If you’re a farmer in the Midwest, you’ve likely heard folks throw around acronyms like ESA and PULA. What does that alphabet soup mean? And what’s EPA got to do with it?

In short, environmental lobby groups have sued the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, arguing that existing pesticide labels don’t meet the standards of the Endangered Species Act. Courts sided with the environmental groups, deciding that EPA does need to meet ESA obligations — and on an accelerated timeline, says Corey Lacey, environmental policy manager for the Illinois Soybean Association.

EPA is working on four strategies: herbicide, fungicide, insecticide and rodenticide. Originally, the Herbicide Strategy deadline was May, but it’s already been extended to August. The draft Insecticide Strategy is expected by July 30, and the rest of the strategies will be released in the next two years.

“But it’s a whole re-write of how we do pesticide policy in the U.S.,” Lacey says. “You don’t want to rush through it.”

Lacey explains that EPA will get a strategy in place; then as pesticide registrations come up for review or new pesticides registrations come in, the new labeling language will be added.

“So it’s not like everything will happen all at once, but we will start seeing impacts pretty, pretty quickly,” he says.

Related:How good science could save our herbicide future

Here’s a look at what it all means, based on what is known at this point:

What is the Endangered Species Act? The ESA is federal legislation that provides protection for plants and wildlife that are listed as threatened or endangered. That means federal agencies like EPA have to make sure their actions don’t harm listed species or their environment. Pesticide registration and labeling will be subject to ESA regulations.

What is a PULA? A pesticide use limitation area is a geographic area of varying size where pesticide use will be limited to protect an endangered species or its habitat. When making pesticide decisions, farmers will need to reference an online platform called Bulletins Live! Two, where they can determine whether a field is inside or outside a PULA. Fields inside a PULA will have additional regulation requirements for some pesticide applications.

How does all this affect the 2024 growing season? Farmers probably won’t see any new impacts this year. However, EPA likely will finalize the Herbicide Strategy this year, so it will likely affect some farmers as early as 2025. Lacey says farmers should learn about the potential changes now so they are prepared to adjust to EPA’s final decision. 

What’s a pick list? A pick list is the list of possible conservation measures that could mitigate pesticide movement. Farmers will be required to choose a certain number of them, depending on the product, soil characteristics, location and proximity to a PULA.

EPA officials say they understand that what they’re asking farmers to do will take time for them to put into practice — things like contour farming take years to implement, whereas cover crops can be planted in a single year.

Lacey says not every farmer will have to make drastic changes like those. “But every farmer’s going to have to think through what they’re going to do to meet these mitigations,” he adds.

What’s the timeline for how this unfolds? Look for a final decision on the Herbicide Strategy this year. Each strategy will go through a draft phase and comment period before it can be finalized. The Herbicide Strategy is already taking longer than planned; EPA negotiated a delay so it can complete the strategy by Aug. 30 instead of May 30. The agency plans to release a draft Insecticide Strategy by July 30.

How will this impact farmers? The general impact will be that farmers will need to keep more records, adopt more conservation practices and follow dynamic regulatory rules when making pesticide decisions. USDA told EPA that the cost of compliance in Illinois, Iowa and Nebraska could be as high as $5.5 billion.

Is EPA listening to folks in production agriculture? It seems so, Lacey says. In April, EPA released an update on its progress toward a final Herbicide Strategy that appears to take into consideration some of the concerns raised by ag interests. The agency says it will increase the number of conservation measures farmers can employ, and it will use better maps to identify where practices are needed. The new maps are expected to considerably reduce the areas where growers might have to employ certain conservation practices.

Several Illinois farm groups offered comments, which led EPA to reconsider its timeline and specifics.

So will the strategy be easier to understand? That’s the idea. Instead of using points for each conservation practice that may be required, EPA says it will use four tiers — none, low, medium and high — to describe the effectiveness of the practice. EPA is also expanding the list of conservation practices that will count for mitigation to include erosion barriers, reservoir tillage and soil carbon amendments.

EPA may also reduce mitigation requirements “when growers have already adopted practices to reduce pesticide runoff or where runoff is minimal.” Lacey says the agency wants to reduce the mitigation burden on those farmers, so they may need fewer or no additional measures in order to use agricultural herbicides, compared to those in the draft strategy.

What’s the takeaway from EPA’s delay? All conditions indicate that EPA has heard the ag community of Illinois and is taking agriculture’s concerns seriously. Lacey says, “That’s a good example of the EPA hearing us, and it’s proof that feedback is worth the farmer’s time.”

What does the ESA mean for future chemical registrations? EPA plans to apply the Herbicide Strategy when issuing new active ingredient registrations or making re-registration decisions under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act. There’s already a hybrid ESA label on Enlist. The new rules may apply to dicamba, but Lacey is especially concerned about glyphosate because so many farmers use it.

“Herbicides like glyphosate are an integral tool in our management system, and any changes will feel like requirements on our farmers. They’re going to be an effective mandate: ‘Make the mitigation change, or you can’t use glyphosate,’” Lacey explains. “Where EPA lands on what pick list applies to glyphosate when it comes up for re-registration in a few years could really impact this conversation.”