Castilleja Publication of the Wyoming Native Plant Society May 2016, Volume 35(2) Posted at www.wynps.org The Importance of Forbs in Big Sagebrush Plant Communities for Greater Sage-Grouse* By Victoria Pennington and William Lauenroth, Department of Botany, University of Wyoming The most widespread species of sagebrush in North American drylands is big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ; Schultz 2012). Big sagebrush plant communities consist of a shrub overstory and an understory composed of forbs and grasses. These communities are important because they provide habitat for wildlife species such as Greater Sage-Grouse (Connelly et al 2004). Greater Sage-Grouse is a sagebrush-obligate species that relies on healthy, intact big sagebrush communities year-round for survival. Greater Sage-Grouse populations have declined because of increasing habitat loss and fragmentation due to wildfires, overgrazing, human population expansion, invasive species, and energy development (Nelle et al. 2000, Pedersen et al. 2003, Connelly et al. 2004, Schroeder et al. 2004, Davies 2011, Smith et al. 2014). It was a candidate for listing under the Endangered Species Act in September 2015, and although listing was not considered warranted, it continues to be a species of management concern (USFWS 2015). Forbs are herbaceous vascular plants found in the understory of big sagebrush plant communities that are not grasses, sedges or rushes. Forbs have been identified as important to Greater Sage-Grouse for three reasons. First, they are an important food source during the spring and summer. Second, they provide concealment from predators. Last, they are host plants for arthropods. Arthropods are closely linked to Greater Sage-Grouse because they are also essential to their diet in the spring and summer. Therefore, we compiled information to determine which forbs are commonly used by Greater Sage-Grouse in their diet and habitat. Our work synthesizes the current knowledge regarding forbs in big sagebrush plant communities and their importance for Greater Sage-Grouse diet and habitat. Additionally, we compiled information on the relationship between forbs and rangeland management practices, the relationship between forbs and climate, and the implications of these changes for Greater Sage-Grouse populations. Last, we identified additional research needs for effective conservation and management of big sagebrush (Cont. p. 4) *This article highlights part of Master thesis research and an associated publication: Pennington, V.E., J.B. Bradford, D.R. Schlaepfer, J.L. Beck, K.A. Palmquist, and W.K. Lauenroth. 2016. Sagebrush, Greater Sage-Grouse, and the Occurrence and Importance of Forbs. Western North American Naturalist , in revision. Left: The Dubois badlands will be among many landscapes featured in the 2016 annual meeting. They rise above the Wind River in rainbows of color that support Dubois milkvetch. Habitat photo by Hollis Marriott. In this Issue: Importance of Forbs in Big Sagebrush Plant Communities for Greater Sage-Grouse . . 1, 4, 5 Championing for Herbaria .3 Growing Native Plants: Shelterbelts .6-8 1 WYNPS News Reminder ! Please register for the 2016 Annual Meeting in Dubois - the deadline is June 1 to help organizers make arrangements. Now is also a good time to make reservations for camping or lodging. Open to the public. 2016 Markow Scholarship Awards : The two 2016 awardees of the Markow scholarship are: • Jason Mercer, Department of Botany, University of Wyoming, for Exploring alternative hydrological niches of rare plants in groundwater dependent mountain peatlands • Marian Lea, Department of Integrative Biology, University of Colorado Denver, for Recovery of genetic diversity in whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis Engelm.) a quarter century after the 1988 Yellowstone fires ...We look forward to hearing from them next year! Chapter News : Teton Plants Chapter Tuesday, May 24, 6-8pm, “Gardening with Natives and Managing Invasives,” Teton County Library, 125 Virginian Lane, Jackson, www.tetonplants.org New Members : Please welcome the following new members to WYNPS: Jay Dierks, Laramie; Barry Hildreth, Laramie; Steve Deutsch, Jackson. Treasurer's Report : Treasurer's report: Balance as of 20 April 2016: Scholarship = $1070.50; general fund = $7822.68; total = $8893.18. Contributors to this Issue : Karen Clause, Robert Dorn, Bonnie Heidel, William Lauenroth, Victoria Pennington, Dorothy Tuthill. Deadline for next Issue : Announcements and articles are welcome at any time. The next deadline is 15 Sept. Wyoming Native Plant Society P.0. Box 2449 Laramie, WY 82073 Message from the President : Happy spring everyone! Things are starting to grow, even around Pinedale. Here is an update on the activities of the Board this spring: We reviewed many excellent scholarship applications, and ended up funding one application at the maximum amount of $1,000 and partially funding another application. Congratulations to the recipients, Jason Mercer and Marian Lea. Our Secretary/Treasurer, Jeannette Flaig, resigned and the board appointed Dorothy Tuthill in the interim until election are held next winter. Well wishes to Jeanette and a warm welcome to Dorothy. Ann Boelter, past Secretaiy/Treasurer extraordinaire, has been transferring her wealth of knowledge and records over to Dorothy. I can't thank them enough for their service. With that, I hope you enjoy the fine newsletter ...AND, don't forget to register for the annual meeting in Dubois this June ©. ~Karen Clause, President WYNPS Board -2016 President: Karen Clause, Pinedale f kdclause@centurvtel.neG Vice-President: Brian Sebade, Laramie f bsebade@uwvo.edu1 Sec.-Treasurer: Dorothy Tuthill f dtuthill@uwvo.edu 1 Board-at-large: Walt Fertig, Phoenix, AZ ('14-'15) f waltola64@gmail.com1 Bob Giurgevich, Sheridan ('15-'16) f bobgiurgevich@live.com1 Other contacts : WYNPS homepage: www.wvnps.org: also on Facebook Teton Plants Chapter: Amy Taylor, Treasurer f tetonplants@gmail.com1 and homepage http : / /www.tetonplants.org/ Sublette Chapter: Julie Kraft, President f iewelvioe@hotmail.com 1 Editor: Bonnie Heidel f bheidel@uwvo.edu1 Webmaster: Brenna Marsicek f brennamarsicek@gmail.com1 Bighorn Native Plant Society: Jean Daly, Treasurer (P.0. Box 21, Big Horn, WY 82833 2 Native Plant Conservation Campaign : Championing for Herbaria Wyoming Native Plant Society is proud to boast on behalf of the Rocky Mountain Herbarium (RM; University of Wyoming), the largest herbarium in the region, and largest between St. Louis and the West Coast. RM is also home-away-from-home for many U-WY alumni, the vital resource for data users and researchers across the country, stomping grounds of high-energy volunteers, and host to a broad fan base. So we are also proud to partner with the Native Plant Conservation Campaign (NPCC) in the call for reinstating National Science Foundation (NSF) funding for herbaria such as RM and similar facilities across the country. NSF funding has been and potentially signifies major support for RM operations and services. NPCC Director, Emily Roberson, presented the essential functions of herbaria as stimulating discovery, providing the raw materials for expanding and deepening scientific knowledge, and providing treasure troves of information needed to understand change. The complete NPCC letter is posted at: http://plantsocieties.cnps.org/images/NSFBiolSpecCollec4.15.16NPCC- lettpdf . Read the full article about critically needed support for herbaria in Nature : http://www.nature.com/news/biological-specimen-troves-threatened-bv-funding-pause-l.19599. Finally, Wyoming Native Plant Society members are also encouraged to check out Friends of the RM f http : / /www.uwvo.edu /botanv/rm%2 Ofriends /I - a group comprised of anyone who is an RM fan. Flora of North America Sale Now thru 9 July, most of the published Flora of North America volumes are on sale at 20% off through the publisher, Oxford University Press (marked down to $76+shipping). If you have always wanted these hardcover references in your library, there's no time like the present. They can be ordered on-line r www.oup.com/academic/biologvcatalog ) using the Promotion Code: 33789. The specific volumes that are on sale include: Volumes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27 and 28. 2016 WYNPS ANNUAL MEETING - DUBOIS, WY June 17-20 2016 BIOBLITZ - BELVOIR RANCH June 11-13 See you in Dubois! For the complete WYNPS schedule and registration information, go to your March 2016 newsletter or to posted on-line information f http : / /www. wvnps.org/acti vities/2 0 1 6 - annual-meeting/ L Attendees are also encouraged to register ahead for camping/lodging. The Dubois KOA is our central meeting area where you go to get your registration packet, maps, sign liability waivers, and to meet at the start of hikes. It is also one of the camping options, where Wyoming Native Plant Society attendees have a group discount. It is located 1 block from town [from Hwy 26/287, turn at the Conoco Station onto Riverton St. and go south 1 block). You can register at the KOA by mail (225 Welty St., Dubois, WY 82513), by phone (1-800-562- 0806) or on-line (www.koa.com/campgrounds/dubois). Just say that you are with Wyoming Native Plant Society and they will give a 20% discount off the full prices for cabins , tent camping or RV. A map of hike destinations and trip rosters will be available for viewing at the registration area. Additional camping and lodging information is in the March newsletter. Belvoir Ranch, 16 miles west of Cheyenne, is destination for the 2016 Bioblitz. The Bioblitz is a weekend-long event teaming together community members of all ages, educators, and scientists to document the plant and animal life of an area. Registration is open from 3-7 pm on Friday and 6-9 am on Saturday, with a Friday evening Keynote presentation at 7 pm by Dr. Dennis Knight, and a weekend full of hikes. All registration and events take place on the Ranch*. People can also register on-line and sign up to get further event details, at: http://wvomingbiodiversitv.org/programs/cheve nne-bioblitz-2016/ . *To get to Belvoir Ranch, go on 1-80 to Exit 342 (Harriman Road), and turn south. Go roughly 3 miles on the Harriman Road to the Ranch turn on the east (lefthand) side. From the Ranch entrance there will be signs and flagging to direct you to the registration area. 3 FORBS FOR GREATER SAGE-GROUSE Continued from p. 1 communities. We conducted a literature search through the University of Wyoming Web of Science and Google Scholar. We included peer-reviewed and non-referred journal articles, conference proceedings, books, agency reports, M.S. theses and Ph.D. dissertations. We obtained 68 sources that addressed the explicit Greater Sage-Grouse requirements in big sagebrush plant communities. Diet studies analyzed crop contents or directly observed Greater Sage-Grouse consuming forbs. Habitat studies evaluated microhabitat characteristics at nesting and brood-rearing locations. Forbs are important because they contain crude protein, calcium and phosphorus, which has been reported to increase Greater Sage-Grouse reproductive success in the spring (Barnett and Crawford 1994, Gregg et al. 2008). Gregg et al. (2008) found that forbs were found in 89% of Greater Sage-Grouse crop dissections and contributed approximately one- third of the aggregate dry mass. In studies conducted in Oregon and Nevada, Greater Sage-Grouse adults consumed 21-22 different food items in the spring, of which 15-16 were different forb species (Barnett and Crawford 1994, Gregg et al. 2008). In the summer, Drut et al. (1994) reported that juveniles consumed 41 invertebrate taxa, 34 forb genera, and 3 grass and shrub genera in Oregon. Invertebrate taxa that were commonly consumed included Coleoptera (beetles), Hymenoptera (ants), and Orthoptera (grasshoppers; Klebenow and Gray 1968, Martin 1970, Peterson 1970, Wallestad and Eng 1975, Drut et al. 1994). Some of the most commonly found families in spring and summer diets were Asteraceae, Fabaceae, and Polemoniaceae. Forbs also provide essential cover during nesting and brood-rearing life stages because they can decrease visibility to predators (Watters et al. 2002). Therefore, Greater Sage-Grouse often inhabit areas with higher forb cover than the surrounding areas (Dinkins et al. 2016). Watters et al. (2002) suggested that nest success could potentially increase with an 8 to 11% increase in forb cover. Nesting females and broods select for areas where Asteraceae and Fabaceae are present. In addition to providing cover, forbs also influence Greater Sage-Grouse movements: as forbs desiccate throughout the summer, broods relocate to areas where forbs are still green and abundant (Klebenow 1969, Peterson 1970, Wallestad 1971, Fisher et al. 1996, Aldridge and Brigham 2002). Our analysis uncovered important uncertainties and research needs. Many studies focused primarily on grasses and shrubs, and forbs are excluded from analyses, lumped together as a single group, or only identified to the family or genus level. Greater Sage-Grouse biologists concur that forbs are a vital diet and habitat component. However, we lack information about forbs, particularly at the species level, and about which forbs are used during different life stages (lekking, nesting, and brood- rearing) or at important times of the growing season. More research is needed to fill this knowledge gap. William Lauenroth and Kyle Palmquist (UW) are embarking on a multi-state field study in May 2016 to enhance our understanding of plant species richness in big sagebrush plant communities with a focus on forbs. The illustrations featured with this article represent a few of the plant species that have been found in the crops of Greater Sage-Grouse hens. Above: Phlox longifolia, Astragalus purshii. Illustrations by Jeanne R. Janish. Next page: Achillea millefolium. Illustration by John Rumley. From: Vascular Plants of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA. 4 References Aldridge, C.L., and R.M. Brigham. 2002. Sage-grouse nesting and brood habitat use in southern Canada. Journal of Wildlife Management 66:433-444. Barnett, J.K., and J.A. Crawford. 1994. Pre-laying nutrition of sage grouse hens in Oregon. Journal of Range Management 47:114-118. Connelly, J.W., S.T. Knick, M.A. Schroeder, and S.J. Stiver. 2004. Conservation assessment of greater sage-grouse and sagebrush habitats. Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. Unpublished Report. Cheyenne, WY. Davies, K.W. 2011. Plant community diversity and native plant abundance decline with increasing abundance of an exotic annual grass. Oecologia 167:481-491. Dinkins, J.B., K.T. Smith, J.L. Beck, C.P. Kirol, A.C. Pratt, and M.R. Conover. 2016. Microhabitat conditions in Wyoming’s sage-grouse core areas: effects on nest site selection and success. PLoS One 11: e0150798. Drut, M.S., W.H. Pyle, and J.A. Crawford. 1994b. Diets and food selection of sage grouse chicks in Oregon. Journal of Rangeland Management 47:90-93. Fischer, R.A., K.P. Reese, and J.W. Connelly. 1996. Influence of vegetal moisture content and nest fate on timing of female sage grouse migration. Condor 98:868-872. Gregg, M.A., J.K. Barnett, and J.A. Crawford. 2008. Temporal variation in diet and nutrition of preincubating greater sage-grouse. Rangeland Ecology and Management 61:535-542. Klebenow, D.A. 1969. Sage grouse nesting and brood habitat in Idaho. Journal of Wildlife Management 33:649-662. Klebenow, D.A., and G.M. Gray. 1968. Food habits of juvenile sage grouse. Journal of Range Management 21:80-83. Martin, N.S. 1970. Sagebrush control related to habitat and sage grouse occurrence. Journal of Wildlife Management 34:313-320. Nelle, P.A., K.P. Reese, and J.W. Connelly. 2000. Long-term effects of fire on sage grouse habitat. Journal of Range Management 53:586-591. Pedersen, E.K., J.W. Connelly, J.R. Hendrickson, and W.E. Grant. 2003. Effect of sheep grazing and fire on sage grouse populations in southeastern Idaho. Ecological Modelling 165:23-47. Peterson, J.G. 1970. The food habits and summer distribution of juvenile sage-grouse in central Montana. Journal of Wildlife Management 34:147-155. Schultz, L. 2012. A Pocket Guide to Sagebrush. Point Reyes Bird Observatory Conservation Science Publication. Petaluma, CA. 85 pp. 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. The Condor 106:363-376. Smith, K.T., C.P. Kirol, J.L. Beck, and F.C. Blomquist. 2014. Prioritizing winter habitat for greater sage-grouse in a landscape influenced by energy development. Ecosphere 5: article 15. USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service}. 2010. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: 12-month finding for petitions to list the greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus } as threatened or endangered. Federal Register 75:13909- 14014. Wallestad, R.0. 1971. Summer movements and habitat use by sage grouse broods in central Montana. Journal of Wildlife Management 35:129-136. Wallestad, R., and R.L. Eng. 1975. Foods of adult sage grouse in central Montana. Journal of Wildlife Management 39:628-630. Watters, M.E., T.L. McLash, C.L. Aldridge, and R.M. Brigham. 2002. The effect of vegetation structure on predation of artificial greater sage-grouse nests. EcoScience 9:314-319. 5 Growing Native Plants Part 20. Windbreaks and Shelterbelts By Robert Dorn Windbreaks and shelterbelts are usually designed for two primary objectives: to reduce wind exposure and to control drifting snow. There are often secondary objectives or benefits that include sound or vision barriers, wildlife habitat, shade, and moisture accumulation from snow. There are four parameters to consider when designing a windbreak or shelterbelt: height, length, density, and setback. Other factors that should be taken into account include annual precipitation and when it occurs; supplemental irrigation; space available; shape of the windbreak or shelterbelt; soil type and depth; proximity of buildings, roads, driveways, utilities, and easements; prevailing wind direction at different seasons; suitable plant species; weed barriers; and protection from animals at least during establishment. The four basic parameters of height, length, density, and setback need to be considered in terms of space available, proximity to buildings, roads, and other objects, and the prevailing wind direction that we want to moderate or control snow drifting. The following two graphs illustrate the effects of height and density which are used to determine setback. DISTANCE FROM FENCE