Pond Boss
Posted By: GrizzFan Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/05/04 02:40 PM
Question: Can mowing and using a weed eater around the edge of the pond have negative side effects? (I did this and ended up with a lot of grass clippings floating in the pond)... my pond is very small (about .25 acre) Thanks for the help!
Posted By: Tuzz Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/05/04 02:51 PM
You'll add organic matter to the pond. I try to avoid gettting the clippings in the water just for asthetics.

Do you have an aeration system in your pond? If not you should and if you do I doubt the added organics would cause a problem.
Posted By: Eastland Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/05/04 02:56 PM
Yes, especially if you have a dense fish population. The grass will heat up the water and kill off the oxygen...I would play it safe and spend 10-15 minutes netting out what you can. If you see fish coming to the surface, that's a warning sign.
Posted By: lildumper Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/06/04 02:30 AM
I use a propane tank and a burner for the weeds on the edges sometimes, works great.
Posted By: Rowly Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/06/04 12:03 PM
GrizzFan: Another option if the tank is close to your house and you would like to have it stand out is to create a buffer zone from the waters edge upland around your water and plant marginal water plants and some colorful shrubs and perennials. Once far enough from the water with your buffer zone cut the grass with your lawnmover. Just food for thought.

Rowly
Posted By: jixxxer Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/06/04 05:47 PM
What about using some round-up or 2-4-d to kill the grass? Will it cause problems with the water and or fish?
Posted By: Bob Koerber Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/06/04 06:09 PM
I've been using Round up for several years along the bank and have not noticed and problems at all. I find it works best when the pond drops and I can use it on the area between the grass line and the water. That way when the pond fills back up to overflow there is no grass under water.

Bob
Posted By: Christopher Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/06/04 07:21 PM
hey bob.. that sounds like a great idea.. so i'm assuming runoff of roundup does'nt effect the fish in anyway... had'nt pulled in that 3 eyed simpsons' fish yet have ya?... i might try that round up... my dam is steep, i cant even get my DR hog down it... so this would be a much eaiser way of handling the grass..cause weedeating is for the birds man!!! i would'nt go as far as you to go into the water, when low, i wouuld just goto the water's edge.. .. any other's use this as a weed control around ponds?

chris
Posted By: Brad B. Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/06/04 10:58 PM
Fellas,
Just last week, I guy told me to use Round Up on some cottonwoods growing out of the shallow water in my pond. He said it wouldn't hurt the fish.
So, Saturday I go over to my chemical supplier and he told me that it's true, but he would have to mix up a special batch for me. He said Round Up and 2-4D both have a chemical additive that will definitely kill the fish. I'll be darned if I can remember the name of the chemical, but I will find out!
Maybe one of the chemically inclined on this website know what it is that I can't remember.

Brad B.
Posted By: Kelly Duffie Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/07/04 02:12 AM
Sometimes, a little (or incorrect) information is worse than no information at all......

ROUNDUP is not EPA registered for, nor intended for use in aquatic sites; NOT because of its active-ingredient (glyphosate), but rather due to the surfactant (a special type of tallow-amine wetting agent) found in its formulation. Tallow-amine surfactants should NOT be used in water for various reasons, some of which are its potential effect on fish gills and eye coverings, along with its impact on other aquatic organisms.

Other formulations of glyphosate (RODEO, AQUAMASTER, et al) do NOT have a surfactant in their formulation. As a result, there is more "room" in which to suspend a higher concentration of glyphosate (53.8% vs ROUNDUP's 41% ~ 25% difference - part of the reason for the price variance between the two types of formulations). However, an appropriate surfactant (designed for use in aquatic sites) should always be tank-mixed with these aquatic formulations of glyphosate.

Those who are determined to cut every last cent from their "perceived cost" insist on using dishwashing soap in place of a commercial surfactant. However, from a technical standpoint, dish soap is mostly detergent with only a comparatively small amount of surfactant (which happens to be anionic, rather than the more beneficial non-ionic surfactant, which is recommended for virtually all pesticide applications due to its ability to enhance chemical activity). Also, the detergent component within dish soap may actually cause plant tissue damage and actually impeded the absorption and systemic movement of the herbicide within the plant's vascular system). So, save money if you must - but you may also be limiting the ultimate performance of the herbicide. "Brown" doesn't always equal "dead", at least not when roots are concerned.

Some formulations of 2,4-D may have a similar surfactant, or at least a type that isn't intended for use in aquatic sites. Simply check the specific brand's label and see if aquatic sites are included. If not, don't use it!

I am constantly amazed at those who are hell-bent to save a few dollars by using pesticide products inappropriately (aka "off label" - which is a Federal violation, as well as very unwise). Believe me, such attitudes are not just a moral or marketing issue. Flagrant and rampant misuse of pesticides are the primary reason why we no longer have many useful products available in the US (Dursban, Diazinon, DDT, Chlordane, etc).

One manufacturer (BASF) recently pulled its widely used (and very beneficial) pasture herbicide from the market because it was being illegally used in place of the more expensive row crop formulation - even though the cost/benefit ratio was quite acceptable for the later.

It is human nature to seek a "better deal". However, when pesticides are involved, follow the product's label - period.
Posted By: Bob Koerber Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/07/04 12:49 PM
Kelly if you are referring to me let me clarify, I do not allow it to contact the water, and I only use it when there are several days planned with no rain. So it has had a chance to do its job and be bonded with the soil. As far as pesticides I agree with you totally, Durspan was the only thing I ever found that worked on fire ants which are terrible here in North Alabama and all the new stuff does is move them around Just wish I had bought a 55 gallon drum from the coop back in 2001.

Bob
Posted By: Brad B. Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/07/04 01:03 PM
I feel kinda silly! If I had seen all my fish floating "belly-up" I wouuld have been convinced that my neighbors crop spraying had washed into my pond. And here I was going to spray it in there myself!

Brad B.
Posted By: Bob Koerber Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/07/04 01:58 PM
I have had my neighbor overspray my trees, yard kids, and myself by spraying the field beside me on a windy day good thing there is distance to the pond asked him what he just sprayed all over us and he said it was "just herbicide"! Some people have no respect. I have only seen three dead fish in the last three years and they had been skewered by the herons that visit my pond. I don't treat my pond itself for weeds mainly cause it is small and I am able to use a rake on a rope to clear unwanted algae out of it and physically pull any cattails and other things I don't want.
Posted By: Torchy Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/07/04 02:20 PM
Bob,

Fire Ants...

I've had pretty good luck with a product called AMDRO...kinda pricey...when I used it according to the directions (imagine that ! \:\) ) it worked well for me...

Torchy
Posted By: Kelly Duffie Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/07/04 02:40 PM
Bob - the reference wasn't to you, or anyone else specifically. It is just interesting to see the bits and pieces of pesticide "information" that pop up here, and how the net sum can be misleading when the pieces are incorrectly assembled.

As for your neighbor overspraying onto your property (and person): he probably realized the possible implications of his error and tried to deflate the situation with his awe-shucks tone. Regardless of "what" he was using, it is against the law (and extremely inconsiderate) to allow pesticide drift off of a targeted site. I would find out exactly what he was using. Your interest and concern will do much to prompt more caution on his part in the future.
Posted By: Bob Koerber Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/07/04 02:52 PM
Well actually he could care less. He is one of those that thinks a single strand of electric barb wire will keep cattle in a field. Went round and round with that one. Finally told him next time I had a calf in my garden I was just going to have to eat some veal! He also runs 6 large chicken houses and instead of building a proper composter just spreads it in the fields that he has control of between the neighborhood houses. The 10 acres beside me sold about 6 months ago and he has never removed his fence lines or cattle and last weekend the new owner came by and wondered who the cattle belonged to. Oh well eventually old farmers die off. I agree there is alot of mis-information on the web and you have to carefully sift through things. I personally just look up the MSDS for every product that we use around the property and then use my best judgement. Guess that comes from being a Safety Officer aboard Navy ships for years.
Posted By: Ric Swaim Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/07/04 11:33 PM
Kelly,
When purchasing herbacides such as 24D or glyphosate without any surfactant what would you recommend to use as a surfactant?
I'm afraid I've been using cheap dishwashing soap.
I have quite a bit of Bad honey & was considering using it.
Posted By: Kelly Duffie Re: Mowing/Weed wacking - 07/08/04 02:42 AM
Don't use the honey! I'm not certain about the chemical-interaction, but it won't likely be good.

Naturally, I'm biased toward my own formulations of surfactants - since I know what they contain. But, I'm not here to hawk my wares.

Unfortunately, surfactants are not regulated by any particular group (gov't or watchdog).

Basically, surfactant formulators may call anything except water an "active-ingredient", and label their product as containing 80% or 90% a.i. ~ translated: it contains 20% or 10% water. As often as not, a lot of that a.i. may simply be rubbing alcohol (IPA), which does actually increase wetting - but also accelerates the spray-droplet's drying time (not good).

To answer your question (finally), just email me with the brand(s) you've located. I'll comment on their quality and appropriateness from there.
© Pond Boss Forum