Chemical Spraying

[Skyvalhunter]

 

[fireweed]

Spraying has been administered like a vitamin--more is better and every site needs it.  Instead spraying needs to be treated like an antibiotic--strategic applications if absolutely necessary.  There are forestry and logging practices that can reduce the need for even site-prep spraying like scattering slash, creating planting spots, return to burn, and using older seedlings to get a better jump.  High elevation areas don't need it either.

[ThurstonCokid]

Wish everywhere would burn and not use such chemicals.. it’s a hard topic to discuss because of the areas chemicals are used.. all i know is chemicals are used in a unit where our camp used to tag about 50% success rate on elk.. before we bailed on the unit we had 3 years of very few elk even spotted. Tough one to swallow when an area you grew up in is a dead zone


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sandberm]

I said it before, Go Spray your Garden if you feel its harmless!  Do it.  Stop weeding and cultivating.  Spray it all around the well house too, yearly, by the gallon.  Suggestions of good weed killer to use are Glyph. Atrazine, 2-4-D, 4L crosshair, Transline, Velpar, to get ya started.  Don't worry there is many more if these don't make ya feel safe.  HUGE $$$ telling the public these are safe...  Kind reminds be of a modern asbestos scandal.  Wonder if George Soros invests in these companies?    

 

Stop with the IRRATIONAL talk about dumping chemicals "By the Gallon" around your well house. The blatant suggestion that people/companies/farmers who apply herbicides do it in a sloppy hap hazard way is crazy talk. I get tired of your exaggerations when this topic gets brought up. NOBODY dumps gallons of herbicide on anything except stupid homeowners who do not know what they are doing.

And to your suggestion of applying chemicals around my garden....happy to as long as it doesnt kill my garden. A little roundup between the rows when the weeds get a little thick does a nice job. Make a border pass around the outside, I'm good to go. I spray the driveway, along the road and other places I do not want weeds. 1.5 ozs/gallon of glyphosphate, .5oz/gallon of 2-4d if I think it will help and I'm good to go.

None of my neighbors have to worry about me being the guy who grows a crop of tackweeds and a hedgerow of kochia every year.

[Buckinlucky]

 

[LDennis24]

First off you’re presuming a lot and your random google earth image is proving nothing. You seem to be claiming they kill all the vegetation for one year and that it’ll be all good the next year. Then what is the point of spraying in the first place? I havent seen anyone saying the game starves, they just go somewhere else. As the practice continues there won’t be anywhere to go. I spend time in these areas and they aren’t full of browse for many years and even then the diversity of plantlife is greatly reduced. They spray to kill all the underbrush to increase the rate which evergreen trees grow which provide no food for ungulates on the west side. This practice has not been happening for very long and there will be long term consequences. Nearly everyone I speak with who hunts areas being sprayed has seen significant reductions in animal use of sprayed clearcuts and roadsides, which in the past were game magnets due to available browse.

What I find concerning is that you guys are arguing that these chemicals are causing cancer across the board and killing everything in sight yet you can not show one single legitimate study that supports it. It's all baseless opinions. Some chemicals cause ill effects and they are highly restricted for that reason and the ones that don't cause harm aren't. You clearly have no experience in the field or you wouldn't be on here spouting off baseless far left propaganda. I carried a pesticide license for many years and know the facts. You should educate yourself more and then come back and show us the evidence that it causes harm in the specific ways your citing or something, but this is all hearsay...

[singleshot12]

These chemicals are just another experiment at the cost of us and the enviro. No one knows "Yet" the long term effects in or on down the eco-system. Just like other experiments in the past no steps in prevention will be made until it's too late.
There are usually two truths to everything. In this case people have the right to believe the chem. companies version or the toxic coalitions version.

[Mudman]

I said it before, Go Spray your Garden if you feel its harmless!  Do it.  Stop weeding and cultivating.  Spray it all around the well house too, yearly, by the gallon.  Suggestions of good weed killer to use are Glyph. Atrazine, 2-4-D, 4L crosshair, Transline, Velpar, to get ya started.  Don't worry there is many more if these don't make ya feel safe.  HUGE $$$ telling the public these are safe...  Kind reminds be of a modern asbestos scandal.  Wonder if George Soros invests in these companies?    

 

Stop with the IRRATIONAL talk about dumping chemicals "By the Gallon" around your well house. The blatant suggestion that people/companies/farmers who apply herbicides do it in a sloppy hap hazard way is crazy talk. I get tired of your exaggerations when this topic gets brought up. NOBODY dumps gallons of herbicide on anything except stupid homeowners who do not know what they are doing.

And to your suggestion of applying chemicals around my garden....happy to as long as it doesnt kill my garden. A little roundup between the rows when the weeds get a little thick does a nice job. Make a border pass around the outside, I'm good to go. I spray the driveway, along the road and other places I do not want weeds. 1.5 ozs/gallon of glyphosphate, .5oz/gallon of 2-4d if I think it will help and I'm good to go.

None of my neighbors have to worry about me being the guy who grows a crop of tackweeds and a hedgerow of kochia every year.

There is plenty of legit science and articles regarding the dangers.  LOTS!  Do some homework, I am not your mommy.  protect yourself.  Don't assume its all good.  Its not good.  How many where marketed as safe for years before Chemical Co were found out to have junk science or cover ups.  PCB, DDT, Mercury, Lead, Asbestos, to name just few things but list is endless.  Its all about $$ to them not what we are concerned with.  Whats foolish is to believe these crooks word and science even after they have been found guilty of numerous cover ups and junk science funded 3rd party scams.  The fines from EPA are ridiculous over the years yet it continues.  Why do they spend such huge $ in lobby of politicians and such?  Why are so many world Counties banning many of these as dangerous but not us?  Why are our animals,water supply, and children suffering exponentially as the use of these increased?  Serious questions and concerns I have.  Not a quack.  I have read a lot and followed this for 6 years.  When I posed this to RCKYMNT Elk regarding Hoof Rot they agreed as well it was a concern to them.  Are they a quack?  Open mind..

[Mudman]

“It’s just an obsolete, toothless, broken piece of legislation,” said Landrigan. “For example, in the early 1990s, EPA was unable to ban asbestos under TSCA.” This was after the National Toxicology Program had classified asbestos as a known cancer-causing agent, and the World Health Organization had called for a global ban. The EPA did briefly succeed in banning asbestos in the U.S. in 1989, but a court of appeals overturned the ban in 1991. Asbestos is still used in consumer products in the U.S., including building materials like shingles and pipe wrap, and auto parts like brake pads.
Landrigan also calls it “a particularly egregious lapse” that when TSCA was enacted, the 62,000 chemicals already on the market were grandfathered in, such that no toxicity testing was required of them. These chemicals were, as Landrigan puts it, “simply presumed safe” and allowed to remain in commerce until a substantial health concern came to public attention.
  Here is something to think about???  I wonder which ones fell into this bracket?

[Mudman]

he nearly 40 years since the law’s passage, more than 20,000 new chemicals have entered the market. “Only five have been removed,” Landrigan says. He notes that the CDC has picked up measurable levels of hundreds of these chemicals in the blood and urine of “virtually all Americans.” Yet, unlike food and drugs, they enter commerce largely untested.                Only 5?  Are ya kidding?  Wow, these companies are 99.9% perfect!  Unbelievable cause it is crap.

[LDennis24]

Just because the Rocky Mountain elk foundation is concerned about it doesn't mean a darn thing. Plus it was shown that the hoof rot was caused by treponeme bacteria. Not glyphosate... They don't know what they are talking about either.

[LDennis24]

You probably drive a car every day don't you, that's killing more people than any of those pesticides ever will. In more ways than one, yet you support it by fueling up and driving around town spreading carcinogens in people's yards and in the air near parks where children play! Get real, your posting opinion papers not factual studies showing links to cancer or long term effects from exposure. "Probably" a carcinogen, meaning they can't prove it but someone "paid" them to agree with them and put it out there anyways. Also 5% taken away from 100% is 95% not 99.9... just so you know.

[Mudman]

  5 out of 20000 is NOT 5%!  Wow, Math class needed!  Yes agreed on car exhaust being bad.  Nobody hides that!  You are aware Trep bacteria is in most all soils everywhere naturally?  Begs the question why only some elk are sickened by it right?  Could it be immune system weakened?  Hmm, maybe.  That was the (RCKYMNT) concern.  Gotta think outside the box a little.  Why is it so hard to even spend the time considering possible actions of this stuff.  Blindly knowing it all and relying on the trillion dollar Chem/Pharma funded studies seems to me to be the ignorant option?  Im just trying to help by getting others to research this stuff on their own and  not rely on Fake News!  Not to be right or win an argument but to help.  Honestly this stuff is going to be an issue in our near future once the public learns whats been going on.  Our health is our concern, not Dow's concern.  There is plenty of REAL science and corruption to support dangers of SOME of these.  Problem is we don't know for sure which ones are problem childs..

[LDennis24]

You got me on the 5%. I thought you wrote 5% were removed. My bad. However, your article you posted is FALSE. Here are some real facts about chemicals and testing you should read. Not some guys OPINION paper filled with lies.

https://www.chemicalsafetyfacts.org/chemistry-context/debunking-myth-chemicals-testing-safety/

And again with that crap about elk hoof rot, if that was in any way correlated, elk on the Palouse would have contracted it long before a herd in a small area that sees probably 10% the amount of herbicide spray would have. There is no connection shown in any study. I base my opinions on facts and studies I've read and on being in the business, not on other people's opinions. That's not blind or ignorant. That's a fact! They DO test them before they release them into the market and they DO regulate anything that fails the test!

[Alan K]

I have to assume that any studys done on chemicals prior to use are verified as sound and peer reviewed before they're cited  for approval. I don't see the government spending the millions upon millions of dollars in development and testing for a company's ultimate benefit, so where else is the funding supposed to come from for the testing? Of course it's paid for by the companies submitting them for approval. That doesnt mean there is some company hack doing testing in their back yard, writing up a 5th grade science fair experiment, and 'buying' it's acceptance. There is no way in heck the government would accept indefensible science as a basis for approval.

I am and will always be in favor of ongoing testing. I just get tired of seeing the timber industry smeared with baseless claims. That it is killing wildlife, destroying their feed, etc. If you have ANY credible citations for it, bring them to the table, otherwise it just comes across as tinfoil hat propoganda. 

What really chaps me is that there was never any of this talk, despite it going on for decades and decades, prior to many timberland owners starting to charge an access fee for recreational access permits. I suspect that that is what made a lot of folks decide they'd try and find any way to smear the timber industry they could. And the funny thing is, if timberlands are these desolate game-less voids, why is there so much outrage over access to their private property? Why do they continue to sell out? You would think everyone would be hunting the logging free, chemical free, game rich public USFS lands...