“ARA is extremely disappointed in the decision to revoke all tolerances for chlorpyrifos. This product has been an essential tool for growers who need to control insect pests so they can deliver the quality products consumers expect to grocery shelves.

“EPA has been following a time-honored statutory process for the registration review of chlorpyrifos. Farmers, retailers, and the public all benefit from and have the right to expect, a science-based process for reviews of pesticide products. In this case, however, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has substituted its judgment for the scientific expertise of the Agency and dictated to EPA a demand to revoke tolerances.

“Not only is this an unjustified usurpation of the Agency’s authority and expertise, but canceling tolerances for a product that remains registered for use creates uncertainty for users. The product is legal to apply for its registered users, but any residue means that the product that the application protected cannot be sold. By issuing this mandate, and EPA not fighting it, anti-pesticide activists have executed an end-run around the statute that is supposed to govern these decisions. It’s a disturbing precedent from an Agency publicly committed to science-based decisions.

“ARA urges EPA to reconsider this decision and use every legal avenue available reassert its statutory authority to be the regulator of these products. If not, this will result in a flood of additional lawsuits by anti-chemical activists seeking the same end-run that will jeopardize the continued use of other essential pesticides. Consumers have benefited from a farmer’s ability to control pests and minimize damage to quality that can result without that control. This decision is problematic for this specific tool, but even more troubling is the precedent that may be set.”

Source: Agricultural Retailers Association

The post EPA Revocation of Tolerances for Chlorpyrifos is a Disturbing Precedent for Pesticide Regulation appeared first on North America FarmQuip Magazine.

Spring marks the beginning of the spraying season. While crops need to be protected from weeds, insects, fungi, and diseases, agricultural vehicle operators also need to be protected from potentially toxic pesticides and liquid fertilizers when working in the fields. Reliably keeping dust, gases, aerosols, and vapors out of the cabin is critical for their health and safety.

Freudenberg Filtration Technologies offers cabin air filters of all categories to ensure that necessary precautions are taken in keeping with the European norm EN 15695. When applying pesticides, category 4 filters, which offer the highest level of protection, are required.

In the Northern Hemisphere, spring is just around the corner, and usually marks the beginning of planting, and spraying crops. Since many agricultural products such as fruits, vegetables and grains need protection from weeds or diseases, pesticides are and will remain a necessity until sustainable and reliable alternatives are available.

Agricultural vehicle drivers can be exposed to a potential health risk when spraying pesticides. In Europe, the norm EN 15695 is intended to ensure the purity of cabin air for tractors and self-propelled sprayers used in agriculture and forestry. The goal is to limit the operator’s exposure to hazardous substances when applying plant protection products (PPPs) and liquid fertilizers.

The importance of effective category 4 filtration

EN 15695 includes specific requirements regarding cabin filter classification. It defines four categories – with category 4 offering the best protection.

“We recommend that farmers and operators themselves check to see if they are sufficiently protected with their current cabin air filtration solution,”

Giacomo Menzio, who is responsible for the agricultural filter product and service portfolio at Freudenberg Filtration Technologies, emphasizes.

Especially when rounding the bend in a field, the cabin can be exposed to a very high concentration of pesticide “fog”; the same is true when the vehicle slows. Moreover, critical situations can arise on windy days, when the pesticide cloud follows or even engulfs the vehicle cabin.

“Only a high-quality category 4 filter can provide reliable operator protection in such high-risk situations. However, it must be installed in a properly certified category 4 vehicle cabin,”

Menzio explains.

Reliable protection from dust, gases, aerosols, and vapors

The premium micronAir category 4 cabin air filter from Freudenberg Filtration Technologies is designed with a coordinated multi-stage filter system, which adds a unique, high-performance, activated-carbon layer in the final filter stage. These highly efficient filters, which offer excellent protection from dust and aerosols, can even block vaporous contaminants that could be extremely harmful to the operator’s health. They are now original standard equipment for the most important agricultural vehicle manufacturers.

“Cabin air filters with activated carbon have been on the market for some time. However, these filters’ status must be carefully and regularly checked in order to truly protect the operator inside the cabin from outside hazards. In many cases, the quality of the activated carbon is lacking, or the quantity of activated carbon in the filter may be insufficient to guarantee proper performance,”

Menzio adds.

Using the right equipment

In Europe, all new machines are now designed in accordance with the formal standard requirements of EN 15695. To be homologated, they have to fulfill both the cabin requirements (EN 15695-1) and cabin air filter requirements (EN 15695-2). In order to consistently ensure operator safety inside the cabin, it is essential that the cabin air filter’s performance, quality, and certification are examined during maintenance and replacement. To ensure optimal air quality inside the cabin, using original parts and checking the machine’s instruction manual to verify the category of the cabin and filter are recommended.

Freudenberg’s micronAir cabin air filters are tested in accordance with EN 15695 by trusted external institutes. The filter category, depending on the filter application, is indicated on the filter label. After design, development, and performance testing, the filter first undergoes the vehicle manufacturer’s internal approval process followed by the machine’s formal approval process.

Regular maintenance and retrofitting older machines

In newer vehicles, a warning appears on the dashboard display when the category 4 filter needs to be replaced. Filter replacements should always be done according to the recommendations in the machine’s instruction manual, and the actual hours of operation should be checked.

Generally, filter replacement is recommended at least once a year, usually at the start of the new spraying season. Basically, every agricultural vehicle cabin can be equipped with the necessary filter and ventilation system. Since agricultural vehicles can only be operated with a closed cabin to ensure adequate protection, upgrading older models with a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system for additional protection is also recommended.

Both the cabin and filter components have to meet the performance requirements of the EN 15695 norm.

“Safeguarding operators’ health at their workplace isn’t optional – which is why properly labeled, high-performance filtration and air purification systems are an absolute must, especially at this time of the year,”

Menzio concludes.

The post Freudenberg Presents Filtration System to Protect Agricultural Vehicle Drivers appeared first on North America FarmQuip Magazine.

Crossing the street, brushing our teeth, and drinking coffee, all come with varying degrees of hazard. This is why we wait for cars, spit out our toothpaste, and limit our caffeine intake. In fact, managing our exposure to activities and substances that are potentially harmful, is simply part of life.

And yet, virtually all substances have the potential to cause harm. Even water, in certain amounts, is lethal. The dose dictates the poison!

So, when a system classifies substances based exclusively on their hazard or risk, that system ignores the most important factor – the degree to which we are exposed. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) cancer classification, for example, virtually disregards exposure amounts or limits, when labeling carcinogenic substances or activities.

On the other hand, the Canadian Government regulates medications and pesticides with the understanding that everything comes with associated risks. The Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA), an entity within Health Canada, determines whether a pesticide product can be used safely, based on the amount that is necessary to control the pests. They then establish limitations on how the product should be used, so that both humans and the environment are thoroughly protected.

I came to Canada in 2010 to study plant biology at the University of Alberta. Today, as a PhD scientist, my role is to understand ‘the science behind the agricultural practices’. So, joining the regulatory team at Corteva Agriscience in 2014 was a great fit for me.

Of course, as a scientist, I was also very curious about how a big corporation operates. Is their science reliable? Who works there? Do farmers have a choice or are they being forced to use their technologies?

The good news is that scientists like me at Corteva are held to the same ethical standards as the scientists I worked with at the university research level. Remember, to earn a PhD, it takes at least 11 years of university studies.

The public wants to know more about the food they eat. Where does it come from? Who’s growing it? How is it being grown? And they are exposed to multiple sources of information that are driving their eating habits. This is an incredible opportunity for farmers who want to help the public understand what they do, how they do it, and why. To help inform the public, you must understand how PMRA assesses the safety of pesticides.

It takes approximately 10 years to come up with a new pesticide that’s unique, beneficial to farmers, safe to humans, and safe to the environment. This is not an easy task. Especially when you consider that our chemistry and biology scientists begin the process choosing from more than 100,000 possible chemicals to end up with one or two that meet or surpass the criteria.

Once the thoroughly-researched chemical candidates are chosen to become products, further studies are conducted to determine the pest it controls. Tests are also conducted to assess the optimal application rates, and its safety to humans and the environment, based on the proposed application patterns and volumes.

Overall, it takes nearly 150 separate studies to assess the safety and efficacy of a chemical product. This is a huge investment for innovator companies.

PMRA, as other agencies around the world, evaluates the safety and integrity of a chemical pesticide product by several types of studies in the scientific areas of:

• Chemistry. Farmers can be reassured that what’s in the package will work as expected.
• Toxicology. Any chemical – even water or coffee – has the potential to cause negative effects if a person is overexposed. For pesticides, PMRA wants to know the safe amounts everyone in the population can be exposed to in the short and the long term.
• Occupational exposure. Based on the proposed label uses, PMRA assesses exposure to the applicators and bystanders. Then, the personal protective equipment and the re-entry time are established, which provide instructions on how to apply the product safely.
• Environmental toxicology. Crops are not isolated environments. There may be animals visiting the field, or a natural forest may be near.  To assess the potential effect of the pesticide on non-target species, PMRA uses worst-case scenarios to test environmental toxicology (or example, a bird feeding exclusively from a field that has been treated).
• Residues. Once a pesticide is sprayed, it acts on the pest and then starts to degrade. PMRA assesses studies that show how much pesticide residues there are on the crop at different times after spraying and up to harvest.  PMRA then establishes the maximum residue limit (MRL) – the amount of pesticide residue that is acceptable and expected when the label is followed.
• Environmental fate. PMRA needs to understand how long it will take for the product to dissipate or breakdown and how the product moves in soil, water, and air. Considering the physical and chemical characteristics of the compound, PMRA can establish the fate of the product once it is sprayed.
• Value. Any label claim (such as this product controls unwanted pests) must be demonstrated through field trials before it can be approved by PMRA. The rate that is used to control a pest must be enough for consistent control but cannot be more than is needed.

Pesticides are one of the most regulated chemicals on the planet. Many studies from several different scientific areas are reviewed by regulatory agencies before a pesticide is considered for registration. We can be confident that registered pesticides can be used safely, while bringing tremendous benefits to the environment, producing more on less land. Pesticides also make good economic sense, keeping food prices low, and ensure that farmers have the right tools to grow their crops.

Source: Corteva

The post Corteva explains what we can learn from Canada’s process for unpacking new pesticides appeared first on North America FarmQuip Magazine.