GuySuCo’s over-aged canes and mounting losses

Dear Editor,

The table below shows the year-end age profile of sugar cane that is 12 months and older on the estates of the Guyana Sugar Corporation (GuySuCo).

At the end of 2025, more than 30 per cent of GuySuCo’s fields were occupied by old, unmanaged canes—commonly referred to as over-aged ratoons or “carry-over” canes. In contrast, for every year over the past decade prior to 2025, the proportion of such old canes remained in the single digit percentages. Even in 2022, following the devastating 65-day floods of 2021, GuySuCo limited the proportion of old canes left in the fields to just three per cent.

I am advised that more than 1,000 hectares are now classified as “double carry-over” canes—meaning they have remained unharvested in the field for more than two years and are now at risk of rotting. This situation has serious economic and scientific consequences. In both 2024 and 2025, GuySuCo had nearly 19,000 hectares of cane under cultivation out of an established 21,000 hectares. Yet sugar output has remained low and production costs high. The reason is clear: too much over-aged, dried-out canes are being harvested, yielding too little sugar per ton of cane crushed.

Older canes beyond 12 months, contain less juice and are not suitable for optimal sugar production. When mixed with prime canes, they significantly reduce overall productivity and sugar recovery. The evidence is already apparent. In December 2025, some of the double carry-over canes required 22 tons of cane to produce one ton of sugar—an extremely poor performance by industry standards. Under normal conditions in Guyana, it takes approximately 12 tons of cane to produce one ton of sugar.

Financially, the impact has been severe. Reported losses since 2024 exceed $30 billion, with $15 billion recorded in 2024 and $18 billion in 2025 and all of this happened under Mr. Paul Cheong as the CEO, Mr. Vishnu Panday as the Agriculture Director for 2024 and Mr. Threbowan Shivprasad who is responsible for field operation after Mr. Panday’s contract was not renewed at the end of 2025.

We are now being told that more than 690 hectares of these double carry-over canes will be uprooted and discarded because it is not economically viable to harvest them. It reportedly costs about $40,000 to harvest and transport each ton of these old, dry canes, yet the output would largely be low-value fibre for fuel rather than commercially viable sugar. While replanting is cheaper in the long term, the decision represents a significant sunk cost to GuySuCo.

This also represents a major waste of resources. The fertilisers, agro-chemicals, tillage costs, planting costs and labour costs invested in these fields will effectively now have to be written off and can run into almost a billion dollars. These developments raise important questions. Why were canes scheduled for harvesting in 2024 allowed to remain in the fields into 2026? Why was corrective action not taken earlier to prevent the accumulation of double carry-over canes in the fields?

There is also a deeper agronomic concern. More than 20 per cent of the canes on GuySuCo’s fields are reportedly over six years old. Fields of that age face root degeneration, soil compaction from repeated heavy machinery use (bell loaders), reduced root vigour and poor nutrient uptake. These outcomes run contrary to the corporation’s own agricultural guidelines, which emphasise proper field rehabilitation and crop cycle management after five years.

Given the mounting financial losses ($18 billion in 2025 and projections of more than $21 billion in 2026) urgent intervention is required. The Minister of Agriculture Mr. Zulfikar Mustapha should consider engaging experienced external technical management from established sugar-producing countries like Brazil or India to stabilise operations, improve agronomic practices and restore productivity. When will it end?