 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Toxicity Rankings
The initial collection of pesticide data originated from interviewed superintendents
who listed, off the top of their heads, the pesticides they applied to
their courses. These lists were compiled
and analyzed according to seven different categories of toxicity and hazards
that were determined by The
Pesticide Action Network (PAN) ranking system. This method was applied
because it incorporates the different terms and categories used by multiple
organizations to rank the same thing. For example, the World
Health Organization (WHO) classifies chemicals with the highest level
of toxicity as "Extremely Hazardous," while the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) classifies the same set of chemicals
as "Category I, DANGER." PAN unites the two classes and labels
them "Extremely Toxic." According to the PAN ranking system,
pesticides can range in toxicity from "extremely toxic" to "not
acutely toxic" and can also have a ranking of "unknown."[27]
The ranking system that PAN applies to acute toxicity draws on four different
sources: The WHO's Hazard Rankings, the U.S. National
Toxicology Program (NTP), U.S. EPA ratings, and Material Safety Data
sheets. A focus was placed on acute toxicity because it provides the most
general indication of toxicity levels in pesticides. The acute toxicity
of a pesticide refers to the immediate effects (0-7 days) of exposure,
which, at the highest ranking of "highly acutely toxic" has
been found to be lethal at very high doses. Each individual pesticide
was listed according to its active ingredients and corresponding toxicity
levels. The data was then tabulated and graphed according to the PAN toxicity
ranking system.
The vast majority of the pesticides were found to be "slightly toxic"
or "moderately toxic.". According to the EPA, "moderately
toxic" compares to Category II, WARNING, which is a step below Category
I, DANGER. Tests conducted on rats have determined that exposure to category
II and III pesticides can result in severe and moderate skin irritation
lasting up to 72 hours.[26]
There were three golf courses that listed four or more pesticide products
with a rank of "moderately toxic" or "highly toxic."
I assessed the maintenance practices of these three courses in the hopes
of determining why these courses used pesticides with greater toxicity
rankings than other courses.
 |
 |
Analysis of Courses that used at least Four Highly Toxic Pesticides
1) G.C. #11 uses five
"moderately toxic" pesticides (Pyrethrins 36-10, Rubigan, Eagle,
Chipco, and Curalan) and one "highly toxic" pesticide (Heritage).
The superintendent operates on a preventative spray program, but said
he tries to reduce his spraying by spot treating when possible. He said
that he could not spray constantly because of the presence of golfers
on the course. However, he also said he could not take any chances with
the greens, and referred to them as the "bread and butter" of
the course. Despite the fact that this superintendent applies the most
toxic pesticides out of all the interviewed golf courses, he specifically
mentioned practices he carries out in order to replace pesticide use.
He uses natural predators that he called "bugs in a bag," and
he makes an effort to monitor playing conditions, watch weather patterns,
and only spray when necessary. The superintendent specifically mentioned
the intense pressure he felt from members to keep the course fast. In
fact he made the comment "God forbid American consumers find an apple
with a blemish on it" with regards to the expectations golfers have
of course conditions.
2) G.C. #4 uses three "moderately toxic" pesticides (Rubigan, Chipco, and Dimension) and one "highly toxic" pesticide (Mancozeb). The superintendent of this course does not have any practices that replace or supplement pesticide use. Instead, he sprays every other week on a preventative program.
3) G.C. # 21 uses
six "moderately toxic" pesticides (Scimatar, Dimension, Acclaim,
Barricade, 2,4-D, and Dicamba). The superintendent of this course sprays
fairly infrequently, usually once or twice per month. He also employs
a number of practices in order to reduce his pesticide use. He stresses
the importance of grass cultivation in order to cut down on chemical costs.
The practices he mentioned were aerification of soils, new seed application,
proper sun and wind movement, water reduction and irrigation at the correct
times of year, topdressing, and monitoring of soil temperature. Despite
the alternative practices, the superintendent commented, "You're
not going to get away from chemicals." He also mentioned that weather
has a great impact on pesticide use and wet summers require more fungicides.
Rhode Island superintendents are not using the most hazardous pesticides;
however, they are not using the safest pesticides either. The pesticides
with the highest toxicity are all fungicides with the exception of two,
which are herbicides, used to kill weeds. A clear distinction in management
practics was not found between the three courses that use the highest
number of the highly toxic pesticides and the other seventeen courses.
Member pressure appears to play a large role at two of the three courses,
and two of the three superintendents had the attitude that no matter what
they did, they would still need to use pesticides. There was also one
superintendent who had no alternatives practices to pesticides, thus it
is logical that he would need to be using highly toxic pesticides. However,
another one of the three superintendents has a number of techniques to
reduce pesticide use, and also mentioned that it was useless to forgo
pesticide applications. Additional considerations and factors that fall
into play are what species of grass the superintendents use, as well as
what the actual pests and diseases
are they were attempting to eradicate. For recommendations on how to maintain
a golf course with less pesticides, click here.