Minor-use pesticides are defined as low-volume, low-profit
pesticides applied to a variety of crops such as vegetables, fruits, or-
namentals, nuts and other specialty crops (Chemical Regulation Re-
porter, March 6, 1992). These pesticides do not provide sufficient
economic incentive to support reregistration and many manufactur-
ers are refusing to reregister them (Chemical Regulation Reporter,
March 6, 1992). Agricultural interests are concerned that losing the
use of these products will prohibit the production of numerous minor
crops and devastate producers in the process. The revenues gener-
ated from the sale of minor-use crops are substantial. EPA estimates
that of the $70 billion in agricultural sales in 1990, minor crop sales
accounted for some $30 billion (Chemical Regulation Reporter, June
11, 1993). Some states, such as Florida, would be devastated by such
losses since all crops grown in Florida, including citrus, are minor
crops.
To address agricultural concerns, the federal government has en-
couraged the retention of minor-use pesticides by establishing the
ongoing USDA administered “IR-4” program. This program enables
the USDA to assist in collecting data for the support of minor-use
products (Womach, p. CRS-4). The end result aids in defraying re-
registration costs for minor-use registrants.
A coalition of farmers and farm organizations known as the
“Minor Crop Farm Alliance” (MCFA), has successfully initiated leg-
islation known as the “Minor Crop Pesticide Crop Protection Act of
1993” (Womach p. CRS-4). Sponsored by Representative de la Garza
(D-TX) in the House and Senator Inouye (D-HI) in the Senate, the
bill provides a series of incentives for registrants. One such incentive
speeds up the registration process (Womach, p. CRS-4). Chance of
passage looks good for several reasons. First, crop protection alter-
natives are not being developed quickly enough to mitigate the loss
of minor-use products. Second, the loss of minor-use products may
result in the use of less environmentally friendly pesticides and in-
creasing off-label uses. Finally, minor-use pesticides can play a ben-
eficial role in Integrated Pest Management (IPM) programs.
Pesticide Reduction: A Policy Alternative?
The Clinton administration appears committed to FIFRA reform
and, according to Administrator Browner, will demonstrate that
commitment in the fall of 1993 (Pesticide & Toxic Chemical News,
July 14, 1993, p. 18). Currently, pesticide use is a necessary activity
for crop production. Nevertheless, this activity has, and will con-
tinue to have, detrimental impacts on the environment. This is clear-
ly reflected in the number of environmental laws and corresponding
regulations addressing pesticide use and impact. To reduce the
negative impacts, there must ultimately be a reduction in pesticide
use.
185