A Taylor’s checkerspot butterfly, found in isolated pockets in Western Oregon and Western Washington. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has removed the species from a pilot program that would have made 1 million Northwest acres off-limits to pesticide spraying.

The federal government has removed a rare butterfly from its vulnerable species protection plan, revoking a pesticide prohibition proposed for roughly 1 million Northwest acres.

Last year, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency included the Taylor’s checkerspot butterfly in a proposed pilot program for protecting 27 vulnerable species, raising alarms among growers in Oregon and Washington about vast swaths of farmland becoming off-limits to pesticides.

In its final “vulnerable species action plan,” however, the EPA has eliminated the Taylor’s checkerspot butterfly from the list because “individuals are currently unlikely to occur within an agricultural matrix” and because pesticides are needed to protect their habitat, among other reasons.

“Since pesticide exposure is comprehensively managed, at present, in the entirety of the species habitat and range, EPA has concluded the species does not currently need the additional protections afforded by inclusion in the VSAP,” according to the action plan.

Oregonians for Food and Shelter, an agribusiness group that sounded the alarm about the proposal, considers the EPA’s decision a relief and a surprise, said Katie Murray, its executive director.

“I think they went back and did the homework they ideally should have done before the proposal,” Murray said.

Some farmers within the proposed pesticide exclusion area, which would have encompassed portions of Oregon’s Willamette Valley and land around Washington’s Puget Sound, thought about selling their properties as a result, she said.

“It would have been better to spare people the stress,” Murray said.

Only about 20 acres in Oregon are known to be inhabited by the Taylor’s checkerspot butterfly, for example, but they’re not actively farmed, she said.

“There was a huge discrepancy between the habitat and the proposed pesticide use limitation area,” Murray said.

The scope of the pesticide restrictions was likely caused by a lack of research, as the EPA was rushing to meet court-ordered deadlines that sprang from Endangered Species Act lawsuits, she said.

“We have litigation driving all those timelines,” she said.

At the time, it appeared the agency didn’t realize biologists with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had determined herbicide spraying is needed to keep invasive plants from degrading the butterfly’s habitat, Murray said.

“The original proposal went against what we heard from Fish and Wildlife in their recovery plan,” she said.

EPA pressing forward

Though the Taylor’s checkerspot and several other species have been removed from the vulnerable species action plan, the EPA is pressing forward with related strategies for reducing risks from herbicides and insecticides.

Those proposals aren’t as drastic, though they may result in “a major shift for some producers,” depending on where they operate and which chemicals they use, Murray said.

“The biggest concerns are about the complexities of the strategy,” she said.

Farmers will need to consult online bulletins to see if they’re affected and how they can mitigate herbicide and insecticide impacts, which can be difficult when mixing several chemicals in one tank, Murray said.

“Many growers combine pesticides. It saves money from not having to do multiple passes,” she said.

Broad opposition

When the Taylor’s checkerspot plan was unveiled by EPA, the USDA raised concerns about the “avoidance areas” where most conventional outdoor pesticide spraying would be banned, underlining the impacts to Northwest farmers.

“For agricultural lands that fall in an avoidance area, transition to alternative land uses is likely to occur and land values could be adversely impacted if the proposal is implemented as written,” according to the USDA’s written comments. “The Vulnerable Species Pilot Project does not include any plans to compensate landowners in avoidance areas.”

The Oregon Department of Agriculture warned the plan would not only have “incalculable” impacts on the farm economy, but on public health and the environment as well, as it would hinder the control of mosquitos and protection of native plant species.

“The restrictions, as proposed, put these resources at risk and undermine the investments that have already been made to protect and restore these areas,” according to ODA’s written comments.

Agricultural groups including the Oregon Farm Bureau, Oregon Association of Nurseries and Oregon Seed Council raised concerns about the proposal.

However, even the Center for Biological Diversity — a nonprofit involved in litigation to strengthen federal species protections — said the EPA’s “broad range-wide prohibition” on pesticides went too far.

The agency focused on the historic range of the Taylor’s checkerspot even though the butterfly no longer occupies most of that area, according to the Center for Biological Diversity’s written comments.

“Targeting only the areas of occupancy, approximately three percent of the range, would provide a substantially similar conservation benefit to the current extant populations while minimizing impacts to area agriculture and associated controversy,” the group said.