Welcome to the Rangelands archives. The archives provide public access, in a "rolling window" agreement with the Society for Range Management, to Rangelands (1979-present) from v.1 up to two years from the present year.

The most recent issues of Rangelands are available with membership in the Society for Range Management (SRM). Membership in SRM is a means to access current information and dialogue on rangeland management.

Your institution may also have access to current issues through library or institutional subscriptions.

ISSN: 0190-0528


Contact the University Libraries Journal Team with questions about these journals.

Recent Submissions

  • Ranch Business Planning and Resource Monitoring for Rangeland Sustainability

    Maczko, Kristie A.; Tanaka, John A.; Smith, Michael; Garretson-Weibel, Cindy; Hamilton, Stanley F.; Mitchell, John E.; Fults, Gene; Stanley, Charles; Loper, Dick; Bryant, Larry D.; et al. (Society for Range Management, 2012-02-01)
    Aligning a rancher’s business plan goals with the capability of the ranch’s rangeland resources improves the viability and sustainability of family ranches. Strategically monitoring the condition of soil, water, vegetation, wildlife, livestock production, and economics helps inform business plan goals. Business planning and resource monitoring help keep ranchers on the land, support the well-being of rangeland-dependent communities, and conserve the rural way of life. To work toward this goal, the Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable (SRR), Wyoming Business Council (WBC), Wyoming State Grazing Board (WSGB), University of Wyoming Extension, Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative (GLCI), Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation, USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station, Natural Resources Conservation Service, and several ranchers formed the SRR Ranch Sustainability Assessment Group. The working group focuses on implementing a monitoring framework for ecological, economic, and social sustainability within the context of ranchers’ business plans...
  • The Effects of a Rotational Cattle Grazing System on Elk Diets in Arizona Piñon–Juniper Rangeland

    Tolleson, Doug; Halstead, Lacey; Howery, Larry; Schafer, Dave; Prince, Steohen; Banik, Kris (Society for Range Management, 2012-02-01)
    It is not uncommon to hear statements such as these in the western United States. Dietary overlap between cattle and wild herbivores such as elk or deer has been reported in various regions, seasons, and ecosystems. Competition between two species occurs when a shared resource is in limited supply or when the presence of one species disturbs the other. The simple fact that space and forage resources are shared might or might not, however, constitute a negative interaction between cattle and elk. Studies in central Arizona found that although diet similarity was high in certain years and seasons, there was actually little inter-specific competition between cattle and elk overall. Factors such as scale, season, and forage availability influence the likelihood and degree of competition. Overgrazing is detrimental to sustained livestock and wildlife productivity. Livestock grazing can, however, be applied to positively manipulate habitat for wildlife. A review by Krausman et al. cites a Montana case study in which a rotational cattle grazing system “maintained productive cover and forage for elk while enhancing native vegetation condition on all of the managed areas.” 
  • Targeted Grazing: Applying the Research to the Land

    Frost, Rachel; Walker, John; Madsen, Craig; Holes, Ray; Lehfeldt, John; Cunningham, Jennifer; Voth, Kathy; Welling, Bob; Davis, T. Zane; Bradford, Dave; et al. (Society for Range Management, 2012-02-01)
    The discipline of range science is in part based on the observation that vegetation on rangelands changes in response to livestock grazing. For much of the history of range science, livestock grazing was considered to affect range plants and ecological condition negatively. Thus range plants were classified as increasers, decreasers, or invaders as a function of their response to grazing. The concept that grazing can be used to restore degraded rangelands is relatively new. It requires a paradigm shift for most people from grazing animals reaping the benefits of the land to the land reaping the benefits of the grazing animals. Using livestock to accomplish vegetation management goals is referred to as targeted grazing. Targeted grazing is defined as the application of a particular kind of grazing animal at a specified season, duration, and intensity to accomplish specific vegetation management goals. It is the last half of this definition that differentiates targeted grazing from traditional grazing. The focus is on the vegetation and the subsequent outcomes and changes in composition or structure, rather than the performance of the grazing animal. Where the potential for targeted grazing to create positive change on the landscape has been clearly demonstrated through research and the experiences of practitioners, it still struggles to gain recognition as a viable vegetation management option. The recently published handbook Targeted Grazing: A Natural Approach to Vegetation Management and Landscape Enhancement was organized and written largely by range scientists to provide the scientific basis for targeted grazing. However, it did not provide much information on the practical and daily management decisions required by contract graziers and land managers. While the scientific basis for targeted grazing provides the foundation for understanding and improving this technology, as with all grazing management it is the daily operations and decisions that determine its success. The diversity of situations to which this tool can be applied necessitates the exchange of real-life experiences to promote learning among practitioners and to inform land managers of the successful programs and potential pitfalls to avoid....
  • Cooperative Prevention Systems to Protect Rangelands From the Spread of Invasive Plants

    Goodwin, Kim; Sheley, Roger; Jacobs, James; Wood, Shana; Manoukian, Mark; Schuldt, Mike; Miller, Eric; Sackman, Sharla (Society for Range Management, 2012-02-01)
    Eastern Montana is a vast region dominated by weed-free plains grassland. The protection of these prairies from the spread of invasive plants through weed prevention areas (WPAs) can preserve high-quality rangelands for wildlife, livestock, and other ecosystem goods and services. Eastern Montana sustains a spacious region of native grasslands and shrublands (approximately 57,000 mi2). The conservation of these rangelands has far-reaching societal implications for long-term sustainability of ecosystem services and rural livelihoods. 
  • Medusahead Management in Sagebrush–Steppe Rangelands: Prevention, Control, and Revegetation

    Johnson, Dustin D.; Davies, Kirk W. (Society for Range Management, 2012-02-01)
    Medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae [L.] Nevski) (Fig. 1) is an aggressive exotic annual grass native to the Mediterranean region of Eurasia that is changing the ecology and productivity of western rangelands. Since the collection of the first known North American herbarium specimen of medusahead in 1887 near Roseburg, Oregon, the exotic annual grass has invaded millions of acres in the Pacific Northwest, California, Utah, Nevada, and Colorado. On public lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management, 3.3 million acres of rangeland are classified as monotypic stands of cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum L.) and/or medusahead, nearly 14 million acres are infested with one or both grasses, and over 62 million acres are at risk of invasion by the exotic annual grasses.
  • 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. 
  • Listening to the Land: Professional Choices in a Once and Future World

    Box, Thad (Society for Range Management, 2012-02-01)
    Last November the human population of the world reached seven billion. When I was born (1929) the world had about two billion people. By the time I earned my PhD (1959) there were three billion. There were 3.7 billion in 1970 when I was appointed dean, and about 5.2 billion when I retired (1990). In the next generation the population will reach eight billion. During my lifetime the world population almost quadrupled. The habitable area decreased. Increasing human density, unequal population distribution, and natural resource values will dictate that land care professionals are destined to work in a conflict zone between haves and have-nots. 
  • Land Lines: On Science, Art, and Ecotone

    Salo, Cindy (Society for Range Management, 2012-02-01)
    I have recently heard some SRM members wonder if the society might be focusing too much on science. They worry that we are forgetting about the art of managing rangelands. A recent SRM Section newsletter explained, “What I mean is that when the average rancher, myself included, reads through the SRM publications or attends meetings, he/she is bombarded with way more scientific jargon that what they can wrap their heads around.”
  • Highlights

    Society for Range Management, 2012-02-01
  • Browsing the Literature

    Mosley, Jeff (Society for Range Management, 2012-02-01)
    This section reviews new publications available about the art and science of rangeland management. Personal copies of these publications can be obtained by contacting the respective publishers or senior authors (addresses shown in parentheses). Suggestions are welcomed and encouraged for items to include in future issues of Browsing the Literature. Contact Jeff Mosley, jmosley@montana.edu.