Tulip tug of war over European pesticide rules

updated 12:45 p.m. ET Oct. 17, 2008

THE HAGUE, Netherlands - A Dutch farmers' organization has raised the stakes over new Europe-wide restrictions on pesticides, saying the limits could lead to the demise of the country's iconic tulip industry.

"Let us keep using those pesticides we can't do without until we can find alternatives," said Jaap van Wenum, a spokesman for the Dutch Agriculture and Horticulture Organization. "If we're given time ... we can keep this industry in the Netherlands."

EU agriculture ministers agreed in June on draft proposals to tighten the use of pesticides across Europe, banning those that cause cancer or pose unnecessary health risks to humans.

Dutch Agriculture Ministry spokesman Murco Mijnlieff said the Dutch government supports the draft proposals agreed by governments in June because it gives farmers time to find alternatives.

But the European Parliament has proposed an even wider ban.

"If the European Parliament proposals become law, it's a problem ... but I don't expect that," Mijnlieff said.

The new regulations would affect most crops, but tulip farmers said tulips and other bulbs would be particularly hard-hit because pesticides are used to prevent diseases that can prevent bulbs from flowering.

"If a sugar beet is small, it can still be sold, if a tulip bulb is too small it cannot produce a flower" and is worthless, said van Wenum.

Spring fields of blooming tulips and other flowers are a major tourist draw in the Netherlands and sale of the flowers and bulbs is worth hundreds of millions of dollars each year.

The European Commission, the EU's executive body, must ultimately implement such regulations and no decision has been made on which proposal to adopt. A vote in the European Parliament is expected in January.

Kathalijne Buitenweg, a European lawmaker with the Dutch Green Left party welcomes the pesticide ban, saying it will help prevent chemicals that can cause cancer, affect DNA and cause infertility from ending up in drinking water.

"On this point, we have to chose for our health," she said. "As far as I am concerned, protecting people and the environment outweighs short-term economic interests."

More from msnbc.com World Blog: Bracing for climate-change migrants Bank bailout will cost taxpayers billions Scoop: Kate says kids 'sobbing' at loss of cameras Brazilian police accused of killing 11,000 since 2003 Send us your salutes to troops, friends, kin Giving back for the holiday season? Tell us how On Twitter: Breaking news updates | Weird and wild

MORE FROM ENVIRONMENT

Environment Section Front

NYT: Millions in U.S. drink dirty water South Pole trek: White out, sticky snow U.N.: Decade likely warmest on record Life, death and climate in Bangladesh Climate talks open with pressure on U.S. EPA: Greenhouse gases are harmful Wolf recovery at crossroads in Southwest Timber program becomes vast entitlement Promises, not treaty, likely at climate summit Mass climate rally in London streets Environment Section Front   Add Environment headlines to your news reader: