Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGorenzel, W. P.
dc.contributor.authorMastrup, S. A.
dc.contributor.authorFitzhugh, E. L.
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-24T02:29:25Z
dc.date.available2020-09-24T02:29:25Z
dc.date.issued1991-03-01
dc.identifier.citationGorenzel, W. P., Mastrup, S. A., & Fitzhugh, E. L. (1991). Economic relationships of brushpiles, forage production, and California quail hunting. Journal of Range Management, 44(2), 129-133.
dc.identifier.issn0022-409X
dc.identifier.doi10.2307/4002310
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/644851
dc.description.abstractHarvesting trees for firewood in the oak hardwood rangelands of the western Sierra Nevada foothills creates slash that may be burned to improve livestock forage production or piled into brushpiles for wildlife. The economics of these actions are undocumented. We observed a firewood harvest that created 378 brushpiles averaging 13.6 m2 and 1.3 m high, and resulted in a forage loss of 1,807 kg dry weight, equivalent to 4.4 AUM. We projected the present net value of 5 management options concerning the removal or retention of brushpiles during a 15-year period. Inputs included revegetation of burned-brushpile sites, annual forage production on areas with the oak canopy removed, burning and reseeding costs, and income derived from cattle grazing and quail hunting. The options were: (A) burning all brushpiles and reseeding the burned sites; (B) option A without reseeding; (C) burning 235 brushpiles and reseeding, leaving 23 brushpiles/ha for quail; (D) option C without reseeding; (E) leaving all brushpiles. All but option B were economically feasible at a 4% interest rate; at an 8% interest rate, only options C-E were profitable. After 15 years, the accumulated returns per hectare at 4% for options A-E were 11.67, -3.97, 32.43, 22.29, and 23.35, respectively, and at 8%, -17.35, -25.74, 8.58, 3.02, and 17.98, respectively.
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSociety for Range Management
dc.relation.urlhttps://rangelands.org/
dc.rightsCopyright © Society for Range Management.
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
dc.subjecteconomic analysis
dc.subjecthabitats
dc.subjecthunting
dc.subjectQuercus
dc.subjectmultiple land use
dc.subjectfuelwood
dc.subjectCallipepla californica
dc.subjectbrushwood
dc.subjectslash
dc.subjectpastures
dc.subjectCalifornia
dc.subjectcattle
dc.subjectwildlife management
dc.subjectrange management
dc.subjectrangelands
dc.subjectgrazing
dc.subjectforage
dc.titleEconomic relationships of brushpiles, forage production, and California quail hunting
dc.typetext
dc.typeArticle
dc.identifier.journalJournal of Range Management
dc.description.noteThis material was digitized as part of a cooperative project between the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries.
dc.description.collectioninformationThe Journal of Range Management archives are made available by the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact lbry-journals@email.arizona.edu for further information.
dc.eprint.versionFinal published version
dc.description.admin-noteMigrated from OJS platform August 2020
dc.source.volume44
dc.source.issue2
dc.source.beginpage129-133
refterms.dateFOA2020-09-24T02:29:25Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
8573-8454-1-PB.pdf
Size:
625.9Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record