close
Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Oct 5;16(10):e0253635.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253635. eCollection 2021.

Changes in hunting season regulations (1870s-2019) reduce harvest exposure on greater and Gunnison sage-grouse

Jonathan B Dinkins  1   2 , Courtney J Duchardt  2 , Jacob D Hennig  2 , Jeffrey L Beck  2
Affiliations

Changes in hunting season regulations (1870s-2019) reduce harvest exposure on greater and Gunnison sage-grouse

Jonathan B Dinkins et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Hunter harvest is a potential factor contributing to population declines of sage-grouse (Centrocercus spp.). As a result, wildlife agencies throughout western North America have set increasingly more conservative harvest regulations over the past 25 years to reduce or eliminate hunter success and concomitant numbers of harvested greater (C. urophasianus) and Gunnison (C. minimus) sage-grouse. Sage-grouse hunting has varied widely over time and space, which has made a comprehensive summary of hunting management challenging. We compiled data on harvest regulations among 11 western U.S. states and 2 Canadian provinces from 1870-2019 to create a timeline representative of hunting regulations. We compared annual harvest boundaries and area-weighted average hunting regulations, 1995-2018, relative to administrative boundaries and areas of high probability of sage-grouse occupation. We also summarized estimated numbers of birds harvested and hunters afield, 1995-2018, across both species' ranges. From 1995-2018, there was a 30% reduction in administrative harvest boundaries across the greater sage-grouse range compared to a 16.6% reduction in area open to harvest within 8 km from active leks. Temporary closures occurred in response to wildfires, disease outbreaks, low population numbers, and two research projects; whereas, permanent closures primarily occurred in small populations and areas on the periphery of the species distribution. Similarly, area-weighted possession limits and season length for greater sage-grouse decreased 52.6% and 61.0%, respectively, while season start date stayed relatively stable (mean start date ~259 [mid-September]). In contrast, hunting of the now federally-threatened Gunnison sage-grouse ended after 1999. While restrictions in harvest regulations were large in area, closures near areas of high greater sage-grouse occupancy were relatively smaller with the same trend for Gunnison sage-grouse until hunting ceased. For greater sage-grouse, most states reduced bag and possession limits and appeared to adhere to recommendations for later and shorter hunting seasons, reducing potential for additive mortality.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

This study was supported by Anadarko Petroleum Company (https://www.linkedin.com/company/anadarko-petroleum-corporation) in the form of a grant awarded to JLB and JBD (UW: 1002114), Wyoming Wildlife and Natural Resource Trust in the form of a grant awarded to JLB (UW: 1002515), and Oregon State University in the form of in-kind time for JBD to complete the analyses and writing of this manuscript. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Assessment region, encompassing eleven states and two provinces stratified as seven management zones, and the extant range of both the greater and Gunnison sage-grouse.
Population names were defined in USFWS listing documents [4, 5].
Fig 2
Fig 2. Greater and Gunnison sage-grouse hunt units in the United States and Canada in 1995, 1999, 2003, 2012, 2015, and 2018 within the 1995–2019 study period.
Closure types are indicated as follows: small or peripheral populations (grey striped), closures due to federal listing of Gunnison sage grouse (green), experimental closures (pink), closures due to fire (dotted red) and closures related to West Nile Virus (yellow striped).
Fig 3
Fig 3. Timeline depicting the harvest history of sage-grouse from 1870s–2019 stratified by sage-grouse Management Zone and greater and Gunnison sage-grouse populations.
Information obtained from state and provincial management agencies and 14,35,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54. All populations that crossed state or provincial boundaries were sub-stratified by those legal boundaries. Green depicts years when a population stratified by state was essentially fully open to hunting, yellow depicts partial closures (>50% open but some closure), orange depicted partial closures (<50% open but some legal hunting), red depicted essentially full hunting closures, and grey with NA indicates years where no data was available. This information is also available in Excel format via S1 Table.
Fig 4
Fig 4. Change in total harvest area for greater sage-grouse across 11 western states and 2 Canadian provinces from 1995–2018, represented by total administrative boundaries (solid) and area within 8 km of known leks (dashed).
Fig 5
Fig 5
Change over time in average bag limits (A) and possession limits (B) of greater sage-grouse, 1995–2018. The solid line represents averaged season length within 8 km of all active greater sage-grouse leks, and the dashed line represents averaged season length within 8 km of active leks with direct exposure to legal harvest in a given year.
Fig 6
Fig 6. Bag limits, possession limits, and total hunt area for greater sage-grouse in 1995, 2005, 2014, and 2018.
Fig 7
Fig 7. Change over time in season length calculated as total hunt days for greater sage-grouse, 1995–2018.
The solid line represents averaged season length within 8 km of all active greater sage-grouse leks within the range of the species, whereas the dashed line represents averaged season length within 8 km of active leks with direct exposure to legal harvest in a given year across the range of greater sage-grouse.
Fig 8
Fig 8
Estimated number of hunters (A–C) and harvest (D–F) grouped by relative abundance of greater sage-grouse among states from 1995–2018. Data were obtained from state wildlife management agencies.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Storch I. Conservation status of grouse worldwide: An update. Wildlife Biol. 2007;13: 5–12.
    1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Native fish and wildlife endangered species. Fed Regist. 1967;32: 48.
    1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: determination of threatened status for the lesser prairie-chicken Federal Register. Fed Regist. 2010;79: 19974–20071.
    1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: determination for the Gunnison sage-grouse as a threatened or endangered species. Fed Regist. 2014;75: 59803–59863.
    1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: 12-month finding on a petition to list the greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) as an endangered or threatened species: proposed rule. Fed Regist. 2015;80: 59857–59942.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources