ELEMENT STEWARDSHIP ABSTRACT

for

Ulex europaeus

Gorse

To the User:

Element Stewardship Abstracts (ESAs) are prepared to provide The Nature Conservancy's
Stewardship staff and other land managers with current management-related information on those species
and communities that are most important to protect, or most important to control. The abstracts organize
and summarize data from numerous sources including literature and researchers and managers actively
working with the species or community.

We hope, by providing this abstract free of charge, to encourage users to contribute their
information to the abstract. This sharing of information will benefit all land managers by
ensuring the availability of an abstract that contains up-to-date information on management
techniques and knowledgeable contacts. Contributors of information will be acknowledged within the
abstract and receive updated editions. To contribute information, contact the editor whose address is
listed at the end of the document.

For ease of update and retrievability, the abstracts are stored on computer at the national office of The
Nature Conservancy. This abstract is a compilation of available information and is not an endorsement of
particular practices or products.

Please do not remove this cover statement from the attached abstract.

Authors of this Abstract:

Marc Hoshovsky
©
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY
1815 North Lynn Street, Arlington, Virginia 22209 (703) 841 5300
 The Nature Conservancy
Element Stewardship Abstract
For Ulex europaeus

I. IDENTIFIERS

Common Name: Gorse, Furze, Irish Furze, Whin

General Description:
The following description of Ulex europaeus is adapted from Skipper (1922), Chater (1931), McMinn
(1951), Robbins et al. (1951), Pryor and Dana (1952), Yeates (1955), Moss (1959), Hitchcock et al.
(1961), Munz and Keck (1973), Rudolf (1974), Amme (1983), and Williams (1983).

Gorse is an evergreen, leguminous shrub. The simple, stiff leaves are spinose or acicular, approximately
5-15 mm long. The typical trifoliolate leaf of the legumes is seen only in the seedling and in plants which
grow in rich damp soils. The plant reproduces by both creeping roots or by seeds.

The shiny yellow flowers are solitary or racemose, often clustered at the ends of branches. The pubescent
yellow calyx (10-15 mm long) is deeply 2-lipped, the upper lip 2-toothed and the lower lip 3-toothed. The
corolla is 15-18 mm long with an ovate banner and oblong, obtuse wings and keel. The wings are larger
than the keel. The 10 stamens are monadelphous.

The short, oblong villous fruit pods are 15-18 mm long, many-seeded, and turn brown when ripe. Gorse
plants are heavy with ripe seed in coastal California by May. The olive green to brownish seeds are
smooth and shining, approximately 2 mm long.

Gorse is an evergreen, leguminous shrub which resembles Scotch broom somewhat in general appearance.
It can be easily distinguished from brooms by its prickly nature and profusion of yellow flowers. Although
gorse may grow taller elsewhere, individuals in California rarely exceed 3.5 m and more commonly are
only 1-2 m high. The short, stout branches are green when young but turn brown with age. They are
often densely packed and superficially appear leafless. Their prickly nature is due to well-developed
branch spines growing in the axils of the leaves.

II. STEWARDSHIP SUMMARY

III. NATURAL HISTORY

Range:
Gorse is native to central and western Europe, where it has long been cultivated for hedgerows (Rudolf
1974). It has been naturalized in Australia and New Zealand for over 150 years (Moss 1978), where a
great deal of research has been done to control its spread (see Gaynor and MacCarter 1981 for a
bibliography). It has been reported as an exotic in Costa Rica (D'Arcy 1980) and the Hawaiian Islands
(Amme 1983). In North America, it has established itself along the Atlantic Coast from Virginia to
Massachusetts (Amme 1983).

There is little published information as to when gorse was introduced to the West Coast. It was originally
used as an ornamental (Holloway and Huffaker 1957, Boyd 1984). Seeds from Ireland were brought into
Oregon prior to 1894 (Hill 1955). A few plants were brought into Marin County, California, before 1912
as "a bit of ol' Ireland" (Pryor and Dana 1952). Boyd (1984) mentions that it has been established in
Mendocino County for 100 years.

By the 1950s, gorse was widespread in western Washington and Oregon and northern California (Hill
1955), covering over 15,000 acres in California (Pryor and Dana 1952) and an estimated 25,000 acres in
southwestern Oregon (Hill 1955). It has been reported in every coastal California county from Santa Cruz
to Del Norte (Pryor and Dana 1952, Holloway and Huffaker 1957, McMinn 1951), and sparingly in
southern California (Munz and Keck 1973). Boyd (1984) states that much of the gorse is localized, and
the "long-standing Mendocino County locality has not expanded its range significantly."

The geographical distribution of gorse depends primarily on temperature (Zabkiewicz 1976). It cannot
survive in arid climates, or in continental regions where there are extremes of heat and cold; neither does
it grow at great altitude. The mature plant can stand fairly severe frosts. The species also has a
preference for habitats sheltered from cold winds. Day length may also affect its latitudinal distribution,
as short-day conditions inhibit maturation and prevent thorn formation and flowering (Zabkiewicz 1976).

Gorse invades infertile or disturbed sites, sand dunes, gravel bars, fence rows, overgrazed pastures, logged
areas, and burned-over lands (Hill 1955, Moss 1978). It will grow on most soil types (Meeklah 1979),
from "good silt soil to plain boulders" (Birdling 1952). It has been recorded as growing well on
serpentine soils (Coombe and Frost 1956) and, though rarely, on highly calcareous soils (Chater 1931) in
England. In New Zealand, gorse readily invades low fertility pastureland where the organic content of the
soil is less than 4% (Matthews 1982).

It is more tolerant of soil acidity than most legumes (Hill 1949). The only restrictions to soil quality seem
to be adequate nutrition and availability of trace elements (Meeklah 1979). Although its nutrient
requirements are considered low (Zabkiewicz 1976), it can suffer from either magnesium or boron
deficiency. Lack of sufficient boron is shown by a yellowing of the needle tips and foliage, slow growth,
and delayed maturation (Zabkiewicz 1976).

Optimal growth is at soil pH of 4.5-5.0 (Meeklah 1979). It grows best where abundant soil moisture is
available (Dancer et al. 1977) and does better on shady slopes than on sunny slopes (Birdling 1952).
According to Boyd (1984), gorse thrives where the water table is very high, although Zabkiewicz (1976)
asserts that it does best where there is good drainage. Gorse has nitrogen-fixing bacteria located in
nodules on its roots which thrive under aerobic conditions (Zabkiewicz 1976). If the roots are flooded,
bacterial metabolism slows down (Zabkiewicz 1976).

Reproduction:
The reputed flowering period varies from author to author (McMinn 1951, Hitchcock et al. 1961, Munz
and Keck 1973, Rudolf 1974), but in general may occur between late winter and early fall. In coastal
Mendocino County, gorse flowers from late winter to early spring (Amme 1983).

VEGETATIVE REPRODUCTION
Gorse may resprout from stumps. Root systems may be much older than shoot systems because of this
resprouting ability (Chater 1931). Such regrowth does not produce flowers until the second year or later,
although root cuttings will flower 6 months after rooting (Zabkiewicz 1976). There is one report of a
seedless variety of gorse in New Zealand (Miller 1970). Hill (1949) suggests that gorse may be spread by
rhizomes.

SEED BIOLOGY
Reproduction by seed is a far more important means of reproduction than is vegetative reproduction and is
far more troublesome to control. The seed problem was first emphasized by Moss (1959). The seeds
produced are very small, averaging 150,000 seeds/kg (Rudolf 1974) and are produced at the rate of
500-600 seeds/square meter, with counts of up to 20,000 seeds/square meter (Zabkiewicz and Gaskin
1978a, Hartley et al. 1980) in the top 2.5 cm of soil.

The seed has a hard, water-impermeable seed coat that prevents immediate germination (MacCarter and
Gaynor 1980). Seeds may remain dormant yet viable in the soil for up to 30 years, with one report of 70
years of dormancy (Zabkiewicz 1976). The fact that fewer seeds germinate and seedling death rate is
higher under older plants than in the open (Ivens 1978b, MacCarter and Gaynor 1980) suggests that
germination may be prevented by organic inhibitors leached from older plants (Zabkiewicz 1976), though
this may be due to other factors (see below).

Seed dispersal is primarily by ejection from the pod (Moss 1959). Since the seed is considered heavy, it is
not wind-dispersed (Chater 1931) and usually lands less than 2 m from the parent plant (Moss 1978).
This may account for its localized abundance. In New Zealand, however, travel of seeds has been
measured at over 5 m (Moss 1978), a distance too large to be accounted for by pod ejection.

Other possible means of seed dispersal include mud which contains gorse seed clinging to livestock or
human feet. Parsons (1958) suggested that birds may play a part in distributing gorse seeds as "patches of
the weed are often found under trees where birds have perched." Of more substance is Chater's (1931)
observation of active gorse seed collection by ants as well as by the introduced California quail in New
Zealand. The effect of quail on gorse seed dispersal has not been studied in California. The seed of gorse
growing along streams is spread by water. Subsequent use on roadways of the gravel from these
seed-bearing watercourses facilitates its spread (Hill 1949).

Seed germination may take place under suitable conditions at any time of the year. This irregularity is
due to the high percentage of impermeable seeds. Light is not essential for germination (Ivens 1978b),
but few seeds germinate in the shade of established gorse. When the dense gorse cover is removed, there
is a "flush of germination," due to either increased light availability or associated changes in temperature
conditions (Ivens 1983). Heat stimulates germination, as Moss (1959) demonstrated by heating gorse to
88 C for 30 minutes. This temperature could be expected to occur 2 cm below the soil surface in a light
burn and at about 5 cm in a heavy burn (MacCarter and Gaynor 1980). Short exposures to temperatures
above 100 C are lethal (Amme 1983).

Seed mortality may be caused by the gorse seed weevil (Apion ulicis) or two Microlepidoptera
(Laspeyresia ulicitana and Coleophora albicosta) (Chater 1931). After germination, seedling death may
be due to burial by debris, desiccation, "choking by grasses ... (Agrostis vulgaris, Deschampsia flexuosa or
Holcus lanatus)" (Chater 1931), grazing animals, or defoliation below the cotyledons "probably by slugs"
(Ivens 1978b).

GROWTH PATTERNS
The surviving seedlings pass through two forms as they mature. The first has a more or less compact,
often with an almost rosette-like, habit. The leaves are typically trifoliolate (Boodle 1914) with thin,
expanded leaflets. As simple leaves are produced, the plant grows rapidly. The leaves become narrower,
smaller, more pointed and eventually, in the second stage, awl-like (Millener 1961). Spines develop in
the axils of the leaves. Bienek and Millington (1968) report that spine (thorn) formation was not
prevented by altering a variety of environmental factors.

In the second stage, as the foliage spines harden, the leaf cuticle thickens, and thick wax is produced on
the leaf surface (Balneaves and Zabkiewicz 1981). Both the cuticle and wax thickness varies seasonally
(Balneaves and Zabkiewicz 1981). It takes at least 18 months before a plant has developed sufficiently to
produce flowers (Parsons 1958).

Individual plants grow outward, forming a central area of dry, dead vegetation (Anonymous 1974). A
single plant can be up to 30 feet in diameter (Boyd 1984). Old bushes are occasionally found to have died
or to be dying of old age. Cores suggest that gorse never grows for more than 30 years (Chater 1931).

Since gorse grows in dense, impenetrable thickets (Boyd 1984), the oil in the plant combined with the
dead dry matter creates a serious fire hazard (Anonymous 1974).

Because the nitrogen-fixing bacterial metabolism slows down in flooded soils (Zabkiewicz 1976), roots
tend to lie within the top few centimeters of the soil, with only the tap root extending to greater depths
(Grubb et al. 1969). These extensive lateral roots are supplemented by a fine mat of adventitious roots
which descend from the lower procumbent branches (Chater 1931, MacCarter and Gaynor 1980).

The above-ground shoot system may occur in a variety of growth forms, depending on exposure. The
typical form is that of a medium-size shrub, although individuals growing closest to the shore may be
matlike (Boyd 1984) or cushion-like (Skipper 1922). This is no doubt the growing branch tips are killed
by exposure to wind and salt spray (Skipper 1922, Boyd 1984).

Zabkiewicz (1976) states that adult gorse plants have a relatively low light requirement, and the shading
effect of other species has little effect on gorse flowering and seeding. In contrast, Amme (1983)
mentions that gorse is relatively intolerant to heavy shade, producing sparse foliage and few flowers.
Hackwell (1980) agrees, describing gorse as a "pioneer plant" which grows best in unshaded sites and
calling it a "light demanding plant."

PLANT PRODUCTION AND COMMUNITY SUCCESSION

Gorse grows very quickly. 6000 kg/ha of dry matter can be produced in one-year-old stands, and the
estimated average annual rate of dry matter production in 7-1/2-year-old stands exceeds 18,000 kg/ha
(Egunjobi 1971a). Nitrogen can accumulate at an annual rate of 100-200 kg/ha. This surpasses the
production of some well-managed, fertilized pastures (Egunjobi 1971a).

Most of this production, with its high nitrogen content, ends up as litter (Hackwell 1980). The rate of
litter accumulation under gorse is higher than any figure recorded for warm temperate species and is near
those recorded for tropical rainforests (Egunjobi 1971a). Much of this litter is made up of the lower
shaded shoots which have died and is hard and spiny (Grubb et al. 1969). This litter tends to acidify and
lower the cation exchange capacity of moderately fertile soils by immobilizing the bases (Grubb et al.
1969, Grubb and Siter 1971, MacCarter and Gaynor 1980).

Observations on soil formation during primary succession show that a certain minimum amount of
nitrogen must accumulate in the soil surface before competitive woody species invade communities
dominated by legumes (Dancer et al. 1977). Repeated fires reduce the available nitrogen (Zabkiewicz
1976) and prolong the gorse stage of a succession in any area (MacCarter and Gaynor 1980).
Undisturbed, the microclimate under gorse can provide favorable conditions for the germination of native
shrub seedlings (Hackwell 1980) and the regeneration of indigenous forest occurs more rapidly
(Zabkiewicz 1976, Dancer et al. 1977, MacCarter and Gaynor 1980, Hackwell 1980). Often fires are
deliberately set to allow the development of exotic forests, as in New Zealand with PINUS RADIATA.
This aids in maintaining the gorse population or in producing a community of gorse intermixed with other
weedy exotics (MacCarter and Gaynor 1980).

Amme (1983) describes the composition of the gorse community in Mendocino County. In his Holcus
lanatus vegetation type, growing on very moist, fine loamy soil, the associated native and exotic plants are
Rubus vitifolius, Equisetum stachys, Potentilla palustris, Pteris aquilina, Carex, Juncus, Myrica
californica, Plantago lanceolata, Agrostis tenuis, Rosa gymnocarpa, and Anthoxanthum odoratum.

IV. CONDITION

V. MANAGEMENT/MONITORING

Management Requirements:
Gorse may be slow in becoming established and spreading, but where it gains a hold, there are few other
plants that will so completely dominate an area (Hill 1955, Anonymous 1974). Besides being a
significant fire hazard (Amme 1983), it can successfully outcompete native plants. On San Bruno
Mountain in San Mateo County, California, gorse is considered the most difficult exotic species to control,
having caused considerable losses to valuable grassland habitat (Reid 1985).
Gorse was nominated to be the subject of an Element Stewardship Abstract by Kate Barrows, former
Preserve Manager of The Nature Conservancy's Northern California Coast Range Preserve. Although it is
not presently growing within the preserve, it does occur on the coastal bluffs near Ft. Bragg and
Mendocino (Barrows 1985), and such proximity may be a cause for concern.

Gorse is a successful invasive species because it can: (1) fix nitrogen; (2) acidify and (at least
temporarily) impoverish soils by taking up bases; (3) survive on a variety of soil types; (4) produce copious
amounts of heat-tolerant seeds with long-term viability; and (5) regenerate rapidly from seeds and stumps
after disturbances such as brush clearing or fires.

Gorse is probably the least recognized yet most unmanageable exotic weed in California. Management
efforts must be very long-term in scope in order to be successful, due to the longevity of buried seeds.
Burning may be the most adequate means of removing the mature plants. There is debate about the
effectiveness of fire in controlling gorse as researchers in New Zealand have seen native species invading
and outcompeting gorse on unmanipulated lands. Planting acid-tolerant, fast-growing trees in gorse
thickets may eventually shade out gorse without further management efforts.

If plant competition proves ineffective, areas which are burned should be further treated to prevent
resprouting and seedling reestablishment. Beyond the use of herbicides for this purpose, goats and
possibly chickens may prove effective in controlling gorse.

From a practical viewpoint, methods of weed management are commonly categorized under the following
categories: physical, managerial, biological, chemical, and prescribed burning (Watson 1977). Physical
methods include both manual and mechanical methods. Managerial methods include the encouragement
of competitive displacement by native plants and prescribed grazing. Biological control is usually
interpreted as the introduction of insects or pathogens which are highly selective for a particular weed
species. Chemical control includes both broadcast and spot application. Prescribed burning includes both
broadcast burning or spot treatment with a flame thrower.

The most desirable approach is that of an integrated vegetation management plan. This involves the
optimum use of all control strategies to control weeds. This approach is generally accepted as the most
effective, economical, and environmentally sound long-term pest control strategy (Watson 1977). In cases
where more than one control technique is used, the various techniques should be compatible with one
another. Broadcast herbicide application, for example, may not work well with certain managerial
techniques (i.e., plant competition).

PHYSICAL CONTROL
Both physical control methods discussed below, manual and mechanical, produce slash (i.e., cutting
debris) that can be disposed of by several techniques. If cut before seeds are produced it may be piled and
left for enhancement of wildlife habitat (i.e., cover for small mammals). Debris may be fed through a
mechanical chipper and used as mulch during revegetation procedures. Care should be taken to prevent
vegetative reproduction from cuttings. Burning the slash piles is also effective in disposing of slash.

MANUAL CONTROL
Manual methods use hand labor to remove undesirable vegetation. These methods are highly selective
and permit weeds to be removed without damage to surrounding native vegetation.

The Bradley Method is one sensible approach to manual control of weeds (Fuller and Barbe 1985). This
method consists of hand weeding selected small areas of infestation in a specific sequence, starting with
the best stands of native vegetation (those with the least extent of weed infestation) and working towards
those stands with the worst weed infestation. Initially, weeds that occur singly or in small groups should
be eliminated from the extreme edges of the infestation. The next areas to work on are those with a ratio
of at least two natives to every weed. As the native plant stabilizes in each cleared area, work deeper into
the center of the most dense weed patches. This method has great promise on nature reserves with low
budgets and with sensitive plant populations. More detailed information is contained in Fuller and Barbe
(1985).

Since manual removal is labor intensive, a ready supply of cheap labor is the first obstacle to overcome for
manual control programs. The Marin chapter of the California Native Plant Society has been successful
in getting volunteers on weekend days to form broom pulling parties (Bravo 1985). Such activities might
be organized to control gorse. Youth groups and civic organizations might also be willing to form work
parties (Mountjoy 1979). More work is accomplished proportionately in a short period, such as from 10
a.m. to 1 p.m., than in a long period with a lunch break. In addition to being short, the 10 a.m. to 1 p.m.
work period also allows volunteers to hike in the afternoon, a factor that results in increased participation.

Hand Pulling: This method may be used to destroy the seedlings and young plants up to 1-1/2 m tall.
Seedlings are best pulled after a rain when the soil is loose. This facilitates removal of the rooting system,
which may resprout if left in the ground. Plants should be pulled as soon as they are large enough to
grasp but before they produce seeds.

Hand Hoeing: Plants can be destroyed readily while they are still small by hand hoeing, either by cutting
off their tops or by stirring the surface soil so as to expose the seedlings to the drying action of the sun.
The object of hoeing is to cut off weeds without going too deeply into the ground and doing damage to the
roots of desirable vegetation. Gorse, which has a large tap root, may not be completely removed by hoeing
and may resprout afterwards. For plants up to 4 m tall a claw mattock is effective. The dirt around the
root is loosened by the claw and the plant is then pulled out in the same way a claw hammer is used to
pull out nails.

Cutting: Manually operated tools such as brush cutters, power saws, axes, machetes, loppers and clippers
can be used to cut gorse. This is an important step before many other methods are tried, as it removes the
above ground portion of the plant. In addition, for thickly growing, multi-stemmed shrubs such as gorse,
access to the base of the shrub may not only be difficult but dangerous where footing is uncertain. Cutting
the above ground portion and leaving the root intact is only partially successful; about half the remaining
roots will resprout. Bravo (1985) suggests cutting plants before the seeds are set. This prevents seed
production and dispersal for that plant.

Hand Digging: The removal of rootstocks by hand digging is a slow but sure way of destroying weeds
which resprout from their roots. The work must be thorough to be effective, as every piece of root that
breaks off and remains in the soil may produce a new plant. Such a technique is only suitable for small
infestations or around trees and shrubs where other methods are not practical.

MECHANICAL CONTROL
Mechanical methods use mechanized equipment to remove above ground vegetation. These methods are
often non-selective in that all vegetation on a treated site is affected. Mechanical control is highly
effective at controlling woody vegetation on gentle topography with few site obstacles such as rocks,
stumps or logs. Most mechanical equipment is not safe to operate on slopes over 30 percent. It is also of
limited use where soils are highly susceptible to compaction or erosion or where excessive soil moisture is
present. Site obstacles such as rocks, stumps or logs also reduce efficiency.

Scarification: Various attachments are available for bulldozers and tractors to clear and uproot woody
plants. The most basic method is to drag a heavy chain between two bulldozers. Brush rakes or blades
may be mounted on the front of the bulldozer and brushland disks or root plows may be pulled behind.
These techniques result in varying degrees of soil disturbance and may create erosion problems. The
brush rake displaces less soil than a straight blade and is much faster at removing brush. Disks do not
remove top soil but they stir and loosen it to depths of up to 16 inches. This is being used on San Bruno
Mountain and, when followed by burning, is quite effective at controlling gorse (Reid 1985). Root plows
are pulled below the soil surface, cutting off all roots at a set depth and pushing them to the surface.
Plants like gorse, which resprout from root fragments, are not permanently controlled by root plowing.
Chopping, Cutting or Mowing: Gorse may be trimmed back by tractor-mounted mowers on even ground
or by scythes on rough or stony ground. Unwanted vegetation can be removed faster and more
economically in these ways than by manual means and with less soil disturbance than with scarification.
However, these methods are non-selective weed eradication techniques. They reduce potential for
biological control through plant competition, and may open up new niches for undesirable vegetation. In
addition, wildlife forage is eliminated. Gorse usually requires several cuttings before the underground
parts exhaust their reserve food supply. If only a single cutting can be made, the best time is when the
plants begin to flower. At this stage the reserve food supply in the roots has been nearly exhausted, and
new seeds have not yet been produced. After cutting or chopping with mechanical equipment, gorse
resprouts from root crowns in greater density if not treated with herbicides (Amme 1983).

MANAGERIAL CONTROL
Biological Competition: Sowing native plant species which have the potential to out-compete weedy
exotics for important resources is usually a preventive method of weed control. In some cases later
successional plants may be encouraged to take root among the unwanted vegetation. Once established
these may displace the gorse by competing for water or nutrients or by shading out the lower growing
plants.

In most cases gorse prevents the establishment of other native plants and must be initially removed.
Following physical or thermal removal of mature plants, root crowns must be treated to prevent
resprouting. Seedlings of native plant species usually cannot establish fast enough to compete with sprout
growth from untreated stumps.

Much of the agricultural literature discusses using exotics to outcompete gorse seedlings (Currie 1959,
Hartley and Phung 1979, 1982, Ivens and Mlowe 1983), but there has only been one attempt at reseeding
with native perennials in California (Amme 1983). The project is ongoing and no results have been
published yet. The plant species used are Hordeum californicum, Bromus maritimus, Elymus glaucus, E.
virescens, Deschampsia caespitosa var maritima, and Danthonia californica. Costs for such a project are
also discussed by Amme (1983).

Some plant species inhibit the establishment or growth of other plants through the effects of allelopathy
(i.e., biochemical interference by metabolic products). Native species with such properties may be
propagated in treated areas. Allelopathic noxious weeds should of course be avoided.

Hill (1949) also mentioned that gorse regrowth may be controlled when it is subject to heavy shade.
Planting of fast-growing native shrubs or trees in conjunction with herbicide stump treatment may provide
long-lasting control.

Prescribed Grazing: The continued removal of the tops of seedlings and resprouts by grazing animals
prevents plant development and seed formation and also gradually weakens the underground parts.
Grazing must be continued until the seedbank is eliminated, as the suppressed plants return quickly after
livestock is removed and begin to dominate pastures again.

Goat grazing has been shown to be effective in controlling gorse (Hill 1955, Leighton 1978, Hartley et
al. 1980). In many areas of California the use of Angora and Spanish goats is showing promise as an
effective control for weedy species such as poison oak, scotch broom, blackberries, pampas grass, giant
reed, and thistles (Daar 1983). In the Cleveland National Forest goats are herded for firebreak
management of brush species on over 79,000 acres of land. Goats are less costly to utilize than
mechanical and chemical control methods. They can negotiate slopes too steep to manage with machines
and do not pose the environmental dangers inherent with herbicides (Andres 1979).

A pioneer in the use of goats for weed control in urban settings is Richard Otterstad, owner of Otterstad's
Brush Clearing Service (718 Adams St., Albany, CA 94706, 415/524-4063). The primary weed control
"tools" utilized by Otterstad's company are Angora goats and light-weight flexible fencing reinforced with
electrified wire. Angora's are preferred over Spanish goats because their smaller size makes them easier
to transport (Otterstad uses a pickup truck). Dairy goats were abandoned when Otterstad found them to be
"goof-offs" when it came to eating (Daar 1983).

Goats prefer woody vegetation over most grasses or forbs, although Angoras have a higher tolerance for
non-woody species. Since goats will trample or browse virtually any vegetation within a fenced area, any
desirable trees or shrubs must be protected. Experience has shown that goats are most cost-effective when
used to clear or suppress one- to four-year-old regrowth of brush rather than to do initial clearing of dense,
tall, mature stands of vegetation. Gorse is most readily eaten when seedlings or regrowth is from two to
four inches high, a stage when the spines have yet to harden and the foliage is soft and palatable. When
faced with mature brush, goats will defoliate twigs and strip off bark, but will leave standing the plant's
main superstructure. The remaining branches are too old and tough to tempt them. A period of at least
two years of grazing by goats is required before there is any significant reduction in the number of gorse
crowns (Hill 1949).

Chickens, surprisingly enough, are known to effectively digest (and destroy) all weed seeds passing
through their crops and they can thoroughly graze back vegetation in areas up to one acre in size.
Releasing chickens into an area after the mature plants are removed allows them to scratch and peck out
weed seeds and potentially reduce the weed seed bank in the soil (Andres 1979).

BIOLOGICAL CONTROL
The term "biological control" is used here to refer to the use of insects or pathogens to control weeds. The
introduction of exotic natural enemies to control plants is a complex process and must be thoroughly
researched before implementation to prevent biological disasters. Such tools are not normally suitable for
preserve managers to implement.

Gorse was the second weedy plant species in the U.S. to have an attempt made at its control by the import
of an exotic insect. The gorse weevil (Apion ulicis) was brought into the U.S. in 1953 from France
(Holloway and Huffaker 1957) and by 1982 had become established in California and Oregon (Julien
1982). The weevil grub eats the seed within the unopened legume. When the pods open adult weevils are
released to feed on the spines and flowers (Cowley 1983), sometimes defoliating large plants.

In California, the weevil has been only partially successful in controlling gorse (Amme 1983). The plant
often has enough food reserves in the root and stem to recover rapidly after serious injury (Evans 1942).
Additionally, the climate on the northern California coast is too cool. This delays dehiscing of the pods,
and the weevil larva dies in the pod (Amme 1983).

Other potential insect enemies of gorse exist but have not been tested for controlling gorse in the U.S.
These include: Apion scutellare, Exapioulicis (both listed in Julien 1982), Anarsia spartiella, Depressia
costosa, Pseudoterpna pruinata, Laspeyresia ulicitana, Coleophora albicosta (Chater 1931), Agonopterix
ulicetella, Rhinocyllus vornicus, Trichosirocalus horridus (Rolston et al. 1981), Tetranychus lintearius,
Dictyonota strichnocera (Hill 1983), Anisoplaca ptyoptera (Butler 1979), Coccus hesperidum, and
Hemiberlesia rapax (Anonymous 1971).

Please notify the California Field Office of The Nature Conservancy of any field observations in which a
native insect or pathogen is seen to have detrimental effects on gorse. These reports will be used to update
this Element Stewardship Abstract. Management techniques which may encourage the spread of such
species-specific agents may be desirable in controlling gorse.

CHEMICAL CONTROL
Detailed information on herbicides is available in such publications as Weed Science Society of America
(1983) or USDA (1984), and will not be comprehensively covered here. The Weed Science Society
publication gives specific information on nomenclature, chemical and physical properties of the pure
chemical, use recommendations and precautions, physiological and biochemical behavior, behavior in or
on soils and toxological properties for several hundred chemicals.

Chemical control of gorse has been well researched in New Zealand. All young seedlings were killed by
picloram (Ivens 1979b). Good results were obtained with Tordon applied during the spring and summer
months. Larger plants seem to need retreatments, and burned stumps showed a high degree of recovery
and regrowth (Ivens 1979b).

There are distinct disadvantages to using picloram. Picloram is persistent in soils, subject to slow
degradation by microorganisms (Amme 1983). It leaches with difficulty through soils high in organic
matter and lateritic clay soils (Klingman 1975). Picloram also kills other broadleaf plants (Amme 1983)
and requires a permit before use.

Hill (1949) reported that 2,4-D was not as effective on gorse as on many other plants. He suggested that
ammate gave better gorse control. Yet none of these was capable of totally eliminating gorse. His
conclusion was that the application of 2,4-D after a treatment of ammate would destroy seedlings and keep
existing live plants under control.

Preest (1980) studied the effect of glyphosate (Roundup) and found it most effective with seedling gorse in
early summer. An autumn-winter mortality rise correlated with increasing root-to- shoot ratio as the
herbicide is carried to the roots with root regrowth in the fall. Preest speculated that glyphosate is most
effective when the wax on the leaf is diminished as the season progresses. Glyphosate is a non-selective
herbicide and will kill both grasses and broadleaf plants (Amme 1983). It is a mobile compound and is
translocated throughout the plant when applied to the leaves. Klingman (1975) report that glyphosate
rapidly degrades in the soil.

Other chemicals used to control gorse include: triclopyr (Naish 1975, McCavish 1980, Balneaves and
Zabkiewicz 1981, Hartley and Popay 1982a, Rolston and Devantier 1983); hexazinone (Preest 1980,
Balneaves and Zabkiewicz 1981, Rolston and Devantier 1983); ammonium sulfamate (Amme 1983);
fosamine ammonium (McCavish 1980);and diquat (Thompson 1975b, Rolston and Talbot 1980).
Additional chemicals and their effects on gorse are reviewed by Davenhill (1976), Ivens (1977), Hill
(1955), Rolston and Devantier (1983), Thompson (1975b), and Bovey (1971).

The success of herbicide treatment will depend on the timing and frequency of application. Preest (1980)
concluded that foliage- absorbed chemicals should not be applied until germination is complete and the
plants have at least 4-12 leaves. Ivens (1979b) concluded that, in the absence of burning, cut gorse is best
controlled when sprayed in the first season after cutting when shoots are most sensitive. At this time, the
longest shoots have reached a length of about 50 cm, and relatively low amounts of the herbicide are
sufficient.

Gorse is very difficult to eradicate with a single application of an herbicide (Balneaves 1980).

Compounds other than herbicides have been used to control gorse. Two or more sprayings of salt when
the gorse is in full seed may kill it (Hooper 1929), although salt is far less effective than herbicides
(Balneaves and Zabkiewicz 1981). Although field trial results have suggested that fewer gorse seedlings
establish in pastures treated with lime (Hartley and Popay 1982c), it is not clear whether the lower number
of gorse seedlings was due to greater pasture plant competition or a direct effect of lime on gorse seedling
emergence and growth (Phung et al. 1984).

The potential for herbicide damage to native plants must be considered when deciding which herbicide to
use. Pines are sensitive to triclopyr. Spruces and firs are damaged by glyphosate. Growth of Douglas fir
and western hemlock was stunted by fosamine ammonium. Herbicides cause less damage to conifers if
applied in July and August, after they have laid down a waxy cuticle on their needles (McCavish 1980).
Herbicides may be applied non-selectively (as in broadcast treatments) or selectively (spot treatments).
Both types of treatments have advantages and disadvantages and will be discussed separately.

Broadcast Herbicide Application: Broadcast application of herbicides has become the mainstay of most
weed control efforts today. This may be due to the illusion that it is a "quick fix" method of eradicating
undesirable vegetation. Most herbicides so applied are non-selective and will kill most, if not all, of the
vegetation sprayed. Those species that survive the treatment may, after repeated sprayings, form an
herbicide-resistant vegetation cover, thus creating a more difficult problem to deal with. Such broadcast
spraying may also kill off native plants, which have the ability to outcompete exotic weeds.

In general, when using the broadcast herbicide application method, plants should be sprayed only in full
leaf. Results are poor if plants are sprayed when the leaves are developing or in full flower before leaf
development. The best results have been obtained when plants are in the seed head stage in late summer
and early autumn (Matthews 1960).

Broadcast herbicide application may be most effective where the weed infestation is very dense and needs
to be killed and desiccated prior to burning. It may also be useful following the removal of mature plants
so as to reduce the soil seed bank.

Spot Chemical Methods: Spot chemical methods consist of various techniques for manually applying
herbicides to individual plants or small clumps of plants (such as stump resprouts). These methods are
highly selective as only specific plants are treated. They are most efficient when the density of stems to be
treated is low. In applying herbicides it is recommended that a dye be used in the chemical mixture to
mark the treated plants and thus minimize waste.

Jones and Stokes Associates (1984) reviewed a variety of spot chemical techniques. The following is an
excerpt from this report, listing techniques in order of increasing possibility of herbicide exposure to the
environment or to humans in the vicinity of treated plants.

1) Stem injection: Herbicides are injected into wounds or cuts in the stems or trunks of plants to be
killed. The herbicide must penetrate to the cambial tissue and be water-soluble to be effective. The
chemical is then translocated throughout the plant and can provide good root-kill, which is important in
order to prevent resprouting.

2) Cut stump treatment: Herbicides are directly applied to the cambial area around the edges of freshly
cut stumps. Application must occur within 5-20 minutes of cutting to ensure effectiveness. McHenry
(1985) suggests late spring as the best season to do this. In early spring sap may flow to the surface of the
cut and rinse the chemical off. At other times of the year translocation is too poor to adequately distribute
the chemical. Applications may be made with backpack sprayers, sprinkling cans, brush and pail, or
squeeze bottles. Picloram should not be used for this technique as it is known to "flashback" through root
grafts between treated and untreated plants and may damage the untreated individuals.

3) Basal/Stem sprays: This technique involves applying high concentrations of herbicides in oil or other
penetrating carriers, using backpack sprayers, to the basal portion of stems to be killed. The oil carrier is
necessary for the mixture to penetrate bark and enter the vascular system. This method gives good root
kill, especially in the fall when vascular fluids are moving toward the roots. This method may be easier to
use with small diameter stems than the two previous techniques.

4) Herbicide pellets: Pelletized or granular herbicides are scattered at the bases of unwanted plants.
Subsequent rainfall dissolves the pellets and leaches the herbicide down to the root system. Optimal time
for treatment is towards the end of the rainy season to prevent leaching beyond the root zone.

PRESCRIBED BURNING
Fire has been frequently used to eliminate gorse thickets, though controlled burns may easily get out of
control due to the high flammability of the plants (Amme 1983). Sometimes herbicides are used to
desiccate plants prior to burning to ensure a hotter fire, although it would seem unnecessary in most cases.
Amme (1983) used two repeated fires in the same area. A year after the first burn, he found that only
24% of the plants were killed by the fire. Of the remaining plants, 21% increased in height and 27%
grew to approximately the same height. A second burn was prescribed for the fall one year after the first
burn. A follow-up of gorse survival the following year was not reported. His report is very detailed as to
climatic conditions on the day of each burn and may be referred to for others interested in doing this.
Although fire may stimulate gorse seed germination, it may be a useful tool to exhaust the soil seed bank.

Flame Thrower: A flame thrower or weed burner device can be used as a spot treatment to heat-girdle the
lower stems of shrubs. This technique has the advantages of being less costly than basal and stem
herbicide treatments and is suitable for use during wet weather.

Broadcast Burning: Large areas of weed infestation may be burned in order to remove the standing
mature plants. This may be accomplished with a pre-spray of herbicides, to kill and desiccate plants, or
without such spraying for notably flammable species. Used alone, this method will not prevent
resprouting from root crowns. Burning is best followed by (1) herbicide treatment of stumps, (2)
subsequent burning to exhaust soil seed bank and underground food reserves, and/or (3) revegetation with
fast growing, aggressive native species. Other considerations for the use of prescribed burning include the
time and cost of coordinating a burn, and the soil disturbance resulting from firebreak construction

VI. RESEARCH

Management Research Programs:

Detailed observations focused on the vegetational change of the affected area over time will help to
determine what method of control would be the most efficient.

Gorse is slow to establish itself in an area, and monitoring of its spread is often overlooked. No
quantitative monitoring studies of gorse were discovered in the course of researching this ESA. Since it is
not considered a major agricultural weed in the U.S., there is apparently little interest or funding available
for detailed sampling programs.

Two gorse management programs currently underway have associated monitoring studies to assess the
effectiveness of control efforts. Such monitoring is probably qualitative, answering the question, "Does
gorse reestablish itself following control treatment?" These two management programs are being
conducted by Thomas Reid Associates on San Bruno Mountain in San Mateo County and by the
California Department of Parks and Recreation at Jughandle State Reserve in Mendocino County.
Analysis of aerial photographs of San Bruno Mountain shows that gorse has spread from 52 acres in 1932
to 334 acres in 1981, a 545% increase (Reid 1985).

We need clearer documentation on how gorse actually influences natural community processes in
California.

1. Does gorse acidify soils in California? Does this prevent germination or seedling development of
native plant species? How? Are other exotics likely to invade these acidified soils more readily than
natives?

2. What are the major means of seed dispersal in California? What is the natural rate of seed mortality
before germination? What is the local seed reserve in the soil?

3. What effect does fire have on the resulting species composition of a burned over gorse stand? Are
there native plants whose seedlings can quickly outcompete gorse seedlings? Are these available to be
artificially distributed after an area is burned? Does fire lead to increased erosion?
4. What effect does lime or salt application have on adult gorse plants? Seedlings?

5. Is gorse intolerant to shading? Can fast-growing trees be planted to shade it out?

6. How effective are goats at controlling gorse?

The extent of the present and potential threat of gorse in California has not been adequately described in
the literature. Comments from reviewers are solicited on this. Gorse is a very successful and tenacious
plant when it becomes established. It can live on a variety of soils, fix nitrogen and acidify the local soil.
It produces copious quantities of seeds that can remain dormant in the soil for several decades.
Eradication of the species may only be successful where there are very few individuals. Otherwise, it can
only be hoped that its spread can be controlled. The use of fire or mechanical means can be used to
initially reduce gorse thickets. Gorse seedling re-establishment may be reduced by fertilizing and
oversowing with grasses capable of outcompeting gorse by their rapid growth rate. Goats may prove to be
effective at controlling resprouting and seedling establishment. Regrowth from stumps may be controlled
by limited application of herbicides. Repeated fires may help exhaust the soil seed bank.

The San Mateo County Department of Parks and Recreation used the Civilian Conservation Corps in 1983
to manually remove gorse on San Bruno Mountain. It took approximately 350 man-hours to remove an
acre of densely growing gorse. Subsequent work using a two-man chain saw crew removed gorse from all
of the pioneering colonies on the mountain, with a follow up of herbicide treatment to prevent stump and
seedling growth. Chaining (dragging a heavy chain between two bulldozers) has produced encouraging
results. Use of a heavy duty, bulldozer-mounted rototiller effectively removed several acres of gorse on
gentle terrain. Burning alone, or burning followed by crushing or ground scraping was inadequate in
controlling regrowth (Reid 1985).

Chemical treatment was also experimented with on the San Bruno Mountain project. Ammate was
ineffective in killing cut stumps and young plants. 2,4-D was not effective, but this was probably a result
of the season of application (September). Translocatable herbicides should be applied in the early spring
when the plants are growing vigorously.

Reid (1985) described all phases and tools of the program to be working well, and he expects 90%
recovery of natural habitat within 10 years if intensive management is maintained. He suggested that
most exotic weed control programs probably fail because of three factors: (1) lack of a trained biologist(s)
coordinating the effort; (2) lack of long-term funding; and (3) lack of persistence and diligence by field
personnel (Reid 1985).

Contact: Victoria Harris or Thomas Reid

Thomas Reid Associates
P.O. Box 872
Palo Alto, CA 94302

Gorse control at Jughandle State Reserve is relatively recent, and it is too early to assess its effectiveness.
Gorse thickets are initially sprayed with glyphosate (Roundup) and allowed to dry for at least four weeks.
The thickets are then burned. Subsequent resprouts and seedlings may be either sprayed or burned again.
Revegetation with native grasses and shrubs will begin in 1986 (Ryburn 1985).

Contact: Dave Boyd or Marla Ryburn

Resource Ecologist
California Department of Parks and Recreation
3033 Cleveland Avenue, Suite 110
Santa Rosa, CA 95403-2183
(707) 576-2185
VII. ADDITIONAL TOPICS

VIII. INFORMATION SOURCES

Bibliography:

Amme, David. 1983. Gorse control at Jughandle State Reserve: resource restoration and development.
Unpublished.

Andres, L. 1979. Unpublished manuscript. Copy on file at The Nature Conservancy, California Field
Office, 785 Market Street, 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103.

Anonymous. 1971. Gorse dying tips. N.Z. J. Agric. 123(4):11.

Anonymous. 1974. Gorse. Pacific NW Exten. Publ. #107. Oregon State Univ. Ext. 3 pp.

Balneaves, J.M. 1976. A preliminary experiment to control gorse and bracken mixtures. In C.G.R.
Chavasse (ed.), The use of herbicides in forestry in New Zealand. N.Z. Forest Service Research Institute
Symposium 18:115-123.

Balneaves, J.M. 1980. A programme for gorse control in forestry using a double kill spray
regime. Proc. 33rd N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference: 170-173.

Balneaves, J.M. and J.A. Zabkiewicz. 1981. Gorse control: a review. In C.G.R. Chavasse (ed.), Forest
nursery and establishment practice in New Zealand. New Zealand Forest Service Research Institute 22nd
Symposium Part 2:92-106.

Barrows, Kate. 1985. Preserve Manager, Northern California Coast Range Preserve. Letter to Barbara
Leitner, California Land Steward, California Field Office. January 21, 1985.

Bell, J.E. 1961. Control of gorse. Proc. 14th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference: 127-135.

Bienek, M.E. and W.F. Millington. 1968. Thorn formation in Ulex europaeus in relation to
environmental and endogenous factors. Bot. Gazette 129:145-150.

Birdling, J. 1952. A farmer's experience in gorse control. Pp. 43-48 in Proc. 5th N.Z. Weed and Pest
Control Conference.

Boodle, L.A. 1914. On the trifoliolate and other leaves of the gorse. Ann. Botany 28:527-530.

Bovey, R.W. 1971. Hormone-like herbicides in weed control.

Econ. Bot. 25:385-400.

Boyd, David. 1984. Gorse. Fremontia 12:16-17.

Bravo, L.M. 1985. We are losing the war against broom. Fremontia 12:27-29.

Butler, J.H.B. 1979. Control of gorse by Anisoplaca ptyoptera. Pp. 307-308 in Proc. 32nd N.Z. Weed
and Pest Control Conference.
Chater, E.H. 1931. A contribution to the study of the natural control of gorse. Bull. Entomol. Res.
22:225-235.

Coombe, D.E. and L.C. Frost. 1956. The heaths of the Cornish serpentine. J. Ecology 44:226-256.

Cornwell, M.J. and M.S. Christie. 1984. Preliminary results with DPX-T6376 for control of gorse and
blackberry. Pp. 197-199 in Proc. 37th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Cowley, J.M. 1983. Life cycle of Apion ulicis and gorse seed attack around Auckland, New Zealand.
N.Z. J. Zool. 10:83-86.

Currie, J.D. 1959. Gorse control on unploughable hill country. Pp. 65-72 in Proc. 12th N.Z. Weed and
Pest Control Conference.

Daar, S. 1983. Using goats for brush control. The IPM Practioner 4:4-6.

Dancer, W.S., J.F. Handley, and A.D. Bradshaw. 1977. Nitrogen accumulation on kaolin wastes in
Cornwall: I. Natural communities. Plant and Soil 48:153-167.

D'Arcy, W.G. 1980. Ulex. Ann. Missouri Botanical Garden 67:789-91.

Davenhill, N.A. 1976. Current gorse control research using herbicides. Pp. 73-77 in C.G.R. Chavasse
(ed.), The use of herbicides in forestry in New Zealand. N.Z. Forestry Service Forestry Research Institute
Symposium 18.

Egunjobi, J.K. 1971a. Ecosystem processes in a stand of Ulex europaeus. I. Dry matter production, litter
fall, and efficiency of solar energy utilization. J. Ecology 59:31-38.

Evans, J.W. 1942. The gorse weevil. Tasmanian J. Agric. 13:15-18.

Field, R.J. and H.T. Phung. 1980. The preferential accumulation of picloram at sites of active growth in
gorse. Weed Research 20:177-182.

Fuller, T.C. and G.D. Barbe. 1985. The Bradley Method of eliminating exotic plants from natural
reserves. Fremontia 13:24-26.

Gaynor, D.L. and L.E. MacCarter. 1981. Biology, ecology, and control of gorse: a bibliography. N.Z.
J. Agric. Res. 24:123-137.

Grubb, P.J., H.E. Green, and R.C.J. Merrifield. 1969. The ecology of chalk heaths: its relevance to the
calcicole - calcifuge and soil acidification problems. J. Ecology 57:175-212.

Grubb, P.J. and M.B. Suter. 1971. The mechanism of acidification of soil by CALLUNA and Ulex and
the significance for conservation. Pp. 115-133 in Duffy, E. and A.S. Watt (eds.), The scientific
management of animal and plant communities for conservation. 11th Symp. Brit. Ecol. Society.

Hackwell, K. 1980. Gorse: a helpful nurse plant for regenerating native forest. Forest and Bird
215:25-28.

Hartley, M.J., D.K. Edmonds, H.T. Phung, A.I. Popay, and P. Sanders. 1980. The survival of gorse
seedlings under grazing, treading, and mowing. Pp. 161-164 in Proc. 33rd N.Z. Weed and Pest Control
Conference.
Hartley, M.J. and H.T. Phung. 1979. Effect of pasture species and grazing on survival of seedling gorse.
Pp. 297-302 in Proc. 32nd N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Hartley, M.J. and H.T. Phung. 1982. Effects of pasture species, fertilizer, and grazing management on the
survival of gorse seedlings. N.Z. J. Exper. Agric. 10:193-196.

Hartley, M.J. and A.I. Popay. 1982a. Control of gorse seedlings by low rates of herbicides. Pp. 138-140
in Proc. 35th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Hartley, M.J. and A.I. Popay. 1982c. Lime helps to halt gorse seedling establishment. N.Z.
J. Agric. 145:19-20.

Hill, D.D. 1949. Gorse control. Oregon State College Agricultural Experimental Station Circular
Information No. 450. 7 pp.

Hill, D.D. 1955. Gorse control. Oregon State Univ. Agric. Exper. Station Bull. 553. 16 pp.

Hill, R.L. 1983. Prospects for the biological control of gorse. Pp. 56-58 in Proc. 36th N.Z. Weed and
Pest Control Conference.

Hitchcock, C.L., A. Cronquist, M. Ownbey, and J.W. Thompson. 1961. Vascular plants of the Pacific
Northwest. Univ. Washington, Seattle.

Holloway, J.K. and C.B. Huffaker. 1957. Establishment of the seed weevil, APION ULICIS for
suppression of gorse in California. J. Econ. Entomol. 50:498-499.

Hooper, R.H. 1929. N.Z. J. Agric. 28:147.

Ivens, G.W. 1977. Susceptibility of seedling gorse to herbicides. Pp. 61-65 in Proc. 30th N.Z. Weed and
Pest Control Conference.

Ivens, G.W. 1978b. Some aspects of seed ecology of gorse. Pp. 53-57 in Proc. 31st N.Z. Weed and Pest
Control Conference.

Ivens, G.W. 1979b. Effects of sprays on gorse regrowth at different growth stages. Pp. 303-306 in
Proc. 32nd N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Ivens, G.W. 1983. The influence of temperature on germination of gorse. Weed Research 23:207-216.

Ivens, G.W. and F. Mlowe. 1983. Response of seedling gorse to fertilizers. Pp. 52-55 in Proc. 36th N.Z.
Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Jones and Stokes Associates. 1984. Transmission right-of-way vegetation management program:
analysis and recommendations. Prepared for Seattle City Light, Seattle, Washington.

Julien, M.H. 1982. Biological control of weeds: a world catalogue of agents and their target weeds.
Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control.

Klingman, G.C. 1975. Weed science: principles and practices. John Wiley & Sons, NY. 431 pp.

Leighton, J. 1978. Goats turning gorse to milk in the North. N.Z. Farmer 19:45-49.

Leonard, W.F. 1965. Control of gorse and sweet brier with picloram. Pp. 32-36 in Proc. 18th N.Z. Weed
and Pest Control Conference.
MacCarter, L.E. and D.L. Gaynor. 1980. Gorse: a subject for biological control in New Zealand. N.Z.
J. Exper. Agric. 8:321-330.

Matthews, L.J. 1960. Weed identification and control: broom. N.Z. J. Agric. 100:229.

Matthews, L.J. 1982. Pasture weeds of New Zealand. Pp. 387-393 in W. Holzner and N. Numata (eds.),
Biology and ecology of weeds. Junk Publishers, The Hague.

McCavish, W.J. 1980. Herbicides for woody weed control by foliar application. Proc. 1980 Brit. Crop
Protect. Conf. Weeds. Part 2:729-737.

McHenry, Jim. 1985. Personal communication.

McMinn, H.E. 1951. An illustrated manual of California shrubs. Univ. Calif. Press.

Meeklah, F.A. 1979. Controlling gorse (in Otago and Southland). N.Z. J. Agric. 139:51-53.

Millener, L.H. 1961. Day-length as related to vegetative development in Ulex europaeus. New Phytology
60:339-354.

Miller, D. 1970. Biological control weeds in New Zealand. 1927-1948. N.Z. Dept. Sci.
Indust. Res. Info. Series 74:37-58.

Moss, G.R. 1959. The gorse seed problem. Pp. 59-63 in Proc. 12th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control
Conference.

Moss, G.R. 1978. Gorse: a weed problem on thousands of acres of farm land. N.Z. J. Agric.
100:561-568.

Mountjoy, J.H. 1979. Broom - a threat to native plants. Fremontia 6:11-15.

Munz, P.A. and D.D. Keck. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley.

Naish, R.W. 1975. A screening technique for evaluation of brushweed herbicides. Pp. 70-73 in Proc.
28th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Parsons, W.T. 1958. Furze: an "old English" weed. Unpublished copy on file at The Nature
Conservancy, California Field Office, 785 Market Street, 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103.

Pengelly, R. and R.H. Ferguson. 1986. Overseas and New Zealand field results with "Tordon." Pp. 222-
228 in Proc. 17th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Phung, H.T., A.I. Popay, and M.J. Hartley. 1984. Effect of lime on emergence and early growth of gorse
seedlings. Proc. 37th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Preest, D. 1980. Seasonal variation in seedling gorse susceptibility to four herbicides. Pp. 165-169 in
Proc. 33rd N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Pryor, M.R. and R.H. Dana. 1952. Gorse control. Calif. Dept. Agric. Bull. 41:43-45.

Rae, S.J. and T.M. Patterson. 1975. Scrub weed control with thiazafluron. Pp. 67-69 in Proc. 28th N.Z.
Weed and Pest Control Conference.
Reid, Thomas. 1985. Thomas Reid Associates. Personal communication. May 1985.

Robbins, W.W., M.K. Bellue, and W.S. Ball. 1951. Weeds of California. California Dept. Agric.,
Sacramento.

Rolston, M.P. and B.P. Devantier. 1983. Alternative herbicides to 2,4,5-T for gorse control. N.Z.
J. Exper. Agric. 11:91-94.

Rolston, M.P., M.G. Lambert, and D.A. Clark. 1981. Weed control options in hill country. Proc. N.Z.
Grassland Assoc. 43:196-203.

Rolston, M.P. and J. Talbot. 1980. Soil temperatures and regrowth of gorse burnt after treatment with
herbicides. N.Z. J. Exper. Agric. 8:55-61.

Rudolf, P.O. 1974. Ulex europaeus: common gorse. In C.S. Schopmeyer (ed.), Seeds of woody plants in
the U.S. U.S. Dept. Agric. For. Serv. Agric. Handbook 450:828.

Ryburn, Marla. 1985. Resource Ecologist, California Department of Parks and Recreation. Personal
communication. May 1985.

Skipper, E.G. 1922. The ecology of the gorse with special reference to the growth forms on Hindhead
Common. J. Ecology 10:24-52.

Thompson, A. 1975b. Movement of herbicide effects within gorse plants. Pp. 60-63 in Proc. 28th N.Z.
Weed and Pest Control Conference.

USDA. 1984. Pesticide background statements. Vol. I. Herbicides. Agric. Handbook No. 633,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Watson, H.K. 1977. Unpublished manuscript. Present weed control and projections for the year 2001.
Unpublished manuscript. Copy on file at The Nature Conservancy, Western Regional Office, 785 Market
Street, 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103.

Weed Science Society of America. 1983. Herbicide handbook.

Williams, P.A. 1983. Secondary succession on the Port Hills, Bank Peninsula, Canterbury, New
Zealand. N.Z. J. Botany 21:237-247.

Yeates, J.S. 1955. Weeds on the sheep farm: the scope and limitations of chemical control.
Sheepfarming Annual (Massey Agric. College) 1955:99-109.

Zabkiewicz, J.A. 1976. The ecology of gorse and its relevance to New Zealand forestry. In C.G.R.
Chavasse (ed.), The Use of Herbicides in Forestry in New Zealand. New Zealand Forest Service Forest
Research Institute Symposium. 18:63-70.

Zabkiewicz, J.A. and R.E. Gaskin. 1978a. Effect of fire on gorse seeds. Pp. 47-52 in Proc. 31st N.Z.
Weed and Pest Control Conference.

OTHER (UNCITED) REFERENCES

Anstey, C. 1976. Gorse control in Southland conservancy. In Chavasse, C.G.R. (ed.), The use of
herbicides in forestry in New Zealand. N.Z. Forest Research Service, Forest Research Institute
Symposium 18:79-81.
Balneaves, J.M. 1978. Seasonal growth of gorse and its susceptibility to 2,4,5-T and
2,4,5-T/Picloram. N.Z. J. Forestry 23:137-142.

Balneaves, J.M. 1981a. Control rain after 2,4,5-T application - effect on gorse. N.Z.
J. Forestry 25:75-78.

Balneaves, J.M. 1981b. Long term gorse and broom control. What's New in Forest Research. N.Z.
For. Res. Inst. 100. 4 pp.

Balneaves, J.M. 1982. Response of mature gorse to different esters of 2,4,5-T and fenoprop and
picloram. Pp. 141-144 in Proc. 35th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Balneaves, J.M. and A.J. Copland. 1983. Diurnal influences on 2,4,5-T application over gorse and
radiata pine. N.Z. J. For. 27:226-235.

Balneaves, J.M. and C. Perry. 1982. Long-term control of gorse/bracken mixtures for forest
establishment in Nelson. N.Z. J. For. 27:219-225.

Batten, G.J. and J.R. McDonnell. 1970. Scrub weed control with cutting and slashing machines. Pp.
170-172 in Proc. 22nd N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Bird, M. 1981. Gorse battle never stops. N.Z. J. Agric. 143:16-17.

Brodie, A. 1953. Gorse control. Pp. 94-95 in Proc. 6th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Chavasse, C.G.R., ed. 1976. The use of herbicides in forestry in New Zealand. New Zealand Forest
Service Research Institute Symposium 18.

Chavasse, C.G.R. and N.A. Davenhill. 1973a. Control of established gorse by multiple chemical
treatments. New Zealand Forest Service Forest Research Institute Rotorua. Research Leaflet 36. 4 pp.

Chavasse, C.G.R. and N.A. Davenhill. 1973b. A review of chemical control of bracken and gorse for
forest establishment. Pp. 2-6 in Proc. 26th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Clarke, E.A. 1954. Some observations on bringing in gorse country. Pp. 58-60 in Proc. 8th N.Z. Weed
and Pest Control Conference.

Crouchley, G. 1980. Regrowth control by goats - plus useful meat returns. N.Z. J. Agric. 141:9-14.

Duncan, A.A. 1953. Pp. 98-101 in Proc. 6th New Zealand Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Duncan, A.A. 1954. Gorse control on hill country. N.Z. J. Agric. 88:359-367.

Dyck, W.J., J.R. Gosz, and P.D. Hodgkiss. 1983. Nitrate losses from disturbed ecosystems in New
Zealand - a comparative analysis. N.Z. J. For. Science 13:14-24.

Egunjobi, J.K. 1969. Dry matter and nitrogen accumulation in secondary successions involving gorse
and associated shrubs and trees. N.Z. J. Science 12:175-193.

Egunjobi, J.K. 1971b. Ecosystem processes in a stand of Ulex europaeus. II. The cycling of chemical
elements in the ecosystem. J. Ecology 59:669-678.

Ferens, P.S. 1956. Recent work in management and control of gorse. Pp. 49-53 in Proc. 9th N.Z. Weed
and Pest Control Conference.
Foreman, M.S. 1964. Field results with Tordon on gorse. Pp. 74-78 in Proc. 17th N.Z. Weed and Pest
Control Conference.

Hartley, M.J. 1982. Control of young gorse plants by grazing. Pp. 135-137 in Proc. 35th N.Z. Weed and
Pest Control Conference.

Hartley, M.J., J.M. Balneaves, and A.I. Popay. 1983. Herbicide additives to 2,4,5-T for gorse control.
Pp. 43-48 in Proc. 36th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Hartley, M.J. and A.I. Popay. 1982b. Gorse control by stump treatment. Pp. 149-151 in Proc. 35th N.Z.
Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Ivens, G.W. 1978a. Further herbicide studies on gorse seedlings. Pp. 44-46 in Proc. 31st N.Z. Weed and
Pest Control Conference.

Ivens, G.W. 1979a. Effects of pasture species and sheep grazing on establishment of sown Ulex
europaeus. Pp. 355-357 in Proc. 7th Asian-Pacific Weed Sci. Soc. Conference.

Ivens, G.W. 1982. Seasonal germination and establishment of gorse. Pp. 152-156 in Proc. 35th N.Z.
Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Ivens, G.W. and F. Mlowe. 1980. A study of competition between seedlings of gorse and perennial rye
grass (Lolium perenne) by means of a replacement series experiment. Weed Research 20:183-191.

Jobson, H.T. and B. Thomas. 1964. The composition of gorse. J. Sci. Food and Agric. 15:652-656.

Lambert, M.G. and M.P. Rolston. 1981. Lime application before and after burning. N.Z.
J. Exper. Agric. 9:393-395.

Lane, P.M.S. and O.L. Park. 1984. Gorse control with glyphosate. Pp. 194-196 in Proc. 37th N.Z. Weed
and Pest Control Conference.

Leonard, W.F. 1961. Thorough planning essential in control of gorse. N.Z. J. Agric. 103:564.

Logan, I.C. and W.T. McLaughlin. 1974. Control of gorse: additives for 2,4,5-T. Pp. 11-14 in
Proc. 27th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Matthews, L.J. 1975. Weed control by chemical methods. Govt. Printer, Wellington, N.Z. Pp. 326-330.

McLaughlin, J.J.A. 1956. Research notes on weed control. Pp. 83-88 in Proc. 9th N.Z. Weed and Pest
Control Conference.

Meeklah, F.A. 1967. A comparison of 2,4,5-T and Picloram for gorse control. Pp. 26-31 in Proc. 20th
N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Moffat, R.W. 1966. Picloram granules for woody weed control. Pp. 90-95 in Proc. 19th N.Z. Weed and
Pest Control Conference.

Moffat, R.W. 1973. Winter treatment of gorse with Picloram/ 2,4,5-T, compared with 2,4,5-T and
2,4,5-T plus diquat. Pp. 23-28 in Proc. 26th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Naish, R.W. 1976. Some aspects of control of gorse on land destined for forestry. In C.G.R. Chavasse
(ed.), The use of herbicides in forestry in New Zealand. N.Z. Forest Service Research Institute Symp. 18.
Parker, B.W. 1984. Gorse to grass. N.Z. J. Agric. 108:314-316.

Phung, H.T. and R.J. Field. 1979. The uptake and translocation of 2,4,5-T in gorse. Weed Research
19:51-57.

Popay, A.I. and D.K. Edmonds. 1983. Control of gorse bushes with a motorised knapsack sprayer. Pp.
49-51 in Proc. 36th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Preest, D. 1979. Ester formulation and surfactant affect response of radiata pine and gorse seedlings to
2,4,5-T. N.Z. J. For. Sci. 9:44-52.

Radcliffe, J.E. 1982. Gorse control with sheep and goats. Pp. 130-134 in Proc. 35th N.Z. Weed and Pest
Control Conference.

Rolston, M.P. and A.G. Robertson. 1975. Some aspects of absorption, translocation and metabolism of
14
C-picloram in gorse. Pp. 54-59 in Proc. 28h N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Rolston, M.P. and F. Sineiro-Garcia. 1974. The response of gorse seedlings to defoliation and shading.
Pp. 2-5 in Proc. 27th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Skinner, H.R.W. 1952. A contractor's experience in gorse control. Pp. 49-54 in Proc. 5th N.Z. Weed and
Pest Control Conference.

Taylor, R.L. and J. Patterson. 1970. Control of scrub weeds with 2,4,5-T plus dicamba. Pp. 178-179 in
Proc. 22nd N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Thomas Reid Associates. 1985. San Bruno mountain area habitat conservation plan: activities report
1983-1984. Prepared for San Mateo Co. Copy on file at The Nature Conservancy, Western Regional
Office, 785 Market Street, 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103.

Thompson, A. 1973. The effect of herbicides on gorse and pasture species. Pp. 13-16 in Proc. 26th N.Z.
Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Thompson, A. 1974. The effect of fertilisers and pasture competition on gorse growth and
establishment. Pp. 6-10 in Proc. 27th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Thompson, A. 1975a. The effect of soil moisture on the uptake of herbicide by gorse. Pp. 64-66 in
Proc. 28th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Till, J.F. 1953. Untitled. [Concerning low volume spraying of herbicides]. Pp. 96-98 in Proc. 6th N.Z.
Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Upritchard, E.A. 1969. Formulations of picloram with 2,4,5-T for brush weed control. Pp. 180-186 in
Proc. 22nd N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Upritchard, E.A. 1973. Formulations of Picloram/2,4,5-T for long term control of gorse. Pp. 17-22 in
Proc. 26th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Williams, P.P. and P.C. Palmer. 1970. The addition of paraquat and diquat to 2,4,5-T for gorse control.
Pp. 173-177 in Proc. 22nd N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

Woodyard, D. 1981. Gorse and scrub development. N.Z. Agric. Science 15:81-83.
Wright, R. 1927. Goats and noxious weeds control. N.Z. J. Agric. 25:295-297.

Wylie, R.E.J. 1976. Growth control of mixed gorse and bracken fern vegetation with herbicides. In
C.G.R. Chavasse (ed.), The Use of Herbicides in Forestry in New Zealand. N.Z. Forest Service Forest
Research Institute Symposium 18:112-115.

Zabkiewicz, J.A. and R.E. Gaskin. 1978b. Seasonal variation of gorse surface wax and trichomes. New
Phytol. 81:367-373.

Zabkiewicz, J.A. and R.E. Gaskin. 1982. 2,4,5-T uptake by gorse - dependence on foliar development
and herbicide formulation. Pp. 145-148 in Proc. 35th N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conference.

IX. DOCUMENT PREPARATION & MAINTENANCE

Edition Date: 89-03-22

Contributing Author(s): Marc Hoshovsky

Herbicide information partly updated: TunyaLee Martin, 8/2001