Vegetational Cover and Predation of Sage Grouse Nests in Oregon

Gregg, Michael A.; Crawford, John A.; Drut, Martin S.; DeLong, Anita K.

doi:10.2307/3809563

Cited by 141 publications

(181 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(9 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

168

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, nest site selection and incubation strategies that decrease the amount of scent associated with the nests should increase the probability of hatching success. This hypothesis supports the importance of herbaceous screening cover within Sage-grouse nesting habitat (Gregg et al 1994;DeLong et al 1995).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Direct Identification of Northern Sage-grouse, <em>Centrocercus urophasianus</em>, Nest Predators Using Remote Sensing Cameras

Holloran

2003

Can Field Nat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. 2003. Direct identification of Northern Sage-grouse, Centrocercus urophasianus, nest predators using remote sensing cameras. Canadian Field-Naturalist 117(2): 308-310.The status and apparent decline of Sage-grouse (Centrocercus spp.) has been of increasing concern and lower nesting success could be contributing to population declines. Our objective was to directly identify Sage-grouse nest predators. Following visual confirmation of radio-marked Sage-grouse nest establishment in 1997-1999, we installed automatic 35 mm cameras controlled by an active infrared monitor. Of 26 nests monitored by cameras, 22 successfully hatched and four were unsuccessful. American Elk (Cervus canadensis), Badger (Taxidea taxus), and Black-billed Magpie (Pica hudsonia) destroyed three of the four unsuccessful nests, and domestic cattle caused abandonment of the fourth. Richardson's (Spermophilus richardsonii) and Thirteen-lined Ground Squirrels (S. tridecemlineatus) were recorded at nests, but were not detected in predation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Direct Identification of Northern Sage-grouse, <em>Centrocercus urophasianus</em>, Nest Predators Using Remote Sensing Cameras

Holloran

2003

Can Field Nat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…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

“…Because grouse nests are often subject to depredation by avian and mammalian predators, horizontal as well as vertical (overhead) cover is critical at the nest site. It is not surprising that nest success of many grouse species, sharp-tailed grouse included, has been positively correlated with greater cover at the nest site than randomly available across the landscape (Meints 1991, Riley et al 1992, Gregg et al 1994, McDonald 1998, McKee et al 1998, Boisvert 2002, Collins 2004, among others).…”

Section: Nesting Habitatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Double-brooding observed in a Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse (Tympanachus phasianellus columbianus) in Idaho

Proett

Roberts

Messmer

2016

The Wilson Journal of Ornithology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

of the University of Wyoming conducted the lifecycle model analyses and prepared the summary of the results. C.E. Braun and an anonymous reviewer provided constructive comments that substantially improved the quality of the assessment. Finally, the authors are extremely grateful to G.D. Patton and P.M. McDonald with the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Their support, technical guidance, understanding, and most of all, patience, made the preparation of this assessment easier. AUTHORS' BIOGRAPHIESRichard W. Hoffman earned his B.Sc. and M.Sc. Degrees in wildlife biology from Colorado State University. He subsequently worked for the Colorado Division of Wildlife for over 30 years as an avian researcher specializing in upland game birds. He has conducted research on population dynamics, habitat relationships, nutritional ecology, and behavior of white-tailed ptarmigan, dusky grouse, greater prairie-chickens, Columbian sharp-tailed grouse, and wild turkey. In retirement, he continues to work on projects involving white-tailed ptarmigan, greater sage-grouse, and Columbian sharp-tailed grouse.Allan E. Thomas earned his B.Sc. Degree in wildlife management with minors in fisheries and range management from the University of Arizona. He also conducted graduate work at the same university and received additional credits from attending schools in Washington, South Dakota, Arkansas, Alaska, and Idaho. His work experience spans more than 50 years and includes positions primarily with the Bureau of Land Management (22 years) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (19 years). He retired from the Bureau of Land Management in 1999 and started another career as a private consultant in Boise, Idaho. DEDICATIONSadly, Allan E. Thomas passed away before this assessment was completed. Allan was a devoted conservation biologist who believed strongly in documenting and communicating biological information. This assessment is testimony to Allan's work ethic and is dedicated to his memory. COVER PHOTO CREDITPhotograph of male Columbian sharp-tailed grouse in an alert posture by Richard W. Hoffman. 3 SUMMARY OF KEY COMPONENTS FOR CONSERVATION OF COLUMBIAN SHARP-TAILED GROUSE StatusThe Columbian sharp-tailed grouse (Tympanuchus phasianellus columbianus; CSTG) is one of six existing subspecies of sharp-tailed grouse in North America. It is endemic to big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), shrubsteppe, mountain shrub, and riparian shrub plant communities of western North America. The subspecies currently occupies less than 10 percent of its historic range, with only three metapopulations remaining in central British Columbia, southeastern Idaho and northern Utah, and northwestern Colorado and south-central Wyoming. Within Region 2 of the USDA Forest Service (USFS), this grouse formerly occurred in as many as 22 counties in western Colorado and in portions of 11 counties in west-central, southwestern, and south-central Wyoming. Today, viable populations occur in only three counties in Colorado and one county in Wyoming. Attempts are being ...

show abstract

Vegetational Cover and Predation of Sage Grouse Nests in Oregon

Abstract: , AND B. N. WILEY. 1979. The biology of the white-crowned pigeon. Wildl. Monogr. 64. 54pp. WOOD, D. A. 1992. Official lists of endangered and potentially endangered fauna and flora in Florida. Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Comm., Tallahassee. 25pp.

Cited by 141 publications

References 8 publications

Direct Identification of Northern Sage-grouse, <em>Centrocercus urophasianus</em>, Nest Predators Using Remote Sensing Cameras

Direct Identification of Northern Sage-grouse, <em>Centrocercus urophasianus</em>, Nest Predators Using Remote Sensing Cameras

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

Double-brooding observed in a Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse (Tympanachus phasianellus columbianus) in Idaho

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About