Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b95js Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T14:02:41.564Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Re-establishment of Sagebrush Following Chemical Control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

L. W. Weldon ,
D. W. Bohmont  and
H. P. Alley
L. W. Weldon
Affiliation:
Univ. of Wyoming, now Research Agronomist, Crops Protection Research Branch, USDA, Univ. of Wyoming
D. W. Bohmont
Affiliation:
Dept. of Agronomy, University of Wyoming, Laramie
H. P. Alley
Affiliation:
Dept. of Agronomy, University of Wyoming, Laramie
Get access

Extract

Increasing the forage yield of rangeland by controlling big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata Nutt.) with fire, chemicals, or mechanical means has become a common procedure. The main problem confronting researchers has been the remarkable ability of sagebrush to re-establish itself after a control program. Fire and mechanical means of control have proved to be effective in killing established sagebrush. However, a heavy stand of young sagebrush often becomes re-established within a few years (3). Since the use of chemicals for sagebrush control has developed within the last decade, very little is known concerning the re-establishment of the plant in chemically controlled areas.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weeds , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , July 1958 , pp. 298 - 303
Copyright
Copyright © 1958 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. Alley, Harold P. Chemical control of big sagebrush and its effect upon production and utilization of native grass species. Weeds 4:164–173. 1956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Alley, Harold P. The chemical control of big sagebrush and its effect upon production and utilization of associated native grass species. Master of Science Thesis, University of Wyoming. 1955.Google Scholar
3. Blaisdell, J. P. Ecological effects of planned burning of sagebrush-grass range on the upper Snake River plains. USDA Tech. Bul. 1075. 1953.Google Scholar
4. Kissinger, N. A. Jr., Hull, A. C. Jr., and Vaughn, W. T. Chemical control of big sagebrush in central Wyoming. Rocky Mtn. Forest and Range Exp. Sta. Paper 9. 1952.Google Scholar
5. Hull, A. C., and Vaughn, W. T. Controlling sagebrush with 2,4–D and other chemicals. Jour. Range Mgt. 4:159–164. 1951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Hyder, D. N. Controlling big sagebrush with growth regulators. Jour. Range Mgt. 6:109–116. 1953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Hyder, D. N. Spray to control big sagebrush. Oregon Agri. Exp. Sta. Bul. 538. 1954.Google Scholar
8. Robertson, J. H., and Cords, H. P. Survival of big sagebrush of different ages after treatment with selective herbicides. Weeds 4:376–385. 1956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar