Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • All Issues
  • Contribute
    • Submit to AUF
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
  • About
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • Journal Metrics
    • International Society of Arboriculture
  • More
    • Contact
    • Feedback
  • Alerts

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • All Issues
  • Contribute
    • Submit to AUF
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
  • About
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • Journal Metrics
    • International Society of Arboriculture
  • More
    • Contact
    • Feedback
  • Alerts
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
Research ArticleArticles

Field Trial Comparison of Techniques of Root Kill on Problem Species

Michael C. McNamara
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) September 1977, 3 (9) 171-172; DOI: https://doi.org/10.48044/joa.1977.3.9.171
Michael C. McNamara
Forestry Supervisor, Southern Division, Pennsylvania Electric Company
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Three basic methods of brush control were compared for their control of black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia L.) root suckers and stump sprouts found on the right-of-way. The selective basal method showed the best control of the black locust root suckers. Where the brush was cut, the pre cut basal method showed better control than the stump treatment method.

It has been a standard practice for tree trimming and brush cutting crews on Pennsylvania Electric Company property to cut the tall standing brush and then chemically treat the stumps. This method of brush control has worked relatively well for the control of stump sprouts for the majority of tree species treated. The problem with this type of chemical treatment is not so much in the lack of control of the stump sprouts of the treated stumps, but in the lack of control from untreated stumps and the erratic control of the root suckers of the black locust.

The possible reasons for the poor results with the stump treatment method can be listed under two categories:

  1. Untreated Stumps. When a cutter is cutting the brush on the right-of-way, he is cutting trees from 6 inches in diameter to 1/2 inch in diameter and he is making his cuts as close to the ground as possible. After the brush is cut, it is either dragged to a chipper and chipped, or to the edge of the right-of-way and piled. During this dragging of brush, some of the stumps will be covered over with debris. These covered stumps will not be chemically treated because they cannot be seen. Also, there will be stumps missed because of human error.

  2. Insufficient amount of chemical solution applied. So many times, the man spraying the stumps only puts enough chemical down to just dampen the exposed stump. Without a tall stem present to permit the chemical to run down and puddle at the base, many stumps do not receive enough chemical solution to control the stump sprouts, let alone the root suckers. Also, a common problem with inexperienced men is the application of the chemical solution to only the cut surface of the stump. This puts very little, if any solution, where it is needed.

The solution to the problems with stump treatment can be found in the basal spray methods employed during the chemical spray program. With a basal spray, the stem to be removed is treated from 12 inches to 18 inches from the ground and the chemical solution is permitted to run down the stem and puddle at the base. This method of treatment assures a sufficient amount of chemical solution on the plant. Also, because the stems are standing and the oil carrier in the chemical solution leaves a stain on the treated stems; there is little chance, other than human error, of not treating all of the stems.

Methods and Materials

With these possible solutions to the problem in mind, a small test area was chosen to compare the results of the three basic methods of brush control on the control of stump sprouts from all species found on the right-of-way and the root suckers of the black locust.

The location of the test area is on a distribution right-of-way that parallels U.S. Route 36 one mile south of Newburg, in Clearfield County, Pennsylvania.

The right-of-way was initially cut in 1970. At this time, there was no chemical applied. As a result of no chemical being applied, the right-of-way immediately resprouted, and by 1975, the regrowth had reached the conductors at many points. What made this section of right-of-way ideal for the type of test to be conducted, was that about 75% of the regrowth was black locust.

Results

The methods of brush control to be compared were:

  1. Chemical Stump Treatment. This method involves the removal of the brush from the right-of-way and then the chemical treatment of the stumps.

  2. Selective Basal Treatment. This method involves the spraying of the brush from the ground up to about 18” high, depending on the diameter of the stem to be removed.

  3. Pre Cut Basal. This method involves the chemical treatment of the brush using the selective basal method followed by the cutting of the treated stem.

The chemical used was picloram plus 2,4,5-T containing 1 lb. picloram plus 4 lb. 2,4,5-T per gallon as the isooctyl (#1) and propylene glycol butyl (#2) ether esters respectively. This chemical was mixed at the rate of one gallon of chemical per 100 gallons of fuel oil. This solution was mixed at crew headquarters in 55 gallon drums. The chemical was applied with back pack sprayers.

The test was conducted on October 20, 1975 using a four man brush cutting crew. The result of this test was taken on July 15, 1976.

Upon review of the results (Table 1), the selective basal method showed the best control of the black locust sprouts, and also showed the lowest number of untreated stems. This method of brush control is best suited for lines that are in areas where the dead stems may be left standing. For the areas that must have the brush removed because of location, i.e., road crossings, lines paralleling the roads and residential areas, the pre cut basal method shows a marked improvement in prolonged brush control over the stump treatment method.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1

Footnotes

  • ↵1 Presented at the Northeastern Weed Science Society Meeting in January 1977.

  • © 1977, International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF)
Vol. 3, Issue 9
September 1977
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Arboriculture & Urban Forestry.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Field Trial Comparison of Techniques of Root Kill on Problem Species
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Arboriculture & Urban Forestry
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Arboriculture & Urban Forestry web site.
Citation Tools
Field Trial Comparison of Techniques of Root Kill on Problem Species
Michael C. McNamara
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Sep 1977, 3 (9) 171-172; DOI: 10.48044/joa.1977.3.9.171

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Field Trial Comparison of Techniques of Root Kill on Problem Species
Michael C. McNamara
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Sep 1977, 3 (9) 171-172; DOI: 10.48044/joa.1977.3.9.171
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods and Materials
    • Results
    • Footnotes
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Hardscape of Soil Surface Surrounding Urban Trees Alters Stem Carbon Dioxide Efflux
  • Literature Review of Unmanned Aerial Systems and LIDAR with Application to Distribution Utility Vegetation Management
  • Borrowed Credentials and Surrogate Professional Societies: A Critical Analysis of the Urban Forestry Profession
Show more Articles

Similar Articles

© 2023 International Society of Arboriculture

Powered by HighWire