Hi Mark, All is well in Texas. It is good to hear from you. It's been tough without hockey but we are making do. I'm heading back home to Canada (Victoria) in Sept. Take care and hope to hear from you soon. Cheers my friend.-JORDY
It takes time to build trust in something new, and we understand that.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think for our industry it is very important for us to be cautious of new products, science, and treatments coming out. It seems important for us to be able to see what results are, not just short term, but long term results also. Our industry has been constantly shooting ourselves in the foot by jumping into new practices without adequate research. If you look at topping, wound paint, or cement filled cavities; these were all commonly used practices twenty years ago, but once we realized the harm these practices cause it was to late. Now we are constantly fighting to end these harmful practices. So in my opinion it is good for all of us to be cautious, and take the time to build trust in something new, so our industry doesnt keep shooting ourselves in the foot.
My opinion is that you have to give a new product a try...how are going to find out if does or does not work, if you do not use it. I personally like to find results out for myself as well as compare results with my colleagues. I also get to see this industry from a different perspective besides just the tree side (which is my passion)and new products are coming on the market constantly for turf. These products are usually just as effective, if not more and cost a fraction of the original product....which seems to be the case with the Quali-Pro Product. We have used other products marketed by Quali-Pro and have had great results. I am looking forward to using their new product on my upcoming jobs.
As far as the results with DED we do not have a problem with that here in Texas, wish I could be of assistance.
[ QUOTE ]
My opinion is that you have to give a new product a try...how are going to find out if does or does not work, if you do not use it.
[/ QUOTE ]
There are ways of collecting data without experimenting on clients trees. /forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif
I hear a lot of names (my forest pathology prof and my Alma Matter) plus many others at TFS. They seem to be drawn like a gun to bolster the credibility of a product in the absence of conclusive data.
I don't question the names being drawn. Great people with dedication to trees and plant pathology. It is always important to underscore the seperation between academia, govt bodies, and the real world where oaks are rapidly dying. There are several other stakeholders as well.
What I do think IS important is the representation of ANY propiconazol product as a Siver Bullet against oak wilt. In Texas, it is simply not so. A useful and powerful tool, yes - silver bullet NO. The pushing of it as a cure-all has led to some disillusioned tree owners and applicators, which can tarnish the name of a very important tool in fighting wilt.
great thread /forum/images/graemlins/applaudit.gif
It's amazing, isn't it Nate, that certain language and words can paint poetry into something that really hasn't been?
Reminds me of the urgent need to invade Iraq. Not to mention the supportive words of assurance that it would be a cake walk and over soon.
Money has taken over all elements of service. The promise of, the ease by which it can be had, and the free-for-all allowed now to pump snippets of reality onto a fog of proof and presto..we got a miracle at a now affordable price.
Geez you promoters...let's go back a few steps and cover some of the basics which haven't been addressed, instead of the hype of ornaments and garnish we're kind of tired of hearing. It's our necks on the line in the epidemic, we're not limited liability or a board member that can excuse himself and move on to the next investment opportunity when reality sours or truths become tainted.
I know how exciting a "new" product can be, especially one which generates a track record. WE'd like to see some numbers AND some data. Make a friend here and you'll be set for life. Act like a marketing ad agency and you might as well go and sell some Arizona oacean front property.
If you truely believe in the recent investment you've paid for, try seeking some alternative researchers that can generate some useful data, like use in trees in a transmission model or innoculated for study purposes. I can kill wilt with my exhaust pipe, you don't see hysteria demanding I release this to the public.
I commend you for your eloquence. As sharp as you are, I can't help but wonder if you missed your calling. I have always assumed that Alamo had a degree of efficacy high enough to justify the millions of dollars that have been spent on the product at seemingly unreasonable prices (due to R&D of course). If Alamo posesses no value, I would be interested to know the depth of your experience with it and how you arrived at that conclusion. If Alamo works to any beneficial degree, a generic with equal efficacy should be a benfit to the industry. Quali Pro guy stumbled into this forum, saw misinformation running rampant and has corrected it.
His words are not part of any marketing plan focused to this website. Alamo has provided some benefit, albeit at a high price. I suspect now that the Alamo profit has dwindled, you may begin to see attempts to devalue Alamo and its clones in order to shift attention to more profitable solutions. The truth benefits everyone. I find it interesting that you spew your political inuendo but hide behind a vague and incomplete bio. Are you an American living in the hill country of Texas or are you someone else? You post as if your opinion is fact without listing your credentials. One thing is for sure, you sure write good and, according to your bio, you had a good year back in 96.
Am I missing something about the Alamo vrs. generic version discussion? From what I've woven together from all of the posts is that the controversy isn't about the name-brand vrs. generic but about using Alamo to treat DED. The bits and pieces seem to come together and agree that either version works on oak wilt, the tree kind not the human who posts here , but the use of Alamo/generic on elms doesn't work. Can either side of this discussion clear this up for me?
Being from Texas,I must admit, my knowledge of the afflictions sufferd by Elm trees is limited to wetwood and lightning. We are selling our Propicinazole for the Oak Wilt market. If it helps people save their trees from DED, Hey , that great. If not, I hope a treatment with clear results is developed soon. The reason we became interested in this forum was not to sell anything, but to correct the misinformation planted by the disingenuous who are already trying sell their product and blaitently advertise on your forum under the guise of information exchange. I guess we started the controversy by introducing a cheaper alternative that I hoped would allow more trees to be saved, not just more margin for the applicators. There are those here in great pain from the introduction of generics and considering my experience with them so far, they will go to great lengths to benefit themselves at the expense of the integrity of your forum and your livelihood. They will wallow in a puddle of untruths in an effort change the un-changeable. We came here to correct misinformation and have found ourselves intrigued by the information presented in the forum. I have learned alot already from some of the postings here and appreciate this forum for what it was designed as, a place to exchange information and learn. Some of the anonymous posters spew their own agenda, but I guess thats to be expected. I hope my postings will be helpful to the majority that use this forum. I appreciate your hospitality.
you're doing well and appear to be a responsible promoter of a product that's had many trials - I'm not condemning ALAMO or any of the label substitutes and am hopeful that with time and varied practitioner's use of it for DED and perhaps even some feedback on the injections into innoculated oaks here, we'll have more opportunity to treat trees otherwise condemned to fail..cost has been a hurdle for many.
While I appear to be a burr under the saddle, my persistance is relevent to prescription. Like I've maintained, I've used the fungistat with varied results and am desperately digging for a co-treatment that will improve results unique to both my area, the sub-species afflicted, and effectiveness for distribution within the host and longevity of the active antagonism. I mentioned briefly before the dire necessity and diminishing returns of multiple treatments...I'm associated with this epidemic here and management of it's effects away from the conventional approach most people primarily reach and advocate for. People want (as Nate mentioned of) a "silver bullet"...one time magical pill that fixes the problem. ALAMO or your new acquisition isn't that and no one really expects it to be. However, we need to expand on the thesis presented so far. Cheaper versions will only continue the limitations relevent to success rates, allow for more trees to be treated (which can be a good thing), yet most likely will divert the need to consolidate expertise that can influence more acceptable success rates for both individual trees (the limited reality with sterol-inhibitors) and ethically more important - entire forests.
Lessoned toxicity was a milestone in adapting a more sane treatment, but vascular cells still respond negatively. Transmission through and beyond a surviving tree is still problematic, as is systemic uptake for effective distibution. These two problems are surmountable yet the "offical" position of the researchers maintain that response/acquired immunity from prior fungal events is irrelevent....or nutritional considerations being translated as NPK guidlines - therefore not worthy of further study - keep the issue from being effectively studied or perhaps a "magic bullet" from being discovered. I believe it was I who stimulated a focus at A&M regarding nutrition but the effort was sidetracked down the wrong road with their understandings incorporating synthesized ferts into innoculated subjects. They fed the disease, Miracle Grow style.
Adriamycin is deadly toxic to soft tissue and rapidy-dividing cells as well as the cancer target it's aimed towards. It wasn't until ten years ago - twenty years after it was prescribed as a conventional therapy - that a red-cell booster and additional lmyphocytes be combined to rescue the human in order to kill the cancer, instead of both. Propoconazole rings of the same frustrating shotgun effect. Study the areas of forest hit with specific bacterial or fungal diseases...many treatments are formulated targeting the pathogens but limited study is funded to dig closer to the root of epidemic - where cures in my background are formulated in hyposthesis then flagged to experiment. Market comes last, but comes because it has to.
I'm not an "anonymnous" poster afraid to reveal my position, nor really care to just trouble your efforts...as I said I hope you the best. But it can get better. That's where my interests are. Is there room in the board room for expansion and committment?
I never said you were afraid to reveal your position. Your position has been revealed about 95 times in these forums. You sound intelligent, but my guess is that people would take you more seriously if you made less effort to speak above their heads. I have noticed a tendency in your posts to speak on behalf of others. You make your political position quite obvious. Never a good idea in a forum such as this. Your disdane for my president is obvious. Call me a little old fashioned, but I will always support a standing president, Republican or Democrat or whatever during times such as these. Plenty of good people have given their lives so that people like you can criticize anyone you like. In my country, that is your right. You have the right to come on this forum and treat yourself as an authority in all aspects of arborculture without stating your credentials or even your real name. Pompusnous + anonimity = invalidity. Please don't take this as a personal attack, just an observation. Believe it or not there are marketeers that do try to do the right thing, always. I am one of these, and I refused to surround myself with anything less. Spend less energy lenghthening your sentences and more energy on straight talking. Although I must admit, you are the master of sentence structure.
I don't agree with your politics or your haughty comtempt for the free enterprise system, but you are a hell of a knowledgeable tree man and one of the main reasons I continue to read these boards.
I hope that our paths cross down here in Texas soon.
Who knows, maybe cutting the operating costs for tree care operators will have some ancillary benefit and free up what would otherwise be monies designated for fungicide to go into the underfunded R&D that you hold so dear.
It also would probably go towards funding whatever complementary treamtments that you or others deem appropriate in a mutli-fronted attack on these diseases.....not to mention affording more care providers the recources to do more work.
You can't be that bad....you were smart enough to chose to live in God's country. /forum/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
We'll certainly cross paths soon, looking forward to it.
Cameron, I'm nothing more now than an arborist finding time best spent doing the right thing. You and are at odds in philosophical opinion, there's no question there but if we meet you'll certainly understand.
Once again a point I'm attempting to make and one by which established the regional cancer center systems that consolidate varied expert opinions towards each subject, is multi-faceted and complimentary treatment regimens.
It's late, I'm bushed, and have to hit the airport at 5:30AM.