Female climbers

[Bermie]

Yes, Casuarina (Australian Pine) a big invasive problem here...find me near the top of THIS one!

Pdql...thanks for the interesting discussion, I've enjoyed it. I actually stopped by one of the reserves today where I used tordon on the stumps deep among the native plants about three weeks ago. No evidence of any off target damage, I'm happy to say, so all is going well!

Bigus, oops, I feel the rope tugging now!

 

[pdqdl]

It's probably too early to detect the damage from the exuding RTU!

Let me know in 6 months.opcorn:

 

[fishercat]

they still make Spike?

Slight mis-perception there: The Tordon is not exuded by the stump, but the tordon is residual in the soil. So if you put enough down to kill a whole lot of trees...it will. Even if it is just a residual amount in the soil. It isn't like roundup, and most people over-apply, distrusting how well it works.

One quart per acre of tordon 22k can wipe out an acre of trees. That would be one gallon of Tordon RTU spread out over an area 208' x 208'. Resistant varieties of trees are usually taken out at 2 quarts per acre of 22k.

The only thing that I know of that is worse for trees is a soil sterilant called Spike. It gets trees for YEARS, and lingers in the deeper layers of soil.

i haven't seen it in years.i could really use some right now.i know they used to use it on rail road beds.

 

[Mapleman]

Jeezum,

why not just use rock salt or chlorox instead of all these toxins? Haven't we done enough to Gaia already?

 

[tree md]

Jeezum,

why not just use rock salt or chlorox instead of all these toxins? Haven't we done enough to Gaia already?

That's what I tell customers who don't want to pay for stump grinding, to use rock salt. To tell the truth, I have never treated one with rock salt, just heard the old timers swear by it and tell customers they may have luck with it. I am curious, does it really work?

 

[Mapleman]

Dunno--I tell customers the same thing, just season the sucker. Chlorox works for sure.

 

[Raymond]

i haven't seen it in years.i could really use some right now.i know they used to use it on rail road beds.

Spike I used that stuff too. Man that had to be over 20 years ago.
I liked the way it smelled. I wonder what it would taste like on toast?

 

[Bigus Termitius]

Bigus, oops, I feel the rope tugging now!

LOL! Yeah, that usually means one of two things....either I'm joking with you about something, or, on a more serious note, it's time for lunch.

 

[pdqdl]

i haven't seen it in years.i could really use some right now.i know they used to use it on rail road beds.

Yes. Commonly available, usually in a granular application. 20lb. bags is what I have bought, treats up to 2 acres, as I recall.

In fact, I have a fence line I need to treat with that. Spike sucks as a soil sterilant, but it has great residual for killing deep rooted trees. So it's perfect for a fence line next to a highway Right-of-Way, in front of some billboards.

The billboard companies hate trees, and they are usually in the awkward position of not wanting to pay for labor to cut the trees or have the public perception of killing the trees, either. They are not that popular with the public, anyway.

 

[pdqdl]

I wonder why you guys think salt or chlorox is any less toxic to "gaia" than a much smaller dose of a herbicide specifically labelled and approved for that use?

Chlorox is almost as deadly as bromine fumigant, and it kills everything. That fact that you are accustomed to finding it in your laundry does not make it any safer.

Salt is not toxic except in larger concentrations. So take Bermie's example of preserving native fauna: should we kill a targeted invasive plant, or just do a "scorched earth" treatment of killing everything within 10 feet of the undesirable stump? I can see how a salt pile would do more than kill a few plants, that would probably play hell with sensitive animal species as well. Think exotic amphibians, the soil micro fauna, even your basic earthworms. Then it migrates to nearby water like a small ponding area and kills some stuff there until eventually the water dilution makes it non-harmful.

If you think about it, you are fearing the unfamiliar in your ignorance, and using ecologically unsound, un-approved, and more damaging methods.

Physical removal methods like stump grinding, grubbing out the roots, or killing with suffocation work fine, but they take so much more work.

 

[Kate Butler]

I wonder why you guys think salt or chlorox is any less toxic to "gaia" than a much smaller dose of a herbicide specifically labelled and approved for that use?

Chlorox is almost as deadly as bromine fumigant, and it kills everything. That fact that you are accustomed to finding it in your laundry does not make it any safer.

Salt is not toxic except in larger concentrations. So take Bermie's example of preserving native fauna: should we kill a targeted invasive plant, or just do a "scorched earth" treatment of killing everything within 10 feet of the undesirable stump? I can see how a salt pile would do more than kill a few plants, that would probably play hell with sensitive animal species as well. Think exotic amphibians, the soil micro fauna, even your basic earthworms. Then it migrates to nearby water like a small ponding area and kills some stuff there until eventually the water dilution makes in non-harmful.

If you think about it, you are fearing the unfamiliar in your ignorance, and using ecologically unsound, un-approved, and more damaging methods.

Physical removal methods like stump grinding, grubbing out the roots, or killing with suffocation work fine, but they take so much more work.

You've summed up what I've been thinking since the words 'Clorox' and 'salt' were introduced to the thread. Those of us who are certified applicators know this, but some seem to think that cheaper is better - whether because the cost is less or because it is a common household product and readily available. Regardless, if we are certified applicators we are REQUIRED to follow label instructions and we should be making the effort to use the least toxic chemical that will get the job done.

 

[pdqdl]

Heck, at $66 per gallon for generic tordon, I spend less than a dollar on killing the biggest tree stump you can find around here.

How much for 10 pounds of rock salt? And do you really KNOW it will work?



?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Who would have ever figured we would end up here, having started this thread considering looking at girls humping their way up a tree with a chainsaw?

To be honest, I don't mind derailing this thread anyway, as I thought it a bit demeaning.

 

[Bermie]

A least we ascend trees with grace and style, and flit about lightly dispensing care and attention ...not great grunting popping bulging forearms and lashings of sweat and bad language and cigarettes or roaches hanging from lips...oke::sword:

It's all good...

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

That's what I tell customers who don't want to pay for stump grinding, to use rock salt. To tell the truth, I have never treated one with rock salt, just heard the old timers swear by it and tell customers they may have luck with it. I am curious, does it really work?

In WI that type of advise can get you in trouble with the DNR. Professional advise for of label/non-labeled pesticide use.

 

[pdqdl]

A friendly suggestion for you non-applicator types

I have never tried this, but I'll bet it would work. It will certainly accelerate decay of the stump, and probably will be lethal as well as ecologically safe.

Drill 3/4" holes all over the surface of the stump. Make them at least 6" deep. Fill with urea, a cheap fertilizer. Ammonium sulfate might work better. Cap with parafin, playdough, something non-toxic and waterproof.

The high nitrogen content will accelerate the decay of the stump. If enough is injected, it will probably kill the stump as well. This should be safe for the rest of the area, too.

[Ammonium nitrate would work best, especially if mixed 5% with diesel and ignited with a blasting cap

Really, really, startlingly fast results.]

 

[pdqdl]

A least we ascend trees with grace and style, and flit about lightly dispensing care and attention ...not great grunting popping bulging forearms and lashings of sweat and bad language and cigarettes or roaches hanging from lips...oke::sword:

It's all good...

Shucks, Bermie. I don't use bad language, and I don't smoke. Roaches of any kind are completely unwelcome on my lips. And...my forearms probably don't bulge nearly enough to rate any comment either.

You can see me here: http://www.arboristsite.com/showpost.php?p=1177674&postcount=2

As to grace, style, and flitting: I don't have much of that, either. If it's any consolation, I hardly sweat at all, even in the worst of heat. I'll beat nearly anybody on a long stretch in the heat without any water.

 

[asthesun]

A least we ascend trees with grace and style, and flit about lightly dispensing care and attention ...not great grunting popping bulging forearms and lashings of sweat and bad language and cigarettes or roaches hanging from lips...oke::sword:

It's all good...

all the girls i have met that climb are like that actually, not exactly wife material, more like boyfriend material... i can see bu the pics that thats not you tho. keep it up

 

[Mapleman]

You've summed up what I've been thinking since the words 'Clorox' and 'salt' were introduced to the thread. Those of us who are certified applicators know this, but some seem to think that cheaper is better - whether because the cost is less or because it is a common household product and readily available. Regardless, if we are certified applicators we are REQUIRED to follow label instructions and we should be making the effort to use the least toxic chemical that will get the job done.

I haven't done any scientific tests or anything, but I'd be willing to bet Chlorox dissipates quicker in the environment and has a shorter "half life" than the toxins you all are talking about. I like the idea of using urea, fertilizer, and whatever that someone suggested. Just because you're licensed to use toxins doesn't mean their toxicity is lessened, it's still toxic. Check out what DDT did to the shells of birds like pelicans. Read "Silent Spring" by Rachael Carson.

It's fine if you want to use that stuff. Just don't try to sell the idea that because you took some courses about applying it, it is somehow not a deadly toxin like agent orange, that no matter how careful you are with it, it's not going to seep into places it shouldn't be.

Personally, I use---nothing to kill stumps, shoots or weeds except old fashion muscle grease. Grind it, pull it, and cut it. Too bad for the folks whose sense of aesthetics is hurt by looking at weeds. Why not just pave over it and be done with it?

I'd rather eat an apple with a worm hole, than one sprayed with alar.

 

[Mapleman]

Ahhh, there's nothing finer than to be on the ground at the base of the trunk, looking up and seeing a woman body thrust up a rope. I've taught several women to recreational climb. I love seeing those hips and butt thrusting up the tree...

I've also worked with several women. I met Trish in Healdsberg, CA, carving up a Doug fir with a big Huskie and a 28" or 32" bar. She met her man climbing for pinecones in the Sierras. But I've yet to see a woman working with a running chain saw in a tree. I came across an outfit in the Raleigh area that had a woman climber who was reputed to be a good take down artist and pruner, but I never saw her work.

Anyone out there have stories of women working in trees? This thread could get real interesting if we allow it to delve out of the PG arena.

Well this is how it started out...

 

[mckeetree]

You've summed up what I've been thinking since the words 'Clorox' and 'salt' were introduced to the thread. Those of us who are certified applicators know this, but some seem to think that cheaper is better - whether because the cost is less or because it is a common household product and readily available. Regardless, if we are certified applicators we are REQUIRED to follow label instructions and we should be making the effort to use the least toxic chemical that will get the job done.

Exactly.