Petition Urges EPA to Halt Antibiotic and Antifungal Pesticide Use Over Resistance Risks

A coalition of public health, environmental, and farmworker organizations has petitioned the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to cancel all pesticide registrations that use medically important antibiotics and certain antifungals on crops, citing risks of antimicrobial resistance and environmental exposure. The petition, submitted November 24, 2025, also asks EPA to immediately suspend these products while cancellation proceedings advance under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).¹

The groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity, Antibiotic Resistance Action Center at George Washington University, Californians for Pesticide Reform, Center for Environmental Health, Center for Food Safety, Friends of the Earth US, Pesticide Action & Agroecology Network, UNI Center for Energy & Environmental Education, and US PIRG, request cancellation of all pesticides containing streptomycin, oxytetracycline, gentamicin, kasugamycin, ipflufenoquin, and triazole fungicides. These agents are classified as medically important antibiotics or antifungals, or have mechanisms that can promote cross-resistance to drugs used in human and veterinary medicine. Petitioners argue that continued agricultural spraying of these products does not meet FIFRA’s requirement that pesticides cause no “unreasonable adverse effects.”¹

Key Medical and Resistance concerns

The petition emphasizes that streptomycin, gentamicin, and oxytetracycline are considered critically or highly important for human medicine and are also used in veterinary settings. It cites evidence that agricultural applications have selected for resistant plant pathogens and non-target bacteria in orchard and soil environments, and that resistance traits can move between environmental and clinically relevant organisms. Cross-resistance concerns include kasugamycin’s classification within the aminoglycoside family, triazole fungicides’ shared drug class with azole antifungals such as fluconazole and voriconazole, and ipflufenoquin’s mode of action matching that of olorofim, an investigational antifungal for invasive aspergillosis.¹

The petition argues that use of ipflufenoquin and triazoles on crops could select for azole- or olorofim-resistant Aspergillus fumigatus in soil and plant environments, with potential implications for clinical management of invasive fungal infections. Petitioners contend that EPA did not adequately evaluate antifungal resistance risk when approving these products and therefore lacks the “substantial evidence” required to justify continued registration.¹

One Health Framing and Environmental Pathways

The filing presents antibiotic and antifungal pesticide use as a One Health issue, identifying soil, water, food pathways, and animal hosts as potential routes for resistant organisms and resistance genes to spread. Cited studies describe uptake of agricultural antibiotics by crops, antibiotic-associated disruptions of mammalian microbiota, and environmental selection of resistant bacteria. Evidence of resistant organisms in marine mammals is referenced as an indicator of environmental contamination.¹

Farmworkers are highlighted as a disproportionately exposed population. The petition notes that EPA risk assessments assume consistent use of personal protective equipment, whereas field studies show low adherence. It also describes “take-home” exposures in households near treated fields and links these exposures to broader structural barriers such as limited insurance and restricted access to health care among agricultural workers.¹

Pollinator health is also included. Studies cited in the petition show that streptomycin-containing mixtures can disrupt bee gut microbiota, reduce beneficial bacteria, increase susceptibility to pathogens such as Nosema, and select for resistant bacteria within pollinator communities, with implications for crop pollination.¹

Regulatory and Legal Context

Oxytetracycline and streptomycin are among the most widely used antibiotic pesticides in US crop production. EPA product registries list approximately 25 pesticide products containing streptomycin sulfate, 20 with oxytetracycline hydrochloride, and eight with calcium oxytetracycline.¹ US Geological Survey estimates indicate more than 125,000 pounds of these antibiotics were applied to crops in 2018.² Use expanded during the late 2010s, including approvals for spraying across roughly 700,000 acres of citrus crops in Florida and California.²

In 2023, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit vacated EPA’s approval of streptomycin for use on citrus, citing inadequate compliance with FIFRA and the Endangered Species Act.² The ruling did not affect earlier registrations, and oxytetracycline applications continue. Petitioners note that CDC submitted data to EPA in 2017 showing potential for agricultural spraying of streptomycin and oxytetracycline to select for resistant bacteria in environmental settings.²

National AMR Context

CDC reports that antimicrobial resistance remains an urgent public health threat, causing more than 2.8 million infections and over 35,000 deaths annually in the US; adding Clostridioides difficile brings the burden to more than 3 million infections and 48,000 deaths. CDC has expressed concern about resistant infections emerging in community and environmental settings, which can complicate detection and containment.³

Pandemic-era trends have also influenced AMR patterns. CDC surveillance shows that six hospital-onset resistant infections increased by a combined 20% during the COVID-19 pandemic and have remained above pre-pandemic levels.³ Clinical cases of Candida auris increased nearly five-fold from 2019 to 2022.³

CDC identifies soil, water, and other environmental reservoirs as components of AMR spread and tracks resistance patterns through systems such as the National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System and the AR Lab Network.³ These programs include monitoring resistance in foodborne and environmental organisms, reflecting concern that agricultural practices may influence broader exposure pathways.

EPA is not required to take immediate action on the petition. Historically, the agency has discretion in determining whether and when to initiate cancellation or suspension proceedings.Petitioning groups have indicated that litigation may follow if EPA declines to act.²

For clinicians and antimicrobial stewardship programs, the petition frames agricultural antibiotic and antifungal use as a modifiable contributor to resistance emerging outside traditional health care environments. Potential EPA action could affect availability of antibiotic and triazole-related fungicide sprays in crop production and influence longer-term efforts to preserve antibiotic and antifungal effectiveness across human, veterinary, and agricultural settings.

References

1.Petition to US Environmental Protection Agency to Cancel the Registration of Pesticides That Can Promote Resistance to Medically Important Antibiotics and Antifungals. November 24, 2025. Accessed December 3, 2025. https://biologicaldiversity.org/programs/environmental_health/pdfs/2025-11-20_Petition-to-Cancel-Medically-Important-Pesticides.pdf

2.Dall C. Petition calls for EPA to ban use of medically important antimicrobials in pesticides. November 26, 2025. Accessed December 3, 2025. https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/antimicrobial-stewardship/petition-calls-epa-ban-use-medically-important-antimicrobials-pesticides

3.CDC. Antimicrobial Resistance Facts and Stats. February 4, 2025. Accessed December 3, 2025. https://www.cdc.gov/antimicrobial-resistance/data-research/facts-stats/index.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com