Research proves the payback period for Integrated Vegetation Management is faster than you might think.
If you’re a utility vegetation manager, it’s not news to you that a properly implemented Integrated Vegetation Management (IVM) program can: reduce carbon emissions; reduce labor requirements; restore native habitat and wildlife; and boost environmental, social and governance (ESG) scores. But field-proven research also points to a significant reduction in long-term VM expenses for managers adopting an IVM program. The question is when? How long before those savings are realized, and how exactly are they achieved?
To get answers, it’s worth recalling how a successful IVM program works. Using selective herbicides and application methods, IVM preserves the grasses and forbs, or “early successional habitat,” while controlling undesirable brush and trees. As this early successional habitat becomes established, it crowds out undesirable seedlings before they can become established. It’s this biological control that forms the heart of a successful IVM program and provides the foundation for future cost reductions.
In his landmark study The Cost-Efficiency of IVM: A Comparison of Vegetation Management Strategies for Utility Rights-of-Way, industry consultant John Goodfellow compares long-term VM expenses by using two scenarios: 1. An IVM program under which a site is initially cleared and herbicides are applied every four years by cut-stubble treatment; and 2. A mowing-only strategy under which a site is mowed every four years. Goodfellow’s findings mimic the real-world experiences of utility vegetation managers across the country.
“[B]ecause of the added cost of herbicide treatment during initial clearing, the IVM strategy is initially the higher cost strategy,” he says. “At the time of first maintenance event (four years), the cost of mechanical maintenance overtakes that of the IVM.”
Goodfellow further concludes: “An IVM-based strategy that includes the use of a variety of vegetation maintenance treatments including herbicides was shown to be significantly less costly as compared to the non-IVM strategy of repeated mowing. In most cases it was also shown to be more cost efficient at producing a variety of benefits.”
All well and good, you might say, but where do the savings come from?
The establishment of early successional habitat helps prevent the growth of undesirable or invasive vegetation, extend cycle periods and reduce the frequency of treatments. Together, these help lower long-term VM expenses through a number of avenues, including:
Adopting an IVM program doesn’t have to be complicated or expensive. If you’d like to learn more about how IVM can help reduce your VM expenses, reach out to your local Corteva Agriscience Vegetation Management Specialist.
For over 30 years, Vistas® has covered strategies, trends and stories from across the Vegetation Management industry.
