[MAIPC] MAIPC Digest, Vol 42, Issue 29

Thu Apr 16 10:02:52 PDT 2015

Can you please tell me if 20% vinegar solution has been tested for
eradication of lesser celandine?  Is it true that it can't be used
commercially because the EPA hasn't approved it?  I took your advice about
trying to find common ground and it is opening up a discussion I didn't
think would happen.
Thank you.

-----Original Message-----
From: MAIPC [mailto:maipc-bounces at lists.maipc.org] On Behalf Of
maipc-request at lists.maipc.org
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 11:03 AM
To: maipc at lists.maipc.org
Subject: MAIPC Digest, Vol 42, Issue 29

Send MAIPC mailing list submissions to
	maipc at lists.maipc.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.maipc.org/listinfo.cgi/maipc-maipc.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	maipc-request at lists.maipc.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	maipc-owner at lists.maipc.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of MAIPC digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: [GRAYMAIL] Re:  does Chlorox work on cut stems?
      (kathi mestayer)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 11:03:24 -0400
From: kathi mestayer <kschachinger at gmail.com>
To: "Grund, Steve" <SGrund at paconserve.org>
Cc: "maipc at lists.maipc.org" <maipc at lists.maipc.org>
Subject: Re: [MAIPC] [GRAYMAIL] Re:  does Chlorox work on cut stems?
Message-ID: <1960DF1B-B201-4BAF-9A48-4871839F5300 at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

WOOOO!
good one!

On Apr 16, 2015, at 10:50 AM, Grund, Steve <SGrund at paconserve.org> wrote:

Hedging his bets, or betting his hedges?

Steve Grund
Botanist
Natural Heritage Program, Western Pennsylvania Conservancy
800 Waterfront Drive
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
(412) 586-2350
www.paconserve.org

From: MAIPC [mailto:maipc-bounces at lists.maipc.org] On Behalf Of kathi
mestayer
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 10:49 AM
To: Ruth Douglas
Cc: maipc at lists.maipc.org
Subject: [GRAYMAIL] Re: [MAIPC] does Chlorox work on cut stems?

...and my opinion, for what it's worth, is that the demand side with drive
changes.  When the customers request/demand natives, they will fall in line;
they know what side their proverbial bread is buttered on.  Of course, that
will take time and effort.
A friend of mine specified beautyberry for her new landscaping.....and got
half beautyberry, half beautybush (kollwizia (sp?).  I think the landscaper
was trying to hedge his bets...."beautysomething"...but was clearly paying
attention.
Kathi Mestayer

On Apr 15, 2015, at 11:07 PM, Ruth Douglas <cvilleruth at embarqmail.com>
wrote:

Thanks, Steve, I think you are making some really good points, and indeed,
where do these points get discussed? Could there be a session or two at
conferences where invasive plant management is discussed? Such as the MA-IPC
conference this summer? Where else?

And this reminds me in a way about the large gap between
environmentalists/land managers/etc. and the horticulture industry. WE want
to ban the sale of any invasives; THEY think we are after their livelihood
and those plants are not really so bad and besides they are what the public
wants to purchase. I don?t think we are going to bridge the gap without our
all sitting down and talking to each other and working together on such
topics as creating more demand for native plants that the horticulture
industry can grow and sell in significant quantities. It?s my impression
that there is a lot of distrust on both ?sides?.

Ruth

From: MAIPC [mailto:maipc-bounces at lists.maipc.org] On Behalf Of Stephen L.
Young
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 10:20 PM
To: maipc at lists.maipc.org
Subject: Re: [MAIPC] does Chlorox work on cut stems?

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

From: MAIPC [mailto: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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.maipc.org/pipermail/maipc-maipc.org/attachments/20150416/635ff
759/attachment.htm>

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
MAIPC mailing list
MAIPC at lists.maipc.org
http://lists.maipc.org/listinfo.cgi/maipc-maipc.org

------------------------------

End of MAIPC Digest, Vol 42, Issue 29
*************************************