Grapes, dead fish, sulphur and bullies

Home/car maintenance, renos, gardening, DIY, farming, creative endeavours.
User avatar
Jim Dixon
Generalissimo Postalot
Posts: 901
Joined: Aug 29th, 2005, 9:19 am

Grapes, dead fish, sulphur and bullies

Post by Jim Dixon »

During a chat today with a medical professional, I was told that there was a story or article about a grape grower that uses raw scented (non-deodorized which is available), fish fertilizer, and a sulfur compound to spray his neighbours with, while adding some to his grapes.

I know who it is, but I can't find the articles, either here, the forums, or local snews papers. This is an issue I know some neighbours around here will agree is tantamount to torture. One can't eat outside, leave windows open, or their vehicle out as he WILL spray it.

There are two versions of the fish fertilizer. One is deliberately deodorized to be used in communities where drift may be a problem. The other, is just raw fish ground up in to a powder, added to water and aggressively sprayed. The compound called Kumulus DF is a protectant fungicide to prevent powdery mildew in peas, grapes and tree fruit. I use Kumulus too, but I spray on the grapes, not 20 feet into the air! By all accounts most responsible vintners will put fish fertilizer, unscented, on the ground, not 20 feet in to the air on a windy day!

There is no bylaw or regulation dictating which fertilizer the vintner should use, if they believe it helps their grapes.

I'd appreciate anyone with knowledge about the issue to comment, especially if you too are gagging on the smells from inconsiderate bully-vintners.
WARNING::: Anything you say can and will be taken out of context by many and used against you in a Court of Social Media.
User avatar
Hassel99
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3815
Joined: Aug 23rd, 2012, 9:31 am

Re: Grapes, dead fish, sulphur and bullies.

Post by Hassel99 »

If he is spraying an unknown or unconfirmed substance on neighbors have him charged with assault...
Kalvin K
Fledgling
Posts: 254
Joined: Jun 24th, 2005, 10:02 am

Re: Grapes, dead fish, sulphur and bullies.

Post by Kalvin K »

I've sprayed Kumulus on a few occasions.

The information you have is completely wrong.

Kumulus is a type of Sulphur spray. Sulphur sprays are very good at fighting mildew and other fungi. Sulpher sprays are extremely effective and safe. They're essentially raw Sulphur - the only other ingredients are not active ingredients but are there to help the Sulphur "stick" to the plant it's applied to. Raw Sulphur is more effective but it washes off with the 1st rainfall. Kumulus is a very effective spray for grapes, it's only downsides are cost and that you must alternate with a different spray type as some funji are resilient to it.

Like all Sulphur spays there is that rotten egg Sulphur smell. But it's not a fishy smell and it's nowhere near as strong as fish fertilizer. I found the smell "moderate" at time of application, "mild" 30min after application, and "non-existent" the next day.

Here's a datasheet: http://gcrec.ifas.ufl.edu/static/docs/p ... lus-DF.pdf
User avatar
Jim Dixon
Generalissimo Postalot
Posts: 901
Joined: Aug 29th, 2005, 9:19 am

Re: Grapes, dead fish, sulphur and bullies.

Post by Jim Dixon »

Kalvin K wrote:I've sprayed Kumulus on a few occasions.

The information you have is completely wrong.
..........
............


Hmm. Perhaps most of my post is chopped off in your screen, but to reiterate, it's not about Kumulus DF.
j
WARNING::: Anything you say can and will be taken out of context by many and used against you in a Court of Social Media.
baldmofo
Newbie
Posts: 18
Joined: Dec 12th, 2005, 5:23 pm

Re: Grapes, dead fish, sulphur and bullies.

Post by baldmofo »

As someone interested in organic methods of raising crops and soil fertility, I am concerned by the view of the OP. Kelowna is a great example of agriculture working in communities. I think that it's more important to be concerned about the health effects of someone spraying petrochemical fertilizers and pesticides into the air mulitple times during a growing season than about the smell in the air. Agriculture, especially traditional agriculture has some smelly elements. I would rather deal with a stink for a few hours than have my air, soil, water and children contaminated with substances that haven't been fully tested for their effects on human health, or worse, are known to be harmful to human health, but are 'easier' to use than traditional, organic methods.
Donald G
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 20156
Joined: Jan 29th, 2008, 8:42 pm

Re: Grapes, dead fish, sulphur and bullies.

Post by Donald G »

Agriculture vs Urbanization frequently results in friction.
LANDM
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 11598
Joined: Sep 18th, 2009, 11:58 am

Re: Grapes, dead fish, sulphur and bullies.

Post by LANDM »

Hassel99 wrote:If he is spraying an unknown or unconfirmed substance on neighbors have him charged with assault...

How can it be unknown if it is precisely defined by the OP?
You and 71 others Like this post
User avatar
Hassel99
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3815
Joined: Aug 23rd, 2012, 9:31 am

Re: Grapes, dead fish, sulphur and bullies.

Post by Hassel99 »

Hearsay is not very precise.

Regardless my point was that it does not matter what it was, spraying neighbors with anything is assualt.

Honestly I was being cheeky and was hoping the op would clarify if it was neighbours or "neighbours property"
LANDM
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 11598
Joined: Sep 18th, 2009, 11:58 am

Re: Grapes, dead fish, sulphur and bullies.

Post by LANDM »

I'm on the side of what the OP called the "bully vintner"......simply because I feel it is probably a case of "bully neighbours" not wanting to deal with the realities of living next to a farm.

People complain when pesticides and fungicides are used. Now they complain when natural products are used.
Dead animals, fish, and poop have been used as fertilizer forever......
Sulfur has been used as a fungicide forever......

Neighbours moved in more recently than forever. That is why the Right to Farm legislation is important to keep the whining neighbours at bay when someone is doing their job and using accepted farm practices.

Perhaps the nosy neighbours should try the honey vs vinegar approach with the farmer?
You and 71 others Like this post
User avatar
Pkunko
Fledgling
Posts: 279
Joined: Apr 13th, 2007, 1:55 pm

Re: Grapes, dead fish, sulphur and bullies.

Post by Pkunko »

LANDM wrote:Perhaps the nosy neighbours should try the honey vs vinegar approach with the farmer?


You're not suggesting that OP was anything but diplomatic in broaching this matter with his neighbour? /s

I think what has likely occurred is that OP has lived at his property for 25 or more years, while the neighbouring farm has changed hands multiple times. Farming activities that were previously tolerable to OP are now causing an issue as the use of the land has changed from orchard to vineyard. There likely is some compromise that can be reached, but calling someone a bully-vintner is unlikely to help.
User avatar
Jim Dixon
Generalissimo Postalot
Posts: 901
Joined: Aug 29th, 2005, 9:19 am

Re: Grapes, dead fish, sulphur and bullies.

Post by Jim Dixon »

LANDM wrote:I'm on the side of what the OP called the "bully vintner"......simply because I feel it is probably a case of "bully neighbours" not wanting to deal with the realities of living next to a farm.

People complain when pesticides and fungicides are used. Now they complain when natural products are used.
Dead animals, fish, and poop have been used as fertilizer forever......
Sulfur has been used as a fungicide forever......

Neighbours moved in more recently than forever. That is why the Right to Farm legislation is important to keep the whining neighbours at bay when someone is doing their job and using accepted farm practices.

Perhaps the nosy neighbours should try the honey vs vinegar approach with the farmer?


We bought our property BEFORE it was a vineyard. "whining neighbours"??? One complaint is a whine? If you woke up one morning to the stench of dead, rotting fish and scent of fire and brimstone, don't "whine" about it. If you try to sell your home and potential buyers get our of their, and back in again, don't whine. If inviting friends for dinner and they say, "not if that ^&%$%^ at (........) wine has sprayed recently.

Until you have breathed another man's air, keep your cynical and myopic digs to yourself. You only enforce the idea that you don't have any idea of what you're talking about. My property is 16 feet from where he sprays a row of grapes SIXTEEN feet, and the reason he came so c lose was because he was trying to take it right up against our property line, but Highways, at the time, told him, to use his boundary. So he did, and took only 16 feet of setback, making him 16 feet from mine. That is too close, and is CORD (aka RDCO) had done their job, he would be 43 feet away from me, but he has money, and already had his fence up, so they CORD turned a blind eye, as they did, against the recommendation of the Variance Committee, keep the extra 16 feet which is now city property owning 3-4 rows of grapes.

He has informed me that he is desperate to get it out of the ALR and if irking the ire of local residents will irritate them enough to agree to support the idea. Stinking up the community is just part of it.

About your take on poop. It is used - yes, after treatment. It doesn't even have a bad odour after treatment. NEITHER does treated fish fertilizer. Clearly you perused, assumed, then typed. And please, taking one thing and turning it in to a "whining neighbour" is for Googies and kiddies, and true Trolls.

But, thanks for your differing opinion, even though is has no foundation, and is nothing much more than a troll, it does minutely touch on the eroding relationship between farmer and residents.

Lastly, if I had bought beside a vineyard, I agree I'd have no right to complain provided the farmer was adhering to the regulations. I love your logic and it means then, the vintner had better use treated fish fertilizer. Aftwer all, using your logic, I WAS here first.

J
WARNING::: Anything you say can and will be taken out of context by many and used against you in a Court of Social Media.
User avatar
Jim Dixon
Generalissimo Postalot
Posts: 901
Joined: Aug 29th, 2005, 9:19 am

Re: Grapes, dead fish, sulphur and bullies

Post by Jim Dixon »

Pkunko wrote:Perhaps the nosy neighbours should try the honey vs vinegar approach with the farmer?


I might add, Perhaps Pkunko should avail it'self of the facts before looking - well, you know.
This isn't a new thing. You'd know that had you read 1/10 of what I posted. It's been ongoing fore years. Diplomacy failed. The governments approach is still in limbo - has been for 4 years, and waiting. He has options and can compromise easily by using treated fish fertilizer, or does that matter to myopics? Another 1/10th. Please, kindly return and read another 8/10ths and then make a informed comment. I look forward to seeing one.

LANDM wrote:You're not suggesting that OP was anything but diplomatic in broaching this matter with his neighbour? /s

I think what has likely occurred is that OP has lived at his property for 25 or more years, while the neighbouring farm has changed hands multiple times. Farming activities that were previously tolerable to OP are now causing an issue as the use of the land has changed from orchard to vineyard. There likely is some compromise that can be reached, but calling someone a bully-vintner is unlikely to help.


OK, you don't know him so your comment ..."but calling someone a bully-vintner is unlikely to help." Have you talked to him? Have you ever helped him in the vineyard? Have you ever done business with him? Has he ever tried to take away our access to your property? Have you been sprayed because you couldn't get away fast enough? Have you had to wash your window sills because spray went 20 feet from the spray tank and in to your window? When you can say yes, than tell me calling him a bully-vintner, in my opinion, is improper.

I comment based on experience, not when some posters in Facebook telling me how I should live, or any googies passing judgement from their couch. This is a forum, not the local news medium and while we may have limited opinions it would be nice if come carried some weight with knowledge, not innuendos - don't you think? g'night - j
WARNING::: Anything you say can and will be taken out of context by many and used against you in a Court of Social Media.
LANDM
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 11598
Joined: Sep 18th, 2009, 11:58 am

Re: Grapes, dead fish, sulphur and bullies.

Post by LANDM »

Jim Dixon wrote:
We bought our property BEFORE it was a vineyard. "whining neighbours"??? One complaint is a whine? If you woke up one morning to the stench of dead, rotting fish and scent of fire and brimstone, don't "whine" about it. If you try to sell your home and potential buyers get our of their, and back in again, don't whine. If inviting friends for dinner and they say, "not if that ^&%$%^ at (........) wine has sprayed recently.

Until you have breathed another man's air, keep your cynical and myopic digs to yourself. You only enforce the idea that you don't have any idea of what you're talking about. My property is 16 feet from where he sprays a row of grapes SIXTEEN feet, and the reason he came so c lose was because he was trying to take it right up against our property line, but Highways, at the time, told him, to use his boundary. So he did, and took only 16 feet of setback, making him 16 feet from mine. That is too close, and is CORD (aka RDCO) had done their job, he would be 43 feet away from me, but he has money, and already had his fence up, so they CORD turned a blind eye, as they did, against the recommendation of the Variance Committee, keep the extra 16 feet which is now city property owning 3-4 rows of grapes.

He has informed me that he is desperate to get it out of the ALR and if irking the ire of local residents will irritate them enough to agree to support the idea. Stinking up the community is just part of it.

About your take on poop. It is used - yes, after treatment. It doesn't even have a bad odour after treatment. NEITHER does treated fish fertilizer. Clearly you perused, assumed, then typed. And please, taking one thing and turning it in to a "whining neighbour" is for Googies and kiddies, and true Trolls.

But, thanks for your differing opinion, even though is has no foundation, and is nothing much more than a troll, it does minutely touch on the eroding relationship between farmer and residents.

Lastly, if I had bought beside a vineyard, I agree I'd have no right to complain provided the farmer was adhering to the regulations. I love your logic and it means then, the vintner had better use treated fish fertilizer. Aftwer all, using your logic, I WAS here first.

J

My my.....someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed and forgot to put on their big-girl panties.

Try reading your original post and then go read your above rant and try and make a connection.

You do realize that you are on a discussion forum and we don't actually know you and don't live your life, don't you? When a connection can only be made within your own mind by someone living your own private life, maybe you should use your "inside voice". Ranting about trolls and whatever else you brought up adds little to a discussion other than reinforcing the "bully neighbour" aspect of this.

Did you buy your property thinking that there is no farming next door? Yeah, I thought not.

Now, try looking up permissible farming both within the ALR (provincial) and under whatever zoning the property lies within....are they doing a permissible activity? Yeah, I thought so.

Now, try looking up right-to-farm legislation. Are they acting within such rules? Yeah, I thought so.

You are expecting a farmer to have a setback on *his* side of the property to provide *you* with an enhanced lifestyle at the expense of efficient use of his land. Riiiggghhhttt. That's a good one. An ALR buffer is not given on the ALR side.....it is always on the non-ALR side.

You are expecting a farmland owner to not be able to change crops. Does that sound reasonable? Yeah, I thought not.

And no, one complaint is not a whine. However, your original post was a very strong indication of a whine. The post above merely made it a certainty.

So, no......I'm pretty confident I was spot on with my first comments about whiny neighbors. And, I'm pretty confident that I got it right the first time about the agricultural land being there before you and your house.

But, your reply with sudden excessive detail about your personal situation was fascinating. Maybe lie down on the couch and tell us about Aunt Betty next time, or what happened in your youth to make you so angry. And remember, most importantly, it's big-girl-panties day today! :smt045
You and 71 others Like this post
Kalvin K
Fledgling
Posts: 254
Joined: Jun 24th, 2005, 10:02 am

Re: Grapes, dead fish, sulphur and bullies

Post by Kalvin K »

LANDM: Great post. Fully agree.

OP: There is no setback. He can plant trees/vines right at his property line. Tho you can cut back branches or take the fruit that grows over that line and on your side.

However, there are legal setbacks required for most sprays. If he's got a line of grapes right on the property line, they'd better be going for organic status (probably are if they're using fish fertilizer - that's the only reason most people would use it) as almost every spray has minimum setbacks associated with it.

Long story short - plants are allowed on the property line, most sprays are not. Setbacks vary dramatically by the spray and other influencing factors (such as presence of water).
Coconut11
Newbie
Posts: 22
Joined: Jun 28th, 2015, 9:46 am

Re: Grapes, dead fish, sulphur and bullies

Post by Coconut11 »

Do you post this every spring Jim??

Return to “Creative Endeavours”