Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-l72pf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-03T17:18:47.061Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Accepted manuscript

Current state of noxious weed management in South Dakota

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2025

Eric AL Jones*
Affiliation:
Assistant professor, Agronomy, Horticulture, and Plant Science Department, South Dakota State University
Krista Ann Ehlert
Affiliation:
Assistant professor, Natural Resource Management Department, South Dakota State University
Philip Rozeboom
Affiliation:
Integrated pest management coordinator, Agronomy, Horticulture, and Plant Science Department, South Dakota State University
Jill Alms
Affiliation:
Agricultural research manager, Agronomy, Horticulture, and Plant Science Department, South Dakota State University
David Vos
Affiliation:
Agricultural research manager, Agronomy, Horticulture, and Plant Science Department, South Dakota State University
*
Author for correspondence: Eric Jones, eric.jones@sdstate.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

An online survey was distributed to South Dakota stakeholders to understand how noxious weeds are currently being managed. The response rate was 26%; 129 stakeholders completed the survey of the 491 stakeholders who opened the survey. Eighty percent of respondents stated noxious weeds were a problem. Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) and absinth wormwood (Artemisia absinthium) were the most common and troublesome but all statewide noxious weeds were reported. Herbicides alone (25%) was the most common singular response to manage noxious weeds, but respondents utilized two (27%) to three (24%) other tactics as well. Most respondents (47%) were somewhat satisfied with management tactics while others were completely satisfied (9%), neither satisfied nor dissatisfied (20%), somewhat unsatisfied (11%), or very unsatisfied (15%). A covariate analysis showed that the more management tactics a stakeholder utilized, the less satisfied they were with control (P < 0.0001). The most common barrier of adopting new tactics was effectiveness (26%) followed by a combination of effectiveness + current production practices + cost + labor (13%). An additional covariate analysis showed that the increase of management tactics increased the barriers of adoption (P = 0.04) and increasing the number of barriers of adoption resulted in stakeholders being dissatisfied with control (P = 0.0003). Overall, the results of the survey suggest that statewide noxious weeds remain a problem, and multiple tactics are used to manage these weeds. However, Extension efforts need to address how to use current and implement new management to increase effectiveness.

Type
Education/Extension
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Weed Science Society of America