INPUTS

Diesel Prices Are Breaking Records Across Multiple States, And Relief May Not Come in 2026

Wed, 06 May 2026 12:53:38 GMT

On Tuesday, President Trump stated that high gasoline prices are a “very small price to pay” for the ongoing war with Iran, arguing they are necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. He predicted prices will “come crashing down” once the war ends. But for farmers and ranchers, diesel prices have risen more than gas, putting a further strain on already high input costs for 2026.

Trump on Oil Prices:

I looked today, it's like at 102 and that's a very small price to pay pic.twitter.com/2V8LC93wFj
— Acyn (@Acyn) May 5, 2026

To start the week, diesel prices went on another run with the national average diesel price is just 20 cents away from reaching a new all-time high. And across the country, a growing number of states aren’t waiting to get there. About six states are already seeing the national average price of diesel reach record highs.

From the Great Lakes to the West Coast, roughly a half dozen states have already smashed previous records, as a late-April dip in prices quickly faded and a fresh surge took hold.

“Diesel now averaging about $5.65 a gallon nationally. That is only about 20 cents away from a new all-time record high,” says Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy . “So even though we had that short-lived break, we’re right back knocking on the door of records again.”

That “break” didn’t last long. De Haan says even though diesel prices saw a bit of a respite for April, with even prices starting to trend down in mid-April, those prices re-accelerated in the last week.

New records for diesel in:
Michigan, $6.01
Illinois, $6.01
Wisconsin $5.67
(Indiana 0.2c/gal away), $6.03
(Ohio ~19c/gal away), $5.93 https://t.co/DV0387vvMR
— Patrick De Haan (@GasBuddyGuy) May 5, 2026

Now, the rally is showing up in state-by-state records, especially in the Midwest.

“Looking at it state by state, Great Lakes states have seen some tremendous refining issues that have really caused prices to rise dramatically,” he says. “Michigan has now set a new all-time record high for diesel over $6. Indiana is just a few tenths of a penny away from setting a new all-time record. Illinois has set a new all-time record. Wisconsin has set a new all-time record.”

And it’s not just a regional story. States in the West were some of the first to not just see the highest prices, but now also hit record levels.

“Out on the West Coast, Arizona set a record a couple of weeks ago, and Washington state is at an all-time record,” he adds. “So there are probably about a half dozen or so states that have set new all-time records, and again, the national average itself is just 20 cents away.”

Perhaps the most telling shift, though, is there’s no longer a low-price refuge.

“No states any longer have diesel averaging below $5 a gallon,” De Haan says. “Texas was the last holdout, and it now is above $5 per gallon. So across the board, $5 diesel is now essentially the floor, and in some areas, that’s actually the cheaper end of the spectrum.”

At the high end, prices are reaching extremes with California’s average diesel price now surpassing $8 per gallon.

Global Tensions Cloud Relief Outlook

With prices continuing to climb, farmers are looking for relief. What would it take to reverse course? That answer remains tied to global uncertainty.

“Relief may be a little bit elusive,” De Haan admits. “It really just depends on the daily developments in the situation between the U.S. and Iran—whether the Strait is open or not, or whether we’re in phases of escalation.”

The Strait of Hormuz remains a critical chokepoint for global energy supply, moving roughly 20 million barrels of oil per day.

“Nothing else matters to the oil market more than this waterway,” he emphasizes. “We’ve seen attacks that have pushed oil prices higher, which in turn pushes diesel wholesale prices up. You may get a little bit of day-to-day relief, but there really is no ‘coast is clear’ until there’s some sort of definitive resolution.”

And even then, he says a turnaround won’t happen overnight.

“If there is a definitive signal to the market, if the Strait reopens and both sides are aligned, prices could start falling within 48 hours,” De Haan explained. “But the rate of decline is likely to slow after that initial drop.”

Prices Likely to Remain Elevated Through 2026

Not only is the rate of decline projected to be slow, but De Haan says diesel prices aren’t likely to drop back to pre-war levels by the end of the year.

“Roughly half of the increase we’ve seen over the last couple of months could come down within the first few months of positive news,” he said. “But the other half could take many more months. We may not get back to pre-conflict diesel prices until late this year—or even into 2027.”

For agriculture, that prolonged stretch of elevated prices carries real consequences.

“When you look at what comes out of a barrel of oil, diesel only makes up about 25%,” De Haan explained. “Gasoline is a larger portion, so it’s been less impacted. Jet fuel, which is an even smaller share, has been hit the hardest. So it’s almost inverse to how much is produced.”

Why Diesel Is Climbing Faster Than Gasoline

If it feels like diesel prices are rising faster and hitting harder than gasoline, there’s a reason rooted in how a barrel of oil gets used.

“Diesel has seen more of the sticker shock compared to gasoline,” says De Haan. “And a lot of that comes down to what comes out of a barrel of oil.”

Not all fuels are created equally in supply. Gasoline makes up the largest share of a refined barrel, while diesel represents a smaller slice, making it more vulnerable when supply is disrupted.

“Gasoline is the top product flowing out of a barrel of oil, so it’s been the least impacted,” De Haan explains. “Diesel, on the other hand, only accounts for about 25% of a barrel, so it’s been more impacted when there are supply issues.”

That imbalance becomes even clearer when looking across the full spectrum of refined fuels.

“The most significant impact has actually been to jet fuel, which is only about 9% of a barrel,” he adds. “So if you look at it inversely—the smaller the share of the barrel, the bigger the impact we’re seeing right now.”

For agriculture, that dynamic matters more than most sectors.

Diesel isn’t optional on the farm. It’s essential. From planting to harvest, it powers tractors, trucks and the supply chain that moves commodities across the country.

“Diesel is the fuel that drives agriculture,” De Haan say. “And that’s why these price increases are so impactful, not just at the pump, but all the way through the economy.”

And while prices are already elevated, the full effect is still working its way downstream.

“Consumers really haven’t even seen the full onset of some of these higher prices yet,” he adds. “That’s going to continue to trickle through in the weeks ahead.”

Demand Holding...for Now

Even with these high prices, so far, demand hasn’t shown many signs of slowing.

“We have not seen much meaningful decrease in demand yet,” De Haan says. “We’ve seen very little, if any, diesel demand destruction so far, which tells you the economy is essentially preparing to pay these prices because it still needs the fuel.”

But there are warning signs ahead.

“If diesel nationally hits $6 a gallon, that’s likely when we start to see consumption slow,” he says. “For gasoline, that number is about $5 a gallon. We’re getting very close to those thresholds.”

Until then, the pressure continues to mount. And for farmers heading deeper into the growing season, that pressure is becoming harder to ignore.

Trump Admin to Roll Out Major Fertilizer Plan This Week, Accelerate U.S. Production Push

Mon, 27 Apr 2026 17:09:55 GMT

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins says the Trump administration will unveil a sweeping set of fertilizer initiatives this week, warning that surging input costs are putting intense pressure on American farmers. Speaking at a Missouri farm on Friday, Rollins told those in attendance that fertilizer has become an issue of national security, which is why she says this week’s announcement will be broader than just USDA, also including EPA, Department of Energy, Department of Commerce and Department of the Interior.

While at GR Farms in Higginsville, Mo., on Friday to roll out an announcement on the Supplemental Disaster Relief Program (SDRP) top-up payments, Rollins described the Trump administration’s upcoming announcement on fertilizer as a large-scale investment initiative. She says while she hoped to roll out the plan while in Missouri, the administration is still finalizing the size of the funding package.

Rollins says the plan will address both immediate actions to stabilize fertilizer prices and a longer-term roadmap aimed at ensuring affordable, domestically produced supply for U.S. farmers.

Washington analyst Jim Wiesemeyer says the plan will likely need to include a mix of financial and policy tools, such as grants, tax incentives, loan guarantees outside of existing USDA programs and greater consistency in U.S. trade policy, while noting imports will still play a role, particularly for key nutrients like potash sourced from Canada.

Short-Term Fertilizer Price Pain

During her comments Friday, Rollins highlighted how quickly fertilizer prices have increased since the conflict started in Iran, outlining the additional strain it is placing on producers.

“We know that urea prices have gone up 50% over the last month. Ammonia is up 30% or more,” she said, adding that “our farmers are feeling that pinch.”

Rollins also told the crowd fertilizer has been a longer-term challenge, even before the situation in Iran caused the latest price spike.

“To be clear, this has been a problem for years. The actual numbers are lower, believe it or not, than they were even in 2022,” she says. “But nevertheless, that jump in prices overnight, we have to address.”

Framing the issue as more than just an economic challenge and one that is a matter of national security after decades of offshoring fertilizer production, Rollins says the administration views the issue as part of a broader structural problem within the fertilizer industry.

“The loss of competition in the fertilizer industry has obviously led to higher fertilizer costs over time,” she says. “When combined with what’s happening overseas with the current geopolitical issues facing our world, certainly we have come to a crossroads that requires immediate action. This is indeed a matter of national security, and we are working to tackle it head on.”

Focus on Domestic Fertilizer Production

While Rollins didn’t give details, she hinted the centerpiece of this week’s announcement will be a major push to reshore fertilizer production, backed by federal investment to accomplish that. Working with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, she says the administration is preparing to direct significant funding toward building new fertilizer plants across the country, while also supporting existing projects.

“I have asked Howard to do, and his team to do, and what we’re doing in partnership is to identify a significant number ... that we can deploy into building out fertilizer plants in America,” she says.

Rollins emphasizes cutting regulatory delays will be critical to making that plan work. She says projects are already being identified nationwide, but permitting delays remain a major obstacle — with the goal of getting that process down to months versus the current years it takes.

“We’ve already begun to identify all over the country. Some are under production. How do we move them along more quickly? Some are in the permitting bureaucracy, which sometimes takes years to get through permitting,” she says. “Our goal is to, instead of years, to get to permitting in a matter of weeks, or perhaps months, so that even in one year, two years and three years, we will have facilities up and running that we will never have had that opportunity or option before.”

United States’ Energy Advantage for Nitrogen Fertilizer

Rollins also points to domestic energy resources as a key factor in expanding fertilizer output, particularly for nitrogen production.

“We became, in a matter of just a short period of time, a net exporter of LNG versus importer, meaning we were producing our own energy in America, so much so that we no longer had to rely on other countries,” she says. “The reason that is important is, as our farmers are facing these exponential nitrogen fertilizer costs, we now have the resources in America. We just have to build the facilities, the manufacturing facilities, to turn that LNG into nitrogen. So this is going to happen quicker than you would normally expect, I think because of the pieces of the puzzle that have already been put into place.”

In the meantime, Rollins says the administration is continuing short-term efforts to improve supply availability and reduce costs.

While the longer-term strategy ramps up, she says the administration is continuing short-term interventions to ease pressure on farmers. These include:

Extending a waiver of the Jones Act
Opening new import channels
Working and meeting with industry/fertilizer companies

Highlighting cooperation with domestic producers, she pointed to CF Industries as an example.

“They have said, in order to protect our farmers, we are going to stop maintenance. We are going look at holding our prices steady,” she says.

She also points to ongoing coordination with the Department of Justice.

“Last year, we signed a joint agreement, USDA did, with the Department of Justice, ensuring that farmers have access to competitive and affordable inputs,” she says. “Looking into the activities of our fertilizer companies and what has happened over the last few years, but with a new eye on potential price gouging right now.”

Long-Term Goal: Reduce Foreign Dependence

Looking longer term, Rollins says the administration is focused on reversing decades of reliance on foreign suppliers.

“America has offshored for far too long, far too much of our fertilizer production, leaving us dangerously reliant on Russia and China,” she says. “Changing that long-standing industry that is reliant on global markets won’t happen overnight,” she says. “But working with our farmers and across industry and government, we will find ways to make fertilizer that we can do here in America and make sure it is a price that our great farmers can afford.”

At the same time, the administration is increasing scrutiny of fertilizer markets. Rollins noted ongoing coordination with the Department of Justice, saying officials are taking “a new eye on potential price gouging right now.”

Ultimately, she framed this week’s announcement as the beginning of a broader shift away from foreign dependence.

Rollins says additional details, including funding levels and project specifics, will be included in next week’s announcement.

“We’re at a crossroads that requires immediate action,” she says.

Watch Rollins’ full press conference here:

Fertilizer Prices Under Fire: Monopoly or Markets to Blame?

Mon, 10 Nov 2025 17:11:27 GMT

As President Donald Trump demands a federal investigation into meatpackers for inflating beef prices , another battle over farm input costs is already heating up. Fertilizer, long one of the most volatile and least transparent costs in farming, is now drawing renewed scrutiny on Capitol Hill.

Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, has reintroduced The Fertilizer Research Act, a bipartisan measure requiring USDA to study pricing and competition across the fertilizer market. U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins says that effort will go hand in hand with a Department of Justice probe into market concentration, promising to take a look at whether farmers truly have fair choices when buying the inputs that feed the nation.

“Pressure Cooker” on Capitol Hill

Two weeks ago on Capitol Hill, lawmakers took up the issue farmers have long demanded answers for: Why fertilizer, seed and input prices keep rising while competition keeps shrinking.

The Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearing, titled “Pressure Cooker: Competition Issues in the Seed and Fertilizer Industries, ” drew fiery testimony from across agriculture. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle say they’re hearing growing frustration from rural America.

Grassley tells the committee that farmers are being boxed in by consolidation at every level of the ag supply chain.

“Over the last 20 years, a few big companies have bought up many of the smaller seed and chemical businesses,” he says. “Those same companies now sell not just the seeds, but also the pesticides and digital farming tools that tell farmers what to plant and when. Because all these products and data systems are tied together, it’s hard for farmers to switch to a different brand.”

Sen. Cory Booker, D–N.J., delivers one of the sharpest warnings of the day.

“What’s happening in America is dire,” he says. “Congress must not just talk about the problems; we’ve got to fix them. Otherwise, American farming as we know it will be forever changed.”

Farmers Take a Stand

The goal of the hearing was to understand what’s driving record-high input prices and what, if anything, Congress can do to restore fairness and competition.

Of the six witnesses called that day, two were farmers who spoke candidly about what they’re experiencing on the ground.

Noah Coppess, a fifth-generation farmer from Cedar County, Iowa, tells senators the volatility of fertilizer pricing has turned crop planning into a gamble.

“If the market becomes too constricted, it is ultimately the farmer who loses,” Coppess says. “Fertilizer pricing has become very volatile, with wild swings of 25% to 50% from year to year. We’re asked to prepay for fertilizer three to six months before it’s applied to the soil and up to 14 months before harvest. Many contracts have a narrow window for application. If we miss it, the contract expires and the input is repriced higher or we’re charged monthly fees just to extend it.”

He says it’s forcing farmers to cut back in ways that threaten long-term soil health.

“Phosphate fertilizer has become a bare-minimum usage fertilizer on our farm because of the cost,” Coppess adds. “We simply can’t afford to apply it like we used to.”

Kentucky farmer Caleb Ragland tells the committee the same pressures are weighing on his operation.

“Farmers are paying more than ever to grow their crops,” he says. “In just five years, seed prices have increased by 18%, fertilizer by 37%, pesticides by 25%, machinery by 23% and interest expense by 37%. Seed is a key cost consideration for farmers. Advancements in seed technology and pesticides have delivered real agronomic benefits — but at an added cost. Those costs are eating away at what little margin we have left.”

Industry Response: “A Perfect Storm”

But the hearing wasn’t just about farmers. Corey Rosenbusch, president and CEO of The Fertilizer Institute (TFI), appeared before the committee to represent the industry’s view. Speaking later with “AgriTalk” host Chip Flory, Rosenbusch says the pressures farmers face are real but are largely the result of global dynamics, not domestic decisions.

“It’s a challenging time for growers,” Rosenbusch says. “In some cases, it’s even harder for the American farmer right now than it was a few years ago when markets exploded because at least, back then, commodity prices were high. Right now, it’s a perfect storm. Commodity prices are low, and input costs keep going up and up. Our message is simple: We need farmers to be successful because if they’re not, we don’t exist. But the factors driving this market are frankly outside of our control and, honestly, outside of this country’s control. Geopolitics is taking the headlines when it comes to supply and demand.”

He says Russia’s war in Ukraine, China’s fertilizer export restrictions and global energy volatility are all rippling through fertilizer markets — forces far beyond the industry’s ability to manage.

“These are global supply and demand pressures,” Rosenbusch says. “When geopolitics dominate, prices react worldwide.”

Farmers Push Back: “Too Few Suppliers”

Farmers listening to the hearing say those global explanations don’t tell the whole story.

Mark Mueller, a farmer from Bremer County, Iowa, was supposed to testify on behalf of the Iowa Corn Growers but says he was disinvited, which he believes was because of Iowa Corn’s strong stance on lack of competition in the fertilizer market.

He still attended the hearing in person and says one statement from the fertilizer industry blew him away.

“The bottom line is that we don’t have many places to get our inputs from,” Mueller says. “I might have a half dozen retailers in my county, but when you go a little farther, they all get their phosphorus from one company, their potash from two companies, and their nitrogen from maybe three, and it’s the same problem in the seed industry.”

Mueller says one comment from the industry’s leadership stuck with him.

“The most disingenuous statement I heard came from the CEO of the Fertilizer Institute,” he says. “He said there are 20 unique companies supplying fertilizer inputs to the industry. That’s like General Motors saying they’re made up of four or five unique companies — Buick, Chevrolet, GMC and Cadillac. It’s all one company.”

“It’s Not a Monopoly — It’s an Oligopoly”

Josh Linville, vice president of fertilizer at StoneX Group, agrees the U.S. fertilizer market isn’t a monopoly, but he says it operates much like one.

“Here’s why I can’t be a politician,” Linville jokes. “No, there isn’t enough competition. It’s not a monopoly, but it’s definitely an oligopoly. When you look at nitrogen, three players control the vast majority of production. For phosphate, there’s one main producer. For potash, we’re highly dependent on imports. Almost all of it comes from Canada. So yes, we have some competition — but not enough.”

Linville says fewer players mean tighter supply chains, and that amplifies every global shock, from wars to tariffs.

“A lot of what’s happening is global supply and demand,” he says. “But the lack of competition doesn’t help. Tariffs, countervailing duties and even the fear of new sanctions on Russia are inflating prices that global trade already pushes higher.”

Concerns Potential Government Trade Aid Payments Further Inflate Fertilizer Prices

There’s yet another wildcard this year: the potential for the White House to release tariff aid payments. USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden confirmed on AgriTalk the agency is preparing to roll out $12 billion in trade aid once the government reopens.

Linville says the potential for new government aid has some unintended consequences for the fertilizer market.

“Unfortunately, no,” Linville says when asked if fertilizer prices might ease if aid payments don’t go out. “If the payments come out, I’m afraid it’s gonna boost fertilizer prices. It doesn’t change the supply and demand for most of these products, but it does change the timing, and timing is everything.”

Linville says the fertilizer market is as much about when farmers buy as it is about how much they buy. Injecting fresh cash into the market at once could cause a surge in demand that suppliers can’t absorb smoothly.

“If there’s a big fat check that goes into the farmer’s pockets and that gets spent on fertilizer, and you pull all that demand into one period, fertilizer is going to see its prices boosted as a result,” he adds. “We saw that the last time the checks went out.”

Read More: Tariff Aid Payments Could Backfire, Boosting Fertilizer Prices, Analyst Warns

Little Hope for Price Relief

When asked whether fertilizer prices could ease before spring, Linville doesn’t sugarcoat it.

“You know me — I’m never going to deal in guarantees,” he says. “I’m not going to say prices can’t fall between now and spring, but the second I do, the market will humble me again. We’ve got some improvements: China’s exporting a little more, Russia’s exporting more, there’s more peace in the Middle East, but we still have production problems in Europe, and China’s slowing exports again. Phosphate exports are being cut in half this year, and the world doesn’t have anyone ready to fill that gap. So could prices fall? Yes. But I’m not holding my breath.”

Stockpiling Isn’t a Solution

When asked on “AgriTalk” whether stopping exports and stockpiling product domestically could help ease prices, Rosenbusch says the U.S. doesn’t have that capability.

“Even if we wanted to take a page out of China’s book and stop exports, we couldn’t,” he says. “We still have to import 40% of our phosphates. We don’t have the infrastructure to stockpile fertilizer in this country. It just doesn’t exist.”

A Critical Step Forward

In what’s being hailed as a small but meaningful win for the U.S. farm economy, the Trump administration recently added phosphate and potash to the list of 10 minerals deemed critical to national security. The designation could help accelerate mining permits and spur new domestic investment — something both industry and lawmakers say is badly needed.

But for farmers testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee, the message was clear: They can’t wait years for market reform.

“Fertilizer is the biggest pain point on farms today,” Coppess says. “We need change, and we need it soon.”

Key Updates: How Two Legal Developments Could Impact Glyphosate Cases

Mon, 12 May 2025 19:53:07 GMT

This past week had two developments around Bayer’s campaign to reframe how regulations around pesticides are interpreted and applied by the court system. Earlier this spring, Bayer leadership confirmed it’s engaging in the multifront approach to limit its legal liabilities as the only domestic manufacturer of glyphosate.

To-date Bayer has paid more than $10 billion to plaintiffs in litigation claiming Roundup as the cause of their cancer.

Bill Anderson became CEO in 2023, and one of his commitments was to get the glyphosate litigation “under control” by 2026.

Two “wins” for the company have come in the past several days.

Supreme Court Brief

On May 9, 10 agricultural groups filed a brief encouraging the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a case regarding glyphosate (and other pesticide) labeling.

In the coming weeks, the Supreme Court will decide on whether it’ll hear the case, with the key question being whether manufacturers of pesticides are liable under state law for “failure to warn” of alleged cancer or other health risks when federal regulators have evaluated the product’s safety and determined its uses are safe.

Groups named supporting the submission of the brief: American Farm Bureau Federation, American Soybean Association, American Sugarbeet Growers Association, International Fresh Produce Association, National Association of Wheat Growers, National Corn Growers Association, National Cotton Council, National Sorghum Producers, North American Blueberry Council, and Western Growers.

Second State Signs Law Reinforcing EPA’s Authority

In late April, North Dakota was the first state to have legislation signed into law reasserting federally approved pesticide labels are the law and companies can not be subject to litigation when those laws are followed.

Georgia becomes the second state to sign into law a bill that reinforces the authority of EPA’s science-based rulings that crop protection products are safe when used as directed.

Georgia Governor Brian Kemp has signed SB 144, which is a bill that has gone through the state’s legislature to re-affirm the authority of EPA and its scientific rulings on the safety of crop protection products.

“This is a major victory for Georgia’s top industry: agriculture,” said Will Bentley, president of the Georgia Agribusiness Council. “By reinforcing science-based regulations for crop protection products, this law provides Georgia’s farmers and agribusiness with the certainty they need to remain competitive and contribute to a strong food and fiber supply chain. We appreciate Governor Kemp and the Georgia Legislature for prioritizing policies that benefit Georgia farmers, agribusinesses and consumers alike.”

Starting last year, Bayer has worked at the state level with legislators to introduce legislation to put a focus around pesticide labels and liability. This year, the company expanded its efforts to 10 states.

“The signing of SB 144 by Governor Kemp demonstrates that Georgia stands with its farmers, who work tirelessly to produce safe and affordable food for communities throughout the state. We thank Governor Kemp and the legislators, farmers and ag groups that supported this important piece of legislation,” said Brian Naber, president, Crop Science North America & Australia/New Zealand Region. “At Bayer, we are committed to developing agricultural innovations that help farmers thrive. This is important not only for Georgia’s farmers and American agriculture, but also the everyday American worried about the cost of groceries, which could increase if these vital tools went away. We hope states around the country considering similar legislation will also support farmers and the tools critical to their success.”

Bayer officials have said the courts will continue to interpret the laws, but they are optimistic the state laws will bring greater legal certainty around claims about the warning label.

Breaking Down EPA's New Action Plan for Insecticides

Wed, 30 Apr 2025 17:59:59 GMT

In the trio of Endangered Species Act (ESA) enforcement regulations — herbicide, insecticide and fungicide — the industry now has two of the three to consider.

The final herbicide rule was released in 2024, and just yesterday EPA released its final insecticide rule. This comes after the draft insecticide rule was first released in July 2024, and the final rule takes into account the public comments provided during the comment period.

These EPA regulations are a response by the agency to enforce ESA at the agency level rather than through litigation and the court system.

As new insecticides are registered and existing products are re-registered via the FIFRA process, they will need to comply to the new rule. Unlike the herbicide final strategy already being applied to the label for BASF’s Liberty Ultra, the industry does not have a product to look to as it applies to the insecticide rule, yet.

“Late yesterday, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its final Endangered Species Act (ESA) Insecticide Strategy. The Agricultural Retailers Association (ARA) plans to thoroughly review the proposal and provide feedback to the EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), addressing any questions or concerns that may arise,” says Richard Gupton, senior vide president of public policy and counsel for the Agricultural Retailers Association. “At first glance, it appears that the agency is considering the input from impacted agricultural stakeholders, which is encouraging. We will gain a clearer understanding once new labels are registered, and we can observe whether commercial applicators and farmers are afforded the necessary flexibility to utilize these products without facing undue regulatory burdens or additional operating costs.”

3 Steps Behind the Rule

Step 1

Establishes the potential for population-level impacts to the listed species as not likely, low, medium, or high. The low, medium, and high categories indicate a potential concern for population-level impacts that may need mitigation

Step 2

Identifies levels of mitigations that reduce spray drift and runoff/erosion to non-target habitats (e.g., low impacts would be addressed with fewer mitigations than medium or high potential impacts). EPA developed menus that identify mitigations that the Agency has determined to be effective at reducing spray drift and runoff/erosion in different parts of the country.

Step 3

Applies the mitigations by geography, crop type, etc. In those cases, EPA would specify the mitigations on the general pesticide product label. In other cases, mitigations may only apply in geographically specific areas (referred to as Pesticide Use Limitation Areas or PULAs). For geographically specific mitigations, the pesticide labeling would include a direction for the user to access EPA’s Bulletins Live! Two (BLT) website to determine whether they are in an area that requires mitigation.

Mitigation Efforts

Similar to the herbicide rule, retailers and farmers can expect to calculate necessary mitigation efforts including spray drift and runoff/erosion considerations.

Per the Final Insecticide Strategy, farmers and retailers can expect EPA is working to:

develop a process to qualify individual conservation programs that could achieve 9 mitigation points
reconsider using descriptions of protected areas or habitat, as opposed to (or to supplement) the descriptions of managed areas (e.g., what is not a protected area) in the Final Insecticide Strategy.
Develop refined Pesticide Use Limitation Area (PULA) maps2 to limit the spatial extent of off-target mitigations to specific areas to protect listed species and to minimize impacts to applicators
continue to work with stakeholders to evaluate drift-reducing adjuvants as a mitigation measure for insecticides.
work with stakeholders to identify additional mitigation options including potential offset opportunities for insecticides and other types of pesticides.
develop a mobile-friendly application tool for growers and other applicators that provides efficiencies in compiling the label information and helps pesticide users consider their options and understand how their current practices, location, and field properties relate to any required mitigations.