The lack of data available to fully implement the Federal Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 may cause the loss of pesticides important to almonds and other crops, according to Jean-Marie Peltier, chief deputy director of the California Department of Pesticide Regulation.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is charged with developing protocols and procedures called for by the act, she said in a panel discussion on "Endangered Chemicals" during the recent almond industry conference in Modesto.

One requirement is that EPA, over the next 10 years, re-evaluate all existing tolerances on all pesticides. There are an estimated 9,700 tolerances on the books.

In the first three years, organophosphates important to almonds and other crops are to be included in the re-evaluations, and one year has already passed.

EPA's theoretical "risk cup" of exposures allows uses for occupational, residential, dietary, water, and diet categories.

Once the allowable amount of materials is reached, or the cup is full, no additional uses of materials can be approved, even if they do not result in increased dietary exposure. This provision had great importance for materials used for soil and seed treatments.

Organophosphate compounds, such as Parathion and Diazinon, and how they interact with each other figure prominently in the risk cup classification.

Peltier said it is likely EPA officials will conclude there is too little data available about how organophosphates interact with each other and they should be grouped together in the same risk cup.

In the absence of that data, she said, it is possible several organophosphate materials will become unavailable.

So what are some proactive steps the almond industry can take to insure it has adequate crop protection material? The almond industry, Peltier recommended, should "challenge the science and challenge the EPA policy and work closely with your advisory board to develop real information."

The pesticide user community, she said, has "no place at the table" when EPA is making a determination on which crops go on or come off a label.

"That is between EPA and the registrant, so if there are critical uses, you need to be working with policy people to make sure there's a way for the needs of the industry to get on the table."

Taking a look at the Food Quality Protection Act threats to pest management systems in practice in California is high on DPR's agenda.

"Let me suggest that the task ahead of you is truly daunting, but there is too much at stake to walk away at this point," Peltier said.

Panelist Frank Zalom, director of the University of California's Statewide Integrated Pest Management program, said the almond industry has been able to adjust to losses of key pesticides in other legislation, but the FQPA is the most comprehensive of all.

Potentially at risk are familiar products for brown rot control on almonds such as Benlate, Captan, Rovral, Maneb, and Topsin.

After outlining categories of materials and their importance to needs of the almond industry, Zalom said, "it's very fortunate that almond growers have been willing to fund research on things other than traditional pesticides. That is putting the industry in a better place to weather loss of materials."

The third member of the panel, Robert Schramm, a Washington, D.C. advocate for several agricultural groups, was critical of the FQPA, saying it was hastily written without input from any of the Washington D.C. sources he considers knowledgeable about pesticides.

Predicting it will take years to amend the 1996 act, Schramm said Congress gave EPA a deadline of 1999 by which to accomplish certain goals. One goal was coming up with, in one year, new regulations for dealing with tolerances for Section 18s. Fifteen months later there's still no sign of any new regulation.

Schramm said EPA has a checkered record of timeliness in granting of Section 18s. The California pepper industry suffered heavy losses to late blight last year because an approval was three weeks late. However, politics gets things done and the potato industry, which grows the crop in 26 states, got its Section 18 clearances through in record time.

One question of great concern is whether EPA will continue to use the 99.9 percentile of consumption in assessing dietary risk. That measurement would apply to someone eating five apples a day, although most people eat an average of three per week, he said.

Another difficulty in the public's perception of pesticides is the tendency of the popular media to cover issues such as the Alar scare rather than the healthful effects of eating fruits and vegetables that depend on pesticides.

Since regulation of pesticides is based on politics, either at the agency level or the Capitol Hill level, agriculture has to be more active in the public policy arena. "We have to put more pressure on national leaders to bring sensibility to the process," Schramm said.

Last Updated on 11/10/00
Email: information@hillnet.com