A plan to restrict pesticide use report by a U.S. agency was abandoned following protests.
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) faced protests from hundreds of scientists regarding their plan to scale back reporting to a database tracking the use of 400 agricultural chemicals in the United States. Initially, the agency aimed to reduce the number of chemicals tracked in the database and release updates less frequently, sparking controversy among researchers. However, after significant backlash, including letters signed by around 250 scientists and 120 organizations, as well as support from members of Congress, the USGS decided to reverse its decision.
The USGS had planned to limit the scope of its Agricultural Pesticide-use Estimates and Maps data, which had been providing county-level information on chemical usage since 1992. The reduction included tracking only 72 chemicals and switching from annual to 5-year updates. This move was met with strong opposition as the database has been a crucial resource for numerous peer-reviewed studies.
Following pressure, the USGS announced its decision to resume annual publication of preliminary data for all 400 compounds tracked, with the 2018-2022 data set to be released in 2025. This reversal was seen as a victory by many scientists, who rely on this data for their research. Alan Kolok, an ecotoxicologist at the University of Idaho, highlighted the importance of the database for studying the health effects of pesticide exposure and expressed relief at the USGS's change of heart.
While the reinstatement of most data was welcomed, there are still concerns about a previous cut where the USGS stopped tracking pesticides used on seeds before planting. This omission is seen as a critical gap in the information provided, especially considering the growing prevalence of this practice. Researchers like Maggie Douglas, an entomologist at Dickinson College, are hopeful that the USGS will address this issue by resuming data collection for these compounds.
The agency cited rising costs as a factor in its initial decision to scale back the database but acknowledged the importance of maintaining this valuable resource for researchers. The swift reversal following the outcry demonstrates the power of collective action in advocating for the preservation of scientific data and highlights the significance of transparency and accessibility in environmental research.
In conclusion, the USGS's decision to maintain the comprehensive pesticide-use database is a testament to the impact of scientists' advocacy in safeguarding vital scientific resources. It underscores the critical role of data transparency and accessibility in advancing research and policymaking in environmental science.
Source: https://www.science.org/content/article/after-protests-u-s-agency-drops-plan-limit-pesticide-use-report
The USGS had planned to limit the scope of its Agricultural Pesticide-use Estimates and Maps data, which had been providing county-level information on chemical usage since 1992. The reduction included tracking only 72 chemicals and switching from annual to 5-year updates. This move was met with strong opposition as the database has been a crucial resource for numerous peer-reviewed studies.
Following pressure, the USGS announced its decision to resume annual publication of preliminary data for all 400 compounds tracked, with the 2018-2022 data set to be released in 2025. This reversal was seen as a victory by many scientists, who rely on this data for their research. Alan Kolok, an ecotoxicologist at the University of Idaho, highlighted the importance of the database for studying the health effects of pesticide exposure and expressed relief at the USGS's change of heart.
While the reinstatement of most data was welcomed, there are still concerns about a previous cut where the USGS stopped tracking pesticides used on seeds before planting. This omission is seen as a critical gap in the information provided, especially considering the growing prevalence of this practice. Researchers like Maggie Douglas, an entomologist at Dickinson College, are hopeful that the USGS will address this issue by resuming data collection for these compounds.
The agency cited rising costs as a factor in its initial decision to scale back the database but acknowledged the importance of maintaining this valuable resource for researchers. The swift reversal following the outcry demonstrates the power of collective action in advocating for the preservation of scientific data and highlights the significance of transparency and accessibility in environmental research.
In conclusion, the USGS's decision to maintain the comprehensive pesticide-use database is a testament to the impact of scientists' advocacy in safeguarding vital scientific resources. It underscores the critical role of data transparency and accessibility in advancing research and policymaking in environmental science.
Source: https://www.science.org/content/article/after-protests-u-s-agency-drops-plan-limit-pesticide-use-report
Comments
Post a Comment