Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Volume 3, Issue 3
IN THIS ISSUE
CBCP OPINION: COMMON LANGUAGE THROUGH ECOLOGICAL SITE DESCRIPTIONS......................................4 CBCP MISSION STATEMENT............4
WWW.UTAHCBCP.ORG
Not all res are harmful to sagebrush ecosystems. The Bureau of Land Management prescribed this re for Sage Creek in Rich County. Range Conservationists report that the vegetation has naturally recovered.
AUGUST 2007
PAGE 2
Utah Chuckar and Wildlife Foundation bird dogs the morning of the survey.
So, the answer to our original question of whether re is a friend or foe to sagebrush communities is that it depends.
VOLUME 3, ISSUE 3
PAGE 3
Utahs Community-Based Conservation Program Utah State University 4900 Old Main Hill Logan, Utah 84322-4900
If its not good for communities, its not good for wildlife.
Utahs Community-Based Conservation Program Mission
Utahs Community-Based Conservation Program is dedicated to promoting natuConservation has been dened as the highest and best use of our natural and hural resource management education and man resources. We in the CBCP argue that the only way we will truly achieve conservafacilitating cooperation between local communities and natural resource man- tion in this country is through open dialogue. Dialogue increases awareness and enhancagement organizations and agencies. es appreciation, the rst step in conservation. This dialogue however must incorporate a
Community-Based Conservation Program Opinion: Common Language Through Ecological Site Descriptions
common language to facilitate understanding. Range and wildlife managers agree that peer-reviewed science should be used to make informed decisions about land-use. Unbiased science should also provide the necessary information for management direction to be improved over time (adaptive management). In the case of sage-grouse conservation, the science and management Utah State University employees and students cannot, because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, or veterans community must do a better job of monitoring populations and habitats if we are to betstatus, refuse to hire; discharge; promote; demote; terminate; discriminate in compensation; or discriminate regarding terms, privi- ter understand how management affects the species. However, a major factor impeding leges, or conditions of employment, against any person otherwise qualied. Employees and students also cannot discriminate in the the range and wildlife community dialogue on these issues has been the lack of common classroom, residence halls, or in on/off campus, USU-sponsored events and activities. terminology and ecological denominators. One way to address this impediment may be through the use of ecological site This publication is issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the descriptions. These descriptions being developed by the Natural Resources ConservaU.S. Department of Agriculture, Noelle Cockett, Vice President for Extension and Agriculture, Utah State University. tion Service (NRCS), the Bureau of Land Management and others replaces the traditional range site descriptions that focused primarily on forage production in favor descriptions that include vegetation dynamics and broader resource uses and values. This October (22-25) the Western Governors Association, NRCS, the Society for Range Management, the Wildlife Society, and others are planning a workshop in Park City, Utah designed to bring together range and wildlife communities to focus on creating a common conservation metric ecological site descriptions to guide sage-grouse conservation. As more details of this workshop are available we will provide them. We see this type of united approach to conservation as an essential step to enhance range wide efforts to conserve both human and wildlife resources.
Utah State University is committed to providing an environment free from harassment and other forms of illegal discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age (40 and older), disability, and veterans status. USUs policy also prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in employment and academic related practices and decisions.
AUGUST 2007
PAGE 4