1. Grazing can have considerable ecological impacts when managed inappropriately, however livestock production is a significant contributor to global food security and the removal of land from production is not always a viable option. Grazing management practices that incorporate periods of planned rest (i.e. strategic-rest grazing) may be an alternative to grazing exclusion or continuous grazing that could achieve ecological and animal production outcomes simultaneously.2. We conducted a meta-analysis of global literature to investigate how strategic-rest grazing mediates ecological (i.e., plant richness and diversity), biophysical (plant biomass and ground cover) and production response variables (animal weight gain and animal production per hectare) compared to continuously grazed or ungrazed areas.3. Overall, total ground cover and animal production per hectare were significantly greater under strategic-rest grazing than continuous grazing management, but biomass, plant richness, plant diversity and animal weight gain did not differ between grazing treatments. Increasing the length of rest relative to graze time under strategic-rest grazing was associated with an increase in plant biomass, ground cover, animal weight gain and animal production per hectare when compared to continuous grazing. Synthesis and applications.Understanding both the ecological and animal production trade-offs associated with different grazing management strategies is essential to make informed decisions about best-management practices for the world's grazing lands. We show that incorporating periods of rest into grazing regimes improves ground cover and animal production per hectare and that these benefits are more pronounced with increases in the length of time land is rested for. This extended rest also improves biomass production and weight gain compared to continuous grazing systems. Based on these meta-analyses, we recommend that future research considers the duration of rest compared to graze time in comparisons of grazing systems.

No abstract

Demonstrating sustainable land management (SLM) requires an understanding of the linkages between grazing management and environmental stewardship. Grazing management practices that incorporate strategic periods of rest are promoted internationally as best practice. However, spatial and temporal trends in unmanaged feral (goat) and native (kangaroo) populations in the southern Australian rangelands can result land managers having, at times, control over less than half the grazing pressure, precluding the ability to rest pastures. Few empirical studies have examined the impacts of total grazing pressure (TGP) on biodiversity and resource condition, while the inability to manage grazing intensity at critical times may result in negative impacts on ground cover, changes in pasture species composition, increased rates of soil loss and reduce the ability for soils to store carbon. The widespread adoption of TGP control through exclusion fencing in the southern Australian rangelands has created unprecedented opportunities to manage total grazing pressure, although there is little direct evidence that this infrastructure leads to more sustainable land management. Here we identify several key indicators that are either outcome- or activity-based that could serve as a basis for verification of the impacts of TGP management. Since TGP is the basic determinant of the impact of herbivory on vegetation it follows that the ability for rangeland pastoral management to demonstrate SLM and environmental stewardship will rely on using evidence-based indicators to support environmental social licence to operate.

Australia’s rangeland communities, industries, and environment are under increasing pressures from anthropogenic activities and global changes more broadly. We conducted a horizon scan to identify and prioritise key challenges facing Australian rangelands and their communities, and outline possible avenues to address these challenges, with a particular focus on research priorities. We surveyed participants of the Australian Rangeland Society 20th Biennial Conference, held in Canberra in September 2019, before the conference and in interactive workshops during the conference, in order to identify key challenges, potential solutions, and research priorities. The feedback was broadly grouped into six themes associated with supporting local communities, managing natural capital, climate variability and change, traditional knowledge, governance, and research and development. Each theme had several sub-themes and potential solutions to ensure positive, long-term outcomes for the rangelands. The survey responses made it clear that supporting ‘resilient and sustainable rangelands that provide cultural, societal, environmental and economic outcomes simultaneously’ is of great value to stakeholders. The synthesis of survey responses combined with expert knowledge highlighted that sustaining local communities in the long term will require that the inherent social, cultural and natural capital of rangelands are managed sustainably, particularly in light of current and projected variability in climate. Establishment of guidelines and approaches to address these challenges will benefit from: (i) an increased recognition of the value and contributions of traditional knowledge and practices; (ii) development of better governance that is guided by and benefits local stakeholders; and (iii) more funding to conduct and implement strong research and development activities, with research focused on addressing critical knowledge gaps as identified by the local stakeholders. This requires strong governance with legislation and policies that work for the rangelands. We provide a framework that indicates the key knowledge gaps and how innovations may be implemented and scaled out, up and deep to achieve the resilience of Australia’s rangelands. The same principles could be adapted to address challenges in rangelands on other continents, with similar beneficial outcomes.