weed and feed? granules or liquid

Discussion in 'Pesticide & Herbicide Application' started by Christian Brothers, May 1, 2009.

  1. rcreech

    rcreech Sponsor
    Male, from OHIO
    Messages: 6,136

    Yep...sure did, but looks like a new one now! Just a $250 deductable so not too bad!

    Speaking of straps breaking....how is your strap on?

  2. LushGreenLawn

    LushGreenLawn LawnSite Silver Member
    Messages: 2,120

    I posted a simple response to your question about how organics can be as harmful to the environment as synthetics. I expected you to quote me and rip it apart, however, I got nothing. I have to admit, I am a little disappointed.

    Did you miss it, or was I right?
  3. lilmarvin4064

    lilmarvin4064 LawnSite Senior Member
    Messages: 757

    wow, this has gotten a little out of hand.

    sorry, I didn't relpy sooner. I didn't know I had to respond immediately. Some of us have better things to do than answer your demanding quesions that you could easily find yourself. I can only assume you did not know the answers.

    ok, but you're probably not trying to kill weeds with "a rock flung from an edger". what's your point? Taken directly from the MSDS on vinegar...

    "SKIN CONTACT: Contact may cause mild injury and burns from vinegars of 11% acetic acid and
    greater. Dilute solutions may cause dermatitis in some individuals.
    EYE CONTACT: May cause severe burns and permanent corneal injury from concentrated vinegars.
    May be followed by blindness. High vapor concentrations may result in conjunctivitis."

    I assume they mean somewhere between 11 and 30%.

    "Off-site movement of phosphorus
    Phosphates, P combined with oxygen, are removed from the soil solution and immobilized in the soil. Consequently, phosphates are not prone to leaching and pose little or no threat to groundwater resources.

    Phosphorus can also be part of organic material such as manures, composts, various natural fertilizers, grass clippings, or tree leaves. In the soil solution, these organic forms of P may not be bound tightly to soil particles. Thus, they are more prone to leaching or runoff than the phosphates."
    -university of minnesota

    just one of many resources...

    if I had more time i'd go farther...

    it's not the plant's fault, just the perception of certain people that all the blame lies with synthetic fertilizers.

    my point being, don't blame just the synthetics. People need to be aware of best cultural practices with organics and synthetics, and not place the blame on just one side of the table.

    and the last question... my point was... if there exists a synthetic (or synthetically altered or extracted natural compound) that will produce the same or better result than using a "natural" product) then why would you not want to use it? Do you disregard science? Do you not see the economical reasons for using this compound? Should we just pander to the people that disregard science and want to use nothing but "organic" methods, even if they don't really work?

    extracted and modified natural compounds are quickly replacing older pesticides and are classified as reduced risk. so why not embrace these advances instead of ignoring them in ignorance?

    I am not into fads, clever marketing, loopholes, and pandering.

    more too come...

    give me some time please
  4. ted putnam

    ted putnam LawnSite Platinum Member
    Messages: 4,662


    Ric, I thought we cleared all of this up a couple of months ago in the 65+ page "Battle Royale". There is an extensive reference library and Mom's got plenty plenty of PB&J's and Grape Kool Aid stashed in that hole in the base of that big tree...
  5. Kiril

    Kiril LawnSite Fanatic
    Messages: 18,315

    1) That would be because I am always getting attacked here

    2) You or anyone show me even ONE post where I have cut and paste without a giving credit.

    3) You continue to dodge the question (AKA. I don't know, or I am wrong)

    Really Ric, I am surprised that you would go out on a limb like you did. Normally you have better sense.

    Really Ric. You, more than anyone, attack me the moment I post anything in this forum. Rod is next in line to follow with the insults. You like to put blame on other people don't you.

    As usual when you guys get called out to defend your statements, you can't, then you go to the childish insults. Bravo for acting like men.

    See above.
  6. Ric

    Ric LawnSite Fanatic
    Messages: 11,969


    Yes we all have seen the above and maybe that is why we are on the offensive now. You have a knack of irritating people to that point. Like Ted said we thought the Battle Royal had finally locked you in your locker, but some how you found how to open it from the inside and come out for some more wedgies. Oh Well! I guess Bad attention is better than no attention in your mind. May I suggest you spend more time at the Comic Book Store. The nerds tell me the new Hellboy issue beats all the Spider man and Superman episodes put together.
  7. Kiril

    Kiril LawnSite Fanatic
    Messages: 18,315

    Do you mean this?

    Yes, it is correct. I have said many times before, and will say it again. Anything in solution has the potential to leach.
  8. Kiril

    Kiril LawnSite Fanatic
    Messages: 18,315

    Ric, you are so full of yourself it is not funny anymore.

    FYI, my first (undeleted) post in this topic.

    Yup, I am trolling. I simply asked for someone to back up their comment. You however, have done nothing more than throw insults and personal attacks in my direct ... no?

    Here is your first post. Red is what started this compost discussion, bold is your typical attempt to poke and prod. Who is the troll here Ric?

    And then you continue in your next post to insult, poke and prod without provocation.

    In fact, in almost every post you have made, you managed to say something insulting about or towards me. And you call me a troll.

    I have now asked you REPEATEDLY to answer the question, yet you refuse to. I don't care how you answer it, just answer it.

    And once again, here you go talking more shiit without backing up your information.
    If you are so knowledgeable on these subjects Ric, my questions should be easily answered by you ... no?

    How about these questions? You are the one who made the statement about glass beads ... no?

    Are you going to answer the question and demonstrate you actually do know what you are talking about, or as usual, are you just going to resort to insults to avoid answering the questions? Once again, I don't care how it gets answered, credible links, or a logical argument with verifiable data, just answer the damn questions!

    The whole point of all this is people here attack anyone who uses alternative methods. They then make incorrect statements about organics, but when asked to present information to substantiate their statements, they can't! If you want to call that trolling, attacking, blah, blah, blah, so be it. But believe you me, if anyone makes a statement about a synthetic here you know to be wrong, you and all your buddies will be all over them like stink on shiit. Am I wrong Ric?
  9. Ric

    Ric LawnSite Fanatic
    Messages: 11,969


    I really feel sorry for you because you can't seem to get the point here. "It is not what you say, But how you say it." You need to work on your communication skills. Most people reading here get the perception you are a total dork.

    Quit while you are behind instead of a complete loser.
  10. Kiril

    Kiril LawnSite Fanatic
    Messages: 18,315

    You don't use an edger/weed wacker to control weeds. Hmmm, interesting.

    My point is, even the most innocuous item can be harmful to you personally. I specifically asked for examples of environmental damage, so what does that have to do with vinegar and your eyes? Do you want me to pull up some MSDS sheets on the chems you guys typically apply? ...

    First .... please link the source, don't just cut and paste.

    Second, that document is not quite right. P can and does leach.

    Because of that little thing we like to call sustainability, natural balance, protecting natural resources, etc....

    No I do not. These products have trickled down from Ag into landscapes. Are you saying we need/should manage our landscapes like Agricultural crops? And if you do believe that, please explain why. Can you give me a valid reason why landscapes can not be managed with little or no chems?

    No, not really. Please explain it to me. How is it economical to maintain high input landscapes as opposed to low input landscapes?

    Once again, a BS statement with regard to organics and science.

    I wonder why this is happening? Perhaps because of environmental damage and a need to preserve our resources? Perhaps because of pest resistance and adaptation? Perhaps all of the above?

Share This Page