Biodegradable Insecticides in Forestry
167
a particular pesticide (e.g., mexacarbate) (Graham, 1975) or to develop a formulation of an insecticide (e.g., trichlorforn) (Hard, 1979) for the forestry market. For these reasons, pesticide availability needs to be determined early in the
R&D process to avoid unnecessary expenditure of tax-supported funds in an
effort that cannot come to fruition. Thus, the philosophy of the Forest Service
regarding insecticide development requires that the insecticide must be registered,
or nearly so, for a major agricultural use (Lyon, 1974; McKnight, 1976). This
philosophy more adequately assures future availability of the pesticide for forestry
use.
Since the forestry market for insecticides is small, the problems related to
a "minor use" have recently been evaluated by the National Academy of Sciences
(1975b). Its report highlighted one of the major problems associated with the
application of biodegradable pesticides in forestry:
Forestry has depended almost entirely upon pesticides developed for use in agriculture,
because it is in the minor use category with respect to the pesticide market. There
is little incentive for manufacturers to develop and register formulations for minor
uses, and useful, relatively safe pesticides have been taken off the market when their
use in agriculture declined. The result is that many pesticides that are potentially
useful in forestry are unavailable, and in some cases, there have been no alternative
solutions to pest problems, while in others the alternative has been more costly with
more adverse environmental effects.
The Academy recommended establishment of mechanisms that would provide
a greater range of chemicals for the specific needs of minor users.
7.6. TESTING PROTOCOL
A testing protocol for the research and development of insecticides has
several steps (Lyon, 1974, 1976; Lyon and Camp, 1972; Markin and Shea,
1978). Most of the field and environmental safety testing is performed for the
Forest Service by the Field Evaluation of Insecticides Research Work Unit,
headquartered at Davis, California. Other research centers conduct field testing
on more specific and local research missions. The Forest Pest Management
Institute in Canada follows a similar testing protocol. For both research groups,
the incorporation of chemical control into an integrated pest management program
is a massive web of legislation, regulation, chemistry, biological phenomena,
and environmental awareness. The state of Maine has, for example, implemented
an efficient system for managing spruce budworm, which includes budworm
biology, control, impact, environmental monitoring, and detection (Burke and
Hulsey, 1979).
Principal steps in the testing procedure for an insecticide have been developed into a working protocol (Markin and Shea, 1978). Specific examples of
167
a particular pesticide (e.g., mexacarbate) (Graham, 1975) or to develop a formulation of an insecticide (e.g., trichlorforn) (Hard, 1979) for the forestry market. For these reasons, pesticide availability needs to be determined early in the
R&D process to avoid unnecessary expenditure of tax-supported funds in an
effort that cannot come to fruition. Thus, the philosophy of the Forest Service
regarding insecticide development requires that the insecticide must be registered,
or nearly so, for a major agricultural use (Lyon, 1974; McKnight, 1976). This
philosophy more adequately assures future availability of the pesticide for forestry
use.
Since the forestry market for insecticides is small, the problems related to
a "minor use" have recently been evaluated by the National Academy of Sciences
(1975b). Its report highlighted one of the major problems associated with the
application of biodegradable pesticides in forestry:
Forestry has depended almost entirely upon pesticides developed for use in agriculture,
because it is in the minor use category with respect to the pesticide market. There
is little incentive for manufacturers to develop and register formulations for minor
uses, and useful, relatively safe pesticides have been taken off the market when their
use in agriculture declined. The result is that many pesticides that are potentially
useful in forestry are unavailable, and in some cases, there have been no alternative
solutions to pest problems, while in others the alternative has been more costly with
more adverse environmental effects.
The Academy recommended establishment of mechanisms that would provide
a greater range of chemicals for the specific needs of minor users.
7.6. TESTING PROTOCOL
A testing protocol for the research and development of insecticides has
several steps (Lyon, 1974, 1976; Lyon and Camp, 1972; Markin and Shea,
1978). Most of the field and environmental safety testing is performed for the
Forest Service by the Field Evaluation of Insecticides Research Work Unit,
headquartered at Davis, California. Other research centers conduct field testing
on more specific and local research missions. The Forest Pest Management
Institute in Canada follows a similar testing protocol. For both research groups,
the incorporation of chemical control into an integrated pest management program
is a massive web of legislation, regulation, chemistry, biological phenomena,
and environmental awareness. The state of Maine has, for example, implemented
an efficient system for managing spruce budworm, which includes budworm
biology, control, impact, environmental monitoring, and detection (Burke and
Hulsey, 1979).
Principal steps in the testing procedure for an insecticide have been developed into a working protocol (Markin and Shea, 1978). Specific examples of