Retrospective evaluation of costs associated with methyl bromide critical use exemptions for open field strawberries in California

Abstract:Methyl bromide (MBr) has been widely used as a fumigant to control pests in the agricultural sector, but it is also an ozone depleting substance. After 2005, methyl bromide could only be produced when a critical use exemption was agreed to by the signatories to the Montreal Protocol. This paper examines how the EPA’sex antecost analyses for open field fresh strawberries in California for the 2006–2010 seasons compare to anex postassessment of costs. A key input into theex antecost analysis is the assumed yield loss associated with methyl bromide alternatives. The EPA used conservative assumptions given the wide range of estimates in the literature at the time, but it appears that a number of viable MBr alternatives – either new fumigants or new ways of applying existing fumigants – may have become available more quickly and resulted in lower yield loss than initially anticipated. Likewise, it appears that farmers who substituted away from methyl bromide did so without imposing large negative impacts on production in prime California strawberry growing areas.Ex postevaluation also confirms the effect of California regulatory restrictions in limiting the use of various economically competitive alternatives. It is worth noting that unanticipated complications after switching away from methyl bromide, such as new diseases, slowed the transition to MBr alternatives.

Download Full-text

Effects of Fumigant Alternatives to Methyl Bromide on Pest Control in Open Field Nursery Production of Perennial Fruit and Nut Plants

HortTechnology ◽

10.21273/hortsci.19.3.526 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 19 (3) ◽

pp. 526-532 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Sally M. Schneider ◽

Bradley D. Hanson

Keyword(s):

Open Field ◽

Methyl Bromide ◽

Nematode Control ◽

Root Knot Nematode ◽

Regulatory Requirements ◽

Nursery Stock ◽

Wide Range ◽

Field Nursery ◽

Nursery Production ◽

Phase Out

Nursery producers of perennial fruit and nut plants rely on preplant fumigation to meet regulatory requirements designed to ensure nematode-free planting stock. In the past, preplant treatments with methyl bromide or high rates of 1,3-dichloropropene were the preferred treatments. However, the phase out of methyl bromide due to environmental concerns and evolving regulations on the use of 1,3-dichloropropene has increased the need for effective and economical alternative fumigation treatments in open field nursery production. A field trial was conducted in a commercial nursery to test weed and nematode control with several tarped and untarped preplant applications of 1,3-dichloropropene, chloropicrin, and iodomethane in comparison with methyl bromide. Crop safety and nematode infestation were evaluated on a wide range of tree, vine, and berry nursery stock. No fall fumigation treatment in this study resulted in measurable injury to spring-planted nursery stock. There were few statistical differences between methyl bromide and the other fumigation treatments in crop establishment, crop quality, or nematode level at planting 5 months after treatment, although some untarped treatments had detectable levels of the root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne spp.). At grape (Vitus vinifera) and bramble (Rubus spp.) harvest after the first growing season, few statistical differences were noted in the number of nematodes isolated from roots; however, only methyl bromide had nondetectable levels in all varieties. The highest nematode levels were usually found in untarped iodomethane:chloropicrin and untarped chloropicrin plots. At tree harvest 26 months after fumigation, root-knot nematodes were isolated from the roots of highly susceptible tree varieties in several iodomethane:chloropicrin treatments and in chloropicrin alone plots. Untarped applications did not provide commercially acceptable control of weeds or root-knot nematode in this trial. Tarped applications of 30:70 and 50:50 iodomethane:chloropicrin provided nematode control similar to 1,3-dichloropropene, although not as good as methyl bromide. Iodomethane:chloropicrin combinations have been registered in other states and should be considered for use in California perennial fruit and nut crop nurseries as an alternative to methyl bromide.

Download Full-text

Counterfeiting: addressing mitigation and resilience in supply chains

International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management ◽

10.1108/ijpdlm-01-2017-0004 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 48 (2) ◽

pp. 139-163 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Solange Mata Machado ◽

Ely Laureano Paiva ◽

Eliciane Maria da Silva

Keyword(s):

Supply Chains ◽

Negative Impact ◽

Data Gathering ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Limited Information ◽

Content Type ◽

Foreign Companies ◽

Ex Post ◽

Ex Ante ◽

Negative Impacts

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze how companies develop mitigation capabilities in their supply chains in order to reduce the negative impacts of counterfeiting. Design/methodology/approach Five cases with two types of supply chain are analyzed: B2B (clothing, footwear and toys) and B2C (automotive). Data gathering was based on interviews, while secondary data were obtained directly from trade associations. Findings Companies presented different levels of proactivity for counterfeiting resilience. Companies with a lower level of appetite for risk are more proactive and have a broad number of mitigation capabilities. These companies develop intelligence that is required for combating counterfeiting and the capabilities needed for addressing its ex ante and ex post phases. Research limitations/implications The research examines a complex and controversial subject about which there is limited information. The case studies are limited to Brazilian companies and the local subsidiaries of foreign companies. Therefore, the specific context may influence the study findings and reduce their generalizability. Practical implications Mitigation capabilities enable companies to minimize the negative impact of counterfeiting and make companies more resilient to counterfeiting activities. The findings indicate that when managers allocate resources in earlier phases of counterfeiting, losses are lower. Originality/value This study shows the development process of mitigation capabilities in the ex ante and post-disruption phases of counterfeiting.

Download Full-text

PERFORMANCE OF METHYL BROMIDE ALTERNATIVES FOR STRAWBERRY IN FLORIDA AND SPAIN

HortScience ◽

10.21273/hortsci.41.3.506b ◽

2006 ◽

Vol 41 (3) ◽

pp. 506B-506

Author(s):

Bielinski M. Santos ◽

José Manuel López-Aranda ◽

James P. Gilreath ◽

Luis Miranda ◽

Carmen Soria ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Open Field ◽

Propylene Oxide ◽

Methyl Bromide ◽

Dimethyl Disulfide ◽

Field Trials ◽

Fruit Weight ◽

The Other ◽

Low Density Polyethylene ◽

Methyl Bromide Alternatives ◽

Marketable Fruit

Tunnel and open field trials were conducted in two locations in Huelva, Spain, and one in Florida to determine the effect of selected methyl bromide (MBr) alternatives on strawberry yield. In Spain, the tunnel treatments were: a) nontreated control, b) MBr + chloropicrin (Pic) 50:50 at a rate of 400 kg·ha–1; c) dazomet at 400 kg·ha–1, d) 1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D) + Pic 65:35 at 300 kg·ha–1; e) Pic at 300 kg/ha; f) dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) + Pic 50:50 at 250 + 250 kg·ha–1; and f) propylene oxide at 550 kg·ha–1. All treatments were covered with virtually impermeable film (VIF), except the nontreated control, which was covered with low-density polyethylene (LDPE) mulch. Dazomet was rototilled 10 cm deep, whereas the other fumigants were injected with four chisels per bed. In Florida, the open-field treatments were a) nontreated control, b) MBr + Pic 67:33 at a rate of 400 kg/ha with LDPE; c) MBr + Pic 67:33 at 310 kg·ha–1 with VIF; d) 1,3-D + Pic 65:35 at 300 kg·ha–1 with VIF; e) methyl iodide (MI) + Pic 50:50 at 230 kg·ha–1 with VIF; f) Pic at 300 kg·ha–1 with VIF; g) DMDS + Pic 50:50 at 250 + 250 kg·ha–1 with VIF; and g) propylene oxide at 500 kg·ha–1 with VIF. The fumigants were applied with three chisels per bed. In Spain, the results showed that 1,3-D + Pic, DMDS + Pic, and Pic consistently had similar marketable yields as MBr + Pic. Similar results were found in Florida, with the exception of propylene oxide, which also had equal marketable fruit weight as MBr + Pic.

Download Full-text

Alternatives to Methyl Bromide: A Florida Perspective

Plant Health Progress ◽

10.1094/php-2005-1027-01-rv ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 6 (1) ◽

pp. 19 ◽

Cited By ~ 20

Author(s):

Erin N. Rosskopf ◽

Daniel O. Chellemi ◽

Nancy Kokalis-Burelle ◽

Gregory T. Church

Keyword(s):

Methyl Bromide ◽

Cropping Systems ◽

Ozone Layer ◽

Montreal Protocol ◽

Current Status ◽

Atmospheric Ozone ◽

Soil Fumigant ◽

Soilborne Fungi ◽

Wide Range ◽

Phase Out

Methyl bromide is a soil fumigant used to control soilborne fungi, nematodes, and weeds in a wide range of agricultural, horticultural, and ornamental cropping systems. The Montreal Protocol of 1987 called for the phase-out of methyl bromide due to its ability to deplete atmospheric ozone, thus disrupting the UV protective ozone layer. This article reviews the current status of the on-going methyl bromide phase-out from the perspective of agriculture in Florida. Accepted for publication 27 September 2005. Published 27 October 2005.

Download Full-text