Our farmers don't have any information or don't consider the effect of PHI (Pre-harvest interval) and REI (Re-entry interval) after pesticide spray. It has a negative effect on Human health after exposure either in contact or after consumption and this leads to health effects/disease like cancer.
Comment on previous answer, although PHI and REI of main pesticides are published
1)With the help of persistence study of pesticide on crop under investigation
Studies of residue persistance (or presence) of the considered substance may be a good point: adding some days (1-3) after residual preseence
2) Using efficacy data (sply for REI)
> efficacy data may show residual efficacy therefore adding some days (1-3) after residual activity of the substance.
3) By knowing MRL values using good agricultural practices
MRLs may be good way to compare substances between themselves but have low link to PHI and REI.
In many instances, the pesticide label gives both technical and some basic guidelines on proper use, toxicity, limits of application, personal protective equipment, mobility and longevity of effects. The label guidance and detail may be difficult to understand, and farmers may not be able to measure or plan treatment with wind, rain, open or running water limits, or be aware of sensitive sites to avoid as bee hives or sensitive species, and drinking water sources. Guidance for safe mixing and spill action plans also needed. I don’t know if any interest, but the spruce budworm report was a large National forest spray operation. It might have some tidbits of information about monitoring, spill containment and actions taken, efforts to buffer streams, avoid sensitive areas, etc. If conditions are creating health hazards, then some level of training and certification of farmers may help. In SC, if loggers dont use water quality BMPs, they loose certification and may have a hard time selling logs. The forest industry wants voluntary compliance rather than legal requirements and regulations.
- Badges
- Science method