Please login first
Terence Centner      
Timeline See timeline
Terence Centner published an article in June 2018.
Top co-authors See all
Susana Ferreira

27 shared publications

S. Ferreira

24 shared publications

A. M. Stelzleni

10 shared publications

Brady Brewer

10 shared publications

Rebecca M. Shuman

2 shared publications

The University of Georgia

19
Publications
24
Reads
0
Downloads
37
Citations
Publication Record
Distribution of Articles published per year 
(2004 - 2018)
Total number of journals
published in
 
15
 
Publications See all
Article 0 Reads 0 Citations Reducing damages from sulfoxaflor use through mitigation measures to increase the protection of pollinator species Terence J. Centner, Brady Brewer, Isaac Leal Published: 01 June 2018
Land Use Policy, doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.03.016
DOI See at publisher website
ABS Show/hide abstract
The demise of pollinator species due to the increased use of insecticides and other factors is leading to declines in crop yields. In regulating insecticides, governments may preclude usage if it poses an unreasonable risk to the environment taking into account the economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits of its use. To meet this requirement, the registration of an insecticide often includes mitigation measures to reduce the adverse effects of its use. For the registration of sulfoxaflor in the United States, a systemic insecticide used on hundreds of crops, four mitigation measures were recommended to reduce the risk of harm to pollinator species. Yet, given the importance of pollination to food crops, governments may need to take additional steps and adopt a greater variety of measures. Through a comparison of three regulatory options for use of insecticides, we show that it may be advantageous to mitigate harm to pollinators.
Article 1 Read 8 Citations Beta agonists in livestock feed: Status, health concerns, and international trade T. J. Centner, J. C. Alvey, A. M. Stelzleni Published: 01 September 2014
Journal of Animal Science, doi: 10.2527/jas.2014-7932
DOI See at publisher website
PubMed View at PubMed
ABS Show/hide abstract
Since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved ractopamine hydrochloride and zilpaterol hydrochloride in animal feeds, usage of those compounds has been a topic of worldwide debate. Ractopamine and zilpaterol are β-adrenergic agonists used as veterinary drugs to increase weight gain in certain animals raised for food. The Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) established maximum residue limits for ractopamine, which were adopted by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex). No maximum residue limits for zilpaterol have been adopted by JECFA, and new reports of animal mobility issues confront the use of this feed additive. However, many countries disagree with theCodex standards and are restricting or banning meat products containing β agonists. The bans by major importers of U.S. meat products have prompted some to advocate that the United States use the World Trade Organization dispute settlement body. This paper looks at the developments to provide a fuller accounting of what the issues may mean to U.S. firms selling meat products containing residues of β agonists.
Article 2 Reads 1 Citation Governmental Provisions to Manage and Eradicate Feral Swine in Areas of the United States Terence J. Centner, Rebecca M. Shuman Published: 21 May 2014
Ambio, doi: 10.1007/s13280-014-0532-9
DOI See at publisher website
PubMed View at PubMed
ABS Show/hide abstract
Feral swine (wild hogs) are one of the most widely distributed free-ranging mammals in the world. In the United States, feral swine serve as game animals for the sport of hunting in some areas, while they are nuisance species at other locations. Increasing feral swine populations creates negative impacts to growing crops, native plant communities, and wildlife. Feral swine can also serve as reservoirs for a number of bacterial and viral diseases that can infect wild animals, livestock, and humans. The US state governments are adopting statutes and regulations to reduce the growth and dispersal of feral swine populations. An analysis of these provisions suggests that while they seek to control feral swine populations, they are unlikely to provide any significant relief from damages to crops and native ecosystems. More localized reduction plans and a national disease control program are suggested to assuage damages being wrought by these invasive animals.
Article 1 Read 0 Citations Requiring Pollutant Discharge Permits for Pesticide Applications that Deposit Residues in Surface Waters Terence Centner, Nicholas Eberhart Published: 08 May 2014
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, doi: 10.3390/ijerph110504978
DOI See at publisher website
PubMed View at PubMed
ABS Show/hide abstract
Agricultural producers and public health authorities apply pesticides to control pests that damage crops and carry diseases. Due to the toxic nature of most pesticides, they are regulated by governments. Regulatory provisions require pesticides to be registered and restrictions operate to safeguard human health and the environment. Yet pesticides used near surface waters pose dangers to non-target species and drinking water supplies leading some governments to regulate discharges of pesticides under pollution discharge permits. The dual registration and discharge permitting provisions are burdensome. In the United States, agricultural interest groups are advancing new legislation that would exempt pesticide residues from water permitting requirements. An analysis of the dangers posed by pesticide residues in drinking water leads to a conclusion that both pesticide registration and pollutant discharge permitting provisions are needed to protect human health and aquatic species.
Article 1 Read 0 Citations Rationing health protection: A proposal to exempt nuisance dust from US Clean Air Act Regulations Gregory Colson, Terence J. Centner Published: 01 March 2013
Journal of Environmental Management, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.12.016
DOI See at publisher website
PubMed View at PubMed
ABS Show/hide abstract
The US House of Representative has passed a bill called the “Farm Dust Regulation Prevention Act” (Dust Act) that would exempt most types of particulate matter (PM) in rural areas from the air quality controls of the US Clean Air Act. The Dust Act would markedly change the country's air quality standards. An examination of the proposed provisions shows that they would exempt non-combustion PM pollutants from mining, smelting, petroleum production, and power generation from existing air quality standards. Persons downwind from pollutants generated in rural areas could be exposed to concentrations of carcinogenic heavy metals, asbestos, and benzene known to adversely affect their health and ecological resources. Existing federal air quality standards based on science would be replaced by a flexible standard that rations health protection. Highlights► Legislation proposes to remove significant air quality controls in the United States. ► Agricultural producers seek exemption of particulate matter from federal air quality controls. ► Changing from federal to sub-governmental regulation allows downwind pollution damages. ► Exempting particulate matter pollution from air quality controls will ration health protection.
Article 1 Read 0 Citations Securing recompense under nuisance law for crop damages from pesticide applications Terence J. Centner Published: 01 August 2012
Science of The Total Environment, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.05.057
DOI See at publisher website
PubMed View at PubMed
ABS Show/hide abstract
In areas where several crops are grown or where organic practices have been adopted, conflicts may arise due to the use of pesticides. Accompanying the use of specialized pesticides for individualized crops are possibilities that spray applications or volatilization will result in airborne pesticide particulates damaging nontarget crops. American jurisprudence provides several major causes of action that may be used to secure recompense for damages to crops from applications of pesticides. However, defenses and limitations for each of these causes of action create impediments that make recovery difficult. An evaluation of nuisance law discloses that defenses often preclude recoveries for damages to nontarget crops from airborne pesticide particulates. Policy makers may want to evaluate the defenses due to their interference with property rights. The defenses may discourage changes in crop production resulting in suboptimal uses of resources. Highlights► Due to different crops and cropping practices, conflicts arise from pesticide usage. ► Drifting or volatilizing pesticides is carried onto nearby properties. ► Nuisance law may provide a remedy for damages from pesticide drift and volatilization. ► Right-to-farm laws may preclude damages caused by pesticide particulates. ► Reconsider laws interfering with collecting damages from airborne pesticide particulates.