I think many of you will find this statement interesting and very applicable for both conventional and organic producers of all crops.
Statement on “Least Toxic” & “Last Resort”
Recommendations and decisions to use “least toxic pesticides” and
“pesticides as a last resort” have flourished in the last decade, but
according to three scientific organizations – the Weed Science Society
of America (WSSA), the American Phytopathological Society (APS) and the
Plant-Insect Ecosystems Section of the Entomological Society of America
(P-IE ESA) – these are not the correct approaches to the pesticide
component of an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) program. The three
organizations have joined to take an objective look at these two
descriptions and prepared a position statement.
It is essential to practice integrated pest management (IPM), whether
managing weeds, insect pests or plant disease - on the farm, on
commercial sites, on public lands, or in or around the home. Key
components of IPM include making the habitat unfavorable for pests,
excluding pests where feasible, using proper sanitation practices,
monitoring the infestation level, knowing the pest tolerance level for
the specific situation and implementing the necessary management
practices. Judicious use of pesticides is a critical component of many
IPM programs.
Judicious (careful) use refers to various practices - following all
label directions and making all appropriate stewardship decisions
required in the particular situation. This includes applying a product
registered for the target pest(s) after accurate pest identification,
and consideration of the level of infestation and the potential for
economic, health or other negative pest impacts. Careful use extends
beyond pesticides to household chemicals, automobiles, medicines,
alcoholic beverages, and countless other products that are part of our
daily lives.
“Least toxic” implies there are pesticides available for every pest
spectrum that are least toxic to everything else. This is not true. The
toxicity of a pesticide depends on what is being evaluated and who or
what may be affected. It is also important to remember that toxicity is
not the same as risk, which is dependent on both toxicity and exposure.
The risk associated with the use of pesticides and other chemicals is
managed by establishing safe exposure levels based on the toxicity
specific to each product. Assigning a “most” or “least” toxic rating
does not equate to actual risk when the product is properly applied.
“Last resort” implies that pesticides will work as well when every
non-chemical control technique is attempted first. However, delaying
application of a pesticide can cause buildup of the pest(s) in crops,
gardens, buildings and other sites, with negative impacts on yield,
quality and/or health. In fact, delaying treatment can significantly
increase the ecological and economic damage to crop and non-crop areas.
Using pesticides as the last line of defense can result in a more
limited choice of pesticides, as well as reduced crop tolerance, the
need for higher rates, and less effective control because of higher
infestation levels and/or more tolerant pest stages. For example,
seedling weeds and early-stage insect larvae and diseases are usually
more easily controlled than later pest stages. Effective pesticide
choices, when they are applied as a “last resort,” means fewer options
to rotate pesticides, which is a critical step in preventing a pest from
becoming resistant to a pesticide. “Last resort” pesticide strategies
may also increase the need for multiple products and higher application
rates to control the pest effectively. The term also suggests pesticides
are always the worst choice, which is not true. First using
non-chemical techniques that are ineffective or inefficient has the
potential to add to the cost of pest management, intensify the pest
problem or create new problems.
Finally, by branding pesticides as the “last resort” choice certainly
does not stimulate a strong public interest in funding education on
their proper use. Pesticides are widely used, but discretionary federal
funding of the U.S. Pesticide Safety Education Program has been
eliminated in 2011 and 2012.
This program is vital to educate pesticide users and dealers who must be
certified to apply or sell pesticides, and to teach the public how to
use pesticides safely. There is no benefit or scientific basis to
simplistic messages like “use least toxic pesticides as a last resort”
for the large number of pesticide users who apply pesticides according
to the label and practice good stewardship. Nor are these messages
beneficial for those who neither seek training nor adequately read the
label believing instead that it is safe, practical, and effective to
simply choose a product considered a “least toxic pesticide” and apply
it only as a “last resort.” These messages hinder pesticide safety and
stewardship education and practices that are in the best interest of the
pesticide user, our food supply, public health and ecosystem
preservation.
(WSSA/APS/P-IE ESA joint statement, 11/12/12).
