Shorten livestock grazing period or control grazing season in forests

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
  • Certainty
  • Harms

Study locations

Key messages

  • One replicated, controlled study in Spain found that shortening the livestock grazing period increased the abundance and size of regenerating oak trees.
  • One paired-sites study in Australia found no effect of shortening the livestock grazing period on native plant species richness.
  • One replicated study in the UK found that the number of tree seedlings was higher following summer compared to winter grazing.


About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A replicated study in 1986-1993 in temperate woodland in the UK (Hester, Mitchell & Kirby 1996) found thatusingsummer instead of winter grazing increased the number of tree seedlings. The number of seedlings was higher following summer (8-17/100 m2) compared to following winter grazing (4-6/100 m2). Six summer (May-October) and six winter grazing (October-May) plots were established in 1986. Seedlings (>1 year old, <30 cm diameter at breast height) were monitored in 2003 in 20 quadrats (10 × 10 m) within each plot.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A paired-sites study in 2006 in temperate woodland in south-eastern Australia (Dorrough et al. 2012) found no effect of different grazing regimes on native plant species richness. The number of native plant species/plot was similar between treatments (continuous-grazing: 18; rotational-grazing: 15). Monitoring was in two continuous-grazing (livestock had unrestricted access) and two rotational-grazing (<56 days grazing followed by >21 days with no grazing) plots (1 ha) in each of 12 sites (a total of 48 plots).

    Study and other actions tested
  3. A replicated study in Mediterranean open woodland in Spain (Carmona et al. 2013) found that seasonal grazing increased the abundance and height of oak saplings compared to permanent grazing. Percentage cover of young oaks (seasonal grazing: 9%; permanent: <1%) and young oak height (seasonal: 80 cm; permanent: 40 cm), and density of young and old oak saplings (seasonal: 100-80 saplings/ha; permanent: 20 saplings/ha) were higher with seasonal than permanent grazing. Two to six sites were located in each of nine permanently grazed areas (grazed throughout the year) and nine areas grazed seasonally December to May. Each area was 20-480 ha and had been grazed in the ten years before treatment. Monitoring was in four 3 × 3 m plots in each site.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Agra, H., Schowanek, S., Carmel, Y., Smith, R.K. & Ne’eman, G. (2020) Forest Conservation. Pages 323-366 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2020. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.


Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Forest Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Forest Conservation
Forest Conservation

Forest Conservation - Published 2016

Forest synopsis

What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust