Journal of Rangeland

This study aimed to evaluate and compare the accuracy and efficiency of some range condition assessment methods including “Four factors”, “Adjusted four factors”, “Frequency”, “Reference” (proposed by Saeedfar 2002), “Australian” (ABCD), and “Adjusted Australian” in eight range sites located in two range places in Isfahan Semi- Steppe rangelands. The vegetation and soil properties of all the studied range sites were observed and their conditions classes (excellent, good, moderate and poor) were evaluated visually by 3 experts as control sites to compare with condition classes obtained by each method. A systematic random sampling method was used to collect the data in each site using 30 plots with size of one square meter each. Plant production, vegetation cover, soil surface condition and plant frequencies in all sites were assessed to utilize in the six range condition assessment methods. If majority of the methods determined one particular condition classes similarly, then it was concluded that these methods had good performances. In the next step, four criteria including accuracy, speed & ease of use, objectivity, and appropriateness of score range for determination of range condition for all methods were selected and the methods were then compared using Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP). Expert choice software was used to perform AHP. The results indicated that in semi-steppe rangelands “Four factors” “Adjusted Australian” and “Frequency” methods have acceptable accuracy. AHP also determined that the “Frequency” was the best method in terms of objectiveness, speed and ease of use. Also the “Adjusted Australian” method had good performance in terms of accuracy and appropriateness of score range. The lack of objectivity to determine range site condition classes as control is among the limitations of this type of study.