Banning Modern Agriculture and High Crop Yields?

Biden EPA policies will raise prices and harm crops and environment, in name of saving species

Paul Driessen

In just seven decades, America’s conventional (non-organic) farmers increased per-acre corn yields by an incredible 500% – while using steadily less water, fuel, fertilizer and pesticides – feeding millions more people. Among the many reasons for this miracle is their ability to control weeds that would otherwise steal moisture and nutrients from this vital food, animal feed and fuel (ethanol) crop.

Long-lasting herbicides don’t just control weeds. They also promote no-till farming, which helps farmers save costly tractor fuel and avoid breaking up soils – thereby reducing erosion, retaining soil moisture, safeguarding soil organisms, and locking carbon dioxide in the soil (reducing risks of “dangerous manmade climate change,” some say).

In the United States, the second most widely used herbicide after glyphosate (Roundup) is atrazine, which is critical to controlling invasive and hard-to-kill weeds impervious to other herbicides. Atrazine is used on 65 million acres of corn, sorghum and sugarcane. That’s equivalent to Colorado or Oregon, on croplands scattered across a dozen Midwestern states. It’s also used on millions of acres of golf courses, lawns and highway medians nationwide.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has periodically reviewed atrazine science – which now comprises more than 7,000 studies over the past 60 years. It has found the herbicide is safe for people, animals and the environment.

But that hasn’t stopped the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), Pesticide Action Network (PAN) and other groups from campaigning to have atrazine banned outright or regulated into oblivion.

Extreme environmentalists also oppose fossil fuels, genetically engineered crops, and manmade fertilizers and insecticides. But they are silent about dangerous “natural” organic pesticides, including many that are lethal to bees and fish – and about cadmium and other toxic metals that can leach out of solar panels dumped in landfills – even though all these toxic chemicals could end up in our waterways.

Last year, I explained how activists successfully used collusive sue-and-settle lawsuits to force EPA to develop a formal process for evaluating whether endangered species were “likely” to be “adversely affected” by exposure to common pesticides. Facing court-ordered deadlines for completing the new assessments, the agency unsurprisingly found that the vast majority of species would “likely be adversely affected” by herbicides and other pesticides.

But it did so by employing the standard that even one affected plant or animal of a species would trigger prohibitions on using the chemicals. EPA also utilized hopelessly deficient satellite imagery, statewide crop and atrazine data, toxicity studies of unrelated laboratory animals, computer models, and best guesses. The garbage-in/garbage-out exercise bears little relation to real-world use, exposure or risks.

CBD, PAN and other anti-pesticide groups recently sued EPA again, in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. EPA used the lawsuit to justify asking the court to order the agency to “reconsider” a 2019 regulation. So now EPA has proposed that detectable levels of atrazine in US aquatic ecosystems must not exceed the astonishingly low average level of 3.4 parts per billion (ppb) over a 60-day period.

EPA calls this the “concentration equivalent level of concern,” or CE-LOC. But 3.4 ppb is equivalent to 3.4 seconds in 11,500 days – nearly 32 years! Atrazine isn’t plutonium. It’s been used and studied since 1958. To suggest that 3.4 ppb could devastate American ponds and rivers defies reason, and science.

These outfits aren’t even dealing with actual field or pond observations and evidence of harm. They’re talking about extrapolations, backed up mainly by secretive models, conjectures and activist pressure. However, the effects on American agriculture are likely to be profound, and widespread.

This focus on protecting aquatic life goes back two decades or more; it is so “inside baseball” in its details and complexity that eyes roll and readers fall asleep. The essence is this. Barely three years ago, EPA set the atrazine CE-LOC at 15 ppb, based on a host of government, academic, industry and activist studies and comments. Even the US Geological Survey and Agriculture Department weighed in. Prior to that, it was the still-reasonable level of 10 ppb.

In 2016, EPA proposed but ultimately rejected the 3.4 ppb LOC, after numerous farmers and scientific groups pointed out the shoddy methods and poor science the agency used to get there. But this June 30 – employing the court order that the agency itself asked for – EPA “re-evaluated” its decision. The agency dishonestly claimed it had intended all along to set that extremely low standard, and presented its decision for public comment, almost as a fait accompli.

Anticipating the uproar its proposal would cause, EPA said it would seek “external peer review” of its aquatic species risk assessment and 3.4 ppb decision. But this is a far cry from having a formal, balanced Scientific Advisory Panel do a full, impartial, scientific review, under standards actually set by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).

This 3.4 ppb LOC will result in major restrictions on atrazine use and/or necessitate extensive, expensive measures by farmers to control runoff – all based on estimated, predicted, computer-generated atrazine levels across multi-county or multi-state watersheds in which atrazine-based herbicides are used on acreage in who-knows-what proximity to those watersheds.

The near-zero LOC amounts to an effective ban on using atrazine-based  herbicides – amid growing international grain shortages, widening hunger, soaring fuel and fertilizer prices, increasing mandates to turn more corn into ethanol (to replace “non-renewable” gasoline), and other important considerations.

This Biden EPA decision certainly looks like a “major federal action,” representing a “transformative expansion” in EPA’s regulatory authority, and raising “major questions” about what specific language in FIFRA gives EPA such enormous, unprecedented authority. It would certainly seem that this 3.4 ppb edict defies the legal standards just recently articulated by the US Supreme Court in West Virginia v. EPA, regarding the agency’s asserted authority to regulate power plants in the name of climate change – wherein the court used precisely those quoted terms to reject EPA’s arrogation of authority.

EPA’s proposed standard would certainly result in significant regional and national political, economic and agricultural consequences. It would certainly affect a significant segment of the US economy – and intrude into arenas that are the province of the US Departments of Agriculture and Energy. It would also undermine EPA’s own climate change mitigation and prevention initiatives.

America’s premier environmental agency seems to be telling the Supreme Court, try and stop us again.

Biden Administration policies have already made energy insanely expensive (up to $5 a gallon for regular and $9 in some California cities), created supply chain crises for baby formula and other essential consumer goods, and sent inflation soaring to 9.1% annualized, compared to 1.5% in January 2021. These policies are battering millions of American families.

The President just returned from Saudi Arabia, where he begged the king and prince to produce more oil, so that Team Biden can continue restricting production of America’s own vast petroleum resources. This is embarrassing, demeaning, hypocritical and destructive.

Amid widespread hunger in Sri Lanka, and even in Germany and the UK, due to extreme green policies, Team Biden seems to think it should cause still more damage – and must kowtow more to extremists.

As the nation flirts with the possibility of recession, would Team Biden really risk another Depression Era Dust Bowl – which occurred in part because of too much plowing, amid still-record high temperatures and droughts decades before anyone conceived of manmade, fossil-fuel-driven climate crises?

This 3.4 ppb LOC is bad science, bad policy, bad agriculture, bad economics, and perverse morality. Anyone wishing to weigh in on the proposal can submit comments until September 6 at:

Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow ( and author of books, reports and articles on energy, environmental, climate and human rights issues.

4.9 29 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
July 24, 2022 2:08 am


Reply to  Chaswarnertoo
July 24, 2022 7:29 am

It’s the old 80:20 rule. They want to kill off the 80% of us, while the world would be ahead doing the same to the 20% of them

July 24, 2022 2:09 am

Nowadays no-one, particularly politicians, will admit (even if they realise it) that their actions inevitably have consequences…

Reply to  atticman
July 24, 2022 4:43 am

Why do think they won’t admit it?

Reply to  Derg
July 24, 2022 7:31 am

The Elites can not be wrong because they are the Elites! Gifted by something (certainly not God, because the Elites don’t believe in gods) they are superior to all other humans and must be obeyed.

Old Man Winter
Reply to  Spetzer86
July 24, 2022 9:30 am

Since all people are religious due to having a conscience, Elites will create their own
religion of self-worship & other beliefs. Even Mao was quite superstitious!

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Spetzer86
July 24, 2022 1:34 pm

Or…… everyone is equal but some are more equal than others.

Reply to  Derg
July 24, 2022 7:38 am

From (bitter) experience.

Joao Martins
July 24, 2022 3:11 am

That in-practice-prohibition of glyphosate and atrazine is an obscene show of ingnorance of the science of toxicology.

July 24, 2022 3:14 am

all i can say re chem fertiliser n weed/pesticides is; i ran a small soil testing setup. the farm soils were damned near inert for any soil life using the roundup etc no till systems. roadside soils and soil in my yard with no chem and a LOT of disturbance were teeming with biota. I take that as evidence that chem fertiliser n the rest are NOT conducive to really healthy soils

Tim Gorman
Reply to  ozspeaksup
July 24, 2022 6:18 am

You *have* to look at this on a holistic basis. Is the lack of biota a problem when compared to increased crop yields and lower CO2 emission? In addition, no-till stubble *does* disappear over time so there is some level of biota available to break it down. Traditional tilling practices have problems and so do no-till practices. You have to look at results you get and make your choice.

Reply to  ozspeaksup
July 24, 2022 6:57 am

Teeming with biota. Care to speciate and quantify? Are we talking bugs or bacteria? What about confounding variables? Anyhow, unless you are a goat, you don’t eat roadside and lawn grasses.

Ron Long
July 24, 2022 3:14 am

The EPA, along with the Justice Department, the Department of Education, and others, have been weaponized. They readily undertake a woke-leftist agenda without concern for those pesky Supremes or other silly laws. The cure is for Trump, or some similar politician, to drain the swamp. When exploring for gold deposits, I analyze for gold in rocks, and 3.4 ppb is low background, we don’t tend to get interested until 100 ppb (depending on geologic setting). Basically, virtually no chemical at 3.4 ppb can do anything.

Eric Vieira
Reply to  Ron Long
July 25, 2022 1:23 am

Just to inform you: for example the safety limits for Aflatoxins (from fungi) in grain is around 10 ppt (parts per Trillion !) per ton. The real problem there was sampling: you could have a rail wagon full of clean wheat, except for a small hole where the rain got in .. and the whole load, when mixed would be contaminated … The real problem we have: there are much too many incompetent politicians around who have substituted ideology for knowledge. Earlier, they had at least the common sense to get qualified advisors. Today it seems to go in the direction “nobody can be better than the boss” so they hire even less qualified people, usually from their own party, as advisors. No wonder these people are making the wrong decisions … How do we get qualified people back in power ? Most of them were sorted out early in the new system.

Ron Long
Reply to  Eric Vieira
July 25, 2022 3:15 am

Interesting comment about Aflatoxins, so I searched for data, and found reports from Turkey that said the Aflatoxin concentration in wheat products ranged from 10.4 to 643 ng/kg. OK, ng/kg converts to 1,000 ppt, or 1 ppb, and the range detected in wheat products in Turkey is 10 to 643 ppb. Interesting, and important aspect of analyzing wheat for Aflatoxin, but I have no idea how reliable an analysis at 1 ppb levels is. For a gold analysis, by Fire/AA finish, the error is 100% for single digit ppb results.

Reply to  Ron Long
July 25, 2022 6:19 pm

President Trump is NO Politician, nor is there anyone ‘similar’.

July 24, 2022 3:27 am

The post begins, “Biden EPA policies will raise prices and harm crops and environment, in name of saving feces.”


Reply to  Bob Tisdale
July 24, 2022 7:35 am

I don’t care is Brandon and Co. save feces. Heck they can smear it all over themselves for all I care. But Brandon’s programs will have the net effect of making life worse for everyone in the country, and probably have negative impacts on most other countries in the world. The Ds are a general menace to life, let alone liberty and happiness.

Reply to  Spetzer86
July 24, 2022 10:11 am

That’s a feature, not a bug – WEF protocol.

Reply to  Bob Tisdale
July 24, 2022 7:45 am

Is that supposed to be faeces?

Only asking for a friend. (Sorry, I haven’t got a winky emoticon).

July 24, 2022 3:29 am

Go to Sri Lanca and find out what happens to agriculture when industrial fertilisers are banned, country is on verge of starvation.
On another point, when there are few IC vehicles about it will be uneconomic to run a petrol station, so may have to drive tens of miles to fill up.
Motorcycles for time being are not included in sale of IC vehicles. Thinking of getting electric one, think twice, for the same energy of your petrol tank you will need 40x in weight of the batteries.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Vuk
July 24, 2022 6:21 am

I am just truly amazed more motorcycle makers are not offering motorcycles with covered sidecars and pull-behind trailers. You’d miss all the motor vehicle regs and should be able to turn some kind of a profit.

Oh, well. Maybe someday.

Reply to  Tim Gorman
July 24, 2022 11:18 am

I don’t know about covered but Ural motorcycle has sidecar.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  mkelly
July 24, 2022 3:01 pm

I just know I haven’t seen a covered one for decades, not even with just a tonneau cover to protect cargo.

It didn’t make sense till Biden and the Dems drove gasoline prices so high. It looks better and better today.

Reply to  Vuk
July 24, 2022 6:38 am

The left doesnt care about facts or reality.

Eric Vieira
Reply to  Vuk
July 25, 2022 1:35 am

What’s creepy abut the whole thing: The elites have also seen what happened in Sri Lanka, and all of a sudden you see such programs popping up all over the place: Canada, The Netherlands, Germany, Italy, Ireland etc… These people saw the catastrophe in Sri Lanka and saw that this works (for them), and now they’re pushing it everywhere, because this is exactly what they want.

July 24, 2022 3:31 am

“‘I’m not making ends meet’: Majority of Americans believe the US economy is getting worse”

Barry James
Reply to  mwhite
July 24, 2022 4:00 am

Just as the Borg intended that is should. Before installing their new regime, the current one has to be destroyed

Peta of Newark
July 24, 2022 3:55 am

Let’s pick up on one paragraph…
Quote:”Long-lasting herbicides don’t just control weeds. They also promote no-till farming, which helps farmers save costly tractor fuel and avoid breaking up soils – thereby reducing erosion, retaining soil moisture, safeguarding soil organisms,

Do we take it you’re talking Glyphosate?

  • ‘Long Lasting ‘The companies that make/sell Glyphosate tell the Exact Opposite – they assert that Roundup is disabled when it touches The Soil. Lie number one
  • ‘Costly fuel’. So it’s money you;re actually worried about, not The Children.
  • ‘Breaking Up Soils’ While 10 thro 15 tonnes tractors and 20+ tonne Lo Till machines do what exactly?
  • ‘Reduce Erosion’ What sort of erosion, chemical or physical. Lo till does not reduce physical erosion and pesticides vastly accelerate chemical/biological erosion
  • ‘Retaining moisture’ Leaving bare soil lying around at times of year when the sun is at it’s very zenith is ‘retaining moisture’ Are you drunk?
  • ‘Safeguarding soil organisms’ How exactly does dousing the plants and soils with, your own words, ‘a Long Lasting Chemical’, do that, especially when that chemical is a patented antibiotic – and lasts for at least 5 years or even 10 years in the soil, In fact, the only way it ‘goes away’ is via the process of Soil Erosion which you claim it prevents.

everything is now wrong – we are in sooooo much shit here it’s near impossible to describe…

btw: Maize is NOT = Food

Reply to  Peta of Newark
July 24, 2022 4:10 am

show your proof

Reply to  Peta of Newark
July 24, 2022 4:33 am

PETA, It seems the worst 4 years of your life were spent in 5th grade science. You cannot even form logical arguments.
Have you ever even been to a farm?
– $ is merely a means of measuring value and effort. Children NEED FOOD more than you suspect.
– heavy vehicles have large footprints SO THEY DON’T sink into soft ground!
– Obviously it is soil erosion. Low till farming reduces erosion over far more aggressive methods. The only way to eliminate soil erosion would be to pave it over, which is probably what you are used to.
– Fields and yields are valuable to the farmers. The time of the year that fields are not covered with crops is …WINTER. During that time the “bare” fields are covered with SNOW.
– There are far more sites than you can imagine where natural biota thrive absent any human interaction.

Try going to a farm next time you need groceries instead of to the urban supermarket.

Reply to  Rocketscientist
July 24, 2022 5:11 am

Interesting comments. I always had the impression that Peta was some kind of expert in his ‘field’. I look forward to the response from Peta.

Reply to  Beagle
July 24, 2022 5:59 am

I thought Peta referred to

Reply to  mwhite
July 24, 2022 7:39 am

more likely this one:

Reply to  Spetzer86
July 27, 2022 2:55 pm

No! it’s People Eating Tasty Animals,but what do I know I still believe gay means Happy and Carefree whatever your sexual persuasion.
A little lightness to chase the gloom away.

Reply to  Beagle
July 24, 2022 6:22 am

He claims expertise, he has never demonstrated it.

Reply to  Beagle
July 24, 2022 8:27 am

I think Peta is of the female persuasion.

Joe Gordon
Reply to  Disputin
July 24, 2022 12:31 pm

I thought it was a reference to Peeta of Mellark from the Hunger Games, who was Katniss’s male counterpart from the most impoverished district. The people had to trade participation in this cruel deathsport in order to receive food from the government.

Since farming was not a part of Peeta’s district, it stands to reason that he would have no idea how the government acquired the food it magically sent to his district upon payment of the “tributes” who represented his district in the games.

What people usually miss when looking at the Stalinist structure of the world in the Hunger Games is that it requires the complicity of people from all of the districts to create these artificial shortages that only the government can magically fulfill.

And make no mistake about it. With the help of dumb, but seemingly noble tributes, our government is trying to create artificial crises that only they can solve. Energy poverty, food poverty, the destruction of our savings… all carefully planned to increase dependence on the ruling class. That’s the Great Reset they want.

Hopefully, Peta and others will rebel against their rulers just as Katniss and Peeta ultimately struck back against their government.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Disputin
July 24, 2022 1:52 pm

That was my guess (based solely on the feminine-sounding name), if “Peta” is a bona fide commenter.

I have often suspected, however, that “Peta” is a male troll (and I don’t know why I think “male” — just a feeling) playing the role of a half-psychotic, sometimes lucid, sometimes, not, mildly paranoid, old, hippie.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Beagle
July 24, 2022 1:51 pm

Seriously? 🙄 I always had the impression that “Peta” is (sadly) mentally ill and reads about a lot of different topics with poor comprehension.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Rocketscientist
July 24, 2022 6:28 am

Large tractors and combines are not necessarily that much heavier than small one, improvement in drawbar horsepower from engines and drive trains have been tremendous. In addition the size of the implements (e.g. width of a corn header, planter, etc) means you actually traverse less ground with the machinery than you would with a smaller tractor/combine. It’s a win-win all the way around. Less cost to production and increased production.

I know what the claims against the current herbicide and insecticides are. But I also know that left fallow, a corn field from last year will see the stubble gradually disappear (something is decomposing it) and next year you also get all kinds of weed growth and volunteer corn coming back up. Same with soybeans and wheat. So the soil isn’t “ruined* by the herbicide and insecticides. Poorer than in natural condition? I guess that depends on how you look at it!

Reply to  Tim Gorman
July 24, 2022 7:58 pm

It also depends on the ground contact of the tires to spread the load.
Old small tractors with narrow wheels cause more ground conpaction than some larger tractors with wider radial tires that spread the larger weight across a bigger footprint.

Old Cocky
Reply to  Martin
July 24, 2022 8:24 pm

You beat me to it.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Martin
July 25, 2022 7:49 am

Old, small tractors with narrow wheels also can’t pull as big of a load meaning smaller implements must be used. Smaller implements mean more trips up and down the field leading to more compaction.

Old Cocky
Reply to  Tim Gorman
July 24, 2022 8:01 pm

As far as I know, the ground pressure of the tyres is similar for small and large tractors, and is optimised for traction. Four wheel drive used to predominate over about 150 horsepower, with a lot of rubber tracked tractors in the market in recent decades. These are claimed to have lower ground pressures than wheeled tractors to reduce compaction.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Old Cocky
July 25, 2022 7:52 am

Narrow tires on smaller tractors mean less traction and also mean more trips up and down the field leading to more compaction of the soil. Wider wheels on smaller tractors lead to horsepower problems and ground speed reduction, i.e. less productivity.

Bottom line? Developments of the past 50 years have led to lower impact on the earth, higher productivity, and — more food!

Old Cocky
Reply to  Tim Gorman
July 25, 2022 1:50 pm

We were cereal/pulse growers, so never used the narrow-tyred rowcrop tractors.
I’m not sure I agree about wider tyres leading to horsepower problems – it seems to be more a matter that wider tyres can transmit more power than the tractor has available to pull the implement in the soil conditions.

Apart from the higher horsepower 4wd and tracked tractors allowing wider implements, the wider implements require a different approach. Older narrower implements were left engaged while you drove in ever diminishing rectangles, but wider implements need to be lifted out of the ground at the end of the (rather long) row. The current approach seems to be to run up and back along the same track, so limiting compaction to the same sections, probably with GPS auto-assist.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Old Cocky
July 25, 2022 3:52 pm

I’m not sure I agree about wider tyres leading to horsepower problems – it seems to be more a matter that wider tyres can transmit more power than the tractor has available to pull the implement in the soil conditions.”

I think we are saying the same thing. If you put on wider tires (or go to duals) it is normally to handle larger implements. The only way to do that with a smaller tractor is to go down a gear to get more drawbar horsepower. If that lower gear costs you more time than you gain with the larger implement then you have run into a horsepower problem. The answer is a larger tractor with more horsepower (or turn up the diesel pump, add a turbine and inner-cooler, etc).

The current approach seems to be to run up and back along the same track, so limiting compaction to the same sections, probably with GPS auto-assist.”

Those same sections will still be wider than with a smaller tractor with narrow wheels so less ground gets compacted.

It’s nice to hear from someone that has actual experience!

Old Cocky
Reply to  Tim Gorman
July 25, 2022 5:06 pm

The actual experience was some time back, Tim, but I appreciate the sentiment.

I quite agree about the wider tyres now you’ve expanded on your point. There is also a limit to what can be handled by a 2wd tractor, even with duals and weights/water. Front wheel assist seems to help in the intermediate range (100-150 hp) and has crept down to lower powers, possibly for wet conditions.

I also agree about the reduced overall compaction with wider equipment. I think tramlining is more oriented towards chemical knockdown, but the same approach of following the same wheel tracks seems to be widely utilised for cultivation now as well.

Just on the nostalgia kick, I seemed to wind up on the Oliver Super 99 (Waukesha engine, not GM) in school holidays, or a Case 930 on a good day. Later on, we moved up to a second-hand crab steering Case 2670 and then a Steiger (I think a Bearcat II). Farmers never let anything go to waste, so we still used the IH 10/20 (on rubber, but we had the original steels) and AW6 for light work such as mowing hay or driving the auger on the field bin.

That was quite a progression in machinery over the 60 year span of those machines.

Old Cocky
Reply to  Old Cocky
July 25, 2022 5:31 pm

Oh, how could I forget the Cletrac/Oliver BDH crawlers? Acquiring a very used D8 was a revelation.

Reply to  Rocketscientist
July 24, 2022 8:26 am

Again, RS, you perhaps don’t know that we get little snow in the southern UK.

Reply to  Peta of Newark
July 24, 2022 5:12 am

Peta claims: “Maize is NOT = Food” HUH????? Maize is corn.
Maize, also known as corn, is a cereal grain first domesticated by indigenous peoples in southern Mexico about 10,000 years ago. The leafy stalk of the plant produces pollen inflorescences and separate ovuliferous inflorescences called ears that when fertilized yield kernels or seeds, which are fruits. Maize has become a staple food in many parts of the world, with the total production of maize surpassing that of wheat or rice….”

How wrong can you be?

Reply to  CoRev
July 24, 2022 5:51 am

Cheap tortillas can seem a bit like cardboard…

Reply to  Peta of Newark
July 24, 2022 6:24 am

Native Americans have been eating maize, for thousands of years. For many (most?) it’s the staple of their diet.

Andy Pattullo
Reply to  Peta of Newark
July 24, 2022 8:15 am

You seem to live in a fact free fantasy world from your comments. You have drawn conclusions from emotion and preconception not evidence.

Reply to  Peta of Newark
July 24, 2022 8:23 am


Do we take it you’re talking Glyphosate?

You say “lie number 1”, but you don’t give the degradation pathway, so we don’t know (at least I don’t) what it breaks down to.

In the UK at least, you’ll be bloody lucky to have the sun shining at all.

It has found the herbicide is safe for people, animals and the environment.”

Well, that seems fairly conclusive!

It doesn’t matter whether it’s patented or not, are they antibiotics?

Maize, of course, is a staple food for millions of people not in the UK.

And, for those not familiar with your history, like Rocket Scientist below, we should point out that you have several years of experience in farming.

Reply to  Disputin
July 24, 2022 12:49 pm

When paraquat was invented in the 1960s the degradation pathway was investigated all the way to CO2 and ammonia.
I don’t know whether similar work has been done on glyphosate.
A return to 19th century farming systems would involve much more cultivation of the soil, reduced area of cereals in order to include nitrogen fixing crops into the rotation and more cultivation to control weeds. (Who is volunteering to go out in all weathers with a hoe?)
In Sri Lanka crop yields fell by 50% in the short time their government banned modern farming methods.
What would the effect on US farming output be if a similar law was introduced?
In the UK I know from personal experience that cereal yields drop by 50%.

Nick Graves
Reply to  StephenP
July 25, 2022 1:00 am

In Peta’s defence, Stephanie Seneff has published various articles suggesting that glyphosate build-up in humans may be responsible for many ‘modern diseases’. So it’s not any alleged harm to the agricultural environment, per se.

The blue corn that the Aztecs ate was far lower in fructose than the modern yellow stuff – some believe that it’s the High Fructose Corn Syrup that’s added to everything processed that is dangerous (non-alcoholic fatty liver disease etc…) and causes obesity, especially as we don’t need to work as hard as the Aztecs did to grow food.

And in the UK, maize is the smaller, animal-feed variety and the human stuff we call ‘sweetcorn’ – clue to the problem’s in the name!

July 24, 2022 4:26 am

Banning Modern Agriculture and High Crop Yields?

Sri Lanka did it

Curious George
Reply to  fretslider
July 24, 2022 8:28 am

Let’s follow today, not tomorrow. Long live Joe Biden.

Tom Halla
July 24, 2022 4:49 am

I will remind everyone that organic farming is just renamed biodynamic agriculture, which arose from the same sort of Grenzwirtschaft as Ariosophy, the foundation of the NSDAP.
Heinrich Himmler was a great advocate for biodynamic farming. And one must also remember Nazi Germany was notorious for food shortages.

Reply to  Tom Halla
July 24, 2022 6:04 am

Britain didn’t do much better. Powdered egg….

July 24, 2022 6:11 am

Atrazine as I understand it is highly estrogenic. This creates reproduction issues for aquatic animals and more soy boys. I’m not sure what the ppb should be, but it’s not something to ignore. We should not be growing crops for fuel, that’s the low hanging fruit. We should also move some of these massive mono crop systems to prairie and raise more herbivores. It’s weird we throw 1000s of cattle into a CAFO and feed them corn when the naturally walk around on prairies and eat. That would be best for the eco system and human health because that corn and soy is basically processed food. Spot spraying with AI, will also be huge advancement in the future than just nuking a field.

Reply to  Adam
July 24, 2022 6:28 am

No one is proposing no regulations on atrazine. Farmers are already doing their best to do spot treatments, not just atrazine but fertilizers as well. All farm chemicals cost money and farmers, like everyone else, don’t want to spend any money they don’t have to.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Adam
July 24, 2022 9:19 am

It’s weird we throw 1000s of cattle into a CAFO and feed them corn when the naturally walk around on prairies and eat. “

The cattle industry is a highly competitive business where it is necessary to cut costs to the minimum. While those cattle are out on the prairie (where you want to put the mono crop systems btw) walking around, how much weight are they losing from the exercise?

The Great Plains (i..e. the prairie) already have large mono crop systems, wheat, corn, soybeans primarily but some sunflowers and even cotton (although these are not widespread).

Janice Moore
Reply to  Adam
July 24, 2022 2:02 pm

We should not be growing crops for fuel

You got that right.

July 24, 2022 7:41 am

Anyone else imagine that Lysenko never actually died, he’s living on and spreading like Dracula…

Old Man Winter
July 24, 2022 8:36 am

Before chemical weed control, the ideal field had no residual trash on the surface, which prevents
soil erosion. The Mississippi Delta in the Gulf of Mexico is a result of that. Plowing also used a lot
more fuel vs using chisel plows or better yet, using reduced/minimum till practices that now are
viable with chemicals. The only alternative to chemicals is a lot of cultivation & burning the weeds
in row crops which also uses a lot more fuel & manpower to do, as well as wear & tear on
equipment. You don’t get something for nothing!

Atrazine does leave residuals in the soil for three yrs as we could only use 1/3 strength on fields
where we planted grain vs full strength where we went continuous corn. It was really good on hard-
to-kill thistles, especially @ full strength. On grain, we used 2-4D which also killed thistles well.

Since the advent of Roundup, I’ve noticed there are less grass strips in hillside ravines where they
should be as these areas are eroding as Roundup kills everything green that isn’t modified to
resist it. Again, you don’t get something for nothing!

Beside responsible chemical usage, they’re also using vertical till to better incorporate crop
residue into the soil for “healthier” soils. Cover crops prevent soil erosion in the off-season as well
as provide grazing areas & store fertilizer so it can’t leach or get washed away. Farmers are always trying to find better ways to farm.

Good farmers are independent businessmen who are used to having to think for themselves & solve
their own problems. They’ve always been long-term thinkers as they know very well what they do
today can bite them in the backside tomorrow. Spring planting is a long time from summer & fall
harvests with a lot of work & unforeseen events in between. Land & animals are treated like bank
accounts- you need to make deposits beforehand if you plan to make withdrawals later. For some
reason, they don’t get the respect they deserve as they continually succeed in improving
productivity & efficiency while not shooting themselves in the foot along the way. By the time they
finish high school or vo-tech, their knowledge base is many times more than the supposed
“eco experts” who have little to say but say it anyway!

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Old Man Winter
July 24, 2022 10:36 am

Bravo! Glass-house experts with no dirt under their fingernails aren’t the true “experts”.

Jim Gorman
Reply to  Old Man Winter
July 25, 2022 5:30 am

Yep, I just love talking to city born and bred folks who think they know just how farming should be done. They’ve never slopped hogs, dehorned or castrated hogs or cattle, never made a decision about building farm storage or selling immediately. These folks never buy the expensive “organic” stuff because it is too expensive but think that is all that should be raised. They’ve never killed, cleaned, and processed any animal. If the world goes to s**t, these are the folks who will go first thankfully.

Reply to  Jim Gorman
July 25, 2022 6:39 pm

Just to nitpick… better you should change your sentence a bit… I’ll be a monkey’s uncle before I attempt to dehorn a hog…

July 24, 2022 10:16 am

Getting rid of farming here in West Texas would certainly lower the wildlife population , no more irrigation tanks , no more stock tanks / ponds , no water = no wildlife .

July 24, 2022 10:35 am

As for infant formula: Biden didn’t cause one factory to be responsible for so large a percentage of the infant formula supply that its shutdown would cause so much trouble, and Biden didn’t cause that factory to have unsanitary conditions (noted to have existed as far back as in 2019) that the FDA shut down that factory for. And why did the manufacturer take so long to clean their factory?

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Donald L. Klipstein
July 24, 2022 2:57 pm

Why didn’t the government do something besides just letting it go till it got so bad they had to shut it down. Government is supposed to be a *partner* in thigs it regulates.

Matthew Schilling
Reply to  Donald L. Klipstein
July 25, 2022 8:27 am

So you don’t think (at least a portion of) the delay in reopening wasn’t already planned on the day it was shut down? Hmmm.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Matthew Schilling
July 25, 2022 9:39 am

They couldn’t reopen until the FDA let them!

Reply to  Donald L. Klipstein
July 25, 2022 9:30 am

40% of US production shut down by bureaucrats with no plan to provide that output some other way?

Shutdown due to the actions of a “whistleblower”, not any actual harm to those who purchased and used the products?

Did this company just fail to donate to the Democrat machine?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Bill Parsons
July 24, 2022 12:26 pm

RE: Atrazine is used on 65 million acres of corn, sorghum and sugarcane. That’s equivalent to Colorado or Oregon, on croplands scattered across a dozen Midwestern states.

Should this read:

Atrazine is used on 65 million acres of corn, sorghum and sugarcane. That’s equivalent to (the land under cultivation in) Colorado or Oregon, on croplands scattered across a dozen Midwestern states. (?)

Janice Moore
Reply to  Bill Parsons
July 24, 2022 2:13 pm

Oregon (land only) is about 96,184 square miles. Divided by .0015625 acres/square mile = about 62 million total acres in Oregon.

Matthew Schilling
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 25, 2022 8:30 am

I guess there are two kinds of people in this world: Those that multiply by 640 vs. those that divide by 0.0015625. Personally, I’m in the “multiply by 640” camp.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Matthew Schilling
July 25, 2022 9:48 am

Well… it helps me to set up the math to use label cancelation (like one does to do chemistry equations)….

Thanks for the gentle reminder to be more straightforward.

Matthew Schilling
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 26, 2022 7:43 am

(But it’s 640 acres/square mile. That would’ve canceled square mile, leaving acres)

Janice Moore
Reply to  Matthew Schilling
July 27, 2022 10:21 am

I didn’t have that number, Mr. Schilling. I guess I should have said:

Thank you for the firm reminder to be better at my research of how many acres per square mile. I just used the first figure I found. No, obviously, I never memorized the 640 figure. Thanks for your perseverance in instructing me.

Old Man Winter
Reply to  Matthew Schilling
July 25, 2022 10:40 am

Guesstimate- X 1,000, then X 2/3 => close enough- ±10% (4% too high)

Matthew Schilling
Reply to  Old Man Winter
July 26, 2022 7:40 am


I bet lots of us guesstimate the sales totals in stores or while listening to a sales pitch, etc. As long as the estimate is in the ballpark, We’ll recognize an amount that’s way too high or too low.

(I went to the counter of an ice cream stand recently, to place some family orders. Had a total cost estimate in my head. Teen behind counter mentioned an amount that seemed too low. It turns out, she had misheard one of the items ordered. I literally avoided a crisis back at the car! Ironically, I think a little one in the backseat might’ve had a meltdown if I had come back with the wrong ice cream order…)

July 24, 2022 2:21 pm

Yesterday the world went Dutch and the media ignored it

Janice Moore
Reply to  Phil Salmon
July 24, 2022 3:16 pm

WOW. Thank you for sharing that, Mr. Salmon. Very cool.

Btw: I still have not seen ANY, but one (David Dibble’s), of the non-winning WUWT Essay Contest entries published on WUWT. Have you?

Q: Why would Anthony say this on March 4, 2022:

In addition to the two winning essays in each category posted here, I will publish ALL of the essays over the coming weeks. We don’t want the hard work of our contestants to go unnoticed and un-appreciated.”

(Here: )

and not do it?

I don’t know about you, Mr. Salmon, but I am feeling “unnoticed and unappreciated.” 😟

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 27, 2022 10:24 am

To: Whomever was kind enough to give me a +1 for my angst-filled query.


It was hard to not have ANYONE care at all about us essay entrants. There must be several who are wondering “why?” (Mr. Salmon and I can’t be the only non-winning entrants besides Mr. Dibble??).

Philip CM
July 24, 2022 2:29 pm

By kowtowing, the political class (cowards) are killing the planet.

July 24, 2022 9:33 pm

The EPA is a lawless agency. If the Republicans had any guts, at the first opportunity they would eliminate it along with other hopelessly corrupted and/or unnecessary and harmful federal agencies like the FBI, Department of Education, Department of Energy, Department of Agriculture, CFPB, etc. etc. And of course also go after government funding of leftist scum like Planned Parenthood, NPR, PBS, etc. I wonder sometimes if they will ever wake up and realize that all of these are the enemies of patriotic Americans and they need to be totally destroyed, not just “reformed.”

Reply to  Independent
July 25, 2022 10:08 am

2nd action of a TRUMP! 2nd administration, after the wholesale nomination and confirmation of ALL appointive federal positions in a single vote of the Senate should be a reconciliation bill, allowed under Senate rules for budgetary purposes, which would eliminate the IRS and replace it with the Fair Tax AND eliminate almost every department that is justified by the “Commerce Clause” that really has nothing to do with commerce.

Ex. ATF, FBI, DOEnergy, EPA, HUD, DOEducation, DOA, DOL, DOT, DOVA, DHS. Departments like the DOEnergy, DOT and D of Veteran’s Affairs, DHS to have actual constitutional duties located is valid departments.

Education to disperse all funds currently allocated to the bureaucracy and pass through to states directly and equally to only US citizens and LEGAL resident alien children to be used for home schooling, payment to ANY private school or to a government run school, as the PARENT so desires.

Other departments that currently pass funds through to states to eliminate all of their bureaucracy and the first year pass through 80% of the funds equally to states based on the number of citizens and legal alien residents ONLY, nothing for illegals, requiring a NEW census to establish actual LEGAL populations in each state.

Notify states that upon the completion of the new census, the number of representatives shall be reapportioned accordingly.

Create a NEW DOJ to build from scratch so that all the leftists now running and employed in that department are out of a job. The first act of the NEW Attorney General to be to prosecute under the equal protection clause all the leftists who took part in the Russia hoax and Jan 6 show trials and prosecutions while doing nothing to all those who destroyed Federal property across the US and assaulted American citizens during the leftist 2020 riots.
The second act to sue all organizations that use race as a factor in hiring and enrollment and all those who teach or preach racist and sexist ideologies in any form especially in schools that accept Federal or Student loan funds.

End government subsidies and insurance programs such as the FDIC, Freddy Mack, Sally Mae, Student loans, and the Federal Reserve which would return all LOAN debt to the US Treasury and put a crap load more worthless overhead people out of jobs.. Remove all direct federal spending for the Post Office, and therefore the power of a President to force the Post Office to buy electric vehicles.

July 26, 2022 1:47 pm

Well, some crops would continue to be favored with the right lobbying effort…

High-Strength Cannabis Linked to Addiction and Mental Health Problems – Neuroscience News

July 26, 2022 2:09 pm

No-till v. conventional results, a stark contrast. In event you are not familiar with no-till, here are results from edge-of-field monitoring. Employing no-till agriculture is hugely beneficial in saving dollars, fuel, effort and soil. Results show that returning to conventional agriculture will in time destroy farmland, eventually the practice of agriculture and with it end a supply of food. The results are clear: Conventional agriculture practice contributes to run-off loss of 20% of rainfall and similar percentage loss of fertilizer while losses with no-till agriculture losses are near zero, a stark contrast. Writer has extensive experience with conventional tillage but slowing moving to no-till, on account of required expenditure in new equipment.
Monitoring results of (1) conventional tillage on 26 acres (plowing and numerous tillage passes required to control weeds) versus (2) no-till agriculture (roundup to control weeds) without need of tillage on 21 no-till acres. Test period of 11 months in Spokane County WA by County Conservation District with rainfall 11.8 inches or 8.4 million gallons:
(1) Conventional tillage: runoff loss, 1.7 million gallons (20% of rainfall), soil loss 2620 lbs (includes loss of orthophosphate and nitrate fertilizer).
(2) No-till: runoff loss, 20 gallons, soil loss 17 lbs, fertilizer loss not measurable.

July 29, 2022 4:20 am

These attacks on agricultural output are happening globally. It looks like they are intentionally creating a global famine. They being “WEF”. And most people who read this, either won’t believe it, or imagine it won’t affect them, so won’t do anything about it. Until it’s happening, the harvest is coming in, and there just isn’t enough food. And, then people will say “why didn’t anyone tell us”?

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights