Exploring the efficacy of prairie dog boundary management and its application toward density control in a working landscape

Authors: BUEHLER, LINDSEY - Oklahoma State University; Augustine, David; Porensky, Lauren; DUCHARDT, COURTNEY - Oklahoma State University

Submitted to: Rangeland Ecology and Management
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 12/18/2024
Publication Date: 2/13/2025
Citation: Buehler, L.M., Augustine, D.J., Porensky, L.M., Duchardt, C.J. 2025. Exploring the efficacy of prairie dog boundary management and its application toward density control in a working landscape. Rangeland Ecology and Management. 99:66-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rama.2024.12.005.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rama.2024.12.005

Interpretive Summary: Managing prairie dogs on rangelands in the Great Plains in a manner that allows coexistence with livestock is a major challenge. On the USFS Thunder Basin National Grassland, managers seek to maintain prairie dog colonies on portions of the landscape for conservation objectives, while minimizing impacts on livestock production and preventing prairie dog expansion onto private lands. As a result, a public-private boundary management zone (BMZ) has been created where prairie dog colonies are controlled via rodenticides to minimize colony expansion, but colonies on lands encircles by the BMZ are not treated via rodenticides. A key question is how effective treatments in the BMZ will be given the presence of adjacent untreated colony areas. We surveyed areas in the BMZ that were treated with rodenticide, and found that boundary management did not reduce adult prairie dog density relative to uncontrolled areas but pup numbers were lower following treatment. Abundance of focal bird species, bird species richness, visual obstruction, and overall biomass were unaffected by treatment, although forb biomass was 35% higher on treated sites. This increase in forb production indicates that the treatments removed prairie dogs for a portion of the growing season, but then plots were recolonized from the untreated zones. Studies of efficacy and secondary effects of these approaches are rare and difficult to access by managers, especially because we found little support for positive impacts of prairie dog control.

Technical Abstract: Black-tailed prairie dogs (Cynomys ludovicianus) are a substantial challenge in rangeland management. Despite providing numerous ecosystem services, they can negatively impact livestock production. Many management tools have been applied to balance competing stakeholder desires, including lethal control along public-private boundary management zones (BMZs) to reduce colony expansion into undesired locations. A novel approach aiming to reduce prairie dog density on public land to minimize negative effects on forage while maximizing other ecosystem services has been proposed as a management option in the USFS Thunder Basin National Grassland of northeastern Wyoming, but research is needed to evaluate this approach. We reviewed the literature on both boundary management and density control, and then evaluated boundary management as one form of density control using a before-after control impact design in the Thunder Basin National Grassland. Scant research was available about either management approach in the literature, and resources that reported efficacy were typically management documents not found in traditional literature searches. Boundary management did not reduce adult prairie dog density relative to uncontrolled areas (ßtreatment = 0.28, 95% CI [-0.28, 0.85]), but pup numbers were lower following treatment (ßtreatment = -1.43, 95% CI [-2.12, -0.79]). Abundance of focal bird species, bird species richness, vegetation visual obstruction, and overall plant biomass were unaffected by treatment, although forb biomass was 35% higher on treated sites. It appears that poisoning was either ineffective or, more likely, prairie dogs rapidly re-colonized areas left empty following control. It is concerning that studies of efficacy and secondary effects of these approaches are rare and difficult to access by managers, especially because we found little support for positive impacts of control at local scales – prairie dog associated species were unaffected and forage availability for livestock did not increase. As a result the costs of lethal control may not be justified.