Table 10. — Area grazed, selected out'puts, and costs for Resource Situation — 1970 



and single strategy management. 













Strategy- 











Resource 

























Item 



Units 



Situation- 



No 



Some 



Extensive 



Intensive 



Maximize 







1970 



livestock 



livestock 



management 



management 



livestock 









A 



B 



C 



D 



E 



Area grazed 



Million acres 



834.9 



0.0 



1,176.0 



1,153.0 



1,161.0 



1,163.0 



Animal unit 

















month 



Million 



213.1 



0.0 



184.0 



317.0 



566.0 



1,739.0 



Wood growth 



Billion cubic feet 



20.5 



21.0 



20.0 



19.0 



16.0 



6.0 



Water yield 



Million acre feet 



780.1 



773.0 



743.0 



718.0 



730.0 



746.0 



Quality water 



Million acre feet 



706.3 



773.0 



732.0 



659.0 



599.0 



510.0 



Storm runoff 



Million inches 



908.9 



820.0 



802.0 



791.0 



832.0 



924.0 



Sediment 



Million tons 



1,658.3 



1,312.0 



1,434.0 



1,511.0 



1,505.0 



1,688.0 



Total invest- 

















ment cost 



Million dollars 



858.2 



0.0 



827.0 



1,113.0 



2,704.0 



8,292.0 



Cost per AUM _ 



Dollars 



4.03 



0.0 



4.49 



3.51 



4.78 



4.77 



intensive management, and maximizing live- 

 stock respectively) indicates the impact of in- 

 creasingly more intensive livestock manage- 

 ment to all of the forest-range environment. In 

 each case it is assumed that all of the land will 

 be managed for grazing at the same intensity. 



The B management strategy level is less in- 

 tensive than the current average level of man- 

 agement. The use of Strategy B would reduce 

 the total investment costs in forest-range facili- 

 ties for livestock use (table 10). Total AUM 

 production would be below 1970 levels and 

 would not meet current or future demands. 

 The location of production would shift since 

 the analysis assumes a single level of manage- 

 ment on each area even though in 1970 many 

 areas were not grazed and some were grazed 

 intensively. 



The C management strategy level would pro- 

 duce 317 million animal unit months, which is 

 in excess of current demands and approximate- 

 ly equal to the year 2000 demand level. Annual 

 investment costs of $1,113 million is a signifi- 

 cant increase above the 1970 costs, although 

 costs per AUM would decrease from $4.03 to 

 $3.51. Annual wood gro^vth decreases about 7 

 percent below the 1970 level. 



The D management strategy level would pro- 

 duce 566 million animal unit months, a produc- 

 tion level in excess of the projected year 2020 

 need of 394 million. Costs would be $2,704 

 million, an amount three times greater than 

 the 1970 cost, while wood growth would de- 

 crease by 20 percent. 



Management at the level of Strategy E 

 (maximizing livestock production) would pro- 

 duce 1,739 million animal unit months or five 

 and one-half times the projected demand for 

 year 2000. Wood growth would be reduced to 

 less than one-third of current levels while sedi- 

 ment would remain about at the 1970 level 

 (fig. 43). 



As the intensity of livestock management 

 systems increases, the herbage available and 

 harvested increases. The value of livestock 

 production and the employment in livestock 

 production also increase. Environmental fac- 

 tors are specifically protected in Strategies B, 

 C, and D and, therefore, the losses in environ- 

 mental value are relatively minor. Application 

 of Strategy E, which emphasizes livestock at 

 the expense of other factors, causes deteriora- 

 tion of environmental quality. 



In general, the single strategy management 

 approach either results in more commodity out- 

 put (grazing) than demanded, and less of the 

 environmental values than demanded, or vice 

 versa. This proved true for individual ecosys- 

 stems as well as for the Nation. It follows tjiat 

 a combination of management strategies that 

 vary by ecosystem and resource unit could im- 

 prove the ability of resources to meet the 

 demands for outputs. 



None of the single strategy alternatives ex- 

 hibit sufficient favorable factors to justify their 

 acceptance. Furthermore, as livestock grazing 

 increases, wood growth decreases. This sug- 

 gests the need (as will be illustrated later) to 

 identify the ecosystems and strategy combina- 

 tions where the livestock versus wood growth 

 conflict can be minimized. Total investment 

 costs increase as management intensity in- 

 creases (fig. 44). Many of the alternatives to 

 be discussed later can achieve the same outputs 

 at lower investment cost, with fewer of the 

 qualitative factors showing deterioration. 



LEAST-COST MANAGEMENT 



The least cost alternatives were evaluated 

 through the use of the Forest-Range Environ- 

 mental Production Analytical System. The 

 over-riding concern in the analysis is the abil- 

 ity to modify grazing management with a 



74 



