Conservation Status of Grouse Worldwide: An Update

Storch, Ilse

doi:10.2981/0909-6396(2007)13[5:csogwa]2.0.co;2

Cited by 130 publications

(146 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

144

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Globally, ptarmigan still occupy most of their original ranges, and they are considered to be the best-protected grouse species because of their often remote habitats, but there are emerging concerns that some populations are declining (Johnsgard 1983, Storch 2000, 2007. It is extremely challenging to determine populations at risk and summarize population status for North American ptarmigan when so few populations have been studied or monitored over a continental landmass that stretches from Newfoundland to the Aleutian Islands and from Ellesmere Island south to New Mexico (Figure 1).…”

Section: Status Of Ptarmigan Populations In North Americamentioning

confidence: 99%

Ptarmigan in North America: Influence of Life History and Environmental Conditions on Population Persistence.

Martin

Wilson²

2011

Gyrfalcons and Ptarmigan in a Changing World

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT.-Three ptarmigan species (Willow Ptarmigan Lagopus lagopus, Rock Ptarmigan L. muta, and White-tailed Ptarmigan L. leucura) occupy the tundra habitats of North America. Willow and Rock Ptarmigan inhabit arctic and alpine regions of Canada and Alaska, while Whitetailed Ptarmigan occupy alpine habitats from Alaska and northern Canada south to New Mexico. Ptarmigan populations have relatively short generation times (1.7 to 2.62 years) with an annual fecundity of 0.4 to 2.04 female fledglings/female. In some populations, annual fecundity depends strongly on re-nesting to replace failed first clutches (predation rate usually >50%). We use demographic data from five study sites (38 study-years) to demonstrate that the life history of the North American ptarmigan varies from fast (r-selection/high fecundity) to slow life styles (Kselection/high survival). Willow Ptarmigan, living in sub-arctic and sub-alpine habitats, have a fast life history. Their populations are most strongly influenced by fecundity and survival of juveniles and yearling females. At the other end of the spectrum, Rock Ptarmigan have a slower life history with nearly 40% lower reproductive output, but over 20% higher adult survival rate. Interestingly, White-tailed Ptarmigan show within-species variation from fast to slow lifestyles across their latitudinal range. White-tailed Ptarmigan in the Yukon allocate more effort to reproduction than those in Colorado, but they have lower annual survival, suggesting that environmental factors can lead to life history shifts even within species. In all species, a well-developed external recruitment (rescue) capacity allows ptarmigan populations to persist in stochastic conditions for breeding and survival. The impact of climate change is expected to differ with life history. Slow life style ptarmigan populations are buffered more from climate change influences that impact fecundity but they are more vulnerable to environmental processes that decrease adult survival than the fast life style Willow Ptarmigan.

show abstract

Section: Status Of Ptarmigan Populations In North Americamentioning

confidence: 99%

Ptarmigan in North America: Influence of Life History and Environmental Conditions on Population Persistence.

Martin

Wilson²

2011

Gyrfalcons and Ptarmigan in a Changing World

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The aim of this article is to illuminate the hunting regulations used in today's management of grouse (Tetraonidae) species in Europe and North-America, with a special focus on the implementation uncertainty that lies in operationalization links from the chosen harvest strategy to the practical solutions and how an MSE-model could be appropriate in such an approach. The bird family Tetraonidae includes 20 species distributed in temperate and subarctic regions of the Northern Hemisphere (Storch, 2015), today devoted considerable attention because of a an increasing level of red-listing on one side, and a relatively widespread harvest on the other side (Mustin et al, 2011;Storch, 2015). A better understanding of the precision of the harvest management in these species is therefore a pressing conservation issue.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Harvest Regulations and Implementation Uncertainty in Small Game Harvest Management

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A main challenge in harvest management is to set policies that maximize the probability that management goals are met. While the management cycle includes multiple sources of uncertainty, only some of these has received considerable attention. Currently, there is a large gap in our knowledge about implemention of harvest regulations, and to which extent indirect control methods such as harvest regulations are actually able to regulate harvest in accordance with intended management objectives. In this perspective article, we first summarize and discuss hunting regulations currently used in management of grouse species (Tetraonidae) in Europe and North America. Management models suggested for grouse are most often based on proportional harvest or threshold harvest principles. These models are all built on theoretical principles for sustainable harvesting, and provide in the end an estimate on a total allowable catch. However, implementation uncertainty is rarely examined in empirical or theoretical harvest studies, and few general findings have been reported. Nevertheless, circumstantial evidence suggest that many of the most popular regulations are acting depensatory so that harvest bag sizes is more limited in years (or areas) where game density is high, contrary to general recommendations. A better understanding of the implementation uncertainty related to harvest regulations is crucial in order to establish sustainable management systems. We suggest that scenario tools like Management System Evaluation (MSE) should be more frequently used to examine robustness of currently applied harvest regulations to such implementation uncertainty until more empirical evidence is available.

show abstract

“…Like other sharptailed grouse subspecies, and North American prairie grouse in general, the CSTG employs a lek mating system in which males congregate at display areas and females assess displaying males in the process of choosing their mating partners (Selous 1906(Selous -1907Beehler and Foster 1988). Similar to other North American prairie grouse (Storch 2007), CSTG populations have declined substantially (Gregg and Niemuth 2000;Drummer et al 2011), now occupying less than 10% of the subspecies' historic range (Miller and Graul 1980;Giesen and Connelly 1993). Conversion of native plant communities to agricultural crop production and habitat degradation as a result of livestock grazing are hypothesised to be important factors in CSTG population declines (Connelly et al 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Survival of translocated sharp-tailed grouse: temporal threshold and age effects

Mathews¹,

Coates²,

Delehanty³

2016

Wildl. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context. The Columbian sharp-tailed grouse (Tympanuchus phasianellus columbianus) is a subspecies of conservation concern in the western United States, currently occupying 10% of its historic range. Land and management agencies are employing translocation techniques to restore Columbian sharp-tailed grouse (CSTG) populations. However, establishing self-sustaining populations by translocating grouse often is unsuccessful, owing, in part, to low survivorship of translocated grouse following release.Aims. We measured and modelled patterns of CSTG mortality for 150 days following translocation into historic range, to better understand patterns and causes of success or failure in conservation efforts to re-establish grouse populations.Methods. We conducted two independent multi-year translocations and evaluated individual and temporal factors associated with CSTG survival up to 150 days following their release. Both translocations were reintroduction attempts in Nevada, USA, to establish viable populations of CSTG into their historic range.Key results. We observed a clear temporal threshold in survival probability, with CSTG mortality substantially higher during the first 50 days following release than during the subsequent 100 days. Additionally, translocated yearling grouse exhibited higher overall survival (0.669 AE 0.062) than did adults (0.420 AE 0.052) across the 150-day period and higher survival than adults both before and after the 50-day temporal threshold.Conclusions. Translocated CSTG are especially vulnerable to mortality for 50 days following release, whereas translocated yearling grouse are more resistant to mortality than are adult grouse. On the basis of the likelihood of survival, yearling CSTG are better candidates for population restoration through translocation than are adult grouse.Implications. Management actions that ameliorate mortality factors for 50 days following translocation and translocations that employ yearling grouse will increase the likelihood of population establishment.

show abstract

Conservation Status of Grouse Worldwide: An Update

Abstract: BioOne Complete (complete.BioOne.org) is a full-text database of 200 subscribed and open-access titles in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses.

Cited by 130 publications

References 11 publications

Ptarmigan in North America: Influence of Life History and Environmental Conditions on Population Persistence.

Ptarmigan in North America: Influence of Life History and Environmental Conditions on Population Persistence.

Harvest Regulations and Implementation Uncertainty in Small Game Harvest Management

Survival of translocated sharp-tailed grouse: temporal threshold and age effects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About