Arkansas Pesticide News - Volume 22


February 1999 Volume 22
Arkansas Pesticide News

Arkansas News

Pesticide Applicator Training

National News

EPA Will Miss Deadline
The Methyl Bromide Shakeup
An FQPA "Side Effect"
New EPA Brochure
EPA/USDA to Update Advisory Committee on Pesticidde Residues On Food

General Information

Stressing the Green Message

Health and Safety

Research On Chemical Safety
Pesticide Applicators' Eposure of Family Members

Registration News

EPA Registers New Corn Hericide

Biotech/IPM/Advanced Technology


Dutch Farmers, Locust Control and more....

Did You Know





In this issue there are a number of interesting articles concerning the chemical tools used in agriculture. As has been the case over the last year the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) seems to be in the forefront of the news. Apparently, the deadline for meeting the FQPA's mandate for review of the organophosphates and carbamates will not be met by the EPA. At the same time research into exposure and how pesticides affect the health are being investigated to answer some of the nagging questions that have been around for decades. Some of this research is actually using human volunteers for testing, something that we haven't heard about for quite sometime. Soon to hit the grocery stores will be the EPA Right-To-Know pesticide brochure that is intended to help consumers reduce their "risk" of pesticide exposure from food. Those of us that apply pesticides should read "Pesticide Applicators' Opportunities to Expose Family Members". Though the title sounds like it's a recipe for how to expose you family, it really points out those avenues that lead to unwanted or potential exposure of our loved ones and ways to reduce potential exposure. There is also a schedule of training dates for those individuals who need to become certified as pesticide applicators. These sessions are for individuals who have not been previously certified. Finally, read the article "Stressing the Green Message" to hear a view about how our present systems of farming are actually helping to conserve wildlife habitat. The suggestion being that losing the various yield enhancing tools and technology we presently have could lead to expansion of farming into presently untouched wildlife habitats.

ARKANSAS COMMERCIAL / NON-COMMERCIAL PESTICIDE APPICATOR TRAINING SESSIONS
ANNOUNCED


Attached you will find the 1999 schedule for Commercial/Non-Commercial Pesticide Applicator Training sessions. These meetings are for persons who have never been tested by the State Plant Board and have never had a license for purchasing and/or applying restricted-use pesticides in Arkansas. Please make the appropriate people in your organization aware of these training dates. Preregistration for these meetings is required. See the schedule below for details. There will be a $5.00 charge for each person attending a training session. The payment must be made by check and made out to the "Agri. Development Council". The checks will be collected on the day of the training at the training location. These training sessions are for initial certification and serve the Commercial and Non-Commercial categories for Agricultural Plants (includes aerial applicators), Agricultural Animals, Forest Pest Control. Wood Treatment, Right-of-Way, Aquatic Pest Control, Demonstration and Research, Public Health, Seed Treatment, and Regulatory. These meetings are not for people needing recertification. If you need to be recertified, call me at 501-671-2234.

If you know of someone who needs a license for ornamental plants or turf spraying, they need to contact Tim Ellison at the Plant
Board (501-225-1598).

Ples Spradley
Extension Pesticide
Assessment Specialist

Please call or e-mail me if you have questions.
email to: pspradley@uaex.edu)
Phone: 501-671-2234


1999 SCHEDULE FOR COMMERCIAL /NON-COMMERCIAL PESTICIDE APPLICATOR TRAINING
(For Individuals Who Have Never Taken the Exams)

These meetings have nothing to do with recertification. These training sessions are for persons who have never been tested by the Arkansas State Plant Board and have never had a license for using or purchasing restricted-use pesticides. Persons planning to attend these meetings should call Mrs. Jean Page after 1:00 pm at 501-671-2226 and indicate which meeting they plan to attend.
There will be a five dollar ($5.00) charge for each person attending a training session. The payment must be by check and made out to the "Agri. Development Council". Checks will be collected on the day of the training at the training location.

Dates, times and locations:

March 3, 1999, All Categories,
9 am - 5 pm, Jonesboro, County Extension Office, 221 W. Jackson, Ph: 870-933-4565

March 15, 1999, All Categories,
9 am - 5 pm, Fayetteville, Plant Science Building Auditorium (PS009), U of A Campus, Ph: 501-671-2234

March 18, 1999, All Categories,
9 am - 5pm, Monticello, County Extension Office in the Drew County Courthouse, Ph: 870-460-6270

March 22, 1999, All Categories,
9 am - 5pm, Little Rock, Extension Service State Office, 2301 S. University (just north of the UALR campus) Ph: 501-671-2000




EPA WILL MISS FQPA AUGUST DEADLINE

The EPA has acknowledged that they will not be able to meet the Food Quality Protection Act's (FQPA) mandated August deadline for completing tolerance reassessment of the organophosphate and carbamate insecticides. FQPA charged EPA with reviewing one-third of the 9,000+ pesticide tolerances by this August, two-thirds by August 2002, and the remaining tolerances by August 2006. EPA is confident, however that they will beat the statutory, first-third deadline, it just will not include all the
organophosphate and carbamate insecticides as was originally required. Agency officials assured the public as recently as September that the August 3 deadline for organophosphate/carbamate reassessments would be met. Essentially, then, EPA will have the first third of the tolerances finished by August 3, but not necessarily the "riskiest" tolerances.
Food Chemical News; January 18, 1999

THE METHYL BROMIDE SHAKEUP

In somewhat surprising fashion, the House and Senate conferees accepted an amendment to the USDA fiscal 1999 appropriations bill that postpones the phaseout of methyl bromide in the U.S. by four years. Buried in the bill was a rider extending the phaseout for the fumigant from 2001 to 2005. The move harmonizes the U.S. Clean Air Act with the United Nations Montreal Protocol, an international treaty reached in 1987 and signed by 167 countries. The original version of the House and Senate agriculture bills did not include the amendment, but legislators felt that complying with the Clean Air Act's original deadline would be potentially devastating to American agriculture. Newly instilled methyl bromide production and importation regulation levels will be reduced by 25 percent in 1999, 50 percent in 2001, 70 percent in 2003, and by 100 percent in 2005, based on 1991 consumption levels. Developing countries, including Mexico, will still be allowed to use methyl bromide until the year 2015. Further information on this development can be obtained from the EPA Website at http://www.epa.gov/ozone/mbr Further information can also be obtained y call the Ozone Protection Hotline at (800) 296-1996.
In a related note, the ozone depleting potential for methyl bromide has been lowered from 0.6 to 0.4 in a new scientific assessment by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). This assessment will be used by governments worldwide in coming years as they decide whether and how to further restrict production and use of chemicals under the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. Under the Protocol, chemicals are assigned an ozone-depleting potential, compared with the ability of chlorofluorocarbon-11 and CFC-12, to break down ozone in the stratosphere. CFC-11 and CFC-12 are each assigned an ozone-depleting potential of 1.0. The original WMO-UNEP scientific assessment assigned methyl bromide an ozone-depleting potential of 0.6. Findings since 1994, however, led scientists to reduce that number to 0.4. The reduction was made because new research has shown that oceans and soils take up more of the chemical from the lower atmosphere, which keeps methyl bromide from reaching the stratosphere, than was previously thought.
Food Chemical News; November 2, 1998
Chemical Regulation Reporter; September 25 and October 2, 1998 Rereg. Notification Network, Nov. 4, 1998

AN FQPA "SIDE EFFECT"

When the Food Quality Protection Act was passed, Congress' intent was to protect children from dangerous pesticides. But the legislation has produced one side effect that no one predicted. Some organizations conducting pesticidal research have been testing their products on humans to demonstrate their level of safety, a practice that all but disappeared in the early 1980s. Manufacturers are paying human volunteers in Britain and the U.S. to swallow "small doses" of pesticides. This development disturbs officials at EPA, which does not require or encourage such studies. EPA calls this an unanticipated consequence of the legislation. The Agency has asked for an independent scientific panel to determine whether these new human studies meet ethical and safety standards. They will await the findings of the panel before using any human test data in administering the new law. Using human subjects to test the toxicity of pesticides is not illegal in the U.S. or Europe, but doubts about the safety and ethics of such studies led most companies to discontinue this type of research in the 1980s. Dow Jones News; September 27, 1998

* A panel was convened by the National Cancer Institute of Canada and the Canadian Cancer Society: After reviewing countless studies on the general population's exposure to pesticides, the panel found that pesticides are not a cancer risk and that a diet rich in fruits and vegetables is important in the reduction of cancer risk. (Journal of Cancer, November 1997).

NEW EPA BROCHURE AND WEBSITE EXPAND PUBLIC'S RIGHT-TO-KNOW ABOUT PESTICIDE USE ON FOOD

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today released a new right- to-know pesticide brochure and website informing consumers and their families on practical steps to reduce their exposure to pesticides used on food. These information products are being issued as part of an EPA program to help consumers reduce dietary exposure to pesticide residues and maintain a healthy diet. The brochure and website mark an important first step in the EPA program to inform the public about the risks and benefits of pesticide use. The website provides more specific information on how EPA regulates pesticides, organic farming practices, what the pesticide residue limits are on food and the health problems pesticides may pose. Copies of the brochure are being distributed to more than 40,000 grocery stores nationwide and also are available to consumers by calling 1-800-490-9198. The new website can be accessed at: www.epa.gov/pesticides/food.

EPA/USDA SCHEDULE MEETINGS TO UPDATE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REVIEW OF PESTICIDE RESIDUES ON
FOOD


The EPA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) have scheduled two informational meetings with the Tolerance Reassessment Advisory Committee (TRAC), a federal advisory committee chartered to provide the Clinton Administration with advice on implementation of the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA). The meetings have been scheduled to give TRAC members an update on the progress that is being made to meet new food safety standards required by the FQPA, including the reassessment of residue limits for the organophosphate pesticides. Many of the initiatives and pilot projects underway are the result of recommendations from the TRAC on FQPA implementation. The first informational meeting will be held Feb. 25, 1999 in Washington, D.C. The second meeting is scheduled for March 2, 1999 in Phoenix, Ariz. Both meetings are open to the public, which have been scheduled to encourage participation from both the eastern and western regions of the country. These informational meetings are being held to help prepare for a full TRAC dialogue meeting, which will be held in April. That meeting will include discussions on the risk assessments and proposed risk management options for certain organophosphates, as well as the development of a transition process for agriculture, as needed. An agenda for the February and March meetings will be made available on the EPA's website at: www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac. Future announcements regarding the April meeting also will be posted at this site.

STRESSING THE GREEN MESSAGE

The director of global food issues for the Hudson Institute told the 45th World Food Production Conference that food producers must counter opposition to advances in pesticides, fertilizers and crop engineering by stressing the environmental benefits of increased crop yields brought about by these advances. Further, it was stressed that industries would gain more public support if they demonstrated how high yields help the environment rather than if they show how they prevented starvation. One reason this message is reportedly not getting out is because conservation groups, whose main fear is typically overpopulation, are not looking realistically at the benefits of increased yields from improved technology and products. "The very people who are pledged to save the environment are telling us to use low yield organic and traditional farming systems, which will mean the destruction of the wildland. The stakes now are not famine, the stakes now are defined in wildlife habitat saved. Groups such as Greenpeace cannot afford to recognize this because their campaigns against pesticides and biotechnology have been the best fund raising techniques they have ever come up with. We are already using 36 percent of the earth's surface for food production, and that means if we do not radically raise the yields still further, there will be disappointed, possibly malnourished consumers and no room for wildland." It was estimated that modern agriculture is already saving at least 15 million square miles of wildland, which is the greatest conservation triumph in human history. AAP; October 13, 1998

BIG DOLLARS COMMITTED FOR RESEARCH ON CHEMICAL SAFETY

The chemical industry has now committed $1.2 billion for a six-year program of independent research into how chemicals affect health and safety. Project chairs have said that the results of this research will be peer reviewed and made public, "even if it hurts," promising to "let the chips fall where they may." The wide-ranging program includes an ambitious project that earmarks $100 million into general research into 10 priority areas. These include:
* Research into pathways through which humans are exposed to chemicals;
* Risk of disease from exposure;
* How health data from animals relates to humans; and,
* Obtaining a better understanding of the relationship between chemical exposure and cancer.
The industry believes that these are fundamental questions that must be better understood. The industry will spend $500 million over six years to test the toxicity of the 3,000 most widely used chemicals. An additional $600 million is expected to go toward screening as many as 15,000 chemicals to learn whether they pose a threat to human hormonal systems, leading to cancer or infertility. EPA has called the industry initiative "a truly very significant commitment of resources. Most important is the fact that the funding is not focused on 'firefighting' but at trying to answer the long-term questions that have puzzled health experts and the industry about the relationship of chemicals and public health." About two-thirds of the $100 million for general research is expected to go to the Chemical Industry Institute of Toxicology. Although formed in 1974 by the chemical industry, its work is widely respected for independence. The remaining one-third will be awarded to independent research scientists. Industry officials said that the research will be open to peer review and public scrutiny, stating that "the integrity of this research must be unquestioned."
AP; January 27, 1999

PESTICIDE APPLICATORS' OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPOSE FAMILY MEMBERS

Unlike many other occupations, family farms are different in that the workplace is often at the same location as the worker's home. Therefore, families of farmers have unusual opportunities for potential indirect exposure to occupational hazards, such as pesticides, regardless of whether they themselves are engaged in the daily operations. Additionally, family members may assist in farm duties and, thus, have the potential for direct pesticide exposure. The National Cancer Institute and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences conducted an Agricultural Health Study in which all people applying for private pesticide applicator licenses in North Carolina and Iowa from 1994-96 participated. The study included an extensive questionnaire assessment of exposures and health. One questionnaire was administered at enrollment. Applicators were then given a supplemental questionnaire that queried many items relevant to indirect household exposure to complete and return. Applicators were also given a take-home questionnaire for their spouse to complete that included additional items on indirect exposures as well as items relating to farm work carried out by the spouse that might lead to direct exposure. The final take-home questionnaire included information about children. A total of nearly 26,800 applicators supplied completed surveys, and this included information on more than 18,800 children.
Results suggest that members of households of licensed private applicators have several types of potential opportunities for indirect exposure. Many homes (21%) and wells were located within 50 yards of pesticide mixing areas, and 48 percent of homes were within 100 yards of the nearest field or orchard where pesticides were applied. Proximity of homes to areas of pesticide use has been shown to be related to pesticide residue levels in household dust and yard soil. In addition, there was the opportunity for potential indirect exposure via pesticides inadvertently carried into the home on the applicators themselves and on their clothing.
Another route of potential exposure was the fact that 79 percent of applicators indicated that they usually washed up or showered in an in-house bathroom after mixing pesticides, whereas 5 percent used an outside shower and 16 percent used another area outside the home. The laundry is yet another mechanism of possible exposure. The most common practice, used by 81 percent of respondents, was to wash clothes worn when mixing or applying pesticides separately in the machine used for all laundry. Another 2 percent always wore disposable clothing, and 4 percent sent the work clothes out to be laundered or washed it in a machine used only for this purpose. The remaining 13 percent mixed clothes worn when mixing or applying pesticides in with the other wash. Work boots were another route of bringing pesticides into the house. Typical habits show that 38 percent of respondents who had been working in the fields usually did NOT take their boots off before entering the house. A total of 93 percent reported that there was a wipe mat by the door used by family members working in the fields. The data showed that spouses and children of licensed private applicators frequently engage in farming activities, thus potentially directly exposing themselves to pesticides. Approximately 50 percent of wives did some work in the fields, and 40 percent reported having mixed or applied pesticides (66 percent of these performed both duties, 3 percent only mixed, and 31 percent only applied). The vast majority of older boys and more than half of the older girls also participated in farm activities.
The consequences of families being exposed to pesticides in these manners are uncertain but could be potentially serious. The extent of these opportunities for family member exposure makes additional studies of their health important. The Agricultural Heath Study includes follow-up plans for continuing formal contact the applicators and their families. Passive follow-up is also planned through cancer registries and death certificates. Somewhat conversely, however, was a study released in October 1998 suggesting that farmers have a lower standardized mortality rate, are healthier, and have a lower rate of accessing health care than other occupational groups and the general population. The study assessed the health status of more than 1,200 male farmers matched against 1,100 nonfarmers from the national population. Results of the physician-administered examinations included:
* Farmers had significantly more lower back pain, hip pain, and numbness of the hands;
* Farmers had significantly less fatigue, dizziness, chest discomfort, and heartburn;
* Farmers had significantly less use of outpatient heath care for psychiatric, neurologic, ear-nose-throat, ophthalmologic,
gastrointestinal, and dermatological diseases;
* Farmers had significantly more use of outpatient health care of trauma; * Farmers had lower rates for all causes of admission
to the hospital;
* Farmers had a heavier workload, worked longer hours, had more sleeping hours, and consumed less alcohol.
Interpretation of these data shows that the differences between farmers and nonfarmers were independent of the urban-rural factor and could not be explained by traditional determinants of heath and health care utilization.
American Journal of Industrial Medicine; December 1998 Agromedicine Program Update; Nov. 1998

A National Research Council study on Carcinogens and Anti-Carcinogens in the Human Diet: Found that any risk that may result from increased pesticide residue exposure "would be greatly outweighed by the potential benefits of consuming fruits and vegetables." Their report also states that the "recommendation to consume liberal amounts of fruits and vegetables is appropriate and poses no undue competing risk."



EPA REGISTERS NEW REDUCED RISK HERBICIDE FOR FIELD CORN USE

The EPA has registered a new reduced risk herbicide for use on field corn. The new herbicide controls a wide range of broadleaf weeds and suppresses some grasses. It is of low acute toxicity to humans, mammals, birds, aquatic organisms, and honeybees. The active ingredient in the herbicide is a chemical called diflufenzopyr and will be manufactured by BASF Corp., Research Triangle Park, N. C., under the trade name, Distinct. Health and safety data submitted to the EPA indicate that in addition to its low acute toxicity, diflufenzopyr is not a carcinogen, and does not cause developmental o r reproductive effects. Based on its chemical and physical characteristics, diflufenzopyr is not expected to contaminate groundwater. As a result of these findings, the EPA was able to register this product in 13 months. The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 directs the EPA to give priority to the registration of reduced risk pesticides. In addition, the EPA conducted its review of diflufenzopyr jointly with the Canadian Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA), under the North American Free Trade Agreement. Canada also has registered the product for use on field corn. Under NAFTA, U.S. and Canada are coordinating their review of pesticides to reduce trade barriers and bring safer pesticide products to both markets faster. The EPA and PMRA have requested the development of field data on the use of diflufenzopyr, including rotational crop studies, and certain ecological studies. As a condition of registration, these studies will be reviewed on an ongoing basis by the EPA and PMRA. More information on diflufenzopyr is available on the EPA website at:
www.epa.gov/oppfead1/international/naftatwg.

Tolerance reassessment decisions for chlorpyrifos (Lorsban/Dursban), one of the most widely applied insecticides, will not be completed by the August 1999 deadline. This delay is due primarily to all the necessary periods of comment required as a part of the reassessment process.
Pesticide and Toxic Chemical News; January 21, 1999

The Agency is now seeking public comment on FQPA-mandated preliminary risk assessments for 12 organophosphates. The risk assessments that the EPA is making available may be refined in the future if additional health and environmental effects data, use data, or other information on the pesticides becomes available. Human health and ecological preliminary risk assessments are available for acephate (Orthene), disulfoton (Di-Syston), methamidophos (Monitor), oxydemeton-methyl (Metasystox-R), pirimiphos-methyl (Actellic 5EC/Tomahawk Ear Tags), azinphos-methyl (Guthion), chlorethoxyfos (Fortress), ethyl parathion (Parathion 8EC), methidathion (Supracide), phosmet (Imidan), propetamphos (Safrotin), and tetrachlorvinphos (Rabon/Ravap/Hartz Flea and Tick Collar). Comments are requested by March 16. This brings the total number of organophosphate risk assessments available for public comment up to 28, and more are scheduled for release through this spring.
EPA Press Release; January 20,
1999 Federal Register; January 8 and 15, 1999

* EPA issued notice in the January 13 Federal Register that the Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) document for bromoxynil (Buctril Herbicide) is now available. This notice started the 60-day window to provide comments. EPA proposed product labeling changes associated with this new RED include:
* Plantback intervals. Labels must restrict rotation of treated fields, treated with more than 0.5 pounds of active ingredient per acre per season, to transgenic cotton (BXN cotton).
* The following language must be placed on registered labels: "The restricted-entry interval (REI) for cotton is 4 days and this includes scouts and crop advisors. The exemption in the Worker Protection Standard for certified crop advisors does not apply to bromoxynil. Scouts and crop advisors are prohibited from entering the treated area during the entire 4-day REI for bromoxynil. Applicators and other users must inform crop advisors and scouts of this requirement."
* In addition to the 4-day REI for bromoxynil on cotton, EPA is establishing a 26-day REI for uses of bromoxynil on turf grown for transplanting (ex., on sod farms).
* EPA has required mixers and loaders to wear a chemical-resistant apron. Although EPA has no data to assess the exposure reduction to mixers/loaders afforded by a chemical-resistant apron specifically, the Agency was persuaded that the exposure reduction would be significant.
For more information, call EPA at (703) 305-5805, or copies of this RED and RED Fact Sheets can be downloaded form the EPA
Website at http://www.epa.gov/REDs
Federal Register; January 13, 1999
Bromoxynil RED Fact Sheet

Monsanto has estimated that 27 million acres of Roundup Ready soybeans were planted in the U.S. last year. This is 37 percent of the total crop.
Agricultural Chemical News; January 1999

Abbot has added control of mosquito larvae in citrus, rice and irrigated crops to their Clinch (avermectin) label.

Thiacloprid is an analog of Bayer's insecticide imidacloprid. Thiacloprid is being developed for use on fruit trees, rice, and other crops.



Dutch farmers whose slow-growing cucumbers have been causing them headaches may have found what they believe to be a solution - Aspirin, and not aspirin for the farmers, but aspirin for the cucumbers. Scientists with the Dutch research institute TNO have discovered that feeding Aspirin to young cucumber plants helps prevent thickening of the root walls. Plants with thick root walls absorb water, pesticides and minerals less easily than those with thin root walls, leading to slower growth and related problems. It was reported that aspirin contains an acid also made naturally by plants to protect themselves. Further research is also planned on eggplants, tomatoes and peppers. The Globe and Mail; November 11, 1998

Locusts may become an endangered species following the development of the world's first bioinsecticide active against the insect. Trade named Green Muscle, this fungal pesticide spray contains spores of Metarhizium anisopliae, a fungus that invades and kills locusts and grasshoppers but is harmless to beneficial insects. It reportedly kills nine out of every ten locusts within 21 days.
New Scientist, via Agnet; November 28, 1998

Scientists at the University of Florida have found what seems to be a sure-fire way to outsmart cockroaches and get rid of them for good. It was reported in this month's New Scientist magazine that the insects follow filthy trails laid down by other roaches, and that the chemicals they follow could be used to lead them to traps. In some badly infested homes the long-lasting brown trails are visible on sinks, counter tops and other areas frequented by the insects. The pests use their antennae to sense chemicals in the fecal trails, so researchers thought they could use the chemical as bait for traps. The material, however, was very foul smelling, and they decided to dissolve the feces and isolate the chemicals instead. They transferred the chemicals to a water solution and found that the cockroaches still followed the odorless path directly to the traps. Until scientists specifically identify and synthesize the chemicals involved, they suggest people with a cockroach problem place their traps along the well-trodden roach trails.
Reuters; November 16, 1998

London-based 3M is investing $1.5 million in equipment so they can produce a complete line of microencapsulated products that can be dispensed by sprayers, including insect pheromones. The pheromones, which mimic a female insect's scent produced to attract a mate, have long been used by farmers and foresters in "fixed point dispensers" to monitor and/or foil the male insect's search and disrupt breeding behavior. While the fixed point dispensers can be effective, they are labor-intensive. By encasing the pheromones in a polymer coating, the company has created a mechanism for controlled release of the chemical come-on. As the capsules break open, they release a steady stream of pheromones that mask any plume sent up by a female insect. The female discovers her chemical voice cannot be detected over that of the popping capsules.
The London Free Press; September 26, 1998

Researchers are utilizing foraging honeybees to deliver biocontrol pesticide products to fruit, vegetable and field crops by placing an applicator containing a fungicide or narrow-spectrum insecticide, like B.t., at bee hive entrances. The bees pick up the material, which is harmless to them, on their bodies as they exit the hive and then rub it on the host plant when they visit the flowers. This technique was first used experimentally in Canada to control gray mold in strawberries and later expanded to raspberries. Since then, scientists in Oregon and Washington have used this technique to fight fireblight in apple orchards, while European researchers use bees to infect beetle pests of canola with a lethal fungus.
Ontario Farmer; September 22, 1998


A pest control operator in Green Bay, Wisconsin has been accused by that state's Consumer Protection Department of using nicotine smoke bombs to kill roaches in a home. The smoke bombs reportedly exposed a mother and her four children to the equivalent of 37,000 cigarettes. They were treated at a hospital emergency room for tightness in the chest and continuous coughing. The pesticide applicator is accused of using a pesticide in a manner not consistent with the directions on its label, and could face four years in prison and a heavy fine. (To make matters worse, nicotine does not control roaches!) Wisconsin State News Service; January 6, 1999

Pesticides applied in the 1980s to wood in buildings where wine was stored has been identified as being responsible for the poor taste of some wines produced in France's Bordeaux region over the past decade. Up to this point, the bottle corks were believed to be at fault. Trace quantities of pentachlorophenol, a wood preservative used on new wood to prevent decay and infestation by termites and other wood-destroying insects, somehow seeped into wines from Bordeaux, Burgundy, Beaujolais, and even champagnes. The chemical apparently worked its way into the wines in trace quantities, giving them a faint taste of damp cardboard or mold that is often associated with a wine cork that has gone bad. The amount of chemical in the wines is not enough to threaten health. When the cause was identified by wine chemists in 1993, several vineyards, including some of the Bordeaux region's most prestigious names, decided to tear down treated storage buildings and replace them with more expensive buildings made of solid oak, which do not require treatment, to eliminate the problem. Bordeaux wines were the hardest hit because they are always stored in wooden buildings after bottling. In most other regions, bottled wines are stored in underground cellars made of stone. This problem should never resurface, however, because that use of the pesticide in question was banned in the European Union in 1991. During analysis of 1,344 wines tested in the past two years, 44 had a bad corky taste, and only 11 (0.82%) of those were due to pentachlorophenol contamination.
AP, Reuters; December 28 and 29, 1998

According to a brief in the December 5 National Post, the EPA claims that foods grown organically are a safe alternative to those grown using pesticides and synthetic fertilizers. Others, however, say that evidence suggests consuming organic foods can be more dangerous than eating food treated with pesticides. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) confirmed 2,471 cases of people infected with the potentially deadly O157:H7 E. coli strain in 1996, but the CDC says this was only a small fraction of the total poisonings that occurred, and estimates there were at least 250 deaths. Organic foods made up barely 1 percent of the U.S. food supply, but were implicated in at least 85 of the confirmed cases. Crops grown organically also have higher rates of infestation by natural toxins from fungi, says the FDA, including aflatoxin, one of the most virulent cancer agents known to man. The story also says that organic food producers can compound risk by not using chemical washes, disinfectants, or even chlorinated water to prepare their products for market. Researchers say composting manure may not kill the bacteria, since the compost must be heated to at least 160 degrees Fahrenheit.
FSNet; December 8, 1998

The U.S. Congress has approved $23 million for further research into what are known as "mycoherbicides." Mycoherbicides are soil-borne fungi capable of eradicating plants that provide the raw material for cocaine, heroin and marijuana. Skeptics are cited as saying more testing must be done to prove the effectiveness and safety of the technology, and winning the support of governments of drug-producing South American countries, Colombia, Peru and Bolivia, will not be easy. Experiments conducted by Agriculture Department scientists focus on isolating the mycoherbicides that narcotics plants produce naturally. If, for example, a coca plant is doused with the fungi, it wilts, and decades must pass before the area is again suitable for growing coca. In addition, beans, corn or other crops grown nearby are unaffected. EPA scientists are cited as saying they believe no harm will come to humans or animals either.
AP; October 23, 1998

The pesticide industry currently is reportedly losing $200 million per year in sales, primarily because new crop varieties have lowered input costs. Additionally, next year the loss is estimated to be $300 million or more, and in two to three years it will be $700 million a year. Roundup-Ready beans, for example, have lowered herbicide costs from about $20 to about $10 to $12 an acre. This reduced pesticide sales across North America from $8.7 billion last year to about $8.5 billion this year, and next year it will be down to about $8.4 billion and then will decline to about $8 billion. The big companies that have invested heavily in biotechnology will be hard pressed to capture enough sales revenue from the new crop varieties to cover their costs and they are losing revenues on pesticide sales. The companies that have stuck to chemicals and stayed out of biotechnology and seeds are also losing revenues, so they have less to spend on research and development for the next generation of pesticides.
Ontario Farmer; September 29, 1998 via Agnet

Mountains in the temperate zones that get high levels of snow are reportedly "particularly susceptible" to accumulation of some organochlorine-type pesticides (chlordane, dieldrin, heptachlor), according to a report in the October 8 issue of Science. The report says that accumulation of organochlorine compounds in snow on mountains in temperate areas increases with altitude. The chemicals are said to become airborne in warmer areas, then are carried by air currents toward the poles, then condense and fall out of the atmosphere in colder climates. Analysis shows that concentrations of organochlorines increased 10 to 100 times between altitudes of about 2,500 feet to 10,200 feet. It was also noted that there is 10 times as much snow at 10,200 feet than at 2,500 feet. Increased organochlorine concentrations were gradual at first, but increased sharply above 6,600 feet.
Chemical Regulation Reporter; October 9, 1998

A Washington State University Extension Specialist and Environmental Toxicologist, Dr. Alan Felsot, contends that the Environmental Working Group (EWG) and other advocacy groups have a recurrent theme: There is a health crisis in America today because of pesticides. EWG wants the public to accept the notion that "pesticide use is rising, pesticide residues in food are increasing, and drinking water is even more polluted than a few years ago." Dr. Felsot writes that "(a) pesticide use has risen only as more acres are farmed; (b) 90 percent of pesticides used on corn and soybeans are herbicides with residues rarely found in foods, and 29 percent of insecticides are used on cotton, which is not eaten; (c) lumping all pesticide residues together to assess risk is absurd; and (d) the level of pesticide residues in our waterways is not increasing, but, rather, how our ability to detect more minute amounts increases detection numbers."
ACPA Action Line; October 26, 1998