Does EPA Have the Resources it Needs to Perform?
Weeds resist, insects persist and fungus continues to grow—that is, unless stewardship is practiced and new tools are introduced. One of the biggest barriers to introducing new pesticides—which includes herbicides, insecticides and fungicides—is regulatory review and its uncertain timing and expense.
For perspective, each new active ingredient that hits the farmgate takes about six years from start to finish—and today EPA, the agency in charge of registrations, is about 300 days behind, according to CropLife America President Chris Novak.
“EPA historically employed 900 employees [in the pesticide registration division],” Novak says. “Today they’re closer to 600 employees. We’ve seen Congress handicap this agency by not approving adequate funding for them to hire people who are needed to get the job done.”
More precisely, EPA’s Office of Pesticide Program (OPP) employs 657 people now and is “working toward” being fully staffed at 709 employees, the agency said in a statement to Farm Journal. The agency also said the past two fiscal year appropriation budgets have been relatively stable to support the OPP’s mission.
However, the registration process still takes time, which keeps tools out of farmers’ hands. And it’s not just new pesticides that undergo investigation by the agency either. Every 15 years EPA reviews registered pesticides to ensure they still meet agency standards while using the most up-to-date science available.
“EPA has set a goal to complete all FIFRA-mandated decisions for the pesticide registration review program by September 30, 2022,” the agency said in a statement.
Processes Criticized
Recent lawsuits highlight concerns some have with EPA’s current system. For example, the recent petition to vacate dicamba’s over-the-top registration, which was successful, highlighted concerns about how EPA upheld FIFRA and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). However, the court only upheld FIFRA concerns.
Now, a proposed bill would change FIFRA with more strict standards, and would require complete vacatur of paraquat, organophosphates and neonicotinoid chemicals. The Protect America’s Children from Toxic Pesticides Act of 2020 (PACTPA), proposed by Senator Tom Udall (D-N.M.) and Representative Joe Neguse (D-Colo.), calls for EPA to apply stricter rules to pesticides.
“This bill updates our laws so that they adhere to the science,” Udall said. “And the science is warning us that we must protect critical links in our food chain, and protect children and farmworkers from brain damage and other health risks of dangerous pesticides.”
However, those involved in the pesticide industry challenge claims that the current regulatory system is in need of change. The industry contends that the massive changes proposed would supplant science with politics, and would undermine the EPA’s comprehensive human health and ecological risk assessment process, Novak explains.
“In recent years, the process of pesticide registration has become less predictable. This most recent proposed legislation, based on politics and emotion, undermines EPA’s science-driven risk-based approach to pesticide regulation. We are eager to work with all stakeholders to address any concerns, while preserving current pesticide law,” Novak says.
Bringing new, effective tools to market involves extreme delays, which could get longer with FIFRA changes, and leaving fewer tools to break the resistance cycle.
“Today’s farmers are judicious stewards of the land, using pesticides only when and where necessary and in the smallest amounts possible to control the threat of pests, weeds and disease,” Novak says. “Pesticides are just one of many tools farmers use and is a tool that needs to remain available.”
