The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Ecological Costs of Livestock Grazing in Western North America
Abstract
Livestock grazing is the most widespread land management practice in western North America. Seventy percent of the western United States is grazed, including wilderness areas, wildlife refuges, national forests, and even some national parks. The ecological costs of this nearly ubiquitous form of land use can be dramatic. Examples of such costs include loss of biodiversity; lowering of population densities for a wide variety of taxa; disruption of ecosystem functions, including nutrient cycling and succession; change in community organization; and change in the physical characteristics of both terrestrial and aquatic habitats. Because livestock congregate in riparian ecosystems, which are among the biologically richest habitats in arid and semiarid regions, the ecological costs of grazing are magnified in these sites. Range science has traditionally been laden with economic assumptions favoring resource use. Conservation biologists are encouraged to contribute to the ongoing social and scientific dialogue on grazing issues.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Recovery of wild large herbivores following livestock decline in a tropical Indian wildlife reserve
MADHUSUDAN, M. D. (2004) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.0021-8901.2004.00950.x · Cited by 211
Globalization of the Cashmere Market and the Decline of Large Mammals in Central Asia
BERGER, J., BUUVEIBAATAR, B., & MISHRA, C. (2013) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/cobi.12100 · Cited by 191
Beschta, R. L., Donahue, D. L., DellaSala, D. A., Rhodes, J. J., Karr, J. R., O’Brien, M. H., Fleischner, T. L., & Deacon Williams, C. (2013) · Environmental Management · doi:10.1007/s00267-012-9964-9 · Cited by 160
Self-citationCOTTONWOODS, ELK, AND WOLVES IN THE LAMAR VALLEY OF YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK
Beschta, R. L. (2003) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/02-5175 · Cited by 120
Ecological foundations for fire management in North American forest and shrubland ecosystems
Keeley, J. E., Aplet, G. H., Christensen, N. L., Conard, S. G., Johnson, E. A., Omi, P. N., Peterson, D. L., & Swetnam, T. W. (2009) · doi:10.2737/pnw-gtr-779 · Cited by 101
A theoretical analysis of competitive exclusion in a Trans‐Himalayan large‐herbivore assemblage
Mishra, C., Van Wieren, S. E., Heitkönig, I. M. A., & Prins, H. H. T. (2002) · Animal Conservation · doi:10.1017/s1367943002002305 · Cited by 81
Bison limit ecosystem recovery in northern Yellowstone
Beschta, R. L., Ripple, W. J., Kauffman, J. B., & Painter, L. E. (2020) · Food Webs · doi:10.1016/j.fooweb.2020.e00142 · Cited by 41
Endress, B. A., Wisdom, M. J., Vavra, M., Parks, C. G., Dick, B. L., Naylor, B. J., & Boyd, J. M. (2012) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2012.03.019 · Cited by 29
Grassland bird diversity and abundance in the presence of native and non-native grazers
Boyce, A. J., Shamon, H., Kunkel, K. E., & McShea, W. J. (2021) · Avian Conservation and Ecology · doi:10.5751/ace-01944-160213 · Cited by 20
Freese, C. H., Fuhlendorf, S. D., & Kunkel, K. (2014) · Ecological Restoration · doi:10.3368/er.32.4.358 · Cited by 19
Boyce, A. J., Shamon, H., & McShea, W. J. (2022) · Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.3389/fevo.2022.821822 · Cited by 18
Kauffman, J. B., Cummings, D. L., Kauffman, C., Beschta, R. L., Brooks, J., MacNeill, K., & Ripple, W. J. (2023) · Ecosphere · doi:10.1002/ecs2.4406 · Cited by 15
Kauffman, J. B., Cummings, D. L., Beschta, R. L., & Ripple, W. J. (2025) · Ecosphere · doi:10.1002/ecs2.70410 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Fleischner, T. L.
- Venue
- Conservation Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1994-09
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 629-644
- ISSN
- 0888-8892 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-1739
- OpenAlex
- W2067198450
- Cited by
- 1,072
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 28.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
