The publications in this section are those that we consider to be most useful in Tribal rangeland management. If you are a Tribal land manager and have other publications that should be included, please submit them to email@example.com. Papers are listed in alphabetical order by the last name of the first author.
Helpful sites for more in depth literature searches include: aces.nmsu.edu/pubs/_b/; jornada.nmsu.edu; rangelandsgateway.org; lib.uidaho.edu/find/articles.html;
Black Elk, Linda. 2016. Native Science: Understanding and Respecting Other Ways of Thinking. Rangelands 38(1):3-4
This paper acknowledges Native Science as a way of addressing the landscape and all that it has to offer in terms of chemical, physical, communities and ecological processes.
Diekmann, L., L. Panich, and C. Striplen. 2007. Native American Management and the Legacy of Working Landscapes in California. Rangelands(43):46-50.
This paper describes and provides examples of how many western ecosystems were shaped by the work American Indians did to make their local environments produce needed food and raw materials.
Doan-Crider, D., J. Hipp, L. Lone Fight, V. Small, and V. Yazzie-Ashley. 2013. Keeping Native American communities connected to the land: women as change agents (Rangelands_DoanCrideretal_2013). Rangelands, 35(6):63-67.
This paper provides viewpoints on the relevance of women as change agents for keeping tribal communities connected to the land, and includes challenges in land management.
McCuen, J., D. Doan-Crider, and B. Alexander. 2011. Partnering for rangeland health on tribal lands (Rangelands_McCuenDoanCrider_2011). Rangelands 33(6):19–22.
This paper provides viewpoints on tribal rangeland health capacity building needs and potential partnering opportunities.
Agouridia, C. 2015. Rotational vs. Continuous Stocking Comparisons: Environmental and Wildlife Responses. Natural Resources Conservation Service Conservation Insight.
This paper provides supporting literature that rotational stocking has fewer negative environmental effects than continuous stocking.
Augustine, D.J., and J.D. Derner. 2015. Patch Burn Grazing Management in a Semiarid Grassland: Consequences for Pronghorn, Plains Pricklypear, and Wind Erosion. Rangeland Ecology & Management (68):40-47.
This paper found that patch burns, as well as subsequent response of pronghorn, reduced plains prickly pear density by 54-71% during the first year after the burns and density remained suppressed for up to 6 years after burns. Wind erosion rates were less than fallow croplands, soil stability was not effected long term, and livestock weight gains were not negatively effected.
Briske, D.D., B.T. Bestelmeyer, J.R. Brown, M.W. Brunson, T.L. Thurow, and J.A. Tanaka. 2017. Assessment of USDA-NRCS rangeland conservation programs; recommendation for an evidence-based conservation platform. Ecological Applications 27(1):94-104.
This paper describes how the USDA-NRCS should restructure conservation programs to provide site specific information, learning, and accountability and further advance balanced delivery of agricultural production and environmental quality goals.
Drake, D.J., and J. Oltjen. 1994. Intensively Managed Rotational Grazing Systems for Irrigated Pasture. California Ranchers’ Management Guide. 33- 42.
Using livestock for harvesting rotational irrigated pastures can mimic hay harvest with equipment leading to timely, uniform and planned harvest of pasture plants.
Green, S. and B. Brazee. 2012. Harvest Efficiency in Prescribed Grazing. USDA-NRCS Technical Note Range No. 73.
This paper describes how to understand harvest efficiency and illustrates the percentage of forage actually ingested by the animals from the total amount of forage produced.
Kerlin, K. 2018. Grasslands More Reliable Carbon Sink Than Trees. University of California Davis Science and Climate
This study from the University of California, Davis, found that grasslands and rangelands are more resilient carbon sinks than forests in 21st century California. As such, the study indicates they should be given opportunities in the state’s cap-and-and trade market, which is designed to reduce California’s greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.
Maczko, K., J.A. Tanaka, R. Breckenridge, L. Hidinger, H.T. Heintz, W.E. Fox, U.P. Kreuter, C.S. Duke, J.E. Mitchell, and D.W. McCollum. 2011. Rangelands Ecosystem Goods and Services: Values and Evaluation of Opportunities for Ranchers and Land Managers. Rangelands, 33(5):30-36.
This paper describes opportunities for ranchers to add EGS based enterprises to ranching operations and important questions to answer.
Reese, G.A., R.L. Bayn, and N.E. West. 1980. Evaluation of Double-sampling Estimators of Subalpine Herbage Production. Journal of Range Management 33(4):300-306.
Electronic capacitance metering, relative and dry weight estimations, and canopy cover estimation of herbaceous standing crops were statistically evaluated with respect to sampling costs, crops were statistically evaluated with respect to sampling costs, precisions, and the vegetal and environmental factors which affected their double-sampling correlations.
Ruyle, G., and J. Dyess. 2010. Rangeland Monitoring and the Parker 3-Step Method: Overview, Perspectives and Current Applications. University of Arizona Cooperative Extension, Report az1525. 9 pages.
This paper discusses the Parker 3-step Method and suggests potential application for interpretation and analysis in conjunction with current rangeland ecological analyses.
Smith, L., G. Ruyle, J. Maynard, S. Barker, W. Meyer, D. Stewart, B. Coulloudon, S. Williams, and J. Dyess. 2005. Principles of Obtaining and Interpreting Utilization Data on Rangelands (az1375). University of Arizona Cooperative Extension.
This paper describes how residual measurements and utilization data can be properly used which are consistent with scientific literature, experience of the Range Management Professionals, and analysis in this paper.
Sprinkle, J. 2001. Protein Supplementation. Range Cattle Nutrition Pgs. 49-58.
This paper describes the purpose of protein supplements, when is the proper time to provide supplement, and which supplements to use.
Torell, L.A., K.C. McDaniel, J.R. Brown, and G.L. Torell. 2018. Broom snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae) Population Change in Central New Mexico: Implications for Management and Control. Rangeland Ecology & Management(71):228-238.
This paper examines changes in broom snakeweed populations (Gutierrezia sarothrae [Pursh] Britt. & Rusby) from 1979 to 2014 at three prairie grassland sites in New Mexico. Data gathered each fall were used to study broom snakeweed population dynamics and to estimate the probability that the relatively short-lived subshrub will die off or invade blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis [H.B.K. Lag]) rangelands.
Walter, J. H., Y.C. Newman, S.F. Gamble, D.M. Mudge, P. Deal, M. Baseggio, and A. Fluke. 2013. Use of Rotational Stocking in Combination with Cultural Practices for Smutgrass Control – A Florida Case Study. Rangelands 35(5):98-103.
This paper describes how stocking densities and rotational grazing help control Smutgrass infested pastures in south Florida.
West, A.L., C.B. Zou, E. Stebler, S.D. Fuhlendorf, and B. Allred. 2016. Pyric-herbivory and Hydrological Responses in Tallgrass Prairie. Rangeland Ecology & Management(69):20-27.
This paper monitored the pattern of cattle occupancy on annually burned and patch burned pastures under moderate stocking rates of steers in the Tallgrass Prairie Preserve and quantified surface runoff and sediment transport for simulated rainfall of 10 year return storm intensity applied to different phases of the fire-grazing interaction in 2011-2012.