Treatment life and economic comparisons of honey mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa) and huisache (Vachellia farnesiana) herbicide programs in rangeland

Abstract

Herbicides have been a primary means of managing undesirable brush on grazing lands across the southwestern United States for decades. Continued encroachment of honey mesquite and huisache on grazing lands warrants evaluation of treatment life and economics of current and experimental treatments. Treatment life is defined as the time between treatment application and when canopy cover of undesirable brush returns to a competitive level with native forage grasses (i.e., 25% canopy cover for mesquite and 30% canopy cover for huisache). Treatment life of industry-standard herbicides was compared with that of aminocyclopyrachlor plus triclopyr amine (ACP+T) from 10 broadcast-applied honey mesquite and five broadcast-applied huisache trials established from 2007 through 2013 across Texas. On average, the treatment life of industry standard treatments (IST) for huisache was 3 yr. In comparison, huisache canopy cover was only 2.5% in plots treated with ACP+T 3 yr after treatment. The average treatment life of IST for honey mesquite was 8.6 yr, whereas plots treated with ACP+T had just 2% mesquite canopy cover at that time. Improved treatment life of ACP+T compared with IST life was due to higher mortality resulting in more consistent brush canopy reduction. The net present values (NPVs) of ACP+T and IST for both huisache and mesquite were similar until the treatment life of the IST application was reached (3 yr for huisache and 8.6 yr for honey mesquite). At that point, NPVs of the programs diverged as a result of brush competition with desirable forage grasses and additional input costs associated with theoretical follow-up IST necessary to maintain optimum livestock forage production. The ACP+T treatments did not warrant a sequential application over the 12-yr analysis for huisache or 20-yr analysis for honey mesquite that this research covered. These results indicate ACP+T provides cost-effective, long-term control of honey mesquite and huisache.

Identification of Brush Species and Herbicide Effect Assessment in Southern Texas Using an Unoccupied Aerial System (UAS)

“…So, 25% of mesquite canopy cover and 20% huisache canopy cover can be set as the threshold rangeland managers use to determine when treatment is necessary for optimum forage production. As one of the most effective management methods, chemical treatment has been a primary means of brush management in the southern U.S. for decades [4]. The plant physiology and growing conditions, herbicide selection, spray mix, and nozzle selection are heavily related to the success of herbicide applications.…”