As most of you are aware, EPA developed a Proposed Interim Registration Review Decision (PID) for mancozeb, and as proposed, mancozeb use on grapes would no longer be allowed. Yesterday, Katie Gold (Cornell University) and I visited with several EPA personnel at the Washington, D.C. headquarters concerning the importance of mancozeb to grape production in the eastern United States. We met with scientists and economists in the EPA Office of Pesticide Programs to discuss the viticultural and disease control habits of eastern grape growers. Also in attendance were two individuals from the USDA Pesticides Office. In total, we had 11 people in attendance (5 in person and 6 virtual) from either the EPA or the USDA. I am thankful to report that it was a very gracious meeting, and without exception, we felt that the participants listened and engaged in a helpful manner. In my notes before the meeting, I developed the main points that I hoped we could communicate.
Bottom line. Not all grapes are equal when it comes to mancozeb use or human contact. We need to work with EPA to develop mitigation strategies that will allow use of mancozeb, even on V. vinifera grapes in the East. We are asking EPA for the time and communication that will be needed to work out these measures through interaction with the vineyard managers and University/USDA personnel in the grape industry throughout the regions of concern.
Based on the interactions we had yesterday, EPA is asking for our input, and we are hopeful that we can maintain mancozeb use for grapes – in part if not in whole. Our practices are very different for grapes grown in the East (e.g. muscadine versus vinifera grapes for example), but we do have several points at which we do in fact physically touch vines. The key for maintaining mancozeb will be developing mitigation strategies for all the major operations of concern to EPA (e.g. leaf pulling, shoot maintenance, etc.) to eliminate dermal contact where possible, as related to mancozeb use and a longer reentry interval. In Georgia, Sarah Lowder and I will work to provide opportunity for grower input as we develop plans for mitigation.
There may be other changes to the information that EPA uses to develop their reentry and preharvest intervals. For example, all residue data was from California – where it does not rain much in the summer due to the Mediterranean climate and there is no or limited residue removal through rainfall. However, we can’t count on changes at this point, so we will need to develop mitigation strategies with the information we have at the moment.
We will be in contact. This will not be easy, and there will likely be some mitigation strategies that will make us unhappy. However, maintaining mancozeb use is critical to wine grape production in our region. For some grapes (e.g. muscadine), I think mitigation will be relatively easy. For others, it will be more challenging. However, some mancozeb is better than no mancozeb. Stay tuned.
