The validation of pesticide leaching models presents particular proble
ms where the number of model predictions is far in excess of the obser
ved data. Normally, however, there are more frequent held observations
for other parameters (notably the site hydrology) than for pesticide
concentrations in either water or soil. A five-stage validation proced
ure which takes advantage of the most frequently available observation
s and which tests each of the components of the model in a cumulative
way, is thus advocated: Stage 1: Parameterisation of the model using o
nly independently measured parameters. Stage 2: Hydrological validatio
n: the validation of the predictions of water movement and water conte
nt of the soil. Stage 3: Solute movement validation: where field data
are available for solutes other than pesticide, the model should first
be validated for them, especially if they are more abundant than the
pesticide observations. Conserved solutes such as chloride or bromide
are preferred, although nitrate may be used for short periods. Stage 4
: Pesticide fate in the soil: models should use parameters of pesticid
e fate derived from independent studies. Stage 5: Pesticide leaching:
only in the last stage are the relatively small number of pesticide ob
servations compared with the model predictions with respect to pattern
s and orders of magnitude of occurrence. With this scheme, the results
of each stage are carried forward to the next, and confidence in the
model is built with each stage. This is illustrated using the CRACK-P
model and hydrological, nitrate and pesticide data from the Brimstone
Farm Experiment Oxfordshire, UK.