Imagine throwing a dart at a world map, excluding the oceans. Shockingly, there's a 25% chance it would land on an area used for grazing livestock. But here's where it gets controversial: while we often focus on the environmental impacts of overgrazing, a new study reveals a surprising gap in our understanding of what happens when livestock numbers decline. Are we overlooking a critical piece of the climate puzzle?
A recent paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by researchers at Arizona State University analyzed livestock trends from 1999 to 2023 using data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The findings are eye-opening: while livestock numbers are rising in parts of Africa, Asia, and Central and South America, they’re declining in North America, Europe, and Australia. Yet, the environmental consequences of fewer livestock haven’t received nearly as much scientific attention as the effects of overgrazing.
Osvaldo Sala, director of Arizona State University’s Global Drylands Center and one of the study’s authors, highlights a striking imbalance: for every 10 studies on overgrazing, there’s only one exploring how landscapes respond when livestock are removed. “The mismatch between stocking rate patterns and the research focus really surprised me,” Sala said. “Policy is shaped by what scientists tell the public. If the focus is solely on overgrazing, we’re only addressing half the problem.”
And this is the part most people miss: declining livestock numbers in the West, for instance, can lead to unpredictable environmental outcomes. While some ecosystems may recover and restore biodiversity, others could face disrupted water cycles, increased wildfire risk, or even reduced biodiversity if not managed properly. These changes have significant climate implications. For example, more plant growth can trap carbon, but it also makes landscapes more susceptible to severe wildfires, releasing stored carbon back into the atmosphere.
Without deeper research into these dynamics, scientists risk missing a key link between agriculture and climate change. “It’s not just an opportunity—it’s a necessity if we want a complete picture of climate change,” Sala emphasized.
Even in regions like the American West, where livestock numbers have declined since 1999, overgrazing remains a pressing issue. Wealthy landowners often ignore federal warnings, allowing their cattle to overgraze public lands, as reported by High Country News. Retta Bruegger, a rangeland ecologist at Colorado State University, notes that the study sheds light on a critical blind spot in global livestock research. “The implications for rangeland health are profound,” she said, suggesting that drought and wildfire research could be particularly fruitful.
Bruegger, who collaborates with ranchers in Colorado, stresses the importance of understanding historical livestock trends, especially in the West. “We often assume livestock numbers on public rangelands are constant or increasing, but the data shows otherwise,” she explained. “This study underscores the need to align our ecological research with real-world trends.”
Sala is enthusiastic about the research opportunities this study presents. Even well-understood concepts, like plants’ ability to trap carbon, need further exploration. “It’s not enough to assume that ungrazed flora will store more carbon,” he said. “We need to quantify how much, where, and when—questions we still can’t answer.”
Here’s a thought-provoking question for you: Should scientists shift their focus to study the effects of declining livestock as urgently as they study overgrazing? Why or why not? Share your thoughts in the comments—let’s spark a conversation!
About This Story: This article, like all our content, is free to read because Inside Climate News is a nonprofit organization. We don’t hide behind paywalls or bombard you with ads. Our mission is to provide accessible, in-depth climate and environmental journalism to everyone. We collaborate with media organizations nationwide, ensuring this vital work reaches as many people as possible. Since our founding in 2007, we’ve grown into the nation’s largest dedicated climate newsroom, earning a Pulitzer Prize along the way. Your donations fuel our reporting, holding polluters accountable, exposing injustice, and inspiring action. If you value this work, consider making a tax-deductible donation today. Together, we can amplify the impact of climate journalism. Thank you for being part of this mission.
— Jake Bolster, Reporter, Wyoming and the West
