The main problem: the insect suppression programme, which is targeted at certain types of mosquito, is ineffective, also harmful, and the regulations about its implementation are largely ignored.
BACKGROUND
In Croatia every summer massive amounts of lethal insecticides are sprayed across most of the country as part of the campaign to kill off adult mosquitoes. The spraying is done from road vehicles or aeroplanes, with very little regard for the safety of humans, animals or the environment. This is part of the Ministry of Health's drive to prevent illnesses borne by certain types of mosquito and is laid down in the law for 'Protecting the Population from Infectious Illnesses' (Zakon o zaštiti pučantsva od zaraznih bolesti, in Croatian). While the Ministry has formulated the law, responsibility for carrying out an annual programme for suppressing insects is delegated to the Croatian Institute for Public Health (Article 5 in the law / članak 5. u Zakonu); the responsibility is further delegated to the Regional Public Health Institutes and passed on to the local authorities who select registered companies to carry out the programme requirements.
The Regional Public Health Institutes publish two documents every year setting out in some detail the rules governing the national programme for pest suppression : 'The Programme of Measures for Compulsory Preventive Disinfection, Insect and Vermin Suppression' and 'The Implementation Plan for Compulsory Preventive Insect and Vermin Suppression'. Local authorities are the end-users who have to enact and finance the programme.
THE PROBLEMS
1. THE LAWS AND REGULATIONS ARE NOT RESPECTED
1.1. Various laws state that using chemical biocides is one of several methods for suppressing unwanted insects, described as "mechanical, physical, biological/organic and chemical". The measures include using biological /organic substances to reduce mosquito numbers and promoting natural predators, in particular controlling mosquito larvae through the introduction of Mosquitofish in standing water such as pools and lakes. Chemical biocides should be the last resort, used as the follow-up to larvicidal actions.
1.2. What happens in practice: the use of chemical biocidal insecticides has in most cases become the first, often the only choice for suppressing the target mosquitoes. It is the worst possible scenario!
2. BIOCIDES ARE KNOWN TO BE DANGEROUS
(1)"Biocidal products are necessary for the control of organisms that are harmful to human or animal health and for organisms that cause damage to natural or manufactured materials. However, biocidal products can pose risks to humans, animals and the environment due to their intrinsic properties and associated use patterns."
2.2. These concerns are reiterated in all the Croatian regulatory documents, for instance the Croatian Programme of Measures NN 128/2011-2569. (in Croatian), which states in translation: "Adulticide actions represent significant danger for all non-target night-time insects, and indirectly for their predators in the area of the adulticide action or in a wider area over which toxic aerosols are carried by the wind, which, taking into account their poor efficiency and the broad spectrum of their action, represents significant ecological damage." III 4.3.2. (c).
2.3. The list of biocides with their possible adverse effects known to have been used for adulticide insect suppression throughout Croatia in the last few years reveals immediately just how dangerous these substances are for human health and the environment. Yet they have been sprayed indiscriminately from road vehicles and even aeroplanes year after year for regular repeated 'fogging' and 'misting' actions, supposedly against specific target types of mosquitoes.
2.4. The argument that the insecticides are approved as biocides for this use does not hold good. 'Approval' does not make them safe, far from it!
2.5. A major problem is the use of insecticidal substances which the European Union (EU) has banned from outdoor use for 'plant protection products' because of their known risks to the environment. Yet the same substances can be used unrestrictedly as biocides. The reason is that the EU grants permits for the so-called 'plant protection products', while the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) allocates separate approvals for biocides..
2.6. The Croatian Ministry of Health publishes a list of approved biocides at intervals (Ministarstva Zdravstva (MIZ) in Croatian). This list does not include possible adverse effects and it does not seem to be updated regularly.
2.7. The approvals granted by the three institutions are frequently not co-ordinated. In the Croatian Ministry's 2025 list there are several which are not approved as biocides by the ECHA, for instance azamethiphos, d-allethrin, diflubenzuron, d-phenothrin, esbiothrin, fipronil, tetramethrin and thiametoxam
2.8. There is a further complication in the issue of approvals. Even when a substance is known to have particularly harmful qualities such as being carcinogenic, mutagenic, disruptive to the reproductive or endocrine systems, so it should be banned, the ECHA allows for exceptions (derogations) "when the active substance may be needed on the grounds of public health or of public interest when no alternatives are available".
3. THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IS IGNORED
The idea that dangerous pesticides could be 'necessary for protecting public health or in the public interest' is an oxymoron and is not in keeping with the Precautionary Principle which is a basic human right.
According to the European Union, "Union policy on the environment shall aim at a high level of protection taking into account the diversity of situations in the various regions of the Union. It shall be based on the precautionary principle and on the principles that preventive action should be taken, that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source and that the polluter should pay." (EUR-Lex Article 191: 2.)
The United Nations also uphold the principle that "access to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment is a universal human right", as confirmed in their Resolution adopted in July 2022.
4. BANNED AND FORBIDDEN PESTICIDES USED
4.1. Pesticide permits are granted in the EU on the basis of largely unpublished industry studies, while any bans follow much later on the basis of proven ill-effects in practice and independent studies. Menwhile harmful pesticides maybe in regular use and actually eradicating them from the market can be close to impossible.
4.2. Banned substances have been used for insect suppression actions for years after being banned. For instance Neopitroid Premium, was no longer on the Ministry of Health approved list from 2022, yet it was used for adulticide insect suppression around the Jelsa Municipality in 2025,
4.3. In the 2025 Implementation Plan for the Jelsa Municipality the Regional Public Health Institute decreed that only biocides based on pyrethroids should be used for adulticide insect suppression (Article 2.2., in the section 'Compulsory preventive insect suppression')
4.4. However, contrary to this regulation, Twenty 1 WP, an organophosphate biocide based on azamethiphos, was used twice for fogging actions around the Jelsa Municipality, on July 23rd and August 25th 2025. Apart from not being a pyrethroid biocide, Azamethiphos is not authorized as a biocide by the European Chemicals Agency..
5. TIMINGS AND MISTIMINGS OF ADULTICIDE INSECT SUPPRESSION ACTIONS
5.1. Officially, in all the regulating documents, the optimum time for general spraying against insects is around dawn or sunset.
5.2. In practice, the timings for fogging actions are very variable.
6. INFORMATION AND WARNINGS ABOUT INSECTICIDE ACTIONS: HOW AND WHERE?
6.1. All the official documents stating the laws and regulations set out clearly that the public must be warned in advance of planned insect suppression actions, the types of pesticides which will be used, the timing and aims, as well as the potential risks for vulnerable people; beekeepers in particular should be warned of the risks so that they can protect their hives. The implementing firm is supposed to advertise spraying (fogging) actions through the media (newspapers, local radio, posters in visible places).
6.2. The instructions about publicizing fogging actions are inadequate: there is no national system and no proper regulation which could ensure that the majority of people who will be affected by the spraying actions can be forewarned.
6.3. In practice, the public does not receive proper timely warnings about fogging actions. Out of 42 actions around the country, 5 were advertised on the day of the actions, 24 1-2 days in advance, while the rest were mainly 3-4 days in advance (apart from 2 for which we don't have that detail).
6.4. 14 of the 42 do not mention any safety precautions which the public should take.
6.5. 20 of the 42 do not state which biocides will be used.
6.6. Not a single one warns of the known possible adverse effects of the biocides.
6.7. It even happens that the fogging taskes place without any prior warning, for instance around the Jelsa Municipality and Stari Grad on July 18th and 19th 2023.
6.8. Beekeepers do not receive special warnings as there is no system in place to guarantee this.
6.9. Although the fogging actions take place during the summer when tourism is at its height in Croatia, any warnings are only given in Croatian, keeping non-Croatian speakers in the dark. (Eco Hvar regularly publishes the warnings for our areas when we receive the information.)
6.10. All these failings contravene European Law: "EU citizens should have access to information about chemicals to which they may be exposed, in order to allow them to make informed decisions about their use of chemicals." (Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 Introduction. clause 117)
7. DISINFORMATION AND DECEPTION
7.1. Official documents (eg NN 128/2011-2569 III 4.3.2. (c) - in Croatian) admit that the adulticide fogging actions are not selective and can damage the health of vulnerable people, and cause damage in the environment to aquatic and land-based creatures, besides annihilating all the different types of insect in the vicinity, thus significantly undermining ecological balance while loading the environment with harmful substances whose long-term application jeopardizes biodiversity. .
7.2. However, such public warnings as there are present the insect suppression actions as solely targeted atcertain types of mosquitoes. They use phrases such as: "treatment of adult female mosquitoes", "land-based suppression of mosquitoes", "treatment to suppress mosquitoes". No mention of killing or maiming other insects and destroying biodiversity.
7.3. Despite the fact that all the biocides used for adult insect suppression are known to be potentially verydangerous for people and the environment, some public announcements go so far as to spread misinformation about the nature of the poisons, such as: "The fogging will be carried out using formulations which are harmless to warm-blooded creatures", "These insecticides have good initial effects and last long enough. They are not significantly dangerous for people and the environment", "Insecticides will be used which are approved by the Croatian Ministry of Health and are recommended by the World Health Organization for use in built-up areas; they do not have any damaging effects on human health or warm-blooded animals".
7.4. Some implementing firms go even further, whether in ignorance or with intent to deceive, claiming that they use biological (ecological), non-harmful formulations, whereas in truth they apply dangerous biocides. On Hvar, for instance, the fogging bill for Hvar Town on October 8th 2017 stated that 'ecological formulations' were used around Hvar Town, Brusje, Milna, Zaraće, Sveta Nedilja and the rubbish dump, whereas the detailed account revealed that the substances used were Cipex 10E, Permex 22E and Muhomor AZ, all potentially highly dangerous chemical poisons..
7.5. A similar claim was made in the bill for the Jelsa Municipality dated Spetmeber 10th 2018, for fogging actions all round the region, but in fact Cipex 10E, based on cypermethrin, was used.
8. EDUCATION FAILURES
8.1. Educating the public as to measures for controlling mosquito numbers is a stated aim of the law-givers, using various means including leaflets, posters and through local newspapers. Measures are put forward in the official documents, especially removing potential mosquito breeding grounds from around properties. The Split-Dalmatia County Institute of Public Health claims that it supplies a sample leaflet together with the 'Programme of Measures' for the implementing company or the local authority can distribute to residents when the insect and vermin suppression measures are being carried out.
8.2. On Hvar, at least, over many years there has never been any public education about pest control nor any educational leaflets or posters..
8.3. In its 'Programme of Measures' the Split-Dalmatia County Institute of Public Health has for years included the claim that there is a free telephone number, 0800 300 100, giving advice about suppressing mosquitoes, which was also to be used for collecting information about mosquito infestations. That number has never been shared in the public domain.
8.4. Perhaps it's just as well that the number has not made it beyond the document provided for the authorities. When we tried it in 2023, it was not in function. We were given an alternative number, 021 401 103, which responded to calls with a fax signal.
9. PEOPLE ARE NOT PROTECTED
9.1. It often happens that people are sprayed with biocides during the fogging actions - there is no mention in the regulatory documents that people should not be sprayed!
9.2. During the night of 18th - 19th July 2023, a fogging action took places around the Jelsa Municipality without any prior warning at all. People on the Jelsa waterfront (which is a restricted area for motor traffic) were sprayed directly into their faces. One of the bystanders was a seriously asthmatic young man who was relaxing with his friends after his shift working in a restaurant. Shortly after 2am, Eco Hvar received an email from his distressed mother: "My son is asthmatic and has just come home hardly able to breathe so he is on inhalations. He says that about an hour ago at about 1am he was on the waterfront in Jelsa when the van passed and sprayed him and his friend. My son and his friend are now both having difficulty breathing. We didn't go to the emergency service as we have an inhalator and all the necessary medicines at home, but this is really unacceptable and shameful." (email 19/07/2023). The young man was under treatment for the next ten days and had to take sick leave as he could not work. If the family had not had all the necessary treatments to hand for such emergency situations, the result could have been much more serious.
9.3. Obviously, when adulticide actions are done from aeroplanes, many more people are exposed to being sprayed directly. This is the more serious, given that aerial spraying is done during daylight and warnings are totally inadequate.
10. BEES AND OTHER POLLINATORS ARE NOT PROTECTED
10.1. Beekeepers do not receive sufficient warnings of fogging actions. There is no system in place for alerting them specifically in all regionsof Croatia.
10.2. The insecticides used for insect suppression are by definition dangerous for all pollinators, yet they are used in the spring and summer when most plants are in flower.
10.3. Collated by the United Nations, there are innumerable 'Hazard Warnings' and 'Precautionary Statements' highlighting the dangers posed by chemical substances. Apart from risks to humans, some refer to aquatic organisms and the environment. There is no mention of dangers to bees and other insects. There is no pictogram for bees and other beneficial insects. There is a sub-category headed SPe (Special Protection) warning which is supposed to appear on pesticide labels when appropriate. The code SPe8, way down the list, specifies danger to bees and other pollinators, advising that the product should not be used when plants, including weeds, are in flower. However, the warning is not present in the labels of every pesticide which consists of active ingredients which are known to be dangerous to bees, in particular the insecticides.
11. LARVICIDE ACTIONS ALSO CARRY RISKS
11.1 Larvicides are used to exterminate mosquito larvae in their breeding areas. Larvicide action are supposed to be the prerequisite for subsequent actions against adult mosquitoes.
11.2. Although larvicide pesticides are considered to be less harmful than those used for adulticide actions, they still cause unwanted effects. For instance, on the assumption that it was harmless, Bacillus Thuringiensis Israelensis (Bti) has been used for many years to control mosquito larvae. On Hvar Island it has also been used to spray 3 hectares of woodland around Hvar Town to kill the pine processionary moth caterpillars. However, research as shown that Bacillus Thuringiensis can cause biodiversity loss (2000) and can also cause significant harm to birds in their breeding season (2010).
11.3. Larvicide actions can also cause losses of the natural predators for mosquito larvae, such as dragonfly and damselfly nymphs / naiads, which can live for months or years in their water habitats eating copious amounts of their prey.
11.4. Larvicide actions are supposed to precede the fogging against adult mosquitoes. On Hvar, by contrast with the adulticide fogging actions, larvicide actions have been variable over the years: for instance around stari Grad in 2018, it appears from the Health Institute's report that no larvicide actions were done; in some years there were two larvicide actions in areas of the island including around Hvar Town and Jelsa, in May and October; in 2025 in the Jelsa Municipality , two actions took place on July 23rd and August 28th, the same days as the adult fogging actions.
12. MONITORING
12.1. Some years ago, the Health Ministry announced plans for monitoring the mosquito presence across the whole of Croatia in its Strateški program za razdoblje 2008.-2013. The aim was to assess the results of the insect suppression programme. In 2016 the Croatian Institute of Public Health (HZJZ) launched a national programme for monitoring invasive species of mosquitoes. Responsibility for the actual monitoring was passed to the regional Health Institutes, and the intention was to create a national database of the ongoing results of monitoring.
12.2. If the national database exists, it is not available to the public. On its website, in an advice column to citizens about mosquito control, the HZJZ refers to the monitoring done in 2016. This as late as 2025, so it seems likely that the natonal database has not materialized (yet?).
12.3. There is a Centre for Invasive Species in Istria, which organised monitoring of invasive mosquitoes back in June 2018, with the aim of making the insect suppression measures more efficient including educating the local population regarduing preventive mosquito control measures.
12.4. It seems this initiative was a one-off, as there was no update of the data on the Centre's website in 2025.
12.5. Some local authorities sensibly use monitoring as the basis for their insect suppression programme, for instance Grad Osijek (link in Croatian). However, ascertaining the presence of mosquitoes scientifically is not compulsory, but left to the discretion of local authorities according to their financial capabilities. Very often insect suppression actions are indertaken as a matter of routine, without realistic monitoring of the need or the result.
13. SUPERVISION
13.1. Expert supervision is not compulsory in the case of the general measures for pest control, although it is in the case of the special measures applied when there is an urgent need for intervention because of large-scale infestations or epidemic situations.
13.2. On Hvar, following the routine annual pest suppression measures, it has been the practice for the Split-Dalmatian Public Health Institute (NZJSDŽ) to issue a report annually which invariably concludes "The measures for the compulsory preventive rat control and larvicidal and adulticidal actions against mosquitoes [in this area] have been carried out [this year] according to the essential regulations in the 'Programme of Measures..' ". Does the Institute consider some regulations 'inessential'??!
13.3. In 2024 the Institute report for the Jelsa Municipality added two more recommendations:
(3.2) "Although there is a large population of tiger mosquitoes during the season, we recommend trying to reduce the number of adulticide actions and increasing the scope and number of larvicide actions for eliminating mosquitoes maximally, reducing the environmental capacity for mosquito development through applying preventive measures (remedial, physical) for removing mosquito breeding grounds wherever possible." However, in 2025 the implementing company ignored these recommendations by continuing the usual number of fogging actions and performing three larvicide actions almost alongside the adulticide spraying (larvicide, 20th June, 23rd July and 25th August 2025, fogging 19th June, 22nd July, 25th August 2025).
(3.3) "It is necessary to continue persevering with regular warnings to the public and beekeepers prior to the fogging actions against mosquitoes and to include which biocides will be used together with warnings to people suffering from allergies."
However the public warnings in 2025 followed the same pattern as in previous years: no identification of the biocides, limited visibility on the Jelsa Municipality website and the noticeboard beside the Town Hall, no special warning to beekeepers.
13.4. The official report from 2025 states that Neopitroid Premium was the only the biocide used for fogging. However the certificates from the implementing company show the the organophosphate Twenty One was used on two occasions (23rd july, 25th August 2025), despite the Institute's stipulation that only pyrethroid biocides should be used. Also of note, Neopitroid Premium was not on the Ministry of Health's list of approved biocides as from 2022.
13.5. It is clear that the official report from 2025 is inaccurate.
14. INSECT SUPPRESSION MEASURES USING PESTICIDES ARE BOTH HARMFUL AND INEFFECTIVE
14.1. Official documents recognise that the effects of adulticide insect suppression actions are always temporary, dealing only with the tip of the adult mosquito populations while failing to deal with breeding areas; they also represent significant dangers for non-target night insects and their predators; considering the insignificant efficiency and wide-ranging spectrum [of the biocides] represents significant environmental damage. (Program mjera..2008.-2013. - link in Croatian). Value for money is also called into question (NN 128/2011-2569 4.3.1. - link in Croatian). .
14.2. Eliminating all target mosquitoes is 'mission impossible' in itself. To do so without collateral damage evenmore so.
14.3. In practice, the inevitable collateral damage caused by the insect suppression measures is ignored. It is never mentioned in any official warnings.
14.4. Apart from the many risks to human health, the biocides are also potentially damaging for animals, especially cats, while dogs too are at risk.
14.5. Bee losses are almost certainly under-reported, although they definitely occur. For instance, in 2021 a professional beekeeper on Hvar lost his bees following a fogging action without prior warning. In 2023 catastrophic bee losses were reported near Osijek in Slavonija following aerial insecticide spraying.
14.6. On Hvar and other islands there have been visible reductions in mosquito predators such as bats and bee-eaters, for which the insect suppression programme is most likely among the causative factors.
14.7. Aerial spraying by law is allowed only as an exceptional measure (NN 76/2012, Article 14., link in Croatian), but in recent years it has been used with increasing frequency.
14.8. Aerial spray has been shown to cause too much collateral damage (link in Croatian) to be an appropriate way to tackle mosquitoes. State Secretary Tugomir Majdak of the Agriculture Ministry stated in Parliament on 30th March 2022 that pesticides which were harmful to bees were banned, as was aerial spraying. Unfortunately, these assertions fell short of the truth about the situation in practice!.
14.9. The costs of the Insect Suppression Programme are prohibitively high, especially in northern Croatia. For instance about 1.6 million euros were allocated for it in the Osijek budget for 2025.
14.10. Biodiversity is suffering, partly as a result of the damage caused to the natural chain by larvicide and adulticide actions. The losses of helpful insects, pollinators, bats and birds are especially obvious in Dalmatia. Nature-loving guests to Croatia have noticed the damage and some have stopped visiting the country as a result. Ambitions for 'quality tourism' on the basis of 'untouched nature' have been greatly eroded and urgent action needs to be taken to reverse this situation.
15. WHY ARE WE POISONING OUR PARADISE?
15.1. The aim of the insect suppression programme is expressed in the 'Law on Protecting the Populace against Transmissible Diseases' as being to prevent and eliminate infectious diseases of interest to the Croatian Republic and to state the measures for protecting the populace against the said infectious diseases. (Zakon o zaštiti pučantsva od zaraznih bolesti, pročišćeni tekst zakona NN 143/21, (2021.) Članak 1).
15.2. This aim is questionable: epidemiology does not offer any evidence to justify the drastic suppression measures which have arisen as a result of this law and the compulsory programme of pest suppression.
15.3. The number of mosquito-borne diseases in Croatia is limited, and (so far at least), there have been no signs of significant numbers of people in the country being affected. The figures issued in the Croatian Health and Statistical Yearbook up to 2024 bear this out:
Iz Hrvatskog zdravstveno-statističkog ljetopis za 2024.g., Zarazne bolesti u Hrvatskoj:
West Nile Virus, 2018: 63/64 (just 4 died); 2019: 0; 2020: 0; 2021: 0; 2022: 8, 2023:10; 2024: 23;
Dengue Virus, (all these cases were imported) 2018.: 2; 2019.: 5; 2020.: 3; 2021. i 2022.: 1; 2023: 5; 2024.: 10
Malaria, (all these cases were imported) 2018.: 2; 2019.: 4; 2020: 5; 2021.: 3; 2022.: 1; 2023.: 6; 2024.: 8
Zika, 2016.: 1 (imported); 2017.: 1 (imported); 2020.-2023.: 0; 2024.: 0
Chikungunya virus, 2016.: 1 (imported)
15.4. There is no sientific evidence that the programme of compulsory insect suppression as practised up to now has any influence on the incidence of these diseases in Croatia. The figures do not justify< pressing the panic button for extreme measures such as dowsing the whole country in dangerous poisons!
15.5. Mosquitoes are a constant presence during the summer in Croatia, with new types arriving at intervals over the years. Many people get bitten by mosquitoes. Yet the incidence of mosquito-borne diseases has been minimal. By contrast, in 2023 the leading cause of death that year were diseases of the circulatory system (19,937), just as they had been in 2022 (22,303 deaths), in 2021 (23,184) in 2019 (22,020) and in 2018 (23,048 deaths); neoplasms accounted for 13,419 deaths in 2023, 13,247 in 2022, 13,571 in 2021, 13,718 in 2019, and 14,210 in 2018.
As the Health and Statistical Yearbooks reveal much the same pattern year on year, it is tempting to suggest that investing in promoting healthier lifestyles would save more lives than the insect suppression programme.
16. THERE ARE BETTER WAYS
16.1. It is obvious for all the reasons stated above that the current methods for suppressing insects using biocides should be stopped as a matter of urgency. The institutions responsible should find and use environmentally friendly ways of protecting human health.
The priorities:
16.2. stop the harmful practice of spraying people and the environment with dangerous pesticides;
16.3. use natural resources and identify, promote and use ecologically acceptable methods for pest control, especially by helping to restore their natural predators, such as bats and bee-eaters;
16.4. develop further the 'SIT' ('Sterile Insect Technique') programme in Croatia, which has shown promising results in the areas where it is already used;
16.5. educate people as to how to avoid suffering from mosquito bites and to highlight the role of mosquitoes in the natural chain, for instance as pollinators (see our article: 'Mosquitoes: Friends and Foes?');
16.6. as long as the insect suppression programme is carried out in its present form, the safety measures must be respected and properly enacted;
16.7. the public must be adequately informed in advance of any adulticide fogging actions;
16.8. posters and online information should be in several languages;;
16.9. treba uspostaviti učinkovit sustav pravovremenog uopzoravanja pčelara;
16.10. warnings should include details of the biocides which are to be used, including their possible adverse effects;
16.11. all the planned larvicide and adulticide actions should be advertised openly and transparently, together with appropriate warnings in other languages as well as Croatian;
16.12. the timing and route of every fogging action, whether by road vehicle or aeroplane, should be published;
16.13. on the day of any fogging action, warnings should be given as for any major event threatening the populace, such as before a potentially violent mass demonstration or an enemy bombing; this could be done by a vehicle patrolling the streets using a public address system to emit warnings in various languages;
16.14. people should be warned to keep off the streets for the duration of the spraying and several hours afterwards; shutters and windows should be closed, pets kept indoors if possible, washing removed from outdoor drying lines;
16.15. from the start of the fogging action, a police car should precede the fogging vehicle warning pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists and drivers to clear the area as far as possible and stay away for several hours.
Vivian Grisogono MA(Oxon)
February 2026.
