Growers Frustrated EPA Opted Against Best Science in Biological Evaluations

Nov 18, 2021

“The best available science and data.” It’s a phrase that carries heavy weight—or at least it should, as “the best available science and data” is the standard by which a regulatory agency is charged with conducting Endangered Species Act decisions. It is also the standard on which the fate of farmers across the country and their continued ability to use vital crop protection tools hinges.

Grower groups are expressing frustration that EPA recently did not use “the best available science and data,” as is required by law, in its endangered species biological evaluations (BE) for glyphosate, atrazine, and simazine released November 12. As a result, EPA’s final BEs for these chemistries vastly inflate the number of species and habitats found likely to be adversely affected.

The American Soybean Association and American Farm Bureau Federation have sought to provide the agency with better, real-world data sources, including in comments on the draft BEs—comments that EPA opted not to incorporate into the final BE. For example:

The final BE for glyphosate also continues to assume soybean growers use 3.75 lbs./acre of glyphosate per application, whereas market research data and USDA survey data show the number is 1.00 lb./acre – nearly four times less than the BE assumes.
The final BE for glyphosate also assumes growers reapply chemistry a mere seven days after an initial application. This extraordinarily unrealistic assumption for any producer increases model exposure risks for species.

Growers provided these and other real-world examples and data sources to EPA in public comments, which EPA chose not to incorporate into its final BE.

Kevin Scott, soybean farmer from South Dakota and president of the American Soybean Association, expressed frustration with EPA failing to use better data, saying, “The law is clear EPA must use the ‘best scientific and commercial data available’ for its endangered species assessments, but the agency has indicated it has no intent of doing so. What is more frustrating is that growers shared with EPA better and credible data, which it chose to ignore. These unrealistic findings will only fuel public distrust and risk grower access to glyphosate and other essential tools.”

American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall said, “We are disappointed that the Environmental Protection Agency was presented with real-world evidence of limited pesticide use but failed to use the most accurate data in its biological evaluations. By overestimating the use of these crop protection tools, the EPA also overestimated the impact on species.

Click here to see more...

Video: Spring 2026 weather outlook for Wisconsin; What an early-arriving El Niño could mean

Northeast Wisconsin is a small corner of the world, but our weather is still affected by what happens across the globe.

That includes in the equatorial Pacific, where changes between El Niño and La Niña play a role in the weather here -- and boy, have there been some abrupt changes as of late.

El Niño and La Niña are the two phases of what is collectively known as the El Niño Southern Oscillation, or ENSO for short. These are the swings back and forth from unusually warm to unusually cold sea surface temperatures in the Pacific Ocean along the equator.

Since this past September, we have been in a weak La Niña, which means water temperatures near the Eastern Pacific equator have been cooler than usual. That's where we're at right now.

Even last fall, the long-term outlook suggested a return to neutral conditions by spring and potentially El Niño conditions by summer.

But there are some signs this may be happening faster than usual, which could accelerate the onset of El Niño.

Over the last few weeks, unusually strong bursts of westerly winds farther west in the Pacific -- where sea surface temperatures are warmer than average -- have been observed. There is a chance that this could accelerate the warming of those eastern Pacific waters and potentially push us into El Niño sooner than usual.

If we do enter El Nino by spring -- which we'll define as the period of March, April and May -- there are some long-term correlations with our weather here in Northeast Wisconsin.

Looking at a map of anomalously warm weather, most of the upper Great Lakes doesn't show a strong correlation, but in general, the northern tiers of the United States do tend to lean to that direction.

The stronger correlation is with precipitation. El Niño conditions in spring have historically come with a higher risk of very dry weather over that time frame, so this will definitely be a transition we'll have to watch closely as we move out of winter.