sign in sign up
<<
Home , Prairie, Shortgrass prairie, Tallgrass prairie

University of - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln

USGS Staff -- Published Research US Geological Survey

2004

Great : Past, Present, and Future

Fred B. Samson Service

Fritz L. Knopf United States Geological Survey Biological Resources Division

Wayne Ostlie The Nature Conservancy, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub

Part of the Earth Sciences Commons

Samson, Fred B.; Knopf, Fritz L.; and Ostlie, Wayne, " Ecosystems: Past, Present, and Future" (2004). USGS Staff -- Published Research. 45. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub/45

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Geological Survey at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in USGS Staff -- Published Research by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Great Plains Ecosystems: Past, Present, and Future Fred B. Samson, Fritz L. Knopf, & Wayne R. Ostlie 6 SPECIALCOVERAGE

...eat Plains ecosystems: _ _ t, present, and future HH[[~dIed B. Samson, Fritz L. Knopf, and e R. Ostlie

sts that the main bodies of North American (i.e., the tall- grass, mixed, and shortgrass) are among the most endangered resources on the con- tinent. The purpose of this paper is to provide a past and present biological base- line by which to understand North American and to provide a platform for future conservation. Events both immediate to the end of the and his- toric suggest that the present conditions are different from those within which most of the grassland organisms evolved. Our analysis suggests that few grassland remain adequate in area and distribution to sustain diversity sufficient to include biota and ecological drivers native to the . A robust and history-based scenario to conserve Great Plains is to 1) identify areas large enough to sustain an ecological system with all its , 2) reverse significant losses in area of native grasslands, 3) ensure that restoration matches the grassland previously existing at that site, 4) refocus the profession of range management, and 5) establish a more meaningful agency design for grassland and natural resource management. Key Words biological diversity,conservation planning, ecological drivers, grasslands,manage- ment, prairie, restoration

ittlequestion exists that the main bodies of North for the GreatPlains (Risser 1996), majorhurdles remain Americanprairie (i.e., thetallgrass, mixed, and short- to understandingand integratingthe varietyof social, grass) are amongthe continent'smost endangered,and economic,and biological issues into efficientprairie con- tallgrassis a globally endangeredresource (Rickletts et servation. In this paperwe offer a platformfor conserva- al. 1999). Loss of NorthAmerican prairie has had a pro- tion built on principlesthat 1) prairieconservation must found and negativeeffect on nativeprairie plants and ani- be based on an understandingof history,2) conservation mals (Samsonand Knopf 1994, 1996 and others). prioritiesmust be based on more sophisticated(especial- Society can protectportions of endangeredecosystems in ly geospatial)information, 3) environmentallegislation non-usepreserves, but in the long run,partnerships withoutecological understandingmay do more harm amongagencies, nongovernmentalorganizations, and pri- thangood, and 4) just as naturalresources are lost vate landownerswill play a majorrole in the conserva- throughecosystem dysfunction, so are capabilitiesto tion of nativebiota and ecosystems(Raven 1990). supportresource conservation lost withoutprofessional Althougha frameworkfor conservationis developing organizationand natural-resourceagency change.

Address for Fred B. Samson: United States Forest Service, 200 East Broadway, Missoula, MT 59812, USA; e-mail: [email protected]. Address for Fritz L. Knopf: United States Geological Survey Biological Resources Division, 2150-C Center Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80525, USA. Address for Wayne R. Ostlie: The Nature Conservancy, 4245 North FairfaxDrive, Suite 100, Arlington, VA 22203, USA.

Wildlife Society Bulletin 2004, 32(1):6-15 Peer refereed Great Plains ecosystems * Samson et al. 7

Prairiesthrough time icant in all areas. Since the 1920s in the United States, changesin farmingpractices and federalagriculture poli- Prairie losses cy have exacerbatedthe loss of nativegrasslands and A comparisonof the prairiesof the past with those of (Barnes1993). the presentprovides a measureof 1) the loss or changein Land-coverestimates based on recentthematic the extentof dominantecosystems, 2) informationon imageryplace grasslandsystems loss acrossthe Great whetherthe frequencyand extentof majorecological Plainsat 70%,with tallgrassprairie regions retaining as drivers(herbivory and fire) have changed,3) an indica- little as 13%of the historicextent (Table 1). Mixed tion of the presenceand impactof disturbances(human- prairie(29%) and shortgrassprairie (52%) have retained relatedactions), and 4) a basis to developconservation strategies to [P]rairieconservation requires: 1) new technology...to maintainor restoreecosystems, com- munities,species, and the ecological prioritizeand set context to save prairie,2) ecologically processesthat maintain systems and based initiativesto reverse significantlosses in area and habitatfor species conservation condition of native of standard- (Hauflerat el. 2002). grasslands,3) rethinking Flannery(2001:348) wrote that the ized tools in the range managementprofession, and time has come "to summarizewhat 4) a new naturalresource agency.... we have learnedof the (evolution- ary/ecological)forces shapingthis New Worldand to look towardsthe greatissues and largerproportions of the historicextent. Althoughsimple dilemmasthat will face in comingcen- estimatesof remainingprairie can shed light on the status turies."Flannery further suggests it may be worthcon- of biodiversity,they alone do not providea clear and sideringthe reintroductionof NorthAmerican accurateprognosis for long-termpersistence. Factorsof (>1,000 kg) by parkmanagers into theirreserves ( i.e., patchsize, condition,and landscapecontext play a major the elephant[Loxodonta and Elaphus spp.] as a replace- role in determiningwhether an ecological systemor mentfor the mammoth,camel [Camelusspp.], Chacoan species will remainviable for an extendedperiod of time. peccary [Catagonus wagneri], llama [Lama spp.], and lion [Pantheraleo]). The purposeof restoringthe struc- tureof vertebratecommunities is to reestablishthe eco- Table 1. Summary by geographic unit (Bailey 1996) of estimated extent driversthat influencedthe habitat and decline in Great Plains prairie systems in North America by 2003. logical originally Historic extent of prairievegetatopm is based on Kuchler (1964). mosaic. It is, however,unlikely that elephants, camels, or othersurrogates for the Pleistocenemegafauna can be Remaining introducedto the NorthAmerican prairie to restorehabi- Biogeographic unit extent (km2) Percent of historic tat and animaldiversity, or even thatthis courseof action Great Plains bioregion 988,420 30.1 would be desirable. Tallgrassprairie province 82,680 13.4 The arrivalof Euro-Americanson the GreatPlains Northern 4,070 2.4 4.4 triggereda series of eventsthat altered the characterof Central tallgrass prairie 8,360 the and its no set of events / prairie 26,480 37.6 region biodiversity.Perhaps Crosstimbers/Southern 26.3 had a and more on the tallgrass 40,140 greater significantimpact grass- Gulf & marshes 3,630 9.5 lands of the GreatPlains than the UnitedStates prairies Mixed prairie province 608,010 29.1 HomesteadAct of 1862 and the accompanyingCanada 45,880 24.8 DominionLand Act of 1872 (Ostlieet al. 1997). Under Fescue-mixed prairie 39,260 31.0 this act in the UnitedStates, nearly 1.5 millionpeople Dakotas mixed prairie 24,820 25.8 acquiredover 800,000 km2of land,primarily in the Great Northern Great Plains 357,060 62.9 Plainsregion. Central mixed prairie 121,090 54.1 TheseActs, coupledwith landmade availablethrough Edwards Plateau 19,900 21.0 51.6 an arrayof otherfederal acts and directsale of landsto province 280,800 Central 140,530 64.3 landowners,resulted in a loss of shortgrass prairie private pronounced Southern 140,270 54.9 native most often conversionto shortgrass prairie prairie, through agricul- Black Hills province 5,280 18.3 ture. The impactwas greatestin the tallgrassportion of Tamaulipanthornscrub province 11,650 7.9 the Plains,where soils were highly arable,but was signif- 8 Wildlife Society Bulletin 2004, 32(1):6-15

Ecological drivers Analysisof RNV can help describedynamic changes Challengesother than loss and fragmentationof native in vegetationand identifythose vegetationtypes that grasslandsexist in the conservationof GreatPlains sys- were importanthistorically but are less commonor rare tems. An essentialissue in conservationtoday is the role today (Haufleret al. 1996). For example,historically, the of ecological drivers(Knopf and Samson 1997). mixedprairie may have occurredas a relativelynarrow Emphasison landscapepattern alone and not the ecologi- transitionzone betweenthe tallgrassprairie and short- cal driversthat provide an evolutionaryand ecological grassprairie (Bessey 1893), extendingsouth from eastern contextfor species diversityneglects a vital component NorthDakota into easternKansas (Blakeslee 1996). of species, community,and ecosystemconservation. Today,the westernedge of the mixedprairie extends Ecologicaldrivers on the GreatPlains included southfrom western to far-westKansas and droughtat the broadscale and grazingand fire at the . landscapeand local scales (Fuhlendorfand Engle 2001). Expressionof ungulateherbivory and habitat selection The GreatPlains evolved in the shadowof the at severalscales impactsspatial and temporal patterns of ,where seasonal occurs animaland plant communities on the GreatPlains mostly in springand summer. Fromthe Rocky (Milchunaset al. 1998). Herbivoresand grasslandson Mountainseast to the MississippiRiver, amount of pre- the GreatPlains have a long relationshipextending over cipitationincreases and frequencyof droughtdecreases. severalmillion years. Froman ecologicalperspective, Along the south-to-northgradient from centralTexas to significantrecent changes to the GreatPlains landscape south-centralCanada, the growingseason becomes short- resultedfrom reduction in the numberand distributionof er, averagetemperature decreases, and a greaterpercent- nativeherbivores and their replacement with domestic age of annualprecipitation occurs as snow. livestock(species adaptedto the moremesic, wooded Broad-scaleclimate gradients significantly influence environmentsof Europe[Hartnett et al. 1997]) and the the evolutionarycomposition and distributionof prairie suppressionof fire (Risser 1996). communities(Steinauer and Collins 1996). Average Historically, movednomadically in responseto rates,however, are only partialdrivers for prairiecompo- vegetationchanges associated with rainfalland fire. The sition. Rather,the inherentunpredictability of precipita- time lag for returnmovements provided deferment during tion amongyears is an importantinfluence; severe the regrowthperiod, which, accordingto historicand droughtscan cause massivelocal extinctionsof annual archeologicalrecords, may have rangedfrom 1-8 years and grassesthat have invadedstands of perennials, (Malaineyand Sherriff1996). This intervalwould have andrecolonization of those sites is slow. provideda naturalrest intervaland is consistentwith spa- An -specificdescription of the expectednat- tial heterogeneitymodels that suggeststability in uralrange (space and time) over which the primaryeco- plant-herbivoreinteractions (Irby et al. 2002) and lead to logical driversoperate is capturedin the conceptof a naturalhabitat mosaic of short,mid, and tall seral Rangeof NaturalVariation (RNV) (Aplet and Keeton stages. 1999). The assumptionis thatwhen ecological drivers In the past (<1840), fire may have been a yearlyevent act with characteristicbehavior, ecosystems exhibit char- in the tallgrassprairie (Edwin et al. 1966), occurred acteristiccomposition and behavior. every 3-5 yearsin the mixedprairie (Umbanhowar The objectivebehind the applicationof RNV in prairie 1996), and was an ecologicaldriver on the shortgrass conservationis to restoreand maintain the ecosystemcon- prairie(Brockway et al. 2002). Today,fire is rareon ditionsthat sustained biological diversity prior to dramatic publiclands managed by the UnitedStates Forest Service changesof the recentpast. The bridgebetween the past in the NorthernGreat Plains (Samsonet al. 2003), affect- anddramatic change on the northernGreat Plains is the ing about7.9 km2per year (of 371.1 km2)in the tall- year 1770 (Higgens1986). Any historicrecord (diary, grassprairie, 33.4 km2(of 17,663.4km2) in the mixed photograph,and patent or land survey)after 1770 provides prairie,and 14.2 km2 (of 2,675.8 km2)in the shortgrass a descriptionof a modifiedrather than a naturallandscape, prairie. althoughrecords from 1770 to 1840 areaccepted with caution. the reasonsfor this caution Among possible are Present 1) level of Europeanuse, particularlyalong waterways, 2) introductionof diseaseseverely detrimental to indigenous MinimumDynamic Area (MDA) nations,and 3) changein behaviorof the dominantlarge An arealarge enough to sustainan ecological system herbivore,the bison (Bisonbison). All of these areknown with all of its biodiversityhas been termedMDA (Pickett to havechanged the historiclandscape (Nasatir 1952). andThompson 1978). The MDA is the smallestarea Great Plains ecosystems * Samson et al. 9

with a system of natural ecological drivers that support 1). They also capture 29% of the documented imperiled- and sustain native biodiversity. In an MDA the size and species occurrences in the Plains. These MDAs are prin- number of patches remain relatively constant, cipally in the western Great Plains, with 58% and 30% though the location of patches in various stages of devel- total area coverage in the mixed prairie and shortgrass opment changes over time. The advantage to setting prairie, respectively. Few landscapes in the tallgrass reserve size (MDA) above that based on RNV is to per- prairie and northern mixed prairie are >1,000 km2. mit natural drivers to continually refresh the natural Large-scale restoration is required to restore these sys- amount of habitat and maintain approximate number and tems to an appropriate(MDA) scale. sizes of patches and their juxtaposition native to the land- Two prominent prairie landscapes occur in the north- scape. west and southwest portions of the Great Plains and Analysis of MDAs can help identify areas important to account for 70% of the total landscape. These 2 large the long-term persistence of biodiversity on the Great and relatively intact mixed prairie and shortgrass prairie Plains (The Nature Conservancy 2000) and can help landscapes offer the best chance for comprehensive con- identify approaches that will sustain intermediate and servation action targeting the full array of biodiversity, other, smaller landscapes. Ostlie et al. (unpublished data) including local- and regional-scale elements (e.g., large identified 47 MDAs (each >1,000 km2) in the Great predators and ungulates native to the prairie) (Figure 1). Plains that account for 28% of the bioregion area (Figure Large size and existing linkages to other areas, most notably the adjacent Rocky Mountain region, bolster the value of these 2 landscapes for regional-scale species reintroduction.

Future Conservation Saving prairie Almost 93,000 km2 of United States grasslands were lost between 1982 and 1997, primarily to conversion to . This conversion occurred in both relatively dry grassland areas, such as , , and the western Dakotas, and in relatively wet grassland areas of the Midwest such as , , and . Commodity programs in the and elsewhere are tilting the balance in many locations from ranching and pasturing to the production of row crops. In general, the farm bill in the United States has promise for grassland conservation, with components such as the proposed Grassland Reserve Program that would provide incentives to landowners who voluntarily protect grass- land systems. In the early 1900s, the Canadian prairie region was I known as the last best west, referring to the fact that this region contained the last free homesteads in North America (Radenbaugh and McDonald 2000). In common with prairie landscapes elsewhere, the extent of native prairie in underwent drastic changes, and within many landscapes, human-related activities have dominant roles. In 2002 the Government of Canada announced a $190 million investment to improve sustainabilityin agri- culture, $100 million to convert marginal cultivated lands Figure 1. Major remaining areas of native prairie of North America by 2003: black lines delineate Kuchler (1964) biogeographic units, highly to permanent cover (1.2 million ha), and to assist in iden- fragmented areas are in white, Minimum Dynamic Areas (>100,000 tifying and protecting critical wildlife areas. km2) are in and dark Dark areas further delineate rela- light gray. gray The Conservation Reserve (CRP) is tively intact mixed prairie and shortgrassprairie landscapes that offer the Program thought best chance for action to conserve the full array of biodiversity. by many to be essential to the conservation of grassland

--m 10 Wildlife Society Bulletin 2004, 32(1):6-15

systemsin the United States. However,many areas of reactivemeasures of most endangered-speciesprograms, historicprairie recently converted to agricultureand 2) thatbiodiversity occurs at (and must be conservedat) enrolledin CRP have been plantedwith expansesof differentspatial scales, and 3) the need to conservethe nativegrasses. Fire, a naturalecological driverin grass- underlyingecological processesthat supportpatterns of lands,has a significantimpact on farmlandreseeded to biodiversity.These effortshave identifiedareas that, if artificialprairie. In the shortgrassprairie region, follow- conserved,will addressthe needs of most elements of ing ,CRP landsexperience extensive biodiversitywithin an ecoregion. comparedto nearbynative prairie (Figure 2). Without full ecological considerationof the living networkin Restoring prairie unbrokenprairie soil, legislativeapproaches to grassland A recentpanel of grasslandecologists, with particular conservationmust be cautious(Weaver 1968). expertisein grasslandbird ecology, developeda number The vast majorityof conservationtheory began from of consensusrecommendations that provide guidance for simple conceptsin which habitatis eithersaved or prairierestoration (Searchinger 2002). In short,recom- restored(Fahrig 1997). A case in point is The Nature mendationswere to 1) emphasizediverse native grasses Conservancy.The NatureConservancy began conserva- and forbs, 2) understandthe natureof the landscape,and tion workin the GreatPlains with the typicalacquisition 3) be awareof the inherentrole of . or gift acceptanceof small tractsof remnantnative The productivityand diversityof GreatPlains grass- prairie,most less than 1.5 km2 in size. The Conservancy lands have been substantiallyreduced by past manage- today is undertakingscience-based, region-wide conser- ment thatfacilitated the establishmentof nonnative vationplanning activities that recognize 1) the need for species and the displacementof nativespecies (Masters proactiveconservation measures that complement the et al. 1996). Unfortunately,comparative analysis of soils and vegetationin areasreseeded to nativegrasses and nativeprairies show thatrestored sites may requirea 30-50-year periodto recoverand may requireexternal inputsto adequatelyrestore organic matter, soil carbon, and soil nitrogen(Fuhlendorf et al. 2002). The potentialfor restorationwill dependon the nature of the landscape. The probabilityof a plant species that belongs to a local species pool becomingincorporated into the landscapewill dependon 1) the habitatrequire- mentsof the species, 2) the distanceto the nearestpopu- lation,3) fecundityand the abilityto disperse,4) the abil- ity to germinate,and 5) the longevityof the species as seed or in the seed bank(Bakker and Berendse1999). Dominantspecies have a significantinfluence on com- munitystructure and functionin grasslandsto form the l. i e ,- - t WASMVAM- - ;'r1 i - ft. " Y . -i---- ' 1 e A templatefor food and habitatstructure for many species in highertrophic levels (Vintonand Collins 1996). Nevertheless,dominant species are limitedin theirability to disperseand colonize additionallandscapes, especially if such landscapesare fragmented(Collins et al. 1998). Restorationmust considerthe interactionof life-history traitsand the natureof the landscape. An additionalissue involvingthe natureof the grass- land landscapeis to considerthe developmentof spatial heterogeneity(Rice et al. 1998). Small nativecommuni- ties are importantcomponents to grasslanddiversity and may not reflectthe dominantvegetation of a . Restorationactions must matchgrasses or otherspecies to the immediatesurroundings rather than to the biore- Figure 2. Post-burning, wind-induced soil erosion and loss on Conser- A is to create vation Reserve Program(above), and versus native shortgrassprairie gion (Searchinger2002). workingexample (below) at Keota, Colorado, June 2002. Photos by Fritz L. Knopf. shortgrassprairie in a sand-sage prairielandscape. Great Plains ecosystems * Samson et al. 11

Despite the interest,the overallgenerality in the relation- Range management ships of small-scalespecies diversityand the The historictallgrass prairie, or TruePrairie, occurred diversity-stabilityrelationships at large scales, whetherin along the easternGreat Plains, with a PrairiePeninsula ecology or in restoration,is poorlyknown (Seastedt et al. radiatingnorth and east into Indianaand during 1998). Pleistoceneinterglacials. Besides , per- Grazerpopulation densities (stocking rates), type of petuatedthe trueprairie by controllingbrush encroach- grazer(native or domestic),and temporalpattern are pri- ment on the northern,eastern, and southernperimeters. marydeterminants of grazingeffects on grasslandstruc- The TruePrairie has been geographicallyreduced tureand functionand success in restoration(Fuhlendorf morethan 86% in the last 200 years,and the opportunity et al. 2002). Both bison and prairiedogs (Cynomys to recoveror restorethat ecosystem on any meaningful ludovicianus)have multipleand drasticeffects on grass- spatialscale has been lost. The debatefor trueprairie is lands,and both shouldbe consideredkeystone herbivores not one of conservation.Rather, it involvesthe vision for (Fahnestockand Detling 2002). Historically,grazers, re-creation.In TruePrairie, remnant reserves and despitetheir relatively small ,had small (e.g., restorationsare all thatcan be envisionedas long as the bison creatingwallows importantto many species) to United Statesand Canadacontinue to subsidizethe con- large(e.g., distributionof primaryproductivity) impacts, temporarycereal-grain economy of thatregion. suggestingboth bottom-upand top-downinfluences on Whereasthe nativemegafauna of the GreatPlains grasslandsystems (Steinauer and Collins 2001). since the Pleistocenewas characteristicof the shortgrass Understandinghow both bottom-upand top-downforces prairieand a muchless-extensive mixed prairie, conser- influencefactors controlling grassland and othercommu- vationvision to restorethe GreatPlains must focus on nities is currentlyof wide ecological interest,yet this has thatregion. It is in this regionthat the opportunityfor not been a widespreadfocus in restorationor in manage- conservationof a nativelandscape remains. Fortunately, mentof landsin the CRP or similarlegislative initiatives. most terrestrialendemic vertebrates evolved in these The importanceof land-usehistory and its legacy is an drier,westerly plains (Knopf 1996, Knopfand Samson integralpart of conservationplanning (Samson 1992). 1997). Equallyfortunate, the westernGreat Plains Fire is importantto the regulationof plantcover, diversi- (unliketallgrass prairie) contain opportunity in the form ty, biomass,and nutrientstatus in tallgrassprairie of landsheld in publicownership. (Johnsonand Matchett2001) and mixed prairie(Madden Refocusingconservation and naturalresource manage- et al. 2002), with its role in the shortgrassprairie ecosys- ment of the shortgrassprairie and mixed prairiewill take tem yet to be fully understood(Glenn and Collins 1992). a concertedeffort. The effortmust includecommitment Little differenceexists in the fire suppressionacross beyondtraditional thinking to begin workingtoward an muchof the nativeand reseededgrasslands on the Great ecological vision for the region. We offer thatthis transi- Plainsand thatin the forestsof the westernUnited tion challengesthe professionof rangemanagement to States,an issue in the politicaland conservationfore- rethinkstandardized tools and commonpractices used to front. The encroachmentof woody vegetationand non- pursuethe underlyingparadigm of stabilizingsoils while nativespecies due to grazingby domesticlivestock and maximizingforage production to providea red-meat suppressionof fire has createdan environmentalchal- commodity. On the westernprairies especially, the pri- lenge (VanAuken 2000) thatis arguablyequal to the marytool has been promotionof the allotmentsystem for ongoingdebate in Congressand elsewhererelative to the regulatinggrazing pressures on the landscape.What is healthof westernforests. the datedtool for defininggrazing allotments? Fencing. To date, not enoughis knownabout restoration to pre- Fences are the problemin, not the solutionto, conser- dict how grasslandswill respondover long time scales or vationof historicallygrazed ecosystems. Fencedallot- to estimatea level of success (Collinset al. 1998). mentsenable management agencies to establishstandard- Developmentof effectivegrassland restoration methods ized guidelines(measures of residualforage) for removal must includetesting of hypothesespertaining to the role of grazersfrom ecosystems. Ratherthan challenging the of 1) resourceheterogeneity (as influencedby ecological practiceof fencing,the professionhas committeditself to drivers),2) life-historycharacteristics of nativespecies as intensifyingfencing on smallerspatial (and temporal) influencedby the natureof the landscape,3) nutrientand scales to achievestandard vegetation targets in the name soil conditionsat the startof the restorationas influenced of conservation.Fencing of locally importantriparian by cultivationand agriculture,and 4) how these factors, areas,for example,is common,but it is both economical- singly or in combination,influence species diversityin ly and biologicallycostly. Likewise,high-density fenc- restoredgrassland vegetation. ing withinthe commodity-orientedsystem is movingto 12 WildlijfeSociety Bulletin 2004, 32(1):6-15

the oppositeend of the conservationcontinuum from a responsiblefor the conservationof threatenedand endan- regionaland ecosystemvision. gered species and theirdistributions (Knopf 1992). The The rangemanagement profession must examine fenc- GreatPlains is no exceptionto jurisdictiondisintegration. ing approachesrelative to perpetuatinghabitats of the This GreatPlains resource is managedby at least 4 feder- native,endemic biota. Fencingcattle from riparianareas al agencies,7 administrativeregions, 19 administrative thathistorically were obliteratedby bison promotesthe areasor parksor supervisorunits, and44 districts. There growthof andbiological ubiquity in nativegrass are no consistent1) criteriato identifyspecies-at-risk, 2) landscapes.The moreintensive the fencing,the less approachesto species, community,or ecosystemviabili- probablethe viabilityof nativespecies such as prairie ty, or 3) federalrules or modelsto developand imple- birds. Managingfor standardizedvegetative goals pre- ment consistentand science-basedconservation planning. cludes endemicspecies at the ends of the ecological con- Consolidationor realignmentof federalagencies would tinuumof grazingactivity. Managingin the middle reduceconflict in conservationof species-at-riskand acrossbroad landscapes manages against species that facilitatethe developmentof a step-down,cost-effective requireheavy grazingto createopen areasand those that frameworkfor theirconservation (Samson and Knopf requirelighter grazing that leaves moreresidual vegeta- 2001). tion for the subsequentseason's nesting cover (Knopf Anotherissue is agencyeffectiveness (e.g., quick 1994). Managingfor the middleacross broad landscapes responseto the public). Flexibilityand the abilityto is managingto promotelistings of species underthe changestrategy if necessaryare mandatory.The abilities EndangeredSpecies Act (1973). to pull people togetherrather than subdividing tasks, and Ourideas shouldnot be viewed as threateningto the to promotesharing of new ideas andproducts are also professionof rangelandmanagement. Rather, we offer necessary(Eisenshardt and Sull 2001). For instance,do thatthe professionneeds to thinkmore in the perspective our expectationsin conservingthe prairiedog or the less- of longertemporal (historical) sustainability of native er prairie-chicken (Tympanuchuspallidicinctus) need to landscape. It's ironicthat the Society for Range be modulatedin light of whatwe know aboutan adver- Managementlogo depictsa cowboy on horseback. sarialstate-federal agency systemin which biologists While thatlifestyle does survivein remnantsof the Great matchwits with one another? Basin and ColoradoPlateau, it has been managedoff the Recommendationsfor agency separation,along with landscapeon the westernGreat Plains. A cowboy with demandsfor betterscience in the legal process(Shaffer manyfences doesn't need a horse as much as a truck. et al. 2002), chronicallyoverestimate the powerof agen- cies to be effectivein politicalchoices aboutscience Archaicagencies (Jasanoff1998). The mechanicsof conservationrequire Thereis growingconsensus that the currentsystem of an organizationaldesign in naturalresource conserva- protectingthe environmentis inappropriatefor meeting tion-one of effectiveagencies working with nongovern- the challengesahead (Samson and Knopf2001). A new mentalorganizations and private landowners. approachis requiredin which the environmentis man- In the 1970s, when the contextof environmentalman- aged in a way similarto how any good businessmanages agementwas simpler,agencies could affordto have inde- its valuableand productiveassets (Costanzaet al. 2000). pendentand complexconservation strategies. The envi- This recognizesthat the environmentis of criticalimpor- ronmentalcontext is no longersimple. Today,lack of tance as a life-supportsystem and shifts the burden-of- leadershipand conflictinglegal mandatesfor conserva- proof of conservationto those who potentiallyharm tion have fostereda creepingparalysis in publicland grasslandsby theiractivities (e.g., overharvesting,habitat managementin the UnitedStates (Samson and Knopf destruction,introduction of exotic species, and so on). 2001). Understandingand openingdialogs in coopera- Cases in point are the UnitedStates Department of tive venturesand movingtoward a sharedconservation Agricultureand the shelterbeltelement of the Canadian vision are the foundationof effectivenatural resource GreencoverInitiative to promotethe plantingof trees, conservation.Both agencyand ecosystem dysfunction which conflictswith carbonsequestration, a significant can lead to loss of naturalresources (Pressey 1998). prairieecosystem asset (Jacksonet al. 2002). A fundamentalproblem for naturalresource conserva- tion is thatno effectiveorganization exists at the appro- Summary priatespatial or temporalscales (Costanzaet al. 2000). TheodoreRoosevelt, in his most importantconserva- A strikingexample in the UnitedStates is the lack of tion speech (i.e., NaturalResources-Their Wise Use or congruenceof federalagency administrativeboundaries TheirWaste), said, "Theconservation of natural Great Plains ecosystems * Samson et al. 13

resourcesis only preliminaryto the largerquestion of BAKKER,J.P,AND F BERENDSE.1999. Constraints in the restoration of in and heathland communities. nationalefficiency" (Taylor 1911:1). Efficiencyincludes ecological diversity grassland Trends in Ecology and Evolution 14:63-68. creativedestruction (i.e., replacingexisting technologies BARNEs,R. C. 1993. The U. C. C. insidious preference for agronomy over and processeswith innovationand new organizations) ecology in farm lending. University of Colorado Law Review 64: (Shankin2000). To increaseefficiency, prairie conserva- 457-512. tion 1) new (MDAs)to BEssEY,C. E. 1893. Seventh annual report of the botanist. Nebraska requires: technology prioritize Board of Lincoln, USA. and set contextto save basedini- Agriculture, prairie,2) ecologically BLAKESLEE,D.J. 1996. Persistence and change in the natural and cultur- tiativesto reversesignificant losses in areaand condition al landscapes of the central plains. Transactions of the Kansas of nativegrasslands, 3) rethinkingof standardizedtools Academy of Sciences 99:86-94. in the and4) a new natu- BROCKWAY,D., R. GATEWOOD,AND R. PARIS.2002. Restoring fire as an eco- rangemanagement profession, in shortgrass initial effects of ral resource at the logical process prairie ecosystems: agency,organized appropriatespatial prescribed burning during the dormant and growing . scale and workingeffectively with nongovernmental Journal of Environmental Management 65:135-152. organizationsand privatelandowners. COLLINS,S. L.,A.K. KNAPP,D. C. HARTNEr,ANDJ. M. BRIGGS.1998. The The national of Canadaand the United dynamic tallgrass prairie:synthesis and research opportunities. strengths 301-316 in A. K. M. D. C. and S. L. Stateswere built theircollective wealthof natural Pages Knapp,J. Briggs, Hartnett, upon Collins, editors. Grasslanddynamics. Oxford University Press, New resources. The evolutionof naturalresource manage- York,,USA. mentfrom sustainableharvest through multiple-use and CONSTANZA,R., H. DALY,C. FOLKE,P HAWLEN,C. S. HOLLING,A.J.McMICHAEL, then seemedto to D. PIMENTEL,AND D. RAPPORT.2000. Managing our environmental ecosystem-viabilityparadigms apply BioScience 50:149-150. all nativebiomes the central The tall- portfolio. except grasslands. EDWIN,J.,S. H. LONG,AND T.SAY. 1966. Stephen H. Long expedition to grass prairiewas viewed as economicallyviable only the Rocky Mountains, 1819-1820. University Microfilms,AnnArbor, when totallyconverted to an exotic ecosystemsustained Michigan, USA. chemicaladditives. The fol- EISENHARDT,K. M.,AND D. N. SULL.2001. Strategy as simple rules. by mixed-prairieregion HarvardBusiness Review 79:107-113. lowed this but with additional to history engineering sup- FAHNESTOCK,J. I.,NDJ. I. DETLING.2002. Bison-prairiedog-plant interac- plementwater resources for .Farther west, the tions in North American mixed-grass prairie. Oecologia 132:86-95. shortgrassprairie suffered homogenization of the natural FAHRIG,L. 1997. Relative effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on extinction. of Wildlife variabilityinherent in the world'snative herbivore-driven population Journal Management 61:603-610. FLANNERY,T.2001. The eternal frontier:an ecological history of North landscape. America and its peoples. Atlantic Monthly Press, New York,New The GreatPlains are America's 140-year Failed York,USA. Frontierthat has cost trillionsof dollarsin misguided FUHLENDORF,S. D., ANDD. M. ENGLE.2001. Restoring heterogeneity on farm and immeasurableheartbreak :ecosystem management based on evolutionary grazing programs (Kristof BioScience We offer thatNorth America's Great Plains have patterns. 51:625-632. 2002). FUHLENDORF,S. D., H. ZHANG,T. R.TUNNELL,D. M. ENGLE,AND A. E CROSS. sufferedfrom an abundanceof fiscal greedand a shortfall 2002. Effects of grazing on restoration of southern mixed prairie of ecological commonsense. The GreatPlains are the soils. 10:401-407. of naturalresource conservation in North GLENN,S. M.,AND S. L.COLLINS. 1992. Effects of scale and disturbance on birthplace rates of and extinction. Oikos America The view fromMt. immigration 63:273-280. (Reiger 1986). Rushmoreis HARTNETT,D. C.,A.A. STUETER,ANDK. R. HICKMAN.1997. Comparative hardlythe legacy TeddyRoosevelt imagined. ecology of native and introduced ungulates. Pages 105-130 in E L. Knopf and E B. Samson, editors. Ecology and conservation of Great Acknowledgments.We thankN. Silvy and J. Wallace Plains Vertebrates. Ecological Studies 125, Springer-Verlag,New for theirvaluable editorial assistance, D. M. Engle and D. York,New York,USA. C.A. ROLOFF1996. a coarse filter G. Milchunas,two anonymousreviewers for helpfulsug- HAUFLER,J.B., MEHL,AND G.J. Using approach with species assessment for ecosystem management. gestions, andThe WildlifeSociety for grasslandand Wildlife Society Bulletin 24:200-208. grasslandwildlife conservationsessions at the annual HAUFLER,J.B., R. K. BAYBACK,H. CAMPAIII, B.J. KEtNOHAN, C. MILLER,L.J. meetingin Bismarck,North Dakota, USA. O'NEIL,AND L.WATT.2002. Performance measures for ecosystem management and ecological sustainability. Technical Review 02-1. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, Maryland,USA. Liteature cited HIGGENS, K. F 1986. Interpretation and compendium of historical fire accounts in the northern Great Plains. United States Department of APLET;G. H.,AND W S. KEETON.1999. Application of historic range of via- Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Resource Publication 161, bility concepts to biodiversity conservation. Pages 71-86 in R. K. , D.C., USA. Baydack,H. Campa III,and J. B. Haufler,editors. Practical approach- IRY, L. R.,J. E. NORLAND,J.A.WESTLAND, AND M.A. SUTLLAN.2002. es to the conservation of biological diversity, 1999. Island Press, Evaluation of a forage allocation model forTheodore Roosevelt Washington D.C., and Covello, ,USA. National Park. Journal of Environmental Management 64:153-169. BAILEY,R. G. 1996. Descriptions of the ecoregions of the United States. JACKSON,R. B.J. L.BANNER, E. G.JOBBAGYWT. POCKAMAN,AND D. H.WALLS. Miscellaneous Publication 1391. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2002. Ecosystem carbon loss with woody plant invasion of grass- Forest Service, Washington, D.C. lands. Nature 418:623-626. 14 Wildlife Society Bulletin 2004, 32(1):6-15

JASANOFF,S. 1995. Science at the bar. Law,science, and technology in 261-274 in F B. Samson and F L. Knopf, editors. Prairie conserva- America. HarvardUniversity Press, Cambridge,Massachusetts, USA. tion. Preserving North America's most endangered ecosystem. JOHNSON,L. C., ANDJ. R. MATCHETT.2001. Fire and grazing regulated Island Press,Washington D. C., and Covello, California,USA. belowground processes in tallgrass prairie. Ecology 82:3377-3389. SAMSON,F B. 1992. Conserving biodiversity in sustainable ecosystems. KNOPF,E L. 1992. Faunal mixing, integrity,and the biopolitical Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resource template for diversity conservation. Transactions of the North Conference 57:308-320. American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 57:30-342. SAMSON,F B.,AND F L. KNOPF. 1994. Prairie conservation in North KNOPF,F L. 1994. Avian assemblages on altered grasslands. Studies in America. BioScience 44:418-421. Avian Biology 15:247-257. SAMSON,E B., ANDF L. KNOPF.1996. Prairie conservation. Preserving KNOPF,F L. 1996. Prairie legacies-birds. Pages 135-148 in F B. Samson North America's most endangered ecosystem. Island Press, and F L. Knopf, editors. Preserving North America's most endan- Washington D.C., and Covello, California,USA. gered ecosystem. Island Press, Covello, Californiaand Washington, SAMSON,E B.,AND F L. KNOPF2001. Archaic agencies, muddled missions, D. C., USA. and conservation in the 21st century. BioScience 51:869-873. KNOPF,F L.,AND F B. SAMSON.1997. Ecology and conservation of Great SAMSON,F B., E L. KNOPF,C. L. MCCARTHY,W R. HOSTILE,S. LARSON,G. E. Plains Vertebrates. Ecological Studies 125. Springer-Verlag,New PLUMB,B. R. NOON,D. N. SVINGEN,G. L. SCHENBECK,S. M. RINEHART,AND T. York,New York,USA. W BYER.2003. Planning for population viability on Northern Great KRISTOF,N.D. 2002. America's Failed Frontier. New YorkTimes. 3 Plains grasslands. Wildlife Society Bulletin 31:986-999. September 2002; section A: 19. SEARCHINGER,T.D. 2002. Letter to The Honorable Tom Harkin and The KUCHLER,A.W1964. Potential natural vegetation of the conterminous Honorable Richard Luger. 2002,January 28. On file,The United States. Special Publication 36. New York:American Environmental Defense Fund,Washington, D.C, USA. Geographical Society, New York,New York,USA. SEASTEDT,T.R., B. P. HAYDEN,C. E. OWENSBY,AND A. K. KNAPP. 1998. Climate MADDEN, E. M.,A.J. HANSEN,AND R. K. MURPHY.1999. Influence of pre- change, elevated CO2, and predictive modeling: past and future cli- scribed fire history on habitat and abundance of passerine birds in mate change scenarios for the tallgrass prairie. Pages 283-300 in A. northern mixed-grass prairie. Canadian Field-Naturalist4:627-640. K. Knapp,J. M. Briggs, D. C. Hartnett,and S. L. Collins, editors. Grass- MALAINEY,M. E., AND B. L. SHERRIFF.1996. Adjusting our perceptions: his- land dynamics. Oxford University Press, New York,New York,USA. torical and archaeological evidence of winter on the plains of SHAFFER,M. L., L. H.WATCHMAN,W.J.SNAPE III,AND I. K. LATCHIS.2002. Western Canada. Plains Anthropologist 41:333-357. Population viability analysis and conservation. Pages 123-145 in S. MASTERS,R.A., S.J. NISSEN,R. E. GAUSSOIN,D. D. BERAN,ANDR. N. STOUGARD. R. Beissenger and D. R. McCullough, editors. Population viability 2002. Imidazoline herbicides improve restoration of Great Plains analysis, University of Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA. grasslands. Weed Technology 10:392-403. SHANKIN,W L. 2000. Creatively managing for creative destruction. MILCHUNAS,D. G., W K. LAUENROTH,ANDI. C. BURKE. 1998. Livestock graz- Business Horizons 43:29-36. ing: animal and plant biodiversity of shortgrass steppe and the rela- STEINAUER,E. M.,AND S. L. COLLINS.1996. Prairie ecology-the tallgrass tionship to ecosystem function. Oikos 83:65-74. prairie. Pages 39-52 in F B. Samson and F L. Knopf, editors. Prairie NASATIR,A.P. 1952. Before Lewis and Clark. Volumes 1 & 2. St. Louis conservation. Preserving North America's most endangered ecosys- Historical Documents Foundation, St. Louis, , USA. tem. Island Press,Washington D.C., and Covello, California,USA. OSTLIE,W R., R. E. SCHNEIDER,J.M.ALDRICH,T. M. FAUST,R. L. B. McKIM,AND STEINAUER,E. M.,AND S. L. COLLINS.2001. Feedback loops in ecological S.J. CHAPLIN.1997. The status of biodiversity in the Great Plains. hierarchies following urine deposition in tallgrass prairie. Ecology The Nature Conservancy,, Minnesota, USA. 82:1319-1329. PICKETT,S.T.A., AND J. N. THOMPSON. 1978. Patch dynamics and the TAYLOR,F W 1911. The principles of scientific management. Harper & design of reserves. Biological Conservation 13:27-37. brothers, New York,New York,USA. Available online at http:// PRESSEY,R. L. 1998. Algorithms, politics and timber: an example of the www.fordham.edu.halsal/mod/1911 (accessed 14 September 2003). role of science in a public, political negotiation process over new THENATURE CONSERVANCY. 2000. Ecoregional planning in the Osage conservation areas in production . Pages 73-87 in R.Wills Plains/Flint Hills Prairie. The Nature Conservancy,Midwestern and R. Hobbs, editors. Ecology for everyone: communicating ecolo- Resource Office, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. gy to scientists, the public and the politicians. Surrey Beatty and UMBANHOWAR,C. E. 1996. Recent fire history of the northern Great Sons, Sydney,Australia. Plains. American Midland Naturalist 135:115-121. RADENBAUGH,T.A.,ANDP C. DOUAUD.2000. Introduction: changing land- VANAUKEN, O. W 2000. Shrub invasions of North American semiarid scapes of the Northern Great Plains. Pages 1-8 in T.A.Radenbaugh grasslands. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 31:197-215. and P Douaud, editors. Changing prairie landscapes. Canadian VINTON,M.A.,AND S. L. COLLINS.1996. Landscape heterogeneity gradi- Plains Research Center, University of Regina, , ents and habitat structure in native grasslands of the central Great , Canada. Plains. Pages 3-19 in E L. Knopf and F B. Samson, editors. Ecology RAVEN,P H. 1990. The politics of preserving diversity. BioScience 40: and conservation of Great Plains vertebrates. SpringerVerlag, New 769-774. York,New York,USA. REIGER,J. E 1986. American sportsmen and the origins of conservation. WEAVER,J.E. 1968. Prairie plants and their environment. University of University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, USA. Nebraska Press, Lincoln, USA. RICE,C. W,T. C.TODD,J. M. BLAIR,T.R. SEASTEDT,R.A. RAMUNDO,ANDG.W T. WILSON.1998. Belowground biology and processes. Pages 244-264 in A. K. Knapp,J. M. Briggs, D. C. Hartnett,and S. L. Collins, Fred B. Samson (top left) is a regional wildlife ecologist for the United States Forest Service in . He received his in editors. Grasslanddynamics. Oxford University Press, New York, Missoula, B.A. business and M.S. in form and a Ph.D. in New York,USA. zoology University from Utah State Fred has worked for the United E. D. M. ecology University. RICKLETTS,T.H., DINERSTEIN, OLSEN, C.J. LOUCKS,W. EICHBAUM,D. States Fish and Wildlife Service and for the United States Forest DELLASALA,K. KAVANAGH,P P.T. K. M. HEDAO, HURLEY, CARNEY,R.ABELL, Service research and management, and taught at State ANDS.WALTERS. 1999. Terrestrial of North America. ecoregions University, State College; the University of Missouri-Columbia; and Island Press,Washington D.C., and Covello, California,USA. Colorado State University, FortCollins. His primary conservation RISSER,P 1996. A new framework for prairie conservation. Pages activities are large-scale planning and applied biodiversity conserva- Great Plains ecosystems * Samson et al. 15

tion, with a particular interest in the Great Plains grasslands. Fritz L. Assessment Learning Center, The Nature Conservancy, in Washington, Knopf (bottom left) received his B.A. in biology form Hiram College D.C. Since 1987 Wayne has held a number of positions with the and M.S. and Ph.D. in wildlife ecology from Utah State University. Conservancy including director of science for the Great Plains He is currently a senior scientist with the United State Geological Program and director of science and stewardship with the Survey's Biological Resources Division, Fort Collins, Colorado; has Conservancy Field Office. He received a B.A. in biology from Luther served as project leader and branch chief of vertebrate ecology for the College and an M.A. in biology from the University of Kansas. His National Biological Survey; and has taught at Oklahoma State primary interest is to deliver training, peer review, tools, and University. Fritz'sprimary research interests are in the conservation of methods to ecoregional practitioners worldwide. Great Plains grasslands, declining wildlife that depend on prairie, and rare grassland species including the . Wayne R. Ostlie's (top right) current position is senior management, Ecoregional Special section associate editor: Silvy