The Ecologist

 
Mark VanGessel identifies Palmer Amaranth - now a superweed resistant to Roundup herbicides - in a field of soybeans. But how long before it also develops resistance to dicamba as well? Photo: University of Delaware Carvel REC via Flickr (CC BY).

Mark VanGessel identifies Palmer Amaranth - now a superweed resistant to Roundup herbicides - in a field of soybeans. But how long before it also develops resistance to dicamba as well? Photo: University of Delaware Carvel REC via Flickr (CC BY).

More articles about
Related Articles

Lawsuit challenges Monsanto's 'back to the future' toxic herbicide

Center for Food Safety

25th January 2017

A coalition of farmer and public interest groups are suing the US Environmental Protection Agency for unlawfully approving the use of Monsanto's highly toxic herbicide dicamba on its dicamba-resistant GMO soybeans and cotton, without consulting wildlife and fisheries agencies.

Planting more GE crops and dousing them with more noxious chemicals isn't the answer. The Environmental Protection Agency should be protecting health and environment, not Monsanto's profits.

Farmers and conservation groups have filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) approval of Monsanto's new 'XtendiMax' pesticide.

The approval of the pesticide company's latest version of the older weedkiller known as dicamba permits it to be sprayed directly on Monsanto's genetically engineered dicamba-resistant soybeans and cotton.

Monsanto projects over 15 million acres of 'Roundup Ready 2 Xtend' soybeans (tolerant to dicamba and glyphosate herbicides) in 2017, and over 3 million acres of 'Bollgard II XtendFlex' cotton (tolerant to three herbicides, dicamba, glyphosate and glufosinate).

Because these same crops are also engineered to withstand applications of Monsanto's Roundup, the overuse of that pesticide, which contains the active ingredient glyphosate, will continue at high levels.

"Federal regulators have abandoned the interests of farmers, the environment, and public health", said George Kimbrell, of the Center for Food Safety and counsel in the case. "We won't allow our food to be dragged backward into a pesticide-soaked nightmare - not without a hell of a fight."

The petitioners request the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to "find that (1) EPA violated its duties under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act in issuing the conditional registration, and (2) EPA violated the Agency’s duties under the Endangered Species Act ... by failing to consult with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service to insure that conditionally registering dicamba for uses on genetically engineered cotton and soybean in the thirty-four states will not jeopardize any listed species or destroy or adversely modify any of their critical habitats ... and to grant relief as may be appropriate."

Monsanto's chemical treadmill

The decision greenlights a more than tenfold increase in use of dicamba, a toxic pesticide, increasing risks to farmers, community health and the environment.

Dicamba is linked to increased rates of cancer in farmers and birth defects, while glyphosate was recently classified as a 'probable carcinogen' by the World Health Organization. Farmers are extremely alarmed by dicamba's propensity to drift and damage neighboring crops.

Meanwhile conservationists are concerned about its impacts to biodiversity: dicamba drift threatens plants that provide nectar for pollinators and habitat for animals, and it is frequently detected in surface waters, says Earthjustice attorney Paul Achitoff:

"Monsanto's Roundup Ready crops created an environmental disaster by causing infestation of tens of millions of acres of farmland with herbicide-resistant weeds and spurring an enormous increase in pesticide use. Planting more GE crops and dousing them with more noxious chemicals isn't the answer. The Environmental Protection Agency should be protecting health and the environment, not Monsanto's profits." 

Farmers in 10 states have already reported that much more limited dicamba spraying associated with Monsanto's new dicamba-resistant crops has caused widespread damage to thousands of acres of their crops. And last fall, a dicamba drift dispute between an Arkansas and a Missouri farmer even resulted in one farmer being shot to death.

"Monsanto's dicamba-resistant crop system will drive up sales of this outdated pesticide, spur more superweeds and damage vulnerable crops", said Dr Marcia Ishii-Eiteman, senior scientist with Pesticides Action Network.

"Monsanto's solution is expensive, inadequate, and reckless. If Trump's administration wants to serve farmers, it will invest in healthy, long-lasting solutions to farmers' needs, not pander to corporate greed."

On the way: another generation of superweeds

The huge increase in dicamba spraying will trigger an outbreak of dicamba resistance in weeds, just as massive use of Roundup on first generation GE crops created an epidemic of weeds immune to glyphosate.

While Monsanto spins its new dicamba crops as a fix to the current weed resistance problems its own Roundup Ready crop system caused, many scientists, and even the US Department of Agriculture, predict the opposite: the rapid emergence of more superweeds, resistant to both herbicides.

The evidence on the ground already indicates EPA's weak weed resistance 'management plan' will make the problem even worse, both because it lacks limits on dicamba use, and because it primarily relies on Monsanto for its implementation and enforcement.

Margot McMillen, NFFC board representative and Missouri organic farmer commented: "The whole system of genetic engineering threatens plant and animal health. Because of cross-pollination, the original non-GMO and wild weed genomes are fast disappearing, while the fight against weeds requires more and more potent chemicals.

"These new crops and their unintended consequences were predictable and avoidable, but the safe and healthy alternative offered by sustainable and organic agriculture has been ignored."

Despite admitting significant risks to dozens of endangered species, the EPA still refused to consult with the expert federal agency in charge of endangered species, the US Fish and Wildlife Service.

"Once again the EPA is allowing staggering increases in pesticide use that will undoubtedly harm our nation's most imperiled plants and animals", said Nathan Donley, a scientist with the Center for Biological Diversity. "Iconic species like endangered whooping cranes are known to visit soybean fields, and now they'd be exposed to this toxic herbicide at levels they've never seen before."

The plaintiff organizations bringing the lawsuit are National Family Farm Coalition, Pesticide Action Network, Center for Food Safety, and Center for Biological Diversity, represented jointly by legal counsel from Earthjustice and Center for Food Safety.

 


 

Principal source: Center for Food Safety.

 

Previous Articles...

ECOLOGIST COOKIES

Using this website means you agree to us using simple cookies.

More information here...

 

FOLLOW
THE ECOLOGIST

 

Help us keep the Ecologist platform going

Since 2012, the Ecologist has been owned and published by a small UK-based charity called the Resurgence Trust. We work hard to support the kind of independent journalism and comment that we know Ecologist readers enjoy but we need your help to keep going. We do all this on a very small budget with a very small editorial team and so joining the Trust or making a donation will show us you value our work and support the platform which is currently offered as a free service.

Join The Resurgence TrustDonate to support the Resurgence Trust