Posted
by Bigredfishing on 2002 PM:
Chemical weed
treatments
A small pond near me(barney road,
In this particular pond, the bass were oriented to the weeds. They were always
found in, or around the weeds.
Thanks
Lance
Posted
by JOHN G on 2002 PM:
Red, it doesn't have to
be a disaster.....first of all, if it was extremely weed choked, it will
actually improve the fishing after a couple of weeks....as long as they didn't
completely eradicate the weeds in a small pond, you will find the fish to still
be cooperative and in fact, you might even catch some bigger ones than you had
seen before.
this situation can shift populations and styles of
bass in some waters, especially bigger waters, however, most small ponds are
over-fertile and knocking down the weeds every now and then might be an
improvement.....
JOHN G
__________________
"and a new Commandment I shall give you.....that you shall love one
another"
---------------------------------
> email
- DrBass2@aol.com
> Forum Moderator aka:
Head Honcho
---------------------------------
Quote: "coming
soon"
---------------------------------
Posted
by Bigredfishing on 2002 PM:
unfortunalely, the weeds were just right, there was a shallow,
weedy portion of the pond, where the weeds were scatterd,
in clumps, and along the bank. The deep side only had weeds on one side. The
shallow side is only about 30% of the pond.
BUT, i will go in optimistic, as you said john, maybe
the bigger ones will be more accessable.
Posted
by Explorer on 2002 PM:
Bigred, how's it going? where in
Posted
by Bigredfishing on 2002 AM:
the pond in question is located on
barney road, in
Posted
by Bigredfishing on 2002 PM:
i fished that pond this evening, and well, the weeds are
better than ever! The weed treatment only killed the slop on the shore. The
milfoil is in thicker than ever, with some well defined edges!
Anyway, the afternoon bite was almost non-existant.
The only bites we could get were on 5" senko's
and just couldnt connect.
Later in the evening, the fish decided to turn on, and they started slamming
4" watermelon senkos. My buddy paul broke a screamer off, that we
suspect was a carp. All totall, 18
LMB between the two of us, all on senkos, except one
on a lizard, and another on a buzzbait.
Lance
Posted
by GMAN on 2002 PM:
I thought you needed a
permit
Red...I'm wondering if
those people got a permit to pour that stuff in that lake. It was my
understanding you couldn't do this otherwise...maybe I'm wrong....have a tight
one..
Posted
by Bigredfishing on 2002 PM:
yeah, i
guess the neighborhood association got the go-ahead from the town board, and
hired a firm from mass. to do it, under a state issued
permit. I dont know what they got paid, but from the
looks of things, the town got ripped, to the benefit of the fishing!
Lance
PS: the pond now has a film of duckweed over it, in places,
that was not present previous to the treatment.
Posted
by Jon Puhalski on 2002 PM:
Aquatic Weed Poison
I've got a personal
problem with aquatic herbacides. It just doesn't make
any sense to be pouring poison in our waters. Below is some information that is
a little scary about the use of a couple of common herbacides.
Massachusets LOVES the stuff. Read about its
potential hazards and tell me it is OK to put this crap in the water.
Aquatic Herbicide Alert Sarah Little, Ph.D., Wellesley Pesticide Awareness
Coordinator, 781-431-1019 x294 Sherry Ayres, Toxics Action Center, 617-747-4362
Please read this document if you are considering the use of herbicides in ponds
or lakes for controlling nuisance and invasive weeds. False and misleading
statements on the safety and characteristics of these herbicides are being
promulgated in
Executive Summary Certain vendors are approaching pond and lake associations,
city councilors, conservation commissions, and selectmen and advocating
herbicide use as the method of choice for controlling nuisance and invasive
weeds in water bodies. These vendors are not revealing the health risks
involved with pesticide use, and are, in fact, illegally1 making false and
misleading claims about the safety, characteristics, and endorsements of their
products. The most serious misleading statements encountered involve
understating the health risks, environmental effects, and persistence of the
chemicals; falsely linking United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
registration with verifications of safety and/or non-carcinogenic status; and
false claims of endorsement by the Massachusetts Audubon Society for using
herbicides in water bodies. Never accept the material presented by a vendor on
the health and environmental effects of an herbicide without verifying it with an
independent authority such as the Environmental Protection Agency, Department
of Environmental Protection, Extoxnet, the Material
Safety Data Sheet, or the Product Label itself. Herbicides are a type of
pesticide. The following four synthetic herbicides are being proposed, all are
subject to site-specific local and state approval: 2,4-D,
Diquat bromide (Reward), or Fluridone
(Sonar), for killing aquatic plants; and glyphosate
(Roundup or Rodeo) for killing embankment plants. All four pose health and environmental
risks and provide only temporary relief from the weed problems. Although EPA
allows registration and restricted use of pesticides, they do not encourage
their use. Registration of a product by the EPA does not imply that it is safe;
there are currently thirty-six EPA registered pesticides which are
carcinogenic. In fact, the EPA states that all “pesticide use creates some risk
of harm to humans, animals, or the environment.” Pesticides should not be used
as a routine, repeated, or long-term method for controlling invasive weeds in
ponds and lakes. Even single-use applications must be carefully considered to
ensure that the voluntary and involuntary health and environmental risks
associated with broadcasting toxic chemicals into the environment are justified,
and that alternative methods are not available. Presented here is a summary of
what is known about the actual health and environmental effects, and
persistence, of the chemical herbicides in question. This information is
obtained from the manufacturer’s Material Safety Data Sheets; the EPA; the DEP;
EXTOXNET multi-University pesticide database; the New York State Board of
Health; and the references appended to this document. A description of some of
the non-chemical alternatives is also presented.
Chemical Summary 2,4-D: (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic
acid. Exposure routes: 2,4-D is toxic if inhaled,
ingested, or absorbed through the skin. Acute toxicity: 2,4-D
is moderately toxic via ingestion: an amount equivalent to two Lifesavers
administered to each of four kindergarteners would kill two of them (oral LD50
as low as 320mg/kg). It is highly toxic via eye exposure. It is readily
absorbed through the skin and lungs. Chronic toxicity includes adverse effects
to the liver, nerves, bone development, and possibly cancer. Environmental
effects: It is moderately toxic to birds and highly toxic to fish. Persistence:
The half-life in soil is less than 7 days. Despite its short half-life in soil
and in aquatic environments, the compound has been detected in groundwater
supplies in at least five States and in
Fluridone (Sonar): 1-Methyl-3-phenyl-5- [3-(trifluoro-methyl) phenyl]-4(1H)- pyridinone Exposure routes: Fluridone
is toxic if inhaled, ingested, or absorbed through the skin. Acute toxicity: Fluridone is considered an immediate health hazard. It has
low acute toxicity via ingestion: an amount equivalent to a scoop of ice cream
administered to each of four kindergarteners would kill two of them (LD50
5000mg/kg). Chronic toxicity includes adverse effects to eyes, liver, kidney, and
testicular atrophy. Studies by Dynamac Corportation for the EPA reported fluridone
to be a carcinogen. Environmental toxicity: Fluridone
is moderately toxic to birds, fish and aquatic invertebrates. Trees and shrubs
growing in treated water may develop chlorosis (loss
of green pigment). Irrigation with treated water may result in injury to
plants. Persistence: It has a half-life of 5-60 days, depending on conditions.
It must remain in contact with target plants for 45 days to be effective. NO
DRINKING WATER STANDARDS CURRENTLY EXIST2. Breakdown products: Fluridone degrades to a number of intermediates, including
n-methylformamide(NMF), which has been shown to cause birth defects, liver
damage, spina bifida, and
deformity of the brain and internal organs. Contaminants and inerts3: The
“inert”1,2-propanediol may be harmful by ingestion,
inhalation or through skin contact, and cause skin or eye irritation.
Glyphosate (Roundup, Rodeo): N-(phosphonomethyl)
glycine. Exposure routes: Glyphosate
is toxic if inhaled, ingested, or absorbed through the skin. Acute toxicity: Glyphosate has low acute toxicity via ingestion: an amount
equivalent to a scoop of ice cream administered to each of four kindergarteners
would kill two of them (LD50 5000mg/kg). Chronic toxicity: Miscarriages,
premature births, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Environmental toxicity: It is a broad
spectrum, non-selective herbicide, that affects
non-target and native plants. It is slightly toxic to birds, fish and aquatic
invertebrates. Persistence: Glyphosate is moderately
persistent in soil, with field half-lives of up to174 days. Its half-life in
pond water ranges from 12 days to 10 weeks. It is extensively metabolized by
some plants, while remaining intact in others. Current MCL2 drinking water
standards are 0.7mg/l. Breakdown products: Transformation products include
formaldehyde, a known carcinogen, and N-nitrosoglyphosate.
Contaminants and inerts3: Of serious concern is the inert ingredient in the Glyphosphate formulation called polyoxyethyleneamine
(POEA), a surfactant. This and possible other “inerts”
are moderately toxic and appeared to be the cause of death and illness in
reported cases of accidental poisoning. They can cause a wide range of
respiratory, cardiovascular, reproductive and central nervous system problems.
A 1999 study by the American Cancer Society found elevated incidence of the
cancer, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
1. It is a violation of Massachusetts State Law to make false or fraudulent
claims about pesticides, including verbally. “12) All persons shall: c) Make no
false or fraudulent claims. The term fraud includes misrepresentation
personally or through the media, falsified records, invoices or reports,” -333
CMR 13.03 Massachusetts Pesticide Regulations.
2. ”The law requires EPA to determine safe levels of
chemicals in drinking water which do or may cause health problems. These
non-enforceable levels, based solely on possible health risks and exposure, are
called Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLG). Based on this MCLG, EPA has set
an enforceable standard called a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL). MCLs are set as close to the MCLGs
as possible, considering the ability of public water systems to detect and
remove contaminants using suitable current treatment technologies.” -
3. Be aware that chemicals listed as inert ingredients
can be highly toxic. Inert ingredients may comprise up to 99% of a pesticide
product, but are considered trade secrets so are not disclosed. “Since neither
the federal law nor the regulations define the term "inert" on the
basis of toxicity, hazard or risk to humans, non-target species, or the
environment, it should not be assumed that all inert ingredients are
non-toxic,” -U.S. EPA. Alternatives Pond weed treatment should not be
considered until the creation and implementation of a watershed management plan
to address the root causes of the pond’s excess eutrophication.
It is primarily the nitrogen and phosphorus in run-off from lawn fertilizer,
atmospheric deposition , and septic system releases
which cause excess growth of weeds and algae in the first place. Reducing the
source of nutrients coming into a pond will alleviate excess weed and algae
growth. Consideration should be given to the “no action” option with the
understanding that aquatic vegetation provides critical habitat for pond
organisms, which could be adversely affected by its removal. Removal of weeds
can also stimulate growth of algae, which take advantage of the nutrients no
longer sequestered by the plants. Some sustainable solutions to weed
infestation include 1) biological controls which will establish an equilibrium and keep the weeds in check, or 2) a
harvesting program to clear the water and reduce the total organic matter,
which will slow or reverse the natural eutrophication
process. The harvested material, if not contaminated with heavy metals or
herbicides, can be used as feed for municipal and commercial composting
systems. Such programs should be evaluated for their impact on overall pond
health and environmental impact. One approach being developed for this season
is a comprehensive hand-pulling program. For information on alternatives,
contact Jackson Madnick in Wayland, at jacksonmadnick@msn.com, or James
Straub, Program Director of Mass. Dept. of Environmental Management, Lakes and
Ponds Program 508-792-7716. False Safety Claims When considering the use of
herbicides to control invasive weeds, remember that information provided by
herbicide applicators on effectiveness and safety involves a conflict of
interest. In addition, there is a higher profit margin involved with pesticide and
herbicide applications than with manual labor. Always obtain your health,
environmental, and effectiveness information from independent sources such as
the EPA, the National Institutes of Health, or other non-industry funded
studies. Then make sure you have thoroughly explored alternatives and have
weighed the risks you are taking as well as those you might be imposing on
other people and the environment. The issue of false-safety claims by pesticide
manufacturers and applicators is quite serious. The United States General
Accounting Office (GAO) was charged with reviewing the information that pesticides industry- manufacturers, distributors, and
professional applicators- provides to the public about the safety of its
products. They found that the pesticides industry continues to make prohibited
claims that its products are safe or nontoxic. The GAO also found that EPA has
yet to establish an effective program to determine whether pesticide
manufacturers and distributors are, in fact, complying with requirements. It is
illegal in the State of
Posted
by JPBass on 2002 PM:
Jon,
I guess to sum all that up what you're saying is poison isn't very healthy.
Especially when dumped into the water. I couldn't agree more.
Those big weed eating machines, although not as effective and more time
consuming, are a far better solution. Introducing sterile grass carp is another
solution. Just not too many of them like they did in Mahopac.
__________________
http://www.renegadebassmasters.com
Posted
by Bigredfishing on 2002 PM:
Wow, excellent reply. Very informative. It is amazing to me that some people dont realize that pesticides=herbicides=weed treatments
I was doing some research, and have found that chemical treatments effect a
fish's growth rate negatively. I think i am going to
do an independent study on this, sometime in the next two years.
Also, whenever you get a chance, look up the effects of golf course maintainance chemicals, on ajoining
waterways. BaaaaaD stuff.
Lance
Posted
by one more Cast on 2002 AM:
thanks for the info on
the pond took a trip out sunday fished from 5 to8 pm i cought 5 lm .one got off .all
on strike king floator it seemed like nobody was
reeling um in but me they were slaming it. i will be going back. oh sene some prety
big carp swimming around what kind of bait do they like. THANKS BIGRED
Posted
by Bigredfishing on 2002 AM:
Welcome to the board.
Where are you from? what do you normally fish for?
I am glad you got a chance to hit up that pond. It is definetly
a numbers pond, with size only a hit or miss.
There are some big carp in that pond, and they are skiddish.
I personally havent fished for those carp, but i would imagine that they would take a small 1/16oz jig.
Oh yeah, there are two monster snapping turtles in the pond, and they are agressive. I have actually lost two senkos
to them.
Let me know next time you go there.
Oh yeah, if you see a dark blue
Lance
Posted
by one more Cast on 2002 AM:
THE
whats up red i live in roesselville. i
love fishing for larg mouth bass big lunkers .if u know what i mean. if u see a white ford tempo around thats
me my name is brian see ya
out on the pond.look for the guy with the bent rood
hauling in the fish.
Posted
by Explorer on 2002 AM:
Red, Thanks for the
directions to the pond. I wasn't sure where to park when I first got there. The
fishing there was great. I was only there for about 2 hours but I landed 5 LM,
all on Senkos. I did come across one of those big
snappers, mean looking I tell you. I will probably be heading there this
afternoon.
Posted
by hammer on 2002 PM:
WEED
NOT THAT KIND SILLY! I
HAVE ONLY ONE THING TO SAY AQUACIDE!!!!
__________________
hammer
Posted
by donw40 on 2002 PM:
copper sulfate
Lakes around me, glenmere comes to mind, use copper sulfate to control weed
growth.
does anyone here know what type of threat that might
pose?
dw