The Combine Forum banner

21 - 39 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,924 Posts
Discussion Starter #21
Well I’m going to start giving it away but our grain is segregated right till it’s at the end user.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Its not the government who will stop us from desiccating with roundup and be reliant on chemicals to keep the fields clean. It will be the buyers who will change the landscape of farming, whether you like it or not. Time will tell on what practices I need to do to keep the farm sustainable but yet be able to market the grain.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,825 Posts
With the grain business we need far better definition of things like GMO. ALL GRAIN GROWN COMMERCIALLY TODAY IS GMO.
I agree we need better definitions. But by all current definitions of GMO, including the ones that lay persons use, no all grain grown today is certainly not GMO. GMO has a specific meaning, which is that the genes have been manipulated directly in the cell by chemical, radiation, or other means. Conventional breeding, regardless of the fact that genes are being selected and influenced by the breeder, is not GMO under any definition that I know of, be it scientific, or the ignorant masses.

As to the current insanity over glyphosate, I think we as farmers really need to think carefully about using any sort of pre-harvest glyphosate, particularly on grains (in other words stop doing it entirely). Else we run the risk of losing it entirely. I hope that "natural" glyphosate-like chemical sees the light of day. It won't be any safer than glyphosate (or solve the resistance issue), but hopefully the "naturalness" of it will give us a bit of breathing room. Funny that folks don't seem to know or understand that glyphosate itself is a naturally-derived product, that was isolated in a fungus.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
357 Posts
Stopping using glyphosate voluntarily as a pre harvest aid is like committing suicide before going to the electric chair.

Regardless of using it as a harvest aid or not we run the risk of losing it entirely so I'm going to keep using it while I can and adapt if/when necessary. If you think stopping using it as a harvest aid will appease the protestors I think you're sadly mistaken.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
119 Posts
Stopping using glyphosate voluntarily as a pre harvest aid is like committing suicide before going to the electric chair.
And that would be why? Unless you are referring to weed control, harvest is pretty trouble free without glyphosate for us. Not that there aren't cases where it is necessary.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
726 Posts
With amount of canola that will need to find its way over to EU this year and the lack of "sustainability" agreements that exporters have signed with farmers to date have to think that it a great Summer job in grain Co offices to manufacture something that will make this stuff happen. Of course, it will be promoted as providing value added solutions for canola growers, but suspect that exporters will collect most of this - particularly on any blending of green seed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
357 Posts
I'm not going to get into an argument about how we do things vs how others do things. We use tools available to us. I'm not throwing away my 9/16 wrench because it might be taken from me at some point in the future.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,045 Posts
And that would be why? Unless you are referring to weed control, harvest is pretty trouble free without glyphosate for us. Not that there aren't cases where it is necessary.
Two years now with no pre-harvest anything, glyphosate/reglone/heat. No swather either. I think there will be times where the swather might be handy still but something just didn't feel right about spraying a crop right before harvest.

The sustainability agreements are a bit of a joke though, I'm not aware that they actually make you do anything different, probably just shift blame to the farmer if something goes wrong. I never read the agreement though, and never signed it...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,668 Posts
I don't think that ceasing to use Glyphosate pre harvest is necessary. What needs to happen is people need to stop using glyphosate pre harvest TOO EARLY!. THAT is where the problem lies. I'm not a believer in using pre harvest to "even out the crop" for harvest. If that is the driving force behind using it, that means that SOME of the crop is too immature and will take on residue in the seed and THAT is where the problem comes from. If it is used as a means of weed control for the following year (which is what I believe it should be used for) then you can wait until the whole crop is ripe enough to NOT absorb residue and the problem goes away.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,825 Posts
You're right technically, but unfortunately that won't save us because there are a few guys who do it anyway and will screw us all over soon. The only way we can preempt that now is to stop all pre-harvest glyphostate on most crops. It's really the only way we're going to placate the unwashed masses. If we don't we'll most likely lose it for all other uses too. This has already happened in Europe. It will happen here, driven by public paranoia.

Spraying pre-harvest at the right stage meets current MRLs, but if those get tightened more (or pushed to zero), then even that won't work.

I agree that the primary and probably only use of glyphosate should be in spring burn off, tolerant crops, and after-harvest burn off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,461 Posts
I'm not going to get into an argument about how we do things vs how others do things. We use tools available to us. I'm not throwing away my 9/16 wrench because it might be taken from me at some point in the future.

But your wrench won't be taken away if it's used properly. If you smack someone across the head with it, then it will be taken away. I don't believe you would be one of the few farmers to apply it wrong from seeing on here your farming practices, I'm always impressed with how you operate. It's the few others that cause the problems that worry me.


I would hate for it to be taken away from us, as it is probably the most cost effective tool on our farm. I would hate to not have it for spring burnoff or post harvest because people spray it at the wrong time. I believe most do spray at the right time, but there will always be someone who doesn't, that's where the problems will arise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
2 weeks ago, my employer received a letter saying there was a ban on using glyphosphate for preharvest burn down in the edible beans. Any type of desiccant must be pre-approved. Thank you Europe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
I'm not going to get into an argument about how we do things vs how others do things. We use tools available to us. I'm not throwing away my 9/16 wrench because it might be taken from me at some point in the future.

But your wrench won't be taken away if it's used properly. If you smack someone across the head with it, then it will be taken away. I don't believe you would be one of the few farmers to apply it wrong from seeing on here your farming practices, I'm always impressed with how you operate. It's the few others that cause the problems that worry me.
In the mean time, its likely wise to get a 6” thumb wrench so (if)(when) they do take your 9/16 away you can still complete your tasks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,808 Posts
2 weeks ago, my employer received a letter saying there was a ban on using glyphosphate for preharvest burn down in the edible beans. Any type of desiccant must be pre-approved. Thank you Europe.
Frankly, I think that's a fair request.
I wouldn't want to eat beans that had recently been soaked in Glyphosate or any other chemical for that matter.
I doubt if there would be a person on here who would.

But by the same token, if end users want nil chemical residue they will need to relax their requirements in other areas.
i.e. They can't expect farmers to grow produce in an imperfect environment, take away half their management tools and expect a perfect product, which is what they currently demand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,808 Posts
Good god we’re screwed. If a farmer thinks the beans are “soaked in glyphosate” what’s the general population going to think.
Well okay, not soaked (That word is a tad emotive, I admit) but absorption and translocation of chemical into the plant and seed, if still green, does take place.
Call me fussy, but that's enough for me not to want to eat them. You eat what you want!:)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,045 Posts
Good god we’re screwed. If a farmer thinks the beans are “soaked in glyphosate” what’s the general population going to think.
Yeah that was pushing it a wee bit. Truth is the pod would be sprayed with a very minute amount, and then at harvest the pod goes out the back of the combine.

But seriously it's hard to believe the BTO's are staging their crop properly every time, and there is some smaller guys that don't know what they are doing either. Do guys shut off the boom when they go through a green patch? What about all the two-stage crop this year? Ideally each farmer's grain would be tested, but I doubt that is economical.

And as always there are more important issues that need to be addressed, but this seems to be the "scary" issue of the day used to sell stuff on store shelves...:rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,461 Posts
Good god we’re screwed. If a farmer thinks the beans are “soaked in glyphosate” what’s the general population going to think.

That's the problem, go on any non-farming forum and read what people think we are doing to our crops. Almost every time it comes to chemical use, they use the term "soaked", like we are bathing the crop in it. No matter how you try to explain things to them, they just don't understand it. 99% of the population is so far removed from agriculture they don't have a clue what we do, and unfortunately we need them to eat so we can make a living. They have the last say.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
That's the problem, go on any non-farming forum and read what people think we are doing to our crops. Almost every time it comes to chemical use, they use the term "soaked", like we are bathing the crop in it. No matter how you try to explain things to them, they just don't understand it. 99% of the population is so far removed from agriculture they don't have a clue what we do, and unfortunately we need them to eat so we can make a living. They have the last say.
They don't want to "understand," that would cause them to question their green religion. If they question their religion they will be on the "outs" in their broccoli taliban group meetings. Many people have their identity wrapped up in this religion and questioning their beliefs is a threat to their identity.
 
21 - 39 of 39 Posts
Top