A Q&A on Sagebrush Conservation with Jeremy Maestas

National Sagebrush Ecosystem Specialist Jeremy Maestas answers questions about the Sagebrush Conservation Design and the latest sagebrush science highlighted in a 2024 Journal of Rangeland Ecology & Management.
By: Jocelyn Benjamin, USDA Public Affairs Specialist, Farm Production and Conservation
Jeremy Maestas is the National Sagebrush Ecosystem Specialist for USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) at the West National Technology Support Center where he helps staff and producers put science into practice to conserve the sagebrush biome. In this Ask the Expert, Jeremy answers questions about the Sagebrush Conservation Design (SCD) and the latest sagebrush science highlighted in a special issue of the Society for Range Management’s journal, Rangeland Ecology & Management, which features 20 peer-reviewed articles that use the SCD to provide an actionable path forward to fight common threats to healthy working lands across 14 states in the sagebrush biome.

What is the Sagebrush Conservation Design?
The Sagebrush Conservation Design (SCD) came out in 2022, and it was the first comprehensive analysis we’ve had assessing the ecological condition of sagebrush rangelands through time across the entire American West where sagebrush exists. Using recently developed remote sensing technology, like the Rangeland Analysis Platform, the SCD mapped sagebrush ecological integrity relative to the severity of rangeland threats and categorized lands into Core Sagebrush Areas (most intact), Growth Opportunity Areas (somewhat impacted), and Other Rangeland Areas (most degraded).
Basically, the SCD sought to identify the last, best, ecologically intact sagebrush areas to safeguard so we can proactively defend them against degradation. This strategy is far more efficient than trying to restore areas that have already been degraded.
What are the main threats to the sagebrush biome?
In addition to categorizing the sagebrush biome into Core, Growth, and Other Areas, the SCD analyzed the main threats degrading the biome. It found that two threats - invasive annual grasses and conifer (tree) expansion - are responsible for 87% of the degradation of core sagebrush over the past 20 years. Other threats like human modification present severe, but localized, degradation that can be nearly impossible to reverse.
What is at risk?
Not to be overly dramatic, but if we don’t shift how we’re conserving sagebrush, we’re at risk of losing a western way of life – world-class wildlife, forage for livestock, water and recreational opportunities. The SCD showed us that despite current conservation investments, we’re losing 1.3 million acres of the most intact sagebrush areas each year. These losses impact livelihoods and threaten all the ecosystem services provided by resilient rangelands.
Can you share some of the key findings?
One of the most important take-aways is that we have to be far more proactive in how we address resource concerns in sagebrush country. Given how fast-moving and widespread these threats are, we really need to embrace the adage, “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” One of the articles showed that, collectively, partners are currently targeting only about 10% of our conservation actions in sagebrush cores. Saving the biome from degradation will require massive coordination, additional targeting, and focusing resources squarely on defending and growing cores.
Another big message relates to the importance of maintaining and improving our efforts to help producers tackle conifer encroachment while also scaling-up our work, addressing invasive annual grasses – the two biggest biome-wide threats. NRCS is well-positioned to tackle these threats with our WLFW Framework for Conservation Action in the Sagebrush Biome. Our investments in targeted conifer removal through the Sage Grouse Initiative over the last 15 years are working, and we’re just beginning to ramp up our annual grass treatments. Yet, the science here is clear that a more concerted effort to reduce invasive grasses at much larger scales is needed if we want to fully defend and grow cores.
The special issue also clearly shows that defending core sagebrush areas goes hand-in-hand with sagebrush bird conservation. For example, one of the articles found that sagebrush songbirds are far more abundant in core areas than in more degraded areas. One article shows that sage grouse populations are stable in cores but declining in the other areas of the biome. If you’re a wildlife professional, this is critical to know. Taking an ecosystem-based approach, rather than a single species approach works for wildlife that rely on sagebrush.
Finally, there’s even a paper on how to improve technical transfer to bridge the gap between science production and on-the-ground implementation, which is close to my heart since that’s what I do for NRCS.
I hope folks take some time to explore the research. It’s hard to highlight just a few key findings, but defending cores, working across boundaries, being more efficient and targeted with the resources we have, and the need to make tough choices are top of the list for me.
Where can I find more information on sagebrush conservation?
In the Sagebrush Conservation Gateway, you can see all 20 peer-reviewed articles, along with interviews and presentations from the researchers to make science more accessible to diverse audiences.