1. Are Fire and Grazing a Solution to the Invasive Non-Native Lehmann Lovegrass?
Tahlia Bragg, Chris McDonald, Guy McPherson
UA/NASA Space Grant Consortium
The University of Arizona

3. Lehmann Lovegrass Eragrostis lehmanniana Non-native grass
Burns faster and hotter
California, Utah, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas
Lehmann Lovegrass, or Eragrostis Lehmanniana, is a perennial monocot that is not native to the Arizona grasslands. It was introduced to the state in the 1930’s to reduce soil erosion on rangelands. Lehmann lovegrass is a native of southern Africa. This grass has presented an increasingly alarming concern in regards to its involvement in wildfires. Lehmann lovegrass is invasive and decreases the abundance of native plants that are more fire-resistant. It burns hotter and at a more rapid rate than native grasses; therefore increasing the potential destruction a wildfire could have by allowing it move much quicker. Aside from Arizona, this grass can now be found in California, Utah, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas

4. Santa Rita Experimental Range

5. Fire and Grazing Santa Rita Experimental Range 24 plots 2004-2007
2004: Initial biomass was recorded
2005: Grass was treated with Grazing, Burning, Burning and Grazing, or Untreated plots
2006: Treated again with Grazing, Burning, Burning and Grazing, or Untreated plots
2007: Data Collected
The project that I am involved with in the School of Natural Resources uses fire and grazing as methods that possibly could reduce the amount of Lehmann lovegrass in Arizona grasslands. This experiment began in 2004 on the Santa Rita Experimental Range, using 24 plots. Initial biomass was recorded in 2004, after which the 24 plots were divided into 4 groups. Six were grazed by cattle, six were burned, six were burned and grazed, and six were untreated. The assigned treatment for each group of plots occurred in 2005 and In 2007, data was collected from all 24 plots.

6. Methods
2005
2006

7. Grass by Treatment Type
From left to right, G, B, C, BG

8. Dicots

9. Dicots

10. Initial Weight
Final Weight

11. Discussion
Grazing is not a solution because cows do not incur mortality of Lehmann lovegrass
Roots and crowns of plants were not burned
Chemical treatment could be a possibility
Here are some interesting points from the data that might be taken into consideration in future research. (Read 1st point) As noted by the graph. Grazing was only effective for the year the grass was grazed. By 2007, Lehmann lovegrass nearly returned to its initial biomass from Another item to consider is that while burning Lehmann lovegrass was effective during the year it was burned, burning is only a topical treatment as the roots and crowns of plants are not burned during this process. Burning was highly successful in 2005, but the summer of 2006 was the 7th wettest summer on record in southern Arizona which may have inadvertently affected the effectiveness of burning by sprouting new growth from the unburned roots and crowns of the grass. Because none of the treatments implemented in this project yielded long-term results, chemically treatments could be used as another alternative to treatment. This would not only kill the roots and crowns of the lovegrass but minimize the amount of Lehmann lovegrass in the Arizona grasslands. The flaw to this type of treatment, however, would be that the chemical used would need to be one that would not disturb native grasses. Chemical treatment, additionally, is not ecologically sound for the environment. They would disturb the habitats of organisms that contribute to the homeostasis of the grasslands. Therefore, chemical treatment would not be a viable option, but is an option that would be effective.

12. Acknowledgments UA/NASA Spacegrant Consortium Guy McPherson
Chris McDonald

13. Questions?