Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan - U.S. Fish and Wildlife ...

Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan
RQ = EEC/Toxicological Endpoint
The level of risk associated with direct effects of pesticide use would be characterized by comparing
calculated RQs to the appropriate Level of Concern (LOC) established by EPA (1998 (Table 2)).
The LOC represents a quantitative threshold value for screening potential adverse effects to fish and
wildlife resources associated with pesticide use. The following are four exposure-species group
scenarios that would be used to characterize ecological risk to fish and wildlife on the refuge: acutelisted
species, acute-nonlisted species, chronic-listed species, and chronic-nonlisted species.
Acute risk would indicate the potential for mortality associated with short-term dietary exposure to
pesticides immediately after an application. For characterization of acute risks, median values from
LC50 and LD50 tests would be used as toxicological endpoints for RQ calculations. In contrast,
chronic risks would indicate the potential for adverse effects associated with long-term dietary
exposure to pesticides from a single application or multiple applications over time (within a season
and over years). For characterization of chronic risks, the no observed concentration (NOAEC) or no
observed effect concentration (NOEC) for reproduction would be used as toxicological endpoints for
RQ calculations. Where available, the NOAEC would be preferred over a NOEC value.
Listed species are those federally designated as threatened, endangered, or proposed in accordance
with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 USC 1531-1544, 87 Stat. 884, as amended-Public Law
93-205). For listed species, potential adverse effects would be assessed at the individual level
because loss of individuals from a population could detrimentally impact a species. In contrast, risks
to nonlisted species would consider effects at the population level. A RQLOC would indicate a “may affect, likely to adversely
affect” for listed species and it would also pose unacceptable ecological risk for adverse effects to
nonlisted species.
Table 2. Presumption of unacceptable risk for birds, fish, and mammals (US Environmental
Protection Agency 1998).
Risk Presumption Level of Concern
Listed Species Non-listed Species
Acute Birds 0.1 0.5
Fish 0.05 0.5
Mammals 0.1 0.5
Chronic Birds 1.0 1.0
Fish 1.0 1.0
Mammals 1.0 1.0
Appendix G. Integrated Pest Management G-17