GM Crop Farm Scale Evaluations:
Scientific Steering Committee Minutes
6 July 2001
| Attending: | Members: | Professor Chris Pollock (Chairman) (IGER) Dr David Gibbons (RSPB) Mr Jim Orson (Morely Research Centre) |
| Secretariat: | Dr Linda Smith (Defra) Dr Andrew Wakeham-Dawson (Defra) (Secretary) Mr James Johnstone (Defra) |
|
| Assessors: | Dr Roger Turner (SCIMAC) Dr Rosie Waterhouse (SE) |
|
| Contractors: | Contractors: Dr Les Firbank (CEH) Dr Matthew Heard (CEH) Dr Peter Rothery (CEH) Dr David Brooks (IACR) |
|
| Apologies were received from Prof Mick Crawley, Dr Alastair Burn and Dr Nick Sotherton | ||
Summary
The Scientific Steering Committee overseeing the Farm Scale Evaluations of GMHT crops met on Friday 6 July 2001 at the Institute of Arable Crops Research (IACR), Boom's Barn.
The Scientific Steering Committee provided the following advice to Ministers:
- The Committee has reviewed the progress of the 2001 spring round of research and is pleased to report that despite wet sowing conditions, sites are now drilled and the crops established. Data collection is underway.
- The Committee was pleased to find that the target number of sites for winter oilseed rape has been met and exceeded by SCIMAC. SCIMAC has provided a pool from which sites can be selected for the second autumn sowing round of the Farm Scale Evaluation programme.
- The Committee has considered and approved the distribution of sites for winter oilseed rape selected by the contractors from the pool submitted by SCIMAC. There were, however, some slight inequalities in the distribution of sites and the Committee recommended these be addressed in the third year.
- The Committee considered the number of sites selected by the researchers. The researchers had initially selected 25 sites for the autumn round but advised that there were further suitable sites available. The Committee asked the researchers to consider this pool of sites and identify five more for selection this year. The overall number of sites recommended for the autumn round would therefore be up to 30.
- The Committee continued to emphasise the importance of meeting its requirements with regard to adequate:
- geographical distribution of study sites,
- representation of less intensive production systems, and
- Total number of study sites, to meet the original aims and objectives of the Farm Scale Evaluations.
- The Committee advised that the timing of the overall site selection and notification process should be arranged so that it does not affect the good agricultural practice involved in the cultivation of the FSE crops.
Introduction
The Chairman thanked IACR for hosting the event and for showing the Committee the nearby Farm Scale Evaluation site, and outlined the purposes for the meeting. These were:
- to discuss the progress of the Farm Scale Evaluations (FSE)
- to consider the winter oilseed rape site selection made by the research consortium from the pool of sites offered by SCIMAC for the autumn 2001 round of the FSE, and provide advice to Ministers
- to discuss the enhanced site assessment proposed by Defra
- to discuss how to take forward the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) research project; and
- to discuss the timing and progress of FSE research papers.
Update on progress
The Research Consortium reported that despite difficulties associated with the Foot and Mouth crisis and the unusually wet weather this year, research was progressing satisfactorily at 82 spring sown sites and 21 winter sown sites.
FSE research papers
The Consortium thanked the Committee for their comments on drafts of the 'overview' and 'invertebrate protocol' papers and reported that they intended to submit these papers to the Journal of Applied Ecology. In addition, the Consortium reported that a number of other specific protocol papers were nearing completion for review by the Committee. It was agreed that the Consortium would submit these papers, via the Secretariat, to the relevant Committee subgroups, rather than the full Committee, for detailed review in the near future. However, these papers would also be circulated to the full Committee for informal consideration and feedback if appropriate. By contrast, all Committee Members would review drafts of the major results papers as they became available and the final versions would be formally approved before submission.
Selection of sites for autumn 2001
The Consortium reported that they had selected 25 sites (with further sites held in reserve) from the pool of prospective winter oilseed rape sites provided by SCIMAC. The Committee was pleased to note that there was an improvement on the autumn 2000 site distribution in the number of sites offered in northern and southeast England. However, the Committee noted that it was still important for further sites to be found in south-east Scotland and north, south-west and south-east England if the overall distribution of FSE winter oilseed rape sites over the three years was to be representative of the current geographic distribution of commercial winter oilseed rape production. It was noted that the practical difficulties arising from the Foot and Mouth outbreak had made it difficult for SCIMAC to secure sites in south-west England despite interest from farmers there.
The Consortium reported that questionnaire assessment of the 25 short-listed winter oilseed rape sites and the reserve sites showed that there was a good range of farming intensity, representing the range of winter oilseed rape production systems in Britain. In particular, herbicide application data for oilseed rape on the farms showed that they were representative of the range of commercial herbicide management regimes. The Biodiversity scores similarly showed a range of diverse wildlife conservation management practices on the farms, with a good representation of farms where steps had been taken to improve biodiversity.
The Committee discussed the number of sites. It agreed that between 60 and 75 winter oilseed rape sites were needed over the three years of the study and that as a result it would be expected that there should be about 25 sites per year. However, the Committee considered that as additional suitable sites were available they should be accepted and recommended that an additional five of the most suitable reserve sites should be included in the original selection of 25 sites. This would allow the loss of four sites in autumn 2000 to be accounted for. The Committee approved the Consortium's selection of the 25 short-listed sites and five additional reserve sites, and made a recommendation to Ministers accordingly.
Forage maize programme
The Consortium reported that they had data from 12 sites in 2000 and were collecting data from 25 sites this year (2001). This meant that 23-38 sites would be required next year (2002) to meet the target of 60-75 maize sites over the three-year programme. The Consortium highlighted that geographic distribution of sites would also be important and that further sites would be needed in south and southwest England to ensure that the distribution of FSE maize sites represented the distribution of current commercial maize production. The Committee recommended that provision of sites for next year (2002) should focus on the distribution of sites in south and south-west England and aim to offer a sufficient pool from which between 23-38 suitable sites could be selected. The Committee noted the efforts made by SCIMAC in offering the number of sites for the 2001 round and the difficulties Foot and Mouth had posed to the provision of sites in south-west England.
Enhanced FSE site assessment by Defra
The Secretariat explained there would be an enhanced assessment of proposed FSE sites in autumn 2001. However, this site assessment was concerned with ensuring that sites met the conditions of the official consent to plant the FSE crops and would not replace any of the Committee's functions as it would only involve the sites already selected on scientific grounds by the Consortium. The enhanced assessment will involve a two-stage (desk study followed by field visits) process whereby both a regulatory assessment and an assessment of compliance with the code of practice produced by SCIMAC would be carried out on sites approved by the Committee. Assessments will be made publicly available. The Committee endorsed this approach.
BTO research
The Secretariat explained that they had received three research reports from the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO), which had been circulated among Committee and Consortium members. The Committee asked the Secretariat to arrange for discussions with relevant Committee Members about further analysis of the BTO's data to be carried out. This would be with a view to advising the full Committee (at its next meeting) whether any additional work was required in this area. It was agreed that Dr David Gibbons would take the lead on behalf of the Committee on this work.
AOB
The Committee advised that the timing of the overall FSE site selection and notification process should be arranged so that it does not affect the good agricultural practice involved in the cultivation of the FSE crops.
The next meeting of the SSC will be on 1 November 2001.
The meeting closed at 15.15 hours.
GM Policy and Regulation Unit, Defra
Ashdown House, 123 Victoria street, London, SW1E 6DE
Page published 10 October
2001;
Page last modified
25 February, 2003