Invasive winter annual grass infestations on rangeland accumulate large quantities of litter on the soil surface, as plants senesce yearly and decompose slowly. It has been speculated that winter annual grass litter can adsorb soil-active herbicides and reduce overall performance. Three experiments were conducted from 2017 to 2018 at the Colorado State University Weed Research Laboratory to evaluate interception and subsequent desorption of herbicides applied to litter from three invasive winter annual grass species with simulated rainfall. Imazapic, rimsulfuron, and indaziflam were applied to medusahead [Taeniatherum caput-medusae (L.) Nevski], ventenata [Ventenata dubia (Leers) Coss.], and downy brome (Bromus tectorum L.) litter at two amounts (equivalent to 1,300 and 2,600 kg ha−1). Rainfall was simulated at 3, 6, 12, and 24 mm at 0, 1, and 7 d after herbicide application. Herbicide concentration from the collected rainfall was measured using liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry. At 2,600 kg ha−1, B. tectorum herbicide interception was 84.3%, while V. dubia and T. caput-medusae averaged 76% herbicide interception. There were no differences in desorption among the three litter types. Simulated rainfall at 0 d after application recovered 100% of the intercepted rimsulfuron and imazapic from B. tectorum litter, while recovery decreased to 65% with rainfall at 1 or 7 d after application. Only 54% of indaziflam could be recovered at 0 d, and recovery decreased to 33% when rainfall was applied at 1 or 7 d after application. Applying soil-active herbicides before forecasted rain or tank mixing with a POST herbicide to provide initial control could potentially increase the amount of herbicide reaching the soil and provide more consistent invasive winter annual grass control.

Restoration of exotic annual grass-invaded rangelands is needed to improve ecosystem function and services. Increasing plant species richness is generally believed to increase resistance to invasion and increase desired vegetation. However, the effects of species richness and individual plant life forms in seed mixes used to restore rangelands invaded by exotic annual grasses have not been investigated. We evaluated the effects of seeding different life forms and increasing species richness in seed mixes seeded after exotic annual grass control to restore desirable vegetation (perennial herbaceous vegetation) and limit exotic annual grasses at two sites in southeastern Oregon. We also investigated the effects of seeding two commonly used perennial grasses individually and together on plant community characteristics. Large perennial grasses, the dominant herbaceous plant life form, were the most important group to seed for increasing perennial herbaceous vegetation cover and density. We did not find evidence that greater seed mix species richness increased perennial herbaceous vegetation or decreased exotic annual grass dominance more than seeding only the dominant species. None of the seed mixes had a significant effect on exotic annual grass cover or density, but the lack of a measured effect may have been caused by low annual grass propagule pressure in the first couple of years after annual grass control and an unusually wet-cool spring in the third year post-seeding. Although our results suggest that seeding only the dominant plant life form will likely maximize plant community productivity and resistance to invasion in exotic annual grass-invaded northern Great Basin arid rangelands, seeding a species rich seed mix may have benefits to higher tropic levels and community stability. Clearly the dominant species are the most prudent to include in seed mixes to restore exotic annual grass-invaded plant communities, especially with finite resources and an increasingly large area in need of restoration.

Producers facing infestations of invasive annual grasses regularly voice the need for practical revegetation strategies that can be applied across broad landscapes. Our objective was to determine the potential for scaling up the single-entry approach for revegetating medusahead-infested rangeland to broader, more heterogeneous landscape-scale revegetation of winter annual grass–infested rangeland. We hypothesized, when applied on a highly variable landscape scale, the combination of imazapic and seeding would provide highest abundance of perennial grasses and lowest amount of annual grasses. Treatments included a control, seeding of crested wheatgrass (‘Hycrest’) and Sandberg's bluegrass, spraying (60 g ai ha−1 imazapic), and a simultaneously applied combination of spraying and seeding. The HyCrest and Sandberg's bluegrass seeding rates were 19 and 3.4 kg ha−1, respectively. The treatments were applied to large plots (1.4 to 8 ha) and replicated five times, with each replication located in different watersheds throughout southeastern Oregon. This study shows that the single-entry approach can be scaled up to larger landscapes, but variation within establishment areas will likely be high. This procedure should reduce the costs over multientry treatment applications and make revegetating annual grass–infested rangeland across landscapes more affordable.

Medusahead is among the most invasive grasses in the western United States. Selective control of this noxious winter annual grass is difficult in California grasslands, as many other desirable annual grasses and both native and nonnative broadleaf forbs are also important components of the rangeland system. Intensive grazing management using sheep is one control option. This study was designed to determine the optimal timing for sheep grazing on heavily infested medusahead sites, and to evaluate the changes in species composition with different grazing regimes. Midspring (April/May) grazing reduced medusahead cover by 86 to 100% relative to ungrazed plots, regardless of whether it was used in combination with early spring or fall grazing. Early spring (March) or fall (October to November) grazing, alone or in combination, was ineffective for control of medusahead. In addition, midspring grazing increased forb cover, native forb species richness, and overall plant diversity. At the midspring grazing timing, medusahead was in the “boot” stage, just prior to exposure of the inflorescences. The success of this timely grazing system required high animal densities for short periods. Although this approach may be effective in some areas, the timing window is fairly narrow and the animal stocking rates are high. Thus, sheep grazing is unlikely to be a practical solution for management of large medusahead infestations