CO.:No Sage Grouse Listing

[Nemont]

August 5, 2004

Last modified August 5, 2004 - 12:36 am


Colorado balks at giving grouse endangered protection
Associated Press

DENVER (AP) - Colorado has notified the federal government that the greater sage grouse doesn't need endangered species protection in the state.

"The species is showing signs of vigor not seen for decades in Colorado," Russell George, executive director of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, wrote to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

State officials cite increasing numbers of sage grouse in North Park, where the number of males is similar to high counts in 1979. Grand County data also indicate breeding grounds are equal to or greater than numbers reported 10 years ago.


Sage grouse male counts in northwestern Colorado have also exceeded 2,100 per year since 2000, approaching levels not seen since the late 1970s.

Some groups have urged the government to list the bird under the Endangered Species Act. Ben Deeble of the National Wildlife Federation said grouse numbers may seem healthy now, but he said they declined 80 percent to 90 percent between 1960 and 1980.

"While most of the Western states with greater sage grouse are saying the birds don't need listing, we feel there is a lot of concern about impacts from gas exploration, and we'd rather the federal biologists be given space to make a professional decision about the grouse," he said Tuesday.

"Right now, energy companies want quick decisions on drilling permits while President Bush is in office, and that stands in the way of biological decisions on the birds," he said.

Tom Remington of the state Division of Wildlife said grouse numbers cycle every 10 years or so; if an assessment was made on an up cycle, a loss could show up on the down cycle.

 

[Bambistew]

Hey Nemont, I see in the grouse regs they uped the sage grouse limit to three... which is about two more than I'm willing to eat in a year . But I'm glad to see that the fish and game think there is enough of them to raise the limit!

 

[Oak]

Yeah, they're doing so well here that our season is 7 days long!!

Oak

 

[1_pointer]

The last 30yrs data from NW UT and last 20yrs data from NE UT are showing short term static trends with long term upwards trends. IMO, a range wide listing is uncalled for, but in certain areas I see that it could be needed.