ST. LOUIS, Mo. – The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned a ban on a popular insecticide used to treat various crops.

The decision, in which the court found the U.S. EPA disregarded its own scientists’ findings by ending numerous uses of chlorpyrifos they determined were safe, vacates the EPA order and restores agricultural uses of the product. Crops affected include sour cherries, soybeans, sugarbeets, alfalfa, apples, asparagus, citrus, cotton, peaches, strawberries, as well as spring and winter wheat.

According to the court opinion dated Nov. 2, the EPA acknowledged it could safely retain some chlorpyrifos tolerances; that is, applications. “In fact, before the Ninth Circuit declared that ‘time was up,’ it seemed headed toward that solution,” the opinion said. “(EPA) had solicited comments on whether it was possible to retain some group of tolerances. After announcing that the aggregate exposures from them were not of concern, it planned to consider whether any additional limited uses could be retained, inviting registrant and stakeholder input on the subset of crops and regions.

“The revocation order abruptly ended that process. And the reason was not new findings, a reevaluation of the evidence, or even a lack of time, but a misunderstanding of its duty to anticipate the aggregate exposure from its own proposal. Under these circumstances, the EPA’s decision to ignore modification as a possibility was arbitrary and capricious.”

American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) President Zippy Duvall hailed the ruling as a great victory for farmers. “AFBF appreciates the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals for recognizing that the Environmental Protection Agency failed to follow the law when it revoked the use of chlorpyrifos,” Duvall said. “Farmers and ranchers are committed to growing safe and nutritious food and they use science to guide decisions on how to manage pests and insects. Today’s decision sends a message to EPA that it, too, must use sound science when drafting rules.”

Pesticide Action Network of North America (PAN), friend of the court on behalf of the EPA, was disappointed in the ruling and issued several statements in response. PAN Policy Analyst Willa Childress said, “EPA’s initial decision to ban chlorpyrifos on food crops happened nearly 10 years ago, in 2015 – but the pesticide industry’s undue influence in our regulatory system means that this decision has now been reversed, weakened and delayed numerous times. Meanwhile, chlorpyrifos has been banned by multiple U.S. states and 39 countries. EPA must act quickly to ensure that communities across the U.S. resume protection from chlorpyrifos exposure. We can’t fail to protect another generation of kids from this outdated and hazardous chemical.”

The Michigan Farm Bureau’s Laura Campbell said that specialty crop growers, particularly of fruits and vegetables, have very limited tools available to make sure the food they produce is not only safe, but also doesn’t get so damaged by insects and other pests that it’s not marketable.

“Removing access to a crop protection tool, especially for uses that don’t present any risk to the public, puts a huge dent in their ability to get fresh produce to market,” she said. She added that many uses of the product do not call for spraying on actual fruit or vegetables, but rather on the trunk of trees to protect tree health.

The primary producer of chlorpyrifos products in the United States, Corteva, stopped making them in 2021 following the EPA order. Companies still make it, including FMC Corp., Adama, Loveland Products and others under product names such as Bolton, Stallion Brand and Vulcan. According to Campbell, this latest decision regarding the fate of chlorpyrifos could be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.