Uruguay
10. Current State of Chlorine Containing
Pesticides in Uruguay
by Mr. Mario Boroukhovitch
Tables
I - XVII Table
VI
Uruguay's economy is based mainly on livestock and agriculture,
that represent today 10-12% of P.B.I.(Internal Gross Product)(12) The animal
production (cattle and sheep meat, milk, pork, poultry) represent 60% of the
P.B.I of this sector, and the other 40% correspond to agriculture production
(rice, citrics, barley and other cereals, etc): Agriculture and livestock
product and agroindustrial produce 37% of the full enter holding in the country
for export concepts.
The agriculture and livestock production is affected by the
attack of different pest, which produce important damage. With the proposal to
diminish the incidence of this dangerous organisms, has implemented different
control measures, and chemical control was one of the alternatives.
Like in most countries of similar characteristics, since the
apparition in the world market of the organic synthetic pesticides, after the
Word War II, Uruguay had used these products. Between this pesticides were the
organochlorates insecticides.
At the end of the forties, it was used hexachlorociclohexane
(commonly commercially named Gammexane) for the control of the swarms of locust
(American Schistocerca = Schistocerca cancellata) and later the uses of other
chlorate insecticides for control of local locust named "tucuras" (Orthoptera,
Acrididae).
The extensive use of chlorate pesticides in the sixties was for
the insect control, mainly lepidopterous worms in cereal crops (wheat, barley,
oats, corn, sorghum), oilcrops (flax, sunflower), industrial crops (potatoes,
sweetbeet), and for soil insects and cutting ants control. Also part of the
farmers used organochlorates insecticides for control of pest in vegetable and
fruit crops.
In the livestock area, it was used some chlorate pesticides for
ectoparasites control.
National Authorities perceiving the risks that can produce the
wide use of the organic synthetic pesticides in the agriculture, could produce,
intended to minimize their risk throughout the technical advice to the farmers
who used these pesticides. In 1958 a supervised control service was established,
and the main goal was to avoid unnecessary wide applications of this pesticides.
For this reasons the Campaigns of locust control were transformed to
"Campaign of the fight against caterpillar and others pest insects"
This Campaign had an Aerial Service Department with area
applicant aircraft that make aerial applications only authorized by official
entomologist and farmers technicians.
The main organochlorates insecticides first used in this
Campaigns were DDT and endrin in aerial sprays , but others products as
toxaphene, toxaphene-DDT, dieldrin, telodrin.
By inspections solicited by the farmers, the entomologists of
the Livestock and Agriculture Ministry (M.A.P.) Plant Protection Department
especially assigned to the "Campaign of the fight against caterpillar and
others pest insects", determinated in each situation the necessity or not
for proper control measures. For such aspect as vegetative phase of the crop,
type and amount of damage, density of the pests, development stade of the
insect, distribution in the crop, presence of natural enemies (parasites and
predators) and its incidence, and attacks places in the crop were evaluated.
Likewise, the technician determinated if were necessary make
local 0 total treatment in the crop, type of pesticide to use, doses and total
volume of spraying for ha, especially in the aerial applications.
In this manner, it could diminish the treatment at only 30% of
the total area inspected (2), which is showed in the table VI.
This activity of technical assistance at Official level, made by
the Plant Protection Department (further on Plant Protection Direction) in the
eighties was transformed in a monitoring service in extensive crops, making
advertences about the appearance of insect pest. This information was noted by
technicians and farmers and used for make decisions for pest control. This
monitoring work was extended as advertences about appearance of fungal diseases
in winter cereals (rust, fusarium, septoria and other phytosanitary problems).
In 1968, in account the knowledge of the problems of
bioaccumulation of chlorates pesticides in the lipids of animals and the men,
raise general preoccupation to protect the national consumer, but at the same
time make not affect the meat and derivades exportations. The Uruguayan
Government decree 367/68 empowered at the Livestock and Agriculture Ministry to
regulate, and in the necessary cases ban the application and destination of the
pesticides of use in livestock and plant protection, when it consider dangerous
to public health.
By Livestock and Agriculture Ministry Resolution dated 6/6/968
was banned the use of chlorate insecticide formulated with aldrin, dieldrin,
endrin, chlordane, heptachlor, gamma isomer of H.C.H., DDT and endosulfan,
destined to the control of insect pest in grassfield and implanted and/or
artificial prairies. It was excepted the use of chlorinated insecticide for ant
control in focussed treatment.
All the registrants of this insecticides must add in the labels
the phrase "Its must not use in grasslands implanted and/or artificial
prairies".
Other problems that general concern, no only of the plant
protection view, but of the consume population, because can repercute in the
human and animal health, was the insect control of stored grains.
In 1973 was created in the Plant Protection Research Center and
Direction, a Department of Stored Grain that realized a survey of the problem
and developed a Campaign to control insects in stored grain, recommending
cleaning in treatment of the storehouses and storing locals and the use of the
adequate protestant insecticides. In this recommendation was eliminated
chlorated insecticides for all the treatment in structures, empty bags and
vehicles, authorizing only their use for seed treatment.
Parallel it was started a Program of Grain management, avoiding
quality and quantity losses, and diminish presence of micotoxines, and make
inadequated the life conditions to pest.
It was stated in the different inspections, that in the years
that the climatic conditions owed to reduce the sowing areas of cereals (wheat,
oats, barley, etc) the stored seeds treated with chlorates pesticides were mixed
with cereal grain and destined to human and animal consume.
View the difficulties in this moment to make analytical
determination of residues of pesticides in 1977 with the promulgation of decree
149/977 dated, march 15, 1977 yet today in force was included banning chlorate
insecticides not only in grassland and prairies, but also in grain treatment
destined for human and or animal consumption and/or industrialization.
After the Committee for the study of biological residues in meat
at National level carnation in 1979, the analytical laboratory of the Veterinary
Research Center Miguel C Rubino, collaborating with agronomic area were analyzed
different wheat and rice grain samples extracted by technicians of Plant
Protection Direction (4).
Similar activity was realized by the Technological Laboratory of
Uruguay (L.A.T.U). The results of this analysis area showed in the tables VIII,
IX, X and XI.
In the same period, and with the creation of the Toxicological
Information and Advice Center (C.I.A.T.) of the Clinics Hospital (University of
the Republic), for agronomist and medical initiative was developed an
agromedical team integrated also with veterinarian and chemicals technicians.
Working jointly one of the task of this team was to evaluate to organochlorates
pesticides contamination in Uruguay to determine the chlorate level in the blood
of exposed and don’t exposed professional way population (5) The conclusions
confirm that exist certain grade of organochlorates residues in the general
population. (Table XIII)
The exposed population presented higher levels that the no
exposed one. Residues did not concord strictly with the pesticides in use at
that moment, but reflected a greater grade of exposition, the logical
consequence of years working with different organochlorates (14) HCB levels,
product used for seed treatment of diseases in wheat and other cereals, may be
owing a use deviation of treated seed that were incorporated at human or animal
consumption, violating the legislation at that moment (14). In the dieldrin
event, the residue values can be explained more for domestic use or a deviation
of agriculture use to household.
It attracted the attention the appearance of important residues
of DDT, since Uruguay did not import this product for agricultural use after
1977.
This activity was continued and in 1982 the conclusion and
result were founded in the paper Clinical and analytical control to an
organochlorates pesticides exposed population.
Of the results can be concluded that organochlorates
impregnation values descended in the lapse of three years in people with initial
high, medium and low values, and descend at the mid founded for no exposed
populations in many cases (See table XVI). The presence of these organochlorine
levels in blood showed an impregnation without clinical or paraclinical
repercussion in those three years. The most used insecticides in those moment -
endrin and endosulfan - don't leave residues because they have a quickly
metabolization.
It was detected metabolites of others chlorates pesticides which
were used in agriculture in these moment. Also existed interest in research in
motherly milk. In this area can be mention the paper* Pesticides organochlorates
residues in human milk*(7) in 1985. In all the samples were founded BHC, beta
HCH, DDT and their metabolites (ppDDT y ppDDE) and dieldrin at different levels.
They didn't detect polychlorinated biphenyls (PBCs).
These results indicate that the use deviation of many
organochlorates of agricultural use to domestic use, the food contamination,
especially treated seeds that deviate at human or animal consume and
organochlorates domestic insecticides, are the reasons for the detected
contamination.
An other paper "organochlorates pesticides residues in
umbilical cord blood": Comparation with maternal level"(14) was
detected in the most of the samples of blood mother HCB, beta HCH, dieldrin and
DDT and its metabolites residues.
Legal Restrictions and Prohibitions of Organochlorates from 1977
to Present
The Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock based in the
recommendations of the General Directions of Agronomic and Veterinary Services
for Legal Resolution date 1/12/977 banned hexachlorociclohexane importation,
manufacture, formulation and sale for agricultural and veterinary uses. This
action was the consequence of deviation use from agricultural to veterinary. It
is excepted for this banned lindane (99% gamma isomer of HCH).
By Legal Resolution of Plant Protection Direction dated May 19,
1988 the registration and sale authorization of endrin was revoked, for all
agronomic use, except parakeet control (Myiopsitta monachus, Aves Psittaciformes),
only been sale with official authorization from Plant Protection Direction and
no less 20 liters containers. In account to endrin high toxicity to man, animals
and the environment, and in view that existed other actives to substitute them,
was limited its use. The parakeet control consists in endrin introduction in the
next entry.
In March 29 of 1989,by Plant Protection Direction Resolution all
the organochlorates pesticides used in seed treatment were revoked. This
included benzene hexachlorate (HBC) used many years ago for your fungicide
action in seed treatment. The HCB residues were detected in exposed and no
exposed populations at organochlorates pesticides, before mentioned.
For Plant Protection resolution dated September 22 of 1989 was
revoked the register and sale authorization of chlorate insecticides, permitting
its use only for cutting ant control with an active concentration less than 2,5%
p/p or p/v., colorless in red and it has to be more than 1 liter o 1 kg.
In Uruguay the cutting ants on special Acromirex and Atta are a
very big problem for many crops because of the serious damage on them.
Other similar study performed in Rio de la Plata and programme
of monitoring and control on Uruguay River was published in 1992 by Chemical
Engineer Juan Miguel Moyano Recine in its paper "Pesticides residues in
rivers and seas" (13) and the results of organochlorates in Uruguay River
showed in the table XXII.
Also is necessary to distract the inform realized by consultants
of the Programme of the Environmental National Study in the orbit of
Presidential of Republic, with the support of BID and OEA*.
The agreement between Ministry of Transport and Public Work and
the University of the Republic, through Hydrographic Direction and C.I.A.T.
started pesticides residues studies in the Basin of Santa Lucia River had the
objective to obtain information about pesticide use and management in the Basin.
In 1989 an inquiry was made of farmers and applicators. There are a paper about
this, named "Pesticides on environment Risk criterion"(9). The Rio
Santa Lucia Basin is one of the potable drinking water source to Montevideo and
Canelones population.
Elimination Problem with the Organochlorates Pesticide Lots
It doesn't exist a survey of finished or used lot, we know
puntal situations of lots of chlorated insecticides stored in sure locals. The
elimination solution was burned in special incinerator ovens with temperatures
over 1200 centigrade grades. In first instance it was thought to use the
incinerators of cement manufactures that operate in Uruguay, but have big
difficulties for elimination of solid residues and don't overtake the
temperature mentioned. and it is necessary search alternatives others.
Discussion about the Problematic of Chlorated Insecticides in
Uruguay
As other countries in the world, use of chlorated insecticides
in Uruguay was ample, since their entry in the market, at the end of the
forties.
The diffusion of scientific evidence that showed adverse effects
of this chemicals to man, domestic animals and environment, carry on the
Uruguayan Government, at initiative of Ministry of Livestock and Agriculture, by
decree 367/968 to authorize at those Ministry to regulate and to ban, when it is
necessary, those livestock and agriculture pesticides, when it consider threat
for human health. Based in this normative, was resolved use prohibition of
chlorates insecticides to control insect that attack grasslands, and implanted
or cultivated prairies. In account the high incidence of cut ants in this
pasture fields, is permitted localized nest control of these insects. The
regulatory action obliged to intensify the use of others actives,
organophosphorous and organocarbamates, but also the use of microbiological
insecticide Bacillus thuringiensis, registered in Uruguay at middle sixties, but
being more expensive that other insecticides.
The substitution of chlorates to organophosphorous and
carbamates insecticides provoked a higher costs in control treatments, in some
circumstances higher risk of intoxications and the necessity of realize
different experiments for control insects. Nevertheless this actions started
chlorinated substitution process in others crops, and the news to the farmers of
practicable alternative products.
By Plant Protection resolution dated November 22 of 1989 it were
clarify that the before revocation mentioned excepted endrin and endosulfan.
Finally, by Ministry Resolution date on September 23 of 1997,
all chlorate pesticide register were revoked, except endosulfan and dodecachlor
This last product formulated like 0,45% granulate toxic bait.
Of this manner culminate a restriction and prohibition
proceeding of this COPs, restricting the revision of dodecachloro. The reason
for no prohibited dodecachlor is due that in Uruguay the farmer have preference
use for the granular toxic bait in ant control in fruticulture, horticulture,
floriculture and mainly forest cultures. The others toxic granules registries
haven't the same efficient control, according the farmers opinion.
Imports Statistics of Organochlorates Insecticides in Uruguay
In Uruguay, with exceptions, pesticides for veterinary or
agronomic use are not manufactured here. Most of the products area already
formulated auxiliary substances are imported for a local formulation.
Each one of the imported shipment that is imported, is analyzed
by the laboratories of the General Direction of Agronomic Service and if the
analytical results are coincident with the official registration is liberated by
custom authorities. General Direction of Agronomic Services has an actual
statistical information in this field since sixties( 1,3).
At this respect, except dodecachloro and endosulfan, the last
shipment of chlorates imported was aldrin, power formulation 2,5%(830 kgs a.i.),
in 1991.
Tables I, II, Ill, IV and V show the importation evolution of
organochlorates insecticides in different periods, and the comparative volumes
of the others insecticides groups.
Pesticides Intoxications Statistics
The Toxicological Information and Advisory Center (C.I.A.T.) had
elaborated annual reports that include different types of intoxication
statistics. In the paper "Chlorates insecticides intoxication"(l0) we
reproduce in the tables XIX and XX the consult about chlorates, according of
intoxication type, ingress way and age, between December 1975 and October 1978.
The most chlorated intoxication is by accidental ingestion in
children of suicide intent. The labor intoxication is few.
In the Environmental contamination area, there are information
about river contamination as is showed in the papers "Presence of
organochlorates pesticides in exterior Rio de la Plata an Maritime Front (11),
1987. The result is showed in the table XXI. All the amounts respect to aldrin,
dieldrin and DDT exceed established limit to aquatic life, but all the values
are lower for human health criterion.
The initiating campaign to control insects that attack stored
grain, in 1973, was the opportunity to rationally the use of preservative and
curative insecticides, eliminating chlorated insecticides use as structural
treatments and avoiding use deviation to treat directly stored grains destined
to human and animal consummation.
At this respect, in the opportunity of study the regulations
about registry, importation and sale authorization of agriculture pesticides,
incorporated the use prohibition of chlorated to treat grain destined to human
and animal consummation and for industrialization. The obligation of colorant
add to treatment seed formulation, limited yet more deviation stored seeds at
human or animal consumption. Subsequently, the chlorated seed treatment ban,
eliminate of fact the use deviation of seed to consume.
After, the use restriction of chlorates insecticides only for
cutting ant control, is other stage of the restrictions process of this products
and the use of others actives, as phosphorous, carbamates and pyretroids
insecticides, with similar effectively, but without the chlorates problems. This
chlorate restriction imply that maximum concentration must no high than 2,5%,
only for ant control, and must be identified the chlorate formulation with
adding colorants for easy identification in the situation of deviation of use.
The use restriction of endrin, only for parakeet control,
eliminate a insecticide, that its effective is the high threat, and its
accumulative action is lesser than others chlorates, its environment impact and
its toxicity made inadequate its use, having adequate substitutes, except for
parakeet control.
We need to add at all the mentioned actions the chlorate
monitoring residues in stored grains destined to internal consume as well
exportation, the meat monitoring residues and some evaluations made by
analytical laboratories of the Plant Protection Direction in certain fruits and
vegetables that commercialize in the major center of Uruguay, Model Market, has
rendered to conclude that chlorates residues do not create threat to consumers
and the environment. In the practice, since 1991, except dodecachloro and
endosulfan were no import chlorate insecticides.
Finally with the prohibition of chlorated insecticides (except
dodecachlor and endosulfan) by Ministry Resolution dates September 23 1997
culminate regulatory actions of this POPs that initiated in 19687 with the
chlorated insecticides ban in grasslands and prairies.
Today 1998, only are authorized endosulfan and dodecachlor, the
first without the problems of the group. Formulation authorize of dodecachlor is
granular toxic boat with 0,45% of active ingredient for control cutting ants.
This type of formulation it is choose by the farmers for ant control in
fruticulture, horticulture, floriculture and mainly forestall cultures. This is
because the farmer saw the toxic bait granule in the ant ways to nest, and the
ant’s charge it and introduce the toxic in the colony. The others products are
formulated like dusts and concentrates and to imply it, to have to search the
nest, and to introduce the product, being more difficult and expensive.
In Uruguay they are others toxic bait granules registered at
sufluramida and phenil pirazol, but this products do not conform many of the
farmers, whom continue using dodecachlor.
Today, dodecachlor is in revision and study for Plant Protection
Division of the General Direction of Agronomic Services takes in account others
alternatives. Some farmers differ with dodecachlor ban, and they argue that the
quantity of toxic bait granulate applied is very few for ant nest to contaminate
the environment and they wish to wait until found others substitutes of the same
efficient control than dodecachlor.
In relation to a soil treatment, actually it is used
chlorpirifos, diazinon or carbofuran for example with the same effectively than
chlorate insecticides.
With respect a parakeet control, the substitution of endrin by
carbofuran, do not lessen toxicological threat to applicators and environment,
because the used formulations (flowable 40%) is the high toxicity and no
selective.
In the agromedical area, the survey of organochlorates
pesticides realized in exposed and no exposed populations and studies in
mother's milk and cord umbilical blood had detected the problematic, and were
the basis for take restrictive an ban actions.
The intoxication statistics indicate that labor intoxication is
limited. In the environmental area it is where the effort had been less
incentives, but there are papers that show the presence of pesticides residues
in rivers, but there are not consequence of national management, because the
rivers are binationals and trinationals and the chlorates residues can be origin
of neighbor countries and no only from Uruguay.
The relative recent creation (10 years) Ministry of Dwelling,
Territorial Ordering and Environment Media, would permit, take new measures with
a national regulations that will permit increase this actions.
References
l. Boroukhovitch M. 1973, Reseña sobre Insumos de Insecticidas
en Uruguay para la Agricultura. Primera Reun. CIPA -COPANT Plaguicidas -
Residuos de Plaguicidas Buenos Aires.Doc RTE/5/2/ 10
2. Boroukhovitch M. 1978, Manejo de Plaguicidas y Preservacion
del ambiente. Rev. As. Uruguaya de Seguridad, Montevideo
3. Boroukhovitch M y Llanes E 1982, Breve Reseña sobre
Estadisticas y Empleo de Plaguicidas Agricolas en Uruguay. Congreso Seguridad e
Higiene en el Trabajo. As. Uruguaya Seguridad Paysandu. Uruguay
4. Boroukhovitch M. 1988, Algunas Acciones Realizadas a Nivel de
la Direccion General de Servicios Agronomicos en Relacion con Contaminantes en
Alimentos. Primer Seminario de Ecotoxicologia/Soc Uruguaya de Toxicol. y
Ecotoxicologia Montevideo 29/30 abril 14 pp Montevideo
5. Burger,M,de Barbino J.P.,Schonbrod P,Decia C,Boroukhovitch M
and Antonaz R. 1980. Niveles Sanguineos de Plaguicidas Organoclorados en Uruguay
en Adultos Expuestos y no Expuestos. Libro Resum. Soc. Uruguaya Toxic. y
Ecotoxicol. So Congreso Latinoamericano
http://irptc.unep.ch/pops/POPs_Inc/proceedings/Iguazu/URUGUAYE.html |