Editing Rotational grazing (section)

== Criticism ==

Managers have found that rotational grazing systems can work for diverse management purposes, but scientific experiments have demonstrated that some rotational grazing systems do not always necessarily work for specific ecological purposes.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Briske |first1=D.D. |last2=Sayre |first2=Nathan F. |last3=Huntsinger |first3=L. |last4=Fernandez-Gimenez |first4=M. |last5=Budd |first5=B. |last6=Derner |first6=J.D. |title=Origin, Persistence, and Resolution of the Rotational Grazing Debate: Integrating Human Dimensions Into Rangeland Research |journal=Rangeland Ecology & Management |date=July 2011 |volume=64 |issue=4 |pages=325–334 |doi=10.2111/REM-D-10-00084.1 |bibcode=2011REcoM..64..325B |hdl=10150/642874 |s2cid=17085968 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> This controversy stems from two main categorical differences in rotational grazing, prescribed management and adaptive management. The performance of rangeland grazing strategies are similarly constrained by several ecological variables establishing that differences among them are dependent on the effectiveness of those management models. Depending on the management model, plant production has been shown to be equal or greater in continuous compared to rotational grazing in 87% of the experiments.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Briske |first1=D.D. |last2=Derner |first2=J.D. |last3=Brown |first3=J.R. |last4=Fuhlendorf |first4=S.D. |last5=Teague |first5=W.R. |last6=Havstad |first6=K.M. |last7=Gillen |first7=R.L. |last8=Ash |first8=A.J. |last9=Willms |first9=W.D. |title=Rotational Grazing on Rangelands: Reconciliation of Perception and Experimental Evidence |journal=Rangeland Ecology & Management |date=January 2008 |volume=61 |issue=1 |pages=3–17 |doi=10.2111/06-159R.1 |bibcode=2008REcoM..61....3B |hdl=10150/642920 |s2cid=30969297 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>