Jump to content
Thai Visa Forum

Farmers are reluctant to stop using toxic weed killers


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 191
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Sell it and they will buy. Why let health stand in the way of profit! It's a cultural thing!

well, is it jungle or farmland ? If it is virgin jungle then perhaps it should not be cleared by any means, mechanical or chemical ? and if it is actually farmland what have they been doing for t

It's the same the world over. Some must die so that others can live. I bet the farmers buy organic and don't touch their own produce. 

Posted Images

1 hour ago, laislica said:

Salvador: record harvests since Monsanto's Roundup dropped

By Fabrice Renault updated on 2 July 2019

El Salvador, which has turned its back on the big seed and phytosanitary multinationals, is seeing its crops explode! By abandoning Monsanto Roundup and promoting local seed cultivation, the country has significantly improved its agricultural system.

roundup of monsanto
 

Two years ago, El Salvador voted to ban 53 plant protection products for agricultural use. This major coffee, cotton, maize and sugar cane producer was withdrawing from the market, among other things, Monsanto Roundup (glyphosate), recently classified as a "probable carcinogen" by WHO (World Health Organization).

A plan to emancipate family farming in 2011

To protect the Salvadoran seed heritage and ensure agricultural production, the government of former President Mauricio Funes launched in 2011 the Family Farming Plan (FAP). For some 400,000 farm families, this plan aimed to upgrade local seeds and emancipate small producers of biotechnology companies and their GMOs.

In crisis, the agricultural system was mainly dependent on hybrid seeds marketed by Monsanto, Pioneer et al. Prior to the implementation of the FAP, 75% of the corn and 85% of the beans were imported according to the information site The Seattle Globalist .

And the plants grown on the territory were mainly from sterile GMO seeds, not adapted to the territories and their particularities, forcing the use of chemical inputs. Reaffirming its food sovereignty, the government has decided to break with the international seed industries to favor local seeds.

roundup of monsanto

And $ 18 million investment later

The state then invested more than $ 18 million to deliver 400,000 H-29 corn farmers, developed by the National Center for Agricultural and Forest Technology (CENTA). Maize has the advantage of being a local variety, better adapted to Salvadoran lands and more drought resistant.

"According to the Natural Society website, El Salvador's agriculture is in full expansion. The country has reported record harvests since it banned some plant health products. "

If El Salvador has turned away from major international biotech groups, questions remain about the sustainability of the country's agricultural plan. Because corn H-29, although produced locally, is a hybrid variety. Although it may be better adapted to the territory of El Salvador and require the use of less input, it is no less sterile.

Strong political will and small financial investments

Although not perfect, in terms of sustainability, Salvadoran agricultural policy is exemplary in many respects. Can other countries, or even whole continents, permanently break away from the seed and phyto-sanitary industry in the future?

 

Feeding people healthier, without polluting or fattening the major agri-food industries may well be the next big challenge for the planet. A challenge that El Salvador is in the process of picking up.

We will retain the method: political will affirmed (Fap in 2011, then plant protection ban in 2013), then an investment of (only) $ 18 million, or $ 45 per operator, or only $ 2.85 for each of the 6, 3 million Salvadorans.

So it's as simple as that change ... but then, the Republic it starts or not?

 

 

That is all good but we are not talking about GMO'S in Thailand.

As far as hybrid seeds go,they are cross pollinated between to varieties and are designed to combat disease while maintaining higher yields.Personally i think the seed is over priced in Thailand but effective in certain crops. 

Seed production is big business with plant breeders rights and always evolving.Heirloom or Hybrid.

Try planting a heirloom seed from 1980 and see how it performs in todays climate.

   

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a major issue here for me and today provided a good example. I was asked if someone here in the village had any of a particular bean seed to sell. We checked and yes we could get them. The grower asked for 25 baht a kg, 10 baht over the wholesale/farm gate price. I checked an often quoted here internet market, 148 baht/kg. Something is broken in this system.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The government’s plan to phase out three chemical weed killers, paraquat, glyphosate and chlorpyrifos, which are widely used by Thai farmers, may be easier said than done as most farmers oppose the ban because the chemicals enable higher crop yields.

 

 

 

   My parents in law are farmers and I doubt that they can even pronounce the words for their chemical helpers, nor do they know anything about the ingredients.

 

They just call it Ya, like medicine and have no idea how dangerous it is- even for them. 

 

That can happen when you kiss the wrong frog and the result isn't a prince, but looks like a long nosed liar who pretends to be a newbie politician.

 

Would the current Thai government educate the farmers that most of these weed killers aren't even allowed in other countries and much cheaper, they'd of course participate and use the stuff the government should provide for them.

 

It’s a shame that a farmer in Isaan is usually a very poor person with the lowest income.

 

Even Filipino farmers have way more money than Thai famers and that means a lot.

 

There’s not even one wealthy family in my wife’s village.

 

Farmers here are the slaves for the rich who don't give a flying kangaroo where their rice actually comes from. 

DSC03843.JPG

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, IsaanAussie said:

This is a major issue here for me and today provided a good example. I was asked if someone here in the village had any of a particular bean seed to sell. We checked and yes we could get them. The grower asked for 25 baht a kg, 10 baht over the wholesale/farm gate price. I checked an often quoted here internet market, 148 baht/kg. Something is broken in this system.

Everyone makes some money of it if you want to fix it start to sell directly to consumers. But that costs money too and effort. Its not as if there was no added value. I often see what people pay for stuff as an accountant and then see for how much they sell it. There is a markup.. but what many people forget is that there are costs too. Postage / packaging / labor / ect ect. People often only see the markup. 

 

But if you think you can sell it for that price then why don't you ? I mean create your own selling platform and so on (you will see that costs money too). 

 

Where I come from many farmers sell directly to consumers (my area in the Netherlands) and make some money that way but they can't reach enough consumers to sell all of it so somethings they sell at a higher rate to consumers and others at a lower rate to whole-sellers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The discussion is an interesting one that shows an appreciation by several as to the benefits of getting off dependency on some corporate agricultural/chemical giants. It always reverts to a need for healthy, microbially active soils. Some have pointed out that it's tough weeding and tending to many rye of land without use of a tractor, and others that the soils in the tropics don't retain fertility once ground is broken.
I see it as a problem of trying to bend the land to human use when instead we could be more easily applying nature's techniques to our benefit. A natural forest retains its fertility because if has built up a thick layer of leaves and twigs that hold water like a sponge, very active biologically with those leaves forming a compost tea that nourishes the roots from above while fungi (het) extract and supply minerals from below. Desired fruit and nut trees can be added to hillsides by coppicing or pollarding  existing trees allowing newer trees access to light while not killing off the network of fungi below ground. Providing a wide mixture / diversity of trees then reduces the attraction to pests out of balance with their assorted predators. Seasonal plants can be grown too in the pockets of thinned out forest - plus beans and squashes that climb the branches as their trellis.
There is the problem of hillsides that have already been stripped of trees/ forest. For that humans need support the return of the forest by adding water catchment ditches on contour. My family is doing that now for a small area that was formerly a cornfield. Yes, a lot of work - but it is health work on their own terms - with mutual company and support.

Leave the rice paddies to the lowlands or do terracing to hold the water. It is a sustainable system because the bacteria of those paddies fix nitrogen, and the flatness of the bottom lands precludes erosion that happens when hills are exposed to tropical rains and sun. Where humans are headed is a warmer climate. Preparing for it now as best we can will mean getting off the crops and agriculture that requires our burning fossil fuels (tractors/ harvesters/ trucks to processing plants) and getting back to having as much canopy over the land as possible.
The first image is a projection based largely on what heat will do to grain crops, while the 2nd is a an example of how swales (level ditches that follow contour lines) can help absorb water and avoid erosion on hillsides that had been cleared of trees.

image.png.1c8817eec991b6120e295220aa3401fd.pngswales_windbreak-1.jpg.37dcee82e32af1f49b01f27b5bb6a353.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Our land is rice paddy on the Korat Plateau and as flat as a pin. We do have swales but they are called bunds that edge each paddy field. Some major earthworks needed to control what water we get so we can get more than just one rice crop per year. Love to do what you have described but it will take some adaption, lots of time and money no doubt. Hopefully, one day!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/17/2019 at 6:58 PM, GreasyFingers said:

You must be very fit. Offer to help them, this year, next year and every year thereafter.

The soil needs to be turned, and all roots removed.  It takes time, but the end product is very healthy clean soil.  Jeez, ever done manual labor?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/17/2019 at 1:12 PM, IsaanAussie said:

Hey guys, take another look at the "jungle" those men are standing in. Now please add some more of your experience and wisedom and suggest just how they could clear 10 or 20 Rai of farm land covered in that stuff to plant their crops.

They won't. They'll burn it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Redline said:

The soil needs to be turned, and all roots removed.  It takes time, but the end product is very healthy clean soil.  Jeez, ever done manual labor?

All of my life but the body slows down a lot these days.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/17/2019 at 1:12 PM, IsaanAussie said:

Hey guys, take another look at the "jungle" those men are standing in. Now please add some more of your experience and wisedom and suggest just how they could clear 10 or 20 Rai of farm land covered in that stuff to plant their crops.

 

Forget about chemicals, fire, chainsaws and hoes. 

 

Just use a Bron Mulcher...  

 

 

It would probably also work well in Bangkok traffic jams 🤣

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JungleBiker said:

Forget about chemicals, fire, chainsaws and hoes. 

 

Just use a Bron Mulcher...  

 

It would probably also work well in Bangkok traffic jams 🤣

At least on the masses of motor scooters.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, JungleBiker said:

 

Forget about chemicals, fire, chainsaws and hoes. 

 

Just use a Bron Mulcher...  

 

 

It would probably also work well in Bangkok traffic jams 🤣

 

I want one of those.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Forget about chemicals, fire, chainsaws and hoes. 

 

Just use a Bron Mulcher...  

 

 

It would probably also work well in Bangkok traffic jams [emoji1787]

 

That little monster is just one step below a napalm strike [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Reminds me that this is actually a technique used to remove weed without chemicals. 
 
 
European and Swiss universities also researching UV light and electricity to kill weeds
Link to post
Share on other sites
SRI system is well tested and documented. A friend of mine, former member here, now in Cambodia, had an organic research and teaching farm in Chiang Mai. He had side by side comparisons and I think he posted here about it. PM me if you want to pursue a contact. 
Tried to talk that SRI system into one of my professors at Agronomy rice research department. Useless, his answer was "doesn't work for Thailand" Don't bother me anymore with your ideas...
Link to post
Share on other sites
Key statement.  There are alternatives, just maybe not in Thailand yet.  I'm in the US right now and using herbicidal soaps, biodegradable, organic program compatible.  I have yet to try D-limonene herbicide products, but they are popular here. There is a tremendous amount of R & D going on in biopesticides, and new less toxic products coming out all the time. 
Pelargonic acid actually widely proven to work and available in EU and I guess also other countries.
The raw material easily available just wondering why it is not available as herbicide in Thailand yet?
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

I thought i would revert back to this thread rather than have a slinging match in the news forum.

Well it looks like it's happened with the banning of the 3 chemicals.

The anger i feel now is high having invested a lot of baht into spraying equipment.

Ok vented.

What are the alternatives,attrazine is still widely availiable as a pre and post emergent herbicide but only kills broad leaf weeds.Cypermethryn can take care of most unwanted bugs if required.

2-4D will take care of the vines.

But what about grasses?

Can anyone point me in the right direction for a product name here with no residue.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Been trying to find actual facts about this immediate ban.

The closest i can find is a news report one day after the report on here.

It stated the minister was ready to ban after 60 days provided the alternative products are just as effective and costs a not more.

An earlier report suggested that the ban will be only on herbs and vegies.

So no need to rush out and stock up just yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 I did my best to wean us off of glyphosate this year. It went really well until August and we had an explosion of some aggressive very tall (2m+) grass. We know this grass and there really is only one answer for it, to spray it. What will we do next year. I would like to store away some glyphosate, but I also heard rumors that they will be fining people who are caught with it.

It would be nice to know, what's coming down. We are super responsible with the spraying, even using very small sprayers and spot spraying only the grass and leaving some other weeds. We actually only try to remove about 4 main nuisance weeds, and we allow all of the others alone. Of course it depends what you grow, other people couldn't do this.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://forum.thaivisa.com/topic/1126655-civic-groups-doubt-democrat-party’s-stance-on-three-controversial-herbicides/

So my interpretation would be that there going with the no use on vegies and herbs stance.

Which is fine by me,as they can be grown in smaller areas with more labour intensity as the produce is worth more compared to other agricultural crops.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, drtreelove said:

I don't advocate the use of glyphosate products, but within an intelligent IVM program (Integrated Vegetation Management) it has been an important tool.  There is nothing like it for economical weed control when other methods and materials have been considered. There are of course downside effects, but much of that comes from uninformed and inappropriate use.  Here are some of my observations:

 

Regarding your 2m+ grass, it didn't just appear at 2m height.  There was an immature stage that for some reason you missed, and that would have been the time to control it, during the early growth stage. During emergence and early vegetative growth, grasses are easiest to kill and require much, much less herbicide volume to do it.  A fine spray that covers the foliage and doesn't drench the soil will affect the grass and not cause excessive environmental exposure and soil chemistry effects. 

 

Glyphosate is a post-emergent contact and systemic herbicide. It is sprayed on the green foliage and is taken in and translocated into the root system. It is not a pre-emergent and does nothing to prevent seeds from sprouting, so spraying it on bare soil is a waste. You cannot kill the roots of weeds by spraying it on the soil. Soil drenching is useless and creates excessive environmental contamination. If you recognize this fact then the amount of herbicide that you need to use will be reduced considerably. 

 

Another important consideration is the mixing rate. To kill young grasses (and some broadleaf weeds) use the recommended label mixing rate, it works. A 2% solution is all you need for most grass applications. If you are starting with a concentrate that is 48% active ingredient of glyphosate, that's 2.5 oz of the concentrate per gallon of water (12.5 oz per 5 gallons, =  370 ml per 20 liters of water). check my math.  More is not better. 

 

Improve effectiveness by adding ammonium sulfate 21-0-0 to the water and agitate before adding the glyphosate concentrate. 

"6 pounds per 100 gallons of spray mixture (lbs/100 gal)  If water hardness is greater than 1600 ppm apply minimum of 8.5 to 17 lbs/100 gal."

 

Cover up, to avoid personal exposure. Standard pesticide applicator PPEs (personal protective equipment) is rubber boots and socks, long pants, long sleeve shirt, chemical resistant gloves, eye protection.  A full face shield is optional. If the applicator is out there spraying with shorts, tank top and flip flops, then he/she is asking for unnecessary exposure. If the wife and kids are tagging along behind then he is totally irresponsible.  Yeah its hot, but the choice of protection or exposure is yours. 

 

Don't be a sucker for the unreasonable hype created by the class action personal injury attorneys who are after the big bucks that come from the bandwagon protest mentality. Know what you are working with and follow sensible, safe and effective use of pesticides. It is possible to reduce or eliminate personal and environmental exposure.  Do your homework and be responsible.  Don't drink or get high or angry or otherwise compromise your judgement and accuracy while mixing and applying pesticides. If you are not comfortable with it, don't use it. 

 

IVM has options for weed control, consider mechanical control, planting of competing cover crops, etc. Don't always reach for the herbicides before considering other options. Don

 

 

I said it strangely. The grass was noticed at a much smaller stage. I described it as 2 meter grass because that's what it turns into, and what we are trying to avoid. Most of it was killed at around 50 cm or smaller. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...