USA
September 20, 2017
Source: Monsanto Company
By Ty Witten, Ph.D., North American Crop Protection Lead
During my graduate education and research at Texas A&M and near 15 years with Monsanto, I have been very fortunate to be able to work closely with university researchers and extension specialists on a wide variety of projects. These collaborations and friendships have played a significant role, not only in the development of important agricultural tools, but also in my own personal and professional development. Additionally, many of these tools are used on our family farm in West Texas. Like my colleagues, I greatly respect and appreciate the key role academics play in advancing modern agriculture and developing the next generation of innovators.
Monsanto has been assertive in our advocacy and defense of XtendiMax® with VaporGrip® Technology this summer. We regret the strain it has put on relationships with some of our academic partners. We are eager to have a candid dialogue and rebuild those relationships at the academic summit we are hosting later this month. As scientists, this forum will serve to review scientific data of this technology and provide a platform to discuss this season’s observations and experiences.
Our assertiveness stems from our confidence in this innovative technology. XtendiMax® with VaporGrip® Technology was extensively tested and was approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and state regulators before we launched this season. Overwhelmingly, farmers and professional applicators are having success with on-target applications and experiencing excellent weed control. This technology is meeting a critical need on the farm and we will continue to advocate for fully informed, science-based decisions about the future of this important crop protection tool.
There has been much misdirected attention surrounding our recent petition to the Arkansas State Plant Board to halt what would be an ill informed and unnecessary ban on new low-volatility dicamba products. As we laid out in our petition and letter to Governor Hutchinson, drastic measures that will deprive all Arkansas farmers of this important technology are unwarranted, misguided, and not supported by the facts or the body of scientific data.
In our petition, we call out unsubstantiated theories and apparent conflicts of interest for the Plant Board to consider. We addressed these points not to personally attack individuals, but rather add necessary context to the Plant Board’s process, which has not taken a comprehensive look at all the science and neglected the information of other well recognized and experienced researchers who have engaged on these issues. To the extent our criticisms of the Plant Board’s process have been perceived as a personal attack on academics individually, collectively, or the universities they represent, that was not our intent and we regret having created that perception. However, there is too much at stake for farmers, companies, and modern agriculture overall for these points to be ignored during the Plant Board’s deliberations.
We urge all those involved in making decisions about the future of low-volatility dicamba formulations to let sound science guide our path forward. Just like the isolated issues in a few counties in Arkansas are not representative of the overall experience of growers across the country, the theories of individual researchers, no matter how accomplished and well respected, are not representative of the overall science supporting new low-volatility dicamba formulations. We encourage the Plant Board to take a broader look.
One of my initial job offers out of school was as research faculty and extension specialist with the University of Arizona. This summer I have often considered how I would view the dicamba conversation from that perspective. One thing is clear: my goal from either position would be to ensure farmers have the tools, training, and resources they need to be successful. That cannot happen without constructive dialogue and ongoing collaboration between private- and public-sector researchers. Now, more than ever, is the time to come together and move forward in a constructive manner.
For more about Monsanto’s perspective on the ongoing conversation around dicamba, please visit www.Monsanto.com/dicamba
Topics
Species
