however, is modified by the changing technol- 

 ogy and structure of the beef industry and 

 modifies the impact of demands on the forest- 

 range environment for feed. The total impact 

 on the resource may or may not have been 

 modified by this changing technology when all 

 outputs are considered. The impact of changing 

 governmental policies was assessed by measure- 

 ment of trade-offs between ecosystems if action 

 were taken to invest in one output versus an- 

 other, or to prevent Federal investment in one 

 ecosystem versus another. The data, analytical 

 system, and evaluation completed permits as- 

 sessment of changing or projected changes in 

 conditions as they impact on the management 

 of the forest-range resource. 



What is the most efficient tvay for meeting 

 future demands for forest-range grazing under 

 existing public 'policies with respect to main- 

 taining: (l)a viable rural economy and (2) a 

 quality environment? This question can be only 

 partially answered at this point. It has been 

 established that identification of the most effi- 

 cient lands for grazing for added development 

 can insure that the cost of grazing does not 

 increase to the point that grazing becomes non- 

 competitive with other feed sources. Such a mix 

 has tentatively been identified in Alternative 

 19. It has also been established that the fur- 

 ther development of certain lands, while phys- 

 ically possible, is not efficient, and these lands 

 should remain under the extensive management 

 strategies. Alternative 19 also identified an 

 output of AUM's which met projected demands 

 while preventing deterioration of total environ- 

 mental quality values. 



What is the existing capability of the forest- 

 range environment to produce grazing and 

 associated products? Again this question is only 

 partially answered. The capability of the forest- 

 range environment to produce grazing is nearly 

 eight times the projected demand in year 2000, 

 but can be accomplished only through sacrifice 

 of other outputs. Projected demands for graz- 

 ing can be met for year 2000 without adverse 

 impacts on other outputs through the careful 

 selection of ecosystems and resource units to be 

 developed for grazing. The capability of the 

 forest-range to produce outputs other than 

 grazing cannot be fully assessed until strate- 

 gies are also developed specifically for the 

 management of the resource for production of 

 those outputs and this information included in 

 the analysis. 



What investment ivill be required to com- 

 plete present policies? An additional $1,102 

 million annually will be required to implement 

 present policies for the total forest-range envi- 

 ronment by year 2000 as measured by the 

 Now Policy alternative. Several alternatives 

 have been evaluated which are reasonable op- 

 tions to the continuation of current policy 



direction and which can achieve the same 

 output levels at lower costs. 



What is the least-cost program of range 

 management for achieving selected levels of 

 associated products ? Alternative 19 represents 

 one alternative that would preclude decreases 

 in wood growth, water yield, and quality water 

 while grazing is increased. Added alternatives 

 of this type are needed as are added man- 

 agement data on wood growth and water yield. 

 Additional alternatives not yet formulated are 

 necessary to complete the response to this ques- 

 tion. 



What future patterns of grazing production 

 will be expected to prevail? It has been gen- 

 erally established that the future grazing 

 pattern to be expected will increase grazing in 

 the Eastern Forest ecogroup. Amount of range 

 grazed in the Great Plains Ecogroup would not 

 change appreciably but there would be increases 

 in the intensity of management. The Western 

 Range and Western Forest would be expected 

 to have an AUM output at least equal to cur- 

 rent levels but on fewer acres. The Western 

 ecogroups would stay in the production of graz- 

 ing but the magnitude of grazing will depend 

 in part on the specific policies developed to 

 protect existing investment and established 

 rural communities. 



Can range management offset such envi- 

 ronmental attributes as rare and endangered 

 species? Without question improvement or de- 

 gradation of these and many other environ- 

 mental attributes is possible through the kind 

 of range management systems used. Not fully 

 resolved at this point is the full scope of the 

 trade-off's involved and further assessment must 

 be developed to determine which of the attri- 

 butes can be improved simultaneously and the 

 impact on production costs. 



What are the costs and output implications 

 of managing all of the forest-range environ- 

 ment under a single management strategy? 

 Single strategy management had adverse effects 

 on the environmental attributes and is the most 

 expensive means of achieving AUM output 

 when reqirements are above 200 million. Single, 

 simple broad strategy applications are incapa- 

 ble of meeting demands at reasonable costs. 



What is the impact of increases in demand 

 for outputs of the forest-range environment? 

 The increased demands require new approaches 

 to the selection of management strategies. If the 

 increasing demands are to be met at reasonable 

 costs, then analytical systems with efficiency 

 criteria and capabilities to deal simultaneously 

 with several to many sets of demands and re- 

 source values should be used to select the best 

 management. Selection of least cost combina- 

 tions of management strategies by ecosystem 

 and resource units consistently lowers the costs 

 and permits improvement in other (non-graz- 



94 



