Triclopyr is very powerful...which is why it's good for tough woodland/shrub "weeds." It's a hardcore defoliant.

You're going to want to wait 60-90 days before planting anything there to be safe. Full breakdown can take up to a year, but the "plant dangerous" amount left in the soil is mostly dissipated after 60-90 days unless the soil is dry for most of that period.

It's systemic (it moves/stays in plant tissues). The biggest danger wouldn't be accidentally poisoning yourself...it would be killing your seedlings/plants by putting in the soil before the Triclopyr is broken down.

You can hasten it's breakdown by keeping the soil moist, especially during warm/sunny days.

Why dont you look for safer "natural" methods instead of worrying about poisons.. Personally, i would rather roll in poison ivy then suffer from the long term effects of deadly poisons people so nonchalantly spray...

Joe

It's not deadly when applied properly, though ducks seem to be sensitive to it. don't spray it around your duck pond if you have one.

It's a synthesized version of a natural auxin...not that this fact makes it "safe"...but it's a rather well studied herbicide and one of the safer ones out there for humans, fish, birds, etc.

It causes a plant to grow uncontrollably through a hormone signal.

Just imagine how it is made in the factory... It is polluting the earth, water,soil, and life.. It it unnecessary, unhuman, and uncalled for...

Joe

It was used and they want to know how long until it's safe to plant something.

This post was edited by nc-crn on Thu, Mar 14, 13 at 23:12

It was used and they want to know how long until it's safe to plant something.

Exactly. Let's stay on topic.

If one wants to make unsupported claims about the chemicals some freely choose to use in gardening then the Organic Gardening forum is the best place for it.

Dave

Common sense... Next time Im sure he'll think twice about what he uses. Goodluck on growing that melon. Make sure you put a thick layer of mulch so you dont apply any herbicides.. Forgive me if I come off cocky. But man needs to take responsibility of his actions, or your grand children and further generations is going to pay... It's a matter of time these poisons are getting banned.. The effects are so subtle now, but just wait, we'll wake up real quick! Forgive me for being a prick, someone has to stand up for what's right and stop this insanity!

Joe

Joe

" Forgive me if I come off cocky. But man needs to take responsibility of his actions, or your grand children and further generations is going to pay... It's a matter of time these poisons are getting banned."

You do realize you're using a computer to type this, right?

The amount of water used to make one...much less the amount of contamination in that water...is mindblowing. That's before we get into how the metals used in that computer you're enjoying are mined or sourced via recycling.

Fwiw, Triclopyr is a whole-chemical-process reaction to produce. It doesn't produce any bad waste products, such as dioxins (which is more that you can say for some other herbicide production). It's also not stable in water and is dissipated rather quickly in the environment...especially in moist soils.

If you're going to "stand up for what's right" you might as well take the time to learn about what you're standing up to confront...and perhaps tone it down when you're doing it while typing on one of the most pollution intensive personal devices mankind has ever produced.

This post was edited by nc-crn on Fri, Mar 15, 13 at 0:28

"Forgive me for being a prick" ... Maybe as the "new kid on the block" (from another post), you should settle in, take a good look around at how people here tend to address one another. Frankly, I agree with your sentiments more or less, but your manner of voicing them is extremely alienating to me. 99% of the time no one here has to ask others to forgive them for being a jerk. It's one of the things that keeps this forum awesome. So, retain the enthusiasm, the more gardeners the merrier!

Apologies to the OP, but I think the origianl question had already been answered. Cheers!

I hear you guys,I understand... I definitely do not want to come off as hostile or unfriendly.. Forgive my ignorance... Just know that my intentions are good...

Joe

That was a gentlemanly apology, Joe, thank you :). I appreciate a person who uses criticism as something to learn from rather than being defensive!

And nc-crn, thank you very much for the clear explanation :).

Triclopyr production is rather low-key stuff, but it's very powerful in it's effectiveness. It mimics a natural auxin/hormone and signals a plant to start uncontrolled growth which busts cells and demands more out of a plant than it could hope to provide.

It's basically oxamic acid (found in spinach in measurable quantity, fwiw) and catalysts mostly driven by (and consumed with) CO2...which, btw, are 2 of the main chemicals it breaks down into (oxamic acid/CO2)...along with a few other organic acids like TCP (in small amounts) and TMP (even smaller amounts, and not produced via water degradation).

Now, TCP exposure has been linked to lower sperm counts in human males...but the TCP produced in this breakdown is extremely weak, a small amount, and rarely persistent...especially in water and moist soil (nearly non-existent in air). The continuing breakdown from Triclopyr to TCP/TMP compounds to CO2 and lesser organic acids (such as oxalic acid) is rather quick.. If it's applied properly (aka, not getting it all over you...because it's a mild skin irritant, too) it's not much of an issue...especially considering how extremely low it's toxicity is in the air. It nearly fully breaks down REALLY quickly in the presence of direct light (minutes to hours).

The further breakdown of TCP/TMP mainly becomes CO2.

Aside from the small amount of time the breakdown consists of TCP, there's no "red flags" in the production or degradation productions of Triclopyr. Even the low-sperm count alarms of TCP aren't much of an issue considering how little of it that is produced and that you're going to have be putting bare hands all over soil where Triclopyr has been recently applied in order to get it on you...unless you're improperly applying it and getting it all over you...which you'd know because it's a mild skin irritant because of the quick chemical reaction changes that occur once it's exposed to the environment (especially direct light or moisture).

Nc-mn - I hear where you're coming from, some pesticides, herbicides, etc are safer than others... I don't think anyone can rationalize the use, production, or danger of these chemical, whether it be synthetic or natural... Are they completely safe, no.

I am merely trying to look out for us, our fututre generations, and life on this planet as a whole.. I think we can all agree that these "chemicals" are dangerous to one thing or another. I think we can all agree we do not want
to eat, drink,breath, touch, etc any of these chemicals. I think we can agree that the use of these"chemicals" are unnecessary, and we could live without them.. I hope we can all agree my intentions are solely for the health of the world overall.

Joe

"I think we can agree that the use of these"chemicals" are unnecessary, and we could live without them."

We could also live without a computer...which is being used to make a point about pollution, future generations, etc.

The personal computer is one of mankind's greatest contributions to environmental waste. Almost every chip in your computer uses 5-10 gallons of water rendered unsafe for human consumption. The mining of the metals in a computer and/or the recycling methods used to claim those metals is far more of an impact than 100s of barrels of Triclopyr. At least Triclopyr will break down into harmless organic substances and CO2 given time and rainfall.

If we're going to pick-and-choose battles, at least pick on a more harmful chemical...pick on phenoxy herbicides for a start. Those at least have pollution produced in the end result of their production...though vastly less than the amount produced in the production of a single computer.

We can at least pick the battles of what pollution we choose to live with a little better, because some is obviously "okay" in your world and some is not.

Of course, we shouldn't use the computer as a baseline for that though...or else we'd accept swimming in a high cancer risk and metal contaminated cess pool of a world. We should, however, note how much risk/harm is actually contained in the products we use...and if it's impact warrants our use of it. We can't just blanket-apply everything we don't fully understand as "bad" or assume it's proper dosage/use is akin to global poisoning. Tylenol will help aches at a proper dose...take 4-5 every day and you'll probably damage your liver...take 100 all at once and you'll probably die of liver failure.

This post was edited by nc-crn on Fri, Mar 15, 13 at 22:23

I am not here to argue. I am here to try and help the health of the people, and the world as a whole.

I'm sorry for any misunderstandings,
Joe

I don't believe I'm misunderstanding anything.

I'm reaching out for a bit of level headed understanding of choices vs impact while trying to make some points about the issue.

That said, I think all the points I care to make have been made...especially concerning anything other than the topic of this post.

This post was edited by nc-crn on Fri, Mar 15, 13 at 23:20

Don't worry about any misunderstandings. Just know that my intentions are good.

Thanks,
Joe

Joe, that was a lovely apology, thank you. On the other hand, have you considered that thinking that your way is the only right way might become problematic? You seem to assume that others have made the choices they make out of ignorance or indifference, which on this forum is not usually the case. Actually, in life it is not often the case. (We do seem to be living in an age of purile finger-pointing where if someone doesn't think like me I'm supposed to react by saying that they are "stupid". It's very fifth grade out there in the media.) Anyhow I don't think you're going to "save" anyone by telling them you think they are too stupid to already be thinking about this stuff themselves. Just a thought.

Chemicals cause problems, chemicals solve problems. Is it better for the health of the world to not use any chemicals, perhaps sinking back into a pre-industrial world of famines, blights, and plagues? I mean, that isn't very healthy. There is so much more that could be said on this topic, but this likely isn't the place. I do believ there is a "hot topics" forum somewhere where this would be appropriate.

Thanks, yarnaholic for your patience with us all! And thanks for the interesting info. On the chemistry, nc-crn.

you can not help the health of people when it comes to chemicals if don't know what you talking about.

goats will consume every sprig of poison ivy they can get to. it does not harm them. some states even use them for keeping certain ateas cleaned out.