Financial barriers and opportunities for conservation adoption on U.S. rangelands: A region-wide, ranch-level economic assessment of NRCS-sponsored Greater Sage-grouse habitat conservation programs

Sagebrush ecosystems of the western U.S. support ranching livelihoods and imperiled populations of the Greater Sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus). Incentive-based conservation such as cost-sharing is the primary tool used by the federal government to support conservation practices on rangelands in the U.S. Financial support for adopting specific prescribed grazing practices on private land has been supported through the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)-led Sage-Grouse Initiative (SGI), initiated in 2010 as an unparalleled private and public effort to conserve Greater Sage-grouse habitat. The purpose of this research was to provide an economic assessment of the impact of this conservation program on participating ranches. Representative ranch enterprise budgets and ranch economic models were created for this analysis for eleven NRCS Major Land Resource Areas where critical sage-grouse habitat exist, including parts of Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and Wyoming. Results of the economic assessment showed that SGI/NRCS financial support alleviated the financial impact of conservation practice adoption, but negative financial impacts were estimated in some locations and more frequently for smaller ranches. Larger ranches were found to do better under these programs on average. Results demonstrate the important role of research and government financial support in removing financial barriers to conservation adoption on rangelands.

Expected Net Benefit of Vaccinating Rangeland Sheep against Bluetongue Virus Using a Modified-Live versus Killed Virus Vaccine

Recurring outbreaks of bluetongue virus in domestic sheep of the US Intermountain West have prompted questions about the economic benefits and costs of vaccinating individual flocks against bluetongue (BT) disease. We estimate the cost of a BT outbreak on a representative rangeland sheep operation in the Big Horn Basin of the state of Wyoming using enterprise budgets and stochastic simulation. The latter accounts for variability in disease severity and lamb price, as well as uncertainty about when an outbreak will occur. We then estimate the cost of purchasing and administering a BT vaccine. Finally, we calculate expected annual net benefit of vaccinating under various outbreak intervals. Expected annual net benefit is calculated for both a killed virus (KV) vaccine and modified-live virus vaccine, using an observed price of $0.32 per dose for modified-live and an estimated price of $1.20 per dose for KV. The modified-live vaccine’s expected annual net benefit has a 100% chance of being positive for an outbreak interval of 5, 10, or 20 years, and a 77% chance of being positive for a 50-year interval. The KV vaccine’s expected annual net benefit has a 97% chance of being positive for a 5-year outbreak interval, and a 42% chance of being positive for a 10-year interval. A KV vaccine is, therefore, unlikely to be economically attractive to producers in areas exposed less frequently to BT disease. A modified-live vaccine, however, requires rigorous authorization before legal use can occur in Wyoming. To date, no company has requested to manufacture a modified-live vaccine for commercial use in Wyoming. The KV vaccine poses less risk to sheep reproduction and less risk of unintentional spread, both of which facilitate approval for commercial production. Yet, our results show an economically consequential tradeoff between a KV vaccine’s relative safety and higher cost. Unless the purchase price is reduced below our assumed $1.20 per dose, producer adoption of a KV vaccine for BT is likely to be low in the study area. This tradeoff between cost and safety should be considered when policymakers regulate commercial use of the two vaccine types.