Mr. Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to speak on this debate which is very important for our producers in western Canada.
During two previous debates, on September 19 and October 22 respectively, the government fully described, for the information of the hon. member for Lakeland and all members of the House, how and, more important, why a decision was made concerning the availability of liquid strychnine concentrate for use in the formulation of strychnine baits on farms.
I will describe, step by step, the actions that the government has taken to investigate and find solutions to the problems that farmers have been experiencing with the ready to use formulation of strychnine.
However, first I must reply to the hon. member's allegations that we are hiding information about this decision. He stated in the October 22 debate that there has to be more and that he had not received all the goods.
We have fully disclosed all information regarding the decision taken by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada on strychnine in 1992. There is nothing to hide, no secret studies and no undisclosed data. We are working together with the provinces and with the partners to resolve this major challenge for our farmers and for our ranchers.
As was explained during the last debate on strychnine, it was impossible to have predicted the poor performance of the ready to use strychnine baits prior to the restrictions put in place in 1992.
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada took very reasonable action to protect the health and safety of all Canadians. That decision was made with every expectation that safer, ready to use baits available to farmers would prove as effective as the baits prepared by the farmers from liquid strychnine to control the gopher pest. The concentration of the baits was the same in both cases.
The reason action had to be taken to restrict the availability of liquid strychnine was that it was implicated in the intentional and unintentional poisonings of non-target animals, including dogs and wildlife. There were also some suspected human suicides linked to this.
The decision on strychnine was not taken lightly. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada recognized that these changes would involve some minor increased costs to users who previously used their own grain for bait, but would now have to purchase pre-packaged grain treated with strychnine.
Prior to the withdrawal, a two year consultation was carried out with those provinces where strychnine products were largely used, that is, in Alberta, British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. This consultation involved the western forum and the then Canadian Association of Pest Control Officials.
However, let me emphasize that no formal economic impact studies were done because it was reasonable to expect that the bait products remaining on the market, which contained the same or higher concentrations of strychnine, would control gophers in the same way that baits prepared by the farmer from the liquid strychnine concentrate had. The problems with the ready to use bait came to light only after several years of use.
Again, let me underline the fact that strychnine has a very high acute toxicity and it acts quickly on the central nervous system causing frequent violent convulsions which eventually lead to death through respiratory failure. There is no effective antidote available for poisoning from strychnine. The safety implications of allowing access to this type of product in Canada cannot be ignored.
In Alberta, the number of accidental strychnine poisoning has been steadily declining over the past seven years. According to the provincial agri-food surveillance systems lab in Edmonton, there are now 10 to 15 cases a year. In Saskatchewan 20 to 25 strychnine dog poisonings and the occasional strychnine wildlife poisoning are confirmed each year, according to the Western College of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Saskatchewan.
I want to point out that poisoning wildlife and domestic animals using bait laced with strychnine is illegal, not only under the Pest Control Products Act but also under the cruelty to animals section of the criminal code, as well as provincial wildlife acts.
Canada is not alone in having taken action on strychnine. All above ground uses have been prohibited in the United States since 1988. It is illegal to use strychnine for pest control in most European countries and its use is prohibited by the Berne convention on the conservation of European wildlife and natural habitats.
In its initial response to growers' concerns about ineffective strychnine baits, the Pest Management Regulatory Agency, PMRA, made an extensive analysis of the ready to use products currently being marketed to find out whether they met the level of strychnine guaranteed, that is, 0.4% strychnine. This is the concentration that has been shown to provide an acceptable level of control.
This analysis confirmed that the concentration of strychnine present in the ready to use baits is the same or even slightly greater than that found previously in baits prepared by mixing the concentrated liquid strychnine product with farm available grain. It was then necessary to look for other explanations for the poor performance of these products, such as baiting procedures, environmental conditions affecting the bait and the fact that some of the gophers just did not like the bait.
To investigate these possibilities, the following actions have been taken: The PMRA upgraded the labels of all registered strychnine products to provide clearer instruction on the need to carefully locate and time bait placements to ensure optimum performance. These use instructions were developed in consultation with the provinces.
From 1998 to 1999, registrants were required to submit quality control results on several batches of their product to the PMRA for review prior to their product being distributed into the marketplace for the upcoming use season.
In 1998-99 the province of Alberta and the Alberta Cattle Commission each carried out efficiency studies designed to explore the relative attractiveness of various carrier baits. Based on the findings of these studies, which showed some indication that canary seed was preferred to other bait, in 2000 the PMRA granted a research permit to Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development to conduct further field trials on strychnine treated canary seed bait. The results of the trials done in 2000 showed that bait freshness and the type of bait seemed to be important considerations in achieving good bait uptake and successful gopher control.
In 2001 the PMRA granted another research permit to AAFRD to conduct additional field trials to compare the effectiveness of commercially available, ready to use 0.4% strychnine bait to freshly prepared 0.4% strychnine bait, the same product. The results of these trials again showed that bait freshness appeared to be very important.
In July 2000, staff from the PMRA visited sites in Alberta to better understand the nature of the gopher problem and have discussions on improving control measures. To further the state of knowledge on alternatives to strychnine, the PMRA is in contact with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and a number of northern U.S. states to discuss the problem of gophers in various regions, as well as the available control methods.
The U.S. uses anti-coagulant baits for gopher control and they appear to be effective. Let me stress that these anti-coagulants control products are also registered for gopher control in Canada, along with others such as zinc phosphide and sulphur gas based products.
Unfortunately, strychnine seems to be preferred by growers here. The alternative products may appear to be more inconvenient and labour intensive to apply than strychnine products but the PMRA believes that further study needs to be done to see if their use could be enhanced.
In recognition of the serious nature of the gopher control problem in western Canada, the PMRA also granted emergency registrations this summer in Saskatchewan and Alberta. In this highly restricted access program, premixed fresh bait product at 0.4% was made available to growers under the supervision of provincial officials.
On November 16 the PMRA met with Alberta and Saskatchewan pesticide regulatory officials to review the further results of research and to assess this summer's emergency registration program.
Officials will discuss whether the access program was effective and whether it provided reasonable availability while mitigating any possible adverse effects of allowing liquid strychnine concentrate to be used to make fresh bait. Another topic to be discussed at this meeting will be the use of currently registered alternative products to strychnine.
To sum up, members should be assured that the concerns of farmers regarding strychnine have been listened to. There is nothing being hidden from hon. members. They have indeed received all the goods and progress is being made to find a resolution to this very serious and complex problem.
