New criteria for measuring range management activities.

Abstract

SummaryThe status of range resources is not being adequately portrayed to the Agency, Department, Congress, or constituent groups by the existing methods of measuring range management. The measures traditionally used have been range condition and numbers of animal unit months (AUMs) of livestock grazing. Range condition is slow to change, often taking decades; and the number of AUMs of authorized grazing does not accurately reflect the work being accomplished on the ground.These problems are further complicated by effective range resources management creating a flow of outputs that go beyond those traditionally associated with range programs. Multiple products flow from range management, yet traditional budget and accounting constraints force separation of the benefits and costs into functional program areas. Legislation and General Accounting Office (GAO) reports have emphasized integrated resource management and the need to consider all outputs in resource decisionmaking.The Range Measurement Task Group of Agency personnel was assembled in January 1988 to evaluate and recommend methods of measurement that would best reflect the various jobs involved in managing range 'vegetation resources--their ecological status and interrelations. The overriding principle guiding the effort was that range management is broader than mere livestock grazing. Recreation, water quality and quantity, soil stability, wildlife habitat, and timber are other outputs associated with range management. Measurements of all products are needed to accurately describe the range program when budget decisions, project selections, and program justifications are prepared.The Range Measurement Task Group recommended that the tasks and outputs of range managers be summarized in five broad areas. Each area has methods of measuring that are useful in assessing progress toward goals and relating the area's status. The five areas are range vegetation management, riparian vegetation management, grazing management, noxious weed management, and wild horse and burro management. Separating riparian vegetation is done only to put emphasis on that portion of range vegetation. Managing and monitoring range resources require tracking many elements other than those highlighted here; however, these five have been identified for reports to the National level. Regions, National Forests, and Ranger Districts can use additional measures as necessary.In the task group proposal, vegetation management objectives of Forest plans are the yardsticks for measuring the effectiveness of range vegetation management. Measurements are in acres and describe whether range vegetation is being managed to meet Forest plan objectives: A similar measure is used for riparian vegetation. Noxious weed management is measured in acres treated or untreated and is reported annually. A status report showing the acres of infestation is suggested at 5-year intervals. Grazing management measures will reflect the status of allotment management plans being used to meet Forest plan objectives. Stat...