January 29, 2025 • 49 mins
Welcome back to season 9 of War Against Weeds! We are so excited to be back, and to start our season off with Roger Batts to discuss his work with the IR-4 Project. Learn about what IR-4 is and what services it provides for farmers across the United States.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Sarah Lancaster (00:00):
Sarah, welcome back to the war against weeds
(00:08):
podcast. This is SarahLancaster, extension weed
management specialist at KansasState University. The co host
for this episode is the gooddoctor Joseph Ikley, howdy, Joe.
Joe Ikley (00:19):
Hello!
Sarah Lancaster (00:21):
and our guest today is Roger Batts, so I've
known Roger since my master'sprogram at NC State, more years
ago than either of us wouldprobably care to mention. But
that's not why we invited Rogeron today. So today, Roger is
going to talk to us a little bitabout the IR-4 program. So
(00:42):
thanks for joining us, Roger.
Roger Batts (00:44):
I appreciate you inviting me great to be here. So
Sarah Lancaster (00:48):
going to start off with an easy Well, yeah, I
we're
think it's an easy question.Tell us about your role with the
IR-4 program and kind of how youcame to be in that position.
Roger Batts (00:58):
Yes ma'am, I'm currently the Weed Science
biologist at IR-4 headquarters.Headquarters is in Raleigh.
After many, many years in atRutgers University, it's moved
to Raleigh now at NC State. Andwhen that happened, I was asked
if I'd like to do this biologywork from my headquarters
(01:18):
position, because I had doneresidue work under the IR-4
program at NC State for about 20years before that. So it's a
little bit different, but it'ssort of back to where I was,
because I have done a lot offield plot work, spraying the
screening of herbicides in thepast and lots of crops. So
that's what I do now. Icoordinate projects across the
country for Weed Science.
Sarah Lancaster (01:41):
So you've kind of gone from putting out the
plots trials to analyzingpesticide residues, or talk a
little bit more about thatresidue piece of your your work
background?
Roger Batts (01:52):
Oh, sure, well, not analyzing residue, but doing
residue work is a little bit isdifferent than your regular
multi plot, multi rep screeningprograms that most extension
people are familiar with. It'sit's not as large, but it is
just, it can be just as complex,because I like to tell people
(02:15):
with a story that one of thefirst trials I ever sprayed
residue wise, I sprayed for atotal of 88 seconds. But because
of the need for all the thepaper trail that's required for
GLP or residue work, it took methree hours that day to do the
plots, even though I onlysprayed for 88 total seconds. So
(02:36):
including, you know, lots ofspecific maps, you got to make
sure that you got all yourrecords in line before you
submit your final report. Andit's it can be cumbersome the
GLP world. Yes, ma'am, but I didthat for about 20 years for our
four before moving over.
Sarah Lancaster (02:51):
So just maybe I was
Joe Ikley (02:53):
gonna say maybe it's good time to hit a pause and do
a little acronym update here.Yeah, sure. Maybe we'll start
with GLP, and then IR-4 itself,sure.
Roger Batts (03:05):
Well, IR-4 stands for the inter regional research
project number four. USDAcreated this project in 1963 so
it's older than I am, not verymuch older, but a little bit
older. Basically, it was createdbecause the the State Extension,
(03:27):
ag extension specialist atdifferent states realized that
the tool boxes for specialtycrops weren't as deep as those
for row crops, and it's becausethe economic incentive is not
there for a registrant to try tochase individual registrations
for each specialty crop. So USDAset up this program so we will
(03:47):
perform some of the researchneeded to get a registration in
exchange for the registrantpromise to put it on the label
if we do so in original researchproject number four, and as far
as GLP, that goes back to theresidue world itself good
laboratory practices that becamein the late 80s. It became
(04:08):
actually a law where you had todo all the background and
paperwork to make sureeverything is traceable and
documented properly so that theresearch could be reproduced if
needed, and also it helps sortof standardize the research
across different places, so thatif I'm doing it in Georgia, I'm
doing it in Virginia, or I'mdoing it in North Dakota, the
(04:31):
research is done similarly, sothat the residue levels come out
similarly, and it makes aneasier decision at EPA when they
review the data. So goodlaboratory practices is what
it's called.
Joe Ikley (04:43):
Perfect, I just want to make sure everyone listening
is all on the same page as weare.
Sarah Lancaster (04:47):
Yeah, that's where I was headed to Joe. So I
guess we've done this longenough.
Joe Ikley (04:53):
Scary.
Sarah Lancaster (04:55):
Yeah for you. all right. So. I think we've got
kind of the background covered.And so Roger, you defined IR-4
and talked a little bit about,kind of how you came into being.
So in here, in 2025 what are thegoals of the IR-4 project?
Roger Batts (05:14):
Basically it's because of that lack of we don't
have a deep, specialty crops.Don't have deep tool boxes for
pest management. So we have, wecan do all the disciplines, Weed
Science, entomology, pathology.We basically are there to run
the residue studies to get thesetolerances, or MRLs, maximum
(05:35):
residue levels. Those MRLs getestablished before you have
before you can put a thing, puta product on a label or put a
crop on a label. So that's whatwe're basically charged with.
Now the biologist side that Ido, sometimes a registrant will
say, Well, before we get startedon that, we need a little more
comfortable. We need to be morecomfortable with the efficacy
(05:57):
and crop safety of our productin that crop or on that pest. Or
sometimes we'll do itsimultaneously. They'll say we
feel comfortable, but give us alittle bit more background data
so we can write an appropriatelabel at the end. So I guess I
sort of went tangent on youthere. But yes, we it's the IR-4
(06:17):
program was designed to getthese residue levels established
so the MRLs could get publishedin the Federal Registry. The
biologist side helps supportthat with efficacy and crop
safety data.
Sarah Lancaster (06:29):
So you approach it from from both sides then.
Roger Batts (06:32):
When we have to in a perfect world, the registrar
will already be comfortable, andthey'll say, Just go do the
residue work, and we'll be fine.But sometimes we have to support
it with some more efficacy andcrop safety. Yes, ma'am,
Sarah Lancaster (06:44):
okay. And so you kind of started us down
this, this path, Roger. Butwhat's the relationship like
between IR, the IR-4 program,and a registrant? Like, how do
you guys interact from kind ofbeginning to end of the process?
Sure.
Roger Batts (07:00):
Well, it all. Everything is triggered by a
request that comes in from ourstakeholders. And we get
requests for from from growersand commodity growers
associations. We get requestscoming in from extension
specialists and and universityresearchers. We can basically
accept requests from anybody buta registrant employee. That's
(07:20):
sort of, you know, that will beconflict of interest on on our
part. But those requests come inand the first thing we do as far
as interacting with theregistrant is, if the product,
if the request comes in andinvolves a product that would
that registrant owns, we sendthat request to them and say,
Would you support this if itbecame part of the IR-4 priority
(07:43):
list in a certain year, andwould you put it on the label,
if they say no, of course,everything stops right then. But
if they say yes, then theprocess starts those projects
that they say yes to go into ourbig database, and then every
year, in September through aseries of of whittling down, I
(08:05):
guess you'd call it, through aseries of of eliminations and
meetings, we find out which onesare the most pressing needs in
our September food use workshop.We call it, and those go into
our following year's researchplan. Now, during all this,
also, we have regularlyscheduled the group of IR-4 will
(08:28):
travel or the registrant maycome to us, where we meet with
registrants every year anddiscuss either ongoing projects,
new potential projects, orthings that may have already
gone through EPA, and we're justchecking up on Hey, is it on a
label yet, so that we can followup and go all the way through
the process with them. So ourannual meetings with these
(08:49):
registrant is important to us,but the really kickoff thing is
right there at the beginning,when when a request comes in, we
send that forward to theregistrant and they tell us yes
or no, whether or not they willbe willing to support that use.
Sarah Lancaster (09:04):
So I'm not asking you to, like, name names
or anything, but like, how oftendo you get a no? Like, what
percentage actually moveforward? Does that make sense?
Roger Batts (09:14):
Well sometimes we say no ourselves. When it comes
in, we vet the request first.And if it's something like, you
know, we want to see if roundupworks over the top of a soybean
of a non GMO snap bean. Well, wego right then and go back to the
requester and say, Well, thisone probably not going to work.
(09:35):
And we also have, you know, youalso have to identify the
requester to make sure they are,you know, qualified to make
these requests. Sometimes, youknow, we get things that, I
guess you won't, don't want tosay Russian hackers, but
sometimes we get people playingin our websites that we we
really have to vet these thingsfirst. As far as registrants
(09:57):
saying no, it depends on. Mostof the time they will say yes. A
lot of times they say yes, butyou know, we'll need some more
supporting data, or we make sureyou know, all the supporting
data we see so far is on mucksoils. We need some more mineral
soils before we're willing toexpand the label for you. So we
get some yeses, we get someyeses, buts, and then sometimes
(10:20):
they know that their product maybe in a regulatory bind at EPA,
and they'll just say, No, we'renot moving forward from that
one. So if you want to press meon a percentage, maybe 65 70% or
a yes, go forward, somethinglike that. Yeah,
Sarah Lancaster (10:38):
the other question that came to mind when
you were talking about thatRoger is when you provide all
the data to the EPA, you'regoing back to make sure that
it's on the label. You'rechecking that full federal
label, right? This is part ofthat section three, label, not
like a special local needs oranything like that, right? This
(11:00):
is a full label?
Roger Batts (11:02):
Not necessarily, if they they will tell us.
Sometimes, some registrantschoose 24 C's, especially,
especially in specialty crops.They, they, they're a little bit
more cautious with their withtheir labeling. Sometimes it is
a section three. They'll say,yes, it's on the section three
label. Sometimes in ourdatabase, we will have to go
(11:23):
back and document thatparticular project as use
registered, not nationally,because it will be in certain
states under 20 4c labels not itreally isn't section three so it
varies. Yeah.
Sarah Lancaster (11:39):
Any questions on your end, Joe,
Joe Ikley (11:43):
oh, plenty, but I'm also a state full of what may
categorize a specialty crops,according to some registrants,
so I'll continue to digest a fewquestions into more palatable
form.
Sarah Lancaster (11:57):
Okay, so that is a good question.
Roger Batts (12:02):
we get that asked a lot. What is the specialty crop?
And under the latest farm bill,specialty crops are basically
fruits, vegetables, tree, tree,nuts, herbs and spices,
consumable things as well asenvironmental or what we call
(12:22):
the environmental horticulturalcrops, or ornamental
horticultural crops, landscapes,nursery crops like that. We also
work in those crops whichbasically we just have to prove
efficacy and crop safety. Inthere. We don't have to worry
about a residue number, becauseit's nothing that's going to be
in end up being consumed. So, sothat is basically just
(12:44):
screening, sending the data to aregistrant, proving that it is
safe or not safe, and then theymake the choice on putting it on
a label or not. So ourenvironmental hort side, as far
as scoreboard, is a whole lotmore successful. I think we've
over the years, we may havegotten 60 to 65,000 approvals
through an environmental Hort,where, on our food side, we're
(13:07):
somewhere 25 to 23,000 or 25,000since 1963 now that does not
mean all of them are still inplace, because products get
removed from the market,registrations get canceled,
things like that. But that'ssort of the scoreboard since our
beginning.
Joe Ikley (13:26):
Yeah. So, so Sarah, for example, I'm sitting here
thinking, corn, soybean, smallgrain that. That's what we kind
of call our major crops, butthen the other 20 some that we
might grow on a regular basis. Imean, here's a foot and mouth
movement. I was in Saskatoonlast week and called canola
minor crop like, oh, I shouldn'tbe calling that a minor crop up
(13:47):
here, but that's how we have tocategorize it, so that edible
legumes are a big one for us,and we even have things like
onions on mineral soil. Maybe,maybe one of the things Roger
was referring to, of muck versusmineral soils earlier. So we can
grow 20 to 30 different crops,and most of them, we might be
working with IR-4 to try and getsome additional registration. So
(14:11):
if we sit here, I can askquestions all day.
Roger Batts (14:15):
Now, you mentioned canola. Canola is actually one
of those where we have to it'smore than the typical 300,000
acres that people consider aminor crop, but we are allowed
to work on it because it has nowbeen classified as a specialty
crop. But in order for and letme go back to one of the
(14:36):
privileges of working with IR-4,or one of the advantages to work
in IR-4 is that, since we arethe government, generating
government data for thegovernment, our submissions to
EPA are generally we don't haveto worry about these PRIA fees
that are registrant would whenthey send a packet a petition to
EPA. So if we get those PRIAfees waived, except when. You
(15:00):
get that, that little thingabout if it's above 300,000
acres, we have to have a littlebit more justification behind
our petition, some weight of theevidence, we call it, and EPA
lines out those weight of theevidence items that we must
check box in order for that toalso get our PRIA fee waiver,
(15:21):
waived, waived, waiver exempt.That is one of the advantage
through IR-4, is that the PRIAfees that registrants generally
have to pay if it comes to IR-4for a specialty crop use, we
don't have to pay those fees. Sothere have been years where and
(15:43):
we keep up with this. I thinklast year, our registrant PRIA
fee savings was like betweenfour and $5 million we have had.
I think our record year is likea little bit short of $7 million
in PREA fee savings that IR-4has been able to save in order
for our projects to go throughEPA versus what it would have
(16:06):
cost from registrar. Soregistrars like to do that. It's
a win win. It's actually it's awin win win. Because the more
crop we protect, the more theconsumer benefits. Because
there's more on the grocerystore shelves, prices are lower.
You don't have to spend as muchas your take home income for
food in the US, as you willother places. So.
Sarah Lancaster (16:29):
So I'm curious, in the case of like, a canola or
dry beans or something that'smaybe a little larger acre than
some of the others, what arethose things that you have to to
demonstrate, to justify kind ofhaving it under the umbrella of
IR-4.
Roger Batts (16:43):
I thought you might ask me that the weight of the
evidence list, I've been exposedto it, but basically our the
regular the registration team,you know, the the residue side
of IR-4 they deal with thosequestions and answering those
questions, I it may be thingslike, will it be registered in
(17:08):
the US first or or there's noother options if we don't get
this tool, there are no otheroptions available. Sort of a
validation of why we did it,like type stuff, but the
specifics, or I may not know allthose so I better not say
Sarah Lancaster (17:26):
it sounds a lot like the things that we talk
about when we help with 20 4clabels at the state level, like,
Why? Why should we approve thisif there's already something
else, if
Roger Batts (17:36):
there's nothing there, it's reached a critical
this pest is a rich crisislevel, Section 18. The same way
you've got to prove, you got toshow how much of a crisis it is
in order for a department togrant it to you. I understand.
Joe Ikley (17:52):
I know a specific example recently, the tribe
around label. From a pre plantperspective, we have reduced the
crop rotation interval to someof our minor crops, or low, low
acreage crops. Maybe we'll callit that. And you know, that's to
expand our weed controlpotential pre plant but maybe a
different example of a productthat's been around for a while,
(18:15):
but just trying to tighten upsome of those pre plant
intervals, I guess. Yeah. Oh,the
Roger Batts (18:20):
rotational intervals. Yes, yes, we, we've
got some projects going on rightnow for that, that very reason,
it also, you know one thing, itallows you to control the weeds
without having to skip an entireyear before you get into that.
If you, if you have to skip anentire year after using it, you
(18:41):
may have to put a lower valuecrop in where, if we shorten
that interval, the grower cancome back the very next year and
have a more profitable crop onthat land, as well as was, well
as resistance management,maintaining weed control in your
rotation. Crop is very importantfor specialty crops, because,
like I said, the tool boxes areshallow to start with. It. Those
(19:04):
reduction of the rotationalintervals is the very valuable
thing. We've gotten quite a bitof interest in that we I know
I've written a couple ofprotocols in the last two, three
years, multiple crops involved,just to get the data to the
registrant so that they canreduce those intervals. Yeah,
good examples.
Sarah Lancaster (19:25):
So, Joe, you made a comment earlier. That
kind of alludes to the nextdirection I thought we'd take
the the discussion, and that is,Roger, how do you interact with
academics? So, you know, how doyou work with Joe in North
Dakota, or, you know, ourcounterparts in other places,
sure.
Roger Batts (19:43):
Basically, my interaction will start once a
project does get a priority andI start developing a protocol. I
know, I know lots of researchersacross the country who say, Oh,
this. I know they work in thatcrop, so I lean on them. For
advice on All right, what kindof rates do you see? What kind
of soils do you have where I cancheck the label and make sure
(20:06):
that the rate that I assign in aproject in your area is
appropriate? They also are oftencalling me and saying, does any?
Has anyone submitted a requestfor x in crop y, and I can help
them with that. And then they'lltell me why, and then I'll say,
well, yes or no, and if there'snot, I can help them, you know,
(20:29):
with their submission to IR-4,and let it, let it come in
through a regular submissionpathway. That's the biggest
thing, is that I've worked withso many of them for so long,
that I know who to lean on asfar as advice and interaction
with our and I know maybe theyeven worked on the this
(20:52):
particular product in thisparticular crop. So that's
that's the big, the biggestinteraction I have. Another
thing is that a lot of them willcome to our our September meet,
our food use workshop, and theywill stand up for things that
are very important for theirtheir growers and their regions
at our state. So that's, well,that's where I get a lot of
(21:14):
interaction with them as
well. So
is the coolest discipline? So,yeah, they're the coolest
people. Anyway, people in theroom with Weed Science.
Joe Ikley (21:25):
Well, obviously, yeah, I was going to ask, Is it
like a so I don't know this isan official thing or just
something that we've done, butwe have Brian Jenks up here as
our IR-4 liaison, at least forWeed Science, because I'm in the
heart of the corn, soybean, kindof wheat of the state, but we
(21:48):
want to talk lentils orchickpeas. Brian's in the heart
of that, and then he's got yearsof experience, so he's the
obvious choice for us. But wealso have fungicides,
insecticides, and so does itlook kind of like one liaison
per state, per pesticide, ordoes it differ? Did we just kind
of default to let Brian handlebecause he's going to give the
right answers. Generally,
Roger Batts (22:09):
the liaison, the state liaisons under the IFO
program, uh, represent all thedisciplines they it's their job
in their just in their littlejob description that we assign
to them is their job to identifythe needs in all the disciplines
and bring them forward to IR-4,either at that September meeting
(22:30):
or through other regionalmeetings where they can sort of
narrow down the most pressingneeds before they come to the
September meeting. That's whatliaisons basically cover all the
disciplines.
Sarah Lancaster (22:44):
And then when every single state and even like
territories have a liaison. Orhow does that work?
Roger Batts (22:49):
Yeah. Well, yeah, we do. We've got an IR-4 liaison
in every state. Some are veryactive. Some are not active. I
mean, some of them are notactive for obvious reasons. You
know, there may not be that manyspecialty crops in the state, or
they may be fill it up withhouses, you know, but we do have
a liaison for every state, eveneven in some of the northeastern
(23:11):
states, where there's not a lotof food crop production, there
may be a lot of landscape andornamental production, so we do
have A liaison that'll handlequestions for those as well.
Sarah Lancaster (23:25):
So go ahead, Jim. I'm just going off
Joe Ikley (23:28):
on a tangent here, but I was just thinking, so what
does that look like when youhave a Kansas liaison versus a
California one? Just kind ofthe, you know, the acreage or
percentage of what might becrops falling under the RF four
program on one state versus theother. It's, I'm sure it's a
balancing act you guys havefigured out by now, but I'm just
curious,
Roger Batts (23:48):
a need is a need? Well, if it's, if it's a high
need in watermelons in Kansasand and a high need in
watermelons in California, thathelps, because when we're at our
meeting, the more differentregions. In order for states
that feel the same way and giveit a high priority, an a
priority is we go with the ABCsystem, basically in our
meeting, if they both feel itneeds an A, it gets an A. And
(24:13):
if, if Kansas watermelon growersare there and they speak up loud
enough, then it might overshadowa California safflower request,
because it's the room may feelthat the need is more for the
Kansas watermelons. So again,state cooperation, regional
(24:34):
cooperation, the you know, themore, the more you get involved
with the same project, thebetter chance it has in making
the final list. So
Sarah Lancaster (24:46):
you've talked about this list and ranking
priorities. Do you aim to haveso many like ABC or high,
medium, low priorities eachyear?
Roger Batts (24:55):
We basically get limited or to, well, we try to,
we will. Calculate that based onour NIFA funding. Yeah, and in
the past few years, basically,we've been somewhere
prioritizing 35 to 45 as in thefall of for our next year's
projects. When I first startedwith if for that number, because
(25:18):
it wasn't as expensive toconduct research as it is now,
inputs weren't as high. That,combined with the relatively
fat, flat funding that we havehad at IR-4 for a decade or so
now, means that we don't get todo 60 or 65 projects that I was
familiar with when I firststarted with our four. We're
(25:40):
down into 30 fives and 40 fivesnow, because of the cost it
takes to do it and the flatfunding,
Sarah Lancaster (25:47):
how does the number of new active ingredients
play into that decrease? Or doesit?
Roger Batts (25:53):
Well, I don't know if you can really say new active
ingredients and Weed Science inthe same medium. That's my
point.
Sarah Lancaster (26:02):
Just the lack of new AIS, is that part of
what's making that number,
Roger Batts (26:06):
the joke I make sometimes is that weed science
and specialty crops is liketaking 1950s television and
vacuum tubes and trying to fitthem in flat screen plasma
televisions. We're trying tomake things fit old things fit
into the new systems. That'sbasically where we are with
herbicides and specialty crops.When you look at our list every
(26:28):
fall, you'll see that a lot ofthe products that are moving
forward into next year'sresearch are old products. I
mean, I think last year weprioritized, last year we
started, I think 20 or 21residue studies in Weed Science,
and four of them were linuronnand three of them were
(26:54):
s-metholachlor, you know, so weare, we're just Trying. We're
trying to make things fit oldproducts fit into the new
technologies where we can begreat if we had some more new
modes of action, developed andexciting stuff. But that's the
way it is, especially crops.Yep, it's not like that in
(27:15):
fungicides and insecticides,they they come up with something
new, and it is. It's brand new.Weed Science is a little
different.
Sarah Lancaster (27:24):
Yeah, that's a whole nother line of questions
for another day. Why thosethings are so different right
now? Um,
Roger Batts (27:33):
interrupt you again. But, um, another aspect
of that is with the ESA theEndangered Species Act stuff
with EPA right now, they havetold us that are the first the
first thing they're going to tryto conquer, or things they're
getting sued over, the nextthing they're going to attack
are brand new molecules. Andafter that they're going to
(27:54):
tackle the they move thingsalong for new uses, for existing
products. Well, that's whereherbicides, especially crop,
that's where we play, that'swhere we live. So it's sort of
down the pecking order a littlebit right now.
Sarah Lancaster (28:09):
Okay, so what does that do for, like,
timelines to see the processthrough? So if I were to call
and say, My pumpkin growers wantproduct X today, can we start on
this? We're going to collect thedata. I'm assuming that's a two
or three year process,
Roger Batts (28:24):
it is, and then you have
Sarah Lancaster (28:27):
any like predictions for how long after
that, growers should actuallysee a
Roger Batts (28:32):
label where, in the past, before, before we started
seeing a little slowdown at EPAwe could rely on, and they've
told us, keep submitting, so westill submit. But in the past,
we would, once it's through thedoor and they reviewed it for
that initial screen they'll use.They usually set that pre a date
(28:53):
about 15 months out, they'llsay, all right, 15 months you
ought to have your MRL decisionmade, and then, then it's a
matter of the registrant. Youknow, once you get an MRL, the
registrant may do it in threeweeks, or it may take a year and
a half when they decide to printthe label next time. But for the
for the EPA, used to be about 15months in the door, and then it
(29:15):
started becoming 18 months, andthen it became 20 months and 24
and so it's the pre a dates noware pretty much estimates
instead of deadlines, because ofall the other things that are
going on at the agency. So ithas slowed down. And I think as
far as I for, as far as I can, Ican see it, it will, it will
(29:38):
slow down the timelines onprojects that we work on and
submit, yes, ma'am,
Sarah Lancaster (29:44):
so instead of being I'm just trying to get my
head around it. So instead ofbeing like a four year process
from start to finish, it's goingto become like a six year
process.
Roger Batts (29:53):
It could Yes. Ma'am, okay, we let we generally
like to think. We prioritize itin the fall. So we sign a
protocol in the spring, give itone year in the field, one year
in the lab, and then a half ayear to write up and submit. So
we'd like to say from the timewe sign a protocol to to to
(30:15):
writing it up, ready to submit,is like two and a half years of
I or four handling it sometimesthat doesn't work, because
trials may fail. We may haveproblems in the lab with getting
the method validated and workedout in the lab properly, but 30
months is our is our goal forsigning a protocol to being
(30:40):
ready to submit, so two and ahalf years, and then you add on
the the EPA timeline. Now you'reright. It could be five, six
years from the time we start, tothe time it gets the label.
Sarah Lancaster (30:55):
So random, tangential question, who runs
all the actual residue analyzes?What lab does that,
Roger Batts (31:01):
we have a couple of labs inside the IR-4 network at
universities. We've got one atUniversity of Florida and one at
UC Davis, and we will also usecontract labs to do things
that's a little more expensive,but it helps keep things moving
along faster, instead ofcreating backlogs at our IR-4
(31:23):
four labs, years ago, we hadfour labs, Cornell, Michigan,
state, Florida and UC Davis, andagain, with flat line budgets,
with cost increasing everywhere,especially for some of that lab
equipment, we Were down to twolabs inside the network and
using contract labs otherwise.
Sarah Lancaster (31:45):
Roger, do you think we need to go any more
kind of step by step,chronologically through the
process of like the productyou've talked about? The
stakeholder makes the request,you prioritize it, you write a
protocol, then you gather allthe data and ship it out to the
EPA, and then the EPA says yayor nay, and then the registrant
(32:09):
is responsible for printing thelabels. Is there anything else
in that process that we've nottouched on, or did I totally
screw up that process?
Roger Batts (32:19):
That's very good umbrella now, but there's, there
are lots of many steps, manysmaller steps involved in all
those steps. But I don't knowhow in depth you'd like to get
Now, if we want to back up tothe before, the prioritization,
before it gets the right, thepriority to work, we can, we? We
(32:41):
will have our regional offices.We have four regional offices,
ones that University ofMaryland, Eastern Shore, ones at
University of Florida, ones inMichigan State, ones at UC
Davis, throughout the spring andsummer each year, they will be
meeting with their stakeholdersas regional meetings to set
(33:02):
their little regional prioritiesso that they can bring those
forward at the National Meetingand sort of negotiate between
regions. Sometimes they're thevery same one. You know that it
could be the herbicide X intomatoes may be important of all
four regions. But if it's not,then sometimes it's like, well,
(33:22):
my, my, my request for tomatomight, might mean more than your
request in the South for sweetpotatoes. And so there's a lot
of give and take, a lot ofnegotiation, and some of that
boils down to also whether ornot the particular product is
something the EPA says is a sortof a green light, or whether
(33:46):
that product is a yellow, whichmeans a few, there's some
cautionary about that, orwhether it's an orange, which
means don't necessarily stop it,but there may be some
significant hurdles. It has totravel. But if EPA tells us red
then that that will probably putthe stop on, on the momentum of
(34:06):
a project. So
Sarah Lancaster (34:08):
I'm a little curious about this, this ranking
process. Do you guys like bringthe data and say this is the
dollar value to my region? Theseare the acres. Is there a little
bit of like, politicking, not somuch in the negative sense, but
like you said, negotiating, likewe'll do this this year and
yours next year. Or if you helpme with this, I'll help you with
(34:28):
that. Like, are those the kindsof conversations happening?
Roger Batts (34:31):
I think that's more representative, rather than
someone screaming out, well, 75%control, well, that we're going
to get 90% control and overthere, instead of the data, it's
more of the need, basically, thecrypt, how critical it is for
our crop. So it is, it is sortof squeaky wheel gets to grease.
(34:52):
It is. Sometimes we can takethat instead of calling it an A,
we'll move it to B, but we'llbring it back next year and try
to get an. A next year, thingslike that happen. It's that's
getting tougher and tougher.Because, like I said, we used to
be able to do 6060, or 65 A's,and now we're down to 35 to 40,
(35:13):
those negotiations and thosediscussions in the in the room
of 200 or so, those discussions,sometimes are heavy. Those are
some. They can get intense. Theycan get intense. Yes,
Joe Ikley (35:30):
spirited, spirited discussions. Very good, very
good.
Roger Batts (35:33):
I mean, good work.
It can get spirited, butgenerally, we usually get it
worked out for this, all saidand done, we usually leave the
room at a food use workshop withwith our correct number.
Joe Ikley (35:54):
So I don't think we cover this. But so what is kind
of the current ratio of what tosay, herbicide, fungicide,
insecticide of the current alist,
Roger Batts (36:09):
it's running pretty, pretty close to a third
some years. Herbicides may be20% some years, they may be 40%
but generally, all threedisciplines generally run about
a third of the priorities eachyear. That was a concern several
years ago, when we made thisshift to we'd have a Weed
(36:30):
Science Day, an entomology day,a pathology day, and then the
final day we all got together,but now we cover them all as we
go through all the disciplinestogether, as we go through that
was a concern that onediscipline might be more vocal
than others, but it's worked outto be about a third actually.
(36:55):
Now under the Weed Science, wealso take care of PGRs, so both
of those, since they both, youknow, handle plant processes,
they they both are under theWeed Science category in our
food and similarly, nematicidesfall under pathology like I
(37:17):
think that's how EPA views italso. So do
Sarah Lancaster (37:23):
you have any other process questions? Joe,
nope, so my curiosity questionhere, Roger, what do you think
is the most you can chooseinteresting or impactful project
that you've been part of in theIR-4 for
Roger Batts (37:46):
a specific project.
Sarah Lancaster (37:47):
Yeah, what's something that stated like, if
you were to look back at, like,the highlights of, we were to
play a highlight reel of theRoger batts career, what would
be some of the things that,like, you know, stick out as
being important? Oh, gosh, doesthat make sense?
Roger Batts (38:03):
I think I know what you're asking, but I should have
prepped you for that one I did.I was doing the residue work at
NC State. Man ran like almost500 residue trials over the
course of those years. And I, Idon't know, I don't know which
one would be most impactful.Wow, that's a good question. I
(38:28):
guess the government answer is,they were all equally important
and all equally valuable to thespecialty crop growers of the
United States.
Sarah Lancaster (38:39):
I sounds like an advanced,
Joe Ikley (38:43):
difficult thing, but at least it was herbicide
related, right? Yeah, all right,good.
Roger Batts (38:56):
I'm sorry, Sarah, that was a vague answer, but I
don't know nothing sticks out. Icould pull one out that really
Sarah Lancaster (39:03):
stood out. Nothing was a particular pain in
the neck. No,
Roger Batts (39:07):
there ever been some pain in the necks. Um,
ginseng. They asked me to do aginseng residue trial in the
mountains of North Carolina, andthis grower had been growing
them in his woods for years andyears, and selling the berries
(39:27):
to a lady in Australia who wasprocessing it into some sort of
supplement, right? Well, he wasabout to get out of the
business. And the my sample hadto get roots. Had to get ginseng
roots out of it. So when it cametime to I sprayed the fungicide.
It came time to harvest. I'mpulling up these roots that are
(39:49):
30 years old, and they'rethey're just huge roots. Now I
didn't know what what I washolding, but you had to dry them
down. So we put them in theselaundry band. Baskets, clean
laundry baskets, take them back,dry them down in a in a room,
before I could bag them up andsend them to the lab. And when I
sent them to the lab, the labdirector said, Where did you get
(40:10):
these roots? He said, Do youknow how valuable these roots
are? And apparently, my basketfull of of ginseng roots that I
had pulled out and dried downwere like 1215, grand because of
those, the size of those ginsengroots, depending on the market
(40:31):
you go to the like the Asianmarket. But she was telling me,
she said, Do you know how much,how valuable these are? And I
didn't know how much silver. Ithought they were just ginseng
roots. So that was a sort of awell back to the difficulty of
it. It rained the day weharvested them. So we're sitting
in the woods and we're having todig em up, sitting on our butts,
(40:54):
digging them out of the groundin a clay soil is raining on us.
It. It was sort of misery. Youknow that was, that was a
memorable residue trial, yes,ma'am, that was very good.
Sarah Lancaster (41:10):
All right. Jim, did you have any last questions?
Joe,
Joe Ikley (41:13):
no more popped up. But we, we kind of went past
that part of it, so no pointcircling back around. Are you
sure fire away. Pick one. Allright? I mean, the one that kind
of popped in my head is, andit's probably because I hadn't
found the right way to phraseit, why I said move on. But so,
so thinking about pesticideregistrations, not just in the
(41:37):
US, but in internationalcountries as well. Is there any
sort of working relationship orprioritization if, if a
pesticide is registered in Xcountry, but not in the US, on a
minor crop? Does that makethings easier or prioritization
(41:59):
easier? I couldn't find theright way to phrase it, but
hopefully that makes enoughsense. Sarah, you nodded, like
you can phrase it better. Well,I
Sarah Lancaster (42:09):
the what I'm thinking of is like, for
example, if there's a productthat the Canadians are using in
canola, does that make it easierfor North Dakota to get it?
Yeah, or
Joe Ikley (42:19):
Europeans using something in sunflowers because
they do that that we can't use.Would that make it easier for us
to get that in the US andsunflowers? Yeah, sometimes
Roger Batts (42:28):
yes, sometimes no. And that generally depends on
the registrar. We've got aherbicide right now that is
being a lot of my researchersare, are really demanding that,
hey, we got to get it. It'sregistered into Europe. We got
to get it here in the UnitedStates, because it's going to,
it's going to fit a void, it'sgoing to help control amaranthus
(42:50):
and the and so, yes, that'sgreat. It's registered already
in Europe or in Australia, andthe registrant says, No, we're
not bringing in the UnitedStates. So that sort of puts the
kibosh on that. But as far asinternational cooperation,
Canada actually has an IR-4 Pro,IR-4 type program, and we work
(43:10):
very closely with them. In fact,if we both have the same
priority, and we both are, theywant herbicide x in garlic. We
want herbicide x in garlic.Both. Both priorities. Get it.
They both get a priority. Then,instead of 15 trials in the US
(43:34):
and seven in Canada, if we'regoing to submit to EPA and PMRA
Pest Management RegulatoryAssociation in Canada, which is
their EPA, if we're going tosubmit to both of them at the
same time, then we go, we bothget a break. Instead of 15 and
seven, it may be 10 and five. Asfar as number of trials that are
(43:55):
required, because we're going tobe combining that, we work very
closely with the PMC PestManagement Center in Canada,
which is, which is our fullprogram up there. We've we've
worked at our meetings. We'vehad a lot of interest from other
countries, Australia, Germany,China, Japan, Korea, some of
(44:18):
those representatives of theirminers, minor crop programs will
come and see our our processes,and we work with with some of
them on, you know our Well, ifwe could, we collaborate or
share data to help getregistrations internationally.
And I'll also throw out probablywhere I'm stepping above my head
(44:40):
too is that there's a IR-4because of our international
need to cooperateinternationally, we sort of
launched a nonprofit called,excuse me, the minor use
foundation. And the minor usefoundation does exactly what we
do on. A global scale, they willprioritize on crops. They and
(45:05):
they'll find out, well, the USdid seven trials. If we do one
in Spain, one in China and onein India, we could get a global
registration. So then they'llthe the minor, minor use
foundation will do that kind ofthing to help get more trade
opportunities for the US growersthat we wouldn't have gotten
(45:28):
otherwise. So, yeah, it's sortof an international program that
we've helped launch,
Sarah Lancaster (45:35):
maybe. So the thinking there was no, sorry,
the thinking there then Rogerwould be that you have to have
that MRL in order to export it,right? And so you're just
helping getting those tolerancesestablished in potential export
markets, correct.
Roger Batts (45:49):
Okay, correct. And, and there are, there are
different groups of countrieswho form different coalitions to
establish these MRL rules. Youknow, there's Codex. You may
have heard of Codex. And thatgroup of countries, the minor
use foundation, will say, hey,if we do, like I said, those,
(46:11):
those examples of the addedtrials, could get them a codex
tolerance for, you know, lotsmore countries than just the
United States then, and sinceyou referred to that
international shipping isimportant to the US, of course,
especially when some countrieswill maybe arbitrarily set an
MRL instead of using some dataand two of the crops that we
(46:38):
work With most that areinfluenced by international MRLS
the most are sweet potatoes andhops. A good 35 to 40% of the US
sweet potatoes go to Europe,where they have these arbitrary
(46:58):
MRLS that we have to try toabide by and the same in with
hops. About 40% of the hopsproduced in the US go to Europe,
and so we have to really payattention to the MRL and the
residue levels on those cropswhen, whenever we're developing
data in the US. Well, gotta getas many tools as we can deepen,
(47:22):
you know, fill the toolbox.That's, that's sort of, you
know, Stanley, StanleyCulpepper, he, he was been, he's
not as heavily involved anymore,because he's been distracted by
all his wssa responsibilities.But for years, when he, when I
would listen to him talk at thesavannah vegetable meeting, he'd
say, fill the toolbox. Fill thetoolbox. And that's basically
(47:45):
what I are for. We need to fillthe toolbox with speciality crop
growers.
Joe Ikley (47:49):
That's why we need to get you our War Against Weeds
toolbox Stress Ball.
Roger Batts (47:56):
well, being being indoors is very stressful,
because I really love my Ireally love outdoor work. So
being indoors is stressful.Maybe I need that.
Sarah Lancaster (48:08):
is a perfect place to land this thing.
Sometimes
Roger Batts (48:11):
Sometimes I feel like a caged animal.
Sarah Lancaster (48:13):
Thank you Roger In the last 50 minutes with us
chatting about IR-4 and thethings you do to help our our
specialty crop growers. So didyou have any like websites or
places you wanted to directlisteners to get more
information?
Roger Batts (48:30):
Yes ma'am, that would be a great way. The IR-4
website is loaded withinformation on projects that are
current, data that we'vereceived over the years that
people can look into and seewhat can work and what has
worked. You can go to www.irfour project.org, and IR4 has no
dashes in it, even thoughsometimes you'll see as IR - 4
(48:53):
when we write it, it's ir4project, all lowercase.org, so
that will be a great place tojump into looking at what we do
and what we've succeeded and howwe're going to help in
Sarah Lancaster (49:05):
the future. Awesome. Well, thanks again,
Roger. It's really been apleasure to have you on and
thanks to the listeners. We'llsee you guys next time. Thank
you much.
Thanks for listening to the waragainst weeds podcast. We
appreciate support from thenorth central Integrated Pest
(49:28):
Management Center and thecollaboration with the Crop
Protection Network. At cropprotection network.org you can
find this podcast other podcastsand a variety of other pest
management resources.
Sarah, welcome back to the war against weeds
(00:08):
podcast. This is SarahLancaster, extension weed
management specialist at KansasState University. The co host
for this episode is the gooddoctor Joseph Ikley, howdy, Joe.
Joe Ikley (00:19):
Hello!
Sarah Lancaster (00:21):
and our guest today is Roger Batts, so I've
known Roger since my master'sprogram at NC State, more years
ago than either of us wouldprobably care to mention. But
that's not why we invited Rogeron today. So today, Roger is
going to talk to us a little bitabout the IR-4 program. So
(00:42):
thanks for joining us, Roger.
Roger Batts (00:44):
I appreciate you inviting me great to be here. So
Sarah Lancaster (00:48):
going to start off with an easy Well, yeah, I
we're
think it's an easy question.Tell us about your role with the
IR-4 program and kind of how youcame to be in that position.
Roger Batts (00:58):
Yes ma'am, I'm currently the Weed Science
biologist at IR-4 headquarters.Headquarters is in Raleigh.
After many, many years in atRutgers University, it's moved
to Raleigh now at NC State. Andwhen that happened, I was asked
if I'd like to do this biologywork from my headquarters
(01:18):
position, because I had doneresidue work under the IR-4
program at NC State for about 20years before that. So it's a
little bit different, but it'ssort of back to where I was,
because I have done a lot offield plot work, spraying the
screening of herbicides in thepast and lots of crops. So
that's what I do now. Icoordinate projects across the
country for Weed Science.
Sarah Lancaster (01:41):
So you've kind of gone from putting out the
plots trials to analyzingpesticide residues, or talk a
little bit more about thatresidue piece of your your work
background?
Roger Batts (01:52):
Oh, sure, well, not analyzing residue, but doing
residue work is a little bit isdifferent than your regular
multi plot, multi rep screeningprograms that most extension
people are familiar with. It'sit's not as large, but it is
just, it can be just as complex,because I like to tell people
(02:15):
with a story that one of thefirst trials I ever sprayed
residue wise, I sprayed for atotal of 88 seconds. But because
of the need for all the thepaper trail that's required for
GLP or residue work, it took methree hours that day to do the
plots, even though I onlysprayed for 88 total seconds. So
(02:36):
including, you know, lots ofspecific maps, you got to make
sure that you got all yourrecords in line before you
submit your final report. Andit's it can be cumbersome the
GLP world. Yes, ma'am, but I didthat for about 20 years for our
four before moving over.
Sarah Lancaster (02:51):
So just maybe I was
Joe Ikley (02:53):
gonna say maybe it's good time to hit a pause and do
a little acronym update here.Yeah, sure. Maybe we'll start
with GLP, and then IR-4 itself,sure.
Roger Batts (03:05):
Well, IR-4 stands for the inter regional research
project number four. USDAcreated this project in 1963 so
it's older than I am, not verymuch older, but a little bit
older. Basically, it was createdbecause the the State Extension,
(03:27):
ag extension specialist atdifferent states realized that
the tool boxes for specialtycrops weren't as deep as those
for row crops, and it's becausethe economic incentive is not
there for a registrant to try tochase individual registrations
for each specialty crop. So USDAset up this program so we will
(03:47):
perform some of the researchneeded to get a registration in
exchange for the registrantpromise to put it on the label
if we do so in original researchproject number four, and as far
as GLP, that goes back to theresidue world itself good
laboratory practices that becamein the late 80s. It became
(04:08):
actually a law where you had todo all the background and
paperwork to make sureeverything is traceable and
documented properly so that theresearch could be reproduced if
needed, and also it helps sortof standardize the research
across different places, so thatif I'm doing it in Georgia, I'm
doing it in Virginia, or I'mdoing it in North Dakota, the
(04:31):
research is done similarly, sothat the residue levels come out
similarly, and it makes aneasier decision at EPA when they
review the data. So goodlaboratory practices is what
it's called.
Joe Ikley (04:43):
Perfect, I just want to make sure everyone listening
is all on the same page as weare.
Sarah Lancaster (04:47):
Yeah, that's where I was headed to Joe. So I
guess we've done this longenough.
Joe Ikley (04:53):
Scary.
Sarah Lancaster (04:55):
Yeah for you. all right. So. I think we've got
kind of the background covered.And so Roger, you defined IR-4
and talked a little bit about,kind of how you came into being.
So in here, in 2025 what are thegoals of the IR-4 project?
Roger Batts (05:14):
Basically it's because of that lack of we don't
have a deep, specialty crops.Don't have deep tool boxes for
pest management. So we have, wecan do all the disciplines, Weed
Science, entomology, pathology.We basically are there to run
the residue studies to get thesetolerances, or MRLs, maximum
(05:35):
residue levels. Those MRLs getestablished before you have
before you can put a thing, puta product on a label or put a
crop on a label. So that's whatwe're basically charged with.
Now the biologist side that Ido, sometimes a registrant will
say, Well, before we get startedon that, we need a little more
comfortable. We need to be morecomfortable with the efficacy
(05:57):
and crop safety of our productin that crop or on that pest. Or
sometimes we'll do itsimultaneously. They'll say we
feel comfortable, but give us alittle bit more background data
so we can write an appropriatelabel at the end. So I guess I
sort of went tangent on youthere. But yes, we it's the IR-4
(06:17):
program was designed to getthese residue levels established
so the MRLs could get publishedin the Federal Registry. The
biologist side helps supportthat with efficacy and crop
safety data.
Sarah Lancaster (06:29):
So you approach it from from both sides then.
Roger Batts (06:32):
When we have to in a perfect world, the registrar
will already be comfortable, andthey'll say, Just go do the
residue work, and we'll be fine.But sometimes we have to support
it with some more efficacy andcrop safety. Yes, ma'am,
Sarah Lancaster (06:44):
okay. And so you kind of started us down
this, this path, Roger. Butwhat's the relationship like
between IR, the IR-4 program,and a registrant? Like, how do
you guys interact from kind ofbeginning to end of the process?
Sure.
Roger Batts (07:00):
Well, it all. Everything is triggered by a
request that comes in from ourstakeholders. And we get
requests for from from growersand commodity growers
associations. We get requestscoming in from extension
specialists and and universityresearchers. We can basically
accept requests from anybody buta registrant employee. That's
(07:20):
sort of, you know, that will beconflict of interest on on our
part. But those requests come inand the first thing we do as far
as interacting with theregistrant is, if the product,
if the request comes in andinvolves a product that would
that registrant owns, we sendthat request to them and say,
Would you support this if itbecame part of the IR-4 priority
(07:43):
list in a certain year, andwould you put it on the label,
if they say no, of course,everything stops right then. But
if they say yes, then theprocess starts those projects
that they say yes to go into ourbig database, and then every
year, in September through aseries of of whittling down, I
(08:05):
guess you'd call it, through aseries of of eliminations and
meetings, we find out which onesare the most pressing needs in
our September food use workshop.We call it, and those go into
our following year's researchplan. Now, during all this,
also, we have regularlyscheduled the group of IR-4 will
(08:28):
travel or the registrant maycome to us, where we meet with
registrants every year anddiscuss either ongoing projects,
new potential projects, orthings that may have already
gone through EPA, and we're justchecking up on Hey, is it on a
label yet, so that we can followup and go all the way through
the process with them. So ourannual meetings with these
(08:49):
registrant is important to us,but the really kickoff thing is
right there at the beginning,when when a request comes in, we
send that forward to theregistrant and they tell us yes
or no, whether or not they willbe willing to support that use.
Sarah Lancaster (09:04):
So I'm not asking you to, like, name names
or anything, but like, how oftendo you get a no? Like, what
percentage actually moveforward? Does that make sense?
Roger Batts (09:14):
Well sometimes we say no ourselves. When it comes
in, we vet the request first.And if it's something like, you
know, we want to see if roundupworks over the top of a soybean
of a non GMO snap bean. Well, wego right then and go back to the
requester and say, Well, thisone probably not going to work.
(09:35):
And we also have, you know, youalso have to identify the
requester to make sure they are,you know, qualified to make
these requests. Sometimes, youknow, we get things that, I
guess you won't, don't want tosay Russian hackers, but
sometimes we get people playingin our websites that we we
really have to vet these thingsfirst. As far as registrants
(09:57):
saying no, it depends on. Mostof the time they will say yes. A
lot of times they say yes, butyou know, we'll need some more
supporting data, or we make sureyou know, all the supporting
data we see so far is on mucksoils. We need some more mineral
soils before we're willing toexpand the label for you. So we
get some yeses, we get someyeses, buts, and then sometimes
(10:20):
they know that their product maybe in a regulatory bind at EPA,
and they'll just say, No, we'renot moving forward from that
one. So if you want to press meon a percentage, maybe 65 70% or
a yes, go forward, somethinglike that. Yeah,
Sarah Lancaster (10:38):
the other question that came to mind when
you were talking about thatRoger is when you provide all
the data to the EPA, you'regoing back to make sure that
it's on the label. You'rechecking that full federal
label, right? This is part ofthat section three, label, not
like a special local needs oranything like that, right? This
(11:00):
is a full label?
Roger Batts (11:02):
Not necessarily, if they they will tell us.
Sometimes, some registrantschoose 24 C's, especially,
especially in specialty crops.They, they, they're a little bit
more cautious with their withtheir labeling. Sometimes it is
a section three. They'll say,yes, it's on the section three
label. Sometimes in ourdatabase, we will have to go
(11:23):
back and document thatparticular project as use
registered, not nationally,because it will be in certain
states under 20 4c labels not itreally isn't section three so it
varies. Yeah.
Sarah Lancaster (11:39):
Any questions on your end, Joe,
Joe Ikley (11:43):
oh, plenty, but I'm also a state full of what may
categorize a specialty crops,according to some registrants,
so I'll continue to digest a fewquestions into more palatable
form.
Sarah Lancaster (11:57):
Okay, so that is a good question.
Roger Batts (12:02):
we get that asked a lot. What is the specialty crop?
And under the latest farm bill,specialty crops are basically
fruits, vegetables, tree, tree,nuts, herbs and spices,
consumable things as well asenvironmental or what we call
(12:22):
the environmental horticulturalcrops, or ornamental
horticultural crops, landscapes,nursery crops like that. We also
work in those crops whichbasically we just have to prove
efficacy and crop safety. Inthere. We don't have to worry
about a residue number, becauseit's nothing that's going to be
in end up being consumed. So, sothat is basically just
(12:44):
screening, sending the data to aregistrant, proving that it is
safe or not safe, and then theymake the choice on putting it on
a label or not. So ourenvironmental hort side, as far
as scoreboard, is a whole lotmore successful. I think we've
over the years, we may havegotten 60 to 65,000 approvals
through an environmental Hort,where, on our food side, we're
(13:07):
somewhere 25 to 23,000 or 25,000since 1963 now that does not
mean all of them are still inplace, because products get
removed from the market,registrations get canceled,
things like that. But that'ssort of the scoreboard since our
beginning.
Joe Ikley (13:26):
Yeah. So, so Sarah, for example, I'm sitting here
thinking, corn, soybean, smallgrain that. That's what we kind
of call our major crops, butthen the other 20 some that we
might grow on a regular basis. Imean, here's a foot and mouth
movement. I was in Saskatoonlast week and called canola
minor crop like, oh, I shouldn'tbe calling that a minor crop up
(13:47):
here, but that's how we have tocategorize it, so that edible
legumes are a big one for us,and we even have things like
onions on mineral soil. Maybe,maybe one of the things Roger
was referring to, of muck versusmineral soils earlier. So we can
grow 20 to 30 different crops,and most of them, we might be
working with IR-4 to try and getsome additional registration. So
(14:11):
if we sit here, I can askquestions all day.
Roger Batts (14:15):
Now, you mentioned canola. Canola is actually one
of those where we have to it'smore than the typical 300,000
acres that people consider aminor crop, but we are allowed
to work on it because it has nowbeen classified as a specialty
crop. But in order for and letme go back to one of the
(14:36):
privileges of working with IR-4,or one of the advantages to work
in IR-4 is that, since we arethe government, generating
government data for thegovernment, our submissions to
EPA are generally we don't haveto worry about these PRIA fees
that are registrant would whenthey send a packet a petition to
EPA. So if we get those PRIAfees waived, except when. You
(15:00):
get that, that little thingabout if it's above 300,000
acres, we have to have a littlebit more justification behind
our petition, some weight of theevidence, we call it, and EPA
lines out those weight of theevidence items that we must
check box in order for that toalso get our PRIA fee waiver,
(15:21):
waived, waived, waiver exempt.That is one of the advantage
through IR-4, is that the PRIAfees that registrants generally
have to pay if it comes to IR-4for a specialty crop use, we
don't have to pay those fees. Sothere have been years where and
(15:43):
we keep up with this. I thinklast year, our registrant PRIA
fee savings was like betweenfour and $5 million we have had.
I think our record year is likea little bit short of $7 million
in PREA fee savings that IR-4has been able to save in order
for our projects to go throughEPA versus what it would have
(16:06):
cost from registrar. Soregistrars like to do that. It's
a win win. It's actually it's awin win win. Because the more
crop we protect, the more theconsumer benefits. Because
there's more on the grocerystore shelves, prices are lower.
You don't have to spend as muchas your take home income for
food in the US, as you willother places. So.
Sarah Lancaster (16:29):
So I'm curious, in the case of like, a canola or
dry beans or something that'smaybe a little larger acre than
some of the others, what arethose things that you have to to
demonstrate, to justify kind ofhaving it under the umbrella of
IR-4.
Roger Batts (16:43):
I thought you might ask me that the weight of the
evidence list, I've been exposedto it, but basically our the
regular the registration team,you know, the the residue side
of IR-4 they deal with thosequestions and answering those
questions, I it may be thingslike, will it be registered in
(17:08):
the US first or or there's noother options if we don't get
this tool, there are no otheroptions available. Sort of a
validation of why we did it,like type stuff, but the
specifics, or I may not know allthose so I better not say
Sarah Lancaster (17:26):
it sounds a lot like the things that we talk
about when we help with 20 4clabels at the state level, like,
Why? Why should we approve thisif there's already something
else, if
Roger Batts (17:36):
there's nothing there, it's reached a critical
this pest is a rich crisislevel, Section 18. The same way
you've got to prove, you got toshow how much of a crisis it is
in order for a department togrant it to you. I understand.
Joe Ikley (17:52):
I know a specific example recently, the tribe
around label. From a pre plantperspective, we have reduced the
crop rotation interval to someof our minor crops, or low, low
acreage crops. Maybe we'll callit that. And you know, that's to
expand our weed controlpotential pre plant but maybe a
different example of a productthat's been around for a while,
(18:15):
but just trying to tighten upsome of those pre plant
intervals, I guess. Yeah. Oh,the
Roger Batts (18:20):
rotational intervals. Yes, yes, we, we've
got some projects going on rightnow for that, that very reason,
it also, you know one thing, itallows you to control the weeds
without having to skip an entireyear before you get into that.
If you, if you have to skip anentire year after using it, you
(18:41):
may have to put a lower valuecrop in where, if we shorten
that interval, the grower cancome back the very next year and
have a more profitable crop onthat land, as well as was, well
as resistance management,maintaining weed control in your
rotation. Crop is very importantfor specialty crops, because,
like I said, the tool boxes areshallow to start with. It. Those
(19:04):
reduction of the rotationalintervals is the very valuable
thing. We've gotten quite a bitof interest in that we I know
I've written a couple ofprotocols in the last two, three
years, multiple crops involved,just to get the data to the
registrant so that they canreduce those intervals. Yeah,
good examples.
Sarah Lancaster (19:25):
So, Joe, you made a comment earlier. That
kind of alludes to the nextdirection I thought we'd take
the the discussion, and that is,Roger, how do you interact with
academics? So, you know, how doyou work with Joe in North
Dakota, or, you know, ourcounterparts in other places,
sure.
Roger Batts (19:43):
Basically, my interaction will start once a
project does get a priority andI start developing a protocol. I
know, I know lots of researchersacross the country who say, Oh,
this. I know they work in thatcrop, so I lean on them. For
advice on All right, what kindof rates do you see? What kind
of soils do you have where I cancheck the label and make sure
(20:06):
that the rate that I assign in aproject in your area is
appropriate? They also are oftencalling me and saying, does any?
Has anyone submitted a requestfor x in crop y, and I can help
them with that. And then they'lltell me why, and then I'll say,
well, yes or no, and if there'snot, I can help them, you know,
(20:29):
with their submission to IR-4,and let it, let it come in
through a regular submissionpathway. That's the biggest
thing, is that I've worked withso many of them for so long,
that I know who to lean on asfar as advice and interaction
with our and I know maybe theyeven worked on the this
(20:52):
particular product in thisparticular crop. So that's
that's the big, the biggestinteraction I have. Another
thing is that a lot of them willcome to our our September meet,
our food use workshop, and theywill stand up for things that
are very important for theirtheir growers and their regions
at our state. So that's, well,that's where I get a lot of
(21:14):
interaction with them as
well. So
is the coolest discipline? So,yeah, they're the coolest
people. Anyway, people in theroom with Weed Science.
Joe Ikley (21:25):
Well, obviously, yeah, I was going to ask, Is it
like a so I don't know this isan official thing or just
something that we've done, butwe have Brian Jenks up here as
our IR-4 liaison, at least forWeed Science, because I'm in the
heart of the corn, soybean, kindof wheat of the state, but we
(21:48):
want to talk lentils orchickpeas. Brian's in the heart
of that, and then he's got yearsof experience, so he's the
obvious choice for us. But wealso have fungicides,
insecticides, and so does itlook kind of like one liaison
per state, per pesticide, ordoes it differ? Did we just kind
of default to let Brian handlebecause he's going to give the
right answers. Generally,
Roger Batts (22:09):
the liaison, the state liaisons under the IFO
program, uh, represent all thedisciplines they it's their job
in their just in their littlejob description that we assign
to them is their job to identifythe needs in all the disciplines
and bring them forward to IR-4,either at that September meeting
(22:30):
or through other regionalmeetings where they can sort of
narrow down the most pressingneeds before they come to the
September meeting. That's whatliaisons basically cover all the
disciplines.
Sarah Lancaster (22:44):
And then when every single state and even like
territories have a liaison. Orhow does that work?
Roger Batts (22:49):
Yeah. Well, yeah, we do. We've got an IR-4 liaison
in every state. Some are veryactive. Some are not active. I
mean, some of them are notactive for obvious reasons. You
know, there may not be that manyspecialty crops in the state, or
they may be fill it up withhouses, you know, but we do have
a liaison for every state, eveneven in some of the northeastern
(23:11):
states, where there's not a lotof food crop production, there
may be a lot of landscape andornamental production, so we do
have A liaison that'll handlequestions for those as well.
Sarah Lancaster (23:25):
So go ahead, Jim. I'm just going off
Joe Ikley (23:28):
on a tangent here, but I was just thinking, so what
does that look like when youhave a Kansas liaison versus a
California one? Just kind ofthe, you know, the acreage or
percentage of what might becrops falling under the RF four
program on one state versus theother. It's, I'm sure it's a
balancing act you guys havefigured out by now, but I'm just
curious,
Roger Batts (23:48):
a need is a need? Well, if it's, if it's a high
need in watermelons in Kansasand and a high need in
watermelons in California, thathelps, because when we're at our
meeting, the more differentregions. In order for states
that feel the same way and giveit a high priority, an a
priority is we go with the ABCsystem, basically in our
meeting, if they both feel itneeds an A, it gets an A. And
(24:13):
if, if Kansas watermelon growersare there and they speak up loud
enough, then it might overshadowa California safflower request,
because it's the room may feelthat the need is more for the
Kansas watermelons. So again,state cooperation, regional
(24:34):
cooperation, the you know, themore, the more you get involved
with the same project, thebetter chance it has in making
the final list. So
Sarah Lancaster (24:46):
you've talked about this list and ranking
priorities. Do you aim to haveso many like ABC or high,
medium, low priorities eachyear?
Roger Batts (24:55):
We basically get limited or to, well, we try to,
we will. Calculate that based onour NIFA funding. Yeah, and in
the past few years, basically,we've been somewhere
prioritizing 35 to 45 as in thefall of for our next year's
projects. When I first startedwith if for that number, because
(25:18):
it wasn't as expensive toconduct research as it is now,
inputs weren't as high. That,combined with the relatively
fat, flat funding that we havehad at IR-4 for a decade or so
now, means that we don't get todo 60 or 65 projects that I was
familiar with when I firststarted with our four. We're
(25:40):
down into 30 fives and 40 fivesnow, because of the cost it
takes to do it and the flatfunding,
Sarah Lancaster (25:47):
how does the number of new active ingredients
play into that decrease? Or doesit?
Roger Batts (25:53):
Well, I don't know if you can really say new active
ingredients and Weed Science inthe same medium. That's my
point.
Sarah Lancaster (26:02):
Just the lack of new AIS, is that part of
what's making that number,
Roger Batts (26:06):
the joke I make sometimes is that weed science
and specialty crops is liketaking 1950s television and
vacuum tubes and trying to fitthem in flat screen plasma
televisions. We're trying tomake things fit old things fit
into the new systems. That'sbasically where we are with
herbicides and specialty crops.When you look at our list every
(26:28):
fall, you'll see that a lot ofthe products that are moving
forward into next year'sresearch are old products. I
mean, I think last year weprioritized, last year we
started, I think 20 or 21residue studies in Weed Science,
and four of them were linuronnand three of them were
(26:54):
s-metholachlor, you know, so weare, we're just Trying. We're
trying to make things fit oldproducts fit into the new
technologies where we can begreat if we had some more new
modes of action, developed andexciting stuff. But that's the
way it is, especially crops.Yep, it's not like that in
(27:15):
fungicides and insecticides,they they come up with something
new, and it is. It's brand new.Weed Science is a little
different.
Sarah Lancaster (27:24):
Yeah, that's a whole nother line of questions
for another day. Why thosethings are so different right
now? Um,
Roger Batts (27:33):
interrupt you again. But, um, another aspect
of that is with the ESA theEndangered Species Act stuff
with EPA right now, they havetold us that are the first the
first thing they're going to tryto conquer, or things they're
getting sued over, the nextthing they're going to attack
are brand new molecules. Andafter that they're going to
(27:54):
tackle the they move thingsalong for new uses, for existing
products. Well, that's whereherbicides, especially crop,
that's where we play, that'swhere we live. So it's sort of
down the pecking order a littlebit right now.
Sarah Lancaster (28:09):
Okay, so what does that do for, like,
timelines to see the processthrough? So if I were to call
and say, My pumpkin growers wantproduct X today, can we start on
this? We're going to collect thedata. I'm assuming that's a two
or three year process,
Roger Batts (28:24):
it is, and then you have
Sarah Lancaster (28:27):
any like predictions for how long after
that, growers should actuallysee a
Roger Batts (28:32):
label where, in the past, before, before we started
seeing a little slowdown at EPAwe could rely on, and they've
told us, keep submitting, so westill submit. But in the past,
we would, once it's through thedoor and they reviewed it for
that initial screen they'll use.They usually set that pre a date
(28:53):
about 15 months out, they'llsay, all right, 15 months you
ought to have your MRL decisionmade, and then, then it's a
matter of the registrant. Youknow, once you get an MRL, the
registrant may do it in threeweeks, or it may take a year and
a half when they decide to printthe label next time. But for the
for the EPA, used to be about 15months in the door, and then it
(29:15):
started becoming 18 months, andthen it became 20 months and 24
and so it's the pre a dates noware pretty much estimates
instead of deadlines, because ofall the other things that are
going on at the agency. So ithas slowed down. And I think as
far as I for, as far as I can, Ican see it, it will, it will
(29:38):
slow down the timelines onprojects that we work on and
submit, yes, ma'am,
Sarah Lancaster (29:44):
so instead of being I'm just trying to get my
head around it. So instead ofbeing like a four year process
from start to finish, it's goingto become like a six year
process.
Roger Batts (29:53):
It could Yes. Ma'am, okay, we let we generally
like to think. We prioritize itin the fall. So we sign a
protocol in the spring, give itone year in the field, one year
in the lab, and then a half ayear to write up and submit. So
we'd like to say from the timewe sign a protocol to to to
(30:15):
writing it up, ready to submit,is like two and a half years of
I or four handling it sometimesthat doesn't work, because
trials may fail. We may haveproblems in the lab with getting
the method validated and workedout in the lab properly, but 30
months is our is our goal forsigning a protocol to being
(30:40):
ready to submit, so two and ahalf years, and then you add on
the the EPA timeline. Now you'reright. It could be five, six
years from the time we start, tothe time it gets the label.
Sarah Lancaster (30:55):
So random, tangential question, who runs
all the actual residue analyzes?What lab does that,
Roger Batts (31:01):
we have a couple of labs inside the IR-4 network at
universities. We've got one atUniversity of Florida and one at
UC Davis, and we will also usecontract labs to do things
that's a little more expensive,but it helps keep things moving
along faster, instead ofcreating backlogs at our IR-4
(31:23):
four labs, years ago, we hadfour labs, Cornell, Michigan,
state, Florida and UC Davis, andagain, with flat line budgets,
with cost increasing everywhere,especially for some of that lab
equipment, we Were down to twolabs inside the network and
using contract labs otherwise.
Sarah Lancaster (31:45):
Roger, do you think we need to go any more
kind of step by step,chronologically through the
process of like the productyou've talked about? The
stakeholder makes the request,you prioritize it, you write a
protocol, then you gather allthe data and ship it out to the
EPA, and then the EPA says yayor nay, and then the registrant
(32:09):
is responsible for printing thelabels. Is there anything else
in that process that we've nottouched on, or did I totally
screw up that process?
Roger Batts (32:19):
That's very good umbrella now, but there's, there
are lots of many steps, manysmaller steps involved in all
those steps. But I don't knowhow in depth you'd like to get
Now, if we want to back up tothe before, the prioritization,
before it gets the right, thepriority to work, we can, we? We
(32:41):
will have our regional offices.We have four regional offices,
ones that University ofMaryland, Eastern Shore, ones at
University of Florida, ones inMichigan State, ones at UC
Davis, throughout the spring andsummer each year, they will be
meeting with their stakeholdersas regional meetings to set
(33:02):
their little regional prioritiesso that they can bring those
forward at the National Meetingand sort of negotiate between
regions. Sometimes they're thevery same one. You know that it
could be the herbicide X intomatoes may be important of all
four regions. But if it's not,then sometimes it's like, well,
(33:22):
my, my, my request for tomatomight, might mean more than your
request in the South for sweetpotatoes. And so there's a lot
of give and take, a lot ofnegotiation, and some of that
boils down to also whether ornot the particular product is
something the EPA says is a sortof a green light, or whether
(33:46):
that product is a yellow, whichmeans a few, there's some
cautionary about that, orwhether it's an orange, which
means don't necessarily stop it,but there may be some
significant hurdles. It has totravel. But if EPA tells us red
then that that will probably putthe stop on, on the momentum of
(34:06):
a project. So
Sarah Lancaster (34:08):
I'm a little curious about this, this ranking
process. Do you guys like bringthe data and say this is the
dollar value to my region? Theseare the acres. Is there a little
bit of like, politicking, not somuch in the negative sense, but
like you said, negotiating, likewe'll do this this year and
yours next year. Or if you helpme with this, I'll help you with
(34:28):
that. Like, are those the kindsof conversations happening?
Roger Batts (34:31):
I think that's more representative, rather than
someone screaming out, well, 75%control, well, that we're going
to get 90% control and overthere, instead of the data, it's
more of the need, basically, thecrypt, how critical it is for
our crop. So it is, it is sortof squeaky wheel gets to grease.
(34:52):
It is. Sometimes we can takethat instead of calling it an A,
we'll move it to B, but we'llbring it back next year and try
to get an. A next year, thingslike that happen. It's that's
getting tougher and tougher.Because, like I said, we used to
be able to do 6060, or 65 A's,and now we're down to 35 to 40,
(35:13):
those negotiations and thosediscussions in the in the room
of 200 or so, those discussions,sometimes are heavy. Those are
some. They can get intense. Theycan get intense. Yes,
Joe Ikley (35:30):
spirited, spirited discussions. Very good, very
good.
Roger Batts (35:33):
I mean, good work.
It can get spirited, butgenerally, we usually get it
worked out for this, all saidand done, we usually leave the
room at a food use workshop withwith our correct number.
Joe Ikley (35:54):
So I don't think we cover this. But so what is kind
of the current ratio of what tosay, herbicide, fungicide,
insecticide of the current alist,
Roger Batts (36:09):
it's running pretty, pretty close to a third
some years. Herbicides may be20% some years, they may be 40%
but generally, all threedisciplines generally run about
a third of the priorities eachyear. That was a concern several
years ago, when we made thisshift to we'd have a Weed
(36:30):
Science Day, an entomology day,a pathology day, and then the
final day we all got together,but now we cover them all as we
go through all the disciplinestogether, as we go through that
was a concern that onediscipline might be more vocal
than others, but it's worked outto be about a third actually.
(36:55):
Now under the Weed Science, wealso take care of PGRs, so both
of those, since they both, youknow, handle plant processes,
they they both are under theWeed Science category in our
food and similarly, nematicidesfall under pathology like I
(37:17):
think that's how EPA views italso. So do
Sarah Lancaster (37:23):
you have any other process questions? Joe,
nope, so my curiosity questionhere, Roger, what do you think
is the most you can chooseinteresting or impactful project
that you've been part of in theIR-4 for
Roger Batts (37:46):
a specific project.
Sarah Lancaster (37:47):
Yeah, what's something that stated like, if
you were to look back at, like,the highlights of, we were to
play a highlight reel of theRoger batts career, what would
be some of the things that,like, you know, stick out as
being important? Oh, gosh, doesthat make sense?
Roger Batts (38:03):
I think I know what you're asking, but I should have
prepped you for that one I did.I was doing the residue work at
NC State. Man ran like almost500 residue trials over the
course of those years. And I, Idon't know, I don't know which
one would be most impactful.Wow, that's a good question. I
(38:28):
guess the government answer is,they were all equally important
and all equally valuable to thespecialty crop growers of the
United States.
Sarah Lancaster (38:39):
I sounds like an advanced,
Joe Ikley (38:43):
difficult thing, but at least it was herbicide
related, right? Yeah, all right,good.
Roger Batts (38:56):
I'm sorry, Sarah, that was a vague answer, but I
don't know nothing sticks out. Icould pull one out that really
Sarah Lancaster (39:03):
stood out. Nothing was a particular pain in
the neck. No,
Roger Batts (39:07):
there ever been some pain in the necks. Um,
ginseng. They asked me to do aginseng residue trial in the
mountains of North Carolina, andthis grower had been growing
them in his woods for years andyears, and selling the berries
(39:27):
to a lady in Australia who wasprocessing it into some sort of
supplement, right? Well, he wasabout to get out of the
business. And the my sample hadto get roots. Had to get ginseng
roots out of it. So when it cametime to I sprayed the fungicide.
It came time to harvest. I'mpulling up these roots that are
(39:49):
30 years old, and they'rethey're just huge roots. Now I
didn't know what what I washolding, but you had to dry them
down. So we put them in theselaundry band. Baskets, clean
laundry baskets, take them back,dry them down in a in a room,
before I could bag them up andsend them to the lab. And when I
sent them to the lab, the labdirector said, Where did you get
(40:10):
these roots? He said, Do youknow how valuable these roots
are? And apparently, my basketfull of of ginseng roots that I
had pulled out and dried downwere like 1215, grand because of
those, the size of those ginsengroots, depending on the market
(40:31):
you go to the like the Asianmarket. But she was telling me,
she said, Do you know how much,how valuable these are? And I
didn't know how much silver. Ithought they were just ginseng
roots. So that was a sort of awell back to the difficulty of
it. It rained the day weharvested them. So we're sitting
in the woods and we're having todig em up, sitting on our butts,
(40:54):
digging them out of the groundin a clay soil is raining on us.
It. It was sort of misery. Youknow that was, that was a
memorable residue trial, yes,ma'am, that was very good.
Sarah Lancaster (41:10):
All right. Jim, did you have any last questions?
Joe,
Joe Ikley (41:13):
no more popped up. But we, we kind of went past
that part of it, so no pointcircling back around. Are you
sure fire away. Pick one. Allright? I mean, the one that kind
of popped in my head is, andit's probably because I hadn't
found the right way to phraseit, why I said move on. But so,
so thinking about pesticideregistrations, not just in the
(41:37):
US, but in internationalcountries as well. Is there any
sort of working relationship orprioritization if, if a
pesticide is registered in Xcountry, but not in the US, on a
minor crop? Does that makethings easier or prioritization
(41:59):
easier? I couldn't find theright way to phrase it, but
hopefully that makes enoughsense. Sarah, you nodded, like
you can phrase it better. Well,I
Sarah Lancaster (42:09):
the what I'm thinking of is like, for
example, if there's a productthat the Canadians are using in
canola, does that make it easierfor North Dakota to get it?
Yeah, or
Joe Ikley (42:19):
Europeans using something in sunflowers because
they do that that we can't use.Would that make it easier for us
to get that in the US andsunflowers? Yeah, sometimes
Roger Batts (42:28):
yes, sometimes no. And that generally depends on
the registrar. We've got aherbicide right now that is
being a lot of my researchersare, are really demanding that,
hey, we got to get it. It'sregistered into Europe. We got
to get it here in the UnitedStates, because it's going to,
it's going to fit a void, it'sgoing to help control amaranthus
(42:50):
and the and so, yes, that'sgreat. It's registered already
in Europe or in Australia, andthe registrant says, No, we're
not bringing in the UnitedStates. So that sort of puts the
kibosh on that. But as far asinternational cooperation,
Canada actually has an IR-4 Pro,IR-4 type program, and we work
(43:10):
very closely with them. In fact,if we both have the same
priority, and we both are, theywant herbicide x in garlic. We
want herbicide x in garlic.Both. Both priorities. Get it.
They both get a priority. Then,instead of 15 trials in the US
(43:34):
and seven in Canada, if we'regoing to submit to EPA and PMRA
Pest Management RegulatoryAssociation in Canada, which is
their EPA, if we're going tosubmit to both of them at the
same time, then we go, we bothget a break. Instead of 15 and
seven, it may be 10 and five. Asfar as number of trials that are
(43:55):
required, because we're going tobe combining that, we work very
closely with the PMC PestManagement Center in Canada,
which is, which is our fullprogram up there. We've we've
worked at our meetings. We'vehad a lot of interest from other
countries, Australia, Germany,China, Japan, Korea, some of
(44:18):
those representatives of theirminers, minor crop programs will
come and see our our processes,and we work with with some of
them on, you know our Well, ifwe could, we collaborate or
share data to help getregistrations internationally.
And I'll also throw out probablywhere I'm stepping above my head
(44:40):
too is that there's a IR-4because of our international
need to cooperateinternationally, we sort of
launched a nonprofit called,excuse me, the minor use
foundation. And the minor usefoundation does exactly what we
do on. A global scale, they willprioritize on crops. They and
(45:05):
they'll find out, well, the USdid seven trials. If we do one
in Spain, one in China and onein India, we could get a global
registration. So then they'llthe the minor, minor use
foundation will do that kind ofthing to help get more trade
opportunities for the US growersthat we wouldn't have gotten
(45:28):
otherwise. So, yeah, it's sortof an international program that
we've helped launch,
Sarah Lancaster (45:35):
maybe. So the thinking there was no, sorry,
the thinking there then Rogerwould be that you have to have
that MRL in order to export it,right? And so you're just
helping getting those tolerancesestablished in potential export
markets, correct.
Roger Batts (45:49):
Okay, correct. And, and there are, there are
different groups of countrieswho form different coalitions to
establish these MRL rules. Youknow, there's Codex. You may
have heard of Codex. And thatgroup of countries, the minor
use foundation, will say, hey,if we do, like I said, those,
(46:11):
those examples of the addedtrials, could get them a codex
tolerance for, you know, lotsmore countries than just the
United States then, and sinceyou referred to that
international shipping isimportant to the US, of course,
especially when some countrieswill maybe arbitrarily set an
MRL instead of using some dataand two of the crops that we
(46:38):
work With most that areinfluenced by international MRLS
the most are sweet potatoes andhops. A good 35 to 40% of the US
sweet potatoes go to Europe,where they have these arbitrary
(46:58):
MRLS that we have to try toabide by and the same in with
hops. About 40% of the hopsproduced in the US go to Europe,
and so we have to really payattention to the MRL and the
residue levels on those cropswhen, whenever we're developing
data in the US. Well, gotta getas many tools as we can deepen,
(47:22):
you know, fill the toolbox.That's, that's sort of, you
know, Stanley, StanleyCulpepper, he, he was been, he's
not as heavily involved anymore,because he's been distracted by
all his wssa responsibilities.But for years, when he, when I
would listen to him talk at thesavannah vegetable meeting, he'd
say, fill the toolbox. Fill thetoolbox. And that's basically
(47:45):
what I are for. We need to fillthe toolbox with speciality crop
growers.
Joe Ikley (47:49):
That's why we need to get you our War Against Weeds
toolbox Stress Ball.
Roger Batts (47:56):
well, being being indoors is very stressful,
because I really love my Ireally love outdoor work. So
being indoors is stressful.Maybe I need that.
Sarah Lancaster (48:08):
is a perfect place to land this thing.
Sometimes
Roger Batts (48:11):
Sometimes I feel like a caged animal.
Sarah Lancaster (48:13):
Thank you Roger In the last 50 minutes with us
chatting about IR-4 and thethings you do to help our our
specialty crop growers. So didyou have any like websites or
places you wanted to directlisteners to get more
information?
Roger Batts (48:30):
Yes ma'am, that would be a great way. The IR-4
website is loaded withinformation on projects that are
current, data that we'vereceived over the years that
people can look into and seewhat can work and what has
worked. You can go to www.irfour project.org, and IR4 has no
dashes in it, even thoughsometimes you'll see as IR - 4
(48:53):
when we write it, it's ir4project, all lowercase.org, so
that will be a great place tojump into looking at what we do
and what we've succeeded and howwe're going to help in
Sarah Lancaster (49:05):
the future. Awesome. Well, thanks again,
Roger. It's really been apleasure to have you on and
thanks to the listeners. We'llsee you guys next time. Thank
you much.
Thanks for listening to the waragainst weeds podcast. We
appreciate support from thenorth central Integrated Pest
(49:28):
Management Center and thecollaboration with the Crop
Protection Network. At cropprotection network.org you can
find this podcast other podcastsand a variety of other pest
management resources.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.