Critics of Dow Herbicide Sue U.S. EPA over Approval

Widespread use of the herbicide 2,4-D carries a range of risks to human health, animals, and the environment, a coalition of U.S. farmer and environmental groups alleges

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

By Carey Gillam

(Reuters) - A coalition of U.S. farmer and environmental groups filed a lawsuit on Wednesday seeking to overturn regulatory approval granted last week for an herbicide developed by Dow AgroSciences.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in California, argues that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) did not adequately analyze the impact of one of the new herbicide's active ingredients, 2,4-D, before granting approval on Oct. 15 to Dow's Enlist Duo herbicide.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The groups are asking the court to set aside the EPA's approval.

Widespread use of 2,4-D carries a range of risks to human health, animals, and the environment, the groups allege. They claim the EPA's approval violated both the Endangered Species Act and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.

"They did not do an adequate job," said Andrew Kimbrell, an attorney with the Center for Food Safety, a plaintiff in the case. "This was a rubber stamp. They acted illegally in approving this."

The National Resource Defense Council filed a similar action on Oct. 16 against the EPA to block Enlist Duo, saying the new weed killer will be destructive to monarch butterfly populations and pose risks to humans.

The herbicide developed by Dow AgroSciences, a unit of Dow Chemical Co, is to be used with new genetically modified corn and soybean crops developed by Dow to tolerate treatments of the herbicide.

The Enlist crops were approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture last month. When used in combination with the new herbicide, the Dow products should help farmers combat severe weed problems hurting U.S. crop production, according to Dow and government officials.

Millions of acres of U.S. farmland have been infested with weeds resistant to glyphosate-based Roundup herbicide, developed by Dow rival Monsanto Co and used widely by cotton, corn and soybean farmers. Critics say use of Enlist will make weed problems worse.

But the EPA said last week it had thoroughly evaluated the risks, and was requiring many restrictions on use of the herbicide.

Dow AgroSciences said it is "confident that EPA thoroughly reviewed" Enlist Duo and that the EPA will prevail in court.

The EPA had no immediate comment.

The EPA has been inundated with calls for the agency to deny approval of Enlist Duo, including warnings from a group of physicians and scientists who said 2,4-D can be linked to health problems that include suppressed immune function and greater risk of Parkinson’s disease.

The lawsuit was filed by the Center for Food Safety and by Earthjustice, a nonprofit environmental law firm, on behalf of Beyond Pesticides, Center for Biological Diversity, the Environmental Working Group, the National Family Farm Coalition, and Pesticide Action Network North America.

Initially, EPA approved Enlist Duo only for Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Ohio, South Dakota and Wisconsin. EPA is considering approving it for use in 10 more states.

 

(Reporting by Carey Gillam in Kansas City, Missouri; Editing by Matthew Lewis and Lisa Shumaker)

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe