1. Russian Olive Control

2. Russian olive (Eleagnus angustifolia)
THE GOOD
Windbreak
Wildlife habitat
Wildlife feed source
Drought tolerant
Nitrogen fixation

3. Russian olive (Eleagnus angustifolia)
THE BAD
Spread by suckers and seeds
Displaces native vegetation
Reduces bio-diversity
Reduces land use and values

4. Russian olive (Eleagnus angustifolia)
THE UGLY!

5. Propagation Sexual—spread by birds and other wildlife
Asexual—Stressed or damaged trees readily sucker
Key—Kill the crown before plant removal

6. A Noxious Weed In some Utah Counties
Carbon Sevier
Duchesne Uintah
Grand Wayne
San Juan

7. Chemical Application Methods
Foliar Spray
Basal Bark Spray
Frill Cut
Stump Cut

8. Foliar Spray Foliar spraying—complete control is difficult
Care must be taken to apply herbicide to every branch
Increased the risk of contaminating the environment or damaging non-target plants.
Dilution of the chemical is usually required.

9. Basal Bark Spray
Apply herbicide to the lower area of the main trunk(s) of the tree
Chemical is absorbed through the bark
Reduced the risk of environmental contamination
Less effective on trees with corky bark
Penetrating oil or diesel may help with absorption to cambium

10. Frill Cut
Cut notches through the bark and into the sap wood of the tree
Undiluted herbicide is poured or injected into each notch
Cuts are made with a downward motion so the notches will hold the herbicide
Do not girdle the tree with the chop marks.
Environmentally friendly application method that makes very efficient use of herbicide
The main difficulty is getting through the thorny lower branches of the tree to access the trunk
Undiluted herbicide is applied in small amounts (2cc or less per inch of trunk diameter)

11. Frill Cut

12. Stump Cut
The tree is cut down and the stump is immediately (within ten minutes) sprayed or painted with herbicide
Cutting down the tree and applying the chemical immediately usually requires two or more people to accomplish
Anecdotal evidence indicates this may not be as effective as the frill cut method
Undiluted chemical is more effective with this application method

13. Experiment Design
Used the Frill Cut method for accuracy of placement and ease of metering
Three chemicals
Habitat (Arsenal)—28.7%
2-4,D—47.3%
Roundup—41.0%
Three rates (cc/inch trunk diameter)
1.00
1.50
2.00
Control trees were cut and marked but nothing was applied to the cuts

15. Treatment and Evaluation
The tress were treated October 12, 2005 and evaluated September 5, 2006

16. Control trees showed no evidence of stress or damage
Results
Control trees showed no evidence of stress or damage

17. Results
Habitat (Arsenal)

18. Results
2,4-D Amine

19. Results
Roundup

20. Chemical Effectiveness
Results
Chemical Effectiveness
Tree #1
Tree #2
Tree #3
Average
Control
0.00
2-4,D--1.0
100 95
98.33
2-4,D--1.5 90
96.67
2-4,D--2.0
100.00
Roundup--1.0 80
93.33
Roundup--1.5
Roundup--2.0
Habitat--1.0
Habitat--1.5
Habitat--2.0

22. Results
The frill-cut method is effective and reduces environmental contamination
Lower application rates appear to be as effective as the higher rates
No significant difference in the effectiveness of the different chemicals used
The greatest cost, regardless of chemical and application method, is labor to remove the plants

23. Recommendations Treat trees with the frill-cut method
Take care to not girdle the tree with frill cuts
Apply 1.0 cc of undiluted chemical into each cut
Use of a soil-active chemical could hinder re-vegetation efforts

24. Future Studies
Time-of-year effectiveness
Biocontrol--goats

25. Questions?