Sage-grouse may avoid ESA listing

[Oak]

Interior official: Sage grouse may avoid listing
By Scott Sonner
Associated Press Writer

Salt Lake Tribune Updated: 12/11/2008 10:47:01 AM MST

RENO, Nev. » Documentation of an "impressive" number of steps being taken to save the sage grouse from extinction may be enough to keep the bird off the U.S. list of protected species despite significant loss of its habitat to wildfires across much of the West in recent years, a top Interior Department official said.

Assistant Interior Secretary Stephen Allred emphasized he will play no role in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's upcoming decision on whether the greater sage grouse warrants protection under the Endangered Species Act across 11 Western states.

But Allred said during interviews while attending a wildfire conference in Reno on Tuesday and Wednesday his department has made some significant policy changes aimed at bolstering populations since USFWS rejected a listing petition in 2005. He believes the bird would be better off in the long run if it is not listed as threatened or endangered.

"From a practical standpoint, the identified measures I've seen encourages me that we are doing what we need to do," said Allred, assistant secretary for land and mineral management.

"They are pretty impressive. There's a considerable difference from six years ago," he told The Associated Press.

"You lose so much flexibility when you list that the ability to do what I'm going to call sort of 'out of the box' things to improve (habitat) is severely restricted," he said. "So I am hopeful that what we are seeing is that we are dealing with the issue and that will make a difference and it won't be listed."

A judge in Idaho overturned the Fish and Wildlife Service's decision last December amid allegations Interior Department managers interfered with the science used in assessing the sage grouse and ordered the agency to conduct another review.

Sharon Rose, a spokeswoman for the wildlife service in Denver, on Thursday said the agency is still gathering and reviewing information and no imminent decision on a listing is expected.

The chicken-sized game bird is found in 11 Western states on sagebrush plains and high desert from Colorado to California and north to the Canadian border. Its population has been declining for decades and it now occupies about half of its original, year-round habitat. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service estimated in 2005 there were 100,000 to 500,000 sage grouse.

Federal officials and private researchers have estimated that an ecosystem described as the sagebrush "steppe" covered anywhere from 150 million acres to 300 million acres of North America prior to white settlement.

A federal listing could have an impact on livestock grazing, oil and gas drilling, mining, construction of energy transmission lines and other development.

Allred said the new decision will be based in part on the condition of the bird's population and remaining habitat, and part on the steps that have been taken and are continuing to protect the bird on federal, state and private lands. He expects the agency to produce a status report on the new review in the coming days or weeks.

"Certainly we've identified just within the Interior Department a lot of measures that are in place as well as what the states and others have done," Allred said.

One of the biggest changes was adopted last summer when for the first time, the department directed the Bureau of Land Management -- which manages much of the land that is home to the grouse -- to make protection of traditional grouse mating grounds known as "leks" a priority second only to human life and structures when fighting wildfires, he said.

"Before, protecting sage grouse leks was not a primary focus. It is now. Each of the fire offices have maps that identify where those leks are thought to be located. So that's a primary objective in terms of fighting fires," Allred said.

A study released in October by an environmental group that advocates federal protection for the bird concluded fourth-fifths of sage grouse habitat is adversely affected by either livestock grazing, natural gas and oil development or invasive weeds. It singled out livestock grazing -- permitted on 91 percent of the bird's range -- as "the most ubiquitous use of sage grouse habitat on federal public land."

"This illustrates and quantifies, we believe for the first time, that the sagebrush steppe is one of the least -- if not the least -- protected landscapes in the United States," said Mark Salvo, director of WildEarthGuardians based in Chandler, Ariz.

Allred said the agency believes wildfires and invasive weeds cause the most harm to sage grouse, not livestock grazing. He said recent research suggests some grazing in areas overgrown with cheatgrass actually reduce fire threats and therefore benefits the bird.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Documentation of an "impressive" number

He believes the bird would be better off in the long run if it is not listed as threatened or endangered.

"You lose so much flexibility when you list that the ability to do what I'm going to call sort of 'out of the box' things to improve (habitat) is severely restricted," he said.

I think Greenhorn's comment about "don't piss on my neck and tell me it is raining" comes to mind on this one....

I am surprised he is not talking about a "paradigm" shift ......

Remember, it was just one year ago that the Interior got spanked by Judge Winmill for their lies and false science....

Western Watersheds Project Wins Court Order Overturning Bush Administration Decision Not To List Greater Sage Grouse !

Tuesday December 4, 2007

Today Western Watersheds Project won a remarkable Court Order from Chief Judge B. Lynn Winmill of the federal District Court of the Idaho District that overturned the Bush Administration U.S. Fish and Wildlife decision that denied the protections of the Endangered Species Act for Greater Sage Grouse.

In his 35 page Order, Judge Winmill stated that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service decision “was tainted by the inexcusable conduct of one of its own executives, Julie McDonald, whose tactics included everything from editing scientific conclusions to intimidating FWS staffers.”

Interested readers can download the 35 page Court Order in PDF format from the WWP web site home page: http://www.westernwatersheds.org

During this time of giving, all hunters should give to Western Watersheds in order to continue their efforts to improve hunting in the West.

 

[1_pointer]

If I were a betting man, I be betting on the bird not being listed. IMO and the data I've seen does not seem to warrant it's listing. Heck, nearly every state with the bird was hunting them just this year...

Again my opinion, I feel that push to list this bird is based on politics and not science. If the information/data show that it deserves listing, then by all means, but I am wholly against the listing as a political move to further an agenda. 'Course some of the unintended consequences could be fun to watch. There's LOTS of data showing that there were more birds 50yrs ago in some areas with much worse range conditions than exist to today...

 

[mtmiller]

Tyler, you may want to look at bird pops outside of UT.

Not positive, I will have to check it out this weekend, but didn't SD and ND close their season this year?

 

[Oak]

What is the value of individual populations? What avenues currently exist to protect individual populations short of listing? What is being done?

It's easy to say that GRSG are not in danger of going extinct and don't warrant listing range-wide, but many populations are in serious trouble. Some great things are being done voluntarily through working groups, but in the end it will not be enough for some of the more threatened populations. Are they worth saving? How?

 

[1_pointer]

miller- What were the bird counts along the Highline? Did they still have a season?

I know southern ID had a rough winter and a bad hatch and the hunting regs in some areas changed to reflect that. IIRC, there were also some areas in ID that were opened to hunting or the bag limit increased.

 

[1_pointer]

What is the value of individual populations? What avenues currently exist to protect individual populations short of listing? What is being done?

It's easy to say that GRSG are not in danger of going extinct and don't warrant listing range-wide, but many populations are in serious trouble. Some great things are being done voluntarily through working groups, but in the end it will not be enough for some of the more threatened populations. Are they worth saving? How?

Very good questions. I would have to give the famous reply of it depends... Some will be lost no matter the protections as habitat loss/alteration has made certain areas population sinks. Those areas may never contain self supporting populations, so more focus/energy should be spend on those that can. Individual populations, IMO, have little to do with the long term success of the species. They are far from a genetic bottleneck and there are plenty of populations to increase the species.

The current avenues of protection for individual populations reside with the states. Look at what CO has down for the Gunnison sage grouse! Same kind of thing could be done for populations needing saving. In UT the population in Strawberry Valley was close to being loss. Cessation of hunting, predator control efforts, transplants, and habitat projects have increased that population from around 150 birds to over 500 birds in the last 7 years! So, I think the populations in trouble need to be evaluated and aided on a case by case basis at the state and working group level. IME that is working and working well.

 

[mtmiller]

miller- What were the bird counts along the Highline? Did they still have a season?

Numbers down. Yes, still had a season. ESA still looking range wide.

 

[1_pointer]

Numbers down. Yes, still had a season. ESA still looking range wide.

What would attribute the down numbers to? Part of the regular cyclical nature of the bird or something that would be preventative under ESA protection?

I think the very fact that the listing is being proposed range wide will keep it from being listed. Too disruptive to SOP and too many places having success increasing bird numbers.

 

[mtmiller]

What would attribute the down numbers to?

I think there are many factors. Here are a couple of examples in my area.

Used to have a lek at this location a few years before I got to Havre. Last time any birds were seen was about the time gas development picked up in the area. Notice the water pits on the right hand side? The gas wells are producing so much water that the onsite evaporation pits can't keep up, so water is hauled to these larger evaporation pits. Is this the reason this lek is gone? My opinion it was least a contributing factor with the new roads, wells and constant water hauling traffic. On a side note, additional surface water may be a contributing factor of WNV on birds. http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/bsc/ele/2004/00000007/00000008/art00011?crawler=true

Here is another example. Lots of native prairie is being plowed up. My first year in Havre I drove over the hill to lek marked on the map. I laughed when I pulled over hill and saw it farmed. Just for shits, I pulled out the spotting scope and saw a 8 or 9 males in the stubble. In '07 my high count was 4 and this year was 3.

So in my opinion, land conversion is another threat in my area.

Here is another area that did have a lek on public land, but for some reason it has disappeared as well. Looks like they need more than a 320 of silver sage habitat.

I think the very fact that the listing is being proposed range wide will keep it from being listed. Too disruptive to SOP and too many places having success increasing bird numbers.

I don't know how birds are doing everywhere in the country, but I do know number in MT, ND and several key areas in WY are not doing well. You indicate that is not the case in UT, but hopfully lessons will be learned when things come to yourtown, Utah.

 

[mtmiller]

Tyler, out of curiousity about greater sage grouse in UT, I did a quick google search and thought it was interesting about the State's take on grouse.

June 6, 2008

While many greater sage-grouse populations have increased in recent years due to intensive habitat and wildlife management efforts, there remains a long-term declining trend in sagegrouse populations throughout the West and across Utah. Sage-grouse populations are known to vary cyclically, but the present long-term pattern of decline exceeds any historically observed population variability. Sage-grouse populations are, as a result, continuing to receive heightened conservation focus by state wildlife agencies and federal land managers, among others.


http://wildlife.utah.gov/uplandgame/sage-grouse/sg-dev.php

 

[TheTone]

Pointer here is some ID info. In my part of Idaho we struggled this spring with counts due to lingering winter conditions in our tradtional lek survey locations. We had a longer hunting season (in part for some overlap with sharptail hunts) and a two bird limit. I talked to numerous hunters who were hunting sage grouse this year for the first time in a while due to the 2 bird limit. Our check stations also showed high success with most hunters reporting lots of birds sighted. Since the season ended I've been observing many large groups of birds that have flocked up for winter. Seems to me I've seen way more birds this fall vs. fall of 2007. This coming spring should make for interesting lek counts depending on what snow levels are like.

 

[1_pointer]

miller- Pictures no worky... But, from the text I pretty much get the jist, birds in some places are not doing well. I get that. Again, in your opinion would ESA protection have prevented any of that from happening?

On a different note, if Federal protection is needed to 'save' a species that is currently being hunted, then IMO the state agencies have dropped the ball big time.

Tone- Thanks for the info. That mirrors what the Salmon area F&G biologists I talked to related to me. They were in No. UT chasing pronghorns! However, BOY has related a bit different story for the bird in So. ID...

 

[Oak]

On a different note, if Federal protection is needed to 'save' a species that is currently being hunted, then IMO the state agencies have dropped the ball big time.

As you've already mentioned, and others have agreed with, the status of GRSG varies widely from population to population. State wildlife agencies are wildlife managers, not land managers. The plight of the populations in trouble is largely based in land management practices. State agencies allow hunting of populations which are still in good shape. I know that there are populations in both WY and CO which are not hunted due to their poor status.

Is ESA listing needed? Probably not right now. But I see no major changes occurring in land management practices that is going to reverse the downward trend in the overall population. It will be much harder to recover the species if we wait to do something until they crash.

 

[1_pointer]

Is ESA listing needed? Probably not right now. But I see no major changes occurring in land management practices that is going to reverse the downward trend in the overall population.

We do agree that listing is not needed at this time. What changes in land management do you see as being needed to reverse or slow the downward trend? What hurdles do you see in those changes being implemented?

 

[Oak]

What changes in land management do you see as being needed to reverse or slow the downward trend?

Greater restrictions on development within at least 0.6 miles of leks. I'd like to see NSO (and no exceptions!) within 1 mile of leks. Restrictions on energy development within 4 miles of leks. I'd like to see no more than one pad/facility per 640 within 4 miles of any lek, to protect nesting habitat.

What hurdles do you see in those changes being implemented?

Much of the habitat within 4 miles of leks has already been leased under outdated RMP's. A lot more is private land.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Again, in your opinion would ESA protection have prevented any of that from happening?

.

1Pointer,

In YOUR opinion how would ESA protection have HARMED the SageGrouse populations?

How could it be anything other than a GOOD thing?

 

[mtmiller]

Oak, where did the 0.6 buffer come from? I know we were just informed by our SO that we needed to incorporate it as an alternative. I know there is some recent science behind it and I was thinking WY, but maybe it was in CO. Of course there are some groups wanting 2 mile NSO.

 

[Oak]

Oak, where did the 0.6 buffer come from? I know we were just informed by our SO that we needed to incorporate it as an alternative. I know there is some recent science behind it and I was thinking WY, but maybe it was in CO. Of course there are some groups wanting 2 mile NSO.

It is based on daytime movement of adult males during the breeding season. It's actually old data. When people working on conservation plans, etc., began to look for the basis of the arbitrary 0.25 mile buffer generally applied by the BLM, they realized all the old studies showed larger daytime movements by the males (with maximum distance averaging around 0.6 miles). Most new conservation plans and RMP's are now recommending 0.6 miles, I believe.

See:

Carr, H. D. 1967. Effects of sagebrush control on abundance, distribution, and movements of sage grouse. Colorado Game, Fish and Parks Department Job Completion Report. W-37-R-20. Job 8a.

Wallestad, R. O., and P. Schladweiler. 1974. Breeding season movements and habitat selection of male sage grouse. Journal of Wildlife Management 38:634-637.

Rothenmaier, D. 1979. Sage grouse reproductive ecology: breeding season movements, strutting ground attendance and nesting. Thesis, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming, USA.

Emmons, S. R. 1980. Lek attendance of male sage grouse in North Park, Colorado. Thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.

Schoenberg, T. J. 1982. Sage grouse movements and habitat selection in North Park, Colorado. Thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.

 

[mtmiller]

Greater restrictions on development within at least 0.6 miles of leks. I'd like to see NSO (and no exceptions!) within 1 mile of leks.

A agree with the 1 mile NSO and just throw the 0.6 out the window. I do see cases that would allow a "waiver" in some instances.