Prescribed Burning – Old Practice, New Concerns

by David J. Kraft, Rangeland Management Specialist
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
Emporia, Kansas

Development of an ecosystem, the defining of a culture, and protecting a resource are all descriptions and understandings of the role which fire has played in the tallgrass prairie through time.

In many circles, prescribed burning or the burning of native grass residue following the annual dormancy period has been described or defined as agriculture burning. However, in some circles it may be defined as conservation burning. In either case, the use of prescribed burning or prescribed fire has been recognized for many decades as a primary management necessity in long-term sustainability of native rangeland.

In Kansas alone, there are approximately 16 million acres of rangeland consisting of native warm-season grass species. Another two million plus acres of cropland are enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and planted to native species. However you add the numbers up, the fact remains that Kansas contains a substantial portion of the remaining native rangeland in the North American continent. It is also recognized as an ecosystem in jeopardy without the use of prescribed burning.

Within the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), three primary reasons for the use of prescribed burning are recognized. The first would be to minimize the effect of grazing distribution challenges which affects rangeland health. Grazing distribution problems or challenges can occur for many reasons, some of which are topography, prevailing wind, pasture size, and shape. Prescribed burning can be very effective in removing, or at least evening out, the impact or effect of the previous grazing season. Prescribed burning has also long been recognized as a very powerful tool in stimulating positive vegetative growth and vigor of many native warm-season grass species while diminishing the negative impact of introduced or cool-season grass species which compete for space and moisture.

The second reason NRCS promotes the use of prescribed burning is as a follow-up tool to conservation practices such as brush and pest management. Effective and specifically-targeted prescribed burns are vital in addressing plants which either escaped the brush or pest management practice or are re-sprouting plants which can be effectively controlled by prescribed burning as a follow-up practice. This might include the use or scheduling of the prescribed burn for multiple years back to back.

The third reason, which is commonly recognized as a prescribed burning benefit, is improved animal performance following the application of a prescribed burn. While this reason may not fit the definition of a conservation reason or purpose for using prescribed burning as a tool, it remains a proven fact and often important in the producer’s reasoning process to either include prescribed burning in his/her management or choose to attempt to manage without it.

The ability of a producer or landowner to use prescribed burning in the future has come under attack in the past few years. These reasons range from safety or liability issues to air quality standards or concerns. In fact, air quality concerns may have gained equal ground with safety or liability concerns as a threat to the future use of prescribed burning. In April 2003, ozone created and traced back to the Flint Hills caused air quality monitors in Kansas City to pass over a threshold considered to be safe or at least a concern to the public. This was primarily caused by what meteorologists would call an inversion in the atmosphere not allowing greater dispersion of the ozone into the atmosphere. Granted, this occurred on two days back to back. Initially, it was thought this might be just a very rare occurrence; however, there have been a few days since then where these levels or thresholds have been threatened but not exceeded. What this all adds up to, at a minimum, is that those who use prescribed burning as a tool may need to be aware of environmental conditions and how it will affect the dispersion of the smoke the fire creates.

One thing that most researchers and many landowners have discovered is that a native grass rangeland setting, at least in the eastern half of the state of Kansas, will become quickly threatened by woody plant invasion where effective prescribed burning is absent. Another change which ultimately becomes a threat to the long-term sustainability of a native warm-season grass plant community is the increase or invasion of cool-season introduced species, such as Kentucky Bluegrass, Tall Fescue, or even Smooth Bromegrass, into the once native warm-season plant community. Where warm-season native grass species are quite tolerant of prescribed burning, many cool-season species are susceptible to the effect of the prescribed burn when applied at a time when warm-season grasses are beginning to emerge from winter-time dormancy. Another concern which would arise is the increased amount of chemical used to control woody species invasion in the eastern half of the state of Kansas in an attempt to maintain a tree-free grassland.

So where do you begin to draw the battle lines. If in fact you sit on either side of the prescribed burning fence, either pro or con, there are certainly things each side can agree on. Those items are backed with a great deal of research and are foundations for further solutions to the challenges in front of us.

Every prescribed burning article would be remiss by not mentioning the most important issue in the application of prescribed burning. Personal safety, as well as the safety of others, in conjunction with the property targeted for the prescribed burn or in the potential path of the fire should be planned for well in advance of a match ever being lighted.

If you are interested in more details concerning the history, effects, or use of prescribed burning, please contact your local U. S. Department of Agriculture’s Service Center and talk to the NRCS or conservation district staff.

For more information about NRCS programs, visit the Kansas NRCS Web site at www.ks.nrcs.usda.gov.

This article is also available in Microsoft Word format.

Prescribed Burning – Old Practice, New Concerns (DOC; 44 KB)

< Back to Conservation Editions - Fiscal Year 2006 Index

Last Modified: 08/20/2008