Kansas Range Research

Clenton Owensby, John Launchbaugh, Robert Cochran, Kling Anderson,
Ed Smith, and Eric Vanzant

Original 1978 Publication as a PDF File.

INDEX

Introduction | Proper Stocking Rates | Deferred Grazing | Deferred-rotation Grazing | Intensive Early Stocking | Prescribed Burning | Wildfire | Range Fertilization | Native Hay | Wildfire | Managing Secondary Grasses and Perennial Forbs | Controlling Woody Plants | Reestablishing Range Grasses | Common and Scientific Names of Plants | Selected Bibliography

INTRODUCTION

Back to the top of page

Kansas Rangelands

Kansas grasslands evolved under semi-arid to subhumid climates, characterized by much the same weather extremes of temperature, rainfall, and snowfall we are familiar with today. As a result of prehistoric glacial activity and other natural forces then and later, plants have migrated from their places of origin, so that today Kansas ranges are simple-to-complex mixtures of perennial grasses and forbs, plus a few native annuals and biennials. Species composition has been modified by the introduction of Kentucky bluegrass and cool-season annual grasses, particularly Japanese brome. Most of the introductions are now "naturalized" enough to be considered permanent parts of Kansas range vegetation.

Through the ages to modern times, wildfires - many started by lightning, but most by primitive people - influenced development of fire-tolerant grasses and suppressed woody vegetation. Certain woody plants, however, always were present as natural components of some grasslands. Browsing by animals and frequent prairie fires were largely responsible for maintaining "normal" amounts of woody species.

In prehistoric time, numerous large herbivores subjected herbaceous vegetation to grazing stress. After the last glacial retreat (15,000 to 25,000 years ago), buffalo emerged as the major dominant large grazer, although the prairies and plains simultaneously supported many pronghorn antelope, elk, deer, prairie dogs, rabbits, rodents, and insects. And each exerted grazing pressures on the vegetation. There is little doubt that during and long before Spanish explorations into Kansas, most of the grassland was used almost continuously throughout the year by one roving herd of buffalo after another and other grazing animals. Grazing and trampling by buffalo and their associates were often intensive, as was uncontrolled grazing by livestock in the late 1800s after most of the wild grazers had been eliminated.

Palatable plants have persisted under nearly all grazing regimes by domestic livestock, whether or not the ranges have been managed economically. The ability of desirable range plants to endure and recover from heavy use underscores the important role of prehistoric grazers in range-plant evolutionary development.

Approximately two-fifths of Kansas (about 20 million acres) is native rangeland, reestablished native range, and grazed woodland. Native vegetation is characterized by various kinds of grassland. Most stockmen and others in the field of range management have general knowledge of kinds and amounts of forage that can be produced on conservatively stocked ranges in different geographical areas. Although important features of range production are reasonably well understood, grazing management and related practices that affect livestock performance are not so well understood.

Importance of Range and Range Livestock Management

Kansas has more than 6 million head of cattle. About 1.7 million beef cows and their calves depend entirely or in part on native range, and 1.75 million grass-fed cattle and calves are marketed in the state each year. In addition, 170,000 sheep and a variety of wildlife, including approximately 35,000 deer, share the range resources and supplementary roughages. The need to improve conversion efficiency of forages to livestock products already exists; future demands on the state's grazing resources will be even greater.

Use of native range for livestock production involves change, including problems and opportunities that accompany change in management. Grazing procedures should be appraised regularly and altered to take advantage of practices that research demonstrates to be more profitable than existing ones.

Early research by the Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station on range and range livestock related burning practices and stocking rates to the conservation of Flint Hills grazing resources. Over the years, research priorities have shifted toward increasing range livestock production efficiency on a sustained basis throughout the state. Investigations at both Manhattan and Hays have centered on improved livestock performance in harmony with maintaining desirable plant composition, optimum forage yields, wildlife habitat needs, watershed protection, recreational requirements, and esthetic values.

Presented here are recommendations for range and range-livestock management based on experiments at Manhattan and Hays, augmented by applicable research from Colorado, Nebraska, and Oklahoma. Practices that make more efficient use of grazing resources should increase livestock production and improve economic returns to producers, communities, and the state.

Proper Stocking Rates

Back to the top of page

Proper grazing intensity of native range requires stocking so livestock can convert forage to saleable products most efficiently and economically on a sustained basis. The plant community must be maintained in a vigorous condition to provide desirable vegetation, sufficient ground cover for soil and water conservation, and habitat for wildlife and to increase the probability of a reliable forage supply during drought.

In long-term, rate-of-stocking studies at Manhattan and Hays, forage production was greatest on lightly stocked, intermediate on moderately stocked, and least on heavily stocked ranges (Figure 1 and Figure 2. ). Moderate stocking, the most economically efficient grazing intensity, left 40 to 60 percent of the current year's forage ungrazed at the end of the growing season (Figure 1 and Figure 2. ).

Quality of range vegetation varies not only among plant species, plants of the same species, and plant parts, but also with weather and soil characteristics, and seasonally with plant development, age of regrowth, grazing management, and such range treatments as burning, mowing, nitrogen fertilization, and pesticide applications. Forage samples collected from esophageally-fistulated steers grazing Flint Hills bluestem range had consistently higher crude protein and digestible energy than did forage samples clipped to approximate grazing activities of the livestock. Properly-stocked ranges are grazed in small-to-large patches, rather than uniformity throughout, because given the opportunity, livestock choose their diets. Selective grazing is highly important for animal performance, so ample forage should be available to livestock the entire time they are on range. Overstocking ranges to the extent that grazing animals are restricted to forage they would not otherwise select is a major cause for reduced stocker gains, reproductive performance, and weaning weights.

Proper stocking of native range is using the fewest acres a grazing animal requires to achieve maximum performance in a specified time (Figure 3 and Table 1). Proper stocking also maintains desirable and vigorous range plant communities. Overstocking shortgrass range near Hays throughout the growing season for seven years reduced soil-moisture intake on a clay upland range site. Lowered plant vigor from heavy grazing and decreased water penetration from intensified soil packing interacted to change plant species composition and to reduce forage production.

Table 1. Average daily gains of yearling steers stocked lightly, moderately, and heavily on Kansas Flint Hills Bluestem range from May1 to October 1, 1950 to 1956.

Month
Stocking Rate May June July August September Average
May 1 - Oct 1 Acres/head Steer Gain (lb/hd/day)
Light 6.00 1.99 1.71 1.37 1.21 1.34 1.52
Moderate 3.30 1.83 1.74 1.58 1.24 1.24 1.57
Heavy 1.75 1.86 1.75 1.28 1.16 1.1 1.43

Recommendations:

  • Stock ranges at "long-term" rates that will maintain desirable, vigorous plant species from season to season.
  • Encourage livestock to graze the range as evenly as economically feasible: Control availability of drinking water at wells and by fencing ponds; place salt boxes, mineral feeders, back oilers, dust bags, and other objects that attract livestock to less-used parts of the range; and fertilize small areas with nitrogen or burn an acre or less on sites where conventional aids do not attract grazing animals satisfactorily. Ride the range frequently and drive livestock into underutilized areas.
  • Keep in mind that range forage production may vary widely from season to season, but that livestock performance is not benefited by varying stocking rates seasonally in attempts to match changes in plant production. During severe drought, however, remove stock from ranges earlier than normally anticipated to avoid weight losses.
  • Judge proper stocking rates by evaluating these factors: Individual animal performance (profitable stocker gains, weaned calving percentages, and weaning weights); presence of the major desirable grasses and forbs that are adapted to each range site; and patchy covering of ungrazed forage remaining at the end of the growing season and at the start of the next growing season.

Deferred Grazing

Back to the top of page

Throughout Kansas smooth brome, tall fescue, irrigated cool-season pasture, or winter cereals furnish early-spring grazing. All such pastures can be used much earlier than warm-season range and for some time after native vegetation starts growth, which lengthens the grazing season and increases carrying capacity over native ran ranges used alone.

For most efficient use by livestock, cool-season pastures usually are grazed from about March 15 to approximately June 1 in eastern Kansas and from about April 1 to near June 15 in western Kansas, so grazing native range is delayed until early to mid-June. Deferred grazing requires sacrifice of native range use during early growth, then stocking it above normal rates the remainder of the growing season. When grazing animals are restricted to early-spring pasture until after native-range growth is well under way, cool-season forages complement warm-season range (McIlvain 1976).

During a 12-year study at Manhattan, livestock gains per head were slightly higher and gains per acre were much higher from a system of deferred grazing on Flint Hills bluestem range complemented with smooth brome than from native range alone. Yearling steers gained an average of 1.32 pounds per head daily for 85 days on deferred range, compared with 1.17 pounds per head daily for 127 days on native range stocked seasonlong at normal rates. Proper timing in the utilization of early pasture and then of native range permitted the steers to graze both cool- and warm-season grasses when quality of each was ideal. That not only lengthened the total grazing season but rested warm-season range the first six weeks of the growing season each year.

To defer grazing warm-season range, any method of carrying livestock the first month and a half of the growing season may be used; livestock performance will depend on backgrounding and stocking rate.

Plant species composition on deferred range was as good as or better than that on grassland stocked seasonlong. Grazing deferment tends to increase forage yields on depleted ranges, but it may have little or no advantage for top-condition ranges (Harlan 1960). Where range burning is customary, fire controls most woody plants and forbs. Because grazing animals prefer immature forbs to more mature ones, livestock are more likely to suppress growth of "weedy" vegetation under conservative season-long stocking than under deferred grazing. Yearly deferment and favorable soil moisture conditions early in the growing season may favor unusually high forb increases on most range sites that are not burned frequently.

Recommendations:

  • Graze cool-season forages from the time they start late-winter growth until June 1 to 15, depending on development of local vegetation. Move livestock to native range for the remainder of the intended grazing period.
  • Allow warm-season species in native range to grow about one and a half months before grazing.
  • Under deferred grazing, stock the entire system at rates about 30 percent higher than those considered normal for continuously grazed ranges.
  • If range burning is not practiced, rotate deferment among several units on range sites that become "weedier than usual" when not grazed season-long.
  • Compensate for grazing shortages by moving livestock to native range early, by selling marketable stock earlier than expected, or by taking livestock off late-summer range sooner than normal.

Deferred-rotation Grazing

Back to the top of page

Results of Kansas Research

A three-pasture rotation system was compared with season-long, continuous grazing from 1950 to 1967 at Manhattan (Figure 4). Concentrating livestock on two pastures to defer grazing on the third, and grazing the deferred pasture heavily the latter part of the growing season reduced gains of yearling steers an average of 23 pounds per head. Compared with seasonlong continuous grazing, average daily gains of steers in the deferred-rotation system decreased significantly after the first two months of the grazing season (Figure 5). The deferred-rotation system, however, favored desirable plant species, increased grass production, and decreased forb yields (Table 2) However, the increased herbage yields are likely due to reduced intake on the deferred-rotation pastures which is indicated by the reduced gains.

Table 2. Grass and forb average yields on indicated Flint Hills bluestem range sites grazed by yearling steers season long continuously and in a seasonal deferred-rotation system. May 1 to October 1, 1950 to 1967.

Range Site
Forage
Group 		Grazing Loamy Upland Limestone Breaks Clay Upland Average
3.3 acres/head Yield (lb/acre, air-dry)
Grass Season-long, continuous 3,920 2,560 3,160 3,390
Deferred rotation 4,250 3,400 3,970 3,970
Forbs Season-long, continuous 300 340 490 360
Deferred rotation 270 160 340 260

Major Conclusions from Research on Grazing Systems The indicated increase in carrying capacity shown by the deferred-rotation system studied in Flint Hills bluestem at Manhattan was approximately 16 percent. Considering that under deferred-rotation grazing, yearling steers gained an average of 23 pounds per head less than did those under continuous grazing stocked at the same rate, "stocking up" to take advantage of increased carrying capacity would have further reduced individual gains while possibly increasing gains per acre.

Livestock performance per head is a function of stocking rate rather than of range condition (Harlan 1960). Increasing stocking rates to take advantage of improved range condition increases livestock gain per acre but reduces individual animal performance. Usually it is most profitable to stock range for maximum individual animal performance, with as many individuals as possible making top performance (reproductive efficiency, weaning weight, gain per head). It is unrealistic to assume that increased gain per acre will compensate for reductions in gain per head, unless livestock market prices and production costs are compatible.

In planned grazing systems, as with other methods of managing livestock on range, the practicality of procedures that increase carrying capacity and/or livestock production must be evaluated on the basis of livestock market prices, production per animal, production costs (fertilization, expansion of facilities, additional labor and management costs, etc.), and the role of such systems in integrated livestock production programs. Profitability of livestock gains on range may depend on compensatory gain efficiency of young animals and cost items in the total livestock production enterprise.

Recommendations

  • Poor-condition range probably benefits more from deferred-rotation grazing at stocking rates commensurate with optimum livestock performance than does comparably stocked range in good-to-excellent condition. Therefore, consider current range condition when contemplating specialized grazing systems.
  • In so far as possible, base stocking rates on livestock performance and attempt to arrive at the optimum production per head in relation to beef production per acre.
  • To resolve grazing-distribution problems that cannot be overcome by conventional livestock distribution measures, force animals to use the entire range more uniformly by cross-fencing. Place division fences so that resulting units will be of optimum size. Pay particular attention to livestock watering developments, and relative location of under- and overused areas. Stock each range unit simultaneously or in a deferred-rotation system, depending on the adaptability of management options and livestock performance (in relation to grazing system) during two or three seasons.
  • Avoid moving livestock from relatively immature to mature vegetation.
  • Adapt all grazing systems to the nutritional and reproductive needs of livestock.

Intensive Early Stocking

Back to the top of page

Results of Kansas Research

Rate-of-stocking studies near Manhattan on Flint Hills bluestem range grazed May 1 to October 1 showed that yearling steers made approximately two-thirds of their total gain during the first half (May 1 to July 15) of the growing season from 1950 to 1967. Stocking heavier increased total beef production per acre but reduced individual animal gains during the five months of the summer grazing season. Gains per head, however, were not reduced by any increases in stocking rate from start of grazing until July 15; heavier stocking rates after July 15 decreased animal gains.

Research on intensive early stocking Flint Hills bluestem range compared season-long stocking (3.3 acres per yearling steer, May 1 to October 1, on both unburned and late-spring-burned range) with twice the normal season-long stocking rate (1.67 acres per yearling steer on late-spring-burned range) May 1 to July 15. In contrast with season-long grazing, intensive early stocking increased beef production 35 pounds per acre over gains from unburned range and 22 pounds per acre over gains from burned range (Table 3). During the first 10 weeks of the forage growing season, steers grazing intensively early-stocked range and those grazing all season on burned range gained the same up to July 15; so individual performance was not reduced by doubling the stocking rate the first half of the growing season.

Table 3. Beef production per acre by yearling steers on Flint Hills bluestem range under season-long and intensive-early stocking and indicated late-spring burning treatments, 1972 to 1977.

Stocking system
Season-long

May 1-October 1,

3.30 acres/head

Intensive-early

May 1-July 15,

1.67 acres/head

Year

Range not

burned

Range burned

May 1

Range burned

May 1

Yearling steer beef production (lb/acre)
1972 30 56 79
1973 41 48 72
1974 61 79 94
1975 48 49 70
1976 54 63 93
Average 47 59 82

The large increase in livestock gain per acre from intensive early stocking resulted from steers averaging 1.83 pounds per head daily for two and one-half months compared with only half as many animals averaging 1.30 pounds daily on burned range and 1.07 pounds daily on unburned range stocked season-long for five months (Table 4).

Table 4. Daily gains of yearling steers (lb/head) on Flint Hills bluestem range under season- long and intensive-early stocking and indicated late-spring burning treatments, 1972 to 1977.

Stocking systems
Season-long

May 1-Oct 1,

3.30 acres/head

Intensive-early

May 1-Jul 15,

1.67 acres/head

Year Range not burned Range burned May 1 Range burned May 1
Yearling steer daily gain (lb/head)
1972 0.84 1.23 1.72
1973 0.90 1.06 1.51
1974 1.30 1.69 2.11
1975 1.17 1.18 1.78
1976 1.14 1.34 2.03
Average 1.07 1.30 1.83

Perennial grass yields were slightly higher (Table 5) and forb and brush production lower on range stocked intensively early in the growing season than on ranges grazed at the normal rate all season (Table 6).

Table 5. Average yields of perennial grass for three major Flint Hills bluestem range sites under season-long and intensive-early stocking with yearling steers. 1972 to 1975.

Stocking system

Range site

Season-long

May 1-Oct 1,

3.30 acres/steer

Intensive-early

May 1-Jul 15,

1.67 acres/steer

Perennial grass yield (lb dry matter/acre)1
Loamy upland 2480 2860
Limestone breaks 2190 2440
Clay upland 2270 2000
Average 2310 2500
1. Range late-spring burned annually May 1.

Table 6. Combined yields of major perennial forb and brush species on grazed and ungrazed areas averaged for three major Flint Hills bluestem range sites and, for years indicated, under season-long and intensive-early stocking with yearling steers, 1972 to 1975.

Stocking system

Area

Year

Season-long

May 1-Oct 1,

3.30 Acres/steer

Intensive-early

May 1-Jul 15,

1.67 acres/steer

Perennial forb + brush yield

(lb dry matter/acre)1

1972 310 140
Grazed 1973 290 270
1974 280 370
Average 290 260
1972 430 210
Not grazed 1973 570 320
1974 410 520
Average 470 350
1. Range late-spring burned annually May 1.

Grass-stand composition steadily improved on range stocked intensively early and remained stable or deteriorated on ranges stocked all season; forbs increased in the plant cover more under season-long stocking than under intensive early stocking (Table 7).

Table 7. Relative percentages of big bluestem and little bluestem in the total plant ground cover (species composition) averaged for three major Flint Hills bluestem range sites before grazing treatments were started in 1971; and in 1975, after four grazing seasons under season- long and intensive-early stocking with yearling steers, 1972 to 1976.

Stocking system

Grasses1

Year

Season-long

May 1-Oct 1,

3.30 acres/steer

Intensive-early

May 1-Jul 15,

1.67 acres/steer

Species composition (%)2
1971 28.9 26.0
Big bluestem 1975 21.7 30.8
Change -7.6 4.8
1971 15.5 11.9
Little bluestem 1975 11.0 10.8
Change -4.5 -1.1
1. Major desirable Flint Hills grasses. 2. Range late-spring burned annually May 1.

Grazing distribution was more nearly uniform on range stocked intensively early in the season than on burned range stocked all season. Fuel for burning was distributed more uniformly on intensively early stocked range than on range grazed season long. Livestock concentration, shortness of grazing season, and evenness of burning probably interacted favorably to improve grazing distribution.

By the end of growing season, food reserves in big bluestem (a major constituent of Flint Hills bluestem range) did not differ between ranges stocked intensively early in the season and those stocked all season (Figure 6). That is, heavier-than-normal grazing each spring, followed by summer-fall resting, did not reduce range-plant vigor after three years.

Intensive-Early Stocking - Stocking Rate

Stocking rate effects on intensive-early stocked Kansas Flint Hills range were studied from 1982 through 1987. Rates were 2X,2.5X, and 3X normal season-long stocking rates for 500-550 lb steers. Overall, growing season precipitation during the study period was below normal, with late-summer precipitation much below normal in the second and third years of the study. Grass remaining in mid July decreased with increased stocking rate, but by early October was similar under the 2.5X and 3X stocking rates, but continued to be lower than that under the 2X rate. There was no difference in forb herbage in mid July forb standing crop with respect to stocking rate. In early October, forb herbage was either not affected by stocking rate (1993, 1986, and 1987) or was greater under the highest stocking rate (1982, 1984, and 1985). The major changes in botanical composition and basal cover were a reduction in Indiangrass and an increase in Kentucky bluegrass as stocking rate increased. Botanical composition of big bluestem increased under the 2X rate, but did not change under the higher rates. Steer gains (lb/head) differed among years, but within each year, gains were similar on pastures stocked at different rates (Table 8). Year-to-year variability in steer gains was likely due to changes in cattle type used in the study. In 1982 and 83, British-cross steers purchased from local sale barns were used. During the remainder of the study, Brangus-cross steers from a single source were used. Because average daily gain was not influenced by stocking rate, gain per acre was increased in direct proportion to increasing stocking rate.

Table 8. Influence of stocking rate on average daily gain of intensive-early stocked steers.

Stocking Rate
Gain per steer (lb/d) Gain per acre, lb
Year 1.75 1.50 1.25 Average 1.75 1.50 1.25
1982 139 128 136 134a 76 84 113
1983 132 121 136 130a 73 80 112
1984 165 165 167 167b 91 109 137
1985 207 185 174 189c 114 121 143
1986 185 189 196 189c 101 125 160
1987 178 183 187 183c 98 120 154
Average 167 163 165 92 106 136
a,b,c Year averages with a common superscript are not different (P<.01).

Intensive-Early Stocking - Grain Supplementation

A 4-year study was conducted on Kansas Flint Hills bluestem range to monitor animal gain, grass and forb standing biomass following grazing, plant population dynamics, and in two years, subsequent feedlot performance of steers under intensive-early stocking supplemented with increasing levels of sorghum grain. Each year from 1988 through 1991, crossbred beef steers were stocked at 0.24 ha/100 kg of initial steer weight from 5 May to 15 July. Steers in twice-replicated pastures were given no supplementation, 0.91 kg rolled sorghum grain per head daily, or 1.82 kg rolled sorghum grain per head daily, which corresponded to approximately 0, 0.3, and 0.6% of body weight -1. All steers were implanted with estradiol 17 beta in 1988 and zeranol in 1989-91 during initial processing and had unlimited access to a lasalocid/mineral mixture during the entire trial. In 1989 and 1990, representative groups of steers selected from all treatment/pasture combinations were subjected to a feedlot finishing phase and carcass data were obtained. Grass and forb standing crops were estimated each year at livestock removal in mid July and again in early October. Pretreatment species composition and basal cover were determined in 1988 and compared to those at the end of the study. In mid July, when cattle were removed, residual standing biomass of grass increased in direct proportion to increasing level of supplement. Standing biomass of grass at the end of the growing season did not differ among pastures with different supplement levels. Forb standing biomass did not differ among pastures with different supplement levels in July or October. Changes in plant populations among treatments during the course of the study were minimal. During the early portion of the grazing period, sorghum grain supplementation did not significantly influence steer gains, but average daily gain during the latter part of the grazing period increased in direct proportion to increasing level of sorghum grain supplement (Table 9). Daily gain, feed intake, carcass characteristics, and gain:feed ratio were not different among treatments during the feedlot phase (Table 9). Although conversion efficiencies may be economically marginal, low-level grain supplementation has the potential to increase the daily gain of cattle grazing early-season tallgrass prairie under an intensive-early stocking program.

Table 9. Influence of Level of Grain Supplementation for Intensive-Early Stocked Steers on Average Daily Gain (ADG)

Level of Supplementation Probabilitya
Item 0 2 4 L Q
Early ADG, lb/d

(5/1 - 6/7)

2.48

2.61

2.79

.32

.53

Late ADG, lb/d

(6/8 - 7/15)

1.90

2.25

2.39

.07

.54

Total ADG, lb/d

(5/1 - 7/15)

2.19

2.43

2.59

.16

.86

a L = linear effect of increasing supplement level; Q = quadratic effect of increasing supplement level.

Conclusions

1. Grass standing crop at the end of the growing season under 2.5X and 3X stocking rates was less than that under the 2X rate. There was no downward trend in amount of grass standing crop over the course of the study at any stocking rate. Apparently, herbage production can be sustained for all stocking rates tested.

2. Percent of composition and basal cover of the major dominants changed little during the study period. Indiangrass appeared to be adversely affected, particularly at the higher stocking rates. Kentucky bluegrass was favored by the 3X rate.

3. Stocking rate did not affect individual steer gains overall. Because of the higher stocking rates, gain per acre was significantly increased. Livestock type apparently had a significant impact on steer gains.

Results of Hays Research

A 9-year grazing trial was conducted to compare shortgrass vegetation response and steer gain under intensive-early stocking (IES, May 1 to July 15) at 2 stocking rates to season-long stocking (SLS, May 1 to October 1). The SLS stocking rate was 3.5 acres per steer. The 2 stocking rates under IES were double- (1.75 acres/steer, 2X-IES) or triple-stocking (1.2 acres/steer, 3X-IES). The pastures were not burned in this study.

Steer gain under SLS and 2X-IES were equal during the early season, but 3X-IES gain was less. Total-season gain under SLS was greater than both IES stocking rates, but ADG over the entire SLS season was equal to 2X-IES. These results are different from those found on Flint Hills range, where IES gain and ADG at all stocking rates exceed those under SLS. Total season gain achieved by July 15 under SLS averaged 57%, and ranged from a low of 41% to a high of 72%. This variability was much greater than occurred on Flint Hills range. This is probably because the season of active growth and resulting high nutrition varies from year to year on shortgrass range depending upon the seasonal pattern of rainfall, while the pattern of nutritional decline as the season progresses is much less variable on Flint Hills range. Production per acre was equal under SLS and 2X-IES, but greater under 3X-IES. Again, this differs from Flint Hills range where IES treatments at any stocking rate produce more gain per acre than SLS.

Vegetation composition and production responses were equal under SLS and 2X-IES, but indicated declines in range condition and productivity under 3X-IES. Western wheatgrass and buffalograss composition did not change from the beginning to the end of the trial under SLS and 2X-IES, but western wheatgrass decreased and buffalograss increased under 3X-IES. Differences in utilization that did not lead to composition shifts over the length of the study indicated that IES at both stocking rates increased use of annual grasses (primarily Japanese brome) and decreased use of blue grama. It appears that IES improves the ability to use annual brome before it matures, but is not capable of reducing an annual brome infestation. Composition of other grasses and forbs did not respond to the grazing systems. The amounts of available grass did not change throughout the study under SLS and 2X-IES, but was reduced over time by 3X-IES. Additionally, available herbage continued to decrease under IES at both stocking rates, despite the lack of livestock grazing. Thus, October herbage availability under IES was equal to SLS. Forb biomass was not affected by grazing systems. The shift from western wheatgrass, a cool season species, to buffalograss, a warm season species, under 3X-IES resulted in decreased herbage production, indicating that the buffalograss increase was unable to compensate for the decline in western wheatgrass. The lack of change under 2X-IES and undesirable changes under 3X-IES contrast with positive changes under IES at all stocking rates on Flint Hills range. This difference is probably related to the importance of cool-season grasses as desirable forage producers. All desirable grasses on Flint Hills range are warm-season grasses, and most undesirables, such as Kentucky bluegrass, are cool-season grasses. However, on shortgrass range, western wheatgrass is a cool-season grass and one of the most important forage producers. Early season use with late season rest benefits warm-season grasses by allowing rest while they are still growing, but is harmful to cool-season grasses because they are typically dormant during the late-season rest and do not benefit from it.

In conclusion, SLS and 2X-IES were equal in terms of both livestock performance and vegetation responses, but livestock performance and biomass availability were reduced and vegetation composition changed under 3X-IES, indicating that it was not sustainable. While SLS and 2X-IES appear equal, using them simultaneously on separate land areas appears to be a valuable marketing strategy, by allowing cattle to be marketed more than once per year.

Recommendations

  • Use stocker-type grazing animals for intensive early stocking; the system is suited for weaned livestock that is still growing, but it is not practical for reproductive stock.
  • In eastern Kansas, burn range in late spring (about May 1). Stock two times the normal seasonal rate for yearling animals from the beginning of the forage growing season to July 15, then move the livestock to other high-quality forage or to a feedlot.
  • On central and western Kansas ranges, where prescribed burning is not practiced, stock ranges at twice the normal rate for young animals at the beginning of the growing season. Start grazing in March or early April if western wheatgrass and annual grasses predominate; start in late April to early May if only warm-season species are present. Remove livestock about July 15; rest range until after fall dormancy. After November 1 to start of forage growth the next spring, use the carry-over old growth as a holding area for stockers as they are accumulated to be ready for intensive early stocking during the spring growing season. Graze winter range moderately (the range should have a patchy grazed appearance at the start of new growth) and supplement old growth by feeding livestock protein equivalent to five pounds per head daily of good-quality alfalfa hay.

Prescribed Burning

Back to the top of page

Fire has always occurred on grasslands; in recent times it has been used as a management practice to increase livestock production and maintain high-quality rangeland. Prescribed burning has been researched on Flint Hills bluestem range near Manhattan since the early 1900s, on various range sites in central Kansas since 1971, and on clay upland shortgrass range near Hays since 1975.

The differences in livestock performance, despite similarities in diet composition, indicated that forage intake by yearling steers was greater on burned than on unburned range.

A long-term study comparing the effects of annual burning with no burning indicated that animals on range burned in late spring gained approximately 11 percent more than did those on unburned range(Figure 7). When summarized across the 40 years of the study, we observed an average increase of 14% in total gain for steers grazing burned pasture (Figure 8).

On grazed areas, forage yields were similar on unburned range and grassland burned in late spring (May 1), but yields were reduced by burning in mid spring (April 10) or early spring (March 20) (Figure 9); forb yields were lower on range burned in late spring than on range unburned or burned earlier in the spring (Figure 10).

Amounts of soil moisture in the upper five feet of a loamy upland range site correlated well with range forage production (Figure 11). Areas not burned and those burned in early or mid spring generally had less soil moisture than did those burned in late spring (May 1), the ideal time to burn considering range forage production and livestock gains.

Burning ungrazed Flint Hills bluestem range annually in early winter to mid spring for 46 years tended to increase pH, organic matter, and exchangeable elements (calcium, magnesium, and potassium) of the soil, but late-spring burning (May 1, the optimum date) annually for that long had no important effect on soil chemical properties (Table 10). Annual late-spring burning under season-long moderate grazing for 22 years, however, caused increases in soil pH and decreases in organic matter, exchangeable magnesium, available phosphorus, and total nitrogen (Table 11). Such slow rates of chemical change suggested that late-spring burning annually probably never would result in irreversible adverse effects on Flint Hills bluestem range.

Table 10. Average soil reaction, organic matter, exchangeable calcium and magnesium, and available phosphorus in the top 3jeet of soil, plus total nitrogen and exchangeable potassium and bulk density in the top 3 inches of soilfor Flint Hills bluestem range, unburned and burned annually on dates indicated and protectedfirom livestock grazing, 1926 to 1972.

Depth of Soil Samples
3 feet 3 inches

Exchangeable

Range Burned

 Soil reaction Organic matter

Ca

Mg

 Available

P

 Total

N

 Exchangeable

K

 Bulk

Density

Season Date pH (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) Grams/cc
Early winter Dec 1 6.07 25,100 2,510 534 1.15 2,160 965 1.08
Early spring Mar 20 6.02 25,700 2,210 473 1.15 2,360 929 1.04
Mid spring Apr 10 6.05 23,000 1,910 454 1.24 2,210 930 1.05
Late spring May 1 5.85 23,100 2,000 479 1.09 2,010 839 1.09
Not burned 5.83 23,300 2,040 443 1.14 2,360 862 1.09

Table 11. Average soil reaction, organic matter, exchangeable calcium, magnesium and potassium, available phosphorus, and total nitrogen, in the top 3 feet of soil in Flint Hills bluestem range, unburned and late-spring burned annually and stocked moderately with yearling steers (3.3 acreslhead~May 1 to October1, 1950 to 1972.

Depth of soil samples, 0-3 feet

Exchangeable

Range Burned

Soil reaction Organic matter Ca Mg K Available

P

 Total

N

Season

Date

 pH Parts/million

Late spring

May 1

 6.66 30,000 4,048 741 593 2.21 1,460

Not burned

6.41 34,000 3,774 548 638 3.31 1,690

Late-spring burning consistently produced a more desirable plant-species composition than did burning earlier or not burning. Ground covered by living plant bases of big bluestem and indiangrass was greater on late-spring burned range than on range burned earlier or not burned; ground cover of little bluestem was unchanged except by early-spring burning, which reduced it (Figure 12). Low-producing Kentucky bluegrass (Figure 13) and naturalized annual species (Figure 14) - cool-season grasses - were essentially eliminated on burned sites, as indicated by reduced ground cover regardless of time rangeland was burned. Basal cover of perennial forbs was reduced by late-spring burning (Figure 15).

Late-spring burning effectively controlled eastern redcedar, buckbrush, and most other undesirable woody plants except smooth sumac, which maintained itself regardless of date range was burned (Section 8, Woody Plant Control).

Late-spring burning of Flint Hills bluestem range also improved grazing distribution, because livestock sought vegetation that developed after the fire in preference to vegetation on areas heavily grazed the previous season but not burned because of insufficient grass left for fuel.

Prescribed Burning

Results of Hays Research

Evaluation of vegetation response to wildfires occurring from November through March has indicated that burning during dormancy is detrimental to herbage yield. To test late-spring burning, annual burning on April 26 for three consecutive years was compared to adjacent unburned plots. Western wheatgrass production almost tripled the first two years, but increased only slightly the third year. Shortgrasses, buffalograss and blue grama, were essentially unaffected the first year, but reduced during subsequent years. Japanese brome and red threeawn were substantially reduced in all years, as was western ragweed in the second and third years. Total herbage was increased in year 1, slightly reduced in year 2, and greatly reduced in year 3. Evidently, late spring prescribed burning can be used periodically, but not repetitively, to improve range condition by increasing western wheatgrass and reducing large quantities of undesirable grasses and forbs. This research is further supported by prescribed burning of a seeded stand of pure western wheatgrass on April 1 for four consecutive years. Tiller density and herbage yield were improved by burning compared to the control, particularly in the first year. Additionally, invasion by other species (weeds) was prevented by burning. Livestock responses to burning of shortgrass range have not been evaluated.

Recommendations

On shortgrass range in western Kansas, annual burning, even late in spring after vegetation growth has been initiated, appears to lead to reduced productivity, particularly of warm-season shortgrasses. However, responses to the first year of burning were positive in terms of herbage yield and reduction of annual brome, red threeawn, and western ragweed. Late spring burns can be used periodically to control these species, remove excess mulch, and improve cool-season forage production from western wheatgrass.

Recommendations

Precautions

  • Frequent range burning is recommended for the Flint Hills and other areas in eastern Kansas. Currently, prescribed burning of ranges in central and western Kansas is for special purposes or is still experimental.
  • Carefully plan prescribed burning and have the utmost respect for maintaining control of vegetation fires. Sufficient fire-control equipment is a must; at least two spray rigs (one along each fire line) are necessary. Fire can be spread uniformly along fire lines most efficiently by using "drip torches" that distribute a mixture of gasoline (1 part) and diesel fuel (4 parts). (Diesel fuel in the mixture produces residual flames, generally needed to ignite vegetation under controlled burning conditions.)
  • Notify all neighbors and the rural fire district of your intention to burn.
  • If smoke might present a traffic hazard, notify the proper law-enforcement agencies.
  • Obtain from your local county extension agent the latest State Department of Health rules and regulations pertaining to agricultural burning.
  • Monitor weather reports several days before the tentative date of burning; obtain both short- and long-range forecasts.
  • Do not start broadcast burning on a calm day or when there are only intermittent shifting breezes. In addition to difficulties in getting a fire to move and generate heat, burns started under those conditions are subject to being blown out of control if a wind should come up suddenly from an unexpected direction. Furthermore, temperatures too cool or too hot will retard the fire or increase fire intensity beyond control.
Time of burning

  • Burn range concurrently with start-of-growth of the major warm-season perennial grasses, which generally is late April in northern Kansas and mid-to-late April in southern Kansas.
  • Burn range under as ideal conditions as possible - when there is a moist mulch, winds are steady at 5 to 20 miles per hour, and the day is clear and air temperatures are mild.
Method of burning
  • Use natural firebreaks, including roads, trails, and cowpaths along fence rows, when possible.
  • In open grassland, spread fire slowly and extinguish the flames outside the fire lines with motorized water-spraying equipment.
  • Use appropriate means to remove woody vegetation along fire lines and preburn it under low, wildfire-hazard conditions.

Wildfire

Back to the top of page

Each year throughout Kansas untimely accidental range fires occur, generally from late fall to mid spring when vegetation is dormant, humidities are low, soil surfaces are dry, and wind velocities are above average. Some grass crowns and tillers may be killed by heat or combustion under smoldering organic material, but major detrimental effects appear to be associated with exposure of dormant plant-regenerative tissue to winter weather extremes, soil moisture evaporation, and the puddling action of early-spring rains especially on bare, fine-textured soils.

Near Hays in 1959, all plants that grew on range burned by wildfire in early spring were shorter than plants on nearby unburned range (Table 12) - which indicated that reduced soil-moisture intake on early-burned range, coupled with exposure, lowered plant vigor and hence forage yields (Figure 17). Timely range burning generally favors native perennial grasses and decreases other kinds of plants (see Sections 7 and 8), but fall to mid-spring fires may interact with spring weather conditions to increase less desirable plants. Contiguous wildfires near Hays, one in November and the other in March, resulted in yield differences of western ragweed the next growing season (Hopkins et al. 1948).

Management of ranges burned from late fall to mid spring, whether planned or accidental and regardless of location, may require adjustments in stocking rates for one or more seasons - because of reduced forage yields - (Table 13). Livestock grazing range only partly burned, avoid unburned sites and concentrate on burned areas. To circumvent that, the remaining old growth should be burned at the proper time (late spring, after new growth has started), mowed closely from mid to late April, or fenced and grazed separately one to three seasons. Another alternative is to reduce stocking to what the burned areas will carry until grazing distribution from the fire is no longer a problem. If one of those choices is not used, the heavy grazing for several seasons after the fire may result in further, long-lasting damage to the parts of the range burned by wildfire.

Table 12. Average heights of major plants on clay upland shortgrass range near Hays October 1, 1959, in areas protected from livestock grazing after a wildfire on part of the range March 18, 1959.

Range treatment

Wildfire

Mar 18, 1959

 Not burned

Plant height (inches) Oct 1, 1959

Western wheatgrass 11 17
Blue grarna 6.7 11.9
Butfaiograss 4.1 6.9
Western ragweed 6.1 9.7
Horseweed 10.3 14.2
Average 7.6 11.9

Table 13. Average yields of forage on Flint Hills bluestem range, unburned and burned annually on dates indicated, 1950 to 1967. Burning bluestem range earlier than the latest date in spring when vegetatation will still carry a fire, whether intentionally or by wildfire, reduces forage yields.

Item

 Range Burned
Mar 20 April 10 May 1 Unburned
Yield (lb dry matter per acre)
Total Forage 2,360 2,840 3,150 3,240

Recommendations

  • Wildfires frequently do not take in an entire range unit. Prevent livestock from concentrating on burned parts of range by burning or mowing significant "missed" areas from mid to late April (in southeastern Kansas) to late April-early May (in northwestern Kansas), or by adjusting stocking rates to the carrying capacity of the burned area until fire-caused livestock-grazing-distribution problems no longer exist (one to three seasons), or by separating burned from unburned areas with cross fencing for one or three seasons (if that is practical with regard to fencing requirements and livestock water supplies) and grazing the resulting fenced units independently (if necessary, fence lanes of access to water supplies).
  • Reduce stocking rates on burned areas 25 to 75 percent the first season and 25 to 50 percent the second season, depending on season in which the range is burned and on soil texture. The closer the date of burning is to the start of spring growth and the coarser the soil texture, the less will be soil puddling from raindrops, reductions in soil-moisture intake, and decreases in herbage yields.
  • Graze burned range moderately during the growing season (see section 1), not only for optimum livestock production but to help control forb increases that may result from conditions peculiar to an individual wildfire and subsequent growing-season conditions.

Managing Secondary Grasses and Perennial Forbs

Back to the top of page

In years with favorable conditions for spring growth, dominant range grasses may be obscured by secondary cool-season annual grasses and warm-season perennial forbs, particularly under conservative stocking. Although in many years some native forbs, including broom snakeweed and slimflower scurfpea (a legume), seem to take over native ranges (except under continuous grazing at heavy stocking rates), actual production of species that create a weedy appearance may be relatively small.

Japanese brome, the commonest "naturalized" cool-season annual grass, and certain perennial native forbs are "opportunistic" in that they depend on soil moisture in excess of that used by the dominant grasses. Thus, in shortgrass range near Hays, from 1956 through 1965, yields of opportunistic plants were greatest during years most favorable for plant growth (when grazed lightly season long) and their yields were least during dry years (particularly under season-long heavy grazing)(Figure 2). .

Little barley and upright prairieconeflower were most abundant on heavily stocked summer range during some years of high rainfall early in the growing season. Regardless of stocking rate on clay upland shortgrass range, however, western ragweed and upright prairieconeflower were nearly absent some years, largely because precipitation and resulting soil-moisture regimes were less favorable than in other years.

Soil-moisture surpluses in spring favor the growth of most opportunistic plants. Prairie threeawn - a noxious warm-season annual grass - increases in eastern Kansas ranges, hay meadows, and abandoned cultivated areas when surface mulch accumulations and late-spring soil moisture are favorable. Grass production on a loamy lowland range site near Hays that had western ragweed stands dense enough to nearly obscure the grasses benefited from forb control in a year of high precipitation early in the growing season. A herbicide treatment June 1 increased grass production more than did mowing on that date. Although mowing reduced forb production, compensating increase in grass production was minor compared with the increase after herbicide treatment.

Stands of western ragweed with yields ranging from nothing to nearly 3,000 lbs. of dry matter per acre under moderate-to-light season-long stocking did not reduce grass yields on a clay upland range site near Hays in a year of high rainfall throughout the growing season (Figure 18); in ragweed stands of 7,000 lbs. of dry matter per acre, perennial grass yields were still within 50 percent of maximum.

Western ragweed stands averaging about 1,200 lbs. dry matter per acre appeared to be beneficial to grass production on a clay upland range site in the semi-arid climate near Hays (Figure 19). A reasonable explanation is that native perennial range grasses, as the dominants, exert their control of the habitat by having 75 to 80 percent of their root systems in the first one and a half to two and a half feet of soil (Figure 20). To compete, most subdominant forbs have root systems that use moisture below the major extraction zone of grass roots. Also, the taller growing broadleaf plants moderate microclimatic factors - wind velocities, temperatures, and evaporation rates near the ground - and thereby reduce environmental stress on the perennial grasses.

The role of native legumes in adding nitrogen to range soils has not been clearly defined. Many legumes, along with other forbs, however, have much higher protein content than do the grasses, and the most palatable ones are sought out and grazed by livestock. Livestock gain more on ranges with mixtures of grasses and forbs than on grasses alone (Costello 1944), so most broadleaf plants, maintained at tolerable levels, are desirable on native range.

Grazing Flint Hills bluestem range season long at conservative stocking rates for 17 years reduced perennial forb yields (Table 14). On clay upland shortgrass range near Hays, forb and annual grass yields were reduced by season-long continuous moderate and heavy stocking rates compared with light stocking (Table 15).

Table 14. Average yields and disappearances of perennial forbs on two major Flint Hills bluestem range sites, burned on dates indicated and unburned, and grazed moderately by yearling steers (3.3 acres/head) May 1 to October 1, 1950 to 1967.

Range stocked

 Loamy upland Limestone breaks

Yield

Disappearance

Yield

Disappearance

Season

Date

 lb/acre

air-dried

 lb/acre

air-dried

 % lb/acre

air-dried

 lb/acre

air-dried

 %

Early spring

Mar 20

 340 120 35 430 160 37

Mid spring

Apr 10

 290 140 48 270 100 37

Late spring

May 1

 160 50 31 110 20 18

Not burned

300 120 40 340 110 32
Average 270 110 41 290 100 34

Table 15. Average yields and disappearances of perennial forbs and annual grasses on clay upland shortgrass range near Hays, grazed by yearling steers May 1 to October 1, 1956 to 1966, at the stocking rates indicated. (Ranges were grazed by yearling cattle May 1 to November 1, 1946 to 1956, at the same stocking rates indicated.)

Range stocked

 Perennial Forb Annual Grass
Yield Disappearance Yield Disappearance

May 1 -Oct 1

Acres/head

 lb/acre

air-dried

 lb/acre

air-dried

 % lb/acre

air-dried

 lb/acre

air-dried

 %

Heavy

 2.0 270 200 74 70 60 86

Moderate

 3.5 710 350 49 130 100 77

Light

 5.0 1,020 410 40 410 250 61

Abundance of pricklypear and thistle probably is associated with weather and site effects and not overgrazing. Continuous season long or year long heavy grazing ultimately will kill many forbs, but that is not a profitable way to manage native range.

Recommendations

Secondary grass and forb control in general

  • Use and manage most secondary grasses and forbs by grazing ranges during the growing season of those plants, especially early in the season when they are most palatable. Because of relative locations and heights of growing points, broadleaf species are weakened more than are grasses by continuous grazing. Broadleaf plants are more likely to remain in "grazeable" growth forms than are similar but more mature forbs protected from grazing early in their development.
  • Except for specific procedures to control certain undesirable range plants that cannot be maintained at tolerable levels by grazing management alone, conservative season-long or year-long stocking, combined with appropriate supplemental practices, appear to be the way to manage the dominant grasses and nearly all the opportunistic plants that grow among them.
  • Restrict weedy-plant control (by chemical or mechanical methods) to the most highly productive range sites, such as lowlands and meadows.
  • Direct noxious weed-eradication procedures toward eliminating specific plants. Avoid broadcast treatments that may remove desirable species indiscriminately.
  • Secondary grass and forb control in eastern Kansas
  • Combine grazing management with prescribed burning.
  • Graze continuously during the growing season or stock ranges intensively early, and combine either system with late-spring prescribed burning to manage stand densities of annual brome, Kentucky bluegrass, and broadleaf plants (western ragweed, Louisiana sagewort, ironweed, and goldenrod).
  • To control prairie threeawn, combine prescribed burning every three to five years (mid-to-late November) with moderate, continuous grazing.
  • Stock ranges season long or year long at conservative rates to restore vigor of desirable plants and to minimize production of annual broomweed and snow-on-the-mountain.
Secondary grass and forb control in western Kansas

  • Stock ranges in spring, before warm-season perennials are ready, to use Japanese brome, which tolerates close defoliation before heading (Hulbert 1955). Cool-season annual grasses seldom produce substantial amounts of forage without nitrogen fertilization.
  • Graze ranges season long or year long continuously at moderate stocking rates for optimum use of western ragweed and broom snakeweed. Ranges that normally have dense forb stands should be stocked at the start of the growing season so that livestock will have access to the forbs in their most grazeable form.

Controlling Woody Plants

Back to the top of page

Woody vegetation invades range and increases when such natural controls as fire and year-long conservative grazing are absent. On properly stocked range, woody-plant seedlings and sprouts are stunted by livestock browsing them, but cattle do not consume large amounts of most mature woody species on Kansas grasslands. Hence, unless controlled, shrubs and trees gradually increase in size and number on rangeland and reduce livestock-carrying capacity. Prescribed burning or other periodic control measures are necessary to maintain desired amounts of open range.

Woody plants generally are not completely eradicated by control measures, nor would it be economically sound to do so. A point is reached at which the cost of eliminating remaining woody plants would exceed benefits.

Trees and shrubs left to grow along water courses, in ravines, and in difficult-to-control areas have little influence on livestock-carrying capacity, yet they are important as shade and winter protection for domestic stock. They also provide wildlife habitat, watershed, and other multiple-use benefits. Manageable amounts of woody plants are compatible with profitable livestock production when in practical balance with proper stocking and grazing distribution. Reducing brush and trees to stands that can be maintained easily with prescribed burning likely is the least-cost, maximum-benefit way to control most woody vegetation; some require other control measures. On Flint Hills bluestem range, woody plants were controlled most effectively by top killing when burning or mowing was properly associated with regrowth characteristics of each species.

Eastern redcedar, which does not root sprout after its tops have been killed, is susceptible to prescribed burning. As demonstrated on bluestem range (Table 16), degree of control depends on tree height, amount and distribution of herbaceous material that serves as fuel, backfire or headfire, and whether or not weather conditions favor generating a fire front necessary to ignite tree crowns. Backfires eliminated eastern redcedar seedlings overtopped by grass fuel, but headfires running with a 5- to 20-mph wind were necessary to create flames that would engulf the lower parts of large trees enough to set them ablaze.

Table 16. Effectiveness of prescribed burning of Flint Hills bluestem range (April 24, 1971) to control eastern redcedar in three size classes.

Tree kill, 4 months after range burning

Eastern redcedar

 Live trees before range burning

on April 24

 Partial to complete kill of

tree crown area

 Dead trees

Height class

 Number per acre

Seedlings,under 2 ft

 25 22 18

Small trees, 2-6 ft

 25 21 12

Medium trees,over 6 ft

 10 4 2

Species that would root sprout after their tops had been killed were adequately controlled on Flint Hills bluestem range by burning or mowing the range two or more consecutive years when plant food reserves were low. Low ebb in buckbrush food reserves, reached at the first indication of full-leaf stage, was between mid April and late May (Figure 21). Early-May mowing, which coincide with low food reserves, reduced buckbrush stem numbers more than did cutting on other dates (Figure 22). Late-spring burning two or three successive years satisfactorily controlled buckbrush (Figure 23).

Smooth sumac was not controlled by late-spring burning (Figure 24)because its food reserves were lowest fully a month later than the latest possible date the range would burn (Figure 21). Smooth sumac was most effectively controlled, therefore, by mowing from late May to early June (Figure 22).

Proper management of sites with highly concentrated brush stands may require spot treatment with one of several control measures to prevent extensive, unmanageable brush problems on rangeland. Treatments to consider for spot application, extensive control, and maintenance of compatible grass and woody plant stands include fire and mechanical, biological, and chemical means (Table 17).

RANGELAND CHEMICAL BRUSH & WEED CONTROL

Gary L. Kilgore

Extension Crops & Soils Specialist, Southeast

Kansas State University

Brush control is a major problem in eastern Kansas. The species involved are buckbrush, locust, dogwood, hedge, elm, redcedar, brambles, oaks and sumac. The main objective of brush control is to obtain an acceptable population of woody plants on rangeland to increase or maintain an optimum amount of area available for livestock grazing. Other potential benefits of brush control include: 1) increased forage quality; 2) increased animal production; 3) easier handling and care of animals; and 4) reduction of potential fire hazard if volatile fuels like cedars are removed. Total removal of all woody plants, however, is not necessary or recommended. Brush and trees around watering areas, in ravines, and other areas where they are difficult and expensive to control can provide shade and winter protection for livestock. They also provide much needed habitat for wildlife. Complete removal of these plants would have little effect on livestock-carrying capacity. If the trees are near watering areas, they should be removed to reduce the heavy grazing pressure in the watering area.

It seems that we focus on control after the problem develops instead of working to prevent the problem from developing in the first place. Prescribed burning can oftentimes keep rangeland almost free of unwanted brush. And, it can also be a low-cost way to control many woody species after establishment. Of course, it is most effective when brush and trees are small and adequate fuel (old grass) is available to generate a hot fire.

Combined with other control methods, it can reduce the total cost of obtaining control. Late spring burning is best for most brush species. The amount of control achieved is directly related to size of the woody plant, amount of fuel present (herbaceous material below the brush), kind of fire used, weather conditions favorable for a hot fire, and for most species, the level of food reserves.

Redcedar is effectively controlled by a burn. Seedlings and sprouts will be controlled by fire, whereas large, more mature trees probably won't be controlled. Burning in late spring for three or more consecutive years is required to control species that re-sprout. At that time the plant food reserves are low. Buckbrush, elm, oak, and hedge are a few examples of species that can be effectively controlled by burning. However, sumac can be enhanced by a late spring burn because the plant may be dormant when the prescribed burn occurs.

Chemical Control

All chemicals must be applied according to the directions on the label. Be sure to read all label information.

Most woody plants are susceptible to herbicides when applied properly. Chemicals that are translocated to or taken up by the roots are preferred. After heavy stands are reduced to a manageable level, spot treatment rather than broadcast treatment is best. The application of 'herbicides can be done by one of several methods. Be sure method of application is approved on herbicide label.

Aerial or Ground Application: Chemicals may be applied by air or ground sprayers when heavy stand or large areas are to be controlled. Timing, correct herbicide, conditions (growth stage), amount of spray solution (plant coverage), and management following application are important factors to consider. Most foliar applied herbicides should be applied at full leaf stage and plants are actively growing.

Basal Bark: Some species can be controlled by applying a mixture of diesel and herbicide to the lower 18-24 inches of the trunk. Wetting the bark to run off at the soil line is important to reduce root collar sprouts.

Cut Stump: Cutting trees and brush at or near ground level will result in re-sprouting with many species, except redcedar. Treating the cut surface after cutting with a herbicide will usually prevent regrowth. Treatment should be applied soon after cutting. Redcedars do not require stump treatment when cut below lowest limb.

Pellets or Granules: Spot treatments applied by hand or aerial application of pelleted or granular herbicides are effective when used properly. The herbicide is leached into the soil by rainfall and then taken up by the plants. Don't apply on frozen or water saturated soils. Soils of limestone or shale origin may contain enough clay that it will reduce effectiveness of these materials.

Soil Applied Liquids: Application and action is similar to pellets and granules except that they are for spot treatment only. They appear to work much better than pellets or granules on heavier clay soils. Once again, don't apply on frozen or water saturated soils.

USE ONLY LABELED CHEMICALS, CONSULT YOUR LOCAL EXTENSION

AGENT FOR THE LATEST RECOMMENDED CHEMICALS.

Table 17. Brush control chemicals for different woody species.

Basal Bark or Cut Stump Best when used on These species
Crossbow Dow/ Elanco Chemical Company

Range, Pasture & Non-Cropland.

1.0 part Crossbow to 20 parts diesel fuel.

Spray to point of runoff.

 A,C,D,E
Weedone 170 Rhone-Poulenc Ag. Company.

2,4-DP/gal. Non-Cropland.

1.0 part chemical to 20 parts diesel fuel.

 J
Tordon RTU Dow/ Elanco Chemical Company. Non-Cropland.Treat freshly cut stumps with undiluted chemical directly from container (RTU = Ready-to-Use). Tissue just inside of bark is most important to treat to wet point. J

Foliar
Crossbow Dow/ Elanco Chemical Company.

Range, Pasture & Non-Cropland

Spot, high volume 1.5 gal/100 gal. of water.

Wet leaves and green stems to drip point. For aerial application, helicopter only.

 A,C,D,E,H,I
Remedy

+ Tordon 22K

+ 2,4-D

 Dow/ Elanco Chemical Company.

Pasture & Rangeland.

Foliar broadcast ground or aerial.

Apply 1.0 pt. Remedy + 1.0 pt. Tordon 22K + 1.0 qt., 2,4-D LVE / acre.

For high volume foliar spot treatment mix 2.0 qts. Remedy + 2.0 qts. Tordon 22K + 2.0 qts. 2,4-D LVE in 100 gallons of water.

 A,C,D,E,F,H,I

Remedy + 2,4-D Pasture & Rangeland. For high volume foliar spot treatment. Mix 2.0 qts. Remedy + 2.0 qts. 2,4-D LVE in 100 gallons of water. For foliar broadcast ground or aerial. Apply 1.5 pt. Remedy + 1.0 qt. 2,4-D LVE/ Acre. A,C,D,E,F,H,I

Soil
Velpar L DuPont Range and Pastureland.

Ready-to-Use, spot treatment.

Use 2-4 milliliters/1 inch of stem diameter. Apply within 3 ft. of root collar.

Don't apply on frozen or saturated soil treated. Brush may re-leaf several times before dying. For thickets, apply 10 ml of chemical in a 6 ft. grid pattern.

 J
Spike 20P Dow/Elanco. Pastureland. Ready-to-Use.

Apply 0.5 oz/45 sq. ft.

Don't apply on frozen or saturated soil.

Treated brush may re-leaf several times.

 B,C,E,F,H,I

Species Key
A. Hedge E. Hackberry I. Multiflora Rose
B. Locust F. Oak (Blackjack/Post J. All A -I
C. Elm G. Persimmon
D. Mulberry H. Buckbrush & Sumac

All chemicals are subject to label statements. Those who apply chemicals are responsible for correct use. Always read the label before purchase and/or use. Be sure you know how to apply, rate to apply, time of year to apply and use restrictions. The User is Responsible.

RANGELAND WEED CONTROL

It is common for ranchers to consider most broadleaf plants to be weeds, even though they may be an important forage resource. From a strict livestock production aspect, the key to determine whether control should occur is whether that control will actually increase forage production for use by the grazing animal. And another criteria is to determine if the particular weed is "noxious" or not.

Control of muskthistle and sericea lespedeza must be controlled if considered noxious in your county. Annual weeds such as ragweed may not be a problem, especially if it is eaten by the grazing animal.

A prescribed burn can greatly reduce annual weeds when the burn is conducted after initial emergence of seedlings.

If you decide to control weeds with chemicals, please check with your County Extension Ag Agent and follow recommendations in the latest issue of Chemical Weed Control for Field Crops, Pastures, Rangeland and Non-Cropland publications from Kansas State University.

Muskthistle

Chemicals that can be used include: Banvel (2/3 pt/A) or Banvel (1/2pt/A) + 2,4-D LVE (3/4 qt/A) or Tordon 22K (1/2pt/A) or Tordon 22K (6 oz/A) + 2,4-D LVE (1.0 qt/A) or 2,4-D (1.5 - 2.0 qts/A) or Ally (0.2 - 0.3 oz/A). Please follow label directions. Most can be applied in fall or spring while thistle is in the rosette stage and soil moisture and air temperature is favorable for growth.

Sericea Lespedeza

Chemicals that can be used include: Ally (1/3 - 1/2 oz/A) when plants are flowering. Research in southeast Kansas shows September best time to treat if soil moisture is favorable for growth. Or, Remedy (1.5 pt/A), apply same time as for Ally.

Use a minimum of 20 gallon of spray solution per acre and follow label directions and include any additive like a non-ionic surfactant.

Prior treatment such as mowing or grazing can affect final outcome.

Recommendations

General

  • Adopt woody-plant-control procedures that result in practical and economical compromises between "no control" and eradicating all woody plants.
  • Focus control measures on sites with greatest potentials for producing desirable range forage; give least attention to sites with brush that will not respond economically to treatment.
  • Control new infestations or reinfestations of woody plants, after initial control measures have reduced stands to manageable levels, with procedures applied periodically for maintaining acceptable amounts of woody species.
Prescribed burning

  • Control scattered clumps of susceptible woody species by burning range in late spring when enough dead grass is available to carry the fire through stands of woody plants. Controlling brush requires intense heat, which can be generated with headfires when humidity is low and winds are from 5 to 20 mph.
  • In preparation, burn fireguards through brush and tree stands under less hazardous conditions of high humidity and low wind velocity.
  • Before starting any burning, notify fire departments, neighbors, and - if roadways downwind are near enough for smoke to be a hazard - appropriate authorities who control traffic.
  • Monitor immediate and long-range weather forecasts.
Mowing or cutting

  • Consider mowing range as an option to control woody species, particularly those not controlled effectively with fire. Root-sprouting species, however, must be mowed when their food reserves are low and the treatment must be used two or three successive years.
  • Kill eastern redcedar, especially trees that escape controlled burning, anytime with a single cutting to remove all green material. Although red-cedar is a nonsprouter, any green branches left after cutting will produce regrowth.
Chemical control

  • For best control of woody plants, use herbicides that are translocated to roots.
  • Apply herbicides at the proper time and calibrate sprayers to insure the desired application rate.
  • Do not use a herbicide unless its label includes directions for applying it on rangeland, and be absolutely certain to apply each herbicide or herbicide mixture according to all directions; heed all warnings and precautions given on the label.
  • After heavy stands of woody plants have been reduced to manageable levels, switch from broadcast to spot treatment and basal applications of herbicides. Broadcasting chemicals repeatedly eventually eliminates desirable forbs that make up "natural" protein complements to the low-quality range grasses.
  • When brush colonies do not contain enough grass or dead stems to carry a fire through the clumps, use herbicides, followed by prescribed burning to prevent reinfestation. Do not apply translocated herbicides and burn range the same season.
Biological control

  • Once woody vegetation is under control from prescribed burning, mechanical cutting, or chemical application, maintain regrowth, sprouts, and seedlings in a grazeable browse forms as long as possible through continuous grazing, especially during the growing season. Livestock can thus benefit from increased dietary selection; at the same time competition of woody vegetation with desirable grass will be reduced.
  • Reduce or eliminate stands of small soapweed by two-or-three consecutive years of continuous, moderate winter grazing (November to March) with cows (Jensen 1975). Although it is not necessary to starve cattle as an inducement for them to use small soapweed on winter range, overfeeding high-quality roughages and protein concentrates as range supplements could reduce their effectiveness as control agents.

Range Fertilization

Back to the top of page

Among the three major elements - nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium - used to fertilize Flint Hills bluestem range in the early 1950s, only nitrogen increased forage yields significantly (Mader 1956). In later fertilization comparisons on the same site, with and without residual and added phosphorus, nitrogen alone still was the only nutrient to increase yields of bluestem range significantly (Table 18). In addition, nitrogen fertilization improved the efficiency of soil-moisture use by bluestem range (Table 19).

Table 18. Yields of forage in 1963 on Flint Hills bluestem range fertilized that spring with phosphorus and nitrogen at rates indicated on sites that had not received phosphorus before 1963 compared with sites having residual P from annual applications, 1951 to 1955.

Fertilizer applied, spring 1963 Phosphorus added annually, 1951 to 1955
Phosphorus Nitrogen None1 44 lb P/A2
lb P/acre lb N/acre

Forage yield in 1963

(lb dry matter/A)

0 0 4,030 3,980
0 33 4,600 4,410
0 67 4,660 5,310
Average 4,430 4,570
20 0

4,540 4,160
20 33 4,890 5,190
20 67 4,560 5,770
Average 4,660 5,040

1. Plots with no phosphorus added from 1951 to 1955 contained 12 lb P/A in the upper six inches of soil before fertilization in 1963.

2. Plots that received phosphorus from 1951 to 1955 contained 90 to P/A in the upper six inches of soil before fertilization in 1963.

Table 19. Moisture-use efficiency of vegetation on Flint Hills bluestem range fertilized with 0 and 50 pounds N /acre, 1965 to 1969.

Nitrogen fertillization rate

Year

1965

1966

1967

1968

 Average

lb N/acre

Dry matter yield (lb/ inch of precipitation)

0 101 115 183 112 128
50 157 130 183 153 158

Applying 40 pounds of N per acre late each spring from 1972 to 1976 increased carrying capacity of grazed bluestem range 50 percent from 3.3 acres/steer to 2.18 acres/steer. Livestock performance, however, was more efficient on burned, fertilized range than on fertilized, unburned range (Table 20).

Table 20. Average beef production (lbs/acre and lbs/steer/day) on late spring burned and unburned bluestem range fertilized with nitrogen and grazed with yearling steers from May 1 to October 1, 1972 to 1976.

Range Burning

Treatment

 Nitrogen fertilization rate

(lbN/acre)

0 40 80
Burned May 1
lb/acre 58 83 93
lb/steer/day 1.29 1.26 1.06
Unburned
lb/acre 47 61 68
lb/steer/day 1.05 0.94 0.84

Comparing forage samples clipped from treated ranges indicated that burned, fertilized bluestem range produced slightly lower-quality forage than did unburned, nonfertilized range. Comparing forage samples collected from esophageal fistulated steers that had grazed on the two treatments, however, showed that except for crude protein, the animals selected diets similar in composition from both ranges. Other than close similarities in relative amounts of cellulose and hemicellulose in samples clipped by hand and those from esophageal fistulated animals, steers selected diets that differed greatly in chemical composition from the clipped samples. Nitrogen-fertilized Flint Hills bluestem ranges had to be burned in late spring to prevent shifts to undesirable plants in the vegetation. Kentucky bluegrass and western ragweed incresed dramatically in the unburned fertilized pastures.

Nitrogen fertilizer was applied annually during spring for four years at different rates on two contrasting range sites near Hays. N increased forage yields up to two or three times those on range without N (Figure 25). Applying 40 pounds of N per acre May 1 annually (for four years) on shortgrass range near Hays increased carrying capacity for yearling steers approximately 50 percent compared with that of unfertilized range, 3.34 acres/steer with 0 N and 2.18 acres/steer with 40 lb N. Although steer gains per head on the fertilized and unfertilized ranges were comparable, 198 lbs/steer with 0 N and 200 lbs/steer with 40 lb N /acre, beef production per acre on the fertilized range was increased more than 50 percent, 60 lb/acre with 0 N and 91 lbs/acre with 40 lb N /acre. Japanese brome and western wheatgrass were major forages during spring and early summer on fertilized range. Those species gave way to blue grama, buffalograss, and forbs during summer and early fall.

Recommendations

Flint Hills region

  • Burn fertilized range when big bluestem has an inch of new growth, usually in late April.
  • Apply 40 pounds of N per acre about May 1. Aerial application may be necessary on rough topography; otherwise, conventional ground rigs may be used.
  • Increased stocking rates on nitrogen-fertilized ranges approximately 50 percent above normal, conservative stocking rates for unfertilized ranges.
Mixed prairie and shortgrass regions

  • Apply 40 pounds of N per acre from early to late April and stock range when grasses begin spring growth. Sites with western wheatgrass and Japanese brome start to grow two to four weeks earlier than does vegetation on sites with all warm-season perennial grasses and forbs.
  • Increased stocking rates approximately 50 percent above normal, conservative stocking rates for unfertilized ranges.
General for all regions

  • Use the lowest-priced nitrogen fertilizer per unit of N that is compatible with type of application equipment required for the site; profit depends largely on the market prices of livestock and fertilizer.
  • If range vegetation fails to respond to 40 pounds of N per acre, add the most readily available form of phosphorus (40 to 60 pounds of P per acre) with nitrogen to small areas protected from livestock grazing; observe the treatment compared with nitrogen alone for a growing season before making major applications of fertilizer. On southeastern Kansas range, include potassium (60 to 80 pounds of K per acre) in small-scale trials. Normally, however, available phosphorus and potassium in Kansas range soils are adequate.
  • Take advantage of increased production and palatability of forage on fertilized range by stocking early in the growing season. Compensate for overstocking during drought years by removing livestock earlier than usual during the grazing season.
Reestablishing Range Grasses

Back to the top of page Reestablishing range grasses in undisturbed "preparatory crop residue" became virtually standardized in the 1950s, particularly under semi-arid conditions where clean-tilled seedbeds frequently erode and planted grasses sometimes fail to produce satisfactory stands (Cooper 1957). Although undisturbed crop residues reduce erosion and result in firm seedbeds, grass stands in Kansas Soil Bank plantings of the early 1960s were influenced greatly by climatic factors--stand success was lowest in the arid western counties and highest in the subhumid central counties (Table 22). The Conservation Reserve Program, authorized by the Food Security Act of 1985, resulted in 98% of the seedings made between 1986-89 being established by at least the end of the third growing season following seeding. This success level is largely the result of using adequate preparatory crop residue and weed control during the first 60 to 90 days of the first growing season.

Studies in Kansas have been directed at maximizing benefits of the preparatory crop residue method of providing a seedbed for planted grasses. Major findings support grass-establishment recommendations regarding: (1) preparatory crop-harvesting treatments - ecessive amounts of preparatory crop must be harvested to reduce spring planting cover; (2) effects of amount and condition of preparatory crop residue on moisture-holding capacity of grass seedbeds - soil water is greatest under high amounts of surface litter(Figure 26) and least under low amounts due to reduced soil temperatures with greater amounts of surface litter, on competitive weed numbers - weedy plant numbers were highest under low litter amounts, and on first-year grass stands ; (3) optimum grass planting dates (Figure 28) ; (4) effects of first-year competitive weed-control treatments (including grazing) on first- and second-year grass stands (Figure 27).

Recommendations

Seedbed preparation and grass planting

_ The year before grasses are planted, establish forage or grain sorghum types using conventional cropping practices and methods appropriate to the crop to be harvested. Herbicides used should have a short residual life to prevent carryover into the seeding year.

_ All preparatory crops must be managed to prevent the production of seed. High levels of volunteer plants the following season can reduce or prevent the germination, emergence, or growth of grass seedlings.

_ Leave a minimum of 12 inches of preparatory crop stubble by cutting forage types for hay or silage and combine harvesting grain types. Leave stubble of comparable heights by grazing in the fall after a killing frost. Base harvesting method on the practicality of removing a part of the preparatory crop. Site and weather conditions may dictate leaving the total crop for grass seedbed cover. If the crop is to be left unharvested, clip heads in the boot to bloom stage to prevent volunteer plants during the seeding year.

_ Do not disturb soil or preparatory crop residue with tillage equipment.

_ Plant grass seed from regionally adapted sources, at 20 pure live seeds (PLS) per square foot, from late March to early May, with a standard grass drill (equipped with double-disc furrow openers, depth bands, separate hoppers for chaffy and free-flowing seed, and presswheels. Fertilizing grass seedlings during the seeding year is not recommended, but when the soil pH is below 6.0, lime or phosphorus must be added to insure good germination, emergence, and growth of seedlings. If nitrogen fertilizer is applied, added fertility may intensify competition from unwanted grasses and broadleaf weeds.

Species to plant

_ Revegetate marginal cropping areas--those with complex mosaics of soils, range sites, and degrees of soil erosion--with mixtures of the most productive native species, considering (in order): grazing potential, site conservation, wildlife, and esthetics.

_ Plant waterways to desirable cool- or warm-season hay-type perennial grasses. If more than one species is seeded, do not mix warm- and cool-season species.

_ To establish grass as an alternative to cultivated crops on highly productive farmland, plant single species or simple mixtures of warm-season tall grasses that respond efficiently to nitrogen fertilization, are palatable, have inherently high livestock carrying capacity, and resist encroachment by less-productive vegetation.

Managing first-year grass plantings

_ Keep in mind that moisture and temperatures that favor grass-seed germination and seedling emergence also favor competing weeds that grow much faster than the planted grasses.

_ Be aware that conventional weed-control measures (mowing or herbicides) are expensive and usually ineffective in controlling competing vegetation enough to improve grass establishment significantly. Weed control during the first 60 to 90 days of the growing season can be critical to the establishment of the seeded grasses. Failure to control weeds may cause competition for light and can significantly reduce stand establishment. Weed control can be done using mowing, herbicides, and/or grazing as best fits the situation.

If available, preplant or preemerge herbicides are preferred over mowing or post emergent herbicides for weed control. Post emergent weed control is rarely possible with the herbicides currently labeled.

Consider the weed "crop" in first-year grass plantings as a grazing resource that would otherwise be lost if not used by livestock.

1. Begin grazing when weeds are two to four inches tall and sufficiently abundant to furnish a practical forage supply, usually late spring to early May.

2. Regulate stocking rates for optimum animal performance.

3. Disperse livestock grazing as evenly as possible using conventional distribution aids.

4. Remove livestock when necessary to prevent soil puddling during periods of high rainfall.

5. Avoid high intensity-low frequency grazing strictly for weed control unless livestock are physiologically adjusted to radical changes in diet.

_ If first-year plantings are not grazed, allow them to develop with a minimum of time and money invested; stands will establish at about the same rate with or without conventional, mechanical, or chemical weed control.

If sufficient fuel and soil moisture are available, a prescribed burn will significantly improve stand development and limit weed growth.

Managing reestablished range

_ From the time reestablished ranges are planted, manage them as grazing resources.

_ Because it is impossible to duplicate native grassland in the revegetation process, livestock may or may not use reestablished range most efficiently if given free access to both seeded and native vegetation.

1. Graze reestablished range concurrently with native range when water development and fencing make separate management uneconomical.

2. Manage reestablished range separately from native range if practical, and especially if differences in grazing cause inefficient use of either native or reestablished range.

3. Use reestablished range as a complement to native range by concentrating livestock on one or the other or allowing simultaneous grazing.

4. When fertilizer cost-livestock price relationships appear favorable, apply 40 lb of N per acre about May 1 and increase stocking rates approximately 50 percent above normal rates for unfertilized reestablished range. Increased forage production from nitrogen fertilization of reestablished range depends largely on inherent soil fertility and kinds of grasses the site supports. Thus, yield increases of tall grasses on highly productive sites are greater per unit of N than are increases from the same grasses or shorter ones on less productive sites. In addition, prescribed burning or herbicides may be needed to control the growth of competing broadleaf and grass species stimulated by fertilization.

Native Hay

Back to the top of page

Harvest date is the most important operator-controlled factor in producing native hay. It can affect hay yield, forage quality, stand composition, and usable regrowth.

Near Manhattan, during an eight-year period, the best quantity-quality relationship for native hay came from harvesting in mid July (Figure 29). Hay quality was also affected by cutting date. As the growing season progressed, indigestible plant tissue increased as plants translocated nitrogen compounds to stem bases and underground stems (rhizomes). It was not possible to obtain maximum quantity and quality hay in the same cutting. The compromise cutting stage near Manhattan was early-to-mid July. Reduced plant-food reserves decreased hay yields the next year when harvest was later. After being cut, active hay plants produced new top growth. That drew on stored food in the crowns and roots. When time between harvesting and grass dormancy was not adequate for replenishing reserves, plants went into winter with low food reserves (Figure 30). Hay production was lowered the next season. Haying in August and September also changed stand composition; as desirable warm-season perennial grasses became less abundant, undesirable vegetation increased (Figure 31). After eight years of being cut September 1, a bluestem meadow was dominated by showywand goldenrod, a weedy forb of low value for hay.

Clipping (to stimulate grazing of plant regrowth after hay had been cut) reduced yields, tiller numbers, and food reserves the next season. The same would hold true for cutting a meadow more than once during the growing season or cutting grazed pastures late in the growing season.

Nitrogen appeared to be the only fertilizer that increased herbage yields enough to warrant using it on native hay meadows. Applying 33 to 67 pounds of N per acre increased hay yields 0.75 to 1.00 ton of dry matter per acre; adding phosphorus to the extent of increasing the amount of available P seven- to eightfold in the top six inches of soil had no consistently significant effect on hay yields. Crude protein of early- and late-cut hay also was increased by nitrogen fertilization; but again, phosphorus had no important effect.

Nitrogen fertilization of a Flint Hills bluestem hay meadow several years in a row caused an increase in cool-season Kentucky bluegrass. Such a composition change negated benefits of N fertilization. Late-spring burning controlled that shift, so meadows fertilized with nitrogen must be burned in late spring. Otherwise, too much of the hay produced will be low-producing weedy plants.

Recommendations

  • Cut native hay in early-to-mid July in northern parts of Kansas and slightly earlier in southern Kansas.
  • Do not allow livestock to graze regrowth until after frost; late summer-early fall grazing lowers meadow productivity the next growing season.
  • Apply 30 to 40 pounds of N per acre about May 1, depending on cost of nitrogen application, anticipated increase in tonnage, and price of hay.
  • In eastern Kansas, burn fertilized meadows in late spring (April 15 in southeast; May 1 in northeast) to control increases in undesirable weedy vegetation. If regrowth is grazed after frost, enough grass must remain as fuel to carry a late-spring fire.

Common and Scientific Plant Names


Back to the top of page

Common Name Scientific Name

Grasses

alkali sacaton Sporobolus airoides (Torr.) Torr.

big bluestem Andropogon gerardi Vitman

blue grama Bouteloua gracilis (H.B.K.) Lag. ex Steud.

bluestem Andropogon L.

buffalograss Buchloe dactyloides (Nutt.) Engelm.

grama Bouteloua Lag.

hairy grama Bouteloua hirsuta Lag.

indiangrass Sorghastrum nutans (L.) Nash

inland saltgrass Distichlis stricta (Torr.) Rydb.

Japanese brome Bromus japonicus Thunb.

Kentucky bluegrass Poa pratensis L.

little barley Hordeum pusillum Nutt.

little bluestem Andropogon scoparius Michx.

needleandthread Stipa comata Trin. & Rupr.

prairie sandreed Calamovilfa longifolia (Hook.) Scribn.

prairie threeawn Aristida oligantha Michx.

purple threeawn Aristida purpurea Nutt.

sacaton Sporobolus R. Br.

saltgrass Distichilis Raf.

sandreed Calamovilfa Hack.

sand dropseed Sporobolus cryptandrus (Torr.) A. Gray

sideoats grama Bouteloua curtipendula (Michx.) Torr.

smooth brome Bromus inermis Leyss.

sorghum Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench

switchgrass Panicum virgatum L.

tall dropseed Sporobolus asper (Michx.) Kunth

tall fescue Festuca arundinacea Schreb.

western wheatgrass Agropyron smithii Rydb.

Oth er PlantsOther Plants

ashy goldenrod Solidago mollis Bartl.

blackberry Rubus L.

broom snakeweed Gutierrezia sarothrae (Pursh) Britt. & Rusby

broomweed Gutierrezia dracunculoides (DC.) Blake

buckbrush Symphoricarpos orbiculatus Moench

bulrush Scirpus L.

common pricklypear Opuntia humifusa Raf.

fine-leaf sedges Carex L.

goldenrod Solidago L.

hickory Carya Nutt.

horseweed Conyza canadensis (L.) Cron.

ironweed Vernonia baldwini Torr.

Louisiana sagewort Artemisia ludoviciana Nutt.

oak Quercus L.

osageorange Maclura pomifera (Raf.) Schneid.

plains pricklypear Opuntia polycantha Haw.

Other Plants

pricklypear Opuntia Mill.

redcedar Juniperus virginiana L.

roughleaf dogwood Cornus drummandi Meyer

sandsage Artemisia filifolia Torr.

scarlet globemallow Sphaeralcea coccinea (Pursh) Rydb.

showywand goldenrod Solidago mollis Bartl.

slimflower scurfpea Psoralea tenuiflora Pursh

small soapweed Yucca glauca Nutt.

smooth sumac Rhus glabra L.

snow-on-the-mountain Euphorbia marginata Pursh

upright prairieconeflower Ratibida columnifera (Nutt.) Woot. & Standl.

wavyleaf thistle Cirsium undulatum (Nutt.) Spreng.

western ragweed Ambrosia psilostachya DC.

yellowspine thistle Cirsium ochrocentrum Gra y

Selected Bibliography

Back to the top of page

Albertson, F.W. 1937. Ecology of mixed prairie in west-central Kansas. Ecol. Monogr. 7:481-547.

Aldous, A.E. 1934. Effect of burning on Kansas bluestem pastures. Kansas Agr. Expt. Sta. Tech. Bull. 38.

Allen, Leland James. 1973. Effects of range burning and nitrogen fertilization on the nutritive value of bluestem grass. MS Thesis, Dept. Animal Sciences & Industry, Kansas State University, Manhattan.

Allen, Leland J., Leniel H. Harbers, Robert R. Schalles, Clenton E. Owensby, and Ed F. Smith. 1976. Range burning and fertilizing related to nutritive value of bluestem grass. J. Range Manage. 29:306-308.

Anderson, Kling L. 1940. Deferred grazing of bluestem pastures. Kansas Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 291.

Anderson, Kling L. 1965. Time of burning as it affects soil moisture in an ordinary upland bluestem prairie in the Flint Hills. J. Range Manage. 18:311-216.

Anderson, Kling L. 1967. Grazing management and fire in the Flint Hills. Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci. 70:171-176.

Anderson, Kling L., and Claude L. Fly. 1955. Vegetation-soil relationships in Flint Hills bluestem pastures. J. Range Manage. 8:163-169.

Anderson, Kling L., and Clenton E. Owensby. 1969. Common names of a selected list of plants. Kansas Agr. Expt. Sta. Tech. Bull. 117 (revised).

Anderson, Kling L., Ed F. Smith, and Clenton E. Owensby. 1970. Burning bluestem range. J. Range Manage. 23:81-92.

Burzlaff, Donald F., John Launchbaugh, and James Stubbendieck. 1975. The growth and development of blue grama ( Bouteloua gracilis (H.B.K.) Lag ex Steud.) Texas Tech University Range and Wildlife Information Series No. T-9-153.

Choate, Jerry R., and Eugene D. Fleharty. 1975. Synopsis of native, recent mammals of Ellis County, Kansas. Occasional Papers. The Museum, Texas Tech University. 37:1-80.

Cooper, H.W. 1957. Some plant materials and improved techniques used in soil and water conservation in the Great Plains. J. Soil and Water Conserv. 12:163-168.

Costello, David F. 1944. Efficient cattle production on Colorado ranges. Colorado Agr. Ext. Bull. 383-A.

Dary, David A. 1974. The buffalo book. Sage Books, The Swallow Press, Inc. Chicago, Illinois.

Dyksterhuis, E.J. 1958. Range conservation as based on sites and condition classes. J. Soil and Water Conserv. 13:151-155.

Hanks, R.J., and Kling L. Anderson. 1957. Pasture burning and moisture conservation. J. Soil and Water Conserv. 12:228-229.

Harlan, Jack R. 1960. Production characteristics of Oklahoma forages: Native range. Oklahoma Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. B-547.

Hensel, R.L. 1923. Effect of burning on vegetation in Kansas pastures. J. Agr. Res. 23:631-647.

Herbel, Carlton H. 1971. A review of research related to development of grazing systems on native ranges of the Western United States. Jornada Expt. Range Rpt. No. 3.

Herbel, C.H., and Kling L. Anderson. 1959. Response of true prairie vegetation on major Flint Hills range sites to grazing treatment. Ecol. Monogr. 29:171-186.

Hickey, Wayne C., Jr. 1969. A discussion of grazing management systems and some pertinent literature (abstracts and excerpts) 1895-1966. U.S. Dept. Agr. For. Service, Denver, Colorado. Non-classified Rpt.

Hopkins, Harold, F.W. Albertson, and Andrew Riegel. 1948. Some effects of burning upon a prairie in west-central Kansas. Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci. 51:131-141.

Hulbert, Lloyd C. 1955. Ecological studies of Bromus tectorum and other annual bromegrasses. Ecol. Monogr. 25:181-213.

Hyde, Robert M., and Clenton E. Owensby. 1971. Bluestem range burning. Kansas Agr. Ext. Service Leaflet. L-277.

Hyde, Robert M., and Clenton E. Owensby. 1972. Fertilizing native grassland. Kansas Agr. Ext. Service Leaflet. L-296 Revised.

Hyde, Robert M., and Clenton E. Owensby. 1975. Bluestem haying. Kansas Agr. Ext. Service Leaflet. L-281.

Jensen, Peter N. 1975. Personnel communication: Control of small soapweed in Nebraska by winter grazing with cattle. U.S. Dept. Agr. Soil Conserv. Service, 134 S. 12th St., Rm. 604, Lincoln, NE 68508.

Klipple, G.E. 1964. Early- and late-season grazing versus season-long grazing of short-grass vegetation in the Central Great Plains. U.S. Dept. Agr. For. Service Res. Paper RM-11.

Launchbaugh, J.L. 1957. The effect of stocking rate on cattle gains and on native shortgrass vegetation in west-central Kansas. Kansas Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 394.

Launchbaugh, J.L. 1958. Grazing reseeded pastures, buffalograss, western wheatgrass, intermediate wheatgrass, on lowlands at Hays, Kansas. Kansas Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 400.

Launchbaugh, J.L. 1962. Soil fertility investigations and effects of commercial fertilizers on reseeded vegetation in west-central Kansas. J. Range Manage. 15:27-34.

Launchbaugh, J.L. 1964. Effects of early spring burning on yields of native vegetation. J. Range Manage. 17:5-6.

Launchbaugh, J.L. 1964. Seeding western wheatgrass with increasing rates of perennial ryegrass or smooth brome in waterways. J. Range Manage. 17:245-248.

Launchbaugh, J.L. 1967. Vegetation relationships associated with intensity of summer grazing on a clay upland range site in the Kansas 20- to 24-inch precipitation zone. Kansas Agr. Expt. Sta. Tech. Bull. 154.

Launchbaugh, J.L. 1969. Range condition classification based on regressions of herbage yields on summer stocking rates. J. Range Manage. 22:97-101.

Launchbaugh, J.L. 1971. Upland seeded pastures compared for grazing steers at Hays, Kansas. Kansas Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 548.

Launchbaugh, J.L. 1972. Effects of fire on shortgrass and mixed prairie species. Proc. Annual Tall Timbers Fire Ecol. Conf.:129-151.

Launchbaugh, John. 1976. Graze first-year native grass plantings. Kansas Agr. Expt. Sta. Keeping Up With Research 23.

Launchbaugh, J.L., and Kling L. Anderson. 1963. Grass reseeding investigations at Hays and Manhattan, Kansas. Kansas Agr. Expt. Sta. Tech. Bull. 128.

Launchbaugh, J.L., R.E. Bement, D.F. Burzlaff, J.K. Lewis, W.G. McCully, W.E. McMurphy, J.R. Harlan, R.D. Pieper, Frank Rauzi, J.E. Taylor, W.C. Whitman, and O.G. Bentley (Editors). 1966. A stand establishment survey of grass plantings in the Great Plains. Nebraska Agr. Expt. Sta. Great Plains Council Rpt. No. 23.

Launchbaugh, J.L., and J.R. Brethour. 1968. Summer precipitation and steer gain interactions on supplemented shortgrass range. J. Range Manage. 21:145-148.

Launchbaugh, John L., and John R. Brethour. 1977. Nitrogen fertilization on short-grass range. Proc. Western Kansas Range-Livestock Manage. Clinic, Hays. MF-443:1-4.

Launchbaugh, John L., and John R. Brethour. 1977. Supplemental feeding for steers on shortgrass range. Proc. Western Kansas Range-Livestock Manage. Clinic, Hays. MF-443:12-14.

Launchbaugh, John L., John R. Brethour, and Lynn Gibson. 1977. Nitrogen fertilization of planted switchgrass dryland pasture. Proc. Western Kansas Range-Livestock Manage. Clinic, Hays. MF-443:8-11.

Launchbaugh, J.L., and Clenton E. Owensby. 1970. Seeding rate and first-year stand relationships for six native grasses. J. Range Manage. 23:414-417.

McIlvain, E.H. 1976. Seeded grasses and temporary pasture as a complement to native rangeland for beef cattle production. Integration of Resources for Beef Cattle Production Symposium. Proc. 29th Annual Meeting, Soc. Range Mange.

McIlvain, E.H., A.L. Baker, W.R. Kneebone, and D.H. Gates. 1955. Nineteen-year summary of range improvement studies at the U.S. Southern Great Plains Field Sta., Woodward, Oklahoma, 1937-1955. Woodward Prog. Rpt. 5506.

McIlvain, E.H., and D.A. Savage. 1951. Eight-year comparisons of continuous and rotational grazing on Southern Plains Experimental Range. J. Range Manage. 4:42-47.

McIlvain, E.H., and M.C. Shoop. 1969. Grazing systems in the Southern Great Plains. Abst., 22nd Annual Meeting, Soc. Range Manage.

McIlvain, E.H., and M.C. Shoop. 1971. Moving and mixing range steers. J. Range Manage. 24:270-272.

McKendrick, Jay D., Clenton E. Owensby, and Robert M. Hyde. 1975. Big bluestem and indiangrass vegetative production and annual reserve carbohydrate and nitrogen cycles. Agro-Ecosystems 2:75-93.

McMurphy, W.E., and K.L. Anderson. 1963. Burning bluestem range - forage yields. Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci. 66:49-51.

McMurphy, Wilfred E., and Kling L. Anderson. 1965. Burning Flint Hills range. J. Range Manage. 18:265-269.

Mader, E.L. 1956. The influence of certain fertilizer treatments on the native vegetation of Kansas prairie. PhD Dissertation, Dept. of Botany, University of Nebraska, Lincoln.

Moser, Lowell, and Kling L. Anderson. 1964. Nitrogen and phosphorus fertilization of bluestem range. Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci. 67:613-616.

Owensby, Clenton. 1975. Controlling eastern redcedar. Kansas Agr. Ext. Service Leaflet. L-457.

Owensby, Clenton E., and Kling L. Anderson. 1967. Yield responses to time of burning in the Kansas Flint Hills. J. Range Manage. 20:12-16.

Owensby, Clenton E., and Kling L. Anderson. 1969. Effect of clipping date on loamy upland bluestem range. J. Range Manage. 22:351-354.

Owensby, Clenton E., Kenneth R. Blan, B.J. Eaton, and O.G. Russ. 1973. Evaluation of eastern redcedar infestations in the northern Flint Hills. J. Range Manage. 256-260.

Owensby, Clenton E., Robert M. Hyde, and Kling L. Anderson. 1970. Effects of clipping and supplemental nitrogen and water on loamy upland bluestem range. J. Range Manage. 23:341-346.

Owensby, Clenton E., and John L. Launchbaugh. 1971. Acidifying nitrogen compounds and range fertilization. J. Range Manage. 24:203-206.

Owensby, Clenton E., and J.L. Launchbaugh. 1976. Controlling weeds and brush on range land. Kansas Agr. Ext. Service Leaflet. L-465.

Owensby, Clenton E., and John L. Launchbaugh. 1977. Burning central Kansas shortgrass range. Proc. Western Kansas Range-Livestock Manage. Clinic, Hays. MF-443:5-7.

Owensby, Clenton E., and John L. Launchbaugh. 1977. Controlling prairie threeawn ( Aristid oligantha) in central and eastern Kansas with fall burning. J. Range Manage. 30:337-339.

Owensy, Clenton E., Gary M. Paulsen, and Jay D. McKendrick. 1970. Effect of burning and clipping on big bluestem reserve carbohydrates. J. Range Manage. 23:358-362.

Owensby, Clenton E., Jerry R. Rains, and Jay D. McKendrick. 1974. Effects of one year of intensive clipping on big bluestem. J. Range Manage. 27:341-343.

Owensby, Clenton E., and Ed F. Smith. 1972. Burning true prairie. Proc. Third Mid-west Prairie Conf. Manhattan.

Owensby, Clenton E., and Ed F. Smith. 1975. Intensive early stocking of bluestem range. In Bluestem Range Management Clinic. Kansas Agr. Expt. Sta. Prog. Rpt. 244:21-26.

Owensby, Clenton E., Ed. F. Smith, and Kling L. Anderson. 1973. Deferred-rotation grazing with steers in the Kansas Flint Hills. J. Range Manage. 26:393-395.

Owensby, Clenton E., and John Bruce Wyrill, III. 1973. Effects of range burning on Kansas Flint Hills soils. J. Range Manage. 26:185-188.

Rains, Jerry R., Clenton E. Owensby, and Kenneth Kemp. 1975. Effects of nitrogen fertilization, burning, and grazing on reserve constituents of big bluestem. J. Range Manage. 28:358-362.

Roe, Frank Gilbert. 1951. The North American buffalo. Univ. of Toronto Press.

Sauer, Carl O. 1950. Grassland climax, fire, and man. J. Range Manage. 3:16-21.

Shiflet, Thomas N., and Harold F. Heady. 1971. Specialized grazing systems: Their place in range management. U.S. Dept. Agr. Soil Conserv. Service. SCS-TP-152.

Stubbendieck, J., Michael A. Foster, and Mickey R. Jones. 1976. Range management research in the Nebraska Panhandle. Nebraska Panhandle Sta. Prog. Rpt.:2-22.

Woolfolk, John S., Ed F. Smith, Robert R. Schalles, Benny E. Brent, Leniel H. Harbers, and Clenton E. Owensby. 1975. Effects of nitrogen fertilization and late-spring burning of bluestem range on diet and performance of steers. J. Range Manage. 28:190-193.

Return to KSU Range Page