Activity 3.3 – Regenerative Agriculture Part 2

1.0 Points of View

The authors of The Savory Method Can Not Green Deserts or Reverse Climate Change (Briske, Bestelmeyer, Brown, Fuhlendorf, and Polley), and Savory’s Unsubstantiated Claims Should Not Be Confused With Multipaddock Grazing (Briske, Bestelmeyer, and Brown), clearly take a critical stance against Savory's claims. They express concern about the effects of his relentless promotion of his methods and challenge the credibility of his claims. They hold the opinion that adaptive management can have beneficial effects, but that Savory's "holistic" technique lacks substance, evidence, and even truth. These authors take a very calculated, scientific approach to this and reference only "documented evidence" as opposed to Savory, who the deplore for lacking and even opposing fundamental evidence (Briske et al., 2014).

Additionally, it is clear from Ketcham's writing that he does not agree Savory's methods either. Based on the fact that he had prepared several pieces of evidence that challenged Savory's claims, it is apparent that even before their interview, Ketcham had his doubts. He even comes off as a bit patronizing at times, such as when he writes that "In Savory's universe" all rested land withers away (Ketcham, 2017).

2.0 Purpose

In all three articles, the authors' main purpose is to educate the readers. 

In The Savory Method Can Not Green Deserts or Reverse Climate Change, the authors' simply wish to evaluate or "fact check" Savory's claims (Briske et al., 2014). Specifically, they challenge assumptions and critique invalid arguments made by Savory. However, the authors in Savory’s Unsubstantiated Claims Should Not Be Confused With Multipaddock Grazing, write with the intention of reiterating parts of their previous critique as well as adressing "concerns presented by Teague" in response to it (Briske et al., 2014). They also end by commenting on the future of grazing systems research. 

Similarly, Ketcham's goal is to educate the readers about the skepticism surrounding Savory's holistic management theory in the scientific community, shed light on the evidence that disproves it, and detail his own personal experience with him from their interview.

3.0 Questions at Issue

The authors write about a number of things issues such as Savory's unsubstantiated claims, invalid arguments, and complete disreguard and opposition of scientific evidence. The claims they take issue with are that: 1) all nonforested lands are degraded or degrading, 2) rangelands can store all fossil fuel carbon in the atmosphere, and 3) intensive grazing in necesary to prevent rangland degredation (Briske et al., 2014). In additoin to these invalid claims, they also expose invalid evidence such as the photos he uses for proof of his method, as land recently recovering from intensive grazing. Ketcham writes about the holes in Savory's holistic management method, his inability to provide sufficient details about the process, and simply the unreliability of of it all.

4.0 Information

The authors of The Savory Method Can Not Green Deserts or Reverse Climate Change present numreous facts, data, and observations in cluding the following:

• "Rangeland degradation...is often a consequence of increasing human and livestock populations, land fragmentation, changes to land tenure, and poverty, rather than invalid or insufficient scientific information"
• "Savory’s claim that his grazing method can reduce atmospheric carbon (C) concentrations to preindustrial levels...is an enormous misrepresentation of the global carbon cycle and climate change science"
• "Fossil fuel combustion, followed distantly by deforestation, land conversion, and degradation are the major contributors to increasing atmospheric C and global warming"
• "Rangelands are known to be very weak sinks for atmospheric C"
• "In 2012, global greenhouse gas emissions were estimated at about 50 billion metric tons (CO2 equivalents; CO2e). In order to offset these current emissions, rangelands would have to sequester approximately 13.6 billion tons of C annually. Given that there are about five billion hectares of rangeland globally, it is relatively simple to calculate that each hectare of rangeland would have to sequester an additional two tons of C each year. Credible estimates of the potential for rangeland C sequestration are generally less than 0.25 tons C per hectare per year, which is eight-fold less than Mr Savory’s claims would require."
• "The ecological benefits of concentrated livestock grazing or 'hoof action' to rangeland restoration and C sequestration are grossly overstated and without supporting evidence, other than for a few select photos"
• One photo of Chaco Culture National Historical Park which Savory used as evidence of his "holistic management" theory, was actually proven to be an area which was "slowly recovering from a historical period of mismanaged grazing." Another set of photographs were "inappropriately associated with Jornada Experimental Range, but were actually of a small patch of desert grassland within the Las Cruces International Airport in southwestern New Mexico." 
• As opposed to Savory's claims, it has also been proven that "Grass cover increases dramatically with rest and intensive grazing delays this recovery"

Additionally, the authors of Savory’s Unsubstantiated Claims Should Not Be Confused With Multipaddock Grazing present the following facts, data, and observations:

• There is absolutely no evidence to support the claim that "'periodic trampling [by livestock] is
  necessary to prevent degradation' by minimizing biological crusts that increase runoff and evaporation."
• They do acknowledge that, "there may be cases where trampling of previous years’ plant material on the soils surface may be valuable," but simply find it too difficult to see how it could represent a central, unifying aspect of all grazing management.
•  They also reference data of Teague and his colleagues which indicate that "1) soils under multipaddock rotation had similar soil carbon stocks, runoff rates, sediment loss rates, and infiltration rates compared to ungrazed rangeland and 2) the amount of bare ground and peak standing crop biomass were not statistically distinguishable between multipaddock rotation and ungrazed rangeland. These comparative responses indicate that long-term ungrazed rangeland was not degrading, was not impaired with regard to infiltration and runoff, and stored the same amounts of carbon as rangelands that were managed with what is presumably the Savory method" 
  

Finally, the author of Allan Savory's Holistic ManagementTheory Falls Short on Science presents the following facts, data, observations and experiences:

• He details his personal experience with Savory and how "he rolled his eyes in exasperation and shook his head" when Ketcham attempted to reference literature that opposed Savory's ideas
• "When there are too many cows in places with intermittent or little rain, where the vegetation is brittle and the soil fragile, the animals spell trouble. Overgrazing denudes the soil and produces erosion, which leads to a landscape where plants can't revive and grow. At least 8.4 billion acres on the planet are grazed, and 73 percent of that land is suffering from some form of land degradation, according to the International Journal of Biodiversity"
• Savory refused to give any details or statistical measurements of his method stating that, "There can be no discussion of specifics. If I gave you the specifics, it would start an argument."
• He also states that any tales of success from the Savory method on the Savory institutes website are  "self-reported and anecdotal"
• "In 1969, the Charter Estate, a London-based company, donated land, funding, and cattle to conduct a seven-year study of Savory's 'short-duration grazing' on 6,200 acres in Zimbabwe. Savory stated in 2000 that the Charter Trials, as the experiment was called, was 'the only trial ever conducted' about his work and that it 'proved what I have always advocated and continue to advocate when livestock are run on any land.' But a 2002 review of the Charter Trials concluded that the Savory grazing method 'failed to produce the marked improvement in grass cover claimed from its application.' The study's authors found 'no definite evidence in the African studies that short-duration grazing . . . will accelerate plant succession.' "
• Ketcham also notes how the landscape photos of Chaco Culture National Historical Park in New Mexico were misrepresented.
• He includes a statement from Cibils, a man familiar with the ranches where the Savory system was attempted, in which he recalls that, "These are people who tried it and who either modified or abandoned it because the results were a train wreck."
• "A study of grasslands in China found that 20 years of grazing exclusion increased soil carbon storage by more than 35 percent. Another study there of semiarid grasslands reported that carbon levels, variously measured in aboveground biomass, belowground biomass, and grass litter, were as much as 157 percent higher in livestock-free grasslands than in grazed grasslands."
  

5.0 Interpretation and Inference

 The authors of The Savory Method Can Not Green Deserts or Reverse Climate Change, conclude that all of Savory's claims are unfounded and that his aggressive promotion of his holistic theory only weakens global efforts to sequester carbon and restore rangeland. Additionally, they feel that he is providing the world, and especially desperate communities,  with a false sense of hope. They finally conclude that scientific evidence irrefutably proves that his methods do not reverse land degredation, and might actually even accelerate it (Briske et al., 2014). 

Similarly, the authors of Savory’s Unsubstantiated Claims Should Not Be Confused With Multipaddock Grazing also conclude that Savory's methods should not be used as a reference for grazing management or research due to lack of sufficient evidence. They even refer to Savory's claims as "unfortunate distraction from legitimate and proven procedures, processes, and outcomes of grazing management" and also emphasize that focus should be shifted to adaptive grazing management as opposed to "single, superior grazing system that is effective on global rangelands" (Briske et al., 2014).

Furthermore, Ketcham, along with the previous authors, also found that Savory's claims, ideas, and assumptions were unfounded and lacked substantial detail and evidence to be credible. He insists, based on multiple studies, that rest from grazing consistantly proves more beneficial to rangelands. By the end, he even questions Savory's credibility as a scientists when he quotes Dennis Bramble saying, "I don't know if he is a scientist" (Ketcham, 2017).

6.0 Concepts

 Several concepts are referenced in these peices including, holistic management, carbon sequestration, desertification, and adaptive management. 

Holistic management referes to Savory's "panned grazing" method, in which livestock are brought onto a rangeland and herded in tight, moving packs around the land to trample dead plant matter and fertilize the ground with their urine and feces (Briske et al., 2014). This is meant to mimic the circumstanges that allow grass and plan-life to thrive in nature. 

Carbon sequestration refers to the process in which soil to absorb and store carbon from the atmosphere, which proves beneficial to both the soil and the air. This reduces climate change, and even presents the possibility of reversing it. 

Desertification is the process in which soil in arid and semi-arid climates dryes out and erodes "as the climate warms and droughts worsen" (Ketcham, 2017). This process, which plagues 2/3rds of Earth's land, leaves the ground devoid of all plant life. 

Adaptive management is a diverse form of management and grazing system which acknowledges that there is no "superior" grazing system. Instead it is a "flexible, learning oriented approaches to rangeland grazing management that should be promoted, rather than the narrow, singular prescription advocated in the Savory TED video" (Briske et al., 2014).

7.0 Assumptions

Ketcham, in his writing, makes the assumption Savory fails to grasp the complex process of carbon sequestration in soil and nutrient cycling, and that he has a unfounded, yet unshakable confidence in his method. (Ketcham, 2017). They also make the assumption in Savory’s Unsubstantiated Claims Should Not Be Confused With Multipaddock Grazing, that Teague misunderstood their previous position concerning grazing systems (Briske et al., 2014). Finally, they are under the assumption that Savory's claims "have the potential to undermine proven, practical approaches to rangeland management and restoration" (Briske et al., 2014).

8.0 Consequences

 In the end, the consesus of the authors of all three peices is that Savory's methods and ideas are unsustantiated and unreliable. This means that the scientific community will have to focus more on research and other methods such as adaptive management. These articles do much to damage Savory's credibility, and it it likely that as a result, less people will use Savory's holistic method, and be more receptive to different management techniques.

References

    Briske, D. D., Bestelmeyer, B. T., & Brown, J. R. (2014). Savory's unsubstantiated claims should not be confused with multipaddock grazing. Rangelands, 36(1), 39-42., BRISKE_et al_2014_Savory's_unsubstantiated_claim.pdf

    Briske, D. D., Bestelmeyer, T., Brown, J. R., Fuhlendorf, S. D., & Polley, H. W. (2014). The Savory method can not green deserts or reverse climate change. Rangelands, 35(5), 72–74., https://www.ars.usda.gov/ARSUserFiles/4472/RANGELANDS-D-13-00044.pdf

    Ketcham, C. (2017). Allan Savory’s holistic management theory falls short on science. Sierra., https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/2017-2-march-april/feature/allan-savory-says-more-cows-land-will-reverse-climate-change