Sustainable Development and The Great Sage-Grouse

Sustainable Development and The Great Sage-Grouse

Douglas D. Rideout Yu Wei Joe-Riley Epps David Mueller Niki Kernohan 

WESTFIRE Research Centre, Department of Forest and Rangeland Stewardship, Colorado State University, U.S.A.

Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, U.S.A.

Page: 
31-40
|
DOI: 
https://doi.org/10.2495/SAFE-V7-N1-31-40
Received: 
N/A
|
Accepted: 
N/A
|
Published: 
31 March 2017
| Citation

OPEN ACCESS

Abstract: 

The invasion of non-native grasses, pinyon-juniper encroachment, drought and climate change have resulted in larger, more intense fires in the western United States’ sagebrush-steppe ecosystem. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service identified these factors as the primary threat to sagebrush obligate species, particularly the endemic greater sage-grouse. A large portion of primary sage-grouse conservation areas reside on the U.S. Department of the Interior federal lands. In 2015, the DOI issued Secretarial Order 3336 that directed the development of a comprehensive science-based strategy to reduce the threat of large-scale rangeland fires to greater sage-grouse habitat and the sage-steppe ecosystem. This study reports the results of using the STARFire planning and budgeting system to respond to Sec- tion 7(b) iii-Fuels, Action Item #4 of the secretarial order. This study demonstrates the capabilities of STARFire to apply the latest science and technology using a risk-based approach to conduct a wildfire risk analysis and improve the targeting of fuels reduction programs on a landscape-scale study across the Northern Great Basin of the United States.

Keywords: 

economics, fuel treatment, Great Basin, Landscape analysis, risk, sage-grouse, spatial planning, STARFire, U.S. Bureau of Land Management. wildland fire.

  References

[1] USFWS. Why Care About America’s Sagebrush? US Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, Colorado. February 2014, available at https://www.fws.gov/ mountain-prairie/factsheets/Sage-steppe_022814.pdf. (accessed 15 December 2016).

[2] Welch, B.L., Big sagebrush: a sea fragmented into lakes, ponds, and puddles. Vol. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-144: U. S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, 2005.

[3] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Greater Sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) Conservation Objectives: Final Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, CO. February 2013.

[4] Finch, D., Boyce, D., Chambers, J., Colt, C., McCarthy, C., Kitchen, S., Richardson, B., Rowland, M., Rumble, Schwartz, M. Tomosy, M. Wisdom. 2015. USDA Forest Service Sage-Grouse Conservation Science Strategy 2015-2020. USDA Forest Service. Washington, DC.

[5] DOI. Greater Sage-Grouse Wildfire, Invasive Annual Grasses & Conifer Expansion Assessment (Fire and Invasive Assessment Tool (FIAT)). Central Oregon. June 2015. Prepared by Fire and Invasive Assessment Team (Appendix 5), P. 43, 2015.

[6] BLM. An Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy, Final Report to the Secretary of the Interior, p. 82, May 2015.

[7] Rideout, D., Wei, Y., Kirsch, A. & Kernohan N. (In Press). STARFire: Strategic budgeting and planning for wildland fire management. Park Science, 32(3).

[8] Rideout, D., Wei, Y., Kirsch, A. & Botti, S. Toward a unified economic theory of fire program analysis with strategies for empirical modelling. In The Economics of Forest Disturbances: Wildfires, Storms and Invasive Species, eds T.P. Holmes, J.P. Prestemon & K.L. Abt, Springer: New York, pp. 361–380, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4370-3_18

[9] Rideout, D.B. & Kernohan N. The relative value of fire planning alternatives. In Modelling, Monitoring and Management of Forest Fires III, eds C.A Brebbia & G. Perona, WIT Press: Boston, MA, pp. 151–162, 2012. https://doi.org/10.2495/FIVA120131

[10] FLAMMAP. 2016, available at https://www.firelab.org/flammap, (accessed January, 2015).

[11] LANDFIRE. 2016, available at http://www.landfire.gov. (accessed December, 2015).

[12] Chambers, et al., Using resistance and resilience concepts to reduce impacts of invasive annual grasses and altered fire regimes on the sagebrush ecosystem and greater sagegrouse: A strategic multi-scale approach. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-326. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. p. 73, 2014.

[13] Rideout, D.B., Ziesler, P.S., Kling, R., Loomis, J.B. & Botti, S.J., Estimating rates of substitution for protecting values at risk for initial attack planning and budgeting. Forest Policy and Economics, 10, pp. 205–219, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2007.10.003