April 10, 2009

The Environmental Protection Agency said Wednesday (Apr 8) it will not appeal a federal court decision that farmers fear could require them to seek permits for pesticide applications.

 

The US Court of Appeals 6th Circuit had issued the decision in January, nullifying an EPA ruling during the Bush administration that allowed the chemical applications to fall only under federal pesticide regulations. Instead, the pesticides applied in or near waterways will now be classified under the Clean Water Act.

 

Among those who have expressed concern is US Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, who asked EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to seek another hearing of the case.

 

EPA spokeswoman Enesta Jones confirmed Wednesday afternoon that they would not seek a new hearing, adding in a statement that "EPA recognises the significant implications of the court decision."

 

The government will request a delay of two years before the necessary permits are put in place, she said.

 

"If the request is accepted by the court, water permits would not be required for another two years," Jones said. She added that the EPA will work closely with state water permitting programmes to develop their permits.

 

Farm groups have opposed the decision, saying the permitting could be costly and timely, and leave farmers susceptible to lawsuits.

 

But environmental groups that pushed the case said the ruling is geared toward pesticides applied in or near waterways, and will primarily affect mosquito control, irrigation districts and forest canopy spraying -- not farmers.

 

Environmental groups praised the decision, but also questioned the two-year timeline for putting the permitting programme in place.

 

"Our reaction is essentially you don't need that much time to do this," said Charles Caldart, litigation director for the National Environmental Law Center. "California and Washington states have permitting programmes, and California especially was able to put it on the ground in just a few months."

 

"We do appreciate the need to put together a comprehensive programme," he added.

 

He said he expects farm industry groups will still appeal the court's decision.