The Pesticide Stewardship Alliance Annual Meeting February 5-7, 2013

 History of pesticide safety education ◦ Purpose ◦ Funding  State of pesticide safety education programs  Effort to secure and sustain funding for pesticide safety education

 1960s ◦ Extension agents and specialists in Land Grant Universities and Colleges began teaching farmers and professional pesticide applicators about pesticide safety ◦ Congress, through USDA, partnered with these institutions to create Pesticide Coordinator Positions  1970s ◦ EPA is established ◦ Mandatory certification and training requirements for RUPS ◦ Pesticide safety education programs became more robust ◦ EPA provides funding to support efforts  USDA maintained role in managing and directing funds

*2011 CPARD Data and USDA Reports

 Federal support has declined ◦ Program impact (2011 AAPSE Survey)  >50% experienced significant impacts to program  Reduced number of trainings  Delayed development/revision of materials  Shift in program focus  29% experienced dramatic impacts to program  Reduction in % FTE dedicated to program  Loss of Staff  Vacant positions are not being filled

Note: Pesticide Registration Improvement Act funds (2007)

 Other sources of program support varies and in some cases has also declined ◦ State general appropriations ◦ State Lead Agencies ◦ Training fees ◦ Sale of educational materials ◦ Third party sponsorship ◦ Project Grants

 Elevate Pesticide Safety Education Program funding ◦ Federal support can be enhanced ◦ State support can be enhanced, and ◦ Industry and other support can be developed  Membership open to all Stakeholders ◦ EPA & USDA ◦ State Lead Agencies ◦ University Extension ◦ Industry (registrants; professional associations)  State Lead Agency & Industry - Co Leads

 Pesticide safety education is important  Each stakeholder group has a role  Forward facing with an acknowledgment of history  Conference Calls   ◦ Membership List ◦ Fact Sheets ◦ Meeting Notes ◦ Press Releases

 Clarify the scope of PSEP activities on which this stakeholder team will focus.  Establish a permanent source of federal funding for the PSEP program in every state and territory.  Determine the status of, and potential for, additional state and territory support of PSEP through pesticide product registration fees, enforcement fines and other means.  Explore various processes for stakeholders to provide unrestricted gifts, grants, and endowments to support all or designated PSEP programs.  Explore ways in which industry, commodity, and regulatory leadership can better understand the scope and importance of PSEP programs.  Publicize the continuing PSEP funding crisis and the formation of this stakeholder team, and increase the visibility of the problem with all stakeholders.

 Primary focus is pesticide users and dealers who must be certified ◦ Secondary focus – all other pesticides users  Developing strategies to communicate the importance of pesticide safety education  Determining how much is needed for a base program & options for distribution

Campaigns or funding drive Groups that benefit from PSEP Varying Faculty & Administrative Costs Gift/grants Endowments Restricted/unrestricted Funding sources Enabling legislation MOU/MOAs Other Initiatives PRIA Funding Penalty Dollars Incorporating into IPM Faculty & Administrative Costs Caps Other Federal Agencies / Organizations Federal Government State Government Other Non- Government

 Press Releases ◦ Weed Science Society Of America  Presentations ◦ The Pesticide Stewardship Alliance (TPSA) ◦ Association of American Pesticide Control Officials (AAPCO)  Team Members 

 Written framework ◦ Identify potential funding sources for each stakeholder group ◦ Processes for securing potential funds  Short Term  Long Term ◦ Enabling legislation  Interested parties, working independently or together, use the framework to attain sustainable funding