By Lauren Diepenbrock and Brett Bultemeier
There have been a lot of changes within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), so much so that it seems there is an update nearly every day! This is because the EPA had to settle a mega lawsuit dealing with endangered species. In the past, the EPA did not directly address endangered species during registration. The agency certainly considered non-target organisms but not to the same standard that the Endangered Species Act implies, or so said the courts. In order to get in compliance, EPA had to move away from a product-by-product, species-by-species approach that was too slow.
The agency has streamlined these efforts with a new approach. Read about that approach in the final form of the Herbicide Strategy or in this press release. The EPA has adopted a three-step approach:
- Identify potential for population-level impacts. Will these products have any toxic impact on the listed species? If so, clearly define it.
- Identify type and level of mitigation. What types of things would mitigate the impact of those products that do pose a risk?
- Identify where mitigation applies. Is this simply crop dependent, state dependent or highly small and defined areas?
In essence, the EPA is more robustly looking at endangered species during the registration and reregistration process, making faster more widespread decisions, and balancing that with the flexibility needed to change in the future. Most of the mitigations focus on drift/erosion and keeping the herbicide on the farm. This makes sense as very few, if any, endangered species would be expected to use an agricultural field as suitable habitat. However, there could very much be suitable habitat close by, so a renewed focus on ensuring product stays on the field is primary.
Mitigation points are assigned based on how great the risk of erosion or drift might be. EPA will assign areas as very low, low, medium or high risk. These require 3, 6 or 9 points worth of mitigation, respectively (very low likely to have no points needed). Get enough points from the menu of options, carry on. Fail to get enough points, you can’t use the product. By not having this etched in stone on the label, but found on a website, EPA has maximum flexibility to make changes as needed. In case you missed that, websites count as labels now, so if a website is on the label, it counts as a label, too.
For an idea on what things count to mitigate risk, check out the Mitigation Menu. With the Herbicide Strategy just now approved, expect much more detailed information in the future and a points calculator to make this a little easier.
Some areas may carry an extra level of risk or have other issues that need to be addressed. This is where Pesticide Use Limitation Areas (PULAs) show up. Remember a BLT is more than just a sandwich. BLT also means Bulletins Live! Two. Follow those additional instructions, assuming you have enough mitigation points, and away you go.
Here is a simple recap:
- EPA must protect endangered species.
- Registration will now address that.
- Labels will directly inform about endangered species.
- Find your mitigation points.
- Check if BLT applies.
For some examples of what this might look like in the real world, download the file EPA added to the docket. It gives examples from all over the country. Several Florida examples are included.
There is still more to be decided in the future regarding the exact language on the labels, and how the points are assigned is yet to be determined. So, we don’t know all the stops we will take on this road trip, but we do know the destination, what vehicle is taking us there, and, in general, what to expect along the way. Start thinking about your operations and how you will incorporate this new regulatory hurdle into your plans. Follow the Pesticide Information Office blog to keep up to date.
Lauren Diepenbrock and Brett Bultemeier are University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences assistant professors.
Share this Post
Sponsored Content