Anthropogenic features such as urbanization, roads, and power lines, are increasing in western United States landscapes in response to rapidly growing human populations. However, their spatial effects have not been evaluated. Our goal was to model the human footprint across the western United States. We first delineated the actual area occupied by anthropogenic features, the physical effect area. Next, we developed the human footprint model based on the ecological effect area, the zone influenced by features beyond their physical presence, by combining seven input models: three models quantified top-down anthropogenic influences of synanthropic predators (avian predators, domestic dog and cat presence risk), and four models quantified bottom-up anthropogenic influences on habitat (invasion of exotic plants, human-caused fires, energy extraction, and anthropogenic wildland fragmentation). Using independent bird population data, we found bird abundance of four synanthropic species to correlate positively with human footprint intensity and negatively for three of the six species influenced by habitat fragmentation. We then evaluated the extent of the human footprint in relation to terrestrial (ecoregions) and aquatic systems (major rivers and lakes), regional management and conservation status, physical environment, and temporal changes in human actions. The physical effect area of anthropogenic features covered 13% of the western United States with agricultural land (9.8%) being most dominant. High-intensity human footprint areas (class 8-10) overlapped highly productive low-elevation private landholdings and covered 7% of the western United States compared to 48% for low-intensity areas (class 1-3), which were confined to low-productivity high-elevation federal landholdings. Areas within 1 km of rivers were more affected by the human footprint compared to lakes. Percentage human population growth was higher in low-intensity human footprint areas. The disproportional regional effects of the human footprint on landscapes in the western United States create a challenge to management of ecosystems and wildlife populations. Using footprint models, managers can plan land use actions, develop restoration scenarios, and identify areas of high conservation value at local landscapes within a regional context. Moreover, human footprint models serve as a tool to stratify landscapes for studies investigating floral and faunal response to human disturbance intensity gradients.

The distribution of sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) within the Sage-Grouse Conservation Area (SGCA, the historical distribution of sage-grouse buffered by 50 km) stretches from British Columbia and Saskatchewan in the north, to northern Arizona and New Mexico in the south, and from the eastern slopes of the Sierra Nevada and Cascade mountains to western South Dakota. The dominant sagebrush (sub)species as well as the composition and proportion of shrubs, grasses, and forbs varies across different ecological sites as a function of precipitation, temperature, soils, topographic position, elevation, and disturbance history. Most important to Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) are three subspecies of big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata)(basin big sagebrush [A. t. ssp. tridentata], Wyoming big sagebrush [A. t. ssp. wyomingensis], and mountain big sagebrush [A. t. ssp. vaseyana]); two low or dwarf forms (little sagebrush [A. arbuscula] and black sagebrush [A. nova]); and silver sagebrush (A. cana), which occurs primarily in the northeast portion of the sage-grouse range. Invasive plant species, wildfires, and weather and climate change are major influences on sagebrush habitats and present significant challenges to their long-term conservation. Each factor is spatially pervasive across the Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Area 145

Greater sage-grouse Centrocercus urophasianus (Bonaparte) currently occupy approximately half of their historical distribution across western North America. Sage-grouse are a candidate for endangered species listing due to habitat and population fragmentation coupled with inadequate regulation to control development in critical areas. Conservation planning would benefit from accurate maps delineating required habitats and movement corridors. However, developing a species distribution model that incorporates the diversity of habitats used by sage-grouse across their widespread distribution has statistical and logistical challenges. We first identified the ecological minimums limiting sage-grouse, mapped similarity to the multivariate set of minimums, and delineated connectivity across a 920,000 km2 region. We partitioned a Mahalanobis D2 model of habitat use into k separate additive components each representing independent combinations of species–habitat relationships to identify the ecological minimums required by sage-grouse. We constructed the model from abiotic, land cover, and anthropogenic variables measured at leks (breeding) and surrounding areas within 5 km. We evaluated model partitions using a random subset of leks and historic locations and selected D2 (k = 10) for mapping a habitat similarity index (HSI). Finally, we delineated connectivity by converting the mapped HSI to a resistance surface. Sage-grouse required sagebrush-dominated landscapes containing minimal levels of human land use. Sage-grouse used relatively arid regions characterized by shallow slopes, even terrain, and low amounts of forest, grassland, and agriculture in the surrounding landscape. Most populations were interconnected although several outlying populations were isolated because of distance or lack of habitat corridors for exchange. Land management agencies currently are revising land-use plans and designating critical habitat to conserve sage-grouse and avoid endangered species listing. Our results identifying attributes important for delineating habitats or modeling connectivity will facilitate conservation and management of landscapes important for supporting current and future sage-grouse populations.

. 2014. Quantifying restoration effectiveness using multi-scale habitat models: implications for sage-grouse in the Great Basin. Ecosphere 5(3):31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/ES13-00278.1Abstract. A recurrent challenge in the conservation of wide-ranging, imperiled species is understanding which habitats to protect and whether we are capable of restoring degraded landscapes. For Greater Sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus), a species of conservation concern in the western United States, we approached this problem by developing multi-scale empirical models of occupancy in 211 randomly located plots within a 40 million ha portion of the species' range. We then used these models to predict sage-grouse habitat quality at 826 plots associated with 101 post-wildfire seeding projects implemented from 1990 to 2003. We also compared conditions at restoration sites to published habitat guidelines. Sage-grouse occupancy was positively related to plot-and landscape-level dwarf sagebrush (Artemisia arbuscula, A. nova, A. tripartita) and big sagebrush steppe prevalence, and negatively associated with non-native plants and human development. The predicted probability of sage-grouse occupancy at treated plots was low on average (0.09) and not substantially different from burned areas that had not been treated. Restoration sites with quality habitat tended to occur at higher elevation locations with low annual temperatures, high spring precipitation, and high plant diversity. Of 313 plots seeded after fire, none met all sagebrush guidelines for breeding habitats, but approximately 50% met understory guidelines, particularly for perennial grasses. This pattern was similar for summer habitat. Less than 2% of treated plots met winter habitat guidelines. Restoration actions did not increase the probability of burned areas meeting most guideline criteria. The probability of meeting guidelines was influenced by a latitudinal gradient, climate, and topography. Our results suggest that sage-grouse are relatively unlikely to use many burned areas within 20 years of fire, regardless of treatment. Understory habitat conditions are more likely to be adequate than overstory conditions, but in most climates, establishing forbs and reducing cheatgrass dominance is unlikely. Reestablishing sagebrush cover will require more than 20 years using past restoration methods. Given current fire frequencies and restoration capabilities, protection of landscapes containing a mix of dwarf sagebrush and big sagebrush steppe, minimal human development, and low non-native plant cover may provide the best opportunity for conservation of sage-grouse habitats.

No abstract