% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Monsanto Company Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • iggybiggies iggybiggies Jan 29, 2013 6:16 PM Flag

    Monsanto great at growing weeds

    You assertion of Monsanto PAYING farmers to use other herbides sounded pretty good from the perspective of the grower of crops. But after researching this: here is the real deal according to the Des Moines Register. Monsanto will offer up to $6/acre REBATES.........which will cover roughly 30% of the total cost of the extra herbicides. Roundup prices have been steadily declining over the years, and it would appear the total cost per acre with the added herbicides is neither significantly higher or lower as opposed to straight roundup application. Superweeds appear where operators APPLY way to much Roundup above the recommended rate year after year. By adding the extra herbicides one can look at it as a glass half full or half empty. Some would say the idea is to nip any potential superweeds in the bud, yourself .... will take the pessimistic route.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Some of the "super weeds" are a result of trying to cut corners on the amount of glufosinate applied. Apply not on the label recommendations with stage of growth and the timing. A few resistant weeds can be held in the combines . Then moved to other fields in the machinary

    • Why do you always take the optimistic route? Wouldnt RR crops that need a competitors weed killer raise serious questions?

      • 3 Replies to md2021d
      • Resistance to pesticides is expected, just like antibiotic resistance in pathogenic bacteria is a growing issue in health care. There are organisms that have evolved to live in boiling sulfur springs etc., organisms are amazingly resilient and will find a way to survive almost anything. The trick is to manage the resistance.

      • not when evevery herbicide that has ever been used has resistance issues and for a while they only needed one now they have to go back to using more options but probably still less variation than they needed before. Roundup can be the main and then bring in other when you need it rather than always use the more toxic and expensive other herbicide. This is the problem with the anti-GM folks their option was really go back to using the expensive and more toxic whether its herbicides or insecticides but Gm trait reduce the variation needed but dont remove some variation. Insect protection can be with multiple traits and weed control with a few good herbicides with no threat to production levels (compared to pre GM use). But they don't under it. They also don't get it that Monsanto competitors always wanted farmers to be using their more expensive herbicides and so you wouldn't get any of them suggesting otherwise so since there is no competitor of Monsanto doesn't sell of lot of other herbicides you will get zero support from them and in fact them constantly doubting whether RoundUp was useful while they were panicking their market was diappearing before their eyes. They were fortunate to have the anti-GMs and nature on their side and after 12 years we now need more than just RoundUp and of course Monsanto has options in the wing which again teh competition will hate and try to shoot down while they panic to make their own me-too versions undercover (just like Pioneer did with OGAT). And they did such a great job with that and IMI corn

      • When was the last time you saw a fragile insect anywhere near roundup

    • Ask the farmer what he thinks --- after all he makes the choice of what weed contol system he will use every planting season.. He is the one making the BIG money investment.

89.75+0.09(+0.10%)May 6 4:02 PMEDT