Pesticides/Herbicides-Use Consequences

[wlamarparmer]

Probably long post, was advised by lots on these boards that I respect to participate instead of reading
and mumbling under my breath. Here goes my first ever post. I will offer nor substantiate any data nor
research, as this is only my personal experiences.
#1. My only experience with broadcast insecticides, is Toxaphene on cotton, and Malathion/Parathion
on peanuts South Alabama mid 50's. As far as herbicides that era was "plow and hoe".
#2. Respect those that say we ruining environment with todays product, but issue between agricultural
entity with conscious as compared to 100% environmentalist.
#3. If I have plant (WalMart special) two plants -one desirable one not, I do cut stump treatment with glysophate on undesirable, and year later desirable plant is healthy and doing well, what did I harm.
#4 SweetGum growing in contact with water oak. Cut out Sweet Gum "12 Inch" and use cut stump treatment,
5 yr. later sweet gum gone, oak thriving.
#5. All this being said and what i see is the alarmist are crying wolf, read specs on glysophate, recommended for foilage, pressure injection, or cut stump treatment. If I have 2 plants in 12 inch pot and treat one/other stays healthy, apparently does not translocate, and researchers are right.
#6. Admire and respect those that question, for therein lies the check and balances for anything environmentally related.
#7. Lots of variation in rainwater runoff thru-out US., my area slow winter drizzle see no runoff, .25 inch spring rain in my lake, neighbor lake, all nearby streams. Hard Georgia clay on hills does not absorb well. Have large gully on property that use for disposal of biodegradable materials which drains into my lake. Toxic or non biodegradable
products go to landfill for contained disposal.
#8. When this propert '07 used Roundup fencelines/one side of lake, didn't like the idea of nothing growing, so now use broadleaf control and pay for weed eat to control grass. Environmental/runoff issue, don't know, just didn't like concept.
# 9. Never been involved/ nor participate in broadcast ant treatment, but when I do individual hill treatement, and week later dead hill still shows most product there, what did I harm ???
Opinion/Cuss/Discuss Please

 

[fenceman]

What did you harm? A sweet gum tree and some fire ants. ;-) :welcome:

 

[M-5]

I still burn garbage and pour used oil on corner post. I will also light a fire with a old tire. If these products you describe were toxic the areas that were treated would be barren for years. I spray around my fruit trees, peaches and figs and if I get some on the foliage those leave will turn yellow and look sickly but it does not kill the tree and it continues to produce.

 

[wlamarparmer]

My point in this was several. Reading the alarmists posts, whatever we use, harming environment., killing everybody.
However if used as described, most products are relative safe, and do no major damage. As 3 Waycross posted on ant
problem, was his plan, but worried about consequences to pets, livestock, and environment. All that's good, just adds to the checks and balances we need as a society. But if I treat one of two plants in close proximity and the desired one shows no ill effects, apparently the manufacturers research is OK. If I treat an ant hill that is threat to me and horses, and look at same two days later, and appears most product is still there on dead hill, with non dissolved and run off in surrounding area. What did I harm???

 

[Jogeephus]

I think many of the alarmists are either well meaning but ignorant or they have a monetary agenda. Take for instance mum juice, one of the insecticides used by organic gardeners. They claim its safe because its natural. So is cyanide and its far from safe. So the argument that something is "safe" because its natural is a weak one at best.

To carry this further the natural organic crowd celebrates the use of mum juice. The active ingredient is pyrethin which kills most insects in a garden. The good thing and bad is sunlight breaks it down in just a few hours which means you have to make repeated applications to get insects under control. The commercial folks saw the beauty of this insecticide and tweaked it to make it sunlight resistant for a couple of days before it degrades. We know this mum juice as permethrin. Is this any more dangerous? Don't think so but it only requires one or two applications to the seven applications required with pyrethin. So what is worse for the environment, the unnecessary repeated spraying of an insecticide requiring the burning of more fossil fuels or a one shot deal that will save time, money and fuel?

Personally, I'd have no problem eating food raised either way but I'm not willing to pay a fortune for a feel good feeling that I'm eating naturally because other things are tainted with poison.

 

[JW IN VA]

We live in an era of extremists.There is also a great lack of common sense . When using any product,we ought to think rather than just go blindly ahead with a shotgun approach.
It sounds like the original poster used what he needed to do a job and no more.Sounds like a good idea.

 

[sim.-ang.king]

Stupid fears what he doesn't know, and we got a whole lotta stupid in this world.