Pesticide spraying?

[RH. 56]

These signs are posted at the beginning of a cutting road near my camp at stewart lake in dorion and am wondering if anyone knows anything about this pesticide "visionmax", this topic is somewhat relevent to fishing because it could be harmful to fish if rain carrys it to a waterbody. The sign also says berries cant be eaten till next year.

[RH. 56]

The company spraying it is "greenmantle forest products"

[naden 131]

http://www.engageagro.com/uploads/labels/20110318_VisionMAX%20Silviculture%20Herbicide.Common%20Reed.E%20Booklet.pdf

I think when the clear cuts are sprayed there is a buffer zone left around aquatic areas. I would imagine though that this depends largely on the wind that day and proper application by who is spraying.

[RH. 56]

I came across that same booklet about the pesticide i was hoping someone could simplify it or have any experiences with it before instead of the company explaining their pesticide as "best" as possible as i know the manufacturer monsanto is a bit of a sketchy company

[Guest 2112]

maybe they are prepping for next years tent caterpillar explosion? thinningthe ones that are already there out?

[Retriever 15]

I am a forester who has considerable experience with Visionmax. This herbicide product replaced Vision which in agriculture is commonly called Roundup. Glyphosate the active ingredient in the products have been registered since 1984. With 30 years of use in forests across Canada, the product has become the product of choice of forest companies due to its environmental safety profile. Visionmax is a herbicide that is used to control vegetation only (not insects) that compete with conifer seedlings. Without weed control, seedling survival is significantly impacted.

Visionmax is applied usually once in a forest rotation of approx. 60 years.

The sign says don't eat berries until next year since the Vmax registration is for a conifer crop not berries. In agriculture, glyphosate is sprayed over food crops like canola,

soybeans, etc.

Near aquatic habitat, no spray buffer zones (60-120 metres) are used to leave the vegetation as is. The product is tightly bound to soil particles and does not move in the soil.

Visionmax does not have any soil residual effect so various seeds in the soil germinate and difficult to control brush species reappear. Foresters hope to gain a few years of weed control in order to get the pine and spruce seedlings above the competition and hopefully free to grow.

[Pro fisherman-Stud Muffin 420]

what him say ^

[Iron Ranger 125]

I came across that same booklet about the pesticide i was hoping someone could simplify it or have any experiences with it before instead of the company explaining their pesticide as "best" as possible as i know the manufacturer monsanto is a bit of a sketchy company

What's sketchy about Monsanto?

If it was not for companies like Monsanto there would be a lot less crops, beef, pork, forest products etc coming to market.

[gsambray 172]

I used to work for a forestry company that did the spraying. Personally i didnt do cause for my own reason im against the spraying.

[BigFisher92 1]

It''s visionMAX, it causes cancer and respitory problems, and its very dangerous if it gets into the water.
Monsanto has it on their website.

[BigFisher92 1]

http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/canada/newbrunswick/story/1.3181071

this also explains from a spokesman that it's toxic to fish, and they're spraying too close to waterways.

[fishman1 164]

After the spray, there is NOTHING in the area, no squirrels, moose, birds, nothing. Dead zone!

[gsambray 172]

When I started hunting gold creek area a cow and twin calves were common to see. They sprayed the area and it's been a long time since you started seeing moose in that area again. But a cow with twins is very rare. I've noticed it in a lot of hunting areas as well. Has anyone looked into this as a population decline?

[mad scientist 140]

When I started hunting gold creek area a cow and twin calves were common to see. They sprayed the area and it's been a long time since you started seeing moose in that area again. But a cow with twins is very rare. I've noticed it in a lot of hunting areas as well. Has anyone looked into this as a population decline?

The point of spraying is to kill off the poplar and other broadleafed trees that would otherwise outcompete with the pine and spruce that the forest companies have planted. But those same broadleafed trees are the browse for the moose. Without browse, the moose will move elsewhere to look for food.

[BPFishing 2]

When I started hunting gold creek area a cow and twin calves were common to see. They sprayed the area and it's been a long time since you started seeing moose in that area again. But a cow with twins is very rare. I've noticed it in a lot of hunting areas as well. Has anyone looked into this as a population decline?

They've been spraying for over 20 years, it's very unlikely we would just start seeing an effect like that now. When an area is sprayed it has a pretty quick effect, the deciduous trees lose their leaves almost instantly. Animals rarely have a chance to ingest any. The particular chemical they use has had more research and testing than anything else on the market. In my opinion if we need herbicides to meet our forest management goals there are much worse choices.

[dano 8]

Trees lose their leaves almost instantly. Yeah right. Spraying is just another practice that only benefits the forestry/ logging companies. Fits in perfectly with most of all the other piss poor forestry management practices we have going on in NWO

[gsambray 172]

I've been hunting for 20 years and areas sprayed have never been the same

[fishman1 164]

Agent orange

[Benji 67]

Bpf glyphosate takes s bit of time to go into effect on grass. It would take longer for trees so moose might have a chance to eat it

[Guest FreshwaterFisherman]

The lack of animals is not due to spraying it is due to forage being removed. The animals just move elsewhere.

[Guest FreshwaterFisherman]

Dano sounds like he is a forestry expert, surely you must have some sort of formal education or training in the field right? Or is this just you spouting off what you "think"?

[dano 8]

FreshwaterFisherman,

Not that I owe you any type of explanation, but Yeah I'm no forestry expert. I didn't receive any formal education in forestry either. I'm just someone who has spent some time in the outdoors, just like everyone else. I don't need to be an expert to see that there are flaws in the forestry practices. When natural brook trout creeks are crossed in multiple locations without bridges with logging equipment and the trees are cut on both sides right to the edge , I'm sure that's not good. When prime moose wintering areas are mowed down and all that's left is a small block of trees and the rest looks like the moonscape, that can't be good. When moose habitat( and moose in certain units) are sacrificed to provide habitat for non existent caribou. That doesn't make sense. When once productive trap lines and Bear Management Areas are more or less ruined, it kinda pisses me off. At one time all it took were a few phone calls and productive portions of the line were usually spared. Now all you get is the one tree that had the marten box on it left, and usually the section of tree above the box is cut.

So no this isn't just me spouting off what I think.

[juststarting 3]

It looks like there is a pretty divisive debate about visionMAX going on in scientific circles. FYI the concerning chemical in the spray is glyphosates.

Here's a couple of links if you want to do some research on it.

The US is restricting use of glyphosates.

http://www.producer.com/2015/04/how-will-u-s-glyphosate-restrictions-affect-canada/

This CBC story says that a 300-page report is to be published by the World Health Organization on whether the chemical is carcinogenic.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/herbicide-chemical-glyphosate-probably-carcinogenic-who-agency-finds-1.3018545

Here's a Nature story on it that claims glyphosate has links to cancer:

http://www.nature.com/news/widely-used-herbicide-linked-to-cancer-1.17181

The Canadian federal government just completed a review of glyphosate and concluded that the chemical does not present unacceptable risks to human health

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/cps-spc/pest/part/consultations/_prvd2015-01/prvd2015-01-eng.php

[whoreleur 13]

If you think Monsanto is a good company you are way out to lunch. Possibly the worst company for the environment in the world. Huge in gmo crops and pesticide. These chemicals being sprayed affect the endocrine system on humans and are toxic. These chemicals have been sprayed for years in our area for the sole purporse so the province can create high yielding crops (wood) on crown land after cutting. They look at it as farming on their land. They are for sure getting into the water and affecting habitat. All the government can do is put out a booklet on safe quantities of fish to eat in each lake. This is direct link to pesticide use in the area. The wind will carry pesticide along with run off. This practice needs to be stopped, maybe Bill Mauro can comment on this topic. I know he enjoys the outdoors. Anyone that enjoys the outdoors should be concerned about this continuing practice. There is too much info on Monsanto and its sketchy practices. Their reach is long and pesticide use is only the tipping point.

[Retriever 15]

I love the outdoors and am not concerned a bit about glyphosate use in forestry. The forestry spraying regulations are far more than adequate to protect human health and the environment. There is over 40 years of scientific studies on glyphosate and the overwhelming weight of evidence suggests that glyphosate is safe to use.

Yes, forestry companies get greater seedling survival and a higher crop yield after spraying but that is a great investment for the future of the forest industry and communities. Google "Falling Snow Ecosystem Study" - a multi year world class study on herbicide use in forestry conducted just south of Thunder Bay. You would be amazed at how minimal and short term the non target impacts are. I believe in the science and not in the emotion and politics associated with using glyphosate in forestry.