Is the weed control revolution underway?
Amenity Forum Conference highlights the need for a serious rethink about pesticide application
IF one single message emerged from the Amenity Forum Conference at the Trent Bridge County Cricket Ground in Nottingham on 4th November, it is that the permitted use of pesticides and the operational methods for weed control will have to change dramatically over the next two years, and no more so than for total weed control on paved surfaces and highways.
Adrian Dixon from the Chemical Regulations Directorate, Jo Kennedy from the Environment Agency and Dr Neil Hipps from East Malling Research all confirmed that the EU’s Water Framework Directive and the Sustainable Use of Pesticides Directive meant that pesticide use would have to be dramatically cut on hard surface applications, ruling out high current pesticide application rates and overall blanket spraying of hard surfaces.
The Water Framework Directive is zoning the country into river basins and water catchment areas where water quality is being closely monitored for pesticide content.
Worryingly, the mainstream herbicide, glyphosate, has already been picked up in water, along with other and older pesticides. Under the regulations and the previous EU Drinking Water Directive, such pollution must be stopped. No spray zones are likely to be introduced in sensitive areas.
The Sustainable Use of Pesticides Directive requires that national plans are introduced over the next two years to dramatically reduce the volume of pesticides applied.
What can be done meet these requirements and maintain reasonable levels of weed control? Dr Neil Hipps outlined the experiences in Holland, where they are already meeting the required standards. Glyphosate application is limited there in several ways.
Firstly, the approved product application rate has been reduced to just 360 grams per hectare, equivalent to only one litre per hectare applied no more than twice in any year. Secondly, it is not allowed to be applied if rainfall and consequent run off is expected within twelve hours. Thirdly, spraying is not allowed unless, or until, weed infestation reaches defined limits. Herbicide application is then integrated with increased road sweeping to reduce the problem and sometimes with other methods, such as steam or thermal, or even hand weeding, in no spray zones.
All of this rules out traditional hydraulic water based spray application, which is banned anyway in Holland, due to risk of spray drift and which would not kill the weeds at such low herbicide rates.
So, how have they managed to meet the required standards? Spot spraying replaces overall blanket spraying. This means pedestrian hand held ULV (ultra low volume) spraying, such as the Mankar sytsem, that applies neat glyphosate effectively at rates as low as one litre per hectare. Where overall application has been ruled out, weed sensor technology can be used to automatically only spot spray green growth if a motorised vehicle sprayer is used. In addition, in more sensitive areas, weed wipers such as the RotoFix machine can apply glyphosate only to the leaves of weeds that protrude, applying none to the ground.
Where methods combining sweeping are used, overall weed control costs increase, on average, by no more than 25%. Where the use of herbicide is totally eliminated, costs are at least four times greater, with standards falling and costly damage to infrastructure.
If one other message emerges from the conference, it is that those responsible for weed control had better start planning how they propose to comply now, rather than waiting for major problems within the next two years!
The Largest Indoor Sports Facility and Turf Maintenance Exhibition in Europe
incorporating...
An Extensive Five Day Education Programme
Exhibition Tuesday 19 January 2010 Wednesday 20 January 2010 Thursday 21 January 2010
Education 17-21 January 2010
Venue Harrogate
International Centre North Yorkshire England
7
Visit our
Harrogate Week page on...
k
V
i s
i t
o u
r
we
bsi
te
at
ww
w.
har
rog
atew
eek.
org.u
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 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132