Hydrologic and Biotic Effects of Grazing vs. Non-Grazing near Grand Junction, Colorado

Lusby, Gregg C.

doi:10.2307/3896216

Cited by 37 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…But erosion rates as evidenced by measured sediment yields from shale areas were much greater. A later report on these highly erodible Mancos shale watersheds (Lusby, 1970) showed the effect of normal grazing versus no grazing. Over a 12-1/2-yr period, grazed watershed sediment yields averaged 9.5 tons/acre/yr compared with 6.5 tons/acre/yr for ungrazed areas.…”

Section: Erosion On Western Rangelandsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Sedimentation Engineering

2006

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Erosion On Western Rangelandsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Sedimentation Engineering

2006

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…We emphasize again that livestock trampling can be a major cause of soil loss and sedimentation (Lusby 1970), and grazing must be carefully managed. West (1982) and others suggest salt-desert shrub ranges will likely remain largely as wildlands with extensive management based on ecological restraints and economic constraints.…”

Section: Soil Stabilizationmentioning

confidence: 97%

Managing lntermountain rangelands - salt-desert shrub ranges

Blaisdell¹,

Holmgren²

1984

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PREFACEManagers and users of salt-desert shrub rangelands will find this publication to be a reference summary to aid in planning and decisionmaking. This is not a comprehensive literature review, but rather a distillation of some of the most useful information for on-the-ground management. Two manuals- Hutchings and Stewart (1953) and Hutchings (1954)-were based on the early years of grazing research at the USDA Forest Service's Desert Experimental Range (DER). They have been valuable guides for managers for three decades and, although out of print, are still useful. More recent experience at the DER, as well as much research information from other sources, warrants the broader updated summary in this publication.Because much of the content herein derives from work at one location in the eastern part of the Great Basin-the DER-specific results may not all be directly appl icable to other salt-desert shrub areas. Although general concepts, principles, and recommendations can be extended to distant salt-desert shrub lands, caution and professional judgment should be exercised in extrapolating the particulars. RESEARCH SUMMARYSalt-desert shrub rangelands cover some 40 million acres (16 million ha) of the Intermountain West. Much of this land was misused and damaged by unsound grazing practices in pioneer times and well into the 20th century.Although productivity of the desert is low, the high quality of the range forage produced and the vastness of the area make the desert an important part of the regional resource base. Its principal value is in the annual harvest of feed by livestock. The ecosystem is fragile and easily disrupted by improper use, but under good management, deterioration can be reversed, condition can improve, and areas still in good condition can remain so under grazing use.A grazing system compatible with other values of salt-desert shrub lands is one where grazing allotments are used as winter and early spring range, with each allotment grazed as several small units, each unit to be fully and properly harvested during one short period before the animals move on to the next one. With annual rotation of season of use of units and frequent years of rest from grazing on some of them, the harvest can be taken without detriment to soil stability, wildlife and game can thrive in their natural habitat, and the esthetic quality of the desert's vast emptiness can be enjoyed.

show abstract

“…Lusby (1970) for example recorded the effects of grazing by comparing grazed and ungrazed catchments near Grand Junction, Colorado. Measurements made ten years apart showed that cover on ungrazed watersheds had remained virtually unchanged.…”

Section: Grazingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptual issues in environmental archaeology

1989

Choice Reviews Online

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hydrologic and Biotic Effects of Grazing vs. Non-Grazing near Grand Junction, Colorado

Cited by 37 publications

References 0 publications

Sedimentation Engineering

Sedimentation Engineering

Managing lntermountain rangelands - salt-desert shrub ranges

Conceptual issues in environmental archaeology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About