Crop Protection Products for Organic Agriculture - ACS Publications

grating cultural, biological, and mechanical practices that foster cycling of resources, promote ecological balance, and conserve biodiversity." A dis...
1 downloads 0 Views 299KB Size
Downloaded by PURDUE UNIV on August 29, 2014 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: December 14, 2006 | doi: 10.1021/bk-2007-0947.pr001

Preface The U . S . Department o f Agriculture ( U S D A ) National Agricultural Statistics Service documented a 6 3 % increase between 1995 and 2003 i n the number o f farms certified for organic production practices, although the total acreage (2.2 m i l l i o n acres) remains small by comparison to noncertified farms (794 m i l l i o n acres). Certification o f a farm operation as organic follows the administrative rules promulgated as 7 C F R Part 205, the National Organic Program ( N O P ) . Administered by the U S D A Agricultural Marketing Service, the N O P defines organic production as " A production system that is managed in accordance with the A c t and regulations i n this part to respond to site-specific conditions by i n t e ­ grating cultural, biological, and mechanical practices that foster cycling o f resources, promote ecological balance, and conserve biodiversity." A distinguishing feature o f certified organic production is the requirement to operate under a system plan that must be audited by a certifying agent. In contrast to popular perception, this plan can include the use o f pesticides for crop protection although philosophically they may be used as a tool o f last resort. G i v e n that integrated pest management (DPM) theory promotes the judicious use o f pesticides as part o f a com­ prehensive approach i n combination with other tactics, the differences between so-called conventional crop protection practices that rigorously follow I P M and certified organic practices may be defined more by the types o f pesticides deployed rather than by "use versus no use". A l l pesticides, regardless o f origin (synthetic or natural) or organic certification status, must undergo regulatory evaluation as part o f the Environmental Protection Agency ( E P A ) registration approval process. Therefore, we felt it was time to publicly explore from a scientific perspective what is k n o w n about products suitable for organic crop production. W e considered also that such products w o u l d likely fall under the rubric o f E P A ' s biopesticide and/or reduced risk programs,

xi In Crop Protection Products for Organic Agriculture; Felsot, A., et al.; ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2006.

Downloaded by PURDUE UNIV on August 29, 2014 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: December 14, 2006 | doi: 10.1021/bk-2007-0947.pr001

although pesticides with either status may not meet the requirements allowing use i n organic production. A s a first step i n understanding the crop protection products used i n organic systems, and by extension more compatible w i t h the ideals o f BPM systems, we organized i n the spring o f 2003 a multi-day symposium titled, "Environmental, Health, and Efficacy Aspects o f B i o l o g i c a l l y Derived and Certified Organic Pesticides". This symposium was part o f the technical program o f the American Chemical Society's ( A C S ) D i v i s i o n o f Agrochemicals. Some observers may consider it odd that the A C S would sponsor a symposium about seemingly "non-chemical" agricultural technology that benefits organic farmers. However, the D i v i s i o n has long convened national programs examining a l l aspects o f pest control technology. Subject matter has been interdisciplinary ranging from basic chemistry and biochemistry to biology and applied ecology. The perspective has encompassed many scales o f measurement ranging from the laboratory to the field and beyond to the landscape, region, and global system. The scientific aspects o f risk assessment o f crop protection technologies as well as the societal mandates o f risk management are subjects o f great interest. Perceiving many misperceptions about the permissible technologies used to protect crops under certified organic production practices, we had decided it was time to scrutinize the tools as we w o u l d any other chemical technology. Our purpose was not a cynical position but essentially an airing o f questions that are asked before any pesticide is registered regardless o f the type o f production system it w i l l be deployed in. G i v e n that the scientific literature seemed to lack significant health, environmental, or efficacy assessment information for many crop protection products deemed suitable for organic agriculture, we invited the symposium participants to write a chapter for this book that we hoped w o u l d help meet this need. One o f the primary goals in assembling the chapter subject matter for this book has been to stimulate further research into new pesticide technologies that w i l l be acceptable to the organic agricultural community but also likely to be adopted by non-organic producers. The new products w i l l necessarily have a reasonable certainty o f causing no ecological or environmental harm, but w i l l also have high efficacy without harming native or introduced biological control organisms. In this volume, Chapter one provides a brief overview o f the needs for crop

xii In Crop Protection Products for Organic Agriculture; Felsot, A., et al.; ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2006.

protection and the evolution o f strategies for attaining technological competence that are compatible with environmental stewardship. The next set o f chapters detail h o w risk assessment o f pesticide technologies is handled from the perspective o f the agrochemical industry and by the governing bodies for organic agriculture. The remainder o f the book examines specific pesticide technologies compatible (or already ap­ proved) for organic agricultural production and attempts to make transparent the information i n hand regarding human and ecological safety as w e l l as efficacy.

Downloaded by PURDUE UNIV on August 29, 2014 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: December 14, 2006 | doi: 10.1021/bk-2007-0947.pr001

Allan S. Felsot Department o f Entomology Washington State University 2710 University D r i v e Richland, WA 99352

Kenneth D. Racke D o w AgroSciences 9330 Zionsville R o a d B u i l d i n g 308/2B Indianapolis, I N 46268

xiii In Crop Protection Products for Organic Agriculture; Felsot, A., et al.; ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2006.

Downloaded by PURDUE UNIV on August 29, 2014 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: December 14, 2006 | doi: 10.1021/bk-2007-0947.pr001

In Crop Protection Products for Organic Agriculture; Felsot, A., et al.; ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2006.

Downloaded by PURDUE UNIV on August 29, 2014 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: December 14, 2006 | doi: 10.1021/bk-2007-0947.pr001

Crop Protection Products for Organic Agriculture

In Crop Protection Products for Organic Agriculture; Felsot, A., et al.; ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2006.