• Lessons in developing successful invasive weed control programs

      Anderson, G. L.; Delfosse, E. S.; Spencer, N. R.; Prosser, C. W.; Richard, R. D. (Society for Range Management, 2003-01-01)
      The development of successful regional or national invasive weed control programs is often hampered by the way the problem is approached. Typically weed control programs are developed and evaluated solely from the perspective of the biological sciences. While this is appropriate from a local or landscape perspective, it will probably not produce the desired results when addressing widespread well-established infestations that impact large regions. The "Ecological Area-wide Management (TEAM) of Leafy Spurge" program was the first U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural Research Service (ARS) area wide invasive weed program. The 5-year program, funded by the ARS and conducted cooperatively with the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, focused on the control of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula L.) in North Dakota and South Dakota, Montana and Wyoming. Now in its final year (2001), the TEAM Leafy Spurge program has made significant progress in controlling leafy spurge, increasing public awareness of the problem and demonstrating the effectiveness of biologically-based integrated pest management. While this is a significant accomplishment, the lessons learned over the course of the project clearly demonstrate that the success of regional weed control programs depends on more than a persistent, marked reduction in the pest population. Effective regional weed control programs need to focus not only on biological issues, but also on the ecological, scientific, economic, social and legal factors that influence the effectiveness of the program. Therefore, the implementation and subsequent evaluation of a weed control program must include all the principal factors that will ultimately determine success and sustainability. This manuscript outlines the history of leafy spurge on the North American continent, the situation currently facing weed managers, and an evaluation of the TEAM Leafy Spurge program's success for each factor listed above. The final analysis indicates that successful biologically-based leafy spurge control is on the horizon, especially when weed managers understand the number of problem areas that must be addressed to achieve a sustained reduction of a weed population. The amount of time it will take to be realized depends on our commitment to solving the problem and our willingness to work together as a cohesive team.
    • Lessons Learned from Bison Restoration Efforts in Utahi on Western Rangelands

      Bates, Bill; Hersey, Kent (Society for Range Management, 2016-12-01)
      On the Ground • Bison are considered the keystone species of the Great Plains but widespread slaughter led to their near extinction. • Utah has two wild, free-ranging herds on public lands managed as wildlife though hunting. Both herds are descended from animals reintroduced to the Henry Mountains in the 1940s and more recently the Book Cliffs in 2008. • Key elements for the successful ecological restoration of bison include: ∘ Legal designation of bison as wildlife in the state ∘ Genetically-pure, disease-free source ∘ Large expanses of habitat-they take a lot of room ∘ Potential conflicts must be identified and addressed in a transparent manner ∘ Mutual purpose and trust with all affected stakeholders is essential; i.e., ask, How can we have both sustainable livestock grazing and a viable bison herd on the unit? ∘ Active management to address changing situations and maintain herd size at a sustainable level
    • Lessons to Learn: Thinking Like a Mountain

      Brown, Cristy (Society for Range Management, 1996-12-01)
    • Let's Not Forget the Art in Range Management

      Mosley, Jeffrey C. (Society for Range Management, 1985-08-01)
    • Let's take a long look

      Noh, Laird (Society for Range Management, 1979-06-01)
    • Letter to the Editor

      Barnes, Matthew K.; Steffens, Timothy J.; Thorpe, Jim (Society for Range Management, 2012-02-01)
      The article “Cross-Fencing on Private US Rangelands: Financial Costs and Producer Risks” (April 2011), arguing that cross-fencing may not be cost effective is interesting, but problematic. Although it is true that cross-fencing with no expected resource benefits would be neither cost effective nor a public good, the assumptions of the article are not generally supported in our experience, and the article’s implications may unjustifiably undermine support for this widespread conservation practice utilized by USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) technical and financial assistance programs as part of a prescribed grazing strategy addressing resource concerns. To preclude any impression that the article’s implications are widely applicable and prevail among the rangeland management profession, we briefly present arguments in support of cross-fencing to facilitate planned grazing for rangeland health and associated ecosystem services. 
    • Letter to the Editor

      Marshall, Fred (Society for Range Management, 2012-10-01)
    • Letter to the Editor

      Marshall, Fred (Society for Range Management, 2010-10-01)
    • Letter to the Editor

      Skovlin, Jon M. (Society for Range Management, 2007-10-01)
    • Letter to the Editor

      Blew, Roger (Society for Range Management, 2011-04-01)
    • Letter to the Editor

      Adams, Laurie Davies (Society for Range Management, 2011-08-01)
    • Letter to the Editor

      Smith, Lamar (Society for Range Management, 2011-04-01)
    • Letter to the Editor

      Langford, David K. (Society for Range Management, 2007-08-01)
    • Letter to the Editor

      Brunner, James (Society for Range Management, 2008-10-01)
    • Letter to the Editor

      Society for Range Management, 2008-04-01
    • Letter to the Editor

      Murray, John E. (Society for Range Management, 2010-06-01)
    • Letter to the Editor

      Martin, Niels LeRoy (Society for Range Management, 2008-02-01)
    • Letter to the Editor

      Sundt, Pete (Society for Range Management, 2008-02-01)
    • Letter to the Editor: A Producer Perspective on Savory’s TED Talk

      Grissom, Grady (Society for Range Management, 2014-06-01)