CropLife Retail Week: 2026 Fertilizer Crisis, Iran Conflict and EPA Cuts

In this episode, CropLife Editor Eric Sfiligoj and Jeff Pritchard, CEO of WestLink Ag, break down the most pressing issues facing growers and retailers in 2026. From strategies for side-stepping fertilizer spikes caused by the Iranian conflict to proposed 54% budget cuts at the EPA that may boost biologicals, we explore how the industry is adapting.

Can’t see the video? To view it, please accept cookies by clicking the icon in the bottom-right corner of the screen, or click here.
♦ Subscribe to CropLife Retail Week’s Youtube Channel

*Below is a partial and edited transcript:

Eric Sfiligoj:
Welcome to another edition of Retail Week. I’m Eric Sfiligoj, editor of CropLife and CropLife Iron. Here with the special guest this week, Jeff Pritchard from WestLink Ag. Jeff, welcome to the program.

Jeff Pritchard:
Thank you. I appreciate you taking the time to talk with me.

Eric Sfiligoj:
Yeah, I was going to say, I know you and I go way back. I think it was around 2001 when I first met you—you were on the East Coast at that point. Now you’re with WestLink Ag in Idaho. For viewers who may not know, can you explain what WestLink Ag is and what you do for your members?

Jeff Pritchard:
Sure. WestLink Ag was started in January 2000—Y2K, a memorable time for those of us old enough to remember it. At that time, we were essentially a fertilizer buying group, formed by combining two existing groups. We started with 17 independent retailers focused on purchasing fertilizer collectively to secure better pricing and availability.

I became CEO in 2016, and I’m coming up on my 10th year this August. Today, we have about 50 independent retail members across the U.S., from New York to Florida, Southern California to Washington State, and everywhere in between. Our members are independent retailers not affiliated with larger national or regional organizations, all serving American farmers.

We supply fertilizer, seed, and crop protection products, but we also support members in other ways—fleet services, insurance captives, and market intelligence through partners like StoneX and Green Markets. That helps them stay on top of what’s happening in the farm economy. That’s a high-level overview of what we do.

Eric Sfiligoj:
Very good. You mentioned fertilizer, which has been top of mind for the ag community this year—especially with the Iranian conflict and disruptions around the Strait of Hormuz. As we record this, it’s closed again. What are you hearing from your members, and how are they coping?

Jeff Pritchard:
The Iranian situation is just the latest headline, but fertilizer prices have been escalating since around 2021. The conflict impacts urea most directly, but we’ve also seen rising costs in sulfur, ammonia, natural gas—you name it.

We’ve been in a constant state of monitoring pricing as we prepare to supply the channel. What’s frustrating is that we had ample supply in the U.S. before the conflict, yet urea prices still jumped $100–$120 per ton almost immediately. Coming from the crop protection side, where supply and demand dynamics are more consistent, it’s tough to see domestic product prices spike due to events halfway around the world.

Eric Sfiligoj:
Are there segments that might benefit from this situation? Any alternatives gaining traction?

Jeff Pritchard:
Yes, absolutely. We’ve identified about 20 strategic initiatives aimed at shifting the playing field—everything from alternatives to MAP fertilizers to increased use of biologicals, stabilizers, and improved application timing.

There’s also an educational component. For example, do we really need to apply all fertilizer in the fall if we’re losing a large percentage before planting? Maybe shifting applications closer to planting improves efficiency.

With advances in AI and technology, we’re seeing promising developments that could support these alternatives. We’re investing a lot of time into exploring and developing them for our members.

Eric Sfiligoj:
That’s a great point. Technology and AI could help analyze grower data and even suggest alternative inputs or strategies.

Jeff Pritchard:
Exactly. And tough times force innovation. Farmers are resilient—they’ll adapt. We’re already seeing demand destruction. One large Midwest member applied fertilizer across the same acreage but saw volumes drop 40%.

Farmers may adjust yield goals or focus on their most productive land. It’s going to create a more strategic, data-driven end user, which is ultimately a positive outcome.

Eric Sfiligoj:
Earlier you mentioned COVID-era shifts. We saw a move from “just in time” to “just in case” inventory strategies. Do you expect any long-term structural changes from the current situation?

Jeff Pritchard:
It’s tough to say. Fertilizer has high barriers to entry, so supply is concentrated among established players. I don’t see major changes at the supply level.

However, on the farm level, I do expect meaningful shifts. Farmers are looking for ways to reduce costs. I saw an estimate recently that corn production costs are $5.20–$5.80 per bushel, while market prices are around $4.50. Farmers can’t control price—only yield and input costs.

So I think we’ll see innovation and efficiency improvements at the farm level to close that gap and restore profitability.

Eric Sfiligoj:
Alright, we’ll take a quick break.

As the nation approaches its 250th anniversary, we’re spotlighting the brands that power U.S. agriculture. Our upcoming “Made in the USA” special section in the July 2026 issue of CropLife highlights companies supporting ag retailers and growers nationwide. This is a great opportunity to showcase your brand across print and digital—and even extend your story on Retail Week through a custom interview feature. Space is limited, so contact your CropLife media representative today.

Eric Sfiligoj:
And we’re back with Jeff Pritchard. Jeff, shifting to crop protection—what’s your take on the proposed EPA budget cuts, potentially up to 54%?

Jeff Pritchard:
It’s definitely a concern. Fewer resources likely mean fewer new product approvals. Over time, investment has already shifted from chemistry into seed technology, which made sense.

But what concerns me more is implementation. The EPA has introduced complex labeling requirements tied to the Endangered Species Act. That requires significant oversight and manpower. If budgets are cut drastically, how do they manage both new approvals and existing regulatory responsibilities?

It risks creating an agency that can’t effectively do either.

Eric Sfiligoj:
Some industry groups are pushing back strongly. But if cuts do happen, could that accelerate adoption of biologicals?

Jeff Pritchard:
Yes, absolutely. Biologicals could benefit because they typically have faster approval timelines. But the challenge is trust—there’s less regulatory rigor in that space.

I’ve personally reviewed well over 100 biological products in the past decade. Many look great on paper, but we need field validation. Retailers need confidence that products perform as advertised.

If any remaining EPA resources could help bring more structure and validation to biologicals, that would go a long way. That said, we’re already investing heavily—many of our initiatives involve biological solutions.

Eric Sfiligoj:
Interesting. We’ll definitely keep watching that space. Maybe we’ll have you back to dive deeper into biologicals.

Jeff Pritchard:
I’d be happy to.

Eric Sfiligoj:
Jeff Pritchard, thanks for joining us on this edition of Retail Week. We appreciate your insights. And thanks to our viewers—we’ll see you next week.