“We learned by trial and error - a bit of scorch here and there but the grass soon recovered”


JOHN ALLBUTT, Chairman of the Amenity Forum


within your industry is that it gives you a sense of perspective,” he recalls. “I remember in the early 1960s the way we enthusiastically used new products that would rid us of worm casts, persistent attacks of Fusarium and a whole range of turf weeds in one single sweep of a sprayer nozzle.” “We used DDT, Mowrah Meal, lead arsenate, Chlordane, various organo- mercury compounds with exciting names like Mersil, Merfusan, Fusarium Specific Powder and many others. Can you imagine getting years of worm-free fairways and greens from a single application? Some greenkeepers on the heavier soils would claim more than five years of worm-free grounds.” The application of this chemical cocktail, he admits, was largely done on a trial and error basis. “It’s true that we didn’t have much of an idea about application rates. It was so many fluid ounces per gallon over what seemed to be a lot of square yards.” “There were a few difficulties as we learned by trial and error; a bit of scorch here and there, but the grass soon recovered. We didn't have much in the way of equipment that would accurately apply these products until Allman, Drake and Fletcher and others started producing bigger, more sophisticated units.”


One of these was the famous Drake and Fletcher Mystifier. “The Drake and Fletcher Mystifier was a brass pump up cylinder mounted on small bicycle wheels,” he explains. “When I asked my head greenkeeper why it was called a Mystifier he replied: ‘Well, probably because we are all mystified about how it actually works!’.”


“This was a reference to the inflatable bag within the cylinder that created the pressure. We spread the mercury powder by Sisis spreaders, walking briskly forward and getting covered in the powder. We mixed the Chlordane in large water butts and dipped watering cans fitted with a large course ‘rose’, getting soaked around the arms and legs in the process.”


As a means of giving professional


credence to their profession, he says those working on golf courses regularly referred to spraying as a bit of a dark art. “Any approach by a golfer or member of the public was met with evasive responses and references to ‘only doing what I’m told by the boss’,” he says. “In truth we didn’t know very much about it ourselves.”


It was not until the mid 1970s, he


recalls, that they were told to wear gloves and masks. Product labels were changed too. “We learned that these products were not apparently good for us, or the environment,” he says, “and we saw the withdrawal of all the old favourites during this period. And yet there are very few confirmed reports of greenkeepers and groundsmen becoming ill as a result of all this exposure.” Today, though, he says it’s a very


different story and greenkeepers and groundsmen should be as transparent and approachable as possible to inspire public confidence. “We have to raise awareness in the public domain” he says. “If someone is spraying and a member of the public asks what they’re doing, we need to be ready and willing to explain that we have certificates of competence, the product has been thoroughly


“When asked why it was called the Mystifier the answer was


‘because we are mystified about how it actually works!’”


51


assessed and is approved for the purpose, and we are able to carry out environmental risk assessments to ensure there is minimum impact on the environment.”


Is he confident though that pesticide use does not endanger the safety for its users and the public at large? “Today the situation is very different.


We are surrounded by codes of practice, guides, regulations, training and some very sophisticated spraying equipment to ensure that we apply turf products very accurately indeed. We are able to achieve much greater control over spray droplet size, pressure and therefore drift.” “We also have a much greater


appreciation of the risks of applying these products to the environment and why we must confine the application to the target only. We have more than adequate legislation in place that requires us to be competent to apply pesticides efficiently and safely, use the products within strict limits, ensure that the equipment works properly and carry out personal exposure and environmental risk assessments.” But even though Allbutt points out that much of the existing pesticides legislation predates our membership of the EU and that, in fact, some UK legislation has been used when preparing EU Directives, he’s well aware that the pesticides industry will always be under close scrutiny and cannot afford to put a foot wrong.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64