Assessment of National Program 308: Methyl Bromide Alternatives Gary L. Obenauf Agricultural Research Consulting (559) Visit us at:

NP 308 Review 1.Overarching Review 2.Not OSQR Review 3.Accomplishment Report 4.NP 308 Action Plan 5.Publications 6.Databases 7.Professional Knowledge 8.Short Time Frame

NP 308 Panel Gary Obenauf, ARC, Panel ChairGary Obenauf, ARC, Panel Chair Mike Aerts, FFVAMike Aerts, FFVA Dan Legard, CSCDan Legard, CSC Jim Bair, NAMAJim Bair, NAMA Bill Chism, EPA-OPPBill Chism, EPA-OPP Larry Zettler, USDA-APHISLarry Zettler, USDA-APHIS

Assessment Criteria 1.Environmentally Acceptable 2.Practical 3.Economically Feasible 4.Sustainable (Preplant only) 5.Effective 6.Outreach 7.Potential Impact

Positive Comments 1.NP 308 Stay Stand Alone Program 2.Significant Progress/Lot of Work Remains 3.Good Variety of Approaches 4.High Quality Research 5.Responsive to Stakeholders/Compliments Stakeholder Funded Research

Positive Comments 2 6.Communication of Results MBAOMBAO Quarterly Research BulletinsQuarterly Research Bulletins Grower/Industry MeetingsGrower/Industry Meetings Information for CUE ProgramInformation for CUE Program 7.Significant Success Application, Films & Lower Rates but Additional Research Needed

Positive Comments 3 8.Recovery Technology Improving but Needs Improvement 9.Projects Completed and New Research Started

Constructive Comments 1.Summary Only Selected Projects Overall Impacts of All Research ProjectsOverall Impacts of All Research Projects Matrix: Crops-sites-pests-technologiesMatrix: Crops-sites-pests-technologies 2.Lack of Information in Report/Better Organization of Plan 3.Economic Feasibility not Addressed but was a Key Criterion set by ARS

Constructive Comments 2 4.Report Relative to Goals 5.Limitations/Problems 6.Lot not Reported at MBAO Conference/Biannually Plus Written Off Years 7.Use Figures on MB should be Used to Help Prioritize Research

Constructive Comments 3 8.Progress Reports not Easy to Find/List Server Interested Parties Also Identify Parts of NP308 Results if not Listed as NP 308 Project 9.Lack Of Extension Service Activity 10.More Emphasis Short Term Research to Meet Phase Out of Montreal Protocol

PrePlant 1a Chemical Controls Rating High Rating High Inconsistency of Data Years & Locations Inconsistency of Data Years & Locations Highest Probability of Success & Needs Additional Support Highest Probability of Success & Needs Additional Support

PrePlant 1a Virtually Impermeable Films Rating High Rating High Low Emission Films Low Emission Films Disposal Needs Additional Work Disposal Needs Additional Work Need Summary of Progress to Date Need Summary of Progress to Date

PrePlant 1a Alternative Chemistry-Annuals Rating High Rating High Propargyl Bromide? Propargyl Bromide? Technical Economic & Safety Limitations Needs to be Identified Technical Economic & Safety Limitations Needs to be Identified Regulatory Restrictions Regulatory Restrictions

PrePlant 1a Alternative Chemistry- Perennials Rating HighRating High Limitations of Alternatives-Townships Caps, etcLimitations of Alternatives-Townships Caps, etc

PrePlant 1a Application Rating High Rating High Some Excellent Results in Area-Drip Appl. Some Excellent Results in Area-Drip Appl. Not All Appl. Equipment Effective or Practical Not All Appl. Equipment Effective or Practical Remote Sensing? Remote Sensing? Questions about Power-Tiller Use/Limitations Questions about Power-Tiller Use/Limitations More on Reduced Rates of Fumigants More on Reduced Rates of Fumigants

PrePlant 1b Biorationals Rating Low Rating Low High Risk, Long Term but Needed with Much Less Emphasis High Risk, Long Term but Needed with Much Less Emphasis Lack of Progress and Other Areas Way Under-funded Lack of Progress and Other Areas Way Under-funded

PrePlant 1b BioControl Plant Pathogens & Nematodes Rating Low Rating Low Research Results have not easily fit into Production Agriculture Research Results have not easily fit into Production Agriculture Limited Potential as Replacement for MB Limited Potential as Replacement for MB

PrePlant 1b BioControl Weeds Rating Low Rating Low Research Results have not easily fit into Production Agriculture Research Results have not easily fit into Production Agriculture Limited Potential as Replacement for MB Limited Potential as Replacement for MB

PrePlant 1b BioControl Ecological Evaluations Rating Low Rating Low Too Long Term for Short Term Demands of MB Phase Out Too Long Term for Short Term Demands of MB Phase Out

PrePlant 1b BioControl Molecular Traits Rating Very Low Rating Very Low Even when Identified, Implementing into Practical Use seems Problematic Even when Identified, Implementing into Practical Use seems Problematic High Risk not likely to Solve Problems to Other Areas of Research High Risk not likely to Solve Problems to Other Areas of Research

PrePlant 1c Cultural Controls Rating Medium Rating Medium Long Term Relative to Chemical Controls but Shorter than Biorationals Long Term Relative to Chemical Controls but Shorter than Biorationals Limited Success to Date Limited Success to Date Like to Become More Important as Other Fumigants Face Increased Regulatory Restrictions Like to Become More Important as Other Fumigants Face Increased Regulatory Restrictions

PrePlant 1c Host Resistance for Disease Management Rating Medium Rating Medium Long Term Long Term Limited Specific Host/Pest Limited Specific Host/Pest Will do Little to Meeting Phase Out Schedule Will do Little to Meeting Phase Out Schedule

PrePlant 1c Crop Rotation, Fallow and Solarization Rating Medium Rating Medium Limited Cases with Viable Fit Limited Cases with Viable Fit Not Practical or Economically Viable Not Practical or Economically Viable Like to have Limited Impact Like to have Limited Impact

Postharvest IIa Stored Durables-Heat/Cold Rating High Rating High Will probably have a Limited Fit Will probably have a Limited Fit

Postharvest IIa Stored Durables-Biological Rating Low Rating Low Too Narrow Host Range Too Narrow Host Range Limited Use Limited Use

Postharvest IIa Stored Durables-Pheromone Rating High Rating High Effective Monitoring Tool-not Direct Replacement Effective Monitoring Tool-not Direct Replacement Can Reduce Number of Treatments Can Reduce Number of Treatments Combine with IId (Phys. Chem. Det.) Combine with IId (Phys. Chem. Det.)

Postharvest IIa Stored Durables- Alternative Fumigants Rating High Rating High Most Promise for Alternatives to MB Most Promise for Alternatives to MB All Potential Alternatives Need to be Evaluated i.e. Sulfuryl Fluoride All Potential Alternatives Need to be Evaluated i.e. Sulfuryl Fluoride

Postharvest IIb Quarantine for Export Rating High Rating High Research Emphasis has not been High Research Emphasis has not been High Need a Viable Alternative for every Quarantine Treatment Need a Viable Alternative for every Quarantine Treatment ARS & APHIS need to Prioritize Research, may need Help from FAS, ERS & Stakeholders ARS & APHIS need to Prioritize Research, may need Help from FAS, ERS & Stakeholders

Postharvest IIb Quarantine for Export-Systems Approach Rating High Rating High Limited Use to Date Limited Use to Date Specific Pest/Commodity/Location/Time of Year Specific Pest/Commodity/Location/Time of Year

Postharvest IIb Quarantine for Export-Methyl Bromide Not Rated Not Rated Cited Research was not Appropriate as an Alternative to MB Cited Research was not Appropriate as an Alternative to MB

Postharvest IIb Quarantine for Export-Alternative Fumigants Rating High Rating High Greatest Potential as Alternative Greatest Potential as Alternative All Potential Alternatives need to be Evaluated i.e. Sulfuryl Fluoride All Potential Alternatives need to be Evaluated i.e. Sulfuryl Fluoride

Postharvest IIb Quarantine for Export-Controlled Atmospheres Rating Medium Rating Medium Has Potential with Use Cited for Lettuce but even then Limited Use Has Potential with Use Cited for Lettuce but even then Limited Use Will not Work Well with Most Commodities Will not Work Well with Most Commodities

Postharvest IIb Quarantine for Export-Combination Systems Not Rated Not Rated Combine with Controlled Atmospheres Combine with Controlled Atmospheres

Postharvest IIb Quarantine for Export-Physical/Heat, Cold & Irradiation Rating High Rating High Limited Use Limited Use Concerns with Irradiation Concerns with Irradiation Costs can be an Issue Costs can be an Issue

Postharvest IIc Capture/Recycle Rating High Rating High Limited Use to Date Limited Use to Date Need to Improve Costs, Recovery Efficiencies & make Applicable to Large Fumigations Need to Improve Costs, Recovery Efficiencies & make Applicable to Large Fumigations May be Requirement for Continued Use of MB May be Requirement for Continued Use of MB Does not Address Structural/Processing Facilities to date Does not Address Structural/Processing Facilities to date

Postharvest IId Physical or Chemical Detection Systems Rating Low Rating Low Combine with Pheromone Attractiveness and Trapping Combine with Pheromone Attractiveness and Trapping Not Alternative Treatment but may delay Treatment Not Alternative Treatment but may delay Treatment

Postharvest IIe Processing & Food Storage Facilities Rating Medium Rating Medium

Postharvest IIe Processing & Food Storage Facilities-Aerosol Not Rated Not Rated Not Alternative but could Delay Treatment Not Alternative but could Delay Treatment No Technology Developed Since 2000 No Technology Developed Since 2000 No Literature References No Literature References

Postharvest IIe Processing & Food Storage Facilities-Contact Insecticides Rating Medium Rating Medium Not Replacement but could Delay Treatment Not Replacement but could Delay Treatment

Postharvest IIe Processing & Food Storage Facilities-Heat Rating Medium Rating Medium Few Processing Facilities will Withstand Treatment Few Processing Facilities will Withstand Treatment Some Newer Mills have been able to Use because of Newer Construction Some Newer Mills have been able to Use because of Newer Construction Methods of Using Heat Economically not Available Methods of Using Heat Economically not Available

Postharvest IIf Movement of Commodities out of Quarantine Areas Rating High Rating High Important Area Important Area Need Additional Alternatives Need Additional Alternatives

Postharvest IIf Movement of Commodities out of Quarantine Areas-Behavioral Rating High Rating High Limited Impact-Specific Pest/Host Limited Impact-Specific Pest/Host

Postharvest IIf Movement of Commodities out of Quarantine Areas-Physical Rating High Rating High Has Potential but Limited Use Has Potential but Limited Use Case given is Incorrect in that Olive Fruit Fly is in Major Production Areas Case given is Incorrect in that Olive Fruit Fly is in Major Production Areas

Postharvest IIg Prevent Quarantine Pest into and within U.S. Rating High Rating High Important Area but Limited Research to Date Important Area but Limited Research to Date

Postharvest IIg Prevent Quarantine Pest into and within US-Sterile Insect Rating High Rating High Will not Replace Need for Control of Current Pests Will not Replace Need for Control of Current Pests Can Limit Outbreaks Can Limit Outbreaks Not all Pests of Concern in Sterile Program Not all Pests of Concern in Sterile Program

Postharvest IIg Prevent Quarantine Pest into and within US-Insecticide Baits Rating High Rating High Make Bait Applications More Acceptable Make Bait Applications More Acceptable Important to Prevent Outbreaks Important to Prevent Outbreaks Will not Replace need for Control of Current Pests Will not Replace need for Control of Current Pests

Postharvest IIg Prevent Quarantine Pest into and within US-Prohibition of Imports Rating High Rating High Can be Effective Can be Effective Limited Use as most Exotic Pests like Med Fly have a Wide Host Range Limited Use as most Exotic Pests like Med Fly have a Wide Host Range