Information Requests Monitoring System

This data is maintained as an archive.

Request ID: 151
Request From: Steve Toth
Date Requested: Mar 17, 2006
Request: Note the following request for information regarding proposed risk mitigation for dimethoate for Woody Ornamentals and Christmas Tree Nurseries. Please circulate to the experts in your respective states/territories and submit their responses to the Southern Region IPM Center Information Requests Monitoring System by Thursday, March 30, 2006. Thanks. Steve Toth ------------------------------------------- EPA is proposing risk mitigation for dimethoate for Woody Ornamentals and Christmas Tree Nurseries. EPA is currently assuming aerial and groundboom applications at a 2 lb a.i./A rate, an unspecified number of applications, with a 2 day REI. EPA is NOW proposing a one lb a.i./A rate with one application and longer REIs ( 24 days in "Non-Arid" localities and 36 days in "Arid" localities). Please let me know in two weeks if EPA's proposal is NOT is acceptable and why. EPA wishes to complete risk mitigation decisions within the next several weeks for dimethoate. Thanks again for your assistance. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or comments. Best regards, Teung F. Chin, Ph.D. Biological Scientist Office of Pest Management Policy Agricultural Research Service United States Department of Agriculture LOCATED AT: USDA Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service 4700 River Road, Unit 149 (Room 3D-06.8) Riverdale, MD 20737-1237 Phone (301) 734-8943 Fax (301) 734-5992 Teung.F.Chin@usda.gov http://www.ars.usda.gov/opmp

Responses
Responder: Mark Mossler
State: VI
Date Requested: Mar 22, 2006
Not Important/Relevant to my state(s)
Response:

Responder: Mark Mossler
State: PR
Date Requested: Mar 22, 2006
Not Important/Relevant to my state(s)
Response:

Responder: Jill Sidebottom
State: NC
Date Requested: Mar 23, 2006
Response: I had already communicated with Kari Mavian with Cheminova and Stephanie Plummer with EPA about this issue. In addition, Kari had been talking with Craig Adkins about this issue. I'm still a little confused about how Christmas tree applications come into play as the wording has been, "Christmas tree Nurseries" which imply seedling and transplant beds. I think they may try to get a 24(c) for dimethoate for Christmas tree field applications. The 1 lb AI/A rate would be fine for twig aphid, rust mite and spider mite control, but would not be enough for rosette bud mite control. That is the only pesticide that controls rosette bud mites with a single application. I just put out a trial with Envidor last year hoping to get rosette bud mite control, and it did not. We do not apply dimethoate either aerially -- except for one grower last year -- or with boom sprayers. (And in fact, interestingly enough, my understanding is that the fellow that was flying dimethoate out is in Afghanistan putting herbicides out in poppy fields -- a very lucrative but dangerous occupation). We use high pressure sprayers and mist blowers. Kari had asked Craig about high pressure sprayers and mistblowers which she copied to me. Growers typically are using sprayers that output between 5-6 gallons per minute. That means in a day an opperator is applying often over 1,000 gallons. Most tractors are being used to pull mistblowers do not have enclosed cabs. But I still have some questions about what that means, exactly. Those that do have enclosed cabs by and large do not have air filtration devices hooked up, and applicators can smell the chemical being used. In addition, I don't understand why an applicator pulling a mistblower would be any more likely to come in contact with spray than an applicator pulling a boom sprayer. In one recent study looking at glyphosate exposure among applicators, fully 38% said they felt contact with the spray while pulling boom sprayers. And of course, it is only our largest growers that have tractors with enclosed cabs. If enclosed cabs were required, it would only hurt the small, limited resourse grower. In any case, I can't describe the particulars any better than what we had reported in our Pest Management Strategic Plan for Christmas Tree Production in North Carolina, Tennesse and Virginia. This meeting was held on June 17, 2003 and the report finished May 17, 2004. I have attached a file that has pulled out the pertinent information about dimethoate. When I return to the office tomorrow, I will also forward to you the prior contacts I have had about this issue. Jill Sidebottom Extension Forestry Specialist (Christmas Trees) North Carolina State University
Attachment included in response [Download]

Responder: Charles Luper
State: OK
Date Requested: Mar 28, 2006
Response: This would not impact Oklahoma growers significantly.

Responder: Mark Mossler
State: PR
Date Requested: Mar 29, 2006
Not Important/Relevant to my state(s)
Response: This mitigation is not an issue for Puerto Rico

Responder: Mark Mossler
State: VI
Date Requested: Mar 29, 2006
Not Important/Relevant to my state(s)
Response: This mitigation is not an issue for Puerto Rico

Responder: Mark Mossler
State: VI
Date Requested: Mar 29, 2006
Not Important/Relevant to my state(s)
Response: This mitigation is not an issue for the Virgin Islands.

Responder: Mark Mossler
State: FL
Date Requested: Mar 29, 2006
Response: After conversations with Christmas tree growers, Christmas tree nursery production managers, and Extension personnel responsible for ornamental production, it seems that this mitigation is acceptable. However, 24 days is a very long REI and may lead to compliance issues in the future.

Responder: Eric Day
State: VA
Date Requested: Mar 30, 2006
Response: The current rate for Nantucket Pine tip moth is 2 quarts per 100 gallons, will this rate change with the change the EPA is proposing? We do not list AI/acre for this pest. Eric Day Virginia Tech University

Return to Other Requests