Gap Analysis Report: Prepared For U.S. Army Garrison - Hawaii

APPENDIX 1-4
Gap Analysis Report

CALIBRE Contract #: W911S0-04-D-0002, Task CALIBRE Contract #: W911S0-
Prepared for U.S. Army Garrison – Hawaii
29 June 2011
This report is prepared under Contract #: W911S0-04-D-0002-0183 to

CALIBRE Systems Inc., (prime contractor, POC: Heather LaRowe) and
teammates Crop Production Services-Timberland Division (POC: Ron Lemin)
and Arbor Global (POC: Kevin Eckert)
i
APPENDIX 1-4
CALIBRE Contract W911S0-04-D-0002-0183
TO 183: USAG-HI Uncontrolled Vegetation Management Final Gap Analysis Report
Executive Summary
Team CALIBRE (i.e., CALIBRE Systems, Inc., Crop Production Services, and Arbor Global)
began operational research in 2010 at Schofield Barracks Military Reservation and Makua
Military Reservation to support initiation of a long-term U.S. Army Garrison, Hawaii (USAG-
HI) Integrated Vegetation Management Plan (IVMP) intended to (1) support and enhance
training while simultaneously minimizing risk of fire and environmental impacts to the site
and surrounding area; (2) improve and maintain a sufficient fire line/buffer for threatened
and endangered (T&E) species; and (3) develop and prepare the most cost efficient and
sustainable approach to vegetation management using techniques such as cultivation of
desirable vegetation cover, mowing/harvesting, biological control (including grazing), and
herbicide and/or plant growth regulator application. The IVMP goal is to develop and cost-
effectively maintain a low growing (6”-12”) vegetative ground cover that remains green
throughout the year such that fire cannot propagate and spread to off-site areas.
The purpose of this Gap Analysis Report is to (1) summarize results of Team CALIBRE’s
literature review and interviews of key personnel at USAG-HI and subject matter experts in
the field of vegetation management, and (2) describe the process and findings of
preliminary herbicide testing conducted by Team CALIBRE to address gaps in support of
developing an effective USAG-HI IVMP.
Based on results of the Gap analysis and preliminary testing, Team CALIBRE recommends
further actions needed for development of a long-term IVMP that will support military
training, while protecting USAG-HI sensitive natural and cultural resources.
ii
APPENDIX 1-4
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1
2. Methodology............................................................................................................................ 2
2.1. Identification of Existing Conditions ............................................................................... 2
2.2. Identification of Management Alternatives.................................................................... 10
2.3. Identification of Specific Trial Areas ............................................................................. 11
2.4. Identification of Research Protocols .............................................................................. 13
2.4.1 Herbicide Application Equipment .......................................................................... 13
2.4.2 Herbicide Mixing Protocols .................................................................................... 15
2.4.3 Weather Considerations .......................................................................................... 16
2.4.4 UXO Considerations ............................................................................................... 17
2.4.5 Cultural Resources Considerations ......................................................................... 17
2.4.6 Marking of Test Plots and Sensitive Sites .............................................................. 18
2.4.7 Vegetation Data Collection ..................................................................................... 20
2.4.8 Soil Sampling .......................................................................................................... 21
3. Results ................................................................................................................................... 23
3.1. Analysis of Existing Data and Current Conditions ........................................................ 24
3.1.1 Topography and Soils ............................................................................................. 24
3.1.2 USAG-HI RD Vegetation Treatment Methods....................................................... 27
3.1.3 Vegetation Conditions (SBMR WR) ...................................................................... 29
3.1.4 Vegetation Conditions (MMR) ............................................................................... 29
3.1.5 Vegetation Conditions (Kahuku Training Area)..................................................... 30
3.1.6 Vegetation Conditions Summary ............................................................................ 30
3.2. Preliminary Trials of Herbicide Application .................................................................. 30
4. Control Method Recommendations ....................................................................................... 34
4.1. Biological Control .......................................................................................................... 34
4.2. Mechanical Control ........................................................................................................ 35
4.3. Cultural Management of Vegetation .............................................................................. 35
4.4. Chemical Applications ................................................................................................... 37
5. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 38
iii
APPENDIX 1-4
1. Introduction
The mission of US Army Garrison – Hawaii (USAG-HI) is to “provide sustainable installation
support and services for Joint Warfighters, their families and the military community that
meets current and future mission requirements, safeguards human health, improves
quality of life, and enhances the natural environment.” Important to fulfilling the mission is
the goal to “maximize training support while minimizing the impact on the natural
environment and community.” The objective is to provide realistic, relevant, and available
training facilities to the 25th Infantry Division and other tenant units. USAG-HI is
responsible for conserving over 100 federally listed endangered species. Fire is the
number one threat to endangered species from military training. Significant restrictions
exist on the use of live-fire training infrastructure during periods of high fire hazard due to
access challenges, limitations put forth within Biological Opinions that guide Range
management, transformational changes in equipment and doctrine, increased
environmental pressures, the presence of invasive grass species that facilitate the rapid
spread of fire, and numerous wildland fires that have encroached into sensitive natural and
cultural areas.
To reduce fire hazards created from live fire training, permit exploded Ordnance (UXO)
clearance and support the construction of a new Range, the USAG-HI Range Division (RD)
allocates a large portion of funds [approximately $750,000 over the past five years on
Schofield Barracks Military Reservation (SBMR), Figure 1, alone] to apply herbicide,
conduct prescribed burning,
then apply a second herbicide
treatment to reduce vegetation.
The initial result of this
treatment regime is the creation
of bare ground, which results in
soil destabilization, runoff and
water quality problems
associated with herbicides and
other contaminants that leach
from the site into groundwater.
The unintended result of this
treatment regime is
reestablishment of aggressive,
Figure 1. Schofield Barracks Military Reservation, Oahu, 2011 . highly flammable, invasive
species that now comprise the primary vegetation community at SBMR, Makua Military
Reservation (MMR) (cover photo), and other USAG-HI training sites.
1
APPENDIX 1-4
Team CALIBRE reviewed readily available references, formed a team of vegetation experts
to analyze data gaps and define methodologies, protocol, and best management practices;
evaluated existing field conditions; and initiated preliminary testing of precision-applied
herbicides to determine prescriptions that warrant further rigorous testing.
2. Methodology
2.1. Identification of Existing Conditions
In order to initiate the gap analysis, knowledge and understanding of past treatments of
USAG-HI ranges, significant current conditions, and vegetation management practices and
goals was required. Team CALIBRE’s extensive knowledge and experience with vegetation
management throughout Hawaii and the US mainland facilitated analyzing the
effectiveness and challenges of past treatments, current conditions and the likely result of
alternative treatments. To identify USAG-HI vegetation management goals, past practices
and research that were conducted, Team CALIBRE interviewed the following
knowledgeable, experienced personnel at USAG-HI Range Division (RD) and Environmental
Division (ENV):
• Vic Garo, Chief Operations Officer, RD

• Frank Raby, Range Operations Manager, RD
• Ken Torre, Training Support Manager, RD
• Michelle Mansker, Chief, Natural Resource Section, ENV
• Joby Rohrer, Senior Natural Resource Management Coordinator, ENV
• Jane Beachy, Ecosystem Restoration Program Manager, ENV
Information collected during these interviews included vegetation management goals and
desired results, vegetation management techniques and materials that were currently
applied, the reason that each technique was used, the advantages and disadvantages of
each technique, timing of vegetation management applications, and location of
applications. We collected information on past formulations of herbicides, tank mix rate,
application rates, and method of application via personal communications with personnel
named above and documented reports.
Team CALIBRE completed focused site visits and reviews of conditions at MMR and SBMR
in August 2010, accompanied by RD and ENV staff that provided general information and
responded to questions regarding past treatments and vegetation management goals.
Team CALIBRE already possessed a comprehensive knowledge and understanding of past
management practices and vegetation management challenges through its members’
extensive experience and knowledge gained by working within the vegetation management
industry and living in Hawaii.
2
APPENDIX 1-4
To assist in identifying necessary research to complete gaps in knowledge and provide the
framework for the IVMP, Team CALIBRE reviewed numerous documents and online
resources. Content that was considered relevant to this Gap analysis is summarized in the
remainder of this section or is referenced throughout the document using footnotes. Most
of the descriptions are taken directly and verbatim from key portions of executive
summaries, abstracts or conclusions statements within the reference and amended to focus
on the general areas relevant to this study. Publications are listed in alphabetical order, by
author.
 Alexander, M.E. and L.G. Fogarty. 2002. A pocket card for predicting fire behaviour
in grasslands under severe burning conditions. Fire Technology Transfer Note
Number.
The grassland fire behaviour pocket card recently developed for use by wildland and rural
firefighters in Canada and New Zealand offers a practical field guide for quickly estimating
the near worst case fire behaviour potential in grasslands. At the same time it reinforces an
awareness of the need for adopting safe work practices when attempting to contain grass
fires in an effort to avoid burnovers and entrapments, thereby eliminating firefighter
injuries and fatalities.
 Ansari, S., H. Hirsh, and T. Thair. 2008. Removal of Invasive Fire-Prone Grasses to
Increase Training Lands in the Pacific. SWCA Environmental Consultants. PROJECT
NUMBER 07-362.
Three control treatments were tested including mechanical removal, herbicide application
and grazing using cattle to reduce the fuel loads at Marine Corps Training Area Bellows
(MCTAB), on the island of O‘ahu, Hawai‘i. The total fine fuel load at MCTAB was found to
average 6 tons/acre. Results indicated that grazing by cattle was most effective in lowering
the fuel bed depths of Guinea grass on MCTAB. Effect of treatment on reduction of Guinea
grass fuel loads varied with time. Mechanical treatment was the most effective in rapidly
reducing Guinea grass; however, the grazing treatment was most effective in maintaining
low fuel loads over 5 months post application of treatment. At the end of the experiment,
fuels in the grazing plots also appeared to be less continuous than other treatments and;
therefore, not expected to carry fast moving fires. Grazing treatment appeared to be most
effective in maintaining lower total fine fuel loads, five months post application of
treatments.
 Beavers, A.M. 2001. Creation and Validation of a Custom Fuel Model Representing
Mature Panicum maximum (Guinea grass) in Hawaii. Center for Ecological
Management of Military Lands, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.
Panicum maximum cannot be accurately modeled using standard NFFL fuel models. The
types of fire behavior observed during test burns prove beyond any doubt that this fuel
3
APPENDIX 1-4
type has a propensity for fast moving, high intensity grass fires. There seemed to be a
break point in the RH and fuel moisture, below which fires exhibited behavior that would
be uncontrollable in a wildland suppression situation; however, such observations are
difficult to confirm with empirical data.
Winds did not appear to have as great an effect on fire behavior as would be expected. In
fact, the most intense fire behavior was observed during periods of low winds. This may
have been due to the high heat output released by the burning fuels. This model is
applicable to any location dominated by the Panicum maximum fuel type, a large portion of
the lowland landscape on the island of Oahu. By combining the model with accurate spot
weather forecasts, fire behaviorists can give a very good estimate of what the fire
perimeter and fire behavior will be in the coming 12-24 hours.
The future of fire behavior prediction, associated FDRS's, and fire management
improvements is still open. New technologies and methods of prediction are currently
being developed that incorporate a spatial component into the system. The current system
rates fire danger based upon the highest fire danger throughout the installation. With a
spatially based FDRS, locations of the training area that are at lower fire danger ratings
could continue to be used despite the fact that some areas are under higher fire danger
rating.
 Beavers, A.M., R. Burgan, F. Fujioka, R.D Laven, and P.N. Omi. 1999. Analysis of Fire
Management Concerns at Makua Military Reservation. Center for Ecological
Management of Military Lands, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.
This publication suggested challenges of fire management at MMR can be overcome with
proper fuel management, effective data collection and analysis, and appropriate fire
suppression training and preparedness. If fuel management (including appropriate future
maintenance) is carried out successfully and guidelines are enforced, the fires that do occur
will burn under conditions that allow effective fire suppression before endangered species
habitat is impacted. Although fire risk can never be eliminated completely, the Army will
have improved capabilities for managing the fires that may occur. By initially proceeding
with caution, monitoring conditions under which operations are conducted safely, and
improving fire management techniques whenever possible, undesired fire impacts will be
reduced and the Army will have the use of MMR as a live fire range for the foreseeable
future.
 Beavers, A.M and R. Burgan. 2001. Wildland Fire Risk and Management on West
and South Ranges, Schofield Barracks, Oahu. Center for Ecological Management of
Military Lands, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.
Existing fire management at Schofield Barracks is adequate, but there is room for
improvement. The most logical course of action is to reduce or eliminate the possibility of
4
APPENDIX 1-4
an ignition occurring in dry, windy conditions. The best way to accomplish this task is with
a fire danger rating system. The current state of fuel distribution allows for the
opportunity to continue to stop fires at the fire break, as long as aggressive fuels
management is implemented immediately. Maintenance of the fire break road and
minimization of the extent and density of pyrophytic grasses above the fire break should be
top priorities. If the recommended improvements in this report are implemented and
combined with current management practices, there is no reason to believe that the
Schofield fire management program can’t be one of the most successful in the Islands.
 Goodman, Sherri,W. 1995. Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, Memorandum for

Defense Environmental Council.
This memorandum provides interim policy on the certification of installation pesticide

applicators and contractor employees performing pest management work on DoD
installations. The measures of merit for installation pest management are: Measure of
Merit 1 dictates that by the end of FY 97, 100 percent of all DoD installations will have pest
management plans prepared, reviewed, and updated annually by pest management
professionals. Measure of Merit 2 dictates that by the end of FY 2000, the amount of
pesticide applied annually on DoD installations will be reduced by 50% from the FY 93
baseline in pounds of active ingredient. Measure of Merit 3 dictates that by the end of FY
98, 100 percent of all DoD installation pesticide applicators will be properly certified
within two years of employment.
 Nickerson, N.H. 1992. Impacts of Vegetation Management Techniques on Wetlands

in Utility Rights-of-Way in Massachusetts. Journal of Arboriculture 18(2).
This project compared five rights-of-way treatments to determine their impacts on

wetlands on utility rights of way (ROW). The conclusion reached was that there was no
significant impact to wetlands from any of the vegetation management techniques used on
utility ROW in Massachusetts. Mechanical treatments resulted in higher impacts on the
cover value for wildlife than those involving herbicides. Residue from petroleum products
(bar oil and hydraulic fluid) were recovered on the leaf letter from mechanically treated
sites. No herbicide residues were recovered from herbicide treated sites.
 Nowak, C.A. and B.D. Ballard. 2005. A framework for applying integrated vegetation
management on rights-of-way. Journal of Arboriculture.
Integrated Vegetation Management, or IVM, is being used by many right-of-way

management organizations across the United States. IVM is an in-depth and sophisticated
system of information gathering, planning, implementing, reviewing, and improving
vegetation management treatments. IVM is used to understand, justify, choose among,
selectively apply, and monitor different types of treatments, with an overall goal of eliciting
5
APPENDIX 1-4
site specific, ecosystem-sensitive, economically sensible, and socially responsible treatment

effects that lead to refined achievement of management objectives.
 Ray, C., M. Sanda, J. Dusek, B. Loo, H. Pavelkov, M. Sobotkova, and J. Lichwa. 2007.
Leaching of Selected Pesticides in Hawaii Soils as Influenced by Soil Properties and
Hydrologic Conditions: Field and Laboratory Evaluations. Water Resources
Research Center, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI.
Leaching behavior of six pesticides and bromide were investigated at five test sites in
Hawaii: Poamoho, Kunia, and Waimanalo on Oahu; Kula on Maui; and Mana on Kauai. The
intent of the study was to evaluate the relative leaching behavior of the pesticides and to
compare their leaching behavior to that of bromide tracer. Soil properties that affect
transport are water conduction, organic carbon content, mineralogy, pH, and
texture/structure. These factors affect pesticide half-life, sorption coefficient, and their
movement in soils. Compounds with a longer half-life persist for a longtime in soil.
Compounds with a high sorption coefficient adsorb strongly to soil and are less likely to be
carried down by percolating water. Compounds with low sorption potential and long half-
life are candidates for excessive leaching, unless they are extremely volatile and the
volatilization is the primary mode of pesticide loss.
The soil profile data revealed that the bromide center of mass at the Kunia site moved
about 1.5 m in 16 weeks. The imazaquin front at the Kunia site traveled more than 1.2 m
over 8 weeks. However, the concentration front dissipated over the 8 weeks to below
detection. At other sites, the front did not get past 0.6 m. Most of the chemicals were still
present in the top 0.6 m after the 16-week study period.
Laboratory sorption data showed that imazaquin and sulfometuron methyl have very low
sorption potential (< 10 mL/g). Also, most metabolites appear to be mobile. The mean
half-life values for several chemicals from laboratory degradation studies may not be
reliable due to extreme variations in data.
The Attenuation Factor screening model used by the Hawaii Department of Agriculture
suggests that all chemicals, with the exception of trifloxystrobin, have the potential to
leach. Many of these are applied at low doses. Low dose pesticides raise issues about their
potency. Some pesticides are considered less toxic to mammals and are considered “safer”
from this perspective. However, low dose pesticides residues may be of concern to aquatic
ecosystems downstream and downstream water users.
 Shahin, A., H. Hirsh, and T. Thair. 2008. Removal of Invasive Fire-Prone Grasses
Increase Training Lands in the Pacific, PROJECT NUMBER 07-362. SWCA
Environmental Consultants, Honolulu, HI.
6
APPENDIX 1-4
Invasive fire prone grasses like Guinea grass (Panicum maximum) have become the
dominant cover on several training areas in the Pacific including Marine Corps Training
Area Bellows (MCTAB), Hawaii. Dense stands of Guinea grass provide fuel for fast moving,
high intensity fires thereby aggravating fire risk to weapons firing training and threatening
wildlife and their habitats. Military installations spend millions of dollars to mitigate risk
from such fire prone grasses. Traditionally, mechanical removal and prescribed fire were
used to reduce Guinea grass fuel loads in Hawaii. MCTAB personnel and land managers in
the Pacific seek alternative fuel reduction treatments such as mechanical, herbicide and
grazing to reduce Guinea grass fuel loads; however, very little information is available.
 Smith, C.W. 1982. 1982. Technical Report 45- The prospects for biological control
of nonnative plants in Hawaiian National Parks. Cooperative National Park
Resources Studies Unit, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Botany.
Encroachment of exotic (nonnative) plants into natural NPS areas is inconsistent with
policy. Previous attempts to control such plants in Hawaiian NPS areas have involved
mechanical removal or treatment with herbicides, but these methods as presently
employed are inadequate to provide control on a long-term basis for many exotic species;
they are also expensive and continuous. Previous efforts to control noxious weeds in
Hawaii with phytophagous insects were conducted by the Hawaii State Department of
Agriculture primarily for agricultural interests. Similar approaches for the control of exotic
plants in Hawaii Volcanoes and Haleakala National Parks may have positive as well as
cautionary aspects, which must be considered. A literature review revealed numerous
references to insects and diseases associated with Hawaii's exotic plants, or related species,
in other regions of the world. Some of these, or other suitable organisms not included in
this report, may offer potential in future biological control programs.
 U.S. Army Garrison, Hawai‘i. 2010. Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan,
2010‐2014, Island of O‘ahu, Schofield Barracks Military Reservation, Schofield
Barracks East Range, Kawailoa Training Area, Kahuku Training Area, Dillingham
Military Reservation, Mākua Military Reservation, and Tripler Army Medical Center.
Prepared for the Directorate of Public Works, Environmental Division, Natural
Resources Section. Center for Environmental Management of Military Lands,
Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.
The INRMP guides implementation of USAG-HI’s integrated natural resources management

program on its properties from 2010 through 2014. This plan is prepared in cooperation
with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USWFS) and the Hawai‘i Department of Land and
Natural Resources (DLNR).
SBMR is the primary range complex with limited light maneuver training areas for USAG-HI
at 9,520 ac (3,506 ha). There are four native vegetative communities located on SBMR:
Montane Wet, Lowland Wet, Lowland Mesic, and Aquatic Natural communities.
7
APPENDIX 1-4
Collectively, there are approximately 3,544 ac (1,433.9 ha) of forest outside of the
cantonment area in SBMR. Metrosideros/Acacia/ Dicranopteris and Schinus spp.-dominated
forests account for approximately 93 percent of the land area outside of the cantonment
area. Four endangered animals (one bird, one terrestrial snail, two insects) have been
documented at SBMR, along with 23 federally listed and 8 candidate plant species. About
1,900 ac (774 ha) of SBMR have been designated as critical habitat for the O‘ahu ‘elepaio
(Chasiempis sandwichensis ibidis). Four O‘ahu IP management units are located on SBMR
and on five Mākua IP management units. Species of greatest conservation need include 8
bird taxa, 1 mammal species, 3 invertebrate species, and possibly 4 fish taxa, along with 68
plant taxa. Present on SBMR are some 8 non-native mammals; 10 endemic/indigenous and
31 non-native birds; 6 endemic and 14 non-native fish; 12 endemic terrestrial and 10
endemic aquatic invertebrates, along with 4 non-native terrestrial and 6 aquatic
invertebrates; and possibly as many as 15 non-native herpetofauna. Some 259 plant taxa
have been documented. Three ant species are considered invasive as are 20 plant species.
The O‘ahu Natural Resources (ONR) staff has identified 13 incipient plant species.
The primary drainages for the military reservation are the Waikōloa Gulch and the Waikele
Stream. Also, the North Fork of the Kaukonahua Stream flows along the northeast
boundary of SBMR, along with two tributaries. All streams on SBMR flow north into the
Pacific Ocean at Waialua, with the exception of the Waikele, which flows into Pearl Harbor
from the north. Many streams on SBMR are intermittent. All streams are somewhat
degraded; especially drainages affected by the impact area and associated erosion. Stream
quality is also affected by non-point pollution from adjacent crop lands. Soil erosion is
locally significant in areas where natural drainage and gulches occur, particularly in the
military reservation along Ayres Avenue and McMahon Road in the north, and Duck Field in
the south. However, the dry climate and lack of permanent streambeds may reduce the
risk of erosion, as well as areas where soils are not developed because of exposed lava.
MMR is located in an amphitheater-shaped valley, covering 4,190 ac (1,736 ha). Wildland

fires resulting from live-fire training are the greatest threat to natural resources and
endangered species located at and adjacent to MMR. Two native vegetative communities
have been identified at MMR: Lowland Mesic and Lowland Dry Vegetation communities.
Four forest communities are present and account for 469 ac (189 ha) of land cover, or
about 11 percent. One federally listed bird, 1 mammal, and 1 snail species are documented
on MMR, along with 33 federally listed and 5 candidate plant species have been
documented at MMR. Seven additional federally listed plant species occur within the
Mākua Action Area. O‘ahu ‘elepaio critical habitat was designated on MMR. Critical habitat
for 32 plant species is present within the MMR action area, but there is no critical habitat
for plants on the installation. Four bird, 2 marine mammals, and 1 invertebrate species,
along with 79 plant species of greatest conservation need may be present. There are four
8
APPENDIX 1-4
Mākua IP management units located on the installation and 19 management units off the
installation. Potentially, 2 marine mammals and 3 non-native mammal species (e.g., pigs,
goats, and rats) have been observed at MMR. Bird observations (mostly informal) include
2 forest species, 1 raptor, 1 sea bird, 1 migratory shorebird, and 11 non-native species.
Thirteen herpetofauna may be present at MMR, including one threatened marine turtle.
There are no records for fish. Nine endemic/indigenous and 13 non-native invertebrates
have been observed. Six non-native ant species have been documented. Some 284 plant
species have been identified. Nineteen invasive/weed species have been located at MMR,
along with 17 incipient species that the NR staff control and eradicate.
The primary drainages at MMR are the Punaohaku Stream from the north and the Mākua
Stream from west-central MMR; both are intermittent. There are possible palustrine
wetlands on MMR, characterized by native trees, shrubs, or persistent emergent species.
Possible riverine wetlands and possible palustrine wetlands associated with seep areas in
the Mākua Stream drainage are protected using a variety of training restrictions. Soil
erosion can be significant where slopes are steep because of the high shrink-swell potential
of soils. Erosion and sediment control practices are used when road and firebreak
repair/maintenance is performed to minimize sediment impacts to stream channels.
The grass/wildland fire cycle is an unresolved issue. Because of the rapid and widespread
expansion of non-native invasive species grasses throughout the Island of O‘ahu and the
resulting increase in fuel loads, wildland fire now poses a significant threat to native
habitats, particularly dry forest systems. Ecological approaches to break the
grass/wildland fire cycle are needed. Fire models must be adapted for the Pacific Islands
region to predict fire hazards/severity (behavior). Elements of the models should include,
but are not limited to, fuel loading, fuel moisture dynamics, live/dead rations, and
microclimate and weather. Of particular importance to DoD are self-sustaining means to
prevent and control fire in highly vulnerable areas (e.g., military training areas).
 U.S. Department of Agriculture – Soil Conservation Service (USDA-SCS). 1972. Soil

Survey of Islands of Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, and Lanai, State of Hawaii. Soil
Conservation Service.
This survey describes the soil series and mapping of the five Islands surveyed, including
Oahu.
 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2004. Reinitiation of the 1999 biological opinion of
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for routine military training at Makua Military
Reservation, island of Oahu, September 24, 2004. Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife
Office; Honolulu, HI.
This publication describes firebreaks and fuelbreaks developed for the MMR and includes
Kaluakauila, Kahanakahiki, Pahole, Upper Kapuna, Wes Makaleha, Ohikilolo, and Lower
9
APPENDIX 1-4
Ohikilolo. Fuelbreak areas are defined and illustrated within each area. The new fire
protection systems will be operational within five years or prior to implementation of
Column C in the Weapons Restrictions Table, whichever occurs earlier. Because mowing or
aerial herbicide treatment is expected to produce a thick layer of dead grass that will take
several years to decompose, aerial herbicide and mowing treatments will begin no later
than two years after the completion of this Biological Opinion in order to ensure that the
fire break is operational within five years.
 Yahner, R.H. and R.J. Hutnik. 2004. Integrated vegetation management on an electric
transmission right-of-way in Pennsylvania. U.S. Journal of Arboriculture 30(5).
Integrated Vegetation Management (IVM) has been used for the maintenance of vegetation
along an electric utility transmission right-of-way (ROW) at the Green Lane Research and
Demonstration Area, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, U.S., since 1987. The wire–border
zone method creates a forb–grass–short shrub cover type in wire zones and a tall shrub
cover type in border zones. This area has been studied annually since 1987, which makes
this project one of the longest continuous studies documenting the effects of mechanical
and herbicidal maintenance on flora and fauna along an electric transmission ROW.
Excellent control of target trees was noted in 1999 in wire zones of mowing plus herbicide
units; in contrast, tree control was poor in wire zones of mechanical units (mowing and
handcut). Competition with existing plants and wildlife predation on tree seeds on a ROW
keeps tree invasion to a minimum. Thus, over the years since 1987, IVM and the wire–
border zone method of ROW maintenance have increased the time between treatment
cycles, thereby reducing labor and chemical costs for ROW maintenance.
2.2. Identification of Management Alternatives

Based on research and analysis of past vegetation management practices, Team CALIBRE
identified practical management alternatives thought to possess the best potential to cost-
effectively manage undesirable vegetation and achieve USAG-HI vegetation management
goals. These alternatives are based on standard integrated vegetation control options
within the categories of biological, mechanical, manual, cultural and chemical as modeled
on successful utility vegetation management programs.1 Proposed alternatives were
reviewed with ENV and RD staff to determine priorities for preliminary testing.
Alternatives selected to be actively researched by Team CALIBRE included planting
(cultural), and herbicide applications (chemical). Prescribed grazing (biological) is shown
to be effective in maintaining a low-growing vegetation layer2. According to USAG-HI ENV
1
Nowak, Christopher A. and Ballard, Benjamin D. A framework for applying integrated vegetation management on rights-of-
way. Journal of Arboriculture. Jan 2005.
2
Steven D. Warren, Stephen A. Sherman, and James A. Zeidler. Assessment of Livestock Grazing Impacts on Fuels and Cultural
Resources at Mākua Military Reservation (MMR), Island of O„ahu, Hawai„i. Center for Ecological Management of Military
Lands, Colorado State University. Fort Collins, CO. November 2007
10
APPENDIX 1-4
staff, mowing (mechanical) is currently practiced in certain areas of MMR. The results of
these practices, published and unpublished, will be reviewed and incorporated within the
final IVMP.
2.3. Identification of Specific Trial Areas

Specific trial areas for preliminary research and testing were identified on MMR and SBMR
through coordination with USAG-HI ENV Natural Resource staff and Cultural Resource
staff. To ensure cost-efficiency of limited funds during conduct of trials, the majority of
vegetation management test applications were located on sites identified by ENV and RD
staff as fuels management areas or fire breaks.
RD identified a required fire break along the access road along the west end of the impact
area at SBMR West Range (WR) (Figure 2). This fire break was defined to be 60 meters
wide and generally followed along the east side of the access road. Via site visits, Team
CALIBRE determined that vegetation conditions within this area included a diversity of
grasses, shrubs, medium-sized and tall trees.
Figure 2. SBMR fire break treatment site extending along road, 2011.
ENV identified a number of fire breaks and fuels management areas at MMR (Figure 3).
These areas were described within the "Reinitiation of the 1999 Biological Opinion of the U.
S. Fish and Wildlife Service for U.S. Army Military Training at Makua Military Reservation
Island of Oahu," dated June 2007. Via helicopter, Team CALIBRE and ENV staff redefined
11
APPENDIX 1-4
some of the boundaries of the fuels management areas on the slopes and ridges in January
2011. Vegetation conditions changed since these areas were originally defined in 1999.
The modified target areas better delineated current grasslands and avoided sites with a
tree cover that could resist fire. An additional fuels management area was added by ENV
and Team CALIBRE in January 2010 along Farrington Highway at the south end of MMR.
The previously defined fire break along Farrington Highway was modified to address
cultural resource concerns.
Figure 3. MMR Treatment Sites. Areas denoted in yellow and purple are test plot application
sites, 2011.
In January 2011, Team CALIBRE initiated trials of herbicides shown to be effective in

controlling target species found at MMR and SBMR, specifically Guinea grass (P. maximum)3
and common broadleaf species4. These trials were approved by USAG-HI to provide
further information for review and consideration in establishing a research plan necessary
for developing an effective IVMP. Based on results of preliminary field monitoring on
mortality and long-term control of target vegetation, Team CALIBRE was confident that
satisfactory control would be accomplished within all test plots.
Additional sites for treatments in March and May 2011 were identified by Team CALIBRE
and ENV staff. These sites were located within the upper slopes and isolated areas of MMR
(yellow and red areas in Figure 3) and in the Kahuku Training Area (KTA) (Figure 4) and
3
Personal communications with Edison Hidalgo supported by unpublished, greenhouse research data conducted by Mr. Hidalgo.
4
Experience of Team CALIBRE‟s Kevin Eckert
12
APPENDIX 1-4
included tree and shrub target species that are not currently present in test plots at SBMR
WR or the primary testing sites at MMR.
Figure 4. KTA Treatment Sites – Test Plot Application Sites (Green and Red)
2.4. Identification of Research Protocols

To identify specific control methods to be tested, Team CALIBRE reviewed and presented
existing data to key Hawaii, US and international vegetation management professionals
(referred herein as the Gap Analysis Team) to assist in identification of potentially effective
control methods or herbicide applications. The following individuals contributed to this
review:
• Michelle Mansker, Joby Rohrer and Jane Beachy, USAG-HI ENV,

• Shannon Payne and Mike Bresell, USAG-HI RD consultants,
• Dr. James Leary, University Hawaii,
• Dr. Diane Drigot, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Environmental Division,
• Edison Hidalgo, Allen Teshima, and Ronnie Turner, DuPont,
• Matt Kapaliku Schirman, Hui Ku Maoli Ola native plant specialists, and
• Chad Kacir, U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Based on recommendations of the Gap Analysis Team and expertise of Team CALIBRE,
research protocols were identified to allow testing of techniques and methods while
protecting sensitive natural and cultural resources. Protocols are described below.
2.4.1 Herbicide Application Equipment

All herbicide applications were conducted using a Bell JetRanger helicopter with a
conventional boom and 61 - 0.020 Accuflo nozzles on stainless drop down tubes. The
13
APPENDIX 1-4
equipment is capable of providing a Global Positioning System (GPS) assisted spray pattern
of greater than 1000 micron droplets in a 50-70 foot effective swath (Figure 5). To ensure
a safe and effective application of herbicides, the aircraft uses a SATLOC brand GPS
navigation system that utilizes a Differentially Corrected Global Positioning System (DGPS)
for electronic navigation. All aerial applications and TimberMark spot treatments
incorporated GPS-assisted swath placement and/or location to maintain a uniform and
precise application. In addition to GPS navigation, the aircraft was equipped with a “real-
time” moving map display that showed the treatment site(s), sensitive “no-spray” areas,
and areas previously treated. The boom/nozzle configuration (including controlled
pressure and nozzle orientation) provides a 95% controlled droplet application, with skips
not to exceed 5%. The application equipment and onboard GPS provided GPS guidance
information to be exported into a Geographic Information System (GIS) depicting both
spray on and off data. The aircraft was equipped with nozzles capable of uniform
distribution at the specified rate. Nozzles were directed with the slipstream not to exceed a
maximum of 10 degrees downward and nozzles were positioned uniformly along the boom.
The spray boom height was at an adequate distance from target species, low enough to
obtain proper distribution, uniform coverage and to ensure a safe, accurate, responsible
and efficacious treatment. Additionally, the application equipment provided GPS data that
was exported into a GIS and supplied to USAG-HI ENV for permanent record and archival.
Flight paths (depicted spray and non-spray) and spot treatment locations were recorded
and provided to USAG-HI.
Jet Ranger Helicopter GPS Unit Application Nozzles
Figure 5. Application equipment used by Team CALIBRE to complete aerial application of

herbicides, 2011.
For spot treatments, the helicopter was equipped with the TimberMark™ Aerial Spot
Treatment Device (Figure 6), a helicopter-mounted herbicide application device originally
designed for marking of timber stands and capable of delivering an accurate spot treatment
application of herbicide to small, hard to reach areas. The nozzles provide spot
applications using large droplet spray technology (> 1000 micro droplet size) to minimize
drift. TimberMark™ utilizes on-board computer controls and a GPS to provide precise
14
APPENDIX 1-4
application, coverage, and mapping to meet specific target requirements. In addition, the
on-board computer provides constant regulation and an accurate GPS record of each
application treatment delivered.
TimberMark Unit Ground View Aerial View

Figure 6. TimberMark application device used by Team CALIBRE.
TimberMark’s aerial spray technology was used on individual target trees, small sites and
areas that were difficult to access with a helicopter boom. TimberMark was also used to
pick up misses, and can be further used to paint mark sensitive area boundaries, and
provide treatment of vegetative spots that may re-colonize following the first application.
2.4.2 Herbicide Mixing Protocols

To prevent contamination of test mixes with other herbicides and ensure the integrity of
the applications, specific mixing and equipment cleaning protocols were developed by
Team CALIBRE based on extensive research experience and subject matter expertise
provided by Edison Hidalgo, DuPont’s Global Weed Scientist for Specialty Crops.
The standard mixing protocol required that initial herbicide solutions be prepared using
only the basic herbicides, such as glyphosate and sulfometuron methyl. Additional
herbicides were then added to the basic solution as specified for subsequent test solutions.
With this protocol, the first batch to be prepared and applied included the fewest
compounds. The next batch prepared contained an increase in the amount of those same
compounds or involved the addition of a third compound. Residuals of the previous batch
in the hoses were recirculated in the tank to ensure consistent application (Figure 7).
15
APPENDIX 1-4
Figure 7. Team CALIBRE’s Herbicide Mixing Operation
When eliminating a highly active compound from a batch, including Oust, Escort and/or
imazapyr, all mixing and application tanks and equipment were thoroughly cleaned as
follows:
 The previous solution was totally drained and all spray tanks, booms and hoses
were thoroughly rinsed with clean water.
 The tank was filled with clean water and a commercially approved spray tank
cleaner or one gallon of household ammonia for every 100 gallons of water.
 Cleaning solution was circulated through the tank and hoses for at least 15 minutes;
 Hoses, booms, and nozzles were flushed with the cleaning solution,
 Nozzles and screens were removed and cleaned separately in a bucket containing
cleaning agent and water,
 Rinsate was disposed of on a labeled site or at an approved waste disposal facility (if
a commercial cleaner was used, label directions for disposal of rinsate were
followed),
 Steps above were repeated when the tank was empty, rinsing with equivalent
amounts of an ammonia solution to better solubilize sulfometuron methyl in the
cleanout procedure,
 A final rinse of the tank, boom, and hoses was completed with clean water
For small batches, test batches were mixed in separate tanks that were either new or
cleaned according to the established protocol.
2.4.3 Weather Considerations

Efficacy of herbicide applications can be influenced by precipitation and off-target
movement by wind. Application of herbicides did not take place when wind speed was
variable, when wind speed created a significant off-site herbicide drift potential, or during
periods of rain or predicted heavy rain. The threshold for discontinuing applications
during precipitation was when water could be observed flowing off leaves. If heavy rain
was forecasted within 1 hour of application, then applications were discontinued since
herbicide could be washed off the leaves and the application could become ineffective.
“Rainfast windows” refer to the time required for the product to pass through the leaf
cuticle and get into the plant. The rainfast window for Garlon 4 Ultra is 45 minutes, for
16
APPENDIX 1-4
Roundup Pro Max it is approximately one hour before a heavy rain. Conversely, Oust XP
needs to be “watered” into the soil. Therefore, a moderate rain (not heavy precipitation
that erodes soil) is beneficial to carry the herbicide into the soil where it is absorbed into
the target plants. Thresholds are dependent on the product being used.
2.4.4 UXO Considerations
Given the history of weapons testing on MMR and SBMR, hazards from UXO are present5.
To minimize risks from UXO, wherever UXO may be present, U.S. Army EOD staff
accompanied Team CALIBRE during on-site data collection to assess vegetation conditions
prior to treatment and at post-treatment intervals.
2.4.5 Cultural Resources Considerations
Numerous, sensitive archeological sites are located on MMR and SBMR6,7. Many of these
sites are identified, but the presence of UXO, difficult terrain, heavy vegetation cover and
lack of records potentially render some sites undiscovered at this time. To avoid damage to
sensitive archeological sites, no sites were disturbed without consultation and approval of
the USAG-HI Cultural Resources Division (CR).
USAG-HI CR advised that aerial applications conducted at SBMR would not adversely
impact archeological sites and therefore no identification was required8. Ground activity
conducting soil sampling and installation of plants at MMR did pose the potential for
disturbance of archeological sites. USAG-HI CR provided Team CALIBRE with maps and GIS
polygons to overlay and site each archeological site on treatment maps. No soil
disturbance will be conducted until completion of a Section 106 permit process and
approval by the USAG-HI CR.
Soil disturbance for sampling was postponed due to delays in completion of the Section 106
permit process initiated by USAG-HI CR.
5
Personal communication with Vic Garo, RD.
6
Personal communication with Michelle Mansker, ENV.
7
Site List and Terrain Analysis for the Identification of Public Access Priorities, Makua Military Reservation, Oahu, Hawaii,
February 2009.
8
Personal communication with Alton Exzabe and Lauren Morawski, USAG-HI Environmental Division Office, January 10,
2011.
17
APPENDIX 1-4
Figure 7. MMR Cultural Resources Sites (White)
2.4.6 Marking of Test Plots and Sensitive Sites

USAG-HI provided Team CALIBRE with GIS polygons that identified application sites and
sensitive sites. Sensitive sites that were identified included defined archeological sites
shown in Figure 7 above, threatened and endangered (T&E) species locations, and native
plant locations (Figure 8). In order to ensure sensitive sites were avoided during herbicide
applications, Team CALIBRE added these polygons to planning maps and the helicopter
GPS guidance system used during applications. Pre-spray maps were created and provided
to USAG-HI ENV for review prior to uploading into the helicopter guidance system. All
sensitive area data provided by USAG-HI to Team CALIBRE were buffered by at least 100
feet to ensure drift was not an issue. Team CALIBRE relied on USAG-HI ENV or RD to
indicate whether or not sensitive sites were already buffered when data were provided.
18
APPENDIX 1-4
MMR T&E Species Locations
SBMR T&E Species Locations SBMR Elepaio Buffer Zones
Figure 8. Threatened and Endangered Species and Sensitive Areas Associated with MMR, SBMR.
In order to accurately treat designated test plots and avoid sensitive sites, the helicopter
pilot used the data entered into the GIS navigation system aboard the helicopter. The pilot
entered the unique identifier assigned to the specific test plot into the helicopter GIS
navigation system, which displayed the plot polygon and provided navigation guidance to
permit the pilot to fly to the site. Sensitive area data were displayed whenever they were
near to the treatment site. The pilot applied the herbicide solution to the designated site
using the GIS screen. The GIS screen depicted the treatment site and surrounding area and
illustrated the exact area where the application was applied by showing a green swath on
the GIS screen. The application area was highlighted on the GIS screen when the
19
APPENDIX 1-4
application boom was activated and then discontinued when the application boom was
shut off. The green highlighting on the GIS navigation screen enabled the pilot to see
exactly where the application boom was activated over the ground and avoid application
skips, over-sprays and direct applications to properly marked sensitive sites.
2.4.7 Vegetation Data Collection

Measurement of vegetation conditions was conducted through visual surveys and photos.
A vegetation data collection schedule identified in October 2010 was initiated in January
2011 to define the pre-treatment population condition (immediately prior to or at
treatment) and establish a baseline to help measure treatment efficacy post-application at
the following intervals:
 2 weeks after treatment,
 24 weeks after treatment, and
 Continuing at 12 week intervals until vegetation populations reach stable
composition and density, or further treatments are conducted.
A total of 19 test plots were established (see Figure 2 in Section 2.3 Identification of
Specific Trial Areas). Each test plot included three vegetation sample sites (Figure 9). The
number of subsequent survey plots was determined by the coefficient of variability
between all of the survey plots within each treatment plot and to provide reasonable
sample distribution throughout the plot.
Figure 9. Vegetation Survey Plot Layout, USAG -HI, 2011.
To provide consistency and remove bias, vegetation sample sites were located 250 feet
from each end of the plot and 100 feet from the front boundary. The third survey plot was
located in the measured center of the treatment plot. The center of each vegetation sample
site is marked with a flagged stake.
Each vegetation sample site was round and included 1/10 of an acre measured as a radius
of 33 feet from the staked center point. Data collection was conducted visually using the
20
APPENDIX 1-4
Braun-Blanquet method of vegetation measurement recommended by the US Forest

Service.9 Braun-Blanquet is a system that was used successfully by CPS and Arbor Global
during previous vegetation community monitoring research projects, and was used
extensively by Dr. William C. Bramble, Professor of Forestry (ret.), Pennsylvania State
College, to measure and analyze vegetation community conditions and eco-system changes
resulting from various vegetation management treatments.10 Braun-Blanquet is a method
of describing the characteristics of a vegetation community. It was devised by J. Braun-
Blanquet in 1927 to survey large areas very quickly. Two scales are used. One consists of
values from 1 to 5 that define the proportion of the area covered by the subject species.
The second scale defines species sociability, or grouping. Data were collected within
defined plot areas. The review and estimation of the percent coverage and sociability of
vegetation within each survey plot is recorded.
Two photo stations were established for each treatment plot to provide a general
comparative overview of vegetation conditions. Each photo station was located at a
distance of 50 feet from the front and 50 feet from the end of the treatment plot. Photo
stations were marked with a flagged stake. Photos were recorded while standing on the
photo station location and shooting in a direction toward the plot corner on the opposite
side and furthest diagonal corner of the treatment plot to capture a view as broad as
possible of the vegetation condition in each plot (Figure 9). The field of view within the
photo frame was aligned to capture the best rendition of vegetation conditions. To
standardize photos, the upper border of the frame was aligned and centered with the
opposite side and furthest corner of the treatment plot. The photographer made all
reasonable effort to standardize the field of view across successive photos.
2.4.8 Soil Sampling
Measurement of the fate and mobility of the herbicide hexazinone was conducted through
analysis of soil samples at various soil depths and time progression according to Arbor
Global and CPS’s extensive experience testing the fate and mobility of field applications of
herbicides and according to sampling protocols used by Dr. Norton Nickerson11.
Hexazinone was selected for measurement because it is the most persistent and mobile
herbicide applied. The research team believed that if hexazinone did not move
significantly, then other herbicides with lower environmental fate and mobility would not
persist or move off-site.
A recent pesticide leaching study, performed by Chittaranjan Ray, et al. at the University of
Hawaii Water Resource Research Center12, described four agricultural herbicides, including
9
General Technical Report PSW-GTR-144-Web. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Pacific Southwest
Research Station.
10
Yahner, Richard H. and Hutnik, Russell J. Integrated Vegetation Management on an Electric Transmission Right-of-way in
Pennsylvania. U.S. Journal of Arboriculture 30(5): September 2004.
11
Nickerson, Norton H. Impacts of Vegetation Management Techniques on Wetlands in Utility Rights-of-Way in Massachusetts.
Journal of Arboriculture 18(2). March 1992.
12
Ray, Chittaranjan, et. al. Leaching of Selected Pesticides in Hawaii Soils as Influenced by Soil Properties and Hydrologic
Conditions: Field and Laboratory Evaluations. Water Resource Research Center, University of Hawaii. July 2007.69pp.
21
APPENDIX 1-4
sulfometuron methyl, as having the potential to leach given the volcanic ash soils present on
Hawaii. Ray et al. did not test the influence of heavy vegetation cover, comparable with
that found with Guinea grass populations at USAG-HI, on leaching potential. Rates of
sulfometuron methyl that were applied by Team CALIBRE were lower than Ray et al used.
Further, Team CALIBRE believes that if its testing shows that hexazinone does not leach in
these conditions, then sulfometuron methyl would be less likely to leach based on the Ray
et al. results.
Approval for sub-surface soil sampling and other work that requires excavation requires
completion of the Section 106 National Historic Preservation Act consultation process.
Since approval from USAG-HI CR was not received at the time this report was finalized, no
sub-surface samples were collected for analysis.
Surface soil samples were collected from three vegetation sample sites within each plot
where the higher rates of hexazinone were applied and mixed to form one sample for each
soil depth. These sites were located at the same location as the vegetation data collection
sites shown in Figure 3. Data were initially collected during herbicide applications using
surface-mounted collection materials as recommended by the Pesticide Branch of the Plant
Industry Division of the Hawaii Department of Agriculture. Initial data were collected
using 16 collection units placed on the soil surface at each defined soil sample site.
Collection units were arranged on the ground in a systematic pattern with one unit placed
at each of the cardinal and intermediate compass points at a distance of three feet from the
staked center of the sample plot. The next row of units was placed at each of the cardinal
and intermediate compass points at a distance of six feet from the staked center of the
sample plot. Samples were removed immediately after application, bagged, and sent to the
Analytical Pesticide Technology Laboratories, Inc. in Reading, Pennsylvania for analysis.
Team CALIBRE strongly recommends sub-surface sampling be completed upon receiving

USAG-HI CR to complete fate and mobility research. The first samples should be collected
at the soil surface in a location just under the litter layer, and at a depth of six inches.
Subsequent samples should be collected at the soil surface, just under the litter layer, and
at depths of six and 12 inches. We recommend deeper samples be collected if significant
amounts of hexazinone are found at the 12 inch sample. Significant amounts are defined as
exceeding established detectable thresholds as defined by the State of Hawaii and/or US
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). To avoid contamination of each sample from
previous excavations, test pits should be separated. This technique will eliminate the risk
of false readings within previous test pits where soil was disturbed by digging for sample
collection and excess soil from current testing is disposed. We recommend test pits be dug
a measured distance of three feet to the west of the sample site center at 12 weeks, and
three feet to the east of the sample site center at 24 weeks. Samples should then be taken
three feet to north of the sample site center and then three feet to the south of the sample
site center. Subsequent samples, if required, may be taken following this same pattern, but
at distances of six feet from the sample site center.
22
APPENDIX 1-4
3. Results
Team CALIBRE’s review of existing literature, evaluation of site conditions at SBMR and
MMR, and personal communications with subject matter experts led to the following
results:
1. Fire has been a significant management factor at both MMR and SBMR for decades.
Due to the presence of T&E species, sensitive habitats, cultural sites and personnel,
fire prevention is key to protecting these resources as specified in the INRMP 2010-
2014, Island of O’ahu. The richness of the soils, the repeated range fires, the steep
terrain, and the past management history have encouraged the establishment of tall
growing invasive grasses (Guinea grass) and brush. The spread of the invasive
plants, enhanced by uncontrolled fires, continues to diminish the T&E habitat both
surrounding and within the ranges.
2. Management of Guinea grass has been accomplished using several control

methodologies. The two most common techniques are mechanical mowing and
periodic broadcast aerial herbicide applications. Both are temporary solutions
(efficacy lasting 6 months or less) that allow for military training to continue until
the grasses re-vegetate the range. Herbicide application with a follow-up prescribed
burn has been used extensively at SBMR. This combination results in creation of
bare ground, which increases erosion of these volcanic soils and creates a negative
aesthetic response from the general public. Several issues with the past application
techniques have also been found and corrected. Biological control through grazing
has been successful; however, cultural and logistic restrictions prevent employing
this technique as a primary management alternative (personal communication with
Michelle Mansker).
In order to fill gaps in research and better lay a foundation for the IVMP, Team CALIBRE
initiated preliminary testing of herbicides known to control Guinea grass and other
problematic invasive plants in January, March and May of 2011. Preliminary results
indicate varied results ranging from poor to promising based on the products and
combinations applied. Continued testing is essential to determine whether rates of
herbicide applied or height and biomass of the target species were related to the variation
in results. Past herbicide research has shown that treatments are more efficacious when
plants are young and growing (personal communication with Edison Hidalgo, DuPont).
Further testing involving an earlier application or a combination of mowing and herbicide
would be beneficial.
23
APPENDIX 1-4
3.1. Analysis of Existing Data and Current Conditions

Interviews of key individuals and an analysis of existing data and site conditions, led Team
CALIBRE to several conclusions regarding the current state of vegetation at SBMR and
MMR and the desired end state.
3.1.1 Topography and Soils

The SBMR WR is located within the central plateau of Oahu, on the eastern slopes of the
Waianae mountain range and encompasses approximately 2,200 acres. The SBMR WR is
characterized by folded terrain with deep gullies cutting the area into several
compartments. The topography transitions from relatively flat terrain gradually increasing
in slope to the base of the steeper elevations of the Waianae Range.
The United States Soil Conservation Service (SCS)13 indicated there were two primary soil
associations within the SBMR WR. These included the Tropohumults-Dystrandepts (T-D)
and Helemano -Wahiawa (H-W) soil types. The SCS described the T-D soils as "gently
sloping to very steep, well-drained soils that are underlain by soft weathered rock, volcanic
ash, or colluvium; on narrow ridges and side slopes." The SCS described the H-W soils as
"deep, nearly level to moderately sloping, well-drained soils that have a fine-textured
subsoil: on uplands." The “Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan 2010-2014,
Island of O’ahu”14 further defines primary soil types within the treatment impact area as
Helemano silty clay, Kolekole silty clay and Kunia silty clay with characteristics comparable
to that described within SCS 1972 (Figure 10).
13
Site List and Terrain Analysis for the Identification of Public Access Priorities, Makua Military Reservation, Oahu, Hawaii,
February 2009.
14
Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan 2010-2014 Island of O‟ahu U.S. Army Garrison Hawai'i.
Center for Environmental Management of Military Lands, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. Figure 2.3.f, page
87.
24
APPENDIX 1-4
Figure 10. SBMR WR Soils Map (source: “Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan 2 010-
2014 Island of O’ahu”)
MMR, situated on the western slopes of the Waianae mountain range, covers 4,856 acres.
The Range is bordered by steep cliffs, which begin at Farrington Highway near the
southwest corner of the property, and surround the impact area.
The SCS 1972 study suggested there were two primary soil associations within the MMR.
These include the Lualualei-Fill land-Ewa (L-E) and Rocky land - Stony steep land (R-S) soil
associations. The L-E association encompassed the valley where the primary test plots for
this study are located. The SCS described the L-E soils as "deep, nearly level to moderately
sloping, well-drained soils that have a fine-textured or moderately fine textured subsoil or
underlying material, and areas of fill land; on coastal plains." The SCS described the R-S
soils as "steep to precipitous, well-drained to excessively drained, rocky and stony land."
This assessment was also supported by the Land and Soil Types description within the
“Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan 2010-2014 Island of O‟ahu” (Figure 11).
25
APPENDIX 1-4
Figure 11. MMR Soils Map (Source: “Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan 2010 -2014
Island of O’ahu”)
Vic Garo, Chief Operations Officer, RD, informed Team CALIBRE that RD practices erosion
control measures as necessary to stabilize and minimize soil erosion.
26
APPENDIX 1-4
3.1.2 USAG-HI RD Vegetation Treatment Methods

Prevention of unplanned fires and control of the spread of fires is critical to protect people,
property and natural resources. Wildfires and their suppression pose significant risks to
personnel, property, cultural resources, and T&E species and their habitat15.
Fires were a relatively common occurrence at MMR prior to the 199816. Since 2004, when
the MMR was closed to live fire training, there were few recorded fires17. The most
significant fires within the past 10 years include:
• July 24 -25, 2010. Initiated by arson and burned approximately 486 acres18.
• July 22, 2003. Initiated by a prescribed burn escape and burned approximately
2,100 acres19.
Fires at SBMR WR are relatively common due to the frequent live-fire training conducted.
These fires are most commonly ignited by ammunition. Range management staff on-hand
during live fire exercises control fires as quickly as possible.20 Sizes of fires vary from less
than one acre to over 300 acres, but most are less than 1 acre.21 Prescribed burning on the
SBMR WR impact area occurs annually following the spring herbicide treatment.
Ignition and spread of fires is primarily facilitated by fuels created by tall growing grasses
and brush.22 After fires are established, they burn larger brush and trees and travel with
wind to off-site locations that contain native habitat, including threatened and endangered
species.23 The steep terrain and poor access caused by UXO and topography restrict the
ability to most effectively contain and control fires.24
Analysis of the herbicide-burn-herbicide vegetation management method used by USAG-HI

at SBMR indicated the approach was aggressive and costly and failed to provide a long-
term solution25 as demonstrated by observations of SBMR application results by Team
CALIBRE from 2007 through the present and communications with Vic Garo, Chief
Operations Officer, RD and Allen Teshima, DuPont. This methodology provided an
15
Beavers, Andrew M.; Burgan, Robert; Fujioka, Francis; Laven, Richard D.; Omi, Philip N. Analysis of Fire Management
Concerns at Makua Military Reservation. Center for Ecological Management of Military Lands, Colorado State University. Fort
Collins, CO. December 1999. Page 4.
16
Personal communication. Vic Garo, Chief Operations Officer, RD; Michelle Mansker, Natural Resource Manager, ENV; Joby
Rohrer, Senior Natural Resource Management Coordinator, ENV; Jane Beachy, Ecosystem Restoration Program Manager, ENV.
17
Personal communication. Michelle Mansker, Natural Resource Manager, ENV; Joby Rohrer, Senior Natural Resource
Management Coordinator, ENV.
18
Memorandum For Record. SUBJECT: North Makua Fire July 24-25, 2010. IMPC-HI-PWA. 29 July 2010.
19
Memorandum For Record. SUBJECT: Makua Military Reservation Natural Resource Post Fire Assessment APVG-GWV
(200-3). 30 July 2003.
20
Personal communication. Vic Garo, Chief Operations Officer, RD.
21
Beavers, Andrew M.; Burgan, Robert. Wildland Fire Risk and Management on West and South Ranges, Schofield Barracks,
Oahu. Center for Ecological Management of Military Lands, Colorado State University. Fort Collins, CO. March 2001. Page 8.
22
23
Personal communication. Vic Garo, Chief Operations Officer, RD; Michelle Mansker, Natural Resource Manager, ENV; Joby
Rohrer, Senior Natural Resource Management Coordinator, ENV.
24
25
O„ahu Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan. Section 1.10.1. Page 54.
27
APPENDIX 1-4
immediate solution, but only short-term reduction in fuels. Within six months, Team
CALIBRE and Allen Teshima observed target species, primarily Guinea grass (P. maximum),
reestablished and increased fire fuels. Herbicide solutions were applied by aerial
applications and were reported to be glyphosate and sulfometuron methyl. However,
limited funds, tools, materials and practices significantly affected the ability of USAG-HI RD
to efficiently control vegetation issues within SBMR. In addition, a growing season that
extends for 12 months with periods of limited rainfall tended to exacerbate the vegetation
and fire control issues on SBMR.
Additionally, installations are constrained to work within the three 2004 Measures of Merit
(MOM) for Pesticide Management.26 The MOM requires the creation of an installation pest
management plan, certification of all applicators, and encourages the reduction of the lbs
per acre of active ingredient applied annually since 1993. Any effective control strategy
with a reduction in active ingredient usage will be beneficial to maintaining an effective
and acceptable vegetation management program.
In 2008, CPS found evidence of procedures that could lead to low efficacy associated with
herbicide mixing and applications. Ron Lemin of CPS worked as a batching employee
during the 2008 summer application to the SBMR impact area. The mixing and application
equipment and practices that had been used previously were employed during this 2008
application. During the mixing process, Mr. Lemin used a conductivity meter to measure
the alkalinity (indication that the herbicides were mixed uniformly within the batch tank)
of the herbicide within the solution that was applied. Mixing of the herbicide solution was
performed only by agitation with the water fill hose (the batching system did not have
mechanical or pump agitation). The conductivity readings showed that all of the herbicide
was concentrated on the bottom of the batch tank with very little at the top. The result was
that applications of the solution from the top of the mix tank did not contain adequate
herbicide while solution from the bottom of the tank contained excessive herbicide
concentrates. This would result in inadequate control in some areas and adequate control
in other areas. This system therefore had proven to be inadequate for applications
conducted by Team CALIBRE on any sites under contract with the DOD.
A batching system with effective agitation and circulation is essential in providing uniform
mixing of both the amine formulation of glyphosate and the water dispersed granules of the
sulfometuron methyl. For the 2010-2011 treatments conducted under this study, a new
system was built by Team CALIBRE to facilitate in the application process.
Mr. Lemin also installed a hand held GPS unit in the helicopter to document application
coverage. The historic practice to direct the helicopter in its field applications was for the
pilot to use ground-based visual cues from a large paper map provided by USAG-HI RD.
The GPS readings showed that this system results in significant gaps in ground coverage in
many areas with excessive overspray of other areas that are treated multiple times.
Additionally, it was impossible to determine where the heavy rates and the weaker rates
were applied on the impact area.
26
Goodman, Sherri,W.:Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, Memorandum for Defense Environmental Council. May 16, 1995.
28
APPENDIX 1-4
Creating a bare ground habitat, as is the current management protocol, reduces the risk of
fire, but is only a temporary solution. The first plants to reestablish on the area are
aggressive invasive species, usually Guinea grass (P. maximum). In the meantime, the
exposed ground promotes runoff that can result in water quality problems. The
unattractive, brown, bare site is also visible to the public as they travel the roads adjacent
to SBMR. On several occasions pictures of the SBMR impact area following herbicide
treatments or prescribed burning have appeared in the Honolulu paper.
Although it has not been scientifically determined, there may be a glyphosate resistance
issue that has built up on the SBMR WR impact area.27 Repeated applications of glyphosate
(2 per year) over the last decade might lead to a resistant phenotype of Guinea grass that
would create a different problem. Glyphosate resistance is a known phenomenon in many
areas of vegetation management, but it would only be a theory without further testing.
3.1.3 Vegetation Conditions (SBMR WR)
During site visits of SBMR WR, Team CALIBRE found that the majority of the target area is
covered with grass. Deep gullies are covered with grass, low shrubs and small trees.
Guinea grass (P. maximum) is the primary vegetative cover on SBMR WR. Within the SBMR
WR firebreak system, the primary invasive species include Guinea grass (P. maximum),
haole-koa (L. leucocephala), Christmas berry (S. terebinthefolia), albizia (Falcataria
moluccana), Cook-pine (Araucaria columnaris), lemon-scented gum (Eucalyptus citriodora),
and silk oak (Grevillea robusta). Many other invasive species are present within the
firebreak; however, the species listed above are the most common. Native plant species are
found within the SBMR WR, but were not present in any significant numbers. Most native
species were found outside the firebreak on the surrounding slopes.
3.1.4 Vegetation Conditions (MMR)
During site visits of MMR, Team CALIBRE found that the majority of the target area is
covered with grass, low shrubs and scattered clumps of trees. Guinea grass (P. maximum)
is the primary vegetative cover on the lower elevation areas and many sites that have
burned on the slopes, outside of the firebreak system. Within the firebreak, populations of
haole-koa (L. leucocephala) and klu (Acacia farnesiana) are also common within the
primary test plot area. Primary invasive species found on cliffs, in the upper valley, and on
ridge tops include Guinea grass (P. maximum), molasses grass (Melinis minutiflora), haole-
koa (Leucaena leucocephala), China berry (Melia azedarach), albizia (Falcataria
moluccana), ironwood (Casuarina equisetifolia), silk oak (Grevillea robusta), eucalyptus
(Eucalyptus robusta), kukui (Aleurites moluccana), and African tulip (Spathodea
campanlulata). Other invasive species are present, but those listed above are the most
common.
Native plant species were also found within MMR, and were present in significant numbers
within actively protected sites, outside of the firebreak system. These include populations
of akoko (Chamaesyce celastroides var. kaenana), a'alili (Dodonaea viscosa), wiliwili
27
Personal communication with Jeffery Phillips, Monsanto and “Facts About Glyphosate – Resistant Weeds” Chris Boerboom,
University of Wisconsin; Micheal Owen, Iowa State University, published by Cooperative Extension Service, Purdue University.
29
APPENDIX 1-4
(Erythrina sandwichensis), and maʻo hau hele (Hibiscus brackenridgei). Other native and
T&E species are also present and are primarily found on upper elevations, outside of the
firebreak system. Species lists are maintained and populations monitored and protected
by USAG-HI as required under The “Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP)
2010-2014 Island of O‟ahu”.
3.1.5 Vegetation Conditions (Kahuku Training Area)
In cooperation with ENV, Team CALIBRE conducted special treatments at the Kahuku
Training Area (KTA) to test effectiveness of various herbicide solutions on challenging
species. Vegetation condition assessments were not conducted by Team CALIBRE. ENV
team members identified test sites and individual trees for treatment. Species treated
included Chromolaena odorata, Falcataria moluccana, Cupressus lusitanica, Toona ciliata,
Ficus microcarpa, Spathodea companulata, Trema orientalis, Syzigium cumini, Falcataria
moluccana, and Grevillea robusta.
3.1.6 Vegetation Conditions Summary
Guinea grass (P. maximum) is the most common and noxious of the invasive, fire spreading
species found on MMR and SBMR. This species is fast growing and capable of maximum
growth rates of six inches to one foot per week with a maximum height of approximately
10 feet. Guinea grass is hard to control, and creates a substantial fuel load, measured at 4
to 9 tons per acre in MMR and 2 to almost 12 tons per acre in SBMR28. This grass will grow
on or near any open section of bare ground and is normally the first species to re-emerge
after herbicide treatments and prescribed or wildfire burns. Guinea grass grows well in
dry, sunny areas and invades and disrupts the function of firebreaks, as well as interferes
with the use of a vast majority of the training and Range areas.
Off-site areas surrounding SBMR and MMR include T&E species and desirable native
plants.29 Fire breaks and fuels management areas were established to protect these species
and habitat adjacent to the Ranges. Because of vegetation challenges associated with
invasive species, it is not uncommon for fire to jump firebreaks or circumvent the fuel
management areas and burn into the protected zone.30 Due to the presence of Guinea
grass, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Fire Rating in the impact area in the dry
season increases and, consequently, the range is closed to critical live fire training with
incendiary munitions.31
3.2. Preliminary Trials of Herbicide Application

Mr. Edison Hidalgo at the DuPont Stine-Haskel Research Center32 performed extensive
research (Figure 12 and 13) both in the field and in greenhouse studies on control of
28
Ellsworth, Lisa and Litton, Creighton. “Using Soil Moisture and Weather Variables to Predict Live and Dead Fuel Moisture in
Guinea grasslands (Urochloa maxima) on Oahu, Hawaii”. University of Hawaii at Manoa. Natural Resources and Environmental
Management.
29
Observations of Team CALIBRE and Personal communications with Michelle Mansker, Chief, Natural Resource, ENV; Joby
Rohrer, Senior Natural Resource Management Coordinator, ENV.
30
Observations of Team CALIBRE and Personal communications with Vic Garo, Chief Operations Officer, RD; Michelle
Mansker, Chief, Natural Resource, ENV; Joby Rohrer, Senior Natural Resource Management Coordinator, ENV.
31
Personal communications with Vic Garo, Chief Operations Officer, RD.
32
Edison Hidalgo, 2006, Internal DuPont research, Stine_Haskel Research Center, Newark DE.
30
APPENDIX 1-4
Guinea grass with DuPont chemistries (Weestar, Oust XP, Oustar, and Velpar) and found
that 1-4 oz of sulfometuron methyl (Oust XP) to be efficacious on Guinea grass. The best
results occur when the grass is young and actively growing.33
Figure 12. Guinea grass Control Prescriptions and 28 Day Results Tested by Edison Hidalgo at
DuPont’s Stine-Haskel Research Center in 2006.
Figure 13. Guinea grass Control 28 Days Post Treatment With, 1, 2, 3, and 4 Ounces of Oust XP.
In January 2011, Team CALIBRE began conducting preliminary testing of combinations of

herbicides (Figure 14) that are proven to be effective on the primary target species present,
which are Guinea grass, haole-koa and Christmas berry. Chemical formulations were
applied at various rates within various solutions to test efficacy. Initial applications were
based on the extensive experience of Team CALIBRE and Edison Hidalgo of DuPont.
33
Personal communications with Edison Hidalgo supported by unpublished, greenhouse research data conducted by Mr. Hidalgo.
31
APPENDIX 1-4
Prescription Name Chemical Amount

Standard Solution Glyphosate (Roundup ProMAX) 44.5 oz.
Sulfometuron Methyl (Oust XP) 4 oz.
Methylated seed oil (MSO) 13 oz. (1%)
Test 1 Hexazinone (Velpar DF) .5lbs
Sulfometuron Methyl (Oust XP) 1.6 oz.
MSO 13 oz. (1%)
MSO 13 oz. (1%)
MSO 13 oz. (1%)
Test 4 Hexazinone (Velpar DF) 1.16 lbs
MSO 13 oz. (1%)
Test 5 Hexazinone (Velpar DF) 1.6 lbs
MSO 13 oz. (1%)
Test 6 Hexazinone (Velpar DF) .5 lbs
MSO 13 oz. (1%)
Metsulfuron Methyl (Escort) 1.5 oz.
MSO 13 oz. (1%)
Lineage Prep 20 oz.
4.1 oz. Sulfometuron Methyl (Oust XP)
1.4 oz. Metsulfuron Methyl (Escort)
43.6 oz. Imazapyr (Arsenal)
MSO 13 oz. (1%)
Test 9 Glyphosate (Roundup ProMAX) 44.5 oz.
Lineage Prep 20 oz.
4.1 oz.Sulfometuron Methyl (Oust XP)
1.4 oz. Metsulfuron Methyl (Escort)
MSO 13 oz. (1%)
Test 10 Lineage Prep 30 oz.
6.1 oz. Sulfometuron Methyl (Oust XP)
2 oz. Metsulfuron Methyl (Escort)
MSO 20 oz. (1.5%)
Test 11 Glyphosate (Roundup ProMAX) 44.5 oz.
Triclopyr (Garlon 4) 80 oz.
MSO 13 oz. (1%)
Figure 14. Herbicide prescriptions identified for preliminary testing by Team CALIBRE at SBMR
and MMR, January-March 2011.
32
APPENDIX 1-4
The basic prescription applied within the majority of the sites within SBMR WR and MMR
was 44.5 oz of Roundup ProMAX (glyphosate), 4 oz of Oust XP and 1% MSO (methylated
seed oil) via helicopter application at a 10 gallon per acre rate. This prescription was
selected based on research by Mr. Hidalgo and because it showed some success in past
SBMR treatments. However, adequate data on results was not collected, nor was GPS-
guided application conducted. This application was also commonly followed by a
prescribed burn after the grass began to die, thus results on application and long term
efficacy were not available.
Mr. Hidalgo's research found that the most effective product for Guinea grass is hexazinone
(Velpar), which performed well, and does an outstanding job controlling and preventing
the spread of Guinea grass. However, due to its extensive use in pineapple production
within Hawaii and the restricted use label, Velpar use diminished over the last ten years.
High rates and repeated uses of hexazinone led to ground water contamination in
agricultural areas within some parts of Hawaii. Since then, Mr. Hidalgo tested the product
Oust XP (sulfometuron methyl) as a possible alternative control scenario for Guinea grass.
Research shows that Oust XP works well as a growth regulator in stunting the growth of
Guinea grass at an application rate of one oz/acre, and does a better job at controlling
Guinea grass at a higher application rate of 4 oz/acre (Stine-Haskel Research Study,
2006).34
With the success of both Velpar and Oust on Guinea grass, Mr. Hidalgo recommended Team
CALIBRE apply a product called Oustar, which is a combination of hexazinone and
sulfometuron methyl, which he found to be somewhat effective solution for Guinea grass
control in DuPont greenhouse studies. To best understand the range of efficacy within this
environment and minimize the risk of off-target damage, Mr. Hidalgo suggested initial
Oustar test rates of 10 oz, 14 oz, 18 oz, and 22 oz per acre. Oustar is not yet a registered
product in Hawaii and thus requires a mix of Velpar DF and Oust XP in the appropriate
combinations to get the same active ingredient applied. Based on this recommendation,
applications were applied at these rates on the North Lobe fire break at MMR in January
2011. Since Velpar DF is a restricted use product, this research required obtaining an
aerial permit from the Hawaii Department of Agriculture, Pesticide Branch.
Many of the sites within SBMR WR and MMR include broad-leaf vegetation that is difficult
to control with the standard mix of glyphosate and sulfometuron methyl. In these sites,
Team CALIBRE included Garlon 4 – Ultra (triclopyr) with the Roundup ProMAX and Oust
XP. This prescription was used along the fire break at SBMR WR and along the Farrington
Highway at MMR in January 2011. The combined use of Garlon 4 Ultra and Roundup
ProMAX are based on efficacy results on industrial utility ROW treatments over the last
decade in Hawaii.
Prescriptions applied during the March 2011 test applications at MMR included the use of
Lineage Prep, and a combination of Lineage Prep and Roundup ProMAX. Lineage Prep is a
combination of imazapyr, sulfometuron methyl, and metsulfuron methyl; their equivalent,
34
Personal communication with Edison Hidalgo, DuPont.
33
APPENDIX 1-4
respective amounts are represented in italics in the table above. These formulations
provide four chemistries working on different plant functions, and may provide better and
longer control of target species at lower rates. Trials completed by the USFS on kikuyu
grass for koa regeneration on the Big Island have shown that imazapyr provided good
results on targeted grass species.35 Metsulfuron methyl is labeled as an effective woody
and herbaceous control product that can control grasses at higher rates. Their addition
may prove advantageous in increasing control of target species on MMR.
Team CALIBRE’s findings from preliminary herbicide testing are presented in Appendices
A and B of this report.
4. Control Method Recommendations

General control methods considered by the Gap Analysis team included biological (i.e., pests or
pathogens of target species), mechanical control (i.e., plant and/or facilitate and maintain
desirable ground cover), and chemical applications (i.e., herbicides). Each of these methods was
selected or eliminated from recommendation for additional research based on projected, potential
efficacy against the target plants, projected cost, operational practicality, and potential for off-
target environmental risks.
4.1. Biological Control

Biological control mechanisms (i.e., pests or pathogens of target species) are often considered by
the public to be the optimum control mechanism due to their natural actions. Biological controls
include pathogens (bacteria, virus, fungus, and mycoplasma–like organisms), pests (insects,
mites, bugs, nematodes and similar), animals and parasitic plants. Considerable evidence exists
to demonstrate that biological controls can result in significant adverse impacts when they do not
behave as expected and damage desirable plants or property. There are numerous examples in
Hawaii of alien species introduced for biological control that resulted in a far larger problem than
the solution they provided. Examples include the mongoose (Helogale parvula) and cane toad
(Bufo marinus).
Most of the plants commonly encountered in Hawaii are alien species and many of these are
invasive. Extensive research into potential controls of invasive plants and testing on that
potential control's impact on desirable plants must be conducted before considering release.
Identification and testing is an exhaustive process. Because of the extensive time and resources
that would be required to identify and pre-test most biological methods, Team CALIBRE
recommends that pathogens, pests and parasitic plants not be considered for testing as a long-
term vegetation control method.36
35
Personal communications with Mike Donoho, PuuWaawaa Ahupuaa Coordinator, Department of Forestry and Wildlife during
2008 field visit and test plot observations by Team CALIBRE‟s Ron Lemin.
36
Smith, Clifford W. Technical Report 45- The prospects for biological control of nonnative plants in Hawaiian National Parks.
Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Botany. October 1982.
34
APPENDIX 1-4
Grazing by animals, specifically large herbivores, such as cows, horses, goats and sheep, has
been demonstrated to be an effective technique for maintaining vegetation at low heights in some
areas. USAG-HI37 and the Marine Corps Base Hawaii at Kaneohe38 conducted grazing research
using cattle and other herbivores. Given the extensive cost and logistics of conducting this
research, and the ready availability of published research at USAG-HI on grazing efficacy,
further research is not needed; however, grazing could be considered as a technique for long-
term vegetation management.
4.2. Mechanical Control

Mechanical applications using mowing machines are currently applied extensively on
USAG-HI ranges. Mowing is accomplished through the use of string-trimmers or large
mowing machines transported by tractors. This method removes the upper portion of
target vegetation, but does not control the roots and stump. This method provides fast
control of target species and facilitates removal of fuel from the site. Most vegetation,
including the undesirable vegetation targeted within this study, rapidly re-sprouts. Given
that this method is a common practice and the response of vegetation is well understood,
this method is not recommended for further testing for inclusion in long-term
management. However, research studies by Edison Hidalgo (Dupont) have shown that
efficacy is increased on Guinea grass when it is shorter and actively growing.39 Therefore, a
study to combine mechanical mowing with a glyphosate, sulfometuron prescription could
provide useful results for the Guinea grass problem occurring on the fire breaks. The long-
term IVMP will address the combination of effective management scenarios such as
combining both mowing and chemical as desirable solutions to Guinea grass control.
4.3. Cultural Management of Vegetation

Cultural Management of undesirable vegetation includes disrupting the site by breaking the soil,
planting competitive crops/vegetation, and modification of site conditions.
Breaking the soil and modifying site conditions with plows, bulldozers, explosives or other
physically disruptive techniques can be effective in the short term. However, this technique was
eliminated from consideration due to UXO challenges, aesthetic considerations and the
knowledge that invasive plants would reestablish quickly.
Modifying site conditions through soil additives or physical site changes was eliminated from
consideration for the same reasons as breaking the soil and due to potential for long-term
environmental impacts from any additives that may be applied.
37
Steven D. Warren, Stephen A. Sherman, and James A. Zeidler. Assessment of Livestock Grazing Impacts on Fuels and
Cultural Resources at Mākua Military Reservation (MMR), Island of O„ahu, Hawai„i. Center for Ecological Management of
Military Lands, Colorado State University. Fort Collins, CO. November 2007.
38
Personal communications with Dr. Diane Drigot, MCBH.
39
Personal communications with Edison Hidalgo supported by unpublished internal DuPont greenhouse research data conducted
by Mr. Hidalgo.
35
APPENDIX 1-4
A separate project funded by AEC with the help of Antonio Palazzo, Research Agronomist
for the US Army Corps of Engineers, tested the application of salt spray, glyphosate, and
sulfometuron methyl to control Guinea grass.40 Following control, Mr. Palazzo used a
specialized “seed ball” technique to re-vegetate the site. The “seed ball” has been tested
using perennial rye grasses, root stolons, and cool season grass seeds. The results are
pending, but the “seed ball” might become viable means to re-vegetate the firebreaks
following removal of the Guinea grass. Team CALIBRE will monitor this study to
coordinate review and consideration of the results for incorporation into the IVMP.
Removal of undesirable vegetation followed by installation of desirable plants is sometimes

effectively used to manage undesirable vegetation. Management practices and site
conditions must be conducive to enabling desirable plants to effectively compete against
undesirable plants for space, nutrients and water. Techniques to remove undesirable
plants include cultivation (primarily plowing), or herbicide applications. Undesirable
plants are often aggressive, invasive plants. To maintain communities of desirable plants,
regular management is required. If not regularly managed, undesirable plants may
reestablish and out-compete desirable plants, destroying the plant community.
Team CALIBRE recommends three methods of cultural control to be tested for possible
inclusion in a long-term IVMP:
 Selective removal of undesirable plants using herbicide to promote desirable

vegetation communities,
 Planting of medium-sized, dense foliage trees to shade out undesirable plants,
and
 Installation of low-growing ground-covers (green strips) using a hydro-seeding
process, or possibly the “seed ball” technology developed by Mr Palazzo.
These techniques were selected based on their historical success as described in numerous
publications and in the extensive experience of Team CALIBRE, and the projected, potential
cost-effectiveness of each technique. They are also listed as suggested fire break
management scenarios within the Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan 2010-2014
Island of O‟ahu (page 33). The promotion of desirable vegetation communities through
selective herbicide treatments was successfully demonstrated in Hawaii by Hawaiian
Electric Company in managing vegetation on its rights-of-way.
Team CALIBRE plans to plant medium-sized, dense foliage trees to shade out undesirable
plants and provide a firebreak that will prevent the propagation and spread of fire, pending
40
Personal communication with Antonio Palazzo, Research Agronomist, US Army Corps of Engineers..
36
APPENDIX 1-4
approval of ground disturbance from USAG-HI Cultural Resources. These trees, primarily
native species, are proposed for planting in an area adjacent to the fence that extends along
Farrington Highway. Species currently being proposed include kou (Cordia subcordata),
true kamani (Calophyllum inophyllum), milo (Thespesia populnea), hala (Pandanus
tectorius), and mango (Mangifera indica). The initial test planting is currently projected to
cover an area approximately 1.6 acres in size.
If additional funds are obtained, Team CALIBRE recommends planting five hundred (500)
trees throughout the test plot, excluding any archeological sites that are identified by
USAG-HI CR who we recommend accompany the planting team. Plantings should be
contiguous and provide a dense canopy ground cover to effectively shade and prevent
undesirable grass species from establishing in populations that can propagate and spread
fire. Installation of these plantings would be most beneficial if completed in November
2011, at the beginning of the rainy season, to facilitate establishment. Three sizes of trees
are recommended for planting: 1 gallon, 5 gallon and 25 gallon. Each of these size classes
should be divided into two groups. One group should be irrigated until established and the
other group should be left with only natural water. Team CALIBRE recommends mulch be
applied to one-half of each subgroup to test for increased growth and establishment.
Growth and monitoring of these trees is recommended for at least three years, and perhaps
longer, depending on unpredictable weather patterns.
4.4. Chemical Applications

Chemical applications of herbicides or plant growth regulators are commonly conducted to
control undesirable vegetation. The Gap Analysis Team agreed that combinations of
various herbicide formulations work effectively. Combinations permit lower application
rates for each formulation while often increasing the efficacy of control as compared to one
formulation. These combinations can result in lower cost for the application solution and
increased control efficacy. Increased control efficacy can further reduce costs by reducing
the frequency of applications.
Team CALIBRE recommends TimberMark be used to visually define treatment areas

including sensitive areas and habitat prior to aerial herbicide applications. Marking is
conducted with a blue, water-based latex paint that is easily viewed from the air. The
marked perimeters consist of an equally spaced intermittent line with each paint mark
identified with a corresponding GPS coordinate. GIS data, provided either by USAG-HI or
Team CALIBRE (with approval from USAG-HI), would be uploaded into the helicopter
navigation system to mark sensitive areas and habitats. Boundaries marked with paint
provide confirmation of treatment and sensitive area locations prior to herbicide
application and provide a visual aid to the helicopter pilot during application.
37
APPENDIX 1-4
Team CALIBRE recommends preliminary testing of combinations of herbicides in March

2011 and May 2011 continue with increased replications. Review of the early results of
January applications within the North Lobe showed lower than anticipated control (Figure
15); these sites require further monitoring. Reviews of the early results of applications
within the South Lobe showed mixed results and also require further monitoring.
Summaries of the preliminary observations are located in Appendix A, North Lobe Test Plot
Preliminary Findings and Appendix B, South Lobe Test Plot Preliminary Findings.
Figure 15. Examples of Typical Test Plot Before (left), Then 2 We eks (center) and 12 Weeks
(right) After Treatment showing the regrowth of Guinea grass and resprouting of haole-koa.
Preliminary results and further analysis will permit Team CALIBRE to modify solutions in
an attempt to identify the optimum solution that will provide the desired control at the
lowest rate/cost. Pending funding, additional formulations and solutions will be tested as
soon as final results from the preliminary tests are collected and analyzed, and additional
formulations are identified and registered. Based on these preliminary tests,
recommendations for additional research may be warranted to support long-term
vegetation management.
Team CALIBRE recommends other herbicide formulations that are currently in

development or being registered for application (personal communication with Edison
Hidalgo, DuPont) also be tested to determine their efficacy on the target species
individually and then within solutions. Based on results, these formulations may be
considered in long-term vegetation management based on efficacy and cost effectiveness.
A separate project using salt to modify site conditions is being conducted currently. Team
CALIBRE will monitor this study to coordinate review and consideration of the results for
incorporation into the IVMP.
5. Conclusion
Based on our review of available publications and interviews with key USAG-HI personnel
and subject matter experts, current and past USAG-HI technical vegetation management
38
APPENDIX 1-4
practices are inadequate to support the military mission and protect sensitive natural and
cultural resources by stabilizing the vegetative community and reducing threats of
wildland fires. Our evaluation of existing conditions indicate Guinea grass and invasive
plants continue to dominate the MMR and SBMR range landscape, threatening T&E species
through habitat depletion and fire danger.
Cost-effective and successful vegetation management practices must be developed and

implemented at USAG-HI to better manage vegetation, reduce costly wildland fires, and
permit military training as required. Management of fire breaks and fuel management
areas, especially when associated with a significant slope and high winds, is a key
consideration in managing undesirable vegetation. Elimination of fire danger species, such
as Guinea grass, within and near these fire control areas would be a significant deterrent to
uncontrolled fires. Additional testing is needed to determine if timing of the herbicide
application can improve Guinea grass efficacy or analyze the timing of the prescribed burn
following application to determine whether it may be decreasing overall efficacy.
The USAG-HI IVMP must involve the creation of green strip fire breaks or plantings of
vegetation to deter the spread of wild fires (INRMP 2010-2014, Island of O’ahu). This will
require additional testing and research beyond the research performed to date. Long term
control strategies need to be employed to obtain results beyond a 6 month period.
Combining mechanical, biological and chemical control methods could be advantageous.
Further testing is required.
Development of cost-effective solutions at USAG-HI is challenged by multiple

environmental, administrative, cultural, and public issues. In order to identify and
implement the most cost-effective, environmentally sound control methods, constant
diligence and research on developing tools, techniques and herbicides will be required.
Herbicide tests that have been completed have demonstrated strengths and weaknesses
and should be expanded to develop the most effective formulations that will best address
vegetation conditions throughout USAG-HI. Management of target species more cost-
effectively than previous methods to achieve USAG-HI goals can be accomplished, but
requires extensive research and application of various control methods appropriate for site
conditions. Continued funding and support will be essential to complete the necessary
testing to create a valid and effective IVMP.
The following actions are recommended for continued research and testing within the next
two years for development of the IVMP:
 Selective removal of undesirable plants using herbicide to promote desirable

vegetation communities,
 Planting of medium-sized, dense foliage trees to shade out undesirable plants,
39
APPENDIX 1-4
 Installation of low-growing ground-covers using a hydro-seeding process,

 Continued testing of herbicide formulations,
 Testing of new herbicide formulas,
 Continued soils and vegetation monitoring
Team CALIBRE thanks USAG-HI for the opportunity to conduct a gap analysis and initiate
preliminary research using state-of-the-art tools, techniques, and materials. Team
CALIBRE recommends USAG-HI implement recommendations presented in this plan, and
fund, as able, an additional two years of research and monitoring in support of developing a
long-term, cost effective IVMP.
40
APPENDIX 1-4
Appendix A: North Lobe Test Plots

APPENDIX 1-4
General condition of plants throughout the test site during initial review and assessment:
 Guinea grass (Panicum maximus): Generally healthy. Some basal brown stems, flushing
growth and seed formation observed.
 Haole koa (Leucaena leucocephala): Emerging small brightly-colored healthy leaves and
active normal seed fall observed.
 Klu (Acacia farnesiana): New growth emerging with bright green sprouts and leaves.
Few dried seed pods present.
 Guava (Psidium guajava): Dark green leaves and immature, small green fruits.
 Java plum (Syzygium cumini): Stunted growth with good form, likely due to dry area.
Immature fruits observed.
 Sandalwood (Santalum ellipticum): One individual found on 107 2-C. Healthy
individual.
 Morning glory (Ipomaea ochrocea): One individual found on 101 1-S, healthy and
climbing on a haole koa.
Plot # 101 Treatment Solution 8: 0.5 Velpar, 20 oz Lineage Prep, 13 oz MSO
Haole koa
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Healthy, emerging small brightly-colored leaves and
active normal seed fall were observed. Cover (i.e., the estimated portion of the sample
site comprised of the target plant canopy) at 50%. Sociability medium to large clumps.
 First Post-Treatment Observation (PTO) – Complete leaf drop, dying stems and brittle
ends.
 Second PTO – Average 35% regrowth. Epicormic resprouts along main stems observed
on all trees. No releaf along branches or tips.
 Third PTO – Average 40% regrowth. Flowering and new leaves observed on one sample
site.
Guinea grass
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Flushing growth and seed formation observed. Grass
9-12 feet in height. Coverage 95%. Sociability medium to large clumps.
 First PTO – 100% brown foliage. Grass height declining to 6 feet tall, with mottled
leaves, yellow and brown patches.
 Second PTO – Average 35% regrowth. Grass regrowth observed from inside clumps
with brown low, green six feet high.
 Third PTO – Average 35% regrowth. Clumps to 8 feet in height.
Klu
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Only found in portions of plot. Where found, cover
20%, sociability small clumps.
 First PTO – Complete leaf drop, dying stems.
 Second PTO – Average 30% regrowth.
 Third PTO – Average 30% regrowth.
Java plum
1
APPENDIX 1-4
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover restricted to one healthy specimen. Sociability

was one individual.
 First PTO – Unaffected.
 Second PTO – Control (i.e., the percent of green, live growth relative to the entire target
plants on the sample site) at 20% with only small branch dieback.
 Third PTO – Control increased to 60%.
Morning glory
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover was restricted to one healthy specimen climbing
on a haole-koa. Sociability was one individual.
 First PTO – Control at 50%.
 Second PTO – Control increased to 100%.
 Third PTO – Control remained at 100%.
Sandalwood
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover was restricted to one healthy specimen.
Sociability was one individual.
 Second PTO – 10% leaves remaining. Control increased to 100%.
Plot #102Treatment Solution 6: 0.5lbs Velpar, 4 oz Oust XP, 13 oz MSO
Haole koa
active normal seed fall observed. An average of 75% Cover observed.
 First PTO – Control increased to 100%.
 Second PTO – Average 20% regrowth
 Third PTO – Average 40% regrowth.
Guinea grass
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions: From four to seven feet in height. Cover 95%.
Sociability large clumps.
 Second PTO – Control decreased to 95%.
 Third PTO – Control decreased to 20%.
Plot #103Treatment Solution 3: 0.95lbs Velpar, 2.8 oz Oust XP, 13 oz MSO
Haole koa
active normal seed fall were observed. Cover 15% and sociability small clumps.
2
APPENDIX 1-4
Guinea grass
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 100%. Sociability pure stands. Eight to ten foot
height.
 First PTO – Control at 100%. Stems and clumps lying down, browning, yellowing.
 Second PTO – Control decreased to 85%. Clumps sprouting new green.
 Third PTO – Control decreased to 40%. Resprouts within original clumps with very few
outside old clumps.
Klu
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Bright green leaves. Cover 60%. Sociability medium
to large clumps.
 Second PTO – Average 35% regrowth.
 Third PTO – Average 75% regrowth. Flowering observed.
Plot #104 Treatment Solution 2: 0.74lbs Velpar, 2.2 oz Oust XP, 13 oz MSO
Haole koa
active normal seed fall observed. Cover 70%. Sociability medium to large clumps.
 Second PTO – 40% resprouting
Guinea grass
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 100%. Sociability pure stands. Heights were
over eight feet.
 Second PTO – 30% resprouting from clumps.
 Third PTO – 40% resprouting from clumps.
Klu
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 10%. Sociability individuals. Trees leafing out.
 Second PTO – Resprouting, Control decreased to 50%.
 Third PTO – Resprouting, Control decreased to 10%.
Plot# 105 Treatment Solution 6: 0.5lbs Velpar, 4 oz Oust XP, 13 oz MSO
Haole koa
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Healthy, emerging small brightly-colored healthy
leaves and active normal seed fall observed. Cover 25%. Sociability large clumps.
 The first PTO – Control at 100%
3
APPENDIX 1-4
Klu
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Small, densely-packed stands. Bright green leaves
emerging. Five feet height.
 Second PTO – Resprouting, Control decreased to 75%.
 Third PTO – Resprouting, Control decreased to 35%.
Guinea grass
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 90%. Sociability large clumps. Heights over 8
feet.
 First PTO – Control at 100%. Heights up to 5‟.
 Second PTO – Resprouts from clumps, control decreased to 70%.
 Third PTO – Resprouts from clumps and seedlings, control decreased to 50%.
Plot #106 Treatment Solution 8: 0.5 Velpar, 20 oz Lineage Prep, 13 oz MSO
Haole koa
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Healthy, emerging, small brightly-colored healthy
leaves and active normal seed fall observed. Cover 20%. Sociability small clumps.
 Second PTO – Control decreased to 80%. Unopened, stunted leaves and open leaves on
stems.
Guinea grass
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 95%. Sociability large clumps. Luxuriant
growth, dominant height 10 feet.
 Second PTO – Resprouts from clumps, control decreased to 85%.
 Third PTO – Resprouts from clumps, control decreased to 75%.
Klu
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 25%. Sociability medium to large clumps.
Leaves were freshly emerged.
 Second PTO – Control decreased to 85%, resprouts.
 Third PTO – Control decreased to 10%, resprouts.
Plot 107 Treatment Solution 7: 0.5 Velpar, 4 oz Oust XP, 1.5 oz Escort, 13 oz MSO
Haole koa
4
APPENDIX 1-4

leaves and active normal seed fall observed. Cover 40% on only one site. Sociability
large clumps.
Guinea grass
 Second PTO – Control decreased to 90%, resprouting from clumps.
 Third PTO – Control decreased to 70%, resprouting from clumps.
Guava
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Healthy condition, immature fruit. Cover 5%.
Sociability medium to large clumps.
 First PTO – Control at 80%, leaves yellowing.
 Second PTO – Control decreased to 65%, resprouts.
 Third PTO – Control remained at 65%, resprouts.
Sandalwood
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Healthy. Cover <1%. Sociability was one specimen.
 Second PTO – Control remained at 100%.
Plot 108 Treatment Solution 1: 0.5lbs Velpar, 1.6 oz Oust XP, 13 oz MSO
Haole koa
leaves and active normal seed fall observed.
 Third PTO – Control decreased to 70%, resprout along stems.
Guinea grass
growth, dominant height ten feet.
 Third PTO – Control decreased to 60%, regrowth from clumps.
Klu
5
APPENDIX 1-4
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 25% in one sample site. Sociability medium to
large clumps. Leaves were freshly emerged.
Guava
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Green, mature leaves. Cover 20%. Sociability small
clumps and individuals.
 First PTO – Control at 100%, yellow leaves.
Haole koa
leaves and active normal seed fall observed. Cover 15%. Sociability individuals and
small clumps.
 Third PTO – Control decreased to 60%, resprouts along stems.
Guinea grass
Klu
Leaves freshly emerged.
Haole koa
leaves and active normal seed fall observed. Cover 20% on one site. Sociability small
clumps.
 Second PTO – Control decreased to 70%, resprouts along stems.
6
APPENDIX 1-4
 Third PTO – Control decreased to 40%, resprouts along stems.
Klu
 Third PTO – Control decreased to 20%, resprouts.
Guinea grass
Luxuriant growth, dominant height8 feet.
Plot #111 Treatment Solution 7: 0.5 Velpar, 4 oz Oust XP, 1.5 oz Escort, 13 oz MSO
Haole koa
Klu
 Third PTO – Control decreased to 20%, resprouting.
Guinea grass
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 50%. Sociability medium large clumps.
Luxuriant growth, dominant height 8 feet.
Haole koa
7
APPENDIX 1-4

Guinea grass
Luxuriant growth, 6 feet.
Klu
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 25%. Sociability medium clumps. Leaves were
freshly emerged.
Preliminary Conclusions:
Control of all major target species was initially good, as shown through extensive brown foliage;
however, all species recovered during the review period. Control appeared to be limited to
foliage exposed and did not control the root system of the plants. Heavy ground Cover of
Guinea grass restricts ground contact of herbicide solution as demonstrated through the very
small detection of hexazione during the initial soil tests. Herbicide rates applied appeared to
inadequately provide penetration and satisfactory control of target species.
8
APPENDIX 1-4
Appendix B: South Lobe Test Plot Observations

APPENDIX 1-4
General condition of plants throughout the test site during initial review and assessment:
 Guinea grass (Panicum maximus): Low levels of basal brown stems, flushing growth
and seed drop.
 Haole koa (Leucaena leucocephala): Large brightly-colored healthy leaves and
active, normal seed fall.
 Klu (Acacia farnesiana): Small, developing, bright green woody growth and leaves.
 Guava (Psidium guajava): Dark green leaves and yellow fruits.
 Java plum (Syzygium cumini): Trees form small, likely due to dry site, and well
developed with immature fruit.
Additional plants were found only in small numbers or as individuals. These plants were
generally in good health and normal condition and included the following species:
 Morning glory (Ipomaea ochrocea)
 Carpetgrass (Axonopus fissifolius)
 Sensitive plant (Mimosa pudica)
 Cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium)
 Fireweed (Senecio madagascariensis)
 Coat buttons (Tridax procumbens)
 Dandelion (Taraxacum officinale)
 Plantain grass (Plantago lanceolata)
 White daisy (Bidens alba)
Plot #200 Treatment Solution 9: 44.5 oz Roundup Pro MAX, 20 oz Lineage Prep, 13 oz
MSO
Haole koa
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Healthy, emerging small bright leaves and active
normal seed fall were observed. Cover 25%. Sociability medium large clumps.
 First Post-Treatment Observation (PTO) – Control at 45%. Dieback, spotty
yellowing of leaf, dying stems found.
 Second PTO – Control increased to 60%. Epicormic resprouts along main stems
observed on some trees. No releaf along branches or tips.
 Third PTO – Control increased to 70%. Flowering and new leaves observed on
dying plants in 10% of instances.
Guinea grass
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Tall grass-from 7-8 feet in height. Cover 95%.
Sociability almost pure stands.
 First PTO – Control at 60%. Grass lying down to 4 feet, browning, with mottled
leaves, yellow and brown patches.
 Third PTO – Control increased to 85%. Significant brown. Green at bases only.
Klu
2
APPENDIX 1-4
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Small population in only one sample site. Cover
20%, Sociability small clumps.
Plot #201 Treatment Solution 9: 44.5 oz Roundup Pro MAX, 20 oz Lineage Prep, 13 oz
MSO
Guinea grass
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 25%. Sociability small and large clumps.
Heights over 6 feet.
Carpetgrass
Sensitive plant
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 5%. Sociability individuals.
Fireweed
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover less than 1%. Sociability individuals.
Guinea grass
Eight to 10 foot height.
 First PTO – Control at 65%. Stems still green but lying over.
 Second PTO – Control decreased to 60%. Clumps sprouting new green.
 Third PTO – Control increased to 75%. Resprouting within original clumps.
Carpetgrass
3
APPENDIX 1-4
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 75%. Sociability small and large clumps.
Seeds opening.
Morning glory
 Third PTO – No data. Area was mowed.
Sensitive Plant/Mimosa grass

 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover less than 1%. Sociability individual.
Plot #203 Treatment Solution 10: 30 oz Lineage Prep, 20 oz MSO
Haole koa
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Healthy, emerging small brightly-colored leaves
and active normal seed fall observed. Cover 35%. Sociability medium to large
clumps.
Guinea grass
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 95%. Sociability large clumps. Heights 6 to
8 feet.
 First PTO – Control at 30%. Grass falling over.
Carpetgrass
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 75%. Sociability large clumps.
 Third PTO – Control decreased to 20%. Mowed.
Fireweed
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover <1%. Sociability individuals.
4
APPENDIX 1-4

Morning glory
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover <1%. Sociability individuals. Growing on
Haole koa.
Java plum
Plot #206 Treatment Solution 10: 30 oz Lineage Prep, 20 oz MSO
Guinea grass
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 95%. Sociability large clumps. Heights
were 4 to 10 feet.
 Third PTO – Control increased to 95%. No re-sprout. Dead grass still stands 4 to 10
feet high.
Haole koa
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover <1%. Sociability small to medium clumps.
 Third PTO – Control decreased to 30%. Resprouting along main stem.
Klu
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 25%. Sociability is small clumps. 5 to 6 feet
in height.
Java plum
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover <1%. Sociability individual. One individual
found.
5
APPENDIX 1-4

Haole koa
Klu
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 15%. Sociability small to medium clumps.
Guinea grass
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 95%. Sociability large clumps. Up to 9 feet
in height.
Haole koa
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Healthy, emerging small brightly-colored leaves
and active normal seed fall observed. Cover 20%. Sociability medium large clumps.
Guinea grass
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Height 4 to 5 feet. Cover 45%. Sociability large
clumps to nearly pure stands.
Klu
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Bright green leaves. Cover 5%. Sociability
individuals and small clumps.
6
APPENDIX 1-4
 First PTO – Control at 80%. Leaves fallen, brittle ends found. No resprouting.
 Second PTO – Control remained at 80%. Resprouting observed.
 Third PTO – Control decreased to 70%. Releafing.
Carpetgrass
 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover 25%. Sociability, small clumps and
individuals. Seeds opening.
Plaintain grass
 First PTO – Control at 10%. Leaf margins browning.
 Third PTO – Control decreased to 10%. Site mowed.
Fireweed
Preliminary Conclusions:
Control of all major target species was initially good, and remained satisfactory as indicated
by extensive brown foliage. Guinea grass maintained satisfactory Control in all instances
except Plot 203. Most other species showed some signs of recovery in certain areas during
the review period. Further monitoring of these plots is recommended through January
2012 to measure response of this vegetative community.

Gap Analysis Report: Prepared For U.S. Army Garrison - Hawaii

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gap Analysis Report: Prepared For U.S. Army Garrison - Hawaii

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gap Analysis Report: Prepared For U.S. Army Garrison - Hawaii

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

APPENDIX 1-4

Gap Analysis Report

Prepared for U.S. Army Garrison – Hawaii

This report is prepared under Contract #: W911S0-04-D-0002-0183 to

• Vic Garo, Chief Operations Officer, RD

 Goodman, Sherri,W. 1995. Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, Memorandum for

This memorandum provides interim policy on the certification of installation pesticide

 Nickerson, N.H. 1992. Impacts of Vegetation Management Techniques on Wetlands

This project compared five rights-of-way treatments to determine their impacts on

Integrated Vegetation Management, or IVM, is being used by many right-of-way

site specific, ecosystem-sensitive, economically sensible, and socially responsible treatment

The INRMP guides implementation of USAG-HI’s integrated natural resources management

MMR is located in an amphitheater-shaped valley, covering 4,190 ac (1,736 ha). Wildland

 U.S. Department of Agriculture – Soil Conservation Service (USDA-SCS). 1972. Soil

2.2. Identification of Management Alternatives

2.3. Identification of Specific Trial Areas

In January 2011, Team CALIBRE initiated trials of herbicides shown to be effective in

2.4. Identification of Research Protocols

• Michelle Mansker, Joby Rohrer and Jane Beachy, USAG-HI ENV,

2.4.1 Herbicide Application Equipment

Jet Ranger Helicopter GPS Unit Application Nozzles

Figure 5. Application equipment used by Team CALIBRE to complete aerial application of

TimberMark Unit Ground View Aerial View

2.4.2 Herbicide Mixing Protocols

Figure 7. Team CALIBRE’s Herbicide Mixing Operation

2.4.3 Weather Considerations

Figure 7. MMR Cultural Resources Sites (White)

2.4.6 Marking of Test Plots and Sensitive Sites

MMR T&E Species Locations

SBMR T&E Species Locations SBMR Elepaio Buffer Zones

2.4.7 Vegetation Data Collection

Figure 9. Vegetation Survey Plot Layout, USAG -HI, 2011.

Braun-Blanquet method of vegetation measurement recommended by the US Forest

Team CALIBRE strongly recommends sub-surface sampling be completed upon receiving

2. Management of Guinea grass has been accomplished using several control

3.1. Analysis of Existing Data and Current Conditions

3.1.1 Topography and Soils

3.1.2 USAG-HI RD Vegetation Treatment Methods

Analysis of the herbicide-burn-herbicide vegetation management method used by USAG-HI

3.2. Preliminary Trials of Herbicide Application

In January 2011, Team CALIBRE began conducting preliminary testing of combinations of

Prescription Name Chemical Amount

4. Control Method Recommendations

4.1. Biological Control

4.2. Mechanical Control

4.3. Cultural Management of Vegetation

Removal of undesirable vegetation followed by installation of desirable plants is sometimes

 Selective removal of undesirable plants using herbicide to promote desirable

4.4. Chemical Applications

Team CALIBRE recommends TimberMark be used to visually define treatment areas

Team CALIBRE recommends preliminary testing of combinations of herbicides in March

Team CALIBRE recommends other herbicide formulations that are currently in

Cost-effective and successful vegetation management practices must be developed and

Development of cost-effective solutions at USAG-HI is challenged by multiple

 Selective removal of undesirable plants using herbicide to promote desirable

 Installation of low-growing ground-covers using a hydro-seeding process,

Appendix A: North Lobe Test Plots

Plot # 101 Treatment Solution 8: 0.5 Velpar, 20 oz Lineage Prep, 13 oz MSO

 Baseline Vegetation Conditions – Cover restricted to one healthy specimen. Sociability