APPENDIX B— COST RATIONALE 



This appendix contains the rationale used to 

 develop investment costs for practices used in 

 each ecosystem. It also shows the investment 

 costs for a sample resource unit, as well as the 

 practice life expectancy and maintenance costs 

 for all ecosystems (tables 26, 27, 28). 



Skilled labor, as used in the cost data, in- 

 cludes anyone having special training or skills. 

 A chain saw operator, truck driver, or tractor 

 operator would all be considered skilled labor. 

 Unskilled labor includes hand laborers such as 

 swampers, men to dig post holes, to build 

 fences, and for similar work. 



The basic rationale for cost data by practice 

 was as follows: 



1. Fertilization. — The per acre cost of fer- 

 tilization for each ecosystem was based on 

 the pounds of nutrients applied to the soil. 

 This varied by ecosystems and in some cases 

 by productivity classes within the ecosystem. 

 In some instances the practice was applied 

 more than once annually. In these cases, the 

 cost was multiplied by the number of times 

 fertilizer was applied in one year to bring it 

 up to an annual basis. 



2. Irrigation. — The cost for irrigation is 

 for the system and its installation; it does not 

 include the annual water cost or the main- 

 tenance of the system. In most of the eco- 

 systems, the cost of irrigation increases with 

 the decrease in productivity class because the 

 poorer soils would require lined ditches, 

 sprinkler systems, or some other specialized 

 irrigation system. In the sandier, rocky type 

 soils the cost of irrigation would be extreme- 

 ly high due to the special materials and 

 equipment necessary to apply this practice. 

 An annual maintenance and repair cost is 

 included each year for this practice. 



3. Drainage. — In some ecosystems, includ- 

 ing Sagebrush or Plains grasslands, areas 

 that flood intermittently could be considered 

 for drainage. The draining of this type of 

 area would be classified as a mechanical soil 

 treatment practice. Drainage cost was shown 

 only for those ecosystems that have boggy 

 wet areas. Costs included annual maintenance 

 and repairs. The cost of drainage varied 

 depending on soil and terrain; costs were 

 higher per acre on the rockier or tighter 

 soils than on the more workable type soils. 



4. Brush Control — Mechanical. — All types 

 of mechanical brush control treatments that 

 could be used on an ecosystem were consid- 

 ered in determining the per acre cost. Great- 

 er weight was given to those treatments 

 commonly used in the particular ecosystem 

 being evaluated. Costs varied between eco- 

 systems and productivity classes because of 

 soil conditions and the number of stems per 

 acre. The costs were derived from a weighted 

 average of the different methods of mechan- 

 ical control for each ecosystem. 



5. Brush Control — Chemical. — A weighted 

 average of cost figures for different chemical 

 treatments and different methods of applying 

 the chemicals was used to derive a cost figure 

 for each ecosystem. In most instances there 

 was no difference between productivity 

 classes since the chemical is normally not 

 affected by soil or moisture conditions. The 

 cost did vary from ecosystem to ecosystem. 

 This variance was due to change in rate of 

 application or cost of herbicide. For example, 

 the rate of herbicide for controlling some 

 brush species is y^, to 1/2 pound of 2,4-D per 

 acre, whereas in others the application would 

 be from 2 to 3 pounds per acre. This would 

 make the difference in cost between the two 

 ecosystems to which the practices apply. 



6. Brush Control — Biological. — The use of 

 biological brush control is still in the experi- 

 mental stages and has not been perfected 

 for field use. This practice has been used 

 only on a small scale and cost data are not 

 available, with the exception of one ecosys- 

 tem where beetles have been used to control 

 St. Johnswort. 



7. Brush Control — Fire. — For this practice 

 three types of fire treatment were considered 

 in the cost figures: (1) the broadcast burn- 

 ing of mature stands, (2) the burning of 

 grasslands to kill invading plants, and (3) 

 the burning of individual plants where 

 needed if vegetation is not dense enough to 

 carry fire. The more productive sites in most 

 ecosystems had better cover and more dense 

 plant growth than did the less productive 

 classes; therefore, more precautions would 

 be needed to control fire where it is used as 

 a treatment. On the lower productivity 

 classes the vegetation growth would be more 



107 



