May 30, 2002 Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable

Purpose Today Introduce the Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable Introduce the Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable Introduce the Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Rangelands Introduce the Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Rangelands Provide Future Plans of the Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable Provide Future Plans of the Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable

Rangelands 42 percent of continental U.S. 42 percent of continental U.S. Wildlife habitat, clean water, clean air, open space, habitat for threatened and endangered species, recreational uses, food and fiber production, and a unique setting for social and cultural activities. Wildlife habitat, clean water, clean air, open space, habitat for threatened and endangered species, recreational uses, food and fiber production, and a unique setting for social and cultural activities. Concern about the condition of natural resources in the 20 th century. Concern about the condition of natural resources in the 20 th century. Adoption of the concept of sustainability as appropriate analysis paradigm. Adoption of the concept of sustainability as appropriate analysis paradigm.

Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable A stakeholders process for identifying a set of criteria and indicators (C&I) for assessing sustainability of rangelands. The C&I describe individual elements to assess and determine trends in resource conditions, management, economic benefits, and social values derived from rangelands.

Benefits of the Work of SRR Provide a common framework for monitoring and assessing progress towards sustainable rangeland management. Provide a common framework for monitoring and assessing progress towards sustainable rangeland management. Expand the understanding of rangelands sustainability. Expand the understanding of rangelands sustainability. Enhance quality of debate about rangeland management issues. Enhance quality of debate about rangeland management issues.

Benefits of the Work of SRR Improved efficiencies: Improved efficiencies: Directing monitoring efforts Directing monitoring efforts Development of common data collection techniques Development of common data collection techniques Focusing research on developing methods to measure indicators Focusing research on developing methods to measure indicators

Benefits of the Work of SRR Improve accountability to rangeland stakeholders and Congress: Improve accountability to rangeland stakeholders and Congress: Multi-level, coordinated data reporting Multi-level, coordinated data reporting Assess compliance with applicable laws Assess compliance with applicable laws Facilitate interagency coordination Facilitate interagency coordination Facilitating planning and funding priorities Facilitating planning and funding priorities Improve rangeland management to meet social, economic and ecological goals Improve rangeland management to meet social, economic and ecological goals

Sustainable Development Brundtland Commission (WCED) – 1987 … development that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

Sustainable Development Encompasses environmental and social issues, as well as economic activity. Encompasses environmental and social issues, as well as economic activity. Ensuring human well-being while respecting ecosystem well-being and the earths environmental limits and capacities. Ensuring human well-being while respecting ecosystem well-being and the earths environmental limits and capacities.

International Background Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, 1992 Plan for achieving sustainable development in the 21 st century. Plan for achieving sustainable development in the 21 st century – International seminar on sustainable development of boreal and temperate forest in Montreal. (Montreal Process) 1993 – International seminar on sustainable development of boreal and temperate forest in Montreal. (Montreal Process) 1995 Santiago Declaration – 7 Criteria and 67 Indicators – temperate and boreal forests Santiago Declaration – 7 Criteria and 67 Indicators – temperate and boreal forests Earth Summit in South Africa Earth Summit in South Africa.

U. S. Background Roundtable on Sustainable Forests (1998) Roundtable on Sustainable Forests (1998) Sustainable Minerals Roundtable (1999) Sustainable Minerals Roundtable (1999) 1999 – First meeting on Sustainable Rangelands 1999 – First meeting on Sustainable Rangelands 2001 – First meeting of the Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable 2001 – First meeting of the Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable

Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable Identify criteria and indicators for Sustainable Rangelands. Identify criteria and indicators for Sustainable Rangelands. Indicators are suitable for national reporting. Indicators are suitable for national reporting. Gain from other efforts: Gain from other efforts: Roundtable on Sustainable Forests Roundtable on Sustainable Forests Sustainable Minerals Roundtable Sustainable Minerals Roundtable Heinz, EPA, TNC, NRI, SDIC, others Heinz, EPA, TNC, NRI, SDIC, others

Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable The group determines the outcomes. The group determines the outcomes. Open, Positive, Future Focused Open, Positive, Future Focused Dynamic Dynamic Values and respects all opinions and contributions of members. Values and respects all opinions and contributions of members.

SRR Time Line Twelve Meetings: Twelve Meetings: Four meetings in 2001; five in 2002; three in Four meetings in 2001; five in 2002; three in Indicators completed by Oct., Indicators completed by Oct., Identify and compile data sources: May 2002 through March Identify and compile data sources: May 2002 through March Report on Rangeland Sustainability Indicators – May Report on Rangeland Sustainability Indicators – May 2003.

SRR Meeting Sites, 2001 to 2003 Workshops and Forums j j j j j j j jj j jj j j j D D D D D

SRR Success Time and effort of all individuals and organizations participating. Time and effort of all individuals and organizations participating. Participating groups Participating groups Federal, state and local agencies Federal, state and local agencies Representatives from 16 universities Representatives from 16 universities Non-governmental groups & organizations Non-governmental groups & organizations Over 100 members of SRR Over 100 members of SRR

Products of SRR Symposium and Proceedings at the Feb SRM Annual Meeting in Kansas City, MO Symposium and Proceedings at the Feb SRM Annual Meeting in Kansas City, MO Symposium at ESA Meeting in Tucson, AZ in August 2002 Symposium at ESA Meeting in Tucson, AZ in August 2002 Symposium/Workshop on Indicators at Feb SRM Annual Meeting in Casper, Wyoming Symposium/Workshop on Indicators at Feb SRM Annual Meeting in Casper, Wyoming Report on Sustainable Rangelands in Spring, 2003 Report on Sustainable Rangelands in Spring, 2003

Todays Remarks Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Rangelands – Dr. Linda Joyce Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Rangelands – Dr. Linda Joyce Future Plans & Milestones – Dr. Rod Heitschmidt Future Plans & Milestones – Dr. Rod Heitschmidt Questions and Answers Questions and Answers

May 30, 2002 Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable Development and Evolution of the Criteria and Indicators

Overview Criteria Criteria Productive Capacity Productive Capacity Soil and Water Resources Soil and Water Resources Ecosystem Health and Diversity Ecosystem Health and Diversity Social and Economic Benefits Social and Economic Benefits Legal, Institutional, Economic Frameworks Legal, Institutional, Economic Frameworks Indicators within these Criteria Indicators within these Criteria Scientific Challenges Scientific Challenges Next Technical Steps Next Technical Steps

A journey of 1000 miles begins with 1 step Criteria and indicators described here represent the current development. The indicators will continue to evolve as the SRR advances towards an accepted set for monitoring and assessing rangeland sustainability.

May 30, 2002 Sustainable Rangelands Productive Capacity Health and Diversity Social and Economic Legal, Institutional and Economic Soil and Water Indicators Criteria

Maintenance of Productive Capacity on Rangeland Ecosystems Productive capacity … provide the current generation with a wide variety of goods and services depending on the mix desired by society at any particular time Productive capacity … provide the current generation with a wide variety of goods and services depending on the mix desired by society at any particular time Maintenance … that future generations will be able to obtain their desired mix... Maintenance … that future generations will be able to obtain their desired mix... Indicators must capture: Determinants of Productive Capacity, and the Variety of Outputs that can be produced on Rangelands Indicators must capture: Determinants of Productive Capacity, and the Variety of Outputs that can be produced on Rangelands

Indicators: Determinants of Productive Capacity Extent of Rangeland Available for production of goods and services Aboveground Biomass Production Integrates biotic and abiotic factors influencing capacity Invasive and Noxious Plants Measures alterations in productive capacity Rangeland available for livestock grazing Influences mix of commodity and non- commodity products

Indicators: Productive Capacity Outputs Wildlife Harvested Domestic Livestock Non-forage Products Number of cattle, sheep, goats, horses, bison measures a consumptive use Measures the variety of other consumptive uses Indirect measure of consumptive use

Maintenance of Ecological Health and Diversity of Rangelands Rangeland health.. degree to which the integrity of the soil and the ecological processes of rangelands are sustained Rangeland health.. degree to which the integrity of the soil and the ecological processes of rangelands are sustained Nutrient cycling, energy flow, hydrologic processes Nutrient cycling, energy flow, hydrologic processes Biodiversity.. variety of life and its processes which encompasses the variety of living organisms, the genetic differences among them and the communities and ecosystems in which they occur Landscape, community, population, genetics

Indicators: Health and Diversity Vegetation Production Soil Fertility Integrates abiotic and biotic influences on ecosystem health Changes in Fire RegimesCaptures influences on natural disturbances Riparian Condition Condition of Aquatic Systems Assesses the terrestrial role in watershed health and the sensitivity of aquatic systems to surrounding landscapes

Indicators: Health and Diversity Fragmentation Plant Communities Parcel Size Different Management Captures changes in landscape patterns, connectedness, habitats Plant Communities Area Invasives, Non-natives Vegetation Structure Captures changes in plant community structure and function Population Dynamics T&E, Species of Concern Selected Species Captures finer scale details for individual species

Conservation and Maintenance of Soil and Water Resources Soils influence hydrologic processes by providing the medium for the capture, storage, and release of water. Soils influence hydrologic processes by providing the medium for the capture, storage, and release of water. Flow of water through rangelands influences soil physical and biological properties. Flow of water through rangelands influences soil physical and biological properties. In most rangelands, water is extremely limiting. In most rangelands, water is extremely limiting.

Indicators: Soil and Water Resources Area of Rangeland with Area of Rangeland with Significant Erosion Significant Compaction Significant Compaction Changes in aggregate stability Changes in aggregate stability Bare ground Bare ground Diminished Organic Matter Diminished Organic Matter Changes in Soil Organisms Changes in Soil Organisms Pesticide Application Pesticide Application Measures loss of soil Physical properties Potential for erosion through resistances to wind and water Measures of soil productivity, and ties to water quality

Indicators: Soil and Water Resources Percent of Water Bodies with Variation in Natural Range of Biological Diversity Variation in pH, Chemicals, Temperature, Sedimentation Changes in Groundwater Area in Wetlands Stream Channel Geometry Changes in Intermittent Streams Indicates changes in water quality and aquatic habitat conditions Indicates potential for changes in vegetation and water availability Assesses watershed functioning, and impacts to aquatic and terrestrial diversity

Maintenance and Enhancement of Multiple Economic and Social Benefits to Current and Future Generations Socio-economic indicators provide a measure of societal values reflecting allocation of scarce economic resources. Socio-economic indicators provide a measure of societal values reflecting allocation of scarce economic resources. Economic indicators complement social measures by assessing changes resulting from adjustments in social, ecological, legal, and political systems. Economic indicators complement social measures by assessing changes resulting from adjustments in social, ecological, legal, and political systems.

Indicators: Social and Economic Benefits Social measures are widely available: Population, Migration, Mortality, Education, Income, etc. However, few are rangeland-specific. For example, social acceptability of rangeland policies, practices, conditions Assumption: Human communities are better off if rangelands are both healthy and productive.

Indicators: Social and Economic Benefits Area managed for Area managed for Cultural, Spiritual Values Cultural, Spiritual Values Subsistence Subsistence Non-consumptive-use Non-consumptive-use Land Ownership Land Ownership New Technologies New Technologies Viability and adaptability of social systems Viability and adaptability of social systems Assess management support for these values and uses Measures effect of change Assess adoption for improvement and protection Assesses how use and conditions impact range- dependent communities

Indicators: Social and Economic Benefits Amount and Economic Value Amount and Economic Value AUMs AUMs Forage Forage Non-livestock products Non-livestock products Management for Recreation Management for Recreation Area, Facilities, Visitors Area, Facilities, Visitors Investment in Rangelands Investment in Rangelands Assess availability and value of diverse uses Assess desire for tourism, recreation, wilderness Demand for different uses Rangeland Research, Development and Education Investment in the future

Indicators: Social and Economic Benefits Ranching Sector Ranching Sector Use of new technology Use of new technology Rate of return Rate of return Employment in sector Employment in sector Land Use and Conservation Land Use and Conservation Conservation easements Conservation easements Ownership by NGOs Ownership by NGOs Contribution to restoration Contribution to restoration Trade Flows between Rural and Urban Areas Ability to remain in business, importance in total employment Willingness to contribute to conservation by people and by organizations Identifies where investment income is occurring

Sustainable rangelands are influenced by Sustainable rangelands are influenced by U.S. laws, regulations, guidelines, U.S. laws, regulations, guidelines, Issues of equity, cultural traditions, legal rights and obligations, and Issues of equity, cultural traditions, legal rights and obligations, and Availability of scientific understanding and appropriate management technologies and skills. Availability of scientific understanding and appropriate management technologies and skills. Legal, Institutional, and Economic Framework for Rangeland Conservation and Sustainable Management

Legal, Institutional and Economic Frameworks Criteria Support for sustainability through frameworks of: Legal Institutional Economic Capacity to monitor change in sustainable management Capacity in R&D aimed at improving management and delivery of goods and services Property rights, range- related planning, public involvement in policy, investment, taxation Inventories, policy review, enforcement of laws and regulations Existence of research and development programs

Challenges Capacity? To what extent can productive capacity be measured? Capacity? To what extent can productive capacity be measured? Transition between rangeland and forests? What triggers identification of land as rangeland vs. forests? Transition between rangeland and forests? What triggers identification of land as rangeland vs. forests? Scale? National inventory Scale? National inventory Integration? Links between economic, social, and ecological sustainability? Integration? Links between economic, social, and ecological sustainability?

Next Technical Steps Reduce duplication of indicators Reduce duplication of indicators Develop protocols for evaluating indicators Develop protocols for evaluating indicators Protocols for identifying data sets Protocols for identifying data sets Inventory structure at national level Inventory structure at national level Agency roles Agency roles First Approximation Report First Approximation Report

A journey of 1000 miles begins with 1 step Future Plans

May 30, 2002 Future Plans and Milestones

Short-term Goals & Objectives Complete development of criteria and indicators Complete development of criteria and indicators Finalize criteria list Finalize criteria list Complete indicator development Complete indicator development Complete peer reviews Complete peer reviews Develop first approximation report (2003) Develop first approximation report (2003)

Short-term Goals & Objectives (cont.) Expand interactive outreach activities to include: Workshops Workshops Ecological Society of America – August 2002 Ecological Society of America – August 2002 Society for Range Management – February 2003 Society for Range Management – February th International Rangeland Congress – July th International Rangeland Congress – July 2003 Stakeholder Comment Sessions Stakeholder Comment Sessions NCBA Summer Meeting – July 2002 NCBA Summer Meeting – July 2002 Billings, Montana – August 2002 Billings, Montana – August 2002

Long-term Goals & Challenges Broad based adoption of C & I by local, state, regional and federal rangeland management agencies and non- government organizations. Broad based adoption of C & I by local, state, regional and federal rangeland management agencies and non- government organizations. Challenge – overcoming perceived and real cultural barriers.

Long-term Goals & Challenges (cont.) Implementation of C & I by adopting agencies and organizations. Implementation of C & I by adopting agencies and organizations. Challenge – garnering resources for implementation.

Value of Effective Implementation in Developing Management Policies and Strategies Provides a suite of common indicators for assessing and monitoring a multi- use suite of sustainable rangeland management policies and strategies. Provides a suite of common indicators for assessing and monitoring a multi- use suite of sustainable rangeland management policies and strategies.

Value of Effective Implementation in Developing Management Policies and Strategies Offers opportunity to improve management efficiencies as they relate to ecological, economic, and social factors by helping you: Offers opportunity to improve management efficiencies as they relate to ecological, economic, and social factors by helping you: Focus research on key criteria and indicators that are sensitive to changing ecological processes that either impact economic sustainability and social acceptance or are impacted by local economic situations and social mores. Focus research on key criteria and indicators that are sensitive to changing ecological processes that either impact economic sustainability and social acceptance or are impacted by local economic situations and social mores.

For example, consider: Declining quality of wildlife habitat, secondary productivity, water yields, etc. because of increases in noxious and invasive weeds, or Declining quality of wildlife habitat, secondary productivity, water yields, etc. because of increases in noxious and invasive weeds, or Declining economic well-being of community because of the threat of rangeland recreational activities on an endangered plant or animal species. Declining economic well-being of community because of the threat of rangeland recreational activities on an endangered plant or animal species. Value of Effective Implementation in Developing Management Policies and Strategies

Identify severely degraded and high risk systems that merit immediate attention to prevent further degradation and/or to initiate effective restoration actions. Identify severely degraded and high risk systems that merit immediate attention to prevent further degradation and/or to initiate effective restoration actions. Value of Effective Implementation in Developing Management Policies and Strategies Example – systems that are subjected to increasing rates of fragmentation resulting from increasing rates of urban development.

Provide framework for: Provide framework for: Development of coordinated, multi-use, multi-level management strategies, and Development of coordinated, multi-use, multi-level management strategies, and Improved accountability. Improved accountability. Cost savings Cost savings Value of Effective Implementation in Developing Management Policies and Strategies

Provides a golden opportunity to improve our understanding of the interaction effects of ecology, economics, and social factors as they relate to the sustainability of rangeland ecosystems. Provides a golden opportunity to improve our understanding of the interaction effects of ecology, economics, and social factors as they relate to the sustainability of rangeland ecosystems. Value of Effective Implementation in Developing Management Policies and Strategies

Sustainability is not a destination, but a journey: no deadlines are set, but work steadily progresses towards a goal over time. -Phil Janik, Co-chair, Roundtable on Sustainable Forests

Questions?