{"id":2007,"date":"2025-08-28T08:46:01","date_gmt":"2025-08-28T15:46:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/weeders-of-the-west\/?p=2007"},"modified":"2026-03-20T13:05:06","modified_gmt":"2026-03-20T20:05:06","slug":"survey","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/weeders-of-the-west\/2025\/08\/28\/survey\/","title":{"rendered":"Weed Management Challenges in the Pacific Northwest\u2013Preliminary Producer Survey Results"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"cpb-row  pad-bottom gutter single\" style=\"\"><div class=\"cpb-row-inner\"><div class=\"cpb-column  one\" style=\"\"><div class=\"cpb-textblock cpb-item \"><p>Contributed by Doug Finkelnburg, University of Idaho<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"cpb-textblock cpb-item \"><p>Recent survey results from the <a href=\"pnwhri.org\">Pacific Northwest Herbicide Resistance Initiative (PNWHRI)<\/a> highlight how much weed pressure and complexity have grown over the past decade from the perspective of producers. In winter 2024\u20132025, PNWHRI researchers launched an anonymous survey to learn how weed control challenges have shifted for producers in Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. The survey was distributed at grower meetings, through Extension and industry newsletters, and conservation district communications. Eighty-one responses from 29 counties provided a window into farm realities across a diverse range of crops\u2014wheat, pulses, oilseeds, forages, potatoes, sugar beets\u2014and rainfall zones spanning 7 to 40 inches annually. Most respondents farmed without irrigation, and the majority operated at a commercial scale, with nearly 60% managing more than 1,000 acres.<\/p><\/div>\n<figure class=\"cpb-figure\">\n\t<img src=\"https:\/\/s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2025\/08\/Fink251.png\" style=\"width: 100%;display:block\" \/>\n\t<figcaption>Map of Idaho, Oregon, and Washington Counties showing reported differences in the number of \u201cproblem weeds\u201d observed on farms today compared to ten years ago. The survey shows that some counties saw decreases in weed species, others saw increases, and many counties had no data to analyze.<\/figcaption>\n<\/figure>\n<div class=\"cpb-textblock cpb-item \"><p><strong>A Growing List of Weeds<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"cpb-textblock cpb-item \"><p>More than half of producers (58%) reported an increase in the number of <a href=\"https:\/\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/weed-resources\/common-weed-list\/\">problem weed species<\/a> compared to 10 years ago. Only 13% saw fewer problem weed species, while the remainder noted no change. The survey defined \u201cproblem weeds\u201d as those that directly reduce yields, cause dockage, or interfere with farm activities such as harvest or haying.<\/p>\n<p>The increase wasn\u2019t just from new weeds. Many reported existing weeds becoming more prevalent (42%) or a combination of new and existing species (41%). Proximity to unmanaged areas such as roadsides, ditches, and neighboring fields was the most common reason cited for problem weed issues, followed closely by <a href=\"https:\/\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/weed-resources\/#herbresist\">herbicide resistance<\/a>.<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"cpb-textblock cpb-item \"><p><strong>Weed Budgets Keep Climbing<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"cpb-textblock cpb-item \"><p>Nearly 9 out of 10 farmers reported higher weed management costs than a decade ago. Rising herbicide prices topped the list of reasons, but many also cited the need for more applications, higher use rates, or switching to more expensive products. In many cases, farmers are layering multiple strategies simply to maintain control.<\/p><\/div>\n<figure class=\"cpb-figure\">\n\t<img src=\"https:\/\/s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2025\/08\/Fink252.png\" style=\"width: 100%;display:block\" \/>\n\t<figcaption>Table listing how producers ranked challenges to farm profitability among the listed options. (1) soil erosion; (2) irrigation availability; (3) soil acidity; (4) government regulation; (5) crop disease pressure; (6) borrowing costs; (7) herbicide resistance; (8) high equipment costs; (9) low commodity prices.<\/figcaption>\n<\/figure>\n<div class=\"cpb-textblock cpb-item \"><p><strong>Herbicide Resistance Ranks High Among Challenges<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"cpb-textblock cpb-item \"><p>When asked to rank threats to their operations, farmers placed herbicide resistance third overall\u2014behind only low commodity prices and high equipment costs. Resistance was viewed as more concerning than crop disease, government regulation, or limited irrigation access.<\/p>\n<p>For many, herbicide resistance has already changed day-to-day management. Farmers reported turning to:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>More tillage and other mechanical weed control<\/li>\n<li>Crop rotations that open up new timings and tools<\/li>\n<li>Multiple herbicide modes of action in a single year<\/li>\n<li>Increased reliance on herbicide-resistant crops<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Yet barriers remain. Limited herbicide options, lack of effective non-chemical tools, and poor weed management by neighbors all complicate resistance management. Some farmers also pointed to gaps in knowledge and understanding of resistance as challenges to long-term success.<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"cpb-textblock cpb-item \"><p><strong>Takeaway<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"cpb-textblock cpb-item \"><p>The PNWHRI survey indicates that weed management is becoming more difficult, more expensive, and more central to the sustainability of farming in the Pacific Northwest. Farmers are adapting with creativity and persistence\u2014but they face rising costs and shrinking options. These early results underscore the importance of new research, better coordination, and practical tools to help growers stay ahead in the fight against weeds.<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A recent survey by the Pacific Northwest Herbicide Resistance Initiative (PNWHRI) highlights how much weed pressure and complexity have grown over the past decade from the perspective of producers.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4524,"featured_media":2010,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[8],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/weeders-of-the-west\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2007"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/weeders-of-the-west\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/weeders-of-the-west\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/weeders-of-the-west\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4524"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/weeders-of-the-west\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2007"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/weeders-of-the-west\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2007\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2167,"href":"https:\/\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/weeders-of-the-west\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2007\/revisions\/2167"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/weeders-of-the-west\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2010"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/weeders-of-the-west\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2007"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/weeders-of-the-west\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2007"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smallgrains.wsu.edu\/weeders-of-the-west\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2007"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}