Indexed by Chemical
|
State of California Gray Davis, Governor Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection Paul E. Helliker, Director Department of Pesticide Regulation |
 |
Summary of Pesticide Use Report Data Indexed by Chemical
Table of Contents
- Order Form
- Terminology
- Introduction
- Appendix
1996 Summary of Pesticide Use Report Data Indexed by Chemical
This link downloads the compressed ASCII version. (SEE UNZIP HELP)
Return to 1996 Summary of Pesticide Use Report Data menu.
Beginning with the 1993 reports, the Summary of Pesticide Use Report Data indexed by chemical or commodity are available on floppy disk in WordPerfect 6.0a or ASCII format. Also available is the Annual Pesticide Use Report Data (database) on CD-ROM.
The Summary of Pesticide Use Reports are available in two formats. One report is indexed by chemical and lists the amount of each pesticide used, the commodity on which it was used, the number of applications, and the acres/units treated. The second report is indexed by commodity and lists the chemicals used, the number of applications, amount of pesticides used, and the acres/units treated.
Please use this form to order reports and enclose payment to the address below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Item | Report | Quantity | Amount | Total |
| 603 | Summary Report by Commodity 19__ (printed) |
$10.00 |
||
| 604 | Summary Report by Chemical 19__ (printed) |
$10.00 |
||
| 605 | Summary Report by Commodity or Chemical 19__ (disk) - please circle one |
$ 2.50 |
||
| 606 | Registration Number Book (printed)	 |
$ 7.50 |
||
| 607 | Registration Number Book (disk) |
$ 2.50 |
||
| 608 | Annual Pesticide Use Report Data (database) 19__ (only 1995 and 1996 available at this printing) |
$59.00 |
||
| TOTAL | $ | |||
Enclose payment to:
-
Cashier, State of California
Department of Pesticide Regulation
1001 I Street,
Sacramento, California 95812-5310
NAME_______________________________________________________________
ADDRESS____________________________________________________________
CITY__________________________________________STATE______ZIP__________
COMPANY_____________________________________PHONE(____)____________
- Number of applications - Number of applications of an active ingredient.
- Pounds applied - Number of pounds of an active ingredient.
- Unit type - The amount listed in this column is one of the following:
-
A = Acreage
C = Cubic feet
K = Thousand cubic feet (of commodity treated)
P = Pounds
S = Square feet
T = Tons (of commodity treated)
U= Miscellaneous units (e.g., number of tractors, trees, bins, etc.)
Questions regarding the Pesticide Use Report or information regarding the availability and cost of the computerized database should be directed to:
This summary data represents a small fraction of the information gathered under full use reporting. The Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) uses the data to help estimate dietary risk and to ensure compliance with clean air laws and ground water regulations. Site-specific use report data, combined with geographic data on endangered species habitats, also helps county agricultural commissioners resolve potential pesticide use conflicts. Detailed, individual pesticide use report data may be obtained from DPR for in-depth, analytical purposes.
During 1996, DPR contracted with agricultural commissioners in 56 of the state's 58 counties for the electronic submittal of their pesticide use data to DPR. This accounted for approximately 97 percent of the total reported pesticide usage in the State. As the number of counties participating in this program has increased, quality of the pesticide use data has continued to improve.
The following comments and points should be taken into consideration when analyzing data contained in this report:
1. Commodity Codes
-
DPR uses a database of pesticide product labels to cross-check data entries to determine if the product reported
used is registered on the reported commodity. The DPR label database uses a coding system which is based on crop
names used by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) to prepare official label language.
However, this coding system caused some problems until it was modified in 1990/91.
Problems occur when the label language in the database calls a crop by one name, and the use report uses another. For example, a grower may report a pesticide use on "almonds," but the actual label on the pesticide product--coded into the database--states the pesticide was to be used on "nuts." This causes use data for certain commodities to be listed under more than one category. DPR continues to work on simplification of the crop/commodity codes to achieve a more consistent structure without loss of information in the future reports.
The commodity coding structure also causes some inaccuracies because of confusion among growers. For example, the coding structure differentiates between tomatoes grown for processing and those grown for fresh market use. However, pesticide labels do not make the differentiation and in previous years neither did most growers when filing use reports. However, this practice has been changing, and in the 1996 reports this distinction was usually made.
The commodity "grapes, processed" was renamed "grapes, wine" beginning with 1992 Pesticide Use Reports. This change was made to differentiate grapes grown for wine production from all other categories of grapes including table grapes, raisins, grape juice, etc.
2. Unregistered Use
-
The report contains several entries which reflect the use of a pesticide on a commodity for which the pesticide
is not currently registered. This sometimes occurs because the original use report was in error-either the pesticide
or the commodity was inaccurately reported. DPR is continuing to implement methods to identify and reduce these
types of reporting errors in future reports. Other instances may occur because by law, growers are sometimes allowed
to use stock they have on hand of a pesticide product that has been withdrawn from the market by the manufacturer
or suspended or canceled by regulatory authorities.
Other reporting "errors" may occur when a pesticide is applied directly to a site to control a particular pest, but is not applied directly to the crop in the field. A grower may use an herbicide to treat weeds on the edge of a field, a fumigant on bare soil prior to planting, or a rodenticide to treat rodent burrows. For example, reporting the use of the herbicide glyphosate on tomatoes--when it was actually applied to bare soil prior to planting the tomatoes--could be perceived to be an error. Although technically incorrect, recording the data as if the application were made directly to the commodity provides valuable crop usage information for DPR's regulatory program.
3. Adjuvants
-
Data on spray adjuvants (including emulsifiers, wetting agents, foam suppressants, and other efficacy enhancers),
not reported prior to full use reporting, are now included. Examples of these types of chemicals include the "alkyls"
and some petroleum distillates. (Adjuvants are exempt from federal registration requirements, but must be registered
as pesticides in California.)
4. Zero Pounds Applied
-
There are a few entries in this report in which the total pounds applied for certain active ingredients are displayed
as zero. This is because the chemical (active ingredient) made up a very small percentage of the formulated product
that was used. When these products are applied in extremely low quantities and taking into account that the calculations
are rounded to two decimal places, the resulting value of the active ingredient is too low to register an amount.
5. Acres Treated
-
The summary information in this annual report cannot be used to determine the total number of acres of a crop to
which pesticides were applied during the year. Sometimes the product used contains more than one active ingredient.
(In any pesticide product, the active ingredient is the component which kills, or otherwise controls, target pests.
A pesticide product is made up of one or more active ingredients, as well as one or more inert ingredients.) For
example, if a 20-acre field is treated with a product that contains three different pesticide active ingredients,
a use report is filed by the farmer correctly recording the application of a single pesticide product to 20 acres.
However, in the summary tables, the three different active ingredients will each have recorded 20 acres treated.
This results in a total of 60 acres recorded as being treated instead of the 20 acres actually treated. A similar
problem occurs when the same field is treated more than once by the same active ingredient. The acres treated will
sum the acres treated at each application.
6. Outliers
-
In calculating the total pounds of pesticides used in these tables, DPR excluded values for rates of use which
were so large they were probably in error. Errors occur, for example, when those reporting pesticide use shift
decimal points during data entry. DPR specialists spent more than a year developing, testing, and implementing
software to detect probable errors (outliers). Pesticide rates were considered outliers if (1) they were higher
than 200 pounds of active ingredient per acre (or greater than 1,000 pounds per acre for fumigants); (2) they were
50 times larger than the median rate for all uses with the same pesticide product, crop treated, unit treated,
and record type (that is, production agricultural or all other use); or (3) they were higher than a value determined
by a neural network procedure that approximates what a group of 12 scientists believed were obvious outliers. Although
these criteria removed less than one percent of the rate values in the PUR, some rates were so large that if included
in the sums, they would have significantly affected total pounds applied of some pesticides. We excluded these
probable errors not only from the 1996 summary data, but also from all previous years of the PUR (1990 to 1996)
in the trend summary described below.
Data Summary
This report is a summary of data submitted to DPR. Because outlier values were excluded from previous years' data, the total pounds given here differs from the previous pesticide use summary reports. The revised numbers should be more accurate. In 1996, there were 197,828,481 pounds of pesticide active ingredients reported used in California. Annual use has varied from year to year since full use reporting was implemented in 1990. Reported pesticide use was approximately 167 million pounds in 1990; 153 million pounds in 1991; 180 million pounds in 1992; 188 million pounds in 1993; 191 million pounds in 1994, and 205 million pounds in 1995. Such variances are and will continue to be a normal occurrence. These fluctuations can be attributed to a variety of factors, including changes in planted acreage, crop plantings, pest pressures, and weather conditions. For example, extremely heavy rains result in excessive weeds, thus more pesticides may be used; and drought conditions may result in fewer planted acres, thus less pesticide may be used.
Data for pounds of pesticide active ingredients used from 1993-1996 break down into the following general use
categories:
|
Category |
Pounds Reported Used |
|||
|
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
|
| Production agriculture |
172,492,706 |
175,408,663 |
187,577,922 |
182,375,369 |
| Postharvest commodity treatment |
1,703,738 |
2,004,123 |
3,770,169 |
1,847,859 |
| Structural pest control |
4,687,296 |
5,186,253 |
4,839,368 |
4,738,168 |
| Landscape maintenance |
1,317,791 |
1,325,560 |
1,382,563 |
1,259,332 |
| All others* |
7,811,172 |
7,430,770 |
7,563,928 |
7,607,753 |
| TOTAL |
188,012,703 |
191,355,369 |
205,133,950 |
197,828,481 |
There were 699.5 million pounds of pesticide active ingredients sold in California in 1996; 543.1 million pounds in 1995; 627.9 million pounds in 1994; 661.7 million pounds in 1993; 589.1 million pounds in 1992, and 553.6 million pounds in 1991. Typically, about two-thirds of the pesticide active ingredients sold in a given year are not agricultural and therefore their use is not reported. Examples of non-reported active ingredients are chlorine and home use pesticide products.
In addition, it should be noted that the pounds of pesticides used and the number of applications are not necessarily accurate indicators of the extent of pesticide use or, conversely, the extent of use of reduced-risk pest management methods. For example, farmers may make a number of small-scale "spot" applications targeted at problem areas rather than one treatment of a large area. They may replace a more toxic pesticide used at one pound per acre with a less hazardous compound that must be applied at several pounds per acre. Either of these scenarios could increase the number of applications and amount of pounds used without indicating an increased reliance on pesticides.
Partial reporting of agricultural pesticide use has been in place in California since at least the 1950s. Beginning in 1970, anyone who used restricted materials was required to file a pesticide use report with the county agricultural commissioner. The criteria established to designate a pesticide as a restricted material include hazard to public health, farm workers, domestic animals, honeybees, the environment, wildlife, or other crops. Restricted materials, with certain exceptions, may be possessed or used only by or under the supervision of licensed or certified persons and only in accordance with an annual permit issued by the county agricultural commissioner.
In addition, the State required commercial pest control operators (those in the business of applying pesticides, such as agricultural applicators, structural fumigators, and professional gardeners) to report all pesticides used, whether restricted or nonrestricted. These reports included information about the pesticide applied, when and where the application was made, and the crop involved if the application was in agriculture. The reports were entered into a computerized database and summarized by chemical and crop in annual reports.
With implementation of full use reporting in 1990, the following pesticide uses are required to be reported to the commissioner, who, in turn, reports the data to DPR:
- for the production of any agricultural commodity, except livestock;
- for the treatment of postharvest agricultural commodities;
- for landscape maintenance in parks, golf courses, and cemeteries;
- for roadside and railroad rights-of-way;
- for poultry and fish production;
- any application of a restricted material;
- any application of a pesticide with the potential to pollute ground water (listed in the California Code of Regulations, Title 3, Division 6, Chapter 4, Subchapter 1, Article 1, Section 6800 (b)), when used outdoors in industrial and institutional settings;
- any application by a licensed pest control operator.
The primary exceptions to the use reporting requirements are home and garden use and most industrial and institutional uses.
The expansion of use reporting was primarily undertaken in response to concerns by many individuals and groups including government officials, scientists, farmers, legislators, and public interest groups. It was generally acknowledged that more accurate information about pesticide use would provide a better base for evaluating pesticide impacts and making regulatory decisions.
There are several key areas in which data generated by full use reporting are proving beneficial:
Risk Assessment
Without information on actual pesticide use, regulatory agencies must assume all planted crop acreage is treated with many pesticides even though most crops are treated with just a few chemicals. If the assumptions used by regulatory agencies are incorrect, regulators could make judgments that are overly conservative by several orders of magnitude. The use report data, on the other hand, provides actual use data so DPR can better assess risk and make more realistic risk management decisions.
Worker Health and Safety
Under the reporting regulations, after every pesticide application pest control operators must give farmers a written notice that includes the date and time the application was completed and the restricted-entry and preharvest intervals. The restricted-entry interval is the period required between a pesticide application and when workers may re-enter the field. The preharvest interval is the time between an application and the earliest date the crop may be harvested. Farmers are required to post signs at fields treated with certain pesticides. The signs must include information on pesticide use including when it is safe for workers to re-enter the treated area. Farmers must also make records of pesticide use available to workers. Use reporting makes this information readily available.
DPR's Worker Health and Safety Branch relies on use reporting data when doing exposure assessments, which is a part of the overall risk characterization process. Using this data, scientists can determine typical application rates and how often pesticides are used.
Endangered Species
DPR is working with the county agricultural commissioners to combine site-specific pesticide use data with data on the locations of endangered species. The combined information helps commissioners resolve potential conflicts between pesticide use and the protection of endangered species. Location-specific data on pesticide use brings more accuracy to the evaluation of the possible impact of pesticides on endangered species so that use restrictions can be developed and implemented to protect fish and wildlife.
Environment
In meeting the requirements of the Pesticide Contamination Prevention Act of 1985, site-specific records help track pesticide use in areas that are susceptible to ground water contamination. By reviewing pesticide use data, a determination can be made whether a well became contaminated due to legal agricultural use practices.
In 1983, DPR began a program to reduce contamination of surface water by rice pesticides. With full pesticide use reporting, specific agricultural practices can be pinpointed. This assists DPR in making recommendations on alternate pest control practices that protect surface water while ensuring pest control needs are met.
The federal Clean Air Act requires states to develop plans for reducing the emissions of volatile organic compounds, or VOCs, from all chemicals including pesticide products. VOCs help form smog which is harmful to both human health and vegetation. Accurate data on the amount of VOCs produced by pesticides are critical to developing measures that reduce VOC emissions. Without a state plan, the federal government could use arbitrary assumptions of the smog-contributing potential of pesticides to impose unnecessary restrictions on pesticide use. DPR worked with the State Air Resources Board and the U.S. EPA to develop a plan based on the actual VOC emissions from pesticide products. This was made possible, in part, by accurate use data from full use reporting.
The pesticide use and label databases are often used to assess potential environmental impact in evaluating requests for special local need pesticide registrations or exemptions from registration to respond to emergency pest problems.
Processor and Retailer Requirements
Food processors, produce packers, and retailers often require farmers to submit a complete history of pesticide use on their crops. DPR's use reporting form includes a section which can provide the information needed to fulfill these requirements.
| | DPR HOME | |
Last Update: May 18, 1999 |