Leveraging Oak Woodland Rancher Investment inRanching: “Matching Funds” from Working

Woodlands

I. Public Lands in CaliforniaII. California’s Mediterranean Oak WoodlandsIII. “Working Landscapes”

• Rancher Values• Conservation Easements

IV. Spain vs. California Incentive ProgramsV. Conclusions

I. Public lands in the westernUnited States

California Public Lands: 50%

Bureau of Land Management

United States Forest Service

National Park Service

Department of Defense

National Public Lands: TheAcquisition 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

Southern California Fires

Bad public land management?

II. California Mediterranean OakWoodlands

1800

2000

Some habitat for 95% offederally threatened andendangered species is onprivate land in thewestern U.S. (Wilcove etal. 1996)

Half lost toagriculturaldevelopment

Quercus douglasii,agrifolia, lobata,Englemanii, etc.

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: Morethan 300 vertebrate species (Jensen et al. 1990)

OakWoodlands aremostly privateagriculturallands

70% grazed

56% owned byranchers

92% of animal demand is cattle

California Silvopastoralism

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)

1.5

1.7

1.9

2.1

2.3

2.5

2.7

2.9

3.1

3.3

3.5

1930 1932 1940 1950 1960 1966 1982 1990 1992 2002

Date

Mil

lio

ns

of

Hec

tare

s

Millions of Hectares

Ranches are being replaced by “ranchettes”and housing developments

III. The Alternative: Conserving“Working Landscapes”

• Preserveranching

• Preserve cultureand communityculture

• Preserve land &ecosystems

• Voluntary:depends onrancher choice

Rancher values are key to conservingranches

-cow-calfoperations

-80%+residentowners

-800-960 ha

Studies in California, Colorado, Arizona & West Sulak &

HuntsingerLiffmann

et al.Huntsinger

et al.Roweet al.(a&b)

Smith &Martin

Bartlettet al.

Gentner& Tanaka

Date 2002 2000 1997 2001 1972 1989 2002

State CA CA CA CO AZ CO WesternUS

Sample Permitteesof 3

Forests,similar

nonpermittees

Allranchersin three

CAcounties

Oakwoodlandranchersstatewide

Permitteesin CO twocounties

All AZranch

owners

All COfederal

permittees

Allpermitteesof FS and

BLM

Off-ranchincome

43% notdependent

onranching

44%income isoff-ranch

85% haveoff-ranchincome

78% haveother

source ofincome

80% holdoff-ranch

jobs

62% holdoff-ranch

jobs

Surveytype

Interviews Mail Mail Interviews Interviews Mail Mail

Samplesize

Small(n=37)

Large(n=245)

Large(n~200)

Small(n=37)

Medium(n=89)

Large(n=313)

Verylarge

(n~1070)

Oak Woodland Studies

Less than one-fourth of oakwoodland ranchers reported thatthey made the majority of their

income from livestockproduction.

Working Hobby15%

Retired Hobby18%

Small Hobby11%

Sheep4%

Corporate13%

Trophy Hobby

6%

Dependent20%

Diversified Family13%

Gentner and Tanaka (2002) surveyed more than 1,000 ranchersand classified them

Mainincomefrom ranch

Main incomefrom othersources

When asked about theirmotives for ranching,both groups rankedlifestyle and way oflife above themonetary profits theymight make from theranch.

These values widelyrecognized in studies ofranchers throughout the

West.

Ranchers have beendescribed as “lifestyle

consumers” or“consumptive users”

or in the words of a 1972author: “not economic

men”

Colorado:Eastern Rockies

California:Pacific Coast

Paired surveys ofranchers in 2 distantplaces…

Sulak & Huntsinger, 2002

Rowe et al. 2001

Reasons ranchers in California and Colorado studies gave for continuing toranch (Rowe et al. 2001a, Sulak and Huntsinger 2002).

I continue to ranch because…

Californian=37

Coloradon=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 joboutside the ranch 14% 27%

It's a good way to make money 14% 19%

The personal and family valuesthat ranchers get from owning aranch can be given a monetaryvalue and added to “income.”

This makes theranch profitablefrom the owner’spoint of view

This value also represents landownerinvestment (self-subsidy) in their oak

woodland properties. Ranchers are payingto be ranchers, among other things.

Opportunitycosts

Labor

Off-ranchincome

Rancher and Public Values froma Ranch have Common Ground

Rancher Profits Public ProfitsNatural Beauty Natural Beauty

Living on property Existence and viewshed

Wildlife and recreation Wildlife and recreation

Legacy value: heirs Legacy value: futuregenerations

Production value foragriculture

Healthy agriculturalproducts

Three fourths ofregistered voterssupport using publicfunds to preserveagriculture as longas conservationbenefits areprovided.

http://www.farmland.org/news_2001/071101_survey_main.htm

AmericanFarmland TrustSurvey, 2001

Older tools for conservation ofoak woodland silvopastoral

systems

Planning and temporary contracts: Under thejurisdiction of counties and municipalities

Weak

Found to be least effective where needed most

Regulations: backlash and unintendedconsequences

Californiaranchersdon’t like

planning andregulation

(Huntsinger et al. 1997, Liffmann, Huntsinger, Forero 2000)

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%

“Working Landscapes”Principles

--use of rancherinvestment is most

effective with ranchercooperation

--mimimumgovernmental orregulatory role

--incentive-based

--voluntary

--can stand againstextreme development

pressure

--allows ranchers to beranchers

Agricultural ConservationEasements for conserving ranch

lands a key tool• Permanent deed restrictions that preclude

subdivision or development

Adds another “owner” tothe land title: usually a

land trust like “TheNature 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 nonprofitorganization thatworks toconserve land byundertaking orassisting directland transactions,primarily thepurchase oracceptance ofdonations of landor conservationeasements”

Agricultural Conservation EasementsA market for development rights

Landowner sells or donates voluntarily in exchange forcash and/or tax relief

On ranch lands, commonly brokered by a non-governmental organization (land trust) using privateand/or public funds

The most widely used private sector land conservationmethod in the US.

Land under easement increased 225% in California in the1990s.

Easement value, the value ofdevelopment right, can be 35%

to 65% of property value

In California, averages $5,000per ha

Landowner may take less thanthe maximum price, or donatean easement for property and

inheritance tax relief

Land price asgrazing land

$5,000/ha

“EasementValue”

$5,000.00/ha

Total land pricefor development

$10,000/ha

Attractiveoption forranchers

• Monetary income from land appreciation is greater than thatfrom ranching

• Most ranchers have major financial asset in land(Hargreave, 1993)

• Traditionally sell off parcels to supplement low income, 1% ayear between 1985 and 1992 (Huntsinger et al. 1997)

• Can continue lifestyle but capture appreciation value

Marin Agricultural Land Trust

Land useplanningsupports and issupported bythe easementprogram

The NationalPark isbuffered fromurbanization

“This farmland ispreserved in

perpetuity by theowner and the

Marin AgriculturalLand Trust”

Malt

WorkingLandscapes

Preserves large agriculturallandholdings

Easier to work with fewer ownersin a watershed with commongoals

Easier to protect intactecosystems

Adds additional “owners” to theproperty title

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

Mediterranean Climate

J J A S O N D J F M A M J

TemperatureRainfall

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 wehear about…why so different?

California• Conservation Easements

• Tax relief contracts inexchange for nodevelopment

• Zoning/Planning

Spain• Afforestation subsidies

• Labeling & local products

• Subsidies forenvironmentally beneficialagriculture

• Planning

Hams

States and Transitions: OakSavanna

Grass Shrub Oak/Shrub

Oak/Grass

Human Values and Practices

Intensive mgt.Irregulardistribution

Maintaining dehesa requires regular management and particular practices

Making dehesa

jara

Mt. Diablo Transect 1982

Mt. Diablo Transect 199285% of California oak woodland stable without intervention

Questions

• Are the attitudes and values of landownersand managers in California and Spainsimilar?

• Can these attitudes and values explain whyemergent incentive-based private landconservation strategies in each place takesuch different forms?

• Are the approaches transferable?

Who ismanaging thewoodlands?

An opportunistic look at some survey data. Limitedcomparability: different dates, sampling methods,

and scales.

Landowners, Managers, and Land

927 ha (CA3)507 haProperty size

53 (CA1)51 (CA2)

63% more than 100 years (CA3)

73Years of ownership

55% (CA2)63% (CA3)

58%Manager attended college

59 (CA 1)50 (CA 2)57 (CA 3)

45Age of manager

80% (CA1)92% (CA2)

< 25%Owner is resident manager

CaliforniaCáceres

• Spain: Absentee ownership and hiredmanagers more common.

• California: Family home with owner-manager, few professional managers.

Land Use

Fee hunting/fishing (13%-CA1) 7%-CA2)

Firewood (12%-CA1) (11%-CA2)

Crops (11%-CA1) (20%-CA2)Recreation (3%-CA1) (2%-CA2)

Small game (70%)Large game (23%)

Fishing (9%)Firewood (54%)

Dry farming (47%)Irrigated crops (72%)

Tourism (4%)

Other products

336 (CA3)102Mean # cattle

3% (CA1)7% (CA2-sheep)

2% (CA3)

79%Produce morethan one kind oflivestock

92% (CA1)91% (CA2)

62%Produce cattle

CaliforniaCáceres

cork

Pigs

Most ranches produce cattle only, and two English breeds predominate

Niman Ranch produces the finest tasting meatin the world by adhering to a strict code ofhusbandry principles. Our livestock are humanelytreated, fed the purest natural feeds, never givengrowth-promoting antibiotics or hormones andraised on land that is cared for as a sustainableresource.

“Bill Niman’s obsession for creating the best productpossible has made his Niman Ranch meats a cut abovethe rest. At a time when the local butcher shop has allbut disappeared, both home cooks and renownedrestaurant chefs appreciate Niman’s commitment toproducing exceptional hormone-free beef and pork.”

--Bon Appetit Magazine

Niman ranch

Attitudes about the government andconservation strategies

Tax relief 10 year contract:(65%-CA1) (69%-CA2) (70%-CA3)Conservation Easement 4%+?

Afforestation scheme: 32%Agroenvironmental scheme: 28%

Participationin voluntaryprograms

State has a responsibility to protect naturalresources (65%)

Government has a duty to protectnature (78%)

GovernmentResponsibility

Oaks are being lost (54%-CA1)I see small oaks frequently (23%); I see somesmall oaks (69%) (CA1)

Oaks are endangered (44%)Oaks are regenerating fine on myland (62%)

Condition ofoaks

CaliforniaCáceres

State consults adequately with citizens aboutregulating resources (16%)

Regional government & ag sectorcollaborate satisfactorily (6%)

GovernmentConsultation

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%)

Ban on oak cutting (49%)Implement dehesa law (19%)

Private lands are better managed(78%)

Conservationoptions

Government has a responsibility to protect naturalresources….

But not mine.

Explaining oak conservationstrategies

+-Stability of woodlands

+-Out-migration andland developmentpressure

-+Markets for regionaland diverse products

++Prefer incentives orcompensation

CaliforniaSpain

Stabilizes land

--landowner sells partof title, not part of land

--provides capital andtax relief

May not address:--regeneration

--day to day management

--agriculture viability

--long term planning

Conservation easement

Tool for relativelystable woodland,unstable populationdistribution

California:

Exponential urbanoutgrowth and populationgrowth

Land priced at $1,000.00 perha brings $80,000 per ha ifsold as a small parcel

Spain: very strong zoning.

(AFT Report of nationwide survey)

The Balance SheetRancher

contributioncan be added

to otherreasons whyconservationvia “workinglandscapes,”

includingconservation

easements, canbe a good deal

for theconservation

investor.Ranchers will “pay to be ranchers” but regs mustallow them to maintain day to day autonomy andcontrol

Ironically, that in a country so valuesprivate property rights, sharing land titlewith NGOs and/or agencies has evolvedinto such a popular conservation method.Ranchers are willing to share title as wellas forgo other opportunities in exchangefor the opportunity to continue ranching,

for themselves and their families.