Photo: Kochia. © 2020 Delena Norris-Tull
Minutes of the 8th Annual Western Weed Control Conference, Reno, Nevada, Feb 26-27, 1946
Slade Franklin, Wyoming Department of Agriculture Weed and Pest Coordinator, loaned these archival minutes to Dr. Delena Norris-Tull. The original minutes were typed up documents from the 1940s. Dr. Norris-Tull transcribed and summarized the minutes, and added commentary.
Summary of significant events:
162 individuals attended, double the number from the previous year.
The following states sent representatives to the conference:
As in previous years, Arizona and New Mexico did not send representatives.
Treasurer’s report: Balance on hand $557.20
The representatives discussed the idea of increasing dues from $15 to $25. They also discussed the idea of inviting federal agencies to become dues-paying members.
Wyoming Report Summarized:
Dr. George B. Harston presented the report: Wyoming has had increased interest in using 2,4-D products. After the war, the state was able to obtain some Altacide. In addition to cultivation and burning methods methods, landowners in the state are also using oils, Borax/Borascu, carbon disulphide, Sinox, and ammate. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation is showing an interest in weed control and is cooperating with the state.
“Local officials of the Indian Service are very interested in the alarming spread of the noxious weeds on Indian Lands, but have been unsuccessful in precipitating action from Washington. The Indian land weed menace represents a serious problem in Wyoming.
”The University Experiment Station did some experimenting with 2,4-D products on dandelions; but, it is regrettable that the data was not made available in a written form… for…this conference.
”Field tracts treated with 2,4-D products were observed throughout the season by State Department of Agriculture personnel...
“Landowners throughout the State were enthusiastic about 2,4-D products. This seemed to be partially due to the publicity given the products; and, also to favorable results obtained from their personal application of the products. Although the State Department has not recommended 2,4-D, because of the need for further experimental information, many individuals purchased it for personal use…
“Our control and eradication expenses are carried equally by the State, the County, and the landowner. Never have State and County funds been adequate to permit work on all farms needing weed control. Those working with the problem for several years are now advocating that the State should spend their funds on state-owned property; the County funds should be spent on county-owned property, and the landowner should stand the total expense on his property. The need is being felt for weed control operators acting as private contractors with equipment, training and facilities which the average land owner does not have and cannot afford to obtain privately…
“In accordance with the decision at the last conference, the Wyoming representative furnished his congressmen with a copy of the resolutions pertaining to the weeds on Federally-owned lands. A favorable reply was received from all the congressmen…”
Washington Report Summarized:
E.J. Kreizinger gave the report: “Weed control work in Washington is developing at a progressive, increasing rate, and farmers are becoming more interested in their control.
“At the present time there are 11 of the 39 counties… in which there are weed districts or weed extermination areas organized. Several more are in the process of organization. Some of the areas are organized on a county-wide bases while others are limited to certain isolated areas. It is the hope in developing the districts that the natural drainage or watershed areas can be recognized and weed control developed for the entire area affected.
“Bindweed, Canada thistle, Russian knapweed and whitetop are the weeds receiving major attention at the present time. New work is being initiated by the experiment station this year on Klamath weed.
”The various types and kinds of chemicals used for weed control are being tested on various weeds and also on these weeds in various stages of maturity.”
REPORT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON WEEDS TO THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION’S PLANT INDUSTRY COMMITTEE, Memphis, Tennessee, November 1945.
“Several states have passed laws and have set up fairly good constructive weed programs. However, the majority of the states have inadequate weed control programs or no program at all. Too often, however, action is taken by a state legislature setting up provision for inspection and control without appropriating ample funds to carryout the enforcement for these purposes.
“Most of the state weed control programs now in operation follow along the same general lines as the program in the State of Washington. The Washington law makes it possible for 50% of the landowners in any area by mutual agreement to form a weed control district or a weed extermination area…The law provides for the proper financing and enforcement of weed control prep practices decided upon by the group concern within the area. It also makes possible the formation of an area of any size from one section to a whole county. It has worked fairly effectively where it has been tried out and it is now being used in several counties. The law provides for the inclusion of public rights-of-way, for Federal, State and County lands. These inclusions are necessary in any weed control program because of watersheds or other means of re-infesting land where weeds have once been eradicated.
“There are several weaknesses in the Washington law which is true of the weed laws of other states. It does not provide for definite coordination with the existing seed law, nor does it provide for control of the movement of livestock from weed infested areas through weed control areas. It also fails to provide for prevention of the movement of vehicles along public highways carrying weed infested materials. Also there are no regulations regarding the sale or movement of weed infested grains.
“In many areas the cost of eradication of weeds on the more marginal types of land would be greater than the value of the property on which the weed eradication program might be carried out. It, therefore, would seem that the eradication of weeds must of necessity be a long range program.
“The constant increase and wide distribution of noxious weeds constitutes a very serious menace to the farming industry of the United States. Almost all lands in all the states are infested with one or more varieties of noxious weeds...
“Several years ago the Agricultural Service Department Committee of the United States Chamber of Commerce made a survey of the weed conditions and reported that noxious weeds cause the farmers of the United States to lose each year $3 billion in crops. The loss probably is much greater at the present time due to the increasing weed infestation and the increased value of farm crops.
“It is apparent that noxious weeds cause greater loss to the farmers than all livestock diseases, plant diseases, and insect pests put together. While all farmers realize the menace of noxious weeds, many seem to have an apathetic attitude toward the problem of weed control. We believe the reason for this is weed infestation has developed slowly over a period of many years, and many farmers seem to believe nothing can be done about it, and that weeds are just something they have to put up with. This undoubtedly is a reason why there has been no greater demand on the part of the farmers for an aggressive Federal-State weed control program in past years…
“If extensive control measures can be carried out, it will result in greatly increased yields of practically all crops and will increase farm income several billions of dollars. What is more important, it would lower the cost of farm production which will be the most important single factor in successful farming in the future…
“A weed control program must of necessity be a long-time program… When established in any state, section or nationally, it should be set up to extend over a long period of time, not just one or two years and then neglected. If neglected after such a short period, the money spent on the initial investment is entirely wasted.”
Recommendations of the Subcommittee:
“It is unanimously agreed among those who have made a study of noxious weeds that there is a critical need for a strong, aggressively administered, and fully financed National Weed Control Program.
“It is further agreed that the United States Department of Agriculture should create within the Bureau of Plant Industry, a Weed Division to deal with the various phases of the nation’s weed problems and extend its research, investigations and experiments with noxious weeds on a national scale to assist in developing the most efficient and economical methods of control and eradication.
“1. Research: first and undoubtedly the most important approach to an adequate solution of the weed problem is thorough research. It is agreed that Congress should appropriate sufficient funds to carry out such a program. Federal research should be expended to better cover all the states, and state research should be conducted on a uniform and correlated basis with federal projects where possible.
“An intensive research program is especially necessary now that the field of organic chemistry is being tapped for herbicides and more complex materials are being used than has been true in the past. These studies require the work of plant physiologists, plant chemists, soil chemists and others in the field of research to work out in detail all that can be learned relative to the various chemicals and their reactions on plants and soils, in order that basic information can be developed and passed on to field workers for practical application.
“2. Education: Second and equally important is a program of education. Education and weed control has generally been lacking throughout the United States. There are certain outstanding examples, however, which do prove that an educational program is most helpful and in many cases necessary in order that the farmers may come to know the more serious weeds and in order that the results of research can be properly applied. It is not only important to educate the farmer and the stockman, but also those from all industries which have to do with agriculture, including financial interests, and others who have either a direct or an indirect part in the agricultural field.
“It is felt that the office of Experiment Stations in the US Department of Agriculture should employ a weed specialist who could work with the various states to promote better research, educational methods, and laws in weed control.
“3. Control Practices: Following the research and educational program, control practices can be more understandingly developed and utilized. Past experience has proved thousands of dollars have been lost due to the lack of proper research, proper education, and proper application. In order to carry out a successful weed control program, it is necessary that all three of these steps be given equal consideration...
“4. Regulation: Regulation is necessary in many of the fields of pest control and there is no exception as far as weed control is concerned. So long as large areas of the United States are being farmed by tenant farming, regulation is going to be necessary in many instances to complete a weed control program... Regulation relative to the movement of infested commodities, especially crop seeds, field grains and inspection of incoming lots of seeds or plants is most essential.
Conclusions
“Fundamentally, this Subcommittee on Weeds believes…., in order to carry through a successful long-time program, the organization of all forces to work cooperatively and coordinately is very important…”
Utah Report Summarized:
George Hobson presented the report: “At the close of 1945 we will have released out of the cultivation program 31,600 acres of land upon which white top, wild morning glory, Canada Thistle, and Russian knapweed make up the major portion. In most cases, this land has been kept reasonably clean since its release. Some, however, has been allowed to re-infest almost as badly as in the beginning. The amount that has been improperly handled would approximate about 8%. The land proper has not been neglected as much as fence lines, canals and ditches running through and bordering the areas. Landowners cannot be given full blame for this condition because in the past three years chemicals have not been available for proper treatment. One of the most important factors that has contributed to the continuation and effectiveness of the weed project is the large crops produced on these lands. Usually the amount produced as against former years has been from 1/3 to ½ more; this extra increase justifying the expense of eradication.
“We are looking forward in the future years to a very much reduced number of areas in cultivation due to the effective possibilities of the new chemical 2,4-D.
“Cultivation: The lowest acreage in the past five years have been cultivated this season, which is … 6210 acres. About 1500 acres less than in 1943 and 1944. The reduced amount has not been because of the introduction of new chemicals but from the desire upon the part of the landowners to utilize the land while the prices of farm produce is bringing an attractive price. Another factor affecting reduction in acres is that counties have had difficulty in providing equipment and manpower to cultivate the acreage available. If the late spring and cold weather has not permitted the plants to restore their root system, we are looking forward to the 1945 cultural program being the best of any previous year.”
[Note: The above refers to cultivation methods used to eradicate weeds, not crop acreage.]
“Chemicals: Chemicals have been very scarce… (The amount available) was only about one-third that the program would require… Borax and carbon bisuphide have been available throughout the season in any quantity desired, but because of the excessive amount of labor required in the application of the latter, very little has been used in comparison with former years…
“The New 2,4-D Chemical: … 2,4-D has been used quite extensively in (three) counties. However, nearly all counties have experimented with it in limited amounts. Results have varied from 20% to 100% eradication and it has been used on many of the troublesome weeds as well as noxious ones. It has been found to be quite effective as advertised…(Details of application conditions followed, along with recommendations for the future use of 2,4-D)…
(It is recommended) that we do not abandon the use of chemicals previously used in eradication. Even if 2,4-D is successful, there will be plenty of ways where it will be advisable to use the old chemicals.”
Dr. Evans: “We haven’t anything by way of completed experimental data… We plan now to set up a lot of work in the Spring; a really thorough test, and it is my impression that if we go ahead on this schedule we will able to give a good report at the next meeting.”
Oregon Report Summarized:
Report given by V.H. Freed: “in this past year considerable interest in weed control has been evinced by the farmers of Oregon. (Details on various state-wide committees’ work was included)… more counties are now entering the picture. The extension service of the college has been carrying on educational work on weed control and will probably devote more time and energy to this part of their program in the future.
“In the research field, we have, of course, devoted a good deal of attention to 2,4-D this past year. It has been tried on a number of different plants with varying degrees of success. We have found this material to fit in quite nicely as a selective herbicide on grains and grasses, but we feel that there is still considerable work to be done on the material before final recommendations can be made for it as a general toxicant on pernicious perennial plants.
“One of the things which we consider a major achievement for the year was the establishment of a gorse control experiment sub-station. This is being financed by matched money of the state and counties involved. Both chemical and cultural methods of control will be studied as well as a combination of the two. We are attempting to evaluate some of the new chemical herbicides as well as finding new uses for some of the older ones. Work on the chlorinated hydrocarbons as soil fumigants has proved satisfactory.”
Montana Report Summarized:
Report was given by H.E. Morris: “Weed Control work in Montana is carried out under two distinct programs:
“1. Under a definite county program in which legalized weed control districts are created. The weed program is authorized by a board of three Weed Supervisors and the field work supervised by a field man selected by the supervisors.
“2. Under the regulations of the State AAA Committee, in which certain allowances are made for various procedures…
“Almost 100 persons attended (a two day meeting for Weed Supervisors in Bozeman), and the general opinion of the group was that such meetings should be held occasionally in order to coordinate more closely the control work of the counties. Suggested amendments to the weed law were also discussed at the meeting… In 1945, 18 counties appropriated $136,484 for weed control work… Eight counties appropriated $7000 or more. Approximately 463,500 pounds of chlorates, 2700 gallons of carbon disulphide, 44,000 pounds of Borax, and 40,000 gallons of crude oil for searing and spraying were used in weed control; 18,228 square rods were treated with 2,4-D, 26,000 acres were under cultivation, and 4000 acres were turned back for growing crops.
“Montana has 38 weed control districts in 17 out of the 56 counties. The districts comprise more than 3.5 million acres.
“Recently two counties have organized on a county-wide basis, and the trend appears to be for this form of organization.
“The progress in weed control has been steady since 1940. County appropriations have doubled; the use of chlorates and Borax has materially increased; use of carbon disulphide has remained steady; searing and bury burning reached a peak in 1941 and 1942 and rapidly declined. Acres under cultivation has steadily increased. The weed control districts have increased from 14 to 38…”
Nevada Report Summarized:
Report given by Lee M. Burge: “Weed control operations have, due to labor and material shortages, been confined to old organized control programs and to survey and experimental activities. Control programs on puncture vine, camel thorn, Canada Thistle, white top, morning glory and knapweed have been continued in some locations.
“Surveys have continued to show a rapid spread of the poison plant, Halegeton glomeratus, at a surprisingly heavy spread in established areas. Sheep losses from this plant have again been reported, the latest from Pershing County, where 130 head were lost…
“During the 1945 season, a survey was made of the 200 miles of main canals in the Truckee Meadows area for water hemlock and narrow leaf milkweed. These canals were all found to be generally infested over practically the full length... Cattle losses and, possibly, deer losses have been directly traced to these hemlock infested canals and ditches, especially during the Spring months when other feed is more or less short.
“Preliminary surveys and other valleys of western Nevada have indicated a similar condition, it being estimated that between 130 and 150 head of cattle are lost annually…
“Preliminary steps have been taken to organize a control program in the Truckee Meadows area…
“Experimental plots have showed some promise for 2,4-D. However, final observations on some 45 plots will not be made until this coming Spring. This material is being compared in adjoining plots with Ammate, Chlorate, and Sinox.
“Test plots on Halegeton has shown the oils as the most practical control material…”
Idaho Report Summarized:
Report given by B.E. Kuhns: “The Idaho weed control program, as conducted under county supervision, has made quite satisfactory progress during the past year.
“The total amount of money budgeted by counties for weed programs was $625,000. This is nearly double the amount budgeted in 1944. 14 of the 30 counties conducting organized weed programs raised a part of their budget through special tax levies, ranging from ½ cent to the legal limit of 10 cents per hundred dollar valuation. Substantial assistance was also provided to counties by a State contribution. The State appropriation of $70,000 dollars per year is used to purchase chemicals which are pro-rated to the various counties on the basis of the amount of money spent for weed work in each county.
“Slightly over 15,000 acres of farmland were under a cultivation program in 1945. Most of this land was cultivated with county equipment on a three-year contract between the county and the farmer. Rates charge for this or service varied widely..; the most common rates being $10 and $12 per acre.
“On the basis of the actual cost accounts kept by some counties, the service actually cost counties from $15-$20 per acre…
“Carbon bisulphide and sodium chlorate are still the standard chemicals used in Idaho for weed control work. The amount of chemicals applied in 1945 was considerably less than in 1944. A total of 150,000 gallons of carbon bisulphide was used…and about 1.2 million pounds of sodium chlorate. The use of these chemicals was seriously limited by the amount made available.
“Eighteen counties employed full-time weed supervisors…”
2,4-D in the Idaho Weed Program
“2,4-D in various commercial preparations was used on the experimental and trial basis in most of the counties of Idaho. Applications were made under widely varied conditions of soil, temperature and weather. Several counties purchased products and sold them to the farmers at cost. A total of 1,277 gallons of liquid 2,4-D products and 125 pounds of powder were thus handled. Eight counties conducted spray programs for farmers on a limited scale. The basis of charges for the service varied. In most cases the farmers were assessed the actual cost of the work and material. One county charged 10 cents per square rod for the material and one-half the actual cost of labor. One county charged $35 per acre for material and labor.
“Reports on about 125 trials were tabulated and furnished to the Extension Agronomist by weed supervisors and county agents. Many other trials were made of which we have no record.”
Research
“Under a special research appropriation made by the State Legislature in 1945, a state-wide weed control research program was established under the supervision of the University Agronomy Department. Lambert C. Erickson, a graduate botanist, was employed to take direct charge of this work.
“Mr. Erickson started his duties on July 1 and as a start on this program applied 221 plots with 2,4-D in ten counties on twenty major perennial weeds.
“An intensive research program on 2,4-D was also conducted by C.I. Seely, representing the U.S. Bureau of Plant Industry, and cooperating with the College of Agriculture at Moscow. Mr. Seeley’s weed research work is conducted largely at the Genesee Weed Station near Moscow.”
Halegeton
“Eight hundred sheep were lost in Cassia County during the fall of 1945 from eating Halegeton.”
Educational
“Renewed emphasis has been placed on the educational program for weed control and eradication by County Agents, County Weed Supervisors and the College of Agriculture. Community and county meetings relative to weed control were conducted in most of the counties during the year.”
Colorado Report (full text):
Report given by Bruce J. Thornton: “The research program in weed control at the Colorado Experiment Station has been greatly expanded. Extensive field tests were conducted the past season with the 2,4-D herbicides. These tests involved 4 concentrations, 5 rates, 15 formulations, 10 perennial noxious weeds and lawn weeds and were conducted at sub-stations in five sections of the state. In addition, uniform tests to determine optimum date of application as affecting different perennial weeds were conducted in cooperation with the Extension Service in 38 counties in the State. Results apparent to date, although in no way final, emphasize the great need for further information especially as pertaining to the physiological aspects of the use of the 2,4-D herbicides.
“The efforts in fundamental research are divided into the physiological phase under the direction of Dr. Fults in the Botany Department, the chemical phase in cooperation with the Chemistry Section and the electrical phase in cooperation with the Electrical Engineering Section (e.g., academic departments at Colorado State College). The physiological studies, which involve the laboratory and greenhouse activities, are conducted in cooperation with the chemical and electrical phases as well as the field tests and are revealing some very interesting phenomena.
“Considerable 2,4-D was used in the State last year by individuals. Although the results were frequently disappointing, especially as compared to the advance claims made for herbicides of this type, indications are that they were sufficiently satisfactory to encourage a much wider use of the materials this coming season. Efforts will be made to obtain as much information from the source as possible in addition to that gained from the controlled tests.
“Colorado does not have a recognized State weed control program. However, many of the Counties are conducting weed control programs through the setting up of weed control districts as provided by the State weed law. This permits the County Commissioners to set up a weed fund either from the general funds or by levying an assessment, not to exceed one-half mill, as may be desired. In counties having weed control districts the cultivation of weed areas and the application of chemicals may be conducted with county equipment and county labor under county supervision, but the county is reimbursed in full by the land owner for the cost of the operations and the materials used. In regions where weed districts do not exist the individual land owner must carry his own program. All the weed districts in Colorado are at present set up on a voluntary basis. The law provides for compulsory districts but it is felt that such should not be resorted to until the need is fully apparent.”
California Report Summarized:
Report given by Walter S. Ball: “… We have always looked on Klamath weed, or St. John’s wort, as one of our major weed problems and it is still a major project in California. It has caused such heavy losses to our stockmen, through depletion of the ranges, that it is worthy of attention and we will continue to discuss it as long as it is of importance.
“The most recent important phase of this program is the work being started on the biological control of Klamath weed. A beetle which belongs to the Chrysomelid group feeds upon the Hypericum species in Australia and in some instances has actually killed out heavily infested areas.
“The entomologist of the Experiment Station, of the College of Agriculture, working with the Federal quarantine officials as well as the State officials, has taken all the precautionary steps in introducing this insect to California in the hope that it might find favorable conditions where it will breed and increase, and at the same time assist in the control of this weed. Starvation tests were carried out at the Experiment Station in Berkeley to further assure workers the beetle would not injure other crops; that it favors and will live only on Hypericum species. Releases of the insects have been made in three or four areas in the State under slightly different ecological conditions. In one of those areas, located in Marin County, the insect has fed upon the plant and is starting to increase in numbers. This is the first encouraging report we have had. This work is in a purely experimental stage and we feel it may be years before the population is increased to a point where it will reach economic importance.
“Our chief problem now is to maintain interest on our other methods of control, such as the use of Borax, and cultural practices. Many individuals interested in this program have learned of the biological control method. Already they are asking for insects and considering abandonment of their present programs.
“Another form of weed control to which we are looking more and more is our selective spraying, especially in flax and vegetable crops. The selective spraying in grain, of course, has become very well established.
“In addition to our selective spray work, we feel there is a place for pre-emergent spraying, which as most of us know, is spraying the planted area a day or two prior to emergence of the crop plant. As has been shown in our selective spray program, this can be done with oil with low volume per acre which will successfully kill young weeds. Successful pre-emergence spraying requires knowledge relative to the period of time needed for certain weed seeds to germinate. I have delegated a member of my Bureau to collect weed seeds in the vegetable growing areas in order that we may have this information available. There are certain crop seeds which require such a long period for germination that many of our annual weeds have ample time to germinate and be treated prior to emergence of the crop.
“Undoubtedly you have noticed the stream-lined electrical machine on the lawn. A year or so ago this was brought into California from Wyoming where the owners felt that they could kill deep-rooted perennial weeds. They have been given every opportunity to use this machine. The most extensive work was carried on in the Mendota area of Fresno County where it was found that morning glory was not too successfully handled, although there were indications that Russian knapweed was being killed and that they could handle shallow-routed perennials such as Johnson grass and Bermuda grass. The areas I have seen have not gone through a complete growing season and I am waiting until the Spring to check on some of them. (Note: i.e., the machine did not work well on some deep-rooted perennials).
“One interesting thing worth mentioning is that whether or not this machine successfully handles a weed, the growers seem to be sold on this practice, and some of them are giving contracts for this type of weed control. I am in no position at this time to make any recommendations and I will not make any until I have actually observed and studied the effect of the machine on plants which have had a full year in which to recover. The owners of this machine are in the audience and I am quite sure they will be glad to discuss it with you, individually.
“Another problem that I believe is going to develop in all the Western states is the elimination of common roadside and ditchbank species that are alternate hosts of plant diseases or insect pests which may be carried over on these weeds and injure crop plants. We have had several cases in California where the elimination of such host plant has materially increased yield.
“The last point I wish to stress is my belief that we must give further attention to the question of using commercial pest control operators. Our Agricultural Code provides for registration and is so set up that the individual must know what he is doing or his license will be revoked. I make this statement primarily because I feel that we are going to experience a great deal more trouble in the use of 2,4-D and its mis-handling than we have heretofore unless operators know the material, know how it is applied, and know when to apply it.”
Report from the North Central States Weed Control Conference, Summarized:
Report given by T.F. Yost: The North Central States held the second annual Weed Conference in St. Paul. The two-day conference was attended by nearly 100 delegates, and all states in the region were represented. Nearly 100 commercial representatives attended as well. Four standing work committees met on the first afternoon: 1. Research; 2. Uniform State Weed and Seed Laws; 3. Federal Extension Weed Specialist; and 4: Federal Legislation to Control Interstate Movement of Noxious Weed Infested Seed, Feed and other Material; and Movement and Sale of Weed Infested Materials by Federal Agencies. Committee 4 represents the combined work of two committees.
“The Research Committee did an excellent piece of work under the able leadership of Mr. F.L. Timmons, Agronomist, USDA of the Bureau of Plant Industry... This committee set up a uniform plan for conducting research work with 2,4-D which was adopted and used by most of the federal and state weed research workers in this area, as well as several other states and several provincial workers and the Dominion Experimental Farms of Canada. This committee was divided into several sub-committees, each of which summarized the results of various phases of the plan... This committee has already revised its plan of work for 1946 in the light of experience during 1945. This committee has done a considerable amount of work which has been recognized the nation over by weed research workers. The remaining committees are working at their jobs diligently but are working on problems that will require a longer time to accomplish results. The conference has appointed two new committees, one for the purpose of drafting a model herbicide law for states, and also a committee to draw up a constitution and by-laws for the organization…
“It might be of interest here to state that the general opinion of most workers seems to be that the results of 2,4-D for the first year were not sufficiently conclusive to warrant recommending its used for perennial weeds. It was recognized by all that the percent of kill and plant counts made according to surface indications did not correspond with live roots found by digging at 6 to 18 inches beneath the surface... Much more experimental work needs to be done to determine the proper place and use of 2,4-D for perennial weeds. According to the reports of the committee and some other workers, 2,4-D gave good results generally with certain annual weeds but not with all of them. The use of 2,4-D as a lawn herbicide was generally accepted and recognized by all workers. The speaker personally believes that 2,4-D can be accepted as the best dandelion killer in general lawn herbicide that has come to the attention of the ‘lover of nice lawns’... According to Dr. Krauss the near future should bring forth new weed killers far superior to 2,4-D.
“The last day was devoted to state reports. A few states made notable improvements in their state weed control laws. Several states in the North Central area have excellent weed laws which are supporting a good program and which are producing worthwhile results. Several other states have excellent laws on the statute books but are not supporting an active program. Other states have antiquated weed laws which need to be modernized and brought up to date and put on an active basis…
“I believe that I am safe in saying that the North Central States Weed Control Conference is a going concern and that it is the recognized agency to deal with weed matters for the area. The organization is established and can speak for the 13 North Central States on the weed problem with any organization, group or agency...
”Before closing, I desire to pay special tribute to the excellent research work done by the US Bureau of Plant Industry, to the AAA program for making payments for noxious weed control and to the other Federal agencies who have properly assumed their weed responsibilities.
”At the present time, the Federal Government is doing two important things bearing on the weed problem, which are research dealing with eradication or control, and administration of the federal Seed Act. Both of these activities are being conducted in an excellent manner…
”In the weed control program the National Congress has curiously adopted what seems to be a hands-off policy. Maybe it would be better to say that the Congress seems not to be interested in the national weed control problem. Some of the states, in order to protect themselves against the weed menace, have been forced to initiate and support their own eradication and control program, while the Federal Government has set idly by and has not even done a good job of looking on. The weed problem is so broad in scope, so devastating in effect, and so complicated when considered from the overall standpoint, that we believe the time is here when Congress should sit up and take notice that there is a weed condition in our country that is of national importance, which if not properly handled will undermine the greatest resource of our nation, which is the soil. There are some aspects of the weed problem that cannot be handled on the state level. These problems cut across state lines and can only be handled by Federal action…”
Summary of the Report of the Uniform Research Committee, North Central States Weed Control Conference
Report was given by F.L. Timmons, Agronomist, US Bureau of Plant Industry, Soils, and Agricultural Engineering: “The uniform program of experimentation with 2,4-D and other selective herbicides in the North Central States Weed Control Conference is a project of our Conference Research Committee... Our Research Committee was originally set up prior to the first meeting of the North Central Conference in… 1944, with instructions to survey the field of weed research and bring to the meeting a report on the status of weed research and recommendations for future activities in that field... In that report, (recommendation) number 3,… suggested for accomplishing closer cooperation among weed research workers, read as follows:
“3. The coordination of the various experiment station and Bureau of Plant Industry plans of experiment or methods of attack on certain weed problems of regional importance to permit direct comparison of the results in different parts of the region and a quicker solution of the problem than would be possible through independent research at the various stations under different plans.
“The committee report was adopted by the Conference but this recommendation was not immediately applied to the 2,4-D situation.
“The course of events to come was accurately prophesied at the meeting in Omaha by Mr. L.W. Kephart of the USDA in his discussion of ‘Chemical Weed Killers After the War.’ After reporting briefly on preliminary results with 2,4-D in 1944, he advanced the opinion that revolutionary developments in chemical weed control would soon present weed research workers and control officials with the problems that they were hardly prepared to handle. He predicted widespread publicity and sensational claims for the new weed killers and pointed out the need for a disinterested agency to assemble information, correlate the facts and act as an umpire in the situation. He suggested that our research committee was the logical group to do this in the north central area.
“By the end of January, 1945, much of Mr. Kephart’s prophecy had materialized. Several sensational articles and advertisements about 2,4-D had appeared in print, and the barometer of public interest was rising rapidly as indicated by the sudden flood of inquiries received by nearly every weed control and research worker in the country. It was immediately evident that our meager facilities and personnel for weed research would not be able to gain information rapidly enough to protect the public interest except through organized effort.
“After considerable correspondence five members of our 9-man Research Committee were able to get together for two days,… and work out the first draft of a uniform plan of experiments, using a limited amount of information of information available at that time about 2,4-D. During the next six weeks two revised drafts of the plan were circulated among the committee members and on March 31, copies of the final draft of the plan were mailed to the directors of the 13 state experiment stations.
“The uniform plan in its final form was a 20-page mimeographed booklet with seven distinct features. These were: 1. A statement of the objectives of the plan; 2. A list of the chemicals to be tested and their sources; 3. A uniform code system of designating the different experiments and various treatments; 4. Outlines of six suggested experiments on different weed problems showing the chemicals, concentrations, rates of application and stages of weed or crop growth; 5. Suggestions for conducting experiments as to plot plan and replication, determination of results and retreatments; 6. A set of solution tables showing the amounts of the various products necessary to prepare different concentrations of 2,4-D spray solution in quantities up to 10 gallons and; 7. A complete list of references to technical and popular articles on hormone-like chemicals published up to that date…
“More than 80 copies of the uniform plan of experiments were sent to prospective cooperators and others interested. Many requests for copies were received from persons outside our North Central Conference, in states as far east as New Jersey, as far south as Texas and as far west as California and Oregon. Several copies of the plan was sent to workers in Canada.
“A total of 35 cooperators reported the results from a total of 160 different experiments on different weeds. Thirty-six of the experiments were conducted by cooperators in Canada at stations distributed from Newfoundland to Alberta.
“Our Research Committee was… assigned the task of summarizing and reporting upon the results... The task of summarization resulted in many a headache for these sub-committees. Despite the fact that the results reported were from experiments based on uniform plans, there were some variations in treatments and other details in nearly all cases, so that the problem of correlating the results and arriving at conclusions as to what they showed was a tedious and difficult problem…
“These reports demonstrated the value of our uniform program of research and also revealed some of its weaknesses. The uniform program was as successful in 1945 as could have been expected in the first year… bringing the results and data together in regional summaries for study and discuss made the most efficient use possible of those data. The outstanding weakness of the program in 1945 was the lack of uniformity in conducting the experiments and the resulting inability to make direct comparisons in many cases. As one of the sub-committees stated it, ‘the only thing uniform about the individual experiments reported was their lack of uniformity.’ This variability in the supposedly uniform experiments in 1945 is understandable when one considers that the uniform plan was developed hastily and presented suddenly to the experiment station directors and research workers too late in the season for careful plans to be made…
“Our Research Committee has recently completed a careful revision of our uniform plan of experiments for 1946… We are looking forward to a much more successful year in 1946…
“We have outlines for six different suggested experiments covering the various phases of the 2,4-D problem. These are as follows:
“Perhaps you would be interested in a brief resume of the general trends that were apparent in the regional summaries of results from our uniform experiments in 1945. The results were extremely variable and indicate that the effects of 2,4-D on plants are influenced more strongly by differences in the stage and rate of growth of the plant, in temperature, air humidity, soil moisture, fertility, and texture then are those of most other weed-killing chemicals. In general, the best results were obtained when the weeds were growing most rapidly and before they reach the blossom or fruiting stage. Results were less satisfactory when temperatures were too low or the soil was too dry to promote rapid growth. Increasing the quantity of spray above the amount necessary to uniformly wet the vegetation did not appear to get better results... On the other hand, increasing the concentration of 2,4-D… did seem to give much better results on certain weeds.
“At individual stations there were wide differences in the effectiveness of different commercial formulations of 2,4-D. However, these differences were not consistent over the region and tended to smooth out in the regional summaries. With few exceptions, there was no significant average advantage for anyone product over another…
“The various 2,4-D preparations gave good results more consistently on dandelion and other broad-leaved lawn weeds than on any other type of weeds. The results with dandelions were not as uniformly good in Kansas and Nebraska as in states farther north and east... Applications made any time during the growing season when temperatures and soil moisture were such as to promote active growth seem to give good results on dandelion. Sprayed plots were frequently re-infested by seedlings by the end of the season, indicating that spraying once or twice each year will be necessary to control dandelion and other broad-leaved lawn weeds.
“Most of the lawn grasses were not seriously injured by 2,4-D sprays. However, buffalo grass frequently showed some discoloration and stunting of growth, especially when sprayed in mid-summer…
“Our results… showed 2,4-D sprays to be rather uniformly effective in killing a majority of the species of broad-leaved annual weeds, particularly in early stages of growth. However, none of the grass type weeds were seriously affected, and a considerable number of broad-leaved species (of weeds) proved highly resistant. 2,4-D did not appear to be superior to Sinox for controlling annual weeds in cereals, flax or grass crops.
“The results showed the use of 2,4-D to be more or less hazardous in all kinds of growing crops. Most of the vegetables, ornamentals, and legume crops were killed or severely damaged even by low concentrations of spray. Some of them proved extremely sensitive and were injured by wind drifted spray or by volatilized fumes from nearby sprayed areas. The small grains and other grass type crops in most cases were not seriously injured. However, in some instances reductions in grain yields were as great as 50% and even 100%. The cases in which serious injury resulted to grass type crops were frequent enough to show the need for more experimental work and study before enough information is available to recommend methods that will guarantee the profitable use of 2,4-D for controlling weeds in these crops.
“The injurious effects on crop plants of residual 2,4-D in the soil from spray applications were apparent during periods varying from only a few weeks to several months, apparently depending upon the amount of rainfall received after the spray application. The residual effects seem to persist longer in the soil in the dryer states like Kansas and Nebraska than in humid areas like Ohio. The residual effects of 2,4-D were most injurious to the more sensitive vegetable and legume crops and less detrimental to the grasses and cereals.
“None of the results obtained from our uniform experiments on deep-rooted perennial weeds are considered complete at this time… For the most part, the results with 2,4-D on other deep-rooted perennial weeds were less favorable than the bindweed... The results indicated that a single application of 2,4-D usually will not give a complete kill of any of the weeds of this type…
“…recommendations were drawn up by the Policy Committee of our Conference after a thorough study and discussion of the results of our uniform program of research in 1945. The statements of policy as approved by the Conference are as follows:
1. That the uniform plan of experimentation with 2,4-D and other chemicals be continued as a conference project in 1946.
2. That the conference approve the use of 2,4-D for the control of certain lawn weeds, the qualification and details of recommendation to be set up by each state.
3. That, based on experiments to date, this conference is not prepared at this time to approve the general use of 2,4-D on annual weeds in growing crops.
4. That the conference approve the general use of 2,4-D on certain annual weeds, not in growing crops, the lists of such weeds to be prepared by the Research Committee. A list of resistant weeds will also be prepared.
5. Due to variable results and the short experimental period, this conference is not in a position to recommend 2,4-D for general use in eradicating deep-rooted perennial weeds.”
The rest of this report gave some details on results on specific weeds, and included a list of 23 weeds resistant to 2,4-D. Only one state-level report (from Kansas) was included. The report from Kansas had a brief summary of injurious effects:
“…The effect of 2,4-D upon the soil seems to be rather severe but temporary. In most cases it disappears within 4 to 8 weeks, especially when rains come during that period. Whether there is a cumulative effect from repeated treatments has not been determined... It has not been known to produce any ill effects upon persons handling it or upon animals consuming vegetation sprayed with it. However, when applied near shrubs, flowers, or vegetable plants there is great danger of wind carrying sufficient spray solution to seriously damage the valuable plants…”
The minutes returned to reports of the committees for the Western Weed Conference. The Conference President, Walter S. Ball reported that the executive committee suggested the following: “…inviting the manufacturers of weed control materials and equipment to join the group as paid members with the understanding that the State officials only would have the voting power: This action was taken primarily because the various manufacturers and chemical concerns are taking the research men that we formerly have had in our State Service and in order to receive the benefits derived from the training of these men and the knowledge which they are going to continue to get, we thought it important that they become affiliated with our group…”
Mr. Freed presented a report on the chemistry of 2,4-D, the proper application conditions for the chemical, some suggestions on how to avoid injuries to crops, and how to clean the equipment. His report on soil sterility stated: “In general, 2,4-D breaks down within a month in warm, moist soils but may persist for six months in cool or dry soils. A comparison of soil types under greenhouse conditions shows a higher toxicity of 2,4-D in sandy soils than in clay soils, but a more rapid leaching from the sandy soils. Under field conditions, the toxicity in the soil will depend on the amount of 2,4-D applied, the soil type, temperature, and moisture conditions.”
Next followed some reports from some of the chemical company representatives in attendance. One described new developments in creating specialty sprayers to use with 2,4-D and other chemicals. He commented that some individuals are using high pressure sprayers that were designed for other agricultural purposes, and that may not be appropriate for use with the new chemicals, where low pressure sprayers are better.
For the next part of the meeting, various commercial company representatives talked about the various types of old and new equipment they have available for applying 2,4-D, and some of the weeds they are using the equipment on.
Next a report was given by Mr. H.R. Offord, from the US Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine, entitled, “Control of Host Plants in a Plant Disease Program with Special Reference to Ribes and White Pine Blister Rust Disease.” The report described federal eradication programs underway, to kill various plants that carry viruses and rusts that damage crops. The plants being eradicated and their diseases were:
A very wide array of mechanical and chemical methods were being used on Ribes populations.
A report is included from Mr. J.E. White of the U.S. Indian Service I Salt Lake City, Utah, titled, “What the Indian Service is doing in weed control work.” The report describes collaborations between the Bureau of Indian Affairs, State and county weed control organizations, and university scientists. A range survey had been conducted on Indian lands in Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, California, and Nevada. The Survey examined the extent of weeds on Indian grazing areas, the extent of plants dangerous to livestock, and helped to teach the Indians recognized and practical means of weed control. A program had been implemented to educate school children to recognize various plants.
On February 27, the meeting included discussion of the mechanisms involved in the killing actions of contact herbicides. The following topics were discussed:
A report from the Research Committee on the use of 2,4-D is given by Mr. W.A. Harvey, Chairman of the Experiment Station, University of California, Davis, California. The report included the following statements: “The committee would like to emphasize the need for further coordination of the research programs of the various State, Federal, and commercial agencies. It is felt that a greater interchange of information between agencies as well as some specialization by certain agencies we would be highly desirable.”
“The committee would like to emphasize that the present information on 2,4-D is incomplete and that much of the work is preliminary. Thus the recommendations given herein are tentative and should be considered subject to revision as our information and knowledge increases.”
The committee describes recommended guidelines for testing to 2,4-D on various crops. They include a list of weeds already known to be susceptible to, or resistant to 2,4-D.
Next, the Resolutions Committee Report is given by Mr. Morris. The committee recommended the following resolution: “Now, therefore, be it resolved, by the Western Weed Control Conference, assembled at Reno, Nevada, February 26 and 27, 1946, recommend to the Honorable Secretary of Agriculture and to the Chief of the Bureau of Plant Industry, Chemistry, Soils, and Agricultural Engineering that a separate Division of Weed Research and Control be established to carry out adequately the needs of this program; and the additional regional experimental work be carried on by the government in the irrigated sections of the West on control of important noxious weeds, and that the work of the proposed new Division be closely coordinated with the work of the State Experiment Stations.”
Discussion is made about coordinating the release of this resolution with the similar resolution adopted by the North Central Conference, to put more pressure on Congressmen. The resolution was adopted by the members.
To return to the other archival minutes, select links below:
Next Section:
Minutes of the 8th Annual Western Weed Control Conference, Reno, Nevada, Feb 26-27, 1946
Slade Franklin, Wyoming Department of Agriculture Weed and Pest Coordinator, loaned these archival minutes to Dr. Delena Norris-Tull. The original minutes were typed up documents from the 1940s. Dr. Norris-Tull transcribed and summarized the minutes, and added commentary.
Summary of significant events:
162 individuals attended, double the number from the previous year.
The following states sent representatives to the conference:
- California
- Colorado
- Idaho
- Montana
- Nevada
- Oregon
- Utah
- Washington
- Wyoming
As in previous years, Arizona and New Mexico did not send representatives.
Treasurer’s report: Balance on hand $557.20
The representatives discussed the idea of increasing dues from $15 to $25. They also discussed the idea of inviting federal agencies to become dues-paying members.
Wyoming Report Summarized:
Dr. George B. Harston presented the report: Wyoming has had increased interest in using 2,4-D products. After the war, the state was able to obtain some Altacide. In addition to cultivation and burning methods methods, landowners in the state are also using oils, Borax/Borascu, carbon disulphide, Sinox, and ammate. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation is showing an interest in weed control and is cooperating with the state.
“Local officials of the Indian Service are very interested in the alarming spread of the noxious weeds on Indian Lands, but have been unsuccessful in precipitating action from Washington. The Indian land weed menace represents a serious problem in Wyoming.
”The University Experiment Station did some experimenting with 2,4-D products on dandelions; but, it is regrettable that the data was not made available in a written form… for…this conference.
”Field tracts treated with 2,4-D products were observed throughout the season by State Department of Agriculture personnel...
“Landowners throughout the State were enthusiastic about 2,4-D products. This seemed to be partially due to the publicity given the products; and, also to favorable results obtained from their personal application of the products. Although the State Department has not recommended 2,4-D, because of the need for further experimental information, many individuals purchased it for personal use…
“Our control and eradication expenses are carried equally by the State, the County, and the landowner. Never have State and County funds been adequate to permit work on all farms needing weed control. Those working with the problem for several years are now advocating that the State should spend their funds on state-owned property; the County funds should be spent on county-owned property, and the landowner should stand the total expense on his property. The need is being felt for weed control operators acting as private contractors with equipment, training and facilities which the average land owner does not have and cannot afford to obtain privately…
“In accordance with the decision at the last conference, the Wyoming representative furnished his congressmen with a copy of the resolutions pertaining to the weeds on Federally-owned lands. A favorable reply was received from all the congressmen…”
Washington Report Summarized:
E.J. Kreizinger gave the report: “Weed control work in Washington is developing at a progressive, increasing rate, and farmers are becoming more interested in their control.
“At the present time there are 11 of the 39 counties… in which there are weed districts or weed extermination areas organized. Several more are in the process of organization. Some of the areas are organized on a county-wide bases while others are limited to certain isolated areas. It is the hope in developing the districts that the natural drainage or watershed areas can be recognized and weed control developed for the entire area affected.
“Bindweed, Canada thistle, Russian knapweed and whitetop are the weeds receiving major attention at the present time. New work is being initiated by the experiment station this year on Klamath weed.
”The various types and kinds of chemicals used for weed control are being tested on various weeds and also on these weeds in various stages of maturity.”
REPORT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON WEEDS TO THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION’S PLANT INDUSTRY COMMITTEE, Memphis, Tennessee, November 1945.
“Several states have passed laws and have set up fairly good constructive weed programs. However, the majority of the states have inadequate weed control programs or no program at all. Too often, however, action is taken by a state legislature setting up provision for inspection and control without appropriating ample funds to carryout the enforcement for these purposes.
“Most of the state weed control programs now in operation follow along the same general lines as the program in the State of Washington. The Washington law makes it possible for 50% of the landowners in any area by mutual agreement to form a weed control district or a weed extermination area…The law provides for the proper financing and enforcement of weed control prep practices decided upon by the group concern within the area. It also makes possible the formation of an area of any size from one section to a whole county. It has worked fairly effectively where it has been tried out and it is now being used in several counties. The law provides for the inclusion of public rights-of-way, for Federal, State and County lands. These inclusions are necessary in any weed control program because of watersheds or other means of re-infesting land where weeds have once been eradicated.
“There are several weaknesses in the Washington law which is true of the weed laws of other states. It does not provide for definite coordination with the existing seed law, nor does it provide for control of the movement of livestock from weed infested areas through weed control areas. It also fails to provide for prevention of the movement of vehicles along public highways carrying weed infested materials. Also there are no regulations regarding the sale or movement of weed infested grains.
“In many areas the cost of eradication of weeds on the more marginal types of land would be greater than the value of the property on which the weed eradication program might be carried out. It, therefore, would seem that the eradication of weeds must of necessity be a long range program.
“The constant increase and wide distribution of noxious weeds constitutes a very serious menace to the farming industry of the United States. Almost all lands in all the states are infested with one or more varieties of noxious weeds...
“Several years ago the Agricultural Service Department Committee of the United States Chamber of Commerce made a survey of the weed conditions and reported that noxious weeds cause the farmers of the United States to lose each year $3 billion in crops. The loss probably is much greater at the present time due to the increasing weed infestation and the increased value of farm crops.
“It is apparent that noxious weeds cause greater loss to the farmers than all livestock diseases, plant diseases, and insect pests put together. While all farmers realize the menace of noxious weeds, many seem to have an apathetic attitude toward the problem of weed control. We believe the reason for this is weed infestation has developed slowly over a period of many years, and many farmers seem to believe nothing can be done about it, and that weeds are just something they have to put up with. This undoubtedly is a reason why there has been no greater demand on the part of the farmers for an aggressive Federal-State weed control program in past years…
“If extensive control measures can be carried out, it will result in greatly increased yields of practically all crops and will increase farm income several billions of dollars. What is more important, it would lower the cost of farm production which will be the most important single factor in successful farming in the future…
“A weed control program must of necessity be a long-time program… When established in any state, section or nationally, it should be set up to extend over a long period of time, not just one or two years and then neglected. If neglected after such a short period, the money spent on the initial investment is entirely wasted.”
Recommendations of the Subcommittee:
“It is unanimously agreed among those who have made a study of noxious weeds that there is a critical need for a strong, aggressively administered, and fully financed National Weed Control Program.
“It is further agreed that the United States Department of Agriculture should create within the Bureau of Plant Industry, a Weed Division to deal with the various phases of the nation’s weed problems and extend its research, investigations and experiments with noxious weeds on a national scale to assist in developing the most efficient and economical methods of control and eradication.
“1. Research: first and undoubtedly the most important approach to an adequate solution of the weed problem is thorough research. It is agreed that Congress should appropriate sufficient funds to carry out such a program. Federal research should be expended to better cover all the states, and state research should be conducted on a uniform and correlated basis with federal projects where possible.
“An intensive research program is especially necessary now that the field of organic chemistry is being tapped for herbicides and more complex materials are being used than has been true in the past. These studies require the work of plant physiologists, plant chemists, soil chemists and others in the field of research to work out in detail all that can be learned relative to the various chemicals and their reactions on plants and soils, in order that basic information can be developed and passed on to field workers for practical application.
“2. Education: Second and equally important is a program of education. Education and weed control has generally been lacking throughout the United States. There are certain outstanding examples, however, which do prove that an educational program is most helpful and in many cases necessary in order that the farmers may come to know the more serious weeds and in order that the results of research can be properly applied. It is not only important to educate the farmer and the stockman, but also those from all industries which have to do with agriculture, including financial interests, and others who have either a direct or an indirect part in the agricultural field.
“It is felt that the office of Experiment Stations in the US Department of Agriculture should employ a weed specialist who could work with the various states to promote better research, educational methods, and laws in weed control.
“3. Control Practices: Following the research and educational program, control practices can be more understandingly developed and utilized. Past experience has proved thousands of dollars have been lost due to the lack of proper research, proper education, and proper application. In order to carry out a successful weed control program, it is necessary that all three of these steps be given equal consideration...
“4. Regulation: Regulation is necessary in many of the fields of pest control and there is no exception as far as weed control is concerned. So long as large areas of the United States are being farmed by tenant farming, regulation is going to be necessary in many instances to complete a weed control program... Regulation relative to the movement of infested commodities, especially crop seeds, field grains and inspection of incoming lots of seeds or plants is most essential.
Conclusions
“Fundamentally, this Subcommittee on Weeds believes…., in order to carry through a successful long-time program, the organization of all forces to work cooperatively and coordinately is very important…”
Utah Report Summarized:
George Hobson presented the report: “At the close of 1945 we will have released out of the cultivation program 31,600 acres of land upon which white top, wild morning glory, Canada Thistle, and Russian knapweed make up the major portion. In most cases, this land has been kept reasonably clean since its release. Some, however, has been allowed to re-infest almost as badly as in the beginning. The amount that has been improperly handled would approximate about 8%. The land proper has not been neglected as much as fence lines, canals and ditches running through and bordering the areas. Landowners cannot be given full blame for this condition because in the past three years chemicals have not been available for proper treatment. One of the most important factors that has contributed to the continuation and effectiveness of the weed project is the large crops produced on these lands. Usually the amount produced as against former years has been from 1/3 to ½ more; this extra increase justifying the expense of eradication.
“We are looking forward in the future years to a very much reduced number of areas in cultivation due to the effective possibilities of the new chemical 2,4-D.
“Cultivation: The lowest acreage in the past five years have been cultivated this season, which is … 6210 acres. About 1500 acres less than in 1943 and 1944. The reduced amount has not been because of the introduction of new chemicals but from the desire upon the part of the landowners to utilize the land while the prices of farm produce is bringing an attractive price. Another factor affecting reduction in acres is that counties have had difficulty in providing equipment and manpower to cultivate the acreage available. If the late spring and cold weather has not permitted the plants to restore their root system, we are looking forward to the 1945 cultural program being the best of any previous year.”
[Note: The above refers to cultivation methods used to eradicate weeds, not crop acreage.]
“Chemicals: Chemicals have been very scarce… (The amount available) was only about one-third that the program would require… Borax and carbon bisuphide have been available throughout the season in any quantity desired, but because of the excessive amount of labor required in the application of the latter, very little has been used in comparison with former years…
“The New 2,4-D Chemical: … 2,4-D has been used quite extensively in (three) counties. However, nearly all counties have experimented with it in limited amounts. Results have varied from 20% to 100% eradication and it has been used on many of the troublesome weeds as well as noxious ones. It has been found to be quite effective as advertised…(Details of application conditions followed, along with recommendations for the future use of 2,4-D)…
(It is recommended) that we do not abandon the use of chemicals previously used in eradication. Even if 2,4-D is successful, there will be plenty of ways where it will be advisable to use the old chemicals.”
Dr. Evans: “We haven’t anything by way of completed experimental data… We plan now to set up a lot of work in the Spring; a really thorough test, and it is my impression that if we go ahead on this schedule we will able to give a good report at the next meeting.”
Oregon Report Summarized:
Report given by V.H. Freed: “in this past year considerable interest in weed control has been evinced by the farmers of Oregon. (Details on various state-wide committees’ work was included)… more counties are now entering the picture. The extension service of the college has been carrying on educational work on weed control and will probably devote more time and energy to this part of their program in the future.
“In the research field, we have, of course, devoted a good deal of attention to 2,4-D this past year. It has been tried on a number of different plants with varying degrees of success. We have found this material to fit in quite nicely as a selective herbicide on grains and grasses, but we feel that there is still considerable work to be done on the material before final recommendations can be made for it as a general toxicant on pernicious perennial plants.
“One of the things which we consider a major achievement for the year was the establishment of a gorse control experiment sub-station. This is being financed by matched money of the state and counties involved. Both chemical and cultural methods of control will be studied as well as a combination of the two. We are attempting to evaluate some of the new chemical herbicides as well as finding new uses for some of the older ones. Work on the chlorinated hydrocarbons as soil fumigants has proved satisfactory.”
Montana Report Summarized:
Report was given by H.E. Morris: “Weed Control work in Montana is carried out under two distinct programs:
“1. Under a definite county program in which legalized weed control districts are created. The weed program is authorized by a board of three Weed Supervisors and the field work supervised by a field man selected by the supervisors.
“2. Under the regulations of the State AAA Committee, in which certain allowances are made for various procedures…
“Almost 100 persons attended (a two day meeting for Weed Supervisors in Bozeman), and the general opinion of the group was that such meetings should be held occasionally in order to coordinate more closely the control work of the counties. Suggested amendments to the weed law were also discussed at the meeting… In 1945, 18 counties appropriated $136,484 for weed control work… Eight counties appropriated $7000 or more. Approximately 463,500 pounds of chlorates, 2700 gallons of carbon disulphide, 44,000 pounds of Borax, and 40,000 gallons of crude oil for searing and spraying were used in weed control; 18,228 square rods were treated with 2,4-D, 26,000 acres were under cultivation, and 4000 acres were turned back for growing crops.
“Montana has 38 weed control districts in 17 out of the 56 counties. The districts comprise more than 3.5 million acres.
“Recently two counties have organized on a county-wide basis, and the trend appears to be for this form of organization.
“The progress in weed control has been steady since 1940. County appropriations have doubled; the use of chlorates and Borax has materially increased; use of carbon disulphide has remained steady; searing and bury burning reached a peak in 1941 and 1942 and rapidly declined. Acres under cultivation has steadily increased. The weed control districts have increased from 14 to 38…”
Nevada Report Summarized:
Report given by Lee M. Burge: “Weed control operations have, due to labor and material shortages, been confined to old organized control programs and to survey and experimental activities. Control programs on puncture vine, camel thorn, Canada Thistle, white top, morning glory and knapweed have been continued in some locations.
“Surveys have continued to show a rapid spread of the poison plant, Halegeton glomeratus, at a surprisingly heavy spread in established areas. Sheep losses from this plant have again been reported, the latest from Pershing County, where 130 head were lost…
“During the 1945 season, a survey was made of the 200 miles of main canals in the Truckee Meadows area for water hemlock and narrow leaf milkweed. These canals were all found to be generally infested over practically the full length... Cattle losses and, possibly, deer losses have been directly traced to these hemlock infested canals and ditches, especially during the Spring months when other feed is more or less short.
“Preliminary surveys and other valleys of western Nevada have indicated a similar condition, it being estimated that between 130 and 150 head of cattle are lost annually…
“Preliminary steps have been taken to organize a control program in the Truckee Meadows area…
“Experimental plots have showed some promise for 2,4-D. However, final observations on some 45 plots will not be made until this coming Spring. This material is being compared in adjoining plots with Ammate, Chlorate, and Sinox.
“Test plots on Halegeton has shown the oils as the most practical control material…”
Idaho Report Summarized:
Report given by B.E. Kuhns: “The Idaho weed control program, as conducted under county supervision, has made quite satisfactory progress during the past year.
“The total amount of money budgeted by counties for weed programs was $625,000. This is nearly double the amount budgeted in 1944. 14 of the 30 counties conducting organized weed programs raised a part of their budget through special tax levies, ranging from ½ cent to the legal limit of 10 cents per hundred dollar valuation. Substantial assistance was also provided to counties by a State contribution. The State appropriation of $70,000 dollars per year is used to purchase chemicals which are pro-rated to the various counties on the basis of the amount of money spent for weed work in each county.
“Slightly over 15,000 acres of farmland were under a cultivation program in 1945. Most of this land was cultivated with county equipment on a three-year contract between the county and the farmer. Rates charge for this or service varied widely..; the most common rates being $10 and $12 per acre.
“On the basis of the actual cost accounts kept by some counties, the service actually cost counties from $15-$20 per acre…
“Carbon bisulphide and sodium chlorate are still the standard chemicals used in Idaho for weed control work. The amount of chemicals applied in 1945 was considerably less than in 1944. A total of 150,000 gallons of carbon bisulphide was used…and about 1.2 million pounds of sodium chlorate. The use of these chemicals was seriously limited by the amount made available.
“Eighteen counties employed full-time weed supervisors…”
2,4-D in the Idaho Weed Program
“2,4-D in various commercial preparations was used on the experimental and trial basis in most of the counties of Idaho. Applications were made under widely varied conditions of soil, temperature and weather. Several counties purchased products and sold them to the farmers at cost. A total of 1,277 gallons of liquid 2,4-D products and 125 pounds of powder were thus handled. Eight counties conducted spray programs for farmers on a limited scale. The basis of charges for the service varied. In most cases the farmers were assessed the actual cost of the work and material. One county charged 10 cents per square rod for the material and one-half the actual cost of labor. One county charged $35 per acre for material and labor.
“Reports on about 125 trials were tabulated and furnished to the Extension Agronomist by weed supervisors and county agents. Many other trials were made of which we have no record.”
Research
“Under a special research appropriation made by the State Legislature in 1945, a state-wide weed control research program was established under the supervision of the University Agronomy Department. Lambert C. Erickson, a graduate botanist, was employed to take direct charge of this work.
“Mr. Erickson started his duties on July 1 and as a start on this program applied 221 plots with 2,4-D in ten counties on twenty major perennial weeds.
“An intensive research program on 2,4-D was also conducted by C.I. Seely, representing the U.S. Bureau of Plant Industry, and cooperating with the College of Agriculture at Moscow. Mr. Seeley’s weed research work is conducted largely at the Genesee Weed Station near Moscow.”
Halegeton
“Eight hundred sheep were lost in Cassia County during the fall of 1945 from eating Halegeton.”
Educational
“Renewed emphasis has been placed on the educational program for weed control and eradication by County Agents, County Weed Supervisors and the College of Agriculture. Community and county meetings relative to weed control were conducted in most of the counties during the year.”
Colorado Report (full text):
Report given by Bruce J. Thornton: “The research program in weed control at the Colorado Experiment Station has been greatly expanded. Extensive field tests were conducted the past season with the 2,4-D herbicides. These tests involved 4 concentrations, 5 rates, 15 formulations, 10 perennial noxious weeds and lawn weeds and were conducted at sub-stations in five sections of the state. In addition, uniform tests to determine optimum date of application as affecting different perennial weeds were conducted in cooperation with the Extension Service in 38 counties in the State. Results apparent to date, although in no way final, emphasize the great need for further information especially as pertaining to the physiological aspects of the use of the 2,4-D herbicides.
“The efforts in fundamental research are divided into the physiological phase under the direction of Dr. Fults in the Botany Department, the chemical phase in cooperation with the Chemistry Section and the electrical phase in cooperation with the Electrical Engineering Section (e.g., academic departments at Colorado State College). The physiological studies, which involve the laboratory and greenhouse activities, are conducted in cooperation with the chemical and electrical phases as well as the field tests and are revealing some very interesting phenomena.
“Considerable 2,4-D was used in the State last year by individuals. Although the results were frequently disappointing, especially as compared to the advance claims made for herbicides of this type, indications are that they were sufficiently satisfactory to encourage a much wider use of the materials this coming season. Efforts will be made to obtain as much information from the source as possible in addition to that gained from the controlled tests.
“Colorado does not have a recognized State weed control program. However, many of the Counties are conducting weed control programs through the setting up of weed control districts as provided by the State weed law. This permits the County Commissioners to set up a weed fund either from the general funds or by levying an assessment, not to exceed one-half mill, as may be desired. In counties having weed control districts the cultivation of weed areas and the application of chemicals may be conducted with county equipment and county labor under county supervision, but the county is reimbursed in full by the land owner for the cost of the operations and the materials used. In regions where weed districts do not exist the individual land owner must carry his own program. All the weed districts in Colorado are at present set up on a voluntary basis. The law provides for compulsory districts but it is felt that such should not be resorted to until the need is fully apparent.”
California Report Summarized:
Report given by Walter S. Ball: “… We have always looked on Klamath weed, or St. John’s wort, as one of our major weed problems and it is still a major project in California. It has caused such heavy losses to our stockmen, through depletion of the ranges, that it is worthy of attention and we will continue to discuss it as long as it is of importance.
“The most recent important phase of this program is the work being started on the biological control of Klamath weed. A beetle which belongs to the Chrysomelid group feeds upon the Hypericum species in Australia and in some instances has actually killed out heavily infested areas.
“The entomologist of the Experiment Station, of the College of Agriculture, working with the Federal quarantine officials as well as the State officials, has taken all the precautionary steps in introducing this insect to California in the hope that it might find favorable conditions where it will breed and increase, and at the same time assist in the control of this weed. Starvation tests were carried out at the Experiment Station in Berkeley to further assure workers the beetle would not injure other crops; that it favors and will live only on Hypericum species. Releases of the insects have been made in three or four areas in the State under slightly different ecological conditions. In one of those areas, located in Marin County, the insect has fed upon the plant and is starting to increase in numbers. This is the first encouraging report we have had. This work is in a purely experimental stage and we feel it may be years before the population is increased to a point where it will reach economic importance.
“Our chief problem now is to maintain interest on our other methods of control, such as the use of Borax, and cultural practices. Many individuals interested in this program have learned of the biological control method. Already they are asking for insects and considering abandonment of their present programs.
“Another form of weed control to which we are looking more and more is our selective spraying, especially in flax and vegetable crops. The selective spraying in grain, of course, has become very well established.
“In addition to our selective spray work, we feel there is a place for pre-emergent spraying, which as most of us know, is spraying the planted area a day or two prior to emergence of the crop plant. As has been shown in our selective spray program, this can be done with oil with low volume per acre which will successfully kill young weeds. Successful pre-emergence spraying requires knowledge relative to the period of time needed for certain weed seeds to germinate. I have delegated a member of my Bureau to collect weed seeds in the vegetable growing areas in order that we may have this information available. There are certain crop seeds which require such a long period for germination that many of our annual weeds have ample time to germinate and be treated prior to emergence of the crop.
“Undoubtedly you have noticed the stream-lined electrical machine on the lawn. A year or so ago this was brought into California from Wyoming where the owners felt that they could kill deep-rooted perennial weeds. They have been given every opportunity to use this machine. The most extensive work was carried on in the Mendota area of Fresno County where it was found that morning glory was not too successfully handled, although there were indications that Russian knapweed was being killed and that they could handle shallow-routed perennials such as Johnson grass and Bermuda grass. The areas I have seen have not gone through a complete growing season and I am waiting until the Spring to check on some of them. (Note: i.e., the machine did not work well on some deep-rooted perennials).
“One interesting thing worth mentioning is that whether or not this machine successfully handles a weed, the growers seem to be sold on this practice, and some of them are giving contracts for this type of weed control. I am in no position at this time to make any recommendations and I will not make any until I have actually observed and studied the effect of the machine on plants which have had a full year in which to recover. The owners of this machine are in the audience and I am quite sure they will be glad to discuss it with you, individually.
“Another problem that I believe is going to develop in all the Western states is the elimination of common roadside and ditchbank species that are alternate hosts of plant diseases or insect pests which may be carried over on these weeds and injure crop plants. We have had several cases in California where the elimination of such host plant has materially increased yield.
“The last point I wish to stress is my belief that we must give further attention to the question of using commercial pest control operators. Our Agricultural Code provides for registration and is so set up that the individual must know what he is doing or his license will be revoked. I make this statement primarily because I feel that we are going to experience a great deal more trouble in the use of 2,4-D and its mis-handling than we have heretofore unless operators know the material, know how it is applied, and know when to apply it.”
Report from the North Central States Weed Control Conference, Summarized:
Report given by T.F. Yost: The North Central States held the second annual Weed Conference in St. Paul. The two-day conference was attended by nearly 100 delegates, and all states in the region were represented. Nearly 100 commercial representatives attended as well. Four standing work committees met on the first afternoon: 1. Research; 2. Uniform State Weed and Seed Laws; 3. Federal Extension Weed Specialist; and 4: Federal Legislation to Control Interstate Movement of Noxious Weed Infested Seed, Feed and other Material; and Movement and Sale of Weed Infested Materials by Federal Agencies. Committee 4 represents the combined work of two committees.
“The Research Committee did an excellent piece of work under the able leadership of Mr. F.L. Timmons, Agronomist, USDA of the Bureau of Plant Industry... This committee set up a uniform plan for conducting research work with 2,4-D which was adopted and used by most of the federal and state weed research workers in this area, as well as several other states and several provincial workers and the Dominion Experimental Farms of Canada. This committee was divided into several sub-committees, each of which summarized the results of various phases of the plan... This committee has already revised its plan of work for 1946 in the light of experience during 1945. This committee has done a considerable amount of work which has been recognized the nation over by weed research workers. The remaining committees are working at their jobs diligently but are working on problems that will require a longer time to accomplish results. The conference has appointed two new committees, one for the purpose of drafting a model herbicide law for states, and also a committee to draw up a constitution and by-laws for the organization…
“It might be of interest here to state that the general opinion of most workers seems to be that the results of 2,4-D for the first year were not sufficiently conclusive to warrant recommending its used for perennial weeds. It was recognized by all that the percent of kill and plant counts made according to surface indications did not correspond with live roots found by digging at 6 to 18 inches beneath the surface... Much more experimental work needs to be done to determine the proper place and use of 2,4-D for perennial weeds. According to the reports of the committee and some other workers, 2,4-D gave good results generally with certain annual weeds but not with all of them. The use of 2,4-D as a lawn herbicide was generally accepted and recognized by all workers. The speaker personally believes that 2,4-D can be accepted as the best dandelion killer in general lawn herbicide that has come to the attention of the ‘lover of nice lawns’... According to Dr. Krauss the near future should bring forth new weed killers far superior to 2,4-D.
“The last day was devoted to state reports. A few states made notable improvements in their state weed control laws. Several states in the North Central area have excellent weed laws which are supporting a good program and which are producing worthwhile results. Several other states have excellent laws on the statute books but are not supporting an active program. Other states have antiquated weed laws which need to be modernized and brought up to date and put on an active basis…
“I believe that I am safe in saying that the North Central States Weed Control Conference is a going concern and that it is the recognized agency to deal with weed matters for the area. The organization is established and can speak for the 13 North Central States on the weed problem with any organization, group or agency...
”Before closing, I desire to pay special tribute to the excellent research work done by the US Bureau of Plant Industry, to the AAA program for making payments for noxious weed control and to the other Federal agencies who have properly assumed their weed responsibilities.
”At the present time, the Federal Government is doing two important things bearing on the weed problem, which are research dealing with eradication or control, and administration of the federal Seed Act. Both of these activities are being conducted in an excellent manner…
”In the weed control program the National Congress has curiously adopted what seems to be a hands-off policy. Maybe it would be better to say that the Congress seems not to be interested in the national weed control problem. Some of the states, in order to protect themselves against the weed menace, have been forced to initiate and support their own eradication and control program, while the Federal Government has set idly by and has not even done a good job of looking on. The weed problem is so broad in scope, so devastating in effect, and so complicated when considered from the overall standpoint, that we believe the time is here when Congress should sit up and take notice that there is a weed condition in our country that is of national importance, which if not properly handled will undermine the greatest resource of our nation, which is the soil. There are some aspects of the weed problem that cannot be handled on the state level. These problems cut across state lines and can only be handled by Federal action…”
Summary of the Report of the Uniform Research Committee, North Central States Weed Control Conference
Report was given by F.L. Timmons, Agronomist, US Bureau of Plant Industry, Soils, and Agricultural Engineering: “The uniform program of experimentation with 2,4-D and other selective herbicides in the North Central States Weed Control Conference is a project of our Conference Research Committee... Our Research Committee was originally set up prior to the first meeting of the North Central Conference in… 1944, with instructions to survey the field of weed research and bring to the meeting a report on the status of weed research and recommendations for future activities in that field... In that report, (recommendation) number 3,… suggested for accomplishing closer cooperation among weed research workers, read as follows:
“3. The coordination of the various experiment station and Bureau of Plant Industry plans of experiment or methods of attack on certain weed problems of regional importance to permit direct comparison of the results in different parts of the region and a quicker solution of the problem than would be possible through independent research at the various stations under different plans.
“The committee report was adopted by the Conference but this recommendation was not immediately applied to the 2,4-D situation.
“The course of events to come was accurately prophesied at the meeting in Omaha by Mr. L.W. Kephart of the USDA in his discussion of ‘Chemical Weed Killers After the War.’ After reporting briefly on preliminary results with 2,4-D in 1944, he advanced the opinion that revolutionary developments in chemical weed control would soon present weed research workers and control officials with the problems that they were hardly prepared to handle. He predicted widespread publicity and sensational claims for the new weed killers and pointed out the need for a disinterested agency to assemble information, correlate the facts and act as an umpire in the situation. He suggested that our research committee was the logical group to do this in the north central area.
“By the end of January, 1945, much of Mr. Kephart’s prophecy had materialized. Several sensational articles and advertisements about 2,4-D had appeared in print, and the barometer of public interest was rising rapidly as indicated by the sudden flood of inquiries received by nearly every weed control and research worker in the country. It was immediately evident that our meager facilities and personnel for weed research would not be able to gain information rapidly enough to protect the public interest except through organized effort.
“After considerable correspondence five members of our 9-man Research Committee were able to get together for two days,… and work out the first draft of a uniform plan of experiments, using a limited amount of information of information available at that time about 2,4-D. During the next six weeks two revised drafts of the plan were circulated among the committee members and on March 31, copies of the final draft of the plan were mailed to the directors of the 13 state experiment stations.
“The uniform plan in its final form was a 20-page mimeographed booklet with seven distinct features. These were: 1. A statement of the objectives of the plan; 2. A list of the chemicals to be tested and their sources; 3. A uniform code system of designating the different experiments and various treatments; 4. Outlines of six suggested experiments on different weed problems showing the chemicals, concentrations, rates of application and stages of weed or crop growth; 5. Suggestions for conducting experiments as to plot plan and replication, determination of results and retreatments; 6. A set of solution tables showing the amounts of the various products necessary to prepare different concentrations of 2,4-D spray solution in quantities up to 10 gallons and; 7. A complete list of references to technical and popular articles on hormone-like chemicals published up to that date…
“More than 80 copies of the uniform plan of experiments were sent to prospective cooperators and others interested. Many requests for copies were received from persons outside our North Central Conference, in states as far east as New Jersey, as far south as Texas and as far west as California and Oregon. Several copies of the plan was sent to workers in Canada.
“A total of 35 cooperators reported the results from a total of 160 different experiments on different weeds. Thirty-six of the experiments were conducted by cooperators in Canada at stations distributed from Newfoundland to Alberta.
“Our Research Committee was… assigned the task of summarizing and reporting upon the results... The task of summarization resulted in many a headache for these sub-committees. Despite the fact that the results reported were from experiments based on uniform plans, there were some variations in treatments and other details in nearly all cases, so that the problem of correlating the results and arriving at conclusions as to what they showed was a tedious and difficult problem…
“These reports demonstrated the value of our uniform program of research and also revealed some of its weaknesses. The uniform program was as successful in 1945 as could have been expected in the first year… bringing the results and data together in regional summaries for study and discuss made the most efficient use possible of those data. The outstanding weakness of the program in 1945 was the lack of uniformity in conducting the experiments and the resulting inability to make direct comparisons in many cases. As one of the sub-committees stated it, ‘the only thing uniform about the individual experiments reported was their lack of uniformity.’ This variability in the supposedly uniform experiments in 1945 is understandable when one considers that the uniform plan was developed hastily and presented suddenly to the experiment station directors and research workers too late in the season for careful plans to be made…
“Our Research Committee has recently completed a careful revision of our uniform plan of experiments for 1946… We are looking forward to a much more successful year in 1946…
“We have outlines for six different suggested experiments covering the various phases of the 2,4-D problem. These are as follows:
- The effect of time, concentration and rate of application of different types of 2,4-D formulations on perennial weeds or undesirable woody plants.
- Concentration of 2,4-D and other selective herbicides on annual and winter annual weeds in cereals, grasses or flax.
- Date of application and concentration of 2,4-D on broad-leaved lawn weeds.
- A comparison of commercial preparations of 2,4-D on perennial, annual or lawn weeds.
- Effect of 2,4-D spray on cereals, flax, grasses, corn, or sorghum.
- The effect on crop lands of residual 2,4-D in the soil.
“Perhaps you would be interested in a brief resume of the general trends that were apparent in the regional summaries of results from our uniform experiments in 1945. The results were extremely variable and indicate that the effects of 2,4-D on plants are influenced more strongly by differences in the stage and rate of growth of the plant, in temperature, air humidity, soil moisture, fertility, and texture then are those of most other weed-killing chemicals. In general, the best results were obtained when the weeds were growing most rapidly and before they reach the blossom or fruiting stage. Results were less satisfactory when temperatures were too low or the soil was too dry to promote rapid growth. Increasing the quantity of spray above the amount necessary to uniformly wet the vegetation did not appear to get better results... On the other hand, increasing the concentration of 2,4-D… did seem to give much better results on certain weeds.
“At individual stations there were wide differences in the effectiveness of different commercial formulations of 2,4-D. However, these differences were not consistent over the region and tended to smooth out in the regional summaries. With few exceptions, there was no significant average advantage for anyone product over another…
“The various 2,4-D preparations gave good results more consistently on dandelion and other broad-leaved lawn weeds than on any other type of weeds. The results with dandelions were not as uniformly good in Kansas and Nebraska as in states farther north and east... Applications made any time during the growing season when temperatures and soil moisture were such as to promote active growth seem to give good results on dandelion. Sprayed plots were frequently re-infested by seedlings by the end of the season, indicating that spraying once or twice each year will be necessary to control dandelion and other broad-leaved lawn weeds.
“Most of the lawn grasses were not seriously injured by 2,4-D sprays. However, buffalo grass frequently showed some discoloration and stunting of growth, especially when sprayed in mid-summer…
“Our results… showed 2,4-D sprays to be rather uniformly effective in killing a majority of the species of broad-leaved annual weeds, particularly in early stages of growth. However, none of the grass type weeds were seriously affected, and a considerable number of broad-leaved species (of weeds) proved highly resistant. 2,4-D did not appear to be superior to Sinox for controlling annual weeds in cereals, flax or grass crops.
“The results showed the use of 2,4-D to be more or less hazardous in all kinds of growing crops. Most of the vegetables, ornamentals, and legume crops were killed or severely damaged even by low concentrations of spray. Some of them proved extremely sensitive and were injured by wind drifted spray or by volatilized fumes from nearby sprayed areas. The small grains and other grass type crops in most cases were not seriously injured. However, in some instances reductions in grain yields were as great as 50% and even 100%. The cases in which serious injury resulted to grass type crops were frequent enough to show the need for more experimental work and study before enough information is available to recommend methods that will guarantee the profitable use of 2,4-D for controlling weeds in these crops.
“The injurious effects on crop plants of residual 2,4-D in the soil from spray applications were apparent during periods varying from only a few weeks to several months, apparently depending upon the amount of rainfall received after the spray application. The residual effects seem to persist longer in the soil in the dryer states like Kansas and Nebraska than in humid areas like Ohio. The residual effects of 2,4-D were most injurious to the more sensitive vegetable and legume crops and less detrimental to the grasses and cereals.
“None of the results obtained from our uniform experiments on deep-rooted perennial weeds are considered complete at this time… For the most part, the results with 2,4-D on other deep-rooted perennial weeds were less favorable than the bindweed... The results indicated that a single application of 2,4-D usually will not give a complete kill of any of the weeds of this type…
“…recommendations were drawn up by the Policy Committee of our Conference after a thorough study and discussion of the results of our uniform program of research in 1945. The statements of policy as approved by the Conference are as follows:
1. That the uniform plan of experimentation with 2,4-D and other chemicals be continued as a conference project in 1946.
2. That the conference approve the use of 2,4-D for the control of certain lawn weeds, the qualification and details of recommendation to be set up by each state.
3. That, based on experiments to date, this conference is not prepared at this time to approve the general use of 2,4-D on annual weeds in growing crops.
4. That the conference approve the general use of 2,4-D on certain annual weeds, not in growing crops, the lists of such weeds to be prepared by the Research Committee. A list of resistant weeds will also be prepared.
5. Due to variable results and the short experimental period, this conference is not in a position to recommend 2,4-D for general use in eradicating deep-rooted perennial weeds.”
The rest of this report gave some details on results on specific weeds, and included a list of 23 weeds resistant to 2,4-D. Only one state-level report (from Kansas) was included. The report from Kansas had a brief summary of injurious effects:
“…The effect of 2,4-D upon the soil seems to be rather severe but temporary. In most cases it disappears within 4 to 8 weeks, especially when rains come during that period. Whether there is a cumulative effect from repeated treatments has not been determined... It has not been known to produce any ill effects upon persons handling it or upon animals consuming vegetation sprayed with it. However, when applied near shrubs, flowers, or vegetable plants there is great danger of wind carrying sufficient spray solution to seriously damage the valuable plants…”
The minutes returned to reports of the committees for the Western Weed Conference. The Conference President, Walter S. Ball reported that the executive committee suggested the following: “…inviting the manufacturers of weed control materials and equipment to join the group as paid members with the understanding that the State officials only would have the voting power: This action was taken primarily because the various manufacturers and chemical concerns are taking the research men that we formerly have had in our State Service and in order to receive the benefits derived from the training of these men and the knowledge which they are going to continue to get, we thought it important that they become affiliated with our group…”
Mr. Freed presented a report on the chemistry of 2,4-D, the proper application conditions for the chemical, some suggestions on how to avoid injuries to crops, and how to clean the equipment. His report on soil sterility stated: “In general, 2,4-D breaks down within a month in warm, moist soils but may persist for six months in cool or dry soils. A comparison of soil types under greenhouse conditions shows a higher toxicity of 2,4-D in sandy soils than in clay soils, but a more rapid leaching from the sandy soils. Under field conditions, the toxicity in the soil will depend on the amount of 2,4-D applied, the soil type, temperature, and moisture conditions.”
Next followed some reports from some of the chemical company representatives in attendance. One described new developments in creating specialty sprayers to use with 2,4-D and other chemicals. He commented that some individuals are using high pressure sprayers that were designed for other agricultural purposes, and that may not be appropriate for use with the new chemicals, where low pressure sprayers are better.
For the next part of the meeting, various commercial company representatives talked about the various types of old and new equipment they have available for applying 2,4-D, and some of the weeds they are using the equipment on.
Next a report was given by Mr. H.R. Offord, from the US Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine, entitled, “Control of Host Plants in a Plant Disease Program with Special Reference to Ribes and White Pine Blister Rust Disease.” The report described federal eradication programs underway, to kill various plants that carry viruses and rusts that damage crops. The plants being eradicated and their diseases were:
- wild cotton, pink bollworm, in Florida
- abandoned pear trees, pear psylla, in the Northwest
- barberry, black stem rust on cereals in the main grain-growing states
- Ribes, currants and gooseberries, white pine blister rust, in various areas of the U.S.
A very wide array of mechanical and chemical methods were being used on Ribes populations.
A report is included from Mr. J.E. White of the U.S. Indian Service I Salt Lake City, Utah, titled, “What the Indian Service is doing in weed control work.” The report describes collaborations between the Bureau of Indian Affairs, State and county weed control organizations, and university scientists. A range survey had been conducted on Indian lands in Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, California, and Nevada. The Survey examined the extent of weeds on Indian grazing areas, the extent of plants dangerous to livestock, and helped to teach the Indians recognized and practical means of weed control. A program had been implemented to educate school children to recognize various plants.
On February 27, the meeting included discussion of the mechanisms involved in the killing actions of contact herbicides. The following topics were discussed:
- A report is given on the use of Sinox on weeds in onions and potatoes, describing various methods used, and its limitations, including weed resistance and the conditions in which Sinox would kill the crop. The practice is described of using ammonium sulfate as an activator with Sinox. Situations are described for adding oil to Sinox.
- Use of 2,4-D dust is discussed, including warnings about the dust drifting and killing crops. Examples are described regarding which crops tend to be resistant to 2,4-D, thus enabling dusting to be practical.
- The use of stove oil on some crops is described.
- The use of copper sulfate and Sinox a dust to kill potato vines.
- The use of ammonium cresylate as a dust to kill potato vines.
- The members generated a long list of undesirable plants that are either weeds or toxic to livestock, including a number of native plants.
A report from the Research Committee on the use of 2,4-D is given by Mr. W.A. Harvey, Chairman of the Experiment Station, University of California, Davis, California. The report included the following statements: “The committee would like to emphasize the need for further coordination of the research programs of the various State, Federal, and commercial agencies. It is felt that a greater interchange of information between agencies as well as some specialization by certain agencies we would be highly desirable.”
“The committee would like to emphasize that the present information on 2,4-D is incomplete and that much of the work is preliminary. Thus the recommendations given herein are tentative and should be considered subject to revision as our information and knowledge increases.”
The committee describes recommended guidelines for testing to 2,4-D on various crops. They include a list of weeds already known to be susceptible to, or resistant to 2,4-D.
Next, the Resolutions Committee Report is given by Mr. Morris. The committee recommended the following resolution: “Now, therefore, be it resolved, by the Western Weed Control Conference, assembled at Reno, Nevada, February 26 and 27, 1946, recommend to the Honorable Secretary of Agriculture and to the Chief of the Bureau of Plant Industry, Chemistry, Soils, and Agricultural Engineering that a separate Division of Weed Research and Control be established to carry out adequately the needs of this program; and the additional regional experimental work be carried on by the government in the irrigated sections of the West on control of important noxious weeds, and that the work of the proposed new Division be closely coordinated with the work of the State Experiment Stations.”
Discussion is made about coordinating the release of this resolution with the similar resolution adopted by the North Central Conference, to put more pressure on Congressmen. The resolution was adopted by the members.
To return to the other archival minutes, select links below:
Next Section: