Next‐generation restoration for sage‐grouse: a framework for visualizing local conifer cuts within a landscape context

Abstract

. 2017. Next-generation restoration for sage-grouse: a framework for visualizing local conifer cuts within a landscape context. Ecosphere 8 (7): e01888. 10.1002/ecs2.1888Abstract. The expansion of coniferous trees into sagebrush ecosystems is a major driver of habitat loss and fragmentation, resulting in negative impacts to wildlife. Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) respond directly to conifer expansion through decreased breeding activity, nesting, and overall survival; thus, small amounts of conifer expansion can have significant impacts on sage-grouse habitat and populations. To this end, conservation partners have collaborated across private and public lands to reduce the threat of conifer expansion through targeted removal of conifer trees. Here, we demonstrate the use of the Marxan framework to incorporate important ecosystem attributes in the prioritization of conifer removal within the Oregon range of sage-grouse. We prioritized conifer removal relative to three separate goals: (1) enhancement of existing sage-grouse breeding, nesting, and early brood-rearing habitats; (2) facilitation of sage-grouse movement between breeding and brood-rearing habitats; and (3) improvement of connectivity among sage-grouse priority areas for conservation (PACs). Optimization models successfully identified areas with low conifer canopy cover, high resilience and resistance to wildfire and annual grass invasion, and high bird abundance to enhance sage-grouse habitat. The inclusion of mesic resources resulted in further prioritization of areas that were closer to such resources, but also identified potential pathways that connected breeding habitats to the late brood-rearing habitats associated with mesic areas. Examining areas outside of PACs resulted in the selection of potential corridors to facilitate connectivity; although areas with low conifer cover were selected similarly to the other optimization models, areas with high cover were also chosen to be able to enhance connectivity. Areas identified by optimization models were largely consistent with and overlapped ongoing conifer removal efforts in the Warner Mountains of south-central Oregon. Land ownership of preferential areas selected by models varied with priority goals and followed general ownership patterns of the region, with public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management and private lands being selected the most. The increased availability of landscape-level datasets and assessment tools in sagebrush ecosystems can reduce the time and cost of both planning and implementation of habitat projects involving conifer removal. Most importantly, incorporating these new datasets and tools can supplement expert-based knowledge to maximize benefits to sagebrush and sage-grouse conservation.

A conservation planning tool for Greater Sage‐grouse using indices of species distribution, resilience, and resistance

“…Our pinyon–juniper removal example complements recent tools developed by Reinhardt et al. () to help select pinyon–juniper removal sites that are optimal for Sage‐grouse. Our example is also particularly germane to applied management of Sage‐grouse in the Bi‐State and across the Great Basin for several reasons.…”

“…, Reinhardt et al. ) or extensive radio‐telemetry location data (e.g., Coates et al. ) with output from SDMs quantifying Sage‐grouse abundance and distribution based on lek counts.…”

Integrating Ecosystem Resilience and Resistance Into Decision Support Tools for Multi-Scale Population Management of a Sagebrush Indicator Species

“…Two recent studies (Reinhardt et al, 2017;Ricca et al, 2018) applied spatially explicit mid-scale models of sage-grouse resource selection across different life-stages to proposed or existing conifer removal treatment units identified by resource management agencies (e.g., Bureau of Land Management and FIGURE 6 | Spatial overlay approach depicting the distribution of possible ecological traps to sage-grouse based on the intersection of cover-class 1 conifers with high RandR (upper row, A), and further delineated for management priority based on intersections with a lek-only based model of sage-grouse habitat and abundance using SGCAs (B), and a telemetry-and lek-based model of sage-grouse habitat and abundance (C). The lower row (D-F) represents ecological traps that could be created by thinning of cover-class 2 to cover-class 1 in high RandR areas.…”

Mule deer juniper use is an unreliable indicator of habitat quality: Comments on Coe et al. (2018)

“…Spatial targeting of juniper removal continues to be a hallmark of sage‐grouse conservation across the West including Oregon where Coe et al () conducted their research (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service , Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] , Miller et al , Reinhardt et al ).…”