↓ Skip to main content

Cost/Benefit Considerations for Recent Saltcedar Control, Middle Pecos River, New Mexico

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Management, June 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Title
Cost/Benefit Considerations for Recent Saltcedar Control, Middle Pecos River, New Mexico
Published in
Environmental Management, June 2008
DOI 10.1007/s00267-008-9156-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dave Barz, Richard P. Watson, Joseph F. Kanney, Jesse D. Roberts, David P. Groeneveld

Abstract

Major benefits were weighed against major costs associated with recent saltcedar control efforts along the Middle Pecos River, New Mexico. The area of study was restricted to both sides of the channel and excluded tributaries along the 370 km between Sumner and Brantley dams. Direct costs (helicopter spraying, dead tree removal, and revegetation) within the study area were estimated to be $2.2 million but possibly rising to $6.4 million with the adoption of an aggressive revegetation program. Indirect costs associated with increased potential for erosion and reservoir sedimentation would raise the costs due to increased evaporation from more extensive shallows in the Pecos River as it enters Brantley Reservoir. Actions such as dredging are unlikely given the conservative amount of sediment calculated (about 1% of the reservoir pool). The potential for water salvage was identified as the only tangible benefit likely to be realized under the current control strategy. Estimates of evapotranspiration (ET) using Landsat TM data allowed estimation of potential water salvage as the difference in ET before and after treatment, an amount totaling 7.41 million m(3) (6010 acre-ft) per year. Previous saltcedar control efforts of roughly the same magnitude found that salvaged ET recharged groundwater and no additional flows were realized within the river. Thus, the value of this recharge is probably less than the lowest value quoted for actual in-channel flow, and estimated to be <$63,000 per year. Though couched in terms of costs and benefits, this paper is focused on what can be considered the key trade-off under a complete eradication strategy: water salvage vs. erosion and sedimentation. It differs from previous efforts by focusing on evaluating the impacts of actual control efforts within a specific system. Total costs (direct plus potential indirect) far outweighed benefits in this simple comparison and are expected to be ongoing. Problems induced by saltcedar control may permanently reduce reservoir capacity and increase reservoir evaporation rates, which could further deplete supplies on this water short system. These potential negative consequences highlight that such costs and benefits need to be considered before initiating extensive saltcedar control programs on river systems of the western United States.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 5%
Indonesia 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 36 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 20%
Student > Master 7 18%
Professor 2 5%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 6 15%
Engineering 6 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 13%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 13%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 9 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 October 2014.
All research outputs
#15,516,483
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#1,373
of 1,913 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,174
of 96,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#9
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,913 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 96,772 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.