ECOLOGY OF ISOLATED GREATER SAGE GROUSE GROUSE POPULATIONS INHABITING THE WILDCAT KNOLLS AND HORN MOUNTAIN, SOUTHCENTRAL UTAH by Christopher J. Perkins Committee: Dr. Terry Messmer, Dr. Frank Howe, and Dr. Jack Connelly
Presentation Outline: 1. Ecology of the greater sage grouse populations inhabiting the Wildcat Knolls and Horn Mountain, southcentral Utah 2. The impact of habitat fragmentation on small populations of greater sage grouse in central Utah 3. The evaluation of mitochondrial haplotype diversity among greater sage grouse populations inhabiting the Wildcat Knolls and Horn Mountain 4. Conclusions
ECOLOGY OF THE GREATER R SAGE GROUSE GROUS POPULATIONS ATIONSINHABITING ITING THE WILDCAT KNOLLS AND HORN MOUNTAIN
Justification In 2006 2007 CaCoARM identified the Wildcat Knolls and Horn Mountain as areas of special concern Questions: 1. What was the seasonal distribution and habitat use on the Wildcat Knolls and Horn Mountain? 2. Brooding and nesting? 3. What were the limiting factors to sage grouse on the Wildcat Knolls and Horn Mountain?
Study area Wildcat Knolls: 4,146.6ha Horn Mountain: 6,806.9 ha Both sites are managed by the USFS Elevation ranges from 2500 2900 m Both sites can be characterized as mountains big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata spp. vaseyana) and black sagebrush (A. nova) communities Dominant land uses are cattle grazing from June September, and subsurface coal mining on the Wildcat Both sites are major wintering areas for big game from the Manti La Sal There is one main lek and several satellite leks within each site Both sites are used by grouse year round
Methods Lek Monitoring Trapping Radio telemetry and seasonal movements Nesting Nest site vegetation Brood monitoring Brood site vegetation Arthropod sampling Survival
Lek Monitoring Wildcat Historic Lek Counts 40 35 30 No. ma ales 25 20 15 10 5 0 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 Year Horn Mt. Historic Lek Counts 35 30 No. males 25 20 15 10 5 0 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 Year (Utah DWR 2009)
Trapping Methods Initial trapping began in January 2008 Sage grouse were located by spotlighting with binoculars and captured with a longhandled net Radio collar male and female grouse Results 2008 12 2009 35 Wildcat: 19 (12 hens and 7 males) Horn Mt: 16 (9 hens and 7 males) Captured and collared 43 grouse
Seasonal Movements Methods Identify population type: Migratory or non migratory Spring, summer, fall and winter Lekking Breeding Re located birds at least once a week during the spring and summer, and 2 4 times in the fall and winter months Movement between sites Results Horn Mtn.: One stage migratory (14 16km) Wildcat Knolls: Non migratory No movement between sites Erratic lekking behavior on the Wildcat Knolls from 2008 2009 (density dependence?)
Methods Early May, radio collared hens were located every 3 4 days Estimated nest initiation dates using a 27 day incubation period with one day added for each egg in the nest Nesting Results 2009 Horn Mountain: 9 of 9 initiated 5 of 9 successful l(55%) Wildcat Knolls: 9 of 11 initiated (82%) 6 of 9 successful (66%) Nest predators appeared to be mostly coyotes, 2 raven, and potential red fox
Methods Nest Site Vegetation Shrub canopy cover: line intercept method along 15 meter line transects in four directions (total shrub canopy cover) Percent ground cover (grass and forbs): 20X50 cm Daubenmire frames every 3 meters Nest shrub height and width Nest grass height Visual obstruction between the nest and 4 meters from the nest: Robel pole placed on each transect to measure concealment at the nest Analysis Pooled and Satterwaite t test test for means using SAS 9.1 (2002)
40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Nest Site Vegetation Nest Site Comparisons Unsuccessful Robel in Robel out Forb cover Forb ht Grass cover Grassht Nest grass N Cover type Successful Shrub ht Shrub cover Sh Percent cover
Methods Broods were located 2 3/week Successful if one or more chicks survived 50 days Broods located at night with spotlights Broodless hens located once a week Results Wildcat Knolls: 5 of 6 (83%) were successful. 17 total chicks Horn Mountain: 1 of 5 (20%) brood hens raised 2 chicks past 50 days Brood Monitoring
Brood Site Vegetation Brood Site Comparisons eight cover and h Percent 50 40 30 20 10 0 Shrub Cover Shrub Height Robel Forb Cover Forb Height Grass Cover Grass Height Successful Unsuccessful Cover type
Arthropod Sampling Methods After brood site vegetation was measured, 4 pitfall traps were placed flush with the ground along each transect at 10m and one in the center Traps were filled with water, and left open for 48 hrs Insects were divided in 5 categories to look at relative abundance: Hymenoptera, Coleoptera, Lepidoptera, Orthoptera, and miscellaneous Results h l f ( ) f l The average volume of ants (Hymenoptera) was greater at successful brood sites (P = 0.04)
2008 Horn Mountain: No mortality of 5 total birds. = 100% adult survival Wildcat Knolls: Of 12 total birds, there were 4 Mortalities (1 hen, and 3 males) = 83% hen survival, and 50% male survival Female survival 35% 86%. (Connelly et al. 2000) Over all Horn Mountain: Female survival = 77% Male survival = 71% 2 mammalian (coyote, possible red fox) Wildcat Knolls: Female survival =64% Male survival = 55% 17 Red fox were trapped on the Wildcat last year All positively identified mortalities n=6 of 13 were caused by raptors (golden eagles) on the Wildcat Survival
Golden Eagle Nest sites 281 nest sites (UDWR 2008) 11 active 6 within close proximity (<24 km) of the Wildcat 3 within close proximity (<24km) of The Horn Eagles have been known to have multiple nest within one territory
Chapter 1 Conclusions Grouse on Horn Mountain are one stage migratory, and grouse on the Wildcat Knolls are non migratory No movement between site in 2 years Grass and shrub cover are critical nesting and brooding components Brood survival was much lower on the Horn Ants play a significant role in early brood survival Raptors (golden eagle), habitat, and adult survival Limitingfactor: brooding and nesting
THE IMPACT OF HABITAT FRAGMENTATION ON SMALL POPULATIONS OF GREATER SAGE GROUSE
Justification Of 26 Utah counties reported tdto contain sage grouse, only 5 occur within habitats that have stable populations > 500 breeding individuals (Utah DWR 2009) Methods Movements and indentify potential habitat Using ArcGIS 9.2 and NAIP 1 m photo imagery from the Utah AGRC, I heads up digitized habitat into 2 categories: potential nesting habitat (sagebrush), and non habitat (other woodland habitats) Monitor radio collared hens Nesting Distance to edge of successful and unsuccessful nest sites
Nesting Results Wildcat Knolls: 12 nest 7 successful (58%). Horn Mountain: 10 nest 5 successful (50%).
Results Wildcat Distance to Edge Successful = 536.4m Unsuccessful = 163.4m A buffer of 163.4m was place around non habitat polygons.
Results Horn Distance to Edge Successful = 195m Unsuccessful = 232m An average buffer of 213m was place around non habitat polygons
Chapter 2 Conclusions Successful nest on the Wildcat were 3.5 times farther from non habitat edge than unsuccessful nest Habitat on Horn Mountain has more fragmentations and lower brood and nest success rates Habitat that falls within buffers did fall within suggested management guidelines, and should be managed carefully for nesting and brooding
THE EVALUATION OF MITOCHONDRIAL HAPLOTYPE DIVERSITY AMONG GREATER SAGE GROUSE POPULATIONS INHABITING THE WILDCAT KNOLLS AND HORN MOUNTAIN
Study Area Date released # of Hens # Males Capture location 7/30/1987 8 1 Diamond Mountain 7/8/1988 0 2 Emma Park 8/9/1989 19 1 Diamond Mountain 8/31/1989 6 1 Parker Mountain 4/10/1990 2 13 Emma and Whitemore Parks
Lek Monitoring Wildcat Historic Lek Counts 40 35 30 No. males 25 20 15 10 5 0 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 Year (Utah DWR 2009)
Justification Identify genetic diversity to aid managers in determining the need for translocations Methods Blood samples DNA extraction and amplification (PCR). Performed by the lab of Dr. Karen Mock here at USU Used mitochondrial haplotype sequences to compare DNA between studysites sites, and with populations throughout the state were sequences have been described Analysis MEGA 4.0.2 2(Tamura et al. 2007) software to compare sequenced haplotypes
Genetic background About 80 unique mitochondrial DNA haplotypes have been described by S.J. Oyler McCance 2005 In Utah 23 haplotypes have been described Most larger populations average between 6 10 haplotypes (Parker Mt. had eight types) Gunnison sage grouse there are 2 and 1 that is common
Results Blood Sampling 41 total samples were collected in 2009. 19 on the Wildcat(10 female and 9 male) and 22 on the Horn (8f female and 14 male) l) Mitochondrial Analysis 5 mtdna haplotypes were identified of the 41 samples (DT, DW, DZ, DX, and B). DW, DZ, and DX were very similar to DT (1 2 base pairs different). DW was the most common on the Wildcat B is common though out the range All were found on the Wildcat Only DT was found on the Horn DT is common throughout Utah populations
Clade I 100 Gunnison Sage-grouse D DR DU GQ902781.1 C.urophasianusis DX DZ DT DW GQ902782.1 C.urophasianusis GQ902779.1 C.urophasianusis EU Clade II 97 67 B ER Blue Grouse 0.01
Chapter 3 Conclusions 5 total haplotypes (n=41) found on the Wildcat, and only one shared on the Horn (n=22) Haplotype frequencies do show some similarity (DT), low diversity on Horn Mountain may be a result of isolation
Overall Conclusions Future Research Needs Shrub and grass cover in nesting and brooding birds (production) Predator management as it relates to adult survival Evaluate and monitor grouse response to habitat treatments Connectivity of key habitats Translocations? Local adaptation and out breeding depression (need birds with similar genetics) Continue collecting data among sites (genetic, behavior, and morphometric) Microsatellite test Research Conclusions Grouse onhorn Mountain are one stage migratory, andgrouse onthe Wildcat Knolls are non migratory Avoid future habitat alterations Grass and shrub cover are critical nesting and brooding components Horn Mountain shows low haplotype diversity (translocations)
Acknowledgements Ferron Ranger District SUFCO Mine
Acknowledgements Dr. Terry Messmer Committee members: Dr. Frank Howe and Dr. Jack Connelly Todd Black, Mike Guttery, and Mike Perkins Dr. Karen Mock and Mae Culumber Local biologist: Ferron Ranger District, and Wade Paskett UDWR Allgraduate students who helped: Roger Stringham, Eric Thacker, and Dave Dalghren Technicians: Bobby Boswell, Tamara Luke, and Armando Aispuro Family and parents My Wife