Figure 2. Following a 2007 wildfire, this site was seeded to crested wheatgrass and antelope bitterbrush. Continued monitoring of the site provides useful data and analysis of restoration/rehabilitation practices for future reference.
Monitoring Nevada's Rangelands Charlie D. Clements - Rangeland Scientist, Great Basin Rangelands Research Unit, US Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Research Service Rixey Jenkins - Range/Wild and Burro Program Manager, HumboldtToiyabe National Forest, U.S. Forest Service
T
Educator, University Nevada Cooperative Extension focused his presentation on “Cooperative Monitoring Agreements and the Rancher’s Monitoring Guide”. Gary pointed out that it was very important to monitor to improve management as well as resource conditions. Conducting a cooperative monitoring program with the permittee, Range Conservationist and stakeholders can improve grazing strategies, meet objectives, record accurate conditions, identify trends, adapt management to on-the-ground realities, identify if the objectives are efficient and sustainable as well as identify if the objectives are realistic. This cooperative effort will all circle around communication and trust. This approach if done honestly will lead to increased forage base, decreased environmental variability, decrease scrutiny and increased livestock production which will stabilize income and operational longevity. This cooperation must have a common vision to achieve objectives that are science based in which monitoring can measure and evaluate data to desired rangeland condition. This level of cooperation improves exchange of information, data transparency and data analysis. Gary complimented the US Forest Service for working with the Nevada Cattlemen’s Association in getting cooperative monitoring programs in place. When in place these cooperative monitoring agreements provide the template for long-term monitoring as to the goals, communication and accomplishments or short-comings to adjust management practices to achieve those goals. The crucial elements must have buy in from all parties, be completely voluntary, and have communication and coordination. This Guide was adopted in 2006 from Wyoming and tuned up here in Nevada by early 2017. Gary also pointed out the importance of photographic records and if the communication and trust is maintained that both the producers and agencies will succeed. Dave Voth, Rangeland Health Coordinator, Nevada Department of Agriculture presented the audience details on a new phone app that is an added tool to help with rangeland monitoring. The app provides producers with the ability to do their own monitoring in a quick and easy process. The app does not have to have cell phone service as the producer Figure 1. The ability of producers, resource managers and cooperators to communicate and share information can can down load the gathered information they entered once back in service. The app provides strengthen desired management objectives and accomplishments as well as building trust among all involved.
he Society for Range ManagementNevada Section held its’ annual winter meeting on November 1617th in Winnemucca, Nevada. The meeting, “Monitoring Nevada’s Rangelands” was well received and informative as presenters did a thorough job of updating and informing attendees on various levels of rangeland monitoring. Sherm Swanson, Rangeland Ecology and Management faculty and Riparian Extension Specialist, University of Nevada started the presentations off with an update on the upcoming 3rd Edition of the Nevada Rangeland Monitoring Handbook. Sherm pointed out the importance of conducting proper and efficient monitoring to meet management objectives and that the Rangeland Monitoring Handbook increases the utilization of information already gathered and better provides an understanding of long-term versus short-term monitoring to improve adaptive management, cooperative management with
26 November/December 2017
permittees and an expanded explanation of data analysis and interpretation. The importance of adaptive management includes active engagement with stakeholders to meet management objectives and quantify desired future conditions. The roles and responsibilities of all involved (federal, state, local governments, and land owners) must have an open communication line in the monitoring program to better understand Disturbance Response Groups (ecological sites and states, invasive species, wildfires, etc.), Designated Monitoring Areas (upland, riparian) and management strategies (seeding, grazing, fencing) in measuring achieving management goals and objectives. The use of long-term photos, grazing records and precipitation are also very useful in monitoring and tracking accomplishments to better record appropriate management strategies. Monitoring is not an end in itself, but rather a tool to interpret how current management is affecting the resource. Gary McCuin, Eureka County Extension
The Progressive Rancher
www.progressiverancher.com
GPS coordinates that can be tied to photos as well as entering in simple data points for site description, disturbances, utilization, etc. Another great part about this app is the fact that when a producer comes across such occurrences such as trespass cattle, wildlife sightings, insect damage, grazing pressure, horses, etc. The producer can just enter it and tie it to the GPS coordinates and it gives the exact location of these events to share with others. All information gathered on this app belongs to the individual and they must actively share their information if they so deem so. The Nevada Department of Agriculture encourages you to contact Dave at dvoth@agri. nv.net or (775)738-8076 for details and questions. Ron Cerri, 4th generation rancher at the Rebel Creek Ranch, Orovada, Nevada gave an enlightening presentation on how important it is to monitor your rangelands. Ron discussed how times have changed since his great grandfather settled the country where his family ranch is located. How difficult and hard the land was to work with and the many challenges that occurred. The importance of cattle grazing to Ron Cerri
www.progressiverancher.com
produce and provide food to the American people, especially the demand during World War II. He stated that following the war there was an increase effort to improve infrastructure such as roads,
dams, fencing and water developments to increase food production. Ron stated that in those days the government was interested in improving sustainable use of rangelands and to increase livestock production to feed the Nation, over-time that focus was less about feeding the Nation and more about regulations as views switched to protecting resources which resulted in changing grazing systems to a rest rotation grazing prescription. By the 1980s monitoring became a focus to improve range, wildlife and resource values. Ron is very active in the application of monitoring on his permitted rangelands and even though there is a cost involved it is better to get that monitoring started and collect data that will improve the management of the land and resources, otherwise you will end up in court and that will be more costly than the monitoring program. Monitoring should be budgeted into the operation just like other added expenses. Ron believes strongly in cooperation and to work together rather be adversaries and therefore works very hard to have a good relationship with the numerous range conservationists he has had over the years as well as building bridges and learning together. Ron stated just how important it is to him to pass on a successful operation which revolves around a good monitoring program. Kathryn Dyer, Nevada State Range Program Lead, Bureau of Land Management presented information on the “BLM Outcome Based Grazing Authorization Pilot Project” by pointing out that Outcome Based Grazing is a development of grazing authorization that would allow the public leased operation to demonstrate objective grazing
Figure 3. Continued monitoring of the 1997 wildfire/rangeland seeding reported a very good establishment of antelope bitterbrush, seeded with crested wheatgrass, despite literature reporting the opposite. The added increase in big sagebrush at this site just 10 years later surpassed the goals set in place to provide browse to wintering mule deer herds. Without monitoring this information would not have been recorded. The Progressive Rancher
November/December 2017 27