A recent federal court ruling sent me into the archives to review posts about the pesticide chlorpyrifos.
Back in 2021 when Deephaven state senator Kelly Morrison still served in the Minnesota House, Bluestem posted in Session Daily: Pesticide scrutinized for affecting child brain development could be banned:
We posted about Monday's hearing in the Minnesota House Agriculture Finance and Policy Committee in Pollinator protection bills heard today in the Minnesota House Agriculture Committee at 1PM.
The author of one bill focused on the damage chlorpyrifos can do to human children, rather than to our little pollinator friends.
Here's Session Daily's write-up by Mike Cook, Pesticide scrutinized for affecting child brain development could be banned:
A widely used pesticide could be banned in Minnesota, out of concern that exposure can stunt child brain development.
HF670, sponsored by Rep. Kelly Morrison (DFL-Deephaven), would ban all sales and application of chlorpyrifos, six years after a nationwide ban was proposed under former President Barack Obama. Former President Donald Trump’s administration decided not to pursue the ban, concluding that further study of the pesticide's effects on brain development was needed.
On Monday, the bill was laid over for possible omnibus inclusion by the House Agriculture Finance and Policy Committee. Its companion, SF2017, is sponsored by Sen. D. Scott Dibble (DFL-Mpls) and awaits action by the Senate Agriculture and Rural Development Finance and Policy Committee.
"It's unconscionable that we as a country are ignoring clear science and putting the health and safety of our children at risk," said Rep. Todd Lippert (DFL-Northfield).
Chlorpyrifos is used on crops such as soybeans, on golf courses and in greenhouses.
It has been illegal to sell chlorpyrifos for most residential uses in the U.S. since 2001. Since then, studies have shown a clearer link between exposure and cognitive delays.
In 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency moved to ban the pesticide, but the agency reversed course under Trump. The agency is currently reviewing the pesticide and plans to release its findings by Oct. 1, 2022.
In written testimony, Megan Horton, an associate professor of environmental medicine and public health at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, said even low-level chlorpyrifos exposure can negatively affect children.
"We have more than enough scientific evidence to ban chlorpyrifos, and have known enough for over 20 years," wrote Emily Marquez, a scientist with the Pesticide Action Network.
But farmers and industry groups say there are few pesticides that work as well as chlorpyrifos and that farmers are careful when applying it.
They also say any decision by lawmakers should wait until the federal review is finished.
"The decision to register a particular chemical for use is made after years of rigorous testing," wrote Christian Kiel, legislative liaison for the Red River Valley Sugarbeet Growers Association. "Allowing elected politicians to second guess those decisions based on the direction of the current political winds is irresponsible and could cause great uncertainty for our members."
Bluestem embedded written testimony submitted before the hearing in Pollinator protection bills heard today in the Minnesota House Agriculture Committee at 1PM.
Morrison, an OB/GYN, focused on the effect of the agri-pesticide on the development of chikdren's brains.
Her language didn't survive the process that year, but by August, Bluestem published EPA to block use of chlorpyrifos on food crops; pesticide tied to neurological harm in children.
Earlier this month, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals bounced the ban back into the lap of the EPA. At the Hill, Rachel Frazin reports in Court tosses EPA ban on pesticide linked to brain damage in kids:
A federal appeals court on Thursday is tossing the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ban on a pesticide that has been linked to brain damage in children.
The decision from the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals to send the rule back to the agency does not preclude the agency from reinstating the ban in the future.
But it said the EPA needs to give greater consideration to whether there are cases where the pesticide, called chlorpyrifos, could be used safely.
Chlorpyrifos has been used as an insecticide, protecting crops like soybeans, broccoli, cauliflower and fruit trees.
The EPA banned chlorpyrifos for use in growing food in 2021. That came after a prior court ruling gave the agency just 60 days to either find a safe use for chlorpyrifos or ban it outright.
The appeals court determined that this deadline contributed to a rushed decision from EPA that was ultimately “arbitrary and capricious.”
The ruling comes from Judges Lavenski Smith, Raymond Gruender and David Stras, two of whom were appointed by former President George W. Bush and one of whom was appointed by former President Trump.
The chlorpyrifos issue has ping-ponged between administrations. The Obama administration had proposed to ban its use on food, but the Trump administration reversed course and had proposed to allow some uses of the chemical.
The court’s decision was met with some Republican cheers, including from Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), who called it a “victory for our farmers” in a written statement.
Typical of the ag media's response? Morning Ag Clips' MSGA Cheers Court’s Chlorpyrifos Ruling:
MANKATO, Minn. — Agriculture groups, including the Minnesota Soybean Growers Association (MSGA) and American Soybean Association (ASA), are applauding a recent ruling from the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals that upholds sound science by vacating the U.S. EPA’s rule that essentially banned the use of chlorpyrifos, a product Minnesota farmers use to protect their crops from insects and other pests.
“This is great news and a big win because we were struggling last year to find a chemical to control our crops and keep them free of insects and pests,” MSGA President Bob Worth said. “We took on the big dogs, used sound science and we won.”
The decision, in which the court found EPA disregarded its own scientists’ findings by ending numerous uses of chlorpyrifos they determined were safe, vacates the rule and restores agricultural uses of the tool. MSGA was able to sign onto the lawsuit thanks to its membership support. Worth said the organization’s ongoing legal efforts are another way MSGA advocates for its members.
“This why it’s important to become a member of MSGA,” President Bob Worth said. “We’re fighting for farmers, not only in St. Paul and D.C., but in the courts.”
Worth said Executive Director Joe Smentek, an attorney, has been instrumental in increasing MSGA’s advocacy in the court system.
“We’re very fortunate to have Joe on our team,” Worth said. “Joe understands these rules and he’s pushing us to make sure we’re doing the right thing for our farmers.”
‘Very excited’
ASA, MSGA and fellow agriculture groups brought a lawsuit against the agency in February 2022 seeking to restore farmers’ ability to use this tool to protect crops. The groups highlighted that, in EPA’s own records, agency career scientists have found at least 11 high-benefit, low-risk agricultural uses of chlorpyrifos that can be maintained safely.
“(This) ruling is a win for agriculture and science-based regulation. Federal agencies cannot be permitted to ignore their own science at the expense of America’s farmers,” said Illinois farmer Daryl Cates, president of the American Soybean Association. “This ruling will restore safe, effective uses of a tool needed by many growers to protect crops from damaging pests and help preserve an affordable food supply.”
Though quantities may be limited, growers are eager to have uses of chlorpyrifos restored for the 2024 growing season. Many producers have suffered with the loss of the tool during the 2022 and 2023 seasons, with many needing to apply more pesticides to control an increasing number of pests. Other farmers lost the only effective tool they had to protect their crops from certain economically damaging pests. The groups look forward to engaging with EPA during the chlorpyrifos registration review process to ensure critical and safe uses of the tool can be retained in the years ahead.
“We’re very excited to have this product back,” Worth said. “It’s a win-win for us and proves that we’re doing our jobs to protect farmers and their products.
Better to protect the agri-chemical industry's product than pollinators and children's brain development, one supposes.
However, all isn't lost for pollinators in Minnesota. In the 2023 session, the use of chlorpyrifos was banned on state lands. At the end of May, Lucas Rhoades posted on the Natural Resources Defense Council's Expert Blog, Pollinators Notch Big Wins in Minnesota:
Banning Neonics and Chlorpyrifos on State Lands: A product of years of advocacy by Pollinator Friendly Alliance, Pesticide Action Network, Pollinate Minnesota, NRDC, and other partners, a new law prohibits use of neonics and chlorpyrifos, a dangerous organophosphate pesticide banned for use in agriculture by EPA, on lands managed by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The law ensures that over 5.6 million acres of Minnesota land—about 11% of the state’s area—will be protected from these harmful insecticides.
Bluestem will be on the lookout for the EPA's response to the court ruling--and attempts in the Minnesota Legislature to erode the protection of state lands from the use of chlorpyrifos.
Image: Graphic from The Most Widely Used Pesticide, One Year Later, in Harvard University's SITN's Science Policy blog.
Related posts:
- EPA to block use of chlorpyrifos on food crops; pesticide tied to neurological harm in children
- Annals of regulatory capture: read these Intercept articles on pesticide makers & the EPA
- Session Daily: Pesticide scrutinized for affecting child brain development could be banned
- Session Daily: 'Problem-solving' omnibuzz environment bill passed by House
- Buzz briefs: Bee Lucky lottery tickets; Lawns to Legumes wins Environmental Initative award.
- House enviro omnibus bill centers "the people, & the land, & the water & the wildlife of MN"
- Pollinator protection bills heard today in the Minnesota House Agriculture Committee at 1PM
- MN House Republicans abjectly fail to protect pesticides from radical pollinator-hugging leftists
- Update: MNHouse GOP fails to replace pesticide industry interests over local control
- MN mom spoke out in DC on behalf of bill banning chlorpyrifos, a brain-harming pesticide (2017)
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.
I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6
Comments