Leveraging Oak Woodland Rancher Investment in Ranching: Matching Funds from Working Woodlands

Leveraging Oak Woodland Rancher Investment in Ranching: Matching Funds from Working Woodlands

I. Public Lands in California II. California s Mediterranean Oak Woodlands III. Working Landscapes Rancher Values Conservation Easements IV. Spain vs. California Incentive Programs V. Conclusions

I. Public lands in the western United States

California Public Lands: 50% Bureau of Land Management United States Forest Service National Park Service Department of Defense

National Public Lands: The Acquisition Model Major method since 1800 Gridlock: every decision contested Political Costly: litigation, staff, planning Insensitive to local ecological and social conditions Private lands have more biodiversity

Bad public land management? Southern California Fires

II. California Mediterranean Oak Woodlands Some habitat for 95% of federally threatened and endangered species is on private land in the western U.S. (Wilcove et al. 1996) 1800 Half lost to agricultural development Quercus douglasii, agrifolia, lobata, Englemanii, etc. 2000

Three million hectares of open woodland, mostly non-arable

Mediterranean climate with dry summers

Lion Richest wildlife habitat in the state on a regional basis: More than 300 vertebrate species (Jensen et al. 1990)

Oak Woodlands are mostly private agricultural lands 70% grazed 56% owned by ranchers

California Silvopastoralism 92% of animal demand is cattle

Millions of Hectares Oak Woodlands in California, 1930-2002 (Holzman, 1993; Huntsinger and Fortmann, 1990; Bolsinger, 1988; Ewing et al. 1988; Huntsinger et al. 1997; CDF FRRAP-2003) 3.5 3.3 3.1 2.9 2.7 2.5 2.3 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.5 Millions of Hectares 1930 1932 1940 1950 1960 1966 1982 1990 1992 2002 Date

Ranches are being replaced by ranchettes and housing developments

III. The Alternative: Conserving Working Landscapes Preserve ranching Preserve culture and community culture Preserve land & ecosystems Voluntary: depends on rancher choice

-cow-calf operations -80%+ resident owners -800-960 ha Rancher values are key to conserving ranches

Studies in California, Colorado, Arizona & West Sulak & Liffmann Huntsinger Huntsinger et al. et al. Rowe et al. (a&b) Smith & Martin Bartlett et al. Gentner & Tanaka Date 2002 2000 1997 2001 1972 1989 2002 State CA CA CA CO AZ CO Western US Sample Off-ranch income Permittees of 3 Forests, similar non permittees 43% not dependent on ranching All ranchers in three CA counties 44% income is off-ranch Oak woodland ranchers statewide 85% have off-ranch income Permittees in CO two counties 78% have other source of income All AZ ranch owners 80% hold off-ranch jobs All CO All federal permittees permittees of FS and BLM 62% hold off-ranch jobs Survey type Sample size Interviews Mail Mail Interviews Interviews Mail Mail Small (n=37) Large (n=245) Large (n~200) Oak Woodland Studies Small (n=37) Medium (n=89) Large (n=313) Very large (n~1070)

Less than one-fourth of oak woodland ranchers reported that they made the majority of their income from livestock production.

Corporate 13% Main income from ranch Dependent 20% Diversified Family 13% Sheep 4% Trophy Hobby 6% Small Hobby 11% Retired Hobby 18% Working Hobby 15% Main income from other sources Gentner and Tanaka (2002) surveyed more than 1,000 ranchers and classified them When asked about their motives for ranching, both groups ranked lifestyle and way of life above the monetary profits they might make from the ranch.

These values widely recognized in studies of ranchers throughout the West. Ranchers have been described as lifestyle consumers or consumptive users or in the words of a 1972 author: not economic men

Paired surveys of ranchers in 2 distant places Colorado: Eastern Rockies Rowe et al. 2001 California: Pacific Coast Sulak & Huntsinger, 2002

Reasons ranchers in California and Colorado studies gave for continuing to ranch (Rowe et al. 2001a, Sulak and Huntsinger 2002). I continue to ranch because California n=37 Colorado n=34-37 Enjoy animal husbandry 95% 97% Way of life 95% 95% Family 95% 87% Tradition 95% 81% Live near natural beauty 92% 87% Work 89% 89% It would be difficult to get a job outside the ranch 14% 27% It's a good way to make money 14% 19%

The personal and family values that ranchers get from owning a ranch can be given a monetary value and added to income. This makes the ranch profitable from the owner s point of view

This value also represents landowner investment (self-subsidy) in their oak woodland properties. Ranchers are paying to be ranchers, among other things. Opportunity costs Labor Off-ranch income

Rancher and Public Values from a Ranch have Common Ground Rancher Profits Natural Beauty Living on property Wildlife and recreation Legacy value: heirs Production value for agriculture Public Profits Natural Beauty Existence and viewshed Wildlife and recreation Legacy value: future generations Healthy agricultural products

Three fourths of registered voters support using public funds to preserve agriculture as long as conservation benefits are provided. American Farmland Trust Survey, 2001 http://www.farmland.org/news_2001/071101_surve y_main.htm

Older tools for conservation of oak woodland silvopastoral systems Planning and temporary contracts: Under the jurisdiction of counties and municipalities Weak Found to be least effective where needed most Regulations: backlash and unintended consequences

California ranchers don t like planning and regulation Rancher Attitudes in Four California Counties, Liffmann et al. 2000. California Ranchers: Want their land to stay a ranch 70%+ Find over-regulation a reason to quit 80%+ Believe urbanization is a major threat to ranching 85% Believe land use planning is a major threat to ranchin g 75% (Huntsinger et al. 1997, Liffmann, Huntsinger, Forero 2000)

--use of rancher investment is most effective with rancher cooperation Working Landscapes Principles --mimimum governmental or regulatory role --incentive-based --voluntary --can stand against extreme development pressure --allows ranchers to be ranchers

Agricultural Conservation Easements for conserving ranch lands a key tool Permanent deed restrictions that preclude subdivision or development Adds another owner to the land title: usually a land trust like The Nature Conservancy.

2.52 m ha in land trusts in 2000 California is one of the top three states in land trust land 1263 land trusts in operation in 2000 a nonprofit organization that works to conserve land by undertaking or assisting direct land transactions, primarily the purchase or acceptance of donations of land or conservation easements

Agricultural Conservation Easements A market for development rights Landowner sells or donates voluntarily in exchange for cash and/or tax relief On ranch lands, commonly brokered by a nongovernmental organization (land trust) using private and/or public funds The most widely used private sector land conservation method in the US. Land under easement increased 225% in California in the 1990s.

Easement value, the value of development right, can be 35% to 65% of property value In California, averages $5,000 per ha Landowner may take less than the maximum price, or donate an easement for property and inheritance tax relief $10,000/ha Total land price for development Easement Value $5,000.00/ha Land price as grazing land $5,000/ha

Attractive option for ranchers Monetary income from land appreciation is greater than that from ranching Most ranchers have major financial asset in land(hargreave, 1993) Traditionally sell off parcels to supplement low income, 1% a year between 1985 and 1992 (Huntsinger et al. 1997) Can continue lifestyle but capture appreciation value

Marin Agricultural Land Trust Land use planning supports and is supported by the easement program The National Park is buffered from urbanization

This farmland is preserved in perpetuity by the owner and the Marin Agricultural Land Trust

Working Landscapes Preserves large agricultural landholdings Easier to work with fewer owners in a watershed with common goals Easier to protect intact ecosystems Adds additional owners to the property title

IV. Spain vs. California to highlight the link to ecological and demographic dynamics

Mediterranean Climate Temperature Rainfall J J A S O N D J F M A M J

Pigs

Similar climate, open oak woodlands used for grazing.

Quercus Englemanii

Quercus Ilex

California woods

Spanish woods

American cow browse

Spanish cow browse

Even spacing

Oak distribution

Oak tubes in spain

The conservation strategies we hear about why so different? California Conservation Easements Tax relief contracts in exchange for no development Zoning/Planning Spain Afforestation subsidies Labeling & local products Subsidies for environmentally beneficial agriculture Planning

Hams

States and Transitions: Oak Savanna Oak/Grass Grass Shrub Oak/Shrub

Human Values and Practices

Intensive mgt.irregular distribution Maintaining dehesa requires regular management and particular practices

Making dehesa

jara

Mt. Diablo Transect 1982

Mt. Diablo Transect 1992 85% of California oak woodland stable without intervention

Questions Are the attitudes and values of landowners and managers in California and Spain similar? Can these attitudes and values explain why emergent incentive-based private land conservation strategies in each place take such different forms? Are the approaches transferable?

Who is managing the woodlands? An opportunistic look at some survey data. Limited comparability: different dates, sampling methods, and scales.

Landowners, Managers, and Land Owner is resident manager Age of manager Manager attended college Years of ownership Property size Cáceres < 25% 45 58% 73 507 ha California 80% (CA1) 92% (CA2) 59 (CA 1) 50 (CA 2) 57 (CA 3) 55% (CA2) 63% (CA3) 53 (CA1) 51 (CA2) 63% more than 100 years (CA3) 927 ha (CA3)

Spain: Absentee ownership and hired managers more common. California: Family home with ownermanager, few professional managers.

Land Use Cáceres California Produce cattle Produce more than one kind of livestock Mean # cattle 62% 79% 102 92% (CA1) 91% (CA2) 3% (CA1) 7% (CA2-sheep) 2% (CA3) 336 (CA3) Other products Small game (70%) Large game (23%) Fishing (9%) Firewood (54%) Dry farming (47%) Irrigated crops (72%) Tourism (4%) Fee hunting/fishing (13%-CA1) 7%-CA2) Firewood (12%-CA1) (11%-CA2) Crops (11%-CA1) (20%-CA2) Recreation (3%-CA1) (2%-CA2)

cork

Pigs

Most ranches produce cattle only, and two English breeds predominate

Niman Ranch produces the finest tasting meat in the world by adhering to a strict code of husbandry principles. Our livestock are humanely treated, fed the purest natural feeds, never given growth-promoting antibiotics or hormones and raised on land that is cared for as a sustainable resource. Bill Niman s obsession for creating the best product possible has made his Niman Ranch meats a cut above the rest. At a time when the local butcher shop has all but disappeared, both home cooks and renowned restaurant chefs appreciate Niman s commitment to producing exceptional hormone-free beef and pork. --Bon Appetit Magazine

Attitudes about the government and conservation strategies Cáceres California Government Responsibility Government Consultation Condition of oaks Conservation options Participation in voluntary programs Government has a duty to protect nature (78%) Regional government & ag sector collaborate satisfactorily (6%) Oaks are endangered (44%) Oaks are regenerating fine on my land (62%) Ban on oak cutting (49%) Implement dehesa law (19%) Private lands are better managed (78%) Afforestation scheme: 32% Agroenvironmental scheme: 28% State has a responsibility to protect natural resources (65%) State consults adequately with citizens about regulating resources (16%) Oaks are being lost (54%-CA1) I see small oaks frequently (23%); I see some small oaks (69%) (CA1) Regulate oak use: 21%(CA1) Land use planning a threat to ranching: 81% (CA2) Private lands are better managed 76%(CA2) Want land to become public (3%) Tax relief 10 year contract: (65%-CA1) (69%-CA2) (70%-CA3) Conservation Easement 4%+?

Government has a responsibility to protect natural resources. But not mine.

Explaining oak conservation strategies

Prefer incentives or compensation Markets for regional and diverse products Stability of woodlands Out-migration and land development pressure Spain + + - - California + - + +

Stabilizes land --landowner sells part of title, not part of land Conservation easement --provides capital and tax relief Tool for relatively stable woodland, unstable population distribution May not address: --regeneration --day to day management --agriculture viability --long term planning

California: Exponential urban outgrowth and population growth Land priced at $1,000.00 per ha brings $80,000 per ha if sold as a small parcel Spain: very strong zoning. (AFT Report of nationwide survey)

The Balance Sheet Ranchers will pay to be ranchers but regs must allow them to maintain day to day autonomy and control Rancher contribution can be added to other reasons why conservation via working landscapes, including conservation easements, can be a good deal for the conservation investor.

Ironically, that in a country so values private property rights, sharing land title with NGOs and/or agencies has evolved into such a popular conservation method. Ranchers are willing to share title as well as forgo other opportunities in exchange for the opportunity to continue ranching, for themselves and their families.