Science framework for conservation and restoration of the sagebrush biome: Linking the Department of the Interior’s Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy to long-term strategic conservation actions

Chambers, J. C.; Beck, Jeffrey L.; Bradford, John B.; Bybee, Jordan; Campbell, S. D.; Carlson, John C.; Christiansen, Thomas J.; Clause, Karen J.; Collins, Gail H.; Crist, Michele R.; Dinkins, Jonathan B.; Doherty, Kevin E.; Edwards, Felicity A.; Espinosa, Shawn P.; Griffin, Kathleen A.; Griffin, Philippa C.; Haas, Jessica R.; Hanser, Steven E.; Havlina, Douglas W.; Henke, Kenneth F.; Hennig, Jacob D.; Joyce, Linda A.; Kilkenny, F.M.; Kulpa, Sarah M.; Kurth, Laurie L.; Maestas, Jeremy D.; Manning, Mary E.; Mayer, Kenneth E.; Mealor, Brian A.; McCarthy, Clinton; Pellant, Mike; Perea, Marco A.; Prentice, Karen L.; Pyke, D A; Wiechman, Lief A.; Wuenschel, Amarina

doi:10.2737/rmrs-gtr-360

Cited by 29 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 215 publications

(399 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In response to the decline of sagebrush‐dependent species and impacts to rural economies, local, state, and federal governments have worked independently and partnered with private landowners and non‐profit organizations to find ways to slow and reverse the cheatgrass‐fire problem (Chambers, Beck, et al, 2017; Knick, 2011). A paradigm shift occurred in 2015 when the US Department of Interior (DOI) introduced a comprehensive fire prevention, management, and restoration strategy (Secreterial Order 3336) for sagebrush landscapes across the West, particularly the Great Basin.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The result has been a rapid loss of sagebrush steppe communities immediately after fire as well as a steady loss of sagebrush communities over longer timeframes (i.e., decades) because of a lack of seed sources, degraded soils, competition with non‐native species, unsuitable climate conditions, and recurrent wildfire that limit germination and establishment (Schlaepfer, Lauenroth, & Bradford, 2014; Shriver et al, 2018). Given these frequent pulse‐ and unsustainable press‐disturbances in sagebrush steppe, the need for effective intervention to conserve these plant communities is increasingly critical (Chambers et al, 2017; Davies et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Protecting restoration investments from the cheatgrass‐fire cycle in sagebrush steppe

Pilliod

Jeffries

Welty

et al. 2021

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The U.S. federal government has recently committed to the difficult task of slowing and managing the invasive grass‐fire cycle in sagebrush steppe, where property, livelihoods, and entire ecosystems are at risk. To safely manage this crisis, the government recently proposed to construct about 17,700 km of fuel breaks and millions of hectares of fuel reduction treatments in six western states. A challenge for resource managers will be the strategic placement of these land treatments. We investigated the need for this massive effort from the perspective of protecting previous rehabilitation and restoration seeding investments, including over 3,400 seedings implemented from 1990 to 2019 covering about 24,540 km2. We found that portions of over 26% of these seedings have since burned representing nearly 17% of this seeded area. Locations that had recurrent wildfire had repeat treatments and thus multiple investments in the same location. Our analysis supports the management actions aimed at protecting remaining sagebrush and restoration investments, especially in areas where the invasive grass‐fire cycle is most pervasive. Given the decades required for most sagebrush to recover after wildfire, the urgency of this management intervention is evident. The specific details, placement, and effectiveness of these interventions could influence outcomes and potential unintended consequences.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Protecting restoration investments from the cheatgrass‐fire cycle in sagebrush steppe

Pilliod

Jeffries

Welty

et al. 2021

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the basic template should be consistent allowing staff expertise in building and implementing a KNSM to grow. There are some cases where portions of the approach have been applied, for example, manatees, (Hostetler et al, 2021) and sagebrush restoration (Chambers et al, 2017; Crist et al, 2019). Through systems thinking, the acknowledgement of organizational and environmental complexities, and the design of the KNSM to facilitate knowledge‐to‐action, the KSNM can be a valuable component of participatory conservation decision making.…”

Section: The Knowledge Network Systems Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systems thinking to operationalize knowledge‐to‐action in fish and wildlife agencies

Flamm

Braunsberger

2022

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper incorporates systems thinking in the design of a knowledge networked systems model (KNSM) for supporting knowledge-to-action in conservation organizations. It assumes that organizations are complex entities with properties that should be considered normatively. The synthesis of these properties into a KNSM revolves around the most common question many conservation practitioners are asked by the public: how is X doing? X typically reflects a concept easily grasped by the public such as a species or ecosystem.To operationalize a KNSM, one should consider that (1) information, not authority, empowers the network, (2) structural or bureaucratic impediments to maximizing utility of knowledge are minimized, (3) interacting agents direct the flow of information and knowledge and guide agency outputs, (4) boundaries between offices, programs, departments, and organizations are treated as porous, (5) transparency is fundamental to successful model operation, (6), most conservation problems are spatial, and (7) ecological and knowledge hierarchies organize the network. Benefits of this approach include facilitating research outcomes that support management decisions, a tool for strategic planning and implementation, greater transparency and operational clarity, foundation for team building, means for identifying knowledge gaps, a platform for organizational in-reach and public outreach, facilitated communication in general, and an important tool for collaborative conservation decision making. An example using a hypothetical listed species is presented to illustrate how a KNSM can be designed and implemented.

show abstract

“…Restoration of big sagebrush is slow, and outcomes, particularly of seeding efforts, are often unpredictable and mixed (Knutson et al 2014, Rottler et al 2018, Shriver et al 2019, Davies et al 2020. Because of the importance of the big sagebrush region (Davies et al 2011, Finch et al 2016, detailed management frameworks have been developed (Finch et al 2016, Chambers et al 2017, Crist et al 2019, and the temporal, spatial, and financial extent of restoration activities in the big sagebrush region are among the largest in North America (Young et al 1979, Pilliod et al 2017, Copeland et al 2018). Despite such largescale, long-term efforts, successful restoration of big sagebrush remains rare because of the highly variable, but prevailing dry conditions in dryland environments and because of several specific characteristics of big sagebrush plants, which cannot resprout after fire, have short-lived seeds with limited dispersal, and seedlings that can be outcompeted, particularly by invasive plant species (reviewed by Schlaepfer et al 2014b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2016, Chambers et al. 2017, Crist et al. 2019), and the temporal, spatial, and financial extent of restoration activities in the big sagebrush region are among the largest in North America (Young et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the future of big sagebrush regeneration: challenges of projecting complex ecological processes

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regeneration is an essential demographic step that affects plant population persistence, recovery after disturbances, and potential migration to track suitable climate conditions. Challenges of restoring big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) after disturbances including fire-invasive annual grass interactions exemplify the need to understand the complex regeneration processes of this long-lived, woody species that is widespread across the semiarid western U.S. Projected 21st century climate change is expected to increase drought risks and intensify restoration challenges. A detailed understanding of regeneration will be crucial for developing management frameworks for the big sagebrush region in the 21st century. Here, we used two complementary models to explore spatial and temporal relationships in the potential of big sagebrush regeneration representing (1) range-wide big sagebrush regeneration responses in natural vegetation (process-based model) and (2) big sagebrush restoration seeding outcomes following fire in the Great Basin and the Snake River Plains (regression-based model). The process-based model suggested substantial geographic variation in long-term regeneration trajectories with central and northern areas of the big sagebrush region remaining climatically suitable, whereas marginal and southern areas are becoming less suitable. The regression-based model suggested, however, that restoration seeding may become increasingly more difficult, illustrating the particularly difficult challenge of promoting sagebrush establishment after wildfire in invaded landscapes. These results suggest that sustaining big sagebrush on the landscape throughout the 21st century may climatically be feasible for many areas and that uncertainty about the long-term sustainability of big sagebrush may be driven more by dynamics of biological invasions and wildfire than by uncertainty in climate change projections. Divergent projections of the two models under 21st century climate conditions encourage further study to evaluate potential benefits of recreating conditions of uninvaded, unburned natural big sagebrush vegetation for post-fire restoration seeding, such as seeding in multiple years and, for at least much of the northern Great Basin and Snake River Plains, the control of the fire-invasive annual grass cycle.

show abstract

Science framework for conservation and restoration of the sagebrush biome: Linking the Department of the Interior’s Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy to long-term strategic conservation actions

Cited by 29 publications

References 215 publications

Protecting restoration investments from the cheatgrass‐fire cycle in sagebrush steppe

Protecting restoration investments from the cheatgrass‐fire cycle in sagebrush steppe

Systems thinking to operationalize knowledge‐to‐action in fish and wildlife agencies

Understanding the future of big sagebrush regeneration: challenges of projecting complex ecological processes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About