Soum rangeland management planning guideline developed by NFP, funded by SDC Green Gold/Animal Health project

1. Soum rangeland land management
planning guideline
2017.09.27

2. Resilience of rangelands
Climate condition, land form and soil features
define:
1) Vegetation type and production
2) Ability to respond the environmental factors and
utilization and to be recovered

4. High mountain:
23. Cryophyte cushion forb high mountain pasture
24. Cryophyte cushion forb-small bunch grass high mountain steppe pasture
25. Big bunch grass-xerophytic-mesophytic forbs with shrubs high mountain
steppe pasture
Forest steppe:
1a. Small bunch grass-forb-ARFRI rangeland in Gravelly hills ESG, FS
1b. Festuca-forbs rangeland in Loamy hills ESG, FS
2. SBG-forb rangeland in Loamy fan and mountain valley ESG, FS
3. STBA-forbs meadow steppe rangeland in loamy plain ESG, FS
4. Carex-Grass-forbs rangeland in High water table ESG, FS
5. Grass - forbs mountain meadow rangeland in High water table ESG, FS
Steppe:
6. STGR-ELCHN- forbs rangeland in loamy plain ESG,
Steppe
7. STKR-grass-forbs rangeland in Gravelly hills ESG, Steppe
8. STKR- CLSQ- forbs rangeland in Sandy loam alluvial fan
ESG, Steppe
9. Caragana-grass rangeland in Deep sandy alluvial plain ESG,
Steppe
10. ACSP dominated solonchak in HWT ESG, Steppe
Semi-desert steppe:
11. STKR-STGL/STGO- Grass with Semishrubs rangeland in Gravelly hills
ESG, Semi desert steppe
12. STKR-STGL/STGO-CLSQ rangeland in Sandy loamy covered gravelly
plain ESG, Semi desert steppe
13. ACSP/SCHI dominated solonchak in HWT ESG, Semidesert steppe
Desert steppe:
14. Stipa gobica/ Stpa glareosa –grass rangeland in Gravelly hills ESG,
Desert steppe
15. STGL/STGO-semi shrubs rangeland in Loamy covered gravelly plain
ESG, Desert steppe
16. STGL/STGO-ALLPO rangeland in Sandy plain ESG , Desert steppe
17. ACSP-SALSOLA dominated solonchak in HWT ESG, Desert steppe
Desert:
18. Desert rangeland with Anabasis in Loamy covered gravelly ESG,
Desert
19. Desert rangeland with shrubs in Sandy ESG, Desert
20. Desert rangeland with Nitraria in Deep sandy ESG, Desert
21. Desert rangeland with Haloxylon in Deep sandy ESG, Desert
22. Desert rangeland with halophyte shrubs in Saline solonchak
ESG, Desert
MONGOLIAN RANGELANDS ARE CLASSIFIED AS PER THEIR ECOLOGICAL POTENTIAL,
SPECIFIC TO DISTINCT SOIL-LANDFORM UNITS WITHIN NATURAL ZONES

5. Class V: Extensive soil loss, accelerated erosion rates, or
salinization. Usually impractical to recover former
community (true desertification).
Class IV: Local loss of key plant species, invasion of
noxious plant species, or alteration of hydrology that is
unlikely to be recovered for over a decade to many
decades without intensive interventions
Class I: Reference and slightly altered conditions. It
requires 1-3 growing seasons for recovery from minor
changes.
Class III: May take 5-10 growing seasons to recover; many
ecosystem services lost
Class II: May be rapidly recovered (3-5 growing seasons)
RECOVERY CLASS CONCEPT
5

6. Small bunch grass-forb rangeland in loamy fan and mountain valley
Grass (<20%) – sage (>30%) – sedge community
Artemisia Adamsii (>30%)- sedge community
Үетэн: Ботууль, дааган сүүл, биелэг, хялгана, ерхөг, хиаг
Улалж нь нийт бүрхэцэд эзлэх хувиараа үетэнд хүрэхгүй.I
II
III
3. Sedge increased state 4. Artemisia dominated degraded state
Grass (>20%)-sage(<30%)- forb community
Ш.1a С.2a
Ш.3a
С.4a
1. Grass dominated state
Энэхүү загварт Хур тунадасны нөлөө өндөр, агь болон
улалжийн бүрхэц ихээр хэлбэлздэг учир үндсэн үет
ургамлынхаа хувийг суурь болгож үзнэ.
Sedge (>40%) – sage- forb community
2. Grass thinned state
Ш.2a С.3a
IV

7. I – 55 %
II – 15 %
III – 23 %
IV – 7 %
V
RECOVERY MAP OF MONGOLIAN RANGELANDS
7

8. Zavkhan-Bayantes-Bujir-Bujiriin uvur
II I
 Foliar cover-82%
 Grass-42.5%
 Sage-23%
 507 кg/hа
 Foliar cover-58%
 Grass-19.5%
 Sage-31%
 188 кg/hа

9. Zavkhan-Durvuljin-Buga-Ulaan chuluu
II I
Foliar cover-14%
Grass-14.5%
57 кg/hа
Foliar cover-44.5
Grass-23.5%
320 кg/hа

10. Tuv-Undurshireet-Bayantuul-Kharganatiin hooloi
III II
0
20
40
2013
2014
2015
6
4
0
6 16
33
Stipa krylovii, %
0
50
100
2013
2014
2015
36 54
55
36
78 76
Foliar cover, %

11. RESILIENCE BASED RANGELAND MANAGEMENT
1. Rangeland assessment
2. Mapping
3. Grazing management planning
4. Implementation of plan
5. Long, short term
monitoring
ECOLOGICAL SITE
DESCRIPTIONS

12. RESILIENCE BASED RANGELAND MANAGEMENT
1. Rangeland assessment
2. Mapping
3. Grazing management planning
4. Implementation of plan
5. Long, short term
monitoring
ECOLOGICAL SITE
DESCRIPTIONS

13. 1. RANGELAND ASSESSMENT

14. RESILIENCE BASED RANGELAND MANAGEMENT
1. Rangeland assessment
2. Mapping
3. Grazing management planning
4. Implementation of plan
5. Long, short term
monitoring
ECOLOGICAL SITE
DESCRIPTIONS

15. 2. RANGELAND MAPPING (ECOLOGICAL POTENTIAL, GRAZING PATTERN, RECOVERY)

18. RESILIENCE BASED RANGELAND MANAGEMENT
1. Rangeland assessment
2. Mapping
3. Grazing management planning
4. Implementation of plan
5. Long, short term
monitoring
ECOLOGICAL SITE
DESCRIPTIONS

19. 3. GRAZING MANAGEMENT PLANNING
PUG meeting
Soum
Citizen’s
meeting
Bagh
Citizen’s
meeting
PLANNING
Herder’s participation, financial sources
93.5
93.5
69.3
17.4
8
3.2
3.2
0 20 40 60 80 100
Бэлчээрийн усан хангамжийг
сайжруулах
Өвөлжөө, хаваржааны доорх
газрыг эзэмшүүлэх
Хадлангийн талбайг ашиглуулах
Зун, намрын бэлчээр сэлгэж
ашиглах
Бэлчээрийн хортонтой тэмцэх
Ашиглалтгүй бэлчээрийн
ашиглалтыг сайжруулах
Бэлчээр өнжөөх, амраах

20. RESILIENCE BASED RANGELAND MANAGEMENT
1. Rangeland assessment
2. Mapping
3. Grazing management planning
4. Implementation of plan
5. Long, short term
monitoring
ECOLOGICAL SITE
DESCRIPTIONS

21. • Participation of
stakeholders
• Financial source
• Regulation
• Economic incentives
4. IMPLEMENTATION OF MANAGEMENT PLAN

22. RESILIENCE BASED RANGELAND MANAGEMENT
1. Rangeland assessment
2. Mapping
3. Grazing management planning
4. Implementation of plan
5. Long, short term
monitoring
ECOLOGICAL SITE
DESCRIPTIONS

23. 5. RANGELAND HEALTH MONITORING SYSTEMS

24. RESILIENCE BASED RANGELAND MANAGEMENT
1. Rangeland assessment
2. Mapping
3. Grazing management planning
4. Implementation of plan
5. Long, short term
monitoring
ECOLOGICAL SITE
DESCRIPTIONS
Producers
Universities
Conservation programs
Land manager, Bagh
and Soum governors
Meteorology
technician
Environmental
inspector,
Rangeland
specialist
SOUM, AIMAG,
NATIONAL LEVEL
WORKING GROUP

25. 25
Thank you for your
attention.