TECHNICAL
‘What have you got for worms’ has been the most asked question I’ve received in the past year. And, unfortunately, my answer every single time has been a short and succinct ‘nothing’ much to the frustration of all concerned. But why? And what are companies doing to bring through a safe and eff ective solution for the control of worms, since Carbendazim was banned over twelve months ago? Phil Collinson, Technical Area Sales Manager of ICL reports
I
n most situations in nature, earthworm activity is seen as benefi cial. They can help break down organic matter, improve soil structure and aid the drainage of the soil. However, worm casts can muddy the surface leading to a thinning of the sward, weed invasion and softening of the surface. So, in the sports turf world, they can pose a serious challenge when trying to maintain the quality of the playing surface.
Carbendazim was previously approved and widely used as an eff ective treatment for the control of worm casts, however, since its withdrawal from the market in 2019, there has been no approved chemical solution to replace it - forcing turf managers to either accept the consequences of casting worms or to seek other forms of control. There has been an abundance of ‘biostimulant’ type products and ‘soil conditioners’ coming into the market, with claims and counter claims - yet you won’t fi nd any in our brochure or on our website.
But why is that? Well, trust us when we say we both understand and empathise with turf managers when it comes to the issue of worm casting, but despite numerous research studies, we are yet to come to a solution that we deem as both legal and eff ective and so have yet to unearth something we are happy to put our name
Phil Collinson
to. We could not (with a clear conscience) market substances that clearly have pesticidal properties as nutritional, soil conditioning or bio-stimulatory. So, what’s preventing a legal and eff ective replacement for Carbendazim? Well, the truth is, it’s very hard - if not impossible - to currently receive regulatory approval for
PC April/May 2021 117
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 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148