TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
TASK E 18
MTR-6550
STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT SYSTE
B,
S. A. HAUS
DECEMBER 1973
THE MITRE CORPORATION
-------
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM MTR-6550
TASK E 18
STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT SYSTE
by
S. A. HAUS
for
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
WASHINGTON ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES DIVISION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
Con tract No.: 68-01-1849
Project No.: 2740
DECEMBER 1973
THEE
MITRE
THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED FOR AUTHOR-
IZED DISTRIBUTION. IT HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED "'i«i«'BiWi»a»aua
FOR PUBLIC RELEASE. WASHINGTON OPERATIONS
-------
Approved for Project Pistribution;
. ,/*£i\a
. H. Lubore
Approved for MITRE Distribution
/ x-~.'
; , ' / C^Vf /
! T? ToT"
R. P. Ouellette
This report has been reviewed by the Office of Research and Development, EPA, and
approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily
reflect the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention
of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
ii
-------
ABSTRACT
The use of pesticides has become a necessary and integral part
of our present way of life. Tremendous gains have been realized
from the use of pesticides to increase food and fiber production,
to prevent the spread of disease, to protect structures from damage
and to control weeds. These benefits, however, have resulted in the
ever expanding use of pesticides. Since pesticides can adversely affect
many forms of life other than the target pest, it is necessary to weigh
the benefits of pesticide use against the present and future risks in-
volved in their use.
In this regard the Environmental Studies Division of the
Environmental Protection Agency has undertaken the development of a
Strategic Environmental Assessment System (SEA.S) with the aim of
providing forecasts of the long-range environmental impacts of trends
in population growth and distribution, economic development, public
policy and technological change.
This paper identifies the environmentally important sources,
application and effects of pesticides and describes the methodology
for the generation of pesticide residuals by SEAS. In developing the
methodology, a considerable amount of background information which
should prove extremely valuable to future studies on the use and
impact of pesticides has been collected. While some of this infor-
mation is not directly applicable to SEAS, it is included to provide
a single, comprehensive report on the use and effect of pesticides.
iii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I INTRODUCTION 1
SECTION II SOURCES OF PESTICIDE ENTRY INTO THE ENVIRONMENT 3
INTENTIONAL INTRODUCTION 3
Farm Use 3
Home and Garden Use 3
Industrial Use 4
Governmental Use 4
ACCIDENTAL INTRODUCTION 5
Manufacturing 5
Formulation 5
Marketing 6
Disposal Following Consumption 6
PESTICIDE CYCLING IN THE ENVIRONMENT 7
Transport 7
Water Route 7
Air Route , 9
Food Chain 9
SECTION III IMPORTANT PESTICIDE RESIDUALS 10
SECTION IV DOMESTIC PRODUCTION AND DISAPPEARANCE OF
PESTICIDES 17
ALL PESTICIDES 17
FUNGICIDES 19
HERBICIDES 19
INSECTICIDES 19
TRENDS 21
PRICES 21
SECTION V USE AND LOSS DATA 27
USE DATA 27
Farm Use ' 27
Crop Use 30
Method of Application 30
Expenditures and Return 40
Application Rates 45
Livestock Use 45
Other Farm Uses 70
Home and Garden Use 70
Residential and Structural Use 70
Patterns of Use 76
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
SECTION V Lawn and Turf Weed Control 78
(CONTINUED) Industrial Use 78
Utility Companies 80
Forest Industry 82
Lumber Industry 82
Paper and Pulp Industry 85
Paint Manufacture 85
Exterminating Industry 85
Custom Applicators 88
Dry Cleaning Industry 90
Private Golf Courses 90
Governmental Use 90
Federal Government 90
Brush and Weed Control 91
Vector Control 96
Pest Control and Eradication 96
State Government 98
Brush and Weed Control 98
Vector Control 100
Local Governments 100
Nonagricultural Weed Control 105
SECTION VI ACCIDENTAL LOSS OF PESTICIDES AND OTHER
POLLUTANTS 115
MANUFACTURING LOSSES 115
Raw Materials - 115
Clean-Up and Decontamination of
Equipment 122
Storage 122
Transport from the Manufacturer 130
Spills 137
FORMULATION AND PACKAGING 137
Raw Materials 139
Disposal of Wastes 139
Packaging 139
Marketing 141
Total Losses During Marketing 141
Losses in Three Sectors 141
Home and Garden Marketing Losses 141
Agricultural Marketing Losses 143
Exterminator Losses 143
LOSSES FROM CONTAINER DISPOSAL FOLLOWING
CONSUMPTION 143
vi
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
SECTION VI LOSSES FROM CONTAINER DISPOSAL FOLLOWING
(CONTINUED) CONSUMPTION 143
LOSSES FROM SURFACE RUN-OFF 144
SECTION VII REGIONALIZATION 145
REGIONAL USE DATA 145
Farm 145
Crops 148
Livestock and Poultry 161
Home and Garden 161
Brush Control Program 161
Weed Control on Noncropland,
Forest Plantings and Aquatic
Areas 161
ALGORITHM FOR REGIONALIZATION OF PESTICIDES
APPLIED TO CROPS , 170
Determination of Total Acreage Harvested 171
Determination of the Regional Acreage
to be Treated with Each Type of
Pesticide 172
Determination of the Amount of a
Specific Pesticide Applied to a Crop
in a Specific Region 174
Quantity of Each Pesticide Applied to
Each Crop by State 179
Quantity of Pesticide Applied in Each
EPA Region 179
Assumptions in the Algorithm 179
Sample Calculation 181
SECTION VIII PRODUCTIVITY AND SUBSTITUTION OF PESTICIDES 183
PRODUCTIVITY 183
SUBSTITUTION OF ONE PESTICIDE FOR ANOTHER 187
Phenoxy Herbicides 187
2,4,5-T 188
Organochlorine 190
Chlordane 193
vii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
SECTION IX EFFECTS
EFFECTS ON MAN
Threshold Limit Value
Fatal Dose
Drinking Water
Maximum Acceptable Daily Intake
Carcinogenic Hazard
Mutagenic Hazard
Teratogenic Hazard
Pesticide Poisonings
EFFECTS ON OTHER NON-TARGET SPECIES
Biological Magnification
Toxicity
APPENDIX A PESTICIDE LIST
APPENDIX B PRODUCTION AND DOMESTIC DISAPPEARANCE OF
INDIVIDUAL PESTICIDES
APPENDIX C USE OF PESTICIDE
APPENDIX D PESTICIDE CONTAINERS
APPENDIX E FARM REGIONALIZATION DATA
APPENDIX F EFFECTS OF SELECTED PESTICIDES ON MAN
APPENDIX G PERSISTENCE AND MOBILITY
APPENDIX H REFERENCES
Pace
197
197
197
202
202
204
204
206
209
209
218
218
218
243
249
271
359
363
399
409
427
viii
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure Number
1 PESTICIDE CYCLING IN THE ENVIRONMENT
2 FLOWCHART OF ALGORITHM
8
180
Table Number
I CLASSIFICATION OF PESTICIDES 12
II IMPORTANT RESIDUALS NOT INCLUDED 16
III PESTICIDE PRODUCTION, EXPORT AND DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE 18
IV PESTICIDE SALES TO CONSUMERS IN THREE SECTORS
OF THE ECONOMY 20
V FUNGICIDES, HERBICIDES AND INSECTICIDES:
PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL PESTICIDE PRODUCTION 22
VI FUNGICIDES, HERBICIDES AND INSECTICIDES:
PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL DOMESTIC DISAPPEARANCE 23
VII MANUFACTURERS PRODUCTION AND SALES OF SYNTHETIC
ORGANIC PESTICIDES 24
VIII PESTICIDE PRICES: AVERAGE WHOLESALE QUOTATIONS
IN DOLLARS PER POUND FOR SELECTED PESTICIDES,
UNITED STATES, 1967-71 AND JANUARY-JUNE 1972 25
IX SYNTHETIC ORGANIC PESTICIDE PRICES: AVERAGE
SALES VALUE IN DOLLARS PER POUND AT
MANUFACTURERS' LEVEL, BY CLASSES,
UNITED STATES, 1966-71 26
X PESTICIDE USE BY KIND OF USE, 1968-1970 28
XI FARM USE OF PESTICIDES, 1966 - 29
XII PESTICIDE USAGE BY FARMERS, UNITED STATES,
1966 AND ESTIMATED 1969 31
XIII LEADING CROPS IN TERMS OF QUANTITIES OF ALL
PESTICIDES USED, UNITED STATES, 1966 32
XIV LEADING CROPS IN TERMS OF FUNGICIDE USE ' 33
XV LEADING CROPS IN TERMS OF HERBICIDE USE 34
XVI LEADING CROPS IN TERMS OF INSECTICIDE USE 35
XVII LEADING CROPS IN TERMS OF MISCELLANEOUS PESTICIDE
USE 36
XVIII CROP LIST FOR USE IN SEAS 37
XIX CROP CATEGORY COMPONENTS 38
XX PERCENT OF APPLICATION BY FORM OF APPLICATION,
1964 AND 1966
ix
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (CONTINUED)
Table Number Page
XXI PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF EXPENDITURES FOR
PESTICIDES BY FORM OF APPLICATION ON CROP,
1964 AND 1966 42
XXII AERIAL APPLICATION OF ALL PESTICIDES USED BY
FARMERS 43
XXIII PESTICIDE EXPENDITURES PER TREATED ACRE BY CROP,
1966 44
XXIV 1966 NATIONAL AVERAGE PESTICIDE APPLICATION RATE
BY CROP 46
XXV USE OF INSECTICIDES ON FARM ANIMALS, 1966 67
XXVI INSECTICIDE USE ON LIVESTOCK IN 1966 68
XXVII INSECTICIDE USE ON POULTRY IN 1966 69
XXVIII PESTICIDE USE ON STORED CROPS, SEEDS, SEEDBEDS
AND TRANSPLANTS, 1966 71
XXIX VALUE OF MANUFACTURERS1 SHIPMENTS OF HOUSEHOLD
INSECTICIDES AND REPELLANTS 72
XXX STRUCTURAL AND RESIDENTIAL HERBICIDE USE 73
XXXI STRUCTURAL AND RESIDENTIAL INSECTICIDE USE 74
XXXII POPULATION AND SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS IN
PHILADELPHIA, DALLAS AND LANSING AT THE TIME
OF STUDY 77
XXXIII ESTIMATED COST AND EXTENT OF CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL
ON LAWNS AND TURF 79
XXXIV USE BY UTILITY IN KENTUCKY, 1968 81
XXXV ESTIMATED COST AND EXTENT OF FOREST CHEMICAL
WEED CONTROL - 83
XXXVI U.S. WOOD PRESERVATIVE USE 84
XXXVII USE OF MERCURY PESTICIDES IN PAPER AND PULP
MANUFACTURE 86
XXXVIII USE OF MERCURY PESTICIDES IN PAINT MANUFACTURE 87
XXXIX CUSTOM APPLICATION OF AGRICULTURAL PESTICIDES
BY AIR 89
XL MAJOR FEDERAL AGENCIES REQUESTING PESTICIDE USE
AND ACRES TO BE TREATED, JANUARY-AUGUST 1971 92
XLI IMPORTANT PESTICIDES REQUESTED FOR USE BY FEDERAL
AGENCIES AND ACREAGE TO BE TREATED,
JANUARY-AUGUST 1971 93
XLII SELECTED PESTICIDES USED FOR WEED AND BRUSH
CONTROL BY GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, 1969 94
XLIII ACREAGE OF RANGELAND AND PASTURELAND TREATED FOR
CONTROL OF BRUSH 95
XLIV 1972 USDA PEST CONTROL PESTICIDE USE 97
XLV USDA FOREST USE IN 1970 99
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (CONTINUED)
Table Number
XLVI
XLVII
XLVIII
XLIX
L
LI
LII
LIII
STATE AND COUNTY HIGHWAY USE IN CALIFORNIA
IN 1972 101
VECTOR CONTROL USE IN CALIFORNIA IN 1972 102
ESTIMATED PESTICIDE USE FOR MOSQUITO CONTROL
IN NEW ENGLAND 103
USE OF PESTICIDES BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, 1971 104
USE OF SELECTED PESTICIDES BY CITY AGENCIES IN
CALIFORNIA, 1972 106
ESTIMATED EXTENT AND COST OF NON-AGRICULTURAL
CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL IN THE UNITED STATES, 1968 107
ESTIMATED EXTENT OF NON-AGRICULTURAL CHEMICAL
WEED CONTROL IN THE UNITED STATES, 1968 108
HERBICIDE USAGE TREND, NEED FOR BETTER HERBI-
CIDES, AND RESIDUE PROBLEMS, BY NUMBER OF
STATES REPORTING, UNITED STATES, 1968 109
LIV EXTENT AND COST OF 2,4,5-T USE, 1969 111
LV 2,4,5-T USE, 1969 112
LVI PESTICIDE USE ON NONCROPLAND AREAS IN
CALIFORNIA IN 1972 113
LVII PESTICIDE USE ON AQUATIC AREAS IN CALIFORNIA
IN 1972 114
LVIII MAJOR PRODUCTION FACILITY LOCATIONS 116
LIX RAW MATERIALS USED IN PESTICIDES 117
LX DISPOSITION OF WASTES AND LOSSES FROM PESTICIDE
MANUFACTURE 123
LXI PESTICIDE TRANSPORT FOLLOWING MANUFACTURE 131
LXII PESTICIDE SHIPMENTS: PERCENT DISTRIBUTION BY
MEANS OF TRANSPORT, UNITED STATES, 1963 AND
1967 134
LXIII PESTICIDE SHIPMENTS: PERCENT DISTRIBUTION BY
DISTANCE OF SHIPMENTS, UNITED STATES, 1963
AND 1967 135
LXIV PESTICIDE SHIPMENTS: PERCENT DISTRIBUTION BY
WEIGHT OF SHIPMENTS, UNITED STATES, 1963 AND
1967 136
LXV INCIDENTS OF PESTICIDE SPILLS 138
LXVI HOW PESTICIDES MOVE TO MARKET 140
LXVII PESTICIDE MARKETING OUTLETS TO THE CONSUMER 142
LXVIII STATES WITHIN EACH USDA FARM PRODUCTION REGION 146
LXIX FARM PESTICIDE USE, BY FARM PRODUCTION REGION,
UNITED STATES, 1966 147
LXX PERCENTAGE OF CROP ACREAGE TREATED WITH
FUNGICIDES BY REGION, 1966 149
xi
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (CONTINUED)
Table Number
LXXI
LXXII
LXXIII
LXXIV
LXXV
LXXVI
LXXVII
LXXVIII
LXXIX
LXXX
LXXXI
LXXXII
LXXXIII
LXXXIV
LXXXV
LXXXVI
LXXXVII
LXXXVIII
LXXXIX
XC
XCI
XCII
XCIII
XCIV
xcv
XGVI
PERCENTAGE OF CROP ACREAGE TREATED WITH
HERBICIDES BY REGION, 1966 150
PERCENTAGE OF CROP ACREAGE TREATED WITH
INSECTICIDES BY REGION, 1966 151
PERCENTAGE OF CROP ACREAGE TREATED WITH
MISCELLANEOUS PESTICIDES BY REGION, 1966 152
CROP ACREAGE TREATED WITH FUNGICIDES BY REGION 153
CROP ACREAGE TREATED WITH HERBICIDES BY REGION 154
CROP ACREAGE TREATED WITH INSECTICIDES BY REGION 155
CROP ACREAGE TREATED WITH MISCELLANEOUS PESTI-
CIDES BY REGION 156
AMOUNT OF FUNGICIDES APPLIED ON CROPS BY REGION,
1966 157
AMOUNT OF HERBICIDES APPLIED ON CROPS BY REGION,
1966 158
AMOUNT OF INSECTICIDES APPLIED ON CROPS BY
REGION, 1966 159
AMOUNT OF MISCELLANEOUS PESTICIDES APPLIED ON
CROPS BY REGION, 1966 160
PESTICIDES EXPENDITURES ON LIVESTOCK BY REGION
IN 1966 162
PESTICIDES EXPENDITURES ON POULTRY BY REGION
IN 1966 163
HOME LAWNS: ESTIMATED EXTENT AND COST OF
CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL BY STATE, 1968 164
OTHER TURF AREAS: ESTIMATED EXTENT AND COST OF
CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL BY STATE, 1968 165
ACREAGE OF RANGELAND AND PASTURELAND TREATED
FOR CONTROL OF BRUSH 166
NONCROPLAND: ESTIMATED EXTENT AND COST OF
CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL BY STATE 167
FOREST PLANTINGS: ESTIMATED EXTENT AND COST OF
CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL BY STATE, 1968 168
AQUATIC AREAS: ESTIMATED EXTENT AND COST OF
CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL BY STATE, 1968 169
PERCENTAGE OF CROP ACREAGE GROWN BY REGION, 1966 173
REGIONAL APPLICATION RATE FACTOR FOR FUNGICIDES 175
REGIONAL APPLICATION RATE FACTOR FOR HERBICIDES 176
REGIONAL APPLICATION RATE FACTOR FOR INSECTICIDES 177
REGIONAL APPLICATION RATE FACTOR FOR MISCELLANEOUS
PESTICIDES 178
VARIABLE VALUES FOR THE SAMPLE PROBLEM (PEANUTS) 182
ESTIMATED MARGINAL PRODUCTIVITY OF HERBICIDES
AND INSECTICIDES BY REGION, 1964 184
xii
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (CONTINUED)
Table Number
XCVII
XCVIII
XCIX
CI
CII
CIII
CIV
CV
CVI
CVII
CVIII
CIX
CX
CXI
CXII
CXIII
CXIV
CXV
CXVI
CXVII
A-I
A-II
B-I
C-I
MARGINAL RATES OF SUBSTITUTION AND ELASTICITY
OF SUBSTITUTION OF CROPLAND FOR INSECTICIDE,
BY REGION, 1964
COSTS OF PROHIBITING THE USE OF PHENOXY
HERBICIDES
COST OF RESTRICTING 2,4,5-T IF NO OTHER PHENOXY
HERBICIDES COULD BE USED, BUT ALL OTHER
REGISTERED HERBICIDES COULD BE USED
COST OF RESTRICTING 2,4,5-T IF OTHER PHENOXY
HERBICIDES AND ALL OTHER REGISTERED HERBICIDES
COULD BE USED
COSTS OF RESTRICTING ORGANO CHLORINE INSECTICIDES
COST OF DISCONTINUING CHLORDANE USE, 1971
HUMAN TOLERANCES TO PESTICIDES
MAXIMUM PESTICIDE CONCENTRATION FOUND VERSUS
PERMISSIBLE WATER SUPPLY CRITERIA AND
REASONABLE STREAM ALLOWANCE
COMPARISON OF FAO/WHO ACCEPTABLE DAILY INTAKE
AND DAILY DIETARY INTAKE
CARCINOGENIC HAZARD OF PESTICIDES
MUTAGENIC HAZARD OF PESTICIDES
REPRESENTATIVE MUTAGENIC EFFECTS OF PESTICIDES
REPRESENTATIVE TERATOGENIC EFFECTS OF PESTICIDES
POISONINGS BY PESTICIDES, UNITED STATES
CALIFORNIA REPORTS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASES
ATTRIBUTED TO PESTICIDES AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL
CHEMICALS
BIOLOGICAL MAGNIFICATION OF PESTICIDES
ACUTE ORAL LD5Q
24-HOUR
48-HOUR
96-HOUR
120-HOUR
PESTICIDE LIST
PESTICIDE GROUP COMPONENTS
PRODUCTION AND DOMESTIC DISAPPEARANCE OF
INDIVIDUAL PESTICIDES
PESTICIDE USE AND APPLICATION RATES
186
189
191
192
194
195
198
203
205
207
210
211
215
217
219
220
223
231
234
238
240
244
247
250
272
xili
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (CONTINUED)
Table Number Page
D-I TYPES OF CONTAINERS USED FOR GARDEN AND HOME
PESTICIDES 360
D-II PESTICIDE CONTAINER USE BY AGRICULTURE 361
E-I CROP ACREAGE GROWN BY REGION, 1966 364
E-II PERCENTAGE OF CROP ACREAGE GROWN WITHIN EACH
REGION, BY STATE, 1971 365
E-III CROP STATISTICS 366
E-IV EXPENDITURES ($1000) FOR FUNGICIDES USED ON
CROPS BY REGION, 1966 375
E-V EXPENDITURES ($1000) FOR HERBICIDES USED ON
CROPS BY REGION, 1966 376
E-VI EXPENDITURES ($1000) FOR INSECTICIDES USED ON
CROPS BY REGION, 1966 377
E-VII EXPENDITURE ($1000) FOR MISCELLANEOUS PESTICIDES
USED ON SELECTED CROPS BY REGION, 1966 378
E-VIII PERCENTAGE OF FUNGICIDE USE ON CROPS BY REGION,
1966 379
E-IX PERCENTAGE OF HERBICIDES USED ON CROPS BY REGION,
1966 380
E-X PERCENTAGE OF INSECTICIDES USED ON CROPS BY REGION,
1966 381
E-IX PERCENTAGE OF MISCELLANEOUS PESTICIDES USED ON
CROPS BY REGION, 1966 382
E-XII CROP ACREAGE TREATED BY REGION 383
E-XIII EPA REGION COMPONENTS . 397
F-I EFFECTS OF SELECTED PESTICIDES ON MAN 400
F-II ANNUAL INTAKE OF DDT PLUS DDE, 1965 401
F-III REPORTS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE ATTRIBUTED TO
PESTICIDES AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS
BY CLINICAL TYPE OF DISEASE, CALIFORNIA, 1970 402
F-IV REPORTS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE ATTRIBUTED TO
PESTICIDES AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS
BY OCCUPATION, CALIFORNIA, 1970 403
F-V REPORTS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE ATTRIBUTED TO
PESTICIDES AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS
BY INDUSTRY GROUP, CALIFORNIA, 1970 404
F-VI REPORTS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE ATTRIBUTED TO
PESTICIDES AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS BY
INDUSTRY GROUP AND CLINICAL TYPE OF DISEASE,
CALIFORNIA, 1970 405
xiv
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (CONCLUDED)
Table Number Pag<
F-VII REPORTS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE ATTRIBUTED TO
PESTICIDES AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS
BY ESTIMATED TIME LOST FROM WORK AND
HOSPITALIZATION, CALIFORNIA, 1970 406
F-VIII REPORTS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE ATTRIBUTED
TO PESTICIDES AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL
CHEMICALS BY MONTH OF INJURY, CALIFORNIA, 1970 407
F-IX REPORTS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE ATTRIBUTED TO
PESTICIDES AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS
BY SEX, AGE AND CLINICAL TYPE OF DISEASE,
CALIFORNIA, 1970 408
G-I RELATIVE MOBILITY OF PESTICIDES IN SOILS 410
G-II PERSISTENCE OF PESTICIDES 411
G-III PROPERTIES OF SELECTED PESTICIDES 419
G-IV LOSS OF INSECTICIDES FROM WATER BY
CODISTILLATION 425
G-V PESTICIDES IN A RAINFALL IN CINCINNATI, OHIO 426
xv
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
The use of pesticides has become a necessary and integral part
of our present way of life. Tremendous gains have been realized from
the use of pesticides to increase food and fiber production, to
prevent the spread of disease, to protect structures from damage and
to control weeds. These benefits, however, have resulted in the ever
expanding use of pesticides. Since pesticides can adversely affect
many forms of life other than the target pest, it is necessary to weigh
the benefits of pesticide use against the present and future risks in-
volved in their use.
In this regard,the Environmental Studies Division of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA) has undertaken the development of the
Strategic Environmental Assessment System (SEAS) with the aim of pro-
viding forecasts of the long-range environmental impacts of trends in
population growth and distribution, economic development, public
policy and technological change. This capability requires that
relationships be developed between future residual levels and the
processes which generate residuals and the change agents which affect
the generation of residuals. MITRE has been tasked to support SEAS
by developing the analytical framework for the generation of both the
pesticide residuals and the radiation residuals and by identifying
the effects of these residuals.
This paper describes the methodology for generating pesticide
residuals in SEAS. In developing this methodology, considerable data
were collected which were felt to be extremely valuable in assessing
the use and impact of pesticides; however, not all of the data are
directly applicable to SEAS. Since the data come from a wide variety
of sources, it was decided to incorporate them into a single, compre-
hensive report on the use and effects of pesticides. Thus, pesticide
-------
data are presented which nay not directly relate to SEAS, but which
should prove valuable in other studies of pesticides.
This paper identifies the environmentally important pesticide
residuals and their sources of entry into the environment. For each
source, an attempt is made to identify the use and quantify the
application of pesticides. Most studies on the use of pesticides,
unfortunately, have been limited surveys which are either several
years out of date or not applicable on the national level. There is
very little historical data available. Only for the farm use of
pesticides is there any significant amount of application data
available; however, much of these data are also out of date.
In addition to this use data, information is presented to quantify
the use of pesticides by region. For agriculture, an algorithm is
given for calculating by state the amount of each pesticide applied on
selected crops grown in each state. 1966 data are used in deriving the
coefficients for the algorithm. The reason 1966 data are used is that
this is the latest year for which comprehensive agricultural pesticide
use data are available. A more recent survey was carried out in 1971;
however, the data are unavailable at present. When the 1971 data are
released, the agricultural data in this paper should be replaced with
the more recent, and thus more valid, data. Since comprehensive data
are not available between 1966 and the present, it was not possible to
derive dynamic coefficients for the algorithm. Consequently, static
coefficients are used. Additionally, data are presented on the costs
of substituting certain types of pesticides for other pesticides.
Measures of the effects of pesticides on man and other non-target species
are also presented.
-------
SECTION II
SOURCES OF PESTICIDE ENTRY INTO THE ENVIRONMENT
Pesticides initially are introduced into the environment in one
of two ways - intentionally or accidentally. Once the pesticides
have been,introduced, several routes exist for cycling the pesticides
throughout the environment.
INTENTIONAL INTRODUCTION
Practically all of the pesticides found in the environment have
been intentionally introduced. After all, pesticides are produced
because there are consumers who wish to use them. This intentional
application of pesticides by consumers represents the major source of
pesticide entry into the environment.
There are four categories of pesticide use:
a. Farm use
b. Home and garden use
c. Industrial use
d. Governmental use.
Farm Use
Farm use constitutes over half of the total pesticide use in the
United States. Farmers apply pesticides to crops, livestock,
poultry, seedbeds and transplants and also use them for rodent control,
vector control, noncropland weed control, treatment of structures
(structural control), etc. Two crops, cotton and corn, accounted for
(2)
almost half the entire' farm use of pesticides in 1966, (and conse-
quently almost one quarter of the total U.S. pesticide use).
Home and Garden Use
The household sector uses pesticides for insect control both in-
doors and outdoors, for weed control on lawns and gardens, for
-------
structural control, for rodent control, for mothproofing of clothes,
for algae control in swimming pools and for insect control on plants
and pets. In 1965 the four most important household pests controlled
by pesticides were as follows:
a. German roach
b. House mouse
c. Norway rat
d. Subterranean termites.
Industrial Use
Industrial uses of pesticides include exterminating, weed control
on rights-of-way, structural control, rodent control, preservation
of wood and wood products, preservation of food, etc. In addition,
some products that are used as pesticides are also used as raw
materials for certain industrial processes.
Governmental Use
Pesticides are used at every level of government. Local govern-
ments use pesticides for weed and insect control on public parks, golf
courses, etc., for weed control on county roads and other rights-of-
way, for vector control, in public swimming pools, for municipal pest
eradication programs and in reservoirs. State governments use pesti-
cides for many similar programs.
The federal government uses pesticides for weed and insect con-
trol on federal lands and forests, for brush and weed control on
rangeland, for vector control, and for pest eradication programs.
Current pest eradication programs are aimed at pests such as the
citrus blackfly, the imported fire ant, the giant African snail,
(I.)
cattle fever tick, the Gypsy moth, etc.
-------
ACCIDENTAL INTRODUCTION
Any action which is not a direct, deliberate application of a
pesticide, but which leads to a pesticide being introduced to the
environment, is classified as accidental introduction.
The accidental introduction of pesticides occurs during the
following activities:
a. Manufacturing
b. Formulation
c. Marketing
d. Transportation
e. Storage
f. Disposal following consumption.
Manufacturing
The accidental introduction of pesticides and other pollutants
occurs during the following manufacturing stages:
a. Transport and handling of raw materials
b. Disposal of by-products and wastes of the
production process
c. Clean-up and decontamination of equipment
d. Storage, handling and shipping of the pesticide product.
Formulation
In general, the technical product (pesticide) produced by the
manufacturer is converted into a form that is both pore effectively
used as a pesticide and safer for the applicator to use. Pesticides
are formulated into dusts, wettable powders, granules, emulsifiable
concentrates and aerosols. This formulation is normally done by a
formulation company which is not located at the same site, and
possibly not even in the same state as the manufacturer.
-------
Sources of accidental loss of pesticides during formulation
include:
a. Raw material transport and handling
b. Disposal of wastes
c. Clean-up and decontamination of equipment
d. Storage, handling and transportation of the
formulated product.
Marketing
Marketing of pesticides is the process of moving the finished
pesticidal product from the manufacturer, formulator or packager to
the consumer. Activities include transportation, warehousing,
redistribution and storage or shelving. Each of these activities
provides a potential source of pesticide loss.
Disposal Following Consumption
After consumers have finished using a pesticide, they have to
dispose of the "empty" container and any excess pesticide. The con-
tainer will normally contain anywhere from minute traces of the
pesticide to significant amounts of pesticide.
Following household use, the container and excess pesticide are
normally disposed of through the city waste disposal system or the
municipal sewer system. There is a great chance of the pesticide
entering the environment following such disposal.
Industrial disposal of empty containers by industries other than
pesticide manufacturers and formulators is usually regulated. Special
dumps are supposed to be used. However, such dumps are normally not
readily available and the containers may wind up almost anywhere with a
great chance of the pesticide leaving the container and entering the
environment. Even the use of a regulated dump does not assure that
the pesticide will not leave the dump and enter the environment.
-------
PESTICIDE CYCLING IN THE ENVIRONMENT
Once the pesticide has been introduced into the environment, it
can be transported to other locations, remain where it was introduced,
or be degraded either into harmless substances or into other dangerous
by-products.
Transport
Figure 1 depicts the transport routes by which pesticides may cycle
in the environment. The primary transport routes are as follows:
a. the water route
b. the air route
c. the food chain.
Water Route
Surface run-off is generally considered the major route of pesti-
/o g\
cide movement. ' ' Because of the tight binding characteristics of
pesticides to soil particles, leaching of pesticides into ground water
is not significant and the general movement of pesticides occurs
through the transport of soil particles to which the pesticide residues
are attached. Factors influencing the extent of the pesticide run-off
include:
a. Nature of the pesticide
b. Extent of use
c. Edaphic considerations
d. Climatic factors
e. Topography
f. Practices in land use and management
g. Persistence of the pesticide.
The subsurface drainage of pesticides into groundwaters and the
transport of pesticides in rainfall contribute very little to the
movement of pesticides.
-------
PESTICIDE APPLIED
00
DEGRADATION
LOSS
V
DEGRADATION LOSS
DEGRADATION LOSS
III TAKEN FROM 16).
FIGURE 1
PESTICIDE CYCLING IN THE ENVIRONMENT (a)
-------
Air Route
The atmospheric transport of pesticides results from drift during
aerial application, and from volatilization, codistillation and wind
erosion.
Aerial application is one of the primary means of pesticide
application. A large percentage of the pesticide applied aerially
does not reach its target. For some pesticides estimates of loss
reach 50 percent. The amount and distance of drift are influenced by
wind velocity and air movement, temperature, humidity, height of
release above ground, size of the droplet, with this last factor
(6)
affected by pressure, nozzle size and carrier.
Volatilization of a pesticide depends upon the nature of the
pesticide, air velocity, pesticide concentration, pesticide vapor
pressure, temperature, relative humidity, soil water content and
bulk density of the surface soil.
Pesticides may also enter the atmosphere through codistillation
with water. Because of the bonding characteristics of the pesticide
to the soil, erosion caused by wind also transports pesticides.
Food Chain
The food chain is potentially the most dangerous means of pesti-
cide transport. When organisms eat plants, fruits, vegetables or
other organisms containing pesticide residues, they ingest the pesti-
cide. The organism then either biologically accumulates the pesticide
in its body, or excretes it at a new location. This process occurs
at each stage of the food chain, Animals at the top of food chains
have exhibited enormous magnification of pesticide residues far
exceeding the environmental concentrations of the pesticide.
-------
SECTION III
IMPORTANT PESTICIDE KESIDUALS
Pesticide use is directed toward reducing or eliminating specific
pest species. But once a pesticide reaches the environment, it is
capable of affecting non-target species as well as the target species.
The use of pesticides whose residuals can adversely affect the eco-
system or adversely affect human health or welfare requires serious
study and evaluation.
The pesticides selected for inclusion in this report are those
whose residuals are considered to be of major environmental signifi-
cance. Four criteria were employed in the selection:
a. Toxicity
b. Persistence
c. Pervasiveness
d. Bioaccumulation.
MITRE Technical Report MTR-6362 discussed the selection process
and presented a list of the important residuals. The list of residuals
presented in that report has been modified-to eliminate pesticides
whose use is so limited as to be of little concern, and to add several
pesticides whose widespread use makes them of importance. Regrettably,
several important residuals also had to be eliminated from consideration
in this report because no information about their use could be found.
Table I presents the classification of pesticides whose use is dis-
cussed in this report. With few exceptions, uses are described for each
individual pesticide. Pesticides for which the group use, rather than
the individual use, is discussed are indicated in the table. Note that
copper sulfate is discussed independent of the copper fungicide group.
This group, excluding copper sulfate, will be referred to as the "other
copper fungicide group" in this paper. Additionally, pesticides
10
-------
classified as "Group I" or "Group II" in the previous MITRE report
are identified in the table.
Table II lists the "Group I" and "Group II" residuals which
could not be included because of the unavailability of use data.
Appendix A contains an alphabetized list of the pesticides
discussed and also includes names, other than the common name, by
which specific pesticides are known.
(7)
11
-------
TABLE I
CLASSIFICATION OF PESTICIDES
Insecticides Organochlorines
Aldrin (b)
Chlordane (b)
Chlordecone
Chlorobenzilate
DDT, isomers and metabolites (a)
Dieldrin (a)
Dinocap
Endosulfan (b)
Endrin (b)
Heptachlor (a)
Lindane (b)
Methoxychlor
Mirex (b)
Strobane (b)
TDE, isomers, and metabolites (b)
Tetradifon
Toxaphene (a)
Organophosphorus
Azinphosmethyl (b)
Ciodrin
Coumaphos
Crufomate
DBF
Diazinon
Dicrotophos
Dichlorvos
Dimethoate
Disulfoton (b)
Dursban
Ethion
Fenthion
Folex
Malathion
Methyl Parathion (b)
Haled
Parathion (a)
Phorate (b)
Ronnel
TEPP
Trichlorfon
12
-------
TABLE I (CONTINUED)
Insecticides Carbamates
(Continued) Carbaryl
Carbofuran
Other Synthetic Organics
Abate
Cresol
Botanicals
Nicotine Sulfate (c)
Pyrethrin (c)
Rotenone (c)
Inorganic Insecticides
Calcium Arsenate (c)
Lead Arsenate (c)
Herbicides Organic
Arsenicals
Cacodylic Acid-(b), (d)
DSMA (b), (d)
MSMA (d)
Paris Green (b), (d)
Phenoxy Group
Dichlorprop
Erbon
Fenal
MCPA
MCPB
Silvex
2,4-D
2,4-DB
2,4-DEP
2.4,5-T
Silvex
Phenyl Urea
Diuron
Fenuron
Linuron
Amides
Diphenamid
Naptalam
Propachlor
Propanil
13
-------
TABLE I (CONTINUED)
Herbicides Organic (Continued)
(Continued) Carbamates
CDAA
Chlorpropham
Propham
Propoxur
Dinitro Group
Benefin (c)
Dinitroeresol (c)
DNBP (c)
Triazines
Atrazine
Fropazine
Simagine
Benzoic Group
Amiben
Dicamba
TBA
Defoliant
DBF
Folex
Other Organic
Amitrole
Animate
Bromacil
Dalapon
Paraquat (b)
Picloram (a)
Trifluralin
Inorganic Herbicides
Arsenic Acid (b), (c)
Arsenic Trioxide (b), (c)
Magnesium Chlorate (c)
Sodium Arsenite (b), (c)
Sodium Chlorate (c)
-------
TABLE I (CONCLUDED)
Fungicides
Miticides
Nematocides and
Funri gants
Growth Retardant
Repellants
Dithiocarbamates
Ferbam
Maneb
Zineb
Pthalimides
Captan
Copper Fungicides
Copper Carbonate (c)
Copper Naphthenates (c)
Copper Oxychloride (c)
Copper Sulfate
Others
Organic Mercury Compounds
PCP
Miscellaneous Fungicides
Dinocap (c)
Dodine (c)
Quinones (c)
Aramite
Dicofol
Tetradifon
D-D Mixture
Dibromochloropropane
Ethylene Dibromide
Methyl Bromide
Sulfur Dioxide
Vikane
Maleic Hydrazide
(b)
(a) Group I in (7).
(b) Group II in (7).
(c) These pesticides are not considered separately; only the
group is considered.
(d) For farm use, only the group is discussed.
15
-------
TABLE II
IMPORTANT BESIDUALS NOT INCLUDED
GROUP I
Dioxln
Heptachlor Epoxide
Paraoxon
GROUP II
Dilan (a)
EPN
Isodrin
Nonachlor
PCB
Sodium Fluoroacetate
Thallium Sulfate
Zinc Phosphide
(a) Dilan is a mixture of bulan and proIan,
16
-------
SECTION IV
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION AND DISAPPEARANCE OF PESTICIDES
"Data on the production volumes of pesticides and their formu-
lation are almost completely unavailable on an individual compound
basis and those (data) which are available leave much to be desired"
The basic source of data is the U.S. Tariff Commission's "Synthetic
/o\
Organic Chemicals, United States Production and Sales" publicationv .
Because production data are considered proprietary, individual data
are published only when three or more manufacturers produce a pesti-
cide. Appendix B presents available data on individual pesticides.
For the general pesticide categories of fungicides, herbicides
and insecticides, reliable data are available on production and export;
volumes. Table III presents the data on pesticide production, export
and domestic disappearance (1971 is the latest year for which data
are presently available).
ALL PESTICIDES
Table III shows that the production of all pesticides reached
1,203.9 million pounds in 1971. This number is slightly inflated since;
2,4-D acid and 2,4,5-T acid production were double counted because of
proprietary considerations. Based upon previous production of these
two products, their 1971 production is probably considerably less than
40 million pounds.
The production of all pesticides has nearly doubled since 1960
and has almost tripled since 1950. However, since 1968 the total
production has shown no growth. In fact, 1969 was the first year
in 11 years in which the production declined.
Domestic consumption of pesticides has undoubtedly followed the
same trend as production. Since consumption data are not available
on a.yearly basis, domestic disappearance is generally used as a
17
-------
TABLE III
PESTICIDE PRODUCTION, EXPORT AND DOMESTIC DISAPPEARANCE (a)
(In Millions of Founds)
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1960
1955
1950
FUNGICIDES
Production
(d)
180.3
168.5
182.1
190.8
177.9
178.9
150.2
196.7
187.2
95.3
Export
(e)
26.0(h)
25.6
23.7
22.5
22.7
27.9
22.9
49.6
82.3
N.A.(J)
Domestic
Disappearance
154.3 (h)
142.9
158.4
168.3
155.2
151.0
127.3
147.1
104.9
N.A.
HERBICIDES (b)
Production
458.8 (1)
390.7
371.7
402.8
348.3
272.2
221.1
110.1
N.A.'
72.7
Export
84.5
78.0
69.5
72.9
61.9
45.0
31.4
18.8
15.8
N.A.
Domestic
Disappearance
(f)
374.3
312.7
302.2
329.9
286.4
227.2
189.7
91.3
N.A.
N.A.
INSECTICIDES (c)
Production
564.8
495.4
580.9
581.6
503.8
562.2
503.9
368.7
299.5
257.8
Export
237.5
236.5
250.5
322.5
280.3
262.1
218.4
238.3
172.3
110.1
Domestic
Disappearance
(K)
339.9
273.8
344.7
273.7
240.6
317.2
298.1
145.2
140.2
166.0
ALL PESTICIDES
Production
(d)
1203.9(1)
1054.6
1134.7
1175.2
1030.0
1013.2
875.2
675.5
N.A.
425.8
Export
(e)
348. 000
340.1
343.7
417.9
364.9
335.0
272.7
306.7
270.4
N.A.
Domestic
Disappearance
(«>
868.5 (h)
729.4
805.3
771.9
682.2
695.4
615.1
383.6
N.A.
N.A.
00
(a) Data from (1), (4), (5), (9) and (10).
(b) Includes defoliants, desslcants and growth regulators.
(c) Includes fumlgants and rodenticides; does not Include carbon tetrachlorlde, carbon disulflde, ethylene dibromide and
ethylene dichloride which have many other non-pesticide uses; does not Include paradichlorobenzene or Inorganic rodenticides.
(d) Data for copper sulfate represents only that production designated as shipments to agriculture. Also, sulfur production
data Is not included.
(e) Does not Include copper sulfate nor sulfur exports.
(f) Production less export. No adjustments made for Inventory changes or Imports.
(g) Production less exports plus botanical insecticide Imports. No other adjustments made for inventory charges u'r other Imports.
(h) Estimate.
(i) Double counts 2,4-D acid and 2,4,5-T acid production for proprietary reasons.
(j) Not available.
-------
measure of domestic consumption. Due to the unavailability of data
about imports and inventories, domestic disappearance is calculated
as the difference between production and exports. Using data from
(9)
a Stanford Research Institute Report, botanical insecticide import
data has been included in domestic disappearance in this report.
The data in Table III appear to show a small but steady increase
in domestic disappearance since 1967 (with the exception of 1970).
However, it is impossible to verify whether this is the trend. It is
estimated that pesticide sales volumes (domestic sales and exports)
run 15 to 25 percent less than production. If domestic dis-
appearance is allowed to vary by this amount, any trend is obscured.
Table IV shows pesticide sales to consumers in three sectors of
the economy. These data indicate that consumption has actually
decreased from 1969 to 1971. It is estimated that sales will increase
by about 25 percent by 1975. '
Table III also shows that exports of pesticides have remained
nearly constant since 1966 and not much above 1960 levels. From
1960 exports have dropped from 45 percent of production to 29 percent.
FUNGICIDES
The production of fungicides has remained relatively constant
since about 1955. In fact, production is currently below 1955 pro-
duction. Domestic disappearance has been constant since about 1960.
HERBICIDES
The production and domestic disappearance of herbicides have
both quadrupled since 1960 and doubled since 1965. in 1967 herbicide
use exceeded insecticide use for the first time.
INSECTICIDES
Insecticide production has increased by 53 percent since 1960;
however, in 1971 the production level was identical to that of 1966.
Domestic disappearance is also only slightly above the 1966 level.
19
-------
TABLE IV
PESTICIDE SALES TO CONSUMERS
IN THREE SECTORS OF THE ECONOMY
YEAR
1975
1971
1970
1969
SECTOR
Agriculture
Household, Lawn & Garden
Industrial, Institutional,
Total
Agriculture
Household, Lawn & Garden
Industrial, Institutional,
Total
Agriculture
Household, Lawn & Garden
Industrial, Institutional,
Total
Agriculture
Household, Lawn & Garden
Industrial, Institutional,
GOVP T*nitiATi t* a 1
Total
SALES
(Million
Dollars)
1,325
401
361
2,087
1,035
313
312
1,660
944
298
303
1,545
1,190
255
255
1,700
PERCENT
63.5
19.2
17.3
100.0
62.3
18.9
18.8
100.0
61.1
19.3
19.6
100.0
70.0
15.0
15.0
100.0
(a) Data from (11).
(b) Estimated.
20
-------
In 1971 over 40 percent of the insecticides produced were exported.
This is down from 65 percent in 1960.
TRENDS
Tables V and VI summarize the production and domestic disappearance
trends exhibited by fungicides, herbicides and insecticides. Since
1960 fungicide use and production have dropped steadily when compared
with all other pesticides. Herbicide use and production has steadily
climbed to where herbicide use presently exceeds insecticide use.
Insecticides have only slightly increased in use.
Table VII shows the production and sales of synthetic organic
pesticides at the manufacturing level. Since synthetic organic
pesticides account for 95 percent of all pesticide production, their
trends give a very good indication of trends for all pesticides.
The data indicate that herbicides will continue to capture a larger
share of the domestic market and that any growth in insecticides
and fungicides will be slight or non-existent.
PRICES
Table VIII gives the average wholesale prices for selected pesti-
cides for the past six years. There has generally been a steady
increase in prices during the time, although several pesticides have
dropped in price.
Table IX shows the average sales value of pesticides by class
over a six-year period.
21
-------
TABLE V
FUNGICIDES, HERBICIDES AND INSECTICIDES:
PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL PESTICIDE PRODUCTION
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1960
1955
1950
FUNGICIDES
15.0
16.0
16.0
16.2
17.3
17.6
17.1
29.1
N.A.
22. A
HERBICIDES
38.1
37.0
32.8
34.3
33.8
26.9
25.3
16.3
N.A.
17.1
INSECTICIDES
46.9
47.0
51.2
49.5
48.9
55.5
57.6
54.6
N.A.
60.5
22
-------
TABLE VI
FUNGICIDES, HERBICIDES AND INSECTICIDES:
PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL DOMESTIC DISAPPEARANCE
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1960
1955
1950
FUNGICIDES
17.8
19.6
19.7
21.8
22.7
21.7
20.7
38.3
N.A.
N.A.
HERBICIDES
43.1
42.9
37.5
42.7
42.0
32.7
30.8
23.8
N.A.
N.A.
INSECTICIDES
39.1
37.5
42.8
35.5
35.3
45.6
48.5
37.9
N.A.
N.A.
23
-------
TABLE VII
MANUFACTURERS PRODUCTION AND SALES OF SYNTHETIC ORGANIC PESTICIDES
(a)
YEAR
1975
1971
1970
1969
FUNGICIDES
PRODUCTION
/MilliorA
\Pounds y
130.0
132.3
128.9
124.4
SALES (b)
ililliorA
Dollars/
70.0
73.6
65.2
61.2
HERBICIDES
PRODUCTION
[Million\
\Pounds J
500.0
316.7
308.1
311.2
SALES (b)
ttillion\
Dollars/
814.1
562.5
498.0
495.7
INSECTICIDES
PRODUCTION
/MillioiA
\Pounds /
500.0
497.3
443.9
493.1
SALES (b)
/Million\
\DollarsJ
415.6
343.0
307.2
294.3
TOTAL
PRODUCTION
/MilliotA
\Pounds y
1130.0
946.3
880.9
928.7
SALES (b)
fMillion\
\Dollars/
1299.7
979.1
870.3
851.2
NJ
(a) Data from (4, 5, and 11)
(b) Domestic and exports
-------
TABLE VIII
PESTICIDE PRICES:
AVERAGE WHOLESALE QUOTATIONS IN DOLLARS PER POUND FOR
SELECTED PESTICIDES, UNITED STATES, 1967-71 AND JAN.-JUNE 1972 (a)
PESTICIDE
Aldrin
Chlordane
Copper sulfate, pentahydrate
Copper sulfate, tribasic
2,4-D acid
2,4-D isopropyl ester
DDT
Dichlorvos
Dieldrin
Endrin
Ethylene dibromlde
Keptachlor
Lead arsenate
Lindane
Malathion
Methoxychlor , 50 percent
Methyl bromide
Methyl parathion
Parathion
?yrethrum flowers, 1.3%
2,4,5-T
TDE
Toxaphene
COST PER POUND
1967
(Dollars)
.992
.602
.185
.389
.332
.357
.179
3.750
1.665
2.469
.305
.973
.300
1.406
.900
.660
.606
.780
.780
.810
1.018
.450
.220
1968
(Dollars)
1.038
.590
.195
.406
.352
.372
.175
3.750
1.650
2.450
.305
1.003
.292
1.300
.883
.660
.605
.622
.624
.784
1.111
.450
.220
1969
(Dollars)
1.050
.590
.212
.444
.332
.355
.177
3.750
1.650
2.450
.305
1.030
.266
1.300
.790
.660
.605
.550
.590
.750
1.137
.450
.220
1970
(Dollars)
1.050
.590
.239
.495
.332
.355
,218
3.750
1.650
2.450
.250
1.030
.275
1.300
.790
.660
.605
.550
.590
.750
1.130
.450
.220
1971
(Dollars]
1.050
.590
.226
.468
.360
.410
.220
3.750
1.650
2.450
.250
1.030
.275
1.328
.790
.660
.411
.453
.462
.750
1.120
.450
.229
Jan.-
June
1972
(Dollars)
1.050
.590
.225
.465
.360
.410
.220
3.750
1.650
2.450
.250
1.030
.275
1.370
.790
.660
.340
.465
.450
.750
1.120
.450
.237
(a) Taken from (4).
25
-------
TABLE IX
to
SYNTHETIC ORGANIC PESTICIDE PRICES:
AVERAGE SALES VALUE IN DOLLARS PER POUND
AT MANUFACTURERS' LEVEL, BY CLASSES, UNITED STATES, 1966-71 (a)
CLASSIFICATION
Fungicides
Herbicides
Insecticides,
Rodenticides and
Fumigants
ALL
COST BY YEAR (in Dollars)
1966
0.45
1.16
0.57
0.71
1967
0.47
1.50
0.61
0.88
1968
0.48
1.52
0.59
0.88
1969
0.49
1.59
0.60
0.92
1970
0.51
1.62
0.69
0.99
1971 (b)
0.56
1.78
0.69
1.03
(a) Taken from (4).
(b) Preliminary.
-------
SECTION V
USE AND LOSS DATA
Data are presented on the use of pesticides by each of the four
sectors discussed in Section II. Except for farm use, little data
exist about the use or loss of pesticides. The data that are available
come, in general, from "one-shot" studies rather than from yearly
surveys.
USE DATA
Table X shows the use of pesticides by type of use for the period
from 1968 to 1970. Farm use accounted for 55 percent of all pesticide
use during this period. Industrial use was next, accounting for 20 per-
cent. Home use represented another 15 percent. Governmental use
accounted for the remaining 10 percent of the total use.
The remainder of this section describes pesticides applications,
grouped by specific uses. Appendix C describes the uses and the
application rate, grouped by pesticide.
Farm Use
Table XI shows the purposes for which farmers used pesticides in
2
1966. Famers used almost 93 percent of all pesticides on crops. The
remainder of the pesticides use was almost equally divided between
livestock and other uses.
1 (9)
A Stanford Research Institute Report estimates that home and garden
use may be less than 5 percent in 1970. The report does not establish
percentages for the other uses.
2
1966 is the latest year for which comprehensive agricultural pesticide
use data are available. A more recent survey was carried out in 1971;
however, the data are still being analyzed and are unavailable at
present. They are supposed to be released in the near future. When
they are released, the agricultural data in this paper should be re-
placed with the more recent, and thus more valid, data.
27
-------
TABLE X
PESTICIDE USE BY KIND OP USE, 1968-1970 (a)
USE
PERCENT
Farm
Urb an-Suburban
Industry
Federal, State and Local
Government
TOTAL
55
15
20
10
100
(a) Taken from (1).
28
-------
KJ
VO
TABLE XI
FAEM USE OF PESTICIDES, 1966
(a)
USE
Crops
Lives to ck(c)
Other (d)
Total
AMOUNT OF PESTICIDE USED
(Millions of Pounds)
Fungicides
30.5
1.0
1.7
33.2
Herbicides
112.4
2.9
115.3
Insecticides
137.6
10.8
0.6
149.0
Miscellaneous (b)
47.7
0.7
7.4
55.8
Total
328.3
12.5
12.6
353.4
USE AS
PERCENT OF
TOTAL
USE
92.9
3.5
3.6
100.0
'a<)Data from (2). Does not include Alaska or Hawaii.
* ^Miscellaneous pesticides includes miticides, fumigants, defoliants and dessicants,
rodenticides, growth regulators and repellants.
(C)Includes use on livestock buildings.
Includes use on seed treatments, stored crops, buildings (other than livestock buildings),
seedbeds and transplants, rodent control and other noncropland uses such as fencerows,
roadsides, farmsteads and noncropland acres that are grazed.
-------
Table XII gives an estimate of the increase in farm use of pesti-
cides between 1966 and 1969. The acreage treated is estimated to have
risen by 12 percent and the amount of pesticides applied to have risen
by 16 percent. Herbicide use is estimated to have increased by 40
percent while insecticides and fungicides registered only slight
increases in use.
Crop Use
Table XIII shows the leading individual crops in terms of total
pesticides used in 1966. Nine crops accounted for nearly 77 percent of
the total agricultural crop use. Tables XIV to XVII show the leading
individual crops in terms of fungicides, herbicides, insecticides and
miscellaneous pesticides applied. A relatively few crops account for
the majority of each pesticide use.
Table XVIII presents the crops for which pesticide use is dis-
cussed in this report. For each crop the Standard Industrial Classi-
(12}
fication (SIC) code ' and the economic sector of the INFORUM input-
CIS)
output model used by SEAS are given. The 14 crop categories listed
accounted for 99.6 percent of the pesticide use on crops in 1966.
Table XIX lists the crops which comprise the five general categories
of Table XVIII.
Method of Application. Pesticides are applied either in liquid or
dry form. Liquid applications are usually preferred because they adhere
better than dry applications and because they are generally easier to
apply. Dry materials are normally in the form of dusts or granules.
Although the use of a dust is frequently the cheapest way of applying
pesticides, dusts have become less popular as a means of application
because climatological factors cause dusts to have variable performance
as well as drift problems. The use of granules has been increasing
Miscellaneous pesticides include miticides, fumigants, defoliants
and dessicants, rodenticides, plant growth regulators and repellants.
30
-------
TABLE XII
PESTICIDE USAGE BY FAEMERS, UNITED STATES,
1966 AND ESTIMATED 1969 (a)
PESTICIDE
Insecticides (g)
Herbicides (h)
Fungicides (i)
TOTAL
ACRES TREATED
(Million Acres)
1966
(c)
45
107
5
125
(k)
1969
(d)
50
120
5
140
(k)
Percentage
increase
1966-69
11
12
(J)
12
AMOUNT APPLIED (b)
(Million Pounds)
1966
(e)
195
125
33
353
1969
(f)
200
175
35
410
Percentage
increase
1966-69
3
40
6
16
(a) Taken from (1)
(b) All pesticides other than sulfur and petroleum.
(c) Data from (16)
(d) Estimated that acres treated for weed control increased from 1966
as follows: Corn, 15 percent; soybeans, 35 percent; wheat, 7 percent;
sorghum, 17 percent; and cotton, 15 percent. Estimated that corn
acres treated for insect control increase 18 percent from 1966.
(e) Data from (2)
(f) Assumed that farm use was the same proportion of manufacturer's
sales of synthetic organic pesticides as in 1966.
(g) Includes insecticides, soil and space fumigants, miticides,
rodenticides, and repellents.
(h) Includes herbicides, defoliants, dessicants, and plant growth
regulators.
(i) Includes all pesticides used for controlling diseases.
(j) The percentage increase in acres was estimated to be about the same
as the increase in ingredients, 6 percent. Because of rounding the
change is not shown.
(k) The land area treated is less than the sum of that treated with
specific types of pesticides because several types of pesticides
were used on the same acres.
31
-------
TABLE XIII
LEADING CROPS IN TEKMS OF QUANTITIES OF ALL PESTICIDES
USED, UNITED STATES, 1966 (a)
CROP
Cotton
Corn
Apples
Tobacco
Peanuts
Soybeans
Wheat
Potatoes
Citrus
(All others)
TOTAL
ACTIVE INGREDIENTS
(Million Pounds)
86.0
74.2
18.5
17.2
16.5
13.6
9.1
8.7
8.5
76.1
328.3
PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL
26.2
22.6
5.6
5.2
5.0
4.1
2.8
2.7
2.6
23.2
100.0
(a) Data from (2)
32
-------
TABLE XIV
LEADING CROPS IN TEEMS OF FUNGICIDE USE (a)
CROP
Apples
Citrus
Corn
Potatoes
Peanuts
All Other
TOTAL
AMOUNT
(Million Pounds)
8.5
4.1
4.1
3.5
1.1
9.2
30.5
PERCENT
27.9
13.4
13.4
11.5
3.6
30.2
100.0
(a) Data from (2)
33
-------
TABLE XV
LEADING CROPS IN TEEMS OP HERBICIDE USE (a)
CROP
Corn
Soybeans
Wheat
Cotton
Sorghum
Peanuts
Rice
Potatoes
All Other
TOTAL
AMOUNT
(Million Pounds)
46.0
10.4
8.2
6.5
4.0
2.9
2.8
2.2
29.4
112.4
PERCENT
40,9
9.2
7.3
5.8
3.6
2.6
2.5
2.0
26.1
100.0
(a) Data from (2).
34
-------
TABLE XVI
LEADING CROPS IN TEEMS OF INSECTICIDE USE (a)
CROP
Cotton
Com
Apples
Peanuts
Tobacco
Soybeans
Potatoes
Citrus
All Other
TOTAL
AMOUNT
(Million Pounds)
64.9
23.9
8.5
5.5
3.8
3.2
3.0
2.9
21.9
137.6
PERCENT
47.2
17.3
6.2
4.0
2.8
2.3
2.2
2.1
15.9
100.0
(a) Data from (2).
35
-------
TABLE XVII
LEADING CROPS IN TERMS OF MISCELLANEOUS PESTICIDE USE (a)
CROP
Cotton
Tobacco
Peanuts
Apples
Citrus
All Other
TOTAL
AMOUNT
(Million Pounds)
14.2
13.4
7.0
1.1
1.1
10.9
47.7
PERCENT
29.8
28.1
14.7
2.3
2.3
22.8
100.0
(a) Data from (2).
36
-------
TABLE XVIII
CROP LIST FOR USE IN SEAS
CROP
Apples
Citrus
Corn
Cotton
Other Field Crops
Other Fruits and Nuts
Other Grains
Other Vegetables
Pasture, Rangeland and Hay
Peanuts
Potatoes
Soybeans
Tobacco
Wheat
SIC CODE (a)
0122
0122
0113
0112
0119
0122
0113
0123
0119
0119
0119
0113
0114
0113
INFORUM SECTOR (b)
7
7
5
4
7
7
5
7
7
7
7
5
6
5
(a) Data from (12).
(b) Data from (13). INFORUM is an input-output model
developed by the University of Maryland.
37
-------
IABLE XIX
CROP CATEGORY COMPONENTS
Other Field Crops Other Fruits and Nuts (Continued)
Broomcorn Blackberries
Buckwheat Blueberries
Castorbeans Boysenberries
Cowpeas Cherries
Dry beans Currants
Dry field peas ?±ga
Flax Filberts
Grass and hayseed Gooseberries
H°PS Grapes
Lentils Loganberries
Millet Nectarines
Mung beans Olives
Peppermint Peaches
Popcorn Pears
Rutabagas Pecans
Sesame Plums
sPelt Prunes
Spearmint Raspberries
Sugarbeets Strawberries
Sugarcane Tung nuts
Sunflowers Walnuts
Velvetbeans
Other Fruits and Nuts
Almonds
Apricots
Avocados
38
-------
TABLE XIX (CONCLUDED)
Other Grains Pasture. Rangeland and Hay
Barley Alfalfa
Mixed Grains Hay
Oats Pasture
Rice Rangeland
Rye
Sorghum
Other Vegetables
Artichokes
Asparagus
Beets
Broccoli
Cabbage
Carrots
Cauliflower
Celery
Cranberries
Cucumbers
Green peppers
Green peas
Lettuce
Onions
Snap beans
Spinach
Sweetcorn
Sweet potatoes
Tomatoes
Watermelon
Other vegetables
39
-------
because they are convenient to handle, are not susceptible to drift
problems and are able to penetrate vegetable canopies in aerial
application.
Table XX shows the percent of application by form of application
in 1964 and 1966. In 1966 about 76 percent of all pesticides were
applied as sprays. This represents a slight increase over 1964 use.
From 1964 to 1966 there was a definite trend away from dust to
granules as the primary means of dry application. Dust application
decreased from 14 to 5 percent while granular application increased
from 9 to 17 percent.
Table XXI exhibits the percentage of expenditures farmers made
for each form of application in 1964 and 1966. Liquid sprays
accounted for more than half the expenditures for every crop and for
at least 86 percent of the expenditures for half of the crops. The
continuation of the trend away from dust to granules is shown by the
data.
Table XXII describes the aerial application of farm pesticides.
In 1970 and 1971 about 65 percent of all farm pesticides were applied
by aircraft. This is an increase from 1960 when less than 50 percent
of farm pesticides were applied aerially. The acreage treated by
aerial application more than doubled in the period from 1960 to 1971.
Expenditures and Return. Farmers use pesticides because they
increase productivity. Using 1963 data, Headley estimated that,
on the average, U.S. agriculture could produce an average of $4 addition-
al output for one additional dollar of pesticide expenditure. A later
study by Headley (discussed in Section VIII) estimates the marginal
contributions of pesticides by region and the marginal rate of substi-
tution of cropland for insecticides.
Table XXIII presents, by crop, farmers' pesticide expenditures
per treated acre in 1966. Fungicides cost the most per acre, and
herbicides the least. For every class of pesticide, apples required
40
-------
TABLE XX
PERCENT OF APPLICATION BY FOEM OF APPLICATION,
1964 AND 1966 (a)
FORM OF APPLICATION
Dust
Granular
Spray
Other (b)
TOTAL
1964
(Percent)
14
9
75
2
100
1966
(Percent)
5
17
76
2
100
(a) Data from (14).
(b) Includes fertilizer-pesticide mixtures and other forms.
41
-------
TABLE XXI
PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF EXPENDITURES FOR PESTICIDES BY FORM OF APPLICATION ON CROP, 1964 and 1966
FORM OF APPLICATION
Dust
1964
1966
Granular
1964
1966
Spray
1964
1966
Other (b)
1964
1966
APPLES
4
3
-
(c)
96
96
.
1
CITRUS
4
(c)
-
CHOP
OTHER
VEGETABLES
20
8
2
24
75
67
3
1
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
& Hay
N.A.
4
N.A.
(c)
N.A.
95
N.A.
(c)
PEANUTS
N.A.
36
N.A.
8
N.A.
53
N.A.
3
POTATOES
21
4
3
24
75
70
1
2
SOYBEANS
12
3
29
40
59
57
-
-
TOBACCO
15
8
7
2
54
79
24
11
WHEAT
2
3
_
(c)
98
97
_
-
NO
(a) Data from (14).
(b) Includes fertilizer-pesticide mixtures and other forma.
(c) Less than 0.5 percent.
-------
TABLE XXII
AERIAL APPLICATION OF ALL PESTICIDES USED BY FARMERS
(a)
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1962
1960
PERCENT OF ALL
FARM PESTICIDES
APPLIED AERIALLY
65
65
60
63
N.A.
<50
ACRES TREATED BY
AERIAL APPLICATION
(Millions)
108
104
89
N.A.
57
47
(a) Data from (4) and (10).
43
-------
TABLE XXIII
PESTICIDE EXPENDITURES PER TREATED ACRE BY CHOP, 1966
PESTICIDE
Fungicides
Herbicides
Insecticides
EXPENDITURES PER TREATED ACRE (Dollars)
APPLES
23.83
9.26
23.39
CITRUS
3.10
3.27
14.61
CORN
0>>
2.49
1.81
COTTON
7.60
5.33
10.30
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS
6.28
3.38
2.52
OTHER
FRUITS
& NUTS
6.15
8.71
9.81
OTHER
GRAINS
-
1.18
1.85
OTHER
VEGETABLES
5.35
9.42
8.49
PASTURE,
RANCELAND
4 HAY
-
1.43
3.71
PEANUTS
0.48
4.74
4.20
POTATOES
10.47
2.22
5.56
SOYBEANS
(b)
4.16
1.83
TOBACCO
6.41
7.63
10.38
WHEAT
0.59
0.78
ALL
CROPS
7.08
2.37
4.63
(a) Data from (14).
(b) Negligible amount used.
-------
the highest expenditure per treated acre. Wheat had the lowest cost
per treated acre for both insecticides and herbicides while peanuts
had the lowest cost per treated acre for fungicides.
Application Rates. Table XXIV lists the average pesticide appli-
cation by individual pesticide for each of the fourteen crops. The
rates are the national averages. They have been calculated by dividing
the amount of pesticide applied by the acreage treated. The amount
applied is the total amount applied for all application of that pesti-
cide on the specific crop. The acreage treated is the number of acres
treated with that pesticide.
In several instances when a crop was treated with only a small
amount of pesticides within a classification, the application data are
not reported for that crop. Instead they are combined with the data
of a similar crop which used a significant amount of pesticides within
that classification. For example, wheat required only a small amount
of fungicides and its application data are combined with the fungicide
application data for corn.
Grains such as wheat and corn tend to have relatively low pesti-
cide application rates. Fruits such as apples and citrus tend to have
relatively high application rates.
Livestock Use
Farmers used 12.5 million pounds of pesticides on livestock and
poultry in 1966. Table XI shows that insecticides accounted for
over 86 percent of the use. Table XXV shows that 84 percent of this
insecticide use was for beef and dairy cattle with beef cattle
accounting for 57.1 percent of the use alone.
Tables XXVI and XXVII list the application rates of the individual
pesticides on livestock and poultry respectively. Two insecticides,
toxaphene and methoxychlor, account for nearly half of the total
insecticide use on livestock.
45
-------
TABLE XXIV
1966 NATIONAL AVERAGE PESTICIDE APPLICATION RATE BY
CROP: APPLES
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
FUNGICIDES Captan
Miscellaneous
Fungicides Group
Zineb
Ferbam
Copper Sulfate
Maneb
Other Fungicides
TOTAL
HERBICIDES Inorganic
Herbicide Group
Dinitro Group
2,4-D
Diuron
Other Herbicides
TOTAL
INSECTICIDES Inorganic Insec-
ticides Group
Carbaryl
Azinphosmethyl
DDT
Ethion
Malathion
Parathion
Diazinon
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
5,430
831
747
529
84
66
809
8,496
66
60
26
25
212
389
4,146
1,595
578
567
412
333
198
114
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
325
363
99
99
28
14
289
1,217
39
64
12
10
106
231
235
337
345
162
224
172
155
34
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
16.71
2.29
7.55
5.34
3.00
4.71
2.80
6.98
1.69
0.94
2.17
2.50
2.00
1.68
17.64
4.73
1.68
3.50
1.84
1.94
1.28
3.35
46
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP: APPLES - CONTINUED
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
INSECTICIDES TDE
(continued) ., , ,.
Endosulfan
Lindane
Dieldrin
Methoxychlor
Other Insecticide
TOTAL
MISCELLANEOUS Dicofol
Sulfur Dioxide
Tetradifon
Other Miscellanea
TOTAL
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
114
94
61
49
42
s 182
8,485
294
269
151
us 405
1,119
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
28
25
91
63
8
229
2,108
195
15
175
432
817
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
4.07
3.76
0.67
0.78
5.25
0.79
4.03
1.51
17.93
0.86
0.94
1.37
47
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP: CITRUS
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
FUNGICIDES Other copper
fungicides
Copper Sulfate
Zineb
Cap tan
Ferbara
Other Fungicides
TOTAL
HERBICIDES Inorganic Herbi-
cides Group
Other Herbicides
TOTAL
INSECTICIDES Ethion
Other Inorganic
Insecticides
Methoxychlor
Carbaryl
Parathion
Malathion
Lindane
Chlordane
Other Insecticide
TOTAL
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
1,618
1,092
959
64
28
295
4,056
242
111
353
1,208
723
200
172
136
84
38
15
> 282
2,858
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
292
178
411
21
4
99
1,005
197
54
251
489
97
84
29
43
89
84
83
216
1,214
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
5.54
6.13
2.33
3.05
7.00
2.98
4.04
1.23
2.06
1.41
2.47
7.45 .
2.38
9.93
3.16
0.94
0.45
0.18
1.31
2.35
48
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP: CITRUS - CONTINUED
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
MISCELLANEOUS Repellants
Chlorobenzilate
Dicofol
Other Miscell-
aneous
TOTAL
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
442
421
67
193
1,123
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
3
565
69
116
753
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
147.33
0.75
0.97
1.66
1.49
49
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP: CORN
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
FUNGICIDES Zineb
Other Copper
Fungicides
Cap tan
Maneb
Copper Sulfate
Other Fungicides
TOTAL
HERBICIDE Atrazine
2,4-D
CDAA
TBA
Propachlor
Linuron
MCPA
Dinitro Group
2,4,5-T
Dicamba
Other Herbicides
TOTAL
INSECTICIDES Aldrin
Diazinon
Parathion
Heptachlor
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds
3,295
687
59
55
14
418
4,528
21,066
14,701
3,893
2,610
2,162
290
231
105
58
49
805
45,970
14,244
3,955
1,926
1,484
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
985
88
552
31
27
272
1,955
13,740
22,411
3,034
1,357
1,544
542
332
205
333
137
741
44,376
13,386
4,011
2,099
2,026
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
3.35
7.81
0.11
1.77
0.52
1.54
2.32
1.53
0.66
1.28
1.92
1.40
0.54
0.70
0.51
0.17
0.36
1.09
1.04
1.06
0.99
0.92
0.73
50
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP: CORN - CONTINUED
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
Disulfoton
Carbaryl
DDT
Chlordane
Methyl Parathion
Dieldrin
Lindane
Other
Insecticides
TOTAL
MISCELLANEOUS Dicofol
Tetradifon
Other
Mis cellaneous
TOTAL
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
647
480
234
159
74
52
44
329
23,629
88
29
429
546
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
744
306
351
210
9
183
349
689
24,363
130
4
266
400
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.87
1.57
0.67
0.76
8.22
0.28
0.13
0.46
0.97
0.68
7.25
1.61
1.37
51
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP : COTTON
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
FUNGICIDES Ferbam
Other Copper
Fungicides
Cap tan
Other Fungicides
TOTAL
HERBICIDES Trifluralin
Inorganic Herbicic
Group
Diuron
Arsenicals Group
2,4-D
Other Herbicides
TOTAL
INSECTICIDES Toxaphene
DDT
Methyl Parathion
Parathion
Strobane
Dicrotophos
Carbaryl
Trichorfon
Malathion
Endrin
Disulfoton
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
15
13
5
343
376
2,631
e
3,337
882
802
250
503
8,405
27,345
19,213
7,279
2,181
2,016
1,857
1,571
963
559
510
300
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
15
23
21
134
193
3,552
2,047
1,282
1,020
175
595
8,671
3,881
4,767
3,577
860
225
1,416
415
512
245
403
473
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
1.00
0.57
0.24
2.56
1.95
0.74
1.63
0.69
0.79
1.43
0.85
0.97
7.05.
4.03
2.03
2.54
8.96
1.31
3.79
1.88
2.28
1.27
0.63
52
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP: COTTON - Continued
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
INSECTICIDES Azinphosmethyl
(Continued) ^
Lindane
Aldrin
Other Herbicides
TOTAL
MISCELLANEOUS DBF and Merphos
D-D Mixture
Dibromochloro-
propane
Sulfur Dioxide
Dicofol
Aramite
Tetradifon
Other
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
200
167
163
123
453
64,900
4,226
3,789
3,197
564
271
51
50
180
12,328
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
222
33
298
161
982
17,570
1,688
49
67
33
364
126
92
190
2,609
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.90
5.06
0.55
0.76
0.46
3.69
2.50
77.33
47.72
17.09
0.74
0.40
0.54
0.95
4.73
53
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP: OTHER FIELD CROPS
(c\
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE V '
HERBICIDES^ 2,4-D
Chlorpropham and
Propham
Atrazine
MCPA
Dinitro Group
Diuron
Trifluralin
2,4,5-T
Inorganic
Herbicides Group
Propachlor
CDAA
Arsenicals Group
Propazine
Other Herbicides
TOTAL
INSECTICIDES Diazinon
Disulfoton
DDT
Toxaphene
Malathion
Carbaryl
Parathion
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds
1,059
662
474
273
175
165
118
110
97
62
12
9
5 -
2,182
5,403
201
170
118
107
84
55
47
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
1,424
163
227
89
101
48
176
89
7
45
8
2
1
2,482
4,862
89
151
81
56
176
83
77
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.74
4.06
2.09
3.07
1.73
3.44
0.67
1.24
13.86
1.38
1.50
4.50
5.00
0.88
1.11
2.26
1.13
1.46
1.91
0.48
0.66
0.61
54
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP: OTHER FIELD CROPS (CONTINUED)
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
INSECTICIDES Trichlorfon
(Continued) Other Insecticides
TOTAL
MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
31
103
916
637
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
24
276
1,013
215
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
1.29
0.37
0.90
2.75
55
-------
TABLE JDCIV (CONTINUED)
CROP: OTHER FRUITS AND NUTS
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
FUNGICIDES Ferbam
Cap tan
Other Copper
Fungicides
Copper Sulfate
Miscellaneous
Fungicide Group
Zineb
Maneb
Other Fungicides
TOTAL
HERBICIDES Dinitro Group
Atrazine
Diuron
Inorganic Herbi-
cides Group
2,4-D
Other Herbicides
TOTAL
INSECTICIDES Parathion
DDT
Malathion
Inorganic Insecti-
cide Group
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
1,211
1,003
826
302
232
137
91
500
4,302
1,076
201
175.
135
64
1,205
2,856
960
931
892
726
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
250
301
207
50
163
37
13
111
1,132
74
24
109
35
31
279
552
631
353
143
59
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
4.84
3.34
3.99
6.04
1.42
3.70
7.00
4.50
3.80
14.54
8.38
1.61
3.86
2.06
4.32
5.17
1.52
2.64
6.24
12.31
56
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP: OTHER FRUITS AND NUTS - Continued
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
INSECTICIDES
(Continued) Carbaryl
Diazinon
Endosulfan
Dieldrin
Azinphosmethyl
Ethion
Endrin
TDE
Lindane
Chlordane
Other Insecticides
TOTAL
MISCELLANEOUS Repellants
D-D Mixture
Sulfur Dioxide
Dicofol
Tetradifon
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
555
467
379
339
300
271
175
114
50
24
436
6,619
5,774
1,317
498
129
96
Dibromochloropropane 76
Other
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
802
8,692
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
197
155
258
153
186
112
18
29
34
31
91
2,450
11
9
52
114
112
2
141
441
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
2.82
3.01
1.47
2.22
1.61
2.42
9.72
3.93
1.47
0.77
4.79
2.70
524.91
146.33
9.58
1.13
0.86
38.00
5.69
19.71
57
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CHOP: OTHER CHAINS
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
(c) , (e)
HERBICIDES 2,4-D
Propanil
Atrazine
MCPA
Propazlne
2,4,5-T
Other Herbicides
TOTAL
INSECTICIDES Carbaryl
Toxaphene
Parathion
Methyl Parathion
Aldrin
Other Insecticides
TOTAL
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
6,211
2,589
1,274
721
575
57
344
11,771
807
152
105
94
60
134
1,352
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
11,566
935
829
1,678
445
115
663
16,231
237
92
234
156
43
347
1,109
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.54
2.77
1.54
0.43
1.29
0.50
0.52
0.73
3.41
1.65
0.45
0.60
1.40
0.39
1.22
58
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP: OTHER VEGETABLES
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
FUNGICIDES Maneb
Zineb
Other Copper
Fungicides
Copper Sulfate
Other Fungicides
TOTAL
HERBICIDES Dinitro Group
Linuron
Atrazine
2,4-D
Trifluralin
Chlorpropham and
Propham
Inorganic
Herbicides Group
CDAA
MCPA
Other Herbicides
TOTAL
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
2,702
382
276
195
538
4,093
1,006
628
399
209
175
104
39
39
10
879
3,488
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
241
43
64
67
177
582
238
19
109
124
109
32
22
6
4
165
828
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
11.21
8.88
4.31
2.91
3.04
7.03
4.23
33.05
3.66
1.69
6.50
3.25
1.77
6.50
2.50
5.33
4.21
59
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP: OTHER VEGETABLES - CONTINUED
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
INSECTICIDES Carbaryl
Parathion
DDT
Toxaphene
TDE
Malathion
Dieldrin
Azinphosmethyl
Aldrin
Endosulfan
Diazinon
Methyl Parathion
Disolfoton
Inorganic
Insecticide Group
Botanicals
Other
Insecticides
TOTAL
MISCELLANEOUS* ' Sulfur Dioxide
D-D Mixture
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds
2,581
1,350
810
684
618
290
198
152
132
127
117
99
87
54 -
38
826
8,163
198
160
Dibromochloropropane 114
Other
Mis cellaneous
TOTAL
392
864
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
604
366
332
205
74
213
122
122
71
91
112
33
77
6
78
719
3,225
26
3
13
68
113
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
4.27
3.69
2.44
3.34
8.35
1.36
1.62
1.25
1.86
1.40
1.04
3.00
1.13
9.00
0.49
1.15
2.53
7.62
53.33
8.77
5.76
7.65
60
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP: PASTURE, RANGELAND AND HAY
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
(c), (e)
HERBICIDES 2,4-D
2,4,5-T
Diuron
Dinitro Group
Inorganic
Herbicide Group
Other Herbicides
TOTAL
INSECTICIDES Malathion
Methoxychlor
Carbaryl
Parathion
Azinphosmethyl
Diazinon
Methyl Parathion
Toxaphene
Chlordane
Dieldrin
Heptachlor
Other
Insecticides
TOTAL
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
10,025
379
32
23
7
1,331
11,797
1,851
794
358
318
205
165
110
110
47
30
21
85
4,094
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
7,160
861
23
30
14
515
8,603
878
802
176
416
272
386
230
52
59
84
60
171
3,586
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
1.40
0.44
1.39
0.77
0.50
2.58
1.37
2.11
0.99
2.03
0.76
0.75
0.43
0.48
2.12
0.80
0.36
0.35
0.49
1.14
61
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP : PEANUTS
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
FUNGICIDES Other Copper
Fungicides
Other Organics
Fungicides
TOTAL
HERBICIDES Dinitro Group
Other Herbicides
TOTAL
INSECTICIDES DDT
Carbaryl
Toxaphene
Disulfoton
Diazinon
Lindane
Other Insecticide
TOTAL
MISCELLANEOUS
PESTICIDES Sulfur Dioxide
Other
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
1,093
15
1,108
1,393
1,506
2,899
2,265
1,886
985
174
95
19
i 105
5,529
6,794
211
7,005
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
559
23
582
352
734
1,086
500
371
237
188
50
21
45
1,412
265
24
289
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
1.96
1.90
1.90
3.96
2.05
2.67
4.53
5.08
4.16
0.93
1.90
0.90
2.33
3.92
25.64
8.79
24.24
62
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP: (IRISH) POTATOES
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
FUNGICIDES Maneb
Zineb
Miscellaneous
Fungicides Group
Other Fungicides
TOTAL
HERBICIDES Inorganic
Herbicides Group
Dinitro Group
Linuron
Other Herbicides
TOTAL
INSECTICIDES DDT
Disulfoton
Carbaryl
Parathion
Diazinon
Chlordane
Toxaphene
Endosulfan
TDE
Azinpho sine thy 1
Inorganic
Insecticide Group
Other Insecticide
TOTAL
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
1,499
1,273
73
686
3,531
1,153
743
131
193
2,220
571
532
401
389
321
155
124
119
62
33
5
s 260
2,972
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
292
215
36
178
721
206
277
78
49
610
454
271
140
200
157
38
77
111
16
23
5
117
1,609
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
5.13
5.92
2.03
3.85
4.90
5.60
2.68
1.68
3.94
3.64
1.26
1.96
2.86
1.95
2.04
4.08
1.61
1.07
3.88
1.43
1.00
2.22
1.85
63
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP : SOYBEANS
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
TOTAL
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
3,679
2,238
954
911
384
368
334
255
103
54
45
14
1,070
10,409
1,152
976
707
202
46
45
117
3,245
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
4,020
3,050
673
835
528
613
120
145
231
62
42
65
653
11,037
770
543
558
314
91
46
129
2,451
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.92
0.73
1.42
1.09
0.73
0.60
2.78
1.70
0.45
0.87
1.07
0.22
1.64
0.94
1.50
1.80
1.27
0.64
0.51
0.98
0.91
1.32
64
-------
TABLE XXIV (CONTINUED)
CROP: TOBACCO
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
(c), (g)
INSECTICIDES TDE
DDT
Parathion
Carbaryl
Toxaphene
Inorganic
Insecticide Group
Diazinon
Aldrin
Dieldrin
Other
TTicpr»f--? p-j H£*C
AXiOG W L» J_ l*^UCO
TOTAL
MISCELLANEOUS
PESTICIDES D-D Mixture
Dibromochloro-
propane
Other
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
1,765
782
409
206
150
118
116
80
20
155
3,791
8,619
195
4,587
13,401
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
623
395
280
85
61
27
151
51
79
148
1,900
123
5
715
843
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
2.83
1.98
1.46
2.42
2.46
4.37
0.77
1.57
0.25
1.05
2.00
70.07
39.00
6.42
15.90
65
-------
TABLE XXIV ( CONCLUDED)
CROP : WHEAT
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
(c), (e)
HERBICIDES 2,4-D
MCPA
Diuron
Dicamba
Inorganic
Herbicide Group
2,4, 5-T
Other Herbicides
TOTAL
INSECTICIDES Parathion
Toxaphene
Methyl Parathion
DDT
Other
Insecticides
TOTAL
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
6,851
342
303
153
111
26
461
8,247
303
270
48
32
223
876
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
13,733
746
188
1,231
52
59
631
16,640
654
155
157
45
542
1,553
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.50
0.45
1.61
0.12
2.13
0.44
0.73
0.50
0.46
1.74
0.31
0.71
0.41
0.56
(a) Data from (2). Does not include Alaska or Hawaii.
(b) Includes fungicide use on other field crops, other grains,
pasture, rangeland and hay, soybeans, tobacco and wheat.
(c) Fungicide use included with corn.
(d) Includes miscellaneous pesticide use on other grains,
pasture, rangeland and hay, soybeans and wheat.
(e) Miscellaneous pesticides use included with other field crops,
(f) Includes herbicide use on tobacco.
(g) Herbicide use included with other field crops.
(h) Includes miscellaneous pesticide use on potatoes.
(i) Miscellaneous pesticide use included with other vegetables.
66
-------
TABLE XXV
USE OF INSECTICIDES ON FARM ANIMALS, 1966
(a)
FABM ANIMAL
Beef Cattle
Dairy Cattle
Poultry
Hogs
Sheep
Other
Total
AMOUNT ^
(Million Pounds)
6.2
2.9
0.9
0.7
0.1
10.8
1
PERCENT OF USE
57.1
26.9
8.4
6.3
0.7
0.6
100.0
(a) Data from (2).
(b) Includes use on livestock buildings.
67
-------
TABLE XXVI
INSECTICIDE USE ON LIVESTOCK IN 1966 (a)
LIVESTOCK (Beef Cattle, Dairy Cattle, Hogs, Sheep and Other)
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
INSECTICIDES Toxaphene
Methoxychlor
Dichlorvos
Malathion
DDT
Coumaphos
Ronnel
Cresol
Lindane
Carbaryl
Ruelene
Ciodrin
Botanicals
Other
Insecticides
TOTAL
AMDUNT APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
3,648
1,505
905
614
497
425
367
367
288
141
141
141
134
702
9,875
APPLICATION RATE(b)
(10~3 Pounds /Animal)
20.15
8.31
5.00
3.39
2.75
2.35
2.03
2.03
1.59
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.74
3.88
54.55
(a) Data from (2).
(b) Based upon 181,010,000 animals in 1966 (17).
68
-------
TABLE XXVII
INSECTICIDE USE ON POULTRY IN 1966
(a)
POULTRY
CLASSIFICATION
INSECTICIDE
PESTICIDE
Carbaryl
Cresol
Malathion
Botanicals
Other
Insecticides
TOTAL
AMOUNT APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
407
242
121
27
109
906
APPLICATION RATE(b)
(10~3 Pounds /Animal)
1.02
0.61
0.30
0.07
0.27
2.27
(a) Data from (2).
(b) Based upon 399,924,000 animals in 1966 (17)
69
-------
Other Farm Uses
The amount of pesticides used on stored crops, seeds, seedbeds
and transplants is shown in Table XXVIII. Nearly 10 million pounds of
pesticides were used in 1966. Most of the pesticides were applied
on tobacco seedbeds and transplants. Grains accounted for most of the
remaining use.
Farmers also use herbicides for weed control on noncropland. In
1969 farmers treated 339,000 acres of noncropland with 676,000 pounds
(IB)
of 2,4,5-T at a cost of $6.50 an acre^ . The 2,4,5-T was applied at
the rate of two pounds per acre. Other farm weed control measures
are discussed in a later subsection on nonagricultural weed control.
Home and Garden Use
Home and garden use of pesticides accounted for not more than
15 percent of all pesticide use during 1968 to 1970. The value at
manufacturers* prices of shipments of household insecticides and
repellants is presented in Table XXIX. Sales in 1970 totaled
$133.9 million and were 54 percent above sales in 1960; however, from
1966 to 1970 sales have shown no growth.
Residential and Structural Use
Tables XXX and XXXI summarize several studies which have attempted
to determine the extent of structural and residential pesticide use. In
addition, the State of California has reported such data on a yearly
basis since 1970, and the 1972 data are included in the table.
Since each study concentrated on only one year, the data are not
all from the same year. Instead, they have been collected in three
different years, i.e., 1968, 1971 and 1972.
70
-------
TABLE XXVIII
PESTICIDE USE ON STORED CROPS, SEEDS, SEEDBEDS AND TRANSPLANTS, 1966 (a)
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
FUNGICIDES Inorganic
Organic
TOTAL
HERBICIDES Inorganic
Organic
TOTAL
INSECTICIDES Organo-
chlorines
Organo-
phosphorus
Other organ j
TOTAL
MISCELLANEOUS Fumigants
TOTAL
AMOUNT APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
GRAIN (b)
35
217
252
32
4
36
57
152
c 3
212
1,696
2,196
COTTON
5
62
67
8
8
75
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS
77
77
1
1
14
14
10
102
TOBACCO (c)
1,232
1,232
523
37
560
173
20
11
204
5,237
7,233
OTHER
2
81
83
53
53
31
70
23
124
61
321
TOTAL
42
1,669
1,711
556
94
650
275
250
37
562
7,004
9,927
(a) Data from (2).
(b) Corn, sorghum, wheat and other grains.
(c) Seedbeds and transplants only.
-------
TABLE XXIX
VALUE OF MANUFACTUKERS * SHIPMENTS OF
HOUSEHOLD INSECTICIDES AND REPELLANTS (a)
YEAR
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1960
MANUFACTURERS' SALES
(Million Dollars)
133.9
139.4
138.7
129.9
135.1
86.7
(a) Data from (4)
72
-------
TABLE XXX
STRUCTURAL AND RESIDENTIAL HERBICIDE USE
Nl
to
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
HERBICIDE Inorganic
Herbicides
Group
Simazine
Atrazine
Phenoxy (d)
Animate
Bromacil
MSMA
Diphenamid
DSMA
Diuron
Paraquat
Dalapon
Other
Herbicides
TOTAL
AMOUNT APPLIED (1000 Pounds)
California
(a)
89.1
15.4
11.8
11.4
9.5
3.5
3.5
3.4
2.5
2.2
2.1
1.6
N.A.
N.A,
Philadelphia
(b)
(f>
79
14
93
Dallas
(b)
4
11
9
24
Lansing,
Mich.(b)
13
_
13
Salt Lake
County (c)
82
6
_
88
Arizona
(c)
13
-------
TABLE XXXI
STRUCTURAL AND RESIDENTIAL INSECTICIDE USE
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
INSECTICIDE Chlordane
Methyl Bromide
Vikane
Malathion
Carbaryl
Diazinon
Dieldrin
Aldrln
Lindane
Inorganic
Insecticide
Group
PCP
AMOUNT APPLIED (1000 Pounds)
California
(a)
508.5
343.4
171.8
109.7
51.9
49.5
' 33.5
25.8
8.7
8.2
6.7
Methyl Parathion 6.3
Ethylene
Dibromide
Parathion
6.2
4.7
Philadelphia
(b)
54
104
(d)
(d)
(d)
Dallas
(b)
39
66
19
31
14
Lansing,
Mich, (b)
4
4
3
(d)
Sale Lake
County (c)
6
1
Arizona
(c)
-------
TABLE XXXI (CONCLUDED)
CLASSIFICATION PESTICIDE
INSECTICIDE Toxaphene
(Continued) Heptachlor
Dimethoate
Dichlorvos
Methoxychlor
Other
Insecticides
TOTAL
AMOUNT APPLIED (1000 Pounds)
California
(a)
4.4
2.7
2.6
2.4
1.3
N.A.
N.A.
Philadelphia
(b)
15
2
59
234
Dallas
(b)
(d)
(d)
82
251
Lansing
(b)
3
10
24
Salt Lake
County (c)
3
5
15
Arizona
(c)
48 (e)
Ln
(a) 1972 data from (19) and (20).
(b) 1971 data from (21).
(c) 1968 data from (3).
(d) Included in other insecticides
(e) Insecticide use includes 28,600 pounds of organochlorines,
11,590 pounds of organic phosphorus and 1,900 pounds of
carbamates.
-------
Patterns of Use. Only the most superficial conclusions can be
drawn from the data as to use patterns. These conclusions are valid
only for the year of the survey. Subsequent bans on specific pesti-
cides or subsequent switches to newly developed pesticides may have
resulted in a changing pattern of use in the time since the survey
was conducted.
The most widely used herbicides include the inorganic herbicides
(mainly arsenic compounds) and the phenoxy herbicides (predominantly
2,4-D). The most widely used insecticides include the organochlorines
(especially chlordane) and the organophosphates (especially malathion
and diazinon). In addition, carbaryl is widely used.
Aside from these conclusions, little else can be drawn from the
data. There are not any consistencies as to application rates. This
is illustrated using the data from the three-city study of Philadelphia,
/oi\
Dallas and Lansing in 1971v . Table XXXII shows the population and
the number of single family dwellings in each city at the time of the
study.
The authors of the three-city study concludes that "there were no
correlations between the number of single family residences and the
estimated quantities of pesticides used in each area. Climatic, soil
and other environmental conditions as well as many man-made factors,
vary a great deal between the three cities . . . For this reason the
data could not be meaningfully extrapolated to a national level. '
The lack of correlation can be noted by comparing the population
and dwelling data of Table XXXII with the use data of Tables XXX and XXXI.
For example, Lansing's population and number of dwellings is about one-
fifth that of Dallas and one-fourteenth that of Philadelphia. Lansing
uses considerably more herbicides per capita than Philadelphia or Dallas.
The herbicide use per capita is nearly three times that of Dallas and
76
-------
TABLE XXXII
POPULATION AND SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS
IN PHILADELPHIA, DALLAS AND LANSING
AT THE TIME OF STUDY
CITY
Philadelphia (a)
Dallas (a)
Lansing (a)
POPULATION
(1000)
3,866
1,327
272
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS
(1000)
879
308
1,244
(a) 1971 Data from (21).
77
-------
about twice that of Philadelphia. The insecticide use is also incon-
sistent. Lansing's insecticide use per capita is only one-half that of
Dallas, but it is almost one and one-half times that of Philadelphia.
Salt Lake County provides yet another contrasting use pattern. It
is the only area (state or city) listed in Tables XXX and XXXI for which
herbicide use outweighs insecticide use. Herbicide use is eleven
times that of insecticides. A 1970 study indicates that in the State
of Utah herbicide use is 7 times that of insecticide use .
Lawn and Turf Weed Control
The use of pesticides for weed control on lawns and turf is shown
in Table XXXIII. Between 1959 and 1968, the acreage treated with pesti-
cides for weed control has increased 6300 percent. The expenditures on
materials and application has increased 7500 percent within this period.
(22)
The predominant weeds controlled include:v '
a. Crabgrass
b. Dandelion
c. Chickweed
d. Annual bluegrass
e. Plantain species.
A 1969 study estimates that 1.2 million acres of lawn and turf
were treated with 600,000 pounds of 2,4,5-T at $2.38 per acre. This
2,4,5-T was estimated to be applied at the rate of 0.5 pounds per
(18)
acre . Presently, 2,4,5-T is banned from use on lawns. Further
discussion on lawn and turf weed control is found in the subsection
on nonagricultural weed control.
Industrial Use
Industrial use of pesticides accounted for approximately 20 per-
cent of all pesticide use in the years 1968 to 1970.
78
-------
TABLE XXXIII
ESTIMATED COST AND EXTENT OF CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL
ON LAWNS AND TURF (a)
YEAR
1968
1965
1962
1959
ACRES TREATED
(Million)
3.83
1.13
0.67
0.06
TOTAL COST
(Million Dollars)
112.7
26.8
15.4
1.5
COST PER ACRE
(Dollars)
29.46
23.59
22.87
24.82
(a) Data from (22).
79
-------
Pesticides are used by the following industries:
a. Utilities
b. Forest
c. Lumber
d. Paper and pulp
e. Paint
£. Exterminating
g. Custom applicators
h. Drycleaning
i. Golf courses (private).
Utility Companies
Utilities such as railroads, power companies, gas transmission
companies, telephone companies, and communications use herbicides
to maintain rights-of-way.
Table XXXIV summarizes the use of herbicides by utilities in
Kentucky in 1968. Over 0.9 million pounds of herbicides were applied
to 18,000 acres. The following herbicides accounted for 95 percent
of the use:
a. Sodium chlorate - calcium chlorate and diuron mixture
b. 2,4-D
c. 2,4,5-T
d. Isocil
e. Fenuron.
In 1969, 4,368,000 pounds of 2,4,5-T were applied to 2,175,000
acres of rights-of-way in the U.S. at a rate of 2.01 pounds per acre.
(18)
The materials and application cost $15.53 an acre. The use of
weed control for rights-of-way is discussed further in the subsection
on nonagricultural weed control.
80
-------
TABLE XXXIV
USE BY UTILITY IN KENTUCKY, 1968 (a)
UTILITY
Railroads
Power Companies
Gas Transmission
Communications
TOTAL
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
680.0
191.1
47,4
2.3
920.8
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
8.6
7.8
1.5
0.1
18.0
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
78.64
24.55
31.36
31.20
51.11
(a) Data from (23).
81
-------
Forest Industry
Table XXXV summarizes the estimated use and cost of weed control
in forests in three different years. The most important weeds being
(22)
controlled include:
a. Quack grass
b. Oak species
c. Blackberries and brambles
d. Bracken and other ferns
e. Perennial grasses
f. Pigweeds
g. Broomsedge
h. Bindweeds.
A survey by the Weyerhaeuser company in 1969 reports that pesti-
cides were used on only 186,000 acres out of 28 million acres managed
by 43 forest owners in the South.
In 1969, 880,000 pounds of 2,4,5-T were applied to 430,000 acres
at a rate of 2.07 pounds per acre. The cost of materials and appli-
cation was $8.65 per acre. Further discussion of weed control on
forest lands is presented in the subsection on noncropland weed
control.
Lumber Industry
Table XXXVI shows the use of wood preservatives. The preservatives
are used mainly to keep the wood from rotting.
PGP is the most widely used solid wood preservative. Except for
a decline in 1969, its use has steadily been increasing. Creosote is
the most widely used liquid wood preservative; however, its use has
been steadily declining.
82
-------
TABLE XXXV
ESTIMATED COST AND EXTENT OF
FOREST CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL (a)
YEAR
1968
1965
1962
ACRES TREATED
(1000)
463
117
274
TOTAL COST
(Million Dollars)
6.2
1.5
2.8
COST PER ACRE
(Dollars)
13.35
12.75
10.04
(a) Data from (22).
83
-------
00
TABLE XXXVI
U.S. WOOD PRESERVATIVE USE (a)
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
SOLID PESTICIDES
(1000 Pounds)
PGP
32,039
28,461
25,542
26,389
24,814
OTHER SOLIDS
14,004
11,757
12,513
11,405
12,021
TOTAL SOLIDS
46,043
40,218
38,055
37,794
36,835
LIQUID PESTICIDES
(1000 gallons)
CREOSOTE
116,553
125,624
128,226
136,799
147,594
PETROLEUM
81,122
75,624
68,071
75,588
73,661
COAL TAR
21,449
21,903
19,618
20,469
20,082
TOTAL LIQUIDS
219,124
223,151
215,915
230,856
241,337
(a) Data from (4).
-------
Paper and Pulp Industry
Table XXXVII shows the use of mercury as a pesticide in paper
and pulp manufacture. The use of mercury in preservatives for paper
and pulp has steadily declined and in 1970 the use had dropped to
less than 7 percent of the use in 1960.
Paint Manufacture
The use of mercury in the manufacture of paints is presented in
Table XXXVIII. Mercury is used in paint to prevent mildew and in marine
paints to provide antifouling protection.
Exterminating Industry
In 1967 the 3495 pest control and exterminating firms in the U.S.
did a combined business of nearly $300 million
The ten most important pests controlled by these firms in 1965
(3)
were as follows :
a. German roach
b. House mouse
c. Norway rat
d. Subterranean termites
e. House ants
f. American roach
g. Carpenter ants
h. Oriental roach
i. Fleas
j. Brown dog tick.
Although termite control is only fourth on the list, it accounts for
about 35 percent of the industry's income. Chlordane is the insecti-
cide primarily used for termite control. It is estimated that the
nonfarm use of chlordane substantially exceeded the agricultural use
in 1966. The agricultural use was 452,000 pounds in 1966.
85
-------
TABLE XXXVII
USE OF MERCURY PESTICIDES
IN PAPER AND PULP MANUFACTURE
(a)
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1965
I960
AMOUNT
(1000 Pounds)
(b)
17.2
42.4
31.7
47.0
264.6
(a) Data from (4).
(b) Withheld for proprietary reasons.
86
-------
TABLE XXXVIII
USE OF MERCURY PESTICIDES
IN PAINT MANUFACTURE (a)
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1965
1960
AMOUNT
(1000 Pounds)
MARINE
ANTIFOULING
31.5
15.0
18.5
29.8
19.4
103.4
MILDEW
PROOFING
622.5
771.3
720.9
773.2
624.0
217.4
(a) Data from (4).
87
-------
The nine most important insecticides used for household use by
exterminators are as follows:
a. Diazinon spray
b. Chlordane spray
c. DDVP (Dichlorvos) spray additive
d. Chlordecone pellets
e. DDT dust
f. Pyrethrins and synergist
g. Propoxur
h. Sodium fluoride
i. DDVP spray.
In 1971 1.1 million pounds of pesticides active ingredients were
used commercially for indoor structural control. Diazinon, dursban
4
and propoxur accounted for 90 percent of this use.
Custom Applicators
A large amount of the pesticides sold to consumers are not applied
by the consumer himself, but are applied by firms which specialize in
pesticide application.
In 1970 there were about 2,200 firms which specialized in the
aerial application of agricultural pesticides. Of these, 1300 were
commercial firms and 900 were firms consisting primarily of farmers.
The commercial firms applied over 95 percent of all the pesti-
cides applied aerially.
Table XXXIX shows the number of aircraft used for the custom
application of agricultural pesticides and the cost of the application
in 1970 and 1971. The data are compiled by the National Agricultural
Aviation Association. The sales volume of the industry is estimated
(A)
to be growing by 6.4 percent a year.
4
Private communication with Dr. C. Mampe of the National Pest Control
Association.
88
-------
TABLE XXXIX
CUSTOM APPLICATION OF
AGRICULTURAL PESTICIDES BY AIR
(a)
YEAR
1971
1970
NUMBER OF
AIRCRAFT
6000
6100
APPLICATION COST' '
(Million Dollars)
125
115
(a) Data from (4).
(b) Does not include the cost of the pesticide.
89
-------
Data on the custom application of pesticides on non-farm areas is
included with the regionalization data presented in Section VII.
Dry Cleaning Industry
A survey of dry cleaning establishments in three counties of
Mississippi in 1968 showed that 25 out of the 41 firms questioned used
mothproofing agents. The general practice was to mix the mothproofing
agent with the dry cleaning fluid. Consequently, every article of
clothing was mothproofed regardless of whether the customer requested
it.
The four main mothproofing agents used were as follows:
a. Sanex (contains DDT)
b. Milo (contains DDT)
c. Tripruf (contains DDT)
d. Sanitone (100 percent DDT).
The maximum amount used during the year by any one firm was 20 gallons.
Mothproofing usually began in April or May and ended in July, August
(3)
or September; however, one firm did it year round. '
Private Golf Courses
The use of pesticides on private golf courses is discussed in
the subsection on pesticide use by local governments.
Governmental Use
Federal, state and local governments used 10 percent of all pesti-
cides in the years 1968 to 1970.
Federal Government
The federal government uses pesticides for brush and weed control,
for vector control and for pest control and eradication.
90
-------
Table XL presents the major federal agencies which requested the
use of pesticides and the acreage treated in the period January-August
1971. Table XLI shows the most important pesticides requested by
these agencies and the acreage onto which each was applied.
(A)
According to The Pesticide Review, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture's imported fire ant eradication program used mirex on 11.6
million acres in 1971 rather than on the 6.0 million acres shown in
the table. It is not clear if the additional 5.6 million acres were
treated from September-December 1971, or if the numbers are contradictory.
The total acreage treated by the federal agencies and the acreage
treated with malathion were both unusually high because of the Venezuelan
Equine Encephalomyelitis (VEE) epidemic which began late in June 1971.
The VEE program used malathion on 8.4 million acres. No evidence
(A)
of VEE virus activity was reported in the U.S. in 1972v .
Brush and Weed Control. Federal agencies use herbicides for the
following programs:
a. Timber improvement
b. Rangeland improvement
c. Rights-of-way maintenance
d. Watershed maintenance
c. Witchweed control.
Table XLII summarizes the use of 2,4-D, 2,4,5-T, picloram and
cacodylic acid in five types of governmental brush and weed control
programs. More than 2.1 million pounds of 2,4-D and 0.5 million pounds
of 2,4,5-T were applied at an average rate of 1.9 pounds per acre each.
Over 11,700 pounds of picloram were applied at 1.1 pounds per acre,
and over 156,000 pounds of cacodylic acid were applied at 6.8 pounds
per acre.
Rangeland improvement is primarily directed toward sagebrush
control. Table XLIII gives the total acreage of pasture and range-
land treated for brush control by the Agricultural Conservation
91
-------
TABLE XL
MAJOR FEDERAL AGENCIES REQUESTING PESTICIDE USE
AND ACRES TO BE TREATED, JANUARY-AUGUST 1971 (a)
FEDERAL AGENCY
ACRES TO BE TREATED
(Million)
U.S. Department of Agriculture
U.S. Department of Interior
U.S. Department of Defense
Atomic Energy Commission
Other Federal Agencies (b)
TOTAL
16.7 (c)
2.7
1.2
.6
.2
21.4
(a) Taken from (1).
(b) Includes the District of Columbia, General Services
Administration, National Institutes of Health,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
International Boundary Commission, Tennessee Valley
Authority, Coast Guard, Federal Aviation Administration,
the Veterans Administration, and others.
(c) According to (7) another 5.6 million acres were treated.
92
-------
TABLE XLI
IMPORTANT PESTICIDES REQUESTED FOR USE
BY FEDERAL AGENCIES AND ACREAGE TO BE TREATED,
JANUARY-AUGUST 1971 (a)
PESTICIDE
Malathion
Mirex
2,4-D
Carbaryl
Naled
Others
TOTAL
ACRES TO BE TREATED
(Millions)
9.5
6.0 (b)
.6
.5
.3
4.5
21.4
(a) Taken from (1).
(b) According to (7) a total of 11.6 million
acres were treated with mirex in 1971.
93
-------
TABU XUI
SELECTED PESTICIDES USED FOR WEED AND BRUSH CONTSDt BY OOVZSHKEHT ACDIC1ES. 1969 (a)
Timber Improvement
Department of Agriculture
Rangeland Improvement
Department of Agriculture
Department of Interior
Department of Defeme
Klght*-of-Way Maintenance
Department of Agriculture
Department of Interior
Department of Defence
TVA
Watershed Maintenance
Department of Interior
Department of Defena*
TVA
Wltchweed Control
Department of Agriculture
TOTAL
Amount
Applied
(1000
Found*)
424
233
430
100
12
1.5
300
934
(b)
60
400
926
176
2156.5
2,4-D
Acreage
Treated
(1000)
185
99
249
50
4
0,8
100
99
(b)
78
200
40
176
1141.8
Application
Kate
(Found* per
Acre)
2,3
2.4
1.8
2.0
3.0
1.9
3.0
9.4
0.8
2.0
23.2
1.0
1.9
2,4.5-T
Amount
Applied
(1000
PoundiJ
221
86
26
5
1.5
200
761
(b)
0.6
~
*"
~
540.1
Acreage
Treated
(1000)
107
34
44
2
0.8
100
79
(b)
0.3
__
288.1
Application
Rat*
(Pound* per
Acre)
2.1
2.5
0.6
2.5
1.9
2.0
9,6
2.0
1.9
P1CLORAM
Amount
Applied
(1000
Pound*)
1.7
-_
10
72
(b)
-
11.7
Acreage
Treated
(1000)
0.9
_
--
10
17
(b)
__
10.9
Application
Rate
(Found* per
Acre)
1.8
1.0
4,2
__
_
"
-_
1.1
CACODYUC ACID
Amount
Applied
(1000
Found*)
126
*
~
~
30
--
_.
_«
.-
156
Acreage
Treated
(1000)
22
--
~
1
"
23
Application
Rate
(Pound* per
Acre)
5.7
30.0
"
6.8
(a) Data from (1).
(b) Cudulatlve total applied by TVA during 1951-1969 Inclusive.
(c) Excludes uaage by TVA.
-------
TABLE XLIII
ACREAGE OF RANGELAND AND PASTURELAND
TREATED FOR CONTROL OF BRUSH (a), (b)
YEAR
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
ACREAGE TREATED
(1000)
1,911.6
1,910.9
2,064.3
1,879.0
1,820.6
(a) Data from (4).
(b) Practice B-3 of the Agricultural
Conservation Program.
95
-------
Program of USDA. Nearly 2 million acres is treated annually in the
program.
In the control of witchweed, experiments in 1972 indicate that
one treatment of trifluralin might be able to replace the repeated
(4)
treatments of 2,4-D currently being applied .
Vector Control. In 1971, a VEE epidemic occurred in the U.S.
following introduction of the disease from Mexico. About 1.5 million
pounds of malathion were applied to nearly 8.4 million acres in Texas,
Louisiana and Mexico as part of the program to control the epidemic.
The malathion application rate was 0.18 pounds per acre.
Pest Control and Eradication. The USDA cooperates with various
states and the Republic of Mexico in a number of programs aimed at
controlling and eradicating specific pests. Pesticides are being used
(4)
in the programs directed at the following pests :
a. Boll weevil
b. Citrus blackfly
a. Giant African snail
d. European chafer
e. Golden nematode
f. Grasshopper
g. Gypsy moth
h. Imported fire ant
i. Japanese beetle
j. Cattle fever tick
k. White-fringed beetle
1. Witchweed
m. Psoroptic cattle scabbies.
The pesticides used in these programs during 1972 are summarized
in Table XLIV. Malathion, which is used for the boll weevil and the
grasshopper, is the most widely used insecticide. 2,4-D, which is used
for witchweed, is the most widely used herbicide.
96
-------
TABLE XLIV
1972 USDA PEST CONTROL PESTICIDE USE (a)
USDA PEST CONTROL (Non-Forest)
PESTICIDE
HERBICIDES 2,4-D
Paraquat
TOTAL
INSECTICIDES Malathion
Chlordane
Carbaryl
Mirex
Dimethoate
Azinphosme thy 1
Other
TOTAL
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
376.8
0.4
377.2
1,244.8
207.1
86.3
41.5
6.3
1.7
2.3
1,590.0
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
376.8
0.8
377.6
1,426.7
9.8
62.4
11065.2
2.4
7.0
0.6
12574.1 '
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
1.0
0.50
-
0.87
21.13
1.38
0.0038
2.60
0.25
3.83
(a) Data from (4).
97
-------
The U.S. Forest Service carries out a number of programs to protect
(4)
public forests from insect pests. Insects being controlled include :
a. Spruce budworm
b. Spruce beetle
c. Mountain pine beetle
d. Black turpentine beetle
e. Southern pine beetle
f. Black Hills beetle
g. Bark beetle
h. White pine weevil
i. Balsam woolly aphid
j. European pine shoot moth
k. Bound headed pine beetle
1. Jack pine budworm
m. Saratoga spittlebug
n. Fall cankerworm and leaf rollers
o. Saddle prominent
p. Others.
In 1970 approximately 233,295 acres and an additional 876,786 trees
were treated in the forest insect control problem. The pesticides used
in this program are listed in Table XLV. Ethylene dibromide accounted
for 74 percent of the pesticide use; however, the use of ethylene di-
bromide has decreased by 50 percent since 1968.
State Government
The states use pesticides for brush and weed control, for vector
control and for pest control and eradication.
Brush and Weed Control. A large number of states cooperate with
the USDA in the Agricultural Conservation Program to control brush on
pasture and rangeland. Twenty states had brush control programs
98
-------
TABLE XLV
USDA FOREST USE IN 1970 (a)
PESTICIDE
INSECTICIDES Ethylene Dibromide
Fenitrothlon
Carbaryl
Lindane
Malathion
Other
TOTAL
HERBICIDES Cacodylic Acid
Animate
2,4,5-T
2,4-D
TOTAL
TOTAL
AMOUNT APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
235.4
51.5
14.4
2.1
1.1
1.5
306.0
1.5
1.4
1.1
0.1
4.1
310.1
(a) Data from (4).
99
-------
exceeding 5000 acres in 1969. Texas had the largest program, accoun-
ting for lust under 60 percent of the total acreage controlled. No
(4)
other state accounted for as much as 8 percent of the acreage.
Herbicides are also used to control weeds along state highways.
In 1968 Kentucky appplied 123,000 pounds of herbicides to 39,400 acres
along highways. 2,4-D, 2,4,5-T,maleic hydrazide, picloram and dalapon
(23)
comprised 90 percent of the herbicides used.
Table XLVI summarizes the use of pesticides on state and county
highways in California in 1972. Simazine was the most widely used
herbicide, accounting for over 21 percent of the total use.
Vector Control. A survey of public health officials in 42 states
indicated that slightly less than half of these states use pesticides
for vector control; however, nearly all the states report that they use
pesticides to control mosquitos .
Pesticides used in California vector control in 1972 are listed in
Table XLVII. Halathion is the most widely used insecticide closely
followed by methyl parathion, baytex and dimethoate. Paraquat is the
herbicide that is used in the greatest amount.
Table XLVIII estimates the amount of pesticides used for mosquito
control in New England in 1969 and 1970. Halathion and methoxychlor
account for 81 percent of the total pesticides applied.
Local Governments
Very little data is available about pesticide use by local govern-
ments. The three-city study discussed earlier provides some information
on pesticide use by local governments. Table XLIX summarizes the
finding of this survey.
After households, golf courses are the largest user of pesti-
cides in each city. Public and private courses used a total of 63,400
pounds of pesticides in the three cities. Fungicides accounted for
44,000 pounds and chlordane for over 6600 pounds.
100
-------
TABLE XLVI
STATE AND COUNTY HIGHWAY USE IN CALIFORNIA IN 1972
(a)
PESTICIDES
HERBICIDES Simazine
Ami t role
MSMA
Diphenamld
Dalapon
Atrazine
Inorganic
Herbicide Group
Paraquat
2,4-D
DSMA
Animate
Diuron
Bromacil
(b)
Arsenicals
Trifluralin
Other Herbicides
Total
AMOUNT APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
101.7
59.6
54.8
35.9
32.9
31.7
28.0
20.7
20.3
15.0
12.5
8.8
5.9
4.7
2.7
39.8
475.0
(a) Data from (19) and (20).
(b) Arsenicals other than DSMA or MSMA.
101
-------
TABLE XLVII
VECTOR CONTROL USE IN CALIFORNIA IN 1972
(a)
PESTICIDES
HERBICIDES Paraquat
Atrazine
Diuron
Simazlne
Dalapon
INSECTICIDES Malathion
Methyl Parathion
Fenthion
Dimethoate
Propoxur
Dichlorvos
Dursban
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
4.3
2.5
2.5
1.7
1.5
61.6
51.8
45.2
38.8
7.3
3.5
3.5
(a) Data from (19) and (20).
102
-------
o
U)
TABLE XLVIII
ESTIMATED PESTICIDE USE FOR MOSQUITO CONTROL IN NEW ENGLAND (a), (b)
PESTICIDE
1970
Malathion
Methoxychlor
Carbaryl
Abate
Carbofuran
Naled
Fen th ion
DDT (c)
TOTAL
1969
Malathion
Methoxychlor
Carbaryl
Abate
Carbofuran
Naled
Fenthion
DDT (c)
TOTAL
CONNECTICUT
Amount Applied
(1000 Pounds)
550
160
710
550
160
710
MAINE
Amount Applied
(1000 Pounds)
410
420
152
5
37
1,024
MASSACHUSETTS
Amount Applied
(1000 Pounds)
32,000
10,550
3,100
140
4,430
1,000
«._
51,220
26,315
19,236
11,215
42
2,180
1,624
60,612
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Amount Applied
(1000 Pounds)
4,100
3,804
2,626
"
10,530
4,100
3,800
2,600
__
1,000
11,500
TOTAL
Amount Applied
(1000 Pounds)
37,060
14,774
2,626
3,100
140
4,582
1,165
63,484
30,965
23,036
2,600
11,215
42
2,180
1,784
1,000
72,822
(a) Data from (24).
(b) No data available from Vermont.
(c) No longer used.
-------
TABLE XLIX
USE OF PESTICIDES BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, 1971 (a)
PESTICIDE
HERBICIDES
Phenoxy Croup
Other
TOTAL
INSECTICIDES
Malathlon
Chlordane
Diazinon
Dieldrin
Carbaryl
Dimethoate
Other
TOTAL
FUNGICIDES
TOTAL
PHILADELPHIA
Golf
Courses (b)
(1000 Pounds)
(f)
3.6
3.6
<8>
3.6
(g)
1.0
4.6
40.0
48.2
City
Parka
(1000 Pounds)
~
0.1
0.2
0.6
0.9
0.9
Mosquito
Control
(1000 Pounds)
__
2.3
0.7
3.0
3.0
DALLAS
Golf
Courses (c)
(1000 Pounds)
0.1
2.0
2.1
0.8
3.0
1.0
1.0
0.8
1.0
7.6
3.0
12.7
City
Programs (d)
(1000 Pounds)
Negligible
negligible
Negligible
5.0
(8)
2.0
(g)
(g)
2.5
9.5
Negligible
9.5
LANSING
Golf
Courses (e)
(1000 Pounds)
(f)
0.5
0.5
(g)
(8)
(g)
1.0
1.0
1.0
2.5
Mosquito
Control
(1000 Pounds)
--
2.5
2.5
2.5
TOTAL
(1000 Pounds)
(f)
6.2
6.2
8.2 (h)
6.6 (h)
3.0
1.0 (h)
0.8 (h)
0.2 (h)
9.3
29.1
44.0
79.3
(a) Data from (21).
(b) Five public and 85 private courses.
( c) Five public and 45 private courses.
(d) Includes city parka and health, public
works and water departments.
(e) Number of public and private courses unknown.
(f) Amount included in other
herbicides.
(g) Amount included in other
insecticides.
(h) Additional use is included
in other insecticides.
-------
Table L shows the use of selected pesticides by city agencies
in California in 1972.
Nonagricultural Weed Control
In 1968 the ten most prevalent weeds in the U.S. in order of
rank were as follows:
a. Pigweeds
b. Crabgrasses
c. Quackgrass
d. Foxtails
e. Thistles
f. Ragweeds
g. Lambsquarters
h. Nutsedges
i. Johnsongrass
j. Chickweeds.
Table LI estimates the extent and cost of nonagricultural weed
control in the U.S. in that year. In terms of acreage treated, lawns
ranked first, followed by noncropland, forest plantings and aquatic
areas in that order. In terms of cost per treated acre, lawns again
ranked first, followed by aquatic areas, noncropland and forest
plantings.
Table LII shows the non-agricultural weed control by type of
treatment, i.e., pre-emergence, post-emergence or a combination of the
two. Post-emergence treatment is less costly than pre-emergence
treatment and, consequently, it is the most widely used of the two
methods. Combined pre-emergence and post-emergence treatment is the
most expensive and is the least used.
Table LIII summarizes the herbicide usage trend for both agri-
cultural and non-agricultural land and aquatic areas. The trend was
up in most states, stationary in a few states and down in practically
105
-------
TABLE L
USE OF SELECTED PESTICIDES BY CITY AGENCIES IN CALIFORNIA, 1972
(a)
PESTICIDE
Fungicides
Copper sulfate
Zineb
Herbicides
Simazine
Paraquat
Ami trole
Dalapon
2,4-D
Diphenamid
DSMA
MSMA
Bromacil
Atrazine
Diuron
Cacodylic Acid
Linuron
Insecticides
Malathion
Toxaphene
Carbaryl
Diazinon
Methoxychlor
Chlordane
Lead Ar senate
Dimethoate
Lindane
Miticide
Dicofol
QUANTITY
(Pounds)
4,059
212
6,252
4,406
4,147
4,006
2,747
2,549
2,048
1,580
1,541
1,293
1,279
563
387
3,331
2,020
1,868
1,278
512
442
428
397
192
658
(a) Data from (20),
106
-------
TABLE LI
ESTIMATED EXTENT AND COST OF NON-AGRICULTURAL CHEMICAL WEED
CONTROL IN THE UNITED STATES, 1968 (a)
AREA
Lawns
Forest Plantings
Noncropland
Aquatic areas
QTATPC
o J-AlCjO
REPORTING
39
22
27
20
ACRES TREATED
Total
Number
(1000)
3,826
463
1,659
216
Percent
of Total
Acres
19.1
-«.
TOTAL
COST
OF ALL
ACRES
TREATED
(1000
Dollars)
112,708
6,175
26,785
4,422
AVERAGE
/TICT
OUb 1
PER
(Dollars)
29.46
13.35
16.15
20.50
ACRES TREATED
BY
Owners
79
58
48
25
Custom
21
42
52
75
(a) Taken from (22).
-------
TABLE LII
ESTIMATED EXTENT OF NON-AGRICULTURAL CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL
IN THE UNITED STATES, 1968 (a)
AREA
Lawns
Forest plantings
Noncropland
Aquatic areas
TOTAL
TOTAL
ACRES
(1000)
20,000(b)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
ACRES TREATED
(1000)
Pre-
emer-
gence
only
893
53
138
17
1101
Post-
emer-
gence
only
2455
399
1520
199
4573
Pre- +
post-
emer-
gence
478
11
1
-
490
ACRES TREATED AS
PERCENT OF TOTAL
Pre-
etner-
gence
only
4.5(1>>
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Post-
emer-
gence
only
12.3°
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Pre- +
post-
emer-
gence
> 2.4(b>
N.A.
N.A.
-
N.A.
AVERAGE COST PER ACRE
(Dollars)
Pre-
emer-
gence
onlv
41.52
7.85
20 .'33
101.28
N.A.
Post-
emer-
gence
onlv
17.07
14.04
15.74
13.50
N.A.
Pre- +
po st-
eme r-
eence
70.54
14.85
55.00
N.A.
§
(a) Data from (22).
(b) Estimated
-------
TABLE LIU
HERBICIDE USAGE TREND, NEED FOR BETTER HERBICIDES, AND RESIDUE PROBLEMS,
BY NUMBER OF STATES REPORTING, UNITED STATES, 1968 (a)
Crop or Area
Corn
Cotton
Sorghum
Soybeans
'."neat
Other small grains
Rice
Tobacco
Z'eanuts
2ugarbeets
Sugarcane
,' Legume seeds
! Grass seeds
1 Sweet corn
Other vegetables (e)(f)
Fruits and Nuts (e)
Ornamentals (e)
Lawns (e)
hay
Pastures (e) (g)
Rangeland (e) (h)
Forest plantings
Xoncropland
Aquatic areas
HERBICIDE USAGE
TREND
Up
Sta-
tion-
ary
Down
NEED FOR BETTER HERBICIDE
HERBICIDES (c)
Urgent
Some
Little
[PERSISTENCE PROBLEM
(c)
No
Yes
Number of States Reporting (b)
42
13
19
28
16
20
3
10
5
11
2
6
5
8
2
21
23
2
2
4
6
1
13 6
8 : 5
20
44
11
30
33 j 12
28
5
37 1
21 '< 13
26 ; 16
13 : 4
19 ' 1
20 ' 7
17 2
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
0
1
2
0
1
4
0
3
13
4
2
1
1
3
9
2
6
2
3
36
14
12
5
10
7
4
5
6
7
40
16
21
16
29
37
4
10
6
8
1
11
9
24
44
32
23
30
22
30
14
13
20
13
4
2
3
1
5
6
0
1
0
0
0
2
2
16
9
2
4
4
6
2
4
1
0
16
11
15
26
36
43
5
7
7
10
3
17
11
14
48
36
26
32
31
40
18
21
23
15
32
Percent
of
Treated
Acres
Affected
1 11
7, 5
12! 31
4' 1
7
2
0
5
2
7
0
1
(d)
0
29
7
5
0
2! 6
2; 2
17J 24
13
6
5
5
5
0
0
1
4
5
2
(d)
11
1
6
0
0
1
1
3
(a) Taken from (22).
(b) A zero entry means that of the States reporting herbicide usage trends, quality
needs, or persistence problems, no State reported in this category.
(c) Identifies problem areas needing additional research.
(c) Less than 1 percent.
(e) Each State counted only once in each column; however, within each grouping,
a State could report in more than one column under each major heading. See
individual tables within grouping.
(f) Root crops, cucurbits, vegetable legumes, vegetable seed crops, solanaceous
crops, and all vegetables except sweet corn. Total grouping of 11 vegetable
crops or crop groups.
(g) Annual, perennial improved, and perennial unimproved. Three groupings.
(h) Mountain, prairie, arid, and rainbelt. Four groupings.
109
-------
no states. In general, there was only a slight need for better
herbicides. Most states felt that herbicides did not present much
of a persistence problem.
Tables LIV and LV summarize the use of 2,4,5-T on agricultural
and non-agriculture land and aquatic areas in 1969. Most 2,4,5-T was
applied in non-farm uses. Almost half of the non-farm use was for
weed control on rights-of-way. 2,4,5-T was applied on hay, pasture and
rangeland at an average of 0.24 pounds per acre, on all other crops and
on lawns and turf at around 0.5 pounds per acre and for all other uses
at around 2 pounds per acre.
Tables LV1 and LVI1 list pesticide usage on noncropland areas
and aquatic areas in California in 1972.
110
-------
TABLE LIV
EXTENT AND COST OF 2,4,5-T USE, 1969 (a)
USE CATEGORY
Farm use:
Hay, pasture, and range land
Other Crops
Other Farm Use
TOTAL FARM USE
Nonfarm use:
Federal Government
Lawn and Turf
Rights-Of-Way
Private nonfarm forests
Aquatic areas
Other Uses
TOTAL NONFARM USE
TOTAL
ACRES
TREATED
(1000)
2,441
671
339
3,451
296
1,200
2,175
430
81
306
4,488
7,939
MATERIALS
Pounds
Per
Acre
Pounds)
0.24
(b).59
2.00
.48
2.22
.50
2.01
2.07
2.00
1.91
1.62
1.12
Cost
Per
Pound
(Dollars)
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
Total
Cost
( 1000 ]
\ Dollars/
1,611
1,093
1,865
4,569
1,807
1,650
12,022
2,448
. 446
1,607
19,980
24,549
APPLICATION
Cost
Per
Acre
(Dollars'
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
10.00
3.00
2.00
2.00
5.90
3.77
Total
Cost
( 1000 \
[ Dollars/
2,441
671
339
3,451
1,480
1,200
21,750
1,290
162
612
26,494
29,945
TOTAL COST
OF MATERIAL
AND
APPLICATION
/ 1000 ]
\ Dollars/
4,052
1.764
2,204
8,020
3,287
2,850
33,772
3,738
608
2,219
46,474
54,494
(a) Taken from (22).
(b) Weighted average of all other crops.
-------
TABLE LV
2,4,5-T USE, 1969 (a)
USE CATEGORY
Farm use:^
Hay, pasture, and range-
land
Other crops
Other Farm Use
TOTAL FARM USE
Nonfarm use: , ,
Federal Government
Lawn and turf W
Rights-of-Way<8> ,fav
Private nonfarm forests
Aquatic areas W)
Other Uses^'
TOTAL NONFARM USE
TOTAL
LAND
TREATED
(1000)
2,441
67l(c)
339 (d)
3,451
296
1,200
2,175
430
81
306
4,488
7,939
QUANTITIES OF
ACTIVE INGREDIENTS
IN 2,4,5-T APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
581
398
676
1,655
656
600
4,368
888
162
583
7,257
8,91200
PROPORTION OF
TOTAL QUANTITY
APPLIED
(Percent)
7
4
8
19
7
7
49
10
2
6
81
100
(a) Taken from (22).
(b) Based on (25).
(c) Sum of acreage of all crops except hay, pasture and rangeland.
(d) Noncropland acreage estimated by allocating the quantity of
2,4,5-T applied at 2 pounds per acre.
(e) Based on 1969 usage of Departments of Agriculture, Interior
and Defense and the 1951-1969 average usage by TVA.
(f) Based on (22) and unpublished USDA data.
(g) Based on (22) using same rate of application as federally
treated rights-of-way. Does not include federally treated
rights-of-way.
(h) Based on (22).
(i) Includes state and local governments
(j) Production less exports in 1964, assumes total domestic
disappearance in 1969 similar to 1964.
112
-------
TABLE LVI
PESTICIDE USE ON NONCROPLAND AREAS IN CALIFORNIA IN 1972
(a)
NONCROPLAND AREAS
PESTICIDE
HERBICIDES Inorganic
Herbicide
Group
2,4-D
TCA
Dinitro Group
Simazine
Paraquat
MSMA
Atrazine
FUMIGANTS Methyl Bromide
D-D Mixture
Ethylene
Dibromide
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
575.2
72.2
71.4
67.6
61.0
40.3
16.0
4.2
440.2
158.1
1.2
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
647.3
70.2
1.3
9.2
36.4
98.6
3.8
0.8
4.3
1.0
0.4
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.89
1.03
54.92
7.35
1.68
0.41
4.21
5.25
102.38
158.10
3.00
(a) Data from (19) and (20).
113
-------
TABLE LVII
PESTICIDE USE ON AQUATIC AREAS IN CALIFORNIA IN 1972
(a)
AQUATIC AREAS
PESTICIDE
HERBICIDES MSMA
Diuron
2,4-D
Dalapon
Simazine
Bromacil
Amitrole
INSECTICIDES Fenthion
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
14.5
12.2
10.6
5.4
2.0
1.9
1.8
5.7
ACREAGE
TREATED
(1000)
0.2
1.8
5.1
0.8
0.4
0.4
1.4
6.3
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
72.5
6.78
2.08
6.00
5.00
4.75
1.29
0.90
(a) Data from (19) and (20).
114
-------
SECTION VI
ACCIDENTAL LOSS OF PESTICIDES AND OTHER POLLUTANTS
Data is presented on potential sources and quantities of pollution
associated with pesticide manufacture. In addition, estimates are made
of pesticide losses during marketing. An upper limit on pesticide
run-off is also presented.
MANUFACTURING LOSSES
Pollution and loss of pesticides can occur during the transport
of raw materials, during production and during transport of the pesti-
cide to the formulator or to market.
Table LVIII lists the location of the major production facility
for eighteen pesticides. Except for pyrethrum, 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T,
each pesticide has only one major production facility. These other
three have two major production facilities. (DDT is now produced in
only one location.)
The data which follow summarize the production at these locations
only. The data have been supplied by the manufacturer. Except where
noted, the data are not necessarily typical for manufacturing at
other locations.
Raw Materials
Table LIX summarizes the raw materials used at each location to
manufacture the pesticide. The location from which the raw material is
obtained and the means of transport are given.
Many of the raw materials, while not classified as pesticides,
are extremely hazardous materials and require extreme care in trans-
port and handling. The raw material which is used in the largest
number of pesticides is elemental chlorine. Other hazardous materials
include hydrogen cyanide, carbon disulfide, various amines and con-
centrated acids and caustics. Transport is normally by rail, truck
or barge.
115
-------
TABLE LVIII
MAJOR PRODUCTION FACILITY LOCATIONS
(a)
PESTICIDE
PRODUCTION FACILITY
LOCATION
Aldrin
Atrazine
Captan
Carbaryl
Chlordane
DDT
Dieldrin
Disulfoton
Malathion
Methyl Bromide
Methyl Parathion
Parathion
Phorate
Pyrethrum
Toxaphene
Trifluralin
2,4-D
2,4,5-T
Denver, Colorado
St. Gabriel, Louisiana
Perry, Ohio
Institute, West Virginia
Marshall, Illinois
Torrance, California
Denver, Colorado
Kansas City, Missouri
Warner, New Jersey
Midland, Michigan
Anniston, Alabama
Anniston, Alabama
Warner, New Jersey
Baltimore, Maryland
and Middleport, New York
Brunswick, Georgia
Indianapolis, Indiana
Midland, Michigan
and Portland, Oregon
Midland, Michigan
and Kansas City, Kansas
(a) Data from (5).
116
-------
IAJSLI: LIX
RAW MATERIALS USED IN PESTICIDES
(a)
PEST1CIDL
Aldrin
Atrazine
Cap tan
Carbaryl
RAW MATERIAL
Calcium Carbide
Dicyclopentadiene
Hexachlorocyclopenta-
diene
Petroleum solvent
Hydrogen cyanide
"Appropriate" amines
Chlorine
Lye
Carbon disulfide
Iodine
Chlorine
Ammonia
Calcium carbonate
Maleic anhydride
Butadiene
Lye
Naphthalene
Hydrogen
Chlorine
Air
LOCATION
Oregon; Midwest
Louisiana
New York
Houston
Tennessee
Louisiana
Louisiana
Louisiana
Delaware
Michigan
Louisiana
West Virginia;
Kentucky
Missouri; Pennsylvania
New Jersey
Texas
On-site (West Virginia
TRANSPORTATION
Rail and gondola car
Rail, tank car
Rail, tank car
Rail, tanks
Tank cars
Tank cars
Pipeline
Pipeline
Tank car
Drums
Tank car
Tank car
Truck
Tank car
Tank car
Tank car
Tank cars and barges
Pipeline
Tank cars and barges
-------
TABLE LIX (CONTINUED)
00
PESTICIDE
Carbaryl (Continued)
Chlordane
DDT
Dieldrin
Disulfuton
RAW MATERIAL
Phosgene
Methyl amine
Lye
Naphtha
Chlorine
Caustic
Choral
Chlorobenzene
Oleum
Caustic
Aldrin
Toluene
Acetic acid
Hydrogen peroxide
Sulfuric 'acid
Phosphorus persulfide
Ethanol
Lye
Ethyl mercapto ethyl
alcohol
Phosphorus trichloride
LOCATION
On-site (West Va.)
Illinois
Tennessee
Nevada
Nevada
California
Nevada
On-site (Colorado)
Missouri
TRANSPORTATION
Tank cars
Barges
Pipeline
Tank car
Tanks
Tank cars
Tank cars
Tank trucks
Tank trucks
Rail
Tank truck
Tank car
Tank cars
Tank cars
-------
TABLE LIX (CONTINUED)
PESTIC1UL
Disulfoton (Cont'd.)
Malathion
Methyl Bromide
Methyl Parathion
and
Parathion
Phorate
RAW MATERIAL
Toluene
Sodium hypochloride
Phosphorus persulfide
Methyl alcohol
Diethyl maleate
Toluene
Caustic
Methanol
Bromine
Sulfur
Phosphorus persulfide
Chlorine
Alcohol
NaOC,H.NO«
64 2
Acetone
Soda ash
Phosphorus persulfide
Ethanol
Ethyl mercaptan
Formaldehyde
LOCATION
Illinois or Texas
New Jersey
New Jersey
New Jersey
Various sources
On-site (Alabama)
Louisiana
Louisiana
On-site
Southwest
East, Midwest
New Jersey
New Jersey
TRANSPORTATION
Tank cars
Truck
Rail, tank cars
Pipeline
Tank truck
Tank truck
Tank cars or trucks
Tote bins
Rail, tanks
Rail , tanks
Rail, tanks
Rail, tanks
Truck
Tank truck
Tank car
Tank truck
-------
TABLE LIX (CONTINUED)
K>
O
PESTICIDE
Pyrethrum
Toxaphene
Trifluralin
2,4-D
Michigan
RAW MATERIAL
Crude pyrethrum
Kerosene
Lexane
Methanol
Camphene
Chlorine
Solvent
Clay
Lye
Limestone
Slaked lime
PCBT
Diisopropylamine
Nitric acid
Sulfuric acid
Oleum
Sodium carbonate
NaCl
Benzene
Acetic acid
Acetic anhydride
LOCATION
Africa
New Jersey
Hew Jersey
New Jersey
On-site (Georgia)
Georgia
Georgia
Georgia
Georgia
Georgia
New York; Illinois
Various suppliers
Salt brine wells
Michigan
South
South
TRANSPORTATION
Drum air freight
Tank truck
Tank truck
Tank truck
Tank car
Tank car
Rail
Tank truck
Rail
Rail
Tank cars
Tank cars
Tank cars
Tank cars
Tank cars
100 pound bags
Pipeline
Rail, aluminum tanks
Probably rail, in
tanks
-------
TABU; LIX (CONCLUDED)
I'ESTICIDL
2,4-D
Oregon
2,4,5-T
Michigan
Kansas
RAW MAThlUAI-
Chlorine
Others
Chlorobenzine
Chlorine
Chloroacetic acid
Trichlorophenol
Chloroacetic acid
Lye
Isoethyl alcohol
LOCATION
On-site
Same as Michigan
On-site (Michigan)
On-site
On-site
Michigan
Various sources
Various sources
Various sources
TRANSPORTATION
Same as Michigan
(a) Data from (5).
-------
Production
Virtually all pesticide production processes produce solid waste
and aqueous and gaseous streams which contain unrecovered pesticides,
unreacted raw materials, unrecovered solvents and unavoidable or
undesired by-products. Although extensive efforts are made to
recover, recycle, minimize or prevent these losses from occurring,
there is usually some point at which such efforts are not economi-
cally feasible.
Table LX lists the wastes and by-products produced at each
location, indicates the amount of waste produced and the form of the
waste and describes the disposition of the waste.
Wastes include the pesticide itself, gases such as phosgene,
hydrogen sulfide and sulfur dioxide, liquids containing suspended
solids, nitrates, acids, chlorides and BOD and solids such as still
bottoms, bags and wrappers and filter solids.
Ultimate disposal of the wastes and by-products normally consists
of waste treatment processes, followed by discharge into municipal
sewer systems, rivers and tidal creeks, injection into deep wells,
dumping in the ocean, discharge into evaporation basin and holding
ponds, flaring and incineration, venting to atmosphere, dumping in
landfills or recycling.
Clean-Up and Decontamination of Equipment
Clean-up procedures usually consist of flushing the production
system with a solvent. Wastes from this process normally enter the
same waste disposal system as wastes from the production process.
Storage*5)
Since the use of most pesticides is seasonal, the production and
formulation of pesticides also tends to be seasonal. In general,
storage facilities are well regulated in order to prevent losses
122
-------
TABLE LX
DISPOSITION OF WASTES AND LOSSES FROM PESTICIDE MANUFACTURE
PESTICIDE
Aldrin
Atrazine
WASTES AND LOSSES
Slaked lime
Floor washings con-
taining Aldrin
Process solution (b)
COD
BOD
Total solids
Suspended solids
pH
Chlorides
Nitrates
Phosphates
Toxicity
Flow
Hydrocarbons
Cyanuric chloride
production
Other liquid wastes
BOD
Atrazine, sima-
zine and propazinc
pH
Solid waste
Bag wrappers
Car lining material
etc.
FORM
Slurry
Liquid
Liquid
Gaseous
Liquid
Liquid
Solid
AMOUNT
(Lbs/(Lb of Active
Ingredient) )
0.202
500 mg/1 of flow
50 mg/1 of flow
1000 mg/1 of flow
100 mg/1 of flow
2
High
Unknown
Unknown
High
0.375 gallons/pound of
product
~0.0018
2300 pounds/day
11.5
DISPOSITION
Lime pit
Evaporation basin
Evaporation basin
Used as fuel
6000 foot deep well
Discharged to river
Landfill
K*
CO
-------
TABLE LX (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Cap tan
Carbaryl
WASTES AND LOSSES
Cap tan
Process solutions
Paper
Metal
Chemical
Process solution (b)
Carbaryl
COD
BOD
Total Solids
PH
Suspended solids
Sodium
Chlorides
Phosphates
Organic Nitrogen
Sulfates
Toxicity
Flow per pound of
carbaryl
Phosgene and amines
Heavy residue
FORM
Particu-
lates
Liquid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Liquid
Gaseous
AMOUNT
(Lbs/(Lb of Active
Ingredient))
3.43 pounds/day
10 tons/year
10 tons/year
25 tons/year
1200 pounds/year
0.1-1 mg/1 of flow
10,000 mg/1 of flow
Negligible
40,000 mg/1 of flow
7-10
Negligible
8000 mg/1 of flow
100 mg/1 of flow
Negligible
500 mg/1 of flow
20,000 mg/1 of flow
Low
Not available
DISPOSITION
Scrubbed, then vented to atmosphere
Asphalt settling pond; discharged to river (c)
Local collectors
Local scrap dealers
Buried on plant property
Secondary waste treatment at plant and then
discharged to river. Carbaryl level in
effluent (0.1-1 ppm) .
Flared, scrubbed or condensed, then vented to
atmosphere
Incinerated
-------
TABLE LX (CONTINUED
PESTICIDE
Chlordane
DDT
Dieldrin
Disulfoton
WASTES AND LOSSES
Process solution
(See Aldrin)
Filter solids
DDT
Na2S04
Solid waste
Bags
Empty containers
etc.
Process solution
(See Aldrin)
Filter solid
Disulfoton
Process solution
Solid wastes
Filter solids
Containers
H2S
Particulates from fuel
combustion
FORM
Liquid
Solid
Liquid
Liquid
Solid
Liquid
Solid
Liquid
Liquid
Solid
Gaseous
Particulates
AMOUNT
(Lbs/(Lb of Active
Ingredient))
Unknown
0.87
10-15 cubic yards
19 pounds/day
DISPOSITION
2500 foot deep well
Clay pit
Class 1 dump
Holding pond; recycled
Class 1 dump
Evaporation basin
Incinerate
Discharge to Blue River
Secondary treatment at plant; then discharged
to Blue River
Commercial landfill (disposal of containers
which retain 2-40 ounces of disulfoton per
drum is a problem)
Flared
to
in
-------
TABLE LX (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Malathion
Methyl Bromide
Methyl Parathlon
and
Parathlon
WASTES AND LOSSES
Malathlon
Process solution
Filter solids
Toluene
H2S
Gaseous wastes
Process solution (b)
Parathlon
COD
BOD
Total solids
pH
Acidity
Sodium
Chlorides
Phosphates
Nitrates
Sulfates
Calcium
Flow per pound of
product
Solvents
H2S
Sulfur
Sludge
FORM
Liquid
Liquid
Solid
Gaseous
Gaseous
Gaseous
Liquid
N.A.
Gaseous
Solid
Solid
AMOUNT
(Lbs/(Lb of Active
Ingredient) )
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
0.098
20 mg/1 of flow
3000 mg/1 of flow
700 mg/1 of flow
27,000 mg/1 of flow
2.0
3000 mg/1 of flow
6000 mg/1 of flow
7000 mg/1 of flow
250 mg/1 of flow
20 mg/1 of flow
3000 mg/1 of flow
High
Unknown
0.12
0.11
DISPOSITION
Holding pond, then barged to sea (150-200
miles )(d)
Holding pond; then barged to sea (d)
Landfill (with lye added)
Lost to atmosphere
Recovered as sulfur (emissions from this
process meet New Jersey air pollution control
requirements)
Scrubbers, waste treatment plant
Liquid waste treatment plant; then discharged
to city sewer system (must have < 1 ppm methyl
parathion and parathion)
Incinerate
Flared (produces SO^)
Incinerated (produces SO.)
Discharged into sewer system
K)
O>
-------
TABLE LX (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Phorate
Pyrethrum
Toxaphene
WASTES AND LOSSES
Phorate
Process solution
V
Ethyl mercaptan
Filter solids
Aqueous still bottoms
COD
Solvents
Resin and wax
residues
Filter solids
Solvents
Toxaphene
Camphene production
Process vents
Filter solids
FORM
Liquid
Liquid
Gaseous
Gaseous
Solids
Liquid
Liquid
Solid
Solid
Gaseous
Liquid and
solid
Liquid
Gaseous
Solid
AMOUNT
(Lbs/(Lb of Active
tngredient)J
Unknown
0.12
2000 ppm of flow
DISPOSITION
Holding pond; then barged to sea (150-200
miles) (d)
Holding pond; then barged to sea (d)
Recovered as sulfur (emissions from this
process meet New Jersey air pollution control
requirements)
Burned (causes SO pollution)
Landfill
Discharged to sewers and eventually to one
of three outfalls (e)
Recycled
Drummed and stored
On-site landfill
Vented
Holding pond and waste treatment system; then
to tidal creek
Discharged to tidal creek
Scrubbed and vented to atmosphere
Solid waste
-------
TABLE LX (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Trifluralin
2,4-D
Michigan
Oregon
2,4.5-T
Michigan
Kansas
WASTES AND LOSSES
Process solution
NaCl
N0x
2,4-D
Process solution (b)
COD
BOD
Total solids
Suspended solids
PH
Chlorides
Chlorophenols
Chlorophenoxy Acids
Nitrogen
Phosphorus
Flow
Filter solids and
still bottoms
Process solution
See 2,4-D
Process solution
FORM
Liquid
Liquid
Gaseous
Liquid
Solid
Liquid
Liquid
AMOUNT
(Lbs/(Lb of Active
Ingredient))
0.17
< 2 pounds/day
8300 mg/1 of flow
6300 mg/1 of flow
104,000 mg/1 of flow
2500 mg/1 of flow
0.5
52,000 mg/1 of flow
112 mg/1 of flow
235 mg/1 of flow
Low
Low
30
DISPOSITION
Biological waste treatment and then discharge
to river (discharge cleaner than the river
water)
Same as process solution
Scrubber
Lost through air, shoes, etc.
Trickling filter; biological waste treatment
plant
Incinerated during non-growing season
Charcoal absorption/filtration treatment
Chemical treatment basin and then via city
sewer to river or, in some cases, directly
to sanitary sewer
-------
TABLE LX (CONCLUDED).
PESTICIDE
2,4,5-T (Continued)
Kansas
(Continued)
WASTES AND LOSSES
Solid Wastes
Mixed phenolic wastes
Salt
FORM
Solid
Solid
AMOUNT
(Lbs/(Lb of Active
Ingredient) )
50-75 pounds /month
0.2 (f)
DISPOSITION
Landfill
Commercial landfill
Sanitary sewer
M
CO
(a) Data from (5) and (26).
(b)
(c)
(d)
Typical waste stream compiled from several manufacturers.
A new deep well is being tested for use with liquid wastes.
Under permit from Corps of Engineers.
for use by 1975.
An alternative disposal procedure is planned
(e) The water stream will go into the city sewer system starting in 1973.
(f) Ester production.
-------
during storage and handling. However, many warehouses are not diked.
As a result, water used in fighting warehouse fires can transport
pesticides into the environment.
Transport from the Manufacturer
After the pesticide is produced, the technical product generally
has to be converted (formulated) into a form in which it can be used
safely and effectively. For the most part, this is not done by the
manufacturer; instead, the technical product is usually shipped to
a formulator. The manufacturer may formulate a small part of his
output, however.
Table LXI summarizes for each pesticide the type of container in
which the technical product is shipped to the formulator and the
means of transport. Also, if the manufacturer does some formulating,
the type of formulation is listed, and the container and means of
transport of the formulated product are described.
There is a significant difference in pollution potential
between rail tank cars and tank trucks. Tank cars are normally
owned or leased by the manufacturing company and are used over and
over for the same product. Cleaning is usually done at the production
facility and the wastes enter the plant's waste .treatment system.
On the other hand, tank trucks are normally obtained from a trucking
firm and cleaned by the trucking firm which normally does not have a
waste treatment system or detoxification equipment.
Tables LXII to LXIV present statistics on the transport of all
pesticides from the manufacturer. Table LXII shows for each means of
transport the percent distribution of pesticide shipped by that means
of transport. The percent distribution is given on both a weight
and a ton-mileage basis for the years 1963 and 1967. In 1967 on a
weight basis, the primary means of transport was by truck (commercial
130
-------
TABLE LXI
PESTICIDE TRANSPORT FOLLOWING MANUFACTURE (a)
PESTICIDE
Aldrin
Atrazine
Captan
Carbaryl
Chlordane
DDT
\
\
Dieldrin v-
Disulfoton
TECHNICAL PRODUCT
CONTAINER
28 gallon drums
N. A.
50 pounds bags
(92% cap tan, 8%
calcium carbon-
ate)
50 pound bags
Tank cars and
trucks (40-50%)
5 and 30 gallon
drums (40-50%)
50 pound bags
30 gallon drums
55 gallon drums
TRANSPORTATION
Truck and Rail
Rail
Boxcar (98%)
Trucks (2%)
Mostly rail; some
truck and piggy-
back
Rail and truck
Rail and truck
Boxcar
Rail and truck
Truck (some piggy'
back)
FORMULATED PRODUCT
FORMULATION
10% formulated as
emulsified con-
centrate
80% formulated as
wettable Powder
Liquid (4 pounds/
gallons)
N.A.
Wettable powders
and dust.
Liquid
None
Wettable powder
None
Emulsified con-
centrate
Granular
CONTAINER
5, 30 and 35
gallon drums
5 pounds bags
1 and 5 gallon
plastic bottles
10, 50 and 285
pound bags
1, 5, and 55 gal-
lon drums
100-200 pound
drums and 75
pound boxes
1, 30, and 55
gallon drums
55 gallon drums
TRANSPORTATION
Mostly truck
Rail
Rail
Mostly rail,
some truck and
piggyback
Truck for export
via Los Angeles;
boxcar elsewhere
Truck (some
piggyback)
Truck (some
piggyback)
U)
-------
TABLE LXI (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Malathion
Methyl Bromide
Methyl Parathion and
Parathron
Phorate
Pyrethrum
Toxaphene
TECHNICAL PRODUCT
CONTAINER
5, 30 and 55
gallon drums
1 pound can
10, 50, 100 and
150 pound cylin-
ders
1500 pound pigs
13,000 pound cyl
inder
Tank cars
55 gallon drums
55 gallon drums
30 gallon drums
250 gallon drum
TRANSPORTATION
Rail and truck
Export
Tank cars
Truck (90%)
Rail (10%)
Truck and rail
Truck (to New
York)
Exported via
East Coast
FORMULATED PRODUCT
FORMULATION
'-5% formulated
as powder and
dust
None
<5% formulated
(mainly as liq-
uid)
small amount as
emulsified con-
centrate (6
pounds /gallon)
very small amount
formulated as
concentrate
Most formulated
as 90% concen-
trate
CONTAINER
55 gallon drums
5 and 30 gallon
drums
1 and 5 gallon
cans
55 gallon drum
Tanks, 55 gallon
drums and 50
pound bags
TRANSPORTATION
Exported (sea &
train)
Truck and rail
Trucks and rail
Direct to cus-
tomer
Rail and Truck
exports
CJ
to
-------
TABLE LXI (CONCLUDED)
PESTICIDE
Trifluralin
2,4 - D
Michigan
Oregon
2, 4, 5 - X
Michigan
Kansas
TECHNICAL PRODUCT
CONTAINER
Cans
Tank cars
Drums
Bags
Drums
Drums
TRANSPORTATION
Very small per-
centage trans-
ported as tech-
nical product by
rail and trucks
Tank cars (50%)
Rail
Rail
Rail
Very little
FORMULATED PRODUCT
FORMULATION
Liquid (4 pounds/
gallon) in
aromatic naphtha
Liquid
Dry
Isooctyl ester
in xylene-type
CONTAINER
5 gallon cans
Drums and cans(b)
50 pound bags
Tans down to 1
gallon cans
Drums
1 gallon can and
5, 30, and 55
drums
TRANSPORTATION
Export (10%)
Rail and truck
Rail
Rail
Tank cars
Tank trucks
Rail
Mostly trucks,
some rail to
West Coast
UJ
(A)
(a) Data from (5).
(b) Over 250,000 five-gallon cans packaged per year.
-------
TABLE LXII
PESTICIDE SHIPMENTS: PERCENT DISTRIBUTION BY MEANS OF
TRANSPORT, UNITED STATES, 1963 and 1967 (a)
to
JS
MEANS OF
TRANSPORT
Rail
Motor carrier (b)
Private truck (c)
Water
Other
Total
WEIGHT BASIS
1963
(Percent)
17.0
32.1
48.1
0.8
2.0
100.0
1967
(Percent)
42.7
32.5
24.0
0.1
0.7
100.0
TON-MILEAGE BASIS
1963
(Percent)
37.9
29.4
27.9
1.0
3.8
100.0
1967
(Percent)
63.5
25.4
10.4
0.3
0.4
100.0
(a) Taken from (4). Results of a 1972 survey are,
as of yet, unavailable.
(b) Commercial carrier.
(c) Owned by manufacturer.
-------
TABLE LXIII
PESTICIDE SHIPMENTS: PERCENT DISTRIBUTION BY DISTANCE OF
SHIPMENTS, UNITED STATES, 1963 and 1967 (a)
CO
Ln
DISTANCE SHIPPED
(MILES)
0-49
50-99
100-199
200-299
300-399
400-499
500-599
600-799
800-999
1,000-1,199
1,200-1,499
1,500-1,999
WEIGHT BASIS
1963
(Percent)
5.5
10.2
28.5
21.7
10.5
3.5
4.0
5.3
3.5
1.6
2.4
2.7
2,000-over [ 0.6
Total
..
100.0
1967
(Percent)
14.0
10.4
10.9
14.8
10.8
5.4
3.4
6.7
11.1
7.0
2.0
1.4
2.1
100.0
WEIGHT-MILEAGE BASIS
1963
(Percent)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1967
(Percent)
0.8
1.6
3.8
8.0
8.4
5.1
4.0
10.5
20.9
16.1
5.7
5.2
9.9
100.0
(a) Taken from (4). Results of a 1972 survey are, as of
yet, unavailable.
-------
TABLE LXIV
PESTICIDE SHIPMENTS: PERCENT DISTRIBUTION BY WEIGHT OF SHIPMENTS
UNITED STATES, 1963 and 1967 (a)
SHIPMENT WEIGHT
(Pounds)
1-999
1,000-9,999
10,000-29,999
30,000-59,999
60,000-89,999
90,000-over
Total
WEIGHT BASIS
1963
(Percent)
2.8
25.3
23.4
32.5
5.9
10.1
100.0
1967
(Percent)
2.0
12.7
19.3
32.7
17.7
15.6
100.0
WEIGHT-MILEAGE BASIS
1963
(Percent)
1.9
15.8
16.7
36.2
11.2
18.2
100.0
1967
(Percent)
1.3
6.6
13.9
30.9
28.1
19.2
100.0
(a) Taken from (4). Results of a 1972 survey are, as of yet,
unavailable.
-------
and private truck combined), followed by rail and water. On a ton-
mileage basis, the primary transport was by rail, followed by truck
and water.
Table LXIII shows for each distance shipped the percent of all
pesticides shipped to that distance. This too is given on a weight
and a ton-mileage basis. In 1967 nearly 61 percent of the pesticides
by weight were shipped 499 miles or less. On a ton-mileage basis,
shipments peak at between 800 and 999 miles.
Table LXIV shows the distribution of pesticide shipments
according to the weight of the shipment and according to the weight-
mileage of the shipment. Shipments weighing between 30,000 and 59,999
pounds accounted for nearly a third of all shipments in 1967. This
weight category also had the highest use on a weight-mileage basis.
Spills
Beginning in 1969, the Department of Transportation initiated a
Hazardous Materials Incident Reporting System. This system records
for pesticide shipments the number of incidents involving leakage or
spillage, the mode of transportation, the material involved, the
damage and/or contamination costs and any resulting illnesses or
fatalities. It is believed that coverage of incidents is far short
of being complete. Although data are not published, they are
available from the Office of Hazardous Materials.
Table LXV gives the number of incidents in the year 1969 through
1971. The large increase in 1971 is, in part, the result of better
reporting of spills.
FORMULATION AND PACKAGING
In general, the pesticide is sent by the manufacturer to a
formulator.
137
-------
TABLE LXV
INCIDENTS OF PESTICIDE SPILLS
(a)
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
NUMBER OF
INCIDENTS
203
102
123
(a) Taken from (9).
138
-------
Raw Materials
The basic raw material used by the formulator is the pesticide
active ingredient itself. Thus, the shipment and handling of the
raw material can result in the loss of the pesticide in a highly
concentrated form to the environment.
Disposal of Wastes
Disposal is less of a problem for the formulator. There are no
major by-products and the wastes are predominantly solid wastes such
as empty containers and wrappers and a small volume of liquid wastes.
Wastes are disposed of by incineration, landfill, deep well injection,
discharge into sewer systems, evaporation and special waste treat-
ment systems. The disposal of empty containers retaining small
amounts of active ingredients is a potentially serious problem.
One additional source of pesticide loss occurs when a formulator
has to recall and dispose of a pesticide after its use registration
has been cancelled or suspended. After the pesticide is collected,
the formulator has to somehow dispose of it. When some registrations
for liquid 2,4,5-T were suspended in 1970, one formulator accumulated
over 44,000 gallons of a one percent 2,4,5-T formulation.
Packaging
After the pesticide is formulated, it is packaged and trans-
ported to market. Table LXVI lists, by type of formulation, the
container sizes and the percent of pesticides shipped in each type
of container.
Four and five-pound bags are the most popular packaging for
wettable powders, five-gallon cans the most popular container for
emulsified concentrates and 50-pound bags the most widely used
packaging for granules.
Appendix D describes the packaging used for home and garden
pesticides and for agricultural pesticides.
139
-------
TABLE LXVI
HOW PESTICIDES MOVE TO MARKET
(a)
FORM
Wettable Powder
.
Emulsified Concentrates
Granules
PACKAGE/ CONTAINER SIZE
1 pound
2.5 pounds
3 pounds
4 pounds
5 pounds
10 pounds
24 pounds
50 pounds
1 gallon
5 gallons
30 gallons
55 gallons
4 pounds
5 pounds
10 pounds
20 pounds
25 pounds
50 pounds
80 pounds
PERCENTAGE
3
2
8
37
35
3
2
10
100
26
44
15
15
100
4
8
10
4
4
66
4
100
(a) Data from (5).
140
-------
Marketing
Marketing of pesticides is the process of moving the finished
pesticidal product from the manufacturer or fonnulator to the con-
sumer. Some of this process has already been discussed; however,
this subsection provides a generalized account of the whole process.
Table LXVII shows the estimated marketing outlets utilized to
bring the pesticide to the consumer. Although each outlet is avail-
able for each pesticide and although there is little duplication
between some categories of outlets, the large number of pathways
illustrates the near impossibility of evaluating the pollution
potential associated with the marketing process.
Total Losses During Marketing
Pesticide losses can occur during transportation from the manu-
facturer or formulator to the wholesaler or retailer, during handling
and storage and at the sales outlet or place of export. An upper
limit on losses during all phases of marketing is estimated to be
0.1 percent of the total amount of pesticides produced. A more
realistic estimate is thought to be 0.01 percent.
Based on a 1971 pesticide production of 1.2 billion pounds, an
upper limit on losses during marketing is 1.2 million pounds and a
more likely loss is 120,000 pounds.
Losses in Three Sectors
Losses are estimated for home and garden marketing, agricultural
marketing and marketing to exterminators.
Home and Garden Marketing Losses
An estimated 200-500 million containers are used yearly for home
and garden pesticides. The lawn and garden portion of the total home
and garden market is estimated to have an average loss of 5 to 10
pounds of pesticide per year per outlet. Assuming 10,000 major lawn
141
-------
TABLE LXVII
PESTICIDE MARKETING OUTLETS TO THE CONSUMER
(a)
MARKETING OUTLET
Major Agricultural Outlets
Manufacturers
Formulators
Distributors, independent
Farm cooperatives
Feed and Grain
Fertilizer Retailers
Specialized Outlets
Structural Pest Control
Turf Pest Control
Household Pest Control
Others
Home and Garden Market
Gardener's Supplies
Firms Which Frequently Handle a
Wide Range of Pesticides
Hardware Retailers
Department Stores
Firms Which Handle Smaller Amounts
or Selected Lines of Pesticides
Lumber and Wood Builders Supplies
Drug Stores
Discount Stores
Industrial Supplies
Janitor Supplies
Nurseries
Firms Which Primarily Serve the Home-
Use Market, Particularly Aerosols
Grocery Stores
Variety Stores
Sporting Goods Stores
Other Firms Which May Carry
Pesticide Lines
Chemical Exporters
NUMBER
40 (estimate)
300 (estimate)
100 (estimate)
3,640 of the 8,090 Co-ops are said to
handle agricultural chemicals
27,904 (10,103 grain elevators are also
listed)
8,905
23 members of United Pesticides Formula-
tion & Distributors Association sell to
structural pest control operators'15'
110 distributors sell primarily to pro-
fessional golf course applicators
540 members of the Chemical Specialties
Manufacturers Association are engaged
in production and marketing of chemicals
for household use
Not available
7,919 firms
28,297
1,500 of the 11,580 department stores are
estimated to have garden centers^)
20,602 retailers
48,869 total (11,200 rated at $50,000
per year)
4,888 retailers
7,500 wholesalers
5,000 dealers
1,000 (estimated) large mail-order firms
of the 31, 885 'total
75,000 supermarkets of the 220,000 retail
grocers
22,708 retailers
13,000
513
(a) Data from The Pollution Potential in Pesticides Manufacturing. Pesticides Study
Series-5, TS-00-72-04, EPA, Office of Water Programs, Applicable Technology
Division, Rural Wastes Branch, June 1972.
(b) The National Pest Control Association has over 1,220 member companies engaged
primarily in structural pest control and is said to account for about 50% of
that Industry's business.
(c) Montgomery Ward has about 580 and Sears has nearly 400 retail stores in the
United States.
142
-------
and garden outlets, this loss totals about 75,000 pounds per year.
The total home and garden market is estimated to have losses of
less than 100,000 pounds per year.
Agricultural Marketing Losses '
An estimated 91.1 containers are used for agricultural pesticides
(see Table D-I). The 3640 farm co-ops handle an estimated 32 percent
of pesticide sales. Assuming losses are proportional to this amount
and that losses average 5 to 10 pounds per co-op, losses are estimated
at about 160,000 pounds a year. However, 5 to 10 pounds per outlet may
be a low estimate of loss. Ten to twenty pounds may be more realistic.
In this case, losses would be 320,000 pounds per year of formulated
product.
Additional losses may total 120,000 pounds for other sources.
So total losses may be as high as 440,000 pounds a year.
Exterminator Losses
Exterminators use an estimated 5-10 million containers of pesticides
per year. Losses are estimated at about 150,000 pounds a year.
For these three sectors, the total marketing loss is estimated
to be on the order of 690,000 pounds a year. This represents approxi-
mately 0.05 percent of the 1971 pesticide production.
LOSSES FROM CONTAINER DISPOSAL FOLLOWING CONSUMPTION
Once pesticides are used, the "empty" container has to be dis-
posed of. A study by Wolfe found that an average of 2.73 grains of
technical parathion remained in suspension in. 22 "empty", 5-gallon
metal drums which had contained 45.6 percent parathion emulsified
concentrate. Two washings were found to remove 98 percent of the
(3)
parathion . In a dump it would be possible for the container to be
similarly rinsed by rain or surface drainage.
This number was incorrectly calculated as 80,000 pounds per year by
(5).
143
-------
LOSSES FROM SURFACE RUN-OFF
The annual U.S. run-off is estimated to be 1.6 x 10 million
gallons per day. If the 1967 total pesticide production of 1.05
billion pounds were to be applied to the U.S. every year, there would
(3)
be a concentration of 0.3 mg/1 in all U.S. waters . However, since
a large part of production is exported and since most of the pesti-
cides that are used either degrade quickly or adhere tightly to soils,
this concentration represents an unobtainable upper limit.
144
-------
SECTION VII
REGIONALIZATION
This section contains data which may be employed to regionalize
the pesticide use data presented in Section V. In addition, an
algorithm which can be used by SEAS to estimate the quantity of each
pesticide applied to each crop within each state is presented. Algo-
rithms are not given for other uses due to the unavailability of
sufficient, reliable data.
REGIONAL USE DATA
Data on the regional application of pesticides is presented for
the following uses:
a. Farm
1. Crop
2. Livestock and poultry
b. Home and garden
c. Brush control
d. Weed control
1. Noncropland
2. Forest plantings
3. Aquatic areas.
Farm
The U.S. Department of Agriculture separates the country into ten
farm production regions. Table LXVIII lists the states which are
grouped into each region.
The total farm pesticide use within each of these ten regions in
1966 is shown in Table LXIX. The Corn Belt used the largest quantity
of pesticides, approximately 67.7 million pounds. The largest use
of fungicides was in the Northeast with approximately 6.8 million
pounds applied. Both the largest use of herbicides and the largest
use of pesticides on livestock and poultry occurred in the Corn Belt
145
-------
TABLE LXVIII
STATES WITHIN EACH USDA FARM PRODUCTION REGION
Northeast
Connecticut
Delaware
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
Vermont
Lake States
Michigan
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Corn Belt
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Missouri
Ohio
Northern Plains
Kansas
Nebraska
North Dakota
South Dakota
Appalachian
Kentucky
North Carolina
Tennessee
Virginia
West Virginia
Southeast
Alabama
Georgia
Florida
South Carolina
Delta States
Arkansas
Louisiana
Mississippi
Southern Plains
Oklahoma
Texas
Mountain
Arizona
Colorado
Idaho
Montana
New Mexico
Nevada
Utah
Wyoming
Pacific
California
Oregon
Washington
146
-------
TABLE LX1X
FARM PESTICIDE USE, BY FARM PRODUCTION REGION, UNITED STATES, 1966 (a), (b)
(In Millions of Pounds)
REGION
Northeast
Lake States
Corn Belt
Northern Plains
Appalachian
Southeast
Delta
Southern Plains
Mountain
Pacific
UNITED STATES
CROPS
FUNGICIDES
6.8
3.4
5.4
.8
3.3
5.2
.6
1.8
.4
2.8
30.5
HERBICIDES
6.2
11.6
35.5
14.9
5.2
5.0
6.1
7.5
6.3
14.1
112.4
INSECTICIDES
7.0
4.5
21.5
4.5
10.8
35.4
21.8
16.0
7.0
9.1
137.6
MISCELLANEOUS
0.7
.6
.7
.1
11.1
11.2
1.6
2.2
.8
18.7
47.7
CROPS
TOTAL
20.7
20.2
63.1
20.3
30.4
56.7
30.1
27.5
14.3
44.8
328.1
LIVESTOCK
AND
POULTRY
1.4
.9
3.3
1.5
.7
1.1
.7
1.3
1.1
.5
12.5
OTHER
0.9
.2
1.3
1.3
6.2
1.6
.2
.2
.5
.2
12.6
TOTAL AL
USES
22.9
21.3
67.7
23.1
37.4
59.4
31.0
29.0
15.9
45.5
353.2
(a) Taken from (1).
(b) Does,not include Alaska and Hawaii.
-------
with 35.5 million and 3.3 million pounds, respectively, being applied.
The Southeast used the greatest amount of insecticides, nearly 35.4
million pounds. The Pacific Region applied the greatest quantity of
miscellaneous pesticides, 18.7 million pounds. The largest use of
pesticides for all other uses occurred in the Appalachian Region with
6.2 million pounds applied.
Pesticide application data are presented for each crop grown with-
in each region. The data summarize the use of each of the four classes
of pesticides on each crop within each region.
Tables LXX to LXIII show, by crop, the percentage of acreage with-
in each region that is treated with each class of pesticide. For most
crops considerably less than 50 percent of the total acreage is treated
with any one class of pesticide.
Tables LXXIV to LXXVII summarize, by crop, the amount of acreage
treated within each region by each class of pesticide. The total
quantity of each class of pesticide applied on each crop within each
region is summarized in Tables LXXVIII to LXXXI.
Other regionalization data are supplied in Appendix E. These
data include:
a. The total acreage of each crop grown within each region
(for nine crops these data are also given by state)
b. The total pesticide expenditures by crop within each
region for each class of pesticide
c. The percentage of each class of pesticide applied by crop
within each region
d. The percentage of farms using pesticides by crop and
region
e. Additional historical data by crop on production,.yield,
average price, acreage planted and harvested and total
farm value.
148
-------
TABLE LXX
PERCENTAGE OF CROP ACREAGE TREATED WITH FUNGICIDES BY REGION, 1966(
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
85
96
74
33
86
-
-
-
56
37
72
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
85
-
32
-
-
73
CORN
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.5
COTTON
-
-
18
-
4
2
<0.5
<0.5
10
18
2
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS
6
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3
3
1
OTHER
FRUITS
& NUTS
84
88
71
-
36
33
30
-
28
34
45
OTHER
GRAINS
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
CROP
OTHER
VEGETABLES
15
4
34
-
<0.5
47
-
12
11
23
20
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
& HAY
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- .
-
-
PEANUTS
_
_
-
-
39
43
-
-
-
-
35
POTATOES
81
22
20
94
-
-
-
-
19
22
24
SOYBEANS
_
-
<0.5
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
<0.5
TOBACCO
_
-
1
-
2
44
-
- '
-
-
7
WHEAT
_
-
-
<0.5
-
-
-
2
-
-
<0.5
ALL
CROPS
2.3
0.7
0.4
0.1
0.9
7.3
0.1
0.2
0.1
1.0
0.5
o
(a) Data from (16)
-------
TABLE LXXI
PERCENTAGE OF CHOP ACREAGE TREATED WITH HERBICIDES BY REGION, 1966(l)
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
19
34
-
-
16
-
-
-
40
<0.5
16
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
28
-
8
-
50
29
CORN
67
62
65
46
54
15
24
12
47
49
57
COTTON
-
-
86
-
67
59
76
32
54
39
52
CROP
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS
17
49
26
34
10
2
35
3
28
37
37
OTHER
FRUITS
& NUTS
31
5
37
-
-
4
17
-
-
11
12
OTHER
GRAINS
14
34
6
46
5
9
39
15
35
39
30
OTHER
VEGETABLES
29
39
32
-
11
5
87
11
41
33
28
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
& HAY
1
1
1
3
2
<0.5
2
2
1
1
1
PEANUTS
_
_
-
75
67
-
3
63
-
63
POTATOES
73
5
38
-
-
94
-
-
6
39
59
SOYBEANS
21
24
30
12
36
26
24
19
-
-
2
TOBACCO
3
-
10
-
1
5
-
-
-
-
2
WHEAT
_
40
1
33
5
-
-
1
50
79
28
ALL
CROPS
14
25
25
16
15
12
15
4
3
8
12
In
O
(a) Data from (16)
-------
TABLE LXXII
PERCENTAGE OF CROP ACREAGE TREATED WITH INSECTICIDES BY REGION, 1966 (
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
94
96
Tt
67
86
50
-
100
79
97
92
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
98
-
90
-
93
97 .
CORN
-
19
48
35
48
79
79
-
31
30
33
COTTON
-
-
48
-
48
79
79
37
47
74
54
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS
9
6
9
3
<0.5
69
29
2
23
14
10
OTHER
FRUITS
& NUTS
89
89
87
-
47
35
29
10
46
58
63
OTHER
GRAINS
<0.5
<0.5
1
1
1
8
11
4
1
-
2
CROP
OTHER
VEGETABLES
60
38
61
19
52
70
13
70
47
61
56
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
& HAY
15
<0.5
1
-
<0.5
<0.5
1
1
1
<0.5
1
PEANUTS
_
-
-
-
92
75
-
3
-
-
70
POTATOES
98
98
64
42
43
100
-
100
75
80
89
SOYBEANS
3
-
1
1
14
53
6
-
-
-
4
TOBACCO
71
18
56
-
81
100
-
-
-
-
81
WHEAT
_
-
1
-
13
-
-
9
-
-
2
ALL
CROPS
8
6
17
3
9
19
8
3
1
3
5
(a) Data from (16)
-------
TABLE LXXIII
PERCENTAGE OF CROP ACREAGE TREATED WITH MISCELLANEOUS PESTICIDES BY REGION, 1966(a)
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL (b)
APPLES
28
28
28
-
28
-
-
-
28
28
28
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
40
-
-
-
41
38
CORN
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
-
<0.5
-
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
COTTON
-
-
26
-
26
26
26
26
26
26
26
OTHER
FIELD
CHOPS
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
OTHER
FRUITS
d NUTS
2
2
2
-
-
2
-
-
2
2
2
OTHER
GRAINS
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
<0.5
<0.5
-
<0.5
CROP
OTHER
VEGETABLES
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
-
-
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
(bl tau aronna6ayailable ^ re8l<"" Ihe percen"8M have been '"""< ba«d «P» t
PASTURE,
RANCELAND
& HAY
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
<0.5
-
<0.5
<0.5
h
PEANUTS
-
-
-
-
<0.5
<0.5
-
-
-
-
<0.5
POTATOES
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
22
22
9
SOYBEANS
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
<0.5
TOBACCO
69
_
69
-
69
69
-
_
_
_
69
WHEAT
_
_
-
-
_
.
-
<0.5
_
<0.5
<0.5
ALL
CROPS
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
0.5
he national level.
Oi
10
-------
TABLE IXXIV
CROP ACREAGE TREATED WITH FUNGICIDES BY REGION*
(1000 Acres)
tn
CO
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
171
92
47
2
92
-
-
-
18
60
482
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
753
-
10
-
-
763
CORN
,(b)
29(b)
100 (b>
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
167
COTTON
-
-
64
-
26
27
7(b)
14(b)
40
114
292
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS
10
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
38
38
86
OTHER
FRUITS
& NUTS
155
136
33
-
20
109
50
-
13
497
1013
CROP
OTHER
GRAINS
-
20
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
20
OTHER
VEGETABLES
84
27
95
-
0.5(b>
233
-
38
20
194
691.5
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
& HAY
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
PEANUTS
-
-
-
-
108
337
_
-
-
-
445
POTATOES
265
48
7
124
-
_
_
-
76
47
567
SOYBEANS
_
_
58(b>
-
26
.
_
-
-
-
84
TOBACCO
.
_
0.2
.
15
66
.
-
_
-
81.2
WHEAT
.
.
_
70(b>
_
_
191
_
_
261
ALL
CROPS
694
352
404.2
225
287.5
1525
57
253
205
950
4952.7
(a) Calculated using data In Tables LXX and E-I.
(b) Assumes 0.3 percent of acreage treated with fungicides.
-------
TABLE LXXV
CROP ACREAGE TREATED WITH HERBICIDES BY REGION
(1000 Acres)
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
38
33
-
-
17
-
-
-
13
(b)
0.5
101.5
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
248
-
3
110
361
CORN
2018
6055
21556
4501
2415
520
192
78
356
185
37,876
COTTON
-
-
221
-
440
804
1770
1508
215
246
5,204
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS
28
768
251
949
37
8
159
18
351
468
3,037
OTHER
FRUITS
& NUTS
57
B
17
-
-
13
28
-
161
284
OTHER
GRAINS
227
2273
361
7731
53
72
637
1569
1786
1513
16,222
CROP
OTHER
VEGETABLES
162
258
89
-
18
25
50
35
76
319
1,032
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
& HAY
145
180
356
3000
471
41(b>
294
2514
2172
464
9,637
PEANUTS
-
-
-
-
207
525
-
13
5
750
POTATOES
239
11
13
-
-
66
-
-
24
83
436
SOYBEANS
90
972
5836
277
953
424
1580
53
-
10,185
TOBACCO
2
-
2
-
7
7
-
-
-
18
WHEAT
-
653
51
7662
39
-
-
95
4406
2850
15,756
ALL
CROPS
3006
11211
28753
24120
4657
2753
4710
5886
9404
6399.5
100,899.5
Oi
(a) Calculated using data in Tables LXXI and E-I
(b) Assumes 0.3 percent of acreage treated with herbicides
-------
TABLE LXXVI
CROP ACREAGE TREATED WITH INSECTICIDES BY REGION
(1000 Acres)
(a)
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
189
92
47
3
92
3
-
2
25
157
610
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
868
-
29
-
205
1102
CORN
-
1856
15918
3424
2147
2741
633
-
235
113
27067
COTTON
-
-
123
-
315
1077
1840
1743
188
468
5754
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS
15
94
87
84
1
274
132
12
288
177
1164
OTHER
FRUITS
& NUTS
164
138
40
-
26
116
48
16
21
847
1416
OTHER
GRAINS
5
356
-
71(b)
41(h>
147
1257
2172
139(b)
6415
PEANUTS
-
-
-
-
254
588
-
13
-
-
855
POTATOES
320
212
21
55
27
70
-
33
302
170
1210
SOYBEANS
13
-
195
23
371
863
395
-
-
-
1860
TOBACCO
50
2
11
-
587
149
-
-
-
-
799
WHEAT
_
-
51
_
103
-
-
857
_
-
1011
ALL
CROPS
3269
2720
17079
3751
4090
7201
3383
4600
3369
2713
52328
Oi
in
(a) Calculated using data in Tables LXXII and E-I
(b) Assumes 0.3 percent of acreage treated with insecticides.
-------
TABLE LXXVII
CROP ACREAGE TREATED WITH MISCELLANEOUS PESTICIDES BY REGION(a)
(1000 Acres)
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
56
27
18
-
30
-
-
-
9
45
185
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
358
-
-
-
89
447
CORN
,
99
29
4(b)
8
OTHER
FRUITS
& NUTS
4
3
1
-
-
7
-
-
1
29
45
OTHER
GRAINS
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
31(b)
15(b)
-
46
CROP
OTHER
VEGETABLES
2(b)
2(b)
1<»>
-
0.5(b)
!<«
-
-
0.5
3 00
10
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
& HAY
M00
-
_
-
-
-
-
37?
2(b)
-
_
-
-
3
POTATOES
_
_
_
_
_
_
-
_
88
47
135
SOYBEANS
_
^
_
_
26
_
_
_
-
26
TOBACCO
49
_
13
_
500
102
_
.
_.
-
664
WHEAT
.
.
.
_
.
_
29(b)
_
n(b)
40
ALL
CROPS
164
61
199
29
741.5
824
608
1662
223.5
532
5044
Ol
o
(a) Calculated based upon the percentage estimates given In Table LXXIII.
(b) Assumes that 0.3 percent of the acreage was treated.
-------
TABLE LXXVIII
AMOUNT OF FUNGICIDES APPLIED ON CROPS BY REGION 1966
(1000 Pounds)
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
3093
1992
741
2399
-
-
-
33
238
8496
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
3414
-
636
-
6
4056
CORN
(b)
28
111
3194
248
153
19
_
597
15
163
4528
COTTON
-
-
4
3
48
19
36
-
286
376
OTHER
FIEL^b
CROPS
OTHER
FRUITS
& NUTS
729
790
42
149
166
576
_
187
1663
4302
OTHElCb
GRAINS
CROP
OTHER
VEGETABLES
577
250
1218
~
13
1082
487
82
384
4093
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
& HAY(b)
PEANUTS
_
-
-
623
485
~
-
1108
POTATOES
2396
254
173
564
-
9
~
T 7
J /
98
3531
SOYBEANS
(b)
TOBACCO
(b)
WHEAT
(b)
ALL
CROPS
6823
3397
5372
812
3340
5223
595
1756
354
2818
30,490
Ol
(a) Data from (2)
(b) Com includes use on corn, other field crops, other grains, pasture and rangeland, soybeans, tobacco and wheat.
-------
TABLE LXXIX
AMOUNT OF HERBICIDES APPLIED OH CHOPS BY REGION 1966(a)
(1000 Pounds)
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
117
25
47
-
84
-
-
-
13
103
389
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
288
-
-
-
65
353
CORN
2846
7427
27,473
3361
3182
741
174
95
362
309
45,970
COTTON
-
-
146
-
331
1066
2419
1415
308
841
6526
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS
77
1263
329
767
98
3
155
8
524
1298
4522
OTHER'],
FRUITS
& NUTS
112
48
10
-
1
8
49
-
3
2625
2856
OTHER
GRAINS
176
891
365
3689
95
36
1604
2706
1126
1083
11,771
CROP
OTHER
VEGETABLES
936
362
95
-
30
22
114
64
174
1691
3488
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
& HAY
23
76
200
3493
323
30
143
3203
1848
2458
11,797
PEANUTS
.
-
-
-
553
2339
-
5
2
2899
POTATOES
1833
85
159
-
-
15
-
-
24
2220
SOYBEANS
88
1135
6567
283
532
374
1407
23
-
10,409
TOBACCO
(b)
WHEAT
.
231
47
3093
16
6
_
26
1874
8247
ALL
CROPS
6210
11,588
35,480
14,877
5245
4933
6106
7547
6304
112,420
Oi
00
(a) Data from (2)
(b) Other field crops Includes use on tobacco
-------
TABLE LXXX
AMOUNT OF INSECTICIDES APPLIED ON CROPS BV REGION, 1966(a)
(1000 Pounds)
Oi
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
3116
1231
2134
-
1129
-
-
2
125
757
8494
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
2335
-
116
-
407
2858
CORN
92
1601
17525
2660
346
99
16
2
186
102
23629
COTTON
-
-
205
-
3302
22603
20799
12551
4357
1083
64900
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS
29
70
56
57
55
61
217
12
179
180
916
OTHER
FRUITS
i NUTS
928
742
241
-
201
1039
228
200
82
2958
6619
OTHER
GRAINS
4
52
43
111
46
355
118
609
14
-
1352
CROP
OTHER
VEGETABLES
875
263
558
4
299
1202
188
1780
114
2880
8163
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
& HAY
877
7
127
291
769
132
13
321
1428
119
4094
PEANUTS
.
«
.
1051
4478
_
-
-
5529
POTATOES
933
590
204
144
37
21
2
415
626
2972
SOYBEANS
22
244
7
809
1903
199
33
-
-
3217
TOBACCO
92
1
13
2479
1206
_
_
3791
WHEAT
77
288
203
353
5
_
876
ALL
CROPS
6,984
4,591
21,457
4,502
21 807
6,909
9 151
137,566
(a) Data from (2)
-------
TABLE LXXXI
AMOUNT OF MISCELLANEOUS PESTICIDES APPLIED ON CROPS BY REGION 1966U)
(1000 Pounds)
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
361
247
92
-
42
-
_
-
222
155
1,119
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
411
_
-
-
712
1,123
CORN
7
163
112
113
44
-
5
-
15
87
546
COTTON
-
-
83
_
202
830
1,591
2,100
404
8,997
14,207
FIELD
CROPS
-
-
-
-
-
-
96
57
153
OTHER 1
FRUITS
& NUTS
14
95
264
-
2
-
16
8,301
8,692
OTHER
GRAINS
-
-
- '
-
-
14
26
-
40
CROP
OTHER (b)
VEGETABLES
183
105
106
200
206
-
13
51
864
PASTURE,
RANGELAHD
C, HAY
3
-
-
-
-
68
-
277
348
PEANUTS
-
-
1,594
5,411
~
-
-
-
7,005
POTATOES
(b)
SOYBEANS
.
_
_
~
49
_
-
_
_
_
49
TOBACCO
94
_
40
-
8,963
4,304
-
_
_
_
13,401
WHEAT
_
_
-
.
_
-
18
.
29
47
ALL
CROPS
665
611
755
113
11,094
11,164
1,601
2,200
792
18,668
47,663
o
o
(a) Data from (2).
(b) Other field crops includes use on potatoes
-------
Livestock and Poultry
The total quantity of pesticides applied to livestock and poultry
is shown in Table LXIX. Tables LXXXII and LXXXIII list by region the
1966 pesticide expenditures made for livestock and poultry, respectively.
The Corn Belt spent the most on livestock pesticides. The Pacific
Region spent the most on pesticides for poultry.
Home and Garden
The use of herbicides on home lawns in 1968 is summarized for 37
states in Table LXXXIV. Data is presented on the number of acres
treated and the average cost per acre treated as well as on the per-
cent of herbicides applied by the owner and by commercial applicators.
The acreage and cost data are grouped by pre-emergence treatment,
post-emergence treatment and a combination of the two.
Pennsylvanians treated the most acres. The lowest average cost,
$2, was for post-emergence treatment in Iowa. The highest average cost,
$260, was for combined pre-emergence and post-emergence treatment in
Minnesota.
The use of herbicides on turf areas, other than lawns, in 1968
is presented in Table LXXXV. The data listed are for 33 states.
Brush Control Program
Table LXXXVI shows the acreage of rangeland and pastureland treated
for brush control during the period 1966 to 1969. The treatment is
carried out by the federal government in cooperation with the states.
Weed Control on Noncropland, Forest Plantings and Aquatic Areas
Tables LXXXVI I to LXXXIX summarize the extent and cost of
ehcmical weed control on noncropland, forest plantings and aquatic
areas, respectively.
Includes schools, industrial grounds, cemeteries, military instal-
lations, parks and golf courses.
161
-------
TABLE LXXXII
PESTICIDES EXPENDITURES ON LIVESTOCK BY REGION IN 1966
^
REGION
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
PERCENTAGE OF
FARMS REPORTING
PESTICIDE USE
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
PESTICIDE
EXPENDITURES
(1000 Dollars)
2,158
3,826
6,148
3,910
1,576
1,506
959
2,886
3,647
1,044
27,660
PERCENTAGE
OF
EXPENDITURES
7.8
13.8
22.2
14.1
5.7
5.4
3.5
10.4
13.2
3.8
99.9
(a) Includes beef and dairy cattle, sheep, hogs and others.
(b) Data from (14).
162
-------
TABLE LXXXIII
PESTICIDES EXPENDITURES ON POULTRY BY REGION IN 1966
(a)
REGION
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
PERCENTAGE OF
FARMS REPORTING
PESTICIDE USE
17
23
15
14
2
8
5
14
16
31
11
PESTICIDE
EXPENDITURES
(1000 Dollars)
248
183
230
162
74
218
166
92
175
262
1,810
PERCENTAGE
OF
EXPENDITURES
13.7
10.1
12.7
9.0
4.1
12.0
9.2
5.1
9.6
14.5
100.0
(a) Data from (14).
163
-------
TABLE LXXXIV
HOME LAWNS: ESTIMATED EXTENT AND COST OF CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL BY STATE. 1968
-------
TABLE LXXXV
OTHER TURF AREAS: ESTIMATED EXTENT AND COST OF CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL BY STATE, 1968
STATE AND REGION
Connecticut
Delaware
Maryland
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Pennsyi vania
West Virginia
Northeastern
Illinois
Iowa
Kansas
Minnesota
Ohio
South Dakota
Worth Central
Arkansas
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Louisiana
Mississippi
North Carolina
Oklahoma
Tennessee
Texas
Virginia
Southern
California
Idaho
Montana
Nevada
New Mexico
Utah
Washington
Wyoming
Hawaii
Western
United States
Pre-
emergence
(1000)
CO
4
5
1
3
13
10
50
5
10
30
1
106
(c)
5
50
5
4
5
5
250
324
14
2
(c)
1
4
1
22
465
ACRES TREATED
Post
emergence
(1000)
35
5
21
5
>
103
10
181
30
100
7
70
200
2
409
10
30
100
10
8
5
5
5
200
90
463
16
4
7
(c)
1
3
4
2
5
42
1,095
Pre- + Post-
emergence
(1000)
2
2
--
4
5
15
2
80
20
122
10
12
2
50
74
5
5
1
11
211
AVERAGE COST PER ACRE (b)
Pre-
emergence
(Dollars)
60.00
8.00
40.00
30.00
50.00
31.69
40.00
10.00
25.00
15.00
60.00
20.00
28.25
160.00
50.00
10.00
50.00
30.00
40.00
40.00
25.00
23.98
45.00
5.50
20.00
10.00
7.00
20.00
31.77
25.54
Post
emergence
(Dollars)
50.00
6.00
1.50
20.00
20.00
16.00
7.00
20.27
3.00
2.00
8.00
20.00
15,00
4.00
11.62
10.00
50.00
3.00
10.00
20.00
15.00
6.00
2.50
12.00
35.00
16.91
18.00
5.00
2.50
8.00
5.50
3.00
5.00
5.00
30.00
12.38
15.32
Pre- + Post-
emergence
12.00
-..
66.00
39.00
43.00
12.00
32.00
35,00
75.00
39.01
170.00
35.00
45.00
37.00
54.86
53.00
6.00
40.00
30.45
44.12
ACREAGE TREATED BY:
Owner
(Percent)
95
75
100
75
50
65
50
74.
95
95
80
90
20
80
64
100
100
90
90
90
90
80
90
95
95
70
91
70
100
90
5
90
80
10
75
50
68
78
Custom
Operators
5
25
25
50
35
50
26
5
5
20
10
80
20
36
10
10
10
10
20
10
5
5
30
9
30
__
10
95
10
20
90
25
50
32
22
(a) Taken from (22).
(b) Includes herbicide equipment and labor for treatment made by farmers. Represents cost of herbicide custom
applications and/or cost of owner-applied herbicides. Regional and United States averages are for
acreages on which costs were reported.
(c) Less than 500 acres.
165
-------
TABLE LXXXVI
ACREAGE OF RANGELAND AND PASTURELAND TREATED
FOR CONTROL OF BRUSH (a), (b)
STATE
Texas
Oregon
Oklahoma
Wyoming
Kansas
New Mexico
Idaho
Colorado
Arizona
Nebraska
Montana
California
Utah
Nevada
Iowa
Kentucky
Washington
North Dakota
Arkansas
Virginia
Other
TOTAL
ACREAGE
1966
1,162,537
40,806
98,836
76,760
72,143
67,730
47,783
42,930
49,930
30,006
46,519
14,365
38,876
9,144
5,836
4,569
5,974
15,089
8,921
23,828
1,878,975
1967
1,161,305
99,481
116,638
123,564
63,744
66,961
58,471
64,506
66,984
38,898
39,536
25,148
22,744
16,370
10,279
7,374
12,809
14,843
9,552
34,204
2,064,333
1968
1,098,642
60,946
166,172
96,601
62.835
53,484
52,325
50,397
48,576
46,183
25,967
20,673
19,585
18,755
8,188
6,944
4,515
16,263
8,397
8,612
22,475
1,910,894
1969
1,144,387
150,649
109,095
96,918
71.557
49,586
48,244
41,777
29,931
27,615
22,696
18,370
15,139
11,784
10,525
8,812
8,655
6,519
5,979
5,472
27,952
1,911,662
PERCENT
OF TOTAL
1969
59.86
7.88
5.71
5.07
3.74
2.59
2.52
2.19
1.57
1.45
1.19
0.96
0.79
0.62
0.55
0.46
0.45
0.34
0.31
0.29
1.46
100.00
(a) Taken from (4).
(b) Practice B-3 of the USDA Agricultural Conservation Program.
166
-------
TABLE LXXXVII
NONCROPLAND: ESTIMATED EXTENT AND COST OF CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL BY STATE(a)
Connecticut
Delaware
New Jersey
Pennsylvania
Northeastern
Illinois
Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
North Dakota
Ohio
South Dakota
North Central
Arkansas
Georgia
Mississippi
Tennessee
Texas
Virginia
Southern
Arizona
California
coxoraao
Idaho
Montana
Utah
Washington
Wyoming
Hawaii
Ues te rn
United States
ACRES TREATED
P re-
emergence
(1000)
1
1
1
1
--
7
9
1
50
50
101
25
1
1
27
138
Post-
emergence
(1000)
5
10
20
21
56
50
230
20
250
10
25
100
685
5
150
20
5
200
150
530
25
124
2u
7
3
10
50
2
8
249
1,520
Pre- + Post-
emergence
(1000)
._
1
1
__
__
1
AVERAGE COST PER ACRE (b)
Pre-
emergence
(Dollars)
_
50.00
50.00
__
10.00
20.00
50.00
42.22
100.00
25.00
10.00
18.32
20.00
10.00
15,00
19.44
20.33
Post-
emergence
(Dollars)
20.00
5.00
4.00
16.00
10.11
10.00
__
2.50
4.00
4.00
2.50
3.50
50.00
10.61
5.00
15.00
5.00
6.00
8.00
50.00
21.71
15.00
24.00
25.0o
16.00
4.50
3.00
8. on
30.00
15.00
18.42
15.74
Pre- + Post-
emergence
(Dollars)
55.00
55.00
__
__
._
__
.-
__
55.00
ACREAGE TREATED BY
Owners
(Percent)
100
20
85
90
75
10
100
80
10
15
10
30
75
46
100
50
25
20
90
5
55
50
25
70
10
90
80
in
80
50
34
48
Custom
Operators
(Percent)
80
15
10
25
90
20
90
85
90
70
25
54
50
75
80
10
95
45
50
75
33
90
10
20
90
20
50
66
52
(a) Taken from (22).
(b) Includes herbicide equipment and labor for treatment made by farmers. Represents cost of herbicide
custom applications and/or cost of owner-applied herbicides. Regional and United States averages
are for acreages on which costs were reported.
167
-------
TABLE LXXXVIII
FOREST PLANTINGS: ESTIMATED EXTENT AND COST Of CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL BY STATE, 1968
(a)
STATE AND REGION
Connecticut
New Jersey
Pennsylvania
Vermont
Northeastern
Illinois
Iowa
Kansas
North Dakota
North Central
Alabama
Arkansas
Florida
Louisiana
Mississippi
North Carolina
Tennessee
Virginia
Southern
California
Idaho
Montana
Oregon
Washington
Hawaii
Western
United States
Pre-
emergence
(1000)
2
5
.1
7.1
29
.3
.9
11
41.2
_
_
5
5.0
53.3
ACRES TREATE1
emergence
(1000)
1
29
12
.2
42.2
.3
.1
.6
1.0
100
10
131
100
2
1
2
346.0
7
(c)
.5
1
1
.2
9.7
398.9
3
emergence
(1000)
0.3
0.3
10
10.0
_
.2
.2
10.5
AVERAG
emergence
(Dollars)
10.00
9.50
7.50
9.61
8.00
4.00
13.00
5.00
7.28
__
10.00
~~
10.00
7.85
E COST PER
emergence
(Dollars)
15.00
15.00
10.50
7.50
13.68
9.50
10.00
2.00
5.05
15.00
10.00
15.00
13.00
10.00
8.00
10.00
14.20
12.00
3.75
7.00
10.00
5.00
10.00
10.77
14.04
ACRE (b)
emergence
(Dollars)
11.00
11.00
._
15.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
14.89
ACREAGE 1
(Percent)
90
95
90
100
93
95
100
90
60
85
10
1
5
91
50
100
5
50
51
35
100
100
100
10
100
42
58
REATED BY
Cus torn
Operators
(Percent)
10
5
10
7
5
10
40
15
90
99
95
9
50
95
50
49
65
90
~*~
58
42
(a) Taken from (22).
(b) Includes herbicide equipment and labor for treatment made by farmers. Represents cost of herbicide
custom applications and/or cost of owner-applied herbicides. Regional and United States averages
for acreages on which costs were reported.
(c) Less than 50 acres.
168
-------
TABLE LXXXIX
AQUATIC AREAS: ESTIMATED EXTENT AND COST OF
CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL BY STATE, 1968 (a)
o
State and Region
Connecticut
New Jersey
Pennsylvania
Northeastern
Illinois
Iowa
Minnesota
Wisconsin
North Central
Arkansas
Florida
Georgia
Mississippi
Tennessee
Texas
Virginia
Southern
California
Montana
Utah
Washington.
Wyoming
Hawaii
Western
United States
Acres treated
Pre-
emergence
(1000)
1
1.0
10
2
2
14.0
__.
2
2.0
.2
.2
17.2
Post-
emergence
(1000)
0.4
.5
6
6.9
8
.5
50
58.5
3
5
5
5
.1
100
3
121.1
3
2
-------
ALGORITHM FOR REGIONALIZATION OF PESTICIDES APPLIED TO CROPS
The algorithm discussed below can be used by EPA in SEAS to
estimate the quantity of each pesticide applied to each crop within each
state except Alaska and Hawaii. The algorithm is first presented and
then explained.
The quantity of each pesticide applied on each crop by state
is given by
Vs - Xi ' Dic * F; ' f ' Acr ' Tcrn ' (FPcrn ' Rpc> ' Scrs
where
Q is the quantity of pesticide p applied on crop c in
state s
X.^ is the dollar output of sector i of the SEAS input-
output model
D. is the disaggregation factor for crop c in sector i
P is the national average price per unit of crop c
(dollars per physical unit)
Y is the national average yield per acre of crop c
(physical units per acre)
A is the percent of the total acreage of crop c that is
normally grown in region r -
T is the percent of the acreage of crop c grown in region r
that is treated with pesticides of class n
is the regional application rate factor for pesticide p
of class n on crop c in region r
R is the national average application rate for pesticide p
on crop c
scrs is the percent of the regional crop acreage of crop c
that is grown in state s of region r.
Pesticide application data is not available for these two states.
170
-------
The algorithm is explained below.
Determination of Total Acreage Harvested
INFORUM is the input-output model used in SEAS. There are four
crop sectors in INFORUM^13^:
a. Cotton
b. Grains
c. Tobacco
d. Fruits, vegetables, other crops.
When INFORUM is processed, it calculates the dollar output associated
with each of these sectors. Let X. represent this dollar output from
each sector i. This dollar output must be converted into the equiva-
lent acreage harvested for each crop.
The first step in estimating this acreage is to determine the
dollar value of each individual crop in sector i. For tobacco and
cotton this dollar value is output by INFORUM. For the other crops
it must be calculated.
This is done by estimating, on the average, that portion of the
sector dollar activity which each crop represents. This proportion
is called the disaggregation factor. D. is the disaggregation
8
factor for crop c in sector i. For cotton and tobacco D. equals one.
The sector output i is then multiplied by the disaggregation factor
to determine the crop value (X. D. ).
Next, the quantity of the crop that is harvested is estimated.
This is calculated by dividing the crop value "by the national
average price, P ,of a unit measure of the crop, e.g., dollars per
Q
This quantity is not given in this paper, it is to be supplied to
the SEAS model by the International Research and Technology Corporation.
171
-------
bushel. This gives the quantity of the crop units harvested
-
The total acreage harvested for that crop is then estimated
by dividing the quantity harvested by the national average yield per
acre, Y , for that crop. This gives the total acreage of the crop
C 11
harvested on the national level (X. D. = = ). Crop yields
are listed in Table E-III of Appendix E.
Determination of the Regional Acreage to be Treated with
Each Type of Pesticide
The acreage harvested on the national level for each crop must
now be transformed into the acreage that is to be treated with each
type of pesticide within each region.
To do this, it is first necessary to estimate the percent of the
total national acreage of the crop that is normally grown in each
region. A is the percent of the total acreage of crop c that is
grown in region r. Values of A are given in Table XC. The total
national acreage is then multiplied by A to obtain the acreage of
cf i
the crop grown in the region (X. D. = A ).
c c
Next, it is necessary to estimate the amount of this regional
acreage that is to be treated with pesticides. This must be done for
each of the four classifications of pesticides. T is the percent
crn
of the acreage of crop c in region r that is normally treated with
pesticides of class n (the pesticide classes are fungicides, herbi-
cides, insecticides and miscellaneous pesticides). Tables LXX to
LXXIII give the values of T . The regional acreage is then multi-
plied by T __ to obtain the regional acreage of the crop to be treated
crn - -
by the pesticide class (X. D. =- A T ).
l ±c c Y cr crn
c c
172
-------
TABLE XC
PERCENTAGE OF CROP ACREAGE GROWN BY REGION, 1966
(a)
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
29.8
14.2
9.3
0.7
15.9
0.8
0.3
0.3
4.7
24.0
100.0
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
75.1
0.1
2.7
3.4
18.7
100.0
CORN
4.5
14.7
50.1
14.8
6.7
5.2
1.2
0.1
1.1
0.6'
100.0
COTTON
-
2.5
-
6.3
13.2
22.5
45.5
3.9
6.1
100.0
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS
1.7
16.0
9.8
28.4
3.7
4.0
4.6
6.1
12.8
12.9
100.0
OTHER
FRUITS
& NUTS
7.1
5.9
1.8
0.3
2.1
12.7
6.3
6.1
1.7
56.0
LOO.O
OTHER
GRAINS
3.0
12.4
11.1
31.1
2.0
1.5
3.0
19.3
9.4
7.2
100.0
CROP
OTHER
VEGETABLES
15.2
17.9
7.6
0.1
4.4
13.5
1.6
8.5
5.0
26.2
100.0
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
& HAY
2.t>
3.0
5.8
16.4
3.9
2.3
2.4
20.6
35.6
7.6
100.0
PEANUTS
-
-
-
18.5
52.6
0.2
28.1
0.5
-
99.9
POTATOES
21.8
14.4
2.2
8.8
4.2
4.7
0.6
2.2
26.9
14.2
100,0
SOYBEANS
1.2
10.8
52.0
6.2
7.1
4.4
17.6
0.7
-
-
100.0
TOBACCO
7.3
0.9
2.0
-
74.5
15.3
-
-
-
-
100.0
WHEAT
1.5
3.0
9.3
42.6
1.4
0.4
1.5
17.5
16.2
6.6
100.0
ALL
CROPS
2.6
5.0
11.8
18.2
4.1
2.9
3.2
17.9
27.4
6.9
100.0
(a) Data flow (16)
(b) Based on 1964 data
-------
Determination of the Amount of a Specific Pesticide
Applied to a Crop in a Specific Region
The regional acreage to be treated by a pesticide of class n
has to be multiplied by the regional application rate of a specific
pesticide, P, of class n to obtain the amount of that pesticide applied
on the crop in the region. The regional application rate of a speci-
fic pesticide of class n must be estimated from the national average
application rate since these data are not available on a regional
basis. The scheme for doing this is described below.
Table XXIV gives, by crop, the national average application rate
for each individual pesticide. This is transformed into the regional
rate as follows.
First, the national average application rate for each of the four
pesticide classes is calculated for each crop. Then the regional
average application rate for each of the four pesticides classes is
also calculated for each crop. A regional application factor is then
obtained for each crop by dividing the regional application rate by
the national application rate for each of the four classes of
pesticides.
For each crop it is then assumed that every-pesticide within a
class that is applied on the crop has this same regional application
factor as the entire class. F is the regional application rate
pern
factor for pesticide p of class n on crop c in region r. Values of
F are given in Tables XCI to XCIV.
pern
R is the national average application rate for individual
pesticide p on crop c. R is listed in Table XXIV. The regional
application rate is now obtained by multiplying R by F
The number of regional acres to be treated is then multiplied
by the regional application rate to determine the quantity of each
174
-------
TABLE XCI
REGIONAL APPLICATION RATE FACTOR FOR FUNGICIDES
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
1.03
1.23
0.89
-
1.48
-
-
-
0.10
0.23
1.00
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
0.85
-
11.96
-
-
i.oo
CORN
(a)
0.15
Q.18
1.49
0.40
-
-
-
-
-
-
1.00
COTTON
-
-
0.05
-
0.04
1.38
2.11
2.00
-
1.95
1.00
OTHER
FIELD
CROPSCa
OTHER
FRUITS
& NUTS
1.11
1.3?
0.30
-
1.75
0.36
2.71
-
3.39
0.79
1.00
OTHER(a
GRAINS
CROP
OTHER
VEGETABLES
1.16
1.56
2.17
-
4.39
0.78
-
2.17
0.69
0.33
1.00
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
& HAY
PEANUTS
-
-
-
-
2.32
0.58
-
-
-
-
1.00
POTATOES
1.45
0.85
3.97
0.73
-
-
-
-
0.08
0.33
1.00
SOYBEANS
(a)
TOBACCO
(a)
WHEAT
(a)
ALL
CROPS
1.60
1.57
2.16
0.59
1.89
0.56
1.70
1.13
0.28
0.48
1.00
O)
(a) Corn use includes use of corn, other field crops, other grains, soybeans, tobacco and wheat.
-------
TABLE XCII
REGIONAL APPLICATION RATE FACTOR FOR HERBICIDES
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
0.08
0.20
-
-
4.94
-
-
-
0.26
53.75
1.00
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
1.19
-
-
-
0.60
1.00
CORN
1.16
1.01
1.05
0.62
1.09
1.17
0.75
1.00
0.84
1.38
1.00
COTTON
-
-
0.53
-
0.60
1.06
1.09
0.94
1.14
2.73
1.00
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS("
1.85
1.10
0.88
0.54
1.78
0.25
0.65
0.30
1.00
1.86
1.00
CROP
OTHER
FRUITS
>& NUTS
0.20
0.60
0.06
-
-
0.06
0.17
-
-
1.62
1.00
OTHER
GRAINS
1.07
0.54
1.39
0.66
2.47
0.69
3.47
2.38
0.87
0.99
1.00
OTHER
VEGETABLES
1.71
0,42
0.32
-
0.49
0.26
0.67
0.54
0.68
1.57
1.00
PASTURE,
RANGELAtiO
& HAY
0.13
0.34
0.46
0.95
0.56
0.60
0.40
1.04
0.70
4.33
1.00
PEANUTS
-
-
-
-
0.69
1.15
-
0.10
0.10
-
1.00
POTATOES
1.51
1.52
2.40
-
-
0.04
-
-
0.20
0.25
1.00
SOYBEANS
0.96
1.14
1.10
1.00
0.55
0.86
0.87
0.42
-
-
1.00
TOBACCO
(a)
WHEAT
-
0.68
1.44
0.77
0.78
-
-
0.52
0.81
1.98
1.00
ALL
CROPS
1.85
0.93
1.11
0.55
1.01
1.61
1.16
1.15
0.60
1.98
1.00
(a) Other field crops includes use on tobacco.
-------
TABLE XCIII
REGIONAL APPLICATION RATE FACTOR FOR INSECTICIDES
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
1.18
0.96
3.26
-
0.88
-
-
0.07
0.36
0.34
1.00
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
1.03
-
1.54
-
0.77
1.00
CORN
-
0.99
1.26
1.12
0.09
0.02
0.01
-
0.45
0.52
1.00
COTTON
-
-
0.15
-
0.92
1.86
1.00
0.64
2.05
0.21
1.00
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS
2.46
0.95
0.82
0.86
69.90
0.28
2.09
1.27
0.79
1.29
1.00
OTHER
FRUITS
& NUTS
1.21
1.15
1.29
-
1.65
1.92
1.02
2.67
0.84
0.75
1.00
CROP
OTHER
GRAINS
0.57
1.87
0.51
0.49
3.00
3.98
0.47
1.05
0.20
-
1.00
OTHER
VEGETABLES
0.67
0.27
0.84
1.03
0.90
0.89
6.03
2.08
0.34
1.25
1.00
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
£, HAY
0.63
0.20
0.56
-
16.98
5.04
0.14
0.40
1.03
1.34
1.00
PEANUTS
-
-
-
-
0.64
1.18
-
-
-
-
1.00
POTATOES
1.04
0.99
3.45
0.93
0.49
0.11
-
0.02
0.49
1.31
1.00
SOYBEANS
0.98
-
0.72
0.18
1.26
1,27
0.29
-
-
-
1.00
TOBACCO
0.39
0.11
0.25
-
0.89
1.71
-
-
-
-
1.00
WHEAT
_
-
1.74
-
2.27
-
-
0.48
-
-
1.00
ALL
CROPS
0.81
0.64
0.48
0.46
1.00
1.87
2.45
1.32
0.78
1.28
1.00
-------
TABLE XCIV
REGIONAL APPLICATION RATE FACTOR FOR MISCELLANEOUS PESTICIDES
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN KELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
CHOP
APPLES
1.07
1.51
0.85
-
0.12
-
-
-
4.08
0.57
1.00
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
0.48
-
-
-
3.18
1.00
CORN
0.26
1.89
0.38
1.31
1.14
-
0.84
-
2.53
29.32
1.00
COTTON
-
-
0.23
-
0.22
0.44
0.50
0.32
0.74
10.39
1.00
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1.25
0.75
1.00
OTHER
FRUITS
4 NUTS
0.02
0.16
1.37
-
-
-
-
-
0.08
1.A8
1.00
OTHER
GRAINS
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.52
1.99
-
1.00
OTHER ()
VEGETABLES
1.06
0.61
1.23
-
4.63
2.38
-
-
0.30
0.20
1.00
PASTURE,
RANCELAND
& HAY
0.11
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.29
-
3.21
1.00
PEANUTS
-
-
-
-
0.68
1.16
-
-
-
-
1.00
POTATOES
. 4h) -
SOYBEANS
-
-
-
-
1.00
-
-
-
-
-
1.00
TOBACCO
0.10
-
0.15
-
0.89
2.09
-
-
-
-
1.00
WHEW
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.53
-
2.24
1.00
ALL
CROPS
0.43
1.06
0.40
0.41
1.58
1.43
0.28
0.14
0.38
3.71
1.00
N4
00
(a) Includes potatoes.
(b) Potatoes Included with other vegetables.
-------
pesticide applied on each crop within each region (X D . ~ .
v A T (? R ). c
YC cr crn pern pcy
Quantity of Each Pesticide Applied to Each Crop by State
S is the percent of the regional crop acreage of crop c that
is grown in state s of region r. Values of S are presented in
crs
Table E-II of Appendix E.
The quantity of each pesticide applied on each crop within the
region is then multiplied by S to obtain the quantity of each
crs
pesticide applied on each crop by state (Q = X. D. -
Acr * Tcm ' (Fprcn ' V ' Scrs)' s ^est Calculation0
assumes that for each pesticide and crop the state application rate
is the same as the regional application rate.
Quantity of Pesticide Applied in Each EPA Region
If desired, the quantity of each pesticide applied on each crop
can be aggregated for each of the ten EPA regions. To do this, the
values of Q are added for each state in each EPA region. The
pcs
states within each EPA region are listed in Appendix E.
Figure 2 shows a flow chart of the algorithm. It also summarizes
the table in which the value of each variable is given.
Assumptions in the Algorithm
The following assumptions have been made in the algorithm.
a. Every pesticide applied to a specific crop on the
national level is also applied to the crop on the
state level.
b. For each crop within a region,every pesticide
applied on that crop has the same regional appli-
cation factor as the entire class to which it belongs.
c. For each crop the state pesticide application rate
is identical to the regional pesticide application
rate.
179
-------
Multiply by D± to
Calculate Dollar Output
of Each Crop
(b)
Multiply by £ to
rc
Calculate Units of Crop
that is Grown
Multiply by £ to
*c
Calculate Total Acreage
Grown for the Crop
(c)
Multiply by Acr to
Determine Regional
Crop Acreage Grown
(d)
Multiply by Tcrn to
Calculate Crop Acreage
Treated by Each Class of
Pesticide in Each Region
(e)
Multiply by (Fpcrn . Rpc)
Obtain Quantity of Each
Pesticide Applied on
Each Crop by Region
(f)
to
Multiply by Scrs to
Obtain Quantity of Each
Pesticide Applied on Each
Crop by State
(g)
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
X± from INFORUM
D, and P supplied by International Research and Technology Corp.
LC C
YC is given in Table E-III of Appendix E
Acr is given in Table XC
is Riven in Tables LXX - LXXIII
crn
F is given in Tables XCI - XCIV
pern
S is given in Table E-II of Appendix E.
R is given in Table XXIV
pc
FIGURE 2
FLOWCHART OF ALGORITHM
-------
d. For each state the percent of crop acreage treated
by each class of pesticides is identical to the
percent of crop acres treated for the region
(variable
Sample Calculation
The amount of carbaryl applied on peanuts in Georgia in 1971 is
to be calculated. Georgia belongs to the Southeast Region.
Peanuts are contained in the fruits, vegetables and other crops
sector, Sector 7, of INFORUM. It is assumed that the dollar activity
of sector 7 is $4 billion and that peanuts account for one-twentieth
of this activity. The disaggregation factor is therefore 0.05. Thus,
9
the dollar activity for peanuts is $400 million.
Table XCV gives the value of the other variables. Values of P ,
Y , and S represent 1971 data and have been obtained from (7).
C CITS
Values for A . T . R and F represent 1966 data and have been
cr crn pc pern
obtained from the appropriate table.
(0.526) (0.75) ((1.18) (5.08)) (0.676)
Q =1.14 million pounds.
xpcs r
The quantity of carbaryl applied on peanuts in Georgia is estimated
to be 1.14 million pounds in 1971.
9 In 1971, the total farm value of peanuts was $405 million.
181
-------
TABLE XCV
VARIABLE VALUES FOR THE SAMPLE PROBLEM (PEANUTS)
VARIABLE
VALUE
X.
ic
cr
crn
pern
R
pc
crs
$4 billion
0.05
$0.136 per pound
2,067 pounds per acre
0.526
0.75
1.18
5.08 pounds per acre
0.676
182
-------
SECTION VIII
PRODUCTIVITY AND SUBSTITUTION OF PESTICIDES
It is generally believed that the use of pesticides helps to
increase agricultural productivity. However, very little has been
done to determine the exact value of pesticide productivity or the
costs associated with substituting one type of pesticide for another.
Several studies which have attempted to answer these two questions
are discussed in this section.
PRODUCTIVITY
Using 1963 data, Headley estimated that U.S. agriculture could,
on the average, obtain four additional dollars of farm sales for one
additional dollar of pesticide expenditure in 1963. Although
Headley points out that there are several economic and statistical
limitations involved in his study, it does indicate that pesticides can
be a highly productive input for agriculture.
Headley also carried out a later study aimed at estimating the
(27)
marginal contribution of pesticides on a regional basis. This
study made use of 1964 data on pesticide application. Table XCVI
presents the estimated marginal productivity of herbicides and insecti-
cides by farm production region obtained from the analysis.
The table shows the additional dollar output that can be obtained
from the use of one additional ounce of pesticide within each region.
For insecticides this marginal productivity exceeds the average cost
per ounce of the insecticidal material in all regions except the
Southeast and the Southern Plains. In these two regions the average
cost per ounce of materials exceeds the marginal productivities of
$0.005 and $0.06 per ounce, respectively.
183
-------
TABLE XCVI
ESTIMATED MARGINAL PRODUCTIVITY OF HERBICIDES
AND INSECTICIDES BY REGION, 1964 (a)
REGION
Northeast
Lake States
Corn Belt
Northern Plains
Appalachian
Southeast
Delta States
Southern Plains
Mountain
Pacific
MARGINAL PRODUCTIVITY
(Dollars Per Ounce)
Herbicides
(c)
-1.02
2.38 (b)
0.13
0.60
(c)
0.22
1.05 (b)
(c)
(c)
Insecticides
1.31 (b)
11.09 (b)
0.76
(c)
0.31
0.005
0.30 (b)
0.06 (b)
13.85 (b)
1.74 (b)
(a) Data from (27).
(b) These estimates are the only estimates that are
statistically significant at the 95 percent
confidence level.
(c) Not available.
184
-------
The marginal productivities of the insecticides tend to be
lowest in those areas in which the insecticides were being the most
widely used. These areas of high use are the cotton producing regions
of the Southeast, Delta, Appalachian and Southern Plains Regions.
For herbicides the results are less impressive. They are also not
as statistically significant as the results for insecticides. The
marginal productivities are statistically significant only for the
Corn Belt and the Southern Plains.
Even though the Corn Belt is the region of highest herbicide use,
it is also the region which has the highest marginal productivity
for herbicides.
Unlike insecticides, the marginal productivity of herbicides is
estimated to be negative for the nation as a whole, i.e., an increase
in the use of herbicides would reduce output! Although this result is
not statistically significant, it should evoke some thought since
herbicides use is currently the fastest growing pesticide use.
As part of this last study, Headley also estimated the marginal
rate of substitution of cropland for insecticides and the elasticity
of substitution of cropland for insecticides. The results are given
in Table XCVII.
The marginal rate of substitution of cropland for insecticides
gives the amount by which pesticides use per acre may be reduced for
each one acre increase in cropland if production is to be held constant.
The Southeast and Southern Plains had very low marginal productivi-
ties for insecticides and consequently have very high marginal rates
of substitution.
The statistical significance is measured at the 95 percent confidence
level. The fact that the other marginal productivities are not
statistically significant at this level does not necessarily mean
that they are invalid estimates.
185
-------
TABLE XCVII
MARGINAL RATES OF SUBSTITUTION AND ELASTICITY OF
SUBSTITUTION OF CROPLAND FOR INSECTICIDE,
BY REGION, 1964 (a)
REGION
Northeast
Lake States
Corn Belt
Northern Plains
Appalachian
Southeast
Delta States
Southern Plains
Mountain
Pacific
TOTAL
MARGINAL RATE OF SUBSTITUTION
OF CROPLAND FOR INSECTICIDES
(b)
(d)
-0.80
-10.03
(d)
-33.19
-3,257.00
-256.47
-547.17
-0.97
-24.06
-13.24
ELASTICITY OF SUBSTITUTION
OF CROPLAND FOR INSECTICIDES
(c)
(d)
-8.16
-4.35
(d)
-2.70
-326.67 (e)
-14.89
-170.04 (e)
-7.77
-6.49
-6.49
(a) Taken from (27).
(b) Ounces by which insecticides use per acre may be reduced
for each one acre increase in cropland if production
is to be held constant.
(c) Percentage decrease in insecticide use per one percent
increase in cropland.
(d) Not available.
(e) These numbers are valid only for a cropland increase of
much less than one percent.
186
-------
Headley defines the elasticity of substitution as the percentage
change in insecticide use required to keep production constant when
cropland is increased by one percent. This elasticity is negative so
an increase in cropland requires a decrease in pesticide use. The
elasticity for the U.S. is calculated as -6.49. So an increase in
cropland by 1 percent could possibly lead to a decrease in insecticide
use of almost 6.5 percent if agricultural production were to be held
constant.
SUBSTITUTION OF ONE PESTICIDE FOR ANOTHER
The costs of restricting the use of phenoxy herbicides and of
2,4,5-T in particular and the cost of restricting the use of organo-
chlorine insecticides and of chlordane in particular are discussed
below.
Phenoxy Herbicides
2,4-D and 2,4,5-T are the most commonly used phenoxy herbicides.
Lesser used phenoxy or related herbicides include dichlorprop, erbon,
fenac, MCPA, MCPB, silvex, 2,4-DB and 2,4-DEP.
For some crops the phenoxy herbicides are the only herbicides
which are capable of providing satisfactory weed control. However,
for many other crops, other herbicides used in conjunction with
selected cultural techniques can provide satisfactory weed control.
Usually this control is obtained at a higher cost.
To determine the costs of prohibiting phenoxy herbicides, the
following factors must be considered:
Actually the elasticity is only valid at a specific point. When
the amount of cropland changes, the elasticity also changes. Thus,
if cropland were to change by, say, 0.1 percent the elasticity may
not be -6.49 for the remaining 0.9 percent of cropland change.
187
-------
a. The difference between the cost of purchasing and
applying the phenoxy herbicides and the cost of
purchasing and applying the other herbicides.
b. The cost of necessary additional cultural
practices such as mowing, additional tillage before
planting, changing rotation, additional cultivations
and bulldozing brush.
c. The cost of production on additional acres which are
required to offset any loss of yield that results
when phenoxy herbicides are not used.
Table XCVIII summarizes by crop the costs of prohibiting the
(28)
use of phenoxy herbicides. The costs are based on cultural
practices available in 1969 and on 1966 estimates of use.
Based on 1969 practices, an additional expenditure of $4.63 per
crop acre is required if phenoxy herbicides are prohibited. The total
net additional cost is $289.3 million. This additional cost breaks
down as follows:
a. $60.7 million for the purchase and application
of the other herbicides
b. $137.6 million for the necessary additional
cultural practices
c. $91.0 for production on the additional 5.7
million acres required to offset yield losses
in rice, wheat, small grains and other crops.
2.4.5-T
The cost of restricting one phenoxy herbicide, 2,4,5-T, has been
(18)
estimated for both farm and nonfarm uses. This estimate has been
made for both the case when no other phenoxy herbicides may be used
as substitutes and for the case when other phenoxy herbicides may be
used as substitutes. The estimate is based on 1969 practices and 1966
estimates of use.
188
-------
TABLE XCVIII
COSTS OF PROHIBITING THE USE OF PHENOXY HERBICIDES
^ ' ^
USE
Corn
Other Small Grain
(e)
Pasture and
Rangeland
Rice
Sorghum
Wheat
Other Crops (g)
TOTAL
1966
ACREAGE
TREATED
WITH
PHENOXYS
(1000)
23,136
9,692
7 767
145
3,558
14,577
3,590
62,465
COST OF
PHENOXY
AND
APPLICATION
($1,000,000)
37.0
14.6
17.6
0.4
5.6
21.9
5.4
102.5
ADDITIONAL
INPUTS REQUIRED
LAND (c)
(1000 Acres)
-
1,838
24
-
3,335
538
5,735
LABOR
(1000 Hours)
-
2,757
8,028
142(f)
-
5,003
3,648
19,578
COST OF SUBSTITUTE PRACTICE
SUBSTITUTE
HERBICIDE AND
APPLICATION
($1,000,000)
122.5
10.9
-
14.5
15.3
-
163.2
ADDITIONAL
CULTURAL
PRACTICES (d)
($1,000,000)
21.2
9.1
86.4
6.4
2.4
12.1
-
137.6
PRODUCTION ON
ADDITIONAL
ACRES (d)
($1,000,000)
-
23.1
_
1.6
-
45.0
21.3
91.0
TOTAL
NET
ADDITIONAL
COSTS
($1,000,000)
106.7
28.5
68.8
7.6
11.3
50.5
15.9
289.3
NET
ADDITIONAL
COST PER
TREATED
ACRE
(Dollars)
4.61
2.94
8.86
52.41
3.18
3.46
4.43
4.63
00
CO
(a) Data from (28).
(b) Based on estimated use shown by (2) and on substitute practices available in 1969. Does not include Alaska and Hawaii. Does not
include fence rows, ditches, building sites, other noncropland, Government-sponsored control programs, nor any nonfarm use.
(c) Calculated based on Agricultural Research Service estimates of yield reductions.
(d) Includes costs for hired labor assuming the national average ratio of hired labor to total labor used for each crop.
(e) Includes barley, oats and rye.
(f) Additional costs for cultural practices and loss in quality related to maintaining rice production minus returns for rice above
those for soybeans on the additional acres where rice was grown in place of soybeans. Includes $2.2 million for lower income from
loss in quality.
(g) Includes all other crops listed in Table XVIII except potatoes and tobacco.
-------
Table XCIX shows the additional costs when no phenoxy herbicides
can be used. The additional costs per acre are $12.77 for farm uses
and $28.49 for non-farm uses. The total additional cost per acre for
all uses is $21.66.
Table C shows the additional costs when otherpphenoxy herbicides
can be used. The additional costs per acre are $9.25 for farm uses
and $4.40 for non-farm uses. The total additional cost per acre for
all uses is $6.51.
In both cases the largest additional farm expenditure is for weed
and brush control on pasture, rangeland and hay. The lowest farm
expenditure is for wheat. The largest additional non-farm expenditure
is for weed and brush control on rights-of-way. The lowest expenditure
is for lawn and turf.
Organochlorine
Organochlorine insecticides pose long-term environmental problems
because of their persistence. As they are replaced by organophosphorus
and carbamate insecticides, these long-term environmental changes will
be reduced; however, there may be some increase in short-term problems.
The cost of replacing Organochlorine insecticides with organo-
phosphorus and carbamate insecticide has been evaluated for four
(29)
crops. The crops are corn, cotton, peanuts and tobacco.
For peanuts and tobacco, organophosphorus and carbamate insecti-
cides can be effectively substituted for the organochlorines.
Diazinon, carbaryl and parathion are the insecticides that can be
utilized.
For cotton, some Organochlorine insecticides must be used in con-
junction with the organophosphorus and carbamate insecticides if yields
are to be maintained. The insecticides that can be utilized are
methyl parathion, dicrotophos, trichlorfon and azinphosmethyl.
190
-------
TABLE XCIX
COST OF RESTRICTING 2,4,5-T IF NO OTHER PHENOXY HERBICIDES
COULD BE USED, BUT ALL OTHER REGISTERED HERBICIDES COULD BE USED (a), (b)
USE
FARM
Corn
Other Small Grains
(e)
Pasture, Rangeland
and Hay
Sorghum
Wheat
Other Crops (f)
Other Farm Uses
TOTAL
NONFARM
Federal Government
Lawn and Turf
Rights-of-Way
Private Nonfarm
Aquatic Areas
Other
TOTAL
TOTAL ALL USES
ACREAGE
TREATED
WITH
2,4,5-T
(1000)
255
196
2,441
48
55
117
339
3,451
- 296
1,200
2,175
430
81
306
4,488
7,939
COST OF
2,4,5-T
AND
APPLICATION
($1,000)
454
921
4,052
62
99
229
2,204
8,021
3,287
2,850
33,772
3;738
608
2.219
46,474
54,495
ADDITIONAL
INPUTS REQUIRED
LAND (c)
(1000 Acres)
_
34
13
18
65
_
-
-
65
LABOR
(1000 Hours)
-
69
20
122
211
-
_
-
_
211
COST OF SUBSTITUTE PRACTICE
SUBSTITUTE
HERBICIDE AND
APPLICATION
($1,000)
1,331
218
197
55
4,585
6,386
3,901
2,310
84,812
_
91,023
97,409
ADDITIONAL
CULTURAL
PRACTICES (d)
($1,000)
353
1,328
40,551
48
43
1,866
44,189
10,863
4,800
23,936
33,630
2,430
7,650
83,309
127,498
PRODUCTION ON
ADDITIONAL
ACRES (d)
($1,000)
-
639
176
714
1,529
_
-
_
-
1,529
TOTAL
NET
ADDITIONAL
COSTS
($1,000)
1,230
1,264
36,499
183
175
485
4,247
44,083
11,477
4,260
74,976
29,892
1,822
5,431
127,858
171,941
NET
ADDITIONAL
COST PER
TREATED
ACRE
(Dollars)
4.82
6.45
14.95
3.81
3.18
4.15
12.52
12.77
38.77
3.55
34.47
69.52
22.49
17.75
28.49
21.66
ID
(a) Data from (18).
(b) Based on estimated use shown in (25) and on substitute practices available in 1969.
(c) Calculated based upon Agricultural Research Service Estimates of yield reductions.
(d) Includes costs for hired labor assuming the national average ratio of hired labor to total labor used for each crop.
(e) Includes barley, oats, rye and rice.
(f) Includes all other crops listed in Table XVIII except potatoes and tobacco.
-------
TABLE C
COST OF RESTRICTING 2,4,5-T
IF OTHER PHENOXY HERBICIDES AND ALL OTHER REGISTERED HERBICIDES COULD BE USED (a) , (b)
USE
FARM
Corn
Other Small Grains
(e)
Pasture, Rangeland
and Hay
Sorghum
Wheat
Other Crops (f)
Other Farm Use
TOTAL
NONFARM
Federal Government
Lawn and Turf
Rights-of-Way
Private Nonfarm
Forest
Aquatic Areas
Other
TOTAL
TOTAL ALL USES
ACREAGE
TREATED
WITH
2,4,5-T
(1000)
255
196
2,441
48
55
117
339
3,451
296
1,200
2,175
430
81
306
4,488
7,939
COST OF
2,4,5-T
AND
APPLICATION
($1.000)
454
921
4,052
62
99
229
2,204
8,021
3,287
2,850
33,772
3,738
608
2,219
46,474
54,495
ADDITIONAL
INPUTS REQUIRED
LAND (c)
(1000 Acres)
_
27
-
_
3
8
-
38
_
_
-
-
_
-
-
38
LABOR
(1000 Hours)
45
_
_
4
54
103
_
_
-
-
_
-
-
103
COST OF SUBSTITUTE PRACTICE
SUBSTITUTE
HERBICIDE AND
APPLICATION
($1,000)
408
414
1,781
75
83
150
2,115
5,026
3,765
3,720
36,028
4,411
760
3,026
51,710
56,736
ADDITIONAL
CULTURAL
PRACTICES (d)
($1,000)
255
667
32,443
48
_
766
34,179
735
240
9,548
3,363
240
375
14,501
48,680
PRODUCTION ON
ADDITIONAL
ACRES (d)
($1,000)
392
_
41
317
750
_
_
-
_
_
-
750
TOTAL
NET
ADDITIONAL
COSTS
($1,000)
209
552
30,172
61
25
239
677
31,935
1,213
1,110
11,804
4,036
392
1,182
19,737
51,672
NET
ADDITIONAL
COST PER
TREATED
ACRE
(Dollara)
0.82
2.82
12.36
1.27
0.45
2.04
2.00
9.25
4.10
0.93
5.43
9.39
4.84
3.86
4.40
6.51
CD
to
(a) Source:
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
Restricting Use of 2. 4. 5-T. Costa to Domestic Users. Agriculture Economic
Report No. 99, ETS, USDA, Washington, D.C., March 1971.
Based on estimated use shown in 1966 and on substitute herbicides available in 1969.
Calculated based upon Agricultural Research Service estimates of yield reductions.
Includes costs for hired labor assuming the national average ratio of hired labor to total labor
used for each crop.
Includes barley, oats, rice and rye.
Includes all other crops except potatoes and tobacco.
-------
For corn, in 1966 there were no alternatives to organochlorine
insecticides for the control of several insects. The carbamate and
organophosphor insecticides can only be used on 5.9 million of the 15.8
million acres treated with organochlorine insecticides in 1966. Diazinon
and carbaryl are the insecticides that can be utilized on these
acres.
Table CI summarizes the costs associated with restricting the
use of organochlorine insecticides on the four crops.
Based on 1966 substitute practices and uses, it would cost an
estimated $2.23 per acre to replace the organochlorines used on the
four crops. The cost per crop ranges from $1.23 per treated acre
for corn to $4.22 per treated acre for tobacco.
Chlordane
The estimated costs of discontinuing the farm use of chlordane,
an organochlorine insecticide, are summarized in Table CII. The
12
costs are based upon the estimated 1971 use of chlordane. In
determining the costs, it has been assumed that no organochlorine in-
secticide may be substituted for chlordane and that the cost of
application of chlordane or its substitute are equal.
It is estimated that discontinuing chlordane would cost $6.43
per treated acre. The costs range from $0.17 per treated acre for
cotton to $30.33 per treated acre for citrus.
The total net additional cost is estimated to be $1.8 mill inn.
Additional costs result from two sources. The first is the additional
cost of the insecticides required to replace chlordane. These substi-
tute insecticides include diazinon, carbaryl, methyl parathion and
parathion. This cost is estimated to be $1.56 million.
12
For corn the use is based on an unpublished 1971 survey by the
Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
193
-------
TABLE CI
COSTS OF RESTRICTING ORGANOCHLORINE INSECTICIDES (a)
USE
Corn
Cotton
Peanuts
Tobacco
TOTAL
ACREAGE
TREATED
WITH
ORGANOCHLORINES
(1000)
15,761
4,933
500
623
21,817
COST OF
ORGANOCHLORINES
AND
APPLICATION
($1,000,000)
24.4
34.8
4.8
4.2
68.1
COST OF
SUBSTITUTE
INSECTICIDES
AND ,.,
APPLICATION v '
($1.000,000)
31.7W)
50.1
6.3
6.8
94. 9 (d)
TOTAL
NET
ADDITIONAL
COSTS
($1,000,000)
7.3
15.4
1.4
2.6
26.7
NET
ADDITIONAL
COST PER
TREATED
ACRE
(Dollars)
1.23(c)
3.12
2.90
4.22
2.23(c)
VO
(a) Data from (29).
(b) Based on estimated use shown by (2) and substitute practices available in 1966.
(c) Only 5.9 million acres of the 15.8 million treated with organochlorines could
be treated using substitute practices.
(d) Includes the cost for 10.8 million pounds of organochlorines still required
for corn and 6.6 million pounds still required for cotton.
-------
TABLE CII
COST OF DISCONTINUING CHLORDANE USE, 1971
(a)
USE
Citrus
Corn
Cotton
Other Vegetables
Potatoes
Tobacco
TOTAL
ACREAGE
TREATED
WITH
CHLORDANE
(1,000)
(d)
3
208
6
14
38
17
286
COST OF
CHLORDANE (b)
($1,000)
2
422
10
73
257
46
810
ADDITIONAL COSTS
SUBSTITUTE
INSECTICIDE (b)
($1,000;
(c)
1,830
11
99
365
60
2,365
YIELD
LOSS
($1,000)
93
-
-
190(e)
-
-
283
TOTAL
NET
ADDITIONAL
COSTS
($1,000)
91
1,408
1
216
108
14
1,838
NET
ADDITIONAL
COST PER
TREATED
ACRE
(Dollars)
30.33
6.77
0.17
15.43
2.84
0.82
6.43
VO
Ul
(a) Data from (30).
(b) Includes only the cost of the insecticide; does not include application costs which
are assumed to remain the same for chlordane and alternative insecticides.
(c) No effective substitute nonorganochlorine insecticide available.
(d) Except for corn, estimate of 1971 acreage based on 1966 data from (2). For corn
estimate based on unpublished data from the Economic Research Service of the USDA.
(e) There would be a loss of yield for strawberries, beets, broccoli, brussel sprouts,
cabbage, cauliflower, celery, cucumbers, lettuce, melons, pumpkins, radishes,
rutabagas, squash and turnips.
-------
The second cost results from the loss of yield which results
when chlordane is not used. For citrus there is no effective substi-
tute non-organochlorine insecticide available. For a number of vege-
tables there is an expected.yield loss of approximately 3 percent.
The total loss in yield is estimated to be $0.28 million dollars for
these two crops.
196
-------
SECTION IX
EFFECTS
The effects of pesticides on man and other non-target species
are presented in this section. The ability of a specific pesticide
to affect non-target organisms depends, to a great degree, on factors
such as the pesticide's mobility, persistence and degradability.
Data on these factors are presented in Appendix G.
EFFECTS ON MAN
Four measures of human tolerances to pesticides have been compiled.
These measures are the Threshold Limit Value (TLV), the fatal dose,
the permissible criteria for drinking water and the maximum acceptable
daily intake. Values for selected pesticides are listed in Table CUT
and discussed below. Following this, there is a discussion on the
carcinogenic, mutagenic and teratogenic hazards of specific pesticides.
This is followed by a discussion of specific instances of poisoning
and diseases caused by pesticides.
Threshold Limit Value
The TLV is the maximum time-weighted pesticide concentration to
which industrial workers may be exposed in the work environment for a
7-or 8-hour day and a 40-hour work week. The TLV is set by the
American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists and has been
adopted by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) as
their standard in most instances.
The TLV's are given in terms of the milligrams of substance that
may be found per cubic meter of workroom. Values range from 0.01 for
13
organic mercury compounds to 80.0 for methyl bromide. Many of the
13
It is proposed that the standard for methyl bromide be changed to
60.0 mg/nr*.
197
-------
TABLE CIII
HUMAN TOLERANCES TO PESTICIDES
0.2(e>
0.5(e)
5.0
5.0
5.0
FATAL
DOSE(b)
(grams)
5
140
0.2
40-60
50
0.2
PERMISSIBLE
CRITERIA
FOR DRINKING
WATER (c)
(PPM)
0.017
0.05
FAO/WHO
MAXIMUM
ACCEPTABLE (d)
DAILY INTAKE
(mg/kg)
O.OOOl(h)
0.0025
0.004(f)
0.125(f)
0.01(f)
-------
TABLE CHI (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Chlordane
Chlorobenzllate
Coumaphos
Crufomate
DDT
Diazinon
Dichlorvos
Dicofol
Dieldrin
Dimethoate
Dinitro Group
Binapacryl
Endosulfan
Endrln
TLV(a)
(mg/m3)
0.5
-------
TABLE CIII (CONTINUED)
10
o
o
PESTICIDE
Ethion
Ferbam
Heptachlor
Inorganic Herbicides Group
Arsenic Acid
Arsenic Trioxide
Sodium Arsenite
Inorganic Insecticide Group
Calcium Arsenate
Lead Arsenate
Lindane
Malathion
Maneb
(Organic) Mercury Compounds
TLVfa)
(mg/m3)
10.0
0.50(e),(J)
0.01(e)
FATAL
DOSE (b)
(grams)
15-42
60
PERMISSIBLE
CRITERIA
FOR DRINKING
WATER (c)
(PPM)
0.018
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.056
FAO/WHO
MAXIMUM
ACCEPTABLE (d)
DAILY INTAKE
(ng/kg)
0.00125
0.025^
0.0005
0.0125
0.02
0.025(f)
-------
TABU: cm (CONCLUDED)
PESTICIDE
Methoxychlor
Methyl Bromide
Methyl Parathion
Paraquat
Parathion
PCP
Ronnel
TEPP
Toxaphene
Trichlorfon
2, 4-D
2,4, 5-T
Zineb
TLV(a)
(mg/m3)
15
80.0(e)>(i)
0.2(e)
0.5(e>
0.1(e)
0.5(e)
10.0
0.05(e)
0.5(e>
10.0
FATAL
DOSE(b)
(grams)
350
0.1
18
0.05
5
25
48
42
PERMISSIBLE
CRITERIA
FOR DRINKING
WATER (c)
(PPM)
0.035
0.1
0.005
0.1<8>
FAO/WHO
MAXIMUM
ACCEPTABLE (d)
DAILY INTAKE
(mg/kg)
0.1
0.0007(f)
0.005
0.01
0.3(8)
0.025(f)
(a) Data from (31), (32), (33), and (34). (f) Temporary standard.
(b) Data from (32) and (35). (g) 2, 4-D and 2, 4, 5-T combined.
Data applies to a 70 kg. man. (h) This limit applies to Aldrin and
(c) Data from (36). Dieldrin singularly or in combination
(d) Data from (37), (38) and (39). (i) Proposed new standard is 60.0 mg/m3.
(e) Applies to skin (j) Given as 10.0 in (31).
-------
values apply to skin. This means that the potential contribution to
overall exposure by the cutaneous route, including mucuous membranes
and eye, either by airborne exposure or, more importantly, by direct
contact with the substance is considered part of the standard.
Fatal Dose
The fatal dose is the estimated amount of pesticide that can
kill a 70 kilogram man. Published values range from 0.05 grams of
TEPP to 350 grams of methoxychlor.
Drinking Water
The permissible criteria for drinking water is the maximum per-
missible level of the pesticide which may be found in drinking water.
The criteria is based upon the recommendations of the Public Health
Service (PHS) Advisory Committee on Use of the PHS Drinking Water
Standard. The values represent the level of the pesticide which, if
ingested over extended periods, is not expected to cause harmful or
adverse physiological changes in man.
The published levels range from 0.001 ppm for crufornate and
endrin to 0.1 for 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T combined.
Table CIV compares the maximum pesticide concentration found in
U.S. streams during the period 1964 to 1968 with the permissible criteria
for drinking water (Table CIII) and with the maximum reasonable stream
allowance. The maximum reasonable stream allowance is the maximum safe
level of pesticide concentration in water from which fish are harvested
for human consumption. This value is lower than the permissible criteria
for drinking water because of the ability of some fish to biologically
magnify the pesticide concentration within their body (biological mag-
nification is discussed in a later subsection).
The maximum concentration of each pesticide found did not exceed
the permissible criteria for drinking water. However, the maximum
reasonable stream allowance for dieldrin and endrin were exceeded.
202
-------
TABLE CIV
MAXIMUM PESTICIDE CONCENTRATION FOUND VERSUS
PERMISSIBLE WATER SUPPLY CRITERIA
AND REASONABLE STREAM ALLOWANCE (a)
PESTICIDE
Dieldrin
Endrin
DDT
DDE
DDD
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Aldrin
Lindane (BHC)
Chlordane
Methoxychlor
Toxaphene
Herbicides :
2,4-D plus
2,4,5-T plus
2,4,5-TP
Phenols
PERMISSIBLE^
CRITERIA
(ng/D
17
1
42
(c)
(c)
18
18
17
56
3
35
5
100
1
MAXIMUM
REASONABLE
STREAM
ALLOWANCE
(Hg/l)
0.25
0.1
0.5
(c)
(c)
1.0
1.0
0.25
5.0
0.25
20.0
2.5
(c)
(c)
MAXIMUM
CONCENTRATION
FOUND
(Hg/D
0.407
0.133
0.316
0.050
0.840
0.048
0.067
0.085
0.112
0.169
(d)
(e) .
(d)
(d)
(a) Taken from (40). Data are from the period 1964-1968.
G>) Data from (36).
(c) No criteria given for these compounds.
(d) Not determined.
(e) Not detected
203
-------
Maximum Acceptable Daily Intake
The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO of the United Nations
and the World Health Organization (WHO) establish joint standards for
the maximum acceptable daily intake of pesticides in food. The standards
are given both for total pesticide consumption and by pesticide allowed
per food. The values represent the level of pesticide intake which,
if ingested over extended periods, is not expected to cause harmful or
adverse physiological changes in man.
Published values range from 0.0001 mg/kg of aldrin and dieldrin to
0.3 mg/kg for 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T combined.
Table CV compares the FAO/WHO acceptable limits to the typical
dietary intake during the period from 1965 to 1968. The intake of all
pesticides, except aldrin and dieldrin, was at least one order of
magnitude less than the limit in every year. The intake of aldrin
and dieldrin exceeded their joint limit in 1966 and was slightly
under the limit in the other years.
Carcinogenic Hazard
The Commission on Pesticides and Their Relationship to Environ-
mental Health, Technical Panel on Carcinogenesis evaluated available
data on the tumorigenicity of pesticides and assigned them to four
groups based upon their hazard. The'groups are as follows:^
a. Group A, pesticides judged not positive for
tumorigenicity. These pesticides have been
judged negative for tumor induction in at least
two species.14
b. Group B, pesticides judged positive for tumori-
genicity. These pesticides have been judged positive
for tumor induction in one or more species.^
14
This does not constitute assurance that the pesticide is entirely
lacking in carcinogenic potential.
These data are statistically significant at the 0.01 level.
204
-------
TABLE CV
COMPARISON OF FAO/WHO ACCEPTABLE DAILY INTAKE AND
DAILY DIETARY INTAKE (a)
PESTICIDE
Aldrin and Dieldrin
Carbaryl
DDT, DDE, TDE
Heptachlor and
Heptachlor Epoxide
Lindane
Mala th ion
Parathion
All Organochlorines
All Organophosphates
All Herbicides
FAO/WHO
ACCEPTABLE
DAILY INTAKE
(mg/Kg)
0.0001
0.01 (b)
0.005
0.0005
0.0125
0.02
0.005
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
DAILY DIETARY INTAKE
(mg/Kg)
1968
0.00006
0.0007
0.000031
0.00004
0.00004
0.000001
0.0011
0.00007
0.00006
1967
0.00006
0.0001
0.0008
0.000021
0.00007
0.0002
0.00001
0.0012
0.00025
0.00005
1966
0.00013
0.0005
0.0010
0.00005
0.00006
0.00001
0.00001
0.0016
0.00014
0.00022
1965
0.00009
.0021
0.0009
0.000033
0.00007
0.0012
0.00012
(a) Sources: Pesticide Residues in Food, Report of the 1971 Joint
FAO/WHO Meeting. Geneva, 22-29 November 1971, Food
and Agricultural Organization of the UN, 1971, and
Report of the Secretary's Commission on Pesticides
and Their Relationship to Environmental Health,
HEW, December 1969.
(b) Temporary standard.
205
-------
c. Group C, data insufficient for judgment. These
pesticides require additional data before a judgment
can be made. They have been placed into four groups:
1. Priority Group Cl
"Tumor incidence significant at the 0.01 level
but compound concluded to be less active than
the inean of a group of positive controls employed
in the screening operation." (3)
2. Priority Group C2
"Tumor incidence significant at the 0.02 level but
compound concluded to be less active than a group
of positive controls employed in the screening
operation." (3)
3. Priority Group C3
"Tumor incidence increased in comparison with
the negative controls but statistical signifi-
cance was less than 0.02, possibly because too
few animals were observed." (3)
4. Priority Group C4
"Tumor incidence not elevated in adequate studies
conducted in one species only but current guide-
lines require negative results in two animal
species for judgments of negativity." (3)
d. Group D, "Information available is insignificant to
justify any comment." (3)
For the pesticides listed in Table It Table CVI shows the group
in which they were placed and the organism(s) in which the tests were
performed.
Mutagenic Hazard
The Commission on Pesticides and Their Relationship to Environ-
mental Health also grouped pesticides according to their potential
(3)
mutagenic hazard. The groupings are as follows:
a. Group A, "compounds having chemical structures
known to affect DNA." (3)
b. Group B, "compounds suspected to affect DNA or to be
converted enzymatically into effective compounds." (3)
206
-------
TABLE CVI
CARCINOGENIC HAZARD OF PESTICIDES
(a)
PESTICIDE
Botanicals Group
Rotenone
Carbaryl
Chlorpropham
Aldrin
Ami t rate
Aramite
Chlorobenzilate
DDT
Dieldrin
Heptachlor (b)
Mirex
Strobane
TDE
Monuron
Cap tan
Propham
Botanicals Group
Pyrethrum
2,4-D Isopropyl Ester
Zineb
Arsenicals
Cacodylic acid
Atrazine
Diuron
CLASSIFICATION
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
C 1
C 1
C 2
C 2
C 3
C 3
C 3
C 4
C 4
C 4
ORGANISM
Rat, mouse
Mouse, rat
Mouse, rat
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse, dog
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Rat
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
207
-------
TABLE CVI (CONCLUDED)
PESTICIDE
Endosulfan
Ferbam
Maleic Hydrazide
Maneb
Methoxychlor
Miscellaneous Fungicide
Group
Dlnocap
Dodlne
Fropazine
Simazlne
Tetradlfon
2,4-D
2,4-D Butyl Ester
2,4-D Isooctyl Ester
2,4,5-T
All other pesticides listed
in Table I
CLASSIFICATION
C 4
C 4
C 4
C 4
C 4
C 4
C 4
C 4
C 4
C 4
C 4
C 4
C 4
C 4
D
ORGANISM
Rat
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Rat
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
Mouse
(a) Data from (3).
(b) Assigned this classification because a metabolic product,
heptachlor epoxi.de, was judged positive for tumor induction.
208
-------
For some pesticides listed in Table I, Table CVII shows the
group into which they have been placed.
Table CVIII lists representative mutagenic effects of selected
pesticides. Data are given on the organism tested, the pesticide
dose and the effect.
Teratogenic Hazard
Representative teratogenic effects of selected pesticides are
presented in Table CIX . Data are given on the organism tested, the
pesticide dose and the effect.
Pesticide Poisonings
In 1958 the Public Health Service of HEW established a network
of Poison Control Centers in selected U.S. hospitals. Table CX
summarizes the pesticide poisonings reported by this network in
the years 1968 to 1970.^
The data seem to indicate a relatively low level of pesticide
poisoning compared to other poisonings and no upward trend in the
poisonings. However, the validity of such assertions is questionable
for the following reasons.
First, the data come from only 8.1 percent of all U.S. hospitals.
Second, there seem to be very few occupationally related poisonings
reported. In fact, most of the reported cases involve children,
the vast majority of whom are under ten years of age. Thus, most
of the poisonings are reported by the household sector, one of the
smallest users of pesticides. Based on these factors, it is commonly
assumed that the reported data represent only 5 to 10 percent of the
(9)
actual short-term exposure problems.
Appendix G contains data on effects caused by selected
pesticides.
209
-------
TABLE CVII
MUTAGENIC HAZARD OF PESTICIDES
(a)
PESTICIDE
CLASSIFICATION
Aramite
Dieldrin
Endrin
Ethylene Dibromide
Paraquat
A
A
A
A
A
Aldrin
Arsenicals Group
Cacodylic Acid
Disodium Methyl Arsenate
Azinphosmethyl
Bromacil
Carbaryl
CDAA
Crufornate
Dimethoate
Disulfoton
Heptachlor
Inorganic Insecticides Group
Calcium Arsenate
Lead Arsenate
Linuron
Malathion
Methyl Parathion
Parathion
PCP
Phorate
Propachlor
TBA
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
(a) Data from (3).
210
-------
TABLE CVIII
REPRESENTATIVE MUTAGENIC EFFECTS OF PESTICIDES
(a)
PESTICIDE
Atrazine
Cap tan
Carbaryl
Chlorpropham
2,4-D
ORGANISM
Barley
Human
Embryo
Mice
Rat
Kangaroo
Barley
Barley
Plant
Plant
Plant
Narcissus
Cotton
Allium
cepa
DOSE
1000 ppm
(soaked)
10 IJL g/ml
9-500 ppm
1.25-5.0
IJL g/ml
1000 ppm
(soaked)
500 ppm
(sprayed)
0.5-0.25
ppm
Saturated
»
2.5, 5, 10,
20, 40 and
80 ppm
EFFECT
Slight effect on meiosis
Inhibition of DMA synthesis
Negative induction of dominant lethals
Chromosome aberrations
No effect on meiosis
Abnormal meiosis
\
Abnormal meiosis
Chromosome aberrations
C-mitotic effect; nuclear disintegration
100, 500 and c-mitosis; chromosome aberrations
1000 ppm
i
-------
TABLE CVIII (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
2,4-D (Continued)
!
.
DDT
Dichlorvos
Dicamba
Dieldrin
Endrin
ORGANISM
Allium
cepa
Vicia faba
Trades-
cantia
Mice
Allium
cepa
Trigonella
Foreum
Graecum
Onion
Barley
Barley
Crepis
capillaris
Barley
DOSE
100, 500 am
1000 ppm
EFFECT
C-mitosis; chromosome aberrations
10-10,000 ppm Abnormal mitosis
10-10,000 pp
105 ppm
Saturated
solutions
Saturated
solutions
0.5-6.0
sq. cm
1000 ppm
(soaked)
500 ppm
(sprayed)
10%
solution
1000 ppm
(soaked)
500 ppm
(sprayed)
n Abnormal mitosis
Negative induction of dominant lethals
C-mitosis and chromosome breaks
C-mitosis and chromosome breaks
Chromosome breaks
Abnormal meiosis
Abnormal meiosis
C-mitosis effect, no chromosome breaks observed
No effect on meiosis
No effect on meiosis
KJ
-------
TABLE CVIII (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Ferbam
Lindane
Naptalam
ORGANISM
Aspergillu^
niger
Allium
cepa
Onion
Allium
cepa
Allium
cepa
Zea mays
Triticum
vulgare
T . mono-
coccum
Ehlzobium
Barley
Barley
Barley
DOSE
1000 ppm
240 ppm
1/20,000-
1/80,000
12 . 5 ppm
6-20000 ppm
solid
particles
solid
particles
solid
particles
0-500 ppb
1000 ppm
(soaked)
500 ppm
(sprayed)
1000 ppm
(soaked)
500 ppm
(sprayed)
E7FECT
Morphological mutants and reverse mutations
Chromosome aberrations
Chromosome breaks
Induced aneuploidy and chromosome fragmentation
Induced C-mitosis
Chromosome aberrations
Chromosome aberrations
Chromosome aberrations
Forward mutation induction
No effect on meiosis
No effect on meiosis
Abnormal meiosis
Abnormal meiosis
CO
-------
TABLE CVIII (CONCLUDED)
PESTICIDE
Parathion
PCP
Propham
Simazine
2,4,5-T
ORGANISM
Allium
cepa
Plant
Avena
sativa
Plant
cells
Avena
sativa
Allium
cepa
Barley
Allium cepa
Apricot
DOSE
50, 75 and
100 ppm
Saturated
solution
0.1-5.0 ppn
2.5, 5, 10,
20, 40 and
80 ppm
2.5, 5, 10,
20, 40 and
80 ppm
1000 ppm
(soaked)
500 ppm
(sprayed)
25-500 ppm
100 mg/1
EFFECT
Induced C-mitosis
Meiotic effect
Mitotic aberrations
C-mitotic effect; nuclear disintegration
Anaphase bridges, blocked, nuclear fragmentation
>
Slight effect on meiosis
No effect on meiosis
Chromosome aberrations
Slight antimitotic effect
K)
(a) Data'from (3),
-------
TABLE CIX
REPRESENTATIVE TERATOGENIC EFFECTS OF PESTICIDES
(a)
PESTICIDE
Azinphosmethyl
Cap tan
Carbaryl
Chlordane
Diazinon
Dicofol
ORGANISM
Chicken
embryo
Mice
Chicken
embryo
Rabbits
Mice
Mice
Mice
Beagle
Rats
Dogs
Chicken
embryo
Mice
Mice
DOSE
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
100 ppm
200 ppm
100 ppm
6.25, 12.5,
25 and 50
ppm
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
EFFECT
N.A.
Embryo toxicity
N.A.
N.A.
Abnormal fetuses
Skeletal malalignment, nonfusion and incomplete
ossification and gross facial malformation
Hydrocephaly and skeletal abnormalities
N.A.
.
Embryo toxicity
Embryotoxicity
N.A.
Embryotoxicity
N.A.
-------
TABLE CIX (CONCLUDED)
PESTICIDE
Dicrotophos
Dieldrin
Parathion
Propham
2,4-D
Isooctyl ester
Butyl ester
Isopropyl ester
2,4,5-T
ORGANISM
Chicken
embryo
Mice
Rat
Dog
Chicken
embryo
Mice
Mice
Mice
Mice
Mice
Mice
Rats
DOSE
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
850 ppm
130 fil/kg
100 (al/kg
94 (il/kg
113 ppm
4.6, 10
and 46.4
ppm
EFFECT
N.A.
Embryo toxicity
Erabryotoxicity
Erabryotoxicity
N.A.
Embryotoxicity
Abnormal fetuses
Abnormal fetuses
Agnathia and abnormal fetuses
Abnormal fetuses
Cleft palate and cystic kidneys
Kidney anomalies and abnormal fetuses
NJ
o-
(a) Data from (3).
-------
TABLE CX
POISONINGS BY PESTICIDES, UNITED STATES
(a)
Insecticides
Rodenticides
Fungicides
Herbicides
Mothballs
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
CASES
1968
2,919
1,185
99
254
922
360
5,739
1969
2,929
1,192
90
281
813
397
5,702
1970
2,913
1,132
106
287
933
358
5,729
DEATHS
1968
11
4
0
9
0
_0
24
1969
14
6
0
6
0
_0
26
1970
13
6
0
1
1
_0
21
(a) Taken from (9).
217
-------
California is the only state which compiles detailed records
on occupational diseases attributable to pesticides and other agri-
cultural chemicals. Table CXI summarizes the occupational disease
reports for the years 1966 to 1970. In each of the years, diseases
caused by agricultural chemicals accounted for less than 5 percent
of the total occupational diseases. However, they accounted for
around 45 percent of all the occupational poisonings. A detailed
breakdown of the occupational disease data by individual pesticide,
by industry and by type of disease is presented in Appendix F.
EFFECTS ON OTHER NON-TARGET SPECIES
Once a pesticide reaches the environment, it is capable of
affecting non-target species as well as the target species. Infor-
mation is presented on the effect of pesticides on specific non-
target organisms.
Biological MagnjLfication
A number of organisms are capable of storing pesticides in their
bodies at concentrations considerably above those found in the environ-
ment. This magnification can occur through both the successive con-
centration of the pesticide in the food chain and through the direct
absorption or ingest ion of the pesticide, primarily when found in
the water environment.
Table CZII presents several examples of biological magnification.
In general, animals near the top of food chains exhibit the largest
magnification. Predaceous birds and fish are capable of accumulating
DDT at over 80,000 times its concentration in the environment. The
waterflea, cladocera, can directly accumulate aldrin from the water
at over 141,000 times its concentration in the water.
Toxicity
A number of indicators of the toxicity of pesticides to organisms
have been developed. Unfortunately, many measurements of the values
218
-------
TABLE CXI
CALIFORNIA REPORTS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASES ATTRIBUTED TO
PESTICIDES AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS (a)
YEAR
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
AGRICULTURAL CHEMICAL OCCUPATIONAL DISEASES
AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY
Reported
Cases
938
454
(b)
499
(b)
838
820
Reported
Poisonings
192
121
148
179
163
ALL OTHER INDUSTRIES
Reported
Cases
555
273
(b)
335
(b)
562
527
Reported
Poisonings
67
54
68
61
70
TOTAL
Reported
Cases
1,493
727
(b)
834
(b)
1,400
1,347
Reported
Poisonings
259 (c)
175 (d)
216 (c)
240 (d)
233 (e)
TOTAL OCCUPATIONAL DISEASES
ALL INDUSTRIES
Reported
Cases
33,085
18,153 (b)
19,512 (b)
31,084
27,626
Reported
Poisonings
571
388
462
503
557
to
H
VD
(a) Data from (41).
(b) Does not include eye conditions or chemical burns.
(c) No deaths.
(d) Two deaths.
(e) Three deaths.
-------
TABLE CXI I
BIOLOGICAL MAGNIFICATION OF PESTICIDES
(a)
Pesticide
Aldrin
Chlordane
DDT
Diazinon
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Inorganic Herbicide
Sodium Arsenite
Lindane
Methoxychlor
Mi rex
Organism
Algae
Bacteria
Cladocera
Dipt era
Eastern Oyster
Freshwater Mussel
Eastern Oyster
Croakers
Predaceous birds and fish
Plankton
Fundulus heteraclitus
Freshwater mussel
Rainbow trout
Eastern oyster
Freshwater algae
Caddis fly
Brown trout
Freshwater mussel
Fathead minnow
Eastern oyster
Algae
Eastern oyster
Bluegill
Bluegill
Eastern oyster
Brown trout
Caddis fly
Eastern Oyster
Brook trout
Daphnia Hagna
Gambusia Af finis
Mosquito
Concentration
(PPM)
1
N.A.
16.7
21.3
0.01
0.0034
0.0001
0.001
0.00005
0.32
0.32
0.002
0.001
1.
0.0069
0.0069
0.002
0.000015
0.001
I.
0.01
0.05
0.69
0.05
0.0008
0.0008
0.05
0.005
0.0009
0.0009
0.0009
Exposure
Time
7 days
20 minutes
3 days
3 days
10 days
40 days
2 weeks
N.A.
N.A.
10 days
7 days
7 days
7 days
10 days
7 days
10 days
N.A.
10 days
7 days
7 days
10 days
7 days
3 days
3 days
3 days
i
Magnification
Factor
150
625
141,000
22,800
7,300
2,000
70,000
20,000
80,000-85,000
800
10
2
3,300
1,000
150
3,000
3,000
500
10,000
1,000
170
17,600
315
18
60
5,000
1,500
5,780
352
2200
530
210
220
-------
TABLE CXII (CONCLUDED)
Pesticide
Parathion
Silvex
TDE
Toxaphene
Organism
Fundulus Heteroclitus
Mussel
Bluegill
Carnivorous Fish
Fish-eating birds
Deep lake
Aquatic Plants
Invertebrates
Shallow lake
Aquatic Plants
Invertebrates
Rainbow Trout
Eastern Oyster
Big Bear Lake, Cal.
Zooplankton
Goldfish
Pelican
Concentration
(PPM)
0.12
0.12
N.A.
0.0142-0.02
0.0142-0.02
.002
.002
N.A.
N.A.
H.A.
0.05
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Exposure
Time
4 hours
4 hours
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
10 days
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Magnification
Factor
80
50
N.A.
100,000
100,000
8,500
2,500
500
1,500
15,000
2,920
365
1,000
8,500
(a) Data from (21), (42) and (43).
221
-------
of these Indicators have been made under laboratory conditions,
rather than under field conditions. Consequently, the measurement
cannot be directly related to the pesticide's toxicity in the environ-
ment. However, the data do serve as guide to the pesticide's
potential hazard.
The acute oral LDcQ is the parts per million of the pesticide,
which when taken orally, is lethal to 50 percent of the test animals
to which it is administered under the conditions of the test. The
lower the LDr0» the more toxic the pesticide is to the animal. Table
CXIII summarizes the LD_'s of various pesticides when applied to
eight non-target species.
Organophosphates, such as TEPF, phorate, disulfoton and para-
thion, have very low LD 's and, therefore, are very toxic to
mammals and birds. Organochlorines, such as endrin, dieldrin and
aldrin, also are very toxic although, in general, they are less
toxic than the organophosphates. Herbicides, such as atrazine and
propazine, are considerably less toxic to birds and mammals.
The TL (X-hours) is that concentration of the pesticide, in
parts per million, which kills half the test animals in X hours. '
Tables CXIV to CXVII present the 24-hour, 48-hour, 96-hour and
120-hour TLmfs, respectively, for selected pesticides.
Some authors call this the LCcn instead of the TL
222
-------
TABLE CXIII
ACUTE ORAL LD
50
PESTICIDE
Aldrin
Amlben
Ammate
Aramite
Arsenicals
Cacodylic Acid
Disodium Methyl Arsenate
Paris Green
Atrazine
Azinphosmethyl
Botanicals
Nicotine Sulfate
Pyrethrura
Rotenone
Bromacil
U>50 (ORAL) - PPM U)
RAT
39-60
3500-5620
3900
3900
1280-1400
21.9
1750-3080
11-18
50-60'
820-1720
132
5200
RABBIT
<150
GUINEA
PIG
11-13
150
MOUSE
1750
8
MALLARD
(b)
520
>2000
136
587
>10,000
>2,000
PHEASANT
(b)
16.8
74.9
1200-2000
>1414
BOBWHITE
(b)
6.6
CHUKAR (b)
PARTRIDGE
84.2
to
KJ
CO
-------
TABLE CXIU (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Captan
Carbaryl
CDAA
Chlordane
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorpropham
Ciodrin
Copper Sulfate
Coumaphos
Cresol
Cruf ornate
Dalapon
D-D Mixture
DDT
LD5Q (ORAL) - PPM (a)
RAT
9000
540-850
750
200-590
960
5000-7000
125
56-230
1350-2020
460-1000
7570-9330
140
420-800
RABBIT
3160
100-300
> 3860
250-400
GUINEA
PIG
3860
400
MOUSE
430
>4600
300
200
MALLARD
(b)
>2179
1200
>2000
>2000
29.8
>2240
PHEASANT
(b)
>2000
500
>2000
1296
BOBWHITE
(b)
250
400
CHUKAR (b)
PARTRIDGE
-------
TABLE CXIII (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
DEF
Diazinon
Dibromochloroprophane
Dicamba
Dichlorvos
Dicofol
Dicrotophos
Dieldrin
Dimethoate
Dinitro Group
Benefin
Binapacryl
Dinitrocresol
DNBP
Disulfoton
LD50 (ORAL) - PPM ^
RAT
350
76-108
173
2900
56-80
700
22
37-87
1185-245
1320-380
>10,000
150-350
10-50
40-60
12.5
BABBIT
566
150
>2000
GUINEA
PIG
566
10.8
MOUSE
257
4
15
MALLARD
(b)
3.5
66.8
7.8
4.2
381
41.7
>2000
6.5
PHEASANT
(b)
4.3
673-800
11.3
3.2
79
BOBWHITE
(b)
CHUKAR (b)
PARTRIDGE
9.6
23.4
IS
en
-------
TABLE CXIII (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Diuron
Endosulfan
Endrin
Ethlon
Ethylene Dibromlde
Ferbam
Folex
Heptachlor
Inorganic Herbicides Group
Arsenic Acid
Arsenic Trioxide
Magnesium Chlorate
Sodium Arsenite
Sodium Chlorate
LD5Q (ORAL) - PPM (a)
RAT
3400
18-100
7.3-48
96
146
>17,000
1,272
100-162
48-100
12-13
10-51
5000
RABBIT
5-10
GUINEA
PIG
16-36
MOUSE
51
MALLARD
(b)
>2000
33
5.6
>2000
PHEASANT
(b)
1.8
BOBWHITE
(b)
CHOKAR (b)
PARTRIDGE
-------
TABLE CXIII (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Inorganic Insecticide Group
Calcium Arsenate
Lead Arsenate
Lindane
Linuron
Malathion
Maneb
MCPA
(Organic) Mercury Compounds
Methoxychlor
Methyl Bromide
Methyl Parathion
Mi rex
LD50 (ORAL) - PPM (a)
RAT
49
10-100
88-200
4000
480-2800
1000-8000
700
30-100
5000-6000
14-24
300-600
RABBIT
125
60-200
GUINEA
PIG
100-127
570
MOUSE
86
885-1120
800
MALLARD
(b)
>2000
1485
>2000
10
>2400
PHEASANT
(b)
400
8.2
BOBWHITE
(b)
200
CHUKAR (b)
PARTRIDGE
S3
-------
TABLE CXIII (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Miscellaneous Fungicides
Dlnocap
Dodine
Qulnones
MS MA
NPA
Other Copper Fungicides
Copper Carbonate
Copper Naphthenates
Copper Oxychlorlde
Paraquat
Parathlon
PCP
Phorate
LD5Q (ORAL) - PPM (a)
RAT
980
1000
700
1700-8500
700-1000
150
4-30
27-80
1.1-3.3
RABBIT
GUINEA
PIG
32
50-140
MOUSE
25
MALLARD
(b)
1.9-2.1
0.62
PHEASANT
(b)
12.4
4000-5000
7.1
BOBWHITE
-------
TABLE CXIII (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Picloram
Propachlor
Propanil
Propazine
Propham
Ronnel
Silvex
Simazine
Strobane
Sulfur Dioxide
TEA
TDE
TEPP
U>50 (ORAL) - PPM (a)
RAT
8200
710
1380-2270
5000
5000
1740
650-1070
>5000
220
750
3360-3400
1.2-2.0
RABBIT
ZOOO
850
GUINEA
PIG
3000
850
MOUSE
2000-4000
>5000
2140
2280
MALLARD
(b)
>2000
3.6
PHEASANT
(b)
>2000
735
4.2
BOBWHITE
(b)
CHUKAR (b)
PARTRIDGE
10.1
M
K>
-------
TABLE CXIII (CONCLUDED)
PESTICIDE
Tetrad! f on
Toxaphene
Trichlorfon
Trifluralin
2, 4-D
2, A, 5-T
Vikane
Zineb
LD50 (ORAL) - PPM (a)
RAT
14,700
69-80
450-670
>10,000
375-700
300-500
5200
RABBIT
>2000
800
GUINEA
PIG
69
550-1000
MOUSE
112
5000
375
MALLAED
(b)
70.7
>2000
»1000
>2000
PHEASANT
(b)
40.0
>2000
472
>2000
BOBWHITE
(b)
85.4
CHUKAR (b)
PARTRIDGE
(a) Data from (3), (5), (6), (24), (26), (31), (32), (35), (42), (44), (45), (46), (47), (48), (49), (50), (51) and (52).
(b) Two week old birds.
-------
TABLE CXIV
24-HOUR TL
PESTICIDE
Aldrin
Animate
Aramite
Atrazine
Azinphosmethyl
Botanicals
Nicotine Sulfate
Pyrethrum
Rot en one
Carbaryl
Chlordane
Chi orp r opham
Coumaphos
Dalapon
DDT
DBF
Diazlnon
TL (24 Hour) - PPM (a)
m
BLUEGILL
0.096
0.035
0.016
0.058
10.0-20.0
115-480
0.0185
0.052
RAINBOW
TROUT
0.036-0.05
0.049
0.095
300->500
0.0096
0.380
HARLEQUIN
FISH
1.25
0.55
0.13
3.4
0.082
>500
SAND
SHRIMP
0.03
0.003
HERMIT
CRAB
0.3
0.007
STONEFLY
(P.Callfornlca)
0.025
0.010
2.9
0.030
0.170
>100
0.041
3.8
0.155
WATERFLEA
(D. Pulex)
0.0002
K>
-------
TABLE CXIV (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Dicamba
Dieldrin
Dlmethoate
Dinltro Group
DNBP
Diuron
Endosulfan
Endrin
Ethion
Heptachlor
Inorganic Herbicides Group
Sodium Arsenite
Sodium Chlorate
Lindane
Malathlon
Methoxychlor
Methyl Parathion
TL (24 Hour) - PPM (a)
in
BLUEGILL
135
0.0055
28.
9.7
0.0032
0.0035
58.0
4200.0
0.100
0.14
0.074
RAINBOW
TROUT
35
0.0019-0.05
19.
0.0032
0.0018
0.015-0.25
' 100.0
8600.0
0.030
0.13
0.052
2750.0
HARLEQUIN
FISH
0.24
9.
0.00002
0.7
0.09
0.075
10.0
SAND
SHRIMP
0.068
0.0028
0.110
0.014
0.246
0.009
HERMIT
CRAB
0.070
0.0027
0.460
0.038
0.118
0.009
0.023
STONEFLY
(P.Californica)
0.006
0.510
3.6
0.024
0.004
0.024
0.008
140.0
0.012
0.035
0.003
WATERFLEA
(D. Pulex)
-------
TABLE CXIV (CONCLUDED)
PESTICIDE
Miscellaneous Fungicides
Dinocap
Paraquat
Parathion
Phorate
Picloram
Propham
Silvex
Simazine
Strobane
TBA
IDE
Tetradifon
Toxaphene
Irichlorfon
Trifluralin
2,4-D
2,4,5-T
TL (24 Hour) - PPM ^
m
BLUEGILL
400.
26.5
32.0
2.9-19.
130.
0.015
1500.
0.056
. 1.1
0.0097
0.10
4.9-10.
RAIWBOW
TROUT
150-230
23.
G8.-95.
0.05
0.21
250.
HARLEQUIN
FISH
0.14
840.
<1.0
66.0
48.
0.3
1.0
1.0
SAND
SHRIMP
0.011
--
HERMIT
CRAB
STONEFLY
(P.Californica)
>100
0.028
5.2
0.040
3.0
0.018
0.320
13.
8.5-56.
WATERFLEA
(D. Pulex)
K>
W
(a) Data from (6), (21), (35), (42), (45), (47) and (50).
-------
TAiiLE CXV
48-HOUR TL
ro
CO
PESTICIDE
Aldrin
Araml te
Atrazlni1
Azlnphosmethy 1
Botanicals
Py rethnim
Rotenone
Carbaryl
Chlordano
Chlorobon/.i late
Coppor Sul fato
Couniaphos
Dalapon
wr
TL (48 Hour) - PPM
m
BLUEGILL
0.096
0.035
0.022
0 . 1 50
1 15
RAINBOW
TROUT
0.003
12.6
0.010
0.054
0.010
0.710
7.3
SHRIMP
0.00004
0.002
0.002
0.019
STONEFLY
(P.Californica)
0.008
0.008
0.064
0.9
0.0013-0.015
0.055
-100
0.00036-0.0036
WATERFLEA
(D. Pulex)
0.028
3.6
0.0032
0.025
0.010
0.0064
0.020
11
0.0006
-------
TABLE CXV (CONTINUED)
CO
PESTICIDE
DEF
Diazinon
Dlcamba
Dichlorvos
Dicofol
Dicrotophos
Dieldrin
Dimethoatc
Dinitro Group
Dinitrocresol
Disulfoton
Diuron
Endosulfan
End r in
TL (48 Hour) - PPM(a)
in
BLUEGILL
0.036
0.030
40
0.7
0.0034
9.6
0.040
7.4
0.2-0.7
RAINBOW
TROUT
35
0.1
8.0
4.3
0.0012
1.2
SHRIMP
0.0003
0.0002
0.0002
STONE FLY
(P.Californica)
2.3
0.060
0.01
3.0
1.9
0.0013-0.006
0.140
0.560
0.018
2.8
0.0056
0.0008-0.00096
WATERFLEA
(D. Pulex)
0.0009
0.00007
0.39
0.6
0.250
1.4
0.240
0.020
-------
TABLE CXV (CONTINUED)
NJ
Co
0
PESTICIDE
Ethion
Heptachlor
Inorganic Herbicides Group
Sodium Arsenite
Lindane
Malathion
Methoxychlor
Methyl Parathion
Paraquat
Parathion
Phorate
Picloram
Propazine
Silvex
TL (48 Hour) - PPM
m
BLUEGILL
0.230
44.0
0.076
0.0072
8.0
0.047
0.0055
1.4
RAINBOW
TROUT
0.009
36.5
0.018
2.0
2.5
7.8
0.65
SHRIMP
0.0002
0.0002
0.004
0.001
STONEFLY
(P.Californica)
0.014
0.006
80.0
0.008
0.020
0.008
>100.0
0.011
WATERFLEA
(D. Pulex)
0.042
0.460
0.0018-0.002
0.0008
0.0004
3.7
0.0004
2.0
-------
TAHU5 CXV (C'ONCLUDI'U)
ro
CO
Nl
I'I'SiitllUK
S i nuizi in.'
St rob ant'
TDK
'1't't radlfon
Toxaphene
Trj dilorfon
Trlfluralin
2, 4-1)
2, 4, 5-T
BUJbClU,
118
1.1
i.8
0.019
1.3
1.7
Tl,
in
KAINIiDW
TROUT
i.-Sf,.
O.U025
0.009
0.0028
0.160-3.2
0.011
0.96
(48 hour) -
SHRIMP
0.003
0.003
I'l'M
STONEFLY
(P.CaLiforuica)
50.
0.007
1 .1
0.007
0.180
4.2
1.8
WATKRFUJA
(1). Pulex)
0.0032
0.015
0.00018
0.240
(a) Data from (fa), (21), ( )r.) , (36), (42), (4.S), (4V) and (50).
-------
TABLE CXVI
96-HOUR XL
PESTICIDE
Aldrin
Animate
Atrazine
Azlnphoamethyl
Botanicals
Rotenone
Carbaryl
Chlordane
Coumaphos
Creaol
Dalapon
DDT
Dieldrin
Disulfoton
Endoaulfan
Endrin
Ethion
Ferbam
Heptachlor
BLUEGILL
0.013
10.0
0.0052-
0.022
6.76
0.022
0.18
10.0-13.6
415
0.008-
0.0016
0.008
0.063
0.0035
0.0006
0.087
3.7
0.019
RAINBOW
TROUT
0.0177
0.003-
0.014
1.350-4.38
0.044
1.50
0.007-
0.042
0.001-
0.0237
0.0006
0.019
BROWN
TROUT
0,04
1.95
0.002
GOLDFISH
0.028
1.4-4.270 ;
13.2
0.082
18.0
0.021-
0.027
0.037
7.2
0.0019
0.23
TLm (96 Hour) - PPM
LARCEMOUTH
BASS
0.005
6.4
0.002
YELLOW
PERCH
0.013
0.009
COHO
SALMON
0.0459
0.004-0.174
0.764-0.997
0.056
15.0
0.004-0.44
0.0108
0.0005
0.059
CARP
0.695
5.28
0.010
CHANNEL
CATFISH
203.
3.290
0.47
15.8
0.5
66.8
0.016
0.175
BLACK
BULLHEAD
3.50
20.0
0.005
STICKLE-
BACK
0.040
0.012
3.990
0.090
1.862
0.018
0.015
0.0004
0.112
KJ
CO
00
-------
TABLE CXVI (CONCLUDED)
PESTICIDE
Lindane
Malathion
MCPA
Methoxychlor
Methyl Parathion
Parathlon
Phorate
Propham
Silvex
TEPP
Toxaphene
Trifluralin
BLUEGILL
0.068-0.077
0.103
10.0
0.062
5.75
0.095
0.0049
2.4
1.1
0.0035-
0.018
0.28
RAINBOW
1ROUT
0.027-0.038
0.068-0.170
0.062
2.75
0.0084-
0.011
BROWN
TROUT
0.002
0.200
0.056
4.74
0.003
GOLDFISH
0.131-0.152
. 10.7
9.0
2.7
21.0
0.0056-
0.014
TL
m
LARGEMOUTH
BASS
0.032
0.50-0.285
5.22
0.19
0.002
(96 Hour) - PPM
YELLOW
PERCH
0.068
0.263
3.06
0.012
COHO
SALMON
0.041-0.050
0.010
0.066
5.3
0.008-
0.0094
CARP
0.090
6.59
7.13
0.004
CHANNEL
CATFISH
0.044
8.97
5.71
86.5
1.6
0.013
BLACK
BULLHEAD
0.064
12.9
6.64
0.005
STICKLE-
BACK
0.044
0.094
0.086
0.0086
10
CO
(a) Data from (6), (21), (35), (42), (47) and (50).
-------
O
TABLE CXVI1
120-HOUR TL
m
PESTICIDE
Arsenicals
Paris Green
Atrazine
Azinphosmethyl
Cap tan
Carbaryl
Chlordane
Coumaphos
Dalapon
DDT
Dichlorvos
Dicofol
Dieldrin
Dimethoate
TL (120 Hour) - PPM (a\
m »*'
MALLARD
>5000
1900-2000
>5000
>5000
800-850
>5000
850-1200
>5000
1700-1900
200
900-1100
PHEASANT
1000-1100
1800-2000
>5000
>5000
400-500
300-400
>5000
300-700
2100-2300
50-55
300-400
BOBWHITE
500-600
700-800
400-500
2000-4000
>5000
320
600-1000
2800-3000
39
COUTURNIX
1200-1400
600-700
>5000
>5000
300-350
200-250
>5000
400-600
1400-1500
45-60
300-400
-------
TABLE CXV1I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Disulfoton
Diuron
Endosulfan
Endrin
Heptachlor
Inorganic Herbicides Group
Sodium Arsenite
Lindane
Malathion
(Organic) Mercury Compound
Methoxychlor
Methyl Parathion
Mir ex
Parathion
TL (120 Hour) - PPM fa)
m ^ '
MALLARD
400-600
>5000
900-1100
21
450-700
Toxic to
> 5000
>5000
30-60
>5000
600-750
250-275
PHEASANT
600-700
5000
1200-1350
11
Birds -
500-600
2500-4500
140-160
>5000
100-120
1400-1600
350-380
BOBWHITE
700-800
2000-2200
800-900
15
90-100
900-1100
3300-3700
>5000
90-100
180-200
COUTURNIX
300-400
>5000
2100-2250
15-18
80-95
400-500
2000-2300
90-110
>5000
45-55
> 10000
40-50
-------
TABLE CXVII (CONCLUDED)
K)
PESTICIDE
Phorate
Picloram
Silvex
Simazine
Strobane
IDE
Tetradifon
Toxaphene
Trichlorfon
2,4-D
2,4,5-1
TL (120 Hour) - PPM (a)
in
MALLARD
225-275
>5000
>5000
470-500
4800-5200
>5000
563
>5000
>5000
PHEASANT
400-480
>5000
3000-5000
>5000
800-900
560-600
> 5000
500-550
>5000
1250-1500
BOBWHITE
370-400
800-900
2200-2400
834
700-800
>5000
COUTURNIX
>5000
>5000
500-600
3300-3500
>5000
600-650
1800-2000
>5000
>5000
(a) Data from (42),
-------
APPENDIX A
PESTICIDE LIST
Table A-I presents an alphabetized list of the pesticides
discussed in this report. When a pesticide name is followed by a
(52)
parenthesized name, the name in parenthesis is the common name
of the pesticide. Table A-II lists the components of the pesticide
groups presented in Table A-I.
243
-------
Abate I
Aldrin I
Amiben H
Amitrole H
Ammate H
Ammonium Sulfamate
(Ammate) H
Aramlte M
Arsenicals Group H
Atrazine H
Azinphosmethyl I
Banvel (Dicamba) I
Baygon (Propoxur) I
Baytex (Fenthion) I
Bidrin (Dicrotophos) I
Botanicals Group I
Bromacil H
Captan F
Carbaryl I
Carbofuran I, M
CDAA H
Chlordane I
Chlordecone I
Chlorobenzilate I
Chlorpropham H
Ciodrin I
CIPC (Chlorpropham) H
F - Fungicide
Fm - Fumigant
H - Herbicide
I - Insecticide
M - Miticide
TABLE A-I
PESTICIDE LIST
Copper Sulfate
Co-Ral (Coumaphos)
Coumaphos
Cresol
Cruf ornate
Cyprex (Dodine)
Dalapon
D-D Mixture
ODD (IDE)
DDT
DDVP (Dichlorvos)
DBF
Diazinon
Dibromochloropropane
Dicamba
Dichlorprop
Dichlorvos
Dicofol
Dicrotophos
Dieldrin
Dimethoate
Dinitro Group
Diphenamld
Dipterex (Trichlorfon)
Disulfoton
Disyston (Disulfoton)
Diuron
Dursban
Dylox (Trichlorfon)
F
I
I
I
I
F
H
DBCP (Dibromochloropropane) Fm
Fm
I
I
I
H
I
Fm
H
H
I
M
I
I
I
H
H
I
I
I
H
I
I
244
-------
TABLE A-I (CONTINUED)
Endosulfan I
Endrin I
Erbon H.
Ethion I
Ethylene Dibromide Fm
Fenac H
Fenthion I
Fenuron F
Ferbam F
Folex H
\-Benzine Hexachloride
(Lindane) I
Guthion (Azinphos-
methyl) I
Heptachlor I
Hyvar (Bromacil) H
Inorganic Herbicides
Group H
IPC (Propham) H
Karathane (Dinocap) F
Kelthane (Dicofol) M
Kepone (Chlordecone) I
Lindane I
Linuron H
Malathion I
Maleic Hydrazide G
F - Fungicide
Fm - Fumigant
H - Herbicide
I - Insecticide
M - Miticide
G - Growth Retardant
Maneb
MCPA
MCPB
Mercury Compounds (Organic)
Merphos (Folex)
Methoxychlor
Methyl Bromide
Methyl Parathion
Mirex
Miscellaneous Fungicide
Group
Naled
Naptalam
Nemagon (Dibromochloro-
propane)
NPA (Naptalam)
Other Copper Fungicides
Paraquat
Parathion
PCP
Pentachlorophenol (PCP)
Phorate
Picloram
Propachlor
Propanil
Propazine
Propham
Propoxur
Randox (CDAA)
Repellants
Ronnel
F
H
H
F
H
I
Fm
I
I
F
I
H
Fm
H
F
H
I
F
F
I
H
H
H
H
H
I
H
245
-------
TABLE A-I (CONCLUDED)
Reulene (Crufomate) I
Sevin (Carbaryl) I
Silvex H
Simazine H
Strobane I
Sulfur Dioxide Fm
TBA H
TDE I
TEPP I
Terpenepolychlorinates
(Strobane) I
Tetradifon M
Thimet (Phorate) I
Thiodan (Endosulfon) I
Tordon (Picloram) H
Toxaphene I
Treflan (Trifluralin) H
Trichlorfon I
Trifluralin H
2,4-D H
2,4-DB H
2,4-DEP H
2,4,5-T H
Vikane F
Zineb F
F -
Fm -
H -
I -
M -
G -
Fungicide
Fumigant
Herbicide
Insecticide
Miticide
Growth Retardant
246
-------
TABLE A-II
PESTICIDE GROUP COMPONENTS
Arsenicals Group
Arsan (Cacodylic Acid)
Cacodylic Acid
Dimethylarsinic Acid (Cacodylic Acid)
Disodium Methanearsenate (DSMA)
DSMA
MSMA
Paris Green
Botanicals Group
Nicotine Sulfate
Pyrethrum
Rotenone
Dinitro Group
Balan (Benefin)
Benefin
Binapacryl
Dinitrocresol
Dinoseb (DNBP)
DNBP
DNOC (Dinitrocresol)
Inorganic Herbicides Group
Arsenic Acid
Arsenic Trioxide
Magnesium Chlorate
Sodium Arsenite
Sodium Chlorate
247
-------
TABLE A-II (CONCLUDED)
Inorganic Insecticides Group
Calcium Arsenate
Lead Arsenate
Miscellaneous Fungicide Group
Cyprex (Dodine)
Dinocap
Dodine
Karathane (Dinocap)
Quinones
Other Copper Fungicides
Copper Carbonate
Copper Naphthenates
Copper Oxychloride
248
-------
APPENDIX B
PRODUCTION AND DOMESTIC DISAPPEARANCE OF INDIVIDUAL PESTICIDES
Available data on the production, export, import and/or
domestic disappearance of individual pesticides are presented in
Table B-I.
249
-------
TABLE B-I
PRODUCTION AND DOMESTIC DISAPPEAEANCE OF INDIVIDUAL PESTICIDES
(a)
PESTICIDE: A1Hr-
CLASSIFICATION; Insecticide - Organochlorine
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
116.3
88.6
107.3
116.0
120.2
130.5
118.8
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
30.5
22.6
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
(c)
85.0
62.3
89.7
38.7
86.3
86.6
80.6
250
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: y^
CLASSIFICATION: Insecticide - Organochlorine
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
45.0
59.3
123.1
139.4
103.4
141.3
140.8
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
33.0
45.8
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
(c)
18.2
25.5
30.3
32.8
40.3
46.7
53.0
251
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: mp
CLASSIFICATION:
>er Sulfate
Puneicide CoDDer
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
-
CONSUMPTION AS
A PESTICIDE
(Million Pounds)
31.1
28.8
42.1
37.2
34.. 0
41.5
47.3
41.8
252
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Dibromochlorouropane
CLASSIFICATION: Fumieant
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
10.0 (f)
N.A.
8.6
7.9
5.2
8.7
3.4
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
253
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Dicofol
CLASSIFICATION: Miticide
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
A
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
0
0
0.005
0
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
254
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
. PESTICIDE: Ferbam
CLASSIFICATION: Funeicide - Dithiocarbamates
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
N.A.
N.A.
1.5
1.9
2.3
1.4
2.4
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
255
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Inorganic Insecticides Group
CLASSIFICATION: Insecticides - Inorganic
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
7.1
5.3
10.4
12.4
8.0
10.2
11.3
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
N.A.
0.4
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
(c)
6.6 (g)
8.8 (g)
9.8 (g)
6.7 (h)
8.5 (h)
9.8 (h)
11.6 (h)
256
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Lindane
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
1963
1962
CLASSIFICATION:
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
<1
N.A.
N.A.
N.A,
N.A.
<6
N.A.
<6
6.8
12
Insecticide - Organochlorine
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
0
0
0
0
0
0.1
0
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds;
-,
.
Less
Chan
1.3
each
year
2.4
N.A.
257
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: M.IOM,<«,
CLASSIFICATION^ Tnsertiride - Qrganophosphorus
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
30.0
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
8.0
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
0
0.2
0.5
Negligible
0
Negligible
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
(d)
22.0
258
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Organic Mercury Compounds
CLASSIFICATION: Fungicide - Other
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
0.6
1.1
0.9
1.4
0.9
1.0
1.6
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
-
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
259
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Methyl Bromide
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
CLASSIFICATION:
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
22.0 (f)
21.0
20.0
20.5
19.7
16.3
14.3
12.7
Fumigant
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
2.0
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
N.A.
0
0
0
0
0.3
0
0
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
(d)
20.0
260
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Methyl Parathion
CLASSIFICATION: Insecticide - Organophosphorus
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
37.2
41.4
50.6
38.2
33.3
35.9
29.1
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
12.0
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
6.6
0
0
0
0.1
0.4
0.2
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
(c)
31.8
2 61
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Paraquat
CLASSIFICATION: Herbicide - Other Organ! r
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
5.1
2.7
2.9
1.7
1.0
0.9
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
262
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Parathion
CLASSIFICATION: Insecticide - Organophosphorus
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
N.A.
15.3
N.A.
20.0
11.4
19.4
16.6
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
4.0
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
0
0
0
0
0.02
0.02
0
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
263
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: PCP
CLASSIFICATION: Fungicide - Other
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
50.9
47.2
46.0
48.6
44.2
43.3
40.0
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
264
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: ..
rethrum
CLASSIFICATION: Insecticide - Botanical
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
0.3
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
Flowers Extract
S
0.2 0.8
0.2 0.6
0.5 0.7
0.3 0.7
1.9 0.6
1.0 0.7
0.6 0.6
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
265
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Ttr.t^n^"
CLASSIFICATION:
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
<1.0
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
Whole Powdered
0.9 1.2
0.9 0.8
1.2 1.1
1.6 1.0
1.8 1.0
3.0 1.0
1.0 0.7.
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
266
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Toxaphene
CLASSIFICATION: Insecticide - Organochlorine
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
50.0
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
8.0
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
r>
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
(d)
42. 0
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
34.7
N.A.
38.9
267
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: 2i4-n fAcld)
CLASSIFICATION: Herbicide - Phenoxy
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
N.A.
43.6
47.1
79.3
77.1
68.2
63.3
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
9.7
8.6
N.A.
2.3
3.0
3.7
4.7
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
N.A.
0.1
0.03
2.5
2.0
0
0
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
(c)
32.2
46.9
49.5
68.4
67.0
63.9
50.5
268
-------
TABLE B-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: 7,4^-T TAMH)
CLASSIFICATION: JterhiririP - Phpnovy
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
N.A.
N.A.
5.0
17.5
14.6
15.5
11.6
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
1.1
1.0
N.A.
1.1
1.4
1.7
2.2
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
N.A.
0
0.04
0.3
0.02
0
0
DOMESII:
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds;
1.4
4.9
3.2
15.8
15.4
17.1
7.2
269
-------
TABLE B-I (CONCLUDED)
PESTICIDE: z1tM,h
CLASSIFICATION: v,mgiride - mth-forarhamate
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
AMOUNT PRODUCED
(Million Pounds)
N.A.
N.A.
2.5
3.1
3.1
4.7
5.1
EXPORTS
(Million Pounds)
IMPORTS
(Million Pounds)
-
DOMESTIC
DISAPPEARANCE
(Million Pounds)
(a) Data from (1), (4), (5) and (9).
(b) Aldrin-toxaphene group components include aldrin, chlordane, dieldrin,
endrin, heptachlor, strobane and toxaphene.
(c) Production plus imports less exports and change in inventory.
(d) Production less exports.
(e) Consumption as a pesticide.
(f) Estimated in (5). Data for thisyear not published due to proprietary
considerations.
(g) Year ends December 31.
(h) Year ends September 30.
270
-------
APPENDIX C
USE OF PESTICIDE
The use and application rate of each individual pesticide is
presented in Table C-I.
271
-------
TABLE C-I
PESTICIDE USE AND APPLICATION RATES
PESTICIDE: Aldrin
CLASSIFICATION: Insecticide - Orpanochlorine
USE
FARM (a)
Corn
Other Vegetables
Cotton
Tobacco
Other Grains
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
HOME ^
California
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
14,244
132
123
80
60
112
14,751
25.8
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
\
13,386
71
161
51
43
109
13,821
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
1.06
1.86
0.76
1.57
1.40
1.03
1.07
N.A.
272
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Amihpn
CLASSIFICATION: Herbicide - Benzoic
USE
FARM (a)
Soybeans
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
3,679
86
3,765
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
4,020
66
4,086
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.92
1.30
0.92
273
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Ammaf-f> (Ammnnfitm Sulf"1Pat«0
CLASSIFICATION: n^rMi-Mf
USE
HOME ^
California
GOVERNMENT^
California
Highway Weed
Control
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
9.5
12.5
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
N.A.
N.A.
-
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
N.A.
N.A.
274
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Aramite
CLASSIFICATION: Mitlcide
USE
FARM
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Arsenleals Group 00
CLASSIFICATION: Herbicides - Arsenlcals
USE
(a)
FARM '
Cotton
Soybeans
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
GOVERNMENT ^
California
Highway Weed
Control (i)
California .
City Agencies
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
802
54
10
866
4.7
0.6
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
1,020
62
3
1,085
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.79
0.87
3.33
0.80
N.A.
N.A.
276
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED
PESTICIDE: Atrazine
CLASSIFICATION:
USE
FARM ^
Corn
Other Grains
Other Fieldcrops
Other Vegetables
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
HOME
California ^
Dallas
California
GOVERNMENT ^8'
California
Highway Weed
Control
California
Vector Control
California
City Agencies
Herbicide- Triazine
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
21,066
1,274
442
399
201
113
23,495
11.8
fi
4.2
31.7
2.5
1.3
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
13,740
829
215
109
24
61
14,978
N.A.
N.A.
0.8
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
1.53
1.54
2.01
3.67
8.38
1.85
1.57
N.A.
N.A.
5.25
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
277
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Azlnphosroethyl
f*T A CCTTTT^ ATTTrtW . f «
i
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE:
Botanicals
CLASSIFICATION; Insecticide _ Botanicals
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
FARM a
Other Vegetables
Other Agriculture
Livestock
TOTAL FARM
38
4
161
78
56
0.49
0.13
203
134
0.31
279
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE:
CLASSIFICATION
USE
HOME (g)
California
GOVEBNMENT ^
California
Highway Weed
Control
California
City Agencies
AQUATIC AREAS '^
California
comacil
- Herbicide - Other Organic
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
3.5
5.9
1.5
1.9
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000) '
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
0.4
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
4.75
280
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE; Cacodylic Acid
CLASSIFICATION: Herbicide - Arsenical
USE
GOVERNMENT
(d)
Rights-of-way
Timber Improvement
(d)
California City
Agencies (g)
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
30
126
0.5
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
1
22
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
Pounds Per Acre)
30.00
5.73
N.A.
281
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Cap tan
CLASSIFICATION: Fungicide - Pthalimldes
USE
FARM
Apples
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Citrus
Corn
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
5,430
1,003
64
59
31
6,587
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
325
301
21
552
32
1,251
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
16.71
3.34
3.05
0.19
0.97
5.27
282
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Carbaryl
CLASSIFICATION:
USE
FARM ^
Other Vegetables
Peanuts
Apples
Cotton
Soybeans
Other grains
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Livestock
Corn
Irish Potatoes
Pasture, Rangeland
and Hay
Tobacco
Citrus
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
Insecticide - Carbamate
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
2,581
1,886
1,595
1,571
1,152
807
555
548
480
401
358
206
172
76
. 12,388
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
604
371
337
415
770
237
197
-
306
140
176
85
29
83
3,750
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
4.27
5.08
4.73
3.79
1.50
3.41
2.82
-
1.57
2.86
2.03
2.42
9.93
0.93
3.16
283
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Carbaryl (Continued)
CLASSIFICATION:
USE
HOME
California (g)
Dallas (f)
GOVERNMENT
Non-forest Pest
Control (g)
California City
Agencies (g)
Dallas Golf Courses
(Public and
Private)
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
51.9
19
86.3
1.9
0.8
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
N.A.
N.A.
62.4
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Founds Per Acre)
N.A.
N.A.
1.38
N.A.
N.A.
284
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: CDAA
CLASSIFICATION: Herbicide - Carbamate
USE
FARM U)
Corn
Soybeans
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
3,893
954
51
4,898
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
3,034
673
14
3,721
APPLICATION
RATE
Pounds Per Acre)
1.28
2.78
3.64
1.32
285
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: r
CLASSIFICATION
USE
FARM W
Corn
Irish Potatoes
Pasture, Rangeland
and Hay
Tobacco
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Other Vegetables
Citrus
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
HOME
California (g)
Philadelphia (f )
Dallas (f)
Salt Lake County (c)
Lansing, Mich, (f)
hlordane
1 Insecticide - Organochlorine
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
159
155
47
26
24
18
15
8
452
508.4
54
39
6
4
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
210
38
59
17
31
23
83
11
472
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.76
4.08
0.80
1.53
0.77
0.78
0.18
0.73
0.96
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
286
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Chlordane (Continued)
CLASSIFICATION:
USE
GOVERNMENT
lion-Forest Pest
Control (g)
California City
Agencies (g)
Philadelphia Golf
Courses (Public
and Private) (f)
Dallas Golf
Courses (Public
and Private) (f )
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
107.1
0.4
3.6
3.0
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
9.8
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
^Pounds Per Acre)
21.13
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
287
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE; Chlorobenzilate
CLASSIFICATION; Insecticide - Organochlorine
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
BATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
FARM
(a)
Citrus
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
421
44
465
565
34
599
0.75
1.29
0.78
288
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Chlorpropham (b)
CLASSIFICATION; Herbicide - Carbamate
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
FABM a
Other Field Crops
Soybeans
Other Vegetables
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
662
384
104
3
1,153
163
528
32
12
4.06
1.42
3.25
0.25
735
1.57
289
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Ciodl±a
CLASSIFICATION; insecticide - Organophosphorus
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
FARM
Livestock
TOTAL FARM
141
141
290
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: rf,
CLASSIFICATION
USE
FARM (a)
Citrus
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Other Vegetables
Apples
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FABM
GOVEENMENT
California City
Agencies (g)
pper Sulfate
L Fungicide - Copper
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
1,092
302
195
84
25
1,698
4
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
178
50
67
28
47
370
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
6.13
6.04
2.91
3.00
0.53
4.59
N.A.
291
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE; Coumaphos
CLASSIFICATION! Insecticide - Organophosphorus
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
292
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE; Cresol
CLASSIFICATION; Insecticide - Other Synthetic Organic
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
FARM
Livestock
(a)
TOTAL FARM
609
609
293
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Crufomate
CLASSIFICATION; insecticide - Orgauophosphorus
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
FARM *
Livestock
TOTAL FARM
129
129
294
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
h
PESTICIDE: Dalapon
CLASSIFICATION; Herbicide - Other Organic
USE
HOME
l
1 California
(o)
GOVERNMENT VB'
California Highway
Weed Control
California Vector
Control
California City
Agencies
(e.
AQUATIC AKEAS VB
California
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
1.6
32.9
1.5
4.0
...
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
0.8
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
6.00
295
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: p.^ M1xt1irP
CLASSIFICATION: i?,^,,,-
USE
(a)
FARM
Tobacco
Cotton
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Irish Potatoes and
Other Vegetables
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
NONCROPLAND **)
California
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
8,619
3,789
1,317
160
70
13,955
158.1
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
123
49
9
3
4
188
1.0
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
70.07
77.33
146.33
53.33
17.50
74.23
158.10
296
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE; DDT
CLASSIFICATION; Insecticide - Organochlorine
USE
FARM
(a)
Cotton
Peanuts
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Other Vegetables
Tobacco
Soybeans
Irish Potatoes
Apples
Livestock
Corn
Other Field Crops
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
19,213
2,265
931
810
782
707
571
567
505
234
118
123
4,767
500
353
332
395
558
454
162
351
81
104
26,826
8,057
4.03
4.53
2.64
2.44
1.98
1.27
1.26
3.50
0.67
1.'46
1.18
3.27
(b)
297
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: DBF
CLASSIFICATION: Defoliant and Dessleant
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
BATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
Included with
Folex use
298
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Diazlnon
CLASSIFICATION
USE
FABM (*)
Corn
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Irish Potatoes
Other Field Crops
Pasture, Range-
land and Hay
Other Vegetables
Tobacco
Apples
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FABM
HOME
California (g)
Dallas (f)
Insecticide - Organophosphorus
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
3,955
467
321
201
165
117
116
114
105
5,561
49.5
31
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
4,011
155
157
89
386
112
151
34
58
, 5,153
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.99
3.01
2.04
2.26
0.43
1.04
0.77
3.35
1.81
1.08
N.A,
N.A.
299
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Dlazlnon (Continued)
CLASSIFICATION:
-
USE
GOVERNMENT
California City
Agencies (g)
Dallas City
Programs (f)
Dallas Golf
Courses (Public
and Private) (f)
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
1.3
2,0
1.0
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
300
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
P.E.ST.ICIB.E : TMbromorhl oropropan*1
CLASSIFICATION: *,,<£,,.
USE
FARM (a)
Cotton
Tobacco
Irish Potatoes and
Other Vegetables
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
3,197
195
114
386
3,892
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
67
5
13
58
143
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
47.72
39.00
8.77
6.66
27.21
301
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Dicamba
CLASSIFICATION: Herbicide - Benzoic
USE
FABM(a)
Wheat
Corn
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
153
49
20
222
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
'
1,231
137
265
1,633
APPLICATION
BATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.12
0.36
0.09
0.14
302
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Dichlorvos
CLASSIFICATION: Insecticide - Organophosphorus
USE
FARM (a)
Livestock
TOTAL FARM
HOME ^8'
California
GOVERNMENT ^g)
California Vector
Control
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
907
907
2.4
3.5
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
-
-
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
-
-
N.A.
N.A.
303
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Dicofol
CLASSIFICATION: Miticide
USE
FARM ^a)
Apples
Cotton
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Corn
Citrus
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
GOVERNMENT ^8'
California City
Agencies
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
294
271
129
88
67
43
892
0.7
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
195
364
114
130
69
37
909
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
1.51
0.74
1.13
0.68
0.97
1.16
0.98
N.A.
304
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Dicrotophos
CLASSIFICATION
: Insecticide -
USE
FARM (a)
Cotton
TOTAL FARM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
1,857
1,857
Organophosphorus
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
1,416
1,416
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
1.31
1.31
305
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: rn
CLASSIFICATION
USE
FARM ^a'
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Other Vegetables
Corn
Apples
Pasture, Range-
land and Hay
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FABM
HOME
California (g)
Dallas (f)
GOVERNMENT (f)
Dallas Golf
Courses (Public
and Private)
Leldrin
v Insecticide - Or gano chlorine
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
339
198
52
49
30
66
704
33.5
14
1.0
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
153
122
183
63
84
125
730
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
2.22
1.62
0.28
0.78
0.36
0.53
0.96
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
306
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
| PESTICIDE: Dimethoate
CLASSIFICATION; Insecticide - Organophosphorus
USE
HOME
Dallas (f)
California (g)
GOVERNMENT
Non-Forest Pest
Control (g)
California Vector
Control (g)
California City
Agencies (g)
Philadelphia City
Parks (f)
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
15
2.6
6.3
38.8
0.4
0.2
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
N.A.
N.A.
2.4
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
2.60
N.A.
N.A. .
N.A.
307
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: pl
CLASSIFICATION
USE
FABM (a)
Peanuts
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Other Vegetables
Irish Potatoes
Soybeans
Other Field Crops
Corn
Apples
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FAEM
NONCROPLAND (g)
California
nitro Group
L Herbicide - Dinitro
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
1,393
1,076
1,006
743
334
175
105
60
70
4,962
67.6
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
352
74
238
277
120
101
205
64
80
1,511
9.2
APPLICATION
BATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
3.96
14.54
4.23
2.68
1.07
1.73
0.51
0.94
0.88
3.28
7.35
308
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Dlsulfoton
CLASSIFICATION: TnRPrt-ir.irte - nrgannphnsphnrus
USE
(a)
FARM
Corn
Irish Potatoes
Cotton
Peanuts
Other Field Crops
Other Vegetables
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
647
532
300
174
170
87
34
1,944
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
744
271
473
188
151
77
104
2,008
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.87
1.96
0.63
0.93
1.15
1.13
0.33
0.97
309
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Diuron
CLASSIFICATION: Herbicide - Phenyl Urea
i
USE
FARM (a)
Cotton
Wheat
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Other Field Crops
Pasture, Rangeland
and Hay
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
HOME ^
California
GOVERNMENT ^
California Highway
Weed Control
California Vector
Control
California City
Agencies
AQUATIC AREAS (l
California
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
882
303
175
165
32
67
1,624
2.2
8.8
2.5
1.3
)
12.2
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
1,282
188
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.69
1.61
109 1.61
48
23
178
1,828
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1.8
3.44
1.38
0.38
0.89
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
6.78
310
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: DSMA
CLASSIFICATION: Herbicide - Arsenical
USE
HOME (g)
California
GOVERNMENT ^8'
California
Highway Weed
Control
California City
Agencies
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
2.5
15.0
2.0
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
311
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Endoaulfan
CLASSIFICATION: Insecticide - Or paunch Irrrlne
USE
FARM ^
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Other Vegetables
Irish Potatoes
Apples
Cotton
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
379
127
119
94
61
8
788
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
258
91
111
25
56
11
. 552
APPLICATION
KATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
1.47
1.40
1.07
3.76
1.09
0.73
1.43
312
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Endrin
CLASSIFICATION: Insecticide - Or gano chlorine
USE
FARM ^
Cotton
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Tobacco
Other Field Crops
Apples
TOTAL FARM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
510
175
20
17
13
735
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED .
(1000)
403
18
24
55
22
527
APPLICATION
RATE
Pounds Per Acre)
1.27
9.72
0.84
0.31
0.59
1.39
313
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Ethlon
CLASSIFICATION: Insecticide - Organophosphorus
USE
FARM (a)
Citrus
Apples
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FAEM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
1,208
412
271
113
2,004
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
489
224
112
64
889
APPLICATION
BATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
2.47
1.84
2.42
1.77
2.25
314
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE; Ethylene Dibromide
CLASSIFICATION; Fumigant, Insecticide and Nematocide
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
HOME
California
NONCROPLAND
California
6.2
1.2
N.A.
N.A.
0.4
3.00
315
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE; Ferbam
CLASSIFICATIPJL: Fungicide - Dithiocarbamates
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
FARM
(a)
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Apples
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
1,211
529
49
250
99
19
4.84
5.34
2.58
1,789
368
4.86
316
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE; Folex (e)
CLASSIFICATION: Herbicide - Defoliant
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
^Pounds Per Acre)
FARM
(a)
Cotton
TOTAL FARM
4,226
4,226
1,688
2.50
1,688
2.50
317
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Heptachlor
CLASSIFICATION; Insecticide - Organochlorine
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
Pounds Per Acre)
FARM
(a)
Corn
Pasture, Rangeland
and Hay
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FAKM
HOME
California
1,484
21
8
1,513
2.7
2,026
60
17
2,103
N.A.
0.73
0.35
0.47
0.72
N.A.
318
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: in,
CLASSIFICATION
USE
FARM (a)
Cotton
Irish Potatoes
Citrus
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Wheat
Apples
Other Field Crops
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
HOME
California
Salt Lake County
(c)
GOVERNMENT ^
California High-
way Weed Control
AQUATIC AREAS ^g
California
arganic Herbicides Group
: Herbicide - Inorganic
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
3,337
1,153
242
125
111
66
40
113
5,197
89.1
82
28
575.2
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
2,047
206
197
35
55
39
5
42
2,626
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
647.3
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
1.63
5.60
1.23
3.86
2.13
1.69
8.00
2.69
1.98
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
0.89
319
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: T_
CLASSIFICATION
USE
(a)
FARM
Apples
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Citrus
Tobacco
Other Vegetables
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
HOME (g)
California
California City
Agencies
>rganic Insecticides Group
- Insecticide - Inorganic
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
4,U6
726
723
118
54
6
5,773
8.2
0.4
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
235
59
97
27
6
39
463
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
EATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
17.64
12.31
7.45
4.37
9.00
0.16
12.47
N.A.
N.A.
320
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Lindane
CLASSIFICATION
USE
(a)
FARM
Livestock
Cotton
Apples
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Corn
Citrus
Peanuts
Other Vegetables
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
HOME ^8^
California
GOVERNMENT ^
California City
Agencies
: Insecticide - Organochlorine
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
293
163
61
50
44
38
19
17
3
658
8.7
0.2
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
-
298
91
34
349
84
21
18
27
922
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
-
0.55
0.67
1.47
0.13
0.45
0.90
0.94
0.16
0.40
N.A.
N.A.
321
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Linuron
CLASSIFICATION: Herbicide - Phenyl Urea
USE
FARM (a>
Other Vegetables
Soybeans
Corn
Irish Potatoes
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
GOVERNMENT ^'
California City
Agencies
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
628
368
290
131
8
1,425
0.4
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
19
613
542
78
12
1,264
-
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
33.05
0.60
0.54
1.68
0.67
1.13
N.A.
322
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: j^
CLASSIFICATION
USE
FARM (a)
Pasture, Range land
and Hay
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Livestock
Cotton
Apples
Other Vegetables
Citrus
Other Field Crops
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FAEM
HOME
California (g)
Philadelphia (f)
Dallas (f)
Lansing, Mich, (f)
Salt Lake County (c
lathion
- Insecticide - Organophosphorus
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
1,851
892
735
559
333
290
84
84
193
5,021
109.7
10.4
66
4
1
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
878
143
-
245
172
213
89
176
314
2,230
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
2.11
6.24
-
2.28
1.28
1.36
0.94
0.48
0.61
1.92
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
323
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Malathion ( Continued')
CLASSIFICATION:
USE
GOVERNMENT
VEE Epidemic (f ) -
Non-Forest Pest
Control (g)
California Vector
Control (g)
California City
Agencies (g)
Dallas City
Programs (f)
Philadelphia
Mosquito Control
(f)
Philadelphia City
Parks (f)
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
1,500
1,244.8
61.6
3.3
5.0
2.3
0.1
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
8,400
1,426.7
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.18
0.87
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.-
N.A.
324
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: MarilA
CL.AS.S:J;.FICAT,I9N,: Fimgir-M" - TMHri^rarbflinal-'*
USE
FARM (a)
Other Vegetables
Irish Potatoes
Other Fruits and
Vegetables
Apples
Corn
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FAEM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
2,702
1,499
91
66
55
6
4,419
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
241
292
13
14
31
1
592
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
11.21
5.13
7.00
4.71
1.77
6.00
7.46
325
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: MCPA
CLASSIFICATION: Herbicide - Phenoxy Group
USE
(a)
FARM '
Other Grains
Wheat
Other Field Crops
Corn
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FABM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
721
342
260
231
58
1,612
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
1,678
766
75
332
60
2,911
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.43
0.45
3.47
0.70
0.97
0.55
326
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Me
CLASSIFICATION
USE
FARM (a>
Livestock
Pasture, Rangeland
and Hay
Citrus
Apples
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
HOME
Lansing, Mich, (f)
Salt Lake County (c)
Philadelphia (f)
California (g)
GOVERNMENT ^
California City
Agencies
ithoxychlor
Insecticide - Organochlorine
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
1,509
794
200
42
20
2,565
3
3
2
1.3
0.5
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
-
802
84
8
34
928
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
. N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
-.
0.99
2.38
5.25
0.58
(b)
1.14
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
327
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Methyl Bromldp
CLASSIFICATION : TT,^ ear^
USE
HOME ^
California
NONCROPLAND (g^
California
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
343.4
440.2
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
N.A.
4.3
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
N.A.
102.38
328
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: MP
CLASSIFICATION
USE
FARM ^
Cotton
Soybeans
Pasture, Rangelanc
and Hay
Other Vegetables
Other Grains
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
HOME ^
California
GOVERNMENT ^8'
California Vector
Control
thyl Parathion
L Insecticide - Organophosphorus
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
7,279
202
110
99
94
207
7,991
6.3
51.8
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
3,577
314
230
33
156
201
4,511
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
2.03
0.64
0.48
3.00
0.60
1.03
1.77
N.A.
N.A.
329
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Mlrex
CLASSIFICATION; Insecticide - Organochlorine
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
SATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
GOVERNMENT
Non-Forest Pest
Control (g)
41.5
11,065.2
0.0038
330
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Miscellaneous Fungicides Group
CLASSIFICATION; Fungicides - Miscellaneous
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
FASM
Apples
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Irish Potatoes
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
831
232
73
7
1,143
363
163
36
20
2.29
1.42
2.03
0.35
582
1.96
331
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: MSMA
CLASSIFICATION: Hpr^-f^-n0
USE
HOME ^
California
GOVERNMENT *8*
California
Highway Weed
Control
California City
Agencies
NONCROPLAND ^
California
AQUATIC AREAS ^
California
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
3.5
54.8
1.6
16.0
14.5
ACREAGE ON WHICH
. APPLIED
(1000)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
3.8
0.2
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
4.21
72.5
332
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: n<.u
CLASSIFICATION
USE
(a)
FARM '
Citrus
Peanuts
Corn
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Other Vegetables
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
ler Coppers
'- Fungicide - Other Copper
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
1,618
1,093
687
'
826
276
40
4,540
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
292
559
88
207
64
27
1,237
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
5.54
1.96
7.81
3.99
4.31
1.48
3.67
333
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: P=
iraquat
CLASSIFICATION: H^V-f^-Mo _ n+har n-r^T,^
USE
HOME ^
California
GOVERNMENT ^
Non-Forest Pest
Control
California Highway
Weed Control
California Vector
Control
California City
Agencies
NONCROPLAND ^
California
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
2.6
0.4
20.7
4.3
4.4
40.3
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
N.A.
0.8
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
-
98.6
APPLICATION
RATE
[Pounds Per Acre)
N.A.
0.50
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
0.41
334
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: P,
CLASSIFICATION
USE
FARM
Cotton
Corn
Other Vegetables
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Tobacco
Irish Potatoes
Pasture, Rangelanc
and Hay
Wheat
Apples
Citrus
Other Grains
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
HOME
California
irathion
Insecticide - Organophosphorus
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
2,181
1,926
1,350
960
409
389
318
303
198
136
105
162
8,437
4.7 .
ACBEAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
860
2,099
366
631
280
200
416
654
155
43
234
202
6,140
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
2.54
0.92
3.69
1.52
1.46
1.95
0.76
0.46
1.28
3.16
0.45
0.80
1.37
N.A.
335
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: PHP
CLASSIFICATION: ttmg-ir-MA - OfhP-r
USE
HOME ^
California
INDUSTRIAL ^
Wood Preservative
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
6.7
32,039
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
N.A.
N.A.
336
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Picloram
CLASSIFICATION; Herbicide - Other Organic
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
GOVERNMENT (
Rights-of-Way
Rangeland Improve
ment
10
1.7
10
0.9
1.00
1.89
337
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: P^opaoVln-r
CLASSIFICATION: HOT.MO^O _ A-»O-MO
USE
FABM ^
Corn
Other Field Crops
Soybeans
TOTAL FABM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
2,162
62
45
2,269
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
-
1,544
45
42
1,631
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
1.40
1.38
1.07
1.39
338
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Propanil
CLASSIFICATION
Herbicide - Amide
USE
FARM ^
Other Grains
TOTAL FARM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
2589
2589
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
935
935
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
2.77
2.77
339
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Propazine
CLASSIFICATION
: Herbicide - Triazine
USE
FAEM ^
Other Grains
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
575
5
580
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED .
(1000)
445
2
447
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
1.29
2.50
1.30
340
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE; Propham
CLASSIFICATION; Herbicide - Carbamate
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
Included with
Chlorpropham use
341
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: R«pftna,,n,
CLASSIFICATION : Mi sr*1 1 *in«>rms
USE
FARM ^
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Citrus
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FAKM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
5774
442
542
6758
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
11
3
56
70
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
524.91
147.33
9.68
96.54
342
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE; Ronnel
CLASSIFICATION; Insecticide - Organophosphorus
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
FARM
Livestock
(a)
391
TOTAL FARM
391
343
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Simazine
CLASSIFICATION: Herbicide - Triazine
USE
HOME *g)
California
GOVERNMENT *8^
California
Highway Weed
Control
California Vector
Control
California City
Agencies
NONCROPLAND ^
California
AQUATIC AREAS ^
California
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
15.4
101.7
1.7
6.3
61.0
2.0
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
36.4
0.4
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1.68
5.00
344
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Strobane
CLASSIFICATION; Insecticide - Organochlorine
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
FARM
Cotton
2016
225
8.96
TOTAL FARM
2016
225
8.96
345
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Sulfur Dioxide
CLASSIFICATION: Fumieant
USE
FARM ^a)
Peanuts
Cotton
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Apples
Irish Potatoes and
Other Vegetables
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FAKM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
6794
564
498
269
198
19
8342
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
265
33
52
15
26
15
406
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
25.64
17.09
9.58
17.93
7.62
1.27
20.55
346
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE; TBA
CLASSIFICATION; Herbicide - Benzoic
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
Pounds Per Acre)
FARM
(a)
Corn
Soybeans
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
2610
255
73
1357
145
125
2938
1624
1.92
1.70
0.58
1.81
347
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: TDE
CLASSIFICATION: Insecticide - Organorhlorine
USE
FARM U)
Tobacco
Other Vegetables
Cotton
Apples
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Irish Potatoes
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
1765
618
167
114
114
62
14
2854
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
623
74
33
28
29
16
36
839
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
2.83
8.35
5.06
3.76
3.93
3.88
0.39
3.40
348
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Tetradifon
CLASSIFICATION: Miticide
i
USE
FARM (a)
Apples
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Cotton
1 Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
151
96
50
69
366
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
175
112
92
51
430
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.86
0.86
0.54
1.35
0.85
349
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: TOX
CLASSIFICATION
USE
FARM (a)
Cotton
Livestock
Peanuts
Soybeans
Other Grains
Wheat
Other Grains
Tobacco
Irish Potatoes
Pasture, Rangeland
and Hay
Other Field Crops
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
HOME ^
California
aphene
' Insecticide - Organochlorine
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
27,345
3,670
985
976
684
270
152
150
124
110
107
21
34,594
4.4
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
3881
-
237
543
205
155
92
61
77
52
56
24
5,383
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
7.05
-
4.16
1.80
3.34
1.74
1.65
2.46
1.61
2.12
1.91
0.87
5.74
N.A.
350
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: T«,
CLASSIFICATION
taphene (Continued)
»
»
USE
GOVERNMENT ^
California City
Agencies
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
2.0
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
N.A.
351
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE; Trichlorfon
CLASSIFICATION; insecticide - Organophosphorus
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
FARM
(a)
Cotton
Other Field crops
TOTAL FARM
963
31
512
24
1.88
1.29
994
536
1.85
352
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: Trifluralin
CLASSIFICATION: Herbicide - Other Organic
USE
FARM (a)
Cotton
Soybeans
Other Vegetables
Other Field Crops
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
GOVERNMENT ^
California Highway
Weed Control
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
2631
2238
175
118
22
5184
2.7
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
3552
3050
109
176
66
6953
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.74
0.73
1.61
0.67
0.33
0.75
N.A.
353
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: 2.
CLASSIFICATION
USE
FARM ^
Corn
Pasture, Rangeland
and Hay
Wheat
Other Grains
Other Field Crops
Cotton
Other Vegetables
Soybeans
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
HOME
Philadelphia (f),(k)
Lansing, Mich.(f),
(k)
California (g)
Dallas (£), (k)
Salt Lake County (c
4-D
Herbicide - Phenoxy
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
14*701
10,025
6,851
6,211
375
250
209
103
788
39,523
79 (c)
13 (c)
11.1 (c)
11 (c)
6 (c)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
22,411
7,160
13,733
11,566
633
175
124
231
860
56,909
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.66
1.40
0.50
0.54
0.59
1.43
1.69
0.45
0.92
0.69
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
354
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: j_i
CLASSIFICATION
1
USE
GOVERNMENT
Rights-of-Way (d)
Non-Forest Pest
Control (d)
Watershed
Maintenance (d)
Witchweed Control
(d)
Rangeland
Improvement (d)
California Highway
Weed Control (g)
NONCROPLAND ^
California
AQUATIC AREAS
California
h-D (Continued)
1
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
313.5
376.8
460.0
176
783
20.3
72.2
10.6
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
104.8
376.8
278
176
398
N.A.
70.2
5.1
APPLICATION
RATE
Pounds Per Acre)
2.99
1.00
1.65
1.00
1.97
N.A.
1.03
' 2.08
355
-------
TABLE C-I (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE: 2,4,5-T
CLASSIFICATION
USE
FARM (a)
Pasture, Rangeland
and Hay
Other Field Crops
Corn
Other Grains
Wheat
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
HOME (d)
Lawn and Turf
(see 2,4-D for othe
GOVERNMENT ^
Federal Weed Contro
INDUSTRIAL *d*
Rights-of-Way
Private Forests
NONCROPLAND ^
Weed Control
AQUATIC ^
Weed Control
: Herbicide - Phenoxy
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
379
110
58
57
26
23
653
600
uses of 2,4,5-T
656
4,368
880
676
162
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
861
89
337
115
59
104
1,565
1,200
296
2,175
430
339
81
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
0.44
1.24
0.17
0.50
0.44
0.22
0.42
0.50
2.22
2.01
2.07
2.00
2.00
356
-------
TABLE C-l (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE; v±kane
CLASSIFICATION: Fumigant
USE
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
HOME
California
(g)
171.8
357
-------
TABLE C-I (CONCLUDED)
PESTICIDE: Zineb
CLASSIFICATION
USE
FARM (a)
Corn
Irish Potatoes
Citrus
Apples
Other Vegetables
Other Fruits and
Nuts
Other Agriculture
TOTAL FARM
GOVERNMENT ^
California City
Agencies
: Fungicide - Dithiocarbamate
AMOUNT
APPLIED
(1000 Pounds)
3,295
1,273
959
747
382
137
3
6,796
0.2
ACREAGE ON WHICH
APPLIED
(1000)
985
215
411
99
43
37
"5
1,795
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per Acre)
3.35
5.91
2.33
7.55
8.88
3.70
0.60
3.79
N.A.
(a) Data from 1966.
(b) Includes propham use.
(c) Data from 1968.
(d) Data from 1969.
(e) Includes DBF use
(f) Data from 1971.
(g) Data from 1972.
(h) Also see individual pesticides in Arsenicals group.
(i) Does not include DSMA or MSMA use. They are listed
separately.
(j) Does not include use on livestock.
(k) Includes 2,4,5-T use.
358
-------
APPENDIX D
PESTICIDE CONTAINERS
This appendix summarizes the types of containers used for home
and garden and agricultural pesticides.
359
-------
TAULE D-J
TYPES OF CONTAINERS USKD fOK GARDEN AND HOME PESTICIDES*'1'
SIX15 OF
CONTAINER
Liquid Container
4 Ounces
8 Ounces
1 Pint
1 (Juart
1 Gallon
Over one gallon
Dry Containers
1/2 pound
I pound
CONTAINER CONSTRUCTION
Paper
nags
X
X
1-5 pounds X
i
5 pounds and over X
i
Plastic
il.lfiS
x
X
X
X
Glass
X
X
X
X
X
,
Other
Plastic
X
X
X
X
X
X
Cardboard ...
Carton & Can
X
X
X
Nonprussur Lzed
Metal
X
X
X
X
X
X
Aerosol*-0'
X
X
X
CJ
s
(a) Data from (5).
(h) Odor barriers may bo part of has, carton, and can construction. These barriers arc generally various plastic
Inmlnations or foil.
(c) Aerosols vary more In size, than other containers and may bo sold in odd ounce sizes such as 22 oz.
-------
TABLE DM
PESTICIDE CONTAINER USE BY AGRICULTURE1"1
(>
CONTAINER
Size of
Container
Dry contalnera:
Less than 3 pounda
3 to 6 pounda
7 to 10 pounda
11 to 20 pounda
21 and over pounda
Liquid contalnera
1 pint
1 quart
1 gallon
5 gallons
30 gallons
55 gallons
Total liquid
containers
Total containers
CUP USE
(Million Contalnera)
Herbicide*
0.1
2,7
1.0
0.4
1.6
5.8
20.1
1,5
0.1
0.2
0,1
0.1
22.1
J7.9
Ineectleldes
1.1
21.0
2.1
0.5
4.8
29.5
2.8
13.3
0.1
0.1
-
16.3
45.8
Other
Pesticides
0.1
1.3
0.1
1.5
0.4
1.5
0.2
0.3
2.6
4.1
Total
1.3
25.0
3.1
0.9
6.5
36.8
23.3
16.3
0.4
0.6
41.0
77.8
OIKKOr US8
(Million Containers)
Livestock
1.)
1.1
1.1
3.5
0.4
1.8
1.6
0.4
.
4.2
Stored
Crops
0.1
0.2
0.7
0.1
1.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
7.7 ' 1.3
Seedbeds an
Transplants
0.1
1.5
2.5
0.2
6.S
1.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
1.3
Total
1.5
1.5
2.5
0.2
5.7
0.5
2.0
1.7
0.4
4.*
10. J
TOTAL AGRICULTURE USE
(Million Containers)
2.8
26.5
5.6
1.1
6.5
42.5
23.8
18.3
2.1
1.0
0.2
0.2
».6
91. Kb)
(a) Data fro. (5).
(b) Includes an additional 3 Billion containers used for rodent control
-------
APPENDIX E
FARM REGIONALIZATION DATA
This appendix contains the following data:
a) Acreage of each crop grown within each region, 1966.
b) Percentage of crop acreage grown within each region, by
state, 1971.
c) Historical crop statistics on nine crops, 1964-1971.
1) Production
2) Acreage planted
3) Acreage harvested
4) Yield
5) Price per unit
6) Farm value
d) Expenditures for each type of pesticide used on each crop
by region, 1966.
e) Percentage of each type of pesticide used on each crop by
region, 1966.
f) Crop acreage treated by region, 1966.
1) Percentage of farms using pesticides
2) Total percentage of acreage treated.
3) Total acreage grown.
g) EPA region'components.
363
-------
TABLE E-I
CROP ACREAGE CROWN BY REGION, 1966
(In Thousands of Acres)
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
201
96
63
S
107
5
2
2
32
162
675
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
886
1
32
40
220
1,179
CORN
3,012
9,766
33,163
9.784
4,473
3,469
801
653
757
377
66,255
COTTON
-
-
257
-
657
1,363
2,329
4,712
399
632
10,349
FIELD
CROPS
166
1.568
965
2,790
369
397
455
602
1,254
1,264
9,830
FRUITS
& NUTS
184
155
46
7
55
331
165
158
45
1.461
2,607
OTHER
GRAINS
1,621
6,685
6,013
16,806
1,058
796
1,634
10,460
5,102
3,879
54,054
UROP
OTHER
VEGETABLES
559
662
279
5
163
496
58
314
186
968
3,690
PASTURE,
KANGELAND
14,520
17,964
35,581
100,014
23,540
13,750
14,718
125,694
217,161
46,374
609,316
PEANUTS
_
_
_
_
276
784
3
419
8
-
1,490
POTATOES
327
216
33
132
62
70
9
33
402
213
1,497
SOYBEANS
429
4,052
19,452
2,311
2,648
1,629
6,587
280
_
37,388
TOBACCO
71
9
19
725
149
.
-
973
WHEAT
810
1,632
5,076
23,219
789
239
803
9,526
8,812
3,607
54,513
ALL
CROPS
21,900
42,805
100,947
155 073
34,922
24,364
27,565
152,885
234,198
59,157
853,816
CO
-------
TABLE E-II
PERCENTAGE OF CROP ACREAGE GROWN WITHIN EACH REGION, BY STATE, 1971^
STATE
Northeast
Connecticut
Delaware
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
Vermont
Lake States
Michigan
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Corn Belt
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Missouri
Ohio
Northern Plains
Kansas
Nebraska
North Dakota
South Dakota
Appalachian
Kentucky
North Carol in:
Tennessee
Virginia
West Virginia
Southeast
Alabama
Georgia
Florida
South Carol in;
Delta
Arkansas
Louisiana
Mississippi
Southern Plains
Oklahoma
Texas
Mountain
Ar Izona
Colorado
Idaho
Montana
New Mexico
Nevada
Utah
Wyoming
Pacific
California
Oregon
Washington
APPLES
2.63
0.61
3.89
3.52
5.32
3.04
5.62
47.23
25.78
0.28
2.08
89.05
2.91
8.04
25.14
21.96
2.59
13.71
36.60
100.0
-
-
-
2.00
19.10
0.97
49.55
28.38
-
-
-
00.0
00.0
-
-
.
-
_
36.82
44.78
-
5.97
_
12.43
-
23.19
7.25
69.56
CITRUS
_
~
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
_
_
_
-
_
_
-
-
-
-
~-
100.0
-
-
-
-
_
100.0
100.0
_
-
-
-
_
_
-
100.0
-
-
COW)
_
9.38
-
23.45
_
-
3.75
14.82
48.59
-
-
17.85
60.11
22.04
30.03
16.27
34.16
9.13
10.41
13.75
56.15
2.01
28.09
31.11
38.57
17.13
11.70
1.49
20.76
51.90
11.96
15.38
9.47
27.71
62.82
10.24
89.76
2.83
82.02
5.86
1.41
3.43
_
_
4.44
77.19
3.15
19.30
COTTON
_
_
-
_
_
-
-
_
-
-
-
_
_
-
0.25
_
_
99.75
-
_
_
_
-
0.71
28.76
69.84
0.69
-
43.86
30.26
0.73
25.15
38.45
16.86
44.69
7.72
92.28
65.12
_
-
-
34.36
0.52
_
-
100.0
-
-
PEANUTS
_
^
_
_
_
_
_
_
-
_
-
_
_
-
_
_
_
_
-
_
_
_
-
_
62.27
_
37.73
-
24.68
64.24
9.18
1.90
-
-
100.0
28.24
71.76
_
_
-
-
100.0
-
_
-
-
-
-
POTATOES
1.66
2.47
51.15
0.78
1.62
0.25
3.88
23.28
12.52
1.97
0.42
21.12
51.61
27.26
7.27
25.82
11.64
2.54
52.73
0.94
6.84
86.55
5.67
4.43
26.06
7.27
54.96
7.27
32.40
-
67.60
-
22.95
44.26
32.79
_
100.0
2.57
11.09
81.32
1.99
0.61
-
1.48
0.94
39.41
23.38
37.21
SOYBEANS
_
18,72
26.72
_
6.28
0.86
3.94
_
43.47
15.34
81.02
3.64
32.40
15.30
24.65
16.34
11.30
44.46
32.67
10.62
12.25
24.90
31.41
43.69
_
-
25.95
24.89
8.11
41.04
51.59
19.88
28.52
59.29
40.71
_
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
TOBACCO
9.16
_
54.57
3.14
_
33.13
-
_
_
100.0
_
33.54
13.04
53.42
_
_
_
-
25.45
55.30
8.27
10.76
0.22
0.43
43.73
9.64
46.20
100.0
_
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
WHEAT
4.28
18.84
_
5.65
22.26
48.97
-
26.85
71.03
2.12
27.44
20.51
1.00
23.67
27.38
39.59
11.17
39.24
10.00
20.81
29.57
27.38
20.81
1.42
22.73
40.72
12.69
23.86
58.62
8.62
32.76
69.91
30.09
2.01
29.48
11.45
50.06
1.86
0.13
2.34
2.67
12.49
20.64
66.87
-------
TABLE E-III
CROP STATISTICS
(a)
CROP: APPLES
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
PRODUCTION
(Million
Pounds)
6,110.1
6,293.9
6,751.8
5,441.9
5,394.9
5,646.4
5,993.3
6,240.3
ACREAGE
PLANTED
(1000)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
ACREAGE
HARVESTED
(1000)
675
YIELD PER
HARVESTED
ACRE
(Pounds)
8,365.0
SEASON
AVERAGE
PRICE PER
POUND
(cents)
4.90
4.50
4.06
6.11
5.56
4.46
4.35
3.86
FARM VALUE
(Million Dollars)
299.6
283.3
274.4
332.2
299.8
252.1
260.5
241.1
-------
TABLE E-III (CONTINUED)
CROP: CITRUS
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
PRODUCTION
(1000 Boxes)
280,160
267,095
265,070
195,908
268,516
208,230
181,857
150,392
ACREAGE
PLANTED
(1000)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1,179
N.A.
N.A.
ACREAGE
HARVESTED
(1000)
1,182.5
1,120.2
1,066.4
1,002.0
938.5
876.9
827.8
781.4
YIELD PER
HARVESTED
ACRE
(Boxes)
236.92
238.44
248.57
195.52
286.11
237.46
219.69
192.46
SEASON
AVERAGE
PRICE PER
BOX
(Dollars)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
FARM VALUE
(Million Dollars)
705.7
618.6
648.1
605.9
499.5
510.4
525.7
593.6
U3
-------
TABLE E-III (CONTINUED)
CROP: CORN
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
PRODUCTION
(Million
Bushels)
5,540.3
4,099.5
4,582.5
4,393.3
4,760.1
4,117.4
4,084.3
3.484.3
ACREAGE
PLANTED
(1000)
74,097
67,004 '
64,476
65,126
71,093
66,255
65,119
65,823
ACREAGE
HARVESTED
(1000)
63,819
57,224
54,598
55,880
60,557
56,933
55,332
55,369
YIELD PER
HARVESTED
ACRE
(Bushels)
86.8
71.6
83.9
78.6
78.6
72.3
73.8
62.9
SEASON
AVERAGE
PRICE PER
BUSHEL
(Dollars)
1.06
1.33
1.15
1.08
1.03
1.24
1.16
1.17
FARM VALUE
(Million Dollars)
8,058.0
7,266.6
7,105.5
6,244.4
6,662.7
6,886.6
6,382.4
5,481.8
00
-------
TABLE E-III (CONTINUED)
CROP : COTTON
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
PRODUCTION
(Million
Pounds)
5,024.3
4,888.1 -
4,797.9
5,242.6
3,574.7
4,585.0
7,175.1
7,2.66.4
ACREAGE
PLANTED
(1000)
12,345.9
11,945.2
11,882
10,912
9,448
10,349
14,152
14,835 .
ACREAGE
HARVESTED
(1000)
11,470.9
11,160.0
11,055
10,160
7,997
9,552
13,615
14,055
YIELD PER
HARVESTED
ACRE
(Pounds)
438
438
454
516
447
480
527
517
SEASON
AVERAGE
PRICE PER
POUND
(Cents)
28.62
21.98
21.09
22.15
25.59
20.84
28.14
29.76
FARM VALUE
(Million Dollars)
1,438.7
1,121.6
1,055.0
1,212.0
953.8
997.5
2,106.1
2,258.5
CO
ON
VD
-------
TABLE E-III (CONTINUED)
CHOP: PEANUTS
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
PRODUCTION
(Million
Pounds)
3,003.7
2,979.5
2,528.7
2,542.8
2,473.4
2,410.4
2,384.0
2,099.1
ACREAGE
PLANTED
(1000)
1,529
1,518
1,507
1,493
1,472
1,488
1,517
1,487
ACREAGE
HARVESTED
(1000)
1,454
1,467
1,451
1,436
1,402
1,418
1,435
1,397
YIELD PER
HARVESTED
ACRE
(Pounds)
2,067
2,031
1,743
1,771
1,765
1,700
1,661
1,502
SEASON
AVERAGE
PRICE PER
POUND
(Cents)
13.6
12.8
12.3
11.9
11.4
11.3
11.4
11.2
FARM VALUE
(Million Dollars)
405.9
382.5
311.3
302.3
282.7
217.7
272.7
235,0
OJ
-------
TABLE E-III (CONTINUED)
CROP: (IRISH) POTATOES
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
PRODUCTION
(Million
Cartweight)
316.1
325.6 -
311.9
294.0
305.3
306.9
291.2
241.1
ACREAGE
PLANTED
(1000)
1,414
1,449
1,456
1,410
1,497
1,497
1,419
1,311.
ACREAGE
HARVESTED
(1000)
1,380
1,420
1,413
1,376
1,457
1,464
1,384
1,272
YIELD PER
HARVESTED
ACRE
(Cwt.)
229
229
221
214
210
210
210
190
SEASON
AVERAGE
PRICE PER
CWT.
(Dpll^rs)
2.00
2.21
2.23
2.23
1.86
2.04
2.53
3.50
FARM VALUE
(Million Dollars)
626.5
712.4
694.0
693.9
565.8
619.8
730.8
846.0
U)
-------
TABLE E-III (CONTINUED)
CROP: SOYBEANS
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
PRODUCTION
(Million
Bushels)
1,169.4
1,123.7
1,126.3
1,103.1
976.1
928.5
845.6
700.9
ACREAGE
PLANTED
(1000)
43,176
42,945 '
42,198
42,037
40,776
37,294
35,227
31,605
ACREAGE
HARVESTED
(1000)
42,409
42,056
40,982
41,104
39,767
36,548
34,449
30,793
YIELD PER
HARVESTED
ACRE
(Bushels)
27.6
26.7
27.5
26.8
24.5
25.4
24.5
22.8
SEASON
AVERAGE
PRICE PER
BUSHEL
(Dollars)
2.96
2.85
2.35
2.43
2.49
2.75
2.54
2.62
FARM VALUE
(Million Dollars)
3,464.9
3,204.7
2,647.5
2,679.2
2,432.6
2,553.6
2,151.3
1,836.4
CO
-------
TABLE E-III (CONTINUED)
CROP: TOBACCO
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
PRODUCTION
(Million
Pounds)
1,708.9
1,907.8
1,804.2
1,710.4
1,967.9
1,886.8
1,854.6
2,227.9
ACREAGE
PLANTED
(1000)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
974
N.A.
N.A.
ACREAGE
HARVESTED
(1000)
840.2
899.3
919.9
880.3
959.8
973.9
976.9
1,077.8
YIELD PER
HARVESTED
ACRE
(Pounds)
2,034
2,121
1,961
1,943
2,050
1,937
1,898
2,067
SEASON
AVERAGE
PRICE PER
POUND
(Cents)
78.5
72.8
71.8
69.5
66.8
66.4
65.1
59.2
FARM VALUE
(Million Dollars)
1,342.2
1,389.7
1,295.8
1,188.6
1,315.5
1,252.9
1,206.7
1,318.9
Co
-^1
CO
-------
TABLE E-III (CONCLUDED)
CROP: WHEAT
YEAR
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
PRODUCTION
(Million
Bushels)
1,639.5
1,370.2
1,460.2
1,526.3
1,522.4
1,311.7
1,315.6
1,283.4
ACREAGE
PLANTED
(1000)
54,643
49,488
54,279
62,486
67,796
54,395
57,361
55,672
ACREAGE
HARVESTED
(1000)
48,453
44,141
47,577
55,262
58,771
49,867
49,560
49,762
YIELD PER
HARVESTED
ACRE
(Bushels)
33.8
31.0
30.7
28.5
25.9
26.3
26.5
25.8
SEASON
AVERAGE
PRICE PER
BUSHEL
(Dollars)
1.32
1.33
1.24
1.24
1.39
1.63
1.35
1.37
FARM VALUE
(Million Dollars)
2,167.7
1,826.1
1,815.1
1,951.5
2,110.2
2,140.7
1,774.5
1,757.0
(a) Data from (17).
-------
TABLE E-IV
EXPENDITURES ($1000) FOR FUNGICIDES USED ON CROPS BY REGION, 1966
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
3911
3622
668
-
2882
_
-
474
85
11,582
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
2618
10
-
_32
2665
CORN
2
1
22
5
-
1
-
2
_6
38
COTTON
-
-
21
-
38
12
27
143
616
715
1572
OTHER
FIELD,
CROPS1
2
80
58
24
-
_
685
20
493
1362
OTHER
, FRUITS
'i NUTS
950
1119
194
-
219
223
436
1
42
4004
7188
OTHERCb
GRAINS
CROP
OTHER
VEGETABLES
516
561
1339
-
8
648
75
108
697
3952
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
& HAY (c)
PEANUTS
-
-
-
-
26
223
-
-
-
249
POTATOES
1596
399
160
1367
-
18
-
86
131
3757
SOYBEANS
-
-
13
-
41
_
-
-
_^
54
TOBACCO
-
-
-
-
107
330
-
-
^
437
WHtAT
tt?)
ALL
CROPS
6997
5782
2475
1396
3261
4072
463
914
1348
6168
32,856
(d)
CO
(a) Data from (14).
(b) Other field crops Includes use on other field crops, other grain and wheat
(c) Negligible amount of fungicides used.
(d) Another $44,000 was spent on nursery and greenhouse use.
-------
TABLE E-V
EXPENDITURES ($1000) FOR HERBICIDES USED ON CROPS B Y REGION. 1966
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPTc)
CITRUS
lc
CORN
6920
18,079
SI, 063
7357
7896
1787
722
234
337
414
94,809
con ON
-
-
1067
-
1841
4955
12,253
S369
917
2532
28,934
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS
-------
TABLE E-VI
EXPENDITURES ($1000) FOR INSECTICIDES USED ON CROPS BY REGION, 1966
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
4431
2591
1213
2
2112
-
-
3
1202
2973
14,527
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
13,685
-
201
-
2833
16,719
CORN
130
2970
26,227
8114
801
135
34
4
298
876
39,589
COTTON
-
-
188
-
2283
12,877
15,773
14,843
5509
5617
57,090
CROP
OTHER
T1ELD
CROPS (b)
2350
269
610
476
2009
1028
546
1881
3736
1076
13,981
OTHER
FRUITS
& NUTS
1516
1266
399
-
253
2268
403
120
386
7789
14,400
OTHER
GRAINS
(b?
OTHER
VEGETABLES
1131
870
723
4
508
1519
231
1322
468
10,610
17,386
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
& HAY(b)
PEANUTS
-
-
-
-
1999
2210
-
20
-
_
4229
POTATOES
1507
1817
201
450
45
57
-
5
698
2624
7404
SOYBEANS
56
-
248
12
414
1626
296
93
-
_
2745
TOBACCO
252
5
34
-
3832
2012
-
-
-
6135
WHEAT
(h)
ALL
CROPS
11,373
9,788
29,843
9,058
14,256
37,415
17,283
18,492
12,297
34,398
194,205
(c)
CO
VI
SI
(a) Data from (14).
(b) Other fruits and nuts includes use on other field crops, other grains, pasture and rangeland, and wheat
(c) Another $366,000 was spent on nursery and greenhouse use.
-------
TABLE E-VIl
EXPENDITURE ($1000) FOR MISCELLANEOUS PESTICIDES(a) USED ON SELECTED CROPS BY REGION. 1966
-------
TABLE E-VIII
PERCENTAGE OF FUS1G1C1DE USE ON CROPS BY REGION, 1966
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
36.4
23.4
8.7
_
28.2
_
_
_
0.4
2.8
99.9
ITRUS
_
-
-
-
_
84.2
_
15.7
-
0.1
100.0
CORN
(a)
0.6
2.5
70.5
5.5
3.4
0.4
-
13.2
0.3
3.6
100.0
COTTON
_
-
1.1
-
0.8
12.8
5.0
9.6
-
70.7
100.0
OTHER
FIELD3'
CROPS
OTHER
FRUITS
& NUTS
16.9
18.4
1.0
-
3.5
3.8
13.4
-
4.3
38.7
100.0
OTHER(a
GRAINS
CROP
OTHER
VEGETABLES
14.1
6.1
29.8
-
0.3
26.4
-
11.9
2.0
9.4
100.0
PASTURE, (a
RANGELAND
& HAY
PEANUTS
-
-
-
-
56.2
43.8
-
-
-
100.0
POTATOES
67.9
7.2
4.9
16.0
-
0.2
-
-
1.0
2.8
100.0
SOYBEANS
(a)
TOBACCO
(a)
WHEAT
(«>
ALL
CROPS
22.4
11.1
17. 6
2.7
11.0
17.1
2.0
5.8
1.1
9.2
100.0
CO
(a) Corn includes corn, other field crops, other grains, pasture, rangeland and hay, soybeans, tobacco and wheat.
-------
TABLE E-IX
PERCENTAGE OF HERBICIDES USED 00 CROPS BY REGION, 1966
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
30.0
6.4
12.1
-
21.6
-
-
-
3.3
26.5
99.9
CITRUS
-
-
-
-
-
81.6
-
-
-
16.4
100.0
CORN
6.2
16.2
59.8
7.3
6.9
1.6
0.4
0.2
0.8
0.6
loo.o
COTTON
-
-
2.2
-
5.1
16.3
37.1
21.7
4.7
12.9
100.0
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS H
1.7
27.9
7.3
17.0
2.2
0.1
3.5
0.2
U.6
28.7
99.9
OTHER
FRUITS
'& HUTS
3.9
1.7
0.4
-
-
0.3
1.7
, -
0.1
91.9
00.0
CROP
OTHER
GRAINS
1.5
7.6
3.1
31.3
o.a
0.3
13.6
23.0
9.6
9.2
100.0
OTHER
VEGETABLES
26.8
10.4
2.7
-
0.9
0.6
3.3
1.8
5.0
48.5
100.0
PASTURE,
RANCELAND
& HAY
_
0.6
1.8
27.1
2.9
0.1
1.4
28.8
17.5
19.7
99.9
PEANUTS
_
-
-
-
19.1
80.7
-
0.2
-
^_
100.0
POTATOES
82.6
3.8
7.2
-
-
0.6
-
-
1.1
4.7
100.0
SOYBEANS
0.8
10.9
63.1
2.7
5.1
3.6
13.5
0.2
-
-
99.9
TOBACCO
(a)
WHEAT
2.8
0.6
37.5
0.2
0.1
_
0.3
22.7
35.JJ
100.0
ALL
CROPS
5.5
10.3
31.6
13.2
4.7
4.4
5.4
6.7
5.6
12.6
LOO.O
00
o
() Other field crops Includes tobacco
-------
TABLE E-X
PERCENTAGE OF INSECTICIDES USED ON CROPS BY REGION, 1966
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
36.7
14.5
25.1
-
13.3
-
-
-
1.5
8.9
100.0
CITRUS
-
-
.
-
-
81.7
-
4.1
-
14.2
100.0
CORN
0.4
6.8
74.2
15.5
1.5
0.4
0.1
-
0.8
0.5
99.9
COTTON
-
-
0.3
-
5.1
34.8
32.0
19.3
6.7
1.7
99.9
OTHER
FIELD
CROPS
3.2
7.6
6.1
6.2
6.0
6,7
23.7
1.3
19.5
19.7
100.0
OTHER
FRUITS
& NUTS
14.0
11.2
3.7
-
3.0
15.7
3.4
3.0
1.2
44.7
99.9
OTHER
GRAINS
0.3
3.8
3.2
8.2
3.4
26.3
8.7
45.0
1.0
.~
99.9
CROP
OTHER
VEGETABLES
10,7
3.2
6.8
-
3.7
14.7
2.3
21.8
1.4
35.3
99.9
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
& HAY
-
1.2
0.3
1.4
1.2
34.5
2.6
11.1
47.7
._""__
100.0
PEANUTS
-
-
-
-
19.0
81.0
-
-
-
_^
100.0
POTATOES
31.4
19.9
6.9
4.8
1.2
0.7
-
0.1
14.0
21.1
100.0
SOYBEANS
0.7
-
7.6
0.2
25.1
59.2
6.2
1.0
-
-JL-
100,0
TOBACCO
2.4
-
0.3
-
65.4
31.8
-
-
-
.._-
99.9
WHEAT
-
0.1
8,8
26.0
23.2
-
1.0
40.3
0.6
-
100.0
ALL
CROPS
5.1
3.3
15.6
3.3
7.8
25.8
15.9
11.6
5.0
6.6
100.0
00
CO
-------
TABLE E-XI
PERCENTAGE OF MISCELLANEOUS PESTICIDES USED ON CROPS BY REGION. 1966
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
APPLES
32.3
22.1
8.2
-
3.7
-
-
-
19.8
13.9
100.0
CITRUS
-
-
-
.
_
36.6
-
-
-
63.4
100.0
CORN
1.3
29.9
20.5
20.7
8.1
-
0.9
-
2.7
15.9
99.9
COTTON
-
-
0.6
.
1.4
5.8
11.2
14.8
2.8
63.3
99.9
FIELD
CROPS
-
-
_
_
-
_
-
62.7
37.3
100.0
OTHER
FRUITS
& NUTS
0.2
1.1
3.0
.
-
_
-
0.2
95,5
100.0
^_ CROP
OTHER
GRAINS
-
-
m.
~
-
35.0
65.0
- ~
100.0
OTHER
VEGETABLES
(a)
21.2
12.2
12.3
23.1
23.8
-
1.5
5.9
100.0
PASTURE,
RANGELAND
A HAY
0.9
-
~
-
-
~
19.5
-
79.6
100.0
PEANUTS
_
-
"*
**
22.8
77.2
~
-
-
-
100.0
POTATOES
(a)
SOYBEANS
_
~
-
100.0
-
_
_
100.0
TOBACCO
0.7
.
0.3
66.9
32.1
-
_
_
_
100.0
WHEAT
-
~
_
-
38.3
_
61.7
100.0
ALL
CROPS
1.4
1.3
1.6
0.2
23.3
23.4
3.3
4.6
1.7
39.2
100.0
CO
00
K)
(a) Other vegetables includes potatoes
-------
TABLE E-XII
CROP ACREAGE TREATED BY REGION
(a)
CROP: APPLES
REGION
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
PERCENTAGE OF
FARMS REPORTING
PESTICIDE USE
1964
81
87
87
75
N.A.
47
91
79
1966
86
78
51
36
100
39
93
67
PERCENTAGE OF
ACREAGE
TREATED
1964
99
99
99
98
N.A.
98
88
97
1966
94
97
87
86
100
79
95
93
1966 CROP
ACREAGE GROWN
(1000)
201
96
63
5
107
5
2
2
32
162
675
383
-------
TABLE E-XII (CONTINUED)
CROP: CITRUS
REGION
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
PERCENTAGE OF
FARMS REPORTING
PESTICIDE USE
1964
___
-
79
100
72
78
1966
___
68
100
73
73
PERCENTAGE OF
ACREAGE
TREATED
1964
-
79
100
97
89
1966
98
89
93
97
1966 CROP
ACREAGE GROWN
(1000)
1
HM
"'"
886
1
32
40
220
1,179
384
-------
TABLE E.-XII (CONTINUED)
CROP : CORN
REGION
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
PERCENTAGE OF
FARMS REPORTING
PESTICIDE USE
1964
55
55
67
48
23
9
7
4
N.A.
18
44
1966
63
59
68
58
30
13
11
10
N.A.
38
49
PERCENTAGE OF
ACREAGE
TREATED
1964
67
59
71
47
48
13
26
5
N.A.
20
59
1966
68
66
77
60
55
17
23
13
N.A.
44
67
1966 CROP
ACREAGE GROWN
(1000)
3,012
9,766
33,163
9,784
4,473
3,469
801
653
757
377
66,255
385
-------
TABLE E-XII (CONTINUED)
CROP: COTTON
REGION
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
PERCENTAGE OF
FARMS REPORTING
PESTICIDE USE
1964
68
63
63
68
44
35
97
62
1966
77
54
63
74
54
54
70
63
PERCENTAGE OF
ACREAGE
TREATED
1964
53
86
93
80
45
77
98
69
1966
93
82
83
92
59
72
73
74
1966 CROP
ACREAGE GROWN
(1000)
257
657
1,363
2,329
4,712
399
632
10,349
386
-------
TABLE E-XII (CONTINUED)
CROP: OTHER FIELD CROPS
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
PERCENTAGE OF
FARMS REPORTING
PESTICIDE USE
1964
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.,
N.A.
N.A.
7
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1966
N.A.
51
N.A.
37
10
26
18
N.A.
51
N.A.
N.A.
PERCENTAGE OF
ACREAGE
TREATED
1964
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
12
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
36
1966
N.A.
53
26
36
10
62
63
N.A.
47
51
45
1966 CROP
ACREAGE GROWN
(1000)
166
1,568
965
2,790
369
397
455
602
1,254
1,264
9,830
387
-------
TABLE E-XII (CONTINUED)
CROP: OTHER FRUITS AND NUTS
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
PERCENTAGE OF
FARMS REPORTING
PESTICIDE USE
1964
88
99
100
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
50
N.A.
N.A.
80
73
1966
84
98
N.A.
100
N.A.
N.A.
25
N.A.
N»A.
74
63
PERCENTAGE OF
ACREAGE
TREATED
1964
93
96
100
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
60
N.A.
N.A.
88
89
1966
94
94
87
100
N.A.
38
30
96
N.A.
65
69
1966 CROP
ACREAGE GROWN
(1000)
184
155
46
7
55
331
165
158
45
1,461
2,607
388
-------
TABLE E-XII (CONTINUED)
CROP: OTHER GRAINS
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
PERCENTAGE OF
FARMS REPORTING
PESTICIDE USE
1964
N.A.
25
N.A.
N.A._
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1966
N.A.
22
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
8
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
PERCENTAGE OF
ACREAGE
TREATED
1964
N.A.
30
N.A.
32
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1966
N.A.
34
N.A.
46
N.A.
N.A.
44
18
35
38
29
1966 CROP
ACREAGE GROWN
(1000)
1,621
6,685
6,013
16,806
1,058
796
1,634
10,460
5,102
3,879
54,054
389
-------
TABLE E-XII (CONTINUED)
CROP: OTHER VEGETABLES
REGION
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
PERCENTAGE OF
FARMS REPORTING
PESTICIDE USE
1964
69
55
70
N.A.
N.A.
50.
27
45
71
77
57
1966
80
58
54
N.A.
N.A.
59
34
78
7?
69
56
PERCENTAGE OF
ACREAGE
TREATED
1964
95
59
79
N.A.
N.A.
79
72
32
76
90
81
1966
89
60
81
19
N.A.
80
96
81
80
87
78
1966 CROP
ACREAGE GROWN
(1000)
559
662
279
5
163
496
58
314
186
968
3,690
390
-------
TABLE Er-XIZ (CONTINUED)
CROP: PASTURE, RANGELAND AND HAY
REGION
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
PERCENTAGE OF
FARMS REPORTING
PESTICIDE USE
1964
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1966
N.A.
N.A.
4
N.A.
16
1
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
PERCENTAGE OF
ACREAGE
TREATED
1964
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1966
15
1
1
3
17
<0.5
3
4
1
2
2
1966 CROP
ACREAGE GROWN
(1000)
14,520
17,964
35,581
100,014
23,540
13,750
14,718
125,694
217,161
46,376
609,316
391
-------
TABLE E-XII (CONTINUED)
CROP: PEANUTS
REGION
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
PERCENTAGE OF
FARMS REPORTING
PESTICIDE USE
1964
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
51
1966
72
69
N.A.
.44
66
PERCENTAGE OF
ACREAGE
TREATED
1964
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
61
1966
92
84
N.A.
63
77
1966 CROP
ACREAGE GROWN
(1000)
276
784
3
419
8
1,490
392
-------
TABLE E-XII (CONTINUED)
CROP: (IRISH) POTATOES
REGION
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
PERCENTAGE OF
FARMS REPORTING
PESTICIDE USE
1964
95
48
46
100
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
81
64
71
1966
95
56
43
100
N.A.
100
100
96
33
65
PERCENTAGE OF
ACREAGE
TREATED
1964
99
86
100
100
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
65
96
84
1966
100
99
84
100
N.A.
100
100
92
74
96
1966 CROP
ACREAGE GROWN
(1000)
327
216
33
132
62
70
9
33
402
213
1,497
393
-------
TABLE E-XII (CONTINUED)
CROP: SOYBEANS
REGION
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
PERCENTAGE OF
FARMS REPORTING
PESTICIDE USE
1964
N.A.
12
19
8
10
22
31
3
16
1966
N.A.
31
34
18
17
48
21
18
29
PERCENTAGE OF
ACREAGE
TREATED
1964
N.A.
8
19
6
23
43
47
2
24
1966
N.A.
24
31
12
41
64
28
29
30
1966 CROP
ACREAGE GROWN
(1000)
429
4,052
19,452
2,311
2,648
1,629
6,587
280
37,388
394
-------
TABLE E-XII (CONTINUED)
CROP : TOBACCO
REGION
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SOUTHERN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
PERCENTAGE OF
FARMS REPORTING
PESTICIDE USE
1964
N.A.
N.A.
74
..'
79
100
81
1966
N.A.
N.A.
79
80
100
81
PERCENTAGE OF
ACREAGE
TREATED
1964
N.A.
N.A.
68
94
100
93
1966
N.A.
18
79
92
100
91
1966 CROP
ACREAGE GROWN
(1000)
71
9
19
725
149
973
395
-------
TABLE E.-XII (CONCLUDED)
CBOf- WHEAT
REGION
NORTHEAST
LAKE STATES
CORN BELT
NORTHERN PLAINS
APPALACHIAN
SOUTHEAST
DELTA STATES
SODTHEBN PLAINS
MOUNTAIN
PACIFIC
TOTAL
PERCENTAGE OF
FARMS REPORTING
PESTICIDE .USE
1964
15
N.A.
30
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
6
46
74
17
1966
21
N.A.
31
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
14
-46
67
16
PERCENTAGE OF
ACREAGE
TREATED
1964
_
35
N.A.
32
. N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
3
47
87
28
1966
^_^_«
40
N.A.
33
N.A.
11
49
80
30
1966 CROP
ACREAGE GROWN
(1000)
810
1,632
5,076
23,219
789
239
803
9,526
8,812
3,607
54,513
(a) Data from (14) and (16).
396
-------
TABLE E-XIII
REGION I
Maine
New Hampshire
Vermont
Massachusetts
Connecticut
Rhode Island
REGION II
New York
New Jersey
Virgin Islands
Puerto Rico
REGION III
Pennsylvania
Maryland
Delaware
West Virginia
Virginia
District of Columbia
REGION IV
Kentucky
Tennessee
North Carolina
South Carolina
Georgia
Mississippi
Alabama
Florida
EPA REGION COMPONENTS
REGION V
Wisconsin
Illinois
Michigan
Indiana
Ohio
Minnesota
REGION VI
Arkansas
Louisiana
Oklahoma
Texas
New Mexico
REGION VII
Kansas
Missouri
Iowa
Nebraska
REGION VIII
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Wyoming
Colorado
Utah
REGION IX
California
Nevada
Arizona
Hawaii
Guam
REGION X
Washington
Oregon
Idaho
Alaska
397
-------
APPENDIX F
EFFECTS OF SELECTED PESTICIDES ON MAN
Table F-I summarizes, for humans, the effects caused by
selected pesticides.
Table F-II presents an estimate of the annual intake of DDT
by an average person based on 1965 data.
For pesticides and other agricultural chemicals, Tables F-III
through F-IX summarize the number of reports of occupational
injury occurring in California'in 1970. The data are summarized by:
(a) Type of disease
(b) Occupation
(c) Industry
(d) Industry and type of disease
(e) Time lost from work and hospitalization
(f) Month of injury, and
(g) Sex and type of disease.
399
-------
TABLE F-I
EFFECTS OF SELECTED PESTICIDES ON MAN
(a)
PESTICIDE
EFFECTS
Aldrin
Carbaryl
DDT
Diazinon
Dichlorvos
Dieldrin
Dimethoate
Dinitrocresol
Lindane
Malathion
Methyl Parathion
Parathlon
Pyrethrum
IDE
TEPP
Trichlorfon
2,4-D
Symptomatology
General systemic effect
Storage; general systemic effect, symptoma-
tology; pendiculosis; scabies
Creeping eruption
Cholinesterace
Skin irritation; concentration in blood
Cholines terace
Concentration in blood
Symptomatology; skin irritation; pendicu-
losis; scabies
Cholinesterace; pendiculosis
Cholinesterace
Cholinesterace; general systemic effect
Dermatitis; scabies; intestinal
helminthiasis
Gushing's syndrome
Cholinesterace; symptomatology; visual
effects; myasthenia gravis
Cholinesterace; helminthiasis;
symptomatology
Coccidioidomycosis
(a) Data from (53) and (54).
400
-------
TABLE F-II
ANNUAL INTAKE OF DDT PLUS DDE, 1965
(a)
SOURCE
Water
Air
Food
Other
(b)
TOTAL
ANNUAL
INTAKE
13,000 m3
0.364 m3
560 Kg
DDT PLUS DDE
CONCENTRATION
2xl04 (jig/rn3
0.00002 ppm
0.00008 ppm
s
DDT PLUS DDE
INTAKE
(ing)
0.03
0.01
44.8
5.0 (?)
50.0 (?)
AVERAGE DAILY INTAKE
FOR 70 Kg MAN
(rag/Kg)
0.0000011
0.0000003
0.001753
0.000196
0.0019604
(a) Data from (3).
(b) Includes skin adsorption and intake from
individual household use.
401
-------
TABLE F-III
REPORTS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE ATTRIBUTED TO PESTICIDES
AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS BY CLINICAL TYPE OF DISEASE
CALIFORNIA, 1970 (a)
ts
O
to
AGRICULTURAL CHEMICAL
Total
i Organic Phosphate Pesticide*
Parathion
Syitox
TEPP
Phoxlrin
Malathion
Thimet
Cuthion
Other and unspecified
Hatogenated Hydrocarbon Pesticides
DDT, chlorddJic, lindane, kclthane
Endriti, aldrin, dicldrin, toxaphcne
Methyl bromide
Other and unspecified
Lead and/or Arsenic Compounds
Herbicides (defoliants uid weed killed)
Fertilizers
Organo-Mcrcury Compounds
Fungicides, Not Elsewhere Classified
Phenolic Compounds
Carbamat«l
Sulfur
Other Specified Agricultural Chemicals
Unspecified
TOTAL
1,493
332
95
6
2
20
9
8
11
181
. 96
34
8
23
31
12
214
164
10
54
53
13
50
57
438
SYSTEMIC
POISONING
259
207
ss
3
2
13
2
4
3
125
11
2
1
S
3
1
6
3
-
-
2
4
4
9
12
RESPIRATORY
CONDITION
68
10
3
_
_
-
1
1
5
5
1
2
2
1
10
13
-
3
1
1
1
4
19
SKIN
CONDITION
409
8
3
_
-
-
1
4
26
10
1
3
12
1
65
27
3
17
18
1
21
13
209
CHEMICAL
BURN
109
-
-
-
-
_
7
1
-
2
4
1
18
36
4
4
11
1
2
6
19
EYE
CONDITION
427
20
3
-
1
4
1
2
9
21
9
3
6
3
2
92
78
3
19
18
-
20
12
142
OTHER AND
UNSPECIFIED
221
87
31
3
6
3
2
4
38
26
11
3
5
7
6
23
7
-
11
3
6
2
13
37
(a) Taken from (41).
-------
TABLE F-IV
REPORTS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE ATTRIBUTED TO PESTICIDES AND OTHER
AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS BY OCCUPATION
CALIFORNIA, 1970 (a)
O
CJ
Totil
Organic Phosphate Peiticidea
Parathion
Systoi
TEPP
Phosdrin
MJithioa
Thimet
Guthion
Other and unspecified
Halogenaled Hydrocarbon Pesticides
DDT, chlordane, lindane, kellhane
Endrifl, aldrin, dicldrin, toxaphene
Metnyl bromide
Other and unspecified
Lead and/or Araenie Compound)
Heiticidei (defolianta and weed Itilleri)
Fertilizen
Organo-Metcury Compound*
Fungicidet, Not Elicwhere Claaiifud
Phenolic Compoundt
Carbunatei
Sulfur
Other Specified Agricultural Chemicals
Unspecified
1,493
332
95
6
2
20
9
11
181
96
34
8
23
31
12
214
164
10
54
53
13
50
57
438
24
27
235
10 113
32
782
52
31
125
40
1
29
5
3
2
3
5
71
29
3
2
7
17
4
60
74
11
1
6
31
15
191
16
12
1
3
3
60
20
4
13
19
1
4
12
47
31
14
3
10
13
1
4
7
25
11
12
2
2
2
4
14
(a) Taken from (41).
-------
TABLE F-V
RLTOKTS OK OCCUPATIONAL UISLASL ATTRIBUTED TO t'LSTICIDES
ANI; OTHER AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS BY INDUSTRY GROUP
CALIFORNIA, 1970 (a)
o
Toul
Offf lie l'lim|iltritc t'rttuidd
Spun
Tlil*
Pliuxlfiil
Olhn mil UiU|Wtir»J
lotril HyiJtutailmii I't'Mii iilrft
I>W, «j|ilici
Othrr 4iul UH^^fctfttd
Lewi »iitt/»i ^\iH-nic Ct»»|>uuridi
HrrUiJ» (Ji-Munit mi wee
pcrttli/erl
Oiguni> Mi-tttity Ci>tii|>oiiinh
FungKHln. Niil lilvwlinr Cljtul
Carbinulri
Sulfui
t,
2
20
9
It
HI.
96
34
8
2J
Jl
12
214
U,4
10
54
51
U
SO
57
I .IX
214
77
5
2
II
5
4
)0
no
48
7
6
1
II,
108
144
47
2
I
4
4
3
7
76
3S
S
5
5
20
4
4
IV
IV
I
10
2
2
7
6
5
1
5
21
(a) Taken from (41).
-------
TABLE F-VI
o
Oi
REPORTS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE ATTRIBUTED TO PESTICIDES AND OTHER
AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS BY INDUSTRY GROUP AND CLINICAL TYPE OF DISEASE
CALIFORNIA, 1970 (a)
INDUSTRY GROUP
Total
Agriculture
Firms
Pest control
Other services
Manufacturing
Food and kindred products
Agricultural chemicals
Other chemicals and
allied products
Other
Construction
Transportation, Communication
and Utilities^
Trade
Structural Pest Control
State and Local Government
Other and Unspecified
TOTAL
1,493
938
711
200
27
156
23
77
14
42
36
60
39
36
145
83
SYSTEMIC
POISONING
259
192
107
84
1
43
5
33
-
S
1
7
2
4
8
2
RESPIRATORY
CONDITION
68
36
25
10
1
6
2
2
-
2
1
3
5
-
30
7
SKIN
CONDITION
409
232
242
. 30
10
33
8
6
5
14
14
9
11
8
29
23
CHEMICAL
BURN
109
60
46
10
4
11
3
3
3
2
10
4
3
2
10
9
EYE
CONDITION
427
244
197
37
10
47
3
24
6
14
9
14
14
13
58
28
OTHER AND
UNSPECIFIED
221
124
94
29
1
16
2
9
5
1
23
4
9
30
14
(a) Taken from (41).
-------
TABLE F-VII
REPORTS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE ATTRIBUTED TO PESTICIDES
AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS
BY ESTIMATED TIME LOST FROM WORK AND HOSI'ITALIZATION
CALIFORNIA, 1970 / v
AGRICULTURAL CHEMICAL
Toul
Orgink Phoiphitc Peuicldei
Pinthion
Synoi
TEPP
Fhoidriit
MiltiKion
Tli but
G u Ui ion
Other ind niupecifud
Hilogeiuted Hydrocirbon Peitkidel
DDT, chlordine, tinduic, kelthine
Endrin, ildrin.dieldrui, toxiphene
Methyl bromide
Other uid unipeciDed
U«d ud/or AiKnlc Compoundi
Herbicide* (defoliant! ind weed kOlcti)
Fertiliitu
Orgtno-Mercury Compound!
Fungkidei, Not Elxwhere Cl.ltifled
Paenolic Compoundi
Cvbftnute*
Sulfur
Other Specified Agrkulturil Cliemictli
Untpecified
TOTAL
1,491
332
95
6
I
20
9
>
11
181
96
34
.8
2)
31
12
214
164
10
*4
53
13
50
57
438
No
Time
Ion
718
109
2Z
j
_
5
5
2
6
68
49
22
3
8
16
4
132
«3
9
33
31
0
23
28
231
ESTIMATED TIME LOST FROM WORK
Time I-oit
Toul
Ml
179
i7
S
2
»
3
1
2
96
32
6
5
10
11
6
50
76
1
14
16
3
22
24
139
1-7
Oavi
393
110
37
s
1
4
3
J
2
55
19
i
4
7
3
5
40
S2
1
12
IS
1
17
21
100
8-14
D«y«
96
34
12
1
2
1
18
«
1
1
4
1
7
14
-
-
1
-
3
2
28
IS Dtyt
42
20
4
2
1
13
5
1
2
2
-
2
«
-
2
-
-
-
1
6
Indefinite
31
15
4
J
10
1
_
1
-
1
4
-
-
-
2
2
-
5
Not
Silted
213
44
16
6
1
1
3
17
15
6
5
4
2
32
23
' -
7
6
4
5
S
68
HOSPITALIZAT1ON S '
Not
1,366
249
65
s
13
7
5
11 .
143
87
33
7
19
28
I
209
154
10
53
53
11
49
53
430
127
83
30
1
2
7
2
3
38
9
1
1
4
3
4
5
10
-
1
-
2
1
4
8
(a) Taken from (41).
(b) A worker treated as a hospital outpatient or in the emergency room only is not
considered to be hospitalized.
-------
TABLE F-VIII
REPORTS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE ATTRIBUTED TO PESTICIDES AND OTHER
AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS BY MONTH OF INJURY
CALIFORNIA, 1970 (a)
P-
O
AGRICULTURAL CHEMICAL
Tool
Organic Phoiplute Pesticides
Parathion
5yirox
TEPP
Phosdrin
Malathion
Thiroet
Guthiod
Other And unspecified
Kilogenated Hydrocarbon Pesticides
DDT. chlordine, lindant. kelihane
Eiuiriu, ajjriu, dtcldrin. tOKJphtae
Methyl bromide
Other and unspecified
Lead and/or Arsenic Compounds
Herbicides (defoliants and weed killen)
FemUieri
Oigaao-Mcrcury Compounds
Phenolic Compound!
Carbamatei
Sulfur
Odier Specified Agricultural Chemicals
Unspecified
TOTAL
1.493
332
95
6
2
20
9
8
11
181
96
34
8
23
31
12
214
164
10
53
13
50
57
438
JANUARY
65
9
5
I
_
-
_
_
3
3
_
1
2
-
9
»
1
-
-
-
25
FEBRUARY
96
IS
9
2
_
-
_
_
4
6
1
2
3
-
18
6
1 «
5
-
-
3
32
MARCH
100
23
9
_
_
3
2
|
I
7
6
3
2
1
-
14
11
-
3
-
4
3
32
APRIL
149
14
5
_
_
1
1
_
_
7
14
4
3
1
6
I
30
28
-
6
3
J
1
42
MAY
175
44
17
1
_
-
1
f.
18
13
i
1
1
5
I
21
23
3
6
1
7
4
52
JUNE
166
32
7
-
6
1
1
_
17
3
2
.
1
2
30
29
-
6
2
11
5
43
JULY
175
35
7
1
-
-*.
1
1
3
22
12
3
2
4
3
9
28
13
1
8
3
4
10
52
AUGUST
187
56
12
-
39
12
4
_
3
5
J
24
6
-
7
1
11
8
54
SEPTEMBER
127
48
4
-
_
5
1
_
_
38
10
4
_
4
2
-
12
5
1
1
4
3
J
S
35
OCTOBER
108
28
11
-
1
1
1
_
14
8
3
_
4
1
-
9
13
2
6
4
-
t
6
31
NOVEMBER
55
10
1
1
_
1
1
_
_
«
7
2
_
3
2
-
8
10
2
4
3
-
-
1
10
DECEMBER
47
7
S
_
_
2
-
_
_
-
_
_
_
_
-
-
7
6
-
2
-
2
9
14
GRADUAL
ONSET
13
1
_
_
_
_
-
_
_
1
^_
_
_
_
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
2
1
8
NOT
STATED
30
10
3
_
1
_
-
1
_
5
2
2
_
_
-
-
4
4
-
1
-
-
1
*
(a) Taken from (41).
-------
TABLE F-IX
REPORTS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE ATTRIBUTED TO PESTICIDES
AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS BY SEX, AGE AND CLINICAL TYPE OF DISEASE
CALIFORNIA, 1970 (a)
oo
SEX AND AGE
Total
Men
Women
Age, Both Scxet
15 and Under
16-17
18-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70 and Over
Age Not Stated
Median Age
TOTAL
1,493
1,385
108
9
43
114
247
198
160
127
141
135
108
73
68
16
7
47
33.5
SYSTEMIC
POISONING
259
246
13
_
13'
32
53
35
26
28
28
14
12
5
7
1
1
4
29.2
RESPIRATORY
CONDITION
68
62
6
.
_
2
9
6
11
8
2
10
9
8
1
_
-
2
38.1
SKIN
CONDITION
409
359
50
2
9
22
54
53
30
31
38
48
30
28
31
11
3
19
39.0
CHEMICAL
BURN
109
106
3
2
3
16
21
18
10
8
9
5
8
2
3
1
-
3
28.1
EYE
CONDITION
427
405
22
1
9
31
70
63
53
35
47
36
32
18
15
2
3
12
33.2
OTHER AND
UNSPECIFIED
221
207
14
4
9
11
40
23
30
17
17
22
17
12
11
1
-
7
33.3
(a) Taken from (41).
-------
APPENDIX G
PERSISTENCE AND MOBILITY
Table G-I gives the relative mobility of selected pesticides
in soil. The mobilities are based on soil - thin - layer chroma-
tography.
Table G-II summarizes the persistence of pesticides in different
types of soils and in water. There is no established definition of
persistence and, as a result, different authors tend to define
persistence differently. In the table, the percent of the pesticide
remaining is each author's choice of when to measure persistence.
When the percentage remaining is given as "persistence," the author
did not define what persistence consisted of. The time is the time
from application to the time when the persistence level is obtained.
Table G-III lists the solubility of selected pesticides in
water and the agents which cause the pesticides to degrade.
Additional comments are given as to other properties of the pesticide.
Table G-IV gives the loss of insecticides from water by co-
distillation at 26.5°C.
Table G-V shows the pesticides found in one rainfall in
Cincinnati, Ohio.
409
-------
TABLE G-I
RELATIVE MOBILITY OF PESTICIDES IN SOILS
(a), (b)
IMMOBILE
SLIGHTLY MOBILE
MOBILE
Aldrin
Chlordane
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Toxaphene
IDE
Lindane
Paraquat
Trifluralin
Atrazlne
Simazine
Propazine
Azinphosmethyl
Diazinon
Ethion
Methyl Parathion
Lindane
Parathion
Phorate
Diuron
Linuron
Chlorpropham
Propham
Benefin
Dicamba
Amiben
2,4-D
2,4,5-T
MCPA
Picloram
DNBP
Bromacil
(a) Data from (6), (26) and (46).
(b) Mobilities are based on soil-thin-layer chromatography.
410
-------
TABLE G-II
PERSISTENCE OF PESTICIDES
(a)
PESTICIDE
Aldiin
Amiben
Animate
Aramlte
Atrazine
Azinphosmethyl
Broraacil
Captan
Carbaryl
CDAA
Chlordane
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per
Acre)
Normal
2-5
N.A.
N.A.
Normal
2
50
4
N.A.
N.A.
4-5
8
0.625-20
Normal
1-2
APPLICATION
RATE(b)
(PPM)
100
25
10 (ig/liter
50
100
TIME
14 years
>4 years
3 months
>6 weeks
1-3 months
>1 week
10 months
17 months
5 months
5-6 months
>65 days
17 days
3-6 weeks
6 weeks
2-8 weeks
14 . 3 months
5 years
1-6 years
8 years
14 years
PERCENTAGE
REMAINING
40
50
0-25
Persistence
Persistence
0-25
Persistence
13-64
50
Persistence
50
Detectable
Level
Detectable
Level
85
50
0-25
5
50
40
WATER
SOIL
*
MOIST-LOAM
SOIL
SANDY-LOAM
SOIL
SILT-LOAM
SOIL
NORMAL
AGRICULTURAL
SOIL
FOREST
SOIL
-------
TABLE C-II (CONTINUED)
PESIICIDE
Chlorprophan
Dalapon
i
DDT
Diazinon
Dicaoba
Dichlorvos
Dleldrln
APPLICATION
KATE
(Pound* Per
Acr«)
4-5
Normal
5-40
1-2.5
10
1
1
Normal
3
Normal
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(PPM)
4
50
100
100
100
25
TIME
3-5 weeks
7 weeks
2-8 weeks
8 weeks
10-60 days
4- JO years
15 years
9 years
30 years
17 years
4 years
26 weeks
12 weeks
20 weeks
2 months
62 days
>6 years
15 years
8 years
PERCENTAGE
REMAINING
Persistence
Detectable
' Level
0-66
0-25
Persistence
5
10.6
Little loss
Persistence
39
0-25
Persists nee
0-25
<8
Persistence
Detectable
Level
50
31
50
WATER
SOIL
s
MOIST-LOAM
SOIL
SANDY-LOAM
SOIL
s
SILT-LOAM
SOIL
NORMAL
AGRICULTURAL
SOIL
s
FOREST
SOIL
-------
TABLE G-II (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Dimethoate
Dlnttro Group
Benefin
Dinitrocresol
DNBP
Disulf oton
Diuron
Endosulfan
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per
Acre)
1.79
4-6
Recommended
Rate
N.A.
6-9
16
N.A.
Normal
1-3
2
1-2
2
APPLICATION
RATE(b)
(PPM)'
3 (ig/liter
10 ng/liter
50
10 (ig/liter
10 [ig/llter
TIME
1 month
8 weeks
2 months
2-3 months
4-5 months
7 days
3-5 weeks
4->8 weeks
4 weeks
8 months
3-6 months
>15 months
18-20 weeks
96 days
2 weeks
4 weeks
PERCENTAGE
REMAINING
30
50
25
<10
'ersis tence
Persistence
'ersls tence
50
0-25
Persistence
Persistence
Persistence
0
5
0
HATER
SOIL
(c)
MOIST-LOAM
SOIL
SANDY-LOAM
SOIL
SILT- LOAM
SOIL
NORMAL
AGRICULTURAL
SOIL
FOREST
SOIL
CO
-------
TABLE c-ii (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Endrln
EthlQn
Ferbam
Heptachlor
Inorganic Herbicide Croup
Sodium Arsenlte
Sodium Chlorate
Inorganic Insecticide
Group
Lead Arsenate
APPLICATION
KATE
(Pound* Per
Acr«L
2-6
N.A.
20
Recommended
Rate
450-1200
300
1300
APPLICATION
HATE (b)
9 years
2 weeks
14 years
5 'years
6-12 months
>1 year
15 years
PERCENTAGE
REMAINING
50
41
50
23-43
Persistence
50
0
16
Persistence
Persistence
Persistence
Detectable
Level
WATER
*
SOIL
s
MOIST-LOAM
SOIL
SANDY-LOAN
SOIL
SILT-LOAM
SOIL
NORMAL
AGRICULTURAL
SOIL
FOREST
SOIL
-------
TABLE G-II (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Lindane
Llnuron
Malathion
MCPA
Methyl Parathion
Paraquat
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per
Acre)
10
Normal
Normal
5
0.5 - 3
Normal
5
0,25-3.0
2.1-2.5
APPLICATION
RATE (b )
(PPM)
25
100
10 ng/liter
10 filter
25
10 ^g/liter
10 ugAlter
TIME
>11 years
2 years
14 years
4 months
1 week
8 days
2 weeks
4 weeks
1-4 weeks
3 months
>103 days
30 days
2 weeks
4 weeks
12-13 days
6-23 days
PERCENTAGE
REMAINING
50
50
10
0-25
0-25
3.1
10
0
Persistence
0-25
Persistence
3
10
0
<10
Persistence
WATER
SOIL
MOIST-LOAM
SOIL
SAMDY-LOAM
SOIL
*
SILT-LOAM
SOIL
NORMAL
AGRICULTURAL
SOIL
*
FOREST
SOU
Oi
-------
TABLE C-I1 (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Parathlon
POP
Phorate
Plcloram
Propachlor
Propanll
Propazine
Propham
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Pet
Acre)
31.4
31.4
1
5
Normal
5-20
N.A.
Normal
5
Recommended
Rate
Recommended
Rate
0.5
4-8
APPLICATION
RATE (b)
(PPM)
10 pg/liter
10 Hg/Hter
1.0
.003
4
TIME
4 years
16 years
2 months
3 months
1 week
2 weeks
4 weeks
1-5 weeks
>5 years
68 days
1 month
2 weeks
>568 days
4-6' weeks
1-3 days
11-24 weeks
4 weeks
2-4 weeks
PERCENTAGE
REMAINING
3
0.1
0
3
0-25
30
<5
Persistence
Persistence
50
0
0-25
50
Persistence
Persistence
Persistence
Persistence
Persistence
WATER
SOIL
f
e
MOIST-LOAM
SOIL
f
*
SANDY-LOAM
SOIL
,
,
e
SILT-LOAM
SOIL
0
NORMAL
AGRICULTURAL
SOIL
*
FOREST
SOIL
-------
TABLE G-II (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Ronnel
Silvex
Simazine
Strobane
TEA
IDE
TEPP
Toxaphene
APPLICATION
RATE
(Pounds Per
Acre)
N.A.
0.5-3
3.6
1-4
10-40
2
Normal
N.A.
1-8
N.A.
N.A.
20
APPLICATION
RATE
(PPM)
25
140
50
100
TIME
1-3 months
>103 days
2-5 weeks
60 days
3-6 months
6-24 month?
17 months
1 year
>1 year
>18 months
>1 year
1-2 days'
4 years
>6 years
11 years
14 years
PERCENTAGE
REMAINING
Persistence
Persistence
Persistence
Persistence
Persistence
Persistence
0-25
Persistence
Persistence
Persistence
Persistence
50
Persistence
50
45
WATER
SOIL
MOIST-LOAM
SOIL
SANDY-LOAM
SOIL
SILT-LOAM
SOIL
NORMAL
AGRICULTURAL
SOIL
FOREST
SOIL
-
-------
TABLE C-II (CONCLUDED)
PESTICIDE
Trifluralln
2, 4-D
2, 4, 5-1
Zlneb
APFUCAIION
RATE
(Found! Far
Acre)
0.75
1-2
Normal
Normal
0.5-3
4
0.5-3
N.A.
APPLICATION
RATE
(PPM)
5
TINE
10-12 month
>200 days
6 months
1 month
1-4 weeks
4-18 weeks
2- 5 'weeks
>190 days
>75 days
PERCENTAGE
REMAINING
t 10-15
Persistence
0-25
0-25
Persistence
Persistence
Persistence
Persistence
Persistence
WATER
SOIL
MOIST-LOAM
SOIL
SANDY-LOAM
SOIL
SILT-LOAM
SOIL
NORMAL
AGRICULTURAL
SOIL
s
e
FOREST
SOIL
00
(a) Data from (6), (21),
(42), (46) and (55).
(b) PPM except where noted
(c) Fine sandy soil
-------
TABLE G-III
PROPERTIES OF SELECTED PESTICIDES
(a)
PESTICIDE
Aldrin
Amiben
Animate
Arsenicals
Cacodylic Acid
Paris Green
Atrazine
Azinphosmethyl
Botanicals
Nicotine Sulfate
Bromacil
Cap tan
SOLUBILITY
IN WATER (b)
(PPM)
0.027
700
684,000
667,000
33
-------
TABLli G-1I1 (CONTINUED)
PESTICIDE
Carbaryl
CUAA
Chlordanc
Chlorbbcnzilato
Chlorpropham
Copper Suifate
Coumaphos
Dalapon
D-D Mixture
DDT
DHF
SOLUBILITY
IN WATER (b)
(PPM)
0.01%
(40)
19 , 700
Insoluble
88(d)
Soluble
Insoluble
900,000
Insoluble -
2,800
0.001
Insoluble
DEGRADATION
ACLNT
Soil fungus
Soil water
Ultraviolet light
Yeast
Soil microorganisms
Soil microorganisms
Water microorganisms
Yeast
Ultraviolet light
Clay surface
COMMENTS
Is adsorbed, but adsorption does not prevent
leaching, merely slows it down. Microbial
decomposition occurs at greater rate than
hydrolysis. Volatile, but volatilization
directly proportional to surface moisture
content.
Does not biologically magnify. It is not a
contamination problem in ground or surface
waters. No residues have been detected.
Gene-rally remains in upper inch of soil until
decomposed by soil microbes.
liydrolizes slowly under alkaline conditions.
Leaches readily in soil.
Non-volatile; Bordeau mixture, ferban and some
clays may cause a slight decomposition.
Hydrolizes slowly under alkaline conditions.
K)
O
-------
TABLE G-I1I (COHTIIJULD)
rr;sTicu>E
Diazlnon
Dibromochioropropane
Dicamba
Dichiorvoa
Dicofol
Dicrotophos
Dieldrin
Dimcthoatc
Uinitro Group
Benef in
Binapacryl
Dinitrocrcsol
DNBP
Disulfoton
Diuron
SOLUBILITY
IN WATiiR (b)
(PPM)
40
1000
4500
1000
(about IA)
Insoluble
Miscible
0.185
200,000-
300,000
<1
Practically
Insoluble
0.013%(c)
50-1000
25
42
DEGRADATION
AGtNT
Hydrolyses in soil
Soil microorganism^
So 1.1
Alkaline hydrolyscs
Alkali hydrolysis
(pK-11)
Ultraviolet light
Soil
COMMENTS
Does not leach.
Strongly adsorbed on soil and shows little
leaching. Gradual decomposition by micro-
organisms. Material on soil surface subject
to photodecomposition.
Leaclies readily. No buildup in soil.
Microbial breakdown.
Hydrolizes under alkaline conditions.
Adsorption increases as clay coiitent and/or
organic matter content o£ soil increases.
Leaching greatest in sandy soils. Microbial
decomposition primary factor in disappear-
ance from soils.
K>
-------
iJ C-H1
PESTICIDE
SOLUBILITY
IN WATER (b)
(PPM)
DEGRADATION
AGENT
CONTENTS
Endosulfan
Endrin
Ethion
Ethylene Dibromide
Perbam
Ileptachlor
Inorganic Herbicides Group
Arsenic Acid
Magnesium Chlorate
Sodium Arscnite
Sodium Chlorate
Inorganic Insecticides Group
Calcium Arsenate
Lead Arsenate
Lindane
Linuron
Malathion
Insoluble
(0.001)
Insoluble
2
4300
0.056
Freely
Soluble
Very Soluble
Very Soluble
500,000
Alkaline hydrolyses
Insoluble
5-10
75
145
Soil microorganisms
Soil
Hydrolysis in acid yll
Hydrolysis in basic pi,
Stable to alkali, but rearranges in presence of
acids to a less insecticidal derivative.
Causes severe burning to skin. Phytotoxic.
Somewhat unstable to heat and moisture.
Nonvolatile under all climatic conditions.
Phytoxic when decomposed; carbonic acid and
dilute alkaline solutions decompose it,
liberating the water soluble form.
Phytotoxic when decomposed.
Adsorption increases as clay and/or organic
matter content increases. Microbial decompo-
sition primary factor in disappearance from
soils. Leaching not an important factor.
-------
TADLL 01II (OJCTINULD)
PESTICIDE
11J WATL'K (b)
(PPM)
AGLN'j'
COJMLN'iS
10
OJ
Maneb
MCPA
Methoxychlor
Methyl Bromide
Methyl Parathion
MSMA
Paraquat
Parathion
POP
Phorate
Picloram
Propachlor
Propanil
Several PPM
825
1174-1600
Insoluble
(0.1)
13,400
55-60
Very soluble
Soluble
20-25
30(S)
50-85
430
700(d>
225-500
Soil
Chemical
Soil microorganisms
Photolyses
Soil microorganisms
Rhizobium
Lake sediments
Ultraviolet light
Water
Soil microorganisms
Ultraviolet light
Soil microorganisms
Rhizobiuni
Lake sediments
Ultraviolet light
Water
Ultraviolet light
Soil microorganisms
Ultraviolet light
Ultraviolet light
Soil microorganisms
Soil
Readily leached from soil.
Rarely phytotoxic; excellent replacement
for DDT
Rapid and complete inactivation by soil
(but very long persistence).
Leaches readily.
Subject to hydrolysis
Some leaching may occur in sandy soils low
in organic matter. Sorption by organic
matter and certain clays has been demon-
strated. Breakdown in ultraviolet light.
Adsorbed by colloidal particles of soil.
Degraded quickly.
-------
TABLE G-III (CONCLUDED)
PESTICIDE
Propazlne
Propham
Ronnel
S 11 vex
Simazine
Strobane
TEA
IDE
Toxaphene
Trichlorfon
Trifluralin
2,4-D
2,4,5-T
SOLUBILITY
IN WATER (b)
(PPM)
8.6
/ j\
250(d)
40
180
5(d)
Insoluble
8400
Insoluble
Insoluble
(0.4)
120,000-
160,000 (e)
-------
TABLE G-IV
LOSS OF INSECTICIDES FROM WATER BY CODISTILLATION
(a)
Ol
INSECTICIDE
Aldrin
Chlordane
DDT
Dieldrin
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxlde
Lindane
STARTING
CONCENTRATION
( g/D
24.0
200.0
25.0
24.0
210.0
25.0
23.0
PERCENT
CODISTILLATE
-------
TABLE G-V
PESTICIDES IN A RAINFALL IN CINCINNATI, OHIO
(a)
PESTICIDE
CONCENTRATION
(PPM)
(b)
Chlordane
DDT
Dieldrin
Heptachlor Epoxide
Ronnel
2,4,5-T
0.5
0.6
0.003
0.04
0.2
0.04
(a) Taken from (21).
(b) Based on air dried weight of dust.
426
-------
APPENDIX H
REFERENCES
! Patterns of Pesticide Use and Reduction in Use as Related to
Social and Economic Factors. Pesticide Study Series-10.
EPA, Office of Water Programs, Water Quality and Non-Point
Source Control Division, Non-Point Source Control Branch, 1972.
2. Quantities of Pesticides used by Fanners in 1966. Agricultural
Economic Report No. 179, Economic Research Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Washington, B.C., April 1970.
3. Report of the Secretary's Commission on Pesticides and their
Relationship to Environmental Health. U.S. Department of
Health, Education and Welfare, December 1969.
4. The Pesticide Review. U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service, Washington,
D.C., 1966, 1967, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972.
5. The Pollution Potential in Pesticide Manufacturing. Pesticide
Study Series - 5, TS-00-72-04, EPA, Office of Water Programs,
Applied Technology Division, Rural Wastes Branch, June 1972.
6. The Effects of Agricultural^ Pesticides in the Aquatic Environ-
ment, Irrigated Croplands^ Jan Joaquin Valley. Pesticide Study
Series - 6, TS-00-72-05, EPA, Office of Water Programs, Applied
Technology Division, Rural Wastes Branch, June 1972.
7. Bisselle, C.A., et al, Strategic Environmental Assessment .
System: Initial Analysis of Environmental Residuals. The
MITRE Corporation, MTR-6362, February 1973.
8. Synthetic Organic Chemicals. United States Production and Sales.
1969, United States Tariff Commission, 1970.
9. Environmental Indicators for Pesticides, Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park, California, April 1972.
10. The Pesticide Situation. U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service, Washington,
D.C., September 1963, June 1964, September 1965.
11. Farm Chemicals and' Croplife, Meister Publishing Company,
Willoughby, Ohio, January 1971 and January 1972.
427
-------
12. Standard Industrial Classification Manual, Executive Office
of the President/Bureau of the Budget, 1967.
13. Miller, B.S., Summary of the Installation and Shakedown of
SEAS Test Model. Control Data Corporation, Rockville, Md.,
August 30, 1973.
14. Farmers^ Pesticida Expenditures in 1966» Agricultural
Economic Report No. 192, Economic Research Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., September 1970.
15. Headley, J.C., "Estimating the Productivity of Agricultural
Pesticides," American Journal of Agricultural Economics,
Vol. 50:13-23, February 1968.
16. Extent of Farm Pesticide Use on Crops in 1966, Agricultural
Economic-Report No. 147, Economic Research Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., October 1968.
17. Agricultural Statistics 1972. U.S. Department of Agriculture,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1972.
18. Restricting the Use of 2,4,5-T: Costs to Domestic Users.
Agricultural Economic Report No. 199, Economic Research
Service and Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., March 1971.
19. Pesticide Use Report 1972. State of California, Department of
Agriculture, Agricultural Chemicals and Feed, Sacramento,
California, 1972.
20. Pesticide Use Report by Commodity - 1972. State of California,
Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Chemicals and Feed,
Sacramento, 1972.
21. The Use of Pesticides in Suburban Homes and Gardens and their
Impact on the Aquatic Environment, Pesticide Study Series - 2,
EPA, Office of Water Programs, Applied Technology Division,
Rural Wastes Branch, May 1972.
22. Extent and Cost of Weed Control with Herbicides and an
Evaluation of Important Weeds, 1968, ARS-H-1, Economic Research
Service, Extension Service and Agricultural Research Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, November 1972.
428
-------
23. Moore, E.E., "Pesticide Sales and Usage in Kentucky - 1968,"
Pesticide Monitoring Journal, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 379-387,
March 1973..
24. The Movement and Impact of Pesticides used for Vector Control
on the Aquatic Environment in the Northeast, Pesticide
Study Series - 9, TS-00-72-09, EPA, Office of Water Programs,
Applied Technology Division, Rural Wastes Branch, July 1972.
25. Quantities of Pesticides Used by Farmers in 1964, Agriculture
Economic Report No. 131, Economic Research Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, January 1968.
26. Atkins, P.R., The Pesticide Manufacturing Industry - Current
Waste Treatment and Disposal Practices, Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C., January 1972.
27. Headley, J.C., "Productivity of Agricultural Pesticides,"
Economic Research on Pesticides for Policy Decisionmaking,
Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Washington, D.C., April 1971.
28. Restricting the Use of Phenoxy Herbicides - Costs to Farmers,
Agricultural Economic Report No. 194, Economic Research Service
and Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agri-
culture, Washington, D.C., November 1970.
29. E^conomic Consequences of Restricting the Use of Organochlorine
Insecticides on: Cotton, Corn, Peanuts and Tobacco, Agricultural
Economic Report No. 178, Economic Research Service, U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., March 1970.
30. Economic Impact of Discontinuing Farm Use of Chlordane,
Agricultural Economic Report No. 231, Economic Research Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., August 1972.
31. ' Documentation of the Threshold Limit Values for Substances in
Workroom Air, Third Edition, American Conference of Govern-
mental Industrial Hygienists, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1971 (1972
revision).
32. Wayland, J.H.,'Clinical Handbook on Economic Poisons, Emergency
Information for Treating Poisoning, U.S. Department of Health,
Education and Welfare, Public Health Service Publication No.
476, 1963 (Reprint January 1967).
429
-------
33. Plunkett, E.R., Handbook of Industrial Toxicology, Chemical
Publishing Company, Inc., New York, 1966.
34. OSHA Concentration Limits for Gases, Wilks Scientific
Corporation, Norwalk, Connecticut.
35. Water Quality Criteria. Publication No. 3-A, The Resources
Agency of California, State Water Quality Control Board,
Sacramento, California, 1963.
36. Report of the National Technical Advisory Committee to the
Secretary of the Interior, Water Quality Criteria, Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration, April 1, 1968.
37. Pesticide Residues in Food. Report of the 1971 Joint FAQ/WHO
Meeting, Geneva, 22-29 November 1971, Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations, Rome, 1972.
38. Recommended International Tolerances for Pesticide Residues,
Report of the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme, Food
and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Number
73-0901, C.I, June 1973, and Number 73-0902, C.I, 1970.
39. Manual on the Use of FAQ Specifications for Plant Protection
Products, Number 73-0903, FAO Working Party of Experts on
the Official Control of Pesticides, Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations, 1971.
40. Lichtenberg, J.J. et al., Pesticides in Surface Waters of the
United States, A Five Year Sujprarg^, 1964-1968, U.S. Department
of the Interior, FWPCA, Division of Water Quality, Research,
Analytical Quality Control Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio,
September 1969.
41. Occupational Disease in California Attributed to Pesticides
and Other Agricultural Chemicals - 1970, 1969, 1968, 1967 and
.1966, State of California, Department of Public Health, Bureau
of Occupational Health and Environmental Epidemiology, 1966,
1967, 1968, 1969 and 1970.
42. Ecological Effects of Pesticides on Non-Target Species,
Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and
Technology, June 1971.
43. Metcalf, R.L., et al., "Model Ecosystem Studies of the Environ-
mental Fate of Six Organochlorine Pesticides," Environmental
Health Perspectives, Experimental Issue No. 4, pp. 35-44,
June 1973.
430
-------
44. The Use of Pesticides for Rangeland Sagebrush Control,
Pesticide Study Series - 3, EPA, Office of Water Programs,
Applied Technology Division, Rural Wastes Branch, May 1972.
45. Pesticide Use on the Non-Irrigated Croplands of the Midwest.
TS-00-72-03, Pesticide Study Series - 4, EPA, Office of Water
Programs, Applied Technology Division, Rural Wastes Branch,
June 1972.
46. Herbicide Handbook of the Weed Society of America. The W.F.
Humphrey Press, Geneva, New York, 1970 (Second Edition).
47. Tarzwell, C.M., "Hazards of Pesticides to Fishes and the
Aquatic Environment," N.Y. Joint Legislative Committee on
National Resources, Albany, New York, September 23, 1963.
48. Pest Control Strategies for the Future. Agricultural Board,
Division of Biology and Agriculture, National Research Council,
National Academy of Sciences, Washington, 1972.
49. Mellanby, K., Pesticides and Pollution, Collins Press, London,
1967 (Revised 1970).
50. Freshwater Biology and Pollution Ecology; Training Course
Manual, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, U.S.
Department of the Interior, September 1968.
51. 1966 Insecticide Recommendations, Circular 191, Agriculture
Extension Service, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, January 1966.
52. 1973 Pesticide Dictionary, Farm Chemicals, Meister Publishing
Company, Willoughby, Ohio.
53. Hayes, W.J., Jr., "Toxicity of Pesticides to Man: Risks from
Present Levels," Royal Society of London, Proceedings, Series B,
Biological Sciences, Vol. 167, 1967.
54. Federal Environmental Pesticide Control Act of 1971, Hearings
before the Subcommittee on the Environment of the Committee on
Commerce, United States Senate, Ninety-Second Congress,
Second Session on H.R. 10729, Serial No. 92-80, June 15 and 19,
1972.
55. Eichelberger, J.W., and J. J. Lichtenberg, "Persistence of
Pesticides in River Water," Environmental Science and Tech-
nology, Vol. 5, No. 6, pp. 541-544, June 1971.
431
-------
56. Pesticides in the Aquatic Environment, Pesticides Study Series
- 1, Environmental Protection Agency, April 1972.
57. Pesticide Usage and the Impact on the Aquatic Environment in
the Southeast, Pesticide Study Series - 8, EPA, Office of
Water Programs Operations, Water Quality and Non-Point Source
Control Division, Non-Point Source Control Branch, September
1972.
58. The Movement and Impact of Pesticides Used in Forest Management
on the Aquatic Environment in the Northeast, TS-00-72-07,
Pesticide Study Series - 7, EPA, Office of Water Programs,
Applied Technology Division, Rural Wastes Branch, June 1972.
59. King, H.P., et al., "Distribution of Pesticides in Surface
Waters," American Water Works Association Journal, 0.61,
pp. 483-486, September 1969.
432
------- |