Ag Ch 1 (03) United States Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service Agricultural Chemical Usage Postharvest Applications - Apples and Pears March 2003 Table of Contents Page Overview 1 Highlights 3 Chemical Applications Tables - - - Apples Percent Treated and Total Applied 4 Chemical Application Rates and Total Applied 4 Chemical Applications Tables - - - Pears Percent Treated and Total Applied 7 Chemical Application Rates and Total Applied 7 Percent of Apples Receiving Wax Applications 9 Percent of Pears Receiving Wax Applications 9 Methods of Pesticide Application - - - Apples and Pears 10 Pest Management Practices - - - Apples Percent of Operations Using Strategies and Practices, Total of Program States 11 Pest Management Practices - - - Pears Percent of Operations Using Strategies and Practices, Total of Program States 13 Survey Procedures 15 Estimation Procedures 15 Reliability 15 Terms and Definitions 16 Trade Names and Common Names 18 Survey Instrument 19 Report Features 29 Postharvest Chemical Use Estimates for Apples and Pears Overview The agricultural chemical use estimates in this report are based on data compiled from the 2002 Postharvest Chemical Use Survey. The Postharvest Survey was conducted for apples and pears in the late summer to fall of 2002, referencing the 2001 crop year apples and pears stored. All results refer to pesticide applications made at off-farm storage facilities after the fruits were harvested. These applications were made at the fruit storage facility or the processing facility. On-farm postharvest applications were beyond the scope of this survey. The time frame for postharvest applications included in this publication was from August 1, 2001 to September 30, 2002 for apples; and from August 1, 2001 through July 31, 2002 for pears. In the six States surveyed, there were 689 apple storage facility reports and 108 pear storage facility reports summarized. The U.S. map below depicts the number of summarized reports for each State in the 2002 Apple and Pear Postharvest Survey. Overview (continued) Apples and pears moving from a storage operation to a packing/shipping operation will be duplicated in the reported total amount handled. The intent of the survey was to obtain the entire amount of chemicals applied to stored apple and pears, therefore this duplication is necessary. All apples and pears handled in the selected States in the survey were included; State or region of origin was not considered a factor. Totals for the States surveyed as well as individual State totals are published for the percent of apples and pears treated, rate per application, rate per marketing year, and the total amount of active ingredient applied. Other tables included in this report detail total pesticide usage by class, methods of pesticide applications, and volume of fruit treated with wax. Though commonly used as a carrier, the active ingredient petroleum distillate is classified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a pesticide. Therefore, petroleum distillate is reported in the insecticide class of postharvest chemicals applied, based on the EPA classification. Apple and pear storage operators were also asked a series of questions concerning their pest management practices related to the fruit handled. Answers to these questions are summarized and included in this report. A copy of the survey instrument used to collect the data is also included. Highlights 2001 Apple and Pear Postharvest Agricultural Chemical Use Survey: Apple storage facilities and processors applied a total of 222,100 pounds of postharvest active ingredients to stored apples during August 2001through September 2002 in the five States surveyed. This total amount applied includes fungicides as well as other types of chemicals including antioxidants, waxes, and fruit wash/cleaner treatments. States surveyed for apple and pear postharvest chemical use do not necessarily correspond to major apple producing States. Pear storage and processing facilities applied a total of 320,900 pounds of postharvest active ingredients to pears during August 2001 through July 2002 in the three States surveyed. This total amount applied includes insecticides and fungicides as well as other types of chemicals including antioxidants, waxes, and fruit wash/cleaner treatments. The pounds of active ingredients on certain pear wraps was also calculated and included in the total pounds applied. States surveyed for pear postharvest chemical use do not necessarily correspond to major pear producing States. Commonly Used Active Ingredients on Apples: The active ingredient most commonly used as a postharvest application to apples, based on total pounds applied in the surveyed States, was diphenylamine, at 101,100 pounds, followed by thiabendazole, at 48,800 pounds. Diphenylamine is actually a plant growth regulator used to control storage scald and thiabendazole is a fungicide that prevents postharvest decay. Of the total chemical applications made to the 2001-02 marketing year apples in the five selected States, 47 percent were drench applications, 28 percent by direct spray, and 17 percent in the dump tank, while 8 percent used a drip or brush-on method. Commonly Used Active Ingredients on Pears: The three active ingredients used most commonly in the three States surveyed were sodium silicate, sodium sulfate anhydrous, and sodium o-phenylphenate. Sodium silicate had the highest total quantity used, at 159,100 pounds applied during 2001 in the surveyed States. Sodium sulfate anhydrous had the second highest total pounds used, at 91,300 pounds, followed by sodium o-phenylphenate, for which 32,700 total pounds were applied in the selected States. No pear chemical use data were able to be published for California due to National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) confidentiality and disclosure restrictions. Of the total chemical applications made to the 2001-02 marketing year pears in the three selected States, 40 percent were applied in the float tank, 36 percent by direct spray, 10 percent were drench applications, 9 percent by hand wrapping with pear wraps, and 3 percent used a drip or brush-on method. An insignificant number of gas or fog applications was used on pears. Apples: Postharvest Chemical Applications, Percent Treated and Total Applied, Program States and Total, 2001-02 Marketing Year ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Volume : Percent Treated and Total Applied State : :-------------------------------------------- : Handled : Fungicide : Other Chemical ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- :Mil. Lbs. Percent 1,000 Lbs. Percent 1,000 Lbs. : : CA : 599.3 5.28 2.9 18.20 2.9 MI : 1,261.0 7.51 1.1 18.77 4.7 NY : 1,089.0 13.84 3.9 19.94 4.3 PA : 860.5 8.28 2.5 19.84 3.1 WA : 5,810.7 43.97 45.1 60.06 151.6 : Total : 9,620.4 30.18 55.4 43.90 166.7 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Apples: Postharvest Chemical Applications, Chemical Application Rates and Total Applied, 2001-02 Marketing Year 1/ 2/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Agricultural : Volume : Appli- : Rate per : Rate per : Total Chemical :Treated :cations : Application : Mkt. Year : Applied -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- :Percent Number Pounds per 1,000 Lbs. 1,000 Lbs. : Fungicides: : Captan : 1.51 1.0 0.02 0.02 3.0 Sodium o-phenylphenate: 0.55 1.0 0.06 0.06 3.3 Thiabendazole : 28.76 1.3 0.01 0.02 48.8 : Other: : Calcium chloride : 0.51 1.0 0.15 0.15 7.2 Chlorine : 15.62 1.0 * * 1.4 Chlorine dioxide : 9.52 1.0 * * 1.4 Citric acid : 4.10 1.1 0.04 0.04 15.5 Diphenylamine : 21.76 1.0 0.05 0.05 101.1 Dodecylbenzene sodium : sulfionate : 2.31 1.0 * * 0.3 Dodecylbenzenesulfonic: acid : 3.01 1.1 * * 0.9 Hydrogen chloride : 5.97 1.1 0.01 0.01 6.0 Phosphoric acid : 10.60 1.1 0.01 0.01 13.9 Silicon emulsion : 11.36 1.2 * * 0.1 Sodium hypochlorite : 9.87 1.1 0.02 0.02 18.2 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Rate applied is less than 0.01 pounds per 1,000 pounds. 1/ Volume handled by apple storage and processing facilities in the five States surveyed was 9,620.4 million pounds. States included are CA, MI, NY, PA, and WA. 2/ Insufficient or limited reports to publish usage data for benomyl, acidic cleaner, alkaline cleaner, Candida oleophila isolate, ethoxyquin, fruit wax, organic cleaner, Pseudomonas syringae ESC-10, Pseudomonas syringae ESC-11, and sodium chlorite. Apples: Postharvest Chemical Applications, Chemical Application Rates and Total Applied, California, 2001-02 Marketing Year 1/ 2/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Agricultural : Volume : Appli- : Rate per : Rate per : Total Chemical : Treated : cations :Application : Mkt. Year : Applied -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent Number Pounds per 1,000 Lbs. 1,000 Lbs. : Diphenylamine : 7.04 1.9 0.02 0.04 1.7 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1/ Volume handled by California apple storage and processing facilities was 599.3 million pounds. 2/ Insufficient or limited reports to publish usage data for acidic cleaner, alkaline cleaner, calcium chloride, chlorine, citric acid, dodecylbenzene sodium sulfonate, fruit wax, sodium hypochlorite, silicon emulsion, sodium o-phenylphenate, and thiabendazole. Apples: Postharvest Chemical Applications, Chemical Application Rates and Total Applied, Michigan, 2001-02 Marketing Year 1/ 2/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Agricultural : Volume : Appli- : Rate per : Rate per : Total Chemical : Treated : cations :Application : Mkt. Year : Applied -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent Number Pounds per 1,000 Lbs. 1,000 Lbs. : Chlorine dioxide : 2.16 1.0 * * 0.1 Diphenylamine : 9.13 1.0 0.04 0.04 4.3 Thiabendazole : 7.34 1.1 0.01 0.01 1.0 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Rate applied is less than 0.01 pounds per 1,000 pounds. 1/ Volume handled by Michigan apple storage and processing facilities was 1,261.0 million pounds. 2/ Insufficient or limited reports to publish usage data for alkaline cleaner, calcium chloride, captan, chlorine, dodecylbenzene sodium sulfonate, and fruit wax. Apples: Postharvest Chemical Applications, Chemical Application Rates and Total Applied, New York, 2001-02 Marketing Year 1/ 2/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Agricultural : Volume : Appli- : Rate per : Rate per : Total Chemical : Treated : cations :Application : Mkt. Year : Applied -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent Number Pounds per 1,000 Lbs. 1,000 Lbs. : Captan : 5.84 1.0 0.02 0.03 1.6 Diphenylamine : 12.48 1.0 0.03 0.03 3.7 Thiabendazole : 11.74 1.2 0.01 0.01 1.2 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1/ Volume handled by New York apple storage and processing facilities was 1,089.0 million pounds. 2/ Insufficient or limited reports to publish usage data for benomyl, calcium chloride, chlorine, fruit wax, and sodium o-phenylphenate. Apples: Postharvest Chemical Applications, Chemical Application Rates and Total Applied, Pennsylvania, 2001-02 Marketing Year 1/ 2/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Agricultural : Volume : Appli- : Rate per : Rate per : Total Chemical : Treated : cations :Application : Mkt. Year : Applied -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent Number Pounds per 1,000 Lbs. 1,000 Lbs. : Diphenylamine : 6.05 1.2 0.03 0.03 1.6 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1/ Volume handled by Pennsylvania apple storage and processing facilities was 860.5 million pounds. 2/ Insufficient or limited reports to publish usage data for captan, chlorine, ethoxyquin, fruit wax, silicon emulsion, sodium hypochlorite, sodium o-phenylphenate, and thiabendazole. Apples: Postharvest Chemical Applications, Chemical Application Rates and Total Applied, Washington, 2001-02 Marketing Year 1/ 2/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Agricultural : Volume : Appli- : Rate per : Rate per : Total Chemical : Treated : cations :Application : Mkt. Year : Applied -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent Number Pounds per 1,000 Lbs. 1,000 Lbs. : Calcium chloride : 0.53 1.0 0.18 0.18 5.6 Chlorine : 22.27 1.0 * * 1.4 Chlorine dioxide : 15.29 1.0 * * 1.3 Citric acid : 6.57 1.1 0.04 0.04 15.1 Diphenylamine : 30.08 1.0 0.05 0.05 89.8 Dodecylbenenesulfonic : acid : 4.98 1.1 * * 0.9 Dodecylbenzine sodium : sulfonate : 2.57 1.0 * * 0.2 Hydrogen chloride : 9.89 1.1 0.01 0.01 6.0 Phosphoric acid : 17.56 1.1 0.01 0.01 13.9 Silicon emulsion : 17.68 1.2 * * 0.1 Sodium hypochlorite : 15.22 1.1 0.02 0.02 16.7 Thiabendazole : 42.48 1.3 0.01 0.02 44.8 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Rate applied is less than 0.01 pounds per 1,000 pounds. 1/ Volume handled by Washington apple storage and processing facilities was 5,810.7 million pounds. 2/ Insufficient or limited reports to publish usage data for acidic cleaner, alkaline cleaner, Candida oleophila isolate, captan, fruit wax, organic cleaner, Pseudomonas syringae ESC-10, Pseudomonas syringae ESC-11, sodium chlorite, and sodium o-phenylphenate. Pears: Postharvest Chemical Applications, Percent Treated and Total Applied, Program States and Total, 2001-02 Marketing Year -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Volume : Percent Treated and Total Applied State : :----------------------------------------------------------- : Handled : Insecticide 1/ : Fungicide : Other Chemical -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- :Mil. Lbs. Percent 1,000 Lbs. Percent 1,000 Lbs. Percent 1,000 Lbs. : : CA 2/ : 216.1 OR 2/ : 508.7 WA : 1,070.6 41.66 23.3 61.05 96.2 : Total : 1,795.4 2.20 0.2 48.30 40.0 67.35 280.7 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1/ Insufficient reports to publish individual state data for this pesticide class. 2/ Data not published due to disclosure restrictions. Pears: Postharvest Chemical Applications, Chemical Application Rates and Total Applied, 2001-02 Marketing Year 1/ 2/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Agricultural : Volume : Appli- : Rate per : Rate per : Total Chemical :Treated :cations : Application : Mkt. Year : Applied -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- :Percent Number Pounds per 1,000 Lbs. 1,000 Lbs. : Insecticides: : Petroleum distillate : 2.20 1.0 0.01 0.01 0.2 : Fungicides: : Captan : 9.74 1.0 * * 0.8 Copper (metallic) : 7.39 1.0 0.01 0.01 1.1 Sodium o-phenylphenate: 27.28 1.0 0.07 0.07 32.7 Thiabendazole : 44.96 1.1 0.01 0.01 5.1 : Other: : Calcium lignosulfonate: 9.71 1.0 0.12 0.12 20.9 Chlorine : 31.31 1.0 * * 1.8 Chlorine dioxide : 2.40 1.0 0.01 0.01 0.2 Ethoxyquin : 24.64 1.0 * * 1.2 Sodium silicate : 14.56 1.1 0.57 0.61 159.1 Sodium sulfate : anhydrous : 25.18 1.0 0.20 0.20 91.3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Rate applied is less than 0.01 pounds per 1,000 pounds. 1/ Volume handled by pear storage and processing facilities in the three States surveyed was 1,795.4 million pounds. States included are CA, OR, and WA. 2/ Insufficient or limited reports to publish usage data for acidic cleaner, alkaline cleaner Candida oleophila isolate, citric acid, dodecylbenzine sodium sulfonate, fruit wax, hydrogen chloride, phosphoric acid, potassium carbonate, Pseudomonas syringae ESC-10, Pseudomonas syringae ESC-11, silicon emulsion, sodium carbonate, sodium hypochlorite, and sucrose esters. Pears: Postharvest Chemical Applications, Chemical Application Rates and Total Applied, Oregon, 2001-02 Marketing Year 1/ 2/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Agricultural : Volume : Appli- : Rate per : Rate per : Total Chemical : Treated : cations :Application : Mkt. Year : Applied -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent Number Pounds per 1,000 Lbs. 1,000 Lbs. : Captan : 27.53 1.0 0.01 0.01 0.7 Ethoxyquin : 33.36 1.0 * * 0.6 Sodium o-phenylphenate : 35.51 1.0 0.07 0.07 13.3 Sodium sulfate : anhydrous : 67.57 1.0 0.24 0.24 83.4 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Rate applied is less than 0.01 pounds per 1,000 pounds. 1/ Volume handled by Oregon pear storage and processing facilities was 508.7 million pounds. 2/ Insufficient or limited reports to publish usage data for chlorine, chlorine dioxide, dodecylbenzene sodium sulfonate, fruit wax, petroleum distillate, potassium carbonate, Pseudomonas syringae ESC-10, sodium carbonate, sodium silicate, sucrose esters, and thiabendazole. Pears: Postharvest Chemical Applications, Chemical Application Rates and Total Applied, Washington, 2001-02 Marketing Year 1/ 2/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Agricultural : Volume : Appli- : Rate per : Rate per : Total Chemical : Treated : cations :Application : Mkt. Year : Applied -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent Number Pounds per 1,000 Lbs. 1,000 Lbs. : Calcium lignosulfonate : 16.28 1.0 0.12 0.12 20.9 Chlorine : 33.64 1.0 * * 1.5 Copper (metallic) : 12.39 1.0 0.01 0.01 1.1 Ethoxyquin : 25.47 1.0 * * 0.6 Sodium o-phenylphenate : 28.88 1.0 0.06 0.06 19.4 Sodium silicate : 8.36 1.2 0.59 0.72 64.2 Sodium sulfate : anhydrous : 10.11 1.0 0.07 0.07 7.9 Thiabendazole : 37.21 1.1 0.01 0.01 2.5 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Rate applied is less than 0.01 pounds per 1,000 pounds. 1/ Volume handled by Washington pear storage and processing facilities was 1,070.6 million pounds. 2/ Insufficient or limited reports to publish usage data for acidic cleaner, alkaline cleaner, Candida olepophila isolate, captan, chlorine dioxide, citric acid, dodecylbenzene sodium sulfonate, fruit wax, hydrogen chloride, petroleum distillate, phosphoric acid, Pseudomonas syringae ESC-10, Pseudomonas syringae ESC-11, silicon emulsion, and sodium hypochlorite. Apples: Postharvest Wax Applications, Percent of Apples Treated with Wax, Program States and Total, 2001-02 Marketing Year -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of : Total State : Volume Treated : Volume Handled -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent Million Lbs. : CA : 14.24 599.3 MI : 10.46 1,261.0 NY : 10.39 1,089.0 PA : 17.17 860.5 WA : 39.03 5,810.7 : Total : 28.54 9,620.4 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pears: Postharvest Wax Applications, Percent of Pears Treated with Wax, Program States and Total, 2001-02 Marketing Year -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of : Total State : Volume Treated : Volume Handled -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent Million Lbs. : CA : * 216.1 OR : * 508.7 WA : 19.26 1,070.6 : Total : 17.98 1,795.4 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Data not published due to disclosure restrictions. Apples: Postharvest Chemical Use, Application Methods Used, Total of Program States, 2001-02 Marketing Year -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Application Method : Total of States Surveyed -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent : Dip in Float/Dump Tank : 17.0 Direct Spray : 28.1 Drench : 46.6 Drip/Brush-On : 8.2 Gas/Fog : 0.1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pears: Postharvest Chemical Use, Application Methods Used, Total of Program States, 2001-02 Marketing Year -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Application Method : Total of States Surveyed -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent : Dip in Float/Dump Tank : 40.2 Direct Spray : 36.1 Drench : 10.2 Drip/Brush-On : 3.5 Gas/Fog : 0.5 Hand Wrap : 9.5 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Apples: Pest Management Practices, Percent of Operations Utilizing Practice, Total of Program States, 2001-02 Marketing Year -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Program States Practice :----------------------------------------- : CA : MI : NY : PA : WA : ALL -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Operations : Mechanical Devices: : : Bin liners to ease scuffing : 21 3 6 9 51 15 Cull rotten fruit : 42 43 44 28 46 40 Elevated CO2 levels : 6 20 25 3 13 15 Frequently changed dump tank : or process water : 53 42 44 29 61 44 Infrared : 1 2 1 Insecticides on bin piles : 2 2 5 6 3 Low oxygen levels : 4 34 31 6 43 27 Ozone to cleanse process water : 4 1 3 1 Pest or rodent controls : 60 63 79 52 72 66 Plastic bins to reduce spore counts : 34 8 10 11 24 14 : Cleaning Activities: : : Clean or sanitize packing equipment : 74 59 53 54 69 59 Clean or sanitize structures in : CA rooms : 25 38 30 18 66 36 Control vegetation around bins : 74 55 64 57 76 63 Hose down or empty bins/boxes : 64 46 42 47 52 48 Pick up spilled fruit : 91 83 86 84 82 84 Spray bins/walls with insecticide : 26 36 29 16 65 34 Sweep, spray, or vacuum facility : floors : 92 88 90 93 89 90 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Apples: Pest Management Practices, Percent of Operations Utilizing Practice, Total of Program States, 2001-02 Marketing Year -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Program States Practice :----------------------------------------- : CA : MI : NY : PA : WA : ALL -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Operations : Measure Storage Facility Temperature: : : Controlled Atmosphere: : : Automatically monitored : 21 11 10 8 50 18 Hourly : 2 1 4 6 2 Daily : 11 26 20 4 7 16 Twice a week : 2 1 1 Weekly : 2 1 1 1 Other : 5 1 1 2 Do not monitor : 2 1 : : Regular Storage: : : Automatically monitored : 11 9 10 10 31 13 Hourly : 6 2 1 7 2 Daily : 34 54 53 65 31 51 Twice a week : 4 4 2 7 2 4 Weekly : 5 2 4 3 3 Other : 5 1 5 7 4 Do not monitor : 15 2 2 5 1 4 : : Other Structures: : : Automatically monitored : 1 7 2 Hourly : 1 Daily : 2 3 6 5 4 4 Twice a week : 2 Weekly : Other : 1 1 5 1 Do not monitor : 13 5 7 2 2 5 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pears: Pest Management Practices, Percent of Operations Utilizing Practice, Total of Program States, 2001-02 Marketing Year -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Program States Practice :--------------------------------------- : CA : OR : WA : ALL -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Operations : Mechanical Devices: : : Bin liners to ease scuffing : 25 41 53 43 Cull rotten fruit : 54 59 53 54 Elevated CO2 levels : 18 11 9 Frequently changed dump tank : or process water : 43 68 65 60 Infrared : 5 2 2 Insecticides on bin piles : 5 5 4 Low oxygen levels : 50 42 32 Ozone to cleanse process water : 7 4 4 Pest or rodent controls : 61 68 80 72 Plastic bins to reduce spore counts : 46 32 22 30 : Cleaning Activities: : : Clean or sanitize packing equipment : 71 68 76 73 Clean or sanitize structures in : CA rooms : 14 59 62 48 Control vegetation around bins : 75 50 76 71 Hose down or empty bins/boxes : 71 68 55 62 Pick up spilled fruit : 93 100 91 93 Spray bins/walls with insecticide : 14 45 64 47 Sweep, spray, or vacuum facility : floors : 96 100 93 95 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pears: Pest Management Practices, Percent of Operations Utilizing Practice, Total of Program States, 2001-02 Marketing Year -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Program States Practice :--------------------------------------- : CA : OR : WA : ALL -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Operations : Measure Storage Facility Temperature: : : Controlled Atmosphere: : : Automatically monitored : 14 27 51 36 Hourly : 5 4 3 Daily : 7 18 5 8 Twice a week : Weekly : 4 1 Other : Do not monitor : 4 2 2 : : Regular Storage: : : Automatically monitored : 25 18 38 31 Hourly : 7 9 7 8 Daily : 39 32 29 32 Twice a week : 2 1 Weekly : Other : 14 5 6 Do not monitor : 7 18 2 6 : : Other Structures: : : Automatically monitored : 11 6 Hourly : Daily : 4 9 7 7 Twice a week : Weekly : Other : 2 1 Do not monitor : 18 5 4 8 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Survey Procedures Operations were chosen from those on the NASS List Sampling Frame known or expected to handle apples or pears. Generally, all operations known to engage in processing, packing or shipping, or storing apples and pears were included in this survey. There were slightly over 2,000 operations selected to participate in the 2002 Apple and Pear Postharvest Survey, referencing the 2001-02 apple and pear marketing year. Estimation Procedures The chemical applications data, reported by product name or trade name were reviewed within State and across States for reasonableness and consistency. This review compared reported data with manufacturers' recommendations and with data from other operations using the same product. Following this review, product information was converted to active ingredient level. The chemical usage estimates in this publication consist of survey estimates of those active ingredients. Detailed data within a table may not multiply across or add down due to independent rounding of the published values. Reliability The probability nature of the survey provides for expansion of data so estimates are statistically representative of chemical use on the targeted commodities in the surveyed States. The reliability of these survey results are affected by sampling variability and nonsampling errors. Nonsampling errors are errors that occur during a survey process and, unlike sampling variability, are difficult to measure. They may be caused by interviewers failing to follow instructions, poorly worded questions, non-response, problematic survey procedures, or data handling between collection and publication. In this survey, procedures and analysis were carried out in a consistent and orderly manner to minimize the occurrence of these types of errors. Variability for estimates of volume of the commodity handled will be higher than the variability for estimates of application rates. This is because application rates have a narrower range of responses, are recommended by the manufacturer of the product, and are generally followed. Sampling variability of the estimates differs by chemical and crop. In general, the more often the chemical was applied, the smaller the sampling variability. For example, estimates of use of a commonly used product, such as diphenylamine on apples, exhibit less variability than a rarely used product. Terms and Definitions Active ingredient: The active ingredient is the specific chemical which kills or controls the target pests. Usage data are reported by pesticide product and are converted to an amount of active ingredient. Agricultural chemicals: The phrase agricultural chemicals refers to the active ingredients in pesticides. Amount applied: This amount represents the percentage of total volume handled receiving one or more applications of a specific agricultural chemical. Antioxidant: A substance that prevents or slows the breakdown of another substance by oxygen. Often antioxidants are added to foods to prevent them from becoming rancid or from discoloring. Application rates: The application rates refer to the average number of pounds of a pesticide active ingredient applied to a volume of product. Rate per application is the average number of pounds applied in one application. Rate per marketing year is the average number of pounds applied counting multiple applications. Number of applications is the average number of times a treated volume receives a specific agricultural chemical. Common name: The common name is an officially recognized name for an active ingredient. This report shows active ingredient by common name. Controlled Atmosphere (CA) storage: CA storage, or controlled atmosphere storage, is a storage facility in which the atmospheric gases are controlled in their amount or in temperature for the purpose of controlling the condition and maturity of fresh apples or pears. Certified and non-certified controlled atmosphere storage facilities were included in this survey. Dump tank/Float tank: Upon leaving CA storage, the apples and pears are subjected to chemical treatments in a float or dump tank where they are floated out of their storage containers. As each bin is completely submerged, the apples or pears float out. The water may contain some or no chemicals. The float solution usually disinfects the fruit prior to its entering the packing line. The number of float tanks per packing house usually ranges from one to four, with each ranging in size from 500 to several thousand gallons. Marketing year: A marketing year refers to the period immediately following harvest of the crop through the marketing or disposition of the crop. For purposes of this survey, the apple marketing year was August 2001 through September 2002. For pears, the marketing year was defined as August 2001 through July 2002. Terms and Definitions (continued) Packers and Shippers: Packers and shippers generally prepare the commodity for fresh market distribution. They may have storage facilities as well. Those elements of the commodity which do not meet the fresh market standards are often moved to processors. Pesticides: As defined by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), pesticides include any substance or mixture of substances intended for preventing, destroying, repelling or mitigating any pest, and any substance or mixture of substances intended for use as a plant regulator, defoliant, or desiccant. Postharvest: After the commodity is harvested from the field, any subsequent activity is termed postharvest. Postharvest chemical usage refers to chemical applications after the commodity is taken from the field or orchard. Processor: Processors actually change the form of the commodity. These firms may have storage facilities as well. Regular storage: The cold storage warehouses consist of large refrigerated storerooms, where the temperature is kept at approximately 32 degrees and high humidity is maintained. This cold temperature slows down but does not stop the ripening process. Most fruit are in regular storage for shorter term than fruit in CA storage. Storage operators: Storage operators store the commodity prior to processing or fresh market distribution. Some processing or packing and shipping facilities also have storage facilities. Total volume handled: The volume of a commodity handled by the market segment. In this release, it is the total amount of a commodity that passed through the firms summarized in the particular table. Trade name: A trademark is the name given to a specific formulation of a pesticide product. A formulation contains a specific concentration of the active ingredient, carrier materials, and other ingredients such as emulsifiers and wetting agents. Some formulations, as in the case of pre-mixes, can contain more than one active ingredient. Trade Names, Common Names, and Classes The following is a list of common name, associated class and trade name of active ingredients in this publication. The classes are insecticides (I), fungicides (F), and other chemicals (O). This list is provided as an aid in reviewing the data. Pre-mixes are not cataloged. The list may not be complete for all postharvest chemicals used on apples and pears. NASS does not mean to imply use of any specific trade name. Class : Common Name : Trade Name O Calcium chloride Stop-It, Cor-Clear, several calcium chloride concentrates O Calcium lignosulfonate Lignosite AF F Captan several Captan formulations O Chlorine Drench-chlor, Chlorine O Chlorine dioxide Chlorine dioxide O Citric acid Tri-Circ, Citric Acid F Copper several O Diphenylamine several O Dodecylbenzene sodium sulfonate EpiClean O Dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid Fresh-Pak O Ethoxyquin several O Hydrogen chloride Fresh-Pak, Tri-Circ I Petroleum distillate several O Phosphoric acid several O Sodium hypochlorite Agchlor 310 F Sodium o-phenylphenate several O Sodium silicate several O Sodium sulfate anhydrous several F Thiabendazole several Report Features Released March 12, 2003, by the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), Agricultural Statistics Board, U.S. Department of Agriculture. For information on "Agricultural Chemical Usage" call (202) 720-6146, office hours 7:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. ET. The next "Agricultural Chemical Usage: Postharvest Applications" will be released during the spring of 2004. This report will cover the use of postharvest chemicals used on corn and soybeans. Listed below are persons within the National Agricultural Statistics Service to contact for additional information. Michelle Radice, Environmental Statistician (202) 690-2284 Kevin Hintzman, Head, Environmental and Demographics Section (202) 720-0684 Linda Hutton, Chief, Environmental, Economics and Demographics Branch (202) 720-6146 The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact the USDA's TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C., 20250-9410, or call 202-720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. ACCESS TO REPORTS!! For your convenience, there are several ways to obtain NASS reports, data products, and services: INTERNET ACCESS All NASS reports are available free of charge on the worldwide Internet. For access, connect to the Internet and go to the NASS Home Page at: http:/www.usda.gov/nass/. Select "Today's Reports" or Publications and then Reports Calendar or Publications and then Search, by Title or Subject. E-MAIL SUBSCRIPTION All NASS reports are available by subscription free of charge direct to your e-mail address. Starting with the NASS Home Page at http:/www.usda.gov/nass/, click on Publications, then click on the Subscribe by E-mail button which takes you to the page describing e-mail delivery of reports. Finally, click on Go to the Subscription Page and follow the instructions. AUTOFAX ACCESS NASSFax service is available for some reports from your fax machine. Please call 202-720-2000, using the handset attached to your fax. Respond to the voice prompts. Document 0411 is a list of available reports. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PRINTED REPORTS OR DATA PRODUCTS CALL OUR TOLL-FREE ORDER DESK: 800-999-6779 (U.S. and Canada) Other areas, please call 703-605-6220 FAX: 703-605-6900 (Visa, MasterCard, check, or money order acceptable for payment.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ASSISTANCE For assistance with general agricultural statistics or further information about NASS or its products or services, contact the Agricultural Statistics Hotline at 800-727-9540, 7:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. ET, or e-mail: nass@nass.usda.gov.