In an eye-opening examination of the agri-chemical review process and Monsanto's corporate culture, Reuters Media reports in Scant oversight, corporate secrecy preceded weed killer crisis:
As the U.S. growing season entered its peak this summer, farmers began posting startling pictures on social media: fields of beans, peach orchards and vegetable gardens withering away.
The photographs served as early warnings of a crisis that has damaged millions of acres of farmland. New versions of the herbicide dicamba developed by Monsanto and BASF, according to farmers, have drifted across fields to crops unable to withstand it, a charge authorities are investigating. . . .
As the crisis intensifies, new details provided to Reuters by independent researchers and regulators, and previously unreported testimony by a company employee, demonstrate the unusual way Monsanto introduced its product. The approach, in which Monsanto prevented key independent testing of its product, went unchallenged by the Environmental Protection Agency and nearly every state regulator.
Typically, when a company develops a new agricultural product, it commissions its own tests and shares the results and data with regulators. It also provides product samples to universities for additional scrutiny. Regulators and university researchers then work together to determine the safety of the product.
In this case, Monsanto denied requests by university researchers to study its XtendiMax with VaporGrip for volatility - a measure of its tendency to vaporize and drift across fields.
The researchers interviewed by Reuters - Jason Norsworthy at the University of Arkansas, Kevin Bradley at the University of Missouri and Aaron Hager at the University of Illinois - said Monsanto provided samples of XtendiMax before it was approved by the EPA. However, the samples came with contracts that explicitly forbade volatility testing.
"This is the first time I’m aware of any herbicide ever brought to market for which there were strict guidelines on what you could and could not do," Norsworthy said. . . .
Read the entire article online at the West Central Tribune.
Minnesota farmers are among those harmed by Monsanto's corporate culture of secrecy and the EPA's weak oversight. Minnesota Public Radio's (MPR) Mark Steil reported on July 20 in State investigating Monsanto weed killer after farmers' complaints:
The Minnesota Department of Agriculture is investigating about two dozen complaints from farmers about the weed killer dicamba.
Dicamba is used on soybean fields that have been genetically modified to tolerate the herbicide. But Minnesota farmers have joined hundreds in the southern U.S. who allege that drifting dicamba hurts non-resistant fields.
Tim Carlblom said he has seen distinctive dicamba damage on soybean plants in his fields near the southern Minnesota town of Jeffers. . . .
Private crop consultant Stephan Melson believes thousands of acres of soybeans across the state have been damaged. He said many farmers won't report the problem to the state agriculture department because they don't want to hurt relations with a neighbor.
"Personally I've counted, I guess, 1,300 or so acres, but I know it's much higher than that," Melson said. "There are a lot of fields that we personally don't work with that have this injury."
Last week, the Minnesota Department of Agriculture encouraged farmers to take survey on alleged dicamba damage, Agweek reported:
The Minnesota Department of Agriculture is gathering information on plant damage that may have been caused by the use of the herbicide dicamba. The MDA is encouraging anyone with damage to complete a survey. The survey will be open until September 15.
“We are trying to gather as much information on this issue as possible,” said Assistant Commissioner Susan Stokes. “Often, neighbors don’t want to file a formal complaint regarding crop damage against their neighbors. This survey, along with information we’re gathering from the product registrants, applicators, and farmers, will help us collect info to assess the scope of the situation. We’re asking for everyone’s cooperation on this issue."
Dicamba is a herbicide used to control broadleaf weeds in corn and a variety of other food and feed crops, as well as in residential areas. In 2016, the United States Environmental Protection Agency conditionally approved the use of certain new dicamba products on dicamba tolerant soybeans.
Dicamba is a highly volatile chemical that can drift and/or volatilize. Dicamba drift may cause unintended impacts such as serious damage to non-DT soybeans, other sensitive crops, and non-crop plants. This survey looks to gather information about these unintended impacts to other crops and plants.
As of Thursday, August 3, the MDA had received 102 reports of alleged dicamba damage; not all of those reports requested an investigation. Those who have already submitted a report to the MDA are encouraged to complete the survey.
If you believe dicamba was used in violation of the label or law, and you wish to request an MDA investigation, you will also need to complete the pesticide misuse complaint form or call the Pesticide Misuse Complaint line at 651-201-6333.
You can find out more information on dicamba at http://www.mda.state.mn.us/dicamba.
Between this news, beewashing, and the Syngenta lawsuits, Bluestem has come to believe that the agrichemical industry is greater Minnesota's best friend--if we choose to define friend as the behavior expected of the characters on Netflix's Missouri-based series Ozark.
Photo: Dicamba damage to soybeans.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 313 Park Street, Ortonville, MN 56278) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the paypal subscription button.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.
Comments