Brief Summary of Minutes of Annual Meeting

Annual Meetings of the W192 & WERA55 Regional Projects Thursday, October 6, 2005 Meeting began at 9:00 a.m. Julie Lurman opened the meeting on behalf of the University of Alaska -- Fairbanks with a brief welcome to Alaska. Administrative Advisor Report Don Snyder reported both projects come up for renewal this coming summer (2006), so we need to have renewal projects being written by January with the possibility of merging the projects and making sure we have identified the interests of the participants to the project. Fen Hunt (Economic & Community Systems at CSREES) also explained more about the status of the formula funds and the attempt of CSREES to retain those. She explained to the group the various program relationships between her office and our regional projects. Areas of future direction she sees coming include: economic prediction of control of invasive species, and community fire readiness  both rangeland sustainability issues. State Reports Idaho State report  Rimbey reported on the variety of projects ongoing or related to Idaho: 1) Continued work on ranch values work in New Mexico and Idaho, and is now moving to work with Trent Teegerstrom in AZ -- Ranch values have little to do w/ the cows. 2) Incorporating the GAMS models into the Fire Surrogate project, and others. He also noted this is his last year as Assoc. Editor of Rangeland and Ecology Management (REM) and suggested it would be good for someone else to step up to perhaps fill this position. Rimbey and other personnel at the Caldwell R&E Center will be relocated sometime before July 1, 2006. California State report  Huntsinger reported that two of the three range faculty have stepped down from administrative positions at Berkeley and returned to research and teaching--good news for the program. There is now an endowed chair for the range program  the Russell Rustici Endowed Chair in Rangeland Management, which went to Barbara Allen-Diaz. Lynn would like to do comparative work with Spain/Calif. re: rangelands and ranches in the area of environmental services. She discussed several of her ongoing projects and the growing research group focused on land conservation. New Mexico State report  Torell added several points about the ranch values study and differences between some of the results in New Mexico and Idaho. He reported on several other ongoing projects and activities. As a member of a committee providing input and direction to the Rangeland Ecology and Management journal, he solicited those interested in replacing Neil Rimbey as Associate Editor for REM. Arizona State report  Teegerstrom reported on collaborative projects with others in the group. One of these projects is how different ranches have dealt with drought in Arizona and these will probably be published in Choices. Another project looks at Risk Analysis and management and this will be posted to rightrisk.org. Nevada State report  Tom Harris reported on several ongoing projects  one focuses on the impact of the cattle sector in White Pine and Eureka. Another study is assessing the water values in one of the districts where Las Vegas is buying the water rights and exporting them. He also reported on a project related to the wild horses in the Great Basin and wild horse/burro interpretive center. He also noted the Joint Fire Science program will be doing more coordinating among the different subcomponents. Colorado State report  Child reported last week the college was named to the Warner College of Natural Resources as a result of Ed Warners recent $30M gift. CSU also is facing quite a few retirements within the range science department in the next few years. There are two positions coming open, but the range faculty numbers are down somewhat. Alaska State report  Lurman reported on projects related to NEPA and Alaska National Lands Conservation Act and how this affects wolf control on federal lands. Other areas being pursued pertain to wildlife law, and the Intensive Management statute in Alaska re: predator control. Harris (N.) added some about the grazing management issues, and climate change related to forests and spruce bark beetle. Texas State report  Fox reported that several hires there in the Range Dept. and interests of those faculty to partner with collaborators from other states for ongoing rangelands projects. Oregon State report  Tanaka reported on ongoing projects: Beef Cattle management; Cheatgrass control; Grazing effects on Birds/Mammals on the Zumwalt Prairie with TNC; and the Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable. He also reported on and OSU initiative called Sustainable Rural Communities, headed by Bruce Weber. He has also been active in a project looking at fire suppression activities and how this can affect agriculture/natural resource production activities. Wyoming State report  Foulk reported on several projects ongoing in Wyoming, one using the GAMS model W-192 developed in the Park County economy. One aspect of this is looking at private land and wildlife, i.e., the importance of winter habitat on private land and the value/s of this. A report on the Bighorn National Forest Plan Revision is completed. A series of annual fact sheets re: PILT has been completed. With the ORV study, they are trying to find how people are using their off-road vehicles in the state. The latest Trends in Agriculture report is also now available. Regional Fire Science Project Update on the Joint Fire Science Program from Harris (T.), Tanaka, and Rimbey. ID, OR, NV, UT. Brunson/Shindler are doing the sociological aspects of the project. Rimbey/Tanaka are conducting the economics components. A team at Nevada is conducting the non-market measures parts of the project. One of the things happening is to try to plan how to make the variety of data collected from all the different sites compatible. Sustainable Rangelands Roundtable Tanaka, Child, and Fox reported generally on this. 63 indicators were developed originally w/ emphases on social and economic aspects. These were boiled down to 27 core indicators. Some concern about the implementation of these indicators, but we run into the issue of defining rangelands, etc. The visibility of SRR has increased over the past year with invitations to some key meetings to help provide more visibility to the importance of it. Some discussion has taken place about the possibility of moving SRR forward through some university-based initiative. At the 4/05 Oklahoma meeting, the NGO reps also indicated support for this. Rimbey noted that putting some of the indicators into a policy arena (i.e., Farm Bill language) is putting the cart before the horse when we havent had time to analyze the indicators via research. Child noted the agencies have increased their financial support of SRR. Fox indicated SRR is still at a stage of evaluating the indicators and many question marks remain within the group. The agencies seem to want to get a common vision/understanding of the ecological aspects. They do not see the social/economic indicators as their mandate to fund. Heinz is interested to develop a natural resources indicators database, akin to the National Labor Statistics, etc. The minutes were approved for WCC 55 and the group was reminded that publications and state reports should be submitted by email to buckaroo@nature.Berkeley.edu or to Trent. Some noted recreation is becoming more and more of an issue and questioned whether ought to be researching the total cost of recreation vs. the returns (just the money coming in). Snyder noted W-1133 focuses on non-market methods to address recreation issues. Discussion continued as to how to fit recreation growth into range analysis. Meyer at Idaho had done some non-market valuation of recreation stuff. Search and rescue things, solid waste. Allen: WCC-55 we have the ability to coordinate our continuing symposiums at least every other year at SRM as we have done in the past; unless we can come up with a strong common research topic, WCC format is more appropriate. Neil: I would agree if we agree to expand beyond economics only. Modify to include regional economics, whatever else that is important issues to rangelands in the West. Allen: The need in rangeland, where we previously dealt mostly with livestock grazing, points to all the values that have nothing to do with the cattle that are grazing it. Range improvements look bad but implemented for rangeland health, may not make any sense economically but will help rangeland health. An interesting question is whether the other 50% was a worthwhile public investment -- what is the benefit? watershed, soil stability, species diversity, birds? Bill Fox: Water yield is the big issue, but health of the rangeland will also pay dividends. Brush species, cant justify on basis of cow grass, but do it. This is where the research begins to connect to the importance of the sustainability indicators. John: we are talking about several different things. Wcc55 re-write will go ahead, group has been fairly successful. Is there interest in pursuing the indicator questions that have emerged. Multidisciplinary approaches needed to address these indicator questions. John: thinks WCC55 should continue on as coordinating committee. Tom: I agree with John. WCC, not range level but regional level. Bill: I heard a very focused desire to approach invasive species, from our indicators model, we ended up with a total of 64 indicators of which 35-40 are on invasive species. JD: I raised this topic because of what we talked about at lunch of common interest in takings issues. We might have a counter position, law interpretations, and what people think the law ought to be. This might feed into the indicators. Tom: indicators feed back into what is sustainable range, what would be the range and regional economy. Dennis: I have a concern because I see wheels in motion and need to get the research underway. We will lose something, so we dont want to delay too long, and we need quickly to get underway. Seventeen western states, and identifications of issues. Is the statement broad enough to incorporate JD and Julie? Some indicated we should keep the topic broader and more inclusive and not narrow it down. We dont have to keep restricting it. Create a broad title and do the writing to match the broad title. Public lands connotations: will they be part of it or the focus. Neil: no problem with objectives but have problem with issues statement at decisions. Public and private, federal and non-federal, NGO role. New forms of ownership are emerging, We have an NGO buying lands, trying to understand waterflow and retention, public agency private lands how do we even begin to value that. Public and private lands are interconnected. And climate change&..in terms of valuation should we be looking into carbon sequestration. What can rangelands contribute to carbon sequestration? The proposed objectives for WCC 55: 1. To coordinate information and methodologies for analyzing the benefits, values, costs and tradeoffs for using rangeland in alternative ways. 2. To coordinate interdisciplinary and multi-disciplinary research that addresses issues and alternatives facing rangeland owners and users, land administrators, and community leaders concerning the economic, social, and ecological aspects associated with the management of rangelands. 3. To coordinate the evaluation of proposed policies that may affect the use of public and/or private rangelands. 4. To foster and improve communications among those interested in the management and use of rangelands. John is re-working the issue statement and suggestions were made for what he should include in it. New forms of ownership and shared ownership are emerging, from trophy and amenity ranches, to conservation easements on working landscapes, to land trust holdings for conservation goals. These all affect and result from how rangelands are valued, used, and managed. Expected outcomes: " symposia, " joint grant proposals " impacts: generate millions of dollars of research support? coordinating across state lines " through the work agencies will have a better understanding of things and will be able to make better policy " sharing information is better use of agency resources, more efficient use of resources, improved decisionmaking; better understanding of policy outcomes. " updated economic information at Arizona. " everyone needs to fill out a new appendices, also people should get folks from their institutions to fill them out even if they cant come " Maria would be a good participant, Nathan Sayre, Rick Standiford. Next Meeting Dennis Child will take the lead to organize a combined WERA55/W192 meeting near Steamboat Springs around late Sept or early October 2006. The meeting adjourned at 2:15pm.

Work on ranch values has been submitted to JARE; currently in for 2nd review. Results related to ranch values were presented at the Society for Range Management meetings in Fort Worth in February. Results were also shared in a symposium sponsored by the University of Arizona Department of Ag and Resource Economics and Arizona Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers in Scottsdale. A large, 5 year, regional project recently funded by Fire Science Program (USDA and USDI)involves both Tanaka and Rimbey (ranch-level analyses)using an enhanced GAMS model that was developed through WCC55. A to Z Retained Ownership program has completed 13th year. Over the past 13 years, 344 ranches have consigned over 5,800 cattle to the program. The program has been effective in that steers showed a profit of $33/head, heifers of $65/head. A study of the economic impact of federal livestock grazing in Park County, Wyoming was concluded. Importance of federal livestock grazing in Wyoming was shown. An analysis was also conducted related to the economic importance of private land as a source of wildlife habitat in the county (IMPLAN supplemented with GIS modeling). Cost of community services was estimated for situations in which ranchland is converted to rural residential development. The Bighorn National Forest Plan was revised. Analyses related to the economic impact of grazing, oil and natural gas development, and recreation were done for two Resource Management Areas (Casper and Kemmerer, Wyoming). PILT factsheets were done for each county in Wyoming. Management of beef cattle in relation to improving riparian areas and ranch economics were studied in cooperation with the University of Idaho, Oregon State University, and the USDA Pacific Northwest Research Station, USFS. Used IMPLAN to evaluate the social and economic impacts of public land policy in Oregon. In addition, work is underway in which the economic and social impacts of various strategies to control cheatgrass and restore native vegetation in the sagebrush biome within the Great Basin. The Rangelands West website (http://rangelandswest.org) was organized to provide credible information on all aspects of rangelands and their management. Additional work in the area of ranch values (similar to that done in Idaho and New Mexico) has been undertaken in Arizona. Provided "RightRisk" training for western livestock producers. A social accounting model is being developed for northeastern Nevada to incorporate public lands so that changes in public land use can be quantified. A dynamic computable general equilibrium model is also being developed that will allow an analysis of public land issues through time. In Alaska, state predator control efforts on federal lands have been implemented without following mandatory procedures under both the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act and the National Environmental Policy Act. A paper entitled, "Subsistence at Risk: Failure to Act and NEPA Complians in Post-ANILCA Alaska, has been accepted by Environmental Law.

Rimbey, N.R., C.W. Gray, R.L. Smathers and G.E. Shewmaker. 2005. Leasing arrangements and other considerations. Chapter 18. in: Shewmaker, G.E., ed. Idaho Forage Handbook Third Edition. Idaho Ag. Exp. Sta. Bulletin 547. Moscow, ID. Smathers, R.L., P.E. Patterson, N.R. Rimbey and C.W. Gray. 2005. Production costs and budgeting. Chapter 19. in: Shewmaker, G.E., ed. Idaho Forage Handbook Third Edition. Idaho Ag. Exp. Sta. Bulletin 547. Moscow, ID. Tanaka, J.A., N. Rimbey and L.A. Torell. 2005. Rangeland Economics, Ecology, and Sustainability: Implications for Policy and Economic Research. W. Econ. Forum. 4(1):1-6. Wulfhorst, J.D., N. Rimbey, and T. Darden. 2005. Sharing the Rangelands  Competing for Sense of Place. American Behavioral Scientist 48(16)xxxx-xxxx. Taylor, D., R. Coupal, T. Foulke, 2005, The Economic Impact of Federal Grazing on the Economy of Park County Wyoming, Project Report, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, College of Agriculture, University of Wyoming, August 2005. Foulke, T., R. Coupal, D. Taylor, 2005, 2004 Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) to Wyoming Counties (23 fact sheets), University of Wyoming, Cooperative Extension Service, B-1163AL  B-1163WE, March 2005. Taylor, D., T. Foulke, R. Coupal, 2005, Whats it Worth to You: Prebles II, Reflections, College of Agriculture, University of Wyoming. Fouke, T., R. Coupal, D. Taylor, 2005, Trends in Wyoming Agriculture, University of Wyoming, Cooperative Extension Service, B-1164, August 2005. Aldrich, G.A., J.A. Tanaka, R.M. Adams, and J.C. Buckhouse. Economics of Western Juniper Control in Central Oregon. Rangeland Ecology and Management 58(2005):542-552. Tanaka, J.A., L.A. Torell, and N.R. Rimbey. Rangeland Economics, Ecology, and Sustainability: Implications for Policy and Economic Research. Western Economics Forum 4(2005):1-6. McCollum, D., L. Swanson, and J. Tanaka. Integrate social and economic indicators with ecological indicators for rangeland inventory, assessment, and monitoring: Why would you ever do that? Paper presented at the 58th Annual Meeting, Society for Range Management, Fort Worth, Texas. 2005. Tanaka, J. Ranch-level economic impacts of off-stream water developments, animal attributes, and fencing. Paper presented at the 58th Annual Meeting, Society for Range Management, Fort Worth, Texas. 2005. Tanaka, J., A. Torell, and N. Rimbey. Rangeland policy and economics research: integrating science and people. Paper presented at the 58th Annual Meeting, Society for Range Management, Fort Worth, Texas. 2005. Tronstad, Russell, Trent Teegerstrom, and Daniel Osgood. The Role of Electronic Technologies for Reaching Underserved Audiences. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 86(3), August 2004:767-771. Tronstad, R., and Teegerstrom, T. Economic Trade-Offs Between Sale Weight, Herd Size, Supplementation and Seasonal Factors, The Journal of Range Management, Vol 56, pg 425-431, Sept. 2003 Harris, Thomas R. and Joan Wright. Estimated Economic Impacts of Cattle Ranching and Farming Sector on the White Pine County Economy, October 2004, UCED 2004/05-15. Fadali, Elizabeth, William W. Riggs, and Thomas R. Harris. Updated Economic Linkages in the Economy of Eureka County, UCED 2005/06-05, June 2005. Tanaka, J.A, N.R. Rimbey, and L.A. Torell. 2005. Rangeland Economics, Ecology, and Sustainability: Implications for Policy and Economic Research. The Western Economics Forum. 4(1):1-6. Torell, L.A., O.A. Ramirez, Neil R. Rimbey, and Daniel W. McCollum. 2005. Income Earning Potential versus Consumptive Amenities in Determining Ranchland Values. J. Agr. Resource Econ. Accepted for Publication. Torell, L.A. 2005. Factors Affecting the Market Value of New Mexico Ranches. pp. G1-G14. In: C.D. Goodloe (Director), Proceedings, Continuing Legal Education, Conservations Easements Conference, Albuquerque, NM. CLE International, Denver, CO. Torell, L.A. and N.R. Rimbey. 2005. Factors Affecting the Market Value of New Mexico Ranches. pp. 55-69. In: M. Peterson (ed.), Proceedings, Corona Range and Livestock Research Center Field Day. New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM.