Variation in BLM Employee Attitudes toward Environmental Conditions on Rangelands

Richards, Rebecca T.; Huntsinger, Lynn

doi:10.2307/4002331

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Uniform livestock grazing distribution and forage utilization are major objectives of range management (Holechek et al, 1989; Provenza, 1991; Richards and Huntsinger, 1994; Walker, 1995; Hunt et al, 2007). Uneven grazing distribution may result in degraded range conditions in areas of livestock concentrations while other areas remain ungrazed (Briske et al, 2011).…”

Section: Previous Research On Grazing Patterns In Native Rangelandsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial and Temporal Grazing Patterns on Intensive‐early Stocked and Season‐long Stocked Pastures

Brock

Evans²,

Owensby

2017

Crop Forage & Turfgrass Mgmt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Core Ideas Temporal grazing patterns influence forage quality. Temporal and spatial grazing patterns aid in grazing system design. Uniformity of grazing distribution is enhanced by increased stocking density. Spatial and temporal patterns of domestic cattle (Bos taurus × Bos indicus) grazing were observed over two consecutive years under two grazing systems, intensive‐early stocking (IES) and season‐long stocking (SLS), to determine the factors influencing the observed patterns. Temporal grazing patterns differed between the two grazing treatments. Area grazed and forage height reduction remained relatively stable and consistently higher on IES pastures than on SLS pastures until midseason. In contrast, SLS pastures exhibited steady increases in area grazed and forage height reduction throughout the grazing season and was comparable to IES by the end of the grazing season. Percent forage height reduction was significantly higher on IES pastures than on SLS pastures in both years until midseason when the IES steers were removed. There was no difference between the amounts of forage height reduction at the end of grazing trials in SLS pastures compared with overall IES means. Cattle grazed a higher percentage of pasture area on IES pastures than SLS in both years. Grazing intensity did not differ between treatments but was significantly different between years. The IES pastures were more uniformly grazed than SLS pastures during the period when both treatments were present, but there was no difference when overall pasture means were compared. Big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii Vitman) tillers were grazed more frequently under IES than under SLS. The results indicate that temporal grazing patterns should be considered when evaluating the performance and design of grazing systems since spatial patterns alone may not reveal periods when forage quality or plant physiology may be adversely or positively affected.

show abstract

Section: Previous Research On Grazing Patterns In Native Rangelandsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial and Temporal Grazing Patterns on Intensive‐early Stocked and Season‐long Stocked Pastures

Brock

Evans²,

Owensby

2017

Crop Forage & Turfgrass Mgmt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The survey questions were shaped by the focus group results, as well as the design of past rancher and agency surveys (Richards and Huntsinger 1994;Brunson and Steel 1996;Coppock and Birkenfeld 1999;Liffman et al 2000). Survey drafts were reviewed and pretested by 4 ranchers, 3 agency employees, extension agents, and several experienced researchers, and were revised numerous times before the final version was completed.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, only a few studies of public (Brunson and Steel 1996) and agency (Richards and Huntsinger 1994) attitudes towards rangeland management specifically have been conducted, and none has directly compared the attitudes and beliefs of agency employees with those of grazing permittees.…”

Section: Values and Attitudes In Rangeland Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Arizona Permittee and Land Management Agency Employee Attitudes Toward Rangeland Monitoring by Permittees

Fernandez-Giminez¹,

McClaran²,

Ruyle³

2005

REM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ongoing conflicts over the management of western rangelands can be attributed in part to the lack of reliable information about current ecological conditions and their causes due, in turn, to insufficient monitoring. To meet the monitoring shortfall, land management agencies increasingly are enlisting permittees to monitor their grazing allotments. We surveyed grazing permittees in 5 Arizona counties and land management agency employees throughout Arizona to compare their attitudes toward permittee monitoring on public rangelands, the role of government in rangeland management, rangeland conditions in Arizona, and the credibility of information sources about rangelands. Permittees and agency employees differed in most of the attitudes measured by our survey. However, both populations agreed that permittees should participate in monitoring their allotments, and many respondents agreed with making permittee monitoring mandatory. Many respondents in both groups also agreed that collaboration can be beneficial. Joint monitoring, which can be considered a type of ''joint fact-finding,'' may help improve agency-permittee relationships and bridge the gap in attitudes and underlying values. Permittee-monitoring programs deserve careful evaluation to determine their impacts on social relationships, management decisions, and ecological conditions. ResumenLos continuos conflictos sobre el manejo de los pastizales del oeste, pueden ser atribuidos, en parte, a la falta de informació n confiable sobre las condiciones ecoló gicas actuales y sus causas, debido a el monitoreo insuficiente. Para subsanar el déficit de monitoreo, las agencias de manejo de tierras cada vez mas está n enlistando los permisionarios para monitorear sus asignaciones de tierras de pastizal. Examinamos permisionarios en 5 condados de Arizona y a los empleados de agencias federales a través de Arizona para comparar sus actitudes hacia el monitoreo de las concesiones en los pastizales pú blicos de Arizona, el papel del gobierno en el manejo de pastizales, las condiciones de los pastizales en Arizona y la credibilidad de las fuentes de informació n sobre pastizales. Los permisionarios y los empleados de las agencias difirieron en la mayoría de las actitudes medidas en muestro estudio. Sin embargo, ambas poblaciones acordaron que los permisionarios deben participar monitoreando sus asignaciones, y muchos de los que respondieron concordaron en que el monitoreo de las concesiones debe ser obligatorio. Muchos de los participantes de ambos grupos también estuvieron de acuerdo en que la colaboració n puede ser benéfica. El monitoreo conjunto, el cual puede ser considerado como un tipo de investigació n conjunta, puede ayudar a mejorar las relaciones permisionariosagencias y cerrar el hueco en las actitudes y los valores fundamentales. Los programas de monitoreo de las concesiones merecen una evaluació n cuidadosa para determinar sus impactos en las relaciones sociales, decisiones de manejo y condiciones ecoló gicas.

show abstract

“…The objective of this survey was to obtain quantitative data on the monitoring knowledge, attitudes, and practices of permittees and land management agency employees, as well as their experiences with Cooperative Extension and their monitoring information needs and preferences. The survey questions were developed on the basis of the evaluation objectives, focus group results, and design of past rancher and agency surveys (Richards and Huntsinger 1994;Brunson and Steel 1996;Coppock and Birkenfeld 1999;Liffman et al 2000). Survey drafts were reviewed and pretested by 4 ranchers, 3 agency employees, extension agents, and several experienced researchers and were revised numerous times before the final version was completed.…”

Section: Surveysmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rangeland monitoring is thought to be a key component of good management because it enables managers to determine whether progress toward management objectives is being made and alerts them to trends that could threaten the sustainability of the rangeland ecosystem. Despite the apparent importance of monitoring to good stewardship, the scant data available suggest that only a small proportion of ranchers do any type of formal rangeland monitoring, and efforts to encourage monitoring by ranchers have not had much success (Richards and Huntsinger 1994;Richards and George 1996;Coppock and Birkenfeld 1999). At the same time, public land management agencies are increasingly scrutinized for their management practices and must monitor to meet environmental assessment and planning requirements and to comply with court judgments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation of Arizona Cooperative Extension’s Rangeland Monitoring Program

Fernández‐Giménez¹,

Ruyle²,

McClaran³

2005

REM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We evaluated Arizona Cooperative Extension's Rangeland Monitoring Program with the use of focus groups and a selfadministered mail survey of grazing permittees and natural resource agency employees. Our primary objectives were to 1) determine whether Extension is reaching its target audience, 2) describe the monitoring practices and attitudes of permittees and agency staff, 3) determine whether there is a relationship between permittees' exposure to Cooperative Extension and their monitoring and management practices, and 4) identify the monitoring information needs and preferences of permittees and natural resource agency staff. We found that Arizona's rangeland monitoring Extension program has been effective in reaching a large part of its target audience, and a significant proportion of Arizona permittees monitor on public, private, and stateowned rangelands. However, overall monitoring adoption rates remain low. Extension contact is associated with use of monitoring and other beneficial management practices, and permittees and agency employees report that monitoring increased their knowledge and led to changes in management. Monitoring by permittees improves agency-permittee relationships in many cases. Most permittees and agency employees believe that their respective peers are the most reliable source of monitoring information and prefer to receive information from Extension through face-to-face contact at workshops or personalized on-site assistance. The evaluation revealed important social dimensions of rangeland monitoring. Extension agents play a key role in facilitating the social process of monitoring, as well as providing technical training in monitoring skills. Further study is needed to investigate whether permittee monitoring actually leads to better management, improved economic returns, or increased tenure security. Resumen Utilizando grupos de enfoque y una autoevaluaciones por correo para los poseedores de permiso de pastoreo y los empleados de

show abstract

Variation in BLM Employee Attitudes toward Environmental Conditions on Rangelands

Cited by 10 publications

References 10 publications

Spatial and Temporal Grazing Patterns on Intensive‐early Stocked and Season‐long Stocked Pastures

Spatial and Temporal Grazing Patterns on Intensive‐early Stocked and Season‐long Stocked Pastures

Arizona Permittee and Land Management Agency Employee Attitudes Toward Rangeland Monitoring by Permittees

An Evaluation of Arizona Cooperative Extension’s Rangeland Monitoring Program

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About