Dicamba

Metabolic Weed Resistance Crisis Builds Across The Heartland

Wed, 06 May 2026 16:51:05 GMT

Waterhemp, Palmer amaranth and some other tough broadleaf weeds and grasses are no longer slipping past just single herbicides. Across the Corn Belt and beyond, they are tolerating entire herbicide programs. Weed scientists say that pattern points to a critical issue more farmers are facing: metabolic resistance.

Unlike traditional target-site resistance, which is often specific to a single herbicide class, metabolic resistance is even worse because it can confer cross-resistance to multiple, unrelated herbicide groups .

Aaron Hager, University of Illinois Extension weed scientist often warns that when a tough weed like waterhemp learns to metabolize one herbicide, it becomes easier for it to “learn” to detoxify others. That ability has helped lead to the 7-way resistance with waterhemp seen in some Illinois counties, according to weed scientist Patrick Tranel, one of Hager’s colleagues.

At least 13 states have reported having some degree of “highly suspected” or confirmed cases of metabolic weed resistance. Here are three of the broadleaf weeds demonstrating metabolic resistance and states where they’re located:

Along with these broadleaf weeds, some common and giant ragweed, marestail/horseweed, annual (Italian) ryegrass and barnyardgrass populations have also demonstrated metabolic resistance.

(Weed Science Society of America, GROW, BASF, Syngenta)

Target-site resistance can be identified through DNA tests. But metabolic resistance is a “guessing game” involving potentially dozens to hundreds of genes working in tandem, making it difficult for scientists and farmers to know which products will still work in their specific fields.

Tommy Butts sees the trend for metabolic resistance taking root in Indiana. He says HPPD resistance in waterhemp is “getting widespread,” and the failures are expanding to other chemistries as well.

“We had more complaints last year about things like mesotrione or Callisto starting to fail, which is really scary in the corn acres,” says Butts, Purdue University Extension weed scientist. “Corn is supposed to be our easy year to control waterhemp, and now, all of a sudden, we start losing Callisto.” He addresses this in detail in the latest Purdue Crop Chat .

The bad news does not stop there.

“You start talking auxins and glufosinate, and we have confirmed resistance in the state to those,” he says. “I wouldn’t say that’s as widespread, but it’s definitely popping up.”

With metabolic resistance chipping away at PPOs, HPPDs, atrazine partners, auxins and glufosinate, the old playbook of “just switch products” no longer works well.

Glufosinate alone 😀⁰Mesotrione alone 😕⁰Glufosinate + mesotrione 🔥😎

That’s the power of effective herbicide tank mixtures.

Deploying synergistic tank mixes with multiple effective sites of action is critical for improving weed control and helping delay herbicide resistance… pic.twitter.com/FggZJrQQ1Q
— Rodrigo Werle (@WiscWeeds) May 6, 2026

“Hammer With Residuals” And Build Effective Combinations

Butts’ first message to corn and soybean farmers is straightforward: no more solo herbicide passes in the field.

“We have to hammer weeds with effective residuals and then mix up our posts as much as possible,” he says.

In his view, that means at least two things for row-crop growers. First, use layered residual programs that keep fields clean as long as possible and reduce the number of emerged weeds that ever see a post pass. Second, use post-emerge applications that combine multiple, truly effective modes of action at full labeled rates.

Cutting rates, he warns, is exactly how growers “train” metabolism-based resistance to take root.

With soybean trait systems, he pushes hard against relying on a single flagship product.

“If we’re growing Enlist soybeans, don’t just rely on Enlist and don’t just rely on Liberty,” Butts advises. “Do the tank mix. The tank mix trumps everything.”

This field shows the result of waterhemp seeds that were spread during harvest by a combine.

(Aaron Hager, University of Illinois)

Pay More Up Front To Avoid Making Expensive “Revenge Sprays”

Metabolic resistance can thrive when weeds are hit with chemistry they can partially tolerate. That is why Butts keeps coming back to strong, early, soil-applied programs.

He hears pushback from farmers every year on using multiple products in the tank.

“A lot of people tell me, ‘Well, it costs way too much up front with $20 for a pre. Corn gets even more expensive,’” he acknowledges.
However, Butts points to work by Purdue University Extension and other states showing those dollars pay off when the entire season is measured.

“If you can get a strong residual program out and get it activated, the whole-season economics of it makes sense,” Butts says. “It’s consistently shown that if you have that strong pre up front, you don’t have what I like to call the revenge sprays in August, where we’re going across the field three different times trying to kill waist-high waterhemp.”

Check out this tool from GROW on how to address waterhemp specifically.

Protect Herbicide Tools To Extend Their Use

As more herbicide modes of action come under pressure, Butts singles out metribuzin as an example of a product that still pulls its weight in soybeans.

“Metribuzin is a big one in soybeans, because we don’t have a lot of resistance to that,” he says.

“I will also put in the plug for AMS in general, across the board,” Butts says. “That always helps with some of those products… when we start getting later in the season, we get more stressed weeds. AMS even tends to help there.”

Butts does caution farmers that AMS is not allowed in dicamba tank mixes for XtendFlex soybeans.

Underlying all of it is a blunt warning about what happens if growers decide to skimp on their weed control efforts.

“If you let it go even one year, now you’ve made yourself a mess for the next five to 10 years,” he says. “You’ve got to try and stay on top of weeds as much as possible.”

5 Practical Recommendations To Address Metabolic Resistance

Because metabolic resistance is so unpredictable, weed scientists have shifted their advice away from “rotating chemicals” toward a “zero-threshold” approach to control. The following metabolic resistance management recommendations have been presented by Aaron Hager, University of Illinois Weed Scientist, and Beck’s agronomists:

1. The primary focus of metabolic resistance management should be on decreasing the weed seed bank. This means that weeds must be eliminated before they ever go to seed.

2. A robust residual herbicide program should be used, not because residuals represent a different herbicide family but because they eliminate weeds at the earliest growth stages – slashing contributions to the weed seed bank.

3. Physically cutting weeds out of the crop must be included in the management plan, because physical elimination of weed escapes further slashes contributions to the weed seed bank.

4. Post-herbicide programs should shift from calendar-based timing to scouting-based timing. Once weeds break through a pre-emerge residual program, they must be eliminated. Such early targeting further slashes contributions to the weed seed bank.

5. Mechanical techniques, field cultivators, etc., should be used where possible to further the cause of decreased seed production.

Late Labels, Updated Restrictions, New Names: Navigate the 2026 Dicamba Landscape

Wed, 18 Mar 2026 22:03:25 GMT

As waterhemp continues to outsmart traditional chemistry, soybean growers are looking for a win in 2026. For Nate Eitzmann, that win starts with a returning tool in the toolbox: dicamba for over-the-top application.

A Certified Crop Advisor for Asmus Farm Supply, Eitzmann says while waterhemp is farmers’ enemy No. 1 in his geographic area—northern Iowa, southern Minnesota, and eastern South Dakota—he readily acknowledges other problematic weeds take the top spot in other regions. But all farmers are united in needing effective weed control options.

Adding to the farmer’s toolbox for 2026, the EPA has reinstated a label for three products for over-the-top (OTT) application of dicamba in soybeans. The 2024 season was the most recent growing year growers had access to OTT dicamba.

What does this mean for soybean growers?

Check your traits: Ensure your XtendFlex beans are ready for the application.
Review state cutoffs: Remember that federal EPA labels are the baseline, but state-specific dates and temperatures still apply.
Plan for ESA: Be prepared for runoff mitigation and buffer requirements that may be stricter than in 2024.

Eitzmann says dicamba is a great tool for broadleaf weed control, especially waterhemp.

“It’s risk versus reward with dicamba. It’s a tool that is great for us to add to our toolbox for waterhemp control. We just have to do our best to spray it responsibly within the label and keep it where we want it to be so it’s a tool we can continue to utilize in the future,” he says.

Acknowledging the volatility risk with dicamba, the EPA labels put in place measures to minimize the potential for off-target movement. Additionally, many states have instituted cutoff dates for application (based on calendar date and/or growth stage) and temperature maximums. Applicator training is also a requirement, as it has been in years past.

“Over the years of spraying this dicamba on soybeans, and even prior to that, using it in corn, the volatility concerns have been addressed and we’ve gotten better at it,” he says. “In addition, we’ve got the ESA compliance, so there are some runoff mitigation points that are also included in this, and a few different buffer requirements.”

Read more about the labels here.

What’s Different About the Dicamba Herbicides Available?

A trio of products is available for over-the-top dicamba application in soybeans and cotton:

Engenia: Newer salt formulation; binds tighter to acid to reduce volatility.
Stryax: The XtendiMax replacement; uses DGA salt + VaporGrip.
Tavium: DGA salt + VaporGrip + residual partner (pre-mix).

“As far as killing weeds, we haven’t seen any difference, and the label states we have to be at a half-pound of dicamba per application. So, that’s a different rate per acre of Engenia versus Tavium versus Stryax, but the active ingredient you’re getting is equivalent,” Eitzmann says.

How Much Dicamba Will Be Sprayed in 2026?

While the label for 2026 didn’t come as a complete surprise to Eitzmann or the industry in general, its timing was unexpected. The EPA label for dicamba arrived in early February, which was too late to affect trait packages already purchased by many farmers. Per Farm Journal research, most farmers are finished buying seed by February.

For his team at AFS, their dicamba-sprayed acres grew quickly after the initial EPA registrations, but they peaked around 2021/2022 as Enlist E3 acres gained market share.

For 2026, because of the timing of the labels, dicamba volumes aren’t expected to reach the same saturation seen in 2024. However, Eitzmann says some farmers are in a position to make the applications because of their seed planning.

“There are people who purchased XtendFlex soybeans and, going into purchasing season, they intended to have dicamba as an option. They maybe purchased herbicides to fill that gap if the registration didn’t happen, but once it did, they’re looking to make a change and add dicamba to their program for 2026,” he says.

As for having the tool, Eitzmann says his team and their farmer customers recognize it’s worth following the application requirements to maintain access to the herbicide.

“Be responsible with it, use it within the labels, use it where it fits, and don’t push those limits. I think as we go forward, it’s not a crutch that we have to lean on, but it’s an extra tool that we can use when it’s applicable,” he says.

Know The Rules For Dicamba Use In Your State

Wed, 18 Feb 2026 19:51:23 GMT

The EPA has finalized the dicamba label for the next two growing seasons, bringing much-needed clarity to U.S. farmers. But while over-the-top (OTT) use is officially back, it arrives with the most restrictive federal requirements farmers have seen to date for products like Engenia , Tavium , and Bayer’s new XtendiMax replacement, Stryax .

In some cases, states are adopting stronger regulations for dicamba use, especially with regard to temperature and calendar cutoffs:

Temperature Cutoff: The federal label mandates a 95°F forecast high as a hard cutoff. If the National Weather Service forecasts a high above 95°F, you cannot legally spray OTT dicamba that day.
No Federal Calendar Cutoff: Unlike previous labels, the EPA has not set a nationwide calendar deadline.

State-Specific Restrictions In Place

Illinois and Minnesota are two states, so far, that are going with stricter regulations for temperature and application timing cutoffs for dicamba.

Illinois is using an 85°F forecast high as the cutoff for dicamba applications in soybeans.

“If you load your sprayer and it is 78 degrees at 10 a.m. in the morning, but the forecasted high by the National Weather Service is supposed to be 85 or 86, that is a do-not-spray day,” says Kevin Johnson, director of government relations and strategy for the Illinois Soybean Association.

Deadline for application: Plan for a June 20 cutoff for OTT applications, Johnson says.

Minnesota:

Temperature: Minnesota is using an 85°F forecast high cutoff for dicamba applications in soybeans.

Deadline for applications: June 12 cutoff south of I-94; June 30 cutoff north of I-94, according to Dicamba Restrictions Announced for 2026 Growing Season .

Shifting Your Weed Control Strategy

Because of the tighter application timing windows in Illinois, Johnson anticipates there could be a shift in how farmers there use the chemistry. He expects many Illinois farmers to move dicamba to a pre-emergence timing rather than post-emergence, saving OTT dicamba only for “super high weed” pressure situations.

With many seed trait packages now stacking dicamba and glufosinate (Liberty) tolerance, Johnson says to expect “a lot more guys using Liberty on the back end.”

In addition, the EPA is tying dicamba use to mandatory conservation practices. Farmers can find more details on the Bulletins Live! Two Website

“We’re still waiting on a lot of details on what those conservation practices are,” Johnson says. “Bulletins Live! Two is a good website, but it’s, I’ll say clunky… it’s not real easy to just find one thing and find what you need,” he cautions.

Record Keeping: Don’t Risk A $700 Fine

The most immediate hurdle for many farmers interested in using the technology this spring will be the paperwork. In Illinois, the Department of Agriculture uses a 22-question record-keeping sheet specifically for dicamba.

“If I can stress anything in this call, do your record keeping,” Johnson emphasizes. “If you ever get called in on a complaint, the first thing they ask you for is your record keeping. If you do not have all 22 questions filled out, you are going to get a $700 fine. There’s no questions asked.”

To stay ahead of that risk, Johnson advises Illinois farmers to complete records on a timely basis, not “later when things slow down.” He urges them to fill out as much of the form as possible before the season begins, including static information about equipment, farm identifiers, and general practices, then finish the day-specific entries in the cab during or immediately after the job. Some of the information—like wind speed, wind direction, and exact application timing—can only be captured accurately in real time.

For custom applications, the legal burden for record keeping falls on the applicator, Johnson adds, but growers should still ask for copies for their own files and talk openly with retailers about documentation expectations.

All of this points toward one overarching need, Johnson says: have a clear herbicide game plan for 2026, especially if you plan to use dicamba, and build in contingencies. He addresses more of the dicamba requirements specific to Illinois farmers in a recent Field Advisor podcast, available here .

EPA Reinstates Dicamba for 2026 Registration in Cotton and Soybeans

Fri, 06 Feb 2026 23:23:35 GMT

EPA is reinstating dicamba use for farmers in 2026, but it comes with a litany of tight controls and restrictions. It will be the first time since the 2024 season that farmers have had the option to use dicamba over-the-top (OTT) for weed control. It’s now offering approval for the next two seasons in 34 states and then will do additional reviews.

“This decision responds directly to the strong advocacy of America’s cotton and soybean farmers, particularly growers across the Cotton Belt, who have been clear and consistent about the critical challenges they face without access to this tool for controlling resistant weeds in their growing crops,” said EPA in a release. “This action reflects this administration’s commitment to ensuring farmers have the tools they need to succeed while protecting the environment with the strongest safeguards ever imposed on OTT dicamba use.”

EPA says it conducted a thorough pesticide evaluation, using data and hundreds of publicly available independent, peer-reviewed studies and real-world field results to do a human health and ecological risk assessment.

“To be clear, these studies involved pesticide applicators with decades of intensive exposure, not typical consumers,” EPA said.

The agency used that information to help build in what it calls extra precautions into the registration with a focus on reducing worker contact with the product. When applied according to the new label instructions, EPA’s analysis found no unreasonable risk to human health or the environment from OTT dicamba use. It also recognized the issues with drift and calls them legitimate concerns.

“The ecological risks associated with dicamba drift and volatility are real,” EPA said. “If not carefully mitigated, off-target movement of dicamba can damage sensitive plants and impact neighboring farms and natural ecosystems. These concerns are exactly why the strongest safeguards ever are essential.”

EPA says it designed new label restrictions to directly address them, including cutting the amount of dicamba that can be used annually in half, doubling required safety agents, requiring conservation practices to protect endangered species and restricting applications during high temperatures when exposure and volatility risks increase.

New Dicamba Restrictions for 2026 Registration

EPA says they will continue to track how the chemistry performs in the real world and make adjustments if needed. That said, it’s now requiring a host of new mitigation measures, focused on reducing drift, minimizing volatility and protecting ecosystems.

Maximum application rate cut in half. A maximum of two applications of 0.5 lbs. of dicamba per acre may be made annually, for a maximum of 1.0 lb. of all dicamba products annually. (The 2020 registration permitted up to four applications of 0.5 lb./acre, only two could be over-the-top, for a total of 2 lb. of dicamba annually.) This directly reduces the total amount of dicamba in the environment and limits potential exposure to sensitive species.
Doubled volatility reduction agents. 40 oz./acre of approved Volatility Reduction Agent (VRA) must be added to every application.** This significantly reduces the likelihood that dicamba will volatilize (turn into vapor) after application and drift off-target hours or days later — one of the primary pathways for environmental damage.
Mandatory conservation practices. Growers must achieve three runoff/erosion mitigation points from EPA’s certified conservation practices menu on each treated field to protect endangered and threatened species. In some geographically-specific pesticide use limitation areas (PULAs) where especially vulnerable species require additional safeguards, six points are required. These practices — such as vegetative buffers, contour farming and cover crops — physically prevent dicamba from moving off-field in runoff or eroded soil, protecting waterways and habitats.
Temperature-based application limits. On the day of or the day after applications occurring with a forecasted temperature between 85 and 95°F, a user may only treat up to 50% of their untreated dicamba-tolerant (DT) cotton and soybean acres in a county. Remaining DT cotton and soybean acres may not be treated until at least two days after the initial application. This reduces risk during elevated volatility and drift conditions. No applications may occur if the temperature is forecasted to be at or above 95°F on the day of or the day after a planned application, eliminating applications during the highest-risk conditions.

Legacy Diacamba Restrictions Retained on the 2026 Registration

Restricted Use Pesticide designation. Only certified applicators may use this product, ensuring applications are made by trained professionals who understand the risks.
Annual mandatory training. Certified applicators must complete annual training specific to OTT dicamba use, keeping users informed of label requirements, best practices and environmental protection guidelines.
Personal protective equipment (PPE). Several products require loaders, mixers, handlers and applicators to wear label-approved PPE, directly reducing worker exposure.
24-hour Restricted Entry Interval (REI). No one may re-enter a treated field within 24 hours of application, protecting workers and the public from exposure.
Mandatory Drift Reduction Agent (DRA). An approved DRA must be added to every tank mix, creating larger, heavier droplets that are less likely to drift off-target.
240-ft. downwind spray drift buffer. A substantial physical buffer must be maintained during applications to protect adjacent areas. This distance may be decreased only if additional label-approved mitigations (hooded sprayers, downwind windbreaks, etc.) are used, ensuring protection is maintained. (The distance of downwind spray drift buffers may be decreased if other label-approved mitigations are used.)
Strict application timing restrictions. Applications may not be made during a temperature inversion (when atmospheric conditions trap pesticides near the ground and increase drift risk), within 48 hours ahead of forecasted rainfall (which can wash dicamba off-target), if soil is saturated with water, or within one hour after sunrise or after two hours before sunset (when inversions are most likely). These timing restrictions target the specific weather conditions that have historically led to drift problems.
Proximity restrictions. Applications are prohibited if dicamba-sensitive crops or plants are in downwind areas, preventing direct harm to vulnerable species and neighboring crops. (A list of dicamba-sensitive plants and crops is provided on the label.)
Wind speed requirements. Applications must take place when wind speed is between 3-10 mph—strong enough to prevent inversions but not so strong as to cause excessive drift.
Droplet size requirements. Applications must use coarse or coarser spray droplets, which are heavier and less prone to drift than fine droplets.
Low spray height. Spray release height must be no higher than 2 feet above the ground or crop canopy, minimizing the distance droplets can drift before reaching their target.
Aerial application prohibition. Aerial application is completely prohibited, eliminating a higher-risk application method.
Tank mixing prohibition. Tank mixing with ammonium sulfate-containing products is prohibited because these products can increase volatility.
Mandatory record keeping. Specific records must be kept of every application to ensure consistency with all label requirements and enable enforcement.

New Dicamba Rules Are Not Optional

In its release, EPA says these restrictions are not optional and adds that they are enforceable legal requirements.

“Applicators who fail to follow label directions are subject to significant penalties under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), including civil fines and, in cases of knowing violations, criminal prosecution,” it said in the release. “EPA will work with state enforcement to actively monitor compliance, and violations will be met with serious consequences.”

EPA says the temporary approval reflects its commitment to make sure farmers have the tools they need to succeed while protecting the environment.

“Cotton farmers across the southern United States have been particularly vocal about why they need OTT dicamba as herbicide-resistant weeds like Palmer amaranth have become nearly impossible to control with other available tools, threatening crop yields and farm viability,” said EPA. “These “super weeds” can grow 3 inches per day and destroy entire fields. Without effective weed management during the growing season, these producers face devastating economic losses.”

Industry Organizations Say Thank You

The Agricultural Retailers Association (ARA) sent a letter to the EPA in fall 2025, urging EPA to adopt clear, workable label requirements for dicamba that help growers manage weeds effectively while supporting strong stewardship across the industry.

“ARA applauds EPA’s recent decision that preserves the safe use of OTT dicamba while maintaining workable, label required mitigation measures for commercial applicators,” said Daren Coppock, ARA president and CEO. “ARA members have a strong record of responsibly managing dicamba applications and advancing the implementation of precision ag technologies that help growers control resistant and hard to manage weeds. OTT dicamba remains an essential tool for protecting yields and supporting soil health and environmental sustainability in cotton and soybean production.”

The National Cotton Council (NCC) says cotton growers need timely access to effective tools to protect yields and deliver a high-quality crop.

“EPA’s decision provides growers much-needed clarity as they prepare for the upcoming growing season,” said Patrick Johnson, chairman of the National Cotton Council. “We support label requirements that are workable in the field and backed by a science-based registration process. NCC will continue engaging with the EPA to advocate for practical provisions that enable responsible use.”

NCC encourages applicators and producers to follow all label requirements when using dicamba as part of an integrated weed management program.

The American Soybean Association (ASA) is eager to review the label and continue engaging with EPA to ensure regulatory decisions support both environmental stewardship and the realities of modern agriculture.

“We appreciate EPA moving forward with a new dicamba label and recognize the importance of maintaining access to this tool for soybean farmers,” said Scott Metzger, ASA president and an Ohio soybean grower. “Farmers need clear, workable rules that accurately reflect how we farm. We look forward to reviewing the final label and hope it incorporates the feedback ASA and its state affiliates provided to ensure dicamba remains a practical option within a responsible, science-based weed management system.”

Bayer Announces New Dicamba Product

On Friday, Bayer said the EPA’s decision enabled the company to launch its new dicamba herbicide: Stryax.

“With a federal registration in hand, we’ll begin the process of seeking state approvals,” said Dr. Ty Witten, Bayer’s vice president of commercial stewardship,crop science. “In the coming weeks, we’ll launch applicator training opportunities, and stewardship education to help ensure that growers and applicators have the best experience possible with Stryax herbicide.”

Stryax will be a restricted use pesticide and require the use of a qualified volatility agent and drift reduction agent. The company says the new product was formulated to be an additional herbicide option for in-crop use with XtendFlex soybeans, Roundup Ready 2 Xtend soybeans and cotton with XtendFlex technology.

Four Strategies To Save Money On Herbicides Without Sacrificing Weed Control

Wed, 17 Dec 2025 18:20:35 GMT

If the 2025 season felt like the “same old, same old” for your weed control program — it shouldn’t. When farmers have the mindset that every year is just like the last, it’s easy to fall into the decision paralysis of: “It worked OK last year, so I’ll just do the same thing again.” That approach can leave money on the table and weeds in the field, reports Meaghan Anderson, Iowa State University Extension field agronomist.

She says the ongoing battle with broadleaf weeds and grasses should encourage farmers to re‑evaluate their control program for next season, especially in fields that ended up weedier than expected.

Start With Your Weediest Field
Anderson says a useful exercise right now is to ask yourself: What was my weediest field this year—and why?

“Most corn and soybean growers can point to at least one field that stood out,” she tells Farm Journal. “In many cases, the same herbicide program was used across multiple fields, but it failed in that one.”

Anderson says that’s a clear signal something needs to change in that field for next year—whether that’s:

Using a stiffer preemergence program
Spiking a premix with more active ingredient effective on key weed escapes
Adjusting your application timing or adding layered residuals

“Dollars invested in a strong preemergent herbicide, especially in known problem fields, is almost always an investment that pays for itself,” she adds.

Other key considerations for the 2026 season: If grass weeds were a problem this year, consider whether you could benefit from using products more targeted to specific species. Also, plan to monitor fields ahead of post applications to catch weed escapes early.

Three Specific Issues To Look For Next Season
1. Expect more volunteer corn. Some fields in Iowa and other Midwest states were “carpeted” with dropped ears of corn by harvest time this fall, Anderson says.

Two questions she says farmers who had a lot of ear loss can benefit thinking through are: How much corn hit the ground but didn’t germinate this fall? How much will survive this winter and emerge next spring?

“We’ve seen this movie before — volunteer corn can quickly become a major issue if it’s not addressed,” Anderson says.

2. Winter annuals are prevalent. Anderson notes that winter annuals like henbit, marestail, and pennycress had an excellent start in soybean stubble this fall. Where fields looked green late into the fall, farmers can expect to see them show up again next spring and will want to be proactive early with control measures:

Aim for late March to early April burndown applications (spray even earlier if it’s an unusually warm spring).
Wait until plants are green and actively photosynthesizing, with day and night temperatures warm enough for good herbicide activity.

Timing control measures can be a bit tricky. “By the time winter annuals are flowering in the spring, it’s usually too late for effective control,” Anderson notes.

3. Look for herbicide-resistant weeds. Cross-resistant and multiple-resistant Palmer amaranth, waterhemp, Italian ryegrass, barnyardgrass, and others are on the rise in row crops, researchers report.

Just this month, dicamba-resistant waterhemp was confirmed in Missouri, according to Kevin Bradley, University of Missouri Extension weed scientist.

Where To Spend Money If Margins Are Tight
With the outlook for high input costs and lower commodity prices, the impulse for farmers is to cut their herbicide spend across the board.
Anderson says a better strategy would be to shift investment from products to planning and scouting. She offers four recommendations that can help improve your weed-control ROI next season:

Spend more time scouting and truly understanding which fields are your problem acres.
Do the math on herbicide programs, compare prices, and tailor rates and products to field history and weed spectrum.
Consider using a full residual + strong post program on your worst fields.
Pull back some where fields are consistently clean and not building a weed seed bank.

This approach doesn’t necessarily slash costs per acre dramatically, but it can chip away at your total herbicide program costs without sacrificing control—or future profitability, Anderson says.

She adds that “thoughtful analysis, targeted programs, and timely applications are the real ‘new chemistry’ most farms need” going into the 2026 season.

EPA Opens Public Comment on Dicamba Registration, Gives The Labels Another Look

Wed, 23 Jul 2025 21:53:55 GMT

Today, the EPA opened its 30-day public comment period for a proposed registration of dicamba in over-the-top applications. The federal agency received applications from Bayer, BASF and Syngenta, which have marketed XtendiMax, Engenia, and Tavium plus VaporGrip.

Those products were not labeled for use in 2025 after have their registration were vacated by a U.S. district court in 2024. The ruling was based on EPA violating public input procedures on the three products.

“We’re pleased to see that the EPA has made significant progress and opened a public comment period for low-volatility dicamba herbicides to be used over the top of dicamba tolerant cotton and soybeans. This technology provides tremendous value to soybean and cotton farmers across the U.S.” Bayer officials said in a statement.

BASF provided this reaction in a statement: “BASF remains committed to a science-based decision-making process and working with regulatory authorities and other stakeholders throughout this process to ensure over-the-top uses of dicamba remain an option for farmers in the future.”

With the public comment period, the agency stated it’s particularly interested in hearing how the proposed mitigation measures would be implemented by farmer stakeholders. Those include: temperature-dependent volatility mitigations, percent of field treated restrictions and any science-backed solutions to manage volatility. EPA is proposing the following nine mitigation measures:

A single use maximum application rate of 0.5 lb. acid equivalent (a.e.) dicamba per acre.
No more than two applications allowed with a maximum annual application of 1 lb. a.e. dicamba per acre from all combined dicamba-containing products.
Prohibition of aerial applications.
Maintaining a 240-ft downwind buffer.
The spray solution must include an approved drift reduction agent and pH buffering volatility reduction agent added to the tank in higher percentages as temperatures increase.
Temperature-dependent application restrictions to manage volatility. Users have flexibility to implement temperature-dependent restrictions by reducing the percent of field treated, including by using precision agriculture techniques, or prohibiting certain tank mixes at higher temperatures.No applications at temperatures above 95 degrees Fahrenheit.
Three points of mitigation required based on the runoff/erosion mitigation menu .
Users must access and follow any applicable endangered species bulletin from “ Bulletins Live! Two” web-based system. Six points of runoff/erosion mitigation will be required in some pesticide use limitation areas where pesticide exposures are likely to impact the continued existence of a listed species, which may include a reduction in survival or recovery of the species.
Applicators are required to wear baseline attire along with personal protective equipment including chemical-resistant gloves when handling these products. A NIOSH-approved dust/mist filtering respirator with any R, P, or HE filter is also required for all handlers of the BAPMA-salt-formulated product. There is a restricted entry interval of 24 hours. Use is restricted to a limited number of approved states by certified applicators only. Applicators are required to complete additional dicamba-specific annual training and maintain records of all applications.

The public comment period is scheduled to close on Aug. 22, 2025. The next step will be EPA’s review of the registration under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Next is a biological evaluation, and then an Endangered Species Act consultation.

“We believe the EPA will benefit from hearing from those closest to the technology. This will help to ensure any decisions regarding the registration of dicamba are fully informed by those who rely on this important tool. Even a simple comment explaining the important role dicamba plays on a particular farm can be impactful and useful for the EPA,” Bayer’s statement continued.

It’s estimated the process could provide a timeline where dicamba could be available for the 2026 application season.

“We know how important this technology is for so many growers, and we will continue working diligently to help ensure these low-volatility dicamba herbicides remain available for over-the-top use in 2026 and beyond,” the Bayer statement said.

Ag Retailers Association CEO and President Daren Coppock said, “This is a win for ag retailers and farmers who rely on safe, effective tools like over-the-top dicamba to protect their crops. The EPA’s risk-based assessment process remains the gold standard for pesticide regulation, and we applaud the agency for reaffirming its commitment to sound science. Ensuring continued access to these products is critical for a productive, sustainable food supply.”

Over-The-Top Dicamba Cutoff Dates For 2023 Are Set

Fri, 27 Sep 2024 01:20:15 GMT

With two recent announcements the EPA has approved labels for over-the-top dicamba applications (XtendiMax, Engenia and Tavium herbicides) in 2023 in Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota and South Dakota.

There are key changes for 2023 applications compared to previous years:

In Illinois, Indiana, and Iowa, June 12 is application cutoff date. Also there is a growth stage cutoff of V4 for soybeans in Illinois, Indiana and Iowa.
In South Dakota, June 20 is the application cutoff date
In Minnesota, south of Interstate 94 the cutoff date is June 12 and north of Interstate 94 the cutoff date is June 30; and applications are not permitted when the air temperature is over 85 degrees at the time of application or if the forecasted high temperature of the nearest available location exceeds 85 degrees

Dr. Aaron Hager, Associate Professor of Weed Science at University of Illinois shared some concerns about the change in Illinois applications from a June 20 to June 12 cutoff date. Hear from him in this farmdoc article and audio interview.

The Illinois Department of Agriculture has three additional restrictions for OTT dicamba applications:

A pesticide containing dicamba shall not be applied on soybeans if the air temperature at the field at the time of application is over 85 degrees Fahrenheit or if the National Weather Service’s forecasted high temperature for the nearest available location for the day of application exceeds 85 degrees Fahrenheit. Local National Weather Service forecasts are available at https://www.weather.gov.
Before applying a pesticide containing dicamba on soybeans, the applicator shall consult the FieldWatch sensitive crop registry (https://www.fieldwatch.com) and comply with all associated recordkeeping and label requirements.
Application on soybeans of a pesticide containing dicamba shall not be made if the wind is blowing toward: any Illinois Nature Preserves Commission site that is adjacent to the field of application; or an adjacent residential area.

One requirement for all XtendiMax, Engenia and Tavium applications that continues for 2023 applications is the mandatory pre-season training. Bayer reports more than 4,000 growers and applicators have completed its company-led training so far in 2023, which outpaces previous years.

Growers and applicators are required to check online versions of the label within 7 days before application in case there are any newly applied state or federal updates.

Here are links to the landing pages for each herbicide product with its label and application requirements.

Monday Is Last Day To Buy And Distribute Dicamba In 2024 For Four States

Fri, 10 May 2024 18:37:09 GMT

Monday, May 13 is the last day for sales and distribution of existing stocks of over-the-top dicamba products in 2024 for Iowa, Illinois, Indiana and Minnesota.
This includes Xtendimax, Engenia or Tavium. And it requires End the entity assumed possession of the dicamba products prior to February 6, 2024.

The sales and distribution deadline for South Dakota is May 21, and for all other states and counties with registrations is May 31 for soybeans/June 30 for cotton.

All regulations are based on the farmer’s billing address, not the intended field location.

The dates were set by the EPA’s existing stocks order issued on February 14, just one week after Arizona federal court decision vacating those product registrations.
Read full details in the existing stocks order here.

Full Details In Federal Register: Existing Stocks Order for Dicamba Products Previously Registered for Over-the-Top Use on Dicamba-Tolerant Cotton and Soybean

EPA stated: “The issuance of this existing stocks order will help to ensure that growers who have already purchased dicamba-tolerant seeds and thus are reliant on the availability of dicamba for the 2024 growing season.”

As for application guidelines, refer to your state guidelines.

Read Previous Coverage

Court Rules Dicamba ‘Was Unlawfully Approved’ By EPA and Halts Use

EPA Issues Existing Stocks Order For Dicamba Products

EPA Issues Existing Stocks Order For Dicamba Products

Fri, 27 Sep 2024 16:27:19 GMT

On February 14, the EPA issued an existing stocks order for dicamba products previously registered for over-the-top use.

This order addresses use of the dicamba products effected by the Arizona federal court decision vacating their registrations earlier this month. It authorizes limited sale and distribution of existing stocks that are already in the possession of persons other than the registrant. The existing stocks provision applies to stocks of previously registered pesticide products (Engenia, Tavium and XtendiMax) currently in the U.S and packaged, labeled, and released for shipment prior to February 6, 2024.

Read the full existing stocks order here

EPA stated: “The issuance of this existing stocks order will help to ensure that growers who have already purchased dicamba-tolerant seeds and thus are reliant on the availability of dicamba for the 2024 growing season:

apply dicamba formulations designed for use over the top of dicamba-tolerant soybean and cotton, rather than misusing more volatile dicamba formulations which could lead to greater offsite movement (and thus potential damage to non-dicamba tolerant crops and other plants); and
apply these dicamba products consistent with restrictions intended to reduce offsite movement and protect human health and the environment.”

In its announcement, EPA cited letters from the Agricultural Retailers Association, the American Soybean Association, American Farm Bureau Federation, and the National Cotton Council.

EPA said its primary concerns were:

“In the absence of any action by EPA, the court’s vacatur of these registrations would render all sale or distribution of the formerly-registered dicamba products unlawful under FIFRA….as of February 6, 2024, FIFRA would prohibit downstream distributors from even returning previously purchased product to the manufacturer for relabeling or shipment by any actor to disposal or export facilities. Among other things, an existing stocks order can permit those in possession of these products to distribute them for return to the manufacturer, export, or disposal.”
“Because the effect of the court’s order resulted in these products becoming unregistered, EPA is issuing this order to ensure that users apply dicamba following the restrictions on the previously approved labeling (including instructions intended to protect human health and the environment). By doing so, any use inconsistent with the previously approved labeling is prohibited, reducing the potential for harm to the environment from unrestricted use. The below provisions for the disposition of existing stocks address these concerns. Further, allowing the limited sale, distribution, and use of existing stocks will reduce the potential for offsite movement and protect human health and environment during the 2024 growing season by encouraging growers to apply the formerly-registered lower volatility dicamba formulations designed for use over the top of dicamba-tolerant soybean and cotton—rather than applying other dicamba products not registered for over-the-top use.”
“As described in numerous stakeholder letters received by the Agency from across the country, growers have purchased dicamba-tolerant seed in the period between the completion of briefing in the District of Arizona case and the issuance of the court’s order and judgment vacating these dicamba registrations, therefore making them reliant on the availability of dicamba for over-the-top use... Additionally, distributors and end-users may have possession of stocks of XtendiMax, Engenia, and/or Tavium purchased in good faith after EPA issued the registrations permitting sale and distribution of the products in commerce and establishing conditions pertaining to the use of the products.”

Read the full existing stocks order here

Here is the table in the EPA document timeframes and end dates for sale and use.

Dicamba Training & Label Links

Tue, 17 Jan 2023 20:48:18 GMT

Via a member alert, the Agricultural Retailer Association shared:

With the spring season coming up and plans being made for weed management plans and associated training requirements, ARA is providing links to the training and label information sites for the three manufacturers of over-the-top (OTT) labeled dicamba products.

Users of OTT dicamba are required to receive training in order to use these products and these training sessions will be starting soon. Product stewardship and label compliance is important with any pesticide, and the future availability of this technology depends on strong stewardship (and cooperative weather).

Reference these links from ARA supplier members:

Since they can be moving targets, state application cutoff dates should be checked directly with state regulatory agencies.

View additional resources:

EPA Approves Dicamba Usage in 2022

Thu, 22 Sep 2022 02:03:46 GMT

Dicamba formulations have been considered controversial for several years as various crops have suffered drift and volatility resulting from the herbicide.

In October 2020, the Trump Administration issued their approval for dicamba-related product use over the course of the next five years.

After previous administrations environmental protection agency (EPA) Administrator Andrew Wheeler shared farmers have the certainty of dicamba use in the 2021 growing season, he said it was far from a sporadic decision.

“After reviewing substantial amounts of new information, conducting scientific assessments based on the best available science, and carefully considering input from stakeholders we have reached a resolution that is good for our farmers and our environment,” said Wheeler.

Current environmental protection agency (EPA) Administrator Michael Regan explains the agency continues to research the effects of dicamba and cautions farmers as they purchase the chemical for the coming growing season.

“The EPA is extremely concerned about these reports and is taking steps to better understand the nature and severity of these incidents in order to assess the sufficiency in the 2020 decision,” says Regan.

While the EPA advances their investigation into dicamba products, individual state departments of agriculture count their own reports.

Illinois Department of Agriculture staff (IDA), for example, have received 348 pesticide misuse complaints in 2021, with 319 agriculture-related complaints. Of the 319, 178 of the complaints are in relation to dicamba.

As growers anxiously await the research verdict, National Association of State Departments (NASDA) President Ryan Quarles shared his expectations as the EPA continues to evaluate dicamba.

“Whether it is dicamba-related products or not, we’ve got to make sure crop technology is adopted through proper regulatory frameworks and not the court system.”

The EPA is expected to issue a final report for the dicamba products registered for use on soybeans by the end of October 2021.

EPA: Despite Stricter Rules, Thousands of Complaints of Dicamba Damage

Fri, 19 Aug 2022 16:04:27 GMT

In draft risk assessments , the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said that “despite the new control measures,” it received nearly 3,500 incident reports in 2021 of damage to crops that were not genetically engineered to tolerate the chemical and to “non-target plants in non-crop areas.”

EPA compiled the draft risk assessments as part of a review of the pesticide required by law every 15 years.

The agency said there was little risk to most people from exposure to dicamba, though it identified six additional instances in which workers handling the herbicide should wear a respirator along with the required outfit of long pants, a long-sleeved shirt, socks, shoes, chemical-resistant gloves, and protective eyewear.

“We believe the decision today will be protective of other farmers’ crops,” said EPA administrator Andrew Wheeler, announcing the new rules and the approval of dicamba through 2025 at a farm in Georgia.

According to the federal notice, comment submitters may request the Agency to reconsider data or information that the Agency rejected in a previous review. However, submitters must explain why they believe the Agency should reconsider the data or information in the pesticide’s registration review.

The Agency said public comment on the documents would be accepted through Oct. 17, 2022. To share your comments, click here .

More on inputs:
3 Changes to Dicamba Label in Iowa and Minnesota
Syngenta and Atticus Settle Azoxystrobin Lawsuit
Bayer Weighs Glyphosate Alternatives

3 Changes to Dicamba Label in Iowa and Minnesota

Thu, 17 Mar 2022 13:11:30 GMT

On March 15, the EPA announced three label changes for the application of over-the-top dicamba relevant for applications in Iowa and Minnesota.

Per the EPA, the revised labeling prohibits over-the-top dicamba application:

On dicamba-tolerant crops after June 20 in Iowa
On dicamba-tolerant crops south of Interstate 94 after June 12 in Minnesota (the cut-off date for land north of Interstate 94 remains June 30)
When the air temperature is over 85 degrees at the time of application or if the forecasted high temperature of the nearest available location exceeds 85 degrees in Minnesota.

The above three amendments were requested by the pesticide registrants in consultation with the states.

In its announcement, EPA stated, “These restrictions are intended to reduce the likelihood of volatility and offsite movement of over-the-top dicamba by avoiding application on days with high temperatures. Among other requirements, the product registrants must add the amended labeling to their training and educational materials and disseminate this information to pesticide authorities and agricultural extension services to assist users in their local area. These label amendments demonstrate EPA’s ongoing commitment to help states address issues related to incidents in their jurisdictions.”

In 2021, the agency reported it received 3,500 dicamba-related incident reports, including approximately 711 incidents in Minnesota and 528 incidents in Iowa.
In the U.S. last year, EPA said more than one million acres of non-dicamba-tolerant soybean crops were allegedly damaged by off-target movement of dicamba.

Illinois Department of Ag Files Rules for Use of Dicamba on Soybeans

Fri, 03 Dec 2021 22:28:09 GMT

The Illinois Fertilizer and Chemical Association reports on Dec. 3, the Illinois Department of Agriculture (IDOA) filed rules with the Illinois Secretary of State on dicamba application to soybeans.

The additional restrictions for dicamba use on soybean filed by IDOA are the same restrictions required in 2021. These changes will most likely appear in the December 17, 2021, Illinois Register. Below is a list of additional restrictions from the filing that mirror the 2021 requirements:

Section 250.230 Use of Pesticides Containing Dicamba on Soybeans

In addition to the requirements of the federally approved labels, all use on soybeans of pesticides containing dicamba shall comply with the following requirements:

Temperature Restriction
- A pesticide containing dicamba shall not be applied on soybeans if the air temperature at the field at the time of application is over 85 degrees Fahrenheit or if the National Weather Service’s forecasted high temperature for the nearest available location for the day of application exceeds 85 degrees Fahrenheit. Local National Weather Service forecasts are available at https://www.weather.gov.
Cut-off Date Restriction
- Application on soybeans of a pesticide containing dicamba shall not be made after June 20 of each year.
Checking Sensitive Crop Registry
- Before applying a pesticide containing dicamba on soybeans, the applicator shall consult the FieldWatch sensitive crop registry (https://www.fieldwatch.com) and comply with all associated recordkeeping and label requirements.
Application on soybeans of a pesticide containing dicamba shall not be made if the wind is blowing toward:
- Any Illinois Nature Preserves Commission site that is adjacent to the field of application; or
- An adjacent residential area.
Any violation of the requirements of this Section shall be considered a use contrary to label directions (precautionary statements, sites, rates, restricted use requirements) and shall be assessed the associated point value of 3 (see Section24.1(4)(E)(1) of the Illinois Pesticide Act [415 ILCS 60]) for purposes of determining the appropriate administrative action or penalty authorized by Section 24.1 of the Act.

Click here to view a full copy of the Department’s administrative rule changes that were filed to start the 45-day first notice period with the Secretary of State. For a breakdown of the rulemaking process in Illinois, click here.

The U.S. EPA is still reviewing the dicamba federal label for 2022.

IFCA says it hopes to see a decision made very soon, and they believe it is important to make clear that the federal label supersedes any requirements set forth by IDOA. Despite IDOA indicating that there will be no changes from what was required in 2021 for dicamba application OTT of soybean, any changes made to the federal label requiring additional requirements or prohibitions will then need to be observed within Illinois as well.

IFCA will remain in communication with IDOA regarding this permanent rule making process. In 2021, 178 dicamba related complaints were reported to IDOA. This compares to over 700 complaints filed in 2019 and 149 in 2020. If IDOA desires to seek additional protections, IFCA will work closely with them and urge an expedited decision to provide clarity to the industry ahead of the 2022 crop year.

Online Options: Annual Mandatory Dicamba Application Training

Mon, 19 Apr 2021 16:23:07 GMT

Online training options are available to ag retailers and their farmers seeking to fulfill the annual mandatory training required for applying approved over-the-top (OTT) dicamba products in their fields.

Certified applicators must participate in training before applying these products in 2021.

Bayer’s Online Training Program

Bayer introduced a new online training program for dicamba applicator training to use XtendiMax with VaporGrip Technology with self-paced or guided webinars. Applicators and growers in 30 states can use the training to meet U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requirements and accomplish training for multiple states due to the program’s customization based on the states specified.

On April 28 from 9-11 a.m. CDT , Bayer will host a free guided dicamba training session to allow for more hands-on experience as directed by an instructor. Participants will receive a certificate as proof of completion following the training.

BASF’s Online Module

BASF offers a self-paced online module required for Engenia herbicide and other dicamba products approved for OTT applications on dicamba-tolerant soybean and cotton. The module takes approximately one hour and ends with a quiz. Once completed, a printable certificate is displayed that should be saved for records. Participants should ensure they have reliable internet connection to complete this module.

Syngenta’s Tavium Online Training

Tavium Plus VaporGrip Technology Application and Stewardship training provides critical information on applying a contact and residual product for control of key broadleaf and grass weeds in dicamba-tolerant soybeans and cotton.

This Application and Stewardship training provides an overview of the application information one needs before using Tavium. Dicamba- or auxin-specific training is required before applying Tavium; please check with your state about training and application requirements before use.

Syngenta offers required training for Tavium herbicide application. Sign in or create an account to get started.

Reminder: Check with your state pesticide regulatory agency for additional training and application requirements or restrictions that are unique to your state.

Final Curtain for FeXapan, Illinois Details 3 Additional Application Parameters

Wed, 24 Feb 2021 02:18:10 GMT

One dicamba domino has fallen. Announced on Feb. 22, Corteva Agriscience will no longer sell FeXapan herbicide in the U.S. and Canada.

In its statement the company said:

“Corteva Agriscience has made a business decision to discontinue sales of FeXapan herbicide in the U.S. and Canada. We continue to see strong demand and broad adoption of Enlist technology for seed and Enlist herbicide crop protection solutions. This decision allows Corteva to focus customer and applicator training, sales and distribution resources on our leading Enlist weed control system.”

The statement also said: “Our commercial team will continue to support our customers who have selected Roundup Ready 2 Xtend technology from a Corteva seed brand. Those customers may use dicamba herbicides offered through other brands, while still accessing other soybean herbicides from Corteva and benefitting from the strong yields of Corteva brand dicamba-tolerant soybean products.”

In late October 2020, the EPA issued a five-year label for three other dicamba formulations: BASF’s Engenia, Syngenta’s Tavium and Bayer’s XtendiMax.

That unconditional registration lists these changes to the label:

Downwind buffer of 240' is required, and a buffer of 310' is required where listed endangered species are located.
National application cutoff for soybeans after June 30; July 30 is the cutoff date in cotton.
An approved pH buffering agent is required to lower volatility.
Growers can use hooded sprayers to reduce buffers up to 110', unless spraying in areas with endangered species, where a 240' buffer is required.

Illinois has added additional label requirements, as detailed by Aaron Hager in this bulletin with three additional parameters beyond the federal labels:

1. Temperature Restriction: A pesticide containing dicamba shall not be applied on soybean if the air temperature at the field at the time of application is over 85 degrees Fahrenheit or if the National Weather Service’s forecasted high temperature for the nearest available location for the day of application exceeds 85 degrees Fahrenheit. Local National Weather Service forecasts are available here.

2. Application Date Restriction: Application on soybean of a pesticide containing dicamba shall not be made after June 20 of each year.

3. Sensitive Crop Registry: Before applying a pesticide containing dicamba on soybeans, the applicator shall consult the FieldWatch sensitive crop registry and comply with all associated recordkeeping and label requirements.

What the New Dicamba Label Looks Like in the Real World

What to Know About the New Dicamba Approval

Dicamba Approved for Over-the-Top Use 2021 and Beyond

Complaints Weigh on Future of Dicamba

Sun, 15 Nov 2020 20:45:55 GMT

Herbicide applicators have the weight of dicamba’s future weighing heavily on their shoulders this year. EPA’s conditional registration lasts through Dec. 20, 2020, and the herbicide’s safety tests, label and real-world experiences will be scrutinized.

“This year we have four soybean traits that don’t coexist chemicals used in each system can cause damage to the others,” says Jean Payne, president of the Illinois Fertilizer and Chemical Association. “The management is going to be so important.”

Illinois had 720 complaints of off-target dicamba movement in 2019. Nearly 500 of those complaints were from farmers who had never filed a complaint before. In 2020, there will likely be more people planting Enlist E3 soybeans and LibertyLink GT27 soybeans as they’re relatively newly available or recently had herbicide partners approved.

“I don’t think symptomology on soybeans will be the undoing of dicamba,” Payne says. “It’s what we’ve observed in tree species after two to three years of exposure There are concerns from Department of Natural Resource-type agencies.”

What’s in a review?

Dicamba is under EPA review again this year. During this process, EPA opens a ‘docket’ where it reviews a variety of factors concerning the pesticide. Essentially, the agency is trying to weigh the risk to the environment with benefits to the producers to find the best outcome. Here’s what you’d find in a Preliminary Work Plan from EPA:

Facts about the pesticide and its current use and usage.
Risk assessment and any data needs.
Estimated timeline for review.

After the docket is published, it goes through a 60-day comment period where anyone can show their support or opposition of the product. Dicamba’s docket will be posted later this year when EPA announces its review.

Approval Likely for Dicamba

With so many acres of dicamba-tolerant soybeans, it’s hard to imagine dicamba won’t be approved, Payne says. Not approving it could open up the temptation for farmers, who wouldn’t have access to a legal product, to turn to older, more volatile formulations.

“It’s in EPA’s best interest to approve and allow states to have more control over the application process,” she adds.

EPA could allow states to control cut-off dates and temperature restrictions, for example.

“We saw cotton and soybeans increase to about 60 million acres in 2019, and about 40 million were sprayed with dicamba,” says Alex Zenteno, dicamba product manager for Bayer. “Label updates for 2019 helped to ensure Xtendimax can continue to be used, that’s why we had label updates to reduce possibility of off-target movement. We’re sharing additional data this year, and so did other registrants.”

EPA has and will continue to reach out to registrants for more information about how the product is performing. In addition, the agency will study university tests.

“We continue to work with the EPA as they consider a registration renewal for Engenia herbicide in 2020. Additionally, we continue to work with academics, NGOs, and state and federal agencies to address concerns they may have about the use of dicamba-based products. Dicamba-based herbicides, like Engenia herbicide, are critically important tools for growers battling resistant weeds,” BASF said in a statement.

Claims of off-target movement will need to be addressed by registrants in time for the 2021 decision.

“Corteva Agriscience stands by the effectiveness of FeXapan when used according to the label and we intend to vigorously defend against claims of off-target movement,” the company said in a statement.

Right now, there are four registrants for over-the-top dicamba: BASF with Engenia, Bayer with XtendiMax, Corteva with FeXapan and Syngenta with Tavium.

Dicamba Damaged Peach Grower Awarded $265 Mil, Bayer/BASF will Appeal

IFCA Gives Update On Dicamba Penalties

IFCA Gives Dicamba Update

What the New Dicamba Label Looks Like in the Real World

Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:36:55 GMT

Late Tuesday afternoon, EPA announced it approved three dicamba formulations for over-the-top use for five years, 2021 through 2025. The formulations included are BASF’s Engenia, Syngenta’s Tavium and Bayer’s XtendiMax.

“The five-year component is huge because it gets rid of uncertainty,” says Jim Hedges, vice president of seed for Winfield United. “You know [2020] caused a lot of anxiety amongst growers and our owners, ag retailers. So, having this stability within the trait platform, as we start to transition from Xtend to XtendFlex is great.”

This five-year unconditional registration varies from previous approvals in length and conditions. It did, however, list changes to the label that must be followed by applicators. As a reminder, these changes include:

Downwind buffer of 240' is required and a buffer of 310' required where listed species are located. The previous label buffer was 110’ for downwind.
Over-the-top application of dicamba of soybeans prohibited nationwide after June 30, and after July 30 in cotton.
An approved pH buffering agent will be required to be mixed for application to lower volatility. Buffering agents are registered with the EPA and must be documented each use.
Opportunities for growers to use hooded sprayers to reduce buffers.
No more 44 oz. rate option.

“All of these efforts will help ensure there are not negative impacts on other farmers’ lands,” says Andrew Wheeler, EPA administrator. “States can further restrict, but they have to work with us and file the appropriate requests with EPA. We’re trying to have a national program here, we’re responding to the court’s concerns with a national cutoff.”

Implications for applications.

Bayer and BASF have each created their own buffering agent to help reduce volatility. They’re required tank-mix additives.

“VaporGrip Xtra [Bayer’s buffering agent] works in two ways, the first is to control that pH solution,” says Alex Zenteno, Bayer dicamba product manager. “The other is the VaporGrip technology attaches itself to available protons in a solution to prevent the formation of the dicamba acid.”

So far, each product has been tested on a smaller scale, which leaves some to wonder how effective they’ll be in real-world conditions.

“We’ll have to wait and see how effective volatility reducing agents are,” says Bob Hartzler, Iowa State University Extension weed scientist. “I’m aware of their tests on relative small-scale studies and I think it’s hard to ramp up when you start spraying large acreages.”

In addition, the label now has a national spray cutoff—June 30 for soybeans and July 30 for cotton. EPA officials said they believe this move addresses some concerns outlined by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

“I don’t think universal dates work,” Hartzler continues. “I don’t see how the date that works for Iowa would be appropriate for Arkansas. June 30 is probably about as good as you could hope for in Iowa.”

There might be opportunities for states to create local changes to the label, including cut off dates. In the past states have added further restrictions and this coming year could see more of the same, or the potential for request for a broader application window. States have to work with EPA to enact any changes.

The last big change is to downwind buffer requirements. Previously, EPA required a 110’ bugger for 22 oz rates and a 220’ buffer for 44 oz. rates. There will be no more 44 oz. option and the downwind buffer more than doubled to 240’ with this new label.

Like with previous labels, if a sensitive crop, including non-Xtend soybeans or cotton, is downwind, farmers and applicators should not spray dicamba. In areas with endangered species a 310’ downwind buffer and 57’ border buffer is required.

“Let’s give these changes a year or two and see if they’ve minimized problems we saw in the first four years,” Hartzler says. “If they dramatically reduce them, I say let’s keep going. But if we see similar problems we saw through 2020 I think [over-the-top dicamba] needs to be reevaluated. How much can you tweak the label?”

Keep tools in the toolbox.

Industry and some farmers have praised EPA for this decision as it keeps yet another tool in their toolbox in the fight against resistant weeds.

“We need that mode of action out there,” says Nick Ehlers, farmer from eastern Iowa. “Let’s see guys do a wonderful job of spraying it. We need a mode of action with residual that waterhemp and pigweeds can’t break through.”

Ehlers notes that some farmers in his area don’t always follow label directions exactly—a practice he implores them to stop. With new label changes, and ‘simpler’ terms added to new new label that is half the size of the 2018 label, he hopes they will.

“The need for Engenia herbicide is greater than ever before due to increased weed resistance,” Scott Kay, Vice President of U.S. Crop, BASF Agricultural Solutions said in a news release. “Controlling resistant weeds is not only a physical challenge for farmers, it also can have a significant financial impact. Farmers planting dicamba-tolerant cotton and soybeans could potentially stand to lose more than $10 billion if they lost access to dicamba-based herbicides, like Engenia herbicide.”

Tennessee Scientists Confirm Dicamba-Resistant Palmer Amaranth

Wed, 11 Nov 2020 06:26:13 GMT

It’s a phone call no weed scientist wants to receive. ‘I’ve sprayed my weeds three and four times and they’re still not dying.’ This time, University of Tennessee’s Larry Steckel took the call as farmers told him their Palmer amaranth was living through multiple dicamba applications.

“The level of dicamba resistance is relatively low, about 2.5x,” Steckel explains. “The level of infestation in any given field ranges from a small pocket where a mother plant went to seed in 2019, to an area covering several acres in a field.”

He says this compares to what farmers saw in Tennessee in 2006 when Palmer amaranth was starting to escape glyphosate—some fields have good control, while others have noticeable escapes. The range of control in resistant fields he’s seen go from 90% down to as low as 40%.

Evolution is natural—but we can slow it down.

There are few guarantees in life, but one you can count on is that Mother Nature will persevere. Weeds are trying to survive so they can produce seed and spread—so if they can find a way to beat a herbicide, they eventually will.

“Is it time to panic? No,” Steckel assures. “However, it is time to reassess weed management. Herbicide stewardship is more important now than ever.”

Consider bringing back some of the older, tried and true methods of weed control. This could be something like using hooded applications of herbicides such as paraquat, glufosinate, flumioxazin, diuron, pyroxasufone and MSMA in cotton, Steckel says.

Cover crops, tillage, cultivation and narrower row width are just a few other, non-chemical means of control to consider. In addition, timely, effective pre-emergent herbicide application is critical as Steckel saw differences in the severity of weeds and resistant populations when a pre-emergent herbicide application was made.

“Finally, preliminary research would suggest that dicamba-resistant Palmer amaranth will also be more tolerant to 2,4-D,” Steckel says. “This makes Liberty the most important herbicide in the weed management system in both Xtend and Enlist crops.”

Concerns about spreading.

Just north of Steckel, University of Illinois Weed Scientist Aaron Hager is keeping a close eye on what’s happening down south.

“It’s hard to tell when the resistance could spread up here,” Hager says. Weed seed spreads in so many different–and often unexpected ways–it’s important to stay vigilant.

Clean equipment thoroughly when moving from field to field, as that’s one of the biggest ways weed seed spreads. But, also scout frequently as factors outside of your control such as wind, bird droppings and other natural vehicles can move weed seed into your fields.

If you have a weed species that isn’t as controlled as it once was with herbicides, talk to a local extension weed scientist. They’ll help you figure out the issue and if it’s truly herbicide resistance.

Stewardship is key to protecting dicamba and other newer herbicides on the market, says Bob Hartzler, Iowa State University weed scientist. It’s a combination of techniques including chemical and mechanical weed control that will help farmers win the fight against weeds.

Listen to more about dicamba-resistant Palmer amaranth, the future ‘problem’ weeds, what’s going on in the world of herbicide litigation and much more at the #FJFieldDays Weed Control Panel. Aaron Hager, Bob Hartzler and Larry Steckel join to discuss everything going on in the world of weeds and herbicides, as well as explain what they think farmers will need to do to control weeds in the future. This 45-minute session is sure to inspire ideas a questions, register today at FarmJournalFieldDays.com .

More than 60% of Farmers Still Have Dicamba to Apply

Wed, 11 Nov 2020 06:25:29 GMT

With recent Court rulings, three of the four legal over-the-top dicamba applications are cancelled. With the cancellation, farmers were told they could use existing stocks in their possession by June 3, 2020—but how many farmers had stocks on hand or have had the ability to spray the product according to the label?

In a recent Farm Journal Pulse, with 539 responses, 36% of farmers said they were done with dicamba applications for the season. With 64% of respondents saying they still have acres to spray, here’s the breakdown:

50% to 100% left: 33%
25% to 50% left: 14%
Under 25% left: 18%

Farmers await the Court’s next decision as plaintiffs are petitioning for immediate vacatur of the three pesticides. They claim EPA should be held in contempt, as well.

“This seems like it’s illegal because EPA is defying the court order and the court had every intention when they passed that rule that, that was it, no more use of this chemical because it wasn’t approved,” says Jim Goodman, with the National Family Farm Coalition, plaintiff in the lawsuit that lead to dicamba’s vacatur. “EPA seems to feel that they have more authority than state and local governments, even the court system.”

EPA, however, is encouraging the court to uphold their cancellation order and provisions for existing stock. If the Court does this, farmers would still be able to apply existing dicamba stocks until July 31 or state-specific cutoffs.

“Petitioners’ motion to ‘Enforce this Court’s Vacatur and to Hold EPA in Contempt,’ is a thinly-veiled attempt to revive arguments the court already rejected or declined to reach. It should be denied,” EPA said in court documents.

Read more about recent lawsuits:

EPA Says Motion In Dicamba Case Is “Distorted Characterization”

Will Farmers Be Able to Spray Dicamba Next Week?

Dicamba’s Future is Shaky—Is Enlist Next on the Chopping Block?

BREAKING: Court Removes Three Out of Four Dicamba Registrations

Non-Dicamba Options for Dicamba-Tolerant Soybeans

Court Allows EPA Existing Stock Provisions to Remain

Wed, 11 Nov 2020 06:25:29 GMT

On Friday, judges in California with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against a petition to halt all use of Engenia, FeXapan and XtendiMax dicamba herbicides. Instead, it will allow farmers to use existing stocks of the dicamba products under specific rules of EPA’s cancellation order.

EPA’s final cancellation order on the three dicamba formulations provided the following guidance:

Distribution or sale is prohibited unless it’s for product disposal or returns to the registrant (BASF, Corteva or Bayer).

Farmers and commercial applicators can use the existing stocks in their possession as of June 3, 2020, when the Court mandate took effect. Applications must be in line with previously approved labels, including temperature restrictions, windspeed restrictions and application date cutoffs.

The cancellation says all applications must be completed no later than July 31, 2020, unless individual states call for earlier cutoffs.

“At the height of the growing season, the Court’s decision has threatened the livelihood of our nation’s farmers and the global food supply,” said EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler in an earlier statement. “Today’s cancellation and existing stocks order is consistent with EPA’s standard practice following registration invalidation, and is designed to advance compliance, ensure regulatory certainty and prevent the misuse of existing stocks.”

Background

On June 3, 2020, three California judges issued an opinion and a mandate that vacated the federal registrations for three over-the-top dicamba products, including Engenia, FeXapan and XtendiMax herbicides. The vacatur was immediate and the Court cited the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, Rodenticide Act.

Five days after the vacatur order, EPA issued a cancellation order that allowed for specific uses of the dicamba products in existing stocks while ending sales and distribution.

Last week, plaintiffs in the case that lead to the vacatur of three over-the-top dicamba products filed another motion that would remove EPA’s current allowances for use of existing stocks. They claimed it went against the court order and EPA should be held in contempt.

The petitioners also asked the court to reexamine claims that the dicamba products violated certain parts of the Endangered Species Act.

Read more about recent lawsuits:

EPA Says Motion In Dicamba Case Is “Distorted Characterization”

Will Farmers Be Able to Spray Dicamba Next Week?

Dicamba’s Future is Shaky—Is Enlist Next on the Chopping Block?

BREAKING: Court Removes Three Out of Four Dicamba Registrations

EPA Says Motion In Dicamba Case Is “Distorted Characterization”

Wed, 11 Nov 2020 06:25:24 GMT

Last week, plaintiffs in the case that lead to the vacatur of three over-the-top dicamba products filed another motion that would remove EPA’s current allowances for use of existing stocks. They claimed it went against the court order and that EPA should be held in contempt.

Late Tuesday, June 16, 2020, EPA responded to the plaintiff in court to denounce their accusations.

“Petitioners’ motion to ‘Enforce this Court’s Vacatur and to Hold EPA in Contempt,’ is a thinly-veiled attempt to revive arguments the court already rejected or declined to reach. It should be denied,” EPA said in court documents.

In addition to asking for the vacatur’s enforcement and EPA to be held in contempt, plaintiffs asked the court to reexamine the mandate to rule on issues that weren’t pertaining to the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

EPA is asking the Court to deny the petitioners’ motion for the following reasons:

Petitioners have shown no ‘exceptional circumstances’ that support recalling the Court’s mandate.
- The vacatur was clear and definitive and should not be expanded or revised.
- Petitioners’ desired ‘clarification’ goes beyond the relief authorized by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and contrasts basic principles of administrative law.
- Court should not and does not need to recall the mandate to rule on unaddressed ESA issues.
EPA acted consistent with and did not violate the court order.
- The cancellation order issued by EPA didn’t violate a ‘specific and definite court order’ and thus cannot give rise to contempt sanctions.
- The cancellation order was consistent with the vacatur order.
The petitioners’ motion is not the proper vehicle—and this court is not the proper tribunal—to review the cancellation order issued by EPA.

“There are numerous other problems with petitioners’ motion,” EPA said in court documents. “For example, petitioners’ request that the Court recall the mandate so that petitioners can have another opportunity to litigate their ESA claims and raise entirely new merits arguments distinguishing over-the-top uses from other uses is wholly unwarranted. But the most important point is that EPA’s cancellation order is, contrary to petitioners’ distorted characterization, an entirely appropriate and responsible response to this Court’s decision.”

Read more about recent lawsuits:

Will Farmers Be Able to Spray Dicamba Next Week?

Dicamba’s Future is Shaky—Is Enlist Next on the Chopping Block?

BREAKING: Court Removes Three Out of Four Dicamba Registrations

Non-Dicamba Options for Dicamba-Tolerant Soybeans

Will Farmers Be Able to Spray Dicamba Next Week?

Wed, 11 Nov 2020 06:25:18 GMT

With EPA’s most recent cancellation order for Engenia, FeXapan and XtendiMax, farmers and commercial applicators were assured they could use existing stocks they had in their possession by June 3. However, plaintiffs in the case that lead to the products’ vacatur say this is wrong and that the courts should grant an emergency motion to enforce the vacatur and hold EPA in contempt for their actions.

“This seems like it’s illegal because EPA is defying the court order and the court had every intention when they passed that rule that, that was it, no more use of this chemical because it wasn’t approved,” says Jim Goodman, with the National Family Farm Coalition, plaintiff in the lawsuit that lead to dicamba’s vacatur. “EPA seems to feel that they have more authority than state and local governments, even the court system.”

To summarize, the EPA issued a final cancellation order on the three dicamba formulations. In that order it provided the following guidance:

Distribution or sale is prohibited unless it’s for product disposal or returns to the registrant (BASF, Corteva or Bayer).
Farmers and commercial applicators can use their existing stocks that were in their possession as of June 3, 2020, when the Court mandate took effect. Applications must be in line with previously-approved labels include temperature restrictions, windspeed restrictions, application date cutoffs and any other detail found in the label.

“At the height of the growing season, the Court’s decision has threatened the livelihood of our nation’s farmers and the global food supply,” said EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler. “Today’s cancellation and existing stocks order is consistent with EPA’s standard practice following registration invalidation, and is designed to advance compliance, ensure regulatory certainty, and to prevent the misuse of existing stocks.”

The plaintiffs, including the Center for Food Safety and the Center for Biological Diversity, filed an emergency order on Thursday, June 11, 2020, requesting relief (a decision) by the earliest possible date.

If the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs, all dicamba applications will be illegal and EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler and the EPA itself will be found in contempt. Depending on how quickly this decision is announced, farmers could potentially lose access to even existing dicamba stocks as early as today.

“USDA supports the actions taken by the EPA to respond responsibly to the decision of the Ninth Circuit regarding dicamba,” said USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue in a recent statement regarding this new motion. “At a time when the security of the food supply chain is paramount, the Center for Biological Diversity and its allies seek to cripple American farmers and further limit their ability to feed, fuel, and clothe this nation and the world. The Ninth Circuit should not allow plaintiffs’ hostility against the American farmer to cloud the fact that the EPA’s actions follow both legal precedent and common sense.”

UPDATE: BASF files motion to intervene in Ninth Circuit case that vacated dicamba registrations.

Friday, June 12, 2020, at 4:25, BASF representatives notified media the company filed an emergency motion to interview following the decision to vacate federal registrations for Engenia, FeXapan and XtendiMax. The June 3, 2020 decision is the first time BASF’s Engenia was brought into the case.

BASF is requesting intervention because of the sudden and severe financial impact the vacatur has on farmers during the height of spraying season, with many farmers having less than one month to complete dicamba applications.

“Taking this action during the height of the application season gives no regard to the significant investments farmers have made in their businesses and leaves them without viable options for the growing season,” said Paul Rea, senior vice president, BASF Agricultural Solutions North America. “Farmers have counted on applications of dicamba-based products to control troublesome weeds for decades, and they continue to need these tools now and in the future.”

UPDATE: Corteva files motion to intervene with U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Corteva Agriscience also filed a motion to intervene with the Ninth Circuit case regarding dicamba technologies. Corteva’s FeXapan product was no mentioned in the lawsuit until until June 3, 2020, prior to that only XtendiMax was involved.

The company said in a press release it’s seeking to intervene to preserve their rights and to support the rights of customers to use the impacted dicamba technologies. Corteva says it’s an effective weed management tool for farmers when used according to the label.

In the motion, Corteva also seeks to preserve the role of EPA to administer the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, including granting or cancelling crop protection product registrations for the benefit of ag and society.

Where do you stand legally?

As you spray dicamba today, it is legal. Stay in tune for updates should that change with a court decision. However, with the federal label vacated there’s potential for more risk.

Essentially, if you have dicamba drift onto a neighbor’s field and they bring forward a civil lawsuit against you the damage amount (money you could potentially pay) is likely no greater than before, according to Todd Janzen, president of Janzen Agricultural Law, LLC. However, the burden of proof shifts from the plaintiff, to the defendant now. Which means it could be harder to win a case brought against you.

In addition, if you purchased dicamba products Engenia, FeXapan or XtendiMax between June 4 and June 8 when EPA issued the final cancellation, there is concern for the legality of that supply. To be safe, experts recommend returning that product.

EPA next steps if vacatur re-enforced.

If the Court sides with the plaintiffs in this recent motion, EPA does have a few options that could allow farmers and applicators to use dicamba up to the cutoff date.

“EPA could file an emergency application with the U.S. Supreme Court asking for a stay pending the filing and disposition of a petition for certiorari [appeal],” says Kristine Tidgren, director for the Center for Agricultural Law and Taxation at Iowa State University. “Seeking emergence en banc review would [be] a less likely action. All of this takes time and it’s hard to predict what will happen.”

*BASF update added 4:35 p.m. June 12, 2020.

*Corteva update added 8:10 a.m. June 15, 2020.

Read more about recent lawsuits:

Dicamba’s Future is Shaky—Is Enlist Next on the Chopping Block?

BREAKING: Court Removes Three Out of Four Dicamba Registrations

Non-Dicamba Options for Dicamba-Tolerant Soybeans

Dicamba Applications Resume, Questions Linger

Wed, 11 Nov 2020 06:25:13 GMT

The past seven days have been full of more questions than certainty around the dicamba products of Xtendimax, Engenia and FeXapan. Following the 9th circuit court decision, the agricultural industry was waiting for EPA to provide clarification on what that court’s ruling meant for the industry’s applications in 2020. In the early evening of June 8 , EPA did provide a statement allowing for applications through July 31 , but the Agricultural Retailers Association and the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives are calling for more details.

ARA President and CEO Daren Coppock and NCFC CEO Chuck Conner sent a letter to EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler on June 9 asking for clarification and emphasizing that days matter as the application window is quickly closing.

“While the Agency’s cancellation order provided some guidance to end-users as well as applicators, it failed to address several scenarios where product is in the pipeline at various points in the supply chain,” the groups stated in the letter. “These questions need quick answers during this critical time of the growing season as weeds will not wait for protracted legal analysis.”

ARA and NCFC cite examples from the supply chain that aren’t addressed in the EPA’s statement. For example, between the 9th circuit ruling on June 3, and the EPA guidance on June 8, many states had resumed dicamba sales and applications. According to ARA and NCFC, it’s unclear if those product purchases are permitted.

One state that was waiting for EPA’s guidance before resuming sales and applications was Illinois. And on June 9, the Illinois Department of Agriculture permitted use to resume. The state has extended its cutoff date for applications of June 25 (it was previously June 20), however other details of its label remain including that forecasted temperatures can’t be above 85 degrees Fahrenheit. Click here for those details from the Illinois label.

The Illinois Fertilizer and Chemical Association released a statement saying decisions about dicamba application this year matter for the future availability of products used in agricultural applications. The IFCA emphasized product stewardship and stated in a newsletter: “Much is at stake beyond dicamba use. The courts are now telling us how to farm, and all pesticide uses are being scrutinized more than ever. There are also millions of acres of soybean and other plants in Illinois that are sensitive to dicamba. We must successfully coexist with other growers and property owners and bring down the number of pesticide misuse complaints.”

Court’s Dicamba Ruling Leaves Industry in “Uncharted Territory”

Wed, 11 Nov 2020 06:25:08 GMT

The details are still being sorted through nearly 48 hours after the 9th circuit court of appeals issued its ruling on three EPA dicamba labels.

Since the decision was announced on June 3, farmers and retailers have been left in the lurch mid-spraying season.

The court decision vacated the labels for Xtendimax, Engenia and FeXapan. Shortly after the ruling was released, the mandate enforcing the order was published. On June 4, the product manufacturers paused their sales and distribution, and many retailers paused their applications and sales.

However, on June 5, some retailers resumed sales and applications of dicamba in states where the state departments of agriculture issued statements saying they would not enforce the 9th circuit court ruling, of which they are not in the jurisdiction of. Such states include Iowa, Kansas, North Dakota, Indiana, and others.

“Several state government agencies have issued public statements indicating the dicamba products referenced in the Ninth Circuit court decision are still available for sale and use as they are currently registered products in that state and the state agency awaits guidance from the EPA,” says Richard Gupton, Ag Retailers Association (ARA) senior vice president of public policy and counsel. “ARA urges caution to any ag retailer as they may still be open to civil liability and their insurance coverage placed in jeopardy as a result of the court vacature decision. The industry at the moment is in unchartered territory.”

One retailer that paused sales and then reopened sales the next day was MKC, a cooperative that serves Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma and Arkansas. For now, their applicators and sales are still paused in Arkansas, but are open in other states.

“We rely on our associations, such as ARA, and relationships with our state regulatory agencies during times like this,” says Dave Spears, senior vice president and chief marketing officer at MKC. “When the Kansas department of agriculture signaled that we could continue to sell the products, we asked for something in writing, and now we’re in the process of spraying and selling those products.”

What could give clarity to the situation? Well, right now, all eyes are on the EPA for guidance. The EPA released a statement late on June 5 including saying: “EPA is assessing all avenues to mitigate the impact of the Court’s decision on farmers.”

ARA sent a letter to the EPA on June 5 urging the agency to appeal the court’s decision. In its letter ARA said, “EPA has long-established procedures for cancelation orders to avoid the chaos we will see and are seeing from this decision.”

MKC’s Spears said this has caused a disruption for their farmers and their business. In 2019, approximately 125,000 acres of dicamba-tolerant genetics were applied across the cooperative’s footprint by MKC applicators—so that number doesn’t include farmer applied acres.

“For soybean farmers who just planted or are finishing up planting of the dicamba-tolerant genetics, they were really caught off guard.” he says. “As wheat harvest approaches and planning for double crop soybean planting is underway, we’ve had growers switch seed platforms because of the uncertainty. And at this time, alternative seed is hard to come by.”

As of today, MKC has 7,000 acres of orders released to apply dicamba products, but their geographic area is just beginning pre and post application so there are many more acres to come.

States Ask EPA for Clarity on Dicamba, State’s Rights to Sell

Non-Dicamba Options for Dicamba-Tolerant Soybeans

Xtendimax, Engenia and FeXapan Sales and Application “Paused”

3 Reasons Everyone Should Pay More Attention to Adjuvants

Wed, 11 Nov 2020 06:24:47 GMT

Surfactants, crop oils, water conditioners, tank cleaners, and more… there’s a lot to sort through when considering the adjuvant market. Industry experts say there are close to, if not more than, 2,000 adjuvant products on the market today.

“I get the question a lot if there are differences in adjuvants, and yes, there are,” says Dr. Bryan Young of Purdue University. “But the problem is those differences don’t always come to light when you test or use commercially because adjuvants perform based on the environment.”

Young publishes the Compendium of Herbicide Adjuvants with the 14th edition pending publication but expected before the fall of 2020. It will detail more than 800 products from 45 manufacturers.

Application consistency is critical, he says.

“More important than ever is making sure every time you apply a herbicide you are optimizing the activity, and that’s just what adjuvants are designed to help do,” he says. “We should be stewarding herbicides as best as we can. If the adjuvant costs more than the herbicide component, think about that cost, but also think about the cost of failure. It’s more than just the price in the tank. Investing in an adjuvant helps you achieve the goal of not letting the herbicide fail.”

While each of the roughly 14 categories of adjuvants has its specific role, that job is being heightened by factors such as weed resistance and the complexity of the products (some claim two or more functionalities, for example).

The Council of Producers and Distributors of Agrotechnology (CPDA) is a non-profit association with members including Helena, Nutrien, Wilbur-Ellis, Winfield United and most other major distributors in the U.S., and in total its member companies represent 90% of the adjuvant market in the U.S.

Joe Gednalske is manager of members and value promotion for CPDA and says these are the three biggest factors in adjuvant use:

Making a crop application without a required adjuvant. He says this can lead to a 30% to 90% reduction in performance of that application.
Selecting the wrong type of adjuvant. Gednalske says this leads to an increased risk of crop injury as well as a 5% to 50% reduction in performance.
Selecting a good enough vs. premium adjuvant. He says research shows a 5% to 25% performance gap depending on adjuvant quality.

He explains CPDA is working to educate ag retailers and farmers on overall adjuvant awareness and the association’s certification program. That certification was launched in 2001 as a voluntary program, and it has 17 benchmarks so all claims meet American Society for Testing and Materials definitions.

Today, more than 480 herbicide labels recommend the use of CPDA certified adjuvants.

“Adjuvants are important decisions. Look at the challenges retailers and growers have in making the right adjuvant selection. There’s a lot on the line to make sure herbicides work. And during these times when ag retailers aren’t able to call on growers in-person, it makes it an even harder task,” Gednalske says.

Adjuvant Know-How Can Boost Sales

Nail Adjuvant Selection for Greater Pesticide Success

$20 Million+ Dicamba Lawsuit Goes to Jury

Wed, 11 Nov 2020 06:22:54 GMT

After three weeks of argument, a seven person jury in Cape Girardeau, Mo., is deliberating whether Monsanto and BASF are responsible for damages on a peach orchard in southeast Missouri. The plaintiff accuses the companies of selling a defective product and conspiring over the launch of dicamba-resistant seeds prior to EPA approval of new dicamba formulations.

The companies say the peach losses were sparked by longstanding disease issues in the orchard.

Bader Farms, the plaintiff, is suing for damages that occurred to peach trees in the 2015 and 2016 season. In 2015, Monsanto (now Bayer by acquisition) sold cottonseed with Xtend traits with warning labels on the bag discouraging dicamba application. In 2016 the company launched the soybean product before the accompanying herbicide received approval. Xtendimax (Bayer) and Engenia (BASF), two new dicamba formulations, received regulatory approval in time to be used in the 2017 growing season.

This trial, Bader Farms versus Monsanto and BASF, is a Bellwether trial for a larger potential class action for dicamba damages. The trial is being held at the Eastern District of Missouri Southeastern District Division.

Plaintiff claims

Over the course of more than 10 days in court, attorneys for Bader Farms interviewed witnesses, played video depositions attempting to assign blame for peach orchard damage to wayward dicamba. In its civil lawsuit, Bader farms is asking for nearly $21 million in damages from Monsanto and BASF.

Bader Farms says Monsanto and BASF have a product that might kill weeds but can’t be controlled and the off-target movement of that product led to tree death. Furthermore, they say the companies conspired together in 2015 and 2016 when the cotton and soybean seed products were released prior to herbicide approvals, sparking a chain of off-label use of older products.

“Defendant Monsanto would benefit from the sales of its defective and incomplete seed system. Defendant BASF, as the nation’s largest seller of dicamba-based herbicides, would benefit from the sale of its existing, older dicamba-based herbicides,” plaintiffs said in their complaint.

“They can’t claim they didn’t know about these products,” according to closing arguments by plaintiff’s council. The continue that because Monsanto limited university testing and released a system without the accompanying herbicide, they knew damage would happen and still moved forward with the product. “The fact is what happened [damage on widespread acres] was foreseeable.”

“This is the first product in American history that literally destroys the competition—buy this product or else,” plaintiff council Billy Randalls continued.

Plaintiff witnesses included Bill Bader, owner of Bader farms and Ford Baldwin, former University of Arkansas Extension weed scientist. Baldwin testified that he personally identified trees in Bader’s orchard with clear signs of dicamba damage.

Bader testified that he saw his peach yields drop by 40% after receiving dicamba damage to trees. The plaintiffs also claim that dicamba damage accelerated disease issues in the orchard that could have otherwise been managed. Bader claims every orchard has been affected by dicamba damage, resulting in death or yield loss.

“Defendants knew that dicamba herbicides cannot be applied safely to Xtend crops due to their extreme volatility and propensity to move off-target, which caused crippling damage to plaintiffs’ peach trees, agricultural crops, vegetation and timber throughout 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018—and ongoing,” court documents state.

Defense response

Monsanto’s experts claim that dicamba was not the cause of tree death on Bader Farms. Instead they said it was a variety of diseases that decimated the peach trees, namely armillaria root rot. Armillaria is a fungus that lives in the soil on tree roots.

“[Monsanto showed] scientific evidence of armillaria through DNA testing,” defense council Jan P. Miller said in closing arguments. They sent more than 50 root samples in for testing, at the price of $250 per test, and found armillaria present on all usable samples.

“The pattern of infection centers [how armillaria spreads in orchards] showed up 10 years before the first Xtend seed was commercialized,” Miller continued. “There’s no objective evidence dicamba was on the farm.”

BASF, which was not added to the lawsuit until 2017, interviewed some of its own staff members to present evidence refuting a conspiracy and used a peach expert to show evidence that Bader farms had a disease problem, not a dicamba issue.

On the claim they conspired with Monsanto the company said: “We are competitors,” BASF council John Mandler said in closing arguments. “BASF sold Engenia, not the system.”

The system refers to dicamba tolerant crops in conjunction with the herbicide. Plaintiffs claimed that BASF profited in increased sales from off-label dicamba products in 2015 and 2016 and received value share payments with Monsanto on each bag of seed sold.

The conspiracy claim is the plaintiff’s way of trying to hold BASF liable for the 15’ and 16’ damages, Mandler said. “They want you to find conspiracy and joint venture so Monsanto and BASF share in the losses. We should not share for something we have no control of.”

When it comes to the actual product, Engenia, BASF representatives say they did allow universities to test the product in advance of its launch and the label explicitly warns applicators about what they need to do to keep the product safe.

Stay tuned to Agweb.com for more information about what the outcome of this case means is and what it means for future dicamba trials regarding soybean damage, and what it means for this year’s re-registration of Xtend, FeXapan and Engenia herbicides.

Peach Grower Trial on Dicamba Underway

IFCA Gives Update On Dicamba Penalties

EPA Approves Fourth Dicamba Option, Tavium, from Syngenta

BASF, Bayer Found Liable for $15 Million in Dicamba Peach Damage Trial

Wed, 11 Nov 2020 06:22:54 GMT

Today a jury of seven people in Cape Girardeau, Mo., found BASF and Monsanto responsible for dicamba damage to peach trees. The plaintiff in the case alleges the companies sold a defective product and they conspired to launch new dicamba-resistant soybean seeds ahead of EPA approval of new dicamba formulations designed to minimize drift.

The jury awarded Bader Farms $15 million in actual damages and tomorrow will decide an amount of punitive damages, too.

“Happy my dad got what he deserved, he built this farm himself,” says Levi Bader, the eldest son of plaintiff Bill Bader. “Peaches are his life and he can’t keep growing them with dicamba [around]. Hopefully he can get paid back for what we’ve lost over the past five years.”

Bader Farms, the plaintiff, is suing for damages that occurred to peach trees in the 2015 and 2016 season. In 2015, Monsanto (now Bayer by acquisition) sold cottonseed with Xtend traits with warning labels on the bag discouraging dicamba application. In 2016 the company launched the soybean product before the accompanying herbicide received approval. Xtendimax (Bayer) and Engenia (BASF), two new dicamba formulations, received regulatory approval in time to be used in the 2017 growing season.

The companies say the peach losses were sparked by longstanding disease issues in the orchard.

This trial, Bader Farms versus Monsanto and BASF, is a Bellwether trial for a larger potential class action for dicamba damages.

Plaintiff and defendants are still under a gag order until jury is released tomorrow. Story will be updated with comments as soon as they’re available.

Read more detail about the trial here .

Stay tuned to Agweb.com for more information about what the outcome of this case means for future dicamba trials regarding soybean damage, and what it means for this year’s re-registration of Xtend, FeXapan and Engenia herbicides.

Dicamba

Metabolic Weed Resistance Crisis Builds Across The Heartland

“Hammer With Residuals” And Build Effective Combinations

Pay More Up Front To Avoid Making Expensive “Revenge Sprays”

Protect Herbicide Tools To Extend Their Use

5 Practical Recommendations To Address Metabolic Resistance

Late Labels, Updated Restrictions, New Names: Navigate the 2026 Dicamba Landscape

What does this mean for soybean growers?

What’s Different About the Dicamba Herbicides Available?

How Much Dicamba Will Be Sprayed in 2026?

Know The Rules For Dicamba Use In Your State

State-Specific Restrictions In Place

Shifting Your Weed Control Strategy

Record Keeping: Don’t Risk A $700 Fine

EPA Reinstates Dicamba for 2026 Registration in Cotton and Soybeans

New Dicamba Restrictions for 2026 Registration

Legacy Diacamba Restrictions Retained on the 2026 Registration

New Dicamba Rules Are Not Optional

Industry Organizations Say Thank You

Bayer Announces New Dicamba Product

Four Strategies To Save Money On Herbicides Without Sacrificing Weed Control

EPA Opens Public Comment on Dicamba Registration, Gives The Labels Another Look

Over-The-Top Dicamba Cutoff Dates For 2023 Are Set

Monday Is Last Day To Buy And Distribute Dicamba In 2024 For Four States

Read Previous Coverage

EPA Issues Existing Stocks Order For Dicamba Products

Dicamba Training & Label Links

EPA Approves Dicamba Usage in 2022

EPA: Despite Stricter Rules, Thousands of Complaints of Dicamba Damage

3 Changes to Dicamba Label in Iowa and Minnesota

Illinois Department of Ag Files Rules for Use of Dicamba on Soybeans

Section 250.230 Use of Pesticides Containing Dicamba on Soybeans

Online Options: Annual Mandatory Dicamba Application Training

Final Curtain for FeXapan, Illinois Details 3 Additional Application Parameters

Related Articles:

Complaints Weigh on Future of Dicamba

Read more on dicamba:

What the New Dicamba Label Looks Like in the Real World

Tennessee Scientists Confirm Dicamba-Resistant Palmer Amaranth

More than 60% of Farmers Still Have Dicamba to Apply

Court Allows EPA Existing Stock Provisions to Remain

EPA Says Motion In Dicamba Case Is “Distorted Characterization”

Will Farmers Be Able to Spray Dicamba Next Week?

Dicamba Applications Resume, Questions Linger

Court’s Dicamba Ruling Leaves Industry in “Uncharted Territory”

Related ArticlesBREAKING: Court Removes Three Out of Four Dicamba Registrations

3 Reasons Everyone Should Pay More Attention to Adjuvants

Related Articles:

$20 Million+ Dicamba Lawsuit Goes to Jury

Read more on dicamba:

BASF, Bayer Found Liable for $15 Million in Dicamba Peach Damage Trial

Read more on dicamba:

Related Articles
BREAKING: Court Removes Three Out of Four Dicamba Registrations