Maple Syrup Digest article (mentioning round up) june edition.

[red maples]

This is just my opinion, and everyone is entitled to an opinion.

The Article "Crown release equal more and sweeter sap" by Keith Ruble

as the title says I believe 100%.

What I don't like about the article is the recommended use of round up. Keith says that its a "very safe herbicide". First, studies have shown (by independent studies not subsidized by Monsanto)that glysophate (round-up) may not be effective in soil but doesn't breakdown in the soil like the product claims. It ends up in soil samples, water samples etc. There is even a possible link to non-hodgkins lymphoma which has been on the increase in the last 30 years since glysophate went to market. The use of herbicides has increase by over 400% in the last 30 years. and cancer has increase probably about the same during that time as well. See a link??? Besides the fact that you are supporting the evil empire that is Monsanto. The company that gets away with murder literally and rules the white house. Need a weed killer? use Vinegar I actually think it works better.

anyway I said my piece about round-up.

If you're collaring trees properly there is no need to spray more chemicals in your woods. Not talking organic or anything like that. its just a simple thing to keep chemicals out of the woods. not that I would but, if I hired a logging company and had any round-up anywhere or even breathed about the use of it I would probably fire them on the spot.

OK said my piece.

[wiam]

I am a firm believer that less chemicals is better.

[steam maker]

Vinager works on weeds ? Really?

[red maples]

yep also works good on moss on roof shingles too.

[motowbrowne]

Agreed. Keep that stuff away from me. I do yellow-jacket removal during part of the off season. One day I show up to this guy's house, and the nest was at the peak of his garage facing the driveway. There he is wearing sandals spraying roundup on the weeds in the gravel at his feet.

First of all, gross, why would you do that? Secondly, thanks a lot, dude. Now I have to stand in that crap for an hour while I use a vacuum cleaner (no pesticides) to get rid of your pests. I expressed my displeasure with his choice of when to apply that junk, and he was like "oh, don't worry, it's non-toxic". Yeah, right.

[super sappy]

I could not agree more red maples ,And Wiam Aparently studies have been done world wide that show round up chemicals in womens breast milk . Links to parkinsons etc ... once you hear this stuff it is hard for me to buy veggies and meat that I do not know were it comes from .I buy from my neighbors or grow my own .My 2 cents no chemicals and no GMO !-ss

[WestWind]

The product doesn't claim to break down in soil; it claims to bind to soil which renders it inactive. Thus, it's not surprising to find it in soil samples, it's just that it no longer kills vegetation. Also, glyphosate is no longer covered by patent and it's widely available in generic form from other companies such that buying most formulations doesn't support the evil Monsanto... I, too, am concerned about its use because I use it in my sugerbush which was overrun, infested, by buckthorn, honeysuckle and prickly ash. If you just cut them without treating the stumps they grow back ten fold, like the medusa of greek mythology. My fight isn't over but if I can effectively substitute something else, I'm interested. Brad, do you think I can substitute vinegar? Currently, I use concentrated/undiluted/40% glyphosate in a squirt bottle to spray a few drops on the cut stumps; this has worked well but I would switch in a heartbeat if something else would work as well.

[batsofbedlam]

Try:
1 gallon vinegar
2 cups Epsom Salt
1/4 cup Dawn Dish Soap (the blue original)

It will kill anything you spray it on.

[3GoatHill]

If there was some way I could make money from selling poison ivy, I'd be a millionaire! I have used roundup to kill poison ivy, it is very effective. If I didn't use it, I'd never be able to be in the woods in the summer. I do not like using it, I used it on my stone driveway last year. The areas on the driveway that didn't get sprayed are lush and green. The parts that got sprayed last year are growing back, but it's yellow and seems stunted. I'm no scientist, but that would seem to tell me that the stuff hangs around a long time. If there was something else out there that's effective I would be using it in a heartbeat! I heard about using vinegar, salt and dish soap, but I wonder if one could get some unwanted attention by not using products consistent with labeling.

[Sunday Rock Maple]

Try:
1 gallon vinegar
2 cups Epsom Salt
1/4 cup Dawn Dish Soap (the blue original)

It will kill anything you spray it on.

I should mix up a batch for the kids student loans.......

[Loch Muller]

That is an interesting mix of vinegar, salt and dish soap. I'll have to try that out sometime. The thing about Glyphosate is that it is a systemic herbicide, meaning that you can spray it on leaves or fresh cuts in a plant and it will travel throughout the plant. My memory is a little fuzzy on all this now, but I think it works through some sort of protein inhibition (enzymes and all that stuff we forgot about since biology 101). As such it generally is much more effective than vinegar based solutions since it kills the tissues in the roots of plants preventing them from re-sprouting. I was part of a study using several different brands of "natural" herbicides on roadside vegetation once. The citric acid and vinegar type ones only killed the tissues they contacted directly, these ones had to be applied to vegetation when it was just emerging in the spring to produce any kind of result.

Personally I only use glyphosate when it is absolutely necessary (ie. invasive plants or noxious weeds) and I do not use it at all in my gardens, kind of like not taking antibiotics for a common cold I guess. As with any chemical, natural or synthetic, read the label recommendations on application and protective equipment, just because it is natural doesn't mean you want it on your skin and in your lungs.

[madmapler]

Besides the fact that you are supporting the evil empire that is Monsanto. The company that gets away with murder literally and rules the white house. And the FDA.

[Clarkfield Farms]

Nothing is innocent OR "inert." Vinegar, bleach, soaps (including detergents), salt - I've heard them for years, too, but do you stop to think of what THOSE "do to the soil?" Seriously, SALT? Please remember your ancient history class... Vinegar? Ah, so it has no effect on soil pH or soil organisms... Ditto soaps, detergents, and bleach.

What ever happened to elbow grease, cultivation, "WEEDING," all that sort of stuff? I know, we live in an age where fewer suffer from financial/material poverty but now nearly everyone suffers from time poverty. Drugs fix bad life choices, chemicals make pretty lawns, yadda yadda yadda. But the cure is worse than the disease.

For those who want to flame, this tongue-in-cheek break from the Monsanto drama you've been engaged in has been brought to you by your sponsor. And no, I don't think any good thing about Monsanto, so there. :D

[collinsmapleman2012]

Just stating what I know, not really trying to have an opinion.
there shouldn't be roundup in your vegetables, because it kills most vegetables, and the roundup ready trait is a field crop trait at this point. glyphosate is (in herbicide terms) a relatively safe chemical, and works because it stops the plant from being able to synthesize amino acid, so it dies quickly. the roundup ready glyphosate resistance trait (makes the plant resistant to glyphosate, so spraying is possible) is pretty amazing in farming terms, because of the sheer effectiveness of roundup. stacked genetics and roundup ready corn and soy could be the reason that many people can put food on the table, because it allows higher yields and spreads costs. the world population is expected to double by 2050, so many agriculture companies are aiming to increase yields while decreasing inputs, such as fertilizer, water, etc.
In the sugarbush you also need very little roundup to do the job, and your woods might benefit greatly.

[madmapler]

Just stating what I know, not really trying to have an opinion.
there shouldn't be roundup in your vegetables, because it kills most vegetables, and the roundup ready trait is a field crop trait at this point. glyphosate is (in herbicide terms) a relatively safe chemical, and works because it stops the plant from being able to synthesize amino acid, so it dies quickly. the roundup ready glyphosate resistance trait (makes the plant resistant to glyphosate, so spraying is possible) is pretty amazing in farming terms, because of the sheer effectiveness of roundup. stacked genetics and roundup ready corn and soy could be the reason that many people can put food on the table, because it allows higher yields and spreads costs. the world population is expected to double by 2050, so many agriculture companies are aiming to increase yields while decreasing inputs, such as fertilizer, water, etc.
In the sugarbush you also need very little roundup to do the job, and your woods might benefit greatly.
What you actually know is what many believe to be true and I truly don't mean to offend, however, if you would look at some of the info available such as the links listed here, you may know a little more. Don't hesitate to type Monsanto or GMOS into your search box either.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENmc9kHnvbo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_AHLDXF5aw They're kinda lengthy but theres plenty of shorter videos on youtube on this subject as well. Thanks.

[motowbrowne]

The thing about roundup-ready crops is that weeds are constantly evolving. Same with insect pesticides. The targeted species can evolve to be resistant to the poison. People talk all day long about how roundup is a "relatively harmless" herbicide. Well when roundup stops working they'll go right up the ladder to 2-4 D. And so on and so forth.

It's a losing battle. Cover crops, balanced soil, and cultivation is the solution, not mindless herbicide application.

[BreezyHill]

So I am curious...how much is a person willing to spend on food? To cultivate a crop in todays world costs in the neighbor hood of$75 to $85 per hour when one takes in the cost of equipment, labor, fuel, etc. The days of the tractor costing $2500 is long gone.

I did a small scale experiment with a college intern. She wanted to see how much of a difference in time it would be to cultivate vs herbicide application for a vegetable crop. To date the time for spray was less than 1 hr at a cost of $37.85. (labor, product & equipment). To date intern time is in excess of 9.5 hours. The cost of the time is figured at $12.50 due to wages, taxes, WC, etc.

The problem that I see as a long term agricultural specialist has seen that in several ag industries, the videos, papers and other reports are not always done in a factual real time or real life basis.
Point in case...why is a salt classified as an antibiotic? Since it makes a better environment for one type of bacteria at the expense of a second bacteria why is it called a antibacterial product? It does not kill the bacteria it just provides an environment that the competing bacteria will flourish. For nearly 30 years this product was not approved for use as a production improval tool due to a non-factual belief that it was a antibacterial product.

This is like stating that banding fertilizer is anti weed because the weeds do not have the same access to the fertilizer as does the intended user of the fertilizer.

Did you know for males that getting out of bed a 6 am increases your chance of death over 11am? Since more people are killed in auto accidents in rush hour it is then safe to say that working second shift will increase your life span.

When reading a report or study one must take in to affect all factors to achieve a finding that is accurate. The article that was published about the third world country that had the village that nearly starved to death. They were provided seed, fertilizer, spray and equipment by a seed company to increase their food production as a model for the country. The first year they produced enough crop for their needs and the neighboring village. The second saw a slight decrease in production and the third was a bust. This was used as proff that the seed company sold seed that was GMO and it would not produce in concurrent seasons. Now where did it state that the use of fertilizer was stopped in the third year and that the spray was reduced in the second year and eliminated in the third year.

Just yesterday I spent 3 hours reading my herbicides product label to calculate the correct amount to use. The rate needed to be adjusted in three separate fields due to the texture of the soil and the organic matter percentage in the three fields. Doing the math to arrive at these rates took about an hour to calculate the sprayer pressure, ground speed and the correct nozzle size to achieve the three different rates necessary to achieve the different levels of product to apply per acre of one tank mixture of product.

When talking roundup or glyphosate products there is such a label and the over use of product is where 99.99% of users fall. The kill level of the product does not increase with the increase of pints per acre. The inclusion rate of 42% is not the same as 50%. The hardware store product at 20% will do the same job as the 50% certified applicator product it is just packaged in a manor that is less likely to be abused and incorrectly applied.

Can vinegar be used to kill many of the sugar bush weeds? YES
Can you make your own vinegar from sap at the end of the season? YES
Can the use of sprays be eliminated? YES

Why don't we? Because of the simple fact that there are only 1440 minutes in a day of which 480 are for sleep. When farmers are less than 1/4 of 1% of this countries population in 2012, there is only so much food that a single person can produce in a manual manor. In 2012 these few people planted 96.4 million acres. In 1937 2.2million farmers planted 97 million acres of corn. The main tractor of the time was the Ford N series that pulled a 2 row planter with many farms using single row planters and some still hand planting. In 2012 the largest planter was 36 row unit. This machine operated by one person could plant up to 38 acres per hour, while the Ford 9N could plant up to 1.2 acres per hour.

I have spent many hours on a Massey Harris 44 Super cultivating corn. I thought it would be better than spraying...I could not produce the tonnage needed to maintain our cattle herd, cultivating. I will stand behind any person that wants to cultivate and I will even help them if I have the time; but I will not fault the farmer that uses the tools at his disposal to produce food while following all safety and labeling procedures.

So if spraying in the bush or anywhere. Read the label and realize that an acre is 43560 square feet. if a honey suckle bush covers 25 square feet of ground use the spray needed to do that area. Not the surface area of the entire bush...which can easily be 5 times that amount.

Ben

[TonyL]

So I am curious...how much is a person willing to spend on food? To cultivate a crop in todays world costs in the neighbor hood of$75 to $85 per hour when one takes in the cost of equipment, labor, fuel, etc. The days of the tractor costing $2500 is long gone.

I did a small scale experiment with a college intern. She wanted to see how much of a difference in time it would be to cultivate vs herbicide application for a vegetable crop. To date the time for spray was less than 1 hr at a cost of $37.85. (labor, product & equipment). To date intern time is in excess of 9.5 hours. The cost of the time is figured at $12.50 due to wages, taxes, WC, etc.

The problem that I see as a long term agricultural specialist has seen that in several ag industries, the videos, papers and other reports are not always done in a factual real time or real life basis.
Point in case...why is a salt classified as an antibiotic? Since it makes a better environment for one type of bacteria at the expense of a second bacteria why is it called a antibacterial product? It does not kill the bacteria it just provides an environment that the competing bacteria will flourish. For nearly 30 years this product was not approved for use as a production improval tool due to a non-factual belief that it was a antibacterial product.

This is like stating that banding fertilizer is anti weed because the weeds do not have the same access to the fertilizer as does the intended user of the fertilizer.

Did you know for males that getting out of bed a 6 am increases your chance of death over 11am? Since more people are killed in auto accidents in rush hour it is then safe to say that working second shift will increase your life span.

When reading a report or study one must take in to affect all factors to achieve a finding that is accurate. The article that was published about the third world country that had the village that nearly starved to death. They were provided seed, fertilizer, spray and equipment by a seed company to increase their food production as a model for the country. The first year they produced enough crop for their needs and the neighboring village. The second saw a slight decrease in production and the third was a bust. This was used as proff that the seed company sold seed that was GMO and it would not produce in concurrent seasons. Now where did it state that the use of fertilizer was stopped in the third year and that the spray was reduced in the second year and eliminated in the third year.

Just yesterday I spent 3 hours reading my herbicides product label to calculate the correct amount to use. The rate needed to be adjusted in three separate fields due to the texture of the soil and the organic matter percentage in the three fields. Doing the math to arrive at these rates took about an hour to calculate the sprayer pressure, ground speed and the correct nozzle size to achieve the three different rates necessary to achieve the different levels of product to apply per acre of one tank mixture of product.

When talking roundup or glyphosate products there is such a label and the over use of product is where 99.99% of users fall. The kill level of the product does not increase with the increase of pints per acre. The inclusion rate of 42% is not the same as 50%. The hardware store product at 20% will do the same job as the 50% certified applicator product it is just packaged in a manor that is less likely to be abused and incorrectly applied.

Can vinegar be used to kill many of the sugar bush weeds? YES
Can you make your own vinegar from sap at the end of the season? YES
Can the use of sprays be eliminated? YES

Why don't we? Because of the simple fact that there are only 1440 minutes in a day of which 480 are for sleep. When farmers are less than 1/4 of 1% of this countries population in 2012, there is only so much food that a single person can produce in a manual manor. In 2012 these few people planted 96.4 million acres. In 1937 2.2million farmers planted 97 million acres of corn. The main tractor of the time was the Ford N series that pulled a 2 row planter with many farms using single row planters and some still hand planting. In 2012 the largest planter was 36 row unit. This machine operated by one person could plant up to 38 acres per hour, while the Ford 9N could plant up to 1.2 acres per hour.

I have spent many hours on a Massey Harris 44 Super cultivating corn. I thought it would be better than spraying...I could not produce the tonnage needed to maintain our cattle herd, cultivating. I will stand behind any person that wants to cultivate and I will even help them if I have the time; but I will not fault the farmer that uses the tools at his disposal to produce food while following all safety and labeling procedures.

So if spraying in the bush or anywhere. Read the label and realize that an acre is 43560 square feet. if a honey suckle bush covers 25 square feet of ground use the spray needed to do that area. Not the surface area of the entire bush...which can easily be 5 times that amount.

Ben

Excellent. ^^^^^^ Thanks for being the voice of reason.

It's pretty easy to jump on the "no chemical" bandwagon, at least it is until you know the whole story.

[happy thoughts]

I have had no strong opinion about roundup and GMO's but have been generally accepting for many of the reasons stated by Ben/Breezy hill. Feeding a large and growing population cheaply is enough of a reason, at least on the surface. And though probably not completely safe it is much safer than older alternatives. Two other reasons that make round up and roundup ready plants attractive for row crops is the need for less tilling which in turn helps decrease erosion and runoff. This alone makes it environmentally beneficial.

But doing a little more reading and as someone else already mentioned, weeds are becoming resistant to roundup, in particular one species common to the south and midwest that grows so large it is a tractor killer. Older and more toxic herbicides like 2-4 D are being added to roundup to combat them. And intense plowing may again be needed to control the worst infestations. Thus we are headed back to square one again.

Also, many round up ready seeds (GMO"S) produce sterile or low fertility seeds so new seeds must be purchased each crop season. That increases costs to farmers who once saved a portion of the current crop for next years planting. Thus GMO plants often produce an unsustainable crop. IMHO, that can't be regarded as a good thing.

Re vinegar- Sounds good but as Clarkfarms said, nothing is inert. As an acid, I have to question it's large scale use on field crops. It can't be any better than acid rain or coal mine runoff for our streams and plantlife. it is also likely to change the soil acidity and affect the beneficial microbes that contribute to soil health. As for salt, I wouldn't use it anywhere near my garden including my maples. Ever see dead trees where road salt has been used?

@ Sean, not trying to single you out and no offense intended but the authors of your links are not without controversy. It pays to be skeptical of both sides, One has had regulatory action taken for making false health claims. Both have skin in the same game as Monsanto and are just as hungry for the green in your wallet. JMHO, but I find their science skimpy and their motivations less than trustworthy.

With that said, would I still use roundup? Probably but I think this topic deserves keeping an eye on for future re-evaluation. There are no miracle cures or free lunches.

[markcasper]

I hate using chemicals and herbicides, but they are a necessary evil. We have had 3 rainstorms in the last 4 weeks delivering 2-4 inches of rain in a short amount of time. There are gullies and ditches on every farm around and ditches in places I have never seen. The no-til aspects of using glyphosate do help with soil erosion, but I know of a few "no-till" fields in my neighborhood, the ditches are deep enough for a tractor tire to be buried in.

One big problem around here is the loss of dairy cattle over the years and everyone jumping on the corn and soybean wagon. No cattle means no hay and alfalfa any more and that has really increased the soil loss in my area. There have been countless acres of CRP and very marginal ground sprayed and planted to corn, ground that should be pasture. The water quality efforts in my area are going the wrong way and much of it is government induced.

We do not use GMO products any more. The concept of them yielding more to feed a growing population is a fallacy. The single fact of them not being tested for safety and our cattle consuming them bothered us. The safety tests were left up to the bitoech company courtesy of the FDA and USDA. (can you say fox guarding the henhouse.) It hard to believe anyone anymore. We have planted both kinds and believe me the GMO does not yield significantly more, in most cases it is less.

[markcasper]

Also, many round up ready seeds (GMO"S) produce sterile or low fertility seeds so new seeds must be purchased each crop season. That increases costs to farmers who once saved a portion of the current crop for next years planting. Thus GMO plants often produce an unsustainable crop. IMHO, that can't be regarded as a good thing.. When you buy a bag of GMO seed, you must sign a statement that you will not save the seed for replanting or resale, and #2 that you will not do any testing of the seed whatsoever. The reason is because that gene in the seed does not belong to you and is under patent. You are at the mercy of the biotech company who pateneted the particular gene. In the case of triple stacked and multi traited varieties, the patents could be held by numerous companies. Just thought of a company making it illegal to plant a seed is scary.

[madmapler]

@ Sean, not trying to single you out and no offense intended but the authors of your links are not without controversy. It pays to be skeptical of both sides, One has had regulatory action taken for making false health claims. Both have skin in the same game as Monsanto and are just as hungry for the green in your wallet. JMHO, but I find their science skimpy and their motivations less than trustworthy.

. I did a quik you tube search for those articles and honestly, I did'nt have the time to watch them through. I just wanted to point out that there is sufficient evidence/information available to raise serious doubts about the safety of round up(glyphosate). You can disregard the information and/or the presenters of such if you wish. Frankly, most do. However, keeping an open mind, if you were to take the time to research this topic and others related to it you would find the info hard to deny. I'm not a fanatic. My investigations were prompted by my interest in health coupled by conversations with members of my gym.The argument presented by breezyhill and others I agree, is valid....... This is all that is left of a much longer response that I tried to post and apparently lost!!! I HATE THAT!!!:mad:.... I have'nt got the heart or the time to type it all over. In short, I don't believe that genetic modification or chemical enhancement are the answer. Go back just thirty years and you would'nt believe the disorders and the frequency of such that are present today. ADD, Altsheimers, frequent cancers,... Food allergys!!!? All tied into the way food is produced today. Do a search on farmed meat. Chicken, beef, pork. Is inhumanity to be justified for the sake of feeding the masses cheaply? People who are starving to death are'nt dying from a lack of food, its more a lack of caring. We're being led down the wrong road. If and when enough people take notice it will be as the bumper sticker says.." If the people lead, the leaders will follow" Its where the money is.:)

[batsofbedlam]

If their was a like button, I would hit it for the previous response.

[BreezyHill]

Lets go back 30 years...1984. We were in another recession, the price of diesel was 79 cents in spring and by summer time it was nearly $1.50. There was a devastating health epidemic called AIDS and kids respected their teachers. A Day Dreamer(ADD), Always Dreaming of Hot Dames(ADHD) was cured by a boot in the but not drugs.
I was just graduating high school and was in the rescue squad. My grand father had died three years earlier of complications from Altshimers. Our town was in the Genius Book of records for the most bars per capita in the world. I was acutely aware of how many people in our town were sick as we were transporting people to the hospital on every time our team was on duty. I also knew where we took the patients that had mental issues....they had their own hospital. The older patients would be transported to yet another hospital because there was a "old folks home on the grounds", and yet another for those that had cancer issues. The Soldiers Home was expanding and we would transport patients to that facility if they were veterans.
Local farmers were going to schools provided by Cornell Cooperative Extension to get certifications to use herbicides because farmers were coming to the industry with now knowledge of safe practaces and to attend production classes for livestock since the world was growing and would need more food to not starve. This was the tenth year anniversary of the introduction of Roundup and weed control was in a new phase of its youth. Atrazine, 2-4-D, and Parquet were no longer the Trifecta the new kid on the block, Roundup was making NoTill and spring burn back common place in corn planting. The Ag news had articles like " Local farmer stops the theft of truck loads of top soil per field".

Oddly enough this was the start of the change in agriculture. "Super Farms" were starting to appear with the recent introduction of 150+ hp tractors and MFD units. One man could do more than ever before. The old stand by IH's 56 4 row corn planter was being left behind by the new 8 and 12 row units. Tractors had duals and farmers had less of a risk of skin cancer due to AC in the tractors, that had evolved greatly in the last 8 years.

Today the vast majority of farms from 1984 are sold, retired or rented by the Mega size farms of today. The maximization of equipment and labor is a major key to profit; the other key to profit is animal comfort.

Todays farmers know that a happy comfortable animal will eat more feed and thus have a quicker, higher return on investment. Thus the use of rubber matresses and sand beds for cows is common place on dairy farms. Fans cool and circulate fresh air in cattle housing and feed areas. The cows are feed three and four times a day; while another three to four times every day the feed is pushed up to stimulate eating. The farms nutritionist check the rations and feed ingredients monthly and on some farms weekly, to balance the diet of the cows They have their nails(Hooves) done at least once a year and some twice, they get sex from the best stud that is available in the country, and their mammary system is cleaned four to six times a day.

On our farm our Show String of Angus cattle are brought into the barn during hot summer days where they lay on rubber mats that are covered with sawdust or straw. There are fans to circulate fresh air to cool them and we also provide the best bull for their sexual enjoyment. This bull often costs between $50 and $125 per insemination. They have a visit once a year from their Doctor and once a year they get a personal pedicure. Bulls that are not to be used or sold as breeding stock are feed the best diet to produce high quality Angus Beef. They are provided with as much feed as they will eat every day, they are provided with shade from hot sun and fresh running water. This is to make their days as happy as possible so that they will gain as fast as possible...more profit.
Unhappy, hot, wet or dirty animals don't eat. This costs money, thus less profit. It would be like having a delaval 75 vacuum pump and only letting it produce 15" of vacuum on the sugar bush; even thou it will do 27" and provide more sap to make a bigger profit, but the producer does not take the time to eliminate the vacuum control unit.

So please don't lump all farmers into a group. The photo or video that is posted of the one bad apple of a bushel is not the true and realistic place that food is produced. The reality of life is that if farmers don't breed the cows, hatch the chickens, plant the crops, tap the trees, there would be no "unhappy animals" & no food for the masses to eat. There would only be farmers that have the know how to produce food for themselves and the rest of the population would starve due to a lack of food.

Care feeds the soul, food feeds the body.

So which came first the egg or the chicken?

The best bumper sticker is the one that says" NO FARMS NO FOOD" followed in a close second by "NO FARMS NO BEER" and is followed in a tie for third by..."HAVE YOU THANKED A VET TODAY" & HAVE YOU THANKED A FARMER TODAY"

This fair season stop by the 4-H barn and visit with the kids and learn what farming is all about. And if at the Schaghticoke Fair the week before labor day come see our display and visit with the three boys with the Angus in Barn #3 . We have plenty of chairs and you can see farming from the other side of the fence. I guarantee that if you spend an hour of time you will witness at least a few shocking questions asked by the part of the public that has no idea where food comes from. Who said that education cant be entertaining?

Ben

[markcasper]

It just is not that profitable to be in the business of feeding people to exist.

[BreezyHill]

That is very true.

Beef farming until recently was not very profitable. Right now, a farm can turn a profit raising feeder cattle...with the price of grain it is hard to justify finishing cattle for what we charge for sides of beef cut and vac wrapped. It is way cheaper than at the store but with the economy in the hole it is...people just don't have the $$$ and are getting by on less, and less.

Economicly the US needs to be more oil self sufficient so that we can keep our $$$ at home. Every time a barrel of oil goes up it is just more $$$ that leaves this country to never come back.

If we had manufacturing to make goods the oil suppliers wanted then we would get it back but they all left with the NAFTA Agreement.

Making food that our tax $$$ sends as aid to other countries is just as bad. The $$$ never comes back.

We have to get those $$$ back and the only product I can think of that we can offer is farm products, with syrup being at the top of the list.

Make a market abroad and we will be in the Captains Chair!

Ben

[3GoatHill]

The reality of life is that if farmers don't breed the cows, hatch the chickens, plant the crops, tap the trees, there would be no "unhappy animals" & no food for the masses to eat. There would only be farmers that have the know how to produce food for themselves and the rest of the population would starve due to a lack of food.



Ben

Well put. And don't forget that the "evil" farmer feeds his family the same food as he feeds yours.

[GeneralStark]

Kind of strange that a thread about using Glyphosate in a sugarbush in association with girdling has turned into a diatribe regarding the changing of the times in cow farming. Perhaps we can back on topic here but I kind of doubt it. It's called the maple trader, not the dairy trader.

[red maples]

yes it is strange. but at the same time it does go hand in hand with bigger better faster. The development of chemical resistant plants at what cost... our health.

I would like to hear of just one person that hasn't been effected by cancer in one form or another in the past 10 years. By that I mean know someone, or anything for that matter that has had or died form cancer. I have lost a dog my wife's aunt and uncle, my Father in-law had a skin cancer inside his nose, my uncle had pre-cancer stuff in colon, my aunt had a pre-cancer stuff removed from her colon, my other uncle's husband has prostate cancer. Just lost my Mother a month ago from a three year batter with cancer. Had a friend with skin cancer. I am sure there are many more just can't think of them right now.

We keep talking about a cure, a cure, a cure.

Well when the roof leaks you put a bucket under the drip for now right? but eventually you have to fix the roof. Well that bucket for the cancer "INDUSTRY" drip is now a Multi-Trillion dollar waterfall in to the biggest gathering tank you could imagine that feeds the Pharmacutical Industry, many CEO's of cancer awareness, Hospitals, cancer treatment centers, cancer research and development programs, chemical companies etc etc etc.

Right now they will never find a cure or look too far into removing what they know is bad for us or change the way food is grown and produced (on the large scale industrial Big Ag plantations) because there is tooooooooo much money to be made and too much of a cost to debate on how the dam law should be written. From feeding arsenic to chickens to making corn that has the pesticides right in it to spreading hundred's of million of pounds of herbicides that eventually end in water supplies. Just look how many years it took for BPA to be removed from so many things and funny thing ITS STILL BEING USED!!!

Our congress doesn't agree on a lot of things but they have agreed on something, the names of post offices across the USA. Why? because that's what is really important.

The bottom line is this if there is money to be made, companies like Monsanto will fight tooth and nail to keep doing what they are doing. Just like the lawsuits against labeling GMO's in VT. or any other state that has or will pass these GMO Labeling laws. OR the Congress man or woman that has its pockets lined by these sompanies on a daily basis. Say what ever you want just let us know if its in there or not and why fight it if you are so proud of what you are doing to the food. It just makes them sound all the worse like they are hiding something.... hmmmmmmm.

I am not saying that one bad farmer speakers for all of them I am just saying it only takes one kid to get hurt and dodge ball is removed from schools, swings set are taken down and monkey bars are band.


OK that's enough ranting for now.

[BreezyHill]

Two thing that many people over look is that the life expectancy of people is much longer now than 30 years ago and the health care is much different.
I had a good friend that was feeling tired and his leg would bother once a week. His wife finally nagged him into going to the doctor. He had stage three lung cancer and cancer in his femur. He was dead in 6 months. He was in his late 60's, no family history that was documented and his dad died of a heart attack. Before he died he was wondering if his dad actually had cancer since they acted very similar towards the end.

100 years ago a person could die from a simple puncture wound from stepping on a nail. Along comes penicillin and suddenly the life span jumps 10+ years; but what about all the germs that evolved and are not killed by penicillin? Should all these antibiotics be banned? We do have some super drugs on the farm now that will save an animal that has some nasty infections.

Farmer visits me at the fair both for our feed mill. He wants to pick my brain as to how to cure a bull that has lost the majority of on foot. The reason he lost the foot was he had stepped on a nail. The infection had spread and finally killed the animal.

My response was simple: Why did you not give him a shot of penicillin to stop the infection. He is certified organic. The life and comfort of the animal is not as important as saving the animals life.

So YES the all mightly dollar drives even the Organic Market Place. The Safety and health of animals and consumers is second at best.

Interesting point on the seed with the herbicide in the seed...please do tell more about that. I understand the coating on a seed that helps to stop fungus and seed rot in cold soil but never herbicides.

Funny FDA just stopped in for a visit. Fewer inspectors and more places to inspect. She now works out of her house so that she can make one or two more stops aday rather than driving to work to get the state car...which she now has to use her private car and the state and feds pay mileage on.

I am not in any saying that there are not things out there that are not wrong. Far from the point. It is simply that not all farmers are evil money grubbing rats. BUT don't think for a moment that just because a farmer doesn't use the tools at his/her disposal wisely that the food they produce is of high nutrient value or for that matter is even safe. The stores to the contrary are numerous. With the current spread of ecoli, listeria, and coccidian on some sectors of farming being what concerns me the most.

Well educate consumers from sources other than YouTube and wiki are needed. Anybody can make a video and say it was something and post it or edit it. Factual based knowledge is what is necessary to make safe decisions.

Did you know that many of the seed hybrids are mechanically produced? Does this mean that they to should be labeled a GMO?

[DrTimPerkins]

I am wading into this swamp with some trepidation......

The death rate in the U.S. is roughly half what it was 100 yrs ago. Infectious diseases killed nearly half those that died in 1900. A tiny fraction of deaths today are caused by infections (at least in the U.S.). While cancer is about 3X more prevalent now than in 1900, people also live far longer now. The average lifespan of a Roman citizen was 22-25 yrs. The average life expectancy in 1900 in the U.S. was about 47 yrs (this is about the current life expectancy in Afghanistan). It is about 80 now (in the U.S....varies somewhat due to a number of different factors). Thus the chance of spontaneous mutation is considerably higher simply due to time and due to exposure to various mutagenic agents...many of which are job-related or due to smoking or sun-exposure. The cancer rate has actually decreased since about 1990, and deaths due to accidents have fallen by half since 1900. Surprisingly the rate of cardio- and cerebro- (mostly stroke) related deaths hasn't changed since about 1900, although the death rate due to Alzheimer's and diabetes have gone up (but are still very small compared to other things).

Cancer is a very difficult thing to "cure" since it has so many causes and there are so many different types. Not saying that some day there won't be some amazing break-through that targets some basic cancer mechanism that can eliminate cancer as a mortality agent, but it certainly is not as simple as it once appeared.

So the basic story is that if you want to live longer, the chances that something else is going to get you goes up. In the case of living organisms, this is likely to be cancer. Eventually...something is going to get you.

Not meaning to stir up a hornets nest, but just to put things into perspective....a higher number of Americans have died as a result of gun violence (non-war-related) in the last 50 yrs than by all U.S. war deaths in total since the country began.

Finally, I strongly agree with Breezy about the source of information. Anyone can put whatever they wish on the internet, whether there is evidence to support it or not. How many times do we need to do studies that show there is no link between radio waves (cellular phones) and cancer, or between vaccinations and autism? Yes, there may be some link to various factors and illness, and in some cases there are certain side effects, but the actual risk is very small (whereas in the case of NOT getting vaccinated the risk can be quite high...anyone else remember Polio?). In both those cases the original studies were done very poorly or completely falsified and the work has been disproven and repudiated many times over, yet the notion that there is a link remains in the human psyche. I guess people are just compelled to seek out a concrete answer when sometimes the real answer is that we simply don't know. I am constantly astonished by how many people believe we can dilute a substance ten thousand fold, but the solution retains a "memory" of the (putative) healing nature of the original substance.

[Cabin]

Just for the record I have yet to meet a violent gun.:) People are another matter.

[markcasper]

yes it is strange. but at the same time it does go hand in hand with bigger better faster. The development of chemical resistant plants at what cost... our health.

I would like to hear of just one person that hasn't been effected by cancer in one form or another in the past 10 years. By that I mean know someone, or anything for that matter that has had or died form cancer. I have lost a dog my wife's aunt and uncle, my Father in-law had a skin cancer inside his nose, my uncle had pre-cancer stuff in colon, my aunt had a pre-cancer stuff removed from her colon, my other uncle's husband has prostate cancer. Just lost my Mother a month ago from a three year batter with cancer. Had a friend with skin cancer. I am sure there are many more just can't think of them right now.

We keep talking about a cure, a cure, a cure.

Well when the roof leaks you put a bucket under the drip for now right? but eventually you have to fix the roof. Well that bucket for the cancer "INDUSTRY" drip is now a Multi-Trillion dollar waterfall in to the biggest gathering tank you could imagine that feeds the Pharmacutical Industry, many CEO's of cancer awareness, Hospitals, cancer treatment centers, cancer research and development programs, chemical companies etc etc etc.

Right now they will never find a cure or look too far into removing what they know is bad for us or change the way food is grown and produced (on the large scale industrial Big Ag plantations) because there is tooooooooo much money to be made and too much of a cost to debate on how the dam law should be written. From feeding arsenic to chickens to making corn that has the pesticides right in it to spreading hundred's of million of pounds of herbicides that eventually end in water supplies. Just look how many years it took for BPA to be removed from so many things and funny thing ITS STILL BEING USED!!!

Our congress doesn't agree on a lot of things but they have agreed on something, the names of post offices across the USA. Why? because that's what is really important.

The bottom line is this if there is money to be made, companies like Monsanto will fight tooth and nail to keep doing what they are doing. Just like the lawsuits against labeling GMO's in VT. or any other state that has or will pass these GMO Labeling laws. OR the Congress man or woman that has its pockets lined by these sompanies on a daily basis. Say what ever you want just let us know if its in there or not and why fight it if you are so proud of what you are doing to the food. It just makes them sound all the worse like they are hiding something.... hmmmmmmm.

I am not saying that one bad farmer speakers for all of them I am just saying it only takes one kid to get hurt and dodge ball is removed from schools, swings set are taken down and monkey bars are band.


OK that's enough ranting for now.

My mother found out six weeks ago she has cancer, lymphoma I believe. The cancer in this country is off the charts!! Don't know how long or if they'll be able to stop the cancer or not, 50/50 I guess. As for getting back to glyphosate. We use it sparingly, and we raise alot of alfalfa and hay that never gets sprayed. Are we going to quit using it because my mother has cancer, probably not. Do I think about whether the cancer came form glyphosate, you bet I do! As mentioned before, its a necessary evil. We do not have the time to cultivate as many acres, nor would cultivation be wise on some of the HEL ground that we farm. If we rented it out, it'd be glyphosate every year, 2-3 times a year because all anybody wants to do around here is corn and bean utopia.

Oh, forgot to mention, my aunt found out she has skin cancer. My bosses wife who is 44 years old is also dying of colon cancer.

[markcasper]

Completely surprising how a glyphosate thread turns into a gun control thread. As it was stated "anyone can put whatever they want on the internet." I strongly question the source of there being more gun related deaths in 50 years than all US war deaths since the country began. Its getting time to put this thread to bed!!!!

[motowbrowne]

Dr. Tim, i'm not quite sure what you mean when you say "the death rate in the US is half what it used to be" last I checked, ain't none of us getting out of here alive, making the death rate, now and always 100%.

On a side note, this conversation reminded me about pirates and their effect on global warming. As it turns out, global temps have gone up as the number of pirates had gone down. Coincidence? I think not. Don't believe me, Forbes has a good article that I can't quite get a link to on here.

[motowbrowne]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikaandersen/2012/03/23/true-fact-the-lack-of-pirates-is-causing-global-warming/

There it is. Enjoy.

[DrTimPerkins]

...i'm not quite sure what you mean when you say "the death rate in the US is half what it used to be" last I checked, ain't none of us getting out of here alive, making the death rate, now and always 100%.

Death rate is defined as the number of deaths per 1,000 people (or 100,000 people) within a set period of time, typically one year. Fortunately it is not 100%. ;^)

[DrTimPerkins]

On a side note, this conversation reminded me about pirates and their effect on global warming. As it turns out, global temps have gone up as the number of pirates had gone down. Coincidence? I think not. Don't believe me, Forbes has a good article that I can't quite get a link to on here.

Oh wonderful....I knew that this thread would eventually come around to global warming. :D However I think I've had my say for the day, so global warming will have to wait for a later time.

[GV2]

RE: the Forbes link discussed earlier in this thread - bottom line "the most common error in logic: confusing simultaneity with causality".

[Cabin]

RE: the Forbes link discussed earlier in this thread - bottom line "the most common error in logic: confusing simultaneity with causality".

Arrrr

Global warming was not a problem until man learned to make fire!!! Remember if it wasn't for global warming most of our maple woods would be covered by a mile high layer of ice!

[madmapler]

Lets go back 30 years...1984. We were in another recession, the price of diesel was 79 cents in spring and by summer time it was nearly $1.50. There was a devastating health epidemic called AIDS and kids respected their teachers. A Day Dreamer(ADD), Always Dreaming of Hot Dames(ADHD) was cured by a boot in the but not drugs.
I was just graduating high school and was in the rescue squad. My grand father had died three years earlier of complications from Altshimers. Our town was in the Genius Book of records for the most bars per capita in the world. I was acutely aware of how many people in our town were sick as we were transporting people to the hospital on every time our team was on duty. I also knew where we took the patients that had mental issues....they had their own hospital. The older patients would be transported to yet another hospital because there was a "old folks home on the grounds", and yet another for those that had cancer issues. The Soldiers Home was expanding and we would transport patients to that facility if they were veterans.
Local farmers were going to schools provided by Cornell Cooperative Extension to get certifications to use herbicides because farmers were coming to the industry with now knowledge of safe practaces and to attend production classes for livestock since the world was growing and would need more food to not starve. This was the tenth year anniversary of the introduction of Roundup and weed control was in a new phase of its youth. Atrazine, 2-4-D, and Parquet were no longer the Trifecta the new kid on the block, Roundup was making NoTill and spring burn back common place in corn planting. The Ag news had articles like " Local farmer stops the theft of truck loads of top soil per field".

Oddly enough this was the start of the change in agriculture. "Super Farms" were starting to appear with the recent introduction of 150+ hp tractors and MFD units. One man could do more than ever before. The old stand by IH's 56 4 row corn planter was being left behind by the new 8 and 12 row units. Tractors had duals and farmers had less of a risk of skin cancer due to AC in the tractors, that had evolved greatly in the last 8 years.

Today the vast majority of farms from 1984 are sold, retired or rented by the Mega size farms of today. The maximization of equipment and labor is a major key to profit; the other key to profit is animal comfort.

Todays farmers know that a happy comfortable animal will eat more feed and thus have a quicker, higher return on investment. Thus the use of rubber matresses and sand beds for cows is common place on dairy farms. Fans cool and circulate fresh air in cattle housing and feed areas. The cows are feed three and four times a day; while another three to four times every day the feed is pushed up to stimulate eating. The farms nutritionist check the rations and feed ingredients monthly and on some farms weekly, to balance the diet of the cows They have their nails(Hooves) done at least once a year and some twice, they get sex from the best stud that is available in the country, and their mammary system is cleaned four to six times a day.

On our farm our Show String of Angus cattle are brought into the barn during hot summer days where they lay on rubber mats that are covered with sawdust or straw. There are fans to circulate fresh air to cool them and we also provide the best bull for their sexual enjoyment. This bull often costs between $50 and $125 per insemination. They have a visit once a year from their Doctor and once a year they get a personal pedicure. Bulls that are not to be used or sold as breeding stock are feed the best diet to produce high quality Angus Beef. They are provided with as much feed as they will eat every day, they are provided with shade from hot sun and fresh running water. This is to make their days as happy as possible so that they will gain as fast as possible...more profit.
Unhappy, hot, wet or dirty animals don't eat. This costs money, thus less profit. It would be like having a delaval 75 vacuum pump and only letting it produce 15" of vacuum on the sugar bush; even thou it will do 27" and provide more sap to make a bigger profit, but the producer does not take the time to eliminate the vacuum control unit.

So please don't lump all farmers into a group. The photo or video that is posted of the one bad apple of a bushel is not the true and realistic place that food is produced. The reality of life is that if farmers don't breed the cows, hatch the chickens, plant the crops, tap the trees, there would be no "unhappy animals" & no food for the masses to eat. There would only be farmers that have the know how to produce food for themselves and the rest of the population would starve due to a lack of food.

Care feeds the soul, food feeds the body.

So which came first the egg or the chicken?

The best bumper sticker is the one that says" NO FARMS NO FOOD" followed in a close second by "NO FARMS NO BEER" and is followed in a tie for third by..."HAVE YOU THANKED A VET TODAY" & HAVE YOU THANKED A FARMER TODAY"

This fair season stop by the 4-H barn and visit with the kids and learn what farming is all about. And if at the Schaghticoke Fair the week before labor day come see our display and visit with the three boys with the Angus in Barn #3 . We have plenty of chairs and you can see farming from the other side of the fence. I guarantee that if you spend an hour of time you will witness at least a few shocking questions asked by the part of the public that has no idea where food comes from. Who said that education cant be entertaining?

Ben Gosh Ben, thats a lot of typing. I don't have the time or the computer to respond to all you just said. I too have grown up in a farming community(the other side of the fence) and have worked for or am friends with the majority of those left. I certainly was'nt blasting all farmers and I honestly can't see how you could have gathered that from my post. Regarding my sources,(AKA Youtube) its not the only source from which I gather my information I simply retrieved a few articles from there for quick posting. I should have known it might be used to invalidate my argument. Your denial regarding the sharp rise in diseases and disorders seems to be derived from personal experience as do many of your arguements concerning farming methods. I do agree "strongly" that much of the ADD problems stem from a severe lack of discipline these days. I respect your views regarding much of the other things you said but I simply can't agree. A primary underlying issue regarding this topic is trust. You seem to trust that all thats being told to you by the powers that be is true enough that theres no cause for alarm. Others, like myself, see many things happening that just don't add up. That in itself raises questions that incline us to wonder. Forget about youtube. There is an undeniable coincidence/relationship in these occurences and although what Dr. Perkins stated about longer life expectancy is valid, I feel its just not a satisfactory answer. With the way the world is today,all of us knowing that greed is a primary motivator,coupled with the fact that Monsanto and our government have been found to be less than truthful on occasion, I don't believe there can be any trust left.... On the topic of trust, I have to ask, Dr. Perkins, if the university recieves any funding from Monsanto. The reason I ask is because my wife used to work in the science and technology advancement dept. at Umass and one of her duties was in sending perks to(game tickets and such) and assisting with "wining and dining"(her words) Monsanto reps. when they visited. Apparently, their funding was very much desired and competed for. Regardless, the nature of your work and the circles of colleagues with which you must associate at times leads me to think that you may "wisely" have a reserved opinion on this topic.

[DrTimPerkins]

On the topic of trust, I have to ask, Dr. Perkins, if the university recieves any funding from Monsanto. The reason I ask is because my wife used to work in the science and technology advancement dept. at Umass and one of her duties was in sending perks to(game tickets and such) and assisting with "wining and dining"(her words) Monsanto reps. when they visited.

I don't have a clue about Monsanto funding at UVM. If any, I doubt it is much. They certainly do not fund maple research (maybe your wife can get me some phone numbers). As for wining and dining....very difficult here at least. Almost impossible to get permission to purchase alcohol with UVM funds, and we have to fill out forms describing any meals we pay for (ourselves or others) and the business purpose of the meeting and turn in all receipts. We can't even give a half-pint of syrup away to important visitors these days without documenting it.

Your viewpoint, at least for me, presents a bit of a quandary. While I agree with you to some degree on the whole big business motives issue (the military-industrial, and I'd add "financial" complex that D. Eisenhower warned us about years ago), I don't believe that this extends throughout all of society and all those who work within those businesses. There are many people even working inside those organizations who are just trying to do a good job. If you cannot trust (the opinion or findings of) anyone or any organization that might have any sort of "interest" in funding research (because they might have less than altruistic motives), and because it is almost impossible to ever get funding from a corporation or company or individual who has no interest at all in the subject, then how is any research ever going to be funded? While I agree that some degree of skepticism is healthy, too much distrust leads to cynicism, which is completely unproductive. Basically it ends up at a point where the U.S. Congress is today.

We've hit just about every point in this thread except religion, so with that, I think this thread is done.

[ToadHill]

Sean aka the "madmapler",

I find the nature of your question to Dr. Perkins to be accusatory and inappropriate in the absence of any evidence. If you have factual evidence to suggest some form of unethical behavior on Dr. Perkins part then fine lets hear it, but to imply that because of your wife's experience at another university Dr. Perkins colleagues have done the same and Dr. Perkins is thereby guilty by association is disgusting. You/we don't even know if the folks at UVM do any of the research you're talking about and/or receive funding from Monsanto, but that doesn't seem to stop you from implying that they are doing something wrong. I firmly believe you owe Dr. Perkins and the folks at UVM an apology.

[BreezyHill]

As a step to becoming a certified applicator we were taught how to read the label and many of the common mistakes in application. There was also a day of how products work. I found it fascinating how products like roundup only last a few hours, where some will last 16-18 months before they are unable to do anything to any plant. Have some companies gone to far in reducing the life of the product...I think yes on many products. That is why we are seeing plants that germinate at high soil temps are not being controlled. Orchard grass was breed to take longer to reach maturity to give a better window for farmers to harvest a higher protein plant. So why is it people freak out when a weed is able to achieve the same growth response? Is it chemical adaption or just a natural progression to produce seed that will survive the hot summers?

Funding for universities that I work with, Rutgers and Cornell mostly, does come from large corporations; but to think that every person, of every dept will realize who the donors are or will tow the corporate line is a stretch at best. Just because an institution accepts donations doesn't mean that their products are pushed...frankly some professors use it as ammunition against a donor.

I have found that over the years that using personal experience is often best; as one is prevue to more facts than the public, details are often over looked or forgotten.

I am a good typer with all the FDA, USDA, Ag & Markets, Federal & State logs and reports that I have to file for our Farm and Feed Mill; then add in all the grants for the snow club and reports for the 4-H shooting sports, Maple, cattle and horse clubs. Typing class in High School was a wise class choice. :)

It is the responsibility of everyone to question what they do not understand or think is right. But is also the responsibility of the rest of us to correct those that are mislead.

No Harm nor Foal.

Ben

[madmapler]

First off Randy (aka toad hill) if you read my post carefully you will find there is absolutely no accusation being made toward Dr. Perkins. I asked a simple question that required only a simple answer and I gave the reasons for such. The only accusations being made (AKA fabricated) are from yourself. Its not an easy thing to stand for what you believe is right especially when speaking as a minority but I will not avoid asking questions that I feel need to be asked no matter how unpopular they may be.... Dr. Perkins...Once again I stand accused of lumping a group together. I have no doubt that there are plenty of people trying to do whats right but if you ask if I think Monsanto as a whole has pure motives then my answer is no. If I appear to be a cynic then perhaps, just maybe,theres a good reason for it. I have researched the topics discussed in this thread with an open mind (as best as one can) and frankly,I'm surprised at where I ended up. If you took offense at my questioning (I don't think you did) then I apologise.... Ben... Whatever man! I'm glad your world is good. I'll post no more on this topic.

[upsmapleman]

I would like Dr. Tim to post how many people have been killed in the last 50 years by guns and how many soldiers have been killed in war since our country began and where this information came from. Also the death rate per 1000 or 100,000 would be interesting.

[Cabin]

Come now next you will want the data on car deaths as well. Just because he gets paid to boil sap does not mean he is not one of those left wing liberal educators.:lol:

[BlueberryHill]

1.3+ Million US war dead.

FBI Stats show about 800K TOTAL US homicides in the last 50 years. (very close estimate, roughly added, I did not want to plug in 50 numbers in my calculator to get an exact number, sorry)

Historically about 2/3 of US homicides are with firearms. Percentage does not change much year to year. So the number is right in the 500K to 600K ballpark. Nowhere near the 1.3M war dead.

Sorry, love ya Dr.Tim but I think you got that info from Piers Morgan or something. It's hard to filter through all the bogus, deceptive "stats" put out by either side.

Bottom line truth. Way more guns and way less firearm homicides in the last few years than in any year since we landed on the moon. Steady decline (as in less deaths, total or per-capita) every year since 1993, the crack-happy peak of the war on drugs. Many other theories about why there has been such a steep decline since the peak in 1993, but it's not because of guns. There are WAY more guns (about 100 million more), bigger faster guns, and better guns every year since. So why not more deaths?

To keep it maple, I'll go polish the Maple stock on my 10/22 as I chart assault weapons sales against squirrel chews to try to find some correlation.

[BAP]

What does Guns and War have to do with the original post about keeping herbicide use in a sugar bush minimal. Some of you posters like nothing more than to go way out in left field with some of the discussions and not keep to the topic.

[Cabin]

What does Guns and War have to do with the original post about keeping herbicide use in a sugar bush minimal. Some of you posters like nothing more than to go way out in left field with some of the discussions and not keep to the topic.

We tend to go out to left field when educators make statements like

"Not meaning to stir up a hornets nest, but just to put things into perspective....a higher number of Americans have died as a result of gun violence (non-war-related) in the last 50 yrs than by all U.S. war deaths in total since the country began."

But then that was the idea behind Dr. Tim's post wasn't it.:)

[BlueberryHill]

Hey, sorry. I think keeping it maple is the thing to do. Guess I got a little emotional and felt compelled to respond. Possibly I am too emotional to possess a firearm ;) Knee-jerk reactions and all, haha.

Back on topic I think round up and Monsanto suck! Bullies!! But that's easy for me to say I guess since I am not a farmer trying to make a living, just a small time mapler, small time garden guy with a few chickens and such.

[markcasper]

If one was to go organic, how close can your woods be to agriculture fields that recieve herbicides? Wondering what the guidelines and setback requirements are for something like this. As well, if your tapping roadside trees and obviously are subject to toadsalt, what are the organic requirements in these situations?

[WestWind]

What's toadsalt?:lol:

[maplerookie]

What's toadsalt?:lol: always a joker in the bunch

[upsmapleman]

Thanks Blueberry hill for clearing that up. Actually I knew that just wanted to see why the good doctor was making such statements in a maple post. I think he says we should always make sure where we get our information. My wife says she thinks the Brady campaign has been putting that info out there to scare people.

[BreezyHill]

Toad salt is what the old timers used to keep the toads out of the road and not scare the horses in the spring. Hahaha....no animals were hurt in the making of this joke.


It does work thou.

[DrTimPerkins]

But then that was the idea behind Dr. Tim's post wasn't it.:)

Yup. Thanks for catching it and pointing it out. :)

For those that didn't understand, that info is out there on the web, but the source is dubious. The point being...you can easily find something on the Internet to support whatever you want to claim. Just because it's out there doesn't necessarily make it true. The veracity of the statements often depends upon the source.

[Sunday Rock Maple]

Yup. Thanks for catching it and pointing it out. :)

For those that didn't understand, that info is out there on the web, but the source is dubious. The point being...you can easily find something on the Internet to support whatever you want to claim. Just because it's out there doesn't necessarily make it true. The veracity of the statements often depends upon the source.

"The trouble with internet quotes is. That it is you can never be sure of your source."
.......... Ben Franklin