Range condition shows how vegetation and soil in the rangeland are affected by living and non living factors. The proper assessment of rangeland condition can indicate the success or failure of management practices. For evaluating rangeland condition in different ecological zones, different methods, indices and criteria are used. In this study, six methods for range condition assessment were evaluated including: “ Four factors ”, “ Adjusted four factors ”, “ Frequency ”, “ Reference ” (proposed by Saeedfar 2002), “ Australian ” (ABCD), and “ Adjusted Australian ”. Australian method was adjusted based on the study area characteristics and forage production. Advantages and disadvantages of these methods were also evaluated. Two approaches were used to compare methods under study. First, the range sites were observed and evaluated visually by 3 experts and then compared with condition Isfahan province. The results indicated that in semi-steppe zone “ Adjusted Australian ”, “ Frequency ” and “ Four factors ” methods and in steppe zone “ Frequency ” and “ Reference ” methods were appropriate respectively. AHP also determined that the “ Frequency ” was the best method in terms of objectiveness and speed ease of use. Also the “ Adjusted Australian ” method had good performance in terms of accuracy and appropriateness of score range. Considering all of the criteria, the frequency method was generally the best method. However, this method depends highly on factors such as plot and sample sizes and some vegetation characteristics. The lack of objectivity to determine range site condition align=left Key Words Range, condition, analytical hierarchical process, evaluation, production, esfahan.
