Final Report. Control of Mesquite-Pricklypear Complex with Aerial Application of Herbicides,

Final Report Control of Mesquite-Pricklypear Complex with Aerial Application of Herbicides, 2003-2008 Site Locations: Cooperators: Authors: Shackelford, Howard, Crockett and Callahan Counties Moon Ranch, Morgan Ranch, Mathews Ranch, Chandler Ranch, Finley Ranch, Davis Ranch, Shaw Ranch and Williams Ranch Charles Hart, Extension Range Specialist, Stephenville Will Hatler, Extension Program Specialist, Stephenville Rocky Vinson, County Extension Agent, Shackelford County Tommy Yeater, County Extension Agent, Howard County Chase McPhaul, County Extension Agent, Crockett County Jerry Warren, County Extension Agent, Callahan County Summary Aerial application of Reclaim, Remedy, and Tordon 22K herbicides were applied at varying total spray volumes to dense stands of mesquite with an understory of pricklypear. Surmount herbicide was also compared to Tordon 22k for pricklypear control. Plots were established during the summer of 2003 in Shackelford County, summer of 2004 in Howard County, summer of 2005 in Crockett, Callahan, and Shackelford Counties, summer of 2006 in Shackelford County and summer of 2007 and 2008 in Callahan County. Final evaluations have been completed for all trials. Objective Two of Texas most invasive and difficult to control species, mesquite and pricklypear, often occupy the same environment. Control of pricklypear in this complex has been difficult due to physical obstruction of chemical applications by mesquite foliage. Fixed-wing applications of Tordon 22K plus Remedy and Reclaim have had moderate success, with pricklypear control likely lower due to Picloram interception by mesquite foliage. Leaf interception leads to higher Picloram photodegradation and less available for control of pricklypear. Most landowners have resorted to treating

mesquite first, then a separate application on pricklypear after mesquite defoliation, or treating pricklypear in late fall after mesquite leaf drop. This project was designed to look at application techniques for treating both mesquite and pricklypear with the same aerial application. Materials and Methods Historically, helicopters have been used almost exclusively for herbicide applications in the forestry industry. The technology includes precision application with high total spray volume and large droplet size. Recently, helicopters have been used to apply Arsenal for control of saltcedar. This application technology has allowed for greater plant coverage through increased canopy penetration by the high total spray volume and larger droplets. We test the use of this technology on the mesquite-pricklypear complex to allow for spray droplet penetration through the mesquite canopy resulting in increased coverage and greater control of pricklypear and mesquite with a single application. Applications were made on the Moon ranch in Shackelford County on August 6, 2003 with a rotary wing aircraft. Accuflo nozzles with a.016 orifice were used to deliver varying rates of total spray volume. This nozzle delivers an extremely large droplet size ranging from 400-600 microns in size. Treatments applied in 2003 included a 16 oz/ac. rate of Crop Oil Concentrate (COC) with the herbicide in a water carrier. Applications were again made on the Morgan Ranch in Howard County on August 4, 2004. Treatments in 2004 varied in that a combination nozzle system was utilized to broaden the droplet spectrum. The spray boom was equipped with alternating Accuflo.028 and CP Nozzles. Orifices were used with each during pre-treatment tests to ensure a 50-50 ratio was obtained for the two nozzles. For example, if the TSV was 10gpa, 5 gpa would be through the Accuflo nozzles and 5 gpa would be through the CP nozzles. Treatments applied in 2004 included a 32 oz/ac. rate of MSO with the herbicide in a water carrier. Similar plots were established in 2005 on August 8 on the Mathews Ranch in Shackelford County, August 3 on the Chandler Ranch in Crockett County, and August 7 on the Finley Ranch in Callahan County. The same combination nozzle configuration was again used in 2005. Treatments applied in 2005 also contained a comparison between methylated seed oil, non-ionic surfactant and diesel as adjuvants. During 2006 treatments were applied on July 17 on the Davis Ranch in Shackelford County and included varying combinations of Reclaim, Remedy, Tordon and Surmount. During 2007, three replicated treatments were made on the Shaw Ranch property in Callahan County on August 8. These treatments evaluated CP and Accuflo nozzles individually compared to the combination setup during an early August application window. The same treatments were repeated on June 30, 2008 on the Williams Ranch in Callahan County.

Both Tordon 22K and Surmount herbicides were evaluated for pricklypear control. The standard commercial rates of Reclaim and Remedy herbicides were simultaneously applied for mesquite control. The helicopter was equipped with a GPS system for precise calculation of acres and areas sprayed. Figures 1-8 show the layouts of the various treatments at each site. Plot sizes were 10 acres for all plots except the 2003 Surmount tests. Evaluations were made by three observers walking through each plot counting 100 plants as live or dead. Environmental conditions on the day of application for all trials are detailed in Table 1 and herbicides, rates, and application data are presented in Tables 2. Table 1. Environmental conditions on the day of application for aerial mesquite-pricklypear trials established 2003-2008. Site Spray Time Wind Speed/ Direction Soil Temp. Air Temp. Soil Type/ Moisture RH Moon 03 8:00-9:30 2-3 mph/s 85⁰F 88⁰F Clay Loam/Low 48% Morgan 04 7:00-8:30 5-10 mph/s 75⁰F 75⁰F Clay Loam/Mod. 30-40% Mathews 05 7:30-11:00 5-7 mph/sw 80⁰F 69-85⁰F Clay Loam/Mod. 45-50% Chandler 05 7:00-10:50 5-7 mph/sw 80⁰F 69-85⁰F Clay Loam/Mod. 45-50% Finley 05 7:30-9:00 5-7 mph/sw 80⁰F 69-75⁰F Clay Loam/Mod. 60-70% Davis 06 6:30-7:30 0-5 mph/ssw 80⁰F 75-85⁰F Clay Loam/Mod. 40% Shaw 07 7:00-8:00 0-7 mph/ssw 80⁰F 76-85⁰F Clay Loam/Mod. 80% Williams 07 7:00-8:00 0-7 mph/ssw 80⁰F 76-85⁰F Clay Loam/Mod. 80% Williams 08 9:05-1:15 6-8 mph/s 85⁰F 78⁰F Clay Loam/Mod. 30-55%

Table 2. Herbicide combinations, rates, and total spray volumes applied on mesquite-pricklypear complex in 2003 through 2008. Herbicide Rates Total Spray Vol. Plot Size 2003 (a.i./acre) (gallons) (acres) Tor+Rec+Rem+COC 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 10 9.4 Tor+Rec+Rem+COC 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 15 8.3 Tor+Rec+Rem+COC 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 10.1 Sur+Rec+Rem+COC 0.806+0.25+0.25 lbs. 4.1 Sur+Rec+COC 0.806+0.25 lbs. 4.3 2004 Tor+Rec+Rem+MSO 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 10 10 Tor+Rec+Rem+MSO 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 10 Tor+Rec+Rem+MSO 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 30 10 Sur+Rec+Rem+MSO 0.806+0.25+0.25 lbs. 30 10 Tor+Rec+Rem+MSO 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 40 10 Sur+Rec+Rem+MSO 0.806+0.25+0.25 lbs. 40 10 2005 Tor+Rec+Rem+MSO 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 10 Sur+Rec+Rem+MSO 1.075+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 10 Sur+Rec+Rem+NIS 1.075+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 10 Sur+Rec+Rem+Diesel 1.075+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 10 Tor+Rec+MSO 0.5+0.25 lbs. 20 10 Sur+Rec+MSO 1.075+0.25 lbs. 20 10 Sur+Rec+NIS 1.075+0.25 lbs. 20 10 Sur+Rec+Diesel 1.075+0.25 lbs. 20 10 2006 Tor+Rec+Rem+NIS 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 10 Sur+Rec+Rem+NIS 1.0+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 10 Tor+Rec+NIS 0.5+0.25 lbs. 20 10 Sur+Rec+NIS 1.0+0.25 lbs. 20 10 Sur+Rec+Rem+NIS 1.0+0.25+0.25 lbs. 15 10 Sur+Rec+NIS 1.0+0.25 lbs. 15 10 2007 Sur+Rec+Rem+MSO 1.075+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 w/cp 10 Sur+Rec+Rem+MSO 1.075+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 w/cp+accuflo 10 Sur+Rec+Rem+MSO 1.075+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 w/accuflo 10 2008 Sur+Rec+Rem+MSO 1.075+0.25+0.25 lbs. 15 w/cp 20 Sur+Rec+Rem+MSO 1.075+0.25+0.25 lbs. 15 w/cp+accuflo 20 Sur+Rec+Rem+MSO 1.075+0.25+0.25 lbs. 15 w/accuflo 20 Sur=Surmount, Tor=Tordon 22K, Rec=Reclaim, Rem=Remedy herbicides. MSO=Methylated Seed Oil, NIS=Nonionic Surfactant, COC=Crop oil concentrate. Emulsifier was used with Diesel treatments.

Figure 1. Layout of aerial plots on the Moon Ranch in Shackelford County applied on August 6, 2003.

Figure 2. Layout of aerial plots on the Morgan Ranch in Howard County applied on August 4, 2004.

Figure 3. Layout of aerial plots on the Chandler Ranch in Crockett County applied on August 3, 2005.

Figure 4. Layout of aerial plots on the Finley Ranch in Callahan County applied on August 7, 2005.

Figure 5. Layout of aerial plots on the Mathews Ranch in Shackelford County applied on August 8, 2005.

Figure 6. Layout of aerial plots on the Davis Ranch in Shackelford County applied on July 17, 2006.

Figure 7. Layout of aerial plots on the Shaw Ranch in Callahan County applied on August 8, 2007.

Figure 8. Layout of aerial plots on the Williams Ranch in Callahan County applied on June 30, 2008.

Results and Discussion Shackelford County 2003 Site Final results from treatments applied on the Moon Ranch in Shackelford County are presented in Table 3. With the larger droplet size, mesquite mortality was not acceptable. Pricklypear mortality was good, averaging 70-75 % mortality with Tordon 22K across all spray volumes. Surmount provided slightly lower mortality compared to Tordon 22K when compared at similar spray volumes. Results of this research indicate 1) the rate of Surmount should be increased to 4 pints/acre, and 2) large droplets do a good job penetrating through the mesquite canopy and controlling pricklypear, but no mesquite mortality was realized. Table 3. Final results (2 years after treatment) of treatments applied to mesquite and pricklypear on the Moon Ranch in Shackelford County in 2003. Applications made by helicopter with.016 Accuflo nozzles. Herbicide Combinations Rates TSV Pricklypear Mesquite (gal.) (% Apparent Mortality) Tordon 22K+Reclaim+Remedy 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 10 70 10 Tordon 22K+Reclaim+Remedy 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 15 75 10 Tordon 22K+Reclaim+Remedy 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 75 10 Surmount+Reclaim+Remedy 3 pts+0.25+0.25 lbs. 10 50 Surmount+Reclaim 3 pts+0.25 lbs. 10 60 Sur=Surmount, Tor=Tordon 22K, Rec=Reclaim, Rem=Remedy herbicides. Howard County 2004 Site Final results from treatments applied in 2004 are presented in Table 4 and Figure 9. Initial results indicate that Surmount provided faster desiccation on pricklypear cactus compared to Tordon 22K at similar spray volumes. Percent desiccation of pricklypear increased with increases in total spray volumes. The 2004 treatments yielded valuable information regarding total spray volume, revealing that 10 gpa is too low and volumes above 20 gpa are unnecessary. Table 4. Final results (2 years after treatment) of treatments applied to mesquite, pricklypear and redberry juniper in 2004. Herbicides Rates TSV Pricklypear Mesquite Juniper (gal.) (% Desiccation) (% Mortality) (% Mortality) 1.Tor+Rec+Rem 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 10 65 46.7 0 2.Tor+Rec+Rem 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 68.3 71.7 0 3.Tor+Rec+Rem 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 30 60 70.7 0 4.Sur+Rec+Rem 3 pts+0.25+0.25 lbs. 30 86.7 80.3 0 5.Tor+Rec+Rem 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 40 76.7 78.3 0 6.Sur+Rec+Rem 3 pts+0.25+0.25 lbs. 40 91.7 82.0 0 Sur=Surmount, Tor=Tordon 22K, Rec=Reclaim, Rem=Remedy herbicides.

Figure 9. Percent mesquite mortality and percent pricklypear desiccation two years after aerial treatments applied on the Morgan Ranch in Howard County during 2004.

Callahan, Shackelford and Crockett Counties 2005 Two year results from treatments applied in 2005 are summarized in Table 5 and presented by site in Figure 10. There were site differences evident among the three sites with the Shackelford County (Mathews) site resulting in significantly lower mesquite and pricklypear mortality. We attribute this to lower soil temperatures (<75F) at the time of spraying due to high moisture conditions following heavy rains. Initial results one year after treatment indicated that Surmount provided faster desiccation on pricklypear cactus compared to Tordon 22K at similar spray volumes. However, no differences were evident following two year evaluations (Figure 11). Results did show a slight decrease in both mesquite and pricklypear control when Remedy was not included in the mix. Additional evaluations were made comparing Methylated Seed Oil (MSO), Non-Ionic surfactant (NIS) and Diesel:Water emulsion in the mix. Results show no differences among adjuvant for mesquite or pricklypear control two years after treatment. Table 5. Final results (2 years after treatment) of treatments applied in 2005 to mesquite and pricklypear, averaged across three sites. Herbicides Rates TSV Pricklypear Mesquite (gal.) (% Mortality) (% Mortality) Tor+Rec+Rem+MSO 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 73.8±8.7 52.8±6.8 Sur+Rec+Rem+MSO 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 78.8±5.3 64.0±9.9 Sur+Rec+Rem+NIS 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 71.3±5.2 62.2±3.1 Sur+Rec+Rem+Dies. 1.0+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 76.3±1.8 45.3±15.9 Tor+Rec+MSO 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 75.0±14.1 36.2±18.6 Sur+Rec+MSO 1.0+0.25 lbs. 20 71.3±1.9 44.3±17.4 Sur+Rec+NIS 1.0+0.25 lbs. 20 62.1±0.6 57.3±13.2 Sur+Rec+Dies. 1.0+0.25 lbs. 20 65.0±7.1 51.3±13.2 Sur=Surmount, Tor=Tordon 22K, Rec=Reclaim, Rem=Remedy herbicides. Figure 10. Apparent mesquite and pricklypear mortality by site two years after 2005 treatments.

Figure 11. Apparent mesquite and pricklypear mortality with and without Remedy in the mix and with Tordon compared to Surmount two years after 2005 treatments.

% Mesquite Mortality Shackelford County Site 2006 Final results for this site are presented in Table 6 and Figures 12-13. Mesquite mortality did not improve from year one to year two after treatment, remaining lower than expected. Interestingly, the highest mesquite mortality occurred on plots receiving the lowest total spray volume. The lack of consistency and low mortality indicates that soil temperatures were too low and conditions were not ideal for mesquite herbicide application at the time these plots were installed Pricklypear mortality increased dramatically in the second year after treatment. All treatments were successful, however, the plot sprayed with a combination of Surmount, Reclaim, and Remedy at 20 gpa showed the best results. Table 6. Final results (2 years after treatment) of treatments applied to mesquite and pricklypear on the Davis Ranch in Shackelford County in 2006. Herbicides Rates TSV Pricklypear Mesquite (gal.) (% Desiccation) (% Mortality) Tor+Rec+Rem+NIS 0.5+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 75 27 Sur+Rec+Rem+NIS 1.0+0.25+0.25 lbs. 20 80 12 Tor+Rec+NIS 0.5+0.25 lbs. 20 63 14 Sur+Rec+NIS 1.0+0.25 lbs. 20 65 14 Sur+Rec+Rem+NIS 1.0+0.25+0.25 lbs. 15 68 37 Sur+Rec+NIS 1.0+0.25 lbs. 15 73 35 Sur=Surmount, Tor=Tordon 22K, Rec=Reclaim, Rem=Remedy herbicides. Percent Apparent Mortality of Mesquite 2 Years After 2006 Treatments 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Treatment No. Figure 12. Percent apparent mesquite mortality two years after aerial treatments applied on the Davis Ranch in Shackelford County during 2006.

% Pricklypear Dessication Percent Apparent Dessication of Pricklypear 2 Years After 2006 Treatments 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Treatment No. Figure 13. Percent apparent pricklypear desiccation two years after aerial treatments applied on the Davis Ranch in Shackelford County during 2006. Callahan County Site 2007 Final results for treatments applied in 2007 are presented in Table 7 and Figures 14-15. Although excellent results were noted in all pricklypear treatments, the highest mortality was achieved in plots sprayed with CP nozzles alone. Extremely wet conditions in 2007 led to poor mesquite control and excellent pricklypear control. Other commercial mesquite treatments applied the same year also showed lower mortality. Table 7. Final results (2 years after treatment) of treatments applied to mesquite and pricklypear on the Shaw Ranch in Callahan County in 2007. Herbicides Rates Nozzle TSV Pricklypear Mesquite (gal.) (% Mortality) (% Mortality) Sur+Rec+Rem+MSO 1.0+0.25+0.25 lbs. CP 20 91 1 Sur+Rec+Rem+MSO 1.0+0.25+0.25 lbs. CP+Accuflo 20 89 2 Sur+Rec+Rem+MSO 1.0+0.25+0.25 lbs. Accuflo 20 83 1 Sur=Surmount, Rec=Reclaim, Rem=Remedy herbicides.

% Pricklypear Mortality % Mesquite Mortality Percent Apparent Mortality of Mesquite 2 Years After 2007 Treatments 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 CP CP+Accuflo Accuflo Nozzle Figure 14. Percent apparent mesquite mortality two years after aerial treatments applied on the Shaw Ranch in Callahan County during 2007. Percent Apparent Mortality of Pricklypear 2 Years After 2007 Treatments 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 CP CP+Accuflo Accuflo Nozzle Figure 15. Percent apparent mortality of pricklypear two years after aerial treatments applied on the Shaw Ranch in Callahan County during 2007.

% Mesquite Mortality Callahan County Site 2008 Final results for treatments applied in 2008 are presented in Table 8 and Figures 16-17. Apparent desiccation of pricklypear at two years after treatment was at or above 85% in all treatments, but highest in those applied with CP and Accuflo nozzles individually. Mesquite final mortality was uniform across all treatments, ranging from 58-62%, with the highest mortality estimated in the treatment applied with a combination of CP and Accuflo nozzles. Table 8. Final results (2 years after treatment) of treatments applied to mesquite and pricklypear on the Williams Ranch in Callahan County in 2008. Herbicides Rates Nozzle TSV Pricklypear Mesquite (gal.) (% Desiccation) (% Mortality) Sur+Rec+Rem+MSO 1.0+0.25+0.25 lbs. CP 15 95 58 Sur+Rec+Rem+MSO 1.0+0.25+0.25 lbs. CP+Accuflo 15 85 62 Sur+Rec+Rem+MSO 1.0+0.25+0.25 lbs. Accuflo 15 95 60 Sur=Surmount, Rec=Reclaim, Rem=Remedy herbicides. 100 90 80 Percent Apparent Mortality of Mesquite 2 Years After 2008 Treatments 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 CP CP+Accuflo Accuflo Nozzle Figure 16. Percent apparent mortality of mesquite two years after aerial treatments applied on the Williams Ranch in Callahan County during 2008.

% Pricklypear Mortality 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Percent Apparent Mortality of Pricklypear 2 Years After 2008 Treatments CP CP+Accuflo Accuflo Nozzle Figure 17. Percent apparent mortality of pricklypear two years after aerial treatments applied on the Williams Ranch in Callahan County during 2008. Conclusions Large droplets do a good job penetrating through the mesquite canopy and controlling pricklypear, but do not provide adequate mesquite control. While CP nozzles alone appear to provide the highest levels of pricklypear control, the combination of CP and Accuflo nozzles provides increased mesquite control with minimal reduction in pricklypear mortality. Total spray volume of 10 gpa is too low and volumes above 20 gpa are unnecessary. A tank mix of Surmount, Reclaim and Remedy appears to be the best combination for single application control of mesquite-pricklypear complexes. No advantage was gained by using differing adjuvants in the spray mixture. Acknowledgements This project was supported by Dow AgroSciences, Shackeford, Howard, Crockett and Callahan Counties and the cooperating landowners. Trade names of commercial products used in this report is included only for better understanding and clarity. Reference to commercial products or trade names is made with the understanding that no discrimination is intended and no endorsement by Texas AgriLife Extension Service and the Texas A&M University System is implied. Readers should realize that results from one experiment do not represent conclusive evidence that the same response would occur where conditions vary.