Kevin Ross has used glyphosate on his farm, believes in its ability to control weeds better than almost anything else, and he doesn’t want to see a California requirement threaten the use of it on anyone’s farm.
“Glyphosate is one of the most effective tools that we absolutely have ever had in controlling weed, weed pressure,” Ross, a rural western Iowa corn farmer, said as he joined leaders including Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers and Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird, both Republicans, at a news conference Wednesday in Omaha, Nebraska.
Ross is also the former president of the National Corn Growers Association.
RELATED: The Rural Revival podcast featured Kevin and Sara Ross from Underwood, Iowa, in this 2019 conversation about raising four sons on the farm, using technology to improve their operations, and some of the many uses for corn across the United States. Listen to that conversation here.
Attorneys General in Nebraska, Iowa, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Montana, North Dakota, South Carolina, and South Dakota formed a coalition in response to California Prop 65 regarding glyphosate.
Prop 65 is also known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986. 63% of voters approved it in 1986 with the goal of protecting people by reducing their exposure to toxic chemicals. Part of that protection includes providing clear warnings to residents before they are exposed at home, work, or in the environment.
“The proposition protects the state's drinking water sources from being contaminated with chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm, and requires businesses to inform Californians about exposures to such chemicals,” California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment’s (OEHHA) website states.
Prop 65 requires California to maintain and update a list that would cite chemicals that could cause “cancer or reproductive toxicity,” according to the website.
An exhaustive list could be realistically impossible, since health officials and researchers don’t know everything about every product in the marketplace. OEHHA’s site said that the potentially harmful chemicals on the list would be the ones “known to the state.”
The website shows that OEHHA added glyphosate to its list of potentially harmful chemicals on July 7, 2017.
“…glyphosate will be listed under Proposition 65 as known to the State to cause cancer,” the notice stated.
The warning does not ban or restrict glyphosate or any other chemical on the list. That was not the intent of Prop 65. It is merely a guide. Consumers can make their own choice about consuming or using a product that contains a chemical on the warning list.
But some farmers, agriculture advocates, and the new coalition of Republican attorneys general want federal guidance when it comes to glyphosate to reinforce that there is no definitive proof that the pesticide causes cancer.
“…help streamline and protect labeling rules for our nationwide marketplace,” Nebraska’s attorney general said during the news conference.
The coalition isn’t suing the E.P.A. – at least not yet – but wants the federal agency to stop states from labeling glyphosate as a carcinogen.
Roundup is the most common product with glyphosate. Bayer bought Roundup from Monsanto, and the company has since removed the chemical from the product that homeowners use to kill weeds in their lawns after some people filed lawsuits alleging that glyphosate caused cancer.
But Roundup remains a popular pesticide choice in agriculture. The attorneys general coalition argued that it is the best option for farmers for weed prevention, and it would increase farmers’ costs if agencies banned its use.
RELATED: The Nebraska Examiner looks at academic studies that point out glyphosate could contribute to cancer if people don’t apply it correctly or are overly exposed to it, and the report also includes labeling opponents who contend the hardship of statewide labeling and any restrictions on the pesticide. Read that article here.
Comments