State needs to keep close eye on dicamba

There's quite a dramatic story slowly developing in the agriculture world.

It involves a herbicide called dicamba, a multinational ag chemical and biotech corporation named Monsanto and farmers across the Midwest.

The controversy surrounding dicamba has pitted neighboring farmers against one another even to the point of homicide.

Dicamba can destroy certain crops, if not applied appropriately. Older versions of the herbicide were especially susceptible to airborne drift, meaning that a farmer applying the chemical on his protected crop could blow over on a nearby crop and destroy it. Monsanto, which produces dicamba, also produces dicamba-resistent seeds. If a neighboring farmer hasn't planted the resistant seed, and the chemical-spraying farmer doesn't adhere to the warnings about applying during the wind, it can spell trouble.

It seemed a prudent and bold move by the state to put a stop to the dicamba use until the science settles or something could be worked out. More than 130 complaints had been lodged against dicamba alleging the destruction of thousands of acres.

On July 7, the Missouri Department of Agriculture placed a moratorium on all dicamba products. A news release stated the moratorium would last until December.

But it didn't last a week.

On Thursday, the Department of Agriculture lifted the temporary halt to the use and sales of dicamba, saying it's satisfied by new safeguards involving the chemical. Older versions of dicamba are still banned, but the order for Xtendimax, Engenia and FeXapan herbicides was lifted after special provisions and safeguards for using the technology were developed and approved with the herbicide makers' cooperation, The Associated Press reported.

In a conference call, according to reporting by Southeast Missourian reporter Tyler Graef, Monsanto's North America vice president, Lisa Safarian, praised Missouri's decision to allow newer formulas while maintaining a ban on older dicamba products, which she said are about 100 times more "volatile," or prone to drift.

She criticized states such as Arkansas, whose wholesale ban on dicamba products she said was a rush to judgment.

"Simply banning a tool that is important to many farmers' success at this late stage in the season after growers have already made their crop protection decisions will hurt more farmers and not get states any closer to an effective solution," she said.

She said the Xtendimax formula is already in use on 25 million acres of farmland.

Monsanto has a point, but this is something the department of agriculture needs to keep a close eye on. Farmers need to be responsible, but it is Monsanto's products that are causing these problems and millions of dollars in damages.

Obviously, Monsanto has to represent its company, its profits and safeguard its reputation.

But the state must do its part to hold farmers and Monsanto accountable. The destruction of cropland is not acceptable and must be stopped.