Laserfiche WebLink
GRAZING EFFECTS ON INFILTRATION <br />':he impact of grazing on soil physical parameters and <br />hydrological relationships has been studied extensively. <br />Infiltration, bulk density, erosion and sedimentation rates are the <br />most common variables evaluated when determining the impact of <br />grazing on the soil resource. <br />My review of the literature revealed that very little research <br />has shown support for positive influences of grazing on <br />infiltration or bulk density (Warren et al. 1986a, 1986b, 1986c; <br />Van ~iaveren :983; Abdel-Magrid et al, 1987; ':oboado 1988; and <br />others). Van :iaveren (1983 reported that bulk densities increased <br />12-13~ on fine textured sails under moderate/heavy grazing; course <br />• textured soils showed no significant differences over all grazing <br />intensities. All reviewed articles conc:uded that all intensities <br />of grazing resulted in compaction and reduced infiltration to some <br />degree. Although the changes may not be significant throughout all <br />cases, the trend indicates a negative change. <br />Research regarding grazing impacts on microrelief and related <br />infiltration increases are minimal at best, i4arlow (1986) reported <br />on changes in microrelief by time-controlled grazing. Ae indicated <br />that on sandy loam soils, microrelief was significantly reduced by <br />concentrations of high numbers of sheen in short periods of time. <br />However, infiltration from natural or simulated precipitation did <br />not differ significantly between grazed and ungrazed areas. <br />Although it seems logical that hoof depressions should ultimately <br />increase detention storage and decrease the erosive energy of free <br />