After years of overgrazing in the late 1800s and early 1900s with little to no management, range management efforts shifted to focus on eradication of sagebrush to promote forage production from World War II to the 1970s.

From the 1970s to present the paradigm shifted to an emphasis on leaving sagebrush intact for the benefit of sagebrush-obligate wildlife.

However, neither management paradigm has yielded an ideal outcome with approximately 30% of the Great Basin being identified as “poor condition shrubland,” with >10% shrub cover and a high ratio of annual to perennial herbaceous cover.

A combination of new and old restoration methods is needed to restore degraded sagebrush communities to rejuvenate the declining perennial herbaceous understories and increase biotic resiliency of the shrub community.

The concepts of ecosystem services and nature's contributions to people highlight linkages between people and nature, directly addressing relationships and the flow of values.

Understanding stakeholder values in specific collaborative contexts may aid in solution-focused approaches, minimizing tradeoffs, improved group cohesion, and partnership success, as rangeland managers attempt to match strategies to needs of landscapes and people.

Using a mixed-methods approach, we explored pluralistic, sociocultural values and perspectives of diverse stakeholders regarding rangeland ecosystem services.

We noted patterns in how stakeholder groups prioritized certain ecosystem services over others and how this prioritization is a reflection of unique yet overlapping values systems.

Sustainable rangeland management is about the ecological underpinnings of a place and also about supporting the people and communities who have direct relationships with those landscapes.

Transplanting the keystone shrub Artemisia tridentata (big sagebrush) post fire is a common management practice in the Great Basin due to the species high fire mortality rates and episodic natural recovery.

Soil characteristics play a major role in big sagebrush transplant survival among many other influential abiotic and biotic factors.

In our case study, a soil contrast between a sandy loam and rocky clay soil had minor impact on mortality rates, likely due to microsite soil selection within the rocky clay soil complex, which ameliorated the expected negative effects.

A considerable proportion of mortality in both soil types occurred post planting (within 1 month) or was associated with suspected herbivory. Higher mortality was slightly associated with higher cover of nearby herbaceous plants, suggesting competition for resources.

Selecting planting sites based on soil factors within larger landscapes, as well as avoiding areas of high competing cover, could increase survival in marginal sites. However, low initial survival and/or herbivory with planting can have large impacts on overall outcomes.