Search Site   
News Stories at a Glance
Kentucky farmer turns one-time tobacco plot into gourd patch
Look at field residue as treasure rather than as trash to get rid of
Kentucky farm wins prestigious environmental stewardship award
Beekeeping Boot Camp offers hands-on learning
Kentucky debuts ‘Friends of Agriculture’ license plate
Legislation gives Hoosier vendors more opportunities to sell products
1-on-1 with House Ag leader Glenn Thompson 
Increasing production line speeds saves pork producers $10 per head
US soybean groups return from trade mission in Torreón, Mexico
Indiana fishery celebrates 100th year of operation
Katie Brown, new IPPA leader brings research background
   
Archive
Search Archive  
   
Pesticides manufacturers asking feds for new review of chemical restrictions
By KEVIN WALKER
D.C. Correspondent
 
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The manufacturers of certain pesticides for agricultural use have written to the Trump administration asking that government studies showing that the chemicals harm protected species be set aside in favor of more public comment and study.
 
In an April 13 letter, Dow Chemical, Makhteshim Agan of North America and FMC Corp. wrote to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross asking that three biological evaluations (BEs) conducted by the EPA and any biological opinions based on them be set aside. 
  
The letter goes on to ask that a 2014 settlement with the government regarding the pesticides and their possible effects on endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) be modified in order to extend a deadline to complete more agency analyses.

 Specifically, BEs are documents from EPA required under an Obama administration policy to resolve “controversies” regarding the chemicals and ESA.

 The letter included a number of complaints about how the government dealt with the chemicals and their registrations for agricultural use. The pesticides in question are chlorpyrifos, diazinon and malathion. The letter complained, among other issues, that the EPA didn’t respond to many of the comments it received during the public comment period, and that the agency didn’t follow its own process correctly.

 The letter also said the evaluations contained a lack of transparency necessary for evaluation and reproduction of scientifically verifiable results; that they included proposed and candidate species that are not afforded protection under the ESA; that many studies selected by EPA as sources of information on the pesticides’ effects and exposure were not evaluated for data quality and relevance; and that when evaluated, many studies did not follow EPA’s own study quality criteria.

 “In addition, many scientifically valid, registrant-submitted studies were not evaluated by the agency, with no explanation,” the letter said. “This is not justified and is contrary to EPA’s own guidance and the recommendations made by the National Academy of Sciences.”

 In reaction to the letter, the environmental group Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) issued a statement on April 20 saying Dow Chemical – buoyed by the Trump administration’s decision to scrap a ban on chlorpyrifos due to its purported ill effects on human health – is now pushing the EPA to abandon efforts to protect endangered species from it and the two other chemicals.
 
Lambasting the letter as a “back channel ploy,” CBD said the chemicals in question harm nearly all 1,800 threatened and endangered animals and plants.
 
“Our government’s own scientists have already documented the grave danger these chemicals pose to people and endangered species,” said Brett Hartl, government affairs director at CBD.
 
“Unable to win on the facts, Dow is now adopting the same disgraceful tactics honed by the tobacco industry and the climate deniers, to try to discredit and scrap reasonable conservation measures that will protect our most endangered animals and plants.”
 
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service were expected to release draft biological opinions – the penultimate stage of the regulatory process – for public review and comment by the end of May. These assessments are required as part of the 2014 settlement the pesticides manufacturers made with the CBD and other environmental groups. 
 
 In 2000, EPA banned household uses of chlorpyrifos, a widely used insecticide, with the exception of ant and roach bait in child-resistant packaging. Between 2000 and 2002, EPA cancelled the use of  chlorpyrifos on tomatoes andrestricted its use on crops including apples, citrus and tree nuts. In 2012, the agency added more restrictions on its use.

  Diazinon and malathion are also insecticides. Diazinon is used on a number of fruits, vegetables, nuts, ornamentals and in cattle ear tags. Malathion is used in the production of a wide variety of food and feed crops to control insects such as aphids, leafhoppers and Japanese beetles. 
5/11/2017