Register free!

The Green Industry's Resource Center



Reply
 
Thread Tools   Display Modes
  #301  
Old 06-14-2012, 12:00 PM
rlitman rlitman is online now
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Long Island
Posts: 1,100
I don't see references to aminocyclopyrachlor having a very high level of toxicity to fish.
Anyway, whatever surface water runoff gets into your fish ponds is of much more concern than leaves blowing in the wind, and fertilizer runoff is probably of far greater concern than this particular herbicide.

You're not planning on eating your fish, right? That would change everything.
Reply With Quote
  #302  
Old 06-14-2012, 12:43 PM
cindyb's Avatar
cindyb cindyb is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: KY
Posts: 354
No, not food fish, pets and very much loved.
Reply With Quote
  #303  
Old 06-14-2012, 02:18 PM
Starbuy Starbuy is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Summit County, Ohio
Posts: 335
DuPont's Imprelis may not have direct toxicity to fish, but the excessive fallout from needle drop and other plant debris caused by Imprelis damage near a person's water feature can be a problem. I've got a tight net now covering my koi pond, instead of the larger spaced net, but it does make feeding a little more difficult. I feel bad for Cindy who already lost one of her koi, which came from Japan, possibly due to the large needle fall from the Imprelis damaged tree last year before much was known about this Imprelis disaster. The indirect effect on birds, insects and invertebrates from Imprelis damaged plants is something that needs studied, as some of us are witnessing these eco system alterations and damages.

Last edited by Starbuy; 06-14-2012 at 02:26 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #304  
Old 06-14-2012, 02:30 PM
Starbuy Starbuy is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Summit County, Ohio
Posts: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlitman View Post
Wow, I'm just reading this thread, and it is indeed scary. Glad I'm not affected...

...Again, to be clear, a 1 year half life does not mean that it will be gone in one year. It means that the chemical is reduced by half each year.

This is all assuming laboratory conditions. In the real world, I would expect some chemical to migrate. Perhaps through migration of water horizontally, or vertically. I'm not sure what happens to the chemical after uptake in plants. Some chemicals move through evaporation, although it appears that the vapor pressure of aminocyclopyrachlor is pretty low (this may not be true for its methyl ester formulation though).
Thanks rlitman for helping explain the chemical lifespan in more detail. Very helpful.
Reply With Quote
  #305  
Old 06-14-2012, 02:40 PM
Starbuy Starbuy is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Summit County, Ohio
Posts: 335
Township Still Weighing Offer Over Dead Trees At Chemung Hills
http://whmi.com/news/article/14613
June 13, 2012

6/13/12 - Oceola Township officials are still considering a settlement offer from a chemical company believed to be responsible for damage to trees at the Chemung Hills golf course. It was discovered that spruce trees on the course were dying after being sprayed with the chemical Imprelis that is manufactured by the company DuPont. The chemical was taken off the market last August and resulted in damaged and dead trees all over the Midwest. After examining the trees at the Chemung Hills course, the company certified the chemical was the cause and offered to remove the nine trees at their cost. DuPont also offered the township $92,000 to plant replacement trees and maintain them but the settlement contained a limited clause as to future liability. The township owns the golf course but previously hired a management company to operate it. Supervisor Bill Bamber tells WHMI the settlement is still on the table but another issue has cropped up. Since the offer was made and DuPont visited the course, he says another tree has been identified with damage similar to the others. Bamber says concerns have heightened following the discovery because they don't want to settle and then have more trees affected. Bamber says they anticipate meeting with DuPont in a couple of weeks to discuss the potential settlement. (JM)

They are wise that they did not sign off on that so fast. I remember speaking to Bill Bamber when I first read the first article about their damage and the board meeting and he seemed concerned, as I also have been, about some of the details of DuPont's offer. I'm glad they decided to wait and not jump so quickly to approve.

Last edited by Starbuy; 06-14-2012 at 02:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #306  
Old 06-14-2012, 02:49 PM
TreeNut TreeNut is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 80
I am a new contributor--individual homeowner in a homeowner's association in Columbus, OH. We have a lawncompany that is handling the claims process with DuPont. We are one out of approximately 20 homes in our small area. We had the most damage of all, and there were only 2 other owners that noticed damage and they live on either side of us.

We first noticed damage to a Norway Spruce less than a month after it was sprayed. (5/11) Later we noticed damage on one other Norway Spruce, and our Vanderwolf Pine. In the month between the spraying and notification, we unknowingly planted a large Honey Locust. We also noticed minor damage to arbovitae, Prague Viburnum, and smoke tree.

The first Norway is completely dead; the second was about 1/3 damaged, and has tried to recover this spring, but still looks obviously damaged and misshaped. The Vanderwolf had about 6 tips damaged, including the top--this year the damage looks a bit worse, but other parts of the tree have put out some new growth. Both latter two trees are growing at a slower pace than usual. The viburnum began to recover last summer, and did much better this spring. The arborvitae seem unchanged--no growth, with little pale green twisted tips on some. The honey locust completely died, and we had it replaced as it was still under warranty. (We took the risk of going this route, but did document prior to that this spring).

Now for THIS spring, we noticed our 3.5" 12' tall Jap Maple came out with cupping leaves, some smaller leaves, and dieback. It appeared unaffected last year. An arborist with Davey Tree came out and said it was herbacide damage. The LCO stated he didn't think it could possibly be Imprelis. Since then he has agreed to replace it this fall, because he is so frustrated in dealing with DuPont, and is afraid another claim will just slow down the process for him and other homeowners. We've agreed by email. Since then, we have had a small, Japanese Pink Snowbell completely die--new growth and new blooms dried up that were small and not fully developed.

I am pleased to have found your forum, as it is the first time I have located anything online that addresses the claims process and NEW damage this spring. Claims have been filed for all trees except the Jap Maple and the Snowbell. It's just SO tiring, and we hear absolutely NOTHING from DuPont.

I agree there needs to be more national attention to this, and I plan on looking in to that.

I'll keep reading......thanks!
Reply With Quote
  #307  
Old 06-14-2012, 03:32 PM
Starbuy Starbuy is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Summit County, Ohio
Posts: 335
Welcome TreeNut to Lawnsite.com!!

Has your condo association approved DuPont's offer already or have they not received the first offer yet? If they have not approved it yet, I strongly suggest you all may do much better and have more future security in regards to true compensation for future damage, if they retain a law firm that's specializing in these cases. But, as long as your association already has it's own attorney then maybe that will lead to DuPont dealing with your association directly with your attorney and getting a better settlement that actually has some legal teeth in it that requires DuPont to compensate within a set time. Right now, most of the resolution agreements (that don't involve the homeowner having retained legal counsel) don't seem to have any stipulations that DuPont must pay within any timeframe if you do sign. Yes, rejecting Dupont's offer leaves out the LCO and he would only get money for removal and replacement from your association paying him out of the settlement (when that is reached using an attorney). By only going through the LCO and approving DuPont's first offer then there may be less compensation to your association. This is what I've seen happening with other homeowners associations where the LCO's is trying to take care of everything and then expecting DuPont to pay him for parts of the work and then the association usually gets less. This is just a suggestion of something to inquire about with your board members.

Remember, the counties and cities that own golf gourses already have attorneys retained. Many have district attorneys employed full time.

Last edited by Starbuy; 06-14-2012 at 03:38 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #308  
Old 06-15-2012, 09:12 AM
Starbuy Starbuy is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Summit County, Ohio
Posts: 335
Researchers are reporting that Imprelis treated areas are started to show signs of disease now that the plants have been damaged. The trees effected, but not dead are now more susceptible to diseases. I feel so bad for those who've already approved DuPont's resolution offer. I spoke with one last night and they are just trusting that all their plants that have not yet been killed will be covered by DuPont and that after the agreed upon 2 year maximum coverage that their trees will not be damaged by the weakening that is now occuring.

Penn State Extension: "Imprelis Damage Continues in 2012"
http://extension.psu.edu/greenindust...tinues-in-2012


Symptoms that I observed this morning include:
Continued leaf distortion on honey locust, pin oak, Japanese maple, and redbud
Fasciation of maple shoots
Terminal bud mortality on oaks and maples
Stem dieback on honeylocust
Witches brooming on oaks
Thin canopies (oaks and redbuds) (Oak trees have been treated preventatively for
anthracnose by an arborist)
Abnormally high production of acorns on red oaks in treated areas, little acorn production in red oaks at other sites on property
Abnormal growth and development of shoots. Terminal growth stunted, lateral shoots elongated
Norway Spruce, needle regeneration at the base of dead shoots. (Approximately 12-18" below the dead shoots)
Dieback on terminal growth of deciduous trees
Longitudinal cracks on red oak trunks which are shaded by the house to prevent south-side bark splitting
Leaf distortion in viburnums and Japanese cherry

Also, one turf professional informed me this afternoon that witches brooming is reportedly being seen by turf companies at sites treated with Imprelis in 2011. I will try to verify this as I visit other sites.

Thomas Ford
Extension Educator

Witch's broom is a disease or deformity in a woody plant, typically a tree, where the natural structure of the plant is changed. A dense mass of shoots grows from a single point, with the resulting structure resembling a broom or a bird's nest.

One example of this would be cytokinin, a phytohormone, interfering with an auxin-regulated bud. Usually auxin would keep the secondary, tertiary, and so on apexes from growing too much, but cytokinin releases them from this control, causing these apexes to grow into witch's brooms.

Witch's broom growths last for many years.
.
Reply With Quote
  #309  
Old 06-15-2012, 09:20 AM
Starbuy Starbuy is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Summit County, Ohio
Posts: 335
Here's a couple photos showing the witches broom deformity.
Attached Images
   
Reply With Quote
  #310  
Old 06-15-2012, 11:02 AM
Starbuy Starbuy is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Summit County, Ohio
Posts: 335
Hearing DuPont reps meeting with law firms this week to try to settle early on some cases are not willing to compensate properly and therefore firms getting ready to play hardball big time. I'm glad firms aren't caving to lowball offers. They know what's at stake. Does DuPont really want a homeowner like me in front of a jury? And what about all the expert witness scientists like AIRCORP, or LCO's who've been hurt by this? Does DuPont really want to see them in court speaking to a jury? Fine by me. I would love the opportunity! At least then I'd have a guaranteed timeframe of when to expect the actual check in hand which is what I can't get with their direct resolution process. They won't even compensate me for the utility lines that must be removed and retrenched (over $2000), electrician permits, etc. They expect the measly 15% to take care of all that and more including damage to property value. Plus, it's STILL MIGRATING and I've got more damage and that may continue past the statute of limitations which may run out in less than a year from now (2 years from application). I have no choice, but to head to court.
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.comô - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:45 PM.

Page generated in 0.07834 seconds with 8 queries