February 2011 Agronomy Technical Note No. 5 Pest Management in the Conservation Planning Process Natural Resources Conservation Service Issued February 2011 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all pro- grams.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for commu- nication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250–9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Pest Management in the Conservation Planning Process Introduction Pest management in conservation planning This technical note is designed to help conservation planners apply the Natural Resources Conservation Conservation planners start by identifying site-specific Service (NRCS) Integrated Pest Management (IPM) natural resource concerns in the conservation plan- Conservation Practice Standard (CPS) Code 595 and ning process. For pest management related concerns, other NRCS conservation practices in the conserva- this can include the potential for pest management tion planning process to prevent and/or mitigate pest activities to impact soil, water, air, plants, animals, and management risks to natural resources. humans. Once site-specific natural resource concerns are identified, conservation planners perform NRCS The term “integrated pest management” and its pest management policy roles 1, 2, and 3 in the con- acronym “IPM” are widely used and can refer to servation planning process by evaluating the potential anything from an individual pest management for site-specific pest management risks to identified technique to a complex year-round pest management natural resources and applying appropriate NRCS con- system. This document references IPM techniques, servation practices (including the NRCS IPM conser- elements, strategies, guidelines, systems, and vation practice) to prevent and/or mitigate identified programs, but the NRCS IPM conservation practice is risks. very specifically defined by CPS Code 595 available at: ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NHQ/practice-standards/ For example, if a conservation planner identified a standards/595.docx. concern about potential pesticide impacts on a nearby drinking water reservoir, he or she would use the NRCS pest management policy NRCS Windows Pesticide Screening Tool (WIN–PST) to evaluate potential pesticide risks to drinking water from pesticide losses in surface runoff. Based on site- The NRCS pest management policy is contained in specific WIN–PST results, the NRCS IPM conservation GM_190_404_A–D, Amendment 12, dated March practice and other conservation practices could then 2009, available at: http://directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/ be applied as appropriate to prevent/mitigate hazard- RollupViewer.aspx?hid=17015. ous pesticide losses to the reservoir. The NRCS pest management policy states that conser- Pest management risks can also be associated with the vation planners have four roles in pest management: use of mechanical, biological, or cultural pest suppres- 1. Evaluate environmental risks associated with a sion techniques, but they must be evaluated with other client’s probable pest suppression strategies tools, such as the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equa- tion 2 (RUSLE2), or the professional judgment of the 2. Provide technical assistance to clients to mitigate conservation planner. identified environmental risks 3. Assist clients to adopt IPM techniques that pro- Conservation planners also perform role 4 in the NRCS tect natural resources pest management policy in the conservation planning process, but with the application of the NRCS Brush 4. Assist clients to— Management, CPS Code 314 and NRCS Herbaceous – inventory, assess, and suppress noxious and Weed Control, CPS Code 315. Both of these conserva- invasive weeds on noncropland tion practices are used on noncropland to address – suppress weeds to ensure successful imple- natural resource concerns related to plant pests, mentation and/or maintenance of permanent including invasive, noxious, and prohibited plants. The vegetative conservation practices (e.g., buffer- NRCS IPM conservation practice can also be used to type conservation practices) prevent and/or mitigate pest management environmen- Agronomy Technical Note No. 5, 1st E., Amend. 1, February 2014 Pest Management in the Conservation Planning Process tal risks associated with the application of the NRCS sion techniques when the economic benefit is greater Brush Management and Herbaceous Weed Control than the cost. These economic pest thresholds must conservation practices. be developed by the Cooperative Extension Service and other IPM experts for each pest in each cropping Applying the NRCS IPM conservation system based on the biology of the crop and pest and practice the pest’s natural enemies. The economic threshold is then dynamically adjusted based on the current cost of The NRCS IPM conservation practice is specifically the pest suppression technique and projected value of designed to document the application of IPM tech- the crop. niques that address site-specific natural resource concerns. The NRCS IPM conservation practice is not A comprehensive IPM system also includes carefully designed to manage pests. Technical assistance for managing the use of different pest suppression tech- managing pests on cropland is not an identified role niques to delay the onset of pest resistance to each for conservation planners, but they must still work suppression technique. Using a combination of dif- closely with the Cooperative Extension Service, pro- ferent techniques including pesticides with different ducers, and their crop consultants to appropriately modes of action is critical to maintaining their efficacy integrate all planned pest management activities into and delaying the onset of pest resistance. the conservation planning process. The adoption of a comprehensive IPM system is always preferred, but Finally, a comprehensive IPM system must also miti- the NRCS IPM conservation practice is not designed gate environmental risks that cannot be prevented by to prescribe what constitutes a comprehensive IPM using appropriate IPM techniques that help minimize system. Commodity-specific IPM elements, guidelines, risks to nontarget species in the field and reduce and year-round IPM programs are often available at offsite movement of hazardous pesticides. the State level from land-grant universities and the Cooperative Extension Service to identify what consti- In some cropping systems, a comprehensive IPM tutes a comprehensive IPM system. These guidelines system will not be feasible because appropriate IPM should be used to help document the application of technology has yet to be developed. In these cases, the NRCS IPM conservation practice. Comprehensive the NRCS IPM conservation practice can be used to IPM systems use a site-specific combination of pest support the application of individual IPM techniques if prevention, avoidance, monitoring, and suppression they appropriately mitigate site-specific pest suppres- (PAMS) strategies. For more information, see: sion risks to natural resources and/or humans. • http://www.ipmcenters.org/ipmelements/index. Note: Identified risks associated with planned pest cfm suppression can also be addressed through other • http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/crops- conservation practices or a system of conservation agriculture.html practices that includes the NRCS IPM conservation practice. • http://www.ipmcenters.org/ipmsymposiumv/ posters/142.pdf Pesticide registration versus pesticide While efficacy will always play an important role in risk analysis in conservation planning what IPM techniques are appropriate for each site, the NRCS IPM conservation practice is only used to docu- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ment specific environmental risk prevention and/or regulates pesticides under two major Federal statutes: mitigation benefits, not efficacy. The goal of the NRCS the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide IPM conservation practice is to prevent environmen- Act (FIFRA) and Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic tal risks with an efficient IPM system, if possible, and Act (FFDCA), both amended by the Food Quality Pro- mitigate any environmental risks that cannot be pre- tection Act (FQPA) of 1996. vented. Under FIFRA, pesticides intended for use in the United A comprehensive IPM system will prevent and avoid States must be registered (licensed) by the EPA before pests as much as possible to reduce the need for pest they may be sold or distributed in commerce. The EPA suppression, including the use of hazardous pesticides. will register a pesticide if scientific data provided by the applicant show that when used according to label- A comprehensive IPM system also includes carefully ing directions it will not cause “unreasonable adverse monitoring pest populations and only using suppres- effects on the environment.” FIFRA defines “unreason-