Vol. 51—1997 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society

Vol. 51—1997 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society Vol. 51—1997 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society

08.06.2015 Views

208 Glickman comments that his "highest priority will be meeting your commitment to our farmers and ranchers.land everyone in rural America -- the commitment to sustain a solid economythat provides opporturuty for growth and prosperity. I intend to keep your commitment to insure that America's consumershave the world's most abundant, wholesome food supply. Today's farm programs helped create those opportunities -- a lesson we should never forget. "During a recent commentary, newscaster Paul Harvey referred to farm programs as "consumer subsidies" and encouraged the public tolsupport them. Senate confirmation hearings have taken place and Mr. Glickman received the unammous vote of the Senate Ag Committee. A vote of the full Senate is expected in early April. While in the House, he served as Chairman of the Subcommittee on General Commodities and as a member of the Subcommittee onDepartment Operations and Nutrition. He is recognized as a national leader in the areas of food safety and food labeling. A quote by Glickman from the hearings: "I have long believed tha t our national strength, indeed our national security, is grounded in the s~rength of American agriculture. The abundant food supply we enjoy - that we take for granted r is a rarity in human history." FDA.gave the go-ahead to companies seeking federal endorsement for seven genetically altered products including herbicide-tolerant cotton and soybeans. The manufacturers voluntarily submitted their products to FDA, which concluded that these plants appear to be as safe as their non-altered counterfarts. APHIS and EPA will still need to comment. TheiUSDA, FDA, and EPA have formed a partnership with several grower organizations and utility companies to promote environmental stewardship in pesticide use in the United States. This "stewardship program" will be a voluntary program and is intended to circumvent the need for mandated pesticide reduction regulation or legislation. Many of the grower groups have taken specifid steps to demonstrate their commitment to the partnership. They have committed to more research and demonstration into IPM techniques and programs, the development of prediction models! for more targeted and precise pesticide applications, education programs to encourage alternative pest control technologies, and cooperation with equipment manufacturers to find application techniques that maintain pest control efficacy while reducing application rates. USpA is still discussing a 75% IPM goal by the year 2000. This appears to be coupled with the stewardship program and will be in the form of research funding and educational efforts. The Pesticide Performance Guidelines appear to be stalled indefinitely. They will not be a part ofthe new registration guidelines. Word at the WSSA annual meeting was that they are "dead". The CASf report entitled "Public Perceptions of Agrichemicals" has been released. The report surveys the public onboth pesticide and animal drug issues. The full 35-page report is available for $10 plus $3 postage and handling from CAST, 4420 West Lincoln Way, Ames, Iowa 50014-3447. C4Sf recently sponsored a conference in Washington, D.C. entitled "Sustainable Agriculture and thie 1995 Farm Bill. The NEWSS sent Mr. Earl Anderson, research associate with Leonard Cianessi of NCFAP (National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy).Very little in regard to weed science or pesticides in general was discussed; however, what little was said was not negatfve. Much of the discussion revolved around commodity programs. Earl commented that the conference was well organized, well attended, and ran on time. Several prominent Congressman were ~n attendance, including Rep. Charlie Stenholm of Texas who said that pesticide reform, including a science-based Delaney revision, will happen after the first 100 days and before discussion of the Farm Bill begins. The WSSA Pesticide Use/Risk Reduction Committee (Robin Bellinder, Chair; Rich Bonanno and ~eonard Gianessi, members) drafted a response to the Tap Water Blues document for consideration in Seattle at the WSSA meeting. The weed scientists quoted by the EWG (Environmental Working Group) were against such a response and appeared to be comfortable wit h the broad interpretations and misrepresentations of the EWG. The statement was modified into a WSS.APosition Statement onHerbicide Use/Risk Reduction Policy. Ji1nBarrentine, WSSA President, has appointed Rich Bonanno as Chair of the WSSA Legtslative Committee for 1995. Leonard Gianessi has been quite active in Washington, D.C. in trying to educate EPA about various aspects of agriculture and pest management. He has organized a seminar "opportunity" for thosq of us that may be in the D.C. area. While in D.C. in March for the IR-4 Annual Meeting, Rich Bonanno presented a seminar at EPA entitled "Dealing with Mother Nature and the Federal Govemment". The seminar discussed the challenges faced on intensive vegetable farms in the Northeast. Dr. Clyde Elmore (CA), who is finishing a sabbatical at Penn State Univ. will present the next seminar in April. If you will be in D.C. and have the inclination to participate, please

i-- I 209 II contact Leonardjat 202/328-5057. According t~ both Janet Anderson and Hoyt Jameson at EPA there is much progress being made relative to reorganization within the Agency. There will likely be 3 major divisions for pesticide registrations: Herbicide/Pungicide, Insecticide/Rodenticide, and Biopesticide. On November 16, 1994 the USEP~ proposed regulations to address plant pesticides. In general they are looking to exempt most fro~ regulation. "The Agency believes that plant pesticides can offer an opportunity to reduce the use .pfconventional pesticides that are applied to agricultural plants and reduce the overall health! and environmental risks from pesticides ..The Agency believes that many plant pesticides wowpnot pose risks that require regulation by EPA. However, the Agency believes some type of oversight is appropriate for plant-pesticides that are new to the plant and have a toxic mode of action'l, The Suprerrie Court recently ruled onthe Sweet Home case involving inadvertent destruction of habitat under ~he Endangered Species Act (ESA).In a 6-3 ruling, the court said that the ESA provides "comprehensive protection for endangered and threatened species" and regulations protecting habjtat are reasonable. The Interior secretary has "reasonably construed the intent of Congress when he defined 'harm' to include 'significant habitat modification or degradation that actually kills qr injures wildlife" the justices said. II As the law stands, you can face prosecution for the lawful use pf your property if that use unintentionally modifies the habitat of an endangered species that may not actually occupy the land. That is clearly not acceptable" said American Farm Bureau president Dean Kleckner. The ESA i$ue is tied to another that resulted from the earlier Supreme Court ruling on the South Carolina land taking. This has resulted in proposed legislation that landowners be compensated by the government if regulation reduces the value of their land by a certain amount (50% in some casesj.Needless to say, the Enviros want to take away the use without compensation. So does USDA ~ndersecretary for Natural Resources and Environment James R. Lyons. The 1995 ~arm Bill was not passed by the September 30 deadline. The holdup has been the budget debate.] C. Robert Taylor (Auburn Univ.), Ron Knutson (Texas A&M), and Leonard Gianessi (NCFAP) presented brie*ngs of a pesticide study to House and Senate staff members in mid June. The meat of these briefings states that "a drastic reduction or elimination of pesticides would bring substantially ~igher fruit and vegetable prices without significantly increasing America's already high level of fbod safety." Although Iweare unlikely to see a 50% mandated pesticide reduction bill, a 50% reduction in pesticide use by 2005 has been listed as a benchmark by EPA. The voluntary Environmental Stewardship Ifrogram is one way EPA hopes to accomplish this. IR-4 funetplg appears stalled at $5.7 million. Although it appeared that the joint House/Senatejcommittee would allow the $6.7 million amount, $1 million was cut. The $5.7 million I matches the ajlrrent funding level. It is doubtful that any change will take place before final budget approval (whenever that happens). The hot t

208<br />

Glickman comments that his "highest priority will be meeting your commitment to our farmers and<br />

ranchers.land everyone in rural America -- the commitment to sustain a solid economythat provides<br />

opporturuty for growth and prosperity. I intend to keep your commitment to insure that America's<br />

consumershave the world's most abundant, wholesome food supply. Today's farm programs helped<br />

create those opportunities -- a lesson we should never forget. "During a recent commentary,<br />

newscaster Paul Harvey referred to farm programs as "consumer subsidies" and encouraged the<br />

public tolsupport them. Senate confirmation hearings have taken place and Mr. Glickman received<br />

the unammous vote of the Senate Ag Committee. A vote of the full Senate is expected in early<br />

April. While in the House, he served as Chairman of the Subcommittee on General Commodities<br />

and as a member of the Subcommittee onDepartment Operations and Nutrition. He is recognized as<br />

a national leader in the areas of food safety and food labeling. A quote by Glickman from the<br />

hearings: "I have long believed tha t our national strength, indeed our national security, is grounded<br />

in the s~rength of American agriculture. The abundant food supply we enjoy - that we take for<br />

granted r is a rarity in human history."<br />

FDA.gave the go-ahead to companies seeking federal endorsement for seven genetically altered<br />

products including herbicide-tolerant cotton and soybeans. The manufacturers voluntarily submitted<br />

their products to FDA, which concluded that these plants appear to be as safe as their non-altered<br />

counterfarts. APHIS and EPA will still need to comment.<br />

TheiUSDA, FDA, and EPA have formed a partnership with several grower organizations and<br />

utility companies to promote environmental stewardship in pesticide use in the United States. This<br />

"stewardship program" will be a voluntary program and is intended to circumvent the need for<br />

mandated pesticide reduction regulation or legislation. Many of the grower groups have taken<br />

specifid steps to demonstrate their commitment to the partnership. They have committed to more<br />

research and demonstration into IPM techniques and programs, the development of prediction<br />

models! for more targeted and precise pesticide applications, education programs to encourage<br />

alternative pest control technologies, and cooperation with equipment manufacturers to find<br />

application techniques that maintain pest control efficacy while reducing application rates.<br />

USpA is still discussing a 75% IPM goal by the year 2000. This appears to be coupled with the<br />

stewardship program and will be in the form of research funding and educational efforts.<br />

The Pesticide Performance Guidelines appear to be stalled indefinitely. They will not be a part<br />

ofthe new registration guidelines. Word at the WSSA annual meeting was that they are "dead".<br />

The CASf report entitled "Public Perceptions of Agrichemicals" has been released. The report<br />

surveys the public onboth pesticide and animal drug issues. The full 35-page report is available for<br />

$10 plus $3 postage and handling from CAST, 4420 West Lincoln Way, Ames, Iowa 50014-3447.<br />

C4Sf recently sponsored a conference in Washington, D.C. entitled "Sustainable Agriculture<br />

and thie 1995 Farm Bill. The NEWSS sent Mr. Earl Anderson, research associate with Leonard<br />

Cianessi of NCFAP (National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy).Very little in regard to<br />

weed science or pesticides in general was discussed; however, what little was said was not<br />

negatfve. Much of the discussion revolved around commodity programs. Earl commented that the<br />

conference was well organized, well attended, and ran on time. Several prominent Congressman<br />

were ~n attendance, including Rep. Charlie Stenholm of Texas who said that pesticide reform,<br />

including a science-based Delaney revision, will happen after the first 100 days and before<br />

discussion of the Farm Bill begins.<br />

The WSSA Pesticide Use/Risk Reduction Committee (Robin Bellinder, Chair; Rich Bonanno<br />

and ~eonard Gianessi, members) drafted a response to the Tap Water Blues document for<br />

consideration in Seattle at the WSSA meeting. The weed scientists quoted by the EWG<br />

(Environmental Working Group) were against such a response and appeared to be comfortable wit h<br />

the broad interpretations and misrepresentations of the EWG. The statement was modified into a<br />

WSS.APosition Statement onHerbicide Use/Risk Reduction Policy.<br />

Ji1nBarrentine, WSSA President, has appointed Rich Bonanno as Chair of the WSSA<br />

Legtslative Committee for 1995.<br />

Leonard Gianessi has been quite active in Washington, D.C. in trying to educate EPA about<br />

various aspects of agriculture and pest management. He has organized a seminar "opportunity" for<br />

thosq of us that may be in the D.C. area. While in D.C. in March for the IR-4 Annual Meeting, Rich<br />

Bonanno presented a seminar at EPA entitled "Dealing with Mother Nature and the Federal<br />

Govemment". The seminar discussed the challenges faced on intensive vegetable farms in the<br />

Northeast. Dr. Clyde Elmore (CA), who is finishing a sabbatical at Penn State Univ. will present<br />

the next seminar in April. If you will be in D.C. and have the inclination to participate, please

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!