Page 95 - Spring2020

Dicamba simply doesn’t stay put, no matter how it’s applied. Farm- humanity is unscientific. It ignores all the data
ers have known this for years. And although the EPA has imposed label we have from the real-world experiments over
restrictions (such as limits on how and when dicamba can be applied), the last fifty years. The high-tech approach to
the complaints of off-target damage have only increased as more acres agriculture has created multiple serious crises:
are planted in GMO dicamba-resistant crops. No label restrictions will
change the tendency of dicamba products to volatilize (change from a loss of topsoil, contamination of water supplies,
liquid to a gas) and travel long distances, nor how toxic they are to native nutrient-deficient foods that have contributed to
and domestic vegetation, even in very low concentrations. an epidemic of chronic disease, and corporate
And the evidence presented at the trial showed that Bayer and BASF control of a fundamental human need. The
not only knew that fact but banked on it. The companies predicted that idea that the next technological breakthrough
dicamba drift would cause losses and planned that as a marketing tool, will somehow be different isn’t logical or data-
using it to sell their genetically-modified seeds to farmers as a “defensive”
measure. driven. Rather, it’s fueled by the interests of
So, farmers who don’t use the Xtend system suffer damages to their large companies that want to amass profits at
crops, while Bayer and BASF make even more profits thanks to the the expense of everyone else.
farmers who switch to buying their GMO seeds to protect themselves. Lawsuits like Bader’s are part of the process
It’s reminiscent of the old gang protection rackets. of cracking the veneer of corporate “solutions.”
Bader’s lawyers recommended that the jury award punitive damages The suit would probably never have happened
of two hundred million dollars, equal to 2.5 percent of Bayer’s net worth, but for the activism of nonprofits and individu-
to deter the corporation from continued behavior that hurts farmers while
they collect profits. This comes on the heels of juries awarding over two als fighting the approval of the genetically en-
billion dollars in damages to plaintiffs in several lawsuits over another gineered dicamba-resistant crops. And in turn,
harmful Bayer product—glyphosate. the jury finding in Bader’s case can help fuel
There are about thirty-five more cases filed against the company by further grassroots efforts to fight back against
farmers in Illinois, Arkansas, Missouri and other states. Bader Farms’ GMOs, educating both farmers and consumers
victory in this case opens opportunities for more farmers to hold Bayer as to the importance of protecting non-GMO
and BASF legally accountable for the dicamba drift crisis that these
companies created in their push for profits. crops and food sources.
Which brings me full circle to the first topic in this article: high- To quote Martin Luther King, Jr., “The arc
tech farming systems. Technology is a wonderful tool, useful for many, of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward
many things. But relying on it to be the answer to how to provide food for justice.”

ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT WAPF
Presentation by Bern, Switzerland, chapter leader Judith Mudrak (center) in February in Berrysburg, Pennsylvania. Mike
Mudrak staffed a WAPF table. The event was organized by Answers Pet Food and attended by about forty farmers. Both
Answers Pet Food representatives and the farmers attending were thrilled with the WAPF materials.

SPRING 2020 Wise Traditions 95