Getting the Drift
Over the past few years, I have heard from others and have experienced myself the sad results of having changing agricultural practices exert a serious negative effect on home gardens. I speak, of course, of spray drift from chemicals which are applied on fields. The two most commonly sprayed chemicals are glyphoste (e. g. Roundup) and 2,4-D. Roundup kills all foliage it comes in sufficient contact with (except some genetically modified field crops), and 2,4-D kills broadleaf plants. Herbicide damage to garden crops has been identified repeatedly by local professionals trained in horticulture.
Two sites that give a good bit of information on the problem are these. One records the court proceedings in a case where a commercial fruit and vegetable farmer had crop damage which a professional identified as having been caused by herbicide spray. The other is a document about how to avoid causing such damage.
One of the "wild cards" in the process of using herbicides in fields is the fact that 2, 4-D, when the temperature is high enough, can re-volatilize if it has not been completely absorbed, or, in other words, can re-form into vapor or droplets. Once having re-entered the air above a field, it can be carried elsewhere by winds, and can damage susceptible vegetation in other places.
Here is information about drift from one expert named Foster, who weighed in on the court case: "He estimated that the temperature had to be 80 to 85 degrees Fahrenheit or warmer. He also estimated that vapor drift would occur within two-to-three days of application. Based on his past observations, Foster opined that vapor drift could go at least one mile, and particle drift could go further."
In the other document, three factors (out of 16) were found to be the most significant in determining the level of damage due to wind drift.
1. Wind speed. Never spray when the wind speed exceeds 10 MPH.
2. Boom height. Keep the spray emergence low to the ground.
3. Distance downwind. I'm sure this is obvious. Don't apply spray close to plants you don't want to damage or kill.
The above parameters stack up like this, as I see it, if avoiding unintended damage is the goal:
1. Don't ever spray if the wind speed exceeds 10 MPH.
2. If there is any vegetation within a mile (or more) that shouldn't die, don't spray if the temperature will exceed 80-85 degrees any time within the next three days, especially if the wind in the same time period will exceed 10 MPH.
Any Kansas farmer will know that meeting the above conditions within the narrow window of time in which spraying is timed properly for the field crop is a tall order. For a farmer who has hundreds of acres to spray, getting over all of them in that time window is even less doable. Which all comes back to the question of ethical conduct in relation to farm size and farming practices. Farming "big" and adopting chemical-dependent farming methods is not an automatic gain for everyone, in my opinion. At some point, for me, it would become a red-line moral issue.
Farmers may argue that earning a decent living demands such methods, and producing cheap food is a benefit to many people. We'll put aside any arguments for the time being on whether food that is genetically modified or laced with chemicals is a great benefit to many people. Of this I am certain: home gardeners who are working hard to grow safe and sufficient food to feed their own families or to share with their neighbors deserve great respect, and will appreciate all the consideration their farming neighbors can muster.
Last week in my food production class I suggested that students form a habit of praying about their gardening practices, and allowed that what God makes possible for an individual gardener at any particular time may look different at another time or for another person. I acknowledged that my own ideals have not always been matched in my practice. I would be greatly reassured if I knew that all our farming neighbors formed a praying habit regarding their practices. A humble learner's stance goes a long way in this matter.
Two sites that give a good bit of information on the problem are these. One records the court proceedings in a case where a commercial fruit and vegetable farmer had crop damage which a professional identified as having been caused by herbicide spray. The other is a document about how to avoid causing such damage.
One of the "wild cards" in the process of using herbicides in fields is the fact that 2, 4-D, when the temperature is high enough, can re-volatilize if it has not been completely absorbed, or, in other words, can re-form into vapor or droplets. Once having re-entered the air above a field, it can be carried elsewhere by winds, and can damage susceptible vegetation in other places.
Here is information about drift from one expert named Foster, who weighed in on the court case: "He estimated that the temperature had to be 80 to 85 degrees Fahrenheit or warmer. He also estimated that vapor drift would occur within two-to-three days of application. Based on his past observations, Foster opined that vapor drift could go at least one mile, and particle drift could go further."
In the other document, three factors (out of 16) were found to be the most significant in determining the level of damage due to wind drift.
1. Wind speed. Never spray when the wind speed exceeds 10 MPH.
2. Boom height. Keep the spray emergence low to the ground.
3. Distance downwind. I'm sure this is obvious. Don't apply spray close to plants you don't want to damage or kill.
The above parameters stack up like this, as I see it, if avoiding unintended damage is the goal:
1. Don't ever spray if the wind speed exceeds 10 MPH.
2. If there is any vegetation within a mile (or more) that shouldn't die, don't spray if the temperature will exceed 80-85 degrees any time within the next three days, especially if the wind in the same time period will exceed 10 MPH.
Any Kansas farmer will know that meeting the above conditions within the narrow window of time in which spraying is timed properly for the field crop is a tall order. For a farmer who has hundreds of acres to spray, getting over all of them in that time window is even less doable. Which all comes back to the question of ethical conduct in relation to farm size and farming practices. Farming "big" and adopting chemical-dependent farming methods is not an automatic gain for everyone, in my opinion. At some point, for me, it would become a red-line moral issue.
Farmers may argue that earning a decent living demands such methods, and producing cheap food is a benefit to many people. We'll put aside any arguments for the time being on whether food that is genetically modified or laced with chemicals is a great benefit to many people. Of this I am certain: home gardeners who are working hard to grow safe and sufficient food to feed their own families or to share with their neighbors deserve great respect, and will appreciate all the consideration their farming neighbors can muster.
Last week in my food production class I suggested that students form a habit of praying about their gardening practices, and allowed that what God makes possible for an individual gardener at any particular time may look different at another time or for another person. I acknowledged that my own ideals have not always been matched in my practice. I would be greatly reassured if I knew that all our farming neighbors formed a praying habit regarding their practices. A humble learner's stance goes a long way in this matter.
posted by Mrs. I (Miriam Iwashige) at
10:52 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home