Progress report for SW22-942

SW22-942 (project overview)

Project Type: Research and Education

Funds awarded in 2022: $328,329.00

Projected End Date: 09/30/2025

Host Institution Award ID: G149-23-W9981

Grant Recipient: Working Lands Conservation

Region: Western

State: Utah

Principal Investigator:

Dr. Kris Hulvey

Working Lands Conservation

Co-Investigators:

Taylor Payne

Utah Department of Agriculture's Grazing Improvement Program

Expand All Collapse 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

Bart Argyle - Producer
pattiwa32@gmail.com
Argyle Ranch Inc. (Other)
PO Box 270
Randolph, UT 84064
Junior Goring - Producer
wmhgoring@gmail.com
other (Other)
9940 North Hwy 38
Deweyville, UT 84309
(435) 452-1152 (office)
Dale Lamborn - Producer
dlamborn@richschool.org
other (Other)
PO Box 46
Laketown, UT 84086

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

Objective 1: We expect that longer grazing durations will lead to lower levels of all measured ecosystem services in rangelands.
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).
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.
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 of pastures on Three Creeks from 1.5 months to 2-3 weeks starting in 2022, would result in taller forage height throughout the grazing season in those pastures. In this first year of our study, we didn’t find this to occur. That is, stubble height in the first year after the implementation of the shorter grazing duration system (Fig 1d, orange line) was similar to what it was in previous years (Fig 1a-c, orange line).

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. 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). We expect that in future years, once the grazing duration in pastures is reduced to the target 2-weeks, stubble heights will become similar across all grazing treatments.

Fig a — **Fig 1: Stubble height across areas grazed with different grazing durations, 2019-2021.**

Measured as bare ground: 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 less bare ground throughout the grazing season in those pastures. In this first year of our study, we didn’t find this to occur. That is, bare ground in the first year after the implementation of the shorter grazing duration system (Fig 2d, orange line) was similar to what it was in previous years (Fig 2a-c, orange line).

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. We expect that in future years, once the grazing duration in pastures is reduced to the target 2-weeks, stubble heights will become similar across all grazing treatments.

Fig 2 — **Figure 2: Bare ground across areas grazed with different grazing durations, 2019 - 2022.**

2.Sage-grouse habitat quality

Measured as perennial grass/sedge height and as perennial forb height:

Perennial grass height is noted in Dahlgren et al. 2018 as a metric of Breeding and early brood rearing and Late brood rearing habitat quality. In our analysis we include sedge height in this metric as well since sedge is common along streams. 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 height during breeding/early brood rearing (>15cm) and during late brood rearing (>20cm) in those pastures.

Perennial forb height is noted in Dahlgren et al. 2018 as a metric of Breeding and early brood rearing and Late brood rearing habitat 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 result in increased perennial forb height during breeding/early brood rearing (>6cm) and during late brood rearing (>8cm) in those pastures.

Breeding and early brood rearing(April-June): In this first year of our study, we didn’t find habitat improvements in breeding/early brood rearing habitat. Rather, perennial grass/sedge and perennial forb height in the pastures formerly grazed with 1.5 month durations (Fig 3d and 4d, respectively; orange bars), were very close to the heights found before 2022 (Fig 3a-c, and 4a-c, respectively; orange bars). A factor that likely affected grass/sedge and forb height in 2022 was that during this first year of the implementation of the new grazing system, cattle spent a longer time in these pastures than was supposed to be allotted via the new grazing plan (i.e. about a month rather than 2-weeks). We expect that in future years, once the grazing duration in pastures is reduced to the target 2-weeks, stubble heights will become similar across all grazing treatments.
Late brood rearing(July-Aug): Similarly, we didn’t find improvements in late brood rearing habitat. Rather, perennial grass/sedge and perennial forb height in the pastures formerly grazed with 1.5 month durations (Fig 3d and 4d, respectively; orange bars), were very close to the heights found before 2022 (Fig 3a-c, and 4a-c, respectively; orange bars). In the case of perennial grass/sedge, these heights are still not meeting the required threshold for good habitat quality (i.e. >20cm). We expect that in future years, once the grazing duration in pastures is reduced to the target 2-weeks, stubble heights will become similar across all grazing treatments.

Fig 3 — Figure 3. Perennial grass and sedge height. According to Dahlgren et al. 2018 perennial grass should be at least 15 cm (Breeding and early brood rearing April - June) and 20 cm (Late brood rearing July - Aug) to support good sage-grouse habitat.

Fig4 — Figure 4. Perennial forb height. According to Dahlgren et al. 2018 perennial forbs should be at least 6 cm (Breeding and early brood rearing April - June) and 8 cm (Late brood rearing July - Aug) to support good sage-grouse habitat.

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

Perennial grass cover and Perennial forb cover are noted in Dahlgren et al. 2018 as metrics of habitat quality across the entire grazing season (April-Aug). In our analysis we include sedge cover with perennial grass cover since sedge is common along streams. 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.

In this first year of our study, 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 5d and 6d, respectively; orange bars), were above the cover thresholds as in previous years (Fig 5a-c, and 6a-c, respectively; orange bars).

fig 5 — Figure 5. Perennial grass cover. According to Dahlgren et al. 2018 perennial forb cover should be at least 5% (Breeding and early brood rearing April – June & Late brood rearing July - Aug) to support good sage-grouse habitat

fig 6 — Figure 6. Perennial forb cover. According to Dahlgren et al. 2018 perennial forb cover should be at least 2% (Breeding and early brood rearing April – June & Late brood rearing July - Aug) to support good sage-grouse habitat.

3. Water quality: Implementation of the new Three Creeks Grazing practices that include shorter duration resulted in slight improvements in water quality when measured as E. coli concentration. We did not find that implementation of the new grazing system led to improvements in any other water quality metric. It is possible that other aspects of water quality will take more than a single year to improve.

Measured as E. coli: Implementation of the new time-controlled grazing practices in 2022 resulted in slight improvements in compliance with Utah State’s E. coli standards for rangelands (Table 1). We expected larger improvements from shortening grazing durations. We believe, however, that our results are due to cattle grazing in pastures for longer than the 2-weeks allotted within the new grazing plan in 2022. 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).

We expect that in future years, once the grazing duration in pastures is reduced to the target 2-weeks, we will see strong improvement in E. coli levels due to shorter grazing durations.

Measured as temperature: After the first year of implementation of the new time-controlled grazing practices in 2022 it does not appear that stream water temperature for fish growth and survival improved (Table 2).

Measured as dissolved oxygen (DO): We 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 treatments.

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).

Nothing to report for first reporting period.

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).

Nothing to report for first reporting period.

Participation Summary

38 Producers participating in research

Research Outcomes

5 Grants received that built upon this project

4 New working collaborations

Education and Outreach

4 Curricula, factsheets or educational tools

1 Tours

12 Webinars / talks / presentations

3 Other educational activities: Had an informational booth at the Annual SRM meeting in Boise (Feb 2023); Participated in Stanford's Bill Lane Center for the West annual Meeting (April 1st); Social media outreach including: Twitter (activity since Oct 1, 2023: #tweets - 34; #impressions 11,655; #likes - 237; #profile visits - 116; #new followers - 155; # total followers - 1258); Instagram (activity since Oct 1, 2023: #posts - 22; #impressions 26,768; #likes - 390; #profile visits - 268; #new followers - 122; # total followers - 2290).

Participation Summary:

144 Farmers participated

306 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:

Nothing to report for first reporting period.

Locally - In the ﬁrst reporting period we: presented study results at two CRM meetings (~12-30 attendees/meeting), two Three Creeks Grazing LLC meetings (~40 attendees/meeting), and one ﬁeld tour; and hired 4 local college and early career natural resource students as part of our crew.

Regionally - In the reporting period we: met with Western Landowner Alliance staff about ongoing work and shared project information over their social platforms; engaged with agency land managers such as the BLM (2 meetings), Utah Geological Service (1 meeting), NRCS (3 meetings), and UGIP (>20 meetings); and began to plan a Young Rancher Workshop that will take place this summer. 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 (5 newly awarded grants).

Nationally - In the ﬁrst reporting period we: organized and hosted a session at the 2023 Society for Range Management Annual Meeting (SRM), and hosted an informational booth at the Annual SRM meeting in Boise (Feb 2023). We also presented at the ACES confrence in DC, the Fall Forum in Pocatello ID (Boise State), the monthly stakeholder meeting BCarbon, and participated in Stanford's Bill Lane Center for the West annual Meeting. We are continuing to share project updates on WLC’s social media accounts including: Twitter (activity since Oct 1, 2023: #tweets - 34; #impressions 11,655; #likes - 237; #profile visits - 116; #new followers - 155; # total followers - 1258); Instagram (activity since Oct 1, 2023: #posts - 22; #impressions 26,768; #likes - 390; #profile visits - 268; #new followers - 122; # total followers - 2290).

6 Farmers intend/plan to change their practice(s)

Education and Outreach Outcomes

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

Return to Project Overview

Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Department of Agriculture or SARE.