Farmers Say This Weedkiller Is Also Killing Their Soybean Plants

Hundreds of complaints led the Arkansas Plant Board to vote for a temporary ban on dicamba.

A soybean field.United Soybean Board

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Across the Southern United States, a virulent new pest has been afflicting soybean crops.  Farmers claim it causes the plants’ leaves to cup together, their budding stems to die back, and their beans to curl into twisted, malformed pods. But this scourge is not your usual insect or fungus: It is dicamba, a potent weedkiller.

Monsanto sells a version of this herbicide that is harmless to the company’s new, genetically engineered soybeans—but not necessarily to the non-GMO versions that are often planted in fields nearby. In Arkansas, which has one of the country’s earliest soybean seasons, state regulators have received 420 complaints from farmers who say their non-resistant crops were damaged when dicamba drifted over from neighboring farms. On Friday, the Arkansas plant board voted to ban the spraying of dicamba for 120 days on all crops except pastureland; the ban will take effect if approved by the governor of Arkansas and a subcommittee of the state legislature.

Farmers, especially in the South, have been desperate for new weapons against superweeds that can’t be killed with more widely used herbicides. In the 20 years since Monsanto introduced a line of genetically engineered, “Roundup Ready” crops, including soybeans, farmers have sprayed so much of the weedkiller Roundup that weeds have evolved to survive it. Roundup-resistant Palmer amaranth, or pigweed, can grow three inches a day, reach seven feet or more, and damage harvesting equipment. But for now, at least, most pigweed can’t survive a dousing of dicamba.

The use of dicamba isn’t new, but it has not typically been applied on fields with mature crops. Conventional soybeans are sensitive to the herbicide, which can be carried along by the wind. Last year, when Monsanto introduced dicamba-resistant soybeans for the first time, some 200 dicamba spraying complaints were lodged in Missouri, with tempers flaring on both sides of the issue. A dicamba dispute between two farmers in Arkansas led to the shooting death of one and the arrest of the other on murder charges.

In a letter submitted to the Arkansas plant board last week and originally reported by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Arkansas grower Tom Burnham estimated that half the farmers in his area who planted dicamba-resistant crops did so simply to prevent themselves from suffering damage. “I feel the need to plant a technology to protect your crop from off-target movement is tantamount to extortion,” he wrote.

Monsanto has criticized the proposed Arkansas dicamba ban as premature. “The Plant Board’s decision was made without hearing directly from farmers about the impact of removing a valuable weed management tool, without providing sufficient notice to the public and without allowing the opportunity for public input,” Monsanto said.  “Instead the board based its decision on off-target movement claims that are still being investigated and have not been substantiated.”

Monsanto maintains that its dicamba herbicide, known as XtendiMax, is safe when applied according to guidelines approved by the US Environmental Protection Agency. Farmers must consult specialty crop registries and provide buffer distances between adjacent fields. “These application requirements are designed to help minimize off-target movement and enable responsible use of the herbicide,” said Monsanto spokeswoman Allison Stein.

Even if farmers can work out the kinks with dicamba, it may soon go the way of Roundup. Though Monsanto says it is unaware of any cases of pigweed developing dicamba resistance, some experts have raised concerns. Bob Scott, a University of Arkansas weed specialist, recently told the Delta FarmPress: “There are fields with multiple metabolic resistant pigweed…where dicamba isn’t working too well.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate