The case represents the effort of and marginal gains of reformers in disturbing the long standing federal grazing system.

1. Story of the
Western Range
Adelaide group 2: Thienhuong Do, Thitam Duong,
Minhthuan Nguyen. October 2012

2. Room for possible collaboration
• Background: The case represents the effort of and
marginal gains of reformers in disturbing the long
standing federal grazing system.
• Recommendations: Voluntary collaborative ventures can
have big effects in long term issues
• Implication: For the long run:
– Ranchers would be ensured the number of stock.
– Range rehabilitation is secured.
2

3. Question to consider
What should environmentalists be doing
if they want to bring about changes
in grazing on the western range?
3

4. Story of the west grazing
1870s-1880s: Stockman spread to west range. Cattle
population rocketed from estimated 3mil to 26 mil
1906: Federal regulation of grazing began: permit and fee
1978: PRIA passed (rancher- approved formula, keep fee quite stable
1990s: focusing on "Ecosystem function, Campaign Voluntary
Grazing Permit Buy Out Act
2000s Widespread approach that involves collaborating with ranchers
to enhane ecological values on their land
2005: VGPBOA Campaign purchased permits covering 2.5 mil acres
2009 Omnibus Public Land
4
Mnagement Act

5. Long lasting Fight
• Economic values and strong political back up
o Ranchers focus on:
• Using more public lands
• More permit and less fee
• Increase number of cattle
• Merging their motives with historic image: cowboy
o Politicians (congressional allies): back up the ranchers
• Range Sustainability
o Ecosystem depleted
• Eroded soil
• Destroyed watershed
• Native plants
• Wildlife movement
• Recovery
5

6. Our Decision is…
• We approach the case from the viewpoints of both
sides: environmentalists and ranchers.
• We weighed our IP (range sustainability, economic
values, media and public attention, political power)
• The alternative which has the highest aggregated
score will be our decision.
6

7. Stakeholder Analysis
Stakeholders Groups Representatives Goals
Land Managers • Forest Service • Want to make changes but stick to
• Bureau of Land Management the past regulations
(BLM) • In most cases, back up the ranchers
• Division of Grazing
Policy makers • President • Ease the tension between ranchers
• Congress and environmentalists
Ranchers • Stockmen and public land • Low fee with built-in profit
ranchers, appointed officer, • More public land use
senator came from ranching • Extend the cattle
families
Environmentalists • Environmentalists • Restore the ecosystem of the range
• Public and other supporters • Reduce the number of cattle in the
range
• Reform the regulation regarding
the permit and fee
7

8. More grazing or range?
(Our analysis based on the following indices of performance)
Criteria Justifications Metrics
Economic values Ranchers focus on using more public - Number of cattle
lands, more permit and less fee, increase - Number of died cattle
number of cattle. - Number of permittees
- Fee built in profit
Political Power The congressional allies support ranchers - Number of bills passed
due to past foundation and their interests. - Budget allocated
Forest Service and BLM needs
appropriation to operate.
Range sustainability The range becomes deteriorated due to - Number of cattle
the overgrazing and not effective - Rainfall
measures to conserve. - Number of wildlife and plants
- Acres of land (grazing, conservation
easements)
- Quality of soil
- Number of endangered sage
grouse
Media and public It is important to arouse more public - Number of news coverage
attention attention to the range condition. (publication, review, articles..)
Involvement of mass media plays key role - Number of people participated
in disseminating information. campaigns 8

9. Data talks
• Existing fee covers 37% of BLM and 30% of Forest Service
admin cost; cost 144mil$, benefit 21mil$ Alternative 1
• 98% arid lands in the west have gone desertification
(1970s) Alternative 2
• Malpai Borderlands Group established in 1990s. New grazing
package introduced (Aug 1995) Alternative 3
9

10. Analysis of Alternatives
• Alternative 1: Impose higher AUM and cut subsidies on
grazing
• Alternative 2: Allow more grazing and expand the range for
grazing
• Alternative 3: Promote voluntary collaborative ventures
between environmentalists and ranchers
10

11. Criteria
Low fee. Number of permittee/
cattles/ profit ? etc?
Economic Values
Quality of soil? Number
of endangered sage
grouse? Rainfall? etc
Range
Sustainability Media & Public
Political Power
News coverage and
Impact?
Number of bills passed
Budget allocated ?
11

12. MAUT Analysis
12

13. Recommendations
We should promote voluntary collaborative ventures
between environmentalists and ranchers
(Alternative 3)
13

14. Sensitivity Analysis
• Ranchers may oppose the Packages and collaboration in the name of
intangeble benefits and value (dignity, cultures, family traditions).
• Solutions that can neutralize economic benefits are a must, however a
cultural approach and friendly policies to call for collaboration will bring
best results.
• Collaboration needs deep understand about the West cultures and people
• Carefully identify Key influencer and Key opinion leaders to enhance
impact of message.
• To cope with issues that have existed for a long time, environmentalists
should be resilient, persistent and act on the long term view.
14

15. Thank you!
15