SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Rangelands”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

USGS2025

An accuracy assessment of satellite-derived rangeland fractional cover

Satellite-derived maps of vegetation cover provide detailed information about vegetation spatiotemporal patterns and are increasingly used to better understand and manage rangelands. Despite their utility, questions remain regarding the regional and site level accuracy for these maps, especially compared to field-collected data. We conducted an accuracy assessment of the Rangeland Analysis Platform (RAP), using over 17,000 field plots sampled through nationwide rangeland vegetation monitoring programs in the continental U.S. We observed higher overall nationwide map error compared to previous validations of RAP, and absolute error (Mean Absolute Error [MAE] and Root Mean Square Error [RMSE]) was highest for perennial herbaceous and bare ground and lowest for trees (MAE range = 2.98 –10.22 %). There were also differences in map agreement with field data across ecoregions. Generally, map agreement was highest in the Great Basin and lowest in the Great Plains and Desert Southwest. Additionally, we assessed the suitability of using RAP in riparian and wetland areas, which are absent in the current version’s training. Errors for bare ground in riparian areas were lower than errors of upland accuracy assessments (upland MAE = 10.22 %, riparian MAE = 7.22 %), but for all other functional groups, riparian error was higher (ΔMAE range: 0.21 – 20.49 %). We examine how our results could inform regional applications of fractional cover data while considering error and uncertainty and identify areas for potential model improvement. Our findings inform the use of RAP regionally and provide a technique for evaluating other vegetation mapping products for use in rangeland management.

Ecological Indicators↗

USGS2006

Storage and transit time of chemicals in thick unsaturated zones under rangeland and irrigated cropland, High Plains, United States

In 2000-2002, three rangeland and six irrigated sites were instrumented to assess the storage and transit time of chemicals in thick (15 to 50 m) unsaturated zones (UZ) in the High Plains. These processes are likely to influence relations between land use and groundwater quality, yet they have not been documented systematically in the High Plains. Land use and climate were important controls on the size of subsoil chloride, nitrate, and pesticide compound reservoirs. The reservoirs under irrigated cropland generally were larger than those under rangeland because more chemicals were applied to cropland than to rangeland. In some cases, chloride and nitrate reservoirs under rangeland were larger than those under cropland, presumably because of long‐term evaporative concentration near the base of the root zone. Natural salts mobilized by irrigation return flow accounted for as much as 60 and 80% of the nitrate and chloride reservoirs, respectively, under some cropland, as indicated by detailed chemical profiles and isotopic tracers ( 15 N, 18 O in nitrate and 2 H, 3 H, 18 O in water). Advective chemical transit times in the UZ under cropland ranged from about 50 to 375 years, longer than any of the instrumented fields had been irrigated, yet agrichemicals were detected at the water table at four of the six sites. The data provide evidence for the existence of slow and fast paths for water movement in the UZ, with larger subsoil chemical reservoirs occurring in areas dominated by slow paths. Implications of these findings with respect to water quality in the aquifer are significant because they indicate that the amount of chemical mass reaching the aquifer could increase with time as chemicals that still reside under irrigated fields reach the water table.

Water Resources Research↗

USGS2016

Low-cost grass restoration using erosion barriers in a degraded African rangeland

Rangeland degradation, typified by extensive bare ground and soil erosion, is a serious problem around the world. In sub-Saharan Africa, rangeland degradation threatens the food security of millions of people who depend on livestock and the region's large mammalian wildlife diversity. We tested the ability of five simple, low-cost erosion barriers to promote grass and forb establishment in a bare ground-dominated rangeland in Kenya. These treatments were: (1) trenches with small berms; (2) bundles of branches; and bundles of branches with (3) elephant dung balls, (4) burlap sacking, or (5) nylon mesh sacking inside them. We also tested whether barrier performance depended on (1) supplemental seeding with the grass Cenchrus ciliaris and (2) whether a barrier was located next to existing vegetation patches versus in the open. Within months, the trench and nylon mesh barriers had accumulated 20–50% more sediment than other treatments and had greater grass and forb seedling establishment. Seeding with Cenchrus resulted in higher herbaceous cover but was not necessary for other grasses to establish. After 3 years, the trench and nylon mesh barriers had created patches of new vegetation averaging 18–63% larger than patches created by the other treatments. Barriers that were initially adjacent to existing vegetation had created new vegetation patches averaging 65% larger than those created by solitary barriers. Results suggest that all barrier types increase grass cover but that trenches—especially if placed next to existing vegetation patches—are a particularly cost-effective way to reduce bare ground and erosion in degraded rangelands.

Restoration Ecology↗

USGS2000

The swift fox in rangeland and cropland in western Kansas: Relative abundance, mortality, and body size

We assessed suitability of cropland and shortgrass rangeland for swift foxes ( Vulpes velox ) in western Kansas. Relative abundance and survival were similar for foxes in rangeland and cropland. Mortality resulting from non-traumatic causes, coyotes, and motor vehicles differed significantly between habitats. Predation by coyotes, motor vehicles, and non-traumatic causes were responsible for 45%, 36%, and 18%, respectively, of 11 deaths in rangeland and 20%, 10%, and 70%, respectively, of 10 deaths in cropland. Swift foxes in rangeland were larger and in better condition than those in cropland. Males were larger than females based on mass, standardized mass (mass/body length), body length, hindfoot length, and ear length.

Kansas↗

USGS2002

Rangeland health attributes and indicators for qualitative assessment

Panels of experts from the Society for Range Management and the National Research Council proposed that status of rangeland ecosystems could be ascertained by evaluating an ecological site's potential to conserve soil resources and by a series of indicators for ecosystem processes and site stability. Using these recommendations as a starting point, we developed a rapid, qualitative method for assessing a moment-in-time status of rangelands. Evaluators rate 17 indicators to assess 3 ecosystem attributes (soil and site stability, hydrologic function, and biotic integrity) for a given location. Indicators include rills, water flow patterns, pedestals and terracettes, bare ground, gullies, wind scour and depositional areas, litter movement, soil resistance to erosion, soil surface loss or degradation, plant composition relative to infiltration, soil compaction, plant functional/structural groups, plant mortality, litter amount, annual production, invasive plants, and reproductive capability. In this paper, we detail the development and evolution of the technique and introduce a modified ecological reference worksheet that documents the expected presence and amount of each indicator on the ecological site. In addition, we review the intended applications for this technique and clarify the differences between assessment and monitoring that lead us to recommend this technique be used for moment-in-time assessments and not be used for temporal monitoring of rangeland status. Lastly, we propose a mechanism for adapting and modifying this technique to reflect improvements in understanding of ecosystem processes. We support the need for quantitative measures for monitoring rangeland health and propose some measures that we believe may address some of the 17 indicators.

Journal of Range Management↗

USGS2014

Future scenarios of impacts to ecosystem services on California rangelands

The 18 million acres of rangelands in the Central Valley of California provide multiple benefits or “ecosystem services” to people—including wildlife habitat, water supply, open space, recreation, and cultural resources. Most of this land is privately owned and managed for livestock production. These rangelands are vulnerable to land-use conversion and climate change. To help resource managers assess the impacts of land-use change and climate change, U.S. Geological Survey scientists and their cooperators developed scenarios to quantify and map changes to three main rangeland ecosystem services—wildlife habitat, water supply, and carbon sequestration. Project results will help prioritize strategies to conserve these rangelands and the ecosystem services that they provide.

California↗

USGS2002

Hydrologic conditions and quality of rainfall and storm runoff in agricultural and rangeland areas in San Patricio County, Texas, 2000-2001

During 2000–2001, rainfall and runoff were monitored in one mixed agricultural watershed and two rangeland watersheds in San Patricio County, located in the Coastal Bend area of South Texas. During this period, five rainfall samples were collected and analyzed for selected nutrients. Ten runoff samples from nine runoff events were collected at the three watershed monitoring stations. Runoff samples were analyzed for selected nutrients, major ions, trace elements, pesticides, and bacteria. Study area rainfall during 2000 and 2001 was 33.27 and 28.20 inches, respectively, less than the long-term average annual of 36.31 inches. Total runoff from the study area watersheds during 2000–2001 was 2.46 inches; the regional average is about 2 inches per year. Rainfall and runoff during the study period was typical of historical patterns, with periods of below average rainfall interspersed with extreme events. Three individual storm events accounted for about 29 percent of the total rainfall and 86 percent of the total runoff during 2000– 2001. Runoff concentrations of nutrients, major ions, and trace elements generally were larger in the mixed agricultural watershed than runoff concentrations in the rangeland watersheds. Pesticides were detected in two of eight runoff samples. Three pesticides (atrazine, deethylatrazine, and trifluralin) were detected in very small concentrations; only deethylatrazine was detected in a concentration greater than the laboratory minimum reporting level. Bacteria in agricultural and rangeland runoff is a potential water-quality concern as all fecal coliform and E. coli densities in the runoff samples exceeded Texas Surface Water Quality Standards for receiving waters. However, runoff and relatively large bacteria densities represent very brief and infrequent conditions, and the effect on downstream water is not known. Rainfall deposition is a major source of nitrogen delivered to the study area. Rainfall nitrogen (mostly ammonia and nitrate) exceeded the runoff yield. The average annual rainfall deposition of total nitrogen on the study area watersheds was 1.3 pounds per acre. In contrast, an average annual yield of 0.57 and 0.21 pound per acre of total nitrogen in runoff exited the mixed agricultural watershed and the rangeland watersheds, respectively.

Texas↗

USGS2012

Assessment of rangeland ecosystem conditions, Salt Creek watershed and Dugout Ranch, southeastern Utah

Increasingly, dry rangelands are being valued for multiple services beyond their traditional value as a forage production system. Additional ecosystem services include the potential to store carbon in the soil and plant biomass. In addition, dust emissions from rangelands might be considered an ecosystem detriment, the opposite of an ecosystem service. Dust emitted may have far-reaching impacts, for example, reduction of local air quality, as well as altering regional water supplies through effects on snowpack. Using an extensive rangeland monitoring dataset in the greater Canyonlands region (Utah, USA), we developed a method to estimate indices of the provisioning of three ecosystem services (forage production, dust retention, C storage) and one ecosystem property (nativeness), taking into account both ecosystem type and alternative states within that ecosystem type. We also integrated these four indices into a multifunctionality index. Comparing the currently ungrazed Canyonlands National Park watersheds to the adjacent Dugout Ranch pastures, we found clearly higher multifunctionality was attained in the Park, and that this was primarily driven by greater C-storage and better dust retention. It is unlikely to maximize all benefits and minimize all detriments at the same time. Some goods and services may have synergistic interactions; for example, managing for carbon storage will increase plant and biocrust cover likely lowering dust emission. Likewise, some may have antagonistic interactions. For instance, if carbon is consumed as biomass for livestock production, then carbon storage may be reduced. Ultimately our goal should be to quantify the monetary consequences of specific land use practices for multiple ecosystem services and determine the best land use and adaptive management practices for attaining multiple ecosystem services, minimizing economic detriments, and maximizing economic benefits from multi-commodity rangelands. Our technique is the first step toward this goal, allowing the simultaneous consideration of multiple targeted ecosystem services and properties.

Utah↗

USGS2015

Geospatial datasets for assessing the effects of rangeland conditions on dissolved-solids yields in the Upper Colorado River Basin

In 2009, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) developed a Spatially Referenced Regressions on Watershed Attributes (SPARROW) surface-water quality model for the Upper Colorado River Basin (UCRB) relating dissolved-solids sources and transport in the 1991 water year to upstream catchment characteristics. The SPARROW model focused on geologic and agricultural sources of dissolved solids in the UCRB and was calibrated using water-year 1991 dissolved-solids loads from 218 monitoring sites. A new UCRB SPARROW model is planned that will update the investigation of dissolved-solids sources and transport in the basin to circa 2010 conditions and will improve upon the 2009 model by incorporating more detailed information about agricultural-irrigation and rangeland-management practices, among other improvements. Geospatial datasets relating to circa 2010 rangeland conditions are required for the new UCRB SPARROW modeling effort. This study compiled geospatial datasets for the UCRB that relate to the biotic alterations and rangeland conditions of grazing, fire and other land disturbance, and vegetation type and cover. Datasets representing abiotic alterations of access control (off-highway vehicles) and sediment generation and transport in general, were also compiled. These geospatial datasets may be tested in the upcoming SPARROW model to better understand the potential contribution of rangelands to dissolved-solids loading in UCRB streams.

Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming↗

USGS2021

Rangeland fractional components across the western United States from 1985 to 2018

Monitoring temporal dynamics of rangelands to detect and understand change in vegetation cover and composition provides a wealth of information to improve management and sustainability. Remote sensing allows the evaluation of both abrupt and gradual rangeland change at unprecedented spatial and temporal extents. Here, we describe the production of the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) Back in Time (BIT) dataset which quantified the percent cover of rangeland components (bare ground, herbaceous, annual herbaceous, litter, shrub, and sagebrush ( Artemisia spp. Nutt.) across the western United States using Landsat imagery from 1985 to 2018. We evaluate the relationships of component trends with climate drivers at an ecoregion scale, describe the nature of landscape change, and demonstrate several case studies related to changes in grazing management, prescribed burns, and vegetation treatments. Our results showed the net cover of shrub, sagebrush, and litter significantly ( p < 0.01) decreased, bare ground and herbaceous cover had no significant change, and annual herbaceous cover significantly ( p < 0.05) increased. Change was ubiquitous, with a mean of 92% of pixels with some change and 38% of pixels with significant change ( p < 0.10). However, most change was gradual, well over half of pixels have a range of less than 10%, and most change occurred outside of known disturbances. The BIT data facilitate a comprehensive assessment of rangeland condition, evaluation of past management actions, understanding of system variability, and opportunities for future planning.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Mont↗

USGS2022

Multi-species inference of exotic annual and native perennial grasses in rangelands of the western United States using Harmonized Landsat and Sentinel-2 data

The invasion of exotic annual grass (EAG), e.g., cheatgrass ( Bromus tectorum ) and medusahead ( Taeniatherum caput-medusae ), into rangeland ecosystems of the western United States is a broad-scale problem that affects wildlife habitats, increases wildfire frequency, and adds to land management costs. However, identifying individual species of EAG abundance from remote sensing, particularly at early stages of invasion or growth, can be problematic because of overlapping controls and similar phenological characteristics among native and other exotic vegetation. Subsequently, refining and developing tools capable of quantifying the abundance and phenology of annual and perennial grass species would be beneficial to help inform conservation and management efforts at local to regional scales. Here, we deploy an enhanced version of the U.S. Geological Survey Rangeland Exotic Plant Monitoring System to develop timely and accurate maps of annual (2016–2020) and intra-annual (May 2021 and July 2021) abundances of exotic annual and perennial grass species throughout the rangelands of the western United States. This monitoring system leverages field observations and remote-sensing data with artificial intelligence/machine learning to rapidly produce annual and early season estimates of species abundances at a 30-m spatial resolution. We introduce a fully automated and multi-task deep-learning framework to simultaneously predict and generate weekly, near-seamless composites of Harmonized Landsat Sentinel-2 spectral data. These data, along with auxiliary datasets and time series metrics, are incorporated into an ensemble of independent XGBoost models. This study demonstrates that inclusion of the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index and Normalized Difference Wetness Index time-series data generated from our deep-learning framework enables near real-time and accurate mapping of EAG (Median Absolute Error (MdAE): 3.22, 2.72, and 0.02; and correlation coefficient (r): 0.82, 0.81, and 0.73; respectively for EAG, cheatgrass, and medusahead) and native perennial grass abundance (MdAE: 2.51, r:0.72 for Sandberg bluegrass ( Poa secunda )). Our approach and the resulting data provide insights into rangeland grass dynamics, which will be useful for applications, such as fire and drought monitoring, habitat suitability mapping, as well as land-cover and land-change modelling. Spatially explicit, timely, and accurate species-specific abundance datasets provide invaluable information to land managers.

western United States↗

USGS2024

Application of normalized radar backscatter and hyperspectral data to augment rangeland vegetation fractional classification

Rangeland ecosystems in the western United States are vulnerable to climate change, fire, and anthropogenic disturbances, yet classification of rangeland areas remains difficult due to frequently sparse vegetation canopies that increase the influence of soils and senesced vegetation, the overall abundance of senesced vegetation, heterogeneity of life forms, and limited ground-based data. The Rangeland Condition Monitoring Assessment and Projection (RCMAP) project provides fractional vegetation cover maps across western North America using Landsat imagery and artificial intelligence from 1985 to 2023 at yearly time-steps. The objectives of this case study are to apply hyperspectral data from several new data streams, including Sentinel Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) and Earth Surface Mineral Dust Source Investigation (EMIT), to the RCMAP model . We run a series of five tests (Landsat-base model, base + SAR, base + EMIT, base + SAR + EMIT, and base + Landsat NEXT [LNEXT] synthesized from EMIT) over a difficult-to-classify region centered in southwest Montana, USA. Our testing results indicate a clear accuracy benefit of adding SAR and EMIT data to the RCMAP model, with a 7.5% and 29% relative increase in independent accuracy ( R 2 ), respectively. The ability of SAR data to observe vegetation height allows for more accurate classification of vegetation types, whereas EMIT’s continuous characterization of the spectral response boosts discriminatory power relative to multispectral data. Our spectral profile analysis reveals the enhanced classification power with EMIT is related to both the improved spectral resolution and representation of the entire domain as compared to legacy Landsat. One key finding is that legacy Landsat bands largely miss portions of the electromagnetic spectrum where separation among important rangeland targets exists, namely in the 900–1250 nm and 1500–1780 nm range. Synthesized LNEXT data include these gaps, but the reduced spectral resolution compared to EMIT results in an intermediate 18% increase in accuracy relative to the base run. Here, we show the promise of enhanced classification accuracy using EMIT data, and to a smaller extent, SAR.

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗

USGS2017

Enhancing wind erosion monitoring and assessment for U.S. rangelands

On the Ground Wind erosion is a major resource concern for rangeland managers because it can impact soil health, ecosystem structure and function, hydrologic processes, agricultural production, and air quality. Despite its significance, little is known about which landscapes are eroding, by how much, and when. The National Wind Erosion Research Network was established in 2014 to develop tools for monitoring and assessing wind erosion and dust emissions across the United States. The Network, currently consisting of 13 sites, creates opportunities to enhance existing rangeland soil, vegetation, and air quality monitoring programs. Decision-support tools developed by the Network will improve the prediction and management of wind erosion across rangeland ecosystems.

Rangelands↗

USGS2021

Making research relevant: Sharing climate change research with rangeland advisors to transform results into drought resilience

On the Ground • Public programs, strategies, and incentives to implement rangeland climate adaptation are more effective if they are tailored to local drought exposures, sensitivities, and adaptation opportunities. As such, local rangeland advisers who aid in climate adaptation are pivotal to the development of these resources. • We hosted a virtual workshop with rangeland advisors to share results from our climate vulnerability assessment, gain their insight on finding usability, and discuss visions for resource creation. • Climate adaptation resources should not follow a one-size-fits-all approach. Accommodating variety in resource development and outreach must consider multiple factors: variation in the ranching community, instability in the environment beyond climate, and rancher/manager identified variables in climate vulnerability assessment analyses.

Rangelands↗

USGS2026

Long-term effects of rangeland improvements on cattle distribution: A ranch-scale case study

Resource matching can be a common assumption that underlies anthropogenic rangeland improvements for wildlife or livestock. Countless resources are spent on targeted vegetation manipulations for both livestock and wildlife, but selection for improved areas has not been well quantified in livestock. This case study investigates whether cattle exhibit preferential use of historically improved rangeland sites within sagebrush steppe ecosystems, and whether these effects are relevant long-term compared with inherent landscape heterogeneity. We used a generalized linear mixed-effects resource selection function on Global Positioning System points collected at a fix rate of 2 h from a subset of animals grazing throughout 14 pastures (totaling 13 079 ha) over 3 yr to investigate cattle distribution in relation to historical rangeland improvements. These consisted of various methods for reducing woody plant cover and increasing forage production, most followed by grass and legume reseeding. Overall selection for treated areas was positive (0.16, P < 0.0 0 01), but highly variable (pasture estimates range from-1.81 to 0.77). Differences in enhanced vegetation index (EVI) accounted for 25% of the variation in treatment selection, whereas herbaceous production did not have an appreciable effect on treatment selection. Within individual pastures, the effects of landscape variables (distance to water, slope, herbaceous production, EVI, tree cover, and shrub cover) were more variable than treatment effects and on average 2.4-fold more influential to selection than anthropogenic treatments. Still, the combined effects of all landscape variables accounted for only 8% of the variation in site selection. The observed inconsistency among selection patterns underscores the complexity of large herbivore resource selection behavior, and the statistical challenges to modeling that behavior. These results provide limited and inconsistent support for the hypothesis that large herbivores select long-term (5–20 yr post establishment) for range improvements in relation to their forage quality/quantity in a resource-matching manner.

Utah↗

USGS2011

Incorporating biodiversity into rangeland health: Plant species richness and diversity in great plains grasslands

Indicators of rangeland health generally do not include a measure of biodiversity. Increasing attention to maintaining biodiversity in rangelands suggests that this omission should be reconsidered, and plant species richness and diversity are two metrics that may be useful and appropriate. Ideally, their response to a variety of anthropogenic and natural drivers in the ecosystem of interest would be clearly understood, thereby providing a means to diagnose the cause of decline in an ecosystem. Conceptual ecological models based on ecological principles and hypotheses provide a framework for this understanding, but these models must be supported by empirical evidence if they are to be used for decision making. To that end, we synthesize results from published studies regarding the responses of plant species richness and diversity to drivers that are of management concern in Great Plains grasslands, one of North America's most imperiled ecosystems. In the published literature, moderate grazing generally has a positive effect on these metrics in tallgrass prairie and a neutral to negative effect in shortgrass prairie. The largest published effects on richness and diversity were caused by moderate grazing in tallgrass prairies and nitrogen fertilization in shortgrass prairies. Although weather is often cited as the reason for considerable annual fluctuations in richness and diversity, little information about the responses of these metrics to weather is available. Responses of the two metrics often diverged, reflecting differences in their sensitivity to different types of changes in the plant community. Although sufficient information has not yet been published for these metrics to meet all the criteria of a good indicator in Great Plains Grasslands, augmenting current methods of evaluating rangeland health with a measure of plant species richness would reduce these shortcomings and provide information critical to managing for biodiversity.

Rangeland Ecology and Management↗

USGS2012

Ecosystem performance monitoring of rangelands by integrating modeling and remote sensing

Monitoring rangeland ecosystem dynamics, production, and performance is valuable for researchers and land managers. However, ecosystem monitoring studies can be difficult to interpret and apply appropriately if management decisions and disturbances are inseparable from the ecosystem's climate signal. This study separates seasonal weather influences from influences caused by disturbances and management decisions, making interannual time-series analysis more consistent and interpretable. We compared the actual ecosystem performance (AEP) of five rangeland vegetation types in the Owyhee Uplands for 9 yr to their expected ecosystem performance (EEP). Integrated growing season Normalized Difference Vegetation Index data for each of the nine growing seasons served as a proxy for annual AEP. Regression-tree models used long-term site potential, seasonal weather, and land cover data sets to generate annual EEP, an estimate of ecosystem performance incorporating annual weather variations. The difference between AEP and EEP provided a performance measure for each pixel in the study area. Ecosystem performance anomalies occurred when the ecosystem performed significantly better or worse than the model predicted. About 14% of the Owyhee Uplands showed a trend of significant underperformance or overperformance ( P <0.10). Land managers can use results from weather-based rangeland ecosystem performance models to help support adaptive management strategies.

Oregon;Idaho↗

USGS2012

Revolutionary land use change in the 21st century: Is (rangeland) science relevant?

Rapidly increasing demand for food, fiber, and fuel together with new technologies and the mobility of global capital are driving revolutionary changes in land use throughout the world. Efforts to increase land productivity include conversion of millions of hectares of rangelands to crop production, including many marginal lands with low resistance and resilience to degradation. Sustaining the productivity of these lands requires careful land use planning and innovative management systems. Historically, this responsibility has been left to agronomists and others with expertise in crop production. In this article, we argue that the revolutionary land use changes necessary to support national and global food security potentially make rangeland science more relevant now than ever. Maintaining and increasing relevance will require a revolutionary change in range science from a discipline that focuses on a particular land use or land cover to one that addresses the challenge of managing all lands that, at one time, were considered to be marginal for crop production. We propose four strategies to increase the relevance of rangeland science to global land management: 1) expand our awareness and understanding of local to global economic, social, and technological trends in order to anticipate and identify drivers and patterns of conversion; 2) emphasize empirical studies and modeling that anticipate the biophysical (ecosystem services) and societal consequences of large-scale changes in land cover and use; 3) significantly increase communication and collaboration with the disciplines and sectors of society currently responsible for managing the new land uses; and 4) develop and adopt a dynamic and flexible resilience-based land classification system and data-supported conceptual models (e.g., state-and-transition models) that represent all lands, regardless of use and the consequences of land conversion to various uses instead of changes in state or condition that are focused on a single land use.

Rangeland Ecology and Management↗