Jeffory Carney (Research, Diagram, Impact on Biodiversity, Case Studies)

Joel Long (Research, Sustainable Methods and Proper Grazing, Literature

Review)
Tanya Herrera (Research, Social Factors involving Overgrazing, Literature
Review, Case Study)

Aspects of Livestock Grazing in Idaho

Forestry 235
Assignment 3

Jeffory Carney
Joel Long
Tanya Herrera
Assignment 3 Aspects of Livestock Grazing in Idaho
As one of the most significant contributors to the agricultural industry in
the United States, 70 percent of land in the western states alone is used for
livestock grazing. Livestock grazing occurs in a variety of ecosystems ranging
from creosote brush desert to forests consisting primarily of Ponderosa Pine
species mix. Throughout the United States, grazing occurs on federal land
which is managed by the Bureau of Land Management and the US Forest
Service. While the Bureau of Land Management manages an astonishing 245
million acres, double that of any other land management agency, only 160
million acres is permitted to use for grazing (Bureau of Land Management).
The Idaho Department of Lands manages approximately 2 million acres,
which is primarily found in southern Idaho (Idaho Department of Lands). Each
agency has laws, policies, and regulations which permit holders must follow
to properly manage this resource. While livestock grazing is a major
contributor Idahos economy, livestock grazing also has a significant impact
on biodiversity, which can be negatively impacted if not for the management
practices that prevent overgrazing.
Livestock grazing impacts biodiversity through the loss of vegetation,
such as sage brush, which is essential to the survival of small mammals
(Reynolds & Trost, 1980). A study done by Reynolds and Trost covered two
varying ecosystems, including sagebrush steps. The study included plotting
out areas that were grazed and those adjacent to areas close to grazing. This
process was repeated in plated and established wheat grass communities.
The results found that species such as birds and large mammals did not have
a significant difference in biodiversity in areas that were grazed compared to
areas not actively grazed; however, with areas actively grazed by livestock,

the behavior of birds did change. In areas that were actively grazed by
livestock, nest building done by birds was delayed by two weeks, compared
to non-grazed areas which were used as the control in the study, nest
building was done two weeks earlier. The conclusions that Reynolds and
Trost found that biodiversity went unchanged in the species due to having a
wide range of area that is traveled in order to find food, water, and to mate.
The species most affected were small mammals, such as rodents, and
vegetation where density and diversity were impacted by grazing. In the
sagebrush steps, small mammals had a fifty percent reduction in biodiversity,
along with a 16 percent drop in density (Trost & Reynolds, 1980). Reynolds
and Trost found that the primary reason causing a drop in diversity and
density were a result of loss in seed heads, which is the primary source of
food, and loss in grass cover. Compared to the impact on vegetation, a nongrazed area with 160 sampled plots, 31 varying species were found. In
actively grazed areas, with the same amount of sampled plots, only nine
different species of plants were found. Plant diversity in this particular area
suffered an overwhelming 70 percent reduction (Trost & Reynolds, 1980).
In another case study, according to a study by Vernon Young, the
mismanagement and overstocking of western grazing lands, 589 million of
the 728 million acres are eroding more or less due to overgrazing (Soil
Erosion in Relation to Overgrazing in Idaho). As a result of logging and
unmanaged watersheds, soil continues to be degraded. Youngs study found
that in areas that once had an abundance of forage species, such as brome,
wheat, and fescue grasses, compared with newly planted annual grasses, the
soil binding has quickly changed. Where forage species have fibrous root
systems that help bind soil, annual grasses are not equipped to bind soil or to
handle livestock grazing. Another factor that plays into soil erosion also
includes wildfire. Land where wildfires have occurred and were later
overgrazed have resulted in the removal of a key organic portion of soil, called
the substratum. This causes mountain streams to be significantly altered,
further causing the necessary forage species to die as a result of drought.
As both case studies exemplify the need to incorporate Aldo Leopolds
The Land Ethic, which takes into account a societys need to take full control
of the land due to the failure to educate people about their obligations to the

land to sustainably manage it. Leopold explains that people know right from
wrong when it comes to living in a community, but when it comes to the land,
which encompasses all living things such as animals and plants, people
cannot always distinguish what is right from wrong. In order to protect
biodiversity, which has been impacted negatively by grazing, a certain
understanding has to come from farmers and ranchers that rely on livestock
grazing. Too frequently, people place more importance on what they can get
out of the land, such as economic value, rather than protecting the land as an
invaluable resource.
In the case of Joyce Livestock Company versus the United States, a
cattle operation company located in Owyhee County, Idaho, argued that they
had long established water rights, prior to the Taylor Grazing Act being
implemented. While the Taylor Grazing Act set terms which ranchers had to
follow, such as whether or not water could be used and how much of it. The
act was created to set regulations and give out permits to ranchers, who had
to follow the terms of the act. While Idaho state law backed Joyce Livestock,
due to the watershed belonging to the company that owned the property, the
company saw more economic value in their property rather than the
protection of the watershed, just as Leopold explained in The Land Ethic.
As a result of the significant impact on biodiversity, several
controversies affect federal agencies such as the Idaho Department of Lands,
the US Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management, who struggle to
meet all public interests (Bock, Saab, Rich, & Dobkin, 1993). In particular, the
economic views of grazing and those of conservationists differ completely.
Prior to the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, the majority of farm land was under
US Forest Service management, leaving only half a billion acres in 17 western
states. The remaining acreage eventually became part of the BLM (Bureau of
Land Management). While Idahos livestock was not under control and land
was open range, soil conditions were heavily degraded and weeds grew
more abundantly. According to the BLM, in 1934, President Roosevelt signed
the Taylor Grazing Act to prevent soil degradation and overgrazing, along with
attempting to stabilize the livestock industry dependent on public range
(USDI, 1988). Particular sections of the act covered issues such as grazing
permits to give preference to landowners and homesteaders, or those living

next to grazing district lands. From the 125 years ago where grazing was not
controlled under the use of permits, Idahos rangeland conditions have
improved significantly due to monitoring (Rangelands: An Introduction to
Open Spaces). While grazing in Idaho has changed due to the regulations
implemented by the effects of the Taylor Grazing Act, the causes of
overgrazing have been driven by economic and social forces.
Before the signing of the Taylor Grazing Act, there were no regulations
to help monitor grazing or livestock numbers, which led to a similar effect
explained in the Tragedy of the Commons, by Garrett Hardin. Hardin explains
how individuals pursue their own economic self-interests, in an open access
resource, which in this case was the land that was grazed. The result is the
effects of overgrazing, such as an impact on a reduction in biodiversity. The
only way to minimize and prevent overgrazing was through the Taylor Grazing
Act, which set permits out to individuals that had to follow specific terms. The
need to overgrazing previously came from having an open-access resource
and from strong economic factors.
The Brundland Report, relates environmental degradation to economic
patterns. During the 1800s, farmers began widespread use of grazing to help
evolve the agricultural industry into Idaho. This pattern in economics began
with the use of farming in other states, which eventually spread into Idaho. As
agriculture further developed in Idaho, the land slowly began deteriorating
with overgrazing. As mentioned in Our Common Future, Development
cannot subsist upon a deteriorating environmental resource base; the
environment cannot be protected when growth leaves out the costs of
environmental destruction. (Our Common Future, 1987). The environment
was not protected until the implementation of the Taylor Grazing Act, through
the use of permits. The need to protect such an invaluable resource took into
account how heavily the soil was degraded and how biodiversity was
changing.
Other reasons why overgrazing occurs frequently is because
government subsidies provide an incentive for farmers to gain more money
this way. Without understanding the value of ecosystem services and setting
preference on the economic value, land goes on being deteriorated
regardless of the number of ecosystem services being provided. Costanza

mentions essential ecosystem services such as climate regulation, nutrient

cycling, soil formation, and water supply. Each essential service is
accomplished by the soil that is also used for grazing. When the soil is
overgrazed, the essential ecosystem services are done at a much slower rate.
Despite the economic forces that often drive overgrazing leading to a
negative impact on overgrazing, the proper way of grazing can have long
lasting positive effects on the land creating a sustainable form of grazing. In
managing and monitoring grazing, herbivores play a vital role. Herbivores,
which consume plants, leaves, stems, and roots, can affect plant
composition, structure and productivity. As the awareness of invasive plant
species has grown due to the role of livestock spreading the invasive species,
this has prompted a desire to remove livestock from public rangelands;
however, other areas are now welcoming back livestock in an effort to battle
weeds and restore ecological health (Gladwell, 2000). Given the correlation
between livestock grazing and plant invasion, grazing animals can provide
more effective and sustainable weed control over herbicides alone, along with
improving pasture quality with less of an effect on non-target species (Bartlett,
2000).
Through hoof action, pawing, and wallowing, grazing animals helps
break up soil surfaces and incorporates seeds into the soil. This also plays a
role in the compaction of soils and trampling plants, along with altering fuel
characteristics and fuel loading. The positive and negative effects of grazing
are largely determined by the time and place of grazing. Grazing animals
contributes to nutrient cycling by depositing nitrogen rich urine and dung,
while their carcasses help provide other nutrients to other trophic levels, and
soil (Bartlett, 2000). Through the number of conservation practices that exist,
many contributions can come from proper techniques.
When grazing is done correctly, the positive effects have a significant impact
on how grazing is viewed in the public eye. A properly managed grazing farm
is visually more pleasing when compared to a mismanaged farm. Just as a
medical doctor requires extensive training to determine the illness or
prescribe the right treatment, formulating an effective grazing prescription
requires a solid understanding of plant ecology, animal behavior, and plantanimal interactions. As previously mentioned The Land Ethic speaks of the

land as a community. By properly managing a grazing farm you will be giving

back to the land. Aldo Leopold states, That land is a community is the basic
concept of ecology, but that land is to be loved and respected is an extension
of ethics. Not only are you giving back to the land, but protecting native
species of the land as well.
A grazing prescription should include specific information on the season
and intensity of defoliation, the species, breed, sex, and age class of animal
to use, and the stocking rate that will result in the most harm to the target
plant and still maintain healthy rangeland
It is a significant accomplishment to have a properly managed farm and
takes a lot of work, planning, and flexibility. Most farms that are managed
properly are family owned and operated, farms that have improper
management largely are associated to having big corporate ties that do not
have the time to manage and monitor (Gladwell, 2000). While upcoming
generations are going to start running into more economic and environmental
difficulties, using proper grazing techniques will play a very large role in
overtaking these difficulties (Gladwell, 2000).
Overall, the difficulty in managing overgrazing due to the controversies
in social aspects has impacted biodiversity through several ways. Despite the
differing views from conservationists and ranchers; however, the sustainable
management practices through livestock being implemented is now bringing
a different view on how grazing can positively impact the ecology of the soil.
As overgrazing can cause soil degradation, grazing during the right time and
season can provide sustainable control of invasive species, which are
severely detrimental to the land.

Works Cited
Bartlet, J., Paine, L., Sample, D., Temple, S., Undersander, D.. Fostering
Habitats Using Rotational Grazing. Grassland Birds. Madison: Cooperative
Extension Publishing. 2000.
Bock, C., Saab, V., Rich, T., & Dobkin, D. (1993, January 1). Effects of
Livestock Grazing on Neotropical Migratory Landbirds in Western North
America. Retrieved December 15, 2014, from
http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs_rm/rm_gtr229/rm_gtr229_296_309.pdf
Costanza, R. (1997). The Value of the World's Ecosystem services and
Natural Capital.Nature, 387, 253-260.
Fleischner, T. L. (1994). Ecological Costs of Livestock Grazing in Western
North America. Conservation Biology, 8 (3), 629-644.
Gladwell, M. The Tipping Point: How Little things Make a Big Difference.
Retrieved December 11, 2014.
Joyce Livestock Company v. United State of America. (2007, February 9).
Retrieved December 15, 2014, from
https://asci.uvm.edu/equine/law/cases/use/joyce_livestock.htm
Leopold, A. (1949). A Sand County Almanac. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Oikos, Cycles in Voles. 90 (3), 509-516.

Paustain, R. T. (2002). Potential Soil Carbon Sequestration in Overgrazed

Grassland Ecosystems. Global Biogeochemical Cycles. 16 (4), 90-1-90-9.
Rangelands: An Introduction to Wild Open Spaces. (2011). Moscow, Idaho:
Idaho Rangeland Resource Commission.
Tero Klemola, K. N. (2000). Delayed effects of Overgrazing Expanding
Populations.
The Taylor Grazing Act. (n.d.). Retrieved December 15, 2014, from
http://www.blm.gov/wy/st/en/field_offices/Casper/range/taylor.1.html
Trost, T. D, Reynolds.(1980, March). The Response of Native vertebrate
populations to crested wheatgrass planting and grazing by sheep. Journal of
Range Management. 122.
World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our Common
Future (1st ed.). United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
Young, V. (n.d.). Soil Erosion in Relation to Overgrazing in Idaho. Northwest
Science.

Social-Ecological System Diagram of Grazing in Idaho