Patch-Hay Grazing – Just Another of Many Ways to Create Habitat Heterogeneity

Managing grasslands for biological diversity and resilience depends a lot on habitat heterogeneity. Every plant and animal in the prairie has its own needs and preferences related to factors like vegetation height and density, diversity of blooming flowers, the amount of exposed bare ground, and many others. To provide for all those needs, we have to manage in a way that provides all those habitat types.

Even more, we want to manage so that those various habitat types occur in different places each year in a kind of shifting mosaic of habitat patches. That allows mobile creatures to move to where they want to live, hunt, forage, mate, etc. It also allows plants to experience the growth conditions they like best at least every few years. As a result, no species consistently wins or loses and everybody stays in the game (persists in the prairie).

Sedge wrens (left) and upland sandpipers (right) need very different habitat structure for nesting. If you want both birds to nest in the same prairie, you need patches of tall/dense vegetation for sedge wrens and large areas of short vegetation for upland sandpipers.
Entire-leaf rosinweed (left) does well in prairies that haven’t been burned or grazed recently but daisy fleabane (right) is a biennial that does best after grazing or another treatment temporarily weakens dominant perennial plants. Consistent management in any particular place will likely eliminate one of these species over time.

There are lots of effective ways to create this kind of shifting mosaic and support a strong diversity of plants and animals (and other organisms). Foundationally, it just requires managers to split a prairie into multiple patches each year and make sure that each patch is both different from its neighbors and different than it was the previous year. Mowing, burning, and grazing are all ways to manipulate habitat structure and growing conditions.

All of those treatments can be applied at any time throughout the year, giving you a lot of options to play with. In addition, if you mow, you can vary the timing and number of times you mow a particular spot during the season, but you can also adjust the mower height each time. Grazing is even more flexible because you can vary timing, intensity, and duration to achieve a wide variety of results. Fire is the least flexible, but even so, you can burn during any season, as long as you have enough fuel (dry vegetation) present to carry fire. You may also be able to take advantage of fuel and weather conditions to create either a complete burn or a patchy one, depending upon your preferences.

If both fire and grazing are options for you, patch-burn grazing can be a terrific way to create a shifting mosaic. Within a patch-burn grazed prairie, large grazing animals (e.g., bison or cattle) focus their grazing in recently-burned areas much more than unburned areas. Managers burn a new patch each year to move the grazing pressure and rest around the grassland. We usually burn around 1/3 to 1/4 of the total site, depending upon how many years it usually takes for burned/grazed areas to fully recover. In drier and/or less productive sites, recovery from being burned and then grazed all season takes longer, so we burn a smaller percentage of the total area each year. Within that basic framework, there are lots of options regarding stocking rate, timing and duration of the grazing period, and more – allowing you to tailor the general approach to your specific objectives.

Patch-burn grazing at The Nature Conservancy’s Platte River Prairies. Cattle are focusing their grazing on a recent (summer) burn but have access to the unburned areas as well.

Patch-burn grazing, however, relies on frequent and consistent use of prescribed fire, which isn’t logistically possible for a lot of people. As a result, we’ve experimented with other approaches to “focal grazing” where we encourage grazers to do most of their grazing in one part of a larger grassland and then shift that focus patch around through space and time. One of those approaches is open gate rotational grazing, which takes advantage of the kind of fence and water infrastructure most ranchers already have, but creates more heterogeneity than most rotational grazing strategies. This summer, we’re testing virtual fencing as a way to influence cattle grazing patterns, and have a lot of optimism about that technology as well.

An additional method we’ve used over the years, and (finally) the topic of this post, is something we call patch-hay grazing. It’s not very complicated. It’s really just patch-burn grazing, but instead of burning, we cut hay where we want to focus grazing pressure. As with patch-burn grazing, the key is to create an area where fresh, nutritious grass growth, without any standing dead vegetation, lures grazers in and encourages them to spend most of their grazing time in that patch.

Cattle grazing in recently hayed prairie back in 2013.
Same prairie/year as above. You can see the edge of the unhayed prairie on the left side of the photo. The cattle had access to the unhayed area but spent little time there.

The results we’ve seen with patch-hay grazing have been very similar to patch-burn grazing, though we are still experimenting and learning. Both cattle and bison gravitate toward recently hayed areas and spend the majority of their time grazing there. That leaves the unhayed areas mostly ungrazed.

We’ve cut hay at various times of year across the growing season and have seen good success with everything we’ve tried. I’d say the biggest concern we’ve run into is that if we cut hay too late in the summer (e.g., late August), especially if we have a dry autumn, there isn’t always enough regrowth to lure grazers in. When that happens, they wander around and create small grazing lawns distributed across much of the pasture. The next spring, they tend to start on those small patches again instead of focusing solely on the hayed area. It’s not terrible, but the grazing isn’t as concentrated as we’d like.

This hay patch was cut in early August last year (2025). This photo was taken after cutting and before baling.
Here’s the equipment that was used.
Hay on the ground after cutting.
Here you can see part of the unhayed portion in the background.
This picture shows the same site the following spring (mid-April of 2026). The green patch is what was hayed in August of 2025.
Here’s a closer look at that hay patch. You can see the cattle (little black specks) grazing in the hayed area.

The nice thing about the concept of patch-hay grazing is that it can be incorporated into lots of situations. You can run it as a season-long grazing system as we usually do – cutting hay to concentrate grazing in one area more than others. But you can also mix some hay harvesting into just about any grazing approach. If there are parts of a pasture cows don’t often graze, you could hay those areas (assuming topography allows it) to encourage more grazing pressure. You could also incorporate haying into a rotational system. You could mow portions of several pastures, for example, to create more patches of higher forage quality and increased habitat heterogeneity at the same time. There’s plenty of room for creativity, depending on what you’re trying to accomplish.

Regardless of the tools and techniques you use, a focus on habitat heterogeneity and a shifting mosaic can help you support the broadest possible diversity of species in your prairie. That diversity is important for its own sake, of course, but it also props up the ecological resilience of the site. Given the raft of challenges facing prairies today, the more resilient we can make them, the better.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Notes on hay-patch grazing logistics: For those who are interested, here are a few additional things we’ve learned.

First, we have had no problem with cutting hay while cattle are in the pasture. The cattle started grazing the hayed area almost immediately after the mower went through and walked between the wind rows without messing them up.

Second, lower mowing heights seem create more attraction for grazers than when the hay mower is set higher. I assume that’s because there is less thatch and old material present, but I don’t know for sure. It’s just what we’ve noticed.

Third, you might wonder if you can just mow instead of cutting hay and baling/removing it. Sure, but a bunch of dried material lying on top of the green regrowth counteracts a lot of the attractiveness of that regrowth. Now when a grazer takes a bite, it’s probably going to get some old dead stuff in its mouth along with the new green growth it really wants. Mowing may still work if the rest of the pasture is tall and dense because the mowed area will probably be more attractive than that, but it’s certainly not as good as haying.

Finally, you might wonder how to calculate a stocking rate when you’re cutting and removing a bunch of forage from the site. When we figure stocking rates for patch-burn grazing, we start with the recommended stocking rate (based on soils, rainfall, etc.) for the whole pasture and that’s usually pretty close. Often, we find ourselves bumping that rate up over the first several years until we find the sweet spot where we get good grazing pressure in the burned areas but light enough grazing elsewhere that previously burned patches recover within a few years.

We calculate stocking rate the same way when we cut hay instead of burning. It feels like we’re able to graze as normal while still cutting hay from about 1/3 or 1/4 of the site. I’m not really able to explain that because it seems like we’d be removing some production from the site and reducing the amount of available forage. One reason might be that we typically mow the tallest and most rank grass, which the cattle weren’t going to be grazing anyway. Regardless, we’ve never yet had an issue with using the same stocking rate as we’d use with patch-burn grazing.

Oh, and it hopefully goes without saying that any of the general approaches here will still require managers to watch and adapt management over time. In addition, there will surely be additional work needed to help suppress invasive species and/or encroaching woody plants, or whatever other challenges your individual prairie faces. None of these approaches should be seen as a recipe that, if followed, will cover all the needs of a prairie.

Learning How to Live With Shrubbier Grasslands – Part 2: Experimentation

In Part 1 of this topic, I wrote about the uncomfortable situation many prairie stewards find ourselves in – that our grasslands are getting “shrubbier” and it’s increasingly difficult to prevent that. Because the drivers for that change are mostly beyond our control, it seems obvious that we need to start thinking differently about grassland management.

There are still plenty of grasslands where we should work to prevent woody encroachment. However, there are also a lot of prairies where trees or shrubs have already become part of the community. In many other places, it appears to be just a matter of time. It seems smart for us to try to get ahead of this and figure out how to manage woodier grasslands for biodiversity and productivity.

Most of us haven’t focused much on how to manage the height and density of shrubs in our prairies because we’ve been thinking mostly about how to repel them. That means we need to start experimenting, and quickly. My team has implemented a couple different field trials in the last couple years and I’m going to share some preliminary results with you. I hope those results will spur others to share their experiences and, more importantly, ramp up their own experimentation efforts.

Our first trials focus on clonal deciduous shrubs (smooth sumac and rough-leaved dogwood). We started with the hypothesis that if we could hit them twice (or more) in the same growing season, we might get multiple years of suppressed height and density as a result. This hypothesis was informed by helpful conversations with people like Dean Kettle at the Kansas Biological Survey and several others.

Field Trial #1 – Smooth Sumac at The Nature Conservancy’s Niobrara Valley Preserve

In 2023, we treated a number of smooth sumac patches with treatments (often in combination) that included prescribed fire, mowing, and a non-lethal “burn-down” herbicide. The photos shown here illustrate what those sumac patches looked like on June 16, 2025.

Quick summary of preliminary results:

  • Mowing sumac in June and August really reduced both the height and density of stems, and that impact has persisted for at least 2 years.
  • An August mowing, followed by a dormant season fire (November, in our case), showed pretty similar results.
  • June mowing followed by herbicide in August seemed slightly less effective than the above two treatments, but much better than any single treatment alone.
  • June mowing followed by a November fire was the least effective of all the combinations listed so far, but still better than a single mowing treatment.
  • All single treatment applications (June mowing, August mowing, November fire) showed quick recovery within two years.
June 16, 2025 Photo of smooth sumac that received no treatment in 2023. You can just barely see my spade in the center of the photo, with sumac looming well above it.
This patch received a single prescribed fire treatment in November of 2023. If you look really closely, you can see just the handle of my spade. The sumac rebounded very well. This is similar to what both single mowing treatments (June and August) looked like by June 2025.

Treatments were applied on June 13, August 9, and November 29, 2023. The photos below show sumac patches with various treatment combinations.

This patch was mowed in June and August of 2023 and experienced a significant decrease in both height and density of stems (the slope in the background was untreated).
August mowing followed by November fire also had a significant impact.
June mowing followed by a November fire was better than any single treatment, but not nearly as effective as the other combinations.

The herbicide we used contained the active ingredient Carfentrazone-ethyl, which disrupts cell membranes in leaves and essentially defoliates plants. The hope was that it would act much like a prescribed fire – injuring the shrubs without killing them or any surrounding plants. We mixed 17.5 ml (0.7 ml/gal) of AIM herbicide and 47.5 oz (1.9 oz/gal) of crop oil in 25 gallons of water and applied a heavy foliar spray.

We tested this on full-sized sumac plants in June, but the spray didn’t penetrate the canopy well, and only burned up the top layer of leaves. It seemed to work much better in August as a follow-up treatment to resprouted sumac plants mowed in June.

The brown-leaved sumac plants on the right were mowed in June and the regrowth was sprayed with AIM herbicide in August. This photo was taken 1 week after spraying.

As we’d hoped, we saw no mortality of sumac or any other plants from the herbicide treatment. Instead, it seemed to act much like a prescribed fire, in that it just injured the shrubs. We’d expected it to do some temporary damage to surrounding vegetation as well, but saw very little evidence of that.

Here is the June 2025 photo of the sumac sprayed with AIM herbicide in June 2023. Height and density are both much reduced compared to untreated patches.

My takeaway from the herbicide application was that it is worth more testing, but seems less effective than mowing or fire. In places/situations where spraying might be feasible, but mowing isn’t, it might be a decent follow-up treatment to extend the impacts of prescribed fire. Maybe. We’ll see. Either way, it didn’t seem to cause any damage to the plant community around the sumac, which reinforces my interest in more experimentation.

.

Field Trial #2 – Rough-Leaved Dogwood at The Nature Conservancy’s Platte River Prairies

For a few years now, I’ve been paying attention to fenceline differences and other evidence that cattle grazing has potential to help manage deciduous shrub height and density. This spring (2024) we set up a quick experiment to test that with rough-leaved dogwood. Cattle were brought into the unit in early June and will be present through October (part of our larger open gate grazing experiment.)

A fenceline photo showing grazed prairie on the left and ungrazed on the right. Note the height and density of the dogwood and plum on the ungrazed side.

Forty cow/calf pairs were introduced to a 49 acre pasture in late May, 2025. In early July, they were given another 25 acres (in addition to the initial 49) and later this summer, they’ll gain access to an additional 69 acres. The photos below, though, were all taken on June 10 – about 2 weeks after cattle were brought into the pasture. In other words, the grazing impacts shown below happened pretty quickly after cattle were brought in. It’s not like they waited to graze dogwood leaves until they’d eaten everything else.

We set up four treatments:

  • Grazed (unmowed)
  • Ungrazed (unmowed)
  • Mowed/Grazed
  • Mowed/Ungrazed

The height of all dogwood stems included in the study was measured on April 22, 2025 and some of those stems were mowed immediately afterward. Small exclosures were set up to exclude grazing from some treatments.

Quick summary of preliminary results (as of June 16, 2025):

  • Cattle are definitely grazing the leaves of dogwood. Stems outside the exclosures looked very ragged compared to ungrazed plants.
  • Dogwood stems mowed in April were being kept cropped off at just a few inches in height.
  • Dogwood stems mowed in April but excluded from grazing had already reached about 10-12 inches in height by June 16.
Grazed dogwood (left) and ungrazed dogwood (right, in the exclosure).
Dogwood stems inside the triangle of red flags were mowed in late April and cattle are keeping them grazed off close to the ground.
Dogwood mowed in April but excluded from grazing had grown 10-12 inches by June 16.

This project is just getting started, but it’s gratifying to see that cattle are grazing dogwood as we’d expected (see photos below for further confirmation). The most promising result so far is that the mowed dogwoods seem particularly attractive to cattle and we hope repeated grazing of those resprouting stems will lead to several years of much-reduced growth compared to stems in the other treatments. Time will tell, but we’re off to a good start.

My real hope is that we can find ways that cattle grazing can play into our larger efforts to manage shrub height and density. For example, burning every 4-5 years isn’t enough on its own to suppress shrub growth. However, burning followed by a season of grazing on the regrowth of those shrubs might lead to significantly reduced growth over the next several years. By the time the next fire comes through, those shrubs might not have grown very tall at all.

We have lots of experience (and data) showing that some kinds of cattle grazing can benefit habitat heterogeneity without reducing plant diversity. If similar grazing approaches can also suppress the height and density of shrubs, that’ll be a huge help.

This (including the sumac work above) is just the start of a long experimental path, but I’m excited by the early results.

A cow grazing dogwood on July 2, 2025
Even the calves are working on the dogwood.

I’m sharing these very early results in the hope that I can encourage others to do similar experimentation. Please don’t interpret these preliminary findings as anything more than what they are. We’re seeing some hopeful signs, but need to follow these trials for more years to see the longer-term impacts of what we’re trying. We also need to greatly expand the treatments and combinations to really understand what various options can do.

Please help! If you are a land manager in the Central U.S. and have shrubs in your grassland, it would be terrific if you could test these or similar approaches to managing shrub height and density and report back. Just as importantly, we need researchers to help us learn about the impacts of different degrees of shrub height and density on plant communities, pollinators and other invertebrates, birds, mammals, and much more. That information will be crucial to land management and help tell us what to aim for.

As I said in the first post, the increase in woody plants in our grasslands doesn’t have to be a catastrophe. It might just be one more factor we need to include in the way we think about managing prairies for various objectives. If we ignore the issue until the shrubs have filled in and taken over, though, we’ll definitely lose. Let’s not lose, ok?