PESTICIDE SAFETY EDUCATION: STILL NEEDED?

1. PESTICIDE SAFETY EDUCATION: STILL NEEDED? Barry M. Brennan, PhD Pesticide Coordinator College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources University of Hawaii-Manoa

2. Background Pesticide Safety Education • Chlorinated hydrocarbons replaced by organophosphates

3. Background Pesticide Safety Education • Chlorinated hydrocarbons replaced by organophosphates • USDA creates Operation Safe

4. Background Pesticide Safety Education • Chlorinated hydrocarbons replaced by organophosphates • USDA creates Operation Safe • 1960 – the Administrator of the FES ask extension directors to appoint a Pesticide Coordinator to -

5. “…receive, interpret, and disseminate information regarding pesticides and pest management.”

6. The (Extension Service) Administrator envisioned educational programs, schools, conferences and intensive training courses for farmers and other pesticide users.

7. Significant Dates • Silent Spring • Environment Protection Agency • FIFRA amended • State Plans for Certification of Pesticide Applicators approved 1976 Training begins 1988-89 Joint EPA/USDA evaluation

8. The 80s and 90s • IPM becomes the buzz word • Endangered Species Act • Worker protection issuesWPS • Water quality protection • Drift management • Structural pest management

9. Pesticide Safety Education • Proposed at 1993 National C&T Workshop • New programs = Increased workload • Funding from new CSREES programs (%-age)

10. Pesticide Safety Education • Proposed at 1993 National C&T Workshop • New programs = Increased workload • Funding from new CSREES programs (%-age) • GPRA passed

11. Pesticide Safety Education • Proposed at 1993 National C&T Workshop • New programs = Increased workload • Funding from new programs • GPRA passed • CTAG created to assess C&T • CES, SLA, EPA, USDA partnership • C&T in the 21st Century

12. Are the problems that justified creation of PSEP still valid? • Number of farms down

13. Are the problems that justified creation of PSEP still valid? • Number of farms down • Number of private applicators down

14. Are the problems that justified creation of PSEP still valid? • Number of farms down • Number of private applicators down • Environmental contamination down

15. Are the problems that justified creation of PSEP still valid? • Number of farms down • Number of private applicators down • Environmental contamination down • Fewer instances of pesticide poisoning

16. Are the problems that justified creation of PSEP still valid? • Number of farms down • Number of private applicators down • Environmental contamination down • Fewer instances of pesticide poisoning • Number of illegal residues down

17. Changes in the last 30 years • Number of RUPs down

18. Changes in the last 30 years • Number of RUPs down • Alternatives developed (e.g., baits, “less toxic” pesticides, non-chemical controls)

19. Changes in the last 30 years • Number of RUPs down • Alternatives developed (e.g., baits, “less toxic” pesticides, non-chemical controls) • Fewer manufacturers = fewer products

20. Changes in the last 30 years • Number of RUPs down • Alternatives developed (e.g., baits, “less toxic” pesticides, non-chemical controls) • Fewer manufacturers = fewer products • Most private and commercial applicators trained (and recertified)

21. Changes in the last 30 years • Number of RUPs down • Alternatives developed (e.g., baits, “less toxic” pesticides, non-chemical controls) • Fewer manufacturers = fewer products • Most private and commercial applicators trained (and recertified) • Funding in real dollars down every year

22. Positive changes in the last 30 years • Enforcement more effective (numbers up?)

23. Positive changes in the last 30 years • Enforcement more effective (numbers up?) • Awareness among applicators up

24. Positive changes in the last 30 years • Enforcement more effective (numbers up?) • Awareness among applicators up • Support from applicator organizations up

25. Positive changes in the last 30 years • Enforcement more effective (numbers up?) • Awareness among applicators up • Support from applicator organizations up • Fewer serious incidents of misuse

26. Positive changes in the last 30 years • Enforcement more effective (numbers up?) • Awareness among applicators up • Support from applicator organizations up • Fewer serious incidents of misuse • Increased number of training materials and formats available • Quality up • Interactive

27. Positive changes in the last 30 years • Enforcement more effective (numbers up?) • Awareness among applicators up • Support from applicator organizations up • Fewer serious incidents of misuse • Increased number of training materials and formats available • Certification required for employment

28. Current situation • PSEP is low priority for many land grants

29. Current situation • PSEP is low priority for many land grants • CSREES does not support

30. Current situation • PSEP is low priority for many land grants • CSREES does not support • Base funding always uncertain

31. Current situation • PSEP is low priority for many land grants • CSREES does not support • Base funding always uncertain • Pesticide coordinators not being replaced

32. Current situation • PSEP is low priority for many land grants • CSREES does not support • Base funding always uncertain • Pesticide coordinators not being replaced • Fewer applicators need certification

33. Current situation • PSEP is low priority for many land grants • CSREES does not support • Base funding always uncertain • Pesticide coordinators not being replaced • Fewer applicators need certification • Non-English proficient applicators up

34. Current situation (cont.) • Agroterrorism is a real concern

35. Current situation (cont.) • Agroterrorism is a real concern • Applicators want training, not certification

36. Current situation (cont.) • Agroterrorism is a real concern • Applicators want training, not certification • Commercial applicators available for hire or on staff • Aerial applicators • Pest management specialists

37. Recommendations • Prioritize training needs • Laws and regulations • Pest management • Environmental protection • Pesticide application • Personal protection and poisoning

38. Recommendations • Assign responsibilities • Laws and regulations - SLA • Pest management – PM coordinator • Environmental protection – SLA • Pesticide application – PSEP • Personal protection and poisoning – PSEP

39. Recommendations • Regionalize program (5-15 programs)

40. Recommendations • Regionalize program (5-15 programs) • Focus on non-certification training • Special needs applicators • Train the trainer • Professional development

41. Recommendations • Regionalize program (5-15 programs) • Focus on non-certification training • Develop partnerships to deliver program (other faculty, associations, private industry, NGOs, etc)

42. Recommendations • Regionalize program (5-15 programs) • Focus on non-certification training • Develop partnerships to deliver program (other faculty, associations, private industry, NGOs, etc) • Seek extramural funding, fees

43. Recommendations • Regionalize program (5-15 programs) • Focus on non-certification training • Develop partnerships to deliver program (other faculty, associations, private industry, NGOs, etc) • Seek extramural funding, fees • Utilize technology • Internet, Pesticide PDA, handheld computers

44. Summary and Conclusions • Original reasons for program have been met • Emphasis has moved from education and training to enforcement • CSREES is not an effective partner • Extension directors ambivalent • Alternatives to state extension available

45. Summary and Conclusions (cont.) • Programs may be regionalized • Programs should be more focused • Funding will always be an issue

46. Thank you! Questions and comments?

47. Summary and Conclusions • Regarding funding • CSREES will not support • SLAs should assume responsibilities for some aspects (laws and regs, environment, etc) • EPA set up competitive grants program OR regionalize program