Copet Michael Glen 597-525 Northwest J 25 nines Montana Libby/ 1992 Hungry Horse Dams wildlife ni i t igat i on t Columbian sharp-" tana Libby/Hungry Horse Dams ion Columbian Sham-tailed ife Mitigation Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse v K\ ■$*% 4 r^:. m Final Report U.S. Department of Energy Bonneville Power Administration Division of Fish & Wildlife Montana State University Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks July 1992 Northwest Montana Lihh fj 0pe This report was funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), U.S. Department of Energy, as part of BPA's program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River and its tributaries. The views in this report are the author's and do not necessarily represent the views of BPA. For copies of this report, write to: Bonneville Power Administration Division of Fish and Wildlife - PJ P.O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208 NORTHWEST MONTANA LIBBY/HUNGRY HORSE DAMS WILDLIFE MITIGATION COLUMBIAN SHARP-TAILED GROUSE Final Report Prepared by Michael Glen Cope Montana State University Bozeman, Montana Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks Kalispell, Montana Prepared For Robert Walker, Project Manager U.S. Department of Energy Bonneville Power Administration Division of Fish and Wildlife P.O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208-3621 Project No. 90-049 Contract No. DE-BI79-90BP07103 July 1992 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2013 http://archive.org/details/northwestmontana1992cope IV ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I wish to express my sincere appreciation to the following, among others, for their contribution to this study: Dr. Robert L. Eng, Montana State University, for technical supervision and advice during the preparation of this manuscript; Dr. John Weigand, Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Dr. Lynn Irby, Montana State University, and Dr Thomas McMahon, Montana State University, for their critical review of the manuscript; Marilyn Wood, Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, for project planning, technical advice, and her assistance with data collection when I was not available; Lewis Young, United States Forest Service, for the hours spent releasing and tracking grouse over the years; the Eureka community for their hospitality and cooperation; and my parents, Glen and Shirley, and my fiance, Dawn McCann, for their undying support. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION 7 METHODS 10 RESULTS 17 Population Dynamics 17 Historical Numbers and Transplant Efforts 17 Survival 18 Nest Success 21 Home Range 22 Adjustment and Post Adjustment 22 Nesting and Brood Rearing 24 Year-long Home Range 25 Cumulative Home Range Data 25 Habitat Use 26 Habitat Composition 26 Dancing Ground Habitat 27 Nest Site Habitat 28 Brood Habitat 29 Use versus Availability 30 DISCUSSION 32 LITERATURE CITED 41 APPENDICES 47 VI LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Mean and Median Movement Between Consecutive Relocations of 1 1 Sharp-tailed Grouse Transplanted Into the Tobacco Valley in 1990 20 2. Home Range Size (ha) of All Grouse Transplanted in 1 990 for Different Time Periods 23 3. Distance (in meters) From Geographic Activity Centers of Individual Birds to the Nearest Dancing Ground, Road, Developed Area, Coniferous Forest, Riparian Forest, Agricultural Field, and to the Release Site 25 4. Vegetational Composition on the Tobacco Plains for Six Sampling Plot Types 27 5. P-Values, Calculated Using the Kruskal-Wallace Test, Showing Statistical Differences in Vegetative Cover Between Plot Types 28 6. Results of Use Versus Availability for 9 Transplanted Sharp-tailed Grouse 31 7. Vascular Plant Species Observed at the Proposed Dancing Prairie Preserve June 6, 1985; June 5, 1986; July 17, 1986 49 8. Capture, Release Dates and Ultimate Fate of Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse Transplanted Into the Tobacco Valley during 1990 and 1991 53 VII LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Past and Present Distribution of Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse in North America (Modified From Miller and Graul, 1980) .... 3 2. Diagram of the Tobacco Plains Study Area 5 3. Diagram of the "W" Wing Trap System Used to Capture Sharp-tailed Grouse on Display Grounds During Spring 1990 and 1991 11 4. Diagram of the "Circle" Trapping System Used to Catch Sharp-tailed Grouse on the Dancing Ground During the Spring Mating Season in British Columbia 11 5. Maximum Number of Grouse Observed on 3 Dancing Grounds (DG A, DG B, and DG C) From 1969 to 1991 18 6. Survival of 4 Cohorts of Transplanted Male Columbian Sharp-Tailed Grouse 1987-1990 20 7. Relationship Between Survivability and Mean Distance Between Consecutive Relocations for Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse in the Tobacco Valley, Montana 21 8. Mean Effective Height (the Height of Visual Obstruction) for the Six Plot Types Used to Describe Habitat Use 29 9. Percent Coverage of Nesting and Brood Rearing Vegetation on the Tobacco Plains, Montana 30 10. Graph of Daily Movements of Male Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse # 049 Transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the Spring of 1990 55 viii Figure Page 1 1 . Graph of Daily Movements of Male Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse # 069 Transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the Spring of 1990 55 12. Graph of Daily Movements of Male Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse # 356 Transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the Spring of 1990 56 13. Graph of Daily Movements of Male Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse # 089 Transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the Spring of 1990 56 14. Graph of Daily Movements of Male Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse # 108 Transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the Spring of 1990 57 15. Graph of Daily Movements of Male Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse # 229 Transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the Spring of 1990 57 16. Graph of Daily Movements of Female Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse # 1 49 Transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the Spring of 1990 58 17. Graph of Daily Movements of Female Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse # 208 Transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the Spring of 1990 58 18. Graph of Daily Movements of Female Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse # 417 Transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the Spring of 1990 59 19. Graph of Daily Movements of Female Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse # 1 27 Transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the Spring of 1990 59 20. Graph of Daily Movements of Female Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse # 168 Transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the Spring of 1990 60 IX ABSTRACT Distribution, habitat use and survival of transplanted Columbian sharp- tailed grouse in the Tobacco Plains, Montana were studied from April, 1990 to August, 1991. For transplant purposes, 12 grouse (5 female and 7 male) were trapped on dancing grounds near Douglas Lake, British Columbia, Canada during spring, 1990. In April, 1991, trapping of 4 female and 2 male grouse for transplant occurred on the Sand Creek Wildlife Management Area in southeast Idaho while 3 additional males were transplanted from Douglas Lake. Minimum annual survival of transplanted grouse in the Tobacco Plains is relatively high (47%). High survival is possibly due to 2 factors: 1) topography and habitat characteristics that discourage dispersal and 2) the presence of limited but relatively good habitat. Two of 18 radio -equipped grouse dispersed out of the study area, while 2 others survived in the area for over 590 days. A negative correlation in distances moved between consecutive relocations and length of survival was seen in radio-equipped grouse in this study. Data collected during this study showed the importance of habitat associated with the Dancing Prairie Preserve. Three of 5 females transplanted in 1990 attempted to nest after being released. Nesting and brood rearing sites were characterized by dense grass cover with an average effective height ^ 20 cm. Shrub cover was associated only with brood rearing sites. Overall habitat use by transplanted Columbian Sharp-tailed grouse showed an apparent avoidance of agricultural land and use of other habitat types in proportion to their availability. INTRODUCTION The Columbian sharp-tailed grouse (Tympanuchus phasianellus columbianus) is one of six sub-species of sharp-tailed grouse found in the United States and Canada (Johnsgard 1973). They historically occupied Intermountain areas west of the continental divide from central British Columbia south through Montana and Washington with a southern range in California, Utah and Colorado. Their current distribution has been drastically reduced (Fig. 1). The sub-species has been extirpated from California and Oregon while only remnant populations exist in Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Idaho, Washington and Montana (Miller and Graul 1980). British Columbia is the only remaining area in which 80% or more of its historical range is still occupied (Miller and Graul 1980). In 1989, the Columbian sharp-tailed grouse was listed as a "Category 2" species on the United States List of Threatened and Endangered Wildlife. This classification lists species which are becoming rarer, but for which conclusive information on vulnerability is not available (Federal Register 1989). The Columbian sharp-tailed grouse once occupied grasslands in intermountain valleys throughout western Montana and were considered to be "fairly common". However, by 1969, they existed only in Lake, Powell, and Lincoln counties (Hand 1969). By 1980, the only documented population in the state was located in Lincoln county on the Tobacco Plains, in the Kootenai Valley (Bown 1980). Presently, this population remains, and additional 2 sightings of a few birds have been made in the Blackfoot Valley near Helmsville (R. Green, Montana Department of Fish Wildlife and Parks [MDFWP] pers. commun.). Figure 1. Past and present distribution of Columbian sharp-tailed grouse in North America (Modified from Miller and Graul, 1980). Circle denotes Tobacco Plains population. In the past, 6 dancing grounds have been observed in the Kootenai Valley with a maximum of 4 active at one time in the early 1970's (Bown 1980). In 1980, Bown reported two active dancing grounds (A and B, Fig. 2). Thirteen and 10 males attended dancing ground A during 1979 and 1980, respectively, while 7 and 6 were seen on ground B during the same time periods (Bown 1980). Dancing ground B was abandoned in 1984, leaving only one known active dancing ground in the state (Manley 1989). Semi-yearly counts of displaying males on ground A from 1969 through 1987 showed a large decrease in numbers. By 1987, only 4 males were displaying, a drastic decrease in numbers from the high count of 33 in 1971 (Manley 1989). In reaction to low numbers of grouse found in 1987, the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MDFWP), and the Nature Conservancy of Montana, began an augmentation project. A population of Columbian sharp- tailed grouse near Kamloops, British Columbia was chosen to provide grouse for the transplant program. Fourteen and 18 male grouse were captured and transplanted onto the Tobacco Plains in 1987 and 1988, respectively. In 1989, trapping efforts yielded 9 females and 4 males. The maximum number of grouse counted on the dancing ground after the 1989 release was 14, which included 8 males from the 1988 release (M. Wood, MDFWP, pers. commun.). The limited success of Columbian sharp-tailed grouse transplants into the valley led the MDFWP to conduct a winter survey and habitat evaluation in 1989 in order to identify possible limiting factors for the Tobacco Plains population. This resulted in locating isolated wintering habitat in the valley, as well as raising questions about limiting factors other than winter habitat (Manley 1989). To Cranbrook CANADA To Libby "8 o _ ■*• CO r^ o> <=> ■ CO in CO f^- CO CO cz> , CO r— r*- t~- r*- r*- i^- CO CO CO CO CO co CO CO CO CO co CO co CO o» o> o> o> OJ o» CO o» CO CO CO CO CO YEAR Survival Minimum yearly survival of male Columbian sharp-tailed grouse transplanted into the Tobacco Valley from 1987 through 1989 was determined by counts of color banded males attending the dancing ground(s). Mean survival was 48.3 % from 1988 to 1991 (survival data from 1988-1989 collected by M. Wood, Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks) (Figure 6). Low survival of the 1987 year-class in 1988 could possibly be due to minimal observation time that occurred that year; no 1987-birds were observed after 19 1988. Other year-classes showed a near 50 % survival rate through most years with a high of 100% in 1989 for the 1987 year-class (one individual surviving) and a low of 20 % in 1991 for the 1988 year-class. Survival data for grouse transplanted in 1990 and 1991 was limited at the conclusion of the study. Figure 6 includes available data for these years. Grouse transplanted in 1990 had a 42% survival rate for the first year and lived from 60 to over 680 days with a mean survival time of 328 days. Survival did not differ for males and females (P = 0.1432).. The 1991 year-class had a known survival rate of 0% for birds trapped in Idaho, but survival of the three birds trapped in British Columbia is not known. At the end of the study, one radio-equipped grouse transplanted in 1990 was alive. Survival of the birds transplanted in 1990, but not equipped with radio packs, is unknown. Since the conclusion of the field work for this study, the area near dancing ground C has undergone changes in order to complete construction of a new airport. This has caused the dancing ground to either be moved or abandoned; therefore, male attendance could not be accurately evaluated in the spring of 1 992. Mean movement between consecutive relocations ranged from 354 - 1278 m for males and 545-1549 m for females. Males showed significantly less movement (P = 0.0446) (Table 1). The figures in Table 1 were used to construct a graphical relationship between movement and days survived. This relationship suggests a significant negative correlation (R2 = 0.865) between bird movement and survivability (Fig. 7). Figures 10-20 (Appendix B) show distances of movements between consecutive relocations for 1 1 grouse transplanted in the spring of 1990. 20 Figure 6. Survival of 4 cohorts of transplanted male Columbian sharp-tailed grouse 1987-1990. 120 r- 100- < > > CL Z> CO DC < LLI >- i i CC < LU >- 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 Table 1 . Mean and median movement between consecutive relocations of 1 1 sharp-tailed grouse transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in 1990. Grouse Mean Movement Median Movement Days Survived Number (m) (m) Males 049 355 331 598 069 1278 1010 69 089 342 338 378 108 500 409 378 229 453 451 288 356 414 373 680+ Females 127 691 1311 252 149 579 417 198 168 1549 438 60 208 578 323 252 417 545 387 441 Mean 662 526 368 21 Figure 7. Relationship between survivability and mean distance between consecutive. relocations for Columbian sharp-tailed grouse in the Tobacco Valley, Montana. BUU - y = 887 54 * 1 0A(-8 0803e-4x) RA2 = 0.865 \ + Q 600- \ + LU > > cc + z> 400- + Nv CO CO + >- + ^Sl < 200- + Q 0 - I ' ' 500 1000 1500 MEAN MOVEMENT (m) 2000 Nest Success Three of 5 transplanted radio-equipped females attempted to nest in 1990. Nests were located 0.5-3.7 km from the nearest dancing ground with a mean distance of 1.5 km. Mean distance to the nearest road or developed area was 0.3 km, while the mean distance to agricultural land was 1 .0 km. Only one radio-equipped hen survived to the next nesting season, and she did attempt to nest. One additional nest was found incidentally in 1991. Nest initiation, determined by back-calculating from known incubation or hatching dates, occurred during 18-30 May in 1990 and on 30 May in 1991. Clutch sizes from 2 nests were 1 1 and 12. Other nests were not located during incubation; therefore, clutch size was not determined. Two nests were successful and 2 were destroyed. Renesting was not documented for either of the hens whose nests were destroyed. 22 Nests that had fallen to predation were not heavily damaged. Eggs were often missing from these nests, leaving the remains of only partial clutches. Remaining eggs had holes on the side approximately 3 cm in diameter, or were totally crushed. All nests that were destroyed showed characteristics of both avian (punctured as well as removed from the nest) and mammalian (crushed) predation (Rearden 1951). In each case of known nest predation, hens escaped injury as was later documented by normal flushing behavior. Hatching occurred in 2 nests on June 17 and 24 in 1990. Brood sizes were 8 and 5 on 29 June and 21 July, respectively. The brood of 5 had been flushed on 29 June, but chicks were so young that only one was seen. On 27 July, brood sizes were 6 and 5 and did not change by mid-September. Chicks were near adult size by 30 September and presumably recruited into the population. Home Range Adjustment and Post Adjustment Home range size was determined for grouse transplanted in the spring of 1990 (Table 2). After being released, grouse were observed to have wide ranging initial movements (adjustment period) usually followed by less extensive movements for the remainder of their relocations (post adjustment) (See Figs 10-20 [Appendix B]). 23 Mean adjustment home range size was 589 ha and did not differ between males and females (P = 0.9168). Male and female post adjustment home range sizes averaged 262 ha, and were not significantly different (P = 0.2207). There was a difference between adjustment and post adjustment home ranges for males (P = 0.0796), but not for females (P = 0.4652) (Table 2). Table 2. Home range size (ha) of all grouse transplanted in 1990 for different time periods. Nesting and brood rearing (BR) home ranges were calculated only for successful hens. Adjustment home range size for females was calculated using a combination of adjustment and pre- nesting home ranges. Birds without an identifiable adjustment or post adjustment home range were determined not to have one. 049 069 Males 089 108 229 356 127 149 Females 168 208 417 Number of Relocations 78 49 54 54 23 83 60 57 25 77 86 Home Range Type X Male X Fern ADJST. 330 902 81 305 1443 612 614 754 892 566 PST. ADJST. 86 102 188 155 300 166 765 318 357 PRE-NEST 243 327 NESTING 3 10 7 EARLY BR 67 37 52 MID BR 30 48 39 LATE BR 41 87 64 NEST + BR 100 243 172 YEAR-LONG 149 699 424 1066 1066 24 Nesting and Brood Rearing Radio relocations of nesting hens showed a mean home range size of 7 hectares (Table 2). Home ranges for hens with broods (including nesting area) were 100 and 243 ha, averaging 172 ha (Table 2). Movement of broods away from the nest site resulted in large mean home range sizes during early brood rearing. Data gathered from two broods during this study show that brood range size can vary significantly. One brood used a large area (home range size = 67 ha) during the first three weeks after hatching, while the other's was relatively small (37 ha). Home range size increased from middle to late brood rearing (Table 2). Geographic Activity Centers (GAC) of nesting and brood rearing home ranges were 0.3 and 0.5 km from the nearest dancing ground, respectively. Activity centers were also 0.9 and 1 .0 km from the nearest road, and 1 .5 and 1 .8 km from the closest developed or residential area, respectively (Table 3). Broods ranged no further than 1 .7 km from the nest site and were within 1 .3 km of the nearest dancing ground. Statistical comparison of home range size between hens with and without chicks was not possible due to small sample sizes. Numerical comparison, however, suggests radio marked hens with broods had a smaller home range (X=172 ha) than hens without (X=357 ha). 25 Table 3. Distance (in meters) from Geographic Activity Centers of individual birds to the nearest dancing ground, road, developed area, coniferous forest, riparian forest, agricultural field, and to the release site. (* denotes hens with broods) Males Females X X GAC TO: 049 069 089 108 229 356 male 127 149* 168 208* 417 fern. Dancing G 100 1125 50 100 400 350 354 875 500 2600 325 775 1015 Road 850 450 800 800 775 850 754 700 850 475 950 625 720 Develop. 1650 1600 1600 1700 1250 900 1450 1750 1500 750 1875 425 1260 Con. For. 300 350 325 250 750 550 421 50 700 600 150 100 320 Rip. For 2675 2100 2725 2775 2400 1350 2338 2325 2250 1700 2700 1200 2035 Agricult. 875 700 800 825 875 1500 929 775 975 875 1025 1200 970 Rel. Site 100 1125 50 100 400 2000 629 875 500 2600 325 2675 1395 Year-long Home Range Three radio-marked birds, one female and two males, survived through two breeding seasons. Year-long home range size for these birds ranged from 149 ha to 1066 ha with a mean home range size of 638 ha (Table 2). Comparable home range sizes from spring through fall ranged from 86 to 318 ha and averaged 235 ha. This shows a considerable extension of grouse movements during the winter. Cumulative Home Range Data On average, sharp-tailed grouse transplanted into the Tobacco Valley established home ranges approximately 1.0 km from the release site (Dancing Ground A). There was a difference in the distance of the GAC from the release site between sexes (0.6 km for males and 1.4 km for females), but it was not significant (P = 0.1432). The distances of female GACs from the nearest 26 dancing ground ranged from 0.3 to 2.68 km (Table 3). Male GACs were 0.05 to 1.1 km from dancing grounds and were significantly different compared to females (P = 0.0996). Activity centers for all birds averaged 0.74 km from the nearest road, 0.97 km from agricultural land, and 2.2 km from the nearest riparian area which could potentially be used for winter habitat. These distances did not differ for males and females (P > 0.25). The distance to the nearest adjacent geographic activity center averaged 0.42 km for all birds. Distances ranged from 0.05 km to 0.73 km for males and from 0.23 km to 1.4 km for females. The difference between males and females was not statistically significant (P = 0.141). Habitat Use Habitat Composition Habitat use of transplanted sharp-tailed grouse was evaluated for spring and summer, 1990 and 1991 . Grass was the most common vegetation component on all plots (Table 4). Forbs made up a small percentage of the total coverage in each of the plot types. Shrubs were found in significant densities only in the brood plot type and were absent in all other types except for a small percentage in the non-use sites. Differences in vegetation composition between types were evident (Chi-Square approximation P = 0.043). 27 Table 4. Vegetational composition on the Tobacco Plains for six sampling plot types. Values represent percent ground cover. TOTAL % PLOT TYPE GRASS FORB SHRUB COVER % BARE GROUND NESTING (N = 4) 69.9 5.3 0.0 75.2 248 BROOD REARING 58.4 7.1 22.0 87 .5 12.5 (N = 5) DANCING GROUND 482 1.8 0.0 50.0 50.0 (N = 2) DAY-USE (N = 5) 538 6.6 0.0 60.4 39.6 ROOSTING (N = 5) 59.6 4.6 00 642 35.8 NON-USE (N = 4) 31.7 44 0.1 36.2 63.8 Although sample sizes were not large, statistical analysis still showed brood rearing cover to be significantly more dense than dancing ground, day- use, and non-use areas (P < 0.023) (Table 5). Roosting cover was less dense than brood rearing cover (P = 0.080), but nesting cover was not significantly different (P = 0.314). Other significant differences include non-use areas being less dense than both nesting and roosting cover (P < 0.064). Overall, nesting and brood rearing cover were the most dense, followed by roosting cover. Day- use areas and dancing ground locations had at least 50% cover, with the majority of the cover provided by grasses. Dancing Ground Habitat Dancing grounds were located in grassland habitat with a mean canopy cover of 50% (Table 4). Mean effective height of the vegetation was 7 cm on ground A, and 6 cm on ground C (Fig. 8). The effective height of vegetation on dancing grounds was significantly lower than in nesting or brood rearing areas (P< 0.055). 28 Dancing grounds averaged 0.7 km from the nearest road, 1.0 km from agricultural land, and 1.9 km from the nearest riparian area. Neither of the grounds were located on ridges or drumlins but rather on flat open areas that privided good visibility. Dancing ground C was near the edge of a 25-m sloping drop but was actually located on a flat area. Table 5. P-values, calculated using the Kruskal-Wallace test, showing statistical differences in vegetative cover between plot types. An * denotes P- values of statistical significance (P < 0.10). BROOD DANCING NESTING REARING GROUND DAY-USE ROOSTING BROOD REARING 0.314 DANCING GROUND 0.127 0.023 * DAY-USE 0.175 0.018 * 0.609 ROOSTING 0.486 0.080 * 0.294 0.468 NON-USE 0020 * 0.001 * 0635 0.219 0.064 * Nest Site Habitat All nests found were located in dense native grass with mean vegetation cover of at least 75 % (Fig. 9). Vegetation at nest sites averaged 62 cm maximum height and had a mean effective height of 20 cm (Fig. 8). Effective height of nesting vegetation was significantly higher than on the dancing ground or in sampled non-use sites (P < 0.055). Nest scrapes were partially covered by residual native bunch grass and lined with dry grass and small amounts of feathers. Only one nest was located within 50 meters of shrub cover. Nests were placed on slopes from 5 to 50 degrees. Aspect was not a factor in nest site selection as nests were found on north (n = 1), southeast (n = 1), and west facing slopes (n = 2). 29 Brood Habitat Hens with broods were located in dense vegetation consisting primarily of native grasses (58.4%) (rough fescue, bluebunch wheatgrass, or bluegrass) or shrubs (22.0%) (snowberry or pearhip rose) (Fig. 9). Mean maximum height of brood rearing vegetation was 76.4 cm and mean effective height was 34.3 cm (Fig. 8). The effective height of brood rearing habitat was significantly higher than all other areas except nesting and day-use (P < 0.020). Brood rearing areas consisting of shrubs were located in small potholes surrounded by native grass. In this study, hens and their broods were the only birds with documented use of shrub communities during spring, summer, and early fall. Figure 8. Mean effective height (the height of visual obstruction) for the six plot types used to describe habitat use. NESTING BROOD DANCING DAY-USE GROUND PLOT TYPE ROOST NON-USE 30 Figure 9. Percent coverage of nesting and brood rearing vegetation on the Tobacco Plains, Montana. I NESTING (n=4) □ BROOD REARING (n=5) V7* , GRASS V/ ^u FORB SHRUB TOTAL VEGETATION TYPE BARE GROUND Use versus Availability Relocations of radio-equipped grouse provided information for analysis of use versus availability. Habitat within designated availability circles was broken into seven types. Grassland habitat, which averaged 89% in each area, was used in proportion to its availability (Table 6). The same was true for coniferous forest habitat which averaged 3 % in use areas. Coniferous habitat included shrubs (snowberry and pearhip rose) often associated with ponderosa pine habitat on the Tobacco Plains. Agricultural land was apparently avoided. Six out of 9 grouse selected against agricultural lands within their use areas. Agricultural land, generally alfalfa and wheat, made up an average 7 % of each bird's use area. Avoidances were not noted for other habitat types. 31 Table 6. Results of use versus availability analysis for 9 transplanted sharp- tailed grouse. A + indicates use of a habitat type with greater frequency than its abundance, a - shows selection against a particular habitat type, and a 0 indicates neither preference nor avoidance of a habitat type (P < 0.05). MALES FEMALES HABITAT 049 089 108 229 356 127 149 208 417 Native Grass 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Coniferous Forest 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 Riparian Forest na1 na na na - 0 na na - Shrubs na na na na - 0 na na - Developed Land na na na - - 0 na na 0 Water 0 0 0 na - 0 na 0 0 Agriculture - - - 0 - - 0 0 - na1 = habitat type did not exist within designated availability circles. 32 DISCUSSION Columbian sharp-tailed grouse numbers and range have declined drastically since the early 1900's (Buss and Dziedzic 1955). This decline prompted supplementation or reintroduction efforts throughout much of its historic range. From 1950 though 1991 there have been at least 13 attempts to reestablish different subspecies of sharp-tailed grouse (primarily Plains and Columbian). These transplant efforts either did not succeed, or resulted in only temporary populations that soon disappeared (Toepfer et al. 1990, K. Durbin, Oregon Dept. of Wildlife, pers. commun.). Inadequate use of available information on basic biology and ecology is believed to be the major cause of most transplant failures. Specifically, 2 major problems arise: 1) consideration of suitability and amount of habitat essential for transplant survival and 2) dispersal away from the release site (Toepfer et al. 1990). The Tobacco Plains population declined nearly every year from 1 977 to 1987. Yearly transplant efforts on the Tobacco Plains have taken place since 1987. Four males were attending the only remaining dancing ground when reintroductions began. Although population levels were low (n = 8), they remained stable from 1989 - 1990. With the initiation of a new dancing ground in 1991, the known male population increased dramatically (n = 22). 33 High annual survival of transplanted birds was possibly a major contributor to the increase in the Tobacco Plains population. Based on dancing ground attendance, annual survival of transplanted males averaged 47 % during 1988 -1991, higher than that reported previously (24 to 35 %) for resident populations of sharp-tailed grouse (Brown 1966, Robel et al. 1972). Radio-equipped grouse released on the Tobacco Plains in 1990 had an annual survival rate of 42 % from 1990 to 1991 . This is high compared to 0 % survival of radio-equipped sharp-tailed grouse in Southwest Idaho and Northeast Oregon (Marks and Marks 1987, K. Durbin, Oregon Dept. of Wildlife, pers. commun.). None of the birds transplanted from the SCWMA in 1991 survived after release on the Tobacco Plains. The fact that the SCWMA is composed of shrub-steppe habitat and the Tobacco Plains is a bunchgrass prairie may have played a role in the low survival of the 1991 transplants. Although more testing of this hypothesis is needed, differential mortality of transplants from different habitat types seems to exist. Survival of transplanted radio-equipped grouse in the Tobacco Valley was negatively correlated with distances between consecutive relocations (R2 = 0.865). Similar relocation procedures were used on all radio-equipped individuals, and unlike transplanted prairie-chickens in Wisconsin (Toepfer 1988), movement did not differ between males and females (P = 0.1432). These data support the theory that increased movement leads to decreased survival possibly due to increased exposure to predators. This relatively high survival rate for grouse transplanted into the Tobacco Plains may be partially due to 2 factors: 1) topography and habitat characteristics that discouraged dispersal and 2) the presence of limited but relatively good habitat. The area is surrounded on three sides by mountain 34 ranges and on the fourth by coniferous forest. This island of native palouse prairie may minimize the tendency of transplants to disperse from the release site. Only two radio-equipped grouse (one male and one female) dispersed from the study area. Although this did occur, dispersal does not seem to be a limiting factor in the success of the transplanting program. If it were, survival rates, which are based on dancing ground returns, would be much lower than reported. Possibly the most important factor affecting the survival of sharp-tailed grouse on the Tobacco Plains is the availability of quality native palouse prairie habitat. In 1991, the Nature Conservancy of Montana and the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks acquired 680 acres of land supporting the areas best sharp-tailed grouse habitat, as well as the only known active dancing ground at that time (Ground A). In the summer of 1 991 , the area was designated the Dancing Prairie Preserve. ■ Six radio-equipped grouse established home ranges on the Preserve, while the remaining birds home ranges were within 2 km of the Preserve boundary. Six of 11 radio-equipped grouse exhibited adjustment behavior soon after being released. Large wandering movements, similar to those reported for prairie chickens in Wisconsin (Toepfer 1988) were apparent. These adjustment periods lasted from 14 to 27 days. They were followed by more limited movements and smaller home ranges indicative of an established individual. Post-adjustment spring and summer home range size varied from 86 to 765 ha, having a mean of 251 ha, with a median home range size of 155 ha. Mean home range size was larger than reported in other Columbian sharp- tailed grouse studies where home range size averaged 162 to 187 ha (Giesen 35 1987, Marks and Marks 1987). Studies of Plains sharp-tailed grouse reported mean home range sizes of 268 to 274 ha (Gunderson 1990, Northrup 1991). Although Toepfer (1988) reported that transplanted prairie chickens often had larger home ranges because of the presence of resident birds, no home range data for Columbian sharp-tailed grouse on the Tobacco Plains was available to compare with home ranges for transplanted birds. Another possible explanation for the large mean home range size is variation in habitat quality. The Dancing Prairie Preserve contains the highest quality habitat, but covers only 2 km2. Smaller parcels of quality habitat are found throughout the remainder of the plains. This patchwork pattern may have forced birds in those areas to range further in order to fulfill their daily or seasonal requirements. This assumption is supported by the fact that radio- equipped grouse centered in the Preserve (n = 6) had a mean home range size of 146 ha while birds not centered on the Preserve (n = 3) had a mean home range size of 458 ha. Home ranges enlarged during the winter months (X = 638 ha). Although winter relocations were limited, grassland habitat continued to be used frequently, and few grouse were relocated in deciduous trees and shrubs. Similar yearlong use of grassland habitat has been reported by others (Marshall and Jensen 1937, Hart et al. 1950, Hamerstrom and Hamerstrom 1951 , Swenson 1985). Use of grasslands in winter was attributed to the fact that snow cover was minimal, and food may not have been a limiting factor. Complete snow cover on the Tobacco Plains is rare, so this assumption might also be applied to the Tobacco Valley. 36 In addition to high survival, another factor indicating success of a transplant effort is reproduction by transplanted individuals. Toepfer et al. (1990) thought that a transplanted population was not functional until the individuals established territories and produced offspring. In the Tobacco Plains, transplanted males were observed displaying on the dancing ground, indicating successful recruitment into the resident population of birds. In 1990 and 1991 , 5 nesting attempts were recorded . Clutch sizes averaged 1 1 .5 (n=2) which is similar to clutch sizes reported for sharp-tailed grouse in other areas (Hamerstrom 1939, Hart et al. 1950, Pepper 1972, Hillman and Jackson 1973, Giesen 1987, Marks and Marks 1987, Gunderson 1990, and Meints 1991). Others have reported nesting success for Plains and Columbian sharp- tailed grouse ranging from 50 to 72 % (Hamerstrom 1939, Hart et al. 1950, Pepper 1972, Giesen 1987, Marks and Marks 1987, Gunderson 1990, Meints 1991). Relatively low nest success on the Tobacco Plains (40 %, n = 5) could be attributed to a high corvid population. Since the opening of a public landfill in the 1980's, raven {Corvus coratf) numbers have dramatically increased ( J. Roberts, MDFWP, pers. commun.). Coyotes {Canis latrans) are also abundant in the valley, and may be contributing to nest predation. Additionally, predation rates could be a reflection of habitat quality. Nests on the Tobacco Plains averaged 1.5 km from the nearest dancing ground. Similar distances have been reported by others (Hamerstrom 1939, Gunderson 1990, Meints 1991). Although the number of nests used for this analysis is small, it seems important that areas within a 1.6 km radius of an existing dancing ground be the focus of management efforts designed to increase nesting habitat. 37 Nest sites of radio-equipped hens were characterized by dense grass cover (residual and new growth) with an mean maximum height of 62 cm, and a mean effective height of 20 cm. Gunderson (1990) reported an effective height of 17-18 cm for plains sharp-tailed grouse nest site vegetation (juniper [Juniperus spp. ] and big sagebrush), while Kohn (1976) reported nesting habitat of 20 cm or more for the same sub-species. Nesting habitat of sharp-tailed grouse in other areas has been described by numerous researchers. Vegetation height and density seems more important to nesting sharp-tailed grouse than species composition (Hillman and Jackson 1973, Gunderson 1990). This is supported by reports of nesting occurring in a wide range of habitat types. Hart et at. (1950) documented the majority of Columbian sharp-tailed grouse in Northern Utah nested in alfalfa and crop stubble due to limited amounts of quality native grassland. In Michigan, Baumgartner (1939) reported Plains sharp-tailed grouse nests in heavy grass, concealed under logs or brush, or found at the base of small trees. In Idaho, Marks and Marks (1987), documented Columbian sharp-tailed grouse nests under big sage (Artemesia tridentata ) and arrowleaf balsamroot (Balsamorhiza sagittata). In south-central Wyoming, nests were found under snowberry bushes (Oedekoven 1985). Grassland comprised approximately 85 % of designated availability circles of nesting radio-equipped hens. Nests (n = 2) were not found in shrub, alfalfa, or crop stubble, although all three habitat types existed within availability circles. Since no nests were found in these types, it seems, based on the limited nesting data collected, that native habitat capable of providing nesting cover does exist on the Tobacco Plains. The majority of nesting cover is within 38 a 1.6 km radius of dancing ground A. Although nesting did occur, management efforts to increase the availability of nesting cover thoughout the Tobacco Plains are needed if the population is to expand. Mean brood size within one month after hatching was 6.5. Early post- hatch brood sizes in other studies ranged from 7.8 to 9.5 (Hart et al. 1950, Hillman and Jackson 1973, Marks and Marks 1987). Brood size decreased to 5.5 by two months after hatching and remained the same size through mid- September. Hart et al. (1950), Marks and Marks (1987) both reported similar decreases in brood size reporting means of 4.6 and 4.5 respectively. Although brood sizes within 1 month after hatching in my study were relatively small, the limited data prevent any conclusion about those differences. Habitat used by radio-equipped hens with broods had the highest vegetative cover (88%) and effective height (34 cm) of all radioed grouse. Habitat was primarily grass (58%) and shrubs (22%). Broods were the only birds observed to use shrub habitat during spring, summer or fall. Other studies have reported the use of grassland and grassland-shrub transition zones by broods (Hamerstrom 1963, Moyles 1981, Gunderson 1990). Columbian sharptail broods in Wyoming used shrub cover (especially snowberry) more often than did male grouse (Oedekoven 1985). This same pattern was seen on the Tobacco Plains. This suggests that shrubs are important hiding cover for broods, and should be considered in developing habitat management goals. Overall habitat use by transplanted Columbian sharp-tailed grouse on the Tobacco Plains showed apparent avoidance of cultivated land. Columbian sharp-tailed grouse were historically associated with grassland and shrub- steppe habitat (Johnsgard, 1973). Through the 1900's, populations decreased as cultivation increased (Buss and Dziedzic 1955). Early cultivation could have 39 possibly increased winter survival, but extensive cultivation and increased grazing has eliminated the majority of the historical habitat in many areas (Hart et al. 1950, Miller and Graul 1980). Areas other than the Dancing Prairie Preserve have been exposed to high grazing pressure. Sharp-tailed grouse are known to be poorly adapted to areas where grazing reduces the vigor of the rangeland (Brown 1966, Mattise 1978, Autenrieth et al. 1977). In Montana, plains sharp-tailed grouse appeared to avoid areas being used by cattle (Nielsen and Yde 1982). On the Tobacco Plains, radio-equipped grouse released in 1990 were relocated more often in areas where cattle were not present. They used areas averaging 64% ground cover, while non-use areas averaged 36% ground cover. Autenrieth et al. (1977) felt that a grazing system that would perpetuate diversity in the rangeland would be beneficial to upland game. Different grazing systems should be tested to identify the best way to increase the density and abundance of existing vegetation for the benefit of cattle as well as sharp-tailed grouse. The Tobacco Plains population of Columbian sharp-tailed grouse approached extinction in the late 1980's. Through transplanting efforts, the population has apparently begun to recover. Although success of the reintroduction is still questionable, favorable signs like documented production, population expansion, and land acquisitions give reason for positive speculation. Management efforts, many of which are being planned for implementation (Wood unpbl. rept.), should center around securing and enhancing existing habitat. This would ensure quality habitat for the existing population, and allow for further expansion. 40 This study was based around collecting data to document habitat selection and survivability of transplanted grouse on the Tobacco Plains. Additional research in the Tobacco Valley is needed to detail other aspects including food habits and population trends. Further telemetry research is needed in order to define winter habitat use in the Tobacco Valley. A hypothesis that differential mortality of transplanted birds is based on habitat differences needs to be tested. Experimental manipulation of habitat and its impacts on nesting, brood rearing and ultimately recruitment needs evaluation. Another potential evaluation would be impacts of raven depredations on sharptail nesting success. By altering the operation of the public landfill or acquiring a predator control permit, it may be possible to reduce corvid populations in the Tobacco Valley. Through these measures, nesting success and population numbers of Columbian sharp-tailed grouse on the Tobacco Plains may increase. 41 LITERATURE CITED 42 Adderhold, M. 1990. Developments at dancing prairie. Montana Outdoors. May/June: pp 2-6, 24-25. Autenrieth, R., W.R. Brigham, W. Molini, P. Shields, J. Slosson, and M. Wickersham. Livestock and upland wildlife, in Proc of the Livestock and Wildlife-Fisheries Relationships in the Great Basin, Sparks, Nevada, May 3-5. pp 76- 86. Baumgartner, F.M. 1939. Studies on the distribution and status of sharp- tailed grouse in Michigan. Trans. N. Am. Wildl. Conf. 4: 485-490. Bown, R.R. 1980. The status of the Columbian sharp-tailed grouse in the tobacco plains, Eureka, Montana. B.S. Report. University of Montana, Missoula. 42 pp. Brown, R.L. 1966. Response of sharptail breeding populations to annual changes in residual grassland cover. 46th Annual Conference of Western Association of State Game and Fish Commissioners, Butte, Montana, July 12-14, 1966. pp 219-222. Buss, I.O., and E.S. Dziedzic. 1955. Relation of cultivation to the disappearance of the Columbian sharp-tailed grouse from southeastern Washington. Condor 57: 185-187. Climatedata, 1990. Summary of the day - West 2. (CD ROM). National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Climatic Data Center. Coffin, D.L, A. Brietkrietz, and R.G. McMurtrey. 1971. Surficial geology and water resources of the tobacco and upper Stillwater river valleys, northwestern Montana. Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Bulletin No. 81. 48 pp. Daniel W.W. 1990. Applied Nonparametric Statistics 2nd ed. PWS-KENT publishing company. 635 pp. Daubenmire, R. 1959. A canopy-coverage method of vegetational analysis. Northwest Science. 33(1): 43-64. Federal Register. 1989. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: animal notice of review. 54: 554-560. 43 Giesen, KM. 1987. Population characteristics and habitat requirements of Columbian sharp-tailed grouse in northwest Colorado. Project No. W-37-R. Pages 251-280 in Colorado Div. of Wildl., Wildl. Research Report, April 1987. Gunderson, P.T. 1990. Nesting and brood rearing ecology of sharp-tailed grouse on the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge, Montana. M.S. Thesis, Montana State Univ., Bozeman. 86 pp. Hamerstrom, F.N. Jr. 1939. A study of Wisconsin prairie chicken and sharp-tailed grouse. Wilson Bull. 50(2): 105-120. Hamerstrom, F.N. Jr., and F. Hamerstrom 1951. Mobility of the sharp-tailed grouse in relation to its ecology and distribution. Amer. Mid. Nat. 46(1): 174-226. Hamerstrom, F.N. Jr. 1963. Sharptail brood habitat in Wisconsin's northern pine barrens. J. Wildl. Manage. 27(4): 793-801. Hand, R.L. 1969. A distributional checklist of the birds of Montana. University of Montana, Missoula. 51 pp: Hart, CM., O.S. Lee, and J.B. Low. 1950. The sharp-tailed grouse in Utah: its life history, status , and management. Pub. No 3. UT State Dept. Fish and Game, Provo. 70 pp. Hillman, C.N., and W.W. Jackson 1973. The sharp-tailed grouse in South Dakota. Tech. Bull. No. 3, South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks. 64 pp. Johnsgard, P. A. 1973. Grouse and Quails of North America. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln. 551 pp. Kohn, S.C. 1976. Sharp-tailed grouse nesting and breeding habitat in south-western North Dakota. M.S. Thesis. SD State Univ., Brookings. 123 pp. Lesica, P. 1986. Vascular plant species observed at the proposed dancing prairie preserve. Unpublished Report, The Montana Nature Conservancy, Helena. 4pp. 44 Manley, T. and M.A.Wood. 1989. Columbian sharp-tailed grouse in the tobacco plains, Eureka, Montana. Final Report.. MT Dept. of Fish Wildlife, and Parks, 26 pp. Marks, J.S. and Marks, V. 1987. Habitat relationships of Columbian sharp- tailed grouse in West-Central Idaho. Department of the Interior, BLM, Marshall, W.H. , and M.S. Jensen. 1937. Winter and spring studies of sharp-tailed grouse in Utah. J. Wildl. Manage. 1 :87-99. Mattise, S.N. 1978. Effects of grazing systems on sharp-tailed grouse habitat. MS Thesis, South Dakota State Univ., Brookings. 46 pp. Meints, D.R. 1991. Seasonal movements, habitat use, and productivity of Columbian sharp-tailed grouse in southeastern Idaho. M.S. Thesis. University of Idaho, Moscow. 74 pp. Miller, G.C., and W.D. Graul. 1980. Status of sharp-tailed grouse in North America. Pages 18-28 in PA. Vohs and F.L Knopf, eds. Proc. Prairie Grouse Symp. Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater. Mills, L.S., and F.F. Knowlton. 1989. Observer performance in known and blind radio-telemetry accuracy tests. J. Wildl. Manage. 53(2): 340-342. Mohr, CO. 1947. Table of equivalent populations of North American small mammals. Amer. Midi. Nat. 37: 223-249. Moyles, D.L.J. 1981. Seasonal and daily use of plant communities by sharp-tailed grouse (Pediocetetes phasianellus) in the parklands of Alberta. Canadian Field-Naturalist 95(3): 287-291. Newell, J. A. 1987. Nesting and brood rearing ecology of the greater prairie chicken in the Sheyenne National Grasslands, North Dakota. MS Thesis, Montana State University, Bozeman. 111 pp. Nielsen L.S., and C.A. Yde. 1982. The effects of rest-rotation grazing on the distribution of sharp-tailed grouse. Pages 147-163 in J.M. Peek and P.D. Dalke, editors, Wildlife-Livestock Relationship Symposium Proceedings. 45 Northrup, R.D. 1991. Sharp-tailed grouse habitat use during fall and winter on the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge, Montana. M.S. Thesis. Montana State Univ., Bozeman. 54 pp. Oedekoven, O.O. 1985. Columbian sharp-tailed grouse population distribution and habitat use in south central Wyoming. M.S. Theses. Univ. WY, Laramie. 58 pp. Pepper, G.W. 1972. The ecology of sharp-tailed grouse during spring and summer in the aspen parklands of Saskatchewan. Saskatchewan Dep. Nat. Resour., Regina. Rep. 1. 55 pp. Robel, R.J., F.R. Henderson and W. Jackson. 1972. Some sharp-tailed grouse population statistics from South Dakota. J. Wildl Manage. 36 (1): 87-98. Rearden, J.D. 1951. Identification of waterfowl nest predators. J. Wildl. Manage. 15(4): 386-395. Springer, J.T. 1979. Some sources of bias and sampling error in radio triangulation. J. Wildl. Manage. 43(4): 926-935. Swenson, J.E. 1985. Seasonal habitat use by sharp-tailed grouse, Tympanuchus phasianellus, on mixed-grass prairie in Montana. Canadian Field-Naturalist 99(1): 40-46. Toepfer, J.E. 1988. The ecology of the greater prairie chicken as related to reproduction. PHD Dissertation. Montana State University, Bozeman. 536 pp. Toepfer, J.E., J. A. Newell, and J. Monarch 1988. A method for trapping prairie grouse hens on display grounds. Pages 21 -23 in A.J. Bjugstad, ed. Prairie-chickens on the Sheyenne Grasslands. U.S. Dep. Agric, For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-159. Vance, D.R., and R.L. Westemeier. 1979. Interactions of pheasants and prairie- chickens in Illinois. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 7:221-225. Toepfer, J.E., R.L. Eng, and R.K. Anderson. 1990. Transplanting prairie grouse: what have we learned? Trans. 55th N.A. Wildl. Nat. Res. Conf. pp 569-579. 46 White, G.C., and Garrott, R.A. 1990. Analysis of wildlife radio-tracking data. Academic Press, Inc., San Diego CA. 383 pp. 47 APPENDICES 48 APPENDIX A TABLES 49 Table 7. Vascular Plant Species Observed at the Proposed Dancing Prairie Preserve June 6, 1985; June 5, 1986; July 17, 1986. An asterisk (*) indicates exotic species. Species observed only in forested areas are indicated by (F). Species associated only with ponds are indicated by (P). Modified from Lesica, 1986. Aceraceae Acer glabrum Anacardiaceae Rhus glabra Apiaceae Lomatium macrocarpum Lomatium triternatum Apocynaceae Apocynum sp. Asteraceae Achillea millefolium Agoseris glauca Antennaria dimorpha Antennaria microphylla Antennaria parviflora Antennaria racemosa (F) Arctium minus * (F) Arnica cordifolia (F) Arnica sororia Artemisia frigida Aster flacatus Aster laevis Aster pansus Balsamorhiza sagittata Centaurea maculosa * Chrysopsis villosa Cirsium undu latum Conyza canadensis Crepis intermedia Erigeron compositus Erigeron corymbosus Erigeron divergens Erigeron pumilus Erigeron strigosus Filago arvensis " Gailardia aristata Gnaphalium palustre{P) Gnaphalium viscosum Grindelia squarrosa Hieracium cynoglossoides Lactuca serriola * Matricaria matricarioides * Rati bid a pinnata Scorzonera laciniata * Senecio canus Senecio integerrimus Senecio pauperculus (F) Solidago missouriensis Taraxacum officinale * Tragopogon dubius * Boraginaceae Cynoglossum officinale * Lappula redowskii Lithospermum incisum Lithospermum ruder ale Mertensia oblongifolia Myosotis micrantha * Plagiobothrys scouleri (P) Brassicaceae Allysum allysoides * Arabis holboellii Arabis nuttallii Camelina microcarpa * Draba verna Lepidium perfoliatum Lepidium viginicum (?) Sisymbrium altissumum * 50 Campanulaceae Campanula rotund if olia Triodanis perfoliata Caprifoliaceae Symphoricarpos occidentalis (F) Caryophyllaceae Arenaria serphyllifolia * Cerastium arvense Dianthus armeria * Holosteum umbellatum Lychnis alba * Silene antirrhina * Silene spaldingii Stellaria longi folia (F) Chenopodiaceae Chenopodium album * Cornaceae Corn us stolonifera (F) Crassulaceae Sedum lanceolatum Cupressaceae Juniperus communis (F) Juniper us scop u brum (F) Cyperaceae Car ex concinnoides (F) Carex filifolia Car ex micoroptera (F) Ericaceae Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (F) Pyrola secunda (F) Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia glypotosperma Fabaceae Astragalus agrestis Astragalus canadaensis Astragalus falcatus * Astragalus lotiflorus Astragalus miser Lupinus sericeus Medicago lupulina * Medicago sativa * Gentianaceae Gentiana amarella Geraniaceae Erodium cicutarium * Geranium bicknellii Geranium viscosissimum Grossulariaceae Ribes inerme (F) Hydrangeaceae Philiadelphus lewisii (F) Hydrophyllaceae Phacelia hastata Phacelia linearis Hypericaceae Hypericum performatum * Iridaceae Sisyrinchium angustifolium Juncaceae Juncus balticus (P) Juncus bufonius (P) Lamiaceae Monardafistulosa Stachys palustris (P) Lemnaceae Lemna minor (P) Liliaceae Allium cernuum Brodiaea douglasii Calochortus macrocarpus Disporum trachycarpum (F) Fritillaria pudica Smilacina stellata Zigandenus venenosus Linaceae Linum perenne Lycopodiaceae Lycopodium annotinum (F) Onagraceae Epilobium glaberrimum (P) Epilobium panicu latum Orchidaceae Spiranthes romanzoffiana Pinaceae Larix occidentalis (F) Pinus ponderosa (F) Pseudotsuga menziesii (F) Plantaginaceae Plantago major * Plantago patagonica Plantago aristata Poaceae Agropyron intermedium Agropyron smithii Agropyron repens * Agropyron spicatum Agrostis alba Agrostis interrupta 51 Agrostis scabra Alopecurus alpinus (P) Aristida longiseta Bromus inermis * Bromus japonic us * Bromus tectorum * Calamagrostis rubescens (F) Dactylis glomerata * Elymus glaucus (F) Festuca idahoensis Festuca octoflora Festuca scabrella Hordeum jubatum (P) Koelaria cristata Oryzopsis hymenoides Panicum capillare * Phleum pratense * Poa compressa * Poa interior (?) Poa pratensis * Poa sandbedrgii Stipa comata Stipa lettermanii Stipa occidentalis (F) Stipa spartea Polemoniaceae Collomia linearis Microsteris gracilis Phlox caespitosa Polygonaceae Eriogonum flavum Eriogonum heracleoides Eriogonum ovalifolium Polygonum amphibium (P) Polygonum aviculare * Polygonum douglasii Rumexcrispus* (P) Rumex maritimus (P) Polypodiaceae Cystopteris frag His (F) Woodsia oregana (F) Portulacaceae Lewisia rediviva Primulaceae Dodecatheon conjugens Ranunculaceae Anemone multifida Anemone nuttalliana Clematis ligusticifolia (F) Delphinium bicolor Ranunculus acris (P) Ranunculus aquatilis (P) Ranunculus glaberrimus Ranunculus pensylvanicus (P) Rosaceae Amelanchier alni folia (F) Fragaria vesca (F) Fragaria virginiana Geum triflorum Potentilla anserina (P) Potentilla glandulosa Potentilla recta * Prunus virginiana (F) Rosa nutkana (F) Rosa woodsii{F) Rubus idaeus (F) Spiraea betulifolia (F) Rubiaceae Galium asperrimum (F) Galium boreale 52 Santalaceae Com and ra umbel lata Saxifragaceae Heuchera cylindrica Lithophragma sp. Saxifraga integrifolia Schophulariaceae Castilleja lutescens Collinsia parviflora Orthocarpus tenuifolius Penstemon confertus Penstemon eriantherus Penstemon nitidus Ver base urn blattaria * Verbascum thapsus * Veronica americana (P) Veronica peregrina (P) Veronica serpyllifolia (P) Selaginellaceae Selagenella densa Verbenaceae Verbena bracteata Violaceae Viola adunca Salicaceae Populus tremuloides (F) 53 Table 8. Capture, release dates and ultimate fate of Columbian sharp-tailed grouse transplanted into the Tobacco Valley during 1990 and 1991 . Also included are various legband color schemes used to mark transplanted birds. (* Kamloops, British Columbia ** Sand Creek Wildlife Management Area, Idaho *** refers to approximate date of death **** refers to an idividual that relocations were not recorded before death, r= radio recovery if actual date of death is unknown) Anml ID# Sex Lgbnd R Lgbnd L Capt. Lctn. Capture Date Release Date Status Date 5 Males Pink Pink Kam* 5-3-90 5-4-90 Unkn. No Radios 049 M Pink Pink Kam 5-3-90 5-4-90 Dead 12-23-91 069 M Pink Pink Kam 5-3-90 5-4-90 Dead 7-12-90 089 M Pink Pink Kam 5-3-90 5-4-90 Dead 5-17-91 r 108 M Pink Pink Kam 5-3-90 5-4-90 Dead 5-17-91 r 129 F White White Kam 5-6-90 5-8-90 Dead 1- 15-91 ** 3-31-91 r 149 F White White Kam 5-1-90 5-4-90 Unkn. Bkn nklace 168 F White White Kam 5-4-90 5-4-90 Dead 7-3-90 208 F White White Kam 5-6-90 5-8-90 Unkn. Bkn nklace 229 M Pink Pink Kam 7-16-90 7-17-90 Dead 3-31-91 r 356 M Pink Pink Kam 4-18-90 4-20-90 Alive New #659 377 M Pink Pink Kam 4-18-90 4-20-90 Dead 5-13-90**** 417 F White White Kam 4-18-90 4-20-90 Unkn. Bkn nklace 148 F Green Green ID" 4-20-91 4-23-91 Dead 6-2-91 210 F Green Green ID 4-28-90 4-29-90 Dead 6-3-91 r 437 F Green Green ID 4-27-91 4-29-91 Dead 5-18-91 478 M Yell. Yell. ID 4-28-91 4-29-91 Dead 5-4-91 498 M Yell. Yell. ID 4-28-91 4-29-91 Dead 6-7-91 658 F Green Green ID 4-27-91 4-29-91 Dead 6-7-91 3 Males Yell Yell Kam 4-6-91 4-8-91 Unkn. No Radios 54 APPENDIX B FIGURES 55 Figure 10. Graph of daily movements of male Columbian sharp-tailed grouse # 049 transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the spring of 1990. LU o z Q 3000 2000 1000 - End of AP #049 II I 1 1 II II II 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 CONSECUTIVE RELOCATIONS MAY - SEPT. 1990 AND JUNE- AUG. 1991 Figure 1 1 . Graph of daily movements of male Columbian sharp-tailed grouse # 069 transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the spring of 1 990. LU o z CO ouuu - ■ #069 4000 - 1 No Adjustment v» f> 3000 - 2000 - A J 1000 - o- AW1 t 0 10 20 30 40 50 CONSECUTIVE RELOCATIONS MAY - JULY 1990 56 Figure 12. Graph of daily movements of male Columbian sharp-tailed grouse # 356 transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the spring of 1990. LU o z CO Q End of AP #356 6000 - 4000 - 1990 1991 2000 - ; o- "l""'""l I '''I'1 ^u 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 CONSECUTIVE RELOCATIONS MAY - AUG. 1990 AND JULY- AUG. 1991 Figure 13. Graph of daily movements of male Columbian sharp-tailed grouse # 089 transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the spring of 1990. 3000 2000 - LU o z in tt 1000 - 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 CONSECUTIVE RELOCATIONS MAY - AUG. 1990 57 Figure 14. Graph of daily movements of male Columbian sharp-tailed grouse # 108 transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the spring of 1990. 3000 —' 2000 H 111 O z ^ 1000 H End of AP #108 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 0 10 20 30 40 .50 60 CONSECUTIVE RELOCATIONS MAY - AUG. 1990 Figure 15. Graph of daily movements of male Columbian sharp-tailed grouse # 229 transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the spring of 1 990. 5000 LU o z: CO 4000 - 3000 - 2000 - 1000 - End of AP #229 0 10 20 30 CONSECUTIVE RELOCATIONS JULY - AUG. 1990 58 Figure 16. Graph of daily movements of female Columbian sharp-tailed grouse # 149 transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the spring of 1990 (* denotes female). LU o Q 5000 4000 - 3000 - 2000 1000 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 CONSECUTIVE RELOCATIONS MAY - AUG. 1990 Figure 17. Graph of daily movements of female Columbian sharp-tailed grouse # 208 transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the spring of 1990. LU o in 5000 4000 - 3000 - 2000 - 1000 - 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 CONSECUTIVE RELOCATIONS MAY - AUG. 1990 59 Figure 18. Graph of daily movements of female Columbian sharp-tailed grouse # 417 transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the spring of 1990. LU o ZL Q #417 6000 - I End of AP 4000 - 2000 - 1990 laaTWw'Va 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 CONSECUTIVE RELOCATIONS MAY - AUG. 1990 AND July 1991 Figure 19. Graph of daily movements of female Columbian sharp-tailed grouse # 127 transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the spring of 1990. 4000 ^ 3000 - LU o en Q 2000 - 1000 - End of AP #127 * ^ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 70 CONSECUTIVE RELOCATIONS MAY - Aug. 1990 60 Figure 20. Graph of daily movements of female Columbian sharp-tailed grouse # 168 transplanted into the Tobacco Valley in the spring of 1990. LU o Q DUUU ~ # 168 * 4000 - /l I I *X— No adjustment Y»» / 1 \ \ 3000 - 2000 - 1000 - o- -1 — i — i — r- 0 10 20 30 CONSECUTIVE RELOCATIONS MAY - JUNE 1990 DOE/BP-07103-2 August 1992 375