Andy Jacobson*, Nick Guth, Zechariah Stone, Dean Desmarteau and Richard Brain,
{"title":"美国现有农药农业最佳管理实践的盘点和审查","authors":"Andy Jacobson*, Nick Guth, Zechariah Stone, Dean Desmarteau and Richard Brain, ","doi":"10.1021/acsagscitech.3c00588","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >To reduce pesticide exposure to nontarget organisms in the United States (US), mitigations are being proposed a priori for regulatory compliance. Consequently, agricultural best management practices (BMPs) for pesticide runoff, proposed in the Environmental Protection Agency’s Endangered Species Act (ESA) workplan [<contrib-group>USEPA</contrib-group>. ESA Workplan Update: Nontarget Species Mitigation for Registration\r\nReview and Other FIFRA Actions, <span>2022</span>. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-11/esa-workplan-update.pdf (accessed Feb, 2023)], were inventoried and their feasibility was evaluated. For mitigation “menus” to be successful, they must be comprehensive and include options for a variety of environmental conditions. Based on this inventory, the most adopted practices by landowners were soil cover and erosion control practices due to their widespread applicability to most cropland. In contrast, the least adopted practices were water management and vegetative buffer practices due to increased costs and land requirements. This work can support the refinement of the pesticide risk assessment process, including future mitigation options, and assist landowners in selecting the most feasible BMPs for their individual operation in compliance with the ESA.</p>","PeriodicalId":93846,"journal":{"name":"ACS agricultural science & technology","volume":"4 5","pages":"567–579"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/epdf/10.1021/acsagscitech.3c00588","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inventory and Review of Existing Agricultural Best Management Practices for Pesticides in the United States\",\"authors\":\"Andy Jacobson*, Nick Guth, Zechariah Stone, Dean Desmarteau and Richard Brain, \",\"doi\":\"10.1021/acsagscitech.3c00588\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p >To reduce pesticide exposure to nontarget organisms in the United States (US), mitigations are being proposed a priori for regulatory compliance. Consequently, agricultural best management practices (BMPs) for pesticide runoff, proposed in the Environmental Protection Agency’s Endangered Species Act (ESA) workplan [<contrib-group>USEPA</contrib-group>. ESA Workplan Update: Nontarget Species Mitigation for Registration\\r\\nReview and Other FIFRA Actions, <span>2022</span>. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-11/esa-workplan-update.pdf (accessed Feb, 2023)], were inventoried and their feasibility was evaluated. For mitigation “menus” to be successful, they must be comprehensive and include options for a variety of environmental conditions. Based on this inventory, the most adopted practices by landowners were soil cover and erosion control practices due to their widespread applicability to most cropland. In contrast, the least adopted practices were water management and vegetative buffer practices due to increased costs and land requirements. This work can support the refinement of the pesticide risk assessment process, including future mitigation options, and assist landowners in selecting the most feasible BMPs for their individual operation in compliance with the ESA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93846,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS agricultural science & technology\",\"volume\":\"4 5\",\"pages\":\"567–579\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/epdf/10.1021/acsagscitech.3c00588\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS agricultural science & technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsagscitech.3c00588\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS agricultural science & technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsagscitech.3c00588","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在美国,为了减少非目标生物接触农药的机会,正在事先提出缓解措施,以符合法规要求。因此,环境保护局的《濒危物种法》(ESA)工作计划[USEPA.https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-11/esa-workplan-update.pdf (accessed Feb, 2023)],对其可行性进行了评估。缓解 "菜单 "要想取得成功,就必须全面,并包括各种环境条件下的备选方案。根据这份清单,土地所有者采用最多的措施是土壤覆盖和侵蚀控制措施,因为它们广泛适用于大多数耕地。相比之下,采用最少的是水管理和植被缓冲措施,原因是成本和土地需求增加。这项工作可以支持农药风险评估过程的完善,包括未来的缓解方案,并帮助土地所有者选择最可行的 BMP,以符合 ESA 的要求。
Inventory and Review of Existing Agricultural Best Management Practices for Pesticides in the United States
To reduce pesticide exposure to nontarget organisms in the United States (US), mitigations are being proposed a priori for regulatory compliance. Consequently, agricultural best management practices (BMPs) for pesticide runoff, proposed in the Environmental Protection Agency’s Endangered Species Act (ESA) workplan [USEPA. ESA Workplan Update: Nontarget Species Mitigation for Registration
Review and Other FIFRA Actions, 2022. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-11/esa-workplan-update.pdf (accessed Feb, 2023)], were inventoried and their feasibility was evaluated. For mitigation “menus” to be successful, they must be comprehensive and include options for a variety of environmental conditions. Based on this inventory, the most adopted practices by landowners were soil cover and erosion control practices due to their widespread applicability to most cropland. In contrast, the least adopted practices were water management and vegetative buffer practices due to increased costs and land requirements. This work can support the refinement of the pesticide risk assessment process, including future mitigation options, and assist landowners in selecting the most feasible BMPs for their individual operation in compliance with the ESA.