“Strong partnerships with the agricultural sector are essential for the protection of biodiversity and wildlife habitat,” states the Honourable Jonathan Wilkinson, Minister of Environment and Climate Change. “Our government is pleased to support the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association through the Species At Risk Partnership on Agricultural Lands fund. Through ongoing collaboration, we will continue to conserve important grassland habitat for species at risk, including the iconic Greater Sage- Grouse.” 

The previous SARPAL project from 2015 to 2020 covered over 189,000 acres in five years within the project boundaries in Alberta. The project worked with 24 ranches and brought 45 habitat enhancement strategies into place. The project had been incredibly successful at bringing together conservation groups and beef producers to achieve meaningful outcomes for species at risk through ranch management plans, education, habitat conservation strategies and habitat improvements ranging from riparian protection, off-site watering, portable electric fencing, and implementation of beneficial management practices. All these projects were producer driven and highlight the benefits of collaborative stewardship programs building on local knowledge and the positive impacts they can have for biodiversity and wildlife habitat. 

“This additional funding from ECCC is welcome news and we are excited to take further steps forward working directly with beef producers through SARPAL to make a difference to the protection of Greater Sage Grouse habitat in southeast Alberta,” said Duane Thompson, CCA Environment Committee Chair. 

Over the next two years of this project the focus will again be on working directly with landowners in the target area to conduct habitat assessments, develop habitat management strategies and employ beneficial management strategies to protect Greater Sage Grouse critical habitat. The project will also evaluate the feasibility of utilizing new technologies such as virtual fencing to protect sensitive habitats. An additional aspect of the latest SARPAL project is the scoping, development and delivery of innovative term conservation easements with willing landowners with Greater Sage Grouse critical habitat on their lands. These term agreements would be in place for a set period of time. Many producers have indicated they prefer term agreements to perpetual agreements primarily for ranch family succession reasons.

The post CCA welcomes continued Environment and Climate Change Canada funding for species at risk appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

Tom Harrison is a rancher and executive director of the South of the Divide Conservation Action Program Inc. (SODCAP), an organization founded in 2014 to create and maintain habitat for species at risk on native grassland while ensuring the land is sustainable for beef production. Providing ranchers with financial incentives for supporting this habitat is one of its main initiatives.

SODCAP primarily works in the Milk River Watershed, an area with large tracts of grassland. “Fifty-two per cent of the land is still native, and over 75 per cent is in perennial cover. So that’s a fairly significant amount of a landscape that’s providing habitat already,” said Harrison. “Environment Canada has designated one million hectares of that land for critical habitat, and it’s almost a direct overlap of the native grasslands.”

With funding from the Species at Risk Partnership on Agricultural Lands (SARPAL), SODCAP has developed six programs to support its mandate: results-based conservation agreements, habitat management agreements, habitat restoration, grass banking, niche product branding and term conservation easements.

Results-based conservation agreements have become one of its most popular pro­jects. Once producers with critical habitat for one or more species at risk sign an agreement, SODCAP, in collaboration with the Saskatchewan Stock Growers’ Association and Environment Canada, determines habitat targets for the operation. The rancher decides how to achieve those targets and receives annual payments if successful.

“Everything that we ask the producer to do or achieve has got to be over and above normal agricultural practices,” notes Harrison. They also have to be measurable, quantifiable and recognize the ecological limits of the landscape.

And while the targets are based on the current state of knowledge, Harrison says “we also have to be adaptable.”

SODCAP uses imagery, soil data and a critical habitat map developed by Environment Canada to track progress, with special attention to other species at risk to ensure the targets don’t negatively affect them.

While the producer is free to decide how the targets will be achieved, SODCAP can provide technical assistance as well as monitoring the progress. “We will run two transects for every section of land,” said Harrison. “Each transect will have 25 data points on it, and then the data is gathered and collected and summarized, and at the end of the summer, we determine whether or not the habitat targets were achieved.” If producers meet the targets, they are paid $3.50 per acre per year.

SODCAP most often works on habitat agreements for the greater sage grouse and Sprague’s pipit. The greater sage grouse has three specific habitat targets related to silver sage, grass droop height and forb cover. Though not specific to this species, the monitoring team also looks at the amount of exposed soil and litter levels as factors contributing to a healthy range. The three habitat targets for the Sprague’s pipit are range condition, litter load and visual obstruction.

Results-based agreements have some obvious benefits over other types of conservation agreements. In this case, if all the targets are achieved on a 10,000-acre parcel, the producer would receive an annual payment of $35,000. By comparison, habitat management agreements, generally offer a one-time payment for signing a 10-year agreement, valued currently anywhere from $1.50 to $6 per acre.

Refining the program

Currently, SODCAP has 10 agreements with producers under the SARPAL funding, encompassing more than 40,000 acres.

In 2016, each producer met their targets, and the annual total payment to producers was a little under $140,000.

Last year, some producers were unable to meet all of their targets and the total payout slipped to $108,000. The shortfall came on Sprague’s pipit habitat. In one case, the dip was related to range condition, likely due to the almost drought-like conditions facing the Prairies, since the producers involved hadn’t changed their management practices. As a result, Harrison said SODCAP plans to refine habitat targets based on initial data and investigate how drought affects the habitats versus management practices.

Harrison maintains there is increasing interest and acceptance of their program by producers in the Milk River Watershed, particularly among those who are already leaders in conservation practices. “In a large number of these cases they’re already achieving habitat targets,” he said.

However, privacy remains an issue for some. “Guys still are reluctant to discuss species at risk publicly,” noted Harrison. Each contract includes a privacy clause for that reason.

The post Ranchers rewarded for preserving species at risk on native range appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

Robin Bloom, a wildlife biologist with Environment Canada who oversees federal support for Species at Risk projects supported the Andersons’ nomination, acknowledging the family not only for facilitating one of the last remaining populations of Greater sage-grouse in Canada, but for facilitating research. The family’s passion for what they do has led to rangeland people and government departments co-operating for the betterment of the birds and other at-risk species that co-exist on the ranch.

In 2011, funding became available to people who live on the land to find out what they do that attracts certain at-risk and threatened species.

Greater sage-grouse have been returning to the Anderson Ranch spring after spring, generation upon generation to mate, nest and rear their brood in a safe habitat. Naturally, the Andersons were interested in co-operating on the project to learn more about this bird that has been as much a part of their native range as the cow herd.

Bloom, whose role has been to help measure the results, says there is a strong relationship between how the Andersons ranch and the appearance of the sage-grouse on their land.

In our March 2016 article, “Ranching for beef and species-at-risk” Anderson explained how a slow rotation across the range creates a patchwork of grazed and ungrazed areas. This provides a balance of the two habitats that the birds need in summer: patches of lightly grazed sagebrush that provides cover for nesting with nearby patches of heavier-grazed grass where the young chicks can find the food they need. Ant piles are a treasure trove of protein and moisture. Other insects and forbs complete the diet because Greater sage-grouse don’t have gizzards to digest seeds.

“Our goal isn’t just to grow lots of grass for cows, but to also have biodiversity, which is part of the reason the Greater sage-grouse are there,” Anderson says. “The cows are a tool to create habitat and tweaking management can make it better for something other than cows.”

Bloom credits the Andersons for the effort that was required to gain the trust and respect of government agencies and the conservation community. The family is now providing cows to graze on native grass across the fence in Grasslands National Park to try and create a more biodiverse habitat for Greater sage-grouse and other wildlife.

The post Ambassadors for Greater sage-grouse appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

U.S. Interior Secretary Sally Jewell touted the decision as a success enabled by a sweeping multi-state conservation strategy devised over the past five years for the grouse and its shrinking habitat, spanning tens of millions of acres.

“This is the largest, most complex land conservation effort in the history of the United States,” Jewell told a news conference, joined by four western governors and a host of top federal land managers, at a wildlife refuge in Colorado.

The plight of the grouse, a key indicator species for the vanishing sagebrush ecosystem of the American prairie, has pitted conservation groups against oil and gas drilling, wind farms and cattle grazing in one of the biggest industry-versus-nature controversies in decades.

Tuesday’s announcement marked a turnabout from a 2010 finding by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, an Interior Department agency, that endangered species protection for the grouse was warranted but that other species were a higher priority.

Conservation plans since implemented by federal and state wildlife officials and commercial interests now offer an alternative for saving the grouse while allowing activities such as energy development, mining and ranching to co-exist with the chicken-sized prairie fowl, Jewell said.

The greater sage grouse, known for the elaborate courtship dances performed by males in spring, once ranged by the millions across a broad expanse of the western U.S. and Canada.

They are now believed to number between 200,000 and 500,000 birds in 11 western states and southern Alberta. Wyoming accounts for about 40 per cent of them.

Despite long-term declines, sage grouse populations “remain relatively abundant and well-distributed” across the bird’s 173 million-acre range, Fish and Wildlife officials said, adding that conservation efforts already in place had staved off any immediate risk of extinction.

In addition to conservation programs for state and private lands representing 45 per cent of sage grouse habitat, a patchwork of 98 U.S. land use plans also were revised to protect the bird on federal property that accounts for most of the rest.

The effort includes designation of 12 million acres of “high-priority” protection zones where energy development, seen as posing the greatest habitat threat, is restricted, Jewell said.

Officials also pointed to newly adopted plans for curtailing two key environmental threats — rangeland wildfires and the spread of an invasive weed known as cheatgrass.

The announcement was immediately hailed by the Denver-based industry group Western Energy Alliance but received mixed reviews from environmental groups.

The head of the National Audubon Society’s Rocky Mountain chapter, Brian Rutledge, joined Jewell to endorse the decision.

But Erik Molvar, a wildlife biologist for WildEarth Guardians, said the plans offered too little protection with too many loopholes, though he said his group would review the details before deciding whether to bring a court challenge.

Unlike many such battles of the past, commercial interests this time have embraced conservation efforts aimed at avoiding potentially tougher restrictions under the Endangered Species Act.

Many ranchers, in particular, found common cause with efforts to protect Western rangelands on which their livestock depend, often citing the rallying phrase, “What’s good for the bird is good for the herd.”

— Keith Coffman is a Reuters reporter based in Denver. Additional reporting for Reuters by Laura Zuckerman in Salmon, Idaho; writing and additional reporting by Steve Gorman in Los Angeles.

The post Sage grouse denied U.S. endangered species status appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

My understanding of the proposals is that there may be a large reduction in the stocking rate on these lands. This reduction could be 50 per cent or more. There may be noise restrictions, fencing regulations and reduced or denied access. All these regulations are being set by the government with little or no involvement of local stakeholders.

These regulations may be well intended, however, if they are meant to protect the sage grouse they will have no positive impact. In fact the regulations will have a negative impact on the sage grouse, the land and local stakeholders.

Let me explain how I arrive at this conclusion. Allan Savory (the man who developed Holistic Management) had four key insights which provided new knowledge about how our ecosystems function. While this knowledge has been available in Western Canada for the last 25 or 30 years it is still not as widely accepted as it might be. I do not mean to imply that the people who developed these regulations were wrong. What I do imply is that they are working with incomplete information because they were either unaware or chose to overlook this new knowledge.

Allan’s Four Key Insights

1. Nature functions in wholes: This implies that in nature everything is interrelated. Each species has a function, a purpose and a value. Each species contributes to the health and well-being of other species. Managing for a single species will not be effective. We must manage for the health of the ecosystem. The result will be balance between all species.
2. Overgrazing is a function of time: For many years it was accepted that overgrazing was the result of too many animals. Allan has proven that overgrazing is a function of time. When grazing, the animals can’t stay too long or return too quickly. To have a healthy ecosystem it is essential to stop the overgrazing. If cattle numbers are reduced and continuous grazing occurs the land will deteriorate. A deteriorating ecosystem will be harmful to the sage grouse.
3. The prey-predator connection: Most of the grasslands in the world were developed by the presence of large herds of grazing animals that were kept bunched and moving due to predators. This is nature’s way. Planned grazing focuses on mimicking nature’s plan. The result is a healthy ecosystem.
4. The brittleness scale: This is a 1 to 10 scale. Number 1 (non-brittle) represents a rainforest. Number 10 (brittle) a desert. All environments fall somewhere on this scale. In a rainforest resting the land (removing the animals) will improve the land. Resting the land in a brittle environment is detrimental to the land. The land involved in this discussion is in a brittle environment. Large grazing animals are essential to maintain the health of the land.

Using Allan’s insights we can see that the likely result of the emergency order will be:

1. A continued deterioration of the land.
2. A further reduction in the number of greater sage grouse.
3. The ranches will be unprofitable.
4. A loss of a way of life.
5. Economic loss for other stakeholders.
6. A devaluation of the deeded land in the area.

A Better Solution

1. Bring all the stakeholders together.
2. Develop a common vision for the land.
3. Apply all the knowledge available.
4. Develop a sustainable plan.

The likely result of the better solution will be:

• An improvement in the health of the land.
• An increase in sage grouse and other species.
• Profitable, sustainable ranches.
• A way of life maintained.
• Economic benefits for other stakeholders.
• An increase in the value of the deeded land.

This is a serious issue. It represents a great opportunity for all stakeholders to come together and develop a win/win plan for the future. Holistic Management can help this happen. Let’s hope that cooler heads prevail and wise decisions are made. Happy trails.

• More ‘Holistic Ranching’ with Don Campbell: Planned grazing makes for healthier pastures

Don Campbell ranches with his family at Meadow Lake, Sask., and teaches Holistic Management courses. He can be reached at 306-236-6088 or doncampbell@sasktel.net.

The post The Greater Sage Grouse appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.