Livestock Grazing, Wildlife Habitat, and Rangeland Values

Krausman, Paul R.; Naugle, David E.; Frisina, Michael R.; Northrup, Rick; Bleich, Vernon C.; Block, William M.; Wallace, Mark C.; Wright, Jeffrey D.

doi:10.2111/1551-501x-31.5.15

Cited by 63 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Rangelands provide habitat for a diversity of wildlife and grouse species (Krausman et al., ). Livestock grazing is not only the predominant use of rangelands (Alkemade et al., ), but has been implicated in declines of grouse populations (Baines, ; Boyd et al., ; Calladine et al., ; Jenkins & Watson, ; Warren & Baines, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, stocking rates were not comparable across biomes. Understanding the effects of stocking rates in similar vegetation communities can help inform land‐use management decisions regarding the effect of grazing management on wildlife (Dahlgren et al., ; Krausman et al., ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Livestock grazing systems are a complex combination of factors that include animal type, stocking rate, animal distribution, timing, duration, frequency, and many more (Briske et al., ; Heitschmidt & Walker, ; Teague et al., ; Veblen, Nehring, McGlone, & Ritchie, ; Veblen & Young, ). Livestock grazing may not be invariably “good” or “bad” for wildlife—rather, there can be positive, negative, or benign effects dependent on aforementioned factors in combination with soil conditions, precipitation, plant community, and the organism of concern (Krausman et al., ). Livestock grazing can have direct negative effects on grouse including destruction of habitat, trampling eggs, nest abandonment, and reducing food availability (Beck & Mitchell, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of livestock grazing on rangeland biodiversity: A meta‐analysis of grouse populations

Dettenmaier

Messmer

Hovick

et al. 2017

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Livestock grazing affects over 60% of the world's agricultural lands and can influence rangeland ecosystem services and the quantity and quality of wildlife habitat, resulting in changes in biodiversity. Concomitantly, livestock grazing has the potential to be detrimental to some wildlife species while benefiting other rangeland organisms. Many imperiled grouse species require rangeland landscapes that exhibit diverse vegetation structure and composition to complete their life cycle. However, because of declining populations and reduced distributions, grouse are increasingly becoming a worldwide conservation concern. Grouse, as a suite of upland gamebirds, are often considered an umbrella species for other wildlife and thus used as indicators of rangeland health. With a projected increase in demand for livestock products, better information will be required to mitigate the anthropogenic effects of livestock grazing on rangeland biodiversity. To address this need, we completed a data‐driven and systematic review of the peer‐reviewed literature to determine the current knowledge of the effects of livestock grazing on grouse populations (i.e., chick production and population indices) worldwide. Our meta‐analysis revealed an overall negative effect of livestock grazing on grouse populations. Perhaps more importantly, we identified an information void regarding the effects of livestock grazing on the majority of grouse species. Additionally, the reported indirect effects of livestock grazing on grouse species were inconclusive and more reflective of differences in the experimental design of the available studies. Future studies designed to evaluate the direct and indirect effects of livestock grazing on wildlife should document (i) livestock type, (ii) timing and frequency of grazing, (iii) duration, and (iv) stocking rate. Much of this information was lacking in the available published studies we reviewed, but is essential when making comparisons between different livestock grazing management practices and their potential impacts on rangeland biodiversity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of livestock grazing on rangeland biodiversity: A meta‐analysis of grouse populations

Dettenmaier

Messmer

Hovick

et al. 2017

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Extensive livestock use has contributed to the conversion of southern New Mexico from grasslands to creosote and mesquite (typically not bighorn forage species) dominated scrubland (Grover and Musick ). Although stocking levels were reduced in the mid‐ to late‐20th century (Grover and Musick ), historical intensive livestock use negatively affected rangeland soils and vegetation (Grover and Musick , Holechek et al , Gibbens et al , Krausman et al ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sympatric cattle grazing and desert bighorn sheep foraging

Garrison

Cain

Rominger³

2015

J Wildl Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Foraging behavior affects animal fitness and is largely dictated by the resources available to an animal. Understanding factors that affect forage resources is important for conservation and management of wildlife. Cattle sympatry is proposed to limit desert bighorn population performance, but few studies have quantified the effect of cattle foraging on bighorn forage resources or foraging behavior by desert bighorn. We estimated forage biomass for desert bighorn sheep in 2 mountain ranges: the cattle‐grazed Caballo Mountains and the ungrazed San Andres Mountains, New Mexico. We recorded foraging bout efficiency of adult females by recording feeding time/step while foraging, and activity budgets of 3 age‐sex classes (i.e., adult males, adult females, yearlings). We also estimated forage biomass at sites where bighorn were observed foraging. We expected lower forage biomass in the cattle‐grazed Caballo range than in the ungrazed San Andres range and lower biomass at cattle‐accessible versus inaccessible areas within the Caballo range. We predicted bighorn would be less efficient foragers in the Caballo range. Groundcover forage biomass was low in both ranges throughout the study (Jun 2012–Nov 2013). Browse biomass, however, was 4.7 times lower in the Caballo range versus the San Andres range. Bighorn in the Caballo range exhibited greater overall daily travel time, presumably to locate areas of higher forage abundance. By selecting areas with greater forage abundance, adult females in the Caballo range exhibited foraging bout efficiency similar to their San Andres counterparts but lower overall daily browsing time. We did not find a significant reduction in forage biomass at cattle‐accessible areas in the Caballo range. Only the most rugged areas in the Caballo range had abundant forage, potentially a result of intensive historical livestock use in less rugged areas. Forage conditions in the Caballo range apparently force bighorn to increase foraging effort by feeding only in areas where adequate forage remains. © 2015 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

“…In fact, grazing activities can have opposite effects on the biodiversity of both plant and animal communities depending on grazing management, intensity and the characteristics of the affected area (e.g. Rook and Tallowin 2003, Cingolani et al 2005, Branson et al 2006, Debano 2006, Dumont et al 2009, Krausman et al 2009, Báldi et al 2013. Grazing contributes to habitat heterogeneity for Orthoptera when moderate (Fartmann et al 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of grazing on populations of the specialist grasshopper Mioscirtus wagneri inhabiting hypersaline habitats in La Mancha Region, Central Spain

Aguirre¹,

Ortego²

2018

JOR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grazing is an influential land use that has introduced profound changes in worldwide landscapes, ecosystems and their species. In this paper, we analysed the influence of grazing on the presence and abundance of the endangered Mioscirtus wagneri, a monophagous grasshopper inhabiting inland hypersaline ecosystems in Spain and showing a marked spatial and genetic fragmentation. Using count transects, we analyzed the presence and abundance of this grasshopper in relation to specific vegetation cover and the abundance of goat and sheep droppings, considering this variable as a surrogate of livestock activity and grazing impact. We found that both the presence and abundance of M. wagneri were positively related to the cover of its host plant Suaeda vera and negatively associated with the abundance of droppings. We conclude that dropping abundance is a useful parameter to assess livestock impact and evaluate habitat quality and the conservation status of M. wagneri and many other singular species of macroinvertebrates inhabiting inland hypersaline ecosystems. We highly recommend the use of electric shepherd fencing around all sensitive and protected areas where inland hypersaline ecosystems are present in order to deter livestock. We also suggest intensive educational campaigns for farmers and shepherds, revealing the ecological importance of these singular and unique habitats for rare and exclusive species like M. wagneri and many other coexisting plants and invertebrates. Key wordsCastilla-La Mancha, conservation, grazing management, inland hypersaline ecosystems, livestock droppings, Suaeda vera IntroductionHistorical and current grazing activities are an important influence on the landscape and, thus, on plant and animal community composition (González Bernáldez 1981, Blondel andAronson 1999). However, intense grazing activities may alter the soil, exerting a negative impact on species biodiversity (Fleischner 1994). Intensive browsing, trampling, and resting on the ground can have a negative impact on the vegetation cover, increasing the proportion of bare soil and aggravating the effects of periods of drought (Ledesma 2000, Gardiner andHaines 2008). However, other studies have found an opposite effect (Kisbenedek 1995, Pocco et al. 2010. In fact, grazing activities can have opposite effects on the biodiversity of both plant and animal communities depending on grazing management, intensity and the characteristics of the affected area (e.g. Rook and Tallowin 2003, Cingolani et al. 2005, Branson et al. 2006, Debano 2006, Dumont et al. 2009, Krausman et al. 2009, Báldi et al. 2013. Grazing contributes to habitat heterogeneity for Orthoptera when moderate (Fartmann et al. 2012). However, the influence of grazing on the abundance of orthopterans varies with grazing management and season (Gebeyehu and Samways 2003). Different studies have found that rotational grazing may be beneficial for orthopteran communities whereas total absence of grazing may be negative for orthopteran populations in other cases (Gebeye...

show abstract

Livestock Grazing, Wildlife Habitat, and Rangeland Values

Cited by 63 publications

References 22 publications

Effects of livestock grazing on rangeland biodiversity: A meta‐analysis of grouse populations

Effects of livestock grazing on rangeland biodiversity: A meta‐analysis of grouse populations

Sympatric cattle grazing and desert bighorn sheep foraging

Influence of grazing on populations of the specialist grasshopper Mioscirtus wagneri inhabiting hypersaline habitats in La Mancha Region, Central Spain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About