Register free!

The Green Industry's Resource Center



Reply
 
Thread Tools   Display Modes
  #81  
Old 05-11-2012, 11:19 AM
cindyb's Avatar
cindyb cindyb is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: KY
Posts: 354
ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS

Do not apply directly to water, or to areas where
surface water is present, or to intertidal areas below the
mean high water mark. Do not contaminate water
when disposing of equipment washwaters or rinsate.

Surface water advisory:
This product may impact surface water quality due
to runoff of rain water. This is especially true for
poorly draining soils and soils with shallow ground
water. This product is classified as having high
potential for reaching surface water via runoff for
several months after application.
A level, wellmaintained
vegetative buffer strip between areas to
which this product is applied and surface water
features such as ponds, streams, and springs will
reduce the potential loading of aminocyclopyrachlor
from runoff water and sediment. Runoff of
this product will be reduced by avoiding applications
when rainfall is forecasted to occur within 48
hours.

Groundwater advisory:
Aminocyclopyrachlor has properties and characteristics
associated with chemicals detected in ground
water. This chemical may leach into ground water
if used in areas where soils are permeable, particularly
where the water table is shallow.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 05-11-2012, 11:22 AM
cindyb's Avatar
cindyb cindyb is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: KY
Posts: 354
This pretty much describes my trees:

IMPRELIS™ herbicide is quickly taken up by the leaves,
stems and roots of plants. IMPRELIS™ herbicide has
excellent soil activity. The effects of IMPRELIS™
herbicide may be seen on weeds from within a few hours to
a few days after application. The most noticeable symptom
is a bending and twisting of stems and leaves. Other
advanced symptoms include severe necrosis, stem thickening,
growth stunting, leaf crinkling, calloused stems and
leaf veins, leaf-cupping, and enlarged roots. Complete death
of the weeds may require four to six weeks.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 05-11-2012, 11:28 AM
cindyb's Avatar
cindyb cindyb is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: KY
Posts: 354
never mind, I'll pm
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 05-11-2012, 11:42 AM
cindyb's Avatar
cindyb cindyb is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: KY
Posts: 354
Q. Will DuPont provide a warranty for the replacement trees? How does it work?

A. DuPont warrants against any damage to any tree on Owner’s property (including replacement trees) caused by Imprelis® until December 31, 2013, or in the case of replacement trees, until a date two years after the date of planting.

Think we'll see a compensation plan before then? Will it be extended?
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 05-11-2012, 05:06 PM
Starbuy Starbuy is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Summit County, Ohio
Posts: 335
Another Dupont offer made public and this one was accepted by city officials for damage to their golf course trees:
http://wcfcourier.com/news/local/gov...c552721c3.html

They had 5 that need replaced and received $36,000 + $4200 removal comp = $40,200 total (5 trees valued $29,000 + $5275 additional "trouble" compensation + $1169 for care of lesser damaged 4 trees + $4,200 (separate figure for removal not in news report - find out on my own). They also reported they'll receive care for new plantings and warranty. They accepted first offer, council didn't want to bother with getting better offer and just settled.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 05-11-2012, 05:15 PM
Starbuy Starbuy is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Summit County, Ohio
Posts: 335
When/if EPA takes Dupont to court the damages/fine/compensation they collect should mostly go toward all those affected by Imprelis, all the LCOs that used it and all the property owners (personal, city, private, companies, golf courses) instead of all those affected only getting what they can get from their own settlements. But, as we all know that money the EPA will get will just go into the govenment abyss instead of those who really deserve it. All those affected would use that money far better since EPA can't seem to do it's job anyhow of protecting us from these products. They failed, so they should give that money to those who got hurt from their lack of EPA proper testing. What do we have to do, sue EPA to get that money? I hope a wise judge rules in such a way to benefit the true victims.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 05-11-2012, 09:33 PM
cindyb's Avatar
cindyb cindyb is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: KY
Posts: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starbuy View Post
Another Dupont offer made public and this one was accepted by city officials for damage to their golf course trees:
http://wcfcourier.com/news/local/gov...c552721c3.html

They had 5 that need replaced and received $36,000 + $4200 removal comp = $40,200 total (5 trees valued $29,000 + $5275 additional "trouble" compensation + $1169 for care of lesser damaged 4 trees + $4,200 (separate figure for removal not in news report - find out on my own). They also reported they'll receive care for new plantings and warranty. They accepted first offer, council didn't want to bother with getting better offer and just settled.
any idea of size?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Starbuy View Post
When/if EPA takes Dupont to court the damages/fine/compensation they collect should mostly go toward all those affected by Imprelis, all the LCOs that used it and all the property owners (personal, city, private, companies, golf courses) instead of all those affected only getting what they can get from their own settlements. But, as we all know that money the EPA will get will just go into the govenment abyss instead of those who really deserve it. All those affected would use that money far better since EPA can't seem to do it's job anyhow of protecting us from these products. They failed, so they should give that money to those who got hurt from their lack of EPA proper testing. What do we have to do, sue EPA to get that money? I hope a wise judge rules in such a way to benefit the true victims.
I hope so too
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 05-11-2012, 10:18 PM
cindyb's Avatar
cindyb cindyb is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: KY
Posts: 354
Reading up. Dupont knew that Imprelis hurt trees and it was still released? Guess thats why the EPA wants more info. A little late, huh.

http://www.freep.com/article/2011081...before-release
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 05-11-2012, 11:04 PM
gqnine44's Avatar
gqnine44 gqnine44 is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 503
The whole imprellis thing sucks and I really feel u for regular posters with serious damages.

The pictures cindyb posted of the new Growth that is distorting is really interesting. I Defenitley understand your anger about this product and the damage it caused through no fault of your own.

Sometimes it sounds like you are getting somewhat carried away describing your site a toxic waste dump and doubting the ability of your ground to support life ever again. I understand .why you feel that way.

I've personally spoken to Ohio state researchers who tested the product for several years and said they tried to kill trees with it and are as shocked as anyone with the problems.

Keep in mind most properties that were treated with spruce trees and all kinds of other stuff showed no damage. I sprayed hundreds of lawns and used
several gallons and to date only had damage on two properties. The trees affected on those properties need replaced but are putting on normal new
buds. Other trees in the area on other properties (not my customers) appear the same.

I sprayed areas of my lawn last fall at a heavy rate including around trees that I didn't care about with no negative side effects. Imprellis was used for an entire season in 2010 in test markets with no issue.

I know your property looks like hell and I hope you get reimbursed nicely from dupont. I just wanted to encourage you to keep your chin up, your property will recover - imprellis will not live in the soil forever. It was an unfortunate thing that happened but it isnt toxic dibilitating sludge that will forever ruin your property and everything that tries to grow there. The sun will come up tomorrow.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 05-12-2012, 11:31 AM
Starbuy Starbuy is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Summit County, Ohio
Posts: 335
I'm glad you're feeling optimistic. I wish the Dupont rep I spoke to was as optimistic about the soil at my property, but they did not have confidence that I would be successful in planting any evergreen in the same privacy hedge area due to the satuation and longevity of Imprelis in my particular case. Could be that the dissipation for my soil is constricted due to hardscape next to it, but not sure. Seems the stuff, which migrated from neighbors uphill lawn had no place to go but into the tree roots. dupont actually recommended I not plant and even had the gall to suggest I just grind down the stumps and leave it be, which would ruin my property privacy. My neighborhood does not allow privacy fences, only iron fences or for privacy, tall evergreens. Still no weeds growing in the lawn or in tree beds. Amazingly affective weed preventer. Too bad it kills trees in certain landscape conditions.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2012, LawnSite.com™ - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:19 AM.

Page generated in 0.11455 seconds with 10 queries