Sage Grouse Use of Nest Sites in Southeastern Idaho

Connelly, John W.; Wakkinen, Wayne L.; Apa, Anthony D.; Reese, Kerry P.

doi:10.2307/3808984

Cited by 72 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Currently, there exists a paradigm of using short-term studies on sage-grouse focusing primarily on drivers of nest survival (Connelly et al 1991, 2000, Gregg et al 1994, Holloran et al 2005, Moynahan et al 2007). Consequently, it is largely thought that management directed at nest survival will yield important returns for conservation investment (Johnson and Braun 1999, Connelly et al 2000, Kirol et al 2015.…”

Section: Sy Hsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating vital rate contributions to greater sage‐grouse population dynamics to inform conservation

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Species conservation efforts often use short-term studies that fail to identify the vital rates that contribute most to population growth. Although the greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus; sage-grouse) is a candidate for protection under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, and is sometimes referred to as an umbrella species in the sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) biome of western North America, the failure of proposed management strategies to focus on key vital rates that may contribute most to achieving population stability remains problematic for sustainable conservation. To address this dilemma, we performed both prospective and retrospective perturbation analyses of a life cycle model based on a 12-yr study that encompassed nearly all sage-grouse vital rates. To validate our population models, we compared estimates of annual finite population growth rates (λ) from our female-based life cycle models to those attained from male-based lek counts. Post-fledging (i.e., after second year, second year, and juvenile) female survival parameters contributed most to past variation in λ during our study and had the greatest potential to change λ in the future, indicating these vital rates as important determinants of sage-grouse population dynamics. In addition, annual estimates of λ from female-based life cycle models and malebased lek data were similar, providing the most rigorous evidence to date that lek counts of males can serve as a valid index of sage-grouse population change. Our comparison of fixed and mixed statistical models for evaluating temporal variation in nest survival and initiation suggest that conservation planners use caution when evaluating short-term nesting studies and using associated fixed-effect results to develop conservation objectives. In addition, our findings indicated that greater attention should be paid to those factors affecting sage-grouse post-fledging females. Our approach demonstrates the need for more long-term studies of species vital rates across the life cycle. Such studies should address the decoupling of sampling variation from underlying process (co)variation in vital rates, identification of how such variation drives population dynamics, and how decision makers can use this information to re-direct conservation efforts to address the most limiting points in the life cycle for a given population.

show abstract

Section: Sy Hsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating vital rate contributions to greater sage‐grouse population dynamics to inform conservation

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although water availability may influence the species' summer distribution (Patterson, 1952;Autrienth, 1981), movements to summer range are probably in response to lack of succulent forbs in an area rather than a lack of free water (Connelly and Doughty, 1989). Existing research suggests that sage-grouse do not regularly use water developments even during relatively dry years but obtain required moisture from consuming succulent vegetation in the vicinity (Connelly, 1982;Connelly and Doughty, 1989;Connelly and others, 2004). More than 56,500 water development projects have been implemented on lands managed by the BLM within the current distribution of sage-grouse plus a 50 km (31 mi) buffer around this distribution (Connelly and others, 2004; fig.…”

Section: Water Developmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, projects that create mesic zones around water developments to promote the growth of succulent vegetation may inadvertently contribute to the proliferation of WNv as Culex tarsalis regularly breed in water-filled hoofprints in these areas . Water developments tend to attract other animals and thus may serve as predator sinks for sage-grouse (Connelly and Doughty, 1989). Additionally, water developments have substantially influenced the movements and distribution of livestock in arid western habitats and have increased the amount of sagebrush area available for livestock (Connelly and others, 2004), which-although these practices may benefit riparian conditions (sage-grouse summer habitats)-may increase the effect of livestock across the landscape, expanding impacts to upland areas important for sage-grouse during nesting, early brood-rearing, and winter seasons.…”

Section: Water Developmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Summary of science, activities, programs, and policies that influence the rangewide conservation of Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus)

Manier¹,

Wood²,

Bowen³

et al. 2013

Open-File Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For more information on the USGS-the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS.For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprodTo order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

show abstract

“…In Oregon, sage-grouse nest success was highest in mountain big sagebrush A. tridentata vaseyana (Gregg 1991). However, othersagebrush species such as low sagebrush A. arbuscula, silver sagebrush A. cana, and threetip sagebrush A. tripartita are commonly used as nest cover by sage-grouse (Klebenow 1969, Connelly et al 1991, Gregg 1991, Sveum et al 1998, Aldridge & Brigham 2001, Aldridge & Brigham 2002.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…dominated habitats for nesting (Klebenow 1969, Wakkinen 1990, Connelly et al 1991, DeLong et al 1995, Aldridge & Brigham 2002. Although many shrub speciesareusedbysage-grouseasnestcover,nestsuccess is greater when sagebrush is used (Connelly et al 1991).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Greater Sage‐Grouse Centrocercus urophasianus Use of Threetip Sagebrush Relative to Big Sagebrush in South‐Central Idaho

2009

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Disturbances that change sagebrush Artemisia spp.‐steppe communities may have an impact on greater sage‐grouse Centrocercus urophasianus populations. Fire can rapidly alter sagebrush‐steppe communities and may result in an increase in threetip sagebrush A. tripartita because this shrub is one of the few species of sagebrush that will sprout following fire. We examined the use of threetip sagebrush by sage‐grouse as nest cover and compared nest success of grouse using threetip sagebrush to that of grouse using big sagebrush A. tridentata. Sage‐grouse used threetip sagebrush as nest cover less than expected based on the abundance of this shrub. The only other species of sagebrush used as nest cover was big sagebrush, and sage‐grouse used big sagebrush more than expected based on big sagebrush abundance. However, nest site selection was confounded by age of sage‐grouse females. Sage‐grouse that used big sagebrush as nest cover had greater nest success than grouse using threetip sagebrush. Our findings demonstrate another negative, but subtle, effect of fire on sage‐grouse populations and further underscore the need for fire suppression and carefully implemented habitat rehabilitation projects.

show abstract

Sage Grouse Use of Nest Sites in Southeastern Idaho

Cited by 72 publications

References 3 publications

Evaluating vital rate contributions to greater sage‐grouse population dynamics to inform conservation

Evaluating vital rate contributions to greater sage‐grouse population dynamics to inform conservation

Summary of science, activities, programs, and policies that influence the rangewide conservation of Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus)

Greater Sage‐Grouse Centrocercus urophasianus Use of Threetip Sagebrush Relative to Big Sagebrush in South‐Central Idaho

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About