27
GROUSE NEWS Newsletter of the Grouse Group of the IUCN-SSC Galliformes Specialist Group Galliformes Specialist Group Issue 49 May 2015
GROUSE NEWS
Newsletter of the Grouse Group of the
IUCN-SSC Galliformes Specialist Group
Galliformes Specialist Group
Issue 49 May 2015
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
2
Contents From the Editor 3
From the Chair 3
Conservation News
Successful Conservation Partnership Keeps Bi-State Sage-Grouse Off Endangered Species List 4
Research Reports
Upcoming rock ptarmigan research project in interior Alaska 6
Citizen science and field survey observations provide comparable results for mapping Vancouver
Island white-tailed ptarmigan (Lagopus leucura saxatilis) distributions
7
A reconnaissance travel to the Okhotsk taiga in the Russian Far East 8
The mixed group and distribution overlap of some sister species in Xinjiang — is hybridization
possible in these Galliformes?
14
Patch-burning to manage prairie-chicken habitat and rangeland fuels 18
Conferences
13th
International grouse symposium ˗˗ Iceland 2015 21
Recent grouse literature 22
Snippets
Dr. Siegfried Klaus received the Federal Cross of Merit 27
Lesser Prairie-Chicken Initiative has launched its website! 27
Management of sandhills rangelands for greater prairie-chicken 27
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
3
From the Editor
Our warmest congratulations to Siegfried Klaus who was awarded the Cross of Merit of the Federal
Republic of Germany in March 2015 for his work on grouse species and nature management. You will
find more in this issue of Grouse News.
In this issue you will find information on an upcoming project on ptarmigan in Alaska and field
survey methods of white-tailed ptarmigan on Vancouver Island. Also a study on Siberian grouse and
hazel grouse in the Okhotsk taiga in the Russian Far East is reported. From China we have a study on the
mixed group and distribution overlap of grouse species. There is also an article on patch-burning to
manage prairie-chicken habitat and rangeland fuels. Conservation news brings information about
successful conservation partnership that keeps Bi-State sage-grouse off the endangered species list.
Snippets have some short information about greater- and lesser prairie-chicken.
We have now close to 100 members of Grouse Group within the Galliformes Specialist Group. If
you intend to join the GG as a member, you should contact Ilse Storch. In addition to the members there
are around 270 subscribing to Grouse News. Of this big group of close to 400 interested in grouse some
of you have problems receiving e-mail containing so many addresses or your mail box is full. Please
check if something of this is true with you. Some may also have moved without giving your new email
address. Send your new email and we will correct the mailing list.
We invite you to write to Grouse News. Research articles, conservation news, small notes about
your research or other things you are doing, suggestions and ideas are welcome. News about status and
conservation of grouse species in your country is very important. We will also invite all new members of
Grouse Group to write a short note on what they are doing to inform the rest of us, or you may write an
article of your research or other. If Grouse News is to continue we must have more contribution from you.
Please think about what you can write and send it when you have something. You do not need to wait till
the deadline or two weeks after that.
The 13th
International Grouse Symposium will be held in early September 2015 in Reykjavik,
Iceland. Plans for the conference are proceeding well. Olafur Nielsen is working on the plans and you will
find info on the web page of the conference. Be sure you are able to join us for these days in early
September 2015.
Tor Kristian Spidsö, Editor Grouse News
Skilsøtoppen 33, N-4818 Færvik, Norway, [email protected]
Don Wolfe, Co-editor North America
G. M. Sutton Avian Research Center, University of Oklahoma, P.O. Box 2007, Bartlesville, OK 74005,
From the Chair
There are two things I briefly want to mention:
In early September, I hope to see many of you in Iceland at the International Grouse Symposium.
If you have not done so, please register and submit an abstract, and encourage your graduate students
working on grouse to attend. For more information, see page 21 and
https://events.artegis.com/event/IGS2015.
The Species Survival Commission (SSC) of the IUCN will hold its 3rd
SSC Chairs’ Meeting in
Abu Dhabi in September 2015. As the previous two meetings, this gathering will offer a unique
opportunity for the chairpersons of all Specialist Groups, Red List Authorities and SSC personnel to
exchange experience and views, and to discuss the role, vision, and strategic plan of the SSC, and its
Specialist Groups in the future. GSG Co-Chairs Peter Garson and Ilse Storch both hope to attend the
meeting and to use the opportunity to discuss the challenges and options of our specialist group. The
shape of the GSG for 2017-20 (the next IUCN quadrennium) needs to emerge from these and later
discussions. – Suggestions are welcome!
Ilse Storch, Chair, Grouse Group within the IUCN-SSC Galliformes SG (GSG),
Co-Chair, IUCN-SSC Galliformes SG.
Wildlife Ecology and Management, University of Freiburg, D-79085 Freiburg, Germany,
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
4
CONSERVATION NEWS
Successful Conservation Partnership Keeps Bi-State Sage-Grouse Off
Endangered Species List Partnership among California, Nevada, Federal Agencies, & Landowners Helped Conserve Key
Habitat, Reduce Threats to Bird.
RENO, NV – U.S. Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell announced that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has determined
that the Bi-State population of greater sage-grouse does not require the protection of the Endangered
Species Act (ESA).
Secretary Jewell joined with USDA Under Secretary Robert Bonnie, Nevada Governor Brian
Sandoval, California Natural Resources Agency Secretary John Laird and other state and local partners to
celebrate an extensive and long-term conservation partnership on behalf of the bi-state greater sage-
grouse population. Federal, state and private partners have come together to proactively conserve key
habitat and significantly reduce long-term threats to this distinct population segment of greater sage-
grouse.
A key factor in the decision not to list the bird was the development of The Bi-State Action Plan,
a conservation plan developed by partners in the Bi-State Local Area Working Group over the past 15
years and secured with $45 million in funding. This adds to nearly $30 million worth of conservation
work USDA and other partners have already completed to implement this plan.
“Thanks in large part to the extraordinary efforts of all the partners in the working group to
address threats to greater sage-grouse and its habitat in the Bi-State area, our biologists have determined
that this population no longer needs ESA protection,” said Jewell. “What’s more, the collaborative,
science-based efforts in Nevada and California are proof that we can conserve sagebrush habitat across
the West while we encourage sustainable economic development.”
“This is welcome news for all Nevadans. I applaud the local area working group, private
citizens, Tribes, the Nevada Department of Wildlife and our federal partners for their tremendous efforts
to develop conservation actions that preclude the need to list the species while still allowing for
sustainable economic development,” said Sandoval. “Today’s announcement highlights the critical
partnerships that must exist for our conservation strategies to be effective and demonstrate that sage
grouse and economic development can coexist in both the bi-state area and across the range of the greater
sage grouse.”
“Together, we’ve worked with ranchers, conservation groups, local governments in Nevada and
California to take proactive steps to restore and enhance sage-grouse habitat while also helping them
improve their ranching operations,” Bonnie said. “The decision to not list the bi-state sage-grouse proves
this work has paid off.”
“The efforts of the local working group and the partnerships they’ve built over the past decade
are truly unprecedented,” said Dan Ashe, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director. “They have set the
stage for the next generation of conservation and convinced us that the sage-grouse population has a
bright future in the Bi-State region.”
“California is committed to continue working with our public and private partners in
implementing this strong, science-based conservation plan into the future,” said Laird. “This partnership
between California and Nevada serves as a model for effective conservation of the Greater sage-grouse in
other Western states.”
As its name suggests, the Bi-State Distinct Population Segment straddles the California-Nevada
border, where biologists estimate that between 2,500 and 9,000 of these ground-dwelling birds inhabit
about 4.5 million acres of high-desert sagebrush. Greater sage-grouse are known for the males’
flamboyant springtime mating displays on traditional dancing grounds, also known as leks. The birds use
a variety of sagebrush habitats throughout the year on private, state and federal lands.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service declared the Bi-State population of greater sage-grouse a
Distinct Population Segment (DPS) under the ESA in 2010 because genetic analysis shows it has been
separated from other greater sage-grouse for thousands of years and the genetic differences are
significant.
In October 2013, the Service proposed listing the Bi-State DPS as threatened under the ESA
based on significant population declines due to the loss and fragmentation of its sagebrush habitat from
urbanization and associated infrastructure development, encroachment of sagebrush by conifers, and a
vicious cycle of wildfire and fire-adapted invasive grasses. These threats, combined with the relatively
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
5
limited number of birds, the small population size and their isolation, were determined to pose a
significant threat to the species.
The Service is withdrawing this proposal in large part because of the success of the Bi-State
Action Plan. The plan is the product of the Bi-State Area Local Working Group, comprising federal, state
and local agencies and landowners from Nevada and California, which has been pursuing sage-grouse
conservation since the early 2000s. Since then, the working group’s technical advisory committee has
finalized plans on nearly 80 science-driven conservation projects specifically designed to reduce
identified threats and protect the sagebrush-steppe habitat.
News release from the US Fish and Wildlife Service.
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
6
RESEARCH REPORTS
Upcoming rock ptarmigan research project in interior Alaska Cameron Carroll
It has been over 40 years since research investigating population dynamics of rock ptarmigan (Lagopus
muta) in Interior Alaska has taken place. That research conducted primarily by Robert Weeden (Weeden
1965, Weeden and Theberge 1972) is one of the few long-term intensive research projects (1960-1969)
on ptarmigan in the state. Once the 10-year intensive research project ended the Alaska Department of
Fish and Game (ADF&G) continued to monitor spring breeding density of males for several years before
focus shifted to management of large game and funding for small game projects was cut. Recently,
however, there has been renewed support by ADF&G to pursue a more active approach to managing
small game species. This renewed departmental support coupled with public concern over a perceived
decline in the abundance of rock ptarmigan near Eagle Summit (110 kilometers northeast of Fairbanks)
prompted efforts to re-establish monitoring and research in the area.
In May of 2014, following methods described by Weeden (Weeden 1961), ADF&G personnel
surveyed ¾ of his former study area at Eagle Summit to estimate spring breeding density of territorial
male rock ptarmigan. Although a complete survey was not accomplished low numbers of male rock
ptarmigan were observed (Carroll and Merizon 2014;
http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=smallgamehunting.research). Roadside counts of territorial
males along a stretch of the Steese Highway that bisects the study area corroborated the survey findings;
observations were the lowest on record since roadside surveys began in 2007 (Carroll and Merizon 2014).
ADF&G will begin a research project in the spring of 2015 aimed at gathering demographic and
seasonal movement data to fill in knowledge gaps regarding rock ptarmigan population dynamics near
Eagle Summit. The use of radio-transmitters will enable biologists to make direct estimates of survival
and reproduction as well as provide information on seasonal movements. Specific biological data that will
be collected include estimates of spring breeding density of territorial males, age-specific survival,
nesting success, and chick production. Ultimately the data will be used to aid wildlife managers tasked
with facilitating harvest management decisions.
The opportunity to continue rock ptarmigan research and monitoring within a historical study
area from which a long-term dataset exists is rare in this state and we are excited about this project. Please
contact Cameron Carroll, ADF&G Small Game Biologist, at [email protected] if you have any
questions or comments about this project.
References
Carroll, C. J., and R. A. Merizon. 2014. Status of grouse, ptarmigan, and hare in Alaska, 2014. Alaska
Department of Fish and Game, Wildlife Management Report ADF&G/DWC/WMR-2014-1,
Palmer, Alaska.
Weeden, R. B. 1961. Population characteristics of rock and willow ptarmigan. Alaska Department of Fish
and Game, Division of Game, Alaska Wildlife Investigations Project W-6-R-2, Juneau, Alaska.
Weeden, R. B. 1965. Breeding density, reproductive success, and mortality of rock ptarmigan at Eagle
Creek, Central Alaska, from 1960 to 1964. - Transactions of the North American Wildlife and
Natural Resources Conference. 30: 336-348.
Weeden, R. B. and J. B. Theberge. 1972. The dynamics of a fluctuating population of rock ptarmigan in
Alaska. - Proceedings of the XVth International Ornithological Congress. 15: 90-106.
Cameron Carroll, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, 1300 College Road, Fairbanks, AK 99701,
USA, [email protected].
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
7
Citizen science and field survey observations provide comparable
results for mapping Vancouver Island white-tailed ptarmigan
(Lagopus leucura saxatilis) distributions Michelle M. Jackson, Sarah E. Gergel and Kathy Martin
Wildlife in alpine ecosystems can be elusive and difficult to survey, yet knowledge of their distributions
is critical as these habitats are threatened by climate change. Opportunistic “citizen science” observations
submitted by hikers in remote alpine regions can be valuable, as coverage can be extensive compared to
scientific field surveys. Citizen science initiatives have gained widespread support and recognition in the
past decade, and can spread awareness about threatened species while providing data to document
distributions of elusive species.
The Vancouver Island subspecies of white-tailed ptarmigan (Lagopus leucura saxatilis) was
designated as an endemic subspecies in 1939 based on unique morphological characteristics (Campbell et
al., 1990; McTaggart-Cowan, 1939), and was blue-listed (vulnerable status) by the British Columbia
government in 1992 given its endemic status and low density (Martin et al., 2004). We compare the
performance of two regression (Generalized Linear Models and Generalized Additive Models) and three
machine learning (Boosted Regression Trees, Random Forest, and Maxent) statistical modeling
approaches and an ensemble model to predict the distribution of Vancouver Island white-tailed ptarmigan
based on two datasets. The first dataset consists of ptarmigan presence locations from field surveys
conducted by K. Martin and students from 1995-1999 using radio-telemetry and call-playbacks. The
second dataset consists of opportunistic citizen science observations submitted by hikers. This citizen
science program was initiated in partnership between the Strathcona Wilderness Institute and K. Martin in
1995. Notices were posted at trailheads within Strathcona Provincial Park describing distinguishing
features of white-tailed ptarmigan. The notices requested that hikers report their ptarmigan sightings by
mailing a card (or sending an e-mail) with GPS or map coordinates and photos (if possible) to K. Martin
at UBC. The initiative began in 1995 and continues to the present, currently resulting in 404 confirmed
white-tailed ptarmigan sightings. To model ptarmigan occurrence based on the two datasets, we included
five topographic variables and four climate variables as predictor variables in the models. We predicted
WTP occurrence over all of Vancouver Island at 100-m resolution.
According to all of the models, the majority of suitable ptarmigan habitat corresponded with
high elevations in the center of Vancouver Island, with small patches of suitable habitat in the relatively
lower elevation southern and northern mountains. Most predicted suitable habitat was located inside
Strathcona Provincial Park due to the fact that the park encompasses the highest mountains, and therefore
the greatest expanse of alpine habitat on Vancouver Island. Model estimates of the area of suitable habitat
varied from 370 to 1,039 km2 based on the field survey data and from 404 to 1,354 km
2 based on the
public data. All models had fair accuracy (kappa > 0.45) when tested on an independent dataset, but
Generalized Linear Models and Generalized Additive Models tended to over-predict ptarmigan
occurrence, had the lowest accuracy, and were most sensitive to the type of response data used. All the
machine learning modeling techniques differed little between the datasets.
Our results show that models trained on opportunistic citizen science data are similar in accuracy
and spatial predictions to the more time and cost-intensive field survey data for an elusive alpine
vertebrate. For white-tailed ptarmigan on Vancouver Island, citizen science data are comparable to data
collected by professional scientists, and may be used as a stand-alone tool to monitor their distributions.
Such similarities are encouraging for the increased use of opportunistic citizen science monitoring
programs, particularly for species that are difficult or expensive to monitor by teams of field scientists and
for questions at large spatial scales (e.g., entire species or subspecies ranges). Citizen science monitoring
programs can save both time and expense while involving and educating the public about threatened
species. We advocate the use of opportunistic citizen science data and machine learning modeling
techniques (Random Forest, Boosted Regression Trees, and Maxent) for predicting alpine vertebrate
species distributions.
References
Campbell, R.W., Dawe, N.K., McTaggart-Cowan, I., Cooper, J.M., Kaiser, G.W., McNall, M.C.E., 1990.
Vol. II: Nonpasserines. Diurnal birds of prey through woodpeckers. Royal B.C. Museum and
Canadian Wildlife Service, Victoria, B.C. and Delta, B.C.
Jackson, M.M., Gergel, S.E., and K. Martin. 2015. Citizen science and field survey observations provide
comparable results for mapping Vancouver Island White-tailed Ptarmigan (Lagopus leucura
saxatilis). - Biological Conservation 181:162-172.
Martin, K., Brown, G.A., Young, J.R., 2004. The historic and current distribution of the Vancouver Island
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
8
White-tailed Ptarmigan (Lagopus leucurus saxatilis). - Journal of Field Ornithology 75: 239–
256.
McTaggart-Cowan, I., 1939. The White-tailed Ptarmigan on Vancouver Island. - Condor 41: 82–83.
Michelle M. Jackson
1 [email protected], Sarah E. Gergel
1 [email protected], Kathy
Martin1,2
[email protected]. 1Department of Forest and Conservation Sciences, University of British Columbia, 2424 Main Mall,
Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T 1Z4, Canada 2Environment Canada, 5421 Robertson Road, Delta, British Columbia V4K 3N2, Canada.
A reconnaissance travel to the Okhotsk taiga in the Russian Far East Tobias Ludwig, Ralf Siano and Alexander V Andreev
Introduction
Due to their specific habitat requirements, forest grouse can be regarded indicators of old-growth forests
with mosaics of different age-classes after natural disturbance. In the Far East of Russia, large-scale clear-
cutting threatens the Okhotsk taiga, an ecosystem with a high amount of old forest, characterized by
dense dark-coniferous stands of Yezo-spruce Picea jezoensis. Siberian grouse Falcipennis falcipennis is
endemic to the Russian Far East and exhibits a close functional relationship with Yezo-spruce (Hafner
and Andreev 1998). It thus makes a good candidate of an indicator of intact natural forests in the
Okhotsk-taiga.
Habitat loss, fragmentation, and deterioration due to forestry are considered main threats to
Siberian grouse (Andreev et al. 2001; Storch 2007). Clear-cut forestry interrupts and changes the natural
succession cycle over large areas and particularly reduce the species´ winter habitat, which comprises
stands of Yezo-spruce (Andreev and Hafner 2011). Large scale clear-cutting has reduced and degraded
Siberian grouse habitat. Concurrently, habitat requirements of Siberian grouse are not yet fully
understood. The species uses a variety of forest types over the year (Hafner and Andreev 1998) but
habitat associations remain descriptive and have not yet been empirically tested. Furthermore, the species´
range-wide habitat status is unclear (Ludwig and Konovalenko 2012) and a reassessment of the species
category according to IUCN guidelines seems to be warranted (Storch 2007). Due to the vastness and
remoteness of the Russian Far East, remote sensing provides an important means to address these issues.
In August and September 2014, we therefore travelled to the Russian Far East to collect Siberian grouse
as well as Hazel grouse Tetrastes bonasia signs and forest structure data. Here we report first findings
based on parts of the data.
Methods
Study areas
We visited two areas in the Okhotsk-Manchurian taiga ecoregion within reach of Komsomol’sk na Amure
(Figure 1). For a two-week period in late August/early September, and for another four days in late
September, we went to the mountains of “Miochan” in the northern part of the Bureinsky range, about
60km west of Komsomol’sk na Amure (50°49’ N, 136°23’ E). The area stretches around a Lake “Amut”,
at elevations between 300 and 1,300 m a.s.l. Forests are dominated by Yezo-spruce and Manchurian fir
Abies nephrolepis with admixtures of Erman´s birch Betula ermanii, Siberian dwarf pine Pinus pumila,
and Siberian rowan Sorbus sibirica and very high proportions of deadwood. Pure stands of dwarf pine can
be found at the edge of boulder fields or on the mountaintops. Since a few years, the region is open for
leisure activities such as cross-country- and downhill skiing/snowboarding with a tourist station at about
900m a.s.l. (see http://amutsnowlake.ru).
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
9
Figure 1. Location of the two study areas within the Okhotsk-Manchurian Taiga (grey) in the Russian
Far East.
We visited the second study area between rivers “Charpin” and “Baktor” for two weeks in mid-
September. Interfluve “Charpin-Baktor” (51°16’N, 137°13’E) is at elevations between 100 and 400 m
a.s.l. and characterized by a multitude of different forest types. Beside Yezo spruce and Manchurian fir,
forests comprise of larch Larix gmelinii or mixed stands of larch and Manchurian birch Betula platyphylla
or –oak Quercus mongolica. Further tree species are Korean pine Pinus koraiensis, poplar Populus
tremula, alder Alnus hirsuta, maple Acer sp., willow Salix sp. and hazel Corylus manchurica. The area is
ongoing subject to clear-cut forestry with concessions to Japanese and Korean companies in past years
and to Chinese enterprises nowadays.
Field sampling
The timing of our fieldwork covered different life history stages of Siberian grouse. It included molting
(August), seasonal migration to winter habitat when the Siberian grouse undertake short (1-2 km)
movements (first half of September) as well as autumnal lekking (from mid-September onwards).
We opportunistically mapped Siberian- and Hazel grouse signs along transects. We both, walked
forest roads and off-track searching for indirect species signs such as feces, feathers, and dust bathes. We
found dust bathes especially along forest road edges as well as in the roots of large fallen trees inside the
forest. At random intervals, we provoked responses by hazel grouse with a whistle. For each sign but also
for random points at intervals of about 200m along transects, we documented forest structure
characteristics such as successional stage, proportion of tree species, canopy cover, rejuvenation cover,
ground vegetation, and sighting distance for later analyses. We also sampled ground truth data for land
cover classification of satellite images using a tablet computer with a panorama camera function.
For each study area and grouse species, we calculated a simple relative density measure.
Therefore, we divided the number of encounters by the total transect length.
First discoveries
Siberian grouse habitat features
Key elements of Siberian grouse habitat throughout the year have been described by Hafner & Andreev
(1998). We made seventy percent of our Siberian grouse observations in mature to old- and mixed-age
spruce-fir (Miochan/ Charpin-Baktor) and larch forests stands (Charpin-Baktor). However, our first direct
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
10
encounter with Siberian grouse (female) in Miochan was on a burned mountaintop (1,120m a.s.l.) with
Pinus pumila, Ledum spec, and Rhododendron sp. (Figure 2). Presence of dust bathes and cowberry
Vaccinium vitis-idaea made this site attractive for the bird (c.f. Hafner and Andreev 1998).
Korean pine Pinus koraiensis is a common tree species in interfluve “Charpin-Baktor”
(“lowland”) and dwarf pine Pinus pumila is as abundant in “Miochan” (“highlands”). The former species
is rather specific for Komsomol’sk area (the protraction coming from Sikhote-Alin’), the latter covers
Siberian grouse’s distribution range entirely. The both pines influence Siberian grouse habitat strongly
through cone harvest →vole cycles → abundance of predators (chiefly owls and sables). It would be
worth checking whether the cone cycles of these two pine species coincide across our study areas.
Another specific habitat feature in Miochan is bog bilberry Vaccinium uliginosum. In September 2013
Siberian grouse ate these black berries intensely, producing black feces (Andreev pers. comm.). In 2014,
we saw no V. uliginosum berries at all, but cowberries might have been a replacement.
Small-scale edge structures or ecotones seem to be important for Siberian grouse. Beside forest
roads, ecotones occur as small openings inside the forest, often with fallen trees and dust bath
opportunities. We found a considerable amount of dust bathes, feathers, and feces when searching along
these ecotone structures inside the forest. In Miochan, we found further edge structures at the transitions
between spruce-fir forest plateaus and screes on south-facing slopes (Figure 3). In Charpin-Baktor,
natural edges occur along swamps and creeks.
Figure 2. A burned mountaintop with remnants of dwarf pine (above) was site of a direct observation of a
juvenile Siberian grouse female (lower right). The species used piles of woody debris as dust bath (lower
left).
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
11
Figure 3. Forest openings (above) but also transition between spruce forest and scree (lower left) and
forest roads (lower right; with Siberian grouse male) were ecotone structures attractive to Siberian
grouse in Miochan.
Autumnal lekking
Autumnal lekking in Siberian grouse can be observed from end of August to early October (Hafner and
Andreev 1998). We encountered lekking Siberian grouse cocks in both areas. In Charpin-Baktor we found
a male on the 14th of September, lekking in old larch forest at the edge of a Ledum-swamp. In contrast,
the lek in Miochan was right beside the forest road in old spruce-fir forest (Figure 4). While the cock in
the lowland area was displaying in the evening (7.30 PM, UTC+11), we found the one in Miochan
lekking at 11 AM (24th of September, UTC+11). This might be explained by the fact that three hens
accompanied the second cock. These were resting on a fallen log but started taking up grid stones shortly
after.
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
12
Figure 4. Left: lekking Siberian grouse male in old larch forest in Charpin Baktor. Right: Siberian grouse
lek in spruce-fir forest in the mountain area „Miochan“.
Sympatric Siberian grouse and hazel grouse
We found Siberian grouse occurring sympatric with hazel grouse in both study areas. Often, signs of both
species were close together in geographical space. With feathers, we found indirect evidence that dust
bathes at one location may be used by both species. Most likely, such a close coexistence is only possible
when different age classes provide a heterogeneous forests mosaic. Comparison of relative densities in
both areas revealed the encounter rate of Siberian grouse in “Miochan” to be twice the rate from the
lowland area (Table 1) and vice versa for hazel grouse.
Table 1. Relative densities (encounters per kilometer walked transect) of Siberian grouse and hazel
grouse in the two study areas over a period of 12 days.
Siberian grouse Hazel grouse
Miochan 0.25 km-1 0.17 km-1 Charpin – Baktor 0.13 km-1 0.34 km-1
These numbers accord with the expectation that hazel grouse density is higher in the lowlands
due to higher proportions of deciduous trees. Different encounter rates for Siberian grouse may be
explained with differences in forest types and study area topography. On the other hand, both main
habitat types - spruce-fir and larch forests, which provide winter- and summer food for the species, make
up a considerable share in “Charpin-Baktor”. It is likely that many factors contribute to the difference,
one of which is landscape-scale fragmentation due to clear-cut forestry. An interesting question in this
respect is if forestry and road construction is a benefit for hazel grouse. Early forest succession as well as
softwood stripes along forest roads may provide additional resources for hazel grouse. In the Russian Far
East, hazel grouse seems to get abundant along with forestry. In 1987, Andreev (1990) found spring
density of hazel grouse in “Charpin-Baktor” reaching 30-36 pairs/km2 in 15-20 year old cuts and many
more remnants of spruce grouse than of hazel grouse. He supposed that numerous hazel grouse attract
predators, which can easily switch to other species. We can only speculate here about forestry’s direct
impact on the Siberian grouse population in this area. Nevertheless, it is a main source of habitat
fragmentation.
Figure 5 shows only a small part of interfluve “Charpin-Baktor”. Yet, forest fragmentation is
clearly visible and its effects on sympatric Siberian- and hazel grouse should be further investigated.
Later timing can possibly be excluded as a factor for decreased visibility in the lowlands. This is
supported by the fact that we encountered 0.4 Siberian grouse per kilometer when coming back to
Miochan for another four days after the two-week visit to Charpin-Baktor. Probably this second visit
marked the beginning of juvenile dispersal and short migrations to the wintering areas.
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
13
Figure 5. A RapidEye satellite image from 2012 in pseudo-color from Charpin-Baktor. Vegetation
appears red, clear-cuts can be distinguished by their striped pattern. White-edged markers show three
Siberian grouse observations; one in a small 30-year old larch stand (SE) and two in old larch forest at
the northwestern fringe of a Ledum-swamp. A new clear-cut from 2013 (indicated by the yellow cursor)
separates the observations. Transects are black with random data collection points (blue).
Summary and conclusions
With endemic Siberian grouse as potential indicator of old forests; the planned project is designed to
broaden our understanding about the impacts of forestry on the integrity of the Okhotsk-Manchurian
taiga. In late summer 2014, we therefore collected Siberian grouse signs in a mountain and a lowland area
of the Russian Far East. We found heterogeneous forests with deadwood, openings, and different age-
classes to be important not only for Siberian- but also for hazel grouse. First results suggest that Siberian
grouse has higher densities at higher elevations whereas hazel grouse is more abundant in the lowlands.
Research on the sympatric occurrence of both species may provide deeper understanding about the effects
of forestry. Forestry that operates at smaller scales could facilitate faster regeneration and have less severe
impact on the species (Hafner and Andreev 1998). Ski tourism is a rather new phenomenon in the
mountains of the Russian Far East but may also have an impact on Siberian grouse populations in the
future.
Acknowledgements
This reconnaissance travel was a joint initiative between the chair of Wildlife Ecology and – Management
at University of Freiburg, Germany, and the Institute of Biological Problems of the North, Magadan,
Russia. The project was financed with grants from The Rufford Foundation, British Ornithological Union
(BOU) and University of Freiburg. We are grateful to Kateryna Konovalenko for invaluable support
during fundraising and project preparation. Fabian Enssle provided helpful technical advices regarding
remote sensing. We would especially like to thank Anatolij Uslontsev and Grigoriy Van for transfers
between Komsomol’sk and the study areas. Last but not least, we thank Siegi Klaus (Jena) and Franz
Hafner (Vienna) for helpful comments during the preparatory phase of the project.
References
Andreev, A. and Hafner, F. 2011. Winter Biology of the Siberian Grouse Falcipennis falcipennis. -
Ornithol Sci 10:101–111.
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
14
Andreev, A.V. 1990. The winter biology of Siberian spruce grouse (Falcipennis falcipennis) in the
Priamurye. - Zool Zhurnal 69:69–80. (in Russian with English Summary).
Andreev, A.V., Hafner, F., Klaus, S. and Gossow, H. 2001. Displaying behaviour and mating system in
the Siberian Spruce Grouse (Falcipennis falcipennis Hartlaub 1855). - J Ornithol 142:404–424.
Hafner, F. and Andreev, A.V. 1998. Das Sichelhuhn - Wundervogel der Amurtaiga. -
Naturwissenschaftlicher Verein für Kärnten, Klagenfurt, Austria (in German with English
Summary)
Ludwig, T. and Konovalenko, K. 2012. Siberian Grouse in the Russian Far East: data deficient? - Grouse
News 43:11–15.
Storch, I. 2007. Grouse: Status survey and conservation action plan 2006-2010. - Gland, Switzerland:
IUCN and Fordingbridge, UK: World Pheasant Association.
Tobias Ludwig, Wildlife Ecology and Management, University of Freiburg, Tennenbacher Str. 4, 79106
Freiburg, Germany, [email protected].
Ralf Siano, Forest Ecology Consultant, Schubertstr. 6, 01307 Dresden, [email protected].
Alexander V. Andreev, Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Biological Problems of the North,
Magadan, Russian Federation, [email protected].
The mixed group and distribution overlap of some sister species in
Xinjiang — is hybridization possible in these Galliformes? Roller MaMing and Guoqiang Zhang
We'll discuss some recent observations on the Galliformes in Xinjiang, north-west China. The theory and
the reality are so very different on the evolution, speciation and biogeography. These unusual events
happen always in the special places, such as Xinjiang -- the intersection of the east-west confluence for
some species.
1. Two species of snowcocks can be sympatric in portions of the Altun and Kunlun Mountains
The Kunlun Mountains is located in the northern margin of the Tibetan Plateau, with branches such as
Altun Mountains and the Qimantage Mountains. From 2011 to 2014, while conducting surveys for
snowcocks in the Qimantage Mountains (89°00’E, 37°45’N, 4310m), we were surprised that we were
able to photograph a group of about 30 snowcocks that included two different species, the Tibetan
snowcock (Tetraogallus tibetanus) and Himalayan snowcock (Tetraogallus himalayensis) together in a
mixed group during early mornings from May to Oct. According to the literature (Козлова, 1953; Shen
and Wang, 1963), the occurrence of the two species together is an unprecedented event. Some researchers
believe that all five species of snowcocks in the world are isolated in different mountains and by distance,
with absolutely no opportunity for contact and exchange (Cheng et al., 1978). In the Kunlun Mountains,
we know that even though their distribution in the plateau may overlap, there is strict elevational
separation of the two species during the breeding season (Ma et al., 1991).
About 30 Himalayan snowcock and Tibetan snowcock in mixed flock in the Altun - Kunlun Mountains
(Photo by Roller MaMing).
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
15
The Tibetan snowcock in the Altun - Kunlun Mountains (Photo by Roller MaMing).
The Himalayan snowcock in the Altun - Kunlun Mountains (Photo by Roller MaMing).
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
16
Mixed flock of Himalayan snowcocks and Tibetan snowcocks in the same point in the Altun - Kunlun
Mountains, May 2014 (Photos by Liang Yong).
2. Two species of ptarmigan occurring together in Altai Mountains
The Altai Mountains encompass four countries, Russia, Mongolia, Kazakhstan and China. These
mountains are the most southern edge of willow ptarmigan (Lagopus lagopus) and rock ptarmigan
(Lagopus muta) (Ma, 2011). In recent years, some birdwatchers were actually in one place (88°00’E,
48°00’N, 1800m) at the correct time to observe them together in summer. We were surprised again that
these two species are so consistent in the body size, shape, colour, habits, food/feeding, habitat, and
breeding season. Could they coexist for cooperating, mating, breeding and common prosperity? Perhaps
they do.
Willow ptarmigan (Lagopus lagopus) (left) in Altai Mountains (Photo by Tang Liming) and rock
ptarmigan (Lagopus muta) (wright) in Altai Mountains (Photo by Zhao Lansheng).
Such mixing occurs along the boundary areas of
species distribution. These closely related species persist at the
extremes, and perhaps climate change would lead to a change in
the vertical distribution?
Opposition and exclusion within the two similar
species or sister species is a natural phenomenon and it is in
line with the laws of nature. Natural isolation is an important
factor in the evolution, speciation and biogeography. The
integration or competition may lead to hybridization, genetic
convergence, assimilation and species extinction. In this case,
the two similar species are unlikely to achieve a "win-win"
coexistence. In nature, the basis of evolution and persistence is
the separation (isolation) of similar species.
The possible hybrid zones and potential for parapatry
within ptarmigan presents an interesting example of the
challenge of defining distinct species or populations. Thoughts
and opinions by other researchers would be of interest, and we
Chick of rock ptarmigan in Altai
Mountains (Photo by Zhang
Guoqiang).
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
17
hope that future discussion of this issue may be forthcoming.
Acknowledgements
This project was financially supported by
the National Natural Science Foundation
of China (No. 31272291). Field workers
included Tang Liming, Wang Chuanbo,
Yang Feifei, Yang Xiaomin, Gou Jun,
Huang Yahui, Zhang Guoqiang (Altai
Bird-watching Society), Zhao Lansheng,
Liang Yong and Sun Dahua (Xinjiang
Bird-watching Society).
Ptarmigan (Lagopus spp.) in Altai
Mountains (Photo by Yang Feifei).
References
Cheng Tso-hsin et al. 1978. Fauna Sinica, Aves: Vol. 4. Galliformes. Peking: Science Press.
Козлова Е. В. 1953. The distribution, phylogeny and history of the birds in Tibetan plateau. - Acta
Zoologica Sinica, 5(1): 25-36.
Ma Ming, Zhou Yongheng and Ma Li. 1991. The distribution and ecology of snowcocks Tetraogallus spp.
in Xinjiang. - Chinese Journal of Wildlife, (4): 15-16.
Ma Ming. 1992. Some biological data on the snowcocks in Kunlun. - WPA-China News, 1:2-3.
Ma Ming. 2011. A checklist on the distribution of the birds in Xinjiang. Beijing: Science Press.
Shen XZ and Wang JJ. 1963. The classification, geographical distribution and ecology of snow-cocks in
China. - Chinese Journal of Zoology, 5(2): 67-68.
Map 1. Mix and overlap of the geographical ranges about the sister species in Xinjiang, the west of
China.
Roller MaMing and Guoqiang Zhang, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of
Sciences, Urumqi 830011, Xinjiang, P. R. China, [email protected].
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
18
Patch-burning to manage prairie-chicken habitat and rangeland fuels Heath D. Starns, Samuel D. Fuhlendorf, R. Dwayne Elmore, Torre J. Hovick,
Dirac Twidwell and Eric T. Thacker
Lesser prairie-chickens (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus) and Attwater’s prairie-chickens (Tympanuchus
cupido attwateri) are among the most at risk grouse in North America. The Attwater’s prairie-chicken
was listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 1973. The lesser prairie-chicken
was federally listed as a threatened species under the ESA in March of 2014. In a similar trend, greater
prairie-chickens (Tympanuchus cupido pinnatus) have declined in number significantly from historic
abundance. All of these grouse occupy portions of the southern Great Plains region, including Texas,
Oklahoma, and Kansas. Prairie-chickens of the Great Plains require heterogeneous landscapes for
survival (Hagen et al. 2004). These landscapes must provide areas with low-growing vegetation for
lekking, moderate height vegetation for brooding, and tall, dense vegetation for nesting (Hagen et al.
2004, USFWS 2010). Furthermore, prairie-chickens require diverse plant communities with abundant
forbs. In addition to providing an abundant food source directly, forbs often positively correlate with
insect abundance, which is essential in the first 14 days of a chick’s life (Hagen et al. 2005). These
various types of vegetation must occur simultaneously on the landscape within the home range of prairie-
chickens to sustain populations.
Photo 1: Two Attwater’s prairie-chicken hens in loafing cover. Note the radio transmitter on the bird to
the left (red circle). Photo: H. Starns.
An additional topic of concern in the southern Great Plains is changes in historic fire regimes.
Changes in wildfire activity have necessitated the development and implementation of fuels management
strategies in the region. Prescribed fire is likely to be the dominant long-term fuels management strategy
(USDI-BLM 2004). However, burning is frequently followed by the removal of grazing animals from the
landscape (Fuhlendorf et al. 2012), which allows rapid recovery of herbaceous biomass (fine fuels). Thus,
prescribed fire followed by grazing removal offers limited benefit as a fine fuel reduction strategy unless
large areas are treated annually. Such large-scale treatments lead to homogeneous landscapes, removing
structural and compositional complexity that exists in the southern Great Plains, and is not conducive to
prairie-chicken ecology (Fuhlendorf et al. 2002). Moreover, prairie-chickens in the southern Great Plains
region may be negatively affected by fuels management strategies that promote homogeneous landscapes.
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
19
In order for prairie-chicken conservation objectives to coincide with fuels management
objectives, fuels treatments must promote landscape heterogeneity while simultaneously reducing fire
behavior characteristics (fire intensity, rate of spread) and increasing fire suppression potential. A
management strategy known as patch-burning may promote both prairie-chicken conservation and fuels
management objectives. Before European settlement, frequent patchy fires across the Great Plains
interacted with large herbivores to promote heterogeneity in grassland structure and function throughout
the region (Fuhlendorf and Engle 2001). Patch-burning replicates this interaction using carefully planned
prescribed fire and subsequent grazing by large herbivores, such as cattle or bison (Bison bison).
Furthermore, patch-burning has been shown to meet diverse habitat requirements of obligate grassland
bird species in the Great Plains region (Fuhlendorf et al. 2006, Hovick et al. 2014).
Photo 2: Two male Attwater’s prairie-chickens early in the booming season. Photo: H. Starns.
Our research focuses on how and whether patch-burning can be implemented in the southern
Great Plains for the benefit of lesser prairie-chickens, Attwater prairie-chickens, and greater prairie-
chickens while at the same time mitigating wildfire risk through fuels reduction. We are collecting
vegetation (structure and fuels) data from four study sites: Packsaddle Wildlife Management Area and the
Tallgrass Prairie Preserve in Oklahoma, as well as the Aransas National Wildlife Refuge and the
Attwater’s Prairie-Chicken National Wildlife Refuge in Texas. These sites are comprised of vegetation
types historically known to provide habitat for prairie-chicken populations: tallgrass prairie, sand-
shinnery oak and coastal prairie. Two of the sites (Tallgrass Prairie Preserve and Attwater’s Prairie-
Chicken NWR) currently have prairie-chicken populations and monitoring programs for prairie-chicken
habitat use which will be compared to the vegetation and fuels data collected to test for correlations
between prairie-chicken life history stage, habitat use, and fuel parameters. Preliminary data from the first
year of data collection suggest that time since fire is the main driver of heterogeneity as well as fuel
measurements at each study site. We expect completion of this project in December 2016.
References
Fuhlendorf, S. D., and D. M. Engle. 2001. Restoring heterogeneity on rangelands: Ecosystem
management based on evolutionary grazing patterns. Bioscience 51:625-632.
Fuhlendorf, S. D., D. M. Engle, R. D. Elmore, R. F. Limb, and T. G. Bidwell. 2012. Conservation of
Pattern and Process: Developing an Alternative Paradigm of Rangeland Management. Rangeland
Ecology & Management 65:579-589.
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
20
Fuhlendorf, S. D., W. C. Harrell, D. M. Engle, R. G. Hamilton, C. A. Davis, and D. M. Leslie. 2006.
Should heterogeneity be the basis for conservation? Grassland bird response to fire and grazing.
Ecological Applications 16:1706-1716.
Fuhlendorf, S. D., A. J. W. Woodward, D. M. Leslie, and J. S. Shackford. 2002. Multi-scale effects of
habitat loss and fragmentation on lesser prairie-chicken populations of the US Southern Great
Plains. Landscape Ecology 17:617-628.
Hagen, C. A., B. E. Jamison, K. M. Giesen, and T. Z. Riley. 2004. Guidelines for managing lesser prairie-
chicken populations and their habitats. Wildlife Society Bulletin 32:69-82.
Hagen, C. A., G. C. Salter, J. C. Pitman, R. J. Robel, and R. D. Applegate. 2005. Lesser prairie-chicken
brood habitat in sand sagebrush: invertebrate biomass and vegetation. Wildlife Society Bulletin
33:1080-1091.
Hovick, T. J., R. D. Elmore, and S. D. Fuhlendorf. 2014. Structural heterogeneity increases diversity of
non-breeding grassland birds. Ecosphere 5:13.
USDI-BLM. 2004. Decision record and resource management plan amendment for fire and fuels
management on public land in New Mexico and Texas. US Dept of Interior, Bureau of Land
Management, New Mexico, 107 p.
USFWS. 2010. Attwater’s Prairie-Chicken Recovery Plan, Second Revision. US Fish and Wildlife
Service. Albuquerque, New Mexico, 107 p.
Heath D. Starns, Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, 008C Ag Hall, Oklahoma
State University, Stillwater, OK 74078. [email protected]
Samuel D. Fuhlendorf, Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, 008C Ag Hall,
Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078. [email protected]
R.Dwayne Elmore, Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, 008C Ag Hall, Oklahoma
State University, Stillwater, OK 74078. [email protected]
Torre J. Hovick, School of Natural Resource Sciences, 201A Morrill Hall, North Dakota State University,
Fargo, ND 58102. [email protected]
Dirac Twidwell, Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 308 Keim
Hall, Lincoln, NE 68583. [email protected]
Eric T. Thacker, Wildland Resources Department, Utah State University, 5230 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT
84322. [email protected]
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
21
CONFERENCES
13th
International grouse symposium ˗˗ Iceland
2015
The 13th
International Grouse Symposium will be held in Reykjavik,
Iceland on 4-7 September 2015. Registration and abstract submission
system opened on the 1st of February 2015, abstract submission
deadline is 30 April and early registration deadline is 30 June 2015.
For more information visit the conference home page
http://igs2015.ni.is or contact [email protected] or
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
22
RECENT GROUSE LITERATURE
For a complete bibliography on grouse, go to: http://www.suttoncenter.org/pages/publications (please
note that the link in previous editions may not be current).
Anderson, L. C., L. A. Powell, W. H. Schacht, J. L. Lusk, and W. L. Vodehnal. 2015. Greater Prairie-
Chicken brood-site selection and survival in the Nebraska Sandhills. Journal of Wildlife
Management XXX:XXX-XXX (online early).
Archibald, H. L. 2014. The enigma of the 10-year wildlife population cycle solved? Evidence that the
periodicity and regularity of the cycle are driven by a lunar zeitgeber. Canadian Field-Naturalist
128:327-340. (Ruffed Grouse).
Arlettaz, R., S. Nussle, M. Baltic, P. Vogel, R. Palme, S. Jenni-Eiermann, P. Patthey, and M. Genoud.
2014. Disturbance of wildlife by outdoor winter recreation: allostatic stress response and altered
activity-energy budgets. Ecological Applications XXX:XXX-XXX (online early).
Bae, S., B. Reineking, M. Ewald, and J. Müller. 2014. Comparison of airborne lidar, aerial
photography, and field surveys to model the habitat suitability of a cryptic forest species – the
Hazel Grouse. International Journal of Remote Sensing 35:6469–6489.
Balzotti, C. S. 2014. Exploring the use of fine resolution nested ecological niche models to identify
Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus ) habitat and connectivity potential across a
diverse landscape. Ph. D. Dissertation. University of Utah. 155pp.
Berkeley, L. I. 2014. Relationships among behavior, habitat, and population density in a cyclic
population of Ruffed Grouse. Ph. D. Dissertation. University of Minnesota. 90pp.
Bland, J. D. 2013. Estimating the number of territorial males in low-density populations of the Sooty
Grouse.Western Birds 44:279-293.
Bland, J. D. 2013. Apparent extirpation of the Sooty Grouse from the sky islands of south-central
California.Western Birds 44:294-308.
Boal, C. W., P. K. Borsdorf, and T. S. Gicklhorn. 2014. Assessment of Lesser Prairie-Chicken use of
wildlife water guzzlers. Bulletin of the Texas Ornithological Society. 46:10-18.
Bolibok, L., B. Brzeziecki, S. Drozdowski, D. Zawadzka, and J. Zawadzki. 2014. Zastosowanie drzew
klasyfikacji do okreslenia preferencji grodowiskovvych gatunkow na przykladzie gluszca
(Tetrao urogallus). [Application of classification trees for assessment species habitat
preferences on the example of Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus).] Silwan 158:267-276. (in Polish
with English abstract).
Borchtchevski, V. G., and A. B. Kostin. 2014. Seasonality and causes of Black Grouse (Lyrurus tetrix,
Galliformes, Tetraonidae) death in western Russia according to count of remains. Biology
Bulletin 41:657-671. Original Russian text: Zoologicheskii Zhurnal 93:982–997.
Bordeau, K. A. 2014. New Hampshire Ruffed Grouse assessment - 2015. New Hampshire Fish and
Game Department. 22pp.
Braun, C. E., and M. A. Schroeder. 2015. Age and sex identification from wings of sage-grouse.
Wildlife Society Bulletin XXX:XXX-XXX (online early).
Braunisch, V., J. Coppes, S. Bachle, and R. Suchant. 2015. Underpinning the precautionary principle
with evidence: A spatial concept for guiding wind power development in endangered species’
habitats. Journal for Nature Conservation 24:31-40. (Capercaillie).
Cantegrel, R., and E. Menoni. 2014. Le Grand Tétras et la gestion forestière des pineraies oncinées.
[Capercaillie and forest management is one born of pine forests.] Les Dossiers Forestiers. Office
National des Forêts-pp. 120-130. (in French).
Caudill, D., M. R. Guttery, B. Bibles, T. A. Messmer, G. Caudill, E. Leone, D. K. Dahlgren, and R. Chi.
2014. Effects of climatic variation and reproductive trade-offs vary by measure of reproductive
effort in Greater Sage-Grouse. Ecosphere 12/2014; 5(12):154. DOI: 10.1890/ES14-00124.1
Christie, K. S. 2014. Trophic dynamics in a changing Arctic: interactions between ptarmigan and
willows in northern Alaska. Ph. D. Dissertation. University of Alaska, Fairbanks. 152pp.
Christie, K. S., and R. W. Ruess. 2015. Experimental evidence that ptarmigan regulate willow bud
production to their own advantage. Oecologia XXX:XXX-XXX (online early).
Christie, K. S., R. W. Ruess, M. S. Lindberg, and C. P. Mulder. 2014. Herbivores influence the growth,
reproduction, and morphology of a widespread Arctic willow. PLoS ONE 9(7): e101716.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0101716. (Rock Ptarmigan, Willow Ptarmigan).
Coates, P. S., M. L. Casazza, B. E. Brussee, M. A. Ricca, K. B. Gustafson, C. T. Overton, E. Sanchez-
Chopitea, T. Kroger, K. Mauch, L. Niell, K. Howe, S. Gardner, S. Espinosa, and D. J.
Delehanty. 2014. Spatially explicit modeling of Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus
urophasianus) habitat in Nevada and northeastern California: a decision-support tool for
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
23
management. USGS Open-File Report 2014-1163. Prepared in cooperation with the State of
Nevada Sagebrush Ecosystem Program, Bureau of Land Management, Nevada Department of
Wildlife, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Coates, P. S., B. J. Halstead, E. J. Blomberg, B. Brussee, K. B. Howe, L. Wiechman, J. Tebbenkamp, K.
P. Reese, S. C. Gardner, and M. L. Casazza. 2014. A hierarchical integrated population model
for Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) in the Bi-State Distinct Population
Segment, California and Nevada. USGS Open-File Report 2014-1165. Prepared in cooperation
with the Bureau of Land Management, Nevada Department of Wildlife, and U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
Coym, M. 2014. Captive breeding, rearing, and release of the Attwater’s Prairie Chickens at the Houston
Zoo. Pp. 61-68 IN: M. Lamont (Ed.). 2014. Proceedings of the IV International Symposium on
Breeding Birds in Captivity, Septemeber 12-16, 2007, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Hancock
House.
Davis, A. J., M. B. Hooten, M. L. Phillips, and P. F. Doherty, Jr. 2014. An integrated modeling approach
to estimating Gunnison Sage-Grouse population dynamics: combining index and demographic
data. Ecology and Evolution 4:4247-4257.
Davis, D. M., and J. A. Crawford. 2015. Case study: Short-term response of Greater Sage-Grouse
habitats to wildfire in mountain big sagebrush communities. Wildlife Society Bulletin
XXX:XXX-XXX (online early).
Doherty, K. E., D. E. Naugle, J. D. Tack, B. L Walker, J. M. Graham, and J. L. Beck. 2014. Linking
conservation actions to demography: grass height explains variation in Greater Sage-Grouse nest
survival. Wildlife Biology 20:320-325.
Dzialak, M. R., C. V. Olson, S. L. Webb, S. M. Harju, and J. B. Winstead. 2015. Incorporating within-
and between-patch resource selection in identification of critical habitat for brood-rearing
Greater Sage-Grouse. Ecological Processes (2015) 4:5, DOI 10.1186/s13717-015-0032-2.
Fearon, M. L., and P. S. Coates. 2014. Interspecific nest parasitism by Chukar on Greater Sage Grouse.
Western Birds 45:224-227.
Fedy, B. C., C. P. Kirol, A. L. Sutphin, and T. L. Maechtle. 2015. The influence of mitigation on Sage-
Grouse habitat selection within an energy development field. PLoS ONE 10(4): e0121603. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0121603
Fike, J. A., S. J. Oyler-McCance, S. J. Zimmerman, and T. A. Castoe. 2015. Development of 13
microsatellites for Gunnison Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus minimus) using next-generation
shotgun sequencing and their utility in Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus).
Conservation Genetics Resources 7: 211-214. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12686-014-0336-z
Galla, S. J., and J. A. Johnson. 2015. Differential introgression and effective size of marker type
influence phylogenetic inference of a recently divergent avian group (Phasianidae:
Tympanuchus). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 84:1-13. (Sharp-tailed Grouse, Greater
Prairie-Chicken, Lesser Prairie-Chicken).
Gibson, D., E. J. Blomberg, M. T. Atamian, and J. S. Sediger. 2015. Observer effects strongly influence
estimates of daily nest survival probability but do not substantially increase rates of nest failure
in Greater Sage-Grouse. Auk 132:397-407.
Gillette, G. L. 2014. Ecology and Management of Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse in southern Idaho:
evaluating infrared technology, the Conservation Reserve Program, statistical population
reconstruction, and the olfactory concealment theory. Ph. D. Dissertation. University of Idaho.
131pp.
Gonzales, M. A., S. Garcia-Tejero, E. Wengert, and B, Fuertes. 2015. Severe decline in Cantabrian
Capercaillie Tetrao urogallus cantabricus habitat use after construction of a wind farm. Bird
Conservation International XXX:XXX-XXX (online early).
Hansen, C. P., M. A. Rumble, R. S. Gamo, and J. J. Millspaugh. 2014. Auxiliary VHF transmitter to aid
recovery of solar Argos/GPS PTTs. U. S. Forest Service Research Note RMRS-RN-72. Fort
Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.
11 p. (Greater Sage-Grouse).
Hanson, L., C. Holmquist-Johnson, and M. L. Cowardin. 2014. Evaluation of the Raven sUAS to detect
and monitor Greater Sage-Grouse leks within the Middle Park population. USGS Open-File
Report 2014-1205. Prepared in cooperation with Colorado Parks and Wildlife.
Hofstetter, L., R. Arlettaz, K. Bollmann, and V. Braunisch. 2015. Interchangeable sets of
complementary habitat variables and target values allow for flexible, site-adapted wildlife
habitat management in forest ecosystems. Basic and Applied Ecology XXX:XXX-XXX (online
early). (Capercaillie).
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
24
Högstedt, G. 2014. Prolonged aerial chase of Willow Grouse Lagopus lagopus by Common Raven
Corvus corax. Ornis Norvegica 37:15
Holloran, M. J. B. C. Fedy, and J. Dahlke. 2015. Winter habitat use of Greater Sage-Grouse relative to
activity levels at natural gas well pads. Journal of Wildlife Management XXX:XXX-XXX
(online early).
Hovick, T. J., R. D. Elmore, S. D. Fuhlendorf, and D. K. Dahlgren. 2015. Weather constrains the
influence of fire and grazing on nesting Greater Prairie-Chickens. Rangeland Ecology &
Management XXX:XXX-XXX (online early).
Hubbard, J. P., C. M. Milensky, and C. Dove. 2014. The emended type locality and historic status of the
Lesser Prairie Chicken. Unpublished manuscript. 20pp.
Jackson, M. M., S. E. Gergel, and K. Martin. 2015. Citizen science and field survey observations
provide comparable results for mapping Vancouver Island White-tailed Ptarmigan (Lagopus
leucura saxatilis) distributions. Biological Conservation 181:162-172.
Kervinen, M., C. Lebigre, R. V. Alatalo, H. Siitari, and C. D. Soulsbury. 2015. Life-history differences
in age-dependent expressions of multiple ornaments and behaviors in a lekking bird. The
American Naturalist 185:13-27. (Black Grouse).
Kirol, C. P., A. L. Sutphin, L. Bond, M. R. Fuller, and T. L. Maechtle. 2015. Mitigation effectiveness for
improving nesting success of Greater Sage-Grouse influenced by energy development. Wildlife
Biology 21:98-109.
Klaus, S., Y. Lou, Y. Fang, W. Scherzinger, and Y.-H. Sun. 2014. Aggressive interactions between
males of Chinese Grouse Tetrastes sewerzowi in autumn at Lianhuashan natural reserve, Gansu,
Central China. Ornithologischer Anzeiger 53:45-53.
Knick, S. T., and C. Gondhalekar. 2014. Birds of a feather. U. S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2014-
3049. (Greater Sage-Grouse).
Knoche, S. 2014. Discrete choice models of hunting and fishing in Michigan. Ph. D. Dissertation.
Michigan State University. (Ruffed Grouse).
Koch, R. E., A. H. Krakauer, and G. L. Patricelli. 2015. Investigating female mate choice for mechanical
sounds in the male Greater Sage-Grouse. Auk 132:349-358.
Kowalczyk, A., and E. Lukaszewic. 2015. Simple and effective methods of freezing Capercaillie (Tetrao
urogallus L.) Semen. PLoS ONE 10(1):e0116797. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0116797
Krilow, J. M. 2014. Distant drumming: morphological correlates of habitat and courtship behaviour in
the Ruffed Grouse (Bonasa umbellus). M. Sc. Thesis. University of Lethbridge, Canada.
133pp.
Kropachev, D. V., and Y. I. Koval. 2014. [Lead content in Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) body in
Tomsk region[. [Bulletin of the NGAU] 3(32):67-71. (in Russian with English abstract).
Kurulyuk, V. M., and D. V. Naumkin. 2014. [Population dynamics of grouse (Tetraonidae) in the
reserve "Basegi" (Perm region) in the years 2001-2011.] Pp. 121-125 IN: [Man and nature -
interaction on specially protected natural territories. Materials of interregional scientific and
practical conference dedicated to the 25th anniversary of the Shor National Park, 3-6 October
2014]. L. A. .Trilikauskas (Editor). Gorno-Altaisk. 192 p. (Black Grouse, Capercaillie, Hazel
Grouse, Willow Ptarmigan). (in Russian).
Lautenbach, J. M. 2015. Lesser Prairie-Chicken reproductive success, habitat selection, and response to
trees. M. Sc. Thesis. Kansas State University.
Loeffler, H., and M. Lauterbach. 2014. Das Auerhuhn Tetrao urogallus in den bayerischen
Vogelschutzgebieten - Natura 2000-Lebensraumschutz von der Modellierung bis zum
Managementplan. [Capercaillie Tetrao urogallus in Bavarian special protection areas - Natura
2000 habitat conservation from habitat model to management plan. Ornithologischer Anzeiger
53:22-44. (in German with English abstract).
Lukaszewicz, E. T., and A. M. Kowalczyk. 2015. The usefulness of captive kept Capercaillie (Tetrao
urogallus L.) as the semen donors for artificial insemination and gene pool preservation In vitro.
Reproduction in Domestic Animals XXX:XXX-XXX (online early).
Mabray, S. T. 2015. Microhabitat selection by Greater Sage-Grouse hens in southern Wyoming. M.Sc.
Thesis. Utah State University.
Macgregor, L. 2015. Moors the pity: the case of the missing grouse - Cramaso LLP v Ogilvie-Grant,
Earl of Seafield and others. Edinburgh Law Review 19(1):112-119.
Manier, D. J., Z. H. Bowen, M. L. Brooks, M. L. Casazza, P. S. Coates, P. A. Deibert, S. E. Hanser, and
D. H. Johnson. 2014. Conservation buffer distance estimates for Greater Sage-Grouse—A
review: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2014–1239. 14 pp.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20141239.
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
25
Merta, D., J. Kobielski, A. Krzywiński, J. Theuerkauf, R. and Gula. 2015. A new mother-assisted
rearing and release technique (“born to be free”) reduces the exploratory movements and
increases survival of young Capercaillies. European Journal of Wildlife Research 61:299-302.
Mora, M. A., and Z. Torres. 2014. A stable isotope approach to determine seasonal diet shifts Attwater’s
Prairie Chickens (Tympanuchus cupido attwateri) released at the Attwater Prairie Chicken
National Wildlife Refuge. Report to U. S. Geological Survey. Texas A&M University. 30pp.
Morrow, M. E. 2015. Attwater’s Prairie-Chicken recovery – 2014 Annual Report. 66pp. U. S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
Nieminen, E. 2014. Timing of reproductive effort as an alternative mating strategy in young Black
Grouse (Tetrao tetrix) males. M. Sc. Thesis. University of Jyväskylä. 29pp.
O’Donnell, M. S., C. L. Aldridge., K. E. Doherty, and B. C. Fedy. 2015. Wyoming Greater Sage-Grouse
habitat prioritization—A collection of multi-scale seasonal models and geographic information
systems land management tools. U. S. Geological Survey Data Series 891, 28 p.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ds891.
Powell, L. A., W. H. Schacht, L. C. Anderson, W. L. Vodehnal. 2014. Management of Sandhills
rangelands for Greater Prairie-Chickens. University of Nebraska Extension Circular:
EC305. 20pp.
Rae, S. 2015. Strategic placement of Rock Ptarmigan Lagopus muta nests adjacent to boulders. Bird
Study XXX:XXX-XXX (online early).
Rottler, C. M., C. E. Noseworthy, B. Fowers, and J. L. Beck. 2015. Effects of conversion from
sagebrush to non-native grasslands on sagebrush-associated species. Rangelands 37(1):1-6.
(Greater Sage-Grouse).
Sandford, C., and T. A. Messmer. 2014. Effects of pinyon juniper removal of Greater Sage-Grouse
(Centrocercus urophasianus) habitat-use and vital rates in northwestern Utah. 2014 Annual
Report. DWR Contract 132573. WRI Project #2555. 14pp.
Spencer, D. A. 2014. A historical record of land cover change of the Lesser Prairie-Chicken range in
Kansas. M. Sc. Thesis. Kansas State University. 62pp.
Stanley, T. R., C. L. Aldridge, D. J. Saher, and T. M. Childers. 2015. Daily nest survival rates of
Gunnison Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus minimus): assessing local- and landscape-scale drivers.
Wilson Journal of Ornithology 127:59-71.
Stenkewitz, U., O. K. Nielsen, K. Skírnisson, and G. Stefa´nsson. 2014. The relationship between
parasites and spleen and bursa mass in the Icelandic Rock Ptarmigan Lagopus muta. Journal of
Ornithology XXX:XXX-XXX (online early).
Streitlien, A. E. 2014. Rypejakt som næring: Kan markedskunnskap bidra til å skape et økonomisk
stabilt jaktprodukt? [Grouse hunting as an industry: Can market knowledge help to create a
financially stable looking product?] B. Sc. Thesis. Hedmark University College. (Willow
Grouse, Black Grouse, Capercaillie). (In Norwegian with English Abstract).
Telepnev, V. G., and L. N. Erdakov. 2014. Description of population cycles of Wood Grouse (Tetrao
urogallus L., 1758) through long-term monitoring. Contemporary Problems of Ecology 7:530-
536.
Thacker, E., T. Messmer, and B. Burritt. 2015. Sage-Grouse habitat monitoring: Daubenmire vs line-
point intercept. Rangelands XXX:XXX-XXX. (online early).
Tirsky, D. I. 2014. Typology and structure of wetland bird and grouse habitats in the Olekminsky
Natural Reserve. Achievements in Life Sciences XXX:XXX-XXX (online early). (Black
Grouse, Capercaillie, Willow Grouse, Rock Ptarmigan, Hazel Grouse).
Url, S., M. Schwanninger, U. Nopp-Mayr. 2015. Analyses of Black Grouse (Tetrao tetrix) faeces with
infrared spectroscopic methods. Journal of Ornithology XXX:XXX-XXX (online early).
Visinoni, L., C. A. Pernollet, J.-F. Desmet, F. Korner-Nievergelt, and L. Jenni. 2014. Microclimate and
microhabitat selection by the Alpine Rock Ptarmigan (Lagopus muta helvetica) during summer.
Journal of Ornithology XXX:XXX-XXX (online early).
Viterbi, R., S. Imperio, D. Alpe, V. Bosser-Peverelli, and A. Provenzale. 2014. Climatic control and
population dynamics of Black Grouse (Tetrao tetrix) in the Western Italian Alps. Journal of
Wildlife Management 79:156-166.
Wang, B., R. Ekblom, I. Bunikis, H. Siitari, and J. Hoglund. 2014. Whole genome sequencing of the
Black Grouse (Tetrao tetrix): reference guided assembly suggests faster-Z and MHC evolution.
BMC Genomics 2014, 15:180 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2164/15/180.
Warren, P., F. Atterton, D. Baines, M. Viel, Z. Deal, M. Richardson, and D. Newborn. 2015. Numbers
and distribution of Black Grouse Tetrao tetrix males in England: results from the fourth survey
in 2014. Bird Study XXX:XXX-XXX (online early).
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
26
Wenzel, M. A., and S. B. Piertney. 2015. In silico identification and characterisation of 17 polymorphic
anonymous non-coding sequence markers (ANMs) for Red Grouse (Lagopus lagopus scotica).
Conservation Genetics Resources XXX:XXX-XXX (online early).
Wenzel, M. A., and S. B. Piertney. 2015. Digging for gold nuggets: uncovering novel candidate genes
for variation in gastrointestinal nematode burden in a wild bird species. Journal of Evolutionary
Biology XXX:XXX-XXX (online early). (Red Grouse).
Whalen, C., M. B. Brown, J. McGee, L. A. Powell, J. A. Smith, and E. J. Walsh. 2014. The acoustic
characteristics of Greater Prairie-Chicken vocalizations. Journal of the Acoustical Society of
America. 136:2073
White, P. J. C., P. Warren, and D. Baines. 2015. Habitat use by Black Grouse Tetrao tetrix in a mixed
moorland-forest landscape in Scotland and implications for a national afforestation strategy.
Bird Study 62:1-13.
Winder, V. L., A. J. Gregory, L. B. McNew, and B. K. Sandercock. 2015. Responses of male Greater
Prairie-Chickens to wind energy development. Condor – Ecological Applications 117:XXX-
XXX (online early).
Wing, B. R. 2014. The role of vegetation structure, composition, and nutrition in Greater Sage-Grouse
ecology in northwestern Utah. M. Sc. Thesis. Utah State University. 113pp.
Wuenschel, A. 2014. Fine-scale spatial variation in vegetation characteristics at sage-grouse nests in
western Wyoming. M. Sc. Thesis. University of Wyoming.
Zwart, M. C., P. Robson, S. Rankin, M. J. Whittingham, and P. J. K. McGowan. 2015. Using
environmental impact assessment and post-construction monitoring data to inform wind energy
developments. Ecosphere 6:art26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/ES14-00331.1 . (Black Grouse).
Grouse News 49 Newsletter of the Grouse Group
27
SNIPPETS
Dr. Siegfried Klaus received the Federal Cross of Merit
Second of March 2015, Siegi Klaus (Jena) was
awarded the Cross of Merit of the Federal
Republic of Germany. The ceremony was
performed by the Thuringian Prime Minister
Bodo Ramelow in a festive atmosphere in the
baroque hall of the State Chancellery in Erfurt.
Many of Siegis companions and friends
accepted the invitation to Erfurt. The ceremonies
background were Siegis decades of commitment
to nature- and species conservation and his
contributions to the study of grouse worldwide.
In his speech, the Prime Minister emphasized in
particular Siegis merits to the designation of
“Hainich”. Siegi had fought tirelessly for the
designation of this beech forest national park.
On behalf of the whole grouse community, we
congratulate Siegi cordially!
Tobias Ludwig & Christoph Unger
Lesser Prairie-Chicken Initiative has launched its website! We're thrilled to announce the launch of our new website, www.lpcinitiative.org. On it, you'll find
extensive information about LPCI: how we go about win-win conservation of lesser prairie-chickens and
rural agriculture, how to take part in LPCI, in-depth natural history information on lesser prairie-chickens
and the prairie community of which they are a part, news, photos, videos, and much more.
We'll be regularly updating it with news, press releases, field reports, and photos. So stay tuned!
www.lpcinitiative.org.
Our mailing address is: [email protected].
Management of sandhills rangelands for greater prairie-chicken
An Extension Circular is now available from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln for landowners in the
Nebraska Sandhills. For the first time, landowners have management guidelines that are not based on
research conducted in the tallgrass prairie region. The circular contains basic life history information,
management suggestions, and a data sheet and monitoring scheme for landowners to use to track
populations of prairie-chickens on their land. The circular may be of use to those who manage prairie
chickens in other states outside of the tallgrass prairie region.
A link to the freely available PDF: http://ianrpubs.unl.edu/epublic/live/ec305/build/ec305.pdf.
Powell, L. A., W. H. Schacht, L. C. Anderson, W. L. Vodehnal. 2014. Management of Sandhills
Rangelands for Greater Prairie-chickens. - University of Nebraska Extension Circular: EC305. 20pp.
