Energy development and production in the Great Plains: Implications and restoration opportunities

Jacqueline P. Ott; Brice B. Hanberry; Mona Khalil; Mark W. Paschke; Max Post van der Burg; Anthony J. Prenni

doi:10.1016/j.rama.2020.05.003

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70211185

Energy development and production in the Great Plains: Implications and restoration opportunities

Jacqueline P. Ott·Brice B. Hanberry·Mona Khalil·Mark W. Paschke·Max Post van der Burg·Anthony J. Prenni

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Energy is an integral part of society. The major US energy sources of fossil fuels (coal, oil, natural gas); biofuels (ethanol); and wind are concentrated in grassland ecosystems of the Great Plains. As energy demand continues to increase, mounting pressures will be placed on North American grassland systems. In this review, we present the ecological effects of energy development and production on grassland systems. We then identify opportunities to mitigate these effects during the planning, construction, and production phases by using informed methodology and improved technology. Primary effects during energy development include small- and large-scale soil disturbance and vegetation removal as small patches of grasslands are used to host oil or gas wells, wind turbine pads, associated roadways, and pipelines or through the conversion of large grassland areas to biofuel croplands. Direct habitat loss or habitat fragmentation can affect wildlife directly through increased mortality or indirectly through reduction in habitat quantity and quality. During energy production, air and water quality can be affected through regular emissions or unplanned spills. Energy development can also affect the economy and health of local communities. During planning, energy development and production effects can be reduced by carefully considering effects on grasslands during siting and even by selecting different energy source types. During construction, effects on soil and plant systems can be minimized by eliminating weed populations before disturbance, salvaging and stockpiling topsoil for future revegetation, and harvesting native local seed for postsite restoration. During energy production operations, noise and road traffic reduction plans and atmospheric monitoring will enable more informed mitigation measures. Continued research on energy development effects and mitigation measures is necessary to establish best management practices beneficial to grassland health while providing needed energy for the United States.

Explore related subjects

Rangeland Ecology and Management Article

Source-reported bounding extent: 30.372875188118016° to 49.15296965617042° latitude; -113.73046875° to -86.66015624999999° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Jacqueline P. Ott, Brice B. Hanberry, Mona Khalil, Mark W. Paschke, Max Post van der Burg, Anthony J. Prenni. 2020. Energy development and production in the Great Plains: Implications and restoration opportunities. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rama.2020.05.003

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Spatial variation in effectiveness and costs of sagebrush restoration treatments across the western United States

Natural resource managers strive to improve restoration efficiency across the vast network of public lands of the United States, seeking the best return on investment through innovation, geographic prioritization, and adaptive management. This challenge is exemplified by ecosystems dominated by sagebrush ( Artemisia spp.), which occur across the western United States and have been degraded by increasing wildfire frequency driven by invasive plant spread, among other factors. However, both costs and effectiveness of sagebrush restoration can vary spatially due to management practices in addition to biotic and abiotic factors, and characterizing this variation could inform broad-scale planning. We leveraged published models of sagebrush recovery and treatment costs to predict and evaluate cost-effectiveness of aerial and drill seeding Artemisia spp. across 429 718 km 2 that overlapped 12 US states. Compared to natural recovery, effectiveness for both methods was generally low, yet effectiveness was often greater, and costs were always greater, for drill than aerial seeding, resulting in slightly higher cost-effectiveness on average for drill seeding. Cost-effectiveness for both treatments increased near major roads and in areas with more repeated burns. Cost-effectiveness also increased with predisturbance cover of sagebrush but decreased with herbaceous cover. However, we also identified areas where aerial seeding was more cost-effective than drill seeding, particularly with greater slope. Our results provide spatially explicit estimates and potential mechanisms of cost-effectiveness for two common seeding methods for sagebrush, which can help prioritize limited resources, guide land use, and improve restoration efficiency and effectiveness across public rangelands of the western United States.

western United States↗

USGS2025

Edge effects along roadside fuel treatments in sagebrush steppe

Increasing wildfire has motivated the construction of fuel breaks on many rangelands to improve prospects for wildfire suppression. However, the linear shape of fuel breaks greatly increases treatment perimeter: area and thus increased potential for edge effects, e.g., invasions by exotic plants. Potential for edge effects are further increased by the disturbances associated with fuel-break implementation. Fire risk in perennial-dominated and sagebrush-steppe rangelands are increased by exotic species, such as cheatgrass and other associated annuals, and therefore invasions after fuel-break implementation are problematic, yet have rarely been evaluated. Abundances of dominant invaders, cheatgrass and Russian thistle, were measured along treated and neighboring untreated edges in 40 paired plots along ∼61 km of 60-m wide fuel breaks. Fuel breaks were constructed using a variety of shrub-cutting and herbicide applications 1–4 yr before measurement. Generalized linear mixed effect models revealed that fractional cover significantly increased in treated compared with untreated areas by 0.02–0.12 for cheatgrass and 0–0.06 for Russian thistle within 9 m of treatment boundaries (on a scale of 0-1). We neither detected increased invasion in adjacent and untreated areas nor gradients of increasing invasion with proximity to treatment boundaries. Although these findings reveal invasions that were otherwise undetected across the entire 60 m width of fuel breaks, invasion levels did not surpass nominal management thresholds for fire behavior or risk of conversion to annual grasslands.

Rangeland Ecology and Management↗

USGS2025

Wildfire and postfire restoration treatments have lasting effects on rodent habitat and community composition

Rangeland fires can quickly change the structure of wildlife habitat and cause changes that persist for years to decades. To facilitate habitat recovery, postfire restoration actions often involve sowing seeds of native and nonnative perennial grasses and shrubs. Empirical information on whether such restoration activities are effective and how wildlife will respond is unknown. We evaluated the effects of wildfire and postfire seeding on rodent communities in sagebrush steppe by measuring environmental characteristics and live-trapping rodents at three wildfire locations in the northern Great Basin that burned 2–14 yr prior. Sampled plots were either 1) burned (control), 2) burned and seeded with nonnative species, 3) burned and seeded with native species, or 4) not burned (reference). Unburned reference plots had 95.7% more shrub cover and less cover of nonnative annual grasses than all burned plots. Burned plots seeded with native species had greater cover of native perennial grasses and less bare ground compared with burned plots seeded with nonnative species or control plots. Wildfire and postfire seeding significantly changed rodent community composition but not species richness. American deermouse ( Peromyscus maniculatus ) and least chipmunk ( Tamias minimus ) were less likely to occur in burned plots than in unburned reference plots. Ord’s kangaroo rat ( Dipodomys ordii ) and Piute ground squirrel ( Urocitellus mollis ) were more likely to occur in burned plots than in unburned reference plots. Sagebrush vole ( Lemmiscus curtatus ) was more likely to occur in burned plots with native seeding than with all other treatments. Species’ responses to wildfire and seeding reflected their relationships to cover of shrubs, perennial grasses, and nonnative annual grasses. These results suggest that wildfire and postfire seeding have long-lasting effects on wildlife communities. Landscape-level rodent diversity may be enhanced when small-scale disturbances or restoration actions increase landscape heterogeneity.

northern Great Basin↗