This winter brought an end to the drought out West, at least for the time being.
There is now snow in the mountains, water in rivers, lakes and streams and weeds everywhere. All are grateful for the water, but wonder what to do about all the weeds, because if the left to grow, weeds will win the war for nutrients, sunshine, territory and water.
What to do?
Out of concern for the environment and people, the municipality in which I live decided some time ago to ban the weed-killing herbicide glyphosate.
“Bravo!” said the weeds, as they grew to the sky.
“Achoooooo!” said the residents, as they popped hay-fever antihistamines.
That the government decided to ban herbicides may well be good, but the fact is the growth of weeds must be managed or they will pose a significant threat to the environment.
So having ruled out the use of weed-killing poisons, the municipal government is left with but two means of control: animals and people.
Of course, government chose people as a means of controlling weeds, as more people means more government, and so on. The strategy allows weeds to grow through fluorescence (“Achoooo!”) into senescence before attacking them with laborers armed with weed wackers.
But what if a shepherdess and her critters were turned loose to fight the war on weeds? Could she, and they, be more effective and efficient at winning the war on weeds than people and chemicals?
And so we ask...
Which can best win the war on weeds: animals, chemicals or people?
Food Chain Radio & Forums #1,053 (Tags: Brittany Cole Bush, Urban Sheperdess, weeds, weed abatement, weed control, herbicides, glyphosate,)