7 Amendments of Elisabeth KÖSTINGER related to 2016/2903(RSP)
Amendment 24 #
Recital C
C. whereas biological pesticides are generally understood to be pesticidelant protection products based on microorganisms, botanicals or semiochemicals (such as pheromones); whereas the present regulatory framework for pesticides (plant protection products)1a does not differentiate between biological and synthetic chemical plant protection products; _________________ 1a The concept of 'pesticides' also covers biocidal products to which this resolution does not apply.
Amendment 34 #
Recital D
D. whereas biological low-risk pesticides may constitute a viable alternative to conventional plant protection products, both for conventional and for organic farmers, and contribute to a more sustainable agriculture; whereas some biological pesticides possess new modes of action, which is beneficial with a view to evolving resistance to conventional pesticidelant protection products and limits the impact on non- target organisms; whereas biological low- risk pesticides should be the preferred option for non-professional users and home gardening;
Amendment 37 #
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas, in order to adequately meet food and feed needs, the use of plant protection products is necessary and whereas the precautionary principle2a is applied in the procedure for authorising such products and their active substances; _________________ 2aArticle 1(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009
Amendment 69 #
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that farmers need to have a bigger toolbox at hand to protect their crops and to decide which measure will most sustainably protect their crops; therefore encourages wider use of various alternatives to synthetic chemical pesticidelant protection products, including biological pesticides, as a component of integrated pest management;
Amendment 80 #
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that in order to promote the development of new biological low-risk pesticides, the evaluation of efficacy in comparison with existing chemical pesticidelant protection products should be designed in a way not to hinder their development and market entry;
Amendment 86 #
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines the need to engage in a wider public debate about making biological low-risk alternatives to conventional pesticidelant protection products available to farmers and growers, and the necessity to educate and propagate knowledge on the need to ensure sustainability of crop protection, in order also to draw attention to the need for plant protection products in food and feed production;
Amendment 127 #
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights the need for a definition of “biological plant protection product”, covering plant protection products the active substance of which is a microorganism or a molecule existing in nature, either obtained from a natural process or synthetized as identical to the natural molecule, in contrast to “synthetic chemical plant protection products”, meaning plant protection products the active substance of which is a synthetic molecule not existing in nature; proposes that it should be possible, on less stringent terms, to authorise and use repellents and products to protect against browsing whose active substances are molecules which occur in nature and are either obtained from a natural process or synthesised as identical to the natural molecule;3a _________________ 3a Some products which are designed to deter browsing animals do so by means of their mechanical effect (in a similar way to a fence - e.g. quartz sand) or their odour. These products should be subject to authorisation and use on less stringent terms.