Greater Sage‐Grouse Population Response to Energy Development and Habitat Loss

Abstract

Modification of landscapes due to energy development may alter both habitat use and vital rates of sensitive wildlife species. Greater sage‐grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) in the Powder River Basin (PRB) of Wyoming and Montana, USA, have experienced rapid, widespread changes to their habitat due to recent coal‐bed natural gas (CBNG) development. We analyzed lek‐count, habitat, and infrastructure data to assess how CBNG development and other landscape features influenced trends in the numbers of male sage‐grouse observed and persistence of leks in the PRB. From 2001 to 2005, the number of males observed on leks in CBNG fields declined more rapidly than leks outside of CBNG. Of leks active in 1997 or later, only 38% of 26 leks in CBNG fields remained active by 2004–2005, compared to 84% of 250 leks outside CBNG fields. By 2005, leks in CBNG fields had 46% fewer males per active lek than leks outside of CBNG. Persistence of 110 leks was positively influenced by the proportion of sagebrush habitat within 6.4 km of the lek. After controlling for habitat, we found support for negative effects of CBNG development within 0.8 km and 3.2 km of the lek and for a time lag between CBNG development and lek disappearance. Current lease stipulations that prohibit development within 0.4 km of sage‐grouse leks on federal lands are inadequate to ensure lek persistence and may result in impacts to breeding populations over larger areas. Seasonal restrictions on drilling and construction do not address impacts caused by loss of sagebrush and incursion of infrastructure that can affect populations over long periods of time. Regulatory agencies may need to increase spatial restrictions on development, industry may need to rapidly implement more effective mitigation measures, or both, to reduce impacts of CBNG development on sage‐grouse populations in the PRB.

Assessing range-wide habitat suitability for the Lesser Prairie-Chicken

“…Several recent studies have documented avoidance of anthropogenic structures and human disturbance by prairie grouse species (Centrocercus and Tympanuchus spp. ; Holloran 2005, Pitman et al 2005, Walker et al 2007, Pruett et al 2009, Grisham et al 2014. The number of Greater SageGrouse (C. urophasianus) males displaying at leks decreased with increasing natural gas field-related disturbances around leks (Holloran 2005, Walker et al 2007).…”

The relative importance of intrinsic and extrinsic drivers to population growth vary among local populations of Greater Sage-Grouse: An integrated population modeling approach

“…In 2013 it reached a low of approximately 1600 males attending leks, a figure roughly 4% of the estimates in . Dave Naugle and his students have documented the impact of a "perfect storm" of habitat loss and disturbances through energy development combined with impacts of added water sources spreading West Nile Virus , 2005, 2007a in this population that portends serious negative consequences for sage-grouse populations experiencing expanded energy development throughout the multistate region containing minable energy sources , Naugle, et al 2011, Walker et al 2007b). …”

A Framework for Quantitative Assessment of Impacts Related to Energy and Mineral Resource Development

“…These PDFs would be estimated based on data from local or analogous areas and those for mines will be dependent on deposit size. Other types of development impact relationships could also be included, such as the quantified relation between well pad presence and behavior (mortality or avoidance) of a threatened species (e.g., Walker et al 2007). The input data will also include whatever fundamental data are required to make use of the development impact relationships, Figure 2.…”

“…To estimate (via the Monte Carlo approach) the number of sage grouse leks that could potentially be lost due to petroleum development, necessary input data include mapped lek locations and the quantified relationship between petroleum development and lek abandonment. Details of the petroleum development impact on sage grouse leks are the subject of on-going research (e.g., Lyon 2000;Holloran 2005;Walker et al 2007); for the purpose of this example, we assume leks within 3.2 km of a well location will be abandoned, following Walker et al (2007). Similar to PJ woodland, a more comprehensive study could include roads and other infrastructure, the impacts of which would be calculated in much the same way as well pads.…”