The GLP is committed to full transparency. Download and review our 2019 Annual Report

State officials urge EPA to permit additional restrictions on controversial herbicide dicamba

Crops damaged by dicamba drift. Image: University of Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service
This article or excerpt is included in the GLP’s daily curated selection of ideologically diverse news, opinion and analysis of biotechnology innovation.

The nation’s state pesticide regulators are fighting back after EPA’s recent announcement that it is considering limiting states’ ability to place additional restrictions on federal pesticides.

Rose Kachadoorian, president of the Association of American Pesticide Control Officials (AAPCO) and an Oregon pesticide regulator, and Leo Reed, an Indiana pesticide regulator, penned a letter urging EPA to leave this state right untouched. Barbara Glenn, CEO of the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA), also sent a letter to EPA, asking the agency to consult with state regulators before making any decision.

“AAPCO takes this issue very seriously, and strongly supports a state’s right to grant a Section 24(c) pesticide registration to reduce risk,” Kachadoorian and Reed wrote.

Related article:  Talking Biotech: Does LaCroix sparking water really contain cockroach insecticide?

At issue is an announcement made by EPA in late March that the agency is “reevaluating” how it handles additional restrictions placed on federal pesticides via a section of pesticide law known as 24(c)….[A] number of states have used 24(c) labels to add restrictions to the new dicamba formulations XtendiMax, Engenia and FeXapan, out of concern over widespread off-target dicamba movement and injury over the past two years.

Read full, original article: States Fight Back on Dicamba

News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.

Send this to a friend