This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under GDPR Article 89.

Re: Prairie Remnants and Grazing

> allowing certain species to become established.  It would seem to me, that
> bison were present in the prairie penisula but not to the extent they were
> present in the western Great Plains.  However, I just recently read Tim
> Seastedt's chapter in The Changing Prairie and he seems to think the soil
> evidence would suggest very minor grazing took place in the eastern prairies
> (at least in the last 1000 yrs).  Because soil is rich in carbon accumulation
> and grazing reduces root biomass, grazing must have been only a small
> component.

Having observed our bison for the last four years, I do not agree that Bisonwere
more numerous in one area over another because historical records
said they were. We have had several heart-stoppers when we could not
find the herd in 1-3 foot high grass, when they were all bedded down in
a depression. They dissapear, especially in forb-rich, growing "tallgrass"
areas.  Out on the poorer soils or dryer areas, bison would seem to
be more numerous because they can be seen much more easily.

Some people say the tallgrass was too dangerous for wildlife due to fires
raging though at high speed so these areas did not have bison, etc. Bison can run

for long distances at a high speed, and in at least one instance, I have seen
yearling bulls cross 200 yards in deep grass in less than 10 seconds. They
would easily get away from fires.

Bison need water, but they can go a long time without it, too.
Eastern Tallgrass areas do not have much standing water since they
can be clays with little in the way of springs. This is true in our area.
People are even less inclined to travel far from water. In addition,
when our bison have escaped, they wandered considerably. Several times we
walked right by them. The last time, we saw them get up, walk around the
back of a small hill, then lay back down. In light of all this, historically,
bison
would stay away from people and would travel further from the water.
The combination of groundwater aridity and deep vegetation would make
human - bison encounters less frequent and the numbers seen less in Tallgrass.

As for carbon accumulation, the native praries here (NE TX) are hayed annually
with
total removal of above-ground vegetation, yet the below-ground there is
a tremendous mass of carbon. This haying has occurred for over a century, yet
it has caused no decrease in total hay produced, which suggests that the
underground root mass has not decreased. In addition, many native praries have
been
managed to remove the forb component and increase the grass component,
destroying the interplay between these two. Its hard to find a control in
this situation, as well.

Another thing to note is that carrying capacity in a "lush" clay Tallgrass is
the January-february dead spot, not the may-august growth spurt. Futhermore,
the grass would have to be dug from underneath frozen, wet snow. In this case,
the bison would frequent areas where there was less snow, more easily found food,

etc. The numbers of bison would be nowhere near where they could utilize
even a tenth of the vegetation nor would their winter/fall impacts be continous
or
heavy in one place. Hence, the roots would not see as much impact or drawdown
as one might believe.

The situation of the interplay between grazing and tallgrass is very, very
complex
and includes all parts of the ecosystem - water, soil type, climatology, human
social patterns, etc - and could vary from watershed to watershed and from
decade to decade.

So much for the info - on to an answer to he question - was grazing a
"small component"?

One theory that shows that even a minimal grazing could have a great impact
is the one that prairies are N-rich, hence why we see that forbs overtake and
choke out grass on burned, but unhayed prairies. The trapping of N and the
disturbances by bison during grazing favor grass over forbs. The removal of
even 5# of N/acre by grazing in this scenario would definately make grasses
more competitive with forbs.

From our observations, I would agree about grass favored over forbs. Bison kill
trees - we have no cedars left and they are killing both plums and hackberries,
and forbs like maximillian and annual sunflowers with their rubbing. Our oldest
pastures are our grassiest and have the least forbs, except for legumes. And
our bison do prefer burned areas over unburned, too.

Hopefully, we will be able to put some bison back onto intact, unsprayed
prairies soon, and look at what happens. From a ranching perspective,
the most diverse prairies would seem to be the most productive since
the plants as an aggregate have the highest protein and energy levels
and maintain these longer over the growing season over purely grass prairies.
If we can show the latter as well, by weight gains against a control
group, then things could get very interesting in counties with Tallgrass
remnants!!

-Austin Moseley
 Caddo Mills, TX




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE PRAIRIE
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index