Title: Transitions in Rangeland Evaluations
1Jornada Experimental Range
Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center
Transitions in Rangeland Evaluations
David A. Pyke Jeffrey E. Herrick
2Rangeland Evaluations
- Age of Discovery - 1800s to 1930
- Rangeland Uses Abuses
- Observations
- Age of Inventory - 1930s to 1970s
- Described Vegetation, Production, Soils
- Taylor Grazing Act - Adjustments of AUMs
- Age of Planning Management - 1970s to 1990s
- Condition Trend
- Broader Objectives
- Age of Sustainability - 2000 to ????
31905
4Age of DiscoveryWhat is the West? How can we use
it?
Powell
- Settlers expected consistent moisture
- Powell warned of the harsh environment
- Livestock successful use
- Livestock overuse observed by federal officials
Pinchot
5Succession Indicators
- Clements Sampson
- Plant communities change with grazing
- Grazing sensitive or preferred species are
reduced - Grazing tolerant and non-preferred increase
- Basis of Clements 1920 book on indicators
6Grazing Indicators
- Observations from -
- Smith, Bentley, Griffiths, Sampson, Jardine,
Wooton Sarvis - Certain species within communities are indicators
of grazing abuse.
71959
8Age of Inventory
- Dust Bowl leads to Taylor Grazing Act
- Required inventories of the amount of forage
available for livestock - Stoddart introduces rangeland condition classes
- Dyksterhuis relates Clementsian succession to
condition classes - Rangeland Classification
- Dyksterhuis
- Proposes range site concept
- Daubenmire
- Habitat types
9Monitoring Techniques Begin
- BLM
- Deming 2-phase
- Combination qualitative and quantitative
(plot)data - USFS
- Parker 3-step
- 100 points on transect with loop frequency/cover
K. W. Parker
10Monitoring Focus
- Vegetation tends to dominate over soils
- SCS still maintains soil-vegetation emphasis
- Forage plants undesirable plants are indicators
of rangeland status - Upland communities are the focus
- Lands around water sources tend to be sacrificed
- Wildlife habitat needs are secondary to livestock
needs
111978
12Heady 1975 Rangeland Mgmt.
Stoddart, Smith Box. 1975. Range Management
13Congressional Directions
- Forest Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning
Act of 1974 - USFS Habitat types were mapped
- Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976
- BLM Soil Vegetation Inventory Method (SVIM)
- Soil Water Resources Conservation Act of 1977
- National Resources Inventory (NRI)
14Inventory ? Condition Trend
- All agencies used some form of Dyksterhuis
Condition Ratings - Monitored trend using various techniques
- Biomass or cover
- Theory behind cond. trend was still Clementsian
succession
15Utilization becomes Important
- Measure of the percent production consumed
- Direct via biomass
- Indirect via heightweight
- Done on a species-basis
- Difficult to determine utilization of pastures
- Estimated by ocular estimate maps
16Key Species
- Utilization by species lead to key species being
monitored. - Selected up to four species
- Utilization consistent over season
- Sufficient abundance and palatability for
livestock - Should make up the majority of forage
17Weakness of Key Species Concept
- Less abundant, highly palatable species are
sacrificed - Rangelands recovering from excessive livestock
grazing in the early 1900s - Former dominant, but palatable species would be
rare - Some dominant or co-dominant palatable species
might have been sacrificed. - Possible example - Basin Wildrye
18Introduction of New Ecological Concepts
- Biological Diversity
- Species richness, evenness
- Diversity among communities
- Non-equilibrium ecosystem dynamics
- State transition successional models
- Thresholds of community change
- Riparian and wetland communities as integral
parts of rangelands - Ecosystem processes
- Nutrient water cycles, energy flow
19Influential Documents in Changing Rangeland
Evaluations
202004
21Age of Sustainability???
- West 2003 - Risk Assessment, Sustainability,
Desertification - Evaluations not focused on single use
- Evaluations strive to incorporate multiple scales
- Upland Riparian ecosystems often given equal
weight in evaluations
22Upland Evaluations Community Dynamics
Reference State
Shrub - Annual Grass State
Threshold
Annual Grass State
23Evaluations of Ecosystem Processes
- Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health
- 3 Attributes (Site Stability, Hydrologic
Function, Biotic Integrity 17 indicators with
some overlapping - Qualitative with Quantitative methods proposed
being tested - Landscape Ecosystem Analysis (Tongway et al)
- 3 indices (Stability, Infiltration, Nutrient
cycling) Multiple indicators) - Quantitative methods published
Soil/Site Stability
Hydrologic Function
Biotic Integrity
24Riparian, Wetland Aquatic
Bear Cr. 1977 Season long use
- Water quality measures
- Stream Geomorphic Classifications
- Stream Cross sections
- Veg. Classification based on soil and water table
depth. - Greenline techniques
- Proper functioning condition
- Wetland stream invertebrates
Bear Cr. 1987 Winter use
25National/Regional Assessments
- Sustainable Rangeland Roundtable
- 5 criteria measured indicators/criteria
- Ecological, Social Economic
- Heinz Center
- 10 national 14 grassland shrubland indicators
- Many indicators not populated
- NRI
- Rangeland NRI begun in 2003
- Non-federal lands
Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable
National Resources Inventory
26Remote Sensing GIS
- Combine soil, climate and current vegetation
- Large areas
- Allows for use of predictive models
- Invasion risk
- Erosion potential
- Useful for wildlife habitat assessments
- Multiple scales
Wisdom et al. 2003
27LandscapesPatterns, Processes, Resistance
Resilience
- Linkages across multiple scales
- Fragmentation monitoring
- Prediction ? early ID of threats and drivers
- Interactions among multiple threats
28Future Evaluations Carbon?
- Carbon Credits on Rangelands
- What could be included
- How to measure?
- International politics may dictate the need
29(No Transcript)