Bryce Gray reported earlier this week at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch Online that, “As suspected drift from dicamba took a toll on farmers the past two growing seasons, Monsanto — the Creve Coeur-based agribusiness company that helped give the herbicide newfound prominence with its introduction of dicamba-tolerant crop varieties — publicly urged growers not to spray illegal kinds of the product while new formulations supposedly less prone to drift waited for regulatory approval.

“But a class-action lawsuit filed Wednesday in federal court in St. Louis accuses company sales representatives of secretly giving farmers assurances that using unauthorized or ‘off-label’ spray varieties would be all right.

“‘This was Monsanto’s real plan: publicly appear as if it were complying, while allowing its seed representatives to tell farmers the opposite in person,’ the suit alleges, based on farmer testimony. ‘Their sales pitch: assure purchasers that off-label and illegal uses of dicamba would ‘be just fine.'”

The Post-Dispatch article noted that, “The suit outlines the shifting circumstances that have surrounded suspected dicamba damage since Monsanto first released dicamba-tolerant cotton in 2015 and brought resistant soybeans to market the following year. Corresponding herbicides produced by the defendants weren’t available for either growing season, only gaining approval since late 2016. Their absence led many growers with dicamba-tolerant seeds to allegedly turn to more drift-prone — or volatile — forms of the herbicide, leaving their fields unharmed but putting nearby growers with nonresistant crops at risk.

“But even though the new, proper forms of the herbicide are now available, alleged misuse of dicamba has shot to new heights in 2017. Hundreds of complaints have poured in to state officials in Arkansas and Missouri alone, with reports of other suspected damage emerging in places such as Tennessee, Mississippi, Kansas, Illinois and Indiana.”

Mr. Gray added that, “Monsanto and BASF cited their efforts to educate growers about correct application of dicamba.

“‘We remain confident in growers’ ability to follow all application requirements and abide by the law,’ Monsanto said in a statement. ‘The (Environmental Protection Agency) spent nearly seven years reviewing and analyzing data and research conducted before issuing a label. The lawsuit is wholly without merit, and we will defend ourselves accordingly.’

“DuPont declined to comment on the litigation, but said ‘this year thousands of growers have used these products properly and successfully.'”

The Associated Press reported earlier this week that, “U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer says there’s more the federal government can do to help New York’s growing craft beer industry.

“The Democratic lawmaker is calling on the U.S. Department of Agriculture to add New York to a list of states eligible for a special federal crop insurance program for farmers who grow malt barley.

“Schumer says malt barley requires specific conditions to grow and can be a risky proposition for farmers in New York. He says that giving New York farmers greater crop insurance options will encourage more farmers to grow the crop.”

For more details on this issue, see this recent press release from Friday.

Mark Steil reported late last week at Minnesota Public Radio Online that, “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.”

The update stated that, “Affected farmers often blame Monsanto, one of the nation’s largest agribusiness corporations which brought dicamba-resistant soybeans to the market.

“Monsanto chief technology officer Robb Fraley said there are small-scale drift problems like any herbicide can experience. But he said most of the damage is caused by farmer error.

“‘The vast majority of the farmers who’ve used this tool have used it safely and effectively,’ Fraley said.”

Last week’s MPR update added that, “But just where the blame lies for the dicamba problems should become clearer in the months ahead. Lab tests of vegetation from damaged fields should prove if dicamba is to blame.

“Like other states, the Minnesota agriculture department is investigating complaints about the herbicide.

“Greg Cremers, a supervisor in the agency’s pesticide and fertilizer management division, said the dicamba complaints starting coming in about 10 days ago.”

A news release earlier this week from USDA’s Risk Management Agency (RMA) stated that, “[RMA] wants to inform producers in Idaho, Oregon and Washington about a new insurance plan option for the crop triticale. Triticale is a cross between wheat and rye and can be covered through this new plan.

An update posted yesterday at WFYI (Indianapolis Public Radio) indicated that, “Indiana farmers are filing complaints about a controversial herbicide, dicamba, that’s allegedly drifting from neighboring fields and damaging their crops.

“Monsanto, DuPont, and BASF all released dicamba tolerant soybeans for this planting season. The herbicide is reportedly causing problems, says Dave Scott, the pesticide administrator for the Office of the Indiana State Chemist.”

Yesterday’s update noted that, “As of July 19, farmers have filled 66 complaints that allege their crops have been damaged by dicamba. Scott says that’s ‘a lot’ of complaints, especially for one product in a two to three-week period.

“The Office of the Indiana State Chemist is investigating the complaints. They say it could be months before investigators can determine if the reported crop damage was caused by dicamba, and whether applicators used the product correctly.

“In a statement, Monsanto says it’s critical ‘that farmers follow all local rules and label requirements.'”

A publication this week from the University of Illinois (“The Dicamba Dilemma in Illinois: Facts and Speculations“) stated that, “Only a short time ago, many agricultural professionals were optimistic Illinois would somehow be ‘spared’ the incidents of off-target damage caused by dicamba that continue to plague several states to our south.  The recent preponderance of evidence (observations made traveling the state, stories on social media, an increasing number of pesticide misuse complaints filed with the Illinois Department of Agriculture (IDOA), etc.), suggests otherwise.  Instances of soybean demonstrating symptoms of exposure to dicamba have greatly increased over the past two weeks and it’s nearly certain the number of affected acres will continue to rise.  To estimate the extent of this using the number of complaints filed with the IDOA as the sole metric would be to grossly underestimate the current reality.”

The U of I article, which was written by Aaron Hager, provides information on

–Symptoms of Exposure

-Possible Routes of Exposure

–Leaf Distortions

–Effects on Soybean Yields; and,

–Industry Comments

To read the complete article, just click here.

Pam Smith indicated this week at DTN that, “My neighbor has a dog that won’t stay home. The mutt is of questionable bloodline, but there’s little doubt about his bark and his bite. He’s successfully attacked me twice.

“Encounters and complaints from several neighbors finally resulted in the dog’s owner fencing his property. However, the dog still manages to, on occasion, sneak into my yard to dish out some terrorism before heading another quarter-mile down the road to indulge in live chicken dinners.

“There’s been a lot of big talk and chest thumping in the neighborhood about what happens next. As a dog lover and peaceful soul, I’m conflicted. However, the thought of fencing my own property to keep someone else’s dog out does not seem just either.”

Ms. Smith noted that, “Sound familiar? It should. Across the farm belt a similar dog-eat-dog power struggle is going on over a new seed trait and herbicide. Monsanto’s new Xtend technology that allows crops to withstand dicamba was developed to give farmers another tool to tackle troublesome weeds. But the dicamba herbicide used in that system is now being accused of chemically trespassing and injuring susceptible crops and plants.”

The DTN article stated that, “As with any legitimate issue, there are plenty of points on each side. However, when EPA finally issued a label for the three herbicides (XtendiMax, FeXapan and Engenia) to be used with the Xtend trait, it gave it a two-year conditional label that challenged applicators to get it right or lose access to the technology. At DTN, we spent the better part of the winter reporting on the many label restrictions and what it would take to spray Xtend crops properly.

“As with any new technology, we assumed some growing pains. But the number of formal misuse and injury complaints tied to dicamba are proof we have a problem and not, as some suggest, only in Southern states. Reports of dicamba symptoms are now being recorded across the Midwest.”

Ms. Smith went on to explain that, “The wounding in terms of crop yield remains to be seen, but the issue is now tearing at the fabric of rural America. Last year our jaws dropped when an Arkansas farmer allegedly died at the hands of another, reportedly over dicamba-drift issues. Sadly, that horrible incident seems less far-fetched the longer the verbal brawling over the right to spray versus the right to protect wages on.

“Farmers that I personally know have come to blows this summer over dicamba. Other farmers that have come forth to share their stories have received threatening messages. As neighbors face off against neighbors, the lawyers are lining up.

“We need to take a collective breath. If dicamba trait technology is indeed a tool that we can’t live without (a thought that has serious implications in its own right), then the agriculture community needs to come together and figure out why injury is occurring and what to do about it.“