[Ccpg] More on Holistic Management ............offering other view points .

[Wesley Roe and Marjorie Lakin Erickson]

Friends,
I would like to let you know of a wonderful opportunity to learn about a 
unique
decision making model, Holistic Management, with its chief creator and leading
spokesperson, Allan Savory. The SARC will be co-sponsoring an event on
Saturday, December 13th, which will give people the opportunity to meet Mr.
Savory and hear about his inspirational, international work at an informal
community gathering.
Two back-to-back events have been planned at the home of Bill and Phyllis
Davies (5015 Jespersen Rd., SLO). All are welcome to attend either or both.
Saturday afternoon, December 13, 2:30-5:00 p.m.:
An intriguing look at Mr. Savory's work in the US, African and other
international ecosystems. The program will be of interest to all ages.
Holistic Management has been used by agriculturists around the world to
understand and manage natural resources more effectively. Its application has
often resulted in a remarkable regeneration of disturbed environments. Mr.
Savory will share some of the “hows” and “whys” of these success stories, and
the Davies will share their first-hand experience with examples they saw on
their recent trip to Africa. Potluck refreshments will be served.
THEN...
Saturday evening, December 13, 5:30-9:00 p.m.:
A more specific talk on Holistic Management as a decision making process that
can be used by any group decision making body ­ whether a farm, business,
organization or even a family. Exciting examples of local applications of
Holistic Management will be shared over a potluck dinner ­ including a
presentation by Cal Poly faculty involved with the development of the SARC’s
(our!) “holistic goal” using Holistic Management under the guidance of Animal
Science Professor Rob Rutherford.
Hope you can join us for any or all of this exciting series of events.
If you are coming in the afternoon, please bring healthy refreshments.
Dinner guests please bring: A-E bring a Salad; F-T Main Dish; U-Z Finger
Deserts.
DIRECTIONS: (5015 Jespersen Rd.) Take Buckley Rd (South of the airport) to
Jespersen Rd. (turn to go South). Go about ½ mile just over the crest of the
first hill. Turn right onto the paved driveway between the pine trees, just
beyond three black mailboxes/bow.
MORE INFO ON ALLAN SAVORY:
“Allan Savory recently received the prestigious environmental Banksia Award
for making, significant contributions to the betterment of our environment on
a global level. Past winners include Rachel Carson and Sir David
Attenborough. Allan Savory has developed what is widely believed to be an
entirely new decision-making framework through which all people, regardless
of their location, industry or circumstances can make decisions that are
simultaneously environmentally, socially and financially sound in both the
short and long term: Holistic Management. Holistic decision making puts
people back in control of their destinies and restores a sense of direction in
difficult times. Many thousands of families and businesses around the world
are now successfully using this new framework to radically improve their
quality of life while simultaneously regenerating the resource base that
sustains them.”

ALSO - You may visit the website of the Allan Savory Center for Holistic
Management at: www.holisticmanagement.org
Hope to see you on the 13th!
............................................................................
Hunter Francis
Program Coordinator
Sustainable Agriculture Resource Consortium
c/o Horticulture and Crop Science Department
California Polytechnic State University
San Luis Obispo, California 93407
(805)756-5086
............................................................................
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
READ BELOW  OTHER VIEWPOINTS ON HOLISTIC MANAGEMENT AND ALLAN SAVORY 
THOUGHTS IN REPLY

Concerning last week’s post on Holistic Management (HM):  two items have
recently come to my attention that do a good job of offering other view points
for those who are interested.

The first is a response to Mr. Raether’s article (offered last week and copied
below) written by Gretchen Blank.  The second is a reply from Allan Savory
himself to Bill Marlett and ecologist Joy Belsky, other skeptics.  I offer 
them
merely to encourage people to consider all sides.

In regard to the event we will be co-hosting at the Davies home during the
afternoon and evening of 12/13, I would stress that the gathering is being
offered in a spirit of openness and learning.  We don’t all need to be on
exactly the “same page”, and, as always, I am quite confident we won’t be.
Questions, comments, and concerns are welcome.  Regardless of one’s 
thoughts on
Holistic Management, it will be a rare opportunity for people to speak with 
its
founder directly.

Also, very important to note: most of the event on 12/13 (especially the
evening) will be on HOLISTIC MANAGEMENT, not grazing practices.  Holistic
Management is a decision making framework that can be used in any situation
where you have a group(s) of people - from families to farms to corporations
to “teams” of any sort.  Managed grazing is but one tool in a list of many 
that
can be used in an agricultural setting to move people towards their ‘holistic
goal’ (which may include a healthy environment, good relations, etc.).  In my
experience with using Holistic Management to work through group decision
making, I have found it to be very effective and in helping people (often from
very different backgrounds and persuasions) develop and then work towards a
common goal they can all embrace.  In many cases, it is truly remarkable what
its use has been able to accomplish.  In no way is HM limited to use by 
farmers.

As far as the idea of Holistic Management being “quasi-religious”, I have to
say the thought reminded me of when my “conventional” colleagues in 
agriculture
call organics a religion or cult.  While it is true that some people
historically involved in moving the organic agenda forward may have been
motivated by their own personal “higher visions”, the fact now is that 
there is
an abundance of very practical, “down-to-earth” tools and resources available
to people wishing to implement organic practices regardless of their faith.
The methods work when applied properly.  The work has begun to quantify the
results and understand the science involved better.

I know this is true for the Holistic Management movement as well.  I have
met/read about countless agriculturists, some local, who have had wonderful
results by employing the system on their land.  The Davies have used it on
their land to manage their animals and report: “We have been using [it and it
has] helped us improve our land, quality of the feed, and the water holding
capacity of the soil much more rapidly than we expected.”  On Cal Poly land,
use of managed grazing of sheep as part of an HM decision making process has
led to return of perennial grasses, increase in biodiversity, marked
suppression of noxious weeds (e.g., yellow starthistle), and improvement of
riparian zone health.

Here are the articles>>>>>  Enjoy!
P.S. You may also wish to check out the website:  www.managingwholes.com  -
w/ interesting info and pix.

******************************************************************************
(The post from GRETCHEN BLANK):

Mr. Raether's article from summer 2002 is a miasma of mis-information,
exaggeration and plain old falsehoods. It is interesting that he quotes Aldo
Leopold in an attempt to contradict Allan Savory as Mr. Leopold is one of
the author's Savory refers to often in discussions of Holistic Management.
It is also interesting to note the author quotes the Council on
Environmental Quality as a reason to disregard Mr. Savory's findings. The
lack of a definition of 'improvident grazings' is a blatant attempt to
mislead the reader into believing that Savory's grazing management is that
improvident grazing. In point of fact, so few ranchers have applied Savory's
management over the past 40 years, that the definition is far more likely
the current methods of low animal impact are the improvident grazing than
anything Savory has described.

Twenty or thirty year old published reports cannot be considered currently
valid. If someone doesn't go actually visually inspect what has happened on
that land in the past 20 plus years, there is no logic to claiming they have
any long term reality. Most of those lands that had a short term revival
have since deteriorated to desert in the interim. Hundreds of pictures
showing currently grazed (the recommended way) land fenced off from
'protected, ungrazed' land are available from recent years. The difference
between the land on either side of the fence is indistinguishable. Anyone
who walks the fence line will tell you the results of poorly grazed land
versus land protected for twenty or more years is identical. This is Allan
Savory's point.

While the author may believe that Joy Belsky was an eminent range ecologist,
many disagree. I have read Ms Belsky's claims about the Dutchwoman Butte but
have never noted any reference to the climatological conditions of that area
versus other range land, nor about the wildlife impact. Mr. Savory's idea
that livestock can be managed to mimic wildlife's natural grazing is not
invalidated simply because live stock has not been somewhere.

Mr. Raether's claim that there was no wildlife grazing the desert basin and
southwest for 5,000 to 10,000 years prior to the introduction of live stock
150 years ago is contradicted in his next paragraph where he talks about
wildlife being able to roam freely for hundreds of miles without competition
for forage.  In fact, Mr. Raether's reference to the way wildlife roamed in
the past is exactly what Mr. Savory is trying to replicate. The point that
all the naysayers seem to miss in Allan's grazing methods is that he
recommends short term heavy animal impact to break up the soil and then
moving the animals to another paddock and allowing a sufficient recovery
time for the grasses roots to recover. By using sufficient paddocks and
planning a timeline for the best forage at any given time for live stack and
planning sufficient recovery time, they mimic the patterns of wildlife who
moved on regularly to give sufficient recovery time.

Finally, Holistic Management (R) is about managing something (a whole) by
taking the synergistic relationships with in that something into account and
making decisions based on environmental, social and economic values of the
decision makers of that whole. Holistic Grazing Planning is part of Holistic
Management only for those who have grazing land and livestock to graze it.

I would suggest Mr. Raether personally research what results Holistic
Management Practioners are getting rather than dredging out old outdated
information and rehashing it.

Gretchen Blank

****************************************************************************
(ALLANS LETTER):

 >From Allan Savory
To Bill Marlett and Joy Belsky
Oregon Natural Desert Association.

Recently someone sent me a letter from the two of you to the Bureau of Land
Management in which you denigrate my work.  As this is by no means the first
time, let me address your latest comments. You state: "ONDA does not wish to
insult BLM by suggesting that they would utilize Allan Savory¹s suggestions in
Holistic Management to restore rangelands.  Most range professionals find
Savory recommendations and discussions of range science to be so improbable
that they ignore this. But some BLM managers accept Holistic Management as
gospel truth.   There are several ways to refute Savory¹s ideas: first to test
his suggestions empirically with field tests; and second, to examine the
validity of his scientific explanations behind his suggestions for range
restoration. Neither supports anything Savory has said in his 30-year career.
And since he has tested his theories in only one scientific study in these
thirty years, and they rejected his ideas, there is nothing to support his
work."   You then go on to refer to papers by yourself and Holocheck that you
say refute my work and "found my ideas severely wanting".

This denigration, coming from an organization such as yours and people of your
reputation, does harm to our work and to me personally as I am sure you are
aware and intend.  However, I wonder if you understand the harm you do to
others in our rural communities struggling for survival following years of
policies and practices such as you continue to promote.

Poor land inevitably leads to poverty, social breakdown, rising flood, 
drought,
invasion by noxious plants, mounting blaming, victimization and eventually
rising conflict, genocide and war till civilizations fall as history has
repeatedly taught us.  Many of these symptoms we are experiencing in the
Western States.  Despite the greatest concentration of scientists (and range
scientists) the world has ever known in one nation, America now exports
annually more eroding soil than all other products combined.  And flooding,
with no major change in the weather, has become our leading weather-related
cause of death.  I can hardly imagine your profession having a greater wake up
call.

The appalling state of our public lands and many private ranches, combined 
with
the adverse consequences of such desertification not only in America but
worldwide is such that we cannot go on affording to be wrong any longer.  As
you know this apparently insoluble problem  biodiversity loss and consequent
desertification -- is thousands of years old.  As a young man I simply did not
want to accept that no one had ever been able to understand either, what was
causing desertification, nor how to reverse it, and so devoted my life to
finding a solution.  Earlier efforts, following new understanding about the
interplay between soil, vegetation, herbivores and predators, yielded some
amazing results, but equally dramatic failures.  Finally in about 1984 the
missing piece fell into place enabling us to achieve consistent results in
reversing desertification where Holistic Management was practiced  greater
harmony amongst people, greater prosperity and measurable land and 
biodiversity
improvement.  Little did I know when I set out to solve the riddle of
desertification that I would engender forty years of abuse, ridicule,
rejection, persecution and character assassination followed by massive
imitation of my work mainly from members of the range profession.  The finest
candle makers did not develop electric lights and I guess history also should
have taught me to expect such treatment. However, it has gone on long enough.

Throughout the years I have devoted to solving this apparently insoluble
problem I have had only that in mind.  I routinely talk in public about my own
scientific blunders, mistakes and the terrible damage I did to certain 
national
parks through faulty research during those years of unrelenting effort.  I do
not try to cover up or defend anything as any who knows me can testify, and I
do appreciate and invite honest criticism and respect ethical behavior from my
fellow scientists.  I am sure you are motivated by a deep love of the land to
attack my work as often as you do.  However, it would be better if you first
took the time to learn and understand what it is you denigrate lest you make
yourselves appear foolish in public.

Over time most of my earlier critics have come to understand Holistic
Management and results over a great many ranches in many countries have helped
bring about this acceptance.  The extreme abuse, ridicule and denigration of
the past is almost over -- with more than twenty universities and colleges
using my textbook. However, a dwindling few like yourselves and Dr. Holocheck
linger on, attacking my work in blind ignorance at every opportunity.  Because
the worldwide situation is so serious and because there might yet be flaws in
Holistic Management that we needed to find, some years ago I offered to pay
$1,000 to any scientist who would let us know of any aspect of the Holistic
Management that was not scientifically sound.  I repeatedly and publicly
invited fellow scientists to come forward if they were aware of anything 
either
from their research that I was not aware of, from a logical point of view or
experience they might have had elsewhere in the world that I had not, to point
out any flaws.  Many did have constructive suggestions that helped us fine 
tune
Holistic Management but none could find anything that was not backed by solid
science, to the best of our knowledge.  Please believe me, the old ground and
myths of range management that you keep hacking over has been looked at many
times and has almost nothing to do with Holistic Management which you would
understand if you actually knew anything about my work.

I offered that reward mainly to try to get beyond the continuous sniping,
abuse, denigration, criticism and rejection to which I have been subjected by
people like you.  The situation is too serious for such behavior to continue
and we need to move forward.  All I am trying, and have always tried, to do is
to find some practical simply way for humans to reverse the biodiversity loss
and consequent desertification that has plagued our world for over ten 
thousand
years.  After all, this is the greatest single problem we face as humans,
having destroyed more civilizations than war has done.

I know my suggestion years ago that large herbivores can be used as tools to
reverse biodiversity loss and desertification offended your profession and
still offends you. Increasingly however I notice many range scientists now
agreeing with me and writing and talking about the use of livestock as 
tools to
reverse land degradation. Two years ago at a conference on the future of
ranching in Colorado I noted that about every second speaker mentioned this
without acknowledging the source.  For your interest there are only a few
things I have claimed animals do and I don¹t believe any empirical study, as
you suggest, will ever disprove them.  All I claim large herbivores do is the
following:

 They cause compaction of the soil.

 They break soil surfaces.

 They speed the breakdown of old plant material returning it to the soil as
dung and urine quicker than it would have returned had they not been there.

One has only to have a horse stand on your foot to understand the compacting
power of a large animal¹s hoof. One has only to track animals, as humans have
done for millennia, to know they break soil surface capping. One has only to
watch a cow dung to know they return broken down plant material to the surface
quickly.  I repeat, that is all I claim they do and you can if you wish study
that to death empirically. When a range is in need of such treatments, as it
often is, as any gardener understands, to maintain biological decay and thus
biodiversity, large herbivores of many sorts can be used to provide such
treatments.   If any technological tool could do what is required the range
profession would have been reversing desertification long ago.  As you should
know better than most, range scientists have spent millions of dollars and
years of effort developing and using machines on a large scale to do just 
these
things without success.  When range scientists developed such Œanimal
mimicking¹ machines they went into immediate service at high public cost and
not one person called for any evidence that they could in fact reverse
desertification or do anything claimed. Goodness knows how many million 
dollars
were wasted in futile efforts as ranges continued to desertify.

When years ago I had the gall, as a non range scientist, to point out that
large animals could do all these things it raised forty years of storm,
ridicule and protest from your profession that you continue to try to keep up
while failing to notice that you are falling behind the changing views in your
own profession.

I also picked up on Voisin¹s research published in five languages and never
refuted by any scientist I know of, in which he discovered that overgrazing of
plants was a function of time rather than animal numbers.

If you do indeed have information that indicates that herbivores do not cause
compaction, do not break soil surfaces and do not speed the return of plant
material to the soil then you should come forward with your data.  If you have
information that Voisin¹s research was wrong and that overgrazing of plants is
a function of animal numbers rather than time of exposure and re-exposure of
plants, again you should come forward with it.  Don¹t hide your light under a
bushel, as the worldwide situation is too serious for you to hang back
withholding your knowledge.

I challenge you to let me personally, the BLM and public, know of any 
aspect of
Holistic Management that is not solidly supported by the best scientific
knowledge (in all fields) that we have today.  I will be the first to
acknowledge your discovery and to spread your knowledge worldwide as fast as I
can through our international network of Holistic Management Certified
Educators.  And I will make sure we all adopt your findings and abandon the
process I have developed as I have only one desire -- to see an end to
worldwide desertification and all the ills it leads to, including its 
threat to
the security of the US and all nations.

I have read Holocheck¹s paper with great care and responded to it.  I could
find no connection at all to Holistic Management.  He did establish that short
duration grazing systems with livestock do not work but he could have saved
himself work and avoided making a fool of himself by reading my book and
learning that I have been saying that since the late 1960¹s.  That is why in
Holistic Management, if livestock pass the testing all tools and actions are
subjected to, I have never advocated the short duration grazing system
Holocheck describes in the failed trials he writes about.  In fact it was a
pity his paper was not peer reviewed, as it would have saved him and the other
authors some embarrassment.

I realize you will probably feel that it is no good sending me the information
you claim shows the unsoundness of Holistic Management, as I would be the
judge. So, please send it not to me but to the professional people I am 
copying
this email to  addresses above. It can be judged by your fellow academics who
know a great deal about Holistic Management. They, like you, care deeply.
Professor Fadiman at San Jose, Dr Chris Jost at Tufts, Dr Dick Richardson at
University of Texas, Dr Chris Jones in Australia, Professor Cliff Montagne at
Bozeman all work closely with us and would dearly love to know if there is
anything unsound in Holistic Management. I am sure most of them are as good
scientists as you and I and they would give us an honest opinion.

The BLM are involved with us in trying to establish a national learning 
site in
Idaho. I am sure they would welcome your participation as we seek to include
all ideas and the very latest of scientific knowledge.  Personally I would
dearly like to involve my strongest critics, as it would be powerful learning
for all of us. So I will copy this to the BLM with the invitation for you to
participate and allow us the benefit of your knowledge.

In addition, we have recently inherited a ranch in Texas on private 
land.  This
ranch had all cattle removed fifteen years ago -- which is plenty of time to
test your belief that prolonged rest benefits such ranges. We intend to manage
this ranch as a learning site for the entire community and benefit of ranchers
and environmentalists in Texas and the US.  Here again we would be willing to
include you if you feel you can add knowledge that we lack and I am sincere in
stating this as once more we seek only success and not any protection of my
ideas.

The ranch shows massive failure of prolonged rest and is now dominated by a
high percentage of bare soil between the plants, most perennial grass over
thousands of acres has died as biological decay has given way to chemical
oxidation in the absence of adequate herbivores and as usual there has been a
major shift in the plant community to what you would call noxious woody and
herbaceous plants.

We believe to reverse this degradation we will need to restore the decay
process and thus biodiversity and we know of no tool available to us as
scientists, other than livestock that will do this -- restore vegetative
cycling, break capped soil surfaces and compact the soil to obtain a seed to
soil contact for germination.  The deer we have are too few and no longer
functioning naturally for a variety of reasons (roads, fences, lack of wolves)
beyond our control.

I believe we scientists have no technology at our disposal that can perform 
all
the functions required, and do so repeatedly in a manner that is 
simultaneously
socially, environmentally and economically sound both short and long term. We
have the years of range science efforts to reverse desertification using
technological tools to thank for teaching us that technology cannot replace
animals.  We can only use livestock at present. If you have solid evidence 
that
suggests this is incorrect then you have only to visit and give us the benefit
of your knowledge and we will credit you with discovering that I was wrong and
there is a better way of reversing biodiversity loss and desertification
through some technological solution.

You state that there was only one scientific study of my theories "and they
rejected his ideas".  You are referring to what was known as the international
Charter Trial that ran for eight years in Rhodesia many years ago.  This
official trial took place many years before Holistic Management was developed
for your interest.  However, the government of the day did test my planned
grazing that we still use when livestock pass the testing in Holistic
Management.  The trial was highly successful and validated all I was 
saying, as
you will note if you actually read the reports (which are available in US
University libraries).  I claimed at the time that the grazing method I was
advocating would result in us being able to double livestock numbers with
nothing but improvement to the land and that we could do it without needing to
invest large amounts of capital.  The government put in a Œpoor man savory¹ 
(on
which I could invest no capital without generating it first from the land) and
a Œrich man savory¹ (where I could invest capital if required) as they called
the two areas with planned grazing and a government control.

Both planned grazing areas doubled the livestock numbers without any land
deterioration and both made more profit every year of the eight year trial 
thus
establishing beyond doubt the two points of contention.  The arrangement with
George Rudland, Minister of Agriculture, who established the trial to end all
controversy between range professionals and myself was that if I proved 
correct
the government would change the teachings at the university, agricultural
colleges and of the extension service.  And I agreed, if proven wrong, to 
close
my consulting practice and stop misleading the country as government and
academic bureaucrats claimed I was doing. To Minister Rudland and I shook 
hands
and agreed.  You are correct in saying my ideas were rejected and the
arrangement was never honored. In fact I found out I was banned from setting
foot on all campuses of southern African universities for over twenty years 
and
even private ranchers were informed all government aid and subsidy would be
withdrawn if I was even invited to speak in a private home!  And to this day
you continue the attacks even though we have progressed far indeed and
developed Holistic Management since those far off days.  Private ranchers did
not react in the same manner as the bureaucrats of universities and
governments, and those following my ideas increased worldwide and continue to
do so because of one simple fact -- results count more than tedious academic
argument.

I trust you will accept that the many professional range managers, extension
agents and academics who are now involved in teaching Holistic Management
worldwide are not simply gullible fools, as you imply, and are as good
scientists as you and I.  I trust that you will accept that many ranchers are
being awarded good stewardship awards for the improvements they are showing on
lands following training from us and that the people judging these situations
are as caring and knowledgeable as you and I.  Lastly I sincerely hope you 
will
come forward with some information that shows us where Holistic Management is
scientifically faulty and collect your $1,000 or else join us in genuinely
trying to empower people to reverse desertification and save our wildlife and
rural communities.

If you are unable to present any evidence that Holistic Management is
scientifically unsound and unsubstantiated then I trust you will give a 
written
apology to the Bureau of Land Management and myself as any ethical person
would.  And I trust you will refrain from further public and damaging
denigration of both myself and this non-profit Center in the interests of all
our people and public lands so desperately in need of more enlightened
management.


Allan Savory recently received the prestigious international environmental
Banksia Award for making, significant contributions to the betterment of our
environment on a global level. Past winners include among others Rachel Carson
and Sir David Attenborough.  The winner each year is selected from a pool of
nominees whose activities they have followed for several years. Their reasons
for selecting Allan this year:
'Allan Savory has developed what is widely believed to be an entirely new
decision-making framework through which all people, regardless of their
location, industry or circumstances can make decisions that are at the same
time environmentally, socially and financially sound in both the short and 
long
term  Holistic Management. Holistic decision making puts people back in 
control
of  their destinies and restores a sense of direction in difficult times. Many
thousands of families and businesses around the world are now successfully
using this new framework to radically improve their quality of life while
simultaneously regenerating the resource base that sustains them.'


****************************************************************************
(ORIGINAL POST)
The post to the following people follows:
From: Chris <refugee at pronet.net>
Reply-To: Chris <refugee at pronet.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:22:09 -0800
To: caucus at omnipost.com, indymedia at omnipost.com, hd-l at slonet.org, Sustainable-
Agriculture-Resource-Center/cpslo_unit at degas.artisan.calpoly.edu
Cc: Hopedance at aol.com
Subject: [INDYMEDIA-CC] Re: [HD-L] Learn about Holistic Management with 
founder
ALLAN SAVORY on  12/13!

A few cautionary notes about Holistic Management when it is applied to
livestock grazing:  It is good for Savory but of questionable value to
ecosystems.  See below.

Chris

Watersheds Messenger     Summer 2002     Vol. IX, No. 2
http://www.westernwatersheds.org/watmess/watmess_2002/2002html_summer/article9.h
tm

Home on the Holistic Range
By Keith Raether

Allan Savory's leap of holistic faith in matters of range management and
livestock grazing belies an entire body of range science. His is a
quasi-religious world laced with proverbs and prophesies -- a world in
which the messiah is Savory himself.

Savory is the founder of the Allan Savory Center for Holistic
Management, which promotes, among other strategies, the Savory method of
livestock grazing to federal agencies and ranching communities. The
method is predicated on the notion that rangelands are in poor condition
because they are undergrazed, not overgrazed.

Savory blames the wholesale degradation of watersheds in the Rocky
Mountain West on "biological decay' and "too few animals" on the
watersheds that feed rivers. In the world according to Savory, domestic
livestock are a means to "land reclamation."

It goes without saying that livestock grazing has severely depleted
vegetative cover and production on public lands in the West. What needs
to be said in holistic management workshops is that sufficient forage no
longer exists in most of the West to support the large herds on which
Savory's grazing system depends.

Also overlooked is the role of livestock grazing in the replacement of
native vegetation with weeds across millions of acres of the West.

Individual ranchers have reported some success with Savory's holistic
management plan. Why? For one, ranchers who buy into the plan are
usually in the hummocks looking up. The promise of a cure-all appears
and, presto, everybody's on good behavior When public lands permittees
suddenly go from absentee stewardship to hands-on animal husbandry, any
result is bound to be positive.

When Savory argues that centuries of large-herd grazing in the West
maintained healthy grasslands, he reinvents history Until domestic
livestock were introduced to the region some 150 years ago, the Great
Basin and the desert Southwest were not heavily grazed for 5,000 to
10,000 years.

Savory also fails to mention that, prior to the introduction of
livestock, 400,000 miles of barbed-wire fencing didn't cut off migratory
corridors. Before rangelands were fenced, wildlife herds were able to
roam for hundreds of miles without competition for forage.

In a recent letter to the publication Rangelands, Savory wrote
positively of the only scientific grazing research trial that he has
conducted in 30 years of consultation with ranchers. All three authors
who published papers on the trial reported the opposite result. Savory's
method, the authors concluded, failed to improve ranch profits, failed
to improve range conditions and failed to increase financial returns per
head of cattle.

Experimental studies dating from 1984 by range and soil scientists
conclude that Savory's principles of range management reduce water
infiltration into the soil; increase erosion; reduce forage production,
soil organic matter and mineral cycling; and increase soil bulk density.

The late, eminent range ecologist Joy Belsky challenged Savory's claims
about livestock management widely and often. In a paper entitled "Allan
Savory's Holistic Management: Scientific Misinformation on Grazed
Ecosystems," she cites a grazing study on a ranch in Zimbabwe where
Savory's recommendations were applied to improve range condition and
increase livestock productivity.

Neither outcome occurred. Increased production only happened during
periods of heavy rainfall. In periods of normal rainfall, stocking rates
prescribed by Savory stifled production and severely damaged the range.

Contrary to Savory, scientific studies show that bunchgrasses in arid
environments such as the Rocky Mountain West are more likely to die if
they are grazed. Contrary to Savory, "overrest" of grasslands does not
cause deterioration. As one of several examples, Belsky cites Dutchwoman
Butte in central Arizona, a fertile, stable territory where grazing by
livestock has never occurred.

"Published comparisons of grazed and ungrazed lands in the western
United States have found that rested (protected) sites had larger and
denser grasses, fewer weedy herbs and shrubs, higher biodiversity,
higher productivity, less bare ground, and better water infiltration
than nearby grazed areas," Belsky writes.

And yet, the U.S. Forest Service is currently collaborating with Savory
to establish a "national learning site" in central Idaho to "heal the
and." This leap of faith for Savory's services will cost American
taxpayers $ 1 million over four years.

The price to pay for livestock grazing on public lands, of course, is
greater still. Public lands ranching threatens native species, reduces
water quality, spreads noxious weeds, alters natural fire regimes and
accelerates soil erosion, destroying streamside and upland
ecosystems.

In its Global 2000 report, the Council on Environmental Quality noted
that "improvident grazing . . . has been the most potent desertification
force, in terms of total acreage (351,562 square miles), within the
United States."

"We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity belonging to us,"
Aldo Leopold once wrote. "When we begin to see land as a community to
which we belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect.

When and where human dominion over the land ends, healing begins.
Holistic management starts here.

Keith Raether is director of public information for Western Watersheds
Project and public information coordinator for the National Public Lands
Grazing Campaign.

See Also:
THE DONUT DIET
The Too-Good-to-Be-True Claims of Holistic Management
George Wuerthner
http://www.publiclandsranching.org/htmlres/wr_donut_diet.htm
And
Holistic Resource Management (HRM):  Panacea or Snake Oil?
by Jeff Burgess © 2001
http://www.grazingactivist.org/hrm.html

-- "Political language--and with variations this is true of all
political parties, from  Conservatives to Anarchists--is designed to
make lies sound truthful and murder  respectable, and to give an
appearance of solidity to pure wind."  --George Orwell 1946


****************************************************************************
(POST FROM)
Hunter Francis
Program Coordinator
Sustainable Agriculture Resource Consortium
c/o Horticulture and Crop Science Department
California Polytechnic State University
San Luis Obispo, California  93407
............................................................................



_______________________________________________
HopeDance Global mailing list
Mail public replies to: HD-L at kcbx.net.
Using this address will send your message to everyone
on the list. Mail private replies to the author
of the message, listed in the "From" field in the message header. This will 
send your message only
to one person. To manage your subscription to
this list, visit:
http://kcbx.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hd-l