Return to the Trees Forum | Post a Follow-Up

 o
Roundup under trees???

Posted by gardenlady48 z5 IL (My Page) on
Mon, Sep 14, 09 at 13:53

Greetings~

When driving around, many times I have seen entire rows of trees, deciduous and conifers with what appears to be 'roundup' sprayed for weed control around the perimeter.

Question: does this harm the trees, and is this roundup or some other product used?

I want to try this idea.....rather than weed eating...
Thanks for your thoughts...


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

  • Posted by bboy USDA 8 Sunset 5 WA (My Page) on
    Mon, Sep 14, 09 at 13:55

Use a funnel or top of bleach bottle + gasket placed over nozzle to eliminate spray drift. Keep it off the trees themselves.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

I haven't looked this up in awhile, but am i correct in believing Roundup works on the soft (Greed, Red, or Yellow) parts of trees and bushes and as long as you don't just inject it into a hardened trunk the tree should not be affected?


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

  • Posted by brandon7 6b (like 7b now) TN (My Page) on
    Mon, Sep 14, 09 at 14:16

Once the glyphosate reaches soil, it starts breaking down very quickly. Only in unusual cases (severe fresh root damage, large soil drenching spill, etc) will the glyphosate enter the tree from the root zone.

Glyphosate usually doesn't hurt mature trees even if sprayed directly on the bark. Two things account for this. First, significant amounts of the chemical will not enter the tree's vascular system through most mature bark. And secondly, it would take quite a bit of glyphosate to damage a large tree. Young green saplings are a complete different story.

Drift (as bboy's post addresses) and even evaporation (on really hot windless days) can be a problem. With reasonable care in application, glyphosate can be applied with very little danger to the tree.


 o
Re: Roundup under trees???

  • Posted by brandon7 6b (like 7b now) TN (My Page) on
    Mon, Sep 14, 09 at 14:18

Yes Toronado, that's pretty much it.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

Just pull them out.
Hear me out on this one...
The way I see it is once the roundup kills the weeds (in theory as many vigorous weeds will resprout anyway) you are left with a bunch of dead weeds that need to be pulled out anyway.
You might as well pull the dang things out from the get go. Use a weedhound and you wont have to bend over.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

  • Posted by brandon7 6b (like 7b now) TN (My Page) on
    Mon, Sep 14, 09 at 15:18

In some cases, I agree with you. Here are some things to consider:

Number/density of weeds: If you have a large area to cover or a large solid mat of weeds, pulling may be impractical. If there are just a few weeds here and there, pulling may actually be faster and easier than mixing, spraying, etc.

Type of weeds: Some weeds are virtually impossible to eliminate by hand. In fact, some weeds actually multiply when pulled! Weeds with small surface-concentrated root systems lend themselves to hand weeding. Weeds like violets don't.

Ease of removal: Some weeds are much easier to remove after they have been killed and allowed to loose their grip on the soil. I'm not sure which weeds this applies to, but I have a few different weeds that are nearly impossible to pull without a shovel when they are alive. If I spray them, I can come back in just about a week and remove them easily.

Application: If weeds are going to be removed after they are killed (as in a well manicured landscape situation), that should be considered when making the decision about whether or not to spray.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees??? ... P.S.

  • Posted by brandon7 6b (like 7b now) TN (My Page) on
    Mon, Sep 14, 09 at 15:22

Oh, and one more thing.

Preemergent: If you use a chemical that includes a preemergent (RoundUp Extended Control or similar product), labor may be drastically reduced.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

i use 100's of gallons per year in my hosta beds under trees ...

ABSOLUTELY NO IMPACT ON EITHER.. when done properly [VERY LOW PRESSURE HAND PUMP SPRAY TANK] .... and according to mixing instructions on the label ...

i will read the other replies tomorrow ... and see if there is anything to add ... gotta run now

ken


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

"In some cases, I agree with you. Here are some things to consider:(...) "

And in most remaining instances you can use a selective herbicide. One that works better.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

and dead plant tissue is called compost ... it all eventually disappears ....

seedlings... are easily killed.. year old and beyond.. very stubborn ... may take multiple applications ...

drift is irrelevant.. if you take the time to learn how to use your sprayer.. with plain water.. before going into the garden...

this is not perfume.. we are not looking for atomization ... that drifts ...

very low pressure ... WITH PROPER NOZZLE ADJUSTING.... leads to large drops you can see.. and large drops are affected by gravity ... and fall to the ground ...

THE DIRECTIONS WILL TELL YOU WHAT % MIX TO USE ON WHAT YOU ARE SPRAYING ....

after spraying.. a nice layer of mulch will help reduce future problems.. reducing the amount needing to be sprayed in the future..

good luck

ken


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

  • Posted by brandon7 6b (like 7b now) TN (My Page) on
    Tue, Sep 15, 09 at 8:46

"And in most remaining instances you can use a selective herbicide. One that works better."

Why would anyone want to do that around trees? If you spray a grass killer, then you have to respray with something for broadleaf plants and possibly sedge. I can see using a selective herbicide over some bedding or crop plants, but that's a different subject. As for something that "works better", like what? And, how would it work any better? Glyphosate works really really well for me for many tasks (clearing vegetation for beds before planting, maintaining clean fence rows, killing stumps, eliminating invasives from wooded areas, etc).

Maybe I'm wrong, but I've seen you respond to posts about RoundUp (glyphosate) before, and it seems possible there is some other motivation. You clearly don't like something about glyphosate, but it's unclear what it is. Just a guess, but are you by any chance trying to steer people clear of Monsanto or something? If that is the case, there are other glyphosate sources besides Monsanto.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

Wow. It's like a whole big group of Scotts employees.
Notice I said Scotts and not Monsanto?

Good cultural practices don't include using herbicide as a first resort. And Ken, it's pretty evident by this comment from the OP "rather than weed eating" that not only are they going to end up using more chemical than is necessary, they are doing so solely for cosmetic reasons and if they are doing so solely for cosmetic reasons, "decaying plant matter" is not going to look much better than living weeds.

While we're on the subject of good cultural practices, using products for reasons other than labeled such as using roundup for killing trees is not something I advocate. From someone who kills a lot of trees (mimosa, royal empress, privet & tree from hell, I suggest using not only what is labelled for killing trees but also what will get it done in as few applications as possible so as not to cost any more money than is necessary and not to impact the environment any more than necessary.

And I too have used many gallons of Roundup and continually find that it does not do that great of a job. Vigorous weeds just respout. A couple of months ago, I doused some crabgrass in Roundup and they yellowed but came back to life. I've sprayed dog fennel and pokewood with roundup- And nothing. Failed to kill it. Additionally, I find "extended control" to be nothing more of a neat looking label. I've wasted plenty of money on these products. On the other hand bending over and/or digging up the weeds has been 100% effective for me. And using products designed to kill woody plants has been more effective for me.

In fairness, I've found most of the products in the retail garden centers to be largely ineffective and I find it amusing, if not hypocritical to one minute say, "Don't use store bought: fertilizer, tree care products, plants, other chemicals" then the next minute turn around and strongly recommend Roundup, a product brought to you by the same corporation that brings you Miracle Gro and Ortho and subscription lawn sprays.

That's my explanation.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

Um, there's plenty of reasons from history to not trust Monstanto. Like reasons that should have sent folks to jail. Don't know of any reasons not to trust Round-up itself.

I've tried maybe a dozen different discount sprays up to the cost of Round-up. Seems like the cheapest product to spray to kill driveway weeds and the like. Biggest "mass application" I've ever done is spraying it on little honeysuckle resprouts or....what's that stuff....english ivy(?) vine bases after I've cut them.

Overall I'd say my experience is acceptable. If it really killed all plants in 1 application the mist/drift/vapors would probably be too toxic to use in a residential setting anyways.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

  • Posted by brandon7 6b (like 7b now) TN (My Page) on
    Tue, Sep 15, 09 at 11:18

"Good cultural practices don't include using herbicide as a first resort."

... but do include using herbicides where applicable. This seems to me to be a great application.

"...not only are they going to end up using more chemical than is necessary"

Don't you realize how much worse for the environment all those weed eater fumes would be for the environment? Glyphosate (used appropriately in a residential environment) is actually relatively very very safe for the environment. Many common household chemicals are way way more toxic and damaging to the environment.

"...using products for reasons other than labeled such as using roundup for killing trees is not something I advocate."

It's right there on the label of my RoundUp. No problem there!

"I suggest using not only what is labelled (sp) for killing trees but also what will get it done in as few applications as possible so as not to cost any more money than is necessary and not to impact the environment any more than necessary."

I totally agree, and that's precisely why I recommend using glyphosate. It fits that bill perfectly.

"A couple of months ago, I doused some crabgrass in Roundup and they yellowed but came back to life. I've sprayed dog fennel and pokewood (sp) with roundup- And nothing. Failed to kill it."

Hmmm, sounds like maybe the wrong concentration. I've killed vast amounts of grabgrass and polkweed with glyphosate, and have never had a problem with it not working wonderfully on these species.

"I find "extended control" to be nothing more (than) a neat looking label."

I'm leaning towards agreeing with you on this. I do find it works "a little", but probably nowhere near what I would expect or even enough to justify the increased cost. I haven't made my own final decision on this product yet, but I could definitely confirm that, at least in my case, it underperforms expectation.

"I find it amusing, if not hypocritical to one minute say, "Don't use store bought: fertilizer, tree care products, plants, other chemicals" then the next minute turn around and strongly recommend Roundup."

If you mean people that don't recommend buying anything form stores, I'd agree (although I've never seen this before). If you mean people not recommend certain products (like tree spikes for instance), that's a whole different ballgame.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

OK now you're just being argumentative for the fun of it. If haphazardly spraying roundup in lieu of the proper tool sounds like a great application to you then you're just being silly or sarcastic.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

  • Posted by brandon7 6b (like 7b now) TN (My Page) on
    Tue, Sep 15, 09 at 13:18

Not at all. I never haphazardly spray chemicals, and I consider glyphosate a very important tool. Without glyphosate, I wouldn't be able to maintain my property, and many of the other properties with which I work, without much more work or a significantly higher cost.

BTW, I was at a weed control seminar given by one of the nation's top experts last night. I learned something that I kind of suspected but had never confirmed. The RoundUp that promises results in 12 hours or so is definitely less effective than just plain glyphosate. The pathways that allow the plant to absorb the glyphosate are damaged by the quick acting chemical before the RoundUp is fully absorbed by the plant. The new quick-acting formulations are sacrificing overall performance for quick satisfaction. Generic glyphosate is more effective and less expensive than the new quick-acting stuff.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

One extremely common but overlooked reason for pesticide (including RoundUp) ineffectiveness is water quality. If the pH of the water is too high, it should be lowered. Also, if your water is hard, that needs to be addressed before mixing.

Just my .02!


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

  • Posted by brandon7 6b (like 7b now) TN (My Page) on
    Tue, Sep 15, 09 at 14:37

Dirty water will disable it quickly also. I've heard stories of people trying to use creek water.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

Then for the love of god, stop telling people to buy the store bought pre-mixed Roundup stuff.
Tell them to hire a landscaper with water of the correct pH, and spreader sticker and pressurized sprayer and the whole 9 yds.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

  • Posted by brandon7 6b (like 7b now) TN (My Page) on
    Tue, Sep 15, 09 at 22:00

"Then for the love of god, stop telling people to buy the store bought pre-mixed Roundup stuff."

Did I miss something? Who's recommending that and for what reason?

"Tell them to hire a landscaper with water of the correct pH, and spreader sticker and pressurized sprayer and the whole 9 yds."

ROFLMBO. It doesn't take a chemist to mix the stuff. All you need is regular clean tap water in most cases. If your tap water happens to way off the scale pH-wise or whatever, then you may have to compensate, but this would definitely be an unusual situation. Lots of glyphosate formulations already contain a spreader-sticker, but if the one you are using doesn't and you have a particularly hard to kill plant (winter creeper euonomous, for instance), spreader-stickers are readily available anywhere lawn chemicals are sold and are extremely easy to add to your mix. Anyone that can read, work with basic measurements, and perform elementary math should have no problems at all.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

This forum rules, such passion for something so simple.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

"Did I miss something?"

Maybe you did. Didn't you read the very first sentence of the very first message?

If you're suggesting that all along you've been advocating that the OP goes out to a landscaper supply house during business hours and plunks down $200 or more for a glyphosate concentrate, a $200 hand sprayer that won't crap out after one use, and spend the time mixing and using it every time they would ordinarily use a string trimmer or what I suggested- hand pulling or using a weedhound tool or shovel, then by admission, you are advocating something other than best practices by using more chemical than is necessary.

And if you come back and say you aren't then you're not being clear. I'm sure everyone else has the idea you're saying Roundup is a good substitute for using a string trimmer because that's what the OP asked.
Not only is that not clear, that's deceptive. The "label" you were referring to on "your bottle" is not what is found on a bottle of RoundUp. And sorry to say it but I don't have patience for deceptive people. Being deceptive puts you right up there with the Wall Street bankers and I don't hold a high regard for that crowd.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

  • Posted by brandon7 6b (like 7b now) TN (My Page) on
    Wed, Sep 16, 09 at 14:15

Iforgotitsonevermind,

I'm not real sure how to take many of your comments. I may be reading you all wrong, but it seems like maybe you are becoming angry or upset. If that's the case, we should stop the conversation. I don't understand the motives behind your position or why you would become upset, but I certainly have no interest in making you upset. Maybe I'm taking your wrong. I will answer your questions below, but unless I'm misinterpreting your demeanor, I think I'll just drop the conversation after this to be on the safe side.

------------------------------------

"Didn't you read the very first sentence of the very first message?"

The first sentence was..."When driving around, many times I have seen entire rows of trees, deciduous and conifers with what appears to be 'roundup' sprayed for weed control around the perimeter."

I don't understand how that relates to "telling people to buy the store bought pre-mixed Roundup stuff." The OP was just sharing an observation.

When I think of "pre-mixed" RoundUp, I think of the stuff where you don't have to add water. Buying the super concentrated stuff may be a fine option for those using lots of RoundUp, but is unnecessary for the homeowner. There's no reason not to use the 18% (or whatever %) concentrate for smaller jobs.

Having to go to the extremes (homeowners buying the pro RoundUp with expensive sprayers) when using RoundUp seems to me akin to insisting that you'd need a mechanical engineer on staff to operate a weed eater or a backhoe to pick weeds.

------------------------------------

"I'm sure everyone else has the idea you're saying Roundup is a good substitute for using a string trimmer because that's what the OP asked."

I use both glyphosate and a trimmer. They are two separate tools with their own mostly unique uses. Trimmers just won't reasonably do the job that the herbicide will do. And, the herbicide wouldn't do the jobs I use a trimmer for. I would never have the time to keep all the grass trimmed around every tree I had. I would be trimming 24/7, and, it wouldn't be best for the trees. Trees do best without root competition from lawns. Even if it weren't for these factors, the likelihood of damaging the bark around a tree or shrub is much higher with a string trimmer. I'm really good and have had a whole lot of experience with accurately handling a trimmer, but if I were to trim around enough trees, I'm sure I'd eventually hit the bark on one. There's really multiple reasons I use glyphosate to maintain the areas around my young trees.

------------------------------------

"The "label" you were referring to on "your bottle" is not what is found on a bottle of RoundUp."

I was indeed looking at a genuine RoundUp Label. A picture of the RoundUp label from the manufacturer can be found at the link below. The instructions pertaining to using the product to kill stumps are clearly on page 4.

------------------------------------

"I don't have patience for deceptive people."

I don't understand why you said that. If your comment was in regards to the RoundUp label, that would make your statement very ironic.

Here is a link that might be useful: RoundUp label


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

What I mean by deceptive is that one minute you imply that you are not talking about RoundUp, then you scramble to find a label that suits your needs and post a link to a label for Roundup Pro concentrate. And it seems like do this because you anticipate an argument.

And if you want to make the argument that it's effective at killing stumps then surely you think there's a risk with using roundup plus concentrate around trees/shrubs.

Especially after reading the warning on the label about trees sharing root systems and all that.

Getting back to the root of the matter, no pun intended, what's the sense in spending $50 for a quart of roundup plus concentrate then go through the trouble of mixing it and spraying it on a calm day and using the bleach bottle and water of the correct pH, with a precisely tuned sprayer, when it takes "1-2 weeks" for a kill, in which time you can't remove the leaves or it won't work it's way down to the roots and then... THEN!... if your lucky enough to be left with a bunch of dead weeds that you have to get out there and pick them up or you'll have to wait for them to decay which takes a long time.

It makes NO sense whatsoever to use this Roundup products for routine weed control. If you like to waste time and money though and like looking at dead or yellowing weeds for weeks or months it's brilliant.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

  • Posted by brandon7 6b (like 7b now) TN (My Page) on
    Wed, Sep 16, 09 at 19:01

Since you addressed my comments with false statements, I will respond.

"What I mean by deceptive is that one minute you imply that you are not talking about RoundUp, then you scramble to find a label that suits your needs and post a link to a label for Roundup Pro concentrate."

This is simply a false statement. I just rechecked the link to make sure something hadn't gone haywire. I guess you didn't actually click on my link. If you had, you'd see it takes you to the most common formulation of homeowner grade RoundUp. Everyone interested can now check the link and see that your statements are just completely false.

"And if you want to make the argument that it's effective at killing stumps then surely you think there's a risk with using roundup plus concentrate around trees/shrubs."

Nope. I don't think you understand how glyphosate works. It is only effective once it gets into the vascular system of the plant through foliage, freshly exposed cambium, or, in some cases, tender green stems. You could probably take an entire bottle of the homeowner type RoundUp, shown in my link, and pour it on the bark of a large tree without damage. I wouldn't try it, but it probably would be safe. And, BTW, once mixed, the Pro stuff isn't any more dangerous than the regular homeowner grade formulation. Glyphosate (RoundUp) is used safely by homeowners, landscapers, and other horticultural professionals all over the world for applications just like those described in the original post.

"It makes NO sense whatsoever to use this Roundup products for routine weed control. If you like to waste time and money though and like looking at dead or yellowing weeds for weeks or months it's brilliant."

The vast majority of horticultural professionals and large numbers of homeowners around the world disagree with you. I haven't figured out what it is, but it's becoming very clear that you have some hidden agenda. Maybe you work for whoever makes a competitive product.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

I meant Roundup PLUS concentrate not Pro. I had it correct in one mention in my post but missed the first one.
That is indeed a consumer product but it isn't the "ready-to-spray" product that most people think about in the blue and white bottle. It is instead an expensive option costing $50-100 depending on the size of the container and requires mixing per directions, a sprayer and a calm dry day when the weeds are actively growing.
Sure you can pick up a cheap $10 sprayer but I have bought more than my fair share of those and they last only for one or two uses then they break.

My hidden agenda is common sense.
Using roundup concentrate is expensive, takes a long time to do it's job, doesn't do it's job on weeds with deep root systems, and even then you still have to manually remove the dead or dying weeds.

To whom other than Brandon, does that make any sense? It's going around your elbow to get to your ***!

"large numbers of homeowners around the world disagree with you."

"Large numbers of homeowners" plant bradford pears. What's your point? I will call you out on the horticulturists disagreeing with me though. I don't believe you will find any that disagree with the points that I made.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

  • Posted by brandon7 6b (like 7b now) TN (My Page) on
    Thu, Sep 17, 09 at 9:58

"It is instead an expensive option costing $50-100."

Nope, sorry. The RoundUp brand ranges from $28-$35 around here for the 32 fluid oz bottle (makes five to six gallons of spray). I don't ever buy the 16 oz, but I'd imagine it would be about half that. Of course the generic glyphosate, that I mostly recommend, is much cheaper that that.

"Sure you can pick up a cheap $10 sprayer but I have bought more than my fair share of those and they last only for one or two uses then they break."

Go for the $11.99 option. They'll last longer.

I won't bother to directly address the rest of what you said. I think the rest of us can see what's going on. I do think you might want to be careful about being vulgar or disrespectful. I've tried to limit my posts to the facts and the actual matter at hand. Some of your posts may be pushing GardenWeb's TOS limits.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

Garden lady:

I planted 1,100 seedlings on 3 acres last spring. I used glyphosate to keep the weeds down - it saved my life and it saved many little trees. There was no way I could hand weed that many seedlings.

I used Ken's advice about low spray. Someone recommended a 5 gallon backpack sprayer - that helped too.

Brandon: You have been more than patient. It's a waste of time to try to have a rational discussion with him. You cannot reason with an obsessive compulsive person who needs to control others, and is extremely hostile.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

The advice given on chemicals is very inconsistent on this board...but we all have our little things that we are passionate about. Some will raise cane about using chemicals to treat diseases or pests, using fertilizers...and then the next day advocate using roundup to kill unwanted greenery. Everyone here gets pretty lenient when it comes to lawns and weeds, I guess cause they know it is impossible to have the lush, green, carpet looking lawn without chemicals. Fertilize the hell out of the lawn, but put in a tree spike and you'll get roasted like a holiday turkey. I vividly remember the statement just recently "you're sure into the chemical side of gardening", coming from one of our esteemed members in response to a lady that was trying to save a tree of beetle damage. But dump roundup into planting beds and around trees instead of weedeating or pulling weeds? The environmental impact of 30 minutes of weedeating is minimal compared to spraying roundup every couple weeks around everything. And if you use an electric w/eater, the only impact is the small amount of electricity you use.
I'll be the first to admit I use chemicals when absolutely necessary. Such as when a mature plant is struggling from disease or pest attack. But I would never advocate spraying roundup into planting beds and around trees, when with a little extra time of weedeating or manually pulling them, the chemicals could be avoided. My theory is, if you don't have time to keep your gardens weeded by hand or by a mulch rake; you don't need the garden. Unfortunately, a lot of people want the beautiful gardens, but don't want to put the work into them. I guess that's why landscapers are in business. And they have to knock out so many jobs a weeks to stay competitive, they have to take the quickest route when it comes to handling weeds.
I'm not trying to continue the argument here, I'm just rambling and giving my thoughts. But I'll say again, the advice on fertilizers and chemicals is very inconsistent here, depending on what the issue is. When in reality, none of them should be used, I don't care how safe the label says they are; they all have a negative environmental impact to some degree unless they are completely natural occuring element. So let's don't talk about dumping roundup everywhere then blast the next person that writes in asking about spraying her roses to keep the beetles off.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

Pam,
That was very hurtful and mean.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

  • Posted by brandon7 6b (like 7b now) TN (My Page) on
    Fri, Sep 18, 09 at 11:05

"I vividly remember the statement just recently "you're sure into the chemical side of gardening" "

Do you remember the rest of the conversation? You might want to review it. Applying multiple chemicals before need is even determined is very different than using them correctly when needed. I'll link the actual thread where the quote originated for review. I think reading the whole context leading up to the statement will show that it's nothing like what we're talking about here. Quotes should always be used with relevant context.

"The environmental impact of 30 minutes of weedeating is minimal compared to spraying roundup every couple weeks around everything."

I bet you'd have a really hard time proving that statement.

"And if you use an electric w/eater, the only impact is the small amount of electricity you use."

Where does the electricity comes from? Maybe a coal or nuclear plant?

"My theory is, if you don't have time to keep your gardens weeded by hand or by a mulch rake; you don't need the garden."

Good gracious, that is one more radical statement if you think about it! You mean people shouldn't have anything but small yards? They should close all the botanical gardens and arboretums around the country? Should the Sierra club stop their fight against invasives (they do this largely with chemicals)? Almost every university, apartment building, airport, and large business uses chemicals to maintain their landscape. Are you suggesting that all this should just be paved over? Then there's the area along all the highways and roads. A significant amount of it is maintained with chemicals. My point is, this suggestion defies logic.

"When in reality, none of them should be used, I don't care how safe the label says they are; they all have a negative environmental impact to some degree unless they are completely natural occuring (sp) element."

Ahh, this says a lot. I've tried to think of the nicest way possible to say this, and I'm not sure how to do it, but the statement seems highly hypocritical. If you use any household cleaners, drive a car, own a home, or basically participate in modern life, the things you do daily do much worse damage to the environment. I'm very environmentally conscious, and I'm all for doing things (within reason) the environmentally responsible way, but it's statements like the one above that actually hurt the environmental movement more than just about anything. When those concerned with the environment make completely unreasonable and unnecessary suggestions, it greatly hurts their credibility. It also gives those less concerned about the environment an excuse to say, "those tree-hugging environmentalist are all just a bunch of silly brainless idiots." Our planet can't afford this kind of publicity.

Here is a link that might be useful: Original Thread for Quote


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

For the sake of not arguing, my point was if presented with the option of manual labor versus a chemical, I always try to choose the manual labor. And I feel that is the best route to lead people. I know, it's not possible in all aspects of gardening and life in general. But to me, handpulling weeds is a reasonable option to avoid (even if in a small way) a negative environmental impact. And I probably have a larger property with more plantings and small trees than the majority of people on here. But as an engineer (both mechanical and environmental), I once studied roundup in my free time and in my opinion, it is a product that has a lot farther reaching effects than many people realize, from aquatic life to humans to animals. Not just what it does to the immediate soil, which is very minimal. An unreasonable suggestion would be to ask people to mow an acre with a reel mower, however I still believe it is reasonable to try to persuade gardeners to pull weeds versus spraying them. It's just my opinion, and I don't expect everyone to agree with it.


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

  • Posted by brandon7 6b (like 7b now) TN (My Page) on
    Fri, Sep 18, 09 at 14:20

I'll definitely agree with you that if you have an area where weeds could be easily removed manually and you have the time to do it, that's the way to go. My home is located on a fairly small lot on the other side of town from my arboretum. I rarely spray at home. A little extra sunshine and fresh air is always good, and, since the area of concern is fairly small there, I can pick the weeds with not much more effort than spraying. I do end up spraying some areas around my home once or twice per year (mainly an area where poison ivy wants to grow).

I don't worry about the toxicity of glyphosate used around the landscape. I've attended many lectures where its safety was discussed and talked to quite a few leading experts on the subject. Something that does raise a red flag for me is its massive use in farming today. There are millions of acres getting routinely sprayed with this stuff in today's modern farming operations. Various problems are starting to really crop up (RoundUp resistant weeds, etc). I've always heard that enough of anything can kill you, and the scale with which this stuff (and other chemicals) is used in large farming operations is just massive. But, I guess that's something for another day and another discussion...


 o
RE: Roundup under trees???

That is exactly what I'm concerned about...the large scale use of this stuff that is rising quickly. Not just in farms, but in residential areas. The way suburban sprawl is around big cities, and the thousands of acres of subdivisions that are being built where everyone has to have a lush, green, weedfree lawn really irks me. I love a good looking lawn also...but I cring all summer when I watch the Pro-green trucks making their rounds through the neighborhood, spraying huge clouds of who knows what all over the neighborhood. I think that will soon rival the amounts that farms are using. I may have some dandelions and other weeds pop up in my yard, and I have to sweat a lot more keeping weeds pulled, but at least I can let my child play and roll around in the grass like a kid does and not worry about what chemicals she is being exposed to. And yes, I guess that's another discussion:)


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum.

    If you are a member, please log in.

    If you aren't yet a member, join now!


Return to the Trees Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here