George B Ruyle

Interests

No activities entered.

Courses

Scholarly Contributions

Books

• Smith, L., Ruyle, G., Dyess, J., Meyer, W., Barker, S., Doc, L. C., Williams, S., Maynard, J., Bell, D., Stewart, D., & Coulloudon, A. (2012). Guide to rangeland monitoring and assessment: Basic concepts for collecting, interpreting, and use of rangeland data for management planning decisions. Arizona Grazing Lands Conservation Association.
  More info

  2012

Chapters

• Sprinkle, J., Ruyle, G., Eppler, C., Cook, D., & Merrill-Davies, M. (2012). Writing your own NEPA alternative. In Cattle Producer's Handbook Range and Pasture Section, 3rd edition(p. 575).
• Pfander, J. L., Pfander, J. L., Ruyle, G. B., Ruyle, G. B., Hutchinson, B. S., & Hutchinson, B. S. (2008). Collaborative Initiatives to Deliver Agricultural Information.. In Convergence and Collaboration of Campus Information Services(pp 177-197). Westport, Conn.: Libraries Unlimited.

Journals/Publications

• Lien, A., Dew, T., Ruyle, G. B., Robbins-Sherman, N., Perozzo, N., Miller, M. L., & Lopez Hoffman, L. (2021). Trust plays an essential role in implementation of adaptive management on public lands.. Rangeland Ecology and Management.
• Ruyle, G. B., Brooks, R. J., Tolleson, D. R., & Failkner, D. B. (2021). A production-scale evaluation of nutritional monitoring and decision support for free-ranging cattle in an arid environment. The Rangeland Journal, 43, 35-46.
• Eisenberg, J., Megdal, S. B., Sundareshan, P. M., Barnett, D., Seiter, M., Ruyle, G. B., Sullivan, B., Davis, R., & Mather, P. (2020). Analysis of the 2020 WOTUS rule & policy implications for ephemeral washes in Arizona. The Water Report, 17.
• Noelle, S., Lyons, T., Gorlier, A., Mcclaran, M. P., Nichols, M., & Ruyle, G. B. (2020). How long before a second defoliation of actively growing grass plants in the Desert Grassland?. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, section Animal Behavior and Welfare.
• Ruyle, G. B., Nichols, M., Mcclaran, M. P., Gorlier, A., Lyons, T., & Noelle, S. (2020). How long before a second defoliation of actively growing grass plants in the Desert Grassland?. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, section Animal Behavior and Welfare.
• Daltrey, A., Sullivan, B., Brandau, B., & Ruyle, G. B. (2019). Federal Appeals Handbook: Guidance for appealing grazing decisions. Arizona Cooperative Extension Bulletin az1803.
• Lien, A., Ruyle, G. B., Bonar, S., Vanasco, W., Ulibarri, C., & Lopez Hoffman, L. (2019). Opportunities and barriers for endangered species conservation using payments for ecosystem services. Biological Conservation. doi:doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.01.017
• Lien, A., Ruyle, G. B., Svancara, C., Vanasco, W., & Lopez-Hoffman, L. (2019). Opportunities and barriers for endangered species conservation using payments for ecosystem services. Biological Conservation, 232, 72-84.
• Lien, A., Ruyle, G. B., & Lopez-Hoffman, L. (2018). Q Methodology: A Method for Understanding Complex Viewpoints in Communities Served by Extension. Journal of Extension, 56(2).
• Tolleson, D., Sprinkle, J., Ruyle, G. B., Howery, L. D., Crimmins, M. A., Brugger, J., Mcclaran, M. P., & Hawkes, K. (2018). Guide to Co-Developing Drought Preparation Plans for Livestock on Southwest National Forests. University of Arizona Cooperartive Extension Bullletin, az1764, 80.
• Tolleson, D., Sprinkle, J., Ruyle, G. B., Howery, L. D., Crimmins, M. A., Mcclaran, M. P., Brugger, J., & Hawkes, K. (2018). Guide to Co-Developing Drought Preparation Plans for Livestock Grazing on Southwest National Forests. Peer-Reviewed Arizona Cooperative Extension Publication (az1764), 80.
  More info

  Hawkes, K., M. McClaran, J. Brugger, M, Crimmins, L. Howery, G. Ruyle, J. Sprinkle, and D. Tolleson. 2018. Co-Developing Drought Preparation Plans for Livestock Grazing on Southwest National Forests. Peer-Reviewed Arizona Cooperative Extension Publication (az1764).
• Tolleson, D., Sprinkle, J., Ruyle, G. B., Howery, L. D., Crimmins, M. A., Mcclaran, M. P., Brugger, J., & Hawkes, K. (2018). Guide to Co-Developing Drought Preparation Plans for Livestock Grazing on Southwest National Forests. University of Arizona Cooperative Extension Bulletin, 80.
• Dyess, J., Ruyle, G. B., & Duval, D. F. (2017). Value of University of Arizona Cooperative Extension’s Involvement in Immediate Post-Wallow Fire Grazing Recovery. College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ).
  More info

  The University of Arizona Cooperative Extensionparticipated in cooperative efforts to monitor rangelandrecovery and assess forage availability after the Wallow Firethat provided critical information supporting the ForestService’s decision to allow grazing to resume on allotmentsearlier than originally anticipated. Enhancement and use ofthe University of Arizona Cooperative Extension VegetationGIS Data System software allowed Forest Service andUniversity personnel to quickly record and analyze ecologicaldata. This ecological data was important to determiningthe response of vegetation to provide forage for livestockand wildlife. Estimates of benefits to ranchers from earlierresumption of grazing on their allotments range from $12,241to $52,835 per allotment. Estimates of total rancher benefitsrange from $477,410 to $2,060,577.
• Lein, A., Svancara, C., Vanasco, W., Ruyle, G. B., & Lopez-Hoffman, L. (2017). The Land Ethic of Ranchers: A Core Value Despite Divergent Views of Government. Rangeland Ecology and Management, 70(6), 787-793.
• Nichols, M., & Ruyle, G. B. (2017). High temporal resolution photography for observing riparian area use and grazing behavior. Rangeland Ecology and Management.
• Duval, D. F., Ruyle, G. B., & Howery, L. D. (2016). Economic Impact of Cooperative Extension Efforts in Rangeland Management for a Northern Arizona Ranching Allotment. University of Arizona Cooperative Extension Bulletin.
• Duval, D. F., Ruyle, G. B., & Howery, L. D. (2016). Economic Impact of Cooperative Extension Efforts in Rangeland Management for a Northern Arizona Ranching Allotment. https://extension.arizona.edu/sites/extension.arizona.edu/files/pubs/az1707-2016_0.pdf. University of Arizona Cooperative Extension Bulletin.
• Lein, A. M., Venasco, W., Lopez-Hoffman, L., & Ruyle, G. B. (2015). Payments for Ecosystem Services for Southwestern Ranchers. Arizona Cooperative Extension Bulletin, 10 pages.
• Lein, A., Ruyle, G. B., & Lopez Hoffman, L. (2016). The land ethic of ranchers: a core value despite divergent views of government. Rangeland Ecology and Management.
• Lien, A. M., Lien, A. M., Neeley, J. L., Neeley, J. L., Lopez Hoffman, L., Lopez Hoffman, L., Ruyle, G. B., & Ruyle, G. B. (2015). The impact of federal policies on rangeland ecosystem services. Rangelands.
• Lien, A. M., Neeley, J. L., Lopez Hoffman, L., & Ruyle, G. B. (2015). The impact of federal policies on rangeland ecosystem services. Rangelands.
• Lien, A. M., Vanasco, W., Lopez Hoffman, L., & Ruyle, G. B. (2014). Payments for Ecosystem Services for Southern Arizona Ranchers. Arizona Cooperative Extension Publication.
• Lien, A. M., Vanasco, W., Lopez Hoffman, L., & Ruyle, G. B. (2015). Payments for Ecosystem Services for Southern Arizona Ranchers. Arizona Cooperative Extension Publication.
• Mcclaran, M. P., Butler, G. J., Wei, H., & Ruyle, G. B. (2014). Increased preparation for drought among livestock producers reliant on rain-fed forage. Natural Hazards.
• Mcclaran, M. P., Butler, G. J., Wei, H., & Ruyle, G. B. (2015). Increased preparation for drought among livestock producers reliant on rain-fed forage. Natural Hazards, 79, 151-170.
• Ruyle, G. B., & Woods, S. (2015). Informal Rangeland Monitoring and its Importance to Conservation in a US Ranching Community. Rangeland Ecology and Management.
• Svancara, C., Lien, A., Ruyle, G. B., Bonar, S., & Lopez Hoffman, L. (2015). Jaguar critical habitat designation causes concern for southwestern ranchers.. Rangelands.
• Svancara, C., Svancara, C., Lien, A., Lien, A., Ruyle, G. B., Ruyle, G. B., Bonar, S., Bonar, S., Lopez Hoffman, L., & Lopez Hoffman, L. (2015). Jaguar critical habitat designation causes concern for southwestern ranchers.. Rangelands.
• Svejcar, T., Boyd, C., Davies, K., Madsen, M., Bates, J., Sheley, R., Marlow, C., Bohnert, D., Borman, M., Mata-Gonzàlez, R., Buckhouse, J., Stringham, T., Perryman, B., Swanson, S., Tate, K., George, M., Ruyle, G., Roundy, B., Call, C., , Jensen, K., et al. (2014). Western Land Managers will Need all Available Tools for Adapting to Climate Change, Including Grazing: A Critique of Beschta et al.. Environmental Management, 1-4.
  More info

  Abstract: In a previous article, Beschta et al. (Environ Manag 51(2):474-491, 2013) argue that grazing by large ungulates (both native and domestic) should be eliminated or greatly reduced on western public lands to reduce potential climate change impacts. The authors did not present a balanced synthesis of the scientific literature, and their publication is more of an opinion article. Their conclusions do not reflect the complexities associated with herbivore grazing. Because grazing is a complex ecological process, synthesis of the scientific literature can be a challenge. Legacy effects of uncontrolled grazing during the homestead era further complicate analysis of current grazing impacts. Interactions of climate change and grazing will depend on the specific situation. For example, increasing atmospheric CO2 and temperatures may increase accumulation of fine fuels (primarily grasses) and thus increase wildfire risk. Prescribed grazing by livestock is one of the few management tools available for reducing fine fuel accumulation. While there are certainly points on the landscape where herbivore impacts can be identified, there are also vast grazed areas where impacts are minimal. Broad scale reduction of domestic and wild herbivores to help native plant communities cope with climate change will be unnecessary because over the past 20-50 years land managers have actively sought to bring populations of native and domestic herbivores in balance with the potential of vegetation and soils. To cope with a changing climate, land managers will need access to all available vegetation management tools, including grazing. © 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York (outside the USA).
• Brugger, J., Crimmins, M., Ruyle, G., & Mcclaran, M. (2013). Ranching with Drought in the Southwest: A workshop report and invitation to participate. Arizona Cattlelog, 67(10), 17-25.
  More info

  Brugger, Julie, Michael Crimmins, George Ruyle, Mitchel McClaran. 2013. Ranching with Drought in the Southwest: A workshop report and invitation to participate. Arizona Cattlelog 67 (10): 17-25.
• Pepper, M. B., Howery, L. D., Krausman, P. R., Ruyle, G. B., W., J., & Schafer, D. W. (2013). Adaptive grazing management and use of forage by cattle (Bos taurus) and Elk (Cervus elaphus) in central Arizona. Southwestern Naturalist, 58(1), 20-27.
  More info

  Abstract: During March 2001-December 2003, we measured use of forage and height of stubble in pastures at low, middle, and high elevations. In years with higher precipitation, use of forage by cattle (Bos taurus) and elk (Cervus elaphus) was less in the middle elevation compared to low and high elevations. In the worst drought year on record (2002), use of forage increased with elevation. Overall, use of forage was greater in 2002 than in 2001 and 2003. Shorter stubble corresponded to lower production and higher use of forage. Total use of forage did not exceed 50%.
• Pepper, M. B., Howery, L. D., Ruyle, G. B., Cain, J. W., & Schafer, D. W. (2013). Adaptive grazing management and use of forage by cattle (Bos taurus) and Elk (Cervus elaphus) in central Arizona.. Southwestern Naturalist, 1(58), 20-27.
  More info

  Pepper, M.B., L.D. Howery, P.R. Krausman, G.B. Ruyle, J.W. Cain III, and D.W. Schafer. 2013. Adaptive grazing management and use of forage by cattle (Bos taurus) and Elk (Cervus elaphus) in central Arizona. Southwestern Naturalist. 58(1):20-27
• Ruyle, G. B. (2013). Arizona rangeland monitoring. Arizona Cattlelog, 68(3), 9.
  More info

  Ruyle, George. 2013. Arizona rangeland monitoring. Arizona Cattlelog 68 (3): 9.
• Butler, G., Ruyle, G. B., Mcclaran, M. P., & Austin, D. E. (2012). Ranching with drought.. Arizona Cattlelog, 66(8), 16-17.
• Goldstein, J. H., Presnall, C. K., López-Hoffman, L., Nabhan, G. P., Knight, R. L., Ruyle, G. B., & Toombs, T. P. (2011). Beef and beyond: Paying for ecosystem services on Western US rangelands. Rangelands, 33(5), 4-12.
  More info

  Abstract: Rangelands provide a diverse array of vital services that pertain to human life: food and fiber, clean drinking water, climate regulation, recreational experiences, wildlife habitat, and others. Ranchers and diverse publics have shared interests in these benefits, and ranchers have a financial interest in maintaining the long-term productivity of these landscapes. Ecosystem services are the benefits that people derive from nature that support and fulfill human life. Although livestock products are likely the most recognized ecosystem service provided by rangelands, healthy rangelands provide a wide array of ecosystem services. The value of payment projects focusing specifically on water quality was recently estimated to be $9.3 billion in 2008, and $50 billion cross all years that examined programs have been active. Third are biodiversity-focused payment programs, which provide payments to landowners for undertaking practices that result in the protection and enhancement of habitat and target species, including mitigation banks for protecting the habitat of endangered species.
• Goodrich, D. C., Guertin, D. P., Burns, I. S., Nearing, M. A., Stone, J. J., Wei, H., Heilman, P., Hernandez, M., Spaeth, K., Pierson, F., Paige, G. B., Miller, S. N., Kepner, W. G., Ruyle, G., McClaran, M. P., Weltz, M., & Jolley, L. (2011). AGWA: The automated geospatial watershed assessment tool to inform rangeland management. Rangelands, 33(4), 41-47.
  More info

  Abstract: The Automated Geospatial Watershed Assessment (AGWA) is an ArcGIS interface to support data organization, model parameterization, integration, and visualization for KINEROS2, RHEM, and the Soil Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model. All of the required initial modeling parameters automatically are generated by AGWA from topography, soils, and land cover/land-use Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data layers. Built into AGWA are digitized and interpolated versions of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) technical publication 40 (TP40) rainfall frequency atlas maps. There are potential long-term implications of these results as well for overall plant productivity. The current RHEM and AGWA tools, as well as those in development, will support the analysis of alternative management systems as well as their placement in a watershed to reduce conservation investments and increase cumulative conservation benefits over a range of scales.
• Goodrich, D., Guertin, D., Burns, I., Nearing, M., Stone, J., Wei, H., Heilman, P., Hernandez, M., Spaeth, K., Pierson, F., Paige, G., Miller, S., Kepner, W., Ruyle, G., McClaran, M., Weltz, M., & Jolley, L. (2011). AGWA: The Automated Geospatial Watershed Assessment Tool to Inform Rangeland Management. Rangelands.
• Ruyle, G. B., Kopec, D., Gilbert, J., Smith, S., Pessarakli, M., Nolan, S., Fish, D., & Ruyl, G. (2011). Native Grass Development for Turf. Turfgrass and Environmental Research Online, 10(12), 1-5.
• Nichols, M. H., Ruyle, G. B., & Nourbakhsh, I. R. (2009). Very-high-resolution panoramic photography to improve conventional rangeland monitoring. Rangeland Ecology and Management, 62(6), 579-582.
  More info

  Abstract: Rangeland monitoring often includes repeat photographs as a basis for documentation. Whereas photographic equipment and electronics have been evolving rapidly, photographic monitoring methods for rangelands have changed little over time because each picture is a compromise between resolution and area covered. Advances in image sensors, storage media, and image-processing software allow enormous amounts of information to be collected efficiently and inexpensively, so multiple pictures taken at full zoom can be combined into a single high-resolution panoramic image. This project was initiated to integrate very-high-resolution panoramic images with conventional rangeland monitoring methods addressing three resource management categories: riparian areas, wildlife, and invasive species. © Society for Range Management.
• Cibils, A. F., Howery, L. D., & Ruyle, G. B. (2008). Social models fail to induce diet and feeding site avoidance in naïve yearling steers. Animal, 2(2), 255-264.
  More info

  PMID: 22445019;Abstract: Social learning can be of critical importance to cattle grazing rangeland environments with high variability of food resources across space and time. Experienced individuals can greatly facilitate foraging decisions (what to eat and where to eat) of naïve peers in such settings. We conducted an experiment with cattle to investigate strength and persistence of socially induced food and feeding site avoidance behaviours. Sixteen naïve yearling steers were paired with 16 social models that had either not been trained (control) or been trained with an emetic (LiCl), electrical shock or both to avoid: (a) an unsafe high-quality food (LiCl); (b) an unsafe high-quality feeding site (shock); or (c) both the unsafe high-quality food and the unsafe high-quality feeding site (LiCl + shock). Ten-minute trials were conducted in an experimental arena containing three artificial feeding sites each consisting of groups of bowls with either high- (HQ) or moderate-quality (MQ) foods (HQ = barley and oat grain; MQ = Bermuda grass hay). Unsafe high-quality (UHQ, surrounded by traffic cones) and safe moderate-quality (SMQ) feeding sites consisted of nine rubber bowls containing either HQ or MQ foods. The safe high-quality (SHQ) feeding site consisted of two groups of eight bowls containing HQ food, which surrounded the UHQ and SMQ feeding sites. Social models did not induce diet and feeding site avoidance behaviours in naïve steers; they exerted small and transient changes in the feeding behaviour of their naïve counterparts. Consequences to the individual outweighed social influences; when naïve animals experienced the same punishment contingencies as their social models, their behavioural patterns closely resembled those of their social model. Conditioned food and location aversions via LiCl were apparently influenced by prior exposure to target foods and the experimental arena. Conversely, conditioned feeding site avoidance via shock was apparently not influenced by prior exposure to target foods or the experimental arena. © 2008 The Animal Consortium.
• Renken, W. J., Howery, L. D., Ruyle, G. B., & Enns, R. M. (2008). Cattle generalise visual cues from the pen to the field to select initial feeding patches. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 109(2-4), 128-140.
  More info

  Abstract: Free-grazing ruminants forage in environments containing multiple levels of complexity; the forage selection process operates at the landscape scale, when selecting feeding sites, and at the plant part level when selecting actual bites. Pen trials have shown that livestock associate visual cues with feeding sites, however, no field study has shown that animals generalise from training with visual cues in pens in order to choose feeding sites in the field. Our study tested nine beef heifers' ability to generalise a learned visual cue association to select feeding sites in a rangeland setting offering a novel forage, Lehmann lovegrass (LL). Initially, animals were trained to associate high quality feed with a visual cue during pen trials. We then tested animal response to the cue before and after they gained 14-day grazing experience with LL. Two identical field experiments (i.e., novel, before animals had experienced foraging LL versus familiar, after the animals had 14-day grazing experience with LL) were conducted over 3-day periods. Each experiment consisted of 27, 10-min trials. Animals were tested in plots containing high quality (HQ) and low quality (LQ) LL patches. For each trial, one of three randomly selected scenarios was presented: (1) the visual cue was placed in the HQ patch, (2) the visual cue was placed in the LQ patch, or (3) no visual cue was placed in either patch. Dependent variables were first patch-type chosen, bite rate in each patch, and number of observations of grazing in each patch. Cue presence influenced initial patch choice, bite rate, and grazing tallies within patch type. Heifers took 212 more HQ bites than LQ bites when the cue was placed in the HQ patch (P < 0.04), but took only 45 more HQ bites than LQ bites when the cue was placed in the LQ patch (P < 0.02). Heifers took 135 more bites from the HQ patch than the LQ patch when no cue was present (P < 0.02). Heifers clearly preferred HQ patches over LQ patches regardless of cue presence or absence, but grazed more in HQ and LQ patches when the cue was placed in those patches. The number of grazing tallies was directly related to bite rate within a patch. Animals grazed more in HQ than LQ patches when no cue was present. Visual cue placement altered this pattern; animals increased grazing in cued patches regardless of quality. Grazing experience did not influence observed grazing behaviour or the influence of the visual cue. © 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
• Conley, J. L., Fernandez-Gimenez, M. E., Ruyle, G. B., & Brunson, M. (2007). Forest Service grazing permittee perceptions of the Endangered Species Act in southeastern Arizona. Rangeland Ecology and Management, 60(2), 136-145.
  More info

  Abstract: This study reports the results of a survey of Coronado National Forest grazing permittees about their attitudes regarding the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the management of threatened and endangered (T&E) species on grazing allotments in southeastern Arizona. A majority of respondents perceived negative impacts from ESA implementation. However, the degree of impact remained independent of the number of listed species on allotments and of the potential for restrictions on those allotments. Perceptions of negative impact and attitudes toward T&E species policies were more related to attitudes toward federal regulation. Permittees broadly supported the idea of species conservation and expressed willingness to work with federal agencies but did not perceive the federal agencies as having the same responsiveness to their concerns. A more proactive agency strategy with science-based, focused recovery objectives coupled with economic incentives could improve support for species recovery efforts.
• Sprinkle, J., Holder, M., Erickson, C., Medina, A., Robinett, D., Ruyle, G., Maynard, J., Tuttle, S., Hays Jr., J., Meyer, W., Stratton, S., Rogstad, A., Eldredge, K., Harris, J., Howery, L., & Sprinkle, W. (2007). Dutchwoman Butte revisited. Rangelands, 29(6), 21-34.
  More info

  Abstract: Dutchwoman Butte (DWB) is a 100-acre isolated landform that supports a relict vegetation. This rangeland was being monitored by the so called "Reading the Range" which is a collaborative range-monitoring program. This program assesses rangelands with the use of standardized monitoring techniques and assists in management decisions. This DWB has been compared to a grazed area located 25 miles away. Other topics being discussed include: the description and history of Dutchwoman Butte as well as for the nearby grazed whiskey tank companion site; range monitoring and soil data collection; species composition; and the management implications.
• Fernandez-Gimenez, M. E., McClaran, S. J., & Ruyle, G. (2005). Arizona permittee and land management agency employee attitudes toward rangeland monitoring by permittees. Rangeland Ecology and Management, 58(4), 344-351.
  More info

  Abstract: Ongoing conflicts over the management of western rangelands can be attributed in part to the lack of reliable information about current ecological conditions and their causes due, in turn, to insufficient monitoring. To meet the monitoring shortfall, land management agencies increasingly are enlisting permittees to monitor their grazing allotments. We surveyed grazing permittees in 5 Arizona counties and land management agency employees throughout Arizona to compare their attitudes toward permittee monitoring on public rangelands, the role of government in rangeland management, rangeland conditions in Arizona, and the credibility of information sources about rangelands. Permittees and agency employees differed in most of the attitudes measured by our survey. However, both populations agreed that permittees should participate in monitoring their allotments, and many respondents agreed with making permittee monitoring mandatory. Many respondents in both groups also agreed that collaboration can be beneficial. Joint monitoring, which can be considered a type of "joint fact-finding," may help improve agency-permittee relationships and bridge the gap in attitudes and underlying values. Permittee-monitoring programs deserve careful evaluation to determine their impacts on social relationships, management decisions, and ecological conditions.
• Fernandez-Gimenez, M. E., Ruyle, G., & McClaran, S. J. (2005). An evaluation of Arizona Cooperative Extension's Rangeland Monitoring Program. Rangeland Ecology and Management, 58(1), 89-98.
  More info

  Abstract: We evaluated Arizona Cooperative Extension's Rangeland Monitoring Program with the use of focus groups and a self-administered mail survey of grazing permittees and natural resource agency employees. Our primary objectives were to 1) determine whether Extension is reaching its target audience, 2) describe the monitoring practices and attitudes of permittees and agency staff, 3) determine whether there is a relationship between permittees' exposure to Cooperative Extension and their monitoring and management practices, and 4) identify the monitoring information needs and preferences of permittees and natural resource agency staff. We found that Arizona's rangeland monitoring Extension program has been effective in reaching a large part of its target audience, and a significant proportion of Arizona permittees monitor on public, private, and state-owned rangelands. However, overall monitoring adoption rates remain low. Extension contact is associated with use of monitoring and other beneficial management practices, and permittees and agency employees report that monitoring increased their knowledge and led to changes in management. Monitoring by permittees improves agency-permittee relationships in many cases. Most permittees and agency employees believe that their respective peers are the most reliable source of monitoring information and prefer to receive information from Extension through face-to-face contact at workshops or personalized on-site assistance. The evaluation revealed important social dimensions of rangeland monitoring. Extension agents play a key role in facilitating the social process of monitoring, as well as providing technical training in monitoring skills. Further study is needed to investigate whether permittee monitoring actually leads to better management, improved economic returns, or increased tenure security.
• Abu-Zanat, M., Ruyle, G. B., & Abdel-Hamid, N. (2004). Increasing range production from fodder shrubs in low rainfall areas. Journal of Arid Environments, 59(2), 205-216.
  More info

  Abstract: Field experiments were conducted at the University of Jordan Research Station at Al-Muwaqqar village to develop a simple technique for establishing Atriplex seedlings, and to evaluate the browse production under natural precipitation compared with shrubs receiving additional harvested water. Overall survival of the transplants after three growing seasons averaged 67% under strictly rainfed conditions compared to 95% when additional harvested water of 39mm was applied. Production of grazable browse of 3-year old shrubs averaged 380 and 1151kg DM (dry matter)ha-1 without and with additional water, respectively. Rain use efficiency averaged 1.14 and 4.48kg DMha -1year-1mm-1 for strictly rainfed conditions and additional harvested water, respectively. Intensity of cutting had a highly significant effect on the potential of shrub regrowth. Cutting shrubs at a height of 15 and 30cm above ground level reduced regrowth substantially, whereas cutting at 45cm enhanced the amount of regrowth. The different cutting intensities had no significant effect on survival of the severed shrubs, which indicates the high tolerance of saltbushes to cutting or browsing. Water-harvesting contour furrows are reasonable for establishing saltbush plantations in low rainfall areas (100-200mm). Additional harvested water in small amounts from macro-catchements had a substantial effect on shrub survival, biomass production and water use efficiency. © 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
• Cibils, A. F., Howery, L. D., & Ruyle, G. B. (2004). Diet and habitat selection by cattle: The relationship between skin- and gut-defense systems. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 88(3-4), 187-208.
  More info

  Abstract: Animals possess an external or skin-defense system that protects them from aggressions inflicted by predators, and an internal or gut-defense system that deters them from over-ingesting toxins. We conducted a study with cattle to investigate the relation between skin- and gut-defense systems and their influence on diet and habitat selection. Sixteen yearling steers were randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups and were exposed individually to an experimental arena during multiple 10 min trials during which they were allowed to select between an unsafe high quality habitat (UHQ) surrounded by traffic cones (visual cues), a safe, uncued high quality habitat (SHQ), or a safe, uncued moderate quality habitat (SMQ). Experimental habitats were made up of groups of bowls containing barley and oat grain (UHQ and SHQ habitats) or Bermuda grass hay (SMQ habitat). Treatments consisted of no aversions (control group), or of averted groups using: (a) electric shock; (b) lithium chloride (LiCl); or (c) both LiCl and electric shock. Steers in the shock group avoided UHQ almost completely, spending significantly less time there than control steers (P
• Abu-Zanat, M., Al-Hassanat, F., Alawi, M., & Ruyle, G. B. (2003). Mineral assessment in Atriplex halimus L. and Atriplex nummularia L. in the arid region of Jordan. African Journal of Range and Forage Science, 20(3), 247-251.
  More info

  Abstract: The foliage of Atriplex halimus contained higher levels (P < 0.05) of ash (28.03%) than that of Atriplex nummularia (23.11%). Spring growth of the two saltbushes contained less ash than the fall regrowth. The foliage of A. halimus contained higher levels of macrominerals than A. nummularia plants except sodium. The two saltbushes contained higher levels of P, K and Mg during spring, but lower levels of Ca and Na compared to the growth of the fall season. Levels of Fe, Cu, Mn and Se present in the foliage of A. nummularia plants were higher than A. halimus. Clipping had no significant effect on ash content of saltbushes, but it affected the composition of the ash significantly. Clipping decreased the concentrations of Ca, P, Na, Mg and Fe in the foliage of clipped shrubs. The mineral composition of the two species of Atriplex appeared adequate to meet the requirements of sheep and goats grazing such types of forage.
• Abu-Zanat, M., Al-Hassanat, F., Alawi, M., & Ruyle, G. B. (2003). Oxalate and tannins assessment in Atriplex halimus L. and A. nummularia L.. Journal of Range Management, 56(4), 370-374.
  More info

  Abstract: The study was conducted at 3 locations in the arid region of Jordan to assess the seasonal changes of oxalate and tannins in Atriplex halimus L. and A. nummularia L. plants commonly used for revegetation of degraded rangelands. During spring and fall seasons, 20 shrubs of each species were selected randomly at each location, 20 similar twigs per shrub were clipped and analyzed for oxalate and tannins. Atriplex halimus contained higher levels of oxalate (7.00%) compared with A. nummularia plants (6.20%) (P < 0.001). Oxalate levels averaged 8.29 and 4.92% in spring and fall season, respectively. Plants of A. halimus accumulated more oxalate in spring than those of A. nummularia. Clipping had no effect on oxalate concentration. The seedlings of A. num. mularia contained more oxalate than old plants whereas old shrubs of A. halimus contained more oxalate than the young seedlings. The browse of A. halimus contained more condensed and hydrolyzable tannins (1.05% and 0.67%, P < 0.0001) than A. nummularia (0.80% and 0.39%, P < 0.0001), respectively. Clipping had no effect on the levels of tannic phenols, condensed and hydrolyzable tannins. Young plants of the 2 species had higher levels of condensed tannins compared to older plants. However, seedlings of A. nummularia contained significantly higher levels of condensed tannins compared to A. halimus seedlings (1.57% and 1.47%, respectively). Atriplex halimus synthesized more oxalate, tannic phenols, condensed and hydrolyzable tannins than A. nummularia. These secondary metabolites may explain the low palatability of Atriplex halimus compared to A. nummularia.
• Halstead, L. E., Howery, L. D., Ruyle, G. B., Krausman, P. R., & Steidl, R. J. (2002). Elk and cattle forage use under a specialized grazing system. Journal of Range Management, 55(4), 360-366.
  More info

  Abstract: The Walker Basin Allotment grazing system in central Arizona is designed to allocate resource use under elk (Cervus elaphus L.) and cattle (Bos taurus L.) grazing. The grazing system was designed to promote biologically acceptable levels of forage use on the half of the allotment scheduled for cattle grazing and to rest the other half by attracting elk to pastures recently grazed by cattle. The objectives of our 2-year study were to determine whether the grazing system facilitated proper forage use as defined by recent forage use and residual stubble height guidelines (i.e., 30 to 40% use and an 8- to 10-cm stubble height) and whether the system rested one half of the allotment from elk and cattle grazing. Mean (± SEM) total elk and cattle forage use for western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithii Rydb.), the key forage species, was 32 and 61% ± 7 in 1997 and 1998, respectively; corresponding mean (± SEM) stubble heights were 11 and 10 cm ± 0.6. Mean total cattle and elk forage use in 1998 (61%) exceeded the 30 to 40% use guidelines. However, mean end-of-year stubble height was never below 10 cm. The grazing system did not provide half the allotment with complete rest; elk used all study pastures. Elk use was higher in pastures with heavier tree cover and steeper terrain in both years, regardless of where cattle grazing occurred. Elk grazing patterns were apparently more dependent on tree cover and topography than any changes in forage caused by the grazing system.
• Halstead, L. E., Howery, L. D., & Ruyle, G. B. (2000). Comparison of 3 techniques for monitoring use of western wheatgrass. Journal of Range Management, 53(5), 499-505.
  More info

  Abstract: Forage use data can help rangeland and wildlife managers make informed decisions. However, managers need to know if forage use techniques that are commonly used to estimate ungulate herbivory under field conditions produce comparable results. The objective of this 2-year study was to directly compare forage use measurements obtained via the paired-plot method and 2 height-weight methods (using on-site height-weight curves and the pre-established United States Forest Service height-weight gauge). In June, July, and October of 1997 and 1998, we measured forage use of western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithii Rydb.) by cattle (Bos taurus L.) and wild ungulates, mainly elk (Cervus elaphus L.). On-site height-weight curves and the USFS gauge consistently produced lower estimates (overall means = 8 and 7%, respectively) than the paired-plot method (overall mean = 31%). Height-weight estimates did not differ (P > 0.05) when calculated with either on-site curves or the USFS gauge. Within sampling areas, paired-plot estimates were relatively more precise (mean CV = 63%) than on-site curves (mean CV = 238%) or the USFS gauge (mean CV = 271%). Selective grazing likely contributed to higher CVs for height-weight techniques. Our findings are important for rangeland and wildlife managers because the forage monitoring techique they use may influence the results obtained and, consequently, grazing management and wildlife harvest decisions. Managers should ensure that chosen monitoring techniques provide an appropriate evaluation of management goals and objectives.
• Howery, L. D., Bailey, D. W., Ruyle, G. B., & Renken, W. J. (2000). Cattle use visual cues to track food locations. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 67(1-2), 1-14.
  More info

  Abstract: We tested the hypothesis that cattle aided by visual cues would be more efficient than uncued animals in locating and consuming foods placed in either fixed or variable locations within a 0.64-ha experimental pasture. Eight yearling steers were randomly selected and trained to associate traffic barricades and traffic cones with high- (oat-barley mixture) and low- (straw) quality foods, respectively. Initially steers were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 food location/visual cue treatments: fixed locations/with cues (F/C), variable locations/with cues (V/C), fixed locations/no cues (F/NC), or variable locations/no cues (V/NC). High- and low-quality foods and their respective cue (or no cue) were placed in the experimental pasture. Individual animals were allowed to explore the pasture for 10 min twice per day every other day for 1 week. Minutes until feeding, first feed type consumed (i.e., high-quality, low-quality, or no food consumed), animal location and activity (i.e., feeding, standing, or moving), and total intake of high- and low-quality feed were recorded during each 10-min trial. At the end of each week, location/visual cue treatments were randomly assigned to another 2 steers, which permitted an independent test of each animal in each treatment over a 4-week period. Animals in the F/C and V/C treatments took about 2 min to initially locate and consume a food, compared to F/NC and V/NC animals who took nearly 4 and 6 min, respectively. The high-quality food was the first food located and consumed by F/C, V/C, F/NC, and V/NC animals during 79, 77, 67, and 54% of sampling occasions, respectively. Cued animals typically spent more time feeding (P = 0.0004) and less time standing (P = 0.005) than uncued animals. Cued animals had a higher mean intake than uncued animals of high- (P = 0.001) and low- (P = 0.04) quality food. Mean high-quality intake for F/C, V/C, F/NC, and V/NC treatments was 266, 245, 214, and 126 (±22) g, respectively; mean low-quality intake for the same treatments was 36, 32, 12, and 10 (± 10) g. Cued animals also consumed more food per distance traveled than uncued animals (P = 0.005). Animals located food quicker (P = 0.03) and consumed more high-quality food (P = 0.02) when food locations were constant than when they were variable. Our data strongly indicate that cattle can learn to associate visual cues with disparate food qualities and use this information to forage more efficiently in both fixed and variable foraging environments. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science B.V.
• Howery, L. D., Provenza, F. D., Ruyle, G. B., & Jordan, N. C. (1998). How do animals learn if rangeland plants are toxic or nutritious?. Rangelands, 20(6), 4-9.
  More info

  Abstract: Over the past 15 years, Dr. Frederick Provenza and his associates at Utah State University have studied how animals use certain physiological and behavioral processes to learn whether rangeland forages are toxic or nutritious. This article summarizes key concepts presented in recent articles (e.g., Provenza et al. 1992; Provenza 1995, 1996, 1997) about how learning plays a major role in the development of dietary choices made by rangeland animals. Animals continually sample and evaluate the nutritional value of forages using their senses of taste, smell, and sight. Postingestive feedback adjusts a forage's hedonic value (i.e., preference and palatability) commensurate with its utility to the animal (i.e., animal age, morphology, and physiology) enabling survival when the animal's foraging environment and nutritional needs are constantly changing. Plant species that cause positive hedonic shifts are usually highly correlated with nutritional well-being, while plant species that cause negative hedonic shifts are typically highly correlated with nutrient deficiencies and toxicosis. Hence, what makes a forage taste 'good or bad' (and thus, sought or avoided) is not taste per se, but rather nutritional benefits or deficits received from forage ingestion, which are sensed by animals through feedback and linked with a forage's taste. Animals use their senses (smell and sight) to seek foods that cause positive feedback (i.e., nutritional well-being) and avoid foods that cause negative feedback (i.e., nutrient deficiencies and toxicosis), and accordingly possess a high degree of 'nutritional wisdom.' This process occasionally breaks down when animals fail to properly link the feedback of a particular food with its taste, smell, or sight, or when their physiological means for binding, metabolizing, or detoxifying toxic compounds is exceeded.
• Anable, M. E., McClaran, M. P., & Ruyle, G. B. (1992). Spread of introduced Lehmann lovegrass Eragrostis lehmanniana Nees. in Southern Arizona, USA. Biological Conservation, 61(3), 181-188.
  More info

  Abstract: Through seeding and subsequent spread, Lehmann lovegrass Eragrostis lehmanniana Nees. has transformed the structure and function of at least 145 000 ha of semi-desert grassland in southern Arizona since its introduction in 1932. Our study of its spread on the Santa Rita Experimental Range since 1954 showed that by 1989 it was present on >85% of 75 relatively widely dispersed non-seeded permanent plots and accounted for >40% of all perennial grass plants on these plots. In addition, it represented >50% of the perennial grass plants on sites 90% of the grass biomass and produce 2-4 times more biomass annually than native grass vegetation. In the future, strong consideration of these plant composition changes, and the likely decrease in wildlife diversity and increase in fire frequencies accompanying Lehmann lovegrass dominance, should be made before seeding the species. © 1992.
• McClaran, M. P., Allen, L. S., & Ruyle, G. B. (1992). Livestock production and grazing management in the encinal oak woodlands of Arizona. General Technical Report - US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 57-64.
  More info

  Abstract: The mixture of warm and cool season grasses, and some browse species provide a favorable forage resource for livestock production. Grazing systems, breeding in late summer-fall, and supplementation of phosphorus, protein, and energy can improve livestock production. Because nearly 80% of the grazing in the woodland occurs on federal land, grazing management must accommodate conflicting uses such as wildlife, rare species, oak recruitment, and recreation. -from Authors
• Cox, J. R., Ruyle, G. B., & Roundy, B. A. (1990). Lehmann lovegrass in southeastern Arizona: biomass production and disappearance. Journal of Range Management, 43(4), 367-372.
  More info

  Abstract: Eragrostis lehmanniana, a perennial bunchgrass from southern Africa, has recently replaced native grasses on 200 000 ha in SE Arizona. Live biomass was present throughout the year but August peaks were almost 2000 kg/ha in 1 wet summer, 1430 kg/ha in 2 normal summers, and 960 kg/ha in 1 dry summer. Recent-dead approached zero in August when live peaked, and slowly accumulated in fall and winter. Old-dead peaked before the summer rains when temperature peaked and rapidly disappeared following snow accumulations in winter. Litter was highly variable among sampling areas, plots and sampling dates but amounts usually peaked before the summer rains and decreased in winter and spring. Lehmann lovegrass annually produces 3-4 times more green forage than native grasses, but cattle prefer native grasses. -from Authors
• Roundy, B. A., & Ruyle, G. B. (1989). Effects of herbivory on twig dynamics of a Sonoran Desert shrub Simmondsia chinensis (Link) Schn.. Journal of Applied Ecology, 26(2), 701-710.
  More info

  Abstract: Density of jojoba was similar but plant size and cover were greater inside than outside a 48-yr-old livestock exclosure in C Arizona. Twig growth was greatest in spring while greatest herbivory occurred in late spring and summer after senescence of annual herbaceous plants. Grazed shrubs had greater twig growth than ungrazed shrubs resulting in similar net increases in twig length and biomass. The ability of jojoba to regrow from lower lateral or apical buds after removal of outer twig ends allows it to tolerate herbivory in the ecological context of the study site. Grazed shrubs had lower male and female flower densities than ungrazed shrubs. Periodic spring rest or control of stocking to limit grazing intensity is recommended to maintain shrub size and total production. -from Authors
• Roundy, B. A., Ruyle, G. B., & Ard, J. (1989). Estimating production and utilization of jojoba. Journal of Range Management, 42(1), 75-78.
  More info

  Abstract: Simmondsia chinensis is a major evergreen browse species for livestock and wildlife throughout its range from central Arizona to NW Mexico and Baja California. Utilization can be estimated accurately from twig diameter measurements. An alternative to basing management of jojoba on time-consuming utilization measurements and arbitrary utilization limits is to monitor size of marked shrubs and manage for stable or gradually increasing shrub size. -from Author
• Ruyle, G. B., Hasson, O., & Rice, R. W. (1987). The influence of residual stems on biting rates of cattle grazing Eragrostis lehmanniana Nees. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 19(1-2), 11-17.
  More info

  Abstract: On semi-arid rangelands, stems and other standing dead material may accumulate in bunch-grasses and restrict access to new growth by grazing animals. We found that the presence and heights of residual stems in Lehmann lovegrass (Eragrostis lehmanniana Nees) increased the times between successive bites taken by grazing cows, thus decreasing biting rates when compared to bites taken where these stems were reduced. As new tillers elongated, biting rates increased but remained lower on those plants with the greatest amounts of residual stems. Ingestive behavior of cows may be influenced by distinctive features of the vegetation available at each bite taken. The number of bites cows take on grass plants containing large amounts of residual herbage could influence the average biting rate during a foraging bout. Methods of collecting biting-rate data should account for these influences. © 1987.

Proceedings Publications

• Mashiri, F., Hutchinson, B., & Ruyle, G. (2014, Fall). International Outreach, Extension for Sustainability: Web-based Resources for Participatory Extension. In International Society for Range Management Annual Meeting.
  More info

  Mashiri, Fadzayi, Barbara Hutchinson and George Ruyle. International Outreach, Extension for Sustainability: Web-based Resources for Participatory Extension. 67th Annual Meeting International Society for Range Management, Orlando, FL (abstract accepted).
• Butler, G. J., Ruyle, G. B., McClaran, M. P., & Austin, D. E. (2013, Fall). Arizona rancher perceptions of drought: How ranchers and land managers prepare for and respond to drought. In International Society for Range Management Annual Meeting.
  More info

  Butler, Gregory J, George B. Ruyle, Mitchell P. McClaran and Diane E. Austin. 2013. Arizona rancher perceptions of drought: How ranchers and land managers prepare for and respond to drought. 66th Annual Meeting International Society for Range Management. Abstract.
• Ruyle, G. B. (2013, Summer). Sustainable ranching: Linking range condition to livestock production and stocking rate. In Cattleman's College: Update and Research Highlights.
  More info

  Ruyle, George. 2013. Sustainable ranching: Linking range condition to livestock production and stocking rate. P29-34. In: Producer&#8217;s update and research highlights, CALS School of Animal and Comparative Biomedical Sciences. Debbie Reed, editor.73pp.
• Hutchinson, B., & Ruyle, G. (2012, Fall). Finding the information you need: Hands-on practice using the Global Rangeland West Portals. In Society for Range Management 65th Annual Meeting.
• Hutchinson, B., & Ruyle, G. (2012, Fall). Finding the information you need: Hands-on practice using the Global Rangeland West Portals. In Society for Range Management Annual Meeting.
• Hutchinson, B., & Ruyle, G. (2012, Spring). Finding the information you need: Hands on practice using the Global Rangelands and Rangelands West portals. In Society for Range Management 65th Annual Meeting.
• Ruyle, G., Dyess, J., & Stewart, D. (2012, Spring). Historical Development and Application of the Parker 3-Step Method for Rangeland Monitoring. In Society for Range Management Annual Meeting, Spokane.
• Sprinkel, J., Ruyle, G., & Crimmins, M. (2011, Fall). Change on the Range. In Not provided in APROL, 64.

Presentations

• Blum, B., Ruyle, G. B., Nichols, M., & Noelle, S. (2018, February). Ecological Interactions of Free-roaming Horses in Montane Riparian Systems. 71st Annual Meeting Society for Range Management. Sparks, Nevada.
• Steidl, R. J., Ruyle, G. B., Tuttle, S., Howery, L. D., & Smalls, Z. (2018, January). Effects of Time-controlled Livestock Grazing on Habitat of Southwestern Willow Flycatchers in West-central Arizona. The International Society for Range Management ConferenceThe Society for Range Management.
• Lopez Hoffman, L., Libby, K., Robbins-Sherman, N., Ruyle, G. B., & Lien, A. (2017, January). Bringing Dark Data into the Light: Mining US Forest Service Records for Trends in Management and Ecological Change. Society of Range Management Annual Meeting. St. George, UT.
• Lopez Hoffman, L., Libby, K., Robbins-Sherman, N., Ruyle, G. B., & Lien, A. (2017, January). Impacts of Adaptive Management on Southwestern Rangelands. Arizona Section of the Society of Range Management Winter Meeting. Tucson, AZ.
• Lopez Hoffman, L., Libby, K., Robbins-Sherman, N., Ruyle, G. B., & Lien, A. (2017, Januray). Measuring Ecosystem Services Provided by Adaptive Management on Southwestern Rangelands. Society of Range Management Annual Meeting. St. George, UT.
• Lopez Hoffman, L., Ruyle, G. B., Merideth, R., & Lien, A. (2017, November). Impacts of adapative management on southwestern rangelands. National Institute for Food and Agriculture Project Directors Meeting. Tampa, FL.
• Smalls, Z., Howery, L. D., Ruyle, G. B., Steidl, R. J., & Tuttle, S. (2017, October). Effects of Time-controlled Livestock Grazing on Habitat of Southwestern Willow Flycatchers in West-central Arizona. The Wildlife Society Annual Conference, Albuquerque, NM. Albuquerque, NM.
• Tuttle, S., Smalls, Z., Ruyle, G. B., Howery, L. D., Andersen, E., & Steidl, R. J. (2017, October). Ensuring habitat for southwestern willow flycatchers through sustainable grazing. The Wildlife Society Annual Conference, Albuquerque, NM. Albuquerque, NM.
• Tuttle, S., Steidl, R. J., Ruyle, G. B., Howery, L. D., & Smalls, Z. (2017, January). Effects of Time-controlled Livestock Grazing on Habitat of Southwestern Willow Flycatchers in West-central Arizona. The International Society for Range Management Conference, St. George, UT. St. George, UT: The Society for Range Management.
• Tuttle, S., Steidl, R. J., Ruyle, G. B., Howery, L. D., & Smalls, Z. (2017, January). Effects of Time-controlled Livestock Grazing on Habitat of Southwestern Willow Flycatchers in West-central Arizona. The International Society for Range Management ConferenceThe Society for Range Management.
• Tuttle, S., Steidl, R. J., Ruyle, G. B., Howery, L. D., & Smalls, Z. (2017, October). Effects of Time-controlled Livestock Grazing on Habitat of Southwestern Willow Flycatchers in West-central Arizona. The Wildlife Society Annual Conference. Albuquerque,NM.
• Tuttle, S., Tuttle, S., Smalls, Z., Smalls, Z., Ruyle, G. B., Ruyle, G. B., Howery, L. D., Howery, L. D., Andersen, E., Andersen, E., Steidl, R. J., & Steidl, R. J. (2017, October). Ensuring habitat for southwestern willow flycatchers through sustainable grazing. The Wildlife Society Annual Conference. Albuquerque,NM.
• Steidl, R. J., Griffin, D. J., Howery, L. D., Ruyle, G. B., Smalls, Z., & Tuttle, S. (2016, October). Ensuring habitat for southwestern willow flycatchers through sustainable grazing. The Wildlife Society Annual Conference, Raleigh, NC. Raleigh, NC: The Wildilife Society; Raleigh, North Carolina; October 18, 2016.
• Steidl, R. J., Griffin, D. J., Howery, L. D., Ruyle, G. B., Smalls, Z., & Tuttle, S. (2016, October). Ensuring habitat for southwestern willow flycatchers through sustainable grazing. The Wildlife Society Annual Conference. Raleigh, NC: The Wildilife Society; Raleigh, North Carolina; October 18, 2016.
• Steidl, R. J., Griffin, D. J., Howery, L. D., Ruyle, G. B., Smalls, Z., & Tuttle, S. (2016, October). Ensuring habitat for southwestern willow flycatchers through sustainable grazing. The Wildlife Society Annual Conference. Raleigh, NC.
• Nichols, M. H., & Ruyle, G. B. (2014, Winter). Documenting grazing behavior with high resolution time-lapse photography. International Society for Range Management Annual Meeting. Orlando: International Society for Range Management.
  More info

  Nichols M. H. and G. Ruyle. 2014. Documenting grazing behavior with high resolution time-lapse photography. 67th Annual Meeting International Society for Range Management, Orlando, FL (abstract).
• Mcclaran, M. P., Guertin, D. P., Ruyle, G. B., Wei, H., Dalke, A., Butler, G., & Ross, M. (2017, summer). Grazing Land Conservation Practices and Drought on Southwestern Rangelands. CEAP Rangeland Assessment Symposium. Reno, NV: Soil and Water Conservation Society.
• Ruyle, G. B. (2013, Summer). Tying Range Management to Livestock Production. Arizona Cattle Growers' Association Convention. Phoenix Arizona: Arizona Cattle Growers' Association.
• Ruyle, G. B. (2013, Winter). Adaptive grazing management on the SRER. Arizona Section Society for Range Management Winter Meeting. Prescott, Arizona: Arizona Section Society for Range Managment.
• Ruyle, G. B. (2012, April). Guide to Rangeland Monitoring and Assessment Workshops. Arizona Cooperative Extension Monitoring Program. Globe, Sonoita, Flagstaff.
• Ruyle, G. B. (2012, December). Managed Grazing of Beef Cattle on Arizona Rangelands.
• Ruyle, G. B. (2012, Fall). Interpreting Rangeland Monitoring Data. How to Interpret Monitoring Data Workshop. Globe: Arizona Cooperative Extension.
• Ruyle, G. B. (2012, March). History of Arizona ranching and influence of the Santa Rita Experimental Range.
• Ruyle, G. B. (2012, March). Targeted Grazing to Improve Antelope Habitat. Springerville.
• Ruyle, G. B. (2012, May). Rangeland Monitoring and Livestock Grazing Workshop. Arizona Cooperative Extension Monitoring Program. Springerville.
• Ruyle, G. B. (2011, April). Managing Grazing in Riparian Areas Supporting Apache Trout. Phoenix, AZ: AGFD and Trout Unlimited.
• Ruyle, G. B. (2011, April). Rangeland Monitoring and Evaluation Workshop. Sonoita.
• Ruyle, G. B. (2011, August). Rangeland Monitoring and Evaluation Workshop. Springerville.
• Ruyle, G. B. (2011, June). Rangeland recovery after wildfire. Springerville, Arizona.
• Ruyle, G. B. (2011, March). Current Issues in Ranch Marketing and Management. Springerville.
• Ruyle, G. B. (2011, March). Rangeland Monitoring and Evaluation Workshop. Sedona, AZ.
• Pfander, J. L., Hutchinson, B. S., & Ruyle, G. B. (1997, November). Home on the Cyber-Range: Creating a Web-Based Information Center for Rangeland Resources.. Arizona Library Association Annual Conference, Phoenix, Arizona, November 6, 1997..

Poster Presentations

• Schlau, J., Lien, A., Dosamontes, E., Mcreynolds, K. H., Conley, J., Hall, A. L., Grace, J. L., Hutchinson, B. S., Brischke, A. S., Howery, L. D., Pfander, J. L., Ruyle, G. B., Noelle, S. M., Noelle, S. M., Ruyle, G. B., Pfander, J. L., Howery, L. D., Brischke, A. S., Hutchinson, B. S., , Grace, J. L., et al. (2020, February). Exploring public lands grazing: redesigning the Global Rangelands website to effectively reach multiple audiences. Society of Range Management Annual Conference. Denver, CO: Society of Range Management.
• Dalke, A., & Ruyle, G. B. (2017, February). A Literature Review: Wolf depredation on livestock and elk. 70th Annual Meeting Society for Range Management. St. George, Utah.
• Lein, A. M., Robbins Sherman, N., Merideth, R., Ruyle, G. B., & Lopez Hoffman, L. (2017, February). Bringing Dark Data into the Light: Mining US Forest Service Records for Trends in Management and Ecological Change. 70th Annual Meeting Society for Range Management. St. George, Utah.
• Robbins, N. C., Lopez Hoffman, L., Ruyle, G. B., Lein, A., & Libby, K. (2017, February). Measuring Ecosystem Services Provided by Adaptive Management on Southwestern Rangelands. 70th Annual Meeting Society for Range Management.
• Turner, R. J., Ruyle, G. B., Tolleson, D. R., & Faulkner, D. B. (2017, February). Monitoring diet quality and predicting animal performance in range cattle with fNIRS and NUTBAL. 70th Annual Meeting Society for Range Management. St. George, Utah.
• Hawkes, K., Mcclaran, M. P., Hawkes, K., Mcclaran, M. P., Brugger, J., Brugger, J., Crimmins, M. A., Crimmins, M. A., Howery, L. D., Tolleson, D., Ruyle, G. B., Howery, L. D., Sprinkle, J. E., Ruyle, G. B., Tolleson, D., & Sprinkle, J. E. (2016, October). Using an Interactive Scenario-Planning Tool for Ranchers and Forest Service to Prepare for Drought. 13th RISE Symposium (Research Insights in Semi-arid Environments. Tucson, AZ: College of Agriculture and Life Science.
• Hawkes, K., Mcclaran, M. P., Mcclaran, M. P., Crimmins, M. A., Brugger, J., Tolleson, D., Crimmins, M. A., Howery, L. D., Ruyle, G. B., Howery, L. D., Sprinkle, J. E., Ruyle, G. B., Hawkes, K., Sprinkle, J. E., Brugger, J., & Tolleson, D. (2016, winter). Using a co-development process to improve livestock grazing during drought on National Forests. 68th Annual Meeting, Society for Range Management. Corpus Christi, TX: Society for Range Management.
• Mcclaran, M. P., Hawkes, K., Brugger, J., Crimmins, M. A., Tolleson, D., Howery, L. D., Ruyle, G. B., & Sprinkle, J. E. (2016, October). Using an Interactive Scenario-Planning Tool for Ranchers and Forest Service to Prepare for Drought. 13th RISE Symposium (Research Insights in Semi-arid Environments). Oct. 8, 2016, Tucson, AZ. Tucson, AZ: College of Agriculture and Life Science.
• Mcclaran, M. P., Hawkes, K., Brugger, J., Crimmins, M. A., Tolleson, D., Howery, L. D., Ruyle, G. B., & Sprinkle, J. E. (2016, October). Using an Interactive Scenario-Planning Tool for Ranchers and Forest Service to Prepare for Drought. 13th RISE Symposium (Research Insights in Semi-arid Environments). Oct. 8, 2016.. Tucson, AZ: College of Agriculture and Life Science.
• Mcclaran, M. P., Ruyle, G. B., & Noelle, S. (2016, Fall). Short-term Rangeland Monitoring Archive: A New Resource for Researchers.. 13th Symposium on Research Insights in Semi-arid Environments (RISE).. Tucson, AZ: College of Agriculture and Life Sciences.
• Ruyle, G. B., Dalke, A., & Dyess, J. (2015, February). Response of Montane Grasslands following the 2011 Wallow Fire. Annual Meeting, International Society for Range Management. Sacramento, California.
• Ruyle, G. B., Noelle, S., & Crigler, W. (2015, February). An analysis of beaked sedge (Carex utriculata) stubble height and recovery following herbivory in Northeastern Arizona. Annual Meeting, International Society for Range Management. Sacramento, California.
• Dalke, A., Mashiri, F., & Ruyle, G. (2014, Winter). A recalibration of the percent ungrazed plant method to estimate utilization in semi-desert grassland invaded by lovegrass. International Society for Range Management Annual Meeting. Orlando.
  More info

  Dalke, Amber, Fadzayi Mashiri and George Ruyle. 2014. A recalibration of the percent ungrazed plant method to estimate utilization in semi-desert grassland invaded by lovegrass. 67th Annual Meeitng International Society for Range Management, Orlando, FL (abstract).
• Dalke, A., Mashiri, F., & Ruyle, G. (2013, Fall). A recalibration of the percent ungrazed plant method to estimate utilization in semi-desert grassland invaded by lovegrass. 10th Annual Research Insights in Semiarid Ecosystems Symposium. Tucson: University of Arizna and USDA/ARS.
  More info

  Dalke, Amber, Fadzayi Mashiri and George Ruyle. 2013. A recalibration of the percent ungrazed plant method to estimate utilization in semi-desert grassland invaded by lovegrass. 10th Annual Research Insights in Semiarid Ecosystems Symposium. Tucson, Arizona. (abstract).

Creative Productions

• Brugger, J., Crimmins, M. A., Mcclaran, M. P., & Ruyle, G. B. (2013. Ranching with Drought in the Southwest: Conditions, Challenges, and a Process to Meet the Challenges. Workshop Report. Tucson, AZ: College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. https://extension.arizona.edu/sites/extension.arizona.edu/files/resources/ranching-drought-southwest-ruyle.pdf
  More info

  This report summarizes a workshop called “Ranching with Drought in the Southwest: Conditions, Challenges, and a Process to Meet the Challenges,” held February 27 and 28, 2013 at the Santa Rita Experimental Range near Tucson, AZ. There were 36 workshop participants, including ranchers from Apache, Cochise, Coconino, Gila, Pima, Santa Cruz, and Yavapai Counties, representatives from the Forest Service (USFS), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and Arizona State Land Department (ASLD), program managers from the National Institute for Food and Agriculture (NIFA) and Western Risk Management Education (WRME) in the Department of Agriculture and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the Department of Commerce, University of Arizona research and extension scientists and students, and guests from the Southeastern US, Kentucky, and California. The workshop was organized by Mitch McClaran, University of Arizona (UA) Professor of Range Management and the Director for Research at the Santa Rita Experimental Range; George Ruyle, UA Range Management Extension Specialist; Mike Crimmins, UA Climate Science Extension Specialist, and Julie Brugger, a social scientist with UA Climate Assessment for the Southwest.

Case Studies

• Eisenberg, J., Sullivan, B., Sundareshan, P. M., Megdal, S. B., Davis, R., & Ruyle, G. B. (2020. Analysis of the Proposed 2019 WOTUS Rule and Policy Implications for Ephemeral Washes(p. 30).

Others

• Soto, J. R., Smith, S. E., Ruyle, G. B., Mcclaran, M. P., Lopez Hoffman, L., Lien, A., Howery, L. D., Gornish, E., Fehmi, J. S., & Archer, S. R. (2021, May). Annual Report, Ecology, Management and Restoration of Rangelands. USDA NIFA REEPort.
  More info

  Hatch Project Annual Report ARZT-1361610-H12-223, 11 pp.
• Ruyle, G. B., Gornish, E., & Hall, A. (2020, August). Poisonous plants on Arizona rangelands. University of Arizona Cooperative Extension Publication.
  More info

  AZ1828. pp 10
• Soto, J. R., Smith, S. E., Ruyle, G. B., Mcclaran, M. P., Lopez Hoffman, L., Howery, L. D., Gornish, E., Fehmi, J. S., & Archer, S. R. (2020, May). Annual Report, Ecology, Management and Restoration of Rangelands. USDA NIFA ARZT-1361610-H12-223 REEPort.
  More info

  Hatch Project Annual Report, 14 pp.
• Pater, S. E., Chadd, B. K., Mcreynolds, K. H., Ruyle, G. B., & Schalau, J. W. (2017, December). Backyards & Beyond: Rural Living in Arizona.
  More info

  Arizona Cooperative Extension. 2 Issues: Winter 7.1 (2013) 20pp and Fall 7.2 (2013) 20 pp. each. 2,500 copies/issue. Editors.
• Pater, S. E., Chadd, B. K., & Ruyle, G. B. (2016, December). Backyards and Beyond: Rural Living in Arizona (80%).
  More info

  3 Issues: Winter 10.1 (2016) 24pp, Spring 10.2 (2016) 16 pp, Summer 10.3 (2016) 24 pp, 1,000 copies/issue. Editor 80%.
• Pater, S. E., Chadd, B. K., & Ruyle, G. B. (2015, December). Backyards and Beyond: Rural Living in Arizona (80%).
  More info

  2 Issues: Spring/Summer 9.1 (2015) 24 pp, and Fall/Winter (2015) 9.2 (2015) 24 pp. each. 1,000 copies/issue. Editor 80%.
• Pater, S. E., Chadd, B. K., McReynolds, K. H., Ruyle, G. B., & Schalau, J. W. (2014, December). Backyards & Beyond: Rural Living in Arizona.
  More info

  Arizona Cooperative Extension. 2 Issues: Winter 7.1 (2013) 20pp and Fall 7.2 (2013) 20 pp. each. 2,500 copies/issue. 10%. Editors.
• Pater, S. E., Chadd, B. K., Mcreynolds, K. H., Ruyle, G. B., & Schalau, J. W. (2014, December). Backyards and Beyond: Rural Living in Arizona.
  More info

  Arizona Cooperative Extension. 3 Issues: Winter 8.1 (2014) 20pp, Spring Special Centennial Issue 8.2 (2014) 24 pp, and Summer 8.3 (2014) 24 pp. each. 2,500 copies/issue. Editor 80%.
• Pater, S. E., Pater, S. E., Chadd, B. K., Chadd, B. K., McReynolds, K. H., Mcreynolds, K. H., Ruyle, G. B., Ruyle, G. B., Schalau, J. W., Schalau, J. W., Pater, S. E., Chadd, B. K., McReynolds, K. H., Ruyle, G. B., & Schalau, J. W. (2013, December). Backyards & Beyond: Rural Living in Arizona.
  More info

  Arizona Cooperative Extension. 2 Issues: Winter/Spring 7.1 (2012) 20pp and Summer 7.2 (2013) 20 pp. each. 2,500 copies/issue. 10%. Editors.
• Butler, G., Ruyle, G., McClaran, M., & Austin, D. (2012, Fall). Ranching with Drought. Arizona Cattlelog.
  More info

  Volume 66, Issue 8, pgs 16-17
• Ruyle, G. (2012, Winter/Spring). Recognizing and describing plant communities. Backyards and Beyond.
  More info

  Page: 11
• Ruyle, G. B. (2012, March). Western Rangelands Partnership Annual Meeting.
• Sprinkle, J., Eppler, C., Ruyle, G., & Cook, D. (2012, Fall). NEPA for ranchers.
• Ruyle, G. (2010, Fall). Stocking small pastures using AUM's-Part 2. Backyards and Beyond.
  More info

  Volume 5, issue 1, pg 9
• Ruyle, G. B. (2010, Fall). Arizona Rancher Focus Group.
• Ruyle, G. B. (2010, Fall). Arizona Rangelands. http://globalrangelands.org/arizona
  More info

  Page: 10
• Ruyle, G. B. (2010, Fall). Global Rangelands. http://globalrangelands.org/
  More info

  Page: 10
• Ruyle, G. B. (2010, Fall). Rangelands West. http://globalrangelands.org/rangelandswest
  More info

  Page: 10