The Costs and Benefits of Using Grazing as a Management tool to

Control Phragmites autralis in Wetlands:

A Project IntroductionBrittany Duncan, Graduate Student in Ecology

Kari Veblen, Assistant Professor, Department of Wildland Resources

Karin Kettenring, Associate Professor, Department of Watershed Sciences

Utah State University, Ecology Center

The Problem: Phragmites australis is taking over Wetlands

Growth Pattern- Forms Monocultures Up to 13ft tall

Very dense/close growing stems

Lots of litter

Reproduces via seeds and stolens/rhizomes

Takes advantage of highly nutritious and disturbed environments

Outcompetes other wetland plants Destroys habitat for wetland birds

and other wildlife

Picture courtesy of: http://plants.usda.gov/java/largeImage?imageID=phco15_001_avd.tif

History Introduced in early

1900’s from Eurasia. Utah- More recent

invasion after the mid-1980 floods Wiped out native

vegetation, and allowed for Phragmites to dominate

Important because the Great Salt Lake is essential for migrating birds, and habitat around it is dramatically decreasing

Photo courtesy of: http://www.historytogo.utah.gov/utah_chapters/utah_today/floods.html

Management

Managers have yet to find a cost and time efficient method for management.

Current Techniques Herbicide

Mechanical Methods

Burning

Flooding

Targeted Grazing- gaining popularity, but not well studied

Picture courtesy of: http://www.invasiveplants.net/phragmites/problem.htm

Common Questions Will cattle eat Phragmites?

YES!! Actually quite Nutritious Crude Protein= ~20%

Digestible Dry Matter ranges from 55-40%

Currently grazed from May to mid-September

Health and Safety of Cattle in Wetlands? Sites must be dried out

Illness and injury can occur (i.e. Foot rot).

*Best with educated/conditioned cattle

Photo courtesy of Steve Young and newsromm.unl.edu/announce/beef/2462/13953

Thesis

What are the COSTS and BENEFITS of using different grazing INTENSITIES as a management tool in Wetlands?

1-Plant composition and reproduction

2-Nutrient Cycling

3-Bird density and Species Composition

Methods

Site Locations

All located around the Great Salt Lake

3 on DWR Wildlife Management Areas

At least 1 on Sovereign Lands (State, Forestry, and Fire)

Possibly 1 at Bear Rive Migratory Bird Refuge

Sites: Howard-Slough

Sites: Crystal at Farmington Bay

Sites: Harold Crane

Theory: Piosphere Definition: The zone of influence of grazing on

a region's vegetation and soil http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/piosphere

"development of a distinct ecological system in which the interactions are determined by the existence of the water-point and by the capacity of the animals to forage away from the water-point.” https://www.zotero.org/groups/savanna_ecology/items/NW4FG65B

Grazing radius of 2-5 km around watering points. (Rajabov, 2009); Large mammals up to 8 km (Thrash 1999); Cattle can be over 2km (Thrash 1999)

Tall, thick grass can slow grazing efficiency

Photo from: http://www.gis.usu.edu/~doug/SERDP/Pubs/SRM2000/

Study Design: Theory

Very High Intensity

High IntensityMedium Intensity

Low Intensity

Very Low to No Grazing

Herbicide Herbicide

Herbicide

Theory: Piosphere and Herbicide

Study Design Conti. Time Frame:

2 summers of grazing (Early May-Mid July)

2 years of Herbicide Treatment

2 years of monitoring

5 piospheres (n=5) Size 0.25-1 acre

Measurements taken along a gradient of grazing intensity

6 plots for data collection per intensity zone

Total=150 data points

Measurements Plants

Biomass

Reproduction

Changes in Plant communities/ soil

Nutrients Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Ammonium

In Soil, Water, Plants, and cow patties

Microbial Enzymes

Conclusion Goal: To be able to recommend the best grazing practice for

Phragmites control and wetland restoration This study will help unravel the complicated relationship

among wetlands, invasive species, nutrients, and cattle. The Piosphere should allow for a cost effective way to display

the relationship at various levels of grazing. A very large cooperation between many individuals,

organizations, and disciplines (ranchers, land managers, professors, students …)

Acknowledgements Utah Forestry, Fire, and State Lands

Primary Funders of Project

Utah Department of Wildlife Resources

Allowing us to conduct the study on their management areas, and assisting with project implementation

Local Ranchers: Ryan Clegg, John Diamond, Matt Marriott, Ed Gilmorr

Volunteering to participate in project

References Berger, Randy. 2013-2014. Raw Phargmites nutrient data.

Hazelton, E.L.G., T.J. Mozdzer, D.M. Burdick, K.M. Kettenring, and D.F. Whigham. 2014. Phragmites australis management in the United States: 40 years of methods and outcomes. AoB Plants.

Interviews with Ranchers and Land managers: Ryan Clegg, Matt Marriott, Rich Hansen, and Chad Cranney

Mitsch, W.J., and J.G. Gosselink. 2007. Wetlands. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey. 571p.

Silliman, B.R, T. Mozder, C. Angelini, J.E. Brundage, P. Esselink, J.P. Bakker, K.B. Gedan, J. van de Koppel, and A.H. Baldwin. 2014. Livestock as a potential biological control agent for an invasive wetland plant. PeerJ 2:e567;DOI 10.7717/peerj.567.

Thrash, I., and J.F. Derry. 1999. The nature and modelling of piospheres: a reviw. Koe

Thanks!!!!!

Photo courtesy of; http://www.fws.gov/nwrs/threecolumn.aspx?id=2147484863