Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T02:36:05.405Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Economic Assessment of Tebuthiuron-Fire Systems for Brush Management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Charles J. Scifres
Charles J. Scifres*
Affiliation:
Dep. Range Sci., Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Economic performance of prescribed burning following aerial applications of tebuthiuron {N-[5-(1,1-dimethyiethyl)-1,3,4-thiadiazol-2-yl]-N,N′-dimethylurea} pellets was estimated for Texas whitebrush (Aloysia gratissima [Gillies & Hook.] Troncoso # ALYLY)-dominated rangeland and for post oak (Quercus stellata Wangenh. # QUESL)-dominated mixed hardwood stands. Honey mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa Torr. # PRCJG) invasion largely negated differences in estimated beef production between treated and untreated pastures within 13 yr of controlling Texas whitebrush with tebuthiuron at 2 kg ai/ha. American beautyberry (Callicarpa americana L.) and other shrubs increased such that the woody canopy cover was 87% of the original canopy 7 yr after applying tebuthiuron at 2.2 kg/ha to a heavy cover of oaks-mixed hardwoods. Burning at 2- to 4-yr intervals after tebuthiuron applications suppressed invading shrubs and increased projected internal rates of return by about 2% for each burning, compared to herbicide application only.

Keywords

Aloysia gratissimaCallicarpa americanaProsopis glandulosaQuercus stellataIntegrated brush managementIBMSALYLYPRCJGQUESL
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , January 1987 , pp. 22 - 28
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Cottam, G., and Curtis, J. T. 1956. The use of distance measures in phytosociological sampling. Ecology 37:451–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Ethridge, D. E., Sudderth, R. G., and Wright, H. A. 1985. Economic returns from burning tobosagrass in the Texas Rolling Plains. J. Range Manage. 38:362–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Garoian, L., Conner, J. R., and Scifres, C. J. 1984. Economic evaluation of fire-based improvement systems for Macartney rose. J. Range Manage. 37:111–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Gordon, R. A., Scifres, C. J., and Mutz, J. L. 1982. Integration of burning and picloram pellets for Macartney rose control. J. Range Manage. 35:427–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Hopkin, J. A., Barry, P. J., and Baker, C. B. 1973. Financial Management in Agriculture. Interstate Printers and Publ., Danville, IL.Google Scholar
6. Mutz, J. L., Greene, T. G., Scifres, C. J., and Koerth, B. H. 1984. Prescribed burning for improvement of Pan American balsam-scale range. Texas Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 1492.Google Scholar
7. Scifres, C. J. 1975. Systems for improving Macartney rose infested coastal prairie rangeland. Texas Agric. Exp. Stn. Misc. Pub. 1225.Google Scholar
8. Scifres, C. J. 1980. Brush Management. Principles and Practices for Texas and the Southwest. Texas A&M Univ. Press, College Station.Google Scholar
9. Scifres, C. J., Hamilton, W. T., Conner, J. R., Inglis, J. M., Rasmussen, G. A., Smith, R. P., Stuth, J. W., and Welch, T. G. 1985. Development and implementation of integrated brush management systems (IBMS) for south Texas. Texas Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 1493.Google Scholar
10. Scifres, C. J., Hamilton, W. T., Inglis, J. M., and Conner, J. R. 1983. Development of integrated brush management systems (IBMS): Decision-making processes. Pages 97–103 in Proc. Brush Manage. Symp., Soc. Range Manage. Denver, CO. Google Scholar
11. Scifres, C. J., Mutz, J. L., Rasmussen, G. A., and Smith, R. P. 1983. Integrated brush management systems (IBMS): Concepts and potential technologies for running mesquite and whitebrush. Texas Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 1450.Google Scholar
12. Scifres, C. J., Stuth, J. W., and Bovey, R. W. 1981. Control of oaks (Quercus spp.) and associated woody species on rangeland with tebuthiuron. Weed Sci. 29:270–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Scifres, C. J., Stuth, J. W., Kirby, D. R., and Angell, R. F. 1981. Forage and livestock production following oak (Quercus spp.) control with tebuthiuron. Weed Sci. 29:535–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Whitson, R. E., and Scifres, C. J. 1980. Economic comparison of alternatives for improving honey mesquite-infested rangeland. Texas Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 1307.Google Scholar
15. Whitson, R. E., and Scifres, C. J. 1981. Economic comparison of honey mesquite control methods with special reference to the Texas Rolling Plains. J. Range Manage. 34:412–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar