Forest conversion to silvopasture and open pasture: effects on soil hydraulic properties

  • Anthony StewartEmail author
  • Adam Coble
  • Alexandra R. Contosta
  • Joseph N. Orefice
  • Richard G. Smith
  • Heidi Asbjornsen


Growing demand for local products in the northeastern U.S. may incentivize forest conversion to pasture, degrading critical soil hydrologic properties such as surface infiltration (Kh) and subsurface saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat). Silvopasture, combining tree cover and grazing, may mitigate these impacts by maintaining the positive effects of trees on soil hydraulic properties. We tested this hypothesis using an experimental field manipulation to compare effects of forest conversion to open pasture versus silvopasture on Kh and Ksat at the Organic Dairy Research Farm (ODRF) and North Branch Farm (NBF). Measurements of surface Kh and Ksat at two soil depths (15 cm and 30 cm) were taken 1 and 4 years after treatment establishment at ODRF and NBF, respectively. Data were analyzed using a mixed effects modeling framework. Results show 15 cm Ksat was significantly lower in pasture compared to forest across both sites. However, in contrast to our hypothesis, soil hydraulic properties in silvopasture did not differ from other treatments at either site. Notwithstanding, silvopasture 15 cm Ksat at ODRF (9.4 cm h−1) was statistically similar to both the forest (22.6 cm h−1) and pasture (3.4 cm h−1) and exhibited a weak positive correlation with proximity to trees (R2 = 0.219, P = 0.042). In conclusion, our study did not find strong evidence that recently established silvopastures mitigate negative hydrologic impacts of forest conversion. Future research should focus on a broader range of northeastern sites and include greater replication over longer time scales to better elucidate opportunities for silvopasture.


Agroforestry Infiltration Conductivity Land use change Pasture Grazing 



We thank Dr. Marie R. Johnston at the University of Wisconsin and Mel Knorr at the University of New Hampshire for technical assistance with the Amoozemeter and other soil measurements. Also thanks to Katherine Sinacore at the University of New Hampshire for support throughout the project process. This project was supported with funds from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) Grant No. 2015-67019-23575. Additional funding was provided by the New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station.


  1. Amoozegar A (1989) A compact constant-head permeameter for measuring saturated hydraulic conductivity of the vadose zone. Soil Sci Soc Am J 53:1356–1361. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arbuckle JG, Valdivia C, Raedeke A et al (2009) Non-operator landowner interest in agroforestry practices in two Missouri watersheds. Agrofor Syst 75:73–82. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arguez A, Durre I, Applequist S et al (2012) NOAA’s 1981–2010 U.S. climate normals: an overview. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 93:1687–1697. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benegas L, Ilstedt U, Roupsard O et al (2014) Effects of trees on infiltrability and preferential flow in two contrasting agroecosystems in Central America. Agric Ecosyst Environ 183:185–196. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beven K, Germann P (1982) Macropores and water flow in soils. Water Resour Res 18:1311–1325. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bezkorowajnyj PG, Gordon AM, McBride RA (1993) The effect of cattle foot traffic on soil compaction in a silvo-pastoral system. Agrofor Syst 21:1–10. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruijnzeel LA (2004) Hydrological functions of tropical forests: not seeing the soil for the trees? Agric Ecosyst Environ 104:185–228. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Butterfield M (2016) The Land in Our Hands-Burley-Demeritt Farm in Lee, NH: Its History., MorrisvilleGoogle Scholar
  9. Chandler KR, Stevens CJ, Binley A, Keith AM (2018) Influence of tree species and forest land use on soil hydraulic conductivity and implications for surface runoff generation. Geoderma 310:120–127. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chedzoy B, Smallidge P (2011) Silvopasturing in the Northeast an introduction to opportunities and strategies for integrating livestock in private woodlands. Cornell Coopertive Extension, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. de Aguiar MI, Maia SMF, de Sá Xavier FA et al (2010) Sediment, nutrient and water losses by water erosion under agroforestry systems in the semi-arid region in northeastern Brazil. Agrofor Syst 79:277–289. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Donahue B, Burke J, Anderson M et al (2014) A new england food vision. Accessed 30 July 2019
  13. Feldhake CM, Neel JPS, Belesky DP (2010) Establishment and production from thinned mature deciduous-forest silvopastures in Appalachia. Agrofor Syst 79:31–37. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fike JH, Buergler AL, Burger JA, Kallenbach RL (2004) Considerations for establishing and managing silvopastures forage and grazinglands forage and grazinglands. Plant Manag Netw. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Foster DR, Donahue B, Kittredge D et al (2008) New England’s forest landscape ecological legacies and conservation patterns shaped by agrarian history. In: Redman CL, Foster DR (eds) Agrarian landscapes in transition: comparisons of long-term ecological and cultural change. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 44–88Google Scholar
  16. Greacen E, Sands R (1980) Compaction of forest soils. A review. Aust J Soil Res 18:163. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Greenwood WJ, Buttle JM (2014) Effects of reforestation on near-surface saturated hydraulic conductivity in a managed forest landscape, southern Ontario, Canada. Ecohydrology 7:45–55. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Greenwood KL, McKenzie BM (2001) Grazing effects on soil physical properties and the consequences for pastures: a review. Aust J Exp Agric 41:1231–1250. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hale I, Wollheim W, Smith R et al (2014) A scale-explicit framework for conceptualizing the environmental impacts of agricultural land use changes. Sustainability 6:8432–8451. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Horel Á, Tóth E, Gelybó G et al (2015) Effects of land use and management on soil hydraulic properties. Open Geosci 7:742–754. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ilstedt U, Malmer A, Verbeeten E, Murdiyarso D (2007) The effect of afforestation on water infiltration in the tropics: a systematic review and meta-analysis. For Ecol Manag 251:45–51. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ilstedt U, Bargués Tobella A, Bazié HR et al (2016) Intermediate tree cover can maximize groundwater recharge in the seasonally dry tropics. Sci Rep 6:21930. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Jose S, Dollinger J (2019) Silvopasture: a sustainable livestock production system. Agrofor Syst 93:1–9. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jose S, Walter D, Mohan Kumar B (2019) Ecological considerations in sustainable silvopasture design and management. Agrofor Syst 93:317–331. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kumar S, Udawatta RP, Anderson SH (2010) Root length density and carbon content of agroforestry and grass buffers under grazed pasture systems in a Hapludalf. Agrofor Syst 80:85–96. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kumar S, Anderson SH, Udawatta RP, Kallenbach RL (2012) Water infiltration influenced by agroforestry and grass buffers for a grazed pasture system. Agrofor Syst 84:325–335. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lal R (1996) Deforestation and land-use effects on soil degradation and rehabilitation in western Nigeria. III. Runoff, soil erosion and nutrient loss. L Degrad Dev 7:99–119.;2-F CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lunka P, Patil SD (2016) Impact of tree planting configuration and grazing restriction on canopy interception and soil hydrological properties: implications for flood mitigation in silvopastoral systems. Hydrol Process 30:945–958. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Neary DG, Ice GG, Jackson CR (2009) Linkages between forest soils and water quality and quantity. For Ecol Manag 258:2269–2281. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Niemeyer RJ, Fremier AK, Heinse R et al (2014) Woody vegetation increases saturated hydraulic conductivity in dry tropical Nicaragua. Vadose Zo J. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nowak DJ, Greenfield EJ (2012) Tree and impervious cover in the United States. Landsc Urban Plan 107:21–30. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Olofsson P, Holden CE, Bullock EL, Woodcock CE (2016) Time series analysis of satellite data reveals continuous deforestation of New England since the 1980s. Environ Res Lett 11:064002. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Orefice J, Carroll J, Conroy D, Ketner L (2017) Silvopasture practices and perspectives in the Northeastern United States. Agrofor Syst 91:149–160. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Orefice J, Smith RG, Carroll J et al (2019) Forage productivity and profitability in newly-established open pasture, silvopasture, and thinned forest production systems. Agrofor Syst 93:51–65. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. R Core Team (2017) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  36. Reynolds WD (2013) An assessment of borehole infiltration analyses for measuring field-saturated hydraulic conductivity in the vadose zone. Eng Geol 159:119–130. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Scheffler R, Neill C, Krusche AV, Elsenbeer H (2011) Soil hydraulic response to land-use change associated with the recent soybean expansion at the Amazon agricultural frontier. Agric Ecosyst Environ 144:281–289. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sharrow SH (2007) Soil compaction by grazing livestock in silvopastures as evidenced by changes in soil physical properties. Agrofor Syst 71:215–223. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sharrow SH, Brauer D, Clason TR, Garrett HEG (2009) Silvopastoral practices. In: Garrett HEG (ed) North American agroforestry: an integrated science and practice, 2nd edn. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 105–131Google Scholar
  40. USDA NASS (2012) Census of agriculture New Hampshire state and county data. Accessed 1 May 2017
  41. Xu Y-J, Burger JA, Michael Aust W et al (2002) Changes in surface water table depth and soil physical properties after harvest and establishment of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) in Atlantic coastal plain wetlands of South Carolina. Soil Tillage Res 63:109–121. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zhang R (1997) Determination of soil sorptivity and hydraulic conductivity from the disk infiltrometer. Soil Sci Soc Am J 61:1024–1030. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zimmermann B, Elsenbeer H, De Moraes JM (2006) The influence of land-use changes on soil hydraulic properties: implications for runoff generation. For Ecol Manag 222:29–38. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zimmermann B, Papritz A, Elsenbeer H (2010) Asymmetric response to disturbance and recovery: changes of soil permeability under forest–pasture–forest transitions. Geoderma 159:209–215. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Natural Resources and the EnvironmentUniversity of New HampshireDurhamUSA
  2. 2.IthacaUSA
  3. 3.Private Forests DivisionOregon Department of ForestrySalemUSA
  4. 4.University of New HampshireDurhamUSA
  5. 5.Yale UniversityNew HavenUSA

Personalised recommendations