U.S. House Passes Farm Bill 2.0, Pesticide ‘Liability Shield’ Removed

By John Dobberstein
Published April 30, 2026 on No-Till Farmer

WASHINGTON — Lawmakers in the House overcame internal bickering among Republican factions to pass Farm Bill legislation April 30 that includes several consequential measures for agriculture.

The Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 passed the House on a 224-200 vote and goes over to the Senate.

The version approved Thursday removed controversial language that would have prohibited states and courts from, “penalizing or holding liable entities for failing to comply with requirements that would require labeling or packaging that is in addition to or different from the labeling or packaging approved by the EPA administrator.”

Bayer and Monsanto have been wading through thousands of lawsuits across the U.S. from plaintiffs claiming the companies failed to warn about the risk of glyphosate to human health and that exposure caused cancer.

That provision angered supporters of Make American Healthy Again movement, who want to eliminate glyphosate and other allegedly harmful chemicals from food production systems. Bayer has proposed a settlement to end the lawsuit liabilities, but that has not been approved by a judge.

The American Soybean Association applauded the bill’s passage because it contains conservation program funding, the Plant Biostimulant Act, increased access to credit programs, funding for precision agriculture, and reauthorization of the Biobased Markets (BioPreferred) Program and Biorefinery Assistance Program.

“At a time when U.S. soybean farmers need certainty more than ever, the 2026 Farm Bill offers a myriad of tools and programs to help the agricultural industry navigate changing market dynamics and ongoing farm production and economic challenges,” said Scott Metzger, ASA president and soybean farmer from Ohio.

National Association of Conservation Districts (NACD) President Gary Blair said the organization applauded lawmakers on navigating the bill through the House, “and reinforcing the importance of conservation investments.

“We urge the Senate to pass a bipartisan Farm Bill this year,” added NACD Chief Executive Officer Jeremy Peters. ”Long-term authorization is critical to provide the certainty and continuity our nation’s producers need to protect our natural resources and keep working lands productive.” 

On the equipment side, the Associated Equipment Distributors (AED) was generally supportive of the passage.

“The farm economy is the backbone of our nation and equipment dealers are essential partners in ensuring America’s agriculture sector thrives,” AED president and CEO Brian P. McGuire said. 

“We look forward to working with the Senate to pass a farm bill and provide much needed certainty, support, and stability to farmers, ranchers, and rural America.”

AED noted multiple provisions to codify the sale of year-round E15 were proposed but not included in the House version or in standalone legislation, “due to concerns from independent refineries. AED continues to urge Congress to expeditiously pass legislation permitting the sale of year-round E15.” 

McGuire said the House is expected to consider E15 legislation in May.

The conservation title of the Farm Bill emphasizes, “proven, voluntary incentive-based and locally led conservation programs,” along with, “science, technology, and innovation, including within the conservation practice standards establishment and review processes.”

The bill protects and enhances the Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) and Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), “while promoting precision agriculture.” 

The Farm Bill also aims to “streamline and improve” program administration for the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP), the Technical Service Provider Program (TSP), and P.L. 566. The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) was re-authorized as well.

Read the original article on No-Till Farmer »

‘Fuming’ MAHA diehards point blame at Trump admin with movement set to ‘implode’

By Ewan Gleadow
Published April 5, 2026 on Raw Story

A diehard collection of Make America Healthy Again supporters say they may abandon the movement and Donald Trump if their demands are not heard. 

At the core of the MAHA movement is Tony Lyons, the president of MAHA Action and the man trying to calm the storm. A series of administrative choices, some backed by RFK Jr, the head of the Department of Health and Human Services, are at the core of the MAHA movement’s concerns. 

Lyons, speaking with The Atlantic‘s Tom Bartlett, says his job at the moment is to maintain MAHA Action’s patience in the face of several unpopular administrative choices. 

Bartlett wrote, “In recent weeks, MAHA diehards have been fuming, particularly after Donald Trump signed an executive order shielding manufacturers of the widely used weed killer glyphosate from liability. 

“Some studies suggest that glyphosate exposure leads to cancer, and MAHA activists want it banned. More recent setbacks for Kennedy—such as Casey Means’s stalled bid for surgeon general and a federal judge’s preliminary injunction against changes to the childhood vaccine schedule—haven’t exactly helped. 

“Lyons has counseled frustrated supporters to ‘stay together and stay focused.’ Several influential MAHA figures have told me, however, that if the Trump administration shrugs off their priorities, they see no reason to remain loyal.”

Despite the tensions bubbling between MAHA Action and the HHS head, Lyons is trying to broker peace between the two. 

Bartlett added, “He denied that he’s personally been instructed by the White House, or Kennedy, to stop talking about vaccines: ‘Nobody’s telling me what to do.’” The reason the movement seems to be in turmoil now, he said, is that corporate interests and “corrupt deep-state allies” are trying to convince the left that MAHA has gone too far, and the right that it hasn’t gone far enough.

“Whether Kennedy can hold on to the power he already has may depend on whether Lyons can somehow appease Kennedy’s restless supporters—all while convincing Republicans that, when it comes to their chances next November, MAHA actually matters.”

Read the original article on Raw Story »

Effective weed control crucial for agriculture in Africa

By Nico van Burick
Published April 5, 2026 on African Farming

A recent study found that an urgent shift towards improved agricultural production on the continent is required to ensure food security, sustain livelihoods and protect the environment. Effective weed management is one of the most important components of successful conservation agriculture.

South Africa’s Bureau for Food and Agricultural Policy (BFAP) conducted the study in collaboration with the Tegemeo Institute for Agricultural Policy and Development in Kenya. The research focused on the use of herbicides and the role of glyphosate in Kenya.

BFAP states that Kenya’s agriculture – a cornerstone of the country’s economy – has reached a critical crossroads and that an urgent shift towards sustainable agricultural production is needed.

Africa’s growth in agricultural output has traditionally depended on expanding the area under cultivation rather than increasing yields, BFAP notes. This model is not sustainable for a population expected to double by 2050.

The investigation was based on market data and farm-level information relating to the production of key staple crops such as maize, wheat and rice. The study found that the use of herbicides leads to significant savings in production costs, particularly through reduced labour requirements.

The same area that a worker can spray with herbicide in one hour would take six people two days to clear manually.

Glyphosate’s Critical Role in Staple Food Production

The study further found that glyphosate is the active ingredient in 45% of commercial herbicides and is regarded as indispensable for staple food production. All wheat producers surveyed use herbicides and indicated that it would be extremely difficult to produce wheat without glyphosate. Without it, many would likely cease wheat production.

In the case of maize, only 16% of the area under cultivation is treated with herbicides. However, glyphosate remains the most commonly used active ingredient, particularly for pre-plant weed control.

The researchers noted that the primary challenge lies in the correct use of herbicides, not merely in market access. In Kenya, farmers’ main sources of information are traders and representatives of agricultural companies, with a shortage of independent and scientifically based advisory support.

The study concludes that herbicides – and especially glyphosate – are of considerable economic importance to the country, but that the gap in independent scientific advice and training must be addressed.

South African Perspective on Weed Control

Corné Louw, head of applied economics and member services at Grain South Africa, emphasised the importance of effective weed control, including under South African conditions where weeds compete with crops for sunlight and soil moisture.

“If weeds are not properly controlled, the impact is severely detrimental, particularly in grain production.”

“Roughly speaking, glyphosate accounts for about 60% to 65% of the local herbicide market. Many of our crops are Roundup Ready, where glyphosate effectively controls weeds without damaging the crop. Years of research have also shown that it is one of the safest, if not the safest, herbicides.”

He added that glyphosate is crucial in conservation tillage systems, particularly in low-rainfall regions such as South Africa.

“It is an input that we genuinely need.”

Expert Assessment: Safety and Scientific Evidence

Dr Gerhard Verdoorn, toxicologist and director of the Griffon Poison Information Centre, maintains after many years of research that glyphosate does not pose a risk to humans, animals or the environment when used according to label instructions.

He reiterates that all substances can be toxic.

“It is the dose that makes the difference between a poison and a useful substance.”

According to Verdoorn, reliable scientific studies have repeatedly supported the safety of glyphosate when properly applied. However, he notes that some studies test glyphosate at extremely high doses.

“This is not scientifically sound. You cannot conduct a study where an organism is exposed to a toxin at thousand times the recommended dose.”

“The principle I adhere to is that if a study is conducted at the correct dosage, with appropriate protective clothing and on the correct crops, the risk is minimal – full stop.”

Read the original article on African Farming »

Does herbicide spraying impact drinking water?

By Katrina Elsken
Published November 18, 2025 on Florida’s Lake Okeechobee News

Okeechobee Utility Authority (OUA) customers have a personal interest in the use of chemical herbicides on plants in Lake Okeechobee. The lake is OUA’s primary source of potable water. The main water intake is in Lake Okeechobee, west of the “Lock 7” pier.

What happens if there are invasive plants near the OUA water intake?
 Zachary Fletcher, of Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), explained: “When invasive plant management is required within the lakeside potable water intake area, FWC staff request the Okeechobee Utility Authority temporarily draws water from their secondary intake location as an additional precautionary measure. Crews are directed to remain 500 feet from the lakeside intake when management is not required, and crew locations are monitored by GPS in real time.”

Is 500 feet of buffer sufficient to protect OUA water customers? The answer depends on which herbicides are used and the concentration used.

According to the University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (UF/IFAS) Center for Aquatic and Invasive Plants website FWC is the lead agency for aquatic plant management in Florida. “FWC issues permits and contracts for the control of aquatic plants, much of which is achieved using EPA and FDACS-registered herbicides. FWC authorizes the use of registered herbicides by state contractors on work plans for each public water body,” the website states.

Fletcher stated herbicides used to treat invasive aquatic plants on Lake Okeechobee in 2025 include:

• Imazapyr: Used to control Cyperus blepharoleptos (Cuban club-rush), Ludwigia grandiflora|hexapetala (large flower Primrose Willow), Luziola subintegra (Tropical American watergrass), Panicum repens (torpedograss);
• Sethoxydim: Used to control torpedograss;
• Diquat: Used to control Cuban club-rush, Eichhornia (water hyacinth) and Pistia (water lettuce), Scleria lacustris (Wright’s nutrush);
• Glyphosate: Used to control Cuban club-rush, Imperata cylindrica (cogon grass), large flower primrose willow, Tropical American watergrass;
• Flumioxazin: Used to control water hyacinth, water lettuce, Ipomoea sp;
• ProcellaCOR: Used to control water hyacinth and water lettuce; 
• Triclopyr: Used to control Schinus terebinthifolius.

“Penoxsulam, 2-4 D, and Imazamox are also herbicides that work on water hyacinth and could be utilized,” Fletcher added.

The University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (UF/IFAS) Center for Aquatic and Invasive Plants website states the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS) determine which herbicide active ingredients are registered for use in aquatic sites in Florida.

FDACS is the state agency designated to regulate pesticides used in Florida, and the Florida Pesticide Law (Chapter 487, Florida Statutes) is used for this purpose. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) is responsible for implementing EPA regulations for chemicals applied to waters within Florida.

UF/IFAS Center for Aquatic and Invasive Plants website “Waters “includes the following information on the herbicides used by FWC spray vendors on Lake Okeechobee.

Imazapyr

IFAS lists Imazapyr as “Low toxicity to fish, non-toxic to waterfowl.”
 Warnings include: “Do not apply within 1 mile of active irrigation water intake.

“Do not apply within 1/2 mile (2,640 feet) upstream of a functioning potable water intake.

“Do not apply within 1/2 mile of an active potable water intake in a standing body of water. Applications within 1/2 mile of potable water intake can be made if the intake is shut down for a minimum of 48 hours.”

Half-life in water is about 2 days.

Sethoxydim

The IFAS website warns “Do not apply within 500 feet of an irrigation intake for crop growing area.”

It also warns, “Do not use water in the immediate area where TIGR herbicide is applied for drinking for 30 days after application or until analytical monitoring has verified less than 1 part per billion (ppb) in water.”

The website advises: “Fishing in the immediate area of application is catch and release only for the restricted period.”

Diquat

The IFAS website warns: “Avoid applications within newly installed revegetation sites.”

The website advises diquat has “slight to moderate toxicity to fish.” It also notes the herbicide is “moderately toxic to birds.”

It advises the applicator “coordinate with water facility manager for applications within 1,600 feet of an active potable water intake,” and to use “rate dependent setbacks of 350-1,600 feet from functioning potable water intake.”

Half-life of the herbicide in water is 1-2 days. Soil dissipation half-life may exceed 3 years.

The site warns: “Avoid mixing with or applying to turbid waters; binds tightly to clay and organic particles.”

Glyphosate

Glyphosate has been the source of controversy for years, with some countries banning its use over concerns about danger to human health. While the herbicide has not been banned in the U.S., some counties and cities have local bans. In 2019, Miami banned use of glyphosate by the county employees and contractors. Key West, Fort Myers, Miami Beach and Satellite Beach have similar ordinances.

The IFAS site warns: “Do not apply within ½ mile upstream of a functioning potable water intake or within ½ mile of a functioning potable water intake in static water.” (One-half mile equals 2,640 feet.)

The website adds that applications can be made if the intake is shut down for 48 hours or an approved water analysis indicates the glyphosate concentration is below 0.7 parts per million (ppm).

Half-life of the herbicide in ponds is approximately 12-60 days.
 IFAS warns: “Avoid application in winds greater than 10 mph.”

Flumioxazin

Flumioxazin is listed as “moderately toxic to fish.”

There are no potable water restrictions.

The website notes this herbicide has a short half-life I water, depending on season, water depth and especially pH. The half-life in water with low pH (6.0-6.2) is approximately 39 hours. Half-life in medium pH (7.0-7.2) is approximately 18.6 hours. Half-life in high pH (>8.5) is approximately 1.7 hours.

Half-life in soil is approximately 45 days.

ProCellaCOR

ProCellaCOR is not on the UF/IFAS list of Herbicides Registered for Use in Florida Waters. ProCellaCOR’s 

Triclopyr

The IFAS website states this herbicide is “practically non-toxic to fish” and is “non-toxic to waterfowl.”

Recommended setback from potable water intake depend on the size and rate of application.

The herbicide has a half-life of 2.5 days in shallow water/summer to 14 days deep water/winter.

Half-life in soil is about 45 days.

Penoxsulam

There are no restrictions on the use of Penoxsulum on potable water. The website states: “Do not apply to waters used for food crop irrigation until concentration drops below 1 ppb. Avoid applications within or adjacent to newly planted aquatic revegetation sites.”

Average half-life in Florida waters is 2 to 4 weeks. Dark or tannic stained waters may decrease sunlight and prolong half-life.

2,4-D

Warnings about 2,4-D include: “Do not irrigate with treated water, if applied within 600 feet of functioning water intake; until 7 days after application within 600 feet of irrigation water intake, or; an approved assay of water taken 3 days after application demonstrates a 2,4D concentration of 0.1ppm or less.”

The site also warns: “Do not apply within 600 feet of a functioning potable water intake for floating plant control. Coordinate applications with facility water operators.”

Half-life of 2,4-D in water is 7-10 days.

Warnings also include: “Highly volatile -- do not apply in winds greater than 5 mph.”

Imazamox

The IFAS website states this herbicide is “practically non-toxic” to fish and waterfowl.

No water restrictions are required if applications are ¼ mile or more (1,320 feet) or more from potable water intake. “Shut down water intake if application exceeds 50 ppb within ¼ mile of water intake,” the website advises.

In gathering information for this article, on November 17, the newspaper reached out to FWC with the following questions:

1. How did FWC determine that 500 feet was a safe distance? 
2. Have FWC contractors sprayed Imazapyr or Glyphosate within half a mile of the primary Okeechobee Utility Authority water intake?
3. Have they sprayed Diquat within 1,600 feet of the intake? 
4. Have they sprayed 2,4-D within 600 feet of the water intake?

On December 2, Zachary Fletcher of FWC responded to the questions: “Potable intake restrictions and application setbacks are specified by individual product labels. FWC staff and contractors follow the label directions of any product used, which include these directions if required for a given product.”

He did not provide the requested information about how close to the water intake the herbicides were sprayed over the past year.

Read the original article on Florida’s Lake Okeechobee News »

Read more from the "In the Weeds" Series »