Menu
Log in

New Jersey State
Horticultural Society

Log in

Hort News Blog

  • 8 Jun 2026 2:27 PM | Jon Clements (Administrator)

    J. Stephen Casscles, Esq., Author and Hudson Valley New York Grape Grower

    As Northeast fruit grower, I have become increasingly concerned about the application of herbicides such as glyphosate (Roundup, Rodeo, Accord, and Eraser), paraquat dichloride (Paraquat), and simazine (Princep) to control weeds. I grow grapes, ribes (currants, gooseberries, & jostaberries), and blueberries on my twelve-acre farm in the Mid-Hudson Valley. This article also applies to those who grow pome and stone fruits, and berries. I am concerned about the adverse health effects that these herbicides may pose to myself, my family, and neighbors, and the adverse effects they have on our soil health and crop productivity.

    This article raises troubling issues that many fruit growers are now recognizing. Consequently, growers are looking for ways to shift away from using chemical herbicides such as glyphosate so that they can increase soil fertility, water retention, and fruit productivity. On my farm, I have only applied glyphosate to control weeds, so my comments concern the use of glyphosate.

    Over the past forty years, I have noticed that because of the repeated use of glyphosate in my under canopy management of grapes, that this herbicide has lead to: 1) hard and compacted soils, 2) increasingly less soil tilth, organic matter content, and fewer beneficial earthworm and microorganism populations in the soil, and less biodiversity, 3) lower retention of soil moisture, 4) the inability of the soil to accept water after large storms, which are occurring more frequently because of our changing climate, 5) consequently, increased soil erosion, especially in the fall and winter months, 6) the increase of very hardy noxious weeds that cannot be easily controlled, even with higher concentrations of glyphosate, and 7) mud or surface water alternating with brick-like hard pan soils that will not accept precipitation, fertilizer, or organic matter for optimum growth.

    Critically important for growers, there are renewed concerns about glyphosate’s adverse health effects. Past health studies on the use of glyphosate are being reexamined as there may be new evidence that links it to cancers such as Lymphoma; Myeloma; bladder, kidney, and lung cancer.

    As a small acreage fruit grower, we may actually have more control over our farming operations than many large growers because we can more closely observe and monitor our growing conditions, crop quality, and overall soil health. Further, smaller farms may be able to institute small incremental steps or field trials to reduce the use of glyphosate and replace such herbicides with other cultivation practices.

    Experimental Study Goals

    Over the past five years, I have conducted trials to control weeds under my grape canopy and in my currant and blueberry patches without the use of glyphosate. This article also applies to apples, pears, stone fruits, and berries. These trials occurred on my farm, Cedar Cliff Vineyards & Nursery, in Athens, New York, where I grow cool climate and heritage grape varieties on their own roots. Our soil is a Valois-Nassau Complex, hilly that is a well to moderately well drained silt loam with ten to fifteen percent glacial till of sandstone, siltstone, limestone, and shale on a three to eight percent slope. Portions of my farm are not very well drained at the bottom of the hill. The bedrock geology is an Austin Glen/Graywacke Formation combined with shale, that is a hard sandstone with some quartz and feldspar. Some of the subsoils are hard pan clay, so there are some drainage issues that has been mitigated with drain tile. The vineyards are on gradually sloping lands facing alternatively to the east, northeast, and south.

    This article is for growers in New England and the Mid-Atlantic states, especially small acreage growers, who can experiment with and evaluate various practices on a small scale, as these techniques are not capital intensive. These practices can be implemented easily over time by both large and small growers. The trend in New England and the Mid-Atlantic states in fruit growing is to operate either very large or small acreage farms. With a heightened interest by new growers to enter farming on a full or part-time basis, this article may be especially helpful. These techniques may assist small growers who want to farm “sustainably” or have an interest in organic, bio-dynamic, regenerative, or other alternative farming practices. In conjunction with these under canopy practices, the grass aisle in between the rows were conventionally mowed.

    My goal in this five-year study (2021-2025) was to identify cost effective ways to gradually replace the use of glyphosate products with other viable practices that were not too labor intensive and which would increase soil health and vine and bush productivity. The eight practices cited below to control weeds that I studied used few to no capital-intensive farm machinery or significantly increased labor above what I was employing to control weeds with glyphosate. For small growers, it is critically important to minimize increases in farm machinery and labor costs as we are already facing tight profit margins. Hence, my study did not consider more expensive weed control methods. After five years, I am proud to say that I no longer use glyphosate on my farm.

    Weed Control Alternatives to Chemical Weed Killers

    Some of these eight practices are recommended, while others are not. Each practice will have different effectiveness depending on the crop, topography, and soil types on each farm. Further, these methods can be used in tandem with each other or on different parts of the farm depending on the crop, soil type, and topography.

    1) Plastic Mulch – I found this technique to be both capital and labor intensive to install, expensive to maintain since it needed continuous repair, and expensive to remove due to the large amount of plastic to dispose of. The plastic did divert rain and moisture away from the vines & ribes and did not increase soil health or organic matter. However, with the right equipment, this technique may be more viable and some growers swear by it.

    2) Stone Mulch –Small stones or gravel are placed directly under the vine canopy to curtail weed growth. The rocks redirected heat back to vines, retained moisture, reduced the risk of soil compaction that leads to hard pan soils, and encouraged earthworm populations. It is moderately effective in controlling weeds, encouraged the retention of useable water for grape vines and ribes (currants, gooseberries, jostaberries). This is not an expensive weed control method if the grower has a cheap source of rock to lay in the vineyard or berry patch. Once installed, it is best to add more stone mulch occasionally as these stones settle into the ground.

    3) Organic Mulch – This is an effective weed control practice and easy to install if there is a cheap supply of organic matter (wood chips, leaves, compost, municipal waste). If wood chips are applied, decomposing wood chips use nitrogen derived from the soil to decompose them. Hence, nitrogen fertilizer or green manure is recommended to be added to counter the depletion of nitrogen in the soil. While this is an effective weed control technique, most mulch decomposes within a year or two, so new mulch must be applied. The positive benefits are that it increases the organic matter of your soils, improves soil health, and increases earth worm populations and biodiversity. It encourages retention of useable soil moisture for vines and bushes, especially in the summer months. If the mulch is laid on too thick, it can create nesting places for rodents such as mice, chipmunks, voles, and other animals that can strip the bark off of vines, trees, or bushes, especially in the winter. Organic growers like this approach to weed control.

    4) Under Canopy Plowing – Under canopy plowing turns over the soil to kill the weeds under the grape canopy. Specialized farm equipment is needed to hill and un-hill the under canopy furrow. Many Cool Climate and Heritage grape varieties genetically have in them riparia grape species. Riparia hybrids such as Baco Noir, Minnesota hybrids such as Frontenac, Marquette, and La Cresent, Kuhlmann hybrids such as Foch and Leon Millot, and Bacchus tend to have spreading and shallow root systems that spread out laterally and do not go down very deep. Hence, if the under canopy is repeatedly plowed, it will cut and damage roots near the soil surface that supply the vine with water and soil nutrients. However, if hybrids such as Chelois, Pallmer, or certain labrusca varieties are being furrowed, they have roots that tend to reach deep down into the ground and would not be injured as badly as riparia hybrids. This method can be labor intensive as the furrow needs to be made and peeled off each year. Further, often the plowing of furrows happens in late fall or spring when the vineyard is wet and more prone to soil compaction due to the use of farm equipment during these months. In the past, this was a very common way to control weed growth.

    5) Promote Desirable Low Growing Ground Cover & Crops – Promoting the establishment of naturally occurring low growing ground cover curtails undesirable weeds from under the vine canopy. At my farm, Cedar Cliff Vineyards, Alpine Strawberries and commercial strawberry varieties thrive in our Valois-Nassau Complex silt/clay soils. Even when I was using glyphosate, I avoided spraying naturally occurring Alpine and other strawberry plants. Over time, these strawberry plants established themselves, expanded their coverage, and helped to curtail weeds from growing. To maintain such strawberry beds, the grower needs to occasionally weed them and set out new runners to expand these strawberry beds. I have also cultivated marigolds and zinnias under my grapes. Both are drought resistant and are low growing. Zinnias and Marigolds make lovely cut flowers for sale or the home. Marigolds are known to repel harmful insects from the immediate vicinity. Zinnias, on the contrary, attract beneficial insects that feed on harmful insects. Both varieties easily re-seed each year or are easy to plant via last year’s numerous seed pods.

    6) Plant Small Understory Fruit Bushes – For the past four decades, I have planted ribes, especially red currants, under my grape rows to control weeds and to cultivate another crop in my vineyard. Red Currants make excellent cassis, jams, and co-fermented ciders and beers for added revenue. Planting two fruit crops will reduce the amount of soil that needs to be hoed for weed control. While planting currants will take some soil nutrients away from the grape vine and slightly reduce vineyard output, the effort will add a unique and valuable crop. Do not plant ribes under riparia hybrid grape varieties such as Baco Noir or Kuhlman hybrids such as Foch or Leon Millot because the vine’s surface roots will compete with the currant or other ribes roots. Plant grape varieties that tend not to have surface roots, but roots that go deep into the ground such as Chelois, Pallmer, or Verdelet or labrusca varieties such as Concord, Delaware, or Catawba. Most ribes ripen by the middle of July so they do not conflict with other vineyard work. They are very fungus disease resistant so they need little spray protection and are late spring frost tolerant. Ribes are very winter hardy and will thrive in damp soils that are slow to drain. Further, birds, deer, and other wildlife are not fond of currants, gooseberries, or jostaberries, so there is little wildlife damage. They do not need to be netted like blueberries or bramble berries to protect the crop. In pruning grapes to increase ribes production, heighten the grape vine’s under canopy so that the ribes have sufficient sunlight and air drainage.

    7) Mowing and Mechanical Vegetation Removal – This low-tech method is increasingly becoming one of the main alternatives to applying herbicides to control weeds. There are several ways to manage weeds:

    a) Grass Trimmer / Weed Whacker – This alternative takes about ten to twenty percent more time to control weeds than applying a herbicide. It should be done at least twice during the growing season, which is the same number of times needed to apply herbicides. This method trims grass and weeds and leaves their remains in the vineyard which then decomposes into the soil. A negative aspect to using a grass trimmer is that it can hit the vine trunk, removing its bark and can go deeper to damage the epidermis, cortex, and phloem which carries nutrients and water up and down the vine.

    b) Lawn Mower – For my three acres of grapes, I find that the easiest method is to use a conventional push lawn mower. It takes a bit longer than applying a herbicide, but encourages the growth of turf grasses and over time reduces large noxious weeds such as burdock, bindweed, thistles, and curly dock. The lawn mower is used only under the canopy, not in the middle of each aisle, which would be conventionally mowed. Using a lawn mower is not recommended for vineyards that contains many medium sized stones that the lawn mower can hit. This method is an effective and inexpensive method for weed control for small vineyards of five acres or less.

    8) Organic Herbicides – This is a viable alternative to using glyphosate. I did not explore this practice in my study because I was trying to either: establish alternative productive plants to be placed under a vine canopy; create or manage a short cropped under canopy turf to eliminate barren sterile soil and increase biodiversity; or install a barrier that would curtail weed growth while still adding organic matter to the soil. Organic growers spray herbicide soaps, horticultural vinegar, botanical oils such as clove and cornmint oil and soaps, or caprylic acid and capric acid, which is a fatty acid derived from coconut and palm oils.

    9) Grazing Animals – For those who do not mind keeping animals, some growers have herds of smaller breeds of sheep, goats, and even geese to manicure the vineyard floor. These animals not only browse under the vine canopy, but clean up the entire vineyard floor. The benefits of using browse animals is that they leave their manure, increase microbial biomass, and non-selectively clean the entire vineyard floor. These animals need to be placed in the vineyard in late fall to early spring (with a break during the cold winter months), before bud-break and shoots begin to grow. The costs incurred include secure fencing to contain the sheep or goats, a supply of water, and a place outside of the vineyard to keep these animals when they are not in the vineyard. Studies indicate that browsing animals do not compact soils and can be a part of a no till vineyard program. Some farmers rent their sheep or goats (like bees) to a vineyard owner for the time needed, hence, the grower does not need to maintain such animals for the rest of the year.

    Conclusions

    The benefits of utilizing stone or organic mulch, establishing desirable low growing ground covers, growing small fruit bushes or flowers, or mowing are as follows:

    1) improves soil health, tilth, biodiversity, and reduces soil compaction.

    2) increases soil organic matter content which increases the supply of available nutrients to a farm’s vines, bushes, and trees. Further, it will increase soil water absorption capacity, earth worm activity which aerates soils, and enhance water drainage. Healthy soils are a more productive for vines, fruit trees and bushes.

    3) increases the number of beneficial insect, amphibian, and small reptile populations, thereby reducing the number of harmful insects because a balanced vineyard or orchard that has biodiversity will attract those insects that consume harmful insects.

    4) reduces the concentration of poisonous herbicides that inhibits the creation of a healthy farm biosphere.

    5) by far the most important benefit to reducing the use of glyphosate is the possible reduction in the incidence of cancer and other serious diseases for growers, their families, and those living near such farms.

    6) because such soils are healthier and will replace strips of barren and sterile soil with a mix of turf grasses, this will reduce compact and hard pan soils because of higher earthworm and microbiological populations, increase biodiversity, and increase the soil’s ability to accept and retain rain water and nutrients.

    7) related to item six, increased soil drainage capacity and the elimination of strips of barren and sterile land with water absorbing turf grasses will reduce water logged soils, especially in the late fall to early spring which hinders and kills grape vine root systems and curtail soil erosion.

    The substantial changes in weather patterns that we are experiencing due climate change is affecting our farming operations. Growers need to change their farming practices to reflect this new reality. Coupled with this, growers are interested in applying fewer highly expensive and poisonous herbicides to produce a crop and which does not poison themselves, their families & neighbors, their land, and water supply. Further, the general public is more interested in purchasing fruits that are either organic or which are grown with fewer pesticides. Hence, there is increased interest by growers to identify and use practices that control weeds in a more holistic way that uses less toxic chemicals. Small growers are not powerless to change their future destiny to lower their reliance on artificial toxic sprays and thereby reduce their potential risk to various cancers and other diseases. To do this, growers need to experiment, share their results with neighboring growers and institutions such as the UMass Amherst Center for Agriculture, Food, and the Environment and the Massachusetts Fruit Growers Association. It is my hope that this article is another step forward to achieving this goal.

    References

    Casscles, J. Stephen, Grapes of the Hudson Valley and Other Cool Climate Regions of the United States and Canada, Flintmine Press, Coxsackie, NY, 30-33, 37-41 (2023).

    Gannett, Maria, Experimental control of bindweed in established blueberry plantings: Year 2 (2025), Fruit Notes, Vol. 90, 15-17, Fall 2025.

    Greene County Soil and Water Conservation District and USDA Soil and Geological Maps, https://gis.gcgovny.com/greenewebmap/.

    Milkovich, Matt, Climate Creep: Michigan’s weather in 50 years will look a lot like New Jersey’s today, Good Fruit Grower, 14-15, June, 2025.

    Milkovich, Matt, Where do we grow from here ?: Our changing climate demands resilience, Good Fruit Grower, 5, April 1, 2024.

    Prengaman, Kate, Not-so-big advantage: In difficult market, apple growers with smaller farms can have a strategic edge, Good Fruit Grower, 32-35, December, 2025.

    Rothamsted Research, The World’s Food Supply Is at Risk: Modern Agriculture Is Destroying the Soil Beneath Our Feet, SciTechDaily, October 10, 2025, https://scitechdaily.com/the-worlds-food-supply-is-at-risk-modern-agriculture-is-destroying-the-soil-beneath-our-feet/.

    Tabuchi, Hiroko, A Study is Retracted, Renewing Concerns About the Weedkiller Roundup, New York Times, January 2, 2026.




  • 8 Jun 2026 2:18 PM | Jon Clements (Administrator)

    Matthew Milburn, Agriculture Program Associate, Rutgers Cooperative Extension of Middlesex County, matthew.milburn@rutgers.edu

    David Hlubik, County Agent III, Rutgers Cooperative Extension of Burlington County

    Introduction

    Among small fruit growers, blueberry producers often experience the highest levels of yield loss due to avian damage. [1] Many of the deterrents available to growers are often cost-prohibitive, not suitable for use in areas with nearby residences, or are overcome through habituation. One emerging technology that has shown promise to bypassing these issues while reducing bird damage is the University of Rhode Island Vegetable Program’s (URI) Laser Scarecrow. [2] The URI Laser Scarecrow is an experimental unit, designed specifically with small to medium-scale growers in mind. The laser system is currently available at cost to growers who are willing to work with and contribute to the URI Program Team’s research efforts. To test the potential efficacy of the URI Laser Scarecrow on blueberries, two adjacent field trials were conducted at the Rutgers Philip E. Marucci Center for Blueberry and Cranberry Research and Extension in Chatsworth, NJ.

    Materials and Methodology

    For this study, the URI Laser Scarecrow model utilized was the 2025 Berry Prototype. This unit consisted of two 532nm, 50mW laser modules mounted on a rotating arm assembly (Figure1). Features such as laser pathing, rotational speed, and time of operation were all programmable. Safety considerations, including proper signage and eyewear protection, were employed based on the URI Laser Scarecrow Operating Manual and the Rutgers Environmental Health & Safety staff recommendations.

    Two adjacent blueberry fields were utilized during the spring and summer of 2025. Fields 1 and 2 were approximately 0.8 acres and 1.25 acres, respectively. Field 1 was in its sixth year of production and was planted with the northern highbush variety ‘Duke’, while Field 2 was in its fourth year and was planted with the variety ‘Draper.’ Neither field received supplemental irrigation nor were harvested fully on a regular basis. A split-block design for each field was implemented, with half the field being treated with laser coverage and the remainder serving as an untreated control (Figure 2). To uncover any differences in feeding due to location, blocks were further divided into an inner and outer stratum. Both fields were noted for experiencing high levels of bird damage in the past, likely due to their location between a woodland border and an irrigation canal, making an ideal habitat for supporting bird populations.

    Based on previously established protocols [3], individual branches were randomly selected and marked across both fields. Exterior stratums were allocated 24 replicates per block, while the interior stratums had 12. Due to the loss of a few plants prior to the end of the harvest season, the total replicates for Fields 1 and 2 ended up being 70 and 71, respectively. Initial berry counts were taken around the green fruit stage of development, BBCH microstages 78-81 [4], on June 13th and 16th. Once fruit had begun to ripen, four weekly harvest events were conducted between June17th and July 11th. Berry loss percentages per replicate were calculated by comparing total fruit harvest data to initial berry counts, providing an estimate of bird damage (Figure 3).

    Results

    The two bird species predominantly observed within the field trials were red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus) and brown-headed cowbirds (Molothrus ater.) Larger flocking bird species that were commonly found in the area, such as Canada geese (Branta canadensis) and a variety of gull species, were rarely observed in the laser-treated field areas.

    Across both fields, harvest data indicated reduced berry loss in laser-covered blocks when compared to the control blocks. For Field 1, the laser-covered block experienced 9.10% yield loss, while the control was 18.40%, while Field 2 experienced losses of 19.38% and 25.01%, respectively (Figure 3). Using a three-way ANOVA, the effect of the field location was found to be significant, with a p-value of 0.02 (Figure 4). More importantly, the treatment effect was found to be significant as well, with a p-value of 0.04. There were no significant differences in bird damage between the interior and exterior stratums, and no significant interaction effects among the treatments were observed.

    Conclusion

    During this study, the use of the URI Laser Scarecrow appeared to be an effective measure for reducing bird damage in blueberries. One major limitation of the study was due to the fields’ infrequent harvesting which would not be comparable to a commercial setting but may relate more with a Pick-Your-Own (PYO) operation. To further validate these initial findings, additional field trials across diverse environments are warranted. If differences in bird damage can be quantified, efficacy field trials on small farm operations, such as PYO’s, should be explored as well. Other crops of interest heavily impacted by bird damage, such as wine grapes, should also be explored as candidates for future laser deterrent efficacy trials.

    Acknowledgements

    We gratefully acknowledge the New Jersey State Horticultural Society, whose grant allowed us to purchase the two laser module units used in this study. We also thank Dr. Peter Oudemans, Director of the P. E. Marucci Center for Blueberry and Cranberry Research and Extension, along with technicians Matthew Hamilton and Wesley Bouchelle, for facilitating our research efforts this past spring. Special thanks to Dr. Rebecca Brown and the URI Laser Scarecrow Project Team at the University of Rhode Island for providing discounted laser modules and technical support. For more information about the URI Laser Scarecrow Project, visit www.laserscarecrow.info.

    [1] A. Anderson, C. Lindell, K. Moxcey, W. Siemer, G. Linz, P. Curtis, J. Carroll, C. Burrows, J. Boulanger, K. Steensma and S. Shwiff, "Bird damage to select fruit crops: The cost of damage and the benefits of control in five states," Crop Protection, vol. 52, pp. 103-109, 2013.

    [2] S. T. Manz, K. E. Sieving, R. N. Brown, P. E. Klug and B. M. Kluever, "Experimental assessment of laser scarecrows for reducing avian damage to sweet corn," Pest Management Science, vol. 80, no. 3, pp. 1547-1556, 2023.

    [3] C. A. Lindell, K. M. Steensma, P. D. Curtis, J. R. Boulanger, J. E. Carroll, C. Burrows, D. P. Lusch, N. L. Rothwell, S. L. Wieferich, H. M. Henrichs, D. K. Leigh, R. A. Eaton and G. M. Linz, "Proportions of bird damage in tree fruits are higher in low-fruit-abundance contexts," Crop Protection, vol. 90, pp. 40-48, 2016.

    [4] F. K. J. J. S. B. A. W. Merret Anna Wichura, "Phenological growth stages of highbush blueberries (Vaccinium spp.): codification and description according to the BBCH scale," Botany, vol. 102, no. 11, 2024.

Thanks our NJSHS and Hort News sponsors!

Brookdale Fruit Farm

Wafler Nursery

Become a Member

Join Now

Horticultural News


Horticultural News, published by the NJSHS, is a quarterly publication serving the fruit growers of New Jersey.

Learn More

© New Jersey State Horticultural Society

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software