Technology On The Label
May 6, 2010
Jr Reabe of Reabe Spraying Service Inc., Plover, WI, is frustrated with product labels that mandate a nozzle or technique for drift reduction — and says there are many ways to accomplish the same end result. The best management principles listed should be suggestions, and the industry should let applicators decide the best way to get the job done, he believes. “It’s like requiring everyone to do something one way, with no provisions for left-handed people or a better idea,” Reabe says. “They are stifling innovation, freezing the application technology to 1990s’ standards.”
Then too, there’s the protracted amount of time it may take for EPA to process pesticide manufacturers’ requests to change labels to reflect drift reduction technology (DRT) advances. His suggestion would be for EPA to adopt supplemental labeling that gives DRT credit to each technology as it is approved. “No pesticide manufacturer should be required to request a label change for DRT credit,” he says.
Mike Lee, Earl’s Flying Service, Steele, MO, would agree, saying that labels do not always reflect the best options or keep up with industry and scientific findings. “And label developers need a more open interface with users to make sure that labels are actually practical and contribute positively” to field work, he says.
Bottom line, believes Brian Rau of Medina Flying Service, Medina, ND, is that “labels need to state the desired droplet size and let the operator who knows how to best obtain that set up his equipment.”