Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine whether use of a certain pesticide
will endanger these species.
After proper notification the EPA can require that certain pesticide
products be relabeled to prohibit their use in the range of the endangered
species.
As presently envisioned, the new provisions would require pesticide labels
to list counties where users would need to consult special county bulletins
concerning endangered species before applying that product. Users would be
obliged to comply with these bulletins for each of the counties in which they
operate.
These bulletins would be available from county extension offices, farm
supply dealers, and other groups. Each would include:
1.
A list of affected species.
2.
A county map identifying species habitats, using commonly recognized
boundaries such as roads, power lines, and bodies of water.
3.
A list of affected pesticides, identified by active ingredient. The list of
endangered species will be determined by the Fish and Wildlife Service of
the Department of Interior, which will also determine the habitats of these
species and which pesticide uses place them in jeopardy.
The EPA anticipates using a "clustered approach" to pesticide selection,
so that all products with common use patterns would be classified together. In
this way EPA hopes to reduce the unfair economic impact of selective labeling
decisions and to avoid case-by-case consultation with the Fish and Wildlife's
Office of Endangered Species.
The compliance date for use on range and/or pastureland, corn, wheat,
soybeans, sorghum, oats, barley, rye and/or cotton was originally set for Feb-
ruary 1, 1988. After EPA delayed partial implementation of the program in
1989 due to dissatisfaction of the methods of implementation by most states,
the American Farm Bureau Federation, and even members of Congress, com-
pliance was finally initiated in 1992. More than 60% of all agricultural pesti-
cides and 1,000 U.S. counties will be affected by the program's provisions.
Unlike the FEPCA, the Endangered Species Act does not require the EPA
to weigh risks and benefits in prohibiting a product's use. The economic cost
of protecting a species is not a consideration under the act.
E. SUPERFUND AMENDMENTS AND REAUTHORIZATION ACT
(1986)
The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), Title III,
the Community Right-to-Know Act, has four major reporting requirements for
