This document summarizes research on changes in ranchland ownership in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem and the implications for conservation. The research found increasing ownership fragmentation as amenity buyers and part-time ranchers purchased more land, potentially reducing local ecological knowledge and increasing absenteeism. However, new owners also brought financial resources and new ideas. The implications depend on cooperation between new and longtime owners and interest in community versus privacy. Multifunctional landscapes and agroecological alliances now contribute to ecosystem values but depend on supportive institutions.

1. When Ranching is for the Birds (and Fish and Elk):
Ranchland Ownership Change in Greater Yellowstone
and Implications for Conservation
Hannah Gosnell Julia H. Haggerty
Department of Geosciences
Headwaters Economics
Sustainable Rural Communities Initiative
Oregon State University
William R. Travis
University of Colorado
2007 RVCC Annual Policy Meeting

3. Ranchlands Research at CAW 2000-2005
Pilot study (2000-2001)
3 Rocky Mountain Counties in CO, WY, and MT
In collaboration with TNC and AFT
GYE study (2001-2003)
10 counties in WY and MT
Ownership fragmentation; ranch sales; buyer types
Mgmt practices of new vs. longtime owners (2003-2005)
Several ranch landscapes in MT, AZ, CA
Semi-structured interviews with ranch owners

4. Case Study Counties

5. Large Agricultural Ownership

6. Large Ranch Sales as Percentage of All Large Ranches
GYE Ranchlands Study Counties, 1990-2001
50% 40%
45%
45%
35%
% of Acreage in Large Ag Ops Sold
40%
30%
% of Large Ag Ops Sold
35% 32%
29% 25%
28% 27%
30%
24% 23%
25% 20%
20%
15%
14% 14% 13%
15%
10%
10%
5%
5%
0% 0%
S
Li
Fr
B
M
P
S
P
S
C
ub
ea
ar
w
ar
til
ar
ad
nc
em
ee
lw
k,
k,
bo
ve
le
i
ol
so
on
tG
tt
at
W
M
n
rh
n
e
n
T
er
t
Y
ea
ra
ss
d
% of Large Ag Ops Sold % of Acreage in Large Ops Sold

7. Working Typology - Large Agricultural Landowners
Amenity Buyer
Traditional Rancher
• Purchases ranch for
Part-time Rancher ambience, recreation, and
other amenities, not primarily
Amenity Buyer for ag production
• Often absentee
Investor • Hires ranch manager to
make day-to-day decisions
and do majority of work
Corporation
• May lease land to
Developer neighboring rancher
• Majority of income from off-
Conservation Organization ranch sources
• Economic viability of ranch
Other usually not an issue

8. Number of Ranch Sales to Different Buyer Types
GYE Ranchlands Study Counties, 1990-2001
90
80
70
Number of Sales
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Su
Pa
St
C
Fr
Sw
B
Li
Pa
M
ar
ea
ad
nc
il
e
r
bl
r
ee
lw
k,
m
bo
k,
v
is
ol
e
er
on
at
tG
tte
M
W
on
n
n
he
er
T
t
Y
ra
a
ss
d
Amenity Buyer Traditional Rancher Investor
Part Time Rancher Developer Unknown
Other Conservation Org Corporation

9. Amenity Buyers and Traditional Ranchers in the Market
Purchases as a percentage of all acres changing hands in large ranch sales
Amenity Buyers Traditional Ranchers
Park, MT 73% Fremont, WY 46%
Madison, MT 64% Beaverhead, MT 41%
Sublette, WY 62% Lincoln, WY 39%
Park, WY 57% Stillwater, MT 38%
Sweet Grass, MT 55% Carbon, MT 20%
Beaverhead, MT 49% Sublette, WY 18%
Lincoln, WY 34% Park, WY 14%
Fremont, WY 14% Sweet Grass, MT 11%
Carbon, MT 14% Park, MT 5%
Stillwater, MT 11% Madison, MT <1%

10. Megasite Conservation Priorities:
Irreplaceability and Vulnerability
A Biological Conservation Assessment for the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, Noss et al 2001

13. Ownership Heterogeneity
(Dickinson 2007)

14. Conservation Implications
Potential Benefits:
Conservation easement opportunities
Agglomeration of parcels
Well-financed ranch operations
Reduced pressure on public lands
New leaders and ideas

15. Conservation Implications
Challenges:
Net loss of local knowledge
Unprecedented levels of absenteeism
Implications for public lands mgmt
Continued instability of ownership

16. New Ruralities?
Contingencies:
Longtime owners’ openness to new ways
New owners’ interest in privacy vs. community
RANCH MANAGERS
An issue to rally around
Supportive laws institutions

17. www.centerwest.org/ranchlands
Major funding provided by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
with additional support from Yellowstone Heritage and the Turner Foundation
gosnellh@geo.oregonstate.edu

18. “Multifunctional”
Landscapes
Wood River Wetland, Root Ranch

19. Wolf-cattle coexistence experiment in the Madison Valley
Madison Valley Ranchlands Group
Wildlife Working Group

20. A New Restoration Economy?
Paying Landowners for Provision of Ecological Services (PES)
Klamath Basin Rangeland Trust
ranchers idling land for $ in the
Wood River Valley, OR

22. Summary and Implications
• Ranch landscapes in the American West are
increasingly heterogeneous
• New types of communities and ruralities are emerging
• Geographies of conflict and cooperation
• Agroecological partnerships seem to be contributing to
strong(er) multifunctional landscapes
• Formation of agroecological alliances is contingent on
a number of factors
• Need more research on contingencies, new
institutional arrangements, socioecological outcomes

23. Ag Land Sales and Ecosystem Values in Sublette County, WY

24. Acres in Large Agricultural Operations
GYE Ranchlands Study Counties, 2002
1,000,000 100%
900,000
800,000 95%
Acres in Large Ag Operations
% of Acres in Large Ag Ops
700,000
600,000 90%
500,000
400,000 85%
300,000
200,000 80%
100,000
0 75%
St
B
M
Sw
Pa
Fr
Pa
C
Su
Li
ea
ar
ad
ill
nc
em
rk
rk
b
ee
bo
w
ve
le
is
ol
,M
,W
on
at
tG
tte
on
r
n
n
he
er
T
t
Y
ra
ad
ss
Acres in Large Ag Operations % of Ag Acres in Large Ag Ops