Development and Use of State-and-Transition Models for Rangelands

Abstract

State-and-transition models have received a great deal of attention since the introduction of the concept to range management in 1989. Nonetheless, only recently have sets of state-and-transition models been produced that can be used by agency personnel and private citizens, and there is little guidance available for developing and interpreting models. Based upon our experiences developing models for the state of New Mexico, we address the following questions: 1) how is information assembled to create site-specific models for entire regions, 2) what ecological issues should be considered in model development and classification, and 3) how should models be used? We review the general structure of state-and-transition models, emphasizing the distinction between changes among communities within states (pathways) that are reversible with changes in climate and "facilitating practices" (e.g. grazing management), and changes among states (transitions) that are reversible only with "accelerating practices" such as seeding, shrub control, or the recovery of soil stability and historical hydrologic function. Both pathways and transitions occur, so these models are complementary. Ecological sites and the climatically-defined regions within which they occur (land resource units) serve as a framework for developing and selecting models. We illustrate the importance of clearly delineating ecological sites to produce models and describe how we have dealt with poorly-delineated sites. Producing specific models requires an understanding of the multiple ecological mechanisms underlying transitions. We show how models can represent and distinguish alternative and complementary hypotheses for transitions. Although there may be several mechanisms underlying transitions, they tend to fall within discrete categories based upon a few, fundamental ecological processes and their relation-We thank several agencies, institutions and individuals who contributed data, knowledge, and criticisms that are represented in this manuscript. From the BLM,

Broad-Scale Assessment of Rangeland Health, Grand Staircase–Escalante National Monument, USA

“…Two potential outcomes resulting from disturbance or weather are: 1) plant communities shift within their range of natural variability or within a steady state (succession) and potential natural vegetation remains the same, or 2) shift to a new steady state. Shifts between multiple stable states represent a transition across a threshold that requires large inputs to return to the site back to the previous state (Bestelmeyer et al 2003, Briske et al 2003. Vegetation composition and structure that is the most persistent through time is typically determined by the intensity and frequency of disturbance events.…”

National‐scale assessment of ecological content in the world's largest land management framework

“…NRCS has provided assistance and monetary support on approximately 188,000,000 ha of private land for conservation-related projects (Briske 2011) while the other agencies focus on public land. The result is a government-sponsored interagency collaboration that solidifies state-and-transition models (Westoby et al 1989, Bestelmeyer et al 2003, Briske et al 2005 in ESDs as one of the world's largest guiding frameworks for the management and restoration of terrestrial ecosystem services.…”

Robustness and management adaptability in tropical rangelands: a viability-based assessment under the non-equilibrium paradigm

“…This means that, if increasing the stocking rate could lead to woody plant encroachment, a successive decrement would not necessarily lead to a symmetrical return to a non-encroached condition. Westoby et al (1989) proposed the state-and-transition model, according to which the manager/ modeller was expected to define a catalogue of possible states of the system and of possible transitions between states, with the respective causes (Bestelmeyer et al, 2003;Briske et al, 2003). The problem of this model was its limited predictive capacity (Ward, 2005b;Bashari et al, 2008).…”