb 2020. 1.2ug/L (max 30/11/17). 0.0841ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 69 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2016 and May 2020. 0.8ug/L (max 29/12/19). 0.0929ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 37 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Jan 2017 and Mar 2019. 0.11ug/L (max 30/11/17). 0.0183ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 25 detections of Metribuzin between Dec 2016 and Jan 2019. 0.47ug/L (max 11/1/19). 0.0508ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 10 detections of Simazine between Jan 2017 and Nov 2017. 0.03ug/L (max 31/1/17). 0.0087ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 58 detections of Tebuthiuron between Dec 2016 and Apr 2019. 1.2ug/L (max 4/12/17). 0.0886ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 42 detections of Triclopyr between Dec 2016 and Feb 2020. 2.4ug/L (max 29/11/17). 0.2076ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

O’Connell River at Staffords Crossing (Qld)

1740 pesticide detections between Sep 2016 and Jan 2023

Diuron: 209 detections of Diuron between Sep 2016 and Jan 2023. 10ug/L (max 29/12/19). 0.3703ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 170 detections of 2,4-D between Dec 2016 and Mar 2020. 6.4ug/L (max 31/1/17). 0.4534ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 3 detections of Ametryn between Mar 2017 and Jan 2019. 0.02ug/L (max 11/1/19). 0.0074ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 203 detections of Atrazine between Sep 2016 and Jan 2023. 6.9ug/L (max 31/1/17). 0.3677ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 40 detections of Bromacil between Nov 2017 and May 2020. 2.6ug/L (max 24/4/19). 0.4222ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: 6 detections of Diazinon between Dec 2016 and Feb 2019. 0.0018ug/L (max 22/3/27). 0.0004ug/L (av.)

Fipronil: 3 detections of Fipronil in May 2017. 0.0013ug/L (max). 0.0008ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 65 detections of Fluroxypur between Dec 2016 and Jan 2020. 1.3ug/L (max 25/3/18). 0.1909ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 28 detections of Haloxyfop between Jan 2017 and Feb 2018. 0.14ug/L (max 30/1/17). 0.0191ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 244 detections of Hexazinone between Sep 2016 and Jan 2023. 3.8ug/L (max 29/12/19). 0.1771ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 215 detections of Imazapic between Sep 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.49ug/L (max 11/1/19). 0.0655ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 207 detections of Imidacloprid between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 2ug/L (17/12/16). 0.1711ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 12 detections of Isoxaflutole between Jan 2017 and Jan 2019. 0.26ug/L (max 11/1/19). 0.0327ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 93 detections of MCPA between Sep 2016 and Feb 2020. 1.2ug/L (max 30/11/17). 0.0841ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 69 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2016 and May 2020. 0.8ug/L (max 29/12/19). 0.0929ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 37 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Jan 2017 and Mar 2019. 0.11ug/L (max 30/11/17). 0.0183ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 25 detections of Metribuzin between Dec 2016 and Jan 2019. 0.47ug/L (max 11/1/19). 0.0508ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 10 detections of Simazine between Jan 2017 and Nov 2017. 0.03ug/L (max 31/1/17). 0.0087ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 58 detections of Tebuthiuron between Dec 2016 and Apr 2019. 1.2ug/L (max 4/12/17). 0.0886ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 42 detections of Triclopyr between Dec 2016 and Feb 2020. 2.4ug/L (max 29/11/17). 0.2076ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2014/2023: O’Connell River at Caravan Park (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

O’Connell River at Caravan Park

2917 pesticide detections between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023

Diuron: 329 detections of Diuron between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023. 3ug/L (max 26/12/10). 0.2056ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 280 detections of 2,4-D between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023. 6.3ug/L (max 13/1/23). 0.2186ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 10 detections of Ametryn between Jan 2014 and Feb 2017. 0.01ug/L (max 10/1/14). 0.0017ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 339 detections of Atrazine between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023. 12ug/L (max 13/11/20). 0.4317ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 52 detections of Bromacil between Nov 2017 and Dec 2021. 1ug/L (max 11/2/21). 0.2023ug/L

Chlorpyrifos: 5 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Aug 2019 and Jan 2023.

Diazinon: 7 trace detections of Diazinon between Dec 2017 and Jul 2022.

Fipronil: 1 detection of Fipronil 2/7/18 0.15ug/L

Fluroxypur: 138 detections of Fluroxypur between Mar 2014 and Jan 2023. 1.2ug/L (max 19/3/21). 0.1194ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 15 detections of Haloxyfop between Jun 2016 and Feb 2022. 0.08ug/L (max 17/2/22). 0.0231ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 397 detections of Hexazinone between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023. 1.3ug/L (max 16/7/16). 0.1354ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 291 detections of Imazapic between Feb 2015 and Jan 2023. 0.51ug/L (max 30/12/21). 0.0689ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 319 detections of Imidacloprid between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023. 1.3ug/L (max 15/1/23). 0.1555ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 103 detections of Isoxaflutole between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023. 0.69ug/L (max 23/2/20). 0.0859ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 118 detections of MCPA between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023 1.3ug/L (max 30/11/17). 0.0783ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 121 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2014 and Jan 2023. 0.78ug/L (max 19/6/16). 0.0717ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 16 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Jun 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.04ug/L (max 11/2/21). 0.0141ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 80 detections of Metribuzin between Jan 2014 and Dec 2022. 1.1ug/L (max 11/1/19). 0.1568ug/L (av.)

Pendimethalin: 2 detections of Pendimethalin between May 2022 and Jan 2023. 0.02ug/L (max 25/5/22). 0.02ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 18 Simazine detections between Jun 2016 and May 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 11/1/19). 0.0162ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 234 detections of Tebuthiuron between Jan 2014 and Dec 2022. 0.23ug/L (max 10/1/14). 0.0365ug/L (av.)

Terbuthylazine: 16 detections of Terbuthylazine between Jun 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.25ug/L (max 30/11/22). 0.0657ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 26 detections of Triclopyr between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023. 0.32ug/L (max 12/12/21). 0.0729ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

O’Connell River at Caravan Park

2917 pesticide detections between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023

Diuron: 329 detections of Diuron between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023. 3ug/L (max 26/12/10). 0.2056ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 280 detections of 2,4-D between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023. 6.3ug/L (max 13/1/23). 0.2186ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 10 detections of Ametryn between Jan 2014 and Feb 2017. 0.01ug/L (max 10/1/14). 0.0017ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 339 detections of Atrazine between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023. 12ug/L (max 13/11/20). 0.4317ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 52 detections of Bromacil between Nov 2017 and Dec 2021. 1ug/L (max 11/2/21). 0.2023ug/L

Chlorpyrifos: 5 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Aug 2019 and Jan 2023.

Diazinon: 7 trace detections of Diazinon between Dec 2017 and Jul 2022.

Fipronil: 1 detection of Fipronil 2/7/18 0.15ug/L

Fluroxypur: 138 detections of Fluroxypur between Mar 2014 and Jan 2023. 1.2ug/L (max 19/3/21). 0.1194ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 15 detections of Haloxyfop between Jun 2016 and Feb 2022. 0.08ug/L (max 17/2/22). 0.0231ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 397 detections of Hexazinone between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023. 1.3ug/L (max 16/7/16). 0.1354ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 291 detections of Imazapic between Feb 2015 and Jan 2023. 0.51ug/L (max 30/12/21). 0.0689ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 319 detections of Imidacloprid between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023. 1.3ug/L (max 15/1/23). 0.1555ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 103 detections of Isoxaflutole between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023. 0.69ug/L (max 23/2/20). 0.0859ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 118 detections of MCPA between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023 1.3ug/L (max 30/11/17). 0.0783ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 121 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2014 and Jan 2023. 0.78ug/L (max 19/6/16). 0.0717ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 16 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Jun 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.04ug/L (max 11/2/21). 0.0141ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 80 detections of Metribuzin between Jan 2014 and Dec 2022. 1.1ug/L (max 11/1/19). 0.1568ug/L (av.)

Pendimethalin: 2 detections of Pendimethalin between May 2022 and Jan 2023. 0.02ug/L (max 25/5/22). 0.02ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 18 Simazine detections between Jun 2016 and May 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 11/1/19). 0.0162ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 234 detections of Tebuthiuron between Jan 2014 and Dec 2022. 0.23ug/L (max 10/1/14). 0.0365ug/L (av.)

Terbuthylazine: 16 detections of Terbuthylazine between Jun 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.25ug/L (max 30/11/22). 0.0657ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 26 detections of Triclopyr between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023. 0.32ug/L (max 12/12/21). 0.0729ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2016/2023: Proserpine River at Glen Isla (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Prosperpine River at Glen Isla

3206 pesticide detections between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023

Diuron: 310 detections of Diuron between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 8.3ug/L (max 28/1/19). 0.8453ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 263 detections of 2,4-D between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 4.9ug/L (max 28/1/19). 0.4705ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 34 detections of Ametryn between Dec 2016 and Dec 2021. 0.3ug/L (max 1/2/17). 0.0106ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 299 detections of Atrazine between Dec 2016 and Dec 2021. 17ug/L (max 28/1/19). 1.0152ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 196 detections of Bromacil between Dec 2017 and Dec 2021. 3.7ug/L (max 28/2/21). 0.2972ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 4 detections of Chlorpyrifos between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.02ug/L (max 24/11/22). 0.005ug.L (av.)

Diazinon: 11 detections of Diazinon between Jan 2017 and Oct 2022. 0.01ug/L (max 3/4/17). 0.001ug/L (av.)

Fipronil: 2 detections of Fipronil in Jan 2017. 0.0012ug/L (max 13/1/17). 0.0009ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 204 detections of Fluroxypur between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023. 1.5ug/L (max 30/11/17). 0.2784ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 52 detections of Haloxyfop between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.27ug/L (max 23/3/17). 0.0517ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 341 detections of Hexazinone between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 6.6ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.801ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 330 detections of Imazapic between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 1.5ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.2436ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 288 detections of Imidacloprid between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 2.5ug/L (max 31/12/19). 0.4983ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 146 detections of Isoxaflutole between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.52ug/L (max 1/12/22). 0.0932ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 226 detections of MCPA between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023. 2.8ug/L (max 28/1/19). 0.2166ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 282 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 3.1ug/L (max 1/12/22). 0.2361ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 42 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Dec 2016 and Mar 2022. 0.06ug/L (max 10/1/19). 0.0274ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 37 detections of Metribuzin between Dec 2016 and Feb 2022. 0.42ug/L (max 4/12/17). 0.0689ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 33 detections of Simazine between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.69ug/L (max 1/12/22). 0.051ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 41 detections of Tebuthiuron between Dec 2016 and Apr 2022. 0.19ug/L (max 1/2/17). 0.0282ug/L (av.)

Terbuthylazine: 47 detections of Terbuthylazine between Jan 2019 and Jan 2023. 0.57ug/L (max 26/11/21). 0.0917ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 17 detections of Triclopyr between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.35ug/L (max 18/5/17). 0.052ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Prosperpine River at Glen Isla

3206 pesticide detections between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023

Diuron: 310 detections of Diuron between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 8.3ug/L (max 28/1/19). 0.8453ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 263 detections of 2,4-D between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 4.9ug/L (max 28/1/19). 0.4705ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 34 detections of Ametryn between Dec 2016 and Dec 2021. 0.3ug/L (max 1/2/17). 0.0106ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 299 detections of Atrazine between Dec 2016 and Dec 2021. 17ug/L (max 28/1/19). 1.0152ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 196 detections of Bromacil between Dec 2017 and Dec 2021. 3.7ug/L (max 28/2/21). 0.2972ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 4 detections of Chlorpyrifos between Jan 2020 and Dec 2022. 0.02ug/L (max 24/11/22). 0.005ug.L (av.)

Diazinon: 11 detections of Diazinon between Jan 2017 and Oct 2022. 0.01ug/L (max 3/4/17). 0.001ug/L (av.)

Fipronil: 2 detections of Fipronil in Jan 2017. 0.0012ug/L (max 13/1/17). 0.0009ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 204 detections of Fluroxypur between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023. 1.5ug/L (max 30/11/17). 0.2784ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 52 detections of Haloxyfop between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.27ug/L (max 23/3/17). 0.0517ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 341 detections of Hexazinone between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 6.6ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.801ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 330 detections of Imazapic between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 1.5ug/L (max 2/12/22). 0.2436ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 288 detections of Imidacloprid between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 2.5ug/L (max 31/12/19). 0.4983ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 146 detections of Isoxaflutole between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.52ug/L (max 1/12/22). 0.0932ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 226 detections of MCPA between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023. 2.8ug/L (max 28/1/19). 0.2166ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 282 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 3.1ug/L (max 1/12/22). 0.2361ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 42 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Dec 2016 and Mar 2022. 0.06ug/L (max 10/1/19). 0.0274ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 37 detections of Metribuzin between Dec 2016 and Feb 2022. 0.42ug/L (max 4/12/17). 0.0689ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 33 detections of Simazine between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.69ug/L (max 1/12/22). 0.051ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 41 detections of Tebuthiuron between Dec 2016 and Apr 2022. 0.19ug/L (max 1/2/17). 0.0282ug/L (av.)

Terbuthylazine: 47 detections of Terbuthylazine between Jan 2019 and Jan 2023. 0.57ug/L (max 26/11/21). 0.0917ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 17 detections of Triclopyr between Dec 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.35ug/L (max 18/5/17). 0.052ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2017/2023: Don River, Bowen (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Don River at Bowen Queensland

381 pesticide detections between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023

Diuron: 5 detections of Diuron between Mar 2017 and Feb 2020. 0.18ug/L (max 23/2/20). 0.0417ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 16 detections of 2,4-D between Mar 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.2ug/L (max 7/1/19). 0.0325ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 13 detections of Atrazine between Mar 2017 and Dec 2022. 3.3ug/L (max 12/5/22). 0.3478ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 1 detection of Chlorpyrifos 17/5/18 1.4ug/L

Diazinon: 22 detections of Diazinon between Apr 2017 and Oct 2022. 0.71ug/L (max 12/5/22). 0.0364ug/L (av.)

Fipronil: 6 detections of Fipronil between Mar 2017 and May 2017. 0.024ug/L (max 28/3/17). 0.0061ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 10 detections of Fluroxypur between Mar 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.14ug/L (max 28/2/21). 0.0666ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 38 detections of Hexazinone between Jan 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.14ug/L (max 27/1/22). 0.0197ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 13 detections of Imidacloprid between Mar 2017 and May 2017. 0.013ug/L (max 18/5/17). 0.0043ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 1 detection of MCPA 23/2/20 0.04ug/L

Metolachlor: 74 detections of Metolachlor detected between Mar 2017 and Jan 2023. 12ug/L (max 17/5/18). 0.3109ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 30 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Mar 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.59ug/L (max 31/1/22). 0.1032ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 7 detections of Metribuzin between Mar 2017 and May 2017. 0.063ug/L (max 18/5/17). 0.0203ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 119 detections of Tebuthiuron between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.72ug/L (max 6/1/21). 0.0647ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 26 detections of Triclopyr between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.72ug/L (max 23/2/20). 0.1252ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Don River at Bowen

381 pesticide detections between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023

Diuron: 5 detections of Diuron between Mar 2017 and Feb 2020. 0.18ug/L (max 23/2/20). 0.0417ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 16 detections of 2,4-D between Mar 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.2ug/L (max 7/1/19). 0.0325ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 13 detections of Atrazine between Mar 2017 and Dec 2022. 3.3ug/L (max 12/5/22). 0.3478ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 1 detection of Chlorpyrifos 17/5/18 1.4ug/L

Diazinon: 22 detections of Diazinon between Apr 2017 and Oct 2022. 0.71ug/L (max 12/5/22). 0.0364ug/L (av.)

Fipronil: 6 detections of Fipronil between Mar 2017 and May 2017. 0.024ug/L (max 28/3/17). 0.0061ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 10 detections of Fluroxypur between Mar 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.14ug/L (max 28/2/21). 0.0666ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 38 detections of Hexazinone between Jan 2017 and Dec 2022. 0.14ug/L (max 27/1/22). 0.0197ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 13 detections of Imidacloprid between Mar 2017 and May 2017. 0.013ug/L (max 18/5/17). 0.0043ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 1 detection of MCPA 23/2/20 0.04ug/L

Metolachlor: 74 detections of Metolachlor detected between Mar 2017 and Jan 2023. 12ug/L (max 17/5/18). 0.3109ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 30 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Mar 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.59ug/L (max 31/1/22). 0.1032ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 7 detections of Metribuzin between Mar 2017 and May 2017. 0.063ug/L (max 18/5/17). 0.0203ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 119 detections of Tebuthiuron between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.72ug/L (max 6/1/21). 0.0647ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 26 detections of Triclopyr between Jan 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.72ug/L (max 23/2/20). 0.1252ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2017/2023: East Barratta Creek at Jerona Road (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

East Barratta Creek at Jerona Road

2839 pesticide detections Aug 2017 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 283 detections of Diuron between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 2ug/L (max 16/12/18). 0.232ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 173 detections of 2,4-D between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 2.8ug/L (max 8/3/19). 0.155ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 220 detections of Ametryn between Aug 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.28ug/L (max 12/12/17). 0.054ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 306 detections of Atrazine between Aug 2017 and Feb 2023. Every sample positive. 4.9ug/L (max 11/1/19). 0.813ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 110 detections of Bromacil between Feb 18 and Jul 2022. 0.96ug/L (max 16/12/18). 0.123ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 3 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Feb 2018 and Oct 2021.

Diazinon: 10 trace detections of Diazinon between Nov 2017 and Jul 2020.

Fipronil: 1 detection of Fipronil 1/2/20 0.03ug/L

Fluroxypur: 178 detections of Fluroxypur between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 2.2ug/L (max 3/2/23). 0.324ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 71 detections of Haloxyfop between Nov 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.2ug/L (max 3/2/23). 0.048ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 70 detections of Hexazinone between Oct 2017 and Nov 2022. 0.17ug/L (max 27/1/20). 0.0378ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 281 detections of Imazapic between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.22ug/L (max 29/11/21). 0.044ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 14 detections of Imidacloprid between Feb 2018 and Jan 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 28/1/22). 0.029ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 208 detections of Isoxaflutole between Oct 2017 and Jan 2023. 1.3ug/L (max 27/11/21). 0.2111ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 158 detections of MCPA between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.71ug/L (max 1/3/21). 0.075ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 218 detections of Metolachlor between Aug 2017 and Feb 2023. 1ug/L (max 27/4/22). 0.075ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 16 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Feb 2018 and Feb 2022. 0.15ug/L (max 2/4/19). 0.078ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 182 detections of Metribuzin between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 16/12/18). 0.419ug/L (av.)

Pendimethalin: 7 detections of Pendimethalin between May 2019 and May 2022. 0.26ug/L (max 26/4/22). 0.141ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 6 detections of Simazine between Dec 2018 and Apr 2022. 0.08ug/L (max 26/4/22). 0.094ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 218 detections of Tebuthiuron between Aug 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.37ug/L (max 7/1/21). 0.023ug/L (av.)

Terbuthylazine: 90 detections of Terbuthylazine between Dec 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.96ug/L (max 11/11/21). 0.156ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 12 detections of Triclopyr between Nov 2018 and Apr 2022. 0.12ug/L (max 18/12/18). 0.079ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

East Barratta Creek at Jerona Road

2839 pesticide detections Aug 2017 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 283 detections of Diuron between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 2ug/L (max 16/12/18). 0.232ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 173 detections of 2,4-D between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 2.8ug/L (max 8/3/19). 0.155ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 220 detections of Ametryn between Aug 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.28ug/L (max 12/12/17). 0.054ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 306 detections of Atrazine between Aug 2017 and Feb 2023. Every sample positive. 4.9ug/L (max 11/1/19). 0.813ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 110 detections of Bromacil between Feb 18 and Jul 2022. 0.96ug/L (max 16/12/18). 0.123ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 3 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Feb 2018 and Oct 2021.

Diazinon: 10 trace detections of Diazinon between Nov 2017 and Jul 2020.

Fipronil: 1 detection of Fipronil 1/2/20 0.03ug/L

Fluroxypur: 178 detections of Fluroxypur between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 2.2ug/L (max 3/2/23). 0.324ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 71 detections of Haloxyfop between Nov 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.2ug/L (max 3/2/23). 0.048ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 70 detections of Hexazinone between Oct 2017 and Nov 2022. 0.17ug/L (max 27/1/20). 0.0378ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 281 detections of Imazapic between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.22ug/L (max 29/11/21). 0.044ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 14 detections of Imidacloprid between Feb 2018 and Jan 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 28/1/22). 0.029ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 208 detections of Isoxaflutole between Oct 2017 and Jan 2023. 1.3ug/L (max 27/11/21). 0.2111ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 158 detections of MCPA between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.71ug/L (max 1/3/21). 0.075ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 218 detections of Metolachlor between Aug 2017 and Feb 2023. 1ug/L (max 27/4/22). 0.075ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 16 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Feb 2018 and Feb 2022. 0.15ug/L (max 2/4/19). 0.078ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 182 detections of Metribuzin between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 16/12/18). 0.419ug/L (av.)

Pendimethalin: 7 detections of Pendimethalin between May 2019 and May 2022. 0.26ug/L (max 26/4/22). 0.141ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 6 detections of Simazine between Dec 2018 and Apr 2022. 0.08ug/L (max 26/4/22). 0.094ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 218 detections of Tebuthiuron between Aug 2017 and Feb 2023. 0.37ug/L (max 7/1/21). 0.023ug/L (av.)

Terbuthylazine: 90 detections of Terbuthylazine between Dec 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.96ug/L (max 11/11/21). 0.156ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 12 detections of Triclopyr between Nov 2018 and Apr 2022. 0.12ug/L (max 18/12/18). 0.079ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2017/2023: Haughton River at Giru Tailwater. Pesticides: Multiple

Haughton River at Giru Tailwater

871 pesticide detections between Aug 2017 and Jan 2023

Diuron: 78 detections of Diuron between Oct 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.74ug/L (max 27/11/21). 0.137ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 59 detections of 2,4-D between Oct 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.45ug/L (max 23/2/20). 0.109ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 12 detections of Ametryn between Jul 2019 and Dec 2022. 0.12ug/L (max 11/5/22). 0.031ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 152 detections of Atrazine between Aug 2017 and Jan 2023. 3.1ug/L (max 14/1/19). 0.316ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 1 detection of Bromacil 14/1/19 0.02ug/L

Chlorpyrifos: 3 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Nov 2021 and May 2022

Diazinon: 8 trace detections of Diazinon between Aug 2018 and Apr 2022.

Fipronil: 4 detections of Fipronil between Feb 2018 and Jan 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 23/2/20). 0.0325ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 40 detections of Fluroxypur between Oct 2017 and Feb 2022. 0.66ug/L (max 1/9/21). 0.1457ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 8 detections of Haloxyfop between Oct 2017 and Feb 2020. 0.11ug/L (max 28/10/17). 0.05ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 5 detections of Hexazinone between Jan 2018 and Jan 2020. 0.01ug/L (max 22/1/18). 0.01ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 59 detections of Imazapic between Feb 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.31ug/L (max 1/2/22). 0.056ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 16 detections of Imidacloprid between Feb 2018 and Dec 2022. 0.1ug/L (max 16/12/18). 0.039ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 5 detections of Isoxaflutole between Dec 2018 and Jan 2022. 0.06ug/L (max 16/12/18). 0.032ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 41 detections of MCPA between Feb 2018 and Apr 2022. 0.25ug/L (max 1/9/21). 0.0424ug/L (av).

Metolachlor: 136 detections of Metolachlor between Oct 2017 and Jan 2023. 1.9ug/L (max 27/1/22). 0.14ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 1 detection of Metsulfuron Methyl on 11/5/22. 0.06ug/L

Metribuzin: 17 detections of Metribuzin between Feb 2018 and Jan 2023. 0.68ug/L (max 16/12/18). 0.139ug/L (av.)

Pendimethalin: 1 detection of Pendimethalin 11/5/22. 0.07ug/L

Simazine: 1 detection of Simazine 14/1/19. 0.01ug/L

Tebuthiuron: 197 detections of Tebuthiuron between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 2.8ug/L (max 28/1/19). 0.154ug/L (av.)

Terbuthylazine: 14 detections of Terbuthylazine between Nov 2021 and Jan 2023. 0.25ug/L (max 29/11/21). 0.061ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 8 detections of Triclopyr between Dec 2018 and Dec 2021. 0.11ug/L (max 24/12/18). 0.075ug/L

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Haughton River at Giru Tailwater

871 pesticide detections between Aug 2017 and Jan 2023

Diuron: 78 detections of Diuron between Oct 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.74ug/L (max 27/11/21). 0.137ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 59 detections of 2,4-D between Oct 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.45ug/L (max 23/2/20). 0.109ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 12 detections of Ametryn between Jul 2019 and Dec 2022. 0.12ug/L (max 11/5/22). 0.031ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 152 detections of Atrazine between Aug 2017 and Jan 2023. 3.1ug/L (max 14/1/19). 0.316ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 1 detection of Bromacil 14/1/19 0.02ug/L

Chlorpyrifos: 3 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Nov 2021 and May 2022

Diazinon: 8 trace detections of Diazinon between Aug 2018 and Apr 2022.

Fipronil: 4 detections of Fipronil between Feb 2018 and Jan 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 23/2/20). 0.0325ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 40 detections of Fluroxypur between Oct 2017 and Feb 2022. 0.66ug/L (max 1/9/21). 0.1457ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 8 detections of Haloxyfop between Oct 2017 and Feb 2020. 0.11ug/L (max 28/10/17). 0.05ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 5 detections of Hexazinone between Jan 2018 and Jan 2020. 0.01ug/L (max 22/1/18). 0.01ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 59 detections of Imazapic between Feb 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.31ug/L (max 1/2/22). 0.056ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 16 detections of Imidacloprid between Feb 2018 and Dec 2022. 0.1ug/L (max 16/12/18). 0.039ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 5 detections of Isoxaflutole between Dec 2018 and Jan 2022. 0.06ug/L (max 16/12/18). 0.032ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 41 detections of MCPA between Feb 2018 and Apr 2022. 0.25ug/L (max 1/9/21). 0.0424ug/L (av).

Metolachlor: 136 detections of Metolachlor between Oct 2017 and Jan 2023. 1.9ug/L (max 27/1/22). 0.14ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 1 detection of Metsulfuron Methyl on 11/5/22. 0.06ug/L

Metribuzin: 17 detections of Metribuzin between Feb 2018 and Jan 2023. 0.68ug/L (max 16/12/18). 0.139ug/L (av.)

Pendimethalin: 1 detection of Pendimethalin 11/5/22. 0.07ug/L

Simazine: 1 detection of Simazine 14/1/19. 0.01ug/L

Tebuthiuron: 197 detections of Tebuthiuron between Oct 2017 and Feb 2023. 2.8ug/L (max 28/1/19). 0.154ug/L (av.)

Terbuthylazine: 14 detections of Terbuthylazine between Nov 2021 and Jan 2023. 0.25ug/L (max 29/11/21). 0.061ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 8 detections of Triclopyr between Dec 2018 and Dec 2021. 0.11ug/L (max 24/12/18). 0.075ug/L

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2017/2023. Ross River at Aplins Weir Townsville (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Ross River at Aplins Weir (Townsville Queensland)

139 pesticide detections Nov 2017 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 3 detections of Diuron between Feb and Mar 2020. 0.02ug/L (max 26/2/20). 0.02ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 19 detections of 2,4-D between Feb 2018 and Apr 2022. 0.04ug/L (max 14/2/20). 0.0289ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 4 detections of Atrazine in Jan 2019. 0.03ug/L (max 27/1/19). 0.0275ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 5 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Mar 2019 to Feb 2023.

Diazinon: 1 trace detection of Diazinon in Nov 2018.

Fipronil:  3 detections of Fipronil in Jan 2023. 0.01ug/L (max 14/1/23). 0.01ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 20 detections of Fluroxypur between Dec 2021 to Jan 2023. 0.27ug/L (max 2/2/22). 0.1105ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 2 detections of Imidacloprid between Jan 2021 to Feb 2021. 0.06ug/L (max 28/2/21). 0.045ug/L av.

MCPA: 56 detections of MCPA between Feb 2018 and Jan 2023. 0.05ug/L (max 28/11/22). 0.0196ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 1 detection of Simazine 24/3/21. 0.01ug/L

Tebuthiuron: 23 detections of Tebuthiuron between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.11ug/L (max 5/2/23). 0.03ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 2 detections of Triclopyr between Jan 2021 and Feb 2023. 0.08ug/L (max 5/2/23). 0.065ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Ross River at Aplins Weir (Townsville Queensland)

139 pesticide detections Nov 2017 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 3 detections of Diuron between Feb and Mar 2020. 0.02ug/L (max 26/2/20). 0.02ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 19 detections of 2,4-D between Feb 2018 and Apr 2022. 0.04ug/L (max 14/2/20). 0.0289ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 4 detections of Atrazine in Jan 2019. 0.03ug/L (max 27/1/19). 0.0275ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 5 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Mar 2019 to Feb 2023.

Diazinon: 1 trace detection of Diazinon in Nov 2018.

Fipronil:  3 detections of Fipronil in Jan 2023. 0.01ug/L (max 14/1/23). 0.01ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 20 detections of Fluroxypur between Dec 2021 to Jan 2023. 0.27ug/L (max 2/2/22). 0.1105ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 2 detections of Imidacloprid between Jan 2021 to Feb 2021. 0.06ug/L (max 28/2/21). 0.045ug/L av.

MCPA: 56 detections of MCPA between Feb 2018 and Jan 2023. 0.05ug/L (max 28/11/22). 0.0196ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 1 detection of Simazine 24/3/21. 0.01ug/L

Tebuthiuron: 23 detections of Tebuthiuron between Jan 2020 and Feb 2023. 0.11ug/L (max 5/2/23). 0.03ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 2 detections of Triclopyr between Jan 2021 and Feb 2023. 0.08ug/L (max 5/2/23). 0.065ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2017/2023: Black River at Bruce Highway (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Black River at Bruce Highway

72 pesticide detections Aug 2017 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 1 detection of Diuron 14/1/23. 0.04ug/L

2,4-D: 6 detections of 2,4-D between Feb 2018 and Jan 2023. 0.16ug/L (max 22/4/21). 0.063ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 4 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Mar 2019 and Feb 2023.

Diazinon: 6 trace detections of Diazinon between Oct 2018 and Nov 2021.

Fipronil: 2 detections of Fipronil between Jan 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.03ug/L (max 16/1/23). 0.025ug/L av.)

MCPA: 12 detections of MCPA between Feb 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.2ug/L (max 28/11/22). 0.0592ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 3 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Mar 2021 and Jan 2023. 0.04ug/L  (max 22/3/21) 0.0333ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 25 detections of Tebuthiuron between Feb 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.1ug/L (max 6/1/23). 0.0392ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 13 detections of Triclopyr between Feb 2019 and Jan 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 26/4/22). 0.078ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Black River at Bruce Highway

72 pesticide detections Aug 2017 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 1 detection of Diuron 14/1/23. 0.04ug/L

2,4-D: 6 detections of 2,4-D between Feb 2018 and Jan 2023. 0.16ug/L (max 22/4/21). 0.063ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 4 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between Mar 2019 and Feb 2023.

Diazinon: 6 trace detections of Diazinon between Oct 2018 and Nov 2021.

Fipronil: 2 detections of Fipronil between Jan 2020 and Jan 2023. 0.03ug/L (max 16/1/23). 0.025ug/L av.)

MCPA: 12 detections of MCPA between Feb 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.2ug/L (max 28/11/22). 0.0592ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 3 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Mar 2021 and Jan 2023. 0.04ug/L  (max 22/3/21) 0.0333ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 25 detections of Tebuthiuron between Feb 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.1ug/L (max 6/1/23). 0.0392ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 13 detections of Triclopyr between Feb 2019 and Jan 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 26/4/22). 0.078ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2018/2023: Murray River at Bilyana (Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

Murray River at Bilyana (Qld)

1700 pesticide detections Sep 2018 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 219 detections of Diuron between Sep 2018 and Feb 2023. 2.5ug/L (max 12/1/22). 0.398ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 190 detections of 2,4-D between Sep 20-18 and Feb 2023. 2.2ug/L (max 1/9/21). 0.23ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 9 detections of Ametryn between Nov 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.04ug/L (max 30/1/23). 0.0189ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 204 detections of Atrazine between Dec 2018 and Feb 2023. 5.1ug/L (max 12/1/22). 0.41ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 15 detections of Bromacil between Nov 2018 and Feb 2020. 0.24ug/L (max 26/1/20). 0.0607ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 3 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos in April 2022

Diazinon: 7 trace detections of Diazinon between Oct 2018 and Apr 2022

Fluroxypur: 43 detections of Fluroxypur between Dec 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.2ug/L (max 20/12/22). 0.0915ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 49 detections of Haloxyfop between Dec 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.28ug/L (max 12/1/22). 0.0579ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 228 detections of Hexazinone between Nov 2018 and Feb 2023. 1.5ug/L (max 24/2/20). 0.2252ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 187 detections of Imazapic between Dec 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.34ug/L (max 20/12/22). 0.0549ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 206 detections of Imidacloprid between Dec 2018 and Feb 2023. 1.1ug/L (max 11/12/18). 0.1898ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 84 detections of Isoxaflutole between Dec 2018 and Dec 2022. 0.37ug/L (max 24/2/20). 0.0773ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 8 detections of MCPA between Dec 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.2ug/L (max 24/2/20). 0.0613ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 145 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.27ug/L (max 10/12/18). 0.0452ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 4 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Jan 2020 to Feb 2020. 0.08ug/L (max 14/2/20). 0.0375ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 58 detections of Metribuzin between Dec 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.82ug/L (max 28/1/20). 0.124ug/L (av.)

Pendimethalin: 1 detection of Pendimethalin 28/4/22. 0.03ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 15 detections of Simazine between Apr 2020 and Jan 2022. 0.46ug/L (max 19/4/20). 0.121ug/L (av.)

Terbuthylazine: 3 detections of Terbuthylazine in Jan 2020. 0.05ug/L (max 2/1/21). 0.023ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 25 detections of Triclopyr between April 2019 and Jan 2022. 0.43ug/L (max 20/4/21). 0.1304ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Murray River at Bilyana

1700 pesticide detections Sep 2018 and Feb 2023

Diuron: 219 detections of Diuron between Sep 2018 and Feb 2023. 2.5ug/L (max 12/1/22). 0.398ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 190 detections of 2,4-D between Sep 20-18 and Feb 2023. 2.2ug/L (max 1/9/21). 0.23ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 9 detections of Ametryn between Nov 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.04ug/L (max 30/1/23). 0.0189ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 204 detections of Atrazine between Dec 2018 and Feb 2023. 5.1ug/L (max 12/1/22). 0.41ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 15 detections of Bromacil between Nov 2018 and Feb 2020. 0.24ug/L (max 26/1/20). 0.0607ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 3 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos in April 2022

Diazinon: 7 trace detections of Diazinon between Oct 2018 and Apr 2022

Fluroxypur: 43 detections of Fluroxypur between Dec 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.2ug/L (max 20/12/22). 0.0915ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 49 detections of Haloxyfop between Dec 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.28ug/L (max 12/1/22). 0.0579ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 228 detections of Hexazinone between Nov 2018 and Feb 2023. 1.5ug/L (max 24/2/20). 0.2252ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 187 detections of Imazapic between Dec 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.34ug/L (max 20/12/22). 0.0549ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 206 detections of Imidacloprid between Dec 2018 and Feb 2023. 1.1ug/L (max 11/12/18). 0.1898ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 84 detections of Isoxaflutole between Dec 2018 and Dec 2022. 0.37ug/L (max 24/2/20). 0.0773ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 8 detections of MCPA between Dec 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.2ug/L (max 24/2/20). 0.0613ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 145 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.27ug/L (max 10/12/18). 0.0452ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 4 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Jan 2020 to Feb 2020. 0.08ug/L (max 14/2/20). 0.0375ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 58 detections of Metribuzin between Dec 2018 and Feb 2023. 0.82ug/L (max 28/1/20). 0.124ug/L (av.)

Pendimethalin: 1 detection of Pendimethalin 28/4/22. 0.03ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 15 detections of Simazine between Apr 2020 and Jan 2022. 0.46ug/L (max 19/4/20). 0.121ug/L (av.)

Terbuthylazine: 3 detections of Terbuthylazine in Jan 2020. 0.05ug/L (max 2/1/21). 0.023ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 25 detections of Triclopyr between April 2019 and Jan 2022. 0.43ug/L (max 20/4/21). 0.1304ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2021: Forrest Beach (Qld). Pesticides: Atrazine, Desethyl Atrazine, Hexazinone

Scheme 3 Forrest Beach Water Supply

Pesticide Residue Analysis
Pesticide residue analysis occurs every 12 months for both untreated and treated samples. Herbicides including, Atrazine, Desethyl Atrazine and Hexazinone, have been recorded to have greater values than <0.1 μg/L, but have not exceeded the ADWG.

Scheme 3 Forrest Beach Water Supply

Pesticide Residue Analysis
Pesticide residue analysis occurs every 12 months for both untreated and treated samples. Herbicides including, Atrazine, Desethyl Atrazine and Hexazinone, have been recorded to have greater values than <0.1 μg/L, but have not exceeded the ADWG.

2021: Macknade (Queensland). Pesticides: Atrazine, Desethyl Atrazine, Hexazinone

Scheme 2 Lower Herbert Water Supply

Macknade bores

Pesticide Residue Analysis
Pesticide residue analysis occurs every 12 months for both untreated and treated samples. Herbicides including, Atrazine, Desethyl Atrazine and Hexazinone, have been recorded to have greater values than <0.1 μg/L, but have not exceeded the ADWG.

Note that PFAS has been detected at Macknade

Scheme 2 Lower Herbert Water Supply

Macknade bores

Pesticide Residue Analysis
Pesticide residue analysis occurs every 12 months for both untreated and treated samples. Herbicides including, Atrazine, Desethyl Atrazine and Hexazinone, have been recorded to have greater values than <0.1 μg/L, but have not exceeded the ADWG.

Note that PFAS has been detected at Macknade

2015/2022: Johnstone River at Coquette Point. Pesticides: Multiple

Johnstone River at Coquette Point

1668 pesticide detections Oct 2015 and Dec 2022

Diuron: 344 detections of Diuron between Dec 2015 and Feb 2023. 0.49ug/L (max 17/1/18). 0.082ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 143 detections of 2,4-D between Mar 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.65ug/L (max 5/2/18). 0.056ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 198 detections of Atrazine between Mar 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.47ug/L (max 19/10/17). 0.053ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 2 detections of Bromacil between Apr 2020 and May 2020. 0.02ug/L (max 1/4/20). 0.02ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 1 trace detection of Chlorpyrifos. 22/4/21

Diazinon: 3 detections of Diazinon between Jan 2018 and Feb 2018. 0.01ug/L (max 5/2/18). 0.003ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 9 detections of Fluroxypur between May 2016 and Apr 2021. 0.07ug/L (max 19/4/21). 0.02ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 48 detections of Haloxyfop between Mar 2016 and Mar 2021. 0.07ug/L (max 17/2/17). 0.018ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 303 detections of Hexazinone between Dec 2015 and Feb 2023. 0.14ug/L (max 19/10/17). 0.029ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 42 detections of Imazapic between Jul 2016 and Dec 2022. 0.06ug/L (max 19/10/17). 0.015ug/L av.

Imidacloprid: 369 detections of Imidacloprid between Dec 2015 and Jan 2023. 0.35ug/L (max 17/1/18). 0.067ug/L (av).

Isoxaflutole: 1 detection of Isoxaflutole 19/8/16. 0.001ug/L

MCPA: 47 detections of MCPA between March 2016 and May 2022. 0.03ug/L (max 6/3/18). 0.013ug/L (av).

Metolachlor: 75 detections of Metolachlor between May 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.5ug/L (max 19/10/17). 0.031ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 21 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between May 2016 and Dec 2019. 0.1ug/L (max 9/12/19). 0.008ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 3 detections of Metribuzin between Oct 2017 and Feb 2018. 0.06ug/L (max 5/2/18). 0.037ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 32 detections of Simazine between Dec 2015 and Jan 2022. 0.12ug/L (max 3/1/21). 0.023ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 8 detections of Tebuthiuron between Mar 2017 and Apr 2020. 0.04ug/L (max 12/12/18). 0.015ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 28 detections of Triclopyr between Mar 2016 and Jun 2021. 0.12ug/L (max 25/12/18). 0.0423ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Johnstone River at Coquette Point

1668 pesticide detections Oct 2015 and Dec 2022

Diuron: 344 detections of Diuron between Dec 2015 and Feb 2023. 0.49ug/L (max 17/1/18). 0.082ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 143 detections of 2,4-D between Mar 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.65ug/L (max 5/2/18). 0.056ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 198 detections of Atrazine between Mar 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.47ug/L (max 19/10/17). 0.053ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 2 detections of Bromacil between Apr 2020 and May 2020. 0.02ug/L (max 1/4/20). 0.02ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 1 trace detection of Chlorpyrifos. 22/4/21

Diazinon: 3 detections of Diazinon between Jan 2018 and Feb 2018. 0.01ug/L (max 5/2/18). 0.003ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 9 detections of Fluroxypur between May 2016 and Apr 2021. 0.07ug/L (max 19/4/21). 0.02ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 48 detections of Haloxyfop between Mar 2016 and Mar 2021. 0.07ug/L (max 17/2/17). 0.018ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 303 detections of Hexazinone between Dec 2015 and Feb 2023. 0.14ug/L (max 19/10/17). 0.029ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 42 detections of Imazapic between Jul 2016 and Dec 2022. 0.06ug/L (max 19/10/17). 0.015ug/L av.

Imidacloprid: 369 detections of Imidacloprid between Dec 2015 and Jan 2023. 0.35ug/L (max 17/1/18). 0.067ug/L (av).

Isoxaflutole: 1 detection of Isoxaflutole 19/8/16. 0.001ug/L

MCPA: 47 detections of MCPA between March 2016 and May 2022. 0.03ug/L (max 6/3/18). 0.013ug/L (av).

Metolachlor: 75 detections of Metolachlor between May 2016 and Jan 2023. 0.5ug/L (max 19/10/17). 0.031ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 21 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between May 2016 and Dec 2019. 0.1ug/L (max 9/12/19). 0.008ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 3 detections of Metribuzin between Oct 2017 and Feb 2018. 0.06ug/L (max 5/2/18). 0.037ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 32 detections of Simazine between Dec 2015 and Jan 2022. 0.12ug/L (max 3/1/21). 0.023ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 8 detections of Tebuthiuron between Mar 2017 and Apr 2020. 0.04ug/L (max 12/12/18). 0.015ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 28 detections of Triclopyr between Mar 2016 and Jun 2021. 0.12ug/L (max 25/12/18). 0.0423ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2012/2023: North Johnstone River at Goondi (Innisfail Qld). Pesticides: Multiple

North Johnstone River at Goondi, Innisfail

766 pesticide detections Feb 2012 and Dec 2022

Diuron: 93 detections of Diuron between Feb 2012 and Dec 2022. 0.21ug/L (max 8/1/17). 0.035ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 67 detections of 2,4-D between Mar 2013 and Feb 2021. 0.46ug/L (max 5/2/18). 0.041ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 41 detections of Atrazine between Mar 2012 to April 2022. 0.11ug/L (max 5/2/18). 0.018ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: 10 detections of Diazinon between Jan 2017 to Oct 2022. 0.0018ug/L (max 8/1/17). 0.0004ug/L (av.)

Fipronil: 10 detections of Fipronil between Jan 2017 to Dec 2018. 0.0013ug/L (max 8/1/17). 0.0026ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 11 detections of Fluroxypur between Dec 2015 to Apr 2020. 0.007ug/L (max 5/2/18). 0.018ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 33 detections of Haloxyfop between Mar 2015 to May 2020. 0.11ug/L (max 16/2/17). 0.013ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 66 detections of Hexazinone between Jul 2013 to April 2022. 0.06ug/L (max 11/1/22). 0.018ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 16 detections of Imazapic between Jul 2016 to Feb 2017. 0.04ug/L (max 19/7/16). 0.009ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 327 detections of Imidacloprid between Feb 2012 to Jan 2023. 0.35ug/L (max 20/5/20). 0.067ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 6 detections of MCPA between Mar 2016 to Jan 2022. 0.01ug/L (max 3/3/16). 0.0095ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 12 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2016 to Jan 2022. 0.017ug/L (max 8/1/17). 0.005ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 13 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Feb 2015 to Feb 2017. 0.01ug/L (max 7/2/15). 0.0023ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 13 detections of Simazine between May 2012 to Dec 2018. 0.016ug/L (max 5/1/17). 0.0066ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 15 detections of Tebuthiuron between Jun 2012 to May 2022. 0.04ug/L (max 17/4/20). 0.0075ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 30 detections of Triclopyr between Jan 2015 to Apr 2020. 0.1ug/L (max 17/4/20). 0.0128ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

 

North Johnstone River at Goondi, Innisfail

766 pesticide detections Feb 2012 and Dec 2022

Diuron: 93 detections of Diuron between Feb 2012 and Dec 2022. 0.21ug/L (max 8/1/17). 0.035ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 67 detections of 2,4-D between Mar 2013 and Feb 2021. 0.46ug/L (max 5/2/18). 0.041ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 41 detections of Atrazine between Mar 2012 to April 2022. 0.11ug/L (max 5/2/18). 0.018ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: 10 detections of Diazinon between Jan 2017 to Oct 2022. 0.0018ug/L (max 8/1/17). 0.0004ug/L (av.)

Fipronil: 10 detections of Fipronil between Jan 2017 to Dec 2018. 0.0013ug/L (max 8/1/17). 0.0026ug/L (av.)

Fluroxypur: 11 detections of Fluroxypur between Dec 2015 to Apr 2020. 0.007ug/L (max 5/2/18). 0.018ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 33 detections of Haloxyfop between Mar 2015 to May 2020. 0.11ug/L (max 16/2/17). 0.013ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 66 detections of Hexazinone between Jul 2013 to April 2022. 0.06ug/L (max 11/1/22). 0.018ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 16 detections of Imazapic between Jul 2016 to Feb 2017. 0.04ug/L (max 19/7/16). 0.009ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 327 detections of Imidacloprid between Feb 2012 to Jan 2023. 0.35ug/L (max 20/5/20). 0.067ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 6 detections of MCPA between Mar 2016 to Jan 2022. 0.01ug/L (max 3/3/16). 0.0095ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 12 detections of Metolachlor between Dec 2016 to Jan 2022. 0.017ug/L (max 8/1/17). 0.005ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 13 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Feb 2015 to Feb 2017. 0.01ug/L (max 7/2/15). 0.0023ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 13 detections of Simazine between May 2012 to Dec 2018. 0.016ug/L (max 5/1/17). 0.0066ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 15 detections of Tebuthiuron between Jun 2012 to May 2022. 0.04ug/L (max 17/4/20). 0.0075ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 30 detections of Triclopyr between Jan 2015 to Apr 2020. 0.1ug/L (max 17/4/20). 0.0128ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

 

2014/23: Russell River at East Russell (Qld). Pestides: Multiple

Russell River at East Russell

3188 pesticide detections Jan 2014 and March 2023

Diuron: 646 detections of Diuron between Jan 2014 and Mar 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 29/1/14). 0.12ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 331 detections of 2,4-D between Jan 2014 and Mar 2023. 0.7ug/L (max 17/2/17). 0.05ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 9 detections of Ametryn between Jan 2015 and Oct 2017. 0.03ug/L (max 16/4/16). 0.018ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 367 detections of Atrazine between Jan 2014 and Feb 2023. 1.7ug/L (max 29/1/14). 0.084ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 3 detections of Bromacil between May 2016 and July 2017. 0.02ug/L (max 5/4/17). 0.007ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 2 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between May 2022 and February 2023.

Diazinon: 4 trace detections of Diazinon between Oct 2018 and Mar 2021.

Fluroxypur: 109 detections of Fluroxypur between Mar 2014 and Feb 2020. 0.12ug/L (max 5/2/18). 0.038ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 36 detections of Haloxyfop between Jan 2015 and Jan 2023. 0.07ug/L (max 10/2/21). 0.019ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 590 detections of Hexazinone between Jan 2014 and Feb 2023. 0.27ug/L (max 22/1/22). 0.046ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 260 detections of Imazapic between Feb 2015 and Feb 2023. 0.12ug/L (max 20/9/17). 0.026ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 549 Imidacloprid detections between Jan 2014 and Feb 2023. 0.31ug/L (max 8/5/20). 0.044ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 43 detections of Isoxaflutole between Jan 2014 and Jan 2022. 0.15ug/L (max 29/1/14). 0.029ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 61 detections of MCPA between Jan 2014 and Jan 2022. 0.23ug/L (max 29/1/14). 0.028ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 78 detections of Metolachlor between Jan 2014 to Dec 2022. 0.63ug/L (max 20/9/17). 0.056ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 47 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Mar 2014 and Jan 2022. 0.08ug/L (max 16/4/20). 0.014ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 32 detections of Metribuzin between Jan 2014 and Feb 2022. 0.16ug/L (max 20/9/17). 0.029ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 10 detections of Simazine between Mar 2020 and Jan 2022. 0.15ug/L (max 22/1/22). 0.044ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 3 detections of Tebuthiuron in Dec 2018. 0.02ug/L (max 25/12/18). 0.013ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 8 detections of Triclopyr between Apr 2016 and Dec 2018. 0.08ug/L (max 25/12/18). 0.015ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Russell River at East Russell

3188 pesticide detections Jan 2014 and March 2023

Diuron: 646 detections of Diuron between Jan 2014 and Mar 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 29/1/14). 0.12ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 331 detections of 2,4-D between Jan 2014 and Mar 2023. 0.7ug/L (max 17/2/17). 0.05ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 9 detections of Ametryn between Jan 2015 and Oct 2017. 0.03ug/L (max 16/4/16). 0.018ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 367 detections of Atrazine between Jan 2014 and Feb 2023. 1.7ug/L (max 29/1/14). 0.084ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 3 detections of Bromacil between May 2016 and July 2017. 0.02ug/L (max 5/4/17). 0.007ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: 2 trace detections of Chlorpyrifos between May 2022 and February 2023.

Diazinon: 4 trace detections of Diazinon between Oct 2018 and Mar 2021.

Fluroxypur: 109 detections of Fluroxypur between Mar 2014 and Feb 2020. 0.12ug/L (max 5/2/18). 0.038ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 36 detections of Haloxyfop between Jan 2015 and Jan 2023. 0.07ug/L (max 10/2/21). 0.019ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 590 detections of Hexazinone between Jan 2014 and Feb 2023. 0.27ug/L (max 22/1/22). 0.046ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 260 detections of Imazapic between Feb 2015 and Feb 2023. 0.12ug/L (max 20/9/17). 0.026ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 549 Imidacloprid detections between Jan 2014 and Feb 2023. 0.31ug/L (max 8/5/20). 0.044ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 43 detections of Isoxaflutole between Jan 2014 and Jan 2022. 0.15ug/L (max 29/1/14). 0.029ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 61 detections of MCPA between Jan 2014 and Jan 2022. 0.23ug/L (max 29/1/14). 0.028ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 78 detections of Metolachlor between Jan 2014 to Dec 2022. 0.63ug/L (max 20/9/17). 0.056ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 47 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Mar 2014 and Jan 2022. 0.08ug/L (max 16/4/20). 0.014ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 32 detections of Metribuzin between Jan 2014 and Feb 2022. 0.16ug/L (max 20/9/17). 0.029ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 10 detections of Simazine between Mar 2020 and Jan 2022. 0.15ug/L (max 22/1/22). 0.044ug/L (av.)

Tebuthiuron: 3 detections of Tebuthiuron in Dec 2018. 0.02ug/L (max 25/12/18). 0.013ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 8 detections of Triclopyr between Apr 2016 and Dec 2018. 0.08ug/L (max 25/12/18). 0.015ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2013/23: Mulgrave River at Deerel (Queensland). Pesticides: Multiple (2515 detections)

Mulgrave River at Deeral: 2515 pesticide detections between 2013 and 2023

Diuron: 420 Diuron detections between Nov 2013 to March 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 3/2/14), 0.105ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 260 2,4-D detections between Nov 2013 to March 2023. 1ug/L (max 22/2/17), 0.087ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 10 Ametryn detections between Feb 2014 to Feb 2021. 0.03ug/L (max 3/2/14), 0.0137ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 345 Atrazine detections between Nov 2013 to March 2023.  1.4ug/L (max 20/9/17), 0.123ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 17 Bromacil detections between May 2016 to June 2017. 0.067ug/L (max 17/2/17), 0.02ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: Trace level 1/11/21.

Diazinon: Trace level 24/12/18.

Fipronil: 1 Fipronil detection. 16/2/23 0.01ug/L

Fluroxypur: 162 detections of Fluroxypur between Jan 2014 to Feb 2023. 0.75ug/L (max 22/2/17), 0.089ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 36 detections of Haloxyfop Acid between Jan 2015 to Jul 2017. 0.04ug/L (max 14/2/15), 0.012ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 327 detections of Hexazinone between Nov 2013 to Mar 2023. 0.41ug/L (max 8/1/17), 0.048ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 85 detections of Imazapic between Dec 2015 and Jan 2023. 0.07ug/L (max 13/4/20), 0.02ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 295 detections of Imidacloprid between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023. 0.56ug/L (max 3/2/14), 0.039ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 73 detections of Isoxaflutole between Jan 2014 and Jan 2022. 0.18ug/L (max 19/9/17), 0.04ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 133 detections of MCPA between Jan 2014 and May 2022. 1.4ug/L (max 22/2/17), 0.067ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 218 detections of Metolachlor between Jan 2014 and Feb 2023. 0.79ug/L (max 2/9/21), 0.06ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 15 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Mar 2015 and Nov 2018. 0.17ug/L (max 12/3/15). 0.023ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 77 detections of Metribuzin between Jan 2014 and Feb 2022. 0.23ug/L (max 9/2/16), 0.04ug/L (av.)

Prometryn: 5 detections of Prometryn between Jan 2014 and Dec 2020. 0.13ug/L (max 24/12/18), 0.052ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 13 detections of Simazine between Jun 2016 and Feb 2019. 0.08ug/L (max 8/1/17), 0.015ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 20 detections of Triclopyr between Mar 2014 and Feb 2017. 0.09ug/L (max 20/2/14), 0.037ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Mulgrave River at Deeral (Queensland): 2515 pesticide detections between 2013 and 2013

Diuron: 420 Diuron detections between Nov 2013 to March 2023. 1.4ug/L (max 3/2/14), 0.105ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 260 2,4-D detections between Nov 2013 to March 2023. 1ug/L (max 22/2/17), 0.087ug/L (av.)

Ametryn: 10 Ametryn detections between Feb 2014 to Feb 2021. 0.03ug/L (max 3/2/14), 0.0137ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 345 Atrazine detections between Nov 2013 to March 2023.  1.4ug/L (max 20/9/17), 0.123ug/L (av.)

Bromacil: 17 Bromacil detections between May 2016 to June 2017. 0.067ug/L (max 17/2/17), 0.02ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: Trace level 1/11/21.

Diazinon: Trace level 24/12/18.

Fipronil: 1 Fipronil detection. 16/2/23 0.01ug/L

Fluroxypur: 162 detections of Fluroxypur between Jan 2014 to Feb 2023. 0.75ug/L (max 22/2/17), 0.089ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 36 detections of Haloxyfop Acid between Jan 2015 to Jul 2017. 0.04ug/L (max 14/2/15), 0.012ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 327 detections of Hexazinone between Nov 2013 to Mar 2023. 0.41ug/L (max 8/1/17), 0.048ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 85 detections of Imazapic between Dec 2015 and Jan 2023. 0.07ug/L (max 13/4/20), 0.02ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 295 detections of Imidacloprid between Jan 2014 and Jan 2023. 0.56ug/L (max 3/2/14), 0.039ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 73 detections of Isoxaflutole between Jan 2014 and Jan 2022. 0.18ug/L (max 19/9/17), 0.04ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 133 detections of MCPA between Jan 2014 and May 2022. 1.4ug/L (max 22/2/17), 0.067ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 218 detections of Metolachlor between Jan 2014 and Feb 2023. 0.79ug/L (max 2/9/21), 0.06ug/L (av.)

Metsulfuron Methyl: 15 detections of Metsulfuron Methyl between Mar 2015 and Nov 2018. 0.17ug/L (max 12/3/15). 0.023ug/L (av.)

Metribuzin: 77 detections of Metribuzin between Jan 2014 and Feb 2022. 0.23ug/L (max 9/2/16), 0.04ug/L (av.)

Prometryn: 5 detections of Prometryn between Jan 2014 and Dec 2020. 0.13ug/L (max 24/12/18), 0.052ug/L (av.)

Simazine: 13 detections of Simazine between Jun 2016 and Feb 2019. 0.08ug/L (max 8/1/17), 0.015ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 20 detections of Triclopyr between Mar 2014 and Feb 2017. 0.09ug/L (max 20/2/14), 0.037ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2017-2023: Mossman River at Bonnie Doon. Pesticides: Multiple

Mossman River at Bonnie Doon

Diuron: 48 Diuron detections between Oct 2017 to March 2023. 2.6ug/L (max. 19/10/17), 0.212ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 25 2,4-D detections between Oct 2017 to March 2023.  1.4ug/L (max 3/1/23), 0.156ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 38 Atrazine detections between Oct 2017 to March 2023. 5ug/L (max 10/12/18), 0.322ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: Trace levels Aug 18 – Dec 18. 3 detections.

Fluroxypur: 28 Fluroxypur detections between Oct 2017 to Feb 2023. 0.52ug/L (max 10/12/18), 0.175ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 3 Haloxyfop detections between Dec 2021 to April 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 22/4/22), 0.043ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 44 Hexazinone detections between Oct 2017 to Jan 2023. 0.33ug/L (max 10/12/18), 0.055ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 14 Imazapic detections between Dec 2018 to Jan 2023. 0.05ug/L (max 10/12/18), 0.019ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 49 Imidacloprid detections between Oct 2017 to March 2023. 0.59ug/L (max 3/1/23), 0.103ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 32 MCPA detections between Oct 2017 to Feb 2023. 0.23ug/L (max 10/12/18), 0.056ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 18 Metolachlor detections between Oct 2017 to Feb 2023. 1.2ug/L (max 19/10/17), 0.3ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Mossman River at Bonnie Doon

Diuron: 48 Diuron detections between Oct 2017 to March 2023. 2.6ug/L (max. 19/10/17), 0.212ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 25 2,4-D detections between Oct 2017 to March 2023.  1.4ug/L (max 3/1/23), 0.156ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 38 Atrazine detections between Oct 2017 to March 2023. 5ug/L (max 10/12/18), 0.322ug/L (av.)

Diazinon: Trace levels Aug 18 – Dec 18. 3 detections.

Fluroxypur: 28 Fluroxypur detections between Oct 2017 to Feb 2023. 0.52ug/L (max 10/12/18), 0.175ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop: 3 Haloxyfop detections between Dec 2021 to April 2022. 0.05ug/L (max 22/4/22), 0.043ug/L (av.)

Hexazinone: 44 Hexazinone detections between Oct 2017 to Jan 2023. 0.33ug/L (max 10/12/18), 0.055ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 14 Imazapic detections between Dec 2018 to Jan 2023. 0.05ug/L (max 10/12/18), 0.019ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 49 Imidacloprid detections between Oct 2017 to March 2023. 0.59ug/L (max 3/1/23), 0.103ug/L (av.)

MCPA: 32 MCPA detections between Oct 2017 to Feb 2023. 0.23ug/L (max 10/12/18), 0.056ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 18 Metolachlor detections between Oct 2017 to Feb 2023. 1.2ug/L (max 19/10/17), 0.3ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2017-2023: Daintree River at Lower Daintree. Pesticides: Multiple

Daintree River at Lower Daintree

Diuron: 39 Diuron detections between Oct 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.57ug/L (max 11/12/18), 0.089ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 16 2,4-D detections between Jan 2018 and Dec 2021. 0.09ug/L (max 31/12/21), 0.032ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 3 Atrazine detections between Oct 2017 and Nov 2021. 0.07ug/L (max 12/2/21), 0.057ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: Trace levels Aug 17. 1 detection

Diazinon: Trace levels Nov 18 – Jan 19. 3 detections.

Fluroxypur: 5 Fluroxypur detections between Jan 2018 and March 2021. 0.09mg/L (max 1/3/21), 0.07ugL (av.)

Hexazinone: 31 Hexazinone detections between Oct 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.21ug/L (max 21/4/22), 0.03ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 14 Imazapic detections between Jan 2018 and Nov 2022. 0.04ug/L (max. 11/12/18), 0.02ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 23 Imidacloprid detections between Dec 2018 and Nov 2022. 0.92ug/L (max. 11/12/18), 0.08ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 1 Isoxaflutole detection. 0.13ug/L 1/7/2021

MCPA: 29 MCPA detections between Jan 2018 and Nov 2022. 0.11ug/L (max 26/11/22), 0.025ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 1 Metolachlor detection 0.3ug/L 12/2/21

Metribuzin: 3 Metribuzin detections between Jan and Dec 2018. 0.05ug/L (max 20/1/18), 0.04ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 3 Triclopyr detections between Jan 2018 and March 2019. 0.12ug/L (max 26/2/18), 0.1ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

Daintree River at Lower Daintree

Diuron: 39 Diuron detections between Oct 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.57ug/L (max 11/12/18), 0.089ug/L (av.)

2,4-D: 16 2,4-D detections between Jan 2018 and Dec 2021. 0.09ug/L (max 31/12/21), 0.032ug/L (av.)

Atrazine: 3 Atrazine detections between Oct 2017 and Nov 2021. 0.07ug/L (max 12/2/21), 0.057ug/L (av.)

Chlorpyrifos: Trace levels Aug 17. 1 detection

Diazinon: Trace levels Nov 18 – Jan 19. 3 detections.

Fluroxypur: 5 Fluroxypur detections between Jan 2018 and March 2021. 0.09mg/L (max 1/3/21), 0.07ugL (av.)

Hexazinone: 31 Hexazinone detections between Oct 2017 and Jan 2023. 0.21ug/L (max 21/4/22), 0.03ug/L (av.)

Imazapic: 14 Imazapic detections between Jan 2018 and Nov 2022. 0.04ug/L (max. 11/12/18), 0.02ug/L (av.)

Imidacloprid: 23 Imidacloprid detections between Dec 2018 and Nov 2022. 0.92ug/L (max. 11/12/18), 0.08ug/L (av.)

Isoxaflutole: 1 Isoxaflutole detection. 0.13ug/L 1/7/2021

MCPA: 29 MCPA detections between Jan 2018 and Nov 2022. 0.11ug/L (max 26/11/22), 0.025ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor: 1 Metolachlor detection 0.3ug/L 12/2/21

Metribuzin: 3 Metribuzin detections between Jan and Dec 2018. 0.05ug/L (max 20/1/18), 0.04ug/L (av.)

Triclopyr: 3 Triclopyr detections between Jan 2018 and March 2019. 0.12ug/L (max 26/2/18), 0.1ug/L (av.)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c0f0c6d7d88a4fd3a5541fe59f41ff75

2021/22: Normanby River at Kalpower Crossing. Pesticides: 2,4-D, Chlorpyrifos, Diazinon, Fluroxypur, Imidacloprid, Metolachlor, Terbuthylazine

Normanby River at Kalpower Crossing

2,4-D: 3 detections February/March 2022. March 1 2022 0.07ug/L (max) 0.04ug/L av. detection

Chlorpyrifos: Trace levels February/March 2022

Diazinon: Trace levels January 2022

Fluroxypur: March 4 2022 0.09ug/L

Imidacloprid: March 4 2021 0.04ug/L

Metolachlor: 4 detections February/March 2021. 0.05ug/L (max), 0.0325ug/L (av. detection)

Terbuthylazine: 3 detections January 2021. 0.02ug/L (max), 0.017ug/L (av. detection)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal - Queensland Government

Normanby River at Kalpower Crossing

2,4-D: 3 detections February/March 2022. March 1 2022 0.07ug/L (max) 0.04ug/L av. detection

Chlorpyrifos: Trace levels February/March 2022

Diazinon: Trace levels January 2022

Fluroxypur: March 4 2022 0.09ug/L

Imidacloprid: March 4 2021 0.04ug/L

Metolachlor: 4 detections February/March 2021. 0.05ug/L (max), 0.0325ug/L (av. detection)

Terbuthylazine: 3 detections January 2021. 0.02ug/L (max), 0.017ug/L (av. detection)

Source: Pesticide Reporting Portal – Queensland Government

2017/18: Yallock Cut (Victoria). Pesticides: Multiple

2017/18 Yallock Cut (Grab Samples):

Winter: Pirimicarb 0.031µg/L, Iprodione 0.041µg/L (max), Tebuconazole 0.092µg/L (max), Metribuzin 0.03µg/L, Diuron 0.032µg/L (max), Simazine 0.041µg/L (max)

Spring: Malathion 0.1µg/L, Pirimicarb 0.52µg/L, Metalaxyl 0.11µg/L, Diuron 0.22µg/L (max), Simazine 0.14 µg/L (max)

Summer: Pirimicarb 0.11µg/L, Diuron 0.4µg/L, Simazine 0.63µg/L

Autumn: Pirimicarb 0.086µg/L, Metalaxyl 0.05µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.13µg/L, Diuron 0.11µg/L

2017/18 Yallock Cut (Chemcatcher Sampler):

Winter: Pirimicarb 0.047µg/L, Iprodione 0.22µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.17µg/L, Atrazine 0.01µg/L, Diuron 0.027µg/L, Simazine 0.049µg/L

Spring: Malathion 0.015µg/L, Pyrimethanil 0.056µg/L, Metalaxyl 0.19µg/L, Iprodione 0.03µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.033µg/L, Diuron 0.069µg/L, Simazine 0.14µg/L

Summer: Pirimicarb 0.28µg/L, Procymidone 0.011µg/L, Pyrimethanil 0.04µg/L, Metalaxyl 0.089µg/L, Iprodione 0.075µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.23µg/L, Atrazine 0.041µg/L, Diuron 0.33µg/L, Simazine 0.38µg/L

Autumn: Pirimicarb 0.15µg/L, Metalaxyl 0.11µg/L, Iprodione 0.05µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.11µg/L, Atrazine 0.056µg/L, Diuron 0.051µg/L, Simazine 0.049µg/L

Myers, JH., Sharp, S., Long, S., Kellar, C., and Pettigrove, V. (2018), Final Report Western Port Toxicant Study Stage 4: Assessment of pesticide risks in catchments of north-eastern Western Port, Aquatic Pollution Prevention Partnership, Technical Report No. 2, RMIT University, Victoria, Australia

2017/18 Yallock Cut (Grab Samples):

Winter: Pirimicarb 0.031µg/L, Iprodione 0.041µg/L (max), Tebuconazole 0.092µg/L (max), Metribuzin 0.03µg/L, Diuron 0.032µg/L (max), Simazine 0.041µg/L (max)

Spring: Malathion 0.1µg/L, Pirimicarb 0.52µg/L, Metalaxyl 0.11µg/L, Diuron 0.22µg/L (max), Simazine 0.14 µg/L (max)

Summer: Pirimicarb 0.11µg/L, Diuron 0.4µg/L, Simazine 0.63µg/L

Autumn: Pirimicarb 0.086µg/L, Metalaxyl 0.05µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.13µg/L, Diuron 0.11µg/L

2017/18 Yallock Cut (Chemcatcher Sampler):

Winter: Pirimicarb 0.047µg/L, Iprodione 0.22µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.17µg/L, Atrazine 0.01µg/L, Diuron 0.027µg/L, Simazine 0.049µg/L

Spring: Malathion 0.015µg/L, Pyrimethanil 0.056µg/L, Metalaxyl 0.19µg/L, Iprodione 0.03µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.033µg/L, Diuron 0.069µg/L, Simazine 0.14µg/L

Summer: Pirimicarb 0.28µg/L, Procymidone 0.011µg/L, Pyrimethanil 0.04µg/L, Metalaxyl 0.089µg/L, Iprodione 0.075µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.23µg/L, Atrazine 0.041µg/L, Diuron 0.33µg/L, Simazine 0.38µg/L

Autumn: Pirimicarb 0.15µg/L, Metalaxyl 0.11µg/L, Iprodione 0.05µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.11µg/L, Atrazine 0.056µg/L, Diuron 0.051µg/L, Simazine 0.049µg/L

Myers, JH., Sharp, S., Long, S., Kellar, C., and Pettigrove, V. (2018), Final Report Western Port Toxicant Study Stage 4: Assessment of pesticide risks in catchments of north-eastern Western Port, Aquatic Pollution Prevention Partnership, Technical Report No. 2, RMIT University, Victoria, Australia

2017/18: Cardinia Creek. Pesticides: Multiple

2017/18 Cardinia Creek (Grab Samples):

Winter: Tebuconazole 0.015µg/L, Atrazine 0.014µg/L, Metribuzin 0.032µg/L, Simazine 0.038µg/L

2017/18 Cardinia Creek (Chemcatcher Sampler)

Winter: Iprodione 0.09µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.017µg/L, Metribuzin 0.044µg/L, Atrazine 0.018µg/L, Diuron 0.012µg/L, Simazine 0.055µg/L

Spring: Simazine 0.011µg/L

Summer: Metolachlor 0.015µg/L

Autumn: Metolachlor 0.044µg/L, Simazine 0.024µg/L

2017/18 Cardinia Reference (Chemcatcher Sampler):

Autumn: Tebuconazole 0.011µg/L, Simazine 0.019µg/L

Myers, JH., Sharp, S., Long, S., Kellar, C., and Pettigrove, V. (2018), Final Report Western Port Toxicant Study Stage 4: Assessment of pesticide risks in catchments of north-eastern Western Port, Aquatic Pollution Prevention Partnership, Technical Report No. 2, RMIT University, Victoria, Australia

2017/18 Cardinia Creek (Grab Samples):

Winter: Tebuconazole 0.015µg/L, Atrazine 0.014µg/L, Metribuzin 0.032µg/L, Simazine 0.038µg/L

2017/18 Cardinia Creek (Chemcatcher Sampler)

Winter: Iprodione 0.09µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.017µg/L, Metribuzin 0.044µg/L, Atrazine 0.018µg/L, Diuron 0.012µg/L, Simazine 0.055µg/L

Spring: Simazine 0.011µg/L

Summer: Metolachlor 0.015µg/L

Autumn: Metolachlor 0.044µg/L, Simazine 0.024µg/L

2017/18 Cardinia Reference (Chemcatcher Sampler):

Autumn: Tebuconazole 0.011µg/L, Simazine 0.019µg/L

Myers, JH., Sharp, S., Long, S., Kellar, C., and Pettigrove, V. (2018), Final Report Western Port Toxicant Study Stage 4: Assessment of pesticide risks in catchments of north-eastern Western Port, Aquatic Pollution Prevention Partnership, Technical Report No. 2, RMIT University, Victoria, Australia

2017/18: Lower Gum Scrub Creek (Victoria). Pesticides: Multiple

2017/18 Lower Gum Scrub Creek (Grab Samples):

Winter: Pirimicarb 0.12µg/L (max), Boscalid 0.023µg/L (max), Iprodione 2.4µg/L (max), Tebuconazole 0.016µg/L, Atrazine 0.017µg/L, Metribuzin 0.16µg/L (max), Diuron 0.61µg/L (max), Simazine 0.022µg/L (max)

Spring: Pirimicarb 0.016µg/L (max), Iprodione 0.087µg/L (max), Diuron 0.067µg/L (max)

2017/18 Lower Gum Scrub Creek (Chemcatcher Sampler)

Winter: Pirimicarb 0.055µg/L, Boscalid 0.028µg/L, Iprodione 4.5µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.014µg/L, Metribuzin 0.018µg/L, Atrazine 0.022µg/L, Diuron 0.093µg/L, Simazine 0.032µg/L

Spring: Pirimicarb 0.055µg/L (max), Iprodione 0.042µg/L, Diuron 0.028µg/L, Simazine 0.013µg/L (max)

Summer: Diuron 0.013µg/L, Simazine 0.021µg/L

Autumn: Boscalid 0.011µg/L, Iprodione 0.029µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.021µg/L, Diuron 0.015µg/L, Simazine 0.044µg/L

Myers, JH., Sharp, S., Long, S., Kellar, C., and Pettigrove, V. (2018), Final Report Western Port Toxicant Study Stage 4: Assessment of pesticide risks in catchments of north-eastern Western Port, Aquatic Pollution Prevention Partnership, Technical Report No. 2, RMIT University, Victoria, Australia

2017/18 Lower Gum Scrub Creek (Grab Samples):

Winter: Pirimicarb 0.12µg/L (max), Boscalid 0.023µg/L (max), Iprodione 2.4µg/L (max), Tebuconazole 0.016µg/L, Atrazine 0.017µg/L, Metribuzin 0.16µg/L (max), Diuron 0.61µg/L (max), Simazine 0.022µg/L (max)

Spring: Pirimicarb 0.016µg/L (max), Iprodione 0.087µg/L (max), Diuron 0.067µg/L (max)

2017/18 Lower Gum Scrub Creek (Chemcatcher Sampler)

Winter: Pirimicarb 0.055µg/L, Boscalid 0.028µg/L, Iprodione 4.5µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.014µg/L, Metribuzin 0.018µg/L, Atrazine 0.022µg/L, Diuron 0.093µg/L, Simazine 0.032µg/L

Spring: Pirimicarb 0.055µg/L (max), Iprodione 0.042µg/L, Diuron 0.028µg/L, Simazine 0.013µg/L (max)

Summer: Diuron 0.013µg/L, Simazine 0.021µg/L

Autumn: Boscalid 0.011µg/L, Iprodione 0.029µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.021µg/L, Diuron 0.015µg/L, Simazine 0.044µg/L

Myers, JH., Sharp, S., Long, S., Kellar, C., and Pettigrove, V. (2018), Final Report Western Port Toxicant Study Stage 4: Assessment of pesticide risks in catchments of north-eastern Western Port, Aquatic Pollution Prevention Partnership, Technical Report No. 2, RMIT University, Victoria, Australia

2017/18: Toomuc Creek (Victoria). Pesticides: Multiple

2017/18 Toomuc Creek (Grab Samples):

Winter: Tebuconazole 0.0138µg/L, Metribuzin 0.046µg/L, Simazine 0.07µg/L

2017/18 Toomuc Creek (Chemcatcher Sampler)

Winter: Iprodione 0.01µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.012µg/L, Metribuzin 0.058µg/L, Atrazine 0.02µg/L, Simazine 0.12µg/L

Spring: Simazine 0.029µg/L

Autumn: Tebuconazole 0.012µg/L, Simazine 0.12µg/L

Myers, JH., Sharp, S., Long, S., Kellar, C., and Pettigrove, V. (2018), Final Report Western Port Toxicant Study Stage 4: Assessment of pesticide risks in catchments of north-eastern Western Port, Aquatic Pollution Prevention Partnership, Technical Report No. 2, RMIT University, Victoria, Australia

2017/18 Toomuc Creek (Grab Samples):

Winter: Tebuconazole 0.0138µg/L, Metribuzin 0.046µg/L, Simazine 0.07µg/L

2017/18 Toomuc Creek (Chemcatcher Sampler)

Winter: Iprodione 0.01µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.012µg/L, Metribuzin 0.058µg/L, Atrazine 0.02µg/L, Simazine 0.12µg/L

Spring: Simazine 0.029µg/L

Autumn: Tebuconazole 0.012µg/L, Simazine 0.12µg/L

Myers, JH., Sharp, S., Long, S., Kellar, C., and Pettigrove, V. (2018), Final Report Western Port Toxicant Study Stage 4: Assessment of pesticide risks in catchments of north-eastern Western Port, Aquatic Pollution Prevention Partnership, Technical Report No. 2, RMIT University, Victoria, Australia

2017/18: Deep Creek (Westernport). Pesticides Multiple

2017/18 Deep Creek (Grab Samples):

Winter: Tebuconazole 0.016µg/L, Atrazine 0.022µg/L, Metribuzin 0.064µg/L (max), Simazine 0.068 µg/L (max)

Spring: Iprodione 0.096µg/L, Metolachlor 0.012µg/L, Diuron 0.034µg/L, Simazine 0.075µg/L (max)

Summer: Simazine 0.27µg/L

2017/18 Deep Creek (Chemcatcher Sampler)

Winter: Propiconazole II 0.015µg/L, Propiconazole I 0.014µg/L, Iprodione 0.02µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.024µg/L, Metribuzin 0.086µg/L, Atrazine 0.042µg/L, Diuron 0.024µg/L, Simazine 0.18µg/L

Spring: DEET 0.12µg/L, Propiconazole I 0.023µg/L, Iprodione 0.05µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.025µg/L, Metolachlor 0.031µg/L, Atrazine 0.07µg/L, Diuron 0.036µg/L, Simazine 0.12µg/L

Autumn: Iprodione 0.037µg/L (max), Tebuconazole 0.047µg/L (max), Metolachlor 0.014µg/L (max), Diuron 0.035µg/L (max), Simazine 0.13µg/L (max)

Myers, JH., Sharp, S., Long, S., Kellar, C., and Pettigrove, V. (2018), Final Report Western Port Toxicant Study Stage 4: Assessment of pesticide risks in catchments of north-eastern Western Port, Aquatic Pollution Prevention Partnership, Technical Report No. 2, RMIT University, Victoria, Australia

2017/18 Deep Creek (Grab Samples):

Winter: Tebuconazole 0.016µg/L, Atrazine 0.022µg/L, Metribuzin 0.064µg/L (max), Simazine 0.068 µg/L (max)

Spring: Iprodione 0.096µg/L, Metolachlor 0.012µg/L, Diuron 0.034µg/L, Simazine 0.075µg/L (max)

Summer: Simazine 0.27µg/L

2017/18 Deep Creek (Chemcatcher Sampler)

Winter: Propiconazole II 0.015µg/L, Propiconazole I 0.014µg/L, Iprodione 0.02µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.024µg/L, Metribuzin 0.086µg/L, Atrazine 0.042µg/L, Diuron 0.024µg/L, Simazine 0.18µg/L

Spring: DEET 0.12µg/L, Propiconazole I 0.023µg/L, Iprodione 0.05µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.025µg/L, Metolachlor 0.031µg/L, Atrazine 0.07µg/L, Diuron 0.036µg/L, Simazine 0.12µg/L

Autumn: Iprodione 0.037µg/L (max), Tebuconazole 0.047µg/L (max), Metolachlor 0.014µg/L (max), Diuron 0.035µg/L (max), Simazine 0.13µg/L (max)

Myers, JH., Sharp, S., Long, S., Kellar, C., and Pettigrove, V. (2018), Final Report Western Port Toxicant Study Stage 4: Assessment of pesticide risks in catchments of north-eastern Western Port, Aquatic Pollution Prevention Partnership, Technical Report No. 2, RMIT University, Victoria, Australia

2017/18: Drain One Westernport (Victoria). Multiple

2017/18 Drain One (Grab Samples):

Winter: p,p,DDE 0.016µg/L (max), p,p,DDD 0.021µg/L (max), p,p,DDT 0.038µg/L (max), Metalaxyl 0.13µg/L (max), Tebuconazole 0.083µg/L (max), Metribuzin 0.014µg/L (max), Diuron 0.34µg/L (max), Simazine 0.098µg/L (max).

Spring: Metalaxyl 0.15µg/L (max), Diuron 3.6µg/L (max), Simazine 0.29µg/L (max).

Summer: Diuron 0.53µg/L (max), Simazine 0.22µg/L (max).

Autumn: Diuron 0.22µg/L

2017/18 Drain One (Chemcatcher Sampler):

Winter: Iprodione 0.045µg/L (max), Tebuconazole 0.075µg/L (max), Metribuzin 0.15µg/L (max), Atrazine 0.016µg/L (max), Diuron 0.18µg/L (max), Simazine 0.12µg/L (max)

Spring: Metalaxyl 0.19µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.047µg/L, Diuron 0.079µg/L, Simazine 0.35µg/L

Summer: Metalaxyl 0.012µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.012µg/L, Diuron 0.14µg/L (max), Simazine 0.14µg/L (max)

Autumn: Metalaxyl 0.014µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.041µg/L, Diuron 0.22µg/L, Simazine 0.096µg/L

Myers, JH., Sharp, S., Long, S., Kellar, C., and Pettigrove, V. (2018), Final Report Western Port Toxicant Study Stage 4: Assessment of pesticide risks in catchments of north-eastern Western Port, Aquatic Pollution Prevention Partnership, Technical Report No. 2, RMIT University, Victoria, Australia

2017/18 Drain One (Grab Samples):

Winter: p,p,DDE 0.016µg/L (max), p,p,DDD 0.021µg/L (max), p,p,DDT 0.038µg/L (max), Metalaxyl 0.13µg/L (max), Tebuconazole 0.083µg/L (max), Metribuzin 0.014µg/L (max), Diuron 0.34µg/L (max), Simazine 0.098µg/L (max).

Spring: Metalaxyl 0.15µg/L (max), Diuron 3.6µg/L (max), Simazine 0.29µg/L (max).

Summer: Diuron 0.53µg/L (max), Simazine 0.22µg/L (max).

Autumn: Diuron 0.22µg/L

2017/18 Drain One (Chemcatcher Sampler):

Winter: Iprodione 0.045µg/L (max), Tebuconazole 0.075µg/L (max), Metribuzin 0.15µg/L (max), Atrazine 0.016µg/L (max), Diuron 0.18µg/L (max), Simazine 0.12µg/L (max)

Spring: Metalaxyl 0.19µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.047µg/L, Diuron 0.079µg/L, Simazine 0.35µg/L

Summer: Metalaxyl 0.012µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.012µg/L, Diuron 0.14µg/L (max), Simazine 0.14µg/L (max)

Autumn: Metalaxyl 0.014µg/L, Tebuconazole 0.041µg/L, Diuron 0.22µg/L, Simazine 0.096µg/L

Myers, JH., Sharp, S., Long, S., Kellar, C., and Pettigrove, V. (2018), Final Report Western Port Toxicant Study Stage 4: Assessment of pesticide risks in catchments of north-eastern Western Port, Aquatic Pollution Prevention Partnership, Technical Report No. 2, RMIT University, Victoria, Australia

2017/18: Bunyip River (Victoria). Pesticides: Simazine, Metolachlor, Prometryn

2017/18 Bunyip River (Grab Samples):

Winter: Simazine 0.029µg/L

Autumn: Metolachlor 0.057µg/L

2017/18 Bunyip River (Chemcatcher Sampler):

Winter: Simazine 0.015µg/L

Spring: Prometryn 0.016µg/L, Metolachlor 0.029µg/L

Summer: Metolachlor 0.011µg/L

Autumn: Metolachlor 0.073µg/L

Myers, JH., Sharp, S., Long, S., Kellar, C., and Pettigrove, V. (2018), Final Report Western Port Toxicant Study Stage 4: Assessment of pesticide risks in catchments of north-eastern Western Port, Aquatic Pollution Prevention Partnership, Technical Report No. 2, RMIT University, Victoria, Australia

2017/18 Bunyip River (Grab Samples):

Winter: Simazine 0.029µg/L

Autumn: Metolachlor 0.057µg/L

2017/18 Bunyip River (Chemcatcher Sampler):

Winter: Simazine 0.015µg/L

Spring: Prometryn 0.016µg/L, Metolachlor 0.029µg/L

Summer: Metolachlor 0.011µg/L

Autumn: Metolachlor 0.073µg/L

Myers, JH., Sharp, S., Long, S., Kellar, C., and Pettigrove, V. (2018), Final Report Western Port Toxicant Study Stage 4: Assessment of pesticide risks in catchments of north-eastern Western Port, Aquatic Pollution Prevention Partnership, Technical Report No. 2, RMIT University, Victoria, Australia

12 March 2023: Spray Drift Cowboys: Fighting Spray Drift in the Cotton Industry

VIDEO: Spray Drift Cowboys: Fighting spray drift in the cotton industry

12 March 2023

https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/programs/landline/2023-03-12/spray-drift-cowboys:-fighting-spray-drift-in-the/102086288

VIDEO: Spray Drift Cowboys: Fighting spray drift in the cotton industry

12 March 2023

https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/programs/landline/2023-03-12/spray-drift-cowboys:-fighting-spray-drift-in-the/102086288

Feb 28 2028: Farm chemical spray drift causing widespread tree deaths, claims community group

Farm chemical spray drift causing widespread tree deaths, claims community group

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-28/spraydrift-ag-chemicals-prompts-calls-for-epa-investigation/102017874

Below: A tree said to be affected by spray drift in Gulgong, NSW.(Supplied)

Farmers, scientists and other community members across NSW have criticised the state’s Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for ignoring reports of damage to crops and vegetation from agricultural chemicals drifting on the wind.

Spray drift is the spread of agricultural chemicals like pesticides and herbicides from farms to neighbouring areas through the air.

It's a widely recognised phenomenon but this season has been described as one of the worst because unprecedented flooding, humidity and atmospheric inversion have all contributed to more incidents.

Members of Community Overspray Groups (COGs) met in Sydney recently to highlight their concerns.

They say the NSW EPA has not been properly investigating their reports of widespread impacts.

The group's secretary Beatrice Ludwig said members from across the state have reported the impact on their crops as well as the vegetation on their land and in public areas.

"We have gardens and orchards being defoliated. We have beekeepers, and entire bee hives dying," Ms Ludwig said.

The group said the EPA was giving them very little attention.

"The response is usually, 'you go and prove it'," rather than EPA taking it upon itself to investigate, she said.

“Spray drift is causing devastation and unintended consequences across thousands of hectares of farming and grazing land,” Pennie Scott, Convenor of the Passive Chemical Exposure Taskforce, said.

“They are doing nothing about protecting our environment … they are sitting on their hands, I don’t know whether its indifference, ignorance or just plain negligence, but they are not fulfilling their role," she said.

A group of scientists chaired by ANU adjunct professor Richard Thackway visited parts of the central west last year and determined that there was enough evidence to warrant investigation into the links between large-scale vegetation stress and agricultural chemicals.

"The group [of scientists] has widely observed symptoms of chemical drift on non-target vegetation over the past few decades and the degradation of vegetation does not appear to be occurring from natural causes," the statement said.

"The current run of wet seasons has resulted in vegetation recovery in many areas, but this is not evident in areas of intensive agronomic production where chemical use can be intense," it said.

'NSW waterways contaminated'

Aside from the possible effects on vegetation, pesticide runoff from agricultural production could also be in the state's waterways. 

Matt Landos is Director of Future Fisheries Veterinary Services and an honorary lecturer at Sydney University.

"What we know from monitoring [in Queensland] is that pretty much all waters that drain from agricultural land in Australia are contaminated with residues of products applied as pesticides," Dr Landos said.

Dr Landos said while New South Wales did not have an extensive monitoring system like other states, it was "almost certain" the state’s waterways were contaminated given NSW's volume of pesticide use in agriculture.

"From the fishery point of view, their productivity can be impacted by very low exposures to chemicals, impacting the viability of the food web, and the recruitment of new juveniles into fisheries," he said.

Bad conditions for drift

The NSW EPA acknowledged the season's conditions have come together to exacerbate spray drift.

"With the way the weather patterns have been this year, it's culminated in many farmers needing to spray at the same time," executive director of regulatory operations at the EPA Carmen Dwyer said.

She said farmers were desperate for their crops to succeed this season after some difficult years due to fires, floods and the mouse plague, and some were possibly spraying in ways they should not.

"We're seeing allegations of quite broad impact from particular chemicals"

Ms Dwyer encouraged people to report incidents of spray drift as soon as they suspected it.

"If we're told quickly about an incident we can get vegetation samples and confirm what type of pesticide has been applied, but unfortunately a lot of the time we're not notified of the incident in a timely way so that restricts our ability to investigate."

The EPA said it looked into all pollution notifications and reports, and had only received 12 this season.

The Community Overspray Groups worried that growers were now disillusioned with the investigation process, after making reports to the EPA for many years.

Farm chemical spray drift causing widespread tree deaths, claims community group

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-28/spraydrift-ag-chemicals-prompts-calls-for-epa-investigation/102017874

Below: A tree said to be affected by spray drift in Gulgong, NSW.(Supplied)

Farmers, scientists and other community members across NSW have criticised the state’s Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for ignoring reports of damage to crops and vegetation from agricultural chemicals drifting on the wind.

Spray drift is the spread of agricultural chemicals like pesticides and herbicides from farms to neighbouring areas through the air.

It’s a widely recognised phenomenon but this season has been described as one of the worst because unprecedented flooding, humidity and atmospheric inversion have all contributed to more incidents.

Members of Community Overspray Groups (COGs) met in Sydney recently to highlight their concerns.

They say the NSW EPA has not been properly investigating their reports of widespread impacts.

The group’s secretary Beatrice Ludwig said members from across the state have reported the impact on their crops as well as the vegetation on their land and in public areas.

“We have gardens and orchards being defoliated. We have beekeepers, and entire bee hives dying,” Ms Ludwig said.

The group said the EPA was giving them very little attention.

“The response is usually, ‘you go and prove it’,” rather than EPA taking it upon itself to investigate, she said.

“Spray drift is causing devastation and unintended consequences across thousands of hectares of farming and grazing land,” Pennie Scott, Convenor of the Passive Chemical Exposure Taskforce, said.

“They are doing nothing about protecting our environment … they are sitting on their hands, I don’t know whether its indifference, ignorance or just plain negligence, but they are not fulfilling their role,” she said.

A group of scientists chaired by ANU adjunct professor Richard Thackway visited parts of the central west last year and determined that there was enough evidence to warrant investigation into the links between large-scale vegetation stress and agricultural chemicals.

“The group [of scientists] has widely observed symptoms of chemical drift on non-target vegetation over the past few decades and the degradation of vegetation does not appear to be occurring from natural causes,” the statement said.

“The current run of wet seasons has resulted in vegetation recovery in many areas, but this is not evident in areas of intensive agronomic production where chemical use can be intense,” it said.

‘NSW waterways contaminated’

Aside from the possible effects on vegetation, pesticide runoff from agricultural production could also be in the state’s waterways.

Matt Landos is Director of Future Fisheries Veterinary Services and an honorary lecturer at Sydney University.

“What we know from monitoring [in Queensland] is that pretty much all waters that drain from agricultural land in Australia are contaminated with residues of products applied as pesticides,” Dr Landos said.

Dr Landos said while New South Wales did not have an extensive monitoring system like other states, it was “almost certainthe state’s waterways were contaminated given NSW’s volume of pesticide use in agriculture.

“From the fishery point of view, their productivity can be impacted by very low exposures to chemicals, impacting the viability of the food web, and the recruitment of new juveniles into fisheries,” he said.

Bad conditions for drift

The NSW EPA acknowledged the season’s conditions have come together to exacerbate spray drift.

“With the way the weather patterns have been this year, it’s culminated in many farmers needing to spray at the same time,” executive director of regulatory operations at the EPA Carmen Dwyer said.

She said farmers were desperate for their crops to succeed this season after some difficult years due to fires, floods and the mouse plague, and some were possibly spraying in ways they should not.

“We’re seeing allegations of quite broad impact from particular chemicals”

Ms Dwyer encouraged people to report incidents of spray drift as soon as they suspected it.

“If we’re told quickly about an incident we can get vegetation samples and confirm what type of pesticide has been applied, but unfortunately a lot of the time we’re not notified of the incident in a timely way so that restricts our ability to investigate.”

The EPA said it looked into all pollution notifications and reports, and had only received 12 this season.

The Community Overspray Groups worried that growers were now disillusioned with the investigation process, after making reports to the EPA for many years.

Jan 23 2023: Mudgee/Macquarie Valley. Spray Drift. Pesticide: 2,4-D?

Cotton Australia & others discuss action on spray drift incidents

Jan 23 2023: https://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/textile-news/cotton-australia-others-discuss-action-on-spray-drift-incidents-285336-newsdetails.htm

Australia’s top agricultural peak bodies including Cotton Australia, government regulators, and enforcement agencies, are discussing the latest incidents of spray drift which SOS NSW has described as at crisis point. Pesticide spray drift occurs when pesticide dust or droplets move through the air at the time of application or soon after, to unintended areas.

Farmers have reported moderate to severe spray drift incidents on the Darling Downs, St George district, Dirranbandi, Mungindi, Gwydir, Lower Namoi, Walgett, and the Macquarie Valley, according to a press release by Cotton Australia.

Cotton Australia’s general manager Michael Murray said: “Media reports have suggested 2,4-D spray drift is responsible in some locations and while the damage is consistent with phenoxy herbicides, there is currently no available evidence in the form of residue analysis to confirm that.

“That being said, unfortunately the industry has a long history of experience with spray drift, and if experienced farmers and agronomists identify the damages as being caused by 2-4D drift, then that is the most likely cause.”

Murray added that cotton crops had been impacted but so too have other crops and it is unclear in each location exactly what chemicals are responsible.

Cotton Australia reminds all growers and spray operators that they must apply chemicals in accordance with the label conditions which can include factors such as nozzle selections, wind speeds, and inversion conditions, added the release.

Cotton Australia is actively urging the relevant authorities to run compliance activities to ensure adherence to label conditions.

“There is no doubt, this year is the worst year in recent years, most likely reflecting the seasonal conditions which have generally been conducive for weed growth, and the weather induced delays to winter harvest means that in some instances weed control is occurring later than usual,” said Murray.

Cotton Australia & others discuss action on spray drift incidents

Jan 23 2023: https://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/textile-news/cotton-australia-others-discuss-action-on-spray-drift-incidents-285336-newsdetails.htm

Australia’s top agricultural peak bodies including Cotton Australia, government regulators, and enforcement agencies, are discussing the latest incidents of spray drift which SOS NSW has described as at crisis point. Pesticide spray drift occurs when pesticide dust or droplets move through the air at the time of application or soon after, to unintended areas.

Farmers have reported moderate to severe spray drift incidents on the Darling Downs, St George district, Dirranbandi, Mungindi, Gwydir, Lower Namoi, Walgett, and the Macquarie Valley, according to a press release by Cotton Australia.

Cotton Australia’s general manager Michael Murray said: “Media reports have suggested 2,4-D spray drift is responsible in some locations and while the damage is consistent with phenoxy herbicides, there is currently no available evidence in the form of residue analysis to confirm that.

“That being said, unfortunately the industry has a long history of experience with spray drift, and if experienced farmers and agronomists identify the damages as being caused by 2-4D drift, then that is the most likely cause.”

Murray added that cotton crops had been impacted but so too have other crops and it is unclear in each location exactly what chemicals are responsible.

Cotton Australia reminds all growers and spray operators that they must apply chemicals in accordance with the label conditions which can include factors such as nozzle selections, wind speeds, and inversion conditions, added the release.

Cotton Australia is actively urging the relevant authorities to run compliance activities to ensure adherence to label conditions.

“There is no doubt, this year is the worst year in recent years, most likely reflecting the seasonal conditions which have generally been conducive for weed growth, and the weather induced delays to winter harvest means that in some instances weed control is occurring later than usual,” said Murray.

2023 January: Lower Namoi (NSW) Spray Drift. 2,4-D?

Cotton Australia & others discuss action on spray drift incidents

Jan 23 2023: https://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/textile-news/cotton-australia-others-discuss-action-on-spray-drift-incidents-285336-newsdetails.htm

Australia’s top agricultural peak bodies including Cotton Australia, government regulators, and enforcement agencies, are discussing the latest incidents of spray drift which SOS NSW has described as at crisis point. Pesticide spray drift occurs when pesticide dust or droplets move through the air at the time of application or soon after, to unintended areas.

Farmers have reported moderate to severe spray drift incidents on the Darling Downs, St George district, Dirranbandi, Mungindi, Gwydir, Lower Namoi, Walgett, and the Macquarie Valley, according to a press release by Cotton Australia.

Cotton Australia’s general manager Michael Murray said: “Media reports have suggested 2,4-D spray drift is responsible in some locations and while the damage is consistent with phenoxy herbicides, there is currently no available evidence in the form of residue analysis to confirm that.

“That being said, unfortunately the industry has a long history of experience with spray drift, and if experienced farmers and agronomists identify the damages as being caused by 2-4D drift, then that is the most likely cause.”

Murray added that cotton crops had been impacted but so too have other crops and it is unclear in each location exactly what chemicals are responsible.

Cotton Australia reminds all growers and spray operators that they must apply chemicals in accordance with the label conditions which can include factors such as nozzle selections, wind speeds, and inversion conditions, added the release.

Cotton Australia is actively urging the relevant authorities to run compliance activities to ensure adherence to label conditions.

“There is no doubt, this year is the worst year in recent years, most likely reflecting the seasonal conditions which have generally been conducive for weed growth, and the weather induced delays to winter harvest means that in some instances weed control is occurring later than usual,” said Murray.

Cotton Australia & others discuss action on spray drift incidents

Jan 23 2023: https://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/textile-news/cotton-australia-others-discuss-action-on-spray-drift-incidents-285336-newsdetails.htm

Australia’s top agricultural peak bodies including Cotton Australia, government regulators, and enforcement agencies, are discussing the latest incidents of spray drift which SOS NSW has described as at crisis point. Pesticide spray drift occurs when pesticide dust or droplets move through the air at the time of application or soon after, to unintended areas.

Farmers have reported moderate to severe spray drift incidents on the Darling Downs, St George district, Dirranbandi, Mungindi, Gwydir, Lower Namoi, Walgett, and the Macquarie Valley, according to a press release by Cotton Australia.

Cotton Australia’s general manager Michael Murray said: “Media reports have suggested 2,4-D spray drift is responsible in some locations and while the damage is consistent with phenoxy herbicides, there is currently no available evidence in the form of residue analysis to confirm that.

“That being said, unfortunately the industry has a long history of experience with spray drift, and if experienced farmers and agronomists identify the damages as being caused by 2-4D drift, then that is the most likely cause.”

Murray added that cotton crops had been impacted but so too have other crops and it is unclear in each location exactly what chemicals are responsible.

Cotton Australia reminds all growers and spray operators that they must apply chemicals in accordance with the label conditions which can include factors such as nozzle selections, wind speeds, and inversion conditions, added the release.

Cotton Australia is actively urging the relevant authorities to run compliance activities to ensure adherence to label conditions.

“There is no doubt, this year is the worst year in recent years, most likely reflecting the seasonal conditions which have generally been conducive for weed growth, and the weather induced delays to winter harvest means that in some instances weed control is occurring later than usual,” said Murray.

Jan 23 2023: Gwydir (NSW). Spray Drift. Pesticide: 2,4-D?

Cotton Australia & others discuss action on spray drift incidents

Jan 23 2023: https://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/textile-news/cotton-australia-others-discuss-action-on-spray-drift-incidents-285336-newsdetails.htm

Australia’s top agricultural peak bodies including Cotton Australia, government regulators, and enforcement agencies, are discussing the latest incidents of spray drift which SOS NSW has described as at crisis point. Pesticide spray drift occurs when pesticide dust or droplets move through the air at the time of application or soon after, to unintended areas.

Farmers have reported moderate to severe spray drift incidents on the Darling Downs, St George district, Dirranbandi, Mungindi, Gwydir, Lower Namoi, Walgett, and the Macquarie Valley, according to a press release by Cotton Australia.

Cotton Australia’s general manager Michael Murray said: “Media reports have suggested 2,4-D spray drift is responsible in some locations and while the damage is consistent with phenoxy herbicides, there is currently no available evidence in the form of residue analysis to confirm that.

“That being said, unfortunately the industry has a long history of experience with spray drift, and if experienced farmers and agronomists identify the damages as being caused by 2-4D drift, then that is the most likely cause.”

Murray added that cotton crops had been impacted but so too have other crops and it is unclear in each location exactly what chemicals are responsible.

Cotton Australia reminds all growers and spray operators that they must apply chemicals in accordance with the label conditions which can include factors such as nozzle selections, wind speeds, and inversion conditions, added the release.

Cotton Australia is actively urging the relevant authorities to run compliance activities to ensure adherence to label conditions.

“There is no doubt, this year is the worst year in recent years, most likely reflecting the seasonal conditions which have generally been conducive for weed growth, and the weather induced delays to winter harvest means that in some instances weed control is occurring later than usual,” said Murray.

Cotton Australia & others discuss action on spray drift incidents

Jan 23 2023: https://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/textile-news/cotton-australia-others-discuss-action-on-spray-drift-incidents-285336-newsdetails.htm

Australia’s top agricultural peak bodies including Cotton Australia, government regulators, and enforcement agencies, are discussing the latest incidents of spray drift which SOS NSW has described as at crisis point. Pesticide spray drift occurs when pesticide dust or droplets move through the air at the time of application or soon after, to unintended areas.

Farmers have reported moderate to severe spray drift incidents on the Darling Downs, St George district, Dirranbandi, Mungindi, Gwydir, Lower Namoi, Walgett, and the Macquarie Valley, according to a press release by Cotton Australia.

Cotton Australia’s general manager Michael Murray said: “Media reports have suggested 2,4-D spray drift is responsible in some locations and while the damage is consistent with phenoxy herbicides, there is currently no available evidence in the form of residue analysis to confirm that.

“That being said, unfortunately the industry has a long history of experience with spray drift, and if experienced farmers and agronomists identify the damages as being caused by 2-4D drift, then that is the most likely cause.”

Murray added that cotton crops had been impacted but so too have other crops and it is unclear in each location exactly what chemicals are responsible.

Cotton Australia reminds all growers and spray operators that they must apply chemicals in accordance with the label conditions which can include factors such as nozzle selections, wind speeds, and inversion conditions, added the release.

Cotton Australia is actively urging the relevant authorities to run compliance activities to ensure adherence to label conditions.

“There is no doubt, this year is the worst year in recent years, most likely reflecting the seasonal conditions which have generally been conducive for weed growth, and the weather induced delays to winter harvest means that in some instances weed control is occurring later than usual,” said Murray.

Jan 23 2023: Mungindi (Qld). Spray Drift. Pesticide: 2,4-D?

Cotton Australia & others discuss action on spray drift incidents

Jan 23 2023: https://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/textile-news/cotton-australia-others-discuss-action-on-spray-drift-incidents-285336-newsdetails.htm

Australia’s top agricultural peak bodies including Cotton Australia, government regulators, and enforcement agencies, are discussing the latest incidents of spray drift which SOS NSW has described as at crisis point. Pesticide spray drift occurs when pesticide dust or droplets move through the air at the time of application or soon after, to unintended areas.

Farmers have reported moderate to severe spray drift incidents on the Darling Downs, St George district, Dirranbandi, Mungindi, Gwydir, Lower Namoi, Walgett, and the Macquarie Valley, according to a press release by Cotton Australia.

Cotton Australia’s general manager Michael Murray said: “Media reports have suggested 2,4-D spray drift is responsible in some locations and while the damage is consistent with phenoxy herbicides, there is currently no available evidence in the form of residue analysis to confirm that.

“That being said, unfortunately the industry has a long history of experience with spray drift, and if experienced farmers and agronomists identify the damages as being caused by 2-4D drift, then that is the most likely cause.”

Murray added that cotton crops had been impacted but so too have other crops and it is unclear in each location exactly what chemicals are responsible.

Cotton Australia reminds all growers and spray operators that they must apply chemicals in accordance with the label conditions which can include factors such as nozzle selections, wind speeds, and inversion conditions, added the release.

Cotton Australia is actively urging the relevant authorities to run compliance activities to ensure adherence to label conditions.

“There is no doubt, this year is the worst year in recent years, most likely reflecting the seasonal conditions which have generally been conducive for weed growth, and the weather induced delays to winter harvest means that in some instances weed control is occurring later than usual,” said Murray.

Cotton Australia & others discuss action on spray drift incidents

Jan 23 2023: https://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/textile-news/cotton-australia-others-discuss-action-on-spray-drift-incidents-285336-newsdetails.htm

Australia’s top agricultural peak bodies including Cotton Australia, government regulators, and enforcement agencies, are discussing the latest incidents of spray drift which SOS NSW has described as at crisis point. Pesticide spray drift occurs when pesticide dust or droplets move through the air at the time of application or soon after, to unintended areas.

Farmers have reported moderate to severe spray drift incidents on the Darling Downs, St George district, Dirranbandi, Mungindi, Gwydir, Lower Namoi, Walgett, and the Macquarie Valley, according to a press release by Cotton Australia.

Cotton Australia’s general manager Michael Murray said: “Media reports have suggested 2,4-D spray drift is responsible in some locations and while the damage is consistent with phenoxy herbicides, there is currently no available evidence in the form of residue analysis to confirm that.

“That being said, unfortunately the industry has a long history of experience with spray drift, and if experienced farmers and agronomists identify the damages as being caused by 2-4D drift, then that is the most likely cause.”

Murray added that cotton crops had been impacted but so too have other crops and it is unclear in each location exactly what chemicals are responsible.

Cotton Australia reminds all growers and spray operators that they must apply chemicals in accordance with the label conditions which can include factors such as nozzle selections, wind speeds, and inversion conditions, added the release.

Cotton Australia is actively urging the relevant authorities to run compliance activities to ensure adherence to label conditions.

“There is no doubt, this year is the worst year in recent years, most likely reflecting the seasonal conditions which have generally been conducive for weed growth, and the weather induced delays to winter harvest means that in some instances weed control is occurring later than usual,” said Murray.

Jan 23 2023: Dirranbandi (NSW) Spray Drift

Cotton Australia & others discuss action on spray drift incidents

Jan 23 2023: https://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/textile-news/cotton-australia-others-discuss-action-on-spray-drift-incidents-285336-newsdetails.htm

Australia’s top agricultural peak bodies including Cotton Australia, government regulators, and enforcement agencies, are discussing the latest incidents of spray drift which SOS NSW has described as at crisis point. Pesticide spray drift occurs when pesticide dust or droplets move through the air at the time of application or soon after, to unintended areas.

Farmers have reported moderate to severe spray drift incidents on the Darling Downs, St George district, Dirranbandi, Mungindi, Gwydir, Lower Namoi, Walgett, and the Macquarie Valley, according to a press release by Cotton Australia.

Cotton Australia’s general manager Michael Murray said: “Media reports have suggested 2,4-D spray drift is responsible in some locations and while the damage is consistent with phenoxy herbicides, there is currently no available evidence in the form of residue analysis to confirm that.

“That being said, unfortunately the industry has a long history of experience with spray drift, and if experienced farmers and agronomists identify the damages as being caused by 2-4D drift, then that is the most likely cause.”

Murray added that cotton crops had been impacted but so too have other crops and it is unclear in each location exactly what chemicals are responsible.

Cotton Australia reminds all growers and spray operators that they must apply chemicals in accordance with the label conditions which can include factors such as nozzle selections, wind speeds, and inversion conditions, added the release.

Cotton Australia is actively urging the relevant authorities to run compliance activities to ensure adherence to label conditions.

“There is no doubt, this year is the worst year in recent years, most likely reflecting the seasonal conditions which have generally been conducive for weed growth, and the weather induced delays to winter harvest means that in some instances weed control is occurring later than usual,” said Murray.

Cotton Australia & others discuss action on spray drift incidents

Jan 23 2023: https://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/textile-news/cotton-australia-others-discuss-action-on-spray-drift-incidents-285336-newsdetails.htm

Australia’s top agricultural peak bodies including Cotton Australia, government regulators, and enforcement agencies, are discussing the latest incidents of spray drift which SOS NSW has described as at crisis point. Pesticide spray drift occurs when pesticide dust or droplets move through the air at the time of application or soon after, to unintended areas.

Farmers have reported moderate to severe spray drift incidents on the Darling Downs, St George district, Dirranbandi, Mungindi, Gwydir, Lower Namoi, Walgett, and the Macquarie Valley, according to a press release by Cotton Australia.

Cotton Australia’s general manager Michael Murray said: “Media reports have suggested 2,4-D spray drift is responsible in some locations and while the damage is consistent with phenoxy herbicides, there is currently no available evidence in the form of residue analysis to confirm that.

“That being said, unfortunately the industry has a long history of experience with spray drift, and if experienced farmers and agronomists identify the damages as being caused by 2-4D drift, then that is the most likely cause.”

Murray added that cotton crops had been impacted but so too have other crops and it is unclear in each location exactly what chemicals are responsible.

Cotton Australia reminds all growers and spray operators that they must apply chemicals in accordance with the label conditions which can include factors such as nozzle selections, wind speeds, and inversion conditions, added the release.

Cotton Australia is actively urging the relevant authorities to run compliance activities to ensure adherence to label conditions.

“There is no doubt, this year is the worst year in recent years, most likely reflecting the seasonal conditions which have generally been conducive for weed growth, and the weather induced delays to winter harvest means that in some instances weed control is occurring later than usual,” said Murray.

Jan 23 2023: Spray Drift St George District. Pesticide: 2,4-D

Cotton Australia & others discuss action on spray drift incidents

Jan 23 2023: https://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/textile-news/cotton-australia-others-discuss-action-on-spray-drift-incidents-285336-newsdetails.htm

Australia’s top agricultural peak bodies including Cotton Australia, government regulators, and enforcement agencies, are discussing the latest incidents of spray drift which SOS NSW has described as at crisis point. Pesticide spray drift occurs when pesticide dust or droplets move through the air at the time of application or soon after, to unintended areas.

Farmers have reported moderate to severe spray drift incidents on the Darling Downs, St George district, Dirranbandi, Mungindi, Gwydir, Lower Namoi, Walgett, and the Macquarie Valley, according to a press release by Cotton Australia.

Cotton Australia’s general manager Michael Murray said: “Media reports have suggested 2,4-D spray drift is responsible in some locations and while the damage is consistent with phenoxy herbicides, there is currently no available evidence in the form of residue analysis to confirm that.

“That being said, unfortunately the industry has a long history of experience with spray drift, and if experienced farmers and agronomists identify the damages as being caused by 2-4D drift, then that is the most likely cause.”

Murray added that cotton crops had been impacted but so too have other crops and it is unclear in each location exactly what chemicals are responsible.

Cotton Australia reminds all growers and spray operators that they must apply chemicals in accordance with the label conditions which can include factors such as nozzle selections, wind speeds, and inversion conditions, added the release.

Cotton Australia is actively urging the relevant authorities to run compliance activities to ensure adherence to label conditions.

“There is no doubt, this year is the worst year in recent years, most likely reflecting the seasonal conditions which have generally been conducive for weed growth, and the weather induced delays to winter harvest means that in some instances weed control is occurring later than usual,” said Murray.

Cotton Australia & others discuss action on spray drift incidents

Jan 23 2023: https://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/textile-news/cotton-australia-others-discuss-action-on-spray-drift-incidents-285336-newsdetails.htm

Australia’s top agricultural peak bodies including Cotton Australia, government regulators, and enforcement agencies, are discussing the latest incidents of spray drift which SOS NSW has described as at crisis point. Pesticide spray drift occurs when pesticide dust or droplets move through the air at the time of application or soon after, to unintended areas.

Farmers have reported moderate to severe spray drift incidents on the Darling Downs, St George district, Dirranbandi, Mungindi, Gwydir, Lower Namoi, Walgett, and the Macquarie Valley, according to a press release by Cotton Australia.

Cotton Australia’s general manager Michael Murray said: “Media reports have suggested 2,4-D spray drift is responsible in some locations and while the damage is consistent with phenoxy herbicides, there is currently no available evidence in the form of residue analysis to confirm that.

“That being said, unfortunately the industry has a long history of experience with spray drift, and if experienced farmers and agronomists identify the damages as being caused by 2-4D drift, then that is the most likely cause.”

Murray added that cotton crops had been impacted but so too have other crops and it is unclear in each location exactly what chemicals are responsible.

Cotton Australia reminds all growers and spray operators that they must apply chemicals in accordance with the label conditions which can include factors such as nozzle selections, wind speeds, and inversion conditions, added the release.

Cotton Australia is actively urging the relevant authorities to run compliance activities to ensure adherence to label conditions.

“There is no doubt, this year is the worst year in recent years, most likely reflecting the seasonal conditions which have generally been conducive for weed growth, and the weather induced delays to winter harvest means that in some instances weed control is occurring later than usual,” said Murray.

Jan 6 2023: Spray Drift impacts on 30,000ha Eastern Darling Downs. Pesticides: 2,4-D

Spray drift damages up to $100 million in cotton, prompting calls for more herbicide controls

https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2023-01-06/spray-drift-damages-100-million-dollars-of-cotton-darling-downs/101816638

Anyone can buy the herbicide 2,4-D from a shop, but its misuse may have caused millions of dollars worth of damage to cotton crops, prompting calls for more controls.

The large-scale spray drift event hit up to 30,000 hectares of cotton on the eastern Darling Downs late last year.

But Crop Consultants Australia confirmed there had been spray drift detected across every cotton valley planted in Australia so far this season.

Spray drift is the airborne movement of agricultural chemicals outside a target area.

In this instance the chemical was 2,4-D, which kills plants by changing the way certain cells grow and is commonly used to control weeds.

Agronomist Matthew Holding said it was a shock to discover the affected cotton and he had never seen anything like it.

"To be able to say that pretty much every paddock we look in has some kind of symptom is just unbelievable," he said.

"These would range from low to moderate, and the moderate would be ones where we're starting to actually get concerned."

He said the true extent of the damage was still to be determined.

"It's happened just prior to Christmas I would say, so it's … still starting to rear its ugly head," he said.

Mr Holding said a lot of people were growing cotton at the moment due to strong prices, but sunflowers and small crops were also at risk.

Stuart Armitage, a former president of the Queensland Farmers Federation and former board member of Cotton Australia, said on top of high input costs, such as diesel, fertiliser and labour, the losses would be a huge blow.

"They [spray drift incidents] cause a lot of damage and a lot of grief and even depression and heartache for a lot of people," he said.

"You spend a lot of money getting a crop going, and then someone who we can't name or find or anything … through inconsideration, damages people's crops."

Agronomist Matthew Holding said $500 worth of chemical could have caused the damage, which may total up to $100 million.

"It's almost beyond belief to think that a few hundred dollars' worth of product done incorrectly and illegally could cause tens of millions of dollars … of damage in 2022," he said.

Both Mr Holding and Mr Armitage want more controls put in place around the chemical's use to create transparency.

They want 2,4-D listed as a controlled chemical that people would require certification to use.

"I would have thought that if you buy it from a shop, you've actually got to go onto a registered list and I think from that registered list, you've got to have the ability to keep good records and to be audited at any time," Mr Holding said.

Mr Armitage said the situation would not require a government review.

"All that does is need a tick from the government," he said.

In a statement, Biosecurity Queensland told the ABC it was investigating the use of herbicides associated with a reported spray drift incident on the Darling Downs affecting a 160-hectare site.

A spokesperson said further public comment was not possible while a complaint was being assessed.

Weeds become resistant due to wet season

Weeds have exploded across much of Australia due to wet weather last year.

Senior agronomist at Nutrien Dalby Ross Pomeroy said a huge amount of weed control in the areas concerned was ongoing, due to wet paddocks last winter and spring.

"We just couldn't work the paddock, it was too wet. So the situation was that we use a lot of herbicides," he said.

"Fleabane has been our biggest issue I'd say this season, and to a point where we've got fleabane varieties that are very tolerant or very, very resistant of our normal herbicides.

"Queensland, New South Wales, Northern Victoria [are affected and] I've seen it in my travels all the way up through the Queensland coast, around the Cape and it's just about everywhere, all the way through inland."

He said 30 years ago very light rates of glyphosate were used, but now he was having to go across paddocks three times.

"This might be the end of the herbicide era when it comes down to knockdown," he said.

Spray drift damages up to $100 million in cotton, prompting calls for more herbicide controls

https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2023-01-06/spray-drift-damages-100-million-dollars-of-cotton-darling-downs/101816638

Anyone can buy the herbicide 2,4-D from a shop, but its misuse may have caused millions of dollars worth of damage to cotton crops, prompting calls for more controls.

The large-scale spray drift event hit up to 30,000 hectares of cotton on the eastern Darling Downs late last year.

But Crop Consultants Australia confirmed there had been spray drift detected across every cotton valley planted in Australia so far this season.

Spray drift is the airborne movement of agricultural chemicals outside a target area.

In this instance the chemical was 2,4-D, which kills plants by changing the way certain cells grow and is commonly used to control weeds.

Agronomist Matthew Holding said it was a shock to discover the affected cotton and he had never seen anything like it.

“To be able to say that pretty much every paddock we look in has some kind of symptom is just unbelievable,” he said.

“These would range from low to moderate, and the moderate would be ones where we’re starting to actually get concerned.”

He said the true extent of the damage was still to be determined.

“It’s happened just prior to Christmas I would say, so it’s … still starting to rear its ugly head,” he said.

Mr Holding said a lot of people were growing cotton at the moment due to strong prices, but sunflowers and small crops were also at risk.

Stuart Armitage, a former president of the Queensland Farmers Federation and former board member of Cotton Australia, said on top of high input costs, such as diesel, fertiliser and labour, the losses would be a huge blow.

“They [spray drift incidents] cause a lot of damage and a lot of grief and even depression and heartache for a lot of people,” he said.

“You spend a lot of money getting a crop going, and then someone who we can’t name or find or anything … through inconsideration, damages people’s crops.”

Agronomist Matthew Holding said $500 worth of chemical could have caused the damage, which may total up to $100 million.

“It’s almost beyond belief to think that a few hundred dollars’ worth of product done incorrectly and illegally could cause tens of millions of dollars … of damage in 2022,” he said.

Both Mr Holding and Mr Armitage want more controls put in place around the chemical’s use to create transparency.

They want 2,4-D listed as a controlled chemical that people would require certification to use.

“I would have thought that if you buy it from a shop, you’ve actually got to go onto a registered list and I think from that registered list, you’ve got to have the ability to keep good records and to be audited at any time,” Mr Holding said.

Mr Armitage said the situation would not require a government review.

“All that does is need a tick from the government,” he said.

In a statement, Biosecurity Queensland told the ABC it was investigating the use of herbicides associated with a reported spray drift incident on the Darling Downs affecting a 160-hectare site.

A spokesperson said further public comment was not possible while a complaint was being assessed.

Weeds become resistant due to wet season

Weeds have exploded across much of Australia due to wet weather last year.

Senior agronomist at Nutrien Dalby Ross Pomeroy said a huge amount of weed control in the areas concerned was ongoing, due to wet paddocks last winter and spring.

“We just couldn’t work the paddock, it was too wet. So the situation was that we use a lot of herbicides,” he said.

“Fleabane has been our biggest issue I’d say this season, and to a point where we’ve got fleabane varieties that are very tolerant or very, very resistant of our normal herbicides.

“Queensland, New South Wales, Northern Victoria [are affected and] I’ve seen it in my travels all the way up through the Queensland coast, around the Cape and it’s just about everywhere, all the way through inland.”

He said 30 years ago very light rates of glyphosate were used, but now he was having to go across paddocks three times.

“This might be the end of the herbicide era when it comes down to knockdown,” he said.

Sep 19 2022: Pilot dies in crop duster plane crash near Toowoomba

Pilot dies in crop duster plane crash near Toowoomba

Sep 19 2022: A pilot has died in a light aircraft crash north-west of Toowoomba.

The pilot, the sole occupant, died at the crash site on private property off Chinchilla Wondai Road at Canaga, near Chinchilla in the Western Downs, about 12.20pm on Monday.

Police said the pilot, a man aged in his 30s, was behind the controls of his crop duster aircraft when it lost altitude and crash-landed in a paddock.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has been notified and will investigate the incident with the police service’s Forensic Crash Unit.

It comes after a pilot was killed in a plane crash in Ayr in the state’s north on Sunday, September 11.

The pilot, a 67-year-old Townsville man who was the only occupant of the aircraft, was found dead at the scene.

Last month, an experienced pilot, a millionaire businessman and his son died in an aircraft crash in the Fernvale area near Lake Wivenhoe in the Somerset Region, 40 kilometres west of Brisbane.

Bird carcass found in Qld plane's cockpit (Shep News Dec 16 2022)

The carcass of a large bird that can weigh as much as eight kilos was found in the cockpit of a crop duster involved in a fatal crash in rural Queensland.

A pilot was killed and his aircraft destroyed when it crashed into the ground at a property near Chinchilla, west of Brisbane, on September 19.

The aircraft hit the ground with the fuselage "in a near vertical attitude" and its "propeller and engine buried in the soft earth", the Australian Transport Safety Bureau's Stuart Godley said.

 

"A large bird carcass was found in the cockpit and the bird's wings were located about 300 metres north of the wreckage, in-line with the aircraft's track."

The engine appeared to be delivering power at the time of impact, a preliminary report says.

Examination have shown the bird was an Australian bustard or Plains turkey, which weighs up to eight kilograms and can be as tall as 1.2 metres.

They are mostly ground dwellers, but are capable of flight.

Farmers began their search for the plane at about midday after concerns were raised when the pilot failed to respond to a call about whether they needed more fuel.

One of the local farmers found the aircraft in a paddock where the pilot had been spraying pesticide shortly after.

The field where the accident occurred would generally be sprayed at a height of two metres above the ground, just above the weeds, the aircraft's operator advised.

While birdstrikes causing fatal aircraft accidents are very rare, the ATSB is separately investigating an incident involving a wedge-tailed eagle carcass located near the accident site of a helicopter that experienced an "in-flight break-up" in NSW in July. 

The ongoing investigation of the Chinchilla accident will include further examination of electronic components, operational documents and maintenance records.

A final report will be published at a later date.

Bird carcass found in Qld plane’s cockpit

Pilot dies in crop duster plane crash near Toowoomba

Sep 19 2022: A pilot has died in a light aircraft crash north-west of Toowoomba.

The pilot, the sole occupant, died at the crash site on private property off Chinchilla Wondai Road at Canaga, near Chinchilla in the Western Downs, about 12.20pm on Monday.

Police said the pilot, a man aged in his 30s, was behind the controls of his crop duster aircraft when it lost altitude and crash-landed in a paddock.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has been notified and will investigate the incident with the police service’s Forensic Crash Unit.

It comes after a pilot was killed in a plane crash in Ayr in the state’s north on Sunday, September 11.

The pilot, a 67-year-old Townsville man who was the only occupant of the aircraft, was found dead at the scene.

Last month, an experienced pilot, a millionaire businessman and his son died in an aircraft crash in the Fernvale area near Lake Wivenhoe in the Somerset Region, 40 kilometres west of Brisbane.

Bird carcass found in Qld plane’s cockpit (Shep News Dec 16 2022)

The carcass of a large bird that can weigh as much as eight kilos was found in the cockpit of a crop duster involved in a fatal crash in rural Queensland.

A pilot was killed and his aircraft destroyed when it crashed into the ground at a property near Chinchilla, west of Brisbane, on September 19.

The aircraft hit the ground with the fuselage “in a near vertical attitude” and its “propeller and engine buried in the soft earth”, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau’s Stuart Godley said.

“A large bird carcass was found in the cockpit and the bird’s wings were located about 300 metres north of the wreckage, in-line with the aircraft’s track.”

The engine appeared to be delivering power at the time of impact, a preliminary report says.

Examination have shown the bird was an Australian bustard or Plains turkey, which weighs up to eight kilograms and can be as tall as 1.2 metres.

They are mostly ground dwellers, but are capable of flight.

Farmers began their search for the plane at about midday after concerns were raised when the pilot failed to respond to a call about whether they needed more fuel.

One of the local farmers found the aircraft in a paddock where the pilot had been spraying pesticide shortly after.

The field where the accident occurred would generally be sprayed at a height of two metres above the ground, just above the weeds, the aircraft’s operator advised.

While birdstrikes causing fatal aircraft accidents are very rare, the ATSB is separately investigating an incident involving a wedge-tailed eagle carcass located near the accident site of a helicopter that experienced an “in-flight break-up” in NSW in July.

The ongoing investigation of the Chinchilla accident will include further examination of electronic components, operational documents and maintenance records.

A final report will be published at a later date.

Bird carcass found in Qld plane’s cockpit

Jan 1 2023: Chemical Romance or Toxic Relationship: what you need to know about EDC’s

Chemical romance or toxic relationship: what you need to know about EDCs

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/7972744/two-heads-on-one-body-the-disturbing-chemicals-our-regulations-havent-caught-up-to/

John Hanscombe (Canberra Times) Jan 1 2023

Matt Landos knew something was seriously wrong when he saw the two-headed fish larvae.

It was 13 years ago when the veterinarian, who specialises in fish, was called to a small hatchery to investigate sudden, unexplained anomalies interfering with the embryos.

“They were having problems getting their fish to survive and they’d noticed some strange development in the eggs and the larvae of those fish in their hatchery,” he says.

“They had had some problems over the preceding couple of years which they suspected may have been related to the practices of their neighbour operating a commercial macadamia farm and utilising registered agricultural sprays on their crop.”

The hatchery operator had taken her concerns to the Queensland government, suspecting pesticide spray drift had introduced chemicals into the water in which the fish were bred. An initial investigation found the neighbour had complied with the necessary regulations.

“They essentially advised her that the operator was in compliance with regulations around application of spraying and therefore there may be other reasons why her fish were having problems. She rang me up and asked me as a veterinarian to come and investigate what was going on with her fish, to try and understand if there were other problems.”

Landos was particularly troubled by a group of bass, which had spawned in the springtime.

‘Two heads on the one body’

“Those larvae began developing their bodies and started bifurcating, so that they had two heads on the one body in a large number of the larvae that were developing.”

They died after 48 hours.

“It was a clear sign that the signalling that cells have early on was becoming deranged due to something,” Landos says.

The vet raised his concerns with then Queensland minister for primary industries and fisheries, the late Tim Mulherin. A task force was set up to try to establish what had caused the problems at the hatchery and whether it had anything to do with reported declining native fish stocks in the local catchment.

“That ran for about 12 months before putting together a final report. However there was really at no stage a consensus reached within the group about causation,” says Landos. “In the final report – the government-authored report – concluded that there was no definitive involvement of chemicals.”

ll these years later, he still takes issue with the report’s findings, saying it was trying to provide a definitive answer, which he says science is unable to do. And given most of the report’s recommendations related to the use of chemicals, it was clear from his perspective that chemicals were the culprit but the government just didn’t want to say so.

“The tension within the task force committee was such that they in fact stopped operating a proper committee process with minutes and actually broke it into meetings with individuals, which was very unusual for a committee.” Landos says there was disagreement over whether there was in fact any spray drift onto the hatchery. But his investigation found there was.

“We metered a swimming pool some 800 metres away from the macadamia farm, which was right next door to the fish farm and found the chemicals that were being sprayed. We hung filter paper in the air inside the closed hatchery building and we measured levels of the chemical being sprayed in the neighbour’s property on the filter paper. It was clearly moving its way into the shed and ended up on the filter paper and we detected it so we demonstrated that exposure was happening.”

Animals abortions and stillbirths

Critically, he says, that exposure occurred at the same time the fish were developing. “It was happening at the specific time that these cells were trying to divide in these embryos. This is a critical timing of exposure.”

Landos concluded that the embryos were being deformed through their exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) in the pesticide. And it wasn’t just the fish.

“Over time, we also identified frogs on the property that were developing deformed legs. There were horses that had abortions, there were horses showing clinical signs as in muscle tremors and a loss of ability to walk properly that responded to an antidote specific for treating organophosphate pesticide poisoning.

“We had a dog on the property that had pups and many of the pups were stillborn. That same dog had pups a couple of years later that had no eyes during their development. They were born without eyes. These things may all be aberrations however when you dig into the peer reviewed literature you see that some of the ways the chemicals involved affect in laboratory studies is the development of eyes.”

Landos says his investigation triggered a lightbulb moment.

“Could these low doses in fact be enough to disturb these body systems and alter the way that animals both develop as embryos but also their ultimate health as they get older?”

He began immersing himself in the growing body of scientific research which suggests there is a link between exposure to even tiny doses of endocrine disrupting chemicals and developmental problems and health issues later in life.

“There had been a decade or more of hormone disrupting research but it wasn’t taught in my undergraduate degree at university. So I hadn’t run across it. It was sitting in a separate science silo that I hadn’t found my way to. Since finding that silo and cracking the lid on the thing it’s a treasure trove of knowledge.”

Lifting the lid on ‘disturbing’ knowledge

That knowledge is disturbing. Endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are everywhere. They’re applied to food and the packaging it comes in. They make their way into the water supply. They’re on the clothes we wear, in the cars we drive and the furniture on which we sit. The research into their effects, Landos says, should raise alarm bells about human exposure to toxic chemicals and the regulations governing their use, which he maintains, fall way too short.

The endocrine system, common to all vertebrates, regulates hormones, which are critical to development and health.

“Hormones are incredibly powerful at tiny doses,” he says. “Tiny exposure levels of hormones can mediate huge effects on development. So small amounts of thyroid hormone are involved in helping the brain develop normally. As animals develop, we see small amounts of testosterone having tremendous effects on the development of different tissues in the animal and of course ultimately in the reproductive capacity of those animals.”

The pesticide being sprayed next to the fish hatchery, he says, might have been applied legally as far as the regulation was concerned. “But what the investigation highlighted was that there were problems with our regulation in that it was not safe and that exposures at levels below those which were permitted were causing harm.”

Landos says the system of regulating chemicals hasn’t been able to keep up with the growing body of research which identifies harms associated with exposure to even tiny amounts of EDCs. Its benchmarks, such as the exposure required for a chemical to become lethal, miss other effects which may be more subtle but still have lasting consequences.

“The issue is one of which part of the testing – which of the end points, as we call them – are considered in the regulatory process. The coarsest end point might be considered to be death of the animal. So at a certain level of exposure the animal’s systems might not be able to sustain themselves, the animal may perish. And this would establish a lethal end point for a study.

Problems in our regulations

“A more subtle end point might be loss of body weight or an impact on liver function or an inability to breed or a change in organ size.

The signal to regulate further is very clear and that is the decline in human health. The signal is one in six Australian couples need fertility treatment to have a child.

– Matt Landos

“So there are many different end points that can be selected to study the effects of exposure to chemicals. In the last couple of decades there has been a growing understanding that there are a group of end points that are extremely sensitive and these are called the endocrine end points. Or end points which are affecting the function of hormones in the body.”

Landos has campaigned vigorously for the past decade for a more robust regulatory system, both through his membership of the Australian Veterinary Association and as a member of the International Pollutants Elimination Network, an international advocacy group. Landos speaks at conferences, including SoilCare’s Australian Biological Farming Conference in Lismore in December, and contributes papers focused on chemical exposure and ocean pollution.

“The signal to regulate further is very clear and that is the decline in human health. The signal is one in six Australian couples need fertility treatment to have a child. The signal is that we are heading towards a quarter of Australians being pre-diabetic before 2025. The signal is that obesity is expanding in our population. The signal is that rates of depression are climbing in our population. The signal is that children with learning difficulties are at their highest rates that they’ve ever been in schools. There are some very strong public health signals out there.”

While exposure to EDCs might not be the sole cause of these problems, it could well be contributing.

A very clear signal over one of the most pervasive classes of EDC, perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances – commonly known as PFAS – emerged this year in the US. A University of California study found high exposure to PFAS can increase a person’s risk of non-viral hepatocellular carcinoma – a common liver cancer – by up to 4.5 times. PFAS are most commonly used in non-stick cookware but are also present in tap water, waterproof clothing and cleaning products.

The toxic legacy of PFAS has been an invisible torment for a number of Australian communities near defence bases – including Newcastle and Jervis Bay in NSW and Katherine in the Northern Territory – where firefighting foam containing the substance leached into surrounding waterways and the soil.

In June, the US Environmental Protection Agency cut the allowable use of PFAS in household products by 99 per cent.

More than 500 scientists from 28 countries gathered recently in Adelaide to hear about the scale of chemical use worldwide and how it’s affecting human and environmental health. Of particular concern was the ubiquity of PFAS. The Australian government recently released the third draft of its plan to manage PFAS but whether it will satisfy the scientific community which warns of a tsunami of chemicals remains to be seen.

Australia lags behind global standards

“PFAS have now been nominated to be listed, the entire class of those chemicals, on the Stockholm Convention on persistent organic pollutants,” says Landos. “But Australia has not sought to remove those at this stage. Australia still has relatively high levels of tolerance in terms of it permitting – as a water safety guideline relatively high levels in water compared to the EU, for example, which in order of magnitude are lower than Australia in their tolerance.”

He says Australia, while a signatory to the Stockholm Convention, drags its feet when it comes to ratifying the ban on troublesome chemicals.

“It doesn’t automatically ratify new listed chemicals to say that Australia will immediately remove them. Australia takes an approach where it says we will decide in our own time when we’ll remove them. So initially when we signed there were a dozen or so dangerous chemicals. We ratified those but since then Australia has been a complete laggard globally in ratifying the subsequent ones.”

Jo Immig, coordinator of the National Toxics Network, a non-profit which raises awareness about chemical pollutants, describes the regulatory system for chemicals in Australia as “a bit of a spaghetti junction”.

Pesticides are regulated by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, industrial chemicals are overseen by the Australian Industrial Chemicals Introduction Scheme and food ingredients and packaging come under the purview of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards.

Australia still uses many pesticides long banned in other countries and still has no effective mechanism to get them off the market.

– Jo Immig, National Toxics Network

In August, Immig wrote on behalf of the National Toxics Network to the new federal Agriculture Minister Murray Watt, urging tighter regulation of agricultural and veterinary (AGVET) chemicals.

“The previous government did untold damage to the regulation of AGVET chemicals,” she said. “They repealed critical legislation introduced under the Gillard government which established a systematic re-registration scheme for AGVET chemicals to ensure they met contemporary regulatory and scientific standards, as well as provided an effective mechanism to remove dangerous pesticides from the market. Given the extensive consultation that was undertaken to develop and implement that legislation perhaps this is something that could be easily achieved … Re-registration schemes have been part of regulatory regimes in Canada, the US and the EU for years.”

Ms Immig was particularly critical of the restructure of the APVMA, which she said had been gutted by the Morrison government which controversially and at great cost moved its operations to Armidale, in the electorate held by former Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce. The restructure, argued then agriculture minister David Littleproud, would “mean the APVMA runs more efficiently, will reduce some costs, and mean that farmers can access safe and effective chemicals quickly”. This was diametrically opposed to the tougher regulatory approach being urged by scientists concerned about chemical exposure.

“The lengthy and costly reform process they recently undertook was marred by conflict of interest and culminated in legislation which further deregulated AGVET chemicals, while blatantly ignoring the science and evidence given by numerous stakeholders,” Immig wrote.

It was “shameful and dangerous Australia still uses many pesticides long banned in other countries and still has no effective mechanism to get them off the market or to incentivise farmers to move away from their use. We are a dumping ground for pesticides long banned by other more cautious countries, which is ultimately not to our competitive advantage and nor is it protective of public health or the environment.”

Australia, she says, should move to the precautionary approach to regulation adopted by the European Union, where chemicals need to be demonstrated to be safe before they are allowed on the market. The National Toxics Network has had notable success.

“We’ve been successful at having some dangerous pesticides removed from the market such as endosulfan,” says Immig. “We were largely responsible for the Gillard government introducing the re-registration scheme for pesticides which would have been great but the Abbott government dumped it.”

This year it brought to public attention concerns about the waste-to-energy incinerators being rolled out across NSW.

While Landos pushes for stronger regulation, he is taking his own small steps to keep himself and his family safe. You won’t find plastic in his home, nor non-stick cookware. “I have a cast iron frypan and no one ever complains about my eggs,” he says. Out too are fragranced cleaning products and personal care products. He buys his fruit and vegetables from organic farms.

But not everyone is in the position to make such choices.

Dr Shanna Swan, author of Count Down: How Our Modern World Is Threatening Sperm Counts, Altering Male and Female Reproductive Development, and Imperiling the Future of the Human Race, says poorer people face greater challenges avoiding chemical exposure.

“It’s much harder to learn about it if you don’t have the resources to access the information and you can’t buy your way out of it,” she says. “Maybe you’re in a food desert and there’s no organic food nearby, there’s no farmers market. You can’t take the steps necessary to decrease your exposure.”

Swan, a professor from New York’s Mount Sinai School of Medicine, says exposure to EDCs is a likely culprit not only in declining fertility and fecundity rates but also genital disorders.

Endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs): Common Sources

Clothing, furniture and electronics

Brominated flame retardants used in electronics, clothing and furniture, such as sofas and mattresses, to reduce flammability have been linked to abnormal hormone function in the thyroid. Adding to the risk of exposure, they often migrate out of their products over time and contaminate household dust and food. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were used in hundreds of industrial and commercial applications due to their non-flammability, as well as chemical stability and insulating properties. Although now banned, PCBs are still present in insulation, electrical equipment, caulking, oil-based paint and more, and do not break down readily. They have the strongest and longest-known associations with neurological disorders.

Food contact materials

Phthalates interfere with the production of androgen (testosterone), a hormone critical in male development and relevant to females as well. They are used in many food and beverage containers and plastic wraps and leach into foods when containers are microwaved. Many companies have voluntarily removed phthalates from their products and advertise them as “phthalate-free”. Other plastic containers, which contain phthalates, have the number “3” and “V” or “PVC” in the recycling symbol.

Pesticides and herbicides

Chlorpyrifos, an insecticide used in commercial agriculture, is a potent neurotoxicant that causes developmental delays, attention problems, and ADHD in children. It accumulates in soil, water, food and air, as well as in buildings. DDT, one of the best-known pesticide EDCs, was used extensively worldwide until it was banned in the 1970s by several countries, including Australia. It remains in use in India and Africa to fight insect-borne disease. Evidence suggests exposure to this neurotoxin might be associated with breast cancer, preterm birth, early pregnancy loss, reduced semen quality, disrupted menstruation and problems with lactation. Atrazine, a widely-used herbicide, has been shown to affect the hypothalamus and pituitary glands. Some studies have also proposed causal relationships between glyphosate, used to kill weeds on lawns and farms, and obesity, behavioral and cognitive disorders.

PFAS

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are man-made chemicals used as oil and water repellents and coatings for common products including cookware, carpets and textiles. They were also used extensively in firefighting foam until the manufacturer withdrew the product from sale because of fears it was unsafe. These EDCs do not break down when they are released into the environment, and they continue to accumulate over time.

Source: US Endocrine Society

 

4 Dec 2022: Court Verdict Spray Drift Holey Plains State Forest. Pesticides: Glyphosate, AMPA, Metsulfuron Methyl, Hexazinone

Slap on the Wrist” for company that killed forest in State Park by Herbicide Spray Drift

For more information see here

4 December 2022

In June 2020, Friends of the Earth found a potential spray drift incident which impacted on a two kilometre native forest boundary of a pine plantation located in Holey Plains State Park. The impacted site is ~14km south east of the Gippsland town of Rosedale and is owned by Hancock Victorian Plantations.

In September 2022 FoE was advised that the investigation and associated legal proceedings against the spray contracting firm by the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions (Agriculture Victoria) had concluded. We were advised that information regarding the incident was confidential but that information pertaining to the incident and subsequent investigation might be accessible via Freedom of Information.

Our heavily redacted Freedom of Information request came through in the last week of November. The name of the company involved in the incident has not been included in the FoI, but they were contracted to Hancock Victorian Plantations. The investigation carried out by Agriculture Victoria was impressive and thorough.

Many trees have appeared to have survived the incident, but unbelievably these are now threatened by logging. Species listed on the Victorian Biodiversity Atlas that have been found in Holey Plains State Park near this location include: Powerful Owl (vulnerable), Australian Owlet-nightjar, White throated nightjar, Jacky Winter, Koala, Lace Monitor (Endangered), Southern Bullfrog, Common froglet, Martins Toadlet (critically endangered), Broom Spurge, Golden Grevillia (vulnerable), Sandhill sword-sedge, Narrow Comb Fern, Wellington Mint Bush (endangered), Sticky Boronia and Coral Lichen.

The FoI revealed that there was not just one spray drift incident, but several that took place over three days in late March 2020. 13 charges, including injuriously impacting native plants, breaching herbicide label instructions, using herbicides in excess of label rates and lack of appropriate record keeping were laid against a contract spraying company in March 2022, with the case ending in August 2022. Maximum fines for the offences could have amounted to more than $66,000, but for some reason weren't applied by the Magistrate.

There were a number of herbicides detected in leaves of vegetation adjoining the plantation, with impacted vegetation as far as 150m inside the Holey Plains State Park. The herbicides included Glyphosate (Wipe-Out 450 Herbicide), AMPA (a Glyphosate metabolite), Metsulfuron Methyl (Kenso Agcare Ken-Met 600 WG) and Hexazinone (Nufarm Grunt 750 WDG Herbicide).

Glyphosate drift was recorded in vegetation at 17 locations including in 2 locations in the tree canopy 15m-20m off the ground.  AMPA was recorded at one location offsite, Metsulfuron Methyl at 5 locations and Hexazinone at 4 locations. Clopyralid was not detected off site.

All 4 herbicides can be applied aerially, although hexazinone is only allowed to be used in a tree plantation as a water dispersible granule. So how did it end up in vegetation 100m from where it was applied? It is likely that the hexazinone moved offsite during rainfall. Hexazinone is extremely mobile in water and remains in soils for years after application. The Victorian Government banned aerial spraying of non-pellitised Hexazinone in the 1990’s after a series of serious spray drift incidents.

One glaring problem with pesticide regulation in Victoria is that it can avoid taking into account affected vegetation that does not have an economic value. It is actually a defence to Section 40 of the Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Control of Use) Act 1992 to prove that affected vegetation has no economic value. Agriculture Victoria had to provide an expert report showing that the impacted vegetation in Holey Plains State Park did indeed have an economic value including: Amenity values for recreational users of the park, values to the apiary industry, carbon storage and sequestration values and biodiversity values, including existence values arising from the presence of koalas and species listed under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act.

In terms of an legal outcome to the event, the company that caused the spray drift was only granted a Diversion Notice, lasting 12 months, which means they must obtain Aerial Improvement Management System (AIMS) accreditation through the Aerial Application Association of Australia and also pay $1000 to the Yarram Yarram Landcare Network. This could be the first time that such a Diversion Notice has been granted in a spray drift incident and it is unclear why the Magistrate took this option. It is also unclear why the company involved was employed to carry out the spraying without AIMS accreditation and why Hancock would employ such a company when they have Forest Stewardship Council certification.

"Magistrates’ Remarks:

Accept that general deterrence relevant. Donation amount significantly reduced due to the time/money required to achieve compliance with the AIMS conditions. Also take into account the community support that the company provides. Sentence: Diversion for a period of 12 months: - The accused obtain AIMS accreditation through the AAAA and provide proof to Agriculture Victoria and the Court by 15 August 2023."

To rub salt into the wounds, it would appear that DELWP is proposing that 17.8 hectares of impacted vegetation in the State Park be removed, lopped or destroyed through a Detailed Assessment Pathway process. Some of the area may include Wellington Mint-bush (Prostanthera galbraithiae). It is unclear how DELWP define large and small trees none of which appear on their application to have been impacted by spray drift. It is also unclear why DELWP has proposed a plan to potentially knock over vegetation was may have survived the spraying incident and to destroy native vegetation which is now regenerating post spraying.

The case has profound implications for areas surrounding pine plantations elsewhere in the State. For instance the State Government is now planning to massively expand pine plantation establishment throughout the Strzelecki Ranges and Central Gippsland. The Strzelecki Ranges is already suffering through destruction of key Koala Feed Preference Trees due to plantation logging and associated roading safety issues. Spray drift impacting on key forest adjoining plantations, including koala habitat over a wide area in the region is a major concern as is the potential health impacts for people living near plantations, where spray drift can and does occur.

“Slap on the Wrist” for company that killed forest in State Park by Herbicide Spray Drift

For more information see here

4 December 2022

In June 2020, Friends of the Earth found a potential spray drift incident which impacted on a two kilometre native forest boundary of a pine plantation located in Holey Plains State Park. The impacted site is ~14km south east of the Gippsland town of Rosedale and is owned by Hancock Victorian Plantations.

In September 2022 FoE was advised that the investigation and associated legal proceedings against the spray contracting firm by the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions (Agriculture Victoria) had concluded. We were advised that information regarding the incident was confidential but that information pertaining to the incident and subsequent investigation might be accessible via Freedom of Information.

Our heavily redacted Freedom of Information request came through in the last week of November. The name of the company involved in the incident has not been included in the FoI, but they were contracted to Hancock Victorian Plantations. The investigation carried out by Agriculture Victoria was impressive and thorough.

Many trees have appeared to have survived the incident, but unbelievably these are now threatened by logging. Species listed on the Victorian Biodiversity Atlas that have been found in Holey Plains State Park near this location include: Powerful Owl (vulnerable), Australian Owlet-nightjar, White throated nightjar, Jacky Winter, Koala, Lace Monitor (Endangered), Southern Bullfrog, Common froglet, Martins Toadlet (critically endangered), Broom Spurge, Golden Grevillia (vulnerable), Sandhill sword-sedge, Narrow Comb Fern, Wellington Mint Bush (endangered), Sticky Boronia and Coral Lichen.

The FoI revealed that there was not just one spray drift incident, but several that took place over three days in late March 2020. 13 charges, including injuriously impacting native plants, breaching herbicide label instructions, using herbicides in excess of label rates and lack of appropriate record keeping were laid against a contract spraying company in March 2022, with the case ending in August 2022. Maximum fines for the offences could have amounted to more than $66,000, but for some reason weren’t applied by the Magistrate.

There were a number of herbicides detected in leaves of vegetation adjoining the plantation, with impacted vegetation as far as 150m inside the Holey Plains State Park. The herbicides included Glyphosate (Wipe-Out 450 Herbicide), AMPA (a Glyphosate metabolite), Metsulfuron Methyl (Kenso Agcare Ken-Met 600 WG) and Hexazinone (Nufarm Grunt 750 WDG Herbicide).

Glyphosate drift was recorded in vegetation at 17 locations including in 2 locations in the tree canopy 15m-20m off the ground.  AMPA was recorded at one location offsite, Metsulfuron Methyl at 5 locations and Hexazinone at 4 locations. Clopyralid was not detected off site.

All 4 herbicides can be applied aerially, although hexazinone is only allowed to be used in a tree plantation as a water dispersible granule. So how did it end up in vegetation 100m from where it was applied? It is likely that the hexazinone moved offsite during rainfall. Hexazinone is extremely mobile in water and remains in soils for years after application. The Victorian Government banned aerial spraying of non-pellitised Hexazinone in the 1990’s after a series of serious spray drift incidents.

One glaring problem with pesticide regulation in Victoria is that it can avoid taking into account affected vegetation that does not have an economic value. It is actually a defence to Section 40 of the Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Control of Use) Act 1992 to prove that affected vegetation has no economic value. Agriculture Victoria had to provide an expert report showing that the impacted vegetation in Holey Plains State Park did indeed have an economic value including: Amenity values for recreational users of the park, values to the apiary industry, carbon storage and sequestration values and biodiversity values, including existence values arising from the presence of koalas and species listed under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act.

In terms of an legal outcome to the event, the company that caused the spray drift was only granted a Diversion Notice, lasting 12 months, which means they must obtain Aerial Improvement Management System (AIMS) accreditation through the Aerial Application Association of Australia and also pay $1000 to the Yarram Yarram Landcare Network. This could be the first time that such a Diversion Notice has been granted in a spray drift incident and it is unclear why the Magistrate took this option. It is also unclear why the company involved was employed to carry out the spraying without AIMS accreditation and why Hancock would employ such a company when they have Forest Stewardship Council certification.

“Magistrates’ Remarks:

Accept that general deterrence relevant. Donation amount significantly reduced due to the time/money required to achieve compliance with the AIMS conditions. Also take into account the community support that the company provides. Sentence: Diversion for a period of 12 months: – The accused obtain AIMS accreditation through the AAAA and provide proof to Agriculture Victoria and the Court by 15 August 2023.”

To rub salt into the wounds, it would appear that DELWP is proposing that 17.8 hectares of impacted vegetation in the State Park be removed, lopped or destroyed through a Detailed Assessment Pathway process. Some of the area may include Wellington Mint-bush (Prostanthera galbraithiae). It is unclear how DELWP define large and small trees none of which appear on their application to have been impacted by spray drift. It is also unclear why DELWP has proposed a plan to potentially knock over vegetation was may have survived the spraying incident and to destroy native vegetation which is now regenerating post spraying.

The case has profound implications for areas surrounding pine plantations elsewhere in the State. For instance the State Government is now planning to massively expand pine plantation establishment throughout the Strzelecki Ranges and Central Gippsland. The Strzelecki Ranges is already suffering through destruction of key Koala Feed Preference Trees due to plantation logging and associated roading safety issues. Spray drift impacting on key forest adjoining plantations, including koala habitat over a wide area in the region is a major concern as is the potential health impacts for people living near plantations, where spray drift can and does occur.

27/12/22: Dead fish found in Channel in Sale.

Dead fish found in channel in Sale

Dead fish found in channel in Sale

Eyewitnesses have spotted dead fish on the surface of irrigation channels on Gibsons Road in Sale after Southern Rural Water (SRW) recently completed its annual weed control program of channels in the Macalister Irrigation District.

SRW said the weed control takes place in spring and early summer, when weeds are at their most vigorous, and is done to ensure the irrigation channels are operating at maximum capacity.

The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) said in a pollution report that the annual weed control program involves the “injection of herbicide into irrigation channels to kill submerged vegetation that restricts water flow”. This occurred on Monday, December 5 in the channel on Gibsons Rd where the dead fish were found by multiple people.

One witness said they first observed the dead fish and other animals on the surface last Thursday (December 8), with other observers taking photos. The witness said they also saw dead frogs and turtles, and believed most of the dead animals may have sunk to the bottom. This individual provided photos, expressing their concern about the environment.

Another witness, who has for years walked their dogs along the channel, told the Gippsland Times that last week they just saw all these “belly-up fish”.

“It was on Gibsons Rd, between Bengworden and Cobain Rds, almost smack down the middle,” they said.

“I thought maybe someone was fishing there … I saw half a dozen, maybe 10 (fish) carcasses on the trail.

“No smell or anything. I wouldn’t have even noticed if not for the dead fish on the trail

“My dogs are not eating them, thankfully. They sniff it and walk away.”

The witness said they had not seen anything like it in 10 years.

“Some of the (fish) were on the grass. I guess if the water is not good, they’ll thrash and jump out,” they said.

“Generally it’s a pleasant place to walk.”

SRW manager environment and climate adaptation, Kate Berg, told the Gippsland Times that an investigation of the channels found European carp.

“The purpose of irrigation channels is to deliver irrigation water to Southern Rural Water customers, who produce food and fibre,” Ms Berg said.

“They are not natural waterways, or intended for use as habitat for aquatic life.

“Our investigations found that European carp, a noxious invasive fish species, were in the channels, and these have been removed and sent to an authorised waste facility in Bairnsdale. No other animals were found by us.

“The Environment Protection Authority has been notified, and decided not to inspect the irrigation channels because our monitoring data shows that there was unlikely to be any impact to natural waterways.

“When we undertake weed control treatment, we notify affected customers directly, and we undertake advertising in local media to notify the community.”

A pollution report from the EPA, seen by the Gippsland Times, goes into more detail about the herbicide used and how it affects structures like the channel on Gibsons Rd.

“The herbicide is approved for channel maintenance, and many water authorities in Australia use it for this purpose,” it reads.

“It breaks down within two-to-three days and works by removing oxygen from the water, which inadvertently causes the death of any fish or other gilled animals that may have entered the channel. The channel is an artificial structure managed solely for distribution of irrigation water and is not intended to provide habitat for aquatic wildlife.

“EPA has reviewed Southern Rural Water’s operating procedures and monitoring program, and is satisfied that it has appropriate controls in place to prevent the herbicide from leaving the channels and impacting upon any natural waterways, including the ocean.”

Dead fish found in channel in Sale

Dead fish found in channel in Sale

Eyewitnesses have spotted dead fish on the surface of irrigation channels on Gibsons Road in Sale after Southern Rural Water (SRW) recently completed its annual weed control program of channels in the Macalister Irrigation District.

SRW said the weed control takes place in spring and early summer, when weeds are at their most vigorous, and is done to ensure the irrigation channels are operating at maximum capacity.

The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) said in a pollution report that the annual weed control program involves the “injection of herbicide into irrigation channels to kill submerged vegetation that restricts water flow”. This occurred on Monday, December 5 in the channel on Gibsons Rd where the dead fish were found by multiple people.

One witness said they first observed the dead fish and other animals on the surface last Thursday (December 8), with other observers taking photos. The witness said they also saw dead frogs and turtles, and believed most of the dead animals may have sunk to the bottom. This individual provided photos, expressing their concern about the environment.

Another witness, who has for years walked their dogs along the channel, told the Gippsland Times that last week they just saw all these “belly-up fish”.

“It was on Gibsons Rd, between Bengworden and Cobain Rds, almost smack down the middle,” they said.

“I thought maybe someone was fishing there … I saw half a dozen, maybe 10 (fish) carcasses on the trail.

“No smell or anything. I wouldn’t have even noticed if not for the dead fish on the trail

“My dogs are not eating them, thankfully. They sniff it and walk away.”

The witness said they had not seen anything like it in 10 years.

“Some of the (fish) were on the grass. I guess if the water is not good, they’ll thrash and jump out,” they said.

“Generally it’s a pleasant place to walk.”

SRW manager environment and climate adaptation, Kate Berg, told the Gippsland Times that an investigation of the channels found European carp.

“The purpose of irrigation channels is to deliver irrigation water to Southern Rural Water customers, who produce food and fibre,” Ms Berg said.

“They are not natural waterways, or intended for use as habitat for aquatic life.

“Our investigations found that European carp, a noxious invasive fish species, were in the channels, and these have been removed and sent to an authorised waste facility in Bairnsdale. No other animals were found by us.

“The Environment Protection Authority has been notified, and decided not to inspect the irrigation channels because our monitoring data shows that there was unlikely to be any impact to natural waterways.

“When we undertake weed control treatment, we notify affected customers directly, and we undertake advertising in local media to notify the community.”

A pollution report from the EPA, seen by the Gippsland Times, goes into more detail about the herbicide used and how it affects structures like the channel on Gibsons Rd.

“The herbicide is approved for channel maintenance, and many water authorities in Australia use it for this purpose,” it reads.

“It breaks down within two-to-three days and works by removing oxygen from the water, which inadvertently causes the death of any fish or other gilled animals that may have entered the channel. The channel is an artificial structure managed solely for distribution of irrigation water and is not intended to provide habitat for aquatic wildlife.

“EPA has reviewed Southern Rural Water’s operating procedures and monitoring program, and is satisfied that it has appropriate controls in place to prevent the herbicide from leaving the channels and impacting upon any natural waterways, including the ocean.”

15/12/22: Suspected spray drift incident. Kuitpo (South Australia)

Farmer calls for spray drift to be investigated after thousands of marron die at his property

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-12-15/sa-pirsa-investigates-bee-and-marron-deaths/101767092

South Australia's primary industries department is investigating the deaths of thousands of bees and freshwater crayfish at a farm south of Adelaide.

It is the second time thousands of animals have died at the site, but the Department of Primary Industries and Regions in SA (PIRSA) says there are several potential causes.

Farmer John Luckens first contacted PIRSA on December 2, when he noticed thousands of bees seemed to be dropping dead on his property near Kuitpo, south of Adelaide.

"Literally bees were falling out of the sky and the driveway was covered in dead and dying bees," he said.

"I did a quick calculation and worked out there's probably at least a thousand bees on that driveway and then in the grass beside there was probably 8,000 or 10,000 bees and I thought that was pretty unusual."

He feared that if insects were dying, his marron — a type of freshwater crayfish — would be next.

"I also then thought that then – because we had a [suspected] poisoning event from farm chemicals here a few years ago, that there might be an impact on the marron, and there was," he said.

Mr Luckens believes his marron were poisoned by aerial spraying in 2019, but neither he nor the department were able to confirm the cause.

He said in this latest incident the crayfish in two of his 30 ponds — the most elevated on his block — were affected.

"We've probably got upwards of half a ton of marron dead. That's relatively significant for us," he said.

Primary industries officers have taken water, bee and marron samples for testing and have also notified the Environment Protection Authority.

"The department … is aware of a mortality event involving marron on a farm in Kuitpo area and is currently investigating the cause including testing for infectious disease, harmful algae and chemical contaminants," a spokesperson said in a statement to the ABC.

"The results of the chemical contaminant testing might also be relevant with PIRSA's investigations into bee mortalities occurring on the same property."

'Concerned' neighbours

Mr Luckens wants the government to investigate whether chemicals from spraying of nearby vineyards may have drifted into his ponds.

The neighbouring properties have sprayed the fungicide combination Top Wettable Sulphur and Tri-Base Blue and the surfactant Viti-Wet recently, but farm managers told the ABC they used advanced equipment that limited spray drift and had not sprayed insecticides.

"We're disappointed to hear what's happened and we want to work closely with John to find out what's happened and find a solution," Mark Vella, who manages the neighbouring Hersey Wines vineyard said.

Other properties were waiting to hear more about PIRSA's investigation.

"We were concerned to hear from PIRSA today about the marron deaths on our neighbour's property," the owners of Top Note winery, Cate and Nick Foskett told the ABC via email.

"Environmental safety is something we take very seriously … however we no longer operate the vineyard and have leased it out since May 2021.

"We understand that PIRSA is conducting an investigation, so we will not be commenting further."

'May just be a coincidence'

University of Adelaide pharmacology lecturer Ian Musgrave said authorities may not be able to determine what killed the bees and the marron, especially given there were several days between nearby spraying and the testing of samples from Mr Luckens's farm.

"It's going to be quite difficult," he said.

"One of the problems is the chemicals involved will degrade in the environment.

"For example, if we're talking about lakes or ponds, the materials will be absorbed into the water, then can quite often be absorbed into the sediments in the water, drop out into the sediment, then not be detectable in the water itself."

Dr Musgrave said the culprit may also be something occurring naturally in the surrounding environment.

"The environment is pretty nasty and it kills lots of things normally. So it may just be a coincidence that we see this bee die-off at the same time as you're seeing a marron die-off," he said.

PIRSA's Rural Chemicals Operations section investigated 39 "chemical trespass" incidents in the past financial year and issued formal warnings for five.

It found more than 60 per cent of the complaints received in 2021/22 were considered to be low risks of various types, or not chemical trespass.

Mr Luckens said the state government needed to do more to protect new industries like marron farming and ensure chemical use did not affect other types of farming.

"I think most people want to do best practice and have good regulation," he said.

"Some of the processes for managing these events are not appropriate.

"We need to have new industries, particularly food industries for the future … sometimes things happen beyond the farmer's control. The government needs to have a process in place to protect their back."

Farmer calls for spray drift to be investigated after thousands of marron die at his property

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-12-15/sa-pirsa-investigates-bee-and-marron-deaths/101767092

South Australia’s primary industries department is investigating the deaths of thousands of bees and freshwater crayfish at a farm south of Adelaide.

It is the second time thousands of animals have died at the site, but the Department of Primary Industries and Regions in SA (PIRSA) says there are several potential causes.

Farmer John Luckens first contacted PIRSA on December 2, when he noticed thousands of bees seemed to be dropping dead on his property near Kuitpo, south of Adelaide.

“Literally bees were falling out of the sky and the driveway was covered in dead and dying bees,” he said.

“I did a quick calculation and worked out there’s probably at least a thousand bees on that driveway and then in the grass beside there was probably 8,000 or 10,000 bees and I thought that was pretty unusual.”

He feared that if insects were dying, his marron — a type of freshwater crayfish — would be next.

“I also then thought that then – because we had a [suspected] poisoning event from farm chemicals here a few years ago, that there might be an impact on the marron, and there was,” he said.

Mr Luckens believes his marron were poisoned by aerial spraying in 2019, but neither he nor the department were able to confirm the cause.

He said in this latest incident the crayfish in two of his 30 ponds — the most elevated on his block — were affected.

“We’ve probably got upwards of half a ton of marron dead. That’s relatively significant for us,” he said.

Primary industries officers have taken water, bee and marron samples for testing and have also notified the Environment Protection Authority.

“The department … is aware of a mortality event involving marron on a farm in Kuitpo area and is currently investigating the cause including testing for infectious disease, harmful algae and chemical contaminants,” a spokesperson said in a statement to the ABC.

“The results of the chemical contaminant testing might also be relevant with PIRSA’s investigations into bee mortalities occurring on the same property.”

‘Concerned’ neighbours

Mr Luckens wants the government to investigate whether chemicals from spraying of nearby vineyards may have drifted into his ponds.

The neighbouring properties have sprayed the fungicide combination Top Wettable Sulphur and Tri-Base Blue and the surfactant Viti-Wet recently, but farm managers told the ABC they used advanced equipment that limited spray drift and had not sprayed insecticides.

“We’re disappointed to hear what’s happened and we want to work closely with John to find out what’s happened and find a solution,” Mark Vella, who manages the neighbouring Hersey Wines vineyard said.

Other properties were waiting to hear more about PIRSA’s investigation.

“We were concerned to hear from PIRSA today about the marron deaths on our neighbour’s property,” the owners of Top Note winery, Cate and Nick Foskett told the ABC via email.

“Environmental safety is something we take very seriously … however we no longer operate the vineyard and have leased it out since May 2021.

“We understand that PIRSA is conducting an investigation, so we will not be commenting further.”

‘May just be a coincidence’

University of Adelaide pharmacology lecturer Ian Musgrave said authorities may not be able to determine what killed the bees and the marron, especially given there were several days between nearby spraying and the testing of samples from Mr Luckens’s farm.

“It’s going to be quite difficult,” he said.

“One of the problems is the chemicals involved will degrade in the environment.

“For example, if we’re talking about lakes or ponds, the materials will be absorbed into the water, then can quite often be absorbed into the sediments in the water, drop out into the sediment, then not be detectable in the water itself.”

Dr Musgrave said the culprit may also be something occurring naturally in the surrounding environment.

“The environment is pretty nasty and it kills lots of things normally. So it may just be a coincidence that we see this bee die-off at the same time as you’re seeing a marron die-off,” he said.

PIRSA’s Rural Chemicals Operations section investigated 39 “chemical trespass” incidents in the past financial year and issued formal warnings for five.

It found more than 60 per cent of the complaints received in 2021/22 were considered to be low risks of various types, or not chemical trespass.

Mr Luckens said the state government needed to do more to protect new industries like marron farming and ensure chemical use did not affect other types of farming.

“I think most people want to do best practice and have good regulation,” he said.

“Some of the processes for managing these events are not appropriate.

“We need to have new industries, particularly food industries for the future … sometimes things happen beyond the farmer’s control. The government needs to have a process in place to protect their back.”

 

Oct/Nov 2022: Snowy River at Marlo. Pesticides: Hexazinone, Simazine, Captan

EPA Victoria – Regional Flood Water Testing Program

Oct 31-Nov 9 2022

Snowy River at Marlo

31/10/22: Hexazinone 0.03ug/L

31/10/22: Simazine 0.01ug/L

7/11/22: Captan 0.3ug/L

PFAS chemicals also detected

EPA Victoria – Regional Flood Water Testing Program

Oct 31-Nov 9 2022

Snowy River at Marlo

31/10/22: Hexazinone 0.03ug/L

31/10/22: Simazine 0.01ug/L

7/11/22: Captan 0.3ug/L

 

2022 November: Murray River at Swan Hill. Pesticides: Simazine, Atrazine

EPA Victoria – Regional Flood Water Testing Program

Oct 31-Nov 9 2022

Murray River at Swan Hill

3/11/22: Simazine 0.01ug/L

7/11/22: Simazine 0.01ug/L

7/11/22: Atrazine 0.02ug/L

PFAS chemicals  also detected.

EPA Victoria – Regional Flood Water Testing Program

Oct 31-Nov 9 2022

Murray River at Swan Hill

3/11/22: Simazine 0.01ug/L

7/11/22: Simazine 0.01ug/L

7/11/22: Atrazine 0.02ug/L

PFAS chemicals  also detected.

October 2022: Murray River at Echuca. Pesticides: Atrazine, MGK-264, Simazine

EPA Victoria – Regional Flood Water Testing Program

Oct 31-Nov 9 2022

Murray River at Echuca

31/10/22: Atrazine 0.0122ug/L

31/10/22: MGK-264 0.0111ug/L

31/10/22: Simazine 0.0140ug/L

PFAS chemicals, Phthalates and Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons  also detected.

EPA Victoria – Regional Flood Water Testing Program

Oct 31-Nov 9 2022

Murray River at Echuca

31/10/22: Atrazine 0.0122ug/L

31/10/22: MGK-264 0.0111ug/L

31/10/22: Simazine 0.0140ug/L

PFAS chemicals, Phthalates and Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons  also detected.

November 2022: Loddon River, Kerang. Pesticides: Atrazine, Simazine

EPA Victoria – Regional Flood Water Testing Program

Oct 31-Nov 9 2022

Loddon River at Kerang

1/11/22: Atrazine 0.0265ug/L

7/11/22: Atrazine 0.01ug/L

1/11/22: Simazine 0.0211ug/L

PFAS chemicals, Phthalates and Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons  also detected.

EPA Victoria – Regional Flood Water Testing Program

Oct 31-Nov 9 2022

Loddon River at Kerang

1/11/22: Atrazine 0.0265ug/L

7/11/22: Atrazine 0.01ug/L

1/11/22: Simazine 0.0211ug/L

PFAS chemicals, Phthalates and Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons  also detected.

November 2022: Little Murray River at Swan Hill. Pesticides: Atrazine, Simazine

EPA Victoria – Regional Flood Water Testing Program

Oct 31-Nov 9 2022

Little Murray River at Swan Hill

3/11/22: Atrazine 0.01ug/L

7/11/22: Atrazine 0.01ug/L

3/11/22: Simazine 0.01ug/L

7/11/22: Simazine 0.01ug/L

PFAS chemicals  also detected.

EPA Victoria – Regional Flood Water Testing Program

Oct 31-Nov 9 2022

Little Murray River at Swan Hill

3/11/22: Atrazine 0.01ug/L

7/11/22: Atrazine 0.01ug/L

3/11/22: Simazine 0.01ug/L

7/11/22: Simazine 0.01ug/L

PFAS chemicals  also detected.

Oct/Nov 2022: Campaspe River at Kyneton. Hexazinone detected

EPA Victoria – Regional Flood Water Testing Program

Oct 31-Nov 9 2022

Campaspe River at Kyneton

31/10/22: Hexazinone 0.0362ug/L

7/11/22: Hexazinone 0.02ug/L

PFAS chemicals, Phthalates and Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons also detected.

EPA Victoria – Regional Flood Water Testing Program

Oct 31-Nov 9 2022

Campaspe River at Kyneton

31/10/22: Hexazinone 0.0362ug/L

7/11/22: Hexazinone 0.02ug/L

PFAS chemicals, Phthalates and Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons also detected.

Oct 2022: Broken River Benalla. Pesticides: Atrazine, Simazine

EPA Victoria – Regional Flood Water Testing Program

Oct 31-Nov 9 2022

Broken River at Benalla

31/10/22: Atrazine 0.0155ug/L

31/10/22: Simazine 0.016ug/L

PFAS chemicals, Phthalates and Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons also detected.

EPA Victoria – Regional Flood Water Testing Program

Oct 31-Nov 9 2022

Broken River at Benalla

31/10/22: Atrazine 0.0155ug/L

31/10/22: Simazine 0.016ug/L

PFAS chemicals, Phthalates and Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons also detected.

November 2021/23: Armidale (NSW) Senior staff member of APVMA urinates on Staff

Pesticides authority boss and chair resign, after inquiry triggered by APVMA worker who allegedly urinated on colleagues

July 14 2023: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-14/apvma-pesticides-urination-review-delivered/

The board chair and CEO of Australia's chemical regulator have resigned, as a damning report finds the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) was "captured" by industry interests and subject to regular complaints of misconduct.

The APVMA review was commissioned by Agriculture Minister Murray Watt following allegations raised in a Senate inquiry that an employee had urinated on his colleagues following a staff Christmas party.

The reviewer, law firm Clayton UTZ, found complaints of misconduct covered the "entire organisation" and were made by and about employees at all levels of the pesticides authority.

"There were clearly cultural issues with the organisation given that on average there was a formal complaint about once every 4-6 weeks for 5 years," Clayton UTZ said.

"There are also a significant number of complaints that refer to serious impacts for the persons involved, including numerous instances of employees having to take periods of stress leave or feeling unable to attend work due to mental health concerns," the reviewer found.

The reviewer found despite the seriousness of some complaints, there appeared to be a lack of response to these concerns, a lack of record keeping and a lack of capacity to respond to complaints.

APVMA chair Carmel Hillyard and chief executive Lisa Croft tendered their resignations in recent days.

Ms Croft has been on leave since an interim review was handed to government.

Responding to Friday's report, the agriculture minister said the review had identified systemic problems.

"The number and range of issues at the APVMA have turned out to be far wider than I think any of us expected," Senator Watt said.

"Concerningly, the review found serious allegations of chemical industry capture of the APVMA, which appears to have played a key role in the organisation not performing its full regulatory responsibilities."

The alleged urination incident was referred to police and the public service commissioner in February.

String of controversies after forced relocation by Barnaby Joyce

The APVMA was also found to have "embedded" industry interests into its regulatory priorities and culture.

The agency was slammed for relying on education as an enforcement measure, even when criminal or civil prosecution was recommended.

Clayton UTZ recommended an urgent "re-evaluation of the APVMA's engagement with industry", which Senator Watt agreed to.

The review determined none of the material examined indicated any chemical products had been registered inappropriately.

But they found the authority, which approves products like weed-killer glyphosate, was taking decades to review chemicals.

"Of the 10 ongoing chemical reviews, eight have been in progress for over 15 years or more, with seven ongoing for nearly 20 years," they wrote.

Senator Watt has issued a ministerial directive for those reviews to be finalised "as soon as possible" and commissioned a fresh inquiry into the APVMA's governance and culture to be carried out by former public servant Ken Matthews. 

"There is enough in this report to make me concerned that if we don’t take action then there is a risk of issues concerning food safety in the future," he said.

"That’s not the case at the moment and I don’t want it to ever be the case."

The APVMA has been mired in controversy since 2016 when former agriculture minister Barnaby Joyce forced the agency to relocate from Canberra to Armidale, in his New South Wales electorate of New England.

The reviewer found that forced move "fundamentally changed the APVMA — if for no other reason than the APVMA had a very significant turnover of staff, including a change in CEO, associated with the relocation".

"This turnover of staff would have inevitably resulted in a loss of corporate knowledge, a loss of corporate culture and a loss of experience and knowledge of what it is to work within the Australian Public Service (APS). This may include practical awareness of foundational public service principles, such as the need to adhere to the APS values."

Senator Watt said the review had pointed to the relocation being one of the key factors behind the "demise of good governance" at the agency and he has not ruled out moving the APVMA back to Canberra. 

That issue, the minister said, would be investigated by the Matthews inquiry which is due to report back by the end of September. 

Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson, who has previously raised concerns about the "embattled agency ... not being fit for purpose", welcomed the inquiries scrutinising its actions. 

"The government must now take a different approach to the regulation of Australia’s agricultural chemicals, and now this critical review has been finalised the Greens will be scrutinising the inevitable changes that should lie ahead," Senator Whish-Wilson tweeted.

Mr Joyce has been contacted for comment.

Executive at Australia’s pesticides authority allegedly urinated on staff at function, Senate hears

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/nov/08/executive-at-australias-pesticides-authority-allegedly-urinated-on-staff-at-function-senate-hears

Agriculture minister Murray Watt says he is seeking an ‘urgent briefing’ over the alleged 2021 incident

A senior staff member at the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) is alleged to have urinated on staff members at a function in Armidale in late 2021, Senate estimates has heard.

 

He has now resigned, according to the APVMA’s chief executive officer, Lisa Croft, who was questioned about the incident at Tuesday’s hearing.

Croft confirmed that she was “aware of an incident” but denied it had happened at the APVMA’s Christmas party, as Green’s senator Peter Whish-Wilson had suggested in his question.

She said it had occurred “in a private capacity not at a work function”.

Croft admitted other staff had raised it with her, but it had not been the subject of a formal complaint.

“I understand that the people directly involved wanted me to be aware of the matter. There was no official complaint made,” Croft said.

She confirmed there had been discussions with HR and that the staff member – a member of the executive team – resigned soon after the event.

Whish-Wilson asked Croft whether there had been complaints of sexual harassment or bullying. Croft said she was not aware of any formal complaints or of three female staff making sexual harassment complaints.

The agriculture minister, Murray Watt, said he would be “seeking an urgent briefing”.

“These are obviously very concerning questions. It is certainly the first time I have heard about it,” he said.

The APVMA is the federal government agency responsible for approving registration of pesticides and other agricultural and veterinary chemicals.

 

Pesticides authority boss and chair resign, after inquiry triggered by APVMA worker who allegedly urinated on colleagues

July 14 2023: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-14/apvma-pesticides-urination-review-delivered/

The board chair and CEO of Australia’s chemical regulator have resigned, as a damning report finds the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) was “captured” by industry interests and subject to regular complaints of misconduct.

The APVMA review was commissioned by Agriculture Minister Murray Watt following allegations raised in a Senate inquiry that an employee had urinated on his colleagues following a staff Christmas party.

The reviewer, law firm Clayton UTZ, found complaints of misconduct covered the “entire organisation” and were made by and about employees at all levels of the pesticides authority.

“There were clearly cultural issues with the organisation given that on average there was a formal complaint about once every 4-6 weeks for 5 years,” Clayton UTZ said.

“There are also a significant number of complaints that refer to serious impacts for the persons involved, including numerous instances of employees having to take periods of stress leave or feeling unable to attend work due to mental health concerns,” the reviewer found.

The reviewer found despite the seriousness of some complaints, there appeared to be a lack of response to these concerns, a lack of record keeping and a lack of capacity to respond to complaints.

APVMA chair Carmel Hillyard and chief executive Lisa Croft tendered their resignations in recent days.

Ms Croft has been on leave since an interim review was handed to government.

Responding to Friday’s report, the agriculture minister said the review had identified systemic problems.

“The number and range of issues at the APVMA have turned out to be far wider than I think any of us expected,” Senator Watt said.

“Concerningly, the review found serious allegations of chemical industry capture of the APVMA, which appears to have played a key role in the organisation not performing its full regulatory responsibilities.”

The alleged urination incident was referred to police and the public service commissioner in February.

String of controversies after forced relocation by Barnaby Joyce

The APVMA was also found to have “embedded” industry interests into its regulatory priorities and culture.

The agency was slammed for relying on education as an enforcement measure, even when criminal or civil prosecution was recommended.

Clayton UTZ recommended an urgent “re-evaluation of the APVMA’s engagement with industry”, which Senator Watt agreed to.

The review determined none of the material examined indicated any chemical products had been registered inappropriately.

But they found the authority, which approves products like weed-killer glyphosate, was taking decades to review chemicals.

“Of the 10 ongoing chemical reviews, eight have been in progress for over 15 years or more, with seven ongoing for nearly 20 years,” they wrote.

Senator Watt has issued a ministerial directive for those reviews to be finalised “as soon as possible” and commissioned a fresh inquiry into the APVMA’s governance and culture to be carried out by former public servant Ken Matthews.

“There is enough in this report to make me concerned that if we don’t take action then there is a risk of issues concerning food safety in the future,” he said.

“That’s not the case at the moment and I don’t want it to ever be the case.”

The APVMA has been mired in controversy since 2016 when former agriculture minister Barnaby Joyce forced the agency to relocate from Canberra to Armidale, in his New South Wales electorate of New England.

The reviewer found that forced move “fundamentally changed the APVMA — if for no other reason than the APVMA had a very significant turnover of staff, including a change in CEO, associated with the relocation”.

“This turnover of staff would have inevitably resulted in a loss of corporate knowledge, a loss of corporate culture and a loss of experience and knowledge of what it is to work within the Australian Public Service (APS). This may include practical awareness of foundational public service principles, such as the need to adhere to the APS values.”

Senator Watt said the review had pointed to the relocation being one of the key factors behind the “demise of good governance” at the agency and he has not ruled out moving the APVMA back to Canberra.

That issue, the minister said, would be investigated by the Matthews inquiry which is due to report back by the end of September.

Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson, who has previously raised concerns about the “embattled agency … not being fit for purpose”, welcomed the inquiries scrutinising its actions.

“The government must now take a different approach to the regulation of Australia’s agricultural chemicals, and now this critical review has been finalised the Greens will be scrutinising the inevitable changes that should lie ahead,” Senator Whish-Wilson tweeted.

Mr Joyce has been contacted for comment.

Executive at Australia’s pesticides authority allegedly urinated on staff at function, Senate hears

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/nov/08/executive-at-australias-pesticides-authority-allegedly-urinated-on-staff-at-function-senate-hears

Agriculture minister Murray Watt says he is seeking an ‘urgent briefing’ over the alleged 2021 incident

A senior staff member at the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) is alleged to have urinated on staff members at a function in Armidale in late 2021, Senate estimates has heard.

He has now resigned, according to the APVMA’s chief executive officer, Lisa Croft, who was questioned about the incident at Tuesday’s hearing.

Croft confirmed that she was “aware of an incident” but denied it had happened at the APVMA’s Christmas party, as Green’s senator Peter Whish-Wilson had suggested in his question.

She said it had occurred “in a private capacity not at a work function”.

Croft admitted other staff had raised it with her, but it had not been the subject of a formal complaint.

“I understand that the people directly involved wanted me to be aware of the matter. There was no official complaint made,” Croft said.

She confirmed there had been discussions with HR and that the staff member – a member of the executive team – resigned soon after the event.

Whish-Wilson asked Croft whether there had been complaints of sexual harassment or bullying. Croft said she was not aware of any formal complaints or of three female staff making sexual harassment complaints.

The agriculture minister, Murray Watt, said he would be “seeking an urgent briefing”.

“These are obviously very concerning questions. It is certainly the first time I have heard about it,” he said.

The APVMA is the federal government agency responsible for approving registration of pesticides and other agricultural and veterinary chemicals.

 

October 20 2022: Secret Files linked with Paraquat and Parkinsons Disease

Secret files suggest chemical giant feared weedkiller’s link to Parkinson’s disease

Documents seen by Guardian detail effort to refute scientific research into paraquat and derail nomination of key EPA adviser

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/oct/20/syngenta-weedkiller-pesticide-parkinsons-disease-paraquat-documents

For decades, Swiss chemical giant Syngenta has manufactured and marketed a widely used weed-killing chemical called paraquat, and for much of that time the company has been dealing with external concerns that long-term exposure to the chemical may be a cause of the incurable brain ailment known as Parkinson’s disease.

Syngenta has repeatedly told customers and regulators that scientific research does not prove a connection between its weedkiller and the disease, insisting that the chemical does not readily cross the blood-brain barrier, and does not affect brain cells in ways that cause Parkinson’s.

But a cache of internal corporate documents dating back to the 1950s reviewed by the Guardian suggests that the public narrative put forward by Syngenta and the corporate entities that preceded it has at times contradicted the company’s own research and knowledge.

And though the documents reviewed do not show that Syngenta’s scientists and executives accepted and believed that paraquat can cause Parkinson’s, they do show a corporate focus on strategies to protect product sales, refute external scientific research and influence regulators.

In one defensive tactic, the documents indicate that the company worked behind the scenes to try to keep a highly regarded scientist from sitting on an advisory panel for the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The agency is the chief US regulator for paraquat and other pesticides. Company officials wanted to make sure the efforts could not be traced back to Syngenta, the documents show.

And the documents show that insiders feared they could face legal liability for long-term, chronic effects of paraquat as long ago as 1975. One company scientist called the situation “a quite terrible problem” for which “some plan could be made … ”

That prediction of legal consequences has come to pass. Thousands of people who allege they developed Parkinson’s because of long-term chronic effects of paraquat exposure are now suing Syngenta. Along with Syngenta, they are also suing Chevron USA, the successor to a company that distributed paraquat in the US until 1986. Both companies deny any liability and maintain that scientific evidence does not support a causal link between paraquat and Parkinson’s disease.

“Recent thorough reviews performed by the most advanced and science-based regulatory authorities, including the United States and Australia, continue to support the view that paraquat is safe,” Syngenta said in a statement to the Guardian.

During the years Chevron USA’s predecessor sold paraquat, “it regularly reviewed and considered scientific studies regarding the safety of its products, including paraquat,” Chevron USA said in a statement to the Guardian, adding that none of the studies reviewed “showed a causal link between paraquat and Parkinson’s disease”.

Chevron USA said the company “does not believe that [its former subsidiary that sold paraquat] had any role in causing the plaintiffs’ illnesses and will vigorously defend against the allegations in the lawsuits”.

As part of a court-ordered disclosure in the litigation, the companies provided plaintiffs’ lawyers with decades of internal records, including hand-written and typed memos, internal presentations, and emails to and from scientists, lawyers and company officials around the world. And though the files have not yet been made public through the court system, the Guardian has reviewed hundreds of pages of these documents in a reporting collaboration with the New Lede.

Among the revelations from the documents: scientists with Syngenta predecessor Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI) and Chevron Chemical were aware in the 1960s and 70s of mounting evidence showing paraquat could accumulate in the human brain.

When Syngenta’s own internal research showed adverse effects of paraquat on brain tissue, the company withheld that information from regulators while downplaying the validity of similar findings being reported by independent scientists.

In addition, the records show company scientists were aware of evidence that exposure to paraquat could impair the central nervous system (CNS), triggering tremors and other symptoms in experimental animals similar to those suffered by people with Parkinson’s. A 1975 Chevron communication speaks of concerns about allegations of “permanent CNS effects from paraquat”.

And as independent researchers continued to find more and more evidence that paraquat may cause Parkinson’s, the documents describe what Syngenta called an “influencing” strategy “that proactively diffuses [sic] the potential threats that we face” and seeks to “maintain and safeguard paraquat registrations”, referring to their regulatory approvals. The strategy “must consider how best to influence academia, and regulatory and NGO environments”.

A Syngenta “regulatory strategy” document from 2003 refers to paraquat as a “‘blockbuster’ product” that must be “vigorously” defended to protect more than $400m in projected annual global sales. Ensuring what Syngenta called its “freedom to sell” paraquat was a top priority, the internal records show.

Syngenta also created a website the company used to publicly dismiss concerns about links between paraquat and Parkinson’s disease and provide positive product messaging. On that website, the company asserted that paraquat did not readily cross the blood-brain barrier, even when the company had evidence from animal and human data that paraquat accumulated in brain tissue. The company no longer uses that language on its website.

“It is highly unethical for a company not to reveal data they have that could indicate that their product is more toxic than had been believed,” said Bruce Blumberg, professor of developmental and cell biology at the University of California, Irvine, speaking generally about corporate conduct. “[These companies are] trying to maximize profits and they jeopardize public health, and it shouldn’t be allowed. That is the scandal.”

‘A unique herbicide’

Paraquat is one of the most widely used weed killing chemicals in the world, competing with herbicides such as glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup brand for use in agriculture. Farmers use it to control weeds before planting their crops and to dry out crops for harvest. In the United States, the chemical is used in orchards, wheat fields, pastures where livestock graze, cotton fields and elsewhere. As weeds have become more resistant to glyphosate, paraquat popularity has surged.

It is used on approximately 15m acres of US farmland. US government data shows that the amount of paraquat used in the United States has more than tripled between 1992 and 2018.

On the Syngenta-run Paraquat Information Center website, the chemical is described as “a unique herbicide” that “can deliver safe, effective weed control, generating social and economic benefits, while protecting the land for future generations”.

Paraquat has been the subject of more than 1,200 safety studies submitted to, and reviewed by, regulatory authorities around the world, according to Syngenta.

Though it is widely used, paraquat has long been known to be dangerous to ingest – a tiny swallow of the chemical can kill a person within days. Scores of people around the world have died from ingesting paraquat either intentionally or accidentally. The EPA restricts use only to people certified to apply it. It is not sold to consumers, and paraquat warning labels carry the symbol of death – a skull and crossbones.

Syngenta maintains on its website that if users follow directions and wear proper protective clothing, including gloves and boots, “there is no risk to human safety”. Paraquat is “not a neurotoxicity hazard,” and “does not cause Parkinson’s disease”, the company states.

Despite the company’s claims, dozens of countries have banned paraquat, both because of the acute dangers and mounting evidence of links to health risks such as Parkinson’s from chronic, long-term exposure. Syngenta currently sells paraquat products in more than two dozen countries, from Australia to Uruguay.

Paraquat was banned in the European Union in 2007 after a court found that regulators did not thoroughly assess safety concerns, including scientific evidence connecting Parkinson’s to paraquat. It is also banned in the UK, although it is manufactured there. The chemical was banned in Switzerland, Syngenta’s home country, in 1989. And it is banned in China, the home base for ChemChina, which purchased Syngenta five years ago.

In the US, the EPA has largely agreed with Syngenta and other chemical companies that say paraquat can be safely used. Last year, the EPA said it would continue to allow farmers to use paraquat, including spraying it across fields from small airplanes.

A ‘Parkinson’s pandemic’

Concerns about possible ties between paraquat and Parkinson’s disease have grown as the spread of Parkinson’s has accelerated; the disease is now considered one of the world’s fastest-growing neurological disorders. Prevalence of Parkinson’s more than doubled from 1990 to 2015 and is expected to continue to expand rapidly, impacting millions of people around the world. Along with paraquat, toxins in air pollution and other pesticides, and to a smaller extent genetic factors, also are considered by many researchers as risk factors for the disease.

Roughly 60,000 Americans are diagnosed each year with Parkinson’s, and in recent years it has been ranked among the top 15 causes of death in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Moreover, the death rate from Parkinson’s has climbed more than 60% in the United States over the past two decades, according to research published last year. It is considered the fastest-growing neurological disease in the world.

As a disease of the central nervous system, common Parkinson’s symptoms include tremors, or a rhythmic shaking in arms and legs, stiffness and rigidity of the muscles, a loss of balance and coordination, and difficulty speaking. Parkinson’s symptoms develop when dopamine-producing neurons in a specific area of the brain called the substantia nigra are lost or otherwise degenerate. Without sufficient dopamine production, the brain is not capable of transmitting signals between cells to control movement and balance

“The Parkinson’s pandemic has exacted an enormous toll on tens of millions of individuals who bear the brunt of the disease,” Ray Dorsey, a neurologist at the University of Rochester Center for Health + Technology in New York, wrote in a 2020 book about the rise of the disease.

Dorsey is one of a number of leading scientists from around the world who say research clearly shows paraquat exposure can cause Parkinson’s disease.

“Paraquat is considered the most toxic herbicide ever created,” Dorsey said in an interview.

Syngenta said the weight of evidence actually shows that paraquat does not cause Parkinson’s and said a 2021 study co-authored by its chief medical office backs that position. The company also pointed to a 2020 update to the US Agricultural Health Study (AHS) as supporting its position. (The 2020 AHS looked at a much larger group of people than prior AHS research has linked paraquat to Parkinson’s, however.)

“There is no properly designed epidemiological study that shows a link between paraquat and Parkinson’s disease,” the company said in a statement.

“To this day, and despite hundreds of studies being conducted in the past 20 or so years, a causal link between Paraquat and Parkinson’s disease has not been established,” Chevron USA said in a statement to the Guardian.

Toxic timeline

Syngenta predecessor ICI first recognized paraquat’s value as a herbicide in 1955, launching its paraquat brand Gramoxone in the UK in 1962 and then in the United States shortly after.

Even as the company was bringing paraquat to the market, its scientists were starting to see early signs of possible problems with the product. Internal records show that in 1958, an ICI researcher reported to a colleague that company tests on laboratory animals found exposure to a chemical compound related to paraquat appeared to affect the central nervous system.

A 1964 ICI study on rabbits noted dermal exposure to paraquat caused symptoms such as “weakness and incoordination” in some of the animals receiving very high doses. In 1966, ICI scientists studying paraquat exposure effects on a variety of animals noted that large doses given to rats and mice showed effects on the central nervous system, with various impacts, including some animals displaying “hyper-excitability”, a stiff gait or tremors.

In 1968, paraquat poisoning deaths were starting to mount around the world, as many people intentionally used the herbicide as a tool for suicide. With the deaths, according to the documents, came multiple autopsies and analyses revealing that paraquat was accumulating in brain tissue in people who had ingested small amounts of paraquat.

In the early 1970s, animal studies by ICI researchers found more evidence of the chemical’s ability to move into the brain, as well as the lungs, and spinal cord. Field workers exposed to the chemical were complaining of health problems, and the documents indicate that by 1974 some state regulators were expressing concerns about the potential long-term, chronic effects on workers who might inadvertently lick small quantities of paraquat residue off lips, or inhale paraquat mist. Company officials were also warned of rumors that some people inside the EPA were in favor of banning paraquat.

In response, Chevron executives decided the labeling on Gramoxone needed stronger warning language, including advising users to wear goggles and a respirator when spraying. Notes from a February 1974 meeting referred to the “paraquat toxicological problems in the USA” and “increasing numbers of reports of toxicological effects of paraquat to applicators in the field”.

ICI expressed concern about market “repercussions” outside the US from added warnings, but agreed to the changes, according to the meeting notes.

Notes from a follow-up meeting a month later quoted a Chevron lawyer as saying “to a lawyer there is evidence now that paraquat could cause industrial injury and it should be recognized that Chevron could face suits totalling millions of dollars”.

A year later, Chevron fears were growing. In a July 1975 letter to ICI, a Chevron toxicologist noted “problems of nosebleed and sore throat in our own plant workers”, as well as studies indicating the potential for central nervous system effects from paraquat. The Chevron scientist asked ICI for information, saying “anything you have on the question of permanent injury from paraquat, or any follow-up evaluations several years after spraying would be of benefit to us.”

Notes from an October 1975 meeting between Chevron and ICI recorded that “Chevron are concerned on the chronic effects of paraquat sprays … The syndrome is reported as injury to the CNS … ”

The notes state that there may be a need for long-term toxicity studies or an epidemiology study because “Chevron would like more positive data to use in litigation cases”. In the same meeting, it was noted that an autopsy of a recent paraquat poisoning victim had found lesions on the motor neurons “sufficient to cause debilitation” but the notes said it was not clear what might have induced this effect. (Motor neurons are cells in the brain and spinal cord that send commands from the brain to the rest of the body.)

In a December 1975 letter to the Chevron toxicologist, an ICI scientist wrote: “We discussed last week the point you raised about possible chronic effects, which you see causing legal problems. This is a quite terrible problem and, frankly, I do not believe a satisfactory investigation can be made. However, I think some plan could be made, and to be as definitive as possible, any study must be as free from doubt as possible.”

Bad news builds

As the companies fretted, the bad news continued to build: a 1976 autopsy of a farmworker reviewed by ICI showed “degenerative changes” in the “cells of the substantia nigra” of the brain. Such changes are a hallmark of Parkinson’s, but the autopsy said they were probably because of lung damage. A Chevron memo that year noted “gaps in our knowledge of the chronic effects of paraquat exposure”.

By 1985 the science on paraquat health effects had become the subject of vigorous research by independent scientists, and the findings were ringing alarm bells within Chevron’s highest ranks.

In October 1985, an internal memorandum circulated to Chevron officials noted that a study by a Canadian researcher had found “an extraordinarily high correlation” between Parkinson’s and the use of pesticides, including paraquat. The memo also noted that paraquat was “chemically very similar” to the byproduct of synthetic heroin called MTPT, “which produces almost instant Parkinson’s, by killing dopaminergic neurons in the brain”.

The author of the Canadian study had warned that an increase in Parkinson’s disease would be seen as a consequence of the relatively recent introduction of paraquat-like pesticides.

The memo then warned that paraquat could turn out to be a huge legal liability, similar to the fate that befell an asbestos company when the common building material was found to cause cancer.

The asbestos situation “highlighted the especially severe financial risks involved in selling a product which contributes to a chronic disease”, the memo states. “Parkinson’s can go on for decades.”

R Gwin Follis, the retired chairman of Standard Oil – which became known as Chevron in 1984 – wrote to GM Keller, the chairman of Chevron: “I cannot think of anything more horrible for us to bequeath to our successors than an asbestos problem.” Chevron stopped selling paraquat a year later, in 1986.

The “decision to exit the paraquat distribution business was made solely for commercial reasons due to increased competition and did not relate to any health concerns regarding paraquat,” Chevron USA said in a statement to the Guardian.

The company added that during the years a former Chevron subsidiary sold paraquat, it “met or exceeded all federal and state requirements for product-safety testing before and after release on the market”.

A ‘defensive position’

Through the 1990s and into the 2000s, the research on paraquat and Parkinson’s expanded, inside and outside Syngenta. Several US researchers did studies that found unsettling impacts of paraquat on mice, adding more evidence the chemical could cause Parkinson’s.

Syngenta noted these “external pressures on paraquat” and decided its own scientists should repeat studies done by the outside scientists to see if they came up with the same results. There was a caveat: the Syngenta science team “avoided measuring PQ [paraquat] levels in the brain, since the detection of any PQ in the brain (no matter how small) will not be perceived externally in a positive light”, according to an internal Syngenta presentation.

“Data generated will be used to build a scientifically robust, defensive position for paraquat in response to the issues already in the scientific literature, and to questions raised by the media, customers and regulatory authorities,” another Syngenta document stated.

“The issue around the claims that paraquat exposure and Parkinson’s disease are linked needs to be addressed if the future Syngenta aspirations for the product are to be realised.”

Along with making a plan to generate data for its defense, Syngenta began honing a broader “influencing” strategy and “freedom to sell” strategy. A 2003 eight-page document made the objectives clear: the goal was not just to protect paraquat, but to expand its use.

At the time, the chemical was under regulatory review in Australia and the European Union. The company worried about evolving regulatory policies posing “a threat”, including that regulators may start to replace “higher hazard products with lower hazard products”, and apply a “precautionary principle”.

Under that type of regulatory approach, companies seeking to sell a chemical have a burden of proving product safety. In contrast, the US regulatory system largely takes the opposite approach – a chemical must be proven unsafe to be kept off the market.

In response to the growing regulatory threats, Syngenta said it would take several steps, including leading “national, regional and global industry initiatives to influence regulatory policy”.

The company also set as an objective “targeted collaborations with key influencers to improve product image … ”

Internal communications show the company discussed consultations with several senior European scientists, and plans to “contribute substantively [sic] to the literature”, including for studies being done for submission to the UK’s Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and the Agricultural Health Study in the US, a decades-long collaborative research project involving multiple US government agencies.

As Syngenta honed its defenses, the data from its internal studies started to come in. The first internal study done in 2003 was designed to dose mice with paraquat as outside scientists had done, and then measure any loss of dopamine neurons in the substantia nigra of the animals’ brains. Syngenta’s tests did find losses but used a manual counting technique for analyzing those losses that was different from the automated technique used by independent scientists. Under the Syngenta analysis, the impacts of paraquat on the animal’s brains were deemed not statistically significant, a finding Syngenta made public.

What the company did not publicize at the time, however, was the fact that Syngenta scientist Louise Marks, who led the animal studies in question, repeated those studies using the more accurate, automated technique used by independent scientists.

he found that when using an automated analysis technique, paraquat actually did result in a statistically significant loss of the relevant brain cells – just as the outside scientists had found. Marks did another study, and the results were the same. Marks could not be reached for comment.

Deposition testimony given in the current litigation by longtime Syngenta scientist Phillip Botham, which has not previously been made public and during which a judge was not present, indicates that company officials would not tell the EPA of Marks’ research findings until roughly 15 years later, in 2019. The company only told the EPA about the Marks’ data after lawyer Steve Tillery, who in 2019 was suing Syngenta on behalf of people with Parkinson’s, threatened to send the evidence to the EPA himself, according to a transcript of Botham’s testimony.

When asked about the Marks tests, Sygnenta said: “The Marks studies involved a model in which a particular breed of mouse was injected with near-lethal doses of paraquat. Such models are of limited relevance to evaluating the safety of those using paraquat occupationally.”

The deposition also revealed that when Syngenta said on its website that paraquat did not readily cross the blood-brain barrier, and did not reach the specific area of the brain necessary to produce Parkinson’s symptoms, the company knew those statements were not accurate.

When asked in the deposition if that information was true at the time it was posted on the website, Botham admitted it “certainly had some inaccuracies”. “It appears that this communication had not had a chance, for reasons which I can’t fully explain, to catch up with the science that was still emerging,” he said. Part of the reason the company never reported Marks’ findings on its website, he said, was because subsequent research produced different results.

A secret plan

Part of the strategy to influence regulators involved trying to lobby for and against who the EPA looked to for independent scientific advice. In 2005, the EPA was considering appointing Dr Deborah Cory-Slechta to an open position on an important agency scientific advisory panel (SAP) on pesticides. Cory-Slechta was an influential US scientist whose work at the time was establishing ever stronger evidence that paraquat could cause Parkinson’s disease.

“This is important. We do not want to have Cory-Slechta on the SAP core panel,” Syngenta senior research scientist Charles Breckenridge wrote to colleagues in a June 2005 email.

Company emails show Syngenta decided to ask Ray McAllister, a regulatory policy expert at the industry lobbying group CropLife America (CLA), to disparage Cory-Slechta’s work in communications to the EPA. Syngenta officials wrote what they wanted McAllister to tell the EPA, and delivered it to McAllister.

“Ray has a tough job to do in providing comments that don’t come back to haunt CLA and be used against us,” one Syngenta executive wrote to colleagues.

Another Syngenta executive wrote to colleagues that it was “going to be very difficult to pin something really specific on D C-S … ”

The company decided secrecy would be key. The company did not want the public or the EPA to know Syngenta was behind the effort.

“I would ask that you handle our comments with care and in such a way that they cannot be attributed to Syngenta,” Greg Watson, a Syngenta regulatory affairs executive, wrote to McAllister. He then suggested that the communications to the EPA about Cory-Slechta “should be submitted informally & NOT placed in the public docket”.

In a separate email, Watson wrote that “for many, many of our projects it would be a real disaster to have her on the SAP!”

Watson suggested, among other things, that McAllister tell the EPA that Cory-Slechta used an “over-interpretation of data” to present scientific conclusions that were “in reality, speculation,” and was someone who made “overly dogmatic” statements.

McAllister communicated the concerns about Cory-Slechta to the EPA without mentioning they came from Syngenta. The agency chose someone else for the advisory panel.

The documents show similar efforts to influence the roster of scientists selected by the EPA for a 2010-11 pesticide advisory panel. At that time, Syngenta advised CropLife to tell the EPA that Cory-Slechta was using her research program for “anti-pesticide advocacy” and was identifying effects “without quality data”.

Cory-Slechta was not selected for the panel in question, while a scientist supported by CropLife was.

When asked to comment about the company’s actions against her, Cory-Slechta said she was not surprised. She said Syngenta representatives had tried various tactics over the years to intimidate her, and also at least once to woo her with an invitation to help fund and collaborate on research.

“They would follow me around,” she said in an interview. “It was clear they were not happy with me. Consistently our research showed that when you administer paraquat in rodent models you would see a loss of dopamine cells … in the substantia nigra. That is the hallmark, or the gold standard, of Parkinson’s disease.”

She said: “They didn’t like the data. They saw a threat to a huge market.”

Cory-Slechta said she is not anti-pesticide, nor pro-pesticide. “I want to stay in the middle,” she said. “I pride myself and I go overboard to stay in the middle. I let myself be led by the data.”

When asked about the Cory-Slechta correspondence, Syngenta said: “We disagree and take exception to this mischaracterization.”

The plaintiffs’ lawyer Steve Tillery was poised to present many of these internal documents and other evidence at a June 2021 trial in Illinois that would have been the first major court challenge to Syngenta and Chevron over the Parkinson’s connection to paraquat.

Just as the trial was set to begin, however, Syngenta agreed to pay $187.5m to settle with the plaintiffs in that case and several others, according to a disclosure in the company’s 2021 financial statement. The company did not admit liability as part of the settlement. It is not clear how much, if any, Chevron might have paid.

Other lawyers are now pressing claims for more than 2,000 other plaintiffs with Parkinson’s disease, including filing lawsuits on behalf of people with Parkinson’s in Canada.

The EPA’s agreement to reconsider its assessment of paraquat was welcomed by the farmworker groups, Parkinson’s scientists and others who brought the court challenge. The agency has said it will take another look at the health risks and costs that come with the widespread use of paraquat, and will have a revised report out in a year.

“Our research partners have studied the ample and compelling evidence showing paraquat’s association with neurological degradation and symptoms related to PD,” Ted Thompson, senior vice president of public policy at the Michael J Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research, said in an email.

“We believe the federal government and the EPA should use every tool at their disposal to eliminate its risk.”

It is not clear however, if the EPA’s extended review of paraquat will change the agency’s position. EPA scientists said in its 2019 draft human health risk assessment that its review of research about the potential association between paraquat and Parkinson’s had found only 71 studies out of 489 to be relevant to the agency’s analysis.

The agency “has not found a clear link between paraquat exposure from labeled uses and adverse health outcomes such as Parkinson’s disease … ” the agency states on its website.

While the agency conducts its reassessment, paraquat use continues.

This story is co-published with the New Lede, a journalism project of the Environmental Working Group. Carey Gillam is managing editor of the New Lede and the author of two books addressing glyphosate: Whitewash (2017); and The Monsanto Papers (2021)

20/10/22: Propyzamide linked to Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IFD)

Cosmos Magazine

https://cosmosmagazine.com/science/herbicide-propyzamide-promotes-ibd/

Scientists identify a readily available herbicide which might lead to IBD

The herbicide propyzamide has been found to interfere with the suppression of pro-inflammatory pathway in the gut.

A new study in Nature has identified an environmental chemical agent that might promote gastrointestinal inflammation or inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

Herbicides with the active ingredient propyzamide, which is the subject of the research, are available in Australia.

The report says propyzamide may boost inflammation in the small and large intestine by disrupting an anti-inflammatory pathway.

Inflammatory bowel disease is a term for two conditions – Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis – which are complex chronic inflammatory disorders of the gastrointestinal tract.

Research has shown that there are about 200 genetic loci associated with the disease, but less is known about the specific environmental factors that influence the risk and severity of IBD.

Now, the Nature study has systematically identified environmental chemical agents that promote gastrointestinal inflammation, and specifically identified a common herbicide called propyzamide, that may boost inflammation in the small and large intestine by disrupting an anti-inflammatory pathway.

Senior author Francisco Quintana, a neurology professor at the Centre for Neurologic Diseases at Harvard Medical School’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital in the US, says environmental factors are known to be important in influencing autoimmune and inflammatory disease.

Propyzamide is widely used to control certain grasses and broad-leaf weeds in sports fields, crops and pastures. It’s used in Australia under various brand names.

And research has shown that about 60% of the chemical remains unmetabolised by the plant 50 days after its application.

With a series of cell-culture, zebrafish, and mouse experiments, they were able to show that propyzamide interferes with the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR), a protein that’s involved in immune regulation.

In the study, researchers found that AHR maintains gut homeostasis by suppressing a second, pro-inflammatory pathway that had previously been shown to be genetically linked with IBD.

“Our methodology allowed us to identify a chemical that disrupts one of the body’s natural ‘brakes’ on inflammation,” Quintana says.

The team is now working to target this inflammatory pathway by engineering nanoparticles and probiotics to activate AHR.

“The anti-inflammatory AHR pathway we identified could be strengthened to ameliorate disease, and, further down the road, we could also investigate additional ways to deactivate the pro-inflammatory response,” says Quintana. “As we learn more about the environmental

factors that might contribute to disease, we can develop strategies to limit exposures.

“Some chemicals don’t seem to be toxic when tested under basic conditions, but we do not yet know about the effect of chronic, low-level exposures over decades, or early-on in development.”

Cosmos has not yet contacted any distributors of propyzamide-based products for comment.

26/5/22: Torrens River (South Australia). Gumeracha. Pesticide: Triclopyr

Torrens River - Gumeracha (South Australia)

Rain event - Torrens River u/s Gumeracha township 26/5/22: Triclopyr 0.3ug/L

Rain event - Torrens River u/s Gumeracha township 26/5/22: Triclopyr 0.3ug/L

ug/L

Torrens River – Gumeracha (South Australia)

Rain event – Torrens River u/s Gumeracha township 26/5/22: Triclopyr 0.3ug/L

Rain event – Torrens River u/s Gumeracha township 26/5/22: Triclopyr 0.3ug/L

2013-2020: Home Hill Emergency Bores. Pesticides: Atrazine and metabolites

Home Hill Emergency Bores Raw Water 2013-2020

PFAS also detected

Atrazine 0.8ug/L (max) 0.178ug/L (av.)

Desethyl Atrazine 0.8ug/L (max) 0.178ug/L (av.)

Desisopropyl Atrazine 0.09ug/L (max), 0.035ug/L (av.)

Home Hill Emergency Bores Raw Water 2013-2020

PFAS also detected

Atrazine 0.8ug/L (max) 0.178ug/L (av.)

Desethyl Atrazine 0.8ug/L (max) 0.178ug/L (av.)

Desisopropyl Atrazine 0.09ug/L (max), 0.035ug/L (av.)

2013-2020: Home Hill Bores Raw Water. Pesticides: Multiple

Home Hill Bores Raw Water 2013-2020

PFAS also detected

Atrazine 0.63ug/L (max) 0.031ug/L (av.)

Desethyl Atrazine 6ug/L (max) 0.128ug/L (av.)

Desisopropyl Atrazine 0.2ug/L (max), 0.034ug/L (av.)

Bromacil 0.1ug/L (max), 0.026ug/L (av.)

DCPMU 0.03ug/L (max), 0.023ug/L (av.)

Diuron 0.16ug/L (max), 0.028ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor 0.1ug/L (max), 0.025ug/L (av.)

Home Hill Bores Raw Water 2013-2020

PFAS also detected

Atrazine 0.63ug/L (max) 0.031ug/L (av.)

Desethyl Atrazine 6ug/L (max) 0.128ug/L (av.)

Desisopropyl Atrazine 0.2ug/L (max), 0.034ug/L (av.)

Bromacil 0.1ug/L (max), 0.026ug/L (av.)

DCPMU 0.03ug/L (max), 0.023ug/L (av.)

Diuron 0.16ug/L (max), 0.028ug/L (av.)

Metolachlor 0.1ug/L (max), 0.025ug/L (av.)

2010-2020: Chambers Bores, Ayr. Pesticides: Atrazine, Desethyl Atrazine, Imazapic

Chambers Bores Raw Water Quality 2010-2020

PFAS above guideline levels also detected

Atrazine 0.02ug/L (max)

Desethyl Atrazine 0.01ug/L (max)

Imazapic 0.01ug/L (max)

Chambers Bores Raw Water Quality 2010-2020

PFAS above guideline levels also detected

Atrazine 0.02ug/L (max)

Desethyl Atrazine 0.01ug/L (max)

Imazapic 0.01ug/L (max)

2010-2020: Nelsons Borefield, Ayr. Pesticides: Desethyl Atrazine, Bromacil, Dimethoate, Flusilazole

Nelsons Borefield Raw Water Quality 2010-2020

Desethyl Atrazine 0.08ug/L (max)

Bromacil 0.26ug/L (max)

Dimethoate 0.4ug/L (max)

Flusilazole 0.05ug/L

PFAS above guideline levels also detected.

Nelsons Borefield Raw Water Quality 2010-2020

Desethyl Atrazine 0.08ug/L (max)

Bromacil 0.26ug/L (max)

Dimethoate 0.4ug/L (max)

Flusilazole 0.05ug/L

PFAS above guideline levels also detected.

2015-2020: Conlan Street Bores, Ayr. Pesticides: Multiple

Conlan Street Bores Raw Water Quality 2015-2020

Desethyl Atrazine 0.07ug/L (max), 0.02ug/L (av.)

Bromacil 0.03ug/L (max), 0.028ug/L (av.)

DEET 0.4ug/L (max), 0.194ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop 0.17ug/L (max), 0.04ug/L (av.)

Imazapic 0.02ug/L (max), 0.013ug/L (av.)

PFAS also detected

Conlan Street Bores Raw Water Quality 2015-2020

Desethyl Atrazine 0.07ug/L (max), 0.02ug/L (av.)

Bromacil 0.03ug/L (max), 0.028ug/L (av.)

DEET 0.4ug/L (max), 0.194ug/L (av.)

Haloxyfop 0.17ug/L (max), 0.04ug/L (av.)

Imazapic 0.02ug/L (max), 0.013ug/L (av.)

PFAS also detected

2010-2020: South Ayr Raw Water Quality. Pesticides: Multiple

South Ayr Raw Water Quality 2010-2020

Ametryn 0.04ug/L (max)

Atrazine 0.72ug/L (max)

Desethyl Atrazine 0.15ug/L (max)

Desisopropyl Atrazine 0.04ug/L (max)

Diuron 0.1ug/L (max)

Haloxyfop 0.07ug/L (max)

Imazapic 0.03ug/L (max)

Imidacloprid 0.18ug/L (max)

Metolachlor 0.35ug/L (max)

PFAS also detected

South Ayr Raw Water Quality 2010-2020

Ametryn 0.04ug/L (max)

Atrazine 0.72ug/L (max)

Desethyl Atrazine 0.15ug/L (max)

Desisopropyl Atrazine 0.04ug/L (max)

Diuron 0.1ug/L (max)

Haloxyfop 0.07ug/L (max)

Imazapic 0.03ug/L (max)

Imidacloprid 0.18ug/L (max)

Metolachlor 0.35ug/L (max)

PFAS also detected

Oct 3 2022: Glyphosate found inside Australian’s urine

The age group most at risk of having weedkiller in their system

Oct 3 2022.

One-in-12 Australians have a common weedkiller in their system, research has discovered, but who is most at risk is not evenly spread across the population.

Researchers from the University of Queensland tested urine samples from more than 1800 Australians, finding 8 per cent had low levels of glyphosate in their system.

Dr Sarit Kaserzon from UQ’s Queensland Alliance for Environmental Health Sciences said the result was good news, relatively speaking, when compared with the rates of the chemical found in other countries.

“In the United States, for example, according to the CDC report recently 80 to 90 per cent of samples came back positive,” she said.

“In France they recorded even higher numbers, so we’re very relieved to see that levels are much lower in Australia, but there’s still things to examine about how people are being exposed here.”

Kaserzon stressed that the levels at which the chemical was found in people’s systems were below the recommended safe guidelines, meaning that even the people who had it in their system were probably not at risk.

However much work was being done on the effect of glyphosate on humans, and what was a “safe” level was yet to be determined sufficiently, she said.

The question is the subject of legal action, including an Australian class action against chemical giant Monsanto, scheduled for hearing in 2023.

The urine samples were sourced from pathology samples which had been de-identified except for demographic information such as age and sex.

The research discovered people in the 45-60 age group were much more likely to have glyphosate in their system.

Kaserzon said they did not have any direct evidence, but the levels involved and the age group suggested it was household gardeners who were directly using products containing glyphosate.

The UQ researchers partnered with New Zealand’s Massey University to compare the Australian levels with 27 farmers who work with glyphosate in that country.

They found the farmers’ levels were much higher than the samples from Australia, which gave them an indication that people who directly used the product were most at risk, rather than people acquiring it through food and drink.

Lead research author, UQ PhD candidate Garth Campbell, said the finding suggested extra precautions should be taken by anyone using glyphosate products, even casually.

“Farmers or anyone else who regularly use chemicals containing glyphosate should wear goggles, protective gloves and avoid inhalation of dust and mist,” he said.

“I also highly recommend additional measures including protective clothing, mask wearing and hand washing after handling a product with glyphosate, and ensure it is stored safely.”

Kaserzon said more monitoring was needed to get more accurate figures about its prevalence in the population.

“More research is also needed into whether adults excrete it from their urine at the same rate,” she said.

“We assume that 20 per cent of [glyphosate] you ingest is excreted, but recent studies suggest it could be as low as 1 per cent, which means we’re under-estimating how much people are exposed.

“For the general population it might not make much difference but it would have a huge impact on farmers, which means more work is needed.”

2022 October: Peregrine Falcon Resurgence coming back from near Extinction

The peregrine falcon's 'remarkable' resurgence coming back from near extinction

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-03/sa-peregrine-falcons-resurgence/101494554

The peregrine falcon looks set to hit another milestone in its unlikely comeback from the brink of extinction.

The bird of prey is the fastest animal on the planet and its 'rare' conservation status is currently under review in South Australia.

Experts predict that status will be changed, making it the last state in the country to list the species population as 'secure'.

After decades of pesticide poisoning and persecution, the resurgence of the native bird has been described as "nothing short of remarkable".

Field ornithologist, Ian Falkenberg — who has been documenting peregrines for 40 years — said research on the peregrine's population helped Australia avert a "major environmental crisis".

Chemical destruction

Mr Falkenberg said pesticides widely used by farmers between the 1960s and 1980s almost wiped out the apex predator.

"Those chemicals started to accumulate in the food that they eat," he said.

"They consume small amounts over time which means that they get a very large dose over a long time."

Mr Falkenberg said chemicals like DDT, which was a commonly used in agriculture, caused the falcons to lay thinner eggs leading to a dramatic drop in the number of chicks being hatched.

"It caused a 28 per cent decrease in eggshell thinning and basically an egg won't hatch if it's at 25 per cent," he said.

"If we kept using these chemicals for another decade essentially we would have been in the situation that America and parts of Europe were in, with the falcon being wiped out in some areas."

The decline in population sparked bans across the country on the use of certain deadly pesticides in the late 1980s.

"We have a lot to be indebted to for the peregrine falcon alerting various countries on the devastation that these chemicals can actually cause," Mr Falkenberg said.

"It is a great story and one in which by looking at wildlife populations we can determine the health of the environment."

The falcon feud

The peregrine's diet consists mostly of other birds, and it's one of the most efficient apex-predators in the world.

But its particular love for eating pigeons has also made it the subject of persecution.

"Peregrine falcons have been blamed for killing racing pigeons over the years," Mr Falkenberg said.

"I know this, because a lot of the birds that I've been banding over the years, the band returns were sent back to me by pigeon racing clubs."

While peregrine hunting is mostly a thing of the past, the falcon remains a heated topic among pigeon racers.

Tom Tirrell has been racing pigeons for 60 years and said he loses at least 40 per cent of his flock a season to the falcon.

"I can remember a time when you would take your birds as a junior, we flew 13 pigeons and we lost 1 pigeon on either line," he said.

"Now if you start with 50 or a 100 pigeons you would struggle to get 20 or 30 at the end of the season."

The veteran racer said his beloved pigeons do not stand a chance against a bird capable of flying up to 300 kilometres per hour. 

"They create havoc and just put them down to ground or put them through trees," Mr Tirrell said.

"It's not like a warm fluffy pigeon that to me doesn't do anything."

"They're out and out killers."

But Mr Falkenberg said that peregrines play an important role in reducing the number of pest species like pigeons.

"They were trying to portray these Falcons as just simply ruthless killers of their pets, which simply wasn't the case," he said.

"The domestic pigeon is actually a feral animal, and causes significant environmental problems in some areas."

"They take over nesting sites of native birds and spread disease."

"We also found that 25 per cent of feral pigeons around buildings have pigeon racing rings on them."

The feud between pigeon racers and peregrines was so serious that racing groups in the 1970s called for the hawk to be killed and for their heads to be sent to the clubs in containers.

City life 'a perfect alternative'

After almost being extinct, experts believe there may be more peregrines now than ever before.

It means nesting sites have become more common, even among urban environments like the ABC Adelaide office in Collinswood.

Ecologist Stuart Collard said that is because peregrines have adapted better than any other native animal to city-life.

"They've been able to adapt to that environment, so typically they would nest on a cliff so they might find a ledge on a cliff but a high-rise building is also a perfect alternative," he said.

"So they've got a high vantage point that's nice and protected and they have access to prey."

"It's terrific and it's unusual that species actually go the other way. Oftentimes in an urban environment we're watching species decline" 

Dr Collard, who is also an operations manager for Green Adelaide, said the organisation is looking to set-up a peregrine nest live camera, like the one on Collins Street in Melbourne.

"We'd love to have a similar sort of story which engages thousands of people like it does in Victoria," Dr Collard said.

The peregrine falcon’s ‘remarkable’ resurgence coming back from near extinction

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-03/sa-peregrine-falcons-resurgence/101494554

The peregrine falcon looks set to hit another milestone in its unlikely comeback from the brink of extinction.

The bird of prey is the fastest animal on the planet and its ‘rare’ conservation status is currently under review in South Australia.

Experts predict that status will be changed, making it the last state in the country to list the species population as ‘secure’.

After decades of pesticide poisoning and persecution, the resurgence of the native bird has been described as “nothing short of remarkable”.

Field ornithologist, Ian Falkenberg — who has been documenting peregrines for 40 years — said research on the peregrine’s population helped Australia avert a “major environmental crisis”.

Chemical destruction

Mr Falkenberg said pesticides widely used by farmers between the 1960s and 1980s almost wiped out the apex predator.

“Those chemicals started to accumulate in the food that they eat,” he said.

“They consume small amounts over time which means that they get a very large dose over a long time.”

Mr Falkenberg said chemicals like DDT, which was a commonly used in agriculture, caused the falcons to lay thinner eggs leading to a dramatic drop in the number of chicks being hatched.

“It caused a 28 per cent decrease in eggshell thinning and basically an egg won’t hatch if it’s at 25 per cent,” he said.

“If we kept using these chemicals for another decade essentially we would have been in the situation that America and parts of Europe were in, with the falcon being wiped out in some areas.”

The decline in population sparked bans across the country on the use of certain deadly pesticides in the late 1980s.

“We have a lot to be indebted to for the peregrine falcon alerting various countries on the devastation that these chemicals can actually cause,” Mr Falkenberg said.

“It is a great story and one in which by looking at wildlife populations we can determine the health of the environment.”

The falcon feud

The peregrine’s diet consists mostly of other birds, and it’s one of the most efficient apex-predators in the world.

But its particular love for eating pigeons has also made it the subject of persecution.

“Peregrine falcons have been blamed for killing racing pigeons over the years,” Mr Falkenberg said.

“I know this, because a lot of the birds that I’ve been banding over the years, the band returns were sent back to me by pigeon racing clubs.”

While peregrine hunting is mostly a thing of the past, the falcon remains a heated topic among pigeon racers.

Tom Tirrell has been racing pigeons for 60 years and said he loses at least 40 per cent of his flock a season to the falcon.

“I can remember a time when you would take your birds as a junior, we flew 13 pigeons and we lost 1 pigeon on either line,” he said.

“Now if you start with 50 or a 100 pigeons you would struggle to get 20 or 30 at the end of the season.”

The veteran racer said his beloved pigeons do not stand a chance against a bird capable of flying up to 300 kilometres per hour.

“They create havoc and just put them down to ground or put them through trees,” Mr Tirrell said.

“It’s not like a warm fluffy pigeon that to me doesn’t do anything.”

“They’re out and out killers.”

But Mr Falkenberg said that peregrines play an important role in reducing the number of pest species like pigeons.

“They were trying to portray these Falcons as just simply ruthless killers of their pets, which simply wasn’t the case,” he said.

“The domestic pigeon is actually a feral animal, and causes significant environmental problems in some areas.”

“They take over nesting sites of native birds and spread disease.”

“We also found that 25 per cent of feral pigeons around buildings have pigeon racing rings on them.”

The feud between pigeon racers and peregrines was so serious that racing groups in the 1970s called for the hawk to be killed and for their heads to be sent to the clubs in containers.

City life ‘a perfect alternative’

After almost being extinct, experts believe there may be more peregrines now than ever before.

It means nesting sites have become more common, even among urban environments like the ABC Adelaide office in Collinswood.

Ecologist Stuart Collard said that is because peregrines have adapted better than any other native animal to city-life.

“They’ve been able to adapt to that environment, so typically they would nest on a cliff so they might find a ledge on a cliff but a high-rise building is also a perfect alternative,” he said.

“So they’ve got a high vantage point that’s nice and protected and they have access to prey.”

“It’s terrific and it’s unusual that species actually go the other way. Oftentimes in an urban environment we’re watching species decline”

Dr Collard, who is also an operations manager for Green Adelaide, said the organisation is looking to set-up a peregrine nest live camera, like the one on Collins Street in Melbourne.

“We’d love to have a similar sort of story which engages thousands of people like it does in Victoria,” Dr Collard said.

28/9/22: Blueberry Blues – Coffs Harbour

Blueberry blues: how the cash crop is causing a contamination crisis in Coffs Harbour

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/sep/28/blueberry-blues-how-the-cash-crop-is-causing-a-contamination-crisis-in-coffs-harbour

High levels of chemicals used to grow the berries are ending up in the water – and it’s community groups, rather than regulators, who are blowing the whistle.

In a region once famous for its Big Banana, blueberries are now the dominant crop. The berries account for $200m of the $250m agriculture industry in the Coffs Harbour district.

But with the change of use came concerns in this idyllic community on the New South Wales mid north coast about the environmental impact of pesticides and fertiliser runoff from these intensive farms. It may now be reaching a crisis, according to some scientists.

 

During heavy rain, water can be seen coursing down hills into creeks and rivers carrying sediment, high levels of fertiliser and other chemicals that are used to grow and protect blueberries.

It ultimately ends up in lakes and the sea, and scientists warn it is now threatening the north coast’s other major industries: fishing and prawn trawling.

The Coffs Harbour city council has been increasingly intervening to demand development applications when farms are set up or expanded in order to manage the problem.

The story of blueberries in the Coffs Harbour region is a salutary lesson in how pesticides and other agricultural chemicals are regulated.

Who monitors pesticides in the environment?

In theory, pesticide use and environmental monitoring fall to state environment protection authorities. But in practice it’s often left to community groups, academics and activist councillors to blow the whistle.

Policing proper use of pesticides is split between the state environment and agriculture agencies.

There are few resources devoted to the issue, yet pesticides are by their nature some of our most toxic poisons, so their escape into waterways or other parts of the environment can have serious unintended consequences.

While regulators acknowledged and responded to the dangers of DDT and other organochlorines, it is now known that seemingly safer new-generation pesticides, such as the neonicotinoids, can have an impact on bees and aquatic life even at very small doses.

Only the most dramatic events seem to gain official attention.

In 2020 the Victorian Environment Protection Authority took action against a commercial flower grower in the coastal town of Torquay after nearby residents suffered vision impairment, sore throats, breathing difficulties, headaches, nausea and vomiting.

Investigators found the chemical was being used to prepare ground for a new crop, but had been incorrectly applied and reacted with moist soil to produce methyl isothiocyanate, which is a hazardous gas.

Three people were taken to hospital by ambulance and a fourth transported himself. The grower was fined $70,000 without conviction.

The Victorian EPA said it did not have any statistics on other pesticide incidents and directed the Guardian to the agriculture department.

In NSW, the state’s EPA is responsible for policing both chemical use and pollution in the environment, including spray drift incidents.

It said it takes “a risk-based approach to pesticides and works with other agencies, industry, academic institutions and public interest groups”.

Over the past three years, there have been only two successful prosecutions of Pesticides Act offences in NSW. The EPA has also issued 30 advisory letters, 27 formal warnings, 30 official cautions, three clean-up actions and one prevention notice.

‘Hearnes Lake isn’t dead but it’s nearly dead’

It took more than 130 incident reports from the community and research by Southern Cross University in association with the Coffs Harbour council in 2017-18 to get official action over the impacts of the rapid expansion of blueberry farms and other intensive horticulture in the region.

Researchers found that nitrogen oxide levels in creeks feeding into the Hearnes Lake catchment were up to 695 times higher during high rainfall events than in dry weather and levels were as high as the worst rivers in China. This was attributed to fertiliser runoff.

Hearnes Lake is particularly important because it serves as a nursery for the nearby Solitary Islands marine park, which in turn nurtures the abundant seafood of the region.

Finally the Natural Resources Access Regulator stepped in on water use issues and the EPA undertook inspections and testing around Hearnes Lake, focusing on the impact of pesticides and fertilisers.

In October 2021 it issued a $7,500 fine and a caution to a blueberry farmer at Woolgoolga over pesticide pollution and storage. It has also put out guidance notes in an effort to raise standards of pesticide use among blueberry growers.

Nine inspections in late 2021 detected low levels of the insecticide imidacloprid – a neonicotinoid – and two cucumber growers were issued with cleanup notices over pesticide containers left near waterways.

Even tiny amounts of imidacloprid can be highly toxic to aquatic life.

Southern Cross University marine science professor Kirsten Benkendorff said her research has found residues of neonicotinoids above the safe residue limits in prawn flesh and in water in Hearnes Lake.

Pesticides had also been found in oysters and while it is causing stress, they seem to be more resistant, she said.

“Hearnes Lake isn’t dead but it’s nearly dead,” she said.

Further up the coast in the Richmond River, Benkendorff has detected high levels of atrazine, a potent endocrine disrupter that affects sexual development and has been linked to cancer. It is banned in Europe but still used on sugar cane and other crops in Australia.

The EPA announced in May it is targeting pesticide use in the Hearnes Lake catchment.

Spray drift and the burden of proof

One of the biggest problems for the regulation of pesticides in the environment is that the burden of proof falls on academics and the community.

Benkendorff said it cost more than $300 for each of her samples to be tested for pesticides, putting it beyond the reach of many communities. Separate tests were needed to detect glyphosate (sold as Roundup or Zero), one of the most common herbicides in use in Australia.

Matt Landos, a veterinarian and honorary lecturer in aquatic health at the University of Sydney, said the environment protection authorities are often reluctant to follow up on allegations of spray drift or concerns about environmental pollution because of the difficulty in getting a successful prosecution.

Spray drift incidents need to be investigated quickly and people reporting them often faced an almost insurmountable burden of establishing who was spraying and where the drift came from, Landos said

Blueberry blues: how the cash crop is causing a contamination crisis in Coffs Harbour

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/sep/28/blueberry-blues-how-the-cash-crop-is-causing-a-contamination-crisis-in-coffs-harbour

High levels of chemicals used to grow the berries are ending up in the water – and it’s community groups, rather than regulators, who are blowing the whistle.

In a region once famous for its Big Banana, blueberries are now the dominant crop. The berries account for $200m of the $250m agriculture industry in the Coffs Harbour district.

But with the change of use came concerns in this idyllic community on the New South Wales mid north coast about the environmental impact of pesticides and fertiliser runoff from these intensive farms. It may now be reaching a crisis, according to some scientists.

During heavy rain, water can be seen coursing down hills into creeks and rivers carrying sediment, high levels of fertiliser and other chemicals that are used to grow and protect blueberries.

It ultimately ends up in lakes and the sea, and scientists warn it is now threatening the north coast’s other major industries: fishing and prawn trawling.

The Coffs Harbour city council has been increasingly intervening to demand development applications when farms are set up or expanded in order to manage the problem.

The story of blueberries in the Coffs Harbour region is a salutary lesson in how pesticides and other agricultural chemicals are regulated.

Who monitors pesticides in the environment?

In theory, pesticide use and environmental monitoring fall to state environment protection authorities. But in practice it’s often left to community groups, academics and activist councillors to blow the whistle.

Policing proper use of pesticides is split between the state environment and agriculture agencies.

There are few resources devoted to the issue, yet pesticides are by their nature some of our most toxic poisons, so their escape into waterways or other parts of the environment can have serious unintended consequences.

While regulators acknowledged and responded to the dangers of DDT and other organochlorines, it is now known that seemingly safer new-generation pesticides, such as the neonicotinoids, can have an impact on bees and aquatic life even at very small doses.

Only the most dramatic events seem to gain official attention.

In 2020 the Victorian Environment Protection Authority took action against a commercial flower grower in the coastal town of Torquay after nearby residents suffered vision impairment, sore throats, breathing difficulties, headaches, nausea and vomiting.

Investigators found the chemical was being used to prepare ground for a new crop, but had been incorrectly applied and reacted with moist soil to produce methyl isothiocyanate, which is a hazardous gas.

Three people were taken to hospital by ambulance and a fourth transported himself. The grower was fined $70,000 without conviction.

The Victorian EPA said it did not have any statistics on other pesticide incidents and directed the Guardian to the agriculture department.

In NSW, the state’s EPA is responsible for policing both chemical use and pollution in the environment, including spray drift incidents.

It said it takes “a risk-based approach to pesticides and works with other agencies, industry, academic institutions and public interest groups”.

Over the past three years, there have been only two successful prosecutions of Pesticides Act offences in NSW. The EPA has also issued 30 advisory letters, 27 formal warnings, 30 official cautions, three clean-up actions and one prevention notice.

‘Hearnes Lake isn’t dead but it’s nearly dead’

It took more than 130 incident reports from the community and research by Southern Cross University in association with the Coffs Harbour council in 2017-18 to get official action over the impacts of the rapid expansion of blueberry farms and other intensive horticulture in the region.

Researchers found that nitrogen oxide levels in creeks feeding into the Hearnes Lake catchment were up to 695 times higher during high rainfall events than in dry weather and levels were as high as the worst rivers in China. This was attributed to fertiliser runoff.

Hearnes Lake is particularly important because it serves as a nursery for the nearby Solitary Islands marine park, which in turn nurtures the abundant seafood of the region.

Finally the Natural Resources Access Regulator stepped in on water use issues and the EPA undertook inspections and testing around Hearnes Lake, focusing on the impact of pesticides and fertilisers.

In October 2021 it issued a $7,500 fine and a caution to a blueberry farmer at Woolgoolga over pesticide pollution and storage. It has also put out guidance notes in an effort to raise standards of pesticide use among blueberry growers.

Nine inspections in late 2021 detected low levels of the insecticide imidacloprid – a neonicotinoid – and two cucumber growers were issued with cleanup notices over pesticide containers left near waterways.

Even tiny amounts of imidacloprid can be highly toxic to aquatic life.

Southern Cross University marine science professor Kirsten Benkendorff said her research has found residues of neonicotinoids above the safe residue limits in prawn flesh and in water in Hearnes Lake.

Pesticides had also been found in oysters and while it is causing stress, they seem to be more resistant, she said.

“Hearnes Lake isn’t dead but it’s nearly dead,” she said.

Further up the coast in the Richmond River, Benkendorff has detected high levels of atrazine, a potent endocrine disrupter that affects sexual development and has been linked to cancer. It is banned in Europe but still used on sugar cane and other crops in Australia.

The EPA announced in May it is targeting pesticide use in the Hearnes Lake catchment.

Spray drift and the burden of proof

One of the biggest problems for the regulation of pesticides in the environment is that the burden of proof falls on academics and the community.

Benkendorff said it cost more than $300 for each of her samples to be tested for pesticides, putting it beyond the reach of many communities. Separate tests were needed to detect glyphosate (sold as Roundup or Zero), one of the most common herbicides in use in Australia.

Matt Landos, a veterinarian and honorary lecturer in aquatic health at the University of Sydney, said the environment protection authorities are often reluctant to follow up on allegations of spray drift or concerns about environmental pollution because of the difficulty in getting a successful prosecution.

Spray drift incidents need to be investigated quickly and people reporting them often faced an almost insurmountable burden of establishing who was spraying and where the drift came from, Landos said

23/9/21: Hing Lee Hong Enterprise Ltd (China). Breaching Australian MRL. Pesticide: Carbendazim

Hing Lee Hong Enterprise Ltd (China) -  Exported Food breaching Australian MRL's for: Carbendazim

23/9/21: Dried Longan - Hing Lee Hong Enterprise Ltd (China): Carbendazim 0.06mg/kg. Not permitted in this food

Source: AQIS Failing Food Surveys. Department of Agriculture Australia

Hing Lee Hong Enterprise Ltd (China) –  Exported Food breaching Australian MRL’s for: Carbendazim

23/9/21: Dried Longan – Hing Lee Hong Enterprise Ltd (China): Carbendazim 0.06mg/kg. Not permitted in this food

Source: AQIS Failing Food Surveys. Department of Agriculture Australia

17/9/21: Progressive Mango Growers Multan. Breaching Australian MRL: Tebuconazole

Progressive Mango Growers Multan (Pakistan) -  Exported Food breaching Australian MRL's for: Tebuconazole

17/9/21: Mangos Fresh - Progressive Mango Growers Multan (Pakistan): Tebuconazole 0.13mg/kg. Detected in excess of MRL

Source: AQIS Failing Food Surveys. Department of Agriculture Australia

Progressive Mango Growers Multan (Pakistan) –  Exported Food breaching Australian MRL’s for: Tebuconazole

17/9/21: Mangos Fresh – Progressive Mango Growers Multan (Pakistan): Tebuconazole 0.13mg/kg. Detected in excess of MRL

Source: AQIS Failing Food Surveys. Department of Agriculture Australia

17/9/21: Manahel Group (Egypt). Breaching Australian MRL. Pesticide: Chlorpyrifos

Manahel Group (Egypt) -  Exported Food breaching Australian MRL's for: Chlorpyrifos

17/9/21: Okra - Manahel Group (Egypt): Chlorpyrifos  0.02mg/kg. Not permitted on this food

Source: AQIS Failing Food Surveys. Department of Agriculture Australia

Manahel Group (Egypt) –  Exported Food breaching Australian MRL’s for: Chlorpyrifos

17/9/21: Okra – Manahel Group (Egypt): Chlorpyrifos  0.02mg/kg. Not permitted on this food

Source: AQIS Failing Food Surveys. Department of Agriculture Australia

15/9/21: Song Tran Import and Export (Vietnam). Breaching Australian MRL. Pesticide: Carbendazim

Song Tran Import and Export Co Ltd (Vietnam) -  Exported Food breaching Australian MRL's for: Carbendazim

15/9/21: Frozen whole durian - Song Tran Import and Export Co Ltd (Vietnam): Carbendazim  0.13mg/kg. Not permitted on this food

Source: AQIS Failing Food Surveys. Department of Agriculture Australia

Song Tran Import and Export Co Ltd (Vietnam) –  Exported Food breaching Australian MRL’s for: Carbendazim

15/9/21: Frozen whole durian – Song Tran Import and Export Co Ltd (Vietnam): Carbendazim  0.13mg/kg. Not permitted on this food

Source: AQIS Failing Food Surveys. Department of Agriculture Australia

24/8/21: Rgn Exports (India). Breaching Australian MRL. Pesticide: Chlorpyrifos

Rgn Exports (India) -  Exported Food breaching Australian MRL's for: Chlorpyrifos

24/8/21: Fresh kolkata betel leaves - Rgn Exports (India): Chlorpyrifos 0.03mg/kg

Source: AQIS Failing Food Surveys. Department of Agriculture Australia

Rgn Exports (India) –  Exported Food breaching Australian MRL’s for: Chlorpyrifos

24/8/21: Fresh kolkata betel leaves – Rgn Exports (India): Chlorpyrifos 0.03mg/kg

Source: AQIS Failing Food Surveys. Department of Agriculture Australia

28/7/21: Anatolia (Iran). Breached Australian MRL. Pesticide: Propargite

Anatolia (Iran) -  Exported Food breaching Australian MRL's for: Propargite

28/7/21: Pitted Dates - Anatolia  (Iran): Propargite 0.11mg/kg Not permitted on this food

Source: AQIS Failing Food Surveys. Department of Agriculture Australia

Anatolia (Iran) –  Exported Food breaching Australian MRL’s for: Propargite

28/7/21: Pitted Dates – Anatolia  (Iran): Propargite 0.11mg/kg Not permitted on this food

Source: AQIS Failing Food Surveys. Department of Agriculture Australia

26/8/21: Xiangyang Tianma Zhonge Trading Co Ltd  (China). Breaching Australian MRL’s: Pesticides: Myclobutanil, Pyraclostrobin

Xiangyang Tianma Zhonge Trading Co Ltd  (China) -  Exported Food breaching Australian MRL's for: Myclobutanil, Pyraclostrobin

26/8/21: Dried Lemon Slices - Xiangyang Tianma Zhonge Trading Co Ltd  (China): Myclobutanil 0.1mg/kg

26/8/21: Dried Lemon Slices - Xiangyang Tianma Zhonge Trading Co Ltd  (China): Pyraclostrobin 0.54mg/kg

Source: AQIS Failing Food Surveys. Department of Agriculture Australia

Xiangyang Tianma Zhonge Trading Co Ltd  (China) –  Exported Food breaching Australian MRL’s for: Myclobutanil, Pyraclostrobin

26/8/21: Dried Lemon Slices – Xiangyang Tianma Zhonge Trading Co Ltd  (China): Myclobutanil 0.1mg/kg

26/8/21: Dried Lemon Slices – Xiangyang Tianma Zhonge Trading Co Ltd  (China): Pyraclostrobin 0.54mg/kg

Source: AQIS Failing Food Surveys. Department of Agriculture Australia

2/8/21: Hunan Duoying Agricultural Science Co Ltd (China). Breaching Australian MRL. Pesticide: Flusilazole

Hunan Duoying Agricultural Science Co Ltd (China) - Food breaching Australian MRL's for: Flusilazole

2/8/21: Fresh sugar snap pea - Hunan Duoying Agricultural Science and Technology Co Ltd (China) - Pesticide: Flusilazole 0.1mg/kg. Not permitted on this food

Source Failing Food Report - Australian Department of Agriculture (AQIS)

Hunan Duoying Agricultural Science Co Ltd (China) – Food breaching Australian MRL’s for: Flusilazole

2/8/21: Fresh sugar snap pea – Hunan Duoying Agricultural Science and Technology Co Ltd (China) – Pesticide: Flusilazole 0.1mg/kg. Not permitted on this food

Source Failing Food Report – Australian Department of Agriculture (AQIS)

23/7/21: Tropical Green Co Ltd (Thailand). Breaching Australian MRL for Chlorpyrifos

Tropical Green Co Ltd (Thailand) - Food breaching Australian MRL's for: Chlorpyrifos

23/7/21: Fresh mangosteens - Tropical Green Co Ltd (Thailand) - Pesticide: Chlorpyrifos 0.36mg/kg

Source Failing Food Report - Australian Department of Agriculture (AQIS)

Tropical Green Co Ltd (Thailand) – Food breaching Australian MRL’s for: Chlorpyrifos

23/7/21: Fresh mangosteens – Tropical Green Co Ltd (Thailand) – Pesticide: Chlorpyrifos 0.36mg/kg

Source Failing Food Report – Australian Department of Agriculture (AQIS)

2021: Pt Mitratani Dua Tujuh (Indonesia). Breaching Australian MRL. Pesticide: Permethrin

Pt Mitratani Dua Tujuh (Indonesia) - Food breaching Australian MRL's for: Permethrin

22/7/21: Edamame soybeans in pod - Pt Mitratani Dua Tujuh (Indonesia) - Pesticide: Permethrin 0.08mg/kg

21/9/21: Soybeans in pod - Pt Mitratani Dua Tujuh (Indonesia) - Pesticide: Permethrin 0.08mg/kg. Detected in excess of MRL

Source Failing Food Report - Australian Department of Agriculture (AQIS)

Pt Mitratani Dua Tujuh (Indonesia) – Food breaching Australian MRL’s for: Permethrin

22/7/21: Edamame soybeans in pod – Pt Mitratani Dua Tujuh (Indonesia) – Pesticide: Permethrin 0.08mg/kg

21/9/21: Soybeans in pod – Pt Mitratani Dua Tujuh (Indonesia) – Pesticide: Permethrin 0.08mg/kg. Detected in excess of MRL

Source Failing Food Report – Australian Department of Agriculture (AQIS)

12/7/21: Red Dragon Co Ltd (Vietnam). Pesticide: Cypermethrin

Red Dragon Co Ltd (Vietnam) - Food breaching Australian MRL's for: Cypermethrin

12/7/21: Fresh Lychee - Red Dragon Co Ltd (Vietnam) - Pesticide: Cypermethrin 0.132mg/kg

Source Failing Food Report - Australian Department of Agriculture (AQIS)

Red Dragon Co Ltd (Vietnam) – Food breaching Australian MRL’s for: Cypermethrin

12/7/21: Fresh Lychee – Red Dragon Co Ltd (Vietnam) – Pesticide: Cypermethrin 0.132mg/kg

Source Failing Food Report – Australian Department of Agriculture (AQIS)

2/7/21: Shanghai Dongmei Import and Export Co Ltd (China). Breaching Australian MRL. Pesticide: Cyhalothrin

Shanghai Dongmei Import and Export Co Ltd (China) - Food breaching Australian MRL's for: Cyhalothrin

2/7/21: Frozen Spinach - Shanghai Dongmei Import and Export Co Ltd (China) - Pesticide: Cyhalothrin detected - not permitted in this food. 0.011mg/kg

Source Failing Food Report - Australian Department of Agriculture (AQIS)

Shanghai Dongmei Import and Export Co Ltd (China) – Food breaching Australian MRL’s for: Cyhalothrin

2/7/21: Frozen Spinach – Shanghai Dongmei Import and Export Co Ltd (China) – Pesticide: Cyhalothrin detected – not permitted in this food. 0.011mg/kg

Source Failing Food Report – Australian Department of Agriculture (AQIS)

August 25 2022: 70 Flying Foxes Poisoned. Pesticide: Dieldrin

Suspected poisoning of Shoalhaven flying-foxes

25 Aug 2022

https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/news/suspected-poisoning-of-shoalhaven-flying-foxes

Up to 70 grey-headed flying-foxes found dead in the Shoalhaven area earlier this year may have been poisoned, prompting authorities to remind people to properly dispose of chemicals and pesticides.

Mike Saxon from the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) said tragically a banned organochlorine pesticide, Dieldrin, was confirmed in one flying-fox and there are signs that others had also ingested a poison.

"At this stage we have not been able to identify any person responsible and we do not know if this was a deliberate or accidental poisoning," Mr Saxon said.

"We are continuing enquiries but regardless, this tragic incident highlights the horrible impact banned pesticides have on our native wildlife.

"Grey-headed flying-foxes play a vital role in our environment pollinating our forests and dispersing our rainforest seeds. They also feed on fruit, including backyard fruit trees.

"We know this can frustrate gardeners but remind people that grey-headed flying-foxes are listed as a threatened species in New South Wales. They are protected under the Biodiversity Conservation Act and it is an offence to harm them," Mr Saxon said.

The department is partnering with the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) to inform the community about risks associated with improper storage and use of pesticides. Director of Regulatory Operations Cate Woods said the use of Dieldrin has been banned in Australia since 1987, noting that it can accumulate in native animals and livestock and contaminate soil for decades.

"This is a good reminder to check areas of your property where old pesticide or chemical stocks may be forgotten and dispose of them lawfully," Ms Wood said.

"Any old stocks of organochlorine pesticides like Dieldrin should be stored securely and properly labelled until they can be safely disposed of at a Household Chemical CleanOut event.

"These events accept household quantities up to a maximum of 20 litres or 20 kilograms of a single chemical or item. They are free services held across New South Wales.

"The next Household Chemical Clean Out Event in the Shoalhaven is this Sunday, 28 August, 9 am–3 pm at the Woollamia Council Works Depot, 3 Erina Road Woollamia.

"We much prefer that people come forward and dispose of these chemicals or poisons correctly, rather than try to dispose of them another way that may end up harming our environment and wildlife," Ms Wood said.

The department would like to thank the team at Wildlife Rescue South Coast, North Nowra Veterinary Hospital, Taronga Zoo and volunteers who helped recover and identify the cause of death for these flying-foxes

Suspected poisoning of Shoalhaven flying-foxes

25 Aug 2022

https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/news/suspected-poisoning-of-shoalhaven-flying-foxes

Up to 70 grey-headed flying-foxes found dead in the Shoalhaven area earlier this year may have been poisoned, prompting authorities to remind people to properly dispose of chemicals and pesticides.

Mike Saxon from the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) said tragically a banned organochlorine pesticide, Dieldrin, was confirmed in one flying-fox and there are signs that others had also ingested a poison.

“At this stage we have not been able to identify any person responsible and we do not know if this was a deliberate or accidental poisoning,” Mr Saxon said.

“We are continuing enquiries but regardless, this tragic incident highlights the horrible impact banned pesticides have on our native wildlife.

“Grey-headed flying-foxes play a vital role in our environment pollinating our forests and dispersing our rainforest seeds. They also feed on fruit, including backyard fruit trees.

“We know this can frustrate gardeners but remind people that grey-headed flying-foxes are listed as a threatened species in New South Wales. They are protected under the Biodiversity Conservation Act and it is an offence to harm them,” Mr Saxon said.

The department is partnering with the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) to inform the community about risks associated with improper storage and use of pesticides. Director of Regulatory Operations Cate Woods said the use of Dieldrin has been banned in Australia since 1987, noting that it can accumulate in native animals and livestock and contaminate soil for decades.

“This is a good reminder to check areas of your property where old pesticide or chemical stocks may be forgotten and dispose of them lawfully,” Ms Wood said.

“Any old stocks of organochlorine pesticides like Dieldrin should be stored securely and properly labelled until they can be safely disposed of at a Household Chemical CleanOut event.

“These events accept household quantities up to a maximum of 20 litres or 20 kilograms of a single chemical or item. They are free services held across New South Wales.

“The next Household Chemical Clean Out Event in the Shoalhaven is this Sunday, 28 August, 9 am–3 pm at the Woollamia Council Works Depot, 3 Erina Road Woollamia.

“We much prefer that people come forward and dispose of these chemicals or poisons correctly, rather than try to dispose of them another way that may end up harming our environment and wildlife,” Ms Wood said.

The department would like to thank the team at Wildlife Rescue South Coast, North Nowra Veterinary Hospital, Taronga Zoo and volunteers who helped recover and identify the cause of death for these flying-foxes