Volume 20, No. 4, October 2002
Contents
Coordinator's Comments
Off-label pesticide misuse: fluke or troubling new trend?
Dow AgroSciences Discontinues U.S. Residential Turf Uses of Herbicide Clopyralid (Confront)
Penalties Assessed For Pesticide Violations
Methyl Bromide to be Phased Out?
Record Amount of Unusable Pesticides Collected
Biotechnology Helps Protect U.S. Food Crops From Pests
Calendar for 2003 Commercial Certification Trainings
Commercial Pesticide Certification Pre-Registration Study Material Requests
Web Site Available on Bt Corn and Monarch Butterfly Case Study
This issue of the Pesticide Quarterly highlights several disturbing problems concerning pesticides in North Dakota. They are: off-label pesticide use, illegal importation of pesticides from Canada, and cheating on pesticide certification exams.
Sadly, off-label pesticide use continues to be a problem. The lead article in this issue, by Crop Life America President Jay Vroom, illustrates this issue from a national perspective. Closer to home, in North Dakota, thousands of acres of mustard were illegally treated late this summer with Roundup herbicide. At the time of this writing, over three million pounds of mustard have been impounded and one truckload of mustard has been destroyed. Three agencies are involved in the investigation including the North Dakota Department of Agriculture, the North Dakota Department of Health, and the Environmental Protection Agency.
In July, news was just breaking that some farmers in the North Eastern part of the state had attempted to import Canadian pesticides. Those importations were stopped before the pesticides could be used. To date, the North Dakota Department of Agriculture has levied some fines against these people, however, the Environmental Protection Agency has not finished their investigation. More enforcement actions are expected.
Another disturbing incident occurred this summer regarding the pesticide certification program. Charges were brought against several applicators for cheating on certification exams, assisting others in cheating on certification exams, and making false statements. The investigation in this matter has been completed. Some applicators have accepted plea agreements. Additional pleas are expected to be signed by applicators before the end of the year.
Unfortunately all of these cases will have downside consequences for not only the individuals involved, but also for the industry as a whole. It is still too early to speculate on what these consequences will be because enforcement actions are still pending. But it is fair to say that the vast majority of righteous pesticide users will suffer the most because they will undeservingly have to bear the burden of more regulations and negative publicity.
On a more uplifting note, the North Dakota Agricultural Statistics Service (NDASS) is wrapping up a survey concerning the effectiveness of the pesticide certification program. To my knowledge, no comprehensive evaluation of the program has been conducted since it's inception in 1982.
Nearly 17 percent of private applicators and 34 percent of commercial applicators responded to the survey. That is an excellent return rate and more are still coming in. The easy part is almost over. Now comes the interpretation of the results and the eventual implementation of policies and actions which will strengthen the program. The results will be shared in training sessions this winter and in future issues of the Pesticide Quarterly.
To those of you who responded to this survey, you have my sincere thanks.
Best regards,
Andrew A. Thostenson,
Pesticide Program Specialist
Jay Vroom, President, CropLife America
"Always read and follow label directions."
Anyone who uses a pesticide has read this statement. Comply with these six words, and as we all know, insect damage is prevented, fungus outbreaks are stopped or weeds problems are cleaned up.
But use a pesticide off-label, and as we also all know, you are breaking the law. Even if a product controls a pest in one crop but isn't labeled for another crop with the same pest, that application is illegal.
During the past year, growers, and in some cases their suppliers, who chose to ignore those six words learned first-hand how costly an off-label application can get.
In one instance, farmers sprayed an unlabeled product on their grain crop to help speed maturity. Result: upwards of 1 million bushels of grain embargoed. In another incident, a cotton worm pest was eating up non-cotton crop fields across a region and about 60 growers chose to use an insecticide labeled for cotton, but not for the other treated crops.
Maybe these farmers were confused by the wording on the product label. Or maybe the problem appeared so serious that someone figured off-label uses would be okay if they got the job done. Hopefully not.
Some might argue these off-label treatments posed no potential human health risk or harm to the crop. That isn't the point. Any off-label pesticide application is illegal. A pesticide can only be used on a crop listed on the label. Period.
Are these instances of off-label use isolated incidents or indications of a troubling new trend? Last year, there appeared to be somewhat more misuse than in years before. Speaking for CropLife America, any case of misuse is enough to make us very concerned. After all, it's our credibility with the public - and the credibility of farmers, dealers, consultants and sales reps who always follow the product label when applying pesticides - that is at stake.
Fortunately in the instances described above, no tainted commodity entered the food supply and sickened consumers. One need only look back about a decade to the West Coast incident where a product was intentionally misapplied to a fruit crop to gauge the potential negative impact of using a pesticide off-label. Dozens of consumers were sickened, and the affected commodity industry suffered millions of dollars in losses and a tarnished image that took years to recover. All because a single grower selfishly chose to use a pesticide off-label.
These isolated instances of off-label applications cannot rightly be used to condemn all pesticide users and uses in the country. After all, millions of pesticide applications are made each year to literally millions of crop acres. The off-label incidents described above and others reported to regulators recently total far less than a fraction of 1 percent of all lawful pesticide treatments in the United States. Still, it's worth a warning to all farmers and applicators that there is a minuscule minority out there who have the potential to ruin things, or at the least make life much more complicated, for everyone else who legally uses pesticides.
Which brings up the prospect of self-policing. One response to those incidents might be to step up state and federal enforcement actions. But, far more effective and desirable, are the self-policing concepts encompassed in product stewardship programs. Basic tenets of these programs is reading and following label directions and staying current with farmer/applicator training and certification programs, which are widely available. Such programs greatly reduce the chance for applicator error.
Self-policing implies another important action: peer pressure. Some might respond "I'm not my neighbor's keeper" but such an attitude ignores the reality of "we're all in this together." Leading by example and recognition of shared responsibility can be strong motivations for explaining to neighbors why off-label pesticide applications are no small matters.
In these times of heightened awareness following the terrorist incidents of Sept. 11, it behooves everyone to be professional and responsible in selling or using pesticides, which we have constantly demonstrated can be handled and controlled properly and safely. Such an effort will help preserve the products that provide countless benefits to farmers and the consuming public.
Jay Vroom is president of CropLife America. Established in
1933, CropLife America (formerly the American Crop Protection
Association) represents the developers, manufacturers, formulators
and distributors of plant science solutions for agriculture and pest
management in the United States. CropLife America member companies produce, sell
and distribute virtually all the crop protection and biotechnology
products used by American farmers. To comment on this article, contact Vroom
at jvroom@croplifeamerica.org.
Editors Note: In the April 2002 issue of the Pesticide Quarterly it was reported that the Washington State Department of Agriculture had banned residential use of this herbicide. Apparently, Dow AgroSciences felt compelled to take further action early this fall. Agricultural users will recognize clopyralid as the primary active ingredient in Stinger and Curtail herbicides.
A widely used herbicide for control of invasive, noxious and other hard-to-control weeds will no longer be used on U.S. residential lawns as a result of an action taken to address regulatory concerns by the product's primary manufacturer, Dow AgroSciences LLC.
Clopyralid products will continue to be used on golf courses and certain other forms of nonresidential turf. However, Dow AgroSciences has petitioned the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to delete residential turf uses from the clopyralid product label. Additionally, under the amended label, professional applicators will now be required to notify property managers not to compost clippings from treated grass. Farm, ranch and forestry uses will be unaffected.
"The decision to discontinue residential turf use of the herbicide was made to address regulatory concerns about the potential for damage to sensitive plants from clopyralid residues in compost," said Dow AgroSciences vice president for urban pest control products Elin Miller. "This action is based on a few isolated reports of plant damage, not on concerns about human health."
A premium herbicide, clopyralid controls noxious and invasive weeds at very low rates. The product breaks down readily in the natural soil environment but appears to degrade more slowly in compost.
While herbicides containing clopyralid are only active on a few families of plants, there have been reports of residues in compost damaging sensitive plants. Few instances have been established, and in those cases that have been documented, primarily in Washington State, the residues were tied to programs promoting composting of grass clippings from residential lawns.
Label directions for products from Dow AgroSciences containing the active ingredient clopyralid warn against using compost containing treated material. However, inadvertent composting of clopyralid-treated grass clippings (e.g., via curbside pickup) may be a factor in residential use.
"We see amending the clopyralid product label to discontinue residential turf use as a prudent step while gathering data to better understand the many ways that the composting industry processes compost and the breakdown of our product in these materials," Miller said. "Considerable research is now underway that will help shed light on this issue."
Plant damage linked with clopyralid-containing compost seems much less likely when the compost is incorporated into soil in use. (Note: Sensitive and nonsensitive plant species lists are available at the Washington State Department of Agriculture Web site ( www.wa.gov/agr/clopyralid.htm ).
Products containing clopyralid
have been on the U.S. market for more than 15 years. Regulators
have described the product as
"a low-toxicity chemical that poses little hazard to people, animals
and most vegetation." The product is extremely effective against
invasive and persistent weeds such as yellow starthistle and Canada thistle.
More than $3,600 in penalties for pesticide violations were collected in the third quarter by the North Dakota Department of Agriculture (NDDA).
From July 1 to Sept. 30, 2002 NDDA assessed a total of $3,625 in penalties against 12 individuals for a variety of offenses, including failure to keep required record, providing false information to investigators, and cheating on certification examinations.
Five producers were assessed penalties and placed on probation for illegally importing pesticides from Canada. Additional enforcement actions by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are pending in this matter.
The largest penalty -$775 - was assessed against a custom applicator for allowing pesticide to drift onto a field of durum wheat.
In all cases, the defendants signed pleas and waived their right to a hearing. The collected penalties are transferred to the pesticide certification programs at North Dakota State University.
NDDA enforces federal pesticide laws through an agreement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Editors note: For several years, methyl bromide (MB) has been slated to be phased out due to concern over "greenhouse gas" formation. Well, after searching in vain for alternatives, MB has been given a reprieve of sorts. This is good news since MB plays a critical role in controlling pests in food processing plants and in stored commodity warehouses.)
After numerous stakeholder meetings in 2001 and early 2002, EPA has issued a call for applications for critical use exemptions. Under this exemption, methyl bromide (chemical name, bromomethane) users without technically or economically feasible alternatives may be permitted to obtain methyl bromide after the phase-out date. Applicants must submit information on their current use of methyl bromide and data on the status of alternatives for their crops or end use.
The Parties to the Montreal Protocol recognize that methyl bromide users in some countries will need a temporary safety net. The critical use exemption will provide additional time for certain end users to transition to alternatives. At the October 2001 meeting of the Parties to the Protocol, the Parties agreed to a specific timeline, as well as data requirements, for the critical use exemption. EPA published a Federal Register notice on May 10, 2002 (67 FR 31798) requesting applications for critical use exemptions. EPA will evaluate these applications based on technical and economic criteria and, with other agencies, develop a nomination package for submission to the Secretariat of the Montreal Protocol in January 2003.
By working in partnership with affected stakeholders and the USDA, EPA expects to implement an appropriate, effective and informed CUE program that will meet the obligations under the Montreal Protocol and Clean Air Act, while ensuring that methyl bromide can be used for those critical agricultural needs until such time as economically and technologically feasible alternatives are available.
Production of methyl bromide, an ozone depleting chemical, is scheduled to be eliminated under the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer and the Clean Air Act. For further information on the phase out and exemption process, please contact EPA's Global Programs Division at 800-296-1996.
To address the possibility that substitutes and alternatives may not be available for all methyl bromide uses by 2005, the signatory Parties to the Montreal Protocol (the Protocol) agreed that limited production and import of methyl bromide may be permitted after January 1, 2005 for specific uses determined by the Protocol Parties to be "critical."
While not specifying which uses might be critical, Decision IX/6 established criteria that the Parties will use in determining whether a certain use of methyl bromide, nominated by an individual country, could be exempted as a "critical use." Specifically,
(a) That a use of methyl bromide should qualify as `critical' only if . . .
(ii) There are no technically and economically feasible alternatives or substitutes available to the user that are acceptable from the standpoint of environment and health and are suitable to the crops and circumstances of the nomination;
(b) That production and consumption, if any, of methyl bromide for a critical use should be permitted only if:
(i) All technically and economically feasible steps have been taken to minimize the critical use and any associated emission of methyl bromide;
(ii) Methyl bromide is not available in sufficient quantity and quality from existing stocks of banked or recycled methyl bromide, also bearing in mind the developing countries' need for methyl bromide;
(iii) It is demonstrated that an appropriate effort is being made to evaluate, commercialize and secure national regulatory approval of alternatives and substitutes . . . Parties must demonstrate that research programs are in place to develop and deploy alternatives and substitutes . . . "
The Parties will make the above noted findings on the basis of a technical evaluation of the nominated critical use by the United Nations Environment Program's Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP). In essence, TEAP will evaluate a proposed exemption according to: Availability of, as well as efforts to find, receive approval of, and market, alternatives for that particular use; Efforts to minimize use and emissions; and, The potential for meeting that need through banked or recycled methyl bromide.
While the 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA) did not permit a critical use exemption from the phase-out, Congress amended the CAA via Section 764 of the 1999 Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act (Public Law No. 105-277; October 21, 1998). The new Section 604(d)(6) of the CAA states that: "To the extent consistent with the Montreal Protocol, the Administrator, after notice and opportunity for public comment, and after consultation with other departments or institutions of the Federal Government having regulatory authority related to methyl bromide, including the Secretary of Agriculture, may exempt the production, importation, and consumption of methyl bromide for critical uses. "With this most recent amendment to the CAA, Congress authorizes EPA to provide a critical use exemption. The phrase "To the extent consistent with the Montreal Protocol" limits the exemption to specific uses which are agreed by the Protocol Parties to meet the criteria outlined in Decision IX/6.
The exemption laid out in both the CAA and the Montreal Protocol is an exemption from the 2005 phase-out. EPA published a notice on May 10, 2002 (67 FR 31798) requesting applications for critical use exemptions. EPA will evaluate these applications based on technical and economic criteria and, with other agencies, develop a nomination package for submission to the Secretariat of the Montreal Protocol in January 2003.
States that have agreed to participate in the exemption process include California and Florida. Other states may choose to participate; applicants should contact their state regulatory agency (generally this will be the State Department of Agriculture or State Environmental Protection Agency) to receive information about their involvement in the process.
More than 95 tons of unusable pesticides, a record amount, were collected in this year's Project Safe Send collections conducted by the North Dakota Department of Agriculture (NDDA).
"These numbers show beyond a doubt the continued need for this program," said Agriculture Commissioner Roger Johnson. "Every year, Project Safe Send helps hundreds of North Dakotans - farmers, ranchers, pesticide applicators and homeowners - get rid of unusable and dangerous chemicals safely and at no cost to participants."
This year, 370 people brought in 190,759 pounds of unusable pesticides, such as DDT, mercury, arsenic, chlordane, toxaphene and other dangerous chemicals, to 16 collection sites.
The largest collection was at West Fargo where 45 people brought in 46,744 pounds. At Finley, 28 people brought in 28,065 pounds, while in Grand Forks, 32 people delivered 26,972 pounds.
Onyx Environmental Services of Blaine, Minn., collected the pesticides and transported them to Wisconsin where they will be bulk packaged and then transported to federally approved incinerators in Illinois and Texas.
Authorized by the Legislature and conducted by NDDA, Project
Safe Send is funded by the fees pesticide manufacturers pay to register
their products in the state.
------------------------------------------
Number of Amount in lbs
Location Participants Collected
------------------------------------------
Selfridge 3 426
Bismarck 28 4,686
Hettinger 12 1,456
Medina 19 5,699
Dickinson 23 7,492
Ellendale 17 3,343
Stanley 12 3,386
Lisbon 21 4,209
Velva 26 17,202
Wahpeton 25 4,056
Cando 20 3,845
Maddock 17 8,742
Grafton 42 24,436
Grand Forks 32 26,972
Finley 28 28,065
West Fargo 45 46,744
------------------------------------------
TOTALS 370 190,759
Biotechnology is helping control diseases and pests that take a bite out of U.S.-grown crops, resulting in more food production at lower costs and with less reliance upon pesticides, according to a comprehensive study released here at BIO 2002.
The 40 case studies of 27 crops compiled by the National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy (NCFAP) documented that hardier crops developed through biotechnology can help Americans reap an additional 14 billion pounds of food and improve farm income $2.5 billion, while using 163 million fewer pounds of pesticide.
"This study explains the vast impact biotechnology is having and the future potential for our food production system," said Leonard Gianessi, program director for NCFAP, a nonprofit, Washington-based research organization. "In some cases we studied, biotechnology offers the only practical way to control diseases that reduce yields and threaten entire crops."
The study confirmed that six crops currently in the marketplace developed through biotechnology — soybeans, corn, cotton, papaya, squash and canola — produce an additional 4 billion pounds of food and fiber on the same acreage, improve farm income $1.5 billion and reduce pesticide volume by 46 million pounds.
Assuming the additional 21 crops evaluated in the study are eventually planted, production would increase 10 billion pounds, farm income would improve $1 billion and pesticide volume would be reduced 117 million pounds. The study evaluated regional production in 27 of America's crops, or slightly more than half of the U.S. crop value.
"As opposed to previous studies, our work goes well beyond the traditional agricultural commodities and evaluates the impact biotechnology can have on a much wider range of crops, including fruits and vegetables," Gianessi said. "In fact, the study shows every region in the country stands to benefit from development of the new varieties evaluated in this study."
Growers in each of the 47 states reflected in the report would see yield increases. (There are no case studies evaluating production in Alaska, Nevada and Rhode Island.) North Dakota would realize the greatest production gains, where growers could see yield increases of 2.4 billion pounds from the adoption of fungal-resistant barley and herbicide-tolerant wheat. California would experience the largest pesticide reduction at 65.8 million pounds per year. Furthermore, Gianessi offered several examples where biotechnology may represent the only chance of avoiding widespread devastation of the food supply, including:
"In nearly every case we evaluated, biotechnology provides equal or better control of harmful pests at reduced costs." Gianessi said. "However, we are still in the early stages of realizing the impact of biotechnology on food and fiber production in this country."
The 40 case studies, which were reviewed by nearly 70 plant biotechnology experts from 20 academic and government institutions, is the most comprehensive evaluation of the impact on U.S. agriculture of crops developed through biotechnology.
The complete study, "Plant Biotechnology: Current and Potential Impact for Improving Pest Management in U.S. Agriculture An Analysis of 40 Case Studies" is available on the Internet at www.ncfap.org. It was commissioned with a grant from The Rockefeller Foundation, and was later expanded to cover 40 case studies of 27 crops with funding from the Biotechnology Industry Organization, CropLife America, Council for Biotechnology Information, Grocery Manufacturers of America and Monsanto.
The National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy is a private,
nonprofit, non-advocacy research organization based in
Washington, D.C. Originally established in 1984 at Resources for the Future, the
center became an independent organization in 1992. NCFAP researchers
conduct studies in four program areas:
biotechnology, pesticides, U.S. farm and food policy, and
international trade and development.
What follows are training schedules you can use for planning your training needs over the next several months. A pre-registration form is also in this issue of the Pesticide Quarterly.
Online pre-registration is now available on the worldwide Web via our secure server. Electronic pre-registration forms can also be found there for downloading and printing. Simply point your browser to our website at: http://www.ag.ndsu.nodak.edu/aginfo/pesticid/Reg2003.pdf .
"Initial Trainings" are designed for new applicators or dealers needing to prepare to take certification exams.
"Recertification Trainings" are structured to give currently certified applicators refresher or update oriented
information necessary to maintain or renew their certificates. "Home Study Materials" are available for those
categories that are not available on the training calendar.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DATE CATEGORY TRAINING TYPE PLACE TIME -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dec 11, 2002 Ground Commercial Grand Forks Registration 8 a.m.
Ornamental & Turf C'mon Inn, Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Greenhouse Initial 3051 32 Ave S
& Recertification
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dec 12, 2002 Ground Commercial Minot Registration 8 a.m.
Ornamental & Turf NDSU North Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Greenhouse Initial Central Research
Recertification & Extension Center,
5400 Hwy 83 S
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dec 17, 2002 Fumigation Commercial & IVN Sites: Registration 8 a.m. (CST)
Private Training 8:30 a.m. to 12:50 p.m.
Inter-Active Video Initial & Fargo
Training Recertification NDSU Campus,
E. Morrow Lebedeff
Hall,Room 183
Seating is limited. Dickinson
Preregistration DSU North Campus, Room 104
is required. Grand Forks
UND Campus Gamble Hall, Room 130
Minot
NDSU North Central Research
Extension Center, 5400 Hwy 83 S
Williston
WSC Campus Main Bldg, Room 120
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan 13, 2003 Fumigation Commercial & IVN Sites: Registration 1 p.m. (CST)
Private Training 1:30 to 5:50 p.m.
Inter-Active Video Initial & Fargo
Training Recertification NDSU Campus,
E. Morrow Lebedeff
Hall,Room 170
Seating is limited. Dickinson
Preregistration DSU North Campus, Room 104
is required. Bismarck
BSC Campus VoTech Center, Room 216
Jamestown
State Hospital, Learning Center, Room 320
Bottineau
Minot State University Bottineau
Campus IVN Bldg, Room 105
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE CATEGORY TRAINING TYPE PLACE TIME
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Feb 5 to 7, 2003 Ground & Commercial Minot Feb 5
Aerial NDSU North Registration 1 p.m.
AgPest Central Research Training 1:30 to 5 p.m.
Right-of-Way Initial Extension, Feb 6
Testing Feb 7 Research & Demo 5400 Hwy 83 S Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Seed Treatment Test Review 4 p.m. to 5 p.m.
Feb 7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Testing 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Feb 25, 2003 Ground Commercial Fargo Registration 8 a.m.
Ornamental & Turf Doublewood Best Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Greenhouse Initial & Western Inn Hotel,
Recertification 3333 13th Ave S
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mar 18, 2003 Fumigation Commercial IVN Sites: Registration 8 a.m.
& Private Training 8:30 a.m. to 12:50 p.m.
Inter-Active Video Initial & Bismarck
Training Recertification BSC Campus VoTech
Center, Room 216
Seating is limited. Devils Lake
Preregistration Devils Lake Memorial Building
is required. Armory Meeting Room, 524 4th Ave.
Fargo
NDSU Campus, Industrial Ag
Communications Center, Room 422
Jamestown
State Hospital,
Learning Center, Room 360
Minot
NDSU North Central Research
Extension Center, 5400 Hwy 83 S
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mar 19 to 21, Ground & Commercial Fargo Mar 19
2003 Aerial NDSU Campus Registration 1 p.m.
AgPest Training 1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m.
Testing Mar 21 Right-of-Way Initial
Research & Demo Mar 19 - Loftsgard
Seed Treatment Hall, Room 114
Mar 20
Mar 20 - Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Loftsgard Hall, Test Review 4 p.m. to 5 p.m.
Room 114
Mar 21 _ Student Union,
Union Ballroom Mar 21
Testing 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE CATEGORY TRAINING TYPE PLACE TIME
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 25, 2003 Ground Commercial Dickinson Registration 8 a.m. (MST)
Ornamental Travelodge Hotel Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
& Turf Initial & 532 15th St W
Greenhouse Recertification
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mar 26, 2003 Ground Commercial Devils Lake Registration 8 a.m.
Ornamental Ramsey County Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
& Turf Initial & Courthouse
Greenhouse Recertification Meeting Room,
524 4th Ave.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mar 27, 2003 Ground Commercial Williston Registration 8 a.m.
Ornamental NDSU Research Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
& Turf Initial & Extension Center,
Greenhouse Recertification 14120 Hwy 2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apr 21, 2003 Public Health Commercial IVN Sites: Registration 8:30 a.m. (CST)
Training 9 a.m. to 3:50 p.m.
Inter-Active Video Initial & Bismarck
Training Recertification BSC Campus VoTech
Center, Room 228
Seating is limited. Devils Lake
Preregistration Devils Lake Memorial Building
is required. Armory Meeting Room, 524 4th Ave.
Dickinson
DSU North Campus, Room 104
Fargo
NDSU Campus, E. Morrow Lebedeff
Hall, Room 183
Minot
NDSU Research Extension Center,
5400 Hwy 83 S
Williston
WSC Campus Main Bldg, Room 120
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE CATEGORY TRAINING TYPE PLACE TIME
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nov 7, 2002 Ground Commercial Fargo Registration 8:30 a.m.
Home, NDSU Campus Training 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Industrial Recertification Loftsgard Hall,
Interactive & Institutional Room 260
Video Training Public Health Minot
NDSU North Central
Research Extension Center,
5400 Hwy 83 S
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dec 3-4, 2002 Ground Commercial Fargo Dec 3
& Aerial Fargodome Registration 8 a.m.
Northern AgPest Recertification 800 University Training 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m.
Ag Expo Right-of-Way Drive N
Research & Demo
Seed Treatment
Must attend both days Dec 4
Training 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dec 11, 2002 Ground Commercial Grand Forks Registration 8 a.m.
Ornamental C'mon Inn, Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
& Turf 3051 32 Ave S
Greenhouse Initial &
Recertification
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dec 12, 2002 Ground Commercial Minot Registration 8 a.m.
Ornamental NDSU North Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
& Turf Initial & Central Research
Greenhouse Recertification & Extension Center,
5400 Hwy 83 S
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dec 17, 2002 Fumigation Commercial & IVN Sites: Registration 8 a.m. (CST)
Private Training 8:30 a.m. to 12:50 p.m.
Inter-Active Fargo
Video Training Initial & NDSU Campus, E. Morrow
Recertification Lebedeff Hall, Room 183
Seating is limited. Dickinson
Preregistration DSU North Campus, Room 104
is required. Grand Forks
UND Campus Gamble Hall, Room 130
Minot
NDSU North Central Research
Extension Center, 5400 Hwy 83 S
Williston
WSC Campus Main Bldg, Room 120
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE CATEGORY TRAINING TYPE PLACE TIME
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan 13, 2003 Fumigation Commercial & IVN Sites: Registration 1 p.m. (CST)
Private Training 1:30 to 5:50 p.m.
Inter-Active Fargo
Video Initial & NDSU Campus, E. Morrow
Recertification Lebedeff Hall, Room 170
Seating is limited. Dickinson
DSU North Campus, Room 104
Preregistration Bismarck
is required. BSC Campus VoTech Center,
Room 216
Jamestown
State Hospital,
Learning Center, Room 320
Bottineau
Minot State University Bottineau
Campus IVN Bldg, Room 105
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE CATEGORY TRAINING TYPE PLACE TIME
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Feb 4, 2003 Ground Commercial Minot Registration 8:00 a.m.
& Aerial NDSU North Training 8:30 a.m. to 4p.m.
AgPest Central Research
Right-of-Way Recertification Extension Center,
Research & Demo 5400 Hwy 83 S
Seed Treatment
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Feb 13, 2003 Ground Commercial Devils Lake Registration 8:00 a.m.
& Aerial Ramsey County Training 8:30 a.m. to 4p.m.
AgPest Court Courthouse
Right-of-Way Recertification Meeting Room,
Research & Demo 524 4th Ave.
Seed Treatment
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Feb 18, 2003 Ground Commercial Williston Registration 8:00 a.m.
& Aerial NDSU Research Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
AgPest Extension Center
Right-of-Way Recertification 14120 Hwy 2
Research & Demo
Seed Treatment
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Feb 19, 2003 Ground Commercial & Dickinson Commercial
& Aerial Private Travelodge Hotel Registration 8 a.m. (MST)
AgPest 532 15th St W Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Right-of-Way Recertification
Research & Demo Private
Seed Treatment Registration 12:30 p.m. (MST)
Training 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Feb 25, 2003 Ground Commercial Fargo Registration 8 a.m. Ornamental Doublewood Best Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
& Turf Initial & Western Inn Hotel,
Greenhouse Recertification 3333 13th Ave S
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Feb 28, 2003 Ground Commercial Park River Registration 8 a.m.
& Aerial City Hall Training 8:30 a.m. 4 p.m.
AgPest Recertification Auditorium
Right-of-Way 514 Briggs Ave S
Research & Demo
Seed Treatment
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE CATEGORY TRAINING TYPE PLACE TIME
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mar 3, 2003 Aerial Commercial Grand Forks TBA
AgPest Alerus Center
NDAAA Convention Right-of-Way Recertification 1200 42nd St S
Research & Demo Only
Aerial Seed Treatment
applicators only
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mar 7, 2003 Ground Commercial Jamestown Registration 8 a.m.
& Aerial Dakota Inn Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
AgPest Recertification Hwy 281 South
Right-of-Way and I-94, Exit 258
Research & Demo
Seed Treatment
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mar 12, 2003 Ground Commercial West Fargo Registration 8 a.m.
& Aerial Speedway Event Training 8:30a.m.-4 p.m
AgPest Recertification Center
Right-of-Way
Research & Demo
Seed Treatment
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mar 18, 2003 Fumigation Commercial IVN Sites: Registration 8 a.m.
& Private Training 8:30 a.m. to 12:50 p.m.
Inter-Active Bismarck
Video Training Initial & BSC Campus VoTech
Recertification Center, Room 216
Seating is limited. Devils Lake
Preregistration Devils Lake Memorial
is required. Building Armory
Meeting Room, 524 4th Ave.
Fargo
NDSU Campus Industrial Ag
Communication Center, Room 422
Jamestown
State Hospital,
Learning Center, Room 360
Minot
NDSU North Central Research
Extension Center, 5400 Hwy 83 S
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 25, 2003 Ground Commercial Dickinson Registration 8 a.m. (MST)
Ornamental Travelodge Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
& Turf Initial Hotel, 532 15th St W
Greenhouse & Recertification
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE CATEGORY TRAINING TYPE PLACE TIME
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 26, 2003 Ground Commercial Devils Lake Registration 8 a.m.
Ornamental Ramsey County Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
& Turf Initial & Court Courthouse
Greenhouse Recertification Meeting Room,
524 4th Ave
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mar 27, 2003 Ground Commercial Williston Registration 8 a.m.
Ornamental NDSU Research Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
& Turf Initial & Extension Center
Greenhouse Recertification 14120 Hwy 2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mar 31, 2003 Ground Commercial Carrington Registration 8 a.m.
& Aerial Recertification NDSU Research Training 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
AgPest Extension Center
Right-of-Way 663 Hwy. 281 N
Research & Demo
Seed Treatment
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apr 21, 2003 Public Health Commercial IVN Sites: Registration 8:30 a.m. (CST)
Training 9 a.m. to 3:50 p.m.
Inter-Active Initial & Bismarck
Video Training Recertification BSC Campus VoTech
Center, Room 228
Seating is limited. Devils Lake
Devils Lake Memorial Building
Preregistration Armory Meeting Room,
is required. 524 4th Ave.
Dickinson
DSU North Campus, Room 104
Fargo
NDSU Campus, E. Morrow
Lebedeff Hall, Room 183
Minot
NDSU Research Extension
Center, 5400 Hwy 83 S
Williston
WSC Campus Main Bldg, Room 120
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A new Web site and publication discussing how the Bt corn/monarch butterfly controversy was resolved is now available. The electronic and print material present a case study of a controversial issue that was settled by scientifically developed facts.
"Butterflies and Bt Corn: Allowing Science to Guide Decisions" was prepared by the Agricultural Research Service, University of Guelph, University of Maryland, Iowa State University, University of Nebraska, Purdue University, Cornell University and Monarch Watch.
The Web version of the publication can be found at: www.ars.usda.gov/sites/monarch
Limited numbers of the printed publication are available from Richard L. Hellmich, USDA-ARS Corn Insect and Crop Genetic Research Unit, 110 Genetics Laboratory, c/o Insectary, Ames, Iowa 50011.
That Bt corn might present a risk became a matter of scientific and public concern when a small study in 1999 indicated caterpillars suffered when given no choice but to feed on milkweed leaves heavily dusted with Bt corn pollen. Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) is a soil bacterium used as an effective alternative to chemical insecticides for controlling moth pests.
Soon after the controversy began, ARS coordinated a workshop attended by representatives and researchers from government, environmental groups and industry. At that workshop, a cooperative attitude developed that the issue needed credible, science-based facts before any decisions were made.
Two major questions needed to be scientifically answered to establish whether Bt corn actually posed a threat to monarch caterpillars — the direct toxicity of Bt pollen on caterpillars and the likelihood that caterpillars might be exposed to that much pollen.
In the end, monarch caterpillars were not found to be very sensitive to pollen from most types of Bt corn. The study also found that the likelihood of caterpillar exposure to Bt pollen is low.
|
Need
help with pesticide certification or |
| Contact: NDSU Pesticide Training and Certification Program PO Box 5051 NDSU Fargo ND 58105-5051
Phone: 701/231-7180,
Email: pesticid@ndsuext.nodak.edu |
Pesticide Quarterly, Volume 20, No. 4, October 2002
NDSU Extension Service, North Dakota State University of Agriculture and
Applied Science, and U.S. Department of Agriculture cooperating. Sharon D. Anderson,
Director, Fargo, North Dakota. Distributed in furtherance of the Acts of Congress of May 8
and June 30, 1914. We offer our programs and facilities to all persons regardless of race,
color, national origin, religion, sex, disability, age, Vietnam era veterans status, or
sexual orientation; and are an equal opportunity employer.
This publication will be made available in alternative format for persons with
disabilities upon request 701/231-7881.