Isa website so bad it’s embarrassing

It seems the issue is that there aren't enough people being sufficiently affected by the 'bad actors'. If there were enough people being harmed in a way that's easy to see, there would probably be more demand for stronger enforcement.
We had region-wide curled leaves on Oak and Redbuds (and others, but those were the worst) that past few years. Last year wasn't bad... wanna know what was different? No over the top dicamba application for soybeans were permitted. It is back on the table this year. I'm working with a friend/college professor to start a sampling program to see if dicamba is in the rain, as expected.

Also, there is this:

There is little doubt that pesticides are moving off site. It's expensive to test. Even when it's identified, it's hard to say where it came from so there is no enforcement.
 
Now that this thread is slightly derailed, I think the bigger picture is ‘our’ general disregard and polarization of ‘nature’. To many plants are just objects, and very few understand that it may take a lifetime to regrow what can be destroyed in a day.
I’ve literally have had clients say ‘I don’t care it will be someone else’s problem after I…..’ Really that’s what it boils down, and it doesn’t need to be a removal just a good ole hack job.

Throw in personal risk tolerance and folks tend to be very risk adverse for things they don’t understand. This can sometimes be overcome with education if they are receptive, that’s where the ISA badge shines.. Yet the bigger issue for us, is we tend to not be a unified voice.

One of the bigger firms in Seattle are literally development guns for hire.. with regulation there are those who profit by knowing how to get things to be pushed through along with skirting tactical omissions.

Instead of focusing on regulating the industry, it’s probably better to regulate the jurisdiction and make solid enforceable penalties to the property owners.
 

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom