Many pipeline operators understand the benefits of a pipeline IVM program built on Integrated Vegetation Management, but they face a practical question:
How do you transition an established mowing program into IVM without disrupting operations?
The answer is not to eliminate mowing.
It is to stop treating mowing as the entire vegetation management strategy.
A successful transition usually happens gradually by assessing current ROW conditions, identifying high-value treatment opportunities, testing different methods, measuring results, and incorporating IVM into existing maintenance cycles.
Step 1: Assess the Existing ROW
Before changing the program, understand current conditions.
A ROW assessment should identify:
- Woody vegetation density
- Species present
- Areas of aggressive regrowth
- Recent mowing history
- Hand-cutting areas
- Steep slopes
- Wetlands
- Access limitations
- Marker visibility
- Erosion concerns
- Compatible vegetation
- Potential habitat areas
GIS can then be used to map these conditions.
This prevents the operator from treating every acre identically.
Step 2: Identify the Highest-Value Pipeline IVM Program Opportunities
The easiest place to demonstrate the value of a pipeline IVM program is often where the existing program struggles most.
Good pilot areas may include:
- Heavy woody regrowth following mowing
- Locations requiring repeated hand cutting
- Difficult terrain
- Areas where markers become quickly obstructed
- Fence lines
- Access limitations
- Areas requiring unusually frequent mechanical maintenance
These locations create an opportunity to compare the existing approach against a different treatment strategy.
Step 3: Select Treatment by Site
IVM does not prescribe one treatment across the entire ROW.
Low-density woody vegetation may respond well to selective foliar treatment.
Dense regrowth may require a different application method.
Larger incompatible stems may require mechanical removal followed by cut-stump treatment.
Severely overgrown areas may first require mechanical clearing and then follow-up herbicide treatment as regrowth appears.
Other areas may contain compatible vegetation and require only monitoring.
The treatment should follow the vegetation condition—not the other way around.
Step 4: Keep Mechanical Maintenance Where It Makes Sense
One of the biggest misconceptions about IVM is that it replaces mowing.
It does not.
Mechanical clearing remains an important tool.
The objective is to reduce unnecessary mechanical work over time.
Operators may continue mowing patrol paths, access areas, specific full-width sections, or locations where mechanical treatment remains the most practical option.
Meanwhile, herbicide and other IVM practices can begin addressing woody regrowth in areas where repetitive cutting has failed to improve long-term conditions.
Step 5: Document the Treatments
Every pilot or transition area should be documented.
Useful information includes:
- Location
- Acreage
- Existing vegetation
- Treatment method
- Date
- Products and rates where applicable
- Photos
- Production
- Cost
- Follow-up requirements
Without documentation, it becomes difficult to determine whether the new program is actually outperforming the old one.
Step 6: Monitor Vegetation Response
A successful herbicide application should not be judged only by what the ROW looks like a week later.
Operators should monitor vegetation response over time.
Questions should include:
- Was target woody vegetation controlled?
- How much resprouting occurred?
- Was compatible vegetation preserved?
- Did marker visibility improve?
- Was future mechanical work reduced?
- Did the treatment create any landowner or environmental concerns?
- How does the cost compare over the full maintenance cycle?
IVM should be evaluated by long-term results.
Step 7: Expand What Works
Once operators understand which treatments perform best under different conditions, those lessons can be applied across more of the system.
GIS makes this process scalable.
Similar vegetation conditions can be identified and assigned appropriate treatment strategies.
Over time, the program becomes less reactive.
Instead of waiting for vegetation to become a clearing problem, operators can intervene earlier with lower-impact treatments.
The Goal Is Not to Stop Mowing
The goal is to stop relying on mowing alone.
Mechanical clearing removes what is visible above ground. In many woody species, cutting alone does not prevent the root system from producing new growth.
That is why operators can find themselves clearing the same areas repeatedly.
IVM introduces additional tools designed to manage that regrowth.
The result is a program in which mechanical clearing, herbicide, compatible vegetation, GIS, monitoring, and long-term planning work together.
SMART-ROW Provides the Framework
Lanracorp’s SMART-ROW approach allows operators to transition into a pipeline IVM program without rebuilding their entire vegetation management program overnight.
We can assess existing ROW conditions, identify pilot opportunities, recommend treatment methods, perform mechanical and herbicide work, document treatments through GIS, monitor vegetation response, and build a multi-year strategy based on actual results.
The transition can be gradual.
The improvement should be continuous.
The question should no longer be only:
“What needs to be mowed this year?”
It should become:
“How do we reduce what needs to be mechanically cleared in the years ahead?”
That is the shift from mowing vegetation to managing it.