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 Diana Horton, Department of Agronomy, Fayetteville and Ples Spradley, Coop. Extension Service, Little Rock

Volume 9, December, 1995

News From All Over

Keeping UP With Pesticide Label Changes

Arkansas extension and research professionals are expected to stay abreast of pesticide label changes within their disciplines. Keeping up is exceedingly difficult as crop uses continually are being dropped from labels. The Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station receives the Reregistration Notification Network bulletin from the USDA National Agricultural Pesticide Impact Assessment Program and can offer assistance in this area. The intent of the bulletin is to inform interested parties of recent or impending pesticide use cancellations and tolerance revocations. This document communicates pertinent pesticide information to interested clientele.
Call Terry Lavy (501-575-3981) for inclusion on the mailing list for the Reregistration Notification Network bulletin.

Using Restricted-Use Pesticides Equals Responsibility Designating a pesticide for restricted use ...

Pesticides are classified for restricted use when preregistration research data indicate a potential to harm people, the environment, or wildlife. Currently, 125 active ingredients about 15 percent of all pesticide active ingredients carry a restricted-use classification. ... mandates that applicators become certified, and that they ...

Applicators who purchase, use, or supervise the use of restricted- use pesticides must be certified to do so. A certified applicator is an individual who has demonstrated a certain level of knowledge and is deemed capable of managing the use of pesticide products so as to minimize associated risks. ... maintain pesticide use records.

Pesticide dealers who sell restricted-use pesticides must ensure that the purchaser holds a valid pesticide applicator license. Both the pesticide dealer and the purchaser are required to maintain a specific set of records prescribed by state and federal laws.
"The Label", October 1995, Purdue Coop. Ext. Service.

Excellent Sources on Restricted-Use Pesticides

The University of Nebraska publishes Federally Registered Restricted-Use Pesticides. Another excellent publication is the Restricted-Use Pesticide List published by the University of Missouri; it identifies health and/or environmental reasons for specific restricted-use classifications.
"The Label", October 1995, Purdue Coop. Ext. Service.

Questions and Answers About Pesticides and Children's Health

Q. In general, are children different from adults in terms of dietary risk?

A. Children's dietary patterns differ from adults in both quantity and types of foods consumed. Both EPA and FDA evaluate dietary patterns as well as other differences between children and adults before determining whether a substance should be approved for use in or on food.

Q. Are children always more vulnerable than adults to the harmful effects of substances?

A. Children differ from adults in terms of diet, metabolism, immunity, exposure to substances in the environment and other factors. Current scientific evidence indicates that such factors may influence whether children are more, less or similarly sensitive as adults to adverse health effects from certain substances.

Q. Does EPA currently take children's risks into consideration before approving specific pesticide uses?

A. To ensure that children are protected, EPA evaluates data from tests on the most sensitive and relevant animal species. These findings are combined with information on children's potential exposure to the substance through diet.

Q. How does EPA estimate children's potential dietary exposure to pesticide residues?

A. To estimate potential dietary exposure to pesticide residues, EPA uses food consumption data gathered as part of the USDA's 1977-78 Nationwide Food Consumption Survey. To help predict exposure estimates for children and other potentially sensitive subgroups more accurately, EPA has also developed a data base known as the Dietary Risk Evaluation System (DRES).

Q. Has EPA ever denied a tolerance because of specific dietary risks to infants and children?

A. EPA carefully evaluates the health impact on various subpopulations for each pesticide it approves. In the case of children, EPA has denied tolerances because of specific dietary risks to children. For example, in 1985 the agency denied a request for new uses of the pesticide fenvalerate (Pydrin) on alfalfa and sorghum. EPA determined that the potential risks to children from secondary residues in milk from cows eating such feed were unacceptable, and the agency denied the request.

Q. What can parents do to ensure their children's food is safe to eat?

A. There are steps individuals can take to ensure the safety of their produce selections: 1) select produce that is free of dirt, cuts, insect holes, mold or decay; 2) wash produce in water and peel its skin or outer leaves; and 3) eat a variety of foods.

Q. Should parents limit their children's consumption of produce?

A. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) states that, "despite the theoretical risk of pesticide residues . . . a diet rich in fruits and vegetables is the most healthful diet that children can consume." It is difficult to imagine children eating too much produce. Produce is a good source of dietary fiber and of many vitamins and minerals essential for proper growth and development.

Q. Should parents buy organically grown produce to protect their children's health?

A. There is no evidence that foods labeled "pesticide-free" are safer than foods grown organically.

Q. Are childhood cancers in any way linked to pesticide residues?

A. According to the American Cancer Society (ACS), there is absolutely no evidence that any cancers in children are linked to diet.
Agrichemical and Environmental News, October 1995.

Laying Pesticide Myths to Rest

For years, Dr. Bruce Ames, professor of biochemistry and molecular biology at the University of California, Berkeley, has railed against common misper- ceptions related to pesticide use. Among his most familiar pet "myths" commonly found among consumers:

Myth:
Cancer rates are soaring. Reality: The age-adjusted death rate for all cancers combined (excluding lung cancer from smoking) has remained steady or decreased since 1950.

Myth:
High-dose animal cancer tests tell us the significance of cancer risks for humans. Reality: Half of all chemicals - natural or synthetic - have been shown to cause cancer in animals. Animal cancer tests are conducted repeatedly, at near toxic doses. (Levels much higher than those occasionally found as residues in food and water.)

Myth:
Human exposure to carcinogens and other toxins is primarily due to synthetic chemicals such as pesticides. Reality: Our consumption of "natural" pesticides - toxins produced by plants to defend themselves against pests - is 10,000 times higher than that of synthetic pesticides.

Myth:
The toxicology of synthetic chemicals differs from that of natural chemicals. Reality: Humans have many general, natural defenses that buffer us against normal exposures to toxins - natural or synthetic.
Pesticide Coordinator Report, Cooperative Extension Service, University of the District of Columbia, September, 1995.

Chemicals as Human Carcinogens

According to toxicologists with the National Institute of Health, less than 5-10 percent of the 75,000 chemicals in commercial use "might be reasonably expected to be carcinogenic to humans." Researchers examined results from carcinogenicity bioassays of 400 chemicals tested by the National Toxicology Program (NTP) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI). They noted that the selection process for test chemicals is biased towards compounds suspected of potential carcinogenicity.

The scientists reported that slightly more than half of the 400 chemicals tested (52 percent) induced cancer in at least one organ of one sex of one species of the four sex/species groups typically used by NCI/NTP. Only 92 test chemicals, 23 percent, were positive in two species and thus by international criteria considered likely to pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans. They added that the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) lists only five of the 400 test chemicals as carcinogenic to humans (group 1) and ten as possibly carcinogenic to humans (group 2A).

The majority (80 percent) of 133 chemicals selected only on production/exposure considerations were not carcinogenic in animals, even when tested at the maximum tolerated dose. Only nine (6.8 percent) were positive in two species, and none is listed in the IARC groups 1 or 2A. In view of this, the scientists "predict that if all 75,000 chemicals in use were to be tested for carcinogenicity in the standard NTP bioassay, significantly less than 50 percent would be carcinogenic in animals, and an even smaller percentage (less than 5-10 percent) would need further evaluation." Nonetheless, the authors of this report endorse IARC's view that, without adequate human data, "it is biologically plausible and prudent to regard agents and mixtures for which there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals as if they presented a carcinogenic risk to humans."

Food Chemical News, Aug. 21, 1995 via Chemically Speaking, September 1995; Univ. of Florida Coop. Ext. Services, IFAS.

Pesticide Potpourri 

EPA plans to issue more changes for the farm- worker protection rule. These include a change in the number of days decontamination facilities need to be provided for certain low risk pesticides, from thirty days to seven, and a change to allow use of smaller signs in greenhouses and signs in languages other than English or Spanish. 

Corn earworms might be controlled in the future by a virus that makes the moths too sick for sex. USDA scientists discovered the "gonad-specific virus" that deforms the female's ovaries and the male's testes, rendering both sexes sterile. Scientists speculate that releasing virus infected moths in crop fields would render about 70 to 80 percent of their progeny sterile. The rest might reproduce, but would transmit the virus to their offspring. Related pests such as the tobacco budworm, fall armyworm, etc., may also be susceptible.
Agricultural Research, August 1995. 

Researchers in China claim they have successfully developed a new breed of cotton that can kill bollworms with a toxic antibody produced by the plant, according to a report issued by the Chinese media.
Knight-Ridder, July 25, 1995. via Chemically Speaking, September 1995, Univ. of Florida Coop. Ext. Service, IFAS. 

During 1990-94, U.S. exports of pesticides, fertilizers, seeds for planting, and farm machinery all exceeded imports. Trade surpluses in these agricultural inputs in 1993-94 were highest for farm machinery. Annual pesticide exports averaged $1.3 billion, with the primary customer being Western Europe. Annual pesticide imports averaged $0.7 billion, coming in mainly from Wester Europe.
AREI Updates, Number, 10, 1995. 

Here in the U.S., sales of pesticide in 1994 climbed to $7.23 billion. This figure is 6.6 percent above domestic pesticide sales for 1993. USDA's Economic Research Service reports trends in pesticide use from 1976 to 1992 in the U.S. has declined somewhat' after usage peaked in 1980-82. The rate of pesticide use has remained relatively stable at about 2.2 pounds of active ingredients used per planted acre since 1976.
Pesticide and Toxic Chemical News, July 12, 1995. via Chemically Speaking, October 1995, Univ. of Florida Coop. Ext. Service, IFAS.

Violative Residues Found In Less Than 1% of Food Samples

Fewer than 1% of 5,366 samples of U.S.-produced foods analyzed in FDA's 1994 Pesticide Program Residue Monitoring Report violated EPA tolerances, and fewer than 1% had residues for which there was no established tolerance for that particular pesticide/commodity.

Some 63% of domestic samples showed no pesticide residues at all, according to FDA.
Pesticide and Toxic Chemical News, Vol. 23, No. 44.

Do As I Say, Not As I Do

A United States District Court sentenced an individual to five years in prison for the repeated application of a pesticide to oats owned by General Mills: The pesticide was not labeled for use on oats. The judge presiding over the case indicated that the individual had violated the very rules that, as a certified and licensed supervisor, he had taught others to follow.
"Ag Consultant", May 1995 via "The Label", October 1995, Purdue Coop. Ext. Service.

Say It's Not a Good Idea, But Do It Anyway

A contractor was asked to fog a room one hour prior to employees' arrival at work. The applicator told the manager that it would be unwise and unsafe to make the application with employees expected so soon. The manager said he was sure that a competitor would be glad to take over the account. The applicator, against his better judgement, sealed the room, turned off the ventilation system, and commenced fogging. The applicator cleaned up afterwards, except that he allowed the ventilation system to be turned on by an employee of the firm. Instead of moving the air outside, it recirculated within the building. Employees experienced health problems and turned to the court. The court held the applicator responsible for the improper ventilation of the room because the pesticide label required the applicator, specifically, to ensure proper ventilation after fogging. The court further concluded that the applicator understood the severity of his actions because he had warned the manager that it was unreasonable to fog in the morning prior to the arrival of workers. He chose to ignore his own warnings and proceed with the application. The verdict was negligence on the part of the applicator. So the pesticide label really is the law!
"West", 1995 via "The Label", October, 1995, Purdue Coop. Ext. Service.

Your Pesticide Business Is on Fire!

A fire breaks out in your business at 2 a.m. Emergency responders quickly evacuate the residents downwind of the blaze. A two-mile section of an interstate shuts down. The fire department applies 400 gallons of water to the fire. The firemen decide that maybe their best action is to avoid a hazardous runoff situation, so they let the fire burn itself out. The manager of a pesticide business arrives within 30 minutes of the phone call and begins putting in place the company's emergency contingency plan. This story turned out well, but what would have happened if the decision had been made to extinguish the fire with water, creating a situation where contaminated water would have left the premises? Contact your local fire department and ask them about their response policies and procedures.
"Pest Control", April 1995 via "The Label", October 1995, Purdue Coop. Ext. Service.

Restricted Use Pesticides

Before a pesticide can be sold of used by any person it must be registered with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). As part of that registration process EPA will classify a pesticide, or maybe just one particular use that a pesticide is labeled for, as either for GENERAL USE or for RESTRICTED USE. If EPA determines that under normal use conditions . . . when all the label directions are followed . . . the use of a pesticide still has the potential to cause unreasonable adverse side effects to the applicator or the environment, they will classify it as a Restricted Use Pesticide.

Those products classified as Restricted Use are required to have the phrase "RESTRICTED USE PESTICIDE" printed in bold letters on the very front of the label. Directly under that phrase will be a statement as to why the use is restricted (e.g. acute toxicity; avian or aquatic toxicity; ground and surface water concerns; reproductive effects . . .).

The State Plant Board also has the authority to put restrictions on the use of a pesticide (e.g. 2,4-D). Unfortunately there is not normally a statement on the label to let you know that these are "STATE RE- STRICTED USE PESTICIDES." But a list of all restricted use pesticides registered in Arkansas is available from the Plant Board office.

One of the biggest reasons for classifying these products as Restricted Use is to ensure that the people using them are aware of the risk. Everyone who buys or supervises the use of Restricted Use Pesticides must be a "CERTIFIED APPLICATOR." Dealers who sell Restricted Use pesticides must verify that anyone who purchases the product has a current applicator license issued by the Plant Board and must keep records of all sales.
Arkansas State Plant Board News, August, 1995.

Methyl Bromide Reregistration Continuing

Methyl bromide reregistration proceeds despite the 2001 phaseout required by the Clean Air Act, EPA's OPP noted in PR-Notice 95-4 sent recently. The last registration data due date for the pesticide is late 1997, the notice said.

It stated that EPA will expedite review of potential methyl bromide alternatives. The notice said:
"Methyl bromide users need to prioritize key uses for research purposes so that alternative pest control methods can be found . . . "There are several possible mechanisms for replacing methyl bromide, or reducing its use. In addition to proposals to expand registration of existing chemicals, registrants and users also need to investigate new use practices (e.g., recycling, capture, better tarping, and improved injection methods), new pesticide active ingredients, new combinations of active ingredients, and non-chemical control methods.

"In terms of chemical alternatives to methyl bromide, the practical short-term focus may be on chemicals already registered that have substantially complete data bases. However, a number of potential alternative chemicals may also face regulatory difficulties in the future. Therefore, efforts toward development of less risky alternatives are being encouraged by the agency through an expedited review process."

Pesticide and Toxic Chemical News, Vol. 23, No. 43.

Agricultural Chemical News September 15, 1995, Volume 192

DIMECRON (phosphamidon) -- Wilbur Ellis -- the company plans to cancel the remaining registrations due to the cost of reregistration. It is currently still registered on apples, cotton, potatoes, and walnuts. Existing stocks may be sold until exhausted.

CONFIRM (tebufenozide) -- Rohm & Haas -- EPA issued an experimental permit to use on 330 acres of spinach to control lepidoptera insects. Authorized for use in AR, CA, MD, NJ, NY, OK, TX and VA. Expires 5-18-96. FR Vol. 60, 8-16-95.

MOCAP (ethoprop) -- Rhone Poulenc -- due to the high cost of reregistration the usage on soybeans and domestic turf will be deleted from the label. FR Vol. 60, 7-19-95.

ORTHENE (acephate) -- Valent -- Chevron Chemical Co. will discontinue the production of this product at its Richmond, CA, plant. Sumitomo, the largest customer, will produce the product in Japan.

CGA-248757 (fluthiacet-methyl) -- Ciba -- EPA issued an experimental permit to use on 600 acres of corn and 600 acres of soybeans to control various weeds. Authorized for use in AR, DE, IA, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MD, MN, MI, MO, NE, NY, NC, ND, OH, PA, SD, TN, TX, VA and WI. The treated crop must be destroyed. Expires 12-31-96. FR Vol. 60, 7-26-95.

AUTHORITY (sulfentrazone) -- FMC -- EPA issued an experimental permit to use on 4000 acres of corn, sorghum, soybeans and wheat to control various weeds. Authorized for use in AL, AR, CA, CO, DE, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WV, and WY. The treated crop must be destroyed. Expires 2-9-96. FR Vol. 60, 7-26-95.

ACCELERATE (endothall) -- Elf Atochem -- A new salt was issued an experimental permit by EPA to use on 50 acres of cotton to enhance cotton boll opening. Authorized for use in AL, AR, GA, LA, MS, MO, NC, SC, TN, TX and VA. The treated crop must be destroyed. Expires 6-14-96. FR Vol. 60, 7-26-95.

ALLANTE (dazomet) -- BASF -- Being developed for agricultural usage as a soil fumigant preplant on tomatoes, strawberries and other high value crops to control nematodes and soil diseases.

ASGROW -- The company has launched six Roundup Ready soybean seed varieties. These are genetically engineered to being resistant to Roundup when it is applied over the top.

IGNITE (glufosinate-ammonium) -- AgrEvo -- EPA issued an experimental permit to use on 562 acres of corn and soybeans to control various weeds. Authorized for use in AR, FL, GA, HI, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, MD, MI, MN, MO, MS, NE, NJ, NY, NC, ND, OH, PA, SD, TN, TX, VA and WI. The treated crop must be destroyed. Expires 3-7-96. FR Vol. 60, 8-16-95.

BLADEX (cyanazine) / EXTRAZINE II (cyanazine/ atrazine) -- DuPont -- The company announced it will amend its labels for the 1997 season to reduce its usage rate on corn from 6.5 lb a.i. to 5 lbs a.i. In 1998 the rate will be 3 lb a.i. and in 1999 1 lb a.i. and the selling of the product will be discontinued in 1999.

USDA -- The organization is in the process of developing the mycoherbicide Colletotrichum truncatum to control hemp sesbania in soybeans and cotton. Applied as a soil application.

Agricultural Chemical News October 15, 1995, Volume 193

DIMILIN 25W (diflubenzuron) -- Uniroyal -- Being tested on rice to control the rice water weevil. When ingested it will prevent normal larvae development after the egg hatches.

SYNER GIN (amitraz/tralomethrin) -- AgrEvo -- This combination product will be more widely available in 1996 for usage on cotton to control armyworms, budworms, boll weevils, aphids and 30 other pest species.

2,4-D -- Due to the cost of reregistration the 2,4-D task force will support the usage on aquatics, corn, fallowland, farmyards, fence rows, forestry, grass (seed crop), pasture, rangeland, rice, rights of way, roadsides, sorghum, soybeans, small grains (wheat, barley, rye and oats), sugarcane and turf. The IR-4 Project will support the usage on apples, apricots, asparagus, blueberries, cherries, cranberries, filberts, peaches, pears, pecans, pistachios, plums, potatoes, strawberries, sweet corn and wild rice. The Citrus Quality Commission will support the usage on citrus as a growth regulator. Uses that will probably be dropped are almonds, clover, cotton and walnuts.

KRENITE BRUSH CONTROL (fosamine ammonium) -- DuPont -- Deleted from their label ditchbank usages.

MCPA -- Due to the high cost of reregistration the MCPA task force has decided to support the usage of this product on alfalfa, barley, clover, grasses, lespedeza, noncrop usages, oats, pasture, rangeland, rye, trefoil, turf, vetch and wheat. The IR-4 Project will support the usage on peas. Uses that will be canceled are aquatics, beans, flax, forestry, rice and sorghum.

OUST (sulfometuron-methyl) -- DuPont -- A label changed added the following: "Do not apply Oust to conifers or hardwoods grown for Christmas trees or ornamentals."

SOLICAM (norflurazon) -- Sandoz -- As a result of the IR-4 Project they have proposed to EPA to establish residue tolerances on caneberries at 0.2 ppm. Comments must be received by 9-29-95. FR Vol. 60, 8-30-95.

BENLATE (benomyl) -- DuPont -- Deleted from their label the usage on turf and lawn grass areas.

EPA Reports to President Clinton on Expansion of Community Right-to-Know Reporting to Include Chemical Use Data

EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner has sent to President Clinton a progress report on the Agency's efforts to explore the expansion of community right-to-know reporting to include data on chemical use. The report is a follow up to directives in President Clinton's Aug. 8, 1995, Executive Order on preserving and expanding community right-to-know reporting. The President issued the Executive Order in the face of the Congressional assault on right-to-know requirements contained in a rider to EPA's appropriation bill.

The President's Executive Order, in part, directed EPA to expedite a fair and open process to consider requiring chemical use reporting to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI). The report demonstrates that chemical use reporting is essential to achieving the full benefits of community right-to-know laws. In her letter to the President, Browner said, "Our goal remains to provide the American people with common-sense, cost-effective and complete picture of the toxics in their communities, so they can fully understand and participate in decisions that affect their health, their families and their communities."

Public meetings to receive comment on and to resolve issues related to expansion of chemical use reporting were held in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 18 and 19 in the Waterside Towers conference room at 907 6th St. S.W. The meetings began each day at 9 a.m. For a copy of the issues paper or more information, the general public can call the TSCA Hotline at 202-554-1404.
Dennis Kopp, DKOPP@ morrill.esusda.gov; 24 Oct 1995.

EPA Enters Into Agreement with National Foundation for IPM Education to Further Development of Biological Pesticides

EPA has awarded $50,000 to the National Foundation for IPM Education to stimulate the research, development, availability and commercialization of biological pesticides which pose less risk to public health and the environment. Biological pesticides include microbials and biochemicals that have non-toxic modes of action and consequently pose little or no risk to human health or the environment. The project was selected for funding under EPA's Environmental Technology Initiative through a competitive, peer reviewed process. Biological pesticide producers may be reluctant to engage in new product development because of regulatory requirements and uncertainty governing the testing and registration of biological pesticides.

Under terms of this new project, the National Foundation for IPM Education of Austin, Texas, will assist EPA in addressing the concerns of the pesticide producers as well as users by working with them to help define product development needs and streamlining the registration process for new, safer pesticides.
Dennis Kopp, DKOPP@ morrill.esusda.gov; 24 Oct 1995.

Triazines Continued Use Need, Benefits Asserted in Comments

The Kentucky Farm Bureau Federation, based on a survey of farmers, found that "Atrazine is the top-selling herbicide in Kentucky used mainly on corn. Last year, 1,747,472 pounds were used to protect the corn crop with a value of $286,667,000 according to the 1995 Kentucky Agricultural Statistics Report". In comments filed with EPA on the triazines special review the federation noted other farmer survey results, including:

 "If atrazine was not available, 64% did not know what they would use to replace it and 85% said yields would decline. The average decline was estimated to be 24 bushels/acre.
 "82% said there would be a loss of crop quality. The types of quality problems stated were increased weed competition which would reduce yields, reduce ear size, reduce grain size and weight, increase weed seed in harvested grain and increase disease pressure.
 "100% said their production costs would increase. Average increase in costs was estimated at $20.39/acre.
 "The most common comment was a concern over losing an effective, low cost chemical that had not been proven to cause problems. There was also concern that any replacement product would be expensive and some producers would have to cultivate more, which could lead to increased soil loss."

The University of Florida's Department of Environmental Horticulture commented that there were no alternatives for atrazine and simazine for broadleaf weed control in St. Augustinegrass and centipedegrass.
L.B. McCarty's comment observed:
"Our turfgrass industry provides a $8.6 billion economic impact to the citizens of Florida. If triazine herbicide registrations are dropped, turf aesthetics will suffer, reducing property value and reducing the tourist industry. Turf quality will also suffer in terms of preventing soil erosion and acting as a filter' of other hazardous materials such as gas, oil, and radiator fluid runoff from parking lots."

The Texas Corn Growers Association, noting that EPA had added a year for producer groups to comment on the triazine special review, said it will look at the "additional data that we can make available in conjunction with the next growing season." The group also asked for a meeting with EPA.

Rose Vesper, Ohio House of Representatives, commented, "Ohioans plant upwards of 5,000,000 acres of corn every year and statistics indicate that at least two thirds of those acres are treated with atrazine to maximize productivity at minimum cost. It can truly be said that a major segment of Ohio's farm production relies upon atrazine as an integral part of its production cycle." She said the state's farmers make decisions based on "proven science," and asked EPA to do the same in its special review of triazines.
Pesticide and Toxic Chemical News, September 13, 1995.

Agricultural Marketplace Excited About Biotech Products 

EPA has conditionally approved Rhone-Poulenc's use of bromoxynil (trade name Buctril ) on bromoxynil-tolerant cotton. This genetically engineered cotton was developed by transferring into cotton a bromoxynil-degrading enzyme from a soil microorganism. EPA will review the conditional registration after two years.  American Cyanamid received EPA permission to conduct controlled, small-scale field tests with a genetically altered cotton containing Autographa californica a multiple nuclear polyhedrosis virus. Autographa is a naturally occurring, insect-specific pathogen that arrests the insects' feeding instincts. The targeted pests will be cabbage loopers and tobacco budworms.
"The Gene Exchange", July 1995; and "Farm Chemicals", July 1995 via "The Label", October 1995, Purdue Coop. Ext. Service.

Organic Farming Successes Detailed in Report

Organic farming, projected to be responsible for 6% of food and fiber production in the next 10 years, results in yields 79% - 96% of those on conventional farms and reduces production expenses by 81% - 95% of conventional farms, according to a report, "Healthy Food, Healthy Farms: Pest Management in the Public Interest," by Charles Benbrook, released this week by the National Campaign for Pesticide Policy Reform.

The report examined eight organic farms. One was a cotton farm in Texas. Quoting USDA, the report noted "98.3% of cotton acreage nationwide was sprayed with one or more pesticides." According to the report, "Texas organic farmers eliminated 100% of synthetic chemical use on their certified organic acreage. By doing so they save $50 to $75 per acre in expenditures on chemicals, money that is used to cover other expenses required to successfully use biologically-based IPM systems."

The report noted that in 1992, 17,299,882 pounds of 16 herbicides were applied to 15,542,000 acres of corn in Nebraska. It said, "Corn and soybean farmers in Nebraska spend between $15 and $35 per acre purchasing pesticides, mostly herbicides, and another $6 to $12 per acre applying them (between $2 to $6 cost per application on each acre treated.)"

The organic corn, small grain and turnip farm in Nebraska (Larson's), according to the report, saved $10 to $20 per acre per year on pest management. It said, "The ability to use all crop residues and surplus forages, as well as turnips grown as a fall cover crop as cattle feed, has helped lower cash production expenses and maximize the food produced on the farm."

This farm in some years more than doubled the average return on a comparably well-managed conventional farm, the report said. It stated, "organic corn-soybean systems also markedly reduce the leaching of nutrients of nitrogen into groundwater a major problem throughout intensively farmed regions of the country. Because no herbicides are applied for weed control, there is no risk of drinking water contamination, another major problem, especially in the spring and early summer, throughout the mid-west."

A California peach and plum farm (Buxman's), in years without adverse weather, harvests crops with yields between 90% and 100% of conventional operations, the report said.

It stated:
"In contrast to conventional growers in the area, Buxman's costs generally run between 95% and 105% of conventional growers. Pesticide expenditures are clearly one of the largest differences . . . . In some years, conventional growers spend over $300 per acre on pesticides, sometimes still suffering significant losses. Resistance to pesticides is serious in nearly all California tree-fruit crops and is bound to compel more farmers to move along the transition to more biologically based pest management systems." This case study in the report concluded, "Most farmers who have adopted sustainable and organic production methods in California orchard systems have done so because of problems with pesticides, especially resistance."

The report's summary section said,
"Farmers are adopting production methods and sustainable farming systems because of concerns about the slipping efficacy of pesticide-based control methods and the rising cost of pesticides, often coupled with a desire to work more closely with natural cycles. Many fear that pesticides have or may harm the health of their families and neighbors. Others are driven by economics and the chance to earn higher prices for safer, more nutritious food products."

It said the experience of the eight farmers and the pest management systems they developed "offer hope that American agriculture can: avoid production problems caused by excessive reliance on pesticides; significantly cut pesticide use and production expenses; assure consumers access to safe and high quality foods and drinking water free from pesticide contamination; and provide farm workers and those manufacturing, handling and applying pesticides a safer working environment."

Pesticide and Toxic Chemical News, September 20, 1995.

Burden of Proof on EPA, Not Crop Duster, Under FIFRA, EAB Rules

The burden of proof in a case involving use of a pesticide inconsistent with its labeling, a violation of FIFRA Section 12(a)(2)(G), is on the complainant charging the violation, not the defendant, the EPA Environmental Appeals Board has affirmed in a case it dismissed involving a woman who complained that Thomsen Aerial Spraying sprayed her with Cornbelt Parathion E8 while cropdusting.

In the case, EPA Region 7, which filed the complaint on behalf of Wymore, NE, landowner Mary Caster, said that Thomsen aerially applied the parathion on Aug. 10, 1990, and the drift from the pesticide hit Caster, despite labeling on the chemical that reads "Keep all unprotected persons and children away from treated area or where there is danger of drift." EPA proposed a $3,000 penalty.

The EPA ALJ in the initial case ruled that the complainant, EPA, had not shown by a preponderance of evidence that the drift from the pesticide had landed on Caster's property or person.

On appeal, EPA argued that the presiding officer had incorrectly required the region to bear the burden of proof as to Thomsen's affirmative defense. Specifically, the agency said that Thomsen denied responsibility for the allegations in the complaint and suggested another applicator might be at fault, which, EPA said, constitutes an affirmative defense for which the respondent bears the burden of proof.

Environmental Appeals Board Judge Ronald McCallum disagreed with the EPA argument, saying that a true affirmative defense raises matters outside the scope of the agency's prima facie case, and that, far from an affirmative defense, "Thomsen's assertion that it was not the party responsible for the alleged violations goes to the heart of the agency's case. As the regulations make clear, it is the complainant that has the burden of going forward with and proving that the violations occurred as set forth in the complaint."

McCallum also disagreed with EPA's arguments that the presiding officer in the case applied an incorrect standard of proof by not only making the complainant show that the pesticide was misapplied, but also by requiring EPA to disprove that a different applicator could have been at fault. The appeals judge said that all that EPA, as the complainant, was required to do was prove that the crop duster wrongfully applied the pesticide, and that EPA had failed to do that.

McCallum in conclusion emphasized, "The preponderance of evidence in the record fails to support the claimed violation. Accordingly . . . the initial decision is summarily affirmed, and the complaint dismissed."

Pesticide and Toxic Chemical News, September 20, 1995.

Protect Yourself With a Shirt

Up to 98% of pesticide exposure can be eliminated by wearing long-sleeved shirts and chemically resistant gloves.

Research shows that, of the contamination that lands on a person's body during the mixing and loading process, 85% gets on the hands and 13% lands on the forearms. Most applicators know the importance of wearing gloves when mixing pesticides, but use inspections have found that many applicators are not protecting their forearms.

Applicators should dedicate a long-sleeved shirt to the sole purpose of pesticide handling. This shirt should be included with an applicator's other personal protective equipment and worn only for pesticide handling. It should be washed separately from the family laundry. For products that bear a "WARNING" or "DANGER" signal word, chemically resistant forearm protectors are needed over long sleeves.
H. Deer, Utah State University Newsletter via Agrichemical and Environmental News, October 1995.

1994 Pesticide Residue Monitoring Data Base

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of Fiscal Year (FY) 1994 pesticide residue monitoring data on computer diskettes. This is the third annual comprehensive compilation and public release of FDA monitoring data for pesticide residues in foods. The agency is making the information available on computer diskettes to facilitate its dissemination to interested persons.

ADDRESSES:
Pesticide residue monitoring data on computer diskettes may be ordered from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield VA 22161. Orders must reference NTIS order number PB95-503132 and include a payment of $50.00 for each copy of the data base.
In addition, there is a handling fee of $4.00 for one copy of the data base, $6.00 for two copies, and $8.00 for three or more copies.
Payment may be made by check, money order, charge card (American Express, VISA, or MasterCard), or by billing arrangements made with NTIS. Charge card orders must include the charge account number and expiration date. For telephone orders or further information on placing an order call NTIS at 703-487-4650.

Lake Getting Cleaner Water

Lakes polluted by farmland runoff can get a new lease on life, ARS researchers showed. For more than a decade, they tracked pollution in Arkansas' Lake Chicot. It is surrounded by 360 square miles of cotton, soybeans, and rice. The ARS study examined how excess farm chemicals, suspended sediment, and other pollutants washing into the lake could harm water quality. In 1985, the scientists arrived at a solution, in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. This included diverting storm water around the lake and channeling cleaner water into it. Water quality improved, rejuvenating the lake's recreation and fisheries.
Charlie Cooper, USDA-ARS National Sedimentation Laboratory, Oxford Mississippi; phone (601) 232-2900. Frank Schiebe, USDA-ARS National Agricultural Water Quality Laboratory, Durant, Oklahoma; phone (405) 924-5066.

Consumers Willing to Pay More to Reduce Pesticide Use

According to a national opinion poll sponsored by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), 84 percent of consumers would be willing to pay as much as $2 per year per family member in additional food costs if pesticide use were reduced. Other findings of the poll, conducted by the Bruskin Goldring research firm on January 27-29, include:
 90 percent of Americans would be willing to pay an extra $0.50 per year per family member to reduce pesticide use;
 86 percent of Americans think federal and state agricultural agencies should teach farmers how to use fewer pesticides and other chemicals;
 76 percent of Americans supported levying a small charge on agricultural uses of pesticides as a way of funding sustainable agriculture.

The CSPI released the results of the poll in a report Funding Safer Farming: Taxing Pesticides and Fertilizers. In the report, CSPI recommended that states raise taxes on pesticides by as much as 5 percent and taxes on fertilizers by as much as 1.5 percent to fund educational and technical efforts aimed at getting farmers to reduce pesticide use. These increases would add slightly less than $2.15 per person to the nation's food bill, according to the report.
Food Chemical News 37(14), May 29, 1995.

Judge Finds Benlate Contamination Free

In a ruling issued Sept. 22, a Florida administrative law judge ruled that benomyl (Benlate 50 DF) was not contaminated by sulfonylureas (SUs) or dibutylureas (DBUs), as has been alleged by the Florida Department of Agriculture.

Bob Crawford, Florida's agricultural commissioner, had charged that benomyl (Benlate DF) was responsible for alleged widespread crop damage in the state. P. Michael Ruff, the Florida administrative law judge, ruled, however, that testimony from DuPont scientists was "more credible, persuasive and probative" than that offered by the state scientists; he ruled that the Florida Department of Agriculture's complaint against DuPont be dismissed. The ruling refutes the position of Crawford and others that Benlate was contaminated by sulfonylurea herbicides.

Central to Crawford's SU case was the testimony of Wendy King, the chief analytical chemist from the state's pesticide laboratory. Judge Ruff's ruling found King's testing and testimony to be unreliable, while finding more persuasive the testing by DuPont scientists and an outside laboratory, which found no SUs in Benlate.

Additionally, the administrative law judge ruled that there was no contamination associated with DBUs, a product resulting from Benlate breakdown.
Agrichemical and Environmental News, October 1995.

ARS Kit Checks Fruits and Vegetables for Fungicide Residues

A new kit just entering the marketplace can verify that fungicide residues on the surface of fruits and vegetables are within safe levels. The fungicide, thiabendazole, protects potatoes, apples, bananas, lemons, oranges, and other produce from mold and rot. ARS researchers and colleagues from Millipore/ImmunoSystems, Bedford, Massachusetts, developed the kit. It will simplify safety checks by regulatory agencies, food processors, and retailers. Growers can use it too. The test can ensure that a thiabendazole concentration applied in a dip or spray can guard the harvest but will not leave excess residue. The kit uses customized proteins called monoclonal antibodies. In a liquid that contains bits of fruit or vegetable peel, the proteins bind to any fungicide present. This changes the liquid's color. The test takes about 4 hours, much less time than other methods. USDA/ARS, August 1995.
For more information call (510) 559-5783.

Pilot Division for Promoting Safer Pesticides and Streamlining the Registration of Biological Pesticides Made Permanent

EPA has announced that the pilot Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division has been given permanent status. Begun in the Agency's Office of Pesticide Programs on a trial basis in November 1994, the division was given a number of key responsibilities: promoting pollution prevention; reducing pesticide use; increasing adaption of integrated pest management techniques; encouraging the development and use of safer pesticides; accelerating the registration of new biological pesticides; and managing the reregistration actions for all biological pesticides. Nineteen biological pesticides were registered by the division in its first year including several biochemical pesticides which have a non-toxic mode of action, a number of pheromones that can reduce the use of chemical insecticides, and some microbial pesticides to replace fungicides used in postharvest treatment of fruit to prevent spoilage in storage. The first genetically engineered plant pesticides were registered this year: The Bacillus thuringensis (BT) toxin produced in potatoes to control the Colorado potato beetle; BT in corn to control the European corn borer; and BT in cotton to control the cotton bollworm. The new division is working closely with the U.S. Department of Agriculture to explore alternatives to traditional pesticides in controlling pests and to promote a new Pesticide Environmental Stewardship Partnership program among pesticide users.
FIEN Environmental Weekly, October 13, 1995.

FDA and USDA Pesticide Residue Monitoring Reports Made Available

The FDA and the USDA have published reports documenting the results of their respective pesticide residue monitoring programs. Both Agencies' reports demonstrate that the year's monitoring results are very similar to results from recent years.

The FDA's Pesticide Program Residue Monitoring report for 1994 revealed that out of 5,366 samples of U.S. produced foods analyzed, 55 (1.02%) samples were violative. Violative samples include those samples where pesticide residues are over tolerance, or for residues which there are no established tolerances for that particular pesticide-commodity interaction.

The FDA report noted that some 63% of domestic samples showed no pesticide residues at all. The domestic surveillance samples analyzed were grouped into six commodity categories:

grains and grain products,
milk/dairy products/eggs,
fish/shellfish,
fruits,
vegetables, and
others'.

The vegetable group had the highest level of violative samples. Of a total of 1,795 samples, 66% had no residues at all, 32% had residues but not at violative levels, and 2% had violative levels of residues. Grains and grain products had the next highest level of violative residues, 1.5%, out of 529 samples. Some 61.4% had no detectable residues, and 37.1% had residue levels within tolerances.

For fish and shellfish, 807 samples were analyzed, of which 0.4% were violative. 59.2% had no residues, and 40.4% had residues within tolerances. For milk/dairy products/eggs, 680 samples were analyzed, of which 0.4% were violative. 93.1% showed no residues, and 6.5 had residues within tolerances.

Of the 1,411 fruit samples FDA analyzed, only 0.3% showed violative levels of residues. 43.7% showed no residues at all, and 56% had residues within tolerances. Of the other' category, which included baby foods, peanuts, other nuts, vegetable oil, honey and other sweeteners, and other food products', 144 samples were analyzed, of which none were found violative. 87.5% contained no detectable residues, and 12.5% had residue levels within tolerances.

Of the 7,328 food samples collected and analyzed by USDA's Pesticide Data Program in 1993, 110 violative samples were found (1.5%). USDA surveyed and tested twelve commonly consumed fruits and vegetables. Samples collected originated in 38 states and 15 foreign countries. Samples were obtained at terminal markets and warehouses, where the commodities are only hours away from the consumer.

Residues were detected in 5,171 (70.6%) of the samples. However, most of the detections "continue to be at very low levels, substantially below tolerances." 94% of all residues detected were below one part per million (ppm), 60% were below 0.1 ppm, and about 10% were below 0.01 ppm. 88% of the 110 detected residue violations were for residues where no tolerance was established for that particular commodity/ pesticide combination.

Of the twelve commodities USDA tested, apples had the highest percentage of samples with residue detections (97%). The commodity with the lowest percentage of samples with residue detections was broccoli, which had detections in 25% of samples. Post-harvest pesticide applications contributed significantly to the number of residues detected and accounted for more than 3,000 (33%) of the total observed residues.

Both Agencies' data attests and reinforces the fact that the nation's food supply is one of the safest in the world.
Copies of the USDA's 1993 Pesticide Data Program Summary can be obtained from the Pesticide Data Program, Science Division, Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA, 8700 Centreville Rd., Suite 2000, Manassas, VA 22110.
Food Chemical News; August 28, Sept. 4, 1995; Chemical Regulation Reporter, Sept. 1, 1995; via Chemically Speaking, October 1995, Univ. of Florida Coop. Ext. Service, IFAS.

Bacteria Dine on Weed Killers

ARS researchers found a pesticide-gobbling "Mr. Clean" microbe in an unlikely place municipal sewage sludge. The Klebsiella terragena bacterium may be ideal for breaking down weed-killing chemicals in water rinsed from tractor-pulled spray tanks. That would free farmers from storing contaminated rinse water while searching for an environmentally safe disposal site. Treating the rinse water requires two 55-gallon, cone-shaped tanks. An ozone generator pumps the gas through rinse water in one tank for 12 hours. Then the water is pumped into the second tank, Klebsiella's dining room. In 24 hours, little remains but carbon dioxide and water that farmers can safely dump on the ground. Klebsiella degrades three major herbicides atrazine, cyanazine, and simazine. Earlier, researchers identified other microbes to break down alachlor, metolachlor, and 2,4-D.
Cathleen Hapeman, USDA-ARS Environmental Chemistry Laboratory, Beltsville, Maryland, (301) 504-6451.

Delaney Clause Applicability to Pesticide Residues in Animal Feed

EPA announces proposed rule to revoke 36 animal feed tolerances for 16 pesticides - EPA is taking this action in response to an agreement with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals which in 1992 held that the Delaney Clause of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act requires a strict, literal interpretation prohibiting the establishment of tolerances for food or animal feed where the pesticide has been found to induce cancer in man or animals EPA Sept. 15 Note to Correspondents -- Tolerances for simazine on sugarcane molasses and for tetrachlorviphos in animal feed would be revoked because the agency found the established tolerances violate the Delaney Clause 16 of the remaining 34 tolerances would be revoked because the animal feeds are no longer considered to be a significant part of livestock diets; thus, animal feed tolerances are no longer needed for them 10 of the remaining 18 tolerances would be revoked because processing studies have shown that residues do not concentrate above the tolerance established for the raw crop the final 8 tolerances are proposed to be revoked because they are for animal feeds that are not "ready-to-eat" The proposed rule will be published soon in the Fed. Reg. for a 90 day comment period
A copy of the EPA Note to Correspondents, an EPA Background Statement on the announcement and a copy of the Fed. Reg. preproposal are available as FIEN Documents ID No.s PestResDC95-35-1, -2, and -3, respectively.
"Newsletter" from Dennis Kopp, NAPIAP.