Economic Impact of Leafy Spurge (<i>Euphorbia esula</i>) in North Dakota

Leistritz, F. Larry; Thompson, F.B.; Leitch, Jay A.

doi:10.1017/s0043174500057349

Cited by 31 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 5 publications

(8 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is defined as the area of land at a given time that is able to provide for a certain number of animals, expressed as animal-units per area (de Leeuw and Tothill, 1990;Tainton, 1999 ;Tainton et al, 1980). An animal unit (AU) is defined to be equivalent to a 450kg cow (Leistritz et al, 1992). One AU is assumed to consume 12kg of forage dry matter (biomass) per day, or 4.38 metric tons per year (Scarnecchia, 1985).…”

Section: Ecosystem Services Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrated Modeling of Land and Water Resources in two African Catchments

Yalew¹

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although all care is taken to ensure integrity and the quality of this publication and the information herein, no responsibility is assumed by the publishers, the author nor UNESCO-IHE for any damage to the property or persons as a result of operation or use of this publication and/or the information contained herein. A pdf version of this work will be made available as Open Access via http://repository.tudelft.nl/ihe This version is licensed under the Creative Commons SUMMARYLand and water are two of the most important and interacting natural resources that are critical for human survival and development. Growing population and global economic expansion are accelerating the demand for land and water for uses such as agriculture, urbanization, irrigation, hydropower, and industrialization. The land surface changes dynamically due to these demands and other socio-economic drivers. Biophysical factors such as topographic suitability, climate change, and rainfall variability further influence landuse changes and land-use change decisions. Water resources are likewise experiencing pressure from overuse, pollution, and changes in hydrologic processes as a result of both socio-economic and biophysical factors.Land and water resources are considered to have strong interactions. Although the science of this interaction is not new, the two are typically managed under separate governance systems (Le Maitre et al., 2014). As a result, land-use change and hydrology or water resources are studied usually separately. Modelers and model developers reproduced the existing separation in governance of land and water resources in their respective models, which gave rise to mild treatment of one of the resources when analyzing the other. The result is that hydrology and water resources are often considered to be processes and resources affected only by biophysical components, ignoring anthropogenic contributions that may actually influence such characteristics through direct effects on land-use, for instance.The need to understand and explicitly represent the interaction between water resources on the one hand and land-use changes with its drivers on the other is imperative for sustainable management of integrated natural resources management in general and land and water resources management in particular. In recent years, interesting sub-disciplines such as 'socio-hydrology' are emerging which recognize and emphasize the importance of socioeconomic and anthropogenic effects on hydrologic and water resources analysis. Interaction and feedback between land-use and water resources is still not explicitly and dynamically represented in most scientific modeling tools related to land and water, however.Furthermore, often due to limitations of access and computing resources, frameworks for communicating integrated assessment and modeling in a way that can be operational to resource managers and decision makers related to such resources is limited. This is especially evident in developing regions. After the land-use models calibrated and...

show abstract

Section: Ecosystem Services Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrated Modeling of Land and Water Resources in two African Catchments

Yalew¹

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…No research or case study data describing a functional relationship between leafy spurge and water runoff and soil erosion exist, so an assumption was made by others (Leistritz et al 1993) to quantify the overall effect. A leafy spurge monoculture would conservatively reduce the soil and water conservation benefits of post-CRP vegetative cover fits of post-CRP vegetative cover by 25% (Leistritz et al 1993).…”

Section: Impacts On Soil and Water Conservationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An increase in the amount of water treatment, for example, represents the cost of decreased water quality. Based on a USDA study by Ribaudo (1989), the annual erosion control benefits of CRP land were estimated to be $14.50 per hectare in the Northern Plains region in 1990 (Leistritz et al 1993). Applying the assumed 25% reduction in CRP erosion control benefits due to leafy spurge infestations to the $14.50 ha -1 value gives an estimate of $3.63 per ha -1 reduction in soil and water conservation benefits.…”

Section: Impacts On Soil and Water Conservationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Leafy Spurge on Post-Conservation Reserve Program Land

Hirsch¹,

Leitch²

1998

Journal of Range Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula L.), a noxious weed infests some of the 1.2 million hectares of Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) land in North Dakota. Once established a leafy spurge monoculture will reduce expected CRP benefits and impact returns to some post-CRP land uses. The study estimated statewide direct economic impacts of about $351,000 on post-CRP land maintained in vegetative cover, $1.118 million on post-CRP grazing land, and negligible (assumed $0) on post-CRP cropland, for a total of $1.469 million. Total annual direct and secondary economic impacts to North Dakota's economy were estimated to be $4.665 million, which would support about 57 jobs.

show abstract

“…Cattle refuse to eat leafy spurge because of its irritant that causes dermatitis (Kingsbury 1964). Economic losses of over $100 million per year (Anonymous 1992) include direct effects and secondary effects on other sectors of the rural economy (agribusiness firms, local trade, and service sectors) (Leistritz et al 1992).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Biology and Host Preference of Nephopteryx divisella (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae): Candidate Agent for Biological Control of Leafy Spurge Complex in North America

Cristofaro

Sale

Campobasso

et al. 1998

Environmental Entomology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Euphorbia esula L. (Euphorbiaceae) is a complex of species that has become major weeds in rangelands and pastures in North America. The biology and host specificity of Nephopterix divisella Duponchel (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) was studied to evaluate its potential as a new biological control agent. This oligophagous, multivoltine stem borer is common on spurges such as E. characias in western and southwestern Europe. The results of no-choice feeding test with 1st instars, showed that the host range is restricted to plant species in the genus Euphorbia. Among them, feeding on E. milii Desmoulins and E. trigona Haworth, both ornamental plants, seems to bar chances for N. divisella to be selected as a leafy spurge biological control agent.

show abstract

Economic Impact of Leafy Spurge (Euphorbia esula) in North Dakota

Cited by 31 publications

References 5 publications

Integrated Modeling of Land and Water Resources in two African Catchments

Integrated Modeling of Land and Water Resources in two African Catchments

Impact of Leafy Spurge on Post-Conservation Reserve Program Land

Biology and Host Preference of Nephopteryx divisella (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae): Candidate Agent for Biological Control of Leafy Spurge Complex in North America

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About