Earthscan Publications the Pesticide Detox Towards a More Sustainable

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Earthscan Publications the Pesticide Detox Towards a More Sustainable The Pesticide Detox Towards a More Sustainable Agriculture Edited by Jules Pretty London • Sterling, VA First published by Earthscan in the UK and USA in 2005 Copyright © Jules Pretty, 2005 All rights reserved ISBN: 1-84407-142-1 paperback 1-84407-141-3 hardback Typesetting by JS Typesetting Ltd, Porthcawl, Mid Glamorgan Printed and bound in the UK by Cromwell Press Ltd, Trowbridge Cover design by Andrew Corbett For a full list of publications please contact: Earthscan 8–12 Camden High Street, London, NW1 0JH, UK Tel: +44 (0)20 7387 8558 Fax: +44 (0)20 7387 8998 Email: [email protected] Web: www.earthscan.co.uk 22883 Quicksilver Drive, Sterling, VA 20166-2012, USA Earthscan is an imprint of James & James (Science Publishers) Ltd and publishes in association with the International Institute for Environment and Development A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Pretty, Jules N. The pesticide detox : towards a more sustainable agriculture / Jules Pretty. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 1-84407-142-1 (pbk.) – ISBN 1-84407-141-3 (hardback) 1. Agricultural pests–Biological control. 2. Pesticides–Environmental aspects. 3. Organic farming. I. Title. SB975.P75 2005 632’.96–dc22 2004024815 Printed on elemental chlorine-free paper Contents List of Contributors vii Preface x Acknowledgements xix List of Terms, Acronyms and Abbreviations xxii 1 Pesticide Use and the Environment 1 Jules Pretty and Rachel Hine 2 The Health Impacts of Pesticides: What Do We Now Know? 23 Misa Kishi 3 Paying the Price: The Full Cost of Pesticides 39 Jules Pretty and Hermann Waibel 4 Corporations and Pesticides 55 Barbara Dinham 5 Overview of Agrobiologicals and Alternatives to Synthetic Pesticides 70 David Dent 6 Farmer Decision-making for Ecological Pest Management 83 Catrin Meir and Stephanie Williamson 7 The Human and Social Dimensions of Pest Management for Agricultural Sustainability 97 Niels Röling 8 Ecological Basis for Low-toxicity Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in Rice and Vegetables 116 Kevin Gallagher, Peter Ooi, Tom Mew, Emer Borromeo, Peter Kenmore and Jan-Willem Ketelaar 9 Towards Zero-pesticide Use in Tropical Agroecosystems 135 Hans R. Herren, Fritz Schulthess and Markus Knapp vi THE PESTICIDE DETOX 10 From Pesticides to People: Improving Ecosystem Health in the Northern Andes 147 Stephen Sherwood, Donald Cole, Charles Crissman and Myriam Paredes 11 Breaking the Barriers to IPM in Africa: Evidence from Benin, Ethiopia, Ghana and Senegal 165 Stephanie Williamson 12 Towards Safe Cocoa Pest Management in West Africa 181 Janny G.M. Vos and Sam L.J. Page 13 Agroecological Approaches to Pest Management in the US 193 Carol Shennan, Tara Pisani Gareau and J. Robert Sirrine 14 Towards Safe Pest Management in Industrialized Agricultural Systems 212 Stephanie Williamson and David Buffin 15 Policies and Trends 226 Harry van der Wulp and Jules Pretty References 238 Index 285 List of Contributors Emer Borromeo works at the Philippine Rice Research Institute, and formerly worked at the Plant Protection Department of the International Rice Research Institute, Los Banos, The Philippines. David Buffin is former coordinator of the UK and Europe programmes at Pesticide Action Network, UK, and is now at City University. Donald C. Cole is associate professor in epidemiology and community medicine with the Department of Public Health Sciences of the University of Toronto, Canada. His research has included the health risks associated with pesticide exposure among Nicaraguan and Ecuadorian farm families. Charles Crissman is regional representative for sub-Saharan Africa at the International Potato Center (CIP), Nairobi, Kenya. His research has included the economic, health and environment tradeoffs of agricultural technologies. David Dent is director of CABI Bioscience, a Division of CAB International, UK. Barbara Dinham is director of Pesticide Action Network (PAN-UK). Kevin Gallagher is IPM specialist at the Global IPM Facility of the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Plant Protection Service, Rome. Tara Pisani Gareau is at the University of California Santa Cruz, where she is studying the role of hedgerows in vegetable cropping systems in the Central Coast region of California for improving biological control of insect pests, and the sociopolitical incentives and disincentives for habitat enhancement in farms. Hans Herren is director general of the International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology, Nairobi. He was awarded the World Food Prize in 1995. Rachel Hine is research officer at the Centre for Environment and Society, University of Essex, UK. Peter Kenmore is coordinator at the Global IPM Facility of the FAO Plant Protection Service, Rome. viii THE PESTICIDE DETOX Jan-Willem Ketelaar is coordinator at the FAO Vegetable IPM programme for South East Asia, Bangkok. Misa Kishi is senior environmental health specialist at the JSI Research and Training Institute, US, and visiting researcher at the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Indonesia. Markus Knapp is a scientist and project coordinator for the Integrated Control of Red Spider Mites project at the International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology, Nairobi. Catrin Meir is a freelance consultant who has worked in farmer participatory research and training to reduce pesticide use, and the evaluation of IPM pro- grammes in Central America since 1992. Tom Mew is head of the Plant Protection Department of the International Rice Research Institute, Los Banos, The Philippines. Peter Ooi is coordinator of the Regional Cotton IPM programme at the FAO Regional Office, Bangkok. Sam Page is organics and soil health specialist at CABI Bioscience, UK Centre. Myriam Paredes is a consultant based in Quito, Ecuador. Her PhD research at Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands, is on the inter- faces between development interventions, technology and rural people. Jules Pretty is professor of environment and society in the Department of Biological Sciences at the University of Essex, UK. His previous books include Agri-Culture (2002, Earthscan), Guide to a Green Planet (editor, 2002, University of Essex), The Living Land (1998, Earthscan), Regenerating Agriculture (1995, Earthscan), and Unwelcome Harvest (with Gordon Conway, 1991, Earthscan). Niels Röling is emeritus professor of agricultural knowledge systems in devel- oping countries at Wageningen University, the Netherlands. His previous publications include Facilitating Sustainable Agriculture (editor with A. Wage- makers, 1998, Cambridge University Press) and Extension Science: Information Systems in Agricultural Development (1988, Cambridge University Press). Fritz Schulthess is principle scientist and project coordinator for the Biological Control of Cereal Stemborers project at the International Centre of Insect Physi- ology and Ecology, Nairobi. Carol Shennan is director of the Center for Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems at the University of California Santa Cruz. LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS ix Stephen Sherwood is area representative for the Andes Region at World Neigh- bors and is based in Quito, Ecuador. His graduate research at Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands, is on the sociobiological developments that led to the modern-day pesticide dependency and ecosystem crisis in the Northern Andes. J. Robert Sirrine is at the University of California Santa Cruz, where he is studying northern Michigan cherry farmers in a network of economic institutions in which they are losing power over their decisions, and integrating agro- ecological theory into the evaluation of practices designed for sustainable production. Harry van der Wulp is senior IPM policy specialist at the Global IPM Facility of the FAO Plant Protection Service, Rome. Janny Vos is farmer participatory IPM specialist at CABI Bioscience, UK Centre. Hermann Waibel is professor of agricultural development economics at the University of Hanover, Germany. Stephanie Williamson coordinates Pesticide Action Network Europe and works in the international and UK programmes at PAN-UK, where she focuses on IPM. Preface There was once a town where all life seemed to live in harmony with its surroundings. The town lay in the midst of a checkerboard of prosperous farms, with fields of grain and hillsides of orchards. Then a strange blight crept over the area and everything began to change. There was a strange stillness. It was a spring without voices. The people had done it themselves. With these words Rachel Carson’s fable of a Silent Spring (1963) became famous worldwide. She painted a picture of a healthy community in town and country- side. This idyll, which could be anywhere in the past, delights visitors and locals alike. But it falls into a mysterious silence, ‘which lay over fields and woods and marsh’. The community had withered and died, and apparently all because of the widespread use of pesticides. This simple story is so compelling that more than 2 million copies of the book have been sold, and it continues to sell well. This is impressive for any book, let alone one mainly documenting the ills of the world. Of course, the truth behind the fable plays out rather differently in real life, as no town has died solely because of agricultural pesticides, and neither has all the wildlife been eliminated. But there is something in what she says that remains significant more than 40 years later. Since the early 1960s, the
Recommended publications
  • A Sustainable Agricultural Future Relies on the Transition to Organic Agroecological Pest Management
    sustainability Review A Sustainable Agricultural Future Relies on the Transition to Organic Agroecological Pest Management Lauren Brzozowski 1 and Michael Mazourek 1,2,* ID 1 Section of Plant Breeding and Genetics, School of Integrative Plant Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA; [email protected] 2 David R. Atkinson Center for Sustainable Future, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 21 April 2018; Accepted: 11 June 2018; Published: 15 June 2018 Abstract: The need to improve agricultural sustainability to secure yields, minimize environmental impacts and buffer environmental change is widely recognized. Investment in conventional agriculture has supported its present yield advantage. However, organic agriculture with agroecological management has nascent capacity for sustainable production and for increasing yields in the future. Conventional systems have leveraged reductionist approaches to address pests, primarily through pesticides that seek to eliminate biological factors that reduce yield, but come at a cost to human and ecosystem health, and leave production systems vulnerable to the development of pest resistance to these chemicals or traits. Alternatives are needed, and are found in organic production approaches. Although both organic and agroecology approaches encompass more than pest management, this aspect is a pivotal element of our agricultural future. Through increased investment and application of emerging analytical approaches to improve plant breeding for and management of these systems, yields and resilience will surpass approaches that address components alone. Keywords: organic agriculture; agroecology; pest management; plant breeding; biodiversity; sustainability; host plant resistance; pesticides 1. Achieving Needs for Agricultural Productivity and Pest Management Sustainably There is broad recognition among agricultural scientists that a growing world population will consume greater amounts of food and fiber with fewer resources available for production [1].
    [Show full text]
  • Efficacy of Electrolyzed Water in Degrading and Removing
    EFFICACY OF ELECTROLYZED WATER IN DEGRADING AND REMOVING PESTICIDE RESIDUES ON FRESH PRODUCE By HANG QI (Under the Direction of Yen-Con Hung) ABSTRACT Pure solution of diazinon, cyprodinil, and phosmet were treated with electrolyzed oxidizing (EO) water and electrolyzed reduced (ER) water. Lower pH, higher available chlorine content (ACC), and longer treatment time of EO water resulted in higher reductions of the three pesticides. ER water was effective in degrading phosmet, slightly effective in reducing diazinon, and ineffective in degrading cyprodinil. Soaking grapes in 12 mg/L mixed pesticide solution for 10 min was found to be the appropriate method for pesticide inoculation. EO water at 500 mL combined with 100 rpm shaking was determined to be the most effective way to wash 200 g contaminated grapes. Then, fresh grapes, spinach, and snap peas contaminated with the three pesticides were washed with EO water at different ACC and treatment time. The results showed both ACC and treatment time were significant (P ≤ 0.05) factors for EO water in removing the three pesticide residues on produce samples. EO water was more effective than ER water, diluted bleach, Vegwash and DI water. Finally, the effect of EO water treatment on produce quality was evaluated. No significant (P > 0.05) color and texture degradation was found for EO water treated produce samples. INDEX WORDS: Electrolyzed water, fresh produce, diazinon, cyprodinil, phosmet EFFICACY OF ELECTROLYZED WATER IN DEGRADING AND REMOVING PESTICIDE RESIDUES ON FRESH PRODUCE by HANG
    [Show full text]
  • Crucifer Insect Pest Problems: Trends, Issues and Management Strategies
    Crucifer insect pest problems: trends, issues and management strategies G.S. Lim1, A. Sivapragasam2 and W.H. Loke2 1IIBC Station Malaysia, P.O. Box 210, 43409 UPM Serdang 2Strategic, Environment and Natural Resources Center, MARDI, P.O. Box 12301, 50774, Kuala Lumpur Abstract Crucifer vegetables are important cultivated crops and are widely grown in many parts of the world, including the highlands in most tropical countries. They are frequently attacked by a number of important insect pests. Some have been a problem for a long time while others have become important only recently. For many, trends are apparent pertaining to their changing status, including other aspects and strategies associated with efforts to counter them. In some cases, they are also closely associated with other agricultural developments and agronomic practices which are driven by commercial interests in vegetable production. Among the major trends recognised are: (1) A number of pests persisting to be important (e.g., Plutella xylostella or diamondback moth (DBM), Pieris rapae, Hellula undalis), (2) Negative impacts of pesticides continuing to be of major concern where DBM remains a serious problem, (3) Some pests becoming more important, either independently of DBM suppression (e.g., leafminer and Spodoptera exigua) or as a consequence of effective DBM control (e.g., aphid and Crocidolomia binotalis), (4) DBM becoming increasingly resistant to Bacillus thuringiensis, and (5) New cultivation practices emerging, such as rain shelter and hydroponic systems. All these have generated new concerns, additional issues and challenges, and have demanded a review of crucifer cultivation and the associated pest problems, including their management practices and approach.
    [Show full text]
  • Pesticides and You News from Beyond Pesticides / National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides (NCAMP)
    Volume 21 , Number 1 Spring 2001 Pesticides and You News from Beyond Pesticides / National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides (NCAMP) Healthy Ecosystems, Healthy Children Weather and the West Nile Virus O Economic and Environmental lmpacts of lnvasive Species and Their Management O Planning for Planting: How to Plan Your Organic Garden O ChemicalWATCH Factsheet: Glyphosate O Fluoride: The Hidden Poison in the National Organic Standards Letter from Washington Fighting Fluoride the Organic Way hile we are enjoying winter and the snow storms on Let there be no mistake, chemical-intensive practices in the east coast, thoughts of Spring are not far off. conventional agricultural systems incorporate polluting prac- WWhat better way to plan for the glorious rebirth of tices that also result in fluoride contamination and other pol- Spring then to start planning a garden. This issue contains a lution problems of a magnitude that far exceeds organic prac- piece that gets us thinking about steps in the preparation of an tices. Nevertheless, as consumers and farmers seek to improve organic garden. Gardens are hopeful and positive, especially and purify organic practices, we must face the challenges raised when they are planned to prevent pest problems. by Ellen and Paul Connett’s article and others. Organic and Fluoride War on Weeds However, this would not be Pesticides and You if we did not This issue also provides the background for a problem that illustrate some of the challenges that we face in making our is taking on greater seriousness as pressure builds to use pes- environment safer for all its inhabitants.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hidden and External Costs of Pesticide Use Denis Bourguet, Thomas Guillemaud
    The hidden and external costs of pesticide use Denis Bourguet, Thomas Guillemaud To cite this version: Denis Bourguet, Thomas Guillemaud. The hidden and external costs of pesticide use. Sustainable Agriculture Reviews, 19, Springer International Publishing, pp.35-120, 2016, Sustainable Agriculture Reviews, 978-3-319-26776-0. 10.1007/978-3-319-26777-7_2. hal-01303109 HAL Id: hal-01303109 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01303109 Submitted on 22 Jul 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Chapter 2 The Hidden and External Costs of Pesticide Use Denis Bourguet and Thomas Guillemaud Abstract A fair evaluation of the net benefi ts provided by pesticides is essential to feed the current debate on their benefi ts and adverse consequences. Pesticides pro- vide many benefi ts by killing agricultural and human pests. However, they also entail several types of costs, including internal costs due to the purchase and appli- cation of pesticides, and various other costs due to the impact of treatments on human health and the environment. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of these costs and their evaluation. We defi ne four categories of costs: regulatory costs, human health costs, environmental costs and defensive expenditures.
    [Show full text]
  • The Biology, Behaviour and Survival of Pupating False Codling Moth
    The biology, behaviour and survival of pupating false codling moth, Thaumatotibia leucotreta (Meyrick) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), a citrus pest in South Africa A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE of RHODES UNIVERSITY by Claire Natalie Love February 2015 i ABSTRACT Control of the citrus pest, false codling moth (FCM), Thaumatotibia leucotreta Meyrick (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) is crucial for the South African citrus industry. The economic losses and phytosanitary status of this pest, coupled with increased consumer awareness and demands, has created a need for effective, IPM-compatible control measures for use against the soil-dwelling life stages of FCM. Promising developments in the field of microbial control through the use of entomopathogenic fungi (EPF) and entomopathogenic nematodes (EPNs) have highlighted the need for research regarding pupation biology, behaviour and survival of FCM, as a good understanding of biology of the target organism is an important component of any biological control programme. The aim of this study was to improve the current understanding of FCM pupation habits through the manipulation of soil texture class, ground cover, shading, soil compaction, air temperature, and soil moisture in the laboratory. These findings would then be used to aid the biological control programmes using EPF and EPNs against FCM in the soil. Three soil texture classes (sandy loam, silt loam and silty clay loam) were obtained from orchards for use in the study. FCM larvae were allowed to drop into the soil of their own accord and the pupation behaviour that followed was then captured on film with pupae formed in the soil being kept in order to measure adult eclosion.
    [Show full text]
  • Managing Pesticide Residue Levels of Michigan Apples and Cherries to Meet Global Mrls
    MANAGING PESTICIDE RESIDUE LEVELS OF MICHIGAN APPLES AND CHERRIES TO MEET GLOBAL MRLS By Anthony Hale VanWoerkom A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Entomology—Doctor of Philosophy 2017 ABSTRACT MANAGING PESTICIDE RESIDUE LEVELS OF MICHIGAN APPLES AND CHERRIES TO MEET GLOBAL MRLS By Anthony Hale VanWoerkom Profitability in global food markets requires meeting high food quality sanitary and phytosanitary standards, often through the judicious use of crop protection materials, including pesticides. At the same time, many export market targets for US fruit crops set standards for maximum pesticide residue limits (MRLs) that are often lower than the domestic tolerances held by the USEPA. Meeting this challenge is especially difficult with the recent prevalence of late season invasive pests, like the Brown Marmorated Stink Bug (Halyomorpha Halys) (Stal) (BMSB) and Spotted Wing Drosophila (Drosophila suzukii) (SWD). Fruit growers need more data to determine which compounds hold the highest risks of rejection for export-bound crops. These data will also support establishment of “Export PHIs” guides that growers can use to avoid load rejections from export-target countries. Treatment regimens with minimum and maximum seasonal applications, addition of adjuvants, and the use of post-harvest water rinsing were tested for their effects on residue levels at harvest. Dedicated to my wife Rachel and daughter Charlotte VanWoerkom iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are many people I would like to thank for the completion of my dissertation and Doctoral Degree. I would first like to thank my advisor, John Wise for the exciting opportunity and encouragement.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Março, 1999
    Março, 1999 An. Soc. Entomol. Brasil 28(1) 1 FORUM INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT: A GLOBAL REALITY? MARCOS KOGAN AND WAHEED I. BAJWA Integrated Plant Protection Center Oregon State University 2040 Cordley Hall, Corvallis Oregon, 97331, USA An. Soc. Entomol. Brasil 28(1): 1-25 (1999) Manejo Integrado de Pragas: Uma Realidade Mundial? RESUMO - A expressão “Manejo Integrado de Pragas” (MIP ou Integrated Pest Management - IPM - em inglês) está completando 28 anos desde que apareceu impressa pela primeira vez. Desde então manejo integrado ou controle integrado de pragas tornou-se o paradigma preferencial para as atividades que visam a atenuar o impacto de pragas – doenças de plantas, ervas daninhas e animais vertebrados ou invertebrados – na produção agrícola, na saúde humana e veterinária, e nas estruturas urbanas e rurais. Apesar da aceitação quase uni- versal do conceito de manejo integrado, sua aplicação prática é ainda restrita variando grandemente de acordo com a região geopolítica, a natureza do cultivo agrícola e, principalmente, com o empenho e apoio governamentais a programas que visam a estimular a adoção do manejo integrado. Uma avaliação objetiva do sucesso da incorporação de programas de MIP nas práticas agrícolas é difícil devido a: a) falta de critérios rigorosos que distinguem um programa de MIP de quaisquer outras atividades tradicionais de controle de pragas, b) falta de um consenso universal sobre uma definição de MIP, e c) carência de levantamentos quantitativos de áreas de cultivo sob programas de MIP. Em alguns círculos, a medida do sucesso do MIP tem sido a porcentagem de redução no uso de pesticidas. No entanto, essa medida, na ausência de outros critérios, é inadequada pois, em algumas partes do mundo a introdução do MIP pode acarretar o aumento, não a diminuição no uso de pesticidas.
    [Show full text]
  • Published in Food Policy 34(5):468-476
    Published in Food Policy 34(5):468-476 Overlap of U.S. FDA residue tests and pesticides used on imported vegetables: empirical findings and policy recommendations Abstract In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) registers pesticides and sets crop-specific tolerances while the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) enforces EPA regulations by testing plant-based foods for pesticide residues. Pesticide treatment histories are almost always unknown, especially on imported produce, posing an empirical question: to what extent do FDA’s residue testing methods used on imported produce correspond to the pesticides used on the crops? In this paper I show that FDA residue testing would have missed residues of the majority of pesticides used on two crops exported to the U.S. from Costa Rica in 2003, suggesting that FDA residue testing on imported produce is inadequate in its coverage. Policy recommendations discussed include better communication of U.S. tolerances to exporters around the world; increased testing for pesticides, especially fungicides, that are currently not part of FDA’s regular testing procedures; and the creation of price floors and fair trade relationships in the transnational vegetable market to support farmers’ attempts to comply. Introduction Pesticide residues are traces of pesticide active ingredients and metabolites that remain on food after being applied on the farm or in post-harvest handling. Pesticide degradation rates depend upon many factors, including characteristics of the compound and environmental conditions (Mahler et al., 1991). At high levels, pesticide residues can cause poisonings when ingested, but these types of poisonings appear relatively rare (Chan, 2001; Chan and Critchley, 1996; Farley and McFarland, 1999; Green et al., 1987).
    [Show full text]
  • Pest Control in World Agriculture - David Pimentel
    AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES – Vol. II - Pest Control in World Agriculture - David Pimentel PEST CONTROL IN WORLD AGRICULTURE David Pimentel College of Agriculture and Life Sciences Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853-0901, USA Keywords: agriculture, insects, pest control, pesticides, economic loss, biological control Contents 1. Introduction 2. Natural Resources Used in Agriculture 2.1 Land 2.2 Water 2.3 Energy 2.4 Biological Resources 3. Ecological Causes of Pest Problems 3.1 Introduced Crops 3.2 Introduced Pests 3.3 Monocultures 3.4 Regional Climatic Differences 3.5 Breeding Crops 3.6 Genetic Diversity 3.7 Plant Spacings 3.8 Crop Rotations 3.9 Soil Nutrients 3.10 Planting Dates 3.11 Crop Associations 3.12 Pesticides Alter Crop Physiology 3.13 Ecology of Pests and Crops 4. Economic Losses Due to Pests 5. Costs of Pest Control 5.1 Pesticides 5.2 Biological Controls 5.3 Host-Plant Resistance 5.4 CropUNESCO Rotations – EOLSS 5.5 Crop Sanitation 5.6 Planting TimeSAMPLE CHAPTERS 5.7 Short Season Crops 5.8 Fertilizers 5.9 Water Management 6. Pesticides and Pest Control 7. Reducing Pesticide Use 8. Environmental and Public Health Costs of the Recommended Use of Pesticides 8.1 Public Health Impacts of Pesticides 8.2 Livestock Destruction and Contamination 8.3 Destruction of Beneficial Natural Enemies ©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES – Vol. II - Pest Control in World Agriculture - David Pimentel 8.4 Costs of Pesticide Resistance 8.5 Losses of Honey Bees and Other Pollinators 8.6 Fish Kills 8.7 Birds Killed by Pesticides 9. Conclusion Bibliography Biographical Sketch Summary Insect, plant pathogen, and weed pests destroy more than 40% of all potential food production each year.
    [Show full text]
  • Patterns of Pesticide Use in California and the Implications for Strategies for Reduction of Pesticides
    30 Apr 2003 18:25 AR AR192-PY41-EPSTEIN.tex AR192-PY41-EPSTEIN.sgm LaTeX2e(2002/01/18) P1: GJB/GCE AR REVIEWS IN ADVANCE10.1146/annurev.phyto.41.052002.095612 V I E E W R S I E Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2003. 41:23.1–23.25 N C doi: 10.1146/annurev.phyto.41.052002.095612 N Copyright c 2003 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved A D V A First published online as a Review in Advance on June 4, 2003 PATTERNS OF PESTICIDE USE IN CALIFORNIA AND THE IMPLICATIONS FOR STRATEGIES FOR REDUCTION OF PESTICIDES Lynn Epstein and Susan Bassein Department of Plant Pathology, University of California, Davis, California 95616-8680. e-mail: [email protected] Key Words biological control, California Pesticide Use Reports, genetically modified plants, fungicides, integrated pest management I Abstract We used the California Pesticide Use Reports to study use of fungicides, bactericides, fumigants and selected insecticides, primarily for vegetable, fruit and nut production in California from 1993 to 2000. There were no obvious trends in decreased use of most compounds used to treat plant disease. However, growers have rapidly adopted recently introduced “conventional” compounds. There is very limited use of microbial biocontrol agents to control plant disease and no indication of an increase. We used case studies to explore the potential of different strategies to reduce pesticide use or risk. There have been reductions in use of organophosphate insecticides, largely by substitution with pyrethroids. Theoretically, replacement of “calendar spray” pesticide programs with “environmentally driven” programs could reduce pesticide use in years with lower disease pressure, but this assumes that the majority of growers currently use a “calendar spray” program and that growers who use less than recommended by an environmentally driven program would not increase their use.
    [Show full text]
  • Pesticide Residues in Tea Homogenate
    EURL-PROFICIENCY TEST-T02, 2014 Pesticide Residues in Tea Homogenate Final Report (December 2014) Organiser: Dr. Amadeo R. Fernández-Alba Co-Head of EURL-FV University of Almería, Edificio Químicas CITE I Ctra. Sacramento s/n 04120 Almería, SPAIN Phone: +34 950015034; Fax: +34 950015008 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.eurl-pesticides.eu Organising team at the University of Almería: Ms. Carmen Ferrer, Chemist. University of Almería Mr. Octavio Malato, Chemist. University of Almería Dr. Milagros Mezcua, Chemist. University of Almería Ms. Ana Lozano, Chemist. University of Almería Mr. Łukasz Rajski, Chemist. University of Almería Ms. Samanta Uclés, Chemist. University of Almería Scientific Committee: Mr. Stewart Reynolds, Senior Chemist (QCG). Food and Environment Research Agency, York, United Kingdom. Dr. Antonio Valverde, Senior Chemist (QCG). University of Almería, Spain. Dr. Michelangelo Anastassiades, Senior Chemist (AG). CVUA Stuttgart, Fellbach, Germany. Mr. Richard Fussell, Senior Chemist (AG). Food and Environment Research Agency, York, United Kingdom. Dr. Miguel Gamón, Senior Chemist (AG). Co-Head of EURL-FV. Pesticide Residue Laboratory (Agro-Food Analysis Service) of the Generalitat Valenciana, Spain. Dr. Magnus Jezussek, Senior Chemist (AG). Bavarian Health and Food Safety Authority, Erlangen, Germany. Dr. André de Kok, Senior Chemist (AG). NVWA - Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Mr. Ralf Lippold, Senior Chemist (AG). CVUA Freiburg, Germany. Dr. Sonja Masselter, Senior Chemist (AG). AGES GmbH, Institute for Food Safety Innsbruck, Austria. Dr. Tuija Pihlström, Senior Chemist (AG). National Food Agency, Uppsala, Sweden. Dr. Mette Erecius Poulsen, Senior Chemist (AG). National Food Institute, Soeborg, Denmark. Dr. Carmelo Rodríguez, Senior Chemist (AG).
    [Show full text]