Exports of basmati rice to the US, one of the key buyers of the Indian variety, have been hit due to presence of excessive pesticide residues bringing down the export price of the grain by 23.5 per cent. India had faced a similar situation last year but that time it was due to the presence of khapra beetle in the export consignments.
Speaking to FnB News, a source from the All India Rice Exporters Association (AIREA) revealed, "The export price of basmati fell from Rs 52,718 / tonne in 2010-11 to Rs 40,381 / tonne in 2011-12 and non-basmati from Rs 40,849 to Rs 11,586. Thus a fall of 23.5 per cent and 71.6 per cent respectively"
An official from the Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA) confirmed, "The trade with US has been hit hard after several US consignments were rejected due to banned pesticide traces, recently."
The official, however, added that this was not the first rejection and that the issue was being discussed for a year. The USFDA (United States Food & Drug Administration) had rejected basmati shipments to the US after identifying around eight chemicals in different consignments due to traces of pesticides namely bavistan, isoprothiolane and tricyclazole.
He explained, "We have been discussing this issue with the USFDA and trying to solve the problem as it hindered the trade and also it was notable that the pesticide traces found in basmati were not merely in legal compliance with the US and not because they were harmful for human consumption."
According to him, tricyclazole is a widely used pesticide in many rice growing countries like India, Thailand, China and Japan and that basmati rice was mainly exported to the Gulf countries. While the European union and Japan allow minimum residue levels (MRL) of as high as 1 and 3 parts per million (ppm), the US pesticide residue norm is 0.01 ppm.
He added that the presence of tricyclazole in basmati grain was within the level of 0.02-0.04 ppm set by the Indian government and also in tune with the WTO (World Trade Organisation) standards.
Meanwhile, the AIREA source informed, "The exporters were now pre-testing their produce and exporting. Also efforts have been made to see if the exporter could make some modification in the processing which would reduce the residue. However, extensive research and discussions with scientists concluded that there was no post-harvest means of residue reduction."
Nevertheless, the problem had been discussed with bodies such as USFDA and FDA, Delhi, and setting up a screening mechanism was stressed.
According to AIREA, it is only the farmer who can control the presence of residue by following GAP. There was a need to emphasise that the farmer had to use pesticides properly if he did not want his produce to be rejected by the exporter. It meant that the farmer had to spray the pesticide before flowering and not after harvesting.
Further, "A committee would be set up from Punjab and Haryana and other states in the country to look into the situation soon," he pointed out.
