Study

Livestock Grazing, Golden Trout, and Streams in the Golden Trout Wilderness, California: Impacts and Management Implications

  • Published source details Knapp R.A. & Matthews K.R. (1996) Livestock Grazing, Golden Trout, and Streams in the Golden Trout Wilderness, California: Impacts and Management Implications. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 16, 805-820

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Other biodiversity: Exclude grazers

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland
  1. Other biodiversity: Exclude grazers

    A replicated site comparison in 1993–1994 in alpine meadows in central California, USA, found more golden trout Oncorhynchus mykiss aguabonita in streams, and more willows on stream banks, in areas of meadows from which cattle were excluded, compared to grazed areas. Ungrazed plots also contained larger willows and more young willows. Fish: More golden trout were found in streams in ungrazed plots, compared those in three of four grazed plots (1.4–2.7 vs 1.3–2.2 fish/m2). Golden trout biomass was higher in streams in ungrazed plots, compared those in three of four grazed plots (20–21 vs 16–18 g/m2). Plants: Ungrazed plots contained more willows than grazed plots (124–246 vs 11–70 trees/125 m of bank), and contained larger willows than three of four grazed plots (140–220 vs 20–70 cm height for largest tree). Young willows less than 20 cm were more abundant in ungrazed plots (16–134 vs 1–8 trees/125 m of bank). Canopy shading over streams was higher in ungrazed plots, for three of four plots (32–35% vs 2–24% shading). Methods: Fences were erected in 1983 and 1991 in two meadows to exclude cattle from a total of three areas. Fish and vegetation were monitored in 125 m sections either upstream or downstream of the exclosures and inside them (a total of seven sites, three ungrazed) in August 1993–1994. Fish were surveyed by electrofishing and vegetation using transects every 5 m along the stream. Areas outside the exclosures were grazed by cattle in July and September.

     

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