Does fire and herbicide benefit cattle production in invaded grassland landscapes?

Abstract

Invasive species management is promoted as a general practice to maintain rangeland biodiversity and mitigate livestock performance losses (e.g., weight gain) stemming from invasive-species effects (e.g., competitive exclusion of palatable forages). It is hypothesized that altering fire-timing (e.g., moving from early to late-growing season burning) or integrating herbicide application into fire management regimes may lead to more successful reduction of certain invasive species without negatively affecting livestock weight gains. However, large-scale, replicated experimental evidence linking invasive species abundance or management practices to cattle weight gain is mostly lacking across grasslands. We manipulated eight large (333 – 766 ha) pastures managed with fire and grazing (i.e., pyric herbivory) to test how growing (i.e., August-September) and dormant (i.e., March-April) season fires, herbicide application, or invasive species abundance (namely Lespedeza cuneata) affected yearling stocker cattle weight gain – i.e., per head weight gain – from 2018 to 2020. We found that yearling stocker cattle gained significantly less weight in pastures burned during the growing season, and herbicide application did not increase weight gains overall. Moreover, we did not find a significant relationship between L. cuneata abundance and per head yearling stocker cattle weight gain. Our results add to a growing line of evidence that invasive species management does not always benefit livestock producers. The hypothesized negative relationship between invasive species abundance and cattle weight gain may be minimal (or neutral) across large grassland landscapes, particularly those managed with pyric herbivory. To date, pyric herbivory is the only management regime known to simultaneously promote biodiversity, and restrict some invasive plant species like L. cuneata.