Caribbean Environment Programme
United Nations Environment Programme
Best Management Practices for Agricultural Non-Point Sources of
Pollution
CEP Technical Report No. 41
1998
Note: This document was commissioned by UNEP Caribbean Environment Programme with a
grant from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and a contribution from the Trust Fund.
The designations employed and the presentation of the materials in this document do not imply
the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP concerning the legal status of any
State, Territory, city or area, or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of their frontiers or
boundaries. The document contains the views expressed by the authors acting in their individual
capacity and may not necessarily reflect the views of UNEP.
©1998 UNEP
Caribbean Environment Programme
14-20 Port Royal Street
Kingston, Jamaica
This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational and non-
profit purposes without special from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the
source is made. UNEP would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this
material as a source.
No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purposes
whatsoever without prior permission in writing of UNEP.
For bibliographic purposes the printed version of this document may be cited as:
UNEP: Best Management Practices for Agricultural Non-Point Sources of Pollution. CEP
Technical Report No. 41. UNEP Caribbean Environment Programme, Kingston 1998.
CONTENTS
Page
Tables............................................................................................................................................................ v
Figures ......................................................................................................................................................... vi
Acronyms....................................................................................................................................................vii
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Background ............................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Purpose
and
Scope .................................................................................................... 2
SECTION 2. REGIONAL OVERVIEW ............................................................................................... 5
2.1 Geographic Area ....................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Land Use and Water Resources ................................................................................ 5
2.3 Socioeconomic
Conditions--Agriculture, Industry, and Resources......................... 7
SECTION 3. AGRICULTURAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION......................................... 13
3.1 Introduction............................................................................................................. 13
3.2 Agricultural
Non-point Sources of Pollution .......................................................... 14
3.2.1 Cultivation.................................................................................................. 14
3.2.2 Livestock
Production ................................................................................. 23
3.3 Agricultural Pollutants and Their Sources .............................................................. 27
3.3.1 Sediment .................................................................................................... 28
3.3.2 Nutrients..................................................................................................... 31
3.3.3 Pesticides.................................................................................................... 33
3.3.4 Pathogens ................................................................................................... 35
3.3.5 Solid
Waste ................................................................................................ 37
SECTION 4. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ......................................................................... 39
4.1 Introduction............................................................................................................. 39
4.2 Nonstructural
BMPs................................................................................................ 41
4.2.1 Education ................................................................................................... 41
4.2.2 Water
Management .................................................................................... 45
4.2.3 Land
Use .................................................................................................... 46
4.2.4 Erosion and Sediment Control ................................................................... 46
4.2.5 Pesticide/Nutrient
Control.......................................................................... 50
4.2.6 Pathogens ................................................................................................... 55
4.2.7 Solid
Waste ................................................................................................ 57
4.3 Structural
BMPs...................................................................................................... 58
4.3.1 Erosion and Sediment Controls.................................................................. 58
4.3.2 Pathogens ................................................................................................... 63
4.3.3 Solid
Waste ................................................................................................ 64
4.3.4 Siting Structural BMPs .............................................................................. 64
4.4 Monitoring .............................................................................................................. 65
4.5 Socioeconomic Factors and Implementation .......................................................... 66
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page iii
CEP Technical Report No. 41
CONTENTS (continued)
SECTION 5. CASE STUDIES.............................................................................................................. 69
5.1 The Better Bananas Program .................................................................................. 69
5.2 Plan
Sierra ............................................................................................................... 70
5.3 Technical Improvements to Local Innovations in Haiti.......................................... 72
SECTION 6. MEETING SUMMARY................................................................................................. 75
SECTION 7. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................... 85
GLOSSARY .............................................................................................................................................. 87
REFERENCES CITED ............................................................................................................................ 91
APPENDIX A Site Visits
APPENDIX B Abstracts by Title
APPENDIX C Additional Resources
APPENDIX D Better Bananas Certification Program
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page iv
CEP Technical Report No. 41
TABLES
Page
Table 1-1. The Cartagena Convention signatory countries and territories ................................................. 1
Table 2-1. Projected land use changes in the WCR.................................................................................... 6
Table 2-1. Principal rivers draining into the WCR ..................................................................................... 6
Table 2-3. Windward Islands banana revenue............................................................................................ 7
Table 2-4. Land use percentage changes in croplands, pasturelands, and forest woodlands in 17
countries of the WCR during the 1977-1989 period ................................................................. 9
Table 2-5. Leading agricultural producers in the WCR............................................................................ 10
Table 2-6. Leading sugarcane and banana producers in the WCR ........................................................... 11
Table 3-1. Percent deforestation in WCR countries and territories .......................................................... 15
Table 3-2. Agricultural land use in the WCR ........................................................................................... 17
Table 3-3. Pesticide use in banana production on the eastern Caribbean islands..................................... 19
Table 3-4. Herbicides used in banana production..................................................................................... 21
Table 3-5. Herbicides used in sugarcane production ................................................................................ 22
Table 3-6. Herbicides used in cotton production ...................................................................................... 24
Table 3-7. Agricultural activities that potentially affect water quality ..................................................... 27
Table 3-8. Average annual fertilizer use in 17 countries of the WCR, including changes during
the 1979-1989 period............................................................................................................... 32
Table 3-9. Average annual pesticide use in 14 countries of the WCR, including changes during
the 1974-1984 period............................................................................................................... 36
Table 4-1. Some examples of traditional systems of soil management, vegetation, and water use by
farmers..................................................................................................................................... 39
Table 4-2. Effectiveness and limitations of nonstructural BMPs ............................................................. 42
Table 4-3. Estimates of potential reductions in field losses of pesticides for cotton compared
to a conventionally or traditionally cropped field ................................................................... 54
Table 4-4. Estimates of potential reductions in field losses of pesticides for cotton compared
to a conventionally or traditionally cropped field ................................................................... 63
Table 4-5. Economic returns from soil conservation in Maissade, Haiti.................................................. 67
Table 6-1. Contaminants/pollutants of concern, sources, causes, and practices for control..................... 78
Table 6-2. Obstacles to implementation and suggested solutions ............................................................ 80
Table 7-1. Agricultural BMPs that can be applied to various management measures ............................. 86
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page v
CEP Technical Report No. 41
FIGURES
Page
Figure 2-1. The Wider Caribbean Region as defined in the Cartagena Convention.................................... 5
Figure 3-1. Banana production system....................................................................................................... 19
Figure 3-2. Pathways through which sediments, nutrients, pesticides, pathogens, and solid waste
are transported from agricultural land to become water pollutants ......................................... 28
Figure 3-3. Four types of soil erosion on an exposed slope....................................................................... 29
Figure 3-4. Factors affecting the transport and water quality impact of a pesticide .................................. 34
Figure 4-1. Diversion method of erosion control....................................................................................... 60
Figure 4-2. Alternative slope patterns on controlled-erosion terraces in Venezuela ................................. 61
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page vi
CEP Technical Report No. 41
ACRONYMS
BMP best
management
practices
BOD
biological oxygen demand
CAR/RCU
Caribbean Regional Coordinating Unit
CCA
Caribbean Conservation Association
ESC
erosion and sediment controls
FAO
Food and Agriculture Organization
IPM
integrated pest management
IRF
Island Resources Foundation
LACCDE
Latin American and Caribbean Commission on Development and Environment
LBSMP
land-based sources of marine pollution
NGO nongovernment
organization
SAV submerged
aquatic vegetation
UNEP
United Nations Environment Programme
USDOS
United States Department of State
USEPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
WCR
Wider Caribbean Region
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page vii
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 1. Introduction
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
During the past two decades, awareness of the impacts of pollution on the coastal and marine
environments of the Wider Caribbean Region (WCR) has increased. Tourism, one of the
dominant economic bases in the region, depends on a healthy coastal and marine environment. In
a concerted effort to prevent the further decline of the coastal and marine environment, countries
and territories, through national research institutions and international organizations, have
undertaken technical and legal actions to prevent and control marine and coastal pollution within
the WCR (UNEP, 1994b).
The Cartagena Convention, signed in 1983 by 29 Caribbean countries and territories (Table 1-1),
represents the joint action taken to protect the coastal and marine environment and its resources in
the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea. Under the Cartagena Convention, the governments of
the WCR are developing a Protocol on Marine Pollution from Land-based Sources and Activities
(the LBSMP Protocol). Land-based pollutants are the most serious threat to the coastal and
marine waters of the WCR. The LBSMP Protocol, when it enters into force, calls for the
protection of the fragile coastal and marine environment encompassing the Gulf of Mexico, the
Caribbean Sea, and those parts of the western Atlantic within 200 nautical miles of the Bahamas
and Florida, down to the northern border of Brazil (Hoagland et al., 1995). The coastal and
marine environment includes nearshore and open-water habitats that can be affected by land-
based pollution.
As defined in the Cartagena Convention, land-based sources of marine pollution are sources
emanating from land by coastal disposal, discharges from rivers, estuaries, coastal establishments,
outfall structures, or any other source being on the territory of a contracting party to the
Cartagena Convention. Because of the comparatively small land mass in many of the Caribbean
countries and territories, much of the coastal and marine environment is generally no farther than
5 to 10 kilometers from agricultural and urban development, as well as construction and other
development activities, thus establishing the need for the protection of the coastal and marine
environment from impacts associated with land-based pollutants (Archer, 1987). The LBSMP
Protocol addresses, among other issues, agricultural nonpoint source pollution as one of the major
categories of land-based source pollution in the WCR. Agriculture is the production of crops and
livestock, and the pollutants associated with it include sediment, nutrients, pesticides, pathogens,
and solid waste.
Table 1-1. The Cartagena Convention signatory countries and territories
Antigua & Barbuda
Grenada
St. Lucia
Barbados
Guatemala
St. Vincent & Grenadines
Colombia Jamaica Trinidad
&
Tobago
Costa Rica
Mexico
United Kingdom
Cuba Netherlands
United
States
Dominica Panama Venezuela
France
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 8
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 1. Introduction
Agricultural runoff and ground water discharge, the main sources of agricultural nonpoint source
pollution, could potentially lead to the environmental degradation of the coastal waters
throughout the WCR. The need to strengthen the institutional capacity to manage problems
related to agricultural nonpoint sources of pollution has been recognized as a critical factor in
sustaining the use of coastal and marine waters in the region. At the request of the governments
of the WCR and the Secretariat to the Cartagena Convention, the United Nations Environment
Programme-Caribbean/Regional Co-ordinating Unit (UNEP-CAR/RCU) assists the governments
in developing an Annex on appropriate controls for agricultural nonpoint source pollution under
the LBSMP Protocol. This document addresses the agricultural nonpoint source aspect of land-
based pollution sources and serves as the technical basis for the development and further
implementation of an Annex on agricultural nonpoint sources of pollution under the LBSMP
Protocol.
1.2
Purpose and Scope
In developing the LBSMP Protocol, the UNEP-CAR/RCU and various governmental and
nongovernmental organization representatives recognize the absence of consistent requirements
for any best management practices (BMPs) relating to agricultural nonpoint sources of marine
pollution in the WCR. Furthermore, in attempting to reduce agricultural nonpoint source
pollution through the implementation of the LBSMP Protocol, attention needs to be focused on
the economic and technical capabilities of the countries and territories in the region. The
agriculture segment of the economy in many countries and territories might be limited in its
capacity to implement a BMP program when considering investment, construction, and
maintenance costs. An effective BMP program needs to address the capabilities of the countries
and territories within the WCR and must be applicable to the largest plantation as well as the
smallest subsistence farm.
In developing this report, a site visit to several agricultural operation in Costa Rica helped provide
an overview of the issues related to agricultural nonpoint source pollution control in the WCR
(Appendix A). In January 1998, a meeting of regional experts on agricultural nonpoint source
pollution control was held in Castries, St. Lucia. Section 6 is a summary of the experts meeting.
The purpose of this document is to describe BMPs for the cost-effective control of agricultural
nonpoint source pollution from crop and livestock production. Factors considered in selecting
BMPs for inclusion in this report include topographic, climatic, socioeconomic, and
environmental conditions within the countries of the WCR. The document has three primary
goals:
1.Improve communication regarding agricultural nonpoint source
pollution among regional technical experts in the WCR, including
persons from the private sector and academia.
2.Develop a compilation of current, relevant literature that focuses on the
extent of agricultural nonpoint source pollution problems in the WCR
and identifies low-tech, low-cost control measures to reduce them
(Appendix B).
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 9
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 1. Introduction
3.Improve knowledge of different types of structural and nonstructural
agricultural nonpoint source pollution controls (BMPs), their benefits
and limitations, and how they might be applied in the WCR.
The document contains descriptions of applicable BMPs and nonpoint source pollution information as they
apply to the WCR. A discussion of agricultural practices in the WCR is included. Cultivation and
livestock production practices are discussed as well. This document focuses on five pollutants (sediments,
nutrients, pesticides, pathogens, and solid waste) and their adverse impacts on the coastal and marine
environment of the WCR. The BMPs discussed are those which are applicable to the targeted pollutants,
are cost-effective, and can be easily implemented.
The discussion of agricultural nonpoint source BMPs includes the following:
A description of practices, including commonly used structural and
nonstructural controls and, where applicable, their operation and
maintenance.
An identification of the individual pollutants or classes of pollutants that
might be controlled by each practice and the resulting effects on water
quality.
A description of the factors that should be considered (e.g., topography,
climate, acceptability) when implementing the practices within specific
sites or locations.
A BMP is included only if the practice is technically and economically achievable in the WCR. A decision
matrix is included to compare individual BMPs and the various constraints and incentives applicable to
their use (Section 4). Case studies demonstrating how low-cost/low-tech BMPs have been used to reduce
agricultural nonpoint source pollution are also included (Section 5).
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 10
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 2. Regional Overview
SECTION 2. REGIONAL OVERVIEW
2.1 Geographic
Area
For the purpose of this document, the geographic area of the WCR is based on the definition used
in the Cartagena Convention: "the [coastal and] marine environment of the Gulf of Mexico, the
Carib-bean Sea and areas of the Atlantic Ocean adjacent thereto, south of 30° north latitude and
within 200 nautical miles" of the Atlantic coasts from the Bahamas and Florida down to the
northern border of Brazil (Hoagland et al., 1995). (See Figure 2-1.) It should be observed,
however, that, although the Convention area encompasses the area closest to the seas, the
drainage area from which pollutants are transported to the seas consists of huge land areas on the
North American and South American continents.
The WCR encompasses an area of 6.4 million square kilometers, including the U.S. Gulf coast
states. The numerous islands of the Greater Antilles and Lesser Antilles account for 4.6 percent
of the total area; Mexico and the Central American countries compose 48.3 percent of the area
(Gajraj, 1981).
2.2
Land Use and Water Resources
Much of the WCR is mountainous and a significant, but rapidly diminishing, proportion of the
land is forested. A prospective analysis by Gallopín (1990) projects severe changes in the land
ecosystems of Latin America and the Caribbean to accommodate the growing population over the
next three decades (LACCDE, 1990). (See Table 2-1.)
Table 2-1. Projected land use changes in the WCR
Initial (1980)
2030
% Change
Primary (forested) 40.6
30.0
-26.7
Altered 22.1
21.0
-6.4
Uncultivated 2.0
3.2
69.6
Farming 7.5
11.0
46.5
Livestock 26.8
32.0
20.4
Plantations 0.3
1.5
443.2
Urban 0.7
1.3
92.7
TOTAL 100.0
100.0
Source: LACCDE, 1990.
The freshwater drainage basins within the WCR cover approximately 5.6 million square
kilometers. The largest portions are in the United States (62 percent), Venezuela (17 percent),
Colombia (4 percent), and Mexico (4 percent) (Diamante et al., 1991). The lands draining into
the marine area are clearly of importance to the management of this area, particularly when
considering nonpoint source pollution. Table 2-2 denotes the major drainage systems in the
region, but it does not include such inputs as the freshwater lagoons, mangrove swamps, and
bayous that constitute the coastlines of Florida, Colombia, Venezuela, and the Yucutan peninsula.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 5
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 2. Regional Overview
Additionally, although the freshwater inputs originating from the Amazon River are outside the
WCR, they should be accounted for as well.
Table 2-2. Principal rivers draining into the WCR
Drainage
Water
Sediment
Specific
Mean Suspended
Area
Discharge
Discharge
Transport
Solids
River
(km2)
(m3/sec)
(106 t/year)
(t/km2/year)
(mg/L)
USA
Mississippi
3,268,000 18,400 222.00
76.00
380
Apalachicola
44,000 620 0.16 6.80
15
Mobile
97,000 1,500 4.50 42.00
95
Brazoa
114,000 160
15.90 0.14
3,200
Colorado
107,000 79
1.90a
17.90
USA-Mexico
Rio Grande
467,000 23
very
lowa
--
--
Colombia
Magdelena
235,000 7,500 234.00 1000.00
1,000
Venezuela
Orinoco
950,000 30,000 85.00
91.00
90
a Low values due to dams.
Sources: Hoagland et al., 1995; UNEP, 1994b.
2.3
Socioeconomic Conditions--Agriculture, Industry, and Resources
The Caribbean region has an extraordinary diversity of natural and cultural resources, which are
subject to unprecedented development pressures (UNEP, 1994a). Major marine-based industries,
such as fisheries, sea transportation (upon which agriculture is dependent), oil and gas extraction,
and tourism, have all played an important role in the development of the WCR (UNEP, 1996).
Approximately 20 million tourists visit the islands and coastal regions each year to enjoy the
coastal and marine environment. Tourists are attracted to the region by the beautiful white
beaches, pristine blue waters, bountiful seafood, diving and snorkeling, sportfishing, and mild
climates (DeGeorges, 1990).
Agriculture, however, has long been the mainstay of the economies in the WCR countries. The
region produces approximately 60 percent of the world's coffee, 40 percent of the world's
bananas, 25 percent of the world's beans, 20 percent of the world's cocoa, and significant
quantities of sugar, corn, vanilla, cotton, potatoes, rice, and wheat (CCA and IRF, 1991). Along
the northern coast of South America, crops such as cotton, corn, sugarcane, and vanilla dominate.
Central America and Mexico focus on cocoa, bananas, sugarcane, mahogany, and livestock. In
the eastern Caribbean, agriculture has historically been the most productive sector of the
economy, dominated by sugarcane and, more recently, bananas (CCA and IRF, 1991).
Dependence on monoculture economies dominates. For instance, Barbados, St. Kitts, and the
Dominican Republic have traditionally depended on sugarcane, while Grenada, St. Vincents, St.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 6
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 2. Regional Overview
Lucia, and Dominica depend on banana production (DeGeorges, 1990). Table 2-3 provides the
annual banana revenue for the Windward Islands from 1994 to 1997.
Livestock activity traditionally has not been as developed as other areas of agriculture, especially
within the island countries and territories. Although livestock was targeted for generous subsidies
and government programs among the islands, only the poultry and pork industries have been
developed extensively. The island countries' beef and dairy industries, in particular, are lacking.
Most beef has been imported from New Zealand and Australia. Dairy production also has been
inadequate. In mainland regions of the WCR, livestock production can be found in greater
quantities.
Table 2-3. Windward Islands banana revenue
Revenue (EC$M)
Country
1994
1995
1996
1997
Total
Dominica
55.37
45.15
44.53
41.31
186.36
Grenada
6.52
5.20
1.63
0.00
13.35
St. Lucia
115.71
128.10
125.79
76.37
445.97
St. Vincent and the
39.83
61.27
52.43
37.10
190.63
Grenadines
TOTAL
217.43
239.72
224.38
154.78
836.31
Source: Naula Williams, Documentalist, Documentation Centre, Organization of East Caribbean States, March 1998.
Mining plays a key role as well. Bauxite, copper, nickel, gold, silver, lead, zinc, manganese, iron
ore, oil, and natural gas are present in commercially exploitable quantities. Again, however, the
majority of the smaller countries of the WCR have no significant mineral resources and their
economies are based primarily on agriculture and tourism (Gajraj, 1981).
Three distinct farming systems typify agricultural production in much of the WCR:
1.
The export-oriented plantation system, characterized chiefly by
monocultures on large estates and generally occupying the most fertile
land (Gumbs, 1981). These systems range in size. For example, in
Costa Rica, the smallest plantation growing bananas for export has 40
hectares but the majority of the farms range between 100 and 300
hectares (Hernández, 1997).
2. The subsistence-based agricultural system, which is typically smaller
than the plantation system and developed on the more marginal agricultural
lands (CCA and IRF, 1991). Most farmers have small plots of only a few
hectares or less (DeGeorges, 1990).
3.Migratory, shifting agriculture practiced mainly by indigenous groups in
Central America, Colombia, Venezuela, and the Guyanas (Gumbs,
1981).
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 7
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 2. Regional Overview
Farming systems are determined by both the natural landscape and the prevailing socioeconomic conditions
of the area (Sentis, 1992). Continued economic growth and development in the WCR have required
changes in the traditional use of the land, such as increased agricultural development at the expense of
forestland (UNEP, 1994a). (See Tables 2-1 and 2-4.) Food-growing potential in the WCR is further
constrained by lack of natural soil fertility, high soil erosion potential due to steep slopes and poor soil
drainage, salinization, and shallow soils. In addition, variable climatic conditions such as drought and
flooding and natural disasters like hurricanes can impose serious limitations on the productivity of the land
(Gajraj, 1981).
The focus of this document is the problems resulting from crop and livestock production. Table 2-5
provides a brief summary of the leading agricultural crop producers of the WCR. They are ranked in terms
of the percentage of land area devoted to agriculture. Table 2-6 provides information regarding two key
crops in the WCR, ranking sugarcane and banana production according to metric tons produced in 1994
(Hoagland et al., 1995).
Table 2-4. Land use percentage changes in croplands, pasturelands, and forest woodlands in 17
countries of the WCR during the 1977-1989 period
Percentage change (1977-1989)
Country
Cropland Pastureland
Forestland
Barbados 0.0
0.0
0.0
Belize 12.8
15.2
(1.1)
Costa Rica
5.5
24.0
(17.9)
Colombia 3.5
6.8
(5.6)
Cuba 5.3
14.3
(11.8)
Dominican Republic
5.5
0.0
(3.1)
Guatemala 8.3
7.8 (17.0)
Haiti 2.7
(3.0)
(30.0)
Honduras 2.3
7.2
(18.8)
Jamaica 1.5
(7.9)
(5.1)
Mexico 1.9
0.0
(12.0)
Nicaragua 2.8
11.5
(23.5)
Panama 4.6
15.9
(19.4)
Trinidad and Tobago
3.7
0.0
(4.3)
Suriname 53.7
11.1
(0.3)
Venezuela 5.9
2.9
(8.6)
Average 4.8
6.7
(9.3)
( ) indicates a decline in land use.
Source: UNEP, 1994b.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 8
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 3. Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
Table 2-5. Leading agricultural crop producers in the WCR (% of total land area in agricultural
land use)
Producer
%
Producer
%
Producer
%
Martinique
87 Barbados
46 Colombia
27
Guadeloupe
84 St. Kitts
45 Trinidad & Tobago
26
Cuba
78 United States
41 Guyana
26
Mexico
73 Panama
39 Dominica
26
Costa Rica
60 Puerto Rico
39 Honduras
24
Haiti
57 Guatemala
38 U.S. Virgin Islands
21
Jamaica
55 St. Lucia
38 Belize
10
Dominican Republic
50 St. Vincent
35 Antigua & Barbados
9
A
ntigua &
Nicaragua
48 Venezuela
34 Bahamas
3
Source: Hoagland et al., 1995.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 25
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 3. Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
Table 2-6. Leading sugarcane and banana producers in the WCR
Leading Sugarcane Producers
Leading Banana Producers
(thousands of metric tons in 1994)
(thousands of metric tons in 1994)
Cuba
44,000 Colombia
1,950
Mexico
41,652 Mexico
1,650
United States
29,335 Costa Ricaa
1,633
Colombia
29,000 Venezuela
1,215
Guatemalaa
9,788 Panamaa
1,110
Venezuela
6,700 Hondurasa
1,086
Honduras
3,004 Guatemala
465
Costa Rica
2,840 Cuba
295
Jamaica
2,661 Martinique
255
Nicaragua
2,400 Haiti
230
Haiti
2,250 Guadeloupea
148
Panama
1,400 Nicaragua
136
Trinidad & Tobago
1,210 St. Luciab
90
Belize
1,159 Jamaica
77
Barbadosa
533 Suriname
50
Guadeloupea
516 Belize
41
St. Kitts & Nevisa
200 Dominicaa,b
42
Martinique
98 St. Vincent and the Grenadinesb
31
Suriname
45 Guyana
21
Grenadab
4
a Exporting to United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Netherlands.
b Data for the Windward Islands were obtained through personal communication with the Organization of East Caribbean
States.
Source: Adapted from Hoagland et al., 1995.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 26
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 3. Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
Pathogens (bacteria, viruses, or any microorganisms that can transmit disease) can be transmitted
to humans through contact with animal feces. Runoff from fields receiving manure as fertilizer
will contain extremely high numbers of bacteria if the manure has not been mixed with other
substances or the bacteria have not been subject to stress (USEPA, 1993). Although not the only
source of pathogens, animal waste has been responsible for shellfish contamination in some
coastal waters (USEPA, 1993).
Problems result from stocking too many animals within too small an area. Animals may
congregate along streams or watering areas, around feeding areas, and in shady spots. If there are
more animals than the vegetation in such areas can maintain, soil erosion and excess manure
deposition are likely (Graves, 1992). Animal traffic within a confined area can impact stream
integrity and plant biodiversity. Improper livestock grazing affects all four components of the
water-riparian system--banks/shores, water column, channel, and aquatic and bordering
vegetation. The potential effects of grazing include the following (USEPA, 1993):
Shore/banks
· Shear or sloughing of stream bank soils by hoof or head action.
· Water and wind erosion of exposed stream bank and channel soils because of
loss of vegetative cover.
· Elimination or loss of stream bank vegetation.
· Reduction of the quality and quantity of stream bank undercuts.
· Increasing stream bank angle, which increases water width, decreases stream
depth, and alters or eliminates fish habitat.
Water column
· Withdrawal from streams to irrigate grazing lands.
· Drainage of wet meadows or lowering of groundwater table to facilitate
grazing access.
· Pollutants (e.g., sediments) in return water from grazed lands.
· Changes in magnitude and timing of organic and inorganic energy (i.e., solar
radiation, debris, nutrients) inputs to the water body.
· Increase in fecal contamination.
· Changes in stream morphology, such as increases in stream width and
decreases in stream depth, including reduction of stream shore water depth.
· Changes in timing and magnitude of stream flow events from changes in
watershed vegetative cover.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 27
CEP Technical Report No. 41
· Increase in stream temperature.
Channel
· Changes in channel morphology.
· Altered sediment transport processes.
Riparian vegetation
· Changes in plant species composition (e.g., shrubs to grass to forbs).
· Reduction of floodplain and stream bank vegetation, including vegetation
hanging over or entering into the water column.
· Decrease in plant vigor.
· Changes in timing and amounts of organic energy leaving the riparian zone.
· Elimination of riparian plant communities (i.e., lowering of the water table,
allowing xeric plants to replace riparian plants).
In the WCR, land is often cleared for subsistence farming. However, because the soils are
typically shallow and of low fertility, these lands are often abandoned and cattle ranchers replace
the subsistence farmers. This process results in large, deforested areas with soils that are heavily
compacted, organically weak, and poorly protected from grazing livestock and natural weather
events such as rain and sunlight (UNEP, 1991). Soil loss and erosion in the region are largely
affected by this process in conjunction with poor soil management.
Soil erosion and general land degradation resulting from overgrazing of livestock have been
significant problems in the WCR (CCA and IRF, 1991). A common practice in the WCR is to
permit livestock to roam without restriction after harvesting each year. Such grazing practices
over time accelerate land deterioration, deforestation, erosion, and general denudation of the
natural resources (CCA and IRF, 1991).
3.3
Agricultural Pollutants and Their Sources
The environmental problems linked to agricultural production range from declines in the local
and regional productivity of soil and water (through erosion, sedimentation, and chemical
pollution) to the destruction of biodiversity and reduction in genetic diversity (through
deforestation, habitat alteration, and other changes) (Altieri, 1991). Runoff of agricultural
chemicals is estimated at more than 1 billion pounds per year (UNEP, 1990, as cited in Diamante
et al., 1991). Agricultural activities also affect marine habitats through physical disturbances
caused by equipment or through the management of hydrology (e.g., constructing ditches to drain
soil). Table 3-7 highlights the range of impacts on water quality due to agricultural activities.
The primary agricultural nonpoint source pollutants that affect coastal and marine environments
are sediment, nutrients, pesticides, pathogens, and solid waste. The following sections address
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 28
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 3. Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
these five categories of pollutants. The pathways for transport of these pollutants from
agricultural lands to water resources are shown in Figure 3-2.
Table 3-7. Agricultural activities that potentially affect water quality
Agricultural
Activity
Potential Impacts on Surface Waters
Tillage/ploughing
Sediment/turbidity: sediments carry nutrients and pesticides adsorbed to sediment
particles; siltation and loss of habitat, spawning ground, etc.
Fertilizing
Nonpoint source pollution, especially nutrients, leads to eutrophication, excess
algae growth leading to deoxygenation of water and fish kills.
Manure spreading
Nonpoint source pollution containing pathogens, metals, and nutrients leads to
eutrophication and potential contamination.
Pesticides
Nonpoint source pollution leads to contamination of surface water and biota;
dysfunction of ecological system in surface waters by loss of top predators due to
growth inhibition and reproductive failure; public health impacts from eating
contaminated fish.
Irrigation
Runoff of fertilizers and pesticides to surface waters leads to ecological damage,
bioaccumulation in edible fish species, etc.
Clear-cutting
Erosion of land leads to high levels of turbidity, siltation of bottom habitat, etc.
Hydrologic regime is disrupted and changed.
Source: Adapted from Ongley, 1996.
3.3.1 Sediment
Erosion. In the WCR, the most serious constraint to agricultural production is the inadequacy of
the soil resources for agricultural purposes, a problem that can be compounded by
mismanagement (Gajraj, 1981). Specific natural soil characteristics, type of vegetation cover,
intensity of rainfall, winds, topography, and poor land use management affect the conservation of
soil in the region. Approximately 25 percent of Latin America is composed of hillsides and
plateaus susceptible to erosion and land degradation (Altieri, 1991). Some estimates of the long-
term effects of soil erosion suggest losses of 30 percent of the potentially cultivatable unirrigated
land in Central America. The areas most vulnerable to erosion are the Greater and Lesser
Antilles, parts of Caribbean South America, and Trinidad and Tobago (Gajraj, 1981).
Soil erosion is a natural process characterized by the transport or displacement of particles
(sediment) that are detached by rainfall, flowing water, or wind. Although it is a natural process,
adverse impacts on receiving waters increase due to agricultural activities that alter the landscape
and increase the rate of erosion. Soil erosion can be caused by the improper use of lands for
cultivation or grazing and by deforestation (LACCDE, 1990). The types of soil erosion
associated with agricultural activities are as follows (Figure 3-3):
· Splash erosion, which occurs when rain hits exposed soils.
· Sheet and rill erosion, which mainly moves soil particles from the surface or
plough layer of the soil. Surface sediments typically contain higher pollution
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 29
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 3. Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
potential due to richer nutrient content, the presence of chemicals from past
fertilizer and pesticide applications, and natural biological activities.
· Rill and gully erosion, severe erosion in which trenches are cut to a depth
greater than 1 foot. Generally, trenches too deep to be crossed by farm
equipment are considered gullies (USEPA, 1994).
· Stream and channel erosion, which occurs due to increased rates and
volumes of runoff from agricultural land uses flowing through a stream or
channel.
During the Pollution Control Measures for Agricultural Runoff Experts Meeting in St. Lucia
(January 22 and 23, 1998), several causes of erosion and sedimentation were identified. They
include the following:
· Planting on steep slopes
· Deforestation
· Clear-cutting
· Improper tillage methods
· Improper timing of site preparation
· Compaction by animals
· Improper irrigation methods and water management practices
· Channelization and artificial drainage
The primary factors affecting soil erosion rates include rainfall intensity and frequency, soil
characteristics, vegetative and other surface cover, topography (slope), and climate (e.g., degree
of exposure to trade winds) (USVI Conservation District, 1995). Soil characteristics play a key
role; even low-intensity rainfall induces erosion in areas where soils are easily saturated (UNEP,
1994a). In addition, the topography, slope length, and slope steepness influence soil erosion.
Steeper slopes are susceptible to erosion due to increased runoff velocity, greater downslope
transport of rain-splashed soil, and greater susceptibility to landslides (UNEP, 1994a). Disruption
of soil through earthmoving (tilling, ploughing, etc.) or livestock activity increases erosion
potential regardless of the soil type. Generally, the more vegetative cover, the less potential there
is for erosion.
Turbidity, Siltation, and Sedimentation. When soils are eroded from agricultural lands and
carried to coastal waters in runoff, the result is usually increased turbidity, siltation, and
sedimentation. Throughout the WCR, siltation and turbidity of coastal waters are on the rise due
to the transport of eroded soils to the sea. Data on the distribution of sediments and the turbidity
of coastal waters of the WCR are insufficient to assess the magnitude of the adverse effects of
present-day land use practices (UNEP, 1994a). However, reefs near the Central American coast
and areas of the eastern Caribbean are believed to be suffering from sediment stress related to
agricultural practices, and some estimates of the long-term effects of soil erosion suggest losses
of potentially 30 percent of arable unirrigated land in Central America (Hoagland et al., 1995).
The adverse impacts of accelerated erosion and sedimentation include the following:
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 30
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 3. Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
· Loss of agricultural productivity. Erosion removes valuable topsoil and thus
reduces the productivity and water-holding capacity of agricultural land.
· Lost reservoir capacity. Sedimentation reduces the water storage capacity of
reservoirs and shortens their functional life span. In Puerto Rico, for
example, some reservoirs have lost virtually all of their storage capacity and
others are filling with thousands of cubic meters of sediment annually.
· Other downstream impacts. Sedimentation can fill culverts, ponds, and
storm drainage systems. Navigation may be impeded by increased sediment
loading to receiving waters, necessitating expensive dredging (UNEP,
1994a).
Erosion and sedimentation affect water quality in many ways:
· Suspended solids reduce the amount of sunlight available to aquatic plants,
cover fish spawning areas and food supplies, smother benthic communities,
clog the filtering capacity of filter feeders, and clog and harm the gills of
fish. Turbidity interferes with the feeding habits of fish. These effects
combine to reduce fish, shellfish, coral, and plant populations and decrease
the overall productivity of coastal waters.
· Turbid waters reduce the recreational appeal of coastal areas, limiting
sportfishing, diving, and swimming opportunities.
· Sediment can cause property damage and cost property owners money for
removal (USVI Conservation District, 1995).
· Nutrients and pesticides are transported mixed with sediment, or chemically
bound to the sediment, changing the aquatic environment through
eutrophication and introduction of toxics.
3.3.2 Nutrients
In the Caribbean, the most common marine pollution problems arise due to nutrient
overenrichment resulting from sewage discharge and runoff from agricultural land uses. Sources
of nutrient overenrichment include fertilizers, soil mineralization, and manure. During the
Pollution Control Measures for Agricultural Runoff Experts Meeting, the causes of nutrient
overenrichment in the WCR were identified as the following:
· Artificial drainage
· Overfertilization
· Poor crop siting (land use)
· Lack of natural buffers between agricultural and natural resources
· Timing of fertilization
· Erosion of absorbed nutrients in sediment
· Improper irrigation techniques
· Allowing open grazing of livestock
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 31
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 3. Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
· Confined livestock facilities
· Volatilization of animal waste
Agricultural crops require nutrients for healthy growth. Some of these nutrients occur naturally,
supplied to a plant through the air, water, and soil. To supplement the naturally occurring
nutrients, organic and inorganic fertilizers are applied in a commercial dry or liquid form, as
manure from animal production facilities, as crop residues, in irrigation water, and through aerial
deposition. Table 3-8 presents data on the use of fertilizers in 17 countries of the WCR. When
applied correctly, fertilizers promote plant growth; when used excessively or inappropriately,
however, fertilizers can lead to nutrient overenrichment within water bodies, one of the most
widespread coastal pollution problems today. As a result, surface water runoff from poorly
managed agricultural lands may transport the following pollutants (USEPA, 1993):
· Particulate-bound nutrients, chemicals, and metals, such as phosphorus,
organic nitrogen, and metals applied with some organic wastes.
· Soluble nutrients and chemicals, such as nitrogen, phosphorus, metals, and
many other major and minor nutrients.
· Sediment, particulate organic solids, and oxygen-demanding material.
· Salts.
· Bacteria, viruses, and other microorganisms.
Table 3-8. Average annual fertilizer use in 17 countries of the WCR, including changes during
the 1979-1989 period
Fertilizer Use in kg/ha of Cropland
Country
1979 1989
% Change
Barbados 162.0
91.0
(43.8)
Belize 36.0
71.0
97.2
Costa Rica
143.0
90.0
(37.1)
Colombia 55.0
191.0
247.3
Cuba 133.0
192.0
44.7
Dominican Republic
41.0
50.0
21.9
Guatemala 53.0
69.0
30.2
Guyana 22.0
29.0
31.8
Haiti 4.0
3.0
(25.0)
Honduras 13.0
20.0
53.8
Jamaica 55.0
105.0
90.9
Nicaragua 31.0
55.0
77.4
Panama 44.0
62.0
40.9
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 32
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 3. Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
Trinidad and Tobago
61.0
28.0
(54.1)
Suriname 49.0
74.0
51.0
United States (Gulf Coast)
106.0
95.0
(10.4)
Venezuela 51.0
162.0
217.6
Average 62.3
81.6
31.0
Source: World Resources Institute, 1992, cited in UNEP, 1994b.
Excess nutrients also enter coastal waters through improper storage and handling of fertilizers and
disposal of fertilizer containers. For example, if bags of fertilizer are stored in such a manner that
the bags can break open and inadvertently release fertilizer into the environment, the fertilizer
adds to the volume of nutrients that could flow to coastal waters in runoff.
Excess nitrogen and phosphorus, considered the nutrients that have the greatest effect on water
quality, enter waters from agricultural fertilizers and manures. Nitrogen dissolves in water and is
carried in runoff. Phosphorus is either dissolved or held tightly by soil clays and transported
mainly through erosion (Lilly, 1995). Excess fertilizers in the form of liquid leachates, surface
runoff, erosion, or gases leave the system and enter surface waters. Nutrients can increase the
productivity and yield of a crop on land and may do the same to aquatic plants when they enter a
water body. Excess levels of nutrients in runoff to coastal waters can result in an imbalance in
the natural nutrient cycle, leading to unwanted and excessive plant growth, a process called
eutrophication (USVI Conservation District, 1995). When nutrients are introduced into a stream,
lake, or estuary at higher-than-natural rates, aquatic plant productivity can increase dramatically
(USEPA, 1993). Increased productivity results in an increase of organic matter in the aquatic
system. Organic matter dies and decays after a period of time. Since the decaying process
requires oxygen, an excessive increase in plant productivity can ultimately result in a reduction in
the oxygen supply. This can lead to anoxic conditions, resulting in an environment where few
organisms can live.
Nutrient enrichment of coastal waters can lead to an increase in algal (planktonic) growth, which
is harmful to coral reefs and other benthic communities. With increases in algal growth, turbidity
increases, further inhibiting the growth of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV). A loss in SAV
equates to a loss of habitat. The accumulation of nutrients in deposited sediments can further
compound problems associated with nutrient enrichment. Changes in the aquatic environment
(e.g., temperature, salinity) allow the nutrients to be released from the sediment and serve as a
long-term contributor to eutrophication.
3.3.3 Pesticides
The term pesticide includes any substance or mixture of substances intended for preventing,
destroying, repelling, or mitigating any pest or for use as a plant regulator, defoliant, or desiccant
(USEPA, 1993). For the purposes of this document, pesticides include insecticides, herbicides,
fungicides, miticides, and similar substances. Within the WCR, regional experts have identified
the following causes for pesticide contamination:
· Improper application (timing, method, amount, etc.)
· Erosion (absorbed chemicals)
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 33
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 3. Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
· Cropping systems (e.g. monocultures)
· Improper equipment maintenance
· Mishandling, storage, and disposal
· Inappropriate selection
· Leaching
· Improper water management
· Artificial drainage
· Volatilization
The pesticides most commonly used in agriculture are the organochlorine and organophosphorus
types, the more toxic but less persistent being the organophosphates. These pesticides are toxic to
crustaceans such as shrimp, lobster, and crab and are similarly toxic to some fish species. They
are known to bioaccumulate in some marine fauna (Archer, 1987).
The impacts of pesticides are not necessarily limited to the intended sites of application. There is
considerable waste when chemicals are applied heavily and infrequently; the crop cannot benefit
from the application before much of it is washed away or dissipated (Hernández and Witter,
1996). Depending on the application method used, dispersion of pesticides off site occurs by
wind, runoff, high-flight-altitude drift of spray outside crop areas, accidental spills, improper
storage and handling, and improper disposal of pesticide containers. Heavy use of pesticides for
agriculture in watersheds some distance from the coast can be as destructive as direct industrial
discharges of toxics, depending on such factors as persistence of the pesticide, quantities reaching
the aquatic environment, potential for bioaccumulation, and toxicity (Coté, 1988). The dispersal
of a pesticide from sites of intentional or accidental application is strongly affected by its
persistence in the environment, its solubility in water, and its tendency to bind to organic matter
or clays in soil (Rainey et al., 1987).
Unintended effects of pesticide use include elimination or reduction of populations of nontarget
desirable organisms, including endangered species (USEPA, 1993). The amount of field-applied
pesticide that leaves a field in the runoff and enters a stream, as depicted in Figure 3-4, primarily
depends on the following factors (USEPA, 1993):
· Intensity and duration of rainfall or irrigation.
· Length of time between pesticide application and rainfall occurrence.
· Amount of pesticide applied and its soil/water partition coefficient.
· Length and degree of slope and soil composition.
· Extent of exposure to bare (vs. residue- or crop-covered) soil.
· Proximity to streams.
· Method of application and formulation.
· Extent to which runoff and erosion are controlled with agronomic and
structural practices.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 34
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 3. Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
Pesticides that bind to soil particles and show little tendency to leach into ground water may still
disperse if the soil particles themselves are eroded downslope and carried into streams, settling
for varying times in stream or estuarine sediments or coastal marine habitats (Rainey et al., 1987).
Furthermore, many pesticides are soluble in water and may enter surface waters through runoff.
Pesticide losses are generally greatest when rainfall is intense and occurs shortly after pesticide
application, a condition for which runoff and erosion losses are also greatest (USEPA, 1993).
This loss of pesticide not only harms the environment but also leads to economic losses. The
misuse of pesticides, through misapplication or overapplication, increases costs for pesticides.
The pesticides that are particularly harmful are those that are resistant to degradation and, as a
consequence, accumulate in the environment. According to their chemical make-up, pesticides
can be transported through sediment transport or by dissolution in water. Pesticides may inhibit
the development or reproductive process of certain organisms. Herbicides may eliminate food
sources of aquatic organisms. Pesticides that bioaccumulate in marine biota can be transmitted
through fishery resources to humans, posing serious health and ecological hazards (Diamante et
al., 1991). Excessive and careless use of agrochemicals, specifically pesticides, is one of the
predominant causes of chemical poisoning in the WCR (Hoagland et al., 1995). Pesticide
residues present at dangerous levels in the food chain and water supply pose immediate threats to
public health.
The extensive use of pesticides due to intensive agricultural activity within the WCR is well
documented, and its impact on land and coastal marine ecosystems is reasonably evident (UNEP,
1994b). In Colombia alone, more than 600 different pesticides are used, which represent
approximately 33,000 metric tons per year (Tinoco, 1994). Through runoff, erosion, and
misapplication, significant quantities of pesticides are reaching the coastal and marine
environment, where they may affect nontarget species and, through the contamination of seafood,
may become a public health problem (UNEP, 1994b). Furthermore, many pesticides that are
banned in developed countries are widely used in Latin America (Altieri, 1991). Approximately
75 percent of the pesticides used in Central America are either prohibited or restricted in the
United States (LACCDE, 1990). The use of pesticides is further influenced by government
subsidies in some countries, which lower the financial burden and thereby induce farmers to
substitute chemical for nonchemical methods of pest management.
Overall, the use of pesticides within the WCR appears to be on the increase. A 1992 report from
the World Resources Institute showed a general increase in the use of pesticide compounds
during the 1974-1984 period (Table 3-9). Pesticide use is expected to increase in Latin America
by 280 percent during the period from 1980 to 2000 (Altieri, 1991). Those countries showing a
reduction in use attributed this to changes in agricultural practices to reduce the use of pesticides
and use less persistent pesticides with lower application rates (UNEP, 1994b).
3.3.4 Pathogens
Wastes from livestock production are a significant component of agricultural nonpoint source
pollution (Myers, 1985). Animal use of water sources, improper location of animals, and
improper application of manure can cause serious water quality problems. As stated in Section
3.3.2, runoff from livestock production areas can lead to water quality problems related to
nutrients. This runoff can have serious human health impacts as well. Animal diseases can be
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 35
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 3. Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
transmitted to humans through contact with animal feces (USEPA, 1993) and dead animals. A
number of pathogenic bacteria can be found in untreated wastewater, including those which cause
typhoid fever, hepatitis,
Table 3-9. Average annual pesticide use in 14 countries of the WCR, including changes during
the 1974-1984 period
Pesticide Use in Metric Tons
Change
Country
1974-1977
1982-1984
(%)
Costa Rica
3,037
3,667
21
Colombia
19,344
16,100
(17)
Dominican Republic
1,961
3,297
68
Guatemala
4,627
5,117
11
Guyana
705
658
(7)
Honduras
940
859
(9)
Jamaica
861
1,420
65
Mexico
19,148
27,630
44
Nicaragua
2,943
2,003
(32)
Panama
1,542
2,393
55
Suriname
974
1,720
77
U.S. Gulf Coast
5,320
4,500
(15)
Venezuela
6,923
8,143
18
( ) = loss in value.
Source: World Resources Institute, 1992, cited in UNEP, 1994b.
and dysentery (Lilly, 1996). Runoff from fields receiving manure will contain extremely high
numbers of bacteria if the manure has not been properly treated for bacterial content. In addition,
the amount of animal waste or manure in runoff can be quite substantial. For example, a 100-cow
dairy herd produces as much fecal matter as a community with a population of 15,000 (Myers,
1985). The bacteria most often mentioned in connection with water quality problems are the
coliforms, since they are reliable indicators of fecal contamination (Lilly, 1996). Although not
pathogenic themselves, coliform bacteria are easily detectable and usually indicate that animal or
human waste is present and, by inference, that pathogens might be present as well (Lilly, 1996).
Shellfish closure and beach closure can result from high fecal coliform counts. Although not the
only source of pathogens, animal waste has been known to be responsible for shellfish
contamination (USEPA, 1993). Shellfish that ingest pathogenic bacteria can cause disease when
eaten by humans (Lilly, 1996).
Another source of pathogens in surface and ground waters is dead livestock. If decaying animals
are not properly disposed of, they introduce fecal coliforms and other bacteria. Mammals serve
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 36
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 3. Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
as a host for a variety of microorganisms that may be released once the animal is dead.
Depending on the cause of death, lethal substances might also be released. Decaying animals,
like decaying plants, are also a source of nutrients.
3.3.5 Solid Waste
The pollution caused by solid waste is largely disregarded (Silva, 1994). All plants produce
significant quantities of general waste, including large quantities of peels, cores, seeds, or other
unusable parts of the raw product that must be discarded. In addition, many facilities produce
office waste, plastics, twine, unusable containers, waste packaging materials, and household
waste (if housing is provided for workers). Improper handling and disposal of these items,
coupled with a lack of disposal alternatives, can result in a significant source of nonpoint source
pollution. Trash and debris from an agricultural facility can be washed off site and into a water
body. These artificial materials can litter the ocean floor and can be detrimental to marine
organisms. Furthermore, solid wastes cause not only impacts related to infectious diseases and
organic matter but also adverse impacts related to high organic concentrations, toxic waste,
hazardous waste, infectious waste, and radiological waste (Silva, 1994).
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 37
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
SECTION 4. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
4.1 Introduction
Agricultural best management practices (BMPs) are procedures and practices designed to reduce
the level of pollutants in runoff from farming activities to an environmentally acceptable level,
while simultaneously maintaining an economically viable farming operation for the grower
(Bottcher et al., undated). This section discusses BMPs that can be used to control the categories
of pollutants described in Section 3.3--sediment, nutrients, pesticides, pathogens, and solid
waste.
The concept and use of BMPs are not new to the WCR. Indigenous farmers have traditionally
used and still use an array of traditional slope, water, soil, pest, and vegetation management
techniques, including composting, crop rotation, polycultures, agroforestry, and watershed
management systems (Altieri, 1991). Several indigenous techniques are outlined in Table 4-1.
Traditional subsistence and
Table 4-1. Some examples of traditional systems of soil management, vegetation, and water use
by farmers
Environmental Limitation
Objective
Management Practices
Limited space
Maximize the use of available
Multiple crops, agroforestry, family
environmental resources and
orchards, altitudinal zoning, land,
land
rotation
Steep hillsides
Control erosion, conserve water Terracing, contour strips, dead and
living vegetative barriers, mulching,
continuous living cover, fallow land
Marginal soil fertility
Sustain fertility and recycle
Natural and improved fallow land,
organic material
rotation, composting, green and organic
fertilizers, pasturing in fallow fields or
after harvest, use of alluvial sediments
Floods or excess water
Integrate irrigation and bodies
High-field crops
of water
Scarce or unpredictable
Conserve water and optimize
Use of drought-resistant crops,
rain
the use of available humidity
mulching, multiple crops, use of short
cycle, etc.
Extremes of temperature
Improve microclimate
Reduction or increase of shade,
and/or radiation
pruning, spacing of crops, use of crops
that tolerate shade, use of windbreaks,
live fences, minimum cultivation,
multiple crops, agroforestry, etc.
Incidence of blight
Protect crops, reduce pests
Overseeding, damage tolerance, use of
resistant varieties, sewing in periods of
low pest risk, management of habitat to
increase natural enemies, use of
repellant plants, etc.
Source: Altieri, M.A. 1988, cited in LACCDE, 1990.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 45
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
small farm practices employ (1) the use of technology as well as a special spatial and social
organization, (2) exact knowledge of resources, (3) adequate consumption, and (4) a
nonantagonistic concept of the environment (LACCDE, 1990).
Source controls are often the most effective BMPs for reducing some types of pollution.
Examples of source controls include the following:
· Reducing or eliminating the introduction of pollutants to a land area. An
example is minimizing the application rates for chemical pesticides,
herbicides, and fertilizers.
· Preventing potential pollutants from leaving a site during land-disturbing
activities. Examples include conservation tillage and limited land clearing.
· Preventing interaction between precipitation and a potential pollutant. An
example is timing chemical applications according to weather forecasts or
seasonal weather patterns.
· Protecting riparian habitat and other sensitive areas. Examples include
protection of shorelines and highly erosive slopes.
· Protecting natural hydrology. An example is proper water management
(USEPA, 1993).
Effective control of nonpoint source pollution in agriculture should focus on controlling soil
detachment and overland flow, with considerations for solutional transport and chemical drift.
For pollutants that tend to bind to sediment, control of erosion and sediment transport off site can
reduce not only impacts from increased sediment loading, but impacts from other pollutants as
well due to the interactions of pesticides and nutrients with sediment (Ongley, 1996). The
majority of the BMPs described in this document are related to soil conservation practices.
Erosion is not the only factor contributing to agricultural nonpoint source pollution. When a field
is actively farmed with the same crop for a number of years, a depletion of nutrients in the soil
occurs, requiring the addition of fertilizers to the soil. Loss of soil fertility can also be mitigated
by shifting cultivation or crop practices. Shifting cultivation is often characterized by a season-
to-season progression of different crops that vary in soil nutrient requirements and susceptibility
to weeds and pests (Reijntjes et al., 1992).
The principles of soil and water conservation include increasing infiltration of water for plant use
instead of surface runoff which can contribute to nonpoint source pollution. Farmers can reduce
erosion, sedimentation, and nonpoint source pollution by 20 to 90 percent by using BMPs to
control the volume and flow rate of runoff water, to keep the soil in place, and to reduce soil
transport (USEPA, undated).
Best management practices can also encompass a revised approach to traditional agricultural
practices. For instance, an effective pest control program might require the use of pesticides as a
small component of a comprehensive pest management program. Practices such as crop rotation,
proper site selection, proper fertilization, and good cultivation techniques promote a healthy crop
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 46
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
and reduce pest infestation, thereby reducing the need for pesticide use. An integrated pest
management program protects the environment, reduces pesticide and fertilizer inputs, and
enhances economic gain.
The following sections describe structural and nonstructural BMPs that can be used to control
agricultural nonpoint source pollution. They focus on pollution prevention, source reduction, and
transport control. Although individual techniques are described, their use should be integrated
into an agricultural nonpoint source control plan that is appropriate for local site conditions and
cropping practices. Many of the methods described minimize or reduce more than one pollutant.
The BMPs discussed in this document is not exhaustive and does not preclude any individual or
group from using other practices. The selection of BMPs should be based on local cropping
practices and site conditions. Table 4-2 provides general guidance on the applicability of the
BMPs described based on certain variables. Table 6-1 (Section 6, Meeting Summary) outlines
the pollutants, providing sources and various methods for control.
4.2 Nonstructural
BMPS
Nonstructural BMPs are modifications in agricultural practices that do not require some type of
construction. They focus on source reduction (pollution prevention) and programs and
procedures for controlling agricultural nonpoint source pollution.
4.2.1 Education
Education needs to occur on a variety of levels. These include decision makers (elected officials,
heads of agencies, and political appointees) who develop policy and regulations and their
implementing measures, farm owners and farmworkers, and the general public. The importance
of protecting natural resources and the impact of nonpoint source pollution on resource
degradation need to be communicated effectively. People need to be educated on the importance
of conserving soils and water and protecting sensitive marine ecosystems (coral reefs, sea grasses,
bathing beaches, etc.). Linkages between healthy natural resources and a strong economy also
need to be communicated. Information on the impacts of nonpoint source pollutants due to some
farming practices on these resources needs to be conveyed at all levels. Availability of data,
information, resources, technologies, and educational materials must be effectively
communicated to the appropriate groups.
Public education and outreach activities and materials can take on a variety of forms, depending
on the target audience. Decision makers need general information on the impacts of nonpoint
source pollution, how nonpoint source pollution affects the environment, ways of controlling
nonpoint source pollution, and how the adverse impacts of nonpoint source pollution affect the
economy and aesthetics of the region. Farmers need detailed information on how to select and
implement proper nonstructural and structural BMPs, operate and maintain structural BMPs,
recognize the limitations of the land and obtain the maximum sustainable yield within those
limitations, correctly apply fertilizers and pesticides, manage land properly, and develop and
implement erosion and sediment control plans. The general public needs to understand the
linkages between their actions, nonpoint source pollution, and degradation of the natural
environment.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 46
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
Education programs should be tailored to the specific needs of the community, the needs of the
farmers, and the education level of the target audiences. An effective strategy for public
education and outreach regarding agricultural nonpoint source pollution in the WCR should
include the following, at a minimum:
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 47
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
Table 4-2. BMP acceptability
Acceptabilityd
Implementation
Practicea
Relative Costb
Degree of Difficultyc
Economic
Societal
Soil and plant analysis (N, S, P)
Moderatee
moderate
moderate
high
Use of proper fertilization techniques (N)
lowe
low
high
high
Planting ground covers (N, S, P)
Moderate
moderate
moderate
high
Buffer zones (N, S, P)
Moderate
moderate/high
moderate
low
Leguminous trees and plants (N)
Moderate
moderate
high
high
Water management (N, S, P)
lowe
low
low to moderate
low to moderate
Use of organic fertilizers (N)
Moderate
moderate
moderate
moderate
Good housekeeping practices (N, S, P)
lowe
low
high
high
Crop management (e.g., maintaining ground cover)
Low
low
moderate to high
moderate to
(N, S, P)
high
Vegetating drainage canal banks (N, S, P)
Moderate
moderate
high
low
Good record keeping (N, P)
lowe
low
high
moderate to low
Land use planning (N, S, P)
lowe
low
moderate to low
moderate to low
Animal placement - away from drainage ways (N, Pa)
Moderate
moderate
moderate
low
Proper animal waste handling (N, Pa)
Moderate
moderate
moderate
moderate
Controlled land clearing (S)
Low
low
high
moderate to low
Proper animal grazing practices (S)
Low
low
low
low
Conservation tillage (S)
Moderate
high
moderate
moderate
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 48
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
Table 4-2. (continued)
Acceptabilityd
Implementation
Practicea
Relative Costb
Degree of Difficultyc
Economic
Societal
Terracing (S)
High
high
moderate to low
moderate
Wind erosion controls (S)
Low
low
moderate
moderate to low
Sediment basins (S)
High
high
high
moderate
Use of organic trash fences (S)
Low
moderate
high
moderate
Diversions (S)
High
high
moderate to low
high
Grassed waterways (S)
Moderate
moderate
moderate
moderate
Contouring (S)
Moderate
high
moderate to high
high
Contour drains (S)
High
high
moderate to high
high
Integrated pest management (P)
Moderatee
moderate
moderate
moderate
Use of biodegradable pesticides (P)
Moderate
low
moderate
high
Reuse of rinse water (P)
lowe
low
moderate
moderate
Crop rotation (P)
Low
low
high
high
Mixed cropping (P)
Low
low
high
high
Use of resistant pesticide varieties (P)
low/moderate
low/moderate
moderate
high
Education of farm workers and farm management
Moderatee
low/moderate
high
high
(N, S, P, Pa, Sw)
Pesticide rotation (P)
Low
low
high
moderate
Aerial buffer (no spray) zone (P)
Moderate
moderate
low
low
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 49
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
Proper manure application (Pa)
lowe
lo
w
moderate
moderate
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 50
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
Table 4-2. (continued)
Acceptabilityd
Implementation
Practicea
Relative Costb
Degree of Difficultyc
Economic
Societal
Provision of alternate shade and water for livestock (Pa)
Low
moderate
high
high
Composting and proper disposal of dead livestock (Pa)
Low
low
moderate
moderate
Integrated waste management (Sw)
lowe
low
moderate
moderate
Landfilling waste (Sw)
Moderate
low
low
moderate
Trash catchment basins (Sw)
Moderate
low
moderate
moderate
Proper reuse of pesticide containers (Sw)
lowe
low
high
moderate
Plastics management (Sw)
lowe
low
high
high
River traps on small flow rivers (Sw)
High
high
low
moderate
Composting facilities (Sw)
moderatee
moderate
moderate
high
a N: applicable to nutrient control.
S: applicable to sediment control.
P: applicable to pesticide control.
Pa: applicable to pathogen control.
Sw: applicable to solid waste control.
b Low cost:
no construction involved; can be implemented through minimal education (e.g., pamphlets, manuals, etc.).
Moderate cost: little or no construction involved; can be implemented through education programs such as agricultural extension services (public and private), outreach programs, seminars,
on-site training, etc.
High cost:
construction involved; requires development of plans and the input of BMP designers.
c Low: can be done with little or no change in existing infrastructure; some education may be required.
Moderate:
some infrastructure changes may be required; education would be required.
High:
infrastructure changes and training and education would be required.
d Low: not necessarily acceptable, primarily because of economic cost or lack of understanding of the benefits achieved by the BMP.
Moderate:
generally acceptable but requires some education on the benefits.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 51
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
High: acceptable.
e Can result in a cost savings for the farmer.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 52
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 53
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 54
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
· Development of a commission or similar mechanism for coordinating
educational policy for the region.
· Development of national plans and program strategies for education. Plans
can include (but need not be limited to):
- Community education programs
- Field demonstrations and follow-up site visits
- School and community workshops
- Outreach and extension programs, including courses for farmworkers
- Use of media (TV, radio, videos, etc.)
- Required school environmental education curriculum
· Development of outreach materials such as fact sheets, guidance documents,
and courses for decision makers, farmers, and the general public.
·
Education of political and policy leaders in the WCR.
· Appointment of one responsible or lead coordinating agency (e.g., Ministry
of Agriculture).
·
Economic incentives for implementing education programs.
· Accessibility of data and information to user groups.
Achieving the successful implementation of BMPs by farmers hinges on demonstrating to them
that adopting such practices can save them money, resources, and time (J. Wright, Cooperative
Extension Service, University of the Virgin Islands, personal communication, February 12, 1998).
Education and outreach programs can focus on working with farmers to implement the BMPs
described in this report.
4.2.2 Water
Management
Water management practices reduce erosion and nutrient losses in runoff by minimizing or
slowing water flow off fields. They also conserve water. Contour tillage, buffer strips,
diversions, and terraces (see Section 4.3.1, Erosion and Sediment Controls) are a few methods to
slow and trap nonpoint source pollutants. When water is slowed or stilled, sediments (and
associated pollutants) can settle out of the water column, thereby inhibiting their entrance into the
coastal waters.
Water management on farms involves two aspects. The first is managing the surface and ground
water flow (hydrology) so as to maximize resource use and minimize environmental damage.
The second is managing irrigation of crops.
Effectively controlling the flow of water over the land and in the ground, either from runoff or
irrigation, reduces erosion potential and sediment transport off site. Management of water on the
site is dictated by site characteristics such as soil type, crop or ground cover, topography, and
climate. Designing the site so that unnecessary water flow is minimized (e.g., planting crops on
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 45
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
the contour, locating infrastructure) can result in less erosion and maximum availability of water
resources.
4.2.3 Land
Use
Proper land use is an important concept when trying to control nonpoint source pollution. It
addresses a variety of issues and concepts. Proper land use planning involves setting goals for the
community or country, completing an inventory of existing land uses and natural resources
(including agricultural soils), and designating areas suitable for various types of development
(including agricultural development) or conservation. Once appropriate land use designations are
categorized and mapped, regulations and policies regarding how the land uses are implemented
can be developed. For example, areas on steep slopes may be appropriate for only minimal
agricultural development and agricultural crops that do not require removal of all the natural
vegetative cover. Areas with highly erodible soils should be cleared only as development is to
occur (no clear-cutting). Crops should be chosen based on the natural resource limitations and
assets of the land; for example, minimal soil preparation and chemical addition should have to
occur to achieve a sustainable yield. Area that is prime for agriculture should be left for
agricultural development, not residential or commercial development. This prevents forcing
agriculture to less desirable locations where cultivation may result in environmental degradation
(e.g., steep slopes). By systematically assessing resources, planning development and
conservation activities, and managing agriculture in a sound manner, environmental degradation
can be diminished.
4.2.4
Erosion and Sediment Control
Nonstructural erosion and sediment control (ESC) focuses on minimizing the amount of exposed
soil and the time the soil is exposed. If crops or other ground cover is kept in place, the soil is
less susceptible to erosion. Many of these practices are beneficial for controlling other pollutants
as well. This is noted in the descriptions.
4.2.4.1 Erosion and Sediment Controls for Cultivated Crops
Conservation Cover/Stabilization Practices. Conservation cover/stabilization practices
establish and maintain perennial vegetative cover to protect soil and water resources on land not
currently in use for agricultural production (Ongley, 1996). This may be accomplished by
preserving existing vegetation or revegetating disturbed soil. Vegetative cover reduces erosion
potential by (1) shielding the soil surface from the impact of falling rain, (2) slowing runoff
velocity and allowing sediment deposition, (3) physically holding soil in place with plant roots,
and (4) increasing infiltration rates by improving the soil's structure and porosity through the
incorporation of roots and plant residues (USVI Conservation District, 1995). Long-term effects
of the practice will reduce agricultural nonpoint sources of pollution to all water resources
(USEPA, 1993). Areas where natural vegetation preservation is particularly beneficial are
floodplains, wetlands, steep slopes, and other areas where erosion controls would be difficult to
establish, install, or maintain. Conservation cover/stabilization practices are also suggested for
use in drainage structures on agricultural lands where canals or ditches are used to remove excess
water. The slopes and bottoms of the canals should be planted with suitable ground cover
vegetation. This practice aids in preventing the erosion of ditches and canals and provides uptake
for excess nutrients and pesticides that might otherwise run off.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 46
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
Ground cover and crop residue can reduce erosion and yields of sediment and sediment-related
water pollutants. Surface runoff temperatures to receiving waters may also be reduced. Effects
will vary during the establishment period and could include increases in runoff, erosion, and
sediment yield (USEPA, 1993).
Conservation Tillage. Conservation tillage, including no-till and reduced tillage, is a planting
system that maintains at least 30 percent of the soil surface covered by residue after planting.
This practice reduces soil erosion, detachment, and sediment transport by providing soil cover
during critical times in the cropping cycle (USEPA, 1993). It increases infiltration into ground
water by reducing soil compaction from raindrops.
Reduced tillage consists of either minimizing tillage to a coarse, cloddy finish with machinery or
hand tools (to improve infiltration and reduce erosion) or tillage in which only the rows are tilled
or holes are dug for crops like banana (Gumbs, 1993). Reduced tillage systems incorporate some
pesticides and fertilizers when applied to the soil surface, reducing the effects of runoff.
No-till is a conservation practice common in North America (Ongley, 1996). The no-till method
consists of planting crops without prior seedbed preparation, into an existing cover crop, sod, or
crop residues, and eliminating subsequent tilling operations (USEPA, 1994). No-till planting is
the most effective conservation method to protect against soil erosion (York et al., 1993), but it
can result in higher losses of nutrients and pesticides in surface runoff.
Although reduced tillage is practiced on steep slopes in the WCR, no-till is seldom practiced on
slopes or flat terrain (Gumbs, 1993).
Cover Crop. A cover crop is a crop of close-growing grasses, legumes, or small grains grown
primarily for seasonal protection and soil improvement. Usually, it is grown for one year or less
(Ongley, 1996). Maintaining a cover crop prevents or reduces erosion and takes up nitrogen,
preventing its undesired movement. In addition, a cover crop traps and recycles nutrients for use
by later crops. A cover crop, planted between the rows of a cash crop, can also be used to
outcompete weeds. Small-scale farmers can plant a cover crop that can be used for food or feed
for animals. Furthermore, the overall volume of fertilizer application may decrease because the
vegetation (if nitrogen-fixing) will supply nutrients (USEPA, 1993).
Buffer Zones. Vegetated buffer zones, either planted or natural, can prevent the movement of
sediment, nutrients, and pesticides to receiving waters such as bays and streams. The vegetation
acts tp slow surface water runoff, allowing sediment to drop out of suspension before entering
receiving waters. Pollutants that are transported with sediment are also prevented from entering
the receiving waters. Soluble nutrients and pesticides can also be taken up by plants in the buffer
zone. Ideally, buffer zones should be areas adjacent to water bodies that are conserved when the
land is initially developed for agricultural purposes. If this did not occur, buffer areas can be
established by planting indigenous perennial plants along shorelines. There is no set formula for
buffer zone width; the width is dependent on factors such as slope, soil, climate, vegetative cover
(crops and buffer vegetation), and total drainage area. The buffer zone also protects stream banks
from eroding and provides riparian habitat and a floodplain during times of high water flow.
Critical Area Planting. Critical area planting involves planting vegetation, such as trees, shrubs,
vines, grasses, or legumes, on highly erodible or critically eroding areas (Ongley, 1996). It
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 46
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
reduces soil erosion and sedimentation into surface waters. The plants may take up nutrients,
reducing the amount washed into surface waters. During the initial stages of planting, large
quantities of sediment and associated chemicals may be transported by runoff prior to plant
establishment (USEPA, 1993).
Residue Use. Crop residues (such as leaves and remnant stalks) left or spread on cultivated fields
protects soil during critical erosion periods (Ongley, 1996). Crop residues reduce erosion by
intercepting rainfall, thereby decreasing soil dispersion and soil compaction. Microbial and
bacterial action within the residue takes up nutrients and pesticides, delaying their entrance to
surface waters.
Delayed Seedbed Preparation. All crop residue and naturally occurring vegetation can be
maintained on the soil surface until shortly before the succeeding crop is planted. This reduces
the period that the soil is exposed and susceptible to erosion (Ongley, 1996). Delayed seedbed
preparation maintains vegetative cover as long as practical to minimize splash erosion and
nonpoint source pollution during critical erosion periods such as the rainy season. Additionally,
moisture is conserved, water quality improved, and soil infiltration increased.
Indigenous Weed Management. Indigenous weed management is the practice of allowing
weeds to grow in fallowed fields, or intercropping or seeding them. Indigenous farmers have
instinctively understood that weeds should be left to grow while crops are young. Weeds cover
the soil, prevent it from heating up or drying out excessively, induce a positive competition that
stimulates crop growth, and reduce erosion due to rainfall. As the crop matures and weed
competition causes a negative impact, farmers hoe the weeds, leaving a protective mulch on the
surface to recycle nutrients and naturally fertilize the crop. This natural fertilization is referred to
as "green manuring." Compost, leaves, and grass may all be used for fertilization.
Mulching. Mulching is a temporary soil stabilization or erosion control practice in which
materials such as cut grass, wood chips, wood fibers, or straw are placed on the soil surface to
temporarily stabilize disturbed areas until a seeded crop or vegetation is established (USVI
Conservation District, 1995). The benefits of mulching stem from reducing the direct impact of
rain, maintaining maximum soil infiltration, and decreasing the quantity, velocity, and transport
capacity of runoff water (Manrique, 1993). Mulching is also an effective water conservation tool.
It provides added benefits to the crop by holding seeds, fertilizers, and topsoils in place; retaining
moisture; and insulating seedlings against high temperatures. It is inexpensive and easy to
implement. Mulching provides a method of weed control, and organic mulch is biodegradable.
On steep or highly erodible slopes, mulch should be used with some type of anchoring system,
such as netting.
Mulching is also an alternative to tilling or hoeing, which has been a common form of weed
control. A typical practice is to slash the weeds three to four times a year, leaving a weed mulch
on the surface to help avoid soil erosion and to delay weed growth (FAO, 1994). This practice, of
course, does not eliminate weeds but inhibits weed growth while cultivated crops gain
dominance.
Mulching materials can also be obtained from the crop itself. In banana production, common
mulching materials are dead banana leaves, pruned suckers, and old stems (FAO, 1994). In the
case of bananas, however, mulch should be used only in vacant rows. Mulch should not be
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 47
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
allowed to come into contact with the banana stems since it can create moist conditions that can
encourage the entry of banana weevils (FAO, 1994).
Although using mulch has many benefits, certain drawbacks do exist. Mulch can intercept light
rains, which evaporate prior to reaching the crop roots. In addition, decaying mulch can
immobilize fertilizers and reduce the availability of nutrients to plants.
Strip Cropping. Strip cropping is growing crops in a systematic arrangement of strips or bands
across the general slope (not on the contour) to reduce water erosion. Crops are arranged so that
a strip of grass or close-growing crop is alternated with a clean-tilled crop or fallow (Ongley,
1996). This method is mainly suited for gentle slopes and areas of lower rainfall (Sheng, 1988).
Conservation Cropping. Conservation cropping is a sequence of crop rotations designed to
provide adequate organic residue for maintenance of soil tilth. This practice reduces erosion by
increasing organic matter, resulting in a reduction of sediment and associated pollutants to surface
waters (USEPA, 1993). It can also disrupt disease and insect and weed reproduction cycles,
thereby reducing the need for pesticides. Legumes and grasses are the typical species planted in
the rotation (Ongley, 1996).
4.2.4.2 Erosion and Sediment Controls for Livestock Areas
Deferred Grazing. Deferred grazing, also called rotational grazing, removes livestock from an
area for a prescribed period of time. This practice reduces nutrient loads from manure and allows
vegetation to recover for a period of time. This practice can also be used as a planned grazing
system, in which two or more grazing units are alternately rested and grazed for a planned period
of time (USEPA, 1993).
Heavy Use Area Protection. Heavy use areas can be protected by using any of three methods--
establishing vegetative cover, surfacing the area with suitable materials, or installing structures
(USEPA, 1993). This practice may result in a general improvement of surface water quality
through the reduction of erosion and sedimentation. Heavy use areas include livestock feeding,
shade, and watering areas; pathways leading to water bodies; and similar areas that livestock
frequently use.
4.2.5 Pesticide/Nutrient
Control
Most BMPs for pesticide and nutrient control are considered nonstructural. However, many of
the structural BMPs outlined for erosion and sediment control can also reduce losses of pesticides
and nutrients. With minimal effort, the probability of chemical accidents can also be drastically
reduced. As with erosion and sediment control, the actual effectiveness of the following BMPs
depends on site-specific variables such as soil type, crop rotation, topography, tillage, and
harvesting method (USEPA, 1993), as well as education of the farmworkers.
Good Housekeeping Practices. "Good housekeeping" practices are one of the easiest BMPs to
incorporate into an agricultural regime. The best way to avoid a problem is to prevent it at its
source (USVI Conservation District, 1995). These practices include any preventive measures
taken to reduce the possibility of accidental introduction of pesticides or fertilizers to the
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 46
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
environment. A few simple steps can be taken to greatly reduce the potential of surface water
contamination due to pesticides or nutrients.
· The area where chemical products are stored is a major source of risk: since
mishandling of materials or accidental spills may occur in storage areas.
Proper storage and handling of chemicals reduces safety hazards. To reduce
the risks of misusing chemical pesticides or fertilizers, the materials should
be handled as infrequently as possible and all handling or disposal
instructions should be carefully followed. Pesticides and fertilizers should
always be stored in a dry, covered area, and the recommended application
rates and methods need to be followed.
· To reduce the risks of nutrient pollution, fertilizers should be applied only
when needed, fertilizer applications should be limited to the necessary area
and the minimum recommended amount, fertilizers should be worked into
the soil to reduce nonpoint source pollution, seeding and fertilizing should be
done in one application, and good erosion and sediment control practices
should be implemented to help reduce the amount of sediment and fertilizers
that leaves the site (USVI Conservation District, 1995).
· Just as pesticides differ in their effectiveness on a variety of pests, they also
differ in their potential to contaminate surface water. Using the appropriate
pesticide in a controlled manner with soil conservation practices reduces the
likelihood of pesticides being carried into neighboring waterways. Pesticides
and fertilizers should never be applied immediately prior to irrigation.
· Used pesticide containers should be disposed of properly.
In any location where intensive agriculture or livestock farming produces serious risks of nitrogen
pollution, the following minimal steps should be taken at the farm level (Ongley, 1996):
· Rational nitrogen application. Overfertilization should be avoided.
· Vegetation cover. As discussed in Section 4.2.4, the maintenance of
vegetative cover inhibits the build-up of soluble nitrogen by absorbing
mineralized nitrogen and preventing leaching during periods of rain.
· Management of the area between crops. Organic debris produced by
harvesting is easily mineralized into leachable nitrogen. Steps to reduce
leachable nitrogen include planting of "green manure" crops and delaying the
ploughing of straw, roots, and leaves into the soil.
· Rational irrigation. Poor irrigation has one of the worst impacts on water
quality, whereas precision irrigation is one of the least polluting practices as
well as a reducer of the net cost of supplied water.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 46
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
· Optimization of other cultivation techniques. The highest yields with
minimum water quality impacts require optimization of practices such as
weed, pest, and disease control; liming; and fertilization.
· Agricultural planning. Erosion control techniques that complement
topographic and soil conditions should be implemented.
· Proper record keeping. Accurate records of nutrients or pesticides used,
when used, quantity used, and on which crop used should be maintained to
establish patterns and needs of the crop being cultivated.
Plant and Soil Analysis. Plant and soil analysis is helpful in determining fertilizer and pesticide
usage. It can help in the following ways:
· Nutrients. Soil and plant analyses are helpful in determining the types of
fertilizers needed to produce a high yield of a crop with minimal
environmental impacts. For example, if soil is tested for pH and the levels of
phosphorus, potassium, and nitrogen, and the nutrient requirements of the
plant are known (e.g., the plant is a high nitrogen-demanding plant),
fertilizers can be applied to the area based on the deficiencies indicated from
the soil test.
· Pesticides. Soil and site analyses are helpful in determining proper pesticide
usage. Before pesticide use, certain characteristics of the soil should be
determined. Locations of aquifers, drinking water wells, sinkholes, drainage
wells, and other features that allow surface water and its contents to enter and
contaminate the ground water should be identified. The runoff potential,
which is increased by steep slopes and highly erodible soils, determines how
fast pesticides that can be carried in runoff will leave the site. Pesticides
should not be applied in areas directly adjacent to surface waters. A buffer
between the site of application and the surface water body should be left
untreated. Soils with low adsorptive capacity have a lower ability to bind
applied pesticides and prevent them from running off or leaching into the
ground water. Highly permeable soils tend to allow water (and, therefore,
pesticides) to rapidly percolate through to the ground water.
Nutrient Management Plan. A nutrient management plan provides information to help control
or reduce the amount of fertilizers used on a crop. The following practices, components, and
sources of information should be considered in the development of such a plan (USEPA, 1993):
· Use of soil surveys and soil testing in determining soil productivity and
identifying environmentally sensitive areas. Soil testing should include pH,
phosphorus, potassium, and nitrogen data.
· Plant tissue testing.
· Use of proper timing, formulation, and application methods for nutrients that
maximize plant utilization of nutrients and minimize loss to the environment,
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 47
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
including split application and banding of the nutrients, use of nitrification
inhibitors and slow-release fertilizers, and incorporation or injection of
fertilizers, manures, and other organic sources.
· Use of cover crops.
· Use of buffer areas.
· Control of phosphorus losses from fields through a combination of erosion
and sediment control measures.
Integrated Pest Management. Integrated pest management (IPM), a mixture of chemical and
other nonpesticide methods to control pests, has been shown to reduce pesticide use (USEPA,
1994). It promotes the health of crops and animals by using natural and cultural control processes
and methods. IPM emphasizes the following strategies (USEPA, 1993):
· Use of biological controls:
- Introduction and fostering of natural enemies
- Preservation of predator habitats
- Release of sterilized male insects
- Use of bait and trap crops
· Use of pheromones:
- For monitoring populations
- For mass trapping
- For disrupting mating or other behaviors of pests
- For attracting predators/parasites
· Use of crop rotation to reduce pest problems.
· Use of mixed cropping.
· Use of improved tillage practices.
· Destruction of pest breeding and refuge sites (which may result in loss of
crop residue cover and an increased potential for erosion).
· Use of mechanical destruction of weed seed.
· Pest scouting and parasite/predator monitoring.
· Use of pest resistant crop strains.
· Pesticide application based on economic thresholds; i.e., applying pesticides
when an economic threshold level has been reached as opposed to applying
pesticides in anticipation of pest problems.
· Use of less environmentally persistent, toxic, and/or mobile pesticides.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 48
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
· Use of timing of field operations (planting, cultivation, harvesting, irrigation)
to minimize application and/or runoff of pesticides.
· Use of more efficient application methods (e.g., spot spraying as opposed to
aerial spraying).
· Management of weed hosts.
IPM uses chemical pesticides only where and when the measures listed above fail to keep pests
below damaging levels. It involves all stages of agricultural production from site selection to
harvest.
A sound pesticide management program matches the pesticide with the pest. This involves
proper identification of the pest and then selection of the pesticide, rate, and application method
most effective for control (Yelverton, 1993). The need for pesticides, particularly herbicides, can
be reduced through proper land preparation before planting. Removing problem weeds prior to
planting reduces the need for large quantities of herbicides during the growing season.
IPM not only prevents environmental degradation but also may lead to economic gain for the
farmer. Table 4-3 summarizes estimates of reductions in pesticide loss using various
management practices and combinations of practices in cotton (North Carolina State University,
1984, cited in USEPA, 1993). Reductions in losses equate to reductions in amount used and
therefore a cost-savings.
Proper Application of Nitrogen and Phosphorus. Surface application of nitrogen and
phosphorus without incorporation into the soil is the least desirable method of applying fertilizer
(Lilly, 1995). Due to the soil bonding properties of phosphorus, it should be incorporated into the
soil by tilling, or a similar method, prior to planting. Phosphorus is stable once it is mixed into
the soil. Nitrogen, however, is very mobile. Ideally, nitrogen should be applied frequently in
small amounts tailored to the crop's immediate needs (Lilly, 1995). For most crops, nitrogen may
be applied in split applications that coincide with the uptake or growth pattern of the crop. A
broadcast method of fertilizer (and pesticide) application should not be used when strong winds
are present. Wind can cause drift from applicators and misplacement of materials.
Table 4-3. Estimates of potential reductions in field losses of pesticides for cotton compared to a
conventionally or traditionally cropped fielda
Range of Pesticide Loss
Management Practices
Transport Route(s)
Reduction (%)b
Optimal Application Techniquesc
All Routesd
40 to 80 A
Nonchemical Methods
All Routes
Scouting Economic Thresholds
All Routes
40 to 65 A
0 to 30 B
Crop Rotations
All Routes
0 to 20 B
0 to 30 B
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 49
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
Pest-Resistant Varieties
All Routes
0 to 60 A
0 to 30 B
Alternative Pesticides
All Routes
60 to 95 A
0 to 20 B
a The hypothetical traditionally cropped comparison field uses the following management system:
(1) conventional tillage without other soil and water conservation practices;
(2) aerial application of all pesticides with timing based only on field operation convenience;
(3) 10 insecticide treatments annually with a total application of 12 kg/ha based on a prescribed schedule;
(4) cotton grown in 3 out of 4 years; and
(5) long-season cotton varieties.
b Assumes field loss reductions are proportional to application rate reductions.
A = insecticides (toxaphene, methylparathion, synthetic pyrethroids).
B = herbicides (trifluralin, fluometron).
Ranges allow for variation in production region, climate, slope, and soils.
c Defined for cotton as ground application using optimal droplet or granular size ranges with spraying restricted to calm
periods in late afternoon or at night when precipitation is not imminent.
d Particularly drift and volatilization.
Source: North Carolina State University, 1984, cited in USEPA, 1993.
Aerial Spray Zones. In some areas, pesticides are applied from airplanes flying low over crops
and releasing pesticides. This allows for maximum coverage in minimum time. Care should be
taken to minimize release of pesticides to surface waters by establishing aerial "buffer" zones
where no spraying would occur within a certain distance of surface waters and populated areas.
For example, in Costa Rica, no spray zones have been established within 15 metres of surface
waters and 100 metres of populated areas. The limits of the zones can be established by
something as simple as markers on poles and trees or something as sophisticated as geographic
positioning systems (GPS).
Realistic Yield Goals. All fertilizer recommendations assume a certain yield goal for the crop to
be grown. Nutrients should not be overapplied in the quest for an unrealistic yield (Lilly, 1995).
Excessive applications or amounts of fertilizer waste money and contribute to water pollution.
Use of Natural Fertilizers. Manure and other waste or by-product materials can be used as
natural fertilizers if applied correctly. This practice minimizes the need for chemical fertilizers.
For example, farms that grow both sugar and coffee can use a mixture of coffee bean shells and
animal manure (e.g., chicken manure) to make fertilizers. Although the natural fertilizer might
need to be supplemented with chemical fertilizers, the amount of chemical fertilizer needed is
reduced. This approach also helps address the issue of waste disposal from the coffee processing.
Leguminous Plants in Rotation. The planting of grasses and leguminous plants, either
individually or together, reduces runoff and provides a source of organic nitrogen, thereby
reducing fertilization needs. During the period of rotation when the grasses and legumes are
growing, they will take up more phosphorus (USEPA, 1993). They also provide an opportunity
for animal waste management because manures and other wastes may be applied for an extended
period of time due to the nutrient uptake by the grass and legume species.
4.2.6 Pathogens
Because they are the primary agricultural source of pathogens, pathogen controls focus on
livestock and manure management.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 50
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
Proper Grazing Management. Proper grazing management includes determining the maximum
number of animals per hectare based on the amount of manure that can be safely applied per
hectare of land. For a sound grazing management system to function properly and to provide for
a sustained level of productivity, the following should be considered (USEPA, 1993):
· Know the key factors of plant species management, plant growth habits, and
their response to different seasons and degrees of use by various kinds and
classes of livestock.
· Know the amount of plant residue or grazing height that should be left to
protect grazing land soils from wind and water erosion, to provide for plant
regrowth, and to provide the riparian vegetation height desired to trap
sediment or other pollutants.
· Know the range site production capabilities and the pasture suitability so an
initial stocking rate can be established.
· Know how to use livestock as a tool in range management to ensure the
health and vigor of plants, soil tilth, proper nutrient cycling, erosion control,
and riparian management, while at the same time meeting the nutritional
requirements of the livestock.
· Establish grazing unit sizes, watering, shade, and feed locations to optimize
livestock distribution and proper vegetation use.
· Provide for livestock herding to protect sensitive areas from excess use.
Livestock Exclusion. The exclusion of livestock from areas such as waterways and stream banks
reduces the amount of sediment and manure that can enter surface waters. Livestock exclusion
prevents livestock from entering a water body or walking down its banks, thereby preventing soil
compaction and water quality problems due to manure deposition. Alternative shade and water
sources should be provided for livestock.
Disposal of Dead Livestock. Dead livestock should be disposed of properly to reduce the
potential for ground and surface water contamination from pathogens and nutrients. They should
be removed from streams or fields and isolated until disposal is possible. Proper disposal
methods include composting and incineration. The general composting guidelines described in
Section 4.2.5 can be used when developing composting facilities for dead animals. Incineration
facilities require more detailed planning and need to be developed under the consultation of local
and national authorities to ensure proper construction, operation, and maintenance. When
animals die from contagious diseases, special care should be taken, such as worker protection,
quarantine, and similar measures, so as not to contaminate workers or other animals.
Manure Management. It is important to consider manure management and the potential for fly,
odor, and water quality impacts when raising livestock. A complete manure management system
involves collection, storage (temporary or long-term), and ultimate disposal or use (Graves,
1992). A manure management plan should establish fertilizer plans to use manure effectively
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 46
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
(Ongley, 1996). Sometimes a small number of animals can cause more difficulties than a large
herd, especially when animals are confined in buildings or on small lots (Graves, 1992).
Manure can be stored for later use as a fertilizer. Regular cleaning of a manure storage area
reduces the opportunity for insect breeding and odor production. Storage areas should be
designed and managed to exclude rodents and to keep rain and surface waters away from the
manure (Graves, 1992).
Grazing animals distribute their manure throughout the pasture. Problems result, however, when
too many animals exist in too small an area. Animals congregate along streams or watering areas
and around feeding troughs and shady areas. Soil erosion and excess manure deposition are
likely when the population levels are excessive. Reducing stocking density, moving feeding
areas, and paving areas around waterers can reduce these problems (Graves, 1992). It might be
necessary to develop alternative watering areas and erect fencing if a stream is present within the
pasture.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 47
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
Waste Utilization. Waste utilization is the practice of using agricultural waste on land in an
environmentally acceptable manner while maintaining or improving soil and plant resources
(USEPA, 1993). This waste can be in the form of manure or runoff water from agricultural lands.
Waste utilization helps to reduce the transport of sediment and related pollutants to surface
waters. Proper site selection, timing of application, and rate of application can reduce the
potential for degradation of surface and ground water (USEPA, 1993). Additionally, waste
utilization may cause microbial reactions in the soil that assist in controlling pesticides and other
pollutants by keeping them in place.
4.2.7 Solid
Waste
Managing solid waste is an issue of control. Solid waste management not only protects farmers
and farmworkers from disease, rodents, and flies but also maintains an aesthetically pleasing
environment.
Integrated Waste Management. Solid waste can be managed through an integrated waste
management system composed of reducing, reusing, and recycling solid waste used or generated
on site. This management system must be supervised, and responsibility for tasks must be
assigned to individuals. In implementing an effective waste management plan, an agricultural
facility must determine which items are not necessary, which can be reused (e.g., pesticide
containers), and what can be recycled. Recycling can be accomplished in a variety of ways. For
example, twine and banana bags from a banana plantation were recycled and fashioned into the
footbridge below. Items that cannot be reused or recycled should be disposed of at a landfill or
other appropriate alternative.
Composting. Organic waste from an agricultural production facility can be composted to be
used as mulch or fertilizer. Composting is a controlled process of degrading organic matter by
micro-organisms (USEPA, 1993). The organic waste (e.g., leaves, stumps, peels) can be stored in
a large garbage can, a constructed structure, or a lined hole that remains dark and allows
decomposition to occur. The storage structure should be secured to protect from rodents and
odor. As the waste decomposes, it evolves into a humus-like substance that can be used as
fertilizer or mulch. Little maintenance is needed, but lime might need to be added to the compost
to reduce acidity prior to application on fields.
4.3 Structural
BMPS
Structural BMPs are practices related to something constructed or built. There are a variety of
structural BMPs and most require some level of routine maintenance to continue working
effectively. The physical structures described in the following subsections are primarily
concerned with changing slope characteristics to reduce the amount and velocity of runoff
(Manrique, 1993). Slope management, based on a combination of simple and inexpensive
cropping practices, can be highly effective in maintaining or improving crop productivity with
minimal erosion risk (Manrique, 1993). Physical structures are also used to trap sediment and
pollutants before they enter surface waters.
United Nations Environment Programme-CAR/RCU
Page 69
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
4.3.1
Erosion and Sediment Controls
The ability of a country to sustain its agricultural productivity is closely related to topsoil quality
and depth, both of which are reduced by soil erosion (Hwang et al., 1994). The focus of any
agricultural erosion and sediment control (ESC) plan should be to prevent erosion before it starts.
Sediment controls are used to trap the sediment that erodes off the land. An effective ESC plan
should minimize the amount of disturbed soil, slow runoff flowing across the site, remove
sediment from runoff before it leaves the site, and plan soil disturbance for the dry season (USVI
Conservation District, 1995). The BMPs employed must be site-specific to achieve desired
effectiveness levels. The actual effectiveness of a BMP depends on site-specific variables such as
soil type, crop rotation, topography, tillage, and harvesting method (USEPA, 1993). The
following erosion and sediment control techniques also provide beneficial results in relation to
nutrient, pesticide, and pathogen control. Combinations of these BMPs can be used to further
ensure reductions in nonpoint source runoff of sediment, nutrients, pesticides, and pathogens.
4.3.1.1 Erosion
Controls
Contour Farming. Contour farming is the use of ploughing, planting, and other management
practices that are carried out along land contours (Ongley, 1996). It includes following
established grades, terraces, or diversions. Contour farming reduces erosion and sediment
production, which, in turn, reduces the transport of related pollutants to receiving water bodies.
The following is an example of contour planting. Every 10 meters, a farmer marks a contoured,
baseline row across the field using an A-frame or an equivalently simple level. Parallel to this
level baseline, the farmer then plants five parallel rows uphill and downhill. The short rows are
re-leveled and fit into the remaining spaces. The farmer's planting, cultivating, and hilling-up
(sometimes 30 cm high) of each row forms many absorption ditches on the contour. Absorption
ditches are expected to store the rain that falls between the rows. The contour planting and
hilling-up practices can eliminate 80 to 90 percent of the erosion occurring, even on steep
mountain soils. The effectiveness of the method depends on the soil's infiltration rate; the
intensity and duration of rainfall; the steepness and length of the slope; and the human factor,
which includes the accuracy of layout and uniformity of height of the ridges (Aldedge, 1988).
Contour planting has been successful in many Latin American and Caribbean countries,
especially Guatemala, Saint Vincent, Barbados, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands (Aldedge,
1988).
Diversions. Diversions are channels constructed across the slope with a supporting ridge on the
lower side. By controlling downslope runoff, erosion is reduced and the infiltration into the
ground water is enhanced (Ongley, 1996). Maintaining drainage channels prevents or reduces
erosion and takes up nutrients. Diversions are particularly effective in preventing sheet and rill
erosion by reducing the length of the slope (USEPA, 1993). Figure 4-1 illustrates this concept.
Terracing. Terraces are constructed earthen embankments that retard runoff and reduce erosion
by breaking the slope into numerous flat surfaces separated by slopes that are protected with
permanent vegetation or are constructed from stone or other materials. Terracing is carried out on
very steep slopes and on long, gentle slopes where terraces are very broad (Ongley, 1996).
Terracing can actually increase the land area in production. On slopes of 30 degrees, bench
United Nations Environment Programme-CAR/RCU
Page 70
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
terracing increases the productive land surface by 25 percent. Therefore, for every 4 hectares of
bench terraces, a farmer gains a fifth hectare. Flatter slopes produce less of an increase in land
area; inversely, steeper slopes provide more (Aldedge, 1988).
Construction of bench terraces requires considerable labor, but maintenance is minimal. In
Venezuela, terracing is accomplished by the "controlled-erosion" construction method--building
strong rock walls along the contours of the slopes and allowing the normal actions of erosion and
cultivation to level the surface (Williams and Walter, 1988) (Figure 4-2). An adequate terrace is
exactly level along the front edge and the base of the slope. The cultivated bench must be
inclined into the mountain enough to store rainfall (15 percent or more). Protection of the
backslope is maintained by a rock wall or planting of perennial species (Aldedge, 1988).
"Controlled-erosion" bench terraces are constructed by controlling the natural process of erosion.
Rock retaining walls (no higher than 1 to 1.5 meters for gentle slopes, higher for steeper slopes),
constructed along the contours of a slope at 10- to 40-meter intervals, provide a block to eroding
material. Thereafter, erosion and downslope ploughing provide the fill behind the retaining wall
(Williams and Walter, 1988). However, the process takes an extended period of time to evolve
naturally and achieving level terraces is delayed indefinitely. The advantage to this form of
terrace construction compared with conventional bench terracing is the reduction in the work
required for moving soil and subsoil. In addition, it tends to provide cultivation surfaces that are
relatively large and stable (Williams and Walter, 1988). In the Venezuela example (Figure 4-2),
the rock for the retaining walls was obtained from the field. If rock were not immediately
available, labor and transportation costs would be great. Level bench terracing has been
successful in several Latin American and Caribbean countries (Aldedge, 1988).
Simple terracing systems such as intermittent terraces, convertible terraces, orchard terraces, and
hillside ditches are alternatives to the more expensive bench terrace. Intermittent terraces are
used for larger tree crops, while orchard terraces are narrower terraces built for a single tree or
bush. The cost of these simple terracing systems is approximately one-fifth to one-third the cost
of bench terraces, and their effectiveness appears reliable. Runoff studies in Jamaica have shown
that hillside ditches with contour mounds or ridges reduce soil erosion by 80 percent in runoff
plots under yam cultivation (Manrique, 1993). However, terraces can also have a detrimental
effect on water quality if they concentrate and accelerate delivery of nutrients and pesticide
pollutants to surface waters (USEPA, 1993).
Wind Erosion Control. Wind erosion controls reduce erosion and nutrient runoff due to wind
transport of sediment by protecting crops against winds and stabilizing soil vulnerable to erosion.
Common wind breaks include shrubs and trees planted in borders or along property boundaries.
Once established, wind breaks become permanent and fruit crops such as bananas are most
benefited due to reduced plant stress (Palada, 1992).
Fencing. Fencing encloses or divides an area of land with a suitable permanent structure that acts
as a barrier to livestock. It can be built on the contour or up and down the slope. When built
across the slope, fencing slows down runoff and causes deposition of coarser-grained materials,
reducing the amount of sediment delivered downslope. Fencing can be placed to protect water
bodies from livestock activity and, with the proper vegetation along the fencerow, serves as a trap
to sediments and solid waste.
United Nations Environment Programme-CAR/RCU
Page 71
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
4.3.1.2 Sediment
Controls
Field Borders. Field borders are strips of perennial herbaceous vegetation or shrubs established
along the edges of fields. They slow runoff and trap coarser sediment. However, field borders
are generally not effective for fine sediment and associated pollutants (Ongley, 1996). This
method is mainly suited for gentle slopes and areas of lower rainfall (Sheng, 1988).
Field borders serve as "anchoring points" for contour rows, terraces, diversions, and contour strip
cropping. By eliminating the practice of tilling and planting the ends up and down slopes, erosion
from concentrated flow in furrows and long rows may be reduced (USEPA, 1993).
Filter Strips. Filter strips are areas of vegetation for removing sediment, organic matter, and
other pollutants from runoff (USEPA, 1993). Like field borders (which are typically grasses),
filter strips trap coarser-grained sediment and might not be effective on suspended fine-grained
materials. Filter strips are most effective when downslope runoff flows across them as sheet
flow, causing the deposition of sediment and polluted runoff.
Grassed Waterways. Grassed waterways, or swales, are natural or constructed channels that are
vegetated, graded, and shaped so as to inhibit channel erosion. The vegetation also traps
sediment that is washed in from adjacent fields (Ongley, 1996). Grassed waterways require little
maintenance, but they must be graded so as to move the runoff off the site.
Sediment Basins. A sediment basin is constructed to remove and store sediment from runoff
during rainfall events. Runoff flows to the basin and is held for a period of time, allowing the
sediment to drop out of suspension. Sediment basins need to be cleaned out periodically to
ensure proper functioning. Their effectiveness is affected by the length of the flow path of the
runoff and, therefore, may be reduced when clays and steep slopes are present (J. Wright,
Cooperative Extension Service, University of the Virgin Islands, personal communication,
February 12, 1998).
As discussed previously, using erosion and sediment control BMPs may result in the control of
nutrients and pesticides as well. Table 4-4 summarizes estimates of reductions in pesticide loss
from cotton fields using various ESC practices and combinations of practices in cotton.
4.3.2 Pathogens
Management of animal wastes and dead animals can reduce leaching of nutrients, ammonia
emission, and health risks due to contamination of surface and ground waters. A variety of
measures, including those BMPs referenced in Sections 4.2 and 4.3.1 can be implemented to
control animal wastes and contamination from dead animals in runoff.
Waste Storage Ponds. Waste storage ponds are impoundments designed and excavated for the
temporary storage of animal or other agricultural waste. This practice reduces the direct delivery
of polluted water, which includes any runoff from manure stacking areas, feedlots, and barnyards,
to surface waters (USEPA, 1993).
United Nations Environment Programme-CAR/RCU
Page 70
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 4. Best Management Practices
Table 4-4. Estimates of potential reductions in field losses of pesticides for cotton compared to a
conventionally or traditionally cropped fielda
Range of Pesticide Loss
Management Practices
Transport Route(s)
Reduction (%)b
Terracing
SR and SL
0 to (20)c
Contouring
SR and SL
0 to (20)c
Reduced Tillage
SR and SL
-40 to +20 AB
Grassed Waterways
SR and SL
0 to 10 AB
Sediment Basins
SR
0 to 10 AB
Filter Strips
SR
0 to -10 A
Cover Crops
SR and SL
-20 to +10 B
SR = surface runoff.
SL = soil leaching.
a The hypothetical traditionally cropped comparison field uses the following management system:
(1) conventional tillage without other soil and water conservation practices;
(2) aerial application of all pesticides with timing based only on field operation convenience;
(3) 10 insecticide treatments annually with a total application of 12 kg/ha based on a prescribed schedule;
(4) cotton grown in 3 out of 4 years; and
(5) long-season cotton varieties.
b Assumes field loss reductions are proportional to application rate reductions.
A = insecticides (toxaphene, methylparathion, synthetic pyrethroids).
B = herbicides (trifluralin, fluometron).
Ranges allow for variation in production region, climate, slope, and soils.
c Refers to estimated increases in movement through soil profile.
Source: North Carolina State University, 1984, cited in USEPA, 1993.
Stream Crossing. A stream crossing is a stabilized area to provide access across a stream for
livestock and farm machinery (USEPA, 1993). The purpose is to provide a controlled crossing or
watering access point for livestock, thereby controlling bank and streambed erosion, reducing
sedimentation, and enhancing water quality.
4.3.3 Solid
Waste
Catchment Basins. A catchment basin is a BMP similar to a sediment basin. It traps waste prior
to its entering a water body.
River Traps. River traps may also be used to inhibit the flow of solid waste off site, but they
cannot be used in streams or rivers with a high velocity of flow. Catchment basins are also
effective at preventing the transport of large amounts of organic waste off site.
4.3.4
Siting Structural BMPs
United Nations Environment Programme-CAR/RCU
Page 70
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 5. Case Studies
For structural BMPs to be effective in controlling nonpoint source pollution, they must be properly
designed, sited, installed, and maintained. Proper design includes making sure the selected BMP will
achieve the desired result (e.g., erosion protection). The BMP should be sited in the best location to
achieve the maximum pollutant removal and installed in such a manner that it will function properly. If
the intended purpose of the BMP is to trap sediment, it should be located in an area where sediment-laden
runoff drains and before the runoff leaves the site. Maintenance is critical to BMP effectiveness. If
structures are not maintained (e.g., kept free of trash and debris, moving parts kept operable), they will
most certainly fail. Sediment needs to be removed from sediment basins and traps, "trash" fences need to
be checked to make sure there are no breaks, and contoured areas need to be regraded from time to time.
4.4 Monitoring
Monitoring is defined as "the measurement of a pollutant or its effects on either man or marine resources
for the purposes of assessing and controlling exposure to that pollutant" (UNEP, 1985, cited in Coté,
1988). Monitoring is necessary to determine whether the predicted benefits of treatment or other
management instruments have occurred to assess the need for further treatment and management, and to
provide a basis for new management strategies and instruments to reduce the impact of similar activities
that might be proposed in the future (Coté, 1988).
It is important to know whether the BMPs used as part of an overall plan are effective in controlling
nonpoint source pollution and in preventing environmental degradation. There are two general types of
monitoring--water quality monitoring and program monitoring. Water quality monitoring looks at the
levels of specific pollutants or contaminants in a water body and measures the change in pollutant level
over time. Program monitoring provides an evaluation of the programs being implemented and allows an
evaluation of the types of programs being used to control the impacts of agricultural nonpoint source
pollution. Monitoring is done to evaluate the effectiveness of an overall program and to identify areas
where improvement or changes are needed. Without monitoring, it is uncertain whether there is pollutant
reduction or environmental benefit associated with a given effort.
For monitoring to be effective, a monitoring plan should be developed. The plan contains the goals and
objectives for the monitoring program (e.g., to determine the extent to which nitrogen is being reduced in
a bay, to determine whether countries are implementing agricultural nonpoint source pollution control
education programs), procedures for carrying out the monitoring (e.g., frequency of data collection,
methods used), data collection, data analysis, and program evaluation (e.g., whether there a is reduction
in nitrogen in the bay, whether country X has developed and implemented an education program).
Water quality monitoring provides specific information on pollutants that are being reduced. Program
monitoring (sometimes called technology monitoring) is based on the assumption that structural and
nonstructural BMPs are effective at reducing nonpoint source pollutant loadings and that through their
implementation, pollutant reduction does occur. For some countries and farm operations, it might be
more practical to develop and implement a program monitoring plan. A program monitoring plan in
conjunction with a biological monitoring program may also be a cost-effective approach to an evaluation
program for BMPs.
Additional information on monitoring technologies and plan development can be obtained from local
extension services and nongovernmental organizations. Appendix C contains additional resources that
can be consulted.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 69
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 5. Case Studies
4.5
Socioeconomic Factors and Implementation
In 1990, the Latin American and Caribbean Commission on Development and the Environment
(LACCDE) formulated a strategy to increase productivity and to assess the present and potential
environmental impact caused by particular agricultural practices. The strategy proposed adopting the
following measures to reduce nonpoint source pollution:
Prudent use of agrochemicals, assigning preference, for example, to such practices as
integrated pest management and the use of organic fertilizers.
Promotion of tillage techniques patterned on nature's own methods, such as
multicropping and agroforestry.
Farm subsidy programs to restore watersheds and deteriorated ecosystems.
Regulation of land use, promoting ecologically suitable crops congruent with land
management planning.
Soil conservation to control erosion produced by wind and water.
Fixing of a fair price for irrigation water to avoid waste (LACCDE, 1990).
The introduction of a BMP program would be the first step toward achieving the goals of this strategy.
To effectively incorporate the use of BMPs into the agricultural sector, however, three major questions
need to be answered (Sheng, 1992):
1.
Which government agency or agencies should be responsible for enforcing
or encouraging the use of BMPs?
2.
How can farmers be effectively motivated to participate in a BMP
program?
3.
What necessary assistance should be given to farmers once they agree to
use BMPs?
The need for each country to develop a national policy and a program of measures addressing agricultural nonpoint
source pollution is evident. Once achieved, such policies and programs will address the questions listed above.
It is generally recognized that the greatest barriers to the widespread use of soil and water conservation measures in
developing countries are socioeconomic. They include insecure tenure, high discount rates, the costs to the farmer
of implementing the practices, and government policies that promote nonsustaining farming practices (Hwang et. al.,
1994). Several barriers prevent the countries of the WCR from answering the questions above and implementing an
effective BMP program. They include insufficient financial or physical resources to control nonpoint source
pollution; inadequate institutions, such as laws and policies; and lack of recognition of land-based marine pollution,
specifically nonpoint source pollution, as an environmental problem (Hoagland et al., 1995). Land tenure and
educational issues also play a major role. Land tenure is an important issue when considering the effective
implementation of a BMP program. Many farmers are tenants and have no vested interest in investing in long-term
agricultural productivity (DeGeorges, 1990).
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 70
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 5. Case Studies
Few quantitative studies have been conducted of the relative cost-effectiveness of different erosion control
techniques (Hwang et al., 1994) and BMPs in general. According to research conducted in Haiti, the
implementation of BMPs may save farmers money (Section 5.4). Through education, the adoption of BMPs, even
on tenant farms, might be perceived as more acceptable if an economic gain can be achieved. Furthermore, the
study determined that successful adoption of soil conservation techniques and BMPs occurred voluntarily among
tenant farmers only when the result increased economic gain, not because of soil conservation per se (White and
Jickling, 1995).
Research conducted in two agricultural areas in Haiti found that the implementation of some common BMPs
produced much greater economic returns to the farmer (White and Jickling, 1995). Researchers found that the
addition of BMPs was beneficial, in terms of both land and labor investments (Table 4-5).
The success of the Haitian program was primarily due to the use of indigenous techniques and subsidies in the form
of seed and saplings.
Table 4-5. Economic returns from soil conservation in Maissade, Haiti
Benefit-Cost
Land Use Option
NPV/ha
Return to Labor
Ratio
Pure agriculture
5656
6.1
2.5
(no BMPs)
Pure agriculture + contour,
11,185 (98%)
16.9 (177%)
3.4
trash barrier
Pure agriculture + indigenous
12,607 (123%)
22.3 (266%)
3.0
trash barrier, hedgerow
NPV = net present value.
Figures in parentheses indicate percent increase from the pure agriculture (no treatment) case.
Source: White and Jickling, 1995.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 71
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 5. Case Studies
SECTION 5. CASE STUDIES
5.1 The Better Bananas Program--Implementing Pollution Reduction
Measures
In 1992, the Rainforest Alliance, an international nonprofit organization that develops and
promotes economically viable and socially desirable alternatives for resource management,
developed the ECO-O.K. certification program to help reduce the adverse environmental impacts
of tropical agriculture. The program develops ways for the growers of crops such as bananas and
coffee to do business with minimal damage to natural resources. A component of this project is
the Better Bananas program. The goal of the program is to transform banana export production
so that its impact on the environment is minimized without sacrificing quality, supply, worker
safety, or economic opportunities. To reach this goal, the program awards an "ecological seal of
approval" to farms that adhere to a series of standards, which permits the promotion of their
produce as having been grown and harvested under conditions of limited environmental impact.
The Problems
As discussed in Section 3.2.1 of this report, there are a variety of environmental issues related to
banana production. These include land erosion, misapplication of pesticides and fertilizers, solid
waste production and improper waste disposal, and storage and handling of hazardous materials.
In some areas, the land needs to be drained for banana production. This can lead to erosion of
ditches and canals and excess sediment loading to receiving waters and ultimately near-coastal
waters. Pesticides and fertilizers, if applied incorrectly or in overabundance, can run off during
rainfall events and wash to receiving waters. Plastic bags used in the banana ripening process are
often left on the ground after a harvest. They wash off the plantation and end up in estuaries and
on beaches. The recognition of these and other problems has led to the development of low-
cost/low-technology options for controlling pollution from banana plantations.
The Solution
The Better Bananas program arose out of a growing environmental awareness in the United
States, Canada, and Europe, where consumers have begun to demand more sustainable systems of
agricultural production. Certification is awarded based on meeting General Production Standards
for socioenvironmental agricultural production (updated August 1997). Appendix D contains the
most recent standards for the Better Bananas program. The standards resulted from collaboration
among farmers, conservation groups, scientists, and government representatives, and they will be
updated periodically as environmental advances, new technologies, and market demand warrant.
The Standards
Standards were developed for six general categories of activities--legislation, natural resource
management, crop management, solid and liquid waste management, environmental education,
and prevailing social and work conditions. Within these categories, subcategories of activities
and resource areas are addressed, such as forested areas, fertilization programs, and equipment
management. Goals are established, with criteria (specific activities) for meeting each goal
outlined. (See Appendix D.)
Implementation
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 72
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 5. Case Studies
Currently, 85 banana farmers are participating in the program. For example, Plantera Rio
Sixaola, S.A., was the initial farm to participate in the program. Chiquita International
implements the program on all of its plantations in Costa Rica and requires, as a contract
condition, that all of its independent growers become certified. Other companies participating in
the program include Banandex in Colombia (13 farms certified), Chiriqui Land Company in
Panama (32 farms certified), and COBAL in Costa Rica (29 farms certified). Activities include
planting the ditch and canal banks on the plantation to prevent erosion, educating workers on
ecologically sound ways for growing bananas, leaving plant cuttings on the ground instead of
removing them from the site, treating wastewater at the banana packing facility, and recycling
plastic materials.
Several farms have extensive recycling programs for the plastic bags and twine used on the farms.
The recycled plastic is used in a variety of ways, including making "bricks" for walkways
throughout the farms to help prevent soil erosion, manufacturing packing materials for shipping
bananas overseas, and making fuel pellets for the local cement plant.
For more information, contact the following:
Chris Wille, Director
ECO-O.K. Certification Program
Rainforest Alliance
Apdo. 138-2150, Moravia
San Jose, Costa Rica
011+ (506) 240-9383
infotrop@sol.racsa.co.cr
5.2
Plan Sierra--The Benefits of Outreach and Education
Plan Sierra is an area and a program on the north slope of the Cordillera Central where sugar cane
and coffee are grown. Plan Sierra was created through a grant from the government of the
Dominican Republic in 1979 to address the needs of the rural poor. It is an autonomous civil
institution with 400 employees, and it receives an annual appropriation from the Dominican
Congress. Its objectives are as follows:
· To create a demonstration project for managing upland and mountainous
agriculture.
· To develop a coordinating mechanism to link existing management
institutions to address the problems of the sierra.
· To respond in a timely and flexible manner to the needs of small-farm
operators.
Plan Sierra has conducted activities in infrastructure development, health, education, and
agriculture. Reducing soil erosion is a central focus of the agricultural aspect of the program.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 73
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 5. Case Studies
The Problem
The erosion rate in the Dominican Republic is estimated to be 300 ton/hectare/year (133
ton/acre/year). More than half of the topography is mountainous and much of the land has been
stripped of trees, which have been harvested for fuel. The creation of Plan Sierra was motivated
by a realization that hydroelectric development projects in Haiti were being seriously
compromised by rapid sedimentation of reservoirs, a result of the massive deforestation occurring
in the mountainous regions.
The Solution
Plan Sierra focuses on a variety of economic activities, including the promotion of ecologically
stable open food plots, reforestation and the sustainable management of existing forests, social
forestry schemes, and the diffusion of integrated systems of food crops and coffee. Important
instruments for its growth and development were the development and involvement of grass-roots
organizations, a focus on infrastructure development, experimentation with new technological
alternatives for sustainable food plots, creation of credit schemes, subsidized sales of tree
seedlings, provision of technical assistance, a food-for-work program for the adoption of soil
conservation techniques, and development and use of training programs. Plan Sierra conducts
on-site visits to farmers and offers training at the Los Montones demonstration farm.
Acceptance and Accomplishment
In a survey of farmers, all who had adopted the soil conservation measures under Plan Sierra felt
that their farms had benefited. Generally, the benefits are in the form of increased crop yields,
increased longevity of soil use, improved soil moisture, erosion control, and increased soil
fertility. Ninety-five percent of Plan Sierra participants were using soil and water conservation
practices, versus 25 percent of nonparticipants. And once adopted, soil and water conservation
practices are consistently used by farmers who have participated in the plan.
Training at the Los Montones demonstration farm also has an impact on the number of options a
farmer is willing to try and plays an important role in the dissemination of agricultural and
conservation innovations. It also forms a stronger bond between the farmers and Plan Sierra.
Farmers who receive training at the farm are more likely to use soil and water conservation
practices on all of their land holdings rather than just some of their land; to use live barriers; to
perceive soil and water conservation practices as beneficial; and to realize that using soil and
water conservation practices not only improves productivity, but also controls erosion. Soil
conservation practices such as contour plowing and terraces are twice as likely to be used by
farmers who have received both on-site visits by Plan Sierra employees and soil conservation
training at the Los Montones demonstration farm than by those who received only one of those
types of assistance under Plan Sierra.
Another success of the program is that, when faced with questions or problems, farmers involved
with Plan Sierra generally turned to it for assistance, implying trust and a willingness to adopt
improved measures for soil conservation. More than 50 percent of Plan Sierra participants
attribute their knowledge of Plan Sierra to outreach activities, and nearly half of those 50 percent
think that onsite visits and training at the Los Montones demonstration farm were the most useful
sources of information regarding soil and water conservation practices.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 74
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 5. Case Studies
5.3
Technical Improvements to Local Innovations in Haiti
Peasant farmers in Haiti have produced many innovations for annual cropping, including the
following:
· Zare: soil and stubble formed into mini-catchments to retain water for rice
cultivation.
· Sakle en woulo: weeds hoed into closely spaced contour ridges prior to
planting.
· Ramp pay: contour trash barriers covered with soil.
· Kleonaj: wattling constructed in ravines to retain sediment for banana, taro,
or yam cultivation.
· Bit: contour bands for sweet potato cultivation.
With the help of technical assistance, these innovations were improved to increase soil retention.
The Problems
In Haiti, environmental degradation and rural poverty are extreme. Only 32 percent of the land in
Haiti is deemed arable, but over 60 percent of the land is under agricultural use. Most hillsides
are eroded, and one-third of the land is severely degraded. There are three principal causes of soil
erosion and deforestation in the nation:
1. Limited access to production resources, i.e., land and capital
2. Few opportunities for off-farm employment
3. Social and economic insecurity
A breakup of plantations into small, individually owned farms led people to move to more
mountainous parts of the country in search of farmland. The average farm in Haiti is too small to
provide for a minimal standard of living, and farming is very intensive so as to reap as much
harvest as possible for a family. The denuded landscape in the mountainous terrain has led to
severe degradation of the land and intensive soil erosion. Soil conservation measures employed
by peasant farmers are inadequate or not practiced widely enough to slow the degradation of the
land, and they are generally used to retain moisture and increase agricultural production, not to
retain soil per se. Soil conservation measures had been introduced by international groups, but
these focused on long-term ecological or downstream benefits. They failed to provide a short-
term, recognizable incentive for their adoption to the farmer who was being asked to use them.
The Solution
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 75
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 6. Meeting Summary
Technical improvements to the existing practices included vegetative techniques such as contour
hedgerows, wattling, and gully plugs. For example, ramp pay were improved by placing them along
contours and supporting them with planted hedgerows, and kleonaj were improved by planting live stakes
and perennials downslope of them. These improved techniques have been widely adopted and are
maintained by farmers without external incentives.
Contour hedgerows with Leucaena leucocephala and gully plugs with Pencaena leucocephala are
especially popular. Hedgerows serve three purposes:
4.
To support the ramp pay structure and protect the sediment that
accumulates behind it and the moisture that it retains.
5.
To reduce labor investments by avoiding the annual reconstruction
of the ramp pay after they decay.
6.
To provide livestock forage material during the dry season.
Hundreds of kilometers of hedgerows have been planted since their introduction.
The local innovations for soil retention that were improved by technical assistance require low labor
inputs and result in short-term net financial gain to farmers that adopt them. Generally, farmers realize
benefits in the same season in which the measures are adopted. Successful adoption of the techniques can
also be attributed to the fact that they can be altered or combined to meet the landowner's specific site
conditions and management objectives. Techniques introduced by international groups often require
complex designs that must be adhered to in order to function properly. The improved techniques that are
now being widely adopted by farmers provide many benefits beyond soil retention--forage for livestock,
wood for fuel, and increased agricultural production.
Results
Sediment retention of 50 centimeters in height in a season behind the improved ramp pay is common.
One study showed that the improved technique increased production of corn by 51 percent and sorghum
by 28 percent in the first year of their use, and by 22 percent and 32 percent, respectively, in the second
year. The study also showed that the average amount of soil retained by the improved soil conservation
measures was 101 tons per hectare in the first year.
The same study also showed that all types of soil conservation being practiced by the farmers are
beneficial. The net returns from a small farm are increased 100 percent with the addition of any soil
conservation measure. However, the combination of ramp pay with hedgerows was the most profitable.
Lessons Learned
The direct lessons of the acceptance and benefits of the improved local innovations for soil conservation
are as follows:
· Acceptable measures combine components that are familiar to peasants (e.g., ramp
pay and hedgerows) and compatible with other agricultural and social activities.
United Nations Environment Programme
Page 73
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 6. Meeting Summary
· Measures need to be simple and require low and non-financial installment costs.
· To be adopted, the measures must provide short-term economic returns, usually in
the same season as their installation.
· Measures need to be adaptable to farmer-specific site conditions, management
objectives, and preferences. These factors facilitate a sense of ownership of the
measures when the measures are used on an individual farm.
· Successful measures are those which can be adopted sequentially, at a pace consistent
with the farmer's acquisition of knowledge and level of comfort with making
changes.
Most importantly, erosion control measures in Haiti have been adopted only when they were shown to
result in economic gain to a farmer in the short term, not because they save soil. The improved ramp pay
with hedgerows were successful because they were a low-cost investment and peasants could quickly
determine whether the improvement was worth their time; that is, economic benefits were noticeable in
the first season of their use.
United Nations Environment Programme
Page 74
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 6. Meeting Summary
SECTION 6. MEETING SUMMARY
This section provides a summary of the discussions at the Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
Experts Meeting held on January 22 and 23, 1998, in Castries, St. Lucia, to discuss best
management practices (BMPs) for controlling agricultural nonpoint source (NPS) pollution in the
Wider Caribbean (as defined by UNEP). The purpose of the meeting was to gather expert input
from professionals in the WCR who are involved with agricultural nonpoint source pollution
control and have an understanding of the technical, economic, and social issues in the region.
Their input is necessary to assist UNEP-CAR/RCU, as Secretariat to the Cartagena Convention
and its protocols, in developing a draft Annex on appropriate controls for agricultural nonpoint
source pollution under the protocol on marine pollution from land-based sources and activities.
The experts discussed a draft report on agricultural BMPs prepared prior to the meeting and
provided input and comments on the draft report. Changes have been made to the report based on
appropriate comments. The experts identified issues that need to be addressed by negotiators of
the land-based sources protocol under the Cartagena Convention. Issues identified included
environmental impacts of agricultural nonpoint source pollution; pollutants of concern, causes,
sources, and control practices; and obstacles for controlling agricultural nonpoint source pollution
in the region and potential solutions. This summary is not the minutes of the meeting but rather a
compilation of comments and discussions. A list of the invitees and participants is provided in
Section 6.8.
Report Comments
The following general comments on the draft report were offered. Specific report comments are
as follows:
· The report should be organized according to pollutants, sources, and
measures for controlling them, not by crop because most of the pollutants
and control measures are not crop-specific.
· More case studies are needed. (Experts were asked to provide these.)
· A better matrix for BMP selection needs to be developed.
· Most "problems" come from small farms; therefore, the report should
distinguish between small, medium, and large farms.
· Livestock should be added.
· Grey literature should also be used, including recommendations from the
experts.
· The fact that monitoring BMP implementation and effectiveness should be
part of a nonpoint source pollution control and monitoring plan needs to be
included in the report.
United Nations Environment Programme
Page 75
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 6. Meeting Summary
· The link between the "greening" of consumers and controlling nonpoint
source pollution should be discussed, as well as how farmers/countries can
capitalize on this for economic and environmental purposes.
Additional Issues
The following issues should be conveyed to the annex negotiators as concerns/issues raised by the
group:
· Nonagricultural pesticides can be a source of nonpoint pollution and need to
be addressed (e.g., mosquito control measures).
· Agriculture-related point sources (e.g., sugar refining, coffee processing)
need to be addressed.
· National land planning activities are needed.
· There is a lack of an "inventory" of environmental impairments due to
agricultural nonpoint source pollution.
· Funding for pollution control programs continues to be a problem.
· There is a need for more consistent pesticide regulations among the
countries.
· Trade standards impact prices and therefore impact growing conditions.
· Regional monitoring programs are needed, including development of
monitoring procedures and protocols specific to tropical environments.
Problems Related to Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
Several environmental problems related to agricultural nonpoint source pollution were identified:
· Decreased biodiversity
· Loss of coral reefs, fisheries, and seagrass beds
· Bacterial contamination
· Increased turbidity
· Algal blooms
· Siltation
· Increased cost of remediation
· Soil depletion*
· Loss of mangroves*
· Reduction in river base flow*
· Flash floods*
(* Caused by physical alteration of the environment, not pollutant loading.)
United Nations Environment Programme
Page 76
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 6. Meeting Summary
Contaminants/Pollutants, Sources, Causes, and Practices for Control
The experts spent a considerable amount of time determining the main environmental
contaminants related to agricultural nonpoint source pollution, their sources, their causes, and
practices for controlling them. The practices identified were focused on low-cost, low-tech
options and were categorized as source reduction practices or pollutant transport reduction
practices. The experts agreed that the primary contaminants/pollutants related to agriculture are
sediment, nutrients, pesticides, pathogens, and solid waste. The information in Table 6-1 will
provide the basis for the guidance provided in the final report.
Obstacles and Potential Solutions
The experts identified four main obstacles for implementing controls to agricultural nonpoint
source pollution. These obstacles were considered to be related to education/public awareness,
economics, natural resource assets, and legislation and national/international policy. The experts
also recommended possible ways to overcome these obstacles. This discussion became the basis
for developing the Annex for agricultural nonpoint source control. Table 6-2 provides a summary
of the discussion.
Recommendations from the Meeting
The following is a summary of the recommendations made by the experts that they felt should be
incorporated into the draft Annex addressing agricultural nonpoint source pollution in the WCR.
· Each country should develop a National Action Programme for the control of
agricultural nonpoint source pollution. Such a plan should contain, at a
minimum, the following components:
Assessment of water quality impairments due to agricultural nonpoint
source pollution.
Inventory of land resources and land use for identification of areas most
suitable for agriculture.
Development of an education, awareness, and outreach program explaining
the importance of natural resources, problems related to agricultural
nonpoint source pollution, and structural and nonstructural BMPs for
control of agricultural nonpoint source pollution.
Requirements for implementation of appropriate BMPs on small, medium,
and large farm operations.
Development of economic incentives for implementation of agricultural
BMPs.
Survey of existing legislation and policies related to controlling
agricultural nonpoint source pollution and those responsible for
implementation, including land use policies and legislation.
United Nations Environment Programme
Page 77
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 6. Meeting Summary
Table 6-1. Contaminants/pollutants of concern, sources, causes, and practices for control
(Practices were classified as source reduction (sr), transport control (t), or both and are indicated as such on the table.)
Conta
S
Cause(s)
Practices for Control
minan
o
t
u
r
c
e
(
s
)
Nutrie
·
· Artificial
· Soil and plant analysis (sr)
nts
Fertilizers
drainage
· Nutrient management (sr)
(includi
· Placement of
- timing, application, type, placement,
ng N
fertilizer (in soil vs. on
handling, and container disposal
and P)
soil)
· Ground covers (including drainageways)
·
(sr/t)
Overfertilizati
· Buffer zones and reforestation of
on
riverbanks (t)
· Poor crop
· Leguminous plants (sr)
siting (land use)
· Proper water management (t)
· Lack of
· Proper use of organic fertilizers (sr)
buffers
· Erosion control measures (sr/t)
· Timing of
· Good housekeeping practices (including
fertilization
record keeping) (sr)
· Erosion
(adsorbed nutrients)
· Leakage
from containers
·
· Irrigation
· Proper water management (t)
Soil
minera techniques
United Nations Environment Programme
Page 78
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 6. Meeting Summary
Conta
S
Cause(s)
Practices for Control
minan
o
t
u
r
c
e
(
s
)
·
· Animals in
· Exclusion of animals from drainageways
Manure
drainage ways
(sr/t)
· Confined
· Waste management (sr/t)
animal facilities
· Proper grazing management (sr)
· Volatilization
of animal waste
Sedim
·
· Planting on
· Ground covers (including drainageways)
ent
Eroded
str
steep slopes
(sr/t)
·
· Buffer zones and reforestation of
Deforestatio
riverbanks (t)
n
· Proper water management (sr/t)
· Clear-cutting
· Erosion control measures (sr)
· Improper
· Proper grazing practices (sr)
tillage methods
· Conservation tillage (sr)
· Improper
· Terracing in proper areas (t)
timing of site
· Wind erosion controls (t)
preparation
· Sediment basins (t)
· Animal
· Use of organic "trash" (e.g., palm and
trampling
banana fronds) as sediment fences (t)
· Improper
· Diversions (t)
irrigation methods and
· Grassed waterways (t)
water management
· Contour farming (t)
practices
· Contour drains (t)
·
Channelizati
on and artificial
drainage
United Nations Environment Programme
Page 79
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 6. Meeting Summary
Table 6-1. (continued)
Contaminant
Source(s)
Cause(s)
Practices for Control
Pesticides
Pesticides
· Improper application (timing,
· Education of workers and farm management (sr/t)
method, amount, etc.)
· IPM (sr)
· Sedimentation
- timing, application method, type, placement, handling,
· Cropping systems (e.g.,
and container disposal; need to triple-rinse containers
monocultures)
· Soil and site analysis (sr)
· Improper equipment washdown
· Ground covers (including drainage ways) (sr/t)
· Spilling
· Use of biodegradable pesticides (sr)
· Inappropriate selection
· Buffer zones and reforestation of riverbanks (t)
· Inappropriate handling, storage,
· Proper water management (including reuse of rinse water)
and disposal
(sr)
· Leaching
· Erosion control measures (sr)
· Improper water management
· Good housekeeping practices (including record keeping)
· Artificial drainage
(sr)
· Volatilization
· Crop rotation, including fallow (sr)
· Mixed
cropping
(sr)
· Use of resistant pesticide varieties (biotechnology) (sr)
· Pesticide
rotation (sr)
· Aerial buffer (no spray) zones (e.g.,100 m from populated
areas; 15 m from surface waters) (t)
Pathogens
· Animal Waste
· Animal use of water sources
· Proper grazing management (sr/t)
(manure and
· Improper location of animals
· Exclusion of livestock from drainage ways (sr/t)
manure used as
· Improper application of manure
· Manure management (sr)
fertilizer)
· Provision of alternative shade and water for livestock (sr)
· Dead animals
· Improper handling and disposal
Composting and proper disposal of dead animals (sr)
Solid Waste
· Plastics (bags,
· Improper handling and disposal
· Integrated waste management (reduce, reuse, recycle,
twine, mulch,
of plastics
remediate) (sr)
containers, etc.)
· Lack of disposal alternatives
· Catchment basins (t)
· River traps (on small-flow rivers) (t)
· Organics
· Improper disposal of
· Composting facilities (t)
waste ag products (e.g.,
· Catchment basins (t)
waste bananas)
United Nations Environment Programme
Page 80
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 6. Meeting Summary
United Nations Environment Programme
Page 81
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 6. Meeting Summary
Table 6-2. Obstacles to implementation and suggested solutions
Obstacles
Solutions
Education/Awareness
· Lack of technical expertise and good extension
· Development of national plans and program strategies for
ices (technology transfer)
cation. Plans may include (but need not be limited to):
· Lack of understanding by decision makers,
- community education programs
ers, and the general public on the importance of
- field demonstrations and follow-up site visits
ral resources and the impact of nonpoint source
- school and community workshops
ution on these resources
- more aggressive outreach and extension programs,
cluding courses for workers
· Overcoming cultural barriers as they relate to
- use of media (TV, radio, videos, etc.)
propriate agricultural practices
- required school environmental education curriculum
· Inadequate user knowledge on environmentally
· Education of political and policy leaders in the WCR
nd farming practices
· Development of a commission or similar mechanism for
· Lack of understanding of the link between
dinating educational policy for the region
sm and agricultural pollution control
· Appointment of one responsible coordinating agency
· Lack of research and available data
, Ministry of Agriculture)
· Use of nongovernment organizations (NGOs)
· Economic incentives for implementing education
rams
· Assessment of environmental impairments due to
cultural nonpoint source pollution
Economics
· World commodity prices
· Development of incentives for implementing agricultural
point source pollution control programs (e.g., tax breaks,
· Poor
resource
allocation
al "environmentally sensitive" farms, etc.)
· Small scale of some farms
· Allocation of government resources for agricultural
point source pollution control program
· Foreign
debt
· Inequity of benefit allocation (poverty)
· Land
tenure
Natural Resource Assets
· Steep
topography
· Development of a resource and land use inventory to help
tify the areas most suitable for agricultural use
· Climate
· Development of national land use plans
· Soil suitability (fertility/infertility)
· Compilation of a list of traditional practices that are
· Availability of land suitable for agriculture (being vative and based on sustainability for use in the education
d for other purposes)
ram
· Pest
diversity
United Nations Environment Programme
Page 82
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 6. Meeting Summary
Table 6-2. (continued)
Obstacles
Solutions
Legislation and National/International Policy
· Tariffs and quota systems
· Survey and review of relevant existing legislation,
ies, and responsibilities for their effectiveness in controlling
· International quality standards
cultural nonpoint source pollution
· Subsidies that are detrimental to environmental
· Development and implementation of plans to
ty (both production- and crop-related subsidies)
ify/create legislation (including enforcement) for agricultural
pollution control
· Lack of enforcement of existing regulations and
ementation of existing programs
· Overlap in governmental responsibility
· Lack of interagency cooperation
· Education of decision makers, farmworkers, and the general public should be
coordinated and standardized at the regional and national levels.
· The private sector needs to be involved in the control of agricultural nonpoint
source pollution.
Experts Meeting Invitees and Participants
Participants
Janice Reid
Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute (CARDI) and UWI
P.O. Box 113
Kingston, Jamaica
(876) 927-1321
Felix Jaria
Agriculture Engineering Services Division
Ministry of Agriculture
Waterfront
Castries, St. Lucia
(758) 450-2337 (phone)
(758) 453-6314 (fax)
Alberto Beale-Cosio
Chairman, Caribbean Food Crop Society
Agricultural Experiment Station
P.O. Box 21360
San Juan, Puerto Rico 00928
(787) 767-9705
United Nations Environment Programme
Page 83
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 6. Meeting Summary
Carlos Vega
Tropical Environmental Coordinator
Chiquita Brands International
P.O. Box 10076-1000
San Jose, Costa Rica
(506) 255-3424
Jean Spooner
North Carolina State University
Water Quality Group
Research 4, Suite 3200
909 Capability Drive
Raleigh, NC 27606
(919) 515-8240
Carlos Hernández
EARTH School
P.O. Box 4442-1000
San Jose, Costa Rica
(506) 255-2000
Brian Cooper
Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and Environment
Environment Unit
Queen Elizabeth Highway
St. Johns, Antigua
Phone: (268) 462-4625
Fax: (268) 462-2836
Julie Wright
University of the Virgin Islands Cooperative Extension Service
#2 John Brewers Bay
St. Thomas, VI 00802
Phone: (340) 693-1082
Fax: (340) 693-1085
Tim Kasten
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water
401 M Street, SW (4101)
Washington, DC USA 20460
Phone: (202) 260-5994
Fax: (202) 260-5711
Bryan Wood-Thomas
United Nations Environment Programme
Page 84
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 6. Meeting Summary
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of International Activities
401 M Street, SW (2660R)
Washington, DC USA 20460
Phone: (202) 564-6476
Fax: (202) 565-2409
Kjell Grip
United Nations Environment Programme
Caribbean Environment Programme - Regional Coordinating Unit
14-20 Port Royal Street
Kingston, Jamaica
Phone: (876) 922-9267
Fax: (876) 922-9292
Nelson Andrade Colmenares
United Nations Environment Programme
Caribbean Environment Programme - Regional Coordinating Unit
14-20 Port Royal Street
Kingston, Jamaica
Phone: (876) 922-9267
Fax: (876) 922-9292
Mary Beth Corrigan
Tetra Tech, Inc.
10306 Eaton Place, Suite 340
Fairfax, VA USA 22030
Phone: (703) 385-6000
Fax: (703) 385-6007
Invited but Unable to Participate
Wayne Hunt
Belleairs Research Institute
McGill University
Holetown, St. James, Barbados
(246) 422-2087
Chris Wille
Rainforest Alliance
Apdo. 138-2150, Moravia
San Jose, Costa Rica
(506) 240-9389
United Nations Environment Programme
Page 85
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Section 7. Conclusion
SECTION 7.
CONCLUSION
The draft Protocol on Marine Pollution from Land-based Sources and Activities (the LBSMP
Protocol) developed under the Cartagena Convention recognizes the need and desire of
governmental and nongovernmental organizations throughout the WCR to address the issues of
agricultural nonpoint source pollution as a major category of land-based source pollution in the
WCR. With this recognition, the next step in effectively reducing or preventing land-based
sources of pollution is to develop and implement a program to educate and aid the agricultural
sectors of the countries and territories of the WCR in the art and science of controlling
agricultural nonpoint source pollution, including implementation of BMPs. The need to improve
the institutional structures, managerial performance, and technical expertise of the small farm
sector is evident (CCA and IRF, 1991); however, participation by the large commercial
production plantations is also necessary. Currently, the WCR is characterized by a lack of
sufficient incentives, extension services, soil conservation investment subsidies, and marketing
assistance to further diversify the agricultural base away from its current emphasis on annual
subsistence and semiperennial export crops (CCA and IRF, 1991). Furthermore, and perhaps
most importantly, the prevalence of land tenure insecurity among small farmers, who in the
absence of other incentives are unwilling to pursue costly land conservation strategies (CCA and
IRF, 1991), inhibits the implementation of a BMP program that, in the long term, could lower
farmers' production costs and improve production yields.
Educating farmers about the costs and benefits of implementing just one or two low-cost, low-
tech BMPs has the potential to prevent the degradation of the coastal and marine environment of
the WCR. Depending on the existing conditions of the site, the implementation of BMPs can be
an economically viable solution to runoff problems. One or two BMPs used in conjunction can
prevent runoff of a variety of land-based agricultural pollutants (Table 7-1). The BMPs do not
have to be expensive or technologically advanced. For example, mulching can prevent soil
erosion. Mulch can be obtained by composting animal waste and vegetative solid waste.
Compost used as a mulch provides a natural fertilizer to enhance crop growth and stabilizes soils.
This approach reduces the use of inorganic fertilizers. Therefore, two BMPs--mulching and
composting--can reduce soil erosion, the runoff of animal waste and solid waste, and the use of
inorganic fertilizers.
Other issues and concerns within the WCR that require resolution if a BMP program is to be
effective include the inadequacy of quantitative data on agrochemicals (importation, use, impacts)
upon which to base informed decisions. At present, a failure to effectively implement existing
pesticide legislation or to provide up-to-date pesticide control regulations and monitoring
procedures is apparent (CCA and IRF, 1991). Additionally, not only do quantitative data
regarding agrochemicals not exist but quantitative data regarding the water quality of the region
are minimal. Although limited data are available, a baseline needs to be established to effectively
quantify the success or, possibly, the failure of implementing a BMP program.
Finally, the establishment of consistent and adequate land use planning or zoning restrictions in
the agricultural sector is needed to ensure the continued availability of environmentally suitable
and economically productive lands for cultivation.
United Nations Environment Programme
Page 105
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Glossary
Table 7-1. Agricultural BMPs that can be applied to various management measures
Management
BMPs
Measures
Structural
Nonstructural
Erosion and Sediment
terraces, diversions, sediment
Education, water management, ground cover
Control
basins, contour farming, wind
(conservation cover/stabilization, cover crop,
erosion controls, field borders, filter
critical area planting, delayed seedbed
strips, grassed waterways, contour
operation, indigenous weed management,
drains, fencing, sediment basins,
mulching, heavy use area protection, residue
stream crossings, sediment fences
use) conservation tillage, strip-cropping, crop
rotation, conservation cropping, buffer zones,
water management, good housekeeping
practices, deferred grazing, leguminous plants
in rotation, proper grazing management,
livestock exclusion
Nutrient Management
terraces, diversions, sediment
Education, water management, nutrient
basins, contour farming, wind
management plan, good housekeeping
erosion controls, field borders, filter
practices, plant and soil analysis, ground cover
strips, grassed waterways, contour
(conservation cover/stabilization, cover crop,
drains, sediment basins, stream
critical area planting, delayed seedbed
crossings, sediment fences
operation, indigenous weed management,
mulching, heavy use area protection, residue
use), proper application of nitrogen and
phosphorus, realistic yield goals, use of natural
fertilizers, leguminous plants in rotation,
manure management, waste utilization, buffer
zones, composting, waste storage ponds
Pesticide Management
terraces, diversions, sediment
Education, water management, integrated pest
basins, contour farming, wind
management, good housekeeping practices,
erosion controls, field borders, filter
nutrient and soil analysis, plant and soil
strips, grassed waterways, contour
analysis, ground cover (conservation
drains, sediment basins, stream
cover/stabilization, cover crop, critical area
crossings, sediment fences
planting, delayed seedbed operation,
indigenous weed management, mulching,
heavy use area protection, residue use), buffer
zones
Pathogens
terraces, diversions, sediment
Education, water management, waste
basins, field borders, filter strips,
utilization, manure management, livestock
grassed waterways, contour drains,
exclusion, deferred grazing, heavy use area
sediment basins, stream crossings,
protection, critical area planting, composting,
sediment fences, terraces,
conservation cover/stabilization, critical area
diversions, grassed waterways,
planting, mulching, designated feeding and
waste storage ponds, fencing
watering areas, buffer zones
Solid Waste
catchment basins, fencing
Education, integrated waste management,
Management
composting
Source: Adapted from USEPA (1993).
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 87
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Glossary
GLOSSARY
Agriculture
Cultivating soil, producing crops, and/or raising livestock.
Best management practice (BMP) A practice or combination of practices that are determined to be the
most effective and practicable (including technological, economic, and institutional
considerations) means of controlling point and nonpoint pollutants at levels
compatible with environmental quality goals (USEPA, 1993).
Composting
A controlled process of degrading organic matter by microorganisms (USEPA,
1993). Controlled methods of composting include mechanical mixing and aerating,
ventilating the materials by dropping them through a vertical series of aerated
chambers, or placing the compost in piles out in the open air and mixing it or turning
it periodically (USEPA, 1996).
Contour
An imaginary line on the land connecting points of the same elevation; a line drawn
on a map to show the location of points at the same elevation; a series of such
contours serving to delineate the topography of the land (USVI Conservation District,
1995).
Cover crop
A close-growing crop grown primarily for the purpose of protecting and improving
soil between periods of regular crop production or between trees and vines in
orchards and vineyards (USEPA, 1993).
Crop residue
The portion of a plant or crop left in the field after harvest (USEPA, 1993).
Crop rotation
The growing of different crops in recurring succession on the same land (USEPA,
1993).
Deposition
The accumulation of material dropped out of the transporting agent (water or wind)
due to the slowing of the travel of that agent (USVI Conservation District, 1995).
Disturbed area
An area where the natural vegetative and soil cover has been removed or altered and
that is, therefore, susceptible to erosion (USVI Conservation District, 1995).
Diversion
A channel, embankment, or other man-made structure constructed to divert water
from one area to another (USEPA, 1993).
Erosion
Wearing away of the land surface by running water, glaciers, winds, and waves. The
term erosion is usually preceded by a definitive term denoting the type or source of
erosion such as gully erosion, sheet erosion, or bank erosion (USEPA, 1993).
Eutrophication The process by which a body of water becomes rich in dissolved nutrients
(specifically, nitrogen and phosphorus), promoting the overgrowth of aquatic
vegetation and leading to a subsequent deficiency in dissolved oxygen (USVI
Conservation District, 1995).
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 88
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Glossary
Fertilizer
Materials such as nitrogen and phosphorus that provide nutrients for plants (USVI
Conservation District, 1995); any organic or inorganic material of natural or synthetic
origin that is added to a soil to supply elements essential to plant growth (USEPA,
1993).
Habitat
The sum total of environmental conditions of a specific place that is occupied by an
organism, a population, or a community (UNEP, 1996).
Herbicide
A chemical substance designed to kill or inhibit the growth of plants, especially
weeds (USEPA, 1993).
Infiltration
The penetration of water through the ground surface into subsurface soil (USEPA,
1993).
Insecticide
A pesticide compound specifically used to kill or control the growth of insects
(USEPA, 1993).
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) A pest population management system that anticipates and
prevents pests from reaching damaging levels by using all suitable tactics including
natural enemies, pest-resistant plants, cultural management, and the judicious use of
pesticides, leading to an economically sound and environmentally safe agriculture
(USEPA, 1993).
Irrigation
Application of water to lands for agricultural purposes (USEPA, 1993).
Leaching
The removal from the soil in solution of the more soluble materials by percolating
waters (USEPA, 1993).
Legume
A member of a large family that includes many valuable food and forage species,
such as peas, beans, peanuts, clovers, alfalfas, sweet clovers, lespedezas, vetches, and
kudzu (USEPA, 1993).
Livestock
Domestic animals (USEPA, 1993).
Manure
The fecal and urinary defecation of livestock; may include spilled feed, bedding
litter, or soil (USEPA, 1993).
Nonpoint source pollution Pollutants emanating from an unconfined or unchanneled source, including
agricultural runoff, drainage, or seepage, and air contamination from landfills or
surface impoundments (UNEP, 1996).
Nutrients
Elements, or compounds, essential as raw materials for organism growth and
development, such as carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, etc. (USEPA, 1993).
Perennial plant
A plant that has a life span of 3 or more years (USEPA, 1993).
Pesticide
Any chemical agent used for control of plant or animal pests. Pesticides include
insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, nematocides, and rodenticides.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 89
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Glossary
Pollutants
Dredged spoil, solid waste, incinerator residue, sewage, garbage, sewage sludge,
munitions, chemical wastes, geological materials, radioactive materials, heat,
wrecked or discarded equipment, rock, sand, cellar dirt, and industrial, municipal,
and agricultural waste discharged into water (Section 502(6) of the Clean Water Act
as amended by the Water Quality Act of 1987).
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 90
CEP Technical Report No. 41
References Cited
Point source pollution Any pollution from a confined and discrete conveyance such as a pipe, ditch,
channel tunnel, well, fissure, container, rolling stock, concentrated animal feeding
operation, or vessel or other floating craft (UNEP, 1996)
Raceme
A long flower cluster on which individual flowers each bloom on a small stalk all
along a common, larger, central stalk (Niering, 1992). Bananas are the flower of a
banana tree.
Runoff
Water which, having fallen, flows across the surface of the ground, picking up
materials such as soil, agricultural chemicals, and other transportable materials and
continuing into a watercourse (UNEP, 1996).
Sediment
The product of erosion processes; the solid material, both mineral and organic, that is
in suspension, is being transported, or has been moved from its site of origin by air,
water, gravity, or ice (USEPA, 1993).
Sedimentation
The accumulation of earthly matter (soil and mineral particles) washed into a river or
other water body (normally by erosion) that settles on the bottom (UNEP, 1996).
Siltation
The process by which silt or mud is deposited in a reservoir, lake, seabed, river, or
overflow area. The deposition or accumulation of silt.
Slope
The degree of deviation of a surface from horizontal, measured as a percentage, as a
numerical ratio, or in degrees (USEPA, 1993).
Tillage
The operation of implements through the soil to prepare seedbeds and rootbeds,
control weeds and brush, aerate the soil, and cause faster breakdown of organic
matter and minerals to release plant foods (USEPA, 1993).
Tilth
The physical condition of the soil as related to its ease of tillage, its fitness as a
seedbed, and its impedance to seedling emergence and root penetration (USEPA,
1994).
Topography
The physical features of a surface area including its relief (or slope), relative
elevations, and the position of natural and man-made features (USVI Con-servation
District, 1995).
Turbidity
The cloudiness of water used as a measure of the amount of particles (suspended
sediment and other particles) in a water body (USVI Conservation District, 1995).
Waste
Material that has no original value or no value for the ordinary or main purpose or
use; damaged or defective articles of manufacture; or superfluous or rejected matter
or refuse (USEPA, 1993).
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 91
CEP Technical Report No. 41
References Cited
REFERENCES CITED
Aldedge, J.E. 1988. Demonstration and Extension of Soil and Water Conservation Principles in Latin
America. In Conservation Farming on Steep Lands, ed. W.C. Moldenhauer and N.W. Hudson,
pp. 166-171. Soil and Water Conservation Society, Iowa.
Altieri, M.A. 1991. Sustainable Agricultural Development in Latin America: Exploring the Possibilities.
Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 39(1 & 2): 1-21.
Archer, A.B. 1987. The Impact of Land-based Sources of Pollution on the Marine Environment. South
and West Coast Sewerage Project, Barbados.
Bottcher, A.B., F.T. Izuno, and E.A. Hanlon. Undated. Procedural Guide for the Development of Farm-
Level Best Management Practice Plans for Phosphorus Control in the Everglades Agricultural
Area, Version 1.1. Circular 1177. University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service,
Gainesville, Florida.
Caribbean Conservation Association (CCA) and the Island Resources Foundation (IRF). 1991. Environ-
mental Agenda for the 1990's: A Synthesis of the Eastern Caribbean Country Environmental
Profile Series. Caribbean Conservation Association and The Island Resources Foundation, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Coté, R.P. 1988. The Management of Land-based Sources of Pollutants in Small Island States: The
Caribbean Case. School for Resource and Environmental Studies, Dalhousie University,
Halifax, Nova Scotia.
DeGeorges, P.A. 1990. Land-based Pollution and Its Impact on Coral Reefs and Related Ecosystems:
The Caribbean Experience Implications for East African Coastal Tourism. U.S. Agency for
International Development, East and Southern Africa.
Diamante, J., M. Varela, B. Wood-Thomas, and P. Gelabert. 1991. Background Paper: Land-based
Sources (LBS) of Pollution as the Dominant Marine Pollution Problem in the Wider Caribbean
Region. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of International Activities, Caribbean
Field Office.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 1994. Weed Management for
Developing Countries. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
Gajraj, A.M. 1981. Threats to the Terrestrial Resources of the Caribbean. Ambio 10(6): 307-311.
The Government of Belize. 1996. Belize: National Environmental Action Plan. The Government of
Belize.
Graves, R.E. 1992. Animal Manure--Managing Sheep and Goat Manure. Pennsylvania State
University, College Park.
Gumbs, F.A. 1981. Agriculture in the Wider Caribbean. Ambio (10)6: 335-339.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 92
CEP Technical Report No. 41
References Cited
Gumbs, F.A. 1993. Tillage Methods and Soil and Water Conservation Methods in the Caribbean. Soil
and Tillage Research 27: 341-354.
Hernández, C.E. 1997. A Systems Method for Evaluating the Sustainability of Ag-Production: An
Evaluation of Banana Production in Costa Rica. Ph.D. diss., Michigan State University,
Lansing.
Hernández, C.E., and S.G. Witter. 1996. Evaluating and Managing the Environmental Impact of Banana
Production in Costa Rica: A Systems Approach. Ambio 25(3): 171-178.
Hoagland, P., M.E. Schumacher, and A.G. Gaines, Jr. 1995. Toward an Effective Protocol on Land-
Based Marine Pollution in the Wider Caribbean Region. Technical Report No. WHOI-95-10.
Marine Policy Center, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, Woods Hole, Massachusetts.
Hwang, S.W., J. Alwang, and G.W. Norton. 1994. Soil Conservation Practices and Farm Income in the
Dominican Republic. Agricultural Systems 46: 59-77.
Jaramillo, R.C. 1986. Banana and Plantain Production in Latin America and the Caribbean. In Banana
and Plantain Breeding Strategies, Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research,
Cairns, Australia, October 13-17, 1986, pp. 39-43.
Latin American and Caribbean Commission on Development and Environment (LACCDE). 1990. Our
Own Agenda. United Nations Development Programme.
Library of Congress. 1987. Islands of the Commonwealth Caribbean: A Regional Study. Ed. S.M.
Meditz and D.M. Hanratty. Library of Congress, Washington, DC.
Lilly, J.P. 1995. Best Management Practices for Agricultural Nutrients. Publication No. AG-439-20.
North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service, North Carolina State University, North Carolina.
Lilly, J.P. 1996. Agriculture and Coastal Water Quality. Publication No. AG-439-10. North Carolina
Cooperative Extension Service, North Carolina State University, North Carolina.
Manrique, L.A. 1993. Soil Management and Conservation in the Tropics: Indigenous and Adapted
Technology. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 24(13&14): 1617-1644.
Myers, C.F. 1985. Food Production and Environmental Quality: Agricultural Nonpoint Source Issues.
In Agricultural Waste Utilization and Management, Proceedings of the Fifth International
Symposium on Agricultural Wastes, Chicago Illinois, December 16-17, 1985, pp.16-18.
Niering, W.A. 1992. Wetlands. National Audubon Society. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. New York.
North Carolina State University. 1984. Best Managment Practices for Agricultural Nonpoint Source
Control: IV. Pesticides. North Carolina State University, National Water Quality Evaluation
Project, Raleigh, NC. Cited in USEPA, 1993.
Ongley, E.D. 1996. Control of Water Pollution. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 55. Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 93
CEP Technical Report No. 41
References Cited
Palada, M.C. 1992. Soil Moisture Conservation Methods for Sustainable Agriculture in the U.S. Virgin
Islands. Workshop on Drip Irrigation, Cooperative Extension Service, University of the Virgin
Islands, St. Thomas, USVI. January 30, 1992.
Rainey, W.E., E.D. Pierson, and E.L. Towle. 1987. Dominica Banana Rehabilitation Project Pesticide
Assessment: Final Report on the Impact on Dominican Wildlife of Pesticides Used in the Banana
Disease Control Program of the Dominica Banana Marketing Association (DBMA). Island
Resources Foundation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Reijntjes, C., B. Haverkort, and A. Waters-Bayer. 1992. Farming for the Future: An Introduction to
Low-External Input and Sustainable Agriculture. Macmillan, London.
Ryder, R. 1994. Farmer Perception of Soils in the Mountains of the Dominican Republic. Mountain
Research and Development 14(3): 261-266.
Sain, G.E., and H.J. Barreto. 1996. The adoption of soil conservation technology in El Salvador: Linking
productivity and conservation. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 51(4): 313-321.
Sentis, I.P. 1992. Soil Conservation Constraints on Sustained Agricultural Productivity in Tropical Latin
America. In Soil Conservation for Survival, ed. K. Tato and H. Hurni, pp. 65-77. Soil and
Water Conservation Society, Iowa.
Sheng, T.C. 1988. Demonstrating Conservation Practices on Steep Lands in Jamaica. In Conservation
Farming on Steep Lands, ed. W.C. Moldenhauer and N.W. Hudson, pp. 207-214. Soil and Water
Conservation Society, Iowa.
Sheng, T.C. 1992. Conservation Extension with Small Farmers in Developing Countries. In Soil
Conservation for Survival, ed. K. Tato and H. Hurni, pp. 277-283. Soil and Water Conservation
Society, Iowa.
Silva, H. 1994. Solid Waste Management. In IOC Workshop Report No. 109, IOC, San Jose, Costa
Rica, April 14, 1994, p. 16.
Sweeten, J.M. 1993. Groundwater Quality Protection for Livestock Feeding Operation. Texas A&M
Unviersity.
Tinoco, J.G. 1994. Impact of Pollution on Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Generated by the Utilization
of Pesticides on Rice Crops in Cartagena, Colombia. In IOC Workshop Report No. 109, IOC,
San Jose, Costa Rica, April 14, 1994, p. 8.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 1985. Protection of the Marine Environment Against
Pollution from Land-based Sources: Montreal Guidelines. Environmental Policy and Law 14(2):
77-83. Cited in Coté, 1988.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 1990. Regional Seas Assessment. CEP Technical
Report No. 121. United Nations Environment Programme Caribbean Environment Programme,
Kingston, Jamaica. Cited in Diamante et al., 1991.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 1991. Background Document for the Development of
a Protocol Concerning Land-Based Sources of Marine Pollution to the Cartagena Convention for
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 94
CEP Technical Report No. 41
References Cited
the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region.
Ninth Meeting of the Monitoring Committee on the Action Plan for the Caribbean Environment
Programme and Special Meeting of the Bureau of Contracting Parties to the Convention for the
Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region.
Kingston, Jamaica.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 1994a. Guidelines for Sediment Control Practices in
the Insular Caribbean. United Nations Environment Programme Caribbean Environment
Programme, Kingston, Jamaica.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 1994b. Regional Overview of Land-Based Sources of
Pollution in the Wider Caribbean Regions. CEP Technical Report No. 33. United Nations
Environment Programme Caribbean Environment Programme, Kingston, Jamaica.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 1996. Guidelines for Integrated Planning and
Management of Coastal and Marine Areas in the Wider Caribbean. United Nations Environment
Programme Caribbean Environment Programme, Kingston, Jamaica.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1993. Guidance Specifying Management
Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. EPA-840-B-92-002. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1994. Terms of Environment. EPA175-B-
94-075. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Undated. Managing Nonpoint Source
Pollution from Agriculture, Pointer No. 6. EPA841-F-96-004F. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, DC.
U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI) Conservation District. 1995. Virgin Islands Environmental Protection
Handbook: A Guide to Assist in the Implementation of Environmental Protection Laws of the
United States Virgin Islands. University of the Virgin Islands, Cooperative Extension Service.
White, T.A., and J.L. Jickling. 1995. Peasants, Experts, and Land Use in Haiti: Lessons from Indigenous
and Project Technology. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation: 7-14.
Williams, L.S., and B.J. Walter. 1988. Controlled-Erosion Terraces in Venezuela. In Conservation
Farming on Steep Lands, ed. W.C. Moldenhauer and N.W. Hudson, pp. 177-187. Soil and Water
Conservation Society, Iowa.
Witter, S.G., M.P. Robotham, and D.A. Carrasco. 1996. Sustainable Adoption of Conservation Practices
by Upland Farmers in the Dominican Republic. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 51(3):
249-254.
World Resources Institute. 1992. World Resource (1992-1993). Prepared in collaboration with UNEP
and UNDP. Oxford University Press, New York, New York. Cited in UNEP, 1994b.
Yelverton, F.H. 1993. Protecting Water Quality and Reducing Pesticide Exposure. In 1993 Cotton
Information. North Carolina State University, North Carolina.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 95
CEP Technical Report No. 41
References Cited
York, A.C., K.L. Edmisten, G.C. Naderman, and J.S. Bacheler. 1993. No-Till Cotton Production. In
1993 Cotton Information. North Carolina State University, North Carolina.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page 96
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Appendix A. Abstracts by Title
Title:
The adoption of soil conservation technology in El Salvador: Linking productivity and
conservation
Authors:
Gustavo E. Sain and Hector J. Barreto
Source:
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 51(4): 313-321, 1996.
Abstract:
Soil conservation practices were successfully disseminated and adopted among farmers in
Guaymango, El Salvador, whereas farmers in two similar areas failed to adopt them.
Adoption was successful in Guaymango for two reasons. First, a recommendation was
developed that combined both productivity-improving and soil conservation components.
Second, these components were linked by economic and institutional incentives that
encouraged adoption of both components. Issues crucial to long-term success of soil
conservation recommendations are discussed, particularly the need for the
recommendation to be compatible with the farming system and effective in minimizing
soil degradation. Potential implications for research, extension, and policy are examined,
with emphasis on technical requirements for developing system-management
recommendations embodying productivity and conservation components.
Title:
Agriculture and Coastal Water Quality
Author:
J. Paul Lilly
Source:
North Carolina State University, North Carolina, 1996.
Abstract:
Degraded streams cannot support (or can only partially support) their original functions.
Many are unsuitable as sources of drinking water and can no longer sustain certain forms
of marine life, and still others have become unattractive to recreational users.
Title:
Agriculture in the Wider Caribbean
Author: F.A.
Gumbs
Source:
Ambio, Vol. 10, No. 6, pp. 335-339, 1981.
Abstract:
Agricultural production has been declining in the Caribbean, and some parts of the region
are now dependent on imports of food. A counterproductive system of land tenure and
heavy dependence on export-crop monoculture are two of the factors involved.
Title:
Animal Manure--Managing Sheep and Goat Manure
Author: R.E.
Graves
Source:
Pennsylvania State University, 1992.
Abstract:
This is one in a series of fact sheets produced by the Pennsylvania State University.
Title:
Background Document for the Development of a Protocol Concerning Land-Based
Sources of Marine Pollution to the Cartagena Convention for the Protection and
Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region
Author:
United Nations Environment Programme.
Source:
United Nations Environment Programme, Kingston, Jamaica, 1991.
Abstract:
This document was prepared by the Regional Coordinating Unit of the Caribbean
Environment Programme as a contribution to the initiative of the Advisory Committee on
Protection of the Sea (ACOPS) for a global legal framework for the regulation of land-
based sources of marine pollution. This initiative was undertaken by ACOPS as part of
the process leading to the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development.
Title:
Background Paper: Land-based Sources (LBS) of Pollution as the Dominant Marine
Pollution Problem in the Wider Caribbean Region
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page A-97
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Appendix A. Abstracts by Title
Authors:
J. Diamante, M. Varela, B. Wood-Thomas, and P. Gelabert.
Source:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of International Activities, Caribbean
Field
Office,
1991.
Abstract:
The lack of adequate marine water quality survey and monitoring data in the WCR
delayed for some time the recognition of the magnitude of the total contribution to
regional marine pollution problems from land-based sources of all types of pollution.
The growing accumulation of site-by-site surveys on a country-by-country basis of
identifiable land-based sources and the observable relationship of these sources to nearby
marine environmental damage and wider regional implications have caused a general
consensus to emerge among experts that as much as 90 percent or more of the WCR's
marine pollution problems are attributable to land-based sources of all kinds.
Title:
Banana and Plantain Production in Latin America and the Caribbean
Author:
Ramiro C. Jaramillo
Source: In
Banana and Plantain Breeding Strategies, Australian Centre for International
Agricultural Research, Cairns, Australia, October 13-17, 1986, pp. 39-43.
Abstract:
The cultivation of banana and plantain in tropical America and the Caribbean countries
has a special importance, not only because they are part of the diet, but also in view of the
economic benefits derived from the production activities, through contribution to the
gross national product, the establishment of employment sources, and the generation of
foreign currency and fiscal earnings.
Title:
Belize National Environmental Action Plan
Author:
The Government of Belize
Source:
The Government of Belize, June, 1996.
Abstract:
This National Environmental Action Plan aims at providing an overview of the major
environmental issues facing Belize and at guiding the government in the prudent use and
management of natural resources. It focuses on the issues, policies, and programs that
are considered most critical to Belize. The document should provide a blueprint for the
Government of Belize to address the environment problems in Belize and to identify
possible areas of assistance that could be provided by donor agencies.
Title:
Best Management Practices for Agricultural Nutrients
Author: J.P.
Lilly
Source:
Publication Number AG-439-20. North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service,
North Carolina State University, Raleigh, 1995.
Abstract:
About 20 elemental nutrients are essential for plant growth. Some of these nutrients are
supplied naturally by air, water, and soil. Fertilizers and manures are used to supplement
the natural supplies. When nutrients are used correctly, they are very beneficial, but in
the wrong place at the wrong time, they become pollutants. Both ground water and
surface water are very vulnerable to pollution. Water is one of our most valuable
resources, and protecting it is an important concern.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page A-98
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Appendix A. Abstracts by Title
Title:
Conservation Extension with Small Farmers in Developing Countries
Author:
Ted C. Sheng
Source: In
Soil Conservation for Survival, ed. K. Tato and H. Hurni, pp. 277-283. Soil and
Water Conservation Society, Iowa, 1992.
Abstract:
Conservation extension is extremely important where the majority of the conservation
work is to be done by farmers. It is also an extremely difficult task where hundreds or
thousands of small farmers are involved in a project and where government staff and
resources are limited.
Title:
Control of Water Pollution. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 55
Author:
Edwin D. Ongley
Source:
Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN, Rome, Italy, 1996.
Abstract:
This publication deals specifically with the role of agriculture in the field of freshwater
quality. Categories of nonpoint source impacts--specifically sediment, pesticides,
nutrients, and pathogens--are identified together with their ecological, public health, and,
as appropriate, legal consequences. Recommendations are made on evaluation
techniques and control measures. Much of the scientific literature on agricultural impacts
on surface and groundwater quality is from developed countries, reflecting broad
scientific concern and, in some cases, regulatory attention since the 1970s. The scientific
findings and management principles are, however, generally applicable worldwide.
Title:
Controlled-Erosion Terraces in Venezuela
Author:
L.S. Williams and B.J. Walter
Source: In
Conservation Farming on Steep Lands, ed. W.C. Moldenhauer and N.W. Hudson,
pp. 177-187. Soil and Water Conservation Society, Iowa, 1988.
Abstract:
In 1961 the Ministry of Agriculture in Venezuela initiated a major soil conservation
program in several states in the central and western Andes. One of the projects focused
on the construction of agricultural terraces in small highland valleys. Terracing was
accomplished by building strong rock walls along the contours of the slopes and allowing
the normal actions of erosion and cultivation to level the surface. This "controlled-
erosion" construction method resulted in terraces large and stable enough to allow use of
animals or machines for cultivation. Controlled-erosion terraces are durable, and they
may be suitable where long-term soil conservation is a prime objective.
Title:
Demonstrating Conservation Practices on Steep Lands in Jamaica
Author: T.C.
Sheng
Source: In
Conservation Farming on Steep Lands, ed. W.C. Moldenhauer and N.W. Hudson,
pp. 207-214. Soil and Water Conservation Society, Iowa. 1988.
Abstract:
This paper discusses the experience of setting up a demonstration project on public land
(the Smithfield Demonstration Center and explains its results and impacts.
Title:
Demonstration and Extension of Soil and Water Conservation Principles in Latin
America
Author: J.E.
Aldedge
Source: In
Conservation Farming on Steep Lands, ed. W.C. Moldenhauer and N.W. Hudson,
pp. 166-171. Soil and Water Conservation Society, Iowa, 1988.
Abstract:
The primary intent of this paper is to offer some conservation ideas, philosophy,
principles, and guidelines for individuals and groups working in developing countries.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page A-99
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Appendix A. Abstracts by Title
The soil and water conservation system described has been applied in many areas in
Central and South America and in the Caribbean.
Title:
Dominica Banana Rehabilitation Project Pesticide Assessment
Authors:
William E. Rainey, Elizabeth D. Pierson, and Edward L. Towle.
Source:
Final Report on the Impact on Dominican Wildlife of Pesticides Used in the Banana
Disease Control Program of the Dominica Banana Marketing Association (DBMA).
Island Resources Foundation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, 1987.
Abstract:
This report reviews the geographical pattern of pesticide use in the banana industry,
toxicology of the pesticides emphasizing data relevant to wildlife, and the major wildlife
groups on Dominica, noting species of special concern. Observations on land and
pesticide use in the banana industry relating to wildlife, how the use of habitat (including
agricultural areas) use by wildlife influences the likelihood of pesticide exposure, and
evaluation of the impact of the banana industry on wildlife are presented.
Title:
Environmental Agenda for the 1990's: A Synthesis of the Eastern Caribbean Country
Environmental Profile Series
Author:
CCA and IRF
Source:
Caribbean Conservation Association and The Island Resources Foundation. St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands, 1991.
Abstract:
This summary document attempts to synthesize the principle elements of a series of six
Country Environmental Profiles and present the main issues and recommendations in an
easily assimilated format. The approaches and recommendations offered in the document
are intended to help in the creation of policy that will bring to the region the type of
development that is sustainable.
Title:
Evaluating and Managing the Environmental Impact of Banana Production in Costa
Rica: A Systems Approach
Authors:
Carlos E. Hernández and Scott G. Witter
Source:
Ambio, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 171-178, 1996.
Abstract:
This paper presents an overview of banana production in Costa Rica based on the
importance of bananas as an export crop and the environmental impacts associated with
their production. The paper takes a systems approach to identifying major environmental
problems associated with banana production. Eco-management alternatives are
recommended, based on what has been learned managing a 306-ha banana plantation at
EARTH College. It is hoped that these experiences will help bring about a more
balanced approach to the exploitation of Costa Rica's natural resources.
Title:
Farmer Perception of Soils in the Mountains of the Dominican Republic
Author: Roy
Ryder
Source:
Mountain Research and Development, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 261-266, 1994.
Abstract:
Scientists concerned with resource management in developing nations have been
surprisingly reluctant to seek opinions of traditional farmers despite growing recognition
of their skills. Farmer classifications of climate, soil, and vegetation can be very
informative. The purpose of this paper is to examine farmer perception of soil in Las
Cuevas, a mountainous region in the Central Cordiller of the Dominican Republic. A
discussion of awareness of soil erosion and local soil taxonomy is followed by a
comparison of opinions held by farmers and scientists on the importance of selected
climatic edaphic criteria for agriculture.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page A-100
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Appendix A. Abstracts by Title
Title:
Farming for the Future: An Introduction to Low-External Input and Sustainable
Agriculture
Authors:
C. Reijntjes, B. Haverkort, and A. Waters-Bayer
Source:
Macmillan, London, 1992.
Abstract:
This document provides examples of indigenous practices illustrating how well farmers
in the tropics learned to manipulate and derive advantage from local resources and
natural processes, applying the principles of agroecology without knowing that this term
exists.
Title:
Food Production and Environmental Quality: Agricultural Nonpoint Source Issues
Author: C.F.
Myers
Source:
Agricultural Waste Utilization and Management, Proceedings of the Fifth International
Symposium on Agricultural Wastes, Chicago Illinois, December 16-17, 1985, pp.16-18.
Abstract:
Providing adequate and economical levels of food production must be accomplished
while ensuring satisfactory environmental quality.
Title:
Groundwater Quality Protection for Livestock Feeding Operations
Author:
J.M. Sweeten
Source:
Texas A&M University, 1993.
Abstract:
This publication summarizes research results and management strategies for ground
water pollution control for open feedlots, holding ponds, and lagoons, and land on which
manure and wastewater are applied.
Title:
Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in
Coastal
Waters. EPA-840-B-92-002.
Author:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Source:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, 1993.
Abstract:
This document contains guidance specifying management measures for sources of
nonpoint pollution in coastal waters. The guidance addresses five source categories of
nonpoint pollution: agriculture, silviculture, urban, marinas, and hydromodification. A
suite of management measures is provided for each source category.
Title:
Guidelines for Integrated Planning and Management of Coastal and Marine Areas
in the Wider Caribbean
Author:
United Nations Environment Programme
Source:
UNEP Caribbean Environment Programme, Kingston, Jamaica, 1996.
Abstract:
The adoption of an integrated approach in the process of planning and management of
coastal and marine resources is fundamental to achieve sustainable development of
coastal areas. Such an approach allows for balanced development of socioeconomic
activities, without compromising the potential and protection of the natural resources.
Title:
Guidelines for Sediment Control Practices in the Insular Caribbean. CEP Technical
Report No. 32.
Author:
United Nations Environment Programme
Source:
UNEP Caribbean Environment Programme, Kingston, Jamaica, 1994.
Abstract:
The purpose of this document is to describe methods of anticipating, assessing, and
minimizing erosion and sediment impacts from site development. It is hoped that by
outlining the processes of erosion and sedimentation, describing the principles behind
erosion and sediment control, and providing examples of effective erosion and sediment
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page A-101
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Appendix A. Abstracts by Title
control strategies, this handbook will support efforts to plan and implement construction
activities in the insular Caribbean with a minimum of environmental damage.
Title:
The Impact of Land-based Sources of Pollution on the Marine Environment
Author:
Arther B. Archer
Source:
South and West Coast Sewerage Project, Barbados, 1987.
Abstract:
This paper provides overviews regarding the environmental and economic features of the
Caribbean combined with information regarding coastal and marine ecosystems. An
overview of land-based pollutants and their impact on coastal ecosystems analyzes
sources of land-based pollution identified or suspected of imposing stresses with
damaging effects on coastal and marine ecosystems.
Title:
Impact of Pollution on Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Generated by the Utilization
of Pesticides on Rice Crops in Cartagena, Colombia
Author: J.G.
Tinoco
Source: In
IOC Workshop Report No. 109, IOC, San Jose, Costa Rica, April 14, 1994, p. 8.,
1994.
Abstract:
In Colombia more than 600 different pesticides are used, which represent near 33,000
tonnes per year. Mainly organochlorates, phosphorates, and carbamates, these substances
are used in banana, cotton, rice, fruit, and other crops along the Magdalena River basin,
the most extensive in the country. This document corresponds to the final report of the
Colombian pilot project carried out by CIOX with the cooperation of INDERENA
(Cartagena) and the support of UNESCO/IOC/UNEP. An inventory, complete and
actualized with qualification of the pesticides used in the Colombian Caribbean rivers, is
given, with special emphasis on the cienaga de la Virgen and its surrounding zone. Also,
organoclorate compound levels in water, sediments, and important commercial species of
the cienaga are analyzed. Measures for the rational use of these compounds and
recommendations to increase the quality of the waters of the cienaga are also presented.
Title:
Land-based Pollution and Its Impact on Coral Reefs and Related Ecosystems: The
Caribbean Experience Implications for East African Coastal Tourism
Author:
Paul A. DeGeorges
Source:
U.S. Agency for International Development, East & Southern Africa, 1990.
Abstract:
Land-based pollution is believed to be the major cause of coral reef degradation
throughout the Caribbean. This is primarily through nutrient enrichment of nearshore
marine waters associated with improperly treated domestic sewage originating from
major urban areas and from tourism developments. The world's tropical waters are
normally nutrient-poor and are ecologically thrown out of balance by this enrichment.
Pollutants associated with agricultural runoff, including sediment, pesticides, and
fertilizers, are believed to be Second in importance in causing coastal degradation second
in importance in causing coastal degradation
Title:
The Management of Land-based Sources of Pollutants in Small Island States: The
Caribbean Case
Author: R.P.
Coté
Source:
School for Resource and Environmental Studies, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova
Scotia.
Abstract:
The increasing attention being given to land-based sources of marine pollutants by
national governments is especially problematic for small island states. In particular,
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page A-102
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Appendix A. Abstracts by Title
pressure to reduce the discharges of persistent chemicals has implications for the
strategies that can be employed in such locations. Water quality standards, emission
standards, and planning approaches, especially siting requirements, can be employed in
the management of land-based sources. This paper argues that the effective application
of these strategies must be supported by appropriate monitoring programs to ensure that
amenities and coastal resources are not being detrimentally affected. Because these
strategies and monitoring programs are scientifically and financially onerous, more
emphasis should be placed on reducing the generation of residuals. Such a policy,
supported by national governments and international development funds, will be
particularly beneficial to small island states in reducing the environmental and health
impacts of land-based sources of marine pollution.
Title:
Managing Nonpoint Source Pollution from Agriculture, Pointer No. 6. EPA841-F-96-
004F.
Author:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Source:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, undated.
Abstract:
This is one in a series of fact sheets regarding nonpoint source pollution.
Title:
No-Till Cotton Production
Author:
Alan C. York, Keith L. Edmisten, George C. Naderman, and Jack S. Bacheler
Source:
1993 Cotton Information. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, 1993.
Abstract:
No-tillage planting is the most effective conservation method to protect against soil
erosion, and in most cases, it is the most practical methodology to adopt to meet the
conservation compliance requirements on erodible soils. No-tillage planting into a
residue offers the additional benefits of conserving moisture on drought-prone soils and
protecting young cotton seedlings from sandblasting.
Title:
Peasants, Experts, and Land Use in Haiti: Lessons from Indigenous and Project
Technology
Author:
T. A. White and J.L. Jickling
Source:
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, pp. 7-14, 1995.
Abstract:
Development planners have frequently identified a lack of appropriate land-use
technology as a key cause of degradation, and consequently, most projects have focused
on encouraging rural people to adopt soil conservation or forestry techniques.
Development experts have gained an appreciation for indigenous farmer knowledge and
local innovations, and a new generation of projects is seeking to develop and promote
techniques that combine the knowledge of both farmers and scientists.
Title:
Procedural Guide for the Development of Farm-Level Best Management Practice Plans
for Phosphorus Control in the Everglades Agricultural Area, Version 1.1. Circular 1177.
Author:
A. B. Bottcher, F.T. Izuno, and E.A. Hanlon
Source:
University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Gainesville, FL, undated.
Abstract:
Heightened concerns in recent years about the impact of the quantity and quality of
drainage waters from the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA) on the Everglades have
prompted the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) to develop both an
EAA regulatory program and plans for a series of storm water treatment areas (STAs).
The procedural guide addresses the concerns regarding the reduction of phosphorus loads
in drainage water leaving the EAA. The information provided can be applied to any
agricultural area composed primarily of organic soils or histosols.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page A-103
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Appendix A. Abstracts by Title
Title:
Protecting Water Quality and Reducing Pesticide Exposure
Author:
Fred H. Yelverton
Source:
1993 Cotton Information. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, 1993.
Abstract:
Measures that can be taken by cotton producers to reduce or minimize pesticide threat to
water quality include crop rotation, proper site selection, the use of thresholds where
available, promoting a healthy and vigorous crop with good cultural practices, and proper
fertilization. Protection both surface and ground water from nutrients and pesticide
residues should be a goal for every farmer.
Title:
Regional Overview of Land-Based Sources of Pollution in the Wider Caribbean
Regions.
CEP Technical Report No. 33
Author: UNEP
Source:
UNEP Caribbean Environment Programme. Kingston, Jamaica, 1994.
Abstract:
This report summarizes the results of the UNEP-CEP Programme for Marine Pollution
Assessment and Control (CEPPOL) activity and provides information on the inventories
of land-based sources of pollution taken in 25 countries of the WCR. This
comprehensive information has been compiled from national land-based source pollution
inventories, mainly from point sources, together with the assessment of the types and
amounts of major pollutants reaching the coastal and marine environment as well as
information on legislative and administrative measures relevant for their control.
Title:
Soil Conservation Constraints on Sustained Agricultural Productivity in Tropical Latin
America
Author:
Ildefonsol Pla Sentis
Source: In
Soil Conservation for Survival, ed. K. Tato and H. Hurni, pp. 277-283. Soil and
Water Conservation Society, Iowa, 1992.
Abstract:
Land degradation, which affects both increase in production and greater productivity per
acre, has emerged as one of the major constraints on further expansion and intensification
of agriculture. There are equally serious off-farm impacts (water pollution,
sedimentation, flooding) associated with on-site soil degradation. Large-scale
introduction of cash crops, sometimes to supply foreign markets, has led to agricultural
intensification and extension to new areas of marginal land, resulting in environmental
impacts in most cases.
Title:
Soil Conservation Practices and Farm Income in the Dominican Republic
Author:
San Won Hwang, Jeffrey Alwang, and George W. Norton
Source:
Agricultural Systems 46 (1994): 59-77.
Abstract:
A method is presented for determining least-cost strategies for meeting soil conservation
targets on small, steeply sloped farms in the Dominican Republic. An easily replicated
farm decision-making model using linear programming was employed to assess the
relative costs of using a variety of erosion control practices including grass strips,
hillside ditches and bench terraces. The effects of agricultural policy reform and secure
land tenure on the cost of reducing erosion were also estimated. Grass strips were found
to be the least costly means of reducing erosion. Policy reforms, in general, will reduce
the cost to the farmer of complying with soil loss restrictions.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page A-104
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Appendix A. Abstracts by Title
Title:
Soil Management and Conservation in the Tropics: Indigenous and Adapted Technology
Author:
Luis A. Manrique
Source:
Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, Vol. 24, No. 13&14, pp. 1617-
1644,
1993.
Abstract:
Past and current soil management and conservation technologies were reviewed to assess
their effectiveness in managing soil erosion in the tropics. Slope management emerged
as the most critical component determining success or failure of efforts to counteract soil
losses and productivity decline. Slope management based on physical structures was
found to be ineffective; combining simple cropping practices such as contour, strip, or
alley cropping with soil management practices, including zero or minimum tillage,
mulching, and green or organic manuring, was found to be highly effective in managing
runoff and soil losses.
Title:
Soil Moisture Conservation Methods for Sustainable Agriculture in the U.S. Virgin
Islands
Author:
Manuel C. Palada
Source:
Workshop on Drip Irrigation, Cooperative Extension Service, University of the Virgin
Islands, St. Thomas, USVI, January 1992.
Abstract:
In semi-arid climates such as the USVI, conserving water and soil moisture is essential
for sustainable crop production. The amount of rainfall received annually in the Virgin
Islands is sufficient to grow many field and vegetable crops if techniques for conserving
water are used.
Title:
Sustainable Adoption of Conservation Practices by Upland Farmers in the Dominican
Republic
Author:
S.G. Witter, M.P. Robotham, and D.A. Carrasco
Source:
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, Vol. 51, No. 3, 249-254, 1996.
Abstract:
This study focuses on Plan Sierra, a large nongovernmental organization located in the
north-central section of the Dominican Republic. Plan Sierra has successfully promoted
the use of soil and water conservation technologies to upland farmers since 1979. This
research is based on data collected from interviews with 161 Plan Sierra farmers
regarding the relationship between planned outreach communication channels, adoption
of conservation practices and sustained use of such practices. The analysis identified a
statistically significant association between farmer interaction with Plan Sierra and the
three outreach communication channels used to gain the adoption and maintenance of soil
and water conservation practices.
Title:
Sustainable Agricultural Development in Latin America: Exploring the Possibilities
Author:
Miguel A. Altieri
Source:
Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, Vol. 39, Nos. 1 and 2, pp. 1-21, 1991.
Abstract:
This paper concentrates on what are perceived as critical issues that should be addressed
if a productive and sustainable agriculture is to be achieved in Latin America. The
attainment of such an agriculture is dependent on new technological innovations, policy
changes, and more socio-equitable economic schemes.
By using several examples of biological control and integrated pest management
programs as case studies, ways of promoting the transition of chemical-intensive
commercial agriculture to low-input management are explored. Similarly, the paper
describes nongovernmental efforts using the agroecological approach to help the great
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page A-105
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Appendix A. Abstracts by Title
mass of resource-poor farmers, mostly confined to marginal soils, hillsides, and rainfed
areas, to achieve year-round food self-sufficiency, reduce their reliance on scarce and
expensive agricultural chemical inputs and develop production systems that rebuild the
productive capacities of their small holdings.
Title:
A Systems Method for Evaluating the Sustainability of Ag-Production: An Evaluation of
Banana Production in Costa Rica
Author: C.E.
Hernández
Source:
Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1997.
Abstract:
This dissertation proposes a method for evaluating the sustainable performance of
agricultural production practices. It uses Costa Rica's banana production industry as a
case to test the method. It presents an overview of banana production in Costa Rica
based on the importance of bananas as an export crop and the environmental and social
impacts associated with their production.
The paper takes a systems approach to define the banana production system and
explicates it with a model. Cause-and-effect relationships are identified. The intensities
of these relationships are derived using hard data when available and expert opinion
when no data exist.
A panel of experts rates the conventional production practices and the alternative
production practices. A mathematical method is structured to aggregate ratings into
sustainable performance indices. Best available alternative practices are recommended,
based on the resulting indices. It is hoped that these recommendations will help bring
about a more balanced approach to the use of Costa Rica's natural and human resources.
Title:
Terms of Environment. EPA175-B-94-075.
Author:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Source:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, 1994
Abstract:
This document is a compilation of definitions of environmental terms.
Title:
Threats to the Terrestrial Resources of the Caribbean
Author:
A. Melville Gajraj
Source:
Ambio, Vol. 10, No. 6, pp. 307-311, 1981.
Abstract:
The most serious constraint encountered in the attempt to meet these objectives is the
inadequacy of the soil resources for agricultural purposes--a problem compounded by
mismanagement. Inappropriate use and mismanagement has led to severe erosion and
loss of fertility.
Title:
Tillage Methods and Soil and Water Conservation Methods in the Caribbean
Author:
F. A. Gumbs
Source:
Soil and Tillage Research, Vol 27, pp. 341-354, 1993.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page A-106
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Appendix B. Site Visits
Abstract:
This review describes the tillage methods and soil conservation methods currently used in
the Commonwealth Caribbean on a range of slopes. A high percentage of the land has
slopes that exceed 20 degrees minimum. In these circumstances, tillage is carried out
with hand tools and is frequently combined with conservation contour drains or/and
barriers of cut vegetation laid across the contour. Many farmers form ridges and furrows
on the contour with hand tools, and a significant number do not use any conservation
measures. Tillage on flat or gently sloping land is done largely by tractor-drawn
implements, and the tillage method is mainly determined by the crop to be grown and the
soil type. The tillage methods used for the cultivation of sugarcane, rice, bananas,
vegetables, and other row crops are described. The agronomic, cultural, and engineering
practices used to conserve the soil against water erosion are also described.
Title:
Toward an Effective Protocol on Land-Based Marine Pollution in the Wider Caribbean
Region. Technical Report WHOI-95-10.
Authors:
P. Hoagland, M.E. Schumacher, and A.G. Gaines, Jr.
Source:
Marine Policy Center, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, Woods Hole, MA, 1995.
Abstract:
In this report, the potential for the design and implementation of an effective protocol
governing the prevention, reduction, and control of land-based sources of marine
pollution in the WCR is analyzed. Lessons learned from a study of other regional
agreements to control land-based marine pollution in the North Sea, Baltic, and
Mediterranean are also included.
Title:
Virgin Islands Environmental Protection Handbook: A Guide to Assist in the
Implementation of Environmental Protection Laws of the United States Virgin Islands
Author:
U.S. Virgin Islands Conservation District
Source:
University of the Virgin Islands, Cooperative Extension Service, 1995.
Title:
Weed Management for Developing Countries
Author:
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Source:
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy, 1994.
Abstract:
Weed control is but one practice that determines the productivity of important crops such
as bananas, cotton, and sugarcane. This document summarizes the problems related to
weeds in these crops and identifies methods of weed management that have practical
relevance for all types of production systems.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page B-107
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Appendix B. Site Visits
SITE VISITS
During the week of November 17, 1997, site visits were conducted in Costa Rica to observe some of the
agricultural best management practices (BMPs) being implemented in tropical climates. Four operations
were observed, and the site visits are summarized below.
EARTH School
The Escuela de Agricultura de la Region Tropical Humida (EARTH School) is a private, nonprofit 4-year
higher educational facility in the eastern coastal plain section of Costa Rica. It was started in 1990. The
majority of the students are from countries throughout Latin America and attend on scholarships. Upon
graduation, the students return to their countries and implement what they have learned at the EARTH
School.
A small banana plantation where students and faculty are researching different pesticide uses, cultivation
practices, harvesting methods, and packing methods was observed. The EARTH School is also
conducting research on ways to control and recycle the solid waste from banana plantations.
Traditionally, banana plantation have produced large volumes of solid waste. Plastic bags are placed over
each banana raceme, and trees are supported with plastic twine. The plastics and the stems from banana
stalks are traditionally discarded in the fields and left to wash into streams, which eventually flow to
coastal waters. The bags and twine can be recycled. The "field waste" (leaf cuttings, prunings, etc.) can
be left on the ground near the banana plants to help control erosion and keep weeds from growing, and the
banana stems can be recycled into paper.
Direccion de Investigation y Extension de al Cańa de Azucar (DIECA)
(Sugarcane Extension Center)
DIECA is doing extensive research in biological pest control for sugarcane. One of the biggest threats to
the sugarcane crop is nematodes. DIECA is doing research on ways to control nematodes and other pests
using a species of wasp that preys on the nematodes during a portion of their life cycle. By using
biological pest controls, the need for chemical pesticides is reduced. In addition, DIECA conducts
outreach activities for farmers and schoolchildren, helping them to understand the value of the land and
the need for using environmentally sound farming practices. DIECA is working with farmers on
implementing ways to control erosion from the sugarcane fields.
Chiquita Banana Plantation
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page B-108
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Chiquita Brands International is working with the Rainforest Alliance to implement the Better Bananas
program. (See Section 5.1.) During a tour of a Chiquita-owned plantation, observers saw how bananas
are cultivated and how Chiquita is implementing the Better Bananas program. A common nonpoint
source pollution problem with banana plantations has been the amount of solid waste produced. The
plastic bags and twine used in banana cultivation and harvest traditionally had been left in the field, from
which they washed away into rivers and out to coastal waters. Chiquita is recycling the plastics and
making a variety of products, such as packaging and shipping materials and "bricks" for walkways in the
plantation to prevent erosion. In the past, waste bananas and crop residue were thrown into canals and
streams, leading to high biological oxygen demand and other water quality problems. During the tour,
observers saw a landfill that Chiquita has constructed to compost organic waste to help prevent water
quality degradation. Chiquita is also actively vegetating the banks of the drainage canals and the
plantation floor to help prevent erosion and increased suspended solids loadings to streams, rivers, and
coastal waters.
Hacienda Juan Vińas
Hacienda Juan Vińas is a large plantation in east-central Costa Rica. Because of the different crops
growing and harvesting cycles, the farm produces both coffee and sugar. The BMPs and other measures
being used by Juan Vińas include the following:
· Using fertilizers that the plantation produces from organic waste material, such as the
shells of coffee beans. These are mixed with poultry guano and some inorganic
fertilizers and used on the farm as well as sold to other farmers in the area.
· Planting fast-growing vegetation along unstable banks to help prevent erosion.
· Constructing an upgraded wastewater treatment plant for the sugar processing
operation.
· Leaving natural vegetative buffers along waterways and along very steep slopes.
· Planting shade trees in portions of the coffee fields. Although this is done primarily
to enhance the flavor of the coffee, it also provides additional habitat.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-109
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Institution
Programs/Projects
United Nations Agencies:
Pan American Health Organization (PAHO)
·
Environmental Health in Sustainable Tourism Development
United Nations Development Programme
·
Land Use Planning, Human Settlement and Terrestrial
(UNDP)
Protection Capacity 21 Fund
United Nations Centre for Human
·
Land Use Planning and Human Settlements Development-
Settlements (UNCHS)
Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS)
United Nations Food and Agriculture
·
Tropical Forestry Action Plans (CARICOM)
Organization (FAO)
United Nations Economic Commission for
·
Environmental Management Issues in Tourism
Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
·
Regional Sewage Disposal and Coastal Conservation
Studies
United Nations Environment Programme
·
Caribbean Environment Programme
(UNEP)
Multilateral Development Institutions:
Caribbean Development Bank (CDB)
·
National Environmental Action Plans (NEAPs)
·
OECW Waste Management Project
·
Pesticide Pollution in the Windward Islands
European Investment Bank (EIB)
·
OECS Waste Management
European Community (EC)
·
CARIFORUM Regional Environment Programme under
Lomé IV
Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)
·
Management of Coastal/Marine Resources--Wider
Caribbean
Organization of American States (OAS)
·
Natural Resources Management--includes parks, protected
areas system plans
·
Environmental and Tourism Awareness
World Bank
·
National Environmental Action Plans (NEAPs)
·
OECW Waste Management Project
·
Wider Caribbean Initiative for Ship-generated Waste
(WCISW)
Bilateral Development Agencies:
British Development Division (BDD)
·
Renewable Natural Resources Programme-Tropical
Forestry Action Plans
·
National Environmental Action Plans
Canadian International Development
·
Caribbean Basin Management Training
Agency (CIDA)
·
Natural Resources Management Data Base Project-
OECS/Barbados/BVI
·
Environmental Training Programme
German Agency for Technical Cooperation
·
Public Health Education-CARICOM countries
(GTZ)
·
Information System Development-CEHI
Japanese Policy and Human Resources
·
National Environmental Action Plans (NEAPs) through
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-110
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Development Fund (PHRD)
World Bank-OECS
United States Agency for International
·
Environment and Coastal Resources Management
Development
(ENCORE)-OECS
·
Eastern Caribbean Policy Project-OECS
Regional Environmental Institutions:
United Nations Environment Programme,
·
Coordination of UNEP's Regional Seas Programme for the
Regional Coordinating Unit for the
Caribbean; support for Caribbean Environment Programme
Caribbean (UNEP/RCU)
(CEO)
UNDP
·
Coordination of GEF NGO Small Grants Activity
University of the West Indies:
·
Department of Biology,
·
Courses in environment-related studies
Engineering, Geology, and
Zoology
·
Research in marine resources conservation and
·
Marine Resources and
management
Environment Management
Programme (MAREMP)
·
Analysis of environmental laws and regulations
·
Caribbean Law Institute (CLI)
·
Training, research and information systems development in
·
Centre for Environment and
environment and development
Development (UWICED)
Caribbean Environmental Health Institute
·
Provision of technical and advisory services in
(CEHI)
environmental management (e.g., water supply, liquid and
solid waste management, pesticides control); collection and
dissemination of environmental data
Escuela de Agricultura de la Region
·
Education and research in sustainable agriculture and
Tropical Humeda (EARTH School)
natural resource management
OECS
·
Coordination of natural resources management programs
Natural Resources Management Unit
for the OECS
(NRMU)
Institute of Marine Affairs
·
Research in marine resources management and pollution
control
Tropical Forestry Action Programme
·
Technical assistance for national forestry resources,
(TFAP)
protected areas, and wildlife management programs
Caribbean Conservation Association (CCA)
·
Advocacy, project preparation and implementation,
institution building, public awareness, and education
Caribbean Natural Resources Institute
·
Research, training, and extension, in the field of community
(CANARI)
participation and comanagement of natural resources
Caribbean Agricultural Research and
·
Covers environmental impacts in the course of its research
Development Institute (CARDI)
on agricultural activities
CARICOM Fisheries Resources
·
Studies the marine fisheries resources of the region
Assessment and Management Programme
(CFRAMP)
Inter American Institute for Agriculture
·
Agriculture and resources development
Cooperation (IICA)
Tropical Agriculture Center for Research
·
Agriculture and natural resources research and training
and Education (CATIE)
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-111
CEP Technical Report No. 41
OECS Fisheries Unit
·
Studies OECS subregional resources
Bellairs Research Institute of McGill
·
Covers marine and coastal resource monitoring and
University
assessment
Caribbean Centre for Administration
·
Covers institutional analysis and development
Development (CARICAD)
Source: adapted from World Bank (1994), cited in Hoagland (1995).
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-112
CEP Technical Report No. 41
AGURICULTURAL CERTIFICATION PROGRAM
<PICTURE>
Better Bananas
Rainforst Alliance
C E R T I F I E D
GENERAL PRODUCTION STANDARDS
(Updated August, 1997)
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-113
CEP Technical Report No. 41
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................3
GENERAL PRODUCTION STANDARDS...........................................................................................4
1. LEGISLATION
.....................................................................................................................5
2. NATURAL
RESOURCE
MANAGEMENT .....................................................................................................6
2.1. FORESTS ................................................................................................................................... ....................6
2.2. WATER RESOURCES ......................................................................................................7
2.3. SOILS .............................................................................................................................7
2.4. AIR ................................................................................................................................8
3.
CROP MANAGEMENT ..........................................................................................................9
3.1. PLANNING AND ESTABLISHING CROPS ...............................................................................................9
3.2. FERTILIZATION PROGRAMS .............................................................................................9
3.3. CONTROLING PEST POPULATIONS .................................................................................... ..................10
3.4 HANDLING AGROCHEMICALS ............................................................................................. ..................10
3.4.1.
General
considerations ....................................................................................................... ..................10
3.4.2.
Transport
of agrochemicals ................................................................................................ ..................11
3.43. Storage of agrochemicals ................................................................................................12
3.4.4. Application of agrochemicals..........................................................................................15
3.4.5. Crop dusting ..................................................................................................................15
3.4.6.
Showers
and changing areas ..........................................................................................................16
3.4.7. Uniform cleaning zones ......................................................................................................16
3.4.8.Waintaining application and protective equipment ..................................................................16
3.5. AGRICLI.TURAL MACHINERY ............................................................................................17
3.5.1. Fuel and lubricant storage .................................................................................................17
3.5.2. Equipment maintenance and storage area ..........................................................................18
3.6. MANAGING THE CARDBOARD STORAGE AREA................................................................19
4. SOLID AND LIQUID WASTE ................................................................................................................... .........20
5. ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION PROGRAM ..........................................................................21
6. PREVAILING SOCIAL AND WORK CONDITIONS....................................................................22
6.1.
Neighboring Populations .................................................................................................22
6.2.
Living Quarters of Farm Employees ....................................................................................23
6.3. Occupational Health ..................................................................................................................23
APPENDICES ...............................................................................................................................................24
APPENDIX 1. METHODOLOGY FOR EVALUATING LAND USE POTENTIAL .........................................25
APPENDIX 2. PARAMETERS FOR MONITORING THE PHYSICAL, CHEMICAL AND
BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF DRINKING AND WASTE WATER ...................................................26
APPENDIX 3. PARA.METERS FOR EVALUATING THE PHYSICAL CHEMICAL AND
MICROBIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SOILS ...................................................................................26
APPENDIX 4. RESTRICTIONS ON CLEARING LAND USING CHOP AND BURN M.ETHOD .....................27
APPENDIX 5. EVALUATION PARAMEFERS FOR DIAGNOSIS OF THE SOCIO-ENVIRONMENTAL
CHARACTERISTICS OF AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITY ...................................................................................28
APPENDLX 6. LIST OF RESTRICTED AND PROHIBITED PESTICIDES ......................................................30
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-114
CEP Technical Report No. 41
APPENDIX 7. PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT REQUIRED FOR AGROCHIEMICAL USE ..............................31
APPENDIX 8. LIST OF MEDICINES FIRST-AID KITS SHOULD CONTAIN ..... ............................................33
APPENDIX 9. INTERVALS OF RESTRICTED ADMISSION FOLLOWING
APPLICATION OF AGROCHEMICALS ........... ................................................... ............................................34
APPENDIX 10. GUIDELINES FOR WASHING AND DRYING AGROCHEMICAL
APPLICATION EQUIPMENT .................................................................................. ..................... ......................35
APPENDIX 11. PERSONS CONSIDERED UNABLE TO APPLY AGROCHEMICALS ..............................36
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-115
CEP Technical Report No. 41
INTRODUCTION
Global population growth has resulted in a steady increase in the demand for food
and raw materials originating in natural ecosystems. In tile process of meeting that growing
demand, conventional agricultural systems have devastated millions of hectares of natural
forests, replacing them with extensive monocultures. At the same time, large quantities of
synthetic chemicals have been used to combat pests and fertilize those crops, in the constant
effort to raise levels of production. Such simplification of natural ecosystems and
accumulation of synthetic chemicals has resulted in serious socio-environmental imbalances
which threaten both future productivity and the current well being of human populations.
In reaction to the socio-environmental deterioration caused by conventional
agricultural production, and inspired by the growing awareness in the markets of the United
States, Canada and Europe, where consumers have begun to demand more sustainable
systems of agricultural production, the Fundaci6n Ambio (a Costa Rican non-profit N.G.O.)
and the Rainforest Alliance (a non-profit N.G.O. based in New York) initiated a program of
socioenvironmental agricultural cerdfication in 1991, the objective of which is to modify
traditional agricultural practices and decrease the negative socioenvironmental impact of
agricultural activity. To reach this goal, the program awards an ecological seal of approval to
those farms that adhere to a series of standards, which permits the promotion of their produce
as having been grown and harvested under conditions of limited environmental impact and in
a more just and dignified social situation.
With this document we present the Better Bananas certification program's general
standards for socio-environmental agricultural production. These standards are the product of
collaboration between farmers, conservation groups, scientists and government
representatives. The standards in the document will probably change in the future in response
to environmental advances on the farms, new technological discoveries and market demand.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-116
CEP Technical Report No. 41
GENERAL PRODUCTION STANDARDS
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-117
CEP Technical Report No. 41
1.LEGISLATION
1.1. COMPLIANCE WITH LEGISLATION
Comply with national legislation corresponding to natural resource management,
agrochemical use, solid and liquid waste management, labor conditions and human rights in
all activities related to agricultural production systems.
Criteria:
1. Comply with local legislation.
2. Comply with accords and treaties related to socio-enviromnental aspects of production that
the country is a signatory of.
3. Acquire legal operating permits.
4. Compliance with certification standards is obligatory, nevertheless, in those aspects where
the local legislation is more stringent than the certification program's standards, farms should
comply with what is stipulated by the law.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-118
CEP Technical Report No. 41
2 NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
2. 1. FORESTS
Conserve and recuperate forested areas in a manner that ensures the
socio-environmental benefits they offer.
Criteria:
1. Do not establish new plantations in areas where the vegetal cover consists of primary forest,
secondary forest or any type of forestry management.
2. Prohibit cutting trees within the jurisdiction of the farm.
3. Use native species for reforestation programs in order to improve wildlife habitat. In cases
where it is determined that native species constitute a serious limitation to crop development or
in which there is a lack of propagative material, it is permissible to use exotic species that have
adapted to the zone.
4. Conserve vegetation and reforest along the banks of rivers and streams adjacent to or flowing
through the plantation in a minimum area of 15 meters, measured horizontally from the river
bank to the edge of the plantation, when the terrain is flat, and 50 meters where the terrain is
steep (30% incline or greater).
5. Maintain and unite forest fragments by planting trees to establish biological corridors.
6. Conserve and reforest the edges of public roads that border or cross the plantation in an area
with a minimum width of 10 meters, measured horizontally from the edge of the road to the
border of the plantation.
7. Conserve and reforest areas with a radius of 100 meters around permanent springs.
8. Implement programs for the reforestation and recuperation of natural forests in those areas
that, according to studies for potential land use (see appendix), are inappropriate for agricultural
activity.
9. Plant, in established farms, vegetational barriers 30 meters thick around housing nuclei, health
centers, schools and any other infrastructure where there is human activity, and which fall under
the jurisdiction of the farm.
10. Do not use wood for construction of platforms and other infrastructure that was cut illegally
in wild areas.
11. Prohibit the extraction of wild flora and fauna from areas within the jurisdiction of the farm..
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-119
CEP Technical Report No. 41
2.2. WATER RESOURCES
Protect water resources by adopting measures of control in agricultural, industrial and
domestic activities.
Criteria:
1. Maintain periodic monitoring of the physical, chemical and biological characteristics of
potable and waste water in order to ensure the quality of the resource. The points and frequency
of sampling should be defined by the certification program's technical team (see appendix 2).
2. Implement the use of clean technologies that are appropriate for the tropics in the treatment of
waste water produced by all activities on the farm.
3. Do not mix agrochemicals nor clean equipment in drainage ditches, rivers, lakes or running
water.
4. Do not use natural wetlands for water treatment purposes.
5. Do not alter (by construction of canals) the natural hydrological system.
6. Design irrigation systems in a manner that balances the crop's water deficit with the
hydrological requirements and precipitation of the ecosystem.
2.3 SOILS
Promote a system of soil conservation that ensures that resources' functions of support
and nutrition over the short, medium and long term.
Criteria:
1. Complete and present systematic annual analyses of physical and chemical conditions (see
appendix 3).
2 Develop a soil conservation program for your farm that takes into consideration the topography
of the terrain and the agricultural practices that accompany the crop.
3. Do not use products for disinfecting soil that have high residual power.
4. Restrict chop and bum land clearing practices (see appendix 4.).
5. When preparing land for the crop, avoid irreversible alterations of soil structure and possible
risk of erosion.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-120
CEP Technical Report No. 41
2.4. AIR
Avoid the production of solid particles, dust, smoke, gases, odors, noise and other
atmospheric pollution.
Criteria:
1. Undertake periodic measurements that ensure air quality in terms of odors, noise, gases and
smoke.
2. Use technologies and techniques that prevent or mitigate air pollution.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-121
CEP Technical Report No. 41
3. CROP MANAGEMENT
3.1. PLANNING AND ESTABLISHING CROPS
Establish plantations at those sites most appropriate for agriculture, where the desired
yields can be obtained while minimizing socio-environmental impacts.
Criteria:
1. Complete a diagnosis of the activity's socio-environmental characteristics (see appendix
5).
2. Undertake a study of land use potential before establishing new plantations (see Appendix
1).
3. Plan measures to correct the terrain's limiting factors (determined by the study of land use
potential).
4. Plan crop location and measures for soil conservation based on a topographic evaluation of
the terrain.
3.2 FERTILIZATION PROGRAMS
Base fertilization program on the conservation and -increased productivity of the
land, while protecting human health and the environment.
Criteria:
1. Determine fertilization programs and use of compensation according to current soil
studies, the climactic characteristics of the region and foliage analysis of the plantation.
2. Apply in a localized and fractional manner.
3. Promote the adequate use of organic fertilizers.
3.3 CONTROLING PEST POPULATIONS
Base control of pest populations on the principles of Integrated Pest Management in
such a way that reduces the environmental impact caused by pesticides, improves the
biodiversity of the plantation and increases the farm's productivity.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-122
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Criteria:
1. Use physical practices for sanitary control of the crop: (pruning, thinning, clipping,
windbreaks).
2. Implement methods of biological and ethological (use of pheromones) control of pest
populations, after having completed studies that determine the efficiency of natural enemies.
3. Implement a program to establish a ground cover in order to reduce the use of herbicides.
4. Make use of monitoring systems and evaluation of pests to determine the economic
thresholds of damage for the application of chemical products.
5. Apply chemical products only when pest populations exceed the previously established
application thresholds, to avoid the preventive use of pesticides.
3.4 HANDLING AGROCHEMICALS
Decrease agrochemical use through the utilization of less toxic products in order to
reduce damage to human health and the environment.
Criteria:
3.4.1. General considerations
1. Only use chemical products that are registered for use in the United States, Canada and
Europe.
2. Restrict and prohibit the use of chemical products as specified by the norms of the certification
program (see Appendix 6).
3. Restrict the use of products listed under category I (extremely toxic).
4. Allow pesticides to be handled only by men between the ages of 18 and 60.
5. Maintain up to date files on the characteristics of the products being used, such as
toxicological and environmental information, and treatment in case of intoxication (labels).
6. Maintain up to date files on application equipment and protective gear.
7. All products should have original labels in the local language.
8. All people who come in contact with agrochernicals should make use of protective gear,
shower and laundry areas (see Appendix 7).
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-123
CEP Technical Report No. 41
9. Establish protocols for all operations, especially those that involve the handling of
agrochernicals, monitoring the environment and human health. Familiarize all personnel with
those protocols.
10. Promote the use of recyclable, reusable and biodegradable containers.
3.4.2 Transport of Agrochemicals
Criteria:
Transport to the farm
1. Demand that suppliers and drivers comply with the following security standards in the
handling and transport of agrochemicals.
- Only transport agrochemicals in the rear part of the vehicle.
- Protect and secure the cargo for transport and check it several times during the trip.
- Transport agrochemicals in their original containers and inspect them before loading
and unloading.
- Carry copies of safety information for every agrochernical being transported.
- Place warning signs on vehicle indicating the type of cargo being transported.
- Carry an insurance policy that covers civil responsibility.
Locate products according to their function, biocide action, toxicity and chemical
formula.
- Observe safety measures when loading and unloading.
- Load and unload in areas set up for that purpose.
- Take safety measures in case of spills or accidents.
3.4.3. Storage of agrochemicals
Warehouse location
1. The storage area should be located the following minimum distances:
- 60 meters from buildings (residential area, administration buildings, schools, etc.)
- 120 meters from rivers and lakes
- 60 meters from canals
- 200 meters from wells and springs
- 50 meters from fuel storage tanks
- 100 meters from public roads
2. Take advantage of natural ventilation by allowing permanent circulation of air.
3. The storage area's location should facilitate the process of loading and unloading.
4. Protect the storage area from rain and flooding.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-124
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Characteristics with which the storage area should comply
1. It should be used to store agrochemicals exclusively. In cases when fertilizers and pesticides are
stored in the same building, they should be kept completely separate.
2. Permit only authorized personnel to enter.
3. Secure the building against robbery and vandalism.
4. The storeroom must have warning signs communicating the danger to human health and the
environment represented by the products in storage that should be legible from a distance of 20
meters and comprehensible by illiterate people.
5. Permanently close any drains in the storeroom floor.
6. There should be a minimum of 3 meters between the floor and the ceiling, with solid walls no
higher than I meter, and the remaining wall space enclosed with bars, chain-link fencing, or another
material that permits constant circulation of air.
7. It should have excellent ventilation, illumination and remain dry.
8. The area dedicated to ventilation and illumination should be the equivalent of 2096 of the total
area of the floor and be distributed in equal percentages and in an alternating form.
9. Entrance(s) to the storeroom should include a retaining doorstep to prevent liquids from escaping.
10. The floor should be impermeable and have a minimum incline of 1%.
11. The design should permit, in case of an accident, that the superficial water be confined to a
specific area for collection and treatment.
12. Limits of storage areas and passage ways should be delineated on the floor.
13. Passage ways should have a minimum width of 80 centimeters.
14. An empty area of 30 centimeters should be maintained between the walls and storage space.
15. The storeroom should be equipped with stands and shelves -- well labeled and built of an
impermeable and non-absorbent material -- so that products aren't in contact with the floor.
16. Store containers holding liquids on lower shelves.
17. Use stands and shelves with enough capacity to hold all the agrochemicals used in the operations.
18. Separate pesticides according to their biocide action, toxicity, and chemical formula.
19. Follow the handling instructions on the labels.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-125
CEP Technical Report No. 41
20. Mark on the wall the maximum height for storage (3/4 of the total height).
21. Keep shelves placed more than one meter away from lights or other sources of heat.
22. Provide one type A-B-C portable fire extinguisher for every 125 square meters.
23. Insure that there is always access to the building from both sides for fire fighters.
24. Place an emergency shower and an eye wash in areas used to store liquid products and in the
areas for mixing and decanting.
25. There should be a separate storage area for empty containers which have been rinsed (3 times)
and are awaiting disposal or recycling.
26. There should not be an office in the storeroom, and in case there is, it should be completely
segregated and kept well ventilated.
Operating Guidelines for Storage Area
1. Prohibit eating, drinking and smoking in the agrochemical storeroom.
2. Keep original labels on containers. If a container is damaged and its contents must be transferred
to another container, it should be sealed and the original label should be pasted on it, or a new label
should be made with all the original information.
3. The storeroom should have a first aid kit with carefully ordered and identified medicines.
4. Keep only the amount of agrochemicals needed during the time of application.
5. Maintain a clean and orderly storage site in such a way that:
- the labels of all products are visible
- problems such as leaks and deterioration of containers are easily detectable.
- doorways are unobstructed and fire fighting equipment is easily accessible.
6. Decanting and transferring should be done using appropriate equipment, guaranteeing proper
safety.
7. There should be absorbent material (sand or sawdust) and protective gear for cleaning up spills
inside the storeroom.
8. There should be a manual of procedures and the necessary equipment for dealing with accidents.
9. Establish emergency plans and familiarize all personnel with them.
10. Keep an inventory of the exact quantity of agrochemicals, their characteristics and safety
measures for their use.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-126
CEP Technical Report No. 41
11. Use products before their expiration date.
12. Establish a system for exact location of agrochernicals within the storage area.
13. Keep a list of emergency telephone numbers.
3.4.4. Application of agrochemicals
1. Prohibit eating, drinking or smoking during the application of agrochemicals.
2. Apply agrochernicals according to the specifications listed on the product's label.
3. When applying agrochernicals, avoid exposing workers and neighbors to those chemicals.
4. Comply with the intervals of restricted entry stipulated on the label of every pesticide in the areas
of application (see appendix 9).
5. Locate signs and pictographs prohibiting entrance to the area during and after application of
pesticides.
6. Maintain a buffer zone 10 meters around the area of pesticide application.
7. Demarcate the limits for application of agrochernicals around sources of water, housing, packing
zones and schools.
8. Use mechanical and automatic methods of application of post-harvest products in the packing
process in a way that avoids worker contact with chemicals and reduces the dosage applied.
3.4.5. Crop Dusting
1. Inform community organizations a minimum of 72 hours before application about the possible
risks and the principal cautions that should be taken during crop dusting.
2. Comply with the specifications for use, transport and storage of pesticides described in the sections
3.4.1., 3.4.2., 3.4.3., and 3.4.4. of this manual.
3. Comply with the specifications for fuel storage described in section 3.5.1. of this manual.
3.4.6. Showers and changing areas
1. This area should be used by all personnel coming in contact with agrochemicals.
2. It should include two areas, entrance and exit, which are connected via the showers.
3. There should be a treatment system for residue.
3.4.7. Uniform cleaning zones
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-127
CEP Technical Report No. 41
1. Establish an area exclusively for washing protective gear.
2. Establish directives for the transport of clothing contaminated with agrochemicals from the
shower area to the laundry area.
3. Wash all uniforms used by workers who apply agrochemicals in the laundry area.
4. Eliminate uniforms in poor condition.
5. Demand that workers in the laundry area also wear protective gear.
6. Establish an area for washing boots.
3.4.8. Maintenance of application and protective equipment
1. Inspect and repair that equipment previous to every application.
2. Prohibit the use of equipment in poor condition.
3. Wash and dry equipment according to the specifications in appendix 10.
4. Designate a specific area for washing application equipment.
5. Protective gear should be worn when providing maintenance for application equipment.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-128
CEP Technical Report No. 41
3.5 AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY
Maintain safety measures in the storage area for fuel and lubricants and in the workshops
that reduce the risk of accidents and problems with environmental contamination.
3.5.1. Fuel and lubricant storage
Criteria:
1. Establish a program for handling fuel and lubricants that includes:
- Construction of a retaining wall around the area where fuel storage tanks are located to contain
any type of spill. The height of that barrier should be proportional to the volume of the storage
tanks.
- The floor of the area where fuel tanks are located should be made of cement or a completely
impermeable material.
- There should be an absorbent material (sawdust or sand) and equipment for the clean up and
treatment of spills in areas where fuel and lubricants are handled.
2. Prohibit the use of ovens, fires or machinery that creates sparks in areas of fuel and lubricant
storage.
3. Keep dangerous products and materials in fuel cans inside a storeroom or other conveniently
isolated locations.
4. Store only quantities necessary for maintaining continuity of operations.
5. Maintain strict security measures against robbery, vandalism, etc.
6. Insure that there is always access to the storage area from both sides for fire fighters.
7. Prohibit eating, drinking and smoking in the fuel and lubricant storage areas.
8. Mark areas with signs indicating the type of substances being stored and the minimum safety
measures necessary.
3.5.2. Equipment maintenance and storage area
1. The floor and walls should be made of cement or an impermeable and incombustible material.
2. Work areas and passage ways should be delineated on the floor.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-129
CEP Technical Report No. 41
3. There should be one portable A-B-C Fire extinguisher for every 125 square meters.
4. Insure that there is always access to the area from both sides for fire fighters.
5. There should be an absorbent material (sawdust or sand) and equipment for clean up and
treatment of spills.
6. Deposit materials impregnated with oil, grease or highly inflammable substances, as well as
residues of dangerous materials and products, in incombustible recipients that can be
hermetically sealed, which should be distributed around the work area in adequate quantities.
7. Comply with the rules established by the local electrical code.
8. Make the use of protective gear mandatory during operation of machinery (welders, saws,
drills, etc.).
9. Keep the area clean and orderly in a way that decreases the probability of accidents.
10 The area should be secured against robbery and vandalism.
11. There should be a first aid kit in the area (see Appendix 8).
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-130
CEP Technical Report No. 41
3.6. MANAGING THE CARDBOARD STORAGE AREA
Design the cardboard storage area according to safety standards that decrease the
probability of accidents and damage to the health of workers.
Criteria:
1. It should be built of an impermeable and incombustible material.
2. The minimum height of the storeroom should be three meters from floor to ceiling.
3. Delineate storage areas and passage ways on the floor.
4. Passage ways should have a minimum width of 80 centimeters.
5. An empty area of 30 centimeters should be maintained between the walls and storage space.
6. Mark on the wall the maximum height for stacking.
7. Take advantage of natural ventilation by allowing permanent circulation of air.
8. Dedicate an equivalent of 20% of the total area of the floor to ventilation and illumination.
9. Do not exceed the maximum noise levels permitted by local legislation.
10. Comply with the requirements established by the local electrical code.
11. Provide one type A-B-C portable fire extinguisher for every 125 square meters.
12. Place clearly visible signs explaining safety measures inside and outside the storeroom.
13. Insure that there is always access to the building from both sides for fire fighters.
14. Create a separate space for assembling boxes that provides a minimum work area of 2 square
meters for each person.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-131
CEP Technical Report No. 41
4. SOLID AND LIQUID WASTE MANAGEMENT
Establish an integral plan for solid and liquid waste management based on reduction,
reuse, recycling and ecologically adequate disposal.
Criteria:
1. Design and carry out an integral plan -- approved by the technical team of the certification
program - for handling, separation and treatment of solid and liquid waste generated by all
agricultural, industrial and domestic activity within the company's jurisdiction.
2. Prohibit burning or disposal of solid waste in open pits, rivers or streams.
3. Before creating a landfill or an incinerator, technical studies must be completed to determine
the size, optimal location and mitigating measures to minimize the socio-environmental impact
during the phases of construction and operation.
4. Establish a strategy, approved by the certification program's technical team, for handling
empty agrochemical containers.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-132
CEP Technical Report No. 41
5. ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION PROGRAM
Implement a permanent educational process for workers and their families with the
goal of helping them accept values, clarify concepts, and develop the abilities and attitudes
necessary for establishing a harmonious coexistence between human beings, their culture and
the environment.
Criteria:
1. The training program should include the themes described in the Agricultural Certification
Program's Environmental Education Manual.
2. Involve all personnel in the environmental education program a minimum of once a year.
3. Train all pesticide handlers before each cycle of application.
4. There should be specific educational plans catering to the different interlocutors of the
program: (managers, supervisors, field workers, etc.)
5. Organize educational sessions for the families that live on the farm.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-133
CEP Technical Report No. 41
6. PREVAILING SOCIAL AND WORK CONDITIONS
Improve the quality of life for workers and their families
Criteria:
6.1. Neighboring Populations
1. Locate new plantations more than 1 kilometer away from human settlements.
2. Respect the natural resources that benefit neighboring populations (don't pollute rivers or
subterranean waters, don't damage wildlife when crop dusting).
3. Respect the culture of neighboring populations and farm employees.
6.2. Living Quarters of Farm Employees.
1. Worker camps and houses should comply with the minimum health requirements in treatment
of drinking water, waste water (see Appendix 2.) and solid waste.
6.3. Occupational Health.
1. Implement occupational health policies approved by authorities and the technical team of the
certification program.
2. Provide procedural manuals for the prevention of and responses to accidents.
3. All workers who apply pesticides should undergo colinesterase blood protein tests previous to
exposure to organophosphorus and carbametes before each cycle of application.
4. Don't permit people who have handicaps or problems with drug addiction to apply
agrochemicals (see appendix 11).
5. Supervise the work environment and provide advice to personnel about all factors that can
affect health.
6. Ensure hygiene of sanitary installations in the work place and housing area.
7. Maintain adequate equipment and accessories for protection of workers.
8. Insure that all work areas are equipped with lavatories for both sexes and pissoirs that are
supplied with sufficient water and toilet paper.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-134
CEP Technical Report No. 41
9. There should be at least one lavatory for every 20 male workers and one for
every 15 female workers when the total number of workers is less than 100.
When there are more than 100 workers, install an additional toilet for every 28
workers, and at least one pissoir for every twenty.
10. All lavatories and pissoirs should fill the following requirements:
- The walls separating toilets should be raised at least 30 centimeters off of the floor to permit the
washing of floors.
- The floors and walls should be continuous, smooth and impermeable. Floors should be washed at
least once a day.
- Disinfection, deodorization, ventilation, lighting and the slopes of floors should meet program's
conditions.
- In cases where there is a sewage system, toilets should be connected to it, otherwise they should
empty into septic tanks or some form of treatment system.
11 Establish a program of decorating in packing areas, warehouses, shower areas, housing areas,
recreational areas and garbage disposal areas.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-135
CEP Technical Report No. 41
APPENDICES
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-136
CEP Technical Report No. 41
APPENDIX 1. Methodology for the evaluation of land use potential
YET TO BE DETERMINED
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-137
CEP Technical Report No. 41
APPENDIX 2. Parameters for monitoring the physical, chemical and biological characteristics
of drinking and waste water.
CHARACTERISTICS OF DRINKING WATER
Chemical substances
Units
Maximum admissible value
Fecal coliforms
Negative
Chlorides mg/1
250
Hardness mg/1
CaCo3
400
Nitrates mg/1
50
Sulfates
mg/1 250
Aluminum mg/1
0.2
Calcium
mg/1 CaCo3
100
Copper mg/1
2.0
Magnesium mg/1
50
Sodium
mg/1
200
Potassium mg/1
10
Zinc mg/1
3.0
Iron mg/1
0.3
Magnesium mg/1
0.5
Fluoride
mg/1
0. to 1.5b
Lead mg/1
0.01
_____________________
b 1.5 mg/1tr for temperatures of 8 to 12o C
0.7 mg./1tr for temperatures of 25 to 30o C
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-138
CEP Technical Report No. 41
CHARACTERISTICS OF WASTE WATER
Waste water is defined as that water which has been used and whose quality has somehow been
modified through the incorporation of contaminating agents. There are two principal types of waste
water:
Ordinary waste water that generated by human domestic activities (use of toilets, sinks. laundry, etc)
Special waste water: all waste water that is not ordinary waste water.
Maximum permissible limits for residues in waste water
PARAMETER
Maximum permissible unit
Biochemical Demand for Oxygen (BDO)
500
Chemical Demand of Oxygen (CDO)
800
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
200
Grease/oil 30
mg/1
Hydrogen potential
5 to 9
Temperature
15oC< T <40oC
*Mercury 0.01
mg/1
*Aluminum 5
mg/1
*Arsenic 0.1
mg/1
*Boron 3
mg/l
*Chromium 1.5
mg/1
*Copper 0.5
mg/1
*Lead 0.5
mg/1
*Tin 2
mg/1
*Phenol 1
mg/1
*Zinc 5
mg/l
*Selenium 0.05
mg/1
*Sulfides 25
mg/l
*Fluorides 10
mg/l
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-139
CEP Technical Report No. 41
APPENDIX 3. Parameters for evaluating the physical, chemical and microbiological
characteristics of soils.
Physical Characteristics
CHARACTERISTIC UNIT
Texture
Apparent density
(gm/cm3)
Porosity (%)
Chemical Characteristics
CHARACTERISTIC UNIT
pH in water
10:25
Extractable Acidity
Cmol(+)1
Zn, Mn, Fe, Cu
Mg/1
S Mg/1
B Mg/1
N %
P (ppm)
Ca Cmol(+)1
Mg Cmol(+)1
K Cmol(+)1
Na Cmol(+)1
Organic material
(%)
Cationic exchange capacity
Cmol(+)L
Electrical conductivity
% of saturation of bases
(%)
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-140
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Limits for toxic substances
Compounds Maximum
admissible value up./I
Aluminum Chloride
20
Aldicarb 10
Aldrin/Dieldrin 0.03
Atrazine 2
Bentazone 30
Coarbofurano? 5
Chlordane 0.2
DDT 2
1, 2-dibromide-3,3-
30
Chloropropane
2.4-D 20
1.2-dichloropropane 20
1.3-dichloropropane 0.03
Heptachlor 9
Heptachloroepoxide
2
Isoproturon? 2
Lindane 20
MCPA 10
Methoxychlor? 6
Methalochlor? 20
Molinate? 9
Pendimethalyne? 20
Pentachlorophenol 20
Permetrine? 100
Propanil? 2
Pyiridad? 20
Simazine 100
Trifluralin 100
Dichloroprop 9
2.4-DB 9
2.4.5-T 10
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-141
CEP Technical Report No. 41
APPENDIX 4. Restrictions on clearing land using cut and burn methods
Before burning, land owners must comply with the following restrictions:
1. Request that the certification program's technical team authorize the bum.
2. Demonstrate to the certification team that burning is the best socio-environmental alternative
for resolving the problem.
3. Define, through firebreaks, the area of the burn and the combustible materials that will be
burned.
4. Cut a firebreak around the perimeter of the area you intend to bum, the width of which should
be double the height of the combustible material that will be burned, and which should be no
narrower than one meter.
5. Prepare enough water and tools (machete, rake, shovel) to extinguish the fire in case of
emergency,
6. Depending on the zone where the burn takes place, additional measures may be necessary,
among which could be:
· Advising the local police with anticipation of the date and hour of the planned burn.
· Burning down hill and between 4 p.m. and 7 a.m., suspending the bum if it is windy
· Do not abandon the area until the fire has completely gone out.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-142
CEP Technical Report No. 41
ANEXO 5. Evaluation parameters for the diagnosis of the socio-environmental
characteristics of the agricultural activity.
1. General information about the legal entity completing the diagnosis (name of company, date
of creation and registration information).
II. Justification of the activity's technical, social and environmental objectives.
111. Environmental Diagnosis Description of the environmental and social characteristics within
the project's area.
A. Environmental Description
a.l.Project location (country, province, department, county, district, and town it lies within),
indicate the location on a map 1:50,000 and provide a copy of the tide.
a.2 Characteristics of the physical environment
Provide a map that includes the aspects mentioned below.
-Soils: classes, current use, capacity.
-Climate: Regional and local descriptions (wind, precipitation, temperature,
humidity)
-Hydrology: Description of the hydrological network, location of rivers,
streams, springs, ponds and other bodies of water within the area of influence.
-Topography- General description of the terrain (relief, human activities).
a.3 Characteristics of the biological environment:
-Description of existing biological recourses (susceptible flora and fauna, endangered species,
forested areas, abandoned areas, deforested areas, areas undergoing natural regeneration).
a.4 Characteristics of the human environment:
Predominant human settlements wdthin the area of influence.
Indicate distances from the plantation.
-Basic services: transportation, communication, health, education, garbage
collection. potable water, sewage system.
Natural and cultural heritage of the area (archaeological and historical sites,
relevant landscapes).
Productive and other types of activities.
-Labor conditions: temporary and permanent workers that fall under the
jurisdiction of local labor laws, foreign workers of migratory status.
B. Detailed description of the Project
b.1 Type of crop, management, planting and harvest methods, total area and area of farm (in
hectares).
b.2 Mechanical equipment use.
b.3 Agrochemical use (pesticides and fertilizers), type and form of application (manual,
mechanical, from land. air, etc.)
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-143
CEP Technical Report No. 41
b.4 Irrigation system.
b.5 Drainage system.
b.6 Access roads and their condition
b.7 Soil conservation practices.
b.8 Location and description of agrochernical storerooms, fuel tanks, packing plant, offices, bag
opening area, cutting area, landfill, housing areas, treatment plant, etc.
C. Description of socio-environmental risks:
c.1 Natural: erosion, flooding, sedimentation, fires, drought, etc.
c.2 Anthropological: Spills and transport of agrochemicals, oil, fuel, fires, deviation of natural
drainage, open air dumps, landfills, deforestation, etc.
D. Evaluation of positive and negative impacts:
d.1 Compliance with the Standards of the Agricultural Certification Program.
d.2 Actions planned by the company (development of strategies to minimize the negative effects
of agrochemical use, implementation of waste treatment systems) including preventive and
corrective measures, procedures and technologies to be used, as well as including corresponding
maps.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-144
CEP Technical Report No. 41
APPENDIX 6. Lost of pesticides restricted or prohibited by the certification program
GENERIC NAME
CHEMICAL GROUP
* 2.4.5-T
PHENOXYACETIC ACID
* ALBICARB
CARBAMATE
* ALDRIN
ORGANOCHLORIDE?
**LEAD ARESENATE
ARSENICAL
**CAPTAPHOL? PHTAL
**CIHEXANTIN? STANNONS
*CLORDANE ORGANOCHLORIDE?
**CLORDECONE? ORGANOPHOSPHORUS
* CLORDIMEFORM7
FORMAMIDIN
*DDT ORGANOCHLORIDE7
* DBCP (DIBROMOCHLOROPROPA) HALOCARBIDE
* DIELDRIN
ORGANOCHLORIDE?
**DINOSED NITROGENOUS
* ENDRIN
ORGANOCHLORIDE7
**EDB (ETHYLENE DIBROMADE)
BROMADE?
*HCH ORGANOCHLORIDE7
* HEPTACHLOR
ORGANOCHLORIDE7
**MERCURY MERCURIALS
* METHYLPARATHION
ORGANOCHLORIDE7
* TOXAPHENE
ORGANOCHLORIDE7
* LINDANE
ORGANOPHOSPHORUS
* PENTACHLOROPHENOL
ORGANOCHLORIDE7
* PARATHION
ORGANOPHOSPHORUS
* PARAQUAT
BIPIRIDILE compound?
* Products included in the DIRTY DOZEN according to the P.A.N.
**Products prohibited in Costa Rica
LIST OF PRODUCTS RESTRICTED BY THE AGRICULTURAL CERTIFICATION PROGRAM
GENERIC NAME
CHEMICAL GROUP
MTETHYLBROMIDE ORGANIC
CARBORANE 48%
CARBAMETE
PHORATE 48 & 80%
ORGANOPHOSPHORUS
ALUMINUM PHOPHORUS
ORGANIC
MONOCROTOPHOS? ORGANOPHOSPHORUS
M.A.F.A. ARSENICAL
DAMINOCIDE? ??
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-145
CEP Technical Report No. 41
APPENDIX 7. Protective equipment required for agrochemical use.
Application of nematicides:
Work cloths, jumper or long-sleeve shirt and long pants made of thick material.
Gas mask with a filter appropriate for the characteristics for the chemical used.
Protection for head (cap, hat, etc.)
Unlined rubber gloves that extend half way up the arm.
A vinyl protector for the back.
Unlined rubber boots.
Safety glasses with indirect ventilation for chemical substances.
Socks.
Application of herbicides:
Work cloths, jumper or long-sleeve shirt and long pants made of thick material.
Gas mask with a filter appropriate for the characteristics for the chemical used.
Protection for head (cap, hat, etc.)
Unlined rubber gloves that extend half way up the arm.
A vinyl protector for the back.
Unlined rubber boots.
Face shield or goggles with indirect ventilation.
Socks.
Application of fertilizers:
Apron
Unlined rubber gloves that extend half way up the arm.
Unlined rubber boots.
Socks.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-146
CEP Technical Report No. 41
Crop duster signaling -- "Bandereo:"
Work cloths, jumper or long-sleeve shirt and long pants made of thick material.
Gas mask with a filter appropriate for the characteristics for the chemical used.
Protection for head (cap, hat, etc.)
Raincoat, poncho or something similar made of impermeable material.
Unlined rubber gloves that extend half way up the arm.
Unlined rubber boots.
Face shield or goggles with indirect ventilation.
Socks.
Preparation of plastic bags soaked with insecticides:
Work cloths, jumper or long-sleeve shirt and long pants made of thick material.
Gas mask with a filter appropriate for the characteristics for the chemical used.
Unlined rubber gloves that extend half way up the arm.
Face shield or goggles with indirect ventilation.
Clean up of pesticide spills:
Work cloths, jumper or long-sleeve shirt and long pants made of thick material.
Gas mask with a filter appropriate for the characteristics for the chemical used.
Vinyl apron
Unlined rubber gloves that extend half way up the arm.
Unlined rubber boots.
Washing work cloths and equipment contaminated with pesticides:
Unlined rubber gloves that extend half way up the arm.
Unlined rubber boots.
Long impermeable apron
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-147
CEP Technical Report No. 41
APPENDIX 8. Ust of medicines first aid kits should contain
ITEM QUANTITY
INDICATIONS
10x10cm sterile dressing
24 units
Cover wounds
Silver Sulfadiacina
1 jar
Burn treatment
Guaze squares
1 package
Wound treatment
Absorbent cotton
460 grams
Wound treatment
Adhesive strips (bandaid)
1 box
Cover wounds
Rolls of guaze
2 3-inch rolls
Wrap wounds
3 5-inch rolls
Elastic bandage
3 3-inch rolls
Wrap sprains
3 4-inch rolls
Sterile tape
2 rolls
Secure bandages
Tincture of odine
1 bottle
External antiseptic
Distilled water
1 liter
Local desinfection
Neutral soap
1 bar
Local desinfection
Active Charcol
12 packets
Oral poisoning
Fuller's Earth
3 jars
Paraquat poisoning
Ofalgenol
2 jars
Ear pain
Antidiarrheic 120
ml
Diarrhea
Analgesic 24
tablets Pain
Oral thermometers
2 units
Check temperature
Scissors 1
unit Cutting
Tounge depressors
12 unites
Revision
Paper towels
1 package
Cleaning
Disposable cups
6 units
Specific use
Sterile latex gloves
1 box Avoid
contamination
Disposable 71/2 - 8
Small garbage bags
6 units
Vomit
Large garbage bags
6 units
Contaminated clothes
Individual sheets
2 units
Cleanliness
First Aid Manual
1 copy
Rapid consultation
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-148
CEP Technical Report No. 41
APPENDIX 9. Intervals of restricted admission following application of agrochemicals
When no restrictions are described on the product label, the following intervals of
restricted entrance are recommended following pesticide application.
Nematicides: a minimum of 26 hours following application
Insecticides: a minimum of 24 hours following application
Herbicides: a minimum of 12 hours following application
Fungicides: a minimum of 4 hours following application
The above mentioned periods of restriction apply to human beings and domestic animals.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-149
CEP Technical Report No. 41
APPENDIX 10. Guidelines for washing and drying equipment used in application of
agrochemicals.
It is important that people who clean equipment used to apply agrochemicals wear
protective gear when washing that equipment.
The cleaning procedures follow:
· Fill approximately on quarter of the tank with water. Close the cap and move it around, being
careful not to splash.
· Spray some of the water, through the nozzle, back into the tank, to insure that the pump, hose
and nozzle are clean.
· Empty the water out in the area reserved for cleaning equipment.
· Repeat the process at least three times.
· Rinse the equipment once using a small amount of soap.
· Disassemble the unit composed of the handle and nozzle, remove the filters and clean them
by submerging them in a container of water. Do not blow through the pieces of the nozzle.
· Wash the exterior of the sprayer, including the shoulder straps, with soap and water.
· When storing the sprayer, remove the cap and hang it up side down to permit the water to run
out of it, so hat it dries completely.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-150
CEP Technical Report No. 41
APPENDIX 11. People considered unable to apply agrochemicals
· Anyone younger than 18.
· Women who are pregnant or breast feeding.
· People considered mentally instable.
· Mentally retarded people.
· People suffering heart or bladder diseases.
· People with chronic diseases of the kidney or liver.
· Illiterate people.
United Nations Environment Programme--CAR/RCU
Page C-151
CEP Technical Report No. 41