2002
DOI: 10.2458/azu_jrm_v55i6_george
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Influence of grazing on channel morphology of intermittent streams

Abstract: Alteration of stream channel morphology by cattle and associated streambank erosion is a concern on rangeland watersheds. The objective of this study was to determine changes in stream channel morphology in response to 5 grazing treatments applied to 0.4 ResumenLa alteracion de la morfologia del canal de la corriente por el ganado y la erosion asociada de la vega del rio es una preocupacion en las cuencas hidrologicas del pastizal. El objetivo de este estudio fue determinar los cambios en la morfologia del … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0
1

Year Published

2004
2004
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
13
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Although studies have shown significant reductions in stream bank erosion resulting from cattle exclusion Zaimes et al, 2008), other studies have not (Allen-Diaz et al, 1998;George et al, 2002;. These results suggest that the effect of cattle on stream bank erosion is site or method-specific.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 87%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Although studies have shown significant reductions in stream bank erosion resulting from cattle exclusion Zaimes et al, 2008), other studies have not (Allen-Diaz et al, 1998;George et al, 2002;. These results suggest that the effect of cattle on stream bank erosion is site or method-specific.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…Studies have associated the impact of grazing on stream bank erosion with the removal of vegetation and hoof treading . However, the effects of cattle on stream bank erosion is still largely unclear, as some studies have noted increased amounts of bank erosion with cattle grazing Zaimes et al, 2008a), while others have not found differences (Allen-Diaz et al, 1998;George et al, 2002). Additionally, many studies seem to have serious faults.…”
Section: Bank Erosionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of 87 sampling reaches evaluated within the study area, we found 32 in Proper Functioning Condition (PFC) with a stable trend; 49 were Functional at Risk (FAR) with an undetermined trend, and 6 were ranked Nonfunctional (NF) (Figure 3 & 4). In almost every case where a stream channel Grazing in riparian areas can cause stream and river bank destabilization, loss of riparian shade, and increased sediment and nutrient loads in the aquatic ecosystem (George et al 2002). The livestock use index (CPI) largely correlated with the functional assessment rank with NF and some FAR reaches reporting high CPI (Appendix A).…”
Section: Habitat Evaluationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The significance of treatment, as defined in this analysis, with respect to cross sectional area is a relatively new result for two important reasons. First, this study was holistic in design, examining a management system rather than individual components of a management system such as alternate water source (Sheffield et al 1997), exclusion fencing (Trimble, 1994;Kauffman et al, 1983), or grazing intensity (George et al, 2002;Marlow et al, 1987) on streambank erosion. Logan (1990) points to the need of multiple types of BMPs (i.e.…”
Section: Significant Variablesmentioning
confidence: 99%