Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable

1
Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable
Dr. Michael Sherm Karl Inventory Monitoring
Specialist Bureau of Land Management
2
CRITERIA AND INDICATORS
Criteria Explicit goal of sustainability Too
general to monitor directly Indicator Measure of
some part of the criteria Qualitative or
quantitative variable Can be monitored to
observe trends
3
HOW ARE CI USED?

• Federal agency strategic planning
• Improve monitoring protocols
• Identify research needs
• Aid policy makers with budgets
• Show importance of rangelands to public

4
BENEFITS OF CRITERIA AND INDICATORS FOR
SUSTAINABLE RANGELANDS

• Common framework for monitoring and assessing
  rangelands.
• National, Regional and Local utility
• Across agencies
• Across land ownership
• Expand the understanding of rangeland
  sustainability.
• Status of rangeland systems over time.

5
BENEFITS OF CRITERIA AND INDICATORS FOR
SUSTAINABLE RANGELANDS

• Improved efficiencies
• Direct monitoring efforts
• Development of common data collection techniques
• Focusing research on developing methods to
  measure indicators

6
DEVELOPING CRITERIA

• Started with list of important rangeland issues.
• Considered Montreal Process criteria
• Converged on five criteria
• Conservation of soil and water resource
• Conservation of plant and animal resources
• Maintenance of productive capacity
• Maintenance of multiple economic and social
  benefits
• Legal, institutional, and economic framework

7
DEVELOPING INDICATORS6-POINT EVALUATION FRAMEWORK
1. What the indicator is. 2. Importance 3. Geograp
hic variation 4. Spatial and temporal
Scale 5. Data availability A. Methods and Data
Available B. Methods exist usable data not
available C. Some data exist methods not
standardized D. Conceptually feasible no
methods or data 6. Clarity Understood by
stakeholders
8
CONSERVATION OF SOIL WATER RESOURCES

• Soil-based
• Area of land with significantly diminished soil
  organic matter
• Area/extent of land with changes in soil
  aggregate stability
• Area of land with significant change in extent of
  bare ground
• Area of land with accelerated soil erosion by
  water and wind
• Water-based
• Percent of surface water with significant water
  quality deterioration
• Changes in ground water systems
• Changes in frequency/duration of stream no-flow
  periods
• Percent stream miles with altered stream geometry

9
CONSERVATION OF PLANT ANIMAL RESOURCES

• Extent of land area in rangeland.
• Rangeland area by vegetation community.
• Number and extent of wetlands.
• Fragmentation of rangeland vegetation
  communities.
• Density of roads and human structures.
• Integrity of natural fire regimes.
• Extent and condition of riparian systems.
• Area of infestation and presence of invasive
  plant species.
• Presence and status of species of concern.

10
MAINTENANCE OF PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY

• Above-ground biomass
• Annual productivity
• Percent of available rangeland grazed by
  livestock
• Number of domestic livestock on rangeland
• Presence and density of wildlife functional
  groups
• Annual removal of native hay and non-forage plant
  materials

11
MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF MULTIPLE ECONOMIC
AND SOCIAL BENEFITS TO CURRENT AND FUTURE
GENERATIONS
Emphasizes two-way relationship between natural
resource base and the economy and society

• Indicators of national economic benefits (9)
  
• Indicators of community well-being and
  capacity (11)
• Community-level explanatory indicators that
  might
• be relevant to sustainability (8)

12
LEGAL, INSTITUTIONAL AND ECONOMIC FRAMEWORK FOR
CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

• Land law and property rights
• Institutions and organizations
• Economic policies and practices
• Public information and public participation
• Professional education and technical
  assistance
• Land management programs and practices
• Land planning, assessment and policy review
• Protection of special values
• Extent of rangeland monitoring
• Research and development

13
CONTINED CRITERIA AND INDICATOR DEVELOPMENT AND
REFINEMENT

• Expand efforts to identify data sets and data set
  needs for indicators.
• Identify gaps in data and knowledge relevant to
  SRR criteria and indicators, as well as data
  needs
• Issues related to data needs
• Data set identification and evaluation
• Data base management content, format , and
  structure
• Definitions of rangeland and forests
• Implementation and conversion of existing data
  sets
• Coordination of indicators among roundtables

14
SCALE IN ECOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS
Grain Resolving power of data. Grain
determines smallest entities that can be found in
data. Extent highest level that can be
accessed. If size of entity is larger than data
(spatial, temporal), then associated attributes
cannot be observed.
15
FREQUENCY OF BEHAVIOR

• - Systems have particular characteristic
  frequencies.
• - Monitoring must accommodate frequency of a
  systems scale.

The larger the system, the longer the cycle time
of unperturbed behavior. From top to bottom of a
hierarchy, there is a continuum of natural
frequencies.
16
SOME COMMON DENOMINATORS

• The concept of sustainability is not concise, but
  is important. There is agreement that it
  involves physical, biological, and
  socio-economic-political systems.
• No Dow Jones of sustainable development or
  sustainability exists. Quantitative ecological
  and economic models are not adequate to address
  any measure of overall sustainability.
• Sustainability indicators are hierarchical
  because the systems they monitor are subject to
  the principles of hierarchy theory.

17
UTILITY OF INDICATORS FOR STANDARDIZED MONITORING
AND REPORTING
SRR Validates/develops indicators and measurement
protocols.
NRI / FIA / etc. Rangeland monitoring systems
incorporate new protocols.
2
1
no
yes
3
RESOURCE ASSESSMENTS Monitors trends of SRR
indicators.
Are the indicators valid and useful?
18
DATA GAPS FOR DISCUSSION

• water quality and at-risk water bodies on
  rangelands
• vegetation communities mapping, monitoring, and
  classifying
• wetland data - quality of NRCS NRI and FWS NWI
• riparian condition - adequacy of PFC for national
  level data
• ecoregional scale data sources on non-domestic
  use of rangelands
• data on loss of species from non-grazing use of
  rangelands

19
GENERAL ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION

• is SRR set of indicators too extensive? is there
  a way to consolidate indicators? are there
  additional indicators?
• how can SRR help ESA rangeland section members to
  reach their objectives?
• fragmentation index for rangelands
• how can ESA rangeland section help leverage
  support to encourage partners to develop a
  national strategy for collecting information on
  rangelands?

20
SRR PANEL FOR ESA SESSION

• Mr. Bob Budd, Society for Range Management
• Ms. Lori Hidinger, ESA Sustainable Biosphere
  Initiative
• Dr. Michael Sherm Karl, Bureau of Land
  Management
• Dr. John Mitchell, USDA Forest Service