Using grazing-duration to balance: livelihoods, clean water, sage-grouse habitat, and sustainable forage in semi-arid rangelands

Progress report for SW22-942

SW22-942 (project overview)
Project Type: Research and Education
Funds awarded in 2022: $328,329.00
Projected End Date: 12/31/2025
Grant Recipient: Working Lands Conservation
Region: Western
State: Utah
Principal Investigator:
Dr. Kris Hulvey
Email
Working Lands Conservation
Co-Investigators:
Taylor Payne
Email
Utah Department of Agriculture's Grazing Improvement Program
Expand All

Project Information

Summary:

Public rangelands support producer livelihoods and communities. Society also expects public rangelands to provide clean water for recreation, plus habitat for wildlife. Because grazing can reduce water quality and wildlife habitat, federal agencies face litigation curtailing grazing. A common way to address ecological concerns is to reduce grazing intensity by de-stocking cattle. Although this can improve rangeland conditions, reducing cattle numbers negatively affects rancher incomes and communities.

To address this management problem, 38 Utah producers engaged in a 11-year collaborative process with federal and state agencies to develop an innovative grazing plan for their public lands: the Three Creeks Grazing Allotment Consolidation Plan (The Grazing Plan). A key element of this plan is shortening grazing-duration (defined as length of grazing-time) along streams. Understanding how grazing-duration affects key ecological goals and producer economic-vitality is critical to determining the Grazing Plan’s success.

Our study addresses this need by examining how the region’s historical grazing-durations affect forage recovery, sage-grouse habitat, and water quality in replicated riparian areas. Because producers will shorten grazing-duration when they implement the Grazing Plan in 2022, we also have an opportunity to examine whether implementation of new grazing practices improves management outcomes.

Our study combines ecological, economic, and social sustainability by assessing producer costs of altering management, and using surveys and interviews to understand whether the Grazing Plan is meeting rancher needs. Our goal is to quantify costs of shortening grazing-duration and demonstrate whether ecological outcomes improve across a working landscape. To this end, our study examines not just how grazing-duration affects forage production, which has been studied, but also how duration impacts ecological outcomes and producer economic-vitality - elements often overlooked.

Our education and outreach plan focuses on sharing data and the story of this project at local, regional, and national scales. Locally, our team employs participatory learning and partnership building through talks, field tours, and rancher surveys; regionally, we share outcomes and innovative management practices with young ranchers through a sponsored workshop and with federal and state agencies through personal meetings; nationally, we share outcomes and project details with the public, researchers, and managers through presentations, publishing in peer-reviewed and popular literature, social media, and peer-to-peer learning.

We expect project results to highlight how short-duration grazing allows producers to meet federal/state regulations on public lands without reducing livestock numbers or facing lawsuits that eliminate grazing privileges. Since the effects of management accrue over multiple years, continued funding will allow our team to more accurately detail whether shortened grazing durations achieve rangeland management goals. We expect this research will identify social factors likely to constrain adoption of novel grazing solutions, but also highlight benefits of altered grazing that make the cost-benefit ratio of adopting innovative management attractive to producers. By linking the costs of altering grazing with gains in environmental quality, this research will justify creation of cost-share programs that support ranchers when they adopt innovative management on public lands. We expect our project to provide a balanced public-lands grazing model that can be replicated in other areas.

Project Objectives:
  • Determine how grazing-duration affects: (a) stream-side vegetation recovery from grazing, (b) sage-grouse habitat quality, and (c) water quality.
  • Quantify improvements to environmental quality (i.e., recovery of vegetation, sage-grouse habitat, water quality) when shorter grazing-durations are implemented through the new Three Creeks Grazing Allotment Consolidation Plan.
  • Quantify the economic costs to producers of changing grazing-duration by comparing costs before versus after implementation of the Three Creeks Grazing Allotment Consolidation Plan.
  • Compare implementation costs incurred versus improvements to environmental quality to determine pros and cons of altering grazing-duration on Rich County public lands. 
  • Evaluate the value to local producers of altering grazing management through surveys and interviews. These will gauge producer-perceived costs of changing management (e.g., monetary, time) and benefits of doing so (e.g., improved environmental quality, reduced litigation risk).
  • Share project results (a) with producers and management agencies via local activities, (b) by engaging with regional stakeholders and young ranchers, and (c) by sharing project information nationally.
Timeline:

 

 

 

2019 WSARE

Proposed WSARE

 

Yr1&2

Yr3

Yr 1

Yr 2

Yr 3

 

Research Plan: Objective 1

Set-up field-sites

X

 

 

 

 

 

Collect stubble height data (pre-Grazing Plan implementation)

X

 

 

 

 

 

Collect sage-grouse habitat data (pre-implementation)

X

 

 

 

 

 

Collect water quality data (pre-implementation)

X

 

 

 

 

 

Analyze data

X

X

 

 

 

 

Write/submit academic manuscript; summarize findings in partners’ report; create factsheet

X

X

 

 

 

 

Research Plan: Objective 2 

Collect stubble height data (post-Grazing Plan implementation)

 

X

X

X

X

 

Collect sage-grouse habitat data (post-implementation)

 

X

X

X

X

 

Collect water quality data (post-implementation)

 

X

X

X

X

 

Analyze data

 

X

X

X

X

 

Write/submit academic manuscript; summarize findings in partners’ report; create factsheet

 

X

 

 

X

 

Apply for supplemental funding

X

X

X

X

X

 

Research Plan: Objective 3

Work with UGIP partners to gain producer economic data

X

X

X

X

X

 

Analyze data

X

X

 

X

X

 

Summarize findings in partners’ report

 

X

 

 

X

 

Research Plan: Objective 4

Combine economic & ecological data

 

X

 

X

X

 

Begin writing manuscript; summarize findings in partners’ report; create factsheet

 

X

 

 

X

 

Education Plan: Objective 5

Pre-implementation survey

X

 

 

 

 

 

Post-implementation survey

 

 

 

X

 

 

Post-implementation interviews

 

 

 

X

X

 

Analyze data

 

X

 

 

X

 

Write academic manuscript; summarize findings in partners’ report

 

X

 

 

X

 

Education Plan: Objective 6

Beginning Ranchers Workshop for new ranchers sponsored by UGIP and WLC

 

 

 

X

 

 

Field tours

X

X

X

X

X

 

CRM & LLC presentations for ranchers & managers

X

X

X

X

X

 

Private meetings with managers & policymakers

X

X

X

X

X

 

Conference talks 

X

X

X

X

X

 

Conference attendance/talks by producers

 

 

 

X

X

 

Website posts of project updates

X

X

X

X

X

 

Weekly Instagram & Facebook posts of field work and project activities

X

X

X

X

X

 

Create outreach materials; fact sheets, scholarly publications

X

X

X

X

X

 

Cooperators

Click linked name(s) to expand/collapse or show everyone's info

Research

Materials and methods:

Objectives: This list includes project objectives from our original WSARE proposal (we edited them slightly to fit new word requirements of this call). Objective 1 was completed with the first round of WSARE funding. Objectives 2-4 require data collected after implementation of the new Grazing Plan. We will have one year of post-implementation data at the end of our awarded 2019 WSARE grant. Additional funding will allow us to continue tracking ecological, economic, and social changes post-implementation, and will allow for a more complete assessment of the effects of changing to short-duration grazing.

  • Objective 1: Determine how grazing-duration affects: (a) stream-side vegetation recovery from grazing, (b) sage-grouse habitat quality, and (c) water quality. Completed with the first round of funding.
  • Objective 2: Quantify improvements to environmental quality (i.e., recovery of vegetation, sage-grouse habitat, water quality) gained through implementation of shorter grazing-durations via the Three Creeks Grazing Allotment Consolidation Plan (Yr1-3).
  • Objective 3: Quantify the economic costs to producers of changing grazing-durations by comparing costs before versus after implementation of the Three Creeks Grazing Allotment Consolidation Plan (Yr1-3).
  • Objective 4: Compare implementation costs incurred versus improvements to environmental quality to determine pros and cons of altering grazing-durations on Rich County public lands (Yr1-3).

Materials & Methods: This project is taking place in Rich County, UT on public lands and a private ranch (Deseret Land and Livestock). The area is sagebrush-steppe, semi-arid cold desert, elevation ~1915 m. Annual precipitation is ~30 cm with most arriving as snow. Temperatures range from an average -9°C in winter to 17.3°C in summer (U.S. Climate Data 2020). In 2016-18 we established sampling sites along perennial streams in areas employing the following durations: 1.5-months, 2-4 weeks, no-grazing. For the no-grazing treatment we used existing exclosures that exclude cattle (but not deer, rabbits, or rodents) from riparian areas. Exclosures are large enough to minimize edge effects. As stated in our initial WSARE grant, we were not able to use the exclosures to provide no-grazed controls for water quality because cattle can access areas upstream and wastes may flow into exclosed areas. We thus examine the effects of grazing-duration on water quality by comparing water quality at 1.5-month and 2-4 week sites. There are at least three replicate sites in independent watersheds per grazing-duration. Sites are grazed with beef cow-calf pairs. Because we are working across a large landscape, we also obtained a non-grazed baseline for vegetation at all sites to ensure similarity. We installed two-1m2 grazing-cages per site and used vegetation in cages to determine if production and cover is similar among sites.

Objective 1 & 2

Research focused on objective 1 was completed during the first round of WSARE funding. We will accomplish objective 2 after implementation of the Grazing Plan, which will entail reducing public-land grazing-duration from 1.5 months to ~2-4 weeks. Data collected in Year 3 of our originally funded WSARE grant, plus that collected if awarded additional Long-Term funding, will be used to accomplish objective 2. We will use these data to compare environmental quality before vs. after the Grazing Plan’s implementation in areas where duration is shortened. We will also examine whether the environmental quality in these areas begins to resemble that found in no-grazed controls and on the private ranch that already employs a short duration rotation. An additional three years of funding will allow us to more accurately detail whether shortened grazing durations achieve ecological management goals because ecological benefits likely accrue over multiple years.

Methods: We will use the same data collection methods for objective 2 as we have used to achieve objective 1. These include:

Forage recovery: We use point-intercept methods (Herrick et al. 2005) to determine the monthly change in: (a) stubble height, and (b) percent bare ground throughout the public grazing season (May-Sept), as cattle move in and out of pastures. We take these measurements along three-75m transects that are located within 1m of streambanks, run parallel to streams, and capture each site’s spatial heterogeneity.

Sage-grouse habitat quality: Steam-side areas are prime habitat for sage-grouse with broods early- to mid-summer (Stiver et al. 2015). Criteria for good habitat include: (a) total grass height/cover, which serve as cover for young sage-grouse, and (b) total perennial forb height/cover with forbs serving as cover, food, and also supporting insects that are food for young grouse (Stiver et al. 2015; Messmer & Dahlgren 2018). We used the 75m transects established to assess forage recovery to also collect grass/perennial forb height, cover, and composition once per month (May–Sept).

Water quality: We measure Escherichia coli (E. coli), pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen levels in streams twice per month, throughout the grazing season (May – Sept). These parameters are regulated by the Utah Department of Water Quality. Streams above regulated limits on public lands are included in the State’s Listing of Impaired Waters (303d) (Utah Department of Environmental Quality 2018). The US Environmental Protection Agency does not regulate water pollution from non-point sources such as livestock grazing, but does recommend thresholds pollutants should remain below (US EPA 2018). By monitoring streams twice per month, we are able to examine how quickly pollutants respond to cattle addition and removal and determine if grazing-duration can be used to maintain water quality. We use a YSI probe® to measure pH, temperature and dissolved oxygen, and the Idexx System to determine E. coli levels in collected water samples.

Through work completed via our 2019 funded WSARE grant, we showed that shortening grazing duration can result in taller riparian corridor stubble height, less bare ground, improvement of some indicators of sage-grouse brood rearing habitat such as perennial grass and forb height, and improvement of some stream water quality characteristics such as E. coli levels and possibly temperature (unpublished; Hulvey et al. 2021). After collecting post-implementation data we will conduct the following analyses, and expect the following results.

Analyses: Forage recovery: We will use separate linear mixed models to determine how stubble height and bare ground vary among grazing-durations pre-vs post-implementation. We will include transect and site as random effects. Fixed effects will be pre-implementation grazing-duration (sample size = 3 sites per duration), and month. Pre-implementation values will be a fixed co-variate. Sage-grouse habitat quality: We will use separate linear mixed models to determine how sage-grouse habitat parameters (grass height, grass cover, perennial forb height, perennial forb cover) vary among grazing-duration treatments pre-vs post-implementation. Random and fixed effects are the same as for forage recovery. Water quality: We will use linear mixed models to determine how each water quality parameter (E. coli, pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen) varies with grazing-duration treatments pre-vs post-implementation. Random and fixed effects are the same as for forage recovery.

Expected results: We expect shortening grazing-duration will improve environmental quality (forage recovery, bare ground, sage-grouse habitat quality, water quality) on public rangelands. This means we expect to find more forage recovery, taller stubble height, and less bare ground in riparian areas over the duration of the grazing season post-implementation of the new Grazing Plan. This change will improve sage-grouse habitat because according to sage-grouse habitat guidelines, taller grass/perennial forbs and more grass/perennial forb cover correlate with better sage-grouse habitat (Stiver et al. 2015; Messmer & Dahlgren 2018). Post-implementation, we expect water quality to meet Utah state requirements. We found water quality violations mainly occurred when cattle were in-pasture, but not once cattle were removed (Hulvey et al. 2021). Thus, we expect shorter grazing-durations to result in fewer water quality violations. Last, we expect these attributes will begin to resemble those within no-grazing exclosures and on private lands already employing 2-4 week rotations. 

Objective 3

Methods: We will accomplish objective 3 by compiling economic information from producers in the Three Creeks Grazing, LLC, plus from partners who provided cost-share funding. We will standardize producer costs (e.g.: moving cattle, building/repairing fencing, managing water sources) per animal unit month (AUM). This allows us to compare producer costs across different sized allotments. Pre-consolidation information has already been collected by Taylor Payne (Extension/Outreach Representative). Post-implementation economic data collected in Year 3 of our originally funded WSARE grant, plus that collected if awarded additional Long-Term funding, will be used to accomplish objective 3. Three years of additional data will support a more complete economic assessment because cost-to-producers will likely be better understood after the new Grazing Plan has been in practice for a longer timeframe. Analysis: We will compare total costs per AUM of all producers before and after LLC formation using paired t-tests. Expected results: We expect producers’ change-in-costs to be variable per producer, but that consolidating management will ultimately allow producers to realize economic benefits due to efficiency gained through streamlined management.

Objective 4

Methods: We will accomplish objective 4 by combining collected economic information (objective 3) with post-implementation ecological data (objective 2). By pairing producers’ implementation costs with changes in environmental quality, we will determine the cost for incremental increases in environmental quality that occur when grazing-duration is changed. Post-implementation ecological and economic data collected in Year 3 of our originally funded WSARE grant, plus that collected if awarded additional Long-Term funding, will be used to accomplish objective 4. Three years of additional data will allow this analysis to more accurately portray the cost-benefit results from this grazing change over time. Analysis: We will use linear regression to determine the relationship between producer costs and improvements in environmental quality. For each target ecological attribute (water-quality, sage-grouse habitat quality, forage recovery), we will regress producer’s cost for implementation (per AUM) against the % gain in environmental quality (e.g., decrease in bare ground, increase in grass height/cover, etc.) on streams in their pastures. Expected Results: We expect the largest improvements in environmental quality will occur to operators who incur the largest cost to transition to the new grazing Plan.

Research results and discussion:

Research Hypotheses

  1. Objective 1: We expect that longer grazing durations will lead to lower levels of all measured ecosystem services in rangelands.
  2. Objective 2:
    • a. Vegetation/forage recovery: We expected that shortening the grazing duration of pastures on Three Creeks from 1.5 months to 2-3 weeks starting in 2022, would result in taller forage height and less bare ground throughout the grazing season in those pastures.
    • b. Sage-grouse habitat: We expected that shortening the grazing duration of pastures on Three Creeks from 1.5 months to 2-3 weeks starting in 2022, would result in increased perennial grass/sedge and forb height during breeding/early brood rearing and during late brood rearing in those pastures. We didn’t expect that shortening the grazing duration of pastures on Three Creeks from 1.5 months to 2-3 weeks starting in 2022, would result in improved perennial grass/sedge cover or perennial forb cover, because these pastures already surpassed the standard of >5% perennial grass/sedge cover and >2% perennial forb cover throughout the season.
    • c. Water quality: We expected that shortening the grazing duration of pastures on Three Creeks from 1.5 months to 2-3 weeks starting in 2022, would improve some metrics of water quality (E. coli, temperature), but might not others (dissolved oxygen, pH).
  3. Objective 3: We expect implementing the new Three Creeks Grazing Allotment Consolidation Plan will lead to reduced costs to producers to operate their grazing operations. 
  4. Objective 4: We expect that we will be able to determine the cost per improvement in environmental quality for our target ecosystem services (vegetation/forage recovery, sage-grouse habitat quality, and water quality), and that this will help ranchers, managers, and supporting agencies weigh their investment in practices that balance multiple ecosystem services across rangelands with the benefits society is receiving from these investments.

Objective 1: Determine how grazing-duration affects: (a) stream-side vegetation recovery from grazing, (b) sage-grouse habitat quality, and (c) water quality.

Completed with the first round of funding.

 

Objective 2: Quantify improvements to environmental quality (i.e., recovery of vegetation, sage-grouse habitat, water quality) gained through implementation of shorter grazing-durations via the Three Creeks Grazing Allotment Consolidation Plan (Yr1-3).

1.Vegetation/forage recovery

Measured as stubble height

We expected that shortening the grazing duration within Three Creeks pastures from 1.5 months to 2-3 weeks would result in taller forage height throughout the grazing season.

We found that stubble height is increasing in these pastures (Fig 1 a-f, green line), but that this did not occur until 2023 (Fig 1 e, two years post-implementation) (P<0.0001; hierarchical, repeated measures GLMM). We do not think this is a legacy effect of historical grazing on plant productivity, but rather, we believe this is due to cattle spending a longer time in pastures during the 2022 season than was allotted via the new grazing plan. Specifically, cattle remained in these pastures for close to a month in this first year of the new grazing system (rather than 2-weeks) due to several factors including: cows and ranchers getting used to the new grazing rotation, the need to stay longer in these pastures due to slow green-up because of a cold spring, and a broken water pump in a pasture into which these cattle were going to move next (thus delaying the cattle move).

During the second and third year post-implementation (2023 & 2024), stubble height in pastures historically grazed for a 1.5 month duration (green line) was not significantly different from that in pastures historically grazed for a short duration (2-3 weeks; blue line). As such, stubble heights in pastures began to become more similar (Fig 1 e,f). We expect that in future years stubble heights in all pastures, including those found in the exclosure (purple line), will continue to become more similar.

Measured as bare ground

We expected that shortening the grazing duration from 1.5 months to 2-3 weeks within Three Creeks pastures would result in less bare ground throughout the grazing season.

We found that bare ground is decreasing in pastures (Fig 2 a-f, green line, P<0.0037; hierarchical, repeated measures GLMM). However, like stubble height, bare ground did not recover immediately after implementation of the new grazing system. In 2022, the first-year post-implementation, bare ground in treatments historically grazed for 1.5 months was similar to previous years (Fig 2 a-d, green line). Again, as with stubble height, we do not think this is a legacy effect of historical grazing on plant productivity, but rather, we believe this is due to cattle spending a longer time in these pastures during the 2022 season than was allotted via the new grazing plan.

During the second and third year post-implementation (2023 & 2024), bare ground in pastures historically grazed for a 1.5 month duration (green line) was not significantly different from that in pastures historically grazed for a short duration (2-3 weeks; blue line). Bare ground began to become more similar across pastures (Fig 2 a-f).  As with stubble height, expect that in future years stubble heights in all pastures, including those found in the exclosure (purple line), will continue to become more similar.

 

2.Sage-grouse habitat quality

Measured as perennial grass/sedge and perennial forb height

The height of grasses and forbs affect habitat quality for the Greater Sage-grouse during the breeding & early brood rearing and late brood rearing periods of their lifecycle (Dahlgren et. al 2018) by offering young sage-grouse cover from predators.

We expected that shortening grazing duration from 1.5 months to 2-3 weeks within Three Creeks pastures would increase both grass height and forb height due to less grazing pressure, and this would thus improve habitat quality for young sage-grouse.

These changes did not occur immediately after implementation of the new grazing system in 2022. For both breeding & early brood rearing (April-June) and late brood rearing (July-Aug) grass and forb height in treatments historically grazed for 1.5 months, were very close to the heights found before 2022 (Fig 3 a-d & Fig 4 a-d, respectively; green lines). Again, we expect that this was due to the longer time cattle spent in pastures than was supposed to be allotted via the new grazing plan (i.e. about a month rather than 2-weeks).

During the second-year post-implementation (2023), breeding & early brood rearing (April-June) and late brood rearing (July-Aug) post-implementation grass and forb height in treatments historically grazed for 1.5 months exceeded heights found before 2022 (Fig 3 a-f & Fig 4 a-f; green lines), meeting height requirements for the entire season. During the third-year post-implementation (2024), heights in the plots previously grazed for 1.5 years did not meet requirements for the entire season, but met requirements for a greater proportion of the season than they had previously.

Measured as perennial grass/sedge cover and as perennial forb cover

The cover of grasses and forbs also affect habitat quality for the Greater Sage-grouse across the entire grazing season (April-Aug; Dahlgren et. al 2018). Both offer young sage-grouse cover from predators. Perennial forbs additionally support insects that supply young grouse with food, so increased cover can provide more habitat for this food source.

We didn’t expect that shortening the grazing duration in Three Creeks pastures would result in improved perennial grass/sedge cover or perennial forb cover, because these pastures already surpassed the standard of >5% perennial grass/sedge cover and >2% perennial forb cover throughout the season.

As expected, we didn’t find habitat improvements due to increases in cover. Rather, both perennial grass/sedge and perennial forb height in the pastures formerly grazed with 1.5 month durations (Fig 5 & Fig 6, respectively; green bars) remained above the cover thresholds.

 

3.Water quality

Implementation of the new Three Creeks Grazing practices that include shorter duration have led to significant improvements in water quality when measured as E. coli concentration. Implementation did not lead to significant improvements of water temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO), or pH, because streams mostly met state standards before implementation.

E. coli: Implementation of the new time-controlled grazing practices resulted in slight improvements in compliance with Utah state’s E. coli standards for rangelands in 2022, and significant improvements in 2023 and 2024 (Table 1).

In 2022, we expected larger improvements from shortening grazing durations, however, we believe our results are due to cattle grazing in pastures for longer than the 2-weeks allotted within the new grazing plan in that year. This longer grazing duration was due to several factors including: cows and ranchers getting used to the new grazing rotation, the need to stay longer in these pastures due to slow green-up because of a cold spring, and a broken water pump in a pasture into which these cattle were going to move next (thus delaying the cattle move). Once these glitches were fixed in 2023, we found the expected improvements in water quality. In 2023, all streams but one met UT standards for E. coli. In 2024, all streams that were historically grazed for 1.5 months met UT standards for E. coli.

Measured as temperature

Most ‘fish-streams’ met state water temperature standards for fish development (<20ºC) before the implementation of the new grazing system (Table 2). In the first year after implementation (2022), two streams did not meet standards. This was a drought year and both streams had less flow than normal, which may have contributed to this result. In 2023 and 2024 all streams met state criteria for water temperature.

Measured as dissolved oxygen (DO)

e do not have strong evidence that implementation of the new time-controlled grazing practices in 2022 affects DO in streams. This was because all streams maintained DO levels above 8.0 mg/L early in the season (May) and DO levels above 4.0 mg/L (June-October), both before and after the implementation of the new grazing plan.

Measured as pH

We do not have strong evidence that implementation of the new time-controlled grazing practices in 2022 affected pH in streams. All streams maintained pH levels within Utah’s allowed limits (i.e., pH = 6.5-9), and there was little difference in pH levels among grazing durations.

 

Objective 3: Quantify the economic costs to producers of changing grazing-durations by comparing costs before versus after implementation of the Three Creeks Grazing Allotment Consolidation Plan (Yr1-3).

We examined how costs for LLC members changed from before implementation (2019-21) to after (2022-24). We averaged pre- and post-grazing implementation LLC expenses, which were separate from grant funding obtained to alter the Three Creeks grazing system. We found LLC expenses increased from $178,794 (2019-2021) to $237,161 (2022-2024), or 33%. This increase was due mainly to: pipeline upkeep (760% increase), fuel to run water pumps (900%), fencing upkeep (33%), and pay for riders to move cattle (14%). The improvement to ecosystem services, however, has been greater than the increase in costs: 50% water quality (E. coli); 400% forage production; 40% erosion control; and 56% sage grouse habitat (see results for Obj #4).

Total funds were contributed by many groups:

  • producers in the LLC (10% of funds),
  • UGIP (a state agency - 37%),
  • UT Dept of Water Quality (a state agency- 20%),
  • Watershed Restoration Initiative (UT state program that pools federal & state funds – 15%),
  • NRCS (federal – 11%),
  • US Fish & Wildlife Service & BLM (federal - 2% each),
  • Other (<3%).

One significant lesson is that most of the project’s initial funding was from state funding sources (>57%), followed Federal sources (15%) or mixed state and federal sources (15%). The ranchers involved in the project also contributed a significant portion of the initial project funding (10%). This highlights a strong role for state institutions in leading innovative change on federally owned landscapes. Project partners attribute the profound role of state partners to reduced red tape faced by these partners, and the strong relationships these state partners have built with all involved in the project. The strong relationships were critical for keeping ranchers united and moving forward with planning, and, at times, for pushing federal partners to overcome stalemate due to fear of litigation.

 

Objective 4: Compare implementation costs incurred versus improvements to environmental quality to determine pros and cons of altering grazing-durations on Rich County public lands (Yr1-3).

Last year, we had proposed that during this grant period, we would determine the grant funding spent on infrastructure across historical Three Creek allotments. By assigning these costs per historical allotment, we wanted to calculate the cost per AUM by historical grazing system to create the new grazing system. We hoped this would provide an idea of if costs differed based on historical grazing system, and if so, how.

We were not able to achieve this goal because we found that the funding for the new infrastructure was profoundly interconnected across allotments. As such, it was impossible to determine which proportion of grant funding, and infrastructure cost should be attributed to any single allotment or past grazing system. Instead of our hoped for analysis, we instead determined how expensive the overall grazing switch was to implement/acre and examined this cost per % increase in different ecosystem services of interest for the entire project.

We summed funds from all grants received by the Three Creeks LLC and collaborative partners for implementation of the new grazing system through 2022 ($4,994,594), then divided the total by project acreage (136,000 ac). Project cost was: $36.72/acre.

Water quality: Before implementation (2019-21), an average 24% of streams were in compliance with UT E.coli standards each year. After implementation (2023-24) 79% complied. Thus, every $1M or $7.34/ac spent increased E. coli water quality by 10%. We have not found other indicators of water quality have improved yet (dissolved oxygen, temperature). We expect these could take longer to recover due to linkages with vegetation recovery, which we believe will take more than the few years we’ve monitored thus far.

Forage-recovery: Before implementation, end of season (Sept) forage was <5 cm along streams across the project site. After implementation forage increased to >25cm, i.e. by 400%. Thus, every $1M ($7.34/ac) spent increased forage recovery by about 80%. 

Erosion control: Before implementation, end of season (Sept) bare ground cover was ~11% along streams. After implementation it decreased to ~7%, i.e. by 40%. Thus, every $1M ($7.34/ac) spent increased erosion control by about 8%. 

Sage Grouse habitat quality (using Dahlgren et al 2019 standards): Before implementation, late season (July-Sept) habitat was adequate about 33% of the time. After implementation, habitat was adequate about 89% of the time, an increase of 56%. Thus every $1M ($7.34/ac) spent increased habitat quality by ~11%. 

Participation Summary
38 Producers participating in research

Research Outcomes

Recommendations for sustainable agricultural production and future research:

How can the study results be applied to the sustainable agricultural production in the western U.S.?

The rangelands in this study can serve as model systems for other rangelands throughout the western U.S. given the unique and strong experimental design, and the robust sampling of multiple ecosystem services. For example, many studies addressing how cattle grazing affects multiple rangeland ecosystem services only compare grazing systems in general terms and rarely tease apart the nuances of a rest-rotation grazing system, such as the duration of grazing. Also, many studies of cattle grazing effects on rangeland ecosystem services focus on single services, rather than the suite of services that are valued on US public lands. The monitoring conducted by Federal agencies can be additionally constrained by monitoring protocols that were not designed to answer specific questions about the impacts of grazing management on these ecosystem services (due potentially to too few sampling sites, or monitoring design), or by agency employed practitioners who do not have the time (due to the large amount of additional duties) to monitor with the rigor needed to answer questions presented in this study.

The experimental design and sampling approach in this study led to the following key research finding: Shorter grazing durations can be used as a tool to improve multiple riparian ecosystem services across US Western rangelands. This implies that degraded rangelands of the western U.S. have the capacity to experience restorative health and increased levels of many riparian ecosystem services with time following the implementation of a short-duration grazing system. We are additionally finding that the time needed to see improvement in some valued ecosystem services is relatively short – just 2-3 years. This is a very exciting result, and is particularly noteworthy given that in our study, the historical grazing systems that caused initial degradation have been in place for about 100 years.

We are also beginning to learn more about the financing needed to undertake an extensive project like the Three Creeks Project. In our initial analysis of input costs, we are learning that the implementation of this new grazing system across 138,000 acres of private-public rangelands cost approximately $5 million. This is just over $36/acre to see increases in some aspects of water quality (enough to reach state benchmarks for E. coli levels), sage grouse habitat (enough to surpass published thresholds for habitat quality during vulnerable stages of the sage-grouse life cycle), and to see increases in vegetation and reductions in bare ground along streams. Ongoing analysis of this information on costs to implement the Three Creeks Project will provide support for cost-share programs that have provided some of the funding for this project, and may highlight the types of activities such programs could invest additional program funds into to better support these projects (water infrastructure, fencing).

How has this study affected, or how will this study affect, agricultural sustainability?

The results from of this study have informed the Three Creeks LLC, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) about how the new grazing system they have implemented is affecting landscape health attributes monitored by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). This is important because the initial impetus for the switch in grazing systems was due to poor landscape health assessments that led to a threat of grazing permits being revoked. Our findings are now highlighting the success of this project, and providing data that can protect the LLC and the BLM from litigation. Improved environmental conditions that allow ranchers to continue grazing on public lands support their families’ economic security and their communities’ agricultural viability – both in turn contribute to agricultural sustainability in the US West.

Our results also highlight that funds invested to implement this new grazing system have led to improvements of environmental quality on public lands. This justifies this investment, and highlights to other managers, and the public, how similar investments on other public lands could lead to similar beneficial outcomes.

What recommendations can be made from this study for future studies?

We would recommend that future studies that hope to inform real management of large western rangelands include gradients of management across real (large) rangeland ecosystems to determine how slight changes in those practices affect ecosystem processes. Studies that try to simply evaluate whether ‘rotational grazing’ systems can improve rangeland conditions may be confounding the grazing treatments by mixing different grazing practices that each effect ecosystem processes differently. When these different grazing practices are grouped into a single category of ‘rotational grazing,’ the variance in results may lead to the false conclusion that rotational grazing does not have environmental benefits for rangelands.

9 Grants received that built upon this project
12 New working collaborations

Education and Outreach

100 Consultations
10 Curricula, factsheets or educational tools
1 On-farm demonstrations
1 Published press articles, newsletters
6 Tours
20 Webinars / talks / presentations
6 Workshop field days
9 Other educational activities: 1) Had an informational booth at the Annual SRM meeting in Boise (Feb 2023, 2024);
2) Participated in Stanford's Bill Lane Center for the West annual Meeting (April 1, 2023);
3) Blogs written about the Three Creeks Grazing Project and related educational activities posted to the WLC website (April 2023 - March 2025);
4) Social media posts on Facebook, Instagram, X (formerly Twitter), and Blue Sky about the Three Creeks Grazing Project and related educational activities (April 2023 - March 2025);
5) Hiring, training, and mentoring 3 undergraduate, or recently graduated, students to work as a crew for the 2024 field season (May - September 2023 & 2024);
6) 2 hands-on field day of ecological research occuring at the Three Creeks research site for Rich County High School (May 2023 & 2024);
7) A podcast hosted by Decode6 to discuss how innovative grazing management can improve soil health sequester SOC (July 2023);
8) Developing a set of pamphlets promoting the Three Creeks Grazing Project to be distributed at various forums (September 2023 - March 2024).
9) 7 Three Creeks Ranchers attended the National Grazing Lands Conference (Dec 2024), and 4 presented in a session about Three Creeks

Participation Summary:

351 Farmers participated
1,120 Ag professionals participated
Education and outreach methods and analyses:

Objectives: When our original WSARE was submitted, Educational Plan objectives were not separated from Research Plan objectives. As such, we have slightly altered the second Educational Objective from our 2019 WSARE proposal by clearly identifying the distinct audiences we engage with through this project.

Objective 5: Evaluate the value to local producers of altering grazing management through a repeated pre- vs. post-implementation survey and a post-implementation interview. These will gauge producer-perceived costs of changing management (e.g., monetary, time) and benefits of doing so (e.g., improved environmental quality, reduced litigation risk) 

Objective 6: Share project results (a) locally, via activities with producers and local managers, (b) regionally, by engaging with management agencies and beginning ranchers, and (c) nationally, by sharing project information with stakeholders and the interested public (Yrs1-3).

Materials & Methods: Our education and outreach plans activities ranging from participatory and peer-to-peer learning, to data sharing via multiple social media platforms.

Objective 5

We are accomplishing objective 5 by conducting pre-and post-implementation surveys of producers involved in the Three Creeks Grazing Project, plus a post-implementation interview. Dr. Hulvey has experience conducting such social enquiry (Redford et al. 2018; York et al. 2019). The surveys and interview will allow us to learn producer perceptions of the costs and benefits of the Grazing Plan’s implementation. By participating in and gaining results from pre- and post-implementation surveys, producers can see how their opinions of the project evolve over the project’s lifetime. This kind of meta-knowledge can help producers synthesize improvements to environmental quality and changes to their economic security. Interviews will serve a similar purpose, and will allow producers to discuss reservations, frustrations, and ideas about grazing practices. Synthesizing such views will ensure there is a shared knowledge among partners and producers. This information can also help others planning similar projects gain an understanding of key factors leading to project success.

We have completed the pre-implementation survey, and learned that most ranchers want both economic and ecological benefits from implementation of the new Grazing Plan. We are proposing to conduct the post- implementation survey and interview between Yr2&3 of this granting period if Long-Term funding is obtained, rather than during the last year of our original 2019 WSARE. Ranchers have been willing to participate in our initial survey (survey response rate = 65%), but other multi-stakeholder partnerships have found that an overabundance of surveys/meetings can lead to waning participation (Network for Landscape Conservation 2018). We believe the most useful time for the post-implementation survey and interview will be after the new grazing system has been operational for more than one season (i.e., during a second WSARE funding cycle).

We will use the same survey tool for our second survey as we used for the first. Surveys include a mix of multiple- choice and short answer questions. They ask about producer motivation for participating in the Three Creeks Grazing Project, perceived barriers to participation, and expected outcomes for their operations and the environment.

Interviews will include open-ended questions that expand on themes discovered in surveys. Because we are using the same survey and interview instruments as were included with our 2019 WSARE, we have already obtained IRB approval. See attachments for copies of surveys and interview instruments, and IRB approval.

Analysis: Survey responses will be statistically analyzed for trends (e.g. Wilcoxon signed-rank test with Pratt modification) and also qualitatively described. Expected Results: We expect producers’ perceived benefit of altering grazing will outweigh any increased management cost. We expect that producers’ views will be influenced by results of our economic and ecological study. If our study indicates producers are spending less and that environmental conditions are improving after implementation, we expect producers to feel more positive about the Grazing Plan’s implementation than they did before knowing outcomes. We expect producers will take ownership for ecological improvements and express a sense of stewardship of their public lands.

Objective 6

We are accomplishing objective 6 via activities designed for local, regional, and national stakeholders.

Locally, our team focuses on participatory learning (as outlined in objective 5), field tours, and local presentations. In this small rural community, building relationships is needed for producers to trust the findings of this study. These relationships also allow the project team to understand community values, which leads to research that can adapt to local needs.

In the first years of 2019 WSARE funding we: presented study results at two CRM meetings (~30 attendees/meeting), six Three Creeks Grazing LLC meetings (~40 attendees/meeting), and four field tours (~90 people); mentored graduate students (1 MS, 1 PhD) on research across our study area; hired/trained/mentored 14 local college and early career natural resource students as part of our crew; hosted a field-based workshop for Rich County high school science students (~50 students); and worked with a Rich County student intern. These activities have built trust as evidenced by our project team being invited to producer LLC meetings, producers stopping to chat with our crew when they see us in the field, and a 65% return rate on our first round of producer surveys.

We plan to do the following:

Field Tours – We believe one of the best ways to share results is by taking people out on the range. During field tours we will demonstrate/explain our monitoring techniques to ensure participants understand how we generate data. We will discuss any initial improvements seen in environmental quality, and encourage a discussion of the barriers producers face when implementing new grazing management. We will participate in at least 1 Annual CRM field tour/yr; ~10-20 people

Rich County CRM and Three Creeks Grazing LLC meetings – We will continue to share results via presentations at semi-annual meetings of local stakeholder groups. The CRM group is attended by local producers plus interested stakeholders (BLM, UGIP, Forest Service, Ducks Unlimited, academic researchers). Three Creeks Grazing LLC meetings are attended by all producers involved in the Three Creeks Grazing Project, and are where grazing rotations are decided, management issues are discussed, and information is shared among producers. For the last two years we have been invited to LLC meetings to informally share information about our research, meet producers, build relationships, and field concerns. This forum will continue to be a key venue to share information with the community. We will attend at least 4 meetings/yr; ~30-40 people per meeting.

Regionally, our team focuses on educating young ranchers across Utah, building partnerships with other multi- stakeholder rangeland management groups, and reporting results to agency partners. Dr. Hulvey and Mr. Payne worked extensively to build relationships with partners participating in the Three Creeks Grazing Project and policymakers interested in the work. For example, in the first years of 2019 WSARE awarded funding, we presented at the ROGER meeting in Nevada (~30 ranchers, agency managers); met with Western Landowner Alliance staff about ongoing work, shared project information over their social platforms, and developed new projects based on ideas being tested in this WSARE project (10 meetings); engaged with agency land managers such as the BLM (14 meetings, 1 field tour), Utah Geological Service (1 meeting, 2 field tours), NRCS (25 meetings, 4 field tours), UGIP (20 meetings, 1 field tour), Utah Division of Water Quality (1 meeting), with Utah State University professors (2 meetings, 2 field tours), and Deseret Land and Livestock (6 meetings). We additionally wrote short annual reports for these partners. These outreach activities led to development of additional joint projects focused on how cattle grazing can be managed to improve rangeland conditions (1 soil health project at our site, 1 project in New Mexico).

We will continue to accomplish objective 6 through regional activities like those included in our 2019 awarded WSARE, but also a Beginning Rancher Rangeland Workshop, similar to past workshops hosted by UGIP:

Beginning Rancher Rangeland Workshop – The Beginning Rancher Workshop will be a co-hosted event by UGIP and WLC that introduces young ranchers to new concepts and management ideas that are critical to rangeland sustainability and operation profitability. UGIP successfully hosted a series of four such workshops across Utah in 2013 (see attached example Agenda). We are proposing to conduct one workshop in Rich County at Deseret Land & Livestock (DLL). UGIP and WLC will run sessions on grazing principles and innovative management like short duration grazing, whole-landscape pasture rotation, and riparian health. Our location on DLL is near our Rich County study sites, and will allow us to combine classroom sessions with field tours where the long-term effects of different grazing practices can be evidenced. We will hold one workshop for about 25 young ranchers during Yrs 2-3.

Field Tours – We will continue to give field tours to regional managers interested in the Three Creeks Grazing Project and our ongoing WSARE work (e.g., BLM, NRCS, USFS, UDAF, producers from other states, and Utah State University researchers). We will host at least 4 field tours/yr; ~2-10 ppl per tour.

Personal meetings with partners and policymakers –Dr. Hulvey and Mr. Payne will continue building relationships with stakeholders and policymakers by personally sharing project updates and research results to groups such the BLM, USFS, NRCS, UDAF, producers, and researchers. These meetings will allow Dr. Hulvey to share research results of interest to individual partners and allow partners to ask detailed questions focused on their management needs. The meetings will allow Mr. Payne to share implementation progress, highlight barriers faced and solutions found. We estimate at least 30 meetings/yr.

Direct written reports and small presentations to collaborators: Because not all agency managers or producers have access to scientific journals, results from objectives 1-5 will also be shared in written reports to collaborators in the Three Creeks Grazing Project. Reports and presentations will limit scientific jargon and make results directly applicable to producers and managers. We will write individualized reports for each partner organization detailing research findings annually.

Nationally, we focus on sharing information with other rangeland scientists and partners who can inform rangeland policy. For example, during the first years of the 2019 WSARE granting period, WLC organized and hosted a session at the 2020 Society for Range Management Annual Meeting (SRM) focused on collaborative partnerships in rangelands and highlighted the Three Creeks Grazing Project. We also presented at the 2021 SRM meeting, in a podcast hosted by the Western Landowners Alliance (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1EGO_tEpy8), in a seminar series at University of Arizona (~50 attendees), and at the SW Society for Ecological Restoration (~50 attendees). We published one of three expected papers from initial WSARE funding in peer-reviewed scientific literature.

We will continue to accomplish objective 6 through:

National conferences – Dr. Hulvey and Mr. Payne will attend the Annual SRM meeting to present results in session talks and in discussions with peers. This conference is a central place for information exchange in the rangeland management community.

In addition, the trust developed between the project team and local producers has opened new opportunities for national outreach during a second WSARE funding period. For example, producers are increasingly willing to discuss their experiences participating in the new grazing management project on Three Creeks with other ranchers during producer-led meetings such as the National Grazing Lands Coalition Meetings and the National Cattleman’s Meeting. Having producers share the story of changed management at Three Creeks with other ranchers is a powerful form of peer-to-peer learning. We plan for at least two team members to attend/present at the SRM conference each year, and for two producer-team members to attend a rancher-led meeting in Yr2&3.

Social Media & Websites – We will continue to share project updates on WLC’s website (workinglandsconservation.org; over 8.1K pageviews since start of the 2019 WSARE project), Instagram (90 posts; 219 followers), and facebook (81 posts; 155 followers). We will post on Instagram & Facebook weekly. We also will write monthly research updates and blogs for our website.

Refereed scientific journal publications: We will publish three scientific journal publications based on objectives 2, 4 and 5, plus an article describing the overall outcomes of the Three Creeks Grazing Project. Results will be targeted to Rangeland Ecology and Management, Environment and Society, and Rangelands.

Extension factsheets and partner newsletters: Results from objectives 1-5 will be presented in three factsheets published through the Utah State University Extension and at least two articles in newsletters of other rangeland stewardship groups. For example, we have been invited by the Western Landowners Alliance to write updates on our findings for their journal ‘On Land.’ These materials will share results with managers and producers, and who may not

Education and outreach results:

Objective 5: Evaluate the value to local producers of altering grazing management through a repeated pre- vs. post-implementation survey and a post-implementation interview. These will gauge producer-perceived costs of changing management (e.g., monetary, time) and benefits of doing so (e.g., improved environmental quality, reduced litigation risk) 

We had planned to begin post-implementation surveys in February, however due to stop work orders from MSU, we paused this work. Now that the stop work order has been lifted, we have met with Taylor Payne to discuss initiating the survey. April-May are very busy months for the ranchers due to calving, and cattle turnout at the start of the season. As such, we will begin to distribute and collect surveys in June. As we distribute the surveys, we will set dates for follow-up interviews.

 

Objective 6: Share project results (a) locally, via activities with producers and local managers, (b) regionally, by engaging with management agencies and beginning ranchers, and (c) nationally, by sharing project information with stakeholders and the interested public (Yrs1-3).

Locally

We engaged with the local community of producers in Rich County, UT in several ways, and shared materials that communicated the importance of innovative grazing management to improve rangeland health through a number of forums. These included:

Period 1:

  • Presented Three Creeks study results at two Coordinated Resource Management (CRM) meetings (~12-30 attendees/meeting). Jan, 2023, March 2023.
  • Presented Three Creeks study results at two Three Creeks Grazing LLC meetings (~40 attendees/meeting). Nov 2022, March 2023.
  • Presented Three Creeks study results on one Three Creeks field tour.
  • Hired & mentored 4 local college and early career natural resource students as part of our crew.

Period 2:

  • Hired & mentored 4 college and early career natural resource students as part of our crew.
  • A hands-on demonstration of the effects of grazing on soil health with students at Rich County High School. May 2023.
  • Discussion / Consultation of land management practices and their effects on rangeland health at the Rich County CRM Field Tour. July 2023.
  • Co-hosted with UGIP a Young Rancher Workshop that took place over a long weekend on the Tavaputs Ranch in central Utah to help young ranchers to manage their operation sustainability for their way of life and the next generation. Attended by 20 ranchers and 10 Utah rangeland managers. July 2023.
  • Invited presentation of Three Creeks study results at a meeting discussing future restoration work across Three Creeks by the BLM. Attendees included upper management of the Salt Lake City field office, the Three Creeks LLC board, BLMs IRA project manager, UGIP partners. February 2024.

These reports, presentations, and discussions led the local community of producers to invite us to participate in the following:

  • Discussion / Consultation about job opportunities in the fields of rangeland science and management at the Rich County High School Job Fair. February 2024.

Period 3:

  • Hired & mentored 3 college students as part of our summer crew. 2024.
  • Presented Three Creeks study results at Coordinated Resource Management (CRM) meeting (~30 attendees/meeting). April 2024.
  • Distributed Annual Report summing research results for BLM managers and Three Creeks LLC board. April 2024.
  • A hands-on field day where Rich County High School students interact with WLC scientists, and invited managers from the BLM, Utah Geologic Survey, Fish and Wildlife, UGIP, to learn about field monitoring and job opportunities in science and management. May 2024.
  • Invited presentation during a Rich Coordinated Resource Management Group field tour on Three Creeks. June 2024; 50 attendees.
  • Co-hosted with UGIP a 3-day Young Rancher Workshop in UT with the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food focused on how management can support the three legs of the sustainability stool = economics, environment and community. Attended by 0 ranchers and 10 Utah rangeland managers. Aug 2024.

 

Regionally

We continued to build upon our partnerships with GIP, BLM, NRCS, and regional nonprofits through meetings and by sharing materials that communicates the importance of innovative grazing management to improve soil health. Such personalized interactions promote the adoption of new grazing practices and technologies. These activities included:

Period 1:

  • Shared research information with Western Landowner Alliance over their social platforms.
  • Two meetings with BLM.
  • One meeting with Utah Geological Service.
  • Three meetings with NRCS.
  • >20 meetings with UGIP.
  • Planned with UGIP a Young Rancher Workshop that will take place this summer.
  • Wrote short annual reports for all above partners.
  • Developed 5 newly awarded grants focused on how cattle grazing can be managed to improve rangeland conditions.

Period 2:

  • Multiple meetings / consultations with the staff and Director of UDAF's GIP.
  • > 7 meetings / consultations with staff from the BLM UT State Office and District Office.
  • Multiple meetings / consultations with staff from the UT Geologic Survey to synergize on the research taking place on the Three Creeks Grazing Project.
  • A Three Creeks Grazing Project field tour with staff of the BLM UT Salt Lake City office. June 2023.
  • Presented Three Creeks study results during a field tour with staff from the EPA and UT Agencies. 15 participants. July 2023.
  • A Three Creeks Grazing Project field tour with members of the Rich CRM. July 2023.
  • A Three Creeks Grazing Project presentation about multiple ecosystem services at the UT Section Meeting of the Society for Range Management. November 2023.
  • A booth at the UT Section Meeting of the Society for Range Management to discuss / consult about the Three Creeks Grazing Project. November 2023.
  • Four meetings / consultations with the UT SRM Board (as a member). November 2023, January, March, April 2024.
  • Invited to workshop re: riparian monitoring tool by BLM; shared need for collaboration with local ranchers. February 2024.

Period 3:

  • > 10 meetings / consultations with staff from the BLM UT State Office and District Office.
  • > 20 meetings / consultations with Utah Grazing Improvement Program (Utah Dept of Ag and Food) Manager & NIFA collaborator Taylor Payne to discuss project logistics, potential future developments, applying for further project support, initial research results.
  • New collaboration formed when PI approached by Fish & Wildlife Partners Program Director in Utah about the program providing funding for collaboration. March 2024.
  • Multiple meetings / consultations with staff from the UT Geologic Survey to synergize on the research taking place on the Three Creeks Grazing Project.
  • Invited presentation to the Salt Lake City BLM Field Office on the research being conducted on Three Creeks. June 2024; 30 attendees.
  • Invited presentation during a Three Creeks Grazing Project field tourwith staff of the BLM UT Salt Lake City office. Sept 2024; 50 attendees.

 

Nationally

We engaged in several activities with stakeholders of all kinds throughout the western U.S. to communicate the importance of innovative grazing management to improve multiple ecosystem services, and promote the adoption of new grazing practices. Some of these planned activities led to unplanned but beneficial activities that fed back into the local community of producers, and included:

Period 1:

  • Invited presentation about Three Creeks study results at the Fall Forum in Pocatello ID (Boise State). 60 attendees. Oct 2022.
  • Presented Three Creeks study results during the ACES conference in DC. 35 attendees. Dec 2022.
  • Organized and hosted a session at the 2023 Society for Range Management Annual Meeting (SRM). 150 attendees. Feb 2023.
  • Hosted an informational booth at the Annual SRM meeting in Boise. Feb 2023.
  • Invited presentation about Three Creeks study results at the monthly stakeholder meeting BCarbon. 150 attendees. March 2023.
  • Participated in Stanford's Bill Lane Center for the West Annual Meeting & presented information on the Three Creeks Project. 40 attendees. March 2023.
  • We are continuing to share project updates on WLC’s social media accounts. Activity since October 1, 2022
    • Facebook – no stats available
    • Instagram – no stats available
    • Website – visits – 1.5K; unique visitors – 1.2K; pageviews – 3K

Period 2:

  • Multiple educational tools about innovative cattle grazing, rangeland health, and multiple ecosystem services posted to the WLC website.
  • A Three Creeks Grazing Project field tourwith a staff member of WLC's host organization, Multiplier. August 2023.
  • A discussion / consultationof the Three Creeks Grazing Project at a Rangeland Ecosystem Service and Policy workshopin southern CO hosted by the Woodwell Foundation. 50 attendees. September 2023.
  • A Three Creeks Grazing Project reportand field tourwith the Board Members of WLA. 25 attendees. September 2023.
  • A Three Creeks Grazing Project presentationabout multiple ecosystem services at the Annual WSARE PI meeting. December 2023.
  • A co-organized workshopwith WLA entitled, "Co-laboring in the West: Stewardship Economies and Rangeland Conservation" at the Society for Range Management Annual Meeting. >60 attendees. January 2024.
  • An invited presentation entitled, "The Three Creeks Grazing Consolidation Project: A story of livestock grazing and stewardship in Northern Utah" that featured by Collaborator Taylor Payne (UGIP) and Three Creeks LLC President and rancher at the Society for Range Management Annual Meeting. >60 attendees. January 2024.
  • A booth at the Society for Range Management Annual Meeting to discuss / consultabout the Three Creeks Grazing Project. January 2024.
  • Three meetings / consultationswith the Nature Conservancy about further investment in Three Creeks Grazing Project. January & February 2024.
  • Meeting / consultationwith TNC about how the Three Creeks Grazing Project could inform a rancher-TNC partnership in Escalante CO. January 2024.
  • Two meetings / consultationswith Soil Health Advisory Committee scoping group (USDA) about water quality standards used across the Three Creeks Grazing Project. January 2024.
  • Invited Meeting / consultation at a 2-day workshop hosted by The Meridian Group and Walton Foundation regarding most important issues currently facing rangeland managers in the US. January 2024.
  • Invited presentation about Three Creeks study results at the California Rangeland Conservation Coalition Annual Meeting. 150 attendees. February 2023.
  • Three meetings / consultationswith WLA about the production of a documentary featuring the Three Creeks Grazing Project. Feb - March 2024.
  • We are continuing to share project updates on WLC’s social media accounts. Activity since April 15, 2023
    • Facebook -- #posts - 26; #views – unavailable; reach 6.1K (up 306.9% from last year); content interactions – 64 (up 100%); visits – 232 (up 100%); follows – 19 (down 34.5%)
    • Instagram -- #posts – 53; # stories – 48; #views – no data available; Reach 3.9K (up 65.7% from last year); content interactions – no data available; visits – 688 (up 100%); follows – no data available
    • Website – visits – 3.4K (up 46%); unique visitors – 2.5K (up 29%); pageviews – 7.2K (up 52%)

Period 3:

  • Multiple educational toolsabout innovative cattle grazing, rangeland health, and multiple ecosystem services posted to the WLC website.
  • First film shootwith WLA for the production of a documentary featuring the Three Creeks Grazing Project. Sept 2024.
  • 2 Invited in-person presentations with Taylor Payne about Three Creeks study results in Chama and Taos NM by local ranching collaboratives. Nov 2024; 100 attendees.
  • A co-organized workshop& invited presentation at the National Grazing Lands Conference about the Three Creeks Project presented by 4 Three Creeks ranchers. 50 attendees. Dec 2024.
  • A co-organized workshop& invited presentation with NatGLC entitled, "Co-laboring in the West:" at the Society for Range Management Annual Meeting. >60 attendees. Feb 2025.
  • A booth at the Society for Range Management Annual Meeting to discuss / consultabout the Three Creeks Grazing Project. Feb 2025.
  • Invited in-person presentations about Three Creeks study in Dillon MT at a rancher collaborative focused on innovative grazing. March 2025; 150 attendees.
  • We are continuing to share project updates on WLC’s social media accounts. Activity since April 15, 2024
    • Facebook -- #posts – 31; #reels -- 9; #views - 2.3K, Reach 15.6K (up 21.8% from last year); content interactions – 116 (up 81.3%); visits – 475 (up 97.1%); #new follows – 26 (up 36.8%); #total followers 243
    • Instagram -- #posts – 62; # stories – 27; #views – 19.8K; Reach 11.4K (up 178.6% from last year); content interactions – 1.4K (up 100%); visits – 861 (up 25.1%); follows – 171
    • Website – visits – 3.7K (up 12%); unique visitors – 2.9K (up 20%); pageviews – 7.3K (up 3%)
6 Farmers intend/plan to change their practice(s)

Education and Outreach Outcomes

Recommendations for education and outreach:

Ways to effectively disseminate agricultural research results

We have found the most effective way to disseminate research results to be building relationship with ranchers and managers working on this project through one-on-one discussion, small group presentations of findings, and in the field demonstrations of results. Such activities enable a back-and-forth discussion that explores ideas, addresses questions, and builds trust in each other and the results of this research.

While we feel that these are the most effective methods, we have found that employing a wide variety of methods including: field tours, meetings & discussions, consultations, reports, webinars, and presentations at meetings and conferences all have led to interest from stakeholders. We gauge this interest via the number of side conversations we have after presentations, the number of invites we receive to meet with additional stakeholders and present at other conferences/meetings.

Describe and assess how project has affected stakeholders’ understanding of agricultural sustainability

For those ranchers, federal and state land managers directly involved in the Three Creeks Project, we have found that this research has been highly regarded and critical as a proof of concept for this grazing system. Our results have also been met with excitement from BLM top managers in UT, with Utah Grazing Improvement Program Directors and Specialists, and importantly by the ranchers themselves. I have had several conversations with ranchers who believe that improving rangeland health is necessary in order to both support their operations into the future, and to allow them to be the rangelands stewards they believe that should be. Our results are giving these ranchers the information they need to achieve these goals. Our study, both via the results we’ve already achieved and the relationships we have built with ranchers and agency partners, has opened doors to additional opportunities to learn about how grazing management affects the sustainability of Western rangelands, for example, by directly leading to a second study of the role of grazing management on soil health and soil carbon sequestration in these rangelands.

Our study and effectively disseminating the results of this study also support the public’s understanding of how we can manage public rangelands in the following ways: 1) It increases the public's collective understanding of how innovative cattle grazing can be used as a tool to improve multiple ecosystem services in US western rangelands, 2) It advocates for the important role that rangelands of the western U.S. can serve in providing open areas to produce these valued ecosystem services; and 3) It uses the Three Creeks Grazing Project as a model system to promote the adoption innovative cattle grazing in other western U.S. rangelands.

50 Producers reported gaining knowledge, attitude, skills and/or awareness as a result of the project
Non-producer stakeholders reported changes in knowledge, attitudes, skills and/or awareness as a result of project outreach
11 Students
10 Ag Service Providers
Key areas taught:
  • role of grazing duration on water quality
  • role of grazing duration on bank stability/erosion
  • role of grazing duration on stream-side forage recovery
  • role of grazing duraiton on economic viability
Key changes:

  • role of grazing duration on water quality

  • role of grazing duration on economic viability

Return to Project Overview
Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and should not be construed to represent any official USDA or U.S. Government determination or policy.