Vol. 15â1961 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
Vol. 15â1961 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society Vol. 15â1961 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
526. findings we increased the amount of sodium arsenite to 5 PPMand treated the most heavily infected coves in 1950. As most of the Potamogeton crispus seeds have matured into plants by June. in our lake water temperature, we ceased further treatment with sodium arsenite at that time. As arsenic is ubiquitou sly distributed in soUs in varYing amounts, we took six water samples in June, 1950 after treatment had ceased; five from. various inlets and one at the spill we:y. The results were as follows: Balsam Inlet, dated 6/3/50, contained - 0.03 PPMof arsenic. The Beach Inlet, under same date, contained - 0.01 PPM. The Beiser Pond Inlet - 0.02 PPM,. The Marine Pond Inlet - 0.03 PPM. The Pumping station No. 5 Inlet - 0.01 PPM. The Outlet, dated 6/ll/50 - 0.03 PPM. Two inlet samples were as high in arsenic as the outlet. It indicates that the arsenic applied had little effect on the outlet water, if any. Moreover, these findings established the reason for the presence of arsenic in previous samples taken at Spillway (Location 3, Samples 1 - 2 and possibly 3) on April 22nd to 24th. Since 1950 we have used. sodium arsenite annually each May. The quantity used showed a general increase from. 1950-1956. Because of a general improvement in the growth density, the amount used in the last four years (1957-1960) showed a decrease. We made further examination of our water and lake bottom in October, 1960, to determine whether or not we were bUilding up arsenical residual after 10 years application of 161,000 pounds of arsenic trioxide over the period (as Atlas "A"). For the purpose of comparison we took bottom samples of nearby Senaca Lake where no sodium arsenite had ever been applied. The two bottom samples taken at Lake Mohawk, and one taken at Upper Mohawk, were taken where the arsenic residual, if any, was likely to be the greatest. The sodium arsenite is loaded from drums to barge at these points. The after O':" ..ip of the transfer hose is run into the water after loading, thereby substantially increasing the amount at that point. The greatest amount of loading occurs at the point where Sample 4 was taken. The results of the findi:lg in Sample 4 compared with Sample 1, where no sodium arsenite was ever applied, shows no appreciable difference. The samples were fil'tered to remove supernatant water, and each solid waf'!washed with one li'ter of distilled '\-rater. The residue was then oven Q.ried and weighed. .All samples were submitted for arsenic analyses with the following results. 1. Pond Bo'ttom, Senaca Lake, 'taken 10/14ft/:) Dried Solids 577 grams 0.000$ arsenic Supernatant ~later 56 milliliters 0.65 mg As/liter Wash Wa'ter 900 milliliters 0~35mg As/li'ter 2. Lake Bottom, Upper Lake Mohawk, e:t Boat Dock adjacent to sv:hnm1ng area, taken 10/20/t/:) Dried SOlids 124 grams 0.03~ arsenic Supernatant Wa'ter 320 millili'ters 1.20 mg As/liter Wash Water 910millili'ters 0.1.3 mg As/liter
527. , , 3. Lake Bottom, La.keMohawk, ,adjacent to Rainbow Trail, taken 10/24/ W Dried' Solids ,344 grams 0.02~ arsenic Supernatant Water 126 milliliters 1.95 mg As/liter Washtvater 965 milliliters 0.33 DIg As/liter 4. Lake :Bottom, Lake Mohawk, adjacent to Beach 3, taken lO/20/W Dried Solids 296 grams 0.007~ ;arsenic Supernata!lt, Hater J.85millili tere ,0.55 DIg As/liter Wash'l-later 950 millilite:r.:s 0.25 rrigAs/liter NOTE - Two other. s~llples have been taken, a...'1dat this writing are in the process 01. being analyzed. They ;will be included in this report if time permits. ' Our method of application is by ~ans of two wooden, flat ,bottom barges, 16 feet long, 4!-feet Wide aJ;1d20 inches deep, power~d' by out-board motors. The flow, is directed through a 20 foot .boom vr..tth 13 outlets evenly spaced, The boom i.s mounted on the bow and the solution is pUmpe9-through the bOomby an engine at three gallons per minute. ' The form ir.l.which we used the arsentc is 40%sqd1um arsenite solution (.four pounds arsenic trioxide per gallon). It is run from drums into a one hundred gallon tank carried in the barge. vIe have done away With jet nozzles and presaure , The boom is carried cl.oae to the water. The, chemica:/.. seems to be eq'qally as eft.acti ve when dripped in as, under pressure nozz;Le,s.. There is no .clogging a:t t~' ;nozzle tips nor dXif't. on windy daYI;I a plywopd boa.rd ,;J.s mourrced on the bow to protect the operator. Rubber gloye$ are prov1:Q.ed to those handling the loading, from drum to barge. Treatment is done on Saturdays" a..."':id. Sundays only anel continues for one morith. Each barge works in a different area. ,This intermittent treatment keeps our concentration down. ., To control the' PPM, we, tilile the .run for one hundred:. gallons, a tank-full. At a unifor.m speed of five miles per hour and a pumping rate of three gallons per minute, it takes 35 minute's to emptytlie tank and the results ,1111 be 5 PPM at any average depth of four feet rfourteen gallons per acre. ' 'Experienced operators can ve'l::ify tbeir speedbyc:u,ecking with established landmarks. These .are the theoretical objectives. In actual operation, factors such as drift~ varying depths, etc,. constant~ycreep in, causing variations from the theoretical. lie balance out. the ,vw:'i~ces by retreating about one-third of the area at 5 :PPM. Our initial treatment begins about Me.yLst , before any plant haa a:9pe~re~ 'on' the surface.. .We'try to destroy the plant before the seeds are fo~u.;ManY seeds stored in the mud bottom have not yet sprouted at -the first trt;)atment. The encased seed or the root stTU:cture 'of Pota,moge~ cri.~s.. seems to be invulnerable to sodium arsenite. About May 20th we find nev plazr!;shave qeveloped, presumably from seeds un- . sprouted at the time of the ini'tial treatment. 'rhearea where nell growth appears is again treated in the hope that the seed population will eventually be reduced. We have employed this double trea.tment prOCedure since 19:>8 and there has been a subotantial decrease in plat!.tspe;r square foot since this procedure was established. This is further sU·bstant1a.t~d by a 33% decrease, ~- in our purchase of sodium arsenite in 1959-1960.
- Page 476 and 477: 476. AQUATIC'J1ElID.CONTJ3.,OL '65~
- Page 478 and 479: 478. For example: Imagine, if you:
- Page 480 and 481: enefit of those both us1ng the wate
- Page 482 and 483: • • of ,-, "",jqc. '\:':' ',:,;
- Page 484 and 485: ~ '. r; I ' ':'.' ~, ',;' '.'. 1·"
- Page 486 and 487: 486. weeds increased the food 4.3 t
- Page 488 and 489: ..; . " .," .. ,', oontro..lbe ·oo
- Page 490 and 491: 490. Idee1ly these woUld coVer' foo
- Page 492 and 493: 4')2. Literatm-o Cit~: Biolog:$,cal
- Page 494 and 495: 494. SYSt.:Clil ..:ne sp:aying cont
- Page 496 and 497: 496. 0ll'l;ljing, &hluL ..l V,~l"Y
- Page 498 and 499: etween our sprayine=. operatdons an
- Page 500 and 501: 500. loblolly pine existed iii quat
- Page 502 and 503: 502. 'j' " Using results for all ou
- Page 504 and 505: cut over several year. ,b.elozoe.·
- Page 506 and 507: 506. HARJJ.rlOOD CONTROL WITHMIST B
- Page 508 and 509: 508. distance was achieved. All sub
- Page 510 and 511: 510. Hardwood oontrol within the li
- Page 512 and 513: • J ". 512. ~ ., and the weather
- Page 514 and 515: ) ) ) '.. . . hble). EffectbeneBB o
- Page 516 and 517: 516. HERBICIDf;TECHNIQUE.:> ,FORTn-
- Page 518 and 519: 518. The possibility o:rusing contr
- Page 520 and 521: 520 • . However, the capacity of
- Page 522 and 523: 522. This is followed by planting i
- Page 524 and 525: 524. AQJJATICWEEDCONTROLANDRELATEDP
- Page 528 and 529: 52e. There is a constant reinfectio
- Page 530 and 531: 530. in 1960 the Potamogeton re-app
- Page 532 and 533: 532. PROGRESSREPORT ON THE FIELD TE
- Page 534 and 535: 534. It· was tht.;n necessary to d
- Page 536 and 537: 536. l.qunlin Hcrbici(.l(; pr-ove-d
- Page 538 and 539: ;538. P.EFEP..ENCES 1. ijOSCIlETTI,
- Page 540 and 541: 540. The oontrol plot was ohosen so
- Page 542 and 543: 542. The dissolved oxygen content r
- Page 544 and 545: 544. Summary 1. Six experimental pl
- Page 546 and 547: 546. A PRELIMINARYREPORTON THE EFFE
- Page 548 and 549: that either slow chemical hydrolysi
- Page 550 and 551: 550. In July of 1959 funds were mad
- Page 552 and 553: 552. The barge was run at ~ speed o
- Page 554 and 555: 554. areas successfully treated in
- Page 556 and 557: 556. pick~rel spawning suacess but
- Page 558 and 559: Control of the Pondweed. Potamogeto
- Page 560 and 561: 560. THE ABSORPTIONANDMETABOLISMOF
- Page 562 and 563: 562. in controlling weeds in ponds
- Page 564 and 565: CommonName WEEDSCONTROLLED ANDAQUAT
- Page 566 and 567: 566. PROGRESS-R!PORT·ON CONTltOLOF
- Page 568 and 569: 568. Herbicides used for these stud
- Page 570 and 571: 570. StHtARy Invasion of Eurasian v
- Page 572 and 573: AUTHORINDEX(continued) ~ King, -Ken
- Page 574 and 575: S/I/pg.2 Dinitro (DNOSBP) •• 11
526.<br />
findings we increased the amount of sodium arsenite to 5 PPMand treated the<br />
most heavily infected coves in 1950. As most of the Potamogeton crispus seeds<br />
have matured into plants by June. in our lake water temperature, we ceased<br />
further treatment with sodium arsenite at that time. As arsenic is ubiquitou<br />
sly distributed in soUs in varYing amounts, we took six water samples in June,<br />
1950 after treatment had ceased; five from. various inlets and one at the spill<br />
we:y. The results were as follows:<br />
Balsam Inlet, dated 6/3/50, contained - 0.03 PPMof arsenic.<br />
The Beach Inlet, under same date, contained - 0.01 PPM.<br />
The Beiser Pond Inlet - 0.02 PPM,.<br />
The Marine Pond Inlet - 0.03 PPM.<br />
The Pumping station No. 5 Inlet - 0.01 PPM.<br />
The Outlet, dated 6/ll/50 - 0.03 PPM.<br />
Two inlet samples were as high in arsenic as the outlet. It indicates that<br />
the arsenic applied had little effect on the outlet water, if any. Moreover,<br />
these findings established the reason for the presence of arsenic in previous<br />
samples taken at Spillway (Location 3, Samples 1 - 2 and possibly 3) on April<br />
22nd to 24th.<br />
Since 1950 we have used. sodium arsenite annually each May. The quantity<br />
used showed a general increase from. 1950-1956. Because of a general improvement<br />
in the growth density, the amount used in the last four years (1957-1960)<br />
showed a decrease. We made further examination of our water and lake bottom<br />
in October, 1960, to determine whether or not we were bUilding up arsenical<br />
residual after 10 years application of 161,000 pounds of arsenic trioxide<br />
over the period (as Atlas "A"). For the purpose of comparison we took bottom<br />
samples of nearby Senaca Lake where no sodium arsenite had ever been applied.<br />
The two bottom samples taken at Lake Mohawk, and one taken at Upper Mohawk,<br />
were taken where the arsenic residual, if any, was likely to be the greatest.<br />
The sodium arsenite is loaded from drums to barge at these points. The after<br />
O':" ..ip of the transfer hose is run into the water after loading, thereby substantially<br />
increasing the amount at that point. The greatest amount of loading<br />
occurs at the point where Sample 4 was taken. The results of the findi:lg<br />
in Sample 4 compared with Sample 1, where no sodium arsenite was ever applied,<br />
shows no appreciable difference.<br />
The samples were fil'tered to remove supernatant water, and each solid<br />
waf'!washed with one li'ter of distilled '\-rater. The residue was then oven<br />
Q.ried and weighed. .All samples were submitted for arsenic analyses with the<br />
following results.<br />
1. Pond Bo'ttom, Senaca Lake, 'taken 10/14ft/:)<br />
Dried Solids 577 grams 0.000$ arsenic<br />
Supernatant ~later 56 milliliters 0.65 mg As/liter<br />
Wash Wa'ter 900 milliliters 0~35mg As/li'ter<br />
2. Lake Bottom, Upper Lake Mohawk, e:t Boat Dock adjacent to sv:hnm1ng<br />
area, taken 10/20/t/:)<br />
Dried SOlids 124 grams 0.03~ arsenic<br />
Supernatant Wa'ter 320 millili'ters 1.20 mg As/liter<br />
Wash Water 910millili'ters 0.1.3 mg As/liter
Change language