Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Grasshopper and Mormon Cricket Suppression Program

The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, representing nearly 4,000 individuals, submitted a petition requesting specific protections and transparency measures in the proposed Grasshopper and Mormon Cricket Suppression Program. They advocate for ending spraying on sensitive public lands, implementing non-chemical prevention methods, and establishing comprehensive buffers for all western streams and wetlands.

Darrell Geist of the Center for Biological Diversity is submitting comments regarding the Grasshopper and Mormon Cricket Suppression Program. The primary purpose of the communication is to coordinate the submission of a large volume of supporting documents due to technical issues with the government's comment websites.

The American Farm Bureau Federation supports the proposed program to suppress grasshopper and Mormon cricket populations, emphasizing the significant economic losses these pests cause to farmers and ranchers. They advocate for a program that includes surveying, monitoring, and the continued use of EPA-approved insecticides within an integrated pest management (IPM) framework, while specifically opposing Alternatives 2 and 3.

The Global Locust Initiative (GLI) at Arizona State University supports the proposed suppression program but recommends specific amendments to Alternative 4. They advocate for a formalized framework to register and adopt the specialist biopesticide Metarhizium acridum, requesting a clear distinction between generalist and specialist strains and a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis comparing biopesticides to chemical pesticides.

New Mexico Wild, representing nearly 1,000 individual commenters, urges APHIS to adopt Alternative 2, which ends the use of chemical insecticides in the Grasshopper and Mormon Cricket Suppression Program. They argue that current practices pose risks to wildlife, water quality, and human health, and call for addressing root causes like overgrazing and providing better public notification.

The Arizona Farm Bureau Federation supports the proposed Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the Grasshopper and Mormon Cricket Suppression Program. They argue that maintaining access to EPA-registered insecticides within an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) framework is essential for protecting livestock forage and agricultural productivity from damaging outbreaks.

CropLife America, a trade association representing pesticide developers and manufacturers, supports the APHIS notice of intent to prepare a programmatic environmental impact statement for the grasshopper and Mormon cricket suppression program. They argue that the proposed alternatives are comprehensive and emphasize that registered pesticides have already undergone rigorous EPA review for safety and efficacy.

The Center for Biological Diversity, representing over 11,000 supporters, opposes the proposed grasshopper and Mormon cricket suppression program. They urge APHIS to overhaul its approach, stop using insecticides on public lands, and prioritize the protection of wildlife and people.

The Prairie Hills Audubon Society, a nonprofit conservation organization, supports the proposed program but requests that the PEIS include more rigorous analysis of food-web effects on birds, landscape-scale impacts on pollinators, and explicit protections for sensitive habitats. They also advocate for the evaluation of non-chemical alternatives, updated Endangered Species Act consultations, and improved public notification.

The Idaho Farm Bureau Federation supports the proposed Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the Grasshopper and Mormon Cricket Suppression Program. They argue that federal suppression is essential for protecting Idaho's agricultural productivity and urge APHIS to maintain a full range of effective management tools, including EPA-approved insecticides, to combat outbreaks.