The second meeting of the Rangeland Initiative team convened at 10:30 a.m., April 19. The meeting was led by chairman Eric Peterson. Other participants were Frank Henderson, Glen Whipple, Ron Cunningham, Blaine Horn, Mike Smith, Tom Heald and Gene Gade. Tom Foulkes attended the second day, while Whipple and Cunningham left for other commitments.

First topic of discussion was "What's expected?" of and by the Initiative Team?

General comments were that Initiative Teams are intended to provide clarity, prioritization, and focus for Extension and its clients on issues and programs related to the major initiative...in this case, rangeland resources. Dr. Whipple stated that Initiative Teams are now performing much of the administrative role formerly performed by Program Leaders. As such, this team can provide help to other agents RE range/natural resource issues. To some extent, Initiative Teams have a "think tank" role...to "get out of the box" and "look over the horizon" at future needs and issues.

Initiative Teams will, in large part, decide "what issues," Extension is going to be involved with, and "how" and "when" it will be involved. This could include identifying research questions, providing information in many forms (including, but not restricted to, "dog and pony shows"). There seemed to be general agreement that we should: 1) include programs for multiple audiences...production ag., agencies, small landowners, general public, youth, etc., 2) provide credible information and interpretation, 3) identify, but not try to dictate, options for the various options, 4) be proactive when possible.

There was also some suggestion that this structure (i.e Initiative and Issues Teams) was part of the Strategic Plan's attempt to "cover the state with fewer people" and to change how we share information and responsibility so that "we won't have to go out of county as much."

Second topic: Is there a process?

Initiative Teams identify issues and collectively decide the response..."orchestrate" "product development" by the Issue Teams. Liaison to Ag/NR groups and other audiences and the State Coordinating Committee (5 initiative team leaders and administration). Internally share what's going on with the rangeland initiative via web site, district meetings, EPIC/In-Depth, other media. Needs Assessment > Response Recommendations > Issue Teams and Network Partners >Program Implementation.

Goals and Objectives of the Rangeland Initiative as written in the draft Strategic Plan were reviewed and discussed. General discussion was that existing goals and objectives were purposefully general and might need revision in the future, but were adequate as a starting point for our team's work. Comment was made that we should always look for our educational role first and to be careful about "advocacy."

The relative roles of the various parts of the Strategic Plan Delivery Model were reviewed:

Basically, Initiative Teams accomplish the functions identified in the above discussion...Needs Assessment...Response Plans/Recommendations...Establishment of Issue Teams to do the Implementation. These are long-term teams with responsibility for program leadership in the various initiative areas. (Ex. The Rangelands Initiative Team has decided that Drought Management is a significant issue that falls under its purview, but it is only one of many such issues related to the initiative.)

The Coordinating Committee makes administrative decisions regarding resource allocation, priorities, etc. (Ex. The Rangeland Initiative chair, Eric Peterson, may ask the Coordinating Committee to provide seed-money to help get the Drought Management Issue Team get started on its work.)

Issue teams accomplish the Program Development and Delivery. That will often include seeking of outside funds via grants, etc., as well as developing both the plan and particular materials for issues identified by the Initiative Teams. They will accomplish program development, dissemination, delivery, etc. Issue Teams may be relatively short-lived or on-going as the Issue demands. (Ex. The current focus on Drought Management, is really an example of an Issue Team that may serve at least two Initiative Teams...Rangeland and Sustainable Ag.)

Area teams may be extensions of an Issue Team, charged with responsibility for implementing a program in a particular region of the state. (Ex. The Extension educators in NE Wyoming may collectively work to implement Drought Management education programs as the Drought Issue Team completes its more general work.)

Eric's Schematic diagram inserted here?

Review of Team Resources - Blaine Horn recently inventoried to UW CES staff relative to their expertise, experience and interest in Rangeland Resources. That inventory has been transmitted via email to all personnel and represents the human resources available within the organization for this initiative - Thanks, Blaine!

Review of Rangeland Initiative deliberations at In-Depth in Laramie - Mike Smith and Gene Gade produced summaries which are included here.

A First Look At Specific Program Needs/Possibilities

List of topics/clientele info requests related to rangelends that are frequent, recurring or current: From flip chart list-- sort of an informal "needs assessment" I guess

Range / Riparian Monitoring
CAFO's, AFO's and TMDL's
Coordination
Livestock Requirement Planning
Weeds
Range Stocking Planning
CRM's - Collaborative Work
Small Acreage
ESA Species
Info Clearing House
Lease Arrangements
Sagegrouse Habitat (et. al.)
Grazing Management
Water - Quality and Regulatory Issues
CBM's H2O Quality and Quantity
Rehabilitation
Seeding Rates and Species Selection for grasses and forages
Drought Management
Livestock Budgets
Ranch Management Systems (Profitability)
Livestock Rations
Winter Feed
Hay Quality
Public Education - Stewardship
School Enrichment
Youth Camps
Ag in Classroom
Range Livestock Disease
Elk - Cattle Relationships
Alternative Ranch Income
Wildlife Habitat Improvement
Large Predators
Predation in General
Wildlife Nuisance Management
Water Development's relationship to (Mammalian / Avian / Amphibian) issues

Futuring Process - Threats and Opportunities

THREATS TO SUSTAINABILITY OF RANGE RESOURCES IN WYOMING

Aging Population of producers

Predators
"Trophy Ranching"
Development
Public Grazing Goes Away
Poorly Informed Public Opinion
Exotic & Invasive Weeds
3^rd World Country Competition
Population Demands (Recreation, etc.)
Prairie Dogs
Demand to reallocate forage to wildlife, and increase public demand on private land , increased wildlife use on private lands (Expanding Wildlife Population)
Water Distribution

INTERESTING CHALLENGES/OPPORTUNITIES FOR EXTENSION PROGRAMS

Potentials Related to Sustain Ability of Wyoming's Rangeland Resources
Genetic Enhancement or Plant Breeding of Forages
New Stuff (Cultivars, etc.)
Potential To Improve H2O Quality
Increasing Public Understanding of the Benefit of Public Grazing
Multi-Species Grazing (Wildlife)
Development H2O Resources for Cattle / Wildlife
Using Collaborative Processes to Resolve Conflict
Biological Control of Invasive Species
Carbon Bank - Sequestration
Predator Issues
Assets - Arid Environment, etc.
Energy Produced Waters
Small Acreage Well Managed

The Infamous Umbrella Concept - Identify two major "umbrellas" for rangeland resources (range/water relations) (range/habitat relations) and gather similar or closely-related topics under the umbrellas.
 
 

Hey, I know that any attempt to separate and organize this stuff is arbitrary. They're all inter-related. Who's "more holistic than thou?" Just striving for a thought model.

DROUGHT ISSUE TEAM - The Rangeland Initiative Team formally acted to support the Drought Management Issue Team that is already working under the leadership of Phil Rosenlund. It is recognized that this is not strictly a rangeland issue and that it will require networking with other Initiative Teams (eg. Sustainable Ag.) as well as outside entities. It's also a bit of a cart-before-the-horse as far as our future process is concerned -- Issue teams will, in the future, develop from Initiative Team work. However, drought is a legitimate, relevant, timely issue to be involved with. More than that, it's an early opportunity for a success story and a model for how an Issue Team can operate. Following are "bullets" from our discussion.

AN ALERT SYSTEM
News Media - Emedia - Extension Media

DROUGHT - EXTENSION RESPONSE

EXTENSION DROUGHT STRATEGY

• 1^st Response Stuff)
• 2^nd Pertinent Information
• 3^rd Climatological - Long Term Prognostication/Planning

• Where is Data? (to agents) -Eric Peterson, Gene Gade, Mike Smith
• Is Drought Likely? How To Interpret Info- Gene Gade, Mike Smith
• When to Ring Alarm - What is Normal?

**LESS IMPERATIVE**

Listing of potential topics for Fact Sheets - (Peer Reviewed to be Clear Complete, Accurate, Organized)
(**Asterisks indicate priority Items - needed quickly)

**Culling Decisions - Brett Moline
**Alternative Forage Sources- Where - How Link - How Far Afford?
**Water Sources - Planning - Equipment Strategies - Economics - Optimizing Grazing Distribution
**What About Marketing? (Early?)
**Early Weaning
**What About "Coming Off" Early?
What About Stocker Operations?
Plant Physiology and Response To Drought and Appropriate Grazing Strategy
Watershed Issues ( Erosion, Plants, etc.)
Animal Performance Under Drought (Numbers)
Wildlife and Drought
Managing to Mitigate Drought For Impacts on Wildlife
Droughts Role in the Environment
**Working With Your Forage Landlord
**Winter Feed Planning - Including Substitute Feeds
**Drought Prognostication - (Information Sources - What the Information Means)
Snow Management / Capture

NEEDS ASSESSMENT - Discussion was held as to whether we needed to undertake a formal needs assessment as part of the Rangeland Initiative Team's work, and, if so, how it should be done. There seemed to be a general consensus that we needed input from outside the team. We did not reach consensus on specifics of how to accomplish such assessment...who to ask, how and what to ask them, etc. Suggestion was made that perhaps we should coordinate our needs assessment with those of other Initiative Teams and that part of Susan James' new position included responsibility for needs assessment. We basically dodged the specifics pending discussions with other teams and Susan.