From researching this propoconozol product QualiPro has gone out of buisness what is the deal I can get a product called TILT that is supposed to be similar but not the same. This is from the distbuters lips not mine. What is up with this
What I have heard is that Quali-pro is sold out (I don't think its out of Biz) a friend found a product called Honor Guard its labeled for Elms & Oaks, + Don't know if any body is studying it though
The problem is the major outbreak of rust disease in the southeast and the shortage of ppz. Rumor has it there will be a major shortage this year (according to Syngenta).
There is plenty of Alamo right now - but most companies around the country who have used this for DED has met with the same failure as we have. Lasts for 1 year (very effective). But the annual wounding is very hard on the tree. Try and stretch it and you will have lots of losses. Don't think the results that TNT are universal - are you sure about this success? /forum/images/graemlins/confused.gif
Alamo exists only because it is so effective against Oak wilt, otherwise it would not exist as only a small fraction is sold for DED control.
Syngenta has significantly reduced Alamo in price. This is because the knockoff ppz's are apparantly pretty good replicas of the Banner Max which is a cousin but not identicle to Alamo (has spreaders, stickers, surfactants - which apparantly interfere with good uptake and distribution - and can dehydrate the tree which causes browning of leaves). Still at least one of the knockoffs is labeled for injection and I have no doubt that people will use it to save a few bucks.
Arbotect lasts 3 years, has a 20 year track record of being extremely effective, and costs about $360 a gallon. (Not $1000) It is the only choice right now of every major tree company in the country. All which have tried Alamo and tell us it is significantly inferior - as we found.
Okay I would agree with your track record of arbortect however where can I get it for 330 a gallon I am paying 398 a gallon here and I used over 75 gallons last year. Your welcome for that Tom. But Really talk with your suppliers then because they are raising our costs and it seems without your knowledge. So you tell me what is a guy to do 70 dollars times 75 gallons is over 5000 of my profit going down the drain. You don't want people to use knockoffs when you did even if it was years ago. But then you help set prices in our region by telling the municipalities what you charge in your market causing a price war in the chicago area. And now find out we should be paying around 330 and are paying almost 400. So who's fault is that. Ours? Your suppliers? or just what we have to pay for as you say "THE ONLY LONG TERM PRODUCT THAT WORKS" I am not sure about that quote but I am sure your product works and willing to pay but I am tired of all the blasting. Just make it fair for everyone and make your suppliers accountable to you for what they sell your product for.
Tom all the stats about Alamo failing miserably around the country (pretty negative), What was the dosage rate they were using? How do you explain TNT's success rate? Where is the Data on the annual wounding from Alamo? Arbotech seems to be alot harder on the tree in my observations.
Please don't take me wrong, there is no score to settle, I shared our information on saving elms with propiconizole, now with a new afordable product on the market I thought arborists would be interested and would LISTEN.
I'll state it again, Arborists can inflict less damage on the tree, get the chemical into the tree faster, and save 75% on the chemical.
I ask you Eric wouldn't you want to share that with any one who loves Elms and the people who care for them? /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
All we have is our imperical studies of over 2700 injections with a .05 loss rate.
EDIT 5/10 sorry my PHC man corrected me on the loss rate is closer to .58 sorry I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer when it comes to elm injections.
I was lucky enough to hire the pathologist/scientist, who helped develop the dosage rates for arbotech, he, Novartis (alamo co at the time)and our company experimented in the early 90's injecting mature elms with Alamo and infecting them with DED(slated to come down for highway improvements) from these studies we were able to get the label on alamo increased to 20 mils. Up until this time I think alot of companies had some catastrophic elm losses at 10 mils (Swingle), I think this is where Alamo got the bad wrap, nobody would touch it with a ten foot pole.
Mark I'm just an old Tree climber and I don't remember all the details from that time that influenced us to start injecting our clients trees with Alamo rather than Arbotech. I went with our pathologists/scientists recommendations when we started our program in ~ 92. We have been quite pleased with Alamos results.
We also did a injection site injury study on some other highway elms and found alamo to be alot friendlier on the trees than Arbotech.
I personally don't know how propiconizole really works in elms, I don't know how this Laptop works, all I know is they work /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
When there isn't qualified research to back up statements those statements don't mean a lot. What controls were used in the studies? Without controls results are meaningless.
Any research that is valid will be able to be duplicated with similar results. Do you know of any other companies or researchers that have duplicated the study?
Most consumers are suspicious of data and research that is presented by a companyh or organization that would seem to benefit from "good" numbers. A good example is the suggested mileage that the car manufacturers paste on the side of the new cars. Does anyone know how accurate those numbers are? Now, if Consumer Reports or some other entity comes up with numbers they have more validity, at least to me.
don't get me wrong, I really would like to see the confirmed research. A friend of mine in Bloomington has an elm that is a potential state record. If there is a "better" treatment available, I sure would like to see that tree alive instead of becoming wood chips.
Take the time to get the research to us. Otherwise, all you're stating are opinions.
I am new to Tree Buzz so I may not understand all the ins and outs of what gets posted here. I read a lot here about many other topics that will not be proven by research. I take it for what it's worth as I'm sure many others do the same. Are the standards in this area different? After all this is not the Journal of Arboriculture. It seems that you and others have a bias against Dave's success story being told about DED control. Why brush it away? The loudest most shrill words are coming from one who lost a big sale to TNT. From my first post, this being my third, I request people avoid ad hominem attacks that dilute, and distract from, the content of the topic area. Even though I may only inject a tree or two this year this discussion is very important to keep going.
I see your point. Sharing an opinion is just that- a point and not fact. I think that certain areas of our work are more sensitive than others when sharing a point. I would also agree that we should take a persons comments with a grain of salt.
I feel that this is an important topic. Even though we have recieved emails from members here that would like us to end this discussion by deleting the thread, Tom and I decided to leave it stand. We see good info here mixed with an occasional jab thrown at someone for their perspective. We have a lot of faith in our members. We expect that most will refrain from using personal attacks and slanderous remarks to make their point. I am asking everyone here(for the final time) that we disagree about the topics without being disagreeable. There is no room for arguments between people on this site. None of us really want to spend the time reading posts filled with bickering. Let's keep our focus on professional discussions. Oh, and have fun! /forum/images/graemlins/cool.gif
You're right, this isn' the Jof A. But you'll find many examples in threads where someone will state an opinion and back it up with some sort of reference. For example, in a discussion about a knot, there will be links to more information that backs up an opinion about the strength of a knot.
If someone came into TB and claimed that XYZ ropes were junk because the rope broke they would be expected to back up the claim. At least to tell the circumstances and their experiences. Otherwise it's just an opinion. All that I've been asking for is some way to seperate opinions from facts.
Bias? I want to know more about ways to save trees. Let me know what options there are.
Re: 6 Alamo trees lost at the University of Minnes
Just waiting for "Oakwilt" to chime in about how unscientific and reckless this type of post is on this forum
Wouldn't the $0.35 you spent on that phone call to the "Arborist at the U of M" be better spent opening up the entire research again as to whether injecting fungicide into sick trees is effective at all?
I am sure that your product will be held up to the same scrutiny that Alamo and Quali-Pro has.....and apparently DECADES of not only testing, but succesful testing is necessary to post anything remotely as unconfirmable as this prattle.