Environmental groups are suing the federal government to stop insecticide use to control grasshoppers and Mormon crickets across federal rangelands in Western states.
The Center for Biological Diversity and Xerces Society filed suit against USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), stating its federal rangeland pesticide program violates the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) because it fails to account for environmental impacts for species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) that may inhabit areas where spraying occurs.
The lawsuit contends that Congress instructed APHIS to “take a holistic approach” for grasshopper control, and the agency has “largely ignored” Congress’ direction and continues to use insecticides as a means of control.
“APHIS’ widespread, routine application of pesticides on public and private rangelands to manage grasshoppers—many of which never reach economic infestation levels—harms not just grasshoppers but also numerous non-target insect species critical to ecosystem functioning and productivity,” court documents state. “This, in turn, has repercussions for birds, mammals, and plants that rely on these insects for food or pollination.”
Environmental groups state APHIS failed to consider the effects of pesticides used in the spraying program on the 230 species protected under the ESA who inhabit the areas where spraying is conducted.
“The rangeland pesticides program also poses a special threat to the food supply of certain birds (many of which naturally regulate grasshopper populations)––perhaps most significantly, the greater sage-grouse,” court documents state.
“The health of this bird is an indicator of the health of every other species in the same ecosystem, including pygmy rabbits, falcons, mule deer, pronghorn elk, and redband trout, and over 180 migratory and resident bird species.”
In court documents, the groups state three pesticides used, carbaryl, malathion and a newer insecticide, chlorantraniliprole, are known to the EPA to harm endangered plants and animals. The primary insecticide sprayed, diflubenzuron, has a label warning against exposing bees, and the rangelands contain an estimated 600 to 1,000 species of native bees.
“In APHIS’ telling, its program magically affects only grasshoppers, and only as much as necessary,” said Andrew Missel, staff attorney at Advocates for the West, which is representing the conservation groups. “But that’s not how pesticides work; blanketing hundreds of thousands or even millions of acres of rangelands with broad-scale pesticides kills bees, butterflies, moths, beetles and other vital species and threatens to further impair ecosystems already suffering from the effects of drought and climate change.”
The groups assert while the 2019 environmental impact statement (EIS) states APHIS and pesticide applicators will comply with labeling requirements, there is “little discussion” of how applicators will adhere to the labeling requirements. Additionally, the groups say the 2019 EIS failed to consider alternatives to the spraying program, such as the ecologically sensitive option first evaluated in the 1987 EIS of using integrated pest management, and they say it failed to examine the effects of reauthorizing the rangelands pesticide program.
Instead, the EIS mentions the use of application buffers and reduced agent area treatments with little scientific support on how the measures will be effective, the groups further assert.
“In sum, the EIS contains an unreasonably narrow purpose and need statement, does not consider a reasonable range of alternatives, fails to take a hard look at the effects of re-authorizing the rangeland pesticides program, and contains an insufficiently definite description of the preferred alternative, all in violation of NEPA,” court documents said.
The lawsuit alleged when APHIS reauthorized the program in 2019, it did not conduct a complete programmatic consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and instead conducted “informal and cursory annual consultations for each state in which APHIS conducts pesticide treatments.”
In addition to declaring the EIS violates NEPA, the environmental groups asked a federal judge to declare the environmental assessments and findings of no significant impact for the programs in Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Wyoming to be remanded to APHIS to address the violations. — Charles Wallace, WLJ editor
