Use plain old cheep bleach---just poor it in the hole & forget it. I
get it at the $ store























wrote:
HomeDecoy wrote:
Can anyone tell me how to safely get rid of a bees nest in the ground?
So far I've taken a hose and left it going for a bit right inside the
nest. That seemed to cut down on some of them. I want to make SURE they
don't come back.
Winter is coming up so I'm figuring that after the first frost I can
maybe dig the area up and remove the nest or something?
Can anyone suggest anything to kill them or make sure they don't return
without dumping chemicals into the ground? It's right in the garden
that we're hoping to bring back to life. (Previous owners let it go
without tending for 5 years and likely never noticed the bees.)

Yellowjackets/ground-wasps don't use the same nest year-to-year, at
least not here in the northeast.

D

On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 09:57:57 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm,
"JoeSpareBedroom" quickly quoth:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On 19 Sep 2006 10:53:08 -0700, with neither quill nor qualm, "z"
quickly quoth:


JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

I extrapolate on the SAFE side, too. Others here believe it's OK to use
untested chemicals on their home vegetable gardens. Or, to be more
correct,
they tell others to do it. No idea if they practice the same foolishness
on
their own property.

Sad thing is, there is info out there which will enable at least a
somewhat educated balance, and with the web it's accessible to people
who are interested in enough to look. You can find out what the EPA
thinks, what studies they based their educated guesses on, they even
discuss what pieces of information they think are lacking and need more
study; as well as what levels they think are safe, and what safety
margin they are using to suggest those levels, then decide for yourself
if they're too conservative, too risky, or just right. It's a bit
better than going by John Stossel and Michael Crichton's opinions.

I'd hope some of you guys would at least take a look at their books
and do more research any of the books they refer to in their extensive
bibliographies.

Please don't remain glued to scaremongers such as Al Gore or weirdos
like Paul Ehrlich? Feh! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_R._Ehrlich

I have no idea who those two people are.

The ex-Vice President of the USA and some eco-weirdo, respectively.


------------------------------------------
Friends don't let friends read "Wired"
http://www.diversify.com Wondrous Website Design
=============================================

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 09:57:57 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm,
"JoeSpareBedroom" quickly quoth:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
On 19 Sep 2006 10:53:08 -0700, with neither quill nor qualm, "z"
quickly quoth:


JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

I extrapolate on the SAFE side, too. Others here believe it's OK to
use
untested chemicals on their home vegetable gardens. Or, to be more
correct,
they tell others to do it. No idea if they practice the same
foolishness
on
their own property.

Sad thing is, there is info out there which will enable at least a
somewhat educated balance, and with the web it's accessible to people
who are interested in enough to look. You can find out what the EPA
thinks, what studies they based their educated guesses on, they even
discuss what pieces of information they think are lacking and need more
study; as well as what levels they think are safe, and what safety
margin they are using to suggest those levels, then decide for yourself
if they're too conservative, too risky, or just right. It's a bit
better than going by John Stossel and Michael Crichton's opinions.

I'd hope some of you guys would at least take a look at their books
and do more research any of the books they refer to in their extensive
bibliographies.

Please don't remain glued to scaremongers such as Al Gore or weirdos
like Paul Ehrlich? Feh! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_R._Ehrlich

I have no idea who those two people are.

The ex-Vice President of the USA and some eco-weirdo, respectively.

OK. And, who instructed you to believe these two people influence my
thinking with regard to the history of the ag-chemical industry? You
certainly didn't come up with the idea yourself.

In article .com,
says...
Use plain old cheep bleach---just poor it in the hole & forget it. I
get it at the $ store


Bleach can sterilize the soil in the area for awhile creating a
vegetation dead zone. The sevin dust at night is probably the
best/safest home owner remedy suggested so far....
--
Lar

to email...get rid of the BUGS

On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 09:58:40 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm,
"JoeSpareBedroom" quickly quoth:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .

How about mercury? An overrated threat?

Yes, somewhat, but it's certainly more deadly than any of the false
fears like silicone breast implants, global cooling/warming, and
asbestos.

Mercury, lead, pesticides, and asbestos pose some real dangers, but
the -fear- levels surrounding them are 100+ times greater than they
should be.


------------------------------------------
Friends don't let friends read "Wired"
http://www.diversify.com Wondrous Website Design
=============================================

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 09:58:40 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm,
"JoeSpareBedroom" quickly quoth:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..

How about mercury? An overrated threat?

Yes, somewhat, but it's certainly more deadly than any of the false
fears like silicone breast implants, global cooling/warming, and
asbestos.

Mercury, lead, pesticides, and asbestos pose some real dangers, but
the -fear- levels surrounding them are 100+ times greater than they
should be.


100+ ??? As in "one hundred plus"? I'm going to need your background stats
on that.

Larry Jaques wrote:

So all these deaths due to unsubstantiated fears are alright by you
enviros? Maybe Crichton's story wasn't fictional after all.

What deaths due to unsubstantiated fears? You mean the unsubstantiated
deaths? You think the people in charge of global malaria fighting had
no idea that DDT wasn't banned for use fighting malaria? Or do you
include them in the people with "unsubstantianted fears" due to their
being ignorant of insecticides, despite using them all the time?

"USAID strongly supports spraying as a preventative measure for malaria
and will support the use of DDT when it is scientifically sound and
warranted."
"Contrary to popular belief, USAID does not "ban" the use of DDT in its
malaria control programs. From a purely technical point of view in
terms of effective methods of addressing malaria, USAID and others have
not seen DDT as a high priority component of malaria programs for
practical reasons. In many cases, indoor residual spraying of DDT, or
any other insecticide, is not cost-effective and is very difficult to
maintain. In most countries in Africa where USAID provides support to
malaria control programs, it has been judged more cost-effective and
appropriate to put US government funds into preventing malaria through
insecticide-treated nets, which are every bit as effective in
preventing malaria and more feasible in countries that do not have
existing, strong indoor spraying programs."
-USAID website

I repeat, if this constitutes a "ban" on spraying, how will you be able
to tell when the ban is lifted?

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

How about mercury? An overrated threat?

And Pluto! (kidding)

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HomeDecoy" wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
Water? Even water is a chemical, technically. What aspect of
"chemicals" don't you want? Use Sevin dust. It breaks down nicely
after a little while.

Haha true. I guess I'm looking for something that can go in the ground
but not cause long-term damage to the soil so that we can grow things
there again.


If you're planning on growing edibles in that area, then you do NOT want to
use ANY so-called "safe" or "relatively safe" pesticide. None of them ever
has been or ever will be shown to be safe. It is not possible.

Another factor: various plants pick up toxins in different amounts.
There are lists around the web from reliable folks like the local ag
stations, etc. about which food plants are more likely to carry toxins
that were in the soil. I'll see if I can find any to post.

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 09:58:40 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm,
"JoeSpareBedroom" quickly quoth:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..

How about mercury? An overrated threat?

Yes, somewhat, but it's certainly more deadly than any of the false
fears like silicone breast implants, global cooling/warming, and
asbestos.

Mercury, lead, pesticides, and asbestos pose some real dangers, but
the -fear- levels surrounding them are 100+ times greater than they
should be.


You are either:
1) Baiting me
2) Intensely stupid
3) Forcing yourself to ignore reality because it's too much work

http://www.mindfully.org/Pesticide/M...ry-Victims.htm

"z" wrote in message
oups.com...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HomeDecoy" wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
Water? Even water is a chemical, technically. What aspect of
"chemicals" don't you want? Use Sevin dust. It breaks down nicely
after a little while.

Haha true. I guess I'm looking for something that can go in the ground
but not cause long-term damage to the soil so that we can grow things
there again.


If you're planning on growing edibles in that area, then you do NOT want
to
use ANY so-called "safe" or "relatively safe" pesticide. None of them
ever
has been or ever will be shown to be safe. It is not possible.

Another factor: various plants pick up toxins in different amounts.
There are lists around the web from reliable folks like the local ag
stations, etc. about which food plants are more likely to carry toxins
that were in the soil. I'll see if I can find any to post.


Be prepared to respond to a couple of knuckleheads who believe you can wash
off systemics. I hope you have lots of patience. :-)

On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 21:31:56 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm,
"JoeSpareBedroom" quickly quoth:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 09:58:40 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm,
"JoeSpareBedroom" quickly quoth:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...

How about mercury? An overrated threat?

Yes, somewhat, but it's certainly more deadly than any of the false
fears like silicone breast implants, global cooling/warming, and
asbestos.

Mercury, lead, pesticides, and asbestos pose some real dangers, but
the -fear- levels surrounding them are 100+ times greater than they
should be.


You are either:
1) Baiting me
2) Intensely stupid
3) Forcing yourself to ignore reality because it's too much work

http://www.mindfully.org/Pesticide/M...ry-Victims.htm

You need to learn to read better, Joe. I acknowledged mercury as a
real threat. This is enough discussion with you, though. (See your
"You are either" paragraph above.)


---
Do. Or do not. There is no try. --Yoda
---
http://www.diversify.com NoteSHADES(tm) laptop privacy/glare guards

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 21:31:56 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm,
"JoeSpareBedroom" quickly quoth:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 09:58:40 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm,
"JoeSpareBedroom" quickly quoth:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
m...

How about mercury? An overrated threat?

Yes, somewhat, but it's certainly more deadly than any of the false
fears like silicone breast implants, global cooling/warming, and
asbestos.

Mercury, lead, pesticides, and asbestos pose some real dangers, but
the -fear- levels surrounding them are 100+ times greater than they
should be.


You are either:
1) Baiting me
2) Intensely stupid
3) Forcing yourself to ignore reality because it's too much work

http://www.mindfully.org/Pesticide/M...ry-Victims.htm

You need to learn to read better, Joe. I acknowledged mercury as a
real threat. This is enough discussion with you, though. (See your
"You are either" paragraph above.)


I'm still waiting for the proof you have that most pesticides are safe when
used as directed. I won't hold my breath.

Hint: Where does ground water eventually end up?

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"z" wrote in message
oups.com...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HomeDecoy" wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
Water? Even water is a chemical, technically. What aspect of
"chemicals" don't you want? Use Sevin dust. It breaks down nicely
after a little while.

Haha true. I guess I'm looking for something that can go in the ground
but not cause long-term damage to the soil so that we can grow things
there again.


If you're planning on growing edibles in that area, then you do NOT want
to
use ANY so-called "safe" or "relatively safe" pesticide. None of them
ever
has been or ever will be shown to be safe. It is not possible.

Another factor: various plants pick up toxins in different amounts.
There are lists around the web from reliable folks like the local ag
stations, etc. about which food plants are more likely to carry toxins
that were in the soil. I'll see if I can find any to post.


Be prepared to respond to a couple of knuckleheads who believe you can wash
off systemics. I hope you have lots of patience. :-)

Rule of thumb: if you intend to ingest some chlorinated hydrocarbon
molecules, count on a good percentage of them remaining in your body
until they are finally released only by its eventual decomposition. And
the same for the ingestion of chlorinated hydrocarbons by things which
you intend to ingest yourself later on.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"z" wrote in message
oups.com...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HomeDecoy" wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
Water? Even water is a chemical, technically. What aspect of
"chemicals" don't you want? Use Sevin dust. It breaks down nicely
after a little while.

Haha true. I guess I'm looking for something that can go in the ground
but not cause long-term damage to the soil so that we can grow things
there again.


If you're planning on growing edibles in that area, then you do NOT want
to
use ANY so-called "safe" or "relatively safe" pesticide. None of them
ever
has been or ever will be shown to be safe. It is not possible.

Another factor: various plants pick up toxins in different amounts.
There are lists around the web from reliable folks like the local ag
stations, etc. about which food plants are more likely to carry toxins
that were in the soil. I'll see if I can find any to post.


Be prepared to respond to a couple of knuckleheads who believe you can wash
off systemics. I hope you have lots of patience. :-)

From the CT Ag Station,

"Although it has been thought for many years that washing fruits and
vegetables prior to consumption reduces the amount of residues
ingested, the anecdotal approach needs laboratory confirmation. We have
found that different pesticides, in fact, have different rinsability
profiles (Arsenault et al., unpublished). Samples of produce were split
into two subsamples. One of these subsamples is analyzed for residues
in the usual way, and the second subsample is rinsed with water prior
to normal analysis. Endosulfan and vinclozolin do not seem to be easily
removed from produce by rinsing. The average
concentration on produce is less than 0.1 ppm, and both have
significantly lower tolerances than does captan. The higher tolerances
for captan may be offset by the fact that on average about 65% of
captan residue can be removed from produce by rinsing (Arsenault et
al., unpublished). The average concentration of captan can be reduced
from 1 ppm, (the average concentration at which it has been found over
the course of this survey), to 0.4 ppm by rinsing with water."
http://www.caes.state.ct.us/Bulletins/1990s/1999/b954.pdf
The CT Ag Station periodically publishes these analyses of pesticide
residues on produce, fresh and processed, see above and
http://www.caes.state.ct.us/Bulletins/2002/b981.pdf Their results are
pretty steady from year to year, and according to the one just above

"The results of our annual market basket survey are in excellent
agreement with similar surveys conducted by other regulatory agencies
(See Figure 1, Table 4). The percentage of samples containing residues
and violations is remarkably similar to those found by the FDA (FDA,
1999), and the states of California (California Residue Monitoring,
1999) and Florida (Florida Division of Food Safety, 2001). Even more
remarkable may be the fact that overseas laboratories in countries such
as Portugal (Portugal, 1999) find similar percentages of samples
containing residues and similar
violation rates. Consistently in all these surveys, approximately 36%
of the samples tested contained at least one pesticide residue. About
1% of the produce tested which
originated in the United States contained violative pesticide residues,
while approximately 4% of the produce tested which originated outside
of the United States contained violative pesticide residues. Due to the
higher number of foreign violative samples, it is important to continue
this market basket survey and to increase the number of imported
samples analyzed in the survey."

z wrote:

Another factor: various plants pick up toxins in different amounts.
There are lists around the web from reliable folks like the local ag
stations, etc. about which food plants are more likely to carry toxins
that were in the soil. I'll see if I can find any to post.

OK, here it is:
"Buy these items organic as often as possible
What: Apples, bell peppers, celery, cherries, imported grapes,
nectarines, peaches, pears, potatoes, red raspberries, spinach, and
strawberries.
Why: The U.S. Department of Agriculture's own lab testing reveals
that even after washing, some fruits and vegetables consistently carry
much higher levels of pesticide residue than others. Based on an
analysis of more than 100,000 U.S. government pesticide test results,
researchers at the Environmental Working Group (EWG), a research and
advocacy organization based in Washington, D.C., have developed the
"dirty dozen" fruits and vegetables, above, that they say you
should always buy organic if possible because their conventionally
grown counterparts tend to be laden with pesticides. Among fruits,
nectarines had the highest percentage testing positive for pesticide
residue. Peaches and red raspberries had the most pesticides (nine) on
a single sample. Among vegetables, celery and spinach most often
carried pesticides, with spinach having the highest number (10) on a
single sample. (For more information on pesticide levels for other
types of produce, go to www.foodnews.org.)

Buy these items organic if price is no object
What: Asparagus, avocados, bananas, broccoli, cauliflower, sweet corn,
kiwi, mangos, onions, papaya, pineapples, and sweet peas.
Why: Multiple pesticide residues are, in general, rarely found on
conventionally grown versions of these fruits and vegetables, according
to research by the EWG. So if you're buying organic only for health
reasons, you may not want to pay 22 percent extra for organic bananas,
let alone more than 150 percent for organic asparagus--the premiums we
found in our price survey of several New York City area supermarkets.

(similar list
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13737389/page/2/)

HomeDecoy wrote:
Can anyone tell me how to safely get rid of a bees nest in the ground?
So far I've taken a hose and left it going for a bit right inside the
nest. That seemed to cut down on some of them. I want to make SURE they
don't come back.
Winter is coming up so I'm figuring that after the first frost I can
maybe dig the area up and remove the nest or something?
Can anyone suggest anything to kill them or make sure they don't return
without dumping chemicals into the ground? It's right in the garden
that we're hoping to bring back to life. (Previous owners let it go
without tending for 5 years and likely never noticed the bees.)

Something I've always wondered; if you leave a dish of saccharine or
some such out, will they try to make honey out of it and end up
starving to death, or don't they fall for that?

On 25 Sep 2006 11:07:49 -0700, "z" wrote:


HomeDecoy wrote:
Can anyone tell me how to safely get rid of a bees nest in the ground?
So far I've taken a hose and left it going for a bit right inside the
nest. That seemed to cut down on some of them. I want to make SURE they
don't come back.
Winter is coming up so I'm figuring that after the first frost I can
maybe dig the area up and remove the nest or something?
Can anyone suggest anything to kill them or make sure they don't return
without dumping chemicals into the ground? It's right in the garden
that we're hoping to bring back to life. (Previous owners let it go
without tending for 5 years and likely never noticed the bees.)

Something I've always wondered; if you leave a dish of saccharine or
some such out, will they try to make honey out of it and end up
starving to death, or don't they fall for that?

Try posting on rec.gardens.