Adaptive, multi-paddock, rotational grazing management alters foraging behavior and spatial grazing distribution of free-ranging cattle

被引:10
作者
Augustine, David J. [1 ]
Kearney, Sean P. [1 ]
Raynor, Edward J. [2 ]
Porensky, Lauren M. [1 ]
Derner, Justin D. [3 ]
机构
[1] ARS, USDA, Rangeland Resources & Syst Res Unit, 1701 Ctr Ave, Ft Collins, CO 80526 USA
[2] USDA ARS, Pasture Syst & Water Management Res Unit, Curtain Rd Bldg 3702, University Pk, PA 16802 USA
[3] USDA ARS, Rangeland Resources & Syst Res Unit, 84084 Hildreth Rd, Cheyenne, WY 82009 USA
基金
美国农业部;
关键词
Foraging selectivity; Grazing velocity; Herd size recursive grazing; Regenerative grazing; Ungulate herbivory; HERBIVORE; DURATION; ECOLOGY; SYSTEM; GRASS; FIRE;
D O I
10.1016/j.agee.2023.108521
中图分类号
S [农业科学];
学科分类号
09 ;
摘要
Sustainable management of grazinglands depends upon understanding how management practices influence livestock movements in space and time. We conducted a ranch-scale (2,600-ha) social-ecological experiment to examine how foraging behavior of cattle differs between a single large herd rotated adaptively among paddocks (collaborative, adaptive rangeland management; CARM) versus continuous, season-long grazing of paddocks by small non-rotational herds (traditional rangeland management; TRM). We analyzed how differences in cattle movement patterns may be linked to reductions in cattle growth rates and diet quality in the CARM treatment, relative to TRM. Cattle in the CARM treatment exhibited more linear grazing pathways, moved at lower velocity while grazing, and exhibited longer grazing bouts early in the growing season compared to TRM cattle. Grazing time within any given 10 x 10 m area was distributed more unevenly across TRM vs. CARM paddocks in years with average or above-average precipitation, but not in dry years. In all years, areas of high and low grazing intensity were more spatially clustered in TRM than CARM paddocks. Movement patterns of cattle managed using adaptive, multi-paddock rotations at high stock density (CARM) are consistent with less selective foraging. Such cattle form a "grazing front" that moves across the paddock and distributes grazing pressure in a more spatially homogeneous fashion. In years with substantial forage production, TRM cattle spent more time than CARM cattle in preferred areas of the paddock and foraged in more circular patches. In dry years, however, both treatments resulted in similarly even grazing distribution, likely due to limited intra-paddock variation in forage quality and quantity. At the ranch scale, these different intra-paddock movement patterns led to reductions in animal growth rates and no overall effect of grazing management on forage production.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 56 条
  • [41] Collaborative Adaptive Rangeland Management, Multipaddock Rotational Grazing, and the Story of the Regrazed Grass Plant
    Porensky, Lauren M.
    Augustine, David J.
    Derner, Justin D.
    Wilmer, Hailey
    Lipke, Megan N.
    Fernandez-Gimenez, Maria E.
    Briske, David D.
    [J]. RANGELAND ECOLOGY & MANAGEMENT, 2021, 78 : 127 - 141
  • [42] Implementation of a rotational grazing system with large paddocks changes the distribution of grazing cattle in the south-western Italian Alps
    Probo, Massimiliano
    Lonati, Michele
    Pittarello, Marco
    Bailey, Derek W.
    Garbarino, Matteo
    Gorlier, Alessandra
    Lombardi, Giampiero
    [J]. RANGELAND JOURNAL, 2014, 36 (05) : 445 - 458
  • [43] Foraging decisions underlying restricted space use: effects of fire and forage maturation on large herbivore nutrient uptake
    Raynor, Edward J.
    Joern, Anthony
    Nippert, Jesse B.
    Briggs, John M.
    [J]. ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION, 2016, 6 (16): : 5843 - 5853
  • [44] Estimating influence of stocking regimes on livestock grazing distributions
    Rinella, Matthew J.
    Vavra, Martin
    Naylor, Bridgett J.
    Boyd, Jennifer M.
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL MODELLING, 2011, 222 (03) : 619 - 625
  • [45] Factors Affecting Site Use Preference of Grazing Cattle Studied from 2000 to 2020 through GPS Tracking: A Review
    Rivero, M. Jordana
    Grau-Campanario, Patricia
    Mullan, Siobhan
    Held, Suzanne D. E.
    Stokes, Jessica E.
    Lee, Michael R. F.
    Cardenas, Laura M.
    [J]. SENSORS, 2021, 21 (08)
  • [46] Sampson A. W., 1951, Journal of Range Management, V4, P19, DOI 10.2307/3894427
  • [47] Forage and Weather Influence Day versus Nighttime Cow Behavior and Calf Weaning Weights on Rangeland
    Sawalhah, Mohammed N.
    Cibils, Andres F.
    Maladi, Aditya
    Cao, Huiping
    Vanleeuwen, Dawn M.
    Holechek, Jerry L.
    Rubio, Christina M. Black
    Wesley, Robert L.
    Endecott, Rachel L.
    Mulliniks, Travis J.
    Petersen, Mark K.
    [J]. RANGELAND ECOLOGY & MANAGEMENT, 2016, 69 (02) : 134 - 143
  • [48] FACTORS INFLUENCING PATTERNS OF CATTLE GRAZING BEHAVIOR ON SHORTGRASS STEPPE
    SENFT, RL
    RITTENHOUSE, LR
    WOODMANSEE, RG
    [J]. JOURNAL OF RANGE MANAGEMENT, 1985, 38 (01): : 82 - 87
  • [49] Seasonal Divergence of Landscape Use by Heritage and Conventional Cattle on Desert Rangeland
    Spiegal, Sheri
    Estell, Richard E.
    Cibils, Andres F.
    James, Darren K.
    Peinetti, H. Raul
    Browning, Dawn M.
    Romig, Kirsten B.
    Gonzalez, Alfredo L.
    Lyons, Andrew J.
    Bestelmeyer, Brandon T.
    [J]. RANGELAND ECOLOGY & MANAGEMENT, 2019, 72 (04) : 590 - 601
  • [50] Steinfeld H., 2006, Renewable Resources Journal, V24, P15