USAID/TANZANIA CEREAL MARKET SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT

PESTICIDE EVALUATION REPORT & SAFER USE ACTION PLAN

0

NAFAKA PESTICIDE EVALUATION REPORT & SAFER USE ACTION PLAN

FEED THE FUTURE TANZANIA NAFAKA PROGRAMMAY 2017. Revised Feb. 2018.

APPROVAL FINAL ACTION FORMPESTICIDE EVALUATION REPORT AND SAFER USE ACTION PLAN (PERSUAP)FOR USAID/TANZANIA’S FEED THE FUTURE TANZANIA NAFAKA PROGRAM –

TANZANIA ECONOMIC STRENGTHENING

PROGRAM AND ACTIVITY DATA

PROJECT NAME:

Cereals Marketing Systems Development (CMSD) Project, formerly NAFAKA I Staples Value Chain Project (Feed the Future) PERSUAP -- which this NAFAKA II PERSUAP updates

Program Activity Title: USAID/Tanzania D.O.2: Inclusive Broad-based Economic Growth Sustained; IR 2.2 Agricultural Productivity and Profitability Increased in Targeted Value Chains

Country/Region:

Functional Objective 4:

Program Area 4.5:

Program Element 4.5.2:

Program Area 4.7:

Program Element 4.7.3:

Tanzania/East Africa

Economic Growth

Agriculture

Agricultural Sector Capacity

Economic Opportunity

Strengthen Microenterprise Productivity

Period Covered:

IEE Amendment Prepared By:

FY 2017-FY 2022

Karen Menczer, Consultant to ACDI/VOCA

Revised PERSUAP Preparation Date:

Submitted Date:

October 25, 2017. AFR BEO revised: Feb. 6, 2018

August 24, 2017.

IEE AMENDMENT: Yes No -- Tanzania Cereals Marketing Systems Development (NAFAKA II) PERSUAP, ECD Tracker ID permalink: https://ecd.usaid.gov/document.php?doc_id=50647

Original NAFAKA Pesticide Evaluation Report and Safer Use Action Plan (PERSUAP). Approved 10/23/2012, http://gemini.info.usaid.gov/repository/pdf/38800.pdf

Original IEE: USAID/Tanzania DO2: Inclusive Broad-based Economic Growth Sustained IR 2.2: #Tanzania_DO2_IR2_ValueChain (DOCX) (PDF

Other relevant documentation: Tanzania Mboga na Matunda (MnM) (Vegetables and Fruits) PERSUAP 2018.

https://ecd.usaid.gov/document.php?doc_id=50646 Tanzania Staples Value Chain - Nafaka Pesticide Evaluation Report:

#Tanzania_NAFAKA_Staple_Crops_PERSUAP_Amended_IEE_BEO (DOCX)(PDF). Programmatic PERSUAP for Fall Armyworm (FAW) Management in Africa – Vers. 1 (May

2017).Details for file #BFS-17-05-002 (PDF)

Page i

AGRA Scaling Seeds and Technologies Partnership in Africa (SSTP): PERSUAP. Details for file #BFS_AGRA_SSTP_PERSUAP (DOCX) (PDF)

PERSUAP for Tanzania Agricultural and Food Security Portfolio - Details for file #Tanzania_SO12_FTF_TAPP_IEE_Amendment_PERSUAP (DOCX) (PDF

USAID Programmatic EA (PEA) For Phosphine Fumigation Of Stored Agricultural Commodity: http://www.usaidgems.org/fumigationpea.htm. (2017 update).

Tanzania_IMARISHA_DAI_PERSUAP_2012-2014_BEO : Tanzania Economic Strengthening For Households Affected By AIDS. https://ecd.usaid.gov/document.php?doc_id=39157 .

IMPLEMENTATION START: July 13, 2016

IMPLEMENTATION END: July 30, 2020

LOP AMOUNT: $17,000,000

Environmental Media and/or Human Health Potentially Impacted:

None Air Water Land Biodiversity Human health Other

ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION RECOMMENDED: (Place X where applicable)

Categorical Exclusion: ____ Negative Determination: _X __

Positive Determination: ____ Deferral: ____

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

The USAID Tanzania Cereals Market Systems Development (CMSD) Program is a successor to the Staples Marketing Systems Development (NAFAKA I) project, under Feed the Future. The CMSD activity (aka NAFAKA II) will bolster productivity, competitiveness, and improved nutrition for smallholders, primarily women and youth, and the market system through increased smallholder adoption of improved technologies and practices at scale. NAFAKA II’s purpose is to develop efficient market systems to serve large numbers of rice and maize producers. NAFAKA II’s theory of change involved two interdependent pathways: the first focuses on restructuring market systems to improve trust and efficiencies, generating growth and competitiveness; and the second focuses on targeted behavior change at all levels to ensure that growth is inclusive of women and youth, and accomplishes critical nutrition outcomes.

The PERSUAP focuses on particular circumstances, pertaining to the NAFAKA II program of the activity being evaluated and the activities that involve pesticide use and/or procurement, the pesticide management choices available, and the implementation of a Safer Use action plan (the SUAP) that is designed specifically for the subject activity’s use of approved pesticides. This PERSUAP (herein referred to as the NAFAKA II PERSUAP) serves as a supplement to the 2012 Tanzania Staples Value Chain NAFAKA PERSUAP (referred to as the NAFAKA I PERSUAP). This PERSUAP presents an evaluation of 23 active ingredients (AIs), some of which were evaluated in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP and other that were not. These 23 AIs are presented in Table 1 along with an indication as to whether the AIs are rejected or advanced for approval in

Page ii

this PERSUAP. Of the 23 AIs, seven are being advanced for approval in this PERSUAP. The seven AIs are presented in Table 2. Table 3 lists the seven AIs being advanced for approval in this PERSUAP along with selected AIs that were approved in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP and, as such, constitutes the list of AIs approved in this PERSUAP.

Scope:

The second phase of NAFAKA (NAFAKA II) under CMSD aims to further strengthen the rice and maize value chain. NAFAKA II goal will be to provide this by expanding farmers access to improve seed, fertilizers and crop protection products (including pesticides). However notable changes in the second phase include addition of leguminous crops that include soya and common (French) beans. The inclusion of the legumes is to improve household nutrition, provide new revenue sources while improving soil fertility through good agricultural practices.

NAFAKA I focused on transitioning farmers from a low input production to adoption of improved production techniques with a focus on adoption of improve inputs and mechanization lead to the market system approaches to access these new technologies in rural communities.

NAFAKA II recognizes that because of the continued commercialization of staple crops, increasing fragmentation of land, population pressures and intensive monoculture systems their will continue to be challenges to address infestation, disease and pests issues for maize, rice and legume crops. NAFAKA II will continue to increase awareness on of these environmental hazards by informing our beneficiaries on pesticide abuse and misuse while providing technical assistance on safer use and handling along with informing these farmers on the options available to them through integrated pest management (IPM) programs.

In compliance with USAID’s Pesticide Procedures (22 CFR 216.3(b)), this 2017 Feed the Future Tanzania NAFAKA PERSUAP:

• Establishes the set of pesticides for which support is authorized for the USAID/Tanzania Feed the Future Tanzania NAFAKA activity. Note that “use” and “support” include procurement, direct use, recommending for use, and in any way directly the supporting the use, handling or storage of pesticides (e.g., by provision of application equipment.)

• Sets out requirements associated with support for these pesticides to assure that pesticide use/support embodies (1) the principles of safer use and, (2) per USAID policy, Integrated Pest Management (IPM).

Accordingly, a PERSUAP consists of 2 sections -- the Pesticide Evaluation Report (PER) and the Safer Use Action Plan (SUAP). The PER, provides a detailed analysis of the various aspects of safe and effective use of pesticides on the program. The SUAP uses this information to produce an action plan with a coherent mitigation and monitoring management framework, specifying responsible parties, partners and timelines. This PERSUAP ensures that environmental considerations are incorporated into the design and implementation of the Future Tanzania-NAFAKA activity. It lays out all of the proposed recommendations, potential impacts, and mitigation measures that will be implemented by ACDI/VOCA throughout the course of the

Page iii

activity. In general, significant adverse impacts are not foreseen throughout ACDI/VOCA’s activity implementation.

Pest management needs are detailed in Annex 1 of the Future Tanzania-NAFAKA PERSUAP, covering a wide range of horticultural, herb, spice and tree crops.

Approved pesticides. ACDI/VOCA evaluated a total of 542 pesticides containing 167 active ingredients and from these, 259 pesticides containing 71 active ingredients were selected. The pesticides that were considered for approval in this NAFAKA II PERSUAP are summarized in Table 1. Sixteen pesticides not included in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP were screened for inclusion in this NAFAKA II PERSUAP and seven passed the screening (see Section 3.1, PER Factor A, Tables 1, 2). Approval is requested in this PERSUAP to use these additional seven active ingredients in addition to the active ingredients already approved in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP.

Upon approval of this PERSUAP, only the pesticides listed in Table 3, section 4 of this document are permitted for use/support on interventions within the NAFKA USAID/Tanzania Feed the Future & economic growth portfolio.

The bases of selection and toxicological summaries and United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) registration status are presented in Table 2.

Note that numerous pesticides in use by farmers and, in many cases, approved by the Government of Tanzania are generally NOT approved for support with USAID funds since they are highly toxic and/or are either Restricted Use Pesticides (RUPs) or USEPA Acute Toxicity Category I. These include, inter alia, atrazine, carbofuran, cypermethrin, diazinon, endosulfan, fenthion, methamidophos, monocrotophos, oxamyl, and paraquat. The pesticides that are allowed for use in this PERSUAP are summarized in Table 3.

Only pesticides and approaches specifically covered by this PERSUAP will be recommended for use or introduced into the activity. In the event that a new chemical is approved for use in one of ACDI/VOCA’s areas and it is shown to be effective in Tanzania, ACDI/VOCA will notify USAID of its intent to incorporate that chemical into its Integrated Crop Management (ICM) program and will provide the necessary supporting documentation (i.e. an amended PERSUAP) to USAID for review.

CMSD (ACDI/VOCA) itself will not procure pesticides for program farmers; only technical assistance will be provided to clients in the appropriate selection and Safer Use of EPA-approved and Tanzania registered pesticides. The ACDI/VOCA activity includes sub-activities that aim: (a) to reduce the use of pesticides (especially broad spectrum pesticides) through the introduction of ICM programs and pesticide alternatives; (b) to promote safe handling and application practices by those that must be used; (c) to eliminate environmental degradation caused by overuse and misapplication and (d) give additional context to these subprograms by linking them to export market expectations on pesticide use and environmental practices.

Feed the Future Tanzania-NAFAKA incorporates an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach to crop health problems. For crop protection activities, the IPM approach is part of a larger ICM approach that emphasizes Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs). Wherever possible, non-chemical control methods are used before resorting to the use of pesticides. In strict accordance with USAID’s pesticide policy, as outlined in USAID’s Pest Management Guidelines (1991), no pesticides cancelled or banned by the USEPA will be recommended for use on Feed the Future Tanzania-NAFAKA. In addition, the recommended pesticides included in this report

Page iv

are authorized in Tanzania for similar uses for which they are registered in the United States of America.

Negative Determination Threshold Decisions:

Pursuant to 22 CFR216.3 (b) (1), a negative determination with conditions is recommended. The conditions are that Feed the Future Tanzania NAFAKA CMSD will implement risk reduction and mitigation measures specified in this PERSUAP under section 4 –Safer Use Action Plan, under the matrix which forms the Environmental Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (EMMP). An overview of conditions of the PERSUAP is detailed below:

1. List of pesticides: Only the pesticides approved in this PERSUAP, listed in Table 3, will be procured and used. Alterations to the list of approved pesticides will require an amendment of the PERSUAP.

2. Training: NAFAKA supervisors, field officers and pesticide users will be trained on management of pesticides-safety precautions during (handling, application, and storage etc...) and on their roles and responsibilities before, during and after use of pesticides. Also training to farmers will incorporate IPM.

3. Personal protective equipment: When handling and applying pesticides, users will ensure that they use protective gear such as gloves, masks, and goggles to minimize hazards/risk to themselves.

4. Fumigation: The USAID Programmatic EA (PEA) for fumigation permits the use of aluminum phosphide by only highly trained, certified and protected fumigation service teams. All use of fumigants will be governed by the USAID PEA For Phosphine Fumigation Of Stored Agricultural Commodity: http://www.usaidgems.org/fumigationpea.htm.

5. Protection of the ecosystem: Measures will be taken to minimize risks to non-target species and ecosystems (water table and fresh water fish, aquatic invertebrates, birds, mammals and beneficial insects).

6. Monitoring: Feed the Future Tanzania - NAFAKA implementing partner ACDI/VOCA will implement the EMMP in this PERSUAP and prepare an Environmental Monitoring and Mitigation report (EMMR) annually.

As required by ADS 204.5.4, USAID Tanzania Mission will actively monitor ongoing activities for compliance with the recommendations in this PERSUAP, and modify or end activities that are not in compliance.

Signing Statement by AFR BEO:

1.)   Two concurrent PERSUAPs compromise.  The AFR BEO had requested a single overarching Agriculture Portfolio PERSUAP, instead of two largely redundant ones.  It was agreed with the  USAID Tanzania Economic Growth Office (David Charles) that the AFR BEO would accept two separate PERSUAPs for the two major value chains of their portfolio.  Tanzania is no longer a Global Food Security Strategy Priority country, and

Page v

the Mission is embarking on a new Mission agriculture/nutrition strategy, which may, or may not, include different value chains.   Given that both NAFAKA and MnM (the Swahili version of “vegetables and fruits”) are the current large legacy value chains, the Mission needs to move forward working under these PERSUAPs.

2.)   Complications in “approved” Pesticides Lists. Technically, this PERSUAP only approves the seven new AIs in Table 2.   Since this PERSUAP does not include all of the NAFAKA I AIs in Table 3,  rather, it “approves” a subset of the AIs approved in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP.  To prevent the reader from thinking that the seven new AIs in Table 2 plus all of the approved NAFAKA I AIs can be used,  the BEO regards Table 3 as the Approved list for this PERSUAP.  The users of this PERSUAP should understand that only selected NAFAKA I AIs can be used in addition to the seven new AIs in Table 2.     

3.)  Tanzanian pesticide registration status.  The Tanzanian (TRPI) pesticide registration status of the pesticides presented in the NAFAKA II PERSUAP is not identified (whereas the MnM PERSUAP does do so).

4.)   The Fall Armyworm outbreak in Africa and Tanzania is not adequately factored into this PERSUAP.

5.)  Consolidated future PERSUAP.  Any future PERSUAP from Tanzania in Ag/EG/Food Security will be a consolidated, single document covering the whole portfolio and all value chains.

These issues, and the redundancies and duplicative treatment of pesticides in the multiple Tanzanian PERSUAPs must be resolved in any future unified Tanzanian Agriculture sector PERSUAP.

1.

Page vi

APPROVAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION RECOMMENDED:

CLEARANCE:

Mission Director, USAID Tanzania: Cleared Date:

Andrew KarasCONCURRENCE:

Bureau Environmental Officer: Date:

Brian Hirsch

File Name: Tanzania Cereals Marketing Systems Development (NAFAKA II) PERSUAP Amendment #1 2017-2020.ECD Tracking ID: https://ecd.usaid.gov/document.php?doc_id=50647

ADDITIONAL CLEARANCES:

Agreement Officer’s Representative:

____ ________ Date: _________06\12\2017_ Elizabeth Maeda

Economic Growth Office Director

USAID/Tanzania: Cleared Date: __

Randy Chester

Mission Environmental Officer: Cleared Date: ___________________

Dosteus Lopa

Program Office Director: Cleared _ Date: ___________________

Sherry Ward

Regional Environmental Advisor

(USAID/EA): __________ Cleared __________ Date: ____________________

David Kinyua

Deputy Mission Director:_______ Cleared ___________ Date:____________________

David Thompson

Page vii

ACRONYMS

AI Active Ingredient BMP Best Management PracticeCFR Code of Federal RegulationsCMSD Cereals Marketing System Development (USAID Tanzania parent project,

successor to NAFAKA I)COP Chief of PartyEA Environmental AssessmentEC/E Emulsifiable Concentrate (pesticide formulation)EC50 Effective Concentration 50 (acute toxicity measure)EMMP Environmental Mitigation & Monitoring Plan EPA US Environmental Protection Agency (also known as USEPA)FAO Food and Agriculture Organization (United Nations agency)FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide ActFS Flowable concentrate for Seed treatment (pesticide formulation)FTF Feed the Future GAP Good Agriculture PracticeGD Granular Dispersible (pesticide formulation)GlobalGAP Global Good Agriculture PracticesGOT Government of TanzaniaHT Highly ToxicIEE Initial Environmental ExaminationIPM Integrated Pest ManagementLC50 Lethal Concentration 50 (acute toxicity measure)LD50 Lethal Dose 50 (acute toxicity measure)M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MC Misting Concentrate (pesticide formulation)MALF Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and FisheriesMRL Maximum/Minimum Residue Level/LimitMSDS Material Safety Data SheetMT Moderately ToxicNAFAKA “Cereal” or: Grain” in SwahiliNAT Not Acutely ToxicPEA Programmatic Environmental AssessmentPER Pesticide Evaluation ReportPERSUAP Pesticide Evaluation Report and Safer Use Action PlanpH log of Hydrogen concentration, measure of acidityPHI Pre-Harvest IntervalPIC Prior Informed Consent (a treaty, relates to highly toxic pesticides)POPs Persistent Organic Pollutants (a treaty, relates to toxic persistent pesticides)PMP Pest Management PlanPNT Practically Non-ToxicPPE Personal Protection EquipmentR&D toxin Reproductive and Developmental toxinReg. 216 Regulation 216 (USAID Environmental Procedures)

Page viii

REI Re-Entry Interval (safety period after pesticide spraying)RUP Restricted Use PesticideS&C Standards and CertificationSC Suspension Concentrate (pesticide formulation)SL Soluble Liquid (pesticide formulation)ST Slightly ToxicSUAP Safer Use Action PlanTAHA Tanzania Horticulture AssociationTPRI Tropical Pesticide Research Institute UC University of CaliforniaUN United NationsUSAID United States Agency for International DevelopmentUSDA United States Department of AgricultureUSEPA US Environmental Protection Agency (also known as EPA)VHT Very Highly ToxicWHO World Health OrganizationWG Wettable Granules (pesticide formulation)WP Wettable Powder (pesticide formulation)WS Water dispersible powder for Slurry seed treatment (pesticide formulation)

Page ix

Contents

Program and Activity Data................................................................................................................................... iSummary of findings............................................................................................................................................. iiApproval of environmental action recommended:.......................................................................................viiAcronyms.............................................................................................................................................................. viii

Section 1: Introduction........................................................................................................................ xi

1.1 Background: USAID Regulatory Requirements.................................................................1

1.2 Integrated Pest Management—USAID Policy.....................................................................1

1.3 NAFAKA PERSUAP methodology........................................................................................ 2

Section 2: Background.......................................................................................................................... 2

2.1 Tanzania country background (with an emphasis on the agriculture sector)..............2

2.2 NAFAKA project........................................................................................................................ 3

2.3 Crop Production Constraints................................................................................................... 4

2.4 International Pesticide Management Agreements, Treaties, and Standards................6

Section 3: Pesticide Evaluation Report (PER).................................................................................9

3.1 Factor A: USEPA Registration Status Of The Proposed Pesticides.............................10

3.2 Factor B: Basis for selection of pesticides...........................................................................13

Section 4: Pesticide Safer Use Action Plan (SUAP) For NAFAKA Project............................30

Annex 1. maize and rice pests and diseases found in Tanzania with preventive and curative control measures.................................................................................................................................. 51

Annex 2. Guidelines for Pest Management Plans (PMPs) for Tanzania Crops and Beneficiaries.......................................................................................................................................... 68

Annex 3. Elements of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Program.......................................71

Annex 4. Botanical Active Ingredients in Pesticides, Repellents, and Baits Regulated by USEPA................................................................................................................................................... 74

Annex 5. Natural Pesticides That Have Been Commercialized.................................................76

Annex 6. Acute Toxicity of Pesticides: EPA and WHO Classifications...................................78

Annex 7: Analyses of Active Ingredients in Pesticides Proposed by NAFAKA and Found in Tanzania................................................................................................................................................ 80

Annex 9. Field Monitoring Form for Farmer Best Practices including GAP and IPM options.................................................................................................................................................... 94

Annex 10: Farm and Project Record Keeping Associated with Pesticide Use........................97

Page x

Page xi

List of Tables

Table 1. Preliminary Screening of NAFAKA-Requested Pesticides Not Already Approved in the NAFAKA PERSUAP.........................................................................11Table 2. Basis for Selection of Pesticides..........................................................13Table 3. Proposed Pesticides that are Accepted by the PER Analysis........................31

Page

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background: USAID Regulatory Requirements

In accordance with 22 CFR 216 (USAID’s Environmental Procedures), all USAID activities are subject to evaluation via, at a minimum, an Initial Environmental Examination (IEE), and if significant environmental effects are expected, an Environmental Assessment (EA). Because of the potential high risk of pesticide use, USAID’s Environmental Procedures require that, as part of the IEE, 12 factors (the “Pesticide Procedures”) outlined in 22 CFR 216.3 (b)(1)(i) (a through l) be addressed. The 12 factors must be discussed in a separate section of an IEE, or in an IEE Amendment, in which economic, social, and environmental risks and benefits of the planned pesticide use are evaluated to determine if a significant environmental impact will result. This section of an IEE has become known as a PERSUAP – a Pesticide Evaluation Report Safer Use Action Plan. The PERSUAP focuses on the particular circumstances of the program being evaluated and the activities that involve pesticide use and/or procurement, the pesticide management choices available, and the implementation of a Safer Use action plan (the SUAP) that is designed specifically for the subject project. USAID’s Environmental Procedures, also known as “Reg. 216,” state that all projects involving assistance for the procurement or use, or both, of pesticides shall be subject to the procedures prescribed in 22 CFR 216.3 (b)(1)(i)(a-l). “Assistance for the procurement or use” is interpreted broadly to include assistance in handling, transport, storage, mixing, loading, application, clean up of spray equipment, and disposal of pesticides, as well as providing fuel for transport of pesticides, and providing technical assistance in pesticide use and management. “Assistance for the use of pesticides” is said to occur if recommendations are given for specific pesticides, including a recommendation to procure certain pesticides. “Assistance for the use” includes curricula with training information on safe pesticide use if it involves discussing specific pesticide products or specific agro-chemicals even if training does not involve actual application of pesticides. This definition of “assistance for the use of pesticides” applies throughout this PERSUAP.

This PERSUAP (herein referred to as the NAFAKA II PERSUAP) covers the new Cereals Marketing Systems Development project, and serves as a succedssor to the 2012 Tanzania Staples Value Chain NAFAKA PERSUAP (referred to as the NAFAKA I PERSUAP). This PERSUAP presents an evaluation of 23 active ingredients (AIs), some of which were evaluated in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP and other that were not. These 23 AIs are presented in Table 1 along with an indication as to whether the AIs are rejected or advanced for approval in this PERSUAP. Of the 23 AIs, seven are being advanced for approval in this PERSUAP. The seven AIs are presented in Table 2. Table 3 lists the seven AIs being advanced for approval in this PERSUAP along with selected AIs that were approved in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP and, as such, constitutes the list of AIs approved in this PERSUAP.

1.2 Integrated Pest Management—USAID Policy

In the early 1990s, USAID adopted the philosophy and practice of Integrated Pest Management

Page

(IPM) as official policy. IPM is also required as part of “Reg. 216.” Since the early 2000s, IPM—which includes non-chemical preventive tools and tactics as well as judicious use of ‘safer’ pesticides—has been an integral part of GAPs—Good Agricultural Practices—and is increasingly considered to constitute best management practices in agriculture.

1.3 NAFAKA PERSUAP methodology

The NAFAKA I PERSUAP (NAFAKA is a Swahili word meaning ‘grain’) is using the original NAFAKA program (2010-2015) PERSUAP as a for this program’s PERSUAP. Sixteen pesticides not included in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP were screened for inclusion in this NAFAKA II PERSUAP and seven passed the screening (see Section 3.1, PER Factor A). Approval is requested in this PERSUAP to use these additional seven active ingredients in addition to the active ingredients already approved in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP.

The NAFAKA I PERSUAP approved the use of aluminum phosphide and zinc phosphide. However, if NAFAKA plans to use aluminum phosphide to protect against pests and diseases of stored grains, NAFAKA will submit an amendment to this PERSUAP and provide the information required by USAID’s Programmatic Environmental Assessment for use of aluminum phosphide in fumigation.

The NAFAKA SUAP was developed based on NAFAKA’s specific situation and needs. Other than these additions, much of the NAFAKA PERSUAP remains unchanged and relevant for NAFAKA.

SECTION 2: BACKGROUND

2.1 Tanzania country background (with an emphasis on the agriculture sector)

Tanzania, with an area of 942,784 km2, is the largest country of the three East African Community member countries, the others being Kenya and Uganda. Approximately 43.6 million people live in Tanzania. It is tropical on the coast and semi-temperate inland. In the eastern rift zones and on the southeastern slopes of the volcanoes, precipitation of 1,500 to 2,000 mm occurs due to orographic rain with more than 10 wet months. Along the coast, the monsoon brings moderate rainfall (500 to 1,000 mm) with 5 to 6 wet months. The highland in the interior is relatively dry with 3 to 4 wet months and annual precipitation of below 500 mm.

Tanzania's economy relies heavily on agriculture. Improving the competitiveness of Tanzania’s agricultural sector, in particular the rice and maize value chains, is crucial to Tanzania’s vision of becoming a middle-income country by 2025. As of 2013, agriculture comprised 25 percent of GDP; 85 percent of exports; and employed 80 percent of the workforce. Food crop production dominates the agriculture economy with 5.1 million hectares cultivated annually.  Smallholder farmers, who dominate Tanzanian agriculture, cultivate 0.9 to 3.0 hectares on rain fed land.  About 70 percent of Tanzania’s crop area is cultivated by hand hoe, 20 percent by ox plow and 10 percent by tractor. Women constitute the main part of agricultural labor force.

As noted in the IEE that covers the NAFAKA Project, maize, rice and horticulture value chains are constrained by poor infrastructure, inadequate on-farm storage, lack of a solid rural roads

Page

network and weak farmer associations, which results in high input costs and difficulties accessing markets. Resistant varieties and hybrids, mechanization, quality inputs, and sufficient water are some of the main needs to improve Tanzania’s food security, respond to climate change, increase agricultural productivity and incomes, and to produce higher valued crops for export.

2.2 NAFAKA project

As part of USAID/Tanzania’s ongoing Feed the Future (FtF) Program, and the Tanzania Cereals Market Systems Development (CMSD) Project, ACDI/VOCA is implementing the four-year NAFAKA II Activity to bolster productivity, competitiveness, and improved nutrition for smallholders, primarily women and youth, and the market system through increased smallholder adoption of improved technologies and practices at scale. NAFAKA’s purpose is to develop efficient market systems to serve large numbers of rice and maize producers.

NAFAKA’s theory of change involves two interdependent pathways: the first focuses on restructuring market systems to improve trust and efficiencies, generating growth and competitiveness; and the second focuses on targeted behavior change at all levels to ensure that growth is inclusive of women and youth, and accomplishes critical nutrition outcomes. These are briefly described below.

Strengthening the market system: To improve livelihoods for smallholders and their families in Tanzania, agricultural markets must increase their orientation toward smallholders. Holding this back are weak links at the input retail and offtake purchase point closest to farmers. Retailers and buyers are geographically distant from smallholders, and high transaction costs, driven in part by the dispersed nature of smallholders, make reaching smallholders cost-prohibitive. NAFAKA will solve this problem by developing new aggregation points for input sale and commodity aggregation through Village Based Agricultural Advisors (VBAAs) and Rural Producer Organizations (RPOs), and by developing scalable mechanisms for bulking sales to and offtake from smallholders. Increased transactions and collaboration with smallholders will build trust between input suppliers, farmers, RPOs, and buyers, and will increase value chain investment in farmers through financed inputs, guaranteed offtake markets, and extension support. This will lead farmers to adopt improved production technologies and practices.

Changing behaviors around women, youth, and nutrition: As NAFAKA builds entrepreneurship, employment, and commercial farming opportunities for women, it will engage the relevant social influencers in their lives, including husbands, mothers-in-law, and male and female community leaders, to communally discuss how to share other household and family duties to enable women to succeed while also safeguarding their control over assets and incomes. Empowering women to control assets and income, coupled with behavior change messaging and nutrition education, will lead to increased household purchase and consumption of nutritious foods, including fortified flour.

Similar to the NAFAKA I project, the targeted value chains are maize and rice. However, as a result of NAFAKA’s collaboration with the Africa RISING group, NAFAKA will also be working with soya and common (French) beans.

Page

NAFAKA II PERSUAP’s activities are similar to NAFAKA I with the exception that milling and processing improvement is a new activity under NAFAKA. Support for improvements in milling and processing will require the use of pesticides, used by millers to protect against pests and diseases during storage.

2.3 Crop Production Constraints

The PERSUAP provided the following information on the main pests and diseases that limit production of the target crops. The information provided in the PERSUAP for maize and rice remains relevant for NAFAKA PERSUAP’s. However, crop production constraints for common beans and soya beans are included in the NAFAKA PERSUAP.

Maize:

Stem borers Termites Maize leafhopper (transmits Maize Streak Virus) Maize flea beetles White C-shaped grubs Whiteflies Spider mites Maize thrips Maize aphids Seed corn maggot African Armyworms (Spodoptera exempa)*1

Rodents Locusts Birds Ear and kernel mold rots (produce aflatoxins) Maize rusts Gray leaf spot Annual & Perennial Grass Weeds Broad Leaf Weeds

Rice:

White C-shaped grubs Termites Rice thrips Rice stem borers Rice gall midges and shoot maggots

1 * This is to be distinguished from the introduced exotic Fall Armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda) introduced to sub-Saharan Africa, ca. in 2015, from the Americas, and requiring different management strategies. See Annex 1for differentiated management strategies (Pest Management Decision Guides, CABI Plantwise).

Page

Rice beetles and flea beetles Rice blast Rice Yellow Mottle Virus Weeds Rodents Armyworms Locusts Quelea birds Annual & Perennial Grass Weeds Broad Leaf Weeds

Maize and Rice Storage Pests

Rodents Larger grain borer Sitophilus grain weevil Maize ear and kernel mold rots (aflatoxins)

Common beans:

Bean stem maggot (bean fly) (Ophiomyia spp., Diptera: Agromyzidae). Bean foliage beetle (BFB) (Ootheca spp., Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Pod borers (Helicoverpa armigera and Maruca vitrata) Aphids and various pod/seed sucking bugs (Aphis spp., Clavigralla spp., Anoplocnemis

sp.) Storage bruchids (Acanthoscelides sp., Zabrotes sp.). Root rots (Fusarium spp., Pythium spp. And Rhizoctonia solani) leaf and pod diseases including anthracnose (Colletotrichum lindemuthianum) angular leaf spot (Phaeoisariopsis griseola) bean rust (Uromyces appendiculatus) Ascochyta blight( Phoma exigua var. diversispora) Common bacterial blight (Xanthomonas campestris pv. Phaseoli) Halo blight (Pseudomonas savastanoi pv phaseolicola)

Soya beans:

Root knot nematodes Stink-bugs Leaf feeding caterpillars Pod borers(Murcura vitrata) Soybean leaf miner(Odontota horni) Soya bean aphids(Aphis glycines) Downy Mildew(Peronospora manschurica) Anthracnose(colletotricum truncatum) Cercospora leaf blight(cercospora kikuchii) Target leaf spot(corynespora sojina)

Page

Red leaf blotch(Phoma glycinicola) Soybean rust(phokospora pachyrhizi) Phytophtora blight( Phytophtora sojae) Charcoal rot(Macrophomina phaseolina) Fusarium rot(Fusarium oxyspoum)

2.4 International Pesticide Management Agreements, Treaties, and Standards

This section describes Tanzania’s status with regards to the main international pesticide treaties. USAID-funded projects must comply with actions stipulated by the agreements described below.

The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants

Tanzania is a party to the Stockholm Convention banning Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). The Stockholm Convention is a global treaty to protect human health and the environment from chemicals that remain intact in the environment for long periods, become widely distributed geographically, and accumulate in the fatty tissue of humans and wildlife.  POPs pose special threats to human health and the environment because they persist and bio-magnify; they increase in concentration up the food chain and are capable of transmission to offspring via the placenta or milk. The Convention focuses on eliminating or reducing the releases of 12 POPs, the so called “Dirty Dozen.” Given their potential for long-range transport, no one government acting alone can protect its citizens or its environment from POPs.   In response, the Stockholm Convention, which was adopted in 2001 and entered into force in 2004, requires Parties to take measures to eliminate or reduce the release of POPs into the environment.   See Persistent Organic Pollutants, a Global Issue, a Global Response The Foundation for Global Action on Persistent Organic Pollutants:   The United States Perspective (164 pp, 15.0MB) Stockholm Convention home page and http://chm.pops.int/Convention/POPsReviewCommittee/Chemicals/tabid/243/language/en-US/Default.aspx for chemicals currently under review. NAFAKA should not use and should strongly discourage the use of POPs.

Prior Informed Consent (PIC) Procedure-the Rotterdam Convention

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) had jointly implemented the original PIC procedure, which operated until the adoption of the Rotterdam Convention (officially known as the Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade).  Tanzania ratified the Rotterdam Convention on August 26, 2002.

The objectives of the Convention are:

Page

to promote shared responsibility and cooperative efforts among Parties in the international trade of certain hazardous chemicals in order to protect human health and the environment from potential harm; and

to contribute to the environmentally sound use of those hazardous chemicals, by facilitating information exchange about their characteristics, by providing for a national decision-making process on their import and export, and by disseminating these decisions to Parties.

The Convention creates legally binding obligations for the implementation of the PIC Procedure. There are 40 chemicals listed in Annex III of the Convention and subject to the PIC procedure, including 25 pesticides, four severely hazardous pesticide formulations, and 11 industrial chemicals. Many more chemicals are expected to be added in the future. The PIC Procedure is aimed at reducing the use of dangerous pesticides imported from other countries, and assisting developing countries to formulate strategies to deal with pesticide issues. The PIC Procedure can be a powerful tool to regulate pesticides. NAFAKA should strongly discourage the use of these chemicals and should support the PIC Procedure.

Organophosphate Pesticides (OPs)

Other pesticides of global concern are OPs, which are among the most acutely toxic pesticides; most of these chemicals are classified by the USEPA as toxicity class I (highly toxic) or toxicity class II (moderately toxic). Moreover, some OPs cause developmental or reproductive harm, some are carcinogenic, and some are known or suspected endocrine disruptors. NAFAKA should strongly discourage the use of these chemicals.

European Community (EC) & Pesticide Residues

The EC has established a harmonized legal framework for the regulation of pesticides in all member countries of the EC. The Commission of the European Communities, in collaboration with member countries of the EC, is responsible for the registration of pesticide active ingredients (also referred to as active substances) for use in all EC member countries. Individual member countries, called Member States, are responsible for the registration in their country of specific pesticide products containing active ingredients authorized for use by the Commission. Standards and regulations for the classifications, labeling, and packaging of pesticides are set by a Council Directive in 1967.

An up-to-date pesticide Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) list for EU countries can be found quickly by visiting the following European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) website: http://ec.europa.eu/sanco_pesticides/public/index.cfm, searchable by pesticide product, active ingredient, or crop.

Global GAP

Started in 1997 as Euro GAP, the new Global GAP (Good Agriculture Practices) is a private sector body that sets voluntary standards for the certification of agricultural products around the globe. The Global GAP standard is primarily designed to reassure consumers about how food is

Page

produced on the farm by minimizing detrimental environmental impacts of farming operations, reducing the use of chemical inputs and ensuring a responsible approach to worker health and safety as well as animal welfare.

Global GAP serves as a practical manual for Good Agricultural Practice anywhere in the world. The basis is an equal partnership of agricultural producers and retailers who wish to establish efficient certification standards and procedures. The Global GAP website, www.globalgap.org, is a comprehensive knowledge base for all interested parties: producers, suppliers, retailers, journalists and consumers. With its clear and easy navigation, the website incorporates exhaustive information on the GlobalGAP standard and its modules and applications.

Page

SECTION 3: PESTICIDE EVALUATION REPORT (PER

This Pesticide Evaluation Report (PER) addresses the 12 factors in Regulation 216.3(b)(1) Pesticide Procedures outlined below.

Reg. 216.3(b)(1)(i) stipulates: “When a project includes assistance for procurement or use, or both, of pesticides registered for the same or similar uses by USEPA without restriction, the Initial Environmental Examination for the project shall include a separate section evaluating the economic, social and environmental risks and benefits of the planned pesticide use to determine whether the use may result in significant environmental impact. Factors to be considered in such an evaluation shall include, but not be limited to the [12 factors listed to the right].” Pesticide “use” is interpreted broadly, and includes recommending (including during training), transporting, storing, mixing, disposing of, providing financing for, and procuring pesticides. “Without restriction” is interpreted to mean a pesticide not labeled as “Restricted Use” by the EPA.

Pesticides can be home-made (artisanal), extracted or synthesized in a factory, and may contain either natural extracts from plants, microbes, spices, oils, minerals or synthesized chemicals, or occasionally combinations of these materials. Pesticides generally contain more than just the AI; they also contain a carrier (water, oil, or emulsion), emulsifiers, surfactants, synergists, adhesives, additives to reduce risk, and other ingredients.

Pesticides generally contain just one AI, but can contain more than one AI for different types of pests or purposes, in a mixture. When produced commercially, each pesticide is made, marketed, and sold with a product commercial name. This product name—in addition to names of artisanal products—is the “pesticide” referred to by Regulation 216. These pesticide names can be ubiquitous (like Roundup for products containing the AI glyphosate) or can be given different names in different countries or regions depending upon cultural and linguistic differences and marketing objectives.

It would be ideal to find pesticides for every need that are Class IV acute toxicity, have no

Page

THE 12 REG 216 PESTICIDE FACTORSFactor A. USEPA Registration Status of the Proposed PesticidesFactor B. Basis for Selection of Pesticides Factor C. Extent to which the proposed pesticide use is, or could be, part of an IPM program Factor D. Proposed method or methods of application, including the availability of application and safety equipment Factor E. Any acute and long-term toxicological hazards, either human or environmental, associated with the proposed use, and measures available to minimize such hazards Factor F. Effectiveness of the requested pesticide for the proposed useFactor G. Compatibility of the proposed pesticide use with target and non-target ecosystems Factor H. Conditions under which the pesticide is to be used, including climate, geography, hydrology, and soils Factor I. Availability of other pesticides or non-chemical control methods Factor J. Host country’s ability to regulate or control the distribution, storage, use, and disposal of the requested pesticide

chronic human health issues, no water pollution issues and no aquatic ecotoxicity issues. Such pesticides do not exist. Almost every pesticide known has toxicity to at least one aquatic organism, or bees, or birds. Furthermore, dose determines toxicity, so any pesticide in a sufficiently high dose, may be fatal to humans.

3.1 Factor A: USEPA Registration Status of The Proposed Pesticides

Table 1 lists pesticides active ingredients (AI) that, in addition to those already approved in the Feed the Future Tanzania- NAFAKA I PERSUAP, were screened for this PERSUAP request. The last column in Table 1 indicates whether NAFAKA is requesting approval from USAID for the screened pesticides (seven pesticides) or whether based on the preliminary screening in Table 1, this PERSUAP recommends rejection (11 pesticides).

In addition to the seven pesticides indicated in Table 1, NAFAKA is requesting approval for the pesticides that were previously approved in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP (See Section 4, NAFAKA SUAP). The exception is that this PERSUAP does not request approval for the use of aluminum phosphide or zinc phosphide. Table 3 is a compilation of all AIs that NAFAKA requests approval for in this PERSUAP: the NAFAKA I-approved pesticides and the additional seven pesticides indicated in Table 1.

Table 1 shows USEPA registration status of each AI. NAFAKA is requesting approval only of AIs that are registered by USEPA for the same or similar uses. Emphasis is placed on “similar use” because often the crops and pests found overseas are not present in the US, and therefore pesticides may not be registered for the same use, but often are registered for similar crops, pest situations, and methods of application.

USEPA classifies pesticides according to actual toxicity of the formulated products, taking formulation types and concentrations into account, thus generally making the formulated product less toxic than the technical AIs alone would be. Table 1 shows the USEPA toxicity classification of the NAFAKA-requested pesticides (not including the NAFAKA PERSUAP-approved AIs).

In the US, only, some specific commercial pesticide products are labeled as Restricted Use Products (RUPs) due to a history of inordinate risks, usually under specific circumstances of use. However, for each AI, which may be present in a number of RUP products, there are generally additional or other products, formulations and uses with the same AI that do not possess the same risks and are thus labeled or determined to be for general use. Therefore, for each AI, RUP and non-RUP products may be available. NAFAKA requests approval for the use of only General Use Products (all products that are not RUPs).

The WHO acute toxicity classification system, used by much of the rest of the world outside the US, is based on the AI only. WHO toxicity class is show in in Table 1 for the pesticides that NAFAKA is requesting (not including NAFAKA PERSUAP-approved pesticides). NAFAKA is requesting approval for AIs that are above WHO toxicity class 1 (1a and 1b). WHO toxicity classes 1a and 1 b are considered too highly toxic for use in NAFAKA activities.

Page

All pesticide AIs for which NAFAKA is requesting approval are registered by the Tropical Pesticide Research Institute (TPRI) for use in Tanzania. For more information on USEPA and WHO acute toxicity classification systems, see Annex 6.

NAFAKA is requesting USAID approval to “use” the seven pesticides shaded green in Table 1 as well as the NAFAKA PERSUAP-approved pesticides (see Table 3 for a compilation of all pesticides requested).

Table 1. Preliminary Screening of NAFAKA-Requested Pesticides Not Already Approved in the NAFAKA PERSUAP

Active Ingredient + Crops

USEPA Registration Status (AI)

GUP/RUP (product)

WHO Toxicity Class

US EPA Toxicity Level

Status of PERSUAP request

Insecticides

1. Alphacypermethrin 10g/LNo Rejected in NAFAKA

PERSUAP-Not USEPA registered

2. Chlorpyrifos 500gm/L + Cypermethrin 100g/L

Rejected in NAFAKA PESUAP-not registered for agriculture use

3. Profenofos 720g/L Yes

RUP

WHO II

EPA 3 Caution

Rejected in this PERSUAP-the only USEPA registered product is an RUP

4. Imidachloprid 200g/L + Cypermethrin 150g/L

I: Yes

Most GUP

C: No

WHO II

Most EPA 3 Caution

Rejected in this PERSUAP-Cypermethrin not USEPA registered

5. Dinotefuran 200g/Kg Yes

Most GUP

WHO NL

Most EPA 3 Caution

Approval requested in this PERSUAP

6. Thiamethoxam 250g/Kg Yes

Most GUP

WHO NL

Most EPA 3 Caution

Approval requested in this PERSUAP

Fungicides7 & 8. Propiconazole 250g/L + Cyproconazole 80g/L

P: Yes

GUP

C: Yes

P: WHO II

EPA 1 to 3

C: WHO III

Approval requested in this PERSUAP for products that are equivalent to EPA 2 and

Page

Active Ingredient + Crops

USEPA Registration Status (AI)

GUP/RUP (product)

WHO Toxicity Class

US EPA Toxicity Level

Status of PERSUAP request

GUP EPA 1 to 3 3 (EPA 1-equivalent products are rejected)

9 & 10. Mancozeb 600g + Dimethomorph 100g)

M: Yes

GUP

D: Yes

GUP

M: WHO U

Most EPA 3 Caution

D: WHO U

EPA 3 Caution

Approval requested in this PERSUAP

11. Hexaconazole 50g/L) No Rejected in NAFAKA PERSUAP-not USEPA registered

Herbicides12. Atrazine 75% + Nicosulfuron 4%

A: Yes

RUP

Rejected in this PERSUAP-atrazine products are RUPs and atrazine has a long residual period

13. Mesotrione 5 % + Atrazine 50%

Rejected in this PERSUAP-atrazine products are RUPs and atrazine has a long residual period

14. Quinclorac 48 %+ Pyrazosulfuron‐ethyl 1.5 % + Cyhalofop‐butyl 22%

Q: No

P: No

Rejected in this PERSUAP-2 AIs are not USEPA registered

15. Bispyribac-sodium 400gm/L

Yes

GUP

WHO NL

EPA 3 Caution

Approval requested in this PERSUAP

16. Ametryn 400g/Kg

Terbutryn 250g/Kg)

A: Yes

GUP

T: No

A: WHO III

Most EPA 3 Caution

Rejected in this PERSUAP-Terbutryn is not USEPA registered

Seed Treatments17. Imidachloprid 10% + Metalaxyl 10 % + Carbendazim 10 %

I: Yes

Most GUP

M: Yes

GUP

I: WHO II

Most EPA 3 Caution

M: WHO III

Rejected by NAFAKA PERSUAP-Seed Plus 20 WS; carbendazim not registered for agricultural use

Page

Active Ingredient + Crops

USEPA Registration Status (AI)

GUP/RUP (product)

WHO Toxicity Class

US EPA Toxicity Level

Status of PERSUAP request

C: Yes

GUP

EPA 1 to 3

C: WHO U

EPA 1 to 3

18. Bronopol 100g/Kg Yes

GUP

WHO II

EPA 1 Danger

Rejected in this PERSUAP-Products are EPA 1

3.2 Factor B: Basis for selection of pesticides

This factor generally refers to the practical, economic and/or environmental rationales for choosing a particular pesticide. As stated in the NAFAKA PERSUAP, in general, best practices and USAID – which promotes IPM as policy – dictate that the least toxic pesticide that is effective is selected. Fortunately, as a general but important trend, the more toxic pesticides (Class I) are decreasing in number worldwide and the number of least toxic pesticides (Class IV) is increasing. Thus, farmers may be able to choose products of lower toxicity (Class III and IV/U pesticides).

The screening undertaken in the NAFAKA PERSUAP and in this PERSUAP (Table 1) eliminated the most highly toxic pesticides. This PERSUAP requests seven pesticide AIs in addition to those requested and approved in the NAFAKA PERSUAP. The seven additional pesticide AIs are the least toxic AIs, as shown in Table 1.

According to the PERSUAP, in Tanzania, the bases for selection of pesticides by farmers, as well as the NAFAKA project are as follows:

price efficacy availability safety environmental protection

In addition, for the seven new NAFAKA pesticides, Table 2 shows the basis for selection, which focuses on their efficacy against specific pests and diseases.

Table 2. Basis for Selection of Pesticides

Active Ingredient Controlled Pests/Diseases/Weeds

Insecticides

1. Dinotefuran A systemic insecticide, it controls a wide range of insect pests

Page

Active Ingredient Controlled Pests/Diseases/Weeds

such as ants, thrips, leafminers, whiteflies, aphids, leafhoppers, and mealybugs in rice.

2. Thiamethoxam A new broad-spectrum insecticide for foliar and soil use to control sucking and some chewing insects.

Fungicides

3 & 4. Propiconazole + Cyproconazole

Controls all wheat and barley diseases such as rust diseases, net blotch, and rhynchosporium, scald, powdery mildew, Septoria tritici blotch, and yellow spot.

5 & 6. Mancozeb + Dimethomorph

Provides preventive and curative action against early blight (caused by Alternaria solan) and late blight (caused by Phytophthora infestans).

Herbicides

7. Bispyribac-sodium Post-emergent rice herbicide highly effective against broadleafs, aquatics, and grasses including resistant biotypes.

Recommendations for Selection of Pesticides

NAFAKA shall use only those pesticides approved for use in this PERSUAP, which includes the pesticide AIs approved in the NAFAKA PERSUAP and seven additional pesticides requested for use by NAFAKA.

NAFAKA shall choose and use least toxic pesticides of trusted quality with low human and environmental risk profiles (see decision matrix in Annex 7, MSDSs, and pesticide labels), as practical.

3.3 Factor C: Extent to which the proposed pesticide use is, or could be, part of an IPM program

This factor remains unchanged from the NAFAKA PERSUAP, which stated: USAID promotes training in and the development and use of integrated approaches to pest management tools and tactics whenever possible. This section emphasizes how use of approved pesticides can be incorporated into an overall IPM strategy.

Good crop management practices can strongly affect the success of IPM, and good agronomic or cultural practices are the most basic and often the most important prerequisites for an effective IPM program. A vigorous crop that has been protected from seedling damage, fertilized and watered properly optimizes both capacity to prevent or tolerate pest damage while maintaining or increasing yield potential.

Page

In the USA, the USDA supports several programs aimed at investigating and developing IPM tools and tactics. These include NIFA2 (the National Institute of Food and Agriculture) and the National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service of the National Center for Appropriate Technology3 (NCAT). Tanzania has a cadre of experts who recognize the importance of these tools and techniques, and are ready to implement them in crop-specific PMPs.

According to NAFAKA experts in the crop protection sector, the GAPs and IPM tools recognized and used in Tanzania in the maize and rice sectors are as follows:

Soil nutrient, texture and pH testing Pest resistant/tolerant seed Seed treatment with pesticides Follow seeding rate & thinning recommendations Soil moisture measurements Use of organic fertilizers (manure, compost) Use of purchased mineral fertilizers Combinations of organic and mineral fertilizers Crop rotation Use of green manure crops Farmer ability to correctly identify pests Mechanical weed control by hoe or tiller Use of herbicides for weed control Crop residue destruction at end of season

BMPs/IPM for stored grain pests:

Sanitation/Cleaning up of all residues Good aeration of commodities Multiple management tactics are combined

For stored grain pests, farmers need to become familiar with continuous monitoring and the capability to accurately identify pests and know their biology, ecology and behavior. An IPM matrix is in Annex 1 containing both preventive and curative tools and tactics useful for managing each constraint listed in Section 2.3.

Recommendations for Incorporating Pesticide Use into an IPM Strategy

NAFAKA shall train farmers and other beneficiaries on IPM methods, which can include the use of pesticides if other methods are not effective.

NAFAKA shall assist the MALF with the production and use of seasonal crop production and pest management plans (PMPs)4 and production of posters for on-farm use in

2 http://www.csrees.usda.gov/pesticides.cfm 3 http://www.attra.ncat.org/ 4 http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/crops-agriculture.html, see “Year-Round IPM Programs” checked in a box next to each applicable crop; there is a program and checklist for corn (maize), but not for rice.

Page

prediction and management of the major pests of each crop. In addition to the above recommendations from the NAFAKA PERSUAP, NAFAKA

shall develop new PMPs, in collaboration with Africa RISING group, for common beans, legumes, soya beans and groundnuts.

3.4 Factor D: Proposed method or methods of application, including the availability of application and safety equipment

This factor examines how the pesticides are to be applied, to understand specific risks with different application equipment available and application methodologies, and the measures to be taken to ensure Safer Use for each application type. The information is unchanged from the NAFAKA PERSUAP.

Pesticides can and do enter the body on the hands, skin or eyes when mixing and from splashes, on back and arms from leaking backpack sprayers when spraying, through the nose and mouth as vapors while spraying and from spray drift, and by mouth from ingestion on food or cigarettes.

Findings from a survey show that all of the following types of equipment or methods are used to apply pesticides to field crops, orchards and cattle in Tanzania:

Hand-pump (piston or diaphragm pump) backpack sprayer with wand Motorized backpack sprayer Hand-held micro-ULV sprayers Fumigation tablets of aluminum phosphide

In many cases the formulation of the pesticide dictates the method(s) of application to be used. Pesticides with FS (flowable concentrate for seed treatment) or WS (water dispersible powder for slurry seed treatment) formulation. These formulations need to be used by project beneficiaries in batch seed treatment machinery that assures safety and even coverage (and less wastage) of product.

Pesticides labeled as EC or E (Emulsifiable Concentrate), SL (Soluble Concentrate), SC (Suspension Concentrate = Flowable Concentrate) or WP (Wettable Powder) are formulated for mixing with water and applying with backpack, among other types of, sprayers. WP formulations tend to quickly wear out the moving parts of piston pump powered sprayers and should be used in diaphragm pump powered sprayers. Otherwise the piston-driven sprayer needs to be cleaned after every WP pesticide use.

Furthermore, one sprayer used by a professional crop spraying service should be marked with a big “H” for herbicide use, only. Then a second sprayer can be used for applying insecticides and fungicides. Many small scale farmers can barely afford to buy and maintain one sprayer; in such cases an argument can be made that farmers band together into an association or cooperative to form and use a spray service that can pool resources, costs and benefits.

None of the pesticides proposed by NAFAKA, now NAFAKA, contain a UL or ULV (Ultra Low Volume) formulation, even though ULV sprayers are available and used by farmers in Tanzania—mostly supplied by the MALF for controlling emergency outbreak pests like locusts or armyworms.

The use of manual hand-held boom and electrostatic or air-assisted sleeve-boom sprayers (for

Page

larger-scale farmers) can reduce pesticide drift and waste, while applying more of the chemical to the plant surfaces. These methods of application are the preferred methods over the traditional backpack sprayer for rice. Manual hand-held boom sprayers should be promoted during training (See hand-held boom sprayers at http://www.yamaho-k.co.jp/en/01product_range/02vegetables_short_rice_fields/.)

Issue: Misapplications

In several instances the NAFAKA PERSUAP team encountered farmers who had used an EC formulation of a stored grain pesticide product to directly spray and treat grain, when in fact the EC formulation is designed for spraying the walls, floor, wooden pallets and ceiling of the grain storage facility—not the grain. A dust formulation is designed for directly and safely treating grain, as an admixture. Some farmers became ill after eating the sprayed grain.

Recommendations for Understanding Pesticide Application Methods

NAFAKA shall train farmers and other beneficiaries to understand pesticide formulations and formulation codes so that errors of application are reduced.

Issue: Leaky back-pack sprayers

Hand-pump backpack sprayers, used by small- and medium-scale farmers, among others, can and do eventually develop leaks at almost every parts junction (filler cap, pump handle entry, exit hose attachment, lance attachment to the hose and at the lance handle) and these leaks soak into exposed skin. Moreover, soaked clothing serves as a wick that holds these pesticides in constant contact with the skin. Unless the clothes are washed immediately after use, other family members may also come in contact with pesticide residues.

Issue: Most small-scale farmers do not have or use PPE

Recommendations to Address Poorly Maintained Equipment, Limited Knowledge of Spray Equipment, and Lack of PPE

NAFAKA shall promote PPE use as a best practice. NAFAKA shall promote the development and use of professional spraying and record-

keeping services, promoted to and accessible by farmers at congregation places (farms stores, cooperatives/associations, produce consolidation/cold storage/processing sites). The best way to ensure PPE use is to hire professional spray services that will have and maintain PPE (See pesticide labels for guidance on appropriate PPE and USEPA website5.)

NAFAKA shall promote the use of manual hand-held boom sprayers, as practical, during training.

NAFAKA shall provide training in proper sprayer maintenance and repair. NAFAKA shall provide training in post-spray hygiene, washing clothing and equipment,

and proper disposal of wastes. NAFAKA shall promote to professional crop spraying services that they mark one

sprayer with a big “H” for herbicide use, only and a second sprayer can be used for applying insecticides and fungicides.

5 http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/safety/workers/equip.htm

Page

3.5 Factor E: Any acute and long-term toxicological hazards, either human or environmental, associated with the proposed use, and measures available to minimize such hazards

This factor examines the acute and chronic toxicological risks associated with the proposed pesticides. Information on specific risks to environmental resources and how to mitigate or minimize such risks are detailed below under Factor G.

Most pesticide poisonings result from ignorance or carelessness regarding safe handling of pesticides. Pesticides can enter the body in four major ways: through the skin, the mouth, the nose, and the eyes. Chapter 13 in the resource http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADK154.pdf contains measures to reduce risks of exposure via oral, dermal, respiratory and ocular routes (See also two sets of Sector Environmental Guidelines: http://www.usaidgems.org/Sectors/ipm.htm; Integrated Pest Management and Safer Use Pesticides).

Pesticides are poisons, and nearly all of them present acute and/or long-term toxicological hazards, especially if they are used incorrectly. The pesticide AI analysis matrix in Annex 7 contains information on acute and chronic human and environmental toxicological risks for each AI in products registered for use in Tanzania. The way to reduce these risks to humans is to ensure that farmers or professional spray service personnel use recommended PPE.

According to the NAFAKA PERSUAP, none of the chemicals contained on the 2010 POPs or PIC lists were found to be present in Tanzania and they will be increasingly unlikely to be found in the future as world-wide production of most of these chemicals has ceased or is ceasing. Further, there are numerous less-toxic replacements for these chemicals. Newer chemicals are rapidly replacing the older, more dangerous chemicals. One chemical that was just (2011) added to the POPs list, endosulfan, needs to be phased out in Tanzania.

Few pesticides found in Tanzania contain AIs that are EPA Class I or WHO Class Ia or Ib (the highest toxicities by mg/kg of body weight), which are considered too toxic for small-scale, uninformed and unprotected farmers to use. Less toxic alternatives, including preventive tactics and tools, and several curative pesticide choices, can be found in Annex 1, and should be used in place of Class I pesticides.

To reduce risks to the environment, farmers and others who use pesticides should be trained to use IPM and to safely transport, store, mix, apply, and dispose of pesticides.

Recommendations to Address Acute and Long-Term Toxicological Hazards

NAFAKA shall promote the formation and use of professional spray services that understand, have, and use PPE to protect against acute and chronic health issues.

NAFAKA shall train farmers and other beneficiaries in IPM and other measures to reduce risks to water, soil, and biodiversity. (See Annex 8 for training topics).

3.6 Factor F: Effectiveness of the requested pesticide for the proposed use

This factor requires information similar to that provided previously, but more specific to the actual conditions of application and product quality. This section considers the potential for use of low-quality off-patent generic and pirated products (such as many of those imported from China) as well as the development of pest resistance to proposed pesticides, both of which will decrease effectiveness of proposed pesticides.

Page

In general, NAFAKA has requested approval to use pesticides based on proven effectiveness, as well as other factors such as cost and availability. As stated in the NAFAKA PERSUAP, the economic reality is that farmers will not continue to spend scarce funds on pesticides that do not work, even if initially they try increasing dosages when a pesticide starts losing efficacy.

This section remains largely unchanged from the NAFAKA PERSUAP. Many pesticides have gradually lost their effectiveness due to the development of resistance by pests they once controlled. An important pesticide resistance management strategy is to avoid the repeated use of a particular pesticide, or pesticides that have a similar pesticide class and target site of action as the pest control mechanism in the same field. One pest control strategy is to rotate pesticides and/or use tank mixtures or premixes with different mode/target sites of action. This will delay the onset of resistance, as well as slow the development and subsequent buildup of resistance, without resorting to increased rates and frequency of application, and ultimately, will prolong the useful life of many pesticides.

A resistance management strategy should also consider cross-resistance between pesticides with different modes/target sites of action. Pests may develop cross-resistance to pesticides based on mode/target site of action. Annex 1 shows IPM tools that are currently effective against specific pests of NAFAKA crops. Further, http://www.pesticideresistance.com/ can be used to search for specific known resistance issues with certain pest or disease resistance to specific pesticide AIs. Pests that are known to rapidly develop resistance are aphids, whiteflies, thrips, mealybugs, leafhoppers, psyllids, mites, Colorado potato beetle, and the tomato fruitworm (Heliothis and Helicoverpa species).

Issue: Lack of knowledge and information on reduced pesticide effectiveness and how to check and reduce development of pest resistance

At some point, project field staff and demonstration farmers may begin to note that some products no longer work well to control pests in their field, and will likely begin to blame pesticide manufacturers for a weaker product. This could be due to the use of cheap generic products, improper dosing, or the development of resistance. Farmers should be trained to monitor for the development of resistance, and NAFAKA staff should be on the lookout for it during field visits.

Recommendations to Address Effectiveness/Loss of Efficacy

NAFAKA shall train and encourage farmers to use quality name-brand products and discourage farmers and other beneficiaries from using cheap generic products.

NAFAKA shall train farmers and other beneficiaries in proper sprayer use, calibration, spray nozzle choice, and maintenance.

NAFAKA shall train farmers and other beneficiaries to rotate pesticides among the classes of pesticides available to reduce the development of resistance, and use the below recommendations for reducing resistance.

If pesticide use is warranted and a risk of pesticide resistance development is identified, a Resistance Risk Management approach should be followed. The following list details points of concern for both application equipment and pesticide applications.

Application equipment o Calibrate and maintain

Page

o Choose proper application nozzle and spray pattern, pressure and droplet size to achieve best coverage

Pesticide applications o Limit applications during the season to the minimum requiredo Alternate pesticide mode of action or use mixes of products with different modes

of action when allowed, to avoid use of a group of pesticides with a single mode of action

o Time pesticide applications for greatest effect (e.g. Target applications during times when the pest is most vulnerable).

o Use forecasting systems or alerts when available to make the most informed management decision.

o Use recommended dose rates. Do not increase dose rate when efficacy appears reduced and avoid using lower dosages at all times.

o Positively identify the problem and do not make assumptions. Expert consultation may be required (e.g. extension agent, state diagnostic lab, crop consultant, etc.). This will ensure that the proper pesticide can be chosen for control and avoid unnecessary applications (e.g. When the problem is actually an abiotic problem that is mistaken for a pest problem.).

3.7 Factor G: Compatibility of the proposed pesticide use with target and non-target ecosystems

This factor examines potential effects of the requested pesticides on organisms other than the target pest. Non-target ecosystems include protected areas and other important natural areas, as well as the species that inhabit them. Non-target species of concern include fish, honeybees, birds, earthworms, aquatic organisms and beneficial insects.

Annex 7 compiles the known risks to terrestrial and aquatic organisms referred to above for each pesticide AI found in pesticide products registered for use in Tanzania and covered by this PERSUAP, so that informed product choices can be made to minimize the use of pesticides that are particularly toxic to ecosystems and species of concern. The NAFAKA PERSUAP stated that according to NAFAKA pest management experts, farmers understand many of these issues and do take steps to mitigate them.

Issue: Pesticides can affect important ecosystems and non-target species.

Tanzania is classified as a global “mega-diversity” site with numerous biological hotspots and unique ecosystems of high diversity of species in a variety of habitats, species, and genetic levels. Tanzania has allocated about 25% of its total area to national parks, game reserves, and game controlled areas. The network of protected areas range from those that enforce total protection in national parks to game reserves where resource use through hunting by permits is allowed to multiple land use category where local communities whose land use pattern is compatible with biodiversity and natural resources conservation share same areas with biodiversity conservation.

Recommendations to Address Impacts to Important Ecosystems and Non-Target Species

Page

NAFAKA shall not support pesticide use at sites adjacent to protected areas and other important ecosystems, or in areas where endangered species are found unless NAFAKA can show that ecosystems and species will not be affected through soil, water, or air routes.

NAFAKA shall strongly discourage and train farmers and other beneficiaries not to spray pesticides within 30 m of a water body

NAFAKA shall encourage the use of and train in the use of erosion control mechanisms like low till and no till on all project sites and especially those near national parks or where water catchments lead to any of Tanzania’s rivers.

Where project farms lie near a water course, NAFAKA shall train in the use of the pesticide decision matrix in Annex 7 to choose products with low aquatic impacts.

NAFAKA shall strongly encourage and provide training in best practices for notification of beekeepers when applications will occur and apply pesticides when honeybees do not forage, such as late in the day when winds are low.

Issue: Pesticides can persist in the environment after application.

The following remains unchanged from the NAFAKA PERSUAP. The effect of each pesticide on non-target ecosystems will depend on how long it stays in the environment, that is, its rate of breakdown, or half-life. Half-life is defined as the time (in days, weeks or years) required for half of the pesticide present after an application to break down into degradation products. The rate of pesticide breakdown depends on a variety of factors including temperature, soil pH, soil microbe content, and whether the pesticide is exposed to light, water, and oxygen.

Many pesticide breakdown products are themselves toxic, and each may also have a significant half-life. Since pesticides break down with exposure to soil microbes and natural chemicals, sunlight and water, there are half-lives for exposure to each of these factors. Fortunately, most of the very persistent pesticides AIs, like chlorinated hydrocarbons, are no longer available or used in modern agriculture.

Pesticides with a long residual period (that are labeled persistent and may last for years) include atrazine herbicide and organochlorine pesticides. In this PERSUAP (NAFAKA and NAFAKA), persistence has been used as a disqualifying characteristic in the overall analysis and selection of pesticides proposed. Many if not most of the newer carbamate, organophosphate, neonicotinoid, synthetic pyrethroid, and growth regulator insecticides and most fungicides found in Annex 1 break down much more quickly in the environment, generally within weeks. None of the pesticides proposed in Table 3. (NAFAKA SUAP) have a high rate of persistence in the environment, or are known water pollutants.

Recommendation to Address Effects of Persistence

NAFAKA shall use only those pesticide AIs proposed in Table 3, which have been screened for persistence.

Issue: Pesticides can adsorb to soil, leach, and contaminate water resources.

This section remains the same as in the NAFAKA PERSUAP. Each pesticide has physical and chemical characteristics, such as solubility in water, ability to bind to soil particles and be held there (adsorbed) and their natural breakdown rate in nature. If they are strongly held by soil they

Page

do not enter the soil water layers and the ground water table as easily.

In general, pesticides with water solubility greater than 3 mg/liter have the potential to contaminate groundwater; and pesticides with a soil adsorption coefficient of less than 1,900 have the potential to contaminate groundwater. In addition, pesticides with an aerobic soil half-life greater than 690 days or an anaerobic soil half-life greater than 9 days have the potential to contaminate groundwater. Moreover, pesticides with a hydrolysis half-life greater than 14 days have potential to contaminate groundwater.

The potential for pesticides to enter groundwater depends, as indicated above, on the electrical charge contained on a pesticide molecule and its ability and propensity to adhere to soil particles, but this also depends on the nature and charge of the soil particles dominant in the agriculture production area. Sand, clay and organic matter, and different combinations of all of these, have different charges and adhesion potential for organic and inorganic molecules. Sandy soil often has less charge capacity than clay or organic matter, and will thus not interact significantly to hold charged pesticide molecules. So, in areas with sandy soil, the leaching potential for pesticides is increased, as is the velocity with which water and the pesticide migrate.

A pesticide’s ability to enter groundwater resources also depends on how quickly and by what means it is broken down and the distance (and thus time) it has to travel to groundwater. If the groundwater table is high, the risk that the pesticide will reach it before being broken down is increased. Thus, a sandy soil with a high water table is the most risky situation for groundwater contamination by pesticides. Groundwater contamination potential for each pesticide AI available in Tanzania is provided in Annex 7.

The following are known water pollutants:

AIs in herbicides that are known water pollutants:o alachlor (already rejected in NAFAKA PERSUAP)o atrazine (already rejected in NAFAKA PERSUAP)o bentazone (In accordance with the NAFAKA PERSUAP, use with adequate

precaution)o s-metolachlor (In accordance with the NAFAKA PERSUAP, use with adequate

precaution)

Recommendations to Address Potential Contamination of Water Resources (adapted for NAFAKA)

NAFAKA shall train and encourage during field work and demonstrations that pesticides labeled for risk to aquatic or other environments, or areas, are used according to label recommendations.

NAFAKA shall train in and encourage the use of measures to reduce soil erosion (such as low till, no till, terracing, using ground cover between rows, planting rows perpendicular to the slope, using drip irrigation) to minimize transport of soil particles with pesticides adsorbed to them (which is a likely transport route to waterways.)

NAFAKA shall train in and discourage the use of herbicides with high leaching and groundwater pollution potential (see Annex 7) on highly sandy soils or soils with water tables close (2-3 meters) to the surface.

Page

NAFAKA shall train in and discourage spraying pesticides with high toxicities to aquatic organisms before an impending rainstorm, as they can be washed into waterways before breaking down.

Training VBAAs to enable them to offer technical assistance to farmers to determine areas with shallow water table(2-3 metres)

Issue: Pesticides can damage environmental resources

Improperly used pesticides can and do damage the following natural resources, which in addition to being important for biodiversity, provide the following environmental services:

honeybees—pollinating most crops fish—aquifer health and human food birds—control insect pests predators and parasitoids—control insect pests earthworms—soil health mollusks and crustaceans—aquifer health and human food clean water—drinking, irrigating, and washing biodiversity and rare species—ecosystem functioning

Wind drift

The risk of wind drift occurs when pesticides suspended in the air as particles are carried by wind to other areas, potentially contaminating them. Pesticides that are applied to crops can and may be blown by winds into nearby areas, potentially posing a threat to wildlife. As wind velocity increases so does the spray drift and exposure. Low relative humidity and high temperature result in more spray evaporating. Also, droplets of sprayed pesticides or particles from pesticides applied as dusts may travel on the wind to other unintended areas.

Recommendations to Address Potential Damage to Environmental Resources

NAFAKA shall train in the following topics, encourage farmers and other beneficiaries to implement the following, and ensure the following are practiced at demo sites:

Warn beekeepers of upcoming spray events so that they may move or protect their hives. Spray at night (best), very late afternoon when winds are below 13 kph, there is no rain,

and when bees do not forage. Read and follow pesticide label instructions including environmental warnings. Choose the pesticide least toxic to fish and wildlife (see Annex 7, MSDS and pesticide

label). Do not apply granular pesticides in fields known to be frequented by birds, in particular,

migratory birds, and completely cover granules with soil, especially spilled granules at the ends of rows.

Minimize pesticide spray drift by using low-pressure sprays and nozzles that produce larger droplets, properly calibrating and maintaining spray equipment, and use of a drift-control agent.

Do not spray or rinse equipment in or within 30 meters of ponds and drainage ditches and

Page

maintain at least a 2.5 km buffer no-spray zone around national parks or other protected areas.

Do not use pesticides with potential or known groundwater risks near drinking water sources, or where the water table is less than 2 meters, or on sandy soils with high water tables.

Properly dispose of empty pesticide containers (provide training on how this can be accomplished).

Ensure that farmers use PPE and apply pesticides only early in the morning or late afternoon when there is no wind or rain.

Collect and keep copies of MSDSs for each commercial pesticide that beneficiary farmers use at all NAFAKA project sites

3.8 Factor H: Conditions under which the pesticide is to be used, including climate, geography, hydrology, and soils

In general, in addition to Factor G above, this requirement attempts to protect natural resources from the dangers of pesticide misuse and contamination, especially of groundwater resources. This Factor is condensed from the NAFAKA PERSUAP.

Tanzania Climate

As a consequence of a diversity of landscapes and land features, Tanzania experiences a variety of climatic conditions ranging from humid coastal to alpine deserts crowning the high peaks of Mt. Kilimanjaro and Mt. Meru mountains to highland montane forest and moist tropical forest. The coastal area and all of the islands in the Indian Ocean have a tropical climate, and most of the country is sub-tropical except for the areas at higher altitudes.

There is a considerable variation in temperatures influenced by altitude; it ranges between below 0o C on top of Mountains Kilimanjaro and Meru and in the higher altitude highlands and the Kitulo plateau in the southern highlands to above 29oC along the coast. Rainfall in about 75% of the country is erratic and only 21% of the country can expect an annual rainfall of more than 750 mm with a 90% probability. The mean annual rainfall varies considerably, ranging from less than 400 mm to over 2,500 mm per annum. The driest areas in the country are found in a 100 to 250 km wide strip, which runs from the Kenyan border through portions of Arusha, Manyara, Singida, Dodoma, Iringa regions and to the northern part of Mbeya region bordering Singida where rainfall ranges from less than 400 mm to 800 mm per annum. However, in the highlands and higher altitude parts of the country in Morogoro, Kilimanjaro, Mbeya, Arusha, Manyara, Kagera, Kigoma and Tanga regions, the Ukerewe and Kara islands in Lake Victoria and the northern shores of Lake Nyasa average annual rainfall is more than 1,500 mm.

Most of the areas where NAFAKA is operating had been stressed by drought conditions in 2012. The drought was more severe in the semi-arid, maize growing areas covering most of Kongwa and Kiteto districts which received an average of 400mm of rains in 2012. Due to climate change, the frequency and severity of droughts, floods and storms have increased. These phenomenon have been experienced within the same growing season. The rice growing districts in the NAFAKA area observed periods of heavy rainfall in January and February, 2016, continued to cause flooding in different area of Kilombero, Mvomero and Iringa districts.

Page

However some NAFAKA districts were hit by droughts which caused crop failure in 2016.

Tanzania Geography

Most of the country is part of the Central African plateau (1,000 – 1,500 masl.) with gently sloping plains and plateaus broken by scattered hills and low-lying wetlands. A 1994 joint study of World Bank – Tanzania divided the country into four main physiographic regions6 namely:

a)  The lowland coastal zone: This zone comprises the coastal plain and low lands with altitude ranging from 0 to 1000 m.

b)  The highland zone: This zone is comprised of the dissected highlands, up to 2100 m, which flank the deep trough of Lake Tanganyika to the west, including the southern portion of the Albertine Rift, which extends from the north in Uganda.

c) The plateau zone: This zone with average altitude of 1200 masl is comprised of gently undulating countryside over much of the western half of Tanzania and includes areas around Lake Victoria.

d) The semi-arid zone: Throughout much of central Tanzania, the country is characterized by generally flat topography, undulating, isolated hills, and inselbergs or rock outcrops. Altitudes are 1200 to 1500 m.

Most of NAFAKA’s activities are in the southern highlands region and semi-arid zones of the central plateau. Some areas lies in the rice growing districts in the coastal plains.

Tanzania Hydrology

Tanzania has a diverse range of national and cross-border wetland resources. These include the great lakes system, major river networks, and deltaic mangroves. Constituting about 10% of the country’s land surface, wetlands in Tanzania support an extensive trading and transport system, rural and urban domestic water supply systems, fishing grounds, mariculture, agro pastoral activities, hydrological processes, irrigation, and hydropower generation.

Wetlands provide livelihoods for large numbers of people. They are used in rice cultivation (and often destroyed or degraded), for fishing, and wetland plants are used to weaving of baskets, mats, and rafts. Additionally, certain ethnic groups attach strong historic and cultural or ritual importance to wetlands.

Some of NAFAKA’s activities in the rice value chain occur in the south near the Kilombero wetlands. The GOT ratified the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands in 2000. The Kilombero Valley wetlands and floodplain, which run along, and to the east of the Udzungwa Mountains National Park and Kilombero Nature Reserve, was added to the Ramsar Convention list in 2002.

Fishing was the traditional primary resource use but agriculture and livestock are rapidly replacing that. About 50% of the floodplain has been converted to agricultural land. Increases in soil erosion have resulted in siltation of downstream hydro dams and of streams and swamps. Intensive agriculture may further deplete and pollute the remaining waters. National Parks that the Kilombero wetlands run through support large mammals including elephant, lion, giraffe, buffalo, hippopotamus, and puku.

6 2001 National CBD Implementation ReportPage

Tanzania Soils

Tanzania has typical tropical soils with a generally low nutrient content particularly in regard to nitrogen and phosphorus. Only 9% of Tanzanian soils are of medium to high fertility, 23% of low to medium fertility and the remaining soils (more than 60%) are generally of lower fertility (FAO-UNESCO, 1977).

3.9 Factor I: Availability of other pesticides or non-chemical control methods

This section remains unchanged from the NAFAKA PERSUAP. This section identifies less toxic synthetic, as well as non-synthetic or ‘natural’ (extracts of naturally-occurring plants, spices, oils, fatty acids, induced resistance elicitors, minerals, microbes, or microbial extracts) pesticide options for control of pests, and their relative advantages and disadvantages. Many of these ‘natural’ pesticides can be toxic to humans, and several are even classified as RUPs due to environmental risks; thus safe pesticide use practices extend to these natural as well as synthetic (produced in laboratories or factories) pesticides.

Annex 1 contains numerous non-chemical preventive control methods for major pests of maize and rice in Tanzania. It is the intent of this PERSUAP that USAID projects dealing with agriculture use this valuable resource, which compiles all known IPM tools and tactics for each pest. It can be considered as a pullout, stand-alone section that can be reproduced as necessary, and should be considered for translation into Swahili, lamination, and distribution to farm input supply companies to advise farmers at point-of-purchase.

Issue: Unavailability of natural pest controls

Natural chemicals: Many non-synthetic chemical IPM tools are listed in Annexes 4 and 5. The list of natural pesticides available in Tanzania is very low compared with other emerging market countries. The list of TPRI registered insecticides and miticides includes some natural oils, neem/azadirachtin, pyrethrins, garlic extract, Bacillus thuringiensis (BT), Bacillus spaericus, Beauveria bassiana, emamectin benzoate, cartap hydrochloride, abamectin, milbamectin, and spinosad (spinosyn A and B).

The list of TPRI registered fungicides includes compounds with copper and sulfur as well as Trichoderma virdae, Trichoderma harzianum, natural oils, garlic extract, and ascorbic acid. One natural microbial nematocide is listed, Paedilomyces species.

Of these, NAFAKA requests compounds containing copper and spinosad that were previously approved in the NAFAKA PERSUAP.

Recommendation to Minimize Highly Toxic Pesticides

NAFAKA shall promote low-risk preventive and natural chemical pest controls that are found in Annexes 1, 4, and 5.

3.10 Factor J: Host country’s ability to regulate or control the distribution, storage, use, and disposal of the requested pesticides

This section remains unchanged from the NAFAKA PERSUAP.

Page

This factor examines the host country’s existing infrastructure and human resources for managing the use of the requested pesticides. If the host country’s ability to regulate pesticides is inadequate, the proposed action – use of pesticides – could result in greater risk to human health and the environment.

TPRI has produced pesticide regulations and has an extensive and updated list of permitted pesticides for agricultural pest control. In 2007, TPRI registered most of the same pesticides that were then registered for use in Kenya, at the recommendation of TAHA. However, very few of the pesticides currently registered are actually found in the country. Some unregistered pesticides like Temik (aldicarb) and others are found in Tanzania pesticide stores. Some of the chemicals from China are considered not to work well, and require testing of quality before they can be recommended.

Most pesticide stores [] visited by the NAFAKA PERSUAP team were well organized and did not have open pesticide bottles or unmarked containers. Most farmers interviewed [by the NAFAKA team] either purchase what they need and use it up, or store leftover pesticides in their home for safekeeping.

For a country where PPE is, for all intents and purposes, little used, there are still some very toxic products being sold in quantity, which leads to increased risk. These include Class I fumigants aluminum phosphide and magnesium phosphide, and Class I insecticides carbofuran, methomyl, endosulfan, fenamiphos, chlorfenvinphos, dichlorvos, omethoate, oxydemeton-methyl, and triazophos.

Due to a lack of resources, the government’s ability to regulate and enforce regulations is limited, as are resources to stop unregistered pesticides from entering at border customs points.

Issue: FumigantsFumigants rejected for use by untrained farmers or untrained personnel (but approved for certified professional and trained personnel) on NAFAKA II/CMSD.

Quickphos (Aluminum phosphide—registered as restricted in Tanzania; all USA products containing aluminum phosphide are labeled as RUP;

Commando 80% (Zinc phosphide—registered as experimental in Tanzania); The USAID Programmatic EA (PEA) for fumigation permits the use of

aluminum phosphide by only highly trained, certified and protected fumigation service teams. All use of fumigants will be governed by the USAID Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) For Phosphine Fumigation Of Stored Agricultural Commodity: http://www.usaidgems.org/fumigationpea.htm.

Issue: Disposal of obsolete pesticides

In 1995, USAID assisted the Netherlands with the removal of 245,000 kilograms/liters of obsolete DDT and malathion from Zanzibar. In 2006, the World Bank provided $6.9 million for the collection and disposal of 1200 tons of obsolete pesticides from over 350 farm stores

Page

throughout the country. According to FAO7, in 2008 about 1500 tons of obsolete pesticides remained scattered throughout Tanzania, awaiting disposal.

Issue: Disposal of empty pesticide containers

Most farmers met by the NAFAKA PERSUAP team did not understand proper pesticide container triple rinsing with water, puncturing and disposal methods. In some countries, the plastic is often burned, buried, or recycled. Burning is discouraged due to the toxic chemicals released upon incineration. For most farmers, rinsing, puncturing and burying is the option of choice. In many parts of the world, Crop Life International provides funds for local pesticide associations and ministries to collect, rinse, cut into chips and recycle or sell plastic from empty pesticide containers.

Global GAP and other S&C systems require that empty pesticide containers are triple rinsed over a pesticide mixing pit, and then properly stored in plastic drums in the field or storage shed, to await disposal. Few empty pesticide containers were found on farms that the NAFAKA PERSUAP team visited likely due to the lack of use. Website http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/labeling/lrm/chap-13.htm provides pesticide and container best practices disposal options.

Recommended Mitigation Actions

NAFAKA shall train in and encourage farmers and other beneficiaries that when storing pesticides, they should be properly labelled and stored outside of the house out of reach of children.

NAFAKA shall train in, encourage use of, and otherwise support farmers and other beneficiaries to use Global GAP best practices for pesticide storage, use, and disposal, whether or not Global GAP certification is sought.

NAFAKA shall ensure that demonstration farms, beneficiary farmers and professional spray services who apply pesticides wear sufficient (what is recommended by the pesticide label and MSDS) PPE as a condition of employment or as a condition for receiving USAID assistance.

NAFAKA shall explore the possibility of an empty pesticide container take-back program (perhaps with a deposit system built in).

3.11 Factor K: Provision for training of users and applicators

USAID recognizes that, in addition to the use of PPE, safety training is an essential component in programs involving the use of pesticides. The need for thorough training is particularly acute in developing countries, where the level of education of applicators may typically be lower than in developed countries. The information below, from the NAFAKA PERSUAP, remains unchanged.

Issue: Farmers need intensive and repeated training

Training in Safe Pesticide Use and GAP/IPM are of paramount importance for farmers, spray services, agro-input dealers, and farm laborers using pesticides. Additional and refresher trainings are good means for setting beneficiary farmer behavior, as many farmers may begin to 7 http://www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/obsolete-pesticides/where-stocks/africa-stocks/en/

Page

use pesticides for the first time, and may begin to intensify usage.

Recommendations for Mitigation

NAFAKA shall train partners and beneficiaries to implement GAP, IPM, and pesticide safer use practices.

NAFAKA shall use Annex 1 to produce and promote the use of Pest Management Plans (see Annex 2 for a guide to PMPs) for farmers to anticipate and better manage primary pests.

NAFAKA shall conduct training programs for professional spray services on monitoring and data record keeping techniques (see Annexes 9 and 10) for pest control and pesticide needs and/or effectiveness.

3.12 Factor L: Provision made for monitoring the use and effectiveness of each pesticide

Evaluating the risks, impacts and benefits of pesticide use should be an ongoing, dynamic process. Pest resistance is one of the risks for which this element is intended, as well as human health and safety, and environmental effects. This section remains unchanged from the previous NAFAKA PERSUAP and the recommendations have been adapted for this PERSUAP.

Record keeping should track quantities and types of pesticides used, where they were used and what they were used for with notes on efficacy. Records of training received are also important to keep, if any sort of future certification will be sought. Notes on effectiveness of individual pesticides and pest numbers will help develop a more sustainable pesticide use plan for NAFAKA beneficiaries.

Records of farmers and extension officers will need to take note of any reductions in pesticide efficacy experienced, which is the first indication that resistance may be developing, and then a strategy needs to be in place to determine a shift to a different pesticide class, and rotation among classes, to overcome resistance development.

Recommendations to Address NAFAKA Beneficiaries and Farm Record Keeping

NAFAKA shall carefully document input use on demonstration farms and shall encourage and train beneficiary farmers to document the following aspects as part of a farm record keeping system:

Environmental conditions: Field conditions should be incorporated into the record keeping system (for example; precipitation, soil analyses and moisture, soil pH, temperatures, etc.).

GAPs/IPM measures tried/used (see Annex 1): NAFAKA should try to incorporate new IPM measures and document their success or failure.

Local regulatory compliance: A list of country laws related to the use of agrochemicals for plant protection, short notes on the relevance of the law, dates the laws come into or exit force and MRLs for each crop-pesticide combination.

A pesticide checklist: This list allows pesticide users to ensure that the pesticides they are using are registered. It should also provide notes on special safety requirements.

PPE: Lists of the types of equipment made available to applicators, dates when

Page

equipment needs to be maintained or replaced. Monitoring/recording pests: Agronomists or spray services should incorporate into their

records regular field pest monitoring and identification.

Recommendations to Address Monitoring by NAFAKA Field Staff and Beneficiary Farmers

NAFAKA shall monitor on demonstration farms and shall encourage and train beneficiary farmers to monitor the following aspects as part of a farm monitoring program:

Poor quality pesticide product. Any pesticide that does not work as it is supposed to, following recommended dose and usage.

Resistance: Pesticide resistance development. This is indicated if the spray no longer works as it once did.

Human poisonings and any incidences of chronic health issues Farm animal and livestock deaths Any incidences of water pollution Fish, wildlife, or honeybee kills

Any of the above items should be reported immediately to NAFAKA for onward reporting to USAID.

Recommendations to Address NAFAKA PERSUAP Reporting

See Safer Use Action Plan, Section 4.

SECTION 4: PESTICIDE SAFER USE ACTION PLAN (SUAP) FOR NAFAKA II PROJECT

This Safer Use Action Plan is the definitive statement of implementing partners’ pesticide compliance requirements and is synthesized from the PER analysis:

Section 4.1, immediately below, delineates allowed pesticides and provides advisories and restrictions for their use.

Section 4.2 summarizes the mandatory safe use conditions attendant to use/support of these pesticides.

Section 4.4 defines these conditions in the attached Mandatory Template, entitled “Pesticide Safer Use Action Plan & Compliance Tracker,” for assigning responsibilities and timelines for implementation of these requirements, and for tracking compliance.

With respect to pesticides, the “Pesticide Safer Use Action Plan & Compliance Tracker” (Section 6.5) satisfies the requirement for an EMMP. The project EMMP should simply incorporate the

Page

MANDATORY TEMPLATEEvery Project subject to this PERSUAP must submit a completed SUAP template to its AOR/COR by the date specified on the attached tracker template and must provide an annual update.

SUAP by reference.

4.1 Allowed Pesticides

Table 3 is a compilation of the pesticides approved in the NAFAKA PERSUAP, which NAFAKA also intends to use and the seven additional pesticides for which NAFAKA is requesting approval. For the seven new pesticide AIs, NAFAKA should identify acceptable, low toxicity products that NAFAKA will recommend, provide training in, and for which NAFAKA will provide other support for their use.

Table 3. Proposed Pesticides that are Accepted by the PER Analysis

Fungicides & Seed Treatments Funguran-OH 50 WP (Cupric hydroxide 50%) Folicur EC 250 (Tebuconazole) Cruiser 350FS (Thiamethoxam 35 g/L) Apron star 42WS (Thiamethoxam20g/Kg + Metalaxyl–M 20g/Kg + Difenoconazole

2g/Kg) Topsin M 70% WP (Thiophanate-Methyl70% w/w) Banko 500 SC (Chlorothalonil) Propiconazole (not previously included in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP, proposed for

NAFAKA II) Cyproconazole (not previously included in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP, proposed for

NAFAKA II) Mancozeb (not previously included in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP, proposed for

NAFAKA II) Dimethomorph (not previously included in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP, proposed for

NAFAKA II) Herbicides

Touchdown Forte (Glyphosate 500g/L) Mamba 360 SL (Glyphosate 360g/L) Roundup 360 SC (Glyphosate) Servian 75 WG (Halosulfuronmethyl 750g/kg) Sanaphen 720SL (2,4-D Amine 720g/L) Ronstar 250EC (Oxidiazon 250g/l) Stomp 500 EC (Pendimethalin) Weedstop EC (Pendimethalin 500g/l) Basagran 480g/l (Bentazone) Buctril MC (Bromoxynil) Dual Gold 960EC (S-Metolactor-960 g/l) Rainbow 25 (Penoxsulam) Garil (Trichorpyr) Bispyribac-sodium (not previously included in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP, proposed

for NAFAKA II)Insecticides

Gaucho 70WS (Imidacloprid) Deltapaz 2.5 EC (Deltamethrin 25g/l) Actellic 50EC (Pirimiphos-Methyl 500g/L)

Page

Actellic super Dust (Pirimiphos-Methyl 1.6%+Permethrin 0.3%) Spintor Dust (Spinosad 1.25 g/kg) Stocal super Dust (Permethrin+Pirimiphos methyl) Shumba super Dust (Fenitrothion + Deltamethrin) Dinotefuran (not previously included in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP, proposed for

NAFAKA II) Thiamethoxam (not previously included in the NAFAKA I PERSUAP as an

insecticide, proposed for NAFAKA II)

Rodenticides (must be purchased and deployed in pre-baited, tamper-resistant bait traps)

Ex-Rat (Bromadiolone 0.005) Brodek (Brodifacoum) Rat-cide (Bromadiolone) Panyacide (Bromadiolone 0.005%) PanyaKill (Bromadiolone 0.005%) Lanirat Bait (Bromadiolone)  Yasodion (Diphacinone)

Page

Table 4. NAFAKA II Safer Use Action Plan

Mitigation Measures from the PER Analysis

Action/s to implement the measure

Monitoring Indicators

Monitoring process Timeline Responsible

parties

Factor A: USEPA & Host Country Registration Status of Proposed Pesticides1. NAFAKA shall only provide assistance for the use or procurement of pesticides in Table 3. Assistance must be provided in conjunction with the mitigation measures.

Establish pesticide control mechanism in collaboration with NAFAKA supported VBAAs and agro dealers

Copies of prohibited pesticide products at all NAFAKA supported VBAAs, lead farmers, agro dealers and producer organizations sitesCopies of all approved pesticides at all NAFAKA supported VBAAs, agro dealers and producer organization sitesCopies of appropriate methods of pesticide handling, storage, transport, use and disposal defined and available among all NAFAKA supported VBAAs, agro dealers, lead farmers and producer organizations.

Surveys for inventory of pesticides types at NAFAKA supported agro dealers and VBAAs

Verification of presence of copies for the list of approved pesticides at NAFAKA supported agro dealers and VBAAs

Training reports on pesticides safer use & handling

Product knowledge training reports

Annual surveys on NAFAKA supported VBAAs and agro dealers

Quarterly

Quarterly

Quarterly

Director Input system and Productivity

Page

Mitigation Measures from the PER Analysis

Action/s to implement the measure

Monitoring Indicators

Monitoring process Timeline Responsible

parties

Pesticides inventory for NAFAKA supported agro dealers

Factor B: Basis for Selection of Pesticides2. NAFAKA shall choose and use least toxic pesticides of trusted quality with low human and environmental risk profiles (see decision matrix in Annex 7, MSDSs, and pesticide labels)

Keep copies of the current list of approved pesticides (table 3) among NAFAKA supported VBAAs, agro dealers and Producer organizations

Training on Safer Use of Pesticides offered to VBAAs, lead farmers and agro dealers

Number of Training sessions/Repeated Message Enforcement on pesticide environmental risk profiles

Number of pesticide Safer Use and management training sessions

Verification of presence of copies of Materials Safety Data Sheets(MSDSs) at all NAFAKA project sites, VBAAs and agro dealer shops

Review of training reports offered to VBAAs, agro dealers and lead farmers

Quarterly

Annually

Director Input Systems and Productivity

Factor C: Extent to Which the Proposed Pesticide Use is Part of an IPM Program3. NAFAKA shall train farmers and other beneficiaries on IPM methods, which can include the use of pesticides if other methods are not effective.4. NAFAKA shall assist the MALF with the

NAFAKA will develop IPM farmer’s handbook manual for VBAAs, lead farmers and extension staff.

VBAAs and lead farmers training on IPM by NAFAKA

Number of IPM training sessions

Individuals adopting IPM

Individuals adopting use of PMP for control of primary

Review of Training reports

Conducting Annual outcome survey to determine adoption of IPM and use of crop PMPs to control primary

Quarterly

Annually

Director Input Systems and Productivity

Page

Mitigation Measures from the PER Analysis

Action/s to implement the measure

Monitoring Indicators

Monitoring process Timeline Responsible

parties

production and use of seasonal crop production and pest management plans (PMPs)8 and production of posters for on-farm use in prediction and management of the major pests of each crop.

5. NAFAKA shall develop new PMPs, in collaboration with Africa RISING group, for common beans and soya beans

agronomists

IPM cascade training to farmers by VBAAs, lead farmers and extension staff.

Test pest-specific PMP information in Annex 1 with beneficiary farmers for field use, validation, modification or adaptation

pests

Individual trained on IPM by VBAAs

pests

Factor D: Proposed Method or Methods of Application, Including the Availability of Application and Safety Equipment6. NAFAKA shall train farmers and other beneficiaries to understand pesticide formulations and formulation codes so that errors of application are reduced.

7. NAFAKA shall promote PPE use as a best practice.

Trainers manual developed for VBAAs, lead farmers and extension staff

VBAAs and lead farmers training by NAFAKA agronomists on Safer Use & handling of Pesticides including use of PPE

Posters, fliers, videos, radio messages targeting farmers behavior change and communication on Safer Use & handling, PPE

Number of Individuals adopting

Verification of presence of Behavior Change and communication materials; posters, videos, fliers, radio programs on Safer Use & handling, PPE

Quarterly

Annually

Director Input Systems and Productivity

8 http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/crops-agriculture.html, see “Year-Round IPM Programs” checked in a box next to each applicable crop; there is a program and checklist for corn (maize), but not for rice.

Page

Mitigation Measures from the PER Analysis

Action/s to implement the measure

Monitoring Indicators

Monitoring process Timeline Responsible

parties

8. NAFAKA shall promote the development and use of professional spraying and record-keeping services, promoted to and accessible by farmers at congregation places (farms stores, cooperatives/associations, produce consolidation/cold storage/processing sites). The best way to ensure PPE use is to hire professional spray services that will have and maintain PPE (See pesticide labels for guidance on appropriate PPE and USEPA website9.)

9. NAFAKA shall provide training in proper sprayer use, maintenance and repair.

10. NAFAKA shall provide training in post-spray hygiene, washing clothing and equipment,

VBAAs and lead farmers demonstrate and training farmers on Safer Use & handling of Pesticides

Training youth groups and VBAAs to provide professional/commercial sprayer services to farmers

Follow up and monitoring of youth groups and VBAAs offering professional sprayer services to farmers.

Linking sprayer services providers with farmers associations, AMCOS and SACCOS

Product knowledge/Safer Use training to sprayer service providers in

use of PPEs

Number of professional Sprayer Service Providers trained

Number of providers of professional sprayer service

Number of farmers accessing services of professional sprayer services

Number of youth groups offering Sprayer Services

Number and amounts of grants offered to professional sprayer service providers

Evidence of existence of professional Sprayer Service providers in NAFAKA project areas

Data collection Forms to track names of farmers utilizing professional sprayer service providers

Annual outcome surveys to determine individuals adopting use of PPEs in NAFAKA project sites

Quarterly

Annually

9 http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/safety/workers/equip.htm

Page

Mitigation Measures from the PER Analysis

Action/s to implement the measure

Monitoring Indicators

Monitoring process Timeline Responsible

parties

and proper disposal of wastes.

11. NAFAKA shall promote to professional crop spraying services that they mark one sprayer with a big “H” for herbicide use, only and a second sprayer can be used for applying insecticides and fungicides.

collaboration with agro input companies

Capacity building of sprayer service providers( grants, business training, linkages)

Number of business contracts/linkages between Sprayer service providers and farmer associations

Factor E: Any Acute and Long-Term Toxicological Hazards, either Human or Environmental, associated with the Proposed Use, and Measures Available to Minimize Such Hazards12. NAFAKA shall train farmers and other beneficiaries in IPM and other measures to reduce risks to water, soil, and biodiversity. (See Annex 8 for training topics).

Drafting of IPM trainers manual for VBAAs, lead farmers and extension staff

Training of NAFAKA agronomists on principles of IPM

NAFAKA agronomists train VBAAs, lead farmers and extension staff on IPM in collaboration with the Africa RISING group

Number of individual trained by VBAAs, agro dealers and lead farmers on Safer Use & handling and IPM

Number of Individuals adopting IPM practices

Filling Data Collection forms for tracking VBAAs and lead farmers IPM cascade training to other farmers

Annual outcome surveys to determine IPM adoption

Quarterly

Annually

Director Input Systems and Productivity

Factor F: Effectiveness of the Requested Pesticides for the Proposed Use

Page

Mitigation Measures from the PER Analysis

Action/s to implement the measure

Monitoring Indicators

Monitoring process Timeline Responsible

parties

13. NAFAKA shall train and encourage farmers to use quality name-brand products and discourage farmers and other beneficiaries from using cheap generic products.

14. NAFAKA shall train farmers and other beneficiaries to rotate pesticides among the classes of pesticides available to reduce the development of resistance, and use the below recommendations for reducing resistance.

Conduct Safer Use and handling and product knowledge training to farmers associations, AMCOS, SACCOS to reduce development of resistance, identify fake, adultered product and promote quality name brand product

Assist providers of quality name brand product to Link with VBAAs, rural agro dealers and farmers organization to strengthen rural retailer network of supply of quality name brand products.

Number of VBAAs, agro dealers, AMCOs, SACCOS linked with providers of quality name-brand products

Number of business to business(B2B) linkage meetings facilitated by NAFAKA between providers of quality name-brand products and VBAAs, agro-dealers, AMCOS and SACCOS

B2B Meeting minutes

Number contracts/agreements between

Filling Data Collection Forms on number of VBAAs and agro dealers linked to providers of quality name-brand products

Annually Director Input Systems and Productivity

Factor G: Compatibility of the Proposed Pesticides Use with Target and Non-Target Ecosystems

Page

Mitigation Measures from the PER Analysis

Action/s to implement the measure

Monitoring Indicators

Monitoring process Timeline Responsible

parties

15. NAFAKA shall train in and encourage the use of measures to reduce soil erosion (such as low till, no till, terracing, using ground cover between rows, planting rows perpendicular to the slope, using drip irrigation) to minimize transport of soil particles with pesticides adsorbed to them (which is a likely transport route to waterways.)

16. NAFAKA shall train in and discourage the use of herbicides with high leaching and groundwater pollution potential (see Annex 7) on highly sandy soils or soils with water tables close (2-3 meters) to the surface.

Conservation tillage practices manual developed in collaboration with the Africa RISING group

Training of NAFAKA agronomists and extension staff on conservation tillage practices by Africa RISING group

NAFAKA agronomists train VBAAs, lead farmers and extension staff on conservation tillage practices

NAFAKA agronomists and extension staff provide technical assistance and training to farmers through VBAAs, lead farmers on techniques to determine water table to minimize ground water pollution.

Number of individual trained on GAP/conservation tillage practices that minimize transport of soil particles with pesticides to waterways

Number of individuals adopting conservation tillage practices that minimize soil with pesticides particles erosion into water bodies

Number of individual trained on water table determination techniques to minimize ground water pollution

Filling and Reviewing Data Collection Forms with registers of farmers trained on conservation/agro ecological tillage practices that minimize soil erosion

Annual outcome survey to determine adoption of conservation/agro ecological tillage practices

Reviewing evidences of individual trained on techniques to minimize ground water pollution

Quarterly

Annually

Quarterly

Director Input Systems and Productivity

Factor I: The Availability and Effectiveness of other Pesticides or Non-Chemical Control Methods17. NAFAKA shall Identification of Linkage meetings

Page

Mitigation Measures from the PER Analysis

Action/s to implement the measure

Monitoring Indicators

Monitoring process Timeline Responsible

parties

promote low-risk preventive and natural chemical pest controls that are found in Annexes 1, 4, and 5

suppliers of natural chemical pest controls

Ensure low risk preventive and natural chemical is part of IPM & Safer Use and handling training program offered to VBAAs, lead farmers and local government extension staff offered by NAFAKA and Africa RISING group

Facilitate Linkages between providers of natural chemical pest control products and rural agro dealers and VBAAs to strengthen access by farmers

between suppliers of natural chemical pest controls and VBAAs, agro dealers, AMCOS, SACCOS and other producer organizations

Individuals adopting natural chemical pest control products

Number of VBAAs, agro dealers selling natural chemical pest control products

Annual outcome surveys to determine adoption

Annually Director Input Systems and Productivity

Factor J: The Requesting Country’s Ability to Regulate or Control the Distribution, Storage, Use and Disposal of the Requested Pesticide18. NAFAKA shall train in, encourage use of, and otherwise support farmers and other beneficiaries to use GlobalGAP best practices for pesticide

Global GAP best practices manual for pesticides storage, use and disposal in place

VBAAs , agro dealers

Number of Individual trained on GlobalGAP

Number of individual adopting

Reviewing training reports on Global GAP

Outcome surveys to determine

Annually

Annually

Director Input Systems and Productivity

Page

Mitigation Measures from the PER Analysis

Action/s to implement the measure

Monitoring Indicators

Monitoring process Timeline Responsible

parties

storage, use, and disposal, whether or not GlobalGAP certification is sought.

19. NAFAKA shall ensure that demonstration farms, beneficiary farmers and professional spray services who apply pesticides wear sufficient (what is recommended by the pesticide label and MSDS) PPE as a condition of employment or as a condition for receiving USAID assistance.

and lead farmers training on GlobalGAP

Behavior change and Communication campaign of use of PPE

Provide technical assistance to farmers on estimation of actual pesticides required to avoid overuse

Global GAP

Poster, leaflets, videos, radio messages on global GAP practices on storage, use & disposal of pesticides

individual adopting Global GAP on pesticides storage, use & disposal

Factor L: The Provisions Made for Monitoring the Use and Effectiveness of the Pesticides20. NAFAKA shall carefully document input use on demonstration farms and shall encourage and train beneficiary farmers to document pesticides use and any indicators of negative environmental effects

Get all project offices copies of commonly-used pesticide MSDSs to keep on-hand, with a source of exact information on risks and risk mitigations for each product, and what measures to take in case of an accidental spill, fire or poisoning.

Conduct a pesticide

GAPs/IPM measures tried/used (see Annex 1) their success or failure.

PPE: Lists of the types of equipment made available to applicators, dates when equipment needs to be maintained or

Review of Data Collection Forms

Conduct surveys

Review field monitoring reports on pesticides use and negative environmental

Quarterly

Annually

Annually

Director Input Systems and Productivity

Page

Mitigation Measures from the PER Analysis

Action/s to implement the measure

Monitoring Indicators

Monitoring process Timeline Responsible

parties

performance monitoring program in all NAFAKA project area

replaced.

Any pesticide that does not work as it is supposed to, following recommended dose and usage

Resistance: Pesticide resistance development. This is indicated if the spray no longer works as it once did.

Human poisonings and any incidences of chronic health issuesFarm animal and livestock deaths

Any incidences of water pollutionFish, wildlife, or

effects

Page

Mitigation Measures from the PER Analysis

Action/s to implement the measure

Monitoring Indicators

Monitoring process Timeline Responsible

parties

honeybee kills

Page

USAID/Tanzania NAFAKA II PERSUAPMust be submitted to AOR/COR by Date: and annually updated thereafter.

PERSUAP COMPLIANCE TRACKER

BASIC INFORMATION SUBMISSION DATES:

Prime Contractor

Initial submission

Project Annual Update #1Pesticide Compliance Lead & Contact Information

Annual Update #2

Summary of Pest Management Needs on Project

Annual Update #3

Note: Pesticide “support” = use of USAID funds to: purchase pesticides; directly fund the application of pesticides; recommend pesticides for use; enable the application or purchase of pesticides via provision of application equipment, credit support, etc.

Page

PESTICIDE SAFE USE ACTION PLAN & COMPLIANCE TRACKER: 2017 USAID/TANZANIA NAFAKA II PERSUAP

REQUIRED COMPLIANCE (MITIGATION) MEASURE INITIAL COMPLIANCE STATUS (IF NOT KNOWN, SO INDICATE)

ACTIONS PLANNED TO ACHIEVE & MAINTAIN COMPLIANCE (W/ DEADLINES & RESPONSIBLE PARTY)

STATUS OF COMPLIANCE ACTIONS

SUPPORT ONLY THE PESTICIDES AUTHORIZED BY THE 2017 USAID/TANZANIA NAFAKA II PERSUAP

To be implemented ImmediatelyInventory Pesticides being supported and ensure NO SUPPORT for Class I chemicals.

(insert extra rows if needed)Ensure that Restricted Use Pesticides (RUPs), as classified by US EPA, can only be used by or under supervision of a certified pesticide applicator.Distribute copies of the list of allowed AIs with matching commercial product names and list of cancelled products to all project field extension staff & advice regarding the Date: deadline for compliance (below). To be implemented as soon as possible but not later than Date:

Assure that USAID-funded pesticide support is limited to ONLY PESTICIDES APPROVED BY PERSUAP. Continue verification throughout life-of-projectPesticide technical assistance and use must be governed by a set of locally adapted IPM-based pest management plans and observe enumerated use restrictions. For agricultural activities these will be crop-and-pest specific.

Page

REQUIRED COMPLIANCE (MITIGATION) MEASURE INITIAL COMPLIANCE STATUS (IF NOT KNOWN, SO INDICATE)

ACTIONS PLANNED TO ACHIEVE & MAINTAIN COMPLIANCE (W/ DEADLINES & RESPONSIBLE PARTY)

STATUS OF COMPLIANCE ACTIONS

To be implemented by this Date:Starting from the information in PERSUAP Annex 1, Annex 2, and drawing on PERSUAP Annex 7, adopt/develop crop- and pest-specific IPM-based pest management plans (PMPs). For chemical controls, PMPs must include the use restrictions specified in the Annex 7 pesticide profiles. (e.g. no use near surface waters.)Translate PMPs into crop-specific field reference guides or posters for farmers to anticipate and manage pests.

To be implemented by this Date: Provide first-time training to appropriate project staff, partners and beneficiaries in PMPs; Provide refresher training annually.

From Date:Require and enforce PMP implementation in situations where the project has direct control over pesticide use

Require and enforce that field extension under

Page

REQUIRED COMPLIANCE (MITIGATION) MEASURE INITIAL COMPLIANCE STATUS (IF NOT KNOWN, SO INDICATE)

ACTIONS PLANNED TO ACHIEVE & MAINTAIN COMPLIANCE (W/ DEADLINES & RESPONSIBLE PARTY)

STATUS OF COMPLIANCE ACTIONS

direct project control be PMP-based.

Where project control over extension or agricultural practice on the ground is less than complete, promote and support the PMPs to the greatest practicable extent.

Ongoing over Life of Project (LOP)Modify PMPs over LOP based on ground-truthing/field experience.

For all target activities, appropriate project staff & beneficiaries must be trained in safe pesticide use & pesticide first aid.Ensure availability of product label and MSDS. For all products that will be in use, the project personnel must obtain and review the product label and MSDS to ensure that pesticide users are aware of potential hazards and are undertaking all measures to minimize risks to human health and safety and to the environment.Ensure that for all beneficiaries that receive support for procurement and use of seed treated with pesticides, training in handling dressed seed is provided.

Page

REQUIRED COMPLIANCE (MITIGATION) MEASURE INITIAL COMPLIANCE STATUS (IF NOT KNOWN, SO INDICATE)

ACTIONS PLANNED TO ACHIEVE & MAINTAIN COMPLIANCE (W/ DEADLINES & RESPONSIBLE PARTY)

STATUS OF COMPLIANCE ACTIONS

Develop a training plan for pesticide safe practices and IPM for project staff and beneficiaries, including at least annual refresher training.

Develop or source curricula conforming to required training elements specified in Annex 8.

Implement training plan, providing first-time training to all relevant staff and beneficiaries within six months.

To the greatest degree practicable, all projects must require use & maintenance of appropriate PPE – as well as safe pesticide purchase, handling, storage and disposal practices.If carbamate or organophosphate-class pesticides are used extensively, follow procedures for baseline testing for cholinesterase inhibition, and establish a periodic cholinesterase monitoring schedule when necessary.

Implement/observe core risk mitigation measures (PPE and other precautions). Where control is less complete, take all practicable measures to support and promote implementation of these measures.

Page

REQUIRED COMPLIANCE (MITIGATION) MEASURE INITIAL COMPLIANCE STATUS (IF NOT KNOWN, SO INDICATE)

ACTIONS PLANNED TO ACHIEVE & MAINTAIN COMPLIANCE (W/ DEADLINES & RESPONSIBLE PARTY)

STATUS OF COMPLIANCE ACTIONS

Whenever providing, supporting or recommending pesticides for use, assure that appropriate PPE is available and, to the degree possible, require its use.

Whenever directly using, procuring or supplying pesticides, assure that quality application equipment is available and local capacity for application is available and maintained.

Projects must follow safety restrictions and precautions for all target activities People who are not wearing PPE should not enter pesticide treated areas during Restricted Entry Intervals (REI) to perform tasks that involve contact with pesticide treated surfaces. Each pesticide label specifies a REI usually ranging from 12 to 72 hours.Warning signs should be posted to warn people in advance about pesticide application and REI.Products that are suspected to have potential to cause harm to unborn child will not be handled and applied by pregnant women. Pregnant women should not enter treated areas during application and REI.

Page

REQUIRED COMPLIANCE (MITIGATION) MEASURE INITIAL COMPLIANCE STATUS (IF NOT KNOWN, SO INDICATE)

ACTIONS PLANNED TO ACHIEVE & MAINTAIN COMPLIANCE (W/ DEADLINES & RESPONSIBLE PARTY)

STATUS OF COMPLIANCE ACTIONS

Pre-harvest interval (PHI) is the time required between the last application of pesticides and the safe harvesting of edible crops for immediate consumption. Farmers will be trained about the importance of adhering to the PHI stated on the label to ensure no chemical residues are found on harvested crops. Projects must be systematic in their pesticide related record-keeping and monitoring. Pesticide efficacy must be evaluated

Any evidence of pesticide resistance development must be tracked and reported.

Flow-down requirementsPrime contractors must write pesticide compliance requirements as set out above into each grant or sub-contract that will involve support for pesticide use.

Pesticide registration status in Tanzania and US EPA must be updated yearly.

Page

ANNEX 1. MAIZE AND RICE PESTS AND DISEASES FOUND IN TANZANIA WITH PREVENTIVE AND CURATIVE CONTROL MEASURES

Page

Annex 1: Maize and Rice Pests and Diseases Found in Tanzania with Preventive and Curative Control Measures

Maize Field Pests and Diseases

Pest or Disease Preventive IPM Measures Curative IPM Measures

Maize Stalk Borers

African Maize Stalkborer, Busseola fusca

Pink Stalkborer, Sesamia calamistis

Spotted Stalkborer, Chilo partelus

Improve & manage soil fertility Use resistant varieties (TMV-1, Staha, Use seed treated with insecticide Collect or destroy (by disking and

plowing under) crop stalk residues Intercrop with beans and sunflower Intercrop with borer-repellent

Desmodium plant (see ICIPE Push-Pull Strategy at http://www.push-pull.net/3.shtml)

Use crop rotation with legumes Control weeds on field margins

Apply artisanal neem powder and/or extract to the whorl when first larval damage appears.

Rotate among pesticides classes and pesticides to manage resistance.

A preventive seed treatment with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

At least 45 days post-emergence from treated seed, broadcast a spray with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

Termites

Macrotermes species

Microtermes species and

Odontotermes species

Destroy termite mounds in and near fields.

Excavation of mound tops and burning of straw to suffocate and kill the colony.

Dig out and remove the queen (the one with really fat abdomen).

Use baits: wood stakes treated with borates.

Seed treated with systemic insecticide. Use composted instead of fresh

A preventive seed treatment with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

At least 45 days post-emergence from treated seed, broadcast a spray with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

Spray with synthetic insecticides containing permethrin.

If available, registered in Tanzania and desired by NAFAKA, insecticides containing the microbe Metarhizium anisopliae or synthetic

Page

mulch. chemicals called Insect Growth Regulators (IGRs) could be used.

Maize Leafhopper—transmits Maize Streak Virus (MSV)

Cicadulina mbila

Use resistant varieties like TMV-1, Staha-ST, Kilima-ST, Kito-ST.

Control weeds, especially grasses, on field margins.

Plant maize well away from previously irrigated cereals or grassland maximizes the distance the leafhopper needs to travel from another host.

Create a barrier of 10 m of bare ground between maize fields and previously infested crops which can reduce leafhopper movement and hence MSV incidence.

Removal of MSV-infected maize plants (rogueing) at an early stage.

Planting a large area of maize all at once is likely to make the crop less vulnerable to maize leafhopper infestation than planting in a staggered sequence. 

Remove residues of maize and other cereal crops since they serve as infection sources.

Do intercropping and crop rotation.

A preventive seed treatment with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

At least 45 days post-emergence from treated seed, rotate among broadcast sprays with thiamethoxam, deltamethrin, fenitrothion or imidacloprid.

Maize Flea Beetles Natural parasites include Braconid wasps, crickets and lacewings.

Artisanal water extracts of neem may provide effective control.

Page

Chaetocnema species Sanitation: Keep fields and field margins free from weeds, especially mustards and field bindweed.

Heavily damaged fields may require re-planting. Remove and destroy or compost

all plant residues. Yellow sticky traps placed in and

around the field.

A preventive seed treatment with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

At least 45 days post-emergence from treated seed, rotate among broadcast sprays with thiamethoxam, deltamethrin, fenitrothion or imidacloprid.

Black maize beetles and white soil-inhabiting larvae called white “C-shaped” grubs

Heteronychus arator

Phyllophaga

Other species

Use seed treated with systemic insecticide.

Soil solarization and tillage. Light trapping of adults. Ensure good soil drainage. Inter-planting with alliums

(onions, garlic). Do crop rotation with a pulse,

mustard or chiocory. Sanitation: Remove crop residues

after harvest.

Can use natural soil insecticides containing Beauveria bassiana.

A preventive seed treatment with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

At least 45 days post-emergence from treated seed, broadcast a spray with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

Can apply a synthetic insecticide containing fenitrothion in-furrow or as a T-band application.

White flies

Bemisia tabaci

Other species

Controlled in nature by hymenopteran parasitoids (Encarsia species), lady beetles and minute pirate bugs.

Yellow sticky traps may reduce populations but cannot prevent the spread.

Spray natural solutions of insecticidal soap, horticultural oil, neem oil or Beauveria bassiana if the infestation is heavy.

A preventive seed treatment with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

At least 45 days post-emergence from treated seed, rotate among

Page

broadcast sprays with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid, and deltamethrin, fenitrothion.

Spider mites

Tetranychus species

Olygonychus species

Natural predators like minute pirate bugs and big-eyed bugs provide a lot of spider mite control.

Maize thrips will feed on early season maize mite eggs and control mite populations.

Plant well away from roads to reduce dust collection on maize leaves.

Remove weeds in field and on field margins using cultivation or herbicides.

Some neonicotinoid pesticides have been shown to increase the prevalence of spider mites.

Rotate among miticides containing deltamethrin or spinosad.

Treat when maize is 0.5 to 1.5 meters high; control after this height is ineffective due to poor leaf coverage.

Maize thrips

Frankliniella occidentalis

Frankliniella williamsi

Other species

Controlled in nature by minute pirate bugs.

Use good field sanitation. Thrips populations tend to build up on

weeds. Cultivating or herbiciding nearby weedy areas before maize emerges will reduce the potential of a thrips problem when the weeds begin to dry out. (Cultivating weedy areas after corn emergence will increase thrips problems).

Maize thrips will feed on early season maize mite eggs and help control mite populations.

Generally treatment is not necessary because seedlings will recover from thrips damage.

Page

Maize Aphids

Maize leaf aphid, Rhopalosiphum maidis

Green peach aphid, Myzus persicae

Other species

Natural enemies include Braconid parasitoids, ground beetles, spiders, rove beetles, ladybird beetles, lacewings, damsel bugs, aphid midges and hoverfly larvae.

Use crop rotation. Plant trap crops such as lupine,

nasturtiums, and timothy grass near the crop to be protected (plow under or spray). Anise, chives, garlic, onions, and radish are good companion crops.

Control ants, which protect aphids. Avoid using heavy doses of highly

soluble nitrogen fertilizers. Instead apply fertilizer into 3 phases: during seeding, vegetative, and reproductive stages of plant growth.

Use yellow sticky board traps placed in field (spread used motor oil on yellow painted plastic, thick cardboard or wood).

Use botanical and homemade water extracts of chili, or neem, narrow range oil, and insecticidal soaps.

Can rotate among synthetic pesticides containing fentrothion and deltamethrin.

Seedcorn maggot Delia platura

Other species

Natural enemies include predaceous rove beetles.

Use a systemic seed treatment. Physical control includes use of

yellow sticky traps (see methodology below) placed on field margins and in field.

A preventive seed treatment with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

Page

Plow under crop residues immediately after harvest. Plowing destroys the pest and exposes pupae to ground predators and sunlight. Maggots can survive for some time in crop residues.

Root flies prefer to lay eggs in the soil that is moist and with high organic matter. Do not plant susceptible crops unless the plant residues are dry and/or completely decomposed by use of composting.

Armyworms

Spodoptera exempta (African armyworm)http://www.plantwise.org/FullTextPDF/2017/20177800134.pdf

Spodoptera frugiperda (Fall armyworm, exotic)

http://www.plantwise.org/FullTextPDF/2017/20177800275.pdf

Use pheromone traps to detect. Use regular surveillance to detect and quickly

reduce populations before they explode. Quickly report outbreaks to MOA; if detected

early, the MOA may spray them at no cost. Control weeds around field and in adjacent

fields. If only the leaves of young plants are attacked

(and not the growing point), compensate the damage by applying recommended fertilizers by the MoA and by irrigating the field so the plants recover from the attack.

A preventive seed treatment with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

At least 45 days post-emergence from treated seed, rotate among broadcast sprays with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid, deltamethrin (there is some armyworm resistance known to deltamethrin) or fenitrothion.

On small-scale farms, handpick and destroy the egg masses and larvae.

If available, spray young caterpillars with neem-based products before they enter the ears or whorl.

Rodents

Many mouse and rat species

Use regular surveillance to detect and quickly reduce populations before they explode.

Control weeds around field. Quickly report outbreaks to MOA; if

detected early, the MOA may spray

Can use artisanal rat attractants plus rodenticides: ground avocado seeds, Glyricida seeds, coconut and salt.

Can use, in a hazard-labeled rodent bait box, synthetic rodenticides containing bromadialone.

Page

them at no cost. Place traps in strategic locations

(entry points). Encourage all neighbors to also

control rodents on an area-wide basis.

Locusts

Red locust, Nomadacris septemfasciata

Migratory locust, Locusta migratoria

Use regular surveillance to detect and quickly reduce populations before they explode.

Quickly report outbreaks to MOA; if detected early, the MOA may spray them at no cost.

Insecticides containing fenitrothion or deltamethrin may provide some control.

Birds

Crow group of birds, Corvidae

Bird scaring with scarecrows, UV-reflective tape or crop guards.

No avicides are recommended for bird control.

Ear and Kernel Rots & production of aflatoxins

Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus parasiticus (yellow-green colored mold)

Fusarium moniliforme (white-salmon colored mold)

Fusarium graminearum (Gibberella zeae) (pink-red colored mold)

Use certified clean seed. Use hybrid varieties with resistance to

Aspergillus. Plant early and avoid drought stress, if

possible. Control insects that damage the husk,

ear and kernals. Control fertilizer applications

carefully and according to extension timing recommendations so as to not over-apply or apply at the inopportune time.

Harvest early and on time (the longer maize is left in the field, the higher the aflatoxin content).

Commercial biological treatments are available in the USA, called Afla-Guard and AF36, and EPA-approved. If desired, try to get these registered by TPRI and try them.

Few synthetic fungicides provide economically efficient control of aflatoxin molds.

Page

Avoid or reduce kernel damage during harvest.

Dry and store maize at less than 13% moisture.

Keep storage facilities clean and cool, with proper ventilation.

Screen incoming corn for infection (see mold colors), remove and destroy (burry or burn) diseased ears.

Maize Rusts

Puccinia sorghi

Puccinia polysora

Use rust resistant or tolerant varieties or hybrids.

Maintain soil and plant health (test these with lab tests).

Destroy infected residue. Rotate maize with other crops.

Generally, fungicides are not needed or economical.

If needed, fungicides containing mancozeb, difenoconazole, or tebuconazole can be used.

Gray Leaf Spot

Cerospora zaea-maydis

Use resistant varieties, such as H6302, UH6010, or TMV-2 or early maturing variety Kilima.

Observe locally recommended time of planting.

Use crop rotation. Sanitation: remove and destroy crop

debris soon after harvest.

Fungicide sprays are not economical.

Annual & Perennial Grass Weeds

Broad Leaf Weeds

Use an integrated weed management scheme:

Perform thorough land preparation (soil tillage, fertilizer, and water management).

Before planting, use non-selective herbicides containing glyphosate or s-metolachlor.

At planting, use synthetic herbicides containing S-metolachlor,

Page

Narrow row spacing makes the crop more competitive than the weeds, use intercropping.

Place the fertilizer in such a way that the crop has access to it but the weeds do not. This allows the crop to be more competitive with weeds.

Keep the surroundings of farm free of weeds, unless they are maintained and intended as habitats for natural enemies of crop pests.

Regularly clean farm tools. Use green manure, which chokes out

weeds. Use intercropping. Hand weeding, hoeing and

composting (do not compost weeds that have flowered and set).

glyphosate, or pendimethalin. After planting, use synthetic

herbicides containing pendimethalin, glyphosate, bromoxynil, or halosulfuron-mehtyl.

Rice Field Pests and Diseases

June and May beetles and white soil-inhabiting larvae called white “C-shaped” grubs

Phyllophaga

Other species

Use seed treated with systemic insecticide.

Soil solarization and tillage. Light trapping of adults. Ensure good soil drainage.

Can use natural soil insecticides containing Beauveria bassiana.

A preventive seed treatment with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

At least 45 days post-emergence

Page

Inter-planting with alliums (onions, garlic).

Do crop rotation with a pulse, mustard or chiocory.

Sanitation: Remove crop residues after harvest.

from treated seed, broadcast a spray with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

Termites

Macrotermes species

Microtermes species and

Odontotermes species

Destroy termite mounds in and near fields.

Excavation of mound tops and burning of straw to suffocate and kill the colony.

Dig out and remove the queen (the one with really fat abdomen).

Use baits: wood stakes treated with borates.

Seed treated with systemic insecticide. Use composted instead of fresh

mulch.

A preventive seed treatment with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

At least 45 days post-emergence from treated seed, broadcast a spray with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

Spray with synthetic insecticides containing permethrin.

If available, registered in Tanzania and desired by NAFAKA, insecticides containing the microbe Metarhizium anisopliae or synthetic chemicals called Insect Growth Regulators (IGRs) could be used.

Rice thrips

Stenchaetothrips biformis

Predatory thrips, Coccinellid beetles, Anthocorid bugs, and Staphylinid beetles are biological control agents that feed on both the larvae and adults.

Use resistant cultivars. Flooding to submerge the infested

field for 2 days as a cultural control practice is very effective against the

Use a preventive seed treatment with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

At least 45 days post-emergence from treated seed, broadcast a spray with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

Page

rice thrips.

Rice stem borers

Chilo zacconius

Coniesta ingnefusalis

Orseola oryzicola

Maliarpha separatella

Pink borer (Sesamia calamistis)

Use resistant and early-maturing varieties. Improved semi-dwarf varieties are generally more resistant to stem borers than the tall traditional ones.

Transplant & grow healthy rice seedlings and plants.

Harvest at the very base of the plants, or plow stubble under and flood.

Early/synchronized planting & water management.

Use natural extracts of neem and chili peppers.

A preventive seed treatment with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

At least 45 days post-emergence from treated seed, broadcast a spray with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

Rice gall midges, shoot maggots cause deadheart

Orseolia oryzivora

Cricotopus sylvestrisParalauterborniella subcinctaParatanytarsus species

Use resistant varieties. Plow under ratoon from previous

crop. Remove off-season alternate host

plants like wild rice. Draining fields for 3-4 days controls

the midge. Seeding synchronously as soon as

possible after flooding. Seed parts of the field in sequence as

they fill with water. Avoid over-doses of fertilizer.

A preventive seed treatment with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

At least 45 days post-emergence from treated seed, broadcast a spray with thiamethoxam, imidacloprid, fenitrothion, or deltamethrin.

Rice beetles and flea beetles

Leaf-feeding beetle (Epilachna similis)

Hispid Beetle (Trichispa species)

Use resistant varieties. Use crop rotation. Keep bunds and surroundings free

from grass weeds

A preventive seed treatment with thiamethoxam or imidacloprid.

At least 45 days post-emergence from treated seed, broadcast a spray

Page

Flea Beetle (Chaetocnema varicornis) Destroy stubble and avoid ratooning. Top the tips of leaves and seedlings

before transplanting to destroy egg masses.

Ensure balanced nutrition (avoid excessive nitrogen application).

Removing weedy vegetation on the levees in spring near the time of seeding.

Winter flooding of the field to enhance straw breakdown and provide waterfowl habitat.

with thiamethoxam, imidacloprid, fenitrothion, or deltamethrin.

Rice blast

Pyricularia oryzae

Use of resistant cultivars. Destruction of infested residue. Use of certified clean or non-infested

seed. Water seeding (not drill seeding). Continuous flooding. Avoid using excess nitrogen. Do not plant too early or too late. Avoid close planting in nurseries.

Use application of synthetic fungicides containing metalaxyl.

Rice yellow mottle virus (RYMV) Many predators control the vectors of RYMV, so avoid over-spraying for insect vectors

Use resistant cultivars as they are developed, such as SSD-1, SSD-3, SSD-5, SSD-7, SSD-35.

Manage the vectors of RYMV by using synthetic pyrethroid pesticides

Control flea beetles (above).

Page

(get RUP training and avoid getting pyrethroids into the water)

Use clean seedling material

Rice weeds Use an integrated weed management scheme:

Perform thorough land preparation (soil tillage, fertilizer, and water management).

Narrow row spacing makes the crop more competitive than the weeds, use intercropping.

Place the fertilizer in such a way that the crop has access to it but the weeds do not. This allows the crop to be more competitive with weeds.

Keep the surroundings of farm free of weeds, unless they are maintained and intended as habitats for natural enemies of crop pests.

Regularly clean farm tools. Use green manure, which chokes out

weeds. Use intercropping. Hand weeding, hoeing and

composting (do not compost weeds that have flowered and set).

Minimizing weed competition during the early stages of the crop, before it has formed a closed leaf canopy, is particularly important. In upland rice this critical period is approximately 15-40 days after seeding, while in transplanted rice, the crop can form a canopy more rapidly. Where a crop is exposed to prolonged weed competition during this critical period it is not usually able to recover sufficiently to give a good yield.

Pre-emergence: use an herbicide containing pendimethalin plus hand weeding/hoeing.

Post-emergence: use an herbicide containing 2, 4 D, bentazone or trichlopyr selectively control broadleaves and sedges.

Rodents See above for maize

Page

Armyworm See above for maize

Locusts See above for maize

Quelea Birds

Quelea quelea

Bird scaring with scarecrows, UV-reflective tape or crop guards.

Remove weaverbird nests and eggs.

No avicides are recommended for farmer Quelea control.

Maize and Rice Storage Pests and Diseases

Rodents

Rats and Mice

Use regular surveillance to detect and quickly reduce populations before they explode.

Control weeds around the facility. Place traps in strategic locations

(entry points). Encourage all neighbors to also

control rodents on an area-wide basis.

Can use artisanal rat attractants plus rodenticides: ground avocado seeds, Glyricida seeds, coconut and salt.

Can use, in a hazard-labeled rodent bait box, synthetic rodenticides containing bromadialone, brodifacoum or diphacinone.

Larger Grain Borer

Prostephanus truncatus

and

Sitophilus Grain Weevil

Sitophilus granarius

Do routine monitoring. Ensure good pest identification; understand pest biology, ecology, and behavior.

Use good sanitation and good grain storage practices, as follows:

All grain stored off the floor on palates, with space between palates,

Spray inside (ceiling, walls, floor, pallets) of storage area with an insecticide containing pirimiphos-methyl.

Treat stored seed and grain with an insecticide containing pirimiphos-methyl and permethrin or spinosad.

Page

well ventilated/aerated and lighted, dispose of old containers.

In empty shipping containers, thoroughly sweep or brush down walls, ceilings, ledges, braces, and handling equipment, and remove all spilled debris.

Brush, sweep out and/or vacuum the truck beds, augers, and loading buckets to remove insect-infested grain and debris.

Remove all debris from fans, exhausts, and aeration ducts (also from beneath slotted floors, when possible).

Remove all debris and vegetation growing within ten feet of the warehouses (preferably the whole storage area).

Examine area to determine if rodent bait stations are required, and use if needed. Be sure to follow all label directions.

Spray cleaned area around bins with a residual herbicide to remove all undesirable weedy plants.

Remove all debris from the storage site and dispose of it properly.

Frequent rotation of the stocks, "FIFO" (First In - First Out) rule

Page

applies. Use sticky traps to monitor for

presence and quantity.

Maize Ear and Kernel Rots & production of aflatoxins

Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus parasiticus (yellow-green colored mold)

Fusarium moniliforme (white-salmon colored mold)

Fusarium graminearum (Gibberella zeae) (pink-red colored mold)

Clean the storage space thoroughly before putting new crop.

Reduce kernel damage from insects. Manage and reduce humidity (below

13%). Increase fresh airflow. Manage and reduce temperature.

Few fungicides control aflatoxin-producing fungi and molds.

References: http://ipm.ifas.ufl.edu/agriculture/index.shtml; http://attra.ncat.org/index.php; http://www.agroatlas.ru/en/about/; http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/.

To find MRLs for each crop and pesticide, see http://www.mrldatabase.com/ and choose MRLs for the market targeted by each crop, in the absence of a national MRL database, Codex.

Page

ANNEX 2. GUIDELINES FOR PEST MANAGEMENT PLANS (PMPS) FOR TANZANIA CROPS AND BENEFICIARIES

What is a PMP10?

Pest Management Plans or Guides provide field crop, livestock production or project decision-makers – farmers and farm managers – with best production practices recommendations, usually adapted by region, crop phenology and seasons. The aims of PMPs are to reduce the risks to production from pests by using a combination of best practices, including IPM, Integrated Vector Management (IVM) and Integrated Weed Management (IWM), that maximize crop or livestock health, and thus resilience to or tolerance of pests, and without an over-reliance on pesticides needed when best practices are not followed. Thus, prevention of pests plays a strongly pivotal role in the PMP, followed closely by management of pests when prevention alone is not adequate for the level of control needed or desired.

Who are the PMP’s intended audiences and users?

Farm land preparation and crop production decision-makers Farmers Farm managers

Why is a PMP being done?

PMP Objectives:

Prevent or reduce pest damage risk to agricultural production or health Protect the health of farmers, farm family members, laborers and community members from pesticide

risks Maintain economically sound practices Reduce environmental pollution and degradation risks Enhance the overall quality and quantity of biodiversity on the sustainable farm work environment Respond to foreign market demand for the use of agriculture sector best management practice standards,

also called Good Agriculture Practices (GAPs) which include IPM measures, to achieve farm and produce certification

Comply with local, regional, donor and international laws, conventions, and regulations

Organization of the PMP

The following pieces of crop- or livestock-specific background information are used to build a PMP base

General information on the crop/livestock/sector Crop/livestock common/species names: Crop/livestock developmental stages: Production regions and how they differ by soil type, pH, fertility, etc Overall concerns and priorities for crop/livestock production

10 PMPs or Year-Round (seasonal) IPM Programs are state of the art in many developed countries, and they help institutionalize IPM in planning and practice. PMPs provide agriculture managers and farmers with a tool to predict and prevent many crop pests of each crop throughout a season. See examples of PMPs at http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/crops-agriculture.html, upper left corner under “Year-Round IPM Programs”.

Page

Crop/livestock cultural best practices Crop/livestock Good Agriculture Practices (GAPs) including some IPM (see PERSUAP section on

GAPS and IPM) recommendations

Individual Pest Prevention and Management Sections for each of the following pest types:

Invertebrate (Insects, Mites, Slugs/Snails, Nematodes) Diseases (Fungi, Bacteria, Viruses, Other) Weeds (annual grasses, broadleaves, perennial grasses, broadleaves, sedges, others) Vertebrates (birds, rodents, other)

For each pest type, first, identify overall priorities for pest prevention and management in the target crop or livestock.

Next, identify individual pest species noting the type of damage incurred; part of plant damaged: roots/rhizomes/tubers, stems/stalks, leaves, florescence, or seeds (field or stored); or if livestock, part of animal affected.

To best understand how to manage a pest, one needs to understand how, where, when and on what parts of the plant or animal the pest feeds. For field pests and stored grain/food pests, many PMPs are designed and outlined as follows, for each major species of pest (insects, mites, slugs/snails, nematodes):

Photographs of each pest, life stages Photographs of plant or livestock damage Description of the pest, life cycle and survival strategies11: Description of damage symptoms Best Prevention Practices

o Use any and all of the above GAPs including IPM o Country or region-specific information

Best Management Practiceso Focus on prevention (above) o Country or region-specific information

Information on PMP-recommended pesticides

Information needed for each pesticide referenced in the above PMP, by pest (so the farmer/farm manager has the information at their fingertips and do not need to refer to other documents and tables to find it):

Pesticide essential information needed

Active Ingredient (AI) name Product Trade names (with EPA and WHO Acute Toxicity Classifications in parenthesis) Amounts to use per hectare

11 Survival strategies: All pests have survival strategies that allow them to live and breed in each crop’s farming systems. Knowing the survival strategies, including overwintering habit and alternate host plants, that are employed by the pest can help with decision making at the farming systems-level (e.g. choice of rotation crops) and also can help to anticipate pest outbreaks.

Page

Price Pre-Harvest Interval (PHI) Special comments on best application methods and frequency Any resistance management strategies needed Pesticide application record sheet Guidelines for reducing spray drift Re-entry interval (REI): field safe re-entry period after spraying Maximum residue levels (MRL) permitted by markets Pesticide precautions with use including Reading the label Legal responsibilities and permitted registration uses Permit requirements for possession and use Recommended and obligated use of PPE and best practices First aid and antidotes Transportation best practices Storage best practices Safer Use best practices Container disposal best practices Leftover pesticide disposal best practices Protection of non-pest animals, plants, endangered species and water body quality Protect natural enemies & honeybees: http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/r584310111.html Posting signage in treated fields Some chemicals not permitted on processed crops Potential for phytotoxicity (crop injury) on some crops Documentation and record-keeping on farms

Information needed on Natural Enemies of Pests

Common Names of Predators and Parasitoids effective against above pests: For a list of common natural enemies of crop pests, see http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/NE/index.html. Genera will likely be the same around the world, with different species in different continents, filling similar niches.

Additional Information Needed:

Will there be an IPM Coordinator, an IPM Advisory Committee, Education and Licensing for Applicators, Currency and Approval of the PMP?

Page

ANNEX 3. ELEMENTS OF INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT (IPM) PROGRAM

IPM12

Although farmers are likely using numerous IPM tactics, without really calling them that, IPM philosophy or planning is not generally an active part of crop production in Tanzania plots; thus, a basic understanding of the steps or elements needed in an IPM program are addressed below.

Step 1: Learn and value farmer’s indigenous pest management tools and tactics.

Most farmers are already using their own forms of GAPs and IPM, many of which are novel, self-created, adapted for local conditions, and many of which work well. These local tools and tactics need to be well understood and taken into account when making PMPs. Accurate assessments of these farmer’s GAP and IPM technologies, as well as an understanding of actual losses due to different constraints in farmers’ fields are required before designing a crop production and pest management program. Standards and Certification (S&C) farmers will have records of historical pesticide use and trends, as well as information on current use of artisanal or local IPM tactics.

Step 2: Identify key pests for each crop.

Although perhaps up to ten species of pests may impact a crop and yields at different plant growth stages, generally only two or three are considered serious enough to spend money controlling. Farmers should be encouraged to monitor their population size, their life cycle, the kind of damage they cause and actual losses. Note that crop loss figures based on farmers’ perceptions of damage and loss are often overestimated.

Step 3: Evaluate all Management Options.

Use of best management practices, preventive measures, and “organic” options to control pest impacts may eliminate the need for synthetic pesticides.

Step 4: Choose IPM methods, identify Needs and Establish Priorities

Continue dialog with project field staff, ministry extension staff and farmers when choosing methods to be used. Consider the feasibility of attractive methods, including the availability of resources needed, farmers’ perceptions of pest problems, their abilities to identify pests, their predators, diseases and parasitoids, and to act upon their observations.

Step 5: Do effective activities and training to promote IPM

Next, identify strategies and mechanisms for fostering the transfer of the needed IPM technology under various project and institutional arrangements, mechanisms, and funding levels. Define what is available for immediate transfer and what may require more adaptation and validation research. Set up an initial planning workshop (with a COP-supported and signed Action Plan) to help define and orient implementation activities, and begin to assign individual responsibilities.

Learning-by-doing/discovery training programs

The adoption of new techniques by small-, medium- and large-holder farmers occurs most readily when program participants acquire knowledge and skills through personal experience, observation, analysis, experimentation, decision-making and practice. At first, frequent (usually weekly) sessions are conducted for 10–20 farmers during the cropping season in farmers’ fields by trained instructors or extension agents.

12 http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/ad487e/ad487e00.htm; http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/ad487e/ad487e02.htm; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farmer_Field_School; http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/crops-agriculture.html

Page

Smallholder support and discussion groups

Weekly meetings of smallholders, held during the cropping season, to discuss pest and related problems can be useful for sharing the success of various control methods. However, maintaining attendance is difficult except when there is a clear financial incentive (e.g., credit, advance knowledge of nearby infestations for early action leading to yield improvement).

Educational material

In many countries, basic written and photographic guides to pest identification and crop-specific management techniques are unavailable or out of date. Videos featuring graphic pictures of the effects of acute and chronic pesticide exposure, and interviews with poisoning victims can be particularly effective.

Youth education

Promoting and improving the quality of programs on IPM and the risks of synthetic pesticides has been effective at technical schools for rural youth. In addition to becoming future farmers, these students can bring informed views back to their communities.

Food market incentives (especially important in the last decade)

Promoting Organic, Global GAP, BRC, Fair Trade or other certification for access to the lucrative and rapidly growing S&C systems-driven international and regional food markets can be, and is, a strong incentive to adopt IPM.

Step 6: Partner successfully with other IPM implementers

The following design steps are considered essential.

Articulate the partnership’s vision of IPM

Organizations may forge partnerships based on a common commitment to “IPM” – only to discover too late that that their visions of IPM differ considerably. It is therefore highly important that partners articulate a common, detailed vision of IPM, centered on the crops and conditions the project will encounter.

Confirm partner institutions’ commitment

The extent of commitment to IPM integration into project, design, and thus implementation depends strongly upon the following key variables:

IPM program integration into larger project.

The IPM program is likely to be part of a larger “sustainable agriculture” project. The IPM program must fit into a partner’s overall goals. The extent of this integration should be clearly expressed in the proposed annual work plan.

Cost sharing.

The extent of funds (or in-kind resources) is a good measure of a genuine partner commitment.

Participation of key IPM personnel.

Organizations should have staff with expertise in IPM. In strong partnerships, these staff members are actively involved in the partnership.

Step 7: Monitor the fields regularly

At minimum twice a week, farmers should monitor their fields for pests, as some pest populations increase rapidly and unexpectedly; this increase is usually related closely to the stage of crop growth and weather

Page

conditions, but it is difficult to predict the severity of pest problems in advance.

Step 8: Select an appropriate blend of IPM tools

A good IPM program draws from and integrates a variety of pest management techniques, like those presented in the above list. Flexibility to fit local needs is a key variable. Pesticides should be used only if no practical, effective, and economic non-chemical control methods are available. Once the pesticide has been carefully chosen for the pest, crop, and environment, it should be applied only to keep the pest population low, not necessarily eliminate it.

Step 9: Develop education, training, and demonstration programs for extension workers

Implementation of IPM depends heavily on education, training, and demonstration to help farmers and extension workers develop and evaluate the IPM methods. Hands-on training conducted in farmers’ fields (as opposed to a classroom) is a must. Special training for extension workers and educational programs for government officials and the public are also important.

Step 10: Monitoring, Record-Keeping and Evaluation (M&E)

Develop data collection forms and checklists, collect baseline GAP/IPM data at the beginning of the project, and set targets.

For the use and maintenance of Good Agriculture Practices (that include safe pesticide storage, use and disposal), maintain farm or project files of: farmer and farm employee training records certification; farm soil, water, biodiversity, cropping and pesticide use maps; pesticide purchase and stock records; price increases or decreases, chemical application instructions including target pest, type of chemical applied, dosage, time of spray, rates at which pesticides were applied, harvest interval days, application machinery, PPE required and used, and any special instructions on mixing, exposure to children or dangers. Further, for project staff, beneficiaries, produce processing facilities, food warehouses, seed multipliers, or farmers that store seed or food and deal with stored seed and food pests, there are warehouse BMPs and monitoring reports that incorporate some IPM tactics. These monitoring forms track, by location or warehouse, use of pallets, stacking, general hygiene and sanitation, damaged packages, actual infestations or signs of rodents, molds, insects, drainage, locks and security measures, use of IPM tactics including least toxic chemicals and strict BMPs.

Page

ANNEX 4. BOTANICAL ACTIVE INGREDIENTS IN PESTICIDES, REPELLENTS, AND BAITS REGULATED BY USEPA

This table, as well as the table in Annex 5, identifies many botanical pesticides that are useful for repelling or killing pests. These natural products are presented to emphasize the range of products possible for artisanal (homemade) use, and small-scale production, should TPRI be encouraged to support and/or register their production and use for small-scale farmers. These are not presently requested for approval by this PERSUAP (and therefore are not approved for use in NAFAKA).

Name Other Names Use Toxicity EPA Tracking Number

Allium sativum Garlic Repels insects Low 128827

Allyl isothiocyanate

Oil of Mustard Kills & repels insects Questionable 004901

Anise Oil Repels vertebrates Low 004301

4-allyl anisole Estragole Kills beetles Low 062150

Azadirachtin Azadirachta indica Neem tree extract

Kills & repels insects Low, IV 121701

Bergamot Repels vertebrates 129029

Canola Oil Brassica Napus B. Campestris

Kills many insects Low 011332

Capsaicin Capsicum frutescans

Repels vertebrates Low, III 070701

Castor Oil Repels vertebrates Low 031608

Cedarwood Oil Repels moth larvae Low 040505

Cinnamaldehyde Ceylon and Chinese cinnamon oils

Kills insects, fungi & repels vertebrates*

Low 040506

Citronella Oil Repels insects & vertebrates Low 021901

Cloves, Crushed Low 128895

Dihydroazadirachtin

Neem tree extract Azadirachta indica

Kills & repels insects III-IV 121702

Eucalyptus Oil Repels insects, mites fleas & mosquitoes

Low 040503

Eugenol Oil of cloves Kills insects** Low 102701

Geraniol Oil of rose isomeric w/ linalool

Repels vertebrates** Low 597501

Page

Name Other Names Use Toxicity EPA Tracking Number

Geranium Oil Low 597500

Indole from all plants Trap bait: corn rootworm beetles

Low 25000-

Jasmine Oil Low 040501

Jojoba Oil Kills & repels whitefly kills powdery mildew

Low 067200

Lavandin Oil Repels clothes moth Low 040500

Lemongrass Repels vertebrates Low 040502

Linalool Oil of Ceylon isomeric w/geraniol

Repels insects, ticks, mites & spiders

Low 128838

Maple lactone Roach trap bait Low 004049

Methyl salicylate Oil of wintergreen Repels moths, beetle & vertebrates

May be Toxic in large quantity

76601-

Mint Herb Kills aphids Low 128892

Mint Oil Kills aphids Low 128800

Mustard Oil Repels insects, spiders & vertebrates

Low 004901

Neem Oil Kills whitefly, aphids Low 025006

1-Octen-3-ol From clover, alfalfa

Trap bait: mosquitoes Low 69037-

Orange Repels vertebrates Low 040517

p-Methane-3,8 diol

Eucalyptus sp. Repels biting flies, mosquitoes

Low

2-Phenylethyl-propionate

From peanuts Kills insects, ticks, mites & spiders

Low 102601

Pyrethrum Chrysanthemum sp.

Stored products use III

Pepper Chilli Repels insects Low 070703

Rosemary Herb Low 128893

Rotenone Derris sp., Tephrosia

Controls ticks III

Page

Name Other Names Use Toxicity EPA Tracking Number

Ryania Ryania speciosa Kills thrips, codling moth, corn borers

Sabadilla Schoenocaulon sp. III

Sesame Oil Sesamum indicum Pyrethroid synergist Low

Soybean Oil Soja Kills insects, mites Low 031605

Thyme Herb Controls aphids Low 128894

1,2,4 Trimethoxy-benzene

From squash Trap bait: corn rootworm, cucumber beetles

Low 40515-

Verbenone From pine trees Repels bark beetles Low 128986

* attracts corn rootworm beetles, ** attracts Japanese beetles. Not all plant extracts are listed. More detailed information available for most oils: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/status.htm. Natural Source: Only one or a few sources are listed. Most of these chemicals are found in many different plants.

Since the time in the late 1990s when EPA did register biological ingredients listed above, it has since developed a list of botanical extracts (mostly essential oils) under “Minimum Risk Pesticides Exempted under FIFRA Section 25(b)13”. Some of the very same ingredients are in both lists. However, most US states and USAID consider botanical extracts and essential oils used to kill, destroy, mitigate, or repel pests to be analyzed and treated as pesticides. Only those included in this PERSUAP would be available for use by NAFAKA.

ANNEX 5. NATURAL PESTICIDES THAT HAVE BEEN COMMERCIALIZED

Both the introductory and final notes above to Annex 4 also apply to this annex.

Insecticides

azadirachtin—component in neem oil botanical extractBacillus thuringiensis-BT microbialBeauveria basiana microbialcartap hydrochloride marine worm (Lumbriconereis heterodopa) extractchili pepper extract botanical (spice)emamectin benzoate botanical extractgarlic extract/allicin botanical extract (spice)harpin protein plant induced resistance elicitorkaolin clay inorganic minerald-limonene citrus extract (spice)Metarhizium anisopliae microbialnarrow range dormant oil paraffin oil

13 http://www.epa.gov/oppbppd1/biopesticides/regtools/25b_list.htm

Page

neem oil botanical extractnuclear polyhedrosis virus (NPV) microbialPaecilomyces lilacinus microbialPaecilomyces fumosoroseus microbialpyrethrin botanical extract pyrethrum botanical extract pyriproxyfen IGR (Juvenile Hormone mimic)ryania botanical extractsoap (insecticidal) fatty acidsspinosad microbial extractbuprofezin IGR (Chitin Synthesis inhibitor)

Fungicides

Bacillus subtilis microbialBordeaux mix inorganic (Bordeaux ingredients EPA registered)copper inorganiccopper hydroxide inorganiccopper oxychloride inorganiccopper sulfate inorganicharpin protein plant induced resistance elicitorsulfur inorganicTrichoderma spp. microbial

Nematocides

Myrothecium verrucaria microbialtomatillo oil + thyme oil extracts (Promax14) botanical + spice extracts—soil biopesticide

Molluscicide

iron phosphate inorganic

14 http://www.bhn.name/humagro/biopesticides.html Page

ANNEX 6. ACUTE TOXICITY OF PESTICIDES: EPA AND WHO CLASSIFICATIONS

General Toxicity

Pesticides, by necessity, are poisons, but the toxicity and hazards of different compounds vary greatly. Toxicity refers to the inherent intoxicating ability of a compound whereas hazard refers to the risk or danger of poisoning when the pesticide is used or applied. Pesticide hazard depends not only on toxicity but also on the chance of exposure to toxic amounts of the pesticide. Pesticides can enter the body through oral ingestion, through the skin or through inhalation. Once inside the body, they may produce poisoning symptoms, which are either acute (from a single exposure) or chronic (from repeated exposures or absorption of smaller amounts of toxicant).

EPA and WHO Toxicity Classifications

Basically, there are two systems of pesticide toxicity classification. These are the USEPA and the WHO systems of classification. It is important to note that the WHO classification is based on the active ingredient only, whereas USEPA uses product formulations to determine the toxicity class of pesticides. So, WHO classification shows relative toxicities of all pesticide active (or technical) ingredients, whereas EPA classification shows actual toxicity of the formulated products, which can be more or less toxic than the active ingredient alone and are more representative of actual dangers encountered in the field. The tables below show classification of pesticides according to the two systems.

a) USEPA classification (based on formulated product = active ingredient plus inert and other ingredients)

Class

Descriptive term

Mammalian LD50

Mammalian

Inhalation

LC50

Irritation Aquatic invert/fish (LC50 or EC50)2

Honey bee acute oral (LD50)

Oral Dermal Eye1 Skin

I Extremely toxic

50 200 0.2 Corrosive Corrosive < 0.1

II Highly toxic

50-500

200-2000

0.2-2.0 Severe Severe 0.11-1.0 < 2 µg/bee

III Moderately toxic

500-5000

2000-20000

2.0-20 No corneal opacity

Moderate 1.1-10.0 2.1-11 µg/bee

IV Slightly toxic

5000

20000

20 None Moderate or slight

10.1-100

Relatively non-toxic

101-1000

Practically non-toxic

1001-10,000

> 11 µg/bee

Non-toxic > 10,0001 Corneal opacity not reversible within 7 days for Class I pesticides; corneal opacity reversible within 7 days but irritation persists during that period for Class II pesticides; no corneal opacity and irritation is reversible within

Page

7 days for Class III pesticides; and Class IV pesticides cause no irritation2 Expressed in ppm or mg/l of water

b) WHO classification (based only on active or ‘technical’ ingredient)

Class Descriptive termOral LD50 for the rat (mg/kg body wt)

Dermal LD50 for the rat (mg/kg body wt)

Solids Liquids Solids Liquids

Ia Extremely hazardous 5 20 10 40

Ib Highly hazardous 5-50 20-200 10-100 40-400

II Moderately hazardous 50-500 20-2000 100-1000 400-4000

III Slightly hazardous 501 2001 1001 4001

U Unlikely to present acute hazard in normal use 2000 3000 - -

Page

ANNEX 7: ANALYSES OF ACTIVE INGREDIENTS IN PESTICIDES PROPOSED BY NAFAKA AND FOUND IN TANZANIA

The information in this annex is from the NAFAKA PERSUAPand was reviewed for the NAFAKA PERSUAPto determine if there were any changes in registration and toxicity status.

Introduction to Annex 7

Annex 7 below compiles all of the AIs in pesticides (natural and synthetic) registered for use in Tanzania. Project decision-makers—especially those who interface at the field level with beneficiary farmers—are encouraged to look at the label of potential pesticide choices to determine the AIs contained in them and then use this Annex as a quick reference guide to attributes and issues with each chemical.

The pesticide attributes include pesticide class (to manage resistance by rotating chemicals from different classes), EPA registration and Restricted Use Pesticide (RUP) status (to comply with Regulation 216) and acute toxicity (judged by this document to be safe, or not, for small-holder farmers—most Class I chemicals are not considered safe for smallholder farmers to use). Annex 7 also presents chronic health issues, water pollution potential, and potential toxicities to important non-target organisms like fish, honeybee pollinators, birds and several aquatic organisms.

Further, Annex 7 contains basic pieces of human safety and environmental data needed for the various analyses required throughout the PER; ergo it is referred to throughout this document. It also provides data used to produce the project-critical information contained in Annexes 8 and 9. Thus, this PERSUAP provides useful tools for evaluating and choosing among IPM options, including natural and synthetic pesticides, while adhering to 22 CFR 216, as well as aiming at the market-driven best practices found in Standards and Certification (S&C) systems—the highest international standards available.

See Annex 7 Matrix, below.

Key to matrix:

Red shading: Do not use products containing AIs shaded in Red color on NAFAKA-supported farms

Yellow shading: Use with Caution due to toxicity, carcinogenicity or water pollution potential

Green shading: Can be proposed for use on NAFAKA-supported farms

RUP: Few = one or two products; Some = a third of products; Most = all or almost all products

EU Registration: Yes = registered; No = not registered; n.i. = no information; pend = pending registration

WHO Acute Toxicity Classes: O = Obsolete; Ia = Extremely Hazardous; Ib = Highly Hazardous;

II = Moderately Hazardous; III = Slightly Hazardous; U = Unlikely to present acute hazard in normal use

EPA Acute Toxicity Classes: I = Extremely Toxic; II = Highly Toxic; III = Moderately Toxic;

IV = Slightly Toxic

Chronic Human Toxicity: KC = Known Carcinogen; PC = Possible Carcinogen; ED = Potential Endocrine Disruptor; RD = Potential Reproductive & Development Toxin; P = Risk of Parkinson’s

Ecotoxicity: PNT = Practically Not Toxic; NAT = Not Acutely Toxic; ST = Slightly Toxic; MT = Moderately Toxic; HT = Highly Toxic; VHT = Very Highly Toxic

References used to find pieces of data contained in Annex 7: See references at the end of the report.

Page

Page

EcotoxicityActive Ingredients

Class

EPA

Registered

Restricted U

se Pesticide

WH

O A

cute Toxicity

Class

EPA

Acute T

oxicity C

lasses

Chronic T

oxicity

Groundw

ater contam

inant

fish

bees

birds

amphibians

worm

s

Mollusks

Crustaceans

Aquatic Insects

Plankton

Fumigantaluminum phosphide inorganic yes All

NL I NL no data HT HT HT   MT   MT    

Insecticides

abamectin microbial extract yesSome

NL

II, III

ED, RD no data ST HT

PNT   MT   HT

VHT

VHT

alpha cypermethrin

synthetic pyrethroid yes All II

II, III PC no data HT HT

PNT     MT

VHT

VHT

VHT

aluminum phosphide inorganic yes All

NL I NL no data HT HT HT   MT   MT    

bifenthrinsynthetic pyrethroid yes Half II

II, III

PC, ED, RD no data

VHT HT MT       HT    

carbosulfan carbamate no No II II NL no data HT HT HT   HT   HT    

chlorpyrifos organophosphateno agr All II

II, III ED no data HT HT HT MT

PNT MT

VHT HT MT

cypermethrinsynthetic pyrethroid

no agr All

NL

II, III

PC, ED, RD no data HT HT

PNT     MT

VHT

VHT

VHT

deltamethrinsynthetic pyrethroid yes

cotton II

I, II, III ED no data MT HT ST HT MT

NAT

VHT

VHT

VHT

dinotefuranNeonicotinoid, Guanidine yes No

NL III NL

potential HT

endosulfan organochlorine no Most II I, II ED no data VH M MT MT MT MT HT HT HT

Page

T T

fenitrothion organophosphate yes No IIII, III ED no data MT HT HT MT MT MT

VHT HT MT

imidacloprid neonicotinoid yes No IIII, III NL

potential

NAT HT MT

NAT HT   MT

VHT ST

lambda cyhalothrin

synthetic pyrethroid yes

Some II

II, III ED no data

VHT HT ST   MT  

VHT

VHT

VHT

permethrinsynthetic pyrethroid yes No II III

PC, ED no data MT

MT

PNT MT ST ST

VHT HT MT

prothiofosorganothiophosphate no No II III NL no data MT   MT     ST HT   HT

pyrimiphos methyl organophosphate yes No

II, III

I, III NL no data MT HT MT   MT MT HT

VHT

VHT

spinosad microbial extracts yes No U III NL no data ST HT MT   MT   MT HT MT

thiamethoxam neonicotinoid yes NoNL III PC

potential

PNT HT MT   MT      

Miticides/Acaricides

alpha cypermethinsynthetic pyrethroid yes All II

II, III PC no data HT HT

PNT     MT

VHT

VHT

VHT

abamectin microbial extract yesSome

NL

II, III

ED, RD no data ST HT

PNT   MT   HT

VHT

VHT

chlorpyrifos organophosphateno agr Half II

II, III ED no data HT HT HT MT

PNT MT

VHT HT MT

cypermethrinsynthetic pyrethroid

no agr Most

NL

II, III

PC, ED, RD no data HT HT

PNT     MT

VHT

VHT

VHT

fenpyroximate pyrazole yes NoNL II NL no data HT

MT MT   MT   HT    

Page

EcotoxicityActive Ingredients

Class

EPA

Registered

Restricted U

se Pesticide

WH

O A

cute T

oxicity Class

EPA

Acute

Toxicity C

lasses

Chronic T

oxicity

Groundw

ater contam

inant

fish

bees

birds

amphibians

worm

s

Mollusks

Crustaceans

Aquatic Insects

Plankton

Rodenticidesaluminum phosphide inorganic

yes all

NL I NL no data HT HT HT  

MT   MT    

brodifacoum coumarinyes no Ia III NL no data MT   HT  

MT   MT    

bromadiolone coumarinyes no Ia III NL no data MT   MT  

HT   MT    

coumatetralyl coumarin no   Ib NL NL no data MT   MT            

diphacinone indandioneyes no Ia

II, III NL no data

NAT   ST       ST    

flocoumafen coumarin no   Ia NL NL no data HT   MT       MT    

zinc phosphide inorganicyes

few Ib

I, II, III RD no data MT   HT  

MT   ST    

Fungicides

azoxystrobin strobinyes no U III NL

potential MT MT MT  

MT   MT  

VHT

carbendazim benzimidazole

no agr no U III PC, ED no data MT ST ST ST

HT   ST   MT

chlorothalonil chloronitrileyes no U

I, II, III KC

potential

VHT

NAT MT HT

MT ST

VHT MT

VHT

copper/cupric hydroxide

inorganic yes

no III I, II,

NL no data HT MT MT   MT

HT

NAT

  HT

Page

III

copper (cuprous) oxide inorganic

yes no II

I, II, III NL no data HT        

HT HT  

VHT

copper oxychloride inorganic

yes no

NL

I, II, III NL no data MT MT MT  

MT      

VHT

copper sulfate pentahydrate inorganic

yes no II

I, II, III NL no data MT   HT  

MT   MT    

cymoxanil unclassifiedyes no III

II, III NL no data MT MT ST  

MT   MT MT ST

cyproconazole azoleyes no III

I, II, III KC no data ST

NAT MT

difenoconazole azoleyes no III III PC, ED no data ST MT ST  

MT   MT MT HT

dimethomorph morpholineyes no U III NL

potential MT ST ST

epoxiconazole triazole no noNL NL PC, ED no data MT MT MT  

MT        

hexaconazole azole no no U IV PC no data MT HTNAT  

MT   MT

NAT  

mancozebdithiocarbamate

yes no U III

PC, ED, RD no data MT MT ST HT        

NAT

metalaxyl benzanoidyes no III

II, III NL

potential ST ST MT  

MT   MT   ST

procymidone unclassified no no U NL PC, ED no data MTNAT  

NAT  

MT MT ST MT

propiconazole azoleyes no II NL PC, RD no data MT

MT MT MT

propinebdithiocarbamate Zn no no U NL RD no data MT

PNT

PNT    

MT MT MT MT

Page

pyrimethanilanilinopyrimidine

yes no U

II, III PC, ED no data MT  

PNT MT  

MT MT MT  

sulfur inorganicyes no U III NL no data

NAT

NAT

NAT

NAT        

NAT

tebuconazole azoleyes no III

II, III PC, ED

potential MT MT MT  

MT   MT MT HT

thiophanate-methyl benzamidazole

yes no U

II, III PC, RD

potential ST ST MT

NAT    

NAT MT ST

triadimefon triazoleyes no III

II, III

PC, ED, RD

potential MT MT

PNT  

MT  

NAT    

triadimenol triazoleyes no III

II, III PC, ED no data MT ST MT  

MT        

trifloxystrobin strobinyes no

NL III NL no data ST ST MT  

MT        

Page

EcotoxicityActive Ingredients

Class

EPA

Registered

Restricted U

se Pesticide

WH

O A

cute Toxicity

EPA

Acute T

oxicity C

lasses

Chronic T

oxicity

Groundw

ater contam

inant

fish

bees

birds

amphibians

worm

s

Mollusks

Crustaceans

Aquatic Insects

Plankton

Herbicides

2 4 D amine chlorophenoxy acidyes No

NL NL PC

no data ST HT MT

ST

NAT

NAT

NAT ST ST

2,4-D dimethyl amine chlorophenoxy acid

yes No II I, II PC

potential MT MT MT   MT   MT    

acetochlor chloroacetanilideyes

Most III

II, IIII

PC, ED

potential MT MT ST   MT       MT

alachlor chloroacetanilideyes All III

I, II, III

KC, ED, RD

known MT MT MT

MT   MT ST   ST

atrazine triazineyes

Most U III

KC, ED

known ST MT

NAT

ST ST ST ST ST ST

bentazone, sodium salt benzothiazinone

yes No III III NL

known

NAT ST MT   MT ST MT ST

NAT

Bispyribac-sodium

Pyrimidinyl(thio)benzoate

yes No

NL III NL

potential ST

bromoxynil octa/heptanoate hydroxybenzonitrile

yes No II

II, III

PC, RD

no data ST MT MT   MT MT    

VHT

butralin dinitroanilineyes No III

I, III NL

no data HT MT

NAT   MT   MT  

VHT

clomazone isoxazolidinoneyes No II

II, III NL

potential MT MT

NAT   MT   MT   HT

cyhalofop-butyl phenoxypropionate yes No U

II, III NL

no data MT MT

NAT   MT   MT    

Page

ethoxysulfuron sulfonylurea no NoNL NL NL

no data MT ST MT   MT        

fenoxaprop-ethyl pheonoxypropionate no No O III RD

no data MT

NAT

NAT   MT   MT   HT

flumetralin 2,6-dinotroanilineyes No U

II, III NL

no data

VHT   MT   MT   HT  

VHT

foramsulfuron sulfonylureayes No

NL III NL

potential MT ST MT   MT   MT    

glyphosate phosphonoglycineyes No U

I, II, III NL

potential ST ST

NAT  

PNT   MT   ST

halosulfuron methyl pyrazole

yes No U

II, III NL

potential ST MT

NAT   MT  

NAT MT

NAT

haloxyfop-R-methyl a propionic acid no No

NL NL KC

no data HT MT MT       MT    

imazapyr imidazolinoneyes No U III NL

no data ST MT ST   MT  

NAT    

maleic hydrazide pyridazine (PGR)

yes No U

II, IIII NL

no data

NAT ST

NAT   MT  

NAT    

MCPA chlorophenoxy acidyes No III

II, IIII PC

no data ST ST

NAT

ST MT ST

NAT

NAT ST

mesotrione unclassifiedyes No

NL

II, IIII NL

no data

NAT MT MT   MT  

NAT    

metolachlor chloroacetamideyes No III III

PC, ED

known MT ST MT   MT   MT    

metribuzin triazinoneyes No II

II, III

ED, RD

potential MT

NAT MT   MT   ST   ST

nicosulfuron sulfonylureayes No U

II, III NL

potential MT MT MT   MT   MT    

oxadiazon oxidiazoleyes No U

II, III

KC, RD

no data MT MT

NAT

MT MT   ST   HT

oxyfluorfen diphehyl etheryes No U

II, III PC

no data HT

PNT

PNT     HT   HT HT

Page

paraquat bipyridyliumyes

Most II I ED, P

potential ST

NAT HT

ST MT ST ST ST ST

pendimethalin dinitroanalineyes No III III

PC, ED

no data MT

NAT MT   MT   MT MT MT

penoxsulam triazolopyrimidine yes No U

II, III PC

potential MT ST

NAT   MT MT

NAT

NAT  

propanil analideyes No III

II, III PC

potential MT

NAT MT

ST  

NAT ST ST ST

pyrazosulfuron-ethyl sulfonylurea no No U NL NL

no data

NAT MT

NAT  

NAT        

Page

EcotoxicityActive Ingredients

Class

EPA

Registered

Restricted U

se Pesticide

WH

O A

cute T

oxicity Class

EPA

Acute T

oxicity C

lasses

Chronic T

oxicity

Groundw

ater contam

inant

fish

bees

birds

amphibians

worm

s

Mollusks

Crustaceans

Aquatic Insects

Plankton

Herbicides continued

s-metolachlor chloroacetanilide yes no III III PC, ED known MT ST MT   MT   MT    

Terbuthylazine triazine yes no U III NL no data MTMT MT   MT   MT   HT

Thiobencarb thiocarbamate yes no II III NLpotential MT ST

NAT MT   MT MT MT HT

Triclopyrchloropyridinyl yes no III

I, III NL no data ST

MT MT

NAT MT  

NAT ST

NAT

Common Disinfectants/Microbiocides used in the Poultry Sector chlorhexidine gluconate organic yes no

NL III NL no data

NAT                

chlorine (sodiuym hypochlorite) inorganic yes no

NL I NL no data HT     MT MT HT HT HT HT

citric acid organic acid yes noNL III NL no data

NAT                

ethyl alcohol organic yes noNL II RD no data

NAT    

NAT

NAT

NAT

NAT

NAT  

Formaldehyde organic yes noNL I KC no data

NAT        

NAT

NAT   ST

dilute hydrochloric acid organic acid yes no

NL I NL no data

NAT          

NAT    

Page

Iodine inorganic yes noNL I NL no data MT               HT

Phenol benzene yes noNL

II, III NL no data ST     ST

NAT

NAT ST

NAT ST

phosphoric acid inorganic yes noNL I NL no data ST                

potassium iodide inorganic yes noNL I NL no data

NAT        

NAT      

sodium hydroxide organic base yes noNL

II, III NL no data

NAT                

Triclosanchlorinated phenol yes no

NL

I, II, III PC no data HT                

Page

ANNEX 8. TRAINING TOPICS AND SAFE PESTICIDE USE WEB RESOURCES

GAP/IPM

Pest identification: How to recognize common important pests and diseases Monitoring: The importance of frequent crop monitoring for pests, diseases and weeds GAP and IPM concepts, tactics and tools found in Annex 1 that can reduce pesticide use and associated

risks on specific pests of Tanzania IP target crops PMPs—Pest Management Plans: Creating and using these farm crop-management tools

Pesticides

Understanding pesticides: Quality, types, classes and acute toxicities of common pesticides Regulations: US and Tanzania laws that guide pesticide registration and use Natural pesticides: Raise awareness of and promote the use of natural pesticides found in Annexes 1, 4,

5 and 7 as well as green-label synthetic pesticides with relatively low risks Spot Treatments: The importance of spot treatments if needed (instead of crop-wide treatments) MSDS: How to use MSDSs for pesticide-specific information on risks and risk reduction measures REI—Re-Entry Intervals: Pesticide-specific risks associated with entering a sprayed field too soon after

the spray operation PHI—Pre-Harvest Interval: Pesticide-specific risks associated with harvesting a crop before pesticides

have had a chance to break down MRL—Maximum Residue Level: Risks associated with pesticide residues on human food Vulnerable individuals: The importance of keeping children, pregnant women, elderly and infirm away

from the field while spraying and kept out after spraying Human and environmental risks: Risks associated with more commonly-used pesticides (use

information from MSDSs and Annex 7) When to spray: Early in the morning, late in the afternoon, or night without wind or rain Use of recommended PPE: Why it is used (see product MSDSs, product labels and web reference

below) Safer Use: How to transport, store and use pesticides safely Maintenance: of PPE and sprayers Monitoring for the development of pesticide resistance Proper collection and disposal of pesticide rinseate and packaging (see disposal web reference below

and MSDSs) The use of pesticide spray buffer zones near schools, water resources, organic crop production, apiaries,

bird sanctuaries, biodiversity enclaves, national parks or other sensitive areas. How to reduce and mitigate risks to critical environmental resources and biodiversity (found in PER

Factors E and G) Honeybees: Ensuring pesticide applicators notify beekeepers about spray activities, and spray early

morning or late afternoon when no heavy winds or rain are present Water Pollution: Raise awareness of pesticides (especially some herbicides) with high ground water

contamination potential where water tables are high or easy to reach (use Annex 7 and MSDSs) Exposure routes: Ways pesticides enter the body and ways to mitigate entry Basic first aid: Understanding how to treat pesticide poisonings (see first aid web reference and MSDSs) Record-keeping: Pesticide used, when used, which crop, how applied, who applied

Page

Web Safe Pesticide Use Training Resources

General Mitigation of Potential Pesticide Dangers General Measures to Ensure Safer Use: http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADK154.pdf, Chapter 13

EPA Recommended Worker Protection Standards: http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/safety/workers/equip.htm (all types of PPE)

http://www.cdc.gov/nasd/docs/d001701-d001800/d001797/d001797.html (respiratory PPE)

Routes of Pesticide Exposure and Mitigation of Risks:

http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADK154.pdf, Chapter 13

Basic First Aid for Pesticide Overexposure:

http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADK154.pdf, Chapter 13

International PIC & POPs Lists:

PIC Pesticides and Industrial Chemicals (http://www.pic.int)

POPs Pesticides and Chemicals (http://www.pops.int)

Pesticide Disposal Options:

http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/labeling/lrm/chap-13.htm

Page

ANNEX 9. FIELD MONITORING FORM FOR FARMER BEST PRACTICES INCLUDING GAP AND IPM OPTIONS

Name of NAFAKA Staff Responsible for Monitoring Demonstration Farms:

Name of Demonstration Farmer: Crop: Date:

What are the major pests encountered by the farmer?:

Which of the attached Preventive and Curative GAP and IPM tools and tactics are used by farmer?

Are pesticides used by demo farmer? Yes__ No__

How are pesticides applied? backpack sprayer__ other__

What are the names of the pesticides used?:

Which PPE does farmer have and use? gloves___ overalls___ boots___

respirator___ goggles___

Has the farmer had IPM and Safe Pesticide Use training? Yes__ No__

Are there any empty pesticide containers scattered in the field? Yes__ No__

Are there signs that the backpack sprayer has leaks? Yes__ No__

Does the farmer understand the pesticide label information? Yes__ No__

Is the pesticide stored safely out of the house or away from kids? Yes__ No__

Does the farmer use gloves for mixing the pesticide with water? Yes__ No__

What times of the day are the pesticides applied? ________

Are pesticides applied during rain or windy conditions? Yes__ No__

Are women or children permitted to apply pesticides? Yes__ No__

Are empty pesticide containers are used to store water? Yes__ No__

Does the farmer rinse equipment away from streams and open water? Yes__ No__

Does the farmer wash clothes after applying pesticides? Yes__ No__

How does the farmer dispose of empty pesticide containers? puncture/bury__ burn__

Is there any evidence that pesticides are becoming less effective? Yes__ No__

Page

Preventive and Curative GAP and IPM options:

Preventive Preventive Curative

Soil nutrient, texture and pH testing Farmer ability to correctly identify pest predators, parasitoids and diseases

Mechanical insect control by hand picking

Pest resistant/tolerant seed/plant variety

Weekly field scouting to assess pest levels/damage

Farmers make & apply local artisanal plant extracts (neem, pyrethroid, garlic, chili, other)

Early/late plantings or harvestings to avoid pests

Use of trap crops to trap and destroy pests

Weed control by machine cultivation, hoe or hand

Seed treatment with pesticides Removal/pruning of diseased or heavily infested plants/tree branches

Purchase and release of predators or parasitoids to control major pests

Soil moisture testing Planting parasite-attracting plants on field margins

Use of pheromone traps to reduce overall pest levels

Raised-bed production or mounding Put baits and use other practices to encourage predator/parasite build-up

Use of pheromone inundation to confuse pest mating

Irrigation and drip irrigation Use of pheromone traps to monitor pest levels

Spot treatment of pest hotspots with insecticides, miticides or fungicides

Use of natural fertilizers (manure, compost)

Inter-planting crops with aromatic herbs (celery, cilantro, parsley, dill or local plants) that repel pests

Area spraying (complete field coverage) using synthetic and natural insecticides, miticides or nematocides

Use of purchased mineral fertilizers Mulching with organic materials or plastic to control weeds

Use of synthetic and natural fungicides or bactericides

Combinations of organic and mineral fertilizers

Plant living barriers or bamboo/tree barriers on windward edge of field

Use of herbicides for weed control

Crop rotation Exclude insect pests by using vegetable tunnels and micro-tunnels

Farm use of a locked storage building for pesticides

Use of green manure crops Use of biodiversity or energy conservation practices

Farmer use of pesticide in-ground compost trap for depositing and capturing spilled or leftover pesticides

Page

Farmer ability to correctly identify pests and their damage

Crop stalks, residue and dropped fruit destruction or composting at end of season

Farmer use of receptacle for empty pesticide bottle disposal

Page

ANNEX 10: FARM AND PROJECT RECORD KEEPING ASSOCIATED WITH PESTICIDE USE

Page

Page

1.- Control Card for Pesticides Use.- This card will stay with farmer, to keep a record on the use of pesticide by crop.

GENERAL DATA

FARMERS NAME

Community: Municipality: Province: Altitude:

USE OF PESTICIDES - 1st TREATMENT

CROP: SURFACE:

Pest to be treated Name of material Date and time of application Quantity used

Environmental conditions:

Justification for use

Other recommended control measures

Result of application

NAME AND SIGNATURE OF IG AND NRM SUPERVISOR:

USE OF PESTICIDES - 2nd TREATMENT

CROP: SURFACE:

Pest to be treated Name of material Date and time of application Quantity used

Environmental conditions:

Justification for use

Other recommended control measures

Result of application

NAME AND SIGNATURE OF IG AND NRM SUPERVISOR:

CONTROL FORM FOR THE USE OF PERTICIDES

ANNEX 11:

PERSUAP REFERENCES

Page

Baker EL, Zack M, Miles JW, Alderman L, Warren M, Dobbins RD, Miller S, Teeters WR. 1978. Epidemic malathion poisoning in Pakistan malaria workers. The Lancet, January: 31–33.

Websites: Website references used to develop the PERSUAP International Treaties and Conventions:POPs website: http://www.pops.intPIC Website: http://www.pic.intBasel Convention: http://www.basel.int/Montreal Protocol: http://www.unep.org/OZONE/pdfs/Montreal-Protocol2000.pdfPakistan malaria poisonings: http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNACQ047.pdf.Pesticide poisonings: http://www.panna.org/resources/panups/panup_20080403 http://magazine.panna.org/spring2006/inDepthGlobalPoisoning.html IPM and PMP websites:http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/ http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pg058 http://www.ipmcenters.org/pmsp/index.cfm http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/154769/Cotton-pest-management-guide-1.pdf Pesticide Research Websites:http://extoxnet.orst.edu/pips/ghindex.html (Extoxnet Oregon State database with ecotox)http://www.agf.gov.bc.ca/pesticides/f_2.htm (all types of application equipment)http://www.greenbook.net/Search/AdvancedSearch (pesticide Material Safety Data Sheets)http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/status.htm (EPA Registration Eligibility Decisions)Ecotoxicity:http://www.ohioline.osu.edu/hyg-fact/2000/2161.html (pesticide toxicity to honeybees)http://wihort.uwex.edu/turf/Earthworms.htm (pesticide toxicity to earthworms)Safety:http://www.epa.gov/oppbppd1/biopesticides/ingredients/index.htm (EPA regulated biopesticides)http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/index.html (IPM, PMPs and pesticide recommendations)http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/PI/PI07300.pdf (Restricted Use Pesticides)http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/ (EPA Health & Safety)http://www.epa.gov/opppmsd1/PPISdata/index.html (EPA pesticide product information)Personal Protection Equipment (PPE):http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/safety/workers/equip.htm (all types of PPE)http://www.cdc.gov/nasd/docs/d001701-d001800/d001797/d001797.html (respiratory PPE)

Page

Page

U.S. Agency for International Development

1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20523

Tel: (202) 712-0000Fax: (202) 216-3524

www.usaid.govPage