Gunnison Sage-grouse

The Gunnison Sage-grouse
(Centrocercus minimus)

Since the late 1970's researchers became aware that the Sage Grouse in the Gunnison Basin, Colorado were unique from Sage Grouse found elsewhere in most of the United States. In 1995, Drs. Clait Braun and Jessica Young proposed that the Gunnison Sage-grouse was a distinct species and along with Drs. Jerry Hupp, Sara Oyler-McCance and Tom Quinn, they published their findings in the scientific journal, the Wilson Bulletin (Young et al. 2000) and were awarded the Edward's Prize for the best major article published by that journal that year. The American Ornithological Union recognized the Gunnison Sage-grouse as a newly named species in 2000 after a review of the scientific data by the AOU Nomenclature Committee which consists of the leading taxonmic specialists in North and Central America. In 2006, the International Ornithological Congress has recommended that the species common name be Gunnison Grouse and that the species previously referred to as Greater Sage-grouse be named Sage Grouse (Gill and Wright 2006).

 Species Designation

Photos Copyrighted © by Louis Swift and Rob Bennetts 

Sage Grouse                 Gunnison Sage-grouse

The traits that distinguish the Gunnison Sage-grouse include the following: they are about 2/3 the size of the Sage Grouse (Hupp and Braun 1991), have differences in their plumage, and produce different mating vocalizations. For example, note the whiter and more distinct tail feathers in the Gunnison male and the filoplume feathers being tossed over his head in comparison to the duller colors and simpler filoplumes of the Sage Grouse male above.  They use these traits in a highly elaborate strut display that begins with a male taking a few steps forward as the wings are raised and lowered and brushed twice against the stiff, feathers of his white pouch, producing loud swishing noises. In addition to the mechanical noises produced by the wing movements, males utter a distinctive series of sounds by vocalizing and popping two air sacs within their pouches. The entire display for both types of grouse lasts approximately 3 seconds. Grouse in Gunnison differ in their display by performing less displays per minute; however, they pop their yellow air sacs 9 times instead of 2 and create different sounds (Young et al. 1994). Young (1994) found that females in the Gunnison Basin and northern Colorado avoided playbacks of male courtship vocalizations of the other species. In addition, they have different visual aspects such as throwing their filoplumes over their head and often wag their tail at the end of their display. Genetic evidence has shown that the Gunnison Sage-grouse are genetically distinct as well. At the species level, Gunnison Sage-grouse have low levels of genetic diversity in both the nuclear and mitochondrial genomes when compared to the Sage Grouse. (Kahn et al. 1999, Oyler-McCance et al. 1999, Oyler Mc-Cance et al. 2005). Oyler-McCance also identified that there is a significant amount of genetic structuring among Gunnison Sage-grouse populations suggesting little gene flow occurs among existing populations.

Females have similar plumage in both species; however, Gunnison females are about 2/3rd's the size of the other females.   In contrast to the difference seen in the male displays, ecological traits of females are quite similar in both species.  For example, selection of nesting, brood-rearing, and non-brood sites by Gunnison Sage-grouse are similar to those chosen by Sage Grouse females throughout their geographical range.  In addition, despite the smaller body size of Gunnison Sage-grouse, egg and clutch sizes are in the same range as those observed in other populations (Schroeder et al. 1999).

Historical and Current Range of Gunnison Sage-grouse in Colorado

Historically, there has been an over 90% loss in Gunnison Sage-grouse habitat leading to the current distribution today (Schroeder et al. 2004, GSGRCP 2005). Today, while birds may move to some use areas in the winter, there remains only 8 extant populations of the Gunnison Sage-grouse (GSGRCP 2005). Of significant concern is the estimated population sizes within each of the extant populations. Only one population, the Gunnison Basin, is estimated to have more than 500 individuals during the breeding season and that population contains approximately 75% of all remaining individuals in the species. The remaining 6 populations are isolated and small with high male counts during the 2004 breeding season from 2 to 50 individuals. Several of the former populations have disappeared since 1980 (Braun 1995, Young et al. 2000). Counts in 2005 were higher through much of the range as precipitation conditions returned to more normal levels. The historic abundance prior to 1950 is unknown but, based on historical documents and interviews, was likely orders of magnitude larger than present. Even during the past decades, leks areas in the Gunnison Basin have seen over 500 displaying males present. Currently, most leks in the Gunnison Basin have fewer than 50 males displaying and many have fewer than 20. Approximately 40% of the leks in the Gunnison Basin are classified as inactive and no longer have birds displaying on them. In other areas in the range, males have not attended leks for several years nor have new leks been discovered in adjacent areas.

Population Trends and Estimates

2001 - 2009 Lek Counts

Recent high male counts of males attending breeding grounds courtesy of the Colorado Division of Wildlife. Current counts do not reflect the greater than 90% habitat loss calculated in the Gunnison Sage-grouse Rangewide Conservation Plan nor the inactive or extirpated leks in any population area. As the Gunnison Sage-grouse Rangewide Conservation Plan points out, lek data is most useful to determine long term trends rather than population estimates. Comparing particular count or lek areas can be useful to understand potential and percent decline in local areas. For example, in 1953, one lek area in the Gunnison Basin had over 500 birds attending it on a single day. A recent high count of that Ohio Creek area indicated an over 40% decline according to the Rangewide conservation plan. In other areas of the range, Gunnison Sage-grouse have experienced greater than 90% declines on lek areas. Recent high counts for 2005 and 2006 in the Gunnison Basin may be due in part to habitat recovery following a severe drought. Interestingly, smaller populations have not realized the same level of drought relief.

The counts above represent high male counts of males attending leks in the spring. There are two methods that have been used to estimate population sizes based on lek counts. The first estimate, found in most local plans and used for the majority of Greater Sage-grouse populations results in an overall spring population estimate for 2009 of 3,576 and the second method derived from a study by J. Stiver found in the rangewide plan results in an estimate of 4,386. 

Conservation

The World Conservation Union recognizes the Gunnison Sage-grouse as a red-listed or globally endangered species according to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (Storch 2000). In 2006, the Audubon Society listed the Gunnison Sage-grouse as one of the 10 most endangered birds in North America. Recently, the USFWS removed the species from any protection under the ESA with a listing determination. Central to the listing determination is the conclusion that the population has experienced no significant decline during the past decades, a finding that is in direct contrast to the Gunnison Sage-grouse Rangewide Conservation Plan published in 2005. Recent articles and a history of conservation groups efforts to have the Gunnison Grouse listed as threatened or endangered can be found at Sagebrush Sea.  

Indicator Species

Wildlife agencies in the United States now recognize that Gunnison and Sage Grouse are indicator species for shrub-steppe habitat. An indicator species is one which, because of its unique life history and strong reliance to multiple ecosystem areas, provides biologists with an indication of ecosystem health. These grouse are an ideal indicator species for uplands dominated by sagebrush (Young 1994). For example, they require a variety of habitats such as large expanses of sage with a diversity of grasses and forbs and healthy riparian ecosystems. Their habitat requirements differ during most of the year and differ for sex and age classes. Therefore the presence of each habitat type in healthy condition in close proximity to winter, lek, nest and brood-rearing habitat is essential. A large percent of each seasonal habitat must be in thelater seral stages of ecological succession to meet the requirements of the grouse. If the sagebrush ecosystem is healthy (for example: the soil is stable (little accelerated soil erosion); ecological functioning is maintained (several trophic levels, nutrient cycling); and plant and animal communities are diverse and productive) then grouse populations and productivity will indicate the success of land use management. Surveying trends in the productiving and populations of these grouse can be a useful management tool for assessing the sagebrush shrub-steppe ecosystem health.

Habitat loss and fragmentation

The key to maintenance of any species is providing sufficient habitat.  Some causes of habitat loss and fragmentation for Gunnison Sage-grouse in the Gunnison Basin include:  recreation, increased roads, the formation of Blue Mesa reservoir, housing developments, Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action, powerlines, reduction in riparian areas. A second problem can be the existing quality of habitat that is present.  Some impacts which cause a decline in habitat quality are: excessive livestock grazing, drought, land treatments, increased elk and deer populations reducing shrub vigour and destribution, and herbicides. Increasingly, oil and gas exploration in the southwestern portion of the species range is threatening habitat for breeding, nesting, and brood rearing.

An example of the importance of good habitat can be seen in the photos below. Female Gunnison Sage-grouse are more likely to have a successful nest when vegetative cover is present. The photo on the left shows a female on a nest and the photo on the right shows the remains of eggs from a nest which was attacked by a predator. Loss of forbs and grasses can lead to increased risk of predation and decreased chances of success for young broods as they emerge from their nests.

Conservation Plans

The local Gunnison Basin Sage-grouse conservation plan published in 1997 can be obtained from the Gunnison Resource Area Office of the Bureau of Land Management. Within the plan specific conservation goals and objectives are proposed to restore habitat and population numbers of the Gunnison Sage-grouse to the Gunnison Basin. In addition, over 50 conservation actions are proposed. Organizations involved with the creating of the plan include the Black Canyon Audubon Society, Bureau of Land Management, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Gunnison County Stockgrowers Association, Gunnison County, High Country Citizens Alliance, National Park Service, Natural Resource Conservation Service, USDA Forest Service, US Fish and Wildlife, and Western State College of Colorado.

The Rangewide Gunnison Sage-grouse Conservation Plan published in 2005 can be obtained from the Colorado Division of Wildlife website through downloading a series of PDF's. Biologists from the following agencies contributed to the plan: Bureau of Land Management, Colorado Division of Wildlife, National Park Service, Natural Resource Conservation Service, USDA Forest Service, US Fish and Wildlife and the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources.

Other Links, Articles, and Relevant Information about the Gunnison Grouse

Gunnison Sage Grouse Working Group works at prioritizing and implementing conservation actions for grouse in the Gunnison Basin
Sisk-a-dee is the only organization completely dedicated to the conservation of the Gunnison Grouse
High Country Citizen's Alliance also maintains a Gunnison Sage-grouse page with current information
The Rangewide Gunnison Sage-grouse Conservation Plan was created by an interagency team in 2005 and has important biological information and conservation assessments and goals
Sagebrush Sea has a wealth of information and news releases from the environmental communities perspective
The USFWS has a Gunnison Sage-grouse webpage that has current information about its US conservation status
The Colorado Division of Wildlife maintains a "Species of Special Concern" website on the grouse
A GIS Database for Sage Grouse and Shrubsteppe Management in the Intermountain West site
A Summary of Sage Grouse Petitions for Listing as Threatened/Endangered can be found at this site
High Country News - "A scarce bird tests new rules" an article from the High Country News in 2000

Gunnison Grouse and Sagebrush Habitat Relevant Literature

American Ornithological Union. 2000. Forty-Second suppliment to the American Ornithologists Union Check-list for North American Birds. The Auk 117(3):847–858.

American Ornithological Union. 2002. Forty-Second suppliment to the American Ornithologists Union Check-list for North American Birds. The Auk 119(3):897–906.

Braun C.E. 1998. Sage Grouse Declines in Western North America. What are the Problems? Proc Western Assoc. State Fish and Wildl. Agencies 78:139-156.

Commons, M.L. 1997. Movement and habitat use by Gunnison Sage Grouse (Centrocercus minimus) in southwestern Colorado. M. S. thesis. Univ. Manitoba, Winnipeg.

Connelly, J.W., M. A. Schroeder, A. R. Sands, and C. E. Braun. 2000. Guidelines to manage sage grouse populations and their habitats. Wildlife Society Bulletin 28 (4): 967-985

Gill, F. and M. Wright. 2006. Birds of the World: Recommended English Names. Princeton University Press.

Hupp, J. W. and C. E. Braun. 1989. Topographic distribution of sage grouse foraging in winter. J. Wildl. Manage. 53: 823-829.

Hupp, J. W. and C. E. Braun. 1989. Endogenous reserves of adult male sage grouse during courtship.  Condor: 91(2): 266-271

Hupp, J. W. and C. E. Braun. 1991. Geographical variation among sage grouse populations in Colorado. Wilson Bull. 103: 255-261.

Kahn, N. W., C. E. Braun, J. R. Young, S. Wood, D. R. Mata, and T. W. Quinn 1999 Molecular analysis of genetic variation among large- and small-bodied Sage Grouse using mitochondrial control-region sequences. The Auk 116(3):819-824.

Oyler-McCance, S.J., N.W. Kahn, K.P.Burnham, C.E.Braun, and T.W. Quinn. 1999. A population genetic comparison of large and small-bodied sage grouse in Colorado using microsatellite and mitochondrial DNA markers. Molecular Ecology 8: 1457-1465.

Oyler-McCance, S.J., K.P. Burnham, and C.E. Braun. 2001. Influence of changes in sagebrush on Gunnison sage grouse in Southwestern Colorado. Southwestern Naturalist 46(3): 323-331.

Oyler-McCance, S.J., J. St. John, S.E. Taylor , A.D. Apa, and T.W. Quinn. 2005. Population genetics of Gunnison sage-grouse: implications for management. Journal of Wildlife Management 69(2): 630-637.

Schroeder, M. A., Young, J. R. and C. E. Braun 1999. Sage Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus): In: The Birds of North America 425:1-28. (A. Poole, P. Stettenheim and F. Gill, Eds.) The Birds of North America, Inc. Philadelphia , PA.

Schroeder, M.A., C.L. Aldridge, A.D. Apa, J.R. Bohne, C.E. Braun, S.D. Bunnell, J.W. Connelly, P.A. Deibert, S.C. Gardner, M.A. Hilliard, G.D. Kobriger, S.M. McAdam, C.W. McCarthy, J.J. McCarthy, D.L. Mitchell, E.V. Rickerson, and S.J. Stiver. 2004. Distribution of sage-grouse in North America. Condor 106: 363-376.

Schroeder, M. A., J. W. Connelly, C. L. Wambolt, C. E. Braun, C. A. Hagen, and M.R. Frisina. Society for Range Management. 2006. Ecology and Management of Sage-Grouse and Sage-Grouse Habitat - A Reply. pp 3-6.

Storch, Illse (2000). Grouse Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan 2000-2004. WPA/BirdlifeSSC Grouse Specialist Group. IUCN, Gland. Switzerland and Cambridge. 112 pp.

Young, J.R. 1994. The influence of sexual selection on phenotypic and genetic divergence of Sage Grouse. Ph.D. dissertation. Purdue University, IN, USA

Young, J. R., Hupp, J. W., Bradbury, J. W., & Braun C. E. 1994. Phenotypic divergence of secondary sexual traits among sage grouse Centrocercus urophasianus populations. Anim. Behav. 47:1353-1362.

Young, J. R., Braun, C. E., Oyler-McCance, S. J., Hupp, J. W. and T. W. Quinn. 2000. A new species of Sage-Grouse from Southwestern Colorado . Wilson Bulletin 112(4):445-453.

Additional management resources

Baker, W. L. 2006. Fire and Restoration of Sagebrush Ecosystems. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 34:(1) 177-185.

Entwistle, P.G., A.M. DeBolt, J.H. Kaltenecker, and K. Steenhof, compilers. 2000. Proceedings: Sagebrush Steppe Ecosystems Symposium. Bureau of Land Management Publication No. BLM/ID/PT-001001+1150, Boise , Idaho , USA .

Lysne, Cindy R.  2005.  Restoring Wyoming big sagebrush  In: Shaw, Nancy L.; Pellant, Mike; Monsen, Stephen B., comps. 2005. Sage-grouse habitat restoration symposium proceedings; 2001 June 4–7, Boise , ID. Proc. RMRS-P-38. Fort Collins , CO : U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. p. 93-98.

Management Considerations for Sagebrush (Artemisia) in the Western United States, Bureau of Land Management 2002. A selected literature summary of sagebrush management research (pdf file)

Monsen, Stephen B.; Shaw, Nancy L.   2000.  Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) communities: ecology, importance and restoration potential  Billings Land Reclamation Symposium, 2000 : striving for restoration, fostering technology and policy for reestablishing ecological function : March 20-24, 2000, Sheraton Billings Hotel, Billings , Montana . Bozeman : Montana State University , 2000. Publication no. 00-01.

Paige, C., and S. A. Ritter. 1999. Birds in a sagebrush sea: managing sagebrush habitats for bird communities.
Partners in Flight Western Working Group, Boise, ID.

Sedgewick, James. 2004. A literature review - Habitat restoration for Gunnison Sage-Grouse

Shaw, Nancy L.; Pellant, Mike; Monsen, Stephen B. 2005. Sage-grouse habitat restoration symposium proceedings. Proc. RMRS-P-38. Fort Collins , CO : U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 130 p.

Viewing the Grouse

Waunita Lek Watchable Wildlife Site

The only public viewing site for Gunnison Sage-grouse is the Waunita Lek Watchable Wildlife Site located approximately 19 miles east of Gunnison, Colorado. Please contact Matt Thorpe at 970-641-4262 or Sisk-a-dee at 970-641-3959 for current information about viewing the Gunnison Grouse. Sisk-a-dee maintains an excellent viewing website with the most recent viewing information, maps, and viewing protocols.

When viewing Gunnison Sage-grouse, please keep in mind that they are highly sensitive to human disturbance. Loud, unusual sounds such as car doors slamming, radios, human voices, dogs, and people walking through brush can cause the birds to fly off. Continual disturbances can ultimately result in these birds permanently abandoning their traditional lek sites. To reduce your impact, arrive at the lek viewing area well before sunrise (at least one hour prior) and view the birds from inside your vehicle using a spotting scope or binoculars. It is essential that you remain inside your vehicle and remain as quiet as possible. Also, please refrain from starting up your vehicle and leaving the area until after the birds have completed their morning display. Your efforts will help reduce any unnecessary stress on the birds and will provide for a better viewing experience for yourself and others.

For information about traveling to Gunnison and finding accomodations, please visit the Gunnison-Crested Butte Tourism Association website or call (800-814-7988).

© 1995-2009 Western State College of Colorado
For More Information Contact: jyoung@western.edu
Updated 7/09