Untested pesticide mitigation requirements: ecological, agricultural, and legal implications
Every pesticide sold in the United States must have a U.S. Environmental Agency approved label on its container. The label provides directions for the pesticide’s use and is legally enforceable under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act. For a pesticide with high ecological risks, mitigation statements may be included on the label to reduce the pesticide’s risks and to support its registration. Many mitigation mandates are easy to implement and are effective, however, at times, well-intentioned but novel and untested mitigation requirements, though theoretically sound, may not be perceived by the pesticide users to be practical under operational settings. Courts of law recognize the pesticide label as a legal document, therefore it is imperative that the label mitigation mandates be achievable. I use the rodenticide Rozol label to illustrate how an untested risk mitigation mandate may be considered too burdensome by pesticide users whereby the mitigation action may not be implemented in the field, resulting in label violation and unreasonable risks to the environment.
|Untested pesticide mitigation requirements: ecological, agricultural, and legal implications
|Nimish B. Vyas
|Drake Journal of Agricultural Law
|USGS Publications Warehouse
|Patuxent Wildlife Research Center