The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane...
-
Upload
utah-section-society-for-range-management -
Category
Sports
-
view
261 -
download
3
description
Transcript of The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane...
![Page 1: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
The Grazing Response Index
A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management
Shane Green NRCSWith many slides borrowed from Dave Bradford, USFS
ret.
![Page 2: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
GRI History
Developed by CSU Extension (Roy Roath)
Early implementation by USFS (Dave Bradford, Floyd Reed)
1999 Rangelands Article
![Page 3: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
GRI in Agency Technical References
![Page 4: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Grazing Response Index
The GRI is used to assess the effects of grazing during the growing season, using the following criteria:
Frequency (measured by Duration) of grazing.
Intensity of grazing.
Opportunity for growth before grazing OR re-growth following grazing.
![Page 5: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Frequency
The number of times a plant is defoliated during active growth.
Normally figure one defoliation every 7 days, during active growth.
As growth slows down figure one defoliation every 10 days, or longer depending on actual growth periods.
One defoliation is positive and rates +1
Two defoliations is neutral and rates 0
Three or more defoliations is negative and rates -1
![Page 6: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Intensity
The amount of leaf material removed during the grazing period. The key point being the amount of leaf material left for the plant to continue photosynthesis.
Light defoliation (> 65% leaf material remaining) +1
Moderate (50-64% leaf material remaining) 0
Heavy defoliation (< 50% leaf material remaining) -1
Generally a grazing intensity of <50% of leaf material removed allows the plant to meet it’s needs and continue growth.
![Page 7: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Opportunity
For plant growth and/or regrowth .
This criteria carries double the value of the frequency and intensity criteria.
Full season to grow/regrow +2
Most of season +1
Some chance 0
Little chance -1
No chance -2
This incorporates Time and Duration of grazing.
![Page 8: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
What Does the GRI Do? The values are additive, providing a
positive, neutral, or negative rating for assessing the grazing impacts for the year.
This gives you an assessment of how your grazing strategy worked this year.
Provides a basis for planning next year’s grazing use.
Accounts for more than just utilization to assess grazing effects
![Page 9: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
What the GRI does not do
Monitor or assess rangeland plant communities or processes
Replacement for vegetation monitoring and assessment
![Page 10: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Graphic
Assessment Monitoring
Gra
zing
Pla
nts
Eco
logic
al
Pro
cess
es Interpreting
Indicators of Rangeland
Health
Trend Photo Plots,
Cover, Nested Frequency,Species composition
Multiple Indicator Monitoring
MIM
ApparentTrend
Grazing Response Index GRI
Proper FunctioningCondition
PFC
Utilization
Similarity Index(Range Condition)
RemoteSensing
SVAPWeather
and Climate
Soil Survey
![Page 11: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Where does GRI fit in to our work?
Stock and monitor approach Lots of tools to monitor the land and
plants Lack tools to evaluate grazing – GRI
helps to fill this void.
![Page 12: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Example 1:
The first example shows the Oak Ridge (BLM) allotment (left side of fence) and the West Elk (FS) allotment (right side of fence).
Both allotments are managed with multi-pasture grazing strategies.
Oak Ridge is grazed by 305 cow/calf pairs, owned by 2 permittees, from 5/10-6/15, with 10 pastures.
West Elk is grazed by 1250 cow/calf pairs, owned by 7 permittees, from 5/15-10/10, with 30 pastures.
![Page 13: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Oak Ridge (BLM)/West Elk (FS) Prior to grazing
5-13-1999
![Page 14: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Oak Ridge (L)/ West Elk (R), 6-4-99Grazed 5/21-5/26/1999 / Ungrazed
![Page 15: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Oak Ridge (L)/ West Elk (R), 7-9-99
45 days post-grazing / Ungrazed
![Page 16: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Oak Ridge (L)/ West Elk (R), 9-9-99
105 days post-grazing / Ungrazed
![Page 17: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Oak Ridge (L)/West Elk (R),10-20-99
145 days post-grazing / Grazed 9/20-10/10
![Page 18: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
How Would the GRI Rate This ?
1999Oak Ridge Frequency +1 Intensity 0 Opportunity +1 Total Response +2West Elk Frequency 0 Intensity 0 Opportunity +2 Total Response +2
![Page 19: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Do these Grazing Responses relate to Range Trend?
Oak RidgeOak RidgeWest ElkWest Elk
7-23-917-23-91
![Page 20: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Oak Ridge (L)/West Elk (R),
7-23-1991 8-10-2001
![Page 21: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Example 3:
This example shows Bear Trap Park on the Dyer allotment.
This example is based on historic photo monitoring, looking at three years 1948, 2000 and 2001.
![Page 22: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
![Page 23: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
![Page 24: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Dyer C&H Bear Trap Park 10/15/1948 Allotment grazed season-long, 5/16-10/15, by 1,048 cow/calf pairs for 5,240 AUMs. SR – 3.0 acres/AUM. Precipitation for season was 105%.
10/12/2000 Allotment grazed multi-pasture rotation, 6/16-10/10, by 425 cow/calf pairs for 2,150 AUMs. This pasture grazed 8/11-10/05 in 2000. SR – 5.8 acres/AUM. Precipitation for season was 80%.
![Page 25: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Dyer C&H Bear Trap Park 10/15/1948 Allotment grazed season-long, 5/16-10/15, by 1048 cow/calf pairs for 5,240 AUMs. SR – 3.0 acres/AUM. Precipitation for season was 105%.
10/15/2001 Allotment grazed multi-pasture rotation, 6/16-10/10, by 375 cow/calf pairs for 2,150 AUMs. This pasture rested in 2001. SR – 5.8 acres/AUM. Precipitation for season was 89%.
![Page 26: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
How Would the GRI Rate This ?
Dyer Allotment 1948 2000 2001
Frequency -1 -1 +1
Intensity -1 -1 +1
Opportunity -2 +1 +2
Total Grazing Response
-4 -1 +4
![Page 27: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Example 4:
This example shows Corral Creek on the Corral Gulch Pasture on the Mesa allotment.
This allotment is managed using a multi-pasture grazing strategy.
The allotment is grazed by 2,000 cow-calf pairs/yearlings, 6/26-10/20.
![Page 28: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
The Black Mesa Story
Corral Gulch 9/1/1992
Corral Gulch 9/1/1992
![Page 29: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Mesa C&H Lower Mesa Unit 8/12/1991
![Page 30: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Mesa C&H Upper Mesa Unit 8/2/1991 35% Use
![Page 31: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
![Page 32: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
![Page 33: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
![Page 34: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
How Would the GRI Rate This ?
Mesa Allotment Corral Gulch Pasture
1995 2007
Frequency 0 0 Intensity 0 0 Opportunity +1 +1 Total Grazing Response +1 +1
![Page 35: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Summary of Grazing Response Values on Corral Gulch Pasture of Mesa C&H Allotment, 1995-2007
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
F 0 0 0 +1
0 +1
-1 0 0 0 0 -1 0
I 0 0 0 0 -1 0 -1 +1
0 0 0 +1
0
O +1
+1
+1
+1
+1
-1 +1
-1 0 +1
+1
+1
+1
T +1
+1
+1
+2
0 0 -1 0 0 +1
+1
+1
+1
![Page 36: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Summary of Grazing Response Values on Corral Gulch Pasture of Mesa C&H Allotment, 1995-
2007: Positive values 8 of 13 years (62%). Neutral values 4 of 13 years (31%). Negative values 1 of 13 years (7%).
Grazing Responses can and do relate to long-term vegetative trend.
![Page 37: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Mesa C&H Corral Gulch 9-25-1995 Grazed 7/25-8/08 (15 days) by1,782 cow/calf pairs & 155 yearlings. 313 mm Growing season precipitation or 169%.
10-10-2007 Grazed 7/15-7/29 (15 days) by1,883 cow/calf
pairs 104 yearlings. 215mm Growing season precipitation or 116%.
Mesa C&H Corral Gulch 9-25-1995 Grazed 7/25-8/08 (15 days) by1,782 cow/calf pairs & 155 yearlings. 313 mm Growing season precipitation or 169%.
10-10-2007 Grazed 7/15-7/29 (15 days) by1,883 cow/calf
pairs 104 yearlings. 215mm Growing season precipitation or 116%.
![Page 38: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Dry Fork C&H Allotment ExampleoAllotment consists of 31,000 acres of which 16,000 are considered unsuitable to grazing.
oThe allotment is grazed by up to 630 cattle owned by 5 different permittees.
oThe allotment has nine pastures, that are grazed from 3 to 32 days.
oCattle graze the Deer Creek/Apache pasture first every year; graze the Sherwood pasture every other year and graze the Ditch pasture last every year.
![Page 39: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Summary of GRI Values on Apache Rocks – Deer Creek Pasture of Dry Fork C& H Allotment, 1998-
200998
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
F -1 No Data
0 0 No Data
-1 0 Pasture rested
No Data
-1 0 0
I -1 0 0 0 -1 -1 0 -1
O 0 +1
+2
-1 -1 +1
+1
0
T -2 +1
+2
-2 -2 -1 +1
-1
![Page 40: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Summary of Grazing Response Values on Apache Rocks-Deer Creek Pasture of Dry Fork C&H
Allotment, 1998-2009:(Data available for 8 of 12 years)
Positive values 3 of 8 years (38%). Neutral values 0 of 8 (0%). Negative values 5 of 8 years (62%).
Grazing Responses can and do relate to long-term vegetative trend.
![Page 41: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Dry Fork C&HDeer Creek PastureDeer Creek CM West View6/18/199914 plant species40% smooth brome30% Kentucky bluegrassTrace wheatgrassTrend uncertain.Dry Fork C&HDeer Creek PastureDeer Creek CM West View6/15/200921 plant species80% smooth brome5% Kentucky bluegrassTrace wheatgrass &Baltic rushTrend slightly upward.
![Page 42: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Summary of GRI Values on Sherwood Pasture of Dry Fork C& H Allotment, 1998-2009
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
F Pasture rested
No Data
Pasture rested
+1
Pasture rested
+1
Pasture rested
0 Pasture rested
0 Pasture rested
+1
I 0 0 0 0+1
O +2
+1
0 +1
+1
T +3
+2
+2
0 +2
![Page 43: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Summary of Grazing Response Values on Sherwood Pasture of Dry Fork C&H Allotment, 1998-2009:
(Data available for 11 of 12 years)
Positive values 4 of 6 years pasture was grazed (67%).
Neutral value 1 of 6 years pasture was grazed (17%).
Negative values 0 of 8 years (0%). No data 1 of 8 years pasture was grazed
(16%) Pasture rested 6 of 12 years (50%).
![Page 44: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Dry Fork C&HSherwood PastureElijah’s Park CM East View6/18/199922 plant species35% Kentucky bluegrass20%western wheatgrassTrace Letterman needlegrassTrend estimated upward.Dry Fork C&HSherwood PastureElijah’s Park CM East View6/18/200929 plant species25% Kentucky bluegrass5% western wheatgrass5% Letterman needlegrassTrend upward.
![Page 45: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Dry Fork C&HSherwood PastureElijah’s Park CM East View6/18/2009
Pasture grazed from 7/6-18/2009 by ~500 head of cattle.Dry Fork C&HSherwood PastureElijah’s Park CM East View10/07/2009GRI RatingF = +1 (13 days)I = 0 (moderate)O = +1 (most of season)TGRI = +2
![Page 46: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Summary of GRI Values on Ditch Pasture of Dry Fork C& H Allotment,
1998-200998
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
F +1
No Data
+1
0 No Data
+1
0 +1
+1
-1 No Data
+1
I 0 -1 -1 +1
+1
+1
+1
-1 +1
O -1 +1
+1
+2
+2
+2
-2 -2 -1
T 0 +1
0 +4
+3
+4
0 -1 +1
![Page 47: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Summary of Grazing Response Values on Ditch Pasture of Dry Fork
C&H Allotment, 1998-2009:(Data available for 9 of 12 years)
Positive values 5 of 9 years (55%). Neutral values 3 of 9 (33%). Negative values 1 of 8 years (12%).
![Page 48: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
Dry Fork C&HDitch PastureUpper Poison Gulch CM NE view6/18/199922 plant species30% smooth brome70% Kentucky bluegrassTrace Columbia needlegrassTrend estimated upward.Dry Fork C&HDitch PastureUpper Poison Gulch CM NE view7/23/200938 plant species30% smooth brome40% Kentucky bluegrass7% Columbia needlegrassTrend upward.
![Page 49: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Grazing Response Index - Summary:
The GRI is used to assess grazing management using the following 3 criteria:
Frequency (measured by duration) - The number of times a plant is defoliated during active growth.
Intensity - The amount of leaf material removed during the grazing period. The key point being the amount of leaf material left for the plant to continue photosynthesis.
Opportunity For plant growth before grazing and/or re-growth following grazing.
![Page 50: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Summary, continued: Easy to understand and communicate.
Allows specialists summarize and communicate a more comprehensive picture of grazing management effects
Fills a void in the landscape of monitoring and evaluation tools with a focus on the management rather than the resource.
Considers more than just utilization Incorporates stock density, time and
duration of grazing, and plant growth and re-growth.
![Page 51: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Summary, continued:
Provides a basis for adjusting grazing in subsequent years.
GRI evaluations should correlate to long-term trend monitoring.
![Page 52: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Where to take GRI from here
Proposed refinements Geographic fine tuning Adding an evaluation factor for
physiological stage of plant growth when grazed
Agency collaboration and endorsement Need for an update and published
interagency technical reference, akin to the Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health or Creeks and Communities efforts.
![Page 53: The Grazing Response Index, A Simple and Effective Method to Evaluate Grazing Management, Shane Green NRCS](https://reader038.fdocuments.net/reader038/viewer/2022110302/546432a7af79596b4d8b5fdc/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Are There Any
Questions ?