Greater Sage Grouse Response to Season-long and Prescribed Rotational Livestock Grazing on Paired Ecological Sites
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•496 views
Greater Sage Grouse Response to Season-long and Prescribed Rotational Livestock Grazing on Paired Ecological Sites
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (14)
Similar to Greater Sage Grouse Response to Season-long and Prescribed Rotational Livestock Grazing on Paired Ecological Sites
Similar to Greater Sage Grouse Response to Season-long and Prescribed Rotational Livestock Grazing on Paired Ecological Sites (20)
More from Utah Section Society for Range Management
More from Utah Section Society for Range Management (20)
Greater Sage Grouse Response to Season-long and Prescribed Rotational Livestock Grazing on Paired Ecological Sites
- 1. Greater Sage-Grouse Response to Season-long and Prescribed Rotational Livestock Grazing on Paired Ecological Sites Seth J. Dettenmaier Nigel Malcolm Stone
- 2. ᴑ Background
- 3. ᴑ Background ᴑ Study Design
- 4. ᴑ Background ᴑ Study Design ᴑ Research Methods
- 5. ᴑ Background ᴑ Study Design ᴑ Research Methods ᴑ Preliminary Results
- 6. ᴑ Background ᴑ Study Design ᴑ Research Methods ᴑ Preliminary Results
- 7. Background • USFWS 2010 designation o “warranted but precluded” • 3 main factors (Connelly and Braun 2007) o Fire oWeather o Livestock grazing
- 8. Background oGrazing and grouse in the West
- 9. Background oInfluences of livestock grazing on sage grouse habitat (2000 Beck and Mitchell) • “…identified positive and negative impacts of livestock on sage grouse and habitat.”
- 10. Background oInfluences of livestock grazing on sage grouse habitat (2000 Beck and Mitchell) • “…identified positive and negative impacts of livestock on sage grouse and habitat.” • “Replicated field experiments are needed to determine widespread relative effects of grazing treatments…on sage grouse…”
- 11. ᴑ Background ᴑ Study Design ᴑ Research Methods ᴑ Preliminary Results
- 12. Study Design Connelly et al. 2004
- 13. Study Design
- 14. Study Design Three Creeks • 10 BLM/USFS allotments • 146,000 acres • season-long grazing Three Creeks Deseret Land & Livestock • private • 200,000 acres • rotational grazing Deseret L&L
- 15. Study Design Three Creeks • 27 BLM/USFS allotments • 146,000 acres • season-long grazing Three Creeks Deseret Land & Livestock • private • 200,000 acres • rotational grazing Deseret L&L
- 16. Grazing Management Systems Season-long March April May June July August Prescribed Rotational
- 17. Grazing Management Systems Season-long March April May June July August Prescribed Rotational
- 18. Study Design 2012-2015 o Paired study • habitat quality, nesting success, brood survival ? Treatment Control
- 19. Hypotheses • 1) Rotational grazing results in increased grass height/cover and higher abundance of forbs. • 2) Rotational grazing practices have higher sage-grouse nesting success, survival, and population vital rates.
- 20. Hypotheses • 1) Rotational grazing results in increased grass height/cover and higher abundance of forbs. • 2) Rotational grazing practices have higher sage-grouse nesting success, survival, and population vital rates.
- 21. ᴑ Background ᴑ Study Design ᴑ Research Methods ᴑ Preliminary Results
- 22. Research Methods Deseret Land & Livestock • Lek counts o population est./trends • Vegetation monitoring o vegetation composition o habitat quality • Predator survey’s o predator abundance o population impacts • Radio-telemetry o habit selection o home range o vital rates
- 23. Research Methods Deseret Land & Livestock • Lek counts o population est./trends • Vegetation monitoring o vegetation composition o habitat quality • Predator survey’s o predator abundance o population impacts • Radio-telemetry o habit selection o home range o vital rates
- 24. Research Methods Deseret Land & Livestock • Lek counts o population est./trends • Vegetation monitoring o vegetation composition o habitat quality • Predator survey’s o predator abundance o population impacts • Radio-telemetry o habit selection o home range o vital rates Alan Vernon
- 25. Research Methods Deseret Land & Livestock • Lek counts o population est./trends • Vegetation monitoring o vegetation composition o habitat quality • Predator survey’s o predator abundance o population impacts • Radio-telemetry o habit selection o home range o vital rates
- 26. Expected Results Season-long Prescribed Rotational
- 27. ᴑ Background ᴑ Study Design ᴑ Research Methods ᴑ Preliminary Results
- 28. Preliminary Results 44 40 40 32 34 33 18 13 10 14 45 28 23 4 21 20 8 12 12 11 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Males/lek 2005-14 Lek Counts Deseret Three Creeks
- 29. Preliminary Results 44 40 40 32 34 33 18 13 10 14 45 28 23 4 21 20 8 12 12 11 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Males/lek 2005-14 Lek Counts Deseret Three Creeks
- 30. Preliminary Results 44 40 40 32 34 33 18 13 10 14 45 28 23 4 21 20 8 12 12 11 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Precipitation (mm) Males/lek 2005-14 Lek Counts with Precipitation Data Deseret Three Creeks Randolph Yearly Precip. Woodruff Yearly Precip. 10Y Ave. Randolph 10Y Ave. Woodruff
- 31. Preliminary Results 2014 Nest Initiation and Nest Survival Rates 86% 52% 11% 40% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Three Creeks Deseret Nest Initiation Nest Survival
- 32. Preliminary Results 17% Brood Success 2012-2014 0% 67% 13% 25% 80% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2012 2013 2014 Three Creeks Deseret
- 33. Vegetation Results 2012-2013 Deseret Land & Livestock Three Creeks Nest Paired Brood Paired Nest Paired Brood Paired %Cover Shrub 30.0 26.8 17.7 20.4 29.0 29.8 32.4 28.5 Grass 16.5 13.0 21.8 14.2 16.0 15.5 18.7 12.3 Forb 5.4 5.3 9.3 7.4 7.2 7.3 9.4 8.2 Litter 73.0 70.0 75.0 74.5 70.4 72.8 72.9 65.5 Bare Ground 21.3 24.2 19.4 22.3 16.5 19.2 17.7 22.4 Height (cm) Grass 11.8 11.8 12.2 12.5 9.5 9.7 11.5 10.6 Forb 4.6 4.5 5.8 6.0 4.2 4.6 5.6 5.0 Robel (cm) 57.2 49.4 58.1 49.0
- 34. Vegetation Results 2012-2013 Deseret Land & Livestock Three Creeks Nest Paired Brood Paired Nest Paired Brood Paired %Cover Shrub 30.0 26.8 17.7 20.4 29.0 29.8 32.4 28.5 Grass 16.5 13.0 21.8 14.2 16.0 15.5 18.7 12.3 Forb 5.4 5.3 9.3 7.4 7.2 7.3 9.4 8.2 Litter 73.0 70.0 75.0 74.5 70.4 72.8 72.9 65.5 Bare Ground 21.3 24.2 19.4 22.3 16.5 19.2 17.7 22.4 Height (cm) Grass 11.8 11.8 12.2 12.5 9.5 9.7 11.5 10.6 Forb 4.6 4.5 5.8 6.0 4.2 4.6 5.6 5.0 Robel (cm) 57.2 49.4 58.1 49.0
- 35. Vegetation Results 2012-2013 Deseret Land & Livestock Three Creeks Nest Paired Brood Paired Nest Paired Brood Paired %Cover Shrub 30.0 26.8 17.7 20.4 29.0 29.8 32.4 28.5 Grass 16.5 13.0 21.8 14.2 16.0 15.5 18.7 12.3 Forb 5.4 5.3 9.3 7.4 7.2 7.3 9.4 8.2 Litter 73.0 70.0 75.0 74.5 70.4 72.8 72.9 65.5 Bare Ground 21.3 24.2 19.4 22.3 16.5 19.2 17.7 22.4 Height (cm) Grass 11.8 11.8 12.2 12.5 9.5 9.7 11.5 10.6 Forb 4.6 4.5 5.8 6.0 4.2 4.6 5.6 5.0 Robel (cm) 57.2 49.4 58.1 49.0
- 36. Thank You! Rich County Commission
- 37. Questions
Editor's Notes
- I want to share with you some of the research that is currently being conducted on sage-grouse conservation. This is being accomplished as part of my graduate studies here at USU under my advisor Terry Messmer. I’ll also provide you a short overview of our preliminary results.
- By now nearly everyone in the room is likely intimately familiar with the complex political and ecological situation that the greater sage-grouse is embroiled. However, since this is the first meeting that I’ve attended that hasn’t had a half dozen or so sage-grouse talks, I’ll do a quick rundown of the obligatory background information.
- What does this mean? They deserve protection but are precluded by higher priority species.
- A lot of federal lands that are managed for grazing. Even if livestock grazing impacts are diffuse, they fact that they occur across the vast majority of the sage-grouse extent makes them important to understand.
- My research is being conducted in the hope of understanding this relationship better.
- West divided into 7 management zones. Floristic characteristics.
- Rich County, Utah. East side of Bear River Range. Idaho and Wyoming.
- Comprised of Private and federal lands. Season-long grazing is an over simplification. There are some nuances but it’s will be useful for this talk
- Some BLM parcels in East. Revenue from wildlife opportunities. Management decisions involve input from a wildlife manager.
- Grass is exposed to multiple grazing events. Potentially leads to a reduction of residual grass cover. Could also compact soils, reduce water infiltration, water retention which could reduce forb abundance.
- The point – residual grasses are used by grouse the next year for nesting cover from predators.
- So what do we hypothesis?
- From the positive effects on vegetation will come…
- I’ll briefly go over some of the methods employed to test these hypotheses.
- Conducted by USU, NRCS, DLL, and DWR. All known and accessible leks.
- Located at nests and broods. paired with random. 4 transects. 20 or 28 Daubenmire frames for cover estimates, line intercept for shrub cover. Robel for concealing cover of nests.
- Both mammalian and avian.
- Now that you have the basics of how we collect and what data we collect, let’s review what we expect to to find?
- The trend is obvious but I’ll overlay the trend line anyway.
- This obvious trend is not unique to Rich County or our study. This is on par with what is being observed across the state. I’m going to muddle this slide slightly by bringing in some climate data.
- 2007 Connely Braun 3 factors “weather”. Interesting pattern. Let’s move onto the drivers of these population numbers.
- DLL lower initiation but much more likely to be successful. This is half the story. Once you hatch chicks you must also be able to raise them to independence 50d.
- Let’s move on to our final analysis, the vegetation results.
- This result supports our hypothesis and makes me excited about future analyses. None of this is possible without the help of so many.
- Acknowledge all the agencies and groups that have made this research possible. Only through collaboration and shared vision that we advance the conservation of a species while serving local communities.
- Dr. Dahlgren is our universities version of the grouse whisperer so he’s much more qualified to take your questions.