scholarly journals Sage‐grouse breeding and late brood‐rearing habitat guidelines in Utah

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 576-589 ◽  
Author(s):  
David K. Dahlgren ◽  
Terry A. Messmer ◽  
Benjamin A. Crabb ◽  
Michel T. Kohl ◽  
Shandra N. Frey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sage Grouse ◽  
Brood Rearing

scholarly journals Nesting, brood rearing, and summer habitat selection by translocated greater sage‐grouse in North Dakota, USA

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kade D. Lazenby ◽  
Peter S. Coates ◽  
Shawn T. O’Neil ◽  
Michel T. Kohl ◽  
David K. Dahlgren
Keyword(s):  
Habitat Selection ◽  
North Dakota ◽  
Sage Grouse ◽  
Brood Rearing

scholarly journals Sage-Grouse Nesting, Brood and Winter Habitat Characteristics in Montana

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 126
Author(s):  
Jennifer Woodward ◽  
Jenny Sika ◽  
Carl Wambolt ◽  
Jay Newell ◽  
Sean Schroff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Objective ◽  
Habitat Characteristics ◽  
Shrub Cover ◽  
Sage Grouse ◽  
Winter Habitat ◽  
Brood Rearing ◽  
Study Sites ◽  
Wyoming Big Sagebrush ◽  
Central Montana ◽  
Cover Density

<p class="emsd"><span lang="EN-GB">Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) habitat characteristics were studied in central Montana primarily on Wyoming big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata Nutt. ssp. wyomingensis Beetle &amp; Young) dominated rangeland. The primary objective was to compare shrub and herbaceous parameters within (use, random or non-use) and between seasonal habitats (nest, brood, winter). Two study sites (Musselshell and Golden Valley counties), and 2 years (2004 and 2005) were compared. Nest, brood, and random sites were compared for herbaceous cover, and grass height (n = 648). Nest, brood, random, winter use and winter non-use sites were evaluated for shrub cover, density, and height. All differences were considered significant at P ≤ 0.05. Sage-grouse nested in areas with greater total shrub cover and height, and taller live and residual grass than was randomly available. No differences were found between brood and paired random sites for any of the herbaceous or shrub parameters measured. Shrub cover and density were greater at winter use sites than non-use sites. Winter use sites had less shrub cover than nest sites. The nest and brood habitat had similar shrub cover, density, and height on the study area. Sage-grouse habitats should be managed to include sagebrush, forbs, and grass. Herbaceous vegetation was more important during nesting and brood rearing than during the winter. Therefore, some portions of <span>sage-</span>grouse habitat may benefit from management for greater herbaceous cover, but not at the expense of removing sagebrush. Sagebrush cover from 10 to 15 percent was the most consistent component of sage-grouse habitat.</span></p>

scholarly journals EARLY BROOD-REARING HABITAT USE AND PRODUCTIVITY OF GREATER SAGE-GROUSE IN WYOMING

2006 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 332-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristin M. Thompson ◽  
Matthew J. Holloran ◽  
Steven J. Slater ◽  
Jarren L. Kuipers ◽  
Stanley H. Anderson
Keyword(s):  
Habitat Use ◽  
Sage Grouse ◽  
Brood Rearing

scholarly journals Identifying and Prioritizing Greater Sage-Grouse Nesting and Brood-Rearing Habitat for Conservation in Human-Modified Landscapes

PLoS ONE ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (10) ◽  
pp. e26273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew R. Dzialak ◽  
Chad V. Olson ◽  
Seth M. Harju ◽  
Stephen L. Webb ◽  
James P. Mudd ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sage Grouse ◽  
Brood Rearing

Landscape-Level Assessment of Brood Rearing Habitat for Greater Sage-Grouse in Nevada

2010 ◽  
Vol 74 (7) ◽  
pp. 1533-1543 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael T. Atamian ◽  
James S. Sedinger ◽  
Jill S. Heaton ◽  
Erik J. Blomberg
Keyword(s):  
Sage Grouse ◽  
Brood Rearing ◽  
Landscape Level

Reconstructing Greater Sage-Grouse chick diets: Diet selection, body condition, and food availability at brood-rearing sites

The Condor ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 121 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kurt T Smith ◽  
Aaron C Pratt ◽  
Jason R LeVan ◽  
Ashleigh M Rhea ◽  
Jeffrey L Beck
Keyword(s):  
Body Condition ◽  
Isotope Analysis ◽  
Field Measurements ◽  
Sage Grouse ◽  
Growth And Survival ◽  
Dietary History ◽  
Brood Rearing ◽  
Big Sagebrush ◽  
Chick Diet ◽  
Selection Of

ABSTRACT Growth and survival of juvenile birds is nutritionally demanding, making the availability of major foods critical to population productivity. Access to nutritious foods for juveniles has important implications because poor foraging conditions during development could result in mortality, or reduced fitness in adulthood. Selection of brood-rearing habitats by female Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) thus has broad implications to survival of juveniles and persistence of populations. Previous research using crop contents demonstrated that invertebrates and forbs comprise the major portion of sage-grouse chick diets for the first few months post-hatch. We coupled stable isotope analysis of feathers and field measurements to quantify chick diet and then correlated that with measures of chick body condition. We sought to reconstruct sage-grouse chick dietary history (2013–2015) using nitrogen stable isotopes to (1) evaluate whether selection of brood-rearing habitats by female sage-grouse was related to chick diet, and (2) assess the relationship between dietary consumption and body condition. Brood-rearing females selected habitats in areas where diet resources occurred in proportion to their availability, with the exception that females selected areas with greater forb abundance 4 weeks after hatch. Diet assimilation by chicks at brood-rearing locations was unrelated to the availability of forbs and invertebrates, but consumption of forbs increased with chick age. Chicks that assimilated proportionally greater amounts of plant-derived nitrogen in their feathers during their first week of life tended to weigh more and have longer wing chords. This relationship was similar between male and female chicks. The importance of quality foods for sage-grouse is well recognized and conservation efforts should aim to maintain functioning sagebrush ecosystems containing adequate brood-rearing habitats for juvenile sage-grouse; there remains a need to identify whether desirable effects are achievable when attempting to improve big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) habitats to benefit sage-grouse populations.

scholarly journals Incorporating within- and between-patch resource selection in identification of critical habitat for brood-rearing greater sage-grouse

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew R Dzialak ◽  
Chad V Olson ◽  
Stephen L Webb ◽  
Seth M Harju ◽  
Jeffrey B Winstead
Keyword(s):  
Resource Selection ◽  
Sage Grouse ◽  
Critical Habitat ◽  
Brood Rearing

Landscape-Level Assessment of Brood Rearing Habitat for Greater Sage-Grouse in Nevada

2010 ◽  
Vol 74 (7) ◽  
pp. 1533-1543 ◽  
Author(s):  
MICHAEL T. ATAMIAN ◽  
JAMES S. SEDINGER ◽  
JILL S. HEATON ◽  
ERIK J. BLOMBERG
Keyword(s):  
Sage Grouse ◽  
Brood Rearing ◽  
Landscape Level

Sagebrush Soundscapes and the Effects of Gas-Field Sounds on Greater Sage-Grouse

Western Birds ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-46
Author(s):  
Skip Ambrose ◽  
Christine Florian ◽  
Justin Olnes ◽  
John MacDonald ◽  
Therese Hartman
Keyword(s):  
Background Level ◽  
Centrocercus Urophasianus ◽  
Sound Level ◽  
Current Policy ◽  
Sage Grouse ◽  
Potential Threat ◽  
Gas Field ◽  
Brood Rearing ◽  
Acoustic Data ◽  
Sound Levels

Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) use elaborate acoustic and visual displays to attract and select mates, and females and chicks depend on acoustic communication during brood rearing. A potential threat to the grouse is sounds associated with human activity. During April, 2013–2020, we collected 17,825 hours of acoustic data in three different acoustic situations in the sagebrush of Wyoming: rural, undeveloped areas (6), at Greater Sage-Grouse leks in a natural-gas field (20), and near active machinery in that gas field (17). The average existing sound levels in undeveloped sagebrush areas were LAeq = 26 dB and LA50 = 20 dB, and the average background sound level was LA90 = 14 dB. These values are lower than previously reported, due in part to our use of more sensitive equipment as well as addressing the influence of the instruments’ electronic self-noise. LAeq and LA50 at leks in the gas field ranged from 25.5 to 33.7 dB and 20.5 to 31.3 dB, respectively, depending on the distance, number, and type of nearby activities. Sound levels at leks were correlated with trends in the number of grouse using the lek: the higher the sound level, the greater the likelihood of a decline. Thresholds above which declines occurred were LAeq = 31 dB and LA50 = 26 dB. Leks with LAeq > 31 dB and LA50 >26 dB, 100% and 91%, respectively, had declining trends. Our findings suggest that the current policy of limiting sound levels at leks to LA50 < 10 dB (or LAeq < 15 dB) over the background sound level is appropriate, if an accurate background level is used.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document