1. Range Science and Range Management:
Finding Common Ground
The Marin Carbon Project
John Wick, Director
Jeff Creque Ph.D., Co-founder

15. 1,000 CONTIGUOUS ACRES
AND 12’ HIGH FENCES: NPS

16. 100,000 ACRES,
NO FENCES: Calif. D.F.G.

27. Blue Wildrye (Elymus glaucus)

28. California Brome (Bromus carinatus)

29. California Brome (Bromus carinatus)

30. Idaho Fescue (Festuca idahoensis)

31. Meadow Barley (Hordeum brachyantherum)

48. Darren Doherty, Australian Keyline Expert
“A 1.6% increase of the organic matter in the soils of
all the arable lands on Earth would stop and reverse
global warming within a decade.”

49. Vegetation 500
Soils 2,000
THE GLOBAL CARBON CYCLE
Units: Gt
1 Gt = 1 Pg = 101

50. Can we
market the
carbon that we
thought that
we were
adding to the
soil?

51. The question was, how to measure
soil carbon in order to market it?
Is there an accepted protocol for
measuring and verifying carbon
sequestered in rangeland soil?

52. We contacted UCB,
where we met
Prof. Whendee
Silver, who was
already working
with SOC in
tropical soil
systems, and she
expressed an
interest in working
with us.

53. We convened a meeting with the regional agricultural
agencies, organizations, institutions and experts.

54. Is it possible
to sequester
atmospheric
Carbon in
Marin’s
rangeland
soils?

55. How much C is in Marin soil?
Marin Carbon Project Phase I:
• A regional soil carbon survey
• Collect soil to 1 meter depth from 35 sites
in Marin and Sonoma
• Analyze soil for carbon, nitrogen, pH,
texture, and carbon fractions.
• Determine if patterns in soil carbon pools
exist with soil chemical and physical
properties, environmental conditions and/
or management.

56. We sampled 35 sites that were typical of land under
management in our area; beef and dairy pasture.

57. The regional analysis also showed a wide range in soil C pools
Ranked Site
0
100
200
300
400
SoilsCarbon(Mg/ha)to1mdepth

58. The soil survey established that our soils
have a range from 14.5 tons/acre to 62.5
tons/acre.

59. 0 100 200 300 400
Depth (cm)
0
100
200
300
CumulativeSoilCarbon(Mgha-1)
Literature data
From California
rangelands
On average Marin soils appear to be in the
mid range of California rangelands
Average soil C for Marin/
Sonoma Counties

60. Organic amendments increased soil carbon by 50 Mg C
ha-1 in the top meter of soil
0-10 10-30 30-50 50-100
Depth (cm)
0
10
20
30
40
50
SoilCarbon(Mg/ha)
Intensive (organic
amendments)
Extensive
Extensive Intensive
0
100
200
300
SoilCarbon(Mg/ha)to1mdepth

61. Fields that had a history of manure
application had significantly higher carbon
than adjacent fields without the manure.

62. Conclusion:
Management, specifically organic
amendments, can enhance soil carbon
sequestration.
Surprise?

63. We decided to look deeper into the carbon
consequences of current practices of local
land managers:
1) grazing
2) organic amendments (we used
compost instead of manure)
Plus we were curious about the benefit of
using the Yeomans plow.
We designed controlled experiments to
measure the carbon consequences of each
of these practices.

69. 0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
Control Compost
2009 2010
Abovegroundbiomass(MtCha-2)
Compost significantly increased forage production
CompostControl
Browns Valley, Ryals and Silver in prep

70. • The result of applying 14 tons of C/ha as
compost was an increase in soil carbon of over
14.8 Mg C/ha in year 1,
• Net gain, beyond compost additions was
approx. 1 Mg C/ha.
• Control plot soils lost carbon in the same time
period.
Assumptions:
Heterotrophic respiration = 50% of total
Root biomass = shoot biomass
No difference in grazed/ungrazed biomass

71. Compost Control
-500
0
500
1000
1500NetChange(gCm-2t-1)
Nicasio, Ryals and Silver in prep
Above Ground Biomass, End
of Year One

72. • The first year, on two sites in California, we
added almost 15 tons of carbon per ha.
• There were no methane or nitrous oxide
emissions.
• We did this by applying a 1/2” layer of
compost over the standing vegetation.
• It was easy to do and relatively cheap.
• It increased forage by 1 ton per acre.
• It buffered temperatures 10ºC.
• It held more water in the soil.

73. California Rangelands and Carbon Sequestration
At a rate of 1 MT C ha-1 y-1
= 42 MMT CO2e/y
At a rate of 5 MT C ha-1 y-1
= 211 MMT CO2e/y
At a rate of 10 MT C ha-1 y-1
= 422 MMT CO2e/y
23 million hectares of rangeland statewide
Assume 50% available for C sequestration
•Livestock ~ 15 MMT CO2e/y
•Commercial/residential ~ 41 MMT
CO2e/y
•Transportation emits ~188 MMT CO2e/y
•Electrical generation ~109 MMT CO2e/y
Units:
Hectare = 2 .45 acres
MT = Metric ton
MMT= Million metric tons
CO2e = CO2 equivalents
MT=Mg=Metric ton

74. Grasslands cover a significant portion of the Earth’s
land surface
*30% of global land surface *Over half of the global land use
*33% of the US land area *56% of California land area

76. Why General Systems Theory?
• Ecosystem Science
–A theoretical framework for the science of
ecosystem management.
• Ecosystem Management
–A theoretical framework identifying
management practices that sequester
carbon in soils, and how.

77. General Systems Theory
• GST suggests that we can manage ecosystems
through the manipulation of positive and
negative feedback processes.

78. System Behavior
• GST suggests systems are either changing or
remaining the same.
• System change is driven by
deviation amplifying positive feedbacks
• System stasis is maintained by deviation
dampening negative feedbacks.

79. “negative feedback” or deviation-dampening
system processes.

80. For 400,000 years, atmospheric CO2 was essentially at
homeostasis, maintained by the deviation dampening negative
feedback of annual vegetation growth and senescence.
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/graphics/vostok.co2.gif

81. Northern Deciduous Forest
Annual CO2 Flux

83. Arctic September Ice
1980 and 2010
(Pattern Driving Process)

84. 310
320
330
340
350
360
370
380
390
AtmosphericCO2(ppmv)
Year
Atmospheric CO2 concentrations have increased
dramatically in the last 50 to 100 years, driven by
deviation amplifying positive feedbacks initiated by
human activity (land use, fossil fuel combustion,
warfare, etc. )
Keeling Curve

85. General Systems Theory
• To reverse the Keeling curve, caused by
deviation amplifying positive feedbacks
resulting in increases in atmospheric CO2, we
must initiate a deviation amplifying positive
feedback process that drives the CO2 curve in
the opposite direction.

86. How do we initiate, stop or reverse
deviation amplifying positive feedback
processes at the system level?

87. Eg: Gully Formation and Repair
• Gullies are a classic example of a deviation-
amplifying feedback cycle. As a gully begins to
form, the way in which water moves over the
land begins to change, with the effect of
further deepening and widening the gully.

88. • As gullies deepen and widen, they can lower
the base level within drainage basins. As the
base level drops due to gully incision, the
potential energy of any water flowing into the
gully increases, which further drives gully
formation.

89. • As channel walls erode, the gully widens and
begins to receive more direct rainfall. A wider
gully holds more water and therefore can cut
more deeply.

90. • We see a cascade of deviation-amplifying
events that act as positive feedbacks to form
deeper and wider gullies;
• Until some new homeostasis is reached.

91. • Good News
• Deviation amplifying positive
feedbacks can also reverse the
process!

92. Gully Restoration
• By introducing energy dissipating structure in the
form of willow and dogwood, and the structure of
the gully itself (Zeedyk and Clothier, 2009),
hydrological conditions improve, supporting further
vegetation establishment, slowing the water,
dropping out the sediments, aggrading the gully
floor, fanning out the water and re-hydrating the
xerified landscape. The water level rises, water-loving
plants move back in, catch more sediment, and the
system begins to re-build itself, as each step fosters
the next.
• And, as the productivity of the system increases,
recovering wetlands are great sinks for carbon.

93. • Organic amendments increased system carbon
by over 14.8 Mg C/ha in year 1.
• Net gain, beyond compost additions was
approx. 0.8 Mg C/ha.

94. Compost Control
-500
0
500
1000
1500NetChange(gCm-2t-1)
Nicasio, Ryals and Silver in prep
Above Ground Biomass, End
of Year One

95. Compost is great, but spreading compost
everywhere is not an option;
What can we do to initiate a deviation
amplifying positive feedback process that
results in the enhanced sequestration of
atmospheric CO2 as soil carbon on rangelands
globally?

96. Livestock grazing is half of the world’s land use.

97. Can we use livestock impacts to initiate
deviation amplifying positive feedbacks to
drive the system in the desired direction?

98. Disturbance Drives System Change
We can manage system change by managing the scale of
disturbance

99. SCALE of DISTURBANCE
Space, Time and Magnitude:
The area of land
The amount of time
The number of animals

100. SOIL CARBON
GRASS
GRAZING
EVENT
Disturbance-driven System Change

101. Question:
Is this why “grazing systems” (sometimes)
work, and (sometimes) don’t?
Does this resolve the “Range Debate?”

102. Focus on Soil Carbon as an
Indicator
of System Change

103. Hypothetical effect of deviation amplifying positive
feedback resulting from Soil Carbon increases on global
rangelands due to strategically scaled livestock impacts

104. What next for the Marin Carbon
Project?

105. Grazing Trials: What does it mean to scale
our livestock impacts appropriately in our
systems?

106. • We are analyzing the data from the
intensive grazing portion of the
experiment.
• We expect to see a significantly higher rate
of sequestration from the high density,
short duration, long recovery
management… Stay tuned.

110. NEXT STEPS
 CREEK CARBON RESEARCH:
EXAMINE 35 YEARS OF LOCAL PASTURE /
RIPARIAN RESTORATION WORK AND DETERMINE
THE CARBON SEQUESTRATION CONSEQUENCES
OF THOSE PROJECTS.
USE THIS INFORMATION TO ADJUST PROJECT
DESIGN AS WE GO FORWARD.

111. NEXT STEPS
COMPOST STUDY:
COMPARE MANURE TO COMPOST,
WHICH WORKS BEST?
Life cycle analysis of compost
 LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS:
COMPARE PASTURE OPERATIONS TO
C.A.F.O.

115. ?

116. MARIN CARBON PROJECT
Jeff Creque, Ph.D.
Rangeland Ecologist
oecos@earthlink.net
John Wick,
Nicasio Native Grass Ranch
johnwick@sonic.net

117. MARIN C ARBON PROJECT
Mission Statement
In response to the rapid pace of global climate change caused by human activity,
the Marin Carbon Project seeks to enhance carbon sequestration in rangeland,
agricultural, and forest soilsthrough appliedresearch, demonstration and
implementation.
Vision Statement
Our vision is to establishland owners and land managers as soilcarbon
sequestration champions by providing economicaland ecological solutions to
global climate change.
Strategy
The Marin Carbon Project, a consortium of agricultural extension, agricultural
producer organizations, county and federal agricultural agencies,the resource
conservation district, private rangeland consultants, and land manager/ owners,
seeks tounderstand the potential for soil carbon sequestration to mitigate and
reverse global climatechange. This consortium of agencies and organizations is
working together and independently to promote, through applied research and
demonstration, enhanced carbon sequestration in Marin’s soils.The consortium
also will help facilitate development of a carbon market that supports soilcarbon
sequestration efforts on agricultural, forest and rangelands in Marin County and
globally.

119. Questions?

121. Fossil Fuel Emissions: Actual vs. IPCC Scenarios
Raupach et al. 2007, PNAS, updated; Le Quéré et al. 2009, Nature Geoscience; International Monetary Fund 2009
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
FossilFuelEmission(GtCy
-1
)
5
6
7
8
9
10
A1B
A1FI
A1T
A2
B1
B2
Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center
International Energy Agency
Source: Global Carbon P

122. 310
320
330
340
350
360
370
380
390
AtmosphericCO2(ppmv)
Year
The Kneeling Curve

124. High temperature fire

125. System disturbance

126. Disturbances can vary in size in both time
and space.

128. Let’s look at gully networks.

129. Soil geomorphic systems (Briske, 2008) throughout the
West have been impacted by similar positive feedback
scenarios, often associated with extirpation of a
keystone species, Castor canadensis, from much of the
region.•
Photo: Phil Myers,
U Michigan, 2003

130. A classic example of a deviation-amplifying
feedback cycle.

132. Low temperature fire

134. Cheat grass invasion is not just a plant
community change

135. The restoration of wet meadow systems.

136. •Climate Change
•The potential to
sequester carbon in
rangeland soils
•The Range “Debate”

137. outline
John:
What MCP is
What MCP Did
What MCP found
Jeff:
What it means (so what?); global context; Climate; C-sequestration; Range debate:
can we do it with grazing alone?
Keeling curve, GST; negative and positive feedbacks
Disturbance as system driver and determinate of + and – change
Strategic livestock impacts as system disturbance to increase soil C
What do we manage for and how?
soil C, native biodiversity, pattern and process
John:
What I manage for and how

138. Range Science and Range
Management:
Finding Common Ground

139. • C/N
• Gas analyzer, burns soil, measures actual CO2;
• Loss by ignition is by weight at constant
moisture; not measuring actual C, measuring
change in weight only.

140. Disturbance, Pattern, Process
• Remember:
General Systems Theory suggests
– We can manage system processes
(photosynthesis, carbon sequestration, etc.)
by managing system patterns. (paddocks,
plant communities; fuel loads, etc.)
–We can manage system patterns by
managing system disturbance (grazing, fire,
mowing, cultivations, etc).
–Disturbances drive system processes

141. • For example, a beaver dam knocks the energy
out of flowing water in a stream. Sediments
settle out, the water level rises, the floodplain
stays moist, moisture-loving vegetation grows,
providing even more energy-dissipating
structure, and habitat becomes more
desirable for beaver.
Castor canadensis
Photo: Phil Myers,
U Michigan, 2003

142. 310
320
330
340
350
360
370
380
390
AtmosphericCO2(ppmv)
Year
Hypothetical deviation amplifying positive
feedback resulting from Soil Carbon increases on
global rangelands due to strategically scaled
livestock impacts
Reversing the Keeling Curve