Syngenta: New EPA framework on pesticides could affect your bottom line

Syngenta is sending a warning to producers that the new EPA framework could have a big impact on farm operations and it centers around the Endangered Species Act.

The Agency is working to get regulations in place to comply with the Endangered Species Act. Leaders at Syngenta say that for that to happen, they are coming after pesticides, and new framework would require farmers to implement certain conservation practices in order to gain herbicide use. Syngenta warns this could hurt the bottom line.

“Everybody agrees we have to do something about the fact that FIFRA, the statute that regulates pesticide use and the Endangered Species Act often collide, and something has to happen. But the reg is just overkill because what they do is they come out and they say farmers will do at least four mitigation practices if you want to use this pesticide. You’re in an area of 1 of 27 endangered species but they’re also very clear that this is a pilot program and they will go from 27 endangered species to 1,600 endangered species. The mitigation things are expensive. It’s like you’ll put in a cover crop, you’ll have a fairly wide buffer strip, you’ll put in vegetation tillage, you’ll reduce pesticide usage by 40 percent. Really things that are going to cost farmers a lot of money,” said Mary Kay Thatcher.

Thatcher says farmers and ag businesses need to keep a close eye on where these regulations are heading, but for now, they remain in the comment period.

Related Stories
API said it stands ready to work with Congress to develop a balanced approach to E15 legislation that promotes fuel choice, supports investment certainty, and contributes to a stable and fair marketplace for American consumers.
Lawmakers are pressing for answers on how Washington’s “managed trade” approach — keeping leverage through long-term tariffs — will affect farmers, global markets, and future export opportunities.
In the meantime, Senate Majority Leader John Thune is asking that farmers be allowed to use marketing assistance loans to help stay afloat.
Beef industry groups seem to agree — market-based pricing, not federal intervention, best supports rancher livelihoods and long-term beef supply stability.
Cattle groups say additional imports would offer little relief for consumers but could erode rancher confidence as the industry begins to rebuild herds.
Understanding how these tax provisions interact will be key for farmers planning long-term equipment purchases or transfers within the family.

EPA