A safer alternative to Roundup

[TomSeller]

As a kid I recall mucking out the family barn time after time and spreading it in the family garden. The barn was clean afterwards and the garden grew better than I can get it to today. I don't use chemicals, but sure could use some cow carp in the garden.

 

[Redneck in training]

Problem with chemicals is that over time they or the stuff they break down to will accumulate in the nature and who knows what issues it will cause. Once the chemicals enter the nature they are going to stay there.
In example pesticides. They kill everything. When I was a kid I remember walking in a meadow it was full of bugs, lot of grasshoppers and lot of animals that feed on insects. There were birds, lizards, snakes, all kinds of birds etc. Agriculture killed their source of food so they disappeared. After that application pesticides increased. When I go to visit places where I grew up there are no lizards, no meadow larks, no crickets, few grasshoppers, very few flowers in meadows. You want to see all what was common everywhere in the past you have to go to undeveloped places not used for intensive agriculture. And those are harder to find as time goes by.

 

[Smallplot]

Problem with chemicals is that over time they or the stuff they break down to will accumulate in the nature and who knows what issues it will cause. Once the chemicals enter the nature they are going to stay there.
In example pesticides. They kill everything. When I was a kid I remember walking in a meadow it was full of bugs, lot of grasshoppers and lot of animals that feed on insects. There were birds, lizards, snakes, all kinds of birds etc. Agriculture killed their source of food so they disappeared. After that application pesticides increased. When I go to visit places where I grew up there are no lizards, no meadow larks, no crickets, few grasshoppers, very few flowers in meadows. You want to see all what was common everywhere in the past you have to go to undeveloped places not used for intensive agriculture. And those are harder to find as time goes by.

People are the only species not directly tied to how much food is available. Will pesticides kill a small percentage of insects pests, sure but, would you kill a wasp nest built on your front door? If they effect a person then they are OK to terminate but if they decimate a farmers livelihood then it is the farmers fault?

You said a lot when you said Ag is encroaching and taking many of these pests food sources away from them. In fact you take away an animals food source and they either starve or find different places to hunt for food. So taking away insects will drive away lizards and snakes. Do you have an alternative which both sides of the fence will find beneficial?

I live in the middle of Ag and still see plenty of insects, lizards, and snakes. Pesticides will not get rid of all insects but they will keep numbers within a threshold when applied during times of dangerous threshold levels. Kind of like when someone sprays themselves down with insect repellent. What about the insecticides formulated from natural flowers because they are in a bottle and sold as a herbicide, are they chemicals? If the insecticide is killing them what does the flower it self do, and what chemicals are the flowers made of?

Just something to think about.

 

[Redneck in training]

People are the only species not directly tied to how much food is available. Will pesticides kill a small percentage of insects pests, sure but, would you kill a wasp nest built on your front door? If they effect a person then they are OK to terminate but if they decimate a farmers livelihood then it is the farmers fault?

You said a lot when you said Ag is encroaching and taking many of these pests food sources away from them. In fact you take away an animals food source and they either starve or find different places to hunt for food. So taking away insects will drive away lizards and snakes. Do you have an alternative which both sides of the fence will find beneficial?

I live in the middle of Ag and still see plenty of insects, lizards, and snakes. Pesticides will not get rid of all insects but they will keep numbers within a threshold when applied during times of dangerous threshold levels. Kind of like when someone sprays themselves down with insect repellent. What about the insecticides formulated from natural flowers because they are in a bottle and sold as a herbicide, are they chemicals? If the insecticide is killing them what does the flower it self do, and what chemicals are the flowers made of?

Just something to think about.

The real problem behind all this is world population. Increase of world population puts pressure on food production. It is true (Monsanto says so) that we can feed even larger number of people but there is a cost.

 

[Smallplot]

The real problem behind all this is world population. Increase of world population puts pressure on food production. It is true (Monsanto says so) that we can feed even larger number of people but there is a cost.

And what is the cost for halting, or limiting, food production? Who will make the decisions on who does without food? It seems to me we are kind of in a catch 22, where what ever direction we take the farmers are the bad guy in this situation. As a humanitarian one would expect more weight to be put on sustaining lives of a growing population.

Limiting grain production and use of chemical herbicides not only will limit grain but will limit the production of meat, dairy, and textile producing crops, therefore increasing the cost of everyday items. Grain sustains many facets from ink to clothing to the food consumed every day. Can the world stand to downgrade from current production limits and the use of chemical herbicides like Round Up?

 

[Creamer]

People are the only species not directly tied to how much food is available. Will pesticides kill a small percentage of insects pests, sure but, would you kill a wasp nest built on your front door? If they effect a person then they are OK to terminate but if they decimate a farmers livelihood then it is the farmers fault?

You said a lot when you said Ag is encroaching and taking many of these pests food sources away from them. In fact you take away an animals food source and they either starve or find different places to hunt for food. So taking away insects will drive away lizards and snakes. Do you have an alternative which both sides of the fence will find beneficial?

I live in the middle of Ag and still see plenty of insects, lizards, and snakes. Pesticides will not get rid of all insects but they will keep numbers within a threshold when applied during times of dangerous threshold levels. Kind of like when someone sprays themselves down with insect repellent. What about the insecticides formulated from natural flowers because they are in a bottle and sold as a herbicide, are they chemicals? If the insecticide is killing them what does the flower it self do, and what chemicals are the flowers made of?

Just something to think about.

What I find most interesting is that over 95% of the usage of 2,4-D a very old and known dangerous broadleaf herbicide, is in Weed and Feeds for the lawn and sprays used by landscapers and groundskeepers, i.e. non-agricultural. Typically these applications are used at a much higher rate than in agricultural applications do because they are not as cost/kill % focused - much more about having an absolutely weedfree appearance. Therefore applying chemicals at even 10X the rate a farmer would is not uncommon. A few more dollars - who cares; a weedfree lawn is very important - green and clean that is all that matters. Now add a little irrigation which creates more runoff and the problem chemicals migrate into the groundwater. Nobody complains about all of this though - it is those **** farmers who are growing their food.

 

[mx1alex]

What I find most interesting is that over 95% of the usage of 2,4-D a very old and known dangerous broadleaf herbicide, is in Weed and Feeds for the lawn and sprays used by landscapers and groundskeepers, i.e. non-agricultural. Typically these applications are used at a much higher rate than in agricultural applications do because they are not as cost/kill % focused - much more about having an absolutely weedfree appearance. Therefore applying chemicals at even 10X the rate a farmer would is not uncommon. A few more dollars - who cares; a weedfree lawn is very important - green and clean that is all that matters. Now add a little irrigation which creates more runoff and the problem chemicals migrate into the groundwater. Nobody complains about all of this though - it is those **** farmers who are growing their food.

Where are you getting this 95% number from??? And 2,4-D is one of the safer chemicals out there, hence the reason you don't need an applicators license to buy or apply it.

 

[Creamer]

I have had a few chemical reps tell me that. I think they are talking pure 2,4-D versus combination products but I am not sure. I know the big change came when Roundup Ready crops came into being and the associated takeover of glycophosphate versus more specific broadleafs like 2,4-D. Also there are a lot more targeted weedkillers available that do less crop damage than 2,4-D. I know my nephews do not use any 2,4-D - they just won't because of the crop damage.

Just because they do not require a license to apply it does not necessarily mean it is safer - it was mostly grandfathered in.

 

[mx1alex]

I have had a few chemical reps tell me that. I think they are talking pure 2,4-D versus combination products but I am not sure. I know the big change came when Roundup Ready crops came into being and the associated takeover of glycophosphate versus more specific broadleafs like 2,4-D. Also there are a lot more targeted weedkillers available that do less crop damage than 2,4-D. I know my nephews do not use any 2,4-D - they just won't because of the crop damage.

Just because they do not require a license to apply it does not necessarily mean it is safer - it was mostly grandfathered in.

As a certified crop adviser, commercially licensed applicator, agronomist, former chem rep, and person who has worked in the industry for 15+ years I can assure you there is way more 2,4-d applied in ag than there is in residential use. Not even close. Most of the 2,4-d use is used in conjunction with glyphosate for burndown applications so there is no worry for crop injury.

It's glyphosate, not glycophosphate.

And no, 2,4-d was not grandfathered in. That's not how chemical classification works. Big box stores are not allowed to sell restricted use pesticides. They can only sell products that any tom, dick, or harry is allowed to go out and apply and not hurt themselves, others, or the environment by applying themselves.

 

[Creamer]

Why use 2,4-D in conjunction with glyphosate for burndown if glyphosphate kills everything or does it have a residual that holds the weeds down longer than glyphosate?

BTW - can you quantify the ag versus non-ag usage? I have not been able to find numbers on that.