Producers are aware of the challenge to meet the mandates of ESA and FIFRA simultaneously for protection of endangered species. However, banning use of products for entire counties does not seem appropriate or necessary. Many other mitigations would protect species and enhance their survival. However, for the agricultural community to understand and participate in these activities, there is a need for transparency of species biology, habitat, and monitoring procedures. Producers have advanced many environmental stewardship programs in partnership with federal agencies to reduce soil erosion, minimize water pollutants, and enhance wildlife habitat. Unfortunately, there seems to be a lack of understanding of these practices by EPA, FWS, and NMFS. The current trends are excessive attempts to avoid litigation by various groups who oppose pesticides. The costs of these actions threaten many agricultural producers, rendering them unable to fairly compete in a global market with no compensation. Upfront mitigations with registrants may satisfy corporate shareholders and maintain some registration, but often these mitigations do not properly represent the need of the producers. It is imperative that producers are an integral part of appropriate mitigations with understanding of species needs.

Upfront mitigation: Is there an engagement role for producers?

Fall 2022 abstracts, posters, and presentations will launch in mid-September.

ACS Fall 2022

The official archive and repository for all ACS Meetings & Expositions abstracts and select posters or presentations.