Status of Pesticide Use In Nepal and Future Strategy for their Safe and Alternative Uses Yubak Dhoj G. C., PhD

Program Director and National IPM Co-ordinator 01. Background Nepal is predominantly an agricultural country. The economic scenario of Nepal is dominated primarily by this sector. In Nepal the diverse agro-climatic conditions has necessitated different approaches to cultivation and also for crop protection. Numerous biotic as well as abiotic agents cause losses to these crops, where insect pests and diseases involve in different crops at different stages. One of the primary objectives of plant protection is to follow the principles "loose less feed more". While doing so both of the strategies prophylactic as well as curative measures of pest control are apparent. Managing and controlling pesticides is to ensure that the product is effective for the control of the target pest while causing little or no deleterious effect to man, non-target organisms and the environment as a whole. As a measure for their protection, pesticide has becoming one of the important weapons for several years. In this course, over use, mis -use and haphazard use are reported by several organizations and individuals, which have been creating numerous problems for living beings including environment. Pesticide problems have been reported to in many non-target organisms such as fishes, wild life, natural enemies, and residue has been detected in food grains, fresh vegetables and milk. Pesticide misuse and overuse causes harmful effects on non-target organisms and adding extra burden to Nepalese society in terms of pesticide related health expenses, environment pollution, crop losses due to pest resurgence and spending extra costs both to farmer and country as whole (Thapa, 2003). Because of this situation, chemical pesticides are seen one of the important culprits for environmental mishaps and their uses has been viewed very suspiciously. Despite of the bitter reality of the hazards associated with the pesticides in Nepal, there is not much use of active ingredients (a.i.) as compared to other Asian countries on the per hectare basis. Until now, it has been reportedly mentioned that, Nepal consumes on an average 142 g/ha of pesticides. However, the application of pesticides in cotton (2560 g/ha), tea (2100g/ha) and vegetables (1400g/ha) appears excessive and without the consideration of applicators (farmers) and consumers. In this scenario, the concerned stakeholders have to play a very proactive role in their judicious uses through various means. The increasing focus on awareness through Farmers Field School (FFS), has to be supported with the development of alternative means of pest control, which could be utilization of botanical and biopesticides as well as the use of indigenous knowledge and technology (IKT) of the farmers. The greater emphasis of trainings through Farmers Field School (FFS) elsewhere in general and particular in Nepal has given important impetus for capacity building at various level i. e. from farmers to the technicians. At the same time, such messages should be conveyed along with the alternative means of pest control which in fact will be will be an important cornerstone for reducing the uses of highly hazardous and even banned group of pesticides at farming communities. The continuous use of hazardous use of chemical pesticides in protecting crop pest is not solely due to desire of the farming communities but largely due to lack of unavailability of the safe chemical pesticides when they are needed. At the same time, use of botanical and biopesticides are lacking despite of their demand and interest of the farmers. The underlying reasons of their lower uses are unavailability when they are needed. One of the bitter realities that majority of the Nepalese farmers tend to use highly hazardous chemical pesticides is due their broad-spectrum in nature, quicker effects and greater efficiency of killing living organisims completely ignoring with their side effects. Over a decade of FFS in Nepal, it has trained thousands of farmers and hundred of technicians, which however, is insufficient to address increasing desires and need of the Nepalese farmers. One of the very basic reasons is to emphasis on capacity building which in fact was inadequate sucess in reducing the continuous use of chemical pesticides. In present time, it has been increasingly realized the necessity of supportive program. Considering these aspects, future strategies of IPM in Nepal should be focused with the development of alternative means of pest control and up-scaling of the outcomes of FFS so far achieved. At the same time, continuation of capacity building in the changing context and need is justifiable. In order to mitigate the effects of chemical pesticides on non-target organisms, environment, ground water contamination, people of least developed countries like Nepal needs to encourage and develop and promote alternative methods, which would be widely based with the use of indigenous knowledge and technology (IKT) and traditional method of the plant diseases, insect pest management. The messages "us chemical pesticides judiciously" is in fact inadequate and time has come to offer them alternative compounds which will be useful in managing crop pests and diseases. Keeping in view the magnitude of the problem, Government should educate and advocate the producer, pesticide whole-sellers, retailers, users and consumer for safe use of pesticide and forge the relations among concerned stakeholders. Effective registration, licensing, quality control, food residue analysis and enforcement measures including monitoring and testing should be initiated without delay in Nepal. It has becoming imperative in producing botanicals and biorational compounds in the context of growing awareness about the deleterious effects of chemical pesticides through strong coordination of public private partnership (PPP) concepts. Moreover, minimization of pesticides in the crop produce or producing pesticide free products is also relevant in the context of the obligations expressed by the Government of Nepal in various conventions and treaties. Historical aspect of pesticide use in Nepal In the world, the modern use of chemical pesticides dates back to 1867, when Paris Green was firs t used to manage Colorado potato beetle. After that, various inorganic or plant originated pesticides came into existence. The successful discovery of the use of dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane (DDT) by the Swiss scientist Paul Hermann Mller in 1939 opened the floodgates worldwide for more and more pesticide synthesis and use, especially for the control of agricultural pests and vector-borne diseases. The chemical pesticides introduced first time in Nepal was DDT and pyrethrum in 1950 from USA exclusively for Malaria control for Gandaki hydropower project. Subsequently, in November 1952, DDT became the chemical pesticide to be introduced in Nepal by Ministry of Health / His Majestys Government of Nepal (the then Government of Nepal). This marked the introduction of pesticides in Nepal. Not only this but also in 1955, Paris green, Gammexene and nicotine sulfates were imported for the same

purpose of eradicating malaria. These pesticides were mostly provided by US Agency for International Development (USAID), which sponsored programs through grant assistance primarily for the control of vector-borne diseases. After then, pesticides began to use in agriculture sector also. The use of pesticides for plant protection has steadily increased, with the introduction of high-yielding varieties of rice, maize,wheat and vegetables which led to the formation of the Agriculture Inputs Corporation in 1967 to deal with agricultural inputs including pesticides. The different groups of pesticides introduced in Nepal in chronological order are as: Organochlorines- 1950s; Organophosphates - 1960s, Carbamates- 1970s, Synthetic pyrethoids- 1980s (Manadhar, 2006). Problems associated with pesticides Both the misuse and excessive use of pesticides disturbs the natural ecosystems and creates environment pollution (air pollution, water pollution and soil pollution). In addition to these they create adverse effect on public health, effect on wildlife and fishes, pesticide residues in food grain, vegetables, and milk etc, detrimental effect on natural enemies, insect resistance to pesticide, pest resurgence (pest falir-back), secondary pest outbreaks and incidental loss of life due to pesticide contamination or deliberately intake etc. Pesticides related problems in Nepal are difficult to notice except poisoning cases which however, may have posed long term effects to the non-target organisms, environments and human-beings. The problems are categorized mainly in following sections. Issues, challenges and area of improvement There are some issues and challenges associated with the chemical pesticides which need to be addressed adequately; 1. Pesticide misuse:

Use of pesticides even it is unnecessary Improper selection of pesticides Use of highly toxic and broad spectrum of insecticides Overdose and frequent application of pesticides Use of insecticide for killing fishes. Use of pesticides for storing food grains and stuffs. Dipping of vegetables like tomato and brinjal in pesticides to keep fresh and shiny. Not following pre harvest waiting periods. Throwing of empty pesticide containers in public areas etc. Use of date expired pesticides

2. Pesticide residue in food grains and vegetables 3. Aggressive marketing strategy by pesticide dealers and retailers 4. Treatment of pesticide like medicine 5. Illegal trans-boundary movement or trade of pesticides 6. Low public awareness 7. Adulterated or substandard products 8. Disposal of obsolete pesticides 9. Alternatives to pesticides not readily available 10. Lack of awareness and availability of biopesticides and biorational compounds 11. Difficulty in registration of bio pesticides and marketing 12. Low quantity of import of sex pheromones, botanical and bio pesticides 13. Inadequate diagnostic services to plant pests and disease related problem 14. Lack of standards for IPM products and institutions for their certification 15. Weak regulatory and poor monitoring system

16. Poor coordination and cooperation among the research, extension and teaching institutions in plant protection 17. Need to amendment of Pesticide Act and Pesticide Regulations 18. Lack of experts in pesticide toxicology Problem on human health and environment Systematic studies are lacking to monitor the effects of pesticides on human health and the environment because of the lack of serious data gaps observed due to lack of capability in monitoring data related to health, environmental contamination and specific incidents. However there is little information on environmental contamination, poisoning cases and the presence of several pesticides in crop and vegetables. Though, environmental levels of pesticides were not reported but a survey conducted in 1995 in Nepal revealed that chemical pesticides such as aldrin were used for fishing baits in rivers, streams and ponds. These chemicals kill the fish, which after surfacing are collected by fisherman. Fisherman even place pesticides (Endosulfan) into rivers, and streams in order to catch fish in an easy way. A study on pesticide pollution in Nepal revealed that 52% of the respondents in the study area had lack of knowledge of the environmental effects of chemical pesticides. It is unfortunate that the consumption of pesticide is high in developed countries but the pesticide related poisoning cases are apparently more in developing countries. The increasing tendencies of choosing toxic pesticides, unnecessary and excessive uses, lack of alternatives, awareness and the discomfort of using protective clothing increase poisoning risks in agricultural workers might have caused their continuous uses. At the same time, Nepal has weak monitoring systems for data collection on poisoning cases and irregular system for monitoring the health of the workers involved in handling the pesticides. Similarly, the pesticide residue limits set by the food standardization committee (FSC) is underused or unused in many instances. At the same time, the country lacks the standard limit of the pesticide residue on various products and on the human health based on the mean residue

limit (MRL). Until now, there is no functional and accredited laboratory in the country where pesticide residue analysis can be operated, which has virtually caused the residue related problem more than expected in various crop produce. This situation may be alarming in case of vegetable produce, receiving greater number of spraying. The current trends of increase in volume of pesticides use seems very high so national average value of pesticide consumption of 142 g/ha needs to be revised. On an ecological basis, the highest average percentage of land using pesticides is the Terai (12%), followed by the hills (4.9%) and finally the mountains (0.7%), mostly on crops like rice, maize, wheat, potato and vegetables (Kansakar et al., 2002). In a recent study carried out by Plant Protection Directorate (PPD, 2010) eighteen samples of vegetables (7 samples of potato, 6 samples of brinjal, and 5 samples of tomato) were analyzed at the private laboratory. The residue level in potato was recorded from 0.45 to 4.8 ppm (Mancozeb), N.C (Endosulfan), 0.017 ppm (Methyl Parathion). Likewise, the residue level in tomato was found from 1.48 to 8.6 ppm (Mancozeb), N.D to 0.042 ppm (Cypermethrin) and N.D (Dimethoate). Samples of brinjal were not found to be contaminated with pesticide residue (Deltamethrin, Fenvalerate, Cypermethrin, Chlorpyrifos and Methyl Parathion). The Department of Food Technology and Quality Control (DFTQC) also revealed the status of pesticide residue on 106 samples of different food commodities with no contamination with Organochlorine (DDT and BHC) and Organo- phosphorous (Parathion, Methyl parathion and malathion) pesticides. These results show, there is greater level of speculation or exaggeration of the uses of chemical pesticides more than the MRL of the body, which however, has to be scrutinized by PPD with fresh report. Pesticide poisoning is a major public health problem in the developing countries. Although some hospital based data are available but there are no large scale or nationwide study done on the scale of poisoning problem in Nepal. For proper evaluation of poisoning pattern, an extensive study has to be conducted in different specialty care, regional, zonal, district hospitals as well as primary care center, health post and sub-health posts so that intervention programs like poison prevention, mental health awareness and restriction on the sale and use of toxic pesticides can be implemented. In Nepal, even though there are general and specialized hospitals, majority of cases are handled in peripheral levels of health care units such as health Post and District Hospital. Treatment of poisoning cases is based on individual level. However, there are no standard protocols for handling such cases immediately after arriving in the emergency ward. Therefore a concrete plan and program to safe guard the health of the public has become mandatory in the area of toxicology. Establishment of Nepal Poison Information Center (NPIC) is a positive step towards this direction. It has been providing tailor made management information to health care professional and preventive information to general public During 2002, the Nepal Drug and Information Center answered 3012 incoming calls that consisted of 2083 human exposures, 18 animal exposures 876 non exposure poison or drug information and 35 medical information 80% (1658) and 20% (412) calls were from hospitals and general public respectively. 4.27% (89) deaths among 2083 calls and aluminium phosphide followed by organophophates were the most commonly involved in those deaths. Over 65% (1368), 31% (660) and o.72% (15) calls were concerning suicidal, accidental and occupational patients respectively. Over 54% (1141) cases involved agricultural agents followed by drugs (23%), household agents (15%), plants (4%), and bites/sting (2%). Among the agricultural agents, insecticide leads the cases, 61% (694) followed by rodenticide, 27% (312). The trends in pesticide use and trade Most pesticides used in Nepal are imported from India, some from China and other countries on the basis of a registration distribution of pesticide in Nepal is conducted only in the form of finished products. Nepal is included under the category of the least developed country (LDC) which has limited use of pesticide per capita and /or on the hectare basis indicating the lowest uses in comparison to other countries. However, the scenario might be different based on the crops and locations. It is because; pesticide use however is much more intensive in areas and crops having greater access and potentiality of the markets and monetary returns. The use is higher in areas with intensive commercial farming of vegetables, fruits, tea, rice and cotton. Under the present scenario, as reported by many of the organizations and individuals, judicious and prudent use of pesticide by the Nepalese farmers is largely disregarded. All the available pesticides are not only repeatedly used but also carelessly used. As there is an open and porous border with India, there is a considerable, but unknown quantity of pesticide trade between farmers close to the border has been common. Illicit import/illegal import, smuggled pesticides and trans-boundary issues are of serious concerns to Nepal which needs to be addressed in multilateral approach with neighboring industrialized countries in prevention of potential infiltration of banned /unregistered pesticides. Pesticide consumption data of District Agriculture Development Offices (DADOs) from few of the districts, show excessive use of pesticides is common in commercial production area i. e. mainly vegetables. The data reveal that Districts like Kavre, Morang, Chitwan, Siraha, Sindhuli, Dhading, Makawanpur, Parsa, Bara, Rautahat, Kaski, Dang, Banke, Kailali, and Kancharpur, having the commercial vegetable production area use more pesticides as compared to other districts. However, some districts (which d ata is not available) like Jhapa, Ilam, Sarlahi, Kathmandu valley, Nawalparasi, Rupandehi, Kapilvastu etc. seems to use high pesticides, whose data are however, unavailable at present. PPD has to work more towards this aspect. The study based on interview during IPM training in Eastern Terai such as Dhanusa and Siraha districts revealed the real picture of pesticide use in general, and also exclusively on vegetables. Use of pesticides on rice, potato and vegetables were ranked as first, second and third, respectively. Endosulfan was the most popular pesticide used, followed by Phorate and Monochrotophos. In Siraha, brinjal was the crop to receive the highest frequency of pesticide followed by cauliflower, bitter gourd and potato. The most common pesticide used was methyl parathion (WHO-IB) where 67 per cent of farmers spray more than 8 applications in a

cropping cycle, and 25 per cent farmers sprayed the crop 4-6 times a cropping cycle. These reports indicate the frequency of pesticide application is excessive with some banned group of chemical pesticides. There are examples of similar types of communications with farmers (Kavre district, one of the hill districts of central region), where a crop like tomato is sprayed 6-7 times with Endosulfan against tomato fruit worm (Helicoverpa armigera) and more than 5-6 times with Dithane M-45 against late blight in a single cropping season. Similarly apple and citrus to protect from insects and disease need calendar wise spraying of insecticide and fungicides. Eggplant is sprayed frequently by Endosulfan against shoot and fruit borer (Leucinodes orbonalis). Recently information showed that Phorate (WHO-IB) was purchased from the Agrovet (pesticide dealers) by a farmer for use in flowering cucurbits. Phorate is heavily used by farmers in rice fields before and after transplanting to guard against insect attack. There are many examples of pesticide use and misuse indicating the urgent programs for their mitigation. Government provisions on the import of pesticides There is a regulatory infrastructure established for the management of pesticides in Nepal. It covers all handling and use aspects of pesticides. The importers wishing to market and sell pesticides must submit an application dealing with the use of pesticides, toxicity and the correct use of pesticides in agriculture and health sector from the health point of view. No pesticide may be imported into the country without the appropriate certificate of importation issued by Registration Authority. At present there is Pesticide Registration and Management Section within the Directorate of Plant Protection. The persistent organic pollutants (PoPS) chemical pesticides have been banned for agriculture and public health from 9th April, 2001 and also hazardous pesticides have been phased out from the use since 9th April, 2001. At present, prohibition on the use of Quinalphos, Ethion, Monocrotophos and Phorate in the tea field is being campaigned and implemented from 9th, May, 2005 because these pesticides are highly toxic. The pesticides to be imported, distributed, traded and used should be friendlier and less hazardous to health and environment more emphasis has been given to use organic pesticides as an alternative of chemical pesticides to control crop pests. Development and use of some microbial and botanical pesticides which are eco-friendly has opened a new arena for bio-pesticides in Nepal. The best known form of bio -pesticide is the Bacillus thuriginsis (Bt), however, other microbial based biopesticides such as NPV (nuclear poly hederosis virus) fungi based (Metarhizium anisopliae and Beauveria bassiana) are also been used accidentally and occasionally in Nepal. The efficacy and potentiality of producing green muscardine fungus, M. anisopliae has been reported for the first time in Nepal (G. C., 2007). Eco-friendly formulations are also being used currently and their value in IPM has been widely accepted as the best alternatives to pesticide application. PPD has already been conducting or is regularly lunching training programs to educate the concerned personnel regarding their values in pest management; however, the introduction of biopesticides from foreign country should be very cautious. Sometimes, their introduction may disseminate the un-necessary transmission of the disliked problems. While registering such compounds, it is utmost important for studying the efficacy through bioassay with enough base of the research data. Unlike stringent regulation of the developed countries in import and export of the pesticides and biopesticides, there is weak enforcement and technical capabilities and expertise in Nepal. Further, there is a need to strengthen the scientific and technical base for health and environmental risk assessment with ample support of research organizations like Nepal Agriculture Research Council (NARC). Status and trend of import of pesticides Pesticide worth NRs 0.5 millions were imported in 1970s. However, an import of pesticides increases to NRs 10 millions in 1983 and NRs 42 million in 1989. And import data of those pesticides reveals that insecticides were the major component of 60% followed by fungicides (30%) and others (10%) (Manandhar, 2006). In 2007, the total pesticides in active ingredient have been found 347494.56 kg worth of 272.7 million Nepalese rupees. An import of pesticides in active ingredient was 108427.19 kg in 1999 and reached as high as 196056.98 kg in 2000 after that it decreased in fluctuating trend till 2006 and suddenly increased to 347494.55 kg in 2007. This was due to tremendous increase in fungicides import. Most of the times insecticide in active ingredient have been second major components of pesticides followed by fungicides ranging from 17.35% (2007) to 49.52% (2005) of total pesticide imports. Organophosphates accounts highest among insecticides ranging from 29% (2007) to 82% (2003). There is in increasing but fluctuating trend on import of mixed pesticides. Amount in active ingredient of botanical based insecticides accounts only 0.01% of total insecticide imports. Fungicide have been the major component in terms of active ingredients in most of the times with exception in 2003 and 2005 (where insecticide exceeds it) ranging from 31.30% (2003) to 68.31% (2007) of total pesticide imports. Bio-pesticide was first imported in quantifiable amounts since 2004. However, amount of biopesticides accounts less than 0.1% of total pesticide import in active ingredients. Pesticide import trend shows that amount of botanical based insecticides accounts only around 0.01% and 1% of total insecticide imports in active ingredients and money value in Nepali currencies, respectively. Similarly, amount of biopesticides occupies less than 0.1% of total pesticide import in active ingredients but in terms of mo ney value it ranges from 0.31% (2004) to 1.84% (2005). There are four trade names and only one common name (Azadirachtin; Neem based) for botanical pesticides. However, in case of biopesticides there are nine trade names that includes fungus based 4 (t wo common names) and five bacteria based (two common names). Bacteriacide and acaricide accounts less than 1% of total pesticide import. Herbicides import in ai have been found in fluctuating trend ranging from 1.89% (2007) to 8.40% (2005) of total pesticides. Similarly, rodenticide shows fluctuating trend imports in

quantity ranging from 0.70% (2002) to 10.73% (2007) of total pesticide import. Pesticide import of other than above pesticides including pesticide use for public health purposes ranges from 0.78% to 10.44% of total pesticide import. Almost 289 pesticide trade products are registered in Nepal at present. Majority of them are insecticide (173), fungicide (62), herbicide (24), rodenticide (9), biopesticide including botanical pesticide (13) and others (8). There are total number of 76 common name pesticides are registered that includes insecticide -36, fungicide -17, rodenticide -3, herbicide -24, biopesticide -6 and others -6. AIC stopped bulk purchasing of pesticides since 1995, then this tasks has been taken up by the private wholesalers and retailers, began to bloom in most of the districts of Nepal. Now there are 6372 pesticide retailers who have been registered and 6772 resellers have received training and got certificate for safe use of pesticides and storage management. Four firms/ companies have been registered for commercial pesticide applicators. Government initiatives on banning POPS pesticides The Government of Nepal has banned fourteen pesticides such as DDT, Aldrin, Dieldrin, Heptachlor, Toxaphene, Mirex, Endrin, Chlordane, BHC, Lindane, Phosphamidon, Organomercury compounds, Methyl parathion and Monocrotophos. Among these first eight pesticides are considered to be POPs. Officially their import, uses are strictly illegal, however, it is pity of seeing their availability and uses in some parts of the county indicating the needs of strong enforcement through coordinated approach of the related line agencies. Moreover, awareness program and alternative provisions for the possible stockpiles of date expired and obsolete pesticides are essential prior to the imposition of enforcement. Future thrusts on plant protection in Nepal Several reports and farmer experiences suggest, there has been un-intentional use of unwanted chemical pesticides in many places leading to several levels of hazards to the human beings and on the environment. Considerable areas of Nepal use pesticide deliberately as a means for controlling pests and diseases because of the lack of other alternatives. The necessity of these compounds has to be minised for several reasons and by several means. PPD has considered this aspect as one of the foremost important aspect to be dealt. Considering this aspect, forthcoming program are directed in this area, which are described as below. Most of the producer and consumer of Nepal are unknown about the hazardous effect of pesticide in human health and environment in one hand and lack of alternative measures of pest control in another hand. At the same time, the country's physical situation has not well supported for checking up of the illegal entry of the chemical pesticides. Moreover, there is weak enforcement in imposing the rules and regulations on the entry as well as sale of banned group of chemical pesticides. The most important aspect which is lacking in the country is unavailability of residue analysis facilities and existence of central laboratories. Looking into the existing situation, Plant Protection Directorate (PPD) has given increasing thrust for moving in a coordinated ways while considering the aspiration of the farmers, consumer, pesticide sellers, and policy makers to the upstream beneficiaries. The below explained points however, can be taken as the shopping lists among the numerous alternatives. PPD has focused its upcoming programs in this direction, which will be cornerstone in this area. 1. Enhance awareness programs to the wider audience There has been increasing concerns about hazardous of pesticides, which however, is still limited mainly among the literate and elites. Information is still lacking among the considerable number of farm families because of the illiteracy and level of their understanding. Besides, there are other hidden facts; pesticides are deliberately used because of the lack of alternatives. Despite of the facts, pesticides has been used more than their desired level, which has caused several levels of hazards and environmental mishaps. Awareness could be the first weapon in reducing un-necessary and deliberate use of chemical pesticides, which can be raised by various means and stakeholders. Now a day, consumer awareness has been considered more effective than the applicators and on the other area of agents. Therefore, they should be presented in a various ways targeting both with the literate and illiterate mass. Thus study materials as well as hearing means could be two options widely. Even in this case, they can be further classified as audio and visual aids, which are mass media. 2. Measures to mainstream alternative pest management techniques, such as IPM and development of biorational and biopesticide compounds as alternatives over chemical pesticides This could be one of the options towards reduction of the pesticides in managing agricultural crop pests. Future program are therefore, directed towards this aspect, where pest management with alternative methods will be enhanced with the reliance of natural biocontrol agents as well as use of bio and botanical pesticides. Production of natural enemies and biopesticides has been started since this year. Regional Plant Protection Laboratory (RPPL) has been directed for the production of at least some biocontrol works in their respective labs. Similarly, biopesticide production on the basis of public private partnership (PPP) basis has been initiated. Initially, PPD will demonstrate their production and private organizations will carryon production and marketing aspect of the biopesticides. The transfer of technology from lab to land is necessary therefore; enhanced collaboration will be done with research, teaching, extension counterparts and private counterparts. In this direction following activities will be launched in future program;

o Comparative demonstration on pesticide and alternative method should be done in the pocket areas in large number in collaboration with DADO's programme to minimize the pesticide use in relation to profit and pesticide residue analysis.

o Awareness and use of sex pheromone lures, bio pesticides and botanical pesticides as per possible in the pocket areas. o Documentation and dissemination of indigenous pest management methods in wider scale. o Functional collaboration with national research systems for the effective backup to IPM program in Nepal. o Mass rearing/ production of minimum one BCA in each RPPL.

3. Strengthening pesticide legislation and regulation The pesticide act and regulations are to be amended as per the present needs and context. Government of Nepal has expressed its consent for organic agriculture and banning of obsolete pesticides during various treaties and conventions. Therefore, more has to be done through enforcement of the legislations and regulations.

o Need of regular monitoring by Pesticide Inspector and staffs of PRMD and PPD in agrovets, pesticide retailers, and formulators especially in pocket areas related districts.

o Pesticide act and rule must be revised. For time being, the main hindrance of enforcement of pesticide law by pesticide

inspector are:

i. Where to store and transport the seize pesticides by the Inspectors (no provision of budget and logistic support for this). ii. Life security

iii. No provision of security support staffs.

4. Strengthening enforcement capacity of the working staff Capacity building is one of the vital steps for the effective launching of the programs, therefore, this will be continued in the needy area. Much of the focus will be laid on the area of biointensive agriculture for catering the needs of farming communities and working staffs. Exposure visits, tours, training to in country and abroad trainings will be emphasised. 5. Strengthening of import controls In order to promote the entry of safe pesticides in Nepal, control mechanisms will be enhanced in the boarder areas with Nepal. The illegal entry may be harassed through effective quarantine measure and imposition of the government rules and regulations. 6. Strengthening pesticide quality control and residue monitoring Until now there is no accredited pesticide residue monitoring laboratory in the country. Therefore, central laboratory will be established and strengthen to their fullest capacity. This will fuel to the laboratories in the regional levels, where the later will support to the requirement of DADOs and farming communities. The residues present in the crop products are mainly related within the Department for Food Quality Testing and Quality Control (DFTQC) whereas periodic monitoring of the residues in the plant samples will be carried out within the pesticide residue monitoring program laboratory of PPD. In this aspect exploration of the facilities already available in the Pesticide Registration and Monitoring Section, National Plant Quarantine Program (NPQP), Regional Plant Protection Laboratory and Plant Protection Directorate (PPD) has been started, however, there is no Central Plant Protection Laboratory, that would assist to the regional programs. For its establishment, arrangement of the lab and equipments is necessary and requested to PACT office. Initially, it is found that, there has been shortage of the space (room) for the establishment and running of the pesticide residue monitoring lab. Similarly, there is lack of trained manpower, which would run this facility comfortably and independently, even short course training was received. This step by no means is expensive and well planning and provision of the funds are necessary. At this stage, preliminary assessment of the laboratory facilities, manpower and possible expenses should be assessed and arranged. In nutshell, following are some of the important points to be considered, For residue monitoring in the crop samples, there must be provision to run existing Gas Chromatography (GC) which is

currently been lodged at Pesticide Residue Management Section. For its running minor repairmen and training to the staff is necessary. Provision of regular budget for its running should be envisioned.

Side by side, analysis may be carried out in private sectors (such eg. NESS), FTRD, NARC until full fledge establishment

and functioning of the central laboratories. As the pesticide residue data do not reveal the high level of pesticide residue in most of the cases, the following basis should be incorporated for sample collection; o Crop basis o Season basis o Pocket basis o Per unit area basis

Pesticide residue monitoring laboratory should be established within the premises of central laboratories. This can be established in the PPD complex, for this another separate working yard has been proposed in the budget of this fiscal year. Refresher training is important at least to the person who has been Master degree in science or agricultural fields. Women support staff of the medium level of degree are normally appropriate in running laboratory. Detail about the smooth running of the laboratory and its administration should be lead by PPD. In order to provide the effective diagnostic services for plant protection in Nepal, there must be one separate central laboratory in Kathmandu with its full fledge mandate, which has been proposed in annex 1. 7. Strengthened guidance and control of importers, formulators, distributors and retailers 8. Development of strategy for the collection and management of empty pesticide containers and unwanted pesticides 9. Formulation pesticide ad IPM policy in the country level 10. Communications and training programme for users

Training and capacity building will be highly useful to various levels of people as seeing believes and people learn by doing. The participants will have opportunity to learn by themselves or they will be graduated by the expert's people. Following program will be focused in these aspects. 11. Observation visits The peoples' feeling may be changed towards positive aspect by allowing them with the opportunity for exposure visits in such a area, where some remarkable works are done. For this, the best alternatives will be done as exchange visits of the farmers from one district to the other area, where these activities are known as presentable. The group leader members of the group may join such exposure visits, so that compulsion can be done upon the return. 12. Mobile plant clinic Until recently, pest and disease problems are tackled bascially with the use of chemical pesticides. Mostly application goes blanket without proper diagnosis which is on the basis of experiences or guestimate. In other words, most of such actions goes without proper diagnosis resulting into the unwanted mixing of poisons in the environment. In order to mitigate this practice, proper diagnosis techniques can be ensured with the means of plant clinics. As a pilot phase of the program, PPD has been running this program in few of the Districts. Recommendation of the control measures will be based on the proper diagnosis of the biotic or abiotic problem. Therefore, the unnecessary and unwanted use of pesticide will be reduced to a great extent. It is also logical to conduct in our situation as there are human clinics as well as animal clinics but in Nepal no plant clinic exists in the country, which in fact should be well taken by the policy makers and practicioners. 13. Lunch campaign based plant protection project Sometimes, the pest and diseases outbreak occurs unexpectedly, which needs emergency services. However, there are other regular instances that, most of the pests and disease occur due to fluctuation or unbalanced climatic relations and death of the natural enemies. In this case, farmers often tend to go in pesticide use without considering natural factors. Therefore, intensive and integrated means of pest control will be mobilized based from principally to the practice. Facilities for carrying out of the laboratory activities is utmost important within the access of Plant Protection Directorate (PPD) where the use of equipments and human resources could be shared on pool basis. Until now, no such facility exists in the country, however, activities related to this area has been done in isolation with the Nepal Agricultural Research Council, Nepal and Science and Technology and couple of other private organization. Laboratory which would allow for running of gas chromatography (GC), laminar flow hood, autoclave, cooling and heating facilities as controlled by AC and incubators should be established. For regular power supply, electric generator is necessary. In addition to this, such kind of laboratory should be equipped with distillation sets, microscopes, reagents, glass wares for satisfying the requirement for plant and pesticide sample diagnosis. At the same time, it has to be equipped with the facility for clinical diagnosis of plant, soil and seed samples with regard to biotic and abiotic causes. Separate room should be allocated having ample space with assured supply of water. Running of this lab can be done by establishing separate laboratory concepts (Annex 1), however, until the provision of manpower and budget with separate identity, PPD may administer such lab coordinating with its Regional Plant Protection Laboratories, Pesticide Registration and Management Sections and Plant Quarantine Programs. 14. Emphasis of bio-intensive IPM FFS and its link to organic agriculture Priority must be given in commercial production areas where pesticide use is high for field school conduction and prepare farmer to farmer (Fto F) from those areas. The better learning of FFS should be replicated to the organic production of some of the income generating crops. As the principles of IPM and OPM prevail in similar way, therefore, it is important to go these programs hand in hand. 15. Pesticide use survey/ study The existing pesticide consumption data i.e. 142 g/ha need to revise because this data is very old and do not reveal for crop specific, season specific and location specific. Therefore, intensive survey or study should be done in national level. At the same time, the status of pesticide use and misuse on the crop-wise and district-wise would be necessary. PPD will focus its future programs in this direction. 16. Coordination and monitoring activity 16. 1 DADO level

o Regular meeting at "District level pesticide management committee" o Monitoring of pesticide use in pocket areas within disciplinarians of DADO and District Agriculture Development

Committee. o Program collaboration with DDC, VDC and other local NGO for awareness, minimum and safe use of pesticide, IPM

FFS and other programmes. o Pesticide use data collection and forward to RPPL, PRMD, and PPD. o Coordinate with local news paper and local FM

16.2 Regional level

o Monitoring, supervision, and technical backstopping to the districts by RPPL, RAD and IPM RCC. o District pesticide use data compilation. o Coordination with other organizations o Coordinate with regional news paper and regional FM

16. 3 Central level o Monitoring, supervision, and technical backstopping to the districts by PRMD, PPD and DOA. o National level coordination with other organizations. o Coordinate with importers, wholesalers for promotion of bio -pesticides and botanical pesticides. o Policy making