In this paper, highly-respected Texas A&M range scientists Dr. David Briske et al. conclude that planned grazing has been disproved, and that low-density set-stocking is the best grazing protocol. The paper reaches seven basic conclusions:
- In spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, rotational grazing continues to be promoted as the only viable grazing strategy.
- Continuation of costly experiments under conventional protocols will yield little additional information.
- Continuous grazing produced better plants in 87% of the studies, compared to rotational grazing.
- Animal performance was better under continuous grazing in 92% of the studies compared to rotational.
- Several effective strategies exist, but none have the unique properties that makes it more ecologically effective.
- Different outcomes are dependent on management.
- Advocacy for any form of rotational grazing is based on subjective perception and anecdotal interpretation.
I read Dr. Briske’s studies and found that the studies he relied on in reaching these conclusions had not tested planned grazing. Instead they tested what are known as short-duration grazing-rotational systems (SDG’s).
SDG rotational systems are not, and have never been, recommended by Allan Savory. This error of testing SDG’s instead of planned grazing is commonplace among conventional range scientists, as the exchanges in this section demonstrate.