+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Bionomics of patterned herbicide application for wildlife habitat enhancement



Bionomics of patterned herbicide application for wildlife habitat enhancement



Journal of Range Management 41(4): 317-321



Outcomes of net-present value analyses were projected for patterned applications of herbicide sprays and pellets to mixed brush in south Texas [USA]. Picloram + 2,4,5-T (1:1) were applied but 1987 costs of triclopyr + picloram sprays, currently registered and considered the biological equivalent treatment, were used for analyses. Projected internal rates of return (IRR) ranged from 7.3 to 8.5% when 60 to 65% of the landscape was sprayed in a variable-rate pattern (VRP) at 0, 0.6, and 1.1 kg/ha; sprayed in strips with the higher dosage alternating with untreated strips; or completely sprayed with 1.1 kg/ha. Investment capital requirements were reduced when the VRD or strips were used by 49% and 35%, respectively, compared to complete treatment of the landscape with herbicide sprays. Treatment of 80% of landscapes at 2 locations with tebuthiuron in VRPs generated IRRs roughly equivalent to those from 2.2 kg ai/ha of tebuthiuron pellets applied in strips. Complete treatment of management units with 2.2 kg/ha of the pellets generated more additional beef and higher IRRs than did treatment with either pattern, but required from 50% to 75% greater investments of capital. Economic response also differed among sites of differing forage production capabilities and between otherwise similar sites because of variation in botanical composition of the brush stands. For example, IRRs at the locations, respectively, were 6.3 and 1.3% when 2.2 kg/ha of tebuthiuron were applied to sites with deep soils (drainages), 3.1 and < 0% following treatment of uplands, and were negative following application to shallow ridges. Sites with a greater proportion of the woody cover contributed by tebuthiuron-susceptible species such as whitebrush yielded greater IRRs from the investment than did sites with heavy cover of honey mesquite (tebuthiuron tolerant).

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 001765677

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

DOI: 10.2307/3899387


Related references

Potential indicators of the impacts of forest management on wildlife habitat in northeastern Ontario: a multivariate application of wildlife habitat suitability matrices. Forestry Chronicle 80(1): 91-106, 2004

Transline herbicide in rangeland and wildlife habitat restoration. Proceedings annual California Weed Science Society0(50): 138-141, 1998

Wildlife habitat enhancement. 1984

Wildlife Habitat Enhancement Council. Fisheries 18: 3, 1993

Forestry herbicide influences on biodiversity and wildlife habitat in southern forests. Wildlife Society BulletinWinter; 32(4): 1049-1060, 2004

An assessment of wildlife populations and habitat in herbicide-treated Jeffrey pine plantations. 1979

Bio-diversity: benefits of Velpar L herbicide on conifer growth and range & wildlife habitat. Proceedings annual Forest Vegetation Management Conference: 2) 10-15, 1991

Compatibility of biofuel production with wildlife habitat enhancement. Unknown, 1985

Forest, Range, and Watershed Management for Enhancement of Wildlife Habitat in Arizona. Arizona Game and Fish Department and Arizona Water Commission Special Report (7): vii + 109, 1979

Wildlife habitat enhancement with Ezject in stand thinning of lodgepole pine. Gaskin, R E [Author], Zabkiewicz, J A [Author] FRI Bulletin, No 192; Popular Summaries from Second International Conference on Forest Vegetation Management 310-312, 1995

Evaluation of wildlife habitat inventories a comparison of 3 systems for evaluating forest wildlife habitat. Transactions of the North American Wildlife & Natural Resources Conference : P392-403, 1979

Agriculture/wildlife enhancement in California the Central Valley Habitat Joint Venture. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 54: 391-401, 1989

Agriculture wildlife enhancement in california usa the central valley habitat joint venture. Transactions of the North American Wildlife & Natural Resources Conference : 391-401, 1989

Wildlife habitat enhancement in the spruce-hardward forest of the Matanuska and Susitna River valleys. 1996