Sage-grouse
Keys to greater sage-grouse management are maintenance of expansive stands of sagebrush, especially varieties of big sagebrush with abundant forbs in the understory, particularly during spring; undisturbed and somewhat open sites for leks; and healthy perennial grass and forb stands intermixed with sagebrush for brood rearing. Within suitable habitats, areas should have 15–25% canopy cover of sagebrush 30–80 cm tall for nesting and 10–25% canopy cover 40–80 cm tall for brood rearing. In winter habitats, shrubs should be exposed 25–35 cm above snow and have 10–30% canopy cover exposed above snow. In nesting and brood-rearing habitats, the understory should have at least 15 percent cover of grasses and at least 10 percent cover of forbs greater than or equal to 18 cm tall. Greater sage-grouse have been reported to use habitats with 5–110 cm average vegetation height, 5–160 cm visual obstruction reading, 3–51% grass cover, 3–20% forb cover, 3–69 percent shrub cover, 7–63% sagebrush cover, 14–51% bare ground, and 0–18% litter cover. Unless otherwise noted, this account refers to habitat requirements and environmental factors affecting greater sage-grouse but not Gunnison sage-grouse. Habitats used by Gunnison sage-grouse are generally similar to habitats used by Greater Sage-Grouse, but some differences have been reported. The greater sage-grouse is a game bird and is hunted throughout most of its current range. This account does not address harvest or its effects on populations; rather, this account focuses on the effects of habitat management.
View article.
We used long‐term data from the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Range Trend Project to assess short‐term (1–4 yr post‐treatment) and long‐term (6–10 yr post‐treatment) effects of fire on vegetation cover at 16 sites relative to sage‐grouse habitat vegetation guidelines. Sagebrush cover remained low post‐fire at sites considered historically unsuitable for sage‐grouse (<10% initial sagebrush cover). In contrast, at sites that had higher (>10%) pre‐fire sagebrush cover, sagebrush cover decreased to <10% in the short‐term post‐fire, but by 6–10 yr after fire, most of these sites exhibited a recovering trajectory and two sites had recovered to >10% cover. Post‐fire sagebrush cover was positively related to elevation. Across all sites, perennial grasses and forbs increased in cover to approximately meet the habitat vegetation guidelines for sage‐grouse. Cheatgrass cover did not change in response to fire, and increased perennial grass cover appears to have played an important role in suppressing cheatgrass. Our results indicate that, while fire poses a potential risk for sage‐grouse habitat loss and degradation, burned sites do not necessarily need to be considered permanently altered, especially if they are located at higher elevation, have high sagebrush cover pre‐fire, and are reseeded with perennial grasses and forbs post‐fire. However, our results confirm that fire at more degraded sites, for example, those with <10% sagebrush cover, can result in cheatgrass‐dominated landscapes and sagebrush loss at these sites should be avoided.
Read the report.
The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the number of federal oil and gas leases issued and number of APD issued between 2015 and 2019 that occurred within BLM-designated sage-grouse habitat (General and Priority Habitats). More specifically, our objective was to evaluate the differences in the number and acreage of federal oil and gas leases and number of APDs assigned inside and outside of BLM-designated sage-grouse habitat from October 1, 2015 to March 15, 2019.
Learn more from the overview webinar.
Access training modules.
This learning series responds to Section 7.b.iii, Action Item #5 within the Fuels section of the 2015 Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy, which calls for a comprehensive knowledge transfer program to enhance the fuels management program’s role in sagebrush-steppe management. The Strategy is intended to improve the efficiency and efficacy of actions to address rangeland fire, to better prevent and suppress rangeland fire, and improve efforts to restore fire-impacted landscapes.
The learning modules synthesize the state of the science for six management topics:
- Background and origins of the conservation problems facing the sagebrush steppe and greater sage-grouse
- Understanding and applying the concepts of resistance and resilience
- Management of sagebrush ecosystems experiencing conifer encroachment
- Management of sagebrush ecosystems at risk of or invaded by invasive annual grasses
- Restoration of sagebrush steppe ecosystems
- Issues specific to the eastern range of greater sage-grouse
View article.
Population genomic analyses reaffirmed genome-wide differentiation between greater and Gunnison sage-grouse, revealed pronounced intraspecific population structure, and highlighted important differentiation of a small isolated population of greater sage-grouse in the northwest of the range. Patterns of genome-wide differentiation were largely consistent with a hypothesized role of genetic drift due to limited gene flow among populations. Inferred ancient population demography suggested persistent declines in effective population sizes that have likely contributed to differentiation within and among species.
This study determined average songbird density in areas of high and low probability of sage‐grouse occurrence. Sagebrush cover at intermediate scales was an important predictor for all species, and ground cover was important for all species except sage thrashers. Areas with a higher probability of sage‐grouse occurrence also contained higher densities of Brewer’s sparrows, green‐tailed towhees, and sage thrashers, but predicted sagebrush sparrow densities were lower in these areas. In northwest Colorado, sage‐grouse may be an effective umbrella for Brewer’s sparrows, green‐tailed towhees, and sage thrashers, but sage‐grouse habitat does not appear to capture areas that support high sagebrush sparrow densities. A multi‐species focus may be the best management and conservation strategy for several species of concern, especially those with conflicting habitat requirements.
The 2019 Summit took place in Burns, OR. To learn more about the Partnership, visit the SageCon webpage.
There are two key takeaways from the research: 1) conifer removal is an effective tool for increasing sage grouse populations, and 2) sage grouse populations may take several years to respond to management actions because they are long lived and have lower reproductive output compared to other game birds.
View infographic.
Relationship between sagebrush habitat characteristics and sage-grouse use in a graphic summary.
View infographic.
Reasons and consequences of pinyon-juniper expansion and treatment options are provided in a graphic summary.