It’s been more than a week since the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision to vacate the registration of three dicamba products. Since then, the EPA issued a cancellation order for the products. Minnesota Soybean Growers Association Executive Director Joe Smentek isn’t exactly sure why the EPA chose this response instead of moving forward with a re-hearing or an appeal. “However, this may have been a way for the EPA to clarify these products could be used because of the timing of the court’s order,” says Smentek. “There are still a lot of legal options on the federal level. For example, the court could go to the EPA and say we wanted you to immediately vacate the products and we don’t like your cancellation order. They could also go along with the cancellation order. With so many moving parts, it was important for Minnesota farmers to find a mechanism in state law for certainty.” Companies could always re-apply for dicamba registration. “They could start this whole process over, putting registrations back in slightly different formulations. A new chemical could be registered under a similar name and hopefully, we could move forward. That’s what we hope to see.” In the meantime, the MSGA will be asking the Minnesota Department of Agriculture for more time to apply these dicamba products. Once farmers are done spraying, Smentek says chemical collections may also be an issue to work out. Listen to the interview.
