National Resource Council, Committee on Rangeland
Classification

National Academy Press, Washington, DC. 1994

Rangeland ecosystems make up between 40 and 50 percent of the land area of the U.S., spanning a diversity of climates and geographic regions. As the debate over the health and management of these lands has increased, scientists have begun to question the methods and data used to classify and describe rangeland resources. One of the primary reasons for raising these questions is that, even when using the same methods and data, experts are not in agreement about the health and sustainability of our nation's rangelands. The purpose of this National Academy of Sciences report was to examine the scientific basis of the current methods of analysis and classification used by the three federal agencies involved in rangeland management: the U.S. Department of Agriculture's National Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS, formerly SCS) and Forest Service (USFS), and the U.S. Department of Interior's Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

The Committee on Rangeland Classification that produced this report established three objectives for their study: 1) analyze historical and current procedures used by federal agencies to assess rangelands; 2) evaluate the success of current systems as tools for characterizing rangeland health and ecological condition; and 3) identify the primary scientific obstacles to developing improved systems.

In order to fulfill these objectives, the Committee organized their fact-finding and deliberations around five key areas. These five areas are reflected in the organization of the report.

Report Highlights

Chapter 1, Rangelands are Important, inventories the various products, commodities and benefits derived from rangelands. This chapter also outlines the history of rangeland use and management and highlights the need for accurate assessments of rangeland productivity and long-term health.

Chapter 2, Rangeland Health, identifies the goals of national assessments and recommends standards for these assessments. This chapter also presents a method for determining when the threshold from health to degradation is crossed, and defines the role rangeland health assessments should play in the larger effort to characterize, monitor, and manage rangelands.

Chapter 3, Current Methods of Rangeland Assessment, examines the development of current theory and practice for rangeland assessment. This chapter also evaluates the assessment methods used by federal agencies and their suitability for assessing rangeland health.

Chapter 4, Criteria and Indicators of Rangeland Health, recommends that the health of rangeland be assessed by evaluating three sets of criteria: 1) the stability of soils and watersheds; 2) the integrity of nutrient cycles and energy flows, and 3) the functioning of ecological processes that enable rangelands to recover from damage. The Committee introduces an initial set of indicators and quality standards, and argues strongly for a more consistent interpretation of rangeland health among technical assistance and land management agencies.

Chapter 5, Inventorying and Monitoring Rangeland Health, reviews some of the past inventories and national surveys of rangeland quality. This chapter also describes current inventorying and monitoring systems, and underscores the need for new or revised systems that are capable of generating the information needed for a national-level assessment.

1. The report acknowledges the importance of the many rangeland inventories that have been conducted in the past, but issues a challenge for a bona fide national-level assessment of rangeland health. Such an assessment, according to the report, would require:
2. adoption of a standardized and consistent definition of rangeland health and of measurable indicators of change; 2) consistent and well correlated classification of federal and nonfederal rangelands;
3. collection of data by the same or similar methods that will enable the data to be combined on a national level; 4) collection of data on the basis of a statistically valid sampling scheme; and 5) periodic and consistent repetition of sampling to detect trends in the measures used to evaluate rangeland health.

In conclusion, the committee identifies six action items needed to organize a meaningful and accurate national level assessment of rangeland health. These are:

1. The secretaries of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Department of the Interior (DOI) should convene an interagency task force to develop, test, and standardize indicators and methods for inventorying and monitoring rangeland health on federal and nonfederal rangelands.
2. The secretaries of USDA and DOI should develop coordinated plans for implementing a system of periodic sampling on federal and nonfederal rangelands that will produce accurate estimates of, and determine changes in the proportion of healthy, at-risk, and unhealthy rangelands.
3. Indicators of soil surface condition should be added to all current and ongoing range condition and ecological status assessments, and any other ongoing efforts to assess rangelands, as a first step toward a more comprehensive evaluation of rangeland health.
4. All current and ongoing rangeland assessments done as part of the Resources Conservation Act appraisals, Resources Planning Act assessments, national forest planning, USFS and BLM land use and allotment planning, and environmental assessments should be based on the analysis of multiple ecological attributes.
5. Basic data on soil surface conditions, erosion rates, plant composition, and biomass production assembled and used to assess rangelands should be made available to the public and the scientific community for independent review.
6. USDA-NRCS, USFS, and BLM should continue current and ongoing range condition and ecological status ratings while the transition to rangeland health assessment is made.

Rangeland Health: New Methods to Classify, Inventory, and Monitor Rangelands is available for $26.00 from the National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Ave., NW, Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055.

(DEC.530)

Contributed by David Chaney