# Keeping sage grouse off endangered species list....



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=960&sid=204...pecies-list-helps-state-economy&s_cid=queue-3


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

Thanks for posting BAX*, you beat me to it! Seems like there are some good efforts going on to help. Does anyone have any particulars as to what can be done to help this important effort in Utah?? Zim?


----------



## hedged (May 20, 2012)

It's only a matter of time with human encroachment and fragmentation of Sage Brush habitat. 2014 is the next consideration for listing and based off current trends of lek counts I'm sure it'll be listed. There is several research projects going on with SG and most are in the stage of habitat protection and hope.

[attachment=0:2amcpvwk]sg on nest.JPG[/attachment:2amcpvwk]


----------



## Cooky (Apr 25, 2011)

Perhaps someone more enlightened than I can explain what will happen if Sage Grouse is listed. Roads closed? Water tied up? Grazing restricted? Private land taken over by the Feds? Mandatory large expenditures of our wildlife management dollars? Mandatory large expenditures of private dollars? I have heard all of these. Are they real?


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

We have very good numbers of sage-grouse in northeastern Utah/southwestern Wyoming these days. But compared to 30 years ago overall numbers are down considerably. 

Loss of habitat is hurting the birds in Hydrocarbon Heaven (Wyoming) We're building a new coal strip mine here in Uinta County on some of the best sage-grouse hunting in these parts. 4,000 to 5,000 new gas wells are going planned to be drilled in southwest Wyoming in the next few years. With every well comes a road, a power line, and a pipeline; many are in prime sage-grouse country.

The natural gas industry along with sportsman groups, enviromental concerns, the WY Game and Fish, local ranchers and others have formed a sage-grouse task force to help diminish the impacts natural gas development has on the grouse. They are doing good things, making improvements like stopping drilling operations during the sage-grouse nesting season.

On a positive note look at sage grouse success stories. An example would be the thriving population of sage-grouse on the eastern part of Deseret Land and Livestock. Birdwatchers enjoy 600 to 700 adult males every spring on the leks during the bird's courtship rituals. The overall flock numbers are significant. What makes the Ranch so much different than the rest of area? Lack of human disturbance? No oil and gas development? No hunting? All the above is my guess. 

It's the opinion of this old sage-grouse hunter that if we continue to encroach upon sage-grouse habitat, destroying their nesting sites, numbers will continue to decline and the bird will, and should, be listed. 


There were 5 billion passenger pigeons in 1860. By 1914 they were all gone. Aldo Leopold remarked "Men still live who, in their youth, remember pigeons. Trees still live who, in their youth, were shaken by a living wind. But a decade hence only the oldest oaks will remember, and at long last only the hills will know."


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Sage grouse will be fine as a species. One very over simplified argument is that if we still allow hunting, then the populations can't be THAT bad off. Granted, it is FAR more complicated than that. But it makes it hard to get them listed when agencies are letting hunters kill them every year. 

The bigger issue, and this addresses your question Cooky - what happens when they are listed. To sportsmen, it means that sage grouse hunting will have to be eliminated as part of any recovery plan. So if you hunt them, you won't be doing it any more. But the bigger picture is related to some other posts that Goob has been entertaining - that is, the impacts to the oil & gas industry. Sage grouse are to fluid mineral development, what the spotted owl has been to the logging industry. Right now, there is really no legal "hook" to slow or stop any massive development in sage brush steppe communities. Deer, antelope, elk, and other kinds of critters have no protection, so if their habitats get trashed, well, too bad. There are plenty out there, and life goes on. But when protected species start taking it in the shorts, then those are grounds to slow or stop the development on Federal lands. 

So to your question - what will happen if it gets listed? It will be used as a tool to oppose, slow, and possibly stop fluid mineral development in the high desert plateaus, the same way the spotted owl was used to stop logging of old growth timber.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Here's how the Deseret Land & Livestock is keeping sage-grouse off the endangered species list; written by a good friend of mine, and hey, the old Goob is even referenced in the paper:

http://www.dlandl.com/Deseret-Ecology%2 ... grouse.pdf

With the exception of 2 years, I have counted Greater Sage-grouse on the DDL Ranch, same area, same time in December, since 1983. Some call it scientific data, although no one is calling me a scientist.  But I did go to high school for 6 years. That should count for sumpin.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

DLL is doing some very good things. Then again, DLL isn't getting dotted with wells and drill pads every 5 acres either.


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

This has actually turned into a really cool thread. Thanks for the insight guys 8)


----------



## Cooky (Apr 25, 2011)

So… simplified to the barest essentials. If the Sage Grouse is listed as endangered the efforts to help them survive and flourish by well educated and thoughtful wildlife managers will be taken over by people with the mindset of absolute protection above all?
How does it change that fast? It almost seems that what was good for the animals one day is suddenly bad after the law changes.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

It depends on how you choose to see it. Some would argue that if sage grouse are listed as threatened or endangered, then there can be some kind of legal mechanism to slow or stop the massive development of lands for oil and gas. This in turn, will result in a slow or stop of the overall habitat destruction for not just grouse, but for all the critters that use this habitat. So that said, listing the grouse will result in loss of that hunting opportunity, but gain overall in the protection of the habitats. If that makes sense. 

The other side of it would be that if it is listed as threatened or endangered, then it is the end of hunting them.


----------



## Cooky (Apr 25, 2011)

Being able to shoot a Sage Grouse isn’t an issue in my mind, just having them around is good. Stopping resource development is an issue. We built this nation on our natural resources. We haven’t always been very smart about it. I would hope that there is some middle ground. We are competing for our livelihoods with people who will happily destroy their part of the world for a buck. It’s great to be able to lead the world in conservation efforts but I worry. What good will our pristine environment be if we can’t live within it, or from it?


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Nice signature line. If they women don't find you handsome, at least they can find you handy.


----------



## Blanding_Boy (Nov 21, 2007)

For those of you who don't know me let me share a bit....(sorry this will be lengthily but you will see why)

I've been conducting research in UT on sage-grouse since 1998. I personally have visited/counted/photographed nearly 150 different leks in 4 different states. I have personally held in my hands over 500 sage-grouse over the years. I still continue to do research including on DLL and other places where we have hunted populations of sage-grouse. I have attended all of the Govs sage-grouse task force meetings. I have given lots of testimony to the group on research, conservation plans, threats etc. I promise, (and I say this as humbly as I can) no one has spent more time with grouse in the field in this state than I  Its pretty much all I have done for the past 15 years.

One thing you all have to realize is our grouse are very different than other states in and how they use the landscape. Our grouse in most areas of the state are big movers and will move in some cases over 100 miles in a year. If you read much of the published literature you will find that in most states, the grouse don't move more than 10 miles from where they were born in a given year. We recently trapped a bunch of grouse on DLL and had some of them go over 20 air miles to nest in a matter of weeks going into ID and WY. Now I realize they are a bird and can fly but in most cases they just don't do that.

A couple of things about the future of grouse in UT....
1--this state gov. tasks force group was formed to hopefully come to a consensus and get a list of guidelines so that the Gov. can put together an Exec. Order in place. It would basically say, these are our core areas of sage-grouse in the state where we have good populations of grouse and this is how we are going to do business in these areas both on state, federal, and private lands (the latter still voluntary). I think it will be a great move and a great plan if we can get it to work. I'm somewhat pessimistic though as there seems to be a few that will NOT budge and give and take and potentially thwart the entire thing. This group has to decide on those things by end of July. They are meeting 2x monthly for 6-7 hours a day to move in that direction. I hope we make it.

2--if an Exec. Order doesn't come from the gov. Currently the BLM and FS are going through and implementing things right now and revising their LUPs and MP to include protective measures for sage-grouse. Many of these just don't make sense. These actions could adversely affect many that use the land and the resources. These will be in place by 2014 but they have intern guidelines they are operating under right now.

3--the next status review of the grouse by the USFWS will be in 2015 (not 2014 as someone said earlier). This is when one of 3 things will happen. a--it stays status quo which is "warranted but precluded" b--it gets moved up to an threatened species c--it gets moved back down off the list (highly unlikely). I will be honest, much of this will be a political decision and will depend on who we have as a president more than anything.

4--hunting sage-grouse (for those that you who hunt) is a big issue with all of the groups i work with. We have some good data that suggest how and when we hunt the grouse could be harmful to their population. I think hunting sage-grouse needs to be looked at outside of the box. Hunting them in the fall and killing mostly brood hens and chicks is not a good idea IMO.

5--if the grouse were to get listed (I pray it doesn't) it will have significant impacts on much of rural UT. Much of rural UT is dependent upon multip use of public lands especially grazing and agriculture uses. There will be significant impacts and restrictions on grazing, roads, natural resource extraction, recreation etc. There will be lots of DON'Ts out there none of which will be good. Hunting will be eliminated I assure you.

Lastly, with regards to the trib article. I wish the press would talk to those that know the grouse. Sometimes things are said that just are not true or are shed in a different light, we all know that but some things are just flat out wrong.

I welcome further discussion, questions, this is a great topic....

Thanks

Todd
435-770-9302


----------



## Cooky (Apr 25, 2011)

Blanding_Boy,
Please talk some more about this executive order and core areas. There is something about the topic posted on the bulletin board in the post office in beautiful downtown Rush Valley but I was unable glean any detail from it.
Thanks,
Cooky


----------



## Blanding_Boy (Nov 21, 2007)

In 2009, the UDWR passed their state wide sage-grouse management plan http://wildlife.utah.gov/uplandgame/sag ... n_2009.pdf this revised/updated the 2002 plan. In the 2009 plan there was an appendix 5 that was left blank to be determined/decided at a later time. This is that latter time. Due to the public land management agencies (FS/BLM) not having protective measures in their land use plans, the USFWS directed them to get it done before the next listing decision (2015). As such, recently the BLM/FS went through scoping meetings to tell the public this is what we are doing and we will consider all alternatives to protect sage-grouse. The UDWR, public, NGOs, enviro groups etc all gave comments on what they felt like and how they felt like sage-grouse should be managed.

These core areas and guidelines that this group will give to the Gov. will be essentially appendix 5. IT will basically identify core areas in UT where we have grouse and give recommendations this is what we ought to consider, should not do, is allowed, etc as guidelines to all state agencies, federal agencies, private lands etc. ALL this done in hopes that the USFWS will agree to and sign off on it to preempt any listing. In other words, if you will do all these things and we maintain what we have from a sage-grouse habitat and population standpoint they are likely NOT to be listed.

Does that make sense? Why it will be an executive order is that it will apply to all state agencies not just UDWR. It will also be considered by the BLM/FS as an 'alternative action' in their plans. It would be highly unlikely that if the USFWS signs off on it that the BLM/FS would not implement it.


----------

