Evaluating establishment of conservation practices in the Conservation Reserve Program across the central and western United States

Vandever, Mark W.; Carter, Sarah K.; Assal, Timothy J.; Elgersma, Kenneth J.; Wen, Ai; Welty, Justin L.; Arkle, Robert S.; Iovanna, Rich

doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ac06f8

Cited by 4 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Multiple photos were taken of nearly all fields for reference, and a common‐cover‐class diagram was used by crew as a visual aid, facilitating data quality control checks. See Vandever et al (2021a) for full description of these visual estimation methods and infield validation of our methods.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For expired CRP fields that retained at least 20% of their area in CRP‐type cover, we compared the characteristics of that retained vegetation (not the entire field) to the characteristics of enrolled CRP fields within the same region and practice type (Vandever et al, 2021a). This analysis was carried out at the regional (rather than state) level to ensure a sufficient sample size.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, we surveyed 1092 expired CRP fields. In a previous study, we sampled 1786 enrolled fields using a similar process and survey methods (see Vandever et al, 2021a).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If the expired CRP fields had 20% of their area in grass and forb cover that resembled typical CRP plantings for that CP, we further quantified vegetation cover, bare ground, soil erosion, and disturbance in that portion of the field using edge‐of‐field visual estimates. These variables are the same as those quantified for enrolled CRP fields in Vandever et al (2021a). The edge‐of‐field estimates included the following: total cover of grasses, forbs, shrubs, trees, and bare soil; presence of soil erosion indicators (rills, gullies, pedestaling); and the amount, type, and timing of disturbances.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, there is an even greater need to understand the fate of CRP lands after contracts expire. Assessing vegetation cover on both enrolled and expired CRP fields enables the quantification of benefits that accrue while the conservation cover persists (Vandever et al, 2021a). Understanding the spatial distribution and characteristics of ex-CRP fields persisting on the landscape could help target conservation practices (CPs) toward areas likely to provide the greatest long-term provision of ecosystem services.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Persistence and quality of vegetation cover in expired Conservation Reserve Program fields

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For nearly 40 years, the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) has implemented practices to reduce soil erosion, improve water quality, and provide habitat for wildlife and pollinators on highly erodible cropland in the United States.However, an approximately 40,470 ha (10 million acres) decline in enrolled CRP land over the last decade has greatly reduced the program's environmental benefits. We sought to assess the program's enduring benefits in the central and western United States by (1) determining the proportion of fields that persist in CRP cover after contracts expired, (2) identifying the type of agricultural production that CRP fields shift to after contract expiration, (3) comparing the vegetation characteristics of expired CRP fields that are persisting in CRP-type cover with enrolled CRP fields, and (4) identifying differences in management activities (e.g., haying, grazing) between expired and enrolled CRP fields. We conducted edge-of-field vegetation cover surveys in 1092 CRP fields with contracts that expired ≥3 years prior and 1786 currently enrolled CRP fields in 14 states. We found that 41% of expired CRP fields retained at least half of their area in CRP-type cover, with significant variation in persistence among regions ranging from 19% to 84%. When expired fields retained CRP vegetation, bare ground was low in all regions and grass cover was somewhat greater than in fields with current CRP contracts, but at the expense of forb cover in some regions. Evidence of more frequent management in expired CRP fields may explain differences between active and expired CRP fields. Overall, there is clear evidence that CRP-type cover frequently persists and provides benefits for more than three years after contract expiration. Retaining CRP-type cover, post-contract, is an under-recognized program benefit that persists across the central and western United States long after the initial retirement from cropland.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, we surveyed 1092 expired CRP fields. In a previous study, we sampled 1786 enrolled fields using a similar process and survey methods (see Vandever et al, 2021a).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Persistence and quality of vegetation cover in expired Conservation Reserve Program fields

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Exotic species explain plant functional trait differences between seed mixes, restored and reference prairies

Kaul

Wilsey

2023

Applied Vegetation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Questions Are community‐weighted plant functional traits related to the ‘fast–slow’ growth rate continuum different in seed mixes, restored and reference prairies? If so, then what are the traits that explain differences? Remnant prairies, which serve as reference sites for restorations, often have higher plant species diversity and a lower abundance of exotic (non‐native) species than their restoration counterparts. They may differ in their community‐weighted functional traits as well, although this is poorly studied. Location Tallgrass prairies and abandoned fields in Iowa, United States, North America. Methods We compared functional traits between remnant prairies, restoration seed mixes, and established restorations to determine if community‐weighted trait values (∑pi × traits) are comparable. Relative abundance was determined by previous sampling of 93 restorations, 48 seed mixes and five remnant sites. Functional traits, including leaf specific leaf area (SLA) and leaf dry matter content (LDMC), and plant height, were measured for 145 native and 39 non‐native plant species, 663 plants, and 1326 leaves. Results Seed mixes had greater community‐weighted LDMC and lower SLA than remnants, perhaps because of human selection for high grass abundance in mixes. Established restorations had lower community‐weighted LDMC and higher SLA than remnants and seed mixes, and restorations had a large exotic species component. The proportional abundance of exotics in restorations explained trait differences between remnants and restorations. After taking into account functional groupings, perennial exotic species, on average, had higher SLA and lower LDMC than perennial native species. Remnants and established restorations had similar plant heights, and height was not significantly different between native and exotic species. Conclusions Our results indicate that seed mixes differ from remnants in a manner that was the opposite of the difference between seed mixes and established restorations. Although seed mixes favored species with slower growth rate trait compositions, the species that established in restored prairies tended to have traits associated with faster growth rates. We recommend developing prairie restoration seed mixes with a greater proportion of forbs, especially those with lower LDMC and higher SLA.

show abstract

Establishing forbs for pollinators in agricultural landscapes of the Great Plains, U.S.A.

Rinella

Porensky

Bellows

et al. 2023

Restoration Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pollinator insects are declining, partly because grasslands containing forbs they feed on have been converted to cropland. This conversion is prevalent in the Great Plains, home to several imperiled pollinators and 40% of U.S. honeybees. Over 1.0 million hectares of former cropland have been seeded with forbs that could benefit Great Plains pollinators, but success of these seeding efforts is unclear. We quantified forb abundances and factors regulating these abundances in 120 crop fields seeded to forbs and grasses by managers in the Great Plains (Colorado and Montana). Our data indicated a need to improve forb establishment. Two to five growing seasons after seeding, seeded forb cover was <10% in most fields, and no seeded forbs were observed in 23% of fields. Our data also indicated ways to benefit forbs. High grass seed rates and high weed densities shortly after seeding reduced forb cover at the end of the study. Past studies indicate certain post‐emergence herbicides sometimes benefit seeded forbs, and we recommend further research in this domain. Instead of beneficial herbicides applied after seeding, managers sometimes applied risky herbicides before seeding that appeared to persist in soil and reduce forb establishment. Seed rates were too low to maximize forb abundances, and much money was wasted buying seeds of species that did not establish. We identified several species with relatively high establishment probabilities that will support most pollinators. For now, these species should be seeded at high rates. Lower rates could become sufficient if effective weed control is implemented.

show abstract

Evaluating establishment of conservation practices in the Conservation Reserve Program across the central and western United States

Cited by 4 publications

References 32 publications

Persistence and quality of vegetation cover in expired Conservation Reserve Program fields

Persistence and quality of vegetation cover in expired Conservation Reserve Program fields

Exotic species explain plant functional trait differences between seed mixes, restored and reference prairies

Establishing forbs for pollinators in agricultural landscapes of the Great Plains, U.S.A.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About