I was pleased to see in your recent article about
Courtney White and his Quivira Coalition that there are serious
questions about the scientific soundness of the livestock-grazing
strategy he promotes (HCN, 9/5/05: Rangeland Revival). I fear,
however, that your reporter’s use of the term “rest-rotation”
to describe this grazing scheme will produce more confusion.
A “rest-rotation” system simply rotates the cattle among
various pastures, while giving rest to some pastures. Such systems
have been widely used with good success. The grazing scheme pushed
by the Quivira Coalition is more accurately described as a
“high-intensity, short-duration” system.
The problem with
such systems is that they don’t work as well as science-based
grazing schemes, wherein the stocking rates and the grazing times
are dictated by conservative forage-utilization rates.
Mr. White professes to believe in collaboration, but I wonder how
collaborative he’d be if someone wanted to participate in the
Quivira Coalition while insisting that the grazing schemes they
promote were science-based.
Jeff
Burgess
Tempe, Arizona
This article appeared in the print edition of the magazine with the headline Quivira Coalition needs science-based grazing.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
