New Herbicide Restrictions Raise On-Farm Risk Questions

For many broadacre, mixed farming and horticultural businesses, the decision is practical as well as regulatory. Paraquat and diquat remain important tools for weed control, particularly where resistance management and timely paddock preparation are critical. However, the APVMA has moved to reduce acute exposure risks for handlers and environmental risks for wildlife by sharply lowering general maximum application rates, phasing out backpack sprayers, requiring enclosed mixing and loading systems, and strengthening personal protective equipment requirements. Existing stock will be phased out over two years, giving growers time to adjust chemical programs and machinery set-ups.

From an insurance perspective, this is a reminder that farm risk is not limited to fire, storm, machinery breakdown or livestock loss. Chemical use can sit across public liability, environmental liability, worker safety, contractor management and farm asset protection. If a spray incident affects neighbouring crops, waterways, livestock, employees or visitors, insurers may look closely at whether chemicals were stored, mixed, applied and recorded in line with label directions and legal requirements.

That makes the transition period important. Farmers should review chemical registers, spray records, staff training, contractor agreements and storage procedures before the new conditions become part of day-to-day operations. Where enclosed loading systems or different application technology are needed, there may also be capital expenditure to plan for. Those upgrades may change machinery values, operational risk and the way a farm should review its sums insured.

The decision also raises a broader point for farm insurance in Australia: compliance and cover are increasingly connected. A policy may provide strong protection on paper, but exclusions, conditions and disclosure obligations can matter when a claim involves regulated chemicals or work health and safety issues. Producers using paraquat, diquat or other high-risk farm inputs should speak with their insurer or farm insurance brokers about how chemical liability, pollution events, spray drift, contractors and employee exposure are treated under their current arrangements.

For farm businesses already under pressure from input costs and seasonal uncertainty, the APVMA ruling is another prompt to keep risk management current. The farmers best placed to respond will be those who treat chemical compliance, operational planning and insurance review as one connected part of protecting the enterprise.