A little more time

It was 2008. Superintendents were scrambling to bulk up their Nemacur stockpiles. It was the industry’s most reliable nematode control product. And soon it, and anything containing its active ingredient, fenamiphos, no longer would be available for sale.

Many superintendents stockpiled hefty amounts of Nemacur for use years into the future, knowing, or at least believing, they would be allowed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to use any Nemacur they purchased by the deadline until it was exhausted.

But the situation has changed, and superintendents with substantial stocks of Nemacur remaining suddenly find themselves in a serious bind: They must use or dispose of their Nemacur by Oct. 6.

The deadline came as a surprise to superintendents, and it’s fast approaching.
 

So what happened?

The EPA didn’t expect stocks to last so long, that’s what happened. So on Oct. 5, 2011, the agency put a notice in the Federal Register mandating any existing Nemacur supplies be used or legally disposed of by Oct. 6, 2014.

Three years’ notice may seem ample. Only, superintendents didn’t know about the notice listed on page 61,690 in volume 76 of the Federal Register. And while most greenkeepers have depleted their stockpiles entirely by now, a few – particularly in coastal areas like the South and California – have not. That’s a problem.

“It’s going to have a huge impact on a few superintendents,” says leading nematologist Billy Crow, Ph.D., of the University of Florida. “Most golf courses don’t have any Nemacur on hand. But there are a few courses that were able to accumulate large quantities of it, and they have more of it than they can legally get rid of by the deadline.”

Nemacur applications are limited to two applications of 100 pounds per acre annually, Crow says. “And for some of these golf courses, if they went wall to wall on the golf course they wouldn’t even use it all. That’s how much they have.”

Disposing of pesticides hardly is as simple as disposing of a paper towel, as superintendents well know.

“The EPA has created a potential problem with disposal of these products that now won’t be used at all,” says Brian Powell, CGCS, president of the Carolinas GCSA. Not to mention, he adds, superintendents who thought they were preparing wisely when they stockpiled Nemacur in large quantities back in 2008 are facing the fact that their substantial financial investment will be wasted.

The GCSAA learned of the EPA’s change in the cancellation order just this spring. The association was quick to publish the information in its communication materials, says Chava McKeel, GCSAA director of government relations, and it wasn’t long before concerned superintendents began calling.

On its membership’s behalf, the GCSAA recently wrote to EPA, asking for an extension of the deadline for the use of existing stocks found within the fenamiphos cancellation order. “We sent a letter asking for continued use for a few more years,” McKeel says. “We just hope we can work with the agency to agree on an extension.”

EPA is reviewing the request now, and McKeel says GCSAA expects a response soon.

While quality nematode control products are on the market today, none are as popular as Nemacur, those in the industry say.

“I believe that golf course superintendents in the Carolinas still do not have a replacement for Nemacur,” laments Powell. “They do not have a current option for [fully] controlling nematodes.”

That’s because other nematode control products are much more targeted than Nemacur, which was praised for its versatility.

“The good thing about Nemacur is that it could be used on greens, tee boxes, fairways, driving ranges, wherever you had a nematode problem, and it would manage several different species of nematodes,” Crow says. “That’s not the case with the others available now. They work well in certain situations but not in others.”

Steve Wright, CGCS at Boca West Country Club in Boca Raton, Fla., recalls seeing immediate improvement in color and root growth after putting Nemacur out. With today’s options, he says, “you’re not going to get an instant response – maybe three or four months as compared to Nemacur, which showed results in three or four days.”

Wright says though he still has an iota of Nemacur on hand for the direst nematode problems. He’s been using another control product that comes in liquid and granular formulations for more than 10 years. “I’m very happy with the result,” he says. “It’s very safe and worked out very well.”

While it’s true newer products are more expensive and need to be applied much more frequently than Nemacur did, a few of them are gentler on the soil, Wright says. He’s happy about that.

“I know that I have healthier soil now,” he says. “The beneficials there are far outweighing the antagonistic forces.”

Crow says three new nematicides are working their way through the regulatory process right now. They’ve been tested and submitted to EPA for approval but have yet to be labeled.

“I expect the time frame to be two to three years,” Crow says. “In the meantime, we have some effective nematicides that work in certain situations, but you can’t throw them out there and have them work against all the different nematodes.”

Crow isn’t holding out hope the EPA will grant an exemption to the Oct. 6 deadline.

“I would be surprised,” he says. “The agency is not in the habit of changing regulations once they’re in place. Personally, I’m doubtful, but hopefully this extension will get approved and grant everyone a little more time.”

Molly McNulty is a freelance writer based in Cleveland, and a frequent GCI contributor.