[MAIPC] does Chlorox work on cut stems?

Thu Apr 16 06:42:06 PDT 2015

ALL,

Bleach is not a registered herbicide. Dr. Tasker notes it is not benign to
the environment.

Past research: http://www.colostate.edu/Dept/CoopExt/4dmg/Weed/bleach.htm

Carol DiSalvo
Servicewide IPM Coordinator
National Park Service
Biological Resources Mgmt. Div. MS 2430
1201 I (Eye) Street, 11th Fl., Cube #48
Washington, DC 20005
202-513-7183 Phone
202-371-2131 Fax
Carol_disalvo at nps.gov
http://www.nature.nps.gov/biology/ipm/ and
http://www1.nrintra.nps.gov/BRMD/ipm/

*...97% of all animals on Earth are invertebrates *

*...Everything we eat comes directly or indirectly from plants*

On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Richard Gardner <rtgardner3 at yahoo.com>
wrote:

> Around here in Berks County, PA, I am having a hard time finding healthy
> multiflora rose to experiment on.  Between rose rosette disease and a  *Colletotrichum
> sp*. fungal pathogen the multiflora rose are dying across the landscape.
>
> As far as manual removal of multiflora, I use a pruning hook or pole saw
> to cut at the base of the plant without me getting hung up in the thorns.
> Then either a spading fork or sharpened shovel is used to remove the stump.
>
> In our woodlot, most of the bush honeysuckles come out by pulling hard.  I
> use a PullerBear for the tougher plants.  Many if not most  have *Insolibasidium
> deformans* infections.  This summer I will be looking to find mites
> associated with this infection in the same way eriphyoid mites are
> associated with rose rosette disease and possibly the different pathogens
> killing *Ailanthus altissima*.  I am seeing a lot of the honeysuckle
> aphid, *Hyadaphis tartaricae*, in the area.
>
> Oriental bittersweet - when I used the PullerBear to remove the roots,
> there were clusters of fine roots along the main root which made it much
> harder to remove the roots.
>
> On one of our spading forks I replaced the standard handle with a long
> shovel handle to make it easier to turn soil and remove weeds.
>
>   ------------------------------
>  *From:* frazmo <frazmo at gmail.com>
> *To:* Stephen L. Young <sly27 at cornell.edu>
> *Cc:* maipc at lists.maipc.org
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 15, 2015 10:45 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [MAIPC] does Chlorox work on cut stems?
>
> I appreciate the thoughtful interjection by one of my fellow Steve Youngs
> and the general discussion in this thread. I will just add, I believe in
> the idea of adaptive management, that we view every action we take as an
> experiment and seek to monitor what outcomes result and adapt our
> subsequent activities accordingly. And sharing information as we are doing
> here is vital.
> Along those lines, I will just throw in that with multiflora rose, I have
> found that when its stems are cut, indeed it resprouts vigorously, bit over
> a year or two the roots seem to start to extend themselves out of the
> ground such that they become much easier to pull out entirely.
> Cheers,
> Steve Young, MAIPC Treasurer, Arlington County VA volunteer,
> plantwhacker.com
>
>
> On Apr 15, 2015 8:20 PM, "Stephen L. Young" <sly27 at cornell.edu> wrote:
>
>  The following is not in support or defense of any one technique or
> method but a broader discussion on this whole topic. Some will say it is
> hogwash, but I’m only sharing what I think is the larger issue, which is
> how can we do things better without knocking one technique or another and
> ending up being divided instead of being drawn together?
>
>  In these discussions, what always seems to happen is that when the topic
> of alternatives to pesticides comes up, the pesticide people feel like
> they’re getting picked on and the alternative folks feel like they’re being
> made fun of. I’ve seen it happen again and again and I think the issue is
> really how can we do things better instead of knocking one technique or
> another.
>
>  Yes, we’ve made advances in our tools for management, but there are
> still a lot of problems associated with how inefficient and ineffective
> we’ve been in their use and many invasive plants are doing quite well with
> or without our intervention. This is not an attack on pesticides or any
> other method or even on invasive plant management, but instead a way of
> thinking differently in an effort to find ways to do things better. Think
> of the fast food industry – it is not sustainable to constantly eat
> unhealthy food. Numerous scientific studies show this to be true. Does it
> mean we should avoid fast food completely? No, but some do. Should we be
> critical of them? Others choose to eat nothing but fast food. More than
> likely, their health reflects this choice. This is just an example. I am
> not suggesting pesticides are like fast food, but instead any technique
> that is overly relied on is like fast food. If our society was more science
> literate and didn’t pay so much attention to the media, then they would
> have the information to make good choices or at least know what are good
> choices with regard to their health and in this case, managing the
> environment.
>
>  What I find especially disturbing is that no one ever talks about the
> long-term affects from putting things into the environment and I don't just
> mean pesticides, but plastics, cosmetics, synthetic products of all types,
> and even spent uranium. Why can’t manufacturers, companies, and even
> government agencies just admit that they don’t know what is going to
> happen? I think this is what frustrates a lot of people. Where is the
> humility in being able to admit that we don’t have all the answers and we
> don’t know if in the long-term what we’re doing now is actually safe? Why
> are we so confident in agencies and regulations that are not perfect and
> have yet to provide long-term protection? In the early 1900’s, kudzu was
> introduced for erosion control and to improve soil fertility. It was
> promoted by the government. That turned out to be not the best choice, but
> we thought it was then. A long, long time ago, it was thought that the sun
> revolved around the earth and the earth was flat. Those who thought
> otherwise were laughed at, made fun of, or worse.
>
>  Why do we defend a certain practice or approach and then either show why
> we think we’re right or why we think others are wrong when there is no
> clear answer? Wouldn’t it be wiser to see that we’re all trying to achieve
> the same goal and that each of the techniques we support or contend for
> based on our personal views has a weakness and that we need to be inclusive
> and not exclusive? Why pick apart each others’ approaches when none by
> themselves are the answer? If we believe the use of all of the "tools in
> the toolbox” principle, then shouldn’t we be allowed to pursue new tools or
> new ideas of how to better use existing tools that results in us getting
> better overall?
>
>  There are more philosophical and idealogical underpinnings that need to
> be included in this topic, instead of just focusing negatively on each
> others methods that we choose to use or have an interest in. Not sure if
> this is the right venue or listserv for this type of discussion, but it
> should be happening more often than it does.
>
>  Steve
>
>
>
>   From: <Tasker>, Alan V - APHIS <Alan.V.Tasker at aphis.usda.gov>
> Date: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 at 5:06 PM
> To: Tom Zaleski <TZaleski at Newark.de.us>, Richard Johnstone <
> ivmpartners at gmail.com>, Ruth Douglas <cvilleruth at embarqmail.com>
> Cc: "maipc at lists.maipc.org" <maipc at lists.maipc.org>
> Subject: Re: [MAIPC] does Chlorox work on cut stems?
>
>   Here, Here, Rick, you just said what I have been thinking reading this
> email chain.  Constant reinvention of the wheel to dodge imaginary hazards
> while ignoring real ones.  And vinegar & Clorox are _*NOT*_ benign to the
> environment.  Nor to humans if used at effective rates.
>
> Alan V. Tasker, Ph.D.
> Senior Regulatory Policy Specialist
> USDA  Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service
> Plant Protection & Quarantine
> Regulations, Permits & Manuals;
> Plants for Planting Import Policy Staff
> 4700 River Road, 4C01.23
> Riverdale, MD 20737
>
> Alan.V.Tasker at aphis.usda.gov
>
> Desk     301-851-2224 Mobile 301-346-7207
> Fax        301-734-8692
> http://www.aphis.usda.gov/planthealth/nappra
>
> *Subscribe to the PPQ Stakeholder registry at:*
> *https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDAAPHIS/subscriber/new*
> <https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDAAPHIS/subscriber/new>
>
>
>
>  *From:* MAIPC [mailto:maipc-bounces at lists.maipc.org
> <maipc-bounces at lists.maipc.org>] *On Behalf Of *Tom Zaleski
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:49 PM
> *To:* Richard Johnstone; Ruth Douglas
> *Cc:* maipc at lists.maipc.org
> *Subject:* Re: [MAIPC] does Chlorox work on cut stems?
>
>  Bravo Rick! I could not agree more!
>  Tom Zaleski
> Parks Superintendent
> City of Newark
> 220 South Main Street
> Newark, Delaware 19711
> 302-366-7059 Shop
> 302-561-5017 Cell
>    ------------------------------
>  *From:* MAIPC <maipc-bounces at lists.maipc.org> on behalf of Richard
> Johnstone <ivmpartners at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:29 PM
> *To:* Ruth Douglas
> *Cc:* maipc at lists.maipc.org
> *Subject:* Re: [MAIPC] does Chlorox work on cut stems?
>
>   Ruth,
>  It is such a disservice to natural resource managers that fear mongering
> over the word "pesticide" leads ill-informed groups, townships, etc to
> consider banning pesticide use; and what wise expert decides what
> constitutes an "emergency"?  I have also heard proposals to use steam to
> kill weeds, not mentioning that the steam will kill unsuspecting insects,
> amphibians, birds and other wildlife that happens to be at the receiving
> end of the boiling water.
>
>  Pesticides that are available for our use have gone through years of
> testing and research and are licensed by the EPA and State Departments of
> Agriculture for specific uses and application rates, as noted on their
> labels - which constitute federal law under the Federal Insecticide,
> Fungicide, Rodenticide Act or FIFRA.  Most of the problems we hear in the
> media are caused by individuals using pesticide products in violation of
> the label instructions, which is a criminal act; i.e. recent bumble bee
> kill in Oregon.  An herbicide probably used in your town for broadleaf weed
> control, 2,4-D, just celebrated its 70th birthday and the sky did not
> fall.  If you want to be concerned about chemicals, take a look at the
> label warnings on cosmetics and the cleaning products you have under your
> sink.
>
>  I am attending the Trilateral Conference (Canada, US, Mexico) in San
> Diego, CA as I write this, where I just gave a presentation showing how we
> are restoring milkweed and other wildflowers to benefit Monarch butterfly,
> bees, birds, and other pollinators using herbicides judiciously applied to
> control invasive plants and problem species.  We need to restore millions
> of acres of prairie habitat in North America over the next few years to
> insure the survival of Monarchs, native bees and songbirds.  Herbicides are
> a "tool in the tool box" to allow successful habitat restoration to occur.
> So to you and others on this list serve, do us all a favor and speak out
> against unnecessary bans on the use of pesticides, and only use them
> according to label instructions.
>  Rick Johnstone
>
>  On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Ruth Douglas <cvilleruth at embarqmail.com>
> wrote:
>   Hello, there is a group locally that wants to ban pesticides in parks
> except in emergencies. It has been suggested that Chlorox will do the work
> of Roundup in painting cut shrub etc. stems, maybe in other situations as
> well, not sure. Anyone have any comments on this?
>
>  Thanks in advance.
>
>  Ruth Douglas
>
> _______________________________________________
> MAIPC mailing list
> MAIPC at lists.maipc.org
> http://lists.maipc.org/listinfo.cgi/maipc-maipc.org
>
>
>
>  --
>  IVM Partners, Inc.
>  P.O. Box 9886
>  Newark, DE 19714-4986
>  www.ivmpartners.org
>
>  IVM Partners is a 501-C-3 non-profit corporation operated exclusively
> for charitable, scientific, literary, and educational purposes to develop,
> educate professionals and the public with respect to, and apply best
> vegetation management and conservation practices and related activities.
>
> _______________________________________________
> MAIPC mailing list
> MAIPC at lists.maipc.org
> http://lists.maipc.org/listinfo.cgi/maipc-maipc.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MAIPC mailing list
> MAIPC at lists.maipc.org
> http://lists.maipc.org/listinfo.cgi/maipc-maipc.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MAIPC mailing list
> MAIPC at lists.maipc.org
> http://lists.maipc.org/listinfo.cgi/maipc-maipc.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.maipc.org/pipermail/maipc-maipc.org/attachments/20150416/80500d8f/attachment-0001.htm>