forwarded a letter to me from Scotts Company LLC, the billion-dollar-a-year selling and exclusive distributor of Monsanto’s Roundup. This letter explained why there is no reason for alarm about the French court decision to view Roundup as dangerous to the environment – so that Home Depot could safely continue to sell their product.

TEXT OF RESPONSE

Home Depot

Gladys (my contact at Home Depot)

I hope you got my long fax and also hope, and almost want to apologize, if it was not too overwhelming much information!

Finding so much on the web was a bit much for me too! To keep things very, very simple, I thought I would follow up with a shorter note and more to the point.

TO RESPOND DIRECTLY TO THE SCOTTS LETTER:
The key issue is that Roundup is a virtual universal killing agent of nearby plants. Its killing toxins are so vastly powerful and in unparalleled ways. This is no ordinary herbicide. It is absorbed first by the leaves, then the sap, and finally the roots of all surrounding plants, spreading like metastatic cancer. It kills the essence of what supports plant life and I think it is quite foolish to think this will not harm our whole ecology of life in the end, or the  chain/web of life (with humans included inducing terrible cancers and farmer worker illnesses). This is a more serious health issue than a passing, one-season swine flu. No amount of making of money should blind us to this, or to justify the sale of such a product. According to Monsanto’s own studies, Roundup does not degrade rapidly, rather at a level of 2% over 28 days (roughly four years) or so I’ve read. But I would rather put you in touch with experts who know more than I do about this.

NOT A MATTER OF LINGUISTICS
Now it makes sense, however, that the French and NY courts both jointly were not quibbling over linguistics. They considered Monsanto’s resounding claim of biodegradability to be a most seriously fraudulent and knowingly deceptive practice. Monsanto has a history of making such claims postured with false pride (as the Scotts letter states “we take great pride…etc”). Monsanto was forced by the Courts to remove their knowingly misleading statements. These known untrue statements were again repeated in the Scotts letter to help sell Scotts products to Home Depot . To quote the Scotts Company  letter you sent: “Does glyphosate biodegrade in the soil? The simple answer to this question is a resounding yes. It is a scientific fact..etc..”)  Really?

SALES PARTNERSHIPS
It sends chills up and down my spine to read the above letter text. I have worked on Wall Street and met all kinds of individuals, noble and corrupt, and I would not want to be in a “partnership” with purveyors of such distortions to fool vendors and customers to buy products. It is amazing how the corruption of money can cause people to falsify things – and even fool themselves. This is why it was necessary to bring Monsanto repeatedly to Court.

COURSE OF ACTION
Let me ask you how does Home Depot deal with employees who lie even once, or cashiers that steal or do secretive discounts? They are immediately fired.The Scotts letter is in this category.

Food for thought why I believe Roundup should absolutely not be sold anywhere, and certainly not, by all  good conscience, in any fine Home Depots outlets.

I suggest you deeply reconsider the Monsanto/Scotts “partnership.” Again I can put you in touch with knowledgeable experts who can share truly independent opinions.

Nathan Batalion

RESPONSE TO SCOTTS COMPANY’S LETTER

.

NOVEMBER 11, 2009

TEXT OF LETTER

“I have always respected Home Depot for its environmental policies and therefore appreciate your taking my the time and attention to view my correspondence seriously. I am a local contractor who believes in shopping responsibly. I also appreciate the letter from Ed Billmaier, director of Scotts Consumer Service directed to Mike Mahler.

I am aware that Scotts Company LLC, with billion in lawn care product sales, has been the exclusive distributor of Roundup, apparently since 1998, and has been also working with Monsanto on a Roundup Ready turf grass since a little before then. I have heard that Roundup is presumably a biodegradable herbicide that binds to the soil and that the EPA has labeled it with but a “caution” classification. However, this brings up the following issues of much greater concern to me.

First since Scotts obviously has a sizeable financial stake in this issue, I think Home Depot would be wiser to get a broader spectrum of opinions. This could  engender further and solid objectivity on this very important issue. May I recommend reviewing the material I will be faxing you and I will aso see if I can get you in touch with Caroline Cox, editor of the Journal for Pesticide Reform who is one of the leading experts on this subject. I can inquire about other experts to give more opinions for your making a sound business decision on Round Up.

Secondly, my concern is not primarily with biodegradability but rather with toxic levels and the overall heath and reverberating environmental impacts. Roundup’s main ingredient has been linked to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in a study published by the American Cancer Society. Some have suggested it is the number one herbicide now implicated in farm-worker illnesses. In my home state of New York, Monsanto was sued by the Attorney General for recklessly claiming their product was “safe and environmentally friendly.” In France it was sued for similarly claiming the product is biodegradable and leaves the soil “clean”, which scientific studies do not bear out. They lost both the French and New York State cases and appeals. Since much the same has happened in NY, this is not something concerning far away overseas affairs where different laws may apply.

Thirdly, as to seeking comfort and refuge via the EPA labeling, I think that was reasonable to say a couple of decades ago. I have friends in Washington DC and things have changed there dramatically, These friends have kept me abreast on how the Bush Administration has unprecedentedly downsized the EPA’s  and ham-stringed regulatory effectiveness, as it did with the financial industry (resulting in near-catastrophic results for our American economy). The Bush Administration originally had private meetings with Monsanto executives to forcefully push their sales agenda without adequate safety testing these products to protect the public, as the literature I am faxing reiterates. The Bush Administration also pushed the closely related notion that genetically modified foods (Roundup Ready) are essentially equivalent to regular foods, requiring no safety testing or labeling at all – even though the EPA’s own scientists substantially disagreed. In short such labeling decisions were political, not science-based and offer little comfort.

My fourth concern is the most paramount. By creating Roundup-Ready genetically modified crops, they can tolerate a vastly increased (several times more) herbicide load that is one of the most growingly polluting factors in our groundwaters and rivers. Alarm signals were put out by the World Health Organization in regard to this specific impact of increasing Roundup use. Related to this is also thrust of the major players in the biotech seed industry have been monopolizing staple food seeds (including via buying out competitive companies and destroying their heirloom seed stocks) – the foundation of life in earth – and creating only Roudup-ready genetically modified seeds and the like. Farmers cannot (by contract) have these seeds independently tested for safety, nor can they be saved or replanted except as directed by Monsanto. This ownership of the foundation pillars of life by such means represents a gravest ever political, human health and environmental threat faced by our planet and civilization.

I cannot think of a single greater positive environmental step, dwarfing any energy-saving sales of HD, than taking Roundup fully off of Home Depot’s shelves. It would attract an avalanching explosion of positive consumer response that would dwarf the comparative size of any profit lost from Roundup toxic product sales. It would also, in my opinion, be the truely responsible approach sending a positive message of the high-minded, moral, consumer-oriented stance of the executive leaders of Home Depot, a firm I have always deeply respected. It would tell the herbicide industry that business cannot be conducted as usual at the huge expense of  our health, our children’s health, the health of the consumer, and of farm workers and our environment.

Thank you again for taking this issue not only to heart but with the utmost of seriousness.”

Nathan Batalion, ND

NOVEMBER 11, 2009
“I have always respected Home Depot for its environmental policies and therefore appreciate your taking the time and attention to view my correspondence seriously. I am a local contractor who believes in shopping responsibly. I also appreciate the letter from Ed Billmaier, director of Scotts Consumer Service.

I am aware that Scotts Company LLC, with billion in lawncare product sales, has been the exclusive distributor of Roundup, apparently since 1998, and has been also working with Monsanto on a Roundup Ready turf grass since a little before then. I have heard that Roundup is presumably a biodegradable herbicide that binds to the soil and that the EPA has labeled it with but a “caution” classification. However, this brings up the following issues of much greater concern to me.

BIASED VIEW
First since Scotts obviously has a sizeable financial stake in this issue, I think Home Depot would be wiser to get a broader spectrum of opinions. This could  engender further and solid objectivity on this very important issue. May I recommend reviewing the material I will be faxing you and I will also see if I can get you in touch with Caroline Cox, editor of the Journal for Pesticide Reform who is one of the leading experts on this subject. I can inquire about other experts to give more opinions for your making a sound business decision on Round Up.

TOXICITY
Secondly, my concern is not primarily with biodegradability but rather with toxic levels and the overall heath and reverberating environmental impacts. Roundup’s main ingredient has been linked to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in a study published by the American Cancer Society. Some have suggested it is the number one herbicide now implicated in farm-worker illnesses.

MONSANTO SUED
In my home state of New York, Monsanto was sued by the Attorney General for recklessly claiming their product was “safe and environmentally friendly.” In France it was sued for similarly claiming the product is biodegradable and leaves the soil “clean”, which scientific studies do not bear out. They lost both the French and New York State cases and appeals. Since much the same has happened in NY, this is not something concerning far away overseas affairs where different laws may apply.

EPA LABELING NO COMFORT
Thirdly, as to seeking comfort and refuge via the EPA labeling, I think that was reasonable to say a couple of decades ago. I have friends in Washington DC and things have changed there dramatically, These friends have kept me abreast on how the Bush Administration has unprecedentedly downsized the EPA’s  and ham-stringed regulatory effectiveness, as it did with the financial industry (resulting in near-catastrophic results for our American economy).

SECRET DEALS
The Bush Administration originally had private meetings with Monsanto executives to forcefully push their sales agenda without adequate safety testing these products to protect the public, as the literature I am faxing reiterates. The Bush Administration also pushed the closely related notion that genetically modified foods (Roundup Ready) are essentially equivalent to regular foods, requiring no safety testing or labeling at all – even though the EPA’s own scientists substantially disagreed. In short such labeling decisions were political, not science-based and offer little comfort.

POLLUTION
My fourth concern is the most paramount. By creating Roundup-Ready genetically modified crops, they can tolerate a vastly increased (several times more) herbicide load that is one of the most growingly polluting factors in our groundwaters and rivers. Alarm signals were put out by the World Health Organization in regard to this specific impact of increasing Roundup use.

MONOPOLIZATION
Related to this is also thrust of the major players in the biotech seed industry have been monopolizing staple food seeds (including via buying out competitive companies and destroying their heirloom seed stocks) – the foundation of life in earth – and creating only Roudup-ready genetically modified seeds and the like. Farmers cannot (by contract) have these seeds independently tested for safety, nor can they be saved or replanted except as directed by Monsanto. This ownership of the foundation pillars of life by such means represents a gravest ever political, human health and environmental threat faced by our planet and civilization.

SINGLE MOST POSITIVE MOVE
I cannot think of a single greater positive environmental step, dwarfing any energy-saving sales of HD, than taking Roundup fully off of Home Depot’s shelves. It would attract an avalanching explosion of positive consumer response that would dwarf the comparative size of any profit lost from Roundup toxic product sales. It would also, in my opinion, be the truly responsible approach sending a positive message of the high-minded, moral, consumer-oriented stance of the executive leaders of Home Depot, a firm I have always deeply respected. It would tell the herbicide industry that business cannot be conducted as usual at the huge expense of  our health, our children’s health, the health of the consumer, and of farm workers and our environment.

Thank you again for taking this issue not only to heart but with the utmost of seriousness.”

Nathan Batalion, ND

On the on-going campaign to remove RoundUp from Home Depot’s shelves:

NOVEMBER 6 RESPONSE TO HOME DEPOT

“The product is the same internationally. I personally think offering an alternative on the shelves is not enough. It is simply not right to make a profit on a  highly, highly dangerous substance any more than selling heroin and cocaine. The fact that Roundup is not banned and illegal in the US is only because the documented backroom deals between Monsanto lobbyists and Bush administration insiders. I think whoever made the decision within Home Depot to continue to carry Roundup is looking at more the short-term profits picture (on a latest quarterly income statements perhaps with product breakdowns) but which is short-sided overall.

Harms Environment
This Roundup product very definitively harms our environment. There is no ifs, ands or buts about it. It also leaves some huge traces in our foods (especially the staples of soy and corn), and thus harms each of us, and our children and for generations to  come. It also harms the surrounding life forms that tread upon the earth’s soil. There really is no logical or moral justification for carrying this product anywhere.  I feel absolutely certain that Home Depot, when it comes to the same conclusion, would gain immeasurably more financially and would make far more profits and significantly more sales by wisely posturing itself as a superior caring and concerned service provider on this critical issue. Taking this off the shelves would send a positive, strong, and powerful leadership message to the entire herbicide industry. The public and media would take note. It would be a breakthrough event for the benefit of our whole planet.

Positive PR For Home Depot With Removal of Roundup
Home Depot does this kind of positive posturing with its energy saving products – and for which it should be greatly applauded. Environmental toxins are an equally serious and pressing issue for all as compared to the issue of global warming. I thus would ask that management more carefully reconsider its position. That would mean getting more data first on this issue.If more information on the dangers of this product is requested, please let me know and I would be more than happy to take the initiative to confer with experts in the field and collect that kind of documented information. Thanks again for your followup on this matter.”

Scotts Letter

On Roundup

Here is a copy of the Scotts Company LLC letter. Scotts has had the exclusive right to sell Monsanto’s Roundup in the US and much of Europe since 1998. The company also has over a billion in total dollar sales annually. Previously they worked with Monsanto on developing a Roundup-ready genetically-modified turf grass.

Scotts Company LLC Letter

November 11, 2009 Addressed to Mike Mahler, D28 Merchant

Thank you for making us aware of the recent information you received regarding Roundup branded herbicides. I sincerely appreciate your letting me know about your concern. This level of communication is a strong testament to the partnership that exists between our two companies.

Does Roundup Biodegrade?

I am very sorry for the confusion this issue has caused. We take great pride in trying to make certain using our products are as simple as possible and it is clear that this ruling confused what is a very straight forward  issue, “Does glyphosate biodegrade in the soil?”

The simple answer to this question is resoundingly yes. It is a scientific fact that has been independently verified that glyphosate binds with the soil shortly after it comes in contact with it and that soil microorganisms over time break glyphosate down into carbon dioxide and other naturally occurring products.

EPA Roundup Comfort Label 

To give you some perspective, the US EPA has determined that this product only needs to carry the “caution” classification on its label. This is the most favorable “signal word” that a product can have. Based on the decades of research that has been conducted, we have complete confidence that when used as directed Roundup branded products poses no undue risk to the environment.

French Roundup Court Case

The case in France was about the use and possible interpretation of language in a specific advertisement and in no way questions the safety of Roundup brand herbicides or the benefits to our customers. The issue was on how the government defined “biodegradable” and the amount of time it took to biodegrade. In this case, France used a different criteria than what is used by other governments. As a result, the French courts have required our company to remove this reference from any materials used in their country. The good news is that this was done many years ago and there is no impact on any recent inventory.

Thank you for bringing this issue to our attention. I hope I addressed your concerns sufficiently . If you have any questions please call me personally at 937-644-7059. We take the issue of the environment very seriously and are very open to addressing any lingering concerns you may have.

Sincerely
Ed Billmaier
Director Scotts Consumer Service