BBBIIRRDDSS IINN AA SSAAGGEEBBRRUUSSHH SSEEAA

MANAGING SAGEBRUSH HABITATS FOR COMMUNITIES

by Christine Paige and Sharon A. Ritter Partners in Flight, Western Working Group 1999 Research and writing by: Christine Paige, Ravenworks Ecology, 612 Lolo Street, Missoula, MT 59802

Revision and editing by: Sharon A. Ritter, Partners in Flight, 142 West Hills Way, Hamilton, MT 59840

Editing and layout/design by: Pam Peterson, Nongame Program, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, P.O. Box 25, Boise, ID 83725

Project funding by: USDI Bureau of Land Management, and Idaho State Offices USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1 USDA Forest Service, Regions 1 and 4 Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Nongame Program Ravenworks Ecology

Acknowledgments: We would like to thank Jack Connelly, Mike Denny, David Dobkin, Randy Hill, Mabel Jankovsky-Jones, Lou Jours, Julie Kaltenecker, Steve Knick, Ron Lambeth, Peter Lessica, Paul Makela, Robert McQuivey, Chris Merker, Bob Moseley, Mike Pellant, Tim Reynolds, Terry Rich, John Rotenberry, Steve Shelly, Michael Schroeder, Chuck Trost, Helen Ulmschneider, Matthew Vander Haegen, and Brian Woodbridge for contributing information and ideas to the development of this document. We owe a special debt to our reviewers for their insightful comments and corrections on the drafts: Loren Anderson, Al Bammann, Jon Beals, Carol Beardmore, Steve Bouffard, Kathy Cheap, Mike Denny, Kim Dickerson, Kristi Dubois, Katy Duffy, Ana Egnew, Jim Hagenbarth, Neil Hedges, Gary Herron, Randy Hill, Nancy Hoffman, Gary Ivey, Bill and Nancy LaFramboise, Ron Lambeth, Tracy Lloyd, Paul Makela, Chris Merker, Alan Peterson, Joe Petzold, Charley Rains, Tim Reynolds, Terry Rich, Bill Roney, John Rotenberry, Michael Schroeder, Dan Svingen, and Helen Ulmschneider. Any errors or omissions in this report are solely the authors’.

Cover photos: Sagebrush landscape -Terry Rich; sage sparrow - Matt Vander Haegen, Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Please cite this publication as: Paige, C., and S. A. Ritter. 1999. in a sagebrush sea: managing sagebrush habitats for bird commu- nities. Partners in Flight Western Working Group, Boise, ID.

For additional copies, contact: IDFG Nongame Program, P.O. Box 25, Boise, Idaho 83707-0025; (208) 334-2920. While supplies last and to cover printing and postage, please send $4.00 each for 1-3 copies, $3.00 each for 4-9 copies, $2.75 each for 10-19 copies, $2.50 each for 20 or more copies. TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ...... 2 ECOLOGY OF SAGEBRUSH HABITAT ...... 3 Climate ...... 3 Vegetation ...... 3 Wildlife Dependence on Sagebrush ...... 5 THE SAGEBRUSH LANDSCAPE BEFORE EUROPEAN SETTLEMENT ...... 5 Wildfire Patterns ...... 6 CHANGES IN SAGEBRUSH COUNTRY ...... 7 Influence of Livestock Grazing ...... 7 Non-native Grasses and Sagebrush Habitat Conversion ...... 8 HOW TO HELP BIRDS IN SAGEBRUSH HABITATS ...... 9 General Sagebrush Habitat Management ...... 10 Sagebrush ...... 12 Understory Grasses and Forbs ...... 14 Biological Soil Crusts ...... 15 Grazing ...... 15 Water Developments...... 16 Insecticides...... 17 Recreation ...... 18 Prescribed Fire and Wildfire ...... 18 Habitat Fragmentation ...... 19 Invasion of Non-native Grasses and Forbs ...... 20 Farming ...... 21 Mining and Oil/Gas Development ...... 21 Residential and Urban Development ...... 22 SUMMARY OF BIRD MANAGEMENT GOALS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...... 24 LITERATURE CITED ...... 27 APPENDIX I. SAGEBRUSH BIRDS OF CONCERN...... 33 SAGEBRUSH OBLIGATE ...... 33 Sage Grouse ...... 33 Sage ...... 34 Sage Sparrow ...... 35 Brewer’s Sparrow ...... 36 SHRUBLAND SPECIES ...... 37 Green-tailed Towhee ...... 37 Black-throated Sparrow ...... 38 ...... 38 SHRUBLAND AND GRASSLAND SPECIES ...... 39 Swainson’s Hawk ...... 39 Ferruginous Hawk ...... 40 Prairie Falcon ...... 40 Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse ...... 41 Loggerhead Shrike ...... 42 GRASSLAND SPECIES ...... 43 Long-billed Curlew ...... 43 Burrowing Owl ...... 44 Short-eared Owl ...... 44 Vesper Sparrow ...... 45 PRIMARILY DRY WOODLAND SPECIES ...... 46 Gray Flycatcher ...... 46 APPENDIX II. SCIENTIFIC NAMES OF SAGEBRUSH, OTHER , AND ...... 47 BIRDS IN A SAGEBRUSH SEA

BACKGROUND o many of us, sagebrush country symbolizes the universities, nongovernment organizations, and others wild, wide-open spaces of the West, populated interested in bird conservation. Tby scattered herds of cattle and sheep, a few Why are we concerned about birds in sagebrush pronghorn antelope, and a loose-knit community of habitats? Nationally, grassland and shrubland birds rugged ranchers. When you stand in the midst of the show the most consistent population declines over the arid western range, dusty gray-green sagebrush last 30 years of any group of bird species. Across the stretches to the horizon in a boundless, tranquil sea. U.S., the populations of 63% of shrubland and - Your first impression may be of sameness and lifeless- dependent bird species and 70% of grassland species are ness—a monotony of low , the over-reaching sky, declining. In the Intermountain West, more than 50% of a scattering of little brown birds darting away through grassland and shrubland species show downward trends the brush, and that heady, ever-present sage perfume. (Sauer et al. 1996). A recent broad-scale assessment of the Columbia River Basin identified sagebrush steppe as the highest priority habitat for conservation based on trends in bird populations and habitat (Saab and Rich 1997). Although the variety of bird species found in sagebrush habitats is far less than in a lush forest, many sagebrush birds, such as sage grouse, live nowhere else. The birds in these shrublands not only add to the West’s diversity of wildlife, they are important to the sagebrush ecosys- tem itself, providing crucial services such as dispersing seeds and preying on and rodents. Other

Michael Mancuso, Idaho Conservation Data Center wildlife species, including prong- Although sagebrush may appear to stretch on in an endless sea, a closer look horn, sagebrush , sagebrush reveals a of openings, wet and dry areas, a variety of species, and vole, and , also depend varying ages of shrubs. on healthy sagebrush habitat. Thoughtful land management But a closer look reveals just how complex and can help rejuvenate native sagebrush habitats and may variable sagebrush landscapes can be. From shrublands turn the tide for the birds of the sagebrush sea. The to grasslands, wet meadows, and woodland edges, a recommendations presented here are not regulations or mosaic of habitats supports an abundance of birds, policies. This document has one purpose: to help animals, and native plants, some specially adapted to anyone who is a steward of sagebrush shrublands these semi-deserts. Far from pristine, however, include management practices that help support a sagebrush habitats across the West have been greatly thriving community of wild birds. These recommen- altered by a century of settlement, livestock grazing, dations are entirely voluntary. Whether you manage agriculture, weed invasion, and changes in wildfire public lands or private, and whether your goal is frequency. livestock production, farming, mining, recreation This booklet presents land management recom- management, wildlife conservation, or a combination of mendations to help bird communities in sagebrush these, we hope this document will help you combine habitats. It was prepared for the Western Working your management goals with steps to enrich habitat for Group of Partners in Flight, a partnership of private sagebrush birds. Not all of the suggestions in this citizens, industry groups, government agencies, document will be appropriate in all places, depending 2 BACKGROUND 3 s l a o g t n e m e S S S S S g a T T T T T n A A A A A a T T T T T m I I I I I r B B B B B . u s A A A A A o n n n n n d y r

H H H o o H H o o o i

i i

i i i e b t t t t t n

H H H H H i a a a a a h t t t S S b t t S S S s Several species and subspecies of sagebrush The focus of this booklet is on sagebrush habitats e e e e e u m U U U U U he entire sagebrush region covers approximately 63 million ha (155.5 million ac) of the West (see map r g g g g g o R R R R R b e e e e e c

e B B B B B V V V T Rotenberry and many studies on raptors and grouse (see “Literature Cited”). The lack of quantitative information on many species’ habitat needs reflects a severe shortage of ecological studies in sagebrush habitats— often even major life history details are known only from anecdotal accounts. We prepared this document with the best information currently available. 1988). From the Great Basin southward, annual precipitation is more variable, ranging from 158 to 419 mm (6.2 to 16.4 in; West 1983, 1988). available for plant growth (West 1988). Annual precipitation in the northern portion of the Intermoun- tain Region averages 246 mm (9.6 in; West 1983, region. “Sagebrush steppe” or “shrubsteppe” includes a significant component of native grass. However, there are no clear dividing lines. Across the sagebrush region, sagebrush habitat ranges from semi-arid grasslands with a scattering of sagebrush to arid sagebrush-dominated shrublands with few grasses. grow in the west, from semi-desert lowlands to scientific subalpine names meadows are (species’ in to left). Sagebrush covers much of the Great Basin and Basin, and reaches into the Snake River Plain, Columbia Basin, southwestern , the Plateau, southwestern Colorado, and northern . This broad zone is divided into two general vegetation types. The true “sagebrush steppe” type covers the northern portion of the Intermountain region, where sagebrush is co-dominant with perennial bunchgrasses (about 45 million ha or 111 million ac; West 1996). From the Great Basin southward, in the much drier “Great Basin sagebrush” vegetation type, sagebrush is dominant and grasses are few and sparse (18 million ha or 44.5 million ac; West 1988). in general. We use “sagebrush habitat” and “sagebrush shrubland” as general terms covering the sagebrush V V u

g

E E E E E o Press. University a

s y

G G G G G Cambridge from permission with reprinted 1988, West From r p A A A A A l o f e S S S

S S

t h

a F F F l F F t l i i O O O O O b

w

a t Y Y Y Y Y h n G G G e G G h c i m O O O O O r u L L L L L n c e o O O O

O O d o

C C C C C t s i E E E E E s h p t

e t e s p o h t h i e w W e e e e e t t t t t a a a a a Sagebrush bird communities are not well studied, m m m m m agebrush occurs in cold semi-deserts across the Intermountain West. In much of this region, winters i i i i i = Sagebrush steppesagebrush Basin Great = l l l l l C C sagebrush vegetation in is not shown. Map of the sagebrush steppe and the Great Basin sagebrush types (adapted from Küchler 1970). Some C S ecosystem. with the exception of the work by Wiens and you adopt only a few of the suggestions, you can give a boost to birds. In addition, we believe these recommen- dations will result in a healthy, diverse shrubsteppe on local conditions and management needs, but even if penetrating the soil and captured for plant growth. All in all, only about half the annual precipitation becomes short growing season follows snow-melt. Summer storms are brief and intense, and most summer rain runs off or evaporates in hot winds, relatively little of it persistent. In these semi-deserts, most of the annual precipitation comes as snow and early spring rain. This winter precipitation recharges soil moisture, and the are long, summers are hot and dry, and winds are C C BACKGROUND Terry Rich Terry Sagebrush habitat ranges from grasslands with a scattering of sagebrush (above) to shrublands with a scattering of grassy openings (left).

Appendices I and II). The species big sagebrush physical processes (Tisdale and Hironaka 1981; West predominates, and has five known subspecies (West 1988). Natural and human-induced disturbances also 1988; Kartesz 1994). It is often important to differenti- play a role. Usually a single species of sagebrush is ate between sagebrush species and subspecies in order dominant in a community, but communities differ to classify rangeland types; understand site potential, widely in understory plants. Understories are usually palatability to livestock and wildlife, and response to dominated by one or more perennial bunchgrasses, such fire; and manage vegetation. However, for many birds as bluebunch wheatgrass, Idaho fescue, Sandberg’s the species of sagebrush is less important than its bluegrass, Thurber needlegrass, needle-and-thread, height, density, cover, and patchiness. In this booklet bottlebrush squirreltail, or Indian ricegrass. Forbs, such we use “sagebrush” generally, usually referring to the as phlox, milk-vetch, and fleabane, are less common, species big sagebrush, and focus on the variables but can be abundant in moist areas. important to birds. The only other distinction made here Stands of sagebrush may be dense, patchy, or is between low and tall life forms—two broad catego- sparse. In tall sagebrush types, sagebrush cover may ries that separate the species (Appendix II). The range from 5% to 30% (Dealy et al. 1981) or greater on management recommendations presented here may some sites. Stands may vary from expanses of single need to be modified to local sagebrush types. species to multi-species mosaics where sagebrush is There is a wide variety of vegetation community intermixed with other shrubs, most commonly rabbit- types within the sagebrush landscape—the result of brush and antelope bitterbrush, but also greasewood, differences in soil, climate, topography, and other shadscale, Mormon tea, winter fat, and spiny hopsage. Other shrub communities often occur adjacent to sagebrush shrublands, especially at higher elevations, such as those domi- nated by serviceberry, mountain-mahogany, wild cherry, ceanothus, and snowberry. Grassy openings, springs, seeps, moist meadows, riparian streamsides, juniper woodlands, copses of aspen, and rock outcrops also add to the sagebrush mosaic, and these habitats help attract a broad diversity of birds and wildlife. Biological soil crust is an integral and usually overlooked component of sagebrush shrublands. It creates a rough crust on the soil surface in semi-arid habitats. Biological Diane Ronayne, IDFG soil crust (also known as “cryptobiotic Most of the denser shrubland types have, or should have, grasses crust,” “microbiotic crust,” or “cryptogamic between and under the shrubs. Here is an ungrazed sagebrush area soil”) is a fragile microfloral community with abundant bunchgrasses. composed of blue-green algae, , 4 BACKGROUND 5

T T T T T Foundation

N N N N N Environmental Science and Research and Science Environmental E E E E E M M M M M E E E E E L L L L L T T T T T T T T T T E E E E E S S S S S

becomes becomes a major portion

N N N N N A A A A A E E E E E P P P P P O O O O O R R R R R U U U U U E E E E E

E E E E E For many decades, range scientists believed that Conditions were different in the Great Basin of The pronghorn is one of several species that The pronghorn is one of several species must have sagebrush to survive. These obligates” “sagebrush called are species and are unique to the West. R R R R R O O O O O McQuivey pers. comm.). grasslands originally dominated the Intermountain West, and that sagebrush invaded because of heavy grazing. More recently, it has become evident that sagebrush was widespread and dominant, and that the boundaries of sagebrush habitats were about the same as they are today. Reports of areas that were once grassland, but are now covered in sagebrush, may have grasses, and perennial broad-leaved herbs (Yensen 1980, 1981). . Reading over 100 old newspapers and 175 diaries of early settlers in Nevada, Robert McQuivey, Nevada Division of Wildlife, found that in the Great Basin of Nevada early settlers and travelers reported very tall sagebrush (approximately 2 to 2.5 m; 6-8 ft) with very little grass understory. Grass areas were usually restricted to areas along rivers and streams (R. shrubs shrubs and grasses (Peterson 1995). Pronghorn, pygmy rabbits, and sage grouse may eat exclusively sagebrush in winter, and sagebrush also of mule and diets. Taller sagebrush provides cover for and sage grouse (Dealy et al. 1981), and the crowns of sagebrush break up hard-packed snow, making it easier for animals to forage on the grasses beneath (Peterson 1995). Throughout the rest of the year, sagebrush provides food for pygmy rabbits and sage grouse; protective cover for fawns, calves, rabbits, and grouse broods; and nesting sites for many shrub- nesting birds. The sage thrasher, Brewer’s sparrow, sage sparrow, and sage grouse most frequently nest in or beneath sagebrush. F F F F F E E E E E h h h h h B B B B B

s s s s s E E E E E u u u u u r r r r r P P P P P b b b b b A A A A A e e e e e C C C C C g g g g g a a a S S a a S S S S S S S S D D D

D D

n n n n n N N N N N o o o o o

A A A A A e e e e e L L L L L

c c c c c n n n n n H H H H H e e e e e S S S S S d d d d d U U U U U n n n n n R R R R R e e e e e B B p p B p B B p p e e e e e E E E E E D D D D D G G G G G

e e e e e A A A A A f f f f f i i i i i S S S S S

l l l l l

Sagebrush itself and the native perennial grasses d d d d d E E E E E pproximately 100 bird species and 70 species can be found in sagebrush habitats (Braun l l l l l arly explorers of the Intermountain West encoun- tered a landscape dominated by shrubs and found

i i i i i H H H H H W W bottlebrush squirreltail and Sandberg’s bluegrass, and eventually sagebrush seedlings, large-culmed perennial ground, complete revegetation of the community took about 10 years. Snakeweed was an early colonizer, followed by short-lived perennial grasses such as bottlebrush squirreltail, Thurber needlegrass, green needlegrass, and needle-and-thread. When the sage- brush steppe was burned or trampled, leaving bare bunchgrasses grew lushly in the understory beneath shrubs, including balsamroot, bluebunch wheatgrass, Idaho fescue, Indian ricegrass, Sandberg’s bluegrass, growing shrubs dominated by big sagebrush. Winterfat, antelope bitterbrush, rabbitbrush, greasewood, and shadscale were also abundant. Forbs and perennial bottoms (Vale 1975). In presettlement times, the Snake River Plain was a landscape of open-canopied, low- grasslands chiefly limited to hillsides and moist valley

E A W and because crusts do not provide much fuel, they also slow the spread of wildfire (Kaltenecker 1997). Clair and Johansen 1993; Kaltenecker 1997). Where crust communities are well established in a healthy shrubland, they help prevent the invasion of cheatgrass, contributing contributing to soil productivity, influencing nutrient levels, retaining moisture, altering soil temperature, and aiding seedling establishment (Belnap 1993, 1994; St. pers. comm.). Many biologists think these crust communities may play an important role in dry regions by stabilizing soils from wind and water erosion, fungi, fungi, mosses, and lichens. The diversity and function of crust communities has been little understood and underappreciated (St. Clair et al. 1993; J. Kaltenecker provides the only available green vegetation, and its protein level and digestibility are higher than most other and forbs of the shrubsteppe are important sources of food and cover for wildlife (Dealy et al. 1981). During winter, the evergreen foliage of sagebrush often sparrow, sage thrasher, sage grouse, pygmy rabbit, sagebrush vole, sagebrush lizard, and pronghorn. breeding season or year-round) or near-obligates (occurring in both sagebrush and grassland habitats). Sagebrush obligates include the sage sparrow, Brewer’s et al. 1976; Trimble 1989). Some of these are sagebrush obligates (restricted to sagebrush habitats during the W W T T T T T been a result of repeated burning and mowing for hay in in presettlement times were probably patchy and small the early days of settlement (Tisdale and Hironaka except in very dry years. Presettlement fire intervals 1981). Over time, many areas of sagebrush steppe have have been estimated at 20 to 25 years in wetter regions, become more densely packed with sagebrush as and 60 to 110 years in the arid sagebrush steppe of livestock eliminated understory grasses and wildfires southern Idaho (Tisdale and Hironaka 1981; Whisenant were suppressed, tipping the competitive advantage 1990). McQuivey (pers. comm.) concluded that the toward shrubs (Tisdale and Hironaka 1981; West 1988). prevalence of tall sagebrush and lack of a grass Evidence also suggests that fire suppression and heavy understory in the Great Basin sagebrush of Nevada BACKGROUND grazing have contributed to the invasion of junipers and indicate that fire was not an important influence on this other conifers in some sagebrush areas (Tisdale and vegetation. Hironaka 1981). After a fire, big sagebrush must be re-established Biologists theorize that the native plant commu- by wind-dispersed seed or seeds in the soil. Most nities in sagebrush steppe west of the Rockies did not sagebrush seeds fall within 1 m (3 ft) of the shrub evolve under pressure from large numbers of grazing ungulates and are not adapted for concentrations of large herbivores (Tisdale and Hironaka 1981; Mack and Thompson 1982). The earliest historical accounts of exploration in the Intermountain West suggest that large native grazers were relatively rare and localized in the region. Bison were limited to the northeastern Great Basin, and the only large ungulate found throughout the region was the pronghorn. In southern Idaho’s Snake River Plain, mule deer may have been abundant, and mule deer and elk were reported to winter in the Raft River Valley

(Yensen 1980). Many explorers of the Great Environmental Science and Research Foundation Basin commented on an abundance of forage Fire was, and still is, an important part of the sagebrush shrubland for their stock and a lack of large game ecosystem. Part of the mosaic pattern in sagebrush is due to fires, which (Tisdale and Hironaka 1981). tend to burn in patches, creating stands of sagebrush of varying ages. Jackrabbits, cottontails, and rodents may have been the major herbivores in the region. The canopy, although wind can disperse seeds up to 30 m cyclic population explosions of jackrabbits, which can (90 ft; Meyer 1994), so the rate of big sagebrush locally deplete range plants, may have had a periodic recolonization in a burn depends on the distance from a but influential impact on vegetation ecology (Yensen seed source and the amount and condition of seed in the 1980; Young 1994). Sage grouse were also important soil. Depending on the species, sagebrush can re- grazers on sagebrush and understory plants. Periodic establish itself within 5 years of a burn, but a return to infestations of and crickets could decimate pre-burn densities can take 15 to 30 years (Bunting the shrubsteppe (Yensen 1980). 1984; Britton and Clark 1984). Eventually sagebrush seedlings, large-culmed perennial grasses, and perennial broad-leaved herbs become established (Yensen 1980, Wildfire Patterns 1981). Often rabbitbrush, perennial bunchgrasses, and xplorers’ reports of abundant and widespread forbs present before a fire resprout vigorously soon Esagebrush probably indicate that fires were afterwards, and some greenup of perennial bunch- relatively infrequent in sagebrush habitats. Big grasses can occur soon after fall rains, depending on the sagebrush does not resprout after a fire and even “cool” fire’s severity (P. Makela pers. comm.). burns may be enough to kill these plants. In wetter Before European settlement, then, spotty and areas, where fuels are more abundant, low severity fires occasional wildfire probably created a patchwork of may have been more common, and on some sites burns young and old sagebrush stands across the landscape, must have been frequent enough to prevent the invasion interspersed with grassland openings, wet meadows, of juniper and conifers (Tisdale and Hironaka 1981). and other shrub communities. In drier regions, such as Because bunchgrasses generally do not provide a Nevada, fire likely had less of an influence. continuous fuel layer to carry fire long distances, fires 6 BACKGROUND 7 Y Y Y Y Y R R R R R T T T T T N N N N N U U U U U O O O O O C C C C C

H H H H H S S S S S As well as affecting vegetation, grazing can Livestock also trample and damage biological Sagebrush steppe can take time to recover from U U U U U R R R R R presence of invasive weeds, an overly dense stand of sagebrush, or heavy browsing by rodents and rabbits can inhibit recovery of grasses and forbs (Tisdale and Hironaka 1981). influence bird communities in another way. The presence of livestock (particularly cattle and horses) creates feeding habitat for the brown-headed cowbird, a “brood parasite” that lays its in the nests of other chaining, and other methods to remove dense sagebrush stands and re-establish grass forage, often reseeding with introduced grass species. soil crusts. Excessive grazing in the 19th and early 20th centuries likely reduced crust communities throughout the Intermountain West, and it is difficult now to piece together their original extent and role in sagebrush habitats (Mack and Thompson 1982; St. Clair et al. 1993). Recovery that includes a well-developed crust community can take a decade or more, depending on the type of disturbance, presence of inoculants from nearby crust communities, and occurrence of invasive weeds (Belnap 1993; St. Clair and Johansen 1993; Kaltenecker 1997). excessive grazing, especially on drier sites. A study on Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory grounds found that 25 years after the heavily depleted range had been closed to cattle and sheep grazing, both perennial grass and big sagebrush cover had nearly doubled, but the most rapid recovery of grasses occurred after a lag period of 15 years (Ander- son and Holte 1981). Even if livestock are removed, the which can have a toxic effect on the microorganisms in their rumen (Young 1994). Even light grazing can put pressure on the herbaceous plants favored by livestock (West 1996), but the effect of grazing in any region depends on season of use, intensity, type of livestock, and the plant species themselves (Tisdale and Hironaka 1981). In the Great Basin, for example, perennial bunchgrasses must grow quickly to set seed over the short growing season, so intensive spring grazing prevents the plants from reproducing, eventually eliminating the palatable native bunchgrasses (Mack and Thompson 1982). Where grazing removes the herbaceous understory altogether, the balance is tipped in favor of shrubs, allowing sagebrush to spread and creating overly dense sagebrush stands with a sparse understory of annuals and unpalatable perennials (Tisdale and Hironaka 1981). This situation ultimately discourages livestock use, and throughout this century range managers have employed fire, herbicides, B B B B B E E E E E G G G G G A A A A A

S S S S S Rich Terry

g g g g g N N n n N n N N n n i i i i i I I I I I

z z z z z S S S S S a a a a a r r r r r E E E E E G G G G G G G G G G

k k k k k N N N N N c c c c c A A A A A o o o o o t t t t t H H H H H s s s s s C C C C C e e e e e v v v v v i i i i i L L L L L

f f f f f o o o o o

e e e e e c c c c c n n n n n

e e e e e As cattle graze sagebrush steppe, they first select u u u u u the late 19th century triggered a rapid change in he arrival of cattle and sheep in the Great Basin in l l l l l

agebrush agebrush communities have suffered severe degradation degradation and loss, and the future for remaining f f f f f recognize the importance of properly grazing their land to maintain its health. Grazing pressure from livestock has decreased has livestock from pressure Grazing since the late 19th century, a period when rapid changes took place in the sagebrush plant communities. Today, good land managers n n n n n I I

I T S grasses and forbs and avoid browsing on sagebrush, remnants of native herbs, and 30% is heavily grazed with the native understory replaced by introduced annuals (West 1988, 1996). early 1900s. However, less than 1% of the sagebrush steppe remains untouched by livestock; roughly 20% is lightly grazed, 30% is moderately grazed and has horses, sheep, and cattle and to clear the land for farming (R. McQuivey pers. comm.). Today, grazing pressure has decreased considerably compared to the and they recommended changes to restore range productivity (Young 1994; West 1996). In addition, settlers burned off sagebrush to produce more grass for years after livestock introduction. By 1900, some range managers judged that livestock had already exceeded the grazing capacity of the Intermountain rangelands, sagebrush plant communities (Yensen 1981; Dobkin 1994). Observers of the time indicated that sites may have lost their native perennial grasses less than 15 and Rich 1997, citing Hann et al. 1997). bunchgrass cover types experienced greater losses than any other habitat and will probably continue to decline with the cumulative impacts of present land uses (Saab grazing, development, sagebrush eradication programs, and changes in fire regimes. Within the Interior Columbia River Basin, for example, sagebrush and natural disturbance patterns, and vegetation communities have been altered by agricultural conversion, invasion of non-native plants, extensive sagebrush sagebrush steppe in particular is bleak. The ecology, I I songbirds for the host parents to raise. This reduces the and forbs, particularly cheatgrass. Inadvertently number of young that the host species population can introduced in the late 19th century, cheatgrass spread produce in a year. Cowbirds feed on insects stirred up like an epidemic across the Intermountain West along by grazing herbivores and parasitize nests in nearby transportation corridors and in the wake of grazing and shrublands and woodlands. A native of the Great Plains, agriculture, and reached its present geographic range by the brown-headed cowbird adapted to follow the herds about 1928 (Mack 1981; Yensen 1981). Cheatgrass of migratory bison. With settlement and the spread of readily invades disturbed sites as livestock churn up soil livestock throughout the West, the cowbird’s range and biological soil crusts and graze native bunchgrasses. BACKGROUND expanded, exposing new populations and species of Today, cheatgrass threatens to dominate 25 million ha songbirds to brood parasitism for the first time. Where (62 million ac)—more than half of the West’s sage- cowbird populations are high and there is no year-to- brush region (Rich 1996). Cheatgrass is a rapid year relief from parasitism pressure, cowbird parasitism colonizer of disturbed sites and a persistent resident, may be a significant factor in the decline of some replacing native species (Mack 1981; Yensen 1981; songbird populations. Whisenant 1990). Other non-native species, such as medusahead, yellow star thistle, knapweed, tumble Non-native Grasses and Sagebrush mustard, and halogeton, are also becoming increasing Habitat Conversion problems (Yensen 1980; West 1996). Cheatgrass invasion fundamentally alters fire and rom the 1930s through the 1960s, and to a much vegetation patterns in sagebrush habitats. Unlike native Flesser extent today, land managers controlled bunchgrasses, cheatgrass creates a bed of continuous, sagebrush on degraded rangeland by burning, plowing, fine fuel that readily carries fire. Where cheatgrass chaining, disking, and spraying herbicides to increase dominates the understory, it carries fire over great livestock forage on sites where the native grasses had distances, and the range burns far more frequently—at been lost. Many areas were seeded with crested intervals of 3 to 5 years. Cheatgrass also matures and wheatgrass, a non-native perennial bunchgrass, to dries earlier than native bunchgrasses, increasing the provide forage. In addition to the thousands of hectares chance of fire earlier in the season (Young and Evans where non-native grasses are mixed with sagebrush, 1978; Whisenant 1990; Knick and Rotenberry 1997). approximately 10% of native sagebrush steppe has now Because sagebrush may take several years to been completely replaced by invasive annuals or by mature before producing seed, repeated, frequent fires intentionally seeded non-native grasses (West 1988, can eliminate sagebrush entirely. As the fire cycle 1996). Another 10% of the sagebrush steppe has been escalates, cheatgrass persists and on some sites is converted to dryland or irrigated agriculture (West eventually replaced by medusahead and other non- 1988, 1996). In eastern Washington, only 40% remains native annuals, causing a downward spiral toward of 4.2 million ha (10.4 million ac) of shrubsteppe that permanent dominance of non-native species and existed before the arrival of settlers (Dobler et al. 1996). deterioration of the site. Cheatgrass dominance The greatest change to sagebrush plant communi- eventually creates a uniform annual grassland perpetu- ties came with the invasion of non-native annual grasses ated by large, frequent fires and void of remain- ing patches of native plant communities (Whisenant 1990). Restoring native plants is then extremely difficult if not impossible (West 1988). There is some indication, however, that native shrubs, perennial grasses, and forbs can re- establish on a cheatgrass-dominated site over a course of several years if fire is suppressed, rainfall is low (Hosten and West 1994), and there is a seed source for native species. The presence of invasive weeds also affects biological soil crusts. In the western Great Basin, Young (1992) noted that communities dominated by medusahead lack biological soil

Terry Rich Terry crusts, and in the Snake River Plain, Kaltenecker Of all the changes that have occurred in sagebrush shrublands, (1997) found that where cheatgrass and medusa- the invasion of non-native cheatgrass is probably the most head invaded, biological soil crusts were shaded harmful. This photo, taken in June, shows the almost continuous out. fuel chain created by cheatgrass. 8 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 9 S S S S S T T T T T A A A A A T T T T T I I I I I B B B B B A A A A A H H H H H

H H H H H SCALES S S S S S U U U U U R R R R R ildlife species respond to their to respond species ildlife environment at different scales. In scales. different at environment B B B B B When you look across a landscape of landscape a across look you When HABITATS ON DIFFERENT ON HABITATS MANAGING SAGEBRUSH MANAGING E E E E E G G pair to survive and raise its young. Many young. its raise and survive to pair supportcan landscape a a across stands The particularspecies. a of population and stands, patches, of size exact each of needs the on depends landscapes species. W termsthe use we document, this 1). (Table “” and “stand,” “landscape,” seem may recommendations our of Some we say we hand, one On contradictory. sagebrush continuous of areas large need a want we that say we then habitat, communities. plant of mosaic or patchwork both. It’s it? is which Well, monotonous a see may you sagebrush, travel you as yet shrubland, uniform and of lot a notice you area, the through low A next. the to spot one from variation taller has moisture catches that swale knob a area, surrounding the shrubsthan area burned a opening, grassy a have may a shrubs, of scattering a just have may the to water and willows adds streamside provides patch habitat Each landscape. by needed resources the of some nesting to feeding from birds, individual habitat these stands, into Combined sites. a for habitat total enough provide patches G G G A A A A A S S S S S Each account briefly mentions conservation consider- ations for the individual species. Your local wildlife agency or State Natural Heritage Program can provide specific information about which species occur in your particular region.

N N N N N I I I I I

S S S S S D D D D D R R R R R I I I I I B B B B B

P P P P P L L L L L E E E E E H H H H H

O O O O O T T T T T

W W W W W O O O O O and are meant to aid the land manager in

bird habitats depend on our ability to provide a mosaic of native plant communities across the H H he maintenance and restoration of sagebrush H H H Natural history accounts for bird species of You may find that certain recommendations are The following management recommendations are Managing a single site for all sagebrush wildlife

concern in sagebrush steppe habitats are in Appendix I. only a few of the recommendations, you can help improve habitat for birds. not appropriate for your situation, depending on your management goals, vegetation types, site potential, costs, and opportunities. But even if you can implement follows this section (see “Summary of Bird Manage- ment Goals and Recommendations”). techniques, our main goal is to describe what birds need. Most of these suggestions will also benefit other wildlife species. A summary of these recommendations dations are based on our current knowledge of habitat requirements of sagebrush birds. Although we provide some ideas on specific vegetation management components within sagebrush steppe. We then offer suggestions for habitat management under different land uses and management activities. These recommen- voluntary enhancing habitat for sagebrush birds. First we give general management recommendations based on habitat represented across a large area. a balance so that all habitats originally occurring (such as young and old sagebrush stands, grassland openings, wet meadows, springs, and riparian habitat) are brush steppe use stands with scattered shrubs mixed with short grassland. Management for a particular site will depend on that site’s potential. The idea is to strike some species may be detrimental to others. For example, the sage grouse and sage sparrow prefer areas of extensive sagebrush, but vesper sparrows in sage- wildlife. species is not possible because practices that benefit much area in the Intermountain West, it is especially important to sustain remaining native plant communi- ties in a healthy state to support native birds and other Different Scales”). This goal goes hand in hand with sustainable rangeland management. Because non-native grasses and agricultural conversion now dominate so landscape (see box, “Managing Sagebrush Habitats on T 10 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS G G b a <1 to 100s of acres PATCH 1 to 1000s of acres STAND acres 1000s to 100,000s of LANDSCAPE Species on Dependent is Size SCALE 1. Table W G ￿ 1997). Rich and (Saab Basin River Columbia Interior the in sparrow Brewer’s and 1997) Force Task Grouse Sage (Idaho Idaho in grouse sage in declines for responsible be to thought is quality, and amount in both habitat, steppe sagebrush of loss A landscape. a across stands aged different of pattern dynamic a for plan should managers range and elsewhere, restoration management activities. G G 1 acre = 0.4 hectares 0.4 = acre 1 ranges. wintering and breeding overlarge range which grouse, sage to apply might number larger Brewer’sthe to ranges,while haveapply home sparrows, which might small number smaller The e e e e e protected areas, sanctuaries, or research areas. research or sanctuaries, areas, protected refuges, uses), land economic exclude necessarily not do (which easements conservation as managed be might integrity, biological high have otherwise or years, many for grazed been not have sion, conver- habitat or grazing livestock by untouched remained have that areas Those plants. sagebrush and understory native of community thriving a have still that habitats those protect and Identify n n n n n b e recommend no recommend e management activities (see the box, “No Net Loss”). Future habitat conversions should be mitigated by mitigated be should conversions habitat Future Loss”). Net “No box, the (see activities management e e e e e r r r r r Different scales at which birds respond to their environment and how we want to direct a a a a a a l l l l l

S S S S S a a a a a g g g g g e e e e e net b b b ouain The size, age, and distribution Populations site, escape cover) (i.e., food, water, nest individuals and pairs Specific needs of individuals and pairs Home ranges of b b This Level:This Affectedat are Birds loss of sagebrush steppe habitat in a landscape. No net loss does not preclude not does loss net No landscape. a in habitat steppe sagebrush of loss r r r r r u u u u u s s s s s h h h h h

H H H H H a a a a a b b b b b i i i i i t t t t t a a a a a t t t t t

other food abundance , other prey, seeds, and vegetation within the patch Height, density, and cover of and accessible whether they are all present Proximity of all resources and Plant species composition drought events such as wildfire and recover from large-scale Ability of populations to Spread of non-native plants the species including areas inhospitable to of stands and patches, AffectThese: Processes Natural and Activities Management M M M M M a a a a a n n n n n ￿ a a a a a of an entirely native plant community may be may community plant native entirely an of restoration the sites, degraded or damaged severely On communities. plant native to sites disturbed and degraded rehabilitate or restore possible, Where protected. be should and wildlife to value have parcels small even occurred, has conversion habitat major Where plants. non-native invasive removing and fire, as such processes, disturbance natural restoring on should focus Management g g g g g e e e e e m m m m m e e e e e n n n n n t t t t t pairs are present needed by individuals and One or more of the resources include wintering resources) present (for grouse, this would individuals and pairs are foraging resources for All of the nesting, cover, and bird populations and canopy cover to support with different ages, species, containing a mosaic of stands shrubsteppe habitat Large areas of continuous Birds: for Conditions Desired MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 11 and foraging opportunities for other sagebrush birds. Use buffers of 30 m (100 ft) or greater around these areas (Braun et al. 1977; Blaisdell et al. 1982). Maintain ground squirrel and prairie dog colonies to provide nesting burrows for burrowing owls, and maintain small mammal populations as prey for many bird and mammal predators. grouse. grouse. Forested streamsides provide nest sites for Swainson’s hawks, and interspersed juniper woodlands supply nesting areas for loggerhead shrikes, gray flycatchers, ferruginous hawks, and green-tailed towhees (see Tables 2 and 3). Openings of short vegetation surrounded by sagebrush are particularly important for sage grouse leks (especially openings, knolls, and exposed ridges) and for ground foraging by sage , loggerhead shrikes, Brewer’s sparrows, and sage sparrows. Openings of short vegetation (5 to 20 cm; 2 to 8 in) with wide visibility provide long-billed curlew and burrowing owl breeding habitat. Maintain remaining biological soil crust communi- ties by minimizing sources of soil disturbance, such as off-road vehicle use or heavy grazing. Maintain seeps, springs, wet meadows, and riparian vegetation in a healthy state for young sage grouse and other species that depend on the forbs and insects available in moist places. Wetlands and riparian zones also provide habitat for prey species ￿ ￿ ￿ ￿ NO NET LOSS When we recommend “no net loss” of sagebrush steppe, we accept that natural forces and forces natural that accept we steppe, sagebrush of loss” net “no recommend we When agebrush habitats are dynamic communities influenced by patterns in rainfall, fire, and the and fire, rainfall, in patterns by influenced communities dynamic are habitats agebrush movements and population fluctuations of grazing animals. A fire, for instance, may kill a large a kill may instance, for fire, A animals. grazing of fluctuations population and movements land management activities will alter the landscape. What we hope is that human-induced habitat human-induced that is hope we What landscape. the alter will activities management land elsewhere. conservation and restoration habitat by accompanied be will conversion lost—the area has just become part of the natural mosaic of habitats within the landscape. However, landscape. the within habitats of mosaic natural partthe become of just has area lost—the sagebrush if or dominant become and invade medusahead, or cheatgrass like plants, non-native if wildlife sagebrush the to forever lost be may area that then over, paved or under plowed is habitat of islands and strips isolated into landscape the fragments conversion habitat Where community. supportwildlife to capacity habitat’s native remaining the reduces also conversion that habitat, populations. S not is it sagebrush,return to to potential the has land the as long as yet shrubs, sagebrush of area burrowing owls. Broad-leaved shrub thickets and riparian areas provide winter habitat for sharp-tailed throated sparrows, gray flycatchers, and sage thrashers. Shrubsteppe with small, grassy openings supports sage grouse, long-billed curlews, and needs. Young sparse stands support vesper sparrows and lark sparrows. Older, denser stands benefit sage grouse, Brewer’s sparrows, sage sparrows, black- and other interspersed shrub and woodland habitats. Mosaics support many bird species with different sagebrush, openings (ranging from bare ground to short vegetation to high grass density), wet mead- ows, seeps, healthy streamside (riparian) vegetation, for a patchwork or mosaic of native plant communi- ties across the local landscape. These patchworks or mosaics may include stands of young and old several thousand hectares of adequately connected habitat to maintain self-sustaining populations. Within extensive areas of sagebrush habitat, manage breed and survive. For sage sparrows, continuous areas should be greater than 130 ha (about a half- section). Sage grouse and sharp-tailed grouse need densities (5 to 20%) and multiple age and height classes. An area-sensitive species is one that requires a large block of unfragmented habitat to successfully grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, and sage sparrows, maintain sagebrush in large, continuous areas composed of a mosaic of open to moderate shrub benefit some bird species. To benefit area-sensitive species such as sage expensive, expensive, long-term, or nearly impossible, but it may be possible to restore the vegetative structure (e.g., variation in shrub heights, mosaic pattern) to ￿ ￿ 12 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS S S SPECIES GRASSLAND AND SHRUBLAND ￿ 3). (Table sagebrush beneath nest nesters ground the of many addition, In hawk. Swainson’s the occasionally and flycatcher, gray shrike, loggerhead towhee, green-tailed sparrow, sage sparrow, Brewer’s thrasher, sage the include shrubs sagebrush SPECIES DRYWOODLAND SPECIES GRASSLAND SPECIES SHRUBLAND SPECIES OBLIGATE SAGEBRUSH 2. Table S S Species S S a a a a a Gray flycatcher Vesper sparrow Short-eared owl Burrowing owl Long-billed curlew Loggerhead shrike Sharp-tailed grouse Prairie falcon Ferruginous hawk Swainson’s hawk sparrowLark Green-tailed towhee Black-throated sparrow Brewer’s sparrow Sage sparrow Sage thrasher Sage grouse shrubland to non-native grassland or farm land. farm or grassland non-native to shrubland sagebrush convert permanently that practices Avoid and are the main food for sage grouse and pronghorn in the winter. Bird species of concern that nest in nest that concern of species Bird winter. the in pronghorn and grouse sage for food main the are and agebrush plants provide nest sites and cover from wind and predators, harbor insects for insect-eating wildlife, insect-eating for insects harbor predators, and wind from cover and sites nest provide plants agebrush g g g g g e e e e e b b b b b r r Habitat components used by 17 sagebrush shrubland bird species of concern. of species bird shrubland sagebrush 17 by used components Habitat r r r u u u u u s s s s s h h h h h dense brush sage- Tall, ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔✔✔ ✔ ✔✔ ✔✔✔ ✔ ✔✔✔ ✔✔ ✔✔✔✔ ✔ ✔✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔✔ ✔✔✔✔ ✔✔✔ patchy Open, brush sage- ✔✔✔ ✔ ✔✔ ✔ ✔✔ ✔✔✔✔✔✔✔ ✔✔ ✔ ✔✔ ✔✔✔✔✔✔✔ ✔ ✔ ✔✔ ✔✔ ✔ Grass cover nests for ￿ Grass- land balance between shrub and perennial grass cover, grass perennial and shrub between balance a for steppe sagebrush of stands existing Manage ground grass, Short bare Seeps, habitat wet wood- land Dry Ripar- ian MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 13 ✔ Cliff ✔✔ ✔ ✔ ✔✔✔ ✔✔ Shrub densities, densities, by using prescribed fires that produce a patchy burn pattern, or by applying reduced rates of herbicide (see Carrithers and Halstvedt 1996 for an example using tebuthiuron on big sagebrush). Only use prescribed fire in areas not threatened by cheatgrass or medusahead invasion. In large disturbed areas, sagebrush and perennial grasses may need to be reseeded to shorten the recovery time and prevent dominance by non-native grasses and forbs. ￿ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔✔ ✔✔ ✔ ✔ ✔✔✔ ✔ ✔ Burrow Ground Nesting substrates for 17 sagebrush shrubland bird species of concern. Vesper sparrow Vesper flycatcher Gray Long-billed curlew Long-billed owl Burrowing owl Short-eared Swainson’s hawk Swainson’s hawk Ferruginous falcon Prairie grouse Sharp-tailed shrike Loggerhead Black-throated sparrow Black-throated towhee Green-tailed Larksparrow Sage grouse Sage thrasher Sage sparrow Sage sparrow Brewer’s Species SPECIES SHRUBLAND SHRUBLAND AND GRASSLAND DRY DRY WOODLAND SPECIES GRASSLAND SPECIES SHRUBLAND SPECIES SAGEBRUSH OBLIGATE SPECIES Table 3. may be possible to thin sagebrush cover by clearing patches that can be reseeded naturally at lower removal of shrubs (rather than broad-scale eradica- tion) to re-establish a balance between shrub cover and perennial grass and forb cover. For example, it Extensive, Extensive, overly dense and crowded sagebrush stands that have lost much of the native herbaceous understory and plant diversity may require selective and for open to moderate shrub cover (5 to 25%) and multiple height classes. ￿ 14 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS U U ￿ 1986). al. et Kelrick 1976; Berry and (Goebel medusahead or cheatgrass than rather seeds grass native eat to prefer birds shrubsteppe that evidence experimental is there Also, 3). and 2 Tables (see cover nesting for grasses on rely shrubs woody in low or ground the on nest that species many and healthy, and dense, tall, are steppe sagebrush in grasses ￿ ￿ ￿ cream.” It’soneofmanyforbsthatgrouseandotherwildlifeeat. This P U U U n n n n n sites, try to use local, native genotypes that genotypes native local, use to try sites, degraded and disturbed reseeding Where strategies. other or clearings, small creating stands, sagebrush thinning grazing, fall-winter appropriate conducting grazing, livestock reducing or eliminating temporarily species, native seeding require may forbs and grasses native of depleted sites Rehabilitating competition. of degree and moisture, soil remaining, tips growing of number the on depends and management, best the under years 8 over require can defoliation) more or (50% season grazing spring heavy single a from recovery that asserts (1991) Anderson wheatgrass, bluebunch on effects defoliation of review recent a In season. growing the during grazing heavy to sensitive particularly is bunchgrasses, native of widespread most the of one wheatgrass, Bluebunch cure. to begin plants until season growing the during grazing avoid reproduction), and growth for capacity (its vigor wheatgrass bluebunch maintain To cover. sagebrush 25%) to (5 moderate to open with balance in cover forb and grass native increase or stabilize that practices choose persist, forbs native and bunchgrasses perennial Wherever erennial bunchgrasses and native forbs provide food and cover for many sagebrush birds. Several species (e.g., species Several birds. sagebrush many for cover and food provide forbs native and bunchgrasses erennial sage grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, and sage sparrow) are more common and more productive where perennial where productive more and common more are sparrow) sage and grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, sage Agoseris d d d d d e e e e e r r r r r s s s s s , or mountain-dandelion, is “sage grouse ice grouse “sage is mountain-dandelion, or , t t t t t o o o o o r r r r r y y y y y

G G G G G r r r r r a a a a a s s s s s s s s s s e e e e e s s s s s

a a a a a n n n n n d d d d d

F F F F F o o o o o shade them, and hide them from predators. from them hide and them, shade These birds use native grasses and forbs to construct their nests, species. ground-nesting other and grouse sage for cover nesting This native grass understory within big sagebrush is excellent r r r r r b b b b b s s s s s restoration is the goal, land managers may need to need may managers land goal, the is restoration community plant native Where rates. germination increase that techniques enhancement and priming seed use and weeds, non-native with competitive are valuable to sage grouse are common dandelion, common are grouse sage to valuable especially are that forbs Some below). “Grazing” (see habitat breeding grouse sage in particularly summer, and spring through continue to growth Terry Rich ￿ only commercially available alternatives. On alternatives. available commercially only the be may perennials non-native or species generalist native using and species, native with revegetation to obstacles greatest the remain seeds native of cost and availability The sites. adjacent from transplant to need may or site project a for seed enough produce to seed local propagate and collect to contractors use monocultures of non-native annuals. non-native of monocultures to preferable be may grasses perennial and forbs non-native sites, degraded severely other wildlife. Use practices that allow forb allow that practices Use wildlife. other and pronghorn, broods, grouse sage of diets the to important extremely are they habitats, sagebrush in cover and composition plant of portion small a only up make may species Maintain native forb diversity. Although forb Although diversity. forb native Maintain

Paul D. Makela MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 15 nestlings (from May through mid-July). Maintain herbaceous cover for nest concealment by protecting the current season’s growth through the nesting season and by managing for at least 50% of annual vegetative growth to remain through the following nesting season (Saab et al. 1995). For sage grouse, average grass height of at least 18 cm (7 in), measured in May and early June, provides adequate cheatgrass and native perennial grasses are mixed, grazing during the dormant period may favor perennial species (Young 1992; Vallentine and Stevens 1994). Where your goal is to protect or recover biological soil crusts, limit grazing to wet periods and winter months. Crusts are more sensitive to damage in dry months and can better tolerate the impact of hooves when wet or frozen. Reduce stock, time grazing, or rotate pastures to reduce or eliminate trampling of ground nests and degree of disturbance (Cole 1990; Belnap 1993; Johansen et al. 1993). Where restoring biological soil crusts is the goal, use exclosures or non-fence methods to eliminate trampling. Inoculating disturbed soils with material from surrounding biological crusts can hasten recovery times (Belnap 1993). ground ground or low in shrubs. Maintain the current season’s growth through mid-July, and manage for 50% or more of the annual vegetative growth to remain through the following nesting season (Saab et al. 1995). ￿ ￿ ￿ ￿ s s s s s t t t t t ), buckwheat, and . s s s s s u u u u u spp r r r r r C C C C C

l l l l l i i i i i o o o o o Trifolium S S S S S

l l l and l l . a a a a a c c c c c spp g g g g g i i i i i n n n g g n n g g g i i i i i

o o o o o z z z z z l l l l l a a lthough not used directly by birds, biological soil crusts are thought by some biologists to promote soil a a a here are many possibilities for harmonizing grazing practices with habitat management for birds. No single grazing strategy is appropriate for all sagebrush habitats, and grazing management should be tailored to the development and productivity in sagebrush habitats, and therefore benefit the native plant community. o o o Melilota Melilota o o

recovery; recovery times depend on the site and debate over recovery times for biological soil crusts, from a few years for visual recovery of the crust structure to several decades for full community To maintain biological soil crusts, minimize soil disturbances. Crusts are sensitive to trampling by hikers, livestock, and vehicles. There is considerable cheatgrass unless perennial grasses are a significant component of the vegetation). In stands where cure. Moderate to heavy spring grazing reduces or eliminates native bunchgrasses by preventing seed- set (but note that deferred grazing can favor deferred grazing. To maintain native bunchgrasses on a given unit, defer grazing until after crucial growth periods, waiting until grasses have begun to concealment. Options could include increasing rest cycles in rest-rotation, two-crop short rotation (early spring before boot stage and fall after seed-set), or distribution) that promote the growth of native grasses and forbs needed by birds for food and Grazing plans will depend on the current condition and plant composition of the range. Use grazing practices (seasons, stocking, kinds of stock, and perennial grass cover, reduce disturbance to biological soil crusts, and prevent sagebrush over- dominance or non-native grass and forb invasion. Use stocking levels that stabilize or increase native yellow yellow salsify, hawksbeard, prickly lettuce, moun- tain-dandelion, sweet-clover and other clover species ( first incubation period for birds that nest on the common yarrow (J. Connelly pers. comm.). Allow herbaceous cover to conceal nests through the r r r r r i i i i i G G B B ￿ ￿ ￿ T G A B other grazers, such as elk and deer, and their influence on vegetation. mosaic of different amounts of shrub cover, perennial grass and forb cover, and openings of bare ground, short grass, or high grass density. Proper seasonal grazing management can also ensure nesting cover and provide protection from trampling of nests or broods during the nesting season. Management plans also need to consider condition and potential of each grazing unit. In general, sagebrush birds will benefit if grazing plans promote a ￿ G G B B 16 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS W W ￿ ￿ these areas in the brood-rearing period. brood-rearing the in areas these abundant insects formanywildlifespecies. Sage grouserelyon and forbs, succulent water, provide They diversity. add shrublands sagebrush within areas riparian and meadows, wet Springs, W W (such as wells and catchments). Be sure to evaluate the benefit of water developments against their effect on effect their against developments water of benefit the evaluate to sure Be catchments). and wells as (such unavailable otherwise is that water harvest or seeps) and springs as (such available already is that water use can wildlife or livestock for developments Water cover. for forbs and grasses and eating, for forbs and insects abundant aquatic and riparian vegetation, the water table, and potential for attracting undesirable animals or plants. or animals undesirable attracting for potential and table, water the vegetation, riparian and aquatic W W brood parasitism on songbird breeding songbird on parasitism brood cowbird brown-headed of influence the increase June) through (April season breeding songbird the during livestock concentrate that Situations condition. site restore to methods rehabilitation other and reseeding with combined be must often and habitats damaged severely of condition the reverse not may livestock removing itself, By degraded. easily are that areas other and below), Developments” “Water streams—see meadows, wet seeps, (springs, sites wet areas, burned recently restoration, undergoing sites types, vegetation rare regionally or locally for option long-term or short- a as considered be can exclusion Livestock protection. needing otherwise or damaged is that area an from livestock removing temporarily Consider cover. nesting sufficient provide to in) (8 cm 20 least at of forbs and grasses perennial of cover residual a retain grouse, sharp-tailed For 1997). Force Task Grouse Sage (Idaho nesting successful for cover herbaceous a a a a a t t t t t e cannot overstate the importance of healthy plant communities around streams, ponds, springs, seeps, wet seeps, springs, ponds, streams, around communities plant healthy of importance the overstate cannot e meadows, and wetlands to birds and other wildlife, especially in arid country. These areas provide water, provide areas These country. arid in especially wildlife, other and birds to wetlands and meadows, e e e e e r r r r r

D D D D D e e e e e v v v v v e e e e e l l l l l o o o o o p p p p p m m m m m e e e e e n n n n n t t t t t s s s s s ground nest. ground under theshrubs.Grazersalsotramplesoilandoccasionallya Excessive grazingremovesthegrassesandforbsbetweeneven ism pressure. ism parasit- high without opportunity breeding mi) 4 or km 6.5 of radius a (within populations songbird local give to and years alternate in concentrations cowbird from units rest to order in use livestock rotating consider possible, Where cowbirds. for sites feeding provide sites watering and feedlots, Corrals, success. Terry Rich ￿ ￿ Sage grouse are attracted to wet areas more areas wet to attracted are grouse Sage publication). this as source Idaho in Birds for Management Habitat Riches: Riparian see birds, for areas riparian managing on information For possible. wherever habitats aquatic and riparian natural enhance and Restore habitats. wetland around and in vegetation the or water natural destroy or degrade that practices avoid sources, water natural of condition and distribution the evaluating After forbs around natural and constructed water constructed and natural around forbs native of growth the enhance and Protect water. free the for than insects associated and forbs succulent of availability the for (available from the same the from (available

Bob Moseley, Conservation Data Center, IDFG MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 17 Livestock Livestock water developments can decrease stock concentrations and distribute grazing more evenly across the range to prevent degradation (Candelaria and Wood 1981). However, the tradeoff is that establishing new water developments can result in degradation of sites not previously grazed or only lightly grazed. Small birds sometimes drown in stock tanks and troughs. Provide escape ramps or floats to prevent drowning (Candelaria and Wood 1981). Organophosphate insecticides (dimethoate and methamidophos at maximum rates) have been shown to cause die-offs and sickness in sage grouse when aerially sprayed on croplands bordered by sagebrush habitat (Blus et al. 1989) and may affect many other species. Burrowing owls and other species attracted to agricultural areas by high densities of small are also at risk from agricultural chemicals (King 1996). ground applications rather than aerial spraying to prevent drift into nontarget areas. Avoid applying pesticides to sharp-tailed and sage grouse breeding habitat during the brood-rearing season (mid-May through mid-July) to reduce the loss of food supply to chicks and avoid the chance of secondary poisoning (Ulliman et al. 1998). Restrict use of insecticides to the minimum applica- tion rates on croplands that border sagebrush habitat. ￿ ￿ ￿ ￿ for grasshop- Nosema locustae s s s s s e e e e e d d d d d i i i i i c c c c c i i i i i t t t t t

c c c c c

In sagebrush shrublands, grasshoppers are traditionally viewed as a major pest, and poor range condition, e e e e e

lthough withdrawal in the U.S. of many organochlorine insecticides, including DDT, eliminated the massive bird die-offs caused by these chemicals, many migratory birds are still exposed to these insecticides on their

s s s s s (November to March) can help prevent damage to these areas (C. Merker pers. comm.). they are necessary, use smooth wires on top and bottom, and don’t string fences across the water. Limiting grazing to the plants’ dormant season ponds, and catchments will protect shoreline and wetland vegetation and benefit birds. However, fences can be hazardous to birds and mammals. If Exclosures Exclosures or non-fencing methods of controlling livestock around riparian habitats, seeps, springs, developments. developments. Enhance water developments for grouse by placing them in known summer ranges and migration routes (Connelly and Doughty 1990). in minimum doses. Avoid broadcast spraying. Use that are least damaging to sharp-tailed grouse such as Sevin bran bait. Target pest control toward key problem areas, and time applications to be effective pathogens (such as pers) instead of broad-spectrum insecticides. Ulliman et al. (1998) recommend using chemicals forms of insecticides. Reduce or avoid the direct toxic effects of insecti- cides on birds by using insecticide baits and natural natural pathogens, suitable crop and grazing practices, pest-resistant crop strains, minimal use of insecticides (George et al. 1995), and using less toxic Include birds in integrated pest management plans for and other insect control, along with Land managers concerned with maintaining productive bird populations should reduce insecti- cide use wherever possible. n n n n n

I I A I ￿ ￿ ￿ ￿ (George et al. 1995). In the long term, insecticide applications that adversely affect insectivorous birds are counterproductive to pest control. themselves are a major protein-rich food source for many shrubsteppe and grassland birds in summer and early fall. Although birds cannot control large pest outbreaks once they have erupted, as predators they play an important role in preventing pest buildups (McEwen 1982). Bird densities will likely decline as insect food sources decline increase the probability and duration of economically damaging grasshopper outbreaks (Lockwood et al. 1988). However, at low, endemic levels grasshoppers play a major role in rangeland ecosystems. Grasshoppers stimulate plant growth by feeding on them and contribute to nutrient cycling by producing litter, and grasshoppers drought, and certain weather patterns can lead to grasshopper outbreaks. Intensive insecticidal control programs that eliminate beneficial insects as well as grasshoppers can trigger a rapid resurgence in pest species and actually wintering grounds in other countries. Incorrect applications of legal insecticides in birds’ breeding ranges also continue to cause direct mortality, sickness, behavioral changes, and reduced survival in many species. The full impact of insecticides on bird behavior and survival is still largely unknown. I I 18 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS P P R R young. of production decreased or failures nest causing activities, breeding bird disrupt also may Humans roadkills. and ￿ ￿ needed. where role natural fire’s fulfill to used be can fire Prescribed sagebrush. of loss and frequency fire in increase subsequent to and invasion cheatgrass to prone areas in prescription management best the is suppression Wildfire Basin). River Columbia the in frequency and intensity wildfire current and historic of discussion a for 1997 al. et Hann (See site. the of aridity and composition, plant topography, climate, the on depending areas, other in occurred frequencies lower at fires larger while shrublands, sagebrush some in norm the been have to appear years 100 to 25 of frequencies at fires patchy small, Historically, cheatgrass. as B P R R ￿ ￿ P P R R r r r e e r r e e e have less impact on native bunchgrasses and forbs and bunchgrasses native on impact less have maturity) after or begins growth (before dormant are grasses and moist is soil the when burns fall late and spring Early storms. rain severe to exposed is soil the when erosion increase can and grasses, native than earlier matures which cheatgrass, favor also fires Midsummer maturity. reached have they before plants destroy they because forbs and grasses perennial native devastate can burns Mid-summer plants. desired of susceptibility and development the consider to timed be should Burns time. and area over sagebrush of ages multiple provide will This seeds. soil-banked or stands upwind from sagebrush of re-establishment gradual allow to designed and scale small a on be should sagebrush dense or continuous in openings create to Burns cally for off-road recreation. off-road for cally specifi- established areas within confined or trails and roads established on vehicles all Keep nestlings. and nests destroy can and erosion, soil to contributes crusts, soil biological and vegetation destroys habitats sagebrush across off-road vehicles Driving below). Development” Oil/Gas and “Mining (see zones riparian forested and cliffs, outcrops, as such areas, nest raptor near or habitat, breeding and leks grouse sage and sharp-tailed near sites recreation placing Avoid ethics. recreation impact minimum- and sites established of use Encourage wetlands. and springs Protect water. contaminate or erosion to contribute not do and vegetation native on impact reduce they so sites recreation Design e e e e e shrub cover. More alarmingly, it promotes the vegetation communities’ conversion to non-native annuals such annuals non-native to conversion communities’ vegetation the promotes it alarmingly, More cover. shrub removes it because habitats sagebrush in birds to detrimental is sagebrush eradicate to areas large over urning invasion, weed fire, of incidence the increase and crusts, soil biological and plants trample may Recreationists habitats. sagebrush degrade also can driving, off-road and biking, hiking, camping, as such activities, ecreation c c c c c s s s s s r r r r r c c c c c e e e e e r r r r r a a a a a i i i i i t t t t t b b b b b i i i i i o o o o o e e e e e d d n n d n d d n n

F F F F F i i i i i r r r r r e e e e e

a a a a a n n n n n d d d d d

W W W W W i i i i i l l l l l d d d d d f f f f f i i i i i r r r r r e e e e e ￿ ￿ ￿ ￿ cattle off recovering sites for one to two growing two to one for sites recovering off cattle Keep medusahead. and cheatgrass aggressive more the to preferable is It birds. to valuable structure some provide may and 1997) (Kaltenecker sites degraded severely on mixtures seed in appropriate be may wheatgrass crested However, species. native outcompete and cover herbaceous continuous a create that species non-native other or wheatgrass crested with reseeding Avoid annuals. native non- of invasion the stem to order in species forb and bunchgrass native with reseeding require may Burns rangeland. sagebrush in species native on impacts minimize to guidelines burning for (1982) al. et Blaisdell and species forb and grass various on impacts fire of summary a for (1983) Young See 1998). Rotenberry 1983; Young 1988; 1983, West 1982; al. et (Blaisdell killing of living targets. living of killing inadvertent or irresponsible avoid to ranges archery and shooting established to practice target Restrict habitat. sagebrush adjacent protect to control fire and weed annual use roads, remaining On below). Fragmentation” “Habitat (see fragmentation and roadkills, invasion, weed reduce will This forbs. and grasses native and sagebrush with roadbeds unused reclaim and roads, of number the Limit trails. established to users these keeping by impacts Reduce erosion. soil to contribute and crusts soil biological and vegetation damage can riders horseback and bikers, mountain hikers, areas, sensitive In MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 19 so they don’t carry fire as easily. However, because greenstrips fragment sagebrush habitat and can bring in more non-native weeds if the seeding is unsuc- cessful (J. Rotenberry pers. comm.), only use greenstripping in areas where there is a high threat of invasion of annual grasses and where there is a real threat to high-value sagebrush sites. For example, the Idaho Sage Grouse Management Plan—1997 (Idaho Sage Grouse Task Force 1997) recommends rating sage grouse wintering and nesting habitats as high priority for wildfire suppression. communities in large and continuous stands wherever possible (see box, “No Net Loss”). n n n n n o o o o o i i i i i t t t t t a a a a a t t t t t loss of sagebrush of loss n n n n n net e e e e e m m m m m g g g g g a a a a a r r r r r F F F F F

t t t t t One option for restoring converted land back to a sagebrush steppe community is the Conser- a a a a a he following activities convert sagebrush shrubland to other habitat types, replacing plants and wildlife with other (often non-native) species. Above, we recommended no net loss of sage- t t t t t i i i i i But how big is big enough? Unfortunately, the minimum or optimum sizes of habitat patches required to b b vation Reserve Program (CRP), a federal set-aside program that pays landowners to plant agricul- tural lands with permanent cover, including native species. Although planned as temporary reserve lands, CRP plantings could provide important habitat to sagebrush birds, especially in areas suffering large losses of sagebrush shrublands. The CRP has had a major positive impact on sharp- tailed grouse populations in Idaho (Ulliman et al. 1998). brush steppe habitat. Where habitat conversions do occur, we recommend the following practices to help reduce impacts to adjacent sagebrush habitat or to provide some of the requirements of sagebrush birds, such as a prey base. T b b b lthough not a management “activity,” habitat fragmentation can result from land conversion to annual grassland or tilled cropland, mining, and development. These activities break sagebrush communities into cheatgrass, or have a tufted (caespitose) growth-form on the landscape. Greenstrips replace cheatgrass and other mat-like annual grasses with bunchgrasses or other plants that remain green, cure later than spread of wildfire and reducing the size of range fires (Pellant 1994). Greenstrips are fuelbreaks of fire-resistant vegetation placed at strategic locations In cheatgrass-dominated landscapes, “greenstripping” offers an option for slowing the seasons; seasons; grazing after a burn can seriously damage soil and native perennials, delaying recovery (Blaisdell et al. 1982). issue is to manage for no steppe habitat and to maintain native vegetation The safest approach to the habitat fragmentation a a a a a H H H A ￿ 130 ha (1/2 section). J. Rotenberry (pers. comm.) suggests that patches should be that size or larger. ￿ sustain populations of birds and other wildlife species are still largely unknown (J. Rotenberry pers. comm.). M. Vander Haegan (pers. comm.), in a study in Washington, did not find sage sparrows on patches smaller than about with increasing disturbance (Knick and Rotenberry 1995; Knick 1996). Nest and cowbird brood parasit- ism may also play a role in reducing bird productivity in fragmented sagebrush habitat, but have not been studied much (T. Rich pers. comm.). vast, continuous landscape of sagebrush habitat. Sage grouse and long-billed curlews are not as productive in small stands of habitat as in large stands. Sagebrush-obligate songbirds (sage thrasher, sage sparrow, and Brewer’s sparrow) are also sensitive to fragmentation. These species prefer larger stands with high shrub cover and decline small and sometimes isolated stands. Habitat fragmentation threatens sagebrush obligate species that evolved in a H H 20 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS I I ￿ ￿ ￿ ￿ management. weed of review complete a provide to document this of scope the beyond far is it and weeds, noxious these eliminating for prescriptions simple no are There habitats. sagebrush of ecology vegetation the change non-natives other and medusahead, cheatgrass, established, Once managers. range facing problem T I mi). 1 x mi (1 km 1.6 x km 1.6 is patches sagebrush three middle the containing square The sparrow. sage the These patches are too small to support area-sensitive species such as (marked sagebrush big Wyoming of patches dark small, the Note Idaho. southern in shrubland sagebrush this fragmented have density) low at crested wheatgrass(marked of seeding rangeland and right) the (on conversion Agricultural I I n n n n n maintain large expanses of sagebrush habitat. sagebrush of expanses large maintain grouse, sharp-tailed and grouse sage benefit To hazards. other and vehicles, with collisions shooting, insecticides, to wildlife expose they and forbs, and grasses invasive and predators, nest cowbirds, support edges These land. altered highly or converted and habitat sagebrush between edge of amount the increase or create that practices and designs Avoid possible. wherever stands between continuity and sagebrush of stands larger existing Maintain Weed control with herbicides, biological agents, and agents, biological herbicides, with control Weed fragmentation. habitat minimizing and disturbances, soil large-scale avoiding levels, stocking livestock controlling species, native of vigor the maintaining by invasion weed of likelihood the reduce forbs, and grasses native of community a contain stands Where v v v v v A overshadows all other concerns. Controlling these invaders is perhaps the most difficult and perplexing and difficult most the perhaps is invaders these Controlling concerns. other all overshadows areas some in and habitats sagebrush remaining to threat major a is forbs and grasses non-native of invasion he a a a a a s s s C s s ) in the middle of the photo and bordering the farmland. the bordering and photo the of middle the in ) i i i i i o o o o o C n n n n n B

o o o o o f f f f f

N N N N N A o o o o o A n n n n n and - - - - - n n n n n B C a a a a a , the latter also having sagebrush having also latter the , t t t t t i i i i i v v v v v C e e e e e

G G G B G G r r r r r a a a a a s s s s s s s s s s e e e e e s s s s s C

a a a a a n n n km 7 to 3 from vary ranges home grouse sage Summer exceed 140 km 140 exceed may ranges home winter grouse Sage requirements. area population’s a define better will populations grouse sage local of habits winter and movements seasonal the surveying and use, habitat year-long for insufficient be may area this However, habitats. to 12 in) provide winter habitat. Sharp-tailed grouse Sharp-tailed habitat. winter provide in) 12 to 10 cm; 30 to (25 shrubs tall and cover canopy >20% to 10% of stands with landscape a across sagebrush will better re-establish if annuals are not already not are annuals if re-establish better will which perennials, fall-dormant seeded of survival enhance can annuals fall-germinating Controlling 1994). al. et (Larson weeds of reinvasion the prevent to species plant native of restoration and reseeding by followed be should techniques mechanical n n d d d d d 2 (1 to 2.5 mi 2.5 to (1

BLM Stock Photo, Burley Field Office F F F F F o o o o o ￿ 1998). al. et (Ulliman ￿ ￿ r r r r r grasslands or croplands. Suppress range Suppress croplands. or grasslands annual to conversion sagebrush Prevent cover. shrub variable and classes height multiple with sagebrush of areas continuous large maintain songbirds, sagebrush-obligate benefit To tating old roads. old tating rehabili- and closing consider and roads of number the Limit weeds. noxious of spread the in role a play and nities commu- sagebrush fragment also Roads grasses. annual by carried wildfire by fragmentation further avoid to and habitat sagebrush remaining augment to communities bunchgrass perennial and sagebrush of restoration require may landscapes Some sagebrush. of areas large eradicate to threaten that fires b b conducive to sharp-tail occupancy sharp-tail to conducive not are agriculture of blocks large population; self-sustaining a support to (acres) hectares of thousands require b b b s s s s s 2 (53 mi (53 2 ) and may be larger in fragmented in larger be may and ) 2 ). Large expanses of expanses Large ). MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 21 Idaho Idaho is using the herbicide sulfometuron-methyl (tradename Oust) to control cheatgrass after fires. It is applied in late fall/early winter or in the early spring prior to seeding and rehabilitation efforts (M. Pellant pers. comm.). Medusahead control appears particularly difficult. Mechanical means of control often do not work on the soils or topography where medusahead invades; herbicidal sprays may be more effective. There is some indication that a few perennial grass species can eventually establish themselves on medusahead- infested sites (Young 1992). outcrops; or riparian areas, springs, and other wetland habitats. The impact of construction and operations on raptor nest sites can be effectively reduced through buffers ground-nesting birds and decreases cover for mammalian prey. If possible, delay haying until ground-nesting birds have fledged. Most will have fledged by late July (Ivey 1995), depending on the area. Reduce or eliminate insecticide use to prevent poisoning birds, reducing insect prey, or eliminating beneficial insects (see “Insecticides” above). To avoid harm to other wildlife, check that fences meet specifications designed to protect deer and pronghorn. Avoid fencing small, scattered sagebrush patches in agricultural areas as this may encourage, rather than discourage, trespass grazing. Sites with unsuitable soils or slopes too steep for farming should be kept in native vegetation as “habitat stepping stones.” t t t t t ￿ ￿ ￿ ￿ ￿ n n n n n e e e e e m m m m m p p p p p o o o o o l l l l l e e e e e v v v v v e e e e e D D D D D

s s s s s a a a a a G G G G G / / / / / l l l l l i i i i i O O O O O

d d d d d n n n n n a a a a a g g g g g

n n n n n g g g g g i i i i i n n n n n

i i i i i m m m m m concurrently with mining operations, can restore sagebrush habitat for birds (see discussions under “General ining and oil/gas development should only be a short-term habitat conversion. Land reclamation, initiated n n n n n remnant sagebrush patches have value to some species. Certain practices can be adopted to reduce farming’s illage fragments and completely alters sagebrush habitat to the detriment of sagebrush birds. However, even r r r r r

i i i i i Haying often destroys nests of short-eared owls, vesper sparrows, sharp-tailed grouse, and other habitat protection can provide important habitat features for many birds during breeding, wintering, and migration. habitat for many songbirds. Provide an unplowed buffer of at least 30 m (100 ft) around springs, seeps, wetlands, and riparian habitats. Even small-scale Maintain riparian woodlands, unplowed borders and edges, and vegetated waterways to provide nest and roost sites for raptors and shrikes and foraging short-eared owl, and to a lesser extent the ferrugi- nous hawk and prairie falcon, all use agricultural areas during winter for foraging (Young 1987). habitat for small mammals and wintering songbirds. This in turn benefits raptors. The burrowing owl and Minimum till and no-till systems maintain vegetative cover through the non-breeding season and provide 1994). The U.S. Bureau of Land Management in spring grazing before seed production may reduce cheatgrass and prepare a unit for reseeding with desirable perennial grasses (Vallentine and Stevens reseed. Deferred grazing plans may favor cheatgrass if perennial grasses are not a significant component of the unit. Where cheatgrass dominates, heavy In cheatgrass-dominated units, managers may have only two options—manage the unit as an annual grassland, or intensively control cheatgrass and rooted rooted and competing for moisture when the perennials germinate in spring (R. Hill pers. comm.). wintering habitat; raptor nest sites on cliffs and Avoid placing mines, oil and gas drill sites, sand or gravel pits, geothermal sites, and roads in or next to sensitive habitats such as grouse lek, breeding, or a a a a a M M F F M M T F ￿ ￿ impacts on birds. ￿ ￿ ￿ Sagebrush Habitat Management” and “Habitat Fragmentation”). M M F F 22 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS R R ￿ ￿ habitats. native other to proximity and size their on depend will support can areas such wildlife of abundance and kinds The landscapes. developed near and within even habitats native conserve can planning careful However, raccoons. and skunks, ravens, crows, , domestic D R old. topsoil, a seed mix, or transplanting shrubs. This site is about 7 years in stored seeds seeds, wind-blown from reestablished be can Sagebrush will result in a mosaic similar to what occurs in an unmined area. topography in Variation habitat. native the with in blend to contoured This shrub reestablishment area at the Skull Point Mine in Wyoming is R R e e e e e before sunrise to three hours after sunrise. after hours three to sunrise before hour one from grouse) sharp-tailed for June through March grouse, sage for May through (March season breeding the during lek a of mi) (0.5 m 800 within disturbances noise loud and mechanical, physical, avoiding and lek a of yd) (400 m 365 within ments develop- no recommend (1997) Force Task Grouse Sage Idaho the and (1998) al. et Ulliman tion. reproduc- successful for important is season mating the during disturbance from leks grouse of Protection timing. and buffers appropriate on advice local for agencies wildlife federal or state Contact factors. other and topography, intervening activities, of duration and type year, of time on based vary will These restrictions. timing and openings as native vegetation communities. vegetation native as openings these maintain to use land Manage commons. and parks public as habitats native of space” “open maintain and promote should planning Large-scale asphalt, lawns, and landscaped parks. Residential areas also harbor animals that prey on birds or eggs, such as such eggs, or birds on prey that animals harbor also areas Residential parks. landscaped and lawns, asphalt, s s evelopments generally eliminate sagebrush habitat entirely by totally converting shrublands to buildings, to shrublands converting totally by entirely habitat sagebrush eliminate generally evelopments s s s i i i i i d d d d d e e e e e n n n n n t t t t t i i i i i a a a a a l l l l l

a a a a a n n n n n d d d d d

U U U U U r r r r r b b b b b a a a a a n n n n n

D D D D D e e e e e v v v v v e e e e e l l l l l o o o o o p p p p p m m m m m ￿ ￿ ￿ ￿ and other wildlife attracted to the water. the to attracted wildlife other and bats, birds, exclude to off closed otherwise or fenced, netted, be should wastes mining containing Ponds habitat. sagebrush adjacent and reclamation both protect to plans control weed and fire Prepare spaces so they connect with surrounding native surrounding with connect they so spaces open Design habitats. non-native and native between ecotones and edges reduce and fragmentation, minimize habitat, interior increase to areas large for plan habitats, native of space open designing When on a case-by-case basis. case-by-case a on necessity their determine fences, by posed hazards of because However, 1990). al. et Romney 1986; al. et (Richardson established well is vegetation until jackrabbits, as such grazers, wild and livestock both from site a protect to necessary be may Fencing 1986.) al. et (Richardson strips separate in seeded are they if rates seeding lower at established be can species herbaceous e e e e e n n n n n t t t t t John Erickson, Wyoming Dept. of Environmental Quality ￿ ￿ shrubs, but a mixture of shrubs and shrubs of mixture a but shrubs, ￿ Avoid planting monocultures. planting Avoid after possible as soon as areas Reclaim Grasses and forbs compete with young with compete forbs and Grasses an excellent way to reestablish this reestablish to way excellent an is topsoil saving so seeds, soil-banked from grow will sagebrush Big species. native with compete that species plant non-native using avoid and available, if stock seed genetic local with Reseed 1980). (Karr area surrounding the in habitats and species plant of diversity the reflects that vegetation of complex a for plan Carefully pattern. mosaic a promote that microsites provide will area surrounding the to similar topography Providing species. sagebrush habitat. sagebrush to recovery the up speeds and time one any at converted habitat of amount the reduces This activities. of completion MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 23 adjacent adjacent sagebrush habitat. Restore areas disturbed by construction, using native plant species. Use native plant species in landscaping for parks, homes, shopping areas, and other developments. Although not a substitute for native habitat, such plantings can provide foraging opportunities, nest sites for some bird species, and migration stopover habitat. Avoid or minimize insecticide and herbicide use on lawns and gardens. As alternatives, landscape with native plants, and encourage birds, bats, and beneficial insects to help control insect pests. Residents can help protect native birds by keeping their cats indoors and by not allowing cats and dogs to run free in adjacent sagebrush habitat. Residents should also avoid attracting other predators by covering garbage and not leaving out food for pets. ￿ ￿ ￿ s s s s s k k k k k r r r r r a a a a a ” . . . We have modified this ocean of sagebrush just as surely m m m m m “ as we have transformed tall-grass prairie with the plow. . . . Unlike pristine wilderness, it requires management. . . . The challenge: juggling a billion acres worth of ecologic, economic, and political realities with deftness, wisdom, farsightedness, and tolerance. We should wish ourselves luck. e e e e e R R R R R

g g g g g n n n n n i i i i i d d d d d u u u u u l l l l l c c c c c n n n n n immediate construction areas to avoid destroying such as conservation easements, to maintain wildlife open space in sagebrush habitat. Confine all construction-related disturbance to habitat fragmentation. Where possible, locate developments in peripheral areas, not interior portions of sagebrush stands. Use tax incentives, preserve large commons of native vegetation. Design subdivision of ranchlands so that native habitats in each subdivided lot are next to one another, reducing On a local scale, design housing developments, shopping areas, industrial parks, and other develop- ments so that homes and buildings are in clusters and better than narrow ones, but the ideal width is unknown. habitats. habitats. Avoid creating small patches or narrow strips of habitat except as possible corridors between larger habitat patches. Wide habitat corridors are o o o o o C C brush sea. We have produced this publication out of concern for the birds, other wildlife, and plants of sagebrush country. Now it’s up to you to put these recommendations to work, to turn the tide for the wildlife and plants of the sage- C ￿ ￿ C C rublands. ogical soil S S S S S N N N N N O O O O O I I I I I T T T T T A A A A A D D D D D N N N N N E E E E E M M M M M M M M M M O O O O O C C C C C E E E E E R R R R R F F F F F

O O O O O D D D D D

crop short rotation, or deferred grazing. deferred or shortrotation, crop season. Maintain remain. to growth vegetative annual of 50% least at for cover. nesting grouse for height grass adequate temporally. or spatially insecticides. spraying. shrublands. sagebrush N N N N N Recommended Action Limit grazing to wet periods and winter months. winter and periods wet to grazing Limit nesting the avoid to pastures rotate or grazing, time stock, Reduce manage and season nesting the through growth season’s current Protect livestock. remove Temporarily years alternate in use livestock rotate concentrations; livestock Minimize Retain natural water flow. water natural Retain forbs. native of growth enhance and Protect out. livestock keep to methods non-fencing or exclosures Use season. dormant plants’ the to grazing Limit areas. wet sensitive from away facilities watering livestock Develop floats. or ramps escape Provide programs. management pest integrated in birds Include Avoid insecticide use during grousebroad-spectrum of instead pathogens natural brood-rearingand baits insecticide Use season. aerial than rather applications ground use spraying; broadcast Avoid bordering croplands on rates application minimum the to use Restrict Y Y Y Y Y A A A A A R R R R R

S S S S S A A A A A L L L L L M M M M M A A A A A SUMMARY OF SUMMARY M M M M M O O O O O U U U U U G G G G G

MGT. RECOMMENDATIONS MGT. S S S S S T T T T T N N N N N E E E E E M M M M M E E E E E G G G G G A A A A A N N N N N A A A A A M M M M M seeps, and riparian areas. riparian and seeps,

Bird Management Goal Promote growth of native grasses and forbs.and grasses native of growth Promote crusts. soil biological Protect/restore two- rest-rotation as such plans grazing and levels stocking proper Use Avoid trampling ground nests. cover. nesting herbaceous Maintain shrublands. sagebrush degraded Restore parasitism. cowbird Reduce springs, in vegetation and quality water Maintain Reduce bird mortality. bird Reduce mortality. bird Reduce D D D D D R R R R R I I I I I B B B B B more details and for general recommendations for sagebrush shrublands, sagebrush shrubs, understory grasses and forbs, and biol For ummary of bird management goals and recommended actions to meet those goals for different activities that occur in sagebrush sh sagebrush in occur that activities different for goals those meet to actions recommended and goals management bird of ummary Activity S crusts, see the section “How to Help Birds in Sagebrush Habitats.” Grazing Water developments Water Insecticides 24 SUMMARY OF

MGT. RECOMMENDATIONS 25

reseeding with perennial grasses. perennial with reseeding

Use heavy spring grazing to reduce cheatgrass and prepare a unit for unit a prepare and cheatgrass reduce to grazing spring heavy Use

Restore native species following weed control. weed following species native Restore Reseed native plant species and control fall-germinating annuals. fall-germinating control and species plant native Reseed

Minimize habitat fragmentation. habitat Minimize

Avoid large-scale disturbances. large-scale Avoid

Control livestock stocking levels. stocking livestock Control and forbs. and non-native invaders. non-native

Invasion of non-native grasses non-native of Invasion Maintain existing sites that are relatively free from free relatively are that sites existing Maintain Maintain the vigor of native species. native of vigor the Maintain

Limit the number of roads; rehabilitate old roads. old rehabilitate roads; of number the Limit

Restore sagebrush and perennial bunchgrass communities. bunchgrass perennial and sagebrush Restore

sagebrush.

Suppress range fires that threaten to eradicate large, continuous areas of areas continuous large, eradicate to threaten that fires range Suppress

Minimize sagebrush conversion to annual grasslands or croplands. or grasslands annual to conversion sagebrush Minimize

Maintain large expanses of sagebrush habitat. sagebrush of expanses large Maintain

Avoid designs and practices that create or increase the amount of edge. of amount the increase or create that practices and designs Avoid sensitive species. sensitive

Habitat fragmentation Maintain large areas of sagebrush for area- for sagebrush of areas large Maintain fragmentation Habitat Manage for no no for Manage loss of sagebrush habitat. sagebrush of loss net

sagebrush sites. sagebrush

cheatgrass invasion or will destroy high-value destroy will or invasion cheatgrass

Prevent large-scale wildfires that will result in result will that wildfires large-scale Prevent Use green-stripping if needed. if green-stripping Use

Keep cattle off recovering sites until native grasses become established. become grasses native until sites recovering off cattle Keep

Reseed burns with native bunchgrass and forb species. forb and bunchgrass native with burns Reseed

adaptations to late season fires and to discourage cheatgrass. discourage to and fires season late to adaptations

Burn late in early spring or fall to take advantage of native grasses’ native of advantage take to fall or spring early in late Burn grasses and forbs. and grasses

Prescribed fire and wildfire and fire Prescribed Allow reestablishment of sagebrush and native and sagebrush of reestablishment Allow Keep burns to a small scale and patchy distribution. patchy and scale small a to burns Keep

Restrict target practice to established shooting and archery ranges. archery and shooting established to practice target Restrict

and nestlings. and

Reduce bird mortality. bird Reduce Keep vehicles on established trails and roads to prevent harm to nests to harm prevent to roads and trails established on vehicles Keep

tion.

Limit the number of roads; reclaim excess roadbeds with native vegeta- native with roadbeds excess reclaim roads; of number the Limit

established trails and roads. and trails established

Encourage use of established sites, including keeping vehicles on vehicles keeping including sites, established of use Encourage

Protect springs and wetlands from recreation use. recreation from wetlands and springs Protect

breeding habitat or raptor nests. raptor or habitat breeding

Recreation Reduce impact on bird habitat. bird on impact Reduce Recreation Avoid placing recreation sites near sage grouse and sharp-tailed grouse sharp-tailed and grouse sage near sites recreation placing Avoid the non-breeding season. non-breeding the waterways. habitat. stopover migration and sites, nest area. insects. pest control that insects beneficial and habitat. sagebrush food). pet (i.e., sources sites, or riparian and wetland areas. wetland and riparian or sites, leks. pits using netting, fences, or other methods. other or fences, netting, using pits stock. genetic Recommended Action Use minimum till and no-till systems to maintain vegetative cover through cover vegetative maintain to systems no-till and till minimum Use vegetated and edges, and borders unplowed riparianwoodlands, Protect fledged. have birds ground-nesting after until haying Delay use. insecticide eliminate or Reduce spaces. open in vegetation native Retain space. open maintain to incentives tax Use opportunities, foraging provide to landscaping in species plant native Use construction immediate the to disturbance construction-related Confine species. plant native using areas disturbed Restore insecticides. of use minimize or Avoid bats, birds, of presence the encourage to plants native with Landscape adjacent in runfree to dogs and cats allow don’t and indoors cats Keep food other reducing and garbage covering by predators other Discourage Avoid developing near grouse breeding or wintering habitat, raptor nest raptor habitat, wintering or breeding grouse near developing Avoid grouse and sites nest raptor protect to restrictions timing and buffers Use Prepare fire and weed control plans. control weed and fire Prepare oil and ponds waste mining from wildlife other and bats, birds, Exclude local and species plant of diversity a using sites disturbed Reclaim species. non-native using Avoid grazers. wild and livestock from sites reclaimed newly Protect SUMMARY OF SUMMARY MGT. RECOMMENDATIONS MGT. shrikes and foraging areas for songbirds. for areas foraging and shrikes developments. to adjacent habitat. wildfires and non-native forb and grass invasion. grass and forb non-native and wildfires Bird Management Goal Provide prey for raptors. for prey Provide and raptors for sites roosting and nesting Maintain mortality. bird Reduce and within habitat foraging and nesting Provide adjacent on development of impacts Reduce mortality. bird Reduce Protect sensitive wildlife habitats. wildlife sensitive Protect Protect reclamation and adjacent habitat from habitat adjacent and reclamation Protect mortality. wildlife Reduce habitat. sagebrush Restore Activity Farming urban and Residential development Mining 26 LITERATURE CITED 27 K. Sanders and J. in K. Sanders and J. in W. D. Edge and S. L. Olson-Edge, D D D D D in E E E E E G. K. Tsukamoto and S. J. Stiver, editors, Stiver, J. S. and Tsukamoto K. G. T T T T T in I I I I I C C C C C

cryptogamic soil crusts in National Park. Great Basin Naturalist 50:321-325. March). Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Pocatello. wildlife water in developments Idaho. southwestern Pages 167-173 sagebrush and bitterbrush. Pages 22-26 Durham, editors, Rangeland fire effects: a symposium. USDI Bureau of Land Management, Boise, ID. rangelands—the Great Basin of southeastern Oregon: sage grouse. USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management, General Technical Report PNW-187. stock watering facilities. Rangelands 3:194-196. sagebrush canopy cover using reduced rates of Spike 20P. Pages 206-208 editors, Proceedings of a symposium on sustaining rangeland ecosystems. Oregon State University, SR 953, Corvallis. on nongame birds. Journal of Wildlife Management 46:945- 952. grassland birds. Wilson Bulletin 95:647-655. following fire in a Montana shrubsteppe. Prairie Naturalist 19:153-158. 1984. Responses of birds, rodents, and vegetation to livestock exclosure in a semidesert grassland site. Journal of Range Management 37:239-242. M. H. Schroeder. 1976. Conservation committee report on effects of alteration of sagebrush communities on the associated avifauna. Wilson Bulletin 88:165-171. for maintenance of sage grouse habitats. Wildlife Society Bulletin 5:99-106. Durham, editors, Rangeland fire effects: a symposium. USDI Bureau of Land Management, Boise, ID. successional changes. Pages 7-11 E E E E E Cole, D. N. 1990. Trampling disturbance and recovery of Connelly, J. W. 1997. Personal communication (e-mail, Connelly, J. W., and L. A. Doughty. 1990. Sage grouse use of Call, M. W., and C. Maser. 1985. Wildlife habitats in managed Candelaria, L. M., and M. K. Wood. 1981. Wildlife use of Carrithers, V. F., and M. B. Halstvedt. 1996. Reduction of big Castrale, J. S. 1982. Effects of two sagebrush control methods Castrale, J. S. 1983. Selection of song perches by sagebrush- Bock, C. E., and J. E. Bock. 1987. Avian habitat occupancy habitat Avian 1987. Bock. E. J. and E., C. Bock, Bock, C. E., J. H. Bock, W. R. Kenney, and V. M. Hawthorne. Braun, C. E., M. F. Baker, R. L. Eng, J. S. Gashwiler, and Braun, C. E., T. Britt, and R. O. Wallestad. 1977. Guidelines Britton, C. M., and R. G. Clark. 1984. Effects of fire on Bunting, S. C. 1984. Fires in sagebrush-grass ecosystems: R R R R R U U U U U T T T T T ) A A A A A R R R R R E E E E E T T T T T I I I I I L L L S. B. Monsen and L L in Numenius americanus A. Poole and F. Gill, editors, Gill, F. and Poole A. in ). No. 172 J. M. Peek and P. D. Dalke, editors, Proceedings of in Buteo regalis mice to prescribed burning in ponderosa pine. Journal of Wildlife Management 47:836-840. organophosphorus insecticides on sage grouse in southeast- ern Idaho. Journal of Wildlife Management 53:1139-1146. INT-134. Craig, E. H. Craig, and D. K. Halford. 1989. Effects of Managing Intermountain rangelands—sagebrush-grass ranges. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report the wildlife-livestock relationships symposium. University of Idaho Forest, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station, Moscow. semiarid rangelands. Pages 179-185 inoculant use and assessment methods. Great Basin Naturalist 53:89-95. The birds of . The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, and American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, DC. grazing on long-billed curlew ( breeding behavior and ecology in southwestern Idaho. Pages 74-85 sparrows. Journal of Wildlife Management 36:534-544. ment of annual rangelands. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report INT-GTR-313. Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, UT. S. G. Kitchen, editors, Proceedings: Ecology and manage- ( site selection by Swainson’s hawk. Condor 84:153-159. Bureau of Land Management, Vale District, Vale, OR. effects and recovery. USDI Bureau of Land Management effects and recovery. Technical Bulletin 91-2. Salmon, ID. ment over 25 years without grazing on sagebrush-dominated rangeland in south-eastern Idaho. Journal of Range Management 34:25-29. exposed to experimental food reductions. Condor 96:739- 748. 1994. Survival and growth of nestling vesper sparrows Bock, C. E., and J. E. Bock. 1983. Responses of birds and deer Blus, L. J., C. S. Staley, C. J. Henny, G. W. Pendleton, T. H. Blaisdell, J. P., R. B. Murray, and E. D. McArthur. 1982. Belnap, J. 1994. Potential role of cryptobiotic soil crusts in Belnap, J. 1993. Recovery rates of cryptobiotic crusts: Bicak, T. K., R. L. Redmond, and D. A. Jenni. 1982. Effects of Best, L. B. 1972. First-year effects of sagebrush control on two Bechard, M. J., and J. K. Schmutz. 1995. Ferruginous hawk Bammann, A. 1997. Personal communication (letter, April). Bechard, M. J. 1982. Effect of vegetative cover on foraging Anderson, L. D. 1991. Bluebunch wheatgrass defoliation: Anderson, J. E., and K. E. Holte. 1981. Vegetation develop- Adams, J. S., R. L. Knight, L. C. McEwen, and T. L. George. L. T. and McEwen, C. L. Knight, L. R. S., J. Adams, 28 LITERATURE CITED Dobler, F. C., J. Eby, C. Perry, S. Richardson, and M. Vander M. and Richardson, S. Perry, C. Eby, J. C., F. Dobler, sage of conservation and Management 1995. S. D. Dobkin, of management and Conservation 1994. S. D. Dobkin, in trends Population 1994. George. L. T. and F., D. DeSante, comments, (review communication Personal 1997. M. Denny, 1981. Concannon. M. D. and Leckenby, A. D. E., J. Dealy, and Crawford, E. J. Stanton, C. D. Pyrah, B. D. D., P. Dalke, Reese. P. K. and Apa, D. A. Wakkinen, L. W. W., J. Connelly, 1988. Gates. J. R. and Browers, W. H. W., J. Connelly, and Movements 1983. Markham. D. O. and W., J. Connelly, England, A. S., M. J. Bechard, and C. S. Houston. 1997. Houston. S. C. and Bechard, J. M. S., A. England, The 1988. Wheye. D. and Dobkin, S. D. R., P. Ehrlich, of nesting Upland 1977. Lokemoen. T. J. and F., H. Duebbert, on emphasis with grouse sage of Status 1994. S. M. Drut, Gates, R. J. 1983. Sage grouse, lagomorph, and pronghorn use pronghorn and lagomorph, grouse, Sage 1983. J. R. Gates, sagebrush- on populations Breeding-bird 1968. G. F. Feist, Swainson’s hawk ( hawk Swainson’s York. New Schuster, & Simon birds. American North of history natural the to guide field a handbook: birder’s 9:33-40. Naturalist Prairie owls. short-eared and hawks, marsh bitterns, American OR. Portland, Portland, of Society Audubon Washington. and Oregon in populations Olympia. Wildlife, and Fish of Department Washington report. Research relationships. wildlife/vegetation and ownership, extent, ecosystem: shrubsteppe Washington’s of Status 1996. Haegen. OR. Portland, ment, Manage- Land of Bureau USDI ecosystems. shrubsteppe of health ecological the for species denominative grouse, Moscow. Press, Idaho of University Plains. Great and Rockies Northern the in landbirds migrant neotropical 15:173-190. Biology Avian in Studies America. North western of landbirds the OR. Audubon, Mountain Blue October). 29 PNW-120. Report Technical General Service Forest USDA wildlife. to importance their and communities plant Oregon: southeastern of Basin Great rangelands—the managed in habitats Wildlife 27:811-841. Management Wildlife of Journal Idaho. in grouse sage of management and productivity Ecology, 1963. Schlatterer. F. E. 55:521-524. Management Wildlife of Journal Idaho. southeastern in sites nest of use grouse Sage 1991. 52:116-122. Management Wildlife of Journal Idaho. southeastern in grouse sage of movements Seasonal 47:169-177. Management Wildlife of Journal Idaho. southeastern in grouse sage of concentrations radionuclide NV. Vegas, Las Management, Land of Bureau development. water Wildlife 22:691-695. Notes Field Audubon Montana. central in habitat grassland DC. Washington, Union, Ornithologists’ American and PA, Philadelphia, Sciences, Natural of Academy The America. North of birds The editors, Gill, F. and Buteo swainsoni Buteo ). No. 265 No. ). in A. Poole Hann, W. J., J. L. Lyons, M. G. Karl, P. F. Hessburg, R. E. R. Hessburg, F. P. Karl, G. M. Lyons, L. J. J., W. Hann, J. and Csuti, B. Lippincott, G. Butterfield, B. R., C. Groves, DeLong. K. A. and Drut, S. M. Crawford, A. J. A., M. Gregg, grass range of Selectivity 1976. Berry. G. and J., C. Goebel, hawk Ferruginous 1983. Stewart. E. R. and S., D. Gilmer, 1995. Petersen. E. B. and McEwen, C. L. T., L. George, Haug, E. A., B. A. Millsap, and M. S. Martell. 1993. Martell. S. M. and Millsap, A. B. A., E. Haug, activity Movements, 1990. Oliphant. W. L. and A., E. Haug, golden the and Buteos 1989. Bloom. H. P. and L., D. Harlow, Hejl, S. J., and R. E. Woods. 1991. Bird assemblages in old- in assemblages Bird 1991. Woods. E. R. and J., S. Hejl, Holt, D. W., and S. M. Leasure. 1993. Short-eared owl ( owl Short-eared 1993. Leasure. M. S. and W., D. Holt, Hill, R. 1997. Personal communication (e-mail, 29 October). Leonard, R. A. Gravenmier, and B. G. Smith. 1997. Smith. G. B. and Gravenmier, A. R. Leonard, G. S. McNicholl, H. C. Menakis, P. J. Long, G. D. Keane, 372pp. Boise. Game, and Fish of Department Idaho wildlife. Idaho’s of Atlas 1997. Scott. M. 58:162-166. Management Wildlife of Journal Oregon. in nests grouse sage of predation and cover Vegetational 1994. 395. 29:393- Management Range of Journal birds. local by seeds 46:146-157. Management Wildlife of Journal Dakota. North in use habitat and populations 48:336-342. Management Range of Journal populations. bird breeding rangeland on programs control grasshopper of Effects Bozeman. University, State Montana thesis. M.S. Laboratory. Engineering of a sagebrush grassland burn site on the Idaho National 1055) 339- (pages 3 Chapter Basin. the of dynamics Landscape Burrowing owl ( owl Burrowing 54:27-35. Management Wildlife of Journal Saskatchewan. in owls burrowing of use habitat and patterns, DC. Washington, Federation, Wildlife National 12. No. Series Technical and Scientific workshop. and symposium management raptor western the of ings 102-110 Pages eagle. OR. Portland, Station, Research Northwest Pacific GTR-405. PNW- Service, Forest USDA II. Vol. Basins: Great and Klamath the of portions and Basin River Columbia Interior the in components ecosystem of assessment An editors, Pages 93-100 Pages assessment. preliminary a Mountains: Rocky northern the in stands pine Douglas-fir/ponderosa rotation-aged and growth DC. Washington, Union, Ornithologists’ American and Philadelphia, Sciences, Natural of Academy The America. North of birds The editors, Gill, F. and flammeus WA. Service, Wildlife and Fish U.S. Pullman. University, State Washington management. its and species the Douglas-fir: Interior proceedings, Symposium editors, Washington, DC. Washington, Union, Ornithologists’ American and Philadelphia, Sciences, Natural of Academy The America. North of birds in T. M Quigley and S. J. Arbelbide, technical Arbelbide, J. S. and Quigley M T. ). No. 62 No. ). in D. M. Baumgartner and J. E. Lotan, E. J. and Baumgartner M. D. Speotyto cunicularia Speotyto in A. Poole and F. Gill, editors, The editors, Gill, F. and Poole A. in B. G. Pendleton, editor, Proceed- ). No. 61 No. ). in A. Poole Asio LITERATURE CITED 29 W. D. W. D. Edge D. W. in in J. M. Peek and P. D. Dalke, The national atlas of the of atlas national The in in J. Verner, M. L. Morrison, and C. J. Ralph, in and S. L. Olsen-Edge, editors, Proceedings—Sustaining Rangeland Ecosystems Symposium. Oregon State University, Corvallis. Montana: special emphasis on possible effects of chlori- nated hydrocarbon insecticides. M.S. thesis. University of Montana, Missoula. shrubs and fledgling roost sites by loggerhead shrikes istics of disturbed shrubsteppe habitats in southwestern Idaho (U.S.A). Landscape Ecology 12:287-297. correspondence among shrubsteppe bird habitats. Condor 92:45-53. crickets eaten by birds. Auk 60:589-591. 1:7,500,000). Pages 90-91 U.S.A. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC (as cited in West 1988). communication (e-mail, 26 October). Richland, WA. January). Bureau of Land Management, Grand Junction, CO. habitat preference by bird-centered vegetation sampling. Pages 37-43 editors, Wildlife 2000: Modeling habitat relationships of terrestrial . University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. management and weed invasion. Pages 30-31 editors, Proceedings of the wildlife-livestock relationships symposium. University of Idaho Forest, Wildlife, and Range Experiment Station, Moscow. managing wildlife on rangelands. Pages 17-23 Edge and S. L. Olsen-Edge, editors, Proceedings— Sustaining rangeland ecosystems symposium. Oregon State University, SR 953, Corvallis. istics of fragmented shrubsteppe habitats and breeding birds. Conservation Biology 9:1059-1071. ecosystem. Prairie Naturalist 27:129-146. Naturalist Prairie ecosystem. fortieth parallel. Clarence King, geologist-in-charge. Part 3: Ornithology. Robert Ridgway. Government Printing Office (as cited in Ryser 1985). ecology of burrowing owls in southwestern Idaho. M.S. thesis. Boise State University, Boise, ID. 160pp. sage grouse. Pages 113-123 Leedy, R. R. 1972. The status of prairie falcons in western Leu, M. 1995. The feeding ecology and the selection of nest Knopf, F. L., J. A. Sedgwick, and D. B. Inkley. 1990. Regional Knowlton, G. F., and F. C. Harmston. 1943. Grasshopper and Küchler, A. W. 1970. Potential natural vegetation (map at scale LaFramboise, B., and N. LaFramboise. 1997. Personal Lambeth, R. 1998. Personal communication (letter, 14 Larson, D. L., and C. E. Bock. 1984. Determining avian Larson, L., R. Sheley, and M. McInnis. 1994. Vegetation Knick, S. T. 1996. New concepts in landscape ecology for Knick, S. T., and J. T. Rotenberry. 1995. Landscape character- Knick, S. T., and J. T. Rotenberry. 1997. Landscape character- King, C. 1877. geological exploration of the of exploration geological States United 1877. C. King, King, R. A. 1996. Post-fledging dispersal and behavior Klebenow, D. A. 1982. Livestock grazing interactions with W. D. Edge D. W. in S. B. Monsen and S. G. Kitchen, in R. M. DeGraff and N. G. Tilghman, editors, in Game, Boise, ID. 34pp. birds in western rangelands. Pages 148-149 Missoula. management plan—1997. Idaho Department of Fish and monitoring program: distribution and habitat relationships. USDA Forest Service Region 1 contract second report. Division of Biological Sciences, University of Montana, tailed hawk in southern Saskatchewan. Blue Jay 41:99-109. Abstract only. Proceedings—Raptor Research Foundation Meeting, 4-6 November 1993, Charlotte, NC. editors, Proceedings: Ecology and management of annual rangelands. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report INT-GTR-313. Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, UT. to sagebrush removal in a high elevation sagebrush steppe Sisson. 1986. Native seed preference of shrubsteppe rodents, birds and : the relationships of seed attributes and seed use. Oecologia 68:327-337. flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. Timber Press, Portland, OR. grasslands for nongame birds. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report INT-86. Pages 88-97 Workshop proceedings: Management of western forests and grazing on breeding birds of uncultivated upland grasslands of the northern Great Plains. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service Wildlife Research Report No. 15. Washington, DC. characteristics of some ground-nesting, non-passerine birds of northern grasslands. Prairie Naturalist 24:67-84. conversation, January). Bureau of Land Management, Boise, ID. western Snake River Plain. M.S. thesis. Boise State University, Boise, ID. 99pp. Great Basin Naturalist 53:73-88. following post-fire rehabilitation on rangelands of the of rangefire on soil algal crusts in semiarid shrubsteppe of the Lower Columbia Basin and their subsequent recovery. and S. L. Olson-Edge, editors, Proceedings of a sympo- sium on sustaining rangeland ecosystems, Oregon State University, SR 953, Corvallis. following following wildfire on a sagebrush semidesert site in central Utah. Pages 56-62 Ivey, G. L. 1996. Management considerations for wetland Idaho Sage Grouse Task Force. 1997. Idaho sage grouse Houston, C. S., and M. J. Bechard. 1983. and the red- Hutto, R. L. 1995. U.S.F.S. Northern Region songbird Houston, C. S. 1993. The Swainson’s hawk productivity crash. Kerley, L. L., and S. H. Anderson. 1995. Songbird responses Kelrick, M. I., J. A. MacMahon, R. R. Parmenter, V.and D. Kartesz, J. P. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular Karr, J. R. 1980. Strip-mine reclamation and bird habitats. Kantrud, H. A., and R. L. Kologiski. 1982. Effects of soil and Kantrud, H. A., and K. F. Higgins. 1992. Nest and nest site Kaltenecker, J. H. 1998. Personal communication (telephone Kaltenecker, J. H. 1997. The recovery of microbiotic crusts Johansen, J. R., J. Ashley, and W. R. Rayburn. 1993. Effects Hosten, P. E., and N. E. West. 1994. Cheatgrass dynamics Cheatgrass 1994. West. E. N. and E., P. Hosten, 30 LITERATURE CITED Page, J. L., N. Dodd, T. O. Osborne, and J. A. Carson. 1978. Carson. A. J. and Osborne, O. T. Dodd, N. L., J. Page, of management and biology, Status, 1993. R. R. Olendorff, of ecology establishment and Germination 1994. E. S. Meyer, comments, (review communication Personal 1997. C. Merker, mammal small and Bird 1990. Clary. P. W. and E., D. Medin, a in birds breeding passerine and Grazing 1986. E. D. Medin, (phone communication Personal 1998. R. McQuivey, McEwen, L. C. 1982. Review of grasshopper pesticides vs. pesticides grasshopper of Review 1982. C. L. McEwen, field their America: North of hawks The 1935. B. J. May, Wildlife 1984. Anderson. G. R. and Thomas, W. J. C., Maser, 5 (e-mail, communication Personal 1997. P. Makela, steppe in Evolution 1982. Thompson. N. J. and N., R. Mack, of Invasion 1981. N. R. Mack, 1985. Hansen. M. R. and Uresk, W. D. G., J. MacCracken, Long- 1988. Onsager. A. J. and Kemp, P. W. A., J. Lockwood, of Land Management, Boise, ID. 84pp. ID. Boise, Management, Land of Bureau USDI Report, Special Center Assistance Technical and Research Raptor review. a hawks: ferruginous UT. Ogden, Station, Research Intermountain GTR-313. INT- Report Technical General Service Forest USDA lands. range- annual of management and Ecology Proceedings: 244-251 Pages restoration. community for implications sagebrush: big Cheney. University, Washington Eastern October). 18 UT. Ogden, INT-425. Report Technical General Service Forest USDA Idaho. in habitat riparian ungrazed and grazed a in populations 46:567-572. Naturalist Basin Great desert. low-shrub Basin Great NV. Reno, Resources, Natural and tion Conserva- of Department Nevada April). 24 conversation, Moscow. Station, Experiment Range and Wildlife Forest, Idaho of University symposium. relationships livestock wildlife- the of Proceedings editors, Dalke, D. P. and rangeland wildlife and habitat. Pages 362-382 Pages habitat. and wildlife rangeland Societies. Audubon of Association National habits. feeding and identification OR. LaGrande, PNW-172. Report Technical General Management, Land of Bureau USDI and Station Research Northwest Pacific Service Forest USDA communities. plant to vertebrates terrestrial of relationship The Oregon. southeastern of Basin Great rangelands—The managed in habitats ID. Burley, Management, Land of Bureau November). 119:757-773. Naturalist American mammals. hooved large, few with 7:145-165. ecosystems Agro- chronicle. ecological an America: North western 87:152-154. Condor Dakota. South Basin, Connata in sites nest owl burrowing of soil and Vegetation 81:1258-1263. Entomology Economic of Journal Acrididae). (Orthoptera: populations grasshopper rangeland of control insecticidal of effects large-scale term, Seattle. Washington, of University thesis. ( Lanius ludovicianus in S. B. Monsen and S. G. Kitchen, editors, Kitchen, G. S. and Monsen B. S. ) in the shrubsteppe habitat. M.S. Bromus tectorum Bromus L. into in J. M. Peek M. J. Petersen, K. L., and L. B. Best. 1985a. Nest-site selection by selection Nest-site 1985a. Best. B. L. and L., K. Petersen, (telephone communication Personal 1998. M. Pellant, Intermoun- the of applications and History 1994. M. Pellant, Reynolds, T. D., and C. H. Trost. 1981. Grazing, crested Grazing, 1981. Trost. H. C. and D., T. Reynolds, native of response The 1980. Trost. H. C. and D., T. Reynolds, sparrow, sage thrasher, sage of Nesting 1981. D. T. Reynolds, Ruos. L. J. and Lovejoy, E. T. Morton, S. E. H., J. Rappole, of atlas summer The 1995. Price. A. and Droege, S. J., Price, North of Birds The 1993-?. editors. Gill, F. and A., Poole, 111-117 Pages Falcons. 1989. Enderson. H. J. and W., S. Platt, of implications ecological Sagebrush: 1995. G. J. Peterson, by selection Nest-site 1991. Best. B. L. and L., K. Petersen, nest- sparrow Brewer’s 1985b. Best. B. L. and L., K. Petersen, Pellant, M. 1990. The cheatgrass-wildfire cycle—are there any there cycle—are cheatgrass-wildfire The 1990. M. Pellant, long- of ecology Breeding 1994. Dalton. J. and P.W.C., Paton, sage sparrows. Condor 87:217-221. Condor sparrows. sage ID. Boise, Management, Land of Bureau May). 27 conversation, UT. Ogden, Station, Research Intermountain INT-GTR-313. Report Technical General Service Forest USDA rangelands. annual of management and ecology Proceedings: editors, Kitchen, G. S. and 63-68 Pages Program. Greenstripping tain UT. Ogden, Station, Research Intermountain 276. INT- Report Technical General Service Forest USDA 1989. 5-7, April NV, Vegas, Las management, and biology shrub of aspects other and die-off shrub cheatgrass, on symposium Proceedings— editors, Tueller, T. P. and Smith, D. S. Northwest Science 55:225-234. Science Northwest Idaho. southeastern in populations bird and wheatgrass 125. 33:122- Management Range of Journal sheep. by grazing and planting wheatgrass crested to populations 64. 83:61- Condor Idaho. southeastern in sparrow Brewer’s and DC. Washington, Service, Wildlife and Fish USDI neotropics. the in migrants avian Nearctic 1983. York. New Press, Academic birds. American North DC. Washington, Union, Ornithologist’s American Philadelphia; Sciences, Natural of Academy The press.) in series volume (Multiple America. DC. Washington, Federation, Wildlife National 12. No. Series Technical and Scientific workshop. and symposium management in Helena. Parks, and Wildlife Fish, of Department Montana manipulation. sagebrush 51:261-266. Naturalist Basin Great Idaho. southeastern in thrashers sage 56:23-27. Ornithology Field of Journal community. sagebrush a in characteristics site solutions? Pages 11-18 Pages solutions? 54:79-85. Naturalist Basin Great Lake. Salt Great at curlews billed 1978:159-173. Wildlife Cal-Neva The influence of livestock grazing on non-game wildlife. B. G. Pendleton, editor, Proceedings of the western raptor western the of Proceedings editor, Pendleton, G. B. in E. D. McArthur, E. M. Romney, M. E. McArthur, D. E. in S. B. Monsen B. S. LITERATURE CITED 31 T. E. Martin and D. M. Finch, editors, Ecology in R. M. DeGraff and N. G. Tilghman, editors, in Raptor Research 15:12-18. ecoregion: a review of the ecological literature. Forest, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station Contribution No. 209. University of Idaho, Moscow. Press, Reno. conservation plan for Columbian sharp-tailed grouse and its and management of neotropical migratory birds. Oxford University Press, New York. 1996. The North American Breeding Bird Survey home page. Version 95.1. Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD. Brewer’s sparrow of spraying big sagebrush. Journal of Range Management 28:294-297. juniper woodland. Wilson Bulletin 99:413-431. symposium on soil crust communities. Great Basin Naturalist 53:1-4. Lichens of soil crust communities in the Intermountain areas of the western United States. Great Basin Naturalist 53:5-12. ferruginous hawk and prairie falcon nest site protection. Station, Portland, OR. Livestock grazing effects in western North America. Pages 311-353 patchiness, and avian communities in North American North in communities avian and patchiness, steppe vegetation: a multivariate analysis. Ecology 61:1228- 1250. of shrubsteppe passerine birds: geographical and temporal variation in clutch size, brood size, and fledging success. Condor 91:1-14. reproductive variation in shrubsteppe sparrows: a hierarchi- cal analysis. Ecology 72: 1325-1335. 51-66 Workshop proceedings: Management of western forests and grasslands for nongame birds. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report INT-86. Nevada Press, Reno. Columbian sharp-tailed grouse in western Idaho. Great Basin Naturalist 52:166-173. assessment for neotropical migratory land birds in the Interior Columbia River Basin. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PNW-GTR-399. Pacific Research Tisdale, E. W., and M. Hironaka. 1981. The sagebrush-grass Trimble, S. 1989. The sagebrush ocean. University of Nevada Ulliman, M. J., A. Sands, and T. Hemker. 1998. Draft Sauer, J. R., B. G. Peterjohn, S. Schwartz, and J. E. Hines. Schroeder, M. H., and D. L. Sturges. 1975. The effect on the Sedgwick, J. A. 1987. Avian habitat relationships in pinyon- St. Clair, L. L., and J. R. Johansen. 1993. Introduction to the St. Clair, L. L, J. R. Johansen, and S. R. Rushforth. 1993. Suter, G. W., and J. L. Jones. 1981. Criteria for golden eagle, Saab, V. A., C. E. Bock, T. D. Rich, and D. S. Dobkin. 1995. Rotenberry, Rotenberry, J. T., and J. A. Wiens. 1989. Reproductive biology Rotenberry, J. T., and J. A. Wiens. 1991. Weather and Ryder, R. A. 1980. Effects of grazing on bird habitats. Pages Ryser, F. A. 1985. Birds of the Great Basin. University of Saab, V. A., and J. S. Marks. 1992. Summer habitat use by Saab, V., and T. Rich. 1997. Large-scale conservation in ) on the Snake Provo, UT, July

, E. D. McArthur J. M. Marzluff and in in Provo, UT, July 9-13, 1984.

, Chrysothamnus E. D. McArthur and B. L. Welch, L. B. and McArthur D. E. in Oreoscoptes Oreoscoptes montanus and Chrysothamnus Artemisia and and review. Pages 157-167 history of the sparrows of the United States and Canada. Academic Press, New York. 9-13, 1984. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report INT-200. Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, UT. and B. L. Welch, editors, Proceedings—Symposium on the biology of management. Island Press, Covelo, CA. western shrublands: exotic invaders and the alteration of ecosystem processes. Pages 262-272 R. Sallabanks, editors, Avian conservation: research and September; telephone conversation, 19 December). University of California Natural Reserve System, Riverside. Forest Service General Technical Report INT-276. Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, UT. Tueller, Proceedings—Symposium on cheatgrass invasion, shrub die-off and other aspects of shrub biology and management, Las Vegas, NV, April 5-7, 1989. USDA report: natural and managed recovery of vegetation on disturbed areas at the Nevada Test Site. Pages 344-349 E. D. McArthur, E. M. Romney, S. D. Smith, and P. T. grouse and associated effects of prescribed fire in south- western Idaho. M.S. thesis, University of Idaho, Moscow. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report INT-200. Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, UT. editors, Proceedings—symposium on the biology of Artemisia Interseeding selected shrubs and herbs on mine disturbances in southeastern Idaho. Pages 134-139 cowbird eggs. Condor 87:561-562. January). Bureau of Land Management, Boise, ID. cheatgrass invasion and livestock grazing: effect on breeding birds. Abstract only. Columbia Basin Shrubsteppe Symposium, April 23-25, 1996. Spokane, WA. owls in the sagebrush steppe of Idaho. Journal of Wildlife Management 50:548-555. sparrows and Brewer’s sparrows. Wilson Bulletin 92:362- 368. sparrows. Condor 80:348. of the sage thrasher ( River Plain in south-central Idaho. Auk 95:580-582. Roberson, J. A. 1986. Sage grouse-sagebrush relationships: a Rising, J. D. 1996. A guide to the identification and natural Rotenberry, J. T., and J. A. Wiens. 1980. Habitat structure, Rotenberry, J. T. 1998. Avian conservation research needs in Rotenberry, J. T. 1997. Personal communication (letter, Romney, E. M., R. B. Hunter, and A. Wallace. 1990. Field trip Robertson, M. D. 1991. Winter ecology of migratory sage Rich, T. D., and S. I. Rothstein. 1985. Sage thrashers reject Richardson, B. Z., S. B. Monsen, and D. M. Bowers. 1986. Rich, T. D. 1997. Personal communication (conversation, Rich, T. D. 1996. Degradation of shrubsteppe vegetation by Rich, T. D. 1986. Habitat and nest-site selection by burrowing Rich, T. D. 1978. Cowbird parasitism of sage and Brewer’s Rich, T. D. 1980. Nest placement in sage thrashers, sage Reynolds, T. D., and T. D. Rich. 1978. Reproductive ecology Reproductive 1978. Rich. D. T. and D., T. Reynolds, 32 LITERATURE CITED Whisenant, S. G. 1990. Changing fire frequencies on Idaho’s on frequencies fire Changing 1990. G. S. Whisenant, of repair and maintenance for Strategies 1996. E. N. West, and steppes shrub deserts, Intermountain 1988. E. N. West, 5: volume world, the of Ecosystems 1983. E. N. West, 1991. Roberson. A. J. and Wagstaff, G. F. L., B. Welch, by use habitat and movements Summer 1971. O. R. Wallestad, spring- and characteristics site Nest 1990. L. W. Wakkinen, 2 (e-mail, communication Personal 1998. M. Haegen, Vander to livestock of Use 1994. Stevens. R. A. and F., J. Vallentine, sagebrush- the in vegetation Presettlement 1975. R. T. Vale, Wiens, J. A., and J. T. Rotenberry. 1985. Response of breeding of Response 1985. Rotenberry. T. J. and A., J. Wiens, associations Habitat 1981. Rotenberry. T. J. and A., J. Wiens, relation- niche Diet 1979. Rotenberry. T. J. and A., J. Wiens, of Reproduction 1985. Thurow. L. T. and M., C. White, Pages 4-10 Pages implications. management ecological Plains: River Snake York. New Press, University Oxford landscapes. managed in Biodiversity editors, Johnston, W. D. and Szaro C. R. 326-346 Pages rangelands. on diversity community biotic UK. Cambridge, Press, University Cambridge vegetation. terrestrial American North editors, Billings, 209-230 Pages woodlands. York. New Company, Publishing Scientific Elsevier semi-deserts. and deserts temperate 44:462-465. Management Range of Journal sagebrush. big for grouse sage wintering of Preference 35:129-136. Management Wildlife of Journal Montana. central in broods grouse sage Moscow. Idaho, of University thesis. M.S. Idaho. ern southeast- in grouse sage migratory of movements summer Olympia. Wildlife, and Fish of Department Washington October). UT. Ogden, Station, Research Intermountain INT-GTR-313. Report Technical General Service Forest USDA rangelands. annual of management and Ecology Proceedings: editors, Kitchen, G. S. and Monsen 202-210 Pages review. cheatgrass—a control 28:32-36. Management Range of Journal West. Intermountain the of area grass 32pp Boise. habitats in Idaho. Idaho Department of Fish and Game, 668. 22:655- Ecology Applied of Journal locality. shrubsteppe American North a in alteration rangeland to birds passerine 51:21-41. Monographs Ecological ments. environ- shrubsteppe in birds of structure community and 42:253-292. Oecologia birds. shrubsteppe and grassland American North among ships 87:14-22. Condor disturbance. controlled to exposed hawks ferruginous UT. Ogden, Station, Research Intermountain 276. INT- Report Technical General Service Forest USDA 1989. 5-7, April NV, Vegas, Las management, and biology shrub of aspects other and die-off, shrub invasion, cheatgrass on symposium the of Proceedings editors, Tueller, in E. D. McArthur, E. M. Romney, and P. T. P. and Romney, M. E. McArthur, D. E. in M. G. Barbour and W. D. W. and Barbour G. M. in S. B. S. in Young, R. P. 1983. Fire as a vegetation management tool in tool management vegetation a as Fire 1983. P. R. Young, the in raptors on agriculture of Effects 1989. S. L. Young, dynamics Population 1978. Evans. A. R. and A., J. Young, Young, J. A. 1994. Changes in plant communities in the Great the in communities plant in Changes 1994. A. J. Young, Yensen, D. L. 1981. The 1900 invasion of alien plants into plants alien of invasion 1900 The 1981. L. D. Yensen, with Idaho southwestern of history grazing A 1980. D. Yensen, the of habitats Nesting 1996. Cade. J. T. and P., C. Woods, An 1995. Seager. T. S. and Finley, K. K. B., Woodbridge, (telephone communication Personal 1995. B. Woodbridge, A 1986. Horne. Van B. and Rotenberry, T. J. A., J. Wiens, 1985. Horne. Van B. and Rotenberry, T. J. A., J. Wiens, Wiens, J. A., B. Van Horne, and J. T. Rotenberry. 1987. Young, J. A. 1992. Ecology and management of medusahead of management and Ecology 1992. A. J. Young, ( shrike Loggerhead 1996. R. Yosef, Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, UT. Ogden, Station, Experiment Range and Forest Intermountain INT-157. GTR Report Technical General habitats. wildlife and range of rangelands—improvement intermountain Managing editors, Shaw, N. and Monsen rangelands of the intermountain region. Pages 18-31 Pages region. intermountain the of rangelands DC. Washington, Federation, Wildlife National 12. No. Series Technical and Scientific workshop. and symposium management raptor western the of Proceedings editor, Pendleton, 209-218 Pages overview. an States: United western 31:283-289. Management Range of Journal grasslands. sagebrush in wildfire after Niwot. Colorado, of Press University Basin. Great and Plateau Colorado the of history Natural editors, Hess, M. 123 113- Pages grazing. livestock domestic by induced Basin 52:245-252. Naturalist Basin Great Melderis). Project, Boise, ID. Boise, Project, Research Prey of Birds River Snake Management Land of Bureau USDI Area. Study Prey of Birds the on emphasis 98:75-81. Condor sagebrush. in shrike loggerhead 29:202-204. Research Raptor of Journal Argentina. in hawk Swainson’s the of investigation CA. Yreka, Forest, National Klamath Service, Forest USDA February). conversation, 67:365-376. Ecology alteration. habitat and birds shrubsteppe experiments: field of limitation the in lesson 505. 102:500- Auk birds. shrubsteppe in variations size 73:60-70. Oecologia birds. shrubsteppe of behavior the in variations spatial and Temporal ( DC. Washington, Union, Ornithologists’ American and Philadelphia, Sciences, Natural of Academy America. 231 41:176-182. Naturalist Basin Great Idaho. southern Taeniatherum caput-medusae Taeniatherum in in K. T. Harper, L. L. St. Clair, K. H. Thorne, and W. and Thorne, H. K. Clair, St. L. L. Harper, T. K. A. Poole and F. Gill, editors, The Birds of North of Birds The editors, Gill, F. and Poole A. ssp Lanius ludovicianus Lanius . asperum . [Simk.] in in ). No. ). B. G. S. B. APPENDIX I. SAGEBRUSH BIRDS OF CONCERN 33 The (Price et al. S S S S S D D D D D series (A. Poole and F. and Poole (A. series N N N N N A A A A A L L L L L B B B B B U U U U U R R R R R H H H H H S S S S S

Birds of North America H H H The “centers of abundance” information for each The information given on species population trends Be aware of several things when interpreting BBS During early brood-rearing, wet meadows, springs, H H S S S S S U U U U U Great Basin areas we are concerned with here. Also, many species are not sampled well either because their range is restricted, they occur in low densities, or they are found in habitats that are not well sampled, such as riparian woodlands. In short, BBS trend estimates must be interpreted conservatively, but declining trends should not be ignored. species in the following accounts is based on Summer Atlas of North American Birds 1995). This atlas maps the patterns of abundance for North American birds using a careful interpretation of BBS relative abundance data. Program’s Program’s vertebrate characterization abstracts database, and the Gill, editors). is based on the most current Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) trend estimates from the U.S.G.S. Biological Resources Division. The accounts below include brief trend synopses for each species in those states and physi- ographic regions having extensive sagebrush shrub- steppe. The most current BBS trend results with complete tables and maps are now published on the Breeding Bird Survey World Wide Web site (Sauer et al. 1996). data. First, although the BBS got its start in 1966, surveys were not run in the West until 1968. Secondly, the BBS is our best source of long-term population information for North American birds, but it does have some shortcom- ings. In many western states, survey routes are few and far between, so sample sizes are generally low for western birds—particularly in the Intermountain and Sage Grouse Task Force 1997). As sagebrush areas dry in June and July, sage grouse move to wetter sites with succulent forbs, including wet meadows, irrigated areas, and riparian areas bordered by sagebrush (Connelly et al. 1988). In a Nevada study, broods used meadows with effective cover 7 to 16 cm (3 to 6 in) tall (Klebenow 1982). Broods used upland habitats with big sagebrush ranging from 1 to 25% canopy cover and 15 to 20 cm tall (6 to 8 in; Wallestad 1971; Klebenow 1982). ridges and knolls. seeps, and other green areas within gently sloping, sagebrush shrublands (15 to 25% canopy coverage) close to the nest site are important for insect foraging (Idaho R R R R R B B B B B ) ) ) ) ) s s s s s E E E E E u u u u u n n n n n G G G G G a a a a a i i i i i A A A A A s s s s s S S S S S —sage a a a S S a a S S S E E E E E

I I h h h I h h I I Shrubland- p p p p p C C C C C N N N N N Birds of the o o o o o I I I I I E E E E E r r r r r

P P P P P ; Connelly and u u u u u ; Connelly unpub. 2

2 N N S S S N S S N N —gray flycatcher. s s s s s

Atlas of Idaho’s u u u R R u u R R R E E E E E c c c c c T T T E E T T E E E r r r r r The Sparrows of the United e e A A e A e e A A —green-tailed towhee, C C C C C (577 mi c c c c c : Except where other sources 2 G G G G G —long-billed curlew, o o I I o I o o I I N N N N N ), The Birder’s Handbook (1 to 2.5 mi 2.5 to (1 r r r r r L L 2 L L L Sagebrush Obligates - A sagebrush obligate in nearly t t t t t O O O O O B B B n n B B n n n Conservation and Management of e e e e e O O O O O C C C C C —Swainson’s hawk, ferruginous (Rising 1996), C C C

C C

( ( ( ( ( . . . . .

H H H H H F F F F F I I I I I

e e e e e S S S S S s s s s s X X X X X O O O O O (Dobkin 1994), 1994), (Dobkin U U I I U I U U I I (Ryser 1985 u u u u u

o o o R R o o R R R D D D D D S S S S S Shrubland Species r r r r r B B B B B N N (Groves et al. 1997), the Idaho Heritage N N N Grassland Species G G G G G D D D D D E E

E

E E

E E E E E We placed these species into several groups. Not all Breeding Habitat Males display on leks in gatherings of a few to a few Information Sources e e e e e P P R R P P P R G G R R G G G eventeen bird species that breed in sagebrush shrublands shrublands score high on the Partners in Flight g g g g g I I I I I P P P P P A A A A A a a a a a B B S S A A S S States and Canada Wildlife Markham 1983; Gates 1983), and annual home ranges may be as large as 1500 km Great Plains (Ehrlich et al. 1988), Neotropical Migrant Birds in the Northern Rockies and extents. The groups are grouse, sage thrasher, sage sparrow, and Brewer’s sparrow; of the species are sagebrush obligates, i.e., using only sagebrush habitat. They all use sagebrush, but to varying their population status is unknown. This section presents brief life history accounts for each of these “species of concern.” Consult field guides for range maps. sagebrush shrublands caused by human activities, and information from the continent-wide Breeding Bird Survey indicates that their populations are in decline or priority rankings for one or more of eight western states. We are concerned about the future for these species for several reasons. They are vulnerable to changes in ranges may be 3 to 7 km in mosaics of sagebrush, grasslands, and aspen, but not in pinyon-juniper woodlands or in shadscale shrublands. Habitat requirements vary during the year. Summer home every way, the sage grouse is found associated with both tall and short species of sagebrush in foothills, sagebrush shrublands, and mountain slopes. Sage grouse also occur S mating. They are in open areas surrounded by sagebrush or where sagebrush density is low, such as on exposed data). hundred birds; leks are used exclusively for display and S A B S major compilations of bird life histories: Great Basin components and nesting substrates for these species. are cited, the following accounts are based on several burrowing owl, short-eared owl, and vesper sparrow; and Primarily Dry Woodland Species Tables 2 and 3 (pages 12 and 13) summarize habitat Grassland Species hawk, prairie falcon, sharp-tailed grouse, and loggerhead shrike; black-throated sparrow, and lark sparrow; S S A A S S B B 34 APPENDIX I. SAGEBRUSH BIRDS OF CONCERN S S across 14 western states and into three Canadian prov- Canadian three into and states western 14 across selecting species and shrubs with high protein levels. protein high with shrubs and species selecting often most sagebrush, of evergreen the on entirely almost feed grouse sage winter, In irruption. an during grasshoppers on exclusively almost focusing grasshoppers, and ants eat also They grasses. and forbs associated of buds and , leaves, the and sagebrush eat they season, breeding the In gizzard. muscular a of lack rately. Winter ranges may exceed 140 km 140 exceed may ranges Winter rately. sepa- females and Males 1988). al. et (Connelly months several span can range winter to movement Fall 1988). al. et Connelly 1977; al. et Braun 1963; al. et (Dalke habitats summer and breeding, winter, between mi) (47 km 75 as much as or all, at not distance, short a to 6500 ft) elevation (Reynolds and Rich 1978), but in the in but 1978), Rich and (Reynolds elevation ft) 6500 to (3900 m 2000 and 1300 between breeds usually It cover. tridentata ( sagebrush big by dominated communities shrubland sagebrush with associated always almost is thrasher sagebrush may be the most limiting factor in some areas. some in factor limiting most the be may sagebrush in habitat winter Suitable 1991). al. et (Welch sagebrush big basin and sagebrush, big Wyoming sagebrush, big sagebrush—mountain big of subspecies certain preferred grouse wintering trials, feeding In protein. most the containing plants choosing sagebrush, on exclusively almost feed grouse Wintering aspects. west and south with slopes on and drainages in forage They 1997). Force Task Grouse Sage Idaho 1985; Maser and Call 1977; al. et (Braun snow the above in) 12 to (10 cm 30 to 25 of heights with 40%) to (10 cover canopy available highest the of patches with stands select They level. snow above sagebrush of availability and depth, snow topography, on based sites winter select grouse Sage 1991). Robertson S shrubs in the stand (36 to 80 cm; 14 to 31 in) with high with in) 31 to 14 cm; 80 to (36 stand the in shrubs tallest the of one choose and stands, surrounding than 40%) to (15 cover canopy higher with stands sagebrush select hens nesting, For 1991). al. et (Connelly species plant other under those than successful more reportedly are sagebrush under Nests shrubs. other uses sometimes but sagebrush, big beneath often most nest its conceals hen The leaves. sage and grass with lined depression canopy cover and at least 20% herbaceous cover. herbaceous 20% least at and cover canopy shrub 35% to 15 contains habitat nesting good indicates (1995) Dobkin by review A 1991). al. et Connelly 1994; al. et Gregg in; 7 cm; (>18 cover grass taller have sites grouse-selected sage sites, random to Compared 1994). al. et Gregg 1985; Maser and (Call microclimate warmer a for and concealment both for important is cover Grass 1990). Wakkinen 1986; (Roberson cover lateral S S a a a a a g g g g g e e e e e Status Feeding Breeding Habitat Breeding Habitat Wintering Nest

T T T T T h h h h h ), using shrublands for nesting and security and nesting for shrublands using ), - The sage grouse nest is a shallow ground shallow a is nest grouse sage The - r r r r r a a a a a - Sage grouse were once widespread, ranging widespread, once were grouse Sage - s s s s s - Sage grouse are restricted to soft foods by foods soft to restricted are grouse Sage - h h h h h e e e e e r r r r r

( ( ( ( ( O O O O O r r r r r - A sagebrush obligate, the sage the obligate, sagebrush A - e e e e e - Sage grouse may migrate only migrate may grouse Sage - o o o o o s s s s s c c c c c o o o o o p p p p p t t t t t e e e e e s s s s s

m m m m m 2 (54 mi o o o o o n n n n n t t t t t a a a a a n n n n n 2 u u ; u u u s s s s s ) ) ) ) ) A. grouse in Idaho is at a record low. record a at is Idaho in grouse sage of number the that states (1997) Force Task Grouse Sage Idaho Utah. and Nevada, Idaho, in populations stable and Wyoming, and Montana, Oregon, Washington, in populations decreasing indicates (1994) Drut by status grouse sage of summary recent A Oregon. and Idaho in 1960 since decline significant and steady a show Surveys 1994). George and (DeSante Utah and Nevada, California, Oregon, Washington, in population former its of 50% than more by declined and range, its of parts in extirpated was grouse sage The 1930s. the by reduced seriously were Populations toll. their took also pressure poaching and hunting and overgrazing, by meadows wet and seeps, springs, of degradation and Destruction Northwest. the in particularly range, former its of much from grouse sage the eliminated herbicides with sagebrush of eradication and grazing, agriculture, to conversion Sagebrush inces. sagebrush with openings of native grasses and forbs across forbs and grasses native of openings with sagebrush patchy of mosaic a for managing by over-dominance sagebrush Prevent shrublands. sagebrush within sagebrush big dense and tall of patches of maintenance from and communities bunchgrass perennial and forb native and feeding habitats (Maser et al. 1984). The sage thrasher sage The 1984). al. et (Maser habitats feeding and breeding primary are communities sagebrush/bunchgrass aspen/ and mahogany/shrub, mountain bunchgrass, juniper/sagebrush/ sagebrush/bunchgrass, tall Basin, Great northern the In comm.). pers. LaFramboise N. and (B. ft) (2300 m 700 as low as nest may Basin Columbia comm.). pers. Connelly (J. habitats brood-rearing and breeding near avoided be should pesticides these of Use 1989). al. et (Blus pesticides carbamate and organophosphate by affected adversely be can grouse Sage 1990). Doughty and (Connelly habitats summer known in located be should but grouse, sage for useful be may guzzlers, wildlife as such developments, Water comm.). pers. Connelly (J. moisture soil reduce or habitats, breeding within cover reduce sagebrush, eliminate forbs, native of abundance and diversity the reduce plants, non-native of invasion allow that uses land Avoid 1982). (Klebenow cover forb and grass maintain that strategies grazing moderate or light to positively respond grouse Sage broods. young of diet insect and forb native the support to over-grazing livestock from protected be should stands sagebrush to adjacent livestock. by trampling to vulnerable be may broods and nests season, breeding the During classes. size and cover multiple have should stands Sagebrush landscape. the Conservation Springs, seeps, and wet meadows within and within meadows wet and seeps, Springs, - Grouse benefit from restoration of restoration from benefit Grouse - APPENDIX I. SAGEBRUSH BIRDS OF CONCERN 35 2 - A summary of several studies shows ), and territory size averages 1.5 to 3 ha 2 - In 1868 at Carson City, Nevada, Ridgway - The sage sparrow builds an open cup nest, Status Nest Conservation consumes consumes grasshoppers, , weevils, ants, and bees; and will also eat small and berries. It forages on the ground between shrubs and gleans food from foliage. (130 to 520 per mi usually placed within a sagebrush shrub or on the small branches at the periphery, and occasionally on the ground beneath a shrub. Nest placement appears to be related to the density of cover over the nest, as the sage sparrow will nest higher in taller sagebrush (Rich 1980). A study in southwestern Idaho found that sage sparrows preferred living sagebrush from 50 to 70 cm (20 to 28 in) tall and avoided placing nests in the southwest portion of the shrub (Petersen and Best 1985a). The sage sparrow is an (3.7 to 7.5 ac; Wiens and Rotenberry 1981; Wiens et al. 1985; Rotenberry and Wiens 1989). bare ground between shrubs may be important for foraging. The sage thrasher reportedly can help control Mormon crickets and other grasshoppers (Knowlton and Harmston 1943). Saab and Rich (1997) found the sage thrasher to be of high management concern in the Columbia River Basin. negatively correlated with cottonthorn, greasewood, and grass cover (Rotenberry and Wiens 1980; Wiens and Rotenberry 1981; Larson and Bock 1984). In the northern Great Basin, it uses low and tall sagebrush/bunchgrass, juniper/sagebrush, mountain mahogany/shrub, and aspen/ sagebrush/bunchgrass communities as primary breeding and feeding habitats (Maser et al. 1984). Breeding densities average between 50 to 200 individuals per km (King 1877 as referenced in Ryser 1985) noted that the sage thrasher was one of the most common species in that area. BBS trend estimates show populations were more or less stable across the West through the 1968 to 1995 survey period; however, sample sizes are generally too low for accurate state and physiographic region trend estimates. Possible declines are evident from 1980 to 1995 in Wyoming, the Colorado Plateau, Great Basin, Snake River Plain, and Columbia Basin. Centers of abundance are in the northern Great Basin, central Nevada, eastern Idaho, southwestern Wyoming, and northern Colorado. varying responses to grazing in sagebrush; the sage thrasher responded positively to grazing in big sage in two studies and negatively in one study (Saab et al. 1995). Long-term responses to grazing are unknown. Maintaining tall sagebrush in dense clumps with significant amounts of other shrubs, grasses, and forbs to minimize bare ground beneath shrub canopies is important for nest habitat. Some ; Wiens and 2 ) ) ) ) ) i i i i i l l l l l l l l l l e e e e e b b b b b

a a a a a z z z z z (78 per mi i i i i i 2 p p p p p s s s s s i i i i i h h h h h p p p p p - The sage sparrow is a sagebrush m m m m m A A A A A ( ( ( ( (

- The sage thrasher winters in the w w w w w o o o o o - An insectivore, the sage thrasher r r r r r r r r r r - The sage thrasher’s selection of a nest site is a a a a a p p p p p S S S S S

Breeding Habitat Wintering Feeding Nest e e e e e g g g g g a a a a a S S is positively correlated with big sagebrush, shrub cover, bare ground, and above-average shrub height, and (1995) found sage sparrows most likely to use sites with high sagebrush cover, spatially similar patches, large patch size, low disturbance, and little fragmentation. The species shrubs and low grass cover, where sagebrush is clumped in a patchy landscape (Petersen and Best 1985a; Wiens et al. 1986). A landscape analysis by Knick and Rotenberry find sage sparrows on patches smaller than about 130 ha (1/2 section), and suggests that they are area-sensitive. On a broad scale, sage sparrows prefer shrublands with tall have noted that the sage sparrow is not found in all seemingly suitable sagebrush habitats (Rich 1978). Vander Haegan (pers. comm.), in a study in Washington, did not brush, and in black greasewood (the latter in western Colorado; R. Lambeth pers. comm.). The species occurs from sea level up to 2000 m (6500 ft) elevation. Observers obligate associated with sagebrush shrublands dominated by big sagebrush with perennial bunchgrasses. It is also sometimes found in shadscale, antelope brush, rabbit- brush, and thickets. especially favors Mormon crickets and their eggs; Southwest and southern California, through Baja, and into central Mexico, where it uses arid and semi-arid scrub, shrubs, as well as displaying in flight. The sage thrasher is known to eject cowbird eggs from the nest (Rich and Rothstein 1985). southeast, presumably for morning warmth, afternoon shading, and protection from prevailing winds (Petersen and Best 1991). Males sing and display from the tops of shrub, nearly always sagebrush, with dense foliage overhead and almost invariably a nest-to-shrub crown depth of 0.5 m (1.5 ft). It most often orients the nest to the very specific within sagebrush stands: the tallest, densest clump of shrubs available surrounded by little bare ground. The sage thrasher builds its nest in or beneath a Rotenberry 1981; Rotenberry and Wiens 1989). S more than 30 individuals per km grasses and forbs, but a few will be present once sage- brush covers 2 to 5% of the area (A. Bammann pers. comm.). Breeding densities in the Great Basin are rarely sagebrush sagebrush cover and greater spatial similarity (Knick and Rotenberry 1995). In Oregon, sage thrashers are not found in extensive patches of crested wheatgrass or annual budsage, and grass cover (Rotenberry and Wiens 1980; Wiens and Rotenberry 1981). In an Idaho study, the sage thrasher was more likely to occur in sites with higher is positively correlated with shrub cover, bare ground, and measures of horizontal habitat heterogeneity, and negatively correlated with the presence of spiny hopsage, S S 36 APPENDIX I. SAGEBRUSH BIRDS OF CONCERN B B southwestern Wyoming, western and northern Great northern and western Wyoming, southwestern in are abundance of Centers regions. physiographic and states other in estimates trend reliable for small too are sizes sample but 1995, to 1980 from Wyoming in declined species The 1980. since increased have but 1979, to 1968 from declined apparently populations stable: is trend and Rotenberry 1979). Rotenberry and (Wiens seeds and lacewings) ants, caterpillars, crickets, grasshoppers, (weevils, insects on feeding shrubs, in and B migration. In winter, they retreat from the northern part of part northern the from retreat they winter, In migration. before elevations higher to move may and flocks loose 1978). (Rich breeders sagebrush and cowbirds between zones contact provide agriculture to sion conver- land and shrublands sagebrush of fragmentation where parasitism to vulnerable now is but part, most the for parasitism cowbird from isolated probably was species the settlement, European Before host. cowbird occasional measured in Washington, Oregon, and Nevada averaged Nevada and Oregon, Washington, in measured territories Breeding 1989). Wiens and Rotenberry 1981; Reynolds citing comm. pers. Lambeth (R. species bird abundant most the usually is it occurs, it Where 1987). al. et (Wiens males singing for sites perch provides Sagebrush 1987). (Sedgwick openings large with associated is species the juniper, pinyon- In 1995). Rotenberry and (Knick size patch large and cover shrub high with sites in occur to likely more sparrows Brewer’s found study Idaho an and 1987), Bock and (Bock sagebrush unburned of favor in shrublands sagebrush burned avoid will sparrows Brewer’s grass. by dominated areas to compared shrubs by dominated areas prefer they that indicates cover grass with correlation negative The 1984). Bock and Larson 1981; Rotenberry and Wiens 1980; Wiens and (Rotenberry budsage and hopsage, spiny cover, grass with correlated negatively are and heterogeneity, habitat horizontal of measures and ground, bare height, vegetation above-average cover, shrub sagebrush, with correlated positively are sparrows Brewer’s components, habitat shrubland sagebrush of studies In 1996). (Rising grasslands bunchgrass or pinyon-juniper, rabbitbrush, mahogany, mountain in found be also can It grass. short and shrubs scattered abundant, have that shrublands sagebrush with associated tightly is sparrow Brewer’s widespread the obligate, scrub. weedy and , coastal grasslands, sagebrush including shrubs, scattered with lands open arid, use sparrows Sage Mexico. northern into south Colorado southern and Utah, Nevada, Oregon, southern in overwinter and range their B B r r r r r e e e e e w w w w w Status The Brewer’s sparrow will breed in high densities. high in breed will sparrow Brewer’s The Habitat Breeding Feeding Wintering e e e e e r r r r r ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ s s s s s

- Throughout the West, the overall long-term overall the West, the Throughout - S S S S S - The sage sparrow forages on the ground the on forages sparrow sage The - p p p p p a a a a a - After breeding, sage sparrows gather in gather sparrows sage breeding, After - r r r r r r r r r r o o o o o w w w w w - Considered a sagebrush a Considered -

( ( ( ( ( S S S S S p p p p p i i i i i z z z z z e e e e e l l l l l l l l l l a a a a a

b b b b b r r r r r e e e e e w w w w w e e e e e r r r r r i i i i i ) ) ) ) ) management concern in the Columbia River Basin. River Columbia the in concern management high of be to sparrow sage the found (1997) Rich and Saab success. foraging its to detrimental probably is cover cheatgrass continuous forager, ground a is it Because habitat. sagebrush of stands continuous large, of nance mainte- from benefit will sparrow sage The 1978). (Rich breeders sagebrush with contact into cowbirds brings alteration habitat where parasitism cowbird to vulnerable be may they shrubsteppe, sagebrush fragmented In 1985). Rotenberry and (Wiens years two within decline steadily sparrows sage scale, broader a on sagebrush of removal complete With 1986). al. et Wiens 1985; Rotenberry and (Wiens removed completely is sagebrush where term short a for or territory a within removed partially is sagebrush where persist may and territories breeding concern. management of species a it make habitats sagebrush big on dependence species’ the and sizes, sample small declines, Local Plateau. Colorado the and Basin, success (Rotenberry and Wiens 1989). Wiens and (Rotenberry success nest and climate between relationship the complicating lag, two-year a show but precipitation increased with increase also predators) other of prey the and predator nest important (an squirrels ground However, 1991). 1989, Wiens and (Rotenberry productivity prey presumably and climate in variations with investment reproductive adjust to ability an indicating possibly years, wetter in increased size clutch Oregon, In 1989). Wiens and (1295 per mi per (1295 km per individuals 300 to 150 average densities Basin, Great the In 1985). al. et (Wiens measured variables habitat to relation in vary not did but increased, density population as contracted and ac) 3 to (1.5 ha 1.25 and 0.63 between are vulnerable to parasitism where land conversion to conversion land where parasitism to vulnerable are populations their hosts, cowbird occasional are sparrows Brewer’s Because 1985b). Best and (Petersen important are foliage sagebrush living by provided cover and Concealment 1980). (Rich edge shrub’s the at growth new of branches finest the on and ground, the from ft) (3 m 1 to cm few a from shrub, the in low nests their construct sparrows Brewer’s 1985b). Best and (Petersen used rarely were in) (19.5 tall cm 50 than less Shrubs in). 41 to (16.5 tall cm 104 to 42 from ranging and in) (27 tall cm 69 averaging shrubs, taller selected species the study, Idaho an In sagebrush. living large, preferring shrub, a in nest 2 (390 to 780 per mi per 780 to (390 Conservation Nest - The Brewer’s sparrow builds an open cup open an builds sparrow Brewer’s The - 2 ; Wiens and Rotenberry 1981; Rotenberry 1981; Rotenberry and Wiens ; - Males show strong site fidelity to fidelity site strong show Males - 2 ), but can exceed 500 per km per 500 exceed can but ), 2 APPENDIX I. SAGEBRUSH BIRDS OF CONCERN 37 - This towhee winters from the South- - Insects, berries, and particularly the seeds - The western BBS trend is relatively stable, Wintering Feeding Status cup nest on the ground beneath dense shrubs, or close to the ground in a low shrub, often in sagebrush. It also uses shrubs as security cover, making an escape by running across the ground when approached. It is an uncommon cowbird host. west and southern California to southern Baja and central Mexico. In winter, it may be found at lower elevations in dry brush and occasionally urban areas. dense shrubs. of grasses and forbs are the towhee’s mainstay. It feeds by raking through leaf-litter with both feet, usually beneath showing a slight decline overall from 1968 to 1995, but a small increase since 1980. Trends show declines in Wyoming, Colorado, Oregon, and California, and sample sizes are too small in many other states and physiographic regions for reliable trend estimates. Centers of abundance are in eastern California, southern Oregon, the Snake River Plain, and the southern Rockies from Wyoming into sparrow to be of high management concern in the Columbia River Basin. to sagebrush control, declining with the loss of shrubs and shifting their diet from insects to seeds with changes in food availability. Because they return to the same breeding territories each year, there can be a time-lag in their response to major habitat changes (Wiens and Rotenberry 1985). In the first year following sagebrush control by herbicides, Brewer’s sparrow numbers declined by more than 50% (Best 1972; Schroeder and Sturges 1975; Kerley and Anderson 1995), and in the years following, they abandoned the habitat completely as the sagebrush died out (Schroeder and Sturges 1975). Castrale (1982) found similar reductions in Brewer’s sparrow numbers on burned plots. In a Wyoming study, 22 years after spraying and 9 years after burning, numbers were less than 50% of the species’ abundance in untreated continuous sagebrush (Kerley and Anderson 1995). Where sagebrush is not completely eliminated, Brewer’s sparrows may persist (Best 1972; Castrale 1982), but the long-term effects of partial shrub reduction need further study. In short, Brewer’s sparrows will thrive best where sagebrush is maintained in tall, clumped, and vigorous stands. Cowbird parasitism is also a concern in areas with fragmentation and cattle. Saab and Rich (1997) found the Brewer’s ) ) ) ) ) s s s s s u u u u u r r r r r u u u u u r r r r r o o o o o l l l l l h h h h h c c c c c

o o o o o l l l l l i i i i i p p p p p i i i i i P P P P P ( ( ( ( (

S S S S S e e e e e E E E E E e e I I e I e e I I - The green-tailed towhee is h h h h h C C C C C E E E E E w w w w w - Many details of the species’ biology P P P P P o o o o o S S S S S T T T T T

- The Brewer’s sparrow winters from the

D D D D D d d d d d – This sparrow forages chiefly in foliage e e e e e N N N N N l l l - Historically, the Brewer’s sparrow may l l i i i i i A A A A A - The green-tailed towhee builds a large, open a a a a a L L L L L t t t t t - - - - - B B B B B n n n n n Nest Breeding Habitat Feeding Status Wintering Conservation U U U U U e e e e e R R R R R e e e e e r r r r r H H H H H G G S S shrubby second-growth (Hutto 1995). The species occurs up to 2400 m (8000 ft) elevation in the Great Basin and 3000 m (10,000 ft) in (Rising 1996). mountain mahogany/pinegrass, and aspen/sagebrush/ bunchgrass communities as primary breeding and feeding habitat (Maser et al. 1984). In Montana, it is found principally in sagebrush habitats and also higher-elevation, (Sedgwick 1987). In the northern Great Basin, the green- tailed towhee uses tall sagebrush/bunchgrass, squaw apple/bunchgrass, mountain mahogany/bunchgrass, canyons and ravines, and in shrubby openings in wood- lands. In pinyon-juniper, it is associated with sagebrush- dominated openings with high shrub species richness sagebrush and other shrub habitats, such as mountain mahogany (Knopf et al. 1990). This towhee occurs in dry sagebrush thickets, brushy slopes, riparian scrub in found on mountain slopes, plateaus, and the higher valleys of the arid West, associated with dense shrubs about 0.5 to 1.5 m (1.6 to 5 ft) high. It prefers the ecotones between G S but also on the ground, feeding on alfalfa weevils, , beet leafhoppers, caterpillars, beetles, spiders, grasshop- pers, and the seeds of grasses and forbs. bush. Outside the breeding season it is usually seen in large, vocal flocks, often with other sparrows. Southwest Southwest through Baja into central Mexico where it uses low, arid vegetation, including desert scrub and creosote agriculture agriculture and the fragmentation of sagebrush shrublands provide contact zones between cowbirds and sagebrush breeders (Rich 1978). and ecology are unknown. Brewer’s sparrows are sensitive Centers of abundance are in the Wyoming Basin, Snake River Plain, and Great Basin, particularly southeastern Oregon and central Nevada. Since 1980, there is a steep, significant decline in the Columbia Plateau, and also declines in the Wyoming Basin and Basin and Range physiographic regions. Montana, Oregon, and Wyoming and apparently an increase in Utah. Sample sizes in Nevada and Washington are too low for reliable trend estimates in those states. Brewer’s sparrow is declining steadily and significantly across the West, with sharp declines since 1980. State trends show declines in California, Colorado, Idaho, have been the most abundant bird in the Intermountain West. The BBS trend estimates indicate, however, that the G G S S 38 APPENDIX I. SAGEBRUSH BIRDS OF CONCERN B B L L L B on stands shrub dense of maintenance from benefit should species The activities. management to sensitivity or ecology, biology, towhee’s green-tailed the on available concern. management of species a towhee green-tailed the make biology breeding species’ the on information of lack a and shrubs, dense for preference species’ the declines, local to addition in areas, many in uncertainty trend High Mexico. New habitats, and less frequently with cottonwood and aspen and cottonwood with frequently less and habitats, sagebrush and grassland with associated is it Montana, In lookouts. as and perches song as posts fence and trees, small shrubs, uses It shrubs. scattered with farmlands or grasslands in and bunchgrasses); with pine ponderosa and pinyon-juniper, savannah, oak riparian, (cottonwood margins woodland and woodlands dry open, in foothills; and valleys of savannah and shrublands lower-elevation fields (Rising 1996). (Rising fields weedy and grasslands, areas, riparian frequent also may it scrub, desert from Apart Mexico. central and northwestern into and Baja through southward desert Mojave the from cowbirds. by parasitized sometimes is It ground. the above in) 18 to (6 cm 45 to 15 shrub, low a in occasionally or tuft, grass or shrub, cactus, a of base the at ground the on nest cup 1996). (Rising south farther ft) (7000 m 2100 to up and range its of part northern the in elevation ft) (5000 m 1500 below found usually is sparrow black-throated The comm.). pers. Denny (M. grasses some and hopsage/buckwheat/sage with slopes sandy/rock steep, with associated closely is sparrow black-throated the Washington, northeastern In vegetation. woody dead of presence the with correlated positively also was species The sites. other to compared diversity species bird and diversity, species shrub height, vegetation maximum cover, shrub greater with sites in sparrows black-throated found (1981) Rotenberry and Wiens in). (20 cm 50 exceeds height shrub where areas and horsebrush, and hopsage, spiny sagebrush, tall of shrublands open uses it Idaho, In juniper. with shrublands arid and rabbitbrush, brush, antelope sagebrush, bush, creosote canotia, greasewood, saltbush, mesquite), claw, - cactus, (ocotillo, brush thorny and scrub desert uses It communities. plant particular with associated closely not is It shrubs. xeric sparse with areas in occurring West, the of valleys desert hot arid, the frequents sparrow throated B B L L a a a a a l l l l l a a a a a r r r r r c c c c c k k k k k Conservation Breeding Habitat Breeding Feeding Wintering Nest Habitat Breeding k k k k k

S S S S S - - - - - t t t t t p p p p p h h h h h a a a a a - The black-throated sparrow builds an open an builds sparrow black-throated The - r r r r r r r r r r o o o o o r r r r r a a a a a - In the dry season, the black-throated the season, dry the In - o o o o o t t t t t w w w w w e e - The black-throated sparrow winters sparrow black-throated The - e e e d d d d d

( ( ( ( ( is information quantitative No -

C C C C C S S S S S h h h h h p p p p p o o o o o - The lark sparrow is found in found is sparrow lark The - - A true desert bird, the black- the bird, desert true A - a a a a a r r n n r n r r n n r r r r r d d d d d o o o o o e e e e e w w w w w s s s s s t t t

t t

( ( ( ( ( e e e e e A A A A A s s s s s m m m m m

g g g g g p p p p p r r r r r a a a a a h h h h h m m m m m i i i i i s s s s s m m m m m p p p p p i i i i i a a a a a z z z z z c c c c c a a a a a u u u u u

b b b b b s s s s s i i i i i ) ) ) ) ) l l l l l i i i i i n n n n n e e e e e a a a a a t t t t t a a a a a (Hutto 1995). (Hutto 1980. The species is poorly sampled in many parts of its of parts many in sampled poorly is species The 1980. since stable more appear trends however, overall; West the in decline slight a and survey-wide decline significant a show 1995, to 1968 from trends, BBS Long-term 50%. than more by declined have Nevada in populations insects. and vegetation green from water its gets begin, rains once but season, dry the in holes water visit will sparrow This insects. fed are Young months. wetter in forbs and grass of shoots new and insects adding seeds, on chiefly feeds sparrow cattle. and fragmentation with areas in concern a also is parasitism Cowbird base. food a provides that groundcover forb and grass the removes that grazing heavy or control sagebrush by harmed be may It ravines. in and slopes mountain parasitism is also a concern where there are cattle. are there where concern a also is parasitism Cowbird nest. its conceal to cover grass perennial good from benefit would sparrow black-throated The trampling. to vulnerable be may nests ground Their lacking. are activities management to response species’ the of studies quantitative Elsewhere, 1986). (Medin grazing heavy to response mixed a showed shadscale in study Utah a and 1984), al. et (Bock Arizona in habitat semi-desert a in grazing moderate to positively responded species The unknown. largely are ecology and biology sparrow’s areas. many in status its of uncertainty and declines local to due concern management of is sparrow black-throated The Southwest. desert the and California, southern Utah, Nevada, in are abundance of Centers Utah. and California, Arizona, in declines and region, Range and Basin the in increase an Mexico, New and Nevada in increases cant signifi- show estimates trend 1995, to 1968 From range. species, and territoriality disappears with the onset of onset the with disappears territoriality and species, other of nests the reuse will sparrow lark The oak). live or mesquite, sycamore, cottonwood, (sagebrush, tree or shrub a in high ft) (10 m 3 to up or rabbitbrush) or sagebrush, thistle, cactus, (bunchgrass, vegetation of base the at nest its places often It crevice. rocky a in sometimes shrub, a in low or depression slight a in ground the on usually ) ) ) ) ) Nest Status Conservation - The lark sparrow builds an open cup nest, cup open an builds sparrow lark The - - DeSante and George (1994) indicate that indicate (1994) George and DeSante - - The details of the black-throated the of details The - APPENDIX I. SAGEBRUSH BIRDS OF CONCERN 39 - In semidesert habitats of Arizona, - According to historical accounts, the Status Conservation found that they used cultivated fields after and during harvesting, taking advantage of reduced plant cover. Locusts, grasshoppers, and crickets are favorite prey, but the Swainson’s hawk also takes small mammals (rabbits, prairie dogs, ground squirrels, mice, voles), birds, amphibians, snakes, and beetles. Early observers reported the Swainson’s hawk feeding heavily on grasshoppers, and also taking other insects and small vertebrates (see May 1935). Woodbridge (pers. comm.) suggests the species evolved to follow outbreaks of locusts and grasshoppers; however, eradication of North American locusts and widespread grasshopper control have shifted the hawk’s diet to small mammals in many areas. and . BBS trends for many other areas are less certain due to small sample sizes. Populations in Colorado and Wyoming have declined steadily since 1968, and the central Great Plains show sharp declines since 1980. Relative abundances are low throughout the hawk’s breeding range. Declines may be associated with loss of native bunchgrass prairies and perennial grasslands for breeding, foraging, and wintering habitat; widespread pesticide application on wintering grounds; and habitat changes that favor red-tailed hawks (Harlow and Bloom Swainson’s hawk was once the most common hawk in suitable habitat. In the West, it has been in decline since the early part of the century and is now a rare breeder in the Great Basin (Ryser 1985; Harlow and Bloom 1989). A long-term decrease in productivity has also been docu- mented in Saskatchewan (Houston 1993). Although BBS data show stable to increasing trends across the West from 1968 to 1995, and across the United States since 1980, these estimates seem to be driven by increases in Montana too low for reliable estimates for Arizona, Washington, and Idaho. Centers of abundance are well-distributed throughout the Great Plains, Great Basin, Colorado Plateau, and western California. Widespread declines make us concerned about this species. Bock et al. (1984) found that moderate grazing can have a positive effect on populations depending on the overall habitat condition. Elsewhere, quantitative information on the lark sparrow’s sensitivity to management activities is lacking. The lark sparrow would benefit from good perennial grass cover to conceal its nest. Reducing or eliminating pesticide spraying and grasshopper control may increase its prey base. 2 S S S S S E E E E E I I I I I ) ) ) ) ) C C C C C i i i i i E E E E E n n n n n P P P P P o o o o o S S S S S s s s s s

n n n n n D D i i D i D D i i a a a a a N N N N N w w w w w A A A A A s s s s s L L L L L

S S S S S o o o o o S S S S S e e e e e t t t t t A A A A A u u u u u R R R R R B B B B B G G - The Swainson’s hawk is found G G G ( ( ( ( (

D D D D D k k k k k N N N N N w w w w w a a A A a A a a A A

- During migration, Swainson’s hawks - This sparrow winters from southern ) throughout their range. H H H H H 2 D D

D

D D

- Swainson’s hawks feed in low vegetation - The lark sparrow forages on the ground s s s s s N N N N N ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ - Long- and short-term BBS trend estimates n n n A A n n A A A - The Swainson’s hawk constructs its nest of o o L L o L o o L L s s s s s B B B B B n n n n n Breeding Habitat Feeding Wintering Nest Feeding Status Wintering U U U U U i i i i i a a a a a R R R R R w w H H w H w w H H S S S S in openings of low sagebrush, other shrubs, woodlands, and wet meadows (Maser et al. 1984). Bechard (1982) locust and grasshopper outbreaks and roost in woodlands and shelterbelts. America. Swainson’s hawks from throughout North America winter in concentrations of hundreds to thou- sands in the Pampas of Argentina, where they forage on will roost in large fields. Highly migratory, the species mostly winters from south of the United States to South are often in juniper and not necessarily associated with riparian zones. In a treeless area, the nest may be placed on a cliff ledge or on the ground. large twigs in isolated trees or in riparian zones adjacent to open country. The nest is often in a tree, sometimes in a conifer or shrub. In the Great Basin, nests (0.3 to 4 per mi S S grasses and forbs. It often forages in flocks even in the breeding season. interspersed interspersed with grassland. for insects (especially grasshoppers) and the seeds of Mexico. In migration and winter, it is usually seen in flocks and frequents agricultural fields, suburban gardens, oak woodlands, chaparral, and mesquite and acacia incubation. incubation. It is a frequent cowbird host. California and southern Arizona through Baja to central Nesting density varies from 0.1 to 1.6 nests per 10 km increase in perch sites in most shrublands (telephone poles, fence posts, and trees) favors the red-tailed hawk over the Swainson’s hawk (Houston and Bechard 1983). in the northern Great Basin (Maser et al. 1984). Tall trees (riparian, juniper, aspen, and shelterbelts) next to open fields are used for nest and roost sites. However, the sagebrush/bunchgrass, juniper/sagebrush/bunchgrass, aspen/grassland, and aspen/sagebrush/bunchgrass communities are important as breeding and feeding habitat in sagebrush shrublands, prairies, and cultivated land (e.g., hay, alfalfa, and grain fields) with scattered trees. Open Colorado and the Intermountain Grasslands and Columbia Plateau physiographic regions, and possible declines in California, New Mexico, and Wyoming. Sample sizes are show significant declines across the West and survey-wide from 1968 to 1995 and from 1980 to 1995. In the 1980 to 1995 period, estimates show significant declines in S S S S 40 APPENDIX I. SAGEBRUSH BIRDS OF CONCERN F F P P breeding density and productivity apparently track the track apparently productivity and density breeding hawk’s ferruginous The insects. large and , snakes, grouse, ducks, songbirds, on feed also will It 1995). Schmutz and (Bechard diet hawk’s this of mainstay the are Divide) the of west cottontails or jackrabbits and Divide, Continental the of east gophers pocket and hangs on sheer cliffs. Most eyries face south or east and east or south face eyries Most cliffs. sheer on hangs over- protective beneath cavities or crevices in usually are sites Nest outcrops. and cliffs of ledges protected on P F sagebrush In prey. insect and rodent for habitats forb and grass native of maintenance from benefit should hawk the and limiting, be may habitat Foraging shrublands. sagebrush and grasslands with interspersed lands 1997). al. et England 1995; al. et (Woodbridge years recent in hawks roosting of thousands killed inadvertently have grounds wintering on applications pesticide Organophosphate 1989). size is 49 to 73 km 73 to 49 is size range home average where Idaho, southwest in is America North in density nesting known highest The factors. important are birds and mammals small of base prey a and sites nest cliff of Availability tundra. alpine dry to valleys arid and prairies from habitats open many in found be can falcon prairie the shrublands, sagebrush and grasslands grounds. breeding the on winter few a although Mexico, central and California Baja to States United western platforms. nest artificial use also will It year. to year from nest and site nest a reuse will and debris and sticks heavy of nest large a builds hawk This comm.). pers. Lambeth, (R. hillsides on outcrops rock on or edge desert the at junipers of clumps small or lone in nest hawks ferruginous Colorado, western In data). unpub. Ritter (S. outcrops and spires on shrublands sagebrush in found often most were but junipers, in observed were nests Wyoming, In ground. elevated or haystack, hillside, shrub, outcrop, an on nest also will It view. a with ledge cliff a or rimrock on or juniper) often conifer, or (deciduous 1983). Stewart and (Gilmer view a command that sites nesting with shrublands sagebrush or prairie grazed lightly or ungrazed extensive is habitat optimal Its America. North western of badlands and grasslands, prairie open dry shrublands, arid other and shrublands sagebrush in landscapes rolling or flat in P P F F e e e e e r r r r r a a a a a r r r r r r r r r r i i i i i r r r r r u u u u u Nest Conservation Breeding Habitat Breeding Feeding Wintering Nest Habitat Breeding i i i i i g g g g g e e e e e i i i i i

n n n n n F F F F F - The prairie falcon nests in a shallow scrape shallow a in nests falcon prairie The - - The ferruginous hawk prefers to nest in a tree a in nest to prefers hawk ferruginous The - a a o o a o a a o o l l l l l u u u u u c c c c c - Small mammals (chiefly ground squirrels ground (chiefly mammals Small - s s s s s o o o o o

- This species winters from the south- the from winters species This - n n n n n H H H H H 2

a a (20 to 29 mi 29 to (20 a a a ( ( ( ( ( - This hawk is tolerant of agricultural of tolerant is hawk This - w w F F w F w w F F a a a a a k k k k k l l l l l - Most associated with prairie with associated Most - found is hawk ferruginous The -

c c c c c ( ( ( ( ( o o o o o B B B B B

u u u u u m m m m m t t t t t e e e e e e e e e e 2 ). o o o o o x x x x x i i i

i i

c c c c c r r r r r e e e e e a a a a a g g g g g n n n n n a a a a a u u u u u l l l l l s s s s s i i i i i s s s s s ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) estimates for other states are less certain due to small to due certain less are states other for estimates and Colorado, and Montana in increases apparent by driven are estimates these However 1980. since especially and 1968 since West the across trends population increasing to stable overall show data Survey Bird Breeding 1989). Bloom and (Harlow colonies squirrel ground and towns dog prairie of elimination including ity, availabil- prey reduced and habitats, prairie native of loss persecution, severe to due century this in declines large 1995). Schmutz and (Bechard prey major its of abundance sites. nest known of view from screened and from away routed be should trails as such facilities Recreational (1993). Olendorff and (1985) Thurow and White see bance, distur- from sites nest hawk ferruginous protecting on recommendations For 1995). Schmutz and (Bechard ments develop- mining to linked been has abandonment Nest hawk. ferruginous the benefit should outcrops) rock and (trees sites nest elevated of protection and lagomorphs, and dogs) prairie (e.g., rodents especially base, prey for habitats Maintaining Basin. Great the in abundance bit jackrab- with especially and availability, prey with varies low. are routes BBS on abundances relative and range, its throughout rare remains species The sizes. sample nesting. for woodlands and trees scattered Maintain 1989). Bloom and (Harlow grasses annual non-native or sagebrush by dominance preventing and sagebrush open with intermixed or openings in bunchgrasses perennial native, for managing by habitat foraging provide shrublands, doves) and small mammals, including ground squirrels ground including mammals, small and doves) mourning and meadowlarks, western larks, horned cially species. prey principle a larks, horned of occurrence the following possibly locally, congregate may and wander falcons prairie winter, and fall In season. breeding during than elevations lower at often Mexico, northern and California Baja to Canada southern cliffs. unsuitable otherwise on holes man-made use also will It territory. a within sites new find as well as sites nest old re-use will falcon This habitats. open overlook Status Conservation Feeding Wintering - Ferruginous hawk populations suffered populations hawk Ferruginous - - This falcon preys on small birds (espe- birds small on preys falcon This - - The species mostly winters from winters mostly species The - - Breeding productivity apparently productivity Breeding - APPENDIX I. SAGEBRUSH BIRDS OF CONCERN 41 ) ) ) ) ) s s s s s u u u u u n n n n n a a a a a i i i i i b b b b b m m m m m u u u u u l l l l l o o o o o c c c c c

- In Montana, Leedy (1972) found Tall, broad-leaved mountain shrub and s s s s s

- u u u u u Sharp-tailed grouse feed on leaves, buds, l l l l l

l l l l l - The subspecies Columbian sharp-tailed

e e e e e - The conversion of native grassland and shrub/ n n n n n

a a a a a i i i i i s s s s s a a a a a Conservation Wintering Feeding Status h h h h h p p p p p

s s s s s that eggshell thinning from organochloride pesticide poisoning was associated with expanding alfalfa produc- tion. In Idaho, the species showed a negative response to moderate grazing in big sagebrush/bluebunch wheatgrass (Reynolds and Trost 1981). Prairie falcons should benefit from protection of cliff nest sites and maintaining habitat for grassland and sagebrush shrubland birds and small mammals. Activities on the cliff tops above eyries are much more disturbing to nesting falcons than below the eyries at cliff bottoms (R. Lambeth pers. comm.). For drilling and construction activities, a buffer zone of 1 km (0.6 mi) around active nest sites is recommended to avoid nest abandonment (Suter and Jones 1981). south through eastern Washington and Oregon; Idaho; western Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado; and northern Utah, Nevada, and California (Fig. 1 in Ulliman et al. 1998). Many remaining populations are small and widely separated from other populations. Idaho has the best remaining populations, with 75% of the remaining birds; the subspecies has been extirpated from Oregon, Califor- nia, and Nevada and is nearly gone in Montana (Ulliman et al. 1998). They often move to higher elevations to get into moister sites that support greater amounts of these types of shrubs (Ulliman et al. 1998). However, in mild winters, they often stay in the open grasslands and shrubland communi- ties that they used for nesting and brood-rearing. Suitable winter sites need to be no more than 6.4 km (4 mi) from leks to be useful to sharp-tails (Ulliman et al. 1998). They form mixed-sex winter flocks of 10 to 35 birds, occasion- ally up to 100. flowers, seeds, and . The young in their first two to three weeks eat mostly insects. In the winter, they eat the buds of broad-leaved trees and shrubs. In Idaho, the fruits of hawthorn and snowberry are favored, as are the buds of chokecherry and serviceberry (Ulliman et al. 1998). Alfalfa, wheat, and barley fields can provide important food resources, but they must be located near permanent cover that provides nesting, brood-rearing, and winter habitat (Ulliman et al. 1998). grouse has undergone a significant rangewide decline; it currently occupies less than 10% of its former range (Ulliman et al. 1998). Historically, Columbian sharp-tailed grouse ranged in suitable habitats from riparian cover types are critical components of winter habitat for sharp-tailed grouse (Saab and Marks 1992). u u u u u h h h h h c c c c c u u u u u n n n n n a a a a a p p p p p m m m m m y y y y y T T T T T ( ( ( ( (

e e e e e s s s s s u u u u u o o o o o r r r r r G G G G G

d d d d d e e e e e l l l l l i i i i i Columbian sharp-tailed grouse

a a a a a - t t t t t - - - - - p p p p p r r r r r a a a a a h h h h h S S S S S

n n n n n Sharp-tailed grouse nest on the ground in - BBS data are slim because the prairie falcon

a a a a a - i i i i i b b b b b m m m m m Status Breeding Habitat Nest Males display on leks, usually in open areas such as u u u u u l l l l l o o o o o C C C perch. and rabbits. and insects make up a small portion of its diet. It will flush prey by flying low over the ground, will stoop on flying birds from above, or hunt from a tall primarily due to a high concern ranking in Idaho, where the species reaches its greatest recorded breeding density. Christmas Bird Counts indicated that prairie falcon populations were stable (Platt and Enderson 1989). Although widespread, the prairie falcon is of concern ographic region trend estimates and the falcon’s abun- dance across the West is low. A 1987 assessment of status based on state wildlife agency listings and Audubon a significant decline across the West since 1968; the declining trend has been somewhat less steep since 1980. Sample sizes are too small for reliable state or physi- is not well sampled by the survey. Overall, BBS data show surrounding grassland or shrubland to nest. Most nest and brood locations are within 2 km (1.2 mi) of the lek where the hen mated (Ulliman et al. 1998). April. Leks contain as few as two males to as many as 30 or more, but average about 12 males (Ulliman et al. 1998). The females come to the lek to mate, then return to the a small knoll, bench, or ridge top. Their mating displays, or dancing, occur from March through June, peaking in with flat to rolling terrain during the breeding season. A self-sustaining population of sharp-tailed grouse needs thousands of hectares (acres). seedings; Ulliman et al. 1998). They need habitat with moderate vegetative cover, high plant diversity, and high structural diversity. They are predominately associated leaved brush patches or shrubby riparian zones. Sharp- tails will also nest and raise broods in cultivated fields (e.g., irrigated pasture, alfalfa hay, grain stubble, dryland the amount of cover provided by the vegetation, whether herbaceous, shrub, or a combination. Brood sites are similar to nest sites, but they are usually close to broad- bitterbrush (Ulliman et al. 1998). They use grasslands having few shrubs to sagebrush/grass areas having shrub cover up to 40%. The common denominator appears to be bluebunch wheatgrass or Idaho fescue (having a high percentage of leaves to stems) and where the shrub layer, if present, is dominated by big sagebrush and/or antelope grasslands. In Idaho, Saab and Marks (1992) found that sharp-tails selected big sage habitat types during summer. They use areas dominated by perennial bunchgrasses like are associated with prairie grasslands and sagebrush- canopy of vegetation, provided either by grasses or shrubs. shallow depressions lined with grass, leaves, and other vegetative They materials. nest in sites with an overhead C C 42 APPENDIX I. SAGEBRUSH BIRDS OF CONCERN L L ecological condition (i.e., late seral condition) will benefit will condition) seral late (i.e., condition ecological excellent to good to sagebrush-grasslands and grasslands restoring or Maintaining future. the in grazing livestock for used or production crop into back placed be either to likely are lands these so extension, an for option with years, 10-15 only for lands aside sets however, CRP, The 1998). al. et (Ulliman Idaho in species this of abundance the in increase large a in resulted has and grouse tailed sharp- Columbian for habitat brood-rearing and nesting of hectares of thousands many restored has (CRP) Program L 1998). al. et (Ulliman livestock by grazing excessive and vegetation, annual non-native of invasion areas), other in enough not areas, some in much (too fire by degraded been has uses other to converted been not has that habitat historical remaining the of Much 1998). al. et (Ulliman populations grouse sharp-tailed Columbian in reduction the for responsible primarily been has uses land unsuitable to communities grass and south through Mexico (Yosef 1996). (Yosef Mexico through south and states, Southwestern the California, Plateau, Colorado and Basin Great the including America, North of tier southern the throughout winters species the and grounds, breeding 1996). Cade and (Woods shrublands western arid in heights nest of representative be may this suggest authors the and height, shrub of regardless in) 63 to 13 cm, 160 to 33 range in; (31 cm 79 averaging ground, the to low placed invariably were shrubland sagebrush this in nests that found study The (12%). greasewood and (20%), bitterbrush antelope (65%), sagebrush in found were and ft) 6 to (3 tall m 2 to 1 shrubs within deep constructed were nests Idaho, southwestern in study a In 1996). (Yosef years past from tree, or shrub same the often and nest, same the uses sometimes It tangle. vine or pile brush a in sometimes and vegetation, thorny preferring often cover, protective for foliage dense with tree or shrub a in nest topography. broken of areas with associated and shrublands sagebrush in uncommon shrikes loggerhead found (1981) Rotenberry and Wiens 1984). al. et (Maser habitats primary are communities riparian and sagebrush/bunchgrass, juniper/ mahogany/shrub, mountain sagebrush/bunchgrass, tall greasewood/grass, Basin, Great northern the In 1996). (Yosef shelterbelts and areas, riparian mahogany, mountain pinyon-juniper, and juniper shrublands, desert meadows, mountain prairies, scrub, arid shrublands, sagebrush in occurs shrike loggerhead The habitat. the of component important an are perches Hunting types. cover open between ecotones around often roosting, and nesting for trees and shrubs scattered and foraging for vegetation low is there wherever country open in L L o o o o o g g g g g g g g g g Conservation Wintering Nest Habitat Breeding e e e e e r r r r r h h h h h - The loggerhead shrike builds an open cup open an builds shrike loggerhead The - e e e e e a a a a a d d d d d

- Northern populations retreat from the from retreat populations Northern - S S S S S h h h h h r r r r r - i i i i i

The federal Conservation Reserve Conservation federal The k k k k k e e e e e - The loggerhead shrike is found is shrike loggerhead The -

( ( ( ( ( L L L L L a a a a a n n n n n i i i i i u u u u u s s s s s

l l l l l u u u u u d d d d d o o o o o v v v v v i i i i i c c c c c i i i i i a a a a a n n n n n u u u u u s s s s s ) ) ) ) ) to three hours after sunrise. after hours three to sunrise before hour one from June) through (March season breeding the during lek a of mi) (0.5 m 800 within bances distur- noise loud and mechanical, physical, avoiding and lek a of yd) (400 m 365 within developments no recommend (1998) al. et Ulliman reproduction. successful for important is season mating the during disturbance 1998). al. et (Ulliman occupancy sharp-tail to conducive not are agriculture of blocks large population; self-sustaining a support to (acres) hectares of thousands require grouse Sharp-tailed 1998). al. et (Ulliman use 35% than more no be should shrubs winter key of Grazing cover. nesting sufficient provide will habitat nesting in in) (8 cm 20 least at of forbs and grasses perennial of cover residual a Retaining grouse. sharp-tailed reproduction, but the full effects of pesticide contamina- pesticide of effects full the but reproduction, on chemicals of effects direct to than base prey in reduction to more connected be may declines and dieldrin, using control grasshopper with coincided numbers shrike in declines steep prairies, Canadian the In habitat. suitable reduced have destruction hedgerow and mining, strip- urbanization, prairies, and shrublands sagebrush understood. well not are but problems, survival winter and loss, habitat contamination, pesticide to linked be to thought are Declines California. and Southwest the in are abundance of centers Western 1995. to 1968 from Plateau Colorado and Basin, Columbia Basin, Great the in declines significant show Data 1968. since significantly declined have West the in populations and continent, the across declines universal nearly show data BBS 1970s. the through 1940s the from dieldrin) and DDE (e.g., pesticides organochloride of use the with coincide declines sharp but past, the in shot often were Shrikes Midwest. and East the of much in century mid-20th the since sharply declined 1995). (Leu higher is prey capturing in success their where ground bare on hunt to prefer shrikes inexperienced Young, shrubs. in prey on swoop or ground open patchy, on hunt and in) 9 to 0.4 cm; 25 to (1 low is vegetation substrate where forage to prefer Shrikes abundant. become instars larger the once grasshoppers and summer, mid- in rodents migration, spring during birds migratory winter, in vertebrates more taking prey, of availability the to diet their adjust Shrikes 1996). (Yosef lizards and voles), and mice, squirrels, (ground mammals small birds, small also but grasshoppers) and (beetles insects on chiefly feeds It ground. the of ft) (6 m 2 within perches from hunting exposed, is ground bare and scattered Protection of dancing grounds or leks from leks or grounds dancing of Protection Feeding Conservation Status - Once abundant, the loggerhead shrike has shrike loggerhead the abundant, Once - - The shrike hunts where vegetation is vegetation where hunts shrike The - - Agricultural conversion of conversion Agricultural - APPENDIX I. SAGEBRUSH BIRDS OF CONCERN 43 - Long-billed curlews generally - Long-billed curlew populations were Status Conservation may ultimately reduce prey habitat and degrade the vegetation structure for nesting and roosting. Light to moderate grazing may provide open foraging habitat. that had been in the program for 5 years (M. Denny pers. comm.). species was stable to increasing over the 1968 to 1995 survey period, with a significant increase in the Columbia Basin. Because curlews can be inconspicuous during breeding, relative abundances along survey routes are low. Centers of abundance are in western Montana and the Snake River Plain, the Columbia Basin, western Utah and eastern Nevada, the Staked Plains of New Mexico and Texas, and High Plains of Colorado and Wyoming. respond positively to grazing prior to the onset of nesting to create short-grass habitat (Ryder 1980; Bicak et al. 1982; Medin and Clary 1990). A study in the northern plains, however, showed no response to heavy or moderate grazing in mixed-grass habitats (Kantrud and Kologiski 1982), and Reynolds and Trost (1981) found a negative response to moderate grazing in big sage/ bluebunch wheatgrass. During the breeding season, nests and nestlings are vulnerable to livestock trampling. Curlews may respond positively to burning that creates openings of short grass (A. Bammann pers. comm.). The species should benefit from wetland protection, protection from trampling during nesting, and maintenance of open areas of short to mixed-grass uplands. In Washington, curlews nested on Conservation Reserve Program lands decimated by uncontrolled hunting in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Protected populations in the arctic recovered, but pesticide poisoning and widespread agricultural conversion of grassland habitats in the central and western states have not permitted the same population recovery. The species is not well sampled on the BBS, so sample sizes are small, but trend estimates show a long- term significant decline across the continent, particularly in the western Great Plains. West of the Rockies, the ) ) ) ) ) s s s s s u u u u u n n n n n a a a a a c c c c c i i i i i r r r r r e e e e e m m m m m a a a a a

s s s s s u u u u u i i i i i n n n n n e e e e e m m m m m u u u u u N N N N N S S S S S ( ( ( ( (

E E E E E I I I I I - Although a shorebird, the long- w w w w w C C C C C e e e e e l l l E E l l E E E r r r r r P P P P P u u u u u S S S S S - Long-billed curlews use beaches and

Adults pick items from the soil or probe C C C C C

D D D D D d d d d d N N N N N e e e e e l l l l l A A A A A - The curlew nests in an open scrape on the l l l l l i i i i i L L L L L b b b S S b b S S S - - - - - S S S Feeding - Wintering Nest Breeding Habitat S S g g g g g A A A A A n n n n n R R R R R o o o o o L L G G grassland, and agricultural fields. mudflats during migration. They migrate to coastal and grassland habitats in California, Mexico, and Central America, and winter in flocks on tidal flats, inland and remain in dry grasslands until they are able to , feeding on items picked from the ground. ground (Paton and Dalton 1994). Nest predators include magpies, gulls, raptors, and many medium-sized mam- mals. The precocial chicks feed themselves from hatching, ft) and open (S. Ritter unpub. data). In Utah, nests were in vegetation from 4.5 to 6 cm tall (1.8 to 2.5 in) in small clumps of live and dead vegetation near patches of barren by other curlews. Territories averaged 14 ha (35 ac; Bicak et al. 1982). In Wyoming, nests in sagebrush shrublands were in areas where the sagebrush was short (<0.3 m or 1 nest in areas with short vegetation (10 to 20 cm; 4 to 8 in) and wide visibility, and required a 300- to 500-m (327 to 5445 yd) buffer zone around a territory that is unoccupied nest near a rock, manure pile, or other object, and lines the scrape with grass, weeds, and bits of cow chips. An Idaho study in grazed cheatgrass found that curlews preferred to ground, usually on a well-drained site with gravelly soils, in a grassy hollow, or on a small slope. It often places the areas with a wide view. They will nest in recently-grazed areas of short vegetation, desert, dry prairies, sagebrush shrublands, grasslands, and moist meadows. breeding season. It breeds in shortgrass uplands, grazed mixed-grass prairie, meadows, arid scrub prairies, and short, open sagebrush. For nesting, curlews prefer open billed curlew is not associated with water during the L G from elimination of pesticides and maintenance of a diverse vegetative structure. Long-term heavy grazing showed no response to grazing in big sage/bluebunch wheatgrass in Idaho (Reynolds and Trost 1980) or in shadscale in Utah (Medin 1986). The shrike would benefit tion are not known (Yosef 1996). In a Nevada study, loggerhead shrikes responded positively to grazing in shadscale and low sage habitats (Page et al. 1978). They billed curlew will also consume berries before fall migration. beetles, caterpillars, larvae) and other invertebrates, especially worms, crustaceans, mollusks, small amphib- ians, and the eggs and nestlings of small birds. The long- into wet sand and mud, feeding on insects (grasshoppers, L L G G 44 APPENDIX I. SAGEBRUSH BIRDS OF CONCERN B B S S efforts and agricultural conversion reduced the prey base prey the reduced conversion agricultural and efforts including mowed or grazed pastures. grazed or mowed including grass, short in forages and ground, the on prey stalking by or flight, low from perch, a from hunts It vertebrates. small other and birds, small voles), and rats (kangaroo mammals small insects, on feeds and predator opportunistic an is It night. at and dusk, dawn, at mostly hunts owl S B grazed, level grasslands for nest and roost sites is of is sites roost and nest for grasslands level grazed, in burrows mammal small abandoned of presence The lots. vacant and rights-of-way, road courses, golf airports, of areas outlying use also will it harassment, direct from free Where meadows. mountain in not but lands, agricultural and shrublands, sagebrush open meadows, grasslands, prairies, dry including country, treeless open, recorded nests, 85% were surrounded by grasses and 90% and grasses by surrounded were 85% nests, recorded 28 of Montana, In mound. or knoll, ridge, slight a as such site dry a on typically cover, concealing in ground the conifer. a in or shrub, low a in ground, the on communally or singly roosts owl This 1992). Higgins and Kantrud 1977; Lokemoen and (Duebbert populations mammal small dense support that wetlands and grasslands native undisturbed and ungrazed with associated strongly is It fields. Program Reserve Conservation and fields, hay fields, stubble in also but grassland, in often most nests It shrublands. sagebrush open and marshes, meadows, grasslands, prairies, uses owl short-eared the America, America. Central and Mexico, Southwest, the in winter to Basin Great and Plains Great the in range breeding its of areas northernmost burrows. nest artificial and pipes, overflow culverts, as such structures human-made use also will owls Burrowing 1993). al. et (Haug skunks and weasels, opossums, dogs, and cats domestic are predators Other predator. nest major a are Badgers year. following the burrow same the to return will and season nesting the throughout burrows maintain Owls colonies. loose in nest often and owls, young for escape provide may that burrows of density high a with areas prefer owls The so. do to known been have Florida in owls although burrows own their excavate not do West the in owls Burrowing badgers. and marmots, squirrels, ground dogs, prairie especially mammals, small of burrows colonies. squirrel ground and dog prairie with associated frequently is owl this and 1993), al. et (Haug importance primary S S B B h h h h h u u u u u o o o o o r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r Status Nest Habitat Breeding Feeding Wintering Nest Habitat Breeding o o o o o t t t t t - - - - - w w w w w e e e e e a a a a a i i i i i - The short-eared owl nests in a depression on depression a in nests owl short-eared The - abandoned in nests owl burrowing The - n n n n n r r r r r - Prairie dog and ground squirrel control squirrel ground and dog Prairie - e e e g g e e g g g d d - Active both night and day, the burrowing the day, and night both Active - d

d d

O O O O O

- The burrowing owl migrates from the from migrates owl burrowing The - O O O O O w w w w w w w w w w l l l l l

l l ( ( l ( l l ( (

A A A A A ( ( ( ( ( - The burrowing owl is found in found is owl burrowing The - A A - Widely distributed across North across distributed Widely - A A A t t t t t h h h h h s s s s s e e e e e i i i i i o o o o o n n n n n

e e e e e f f f f f

l l

l

l l a a c c a c a a c c m m u u m u m m u u n n n n n m m m m m i i i i i c c c c c e e e e e u u u u u u u u u u l l l l l s s s s s a a a a a ) ) ) ) ) r r r r r i i i i i a a a a a ) ) ) ) ) grasslands and pastures and the control of small mammal small of control the and pastures and grasslands of conversion Agricultural habitat. nest owl’s burrowing the maintaining to importance primary of is populations 1980. since decline significant and steep a show Southwest the in Trends 1980. since trend stable more a but 1968, since decline a shows states Plains Great and Mountain Rocky the for estimate overall The years. recent in California in increase apparent an by driven probably 1980, since increase steeper a with 1995, to 1968 from increase significant a show whole a as West the for Estimates estimates. trend state-level for owls burrowing sample adequately not does BBS The 1994). George and (DeSante Arizona and Montana, Idaho, in declined also have and Mexico New and Colorado, Nevada, California, in 50% than more by down are Populations 1993). al. et (Haug decline sharp in are Canada in Populations West. the of much throughout concern of is and Canada, in threatened and Iowa and Minnesota in endangered as listed is species The range. its of parts many in owl burrowing the for habitat nesting and 1990). Oliphant and Haug 1986; (Rich prey insect and rodent support to ranges home owl within forbs and grasses dense of plots uncultivated provides that and burrows of radius (655-yd) 600-m a within pesticides and herbicides of free zones maintains that management from benefit will owls Burrowing 1985). al. et (MacCracken towns dog prairie emulate that grasslands successional early well-grazed, use will Owls 1995). al. et (Saab habitats grassland and sagebrush in grazing to responses mixed shows studies grazing of summary A birds. the on toll heavy a take also collisions vehicle and shooting, pesticides, Predators, habitat. breeding owl’s the eliminate populations and horned lark), and large insects. It seeks out areas with areas out seeks It insects. large and lark), horned and meadowlark, western (killdeer, birds grassland rodents, other take also will it but America, North throughout prey primary owl’s the are Voles activity. prey with synchrony in probably and dusk, and dawn at usually winter communal. often are range breeding northern the within Roosts cover. snow heavy escape to conifers dense in roost will and pastures and meadows, hay fields, stubble- grain use owls Short-eared Mexico. through south and Baja, southern to Canada southern from wintering 1993). Leasure and (Holt high ft) (1.6 m 0.5 than less vegetation in were Conservation Feeding Wintering - This owl hunts day or night, though in though night, or day hunts owl This - - Northern populations are migratory, are populations Northern - - Protection of burrowing mammal burrowing of Protection - APPENDIX I. SAGEBRUSH BIRDS OF CONCERN 45 - Highly dependent on vole popula- - In an overview of several studies, Conservation Conservation throughout throughout the species’ range. tions, the short-eared owl irrupts locally when vole densities are high. In general, it responds negatively to moderate and heavy grazing in mixed grass and big sagebrush habitats (Saab et al. 1995). Maintaining large, continuous grasslands and wetlands with dense vegetation to support a prey base, and grasses 0.5 m (1.6 ft) high or less, provides breeding and foraging habitat. Short-eared owls benefit from habitat management for waterfowl, particularly nest cover protection, and the burning and management of grasslands for nesting and prey habitat (Holt and Leasure 1993). the sagebrush shrublands, it benefits from maintenance of open habitats with scattered shrubs and good bunchgrass cover for nest concealment. Widespread use of pesticides and grasshopper control may be detrimental to the vesper sparrow’s prey base. abundant species in a sagebrush-steppe study site (Feist 1968). Although Brewer’s sparrows are common in grassland habitats, the BBS trend estimates for 1968 to 1995 show long-term declines in the West and survey- wide. Declines are significant in the Basin and Range, Dissected Rockies, and Columbia Plateau physiographic regions, particularly since 1980. Washington, California, and Colorado are the only western states that show stable to increasing trends, and in Arizona and Nevada sample sizes are too low for statewide estimates. DeSante and George (1994) list Washington and Oregon as states where vesper sparrow populations have notably declined. Centers of abundance in the West are scattered throughout the Columbia Basin, northern and eastern Great Basin, Snake River Plain, Colorado Plateau, and western Great Plains. The species’ association with native grasslands and its widespread population declines make it a species of management concern. the vesper sparrow shows inconsistent responses to grazing in several grassland types; a negative response to heavy grazing in sagebrush/grasslands; and a positive response to heavy grazing in greasewood/wild rye and shadscale/Indian ricegrass habitats (Saab et al. 1995). In expanded its range in the Northeast following the clearing of forests for agriculture, then decreased again in this century as farmlands disappeared. A Montana study found vesper sparrows and Brewer’s sparrows to be the two most ) ) ) ) ) s s s s s u u u u u e e e e e n n n n n i i i i i m m m m m a a a a a r r r r r g g g g g

s s s s s e e e e e t t t t t e e e e e c c c c c e e e e e o o o o o o o o o o - A bird of short grasslands, the P P P P P ( ( ( ( (

w w w w w o o o o o - The vesper sparrow winters in the r r r r r r r r r r - The vesper sparrow forages on the a a a a a - In the 19th century, the vesper sparrow - Wetland destruction, grassland conversion, p p p p p - This sparrow builds an open cup nest on the S S S S S

r r r r r e e e e e Status Feeding Wintering Nest Breeding Habitat Status p p p p p s s s s s e e e e e V V foraging farther from the nest. In this study, predation of nestlings played a large role in nest failure (Adams et al. 1994). are important in its diet. A study in western found that grasshoppers composed 67% of its diet, yet its nest success was not affected where grasshoppers were experimentally reduced, as nesting birds compensated by ground, and both insects and the seeds of grasses and forbs It uses grassy or weedy pastures and fields, prairies, old burns, brushy borders of fields, desert scrub, and wood- land openings. southern United States, from California, central Nevada and Arizona, south through Baja and into central Mexico. ground, well-hidden in an excavated depression at the base of vegetation. It is a common host to cowbirds. savannah (Bock and Bock 1983). Male vesper sparrows frequently use sagebrush and juniper as song perches (Castrale 1983). in pinyon-juniper openings with small, dense shrubs (Sedgwick 1987). Populations will increase after pre- scribed burns in ponderosa pine and pine-grassland sparrow is associated with sagebrush, grassland, and agricultural habitats (Hutto 1995). It can be found in the early seral stages of woodlands (Hejl and Woods 1991) or abandoned fields, Conservation Reserve Program fields, and shelterbelt margins—wherever there is sparse grassland with song perches. In Montana, the vesper higher valleys and mountains, where shrubs are low and scattered and grass-cover is thin. It also occurs in mountain meadows, pinyon-juniper, prairie edges, vesper sparrow breeds throughout North America. In the Great Basin, it is found in sagebrush-grass habitats of V high rodent densities, causing local irruptions in short- eared owl numbers during the breeding season, migration, and winter. physiographic regions. Relative abundances are low decline, chiefly in the period from 1968 to 1979. There is also a significant overall decline survey-wide, but sample sizes are too low for accurate trend estimates for states and Because the short-eared owl is an irruptive and nomadic bird, the BBS population trend data are scarce. The 30- year trend estimate for the West as a whole shows a steep West. Agricultural harvesting destroys nests laid in croplands. Populations have declined by more than 50% in California and New Mexico (DeSante and George 1994). and overgrazing of grasslands and shrubsteppe are believed to have caused significant declines across the V V 46 APPENDIX I. SAGEBRUSH BIRDS OF CONCERN G G P P “fly-catches” close to the ground, sallying out from out sallying ground, the to close “fly-catches” It insects. small other and moths, grasshoppers, beetles, on G P species nests in mature big sagebrush where the sagebrush the where sagebrush big mature in nests species the reaches, western Basin’s Great the In 1985). (Ryser woodlands juniper with associated principally Basin, Great the of migrant breeding common a is flycatcher gray forests (Rappole et al. 1983). al. et (Rappole forests gallery and savannahs, shrublands, sagebrush desert in Mexico central and Baja southern to States United Southwestern the from winters species The migration. during flycatcher gray the to important are mesquite ravens. and crows, snakes, from site nest own its of defense hawk’s the of advantage taking association, nesting passive a in nest hawk Swainson’s a as tree same the under or in nest its place may it that notes (1985) Ryser ground. the of ft) 12 to (3 m 4 to 1 within usually sagebrush, or tree low other or juniper 1984). al. et (Maser feeding for important also are woodlands Riparian habitat. feeding and breeding important are communities mahogany mountain and sagebrush/bunchgrass, tall aspen, pine), oak- and pinyon-juniper, juniper, as (such woodlands open Arid size. tree small reaches and luxuriant is G G P P R R R R R r r r r r a a a a a I I I I I M M M M M y y y y y Feeding Wintering Nest Habitat Breeding

A A A A A F F F F F l l l l l R R R R R y y y y y - The gray flycatcher constructs a cup nest in a in nest cup a constructs flycatcher gray The - I I I I I c c c c c L L L L L a a a a a Y Y Y Y Y - An insectivore, the gray flycatcher feeds flycatcher gray the insectivore, An - t t t t t

c c c c c D D D D D - Arid scrub, riparian woodlands, and woodlands, riparian scrub, Arid - h h h h h R R R R R e e e e e Y Y Y Y Y r r r r r

( ( ( ( ( W W W W W E E E E E - Restricted to the arid west, the west, arid the to Restricted - O O O m m O O m m m O O O O O p p p p p D D i i D i D D i i d d d d d L L L L L o o o o o A A A A A n n n n n N N N N N a a a a a x x D D x D x x D D

w w w w w S S S S S P P P P P r r r r r i i i i i E E E E E g g g g g C C C C C h h h h h I I I I I t t t t t E E E E E i i i i i i i i i i S S S S S ) ) ) ) ) big sagebrush/bluebunch wheatgrass (Saab et al. 1995). al. et (Saab wheatgrass sagebrush/bluebunch big in response negative a but bluegrass/sedge, Nevada and ricegrass shadscale/Indian in response positive habitats—a sagebrush in grazing to responses mixed indicates concern. management of species a flycatcher gray the make populations, local for uncertainties trend plus stands, sagebrush big mature and juniper old-growth with association species’ The Basin. Columbia and Plain, River Snake the Oregon, eastern in are abundance of Centers flycatchers. gray reporting routes survey on high are abundances relative although estimates, trend region physiographic or state accurate for low too are sizes sample and however, BBS, the by sampled poorly is species The 1980. since particularly 1995, to 1968 from overall West the in trend plants. low and ground the from insects gleans and catches also It trees. and shrubs of tops on perches eliminating pesticides may increase its prey base. prey its increase may pesticides eliminating or Reducing habitats. feeding and nesting primary as stands pinyon-juniper and juniper mature of and ties communi- sagebrush/bunchgrass big mature tall, of nance mainte- from benefit probably will flycatcher gray The Conservation Status - The BBS data show a significant positive significant a show data BBS The - - A summary of grazing studies grazing of summary A - APPENDIX II. SCIENTIFIC NAMES OF OTHER SPECIES 47 dandelion

ground squirrel squirrel whitetail prairie dog white-tailed antelope golden-mantled ground badger sagebrush lizard balsamroot hawksbeard fleabane or buckwheat snakeweed prickly lettuce phlox common yellow salsify cowbird brown-headed bison pronghorn mule deer elk pygmy rabbit desert cottontail Nuttall’s cottontail black-tailed jackrabbit white-tailed jackrabbit sagebrush vole blacktail prairie dog bottlebrush squirreltail needlegrass Thurber needle-and-thread green needlegrass Medusahead (wildrye) common yarrow milk-vetch . . S S S S S spp spp . E E E E E spp. sweet-clover spp. mountain-dandelion spp. clover I I I I I spp C C C . asperum C C E E E E E continued ssp (Sitanion hystrix) (Stipa viridula) P P P P P C. gunnisoniAmmospermophilus leucurusSpermophilus lateralis Taxidea taxus REPTILES Sceloporus graciosus BalsamorhizaCrepis sagittata alnifoliaEriogonum Gutierrezia sarothraeLactuca serriolaMelilotus Phlox Taraxacum officinaleTragopogon Trifoliumdubius BIRDS Molothrus aterSee also Appendix I. MAMMALS Bison bison Antilocapra americanaOdocoileus hemionusCervus elaphusSylvilagus idahoensisS. auduboniiS. nuttallii Lepus californicusL. townsendiiLagurus curtatusCynomys ludovicianus Scientific Name Scientific GRASSES Elymus elymoidesName English Stipa thurberianaS. comata Nassella viridula Taeniatherum caput-medusae FORBS Achillea millefoliumAgoseris Astragalus S S S S S

R R R R R E E E E E H H H H H ) found in the sagebrush-shrubland region and other plant and T T T T T O O O O O taxa after Kartesz 1994; some subspecies not represented). not subspecies some 1994; Kartesz after taxa

F F F F F Artemisia O O O O O

Artemisia S S S S S antelope brush mahogany E E E E E Sandberg’s bluegrass wild cherry, chokecherry snowberry cottonthorn, horsebrush bluebunch wheatgrass crested wheatgrass western wheatgrass cheatgrass Idaho fescue Indian ricegrass rabbitbrush antelope bitterbrush, greasewood shadscale tea Mormon winter fat spiny hopsage serviceberry curlleaf mountain- stiff sagebrush budsage sand sagebrush Rothrock sagewort big sagebrush basin big sagebrush Wyoming big sagebrush mountain big sagebrush xeric sagebrush subalpine big sagebrush threetip sagebrush low sagebrush alkali sagebrush Bigelow sagebrush silver sagebrush fringed sage black sagebrush pygmy sagebrush M M M M M A A A A A N N N N N

. . C C C C C I I I I I . . . . . I I I I I spp . spp I I I I I F F F F F

I I I I I X X X X X spp I I I I I T T T T T . spp. hawthorn D D D D D N N N N N N N N N N spp E E E E E tridentata E E E E E . xericencis . spiciformis . wyomingensis. vaseyana I I I I I P P P P P C C C C C P P P ssp ssp ssp ssp. ssp (Atriplex spinosa) ssp. longiloba (Poa sandbergii) (Agropyron smithii) (Agropyron spicatum) P P S S A A Festuca idahoensisOryzopsis hymenoidesPoa secunda Pascopyrum smithii Bromus tectorum GRASSES Pseudoroegneria spicata Agropyron cristatum Tetradymia spinosaCrataegus Prunus Symphoricarpos Grayia spinosa Amelanchier Atriplex confertifoliaEphedra viridisEurotia lanata ChrysothamnusPurshia tridentata Sarcobatus vermiculatus A. tripartita SHRUBS OTHER A. rothrockii A. tridentata TALL SAGEBRUSHES TALL A. filifolia A. pygmaea A. rigida A. spinescens A. bigelovii A. cana A. frigida A. nova LOW SAGEBRUSHES LOW Artemisia arbuscula Scientific Name Scientific Name English The major woody sagebrush taxa ( A S species mentioned in the main text ( A A S S recycled paper Western Working Group of Partners in Flight is part of an international coalition called Partners in Flight. This coalition includes government agencies, conservation groups, academic institu- tions, private businesses, and other citizens who share a common vision: to keep bird populations and their habitats healthy. These individuals and groups are dedicated to voluntary actions that will help preserve the magnificent diversity of birds throughout the Western Hemisphere.