Sustainable pesticide use practices for the protection of water resources

Jeffrey Jenkins and Phil JanneyDepartment of Environmental and Molecular ToxicologyAgricultural Experiment Station and Extension Service

Oregon State University

Impact of Agriculture and Forestry on Salmonids in the Pacific Northwest

10/17/2019 2

ESA-listed salmon and steelhead

Oncorhynchus keta

28 Evolutionarily Significant Units

Oncorhynchus nerka

Oncorhynchus mykiss

Oncorhynchus tshawytscha

Oncorhynchus kisutch

Washington Toxics Coalition v EPANinth Circuit Court of Appeals (2001)

EPA failure to consult with NOAA regarding the registration of 54 pesticides.

10/17/2019 3

PNW Stakeholders

• Pesticide users– Industry– Agriculture– Forestry– Rights of Way– Municipal– Residential

• Federal Government• State Government/PSP/WQPMT• Tribes• Land Grant universities• Watershed Councils• Non-Governmental Organizations• Soil and Water Conservation Districts• Irrigation districts• Public

10/17/2019 4

Pacific Salmonid Pesticide Opportunities for Exposure

Salmonid Biology• Life history • Habitat

preference

Pesticide Occurrence• Use practices• Site specific

conditions

5EX

POSU

RE

10/17/2019

Pesticide Surface Water Monitoring in the U.S. and Oregon

• USGS Monitoring• National Water Quality

Assessment Program (NAWQA)

• Clackamas studies

• DEQ/ODA Monitoring• Pesticide Stewardship

Partnership (PSP)• 9 Watersheds• 4 in Willamette Valley

610/17/2019

ESA/FIFRA - National Research Council Review (2013)

• Evaluate current pesticide risk assessment approaches relating to ESA listed species (biological opinions)

• Reach consensus on common risk assessment methods– Modelling/model assumptions– Geospatial information– Characterize effects direct, indirect, sublethal

and cumulative; mixtures and inert ingredients– Characterize uncertainty

710/17/2019

8

Willamette Basin (HUC 4) 12 HUC 8 subbasins388 HUC12 watersheds

Diverse agriculture (170 crop varieties), forestry, urban pesticide use practices

More than 500 pesticide active ingredients registered in Oregon

Pesticide co-occurrence with salmon/food web life histories?

Willamette Basin Salmonid Critical Habitat

10/17/2019

FIFRA/FQPA Federal – State Partnerships designed to Achieve Safe and Beneficial Pesticide Use

Risk characterization through sound

science

Cost effective requirements to insure safe use

Clear understanding

of label restrictions and use mandates

Informed decision-making at the frontline of pesticide use

10/17/2019 9

Scott Hecht, NMFS 10

Pacific Salmonid Biology, Food Web and Critical Habitat

10/17/2019

Fig. 1. Consistent exposure and effect assessment is possible if processes in the environmental system and in the organisms (biological system) are treated with the same modeling structure and tools.

René P. Schwarzenbach et al. Science 2006;313:1072-1077

David Buchwalter

David Buchwalter

Katherine Palmquist

Jason Sandahl

Jason Sandahl

Fig. 1. Consistent exposure and effect assessment is possible if processes in the environmental system and in the organisms (biological system) are treated with the same modeling structure

and tools.

René P. Schwarzenbach et al. Science 2006;313:1072-1077

Risk: Conceptual Framework

Pesticide Use Practices

Human/wildlife Susceptibility and Behavior

RiskOpportunities for Pesticide

Exposure

10/17/2019 13

Sustainable Agriculture and Forestry

• The core concept of sustainability1 is that lasting success requires an integrated approach to:

• producing food, fiber, and other products • farm and forest profitability • quality of life for farmers, foresters, and communities • stewardship of natural resources

• Sustainability requires recognizing and acting upon productivity, economic, social, and environmental goals as a simultaneous set of system attributes.

14

1Brundtland, G. H. (1987). Our Common Future. Annex to U.N. General Assembly document A/42/427.10/17/2019

Technology to Enable Sustainable Production

• Farm/forest operations management• Agronomy/horticulture/animal science/forest science• Pest management/IVM• Nutrient management• Water Management • Natural resource stewardship• Supply chain management• Information management

15

Farm/Forest ProductionSystem

Digital Agriculture and Forestry10/17/2019

WEATHER LAND MANAGEMENT PESTICIDE PROCESSES

NUTRIENT PROCESSES

PRECIPITATION

GROUNDWATER RUNOFF

HYDROLOGY

PESTICIDE PROCESSES

SEDIMENT PROCESSES

NUTRIENT PROCESSES

GROUNDWATERINPUTS

UPSTREAMINPUTS

RUNOFFINPUTS

DOWNSTREAMOUTPUTS

EROSION

HYDROLOGY

CROP GROWTH

WATER MANAGEMENT

Water quality stewardship - conceptual model

Terrestrial ProcessesIn-Stream

Processes

Water Q

uality Monitoring 1610/17/2019

Herbicides Commonly Used in the Pacific Northwest

Trade Common ½ life Koc water sol vapor pressurename name (days) mg/L (mm Hg)Sencor metribuzin 40 60 1220 1.0x10-5Banvel Dicamba (acid) 14 2 400000 3.4x10-5Milestone aminopyralid 35 11 2480 7.1x10-11Garlon trichlopyr 30 210 260 3.0x10-8Dual metolachlor 90 200 530 3.1x10-5Roundup glyphosate 47 24000 530000 02,4-D 2, 4 D acid 10 20 89 1.1x10-72,4-D ester 2,4-D butoxyethyl ester 7 500 100 1.0X10-7Chopper imazapyr 90 100 1100 1.3x10-11Velpar hexazinone 90 54 3300 8.2x10-11Kerb pronamide 60 800 15 8.5x10-5Oust Sulfometuron methyl 28 78 70 1.7x10-16Goal oxyfluorfen 35 100000 0.1 2.0x10-7Prowl pendimethalin 90 500 0.3 9.4x10-6Buctril bromoxynil 7 10000 0.8 4.8x10-6Dachthal DCPA 100 5000 0.5 2.5x10-6

OSU Extension Pesticide Properties Database EM 8709

Pesticide Loss at the Watershed Scale

1810/17/2019

Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT)

19

Conceptual model Process model - computer

Conceptual model

Process model (computer)

ArcSWAT (GIS), use of spatial data (maps)

Describe daily changes in watershed

Pesticides in surface water

Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT)• Watershed scale model1

• Developed by USDA Agricultural Research Service

• Based on over 40 years of expertise

• Developed to evaluate the impact of land management practices on:

• Hydrology• Erosion/Sediment transport• Nutrient fate• Pesticide fate

• Physically based process model that operates on a daily time step

• GIS interface, ArcSWAT, used for spatially explicit parameterization using readily available data

2010/17/2019

Watershed scale modeling of pesticide fate

21

Zollner Creek Watershed, Willamette Basin, Oregon

• HUC12 - 15mi2 watershed

• Watershed area 90% agriculture: > 600 fields, >30 crops

• Pesticide surface water monitoring since 1993 (USGS and Oregon DEQ)

• Contains critical habitat for Upper Willamette chinook and steelhead ESUs

• Weather characterized by dry summers and wet winters

• USGS stream flow gage (Station ID: 14201300)

2210/17/2019

23

J a n -10

J a n -10

Ma r -1

0

A p r -10

Ma y -1

0

Ma y -1

0

J u n -10

J u l-10

A u g -10

S e p -10

Oc t-1

0

N o v -10

D e c -10

J a n -11

F e b -11

Ma r -1

1

A p r -11

Ma y -1

1

J u n -11

J u l-11

A u g -11

S e p -11

Oc t-1

1

N o v -11

D e c -11

0

2

4

6

8

1 0 0

5 0

1 0 0

1 5 0

2 0 0

2 5 0

2 0 1 0 -2 0 1 1 O b s e rv e d a n d S W A T E s tim a te dA v e ra g e D a ily S tr e a m F lo w fo r Z o lln e r C r e e k

D a te

Av

era

ge

Da

ily

Str

ea

m F

low

(C

MS

)P

rec

ipita

tion

(mm

)

U S G S O b s e rv e d F lo w (C M S ) C a lib ra te d S W A T E s tim a te d F lo w (C M S ) P re c ip ita tio n (m m )

Flow StatisticsNSE = 0.75PBIAS = -17.1%RSR = 0.25R2= 0.77

SWAT Hydrologic Characterization1

1Janney, P., and J. Jenkins. 2019. A Systems Approach to Modeling Watershed Ecohydrology and Pesticide Transport. J. Environ. Qual. 48:1047-1056.10/17/2019

Characterizing Pesticide Use Patterns

• All authorized uses (federal/state labeled uses)

• Actual use records • Proprietary • Logistically difficult• Retrospective

• Probabilistic methods based on local knowledge• Realistic boundary conditions (pest management

along crop timelines)• Characterize complex decision making process

(producers, CCAs, Extension)• Both retrospective and prospective – evaluate future

outcomes24

Labels for Oregon – PICOL database

Collaborate with CCAs and growers to refine use

estimates

Create boundary conditions for probabilistic analysis of

application practices

10/17/2019

10/17/2019 25

Atrazine Authorized Use in the Zollner Creek Watershed

10/17/2019 26

Chlorpyrifos Authorized Use in the Zollner Creek Watershed

10/17/2019 27

Trifluralin Authorized Use in the Zollner Creek Watershed

Trifluralin Use - PNW Herbicide Handbook • Pre-plant soil incorporated:

• Broccoli: May-July; 0.5-1 lb AI/A; 3-4” incorporation• Cauliflower: May-July; 0.5-1 lb AI/A; 3-4” incorporation• Green beans: May-July; 0.5-0.75 lb AI/A; 2-3” incorporation• Peas: May-July; 0.5-0.75 lb AI/A; 1-2” incorporation

• Spring pre-emergent:• Caneberries (nonbearing): March-April; 2.5-5lb AI/A; activate

with single rain event or 0.5” irrigation or mechanically incorporate

• Field grown nursery: March-April; 2-5lb AI/A; activate with single rain event or 0.5” irrigation or mechanically incorporate

• Filberts: March-April; 0.5-1lb AI/A; activate with single rain event or 0.5” irrigation or mechanically incorporate

• Fall pre-emergent:• Alfalfa: September-October; 2lb AI/A; activate with single rain

event or 0.5” irrigation or mechanically incorporate• Grass seed: September-October; 2lb AI/A; activate with single

rain event or 0.5” irrigation or mechanically incorporate• Winter wheat: October-November; 0.5-1lb AI/A; activate with

single rain event or 0.5” irrigation or mechanically incorporate 2810/17/2019

Probabilistic Assessment of Application Patterns

• Management operations randomized by field• Applications limited to workable days• Application rates were both probabilistic and deterministic• Pesticides Properties DataBase1 representative values

• Monte Carlo methods utilized to create spatial and temporal distribution of application patterns

• 500 SWAT scenarios generated and run

• Generate a distribution of spatial and temporal patterns of pesticide use practices

• Estimate likely pesticide use patterns

291 PPDB: Pesticide Properties DataBase, University of Hertfordshire.10/17/2019

Generalized (not actual) Distribution of ChlorpyrifosApplications - 2011

CROP TYPE # POTENTIAL APPLICATION SITES

APPLICATION PERIOD

PROBABILITY OF APPLICATION

# WORKABLE

DAYS

Seed/Sod Grass 82 Sept-Oct 0.1 15Nursery 35 Apr-July 0.4 36

Orchard 3 Mar-Apr 0.75 123 May-Aug 0.1 54

Vegetable

2 Apr-May 1 1410 Apr-June 1 167 May-July 1 331 June-July 1 231 Aug-Sept 1 30

1 of 500 daily simulations

10/17/2019 30

SWAT Estimates of Daily Chlorpyrifos Concentration

31

J a n -10

J a n -10

Ma r -1

0

A p r -10

Ma y -1

0

Ma y -1

0

J u n -10

J u l-10

A u g -10

S e p -10

Oc t-1

0

N o v -10

D e c -10

0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

1 0 02 0 0

2 5 0

3 0 0

3 5 0

4 0 0

4 5 0

5 0 0 0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

1 0 0

1 2 0

1 4 0

1 6 0

1 8 0

2 0 0

D a ily S W A T E s t im a te d C h lo rp y r ifo s C o n c e n tra t io n s : 2 0 1 0

D a te

Ch

lorp

yri

fos

Co

nc

en

tra

tio

n (

ng

/L)

Pre

cip

itatio

n (m

m)

S W A T M e a n D a ily C o n c e n tra t io n (n g /L ) D E Q C h lo rp y r ifo s (n g /L )N o n -d e te c ts

O P P A c u te In v e r t e b r a t e B e n c h m a r k

O P P C h r o n ic In v e r t e b r a t e B e n c h m a r k

P re c ip ita t io n (m m )

J a n -11

F e b -11

Ma r -1

1

A p r -11

Ma y -1

1

J u n -11

J u l-11

A u g -11

S e p -11

Oc t-1

1

N o v -11

D e c -11

0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

1 0 02 5 0

3 0 0

3 5 0

4 0 0

4 5 0

5 0 0 0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

1 0 0

1 2 0

1 4 0

1 6 0

1 8 0

2 0 0

D a ily S W A T E s t im a te d C h lo rp y r ifo s C o n c e n tra t io n s : 2 0 1 1

D a te

Ch

lorp

yri

fos

Co

nc

en

tra

tio

n (

ng

/L)

Pre

cip

itatio

n (m

m)

S W A T M e a n D a ily C o n c e n tra t io n (n g /L ) U S G S C h lo rp y r ifo s (n g /L )

D E Q C h lo rp y r ifo s (n g /L )N o n -d e te c ts

O P P A c u te In v e r t e b r a t e B e n c h m a r k

O P P C h r o n ic In v e r t e b r a t e B e n c h m a r k

P re c ip ita t io n (m m )

10/17/2019

SWAT Estimates of Daily Atrazine Concentration

10/17/2019 32

Jan -1

0

Ma r -1

0

A p r -10

Ma y -1

0

Jun -1

0

Jul-1

0

A u g -10

S e p -10

Oc t -1

0

N o v -10

D e c -10

0

1 0 0

2 0 0

3 0 0

4 0 0 0

1 0 0

2 0 0

3 0 0

2 0 1 0 Z o lln e r C re e k S W A T E s t im a te d

A v e r a g e D a ily A tra z in e S u r fa c e W a te r C o n c e n tr a t io n

D a t e

Atr

azi

ne

Co

nce

ntr

ati

on

(n

g/L)

Pre

cipita

tion

(mm

)

P r e c ip it a t io n (m m )

O b s e r v e d A tr a z in e C o n c e n tr a t io n s (n g / L )

M e a n S W A T E st im a te d C o n c e n tr a t io n (n g / L )

G r e y A re a = 5 th -9 5 th p e r c e n t ile

Jan -1

1

F e b -11

Ma r -1

1

A p r -11

Ma y -1

1

Jun -1

1

Jul-1

1

A u g -11

S e p -11

Oc t -1

1

N o v -11

D e c -11

0

1 0 0

2 0 0

3 0 0

4 0 0

0

1 0 0

2 0 0

3 0 0

1 0 0 0

2 0 0 0

3 0 0 0

4 0 0 0

5 0 0 0

2 0 1 1 Z o lln e r C re e k S W A T E s t im a te d

A v e r a g e D a ily A tra z in e S u r fa c e W a te r C o n c e n tr a t io n

D a t e

Atr

azi

ne

Co

nce

ntr

ati

on

(n

g/L)

Pre

cipita

tion

(mm

)

M e a n S W A T E st im a te d C o n c e n tr a t io n (n g / L )

G r e y A re a = 5 th -9 5 th p e r c e n t ile

O b s e r v e d A t r a z in e C o n c e n tr a t io n (n g / L )

P r e c ip it a t io n (m m )

OPP Acute Nonvascular Plant Benchmark: 1000 ng/LOPP Chronic Fish Benchmark: 5000 ng/L

OPP Acute Nonvascular Plant Benchmark: 1000 ng/LOPP Chronic Fish Benchmark: 5000 ng/L

SWAT Estimates of Daily Trifluralin Concentration

10/17/2019 33

0 3 0 6 0 9 0 1 2 0 1 5 0 1 8 0 2 1 0 2 4 0 2 7 0 3 0 0 3 3 0 3 6 00

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

1 0 0

1 2 0

1 4 0

1 6 0

1 8 0

2 0 0

2 2 0 0

5 0

1 0 0

1 5 0

2 0 0

2 0 1 0 T r if lu ra lin D a ily C o n c e n tra t io n E s t im a te s

J D

Tri

flu

rali

n C

on

ce

ntr

ati

on

(n

g/L

)

Precip

itatio

n(m

m)

D E Q G ra b S a m p le N o n D e te c ts (n g /L )

S W A T M e d ia n D a ily T riflu ra lin C o n ce n tra tio n (n g /L ) P re c ip ita tio n (m m )

0 3 0 6 0 9 0 1 2 0 1 5 0 1 8 0 2 1 0 2 4 0 2 7 0 3 0 0 3 3 0 3 6 00

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

1 0 0

1 2 0

1 4 0

1 6 0

1 8 0

2 0 0

2 2 0 0

5 0

1 0 0

1 5 0

2 0 0

2 0 1 1 T r if lu ra lin D a ily C o n c e n tra t io n E s t im a te s

J D

Tri

flu

rali

n C

on

ce

ntr

ati

on

(n

g/L

)

Precip

itatio

n(m

m)

U S G S G ra b S a m p le D e te c ts (n g /L )D E Q G ra b S a m p le N o n D e te c ts (n g /L )

S W A T M e d ia n D a ily T riflu ra lin C o n ce n tra tio n (n g /L ) P re c ip ita tio n (m m )

OPP Acute Fish Benchmark: 9250 ng/LOPP Chronic Fish Benchmark: 1900 ng/L

OPP Acute Fish Benchmark: 9250 ng/LOPP Chronic Fish Benchmark: 1900 ng/L

Passive Sampling Device 21 day Time Weighted Average Pesticide Concentrations in Surface Water

34

Lay Flat Tubing (LFT) passive samplers deployed continuously every ~21 days

J a n- 1

0

Fe b

- 10

Ma r - 1

0

Ap

r - 10

Ma y - 1

0

J un

- 10

J ul -

1 0

Au

g- 1

0

Se p

- 10

Oc t -

1 0

No

v - 10

De c - 1

0

J a n- 1

1

Fe b

- 11

Ma r - 1

1

Ap

r - 11

Ma y - 1

1

J un

- 11

J ul -

1 1

Au

g- 1

1

Se p

- 11

Oc t -

1 1

No

v - 11

De c - 1

1

0

5

1 0

1 5

2 0

2 54 0

4 5

5 0

5 5

6 0 0

5 0

1 0 0

1 5 0

2 0 0

2 0 1 0 - 2 0 1 1 Z o l l n e r C r e e k S i m u l a t e d a n d O b s e r v e d

C h l o r p r y i f o s T i m e - W e i g h t e d A v e r a g e C o n c e n t r a t i o n s ( n g / L )

D a t e

Ch

lorp

yri

fos

Tim

e-W

eig

hte

d A

ve

rag

e C

on

ce

ntr

ati

on

(n

g/L

)

Pre

cip

itatio

n (m

m)

L F T C h lo r p y r i f o s C o n c e n t r a t i o n ( n g / L )

O P P A c u t e I n v e r t e b r a t e B e n c h m a r k

O P P C h r o n i c I n v e r t e b r a t e B e n c h m a r k

P r e c i p i t a t i o n ( m m )

D E Q N o n d e t e c t C h l o r p y r i f o s G r a b S a m p l e s ( n g / L )

U S G S D e t e c t C h lo r p y r i f o s G r a b S a m p l e s ( n g / L )10/17/2019

10/17/2019 35

J a n -10

F e b -10

Ma r -1

0

A p r -10

Ma y -1

0

J u n -10

J u l-10

A u g -10

S e p -10

Oc t-1

0

N o v -10

D e c -10

J a n -11

F e b -11

Ma r -1

1

A p r -11

Ma y -1

1

J u n -11

J u l-11

A u g -11

S e p -11

Oc t-1

1

N o v -11

D e c -11

0

5

1 0

1 5

2 0

2 54 0

4 5

5 0

5 5

6 0 0

5 0

1 0 0

1 5 0

2 0 0

2 0 1 0 -2 0 1 1 Z o lln e r C re e k S im u la te d a n d O b s e rv e dC h lo rp ry ifo s T im e -W e ig h te d A v e ra g e C o n c e n tra t io n s (n g /L )

D a te

Ch

lorp

yri

fos

Tim

e-W

eig

hte

d A

ve

rag

e C

on

ce

ntr

ati

on

(n

g/L

)

Pre

cip

itatio

n (m

m)

L F T C h lo rp y r ifo s C o n c e n tra t io n (n g /L )

O P P A c u te In v e r t e b r a t e B e n c h m a r k

O P P C h r o n ic In v e r t e b r a t e B e n c h m a r k

9 5 th P e rc e n tile S W A T C h lo rp y r ifo s C o n c e n tra to n (n g /L )

5 th P e rc e n t ile S W A T C h lo rp y rifo s C o n c e n tra to n (n g /L )

M e d ia n S W A T C h lo rp y r ifo s C o n c e n tra to n (n g /L )

P re c ip ita t io n (m m )

D E Q N o n d e te c t C h lo rp y rifo s G ra b S a m p le s (n g /L )

U S G S D e te c t C h lo rp y rifo s G ra b S a m p le s (n g /L )

10/17/2019 36

J a n -10

F e b -10

Ma r -1

0

A p r -10

Ma y -1

0

J u n -10

J u l-10

A u g -10

S e p -10

Oc t-1

0

N o v -10

D e c -10

J a n -11

F e b -11

Ma r -1

1

A p r -11

Ma y -1

1

J u n -11

J u l-11

A u g -11

S e p -11

Oc t-1

1

N o v -11

D e c -11

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0 0

5 0

1 0 0

1 5 0

2 0 0

L F T a n d S W A T E s t im a te d T im e -W e ig h te d A v e ra g eC o n c e n tr a t io n s o f T r if lu ra lin

D a te

Tri

flu

rali

n C

on

ce

ntr

ati

on

(n

g/L

)P

rec

ipita

tion

(mm

)

L F T T riflu ra lin C o n ce n tra tio n (n g /L )

U S G S T riflu ra lin G ra b S a m p le D e te c ts (n g /L )

D E Q T riflu ra lin G ra b S a m p le N o n D e te c ts (n g /L )

9 5 th P e rc e n tile S W A T T rif lu ra lin C o n c e n tra tio n (n g /L )

5 th P e rc e n tile S W A T T riflu ra lin C o n c e n tra t io n (n g /L )

M e d ia n S W A T T riflu ra lin C o n ce n tra tio n (n g /L )

P re c ip ita tio n (m m )

O P P F is h A c u te B e n c h m a r k : 9 2 5 0 n g /LO P P F is h C h r o n ic B e n c h m a r k : 1 9 0 0 n g /L

Transferability of Watershed Assessment Framework

10/17/2019 37

South Yamhill Forest Watersheds

OSU application of SWAT:Integrate Institutional knowledge/local expertise Evaluate forestry IVM/herbicides in surface waterEstimate daily loading – benchmark exceedancesInform best management practices/success stories

Fostering sustainable practices through participative modeling

39

OSU Extension Watershed Assessment Framework

(powered by SWAT)

Local knowledge and expertise

Institutional knowledge and expertise

Rapid evaluation of sustainable practices

Demonstrated Stewardship10/17/2019