- Next Meeting: April 17, 2012, beginning at 10:30 AM in the Extension Office. Contact Nicki Frey at 435-586-1924 for more information.
- Please contact Mark Nelson at 435-438-6450 (Millard County) or Chad Reid at 435-586-8132 (Iron County) for more information.
- Chairs: Chad Reid
Tentative Schedule for 2012
June 12: Field Tour
August 14: Group Meeting
October 9: Open House
Dec. 11: Group Meeting
Southwest Desert Local Working Group Sage-grouse Conservation Plan
Southwest Desert Adaptive Resource Management Sage-grouse Plan 2008
Reports and Publications
- 2011 Accomplishment Report, Southwest Desert Section
- 2011 Presentation to County Commission (large file)
- 2010 Accomplishment Report, Southwest Desert Section
- 2010 NRCS brochure "Introduction to NRCS' New Sage-grouse Initiative: Wildlife Conservation Through Sustainable Ranching"
- SWARM Action Report for 2007
- Integrity Table, May 2008
- 2008 Accomplishment Report; Southwest Desert Section
- 2006-7 Accomplishment Report; Southwest Desert Section
- 2007 Hamlin Valley Report by R.L. Boswell and N.S. Frey. The effects of Tebuthurion on Shrub Steppe Ecology and Greater Sage Grouse Use in Lower Hamlin Valley, Utah.
Minutes:
- March 5, 2012
- August 16, 2011
- February 15, 2011
- October 19, 2010 (Fall Field Tour)
- June 15, 2010 (Summer Field Tour)
- February 16, 2010
- December 8, 2009
- August 18, 2009 (Summer Field Trip)
- June 16, 2009
- April 21, 2009
- January 27, 2009
- Archived Meeting Minutes
My study site encompasses regions identified both as Greater sage-grouse (sage-grouse) priority focus areas as well as wind zones with some of the highest energy output potentials in the state. The objectives of this study are to identify basic ecological aspects of this population such as seasonal distributions and critical seasonal habitat for nesting, brood-rearing, and wintering in advance of potential wind energy developments. Radio-collared sage-grouse will be located year-round during 2011 and 2012 to collect basic natural history information including survival, reproduction, habitat use, and seasonal movement patterns. Habitat and vegetation characteristics will be measured to evaluate habitat preferences which, as a fringe population, may vary from other populations.
Cheyenne Burnett is a MS student in the department of Wildland Resources at Utah State University. She received a B.S. degree in Zoology from the University of California at Santa Barbara in 2007. She also studied wildlife biology abroad at the University of Western Australia in 2005. After obtaining the B.S. degree she worked as a temporary wildlife field technician for a variety of field research projects ranging from the Mexico border in Arizona to the Canadian Rocky Mountains in Alberta, Canada and many places in between. After working mainly with carnivores and ungulates she is excited to expand her research scope by studying the basic ecology of a fringe population of Greater sage-grouse in Southern Utah. Her current research interests include behavioral ecology, human wildlife conflict, and threatened/endangered species mitigation.
Hamlin Valley Project
Heather is currently studying the habitat utilization and movements of a population of greater sage-grouse and the effects of fencelines on grouse and grouse predator activity. Her study is taking place in Hamlin Valley, Utah which is on the extreme southern range of the greater sage-grouse and home to the largest and most consistent breeding grounds for sage-grouse in Southwestern Utah (12-year high of approximately 80 grouse counted on the four known leks).
Vegetation sampling and characterization will occur during the nesting, brood-rearing, and wintering seasons for a description of habitat utilization by the population. Vegetation sampling efforts include standard techniques such as line intercept to estimate herbaceous cover and Daubenmire sampling to determine vegetative composition and frequency. Information from this study will be used to identify seasonal habitat use patterns, which will aid in restoration and improvement of brooding and wintering areas, which are slated to occur in 2012.
Introduction
Throughout Utah, habitat loss is often considered the greatest limiting factor for grouse. In the southwest desert, habitat loss and degradation was identified as a large threat to Greater Sage-grouse (grouse) populations by the local working group organized to create a management strategy for grouse. In southern Utah, there has been an increase in habitat projects designed to improve the sagebrush-steppe habitat essential to healthy grouse populations. Unfortunately, we do not have much information regarding the best management practice for habitat modifications that will benefit grouse. For example, we often correlate an improvement in grasses/forb density to a benefit for grouse. However, we seldom are able to monitor grouse to determine how the species response to treatments such as Tebuthiron application, Dixie-harrow, and brush-hogging to remove invasive trees. Because habitat in Utah changes drastically in different regions, it is often diffcult to assume that a successful project in one area of Utah will be successful in another. To gain insight into which methods are the most beneficial to grouse the Southwest Desert Local Working Group, under the direction of Dr. Frey, developed a series of monitoring projects to measure the response of grouse in different vegetation treatments. In addition to assessing vegetation qualities and their suitability for sage grouse they assess other secondary ecological factors such as small mammal populations and invertebrate populations. Results from vertebrate and invertebrate sampling may serve as cues to help evaluate overall ecological conditions.
There are several study areas in Southern Utah, including Hamlin Valley, Pine Valley in Iron County and Sanford Creek, in Garfield County.
Methods
Vegetation Surveys
To determine the affect of mechanical treatment on the sagebrush steppe vegetative community we conducted comparative surveys of vegetation composition. As a control area we selected a similar size of habitat no less than 6 km from the treatment area. This area was selected due to similarities in elevation, moisture, soil, and vegetative community. Within both the control and treatment areas, we randomly assigned 10 permanent points. Each point will act as the origin of a 30 meter transect resulting in 300 meters of transect line per study area. Transect points were randomized using a stratified design to create a spacing of at least 250 meters between each transect point.
Vegetation sampling efforts will be conducted annually in late spring/early summer starting with a baseline vegetation survey in April/May of 2007. We used the line intercept method (Canfield 1941) to measure canopy cover and average shrub height along each transect. We used the Daubenmire technique (Daubenmire 1959) to measure overall herbaceous cover as well as overall vegetative composition and frequency. In addition to the aforementioned methods to sample vegetation, photos were taken at the origin of each transect at “eye level” at a zero degree bearing (facing north). Photos will be taken annually during vegetation surveys to visually document the changes in vegetation before and after treatments.
Shrub Canopy Cover and Height
To measure changes in shrub canopy cover and average shrub height we conducted vegetation sampling using the line-intercept technique. For this sampling technique we stretched a measuring tape along the length of each transect and recorded the amount of shrub that intersects the transect line. The total amounts of shrub intersecting the line will be tallied and divided by the total length of each transect to yield a percentage of total canopy cover. Spaces between foliage that exceed 5cm will be excluded to maintain an accurate estimate of total live shrub coverage. To measure average shrub height the tallest part of each live shrub occurring along the transect line was recorded using a meter stick and averaged for each transect.
Vegetation Composition
To measure changes in the vegetation community we conducted quadrat sampling using the Daubenmire technique. For this sampling we used a 1m Daubenmire-type frame. This frame was placed at 5m intervals along each 30 meter transect, resulting in 5 1x1m Daubenmire samples per transect and 50 1x1m samples per study plot. For each sample we identified the percentage of cover for each vegetation type (i.e. Shrub, Forb Grass) within the quadrat as well as the percentage of bare ground, rock and litter.
Sage Grouse Use Surveys
We estimated sage-grouse use using pellets count surveys (regular or cecal) and bird-dog surveys. Pellet counts will be conducted in the late spring/early summer. To conduct pellet counts we randomly selected a starting transect to survey. For each transect we will delineate a 30 x 30 meter square aligned with the cardinal directions. The southwest corner of the square is the original random point. Within the boundaries of this transect square we will search for fecal sign of sage-grouse for 15-20 minutes. When fecal sign was discovered, we recorded type, distance from the nearest habitat edge (i.e. living sagebrush or obvious vegetative cover). The distance from the nearest habitat edge might be outside the transect plot. We then removed this fecal sign from the transect plot to avoid double-counting. This process will be repeated for each of the remaining transects in the treatment and control areas.
Bird-dog surveys will be implemented in late spring of each study year, beginning 2008, to estimate grouse populations in the treated and control areas. For each study area (treated and control) bird-dogs and their handlers will walk through the habitat for 1 hour each. The area will “walked” in such a way that the entire area will be represented in the search. There will be a ½ hour rest period between searching the treated and control areas. When a sage-grouse is flushed we will recorded the number of birds counted, the sex and age of birds counted, their GPS location at the point of flushing, distance from transect plot, habitat/cover type.
Invertebrate Sampling
Invertebrates, especially ants and beetles, are an important element of Greater Sage-grouse early brood-rearing habitat (Klebenow 1968, Johnson and Boyce 1990). By assessing the diversity and abundance of invertebrate populations in the study area we can evaluate the quality of the habitat. To measure changes in the invertebrate abundance between the treatment and control areas, we captured insects using pitfall and pan traps. Pitfall traps will consist of 300ml plastic containers filled with a solution of one part water and one part ethylene glycol. We will bury the containers such that the rim is flush with ground level. Small pan traps (yellow plastic plates) will be placed over each pitfall trap using nails and twigs. Pan traps will have a small amount of water and dish soap to help capture flying insects by reducing surface tension. Traps will be placed at the origin of each transect resulting in 10 traps per site. Captured insects will be placed in vials with a 75% solution of ethanol for preservation and storage. Pitfall/Pan traps will be left open for 24 hours during June or July to coincide with hatching time of sage-grouse chicks. Invertebrate sampling will take place annually for three years starting in 2007. The total number of captures made will be recorded for each trap, each transect, and each plot. To measure insect diversity and order richness, insects will be classified and sorted by order and further sorted by morphs within each respective order. Percent of total capture and diversity within each order will be recorded for each survey plot.
Small Mammal Trapping
To measure small mammal population in the treatment and control areas, we will use Sherman live traps to sample the area. Small mammal trapping will take place in summer starting in 2007 and continue for 3 consecutive years. Traps were set along one 500 meter transect originating at a random transect point for both treatment and control sites The transect line will run north to south for 250m and east to west for 250m resulting in a “L” shaped line. From a randomly chosen existing point the line will start south and turn east. Two traps were placed along the line every 10m for a total of 100 traps. At each 10m interval one trap was placed parallel to the line and one perpendicular. The perpendicular trap’s opening faced away from the line to the west on the north-south line and to the south on the east-west line. The parallel trap’s opening faced south on the north-south line and east on the east-west line. At each interval the parallel trap was baited with peanut butter and a cracker and the perpendicular trap with a mix of rolled oats, peanuts, and raisins. Temperature data were recorded for each 24 hr period during trapping using Max-Min Thermometers or Hobo data recorders placed at each transect. A small amount of batting was placed in the traps for insulation bedding. Traps were opened in the evening and checked the following morning; traps will be checked for contents and re-baited if necessary. Each day, we recorded the status of each trap (“OK” or “closed” and “bait missing”, “bait OK”, or “capture”). Traps will be closed after checking them in the morning and reset each evening. This design will result in 300 trap nights (3 nights x 100 traps) per transect. Mammals captured were identified down to species and sexed. Captured animals were marked with indelible colored ink on one of the legs each day. A different color of ink and different leg was assigned to each trapping day to distinguish recapture status. We recorded overall captures and individual species captures for each transect (treatment and control). We also recorded capture per unit effort (CPUE) for all captures and each species. CPUE is calculated by dividing the number of captures by the number of trap nights X 100. Using the markings, will we record the percentage of recaptures made for each survey plot once the study is complete.
Results
The project is in its second year, monitoring the factors in their first year of treatment.
Bio
Nicki Frey graduated West Virginia University with a BS Degree in Wildlife Management in1996. In 2001, she obtained her Master’s degree in Wildlife Biology at Utah State University, working on the affects of predator removal on ring-necked pheasant recruitment. Nicki completed her PhD in Wildlife Biology at Utah State University in September 2004 where she conducted research on the interactions between red foxes, raccoons, striped skunks, their use of a corridor environment, and the effects of management on predator populations. Nicki began working for USU Extension and Jack H. Berryman Institute in October 2004, to focus on solving wildlife management issues in southern Utah as the Assistant Extension Wildlife Specialist. She teaches Principles of Natural Resource Management at Southern Utah University, is involved with 4-H, at the national and state level for the Wildlife Habitat Evaluation Program, and serves as the Continuing Education Coordinator for the Jack H. Berryman Institute. In this role, she consults with Wildlife Services employees concerning Wildlife Biologist certification as well as providing them with academic opportunities.
