The Agricultural Experiment Station 276 Altheimer Drive, Fayetteville, AR 72703 Telephone: (501) 575-3955 Fax: 575-3975

Cooperative Extension Service P.O. Box 391, Little Rock, AR 72203 Telephone: (501) 671-2000 Fax: 671-2251
University of Arkansas, Division of Agriculture and USDA Cooperating

ARKANSAS PESTICIDE NEWS EDITORS
Terry Lavy and Briggs Skulman, Department of Agronomy, Fayetteville and Ples Spradley, Coop. Extension Service, Little Rock

Volume 12, August, 1996

Table of Contents 

Arkansas News
	The News is Good When There
	Is Nothing to Report!	 			1
Ten Propargite Uses Canceled				2
Causes of Aging and Cancer:  The 
	Misinterpretation of Animal Cancer Tests	4
Pesticide Container Cleaning and Disposal		5
Collection of Pesticide Containers			7
Pesticide Fact Sheets Available				7
Did You Know?						8
Pesticide Popourri					9
Hitching a Ride to Faraway Places			10
Flim/Flam Alert!					10
Production Practices for The Future			11
Biotechnology News					12
Health News:  Hot Day, Aint It				13
Methyl Bromide - The Continuing Story			13

The News Is Good When There Is Nothing To Report!

Two recent incidents in NW Arkansas bring a certain sense of concern that we all should have about the use of our pesticide tools. Both of these incidents involved the use of the insecticide Dursban, but the problem could easily have been any other compound that applicators might use.

In the first incident a combination of factors allowed the off site migration of the material after it had been applied to a building for termite control. Among these factors were: a sandy soil (which was good for drainage, but poor for retention of pesticide), excessive water from both a sprinkler system and a very heavy unscheduled rain and a nearby drain that allowed infiltration of the runoff water. The runoff eventually fed into a creek that runs through a housing complex on the University of Arkansas campus. This or some other runoff caused a fish kill in the creek and it was several days before the actual cause was determined.  The second incident involved the spillage of Dursban solution in a watershed stream bed that fed directly into the water reservoir for the town of Lincoln. Fortunately, the spill was reported quickly enough that corrective action seems to have prevented any detectable contamination of the water supply. There was a good measure of concern and inconvenience to the people who had to endure being unable to drink from their taps until all the analyses were completed.

As conscientious stewards of our lands and as safety minded applicators of these useful chemical tools, we need to be constantly vigilant of our work. One fact is certain about these incidents, they made the news and received significant coverage in much of the local media. Consequently, the general public become suddenly very concerned about chemicals and their use. Conversely, seldom is there any news stories about the safe, successful and appropriate chemical applications on the thousands of acres of land this season with no environmental damages or contamination of drinking water supplies. Nothing to report makes for "ho hum" (yawn!) news stories. Moreover, things working as normal tend to make us somewhat complacent. So this may be as good a time as any to review one's safe handling procedures, re-read the label instructions for the products that you are using, make sure you have proper safety equipment on hand and use it, store your chemicals properly and securely. Do you have a contingency plan in case of an accident?

Though it may be a hassle, every time each of use follows the rules properly and disposes of their used materials in appropriate fashion we are silently helping to keep our agricultural tools available for everyone else. It really is a team effort on an individual basis. The reward for doing things properly? The answer to that question is simply , no news! Let's continue to make no news by using our agricultural tools wisely.

Remember, for the pesticide applicator's situation no news IS truly good news!

Ten propargite uses canceled

The following detailed discussion regarding use of propargite provides considerable insight into the kinds of decisions being made to help keep our food supply safe.

Uniroyal Chemical Company has agreed to voluntarily withdraw registrations of the miticide propargite (Omite, Comite) on apple, apricot, peach, pear, plum, fig, cranberry, strawberry, green bean and lima bean. This action is unrelated to the recent proposed revocation of the apple tolerance for propargite due to the court settlement involving the Delaney Clause. The cancellation will not affect the continued use of propargite on other crops, because EPA believes the remaining uses of propargite do not pose unacceptable risks.

The purpose of the action is to reduce dietary cancer risk to an acceptable level. Although EPA believes that food already treated with propargite is safe to eat, it also believes there is reason for concern about lifetime exposure and the fact that infants and children eat proportionately greater amounts of some foods treated with propargite than do adults.

Tolerances for propargite on all 10 crops will be maintained for an indefinite period of time, which means existing stocks can legally be used. EPA plans to revoke the tolerances associated with the 10 uses in perhaps three to four years.

Lynn Goodman, Assistant Administrator for EPA's Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, urged even stricter restriction, such as immediate revocation of tolerances, making any further use of propargite on the crops illegal (This would have stranded a tremendous amount of fruits and vegetables in commercial channels). EPA will be accepting input from industry on how much more time should be permitted before the tolerances are revoked.

Uniroyal began a study last month that it expects will definitely determine whether propargite is a carcinogen; it is expected to be done in two years. The company plans to address EPA'S concerns and may ask for reinstatement of uses in the future, in much the same manner as Rhone-Poulenc did with aldicarb (Temik) on potatoes in the Northwest. The risk from propargite. EPA requires manufacturers of older pesticides (those registered before December 1984) to conduct and submit new studies to ensure they meet current safety standards. To comply with this requirement, Uniroyal conducted several studies and submitted results to the agency. EPA reviewed new carcinogenicity studies on propargite and completed a dietary risk assessment. Propargite is known to be a B2 carcinogen, based on the finding of intestinal tumors in two separate feeding studies.

According to an EPA source, the agency believes the propargite dietary risk assessment was one of its better risk assessments, because it was based on more actual data than are most risk assessments. For example, the risk assessment included actual data on occurrence of propargite residues in food based on a Uniroyal study. EPA's dietary risk assessment of propargite assumes a lifetime exposure to the pesticide on a variety of crops.

The agency concluded that cumulative dietary risk from all currently registered uses of propargite were unacceptable. Of particular concern to EPA was the significant exposure to infants and children. For example, in the Uniroyal market basket survey, 52% of samples of infant applesauce contained residues of propargite. The EPA defines negligible risk as 1 x 1-6, or one in a million, incidents over a 70-year period.

Nearly nine months ago, EPA determined that the overall dietary cancer risk from propargite was 1.6 x 1-5. Based on these numbers, EPA estimated that continued use of propargite on all registered sites could result in an additional two cancers per year in the U.S. populations. Apple is the largest contributor, with a risk of 9 x 1-6 (nine in a million). Peach is another large contributor, with a risk of 2.5 x 10-6 (2.5 in a million). Dropping the two uses with the highest risk, the remaining dietary risk would be 4 x 10-6, meaning that EPA would have to cancel additional uses to obtain less than the negligible risk (I x 10-6) level. The remaining risk was spread across a number of uses, so to reduce the risk from propargite to a level acceptable to EPA would involve cancellation of many uses. Several uses of propargite pose dietary cancer risks so small that they almost defy legitimate calculation. Mint and hops are two such examples. Dietary risk from propargite use on mint and hops is lower than the negligible risk level.

The action by Uniroyal is expected to reduce exposure to adults and children by more than 85% and to infants by more than 98%. No serious scientific body, including EPA, believes the remaining registered uses of propargite pose an unacceptable risk.

Percent of Dietary Risk by Population Group by Crop

                                                                               Population               
                                                                                                              Children
Crop                                                                              General        Infants       (7-12)

apples                                                                              53.5            32            59.3
peaches                                                                             19.5          51.1            18.1
tea/peanuts/wine                                                                     4.3           0.3             1.8
cranberries                                                                          4.3           1.2             5.0
plums                                                                                2.7           5.9             2.1
mint                                                                                 0.7
hops                                                                                 0.09
raisins                                                                              3.2           0.2             0.6
     subtotal                                                                       88.3          90.4            86.9
remaining uses                                                                      11.7           9.6            13.1
     TOTAL                                                                         100.0         100.0           100.0

Benefits of propargite.
Propargite is the most widely used chemical in the U.S. for control of mites. The compound, produced solely by Uniroyal, was registered in 1969.

Propargite is (or was) registered on ornamental plants, apples, peaches, pears, plums, jojoba, cherries (post-harvest), avocados (post-harvest), sugar beet seed, clover seed, alfalfa seed. apricots, figs, cranberries, grapes, strawberries, green beans, other succulent beans, lima beans, dry beans, potatoes, mint, hops, oranges, nectarines, grapefruit, lemons, field corn, sweet corn, popcorn, grain sorghum, cotton, almonds, walnuts, peanuts and tea.

The cancellation removes an important component of IPM and resistance management programs for many crops.

Propargite is one of the least harmful miticides to natural enemies, such as predatory mites. According to a 1994 National Agricultural Pesticide Impact Assessment Program study, the use of propargite 1) reduces reliance on pesticides, because natural enemies contribute to pest control, 2) helps manage mite resistance, because mites do not appear to quickly develop resistance to propargite, 3) helps avoid induced pest problems that result from use of less selective materials. Benefits associated with the use of propargite are thought to be the highest in the Pacific Northwest, due to heavy mite pressure, lack of alternatives and importance of the compound to integrated mite control programs.

The NAPIAP report indicates that propargite use is 3.6 million to 5.1 million pounds of active ingredient per year. EPA's estimate is 1 million to 3 million pounds.

The NAPIAP study estimated the total economic farmgate value of propargite in the U.S. at $240 million a year. The canceled uses account for 10% to 15% of annual use. Based on the assessment, the direct farmgate impact from the loss of propargite is expected to be as much as $40 million per year, with some of the most significant impacts on apples (more than $16 million) and peaches (more than $13 million).

EPA has stated that it will give priority review to alternative miticides for the canceled uses and grant Section 18 emergency exemptions when necessary. Realizing that a cancellation was likely, EPA expedited the registration of abamectin (Agri-Mek) on apple (registration obtained on March 29), providing partial relief for that crop. Other products that might receive expedited review include BASF's pyridaben (Oracle) and American Cyanamid's Pirate.

EPA estimated that the farmgate value of propargite use would be minor ($90 million to $200 million), but significant impacts would be felt in selected localized production areas of affected crops. The politics of propargite. According to an EPA official, EPA decided at least nine months ago that regulatory action was needed for propargite. The agency believed it had one of the better documented risk cases clearly showing a chronic risk issue and involving infants and children, a subgroup of the population currently favored for EPA regulatory attention. It had a clear risk case, but there was a problem with taking action against the compound. Its use produced benefits of millions of dollars, it was a true IPM tool, and it was important in mite resistance programs. Besides, many of the user groups were in EPA's Environmental Stewardship Program.

EPA's first effort was to work with the registrant. Uniroyal submitted a risk reduction plan to the agency, but it was the opinion of EPA that the plan would not significantly reduce the risk associated with the product. The Uniroyal risk reduction plan for propargite included 1) lower maximum rates, 2) lengthened PHIs for apples and peaches, 3) promo- tion of IPM to reduce usage, 4) cooperation with food processors to reduce residues on processed commodities, 5) placement of apples and stone fruit on a separate label, and 6) removal of pears and figs from the label.

EPA planned to meet with interested parties in order to obtain voluntary risk mitigation or pursue regulatory action if voluntary mitigation could not be achieved; regulatory actions could include a Notice of intent to Cancel or placement in Special Review. EPA was prepared to accept Uniroyal's risk reduction measures as an interim step and then work with all interested parties to further reduce risk and try to maintain the benefits of the product's use. (EPA believed any risk reduction measure would have to contain cancellation on apples and peaches.)

In March, EPA shared background information with certain groups and individuals with an interest in propargite. EPA originally intended to gather input from grower organizations to look for risk mitigation measures that would lessen the dietary risk and still maintain the use of the miticide.

On March 23,1996, the National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides mailed a letter to Lynn Goodman. In that letter, NCAMP called for an immediate emergency suspension of propargite on apples, peaches, plums, figs and pears by April 8, 1996. NCAMP also wanted additional restrictions placed on remaining uses of the compound. NCAMP stated that, if the agency and Uniroyal are not able to announce emergency steps to stop the high risk uses of propargite by that date, NCAMP will have to act to notify the public about the risks, crops and food commodities associated with propargite's uses.' To back up its position, NCAMP stated that, if the regulatory process cannot work for whatever reason, the media and marketplace can ultimately ensure that the public is notified of the hazards associated with propargite's uses.'

It is an unfortunate coincidence that Uniroyal had another product that received such attention by a related interest group. Still fresh in the minds of EPA and the apple industry was the Natural Resources Defense Council campaign and the CBS Sixty Minutes' program about Alar use on apples. In an April 2 meeting between EPA and representatives of the apple industry, it was clear that the most important issue was to avoid another Alar type crisis in public confidence regarding the nation's food supply. Apples, other tree fruit, cranberries, lima beans and other crops do not have suitable alternatives for propargite but, faced with another Alar crisis, no one was willing to stand up for propargite. The prevailing opinion was to avoid a public relations battle over a compound that has been labeled a carcinogen and commonly occurs in baby food.

EPA and certain user groups wanted this issue settled before the compound was used this growing season. The specter of Alar loomed large, and no one wanted their growers to use propargite and then in the middle of the season find them- selves "Alared". In the end, EPA called Uniroyal into a meeting on April 4 and issued the company an ultimatum: pull registrations or else. No user group could openly defend use of the product.

EPA wanted Uniroyal to give up more than apples and peaches, so Uniroyal was forced to give up certain other registrations that would reduce the risk while maintaining the maximum amount of usage. For example, propargite is the only product available for use on cranberry for control of southern red mite. It is registered for use on cranberry only in Massachusetts. By giving up cranberry, Uniroyal reduced theoretical dietary risks by nearly 4%, but actual usage (and risk) was very small. This allowed Uniroyal to keep some of the more important uses, such as corn, potatoes and grapes.
Agrichem. and Environ. News, No. 122, April 1996, pp. 16-19.

Causes of aging and cancer:
The misinterpretation of animal cancer tests
Bruce N. Ames

Aging appears to be due, in good part, to mutagenic oxidants produced as byproducts of normal metabolism. These oxidants, such as hydrogen peroxide, are the same mutagens that are produced by radiation and cause damage to DNA, proteins and lipids.

The DNA in each cell of a normal rat receives on average about 100,000 oxidative lesions (altered bases) per day. DNA-repair enzymes constantly remove this damage, but they do not keep up: an old rat has over one million lesions in the DNA of each cell. A human cell receives about 10 times fewer lesions than a rat cell, which is consistent with the higher cancer rate and shorter life span of a rat. Decay of mitochondria with time, due to oxidative damage, appears to play a major role in aging.

The degenerative diseases of aging, such as cancer, cardiovascular disease, cataracts and brain dysfunction, are singly found to have, in good part, an oxidative origin. We have argued that dietary antioxidants, such as vitamin E and carotenoids, play a major role in minimizing this damage; however, most of the world's population is receiving inadequate amounts of them, at a great cast to health.

The main source of dietary antioxidants is fruits and vegetables. Insufficient fruit and vegetable consumption increases the rate of most types of cancer about two fold, as shown by about 2,000 remarkably consistent epidemiological studies. Unfortunately, a high percentage of the American population, particularly the poor, is eating insufficient quantities of fruits and vegetables. The quarter of the American population that eats insufficient quantities of fruits and vegetables (five portions a day is advised) is deficient in the vitamin folic acid (a lack of which causes broken chromosomes, cancer and birth defects) and vitamin C and carotenoids (a lack of these causes the same oxidative damage to DNA as radiation). Better diet is thought to be a major contributor to the ever increasing life expectancy in the U.S. and the decreasing (age-adjusted) cancer death rates in non- smokers. Seventh-Day Adventists who generally do not drink heavily or eat much meat, but do eat a diet rich in fruits and vegetables - have an overall cancer mortality about half of the general U.S. population and live several years longer.

The three main causes of cancer are smoking, dietary imbalances (inadequate intake of fruits and vegetables, excessive alcohol), and chronic infections leading to chronic inflammation (hepatitis B and C viruses, Helicobacter pylori infection, schistosomiasis, etc.).

Chronic inflammation is a major cause of cancer in the world, because it releases oxidants (HOONO, H2O2, OCI) that both stimulate call division and are mutagenic. Past occupational exposures, a major factor being asbestos exposure in smokers, might cause about 2% of current cancer; industrial or synthetic chemical pollution causes less than 1%, in my view. The age-adjusted cancer death rate in the U.S. for all cancers combined (excluding those attributable to smoking) has declined 14% since 1950, while life expectancy increases every year.

Two critical factors in the formation of mutations are lesions in DNA (produced when DNA is damaged) and cell division (which converts DNA lesions to mutations). Agents that increase either lesions of cell division increase mutations and, as a consequence, increase cancer incidence. Hormones stimulating cell division increase cancer incidence (e.g. level of estrogen in breast cancer and testosterone in prostate cancer); hormones may be a risk factor in about 20% of human cancer.

The assumption that residues of synthetic industrial chemicals are significant contributors to cancer rates and that we can lower cancer rates by eliminating them is wrong. This strategy is counterproductive. There are several reasons why dietary residues of syn- thetic pesticides and other traces of synthetic chemicals and industrial pollutants are not likely to be significant carcinogenic risks to humans.
a) Animal cancer tests, which are done at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the test chemical, are misinterpreted to mean that low doses of synthetic chemicals and industrial pollutants are relevant to human cancer. Half of all chemicals tested, whether synthetic or natural, are carcinogenic to rodents.
b) The vast bulk of chemicals ingested by humans is natural. For example, 99.99% of pesticides we eat are naturally present in plants to ward off insects and other predators. Half of these natural pesticides tested at the MTD are rodent carcinogens. Reducing our exposure to 0.01% ingested pesticides that are synthetic is not likely to reduce cancer rates. Synthetic pesticide residues in the U.S. diet rank extremely low compared to the background of natural chemicals, when human exposures to rodent carcinogens are ranked according to possible carcinogenic hazard.
c) Cooking food also generates thousands of chemicals. There are over 1,000 chemicals reported in a cop of coffee. Only 26 have been tested in animal cancer tests, and more than half are rodent carcinogens; there are still a thousand chemicals left to test. The amount of rodent carcinogens consumed as pesticide residue in a year is less than the known amount of rodent carcinogens in a cup of coffee. This does not mean coffee is dangerous, but that animal cancer tests and worst-case risk assessment, build in enormous safety factors and should not be considered true risks.

One reason we can eat the tremendous variety of natural chemicals that are rodent carcinogens is that animals and humans are extremely well protected by many general defense enzymes, most of which are inducible (i.e., whenever a defense enzyme is in use, more of it is made). The enzymes are equally effective against natural and synthetic reactive chemicals. One does not expect, nor does one find, a general difference between synthetic and natural chemicals in ability to cause cancer in high dose rodent tests.

Risks compete with risks and, therefore, society must distinguish between significant and insignificant risks. Concern with minuscule exposures to synthetic substances such as pesticides, while ignoring the natural world, harms health by diverting resources from programs that could be effective in protecting the health of the public. For example, adequate consumption of fruits and vegetables plays a major role in lowering disease rates, Therefore, increasing their costs by banning pesticides because of tiny hypothetical hazards of residues is not in the interest of public health.

Bruce N. Ames is a professor in the Dept. of Molecular and Cell Biology, Div.. of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at the University Of California, Berkeley.
Agrichemical and Environmental News, Issue No. 122, April, 1996, pp. 10-11.

Pesticide container cleaning and disposal

Proper rinsing and handling of empty pesticide containers is very important. 
Protects humans by removing hazardous materials. 
Prevents sources of environmental contamination. 
Saves you money by putting all the product into the spray tank. 
Makes recycling or disposal of clean containers convenient and inexpensive.

Mishandled empty pesticide containers can create a major problem for their owner, since most unrinsed containers are considered hazardous waste, complicating disposal. This article explains rinsing and disposal options. SAFETY FIRST!

Before they are rinsed or cleaned, pesticide containers can still hold enough material to harm you or the environment. When emptying or cleaning containers, protect your eyes and hands. Wear chemical-resistant gloves that will neither absorb pesticide or rinsewater nor let the material contact your skin. Wear goggles or a face shield that will protect your eyes from splashes or dust. You also may need to wear a respirator for protection from dust or fumes.

Protect the environment by cleaning the container completely. Use any rinsewater to finish filling the sprayer. If you cannot use the rinsewater, collect it for later use in a spray mix or for disposal; make sure it is labeled. Save cleaned containers for recycling, or dispose of them in a landfill. GENERAL CONTAINER HANDLING GUIDELINES

Never abandon empty containers. Uncleaned containers can be very dangerous to people, animals and the environment. Abandoning containers, even cleaned ones, is against the law.

Burial of empty, uncleaned containers or unused product is not a safe practice. Even small amounts of pesticide can reach water supplies or contaminate the soil.

When mixing, add container rinsewater to the spray mix to avoid disposal problems.

When purchasing pesticides, think about how you will dispose of the container. Manufacturers are putting more products in water soluble packages or in easily recycled containers to assist you in avoiding disposal problems and costs,

Check with your dealer-distributor and County Solid Waste Program about options for container recycling and landfilling. The Washington Pest Consultants Association (VVPCA) operates one statewide program for recycling plastic containers. Many counties or dealers sponsor and help organize WPCA container collection events. Contact WPCA (509-457-3850) for more information. METAL OR RIGID PLASTIC PESTICIDE CONTAINERS. Unless the pesticide label directs otherwise, triple or multiple rinse containers or use pressure rinsing to clean them. Don't forget to completely rinse the hard to reach areas inside the containers, such as the handle. Make sure you also rinse the outside of all the containers.

Triple/Multiple Rinsing:
Empty as much of the pesticide into the sprayer as possible. Turn 5-gallon or smaller containers upside down over the spray tank and let them finish draining for at least 30 seconds after they stop dripping. Pump or drain larger containers as empty as possible.

Add water or the mixing liquid to fill the empty container about one-fourth full. Shake smaller containers thoroughly. Add the rinsewater to larger containers, so that it contacts all of the inside surfaces. 

Drain the container completely, by holding it over the spray tank or pumping out the liquid. Add this rinsewater to the spray tank, if at all possible. 

Repeat this process at least two more times, until the container is clean. When triple rinsing will not sufficiently clean the container, keep rinsing until the rinsewater runs clear from the container.

Pressure Rinsing. This method allows you to continuously wash the inside of the container while draining into the spray tank. It uses a pressure nozzle to puncture and rinse the container in one step. It is easier and more effective than triple/multiple rinsing.

Empty pesticide into the spray tank. Let it drain for 30 seconds.

Puncture lower side of pesticide container with pointed nozzle.

Hold container so that the mouth is over the spray tank. (Make sure cap is removed.)Turn on valve to rinse container. Rotate container to rinse all inside surfaces. Rinse until rinsewater is clear.

Rinsewater. The best thing to do with rinsewater is to use it in the spray mixture you are making up when the container is emptied. This is the safest way for you and the environment. It also creates less waste and cost. If you collect rinsewater for later use or disposal, do not mix different pesticide rinse-waters. Label each container so you know what is in it. Do not dump rinsewater on the ground.

PAPER OR PLASTIC SACKS AND FIBER CONTAINERS.
Cleaning:

Empty the contents completely into the application equipment. You may need to cut the container to clean out all of the material in the seams. Never rip the container, but use a scissors or knife (not your personal pocket knife). Wear appropriate personal protective equipment such as gloves, eye protection, and in some cases a respirator. Do not let material blow around.

Rinse the containers if you can. Some containers have plastic or foil liners that will allow you to rinse them. Use the rinsewater in the spray mixture or collect it for disposal.

Don't burn containers. Burning is against the law and unsafe. Burning can release toxic fumes and cause illness.

DISPOSAL OPTIONS. Recycling pesticide containers helps protect Washington's environment as well as improve the image of agrichemical users in the eyes of the general public. Participating in a recycling program is "Good for Pesticide Users." In addition, it helps the local landfill by reducing the bulk it handles, thus reducing landfill costs. Recycling Procedures - Only pesticide container recyclers' can accept plastic pesticide containers. Do not take them to urban recycling facilities where food containers are accepted.

Only "clean" containers are accepted. Remove caps. They are a different class of plastic and can be disposed of in your normal trash. Remove plastic labels and sleeves; paper labels may remain attached. At collection sites, all containers are inspected, both inside and outside. Stains are acceptable, but residues are not.

Landfill procedures - Only "clean" containers are accepted. Plastic/metal containers must be triple rinsed, paper containers must be emptied, with their seams as clean as possible. Some landfills visually inspect containers and/or require written verification as to the cleanliness of the containers.

Do Not Burn paper, fiber, or plastic containers; it is illegal.

Dirty Containers will most likely be a regulated hazardous waste. Unused rinsewater can be a serious disposal problem. If you are unable to use the rinsewater in the original application, apply the rinsewater to a site allowed on the label. If you cannot do this, the rinsewater would most likely be a regulated hazardous waste, requiring complicated disposal measures.

For camera or Xerox-ready copies of this brochure, contact Carol Ramsay at: 364 FSHN, Washington State Univ., Pullman, WA 99164-5382 or E-mail at: ramsay@mail.wsu.edu Agrichem. and Environ. News, Issue No. 122, April, 1996, pp. 6-8.

Collection of Pesticide Containers

NOTE: The following is information being distributed to pesticide applicators in Florida.

Private Collection Encouraged

Although the main emphasis of my work is to develop local "public" collection programs in the counties and communities around Florida, I also encourage the private collection of containers for recycling. Any business or organization that applies pesticides or crop protection products as a part of its operation can rinse and store the containers for recycling. When approximately 2,000, one to five gallon containers are accumulated, the granulator will come to your site and granulate the containers for recycling at no cost to you.

Matter of fact quite a few large companies are presently participating and they accounted for about seventy percent of the volume ground in Florida last year.

Any individual or business that wishes to start their own program to collect containers for recycling, just needs to give me a call.

Copies of the brochures describing this Program are still available. They can be ordered by writing the address or calling or faxing the numbers listed below. The Brochures are:

1. "Florida Pesticide Container Recycling Program" - the history and background of the program and how to start a collection program.

2. "Recycling Your Used Plastic Pesticide & Crop Protection Containers" - a brochure to promote the program with applicators.

3. "Location & Contact Information for Existing Collection Centers in Florida' I.S. #2.

Sincerely, G. Tim Hurner Jr., Coordinator Pesticide Container Recycling Program, FAX 941-386-6544.

Pesticide Fact Sheets Available

Eight new pesticide fact sheets produced by the Southern Region Pesticide Impact Assessment are now available for distribution. These fact sheets were written by Pesticide Impact Assessment members in various Southern Region states, and were printed and distributed by North Carolina State University. Titles of the fact sheets include:

Pesticides and Endangered Species Protection Program;
Federal Pesticide Laws and Regulations;
Pest Resistance to Pesticides
Pesticide Residues in Food: the Safety Issue
Pesticide Usage in the U.S.: History, Benefits, Risks, and Trends;
The Delaney Clause;
A Proper Perspective on Pesticide Toxicity; and,
Why Use Pesticides.

Copies of these fact sheets have been distributed to all county Pesticide trainers in Florida. The fact sheets are also available on the Internet at the following location:

http://ipmwww.ncsu.edu/safety /Southern_region/contents.html

Chemically Speaking, June 1996.

Thanks to the efforts of the IR-4 group, a tolerance has been established for combined residues of the herbicide lactofen (Cobra) in or on the raw agricultural commodity snap beans. Federal Register; May 8, 1996. 

IR-4's efforts also resulted in EPA establishing a tolerance for residues of the herbicide clomazone (Command 4EC) in or on the raw agricultural commodity snap beans. Federal Register; May 8, 1996.

Control of giant ragweed, kochia, lanceleaf sage, Russian thistle, tall morningglory, and wild okra has been added to the Buctril 4EC (bromoxynil) label.

In the U.S., the average time between initial discovery of a pesticide product and the first registration is approximately 10.4 years, and the average cost of development and the first registration is approximately $36 million. These costs do not include factors incurred by registrants such as cost of manufacture, marketing, sales, and other assorted costs of doing business. Elsewhere, it only takes an average of 9.6 years from discovery to initial registration. Agrichemical and Environmental News; January 1996 and Pesticide and Toxic Chemical News; May 1, 1996.

Texas agriculture officials are considering a lawsuit against the man who ridiculed beef on the Oprah Winfrey talk show. The Texas Agriculture Commissioner has asked for legal action to take place against a vegetarian who said that mad cow disease could "make AIDS took like a common cold," among other comments. Food Chemical News; April 29, 1996.

Related to deaths from cancer, if you exclude lung cancer deaths, cancer mortality declined 14 percent between 1950 and 1990. Env. Tax. Newsletter; April 1996.

Study results presented at the last American Association for Cancer Research meeting proclaim that people who increase their cruciferous vegetable intake will reduce their risk for cancer. Additionally, a study of 120,000 Dutch people shows that people who eat onions every day lower their risk of stomach cancer by one-half over those who don't eat onions at all. The data show that you lower the risk of stomach cancer if you eat onions every day. The more onions you eat, the lower the risk gets. However, onion consumption did not affect the risk for lung, breast, colon, or rectal cancers. Food Chemical News; April 29, 1996.

There are more insects on one square mile of land than there are humans on the face of the earth. Progressive Farmer; May 1996.

The National Institute for the Environment has made more than 140 Congressional Research Service environmental reports available, previously accessible only to members of Congress. Their Internet address is: http://www.cnie.org/nie Pesticide and Toxic Chemical News; Mar. 13, 1996.

A recent poll in Iowa found 78 percent of the respondents favor limiting the amounts of herbicides, insecticides, and fertilizers that growers could use even if such action resulted in reduced agricultural production. This finding is especially noteworthy as Iowa is a very agriculturally active state and much of the population is far less removed from the farm generationally then are citizens in other parts of the U.S. Northeast Fruit; March 1 996.

The Washington State Department of Labor and Industries is providing $1.4 million for research into chemically related illnesses. The newly awarded contracts are to study chemically related illnesses including multiple chemical sensitivity. The department is also funding a pilot project to study the use of a field kit to monitor cholinesterase levels in agricultural workers exposed to pesticides. Chemical Regulation Reporter; Feb. 9, 1996.

EPA and OSHA have published a poster summarizing key elements for employers and workers to follow in controlling heat stress. EPA's WPS requires employers to protect workers from heat-related illness when protective gear must be worn to reduce pesticide exposure. The poster measures 20" X 24" and is printed in English on one side and Spanish on the other. Besides providing basic instructions for preventing heat-related illnesses, the poster also outlines the signs, symptoms, and causes of various heat-related illnesses, as well as first-aid treatment. Copies of the poster, document number 055-000-00544-3, are $1.25 each and available from the U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone in orders by calling (202) 512-1800. EPA Press Release; May 9, 1996.

Researchers in China have reportedly developed a new species of cotton that ulcerates the gut of cotton-eating bollworm larvae. Genes added to the cotton produce a protein that kills bollworms in three days by giving them stomach ulcers. Researchers transferred the bollworm-killing gene to the cotton from a species of germ. Reuter; April 8, via UF/IFAS Pest Alerts; April 15, 1996.

EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxic periodic bulletin "Chemicals in Progress" is now available only via the Internet, due to an EPA ban on printing from continued funding uncertainties. The publication is located on the World Wide Web at: http://www.epa.gov/docs/ChemLibCIP.

EPA has released a descriptive catalog of its 28 voluntary partnership programs. The catalog describes each of the programs and provides mail and telephone contacts for them. The voluntary programs deal with topics such as reducing pesticide risk, and conserving water and energy. For copies of the catalog, "Partnerships in Preventing Pollution: A Catalog of the Agency's Partnership Programs," call EPA at (202) 2603372 or (202) 260-8621. The catalog is also available on the Internet at: http://www.epa.gov /partners or http://es.inel.gov/partners. EPA Press Release; April 22, 1996. 

The 1996 version of the "North American Emergency Response Guidebook" has been issued by the Department of Transportation. This guidance aids those responding to hazardous materials transportation accidents. The guidebook is available in English, Spanish, and French, and may be purchased for $5.50 from the Government Printing Office, Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop SSMB, Washington, D.C. 20402. 

Many in the U.S. House of Representatives, including the Majority Whip, expect a bill overhauling the Delaney clause to be brought up on the House floor and sent to the Senate. 

Due to the high cost of reregistration, the uses of Kryocide (cryolite) that will probably not be supported include radishes, beans, mustard, turnips, and apples.

Control of beet armyworm, fall armyworm, velvetbean caterpillar, Mexican bean beetle, and green clover worms on soybean, and the control of cabbage looper, saltmarsh caterpillar, southern armyworm, and yellow striped armyworm on cotton, has been added to the Dimilin (diflubenzuron) label.

Monsanto is requiring that growers pay a $5/bag technology fee to use Roundup Ready soybeans, Growers need to be licensed to grow the beans and the seed cannot be saved for replanting. Agricultural Chemical News; April 1996.

An Experimental Use Permit (EUP) has been issued to Liberty Herbicide (glufosinateammonium) for evaluation as a selective herbicide in Liberty resistant corn and soybeans. 

The 1997 IR-4 budget proposal to Congress requests a $5.0 million increase to $10.71 million for USDA-CSREES. Together with USDA-ARS and other funding, this would increase total IR-4 funding to $13.3 million for 1997. Agrichem. and Environ. News, Issue No. 22, April, 1996, p. 1. 

IR-4 did a second accounting of the cost of GLP pesticide residue research. The cost of GLP was estimated to consume 36% of the total project costs. This is down from 40% in 1993. Agrichem. and Environ. News, Issue No. 22, April, 1996, p. 1.

PESTICIDE POTPOURRI

Motor vehicles weighing less than 10,000 pounds that carry pesticides would be exempt from the Transportation Department's hazardous materials regulations under a bill recently introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives. This bill would exempt any vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000 pounds or less transporting a substance designated as hazardous, including pesticides. Businesses that carry small quantities of these materials as a part of their normal operations would be relieved of regulatory burdens under the bill. A study focusing on just the pest control industry found that compliance with DOT's hazmat regulations costs the industry $135 million annually. Chemical Regulation Reporter; March 29, 1996. 

The March 26 edition of the New York Times reported that Chile has declared victory over the Mediterranean fruit fly in their persistent, 30-year battle with the insect. Control tactics in that country included spraying over heavily populated areas and confiscating all organic material entering the country. Chilean officials say that their latest inspections showed that all regions of Chile except one in the extreme north were free of the pest. The officials also said that the eradication would allow them to start exporting a number of fruits to Asia that are currently banned. UF/IFAS Pest Alerts; March 31, 1996. 

New research is showing that there is a threshold level for the triazine herbicides below which no estrous effects or tumors occur. Also reported was that triazine exposures are suggested to be overestimated by 10- to 1,000 fold by EPA, and that only eight of 1,500 sampled water wells exceeded federal standards for acceptable triazine levels. Pesticide and Toxic Chemical News; Mar. 27, 1996. 

Scientists at Penn State University are said to have developed a natural herbicide from the bark of what they term to be a trash tree, Ailanthus altissima. The herbicidal compound extracted from the tree bark, called ailanthone, reportedly kills seedlings as efficiently as some of the most popular commercially available products that persist longer in soil. Pesticide and Toxic Chemical News; Mar. 27, 1996.

Hitching a Ride to Faraway Places

Scientists are just beginning to explore the possibility that atmospheric water may contain measurable concentrations of pesticides in the form of rain, snow, and fog. Environmental monitoring of the atmosphere gains momentum as the scientific community begins to present evidence that pesticides can be moved great distances from the site of application.

Local, regional, and national monitoring studies indicate that atmospheric water does contain low concentrations of pesticides. A review of 132 studies, largely conducted in California and the Great Lakes region, indicates that atrazine, alachlor, metolachlor, DDT, dieldrin, simazine, chlordane, cyanazine, and coxaphene can be detected at some measurable concentration in at least 50 percent of the areas sampled. Higher concentrations in precipitation are linked to areas with the highest use. For example, the highest levels of trazine and acetanilide herbicides in precipitation occur in the Midwest during the spring and summer. It has been estimated that the amount of pesticide returning to earth is less than one percent of the total applied.

Evidence indicates that pesticides in the atmosphere may be moving hundreds or thousands of miles from the site of application. A recently published article in Science describes the regional and global transport of organochlorine pesticides. Tree bark from 90 sites around the world was used to track the movement of 22 organochlorine compounds. Tree bark was selected because it is an excellent scavenger of even minute traces of organochlorine pesticides. The evidence collected from tree bark indicates that many of the organochlorine pesticides are ubiquitous throughout the world. Organochlorine concentrations were found in tree bark samples from very remote regions of the world, such as the Orinoco Rain Forest in Venezuela, Guanacaste National Park in Costa Rica, the rain forest of Ecuador. and the Marshall Islands in the Pacific Ocean. The authors of this study postulated that highly volatile compounds can enter the atmosphere and be carried by global atmospheric currents from the warmer latitudes into the cooler areas of higher altitudes. Once in these cooler areas, the pesticides can condense onto plants and soil, and into water.

The presence of pesticides in the atmosphere and their ability to be transported and distributed worldwide are just beginning to generate questions related to their potential impact on drinking water supplies, stream water quality, aquatic organisms, and food chain bioaccumulation. It is apparent that the interaction of pesticides with the atmosphere and the movement of pesticides over long distances will continue to attract scientific investigation. Source: Pesticides in the Atmosphere. U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet, Pub. #152-95; Global Distribution of Persistent Organochlorine Compounds. 1995. Science. 269:1851 via The Label, Purdue Pesticide Programs, April 1996.

NOTE: Researchers at the University of Arkansas Pesticide Residue Laboratory found trace levels of atrazine in rainfall. This source adds to any pesticide in streams which may have pesticide runoff from treated fields.

Flim/Flam Alert!

The following is a current "story" from Indiana. We have no information of such offerings in Arkansas, but you can call the Arkansas State Plant Board for a listing of products registered in the state at 501-225-1598.

Expensive and Illegal Junk Offered for Sale

The Office of the Indiana State Chemist (OISC) has issued a formal warning to those who are considering purchasing pesticide products by phone. In particular, a group of herbicides known as KOM-BAT is being tele-marketed aggressively to farmers. The KOM-BAT line is being marketed by Stockade, Inc., of New York as a selective herbicide for use on agricultural crops or as a nonselective product with up to seven years' residual soil activity. Ed White, OISC, indicates that the Stockade products are not registered in Indiana; thus, they cannot be used legally in the state. In a written release, Mr. White calculated that 196 gallons of product would be needed to treat one acre of Johnsongrass. At a cost of $179.80 for each 2.5 gallon jug (a figure quoted to one farmer) the cost to treat one acre would be $ 14,096.

The following advice is provided by the Office of the Indiana State Chemist.

When contacted by telephone solicitors, purchasers of pesticides should consider the following points: 

Purchase products from local businesses. Avoid dealing with vendors whose only address is a post office box. 
Demand that the solicitor provide the EPA registration number of the product and an advance copy of the label before agreeing to accept shipment of the product.
Herbicides sold through the mail or over the phone often are not registered in Indiana and therefore are not legally for sale within the boundaries of the state.
Telephone solicitors often misrepresent the products they sell, either recommending them for inappropriate uses or exaggerating the length of their residual activity.
Avoid vendors who claim they can provide a product "just like" one of the best selling herbicides for a third or half the price. If a deal sounds too good to be true, it probably is!


Contact the Office of the Indiana State Chemist at 317-494-1587 and ask whether or not the product that is being sold over the phone is registered with EPA and Indiana.

Source: A February 15, 1996, memorandum by Ed White, Assistant Administrator, Office of the Indiana State Chemist via The Label, Purdue Pesticide Programs, April, 1996, p. 7.

Production Practices for the Future

Using insect predators to control pests is a wonderful idea, no residues, no contamination. The problem is that they are not always around when you need them. If you could only spray predators out when you want them ...

Progress is being made. A combination of food-grade carrier and a gentle spray system make it possible to apply the eggs of beneficials like a conventional pesticide application. The carrier is reported to stick the eggs on plants, and the unique spray design is supposed to minimize predator mortality.

Dr. James Hanks of USDA-ARS has developed a sensing device that allows your herbicide sprayer only to spray when it 'sees' a weed. The detectors sense when a green plant passes under the hood, and the nozzle is triggered to spray only when the weed is in view. Tests show that herbicide use can be reduced from 50 to 85% in soybeans with no change in control.

Cornell University has patented a strain of Trichoderma harzianum for use as a biocontrol for Botrytis fruit rot of strawberry. When honey bees and bumblebees were used to deliver Trichoderma, only 5% of the fruit was infected. Fruit infection was similar in plots treated with a conventional fungicide. In untreated plots, about 20% of the berries were infected. 

Predatory mites can be an important part of IPM programs, especially for tree fruits. You can order several different species commercially, but the cost can be prohibitive. With a new publication from Michigan State, you can grow your own. In addition to rearing methods, this publication describes how to release and monitor predatory mite populations. Call the MSU bulletin office to order copies 517-355-0240.

The USDA has identified four sources by which pesticide residues enter the human diet, on-farm pesticide use, post-harvest use, pesticides on imported foods, and persistent residues of canceled pesticides. Persistent, canceled pesticides pose a particular problem because the alteration of farming practices can do little to reduce the levels of DDT or other pesticides that remain in the soil for years. The USDA hopes to identify the greatest pesticide risks in the human diet and target research to reduce those risks.

There are indications that life will continue even without methyl bromide. An Australian report presents examples of successful production in flowers, strawberries, cucurbits, and tomatoes without methyl bromide.

Colombia supplies 10% of the world export market of floricultural products through cut flowers, but the cost and difficulties associated with methyl bromide have prevented its use. Composting, steam, and other pesticides are used to disinfect soil.

The Dutch promoted IPM and developed new cultural methods during their phaseout of methyl bromide. The result has been favorable; little or no loss for field-grown cucurbits and strawberries and yield increases in greenhouse operations. Key changes included techniques to chill plants, double-cropping, artificial substrates. Artificial substrates are used in 90% of cucurbit production.

Italian restrictions on methyl bromide have turned growers to increased soil solarization, pest resistant varieties, crop rotation and other pesticides. Solarization reportedly gives Italian growers satisfactory tomato yields and quality.

Methyl bromide recapturing/recycling is also getting more attention. A Canadian company claims to be able to recapture 75% of methyl bromide applied to agricultural fields.

What is the best way to fund pesticide regulation and IPM? An new book, Taxing Pesticides to Fund Environmental Protection and Integrated Pest Management, contends that mill taxes are the most politically feasible (that doesn't always mean best'). W. Pease, J. Robinson and D. Tuden examine the 2.2% tax that California placed on pesticides. The tax seems to have had minimal effects on food prices and pesticide demand. On the other hand, California realized substantial revenue from pesticide users. The book also investigates ways to raise mill taxes and allocate those resources to fund pesticide regulation and IPM. The book is $10. California Policy Seminar, 2020 Milvia Street, Suite 412, Berkeley, CA 94704; phone (510) 642-5514; fax (510) 642-8793; email ca.polsem@ucop.edu

Disrupting mating through the release of synthetic pheromones is an important part of IPM programs for some pests (e.g., codling moth). Research from Washington state indicates that correct selection, application, and placement of pheromone dispensers can be important to the effectiveness of the program.

Pest pressure and pheromone release rate determine the number of dispensers per acre. Different brands of pheromone products vary in the rate at which they disperse pheromone. Products that release pheromone quickly require fewer dispensers/acre, but the pheromone may not last the entire season. Dispensers must be placed in the upper third of the tree to effectively disrupt mating. Additionally, placing the dispensers in the canopy provides shade and protection from the elements.

Neogen Corporation reports the development of a portable lab that will allow you to positively identify a variety of plant diseases in 10 minutes. The company claims that ALERT On-Site Crop Disease Detection Kits can detect and identify numerous species of Phytophthora, Rhizoctonia and Phythium on potatoes, soybeans, certain vegetables, and some ornamentals.

The kit uses an immunoassay to detect the disease and indicate the level of infection. Target samples are ground and used in an immunoassay performed with included materials. Color changes indicate the presence of a disease and the level of infection. This new product could help to separate disease symptoms from injury caused by nutritional or other factors. I have not seen any unbiased information on these kits, but they may be very helpful. I will try to get more details. Neogen Corp, 620 Lesher Place, Lansing, MI 48912, USA. 1-800-234-5333; Fax: 1-517-372-0108.

Sorry, Integrated Pest Management' in schools does not include management of children. There is still nothing you can spray to control them, but I understand many children are naturally repelled by schools.

IPM in schools is becoming a big issue. Texas has mandated IPM into all school districts. A number of other regional scientists and I are trying to bring IPM to schools in the Southeast. You can find out what California is doing by calling 1-916-324-4100. Ask for Overview of Pest Management Policies, Programs, and Practices in Selected California Public School Districts. It's free. Or contact the author ssimmons@cdpr.ca.gov Or look on the WEB http://www.cdpr.ca.gov in the Publications section.

The EPA found out last month that their budget was reduced by less than 2% from last year. Pesticide education funds from EPA will be reduced nearly 9O%, from $2.08 million to $250,000. 1 have already written a letter to Lynn Goodman (EPA Assistant Administrator over pesticides) and received a reply. The reply stated that some funds might be restored, but it is unlikely that a substantial portion of the cut will be regained. The whole thing seems to be a battle to make USDA pick up the entire tab for pesticide education. In the meantime, you can see who will pay the price if pesticide education is not adequately funded.

According to the Kiplinger Agriculture Letter (67: 1), U.S. investment in agriculture research has been a good idea. Ag. research contributed to a 73% increase in agricultural productivity in the last 40 years. As a result, the American consumer spends about 7% of their personal consumption money on food. Other developed countries spend from 11% to 22%; less developed countries spend even more, up to 55%. The annual return on investments into ag. research is more than 20%. 

Latin America is expected to be a major growth area. Market liberalization, growing international trade alliances, and relative political stability are credited for the increased markets. Pesticides used on maize, soybeans, fruit, and vegetables are predicted to fuel the greatest growth.

BIOTECHNOLOGY NEWS

The European Union rejected the use of genetically engineered maize in European agriculture; the corn is modified to produce a protein that kills lepidopteran larvae. The Union cited insufficient labeling and concern for the gene escaping into wild relatives. Ironically, the Union approved both genetically engineered rape and soybean in the last few months; recent research demonstrated a gene for herbicide resistance jumping from rape into a closely related weed. The owner of the maize, Ciba-Geigy, will try to modify labeling conditions to satisfy the Union's concerns.

Ciba is merging with Sandoz to form Novartis. The two companies agrochemical sales are reported to exceed $4.4 billion. The new corporation will also be the world's second largest seed company. They have big plans for the biotechnology market.

Monsanto will acquire Agracetus, W.R. Grace's U.S. plant biotechnology business. Agracetus, a pioneering biotechnology company, produced the first transgenic varieties of cotton, soybeans, peanuts and certain other crops. This acquisition will give Monsanto unlimited access to the technology.

Zeneca will merge its international seed business with Suiker Unie, a private Dutch agricultural cooperative. This partnership will create Zeneca-VanderHave, one of the world's top five seed companies.

Do you see a pattern here? Many of the big pesticide companies are posturing for big roles in the seed business because they can see the tremendous opportunity in biotechnology to manage agricultural pests. If you want to see the future, look where the money is going. We have only scratched the surface of biotechnology. The Georgia Pest Management Newsletter; May 21, 1996.

HEALTH NOTES
Hot Day, Aint It!

Every year about 500 people in the U.S. die from heat stress. Late spring is one of the most dangerous times of the year for heat exhaustion and heat stroke. The weather can be very hot, but your body has had little time to become acclimated to the heat. Follow these tips from the Ga. Dept. of Agriculture to reduce your risk.

1. Drink a lot of cool water to replace lost fluids and reduce body heat.

2. Acclimate slowly to hotter weather.

3. Hire enough help. It does no good to save money on labor if you kill yourself doing all the work.

4. Take plenty of rest breaks during the heat of the day.

5. Monitor the weather and one another. Watch for confusion or disorientation.

Important Symptoms of Heat Stress!!

Heat exhaustion: fatigue, headache, dizziness, fainting, profuse sweating, fast pulse, cramps, nausea, chills, confusion, irritability. Cool the person with rest and plenty of water (if conscious). Splash them with water and loosen clothing. Don't let it become heat stroke.

Heat Stroke is Life Threatening: sudden headache, dizziness, irrational behavior, confusion, sweating may stop, fast pulse, rapid breathing, convulsions, nausea, coma. Act quickly! Move to cooler area. Remove clothes and wrap with wet sheet if possible. Otherwise, pour water over the person and fan as rapidly as possible. If person is conscious, have them drink as much water as possible. Treat for shock and seek medical attention as soon as possible. Elevate legs and continue pouring water on victim during transport.

Methyl Bromide
- The Continuing Story -

Methyl Bromide Alternatives, Vol. 2 No. 1, January 1996. U.S. Department of Agricultural (USDA), Agricultural Research Service (ARS). Monthly Publication provides updates on research for methyl bromide alternatives from perspectives of USDA, universities and industry. March issue contains selected reports from the Second Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reduction. Discusses use of irradiation, biotechnology, soil solarization and metam sodium use as alternatives to methyl bromide. No charge. Doris Stanley, USDA, ARS, Information Staff, 6303 Ivy Lane, Room 444, Greenbelt, MD 20770; phone (301) 504-5321; fax (301) 504-5987. Pesticide Action Network North Amerca Update Service (PANUPS), May 7, 1996.

Late Breaking News

The Akansas Pesticide News has joined the ranks of the electronic world! Yes, we now have our own web site and home page at :

http://cavern.uark.edu/depts/napiap/newsletter/newslet.html

We hope to add more features and links at this site as time, funding and reader interest permits.