It’s been a long time coming, but now it seems to have gotten here in a hurry. Since the Endangered Species Act (ESA)was passed in 1973, the federal law established agencies must ensure no species listed as endangered or threatened could be jeopardized by actions within their regulatory authority. Until EPA’s Final Herbicide Strategy was published in August 2024, agriculture did not have clear guidance on what that meant for the application of pesticides. And now, we do for herbicides, with insecticides coming next and fungicides to follow.
“It’s been 50 years EPA did not develop methods to protect ESA species as it relates to pesticides, and then everything came at once because the courts were acting and dictating it was time to develop a plan,” says Bill Chism, a weed scientist with a career spanning industry plus 20 years with EPA as a pesticide benefit biologist.
From the Final Herbicide Strategy, there are four main changes to be aware of where a herbicide has the potential to impact listed species or its habitat:
- Spray drift mitigations
- Runoff/erosion mitigations
- More restrictive mitigation in specific geographic areas called Pesticide Use Limitation Areas (PULAs)
- Applicator will be required to visit EPA’s Bulletins Live! two, up to six, months prior to the application and follow current ESA restrictions for the pesticide product
While the new parameters add complexity, Stanley Culpepper from the University of Georgia, says it is a challenge ag retailers, distributors, Extension and crop consultants have an opportunity to help farmers rise to meet.
“This appears to be our way of life into the future,” Culpepper says. “It’s unfortunate how complicated it is, and it’s difficult to understand, but it’s our job to take the burden and simplify it.”
The first row crop product registered under the EPA’s Final Herbicide Strategy is Liberty Ultra, a glufosinate herbicide from BASF. Going forward, as products receive registration or go through the 15 year reregistration process for FIFRA, all will have to be evaluated against the Final Herbicide Strategy.
“It’s not everything immediately, so this year is a learning year about what we can expect,” Chism says. “We think it’ll take at least 15 years for all pesticides to have ESA assessments through that 15-year cycle for reregistration.”
Points-Based System
Culpepper says the ESA parameters are front and center in his local trainings this winter. The practices for pesticide containment in the field are assigned points for runoff mitigation (zero to nine points). The points are expected to vary by product, crop and geography, and PULA.
“When growers walk out of their county meetings, I want them to understand the ESA concept and if they are implementing enough mitigation measures to meet potential pesticide runoff point requirements,” he says.
For trainings across Georgia, Culpepper is matching potential mitigation measures offered with practices implemented by farmers in the geographic area.
“If you present the 40 or more mitigation options to growers, it can be time consuming and overwhelming,” he says. “Focusing on only the measures important to those growers in the room can speed up and simplify the educational approach. The goal is to get each grower to nine points, the maximum required, thereby ensuring herbicides applied remain on the field maximizing weed efficacy while making sure all tools in the toolbox are legally available to the grower.”
For growers who aren’t able to identify the nine points, Culpepper is collecting information on why they can’t accrue enough points.
“If there are good stewardship practices that aren’t getting points, then we need to develop sound science to support those practices and work with our regulatory partners to obtain appropriate credit and recognition of those practices,” he says.
Buffers Required
On the pesticide label, herbicides will be assigned buffer requirements. Per the ESA guidelines, the maximum downwind buffer distances for different application methods are:
- Aerial zero to 320'
- Ground boom zero to 230'
Droplet size and boom height are also considered.
Achievable Goals
There is a track record of growers and their advisers stepping up to meet necessary application requirements and steward pesticide products. Referencing the Using Pesticides Wisely Program that Culpepper helped implement in Georgia for 10 years, growers were able to reduce off target pesticide drift by 90%.
“Our goal is to always use pesticides wisely by applying them on target and keeping them there,” he says. “Although it is hard to see because of complexity, the overall objective of ESA is the same as ours. Thus, we are confident we can do this. We can ensure the product goes on target and stays there.”
This highlights the role of advisers who can help farmers navigate some previously uncharted waters and a new decision-making process.
Culpepper, Chism and others are encouraged by the changes EPA made to the Final Herbicide Strategy after receiving feedback from its initially released draft. Groups such as the Agricultural Retailers Association also advocated for further options and flexibility added into the final version.
“We are at an important juncture, and we need collaboration,” Culpepper says.
One sector that could potentially have more of an uphill challenge with the mitigation points are some of the specialty crop production scenarios that can often impact vegetable growers.
“If you are a row crop producer, you have many potential options when it comes to herbicides. But for some of our specialty crops, they only have only six,” Chism says. “And there are conservation practices certain crops can’t adopt. For example, I’ve never seen a no-till planter for broccoli. So while corn, soybeans and cotton may be taking baby steps, specialty crop producers may be taking leaps.”
Moving Forward With A Bit More Certainty
With the guidance of the Final Herbicide Strategy, Culpepper says he can help growers address the current ESA guidelines documenting how farmers are the true stewards of agriculture, “as long as EPA doesn’t move the goal posts and they continue their effort of working with us.”
EPA states in the rule that no pesticide has been fully removed from the market based solely on ESA risks, and “that remains an unlikely scenario in the future.” Instead, this agency action suffices to keep pesticide registration and use outside of courtroom litigation.
A self-proclaimed optimist, Culpepper says the Final Herbicide Strategy once completed allowed the opportunity to start moving products forward with Liberty Ultra as an example.
“The dam has cracked a bit since August,” he says. “It’s not a big crack, but we desperately need our regulatory partners to move new products forward much more quickly in support of our farmers.”
