-2- Description of herbicidal treatments: The herbicides are designated by accepted common name or code in the data table. All application rates are given as active ingredient or acid equivalent per sprayed acre. The chemicals were applied with an experimental small-plot tractor herbicide unit in 50 gpa water carrier (unless indicated otherwise). Application data: Date- 7 October 1563 0900 AM to 0215 PM Sky- bright overcast to full sun Wind- S to SE 8 15 mph Spray water- pH = 7, hardness = 310 ppm Surface soil moisture was less than 2% Rainfall and temperature data: Accumulated rainfall and average maximum and minimum temperature values, for the general area, are given for the periods indicated. Time after Accum. Average Temperature OF application rainfall Max. Min. 1 week 0.10 in 84 65 2 weeks 0.31 83 62 4 weeks 0.32 83 59 2 months 2.99- 79 56 3 7.19 70 45 4 9.74 71 50 5 14.54 72 49 Method of evaluation: Periodic ratings of sugarcane stand and growth and of annual grass and broadleaf weed control compared the treatments with the unsprayed controls on a 1 9 rating scale. The rating values have been converted to their corresponding percentages of the best treatments for this report. Experimental results: Only the substituted uracils (bromacil and isocil) markedly affected sugarcane stand and growth for a prolonged period. The harmful effects did not become evident until the second and third months after application when rainfall was sufficient to move the herbicides into the rooting zone. In general, sugarcane stand and tolerance was acceptable with most of the other herbicides tested (Table 1). Grass and broadleaf weed populations lower than desired developed under the dry soil and low rainfall conditions early in the trial. Almost all treatments provided grass weed control at commercially acceptable or higher levels. Broadleaf weed control was more variable among the treatments. Fenac, some of the triazines, dicamba and diuron were among the effective, promising chemicals (Table 1).