'Agent Orange' Herbicide Threatens Irreparable Harm to Endangered Species, Suit Charges
Environmental Protection Agency violated Endangered Species Act in its approval of Enlist Duo herbicide, environmental groups say.
The Environmental Protection Agency violated the law in approving a new herbicide for genetically modified crops, threatening "irreparable harm" to endangered species, a coalition farmers and environmental groups has charged.
The herbicide is Dow AgroSciences' Enlist Duo, which the EPA approved in October 2014 despite condemnation by environmental groups, scientists and citizens. Enlist Duo is a combination of the herbicides 2,4-D--one of the active ingredients in Agent Orange--and glyphosate--the main ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup. It is for use on the Dow Enlist-brand genetically engineered corn and soy crops, already approved by the USDA.
EPA's approval of the new herbicide was promptly met with a lawsuit by the groups, which includes the Center for Food Safety, Pesticide Action Network and the Center for Biological Diversity, who charged that the agency neither adequately considered the human impacts of its use nor--in violation of its duties under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)--consulted with the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to verify that the approval would not adversely harm listed species or their critical habitat.
Building on that suit, the groups stated in a motion filed late Friday that the Court should issue a stay "to prevent irreparable harm to protected species, and by two endangered species"--the whooping crane (Grus americana) and the Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis).
EPA needed, according to ESA, to consult with FWS and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) regarding potential impacts of the approval on listed species, but it didn't.
"Instead, after acknowledging that its registration of Enlist Duo 'may affect' listed species, EPA relied entirely on its own internal assessments of the risks to conclude that the substantial increase in 2,4-D use ultimately will have 'no effect' on any listed species or designated critical habitat. The manner in which EPA came to this purported 'no effect' determination flatly violates this Court's consistent interpretation of the ESA's requirements," the motion states.
"EPA's assumption that only endangered plants and animals in the sprayed fields themselves, or those that feed on such plants and animals, may be affected by the spraying is arbitrary and capricious," it continues.
"EPA is well aware that pesticides routinely drift and affect public health and wildlife beyond the fields in which they are sprayed. To ignore this known risk and avoid consultation with other expert agencies is unlawful and irresponsible," stated George Kimbrell, senior attorney for Center for Food Safety, in a statement issued Monday.
Earthjustice managing attorney Paul Achitoff added, "EPA admits that its approval of a toxic pesticide cocktail including 2,4-D for widespread use may affect endangered species, including the whooping crane, one of the most endangered animals on earth."
"We ask only that the Court decide whether EPA has violated the law, as we believe it has before putting these imperiled birds at further risk," Achitoff continued.
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just three days to go in our Spring Campaign, we're falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The Environmental Protection Agency violated the law in approving a new herbicide for genetically modified crops, threatening "irreparable harm" to endangered species, a coalition farmers and environmental groups has charged.
The herbicide is Dow AgroSciences' Enlist Duo, which the EPA approved in October 2014 despite condemnation by environmental groups, scientists and citizens. Enlist Duo is a combination of the herbicides 2,4-D--one of the active ingredients in Agent Orange--and glyphosate--the main ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup. It is for use on the Dow Enlist-brand genetically engineered corn and soy crops, already approved by the USDA.
EPA's approval of the new herbicide was promptly met with a lawsuit by the groups, which includes the Center for Food Safety, Pesticide Action Network and the Center for Biological Diversity, who charged that the agency neither adequately considered the human impacts of its use nor--in violation of its duties under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)--consulted with the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to verify that the approval would not adversely harm listed species or their critical habitat.
Building on that suit, the groups stated in a motion filed late Friday that the Court should issue a stay "to prevent irreparable harm to protected species, and by two endangered species"--the whooping crane (Grus americana) and the Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis).
EPA needed, according to ESA, to consult with FWS and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) regarding potential impacts of the approval on listed species, but it didn't.
"Instead, after acknowledging that its registration of Enlist Duo 'may affect' listed species, EPA relied entirely on its own internal assessments of the risks to conclude that the substantial increase in 2,4-D use ultimately will have 'no effect' on any listed species or designated critical habitat. The manner in which EPA came to this purported 'no effect' determination flatly violates this Court's consistent interpretation of the ESA's requirements," the motion states.
"EPA's assumption that only endangered plants and animals in the sprayed fields themselves, or those that feed on such plants and animals, may be affected by the spraying is arbitrary and capricious," it continues.
"EPA is well aware that pesticides routinely drift and affect public health and wildlife beyond the fields in which they are sprayed. To ignore this known risk and avoid consultation with other expert agencies is unlawful and irresponsible," stated George Kimbrell, senior attorney for Center for Food Safety, in a statement issued Monday.
Earthjustice managing attorney Paul Achitoff added, "EPA admits that its approval of a toxic pesticide cocktail including 2,4-D for widespread use may affect endangered species, including the whooping crane, one of the most endangered animals on earth."
"We ask only that the Court decide whether EPA has violated the law, as we believe it has before putting these imperiled birds at further risk," Achitoff continued.
The Environmental Protection Agency violated the law in approving a new herbicide for genetically modified crops, threatening "irreparable harm" to endangered species, a coalition farmers and environmental groups has charged.
The herbicide is Dow AgroSciences' Enlist Duo, which the EPA approved in October 2014 despite condemnation by environmental groups, scientists and citizens. Enlist Duo is a combination of the herbicides 2,4-D--one of the active ingredients in Agent Orange--and glyphosate--the main ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup. It is for use on the Dow Enlist-brand genetically engineered corn and soy crops, already approved by the USDA.
EPA's approval of the new herbicide was promptly met with a lawsuit by the groups, which includes the Center for Food Safety, Pesticide Action Network and the Center for Biological Diversity, who charged that the agency neither adequately considered the human impacts of its use nor--in violation of its duties under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)--consulted with the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to verify that the approval would not adversely harm listed species or their critical habitat.
Building on that suit, the groups stated in a motion filed late Friday that the Court should issue a stay "to prevent irreparable harm to protected species, and by two endangered species"--the whooping crane (Grus americana) and the Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis).
EPA needed, according to ESA, to consult with FWS and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) regarding potential impacts of the approval on listed species, but it didn't.
"Instead, after acknowledging that its registration of Enlist Duo 'may affect' listed species, EPA relied entirely on its own internal assessments of the risks to conclude that the substantial increase in 2,4-D use ultimately will have 'no effect' on any listed species or designated critical habitat. The manner in which EPA came to this purported 'no effect' determination flatly violates this Court's consistent interpretation of the ESA's requirements," the motion states.
"EPA's assumption that only endangered plants and animals in the sprayed fields themselves, or those that feed on such plants and animals, may be affected by the spraying is arbitrary and capricious," it continues.
"EPA is well aware that pesticides routinely drift and affect public health and wildlife beyond the fields in which they are sprayed. To ignore this known risk and avoid consultation with other expert agencies is unlawful and irresponsible," stated George Kimbrell, senior attorney for Center for Food Safety, in a statement issued Monday.
Earthjustice managing attorney Paul Achitoff added, "EPA admits that its approval of a toxic pesticide cocktail including 2,4-D for widespread use may affect endangered species, including the whooping crane, one of the most endangered animals on earth."
"We ask only that the Court decide whether EPA has violated the law, as we believe it has before putting these imperiled birds at further risk," Achitoff continued.