4/10/2013

1

KenTateandLeslieRocheUniversityofCalifornia,Davis

UCCooperativeExtensionSpringRangeTourTehama,Glenn,ColusaCounties

April13,2013

RangelandResearchUpdate

California Rangeland Watershed Laboratoryrangelandwatersheds.ucdavis.edu

IntegratedApproaches

• RangelandDecision‐MakingMailSurveyCaliforniaCattlemen’sAssociationWyomingStockGrowersAssociation

• Stakeholder‐PrescribedGrazingProjectSierraFoothillRECgrazingexperimentCentralPlainsExperimentalRange

• CARanchStewardshipProjectOn‐RanchInterviews& FieldSurveys

4/10/2013

2

Research Practice

Findingeconomicallyandecologicallyeffectivestrategiestosustainrangelandresources.

IntegratedApproaches

ProjectLeaders:LeslieRoche,JustinDerner,ValerieEviner,MarkLubell,MelGeorge,TobyO’Geen,EmilyKachergis,BethanyCutts,LorienJasny,RickStandiford,LynnHuntsinger,KenTate

ProjectCollaborators:SheilaBarry,TheresaBecchetti,JoshDavy,JulieFenzel,LarryForero,MorganDoran,JohnHarper,RogerIngram,JeremyJames,RoyceLarsen,StephanieLarson,DavidLewis,DavidLile,NeilMcDougald,GlennNader,TracySchohr....

CollaboratorsandPartnersCollaboratorsandPartners

StakeholderFocusGroups

Russell L. RusticiResearch Endowment

4/10/2013

3

WY Mail SurveyWY Mail Survey

RangelandDecision‐MakingSurveyRangelandDecision‐MakingSurvey

• Determinefactorsdrivinggrazingmanagementdecisions.

• Understandhowmanagersreceive,assess,anduseinformation.

• Perspectivesonadaptivegrazingmanagementformultiplegoals.

• 1700ranchersinCalifornia.

• 700ranchersinWyoming.

CA Mail SurveyCA Mail Survey

Private Owned

20%

Private Leased

25%

Public Leased

55%

MeanReportedAcresofGrazingLandTypes

3 Types49%2

Types38%

1 Type13%

PercentofRespondents ReportingNumberofGrazingLandTypes

Diverseoperationswithastrongrelianceonpubliclands.

RangelandDecision‐MakingSurveyRangelandDecision‐MakingSurvey

CaliforniaOperationCharacteristics

4/10/2013

4

CA Mail SurveyCA Mail Survey

GOALS1. LivestockandForageProduction

2. WaterQuality,InvasiveWeedManagement,andSoilHealth

3. Riparian/MeadowHealthandWildlife

4. RecreationandCarbonSequestration

RangelandDecision‐MakingSurveyRangelandDecision‐MakingSurvey

CharacterizingOn‐RanchStrategiesCharacterizingOn‐RanchStrategies3 Classes of Strategies

• Rotational Grazing• Season‐Long Continuous Grazing

“I like to experiment with

new ways of doing things”

No. information sources ranked good/excellent

Rank of livestock production goal

prob. = 0.67prob. = 0.46

prob. = 0.26

prob. = 0.37

Neutral/Disagree

>5

1 or 2 3-9

Agree

‘California brand’ of rotational grazing42% of respondents

• Year‐Long Continuous Grazing

≤5

4/10/2013

5

• Ranchers,rangemanagers,andconservationprofessionals.

• Prescribegoalsandmanagementstrategies(treatments).

• Implement,adapt,andmonitorwithstakeholderinput.

UCSierraFoothillResearchandExtensionCenterUSDA‐ARSCentralPlainsExperimentalRange

UCSierraFoothillResearchandExtensionCenterUSDA‐ARSCentralPlainsExperimentalRange

Stakeholder‐PrescribedAdaptiveGrazingManagementProject

HedgerowFarmsNaturalResourceConservationServiceNevadaIrrigationDistrictPlacerLandTrustPointReyesNationalParkPRBOConservationScienceSanFranciscoPublicUtilitiesCommissionTheNatureConservancyUCCooperativeExtensionUCDavisNaturalReserveSystemUSFish&WildlifeServiceUSForestService

UCSFRECAdaptiveManagementAdvisors

Ranchers&RanchManagersAudubonCaliforniaBealeAirForceBaseCADepartmentofFishandWildlifeCenterforNaturalLandsManagementCityofFairfieldContraCostaWaterDistrictDefendersofWildlifeDepartmentofFish&GameEastBayMunicipalUtilityDistrictEastBayRegionalParksEnvironmentalConsultants

ProjectPartnersProjectPartners

4/10/2013

6

StakeholderWorkshopsStakeholderWorkshops

RequesttoStakeholderAdvisoryGroups

8pastures,1200acres

1) Primarynaturalresourceandagriculturalgoals.

2) Potentialchallengesandopportunitiesforgoals.

3) Adaptivemanagementstrategiestoachievegoals.

StakeholderGoalsandObjectivesStakeholderGoalsandObjectives

“Economically and Ecologically Sustainable”

Vegetation Livestock Habitat Soil health/ Water qualityG

OA

LS

SP

EC

IFIC

O

BJE

CT

IVE

S

• Increase native plant diversity

• Increase forage species diversity

• Increase forage production

• Reduce Medusahead

• Maintain or increase livestock weight gain

• Minimize operating/ practice costs

• Increase grassland bird diversity

• Increase variationin vegetation structure

• Increase native wildlife and habitat diversity

• Minimize compaction

• Restore soil fertility

• Maintain or restore water quality

GrazingTreatments

T1 7monthseason‐longOak‐ 27steers;Grassland– 45steers

T2 4monthfall‐springgrazingOak‐ 63steers;Grassland– 85steers

T3 4monthfall‐spring,targetedOak‐ 65steers;Grassland– 82steers

T4 3monthwinterOak‐ 65steers;Grassland– 82steers

Adaptivelyimplementedandmonitoredwithstakeholderparticipation

StakeholderPrescribedAdaptiveGrazingExperiment– Year1StakeholderPrescribedAdaptiveGrazingExperiment– Year1

4/10/2013

7

Nov Jun

Baseline datacollection

Grazing treatments and data collection

Jan 2013Dec

Advisory group

Advisory group

Monitoring Cattle gains, herbaceous forage production, plant functional group cover, grassland bird cover, fecal/pollutant loading

May 7th

SFREC Field day

May 2012

Workshops

TimelineTimeline

Fall grazing

Mar

Spring grazing

CaliforniaRanchStewardshipProject

On‐RanchInterviewsandFieldSurveys

Connectingthesocial,economic,andecologicaldotsofdecision‐making,implementation,andoutcomes.

• Connectresearchandpolicywithhowdecisionsgetmadeon‐the‐ground.

• Linkdecision‐makingtoagriculturalandecologicaloutcomes.

• Mergemanagementandscientificknowledgetoidentifyadaptivestrategiesformultiplegoals.

• Compiletheknowledgeandexpertiseofexperiencedranchersandrangelandmanagers.

4/10/2013

8

InterviewsandFieldSurveysCross‐SectionalObservationalStudy

• ≥60case‐studiesspanningstate‐widetransects.• Diversestrategies&goals

• In‐person,semi‐structuredinterviews• Spring‐Fall2013

• Subsetoffollow‐upon‐ranchfieldsurveys.• Annualmonitoring• StartSpring2014

InterviewQuestions(examples)Operation&OperatorCharacteristics• 'AnnualForageClock'

• Bigpictureofdifferentlandandcattletypeswithinoperation

• GeneralMarketingStrategies; Diversification

Goals• Whatareyourgoals,andhowdoyouevaluatesuccess?

• Howmanygoalsdoyoumanagefor,andhowaregoalsprioritized?

• Wouldyoubeinterestedparticipatinginanecosystemmarketwhereyouwouldreceivepaymentstoproducespecificecosystemservices(e.g.,cleanwater,carbonsequestration,wildlifehabitat).

ManagementStrategies(~Goals)• Whatpracticeshavebeensuccessful/unsuccessful?

• Doyouseepotentialopportunitieswhereyoucouldchangeyourlandorlivestockmanagementstrategy(s)toprovideformultiplegoals?

AdaptingManagement• Howdoyoumanagefordroughtimpacts?

• Ifthefrequencyofdroughtweretoincrease,wouldyourcurrentstrategiesbeadequate?

4/10/2013

9

Timeline2012‐2014Timeline2012‐2014

Time Period General Plan

Aug 2012 – Mar 2013 Interview Development

Apr – Jul 2013 Northern CA Interviews

Jul – Aug 2013Cascades/Sierra NevadaInterviews

Aug – Nov 2013 Southern CA Interviews

Spring-Fall 2014Start Follow-up Field Surveys*

* Subset of sites selected in collaboration with participants, and monitored for 3-5 years.

Multi‐ProngedApproach

Mail Surveys

BalancingMultipleGoalsonWorkingRangelands

SFREC

Adaptive Grazing Project

CPER

On-Ranch Interviews

4/10/2013

10

RangelandPracticesAssessment

KeyRecommendations

1)Expandcollaborationsbetweenscientistsandlandmanagers.

2)Integratesocio‐economicandecologicalfactorsinexaminingoutcomes.

3)Evaluaterolesofadaptivemanagementinmeetinggoals.

40scientists,3yearstoexamineliteratureontheconservationeffectivenessofrangelandmanagementpractices.

• Prescribedgrazing,fire,planting,brushmanagement,riparianmanagement,etc.

RangelandPracticesAssessment

ProjectPartnersObjective:Quantifyeffectivenessofrangelandmanagementpracticesinenhancingsoilandriparianhydrologicfunctions,uplandandriparianhabitatanddiversity,andhabitatusebybirds.

Cross‐sectionalSurveyfocusedonthe Cottonwood Creek, Stony Creek, and Cache Creek watersheds.

Establishanetworkofstudylocationstolookatdirectmid‐(3‐5years)andlong‐term(10years)responsestomanagement.