Animal habitat selection is an important and expansive area of research in ecology. In particular, the study of habitat selection is critical in habitat prioritization efforts for species of conservation concern. Landscape planning for species is happening at ever‐increasing extents because of the appreciation for the role of landscape‐scale patterns in species persistence coupled to improved datasets for species and habitats, and the expanding and intensifying footprint of human land uses on the landscape. We present a large‐scale collaborative effort to develop habitat selection models across large landscapes and multiple seasons for prioritizing habitat for a species of conservation concern. Greater sage‐grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus, hereafter sage‐grouse) occur in western semi‐arid landscapes in North America. Range‐wide population declines of this species have been documented, and it is currently considered as “warranted but precluded” from listing under the United States Endangered Species Act. Wyoming is predicted to remain a stronghold for sage‐grouse populations and contains approximately 37% of remaining birds. We compiled location data from 14 unique radiotelemetry studies (data collected 1994–2010) and habitat data from high‐quality, biologically relevant, geographic information system (GIS) layers across Wyoming. We developed habitat selection models for greater sage‐grouse across Wyoming for 3 distinct life stages: 1) nesting, 2) summer, and 3) winter. We developed patch and landscape models across 4 extents, producing statewide and regional (southwest, central, northeast) models for Wyoming. Habitat selection varied among regions and seasons, yet preferred habitat attributes generally matched the extensive literature on sage‐grouse seasonal habitat requirements. Across seasons and regions, birds preferred areas with greater percentage sagebrush cover and avoided paved roads, agriculture, and forested areas. Birds consistently preferred areas with higher precipitation in the summer and avoided rugged terrain in the winter. Selection for sagebrush cover varied regionally with stronger selection in the Northeast region, likely because of limited availability, whereas avoidance of paved roads was fairly consistent across regions. We chose resource selection function (RSF) thresholds for each model set (seasonal × regional combination) that delineated important seasonal habitats for sage‐grouse. Each model set showed good validation and discriminatory capabilities within study‐site boundaries. We applied the nesting‐season models to a novel area not included in model development. The percentage of independent nest locations that fell directly within identified important habitat was not overly impressive in the novel area (49%); however, including a 500‐m buffer around important habitat captured 98% of independent nest locations within the novel area. We also used leks and associated peak male counts as a proxy for nesting habitat outside of the study sites used to develop the models. A 1.5...

Animals can require different habitat types throughout their annual cycles. When considering habitat prioritization, we need to explicitly consider habitat requirements throughout the annual cycle, particularly for species of conservation concern. Understanding annual habitat requirements begins with quantifying how far individuals move across landscapes between key life stages to access required habitats. We quantified individual interseasonal movements for greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus; hereafter sage-grouse) using radio-telemetry spanning the majority of the species distribution in Wyoming. Sage-grouse are currently a candidate for listing under the United States Endangered Species Act and Wyoming is predicted to remain a stronghold for the species. Sage-grouse use distinct seasonal habitats throughout their annual cycle for breeding, brood rearing, and wintering. Average movement distances in Wyoming from nest sites to summer-late brood-rearing locations were 8.1 km (SE ¼ 0.3 km; n ¼ 828 individuals) and the average subsequent distances moved from summer sites to winter locations were 17.3 km (SE ¼ 0.5 km; n ¼ 607 individuals). Average nest-to-winter movements were 14.4 km (SE ¼ 0.6 km; n ¼ 434 individuals). We documented remarkable variation in the extent of movement distances both within and among sites across Wyoming, with some individuals remaining year-round in the same vicinity and others moving over 50 km between life stages. Our results suggest defining any of our populations as migratory or non-migratory is innappropriate as individual strategies vary widely. We compared movement distances of birds marked using Global Positioning System (GPS) and very high frequency (VHF) radio marking techniques and found no evidence that the heavier GPS radios limited movement. Furthermore, we examined the capacity of the sage-grouse core regions concept to capture seasonal locations. As expected, we found the core regions approach, which was developed based on lek data, was generally better at capturing the nesting locations than summer or winter locations. However, across

Conserving a declining species that is facing many threats, including overlap of its habitats with energy extraction activities, depends upon identifying and prioritizing the value of the habitats that remain. In addition, habitat quality is often compromised when source habitats are lost or fragmented due to anthropogenic development. Our objective was to build an ecological model to classify and map habitat quality in terms of source or sink dynamics for Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) in the Atlantic Rim Project Area (ARPA), a developing coalbed natural gas field in south-central Wyoming, USA. We used occurrence and survival modeling to evaluate relationships between environmental and anthropogenic variables at multiple spatial scales and for all female summer life stages, including nesting, brood-rearing, and non-brooding females. For each life stage, we created resource selection functions (RSFs). We weighted the RSFs and combined them to form a female summer occurrence map. We modeled survival also as a function of spatial variables for nest, brood, and adult female summer survival. Our survival-models were mapped as survival probability functions individually and then combined with fixed vital rates in a fitness metric model that, when mapped, predicted habitat productivity (productivity map). Our results demonstrate a suite of environmental and anthropogenic variables at multiple scales that were predictive of occurrence and survival. We created a source-sink map by overlaying our female summer occurrence map and productivity map to predict habitats contributing to population surpluses (source habitats) or deficits (sink habitat) and low-occurrence habitats on the landscape. The source-sink map predicted that of the Sage-Grouse habitat within the ARPA, 30% was primary source, 29% was secondary source, 4% was primary sink, 6% was secondary sink, and 31% was low occurrence. Our results provide evidence that energy development and avoidance of energy infrastructure were probably reducing the amount of source habitat within the ARPA landscape. Our source-sink map provides managers with a means of prioritizing habitats for conservation planning based on source and sink dynamics. The spatial identification of high value (i.e., primary source) as well as suboptimal (i.e., primary sink) habitats allows for informed energy development to minimize effects on local wildlife populations.

No abstract

Prioritizing habitats that provide the best options for the persistence of sensitive species in human‐modified landscapes is a critical concern for conservation. Linking occurrence and fitness parameters across multiple spatial scales provides an approach to address habitat prioritization for species of concern in disturbed habitats. To demonstrate the usefulness of this approach, we generated resource selection and survival risk models as a framework to quantify habitat value for wintering female greater sage‐grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) inhabiting a 6,093‐km2 study area in northwest Colorado and south‐central Wyoming, USA, being developed for oil and natural gas reserves. Our approach allowed us to evaluate the relative influence of anthropogenic development and environmental attributes characterizing a large landscape on habitat selection and habitat‐specific survival in winter for female sage‐grouse. When combined, these models provided a spatial representation of habitat quality to inform management and conservation of critical wintering habitats. We used 537 locations from 105 radio‐marked female grouse obtained from 18 fixed‐wing flights across winters 2007–2008, 2008–2009, and 2009–2010. Wintering sage‐grouse selected areas with higher wetness potential (0.75‐km2 scale), intermediate (quadratic form) total shrub cover (18.83‐km2 scale), higher variability in shrub height (18.83‐km2 scale), and less heterogeneity in Wyoming big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata wyomingensis; 4.71‐km2 scale) cover and total shrub cover (18.83‐km2 scale). Anthropogenic surface disturbance (0.75‐km2 scale) was negatively associated with occurrence. Winter survival for female grouse was positively correlated with heterogeneity in big sagebrush cover at the 0.75‐km2 scale, but negatively correlated with heterogeneity in total shrub cover at the 18.83‐km2 scale. We did not detect an association between anthropogenic variables and female winter survival. However, displacement of sage‐grouse in the energy extraction area may have masked our ability to identify anthropogenic variables potentially influencing survival. Our winter habitat quality map indicated highly effective winter habitat (high occurrence‐low survival risk) was limited, only representing 17.1% of our study area. Consequently, displacement from these limited, high‐quality winter habitats could have profound consequences to population persistence.