For what it's worth, what's called safe now is often later determined to be unsafe, and the state of California recently made some noise adding Roundup (the original glyphosate) to a list it keeps of chemicals that "probably cause cancer" in humans.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06...

I'm not on any team, but an herbicide is usually my fifth or sixth choice in dealing with weeds. It strikes me as common sense that one should try other options first before resorting to chemical control.

Thanks, RpR. I have one store supposedly checking into ordering Ortho's nutsedge killer spray for me.

For the record, there are no "teams" of people on this website or anywhere else. This is collectivism and it's a disproven, outdated, counterproductive way of thinking. Individuals have total ontological primacy insofar as the individual is the smallest minority on earth and must be qua the individual. In other words, you have individuals without groups (teams/neighborhoods/societies) but no groups without individuals to comprise them.

All that said, everything is a chemical and anything carbon-based is by definition organic.

Can you explain what you mean with the last sentence? I get the literal sense but I'm wondering how it applies to weed control.

Is it a reference to my comment about chemical control? Because the steps I would take before using chemical control are actions (not chemicals) that do not involve herbicides (regulated as such, recognized as such). That was what I meant to say. It is the standard meaning as it relates to weed control, and pest control too for that matter, to describe those tools. Some gray areas, sure.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

I do have a bottle of Roundup for one very specific application: the Oxalis weeds that sprout right next to my spiniest cacti. I will diligently work with tweezers every time I water a plant, but after a few months of tweezing and getting spines in my fingers, I eventually give up when I realize the only way that thing is going away is if I pull it out by the roots, which realistically isn't going to happen, given the guardian's ferocity. So I employ chemical warfare. Which is a really effective solution when done carefully, by the way. But just because the weapon is available doesn't mean I use it often. I pull or cut 99.9%+ of the weeds I encounter and endorse judicious mulching and regular inspection as helpful in a preventive sort of way.

Yes, I can.

"Everything is a chemical" is a bit obscure these days but it means that any substance composed of matter which has definite, measurable qualities is a chemical. I'm most definitely not a chemist but I used to date one (lol) so if anyone is trained in chemistry please feel free to correct me where I'm wrong. "Chemical" is a popular term that is a bit imprecise.

In other words, the device on which you are reading this message is comprised of chemicals. Your skin, hair, teeth, and bones are comprised of chemicals. Wherever your feet are resting right now--they are resting on, in, and around chemicals.

Whatever you last ate--that was full of chemicals. Your home, automobile, and relatives are all made of chemicals.

The second part, "anything which is carbon-based is by definition organic," follows from the first and basically means that any chemicals which contain carbon are organic. Nightshade will kill you--but it's organic and all natural. Poison ivy will burn your genitals and your eyes into oblivion, but it, too, is all natural and organic. Some kinds of arsenic are organic. Cobra venom is...you guessed it...organic!

The larger point is to say that when people speak of "chemicals" as being negative things in gardening they are ALWAYS using too broad of a brush and they ALWAYS don't realize it. The flipside of the same coin is to point out that when people use "organic" or "all natural" as positive attributes they are doing the same thing, just in the other direction.

Jai, I think you are confusing the meaning of the term "organic" in the chemical sense and the meaning of "organic" in the gardening sense.

Well, I guess we now need a definition of "organic" in the gardening sense to complete the convoluted discussion. Anyone?

Weedwhacker said:Jai, I think you are confusing the meaning of the term "organic" in the chemical sense and the meaning of "organic" in the gardening sense.

No. One meaning is derived from the other. They are not independent, nor are they coterminous.

Jai, I'm having a hard time trying to decipher what point you are trying to get across. All the definitions of organic or chemical are fine and dandy, but the discussion was about using chemical weedkillers. I think we all know what people are talking about when they discuss the use of chemical versus organic/manual methods. I'm not being critical of your discussion, just genuinely confused about what your point is. Perhaps I'm just dense.

I'm in that middle group. I don't use much in the way of herbicide, but have resorted to spraying round-up on my ever growing patch of poison ivy that I'm highly allergic to. I tried several less toxic alternatives before deciding it was better to use a small amount of a chemical that the jury is still out on, than to allow the poison ivy to keep encroaching on my world.

Whatever you say, Jai.

To clarify: my 'team' reference is in direct relationship to the various threads that have usually been started by Trish to begin discussions about differences in gardening approaches. These have been light-hearted and entertaining for the most part. Sorry I can't find one off hand to link to, but I know (for example) there has been a Team Gloves or Team No-Gloves, where members weigh in on their preference, with some always using gloves, some never using gloves, and others falling in the middle. So, I beg to differ with Jai's statement that there are no teams on this web site.

While I agree that everything is comprised of chemicals, perhaps I should have noted that I do not use any synthetic chemicals, which in my mind are quite different from naturally occurring chemicals.

And, finally, I generally agree with Miriam-Webster's definition #3 for organic: "of, relating to, yielding, or involving the use of food produced with the use of feed or fertilizer of plants or animal origin without employment of chemically formulated fertilizers, growth stimulants, antibiotics, or pesticides."

Without getting persnickity, I think most gardeners share a common concept of whether their personal practices are organic, better-living-through-chemistry, or somewhere in the middle.

So offense intended or taken. Interesting discussion.

Oh my. I went to the top of this thread to recall how it started, and fear we may have frightened off a new member, @Oldnodak, who asked a fairly simple question about weed removal. Hopefully he or she will not be put off by the rather esoteric turn this thread has taken and will continue to join in. Looking past the techno-jargon, there are actually good answers to the question at hand. If you're still with us, Oldnodak, warm welcome from the Pacific Northwest!

Indeed, welcome! On my phone sometimes it doesn't show who's new or not. Didn't mean to scare anybody off!

Jai_Ganesha said:The larger point is to say that when people speak of "chemicals" as being negative things in gardening they are ALWAYS using too broad of a brush and they ALWAYS don't realize it.

I think chemicals (as defined and described above in my own words) are negative things in gardening, to the extent they can usually be avoided. I am not using too broad a brush and I realize exactly what size brush I'm using. Much narrower than yours, apparently.

Science has provided us with all kinds of great tools to assess risk and those tools give us statistical evidence about the danger of using specific chemicals. This is not somebody's opinion, it is founded in observable fact, and useful for the public to know. Risk and danger are not binary, they exist on a continuum. And people can disagree about where to draw the line, which I think is an excellent discussion. Compare this story to the California report above, for example.

http://www.independent.co.uk/e...

Can we please avoid the reduction to absurdity and focus on meanings which are relevant to weed control, Jai? For the benefit of the original poster, if nothing else.

We are.

Whatever you say, Jai.

Philipwonel said:@RpR.
What kind and type of nutgrass killer worked good ?
I've used a few kinds, over the years, Monterrey, weed and hoe. Diluted round up. Brushed with full strength round up.
I did one kind, several times, different kind, each year.
Nutgrass, comes back, in same spots, every year. It's been, same thing, for 23 years !!!
Thanks 😁 philip
😎😎😎

I did some online research on nutgrass because it was starting to come in from my neighbor's yard. A university study showed that Roundup had no effect on it all. The best result was with a product called Sedgehammer. The study suggested that it should be mixed at twice the recommended strength on the directions. I can't find the link to the study again, but I tried this and have been fairly successful.

You need to be careful, though. Sedgehammer can be dangerous to desirable vegetation.

Buzzbea424 said:

I did some online research on nutgrass because it was starting to come in from my neighbor's yard. A university study showed that Roundup had no effect on it all. The best result was with a product called Sedgehammer. The study suggested that it should be mixed at twice the recommended strength on the directions. I can't find the link to the study again, but I tried this and have been fairly successful.

You need to be careful, though. Sedgehammer can be dangerous to desirable vegetation.

I'm generally organic around the veggie garden, but I have enough wild ivy and poison ivy to get lethal at times in controlled situations.

On the other hand, I have honey and bumble and many native bees around the yard , so must be doing something right. Mostly organic flowerbeds and dedicated pollinator beds too.

Jai_Ganesha said:Nightshade will kill you--but it's organic and all natural. Poison ivy will burn your genitals and your eyes into oblivion, but it, too, is all natural and organic. Some kinds of arsenic are organic. Cobra venom is...you guessed it...organic!

The larger point is to say that when people speak of "chemicals" as being negative things in gardening they are ALWAYS using too broad of a brush and they ALWAYS don't realize it. The flipside of the same coin is to point out that when people use "organic" or "all natural" as positive attributes they are doing the same thing, just in the other direction.

For what it's worth....
I mostly agree with you.

While I'm familiar with the larger argument, it's the end statement that I think we should always consider when reaching for our poison of choice.

Poison is bad for us.
Whether synthetic, or one of those plant based poisons....

People justify using the "organic" poisons because they will break down in a few hours of sunlight... Or whatever...

But...

Who would willingly injest poison sprinkled on their food?

Don't want it....

Although....

There was that one time.... Hooked up with a 'Deadhead'.
Ended up with head lice...
Didn't care that the shampoo was poison... Just wanted those critters gone...

stone said:
There was that one time.... Hooked up with a 'Deadhead'.
Ended up with head lice...
Didn't care that the shampoo was poison... Just wanted those critters gone...

Serves you right, LOL! And it might have been someone I knew in college.