Three letters in the Jan. 26 Iowa Farmer Today need embellishing.

First is Neil Schwake’s letter concerning dicamba volatilisation. I was amazed that our stagnant chemical industry would ever pursue such an a desperate avenue to address the resistance problem. Dicamba always had a problem with contaminating tanks and volatilisation in warm weather. That is why farmers now have sprayers specifically dedicated to just dicamba products, and in the past we stopped using it when the weather warmed up, like when soybeans require spraying.

Let’s get to the root of the problem: The concept of private property is just a fond memory today. Tracing the source of dicamba contamination is impossible. The advertising and frustration reached a point where as long as enough farmers went the dicamba route, we could never sue for damages.

The lack of that private property concept carries over to the other two letters. Jerry Crew is right as rain on his idea that there should be no subsidized crop insurance. Farmers should pay all costs for their insurance in order to find fair premiums and payouts. Subsidies distort a market that could easily operate on its own. Many of the taxpayers whose property subsidizes this insurance live a lifestyle far below that of the farmers who benefit.

Herman Lenz is right-on in his criticism of the state's management of its deer herd. But he ignores the real issue. Anyone should be able to harvest deer on their property whenever they want. If hunters want deer to shoot they should buy land or ask permission from those who have it.

Too often we hear calls for better management, when it should be for the government to stay out in the first place.

The $20,000 we’ve spent in repairing our own deer damage could have been put to better use. If they are all gone, good riddance.

Fritz Groszkruger

Dumont, Iowa

Sign up for our weekly CropWatch newsletter

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.