Doug Goehring, the state agriculture commissioner in North Dakota, says “90 percent of the problems with off-target movement” of dicamba “may go away” if regulators set a lower application rate for the herbicide. In an interview, Goehring told the Capital Journal that he might allow a lower application rate for crops in his state even if EPA does not revise its rules for the controversial chemical.
Farmers have embraced dicamba as a tool to fight weeds that are developing resistance to other herbicides. The weedkiller is intended for use in combination with cotton and soybean varieties genetically modified to withstand a dose of dicamba, but there are complaints of damage to susceptible crops in neighboring fields. Last year, dicamba was blamed for damage to 3.6 million acres of soybeans. The EPA tightened its rules on when and how the herbicide can be used this year. Some states took steps such as implementing a cut-off date for the use of dicamba. Arkansas effectively banned its use on row crops during the growing season.
In a letter to the EPA last month, Goehring said the minimum application rate of 0.5 pounds of active ingredient per acre “is too high, unnecessary and irresponsible.” In the past, farmers successfully used rates of one-tenth or one-quarter pound an acre, he told the newspaper.
The EPA is scheduled to review its dicamba regulations again this winter.
In mid-July, a University of Missouri weed scientist said his survey of colleagues indicated that dicamba was blamed for damage to 1.1 million acres of soybeans this year. That was less than half of the damage reported at roughly the same point in 2017. The weed scientist, Kevin Bradley, said on Tuesday there would be no more reports this year. Many states did not provide information, he said, so “it didn’t make much sense to keep putting out inaccurate information.”
The Illinois Fertilizer and Chemical Association said a survey of its members found that 70 percent reported incidents of possible dicamba damage to soybeans in adjacent fields when the wind was not blowing toward the susceptible varieties at the time of application. Half saw fields where multiple exposures occurred. “The finger was points at volatility as the primary factor for those symptoms,” said DTN/Progressive Farmer.