Cool! I never heard of the 'shroom technique. Do they use any bar oil, or just cut some rotting wood and then cut up the new wood with this inoculated bar/chain?
Crazy way to apply Tordon
- Thread starter pdqdl
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Jim Timber
1/4 bubble off
They inoculate the bar oil. Shroom spores look like fine dust, so you just add it to the oil and the act of cutting distributes the oil with the spores through the wood.
All day long, and nobody has remarked about the off-target fog of illegally applied mushroom spores.
I can't speak to what the laws or more importantly enforcement is like in your state. Methods of application do appear on labels. In some states, applying pesticides in a manner that is not specifically detailed on the label might fly.
Personally speaking, with the law of my own state in mind, I would not send an applicator to do a job in a manner that I would consider inconsistent with the label. If the label gives specific methods of application, I stick to them.
Some labels limit the use of pesticides in irrigation systems. Even though they would work perfectly well in them.
The label on Tordon lists application methods. They are approved methods. Deviating from them might get you the results your looking for, or they might get you a law suit and revocation of your pesticide license should something bad happen.
Why not try your state pesticide enforcement and ask them their opinion? If they gives the thumbs up (I would get it in writing) then your good to go.
I'm almost tempted to call the head of pesticide enforcement in my own state and see what she would say. Something tells me that she would ask if that method of application is listed on the label, and when I said no, she would say not to do it.
Personally speaking, with the law of my own state in mind, I would not send an applicator to do a job in a manner that I would consider inconsistent with the label. If the label gives specific methods of application, I stick to them.
Some labels limit the use of pesticides in irrigation systems. Even though they would work perfectly well in them.
The label on Tordon lists application methods. They are approved methods. Deviating from them might get you the results your looking for, or they might get you a law suit and revocation of your pesticide license should something bad happen.
Why not try your state pesticide enforcement and ask them their opinion? If they gives the thumbs up (I would get it in writing) then your good to go.
I'm almost tempted to call the head of pesticide enforcement in my own state and see what she would say. Something tells me that she would ask if that method of application is listed on the label, and when I said no, she would say not to do it.
JeffGu
Antagonist/Heckler
I'm having trouble understanding why anyone thinks what he's doing in any way is outside of the scope of what the label says. I think it's an overly complicated solution that isn't likely to yield good results, but I don't see why anyone would think he's going to bring the wrath of the weed police down on his head. The label allows spraying the product without any mention of the equipment. It doesn't say "only airplanes with a single engine and less than four wings" or "only 3 gallon hand pump sprayers from Walmart" or anything else of the kind. It doesn't even require a freakin' respirator. We're talking about a product that I've seen sprayed with electric sprayers mounted to ATVs, from old military aircraft, painted on with brushes, sprayed with almost every kind of device that can spray... and none of those methods are mentioned specifically on the label. It doesn't say you can't spray it with a low-flying blimp or a kid's squirt gun. I believe consistent with the labeling has more to do with mix concentrations and general respect for not poisoning or killing unintended targets than with which particular application device you choose to use. I can see where the Weed Board might get upset if you're lobbing water balloons full of the stuff out of a Howitzer, or strapping the jug to an ICBM as a delivery system... but I can't see them giving a rat's ass about him clogging up his chain oiler with herbicide, unless he's cutting hotdogs for the kiddies with it, afterwards.
This is starting to sound like the NSA looking for terrorists under the doormat of the free clinic. Let the guy dye his chainsaw blue and figure out that it will take sponges and roller brushes and maybe a high pressure oil pump bolted to the saw to make it work. Then we can move on to the real "Next Big Innovation"... climbing helmets with built in 3D por... er... arboriculture movies piped in by satellite.
This is starting to sound like the NSA looking for terrorists under the doormat of the free clinic. Let the guy dye his chainsaw blue and figure out that it will take sponges and roller brushes and maybe a high pressure oil pump bolted to the saw to make it work. Then we can move on to the real "Next Big Innovation"... climbing helmets with built in 3D por... er... arboriculture movies piped in by satellite.
I challenge you to show me any label anywhere that tells you how to make an application. You will not find any label anywhere that mentions a paintbrush, a herbicide roller, and they seldom even mention any specific kind of sprayer. They tell you how NOT to make an application, they will occasionally explain common methods, but they simply don't tell you how to do the job.
Go back and read the rules, then read a label critically to see if it really tells you how to do any application. The US Federal government is not going to absorb product liability by telling anyone how to apply pesticides, and the product manufacturer certainly isn't going to encourage any, either. They only tell you where you are doing it wrong. This is a logical divide that many folks don't seem to understand what is meant with the expression "inconsistent". "Contrary" means exactly breaking a rule in the label. "Inconsistent" is deliberately vague so that any prosecutor can put whatever spin on the interpretation that they wish.
As I quoted previously, the federal manual for all classes of pesticide licenses states that "Unless specifically prohibited by the labeling, FIFRA allows: ...
• Any method of application. " This is just one sentence with no restrictions or codicils on it. All on a single line all by itself.
Why! Why do you guys keep arguing with the facts?
Thank you. That was a rather elegant explanation.
Yes, applying Tordon in a food service application would be a specifically prohibited activity, "inconsistant" with the label.
No conflict with the label at all.
The labor savings of having the application done by the saw would be huge. Much of the active ingredient would go into the chips, but won't be totally lost, and half of what doesn't get on the chips goes onto the piece you cut off. Still, if enough active ingredient is left on each stump and the savings in labor is high enough it could very well be a better way to get the job done.
There is a mist coming off the bar that is there herbicide or not and chemical compounds in many trees are more harmful to breath than Tordon. The mist issue seems irrelevant to me.
Sounds like you already did the job, but when you come to the next one I suggest doing half of it with the chainsaw application and half of it with your current method. Check on it later to compare the efficacy of the two application types.
Last thought, we thinned bar oil in the winter with gasoline or paint thinner.
Mr. HE
The labor savings of having the application done by the saw would be huge. Much of the active ingredient would go into the chips, but won't be totally lost, and half of what doesn't get on the chips goes onto the piece you cut off. Still, if enough active ingredient is left on each stump and the savings in labor is high enough it could very well be a better way to get the job done.
There is a mist coming off the bar that is there herbicide or not and chemical compounds in many trees are more harmful to breath than Tordon. The mist issue seems irrelevant to me.
Sounds like you already did the job, but when you come to the next one I suggest doing half of it with the chainsaw application and half of it with your current method. Check on it later to compare the efficacy of the two application types.
Last thought, we thinned bar oil in the winter with gasoline or paint thinner.
Mr. HE
The pic. says it all, lots of blue marker dye (containing active Herbicide I guess) in the sawdust/chips, bugger all on the stump !
Waste of time, just get one of the crew to apply by a more efficient method and w/o danger to operator breathing the crap or wrecking the oiler, bar & chain or wasting the spray
Like the idea but WOFTAM in practical terms
c5rulz
Addicted to ArboristSite
I am a certified applicator for lawn and fruit crops.
I am not even going to go over the merits of your "technique/idea".
Had the product gone through the saw, I don't believe the concentration of product on the cambium layer of the cut stumps would be sufficient to do the intended job.
I am not even going to go over the merits of your "technique/idea".
Had the product gone through the saw, I don't believe the concentration of product on the cambium layer of the cut stumps would be sufficient to do the intended job.
I will get it to go through the saw. At 2 quarts maximum per acre, I am pretty sure I can get enough on a stump to do the job. It's just a matter of calibration.
Jim Timber
1/4 bubble off
With the secondary benefit of blade lube.
You'd need to spray the bottom of the blade, and most of your dose would get flung all over everything but the stump, but it's still got better odds than the bar oil method.
*unless using an 044
JeffGu
Antagonist/Heckler
I'm going to try sewing a sponge to the ass of my chainsaw pants. Cut stump, dip ass in bucket of Tordon, sit on stump.
Has the added benefit of preventing weeds from growing in the crack of your ass.
Fewer moving parts.
Low maintenance, cheap replacement parts.
Has the added benefit of preventing weeds from growing in the crack of your ass.
Fewer moving parts.
Low maintenance, cheap replacement parts.
c5rulz
Addicted to ArboristSite
pdqdl, I'm amazed at your patience. You had a very clever idea, kindly asked for opinions, and then got blasted with moronic comments where the poster couldn't think of anything intelligent to say in response.
I'm glad there were at least a couple guys who could discuss it wisely. I know nothing about the subject, so all I can say is "it sounds clever. Give it a try and see what happens, and let us know the results."
Certainly a lot of great inventors were ridiculed for their ideas but they persevered, so ignore the brainless haters and go for it. It'll either work or it won't and you'll know for sure then.
I'm glad there were at least a couple guys who could discuss it wisely. I know nothing about the subject, so all I can say is "it sounds clever. Give it a try and see what happens, and let us know the results."
Certainly a lot of great inventors were ridiculed for their ideas but they persevered, so ignore the brainless haters and go for it. It'll either work or it won't and you'll know for sure then.
I have been hanging out at the WTF thread so long. By comparison, these guys are rather toothless with respect to the offensiveness of their comments.
I expected to get blasted. This is SOP for anything that gets posted at the AS Commercial tree care forum. Part of why I spend far more time at WTF. Once you learn to glean the information from the chaff, there were good comments and some new information that I learned. Not as much as I would have preferred; I was kind of surprised that there were not more people that did stump treatments on a regular basis.
I expected to get blasted. This is SOP for anything that gets posted at the AS Commercial tree care forum. Part of why I spend far more time at WTF. Once you learn to glean the information from the chaff, there were good comments and some new information that I learned. Not as much as I would have preferred; I was kind of surprised that there were not more people that did stump treatments on a regular basis.
You would be amazed at the number of guys who clear fence lines and ROWs and don't treat. Either not licensed or charge a bunch extra to treat. I've had them tell me "I'd rather not treat, job security!"
Then there are the farmers "It is cheaper to cut it down every few years, chemicals are expensive and it just grows back anyway!"
Mr. HE
