Managing
Change

-------
MANAGING CHANGE
Livestock Grazing on
Western Riparian Areas
July 1993
Produced for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
by the Northwest Resource
Information Center, Inc.,
P.O. Box 427, Eagle, Idaho 83616.
Authors: Ed Chaney,
Wayne Elmore, and
William S. Platts, Ph.D.
EPA Project Officers:
Roger Dean and Daniel L. Merkel
U.S. EPA Region 8
999 1 8th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2466
This report has been reviewed by EPA
and approved for publication. Approval
does not signify that the contents neces-
sarily reflect the views and policies of
the Environmental Protection Agency,
nor does the mention of trade names or
corn merci al products constitute
endorsement or recommendations for
use.
All programs and services of the U.S.
Government are offered on a nondis-
criminatory basis without regard to
race, color, national origin, religion,
sex, age, marital status or handicap.
p
This document is written for the
most important people in the grow-
ing national effort to enhance water
quality on western rangeland water-
sheds: the men and women who
move the livestock.
:
I
Foreword

-------
j
q -
4..
• r : -
4 :
4.
I ;
The Clean Water Act of 1977 estab-
lished a national objective “...to
restore and maintain the chemical,
physical and biological integrity of
the Nation’s waters.”
Initially the Act focused on easily
identifiable “point sources” of water
pollution. In 1987 it was amended
to include “nonpoint” sources,
broadly defined as any human-
caused degradation of surface or
groundwater, including that caused
by livestock grazing.
I
•1
I , .
r. 1
.A ‘
Control of point sources of water
pollution is mandatory and strictly
regulated. The current approach to
controlling nonpoint sources of
water pollution generally is to seek
voluntary compliance through non-
regulatory programs of technical
and financial assistance, training,
technology transfer, demonstration
projects and education.
As part of this effort, in 1990 the
Environmental Protection Agency
published Livestock Grazing on
Wesiern Riparian Areas. It provided
a broad overview of functions and
¼
h
values of western riparian areas,
causes and effects of degraded
riparian areas and water quality, and
provided case studies representative
of the problems and the opportuni-
ties for improving livestock grazing
on western riparian areas.
This document is a sequel and com-
panion piece to its predecessor.
Together they are designed to foster
broader understanding of how
improved grazing management on
western riparian areas can enhance
water quality and overall productiv-
ity of rangeland watersheds.
3

-------
Managing Change
Things are changing on western
rangelands.
For much of the Nation’s history,
western rangelands were mostly
thought of in terms of how much
livestock grazing they provided.
Riparian areas - lands adjacent to
streams where vegetation is strong-
ly influenced by presence of water -
may comprise less than 2% of total
land area in the western U.S. For
decades they generally were treated
as “sacrifice areas” impractical to
manage within context of vast
uplands. Wetlands were “waste-
lands” to be drained and put to pro-
ductive use.
Those days are over.
practices to improve riparianlwet-
land conditions.
This document doesn’t attempt to
provide a grazing strategy for every
western rangeland riparian area.
That can’t be done through the
mail. It has to be done on the
ground, stream by stream, operator
by operator.
In any event, a recipe book that
attempted to cover even the most
broadly representative riparian situ-
ations would be too heavy to ship
UPS.
This booklet has modest objectives.
To help the men and women who
move the livestock look at their
streams and riparian areas from a
water quality and watershed per-
spective.
Today one of the most powerful
forces of change on the range is
society’s growing awareness of the
value and vulnerability of western
rangeland riparian areas and wet-
lands.
This awareness is being translated
to a growing body of laws, policies
and regulations. These require
changes in rangeland grazing prac-
tices necessary to protect and
enhance ecosystem diversity and
water quality on rangeland water-
sheds.
Change, especially significant
change, is difficult.
Political fireworks are inevitable
when the irresistible force of
change meets the immovable object
of tradition.
However, many livestock operators
have acknowledged the need for
change. They are changing or
beginning to think seriously about
how to change their grazing
• To stimulate their thinking about
how to change their livestock man-
agement to improve riparian/wet-
land conditions and water quality.
• To encourage them to take the
first steps to get their degraded
riparian areas and streams started
on an improving trend.
The relationship between land
management and water quality
has long been recognized.
“To protect your rivers,
protect your mountains.”
—Emperor Yu of China, 1600 B.C.
“The wells are nearly all
dried up and have to be dug
deeper. At the present time
the prospect for next year
is a gloomy one for farmers
and in fact, for all, for when
the farmer is affected, all feel
the effects. The stock raisers
here are preparing to drive
their stock to where there
is something to eat. This
country, which was one of
the best ranges for stock in
the Territory, is now among
the poorest: the myriads of
sheep that have been herded
here for the past few years,
have almost destroyed our
range.”
—Salt Lake City Deseret News,
1879
4

-------
I. —
Over much of the western United
States riparian areas are thin lines of
green (red in infrared photography)
across vast arid and semi-arid
uplands. Unregulated grazing in the
late nineteenth and early twentieth
centuries caused severe and long-
lasting damage to rangeland water-
sheds throughout the West.
In the early days of regulated grazing
on publicly-owned rangelands, it
was considered impractical to man-
age riparian areas separately from
the far more extensive uplands.
Resources were not available to pro-
vide livestock water away from
streams. Eftort was made to lay out
pastures with streams in the middle.
In consequence, livestock tended to
concentrate on and severely degrade
riparian areas, streams and water
quality.
For decades It was national policy to
drain wetlands by channelizing
streams. Times, attitudes and nation-
al policies have changed with
increased knowledge of wetland val-
ues. Today wetlands are recognized
as being among the most valuable
and productive of all land types.
Wetland vegetation protects stream-
banks and shorelines from erosion,
slows flood flows, filters sediment,
builds banks, captures and breaks
down nutrients and water pollutants.
Wetlands can store and slowly
release water, extending the season-
al supply and enhancing its quality.
Wetlands are critical in the life cycle
of many species of fish and wildlife.
a

-------
Why Change?
It’s a reasonable question.
Why not just hunker down and
resist the tide of change sweeping
western rangelands? Maybe it will
pass over and leave things pretty
much the way they are.
Thoughtful livestock operators
aren’t betting on it. They find good
reasons to get out in front of, and
manage, change.
It’s Good Business
If your riparian areas are in bad
condition, chances are good you are
missing an opportunity to make
more money.
Riparian areas typically are much
more productive than an equivalent
amount of adjacent upland.
Improper grazing reduces the
amount of forage produced on your
most productive land. You lose
money.
Cattle are attracted to and tend to
loaf in riparian areas, particularly
after upland forage dries out.
Riparian vegetation can be severely
overgrazed. The much more abun-
dant upland forage can be signifi-
cantly underutilized. You lose
money.
Overgrazing riparian vegetation
makes streambanks more vulnera-
ble to the destablizing effects of
livestock trampling and the erosive
force of water, exposes soils to dry-
ing out by wind and sunlight,
reduces water storage capacity of
the riparian area, reduces shade and
thereby increases stream water tem-
perature, encourages invasion of
undesirable plants, speeds up
runoff, and reduces filtration of
sediment necessary for building
streambanks, wet meadows and
floodplains.
These things typically result in loss
of livestock forage, reduced num-
bers and diversity of fish and
wildlife, degraded water quality,
reduced property value, and fre-
quently cause serious property
damage. You lose money.
The photos to the right are of two
privately-owned places of similar
potential in the same watershed. It
doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see
which is the most economically
productive, or which a buyer would
pay the most for.
The photos below are of a public
land grazing allotment. It is evident
which condition is capable of pro-
ducing the most livestock forage
and the least headaches with the
land management agency and the
public.
-
I
—

Below Poor upland and riparian
grazing management reduced forage
production, eroded streambanks,
reduced streamf lows, increased
water temperatures and sediment
load, jeopardized a threatened
migratory trout population, and cre-
ated costly headaches for the per-
mittee and land management
agency.
- 1.
6

-------
Left Poor grazing managment
severely reduced the economic pro-
ductivity of this ranch. Removal of
upland vegetation accelerated
runoff. Along with removal of ripari-
an vegetation this resulted in chan-
nel downcutting and lowered water
table. Downstream neighbors are
stuck with the costs of increased
sediment and accelerated runoff.
Below What the land in the above
photo could look like with good
grazing management and considera-
lion for downstream neighbors.
1
‘k;
7
q
p -
S .
Ti !
L . . M1% S ..
— -V


Below Ten years of rest from graz-
ing restored this area’s riparian area,
water quality and economic produc-
tivity.
1.,
: i
7

-------
It’s Good Citizenship
Proper grazing practices on upland
and riparian areas of western range-
lands are, above all else, a matter of
good citizenship.
It’s really pretty simple.
The costs of degraded riparian
areas and unstable stream channels
don’t stop on-site. They are trans-
ferred to your downstream neigh-
bors. And to future generations of
downstream neighbors. Some of
whom may be thousands of miles
away. A watershed can be a big
neighborhood. From a water-
shed/water quality perspective, live-
stock grazers are their neighbors’
keeper.
Improper grazing of upland vegeta-
tion can expose soils to erosive
impact of rain drops, reduce water
infiltration, and accelerate runoff.
This can erode topsoil, and cut ntis
and gullies, concentrating runoff,
deepening gullies, lowering water
tables, and increasing sediment pro-
duction.
Riparian areas in poor condition are
unable to buffer the effects of accel-
erated runoff. Stream channels
downcut or erode laterally, acceler-
ating erosion and sediment produc-
tion.
The adverse effects of improperly
grazed uplands and riparian areas
accumulate and flow downhill. As
the people affected become aware
of the source of their problem, they
naturally demand corrective laws
and regulations requiring changes
in grazing practices.
who stops
1
-
p
- ‘,
:i4
,-
•1
/
“He is the
greatest patriot
the most gullies.”
—Patrick Henry

-------
Upland gamebirds such as sage
grouse, are seasonally heavily
dependant upon riparian/wetland
areas. Degraded riparian areas and
water quality which adversely affect
migratory fish and wildlife can have
adverse economic impacts thou-
sands of miles away. The economic
life of hydroelectric and water sup-
ply reservoirs can be significantly
shortened by sediment from over-
grazed uplands and riparian areas.
It’s the Law
The Clean Water Act requires states
to identify nonpoint sources of water
pollution and develop procedures -
Best Management Practices - to
attain and maintain designated bene-
ficial uses of water such as drinking
water, agricultural water supplies,
and fish and wildlife.
States are required to monitor water
quality indicators such as sediment
load, temperature, dissolved oxy-
gen, and fish populations - all of
which can be directly affected by
grazing practices.
The Clean Water Act is only one of
many laws requiring change in the
way watersheds and their riparian
areas are grazed by livestock. A
variety of other laws apply to pub-
licly-owned rangelands managed by
the Forest Service and Bureau of
Land Management. There is increas-
ing public debate over state laws to
govern agricultural practices,
including grazing, that adversely
affect watershed conditions.
Many areas of the West already are
economically stressed by poor qual-
ity of water yielded from rangeland
watersheds. Increasing urban popu-
lations will place ever greater
demands on surface and groundwa-
ter, which in many areas are limit-
ed, shrinking, resources.
The smart money will be on ever
increasing legal requirements for
improved rangeland watershed
conditions and for an ecosystem
management perspective.
9

-------
Accelerated runoff from uplands
can trigger downcutting by
streams with soft bottoms.
Downcuttlng lowers the
streambed and water table, dries
out the riparlan area, destablizes
streambanks, Increases erosion
and further accelerates runoff.
Unless stopped by the presence of
a hard geologic formation or
man’s intervention, downcutting
can migrate upstream and eventu-
ally disrupt the hydrologic func-
lion of the entire watershed.
Improper grazing of upland vege-
tation increases the amount, and
concentrates and increases the
speed of overland runoff to
streams. Doubling the speed of
streamf low increases its erosive
power by 4 times and its bedload
and sediment carrying power by
64 times.
In streams with hard bottoms,
accelerated runoff from uplands
and degraded riparian conditions
can result in destructive lateral
erosion of streambanks and pro-
gressively wider and shallower
stream channels.
2
— _ .-.._, -&..
I— .1
10

-------
Looking at Your
Riparian Areas
From a Water
Quality Perspective
I-low can you tell if your riparian
and wetland areas or watersheds are
ailing and need treatment?
It’s easy if you’ve got a wreck like
the ones illustrated on this page. It
might not be so easy if your cir-
cumstances are less drastic.
In fact, ranchers commonly respond
to requests for improved riparian
conditions with comments like,
“But it’s always looked this way.”
That may be true from their per-
spectives. The present degraded
condition of many western riparian
areas and watersheds has its roots
in uncontrolled grazing of the late
nineteenth and early twentieth cen-
turies.
It also could be that the deteriora-
tion has been so gradual, like kids
growing up, that the change simply
wasn’t noticeable on a day-to-day,
year-by-year basis.
The following pages illustrate and
comment on some common symp-
turns of degraded rangeland ripari-
an areas and watershed conditions.
I.
ft’1
___________ - -‘ .1;’— - -.
c.

-------
AL
Above Left This riparian area is
about 7,000 feet in elevation. It has
been summer grazed by sheep for
100 years. Looking at this stream
strictly from a livestock perspective,
you might ask, “What’s wrong with
this picture?” No raw, eroding
streambanks or other obvious symp-
toms of degraded riparian conditions.
Above Right This is the same
stream immediately downstream.
This is what the whole stream
should look like from a water quali-
ty/fisheries perspective. Narrower,
deeper, cooler in summer and
warmer in winter [ deep snows bridge
over the stream and insulate against
winter temperatures which typically
get down to -20 degrees F].
Above This stream flows through
high-elevation irrigated pastures
grazed by cattle mid-May through
early October since the late 1 800s.
Woody vegetation was virtually elim-
inated; note remnant willows in
background. Riparian vegetation
mostly is a carpet of Kentucky blue-
grass. The stream is wide, shallow
and sediment laden. Fish and wildlife
values and water quality are severely
degraded.
It’s obvious this stream and rlparlan
area are degraded. They’ve been this
way so long, It might not be obvious
what the stream ought to and could
look like under improved grazing
management. The photo/Illustration
at right shows what the stream
should look like from a water quality
perspective.
The economic productivIty and long-
term value of the ranch have been
significantly reduced.
/

-------
Right Sixteen years of vegetation
recovery stabilized badly eroded
streambanks. From a livestock oper-
ator’s perspective, things now look
pretty good. A close look from a
water quality/fisheries perspective,
however, reveals large amounts of
sediment, a symptom of degraded
upstream watershed conditions.
Streams and their riparian areas
must be looked at from a watershed
perspective.
F .
L
4 ___
13

-------
Streambanks trampled by livestock
are a common feature of improperly
grazed western riparian areas.
Many livestock operators don’t rec-
ognize this as a symptom of inade-
quate grazing management and a
major contributor to degraded water
quality.
Some people tout livestock tram-
pling as a “tool” to lay back steep
or undercut streambanks. The chan-
nel of a stream low in sediment
could take decades to recover from
being “laid back.” It doesn’t take
much imagination to visualize the
enormous damage that would result
from applying this “treatment” to
the streambanks in the photo below.
__ :
— . . .. —
I.-.
Trampling damage to streambanks
may not be treatable by simply
adjusting stocking rates.
Streambank vulnerability to tram-
pling damage often is more related
to soil type and how wet the soils
are than to the number of livestock.
A small number of animals on easi-
ly erodable or wet streambanks can
cause more damage than a large
number on stable, frozen or dried
out streambanks.
Successful riparian grazing strate-
gies must include consideration of
soil type and when streambanks are
most vulnerable to trampling dam-
age.
From a livestock operator’s perspec-
tive, trampling and trailing damage is
obvious in the photo above.
From a water quality/ecosystem per-
spective, it also is obvious that
heavy summer use has eliminated
aspens and is eliminating willows.
1 .
The channel is many times its natur-
al width, is shallow, and sediment-
laden.
There is vitually no shade or cover
for fish, a key water quality indicator.
During high flows, raw streambanks
produce large amounts of sediment
which end up in the lake in the dis-
tance.
The landowner and his downstream
neighbors all pay for improper graz-
ing.

-------
Above From a livestock operator’s
perspective this stream might not
look too bad. No raw, sloughing
banks. Pasture looks rested during
the lafter part of the growing season,
which gave grass a chance to pro-
duce foliage and store energy in
roots.
From a riparian/water quality per-
spective, it is obvious that when
upland forage matured and dried
out, livestock concentrated on the
thin line of green. Willows were elim-
inated. Aspen shoots were constant-
ly browsed off and the parent trees
eventually died of old age; soon
aspen too will be gone.
Gravelly soils helped armor the
stream channel against a hundred
years of intense summer grazing
pressure. Still, the stream is four or
more times its natural width and
one-fourth or less its natural depth.
The water table has lowered and
dried out the riparian area, now
largely covered by a thin strip of
Kentucky bluegrass. Livestock for-
age, fish habitat and the economic
value of the ranch have been drasti-
cally reduced.
The willows on the left side of the
fence show classic symptoms of
improper riparian grazing. When
upland forage matures and dries out,
livestock naturally are attracted to
riparian areas. When riparian grass-
es are depleted, cattle typically loaf
around and browse willows, particu-
larly the current year’s growth. The
willows right of the fence had been
protected from livestock for one
year.
Inset This upstream view Is
how the whole stream should
look under proper grazing
management.
15

-------
Thinking Out A
Riparian
Improvement
Grazing Strategy
The preceding pages briefly illus-
trate for livestock operators how to
look at streams and riparian areas
from a watershed/water quality per-
spective.
The following pages are designed
to stimulate thinking about how to
develop a grazing strategy cus-
tomized to improve your particular
ripananlwetland situation.
Yes, It Is Complicated
No one knows better than the peo-
ple who move the stock that graz-
ing western rangelands is a compli-
cated business. The more one learns
about livestock/ecological interrela-
tionships, the more complicated it
gets.
But “complicated” can’t be allowed
to get in the way of business,
including the business of improving
deteriorated riparianlwetland areas
and water quality.
Getting Down to Basics
The kind and degree of riparian!
wetland grazing problems vary all
over the map.
There are a few simple common
denominators which apply whether
you’re in the desert Southwest,
Northern Great Plains, Northwest,
or wherever.
• Livestock follow the green.
• Riparian vegetation typically is
quite different than plants on adja-
cent uplands.
it.
From the least to the most compli-
cated, they are:
• Exclude livestock from the ripari-
an area with stream corridor fenc-
ing.
• Put riparian areas in separate pas-
tures to get tight control over the
season, duration and intensity of
livestock use.
• Herd or use some other grazing
strategy to limit the season, dura-
tion, and intensity of grazing on
riparian areas.
Whatever your riparian improve-
ment objective - improved water
quality, pasture damage control,
improved forage production more
fish and wildlife, making the place
more attractive for future
sale to a movie star,
or what have you? -
you don’t have to
have all the ans-
wers before you
get started.
In most cases, the immediate
objective should be modest:
to get deteriorated riparian
areas and streams started
on an improving trend.
Once that happens,
changes in plants
and streambanks
usually will sug-
gest common-
sense next
steps.
• Grazing strategies targeted exclu-
sively on upland grasses can result
in severe overgrazing of riparian
grasses, forbs, shrubs and tree
seedlings.
Wherever you are, whatever your
particular riparian grazing problem,
there are three basic ways to treat
J h
; ;
-
1
1
Unless your riparian areas have
been severely degraded for a long
time, the vegetative potential likely
will be obvious. Where It isn’t,
Insight may lie across the neighbor’s
fence. If not, help is available from
government agencies and private
consultants.
16

-------
-r
L
For decades, streamc órridor’
Ing got a bad rap from many ranch-
ers who believed the only good
fence is perpendicular to flowing
water.
However, once the decision to
change grazing management has
been made, operators frequently
find fencing - to exclude livestock or
to create riparian pastures - is one
of the most cost-effectIve ways to
control livestock use of degraded
riparian areas and improve water
quality. In some cases, it is the only
practical way.
Operators should resist the urge to
put exclosure fences on the high
water line. Exclosures need to
Include enough of the rlparlan area
to restore riparlan and stream func-
tions, and to give the stream channel
some room to move over time.
Riparlan pastures take a variety of
shapes and sizes. In wide stream
valleys they include the stream and
all or part of the rlparian area target-
ed for special management. Riparian
pastures should be large enough to
provide management flexibility, and,
obviously should have special
management criteria for key plants
and streambanks.
In steep, narrow valleys, rlparlan
pastures may Include a large portion
of uplands. The needs of riparian
vegetation and condition of stream
banks dictate grazing management
for the whole pasture.
In canyon country, short stretches
of gap fence are a relatively low cost
way to control livestock use of many
miles of riparian area. By blocking
livestock from steep terrain, opera-
tors often get substantial secondary
benef its of improved ease of gather-
ing and better utilization of upland
forage.

-------
(J!L
It’s a seductive idea to “fix” an ailing
stream with structures rather than go
through the hassle of changing grazing
management. This can be risky, expen-
sive business.
It’s Important to keep In mind that instream
structures only treat symptoms of the problem.
They typically are high-cost and have high prob-
ability of failure; streams have an exasperating
habit of slipping the best-designed collars. When
they do, the investment in structures Is wasted,
and the symptoms they were designed to treat
may actually be worsened.
Instream structures such as gabions, rock or log
weirs, and riprap may be necessary to treat seri-
ous streambank erosion, to stabilize a runaway
stream channel, or trap excessive sediment.
They should be employed with care and along
with changes in grazing management necessary
to treat the underlying problem of deteriorated
watershed conditions.
Top This stream channel was destabilized by
poor watershed conditions. Massive, expensive,
rock gablons were installed to slow flows,
reduce energy, and catch sediment. Grazing
management wasn’t changed. The stream even-
tually made an end run to the left. The gabion
now deflects the current’s erosive force into the
streambank. Result: a lot of money and more
streambank down the draIn.
Bottom Log weirs are popular stream “training”
devices frequently substituted for improved land
management. The log weirs In the background
washed out. The stream dug under the logs in
the foreground.
I
“
;4i E . : ,.
I .
18

-------
If rangeland watersheds are over-
stocked they will be overgrazed and
their long-term productivity will
deteriorate, no matter how well you
otherwise manage your livestock.
If you under-manage your live-
stock, rangeland riparian areas
probably will be overgrazed, no
matter how understocked you are.
From a riparian/water quality per-
spective, how many head often is
less important than where, when,
and for how long.
Livestock tend to concentrate in
and overuse riparian areas at
certain times of the year.
If you treat your riparian/wetland
problem with anything other than a
stream corridor exclosure, things
can quickly get complicated. They
get modestly more complicated if
you go to riparian pastures with
special management criteria. They
get much more complicated when
you have to simultaneously juggle
livestock and the needs of both
riparian and upland vegetation.
Any successful riparian grazing
strategy will at minimum:
• Limit grazing intensity and sea-
son of use to provide sufficient rest
to encourage plant vigor, regrowth,
and energy storage;
• Ensure sufficient vegetation dur-
ing periods of high flow to protect
streambanks, dissipate stream
energy, and trap sediments;
• Control the timing of grazing to
prevent damage to streambanks
when they are most vulnerable to
trampling.
7
The basic building blocks of such
a strategy can be derived by
answering a few simple questions
such as:
Which plants will grow and
reproduce on each site? Which
plants do you want to encourage;
when do they put on new growth,
produce shoots or seeds, store
energy, become dormant?
• When livestock are in the ripari
an area, what plants do they prefer
at different times of the year?
• When livestock are not in the
riparian area, where are they, and
what plants do they prefer?
• When livestock are in the ripari-
an area, are they under-utilizing
upland vegetation?
• What time(s) of the year are
streambanks and riparian areas
under most stress from high flows?
• When are streambanks most vul-
nerable to damage by livestock
trampling?
The answers to these basic ques-
tions will get your thought process
going, and help narrow options to
those most likely to help you
achieve your specific riparian
improvement objectives.
This area is within a 17,000-acre sin-
gle pasture. The top photo was taken
in 1979. Up to that time the pasture
had been grazed by 1000 herded
sheep, mostly In the late winter and
early spring. In 1981, 40 pairs of
cows were added June-August. The
bottom photo taken in 1990 shows
the results just eight years later.
Bottom line this riparian area and
stream were not degraded because
the pasture was overstocked, but
because the livestock were under-
managed and the riparian area was
not considered in the new season of
use.
•: .. fl. —
:

-------
The next few pages summarize the
likely response of riparian areas in
poor condition to some commonly
used grazing strategies.
Repeat: These are generalized
responses of degraded riparian
areas, under typical management.
Continuous Season-Long Grazing
Graze through the growing season
and into fall every year. Hands-off,
free-will grazing. The Columbus
Method; turn ‘em out in the spring
and come back and discover ‘em in
the fall.
Under typical stocking rates, there
is little to no chance of turning
around deteriorated riparian areas
with continuous season-long graz-
ing. This applies to northern areas
dominated by cool season grasses
and southern areas dominated by
warm season species.
A good manager can make almost
any grazing strategy work. A poor
manager can make almost any graz-
ing strategy fail.
The following examples provide
perspective that may be useful in
thinking through the characteristics
of a grazing strategy to treat your
ailing riparian areas.
Upland and riparian plants get no
rest for regrowth of foliage or for
root production and energy storage.
Seed may or may not be produced.
When upland vegetation dries out.
livestock are attracted to riparian
areas. Riparian grasses, forbs, and
new growth on shrubs and trees
may be severely overgrazed.
Indeed, this is the kind of grazing
that severely damaged rangeland
watersheds throughout the West.
Much of this damage will take gen-
erations of good livestock manage-
ment to repair.
Effects of overgrazing on root production, p’ant vigor and species composition.
When plants are severely grazed,
root growth stops. Regrowth of
foliage takes precedence over
providing energy for root growth.
Repeated severe grazing causes
roots to die back, reducing plant
vigor. Plants then produce less
livestock forage, are more sus-
ceptible to low soil moisture, and
may be replaced by plants less
palatable to livestock and less
useful to protect upland water-
shed conditions and riparian
areas.
Grazing strategies which proper-
ly prune foliage and give plants
sufficient rest for regrowth and
energy storage, will produce
more livestock forage over the
long term than continuous graz-
ing during the growing season.
ing Weed
SOD-FORMING GRASS BUNCHGRASS—
Reduced in Vigor
Reduced in Vigor
I
20

-------
Cool season grasses grow in
the spring, mature by late
spring or early summer,
become dormant during hot
summer months, resume
growth in the fall, become dor-
mant with cold temperatures.
Warm season grasses grow in
late spring and summer and
become dormant In late sum-
mer and fall.
Winter Crazing
The flip side of’ continuous season-
long grazing. Graze when plants are
dormant. Provides total growing
season rest. Promotes plant vigol..
seed and root production.
Generally benefical to riparian con-
ditions if livestock arc watered or
are fed elsewhere, or if cold air
drainage discourages livestock from
congregating in riparian areas.
Otherwise. keep eye out for tram-
pling damage to unfrozen, wet
streambanks and potential overuse
ol’ previous season’s growth on
shrubs and trees.
Generally an excellent strategy for
recovery of deteriorated uplands
and riparian areas.
Spring/Summer Grazing
Graze early spring through summer
plant growth periods every year.
Riparian effects similar to continu-
ous season-long grazing. Cool sea-
son plant communities can be
severely overgrazed early and dur-
ing summer seed production; fall
precipitation might allow some
regrowth and energy storage For the
following year’s early foliage pro-
duction and for bank protection.
. .
.i) ’4 <: .4 ..J. 19i ‘
-
Warm season plant communities
are grazed throughout growing sea-
son with little time For recovery.
This usually results in severe nega-
tive impact on riparian trees and
shrubs. Potential for trampling
damage of wet soils during spring
runoff and summer thunderstorms.
Typically does not provide suffi-
cient vegetation to armor stream-
banks against runoff from snowmelt
and thunderstorms.
Potential for riparian area damage
can be reduced with good manage-
ment to closely control season.
duration, and intensity of riparian
grazing. Otherwise, odds are
against this grazing strategy allow-
ing recovery of degraded riparian
areas.
Top Result of season-long graz-
ing on a Colorado pasture.
Bottom Results of nine years of
grazing restricted to November
through February.
-
21

-------
Three-Pasture Rest-Rotation
Grazing
This is one of the most popular
generic rangeland grazing strate-
gies. Typically provides for grazing
a pasture in spring the first year,
summer the second, and no grazing
the third year.
Basic theory is that you graze cool
season grasses early and heavy the
first year but give them summer to
recover, produce seed, and store
energy in roots. The second year
they are rested until after seed ripe,
then grazed. Rested third year.
Warm season grasses are grazed
lightly early the first year, heavy
the summer of the second year,
with total rest the third year.
A full year’s rest the third year
allows cool and warm season grass-
es to build root reserves and litter.
As generally practiced this strategy
is good for sedge-rush-grass com-
munities. It often is detrimental to
riparian tree seedlings and brushy
species. especially willows.
Livestock can consume two or
three years growth in one summer
grazing period.
Close attention to woody species
utilization generally is necessary
for this grazing strategy to improve
condition of brushy riparian vegeta-
tion.
With attention to the degree of
plant utilization, this grazing strate-
gy has produced good results for
upland grasses.
I
These two streams are within the
same public land grazing allotment
grazed by the same operator, with
the same cows, under the same
three pasture rest-rotation grazing
strategy, with the same goal of
improving riparian conditions.
The photos on the left show the
streams in 1976, those on the right in
1986. The good condition stream and
riparian area in the top photos
responded well to this grazing strate-
gy. Sedges and rushes prospered and
the water table raised (note the result-
ing increase in grasses and decrease
in sagebrush on the small knoll in the
center middleground of photo). The
poor condition stream and riparian
area in the bottom photos continued
to deteriorate. Note the reduction in
willows in the bottom photos.

-------
(C)
(D)
4
- 4
Generations of livestock operators
throughout the West have waged
war on riparian willows, often with
government help. In some cases, the
result may have been a short-term
increase in grasses. In many cases,
the result was riparian areas and
streams falling apart and more gov-
ernment help to put them back
together again. Frequently the most
effective technique is - you guessed
it - replanting willows and/or chang-
ing to a grazing strategy that favors
willow.
Above Willows typically establish on
point bars like the one extending
Into the photo from the right. Here
willow cuttings were planted deep
into the opposite cutbank so roots
would anchor soils and vegetation
would slow and reduce the erosive
force of spring runoff.
GENERALIZED MECHANICS OF
LATERAL STREAM CHANNEL
MIcRATI0N & Roii OF
WiLLows
(A) With good watershed/riparian
conditions, vigorous, diverse
riparlan vegetation resists lateral
channel movement.
(B) When the stream does erode
the left bank, sediment is
deposited on the right and wil-
lows establish on the deposit.
(C) Willows slow high flows and
trap sediment. As the point bar
builds up and the soil dries out,
willows eventually are replaced
by sedges, grasses and other
meadow plants.
(D) Without the streambank
stabilizing and soil building
role of willows, the stream
channel would have greatly
widened and shallowed, and
lowered the water table. Meadow
plants would have been replaced
by sagebrush or other plants
less deslreable as livestock for-
age.
(B)
— \% __3_
23

-------
Early Grazing
Graze early during the grass grow-
ing season; early spring in cool sea-
son areas, early summer in warm
season areas.
This strategy usually results in good
dispersal of cattle and minimizes
use of riparian woody plants.
Provides herbaceous plants rest
during most of the critical late
growing period which promotes
plant vigor, seed production and
energy storage in roots.
Caution: early foliage growth is
from root reserves; heavy grazing
every year at this time can seriously
damage preferred plants.
This strategy has potential to
improve riparian woody vegetation.
Utilization of grasses must be care-
fully controlled. In many areas,
wet streambanks may be suscepti-
ble to trampling damage under this
grazing strategy; potential may be
minimized due to good dispersal
of cattle.
*
(A) Photo taken in 1978 after years of
continuous summer grazing.
(B) Photo taken in 1984 after grazing (C)
was changed to early spring only. No
reduction in AUMs.
(C) Livestock grazed season-long
prior to this 1976 photo.
(D) Grazing was changed to late win-
ter-early spring (February-April).
Riparian vegetation was allowed to
regrow to protect streambanks from
high runoff from summer thunder-
storms and snowmelt following year.
Juniper was thinned on adjacent hill-
sides. Results By 1986, a 400%
increase in AUMs, restored riparian
area, improved water quality, restored
trout population.
: ‘
24

-------
Two - Pasture Rotation Grazing
First year graze during grass grow-
ing season Ispring ft r cool season
species: late spring-summer for
warm season species]. Second year
graze after seed ripe [ summer for
cool season species; late summer-
early fall for warm season].
Provides total growing season rest
for grass every other year. Spring
grazing may help ailing riparian
woody vegetation [ see Early
Grazing]. Summer and fall grazing
potentially harmful to riparian
shrubs and tree seedlings.
Under proper management, this
grazing strategy may maintain or
improve low gradient grass/sedge
riparian areas, but usually is detri-
mental to reestablishment of woody
vegetation.
Riparian Exclosuresflrrigated
Pastures
Repairing damaged riparian areas
within intensively managed irrigat-
ed pastures presents a special man-
agement challenge.
High animal density in a confined
space usually requires putting the
riparian area in a separate pasture
with special management standards,
or excluding livestock from the
riparian area.
The stream in the photos to the right
runs through irrigated pasture inten-
sively grazed June-October. Trees
and shrubs had been virtually elimi-
nated. Streambanks were raw,
actively eroding at high flows, and
contributing large amounts of sedi-
ment to downstream neighbors.
After analyzing all his options, the
rancher concluded stream corridor
fencing to exclude livestock was the
only way to restore and protect the
riparian area and water quality
while still intensively grazing adja-
cent pastures.
The corridor fence was integrated
into a new system of pastures
which were increased from Ibur to
nine. This allowed the rancher to
better manage and increase live-
stock forage while improving water
quality, trout production, and the
aesthetic and future economic value
of the ranch.
I .’, , ,
4,
4 ’.
Top Results of a century of season-
long (June-October) continuous
grazing.
Bottom Results after excluding live-
stock for five years.
25

-------
The preceding pages summarize
likely responses of poor condition
riparian areas to some commonly
used grazing strategies.
These very generalized snapshots
are only for insight, to help narrow
options and stimulate thinking
about a grazing strategy custom-
designed to treat your ailing ripari-
an areas. Some common sense
observations:
• Each watershed, stream, stream
reach, and riparian area has unique
characteristics that must be account-
ed for in developing a grazing strat-
egy to improve degraded riparian
conditions and water quality.
• No one grazing strategy fits all
conditions. Any off-the-shelf graz-
ing strategy likely will have to be
modified to fit your specific condi-
tions, and updated as conditions
change.
• A grazing strategy is only as good
as the management that goes into it.
A high level of management can
make almost any grazing strategy
work. A low level can make almost
any strategy fail.
• Riparian exclosures and riparian
pastures reduce management com-
plexity and enhance the odds and
speed of achieving riparian
improvement objectives.
• When grazing riparian areas with-
in upland pastures, one or more of
the following management tech-
niques probably will have to be
added to your grazing strategy to
improve degraded riparian areas:
—Provide water, salt, supplemental
feeding away from riparian areas;
—Herd to limit livestock use of
riparian areas;
—Add more pastures to increase
management flexibility and increase
rest for riparian areas.
Utilization Standards
Grazing strategies generally are
thought of in terms of time and
place of grazing. You obviously
also have to carefully control the
amount of grazing on riparian vege-
tation you want to encourage.
Utilization standards are important.
However, you have to be careful
when using off-the-shelf utilization
standards such as, take half and
leave half, and four-to-six-inch
residual stubble height.
These common standards may be
inappropriate for some degraded
riparian plant communities. Each
situation must be independently
evaluated. Trial and error may be
required. Standards probably will
have to be changed as vegetation
responds.
Where privately owned stream-
banks and/or riparian vegetation are
severely degraded, to start it may be
best to simply decide what you
want your degraded riparian areas
to look like, and make common
sense changes in grazing manage-
ment in that direction.
Eventually, it will be necessary for
good management to set and consis-
tently meet specific utilization stan-
dards for the riparian vegetation and
streambank conditions you want to
encourage.
Top Sod-forming sedges provide
excellent streambank protection and
sediment collection. In one study, a
four-inch cube of sod contained
more than a mile of fine roots.
Bottom This sedge stand provided a
protective blanket against spring ice
flows that could have caused serious
streambank damage If vegetation
had been grazed to four- to six-inch
stubble height immediately before or
after plant dormancy.
1L ‘ I k

ts
26

-------
These photos show the effects of
similar utilization standards on two
different types of streams under
carefully control led research condi-
ions.
Prior to any cattle grazing. the
sandy loam streambanks in the top
photo were stable, well protected
by grass. and contributed little sedi-
ment to the stream during high
runofi. Over time, takin half and
leaving half - even under carefully
controlled conditions — broke down
fragile streambanks and exposed
soils to the erosive force of spring
high flows. Note heavy sediment
load in stream.
The soils in the riparian aiea in the
bottom photo are more gravelly,
better drained, and generally
tougher than those in the photo
above. Riparian grasses left of the
fence were grazed by cattle to meet
a 60% utilization standard. Result
over time: no significant damage to
streainbanks. Compare to ungrazed
area right of the fence which was
excluded from grazing. Note rela-
tively sediment-free stream bottom.
In the top photo, taking half and
leaving half didn’t overgraze riparian
grasses, but did “overgraze” stream-
banks. In the bottom photo, a higher
utilization rate didn’t damage plants
or streambanks.
Stream character - not the forage uti-
lization rate - determined the effect
of livestock grazing on the riparian
area and on water quality.
i t .
‘S
27

-------
Monitoring Results
Results count.
It’s important to monitor the effects
of changes in grazing management.
To check progress toward long-term
objectives on a continuing basis.
It’s easy to tell if big things are hap-
pening fast. Some sites will be slow
to recover. Some responses impor-
tant from a water quality perspec-
tive will be gradual and only
become obvious over time.
Ranchers typically keep detailed
records on animal performance
from year to year.
It’s no great leap - and a lot easier -
to record how key plant species, the
overall riparian area and stream, and
key upland plants respond to
changes in grazing management.
As with many things. the simplest
way also is the best way - annual
photographs of the same represen-
tative areas.
hstablish a few pfloto points - easily
accessible, easily recognizable, per-
manent landmarks - From which to
shoot each year’s photos.
Supplement the photo album with
notes on your observations of the
condition and trend of riparian veg-
etation, streambanks and stream
channel. Don’t forget to do the
same for key upland sites.
Over time, this record will clearly
reveal progress - or lack of it -
toward long-term objectives that
may not be readily apparent at any
given point in time.
The vegetative response in this
riparian area was immediate and
obvious to a livestock operator basi-
cally in the business of harvesting
plants. Other important responses
might not be so obvious from a live-
stock perspective.
(A) Vegetation filtering out sediment,
building streambanks, and narrow-
ing and deepening the stream chan-
nel.
(B) Reduced fine sediments in
streambed gravels - an important
indicator of improving water quality
conditions and improving trout
spawning habitat.
28

-------
I
some aegrauea riparian areas may be
quickly restored to former productivi-
ty. Others will take generations of
improved grazing management.
P1’
A photographic record is essential for
your successors to see progress - or
lack of it - toward long-term objec-
tives.
The photos on this page document a
half-century of slow but steady
response of this riparian area to slow
but steady changes In grazing man-
agement.
J
Top Northern Great Basin stream
under heavy grazing about 1935.
Middle Same spot in 1947 under
light grazing.
Bottom Same area in 1986 under very
light grazing. The formerly downcut
stream channel has built up bringing
the water table with it. The point bars
now are about level with the opposite
banks.
r 4 41
p• • ’
.-“.
I
j
29

-------
The preceding pages are designed
to stimulate thinking about how to
change grazing management to
improve degraded riparian areas
and water quality.
Just looking at your riparian areas
from a water quality perspective
may suggest a relatively easy
answer to your particular problem.
It may be as simple as adding a
cross fence to get your riparian
areas into a separate pasture and
under special management.
In many areas it will be much more
complicated. For example, high ele-
vation pastures where the grazing
and growing seasons are short;
allotments with several pastures
and streams of different types. in
different condition and trend, and in
mixed ownership.
No one said it was going to be easy
to change the way we have man-
aged grazing on western riparian
areas for more than a century. Only
that change is necessary and
inevitable.
Over the past decade we’ve learned
more about riparian/wetland values,
and about the effects of livestock
grazing on western rangeland
watersheds, than we learned the
previous century.
This knowledge has fundamentally
changed the way land and livestock
managers and society as a whole
think about rangeland grazing in
general, and its effects on limited,
high value riparian/wetland areas in
particular.
But it will take more than just
thinking about it to restore and sus-
tain the many public and private
benefits from productive western
rangeland watersheds.
It requires large, long-term invest-
ments in improved management and
in infrastructure such as fencing,
alternative water supplies, and other
improvements.
It requires more than a new invest-
ment strategy. It requires leadership
by the livestock industry. It requires
a spirit of cooperation and a pub-
lic/private partnership. It requires a
watershed and ecosystem perspec-
tive.
Most of all, it requires a can-do atti-
tude and creative thinking by the
men and women who move the live-
stock.
When it gets right down to it. they
are the most important people in the
growing national effort to improve
water qLlality and the long-term
economic productivity and quality
of life on western range land water-
sheds.
1’ !1: i 1

-------
CREDITS
Getting Help to
Manage Change
This document is designed to
help the men and women who
move the livestock took at their
riparian/wetiand areas and
streams from a watershed/water
quality perspective, to stimulate
their thinking about how to
change livestock management to
improve deteriorated riparian
areas and water quality.
In short, to help them get out in
front of and manage the neces-
sary and inevitable changes in
the way deteriorated western
rangeland watersheds in general,
and riparianFwetland areas in par-
ticular, are grazed.
The document doesn’t, of
course, attempt to prescribe or
design site-specific grazing
strategies, tell how to determine
the carrying capacity of or set
forage management objectives
for a pasture, understand
vegetative succession or stream
hydrology, balance riparian and
upland management, keep graz-
ing records, dose a calf, mend
fence, or balance a checkbook,
all of which and more are essen-
tial to good management.
There is a wealth of technical
information and professional
help available to livestock opera-
tors. Until fairly recent times,
there hasn’t been much call for
expertise in managing livestock
grazing on western riparian/wet-
land areas. But that too Is
changing rapidly.
Today, ranchers with a positive
attitude toward changing their
operations to benefit watershed!
water quality conditions can find
good, mostly free, help.
Places to look for it include the
Soil Conservation Service,
Extension Service, Bureau of
Land Management and Forest
Service (now’s a good time for
permittees to start thinking of
federal land managers as
watershed partners].
Non-traditional sources of useful
expertise for the livestock indus-
try include people within state
and federal fish and wildlife
agencies. Also, there is a small
but growing number of private
consultants who understand
both livestock grazing and water-
shed/water quality issues.
Outside professional help can be
an invaluable complement to
ranchers’ on-the-ground knowl-
edge.
in the final analysis, however, the
quality of water and other values
produced on western rangeland
watersheds depends most on the
business-like creative thinking,
watershed perspective, good citi-
zenship, and can-do-attitude of
the men and women who move
the livestock.
Cover Composite by Murie Graphic
Design, mc; Glasses: Bowers Aero
Photo; Rancher: Kevin Martini-Fuller;
Background: Richard Prange
Pages 2 & 3 Center: Kathleen Menke;
Other Left to Right: Soil Conservation
Service (SCS); Bob Mosely, Idaho
Department of Fish and Game; Kathleen
Menke; National Cattlemen’s
Association
Pages 4 & 5 Bureau of Land
Management (BLM)
Pages 6 & . 7 lop Iwo: SCS; Bottom
Two: BLM
Pages 8 & 9 Top L. Two: BLM; Bottom
1: SCS; Top R. Two: William Mullins;
Middle R.Two: Bureau of Reclamation;
Oregon State University; Infrared: Army
Corps of Engineers
Pages 10 & ilL. Top to Bottom:
William Platts; BLM; BLM; Glasses 1:
Richard Prange; Glasses R: Bowers
Aero Photo; R. Top: William Platts; R.
Bottom: SCS
Pages 12 & 13 Top Three: William
Platts; Bottom Two: Richard Prange;
Enhancement by Murie Graphic Design,
Inc.
Pages 14 & 15 L. Top to Bottom: William
Platts; Richard Prange; R. lop: Ed
Chaney; Inset & R. Bottom: Richard
Prange
Pages 16& 17L. lop: BLM; L. Bottom:
BLM; R. lop to Bottom: William Platts,
Nevada Department of Wildlife, Bob
Mosely, Idaho Department of Fish and
Game; Inset: BLM
Pages 18 & 19 L. Top to Bottom: BLM,
William Platts; R. Two: BLM
Pages 20 & 21 Illustration adapted from:
Understanding Grass Growth: The Key to
Profitable Livestock Production; photos:
BLM
Pages 22 & 23 L. Four: BLM; R. lop:
Richard Prange; illustration adapted
from: Nevada Department of Wildlife
Pages 24 & 25 L. Four: BLM; R. Two:
Richard Prange
Pages 26 & 27 William Platts
Pages 28 & 29 Left: Richard Prange;
Right: William Platts
Page 30 Top: Idaho Woolgrowers’
Association; Bottom: William Platts

-------