Issue link: https://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/997127
farm406 44 challenging. It was Barta's job to contact every landowner in the watershed, explain the opportunity at hand, and the potential costs and benefits. "I spent a lot of time going to houses, having coffee, and teasing out what each landowner might be willing to do," says Barta. "I stressed the negative environmental impacts of invasive species on their operation and the environment. With proper weed control they would end up with more forage on the ground for their cows and better habitat for wildlife." Leo and Lois Cremer wanted nothing more than to conquer their weed problem. They were happy to sit down and listen to Stacey. But the project was a huge commitment of time and money. What if it didn't pan out? "Everybody was a little leery of working with the government," Leo says. "You're signing your name to a contract, committing to do a huge amount of work for ten years. That's a long time. There was a lot of money involved. It was scary, it really was." So what made the difference? "We knew Stacey, and we knew Chuck, and they were convinced it would be a good deal for us," Leo says. "Lois and I decided to trust what they said." Stacey Barta put together the grant proposal, which NRCS approved. The Yellowstone South Cooperative Noxious Weed Project had commitments from 17 private landowners, with properties ranging in size from 7,000 to 100 acres. The 30,000-acre project area encompassed four watersheds, all of which drain to the Yellowstone River. Along with private lands were scattered parcels managed by the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation and the federal Bureau of Land Management. Montana Rail Link, which owned approximately 300 acres in right-of-way along its tracks, also participated. Though he may have some misgivings about the government, Leo Cremer has always been willing to explore new ideas for improving his operation. "If you want to survive, you've got to progress," he says. As the weed-control project was taking shape, Chuck Roloff approached Leo with an idea to further enhance the benefits from eliminating weeds: a new grazing plan. The plan called for dividing Leo's largest pastures into smaller units. In several of those new pastures, Leo had a well put in; a solar-powered pump delivered water to a stock tank for the cows. The reconfigured pastures and new water sources would enable the Cremers to better distribute and manage the number of cows grazing in a given area, and the amount of time they spent grazing each area; it would also move them away from creek bottoms and riparian areas. "We went to a deferred rotation," Leo says. "With the new plan, we wouldn't put cows on the same pasture in the same season two years in a row. It gives your grasses a chance to grow back." The ultimate goal, Roloff says, was to boost the overall vitality of the Cremer's shortgrass prairie rangeland. "It doesn't take long if you're improving your grazing management," Roloff says, "you're leaving more mulch; you're conserving more precipitation, decreasing evaporation, and your plants get happier. They're building stronger root systems, expanding to cover bare ground, By the third year, "there was an unbelievable amount of new grass coming into areas where the weeds were eliminated," Leo Cremer said. Blue bunch wheatgrass now flourishes and dominates the landscape.

