Read full article: “Hawkins’s 2017 Meta Analysis of Holistic Planned Grazing Should be Retracted”
Summary: This paper refutes Hawkins (2017), “A global assessment of Holistic Planned Grazing™ compared with season-long, continuous grazing: meta-analysis findings,” which argues that Holistic Planned Grazing (HPG) is not superior to year long continuous grazing. It is shown that none of the twentyone papers reviewed by Hawkins were representative of HPG. Not one paper, for example, mentioned Holistic Content, Holistic Management, or Holistic Decision Making that are tenants to the practice. Also, according to Frith, none of the studies reviewed by Hawkins mention the Holistic Management Handbook, the “grazing plan & control chart” nor the 17 steps to creating a grazing plan, all central to the HPG protocol. When reviewing the papers for the degree to which they did represent elements of HPG – such as proper planning, adaptive stocking rates and adaptive rest periods – Frith finds that those that matched HPG the most closely, were also the studies demonstrating the most favorable outcomes in numerous categories, including plant biomass and animal performance. Thus, contrary to Hawkins own notion that her study refuted the claims of HPG, it actually supports them.
Frith, Sheldon 2017. “Hawkins’s 2017 Meta Analysis of Holistic Planned Grazing Should be Retracted.” Holistic Management and Regenerative Agriculture, October 14, 2017.
