# Roundup Is Killing Off Amphibians



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

Roundup Is Killing Off Amphibians, Ecologist Says

http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=8477

August 10, 2005  By Eric Hand, St. Louis Post-Dispatch 

Worldwide, amphibians are dying. And University of Pittsburgh ecologist Rick Relyea said he knows one way to kill them: Spray them with a little Roundup, the best-selling weed killer from St. Louis-based Monsanto. 

In a new study from Relyea, published in this month's issue of the journal Ecological Applications, Roundup killed 98 percent of tadpoles during a three-week test in simulated shallow ponds. In a separate dry experiment, Roundup killed 79 percent of young frogs and toads after just one day. "It's much deadlier than we thought," Relyea said. 

Monsanto says that Roundup isn't meant to be used near water and that its directions clearly say so. But many amphibians live in shallow puddles, Relyea said. He said he worries that wetlands within fields and forests are accidentally being sprayed. 

Something clearly is killing amphibians. They have declined drastically since the 1970s, biologists say. Nearly a third of the world's amphibians are threatened, according to a global survey last year by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources. 

By contrast, 12 percent of bird species and 20 percent of mammals are threatened, according to the union's Web site, www.redlist.org. 

"The debate is whether amphibians are the canaries in the coal mine," Washington University biologist Jonathan Chase said. There are reasons to suspect they are." 

Amphibians' permeable skins make them vulnerable to toxins. Global warming, acid rain and increased ultraviolet light all seem to harm them. So even if Roundup has a toxic effect, Chase said, it's unlikely to cause the global declines on its own. Rather, there are likely many causes with the biggest being loss of habitat, he said. 

"The No. 1 cause is that we're building parking lots and malls and expanding our footprint on the world," he said. 

Relyea said he agrees that habitat loss is the most important factor. There isn't evidence yet that Roundup is contributing to the worldwide decline, he said. But his experiments show its striking lethality. 

Relyea added one tablespoon of Roundup Grass and Weed Killer to 250 gallons of water in cattle-watering tanks where tadpoles were growing with soil and food. That amount mimicked a worst-case accidental spraying of a small wetland, Relyea said. 

But Monsanto spokeswoman Mica DeLong said Relyea's concentrations were too high and unlikely to be found in nature. She also criticized the artificial setting of Relyea's dry experiment, in which he sprayed frogs and toads who sat in plastic tubs lined with moist paper towels. 

"We believe this needs to be studied in a natural setting where other factors come into play," she said, citing a field study last year by Canadian scientists, published in the journal Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. It shows that even when small wetlands are accidentally sprayed, Roundup concentrations never come close to the levels Relyea applied. 

Roundup is a product name for a herbicide, one of many in a general class that use the chemical glyphosate, which Monsanto pioneered. Glyphosate is now the top agricultural pesticide in the U.S., according to the Environmental Protection Agency. 

In 1993, the EPA renewed its permit for Roundup. It noted that glyphosate itself is not toxic to aquatic life. The problem was with one of its common surfactants, which is toxic. A surfactant is a soapy additive used so glyphosate can stick to and penetrate plants. 

In Australia and Europe, Monsanto sells Roundup Biactive, a version with a different surfactant that doesn't harm amphibians. 

"Why don't we have the other surfactant?" Relyea asked. "Either it's less effective at killing weeds or it's more expensive to make." 

Monsanto toxicologist Donna Farmer said the surfactant in Roundup Biactive was less effective on North American weeds and also would be subject to a cumbersome EPA approval process.


----------



## Outdoorzman (Jun 5, 2001)

While this story is good that it gets awareness out:
There's a million chemicals out there that could be used in similar experiments and have the same effect. This isn't Vietnam and people are not crop dusting thier fields with Round-up.
Amphibians have been on the decline for many years and while "roundup" and similar chemicals may add to it, I truly doubt it is the main contributing factor.
Is it a coincidence that he is in the same neighborhood as the manufacturer and is trying to make a name for himself? I can see a lawsuit in the near future.


----------



## Rondevous (Mar 14, 2005)

Round up is now being used by to many food plot deer growers in lowlands.

Just read on this site how many people use it in non ag areas.

First thing they are told they need to shoot a big buck is to spray round up.

It might not be they only harmful chemical out there, but it surely is one of the most mis-used chemicals.


----------



## lookin for the gills (Jan 21, 2003)

I agree, I am a licensed applicator here in Michigan, and I know a ton of other commercial applicators that spray lake front homes, in and around lowlands, and everywhere else they are not supposed to. All they do is charge more because the consumer doesnt care what the effects are they just want there garden beds clean and there rock beds free of weeds. I myself have turned down numerous big money accounts because of this. And I have taken a beaten in my wallet too, but I feel I am doing the right thing.

One thing that study doesnt say is that its not "Round-Up" thats killing these amphibians. Its the chemical called glyphosate. This chemical is found in numerous other products. 

So do I think its the main cause in my opinion... yes i do, because i can think of at least 13 products right now in my head that you can buy without a license that are everyday chemicals used in almost every state in the midwest.
Just my 1 cent


----------



## Murphy (Aug 10, 2005)

Very interesting...

When I was young, we used to find frogs everywhere... Yup.. those were the 70's and I was a young one.. 

I hardly ever see frogs anymore and its rare when you hear them croaking..

We have a stream about 100 yards from my home. We walk by it daily.. Every now and then I hear one.. But usually not..

The manicured lawns and the "my landscaping is better than yours" attitude is doing so much damage its sad.

My guess is that some time in the next 20 years, they will pass a law that prevents home owners from using ANY chemical on thier lawns or properties. I think we need to get rid of the mowed manicured lawns and plant more trees. Trees suck up CO2 and create oxygen.. Earth has a CO2 problem so instead of making more CO2 with that lawn mower, maybe we should outlaw the lawn mowers and plant more trees. Let the weeds grow.. So what.. they suck up C02 also and they dont use any of that expensive oil and gas. Another benefit would be that daddy would play with his kids like he should instead of fussing with the lawn. 
Our society is very screwed up.. If we dont fix it, it will eventually fix itself and hold no consideration to how we feel about it.

Murphy


----------



## Ranger Ray (Mar 2, 2003)

I can't think of a person I know who doesn't use it.


----------



## lookin for the gills (Jan 21, 2003)

Nice post Murph. You and I think alike. Even though I put chemicals into the ground for a living and went to school to learn how to do it(pretty sad i went 4 years at MSU and all I learned is how to put chemicals into the ground and that all girls are pretty good lookin after a few beers):yikes:


----------



## sporty (Jun 24, 2004)

Oh my God!, don't post this in the food plot section, those experts will call you a tree lover. I posted some info on Roundup and just about got spanked by the GURU's.:lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Rondevous (Mar 14, 2005)

> Oh my God!, don't post this in the food plot section, those experts will call you a tree lover. I posted some info on Roundup and just about got spanked by the GURU's.:lol: :lol: :lol:


 
I think many of the "Gurus" are profit driven and could care less about the enviroment.
Something has hurt populations and the public should be made aware what's going on.

The average person reads one snippet that says things are peachy and the average person believes just that.

Fighting mis-use of chemicals is still an uphill battle.


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

sporty said:


> Oh my God!, don't post this in the food plot section, those experts will call you a tree lover. I posted some info on Roundup and just about got spanked by the GURU's.:lol: :lol: :lol:


Really? Here's a link to your thread, in which you quoted from the "Northwest Coalition For Alternatives To Pesticides". Your post had holes in it that you could drive a 120ft. sprayer boom through.

Roundup has a far superior toxicological profile to the chemicals it has generally replaced, becomes essentially inert once in contact with soil, and has warnings all over its label that it is not to be used in wet areas. 

Also, to imply that posters here somehow profit from herbicide use is beyond laughable.

FWIW, more than one professional biologist has remarked at the "amphibian paradise" that is my farm; it's loaded with various frogs, snakes, etc.

Murph, you do bring up a good point about stuff that we put on our lawns. The common weedkiller in most lawn fertilizers, 2,4d amine, is relatively nasty, and folks routinely dump this crap on their lawns at rates well in excess of recommended levels, believing that "more is better". 

http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?t=89835


----------



## Murphy (Aug 10, 2005)

farmlegend said:


> Really? Here's a link to your thread. Your post had holes in it that you could drive a 120ft. sprayer boom through.
> 
> Roundup has a far superior toxicological profile to the chemicals it has generally replaced, becomes essentially inert once in contact with soil, and has warnings all over its label that it is not to be used in wet areas.
> 
> ...


Ok dude, I know more than the average joe about chemistry but I'm sure that I probably know much less than you or a chemist but hear me out.

Are you suggesting that just because Roundup has a far superior toxicological profile to other chemicals that its ok to stick it in the ground?

I agree with your general statement that basicaly says as our technology grows and matures the amount of damage we do to obtain a specific result is reduced. But isnt this kinda like saying Joe the Serial Killer is better than Bob the Serial Killer because he hasnt killed as many?

The point is, the round-up is doing damage. We are trying to kill off a natural part of the landscape. That just rubs me the wrong way no matter how you try to present the arguement. I guess what I am saying is that if you can use horse pee to kill a weed then fine.. but round-up is a far cry from any natural solution and therefor, it is probably doing allot of damage in the volume its being used in.

Am I wrong?


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

Not wrong, just impractical. If we were to wave a magic wand and simply ban any and all herbicides overnight, we could not produce the food we need to feed the people of the world. Food prices would skyrocket in a manner that outpaces anything we see with gasoline prices today; that means that millions of little people will get hurt, bad.

I'm personally delighted that there are products such as Roundup, which are measurably less toxic and less persistant in the ecosystem than the products it replaced, and at the same time, increases crop yield, thereby reducing the prices we pay for foodstuffs and other products. Hip-hip-hooray. And if the next capitalist coming down the pike makes a fortune off a new family of herbicides even more harmless than Roundup, that likewise boosts farm productivity, I, as a citizen of this world and a consumer, will cheer that too.


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

FL is correct. I'm generally an enviromentalist, but I need to be a realist too. Selective use of pesticides/herbicides is needed. It is the abuse of chemicals that gets us into trouble. I've been using herbicides all summer trying to reclaim my wildlife area from total exotics control. I've also been spending time with my old cohorts of the sea lamprey crew as they treat the White River with chemicals TFM and Bayer73. Note without our treatments of the rivers with chemicals there would be no Great Lakes coldwater fishery.


----------



## lookin for the gills (Jan 21, 2003)

Just wondering if anyone has heard of wheat farmers that use roundup on there crops so they can harvest the wheat faster and thus make more money? I know for a fact that Quaker has banned the use of roundup on its fields because they tested there grain when it came in and it had glyphosate in it. That product is ending up in our systems because we here in America believe in one thing and one thing only " more is better." Quaker called on the government to put a ban on this way of farming and Bush vetoed it. I am not turning this into a political war cause i like Bush I really do. I just dont think its right for these wheat farmers to do this. The only reason they are using roundup is because they can plant, kill, harvest and plant, kill, harvest all in one season and make twice the money


----------



## walleyechaser (Jan 12, 2001)

Do a search on Glyphosate and you'll find some interesting information.
I just finished reading a number of findings including some published by Dow.
First, it appears that prior posts were substantiated regarding overuse and use around water.
Second, there's a concern that overuse and repetative use year after year, including seed treated with glyphosate will result in glyphosate resistant strains of weeds.
Quaker Oats discontinued accepting oats which was planted with glyphosate treated seed since their studies showed that it appeared in the end product as well ---so much for it becoming inert upon contact with the soil.
Finally, I came across a table which clearly shows the harm it does to crustaceans and amphibians as well as micro organisms which make up a vital part of the aquatic food chain.
As a couple of commercial folks stated in this thread its overused.
I congratulate them on their concern for the environment.
As sportsmen we all share a responsibility for protecting our environment since it equates to benefitting wildlife and aquatic life in the long run. As such, we need to use any chemical judiciously.
Just my 2 cents worth.


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

walleyechaser said:


> Second, there's a concern that overuse and repetative use year after year, including seed treated with glyphosate will result in glyphosate resistant strains of weeds.
> Quaker Oats discontinued accepting oats which was planted with glyphosate treated seed


Is there a method of glyphosate application that I'm unfamiliar with? If so, I'd like to learn more. 

You used the expressions "seed treated with glyphosate" and "glyphosate treated seed". As far as I knew, and I could be wrong, glyphosate has no effect whatsoever on seeds. Up until now, my reading of the labels indicated that glyphosate was only able to control actively growing plants that it is applied directly to.


----------



## Murphy (Aug 10, 2005)

farmlegend said:


> Not wrong, just impractical. If we were to wave a magic wand and simply ban any and all herbicides overnight, we could not produce the food we need to feed the people of the world. Food prices would skyrocket in a manner that outpaces anything we see with gasoline prices today; that means that millions of little people will get hurt, bad.
> 
> I'm personally delighted that there are products such as Roundup, which are measurably less toxic and less persistant in the ecosystem than the products it replaced, and at the same time, increases crop yield, thereby reducing the prices we pay for foodstuffs and other products. Hip-hip-hooray. And if the next capitalist coming down the pike makes a fortune off a new family of herbicides even more harmless than Roundup, that likewise boosts farm productivity, I, as a citizen of this world and a consumer, will cheer that too.


I understand the farmers need to use it.. (I wasnt really thinking about that until you brought it up however) The farmer who lets me hunt his property has to use a weed killer before he plants. I get this part.
But a home-owner is another story yes?

Thanks for the education.. This is interesting.
Murphy


----------



## sporty (Jun 24, 2004)

Excuse me!, I understand that certain people are the experts and the only experts on everything. I think what some people are indicating is the Roundup ready seed which is banned for human consumption and banned for use in other countries. If you further researched this product you will find this company is filing suits left and right on the american farmer. Really I can't wait to be an expert food plotter with my little quad and brag about myself.


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

Rough day, sporty?

The fact that soys produced from glyphosate-resistant seed are "banned" in some countries has little, if anything, to do with science, and everything to do with insulating markets (especially the EU) from having to price-compete with more productive farmers elsewhere(like the USA, for example).


----------



## Murphy (Aug 10, 2005)

farmlegend said:


> Rough day, sporty?
> 
> The fact that soys produced from glyphosate-resistant seed are "banned" in some countries has little, if anything, to do with science, and everything to do with insulating markets (especially the EU) from having to price-compete with more productive farmers elsewhere(like the USA, for example).


I just knew there was some politics in this discusion somewhere... 

Greedy polititians are going to get it one of these days... :evilsmile


----------



## lookin for the gills (Jan 21, 2003)

Not that it matters but... I was reading this for the first time in a few days and was thinking one thing. all you people that sit there and say "well this does more harm than this" or "what about the harm that this does to the Enviroment?" or "Round-up isnt bad". It is obvious that Glyphosate is bad for some things right, and that it is *possible* that it could be doing harm to amphibians and other little creatures right? Then I ask you one thing. Why not stop using for a few years and see what of an impact it has on these things? Why not? Ill tell you why, its because in America we value the dollar so much that we dont give a crap what we step on or kill in this matter, to get what we want. I am sorry but if there is one thing I hate its money. I am not rich but I have money and I hate it. It will tear a person up. You can never have enough. Listen to me I am rambling now and beat red cause I am so fired up about people valueing money. Sorry but thats my opinion:rant: :rant: :rant:


----------



## lookin for the gills (Jan 21, 2003)

Sorry bout that I am cooled off now. Didnt mean to affend anyone:lol:


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

Human beings cannot live without "polluting". It's impossible. Fuhgettaboutit. What we can do is make informed choices of what we do with our earth, based on all possible inputs. 

If we had a world that was suddenly without herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizer, probably a billion people would starve to death. Then the survivors could toil in the fields from dawn till dusk, toasting a brave new era.


----------



## Rick Relyea (Aug 23, 2005)

As the scientist that conducted the studies of how Roundup impacts amphibians (and an avid sportsman), I thought it might be helpful to let the forum members know that a great deal of additional information about Roundup and frogs can be found on our webpages. 
www.pitt.edu/~relyea

This web page includes a response to Monsanto (the manufacturer of Roundup) and plenty of popular press on our research.

The University press release on our research can be found at:
http://www.umc.pitt.edu:591/m/FMPro?-db=ma&-lay=a&-format=d.html&id=2115&-Find

You can also use this web page to obtain copies of the original articles that we have published.

Sincerely,
Dr. Rick Relyea
University of Pittsburgh
(and former resident of Michigan)


----------



## Splitshot (Nov 30, 2000)

First I want to thank you for posting this information. Personally I will never use certain herbicides like Roundup until they proven to be safe. Research is only as good as the method used and from what you have provided, I am convinced that it isnt. It is clear that the criteria for the studies set up by the drug companies are biased.

I am not surprised that some people will justify its use even in the face of sound evidence and convince themselves that this is a better way than using a disk for example. If they are both bad, neither should be used at least not for frivolous reasons. 

Many of us know that there are far fewer amphibians than when we were growing up. Im guessing the reasons are caused by man and your research seems to be pointing us in the right direction. Keep up the good work!


----------



## Rondevous (Mar 14, 2005)

Thanks You !!!!

Dr. Rick Relyea,

I saved your site in my favorites.

In the area that I live corn and beans are grown.
Round Up is used alot by the farmers nearby.
On active farms the amphibian count is low in the surrounding habitats, however if I search out abandon farms and Staet Owned lands I see an huge increase in lifeforms.
Last April I found my first ever breeding site of Spotted Salamanders, I counted 21 over a two day period.
It was a search that took 40 years to fullfill.
The term indicator specie gets alittle press now and then but the ideas are quickly forgotton.
Chemical abuse and the impact it has on wildlife should be more of a concern to all people.
The chain of life is taught in schools all around the nation at an early age, yet adults seem to forget the simple lessons.
Thanks for providing us with some good reading, I look forward to more of your posts!


----------



## Ranger Ray (Mar 2, 2003)

Awful nice of you to take the time to post that information and link for us Dr. Relyea, thank you.


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

The Thinkers: Pitt expert's work targets pesticides' ecological risks

Next to Pymatuning Reservoir in northwestern Pennsylvania are 700 water-filled tanks that may provide the answer to just how risky pesticides are to the environment and human health.

The tanks are filled with tadpoles, and University of Pittsburgh ecologist Rick Relyea has used them over the past several years to show how lethal many of the most commonly used pesticides are, even in concentrations below allowable levels.

Over the last four years, Dr. Relyea and his colleagues have shown how ubiquitous chemicals like the weedkiller Roundup, malathion and endosulfan kill off large proportions of some frog species and may be contributing to the worldwide decline in the amphibian population.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09026/944512-85.stm


----------



## James Dymond (Feb 23, 2002)

Tadpoles in the fall: Never seen this before, last Oct. while I was trapping coyotes I found zillions of live ones in an old beaver flooding, came back a few days later with the camera and they were almost all dead and a stinking mess. Jim


----------



## twodogsphil (Apr 16, 2002)

Walleyechaser you said "Quaker Oats discontinued accepting oats which was planted with glyphosate treated seed since their studies showed that it appeared in the end product as well". 

This is incredible!! How about a link?


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

If it helps in the pursuit of big bucks its a great thing.


----------



## T Brown (Dec 7, 2008)

"*lookin for the gills"* I went to MSU too, and I get sad when I see a traitor.:rant: I went 4 and a half years, and apparently that last half year I got my moneys worth!! 
When ever spraying near a river or pond, you should ALWAYS have a riparian zone. A riparian zone is a 100' to 200' space between the water and where you will actually be spraying. This area is simply left alone, or you can help in along by planting species that love lots of water. This grassy/shrubby area is a "filter" you might say that sucks out all of the nasty pollutant runoff we produce. 
Have you ever heard of algae blooms? These are caused from too much nitrogen being introtuced into the water and a large influx of algae and plants explode, eventually drying out shallow ponds. This riparian zone would help filter out not only roundup, but also all the fertilizers we are putting in!!! Man, those last 6 months were crazy!!
I appreciate the link Dr. Relyea put up, but anyone that is dumb enough to spray fertilizer or roundup directly into a river or pond should not be near these chemicals. Spraying directly into the water source to get rid of surface weeds and algae is rediculous. A simple aerator will keep your surface weed free due to the disturbance of air. Using a little common sense and being able to read warning symbols ought to solve this issue. 

*James Dymond~ *I'm interested in this photo you sent. I took herpetology at state and those tadpoles were bullfrog tadpoles. These tadpoles have to be in a permanent water source over winter that doesn't freeze all the way through, and then they go through a metamorphosis in the following spring/summer. You said it was in a "beaver flooding" in october, so freezing is probably out of the question. what was the size of this area? If it was relatively small with a high density, they may have used up all the available oxygen and could not breathe any more. Another possibility is that they produced so much nitrogenous waste that they actually died in their own toxic filth. Just looking for alittle more detail  

SPARTY HARD!!!!


----------



## wyldkat49766 (Apr 21, 2007)

Murphy said:


> Very interesting...
> 
> When I was young, we used to find frogs everywhere... Yup.. those were the 70's and I was a young one..
> 
> ...


Come over to my place around May and you will be deafened by them during mating season. And we hear them almost every night also.



Ranger Ray said:


> I can't think of a person I know who doesn't use it.



* raises hand *


----------

