Ecological Site Based Shrubland Management

For Utah

Rebecca Mann, MS Ecology, Utah State University Tom Monaco, USDA-Agricultural Research Station Kari Veblen, Wildlands Resources Department, Utah State University

Sandy Loam bottoms, Alkali sacaton

Steep and shallow loamy hillsides, Salina wildrye

Land grouped by:

• Soil type

• Landscape position

• Climate

• Hydrology

• Potential natural plant communities

Slide by Jamin Johanson, NRCS

Steep and shallow loamy hillsides, Salina wildrye

Sandy Loam bottoms, Alkali sacaton

Slide by Jamin Johanson, NRCS

Different potential plant communities across different sites

Ecological Sites: A Tool for Effective

Management

Ecological Site-Based Management

Ecological Site-Based Management

Experimental Framework

Shrub Reduction • Herbicide Application • Mowing

Herbaceous Understory Increase • Broadcast Seeding

8 Ecological Sites

Landscape scale & Small-plot scale

Goal 1

Determine the magnitude of shrub reduction in response to herbicide and mowing, and rate of recovery of four target shrubs in the Great Basin study area.

Research Objectives

Goal 2

Determine the magnitude and duration of herbaceous species increase following reduction of four target shrubs in the Great Basin study area.

Research Objectives

Goal 3

Evaluate how outcomes of shrub management tactics vary due to Ecological Site, at the small plot scale and the landscape scale.

Research Objectives

Cedar Fort: Snakeweed Gutierrezia sarothrae

Birdseye: Rubber Rabbitbrush Ericameria nauseosus

Bear Lake: Sagebrush Artemisia spp.

Park Valley: Greasewood Sarcobatus vermiculatus

Study Area

Two Ecological Sites per ranch

Experimental Design

Ecological Site B

Ecological Site A

Untreated Control

Sampling transects

Herbicide Treatment

1½ -acre study area

80-400 Acres

Location

Dominant

Shrub Herbicide

Application

Rate Ecological Sites

Associated Soil

Series

Upland Loam

(Wyoming Big Sagebrush) Kerl Loam

Upland Stony Loam

(Black Sagebrush) Lonjon Silt Loam

Semidesert Loam

(Wyoming Big Sagebrush) Lembos Loam

Semidesert Alkali Loam

(Black Greasewood) Kunzler Loam

Upland Shallow Hardpan

(Pinyon-Utah Juniper)

Borvant Cobbly

Loam

Upland Stony Loam

(Mountain Big Sgebrush)

Donnardo Stony

Loam

Upland Loam

(Basin Big Sagebrush) Ant Flat Loam

Upland Loam

(Mountain Big Sagebrush) Doyce Loam

Tebuthiuron 20P

(Alligare)

Escort XP

(DuPont)

Cimmaron Max

(DuPont)

Picloram + D

(Alligare)

Low

(2.5lbs/acre)

Med-High

(2.0 oz/acre)

Low

(1.0 oz/acre)

Med-High

(4 pts/acre)

Park Valley

Bear Lake

Cedar Fort

Birdseye

Black

Greasewood

Wyoming Big

Sagebrush

Snakeweed

Rubber

Rabbitbrush

Site Summary

Shrub Density

• 1m x 20m belt transect

• By age class

• Live vs. dead

Herbaceous Cover, Frequency

• Ten, ¼ m2 quadrats

Herbaceous Biomass

• Two ¼ m2 quadrats/year

Landscape Scale Measurements

2013 - 2016

Small Plot Experimental Design

SP RE CM CT KI CM RE CT KI SP

KI RE SP CT CMO

RE CM KI SP CT

CM SP RE KI CT KI SP CT RE CM

20'

CT CM KI RE SP KI CT CM SP RE

40'

20'

10'

Rep 1

Rep 2

Rep 3

Rep 4

Gate

Small Plot Experimental Design

SP CM KI RE CT RE KI CT SP CM

Mowing

Improved Seed Mix

Non-seeded Control

Standard Seed Mix

Code Trade name Active Ingredient

SP Spike Tebuthiron 20P

CM Cimmaron Max2,4-D, Dicamba, +

Metsulfuron methyl

KI Kindra Aminocyclopyrachlor

+ 2,4-D

RE RejuvraAminocyclopyrachlor

+ Metsulfuron methyl

CT Nontreated Control

SP RE CM CT KI CM RE CT KI SP

KI RE SP CT CMO

RE CM KI SP CT

CM SP RE KI CT KI SP CT RE CM

20'

CT CM KI RE SP KI CT CM SP RE

40'

20'

10'

Rep 1

Rep 2

Rep 3

Rep 4

Gate

5 herbicide treatments x 3 seed treatments x 2 mowing treatments x 4 replicates

= 120 plots per experimental area

In 8 Ecological Sites

Shrub Density

• 10’ x 20’ plot

• By age class

• Live vs. dead

Shrub Cover

• 40’ Line-Intercept

Herbaceous Cover, Frequency

• Eight ¼ m2 quadrats

Herbaceous Biomass

• Eight ¼ m2 quadrats in 2016

Small-Scale Plot Measurements 2013 - 2016

Project Progress Landscape-scale herbicide

application at each ranch (Fall 2012 - Summer 2013)

Fenced 1½ acre Experimental Areas established (Fall 2012)

Pretreatment Field Measurements (Summer 2013)

Treatment in small plots: Herbicide application and mowing (Summer 2013 – Fall 2013)

Seeding will occur in Fall 2014

Analysis is ongoing; Finalized 2017

Field Tours of Experimental Sites 2016

USU Extension Shrubland Management Project

https://extension.usu.edu/rangelands/htm/utah-projects/utah-shrub-project

Utah Shrubland Management Handbook

• Review of Literature

• Analysis of state management datasets

• Utah Watershed Restoration Initiative

• Division of Wildlife Resources Range Trend

Outreach and Additional Aspects

Treatments very in their capacity to reduce shrub cover and improve herbaceous understory.

Variability due to

• Ecological Site

• Biology of shrub

• Site History

Assessment of shrub manipulation treatments

implemented through Utah’s Watershed

Restoration Initiative since 2005 (T. Monaco,

unpublished data).

Management Approach Matters

Ecological Site-Based Handbook for Shrubland Management in Utah

• Use best information available: contemporary data sets, current knowledge, up to date technology for brush management and range planting.

• Highlight how Ecological Sites influence effectiveness of range

improvement practices (for wildlife, livestock, etc).

• Use Ecological Sites to improve predictability of management

outcomes.

• Applicable for shrub-dominated sites throughout Utah

Field Tours of Experimental Sites 2016

USU Extension Shrubland Management Project https://extension.usu.edu/rangelands/htm/utah-projects/utah-shrub-project

Utah Shrubland Management Handbook

• Review of Literature

• Analysis of state management datasets

• Utah Watershed Restoration Initiative

• Division of Wildlife Resources Range Trend

Associated Questions

• Seed Production in response to shrub management at project site

• Competitive ability of native grass ecotypes across sites/stresses

Outreach and Additional Aspects

Project Contributors Dr. Tom Monaco, Justin Williams USDA-Agricultural Research Service

Dr. Kari Veblen Wildlands Resources Department, Utah State University

Research Cooperators

Beth Burrit, Dr. Roger Banner USU Extension

Jamin Johanson, Jamison Jewkes, Matthew Phillippi USDA Nat. Res. Cons. Service

Troy Forrest, Ashley Hansen UDAF Utah Grazing Improvement Program

Bill Kral, John Cantlon, Nevin DuPleissis DuPont

Bill Robinson, Lance Westmoreland, Rial Berry, Monty Weston Landholders

Field Assistance

Justin Chutich, Brittany Duncan, Sarahi Felix, Joe Lamb, Jessica Walker

Additional Support

Veblen Research Lab

University Agricultural Experiment Station

Ecology Center Utah State University

Wildlands Resources Dept., College of Natural Resources, Utah State University

Acknowledgements

Rebecca Mann, Wildlands Resources Dept,

Utah State University rkmann@gmail.com