We have decided, particularly in the light of recent bee and bird numbers plummeting, to cease the use of all chemical treatments in the course of our garden work.
On the basis of there's no smoke without fire, I am pretty confident that glyphosate, the mainstay of our former chemical usage, does cause numerous disturbances to many forms of life, not just bees and birds, and that we as responsible citizens do not wish to exacerbate damage to wildlife in general.
No doubt there will be derision in some quarters, but that is our plan - right or wrong. It does not matter whether there is another way of killing the required weeds easily or at all, the health of the wider natural environment is of greater relevance, at least to us, than pretty gardens. Most of our clients seem to agree.
I don't know how many acres of gardens there are in the UK vs farm land, but I suspect that garden usage is a fairly significant portion of overall usage and one which is easily curtailed if the will is there, more so than when used commercially on farm land.
Are you planning or wishing to do something similar ?
More on glyphosate effects here from friends of the Earth (old information):
http://www.foe.co.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/impacts_glyphosate.pdf
Views: 67
Replies
its a good point,
i did one yesterday and the only saving grace there i just thought was - well at least it was left for a year ( due to it needing controlling) so many many insects etc have had the benefit as it was not all ship-shape the last year - so overall no harm done than if it was maintained.
i dont like sprays - but they do earn me money ( a necessary evil) to pay mortgage.
i do use seaweed spray for lwns that i would promote .
and others are nasty that smell and harm us too!
well worth thinking about i think. i wish glyphosate ( i use 3/4? gallons a year now)
but not much else. triathlon and bit of grazon. also kurtail recently increasing.
rob
health and hapiness to you ( many of my clients wont let me use it which is good ( i like and respect) so i dont have a choice - good for environment / good for me.
i only use where i need to btw.
1. The quantities used in amenity horticulture are a drop in the ocean compared to commercial and agricultural use.
2. Professionals in the amenity sector should apply chemicals efficiently as they should have both the training and the financial incentive to do so. Ordinary garden owners much less so. I know private individuals who consume a 5l container of Glyphosate every year to keep their 1/4 acre or less weed free.
My inclination is to avoid chemicals where practical, but to never use them as a matter of policy - No. Of course there is a market niche for companies that do.
Andrew, As profiles no longer appear on here I can't tell what your position is (Pro landscaper, gardener or what ?). I'd be interested to hear how you propose to deal with weeds in the future.
not many responses = shame ...
I have thought of going completely weed killer free. I just have not had the balls to do it yet. I try to use other methods where possible and have had much success but there are always jobs arising where the client insists. I have been spot treating lawn weeds instead of blanket spraying. That made me feel a lot better.
The next step after that is to stop using synthetic fertilisers and iron sulphate.
I applaud your decison and move towards this position.
I - as stu try to limit my usage, but simply find a) client resistance b) alternatives lacking, for equivilent result, hold me back.
Especially with lawn care, their is no alternative to selectives and Few customers would tollerate a weed infested lawn, or pay me to hand weed the lawn! - I dont think their is such thing as someone willing to pay me £100 a week to hand weed the average lawn!
Please keep us all updated on how you get on, and what methods you use, It would be great to integrate some new techniques to reduce chemical usage.
As for hort vs agri - A 40 acre wheat field I spray recently used 40l of neat Glyph (8x 5l of roundup pro )..... so id imagine an average arrable farm uses as much herbicdes as a small city with 50 or so gardeners.
the maths add up to shocking volumes!
Feasible, but not practical and still remain competitive.
I'm sceptical about any research: it always seems to be carried out by people with an agenda, be that the manufacturer, or organisations opposed to large businesses on principle.
I also agree that we are the least damaging users of chemicals, be that because we care, or because we want to use the minimum amount possible in order to maximise profits.
The shelves full of chemicals in the DIY stores fill me with dismay, as does the over-use in agriculture.
It is so market dependant; domestic clients with an organic interest - far easier to 'sell' the no pesticide route Vs hard end commercial sites where economy/value for money rule and to suggest someone spends ages hand weeding or using alternative methods would be thrown out.
However, it should never stop you from selecting the least harmful product, applied the most effective way using a fully trained operative who 'knows' what he is doing.
Continued CDP in this area should be MANDATORY. Personally, I'd like to see the PA license expire every three years or need a certain number of CDP points to continue.
So many times I see people still blanket spraying hard surfaces which is illegal, financially wasteful and ecologically so wrong (...as it all drains into storm overflow systems).
People shouldn't be 'surprised' that Pesticides can be dangerous...just think about what they are trying to..... It doesn't take rocket science to work that one out. However, it is just not the case that you stop using it one day and find another 100% effective method the next day.
The industry has to evolve and like Paul said, everyone has an 'Agenda'.