"gary davis" wrote in message
...
On 5/5/04 12:31 PM, in article
, "Franz
Heymann" wrote:


"gary davis" wrote in message
...
On 5/4/04 2:55 PM, in article ,
"Franz
Heymann" wrote:


"Paul Anderson" wrote in message
...

"flower faerie" wrote in message
...
Hello

I have lots of ant hills appearing all over my lawn. I prefer
not
to
mow the lawn too short but want to try and get the ants to
live
somewhere else like in the flower borders. Also I dont want
to
put down
ant powder.

any ideas?

ff

We have found that Talcum Powder does the trick. It's not
totally
chemical
free but I guess it's much less damaging than other powders
suggested here!

Talcum powder, like any solid, liquid or gas is a chemical.
What
on
earth is all this paranoia about "chemicals"?
As far as I know, talcum is just finely divided Mg3 (OH)2 Si4
O10.

The other powders which have been suggested here were Vim and
Ajax. I
may be wrong, but I think both of them are just powdered chalk.

Franz


Hi Franz
I think the resistance to 'chemicals' is the side affects of
using
certain chemicals. Chemicals that kill aphids, for example, also
kill the
predatory insects such as lady bugs and the worms in the ground.
It
is this
kind of 'chemical' that we do not want to use because of those
harmful side
affects.
I don't think that talcum powder falls into the 'bad
chemical'
category. Talcum, then, is not the kind of chemical that we are
trying to
avoid.

Hello Gary,
I realise what is behind the paranoia.

Paranoia is a word that does not relate to what I am thinking. I
don't think
that what I and many others are talking about is paranoia. We are
concerned
about the use of 'stuff' that kills indiscriminately. It kills the
good and
the bad bug...from the human point of view. There is no bad bug to a
bird or
to the predator insects we fortunately have.

What I don't like is the way folk are overreacting to the use of
chemicals
in the garden.

You don't like the way folks are overreacting to the use of
chemicals in the
garden? Why? Do you generate an income from the sale of those
chemicals?

No.

And
who says we are over reacting?

I do.

I am not over reacting...I just believe the
use of those chemicals has a vast impact to the life span of
important
insects, worms (that work 24-7) and the ground water that we all
drink.
Overreacting? I don't think so.

Let's agree to differ.

I grant you that there are chemicals whose overall benefit is
dubious,

A chemical, any chemical, has an over all dubious benefit.

Then don't water your plants. Water is a chemical. And your
rainwater usually contains sulphuric acid, and sometimes ammonia, if
collected during a thunderstorm

Every chemical
that enters into the lives of insects has a questionable benefit.
Usually
none! And worse...

Rubbish.
Sugar
Salt
Bicarbonate of soda
Water
Calcium hydroxide
Ammonia
Pyrethrum

Would you like me to extend the list?

Please provide the proof of the correctness of what you are saying.

but it is quite unnecessary

What is it that is quite unnecessary? I think some context has been
lost due to surreptitious snipping.



Wrong, it is very necessary to make people, all of them, aware of
this
problem. Some will understand and some will need more information.
It is
necessary!

to lump everything except manure and compost together as
"chemicals" and
therefore to be avoided.

Manure and compost can be as bad as any chemical. It depends upon
just what
is put in the compost bin. There have been tests done and what was
found in
countries that spread human waste on their fields is that the worms
change
the human waste into harmless organic material.

And other experiments have indicated that a number of deleterious
organisms and chemicals remain in the composted faeces.

Material that plants can
utilize and grow. What happens in our compost bins is a different
matter...we must eliminate anything that could kill the worms. The
worms do
so much...even while we sleep.

Yes. Obviously.

By the way, if you used "organic" means other than the highly
ineffectual ladybirds to control aphids, you are also killing off
your ladybirds. They will simply die of hunger if there are no
insects around for them.

I read what you wrote here several times and it really is jubberish.
Are you
sure you are not a politician...they talk like that.

I am a scientist and I don't fall for old wives' tales.

I will simple reply to
your last statement which was "They will simply die of hunger if
there are
no insects around for them."

If there are no insects (aphids) around, the gardener does not have
a
problem now does he/she? So long as we don't use any chemicals that
kill the
predator...we will be ok in the long run. We are talking about the
long run,
aren't we?

I suggest you famimiarise yourself with the realities of the
predator/prey relationships.

I actually have my doubts about the efficacy of ladybirds for
controlling aphids.

The quantity of ladybirds is always less than the quantity of
aphids.
There are always a smaller quantity of predators than there are of
plant
eating pests. Think foxes versus rabbits.

Yes. I have slved the foxes vs rabbits equations. They have chaotic
solutions.

I have noticed that the years in which I have
large populations of ladybirds coincide with years in which I have
serious infestations of aphids.

Which came first? The ladybirds or the aphids?

You would have given a better reply if you had read to the end of the
point I was making before starting to type.

It has to be the
aphids...they multiplied and that attracted the ladybirds. There
will always
be more food than predator. When the food is gone so will the
predator.
Where does the predator go? Ask the birds...a gourmet meal they will
tell
you.
I asked the birds "Well, a gourmet meal, what did it cost?"
Cheap, is
always their response. I don't really understand how they can say
that. How
can a gourmet meal be cheep? I guess only a bird will know the
answer to
that.

Clearly the ladybirds are having a
whale of a time. But unfortunately those are also the years in
which
there is most aphid damage in my garden, so when all is said and
done,
the ladybirds were fighting a losing battle.

No, the ladybirds were doing just fine. Let them alone. It goes in
cycles.

That is quite precisely where you are wrong. The ladybird vs aphids
equations have chaotic solutions.

You have to give a little to get a little. The next year you will
have so
many ladybirds that they will eat every aphid anywhere around. Even
in your
neighbour's yard.


Have you ever stopped to
think how many ladybirds you would need in one garden to consume a
horde of a few million aphids before they breed?

It goes in cycles.

That is an old wives' tale. It is chaotic, in the mathematical sense
of the word.

You have to give a little to get a little. The next
year you will have so many ladybirds that they will eat every aphid
anywhere
around. Even in your neighbour's yard. Am I repeating myself?

I am afraid so. Quite a few times now.

Remember the key-you have to give a little to get a little. Give
a
little and get a little...now where I come from getting a little is
a good
thing.
Happy gardening

Franz