# Pyrethroids Under EPA Attack.



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

From DTN.

Regards, Mike

https://www.dtnpf.com/agriculture/web/ag/news/article/2017/02/09/epa-review-pyrethroids-public


----------



## rjmoses (Apr 4, 2010)

It is the EPA's job to ban everything. Pyrethroids and Permetherins have become mostly useless for fly control. Due to the limited sales here of insecticides for alfalfa, Permetherins are about the only thing I can buy locally on an emergency basis---and it doesn't work worth a damn.

I've sprayed both directly on flies and it looked like they thanked me.

Ralph


----------



## stack em up (Mar 7, 2013)

Permethrin was the active ingredient I was trying to think of yesterday. Thanks Ralph! And thanks Mike, for that reminder of why we need to beat the EPA at their own game. I just don't know how.


----------



## RuttedField (Apr 24, 2016)

Oh I do.

There is 99-1/2% of this country eating what we farmers produce. Therefore if we just stop producing for just one day, one week...saying its too troublesome to farm with the regulations that exist, we will get some attention.

By the way government statistics say farmers are 2% of the population, but they were afraid if the general population saw that, they would be fearful, so the include truck drivers, waitresses, waiters, chefs and fast food workers in that 2%. It really is only 1 out of 200 Americans who are farmers.


----------



## FarmerCline (Oct 12, 2011)

I heard they were trying to ban lorsban as well as pyrethroids.....without those insecticides you can just about forget about growing alfalfa here. It's already bad enough that there isn't an insecticide left on the market that will control insects in the soil like the white fringed beetle grubs I'm dealing with that are decimating my alfalfa stands.


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

Might have to buy some up, damn army worms will eat every bit of profit....ain't much to start with


----------



## endrow (Dec 15, 2011)

Lot of pyrethroids pounce or ambush that was mixed with burn down on cover crop. Took some discipline but many guys would spray burn down when armyworm where in the moth stage. I thought I'm a little pyrethroids would smoke them would smoke them. I'm not surprised when I bought Ambush last spring they told me buy what you need the pretty much stopped production on this insecticide because there's rumors it's going away


----------



## 2ndWindfarm (Nov 11, 2014)

OK, I'm not at all familiar with army worms or white fringed beetle grubs or even Lorsban.

But, I read the article and the concerns or problem areas that the EPA were beginning to review (phase out wouldn't really occur until 2019 or later given the political headwinds) was "insect resistance" and damage to "aquatic" insects ('course if the insecticide is in the water... What does that say about application rates and/or practical usage?)

So... is this a situation were the insecticide was overused? Now the bugs have developed an immunity? And the stuff is beginning to run-off treated fields, etc to the extent that it's having an impact on waterways?

FYI - I've had my applicator's license 7 years now, after discovering that I had been breaking the law for 3 years spraying rented ground without a license. So, I'm not a "No-GMO" anti-technology greenie.

But.... I do pay attention and try to listen to folk's that are not financially tied to either the chemical-seed industry or have "skin in the game" through active farming.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

2ndWindfarm said:


> But.... I do pay attention and try to listen to folk's that are not financially tied to either the chemical-seed industry or have "skin in the game" through active farming.


Like the liberal left leaning, sky is falling, bought and paid science EPA?

Regards, Mike


----------



## 2ndWindfarm (Nov 11, 2014)

Vol said:


> Like the liberal left leaning, sky is falling, bought and paid science EPA?
> 
> Regards, Mike


That's a little bit too far out on the "alt-right" to be a credible concern - IMO. If the discussion is between the "facts" as presented by the EPA versus Monsanto or Dow; I would be considerably more skeptical of the " facts" as Monsanto or Dow frames the issue versus the EPA.

I am old enough Mike to remember using DDT and Aldrin and Dieldrin for grasshopper control. There were a number of years that critters of every dimension were dying.

Respectfully,


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

2ndWindfarm said:


> I am old enough Mike to remember using DDT and Aldrin and Dieldrin for grasshopper control. There were a number of years that critters of every dimension were dying.
> 
> Respectfully,


I too am old enough to remember DDT very vividly, and even the mention of DDT in the same conversation of Pyrethroids is a strong indication of liberal over-reaction. The EPA is still a bought science bunch that had the intention of putting small farmers out of business so that they would have fewer battles to fight.....and that probably would have happened if the witch would have been elected potus. I shudder at the thought of having been under lying liberal control for another four years. Science meant nothing coming from the past O administration controlled EPA. Hopefully, this will turn around very soon.

Regards, Mike


----------



## 2ndWindfarm (Nov 11, 2014)

Vol said:


> I too am old enough to remember DDT very vividly, and even the mention of DDT in the same conversation of Pyrethroids is a strong indication of liberal over-reaction. The EPA is still a bought science bunch that had the intention of putting small farmers out of business so that they would have fewer battles to fight.....and that probably would have happened if the witch would have been elected potus. I shudder at the thought of having been under lying liberal control for another four years. Science meant nothing coming from the past O administration controlled EPA. Hopefully, this will turn around very soon.
> 
> Regards, Mike


I am not at all convinced it is I who is "over-reacting".

I am neither advocating for or against the use of Pyrethroids. I am however, calling into question the knee-jerk reaction to the article regarding the EPA's inquiry into insect resistance and aquatic affects.

And of course, the blanket condemnation of the scientists at EPA who have some alleged, nefarious plot to..... (Fill in the blank).

Respectfully,


----------



## carcajou (Jan 28, 2011)

FarmerCline said:


> I heard they were trying to ban lorsban as well as pyrethroids.....without those insecticides you can just about forget about growing alfalfa here. It's already bad enough that there isn't an insecticide left on the market that will control insects in the soil like the white fringed beetle grubs I'm dealing with that are decimating my alfalfa stands.


I'm surprised Lorsban is still available. They took Furadan away here in Canada and IMO Lorsban is worse.


----------



## FarmerCline (Oct 12, 2011)

carcajou said:


> I'm surprised Lorsban is still available. They took Furadan away here in Canada and IMO Lorsban is worse.


 I haven't personally used Lorsban yet but if it doesn't get taken off the market I will be using it this year since it is the best option I have to try and get these white fringed beetles under control.....and unfortunately Lorsban will only kill the emerged adults and there isn't anything to kill the grubs that are feeding on the roots. Furadan is off the market here as well and I never used it either.....I have heard a lot of horror stories about Furadan. What makes Lorsban worse in your opinion?


----------



## stack em up (Mar 7, 2013)

Lorsban works extremely well here for spider mites in soybeans. Furadan is some nasty $h!t. I sprayed it a few years ago in soybeans and had the runs for almost a week afterwards. Lorsban is considered "safer" than furadan, as is my all time favorite insecticide, Warrior.


----------



## carcajou (Jan 28, 2011)

FarmerCline said:


> I haven't personally used Lorsban yet but if it doesn't get taken off the market I will be using it this year since it is the best option I have to try and get these white fringed beetles under control.....and unfortunately Lorsban will only kill the emerged adults and there isn't anything to kill the grubs that are feeding on the roots. Furadan is off the market here as well and I never used it either.....I have heard a lot of horror stories about Furadan. What makes Lorsban worse in your opinion?


The high rates are hard on beneficial insects in the soil and the vapours from Lorsban were hard on me. Never did find a respirator canister that eliminated all the side effects. As an applicator we were tested every year for chemical buildup in ourselves and after it tested positive 2 years in a row i quit using it.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

Thanks Ralph.

Regards, Mike


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

2ndWindfarm said:


> That's a little bit too far out on the "alt-right" to be a credible concern - IMO. If the discussion is between the "facts" as presented by the EPA versus Monsanto or Dow; I would be considerably more skeptical of the " facts" as Monsanto or Dow frames the issue versus the EPA.
> 
> I am old enough Mike to remember using DDT and Aldrin and Dieldrin for grasshopper control. There were a number of years that critters of every dimension were dying.
> 
> Respectfully,


You know, I have to somewhat agree. DuPont (now merged with Dow and heavy into agriculture themselves) lied to the public about PFOA's. Monsanto no stranger to controversy, either.

The EPA is far from perfect, but DuPont knew PFOA's were going to cause cancer. Now virtually every living organism has PFOA's in it.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

2ndWindfarm said:


> I am not at all convinced it is I who is "over-reacting".
> 
> I am neither advocating for or against the use of Pyrethroids. I am however, calling into question the knee-jerk reaction to the article regarding the EPA's inquiry into insect resistance and aquatic affects.
> 
> ...


Some probably do. All these once well-intentioned agencies have become to some extent, politicized. It isn't hard to imagine one of the minions of a presidential cabinet making a phone call to a "friend" at the EPA, looking for a "favor". In fact, I think it's done every day. Afterall, these agencies are run by presidential appointees.

And some are probably very honest researchers and scientists just trying to protect the public.


----------



## 2ndWindfarm (Nov 11, 2014)

JD3430 said:


> Some probably do. All these once well-intentioned agencies have become to some extent, politicized. It isn't hard to imagine one of the minions of a presidential cabinet making a phone call to a "friend" at the EPA, looking for a "favor". In fact, I think it's done every day. Afterall, these agencies are run by presidential appointees.
> 
> And some are probably very honest researchers and scientists just trying to protect the public.


In nearly every public agency that has regulatory oversight of industry and employs research scientists to review (and test) the products /practices of that industry; there is a clear demarcation between those researchers and management/administration.

The managers - administrators are nearly always "political hacks". Appointed by one administration or another.

Those are the folk's with an agenda. Unfortunately, they are also the people that can (and do) bury the truth or slant the results to fit whatever the "current" agenda might be.

So, yes the EPA is not perfect. But, the researchers can ( and do) find ways for the public to recognize the shenanigans that are taking place and ultimately what the truth is.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

2ndWindfarm said:


> So, yes the EPA is not perfect. But, the researchers can ( and do) find ways for the public to recognize the shenanigans that are taking place and ultimately what the truth is.


http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2013/12/04/epas-new-overseer-of-scientific-integrity-the-blind-leading-the-blind/#43460dea48f0

http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2016/03/09/epa-remains-a-paragon-of-government-waste-fraud-and-abuse/#631b94cf5c89


----------



## carcajou (Jan 28, 2011)

Forbes doesn't like adblock plus. Cool don't need forbes anyway


----------



## 2ndWindfarm (Nov 11, 2014)

Heritage Foundation doesn't like Clean Air Act...foregone conclusion.

I was involved with data collection/sampling of pacific salmonids for tissue analysis to determine the extent of mercury contamination in Alaskan wild salmon. Prior to the 1960's the presence of mercury in Alaskan salmon was extremely low; at the threshold of detectibility.

With China's expansion of coal-fired power generation - the concentration of mercury elevated along with that increased coal burning. Across the globe, much of the world's mercury pollution can be traced directly to coal-fired power plants.

A million dollars a year for 5 years to overhaul the agencies web-page and try to better understand why the public has a poor opinion of the agency? Well.. That and a buck will get you a cup of coffee. Serious malfeasance there...

I have a cautious embrace of nuclear energy. Away from the coast and not located on top of major fault lines!

And I am a strong supporter of genetic engineering...with caveats. I, like the World Health Organization, strongly suspect that Roundup is a carcinogen. Developing plant varieties with the sole advantage of utilizing copious amounts of synthetic herbicides in order to increase yields is a small, (but greedy) advantage to genetic engineering.

Let's see some REALLY drought tolerant crops! And some corn and soybean varities that have increased sugars and oil content that jump bio-fuel efficiencies another 100%!

I also noted that Mr. Miller is very adept at leveling vague, broad brush charges without naming specifics. All those grants and awards to; among others - anti-science... (fill in the blank). Shame, shame... He, of all people should know that's a sure-fire way for "data-centric" people to switch the channel.


----------

