Executive Summary:
In 2015, state and federal agencies made substantial conservation commitments which played a key role in the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service’s 2015 “not warranted” listing decision. Although the states’ conservation investments to Greater Sage-grouse started long before this time, this was a critical point in history that led to well-defined and documented commitments by state and federal agencies. It is essential the implementation of these actions is recognized and recorded in a range wide Conservation Report. Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA) Greater Sage-grouse range states continue to demonstrate their vast commitment to the species and the sagebrush ecosystem generating regular reports, proposals, and highlighting the best available information through the WAFWA Sagebrush Initiative and Committee
WAFWA received supporting funding from BLM to organize and compile this report using a combination of Federal, NGO, and State insights. The Greater Sage-Grouse Report Team was managed through WAFWA and composed of conservation partners with both scientific, technical, and policy expertise from state and federal agencies. This composition allowed for rangewide collaboration and reporting with significant efforts being made to prove a balanced and empirical assessment of range and species conditions. Engaging these diverse perspectives ensured a robust review of the information on Greater Sage-grouse conservation and produced a fact-based document.
The report review period is focused on 2015 to 2020; however, additional information and updates became available during the development of this report, and therefore, some of this information was included when deemed appropriate for context and being representative of the current available science
This report is not meant to be comprehensive of all research or species needs but to identify data needs, to acknowledge available research and reporting mechanisms, and to guide future work in the sagebrush biome by WAFWA and others. This report does not serve as a species assessment, nor does it intend to make rigid prescription for management. Although the audience for this report may be broad, the intent is to provide a report that consolidates rangewide information as a resource for informed policy makers.
The primary purpose of this report was to review the state and federal agency 2015 conservation commitments and actions which are summarized in Chapter 1. These stated commitments and actions played a critical role in previous policy decisions and this report provides clear evidence that these conservation commitments have been fulfilled rangewide. Unprecedented levels of conservation efforts have been successfully implemented across the range during the reporting time period and continue today. State wildlife management agencies continue to update, develop, and improve state policies and plans. For example, Washington’s Shrubsteppe Restoration and Resilience Initiative launched in 2021 and Wyoming’s 2019 update of their Core Area Strategy demonstrates their continued commitment to the Greater Sage-grouse. In addition, the states have accomplished untold volumes of work supported by many specific case studies on mitigation, conservation implementation, species monitoring, and policy that is only briefly represented here. Continued documentation of this work is essential to paint the full picture of the states’ actions benefiting Greater Sage-grouse
Chapter 2 provides information on the condition of the population. This chapter also reports on habitat conditions, for example, increasing habitat losses from wildfire and anthropogenic development and increases in non-native invasive plant species. A robust assessment of the species status was not intended and therefore is not provided in this chapter. The report discusses Greater Sage-grouse populations and several factors influencing population trends. It portrays the population across the range and specifically notes the uniqueness of Washington's Greater Sage-grouse population. It also identifies the need for identifying causal factors of decline, especially in areas of seemingly intact habitat with minimal human disturbance. In addition, it recognizes the need for analysis on the impacts of diseases on populations. A comprehensive analysis or assessment of habitat conditions for Greater Sage-grouse, including an assessment of intactness, was not completed. However, the report does provide an assessment of habitat conditions. Drought, wildfire and anthropogenic changes continue to affect Greater Sage-grouse populations and the habitats they require to survive. Those ecosystem level changes present challenges today and into the future to keeping habitats intact.
Chapter 3 aggregates the substantial body of scientific literature that has been published since 2015 to improve our understanding of Greater Sage-grouse biology and facilitates conservation delivery. A total of 309 publications were reviewed for this report and are available in Chapter 3. Many new management tools have been developed in the past seven years and a list of those tools addressing key threats to the species is provided. While this is not an exhaustive list, and new tools continue to evolve, those included here provide multiple avenues for developing conservation delivery in the sagebrush biome. Examples include: tools that examine habitat suitability and mapping, impacts of anthropogenic activities and wildfire/invasive annual grasses, and restoration techniques.
Chapter 4 lays out the recommendations provided by the GRSG Conservation Report Team and provides a starting point for additional conservation efforts by WAFWA and others. It provides recommendations that would continue to grow and strengthen state and federal agencies’ work. These include additional analysis on mitigation, specifically discussions on documenting the benefits of avoidance. However, it should be noted that the recommendations do not represent a shared direction by all team members and should not be viewed as comprehensive.
This report and other WAFWA products (for example, the Sagebrush Conservation Strategy) catalog the efforts in progress across the range. This report is a review of the conservation actions for the 2015-2020 time period. However, agencies’ actions continue today. It should be noted, the report does not include conservation actions completed by our conservation non-governmental organization partners and others which provide additional measurable benefits and support to the Greater Sage-grouse and the sagebrush biome.
Using the lessons learned, the new science available, and established stakeholder relationships, state and federal agencies should continue to work in a strategic fashion on the sagebrush biome for the benefit of Greater Sage-grouse. Working strategically to address identified challenges and threats in an efficient manner will be essential to build off the progress made thus far. This, in concert with continued work to align data, filling in knowledge gaps, and long-term sustainable funding, will be necessary to maintain the momentum and collaborative efforts behind maintaining healthy Greater Sage-grouse populations.
WAFWA plays an essential role in providing a collective voice for Greater Sage-grouse and the conservation of the sagebrush biome ecosystem. WAFWA will continue to engage in these efforts and provide leadership in conservation strategic planning and implementation, initiate data alignment, generate comprehensive reporting, and serve as an instrument of collaboration for the sagebrush biome.
Attached Files
- Version:
- File Type: pdf
- Size: 2.53 MB
