Which one of the Cedarcide products is registered for flies and/or bees, wasps or other pollinators? I couldn't find one. If the insect in question is not specifically listed, then use of that product is not advised (nor technically legally allowed). FWIW, a hundred (or even a couple hundred) flies on a shrub that large is not out of reason. I had a large(10'x12') flowering shrub at my former garden that when in bloom attracted so many bees and other nectar-seeking pollinators that it literally vibrated with activity and the "humming" sound could be heard clear across the garden!! It was of no concern as the insects were entirely focused on their business and as long as they were left uninterrupted, they left everyone else alone. I guess my question is how "organic" the removal/destruction of these very necessary insects - by any method - is really and what might be the long term impact on the health and success of the rest of your garden if you do succeed in killing them off. IMO, worth considering......

Yowza!!! The only statement that approaches any degree of accuracy in the above post is the one that suggests you do the research. Which the above poster has obviously not done. "Ask yourself basic logical questions like, how in the world can a toxic chemical intuitively know not to poison your tomato or your dog, but to target that bad dandelion only (for example)." The answer to that is simple and is the same principle behind the development of beneficial pharmaceuticals that target disease organisms. It's called 'mode of action' - glyphosate's mode of action is to disrupt a metabolic pathway that allows for the biosynthesis of certain amino acids. This metabolic pathway (shikimic acid pathway) is specific to plants and some microorganisms. The absence of this pathway in mammals explains the low toxicity of glyphosate to non-target organisms. "It is extremely hazardous, and it is toxic to all life" Again, a completely erroneous statement. After some 40 years of the most extensive scientific testing any pesticide has ever undergone, glyphosate is considered to be of very low toxicity and therefore is NOT considered to be "extremely hazardous". And it is obviously not "toxic to all life" - it just simply does not work that way (see above re: mode of action) and if it did, it would not be on the market. And the declaration that it is a causation for cancer is still under debate by world health authorities. First, it has never been documented that gylphosate is carcinogenic with humans - that's probably the major bone of contention with this assessment. The association was made based on very limited epidemiological studies which have been disputed by non-consistent patterns of positive associations indicating a causal relationship between total cancer or any site-specific cancer and exposure to glyphosate. The bulk of the determination was based on studies based on animal experiments submitted by the producers of glyphosate as evidence for the carcinogenic effect of glyphosate. And these findings were considered by various other agencies involved in this assessment (IMPR, FAO/WHO) who concluded that “In view of the absence of a carcinogenic potential in animals and the lack of genotoxicity in standard tests, the Meeting (IMPR) concluded that glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans” (does glyphosate cause cancer?) Finally, had the above poster done her research, she would be aware that glyphosate is a non-specific herbicide. It does not just target weeds nor was it intended to just target weeds. This is a basic premise of any understanding of herbicides and to bother to post without knowing this elementary fact gives no credence to the rest of her rant. Junk science will always be junk science and simply spewing back sensationalized conclusions plucked from the online press without knowledge or understanding is merely ignorant fear mongering.

I've had the same thing happen with my peony bush but actually a service came to the townhouses where I Iive with a machine and sprinkled some stuff around. I had no idea what it was and a week later talking to a friend about it he said it was weed killer. He said the leaves on my bush are curled.. He says it should be ok. Ivan was reading up on it and it says after this happens dolsot with water getting leaves and everything. I hope it will be ok.

OP: You mentioned that they help your edible garden? Are they eating aphids or other bad bugs? The ants I have EAT my edible garden.... so they had to be sacrificed. I didn't get ants in my kitchen, but I had terrible red ants all over my yard. (Aside from eating good plants, they bite painfully... and rumor is it could hurt my doggies!) I had all of spring and summer this year to try every organic suggestion for battling them. Without any successes, I then had to move on to inorganic options. Like barb above, I ended up successfully using Amdro Ant Block, after the myriad of products failed. As stated, this is a last resort method, not organic and only for OUTSIDE. If you can pinpoint their point of entry, try Diatomaceous earth, as others suggested. Although organic, I don't like the idea of sprinkling it indoors (asthma.) Good luck.