Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/11681/33991
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorGetsinger, Kurt D.-
dc.contributor.authorPodkowka, Rebecca L.-
dc.contributor.authorSkogerboe, John G.-
dc.contributor.authorGilbert, Patricia L.-
dc.contributor.authorPennington, Toni Garrett-
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-09T19:46:41Z-
dc.date.available2019-09-09T19:46:41Z-
dc.date.issued2019-09-
dc.identifier.govdocERDC/EL TR-19-16-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11681/33991-
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.21079/11681/33991-
dc.descriptionTechnical Report-
dc.description.abstractEurasian watermilfoil (EWM) was first observed in Fort Peck Lake, MT in 2010 and has spread to over 100 locations in the lake. In 2012, field trials were conducted to evaluate aquatic herbicides for controlling EWM and provide management guidance. This work follows those initial 2012 demonstrations. Five sites were identified for herbicide treatments and bulk water exchange processes were determined using inert tracer dye, rhodamine WT (RWT). Field trials conducted in 2014 spanned two growing seasons, summer (July) and fall (September). Treatments were with a variable-depth application technique, or for one plot, a hand gun from the surface. Vegetative communities were assessed at pretreatment, and at 8 and 52 weeks. Non-target native vegetation was sparse pretreatment in all plots, but generally survived treatments. Treatments had no impacts on water quality measured in the field, including dissolved oxygen levels. Control of EWM was limited (< 50%) in small, open-water plots treated with diquat and endothall, where no barrier curtains were deployed. Control of EWM was near 100% through one year after treatment in plots where barrier curtains mitigated bulk water exchange processes and extended herbicide contact times were maintained.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipAquatic Plant Control Research Program (U.S.)en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipUnited States. Army. Corps of Engineers. Omaha District.-
dc.description.tableofcontentsAbstract ........................................................................................................................................................ Figures and Tables ...................................................................................................................................... iii Preface........................................................................................................................................................ v Unit Conversion Factors ............................................................................................................................... vi Acronyms and Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................ vii 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Approach ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Scope ................................................................................................................................ 2 1.4 Environmental setting ......................................................................................................... 2 1.4.1 Hydrology ................................................................................................................................. 2 1.4.2 Climatic conditions ................................................................................................................... 3 1.5 Objectives .......................................................................................................................... 3 2 Materials and Methods......................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Description of treatment plots .............................................................................................. 4 2.2 Site preparation ................................................................................................................. 6 2.2.1 Treatment plots DC-1, DC-4 and ES-6 ......................................................................................... 6 2.2.2 Treatment Plots DC-2 and DC-3 .................................................................................................. 7 2.3 Vegetation assessments ...................................................................................................... 7 2.4 Herbicide products ........................................................................................................... 10 2.5 Treatment schedule, herbicide rates, and application techniques .......................................... 13 2.6 Water quality .................................................................................................................... 16 3 Results and Discussion ....................................................................................................................... 17 3.1 Environmental conditions .................................................................................................. 17 3.2 Water Exchange Processes ................................................................................................ 17 3.2.1 July 2014 ............................................................................................................................... 17 3.2.2 September 2014 .................................................................................................................... 22 3.3 Plant Assessments and CET ............................................................................................... 28 4 Conclusions and Recommendations .................................................................................................... 37 4.1 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 37 4.2 Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 38 References ............................................................................................................................................... 40 Appendix A: Product Label Use Restrictions .................................................................................................. 44 Appendix B: Raw Plant Data Frequency of Occurrence ................................................................................... 46 Appendix C: Rhodamine WT Fluorescent Dye for Use in Determining Bulk Water Exchange Processes, as Related to Aquatic Herbicide Applications ............................................................................................ 48 Report Documentation Page-
dc.format.extent63 pages / 4.746 Mb-
dc.format.mediumPDF-
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherEnvironmental Laboratory (U.S.)en_US
dc.publisherEngineer Research and Development Center (U.S.)-
dc.relation.ispartofseriesTechnical Report (Engineer Research and Development Center (U.S.)) ; no. ERDC/EL TR-19-16-
dc.rightsApproved for Public Release; Distribution is Unlimited-
dc.sourceThis Digital Resource was created in Microsoft Word and Adobe Acrobat-
dc.subjectAquatic plants--Controlen_US
dc.subjectEurasian watermilfoilen_US
dc.subjectAquatic herbicides--Evaluationen_US
dc.subjectFort Peck Lake (Mont.)en_US
dc.titleDemonstration and evaluation of eurasian watermilfoil control using aquatic herbicides in Fort Peck Lake, MTen_US
dc.typeReporten_US
Appears in Collections:Technical Report

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
ERDC-EL TR-19-16.pdf4.86 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open