Considerable testament exists to the constant pursuit by U.S. agriculture to become better. In the research and education arena alone, hundreds of endeavors are documented in a searchable database entitled, "Agricultural Science & Education Impact," updated annually by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. ( http://www.reeusda.gov/success/impact.htm)

Among the stories told are those dealing with pest management. They reveal a transition in progress ... from a post-World War II reliance on long-acting, non-selective pesticides to an integrated use of multiple pest control tactics, including safer, shorter-acting, more selective pesticides. As science enables better detection of the environmental and health effects of pest management practices, agriculture responds to find improved ways to control pests. For examples of this progress, go to these Web sites:

1997 http://www.reeusda.gov/success/impact/pestman.htm
1998 http://www.reeusda.gov/success/impact98/98pests.htm
More from 1998 http://www.reeusda.gov/success/impact98/98runps.htm

These stories also show that many "conventional pesticides" and "conventional practices" in U.S. agriculture are those of the past. The present state of agriculture is always a state of transition ... to turn change into progress ... to make the best better. To facilitate such transition is the goal of USDA and the opportunity provided by the 1996 Food Quality Protection Act. Read on for an account of how the Office of Pest Management Policy is working to that end.

OPMP's Wilfred Burr hosted a workshop June 10-11 to address the critical pest management needs that may arise in apple production as a result of the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA). The 12-member work group focused only on apples grown in the Southern and Appalachian regions of the U.S., with the intent to develop transition proposals to:

• lessen or eliminate dependency on organophosphate insecticides
• reduce organophosphate residues on apples
• reduce other risks associated with organophosphate insecticide use

Participants were asked to keep several factors in mind:

• that proposals must support producers' profitability
• that geographical regions are unique production areas, with diverse pests, weather conditions, crop varieties, production practices and markets,
• the "big picture" perspective of the commodity's pest complex and interactive effects
• resources and research needed for the apple industry to undertake proposed transition strategies (a "To Do" list of what's needed and who can do it)

Participants included growers, land-grant university faculty (apple IPM specialists and entomologists), an orchard consultant (National Alliance of Independent Crop Consultants), and representatives of the National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy, US Apple, EPA and the USDA Agricultural Research Service.

A guidance document, for apples produced in the Southern/Appalachian region only, is being drafted by OPMP. It will be reviewed by workshop participants before being made available as a public resource. Additional plans include a transition workshop on peaches hosted by OPMP's Kent Smith on July 13 and 14 in Sacramento, California..

Benefits of the long-standing partnership between USDA and the land-grant university system can be found in all that is described above. Now, under the FQPA, these partners are more involved in the pesticide regulatory process than ever before.

Three critical stages for participation by land-grant faculty have emerged: first, in the development of crop profiles; second, in the review of EPA pesticide risk assessments; and third, in the design of transition strategies to mitigate risks and alleviate reliance on high-risk pesticides.

Crop Profiles Proliferating
Begun 14 months ago to support FQPA implementation, the development of crop profiles is coordinated at each state land-grant university by the state liaison for the Pesticide Impact Assessment Program (PIAP). The profiles summarize pest management practices and problems at the state level. Posted on the Web at http://ipmwww.ncsu.edu/opmppiap/proindex.htm, they now total 116. The following were added in June:

California – artichoke
Delaware – snap beans
Florida – carrots, ornamentals, sweet corn
Georgia – peppers
Texas – peanuts
West Virginia – alfalfa

Risk Assessments Reviewed
The EPA revision of preliminary risk assessments for organophosphates now includes a review by USDA staff and land-grant faculty, which is coordinated by this office. On top of pressing demands in the field, some 40 land-grant experts have served as reviewers – an essential role in helping assure the quality of the assessments. Currently in review are naled, tribufos, ethoprop, fenamiphos and methyl parathion. Nine completed reviews have been sent to EPA.

Transition Strategies Building Steam
Our involvement with transition planning is intended to help determine the best way, commodity-by-commodity, to prepare for the foreseeable impacts of the FQPA. From our experience with the apple and peach workshops, we also hope to support many independent efforts by commodity groups and others, including land-grant faculty. At one such activity, on July 2 at Michigan State University, OPMP's Al Jennings and Wilfred Burr participated in a program entitled, "Critical Elements in Transitioning to Biologically-Based Pest Management Systems." A similar program is scheduled in Madison, Wisconsin, July 27-29, 1999.

By teaming up, USDA and the land-grant universities, along with affected stakeholders, are rising to the challenge of gathering and centralizing the information needed to best represent agriculture throughout FQPA's implementation. As EPA proceeds, it's important to provide the agency with reliable information, so the regulatory process can reflect real world conditions for pesticide use and pesticide exposure.

Emergency Exemption (Section 18) Procedures and Criteria Proposed
August 2 comment deadline ... on EPA's proposed procedures and criteria for establishing pesticide tolerances for emergency uses of pesticides. This does not change the criteria for defining when an emergency situation exists. Call the EPA Office of Pesticide Programs Docket at 703-305-5805 for a copy or check the Web at: http://www.epa.gov/fedrgtr/EPA-PEST (Click June 3, 1999, and select "Tolerances for Pesticide Emergency Exemptions.") Contact: Joseph Hogue, 703-308-9072 or hogue.joe@epa.gov.

Revised Risk Assessments Released
August 16 comment deadline ... to submit risk management ideas for bensulide and profenofos. The revised risk assessments for these two organophosphate pesticides were presented by EPA in a technical briefing on June 16, which kicked-off the public comment period. The assessments and supporting documents are on the Web at http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/op/bensulide.htm and http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/op/profenofos.htm. Contact: Karen Angulo, 703-308-8004 or angulo.karen@epa.gov.

August 30 comment deadline ... to submit risk management ideas for the organophosphate sulfotepp. See the Web at http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/op/sulfotepp.htm for EPA's revised sulfotepp risk assessment. Contact: Karen Angulo, 703-308-8004 or angulo.karen@epa.gov.

Methyl Bromide Phase-out Amended
Effective July 1 ... EPA's final rule revising the phase-out regulations that govern production and importation of methyl bromide. The amendment reflects changes in U.S. obligations under the Montreal Protocol, an international agreement recently adjusted by the signatory countries. To conform with the Montreal Protocol's schedule for industrialized nations, the EPA issued the following schedule for production and consumption of methyl bromide:

1. 25 percent reduction in baseline levels for 1999
2. 50 percent reduction in baseline levels for January 1, 2001
3. 70 percent reduction in baseline levels for January 1, 2003
4. 100 percent reduction in baseline levels for January 1, 2005, with emergency and critical use exemptions permitted under the Montreal Protocol. Even sooner, EPA plans to publish a process to exempt quantities of methyl bromide used in the U.S. for quarantine and preshipment. The proposal is on the Web at: http://www.epa.gov/fedrgtr/EPA-AIR. Click on June 1, 1999, and select "Protection of Stratospheric Ozone..." Contact: Tom Land, 202-564-9185, or the Ozone Hotline, 1-800-269-1996.

Azoxystrobin Is Phytotoxic to Several Apple Varieties
An EPA alert (June 21) warns of adverse effects to MacIntosh and MacIntosh-derived varieties of apples from exposure to azoxystrobin (Abound, Heritage and Quadris). Sold by Zeneca Ag Products, azoxystrobin is registered on grapes, several tree nuts, stone fruit, cucurbits, etc. but not on apples. Effects on apple trees include necrosis, leaf drop and fruit drop. EPA may further restrict use of this fungicide. The current label warns about spray drift and prohibits sprayers used with azoxystrobin for subsequent spraying of apple trees. Contact: John Bazuin, 703-305-7381 or bazuin.john@epa.gov.

Apple varieties known to be adversely affected are Akane, Asahi, Bramley, Courtland, Cox's Orange Pippin, Cox, Delbarestival, Discovery, Gala, Galaxy, Grimes, Imperial Gala, Kent, Kizashi, Lurared, McCoun, MacIntosh, Molly Delicious, Mondial Gala, Ontario, Queen Cox, Royal Gala, Spartan, Stark Gala, Starkpur Mac, Summared, Summer Treat, Warabi, Worcester, and Pearmain.

Chlorpyrifos Use on Popcorn Deleted
In response to registrant requests, EPA will delete the use of chlorpyrifos on popcorn, according to a June 18 notice. Registrants may continue to sell or distribute product under the previously approved labeling for 18 months after the effective date of the deletions. Contact: Dennis McNeilly, 703-305-5404 or mcneilly.dennis@epa.gov.

See the following Web sites for details about several meetings that will be held for the state liaisons or coordinators for various national programs, such as the Pesticide Applicator Training (PAT) program, the Pesticide Impact Assessment Program (PIAP), and IR-4 (minor crop pest management program).

http://pmo.umext.maine.edu/ct/CT.htm
Aug. 8-11 - National Pesticide Applicator and Certification and Training Workshop in Portland, Maine.

http://ipmwww.ncsu.edu/opmppiap/subcal.htm
Aug. 12 - Northeast Region PIAP Annual Meeting in Portland, Maine.
Sept. 14-16 - Western Region PIAP Annual Meeting in Bellingham, Washington.
Sept. 27-30 - Southern Region PAT and PIAP Annual Meetings in Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Oct. 4-6 - North Central PIAP Annual Meeting in Washington, D.C.

http://www.cook.rutgers.edu/~ir4
Oct. 4-7 - IR-4 Project Management Committee and Annual Meetings in Washington, DC

Genetically Engineered Crops for Pest Management
The USDA Economic Research Service (ERS) recently examined data from an ERS/NASS Agricultural Resources Management Study (ARMS) to determine the extent that genetically engineered cotton, corn and soybeans were adopted in 1996, 1997 and 1998. The report is on the Web at http://www.econ.ag.gov/whatsnew/issues/biotech/. (Contact: Ralph Heimlich, 202-694-5504.) The main conclusions are:

• Adoption of genetically engineered technology on soybeans, cotton and corn has increased dramatically since introduction in the mid-1990s, encompassing 20 to 44 percent of acreage planted in 1998.
• Use of Bt cotton and Bt corn is associated with significantly higher yields in most years for some regions. Herbicide tolerance in soybeans is associated with significantly higher yields in some regions in 1997. However, crop yield differences between adopters and nonadopters also could be due to other factors not controlled for in the analyses.
• In 1997, herbicide-tolerant technology significantly reduced herbicide treatments for soybeans and, to a lesser extent, for cotton. Fewer insecticide treatments for the target pests were required for Bt corn and cotton.

Biotech Goes Wild
This thought-provoking article by Charles Mann appears in the July/August Issue of Technology Review, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology magazine that analyzes the process of innovation. Charles Mann is a contributing editor at The Atlantic Monthly and Science. The potential benefits and possible hazards of genetic engineering are addressed in his article, which is on the Web at http://www.techreview.com/articles/July99/mann.htm.

Traces of Environmental Chemicals in the Human Body: Are They a Risk to Health?
This report by the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) explains the significance of trace levels of environmental chemicals. The physicians and scientists of ACSH conclude that exposures to small amounts of environmental chemicals are not necessarily detrimental to human health. The complete text is on the Web at http://www.acsh.org or may be ordered for $5 from ACSH, 1995 Broadway, 2nd floor, New York, NY 10023-5860.

The FIFRA Science Advisory Panel (SAP), which last met May 25-27, is expected to comment soon on two key matters that affect pesticide tolerance assessments, namely:

• EPA policy for using the FQPA 10X safety factor, and
• statistical methods for using composite data in acute dietary exposure assessments.

Dr. Linda Abbott represented the USDA Office of Pest Management Policy at the meeting and filed this brief recap.

With regard to the FQPA 10X factor, EPA asked the panel to consider a wide range of issues, including: concerns about the scientific quality of the toxicological database, the degree of confidence in the endpoints, and the adequacy of studies for evaluating risk to infants and children. Other questions focused on characterizing dietary food, dietary water and residential exposure and identification of special exposed populations. The panel was also asked to comment on a proposed test battery for children's health testing.

In a prior panel meeting, it was determined that pesticide residues from composite samples, such as those collected by the USDA Pesticide Data Program (PDP), could not be used directly for unblended commodities in the EPA's dietary exposure model. The panel suggested that the distribution of pesticide residues on single serving samples be used in the dietary exposure model, rather than using composite residue samples. Subsequently, EPA devised a statistical method to estimate the distribution of residues on single serving samples from composite residue samples collected by the PDP or the Food and Drug Administration. This method was presented and discussed at the May SAP meeting.

The methodology EPA developed to "decomposite" composite samples into a distribution of single serving samples is complex. In addition to some underlying assumptions, it also relies on an estimate of the number of single serving samples per composite sample.

When tested by USDA in a simulation study, the methodology tended to overestimate the variance of the single serving samples, resulting in high estimates of pesticide residue. EPA asked the advisory panel to comment on the use of a cut-off value in those cases when the decomposition method predicted extremely high residues. The decomposition method also proved sensitive to the number of single serving samples estimated within a composite sample. The panel was asked to consider how best to estimate single serving samples and what procedures to use when there is uncertainty about this number.

Last Modified July 9, 1999