Spatial Distribution of Greater Sage-Grouse Nests in Relatively Contiguous Sagebrush Habitats

Holloran, Matthew J.; Anderson, Stanley H.

doi:10.1650/7749.1

Cited by 85 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An influential, telemetry-based, tracking project in central Montana indicated more than 90 percent of breeding season movements by male grouse were within 1.3 km (0.8 mi) of a lek and 76 percent were within 1 km of a lek (0.6 mi; Wallestad and Schladweiler, 1974 (Coates and others, 2013), and 95 percent of all nests were located within approximately 5 km (3.1 mi) of leks. Holloran and Anderson (2005) found that 64 percent of nests in Wyoming occurred within 5 km (3.1 mi) of leks, suggesting considerable protection of sage-grouse within these proximate habitats. In contrast, home ranges as large as 2,975 km 2 (1,149 mi 2 ) have been documented others, 2000, 2004) in some portions of the species' range.…”

Section: Analytical Realities and Additional Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…The need for protection of populations that are not well understood requires some generalization, and this distance range is proposed because research suggests that a majority of sage-grouse distributions and movements (within and between seasons) occur within this range (for example, Berry and Eng, 1985;Lyon and Anderson, 2003;Holloran and Anderson, 2005;Walker and others, 2007;Aldridge and others, 2008;Knick and others, 2011;Naugle and others, 2011;Coates and others, 2013). Importantly, due to variability among individuals and populations, some individuals in most populations (migratory and nonmigratory) may move greater distances than those included in the buffer, but specific protections cannot, practically, be determined for all individuals and all behavioral patterns.…”

Section: Surface Disturbancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Conservation buffer distance estimates for Greater Sage-Grouse: a review

Manier¹,

Bowen²,

Brooks³

et al. 2014

Open-File Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Analytical Realities and Additional Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Surface Disturbancementioning

confidence: 99%

Conservation buffer distance estimates for Greater Sage-Grouse: a review

Manier¹,

Bowen²,

Brooks³

et al. 2014

Open-File Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Primary threats to sage-grouse populations in this zone are energy development and transfer, drought, and sagebrush eradication programs (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2013). Sage-grouse population declines near energy developments in this area have been well documented (Lyon 2000;Holloran 2005;Holloran and Anderson 2005;Kaiser 2006). Residential development has also been identified as a threat (U.S.…”

Section: Wyoming Basin Management Zonementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus; hereafter, sage-grouse) is considered a "landscape species" with annual ranges that can encompass > 2,700 km 2 (Leonard et al 2000, Holloran and Anderson 2005, Knick and Connelly 2011. Movements within breeding habitat can exceed 25 km, and seasonal ranges can be > 80 km apart (Connelly et al 1988, Holloran andAnderson 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Coates

Prochazka

Ricca

et al. 2018

The Auk

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We updated our earlier comprehensive analysis of Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) population dynamics and probability of persistence from 1965 to 2007 throughout the species range by accumulating and analyzing additional counts of males from 2008 to 2013. A total of 89,749 counts were conducted by biologists and volunteers at 10,060 leks from 1965 through 2013 in 11 states occupied by Greater Sage-Grouse. In spite of survey effort increasing substantially (12.6%) between 2007 and 2013, the reconstructed estimate for minimum number of breeding males in the population, using standard approximations for missing values from Colorado, fell by 56% from109,990 breeding males in 2007 to 48,641 breeding males in 2013. The best model of annual rates of change of populations estimated across the Sage-Grouse Management Zones was a stochastic density dependent Gompertz model with 1-year time lags and declining carrying capacities through time. Weighted mean estimates of carrying capacity for the minimum number of males counted at leks for the entire range-wide distribution, excepting Colorado, were 40,505 (SE 6,444) in 2013 declining to 19,517 (SE 3,269) in 30 years and 8,154 (SE 1,704) in 100 years. Starting with the estimated abundance of males counted at leks in 2007 a simple effort to evaluate the validity of future forecasts of abundance was conducted by forecasting abundance in 2013 from Gompertz density dependent models with 1-year time lag and declining carrying capacity models of 6 of the 7 management zone populations. Estimated mean abundance in 2013 predicted 97.8% of the variation in true abundance in management zones. Concerted efforts across both public and private land ownerships that are intended to benefit Greater Sage-Grouse show little current evidence of success but more will be required to stabilize these declining populations and ensure their continued persistence in the face of ongoing development and habitat modification in the broad sagebrush region of western

show abstract

Isotopic analysis reveals landscape patterns in the diet of a subsidized predator, the common raven

Harju¹,

Olson²,

Hess³

et al. 2021

Ecol Sol and Evidence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Anthropogenic subsidies to native predators can have cascading effects on sensitive prey populations, but the spatial mechanisms behind these effects are often unknown.2. We used a stable isotope mixing model to reconstruct spatially naïve assimilated diets of common raven (Corvus corax) chicks and then used regression analysis to investigate landscape patterns in assimilated chick diet, with particular respect to the eggs and chicks of greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus).3. Assimilated raven diets were primarily composed of mammal carrion, followed by anthropogenic food and sage-grouse eggs and chicks. 4. Raven diets showed landscape gradients, whereby raven chicks in nests near active greater sage-grouse breeding leks consumed a higher proportion of sage-grouse eggs, sage-grouse chicks and insects in their diet and less mammal carrion. A majority of raven nests on anthropogenic nesting structures (78.7%) were within 5 km of the nearest sage-grouse lek. Ravens nesting in high-probability greater sage-grouse nesting habitat consumed more insects and plants and less mammal carrion.5. In landscapes devoid of natural raven nesting substrates, such as our study area, anthropogenic nesting substrates can 'anchor' breeding ravens nearer to greater sage-grouse leks, with concomitant increases in raven predation on greater sagegrouse nests. Curtailment of anthropogenic nesting substrates within 5 km of a sage-grouse lek may have a disproportionately positive impact on sage-grouse populations. More generally, these findings highlight that the spatial arrangement of anthropogenic subsidies can result in indirect interactions between humans and predators with direct implications for predators and prey.

show abstract

Spatial Distribution of Greater Sage-Grouse Nests in Relatively Contiguous Sagebrush Habitats

Cited by 85 publications

References 21 publications

Conservation buffer distance estimates for Greater Sage-Grouse: a review

Conservation buffer distance estimates for Greater Sage-Grouse: a review

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

Isotopic analysis reveals landscape patterns in the diet of a subsidized predator, the common raven

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About