Three government departments have been ordered by the Gauteng High Court to pay damages to Limpopo farmers whose crops were damaged by the departments’ invasive alien plant control operations, and to cover their legal costs.
By Amelia Genis, senior journalist at African Farming and Landbouweekblad
The case stems from an incident in which irrigation dams on the farm Hartbeesfontein near Alma were contaminated when a contractor from the Department of Environmental Affairs’ Working for Water programme illegally used a toxic substance to combat invasive alien plants in 2016.
Petrus Johannes Barnard, the first plaintiff in the case, reached an agreement with Working for Water in 2015 to have invasive alien plants eradicated on his farm, Hartbeesfontein. Although the work done at the time was carried out to the satisfaction of all parties, the complaint arises from the follow-up control operations carried out in 2016, leading to the destruction of tobacco plants that had been irrigated with contaminated water.
Barnard died in 2022, but the executors of his estate took his place as the first plaintiff. He and the second plaintiff, Nicolaas Röntgen, a sharecropper, grew pumpkins, watermelons and tobacco, and kept cattle and sheep.
Warning On Herbicide Label
The herbicide that was used, Kaput 100 Gel (reg. no. L8855, Act 36 of 1947), contains the active ingredients picloram and triclopyr. The experts who testified in court indicated that picloram has a longer half-life than triclopyr and is therefore more likely to be detected in the soil and water.
The gel was applied in the main irrigation dam’s catchment area and on invasive plants in the dam. Water from this dam was used to irrigate tobacco seedlings that had been planted out. Picloram is extremely harmful to broadleaf plants such as tobacco, pumpkins, peppers and tomatoes.
The use of pesticides such as Kaput 100 Gel is strictly regulated by the Fertilizers, Farm Feeds, Agricultural Remedies and Stock Remedies Act (Act 36 of 1947), and supporting regulations.
Moreover, the label on Kaput 100 Gel includes very clear restrictions on its use near vulnerable crops, dams and rivers. Any deviation from the instructions on the label is a violation of Act 36 of 1947.
In addition to the damage to the tobacco seedlings, the water in the irrigation dam is also unusable for the foreseeable future.
The court ruled that the defendants must compensate the plaintiffs for their past and future damages resulting from the picloram contamination. The value of the compensation has yet to be determined.
Also read: Crop production: How to use pesticides safely
Safe Use Of Toxins
It is clear from the court ruling that the safe use of toxins, especially dangerous ones such as picloram, is a significant problem. Experts who testified on behalf of the plaintiffs and defendants all emphasised the duty that rests on users of the substances to study the labels on toxins and to be aware of the possible consequences of misuse.
Dr Johan van der Waals of Real IPM, one of the experts who testified on behalf of the defendants, conceded that the use of picloram with disregard of the instructions on the label is a problem.
Another expert, Dr Gerhard Verdoorn, operations and stewardship manager at CropLife South Africa, said he had trained contractors in the past, but no longer does so, and that neither the contractor nor the Working for Water project coordinator in the case was registered as a pest control operator as required by law.
