California Fruit and Vegetable

Tag: California Department of Pesticide Regulation

  • Project in Santa Cruz Co. Explores Alternative to Soil Fumigation

    The Santa Cruz County Agricultural Commissioner (CAC) is initiating a $175,000 pilot project funded by the California DPR to use steam as an alternative to pre-plant fumigation, advancing work to foster the availability and adoption of sustainable pest management in California.

    The pilot project, led by CAC David Sanford, resulted from conversations with community groups interested in exploring fumigant alternatives near certain sensitive, community-serving locations such as schools. As part of the pilot, several berry producers in the Pajaro Valley will test the use of steam in lieu of conventional pre-plant soil fumigation starting this summer. Research will continue into next year.

    “This pilot represents an important collaboration to meet the needs of communities and growers in California,” said DPR Director Karen Morrison. “DPR is pleased to support efforts that encourage local partnerships, drive innovations in alternatives, and advance sustainable pest management.”

    Steam treatment for pest management involves injecting high temperature steam into the soil before planting. The heat helps reduce certain soil-borne pests, plant diseases, nematodes, and weed seeds. The test fields will be selected for the pilot project based on their proximity to schools or other sensitive sites to explore this potential alternative to help reduce the use of field fumigants near communities.

    DPR recently released findings from an independent study on alternatives to pre-plant fumigants that documented that no existing alternative can currently serve as a direct substitute for chemical fumigants on a wide scale. The study identified the need for more research to understand the soil and climate conditions where alternatives can be effective.

    “This project provides an opportunity to further assess soil steaming as a potential alternative to conventional pre-plant soil fumigation,” Sanford said. “We’re pleased to support this collaborative effort by helping inform the public, facilitating community engagement, and contributing to the evaluation of a promising technology in sustainable pest management.”

    The Santa Cruz CAC and members of Safe Ag Safe Schools (SASS) brought the project to DPR for funding consideration. The CAC will collaborate with a University of California researcher, industry partners, berry growers and landowners, community members, and adjacent sensitive-site representatives on the pilot.

    “The Pajaro Valley has some of the most concentrated use of fumigants in the state, including near schools and homes,” said Kathleen Kilpatrick, SASS member and retired school nurse. “SASS members support exploring non-chemical alternatives on fields near schools. We hope these pilot projects will provide tools for pesticide reduction and expansion of organic buffers.”

    The Santa Cruz CAC will hold community outreach meetings throughout the pilot period, where people can ask questions, provide feedback, and offer input. The first community meeting will take place Aug. 18at 5:30 p.m. in the Greg Caput Community Room of the South County Government Center, 500 Westridge Dr., Watsonville. More information can be found on the Santa Cruz County Agricultural Commissioner’s website

  • California Fruits and Vegetables Prove Some of the Safest in the World

    Newly released California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) data show that 97% of fresh fruit and vegetable samples collected and tested contain no illegal pesticide residue.

    The department’s 2022 California Pesticide Residue Monitoring Annual Report includes information on 3,281 produce samples collected from more than 500 businesses throughout California.

    Key findings from the report include:

    • 97% of fresh produce tested had no detectable pesticide residues or had residues below health-protective thresholds set by the federal government.
    • 37% of all samples collected had no detectable pesticide residues, while another 60% had residues below federal benchmarks. Just 3% of all samples had illegal residue levels.
    • Only 1% of domestically grown produce sampled and tested contained illegal residues.
    • No illegal residues were found on 78 types of produce tested, including highly consumed products like avocados and apples.
    • Of the illegal residues found, 82% were on imported produce.

    DPR samples produce from wholesale and retail outlets, distribution centers, and roadside and farmers markets. Samples include imported and domestically grown produce that have been both organic and conventionally farmed. When illegal detections are found, the department traces the produce back to the store, distributor and farmer. Produce with illegal detections are quarantined and may be destroyed to prevent further distribution of tainted products.

    Samples are analyzed by scientists at California Department of Food and Agriculture laboratories and tested for 500 types of pesticides and related compounds. The testing occurs on unwashed, unpeeled produce. Residue quantities above limits set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are illegal to sell. These limits are called “tolerances” and are set for specific pesticides found on specific crops.

    Violators may face fines or other penalties. In one case, results found through DPR’s monitoring led to a $10,000 fine levied by the Kern County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office for illegal use of multiple pesticides on strawberries.

    In gathering produce samples, special emphasis is given to the types of produce commonly consumed by children. The department also prioritizes produce varieties with a history of illegal pesticide residues, produce originating from countries with past illegal-residue detections, and products often treated with pesticides listed under Proposition 65 as carcinogens or reproductive toxins.

    Information about DPR’s food safety program, plus past reports, can be found here.

    Watch this YouTube video on the residue monitoring program.

  • DPR Proposes Regulatory Restrictions on the Use of Neonicotinoids to Protect Bees

    In an effort to reduce risks to bees, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation filed an official notice of formal rulemaking as a first step in the regulatory process to limit how and when neonicotinoids can be used in agricultural settings.

    Neonicotinoids are a group of insecticides that are widely used as an alternative to chlorpyrifos, which DPR ended virtually all use of in 2020. At certain levels of exposure, neonicotinoids present risks to pollinators. DPR’s proposed regulations are based on extensive scientific studies and would create new requirements and restrictions for the use of neonicotinoid products containing any of four active ingredients: imidacloprid, thiamethoxam, clothianidin and dinotefuran. DPR estimates the regulations will impact 57 products currently registered in California and will reduce the amount of neonicotinoids applied across the state by approximately 45%.

    The regulations include tiered restrictions based on the chemical used, the type of crop and the time of year the neonicotinoid is applied in order to protect pollinator health. For example, applications to certain flowering plants that are attractive to bees would be prohibited when the plants are in bloom and when bees may be foraging. The regulations also set limits on applications of multiple neonicotinoids and what application methods may be used by growers. They also include an exemption for quarantine pests to provide the option, if necessary, to treat pests that can severely damage crops and food supply chains. The regulations address both risks to bees and ensures the protection of pollinators critical to growers and the agricultural sector.

    “DPR evaluates pesticides on an ongoing basis using the best available science and data to mitigate adverse impacts on ecosystems and the environment,” said DPR Director Julie Henderson. “Our neonicotinoid reevaluation led to the significant advance in pollinator protection reflected in our proposed regulation.”

    The department began re-evaluating imidacloprid and the related neonicotinoids, thiamethoxam, clothianidin and dinotefuran in 2009. DPR completed its scientific review in July 2018, publishing the California Neonicotinoid Risk Determination, and began development of control measures necessary to protect pollinator health. The department’s development of draft regulations included a pair of initial public webinars and a public comment period in 2020. The formal rulemaking process initiated by DPR today will include the opportunity for the public to submit written comments on the proposed regulations. For more information, see DPR’s Neonicotinoid Reevaluation webpage.

    “Our continuous evaluation of pesticides plays a critical role in accelerating a transition to safer, more sustainable pest management that protects the health of our communities, our pollinators and the environment as a whole,” said Henderson.

    As part of its regulatory mandate, DPR evaluates pesticide products for potential human health and environmental effects before they can be registered for legal sale and use in California. Prior to DPR review, pesticide products are evaluated and registered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA).  U.S. EPA’s and DPR’s registration review and required pesticide label instructions – including application instructions and personal protective equipment requirements – are designed to mitigate potential risks to human health and the environment.

    DPR’s registration process includes the review of extensive scientific studies on human health and environmental impacts, safety and efficacy. After pesticide products have gone through this process and are registered, DPR also carries out a continuous evaluation process for pesticides following registration to take into account evolving scientific understanding. This continuous evaluation process can include formal reevaluation of pesticides and mitigation measures, as in the case of the neonicotinoids that are the subject of the department’s proposed regulation, conducting exposure studies, conducting human health risk assessments, monitoring air and water for pesticides, and investigating information that indicates a pesticide may have caused an adverse effect on human health or the environment. Pesticides currently undergoing DPR’s re-evaluation process are listed on the department’s website and the results inform state-specific restrictions, mitigation measures or conditions for use.

    ABOUT THE DEPARTMENT OF PESTICIDE REGULATION

    The California Department of Pesticide Regulation’s mission is to protect human health and the environment by fostering safer and sustainable pest management practices and operating a robust regulatory system to monitor and regulate the sale and use of pesticides across the state.

    DPR’s work includes conducting scientific evaluation of pesticides to assess and mitigate potential harm to human health or the environment prior to and following registration, registering all pesticides prior to sale or use in California, monitoring for pesticides in the air and water, and enforcing pesticide laws and regulations in coordination with 55 County Agricultural Commissioners and their 400 field inspectors. DPR invests in innovative research to encourage the development and adoption of integrated pest management tools and practices and conducts outreach to ensure pesticide workers, farmworkers and local communities have access to pesticide safety information. More information about DPR can be found at www.cdpr.ca.gov.