Archive for Downsizer For an ethical approach to consumption
|
lowri
|
RoundUp/glyphosate QuestionI have a small plot that was once part of a market garden, best depth of soil on the place. It has got completely encroached by bracken, couch, goosegrass, bindweed, nettles, ghastly wild parsnip, brambles, etc.
Aside from the unethical bit, what I want to know is: if I apply RoundUp or glyphosate, will it affect the daffodil bulbs that have been there forever and I would like to see next year?
Pigs are out of the question as an alternative, obviously, and at my age I am not keen on bringing in any more livestock. I don't think strimming or brushcutting is the answer, and as for rototilling, the stuff on top will have to be shifted first, and I thought rototilling just cuts the roots into smaller bits, ad nauseam. I just want a reasonable bit of land to work on, in the shortest possible time, and then to grow a few veg, there is nowhere else suitable.
Is this Pie in the Sky?
|
marigold
|
Glyphosphate is absorbed through the leaves of the plant, so dormant bulbs should be unaffected if you apply it now. You may need more than one application on dense growth.
|
orangepippin
|
I don't see anything wrong with using glyphosate to get a plot under control. Good luck turning pie in the sky to a nice veg patch. I was told if the vegetation is completely overgrown, you should brushcut / strim the stuff down first, then leave it a bit, then apply the glyphos. Not sure about time of year to do that though.
|
Bluedog
|
As a tip, fertilise about a week before you apply round up and when you do add it put a couple of drops of fairy liquid in the can. Glyphosate works its best when the plant is in full growth surge and if you fertalise the weeds (yeah I know its odd but the science is there) the glyphosate will be absorbed quicker into the plant and you are less likely to get that hit and miss result you can sometimes get.
|
beean
|
We've a small amount of very overgrown river-bank opposite our house, which I would really like to get under control. It's full of ground elder, brambles, and the like.
Is gypsophylate a no-no close to water? Common sense suggests to me that it probably is, but am sure someone here knows for sure?
|
Rob R
|
| orangepippin wrote: | | I was told if the vegetation is completely overgrown, you should brushcut / strim the stuff down first, then leave it a bit, then apply the glyphos. Not sure about time of year to do that though. |
That's right- it needs to be actively growing to get the best distribution throughout the plant, so getting it on early in the spring with perhaps a second application if you get some re-growth or cut and wait for the regrowth, as you say, providing the soil temperature is 5 degrees+.
|
Bluedog
|
| Rob R wrote: | | orangepippin wrote: | | I was told if the vegetation is completely overgrown, you should brushcut / strim the stuff down first, then leave it a bit, then apply the glyphos. Not sure about time of year to do that though. |
That's right- it needs to be actively growing to get the best distribution throughout the plant, so getting it on early in the spring with perhaps a second application if you get some re-growth or cut and wait for the regrowth, as you say, providing the soil temperature is 5 degrees+. |
The only problem with that is that Glyphosate is a foliar herbicide. It needs leaves to be truly effective as it is absorbed through the leaves, so if you strim the leaves it will not have any access.
|
Bluedog
|
| beean wrote: | We've a small amount of very overgrown river-bank opposite our house, which I would really like to get under control. It's full of ground elder, brambles, and the like.
Is gypsophylate a no-no close to water? Common sense suggests to me that it probably is, but am sure someone here knows for sure? |
Strictly speaking you are not allowed to use anything near a river bank and rightly so.....
|
beean
|
Thanks, bluedog: I was kind of expecting that to be the answer, but then am no scientist when it comes to understanding how these things work!
|
Rob R
|
| Bluedog wrote: | | Rob R wrote: | | orangepippin wrote: | | I was told if the vegetation is completely overgrown, you should brushcut / strim the stuff down first, then leave it a bit, then apply the glyphos. Not sure about time of year to do that though. |
That's right- it needs to be actively growing to get the best distribution throughout the plant, so getting it on early in the spring with perhaps a second application if you get some re-growth or cut and wait for the regrowth, as you say, providing the soil temperature is 5 degrees+. |
The only problem with that is that Glyphosate is a foliar herbicide. It needs leaves to be truly effective as it is absorbed through the leaves, so if you strim the leaves it will not have any access. |
Hence the need to wait for regrowth- fresh new leaves absorb much more of the chemical than older, darker leaves do. If it doesn't re-grow then you know it is not the right time of year to apply it.
|
Bluedog
|
Yeah but then you are waiting for it to re-grow... If you just add some fairy liquid and feed everything a week before you spray it will do the job of strimming and you can do it weeks before waiting for the plant to recover...
|
Rob R
|
Sorry, I appear to have stumbled into the paralell anti-downsizer forum by mistake. Ignore me.
|
Bluedog
|
| Rob R wrote: | | Sorry, I appear to have stumbled into the paralell anti-downsizer forum by mistake. Ignore me. |
Eh?
|
Rob R
|
Weakening the plant and then hitting it when it is at it's most vulnerable is a lower-input method of using glyphosate (if you find you have to use it at all), more in line with the downsizerish principles.
|
Bluedog
|
| Rob R wrote: | | Weakening the plant and then hitting it when it is at it's most vulnerable is a lower-input method of using glyphosate (if you find you have to use it at all), more in line with the downsizerish principles. |
Surely just using it raises "downsizer" issues, so a better answer would be to try and come up with better ways, more non toxic ways to do the job, but they would have to include not using any form of covering or in fact strimming as both methods would have used petrochemicals to get the same job done.
In answer to the OP's original question then no, the daffs wont be effected, they will die back as most plants will but as with almost all underground storage plants they will sit and brood for a while but they will be fine.
As I have said before on here, I went to a trade show once and watched a Round up rep drink a capful of roundup....
|
Rob R
|
| Bluedog wrote: | | Rob R wrote: | | Weakening the plant and then hitting it when it is at it's most vulnerable is a lower-input method of using glyphosate (if you find you have to use it at all), more in line with the downsizerish principles. |
Surely just using it raises "downsizer" issues, so a better answer would be to try and come up with better ways, more non toxic ways to do the job, but they would have to include not using any form of covering or in fact strimming as both methods would have used petrochemicals to get the same job done. |
Indeed, but as it was a question about the best way to use it, I thought my usual "don't" might fall on deaf ears, so I suggested the alternative that uses less of it.
I don't use a strimmer very often but a long handled sickle works as well and seems to tire my arms out just as much
| Bluedog wrote: | | As I have said before on here, I went to a trade show once and watched a Round up rep drink a capful of roundup.... |
I've slopped a fair bit of it down my back in the past and am not dead yet, but I hardly take that as it being safe to do so. I've heard the story of people drinking it, and people saying you can drink it- never got them to actually go through with it though, once is probably the important word there. There are other issues than personal health & safety and petrochemical use with pesticides though, soil health & diversity, for example. That is a bit of a digression from the original question though.
|
cab
|
I wouldn't use glyphosate near a pond or river. But I rescued my daffodil patch by glyphosating the weeds over them last winter; killed off the weeds and daffodils that came up blind last year flowered beautifully this spring.
|
Slim
|
| Quote: | Toxicity
Glyphosate is less toxic than a number of other herbicides and pesticides, such as those from the organochlorine family.[33] Roundup has a United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Toxicity Class of III for oral and inhalation exposure,[34] but more recent studies suggest that IV is appropriate for oral, dermal, and inhalation exposure.[35] It has been rated as class I (Severe) for eye irritation, however.[35]
A 2000 review of the available literature concluded that "under present and expected conditions of new use, there is no potential for Roundup herbicide to pose a health risk to humans".[35] A recent study, on the other hand, has shown that Roundup formulations and metabolic products cause the death of human embryonic, placental, and umbilical cells in vitro even at low concentrations. The effects are not proportional to Glyphosate concentrations but dependent on the nature of the adjuvants used in the formulation.[36]
[edit] Humans
A review of the literature in 2000 concluded that "under present and expected conditions of new use", and based upon screening tests, there are no known toxic effects for Roundup herbicide to humans.[35] This review considered the likely effects experienced by the two groups most likely to have high exposures, herbicide applicators and children aged 1–6, noting that the normal exposure in those sub-populations does not cause toxic effects.[35] Glyphosate has a United States Environmental Protection Agency Toxicity Class of III in 1993,[34] but more recent studies suggest that IV is appropriate for oral, dermal, and inhalation exposure.[35] It has been rated as class I (Severe) for eye irritation, however.[35] Glyphosate is being evaluated for effects to unborn fetuses and their development. It is currently on the USEPA Endocrine Disrupter Screening list, published in 2007.[37][38]
Outside its intended use, glyphosate can be lethal. For example, with intentional poisonings there is approximately a 10% mortality for those ingesting glyphosate, compared to 70% for those ingesting paraquat.[39]
Laboratory toxicology studies suggest that other ingredients combined with glyphosate may have greater toxicity than glyphosate alone. For example, a study comparing glyphosate and Roundup found that Roundup had a greater effect on aromatase than glyphosate alone.[10]
Statistics from the California Environmental Protection Agency's Pesticide Illness Surveillance Program indicate that glyphosate related incidents are one of the highest reported of all pesticides.[40][41] However, incident count does not take into account the number of people exposed and the severity of symptoms associated with each incident.[41] For example if hospitalization is used as a measure of the severity of pesticide related incidents, then Glyphosate would be considered relatively safe, since over a 13 year period in California none of the 515 pesticide related hospitalizations recorded were attributed to glyphosate.[41]
Greenpeace states that the acute human toxicity of glyphosate is very low, but note that, as mentioned above, other added chemicals (particularly surfactants, e.g. polyoxy-ethyleneamine, POEA) can be more toxic than glyphosate itself.[17] Over-application, or application directly to the soil may impact earth worms.
A review of the toxicological data on Roundup shows that there are at least 58 studies of the effects of Roundup itself on a range of organisms.[42] This review concluded that "for terrestrial uses of Roundup minimal acute and chronic risk was predicted for potentially exposed non-target organisms". It also concluded that there were some risks to aquatic organisms exposed to Roundup in shallow water. More recent research suggests glyphosate induces a variety of functional abnormalities in fetuses and pregnant rats.[43] Also in recent mammalian research, glyphosate has been found to interfere with an enzyme involved testosterone production in mouse cell culture[44] and to interfere with an estrogen biosynthesis enzyme in cultures of Human Placental cells.[45]
There is a reasonable correlation between the amount of Roundup ingested and the likelihood of serious systemic sequelae or death. Ingestion of >85 mL of the concentrated formulation is likely to cause significant toxicity in adults. Gastrointestinal corrosive effects, with mouth, throat and epigastric pain and dysphagia are common. Renal and hepatic impairment are also frequent and usually reflect reduced organ perfusion. Respiratory distress, impaired consciousness, pulmonary oedema, infiltration on chest x-ray, shock, arrythmias, renal failure requiring haemodialysis, metabolic acidosis and hyperkalaemia may supervene in severe cases. Bradycardia and ventricular arrhythmias are often present pre-terminally. Dermal exposure to ready-to-use glyphosate formulations can cause irritation and photo-contact dermatitis has been reported occasionally; these effects are probably due to the preservative Proxel (benzisothiazolin-3-one). Severe skin burns are very rare. Inhalation is a minor route of exposure but spray mist may cause oral or nasal discomfort, an unpleasant taste in the mouth, tingling and throat irritation. Eye exposure may lead to mild conjunctivitis, and superficial corneal injury is possible if irrigation is delayed or inadequate. [46]
[edit] Other species
The direct toxicity of pure glyphosate to mammals and birds is low.[47][unreliable source?] The acute oral toxicity of Roundup is > 5,000 mg/kg in the rat.[48] It showed no toxic effects when fed to animals for 2 years, and only produced rare cases of reproductive effects when fed in extremely large doses to rodents and dogs. It has not demonstrated any increase in cancer rates in animal studies and is poorly absorbed in the digestive tract. Glyphosate has no significant potential to accumulate in animal tissue.[49][50]
An in vitro study indicates that glyphosate formulations could harm earthworms[51] and beneficial insects.[52] However, the reported effect of glyphosate on earthworms has been criticized.[42] The results conflict with results from field studies where no effects were noted for the number of nematodes, mites, or springtails after treatment with Roundup at 2 kilograms active ingredient per hectare.[53] Glyphosate can negatively affect nitrogen-fixing bacteria,[54] and increase the susceptibility of plants to disease.[55] A 2005 study concluded that certain amphibians may be at risk from glyphosate use.[56]
Certain surfactants used in some glyphosate formulations have higher toxicity to fish and invertebrates resulting in some formulations of glyphosate not being registered for use in aquatic applications.[57] Monsanto produces glyphosate products with alternative surfactants that are specifically formulated for aquatic use, for example "Biactive" and "AquaMaster".[58] According to Monsanto, "Conservation groups have chosen glyphosate formulations because of their effectiveness against most weeds as glyphosate has very low toxicity to wildlife".[59] Glyphosate is used with five different salts but commercial formulations of it contain surfactants, which vary in nature and concentration. As a result, human poisoning with this herbicide is not with the active ingredient alone but with complex and variable mixtures. [46]
Glyphosate's effect on soil life may be limited because when glyphosate comes into contact with the soil, it rapidly binds to soil particles and is inactivated.[60][61] Unbound glyphosate is degraded by bacteria. Low activity because of binding to soil particles suggests that glyphosate's effects on soil flora are limited. Low glyphosate concentrations can be found in many creeks and rivers in U.S. and Europe.[citation needed]
The United States Environmental Protection Agency,[60] the EC Health and Consumer Protection Directorate, and the UN World Health Organization have all concluded that pure glyphosate is not carcinogenic. Opponents of glyphosate claim that Roundup has been found to cause genetic damage, citing Peluso et al.[62] The authors concluded that the damage was "not related to the active ingredient, but to another component of the herbicide mixture".
Mammal research indicates oral intake of 1% glyphosate induces changes in liver enzyme activities in pregnant rats and their fetuses.[63]
[edit] Aquatic effects
Fish and aquatic invertebrates are more sensitive to Roundup than terrestrial organisms.[42] Glyphosate is generally less persistent in water than in soil, with 12 to 60 day persistence observed in Canadian pond water, yet persistence of over a year have been observed in the sediments of ponds in Michigan and Oregon.[34]
The EU classifies Roundup as R51/53 Toxic to aquatic organisms, may cause long-term adverse effects in the aquatic environment.[64]
Roundup is not registered for aquatic uses[65] and studies of its effects on amphibians indicate it is toxic to them.[66] Other glyphosate formulations that are registered for aquatic use have been found to have negligible adverse effects on sensitive amphibians.[67]
[edit] Endocrine disruptor debate
In vitro studies have shown glyphosate affects progesterone production in mammalian cells[68] and can increase the mortality of placental cells.[10] Whether these studies classify glyphosate as an endocrine disruptor is debated.
Some[who?] feel that in vitro studies are insufficient, and are waiting to see if animal studies show a change in endocrine activity, since a change in a single cell line may or may not impact an entire organism. Additionally, current in vitro studies expose cell lines to concentrations orders of magnitude greater than would be found in expected exposures, and through pathways that would not be typically experienced in real organisms.
Others[who?] feel that in vitro studies, particularly ones identifying not only an effect, but a chemical pathway, are sufficient evidence to classify glyphosate as an endocrine disruptor, on the basis that even small changes in endocrine activity can have lasting effects on an entire organism that may be difficult to detect through whole organism studies alone. Further research on the endocrine effects of glyphospate is ongoing, including through the EPA endocrine screening program on 73 chemicals, published in 2007.
[edit] Environmental degradation
When glyphosate comes into contact with the soil it can be rapidly bound to soil particles and be inactivated.[34] Unbound glyphosate can be degraded by bacteria.[69] However, glyphosphate has been shown to increase the infection rate of wheat by fusarium head blight in fields that have been treated with glyphosphate. [70]
In soils, half lives vary from as little as 3 days at a site in Texas, 141 days at a site in Iowa, to between 1–3 years in Swedish forest soils.[71] It appears that higher latitude sites have the longest soil persistences such as in Canada and Scandinavia.
[edit] Resistance in weeds and microorganisms
The first documented cases of weed resistance to glyphosate were found in Australia, involving rigid ryegrass near Orange, New South Wales.[72] Some farmers in the United States have expressed concern that weeds are now developing with glyphosate resistance, with 13 states now reporting resistance, and this poses a problem to many farmers, including cotton farmers, that are now heavily dependent on glyphosate to control weeds.[73][74] Farmers associations are now reporting 103 biotypes of weeds within 63 weed species with herbicide resistance[73][74]. This problem is likely to be exacerbated by the use of roundup-ready crops [75]. |
From Wikipedia where the claims all have citations that you can further look into if you so desire.
|
mark
|
It is good to try and minimise the use of Glyphosate
the cutting down and letting regrow is a good trick and works wel in my experience - typically with these sort of weeds you need to re-apply more than once - but the re growth trick reduces the number of applications - and generallyclears the plot the weeds quicker in the long run.
It works best in the spring though as you get a quick regrowth - at this time of year it might be a bit late
Bashing and bruising the plants also helps especially with older plants - hit em with stick or whatever then apply the weedkiller.
the detergent can also help it get in too ...
You can always kill them off and then put polythene or card over the ground to kill or weaken regrowth.
However I favour a mix of cut down - regrow - glyphosate. Let die down - wait a few weeks - then do a proper dig removing roots where i find them.
Then ruthlessly persecute with rotovator or cultivator until its time to plant the bed.
mark
|
beean
|
I don't like the idea of using chemical weedkillers, but the overgrown bit I have is full of ground elder, giant hogweed, brambles and is on a very steep slope. Given that it is near a water course, is the best thing to do = cover with thick plastic/old carpet/etc, and dig roots out?
|
cab
|
| beean wrote: | | I don't like the idea of using chemical weedkillers, but the overgrown bit I have is full of ground elder, giant hogweed, brambles and is on a very steep slope. Given that it is near a water course, is the best thing to do = cover with thick plastic/old carpet/etc, and dig roots out? |
Giant hogweed, brambles and ground elder? Best advice is to move somewhere else 
Clear it best you can (taking great care with the giant hogweed especially; you're quite close to the water source if thats a big problem, I presume), then cover it, then dig again, and you'll still probably have problems with those weeds.
I think I'd clear, dig, cover, dig again, and build a simple lazy-sandwich bed on top (using lots of cardboard to suppress weeds, underneath layers of manure and soil).
|
mark
|
Iwould have though that the main point was to make sure there is no spray drift and no run off into the watercourse.
I think you could get away with using a small hand held applicator - and polythene sheets or boards or similar to ensure the weedkiller only went onto the foliage.
You can even wrap foliage into a cone then spray onto it inside the cone of polythene (spaying lightly to avoid any run off) so you oinly get the foliage
Do not use right up to the bank - and don't spray where leaves might become detached and fall into the water.
Use common sense and where in doubt use manual weed control.
|
cab
|
Giant hogweed likes its toes wet. I've rarely encountered it anywhere I'd be happy to use glyphosate.
|
Rob R
|
Shouldn't spray closer than 10m (from the top of the bank) to a watercourse, or you're worse than one of those bad intensive farmers we hear about. 
|
mark
|
| Rob R wrote: | | Shouldn't spray closer than 10m (from the top of the bank) to a watercourse, or you're worse than one of those bad intensive farmers we hear about. |
I think you can get away with a bit bit closer than that so long as you use individual application method I outlined above.
Though you might use a hand spray you are not really spraying intoland only applying touchweed style.
Just to clarify the technique - wearing gloves gather an armflul of foliage still attached to the plant
wrap it up in a sheet of polythene open at one end so you can spray onto the foliage only
do the next bit
this method is highly recommended for controlling Japanese knotweed and russian vine etc which are a real nuisance on some of our waterways - whee it is the only solution really...
but you need to be careful not do it right up to the bank - and should not be a lazy substitutr where other non chemical methods work (scything down and then covering with plastic cardboard)
It is a bit labour intensive and not at all what the "bad intensive farmers" do - and may be the only solution in some cases with persistent invaders (digging out can destroy the structure of the bank and start serious erosion.
Mark
|
Rob R
|
You can get away with an awful lot if you're not a business.
|
mark
|
| Rob R wrote: | | You can get away with an awful lot if you're not a business. |
yeah guerilla gardening is the way to go - baraclavas anyone..
|
mark
|
oh but please don't mis-interpret anything I wrote above.
i guess i just have a feeling you guys will be careful and not want to hurt our environment - so can allow a bit more flexibility than a hard and fast rule.
I can't imagine most busineses take that much care when spraying..
|
BethinPA
|
I used Roundup on the poison ivy that was growing rampant in my front garden beds. No other way to do it, OH and self are highly allergic. What I found was that whatever grew back in those areas was very damaged-looking. Crinkled, warped violets and periwinkles mostly. And I thought nothing damaged a vinca periwinkle.
It was handy, because I could see where we'd sprayed, and could check to see whether the poison ivy was growing back, pull it out before it could establish itself. However, I wonder how long it will be until that soil is no longer toxic. Most of the front garden is absolutely crawling with earthworms, but not the bed that had the most poison ivy.
Anyone else found that it took more than a year for the soil to recover?
Beth
|
cab
|
| mark wrote: | oh but please don't mis-interpret anything I wrote above.
i guess i just have a feeling you guys will be careful and not want to hurt our environment - so can allow a bit more flexibility than a hard and fast rule.
I can't imagine most busineses take that much care when spraying.. |
The thing with chemistry is that its mostly invisible, until such a time as you use something really bright coloured. Glyphosate is, basically, invisible. So its really hard to see how far it spreads. But it DOES spread, and if you apply it even quite carefully too close to a water course theres a good risk of it getting in to the water flow.
To get the idea, find the brightest coloured food colouring you can, and try to apply it carefully over plants outside. See what happens 
|
mark
|
| cab wrote: | | mark wrote: | oh but please don't mis-interpret anything I wrote above.
i guess i just have a feeling you guys will be careful and not want to hurt our environment - so can allow a bit more flexibility than a hard and fast rule.
I can't imagine most busineses take that much care when spraying.. |
The thing with chemistry is that its mostly invisible, until such a time as you use something really bright coloured. Glyphosate is, basically, invisible. So its really hard to see how far it spreads. But it DOES spread, and if you apply it even quite carefully too close to a water course theres a good risk of it getting in to the water flow.
To get the idea, find the brightest coloured food colouring you can, and try to apply it carefully over plants outside. See what happens |
oh bugger then we are stuck with jap knotweed on our riverbanks and towpaths then.... AND IT GONnA SPREAD more IF NOT CONTROLLED - ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS please ...
|
Cathryn
|
I believe that around here, the Council cut down the knotweed and squirt round up down the stems. What's the lesser evil?
|
Rob R
|
People are people, business or not, but I've seen a lot more risky (both personal & environmental) actions from gardeners who don't have to take a series of PA tests and fill in the paperwork. I think that just comes from a lack of awareness rather than anything else.
|
mark
|
| Rob R wrote: | | People are people, business or not, but I've seen a lot more risky (both personal & environmental) actions from gardeners who don't have to take a series of PA tests and fill in the paperwork. I think that just comes from a lack of awareness rather than anything else. |
alternate solutions please.....
|
Cathryn
|
Ring your Local Council? It is or was a notifiable weed. They will be dealing with it themselves and you could find out how.
|
cab
|
| mark wrote: |
oh bugger then we are stuck with jap knotweed on our riverbanks and towpaths then.... AND IT GONnA SPREAD more IF NOT CONTROLLED - ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS please ... |
I would suggest contacting the environment agency for advice. Knotweed by a watercourse is a pig of a problem.
...errm, would pigs sort it out? Or do pigs find rivers too tempting?
|
Treacodactyl
|
| mark wrote: | | cab wrote: | | mark wrote: | oh but please don't mis-interpret anything I wrote above.
i guess i just have a feeling you guys will be careful and not want to hurt our environment - so can allow a bit more flexibility than a hard and fast rule.
I can't imagine most busineses take that much care when spraying.. |
The thing with chemistry is that its mostly invisible, until such a time as you use something really bright coloured. Glyphosate is, basically, invisible. So its really hard to see how far it spreads. But it DOES spread, and if you apply it even quite carefully too close to a water course theres a good risk of it getting in to the water flow.
To get the idea, find the brightest coloured food colouring you can, and try to apply it carefully over plants outside. See what happens |
oh bugger then we are stuck with jap knotweed on our riverbanks and towpaths then.... AND IT GONnA SPREAD more IF NOT CONTROLLED - ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS please ... |
See how this goes?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8163730.stm
|
Rob R
|
| BethinPA wrote: | I used Roundup on the poison ivy that was growing rampant in my front garden beds. No other way to do it, OH and self are highly allergic. What I found was that whatever grew back in those areas was very damaged-looking. Crinkled, warped violets and periwinkles mostly. And I thought nothing damaged a vinca periwinkle.
It was handy, because I could see where we'd sprayed, and could check to see whether the poison ivy was growing back, pull it out before it could establish itself. However, I wonder how long it will be until that soil is no longer toxic. Most of the front garden is absolutely crawling with earthworms, but not the bed that had the most poison ivy.
Anyone else found that it took more than a year for the soil to recover?
Beth |
I haven't noticed it, no, but then I've never used any kind of pesticides in my own garden, only on farms I've worked for, and we sure don't count earthworms there! We (or people) do count farmland birds though, and I am sure that there is a link. The biodiversity here since we took over has just flourished. I seem to notice new/more plants every year.
|
mark
|
| Rob R wrote: | | BethinPA wrote: | I used Roundup on the poison ivy that was growing rampant in my front garden beds. No other way to do it, OH and self are highly allergic. What I found was that whatever grew back in those areas was very damaged-looking. Crinkled, warped violets and periwinkles mostly. And I thought nothing damaged a vinca periwinkle.
It was handy, because I could see where we'd sprayed, and could check to see whether the poison ivy was growing back, pull it out before it could establish itself. However, I wonder how long it will be until that soil is no longer toxic. Most of the front garden is absolutely crawling with earthworms, but not the bed that had the most poison ivy.
Anyone else found that it took more than a year for the soil to recover?
Beth |
I haven't noticed it, no, but then I've never used any kind of pesticides in my own garden, only on farms I've worked for, and we sure don't count earthworms there! We (or people) do count farmland birds though, and I am sure that there is a link. The biodiversity here since we took over has just flourished. I seem to notice new/more plants every year. |
I have used glyphosate on my plot occasionally - but i am always careful to spray problem foliage only (and protect the earth and neighbouring plants so spray ends up on leaves only ) - and only when i really need to - I prefer to dig!
But I have tons and tons of earthworm ... they are everywhere.
Mark
|
Rob R
|
| mark wrote: | I have used glyphosate on my plot occasionally - but i am always careful to spray problem foliage only (and protect the earth and neighbouring plants so spray ends up on leaves only ) - and only when i really need to - I prefer to dig!
But I have tons and tons of earthworm ... they are everywhere.
Mark |
Taking precautions certainly makes a huge difference, and it's so multifactoral that it's easy to dismiss the effects of one particular one. As my original post was trying to advise for- using less is always best.
|
BethinPA
|
Has anyone ever tried high-strength vinegar for weed control? Our local organic gardening guru recommends it:
http://www.gardensalive.com/article.asp?ai=780
And I'm sure someone here will have a recipe, and extra apples to make their own!
There are some great resources on this site, but it's American. So I couldn't find mention of some of the invasive weeds you all get in the UK. Still, might help.
|
beean
|
H'mm - this has been my dilema (no knotweed fortunately though, "just" giant hogweed, brambles, and ground elder). Attepting to destroy it "manually" - fear am fighting a battle I won't win, also can't afford to let the bank errode too much. But weedkiller near water course - doesn't sound like the best idea either.
I'm guessing that contacting environment agency types as suggsted above might be the best plan.
|
BethinPA
|
Are you required to contact "authorities" about giant hogweed? Our neighbor in Seattle had one in the yard (impressive, it was!), and had to have some poor city employee come out and take care of it. They don't want them ending up in landfills, or attacking garbage collectors and such.
Landscape cloth or cardboard with mulch on top might help minimize erosion on your slope once you clear it. Then plant asap.
The link I included above talks about torching some weeds, but I am guessing that giant hogweed would have fairly noxious smoke. You can't burn poison ivy, either, as you risk getting blisters in your lungs and throat. Wouldn't hurt to try the vinegar. The dead plants will prevent erosion until you can plant something else in there.
|
|