1

Prairie Acre Management Plan

By Hanna Rankin, Andrew Christensen, Brandon Sparling

Monica Funk, Benjamin Growcock, Dylan Geier

Samantha Elledge, and Sam Barone

@KUprovost Twitter

2

Table of Contents

Abstract…………………………………………………………………3

I. Introduction……………………………………………………………..3

II. State of the Prairie……………………………………………………....4

III. Management Recommendations………………………………………..6

a. Fire………………………………………………………………….6

b. Challenges with Fire………………………………………………..8

c. Mowing……………………………………………………………10

d. Manual and Chemical Methods…………………………………...10

IV. Past Monitoring Strategies and Challenges…………………………...12

V. Organizational Proposals……………………………………………...13

a. Native Landscapes Manager………………………………………13

b. Graduate Level Courses…………………………………………...15

c. Organizational Proposals Challenges……………………………..17

VI. Monitoring Strategies…………………………………………………18

VII. Conclusion…………………………………………………………….20

VIII. Works Cited…………………………………………………………...21

3

Abstract: Prairie Acre has been set aside and mostly forgotten since its dedication in 1932. The

prairie remnant contains a fraction of the species that were once prominent across the Kansas

landscape. A section of the 2017 Environmental Studies Capstone class set about creating a

management plan that would help the development of native species while also combating

invasive species. We would like to see Prairie Acre bolstering the biodiversity that is common in

the few high quality prairies across the state. This plan is designed to be used by anybody that

intends to better Prairie Acre. Several management strategies have been included that range

from controlled burns to chemical applications. Additionally, monitoring strategies are proposed

to track their effectiveness. The biggest struggle in maintaining Prairie Acre is deciding who will

be in charge of making decisions. The University of Kansas has a history of preserving and

conserving the surrounding environment. The Prairie Acre Management Plan contains a

proposal for an employee tasked with managing the natural spaces on university grounds.

Hopefully this plan will be utilized and adapted to help Prairie Acre fulfill its biological and

educational potential.

I. Introduction

Prairie Acre is a small patch of remnant prairie on KU’s campus that retains some of the

biodiversity that once covered the state of Kansas. Through years of grazing, farming, and

development, much of the native tallgrass prairie ecosystem of Lawrence has been destroyed.

Prairie Acre has never been plowed, so the soil and the plant life have a better chance of being

restored to pre-settlement conditions. Prairie Acre has the potential to demonstrate how a healthy

ecosystem functions. The rich biodiversity contained within Prairie Acre far exceeds that of the

manicured lawns surrounding it. However, Prairie Acre still requires management and

monitoring to maintain the natural landscape.

Invasive species are plants or animals that have a tendency to spread rampantly. In most

cases, these species have been introduced to an environment that lacks sufficient competition or

predation. As these species spread, they reduce the number species in the ecosystem, causing

harm to the native environment. The impact of these invasions can range from an imbalance in

the soil to the destruction of an entire ecosystem. A small patch of an invasive species has the

potential to greatly diminish the biodiversity and general health of an ecosystem.

4

Prairie Acre is constantly bombarded with invasive species. Some of these threats comes

from the surrounding neighborhood and the KU campus. These areas contain intentionally

planted non-native species and large patches of unmanaged invasive species. Non-native species

are often desired in horticulture due to their bright colors, quick growth, and landscaping

convenience. Often times plants are chosen because of their ability to solve a problem, such as

blocking wind, but they quickly spread out of control. Invasive species are not contained by

geographic or jurisdictional boundaries which makes Prairie Acre vulnerable. Therefore, Prairie

Acre will always contain some amount of non-native species due to the surrounding landscape.

The management plan outlined in this paper discusses techniques and practices to address

non-natives, promote biological integrity, and maintain Prairie Acre as a remnant. This plan will

allow future stakeholders to systematically sustain Prairie Acre in an efficient and effective

manner. The Prairie Acre Management Plan contains goals that groups outside of the

Environmental Studies department can use to manage this site. There are several proposals for

implementing staff positions and graduate courses to aid in management and monitoring. In

order to track effectiveness of these implementations, a monitoring system has been developed to

track the regression and expansion of invasive species populations.

II. State of the Prairie

Prairie Acre is currently undergoing a transformation as the University of Kansas takes a

more active role in its management and development for educational use. These changes come in

the form of an extension of the acre on the eastern side and the creation of an educational garden

on the northern side. The additions will give the prairie a larger role on campus and a greater

presence for the community of Lawrence. The most recent attempts to manage invasive species

in Prairie Acre has emerged from two areas: increased involvement from the Environmental

5

Studies Program and the addition of a Prairie Acre Restoration Coordinator by the Office of

Sustainability. As part of coursework activities, students have assisted with the removal of

woody species. The Prairie Acre Coordinator was responsible for organizing controlled burns in

2016 and 2017 (“Prairie Acre Progress”).

Current information on invasive species frequency is based on predetermined plots used

by the Field Ecology shown on Figure 1. These plots are revisited annually to give a better

perspective on changes in plant communities. The data collected by the course, as summarized in

Table 1, shows the comparison of the 2015 and 2016 inventories of the invasives found (Hagen,

Vegetation Data). These numbers show that future management methods will have to take into

account the spread of Johnson grass, which has multiplied from 6 to 13 plots.

Table 1) Invasive Species Vegetation Data. The number of plots each species was found in 2015 and 2016.

[Robert Hagen, Vegetation Data]

6

Fig. 1) Prairie Acre Vegetation Plots. [Hagen, “Results”]

III. Management Recommendations

a. Fire

Fire has always been a critical disturbance regime in maintaining prairie ecosystems. The

burning of prairie is an important process that removes litter and allows for the native fire

tolerant prairie species to outcompete nonnative and woody invasive species (Schramm, 170;

Haukos, 8). The suppression of fire within a prairie ecosystem often allows for succession into

woodland. Also, the dark ash produced from fire warms the soil and triggers plant growth

(Schramm, 170). The administration of fire to prairies acts to stabilize successional vegetation

and maintain, or even increase, biological diversity, richness, endemicity, and evenness (Bowles

and Jones, 473; Collins, 102; Brudvig et al, 872).

Prescribed burns are a management strategy that should continue to be utilized for Prairie

Acre. Numerous studies, articles, and research have been consulted to determine the optimal

frequency of fire disturbance for Prairie Acre (Schramm, 170; Haukos, 8; Collins, 102; Bowles

and Jones, 475; Towne and Kemp, 190). Prairie Acre’s current state suggests that it should

7

receive annual burns for the next four years to develop a stable vegetative structure. After the

four years of annual burns, prescribed burns should take place in intervals of approximately

every two to three years. This will result in maintaining the integrity of Prairie Acre while

reducing the ability of only a few high fire frequency tolerant species to dominate.

A review of seasonal prescribed burning was conducted to establish a proper fire regime

for Prairie Acre (Schramm, 169; Haukos, 9; Hover and Bragg, 15; Towne and Kemp, 191). It is

recommended that Prairie Acre receive burnings in the spring annually for the next four years.

However, after the prairie has established itself and disturbance regimes have switched to longer

intervals, occasional autumn burnings would be beneficial in improving forb species composition

within the community (Haukos, 9; Towne and Kemp, 191). Plants are not the only members of

Prairie Acre. Patches that do not get burned act as refuges to insects, birds, and plant species

(Schramm, 170; Haukos, 9). A small patch of the original tract should be left unburned after

every future prescribed burn to serve as a refuge.

Future plots and expansion plans for Prairie Acre have been proposed. These areas are

recreations of prairies and therefore will require more management to establish. The expansion

sites should be burned annually in the spring for ten years. This amount of time should be

adequate enough for the native prairie species to outcompete and the community to stabilize. A

small refuge patch should be left after the first five years of annual spring burns. After the ten

years of annual burns, the expansion sites should be burnt along with the original Prairie Acre

site once every two to three years in either spring or autumn.

These recommendations, displayed in Table 2, should be ready to adapt to possible

unexpected events. There are many factors that could alter Prairie Acre including nutrient inputs,

herbicide applications, and invasion by plant species (musk thistle, Lespedeza cuneate, etc)

8

(Gibson et al, 112; Haukos, 11). If Prairie Acre becomes heavily impaired, it may be necessary to

adjust the fire regime to control and protect Prairie Acre’s integrity.

Original Tract Expansion Areas

2018 Spring Spring

2019 Spring Spring

2020 Spring Spring

2021 Spring Spring

2022 Spring

2023 Spring or Fall Spring

2024 Spring

2025 Spring

2027 Spring or Fall Spring

2028 Spring

2029

2030 Spring or Fall Spring or Fall

Table 2) Potential Timeline for burning Prairie Acre and any future expansion restorations [Ben Growcock].

b. Challenges with Fire

At Prairie Acre, there are some unique factors that affect the success of Burning

practices. Burns at Prairie Acre are determined by weather and require extensive coordination

with the local fire department. For instance, this year’s burn took place in snowy conditions due

to communication complications with the local fire department and the erratic nature of Kansas

weather. Additionally, there is no official group responsible for burn control. Currently workers

from the KU Field Station, as shown in Figure 2, have assisted with the burns. While safety

precautions will need to be taken, having students participate in or observing a burn may be a

9

way to get more people involved in conserving Prairie Acre. Due to the presence of the rock wall

some undesirable species may be sheltered from the fire. There is also a threat to animal life and

pollinating insects if the entire plot is burned continuously. The small area may result in a

complete burn instead of leaving pockets of unburned habitat, which are necessary for some

species to find shelter in.

Professor Robert Hagen also expressed concern that the burns are not getting hot enough

to deal with the woody plant species that are mainly found in the northern part of the Acre. There

are a number of reasons why annual fire alone could actually reduce the health of the Prairie

Acre. In fact many of the invasive species present in the Acre, such as Johnson grass, are

resistant to and benefits from fire as a method of control (MDC, “Johnson Grass Control”). This

is not to say that fire management is useless; as it is an important part of many prairie species’

life cycles and provides them with advantages to out compete many invasive species. For

unwanted species that are unaffected or benefit from burns, other manual and chemical methods

may be necessary.

Fig. 2) KU Field Station crew burning Prairie Acre in the snow, March 2017 [Photo: Andy White]

10

c. Mowing

Historically, bison and many other mammals’ grazing was a disturbance regime that

helped shape the prairie ecosystem. Today, mowing has been a common practice for managing

prairie sites (Schramm, 170; Hover and Bragg, 15; Wilson and Clark, 137). In situations where

prescribed burning is not possible, mowing is a way to remove litter and decrease woody

vegetation. However, mowing has been shown to be an ineffective management strategy and

should not be used to substitute for burning (Schramm, 170; Begay et al, 111; Brudvig et al, 872)

(Hover and Bragg, 15). Therefore, it is our recommendation that mowing should not be

implemented into a management plan for Prairie Acre.

d. Manual and Chemical Methods

Another effective means to combat invasive and unwanted species within Prairie Acre is

through manual removal. As long as species can be identified, manual removal is an option for

the entirety of the year. Prairie Acre should be monitored during multiple seasons as some

species are more visible than others at different times of the year; and are therefore easier to

accurately identify. After carefully identifying which species need to be removed, an effective

course of action considers the least damaging method to the surrounding species. For several

woody species, simply cutting the plant’s main stem as close to the ground as possible will kill

the plant. Other species may require that one digs the entire plant up, taking special care to sever

the tap root as far down as possible. Due to the nature of many prairie plants and successful

invasives, these roots are usually very deep. A drain spade, due to the narrow width of the blade,

is recommended for removing plants with deep roots because it disturbs less of the surrounding

soil. Rhizomatous species can present a special challenge to this method because the plants can

send up shoots from any remaining roots in the soil. Initial manual removal with a chemical

11

follow up may be required for new shoots. If species are growing in an area that cannot be

accessed with a shovel or cutting implement, like the wall, chemical methods may be required to

remove the species.

After removing the invasive species, the remains, including extra stems and seed pods,

must be disposed of in a method that prevents new growth. The most effective method for this is

incineration. However, some species such as poison ivy may release particles that can cause

respiratory irritation. For these species, disposal in a waste management site or deep burial is

preferred. Conversely, composting introduces the risk of new growth and should be avoided.

For those species that cannot be removed manually, or at least not fully, application of an

herbicide mix could be used. This especially applies to those of woody and rhizome species that

are currently located in the stone wall. Special care needs to be placed on choosing chemicals as

most are designed to specifically attack only monocot or dicot species. It is important to consider

the expected lifespan of these chemicals, their tendency to drift, and when they can be applied. A

chemical’s lifespan can last anywhere from a few hours to a few months depending on its design.

Short lived chemicals are the safest to use when there are concerns for neighboring species.

Some chemicals may also move to other areas if weather conditions are not ideal, either through

wind borne droplets, or soil leaching. One of the most important factors when choosing a

chemical is what part of a plant’s lifecycle it affects. Compared with manual methods, chemical

options may be limited to a single season or growth period. Most chemicals are designed to be

applied early in the growth stage, before maturation and are ineffective afterward. This means

that chemical methods are only valid during the growth season and therefore have a small

timeframe in which they can be applied.

12

IV. Past Monitoring Strategy and Challenges

A monitoring strategy for Prairie Acre has, to date, not been created nor followed. This

has lead to challenges and complications with facilitators participating in Prairie Acre activities.

These currently include Dr. Robert Hagen, Dr. Kelly Kindscher, and numerous Environmental

Studies courses. Currently, the only monitoring strategies for Prairie Acre are the facilitators’

individualized verdicts agreed upon for assessing the health and maintenance needs for the

prairie. Past and current actions towards the maintenance of the prairie include prescribed

burnings and the collection and measurement data of invasive, non-native, and native species.

So far, the data collection has been completed through Dr. Hagen’s Field Ecology class in

accordance with their prairie assessment. Prairie Acre is analyzed with one square-meter

quadrats facing the northwest with a flag in the bottom, right-hand corner. The collection of data

by quadrat analysis includes the creation of subplots to approximate the coverage of certain

species. Questions arose about the percentage of error in this data collection strategy, considering

the ones measuring the data were semester-long, newly trained undergraduate students.

However, during an interview with Dr. Hagen, it was proven to be accurate enough, with the

percentage of error insignificant (Personal interview, Hagen, 4/11/2017). There was a challenge

that arose regarding a period of waiting before measurements and recordings of species could be

taken. Students were not able to begin observations until the month of June, leaving them rushed

with a smaller time scale. This resulted in more approximations of species coverage. Again, Dr.

Hagen did not see this as too much of a concern, but it does present a problem for students who

are fairly new at learning the correct procedure of quadrat analysis (Personal interview, Hagen,

4/11/2017). Another challenge that seemed to arise was the lack of communication among the

main Prairie Acre facilitators mentioned earlier. Many leaders on the Prairie Acre project did not

13

archive or record any findings, research, or maintenance regarding their work done to the area.

This lead to complications for assessing the effectiveness of maintenance and the reliability of

data collection. For example, Dr. Hagen found the Global Environment class went in to remove

invasive species, without his knowledge. Later on from his surveying of the area, it seemed that

“random clumps” were removed. As someone who went to Prairie Acre to record the percentage

of invasive, non-native, and native species, knowing the Global Environment class was going to

perform this task beforehand would have been useful, for it seemed to askew his data findings.

The lack of an archive record falls into another challenge facing the Prairie Acre monitoring

strategy. Without a log record, a deficiency in noticing new species patterns becomes a problem.

Based on the interview with Dr. Hagen, a summary of the main issues stressed by him and who

is directly affected can be seen in Table 3.

Table 3) Issues Arising From Current Prairie Acre Management and Who Is Directly Affected [Hanna Rankin]

V. Organizational Proposals

a. Native Landscapes Manager

In order to successfully implement a management plan, it needs to be reviewed and

revised over time as conditions change. Prairie Acre would benefit from an adaptable

maintenance process, so that repetitive strategies do not simplify the ecosystem (Helzer, 68). In

14

order to account for variability and to ensure flexibility, active and accurate monitoring of

species composition is essential. Analysis of species monitoring can better inform management

decisions and aids in tracking progress of the restoration. The following proposals include

different levels of involvement that will ensure Prairie Acre is adequately monitored, cared for,

and utilized.

The highest level of involvement recommended is the creation of a staff position at the

Sustainability Center. This person would be the Native Landscapes Manager (NLM) of the entire

campus (Kindscher, Severin, Personal interviews, 3/9/2017; 3/30/2017 ). The creation of this

position would ensure more stable and formal means of maintaining Prairie Acre. The NLM

would not only be overseeing Prairie Acre, but also be involved in multiple aspects of native

landscapes across campus such as Marvin Grove, Potter Lake, and other initiatives for expanding

native prairie landscaping. This position revolves around three main functions: ecological,

administrative, and outreach (Severin, Personal interview, 3/30/2017).

Ecological: first and foremost, the NLM needs to have knowledge of plant species native

to Kansas. Skills in plant identification, field data collection techniques, and knowledge of

invasive species control and ecosystem management are preferred (“Natural Areas Steward”).

Using their skills they can perform monitoring procedures for Prairie Acre, decide on a course of

management, and implement it. Acquiring seeds and growing seedlings for restorations is

another component of the ecological duties.

Administrative: the potential manager would write reports, assist with grant

documentation, help with budgeting, and communicate and collaborate with many different

stakeholders. They would also help develop formal designs and plans for native landscaping on

campus (“Natural Areas Steward”; “Restoration Technician”; Severin, Personal interview

15

3/30/2017). Another administrative duty would be the supervision of an activity log. Any group

that wants to do work in Prairie Acre will have to obtain the activity log from the NLM where

they will record when they were there, and what they were doing (i.e. invasive species removal,

which species, and quantity removed). This will create an archive of activity that will eliminate

any communication discrepancies (Hagen, Personal interview, 4/11/2017).

Education and outreach: the NLM will help facilitate the utilization of Prairie Acre as a

living laboratory and research resource by various academic departments. For example, ecology

courses can use Prairie Acre to learn about population growth and prairie functions. Also,

engineering classes can use Prairie Acre to practice surveying techniques. Additionally, the NLM

would coordinate and oversee volunteer opportunities for students and community members.

Super Service Saturday and the Big Event, planting and burning events, as well as any other

volunteer work event to maintain Prairie Acre will fall under their responsibilities. The Native

Landscapes Manager has the opportunity to further the mission of the Sustainability Center: by

preserving historical and ecologically significant spaces on campus; by promoting more

environmentally conscious landscaping practices; and by advancing the educational mission of

the University (Severin, Personal interview, 3/30/2017). Prairie Acre would be better served by

the adoption of this position.

b. Graduate Level Courses

The next recommendation would be the creation of a graduate level field course. The

Environmental Studies Program at the University of Kansas was established in 1971 as one of

the first of its kind in the country. As an interdisciplinary program, it takes the form of many

different academic areas from natural sciences, social sciences and the humanities. The program

gives the tools to investigate various environmental issues and incorporate those issues into

16

decision planning (“Overview”). Based on the program's growth during the 1990’s and early

2000’s, a Graduate Program is being considered in the near future (Personal interview, Kelly

Kindscher 3/9/2017). A proposal of this scale would increase the learning opportunities on

campus and grow the research ability of the University in the expanding field of environmental

science.

The goal of expanding the Environmental Studies Program to include a graduate program

brings a unique opportunity for Prairie Acre. The relationship with Kansas’s history of expansive

prairies would likely bring students interested in pursuing related research. These increased

research opportunities would ensure the relevancy of Prairie Acre as a reference site when

comparing to the nearby prairies like Konza and Rockefeller. Potential areas of research would

include: native plants, restoration practices and how they affect their communities, inoculation of

soil mycorrhiza and their relationship with plant productivity. The University of Kansas’s

commitment to the prairie through the acquisition of Rockefeller Prairie, Anderson County

Prairie Preserve, and Prairie Acre put it on par with Kansas State University and Konza Prairie in

terms of research capability.

Graduate level courses would be appropriate to successfully accomplish this portion of

Prairie Acre management. Due to the success of the Field Ecology course for undergraduates, a

course that is part lecture and part field work would be ideal. Because the undergraduate Field

Ecology course manages the prairie during the summer, the course would benefit being

scheduled in the spring. This could give greater chances of identification when the plants are in

bloom (Personal interview, Hagen, 4/11/2017). To avoid getting fixed on singular topics the

course would benefit from being taught by two or more faculty. This would also allow the course

to focus on multiple kinds of restoration efforts; streams, rivers, and prairies (Moran, 67-79).

17

Using the natural resource theme instead of solely prairie restoration would allow an

interdisciplinary approach by involving sociologists, biologists, and geologists.

The level of work done on the management of the Acre would depend on the expertise of

the students as well on the interest of the professors. The most effective monitoring method

would be a total species inventory based on Dr. Hagen’s work which takes higher levels of plant

identification skill. For some courses a more simplistic monitoring method is adequate the

Monitoring Strategies Section outlines a rock wall scan and an indicator species inventory.

c. Organizational Proposals Challenges

One of the main challenges to implementing these proposals is acquiring funding for the

NLM and other resources. Funding can come from a variety of sources. This can include

utilizing Kansas Endowment Association funds, applying for grants, and getting funded directly

through the University. Ideally, if enough emphasis is placed on the educational opportunities

Prairie Acre can provide in curriculum, funding directly from the University could be applied to

the Native Landscape Manager’s position and other Prairie Acre activities.

Creating a graduate level field course to assist with the management of Prairie Acre

presents challenges. This level of change would be required to go through a rigid approval

process. The process works through the University then the Kansas Board of Directors where it

proves the necessity for such a program. The academic program proposal would include student

demand, comparison with regional Universities and the advantages of the program for the KU, as

well as the fiscal summary ("Atmospheric Science Phd Proposal"). While a program of this scale

has the potential to bring funding to the University for research and related programs it would

require large amounts of funding.

18

While reaching out and using volunteer work is important to the mission of Prairie Acre,

there are some considerations that need to be taken when working with them. Many volunteers

are not familiar with prairie plants or proper maintenance procedures. However, with proper

supervision and education, volunteers can be a great resource for maintaining the prairie.

Student, university, and community involvement will promote further interest and support for

Prairie Acre and the native Kansas landscape.

VI. Monitoring Strategies

There are three methods of monitoring that we will suggest to coincide with the NLM

position and a field course for graduate students. Each varies with the amount of time and

complexity required. The most basic will be a rock wall scan; the next level will be an indicator

species inventory (Kindscher, Personal interview, 3/9/2017); and the most sophisticated will be a

total species inventory that will be continued by the undergraduate Field Ecology course and Dr.

Hagen. For the rock wall scan, participants will walk on the inside edge and note any extensive

plant growth in the wall and just inside the wall. This can include woody species, poison ivy, and

other vines. They will indicate the date, location based on ordinal direction, and species.

For the indicator species monitoring, participants will be identifying the frequency of the

native and non-native species listed in Table 4. Two examples of the native species can be seen

in Figure 3 and Figure 4. These species were chosen based on their level of conservatism or

invasiveness and their occurrence. The Acre will be divided into equally spaced plots that could

range from 1-5 square meters. Survey posts can be put in the ground at the edges and string run

across the prairie to create a grid network of plots that can be set up and taken down each year.

Participants will observe the plots and record the estimated cover of each species.

19

Table 4) Indicator Species monitoring list. These are the species for which data will be gathered in order to gain a

broad insight of the state of the prairie [Monica Funk]

Fig. 3) Bouteloua curtipendula, sideoats

grama. [Prairie Moon Nursery]

Fig. 4) Helianthus grosseserratus, sawtooth

sunflower. [Prairie Moon Nursery]

20

VII. Conclusion

Prairie Acre will continue to grow over time and each addition will come with new

challenges. The Triangle will hopefully become part of Prairie Acre soon. The Bermuda grass

that currently inhabits the Triangle will out compete native plants. Other Environmental Studies

students studying the Triangle have proposed using either solarization or winterization to

eliminate the Bermuda grass. They also suggested a staged planting method including cover

crops to reduce the ability of invasive species to establish (Presentation, The Triangle Group,

4/27/2017). The management recommendations and suggested monitoring strategies can be

applied to the Triangle and any other expansion efforts.

Prairie Acre is a symbol of our natural heritage that is an important element of the

University of Kansas. Maintenance through fire, physical, and chemical means, and monitoring

through students and staff, will ensure the future of this iconic landmark. Prairie Acre should be

burned in the spring annually for the next four years and then every two to three years with

seasonal variations thereafter. Any future expansions of the Acre should be burned annually for

the first ten years of restoration. The creation of a staff person who facilitates involvement with

Prairie Acre for students, staff, and the community will ensure continuity with restoration efforts.

Graduate level field courses utilizing Prairie Acre will add to data on species composition and

effectiveness of maintenance strategies. Students can then learn from and contribute to prairie

ecology research and Prairie Acre conservation. The recommendations laid out in this paper

create a structured framework and workable management plan that would help sustain and

promote the ecological integrity of Prairie Acre.

21

Works Cited

"Atmospheric Science Phd Proposal". Kansas Board of Regents. N.p., 2015. Web.

Begay, Becky., Alexander, Helen M., Questad, Erin. “Effect of Mid-Summer Haying on Growth

and Reproduction in Prairie Forbs”. Kansas Academy of Science, Vol. 114, no.1-2, p.

108-114. 2011.

Bowles, Marlin L., Jones, Michael D. “Repeated burning of eastern tallgrass prairie increases

richness and diversity, stabilizing late successional vegetation”. Ecological Applications,

Volume 23, Issue 2, Pages 464–478. March 2013.

Brudvig, L. A., Marby, C. M., Miller, J. R., WALKER, T. A. “Evaluation of Central North

American Prairie Management Based on Species Diversity, Life Form, and Individual

Species Metrics”. Conservation Biology, 21: 864–874. 2007.

Collins, Scott L. “Fire Frequency and Community Heterogeneity in Tallgrass Prairie

Vegetation”. Ecology, Vol. 73, pp. 2001-2006. 1992.

Gibson, David J., Seastedt, T. R., Briggs, John M. “Management Practices in Tallgrass Prairie:

Large-and Small-Scale Experimental Effects on Species Composition”. Applied Ecology,

vol. 30, p.247-255. 1993.

Haukos, Jill. “The Tallgrass Prairie”. Accessed through University of Kansas, EVRN 615

Blackboard, Course Documents, 2/2 Supplemental Reading.

Hagen Interview. Christensen, Andrew, and Hanna Rankin. Dr. Robert Hagen. 4/11/2017. in

person.

Hagen, Robert. Prairie Acre Vegetation Data 2016. 2017. Excel Document.

Hagen, Robert. “Results”. KU Prairie Acre Vegetation Survey, Results Of 2015 Fieldwork.

2016. Print.

22

Helzer, Chris. The Ecology and Management of Prairies in the Central United States. Iowa City:

Published for the Nature Conservancy by the U of Iowa, 2010. Print.

Hover, Edward I., Bragg Thomas B. “Effect of Season of Burning and Mowing on an Eastern

Nebraska Stipa-Andropogon Prairie”. The American Midland Naturalist, Vol. 105, No. 1,

pp. 13-18. January 1981.

Kindscher, Kelly. Interview by Monica Funk, Andrew Christensen, Ben Growcock. In-person. 9

March 2017.

Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC). “Johnson Grass Control”. Website. Accessed

May 2017.

Moran, Sharon. "Stream Restoration As A Seminar Theme: Opportunities For Synthesis And

Integration". Journal of Geography 102, 2003.2 (2016): 67-79. Print.

“Natural Areas Steward.” State of Washington Job Opportunities. Department of Natural

Resources, 2017. Web.

“Overview”. Environmental Studies Program. Esp.ku.edu. N.p., 2017. Web. 14 Apr. 2017.

“Prairie Acre Progress”. Center For Sustainability. Sustain.ku.edu. N.p., 2017. Web. 1 May

2017.

“Restoration Technician.” Careers. The Nature Conservancy, 2017. Web.

Schramm, Peter. “Prairie Restoration: A Twenty-Five Year Perspective on Establishment and

Management”. Proceedings of The Twelfth North American Prairie Conference. 1990.

Severin, Jeff. Interview by Monica Funk. In-person. 30 March 2017.

Towne,Gene E., Kemp, Ken E. “Vegetation Dynamics from Annually Burning Tallgrass Prairie

in Different Seasons”. Journal of Range Management, Vol. 56, No. 2, pp. 185-192.

March 2003.

23

"The Triangle Group". 2017. Presentation. 4/27/2017.

Wilson, Mark V., Clark, Deborah L. “Controlling invasive Arrhenatherum elatius and promoting

native prairie grasses through mowing”. Applied Vegetation Science 4: 129-138. 2001.