Study

A 4-pasture deferred rotation system produces the most desirable livestock and wildlife habitat on grasslands of the Edwards Plateau, Texas, USA

  • Published source details Reardon P.O. & Merrill L.B. (1976) Vegetative response under various grazing management systems in the Edwards Plateau of Texas. Journal of Range Management, 29, 195-198

Summary

Grassland forage production under five different grazing management schemes (on natural areas and areas grazed by domestic livestock and wildlife) was compared after 20 years of treatment in the Edwards Plateau region of Texas, southwest USA.

The grazing regimes (initiated in 1949) were:

 
1) continuous heavy grazing with cattle, sheep and goats at 48 AU (animal units)/section (640 acres; 259 ha);
 
2) continuous light grazing with cattle, sheep and goats at 16 AU/section;
 
3) no livestock grazing, deer grazing only (livestock exclosure);
 
4) no livestock or deer grazing (deer-livestock exclosure);
 
5) moderately grazed 4-pasture deferred rotation system stocked with cattle, sheep and goats.
 
 
Forage yields were estimated by clipping 20 (9.6 ft²; 0.89 m²) plots in each pasture in autumn, air drying and weighing. Samples were divided into four groups: decreasers (i.e. species which decrease under excessive grazing pressure); increasers and others; forbs, and weeds.

Forage yields (live plants and litter) were lower on a natural area than under deferred rotation or light grazing. More decreaser plants were found in deferred rotation pastures. Forbs and weeds on the heavily grazed pasture were of little forage value, and were comprised 90% bitterweed Hymenoxys odorata (a native herb, poisonous to livestock, especially sheep).

Forage yields (lb/acre) by grazing regime (1-5) were: 1 - 958; 2 - 1,988; 3 - 1,795; 4 - 1,422; and 5 - 2,195.
 
Overall, the 4-pasture deferred rotation system allowed development of a highly productive herbaceous vegetation community and was considered to produce (maintain or improve) the most desirable livestock and wildlife habitat on the study grasslands.
 
 
Note: If using or referring to this published study, please read and quote the original paper, this can be viewed at: https://www.uair.arizona.edu/holdings/journal/issue?r=http://jrm.library.arizona.edu/Volume29/Number3/

Output references

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, terrestrial 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 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust