Pesticide Committee Meeting July 25, 2016

Transcription

1 Pesticide Committee Meeting July, 01 Speaker Key: LJ RL ME GH JT GR RV KB TF JY TW TB BS FB JZ AK RN RH BN SS Otis Howe Larry Jayroe Robert Campbell Marty Eaton Greg Hay Jammy Turner Grace Ellen Rice Dennie Stokes Danny Finch Rick Cartwright. Ray Vester Kyle Baltz Susie Nichols Terry Fuller Jerry Hyde Terry Walker Jason Norsworthy Tom Barber Bob Scott Ford Baldwin John Shultz Johnathan Siebert Alisha Kemp Robert Coon Rachel Hurly Boyd Carey Ben Noble Steven Steed Page 1 of 1

2 TA AG LW KS JL MT ET GT WW PS CW MS JY WJ DJ UN LP KM RM CM JA EC CY PS SB BR LG DM JR MM MH Tommy Anderson Andrew Grobmeyer Lauren Waldrip Keith Stokes John Tull Mike Thompson Elvira Thompson George Tidwell Wes Ward Pam Smith Cammy Willet Mike Stage Jacob Ray William Johnson Don Johnson Unknown Lawson Priess Kevin Mount Robert Maury Courtney Massey Justin Allen Earlene Cody Clay Starkey Ples Spradley Scott Bray Brandi Reynolds Leigh Gibson Dana McGinty Jason Robertson Marci Manley Mary Smith Page of 1

3 BL CS LJ ME GH JT GR 00:00: RV KB LS TF Brandy Carroll Craig Sandoski It's nine o'clock and I'm going to call this meeting to order. This is a meeting of the Pesticide Committee of the Arkansas State Plant Board. To begin the meeting I'd like for the committee members to please introduce themselves and I'll start on my left. I'm Larry Jayroe, I'm from Forest city of Arkansas, I represent fertilizer in Orville. Rob Campbell, Witts Springs Arkansas, cattle producer and an egg producer. Marty Eaton, Jonesboro Arkansas, representing Arkansas Seed Dealers Association. Greg Hay, Conway Arkansas, representing the Arkansas Forestry Association. Jammy Turner, Gillet Arkansas, representing farmers in South East Arkansas. I'm Grace Ellen Rice with the attorney general's office not a member of the committee. Dennie. Dennie Stokes, Earle Arkansas, representing Arkansas Agriculture Aviation Association. Danny Finch, Jonesboro, representing the cotton farmers. Rick Cartwright UA division of agriculture in the Department of Entomology. Ray Vester, Stuttgart, representing rice farmers. Go ahead and introduce yourself while you're walking. I'm sorry about this, Kyle Baltz representing farmers of Pocahontas. Right on time Kyle. I'm Otis Howe from Little Rock and I represent the Arkansas Crop Protection Association. Susie do we have anybody on the phone. No, we do not. We've got two other board members that are just here to be here, so I'll let these two folks at the table introduce themselves Terry. I'm Terry Fuller, I represent the Arkansas Seed Growers Association on the board and I'm a concerned citizen today. Page of 1

4 00:01: JH TW I'm Jerry Hyde, I'm from Paragould, I represent the Arkansas Pest Management Association. We'll start around room with Terry. Terry Walker, Plant Board. Jason Norsworthy, Weed Scientist University of Arkansas. TB Tom Barber, Weed Scientist University of Arkansas BS FB JZ AK RN RH 00:0: BN SS TA AG LW KS JT MT ET GT WW PS CW MS Bob Scott, Weed Scientist University of Arkansas. Ford Baldwin, Weed Scientist Practical Weed Consultant. John Shultz, BASF. Johnathan Siebert Dow AgroSciences. Alisha Kemp Dow AgroSciences. Robert Coon, Impact Management, representing Dow. Rachel Hurly, Monsanto. I'm Boyd Carey, Monsanto. Ben Nobel of Nobel Strategies, our firm represents a number of ag [?] clients. I'm here to help out Monsanto. Steven Steed Democrat-Gazette. Tommy Anderson, Arkansas Agricultural Aviation Association. Andrew Grobmeyer, with the Agricultural Council of Arkansas. Morning, Lauren Waldrip [?], Arkansas rights. Stokes and a cotton farmer. John Tull, farmer. Mike Thompson, concerned citizen Elvira Thompson, concerned citizen. George Tidwell, concerned citizen. Wes Ward, Arkansas Agriculture. Pam Smith, DTN Progressive Farming Magazine. Cammy Willet, University of Arkansas, Environmental Chemist. Mike Stage, with the Plant Board. Page of 1

5 :0: JR WJ DJ UN LP KM RM CM JA EC CS PS SB 00:0: BR LG DM JR Jacob Ray, [unclear]. William Johnson, Dow AgroSciences. Don Johnson, Arkansas Crop Protection Association. [Unclear], DuPont. Lawson Priess, DuPont intern. Kevin Mount, DuPont Pioneer. Robert Maury with the Governor's office. Courtney Massey with the Governor's office. Justin Allen of Wright Lindsey Jennings, representing the mayor. Earlene Cody, Dow AgroScience. Clay Starkey, Dow Agroscience. Ples Spradley, pesticide education specialist, University of Arkansas. Susie Nichols, Plant Board. Scott Bray, Plant Board. I'm sorry. Brandi Reynolds, Plant Board. Leigh Gibson, Plant Board. Dana McGinty,Plant Board. Jason Robertson, Plant Board. MM Marci Manley, KARK on dock MH BL GS Mary Smith[?], Plant Board. Brandy Carroll with Arkansas Farm Bureau Federation. Craig Sandoski, Gowan USA. That everybody, okay. First item on the agenda today is to review the regulations for Dow AgroSciences product identified as Enlist Duo, a premixed Glyphosate and,-d Choline for use on Enlist weed control systems soybean, cotton and corn. At this time I'm going to turn it over to Susie Nichols. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, at this time I'm going to give a brief overview of this regulation. First of all, can everyone hear me? Okay, all the committee members you have a red book in front of you so if you will turn to the page number. It's the red tab marked Dow. I'm going to start off by reading this regulation. Page of 1

6 00:0: Approximately four years ago the pesticide committee started meeting with Dow AgroSciences to discuss this new technology they were coming out with. Over many discussions and many meetings, these are the regulations we decided to put in place. However, the regulation is only in place for the first two years of registration. This regulation will expire as of December 1st, 01. So we are here today to review this regulation and decide if we'd like to keep it the same or modify it. I'm going to start off by reading this regulation; it's going to be page, number four, Dow AgroSciences exemption. For the first year of registration and the following year, Dow agro sciences product identified as Enlist Duo, a premixed Glyphosate and,-d Choline may be may be used on Enlist weed control systems soybeans, cotton and corn. All Plant Board restriction of, - D containing products will apply except the following. Section XC, section XD one, D two, D three and XG, the application window in section XG shall not apply. All product label requirements must be followed in addition to the following. At the time of application, the wind must be blowing away from adjacent susceptible crops or desirable vegetation. The wind speed during the application may not exceed ten miles an hour. The VMD of the spray droplets must be greater than 00 microns. Tank mixes may not be permitted without proof acceptable to the Plant Board that the mix, when applied according to the product label and or state restrictions, does not increase the driftable vines those less than 00 microns by more than % over that product alone. Excuse me. This tank mix requirement may be waived in part or in whole by the Plant Board if no entity can be identified as acceptable to the Plant Board. 00:0: Were the product label is more restrictive than the Plant Boards restriction than the label must be complied with. At this time I would like to also advise the pesticide committee that our university researchers are here if you have any questions and Dow AgroScience is also here. We have Jason Norsworthy, Tom Barber, Bob Scott and I think Alisha and Jonathan with Dow AgroScience. Now at this time, I'm going to turn it back over to the committee for discussion. Do you have any questions for me? I do how many complaints did you have? We have had only two on,-d across the board this year, none on the new technology, any other questions for me. Board member questions for Susie. Any calls on farmer's comment. No I have not received any complaints or praise calls for this product one way or another. It's very quiet on,-d. Have your field people seen anything that has not been reported? Page of 1

7 :0: 00:0:1 TB I've talked to some several about field inspectors and they have advised me they're not seeing any drift or misuse from what they can see. Now I'd like to stress our field people cannot be everywhere at once they have not looked at every field in the state. But they have told me just driving around the areas they have not seen any drift or misuse of the new,-d technology. Anything from other regions in the mid-south, other states on this technology? I've talk to Missouri and Tennessee and they have not had any complaints concerning the new,-d technology. What is a weed control system in your mind? I'm not the best person to answer that but I'll try. Basically, I take it it's a system Dow has put together in order to combat pigweed. I know we have some resistance to it here in the state and the upgrade to this new,-d that they brought research to us showing it doesn't drift and it's not as volatile. I don't know how much of it was out in the state this year though. Dow could probably answer that better than I can and our researchers. As a regulator do you consider it to be the genetic on technology plus the herbicide technology? That's how I consider it. We'll come back to this later. Okay sorry I think I misunderstood what you asked me originally. Do you have any other questions for me? Any questions for Ms. Nichols. What is the protocol for approving a new pesticide? Does the pesticide committee review research? What we've done in the past is historically we have had some issues and standing regulations on,-d. So what Dow did is they came in along with our researchers. Jason did studies Tom did studies; drift studies. They brought us in research with the products that was going to be labeled by the EPA and the ones registered here in the state currently and I may refer to Jason this is the product you tested in the field correct. That's correct I believe this is probably the fifth year that we tested this product. We have done extensive drift as well as volatility work with the Enlist Duo product. And we have this protocol in place so the product that EPA registers has to be the one our researchers or a third party has done research on. The one that actually goes to market we have to have research on and we do for this product. Page of 1

8 :: 00:: I would ask Dr. Norsworthy I think about just the brief overview of yours, Toms and Bob's work on Enlist Duo and this system we're talking about at the moment. In terms of Enlist Duo again I mean we've actually conducted. Can you stand up so everybody else can hear? We have conducted large plots of research trials, drift trials on multiple passes of a sprayer. These trials were conducted over multiple years. We were probably spraying upwards of close to an acre with the product. Actually sprayed it in a cotton field to look how far it could move. We compared Enlist Duo to some of the other, D Amine formulations such as Weedare [?] that are out there today and what we saw was. First of all the, D Choline or the Enlist Duo product has a drift retardant in it so it did not move as far as the Weedare did. One thing I want to tell everyone here today, the salt, the, D Choline salt really doesn't have any impact on drift versus Amine it's really the formulation itself and it's got a drift retardant in it to minimize off-target movement. The Choline also is a defenless [?] volatile. We conducted a studies over two years maybe three years were we've actually looked at the volatility of the product and it was it was probably a third, three to four-fold reduction in volatility versus Amine and again that was actually small plot work. We placed it under hoods and caused it to volatilize as well as well as these larger plots where we sprayed it. The Amine at times we did have some upward movement which I would say is probably a result of volatility following the application but with the Enlist duo product, it never did really appear to move in an upward direction. Thank you, Dr Norsworthy, when it does move compared to Amine is what are the symptoms and. Symptoms are the same I mean,-d is,-d I mean this is a,-d product. I mean from what we've seen efficacy as well as symptomology, don't see any difference in this product versus the ones that have been on the marketplace prior to it. So symptoms are very similar, yes sir. This product is eating at Roundup resistant pigweed is that is correct? That is correct. Is it efficient? You know it does a good job, it does a pretty good job I'm not going to sit here and tell you that it will kill everything pigweed in the field it's not going to be a cure-all but it definitely has as good activity on pigweed. You know we had plots this year well for the last several years we've had plots. Five years we've been looking at pigweed control. It's part of program and one thing I'll say in terms of a system it's not a standalone product where you're going to go out and just spray Enlist Duo and solve your pigweed problems. You're going to have to put it into a program but in a program, yes it can be quite effective in terms of control. Page of 1

9 :: 00:1:00 TB BS Do you think these regulations that are in place will take care of problems that we have with drift or do you think we need to adjust these to. Well Dennie I mean the regulations in place again, I think it says you know if you take a look at,-d outside of the county's which have the April the 1th restrictions. I think this product is definitely much more safe then what's on the marketplace today. I think it's fair to try and give it a shot in the state of Arkansas and I say statewide. I'm not going to stand here today and tell you that there can't be some mishaps with it. I think anytime cotton and,-d, you are aware of the fact that cotton and,-d don't mix well together. So but I do think it's definitely much-improved formulation from a volatility standpoint, from a drift standpoint and I think it does need a fair look in some cotton country. We will one thing I will mention is I had an opportunity last, back in 01 to, where I'm doing my PPO resistant pigweed location actually one of those had Enlist soybeans on it last year. A nine-acre field near Crawfordsville and there was cotton about a quarter of a mile from that and I never did observe any damage to that, to that cotton. So I think it's a good tool, whether we're going to have any hiccups I'm not going to stand here and tell you yay or nay whether we would or would not. But I do think Dow has put their best foot best foot forward. I do commend Dow from the standpoint that they have worked very diligently with us to test it. And I mean again we tested it around cotton. No, it hasn't been in use over vast acres in any Leachville, Manila Mississippi County etcetera but I do think they have put their best foot forward in terms of looking at this technology. Let me ask Tom Barber, Bob Scott and also Ford Baldwin who are out there walking a lot but from the perspective of, we've heard from Susie there's not been many complaints on this Enlist Duo system that's out there. What are we actually observing in your experience with this system this year? In regards to Enlist Duo I haven't saw personally anything. We've seen demos that they have conducted, our, I have conducted demos myself. And I echo Jason's comments. I mean from my perspective I hadn't seen any issues with Enlist Duo from a volatility standpoint. I mean we've been spraying next to net. Row to row from cotton is not tolerant now I'm not saying that that row next to it is not going to have some injury on it but from a volatility standpoint. It seems to be much more improved just from our general observations. Agree. Yes I completely agree with Tom I'm at the first call on Enlist Duo this year. I think it's probably important to point out that compared to some of the other technologies we're here to talk about today the acres are very small as to what's out there. In regards to your question about the regulations, I would just had to Jason's comment about you know their effectiveness and how they're written. I was here Page of 1

10 00:1: BS FB 00:1:1 FB LJ when we hammered these out and you know it is says for the year first year and you following year and I think these were meant to be trial years to get it out there and take a look at it and I think that will tell the tale. Have you seen this in real life on the farm use or only in research? Dow would have to comment on that I have not seen a real-life field of Enlist Duo yet only research plots. So toward your experience. I haven't seen any of it either but what I am seeing going on in the field more and more is just not being very smart in the way things are being put out if you want to call that real-world scenarios or not and as I recall that regulation had it downwind. It said do not apply with susceptible crops downwind. Jonathan said this morning that applied to an adjacent field, I didn't even remember that. If it is downwind it isn't that very well defined you know. Do you just want to build in a little bit of failsafe for what may happen in the real world until you find out what's going to happen out there? I mean I think again we're here to talk about it in a more defined example of that. But that that would be my only concern, the accuracy of the advisory, in a real-world, situation make sure these other words are going to stick in the advisory. That's what we are wanting have, what do you think it needs to be? I don't have any opinion I guess I've got an opinion but don't do a whole lot better. What's current restriction? What is currently? It's a quarter mile. I'm sorry. No it's fine I'm pulling up a page right now. It's on page Susie I believe. Okay now this, what I'm fixing to read first is the ten counties in northeast Arkansas. We've got two different regulations on,-d here. In the ten counties, applications made within four miles of susceptible crops which is defined as cotton must be done when the wind is blowing at least two miles away from the susceptible crop. Now there is also another statement hereunder C. No other product with this designation shall be applied within a quarter of a mile of susceptible crops at any point time otherwise indicated by this regulation. Now in the rest of the state page 1, there is a buffer zone between the field to be treated. I'm on page 1, A. A buffer zone between the field to be treated and susceptible crops which is cotton of four miles by air and one mile by ground shall be maintained. Page of 1

11 00:0: TB FB LJ But what did you do when the Choline formulation was exempted from that. How did that read? Probably read like the one I just mentioned. That's also on page and that's what I thought. Okay I'm sorry; we exempted that and wrote something new for the,-d Choline Dow's product. What we did is let, me find it again. LJ First paragraph under C page. Okay what we did is at the time of application the wind must be blowing away from adjacent susceptible crops or desirable vegetation. It doesn't say anything adjacent fields. There's not a downwind buffer the way I :1: There's not a downwind buffer like there is on the other products. That's a difference in this and the other regulations. I think you have a downwind. That's one of the differences I found. How much? So based on research what we talking about distance wise there. I think we spray half a mile or half an acre plus mile. One acre plus and I guess my response to that is you've got the buffer currently set at a mile by ground outside of the restricted area currently and I would say this is a safer product than what's currently on the marketplace today. So I think you start worst case scenarios a mile but you possibly even consider starting with something less than a mile based on the research. We can change these regulations anytime we want to change them correct. Yes sir we can revisit regulations at any time. My thoughts are if we're going to try cotton country let's give it every chance we've got to make it work and if we start lowering these buffer zones. Without research. Without research exactly, that's what we've got to drive home and when we need these things on real-life farms. I'm going to talk ugly today just for a little bit right now. When they did their on-farm research they went to Jackson County. The nearest Cotton farm in Jackson County is the one ahead almost 0 miles. Bring it over and put it over in Keiser or Leachville or Manila or a cotton county where we have thousand acres of carton in 00. Let's see what it does, that's my idea. I represent the cotton farmers so I have to say it. And it's not that I'm against the technology, it's just that I want to take baby steps. Page of 1

12 :: JT 00::0 There's two things that concern me and I've written down, they haven't discovered and one of those is you know having people follow protocol properly. And that's a concern and that's something that we normally got so much teeth here as a pesticide committee and State Plant. So that's a concern. And that's something that's out of your control, out of our control, out of Dow's control, everyone's control and you will all agree that something needs to be done about that. But the other thing and I don't know how you do this but I'm very concerned about clean out. Very concerned, because I know how busy it is when those sprayers are running. Joe did you wash those sprayers out. Yes I did three times boss. I mean did he, did he not. I mean those are concerns and I'm not sure if in that label if there shouldn't be something on that label about clean out, about how that's done. Because that's puts teeth in it for the state Plant Board to enforce that if that's not communicated. So just a question for the Dow folks what is your label say about tank clean out of the,-d tank product. Alright so on our label, we have tank cleanout procedures if you're going back into Glyphosate tolerant corn we only require a single rinse. If you're going back into any other crop it's a triple rinse procedure. It outlines how to conduct that procedure, what parts to clean out, minimum volumes that type of thing. Do you think a private applicator is going to follow that label? I can't speak to what a private applicator is going to do but I do know that when those steps are followed properly, we've had extreme success in getting,-d out of the sprayer or Enlist Duo out of the sprayer. And going back into the cotton. So the,-d Choline formulation is not that difficult to wash out. It's 0% water soluble so it is easier to get out than traditional,-d ready. But there's still factors other factors in place, you know the largest one being how clean is your sprayer to begin with. Because before you ever mix the load if you've got a filthy sprayer that's full of residues. That has been a challenge. And then again making sure that you get the big inline strainers, your screens, also bodies or gaps, tight ends are cleaned out as well. Do we have Enlist crops in the state? Yes sir, we've got Enlist cotton planted in the state and Enlist soybeans this year. How much? Exact acreage I'm not sure of but in Enlist cotton we did not spray with Enlist Duo this year because we didn't have a label. You mentioned earlier about what is the Enlist weed control system and you were correct in the fact that it's the Page of 1

13 00:: :: trade and herbicide but the other component is stewardship and we take that extremely seriously. Dow, the reason we've had limited acres the last two years is because we did not have all of the necessary import approvals and because of that we felt it was not an appropriate risk to put on farmers to release the technology. So we have sold Enlist cotton, we have spent a tremendous amount of time working with all of those growers that have Enlist cotton to make sure that no generics and that Enlist Duo is not used because even though it was registered in the state for corn and soybeans it's not registered for use on cotton. And we have not had any incidents of growers going off label for cotton. With soybeans we've been doing seed production for two years now in Arkansas and all of those seed production acres are sprayed with Enlist Duo. I will tell you this year we probably have about several thousand acres of Enlist soybeans that are being grown in the North East corner of the state. And we've had several applications of Enlist Duo adjacent to cotton fields and where the product has performed as advertised as those growers have followed label directions. So it is in Arkansas, we are spraying Enlist Duo. We've got it in Missouri, Foothill [?], Tennessee as well as some of those other areas you referenced. So let me help. And then we have a grower here that's actually doing some seed production for us this year. Help me understand the system here, you sell the genetic technology Enlist cotton. The Enlist strain yes sir. And then the option for the grower for a herbicide is what, you've got,-d Choline. The only,-d product labeled for use with Enlist crops is Enlist Duo which is a premix of Glyphosate,-D Choline. And so I wouldn't be able to go out and just buy something else, a tank mix, and throw it over the top like to,-d Esther. It would be off-label, yes sir. But I could do it if it's cheap and not hurt the Enlist product. That's right, that's correct Enlist crops are tolerant to of all,-d, they don't know the difference between two between formulations but the only label registered formulation is Enlist Duo. And we recognize that there could be incentives for people to use generics if there is a huge price differential and have taken that into consideration with pricing and Enlist Duo. So that there's not a huge gap between the cost of generics and the cost of this product. Page of 1

14 :: 00:1:0 So give me some figures on that generics are about X amount per acre and so what would Enlist Duo be? I'm not exactly sure where generics are pricing today, some of our growers could probably give us a better idea of that. Enlist Duo is going to run you nine to dollars per acre and then we've got some additional incentives throughout Enlist Ahead program to provide additional rebates as well as there could be some additional rebates at a regional level as well. Would two applications be kind of normal. Yes sir that's what will be labeled in cotton as a maximum of two applications per year. What's your projections for the next year on how many acres are you expecting in a state of Arkansas. So next year we do anticipate having a label for use of Enlist cotton and it will make up a large percentage of Biogen portfolio that we sell so approximately 0% of the Biogen cotton plant in Arkansas will have Enlist strain and we anticipate having an Enlist Dup application. From the soybean standpoint it's a little bit more unclear with the import approvals. Should we receive those we are prepared to launch and it will probably look similar to what our competition had in terms of acres this year. If we don't receive import approvals we will continue just to do seed production which would be somewhat less than that. How many acres are we talking about in cotton? I think we've got probably about 0% market share in the state of Arkansas. So if there's 00 thousand acres it could be potentially you know a hundred thousand, no it will be less than that maybe 0, 0 thousand acres. It's not our entire portfolio as well so. Thank you, the last thing I have for the three weed scientists from the UA division would be based on your research and observations the value of Enlist system on resistance management. In terms of resistance management the Enlist system provides us with whether it be soybean, whether it be cotton, three herbicide modes of action. The Glyphosate obviously has no value right now from a pigweed standpoint but the Glyphosate does bring a lot in terms of barnyard grass a lot of I'm not saying cotton but soybean farmer is generally rotating with the rice and we have major issues right now in rice with barnyard grass resistance. So being able to have the Glyphosate component in there I think that's the value associated with that. Glufosinate is, or Liberty, I'm not going to tell it's the best thing out there as far as going in terms of Glufosinate but it is still a good product in terms of grass control. The beauty of I think the Enlist system if you look for resistance is an interesting point is a three-way stack. Liberty can be used to Page 1 of 1

15 00:: :: control the Palmer Amaranth whether it be cotton whether it be soybean,-d provides another mode of action also an Palmer Amaranth. So when you take a look at building a very robust resistance management strategy that's definitely possible with the Enlist system. Probably the one knock that I would say on the Enlist system right now is that it appears that you are not going to be able to tank mix Liberty and Enlist Duo and I think that itself is somewhat of a knock from a resistance measurement standpoint which you want to have access to those three tools for controlling grasses as well as broad leaves. That will clarify the tank mix question. Yes sir, so currently if you look at our Enlist Duo label we do have a website that is referenced Enlist tank mix dot com and this is part of our registration requirements with the EPA. And any product that can be tank mixed with Enlist Duo cannot disrupt the Integrity of Colex - D technology which is our drift reduction in there. So all of our tank mix partners and I mean anything you put in the tank besides water has to go through a third party testing routine to make sure the droplet spectrum does not significantly increased in driftable vines. And unfortunately, at this time Glufosinate or Liberty is one of those products that when we add it to the tank there's a significant increase in vines so it is prohibited from tank mixing that product. Now we do have a new product that we're currently going through the registration process on. Dr. Norsworthy has worked with it as well. It's a standalone,-d Choline with all of the attributes of an Enlist Duo and that product does pass the tank mixing criteria for Glufosinate. So that's another tool that we'll be bringing some time in the future. But as of today Enlist duo is the only product and all the tank mix partners have to be qualified to make sure they don't increase the percentage of driftable vines. I've learnt from my wife to be a little suspicious of promises, so what do you think is coming, date wise, on this on the stand-alone,-d Choline label? So we've submitted it to EPA and we anticipate a launch in 01. Good luck. I think the issue with tank mixing Liberty was the droplet size is that the problem. Correct droplet size. So you can still use Liberty. You could use a sequencher. Sequencher on it. Page 1 of 1

16 ::1 00::0 BS Just not a tank mix. I have one practical doubt, your delivery system would be two halves barrels dedicated totes. So we would have packaged goods in two by two and a half but because of the use rate, we don't anticipate that will get a lot of traction because it's three and a half. miles per acre. So we do have a 0-gallon feet totes in at least in the first two years those are totes that are identified with the Enlist Duo logo and enlist labeling. And that would be refillable through bulk infrastructure at the retail establishment. This is about to comment this, first part's a question that as you know I'm an avgas fan. Primarily the airplanes I'm running but some of these systems, these rebuilt systems aren't working very well. I know we don't hear that at the Plant Board but I know from our farmers there's been some real nightmares out there of these systems getting delivered and we've had totes and this is not your fault. We've had totes, the totes dropped on us had [unclear] spilling down the sides, they had another product in there that's why I said dedicated totes. I appreciate you staying with dedicated totes And that's why we have dedicated totes. Good. From a research standpoint, experience tells me you guys own nothing concrete. There's certain states around us that we trust you guys talk to unless you visit each state you guys probably. What is the surrounding states saying about this, is it very similar to what you guys are saying? I think so, my counterpart says it seems almost stable now but I think they have I mean from what I can tell their data agree with ours. I would agree I find absolutely nothing in Tennessee and Louisiana, Mississippi that will be typical for. Bob you have a comment. Yes I wanted to add to what Jason said about the resistance management issue and I think it's important for this board to have this in mind as we talk about regulating this new technology. Like handling tolerant crops, the,-d Choline tolerant crops and HPV tolerance which is coming along behind them. This does represent the new technology that we have for soybeans and both myself, Jason and Tom all have locations that some of you, many of you may have seen this summer. Where we have found pigweed that's resistant to as many as four classes of chemistry including you know the PPO chemistry which we basically relied on to the point we had resistance everywhere now. And I'm extremely concerned from a resistance management standpoint. Page 1 of 1

17 00:: TB 00:1:0 TB Dr. Cartwright to get back to your question that as a state that has a hold in both cotton and soybeans we are relying incredibly heavily on Liberty and Liberty linked crops right now to solve our pigweed problem. In my location in Gregory at their locations in Crittenden County, were it not for Liberty Link we would not be able to grow soybeans period in those fields. So when we talking about the new stuff that's coming it's as if anything newer than that they're keeping secret or we don't know about it and you know even if one were announced it might be what ten years before it ever made it to market. So just food for thought as you talk to, in reference to your question on resistance. Other questions, Tom do you think that it's a good thing that they get a label for cotton. Do you think that's a workable situation to have,-d cotton in county? Another question, when I was growing up we had a sprayer for,-d and that's always great you know we didn't use it in a cotton plant. So I knew what you're saying it's going to definitely be I think a learning curve on clean out if you try it. Honestly if, I believe if you are cotton farmer and your carton nothing but cotton, you're going to have to have to sprayers. One dedicated to Enlist Duo or,-d Choline maybe down the road and then one if you have something other than Enlist cotton on your farm. So all, that's what I believe is going to happen. I mean. How do we introduce it into the state and not have a catastrophic event? I think having taken this discussion today has brought some light on taking a safe approach to introducing it. I think you're not going to know what it's going to look like until you do it on a large scale and get it onto some acres. We can tell you all our research data one-acre plots or 0-foot plots what have you and it's just a small world scenario. You're not really going to know how well we can do this until we get it out there. I mean I commend Dow for their stewardship because we have never seen any issues of you know with it off-label applications or anything like that so to speak. The only,-d situations I've got this year had to come off a rice paddy. So I think that looking at that restriction whether it's a mile, whether it's a half a mile like Jason said with our data I'm with you I think we can back it up a little bit but if you know I think I have to put it out and test it. And then if we have to back off a bit you know we can back off restriction or you add more to it that's what I think. Mr. chairman on Enlist Duo regulation that we started this on are we talking as a committee about because it expires in December, we're talking about possibly amending and or adding a buffer zone but also are we talking about extending our state regulation past December 1st. That's what we talk about yes. That's the two things we talking about. Page 1 of 1

18 :: 00:: RV GH Yes sir. So we can extend this one as it is or we can amend this and then extend it as it is but what I would like to do today is if you want to add to it. Is to maybe talk about that a little bit about a buffer zone addition and then gave it back to Susie and her staff and let them Write it up and give us a written regulation to come back here and vote on later. That's kind of where I think we are with this situation. Susie is that what you. Yes that's why we're doing this so early because this process can be lengthy. Whatever you decide today, I will go back, write it up we'll have another meeting, make sure everything I've written is what you want and then we'll take it to public comment and board meeting. Then we'll move forward with the governor's approval and the legislative committee we have to defend this to now and be ready to have it placed on January 1st. So Rick does that represent, answer your question. Yes that tells me where we are at. And we can't dilly dally because the end of the year is coming up. We really need, in my opinion we need it to extend it as it is or if we'd like to amend it which I kind of hear that talk around the table then let's talk about what kind of amendment we want to put on it then we can give that back to staff. Let them write it up then we'll come back at another meeting. Vote on the amended regulation and then we'll take it to a public hearing. In the written one the,-d [unclear] and it will work on the Enlist soybeans. I'd also like to discuss is there a way that we can tie that together. The purchase of seed is somehow, legally do that I don't want Dow to have the advantage that you can only us a Dow product. I'm certain that would be an unfair advantage that's not what we're here for. Somehow tie the purchase of those chemicals to the seed so you know that that's going to be used on that field. I mean if you're made to be part of be part of that I'm not aware of. Do you understand what he's asking Susie? I do, is it part of your stewardship, do you have a way to monitor the buyers? We do have a way to track it with EDI, who's purchasing Enlist duo and what those corresponding acres are. Just because you plant Enlist crops doesn't mean you have to spray with Enlist Duo. You can choose to use Glyphosate, Glufosinate any other herbicides that are labeled but if you want a,-d containing product this is the only one that is labeled. So all other products would be considered off-label and we did have Enlist cotton planted in the state this year quite a few acres and we have not had anyone go off label and use generic,-d even though that option was available to those that would want to break the rules. Page 1 of 1

19 00:: LJ GH 00:: And I think it's you know it I guess it just supports our stewardship message and the fact that we are trying to be responsible in bringing this to the market. And we're spending a tremendous amount of time with our growers to make sure that none of these incidents happen and we've not had any incidents in any state of the 1 states we have managed to register in and been selling it for two years now. You're nine to dollars, is that a pound of Glyphosate, how much? So the nine dollars would be for the low rate which would be three quarters of a pound of Glyphosate, three quarters of a pound of,-d. The dollars is a pound. How comparable is that. Fairly close. That's a fully loaded. It's seven to nine for a pound of both. And that's a fully loaded product with your drift reductions that's everything in. The cost per acre to grow we're talking about right now can be a definite problem and Interstate neighbors we're seeing those things now and that's we're as a Plant Board and a pesticide committee so determined about this particular thing because when economics times get hard, if there's a great differential then you're going to have a lot of people. You're working with a smaller group then you might be working with it comes to public issues and it can be a difficult thing to manage on our part. And that's why, that's the concern coming from this Committee of that situation. We can regulate the sale and the use of the pesticide. I would actually have to get [name] in and our regulations a little more on what our Since I've been here we've never tied it to the sale of the seed, so I can't really tell you if we can or cannot do that. I have to get [name] and Grace Ellen and Mary in the seed division. But I know we do have some regulations concerning the sale of pesticides, I have to see if it can be tied to seed if you decide to go that route. Susie this is something and Mr. Chairman that is, I don't know if it's absolutely new but this genetic type of technology and herbicide technology is a system is relatively new and so maybe that's how they need to be regulated. If you all decide to make that motion and put it into regulation what I could do is make a note of it and go back and look and I can advise you the next meeting like I said legally what we can do. Are you saying that if you buy the seed you have to go buy the full range? Well I think their label, I think the label might take care of it is what Dow just said. Page 1 of 1

20 ::00 TB 00:0: You don't have to use Enlist Duo. You don't have to use it but should you want to use a,-d product in your crop. It has to be Enlist Duo; it has to be the only product legally. You're not going to buy the Enlist Duo seed unless you plan on using the,-d product. Not necessarily you may purchase it with the genetics of all of our Glys comes with wider stride grease [?] so there's additional BT trade [?] that has an accurate wipe resistance. It has full Glufosinate tolerance. So you could potentially purchase it if you don't have resistant pigweed. That would be the only soybean technology out there today that you can spray RoundUp and Liberty over the top of both of them so it would be a benefit of that technology versus what's in the market at present. So we don't necessarily want to take away options but the trick is how do you regulate the chosen,-d Choline on the, this that's the trick that we're talking about. How do you keep that magic up if they choose to spray,-d on their farm. I think you'd have to keep the price between the generic cheap,-d and the Enlist Duo price. The closer they come together where they won't be too tempted to do it. Right now you've got to choose the right grower. It s the cream of the crop grower it s the selective people of course there's not going to be problem but when you get it out on hundreds of thousands of acres. Beans go to eight dollars and people are looking at,-d on the Internet you know I think you have to build the price into the seed and not the chemical where people will, people won't be tempted. Every combination. Yes every combination. So do you have a way of me going out there before harvest and taking leaf samples and telling this had,-d supplied to this crop. So there are ways to identify,-d residues present but not if it was wet form of,-d. Yes I understand that but is it a fairly quick and reliable test of tissue? Yes to determine if,-d residues are present that is a. And it would be an indicator then that there was a four-eight application in that field. It will be an indicator that that chemistry was sprayed on. I don't know if it's an indicator of necessarily because the product does start to degrade over time. Page 0 of 1

21 00:1: AK 00::0 So depending on when the application occurred and when you sampled test. The residue would be different but again you can't identify whether it was Esther or mead[?] or Choline on the plant. Is that a commercial test to a proprietary test? That is a commercial test [name] Labs can do that. So if you find it present in a test then you could go and check to see did they purchase,-d. And our technology use agreements requires that they have to keep receipts for two years. Has val [?] had any talks when you buy this seed you buy the product to spray over it. Probably the jig you need. We did talk about that initially the problem is that as you know the grower, you may proceed through one retailer you may purchase chemistry somewhere else. It's difficult to package the products together. Then you have a rate range both on seed as you plant because the bag of seed doesn't go as far on everybody farm. And the same thing with the chemistry so bottling and co-packing the two logistically was difficult to do. 1 What happens if I choose to violate your technology agreement and used to,- D on my Enlist seed crop. 0 1 AK AK AK AK The technology will be taken away from you. How does that work so do you find out I violated the agreement what does that mean, you're going to take it away. You won't be able to purchase it. For is there a period of time or do you just send me a nasty letter. So agreement is right if someone had an applicator that didn't understand what they were planting versus somebody who knowingly went out and violated the agreement. But if I was you know grievously violate it you take me off the. We don't want that kind of customers right so because that hurts the technology for everybody. So we want to keep the Integrity of our system as much as we can. So you are willing then to take the technology away from the grower or make sure I'm clear on that because we asked that question before. So you're willing if a grower grievously goes and sprays,-d Amine on his Enlist cotton. Page 1 of 1

22 :: AK AK KB 00::0 AK AK You could lose the ability to purchase that. You would take away his ability to purchase. That would be one of the options. I appreciate that that's not always the case. Mr. Chairman. Yes. Since we have all these experiences I'm thinking our old chairman back here, I was going to see if he had anything to add to this conversation. None whatsoever. I'm telling you that concerned citizen went a long way. Any other questions from the committee. Kyle. Does it have grain sorted on the label? At this time it does not have the label grain sorted because it does have Glyphosate in the mix. So Enlist Duo is on the label for Enlist crops and it does have a burn down label as well. So it could be used prior planting. The future product that's going through registration, we could potentially label in other areas because it does not contain Glyphosate. But it is also focused on this nozzle [?]. Any other questions. Anybody have a proposed amendment to our proposal. Do we go along with the one that we have or was there an amendment that you'd like to make. The thing that really stuck with me and that needs to be discussed more was the downwind buffer distance, if we extend this state regulation past December 1st. I'd recommend we consider that. Can anybody address that maybe? Yes. So we were here two years ago and this obviously was a big part of the discussion about what the buffer should be and the board at this time and I know we had the University researchers here with us as well. And the idea was you know because we just needed to make sure that it was cotton fields obviously that we wanted to protect with that proximity analysis to make sure an adjacent field could not be caught. That gave that grower enough of a buffer with the adjacent fields being protected that you're essentially creating your own buffer. And that went back to EPA and EPA accepted that on our federal label. So what you all decided here EPA also realized that was a good way to handle it. So that is on our federal label based on the information that you all had discussed here a few years ago. Page of 1

23 ::1 AK AK AK AK 00:: AK So your labels say the wind must be blowing away from an adjacent susceptible crop. Correct. And adjacent though doesn't mean a particular width of crop. Whatever that adjacent field is and if it's a cotton field you won't spray when the wind's blowing towards that cotton. What if it's a 0-foot non-susceptible but then there's cotton on the other side. There's still cotton there. But it's not adjacent, it's just got a narrow field in between it. And that's how we're trying to educate our growers right. Look around you if you can see the cotton field. We're learning right now that education is, like for people who grew up in Stone county it's a problem It's climbing a steep hill climb and so I was just wondering if a distance is not more practical in some ways based on the observations that you are making in both of these crops. I'm just asking I'm putting this forward. We have a grower that has actually sprayed Enlist duo adjacent to a cotton field. But the observations they made in the last two years is that the product has not had any issues based on following the label requirements because we do offer that protection downwind. Whatever the label says do not apply if wind is blowing towards an adjustable susceptible crop. Yes and the applicator here could attest to that. I support Dr. Cartwright. I think we need a buffer and also think that we need to study this idea of co-pack or you've got to buy the chemistry when you buy the technology. We're not against technology we just don't want a train wreck and we're afraid if we turn this thing lose it could possibly do that. And it maybe that if we put a buffer in place, do we just want to do this state regulation a year at a time to see if you know there's no problem then maybe we do away with it. After how much are we talking about next year in Enlist cotton crops? I would say you know the soybean is the big factor if we get our import approvals in place but I would say on the low end probably looking at 0 thousand all the way up to. You know we have soybeans could be 0, 00 thousand acres. But to ease this thing in without huge problems where you know maybe we could do this in 01 and it's still not huge amounts of acreage yet and put a buffer in place and any problems remove it after. Page of 1