Now showing items 15797-15816 of 20709

    • S-Triazine Herbicides Combined with Nitrogen Fertilizer for Increasing Protein on Shortgrass Range

      Houston, W. R.; Van Der Sluijs, D. H. (Society for Range Management, 1975-09-01)
      Three s-triazine herbicides (atrazine, simazine, and cyanazine) applied annually at 1.1 and 3.4 kg/ha to shortgrass range in northcentral Colorado, consistently increased protein concentration in range herbage for 3 years, 1970-72. Overall, herbage yields were not affected. Spring applications were slightly more effective than fall applications. Atrazine and simazine were about equally effective. However, herbage treated with simazine retained protein better into fall and winter than that treated with atrazine. Cyanazine was the least effective. Increases in protein from the three herbicides were additive to increases from N fertilizer applied at 22 and 45 kg N/ha, except in a drought year. During drought, 3.4 kg of atrazine or simazine combined with 45 kg N reduced herbage yields and yields of protein. The most practical treatment was a combination of 1.1 kg simazine and 22 Kg N/ha. Averaged over 3 years, this combination increased protein concentration 43% and yield of protein 35% in September.
    • Saclay Natural Radiocarbon Measurements I

      Delibrias, G.; Guillier, M. T.; Labeyrie, J. (American Journal of Science, 1964-01-01)
    • Saclay Natural Radiocarbon Measurements II

      Delibrias, G.; Guillier, M. T.; Labeyrie, J. (American Journal of Science, 1965-01-01)
    • Safe Fall Grazing Schedule

      Zwerman, Paul J. (Society for Range Management, 1979-10-01)
    • Safe Harbor: Helping Landowners Help Endangered Species

      Toombs, Ted (Society for Range Management, 2005-02-01)
    • Safety Modifications for Operations and Transportation of the Rangeland Drill

      Spencer, J. S.; Rashelof, V. M.; Young, J. A. (Society for Range Management, 1979-09-01)
      The drill-arm assemblies of rangeland drills modified to make furrows are difficult and dangerous for one person to raise and secure. A simple modification for safe lifting of these drill arms is described. For transporting rangeland drills on equipment trailers, loading ramps, wheel chocks, and tie-downs were developed and tested. All of these modifications make the use of rangeland drills safer and easier.
    • Safflower Can be Harvested Before the Doves Eat It All

      Jackson, Ernest B.; Tilt, Pillip A.; Yuma Branch Station; Yuma Branch Station (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1965)
    • Safflower for Arizona?

      Matlock, R. L. (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1950)
    • Sage Grouse Leks on Recently Disturbed Sites

      Connelly, J. W.; Arthur, W. J.; Markham, O. D. (Society for Range Management, 1981-03-01)
      Three sage grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) leks located on recently disturbed areas within the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Site are described. A possible increase in the grouse population and lack of suitable natural clearings in the general vicinity of these leks are suggested as reasons for the bird's use of these areas. This species' acceptance of newly cleared sites for display areas may have potential as a management tool.
    • Sage Grouse Versus Sagebrush Control in Idaho

      Klebenow, D. A. (Society for Range Management, 1970-11-01)
      Spraying with herbicides to control sagebrush was detrimental to nesting grouse and to sage grouse broods. Nesting ceased when one area was sprayed and another contained a nest five years after spraying. Broods were less affected. One area contained broods three years after it had been sprayed, but variation existed from one area to the next, for another that was sprayed in 1962 was not being used in 1966.
    • Sage-Grouse at the Crossroads

      Brunner, Jim (Society for Range Management, 2006-06-01)
    • Sage-Grouse Habitat Monitoring: Daubenmire versus Line-Point Intercept

      Thacker, Eric; Messmer, Terry; Burritt, Beth (Society for Range Management, 2015-12-01)
      On the Ground • Evaluation of range/habitat projects for sage-grouse require careful monitoring to measure their impact. • Daubenmire canopy cover and line-point intercept did not yield similar results. • As herbaceous canopy cover increased, the differences between the cover estimates increased. • Adoption of both techniques by both groups may be the only feasible solution since institutional constraints limit either group from changing monitoring techniques.
    • Sagebrush Control with 2,4-D

      Cornelius, D. R.; Graham, C. A. (Society for Range Management, 1958-05-01)
    • Sagebrush Control: At What Canopy Cover Is It Economically Justified?

      Bastian, Christopher T.; Peck, Dannele E.; Smith, Michael A.; Jacobs, James J. (Society for Range Management, 2012-07-01)
      We determine the economic threshold level for big sagebrush control based on 18 yr of forage-response data from an experiment conducted in Carbon County, Wyoming. We analyze the impacts of climatic variables and treatment site characteristics, such as sagebrush abundance levels, precipitation, and understory composition, on forage response and threshold level. We find that sagebrush canopy cover levels, April precipitation, May soil moisture, and understory composition are statistically significant factors in explaining forage response to sagebrush treatment. Forage yield across treated and untreated plots for 10 canopy cover levels, ranging from 4% to 40%, are analyzed via panel data regression techniques. We further investigate the impact of variability in precipitation and understory characteristics on economic outcomes of sagebrush control by analyzing three scenarios. Scenario 1 uses actual forage response data that include all variability from precipitation and understory composition. Scenario 2 uses regression-predicted yields across plots assuming average precipitation and soil moisture conditions. Scenario 3 uses regression-predicted yields assuming average precipitation, soil moisture, and understory characteristics across plots. Net present values based on value of grazing (for estimated yield differences between treated and untreated plots assuming 50% forage utilization) compared to treatment cost across sagebrush cover levels are estimated across these three scenarios. Results indicate that the economic threshold level of sagebrush infestation for the study period was between 8% and 24% for the analyzed scenarios. This indicates variability in precipitation and understory composition impact forage response and the resulting economics of sagebrush control. We conclude that range managers should consider potential control site characteristics and long-range weather forecasts when contemplating sagebrush control./Determinamos el nivel del umbral económico para el control de la artemisa basados en 18 años de datos sobre la respuesta del forraje en un experimento realizado en Carbon County, Wyoming. Analizamos el impacto de variables climáticas y características del sitio tales como niveles de abundancia de artemisa, precipitación y la composición abajo del dosel en la respuesta del forraje y el nivel de umbral. Encontramos que los niveles de cobertura aérea de la artemisa, la precipitación de abril, la humedad del suelo de mayo y la composición son factores estadísticamente significantes para explicar la respuesta del forraje en el tratamiento de la artemisa. El rendimiento de forraje a lo largo de las parcelas tratadas y no tratadas para diez niveles de cubierta aérea fluctuaron del 4% al 40% son analizados por medio de técnicas de regresión de datos panel. Además investigamos el impacto de la variabilidad en precipitación y características debajo del dosel en los resultados económicos del control de la artemisa analizando tres escenarios. En el escenario uno, se usaron los datos de la respuesta actual del forraje la cual incluye toda la variabilidad de la precipitación y composición de abajo del dosel. El escenario dos, usa rendimientos predichos de regresión a lo largo de las parcelas asumiendo precipitación promedio y condiciones de humedad del suelo. El escenario tres usa rendimientos predichos de regresión asumiendo precipitación promedio, humedad del suelo y características de abajo del dosel a través de las parcelas. Valores presentes netos basados en el valor del pastoreo (estimados de las diferencias entre los rendimientos de las parcelas tratadas y no tratadas asumiendo un 50% de utilización del forraje) comparado con el costo del tratamiento a través de los niveles de cobertura de la artemisa son estimados a través de estos tres escenarios. Los resultados indican que el nivel del umbral económico de infestación de artemisa para el periodo de estudio fue entre 8% y 24% de los escenarios analizados. Esto indica que la variabilidad en precipitación y composición abajo del dosel impacta la respuesta del forraje resultando en el control económico de la artemisa. Concluimos que manejadores de pastizales deben considerar las características potenciales de control en el sitio y rangos amplios de pronósticos de tiempo cuando consideren el control de la artemisa.
    • Sagebrush Control—Costs, Results, and Benefits to the Rancher

      Hyatt, S. Wesley (Society for Range Management, 1966-01-01)
    • Sagebrush Conversion to Grassland as Affected by Precipitation, Soil, and Cultural Practices

      Shown, L. M.; Miller, F. A. (Society for Range Management, 1969-09-01)
      The most successful conversions of sagebrush to crested wheatgrass, in areas of the Western United States that receive an average of 8 to 14 inches of precipitation annually, usually occur where the annual precipitation exceeds 10 inches and on soils having medium moisture-holding capacities. Conversion results were intermediate on coarse soils having low moisture-holding capacities and comparatively poor on fine soils having high moisture-holding capacities. Degree of grass establishment varied directly with the big sagebrush vigor-index. Grass production was lower on gravelly sites converted from black sagebrush than on nearby sites converted from big sagebrush. Cheatgrass hindered the establishment of crested wheatgrass in some places. Conversion results were poor on sites where greasewood or shadscale was mixed with sagebrush. These halophytes had usually re-established on the treated sites.
    • Sagebrush Infested by Leaf Defoliating Moth

      Gates, Dillard H. (Society for Range Management, 1964-07-01)
    • Sagebrush ingestion by lambs: Effects of experience and macronutrients

      Burritt, E. A.; Banner, R. E.; Provenza, F. D. (Society for Range Management, 2000-01-01)
      We investigated how experience early in life and macronutrient content of the diet influenced intake of mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata Nutt. ssp. vaseyana (Rydb.) Beetle) by sheep. In the first part of our study, 2-month-old lambs were exposed as a group for 2 mo to a 70% barley-30% soybean meal ration (300 g/hd/day) that contained increasing amounts sagebrush (1 to 20%). Control lambs received grain without sagebrush. All lambs had access to alfalfa hay and pellets ad libitum. When lambs were tested at 6 months of age, prior exposure had no effect on sagebrush consumption after the first 4 days of the trial. When sagebrush comprised 20% of an alfalfa/barley ration, lambs ate the sagebrush ration readily even when a nutritious alternative was offered indicating the flavor of sagebrush did not prevent lambs from feeding. Increasing the amount of sagebrush in the ration from 50% to 75% resulted in lambs eating less of the barley/sagebrush ration, but daily intake of sagebrush remained constant throughout the 4 day trial, presumably because toxins (terpenes) limited intake of sagebrush. In the second part of our study, lambs experienced with sagebrush were fed 250 g/hd/day of barley, and nutritional status was varied by offering alfalfa pellets at 33% or 80% of ad libitum (1.2 and 2.7 times maintenance, respectively) to determine if dietary energy levels affected intake of sagebrush. Each day lambs received a 50/50 sagebrush/barley supplement ad libitum for 1 hour. Lambs fed at 33% of ad libitum consumed more of the sagebrush/barley supplement than lambs fed at 80% of ad libitum. Thus, additional energy did not enable lambs to consume more sagebrush. In the last trial, lambs in both treatments were fed a basal ration of alfalfa pellets at 50% of ad libitum. Each morning for 1 hour, lambs were offered macronutrient supplements containing either 50% barley/50% sagebrush (high energy) or 25% barley/25% soybean meal/50% sagebrush (high energy and protein). Lambs consumed the same amount of sagebrush regardless of supplement. Thus, supplemental protein did not improve sagebrush consumption. We conclude lambs readily ingested a high-energy ration containing sagebrush, regardless of exposure early in life, suggesting toxins, not flavor, control intake of sagebrush. Further, supplementing lambs with energy or protein failed to improve intake of sagebrush, which suggests these macronutrients did not enhance detoxification of sagebrush.
    • Sagebrush on Relict Ranges in the Sanke River Plains and Northern Great Basin

      Passey, H. B.; Hugie, V. K. (Society for Range Management, 1962-09-01)
    • Sagebrush Rebellion—Another Point of View

      Hyde, Robert M. (Society for Range Management, 1981-12-01)