Search

Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus; sage-grouse) is considered an umbrella species for sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) landscapes in western North America. In 2015, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service determined sage-grouse unwarranted for protection under the Endangered Species Act (1973) because of conservation actions in priority areas. Understanding seasonal movements is key to delineation and assessment of priority conservationareas.Wemonitored radiomarked sage-grouse from1998 to2013 throughoutUtah,USA,to determine seasonal movements. Maximum distances from nearest lek to nesting, summer, and winter locations across all radiomarkedgrouse averaged2.20 km(90thpercentile1⁄4 5.06 km), 3.93 km(90thpercentile1⁄4 8.45 km), and3.76 km(90thpercentile1⁄4 7.15 km), respectively.Maximummovements fromnest to summer,nest towinter, and between summer and winter locations across all radiomarked grouse averaged 5.77 km (90th percentile1⁄4 13.60 km), 11.77 km (90th percentile1⁄4 26.36 km), and 14.75 km (90th percentile1⁄4 30.77 km), respectively. Maximum distance from lek of capture to summer locations was greater for males than females, whereas femalesmoved farther thanmales fromlek towinter andsummer towinter locations.Adult femalesmoved farther than yearlings from lek to nest and summer towinter areas. The state ofUtah’s Sage-GrouseManagement Areas included approximately 85% of the radiotelemetry seasonal locations and >95% when weighted by lek counts.Our results suggest that seasonalmovements could be facilitatedby increasingusable habitat space through management actions, as emphasized in Utah’s sage-grouse plan. 2016 The Wildlife Society.

Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) populations throughout much of their range have been declining. These declines have largely been attributed to the loss or deterioration of sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) habitat. In response government agencies such as the United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service are cost-sharing on management practices designed to improve habitat conditions for sage-grouse. Little is known regarding sage-grouse response to various sagebrush management techniques. We studied the effects of reducing sagebrush canopy cover using 2 mechanical (Dixie harrow and Lawson aerator) treatments and 1 chemical (Tebuthiuron) treatment on greater sage-grouse use of brood-rearing habitats on Parker Mountain, Utah, USA. To conduct this experiment, we identified 19 40.5-ha plots that exhibited >40% mountain big sagebrush (A. tridentata vaseyana) canopy cover and randomly assigned 16 as treatment or controls (4 replicates each). Tebuthiuron and Dixie-harrow-treated plots had more forb cover than did control plots (P = 0.01 and 0.02, respectively) in post-treatment periods. Greater sage-grouse brood use was higher in Tebuthiuron than control plots (P = 0.01). We believe this was attributed to increased herbaceous cover, particularly forb cover. However, in all plots, sage-grouse use was greatest within 10 m of the edge of the treatments where adjacent sagebrush cover was still available. Although the treatments we studied resulted in the plots achieving sage-grouse brooding-rearing habitat guidelines, caution should be exercised in applying these observations at lower elevations, on sites with less annual precipitation, or on a different subspecies of big sagebrush. Prior to using these techniques to implement large-scale sagebrush treatments, the specific rationale for conducting them should be clearly identified. Large-scale projects using the techniques we studied would not be appropriate within sage-grouse wintering or nesting habitat.