About:

The purpose of this website is to make available Bureau of Land Management (BLM) data depicting rangeland health conditions of the 155,000,000 acres of leased grazing allotments under its administration. These agency data represent the most  complete picture of the influence of land health and livestock grazing at  landscape and regional scales. BLM has completed assessments that determine whether allotments meet or fail to achieve one or more fundamental land health standard, and, where failing, whether livestock grazing was a significant contributing factor. They have been compiled to help track, map, and examine achievements and non-achievements of allotment rangeland health. BLM does not maintain these data in electronic form.

PEER, through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requested grazing allotment land health standards records for BLM assessments conducted between 1997 and 2023 for 21,000 allotments. Each of the BLM datasets contained problems with accuracy, resolution, completeness, timeliness, omissions, and inconsistencies, and it was clear that the agency had not subjected them to their rigorous data quality standards. PEER compared these datasets to identify and correct these data quality problems to the best of our abilities, but ultimately reflect the condition of the data as received from BLM. The data quality issues were reconciled where possible, and were converted into geospatial format to provide the public with an opportunity to examine the significance of livestock grazing as a factor impacting rangeland health as reflected in the BLM's Land Health Standards evaluation data.

THE DATA - What are they and why are they important?

The BLM is required to ensure that rangeland health is not compromised within the context of their multiple use mission. The agency has been pivoting from management of land health at the local pasture and allotment scale to the landscape and regional scales. The agency has been conducting important assessments to identify significant factors that impact rangeland health conditions now, and to provide a basis for conducting vulnerability or risk assessment forecasts and intended to inform agency resource management planning and practices. but has not factored in the effects of the most ubiquitous disturbance factor on grazing lands under their administration – livestock grazing. Despite the centrality of ensuring that livestock grazing not compromise rangeland health, the agency has never maintained formal records in order that the significance of livestock grazing impacts be investigated. The lack of this important data precluded inclusion of livestock grazing in these regional assessments.

This project was undertaken to compile records gleaned from field offices of land health assessments for 21,000 grazing allotments, clean them up, and convert them to geospatial format in order that the broad scale significance of livestock grazing on rangeland health could be explored. Many factors impact rangeland health, from off highway vehicles to drought, spread of invasive species to fire. The BLM records reveal however, that livestock grazing is far and away the most frequently cited significant cause of failure to meet rangeland health standards across the grazing lands under the agency's administration. The significance of livestock grazing management – rangeland treatments and structural improvements as factors impacting rangeland health are not factored in as ecological and environmental disturbances associated with livestock grazing.

Rangeland Health Standards

Land health stewardship has been a challenge, and in 1995, formal regulations (43 CFR 4180.1 and 43 CFR 4180.2) defining the minimum rangeland health management requirements, and standards and guidelines for administration of livestock grazing to make it clear that maintaining rangeland health must take precedence over land use. The regulations were enacted specifically to address the impacts of ongoing management practices that contributed to rangeland health degradation. Since its enactment, these regulations require that livestock grazing practices must ensure that:

• (a) Watersheds are in, or are making significant progress toward, properly functioning physical condition, including their upland, riparian-wetland, and aquatic components; soil and plant conditions support infiltration, soil moisture storage, and the release of water that are in balance with climate and landform and maintain or improve water quality, water quantity, and timing and duration of flow.
• (b) Ecological processes, including the hydrologic cycle, nutrient cycle, and energy flow, are maintained, or there is significant progress toward their attainment, in order to support healthy biotic populations and communities.
• (c) Water quality complies with State water quality standards and achieves, or is making significant progress toward achieving, established BLM management objectives such as meeting wildlife needs.
• (d) Habitats are, or are making significant progress toward being, restored or maintained for Federal threatened and endangered species, Federal proposed or candidate threatened and endangered species, and other special status species." [60 FR 9969, Feb. 22, 1995, as amended at 71 FR 39508, July 12, 2006]

The standards and guidelines for grazing administration require that authorized officers ensure that:

• (i) Management practices maintain or promote adequate amounts of ground cover to support infiltration, maintain soil moisture storage, and stabilize soils;
• (ii) Management practices maintain or promote soil conditions that support permeability rates that are appropriate to climate and soils;
• (iii) Management practices maintain or promote sufficient residual vegetation to maintain, improve or restore riparian-wetland functions of energy dissipation, sediment capture, groundwater recharge and stream bank stability;
• (iv) Management practices maintain or promote stream channel morphology (e.g., gradient, width/depth ratio, channel roughness and sinuosity) and functions that are appropriate to climate and landform;
• (v) Management practices maintain or promote the appropriate kinds and amounts of soil organisms, plants and animals to support the hydrologic cycle, nutrient cycle, and energy flow;
• (vi) Management practices maintain or promote the physical and biological conditions necessary to sustain native populations and communities;
• (vii) Desired species are being allowed to complete seed dissemination in 1 out of every 3 years (Management actions will promote the opportunity for seedling establishment when climatic conditions and space allow.);
• (viii) Conservation of Federal threatened or endangered, proposed, candidate, and other special status species is promoted by the restoration and maintenance of their habitats;
• (ix) Native species are emphasized in the support of ecological function;
• (x) Non-native plant species are used only in those situations in which native species are not readily available in sufficient quantities or are incapable of maintaining or achieving properly functioning conditions and biological health;
• (xi) Periods of rest from disturbance or livestock use during times of critical plant growth or regrowth are provided when needed to achieve healthy, properly functioning conditions (The timing and duration of use periods shall be determined by the authorized officer.);
• (xii) Continuous, season-long livestock use is allowed to occur only when it has been demonstrated to be consistent with achieving healthy, properly functioning ecosystems;
• (xiii) Facilities are located away from riparian-wetland areas wherever they conflict with achieving or maintaining riparian-wetland function;
• (xiv) The development of springs and seeps or other projects affecting water and associated resources shall be designed to protect the ecological functions and processes of those sites; and
• (xv) Grazing on designated ephemeral (annual and perennial) rangeland is allowed to occur only if reliable estimates of production have been made, an identified level of annual growth or residue to remain on site at the end of the grazing season has been established, and adverse effects on perennial species are avoided." [60 FR 9969, Feb. 22, 1995, as amended at 61 FR 59835, Nov. 25, 1996; 71 FR 39508, July 12, 2006]

To achieve these objectives, the field offices are required to conduct periodic allotment rangeland health standards assessments to determine whether these basic requirements are met. If one or more rangeland health standard is found to have not been achieved, the significant factors contributing to this failure are required to be identified. If "… the authorized officer determines through standards assessment and monitoring that existing grazing management practices or levels of grazing use on public lands are significant factors in failing to achieve the standards and conform with the guidelines that are made effective under this section, the authorized officer will, in compliance with applicable laws and with the consultation requirements of this part, formulate, propose, and analyze appropriate action to address the failure to meet standards or to conform to the guidelines." ([60 FR 9969, Feb. 22, 1995, as amended at 61 FR 59835, Nov. 25, 1996; 71 FR 39508, July 12, 2006])

These data are provided "as is" and will contain errors or omissions present in the agency's data as received. Please consult with local BLM offices where the original records are housed for any questions regarding any data.

BLM LAND HEALTH STATUS (2024) (BLM LHS Data 2024.shp)

Description:

BLM grazing allotment Land Health Standards evaluation records containing the most current land health status (1997 – 2023) and identifying allotment records that failed to achieve one or more standards and where livestock grazing was determined to have been a significant factor. The BLM does not maintain grazing allotment land health standards evaluation records in electronic format or in any centralized location. This dataset is the product of an effort to compile all allotment land health standards (LHS) evaluation records and to identify the most current evaluation as of 2023.

Three separate datasets were obtained from BLM through FOIA requests since 2008, each containing records from all 21,000 allotments. records obtained from BLM were compiled from scratch by field offices from original data sources in response to each FOIA request. These data were provided in spreadsheet format but were not examined by the agency to determine whether they met agency data quality standards. Once compiled, many records of the same evaluations were available for comparison and to help reconcile errors, omissions, and inconsistencies. Every effort was made to correct these data quality problems to produce a
a single merged dataset containing the most current land health standards evaluation records for BLM's 21,000 livestock grazing allotments through 2023.

These data were then joined with the BLM National Grazing Allotment polygon file for spatial exploration. These records were provided by BLM "as is", and although every effort was made to reconcile errors and inconsistencies The User must be aware that these data may contain errors or omissions. These data are intended just for use in broad-scale exploration of livestock grazing impacts on land health, as reflected in BLM's allotment land health standards evaluation records.

Attributes:

• allot_no: The number that identifies an Allotment that is unique within the BLM administrative state.
• allot_name: The name by which the allotment is commonly known.
• gis_acres: This is a calculated value of area in units of acres based on the area field created by default within the ESRI polygon data structure, that includes both public and private lands.
• admin_st: An administrative unit that identifies the state or geographic area that has administrative jurisdiction over lands, and cases BLM administrative office (which is subordinate to the state office) that has jurisdiction and/or management authority over lands within a geographic area.
• adm_ofc_cd: The BLM administrative office is Administrative Office Code that identifies the Administrative Office that has jurisdiction over the lands.
• adm_unit_cd: The BLM administrative unit/office is a combination of the Administrative State Code and Administrative Office Code that fully identifies the geographic area that has jurisdiction over the lands.
• st_allot: This is a concatenation of two existing attributes but is not a substitute for having either of those two attributes. It is the existing unique code that allows identification of individual allotments throughout the entire United States.
• publicacre: Acres of public land within the allotment recorded in the allotment Land Health Evaluation dataset compiled by BLM in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in 2024.
• last_lheyr: The year of the last allotment land health evaluation or determination.
• determ2020: The recorded information pertaining to the land health standards determination as received from BLM in the 2020 dataset.
• blmcat2020: The recorded land health standards CATEGORY as received from BLM in the 2020 dataset. CATEGORY A is assigned to allotments that achieve or are making significant progress towards achievement of land health standards, CATEGORY B and CATEGORY C are assigned to allotments failing to achieve land health standards and identify current livestock grazing as a significant cause of failure, CATEGORY D is assigned to allotments that fail to achieve land health standards where current livestock grazing is not identified as a significant cause, and DETERMINATION NOT COMPLETE assigned to allotments that have not had a land health standards evaluation since assessments began in 1997.
• causes2020: The recorded information pertaining the cause of causes of failure to achieve land health standards as received from BLM in 2020.
• notes2020: Notes made when inconsistencies in BLM record information were noted.
• causes2007: The recorded information pertaining the cause of causes of failure to achieve land health standards as received in the first LHS dataset compiled by BLM in response to a FOIA request containing records through 2007.
• causes2012: The reconciled cause(s) of failure to achieve land health standards after merging of the first LHS dataset compiled by BLM in response to a FOIA request containing records through 2007 and a second later obtained containing records through 2012.
• fincat2020: The BLM LHS Category records were not formatted uniformly, nor often filled in or filled in correctly. This attribute just represents a standardization of the 2020 reported BLM LHS Category.
• last_lhe: Date of the most recent land health standards evaluation. The format of the original data was inconsistent and incomplete. The attribute last_lheyr was used for data reconciliation due to problems with recorded dates.
• lhs_2020: The land health standards status as of 2020, based on the reconciliation of roughly 70,000 allotment records from the 2007, 2012, and 2020 allotment LHS datasets obtained from BLM. Most of these allotment records appeared to have been recompiled in response to each request. LHS classes: ALL STANDARDS MET, NOT MET - LIVESTOCK, NOT MET - CAUSE NOT IDENTIFIED, NOT MET - OTHER, and DETERMINATION NOT COMPLETE.
• cat_2020: The corrected BLM's land health standards categorical status as of 2020, based on the reconciled land health standards status as of 2020. The standard BLM LHS categories were applied except in cases of ambiguity, such as when no causal factors were identified when an allotment failed to achieve land health standards. BLM's LHS Categories: CATEGORY A (ALL STANDARDS MET), CATEGORY B (NOT MET - LIVESTOCK), CATEGORY C (NOT MET LIVESTOCK), CATEGORY D (NOT MET - OTHER), and DETERMINATION NOT COMPLETE). Several other categories were added for the purposes of classification to address the lack of clarity of status.
• lhs_2024: The land health standards status as of 2024, based on the reconciliation of roughly 70,000 allotment records from the 2007, 2012, 2020, and 2024 allotment LHS datasets obtained from BLM. Most of these allotment records appeared to have been recompiled in response to each request. LHS classes: ALL STANDARDS MET, NOT MET - LIVESTOCK, NOT MET - CAUSE NOT IDENTIFIED, NOT MET - OTHER, and DETERMINATION NOT COMPLETE.
• determ2024: The recorded information pertaining to the land health standards determination as received from BLM in the 2024 dataset.
• causes2024: The recorded information pertaining to the cause of causes of failure to achieve land health standards as received from BLM in 2024.
• cat_2024: The corrected BLM's land health standards categorical status as of 2024, based on the reconciled land health standards status as of 2024. The standard BLM LHS categories were applied except in cases of ambiguity, such as when no causal factors were identified when an allotment failed to achieve land health standards. BLM's LHS Categories: CATEGORY A (ALL STANDARDS MET), CATEGORY B (NOT MET - LIVESTOCK), CATEGORY C (NOT MET LIVESTOCK), CATEGORY D (NOT MET - OTHER), and DETERMINATION NOT COMPLETE). Several other categories were added for the purposes of classification to address the lack of clarity of status.
• notes2024: Notes were made when inconsistencies in BLM record information were noted.

DATA DISCLAIMER

Access Constraints

None, these data are considered public domain.

Use Constraints

These data are provided by the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) "as is" and might contain errors or omissions. The User assumes the entire risk associated with its use of these data and bears all responsibility in determining whether these data are fit for the Users intended use.

The information contained in these data is dynamic and may change over time. The data are not better than the BLM sources from which they were derived, and both scale and accuracy will vary across the data set. These data might not have the accuracy, resolution, completeness, timeliness, or other characteristics appropriate for applications that potential users of the data may contemplate. Raw data quality and accuracy varied by field office, so these data are most suited for broad scale exploration. These data are neither legal documents nor land surveys and must not be used as such. Official records may be referenced at most BLM offices. Please report any errors in the data to the BLM office from which it was obtained.

The BLM should be cited as the original data source in any products derived from these data. PEER should be cited as the source of the data layer containing BLM's compiled data. Any Users wishing to modify the data should describe the types of modifications they have performed. The User should not misrepresent the data, nor imply that changes made were approved or endorsed by BLM, PEER, or PEER contractors and partners. This data may be updated without notification by PEER as more data becomes available from the BLM.

Distributor Liability

PEER and PEER contractors and partners assume no responsibility for errors or omissions. No warranty is made by PEER and PEER contractors and partners as to the accuracy, reliability, or completeness of these data for individual use or aggregate use with other data; nor shall the act of distribution to contractors, partners, or beyond, constitute any such warranty for individual or aggregate data use with other data. Although these data have been processed successfully, no warranty, expressed or implied, is made by PEER or PEER contractors and partners regarding the use of these data for general or scientific purposes, nor does the fact of distribution constitute or imply any such warranty. In no event shall PEER or PEER contractors and partners have any liability whatsoever for payment of any consequential, incidental, indirect, special, or tort damages of any kind, including, but not limited to, any loss of profits arising out of the use or reliance on the geographic data or arising out of the delivery, installation, operation, or support by PEER or PEER contractors and partners.