Lessons learned from the EBIPM large- scale cheatgrass control and

...continued from pg. 4 'Cheatgrass Control'grasses to gain a foothold. Thus, in EBIPMStep 4, with the cooperation and insightsof producers, we determined that fireand herbicide application could be usedstrategically to reduce cheatgrass litterand seed production and improve soilsurface conditions prior to seeding desirableperennial grasses. In essence, thismanagement strategy was deemedappropriate because it was capable ofsimultaneously altering site conditions,plant species availability, and plant speciesperformance.In Fall 2009, replicated pastures ownedby two different producers in Park Valley,Utah were assigned to one of four treatmentcombinations – untreated, burnedonly(early November), herbicide application-only(mid-November, Plateau®applied at the rate of 40oz/acre), andburned+herbicide application. In earlyDecember, all pastures were drill-seededwith a seed mix that consisted of bothnative and introduced perennial grasses(total = 9 lbs of seed/acre). The averagecost for applying these treatments was asfollows: fire, $30/acre; herbicide, $40/acre; and seeding, $30 acre. It is importantto note that these costs reflect professionalcontracts, which are expectedto be much lower if a producer is capableof applying their own cheatgrass controland revegetation treatments.Initial OutcomesTwo years after treatment (2011), burningand herbicide, especially when combined,effectively reduced soil surface litterand cheatgrass seed on the soil surface.In the same token, perennial grassestablishment was significantly greater inall treatments when compared tountreated pastures. For example, fireonlyresulted in over three perennialseeded plants per square yard, whileherbicide-only resulted in just over twoseeded plants per square yard. In contrast,when fire and herbicide were combined,there averaged five seeded plantsper square yard. A particularly promisingaspect of these results is that perennialThe Five EBIPM Steps1. Complete Rangeland HealthAssessment with an USDA-NRCS specialist.2. Identify causes of weed invasionand the associated processesin need of modification.3. Use ecological principles toguide decision making.4. Choose appropriate toolsand strategies based on ecologicalprinciples.5. Design and execute a planusing adaptive management.Figure 1. Management goal ofproject in Park Valley, Utah includedreducing wildfire threat and improvingforage production in dry years.grasses successfully established eventhough cheatgrass within pasturesincreased due to higher-than-averageprecipitation in both 2010 and 2011.However, livestock grazing in 2012 willhopefully reduce the threat of wildfireoccurrence during what appears to be aseason of considerable wildfire risk,given drought conditions and high litterproduction during both 2010 and 2011.Lessons Learned and FutureOpportunitiesUsing the EBIPM framework helpeddefine the underlying causes of cheatgrassdominance and guided the implementationof an ecologically appropriatemanagement strategy. We are encouragedby the results of this pasture-levelstudy and hope that it inspires additionalproducers to adopt the EBIPM frameworkwhen choosing to convert cheatgrasspastures to perennial grass pastures.A few points warrant considerationwhen adopting this ecologically basedapproach. First, although cheatgrass willlikely continue to be a pest into thefuture, pastures invaded by this grasswill not “right-themselves” over timewithout active interventions to triggerthe desired conversion. Second, itappears that perennial grass establishmentis essential for pasture sustainabilityand to prevent re-invasion by cheatgrass.Finally, pasture conversion is aprocess that likely requires more thanthree years and depends on whethercheatgrass is effectively impacted bytreatments and the initial establishmentof perennial grasses. During this conversionperiod, we advocate the use ofadaptive management approaches asoutlined in Step 5 of the EBIPM frameworkto further help producers protecttheir investments in weed control andrevegetation and realize economic gainsthat are anticipated due to improved forageproduction. In this vein, it may benecessary to carefully consider futuregrazing practices that will weaken cheatgrasswhile strengthening the spreadand performance of perennial grasses.6Conservation Connection