Kevin Gunnell

Mr. Kevin Gunnell

State of Utah, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife Resources
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

7Years (2020-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
27 April 2020 in Ecological Applications
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SMSeth Munson
Seth Munson
EYEthan O. Yackulic
Ethan O. Yackulic
LBLucas S. Bair
Lucas S. Bair
SCStella M. Copeland
Stella M. Copeland
KGKevin Gunnell
Kevin Gunnell
Restoration and rehabilitation are globally implemented to improve ecosystem condition but often without tracking treatment expenditures relative to ecological outcomes. We evaluated the cost‐effectiveness of widely conducted woody plant and herbaceous invasive plant removals and seeding treatments in drylands of the western United States from 2004 to 2018 to determine how land managers can optimize efforts. Woody plant cover decreased at a similar rate per dollar spent regardless of vegetation removal type, and the dominant invasive species was reduced by herbicide application. Relatively inexpensive herbicide application also had a large positive effect on seeded perennial grass cover that was enhanced by additional cost; while expensive woody mastication treatments had little effect regardless of additional cost. High seed cost was driven by including a large proportion of native species in seed mixes, and combined with high seeding cost, promoted a short‐term (2–3 yr) gain in perennial forb cover and species richness. In contrast, seeding and seed mix cost had no bearing on seeded perennial grass cover, in part, because relatively cheap nonnative seeded species rapidly increased in cover. Our results suggest the differential benefits of commonly implemented treatments aimed at reducing wildfire risk, improving wildlife habitat and forage, and reducing erosion. Given the growing need and cost of restoration and rehabilitation, we raise the importance of specifying treatment budgets and objectives, coupled with effectiveness monitoring, to improve future outcomes.

28 August 2020 in Plants
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Thomas MonacoThomas Monaco
Thomas Monaco
KGKevin Gunnell
Kevin Gunnell
Woodland encroachment is a global issue linked to diminished ecosystem services, prompting the need for restoration efforts. However, restoration outcomes can be highly variable, making it difficult to interpret the ecological benefits and risks associated with woodland-reduction treatments within semiarid ecosystems. We addressed this uncertainty by assessing the magnitude and direction of vegetation change over a 15-year period at 129 sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) sites following pinyon (Pinus spp.) and juniper (Juniperus spp.) (P–J) reduction. Pretreatment vegetation indicated strong negative relationships between P–J cover and the abundance of understory plants (i.e., perennial grass and sagebrush cover) in most situations and all three components differed significantly among planned treatment types. Thus, to avoid confounding pretreatment vegetation and treatment type, we quantified overall treatment effects and tested whether distinct response patterns would be present among three dominant plant community types that vary in edaphic properties and occur within distinct temperature/precipitation regimes using meta-analysis (effect size = lnRR = ln[posttreatment cover/pretreatment cover]). We also quantified how restoration seedings contributed to overall changes in key understory vegetation components. Meta-analyses indicated that while P–J reduction caused significant positive overall effects on all shrub and herbaceous components (including invasive cheatgrass [Bromus tectorum] and exotic annual forbs), responses were contingent on treatment- and plant community-type combinations. Restoration seedings also had strong positive effects on understory vegetation by augmenting changes in perennial grass and perennial forb components, which similarly varied by plant community type. Collectively, our results identified specific situations where broad-scale efforts to reverse woodland encroachment substantially met short-term management goals of restoring valuable ecosystem services and where P–J reduction disposed certain plant community types to ecological risks, such as increasing the probability of native species displacement and stimulating an annual grass-fire cycle. Resource managers should carefully weigh these benefits and risks and incorporate additional, appropriate treatments and/or conservation measures for the unique preconditions of a given plant community in order to minimize exotic species responses and/or enhance desirable outcomes.

2 December 2022 in Rangeland Ecology & Management
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CRCorinna Riginos
Corinna Riginos
KVKari E. Veblen
Kari E. Veblen
ETEric T. Thacker
Eric T. Thacker
KGKevin Gunnell
Kevin Gunnell
Thomas MonacoThomas Monaco
Thomas Monaco

16 February 2023 in Rangeland Ecology & Management
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MTMitch G. Thacker
Mitch G. Thacker
MMMatthew D. Madsen
Matthew D. Madsen
BHBenjamin W. Hoose
Benjamin W. Hoose
RARhett M. Anderson
Rhett M. Anderson
DTDavid R. Tryon
David R. Tryon
TETodd E. Erickson
Todd E. Erickson

9 October 2025 in Rangeland Ecology & Management
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
KCKyle A. Cook
Kyle A. Cook
BGBradley Geary
Bradley Geary
PAPhil S. Allen
Phil S. Allen
AHApril Hulet
April Hulet
KGKevin Gunnell
Kevin Gunnell
MMMatthew D. Madsen
Matthew D. Madsen

14 August 2024 in Rangeland Ecology & Management
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SCS. Chad Camp
S. Chad Camp
VAVal J. Anderson
Val J. Anderson
MTMitch G. Thacker
Mitch G. Thacker
RARhett M. Anderson
Rhett M. Anderson
TRTodd F. Robinson
Todd F. Robinson
MMMatthew D. Madsen
Matthew D. Madsen