Trying to Create Something Different in the Nebraska Sandhills

At our Niobrara Valley Preserve (NVP), we’re experimenting with prairie management techniques to see if we can create a wider range of habitat conditions than is found throughout much of the Nebraska Sandhills.  On many Sandhills ranches, pastures look fairly similar to each other in terms of vegetation structure.  That’s because Sandhills ranchers tend to be careful in their grazing management to avoid wind erosion that can cause “blowouts” of bare sand.  As a result, pastures are rarely grazed intensively enough to create wide expanses of bare ground.  If intensive grazing does happen, it’s usually on a small scale and/or for short periods of time, which allows for quick recovery of grasses.

The Nebraska Sandhills have tremendous innate heterogeneity.  Just in this photo, you can see areas of bare sand created by pocket gophers and/or other animals, habitat structure created by various kinds of plants, including grasses, wildflowers, yucca, and shrubs.  Vegetation height varies greatly across small areas.

Overall, the ecology of the Nebraska Sandhills seems very healthy.  It’s a huge and mostly intact grassland landscape, and because of the dry sandy soils, topography and diversity of vegetation, there is quite a bit of habitat heterogeneity that is independent of management.  As you walk across most Sandhills pastures, you will move through both short/sparse vegetation and taller/dense vegetation, and occasionally come across other structural components like yucca plants or plum thickets.  Wildlife and insect species can often find the habitat structure they need somewhere in that pasture, though it might be in a small patch surrounded by other habitat types.  That seems to be true even for many bird species, which have relatively large breeding territories.  As an example, in pastures with fairly tall vegetation, we often see and hear horned larks that are (apparently) nesting in a few small and scattered patches of the short vegetation structure they prefer.  Those patches of short habitat often occur in gravelly flat areas or in favorite feeding areas for cattle, where grass growth is weak because of frequent grazing.

This late July photo shows a portion of our west bison pasture that was burned this spring and has been grazed intensively by bison all year. Because bison are in the pasture year round, they had immediate access to the burned area and started grazing regrowth as soon as it was available.

We’re trying to figure out more about how management with patch-burn grazing or other similar grazing systems affects Sandhills ecology.  Patch-burn grazing has part of the management of our bison pastures at NVP since the early 1990’s.  Because of that, we know Sandhills vegetation can recover from fires that are followed immediately by season-long intensive grazing.  However, we still don’t know much about how many animal species might respond – positively or negatively – to the kind of large patch heterogeneity created by this kind of management.  Instead of pastures with interspersed small areas of tall and short vegetation, we’re trying to create large patches (500-1000 acre patches within 10,000-12,000 acre pastures) of each habitat type and then shift the location of those patches between years.

Plains sunflower (an annual) often becomes very abundant after fires because it germinates well in exposed soil and then thrives in the absence of strong competition from perennial grasses.  This is the current year’s burn patch in our east bison pasture, where plains sunflower tall and blooming, surrounded by short-cropped grasses.

Creating large patches of various habitat types could bring both advantages and disadvantages to different species.  As an example, large patches could create an abundance of resources that support larger and more viable populations of some animal species. On the other hand, a vole who likes thatchy habitat could wake up in the middle of a 1000 acre burn, and it would have to make a long dangerous trip to find a more suitable place to live.  Trying to evaluate those potential costs and benefits is a big challenge for us.

This landscape shot shows the abundance of plains sunflower across the entire burned patch.

One possible advantage of the kind of shifting mosaic of habitat approach we’re trying is that it helps avoid risks that come from having the same habitat conditions in the same place year after year.  Just as crop rotation can help avoid buildups of pests and pathogens, shifting habitat types from place to place could have important benefits.  For example varying the location of habitat types from year to year could limit disease outbreaks and help prevent predators or herbivores from building up large and potentially destabilizing populations.

Showy evening primrose, aka fourpoint evening primrose (Oenothera rhombipetala) where the prairie was burned in 2015 and grazed intensively in both 2015 and 2016.  This opportunistic biennial is taking advantage of a long period where grasses are weakened by prior intensive grazing and haven’t yet recovered.

The most intriguing part of our experimentation for me, though, is the idea that we could create large ‘recovery patches’ where grasses have been weakened by a full season of intensive grazing and the plant community is temporarily dominated by opportunistic, mostly short-lived plant species.  That combination of short grasses and tall ‘weedy’ wildflowers can provide excellent brood-rearing habitat for some birds and important structure for reptiles and invertebrates that need to regulate their body temperature by moving quickly from sun to shade as needed.  Studies in other landscapes have shown that this kind of recovery patch habitat creates pulses of high insect biomass, which could have numerous impacts – including the provision of an awful lot of food for wildlife.  In addition, if an abundance of opportunistic plants include species beneficial to pollinators, that could provide quite a bonanza of resources for bees, butterflies, and other insects.

Zoomed out

In most of the Sandhills, patches of  ‘weedy’ habitat tend to be in small, static and widely scattered locations such as around windmills or other places where cattle or bison frequently congregate.  We’re wondering what might happen if we created big patches of the same habitat type and shifted their location from year to year.  In our Platte River Prairies, patch-burn grazing (and similar strategies) has sustained prairie plant diversity over many years, but we haven’t looked closely for similar responses in the Sandhills.  In addition, we know a little about how birds respond to patch-burn grazing in the Sandhills, but not much about impacts on other species like lizards, pollinators, small mammals, or invertebrates.  Now we’re trying to collect data on the responses from all those different organisms.

The lesser earless lizard is often found in and around sand blowouts or other habitat patches with abundant bare sand.  Will they respond positively to much larger patches of sparse vegetation?  Can they successfully shift their population locations as we burn/graze new sites?

Will pollinators such as this plasterer bee (Colletes sp) benefit from higher abundances of flowering plants in big patches of Sandhills prairie that are recovering from season-long intensive grazing?

This is part of our east bison pasture that hasn’t burned since 2012, and has been only lightly grazed during that time period.  It should support a different array of wildlife and allow different plant species to thrive than more recently-grazed areas.  Providing a wide range of habitat types across the prairie seems beneficial for biological diversity, but we still need to test that idea in the Sandhills.

I’ve really enjoyed digging into all the questions we have about our attempts to create more habitat heterogeneity in the Sandhills.  We haven’t had time to answer many questions yet, but we feel like we’re at least creating something different than what exists throughout most of the Sandhills landscape.  A few years from now, we might conclude that the heterogeneity we created didn’t really result in any significant positive or negative impacts compared to what exists elsewhere.  If that’s the conclusion, we’ll move forward with that in mind.  On the other hand, we might find that there are some important positive (and/or negative) impacts of the shifting mosaic approach we’re testing.  In the meantime, it’s exciting to have the opportunity to try something different and watch what happens.  Stay tuned…

If nothing else, huge populations of Plains sunflower like this one in our west bison pasture provide a different (and I think beautiful) look to parts of the Sandhills landscape at the Niobrara Valley Preserve.

Burning For Good Reasons

At the Platte River Prairies, we conduct prescribed burns for various purposes.  Some fires are intended to kill eastern red cedar trees or to suppress cool-season invasive grasses.  Other fires are aimed at removing thatch and old vegetative growth – creating lush regrowth that concentrates cattle grazing in one portion of a prairie.  For each objective, we prescribe a certain set of outcomes that need to be met in order for a burn to be successful, and a parallel set of conditions (especially timing and weather conditions) that will get us to those outcomes.  If we’re just trying to remove most of the old dead growth from a prairie, we don’t need the same kind of fire intensity as when we’re trying to kill cedar trees.  If we’re targeting cool-season grasses (and won’t be following up with grazing), we try to burn about the time those grasses are starting to flower.

On the last day of March this year, we assembled a crew that combined our staff with employees from the Central Platte Natural Resources District and got ready to burn some hilly sand prairie.  Our objective was to remove at least 75% of the thatch and old growth from the burned area so subsequent cattle grazing would be focused in that burned patch while the remainder of the prairie went largely ungrazed.  The forecast had predicted pretty high relative humidity readings, but we thought we’d be ok as long as we didn’t have overnight fog or mist.  Unfortunately, on the morning of the fire, the grass litter along the ground was more damp than we’d hoped and since the sun was hidden behind clouds it didn’t seem likely that litter would dry much.  After considerable discussion and delay, we finally decided to conduct a test fire in the downwind corner of the burn unit to see what kind of burn results we’d get before deciding whether or not to burn the entire 70 acre unit.  We also figured it was an opportunity to learn more about how fire behaves under humid conditions.  At 1 pm, it was 46 degrees F, 71% relative humidity, and we had winds at about 10 mph.

Nelson Winkel, our land steward, had to work pretty hard to get the grass ignited. While it looks like there’s a lot of fire here, watch the video below to get a better picture of how the fire was actually burning.  The flames would flare up when they hit a patch of grass with dry leaves, but the damp litter layer kept the flames from moving very quickly or burning all the way to the soil surface.  (If the video doesn’t work, click on the title of this post to open it in a browser or follow this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3Dh2OqzmEk)

The test fire was definitely instructive.  The upper portions of grass plants were sufficiently dry that they burned fairly well, but the dampness along the ground made the fire creep along very slowly, even when pushed by the wind.  Following along behind the fire, I was kicking away ash to find that quite a bit of litter was still unburned and covering the soil.  After we burned an area about 40 x 40 feet, we extinguished the fire and had a group discussion.  The grass was burning well enough that we could probably burn the unit, and much of the area inside the firebreaks would ignite and turn black.  On the crests of the hills where vegetation was dominated by bunchgrasses and there was considerable bare ground beneath plants, we’d probably get a pretty complete burn.  However, in lower areas where there was more dense vegetation, including some cool-season invasive grasses, we didn’t feel like it would burn very completely at all.  In total, we didn’t think we’d reach our goal of removing litter from 75% of the area.  Importantly, the areas that wouldn’t burn well (and thus wouldn’t attract grazing) were the ones we most wanted cattle to graze (to suppress invasive grass growth).  After talking through our options with the whole crew, we decided to postpone the burn until we had a day with better conditions.

You can see from this photo that while most of the dry standing vegetation burned, much of the litter/thatch remained behind.

Here’s our group, deep in discussion about objectives, results, and whether or not to continue with the fire.

It’s never an easy decision to call off a burn when you’ve got crew and equipment on site.  As a burn boss, I’ve had to do that multiple times, but usually when we’re worried about safety because the weather conditions are too far on the hot, dry and/or windy side.  In this case, there were no extraordinary safety concerns, but every fire comes with risks to people and property.  It never makes sense to burn and not achieve the desired result.  We needed near complete consumption of the dead vegetation to attract cattle grazing and carry out our management plan for that season.   Since we weren’t going to achieve that, we didn’t burn.

As it turned out, we only had to wait four days for another opportunity to burn that unit.  On April 4, most of the same crew members assembled and we set up to try it again.   Our weather conditions at 11 am weren’t all that different from our previous attempt (46 degrees F, 65% RH, and 12-15 mph winds) but the grass litter was much drier, and while the sky was cloudy, the clouds were more patchy and the sun was even popping through once in a while.

Our downwind firebreaks were two gravel roads, so it didn’t take long to get those lines lit and blacked out.  At that point, however, I walked out into the black to see how much litter consumption we were getting.  While it was much better than the previous week, there were still some unburned patches.  Since we had solid firebreaks, we paused ignition to wait for everything to warm up and dry out just a little more.   About a half hour later, relative humidity had dropped nearly 10% and the temperature had risen about 5%.  We restarted ignition and pretty quickly finished up the rest of the fire.

On our second attempt, we had much better fire behavior. Here, a fire is backing uphill through vegetation and getting pretty complete consumption.

Nelson is walking through the black in a low spot where not all the litter was burning well. This was while we were waiting for the humidity to drop a little more.

Here are a couple timelapse videos of the lighting of the “flanking head fires” toward the end of the burn.  They are a little jumpy (sorry) because I was just hand-holding my phone and taking repeated photos, but it shows how different the fire behavior was from the slow creeping fire of our first attempt 5 days earlier.  If you can’t see the videos, click on the title of this post to open it in a web browser or click on these links: Video 1, Video 2.

Here is what the burn unit looked like right after the fire. You can see lots of pocket gopher mounds scattered through the black, but also a few small unburned patches. Those unburned areas are perfectly fine with us, and actually provide some valuable areas of refuge for animals (in addition to the 2/3 of this prairie we didn’t burn and other prairies across the road in three directions.)

I’m glad we waited for more favorable conditions to burn this unit.  We wouldn’t have accomplished what we needed to on the first day, and though it was hard to turn down a potential burn opportunity and assembled crew, I think we made the right call.  As it happened, we didn’t have to wait long for a better day, and we got what we wanted out of that fire.  At the same time, I’m also glad we decided to try a test fire on the first day.  It turned into a good learning experience and fodder for fruitful discussion among the crew.  The whole situation was a good reminder that while we can achieve many important objectives through prescribed burning, it isn’t a toy we play with for fun.  Instead, we want to burn only when we can do so safely, and when we can achieve clear and specific objectives.

If you want to learn more about how we combine prescribed fire and grazing to manage for habitat and species diversity, you can read more here.