1 / 48

Protecting Ground Water via Pesticide Registration in New York

Protecting Ground Water via Pesticide Registration in New York. Presentation to the Cornell Pesticid e Users March 29 , 2013 Soil & Water Group Department of Biological and Environmental Engineering. Outline. Overview: Pesticides in groundwater Upstate monitoring by county

trista
Download Presentation

Protecting Ground Water via Pesticide Registration in New York

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Protecting Ground Water via Pesticide Registration in New York Presentation to the Cornell Pesticide Users March29, 2013 Soil & Water Group Department of Biological and Environmental Engineering

  2. Outline Overview: Pesticides in groundwater Upstate monitoring by county Vulnerable formations: karst New initiatives Outreach

  3. Long Island pesticide data: tracing past contamination hi Sampling intensity low

  4. Pesticide detection patterns in Suffolk County groundwater Preliminary: Percentage of pesticide analyses reported as above detection limit From data Suffolk County submitted to New York State, 2000-2010

  5. Current Pesticide Use in NY Derived from New York Pesticide Sales and Use Reporting system published data.

  6. Mobility & persistence are combined in the Groundwater Ubiquity Score (GUS) factor Low High Very Low MediumVery High * Imazethapyr * Carbofuran * Atrazine * Alachlor * Chlorothalonil * Glyphosate

  7. Pesticide use weighted by GUS

  8. Upstate monitoring strategy • Notlooking for: • Average groundwater concentrations • Spills or violations • But rather sampling well water in areas deemed vulnerable due to: • high pesticide use • groundwater (soil/aquifer) characteristics that favor transport

  9. Working premise • If well water in vulnerable areas is of good quality, then we can have high confidence that well water in less vulnerable areas is also of good quality Cortland County cornfield that dominates hill above shallow wells

  10. Outline Overview: Pesticides in groundwater Upstate monitoring by county Karst formations New initiatives Outreach

  11. County-based sampling Wayne Genesee Schenectady Cayuga Cortland Orange Partnering with local S&WCD’s, WQCC and DOH

  12. Testing for ... DEC lab (to 2009): 93 active ingredients DEC lab since 2010: shorter priority list of 51 AIs and degradates (metabolites) Cornell Soil & Water Laboratory: • - Selected active ingredients using higher resolution ELISA immunoassay methods • - Nitrates, anions (IC)

  13. Findings in six counties ... DEC broad-based scans: Onedetection of one active ingredient in 240 samples (reporting limits 1 μg/L (1 ppb) or less). Degradation products detected in 5 of 41 wells tested in Wayne County No exceedanceof any of 15 NYS ground water standards or guidance levels

  14. Cornell ELISA assay results for select AI’s

  15. Nitrates typical for rural NY * * SO4 interference

  16. Interpretation to date Upstate rural wells – even vulnerable shallow wells surrounded by fields and having elevated nitrate –are in good shape relative to current groundwater pesticide standards. There are frequent low tracesof atrazineand some metolachlor in agricultural areas, as found nationally.

  17. Ongoing county-level work Revisiting selected wells in view of: Improved DEC lab reporting limits (0.1 ppb starting with Wayne Co.) Addition of key pesticide degradation products (metabolites) which can have greater mobility and/or toxicity than original AI Time-of-sampling studies – repeated at several month intervals (Orange County)

  18. Questions so far? Overview: Pesticides in groundwater Upstate monitoring by county Karst formations New initiatives Outreach

  19. Karst (carbonate) ground water Objective: determine if karst requires special registration consideration Genesee county hydrogeologic setting Interim results

  20. Lots of carbonate in Upstate NY Dark hatching is carbonate; Source: USGS

  21. Karst: Solution conduits in limestone

  22. Carbonate western NY

  23. Genesee karstFlow in limestone; losing reaches

  24. Genesee karst: sampling sites

  25. Genesee karst: sampling depths Onondaga Unconf Shale

  26. Genesee karst: 16 months overall: atrazine 5/22 detects to 0.05 ppb 7/19 detects 0/9 detects Metolachlor similar: 6/13, 5/11, 0/6 respectively

  27. Genesee karst: atrazine seasonality (% of samples) Jun10 Jul10 Sep10 Dec10 Sep11 Detect >=0.1 Trace >=0.05 ND <0.05 ppb

  28. Geneva AES limestone?

  29. Questions? Overview: Pesticides in groundwater Upstate monitoring by county Karst formations New initiatives Outreach

  30. Looking ahead: New initiatives • I - Lakeshore water supplies • II - Greenhouse leaching • III - DEC modeling support

  31. Leaching Model Support Objective Assess the standard pesticide environmental fate model toolkit used in the NY registration process. Toolkit = leaching models + conservative environmental scenarios

  32. Modeling tasks Specify evaluation criteria with DEC DEC staff workshop – walk through current goals, assumptions, & input scenarios Stakeholder roundtable – solicit input on model and design scenarios

  33. More modeling tasks Model and scenario evaluation - retrospective cases, new scenarios DEC workshop to walk through and evaluate findings, make draft recommendations Report with new model + scenario packages if merited

  34. Leaching models 1980’s traditional LEACHP, PRZM

  35. Leaching models improved 1980’s traditional LEACHP, PRZM 2000’s with preferential Flow paths, tile drains, fragipans, i.e. short circuits and lateral losses to streams

  36. Scenarios: conservative case(s) of usage, soil, climate, and depth to ground water. Do we need new upstate scenarios? Upstate tile drains (Willsboro) Long Island (Riverhead) Upstate carbonate (Batavia)

  37. Willsboro Farm: Atrazine measured in tile drains Concentration Versus time

  38. Aldicarb at CU Riverhead – simulated with DEC scenario Recharge Leachate concentration

  39. Atrazine leaching: thin soil at Batavia Atrazine leaching: Long Island

  40. Questions? Overview: Pesticides in groundwater Upstate monitoring by county Karst formations New initiatives Outreach

  41. Publications • Ground Water Monitoring & Remediation research articles • NY Veg Growers News • Events • 2011 Empire Farm Days booth • Cornell in-service training • NY State Soil & Water Conservation Committee • September 2012 Northeast Pesticides C&T Meeting • Webpage • soilandwater.bee.cornell.edu/Research/pesticides/

  42. http://soilandwater.bee.cornell.edu/Research/pesticides/

  43. Thanks to Funding NYS DEC NYS WRI directors Keith Porter & Susan Riha, who delegated to BEE County Partners Cortland, Schenectady, Orange, Cayuga, Genesee, and Wayne County Soil & Water Conservation Districts. Genesee County Health Dept. Manyprivate well owners. Karstpartner: Paul Richards, College at Brockport, Dept of Earth Sciences Cornell Pesticide Management Education Program for help using the PSUR database NYS Soil & Water Conservation Committee for early endorsement Cornell students Ian Toevs, Tony Salvucci, Ben Liu, Sophia Garcia, Mike Sinkevich, Ivy Tsoi, Zia Ahmed, Sheila Saia, Austin Merboth, Cedric Mason

  44. Thank You!

  45. Contacts Brian Richards (bkr2@cornell.edu)‏ Steve Pacenka (sp17@cornell.edu) Tammo Steenhuis (tss1@cornell.edu)‏ http://soilandwater.bee.cornell.edu/Research/pesticides/‏

More Related