Duration: 10/01/2007 to 09/30/2009

Administrative Advisor(s):

NIFA Reps:

Non-Technical Summary

Statement of Issues and Justification

Pesticide contamination of the environment is often thought to be caused by agricultural practices. However, municipalities often have widespread contamination of surface waters due to urban pesticide use. Overuse and misuse of pesticides by municipal workers, professional pest managers, and residential populations lead to storm water runoff events resulting in contamination. Many urban areas draw their drinking water from surface sources, and concerns about the environmental fate and potential long-term health effects of pesticides have increasingly led city and government groups to adopt Integrated Pest Management (IPM) policies, e.g. the City of San Francisco. Community groups adopting IPM policies and procedures, in conjunction with targeted training programs for pest managers, have demonstrated more effective pest management, significant reduction in pesticide use, substitution of reduced-risk pesticides and/or formulations and significant risk-reduction (Gouge et al. 2006).

Children face unique hazards from exposure to both pests and pesticides. Children take in more pesticides relative to their body weight than adults in the food they eat, and air they breathe. Their developing organ systems make them more sensitive to toxic exposure and less able to metabolize absorbed toxins. The U.S. EPA, National Academy of Sciences, and American Public Health Association, among others, have stated concerns about the danger that pesticides pose to children. The body of evidence in scientific literature shows that pesticide exposure can adversely affect a childs neurological, respiratory, immune, and endocrine system, even at legally allowable application levels. Several pesticides, such as pyrethrins and pyrethroids, organophosphates and carbamates, are also known to cause or exacerbate asthma symptoms. Thus, child care facilities and schools are considered sensitive environments of top priority, but the vast majority of institutions (e.g. state schools, corporate child care facilities) do not practice good environmental stewardship / risk-reduction IPM. Strangely some entities have recognized the benefits of IPM and practically exercised urban IPM for many years e.g. IPM is mandated on Federal property by Section 303 of the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996; PL 104-170.

More than 1,000 registered pesticidal products are marketed as over-the-counter residential pesticides. Although heavily marketed and readily available, household pesticides are not generally understood to have potential toxic effects; nor are they always safely handled, used, stored, or disposed of properly by the public. In fact, pesticide application throughout indoor and outdoor environments, creates significant non-point source (NPS) pollution and untold numbers of direct exposure events via skin, lungs, eyes and mouth.

While the bulk of pesticide use is in agriculture, roughly 20% by volume of active ingredient applied annually is non-agricultural. Furthermore, urban applications are arguably made by, or on behalf of, the least knowledgeable consumers, since little education and no training programs have been required of this group of users. As uninformed consumers, everyone from a residential customer to a school facility manager may fail to recognize IPM as an environmental health choice.

In low-income urban communities, exposure to both pests and pesticides is a common, health threat inside homes, schools, and child care facilities. High levels of pests in aging buildings drive people to extreme measures with the only tools they can access at the local pharmacy or hardware store  pesticides. Questionnaire data show that pesticide labels are not consulted or followed by a large percentage of users. Pesticides are often not properly stored, resulting in child and pet poisonings. Finally, correct disposal is poorly understood. Many times, pesticides go, literally, down the storm drains to the rivers or down home drains and back into the municipal waste water stream, a system ill-equipped to remove such contamination. Hazardous waste removal programs are unevenly implemented around the country, resulting in pesticide container disposal in landfills.

Asthma is one of the nations most significant and fastest-growing chronic health threats to children under 18. Asthma is the leading cause of school truancy and accounts for a high percentage of pediatric emergency room visits. Asthma is also a leading cause of death in the elderly. Many asthma programs do not identify the negative effects of either pests or pesticide use indoors. Pesticides themselves can be asthma triggers and/or cause other serious health problems. Pesticide formulation type (i.e. aerosols) can be an equally important risk factor but often this is not stressed in asthma outreach.

Hospitals contain compromised individuals; they are institutions designed to care for people with debilitating conditions, and yet most hospital administrators have little to no knowledge of IPM. Even those informed enough to request IPM services of industry partners, often do not know enough about the process, to determine if they are indeed receiving a high quality IPM service. To date there is no accepted industry standard for IPM, but there is well established criterion for consumers to gage service quality (e.g. STAR Certification, IPM Institute of North America).

Objectives

Procedures and Activities

Objective 1. Expand the work group.
Procedure 1a. Outreach will be conducted via phone and e-mail to expand the core group of participants in the region. We will invite open participation from additional change agents and stakeholders throughout all regions.
Procedure 1b. The group will meet via conference calls and Breeze Conferencing. In addition, one face-to-face meeting annually will be arranged, when possible to coincide with existing meetings (will be different each year) to maximize participation and minimize cost. Ongoing e-mail and phone correspondence will support work group activities throughout the program term.


Objective 2. Invite stakeholder input to further awareness of needs.
Procedure 2a. The extent of urban IPM practice will be identified. Annual reporting of group activities will be used to foster collaboration among group participants and minimize duplication of efforts. This will be done electronically and also in the form of presentations at the annual meeting.


Objective 3. Facilitate the adoption of standard IPM practices.
Procedure 3a. The work group will document and review the current standards available, or develop standards for different urban communities, e.g. schools, hospitals, affordable housing, child care facilities, nursing homes, residential, settings.
Procedure 3b. Findings will be shared with stakeholders in a wide variety of conduits including web-site delivery, trainings, publications, etc.

Expected Outcomes and Impacts

Projected Participation

View Appendix E: Participation

Educational Plan

Focus will be on sensitive environments and high risk community groups. Delivery of information to institutions and communities will be modified to be both appropriate and accessible to the varied clientele. Stakeholders will be an integral part of this process and active participants in the determination of group activities.

Organization/Governance

The Committee will receive direction from the Executive Committee, composed of an elected Chairman, Secretary and Member-at-Large. The Administrative Advisor, appointed by the Western Directors, also sits on the Executive Committee. Tenure of each elected officer will be one year.

Literature Cited

Gouge, D. H., M. L. Lame, and J. L. Snyder. 2006. Use of an implementation model and diffusion process for establishing integrated pest management in Arizona schools. American Entomologist. 52 (3): 190-196.

Attachments

Land Grant Participating States/Institutions

AZ, MN, NJ, OK, OR, TX, WA, WY

Non Land Grant Participating States/Institutions