Register free!

The Green Industry's Resource Center



Reply
 
Thread Tools   Display Modes
  #11  
Old 06-10-2000, 01:21 AM
PLS PLS is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 147
The EPD. The EPD is Goverenment. Is there one thing that goverenment does extremly well and efficently besides take money from the ones who work for it and give it to the ones who won't work for it. Better known as income redistribution, Hell on second thought, Their not even efficent at that!!! I would'nt be so quick to trust that the EPD is doing this "For the children", Remenber there is politics involved here. The EPD has their political agenda. Oops, Sorry, I'll get off my soap box now.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-10-2000, 08:26 AM
thelawnguy thelawnguy is offline
LawnSite Silver Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Central CT
Posts: 2,412
When the last hearing on Dursban was held, nobody from the industry showed up to extoll the products virtues, on ly the tree huggers who wanted it removed. Several trade mags put out the call to write to the (whatever agency it was we were supposed to write to). I didnt bother to respond. Did you (collectively)? This ban is what happens when folks sit on their butt thinking someone else will take care of it.<p>Bill
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-10-2000, 09:01 AM
lawrence stone's Avatar
lawrence stone lawrence stone is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: anthracite valley, commonwealth of pennsylvania Winter residence: Charlotte County FLA
Posts: 2,079
Typical big brother bullshit. Instead of ordering a partial phaseout over time the<br>wackos react in this fashion as a spin stunt<br>to advance thier agenda.<p>Now they have every soccer mom thinking this<br>stuff is killing thier babies.<p>Again all they (feds) are doing is getting the ignorant unwashed masses in an uproar.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-10-2000, 09:22 AM
Charles's Avatar
Charles Charles is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 7,170
Steveair, why did you have to throw smoking into this discusion? lol You just asking for it. Talk to any doctor and they will show you using x-rays what smoking will do to you. They showed my dad after his quadruple bypass surgery what smoking had done to him. Needless to say he hasn't smoked a cig since then. They don't call them coffin nails for nothing. Even some of the tobacco companies have admited it. On 60 min. They had doctors on that told of how smoking causes impotence in alot of men over 40 who have been smoking for awhile. This is a fact! One of the effects of smoking is the it narrows most of the arteries in your body! Including those that go to you weiner! And the arteries to your brain. Among other things. These people did a 4 year study on Dursban. How long have you guys studied it? The government does alot of crazy things But they do alot of good too. WE all work outside. Therefore we should all care about the environment. If this drought and heat is caused a somewhat by global warming we should all want it investigated and corrected. Industry as shown by the tobacco co dont care about us they care about the bottom line. Who else is going to keep them in check but the government? Part of our lake is contaminated by PCBs now. Because and industry dumped in it 10 years ago.... I could go on but i won't.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-10-2000, 04:57 PM
Lazer Lazer is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,446
Again this board contains inaccurate posts from lawn care &quot;professionals.&quot;<p>6 chemical producers signed an agreement with the EPA to stop MOST production of chlorpyfos by DECEMBER. That's a far cry from being &quot;pulled off the shelves.&quot;<p>The only reason why this is news is because it it a very common insectide that the public is aware of and the media loves this kind of stuff.<p>It's a common occurance and happens all the time as I already posted. There will be plenty of other cost-effective insecticides in the future.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06-12-2000, 09:34 AM
Scraper Scraper is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,656
From additional infrmation I have seen, I understand that a big problem with the Dursban products was homeowners were using it indoors to kill ants and stuff. Imagine? Duh!
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-12-2000, 05:01 PM
steveair steveair is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: morristown, nj
Posts: 1,073
Hello again,<p>I think what was just said is a good point to be made.<p>The problem is not with dursban, but more with who is using it. Of course it is bad to spray dursban all over the inside of your house. You don't have to be rocket scientist to figure this one out. I think the brute of the problems come from those who see a ant in a baby's room, and then decides to empty 5 cans of aerosol bug spray next to the cript to solve the problem.<p>Again, lack of public education is to be blamed for this ban.<p>I have mentioned this before, but I talked about a study that a professor up at college showed me in a pesticide class I took about 4 years ago. Basically, the study said that during the year, only 2 deaths, nation wide, could be accredited to pesticides. One, happen to have been a suicide case where the person decided to drink a gallon of round-up, and the other was closely related. <p>When you look at the odds of other things in life as being &quot;dangerous&quot;, the use of dursban is a drop in the ocean. A child probably has a 10,000 time more chance of being hurt in a car accident than it does from inhaling dursban, yet are there laws to ban us from driving our kids around in our cars. <p>This whole subject gets me worked up, but the fact is, there is nothing we can do. We can fight it all we want, but it is useless. Even if every landscape contractor in the country banned together, I doubt it would do a thing, especially at this point.<p>steveair
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-12-2000, 05:24 PM
Scraper Scraper is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,656
Here is a link to EPA's website regarding Dursban...<p>http://www.epa.gov/epahome/headline_0608.htm<p>If it doesn't work go to their homepage at www.epa.gov. It is right on the front page.<p><br><p><font size="1">Edited by: Scraper
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 06-12-2000, 05:26 PM
Scraper Scraper is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,656
Here is a link to EPA's website regarding Dursban...<p>http://www.epa.gov/epahome/headline_0608.htm<p>If it doesn't work go to their homepage at www.epa.gov. It is right on the front page. There is also an article about IPM on their homepage for those who care.<p>
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 06-12-2000, 05:41 PM
TURF Editor TURF Editor is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Vermont
Posts: 16
Hi folks -<br>Sorry that this post is so long -- feel free to skip it.<p>Lots of dis-information and half-truths being bandied about here. One hint: NEVER use Dan Rather as a source for accurate information on ANYTHING (that goes for the other networks, too -- not just picking on ol' Dan).<p>I have the actual EPA releases, along with information from Dow Agro, and some other interesting tidbits as well, all on my desk as I write this.<p>Here are the facts:<br>-The labled uses of Dursban are being changed under the Food Quality Protection Act.<br>-The most visible change will be that Dursban, one of the most widely used homeowner applied pesticides in the world, will no longer be available for homeowner use in the USA AFTER existing stocks have been depleated (there will be no &quot;shelf clearing&quot.<br>- This action is NOT based on any new study or new information. Dursban has been around for over thirty years and is the MOST tested pesticide on the market. Nothing new has been added to what we already know about this substance. <br>- There is not one case -- not one -- of any person, child or adult, being harmed by the proper use of Dursban.<br>-- There are thousands of people who rely on this product to safely and effectively protect themselves and their families from such pests as fire ants, cockroaches, stinging insects, fleas, spiders and ticks-- not to mention the protection from termites.<br>-- There was plenty of testimony (over 200 individuals) of the benefits of Dursban presented in EPA hearings -- from everyone from lawncare operators to homeowners-- even a kid who was bitten by a brown recluse spider.<br>-- All studies (over 3500 to date) show that Dursban does not travel to ground water, and through microorganisms and UV radiation, breaks down on site. After it dries, tests repeatedly show it does not transfer. <br>-Dursban has never been shown to be carcinogenic to humans.<br>--The much reported info that Dursban has been shown to cause nuero problems in rats is not new information. (The stuff is SUPPOSED to kill things. Duh! What do we expect, that the pests will stay away because they are afraid?) Forget the fact that there is much evidence that the rat study does NOT transfer to humans. To replicate the dosage given to the rats in that study, you would have to do an indoor application of Dursban over an entire home every three minutes over 500 times in a row. If you did that with Cheez Whiz it would probably kill you.<p>The above being the case, one can assume that something other than science (hmmm...could it be...politics?) is at the base of this action<p>The attitude that &quot;if they are banning it, it must be because the stuff is harmful&quot; is amazing -- especially coming from some of you who work in this industry. You should know better! (If you care to read a more elaborate essay on what we in the green industry should be doing, check out a guest editorial I wrote for the Plant Health Care web site: http://www.planthealthcare.com )<p>You want to know why the EPA went after Dursban -- THE most well known and often-used homeowner pesticide in the world -- at THIS time, with THIS MUCH hoopla? You need look no further than the headline of the official, EPA press release: ----<br>&quot;Clinton-Gore Administration Acts to Eliminate Major Uses of the Pesticide Dursban to Protect Children and Public Health.&quot;<p>Why do you suppose the headline uses the phrase &quot;Clinton-Gore?&quot; Do you think perhaps it has anything to do with Mr. Gore's current attempt as a job upgrade? <p>I've been in publishing for over 20 years, and have written hundreds of headlines. This one wouldn't make it past a high school newspaper editor. &quot;....Protect Children and Public Health&quot; doesn't even make grammatical sense. Nope, someone was told to make sure the word &quot;Children&quot; appeared in the headline (it also appears numerous times in the story). That we allow our politicians to use our children to further some political agenda ought to piss more people off. I do not understand why it doesn't.<p>So -- the facts are that there is no new information about Dursban. No one has been harmed by it. It is not harmful to the environment. And yet, we can thank &quot;Clinton-Gore&quot; for protecting our &quot;Children.&quot; I hope we can also BLAME &quot;Clinton-Gore&quot; for the pain and suffering experienced next year by all the people (including the &quot;Children&quot who will be bitten by brown recluse spiders, stinging wasps and lyme ticks.<p>David G. Cassidy<br>Editor<br>TURF Magazine
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 07:30 AM.

Page generated in 0.11283 seconds with 7 queries