I'm an integralist, applied ecologist, and conservationist, working on rangelands, primarily the working landscapes of the American West. I focus on synthesis, resolving debate about grazing management, and advancing coexistence with large carnivores like grizzly bears and wolves that are potential predators of livestock. My ultimate interests are at the confluence of ecology, the human adventure, and consciousness. Address: Research Associate, Northern Rockies Conservation Cooperative; Shining Horizons Land Management, Dolores, Colorado 81323, USA
• The inaugural Range Practicum incorporated practical, hands-on training and demonstrations into... more • The inaugural Range Practicum incorporated practical, hands-on training and demonstrations into the SRM Annual Meeting and Training, contributing to its "new look" in 2020. The Range Practicum translated stockmanship, packing, horse training, and prescribed fire, as well as agency rangeland monitoring and soils training, into practical skills. It also included rangeland monitoring, soils training, equipment demonstrations, and a small tradeshow. • The Range Practicum incorporated the 2020 Producer Forum as the transformative Women in Ranching Forum and included a Producer Reception. • Over 200 rangeland professionals, including students, ranchers, agency managers and specialists, and applied scientists, attended the Range Practicum. Most Range Practicum participants registered for the entire annual meeting. • Most participants were very satisfied or satisfied with the training sessions. The most popular sessions of the Range Practicum were the handson livestock workshops, specifically the horse and mule packing and low-stress livestock handling, followed by a wild horse demonstration and a hands-on prescribed fire workshop. • We recommend the Range Practicum be an ongoing event at future SRM annual meetings and trainings. We recommend it include experiential sessions that cannot be included in the traditional format of the annual meeting (e.g., hands-on, with live animals, fire, etc.).
Adopting a systems view and regenerative philosophy can indicate how to regenerate ecosystem func... more Adopting a systems view and regenerative philosophy can indicate how to regenerate ecosystem function on commercial-scale agro-ecological landscapes. Adaptive multi-paddock grazing management is an example of an approach for grazinglands. Leading conservation farmers have achieved superior results in ecosystem improvement, productivity, soil carbon and fertility, water-holding capacity and profitability. Their method is to use multiple paddocks per herd with short grazing periods, long recovery periods, and adaptively changing recovery periods, residual biomass, animal numbers and other management elements as conditions change. In contrast, much research on grazing management has not followed adaptive research protocols to account for spatial effects, for sufficient time to produce resource improvement, sound animal production, and socio-economic goals under constantly varying conditions on rangelands. We briefly review what management has achieved best outcomes and show how previous reviews of grazing studies were limited in scope and applicability to larger, more complex landscapes. We argue that future research can provide better understanding of how multi-paddock grazing management can improve socio-ecological resilience in grazing ecosystems, while avoiding unintended consequences of possible management options, by involving realistic scale and context, partnering with innovative land managers on real operations, applying adaptive treatments, and combining field studies with modelling approaches.
In this article we argue that stockmanship is an integral—albeit over-looked and underappreciated... more In this article we argue that stockmanship is an integral—albeit over-looked and underappreciated— part of range management. Low stress herding has been used to improve grazing distribution on large rangeland landscapes with continuous, season-long, or other relatively extensive grazing management. However, it may be that its most powerful application is in more intensive grazing management methods, either in combination with or in place of fences. Strategic grazing management involving concentrated cattle and movement across the landscape over time—if strategically planned and adaptively managed—can have substantial benefits for rangeland health and livestock production, improving wildlife habitat, and capacity to coexist with potential predators. The higher our stockmanship skill level and the more manageable our cattle, the easier it is to undertake some form of strategic or planned grazing and, consequently, the more likely we are to do it, and the more likely it will be successful.
In this project, we—a rancher and a conservationist—applied low-stress approaches to herding and ... more In this project, we—a rancher and a conservationist—applied low-stress approaches to herding and night-penning cattle at relativelyhigh stocking density (SD) within a rangeland pasture in a larger grazing rotation. We increased herd instinct, and we used SD to increase animal impact in a target area, with benefits for rangeland forage production. We used leading-edge methods to intensify grazing management within an existing rotation, increasing herd instinct and effective SD with low-stress herding and night-penning. We also showed that the high SDs of the night pens (comparable to SDs in very intensive rotational grazing) could make grazing use more even. The night pens also documented an example of using herd effect to increase animal impact, and positive results of that impact on rangeland forage production.
Range riders can improve grazing management for rangeland health, livestock production, and coexi... more Range riders can improve grazing management for rangeland health, livestock production, and coexistence with wildlife, including large carnivores, by applying strategic grazing management, especially in combination with low-stress herding. Strategic grazing management is based on the patterns of wild grazing animals in the presence of their predators, which tend to increase group size (comparable to stock density) and movement over landscapes (comparable to grazing management). Managing livestock based on these patterns appears to reduce predation losses. Partnering with progressive ranchers, we compared and combined two approaches to herding cattle at relatively high stock density in the Northern Rocky Mountains of western Montana. We applied two similar but distinct close herding methods to go from these scattered groups to a single herd at increased stock density. In Phase 1, we used night penning and daily herding to enforce constantly high stock density. In Phase 2, we used low-stress herding to train the co-mingled heifers to function socially as a single herd. Both phases were successful. Phase 1 involved constant enforcement of high stock density, but did not kindle the herd instinct, probably because it wasn’t the cattle’s idea. Phase 2 successfully kindled the herd instinct, training the co-mingled heifers to forage in progressively larger groups until a single group formed. Kindling the herd instinct with low-stress herding required more skill, and significant initial labor, but less labor overall. Cattle apparently did not interact with potential predators in either phase. This and other projects suggest that stock density, increased rider presence, and low-stress livestock handling interact to reduce both encounters with large carnivores and the likelihood that such encounters result in predation.
Livestock – large carnivore coexistence practitioners can be more effective by expanding from a d... more Livestock – large carnivore coexistence practitioners can be more effective by expanding from a direct focus on carnivores and predation-prevention tools to the broader social-ecological context of ranches and rural communities, especially livestock management. Ranchers can apply many of the same approaches that work for rangeland health and livestock production to reduce conflicts with large carnivores. This paper synthesizes evidence from the rangeland, wildlife, and animal sciences into a cohesive argument: modeling livestock management after the grazing patterns and reproductive cycles of wild ungulates in the presence of their predators can improve rangeland health and livestock production—and increase the ability of ranching operations to coexist with native carnivores. The central anti-predator behavior of wild grazing animals is to form large, dense herds that then move around the landscape to seek fresh forage, avoid fouled areas, and escape predators. They also have their young in short, synchronized birthing seasons (predator satiation). Grazing management involving high stocking density and frequent movement, such as rotational grazing and herding with low-stress livestock handling, can improve rangeland health and livestock production, by managing the distribution of grazing across time, space, and plant species. Short calving seasons can increase livestock production and reduce labor inputs, especially when timed to coincide with peak availability of forage quality. Such livestock management approaches based on anti-predator behaviors of wild ungulates may directly and synergistically reduce predation risk—while simultaneously establishing a management context in which other predation-prevention practices and tools can be used more effectively.
From both ranching and conservation perspectives, livestock predation by large carnivores has tra... more From both ranching and conservation perspectives, livestock predation by large carnivores has traditionally been seen as a problem with the carnivores as its cause. For instance, much of the work done to reduce livestock-carnivore conflict has focused on keeping carnivores physically separated from humans and livestock, and on developing tools to manage the carnivores. A more holistic view is that carnivores are an inherent and valuable part of the system, some livestock predation is inevitable, and the root cause of excessive livestock predation is that conventional management has made livestock easier than wild prey for predators. Coexistence of livestock and large carnivores in the context of resilient ranching requires synthesizing knowledge of rangeland, livestock, and wildlife. The coexistence field will be more holistic and effective by expanding from a direct focus on carnivores and predation-prevention tools to the context of livestock management and the broader social-ecological systems of ranches and rural communities. The weak link in North American large carnivore conservation is human tolerance. Developing human tolerance for carnivores includes preventing or mitigating livestock depredations, and ideally occurs in the context of building social-ecological resilience in ranching. Much of this takes the form of improving land health, and thus the capacity of the land to produce biological diversity and ecosystem services, including forage for both wildlife and livestock. Progressive livestock management practices such as strategically planned and creatively managed grazing at high stock density, herding using low-stress livestock handling, and synchronized calving are intended to meet the needs of both plant communities and livestock, and are partly based on the patterns of wild ungulate herds in the presence of their predators. These practices can facilitate improved rangeland health, livestock production, and ranch profitability, but they have not been widely adopted. Ranchers can apply many of the same management approaches that work for land health and livestock production to prevent conflicts with large carnivores. Livestock management, specifically holistic planned grazing, herding with low-stress livestock handling, and synchronized calving, can directly and synergistically reduce predation, while establishing a management context in which other predation-prevention practices and tools can be used more effectively.
Strategic Grazing Management for Complex Creative Systems, Oct 2013
Rangelands are complex systems because the dynamic relationships between their parts result in se... more Rangelands are complex systems because the dynamic relationships between their parts result in self-organization, emergent properties, and unpredictable behavior. This panarchy of nested adaptive cycles that oscillate between order and chaos is what many land managers call “the real world.” Considerable debate in the rangeland profession, and especially within the ranching community, surrounds our notions of the efficacy of planned grazing management to achieve plant community, livestock production, and profitability goals. A variety of rotational deferment, rest, and grazing approaches have been promoted and applied by managers from geographically disparate regions. Rotational grazing (a single herd moved through multiple paddocks) in particular has been applied in many variations (e.g., rational, high-intensity/low-frequency, short-duration, time-control, management-intensive, or cell grazing). Often rotations are installed on a rigid calendar basis, sometimes adapted to unique on-site conditions. It is ironic that the phrase grazing “system” as popularly used tends to imply rigid application—the polar opposite of the word’s meaning in systems theory. Such grazing “systems” can be simple or complicated solutions to complex problems. Studies that compare grazing “systems” are inconsistent, and most have found little or no advantage of rotational over continuous grazing. Particularly disappointing to managers who use rotational grazing is the apparent inability to document differences in plant growth and recovery or animal production, particularly in more arid environments. The lack of clear advantages of rotational grazing is especially apparent when pastures are small and lack plant species diversity. We have come to realize that it is especially hard to demonstrate the impacts of any grazing “system” when animal movements are applied on a rigid schedule for the sake of scientific rigor, a common conclusion of recent scientific literature. And yet, substantial evidence is documented in scientific and case studies, and the practical experience of individual ranchers, indicating that strategic grazing management—if well-planned and adaptively managed— can have profound effects on the landscape, animal production, and ranch economics on individual landscapes. The discrepancy has been noted by scientists who suggest that our profession must do a better job of documenting range management at the landscape scale, identifying and recording the variety of factors associated with adaptive decision-making, and consider a less controlled approach to studying comparisons of grazing ”systems.” Our classic approach to range science is still effective in isolating individual portions of ecosystems, but practical experience within the context of complexity has shown that researchers and managers must expand our frames of reference. The papers within this sponsored issue are intended to move the profession beyond debate as suggested by Brown and Kothmann in 2009 and Briske et al. in 2011.
Strategic Grazing Management for Complex Creative Systems, Oct 2013
On the Ground
• Landscapes are complex creative systems that are endlessly emerging, transformin... more On the Ground • Landscapes are complex creative systems that are endlessly emerging, transforming, and vanishing as a result of ever-changing relationships among organisms and environments—soil, plants, herbivores, and human beings. In the process, all organisms are actively participating in creating environments; they aren’t merely adapting to them. • Researchers and managers attempt to understand and manage creative relationships among soil, plants, herbivores, and human beings, but we have become increasingly separated from one another in our endeavors. When we work in partnerships, we can better learn about biophysical processes and participate in managing as landscapes continually create. • To do so, researchers must combine their reductionist thinking and intent to develop “best management practices” with new approaches that consider creative systems. In turn, managers must come to appreciate the value of “reductionist” research for understanding processes and developing principles that apply generally across time and space. • The challenges we face in addressing “critical issues” have little to do with the issues and much to do with crossing the divides that polarize and isolate us. The irony is that working together to transcend the boundaries we create is addressing the “really big issue.”
Strategic Grazing Management for Complex Creative Systems, Oct 2013
On the Ground
• To condition plant communities for desired event-driven change, plants should no... more On the Ground • To condition plant communities for desired event-driven change, plants should not be defoliated during critical periods of their life cycle year after year. • Because animal preferences cause heterogeneous plant use patterns, sufficient time between defoliations is needed for preferred plants to recover sufficiently to maintain themselves and reproduce. • Adequate levels of recovery between defoliations for individual plants generally requires that they go through their rapid growth phase and elongation of the apical meristem, or they may need to set seed, establish desired structure, germinate, and establish seedlings or some other measure of growth/ regrowth, depending on management goals. • Because of the inherent variability of precipitation in most rangeland environments, achieving adequate recovery will require adaptive management that includes variable recovery periods that may be a full growing season or more in some years, depending on weather, level of defoliation, and timing of defoliation.
Rangelands Sponsored Issue:
Strategic Grazing Management for Complex Creative Systems
Grazing M... more Rangelands Sponsored Issue: Strategic Grazing Management for Complex Creative Systems
Grazing Management Can Improve Livestock Distribution: Increasing accessible forage and effective grazing capacity
By managing for more even animal distribution, ranch managers can increase the amount of forage accessible to livestock and raise their effective grazing capacity. Smaller paddocks and higher stocking density improve the distribution of grazing in each paddock. A landscape of many, smaller paddocks will spread grazing pressure more evenly than one of fewer, larger paddocks.
Strategic Grazing Management for Complex Creative Systems, Oct 2013
By managing for more even animal distribution, ranch managers can increase the amount of forage a... more By managing for more even animal distribution, ranch managers can increase the amount of forage accessible to livestock and raise their effective grazing capacity. Smaller paddocks and higher stocking density improve the distribution of grazing in each paddock. A landscape of many, smaller paddocks will spread grazing pressure more evenly than one of fewer, larger paddocks.
Strategic Grazing Management for Complex Creative Systems, Oct 2013
On the Ground
• Grazing capacity increased substantially and
rangeland vegetation measurements im... more On the Ground • Grazing capacity increased substantially and rangeland vegetation measurements improved after the Howell Ranch applied strategically planned and managed grazing. Increased capacity was realized from more spatially uniform grazing distribution and harvest efficiency rather than improving conditions over time. • Dividing a ranch into paddocks and grazing them sequentially, especially at high stocking density, can even out distribution of grazing and thus increase grazing capacity. • More even utilization across more, smaller paddocks contributes to explaining and resolving the apparent discrepancy between successful ranch-scale applications of multiple-paddock grazing and small-scale studies that found no benefit to rotational grazing.
Maintaining or enhancing the productive capacity and resilience of rangeland ecosystems is critic... more Maintaining or enhancing the productive capacity and resilience of rangeland ecosystems is critical for the continued support of people who depend on them for their livelihoods, especially in the face of climatic change. This is also necessary for the continued delivery of ecosystem services derived from rangelands for the broader benefit of societies around the world. Multi-paddock grazing management has been recommended since the mid-20th century as an important tool to adaptively manage range-lands ecosystems to sustain productivity and improve animal management. Moreover, there is much anecdotal evidence from producers that, if applied appropriately, multi-paddock grazing can improve forage and livestock production. By contrast, recent reviews of published rangeland-based grazing systems studies have concluded that, in general, field trials show no superiority of vegetation or animal production in multi-paddock grazing relative to continuous yearlong stocking of single-paddock livestock production systems. Our goal is to provide a framework for rangeland management decisions that support the productivity and resiliency of rangelands and then to identify why different perceptions exist among rangeland managers who have effectively used multi-paddock grazing systems and research scientists who have studied them. First, we discuss the ecology of grazed ecosystems under free-ranging herbivores and under single-paddock fenced conditions. Second, we identify five principles underpinning the adaptive management actions used by successful grazing managers and the ecological, physiological , and behavioral framework they use to achieve desired conservation, production, and financial goals. Third, we examine adaptive management principles needed to successfully manage rangelands subjected to varying environmental conditions. Fourth, we describe the differences between the interpretation of results of grazing systems research reported in the scientific literature and the results reported by successful grazing managers; we highlight the shortcomings of most of the previously conducted grazing systems research for providing information relevant for rangeland managers who aim to achieve desired environmental and economic goals. Finally, we outline knowledge gaps and present testable hypotheses to broaden our understanding of how planned multi-paddock grazing management can be used at the ranching enterprise scale to facilitate the adaptive management of rangelands under dynamic environmental conditions.
The article “Cross-Fencing on Private US Rangelands: Financial Costs and Producer Risks” (April 2... more The article “Cross-Fencing on Private US Rangelands: Financial Costs and Producer Risks” (April 2011), arguing that cross-fencing may not be cost effective is interesting, but problematic. Although it is true that cross-fencing with no expected resource benefi ts would be neither cost effective nor a public good, the assumptions of the article are not generally supported in our experience, and the article’s implications may unjustifi ably undermine support for this widespread conservation practice utilized by USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) technical and financial assistance programs as part of a prescribed grazing strategy addressing resource concerns. To preclude any impression that the article’s implications are widely applicable and prevail among the rangeland management profession, we briefly present arguments in support of cross-fencing to facilitate planned grazing for rangeland health and associated ecosystem services.
“When you’re taking a product from the land… all of the energy that we make use of comes from the... more “When you’re taking a product from the land… all of the energy that we make use of comes from the sun,” rancher Dennis Moroney reminded the audience at “Sustainable Rangelands Through Low-Input Grassfed Production” during the 2010 annual meeting of the Society for Range Management (SRM). The ecological resilience, economic viability, and social sustainability of grazing lands and the livestock industry may be maximized through grassfed livestock production, which relies on biological diversity and ecological complexity with minimal external inputs. Grassfed livestock production keeps land in permanent vegetation, rather than annual crops harvested, trucked, and fed to animals in confinement. Potential benefits of shifting land use from cropland and feedlots to perennial pasture include reductions in soil erosion, pesticide and fertilizer use; and increases in biological diversity, soil fertility and soil carbon sequestration. Relative to grain-fed beef, in terms of meat and protein production, grassfed beef is more energy-efficient, and was previously shown (1981) to be more cost-efficient. The fossil fuel consumption of grassfed meat production may be only half that of grain-finished meat production, and Americans could still exceed their recommended daily allowance of animal protein without grain-finished meats. And, demand for alternative livestock products, such as grassfed, local, organic, and humanely raised, has risen in recent years; for instance, organic meat sales increased from negligible in 1997 to over $600 million in 2008; and according to a recent national survey of chefs, locally sourced meats and sustainability are the first and third ranked top food trends in 2011. The Society for Range Management and the American Grassfed Association (AGA) held the symposium on low-input grassfed livestock production at Working Landscapes: Providing for the Future, the 63rd SRM annual meeting, on 11 February 2010 in Denver, Colorado. The producer-oriented session involved five presentations by ranchers producing grassfed meat or genetics primarily on native rangelands of the western U.S., and one presentation by dairy-farming veterinarians, all of which can be considered case studies of the experiences and observations of the authors; as well as one scientific study, an overview of grazing management, and presentations by the American Grassfed Association and the Southwest Grassfed Livestock Alliance. American Grassfed Association sponsorship enabled ranchers, many of whom were not SRM members, to attend the session; those who spoke became members of SRM through Colorado Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative scholarships. Videos of the presentations are available on the Society for Range Management website. This article summarizes the presentations.
The Society for Range Management and the American Grassfed Association (AGA) held the symposium o... more The Society for Range Management and the American Grassfed Association (AGA) held the symposium on low-input grassfed livestock production at Working Landscapes: Providing for the Future, the 63rd SRM annual meeting, on 11 February 2010 in Denver, Colorado. The producer-oriented session involved five presentations by ranchers producing grassfed meat or genetics primarily on native rangelands of the western U.S., and one presentation by dairy-farming veterinarians, all of which can be considered case studies of the experiences and observations of the authors; as well as one scientific study, an overview of grazing management, and presentations by the American Grassfed Association and the Southwest Grassfed Livestock Alliance. Videos of the presentations are available on the SRM website.
• The inaugural Range Practicum incorporated practical, hands-on training and demonstrations into... more • The inaugural Range Practicum incorporated practical, hands-on training and demonstrations into the SRM Annual Meeting and Training, contributing to its "new look" in 2020. The Range Practicum translated stockmanship, packing, horse training, and prescribed fire, as well as agency rangeland monitoring and soils training, into practical skills. It also included rangeland monitoring, soils training, equipment demonstrations, and a small tradeshow. • The Range Practicum incorporated the 2020 Producer Forum as the transformative Women in Ranching Forum and included a Producer Reception. • Over 200 rangeland professionals, including students, ranchers, agency managers and specialists, and applied scientists, attended the Range Practicum. Most Range Practicum participants registered for the entire annual meeting. • Most participants were very satisfied or satisfied with the training sessions. The most popular sessions of the Range Practicum were the handson livestock workshops, specifically the horse and mule packing and low-stress livestock handling, followed by a wild horse demonstration and a hands-on prescribed fire workshop. • We recommend the Range Practicum be an ongoing event at future SRM annual meetings and trainings. We recommend it include experiential sessions that cannot be included in the traditional format of the annual meeting (e.g., hands-on, with live animals, fire, etc.).
Adopting a systems view and regenerative philosophy can indicate how to regenerate ecosystem func... more Adopting a systems view and regenerative philosophy can indicate how to regenerate ecosystem function on commercial-scale agro-ecological landscapes. Adaptive multi-paddock grazing management is an example of an approach for grazinglands. Leading conservation farmers have achieved superior results in ecosystem improvement, productivity, soil carbon and fertility, water-holding capacity and profitability. Their method is to use multiple paddocks per herd with short grazing periods, long recovery periods, and adaptively changing recovery periods, residual biomass, animal numbers and other management elements as conditions change. In contrast, much research on grazing management has not followed adaptive research protocols to account for spatial effects, for sufficient time to produce resource improvement, sound animal production, and socio-economic goals under constantly varying conditions on rangelands. We briefly review what management has achieved best outcomes and show how previous reviews of grazing studies were limited in scope and applicability to larger, more complex landscapes. We argue that future research can provide better understanding of how multi-paddock grazing management can improve socio-ecological resilience in grazing ecosystems, while avoiding unintended consequences of possible management options, by involving realistic scale and context, partnering with innovative land managers on real operations, applying adaptive treatments, and combining field studies with modelling approaches.
In this article we argue that stockmanship is an integral—albeit over-looked and underappreciated... more In this article we argue that stockmanship is an integral—albeit over-looked and underappreciated— part of range management. Low stress herding has been used to improve grazing distribution on large rangeland landscapes with continuous, season-long, or other relatively extensive grazing management. However, it may be that its most powerful application is in more intensive grazing management methods, either in combination with or in place of fences. Strategic grazing management involving concentrated cattle and movement across the landscape over time—if strategically planned and adaptively managed—can have substantial benefits for rangeland health and livestock production, improving wildlife habitat, and capacity to coexist with potential predators. The higher our stockmanship skill level and the more manageable our cattle, the easier it is to undertake some form of strategic or planned grazing and, consequently, the more likely we are to do it, and the more likely it will be successful.
In this project, we—a rancher and a conservationist—applied low-stress approaches to herding and ... more In this project, we—a rancher and a conservationist—applied low-stress approaches to herding and night-penning cattle at relativelyhigh stocking density (SD) within a rangeland pasture in a larger grazing rotation. We increased herd instinct, and we used SD to increase animal impact in a target area, with benefits for rangeland forage production. We used leading-edge methods to intensify grazing management within an existing rotation, increasing herd instinct and effective SD with low-stress herding and night-penning. We also showed that the high SDs of the night pens (comparable to SDs in very intensive rotational grazing) could make grazing use more even. The night pens also documented an example of using herd effect to increase animal impact, and positive results of that impact on rangeland forage production.
Range riders can improve grazing management for rangeland health, livestock production, and coexi... more Range riders can improve grazing management for rangeland health, livestock production, and coexistence with wildlife, including large carnivores, by applying strategic grazing management, especially in combination with low-stress herding. Strategic grazing management is based on the patterns of wild grazing animals in the presence of their predators, which tend to increase group size (comparable to stock density) and movement over landscapes (comparable to grazing management). Managing livestock based on these patterns appears to reduce predation losses. Partnering with progressive ranchers, we compared and combined two approaches to herding cattle at relatively high stock density in the Northern Rocky Mountains of western Montana. We applied two similar but distinct close herding methods to go from these scattered groups to a single herd at increased stock density. In Phase 1, we used night penning and daily herding to enforce constantly high stock density. In Phase 2, we used low-stress herding to train the co-mingled heifers to function socially as a single herd. Both phases were successful. Phase 1 involved constant enforcement of high stock density, but did not kindle the herd instinct, probably because it wasn’t the cattle’s idea. Phase 2 successfully kindled the herd instinct, training the co-mingled heifers to forage in progressively larger groups until a single group formed. Kindling the herd instinct with low-stress herding required more skill, and significant initial labor, but less labor overall. Cattle apparently did not interact with potential predators in either phase. This and other projects suggest that stock density, increased rider presence, and low-stress livestock handling interact to reduce both encounters with large carnivores and the likelihood that such encounters result in predation.
Livestock – large carnivore coexistence practitioners can be more effective by expanding from a d... more Livestock – large carnivore coexistence practitioners can be more effective by expanding from a direct focus on carnivores and predation-prevention tools to the broader social-ecological context of ranches and rural communities, especially livestock management. Ranchers can apply many of the same approaches that work for rangeland health and livestock production to reduce conflicts with large carnivores. This paper synthesizes evidence from the rangeland, wildlife, and animal sciences into a cohesive argument: modeling livestock management after the grazing patterns and reproductive cycles of wild ungulates in the presence of their predators can improve rangeland health and livestock production—and increase the ability of ranching operations to coexist with native carnivores. The central anti-predator behavior of wild grazing animals is to form large, dense herds that then move around the landscape to seek fresh forage, avoid fouled areas, and escape predators. They also have their young in short, synchronized birthing seasons (predator satiation). Grazing management involving high stocking density and frequent movement, such as rotational grazing and herding with low-stress livestock handling, can improve rangeland health and livestock production, by managing the distribution of grazing across time, space, and plant species. Short calving seasons can increase livestock production and reduce labor inputs, especially when timed to coincide with peak availability of forage quality. Such livestock management approaches based on anti-predator behaviors of wild ungulates may directly and synergistically reduce predation risk—while simultaneously establishing a management context in which other predation-prevention practices and tools can be used more effectively.
From both ranching and conservation perspectives, livestock predation by large carnivores has tra... more From both ranching and conservation perspectives, livestock predation by large carnivores has traditionally been seen as a problem with the carnivores as its cause. For instance, much of the work done to reduce livestock-carnivore conflict has focused on keeping carnivores physically separated from humans and livestock, and on developing tools to manage the carnivores. A more holistic view is that carnivores are an inherent and valuable part of the system, some livestock predation is inevitable, and the root cause of excessive livestock predation is that conventional management has made livestock easier than wild prey for predators. Coexistence of livestock and large carnivores in the context of resilient ranching requires synthesizing knowledge of rangeland, livestock, and wildlife. The coexistence field will be more holistic and effective by expanding from a direct focus on carnivores and predation-prevention tools to the context of livestock management and the broader social-ecological systems of ranches and rural communities. The weak link in North American large carnivore conservation is human tolerance. Developing human tolerance for carnivores includes preventing or mitigating livestock depredations, and ideally occurs in the context of building social-ecological resilience in ranching. Much of this takes the form of improving land health, and thus the capacity of the land to produce biological diversity and ecosystem services, including forage for both wildlife and livestock. Progressive livestock management practices such as strategically planned and creatively managed grazing at high stock density, herding using low-stress livestock handling, and synchronized calving are intended to meet the needs of both plant communities and livestock, and are partly based on the patterns of wild ungulate herds in the presence of their predators. These practices can facilitate improved rangeland health, livestock production, and ranch profitability, but they have not been widely adopted. Ranchers can apply many of the same management approaches that work for land health and livestock production to prevent conflicts with large carnivores. Livestock management, specifically holistic planned grazing, herding with low-stress livestock handling, and synchronized calving, can directly and synergistically reduce predation, while establishing a management context in which other predation-prevention practices and tools can be used more effectively.
Strategic Grazing Management for Complex Creative Systems, Oct 2013
Rangelands are complex systems because the dynamic relationships between their parts result in se... more Rangelands are complex systems because the dynamic relationships between their parts result in self-organization, emergent properties, and unpredictable behavior. This panarchy of nested adaptive cycles that oscillate between order and chaos is what many land managers call “the real world.” Considerable debate in the rangeland profession, and especially within the ranching community, surrounds our notions of the efficacy of planned grazing management to achieve plant community, livestock production, and profitability goals. A variety of rotational deferment, rest, and grazing approaches have been promoted and applied by managers from geographically disparate regions. Rotational grazing (a single herd moved through multiple paddocks) in particular has been applied in many variations (e.g., rational, high-intensity/low-frequency, short-duration, time-control, management-intensive, or cell grazing). Often rotations are installed on a rigid calendar basis, sometimes adapted to unique on-site conditions. It is ironic that the phrase grazing “system” as popularly used tends to imply rigid application—the polar opposite of the word’s meaning in systems theory. Such grazing “systems” can be simple or complicated solutions to complex problems. Studies that compare grazing “systems” are inconsistent, and most have found little or no advantage of rotational over continuous grazing. Particularly disappointing to managers who use rotational grazing is the apparent inability to document differences in plant growth and recovery or animal production, particularly in more arid environments. The lack of clear advantages of rotational grazing is especially apparent when pastures are small and lack plant species diversity. We have come to realize that it is especially hard to demonstrate the impacts of any grazing “system” when animal movements are applied on a rigid schedule for the sake of scientific rigor, a common conclusion of recent scientific literature. And yet, substantial evidence is documented in scientific and case studies, and the practical experience of individual ranchers, indicating that strategic grazing management—if well-planned and adaptively managed— can have profound effects on the landscape, animal production, and ranch economics on individual landscapes. The discrepancy has been noted by scientists who suggest that our profession must do a better job of documenting range management at the landscape scale, identifying and recording the variety of factors associated with adaptive decision-making, and consider a less controlled approach to studying comparisons of grazing ”systems.” Our classic approach to range science is still effective in isolating individual portions of ecosystems, but practical experience within the context of complexity has shown that researchers and managers must expand our frames of reference. The papers within this sponsored issue are intended to move the profession beyond debate as suggested by Brown and Kothmann in 2009 and Briske et al. in 2011.
Strategic Grazing Management for Complex Creative Systems, Oct 2013
On the Ground
• Landscapes are complex creative systems that are endlessly emerging, transformin... more On the Ground • Landscapes are complex creative systems that are endlessly emerging, transforming, and vanishing as a result of ever-changing relationships among organisms and environments—soil, plants, herbivores, and human beings. In the process, all organisms are actively participating in creating environments; they aren’t merely adapting to them. • Researchers and managers attempt to understand and manage creative relationships among soil, plants, herbivores, and human beings, but we have become increasingly separated from one another in our endeavors. When we work in partnerships, we can better learn about biophysical processes and participate in managing as landscapes continually create. • To do so, researchers must combine their reductionist thinking and intent to develop “best management practices” with new approaches that consider creative systems. In turn, managers must come to appreciate the value of “reductionist” research for understanding processes and developing principles that apply generally across time and space. • The challenges we face in addressing “critical issues” have little to do with the issues and much to do with crossing the divides that polarize and isolate us. The irony is that working together to transcend the boundaries we create is addressing the “really big issue.”
Strategic Grazing Management for Complex Creative Systems, Oct 2013
On the Ground
• To condition plant communities for desired event-driven change, plants should no... more On the Ground • To condition plant communities for desired event-driven change, plants should not be defoliated during critical periods of their life cycle year after year. • Because animal preferences cause heterogeneous plant use patterns, sufficient time between defoliations is needed for preferred plants to recover sufficiently to maintain themselves and reproduce. • Adequate levels of recovery between defoliations for individual plants generally requires that they go through their rapid growth phase and elongation of the apical meristem, or they may need to set seed, establish desired structure, germinate, and establish seedlings or some other measure of growth/ regrowth, depending on management goals. • Because of the inherent variability of precipitation in most rangeland environments, achieving adequate recovery will require adaptive management that includes variable recovery periods that may be a full growing season or more in some years, depending on weather, level of defoliation, and timing of defoliation.
Rangelands Sponsored Issue:
Strategic Grazing Management for Complex Creative Systems
Grazing M... more Rangelands Sponsored Issue: Strategic Grazing Management for Complex Creative Systems
Grazing Management Can Improve Livestock Distribution: Increasing accessible forage and effective grazing capacity
By managing for more even animal distribution, ranch managers can increase the amount of forage accessible to livestock and raise their effective grazing capacity. Smaller paddocks and higher stocking density improve the distribution of grazing in each paddock. A landscape of many, smaller paddocks will spread grazing pressure more evenly than one of fewer, larger paddocks.
Strategic Grazing Management for Complex Creative Systems, Oct 2013
By managing for more even animal distribution, ranch managers can increase the amount of forage a... more By managing for more even animal distribution, ranch managers can increase the amount of forage accessible to livestock and raise their effective grazing capacity. Smaller paddocks and higher stocking density improve the distribution of grazing in each paddock. A landscape of many, smaller paddocks will spread grazing pressure more evenly than one of fewer, larger paddocks.
Strategic Grazing Management for Complex Creative Systems, Oct 2013
On the Ground
• Grazing capacity increased substantially and
rangeland vegetation measurements im... more On the Ground • Grazing capacity increased substantially and rangeland vegetation measurements improved after the Howell Ranch applied strategically planned and managed grazing. Increased capacity was realized from more spatially uniform grazing distribution and harvest efficiency rather than improving conditions over time. • Dividing a ranch into paddocks and grazing them sequentially, especially at high stocking density, can even out distribution of grazing and thus increase grazing capacity. • More even utilization across more, smaller paddocks contributes to explaining and resolving the apparent discrepancy between successful ranch-scale applications of multiple-paddock grazing and small-scale studies that found no benefit to rotational grazing.
Maintaining or enhancing the productive capacity and resilience of rangeland ecosystems is critic... more Maintaining or enhancing the productive capacity and resilience of rangeland ecosystems is critical for the continued support of people who depend on them for their livelihoods, especially in the face of climatic change. This is also necessary for the continued delivery of ecosystem services derived from rangelands for the broader benefit of societies around the world. Multi-paddock grazing management has been recommended since the mid-20th century as an important tool to adaptively manage range-lands ecosystems to sustain productivity and improve animal management. Moreover, there is much anecdotal evidence from producers that, if applied appropriately, multi-paddock grazing can improve forage and livestock production. By contrast, recent reviews of published rangeland-based grazing systems studies have concluded that, in general, field trials show no superiority of vegetation or animal production in multi-paddock grazing relative to continuous yearlong stocking of single-paddock livestock production systems. Our goal is to provide a framework for rangeland management decisions that support the productivity and resiliency of rangelands and then to identify why different perceptions exist among rangeland managers who have effectively used multi-paddock grazing systems and research scientists who have studied them. First, we discuss the ecology of grazed ecosystems under free-ranging herbivores and under single-paddock fenced conditions. Second, we identify five principles underpinning the adaptive management actions used by successful grazing managers and the ecological, physiological , and behavioral framework they use to achieve desired conservation, production, and financial goals. Third, we examine adaptive management principles needed to successfully manage rangelands subjected to varying environmental conditions. Fourth, we describe the differences between the interpretation of results of grazing systems research reported in the scientific literature and the results reported by successful grazing managers; we highlight the shortcomings of most of the previously conducted grazing systems research for providing information relevant for rangeland managers who aim to achieve desired environmental and economic goals. Finally, we outline knowledge gaps and present testable hypotheses to broaden our understanding of how planned multi-paddock grazing management can be used at the ranching enterprise scale to facilitate the adaptive management of rangelands under dynamic environmental conditions.
The article “Cross-Fencing on Private US Rangelands: Financial Costs and Producer Risks” (April 2... more The article “Cross-Fencing on Private US Rangelands: Financial Costs and Producer Risks” (April 2011), arguing that cross-fencing may not be cost effective is interesting, but problematic. Although it is true that cross-fencing with no expected resource benefi ts would be neither cost effective nor a public good, the assumptions of the article are not generally supported in our experience, and the article’s implications may unjustifi ably undermine support for this widespread conservation practice utilized by USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) technical and financial assistance programs as part of a prescribed grazing strategy addressing resource concerns. To preclude any impression that the article’s implications are widely applicable and prevail among the rangeland management profession, we briefly present arguments in support of cross-fencing to facilitate planned grazing for rangeland health and associated ecosystem services.
“When you’re taking a product from the land… all of the energy that we make use of comes from the... more “When you’re taking a product from the land… all of the energy that we make use of comes from the sun,” rancher Dennis Moroney reminded the audience at “Sustainable Rangelands Through Low-Input Grassfed Production” during the 2010 annual meeting of the Society for Range Management (SRM). The ecological resilience, economic viability, and social sustainability of grazing lands and the livestock industry may be maximized through grassfed livestock production, which relies on biological diversity and ecological complexity with minimal external inputs. Grassfed livestock production keeps land in permanent vegetation, rather than annual crops harvested, trucked, and fed to animals in confinement. Potential benefits of shifting land use from cropland and feedlots to perennial pasture include reductions in soil erosion, pesticide and fertilizer use; and increases in biological diversity, soil fertility and soil carbon sequestration. Relative to grain-fed beef, in terms of meat and protein production, grassfed beef is more energy-efficient, and was previously shown (1981) to be more cost-efficient. The fossil fuel consumption of grassfed meat production may be only half that of grain-finished meat production, and Americans could still exceed their recommended daily allowance of animal protein without grain-finished meats. And, demand for alternative livestock products, such as grassfed, local, organic, and humanely raised, has risen in recent years; for instance, organic meat sales increased from negligible in 1997 to over $600 million in 2008; and according to a recent national survey of chefs, locally sourced meats and sustainability are the first and third ranked top food trends in 2011. The Society for Range Management and the American Grassfed Association (AGA) held the symposium on low-input grassfed livestock production at Working Landscapes: Providing for the Future, the 63rd SRM annual meeting, on 11 February 2010 in Denver, Colorado. The producer-oriented session involved five presentations by ranchers producing grassfed meat or genetics primarily on native rangelands of the western U.S., and one presentation by dairy-farming veterinarians, all of which can be considered case studies of the experiences and observations of the authors; as well as one scientific study, an overview of grazing management, and presentations by the American Grassfed Association and the Southwest Grassfed Livestock Alliance. American Grassfed Association sponsorship enabled ranchers, many of whom were not SRM members, to attend the session; those who spoke became members of SRM through Colorado Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative scholarships. Videos of the presentations are available on the Society for Range Management website. This article summarizes the presentations.
The Society for Range Management and the American Grassfed Association (AGA) held the symposium o... more The Society for Range Management and the American Grassfed Association (AGA) held the symposium on low-input grassfed livestock production at Working Landscapes: Providing for the Future, the 63rd SRM annual meeting, on 11 February 2010 in Denver, Colorado. The producer-oriented session involved five presentations by ranchers producing grassfed meat or genetics primarily on native rangelands of the western U.S., and one presentation by dairy-farming veterinarians, all of which can be considered case studies of the experiences and observations of the authors; as well as one scientific study, an overview of grazing management, and presentations by the American Grassfed Association and the Southwest Grassfed Livestock Alliance. Videos of the presentations are available on the SRM website.
In this guide, Western Landowners Alliance offers the collective knowledge and hands-on experienc... more In this guide, Western Landowners Alliance offers the collective knowledge and hands-on experience of over 30 land, livestock and resource managers constructively engaged in one of the greatest conservation challenges of our time: how to share and manage a wild, working landscape that sustains both people and wildlife.
The inaugural Range Practicum brought lifelong learners from around the West to develop hands-on ... more The inaugural Range Practicum brought lifelong learners from around the West to develop hands-on land and livestock skills at the National Western Complex in Denver on February 20. Ranchers, range managers, conservationists, and students tried their hand at low-stress livestock handling, horse and mule packing, and prescribed burning. They observed a wild horse demonstration, showing how mustangs are humanely corralled and given their first training. They observed state-of-the-art reclamation equipment and learned to calibrate a pesticide sprayer. They learned a federal land management agency’s latest range monitoring methods. They compared soil cores and learned to texture soils. The event, the first of its kind, was part of the Society for Range Management annual meeting, held in Denver this year. The Practicum was the culmination of an overtly re-envisioned conference themed “Transformation and Translation,” designed to be both more ground-breaking and more directly applicable by land managers, while continuing its longstanding history of leading-edge applied science.
Grazing ecosystems are what scientists call complex adaptive systems: the whole is greater than t... more Grazing ecosystems are what scientists call complex adaptive systems: the whole is greater than the sum of the parts because of the relationships between the parts. The relationships form the web of life, so intricate that their individual and collective behaviors exhibit patterns that are beyond complicated: self-organization with emergent properties, unpredictability, and nonlinear dynamics. This panarchy of nested adaptive cycles between order and chaos is what land managers call “the real world.” Considerable debate has existed in both the rangeland profession and the ranching community, regarding the efficacy of planned grazing management to achieve plant community, livestock production, and profitability goals. Most grazing studies have found little or no advantage to rotational grazing systems over continuous grazing with regard to plant or animal production, particularly in more arid environments, especially when pastures were small and lacking diversity, and grazing treatments were applied rigidly for the sake of scientific rigor. However, there is substantial evidence in the scientific literature, documented case studies, and practical experience of ranchers indicating that strategic grazing management that incorporates relatively short grazing periods with adequate recovery afterward can—if well-planned and adaptively managed— have profound and positive effects on the landscape, animal production, and ranch economics. Both sides of this apparent discrepancy are right, in different ways. In the science of complexity, the types of questions asked and the interpretation of results often differ depending on whether the observer’s orientation is primarily reductionist (emphasizing parts) or holistic (emphasizing systems). Relativity and quantum physics greatly expand scientific understanding, but classical Newtonian physics “works” on most relevant scales and still stands. Similarly, classical range science still stands, but practical experience and the context of complexity expand our frame of reference. This symposium is intended to move the discussion beyond the old debate. The pertinent question is not “is rotational grazing better?” but “How can grazing management be informed by ecological processes, and what principles should be applied strategically to adapt to complexity and change?” Collectively, grazing studies and on-the-ground experience provide evidence for widely applicable guidelines for ecological process-based management to achieve ecological and economic goals by manipulating grazing intensity, distribution across time and space, the diversity of plants available to grazing animals, and animals’ selection thereof. Effective management of these grazing parameters depends primarily on four sets of variables: (1) stocking rate, both for a grazing period and for the grazing season or year; (2) timing and length of grazing periods, and adequate recovery; (3) spatial distribution of grazing; and (4) diversity of plants available, and selection of those plants by grazing animals. This symposium provides a rough answer to the above question using these four variables as a framework, alternating between presentations of the underlying science and corroborating case studies. On behalf of the team of people who put this together, welcome, and we hope you find it an adaptive learning experience.
Proceedings of the 4th National Conference on Grazing Lands, Dec 2009
Pasture subdivision can increase control of the time and place grazing occurs, often resulting in... more Pasture subdivision can increase control of the time and place grazing occurs, often resulting in more even distribution of utilization across a landscape over a grazing cycle, but more concentrated distribution within a grazing period. However, the assumption that paddock subdivision and increased stock density necessarily reduce selectivity, nutrient intake, diet quality, and performance, by increasing uniformity and intensity of utilization, is unsupported. The animals’ ability to select quality over time is driven by stocking rate for that period of time and, therefore, can be changed through management. Though rate of forage disappearance increases with stock density, controlling graze period length can stop utilization at any desired level. When graze period decreases faster, proportionally, than stock density increases, the proportion of total forage on offer that animals can mix to meet requirements for the graze period can increase relative to a longer graze period at lower density. When managing for high animal performance and adequate plant recovery between defoliations, utilization for a graze period should be less or equal in intensity with increasing stock density, assuming similar seasonal stocking rates. Increased paddock numbers with short graze and adequate recovery periods can be used to either increase or decrease heterogeneity of utilization and diet quality over time and space. Animal and plant community responses will occur more rapidly at higher stock densities and rates of forage disappearance, and the direction of those responses will be determined by how the relationships among these factors are managed. Paddock numbers and stock density cannot be changed in isolation, as each increase in these variables will change other factors—requiring monitoring and adaptive management to achieve goals.
Diverse Rangelands for a Sustainable Society, Apr 2011
Introduction
Paddock subdivision can increase spatiotemporal control of grazing, often resulting... more Introduction
Paddock subdivision can increase spatiotemporal control of grazing, often resulting in more even distribution of utilization (Barnes et al., 2008). Increased stocking density increases instantaneous grazing pressure, but does not necessarily reduce diet quality and nutrient intake. Animals’ ability to select quality over time and space is driven by stocking rate for that period of time (Rittenhouse and Bailey, 1996), and can be changed through management (Norton, 2003).
Discussion
Grazing animals select higher quality plants first; longer grazing periods increase differential diet quality from the beginning to the end of the period, limiting the total amount of lower quality forage that can be mixed to provide a diet that meets requirements. Subdividing with a given recovery period, grazing period decreases faster than stocking density increases (Table 1); thus the proportion of available forage that animals can mix to meet requirements increases relative to a longer grazing period at lower density. To maintain animal performance and adequate plant recovery, the grazing period stocking rate should be less or equal in intensity with increasing stocking density, given equal annual stocking rates (Steffens et al., 2010).
Conclusions
Increased paddock numbers with short grazing and adequate recovery periods can change spatial heterogeneity of utilization (Barnes et al., 2008) while maintaining diet quality by keeping the grazing period stocking rate light enough to allow animals to meet their requirements (Steffens et al., 2010). Animal and plant community responses will occur more rapidly at higher stocking density and rate of forage disappearance, and the direction of those responses will be determined by adaptive management of interrelated factors (Teague et al., 2008).
Diverse Rangelands for a Sustainable Society, Apr 2011
Introduction
Rotational stocking may reduce the selectivity of grazing animals relative to more ... more Introduction
Rotational stocking may reduce the selectivity of grazing animals relative to more extensive grazing methods such as continuous stocking, thus increasing grazing capacity (Norton, 1998, 2003). We tested the hypotheses that, as stocking density increased under intensive rotational stocking, grazing use would be distributed over a higher proportion of species, and the tillers of preferred species would be grazed more evenly.
Materials & Methods
At Cedar Mountain, Utah (2600 m elevation; 76 mm mean annual precipitation), during July-August, we stocked cattle on a gradient of 3 levels of decreasing paddock size and increasing stocking density, representing increasing intensity of landscape subdivision (16-, 32-, and 64-paddock rotations) at the same stocking rate: 4-, 2-, and 1-ha paddocks grazed for 4, 2, and 1 days, at 4, 8, and 16 animal units (AU)/ha (Barnes et al., 2008). We measured height of 300 marked tillers in each paddock before and after grazing. Effects of species (codominant graminoids) and treatment levels on proportions of grazed tillers were assessed with a logit model, and effects of treatment levels on standard deviation of defoliated tiller length were assessed with ANOVA (Maeno, 2002).
Results & Discussion
Utilization was light, so there was ample opportunity for cattle to express selectivity. However, there was no difference between treatment levels in proportions of species grazed (P = 0.6518), overall utilization (P = 0.58), or utilization of graminoids (P = 0.63). A strong correlation between the proportion of each species in a paddock and the utilization of that species (r = 0.822, P < 0.001) suggests that selectivity was low regardless of treatment.
Conclusions
The lack of response to the treatment gradient, and the correlation between use and availability, are consistent with the findings (Barnes et al., 2008) that the spatial heterogeneity of utilization was similar in the rotational stocking treatments, but lower than in rotationally deferred 70-ha paddocks on the same site. These results imply that the small paddocks and high stocking densities of rotational stocking can make a higher proportion of herbage effectively available relative to extensive grazing methods (Norton, 1998, 2003), but that ever higher stocking densities do not necessarily result in even lower selectivity and spatial heterogeneity of grazing.
Diverse Rangelands for a Sustainable Society, Apr 2011
Introduction
Rotational stocking may reduce repeat grazing of preferred plants relative to more ... more Introduction
Rotational stocking may reduce repeat grazing of preferred plants relative to more extensive grazing methods such as continuous stocking, thus increasing effective grazing capacity (Norton, 1998, 2003). We measured repeat defoliation and documented a shift in feeding choice over short grazing periods in small paddocks.
Materials & Methods
At Cedar Mountain, Utah (2600 m elevation; 76 mm mean annual precipitation), during July-August, we stocked cattle at 2 levels of decreasing paddock size and increasing stocking density, representing increasing intensity of landscape subdivision (16- and 32-paddock rotations) at the same stocking rate: 4- and 2-ha paddocks grazed for 4 and 2 days, at 4 and 8 animal units (AU)/ha, with 2 replicates (Barnes et al., 2008). We measured height of 300 marked tillers in each paddock at the beginning, midpoint, and end of the grazing periods. The differences in grazed tiller length of the 4 codominant grass species between days 2-4 of the 4-day treatment, and days 1-2 of the 2-day treatment, were assessed using one-way ANOVA for each species (Maeno, 2002).
Results & Discussion
Utilization was light, so there was ample opportunity for cattle to express selectivity. However, the proportion of tillers grazed in both the first and the second half of the grazing period was only 5.41% in the 4-day, and 3.17% in the 2-day paddocks. There were significant interactions between day and species in the 4-day (P = 0.0006) and the 2-day (P = 0.0019) grazing periods, indicating that a shift of feeding choice happened during the grazing periods. Bromus marginatus was preferred in the first and avoided in the second half, while (generally less-palatable) Achnatherum lettermanii was avoided in the first but preferred in the second half of the periods.
Conclusions
The lack of repeat defoliation is probably due to lack of regrowth during the grazing periods, and is consistent with the findings (Barnes et al., 2008) that the spatial heterogeneity of utilization was similar in the rotational stocking treatments, but lower than in rotationally deferred 70-ha paddocks on the same site. Short grazing periods, small paddocks, and high stocking densities can increase the proportion of herbage effectively available to meet nutritional requirements if livestock mix more lower-quality forage in their diet earlier in the grazing period, evening out diet quality over time (Norton, 1998, 2003; Steffens et al., 2010).
Proceedings of the 4th National Conference on Grazing Lands, Dec 2009
Greater and Gunnison sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus and C. minimus) forage in wet meadows... more Greater and Gunnison sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus and C. minimus) forage in wet meadows adjacent to sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) rangelands. Both sage-grouse species are thought to require a higher proportion of forbs and associated insects in their diets than is usually available in either anthropogenic grass meadows or some sagebrush rangelands, especially during brood-rearing. This is thought to be a limiting phase in the life-cycle of these species of concern. Most of the wet meadow – sagebrush edge habitat in the Southern Rocky Mountains occurs on private grazing land. To increase the amount of forbs and associated insects available to Gunnison and greater sage-grouse, enhance hay and pasture quality and production, and improve relationships between private landowners and government agencies, we seeded a 50/50 mix of mammoth red (Trifolium pratense var. sativum) and alsike clover (T. hybridum) on most of the irrigated mountain meadows adjacent to sagebrush rangeland in both the Gunnison Basin and Middle Park, Colorado. We seeded 4 pounds per acre in two passes by airplane: a 140-foot swath (1676 acres) in the Gunnison Basin in April 2006, and a 120-foot swath (1600 acres) in Middle Park in May 2007.A survey sent to participating Gunnison Basin landowners indicated that after 3 growing seasons, most had clover in their meadows in a “patchy” distribution, and Gunnison sage-grouse sightings were equally divided between seeded and adjacent areas. Paired monitoring plots were established along adjacent treated and untreated meadow edges in Middle Park. The amount of clover in areas with suitable conditions was higher in seeded than unseeded areas after 3 growing seasons, except where it was high prior to treatment. Greater sage-grouse pellet transects on the sagebrush side of the edge, measured pre-treatment in 2007 and post-treatment in 2009, were highly variable and did not indicate any correlation with clover production or vegetative cover, except that all sites with sage-grouse pellets had ≤ 35% total shrub foliar cover. The two collaborative projects involved 116 private landowners, represented by the Gunnison and Middle Park Conservation Districts and the Gunnison County Stockgrowers Association, along with the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Colorado State University, Colorado Division of Wildlife, and USDI Bureau of Land Management, with funding from the Colorado Division of Wildlife’s Habitat Partnership Program, the USDI Fish and Wildlife Service’s Partners for Wildlife Program, and Gunnison County.
Generations on the Land: A Conservation Legacy. By Joe Nick Patoski . 2011. Sand County Foundatio... more Generations on the Land: A Conservation Legacy. By Joe Nick Patoski . 2011. Sand County Foundation/Texas A&M University Press, College Station, TX, USA. 136 p. US$25. hardcover. ISBN 978-1-60344-241-1.
The New Ranch Handbook: A Guide to Restoring Western Rangelands. By Nathan F. Sayre. Edited by Ba... more The New Ranch Handbook: A Guide to Restoring Western Rangelands. By Nathan F. Sayre. Edited by Barbara H. Johnson. 2001. The Quivira Coalition, 551 Cordova Road, #423, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501, USA. 102 + x p. US$10.00 (+ 3.00 S&H) paper. ISBN 0-9708264-0-0.
With the reintroduction of wolves, Colorado has an opportunity to restore its biodiversity while ... more With the reintroduction of wolves, Colorado has an opportunity to restore its biodiversity while honoring the livelihoods and traditions of our diverse communities. The Colorado Wolf Restoration and Management Plan Stakeholder Advisory Group was convened to seek consensus among wolf advocates, ranchers, hunters, outfitters, and conservationists who were tasked to explore the social, economic, and scientific aspects of wolf reintroduction and management in an effort to benefit both wildlife and people.
This charge may have seemed impossible in a world of often polarized opinions. Over the course of 15 months of relationship-building, difficult conversations, and information gathering, the SAG ultimately reached consensus on a wide range of important issues that will guide CPW as wolves are returned to the state. Throughout, the SAG fostered civil discussion and understanding across differences, often resulting in strong convergence even on the most contentious issues.
In the SAG’s attempts to reach consensus, members recognized that there are areas where interests and beliefs remained disparate and there was disagreement, as will be the case with the public. However, for Colorado’s wolf program to be successful, there is a need to realize that there are real people affected by any decisions and recognize people have more in common than apart. Everything will have unintended consequences that need to be considered and can be lessened by having early conversations that lead to effective actions. Room needs to be made for individual perspectives and locally-based solutions that help resolve challenges and reduce divisions.
Across all topics, SAG members discussed the importance of achieving restoration of wolves with thriving ungulate populations, rural communities, and agricultural economies. Discussions emphasized utilizing science-based, adaptive, and impact-based management at the local level that involves leaving wolves wherever they are if they are not causing problems, minimizing conflict, and addressing issues on a case-by-case basis using a variety of management tools. SAG members also underscored the critical need for long-term funding as well as outreach and engagement to support wolf reintroduction and management.
Matt Barnes is a Rangeland Scientist who continues to study and apply methods for livestock & pre... more Matt Barnes is a Rangeland Scientist who continues to study and apply methods for livestock & predator coexistence management in the western United States. He is part of the Northern Rockies Conservation Cooperative and is an Advisor for the Rocky Mountain Wolf Project.
Courtney Vail is the Campaign Director for Oceanic Preservation Society, an Advisor for the Rocky Mountain Wolf Project and has been a Senior Policy Professional for conservation and animal welfare for over 30 years.
Matt and Courtney discussed the draft of the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Wolf Management Plan that was released in early December and gave their insights on the plan as it currently stands.
Matt Barnes is a Rangeland Scientist who continues to study and apply methods for livestock & pre... more Matt Barnes is a Rangeland Scientist who continues to study and apply methods for livestock & predator coexistence management in the western United States.
He is part of the Northern Rockies Conservation Cooperative and is an Advisor for the Rocky Mountain Wolf Project.
Matt explained his rangeland management methods, how they impact livestock in positive ways opening the door for predator coexistence including wolves, bears and mountain lions.
Stewart Breck is a research carnivore ecologist with the USDA-APHIS-WS National Wildlife Research... more Stewart Breck is a research carnivore ecologist with the USDA-APHIS-WS National Wildlife Research Center and a member of the new Colorado State University Center for Human Carnivore Coexistence in Fort Collins. He has been focused on carnivore ecology and behavior and minimizing conflict between carnivores and people many years. The interview also includes Matt Barnes, a grazing consultant out of Colorado who works with the Northern Rockies Conservation Cooperative and has a long history in the middle ground between ranchers and wildlife advocates.
Interview with an expert: Matt Barnes, rangeland scientist and former ranch manager, presents an ... more Interview with an expert: Matt Barnes, rangeland scientist and former ranch manager, presents an integral perspective on gray wolf restoration in western Colorado.
A short film showing how proactive herding of cattle can be a strategy for preventing predation b... more A short film showing how proactive herding of cattle can be a strategy for preventing predation by large carnivores including grizzly bears and wolves, featuring a range rider and a coexistence practitioner, in Wyoming.
The Data Mine -- Study finds that intensive planned grazing can improve distribution, offers reso... more The Data Mine -- Study finds that intensive planned grazing can improve distribution, offers resolution to longstanding discrepancy. Interpretive summary of Barnes et al. 2008. Paddock size and stocking density affect spatial heterogeneity of grazing. Rangeland Ecology & Management 61: 380-388.
As a rangeland scientist, former ranch manager, hunter and conservationist who has worked through... more As a rangeland scientist, former ranch manager, hunter and conservationist who has worked throughout the Northern Rockies to develop human-carnivore coexistence strategies and tools, I have serious concerns about the recent direction of Montana’s policies towards wolves and other large carnivores, which are clearly intended to kill most of the state’s wolves and probably some of its grizzly bears and other non-target species as well. The recent anti-predator backlash in Montana represents a reactionary swing by the far-right and a return to the failed predator policies of the early 20th Century, a stance left behind more than 50 years ago not only by the wildlife profession but also by the American public. They are the very policies that landed wolves on the federal Endangered Species list to begin with. Indeed, the new policies are expressly designed to reduce the wolf population to the minimum levels, below which federal re-listing would be triggered.
Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks has long been considered one of the leading state wildlife agencies in the Rockies, and I’ve personally been proud to work with some of your wolf and bear specialists. But, these policies make Montana appear incapable of managing its wolves, if not its wildlife in general, and are already inspiring efforts to get wolves back under federal control. As a direct result of the new policies in Montana and Idaho, and similar policies in Wyoming, more than 400 scientists have called on the federal government for emergency re-listing of wolves in the Northern Rockies, and for a new National Bison, Grizzly Bear, and Wolf Restoration Act to coordinate management of these species across state boundaries.
Why, after all these decades, after tentative successes in the Northern Rockies, are there still ... more Why, after all these decades, after tentative successes in the Northern Rockies, are there still only a few individual gray wolves and wolverines, and no grizzly bears, in the Central and Southern Rockies?
Research Associate Matt Barnes went in search of answers, paddling over 700 miles down the Green River from the Wind River Range to the Uinta Mountains, all the way to the Colorado River, a journey covered in High Country News.
You might wonder why western Colorado doesn’t already have a thriving population of wolves, given... more You might wonder why western Colorado doesn’t already have a thriving population of wolves, given that the Federal government reintroduced gray wolves in the Northern Rockies over a quarter century ago. Gary Skiba and I embarked on a journey to find out, crossing much of the landscape between the Northern and Southern Rockies, looking for wolf sign—and mostly coming up empty. This spring, I paddled over 400 miles of the Green River, at about the speed of a dispersing wolf, from the big-predator country of the Wind River Range on the southern side of Greater Yellowstone, across the arid Green River Basin of southwestern Wyoming, into the Uinta Mountains in northeastern Utah and northwestern Colorado, through Browns Park and Dinosaur National Monument—passing within a day’s trot of where Colorado’s first wolf pack had been located. A year ago, Gary and I had been among the first—and then for a while the last—people to hear wolves howl in Colorado. By then, someone had already killed three of those pioneering wolves—legally—just across the state line in Wyoming. Therein lies the answer: it isn’t just the arid Green River Basin and the Red Desert, or even the dangerous barrier formed by I-80 and the transcontinental railroad, a proverbial border wall across the desert. It’s the divide in our minds between wild and domestic. Human societies have so often used wolves as symbols of untamed nature, whether or not that’s considered desirable, and of both the best and worst in ourselves. Literally caught in the crossfire: the real wolves, who are just living their lives. To Colorado’s north, states responsible for managing wolves have had very liberal wolf killing programs. That’s especially the case in Wyoming, where state policy is to manage wolves as a trophy game species in the northwestern corner of the state, and as vermin to be shot on sight across about 85% of the state. We’re working to change that storyline here in Colorado, laying the groundwork for human-wolf coexistence.
The inaugural Range Practicum brought lifelong learners from around the West to develop hands-on ... more The inaugural Range Practicum brought lifelong learners from around the West to develop hands-on land and livestock skills at the National Western Complex in Denver on February 20. Ranchers, range managers, conservationists, and students tried their hand at low-stress livestock handling, horse and mule packing, and prescribed burning. They observed a wild horse demonstration, showing how mustangs are humanely corralled and given their first training. They observed state-of-the-art reclamation equipment and learned to calibrate a pesticide sprayer. They learned a federal land management agency’s latest range monitoring methods. They compared soil cores and learned to texture soils. The event, the first of its kind, was part of the Society for Range Management annual meeting, held in Denver this year. The Practicum was the culmination of an overtly re-envisioned conference themed “Transformation and Translation,” designed to be both more ground-breaking and more directly applicable by land managers, while continuing its longstanding history of leading-edge applied science.
The Gazette, Colorado Politics, and Out There Colorado, 2020
As a former ranch manager in western Colorado, and an applied scientist and conservationist who h... more As a former ranch manager in western Colorado, and an applied scientist and conservationist who has worked on improving coexistence with gray wolves and grizzly bears in Montana and Wyoming, I have a few thoughts on restoring wolves to western Colorado....
The Southern Rockies have their first wolf pack since the 1940s: a group of six wolves in the nor... more The Southern Rockies have their first wolf pack since the 1940s: a group of six wolves in the northwest corner of Colorado-and probably crossing into Utah and Wyoming. The last wolves documented in Colorado were in 2015, one photographed by a trail camera in North Park, and one shot by a coyote hunter in nearby Middle Park. Over the quarter century since the Northern Rockies reintroduction, until 2019, only a few isolated individuals have found their way across Wyoming to Colorado, but all died or left the state without finding mates. These wolves, dispersers from the Northern Rockies, are fully protected under the Endangered Species Act and managed under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Notably, Colorado's policy has always allowed any natural dispersers from out of state.
I was honored to share some lessons learned about ranching in large-carnivore country at the Dura... more I was honored to share some lessons learned about ranching in large-carnivore country at the Durango Wolf Symposium late last year, which explored the potential return of the gray wolf to western Colorado. The event brought together a group of wolf biologists, Native Americans, a historian, a range conservationist, a member of the Colorado Wolf Management Working Group, a rancher who has learned to live alongside wolves, and a local rancher who would rather not. The point of the symposium was to share multiple perspectives of professionals who have lived and worked with or studied wolves, not to have a debate between two sides.
Both wolves and livestock are here to stay in the Northern Rockies.
Editor's note-Recent articl... more Both wolves and livestock are here to stay in the Northern Rockies.
Editor's note-Recent articles in Cow-Calf Weekly and BEEF magazine addressing wolf depredation of livestock and possible recourses generated some response from our readers, some of it heated. The debate began with an article written by Temple Grandin reporting on a variety of presentations at a Society for Range Management meeting. One of those presentations discussed non-lethal ways that ranchers can deal with wolf depredations of livestock. Matt Barnes, author of the paper presented at the SRM meeting that became the genesis of the follow-up articles in BEEF, offers this response. You can read Barnes' original paper here, which goes into greater depth on the ideas he presents in this counterpoint article.
The health of the Western Range depends on how grazing is managed.
Progressive rangeland managers... more The health of the Western Range depends on how grazing is managed. Progressive rangeland managers are increasingly turning to the ancient art of herding — moving a single large group of animals across the landscape, using low-stress stockmanship — to prevent overuse of preferred areas and allow plants sufficient recovery time before they are grazed again. A cluster of progressive ranchers are using herding to restore the rangelands of Colorado's Western Slope, particularly on of the Gunnison National Forest, under the stewardship of Paonia Ranger District rangeland management specialist Dave Bradford.
I recently spent a day with Bradford on the West Terror, one of the grazing allotments he manages. The permittee, the Campbell and Sons Ranch, was gathering their cattle to ship their calves. I was there to learn about the Campbells' grazing management and herding techniques, methods that have enhanced rangeland health on their allotment as well as the neighboring West Elk allotment, for which both permittees have won the Forest Service's National Range Management Award, as well as the Excellence in Range Management Award from the Colorado Section of the Society for Range Management.
Prescribed grazing that meets the needs of soil and plants as well as animals and their owners is... more Prescribed grazing that meets the needs of soil and plants as well as animals and their owners is the single most important practice to improve the health and productivity of our grazing land resources. West-wide, intensive prescribed grazing management has demonstrated improvements in land health and biological diversity, while set-stocked, extensively grazed lands and lands under long-term rest from grazing have not recovered from degradation or deteriorated further. Poorly managed grazing results in both heavily grazed and ungrazed patches within a pasture, even if the stocking rate is low. Animals return to previously grazed patches, attracted by plant re-growth when the plants are most susceptible to damage, creating expanding patches of deteriorating plant species composition, soil surface condition, and hydrologic function. Prescribed grazing breaks this cycle with short grazing periods and high stocking density, encouraging livestock to consume a higher proportion of plants in a pasture, and then removing the livestock until the grazed plants have recovered.
Uploads
• The Range Practicum incorporated the 2020 Producer Forum as the transformative Women in Ranching Forum and included a Producer Reception.
• Over 200 rangeland professionals, including students, ranchers, agency managers and specialists, and applied scientists, attended the Range Practicum. Most Range Practicum participants registered for the entire annual meeting.
• Most participants were very satisfied or satisfied with the training sessions. The most popular sessions of the Range Practicum were the handson livestock workshops, specifically the horse and mule packing and low-stress livestock handling, followed by a wild horse demonstration and a hands-on prescribed fire workshop.
• We recommend the Range Practicum be an ongoing event at future SRM annual meetings and trainings. We recommend it include experiential sessions that cannot be included in the traditional format of the annual meeting (e.g., hands-on, with live animals, fire, etc.).
Strategic grazing management involving concentrated cattle and movement across the landscape over time—if strategically planned and adaptively managed—can have substantial benefits for rangeland health and livestock production, improving wildlife habitat, and capacity to coexist with potential predators. The higher our stockmanship skill level and the more manageable our cattle, the easier it is to undertake some form of strategic or planned grazing and, consequently, the more likely we are to do it, and the more likely it will be successful.
We used leading-edge methods to intensify grazing management within an existing rotation, increasing herd instinct and effective SD with low-stress herding and night-penning. We also showed that the high SDs of the night pens (comparable to SDs in very intensive rotational grazing) could make grazing use more even. The night pens also documented an example of using herd effect to increase animal impact, and positive results of that impact on rangeland forage production.
Partnering with progressive ranchers, we compared and combined two approaches to herding cattle at relatively high stock density in the Northern Rocky Mountains of western Montana. We applied two similar but distinct close herding methods to go from these scattered groups to a single herd at increased stock density. In Phase 1, we used night penning and daily herding to enforce constantly high stock density. In Phase 2, we used low-stress herding to train the co-mingled heifers to function socially as a single herd. Both phases were successful. Phase 1 involved constant enforcement of high stock density, but did not kindle the herd instinct, probably because it wasn’t the cattle’s idea. Phase 2 successfully kindled the herd instinct, training the co-mingled heifers to forage in progressively larger groups until a single group formed. Kindling the herd instinct with low-stress herding required more skill, and significant initial labor, but less labor overall. Cattle apparently did not interact with potential predators in either phase.
This and other projects suggest that stock density, increased rider presence, and low-stress livestock handling interact to reduce both encounters with large carnivores and the likelihood that such encounters result in predation.
Coexistence of livestock and large carnivores in the context of resilient ranching requires synthesizing knowledge of rangeland, livestock, and wildlife. The coexistence field will be more holistic and effective by expanding from a direct focus on carnivores and predation-prevention tools to the context of livestock management and the broader social-ecological systems of ranches and rural communities. The weak link in North American large carnivore conservation is human tolerance. Developing human tolerance for carnivores includes preventing or mitigating livestock depredations, and ideally occurs in the context of building social-ecological resilience in ranching. Much of this takes the form of improving land health, and thus the capacity of the land to produce biological diversity and ecosystem services, including forage for both wildlife and livestock.
Progressive livestock management practices such as strategically planned and creatively managed grazing at high stock density, herding using low-stress livestock handling, and synchronized calving are intended to meet the needs of both plant communities and livestock, and are partly based on the patterns of wild ungulate herds in the presence of their predators. These practices can facilitate improved rangeland health, livestock production, and ranch profitability, but they have not been widely adopted.
Ranchers can apply many of the same management approaches that work for land health and livestock production to prevent conflicts with large carnivores. Livestock management, specifically holistic planned grazing, herding with low-stress livestock handling, and synchronized calving, can directly and synergistically reduce predation, while establishing a management context in which other predation-prevention practices and tools can be used more effectively.
unpredictable behavior. This panarchy of nested adaptive cycles that oscillate between order and chaos is what many land managers call “the real world.”
Considerable debate in the rangeland profession, and especially within the ranching community, surrounds our notions of the efficacy of planned grazing management to achieve plant community, livestock production, and profitability goals. A variety of rotational deferment, rest, and grazing approaches have been promoted and applied by managers from geographically disparate regions. Rotational grazing (a single herd moved through multiple paddocks) in particular has been applied in many variations (e.g., rational, high-intensity/low-frequency, short-duration, time-control, management-intensive, or cell
grazing). Often rotations are installed on a rigid calendar basis, sometimes adapted to unique on-site conditions. It is ironic that the phrase grazing “system” as popularly used tends to imply rigid application—the polar opposite of the word’s meaning in systems theory. Such grazing “systems” can be simple or complicated solutions to complex problems. Studies that compare grazing “systems” are inconsistent, and most have found little or no advantage of rotational over continuous grazing. Particularly disappointing to managers who
use rotational grazing is the apparent inability to document differences in plant growth and recovery or animal production, particularly in more arid environments. The lack of clear advantages of rotational grazing is especially apparent when pastures are small and lack plant species diversity. We have come to realize that it is especially hard to demonstrate the impacts of any grazing “system” when animal movements are applied on a rigid schedule for the sake of scientific rigor, a common conclusion of recent scientific literature.
And yet, substantial evidence is documented in scientific and case studies, and the practical experience of individual ranchers, indicating that strategic grazing management—if well-planned and adaptively managed— can have profound effects on the landscape, animal production, and ranch economics on individual landscapes. The discrepancy has been noted by scientists who suggest that our profession must do a better job of documenting range management at the landscape scale, identifying and recording the variety of factors associated with adaptive decision-making, and consider a less controlled approach to studying comparisons of grazing ”systems.”
Our classic approach to range science is still effective in isolating individual portions of ecosystems, but practical experience within the context of complexity has shown that researchers and managers must expand our frames of reference. The papers within this sponsored issue are intended to move the profession beyond debate as suggested by Brown and Kothmann in 2009 and Briske et al. in 2011.
• Landscapes are complex creative systems that are endlessly emerging, transforming, and vanishing as a result of ever-changing relationships among organisms and environments—soil, plants, herbivores, and human beings. In the process, all organisms are actively participating in creating environments; they aren’t merely adapting to them.
• Researchers and managers attempt to understand and manage creative relationships among soil, plants, herbivores, and human beings, but we have become increasingly separated from one another in our endeavors. When we work in partnerships, we can better learn about biophysical processes and participate in managing as landscapes continually create.
• To do so, researchers must combine their reductionist thinking and intent to develop “best management practices” with new approaches that consider creative systems. In turn, managers must come to appreciate the value of “reductionist” research for understanding processes and developing principles that apply generally across time and space.
• The challenges we face in addressing “critical issues” have little to do with the issues and much to do with crossing the divides that polarize and isolate us. The irony is that working together to transcend the boundaries we create is addressing the “really big issue.”
• To condition plant communities for desired event-driven change, plants should not be defoliated during critical periods of their life cycle year after year.
• Because animal preferences cause heterogeneous plant use patterns, sufficient time between defoliations is needed for preferred plants to recover sufficiently to maintain themselves and reproduce.
• Adequate levels of recovery between defoliations for individual plants generally requires that they go through their rapid growth phase and elongation of the apical meristem, or they may need to set seed, establish desired structure, germinate, and establish seedlings or some other measure of growth/ regrowth, depending on management goals.
• Because of the inherent variability of precipitation in most rangeland environments, achieving adequate recovery will require adaptive management that includes variable recovery periods that may be a full growing season or more in some years, depending on weather, level of defoliation, and timing of defoliation.
Strategic Grazing Management for Complex Creative Systems
Grazing Management Can Improve Livestock Distribution:
Increasing accessible forage and effective grazing capacity
By managing for more even animal distribution, ranch managers can increase the amount of forage accessible to livestock and raise their effective grazing capacity. Smaller paddocks and higher stocking density improve the distribution of grazing in each paddock. A landscape of many, smaller paddocks will spread grazing pressure more evenly than one of fewer, larger paddocks.
• Grazing capacity increased substantially and
rangeland vegetation measurements improved
after the Howell Ranch applied strategically
planned and managed grazing. Increased capacity
was realized from more spatially uniform grazing
distribution and harvest efficiency rather than
improving conditions over time.
• Dividing a ranch into paddocks and grazing them
sequentially, especially at high stocking density,
can even out distribution of grazing and thus increase
grazing capacity.
• More even utilization across more, smaller paddocks
contributes to explaining and resolving the apparent
discrepancy between successful ranch-scale applications
of multiple-paddock grazing and small-scale
studies that found no benefit to rotational grazing.
Grassfed livestock production keeps land in permanent vegetation, rather than annual crops harvested, trucked, and fed to animals in confinement. Potential benefits of shifting land use from cropland and feedlots to perennial pasture include reductions in soil erosion, pesticide and fertilizer use; and increases in biological diversity, soil fertility and soil carbon sequestration.
Relative to grain-fed beef, in terms of meat and protein production, grassfed beef is more energy-efficient, and was previously shown (1981) to be more cost-efficient. The fossil fuel consumption of grassfed meat production may be only half that of grain-finished meat production, and Americans could still exceed their recommended daily allowance of animal protein without grain-finished meats. And, demand for alternative livestock products, such as grassfed, local, organic, and humanely raised, has risen in recent years; for instance, organic meat sales increased from negligible in 1997 to over $600 million in 2008; and according to a recent national survey of chefs, locally sourced meats and sustainability are the first and third ranked top food trends in 2011.
The Society for Range Management and the American Grassfed Association (AGA) held the symposium on low-input grassfed livestock production at Working Landscapes: Providing for the Future, the 63rd SRM annual meeting, on 11 February 2010 in Denver, Colorado. The producer-oriented session involved five presentations by ranchers producing grassfed meat or genetics primarily on native rangelands of the western U.S., and one presentation by dairy-farming veterinarians, all of which can be considered case studies of the experiences and observations of the authors; as well as one scientific study, an overview of grazing management, and presentations by the American Grassfed Association and the Southwest Grassfed Livestock Alliance. American Grassfed Association sponsorship enabled ranchers, many of whom were not SRM members, to attend the session; those who spoke became members of SRM through Colorado Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative scholarships. Videos of the presentations are available on the Society for Range Management website. This article summarizes the presentations.
• The Range Practicum incorporated the 2020 Producer Forum as the transformative Women in Ranching Forum and included a Producer Reception.
• Over 200 rangeland professionals, including students, ranchers, agency managers and specialists, and applied scientists, attended the Range Practicum. Most Range Practicum participants registered for the entire annual meeting.
• Most participants were very satisfied or satisfied with the training sessions. The most popular sessions of the Range Practicum were the handson livestock workshops, specifically the horse and mule packing and low-stress livestock handling, followed by a wild horse demonstration and a hands-on prescribed fire workshop.
• We recommend the Range Practicum be an ongoing event at future SRM annual meetings and trainings. We recommend it include experiential sessions that cannot be included in the traditional format of the annual meeting (e.g., hands-on, with live animals, fire, etc.).
Strategic grazing management involving concentrated cattle and movement across the landscape over time—if strategically planned and adaptively managed—can have substantial benefits for rangeland health and livestock production, improving wildlife habitat, and capacity to coexist with potential predators. The higher our stockmanship skill level and the more manageable our cattle, the easier it is to undertake some form of strategic or planned grazing and, consequently, the more likely we are to do it, and the more likely it will be successful.
We used leading-edge methods to intensify grazing management within an existing rotation, increasing herd instinct and effective SD with low-stress herding and night-penning. We also showed that the high SDs of the night pens (comparable to SDs in very intensive rotational grazing) could make grazing use more even. The night pens also documented an example of using herd effect to increase animal impact, and positive results of that impact on rangeland forage production.
Partnering with progressive ranchers, we compared and combined two approaches to herding cattle at relatively high stock density in the Northern Rocky Mountains of western Montana. We applied two similar but distinct close herding methods to go from these scattered groups to a single herd at increased stock density. In Phase 1, we used night penning and daily herding to enforce constantly high stock density. In Phase 2, we used low-stress herding to train the co-mingled heifers to function socially as a single herd. Both phases were successful. Phase 1 involved constant enforcement of high stock density, but did not kindle the herd instinct, probably because it wasn’t the cattle’s idea. Phase 2 successfully kindled the herd instinct, training the co-mingled heifers to forage in progressively larger groups until a single group formed. Kindling the herd instinct with low-stress herding required more skill, and significant initial labor, but less labor overall. Cattle apparently did not interact with potential predators in either phase.
This and other projects suggest that stock density, increased rider presence, and low-stress livestock handling interact to reduce both encounters with large carnivores and the likelihood that such encounters result in predation.
Coexistence of livestock and large carnivores in the context of resilient ranching requires synthesizing knowledge of rangeland, livestock, and wildlife. The coexistence field will be more holistic and effective by expanding from a direct focus on carnivores and predation-prevention tools to the context of livestock management and the broader social-ecological systems of ranches and rural communities. The weak link in North American large carnivore conservation is human tolerance. Developing human tolerance for carnivores includes preventing or mitigating livestock depredations, and ideally occurs in the context of building social-ecological resilience in ranching. Much of this takes the form of improving land health, and thus the capacity of the land to produce biological diversity and ecosystem services, including forage for both wildlife and livestock.
Progressive livestock management practices such as strategically planned and creatively managed grazing at high stock density, herding using low-stress livestock handling, and synchronized calving are intended to meet the needs of both plant communities and livestock, and are partly based on the patterns of wild ungulate herds in the presence of their predators. These practices can facilitate improved rangeland health, livestock production, and ranch profitability, but they have not been widely adopted.
Ranchers can apply many of the same management approaches that work for land health and livestock production to prevent conflicts with large carnivores. Livestock management, specifically holistic planned grazing, herding with low-stress livestock handling, and synchronized calving, can directly and synergistically reduce predation, while establishing a management context in which other predation-prevention practices and tools can be used more effectively.
unpredictable behavior. This panarchy of nested adaptive cycles that oscillate between order and chaos is what many land managers call “the real world.”
Considerable debate in the rangeland profession, and especially within the ranching community, surrounds our notions of the efficacy of planned grazing management to achieve plant community, livestock production, and profitability goals. A variety of rotational deferment, rest, and grazing approaches have been promoted and applied by managers from geographically disparate regions. Rotational grazing (a single herd moved through multiple paddocks) in particular has been applied in many variations (e.g., rational, high-intensity/low-frequency, short-duration, time-control, management-intensive, or cell
grazing). Often rotations are installed on a rigid calendar basis, sometimes adapted to unique on-site conditions. It is ironic that the phrase grazing “system” as popularly used tends to imply rigid application—the polar opposite of the word’s meaning in systems theory. Such grazing “systems” can be simple or complicated solutions to complex problems. Studies that compare grazing “systems” are inconsistent, and most have found little or no advantage of rotational over continuous grazing. Particularly disappointing to managers who
use rotational grazing is the apparent inability to document differences in plant growth and recovery or animal production, particularly in more arid environments. The lack of clear advantages of rotational grazing is especially apparent when pastures are small and lack plant species diversity. We have come to realize that it is especially hard to demonstrate the impacts of any grazing “system” when animal movements are applied on a rigid schedule for the sake of scientific rigor, a common conclusion of recent scientific literature.
And yet, substantial evidence is documented in scientific and case studies, and the practical experience of individual ranchers, indicating that strategic grazing management—if well-planned and adaptively managed— can have profound effects on the landscape, animal production, and ranch economics on individual landscapes. The discrepancy has been noted by scientists who suggest that our profession must do a better job of documenting range management at the landscape scale, identifying and recording the variety of factors associated with adaptive decision-making, and consider a less controlled approach to studying comparisons of grazing ”systems.”
Our classic approach to range science is still effective in isolating individual portions of ecosystems, but practical experience within the context of complexity has shown that researchers and managers must expand our frames of reference. The papers within this sponsored issue are intended to move the profession beyond debate as suggested by Brown and Kothmann in 2009 and Briske et al. in 2011.
• Landscapes are complex creative systems that are endlessly emerging, transforming, and vanishing as a result of ever-changing relationships among organisms and environments—soil, plants, herbivores, and human beings. In the process, all organisms are actively participating in creating environments; they aren’t merely adapting to them.
• Researchers and managers attempt to understand and manage creative relationships among soil, plants, herbivores, and human beings, but we have become increasingly separated from one another in our endeavors. When we work in partnerships, we can better learn about biophysical processes and participate in managing as landscapes continually create.
• To do so, researchers must combine their reductionist thinking and intent to develop “best management practices” with new approaches that consider creative systems. In turn, managers must come to appreciate the value of “reductionist” research for understanding processes and developing principles that apply generally across time and space.
• The challenges we face in addressing “critical issues” have little to do with the issues and much to do with crossing the divides that polarize and isolate us. The irony is that working together to transcend the boundaries we create is addressing the “really big issue.”
• To condition plant communities for desired event-driven change, plants should not be defoliated during critical periods of their life cycle year after year.
• Because animal preferences cause heterogeneous plant use patterns, sufficient time between defoliations is needed for preferred plants to recover sufficiently to maintain themselves and reproduce.
• Adequate levels of recovery between defoliations for individual plants generally requires that they go through their rapid growth phase and elongation of the apical meristem, or they may need to set seed, establish desired structure, germinate, and establish seedlings or some other measure of growth/ regrowth, depending on management goals.
• Because of the inherent variability of precipitation in most rangeland environments, achieving adequate recovery will require adaptive management that includes variable recovery periods that may be a full growing season or more in some years, depending on weather, level of defoliation, and timing of defoliation.
Strategic Grazing Management for Complex Creative Systems
Grazing Management Can Improve Livestock Distribution:
Increasing accessible forage and effective grazing capacity
By managing for more even animal distribution, ranch managers can increase the amount of forage accessible to livestock and raise their effective grazing capacity. Smaller paddocks and higher stocking density improve the distribution of grazing in each paddock. A landscape of many, smaller paddocks will spread grazing pressure more evenly than one of fewer, larger paddocks.
• Grazing capacity increased substantially and
rangeland vegetation measurements improved
after the Howell Ranch applied strategically
planned and managed grazing. Increased capacity
was realized from more spatially uniform grazing
distribution and harvest efficiency rather than
improving conditions over time.
• Dividing a ranch into paddocks and grazing them
sequentially, especially at high stocking density,
can even out distribution of grazing and thus increase
grazing capacity.
• More even utilization across more, smaller paddocks
contributes to explaining and resolving the apparent
discrepancy between successful ranch-scale applications
of multiple-paddock grazing and small-scale
studies that found no benefit to rotational grazing.
Grassfed livestock production keeps land in permanent vegetation, rather than annual crops harvested, trucked, and fed to animals in confinement. Potential benefits of shifting land use from cropland and feedlots to perennial pasture include reductions in soil erosion, pesticide and fertilizer use; and increases in biological diversity, soil fertility and soil carbon sequestration.
Relative to grain-fed beef, in terms of meat and protein production, grassfed beef is more energy-efficient, and was previously shown (1981) to be more cost-efficient. The fossil fuel consumption of grassfed meat production may be only half that of grain-finished meat production, and Americans could still exceed their recommended daily allowance of animal protein without grain-finished meats. And, demand for alternative livestock products, such as grassfed, local, organic, and humanely raised, has risen in recent years; for instance, organic meat sales increased from negligible in 1997 to over $600 million in 2008; and according to a recent national survey of chefs, locally sourced meats and sustainability are the first and third ranked top food trends in 2011.
The Society for Range Management and the American Grassfed Association (AGA) held the symposium on low-input grassfed livestock production at Working Landscapes: Providing for the Future, the 63rd SRM annual meeting, on 11 February 2010 in Denver, Colorado. The producer-oriented session involved five presentations by ranchers producing grassfed meat or genetics primarily on native rangelands of the western U.S., and one presentation by dairy-farming veterinarians, all of which can be considered case studies of the experiences and observations of the authors; as well as one scientific study, an overview of grazing management, and presentations by the American Grassfed Association and the Southwest Grassfed Livestock Alliance. American Grassfed Association sponsorship enabled ranchers, many of whom were not SRM members, to attend the session; those who spoke became members of SRM through Colorado Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative scholarships. Videos of the presentations are available on the Society for Range Management website. This article summarizes the presentations.
The event, the first of its kind, was part of the Society for Range Management annual meeting, held in Denver this year. The Practicum was the culmination of an overtly re-envisioned conference themed “Transformation and Translation,” designed to be both more ground-breaking and more directly applicable by land managers, while continuing its longstanding history of leading-edge applied science.
Considerable debate has existed in both the rangeland profession and the ranching community, regarding the efficacy of planned grazing management to achieve plant community, livestock production, and profitability goals. Most grazing studies have found little or no advantage to rotational grazing systems over continuous grazing with regard to plant or animal production, particularly in more arid environments, especially when pastures were small and lacking diversity, and grazing treatments were applied rigidly for the sake of scientific rigor.
However, there is substantial evidence in the scientific literature, documented case studies, and practical experience of ranchers indicating that strategic grazing management that incorporates relatively short grazing periods with adequate recovery afterward can—if well-planned and adaptively managed— have profound and positive effects on the landscape, animal production, and ranch economics.
Both sides of this apparent discrepancy are right, in different ways. In the science of complexity, the types of questions asked and the interpretation of results often differ depending on whether the observer’s orientation is primarily reductionist (emphasizing parts) or holistic (emphasizing systems). Relativity and quantum physics greatly expand scientific understanding, but classical Newtonian physics “works” on most relevant scales and still stands. Similarly, classical range science still stands, but practical experience and the context of complexity expand our frame of reference.
This symposium is intended to move the discussion beyond the old debate. The pertinent question is not “is rotational grazing better?” but “How can grazing management be informed by ecological processes, and what principles should be applied strategically to adapt to complexity and change?”
Collectively, grazing studies and on-the-ground experience provide evidence for widely applicable guidelines for ecological process-based management to achieve ecological and economic goals by manipulating grazing intensity, distribution across time and space, the diversity of plants available to grazing animals, and animals’ selection thereof. Effective management of these grazing parameters depends primarily on four sets of variables: (1) stocking rate, both for a grazing period and for the grazing season or year; (2) timing and length of grazing periods, and adequate recovery; (3) spatial distribution of grazing; and (4) diversity of plants available, and selection of those plants by grazing animals.
This symposium provides a rough answer to the above question using these four variables as a framework, alternating between presentations of the underlying science and corroborating case studies. On behalf of the team of people who put this together, welcome, and we hope you find it an adaptive learning experience.
Paddock subdivision can increase spatiotemporal control of grazing, often resulting in more even distribution of utilization (Barnes et al., 2008). Increased stocking density increases instantaneous grazing pressure, but does not necessarily reduce diet quality and nutrient intake. Animals’ ability to select quality over time and space is driven by stocking rate for that period of time (Rittenhouse and Bailey, 1996), and can be changed through management (Norton, 2003).
Discussion
Grazing animals select higher quality plants first; longer grazing periods increase differential diet quality from the beginning to the end of the period, limiting the total amount of lower quality forage that can be mixed to provide a diet that meets requirements. Subdividing with a given recovery period, grazing period decreases faster than stocking density increases (Table 1); thus the proportion of available forage that animals can mix to meet requirements increases relative to a longer grazing period at lower density. To maintain animal performance and adequate plant recovery, the grazing period stocking rate should be less or equal in intensity with increasing stocking density, given equal annual stocking rates (Steffens et al., 2010).
Conclusions
Increased paddock numbers with short grazing and adequate recovery periods can change spatial heterogeneity of utilization (Barnes et al., 2008) while maintaining diet quality by keeping the grazing period stocking rate light enough to allow animals to meet their requirements (Steffens et al., 2010). Animal and plant community responses will occur more rapidly at higher stocking density and rate of forage disappearance, and the direction of those responses will be determined by adaptive management of interrelated factors (Teague et al., 2008).
Rotational stocking may reduce the selectivity of grazing animals relative to more extensive grazing methods such as continuous stocking, thus increasing grazing capacity (Norton, 1998, 2003). We tested the hypotheses that, as stocking density increased under intensive rotational stocking, grazing use would be distributed over a higher proportion of species, and the tillers of preferred species would be grazed more evenly.
Materials & Methods
At Cedar Mountain, Utah (2600 m elevation; 76 mm mean annual precipitation), during July-August, we stocked cattle on a gradient of 3 levels of decreasing paddock size and increasing stocking density, representing increasing intensity of landscape subdivision (16-, 32-, and 64-paddock rotations) at the same stocking rate: 4-, 2-, and 1-ha paddocks grazed for 4, 2, and 1 days, at 4, 8, and 16 animal units (AU)/ha (Barnes et al., 2008). We measured height of 300 marked tillers in each paddock before and after grazing. Effects of species (codominant graminoids) and treatment levels on proportions of grazed tillers were assessed with a logit model, and effects of treatment levels on standard deviation of defoliated tiller length were assessed with ANOVA (Maeno, 2002).
Results & Discussion
Utilization was light, so there was ample opportunity for cattle to express selectivity. However, there was no difference between treatment levels in proportions of species grazed (P = 0.6518), overall utilization (P = 0.58), or utilization of graminoids (P = 0.63). A strong correlation between the proportion of each species in a paddock and the utilization of that species (r = 0.822, P < 0.001) suggests that selectivity was low regardless of treatment.
Conclusions
The lack of response to the treatment gradient, and the correlation between use and availability, are consistent with the findings (Barnes et al., 2008) that the spatial heterogeneity of utilization was similar in the rotational stocking treatments, but lower than in rotationally deferred 70-ha paddocks on the same site. These results imply that the small paddocks and high stocking densities of rotational stocking can make a higher proportion of herbage effectively available relative to extensive grazing methods (Norton, 1998, 2003), but that ever higher stocking densities do not necessarily result in even lower selectivity and spatial heterogeneity of grazing.
Rotational stocking may reduce repeat grazing of preferred plants relative to more extensive grazing methods such as continuous stocking, thus increasing effective grazing capacity (Norton, 1998, 2003). We measured repeat defoliation and documented a shift in feeding choice over short grazing periods in small paddocks.
Materials & Methods
At Cedar Mountain, Utah (2600 m elevation; 76 mm mean annual precipitation), during July-August, we stocked cattle at 2 levels of decreasing paddock size and increasing stocking density, representing increasing intensity of landscape subdivision (16- and 32-paddock rotations) at the same stocking rate: 4- and 2-ha paddocks grazed for 4 and 2 days, at 4 and 8 animal units (AU)/ha, with 2 replicates (Barnes et al., 2008). We measured height of 300 marked tillers in each paddock at the beginning, midpoint, and end of the grazing periods. The differences in grazed tiller length of the 4 codominant grass species between days 2-4 of the 4-day treatment, and days 1-2 of the 2-day treatment, were assessed using one-way ANOVA for each species (Maeno, 2002).
Results & Discussion
Utilization was light, so there was ample opportunity for cattle to express selectivity. However, the proportion of tillers grazed in both the first and the second half of the grazing period was only 5.41% in the 4-day, and 3.17% in the 2-day paddocks. There were significant interactions between day and species in the 4-day (P = 0.0006) and the 2-day (P = 0.0019) grazing periods, indicating that a shift of feeding choice happened during the grazing periods. Bromus marginatus was preferred in the first and avoided in the second half, while (generally less-palatable) Achnatherum lettermanii was avoided in the first but preferred in the second half of the periods.
Conclusions
The lack of repeat defoliation is probably due to lack of regrowth during the grazing periods, and is consistent with the findings (Barnes et al., 2008) that the spatial heterogeneity of utilization was similar in the rotational stocking treatments, but lower than in rotationally deferred 70-ha paddocks on the same site. Short grazing periods, small paddocks, and high stocking densities can increase the proportion of herbage effectively available to meet nutritional requirements if livestock mix more lower-quality forage in their diet earlier in the grazing period, evening out diet quality over time (Norton, 1998, 2003; Steffens et al., 2010).
agencies, we seeded a 50/50 mix of mammoth red (Trifolium pratense var. sativum) and alsike clover (T. hybridum) on most of the irrigated mountain meadows adjacent to sagebrush rangeland in both the Gunnison Basin and Middle Park, Colorado. We seeded 4 pounds per acre in two passes by airplane: a 140-foot swath (1676 acres) in the Gunnison Basin in April 2006, and a 120-foot swath (1600 acres) in Middle Park in May 2007.A survey sent to participating Gunnison Basin landowners indicated that after 3
growing seasons, most had clover in their meadows in a “patchy” distribution, and Gunnison sage-grouse sightings were equally divided between seeded and adjacent areas. Paired monitoring plots were established along adjacent treated and untreated meadow edges in Middle Park. The amount of clover in areas with suitable conditions was higher in seeded than unseeded areas after 3 growing seasons, except where it was high prior to treatment. Greater sage-grouse pellet transects on the sagebrush side of the edge, measured pre-treatment in 2007 and post-treatment in 2009, were highly variable and did not indicate any correlation with clover production or vegetative cover, except that all sites with sage-grouse pellets had ≤ 35% total shrub foliar cover. The two collaborative projects involved 116 private landowners, represented by the Gunnison and Middle Park Conservation Districts and the Gunnison County Stockgrowers Association, along with the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Colorado State University, Colorado Division of Wildlife, and USDI Bureau of Land Management, with funding from the Colorado Division of Wildlife’s Habitat Partnership Program, the USDI Fish and Wildlife Service’s Partners for Wildlife Program, and Gunnison County.
This charge may have seemed impossible in a world of often polarized opinions. Over the course of 15 months of relationship-building, difficult conversations, and information gathering, the SAG ultimately reached consensus on a wide range of important issues that will guide CPW as wolves are returned to the state. Throughout, the SAG fostered civil discussion and understanding across differences, often resulting in strong convergence even on the most contentious issues.
In the SAG’s attempts to reach consensus, members recognized that there are areas where interests and beliefs remained disparate and there was disagreement, as will be the case with the public. However, for Colorado’s wolf program to be successful, there is a need to realize that there are real people affected by any decisions and recognize people have more in common than apart. Everything will have unintended consequences that need to be considered and can be lessened by having early conversations that lead to effective actions. Room needs to be made for individual perspectives and locally-based solutions that help resolve challenges and reduce divisions.
Across all topics, SAG members discussed the importance of achieving restoration of wolves with thriving ungulate populations, rural communities, and agricultural economies. Discussions emphasized utilizing science-based, adaptive, and impact-based management at the local level that involves leaving wolves wherever they are if they are not causing problems, minimizing conflict, and addressing issues on a case-by-case basis using a variety of management tools. SAG members also underscored the critical need for long-term funding as well as outreach and engagement to support wolf reintroduction and management.
Courtney Vail is the Campaign Director for Oceanic Preservation Society, an Advisor for the Rocky Mountain Wolf Project and has been a Senior Policy Professional for conservation and animal welfare for over 30 years.
Matt and Courtney discussed the draft of the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Wolf Management Plan that was released in early December and gave their insights on the plan as it currently stands.
He is part of the Northern Rockies Conservation Cooperative and is an Advisor for the Rocky Mountain Wolf Project.
Matt explained his rangeland management methods, how they impact livestock in positive ways opening the door for predator coexistence including wolves, bears and mountain lions.
The recent anti-predator backlash in Montana represents a reactionary swing by the far-right and a return to the failed predator policies of the early 20th Century, a stance left behind more than 50 years ago not only by the wildlife profession but also by the American public. They are the very policies that landed wolves on the federal Endangered Species list to begin with. Indeed, the new policies are expressly designed to reduce the wolf population to the minimum levels, below which federal re-listing would be triggered.
Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks has long been considered one of the leading state wildlife agencies in the Rockies, and I’ve personally been proud to work with some of your wolf and bear specialists. But, these policies make Montana appear incapable of managing its wolves, if not its wildlife in general, and are already inspiring efforts to get wolves back under federal control. As a direct result of the new policies in Montana and Idaho, and similar policies in Wyoming, more than 400 scientists have called on the federal government for emergency re-listing of wolves in the Northern Rockies, and for a new National Bison, Grizzly Bear, and Wolf Restoration Act to coordinate management of these species across state boundaries.
Research Associate Matt Barnes went in search of answers, paddling over 700 miles down the Green River from the Wind River Range to the Uinta Mountains, all the way to the Colorado River, a journey covered in High Country News.
The event, the first of its kind, was part of the Society for Range Management annual meeting, held in Denver this year. The Practicum was the culmination of an overtly re-envisioned conference themed “Transformation and Translation,” designed to be both more ground-breaking and more directly applicable by land managers, while continuing its longstanding history of leading-edge applied science.
Editor's note-Recent articles in Cow-Calf Weekly and BEEF magazine addressing wolf depredation of livestock and possible recourses generated some response from our readers, some of it heated. The debate began with an article written by Temple Grandin reporting on a variety of presentations at a Society for Range Management meeting. One of those presentations discussed non-lethal ways that ranchers can deal with wolf depredations of livestock. Matt Barnes, author of the paper presented at the SRM meeting that became the genesis of the follow-up articles in BEEF, offers this response. You can read Barnes' original paper here, which goes into greater depth on the ideas he presents in this counterpoint article.
Progressive rangeland managers are increasingly turning to the ancient art of herding — moving a single large group of animals across the landscape, using low-stress stockmanship — to prevent overuse of preferred areas and allow plants sufficient recovery time before they are grazed again.
A cluster of progressive ranchers are using herding to restore the
rangelands of Colorado's Western Slope, particularly on of the Gunnison
National Forest, under the stewardship of Paonia Ranger District
rangeland management specialist Dave Bradford.
I recently spent a day with Bradford on the West Terror, one of the
grazing allotments he manages. The permittee, the Campbell and Sons
Ranch, was gathering their cattle to ship their calves. I was there to learn
about the Campbells' grazing management and herding techniques,
methods that have enhanced rangeland health on their allotment as well
as the neighboring West Elk allotment, for which both permittees have
won the Forest Service's National Range Management Award, as well as
the Excellence in Range Management Award from the Colorado Section of the Society for Range Management.