When Ranching is for the Birds (and Fish and Elk):
Ranchland Ownership Change in Greater Yellowstone
             and Impl...
Ranchlands Research at CAW 2000-2005

Pilot study (2000-2001)
      3 Rocky Mountain Counties in CO, WY, and MT
      In c...
Case Study Counties
Large Agricultural Ownership
Large Ranch Sales as Percentage of All Large Ranches
                              GYE Ranchlands Study Counties, 1990-200...
Working Typology - Large Agricultural Landowners

                            Amenity Buyer
   Traditional Rancher
       ...
Number of Ranch Sales to Different Buyer Types
                   GYE Ranchlands Study Counties, 1990-2001

              ...
Amenity Buyers and Traditional Ranchers in the Market
    Purchases as a percentage of all acres changing hands in large r...
Megasite Conservation Priorities:
 Irreplaceability and Vulnerability




 A Biological Conservation Assessment for the Gr...
Ownership Heterogeneity




                    (Dickinson 2007)
Conservation Implications
Potential Benefits:

 Conservation easement opportunities
       Agglomeration of parcels

    W...
Conservation Implications
Challenges:

        Net loss of local knowledge

   Unprecedented levels of absenteeism

     I...
New Ruralities?
  Contingencies:

  Longtime owners’ openness to new ways

New owners’ interest in privacy vs. community

...
www.centerwest.org/ranchlands
     Major funding provided by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
 with additional sup...
“Multifunctional”
                                   Landscapes




Wood River Wetland, Root Ranch
Wolf-cattle coexistence experiment in the Madison Valley




Madison Valley Ranchlands Group
Wildlife Working Group
A New Restoration Economy?
Paying Landowners for Provision of Ecological Services (PES)




                              ...
Summary and Implications
• Ranch landscapes in the American West are
  increasingly heterogeneous
• New types of communiti...
Ag Land Sales and Ecosystem Values in Sublette County, WY
Acres in Large Agricultural Operations
                                      GYE Ranchlands Study Counties, 2002
         ...
When Ranching Is For The Birds (And Fish And Elk), Ranchland Ownership Changes In The Greater Yellowstone And Implications...
When Ranching Is For The Birds (And Fish And Elk), Ranchland Ownership Changes In The Greater Yellowstone And Implications...
When Ranching Is For The Birds (And Fish And Elk), Ranchland Ownership Changes In The Greater Yellowstone And Implications...
When Ranching Is For The Birds (And Fish And Elk), Ranchland Ownership Changes In The Greater Yellowstone And Implications...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

When Ranching Is For The Birds (And Fish And Elk), Ranchland Ownership Changes In The Greater Yellowstone And Implications For Conservation

667 views

Published on

Published in: Travel, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
667
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
25
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
27
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

When Ranching Is For The Birds (And Fish And Elk), Ranchland Ownership Changes In The Greater Yellowstone And Implications For Conservation

  1. 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
  2. 2. 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
  3. 3. Case Study Counties
  4. 4. Large Agricultural Ownership
  5. 5. 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
  6. 6. 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
  7. 7. 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
  8. 8. 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%
  9. 9. Megasite Conservation Priorities: Irreplaceability and Vulnerability A Biological Conservation Assessment for the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, Noss et al 2001
  10. 10. Ownership Heterogeneity (Dickinson 2007)
  11. 11. Conservation Implications Potential Benefits: Conservation easement opportunities Agglomeration of parcels Well-financed ranch operations Reduced pressure on public lands New leaders and ideas
  12. 12. Conservation Implications Challenges: Net loss of local knowledge Unprecedented levels of absenteeism Implications for public lands mgmt Continued instability of ownership
  13. 13. 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
  14. 14. 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
  15. 15. “Multifunctional” Landscapes Wood River Wetland, Root Ranch
  16. 16. Wolf-cattle coexistence experiment in the Madison Valley Madison Valley Ranchlands Group Wildlife Working Group
  17. 17. 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
  18. 18. 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
  19. 19. Ag Land Sales and Ecosystem Values in Sublette County, WY
  20. 20. 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

×