Using PUR Data and the PRiME Tool To Assess Pest Management Practices

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Using PUR Data and the PRiME Tool To Assess Pest Management Practices"

Transcription

1 Improving health and environment by identifying and reducing pesticide risks in agriculture Using PUR Data and the PRiME Tool To Assess Pest Management Practices S.E. Kegley, P. Mineau, W.D. Pronschinske, M. Guzy, C. Benbrook, P.C. Jepson, K. Benbrook, T.A. Green, L. Presley, J. Kaplan

2 How does PRiME differ from existing indicators? Risk (not hazard) based, probabilistic for most indices Addresses interspecies toxicity range Includes local soil types, rainfall for site-specific score Adjusts risk for different application methods and mitigation practices Calibrates scores against documented field impacts*** *** Where data permit

3 ** See detailed white paper available for each index Environmental Risk Indicators Defined Acute indices calibrated against available field studies Avian: Probability that a given application will give rise to bird mortality. Small Mammal: Probability of a population-level effect. Earthworms: Probability of >35% loss of biomass. Aquatic Invertebrates: Probability that >10% of taxa will be impacted significantly (typically 50-90% loss of population). Algae: Probability that >20% of species will be impacted significantly. Pollinators: Coming soon Chronic / reproductive indices Follow risk assessment methodology but not calibrated against actual field outcomes. Avian & fish: Proportion of the breeding season over which reproduction is compromised. RISK BANDS: < 10% % > 50 % Negligible Moderate High

4 ** See detailed white paper available for each index Human Health Risk Indices Inhalation: Probability of the 4 12 hour air concentration exceeding the short-term inhalation Reference Exposure Level (REL) for a 1-year-old Dermal: Exceedance of the dermal Reference Dose (RfD) for a woman of childbearing age Dietary Risk Index (DRI): Exceedance of the chronic oral RfD for a 4-year-old child from food and drinking water RISK BANDS: < Negligible Moderate High

5 Choose the Site

6

7 Upload Application Records

8 Grower #1

9

10

11 Grower #1

12 Grower #2

13

14 Grower #2

15 Grower #1

16 California PUR Cotton Data Scenario: Textile producer purchases locally-grown cotton from Kern County, California 10 years of spray records ( ) 100 fields per year analyzed in PRiME Average of 23 growers per year, 40 growers total

17 A. Comparing performance of growers Single Application: Probability of a Bird Kill Number of Applications e.g Probability of a Bird Kill After One Application Season Long: Cumulative Probability of a Bird Kill Number of Fields RISK CREEP Probability of a Bird Kill by Field After All Applications

18 A. Comparing performance of growers Single Application: Probability of a Population Level Effect in Small Mammals Number of Fields Number of Applications Probability of a Population Level Effect After One Application Season Long: Cumulative Probability of a Population Level Effect in Small Mammals A small fraction of applications present a risk to mammals but a large proportion of the fields use a high risk chemical paraquat. Probability of a Population Level Effect by Field After All Applications

19 18.0% 16.0% 14.0% B. Time trend analysis Percent of Applications Terrestrial vertebrate to Cotton risk Considered High % of applications Risk To Terrestrial considered Vertebrates high risk Small mammal acute 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% Avian acute 4.0% 2.0% Avian chronic/reproduction 0.0%

20 B. Time trend analysis Aquatic risk % of applications potentially high risk Percent of Applications to Cotton Considered High Risk To Aquatic Organisms 25.0% 20.0% cyfluthrin endosulfan 15.0% 10.0% Fish chronic Invertebrate acute? 5.0% 0.0% Algae acute

21 C. Landscape Analysis Analyzed all agricultural pesticide applications in 2010 to a 36-square mile block in San Joaquin County, CA.

22 Number of Fields per Section

23 Average Field Score for Avian Acute

24 Proportion of High Risk Scores for Avian Acute

25 Conclusion: Provided you have the pesticide input data, you can use PRiME to identify problem areas, time trends or growers needing assistance. Of course, the tool can be used pro-actively to reduce the environmental footprint of farming activities Acknowledgments: IPM Institute of North America, Inc.... and the many advisors and reviewers 25 of 19

26

27 Inhalation Risk Index High Inhalation Risk Pesticides Used on Grapes 27 of 19

28 Inhalation Risk Index Moderate Inhalation Risk Pesticides 28 of 19

29 Dermal Risk Index High Dermal Risk Pesticides Used on Grapes 29 of 19

30 Dermal Risk Index High Dermal Risk Pesticides Used on Grapes 30 of 19

31 Dermal Risk Index Moderate Dermal Risk Pesticides 31 of 19