He tono nā

ki te

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AUTHORITY

e pā ana ki te

SUBMISSION ON APP203766 – Application to import Revystar

Fungicide to combat cereal diseases

Date

Authors:

Dr Benita Wakefield and Stephanie Dijkstra

Ngāi Tahu HSNO Kōmiti members

SUBMISSION127534

1

Moemoea (Lament)

Mātakitaki au ki te takutai o te raki

ki te pōkaikura e tauawhitia mai.

Ko Uenuku e tīwhanawhana ai ki runga

ko te Rau o Tītapu ki mua.

Ka whakapiki te hā ki te taumata kōrero

kia whakapuakiakihia mai ngā maunga

pepeha.

Ko tōku maunga Kākāpō e tū ake rā.

ko ahau te tangata e whakatika ki runga

Tū te ihiihi

Tū te wanawana

Tū te mauri ki waho

Tū te mauri ki roto.

Tāpuketia au kia mārama ai taku titiro

Ki aku umu tangata.

Puritia, tāwhia kia ita

Te mana tīpuna

Te mana whenua

Te mana tangata

Kia tūturu

Āwhiti whakamaua

Kia tina

Tina !

Hui eee Tāiki ee!

Look to the north where the coast

that embraces us glows a sacred red.

‘Tis Uenuku that arches on high

and our leaders who move to the fore.

The essence of our ancestors rises up to the

pinnacle of oratory

as our mountains are recalled to remind us

of whence we came.

There stands the mountain of the treasured

Kākāpō

`tis I who can stand and claim my place.

I feel the dread

I feel the awesome prestige

As the life force is established

from within and without.

Bury me there so that I may gaze upon

those lands

Through the strength of my people.

Hold fast and firm

To my inherited authority

To my rights to this land

To my rights as a person

Whakatauki (Proverb)

”Te Toto o te tangata, he kai; te oranga o te tangata e whenua”

While food provides the blood in our veins, our health is drawn from the land

SUBMISSION127534

1

1 Executive summary

Application APP203766 was submitted by BASF New Zealand Limited to import Revystar

Fungicide containing 100g/L Mefentrifluconazole and 50 g/L Fluxapyroxad. Fluxapyroxad is

already approved for use in New Zealand, but mefentrifluconazole has not yet been approved.

Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu holds concerns over an already widespread and extensive use of toxic

agrichemicals in the horticultural and agricultural sectors. The burden that they and their

breakdown products place on the terrestrial and aquatic environments is unacceptable.

The application fails to provide a persuasive case for the introduction of the active ingredient

Mefentrifluconazole to control fungal cereal diseases. There is a lack of information provided

and the risk assessment has focused on the already approved active ingredient fluxapyroxad.

We reject that it is acceptable to state “mixture rules” instead of providing specific toxicity

values with respect to human and environmental health.

We are disappointed to read that the applicant fails to mention any form of Māori engagement,

instead stating that “no adverse effects on the natural resources of the flora, fauna, waterways,

land and culture of the indigenous Māori are expected.”

For these reasons, we oppose the introduction of Mefentrifluconazole to New Zealand.

Our decision to oppose the application is also premised on an assessment of the effects of “the

substance” in six key areas taking into account Ngai Tahu rights, interests, cultural values and

world views:

1. Te Ao Turoa (Encironment): The fungicide product will be applied through high volume

spraying either ground boom or aerial application but lacks detail regarding the potential

risks of wind drift where the spread of the fungicide was likely to end up on the ground and

bonded to topsoil particles resulting in sediment run-off leaching into the waterways.

Another potential risk is the aquatic toxicity impacting on taonga species such as, the

spawning inanga, kowaro and freshwater koura, mussels and aquatic plants.

2. Oranga (Economy): TRONT does not currently invest in horticultural crop farming but

individual Ngai Tahu crop farmers could benefit from the fungicide product.

3. Hauora (Public Health): Nga Papatipu Runanga continue to access and utilise natural

resources for mahinga kai and other uses. Any potential threat of the fungicide product

leaching into the waterways will impact on the health of whanau harvesting mahinga kai.

4. He Tangata (People and Communities): Whanau do access waterways and surrounding

environments for recreational purposes (ie, waka ama, swimming, sports), and as such,

whanau must be able to safely access areas free of toxins.

5. Kaitiakitanga (Guardianship): Ngai Tahu whānui, papatipu rūnanga need to be fully

informed on both the associated risks and potential gains of the fungicide product. The

BASF application lacks critical information on the broader impacts of soil micro biology

and other eco-toxicology values.

6. Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Treaty Principles): Whilst BASF did consult with the HSNO komiti,

the issues and concerns raised have not been addressed in their application.

Recommendation

This application should be declined and we wish to be heard in support of our submission.

SUBMISSION127534

2

Contents

1 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 1

2 Tāhuhu Korero (Introduction) ........................................................................................ 3

3 Statutory Obligations to Ngāi Tahu ................................................................................ 3

4 Description of Application APP203620 .......................................................................... 5

5 Position of Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu on Application APP203620 ............................... 5

6 Reasons for position on application APP203620 ........................................................... 5

Te Ao Tūroa (Environment) .................................................................................................. 5

Ōhanga (Economy) ................................................................................................................ 6

Hauora (Public Health) .......................................................................................................... 7

He Tāngata (People and Communities) ................................................................................. 7

Kaitiakitanga (Guardianship) ................................................................................................. 7

Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Treaty Principles) ................................................................................ 7

7 Conclusions........................................................................................................................ 8

8 Recommendation .............................................................................................................. 8

SUBMISSION127534

3

2 Tāhuhu Korero (Introduction)

Ngāi Tahu HSNO Kōmiti

The Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu HSNO Committee is mandated by Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu.

The members of the committee are appointed by Te Rūnanga based on their knowledge and

expertise in the areas of hazardous substances and new organisms.

Ngāi Tahu Values

All Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu activities are informed by the following values:

Whanaungatanga (family)

Respect, foster and maintain important relationships within the organisation, within the iwi and

within the community.

Manaakitanga (looking after our people)

Respect each other, iwi members and all others in accordance with our tikanga (customs).

Tohungatanga (expertise)

Pursue knowledge and ideas that will strengthen and grow Ngāi Tahu and our community.

Kaitiakitanga (stewardship)

Work actively to protect the people, environment, knowledge, culture, language and resources

important to Ngāi Tahu for future generations.

Tikanga (appropriate action)

Strive to ensure that Ngāi Tahu tikanga of is actioned and acknowledged in all of our outcomes.

Rangatiratanga (leadership)

Strive to maintain a high degree of personal integrity and ethical behaviour in all actions and

decisions we undertake.

3 Statutory obligations to Ngāi Tahu

This response is made on behalf of Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu (Te Rūnanga). Te Rūnanga is

statutorily recognised as the representative tribal body of Ngāi Tahu Whānui and was

established as a body corporate on 24th April 1996, under section 6 of Te Rūnanga o Ngāi

Tahu Act 1996 (the Act). We note the following relevant provisions of our constitutional

documents:

Section 3 of the Act: This Act binds the Crown and every person (including any body politic

or corporate) whose rights are affected by any provisions of this Act.

Section 15(1) of the Act: Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu shall be recognised for all purposes as

the representative of Ngāi Tahu Whānui.

The Charter of Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu (1993, as amended) constitutes Te Rūnanga as the

kaitiaki of the tribal interest.

Te Rūnanga respectfully requests that this response is accorded the status and weight due to

the tribal collective, Ngāi Tahu Whānui, currently comprising over 70,000 members registered

in accordance with section 8 of the Act.

SUBMISSION127534

4

Under the HSNO Act, the environmental and cultural health and well-being of Māori, and

Treaty of Waitangi outcomes and values, must be considered when making decisions about

introducing and using hazardous substances or new organisms into New Zealand.

Section 5(b) of the Act provides (amongst other things) for the:

“Maintenance and enhancement of the capacity of people and communities to provide for

their own economic, social and cultural well-being”.

Section 6(d) of the Act requires that the Environmental Protection Authority of New

Zealand (EPA), when exercising functions under the Act, take into account: “The

relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites,

wāhi tapu, valued flora and fauna, and other taonga”.

Section 8 of the Act requires that all persons exercising functions under the Act consider:

“…the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi” including the recognition of the special

relationship between the Crown and tangata whenua.

SUBMISSION127534

5

4 Description of Application APP203620

Application APP203766 was submitted by BASF New Zealand Limited to import Revystar

Fungicide containing 100g/L Mefentrifluconazole and 50 g/L Fluxapyroxad. Fluxapyroxad is

already approved for use in New Zealand, but mefentrifluconazole has not yet been approved

in any other country.

Mefentrifluconazole is used to control a range of fungal cereal diseases; including brown rust,

powdery mildew, and strip rust in wheat; leaf rust, ramularia leaf, awn spot, scald, powdery

mildew and net blotch in barley; as well as fungal diseases in triticale ryecorn and oats. The

minimum purity of Mefentrifluconazole in Revystar is listed as 97% w/v. Revystar Fungicide

will be applied “up to the end of flowering” at an interval of 21 days with a maximum of two

applications. The applicant states that Revystar will be applied through high volume spraying;

either ground boom or aerial application.

5 Position of Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu on Application APP203620

Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu holds concerns over an already widespread and extensive use of toxic

agrichemicals in the horticultural and agricultural sectors. The burden that they and their

breakdown products place on the terrestrial and aquatic environments is unacceptable. The

benefits supporting the introduction of any new agrichemicals must therefore be clearly and

explicitly spelt out. At the same time, the risks must be fully documented, and measures taken

to mitigate their impact.

The application fails to provide a persuasive case for the introduction of the active ingredient

Mefentrifluconazole to control fungal cereal diseases. We find the lack of information provided

in this application troubling, with most of the risk assessment focused on the already approved

active ingredient fluxapyroxad. We reject that it is acceptable to state “mixture rules” instead

of providing specific toxicity values with respect to human and environmental health.

We are disappointed to read that the applicant fails to mention any form of Māori engagement,

instead stating that “no adverse effects on the natural resources of the flora, fauna, waterways,

land and culture of the indigenous Māori are expected.” The applicant did engage with the Ngāi

Tahu HSNO Kōmiti on this application and we raised multiple concerns with them. Rather than

address these significant concerns the applicant has chosen to act as if such a consultation never

occurred.

For these reasons, we oppose the introduction of Mefentrifluconazole to New Zealand. We

wish to be heard in support of our application.

6 Reasons for position on application APP203620

We approach this application under a Kaupapa Māori lens, that includes assessment of the

effects of “the substance” on six key areas. These include Te Aō Tūroa, Ōhanga, Hauora, He

Tāngata, Tikanga ā iwi, Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

Te Ao Tūroa (Environment)

Te Ao Tūroa refers to the natural world, encompassing taonga species, te mana o te wai (all

water bodies; ie: sea, freshwater, wetlands, estuaries), ngahere (native forest, bush), ecosystems

SUBMISSION127534

6

and biodiversity. There are a significant number of fragile taonga species, and their habitats

located in waterways and surrounding areas, which must be protected.

The fungicide product will be applied through high volume spraying either ground boom or

aerial application. In their pre-application consultation phase BASF did provide the HSNO

committee with a confidential briefing document and were challenged on the lack of detail

regarding the potential risks identified. For example, there was concern for the potential risk

of wind drift where the spread of the fungicide was likely to end up on the ground and bonded

to topsoil particles resulting in sediment run-off leaching into the waterways. There was the

potential risk of aquatic toxicity impacting on taonga species such as, the spawning inanga,

kowaro and freshwater koura, mussels and aquatic plants such as, watercress. We were

disappointed that BASF gave no mention in their application of the meeting held with the

HSNO committee and the potential risks and concerns raised or any attempt to address them.

Instead, BASF showed a lack of comprehension and awareness of the risks by stating, “BASF

do not foresee any pathway by which the product Revystar fungicide will enter traditional food

sources or mahinga kai of Maori given its targeted uses on cereal crops.”

During their pre-application consultation with the HSNO Kōmiti, BASF supplied toxicology

data on Mefentrifluconazole. This included information on the environmental degradation of

mefentrifluconazole as well as specific human and aquatic toxicology information.

Mefentrifluconazole is not degraded to >70% through any pathways over a 28 day period and

further testing reveals that it has a half-life of 107 days. Given the longevity of the chemical

in the environment we have significant concerns regarding bioaccumulation through

subsequent sprayings and sediment run-off.

Testing conducted by EU regulators showed that Mefentrifluconazole has significant aquatic

toxicity (Oncorhynchus mykiss = EC50 0.532 mg/L, Daphnia magna = EC50 0.944 mg/L,

Skeletonema costatum = EC50 0.679 mg/L). We are therefore concerned that BASF has chosen

not to state these values in their submission, but rather has chosen to hide them behind “mixture

rules”. Additionally, no studies available look at the combined toxicological effects of

mefentrifluconazole and fluxapyroxad. We therefore have significant concerns about potential

synergism between these active ingredients, creating a significantly more toxic product than

initially predicted.

Furthermore, in their submission BASF states that Revystar will be applied “according to good

agricultural practise” and that “commercial crops will be sprayed according to label

instructions”. Good agricultural practise is not a recognised standard and does not replace the

necessity of buffer zones. In pre-consultation BASF stated that these would be a minimum of

12m, however, there is no mention of buffer zones in their submission. We support helicopter

only aerial spraying, due the superior control this method offers over spray drift mitigation.

Additionally, while they refer to the label instructions in their submission, no example of these

instructions is given.

Ōhanga (Economy)

The Ngāi Tahu economy allows for self-determination of Papatipu Rūnanga in the realisation

of their aspirations. TRONT does not currently invest in horticultural crop farming but there

might be individual Ngai Tahu crop farmers who could benefit from the fungicide product.

SUBMISSION127534

7

Hauora (Public Health)

The health and wellbeing of Ngāi Tahu whanau is interconnected with the health of the

environment, in that mahinga kai (traditional food), and rongoa (traditional medicine) sources

need to be free of toxins. Taonga – tuku – iho are prized resources passed down through the

generations which Nga Papatipu Runanga in particular, continue to access and utilise for

mahinga kai, medicinal purposes, for producing woven products and other uses. Any potential

threat of the fungicide product leaching into the waterways will have a detrimental impact on

the health of the whanau harvesting mahinga kai. Buffer zones of riparian planting must be

maintained where land is located next to waterways to help reduce the risks.

He Tāngata (People and Communities)

The broader social influences on a community which might include; recreational spaces,

employment, housing, land usage, and other areas. Whanau do access waterways and

surrounding environments for recreational purposes (ie, waka ama, swimming, sports), and as

such, whanau must be able to safely access areas free of toxins.

Kaitiakitanga (Guardianship)

Kāitiakitanga is about our responsibility as Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu, both tribally and in our

communities, to assess the cultural acceptability of a proposed activity. We are a part of the

landscape and therefore have a responsibility to ensure its sustenance for this generation and

for those to come.

The relationship between kaitiaki and taonga can be layered and complex. Different kaitiaki

have different degrees of responsibility for taonga such as the kaitiaki of plants and mātauranga

associated with them. The kaitiaki relationship can relate to the sustainability of the taonga

itself, or it its components within the taonga that make it up, or to species, biota and

environment surrounding the taonga.

Ngai Tahu whānui, papatipu rūnanga need to be fully informed on both the associated risks

and potential gains of the fungicide product to make an informed decision. The application

submitted by BASF lacks critical information, analysis of the broader impacts of soil micro

biology and other eco-toxicology values.

Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Treaty Principles)

The Crown has an obligation to honour the Waitangi Treaty principles of Partnership,

Participation and Protection.

The Ngai Tahu Settlement Act explicitly lists flora and fauna that are considered taonga to the

iwi. This is not an intended to be an exhaustive list, as any organism sourced within Ngai Tahu

takiwā may be considered taonga, and at a minimum require some level of consultation.

Consultation with Treaty partner TRONT/ nga papatipu rūnanga in relation to their taonga and

the proposed application requires contact in the earliest stages of the application process

through to its submission and, if approved, mutual agreement on conditions and ongoing

monitoring mechanisms to ensure beneficial outcomes are achieved.

SUBMISSION127534

8

Whilst BASF did take steps to consult with the HSNO komiti before submitting their

application, it was evident the representative for BASF was struggling to understand Maori

cultural values and Maori worldviews. BASF appears to have ignored the feedback by not

making any reference in their application and worse, marginalising the importance of

participation and engagement with indigenous Maori, Ngai Tahu/ papatipu rūnanga in general.

7 Conclusions

The active ingredient mefentrifluconazole has an incredibly long half-life and this, coupled

with moderate aquatic toxicity, raises significant concerns of the impact on aquatic taonga

species.

The application provides little to no information to submitters, rather the applicant has

chosen to put all pertinent information into the confidential appendix

We do not accept that applicants should be allowed to state “mixture rules” in lieu of

providing biochemical and toxicology data for the novel active ingredient. Submitters

should be given sufficient information to assess the impact of new applications, and

without prior knowledge, we would have found it impossible to comment on this

application.

The submitter took steps to consult with Māori through the Ngāi Tahu HSNO Kōmiti.

Instead of answering the questions that the Kōmiti raised, either in person or through this

application, the submitter instead chose to act as if such a meeting never happened. We

thoroughly reject that this product will have “No adverse effects on the natural resources

of the flora, fauna, waterways, land and culture of the indigenous Māori”. The submitter

was in fact told that the environmental impacts of the product will impact on tangata

whenua.

We do not support this application and wish for it to be declined on the above stated

grounds.

8 Recommendation

This application should be declined and we wish to be heard in support of our submission.

SUBMISSION127534