27 research outputs found

    Plant Community Composition after 75 Yr of Sustained Grazing Intensity Treatments in Shortgrass Steppe

    No full text
    Plant community responses to livestock grazing lack conformity across studies, even those conducted within similar ecosystems. Variability in outcomes can often be traced back to short-termor mid-termweather patterns, differences in grazing timing or intensity, or interactive effects of management and weather. Long-term experimental data are needed to determine howgrazing intensity affects plant community composition in semiarid ecosystems where precipitation is low and highly variable. However, long-term grazing intensity experiments, particularly experiments with more than two grazing intensity treatment levels, are quite rare. We capitalized on one of the longest-term grazing studies, with 75 yr of sustained stocking rate treatments (none, light, moderate, and heavy), to identify long-term effects of livestock grazing on plant community composition in shortgrass steppe. Plant community compositionwas similar betweenmoderately and heavily grazed pastures after 75 yr of continuous, season-long (May to October) grazing treatments, and heavy grazing did not extirpate cool-season perennial graminoids. These findings support the long-termsustainability of livestock grazing in the shortgrass steppe, which has high resistance to season-long heavy grazing. Conversely, ungrazed and lightly grazed pastures experienced relatively large shifts in plant community composition, especially in the past 25 yr. Light or no grazing was associated with increased abundance of cool-season perennial graminoids, as well as several weedy and invasive species. Moreover, across most grazing treatments, several aspects of plant community composition have been shifting directionally during the past 25 yr, which recent experiments in this grassland suggest may be a response to increasing atmospheric (CO2). The shortgrass steppe is not only tolerant of fairly high grazing intensities but also likely requires some level of grazing to resist invasion byweedy annuals and to maintain cover of blue grama, a highly drought-tolerant species. © Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of The Society for Range Management.The Rangeland Ecology & Management archives are made available by the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact [email protected] for further information

    Collaborative Adaptive Rangeland Management Fosters Management-Science Partnerships

    No full text
    Rangelands of the western Great Plains of North America are complex social-ecological systems where management objectives for livestock production, grassland bird conservation, and vegetation structure and composition converge. The Collaborative Adaptive Rangeland Management (CARM) experiment is a 10-year collaborative adaptive management (CAM) project initiated in 2012 that is aimed at fostering science-management partnerships and data-driven rangeland management through a participatory, multistakeholder approach. This study evaluates the decision-making process that emerged from the first 4 yr of CARM. Our objectives were to 1) document how diverse stakeholder experiences, epistemologies, and resulting knowledge contributed to the CARM project, 2) evaluate how coproduced knowledge informed management decision making through three grazing seasons, and 3) explore the implications of participation in the CARM project for rangeland stakeholders. We evaluated management decision making as representatives from government agencies and conservation nongovernmental organizations, ranchers, and interdisciplinary researchers worked within the CARM experiment to 1) prioritize desired ecosystem services; 2) determine objectives; 3) set stocking rates, criteria for livestock movement among pastures, and vegetation treatments; and 4) select monitoring techniques that would inform decision making. For this paper, we analyzed meeting transcripts, interviews, and focus group data related to stakeholder group decision making. We find two key lessons from the CARM project. First, the CAM process makes visible, but does not reconcile differences between, stakeholder experiences and ways of knowing about complex rangeland systems. Second, social learning in CAM is contingent on the development of trust among stakeholder and researcher groups. We suggest future CAM efforts should 1) make direct efforts to share and acknowledge managers’ different rangeland management experiences, epistemologies, and knowledge and 2) involve long-term research commitment in time and funding to social, as well as experimental, processes that promote trust building among stakeholders and researchers over time.The Rangeland Ecology & Management archives are made available by the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact [email protected] for further information

    Soil Health as a Transformational Change Agent for US Grazing Lands Management

    No full text
    There is rapidly growing national interest in grazing lands’ soil health, which has been motivated by the current soil health renaissance in cropland agriculture. In contrast to intensively managed croplands, soil health for grazing lands, especially rangelands, is tempered by limited scientific evidence clearly illustrating positive feedbacks between soil health and grazing land resilience, or sustainability. Opportunities exist for improving soil health on grazing lands with intensively managed plant communities (e.g., pasture systems) and formerly cultivated or degraded lands. Therefore, the goal of this paper is to provide direction and recommendations for incorporating soil health into grazing management considerations on grazing lands. We argue that the current soil health renaissance should not focus on improvement of soil health on grazing lands where potential is limited but rather forward science-based management for improving grazing lands’ resilience to environmental change via 1) refocusing grazing management on fundamental ecological processes (water and nutrient cycling and energy flow) rather than maximum short-term profit or livestock production; 2) emphasizing goal-based management with adaptive decision making informed by specific objectives incorporating maintenance of soil health at a minimum and directly relevant monitoring attributes; 3) advancing holistic and integrated approaches for soil health that highlight social-ecological-economic interdependencies of these systems, with particular emphasis on human dimensions; 4) building cross-institutional partnerships on grazing lands’ soil health to enhance technical capacities of students, land managers, and natural resource professionals; and 5) creating a cross-region, living laboratory network of case studies involving producers using soil health as part of their grazing land management. Collectively, these efforts could foster transformational changes by strengthening the link between natural resources stewardship and sustainable grazing lands management through management-science partnerships in a social-ecological systems framework.The Rangeland Ecology & Management archives are made available by the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact [email protected] for further information
    corecore