Seasonal movements of greater sage-grouse populations in Utah: Implications for species conservation

Abstract

Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus; sage-grouse) is considered an umbrella species for sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) landscapes in western North America. In 2015, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service determined sage-grouse unwarranted for protection under the Endangered Species Act (1973) because of conservation actions in priority areas. Understanding seasonal movements is key to delineation and assessment of priority conservation areas. We monitored radiomarked sage-grouse from 1998 to 2013 throughout Utah, USA, to determine seasonal movements. Maximum distances from nearest lek to nesting, summer, and winter locations across all radiomarked grouse averaged 2.20 km (90th percentile ¼ 5.06 km), 3.93 km (90th percentile ¼ 8.45 km), and 3.76 km (90th percentile ¼ 7.15 km), respectively. Maximum movements from nest to summer, nest to winter, and between summer and winter locations across all radiomarked grouse averaged 5.77 km (90th percentile ¼ 13.60 km), 11.77 km (90th percentile ¼ 26.36 km), and 14.75 km (90th percentile ¼ 30.77 km), respectively. Maximum distance from lek of capture to summer locations was greater for males than females, whereas females moved farther than males from lek to winter and summer to winter locations. Adult females moved farther than yearlings from lek to nest and summer to winter areas. The state of Utah's Sage-Grouse Management Areas included approximately 85% of the radiotelemetry seasonal locations and >95% when weighted by lek counts. Our results suggest that seasonal movements could be facilitated by increasing usable habitat space through management actions, as emphasized in Utah's sage-grouse plan. Ó 2016 The Wildlife Society.

Greater sage‐grouse use of mechanical conifer reduction treatments in northwest utah

“…He argued that increasing habitat quality does not necessarily lead to an increase in total population or densities, but increasing usable space can increase total population. Management actions implemented to remove or reduce PJ in areas where the sagebrush understory still provides potentially available habitat may increase the amount of useable space available for sage‐grouse, which could lead to increased local populations in areas where sagebrush habitat is a limiting factor (Dahlgren et al ).…”

Contribution of translocated greater sage‐grouse to population vital rates

“…Sage-grouse population declines have been attributed to poor nest success (Taylor et al 2012), and Dahlgren et al (2016b) suggested the reproductive potential of smaller, more remote sage-grouse populations in Utah is limited by available habitat. Nest success for all years and cohorts on Anthro Mountain (0.43) was lower than nest success averaged over 14 sage-grouse studies (47.4%; Crawford et al 2004).…”

Designing multi‐scale hierarchical monitoring frameworks for wildlife to support management: a sage‐grouse case study

“…, Dahlgren et al. ). The 41 population boundaries were largely based on floristic characteristics (Miller and Eddleman ), presence of active leks, topography (barriers), and spatial separation (Connelly et al.…”

“…These include, but are not limited to, priority areas for conservation (PACs; USFWS 2013), 41 population boundaries (five of which are subdivided into 24 subpopulations) and seven management zones (Connelly et al 2004). Priority areas for conservations are largely based on known active lek locations and the distribution of sagebrush habitat but sometimes accounted for interseasonal habitat movements (Fedy et al 2012, Dahlgren et al 2016). The 41 population boundaries were largely based on floristic characteristics (Miller and Eddleman 2001), presence of active leks, topography (barriers), and spatial separation (Connelly et al 2004: Table 6.16).…”