West Texas Rangelands
West Texas RangelandsWe hope to provide a variety of science-based rangeland information and current research on prescribed fire, wildfires, brush management, and grazing management!

Take What You Need & Let The Range Succeed: Principles of Sustainable Grazing

by

Article written by Mr. Burkes Kissire, Sutton County 4-H Member

When looking out into a rangeland, you might think that all the grass you see can be fully grazed, but when you look a little deeper into the subject, you begin to realize that you may be wrong.

Rangelands are the most valuable resource available to livestock producers in Texas. A well-managed rangeland can easily sustain both livestock and wildlife, while also maintaining healthy soil. However, these resources can decline quickly when overused. One of the most recommended grazing practices is the Take 50%, Leave 50% concept. While simple in theory, this management practice can have significant impacts on the long-term health and the productivity of your land.

Take 50%, Leave 50% is exactly what the name suggests: only half the edible forages should be removed from the pasture. Importantly, this must be based on the weight of the edible forage, rather than the height of the plant. Different plants grow differently, making height an unreliable factor for estimating. By only focusing on the amount of forage used, rangeland managers can better manage their plants and rangelands and ensure that plants retain enough leafy material to recover the lost material efficiently and quickly.

Leaving half of the plant is essential for the plant’s health since plants rely on their leaves to capture available sunlight and produce energy they need through photosynthesis. When too much of the leaf is grazed, the plant goes into a state of emergency, in which the plant begins to use energy stored in the roots for regrowth. Depending on how much leaf was removed, a portion of the roots will stop growing. In contrast, when 50% or more of the leaf material remains and contributes to photosynthesis, the plant recovers more quickly, leading to more efficient plant growth and healthier roots.

Proper grazing affects the roots more than you think. A pasture full of healthy plants has a healthy root system that helps hold soil in place and helps hold water during a drought. Deep roots allow water to infiltrate the soil, instead of running off and eroding your soil. Healthy rangelands also promote nutrient cycling as plant material decomposes and returns nutrients to the soil. Over time, these processes and cycles will lead to better soil health, cleaner groundwater, and a more drought-resistant rangeland for years to come.

Applying the Take 50%, Leave 50% principle starts with understanding the amount available forage. Rangeland managers can visually estimate the amount of plant life in a pasture, but for precise measurements, you should weigh the grass. Begin by marking out a random square yard in your pasture, clip and weigh the grass, then convert this weight into pounds per acre. Knowing the exact amount of forage production in your pasture can help prevent overstocking and ensure that the plant retains enough material to regenerate.

Each livestock species selects different plants, making your choice of livestock very important. Cattle primarily graze taller grasses, and graze less selectively than other livestock species. Sheep graze shorter grasses, legumes, and other plants native to where they live. In contrast to both cattle and sheep, goats prefer browse, similar to a white-tail deer. Because each species has its preference, you can allow multiple species to graze or browse the same pasture to maximize operation. For example, if you have a pasture dominated by grasses that also has a considerable amount of browse, you may consider allowing both sheep and goats to graze and browse the same pasture.

Successfully applying this principle requires more than simply gauging your forage content. Rangeland managers must also consider carrying capacity, stocking rates, growing seasons, seasonal rainfall, and pasture recovery times. Strategies such as rotational grazing and deferred grazing help you maintain the perfect ratio of forage in your pasture. During a drought, you may have to reduce your stocking rate to ensure you do not lose too much grass.

The economic benefits of proper grazing are major. A healthy rangeland produces more edible forage over time, reducing the need for supplemental feeds. Good forage quality is important since it leads to efficient weight gain and overall improves herd quality. By maintaining productive plants on productive soil, producers can avoid costly restoration efforts needed after overgrazing. Sustainable grazing practices help protect natural resources we have and profitability.

The Take 50%, Leave 50% concept has remained one of the most reliable grazing practices since it can balance production and resource conservation. Following this principle helps maintain healthy plants and soil. This combination of benefits leads to productive rangelands for future generations. While every operation is unique, this practical principle can be applied almost anywhere, with any types of grass.

Sources: Dr. Doug Tolleson, Pascual Hernandez, Tammy Fisher

Economic Incentives for Reducing Wildfire Risk

by

What Landowners, Educators, and Technical Assistance Providers Should Know
Wildfire risk across Texas rangelands and working lands continues to rise. Larger fires, longer fire seasons, and increased exposure at the wildland–urban interface are no longer isolated concerns, they are becoming part of routine land management decisions. While traditional wildfire response has focused heavily on suppression, growing attention is being given to prevention and risk reduction, particularly through economic incentives that encourage proactive land stewardship.  Recent research examining economic incentives for reducing wildfire risk highlights both opportunities and challenges for landowners and those who support them through education and technical assistance.

Why Wildfire Risk Is Increasing
Several interacting forces are driving higher wildfire risk on rangelands:

  • Climate and weather variability, including hotter temperatures and more frequent droughts
  • Fuel buildup from invasive grasses, brush encroachment, and reduced disturbance
  • Land use change and fragmentation, which complicates coordinated fire management

The social and economic impacts extend beyond burned acres. Wildfires affect ranch operations, infrastructure, natural resources, insurance markets, and community safety. As a result, there is growing interest in tools that shift investments from post-fire response to pre-fire prevention.

What Are Economic Incentives for Wildfire Risk Reduction?
Economic incentives are mechanisms designed to lower the financial barriers to adopting wildfire-mitigating practices or to reward landowners for reducing risk on their properties. The research summarized in the infographic identifies four broad categories of incentives:

  1. Command-and-Control Policies – These include regulations such as burn bans, fuel treatment requirements, or zoning rules. While they can be effective in certain contexts, they often face resistance if they limit landowner flexibility or fail to account for local conditions.
  2. Information-Based Incentives – Programs such as cost-share education, outreach campaigns, and technical guidance aim to increase awareness and capacity. These approaches are common in Extension programming and are most effective when paired with financial or operational support.
  3. Market-Based Incentives
    • Cost-share programs for prescribed burning, brush management, or grazing infrastructure
    • Payments for ecosystem services
    • Insurance premium adjustments tied to risk reduction
    • Research shows that direct subsidies and cost-share programs are among the most frequently used and most studied incentive types for wildfire risk reduction.
  4. Hybrid Incentives – Hybrid approaches combine regulatory frameworks with market or informational tools. For example, insurance programs that reward compliance with fuel management standards.

Cost, Effectiveness, and Tradeoffs
One of the most important takeaways for landowners and advisors is that upfront investment matters, but long-term savings can be substantial.

  • Prescribed burning, targeted grazing, and mechanical treatments require planning and initial costs.
  • Over time, these practices can reduce wildfire suppression costs, limit infrastructure damage, and improve ecological resilience.
  • Studies summarized in the research indicate that prevention investments can yield significant cost savings compared to repeated emergency response and recovery.

However, challenges remain:

  • Incentive programs are often short-term, while wildfire risk reduction requires sustained management.
  • Programs may not align well with local ecological conditions or landowner objectives.
  • Participation can be limited by administrative burden or lack of technical support.

Implications for Extension and Technical Assistance
For Extension educators and technical assistance providers, the findings reinforce several key points:

  • Cultural context matters. Landowners are more likely to engage when incentives align with local norms, production goals, and stewardship values.
  • One-size-fits-all approaches rarely work. Flexible, locally adapted programs outperform rigid designs.
  • Education alone is not enough. Information is most effective when paired with financial or operational incentives that reduce risk and uncertainty for landowners.

Extension’s trusted role positions educators to:

  • Translate incentive opportunities into practical decision tools
  • Facilitate cooperative approaches across fence lines
  • Support landowners in navigating cost-share, insurance, and hybrid programs

Looking Ahead
As wildfire risk continues to shape rangeland management, future incentive programs are likely to place greater emphasis on:

  • Long-term contracts and sustained funding
  • Risk-based insurance models
  • Integrated approaches that combine grazing management, prescribed fire, and fuel reduction

For landowners, proactive participation in wildfire risk reduction can protect livelihoods, landscapes, and communities. For educators and technical assistance providers, aligning economic incentives with sound land management remains a powerful strategy for building more fire-resilient rangelands.

Learn More and Stay Connected
For additional resources on rangeland fire management, prescribed burning, and incentive programs, contact your local Extension office or rangeland specialist.

What Your Rangeland Is Telling You: If You Know How to Look

by

The condition of your rangeland shows how management decisions are affecting it. By paying attention to plant communities, soil cover, and overall structure, land managers can identify potential issues early and respond effectively. Regular observation is one of the most important tools in long-term rangeland stewardship. 

Key Indicators to Watch 

Plant diversity is a strong indicator of rangeland health. A mix of grasses, forbs, cool and warm season species, and varying plant heights often signals a functioning system. Uniform vegetation or dominance by a single species may indicate stress or management imbalance. Think monocultures of Purple Threeawn or Texas Wintergrass.  

Soil surface condition is equally important. Adequate litter and ground cover protect soil from erosion, temperatures, and help retain moisture. Increasing bare ground can signal declining rangeland condition.  Bare ground between bunchgrasses of plants will slowly start to expand, increasing soil movement and soil loss.  

Monitoring Beyond the Growing Season 

Rangeland monitoring does not stop when plants are dormant! Winter and early spring observations can reveal grazing patterns, hoof impact, and areas where pressure may be too concentrated.  Monitoring native perennial grasses during the winter is just as important as monitoring during the growing season, because what you protect in the winter is what jumpstarts new growth this spring.   

Tracking changes season-to-season rather than reacting to a single observation provides a clearer picture of trends and management outcomes.  

Using Monitoring to Guide Decisions 

Monitoring allows managers to make informed adjustments to grazing timing, duration, and intensity. When rangeland conditions are regularly evaluated, management becomes proactive rather than reactive setting pastures off to a great start this spring.  

Fire and Follow-Through!

by

This amazing class at TAMU RWFM is focused on Communicating Natural Resources. It covers principles for effectively sharing natural resource science with diverse stakeholders, building essential skills for careers in rangeland, wildlife, and fisheries management. Topics include audience analysis, mixed-media presentations, and interpersonal communication tailored to natural resource contexts. Check out 2025 spring semester’s capstone project!

 

High-Energy Fire Significantly Improves Honey Mesquite Control: Key Findings from a 2022 Texas Study

by

A new(er) peer-reviewed study published in the Journal of Environmental Management (Starns et al., 2022) provides some of the strongest experimental evidence to date that fire intensity—not just the presence of fire—is the critical factor in achieving meaningful mortality of honey mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa).

For decades, land managers in Texas, Oklahoma, and across the southern Great Plains have observed that typical “safe” prescribed fires top-kill mesquite but rarely kill it. The plant simply resprouts vigorously from protected buds beneath the bark (epicormic) and at the root crown (basal). This resilience has made prescribed fire alone an unreliable tool for restoring grass-dominated rangeland once mesquite has become dominant.

The 2022 study directly tested whether dramatically increasing fire energy could overcome those protective mechanisms—even without the added stress of severe drought.

Study Design (Sonora, Texas – 2018–2020)

  • 48 similar-sized honey mesquite trees were selected.
  • Plots received either:
    • Low-energy fire (≈10,000 kJ/m²) – representative of standard prescribed burns using grass/hay fuel, or
    • High-energy fire (≈105,000 kJ/m²) – created by adding cut redberry juniper as fuel to produce prolonged, intense heat.
  • Half the trees in each fire treatment had soil removed from the root crown to test the importance of soil as a bud shield.
  • Trees were monitored for survival and resprouting (basal and epicormic) for two full growing seasons.

Major Results Every Land Manager Should Know

  1. 100% survival after low-energy fire Every mesquite exposed to low-energy fire resprouted and survived the 2-year study period.
  2. 29% apparent mortality after high-energy fire Seven of the 24 mesquites subjected to high-energy fire produced no live resprouts after two growing seasons—an unprecedented kill rate in a controlled experiment without drought stress.
  3. Epicormic (trunk) sprouting virtually eliminated Low-energy fires triggered abundant trunk sprouting (often >100 shoots per tree). High-energy fires almost completely prevented epicormic resprouting—only one tree produced any trunk shoots.
  4. Fewer basal resprouts with high-energy fire Although basal buds (protected by soil) were more heat-tolerant, high-energy fires still reduced the number of basal resprouts by roughly 50–70% in the first post-fire year compared with low-energy fires.
  5. Root-crown exposure helped in year one, but effect faded Excavating soil from the base reduced resprouting the first season, but by year two the difference disappeared.
  6. Results achieved under normal-to-wet conditions The burns were conducted during moderate soil moisture and were followed by above-average rainfall. This demonstrates that extreme fire energy alone—not plant water stress from drought—can significantly impair mesquite recovery.

Practical Implications for Ranchers and Prescribed-Fire Practitioners

  • Standard low-intensity prescribed fire remains largely ineffective for reducing mesquite density or canopy cover.
  • To achieve meaningful mortality, fires must deliver sustained high heat to the cambium and bud zone for several minutes. This typically requires substantial woody fuel loading (e.g., scattered juniper, brush piles, or heavy dead mesquite stems) and weather conditions that support fire spread.
  • Adding targeted woody fuel around individual mesquites or in patches is a practical way to create localized “high-energy” zones even on days when broader landscape conditions are moderate.
  • While complete stand replacement with a single fire is still unlikely, repeated high-energy fires over time—especially when residual dead stems remain standing—should progressively increase cumulative mortality.

In short, the study confirms what many experienced burn practitioners have long suspected: when the goal is mesquite control rather than simple top-kill, hotter is unequivocally better.

Citation: Starns, H.D., Wonkka, C.L., Dickinson, M.B., et al. 2022. Prosopis glandulosa persistence is facilitated by differential protection of buds during low- and high-energy fires. Journal of Environmental Management 303: 114141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.114141. Feel free to download a pdf file here!

Safe, effective, and sufficiently intense prescribed fire can be a game-changing tool for restoring grass dominance in mesquite-invaded rangelands. This research gives us the science to justify turning up the heat!!

Fire Up Plant Diversity!

by

A recent study from Texas A&M researchers, published in Landscape Ecology, dives into how prescribed fires impact plant diversity in mesquite-oak savannas like those on the Edwards Plateau. By analyzing data from over 288 plots before and after a prescribed fire, the team found that these fires boost local plant diversity, encouraging more species richness and evenness in burned areas. This is especially true in soils with better water-holding capacity, where post-fire regrowth thrives amid the mosaic of burned and unburned patches. But there’s a flip side: fires can reduce beta-diversity, meaning less variation in plant communities across your land, as similar species start dominating post-burn.

The study highlights how soil types and rainfall play starring roles in these outcomes. In areas with deeper, moisture-retaining soils like Kavett silty clay, fires sparked significant gains in forb and grass diversity, helping control woody encroachment from mesquite and juniper while creating prime grazing spots. However, in shallower, drier soils like Tarrant, the effects were muted, underscoring the need to time burns with wetter periods to avoid stressing your vegetation. Precipitation patterns around the 2019 burns, drier than average, further mediated results, showing that fire heterogeneity (those patchy burns) shapes spatial diversity patterns, ultimately supporting a more resilient ecosystem for livestock and wildlife alike.

For ranchers looking to implement pyric-herbivory, combining fire with grazing, this research is a game-changer!! It suggests strategic burns can sustain biodiversity, improve forage quality, and maintain ecosystem services without homogenizing your landscape. Start by mapping your soil types and monitoring rainfall forecasts to maximize benefits. While the study focused on semi-arid savannas, its insights encourage adaptive management: test small-scale burns, observe plant responses, and adjust for your ranch’s unique conditions. In the end, embracing fire thoughtfully could ignite long-term health for your rangeland, turning potential threats into thriving, diverse, opportunities!

For more information on the study led by Jaime Xavier as part of The Prairie Project, please click here!

Revegetation vs. Encroachment: Why There’s No “Silver Bullet” for Woody Plant Management

by

Across the Great Plains and Texas rangelands, woody plant encroachment continues to challenge grassland health and productivity. A brand new study from Trejo-Perez et al. (2025) offers important insight into why some rangeland reseeding efforts fall short and what it really takes to keep trees and shrubs from taking over.

[Read more…] about Revegetation vs. Encroachment: Why There’s No “Silver Bullet” for Woody Plant Management

Ten Years of Mesquite Application Timing…Spray a Healthy Tree or Wait Until 75F Soil Temperature?

by

Mesquite (Prosopis spp.) is a tough, invasive shrub that plagues rangelands across Texas and beyond, outcompeting native grasses, reducing forage for livestock, and altering wildlife habitats. For ranchers aiming to boost grazing productivity, conservationists focused on restoring biodiversity, and wildlife managers enhancing quail or deer cover, effective mesquite management is key. But timing your herbicide applications, especially foliar sprays, can make all the difference. Drawing from a ten-year dataset spanning counties like Hamilton, Jack, Hood, Eastland, Comanche, Tom Green, and Schleicher, let’s explore how environmental factors like soil temperature influence mesquite mortality rates one and two years after treatment (YAT).

 

Insights from the Field Trials

This dataset compiled over 500 observations across 10 years from individual plant treatment (IPT), from 5 Texas counties, tracking percent mortality alongside variables such as soil temperature (12-inch depth), air temperature, and relative humidity. While individual results varied by site and conditions, clear patterns emerge when we aggregate the data.

  • Peak Performance in Late Spring/Early Summer: Applications in May and June yielded the highest average mortality—around 88% at 1 YAT and 92% at 2 YAT in May, dropping slightly to 85% and 86% in June. These months coincide with rising soil temperatures (averaging 70°F in May and 79°F in June), when mesquite is actively growing and translocating herbicides to roots more effectively.
  • Decline in Late Summer and Fall: By July and August, averages dip to 75% (1 YAT) and 66% (2 YAT) in July, further to 56% and 68% in August, despite warmer soils (82°F average). September through November show even lower efficacy, with November applications averaging just 3% at 1 YAT and 9% at 2 YAT—likely due to cooler soils (68°F) and plants entering dormancy.
  • Soil Temperature’s Role: While warmer soils are indicative of growing conditions, it is not the primary driver of plant mortality – IT’S THE TREE!!! There is no statistical significant difference between spraying below 75F and above 75F (P = 0.300) soil temperature at 12” depth.  These results emphasize that if the target tree is healthy, full leaf, and mature in phenology stage, it is ready to be sprayed!

Practical Tips for Your Operation

  • Target May-June Window: For most Texas regions, this period offers the sweet spot of active growth without excessive heat stress, grasshoppers or other insect damage, and hopefully before cotton is in the ground. Adjust for your county’s microclimate, e.g., earlier in southern areas like Tom Green.

 

 

By syncing sprays with healthy trees and peak growth, you can achieve higher kill rates, saving time and resources while promoting healthier rangelands. Whether you’re running cattle, promoting biodiversity, or managing for open-spaces, data-driven timing turns mesquite from foe to forgotten!!  Happy spraying and spray for the tree!  

*These data are currently being drafted for submission to Rangeland Ecology and Management.

Structural Changes Drive Functional Changes

by

Woody Encroachment soil graphic changeRangelands, vast and vital, are more than just scenic landscapes. They’re complex ecosystems providing essential services, from clean air and water to livestock grazing and wildlife habitat. But these valuable areas face a growing threat: woody plant encroachment. This occurs when shrubs and trees increase in density and coverage, often at the expense of grasslands. While it might seem like a simple change in vegetation, the consequences are far-reaching, impacting everything from soil health to water availability.

[Read more…] about Structural Changes Drive Functional Changes

Non-Target Woody Plant Response to Herbicides

by

Ranchers in West Texas frequently encounter a double-decker challenge with intense canopy coverage from honey mesquite and dense pricklypear in the understory. Synergistic broadcast herbicide applications are commonly employed to tackle these layered problematic, opportunistic, and abundant species. However, it is crucial to recognize the potential for unintended consequences on nontarget woody plant species. A recent study delved into the effects of various herbicide treatments on both target and nontarget woody plant species.

[Read more…] about Non-Target Woody Plant Response to Herbicides