1. Missed the live Ask the Expert event?
    Not to worry. Check out the archived thread of the Q&A with Ken Hutcheson, President of U.S. Lawns, and the LawnSite community in the Franchising forum .

    Dismiss Notice

TGCL - True Trouble?

Discussion in 'General Industry Discussions' started by sporter96, Mar 16, 2006.

  1. sporter96

    sporter96 LawnSite Member
    Posts: 11

  2. Scotts' Yard Care

    Scotts' Yard Care LawnSite Senior Member
    Posts: 343

    And just a few examples of why I'm so vehemently opposed to government regulations. Before the pesticide laws came into being, at least in our area, homeowners would apply a little over the counter chemical in sparing amounts. Most would do a couple of applications and maybe a bit of spot spraying. Here comes the government with rules, regs and suddenly every one is using these big chemical services that put large amounts of poisons on the landscape to pay for and justify the exorbitant cost of being licensed and insured to spray. Instead of lessening the damage of over chemical use the laws made it much worse but it's still perfectly legal as long as the paper work is in order. Now for you independents who apply carefully and only as needed, my comments don't necessarily apply to you. But it sounds like the big mass applicators are starting to undercut your area of expertise too.
  3. SodKing

    SodKing LawnSite Bronze Member
    Posts: 1,648

    two of those sites were created by vehemently anti-pesticide groups. I don't hold their opinion in high regard. Too much emotion and not enough science.
  4. Runner

    Runner LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 13,494

    No, there ARE better sites. I was thinking the same thing, actually. There are sites like this that have actual documentation and fraudulant proof of some of there tactics. After reading into one of these sites a bit, I was thinking...there's just nothing concrete there...no proof or backup. I think the term "emotion based" is a great term for these.....

    TURFLORD LawnSite Senior Member
    Posts: 834

    I believe the homeowner should be cut out of the equation all together. The main problem IMO with Scott's 4 step and companies that are only applicators is that they boost the N to massive proportions to make it look like the consumer is getting their moneys worth. The guy cutting that grass is the one absorbing all the pain to make it look good. "Can you bag It?" BITE MEeeeeeeeeeeeeee. When a HO applies their own fert they say to themselves, "I'll just put down extra and my yard will look extra good", not understanding how to fix the problems or just not wanting to pay for it. These two reasons alone are the cause of the current fish kills and algae blooms in the Raritan Bay. Heavy metals from the Hudson? NO. Fertilizer from New Jersey. As far as chemicals, the EPA has been cancelling entire families of chemicals in the last few years. I'll take their word for it that it's a good thing. I would like to see the EPA and the DEP somehow regulate the amount of N applied. I think the environment would be best served if only people with a clue did the apps. Thinking that if you get rid of turf ag chems will save the planet is ignorant and hypocritical. People will inject all kinds of sh!t into their bodies, but if they kill lawn chems, that's somehow going to make a difference?

Share This Page