Gly for hack and squirt

[George]

No, you were clear, my specific example matches the label, and the label is not a generalization.

 

[yoderjac]

No, you were clear, my specific example matches the label, and the label is not a generalization.

That is not the part I was addressing. I was addressing the "why would I want to pour"... In this specific case, with these specific chemicals, I tend to agree with your conclusions. I was trying to suggest that we should not generalize to to point of saying less of chemical A is a better choice than more of chemical B.

 

[George]

Now lets examine Dr Craigs formula, 40% triclopyr amine, 10% imazapyr, 40% water.

Triclopyr amine label calls for the same application rate as the ester so I will use the same 17 gallons for 68 acres.

17 gallons of solution equals 6.8 gallons of water, 8.5 gallons of triclopyr, and 1.7 gallons of imazapyr.

So now my question is why would I pour out into my woods 8.5 gallons of triclopyr and 1.7 gallons of imazapyr to accomplish what I accomplished with the same 1.7 gallons poured out in a 20% solution with water?

The only reason I would use triclopyr is to kill locust, I'm not killing locust.

The forest service uses imazapyr.

 

[George]

That is not the part I was addressing. I was addressing the "why would I want to pour"... In this specific case, with these specific chemicals, I tend to agree with your conclusions. I was trying to suggest that we should not generalize to to point of saying less of chemical A is a better choice than more of chemical B.

I'm suggesting that if I can achieve the same result with less chemical A- 1.7 gallons of imazapyr I do not need to waste more money, + time and effort, and pour out the same 1.7 gallons of imazapyr in a more dilute solution + 8.5 gallons of triclopyr.

 

[George]

I am going to e-mail Dr Craig and present him with the same question.

G

 

[weekender21]

I am going to e-mail Dr Craig and present him with the same question.

G

I’m not speaking for Dr. Harper but if he’s consistent with quotes I’ve seen in articles, podcasts, and YouTube videos he’s been a guest on over the past few years I’m willing to bet he’ll tell you that Imazapyr (Arsenal AC) is weak on some species. The same goes for Triclopyr 3 (Garlon 3A).

They complement each other and together they’ll kill anything in an eastern mixed hardwoods stand.

I have no experience with this mix to back Dr. Harper up but that’s why I’m using it. I don’t get much time on my property and a repeat treatment on any given acre is undesirable. It’s worth it to me to go through the hassle of mixing it.

At least that’s my plan for now, might be using the George Imazapyr only cocktail next year!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[yoderjac]

I'm suggesting that if I can achieve the same result with less chemical A- 1.7 gallons of imazapyr I do not need to waste more money, + time and effort, and pour out the same 1.7 gallons of imazapyr in a more dilute solution + 8.5 gallons of triclopyr.

Yes, and with these specific chemicals and your specific objectives, I tend to agree. My point was that we can't generalize this. More of chemical A could have less negative impact than less of chemical B to achieve the same desired result. That was my only point.

 

[catscratch]

The older I get the more I'm incline to do less and less invasive practices. If I can use less of any chemical I feel like it's better. So cocktails that kill "everything" may be adding chemicals to my land that I didn't need to add. Less chemical, more diversity, better burning practices, and a smaller overall footprint left by me type of thing.

 

[George]

Yes, and with these specific chemicals and your specific objectives, I tend to agree. My point was that we can't generalize this. More of chemical A could have less negative impact than less of chemical B to achieve the same desired result. That was my only point.

"we can't generalize this", "More of chemical A could have less negative impact than less of chemical B to achieve the same desired result."

?.

The older I get the more I'm incline to do less and less invasive practices. If I can use less of any chemical I feel like it's better. So cocktails that kill "everything" may be adding chemicals to my land that I didn't need to add. Less chemical, more diversity, better burning practices, and a smaller overall footprint left by me type of thing.

Yeah.

I’m not speaking for Dr. Harper but if he’s consistent with quotes I’ve seen in articles, podcasts, and YouTube videos he’s been a guest on over the past few years I’m willing to bet he’ll tell you that Imazapyr (Arsenal AC) is weak on some species. The same goes for Triclopyr 3 (Garlon 3A).

They complement each other and together they’ll kill anything in an eastern mixed hardwoods stand.

I have no experience with this mix to back Dr. Harper up but that’s why I’m using it. I don’t get much time on my property and a repeat treatment on any given acre is undesirable. It’s worth it to me to go through the hassle of mixing it.

At least that’s my plan for now, might be using the George Imazapyr only cocktail next year!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Okay, I did not e-mail Dr Craig, I don't want to be contradictory to my/our habitat hero. So I did the best thing and what my forester told me and what I'm sure Dr Craig would tell me, refer to the product label.

Trees that I have put the hack hammer into that are on both Alligare specimen labels as controlled species, triclopyr amine and Imazapyr- ash, beech, black gum, black birch, cherry, maples red and sugar, sassafras, sycamore, sweet gum, tulip poplar.

Trees I hacked that are not listed for triclopyr but are controlled by Imazapyr- boxelder, hickory, sour wood, tree o hell.

Trees I hacked that are listed for triclopyr but are not controlled by Imazapyr- elm. Locust would be on the list if were hacking it.

So elm is the only tree, according to the specimen labels that I am not controlling with Imazapyr. Which is a non issue for me because on 68 acres I don't think that I have hacked a dozen elms.

Tree o hell, interestingly was the OP's main concern and it is not listed for triclopyr amine. However, I have 2 tree o hell 10-12" DBH mother tree test cases standing 10 yards from one another in which I applied the recommended rates of chemical, one triclopyr ester and one imazapyr back in the summer. The tree treated with triclopyr ester looked deader, faster than the tree treated with imazapyr. Forester Bill has made the point to me that trees treated with imazapyr take longer to look dead.

So lets look at application rates. A 3" diameter tree calls for one hack and 1ml of imazapyr solution (so called George cocktail). A 3" diameter tree being 9+ inches in circumference calling for a hack every 3 inches would require 3 hacks and 3ml of Dr Craigs cocktail.

Word of caution with imazapyr if it calls for 1ml you need to apply 1ml, more is not merrier. If you apply too much you will have collateral damage. Forester Bill has told me about such instances that he has witnessed.

My takeaway is the same as it was, I can greatly reduce time, money, and chemical spent, chemical poured into my woods unnecessarily, with a 20% solution of imazapyr without generalizing anything.

G

 

[George]

Tree o hell is on the specimen label for triclopyr 4 ester (diesel mix) but not on the specimen list for triclopyr 3 amine (Dr Craig cocktail). So are boxelder and hickory but still not sourwood.

G

 

[George]

Further research indicates that elm is indeed controlled by imazapyr.

G

 

[weekender21]

Tree o hell is on the specimen label for triclopyr 4 ester (diesel mix) but not on the specimen list for triclopyr 3 amine (Dr Craig cocktail). So are boxelder and hickory but still not sourwood.

G

Tree o hell equals tree of heaven I assume?

I thought I had a bunch of those. Fortunately, they turned out to be sumac.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[THE LLC]

My suggestion would be to wait until the leaves on the sweetgums are about the size of your thumbnail then burn the crap out of the cut. Then, hack and squirt anything that survived.

 

[yoderjac]

My suggestion would be to wait until the leaves on the sweetgums are about the size of your thumbnail then burn the crap out of the cut. Then, hack and squirt anything that survived.

I can't speak to sweetgum specifically, but a growing season burn seems to do better at reducing stem density in general. I found this MSU Deer Lab podcast interesting and enlightening on effects of burn timing: Burn Baby Burn

 

[BenAllgood]

I used triclopyr/diesel for basal spraying due to timing. I needed to do it in early spring when sap is rising. H/S may not be the best option then. I had excellent kill on tree of heaven that same year. They were dead before fall. There were some pretty big ones too. I did use more chemical, but I covered 22 acres and thousands of trees in 2.5 days. I wasn't targeting just TOH either.

 

[yoderjac]

"we can't generalize this", "More of chemical A could have less negative impact than less of chemical B to achieve the same desired result."

?.

...

G

George,

For example, let's take Gly and Arsenal. A spraying application will have overspray. Gly has no soil residual effect, Arsenal does. So, depending on ones objectives, More gly could be better than less Arsenal.

I was trying to say that I agree with your specific example, but there are cases where applying more of one chemical could be better than less of another. Both may achieve the desired kill objective, but one may have more unintended impacts than the other.

 

[George]

George,

For example, let's take Gly and Arsenal. A spraying application will have overspray. Gly has no soil residual effect, Arsenal does. So, depending on ones objectives, More gly could be better than less Arsenal.

I was trying to say that I agree with your specific example, but there are cases where applying more of one chemical could be better than less of another. Both may achieve the desired kill objective, but one may have more unintended impacts than the other.

I now understand, however, I was speaking specifically about hack/squirt.

G