AR
PE
American
news
Registry of Professional
JUNE, 1977
ARPE COUNCIL MEETS
LEGISLATIVE ACTION
ARPE has been active before Congress. On March 9, 1977, a
statement was presented before the Committee on Agriculture,
U. S. House of Representatives, during that Committee's hearings on the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act,
as amended. On March 11, the same statement was submitted
to the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry
for their hearings on the same law. This statement in its
entirety is printed in ARPE News No. 15.
In the statement ARPE had three messages of concern.
Entomologists
First,
The historic first meeting of the first
Governing Council convened on April
Dr. Perry L. Adkisson, the first duly
Registry presided, and all members of
membership·elected ARPE
11, 1977, at Kansas City.
elected President of the
the Council were present.
After hearing reports on membership, budget, headquarters activities, etc., the Council tot down to a long, full day of
decision-making and action. Appointment of members to the
five Standing Committees (Exbmining Board; Ethics; Membership;
Finance; and Special Award:i) and the Nominating Committees
however, ARPE stated that ARPE believed FIFRA-amended was
for 1978 officers and council members took most of the morn-
a good law, it only needed strengthening or clarification as to
the intent of Congress. The first concern was the EPA inflex·
ible interpretation of use inconsistent with the label. ARPE
stated that registered professional entomologists are available
throughout the country and for these professionals use inconsistent with the label should have a broader meaning. It should
mean application of a pesticide to a crop, animal or site not
in labeling claims, use of a pesticide at a dosage rate exceeding those in the labeling, failure of the applicator or others
directly involved such as registered professional entomologists,
to follow restrictions or limitations and the precautions in label·
ing, and failure to follow label directions in the storage and
disposal of pesticides and their containers. ARPE then urged
the Committee to amend the law so that this would be explicit
and provided suggested wording to do so.
ing as great effort was made to maintain a balance between
private, federal, state and company employed entomologists
and have geographical representation at the same time. The
Presidential appointments to the four Special Committees (Professional Affairs; Professional Standards and Continuing Edu·
cation: Issues, Images and Long-Range Planning; and Local,
State, and Regional Organization of ARPEl were reviewed and
discussed. Because of space limitations the names of the com·
mittee members are not listed here. They can be found in the
May issue (No. 16) of ARPE News.
The second concern was for provision of continued funding for
training of applicators. Again commending Congress, this time
on their conceiving the concept of certification and placing its
administration in the hands of the States, and recognizing the
capability of the State Cooperative Extension Service as the
effective transfer system to the people, ARPE described how
the applicator training program is structured to provide con·
tinuing education to maintain the level of competence in the
face of changing technology. ARPE again gave credit to Congress for giving formal endorsement to the principle that education is a reliable and workable ingredient in the regulatory
process-legal
recognition of education and the competent
man. ARPE noted it was proud of the contributions made by
many of its members in behalf of the effort. After describing
its value, ARPE stated the momentum of the program must not
be allowed to stop. Although both private and state funds have
been contributed, it is the infusion of federal funds that catalyzes the effort. ARPE concludes this part with an emphasized
"there must be provision for continued funding of training at
this time."
The third concern was for immediate classification of pesticides
into restricted and general uses. Noting that the training and
certification effort has proceeded in good faith that restricted
uses of pesticides would be identified, ARPE emphasizes the
need for EPA to proceed immediately with classification separately from the actual registration.
ARPE has been concerned in other bills before Congress, specifically HR 4863, The Agricultural Research Act, and S 275,
the Senate Farm Bill, Title 8, Food and Agricultural Research.
ARPE has provided statements in support of these which statements are available from the ARPE office.
In the afternoon the Council's Finance and Budget Study Committee reported on the 1977 budget and the proposed 1978 budget. With a few modifications the 1978 bUdget was approved
by the Governing Council. This budget, in the amount of
$35,600, will now go to the ESA Governing Board for their
review at their August 1977 meeting in accordance with ARPE's
charter. Other Registry affairs, such as membership promo·
tional plans, legislative action (see article elsewhere on this
pagel, questions on registration requirements and examination
procedures, and on emeritus membership and student chapters,
progress of the Civil Service Subcommittee, the Registry newsletters, and the program for the ARPE Annual Meeting on
November 27th, 1977, were discussed and action taken.
ARPE members should feel well gratified that their organization,
under self·governance, is starting to move forward into action
areas long awaiting this entry by entomologists. With a com·
mittee (Professional Affairs) to develop a five-year plan on how
ARPE might improve salaries, opportunities and advancement
for its members, and to develop ways to counteract our identity
crisis with the general public and employers of entomologists
(by convincing employers and administrators that R.P.E. identi·
fies the highest type of professional, equal to the M.D., D.V.M.,
or P.E. (Professional Engineer)) we should soon see progress out
of our stagnation. With other committees (Professional Stand·
ards and Continuing Education, and Issues and Images) to in·
vestigate what ARPE should do toward providing or requiring
training or periodic recertification to keep its members current,
and to ascertain what issues and activities ARPE should get
involved in and what actions to take, we can not only merit
the confidence to be shown in R.P.E., but also by our action on
issues make R.P.E. respected in policy·making councils of state
and federal agencies. ARPE is on the move!
LAST HURDLE FOR BYLAWS
ARPE has promoted its members desires in the applied area
(more flexible interpretation of use inconsistent with the labeD,
in the teaching and extension area (continued federal funding
for certification, training and recertification of applicatorsl, and
in the research area (support of agricultural research more particularly integrated pest controll. ARPE serves its members
and the field of entomology!
By an overwhelming majority the new ARPE Bylaws were ap·
proved by the ARPE membership. According to our Charter,
these Bylaws now go to the ESA Governing Board for their approval: "The Registry shall establish Bylaws, subject to approval
by the Governing Board of the parent Society," The ESA Governing Board meets August 25 and 26, 1977.
136