Centrocercus urophasianus

(Bonaparte, 1827)

Greater Sage-Grouse

G3Vulnerable Found in 199 roadless areas NatureServe Explorer →
G3VulnerableGlobal Rank
VulnerableIUCN
PS:PTESA Status
HighThreat Impact
Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus). Photo by U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Public Domain (U.S. Government Work), via ECOS.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, https://www.usa.gov/government-works
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.105314
Element CodeABNLC12010
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVertebrate Animal
IUCNVulnerable
Endemicoccurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumCraniata
ClassAves
OrderGalliformes
FamilyPhasianidae
GenusCentrocercus
USESAPS:PT
COSEWICXT,E
Other Common Names
greater sage-grouse (EN) Tétras des armoises (FR)
Concept Reference
American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1998. Check-list of North American birds. Seventh edition. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. [as modified by subsequent supplements and corrections published in The Auk]. Also available online: http://www.aou.org/.
Taxonomic Comments
This species formerly included C. minimus, which is now recognized as a distinct species, the Gunnison sage-grouse (AOU 2000). Subspecies phaios is of questionable taxonomic validity; validity may be impossible to determine because of introductions of nominate subspecies into range of phaios (Johnsgard 1983, Banks 1995). Accordingly, USFWS (2003, 2010) did not recognize any valid subspecies of C. urophasianus.

Columbia Basin Distinct Population Segment: USFWS (2003) found that the discrete population segment of greater sage-grouse that remains in Washington is significant to the remainder of the taxon and thus represents a distinct population segment. The significance of this population segment is primarily due to its persistence in the unique ecological setting of the Columbia Basin. In addition, the available genetic and morphological information on greater sage-grouse, while inconclusive, indicates that this population segment may be differentiating from the remainder of the taxon, and its extirpation could preclude further scientific inquiry into these characteristics. Finally, information concerning the historic and current distribution of greater sage-grouse indicates that the loss of the Columbia Basin population segment would represent a significant gap in the historical range of the taxon.
Conservation Status
Rank Method Rank calculation - Biotics v2
Review Date2025-06-03
Change Date2025-06-03
Edition Date2025-09-21
Edition AuthorsHammerson, G. (2013); rev. R. L. Gundy and E. Ramirez (2025)
Threat ImpactHigh
Range Extent200,000-2,500,000 square km (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences81 - 300
Rank Reasons
This species is widely distributed in the western and central U.S. and extreme southern Alberta and Saskatchewan, Canada. The population has declined over 75%, and historical range extent and area of occupancy has declined by over 50%. The population size is estimated to have declined by another 40% from 2002-2021. It is threatened by habitat loss, fragmentation, and degradation due to agriculture, overgrazing, development, energy infrastructure, invasive plant encroachment, and an increase in wildfires.
Range Extent Comments
This species is resident locally from central Washington, southern Idaho, Montana, much of Wyoming, southeastern Alberta, southwestern Saskatchewan, southwestern North Dakota, and western South Dakota south to east-central California, south-central Nevada, southern Utah, and northwestern Colorado (USFWS 2010). Using Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) (2025) records from 2005-2025, range extent is estimated to be 1,523,629 km² (RARECAT 2025).

It is extirpated from the historical range in southern British Columbia, western Nebraska, and possibly northern Arizona (USFWS 2010).
Occurrences Comments
The species as a whole is represented by many distinct occurrences (subpopulations).

Columbia Basin Distinct Population Segment: The two subpopulations of greater sage-grouse that remain in central Washington are separated by approximately 55 km. While this distance is well within the species' maximum estimated dispersal distance, a number of telemetry studies have never documented their intermixing (M. Schroeder, pers. comm., 1999; M. Pounds, YTC, pers. comm., 1999; cited by USFWS 2003). However, until recently, the two subpopulations were considered relatively continuous and may now represent isolated components of a single metapopulation (WDFW 1995, Schroeder et al. 2000). In addition, sporadic sightings outside current concentrations indicate there may be some minimal interaction and, possibly, genetic interchange between them (WDFW 1995) [from USFWS 2003].
Threat Impact Comments
Proximate reasons for population declines differ across the range, but ultimate underlying causes are loss, fragmentation, and/or degradation of suitable sagebrush habitat, as well as the effects of predation and drought. In many areas of the West, predation and drought have very high impacts on population size and distribution compared to other factors. The quality and quantity of sagebrush habitat has declined over the last 50 years to the extent that expanses of unfragmented sagebrush are rare across the landscape (Connelly et al. 2000b, Miller and Eddleman 2001, Aldridge and Brigham 2003, Pedersen et al. 2003, Connelly et al. 2004, Schroeder et al. 2004, Leu and Hanser 2011, Homer et al. 2015). Habitat loss is attributed to large-scale conversions to cultivated croplands or pastures, increasing wildfire frequencies facilitating annual nonnative grass and noxious weed dominance at lower elevations, conifer encroachment, improper livestock grazing management, herbicide use and chaining to intentionally reduce sagebrush, crested wheatgrass seedings, mineral and energy development, wild horse grazing, and recreational activities related to urban growth and increased human populations (Manier et al. 2013, USFWS 2013). Currently, sagebrush communities and this species continue to be at risk from multiple stressors acting across multiple scales (Connelly et al. 2011b, Manier et al. 2013, Hanser et al. 2018, Doherty et al. 2022a).

Invasive plants, including cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), alter plant community structure and composition, productivity, nutrient cycling, and hydrology and may competitively exclude native plant populations. The presence of invasive annual grasses can also change wildfire cycles, creating a positive feedback loop between wildfire frequency and invasive annual grass persistence, precluding re-establishment of sagebrush and reduce or eliminate vegetation this species uses for food and cover (Manier et al. 2013, Hanser et al. 2018). Warming trends may further exacerbate this cycle, preventing natural recovery in those areas and requiring active management approaches (Pyke 2011, Hanser et al. 2018). While wildfire is a primary factor facilitating annual grass invasion, annual grasses are also able to invade landscapes that have not been burned for decades (Smith et al. 2023).

The expansion of native juniper (Juniperus spp.) and pinyon (Pinus spp.) woodlands (pinyon-juniper) can also contribute to sagebrush habitat loss. Pinyon-juniper expansion and infill occurs from low to high elevations, especially in Nevada’s Basin and Range habitats (Miller et al. 2011). Studies have shown that this species incurs population-level impacts with conifer encroachment as low as 4% (Baruch-Mordo et al. 2013). Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) expansion into this species’ habitat has occurred in Montana (USGS 2011).

Development of energy infrastructure has multiple adverse effects on the population. Impacts from renewable energy development generally include direct habitat loss and fragmentation due to facilities, access roads, and transmission lines as well as disturbance and habitat avoidance from noise and increased human presence. Disturbance from human activity associated with infrastructure maintenance has been linked to declines in reproduction and avoidance of these areas (Kirol et al. 2020). Solar facilities, in particular, require a large land area and high water consumption rates (Hanser et al. 2018). Geothermal power is expanding, and while little is known regarding impacts of geothermal energy on wildlife populations, recent research suggests this species is adversely affected. Decreased nest and adult survival near geothermal infrastructure has been documented (Coates et al. 2023). Ravens also increased in density around geothermal plants, potentially increasing predation risk (Coates et al. 2023). At a wind facility in Wyoming, lek counts declined more severely near wind infrastructure after a 3- or 5-year time lag and the relative probability of choosing the site as brood-rearing and summer habitats was negatively correlated with the percentage of surface disturbance associated with the facility infrastructure (LeBeau et al. 2017a, LeBeau et al. 2017b). However, survival rates were higher on the wind facility site relative to the undisturbed site, possibly due to lower numbers of avian predators (LeBeau et al. 2017b).

While predation by native predators is generally not considered a threat because it is a natural ecological process, there is evidence that this species is facing increased levels of predation because changes in habitat have allowed for increased population sizes in common raven (Corvus corax). Predation is a common cause of mortality for this species (Connelly et al. 2011b, USFWS 2013, Conover and Roberts 2017), but it is generally not considered a threat to the persistence of the species in areas where habitat is not limited and of good quality (USFWS 2010a). Increases in available perches and potential nesting sites (e.g., electrical infrastructure, fences, buildings, encroaching trees) along with increases in incidental supplemental food sources (e.g., landfills, dumpsters, agriculture, roadkill) facilitate increasing population growth in common ravens (Boarman et al. 2006, Hagen 2011, Howe 2012, Coates et al. 2016, Prochazka et al. 2017, O’Neil et al. 2018, USFWS 2023). In one study the majority (64%) of projected breeding concentration areas across the Great Basin and adjoining ecoregions had raven densities associated with below average nest survival, suggesting predation as a result of elevated raven numbers is potentially a more widespread and greater threat than wildfire (Coates et al. 2020). Recent studies indicate that high raven populations have become a significant factor even in relatively intact landscapes. In addition to ravens, the introduction of non-native red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) into central Wyoming, primarily from fox farms that became unprofitable, has further exacerbated predation on this species (Baxter et al. 2000).

This species is highly susceptible to mortality from West Nile virus (Flavivirus spp.), a zoonotic disease transmitted by mosquitoes and other arthropods (Naugle et al. 2004, Clark et al. 2006). Climate change is expected to increase the risk of exposure to mosquitoes as droughts draw sage-grouse to water sources for longer periods each year (Naugle et al. 2004, Schrag et al. 2011).
Ecology & Habitat

Description

This is a very large grayish grouse with a blackish belly and long pointed tail feathers; male has yellow eye combs, black throat and bib, large white ruff on breast, and averages larger than the female (NGS 1983).

Diagnostic Characteristics

This species differs from sharp-tailed grouse (Tympanchus phasianellus) in having a black belly and in lacking white outer tail feathers.

Habitat

Habitat includes foothills, plains, and mountain slopes where sagebrush is present (AOU 1983), often with a mixture of sagebrush, meadows, and aspen, in close proximity. This species uses a wide variety of sagebrush mosaic habitats, including (1) tall sagebrush types such as big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), three-tip sagebrush (A. tripartita), and silver sagebrush (A. cana); (2) low sagebrush types, such as low sagebrush (A. arbuscula) and black sagebrush (A. nova); (3) mixes of low and tall sagebrush with abundant forbs; (4) riparian and wet meadows; (5) steppe dominated by native forbs and bunchgrasses; (6) scrub-willow (Salix spp.); and (7) sagebrush/woodland mixes with juniper (Juniperus spp.), ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), or quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides; Schroeder et al. 1999).

LEKKING: The quality of adjacent nesting and brood-rearing habitat may be the most important factor in lek choice, and males apparently form leks opportunistically within potential nesting habitat where female traffic is high (Wakkinen et al. 1992, Connelly 1999b, Schroeder et al. 1999, Connelly et al. 2000). Leks are located on relatively open sites surrounded by sagebrush, or in areas where sagebrush density is low, such as exposed ridges, knolls or grassy swales (Schroeder et al. 1999). Lek sites themselves are highly variable and may include many types of clearings and disturbed sites, including landing strips, old lake beds, roads, gravel pits, cropland, and burned areas in addition to natural openings (Connelly et al. 1981, Gates 1985, Schroeder et al. 1999, Connelly et al. 2000).

Habitats used by pre-laying females are also important for subsequent reproductive success. At this time, hens require areas rich with forbs that are high in calcium, phosphorus, and protein (Barnett and Crawford 1994, Connelly et al. in prep.). In Oregon, important forbs included desert-parsley (Lomatium spp.), hawksbeard (Crepis spp.), long-leaf phlox (Phlox longifolia Nutt.), everlasting (Antennaria spp.), clover (Trifolium spp.), mountain-dandelion (Agoseris spp.), Pursh's milk-vetch (Astragalus purshii Dougl.), obscure milk-vetch (A. obscurus), and buckwheat (Eriogonum spp.; Barnett and Crawford 1994).

NESTING: Hens typically nest in same specific area in successive years (Fisher et al. 1993). Nest in thick cover in sagebrush habitat, beneath a sagebrush or other shrub; nests are on the ground in a shallow depression. Usually choose areas dominated by sagebrush, in sites with taller sagebrush, greater shrub canopy cover, and more ground litter (Musil et al. 1994), and nest beneath one of tallest shrubs in stand with greater lateral cover (Roberson 1986, Wakkinen 1990). Occasionally use areas dominated by grasses or other shrubs (Schroeder et al. 1999). Proximity to water may be more important in some areas than in others (Schroder et al. 1999).

Both a dense sagebrush overstory and an herbaceous understory of grasses are important to provide shade and security, and both new herbaceous growth and residual cover are important in the understory (Connelly 1999b). Tall grass cover is critical for concealment and a warmer microclimate (Call and Maser 1985, Gregg et al. 1994). Most often nest beneath a sagebrush and approximately 20 percent of time may nest beneath other shrub species or grass, but nest success is higher beneath sagebrush than other shrubs (Connelly 1999b). In southeastern Idaho, nest success averaged 53 percent for females nesting under sagebrush, 22 percent for those using non-sagebrush cover (Connelly et al. 1991). Favor nesting in sagebrush 40 to 80 centimeters in height with 15 to 25 percent canopy cover (sometimes more than 30 percent), and grasses 15 to 30 centimeters high (usually more than 18 centimeters, measured in May) and 3 to 30 percent grass cover (15-25 percent best; Connelly 1999b).

In northern Washington, where native sagebrush habitats have been largely lost and greatly fragmented, females nest in older Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) lands that have been converted from wheat to a mix of crested wheatgrass, sagebrush, and native and non-native forbs. These areas typically have fragments of remnant sagebrush shrub-steppe in the surrounding landscape mosaic. Hens also nest in very small fragments of high-quality habitat within the fragmented landscape, and they move large distances from leks to nests and throughout the season (Braun and Schroeder 1999).

EARLY BROOD-REARING: Habitat for brood-rearing in early spring is critical to brood survival. Hens with broods tend to use sagebrush uplands adjacent to nest sites, but distance of movement varies (Connelly et al. 2000). Sagebrush overstory, herbaceous understory, and the presence of plentiful insects that provide a high-protein diet for broods (especially Hymenoptera and Coleoptera; species typical of sagebrush upland steppe) are the three important factors (Connelly 1999b). Stands may be relatively open (approximately 14 percent sagebrush canopy cover; Martin 1970, Wallestad 1971) with more than or equal to 5 percent grass and forb cover (Sveum et al. 1998).

SUMMER: As spring habitats dry, hens move their broods to wetter sites in June and July (Connelly et al. 2000). Habitats used are highly variable, but food-rich areas with succulent forbs and abundant insects are key. In this season, sage-grouse may roost in sagebrush and use seeps, wet meadows, riparian areas, alfalfa fields, potato fields, and other cultivated and irrigated areas. Males and broodless females use a wide variety of habitats, and they may move to uplands and into mountains, using high mountain meadows and grasslands (Connelly 1999b).

In southeastern Oregon, broodless hens moved to meadows by early July whereas hens with broods remained in upland habitats (Gregg et al. 1993); hens with broods initially selected low sagebrush cover types during early brood-rearing, big sagebrush cover types later in brood-rearing, and ultimately concentrated habitat use in and near lakebeds and meadows (Drut et al. 1994a). In Wyoming, broods most often occupied sagebrush-grass and sagebrush-bitterbrush habitats, in sites containing Stipa comata and Alyssum desertorum (Klott and Lindzey 1990).

WINTER: This species is well-adapted to winter extremes, but access to sagebrush for food and cover in all snow conditions is critical to survival. Individuals are known to move considerable distances to find good habitat, and winter ranges may exceed 140 square kilometers (Robertson 1991). Thus, sage-grouse require a landscape mosaic with a diversity of sagebrush canopy cover and heights over 100s of square kilometers (Connelly 1999b). Winter sites may be selected on the basis of topography and availability of sagebrush above the snow. Sage-grouse tend to feed in low, open sagebrush flats, and once these are covered with snow will move into taller sagebrush (Connelly 1999b). Favored conditions include stands with highest available sagebrush canopy cover (10-25 percent and up to 40 percent) and sagebrush heights of 25-30 centimeters above the snow level (Braun et al. 1977, Call and Maser 1985, Connelly 1999b). Sagebrush subspecies and stands that contain the highest levels of protein may be selected (Remington and Braun 1985). Sage-grouse use snow burrows for thermal cover, tunneling into soft drifts on the lee side of shrubs, or burrowing into dry soft snow (when snow depths more than 25 centimeters) in open, level areas without visible shrub cover above the snow (Back et al. 1987).

Ecology

Males and females gather into separate flocks in winter, as do broodless hens in early summer.

Reproduction

This species is a lek breeder; up to 400 males may display in an area 0.8 kilometers long. Clutch size averages around seven to eight but is highly variable; variation may reflect habitat quality and nutritional condition of female (Connelly et al. 2000). Incubation, by the female, lasts 25-27 days. Young are precocial, downy, tended by female, fly when 7-14 days old. Productivity generally is low; reported nest failure 36 percent (Montana) to 76 percent (Oregon) (see Gregg et al. 1993). Renesting rates after nest loss are variable, from less than 10 percent to more than 40 percent (Connelly et al. 2000). Females are sexually mature in 1 year, though some or many yearlings may not nest. Most sage-grouse live 3-6 years or less, but individuals up to 9 years of age have been recorded in the wild (Connelly et al. 2004).
Terrestrial Habitats
Shrubland/chaparralSavannaGrassland/herbaceousDesert
Palustrine Habitats
Riparian
Other Nations (2)
CanadaN1
ProvinceRankNative
AlbertaS1Yes
SaskatchewanS1Yes
British ColumbiaSXYes
United StatesN3
ProvinceRankNative
New MexicoSXYes
OklahomaSXYes
South DakotaS2Yes
NebraskaSXYes
OregonS2Yes
MontanaS2Yes
NevadaS3Yes
WyomingS4Yes
North DakotaSUYes
CaliforniaS2Yes
WashingtonS1Yes
KansasSXYes
ColoradoS3Yes
IdahoS2Yes
UtahS3Yes
Threat Assessments
ThreatScopeSeverityTiming
1 - Residential & commercial developmentRestricted - smallSerious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
1.1 - Housing & urban areasRestricted - smallSerious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
2 - Agriculture & aquacultureRestricted (11-30%)Serious - moderateHigh (continuing)
2.1 - Annual & perennial non-timber cropsRestricted (11-30%)Serious - moderateHigh (continuing)
2.3 - Livestock farming & ranchingRestricted (11-30%)Serious - moderateHigh (continuing)
3 - Energy production & miningRestricted - smallModerate or 11-30% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
3.1 - Oil & gas drillingRestricted - smallModerate or 11-30% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
7 - Natural system modificationsRestricted (11-30%)Serious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
7.1 - Fire & fire suppressionRestricted (11-30%)Serious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
7.1.1 - Increase in fire frequency/intensityRestricted (11-30%)Serious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
8 - Invasive & other problematic species, genes & diseasesLarge (31-70%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)
8.1 - Invasive non-native/alien species/diseasesLarge (31-70%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)
8.2 - Problematic native species/diseasesLarge (31-70%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)
8.2.2 - Named speciesLarge (31-70%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)

Roadless Areas (199)
California (69)
AreaForestAcres
Barney RileyHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest8,083
Benton RangeInyo National Forest9,637
Benton RangeInyo National Forest9,637
Birch CreekInyo National Forest28,816
Birch CreekInyo National Forest28,816
Black CanyonInyo National Forest32,421
Boundary Peak (CA)Inyo National Forest210,884
Buckeye RidgeHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest2,241
Chineese Camp (CA)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest4,339
Chineese Camp (CA)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest4,339
Deep WellsInyo National Forest7,681
Devil's Gate (CA)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest9,946
Devil's Gate (CA)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest9,946
Dexter CanyonInyo National Forest17,053
Dexter CanyonInyo National Forest17,053
Excelsior (CA)Inyo National Forest45,607
Excelsior (CA)Inyo National Forest45,607
FalesHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest9,138
Fourth Of July Spr (CA)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest2,689
Glass MountainInyo National Forest52,867
Glass MountainInyo National Forest52,867
Halfway CampHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest52
Hoover - Cattle CkHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest598
Hoover - EastHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest91
Hoover - Emma LakeHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest1,007
Hoover - Green Ck NoHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest7,155
Hoover - Mt.olsenHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest624
Hoover - Mt.olsenHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest624
Hoover - NorthHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest1,574
Hoover - NorthHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest1,574
Hoover - Valley RidgeHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest564
Hoover - Virginia LksHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest5,050
Hoover - Virginia LksHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest5,050
Horse Mdw.Inyo National Forest5,687
Horse Mdw.Inyo National Forest5,687
Iceberg - Mill CreekHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest26,988
Iceberg - RodriquezHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest229
Iceberg - SlinkardHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest1,551
Log Cabin SaddlebagInyo National Forest15,165
Log Cabin SaddlebagInyo National Forest15,165
Long MeadowHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest11,967
Mono CratersInyo National Forest7,115
Mono CratersInyo National Forest7,115
Mt. JacksonHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest20,721
Mt. JacksonHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest20,721
Mt. BidwellModoc National Forest11,687
Mt. OlsenInyo National Forest2,161
Mt. OlsenInyo National Forest2,161
Mt. VidaModoc National Forest7,771
Nevahbe RidgeInyo National Forest302
Robinson PeakHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest5,835
Robinson PeakHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest5,835
Rock Creek WestInyo National Forest3,626
Rock Creek WestInyo National Forest3,626
SherwinInyo National Forest3,140
Silver HillHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest4,423
SinkardHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest2,004
Soldier CanyonInyo National Forest40,589
Soldier CanyonInyo National Forest40,589
Steele SwampModoc National Forest18,958
Sweetwater (CA)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest19,241
Sweetwater (CA)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest19,241
WattersonInyo National Forest6,922
WattersonInyo National Forest6,922
West Walker (CA)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest495
West Walker (CA)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest495
Wheeler RidgeInyo National Forest15,744
Whisky CreekInyo National Forest865
Wild Horse Mtn. (CA)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest28,822
Colorado (2)
AreaForestAcres
Dome PeakRoutt NF35,716
Long ParkRoutt NF42,100
Idaho (5)
AreaForestAcres
Borah PeakSalmon-Challis National Forest130,463
Italian PeakCaribou-Targhee National Forest141,158
Lemhi RangeSalmon-Challis National Forest308,533
Pioneer MountainsSawtooth National Forest119,563
Pioneer MountainsSalmon-Challis National Forest172,460
Montana (9)
AreaForestAcres
Freezeout MountainBeaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest97,305
Italian PeakBeaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest90,401
Lost Water CanyonCuster National Forest9,251
Mt. Gmt Area HCuster National Forest1,335
North Big HoleBeaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest52,227
Snowcrest MountainBeaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest97,649
Tash PeakBeaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest61,312
West Big HoleBeaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest133,563
West PioneerBeaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest248,631
Nevada (72)
AreaForestAcres
Alta T - East BHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest21,732
Arc Dome - Secret BsnHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest74,782
Aurora CraterHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest5,689
Aurora CraterHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest5,689
Bald Mtn.Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest41,598
Boundary Peak (NV)Inyo National Forest21,851
Bunker HillHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest27,569
ButlerHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest39,470
Butler Mtn.Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest25,878
ButtermilkHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest19,373
Chicken SpringHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest6,947
Chineese Camp (NV)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest15,207
Chineese Camp (NV)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest15,207
Copper Mtns.Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest31,945
Duck Creek Mtns.Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest12,165
Excelsior (NV)Inyo National Forest7,744
Excelsior Mtns.Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest69,071
Flat CreekHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest5,843
Fourmile HillHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest15,718
Fourth Of July Spr (NV)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest3,145
GrantsvilleHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest6,156
Horse HeavenHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest6,385
Humboldt - SouthHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest11,152
HuntoonHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest36,281
Jarbidge - Biroth RdgHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest4,887
Jarbidge - Three DayHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest2,346
LampsonHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest10,730
Larken LakeHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest4,159
Larken LakeHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest4,159
Lobdell SummitHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest7,791
Long ValleyHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest50,472
Long ValleyHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest50,472
Mahogany RidgeHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest16,765
Martin RidgeHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest12,241
Mt. ArdiveyHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest37,984
Mt. EtnaHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest20,527
Mt. HicksHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest15,698
Mt. HicksHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest15,698
North SchellHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest30,773
North Shoshone PeakHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest40,667
Pearl PeakHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest71,405
Pine Grove NorthHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest8,749
Pine Grove SouthHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest88,945
Pine Grove SouthHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest88,945
Pine Grove SummitHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest6,070
Pine Mtn.Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest12,519
RattlesnakeHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest19,672
Rock CanyonHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest31,552
Rough CreekHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest8,476
Ruby - Lamoille CynHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest32,771
Ruby - SouthHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest13,195
Santa RosaHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest54,555
South Fork QuinnHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest40,535
South SchellHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest125,614
South Shoshone PeakHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest24,528
Spanish PeakHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest31,520
SugarloafInyo National Forest11,534
Sweetwater (NV)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest5,946
Sweetwater (NV)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest5,946
Table Mtn. - EastHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest87,789
Table Mtn. - W. Valley BHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest4,071
Toiyabe RangeHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest99,225
Wellington HillsHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest21,009
West SchellHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest21,656
West Walker (NV)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest5,683
West Walker (NV)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest5,683
White Pine Mtn.Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest25,244
White SageHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest11,993
Wild Horse Mtn. (NV)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest1,399
WildcatHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest28,565
WildhorseHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest11,204
WileyHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest6,864
Utah (26)
AreaForestAcres
0401002Ashley National Forest36,113
0401006Ashley National Forest7,645
0401007Ashley National Forest16,483
0401008Ashley National Forest15,616
0401012Ashley National Forest46,400
0401013Ashley National Forest11,909
0401024Ashley National Forest12,882
0419020Ashley National Forest355,684
418008Uinta National Forest9,367
418009Uinta National Forest18,064
418022Uinta National Forest17,289
418043Uinta National Forest9,493
Boulder Mtn. / Boulder Top / Deer LakeDixie National Forest110,690
Casto BluffDixie National Forest87,466
Dark ValleyDixie National Forest27,481
High Uintas (UT)Wasatch-Cache National Forest102,398
LangdonFishlake National Forest12,160
Little West Fork BlacksWasatch-Cache National Forest8,209
Mollens HollowWasatch-Cache National Forest17,690
Raft RiverSawtooth National Forest23,969
Right Hand Fork LoganWasatch-Cache National Forest15,023
Rock Creek - Green ForkWasatch-Cache National Forest5,660
Sugar PineWasatch-Cache National Forest5,600
Table Cliffs - Henderson CanyonDixie National Forest19,581
Thousand Lake MountainFishlake National Forest27,267
Upper South ForkWasatch-Cache National Forest16,811
Washington (1)
AreaForestAcres
ChelanWenatchee National Forest74,650
Wyoming (15)
AreaForestAcres
Big SandstoneMedicine Bow-Routt National Forest7,180
Cloud Peak ContiguousBighorn National Forest113,757
Grayback RidgeBridger-Teton National Forest295,113
Gros Ventre MountainsBridger-Teton National Forest106,418
Leigh CreekBighorn National Forest19,180
Little SandstoneMedicine Bow-Routt National Forest5,483
Middle ForkShoshone National Forest51,772
Pacific Creek - Blackrock CreekBridger-Teton National Forest24,658
Pennock MountainMedicine Bow-Routt National Forest9,599
Phillips RidgeBridger-Teton National Forest10,108
Salt River RangeBridger-Teton National Forest235,661
South ForkShoshone National Forest64,903
West Slope TetonsTarghee National Forest47,448
West Slope WindsBridger-Teton National Forest143,252
Wilderness Study AreaTarghee National Forest51,961
References (127)
  1. Aldrich, J. W. 1963. Geographic orientation of American Tetraonidae. Journal of Wildlife Management 27:529-545.
  2. Aldridge, C. L., and R. M. Brigham. 2003. Distribution, abundance, and status of the greater sage-grouse, <i>Centrocercus urophasianus</i>, in Canada. The Canadian Field-Naturalist 117(1): 25-34.
  3. American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1983. Check-list of North American Birds, 6th edition. Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence, Kansas. 877 pp.
  4. American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1998. Check-list of North American birds. Seventh edition. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. [as modified by subsequent supplements and corrections published in <i>The Auk</i>]. Also available online: http://www.aou.org/.
  5. Back, G. N., M. R. Barrington, and J. K. McAdoo. 1987. Sage Grouse use of snow burrows in northeastern Nevada. Wilson Bulletin 99(3):488-490.
  6. Banks, R. C. 1995. Taxonomic Validation for Bird Species on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Category 2 Species List. In Biological Survey Project, Patuxent Environmental Research Center, National Biological Service (compilers). Taxonomic Review of Category 2 Species.
  7. Barnett, J. K. and J. A. Crawford. 1994. Pre-laying nutrition of sage grouse hens in Oregon. J. Range Management 47:1114-118.
  8. Baruch-Mordo, S., J. S. Evans, J. P. Severson, D. E. Naugle, J. D. Maestas, J. M. Kiesecker, M. J. Falkowski, C. A. Hagen, and K. P . Reese 2013. Saving sage-grouse from the trees: a proactive solution to reducing a key threat to a candidate species. Biological Conservation 167: 233-241.
  9. Blus, L. J. 1989. Effects of organophosphorus insecticides on sage grouse in southeastern Idaho. J. Wildl. Manage. 53:1139-1146.
  10. Boarman, W. L , M. A. Patten , R. J. Camp , and S. J. Collis . 2006. Ecology of a population of subsidized predators: common ravens in the central Mojave Desert, California. Journal of Arid Environments 67: 248–261.
  11. Braun, C.E. 1995. Distribution and status of sage grouse in Colorado. Prairie Naturalist 27(1):1-9.
  12. Braun, C.E. 1998. Sage grouse declines in western North America: what are the problems? Proc. Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. 78:139-156.
  13. Braun, C.E. 1999a. The status of the Gunnison sage grouse. Presentation given to the Western Sage Grouse Status Conference, Jan. 14-15, 1999, Boise, ID. Online. Available: http://www.rangenet.org/projects/grouse.html.
  14. Braun, C.E. 1999b. Conservation plans. Presentation given to the Western Sage Grouse Status Conference, Jan. 14-15, 1999, Boise, ID. Online. Available: http://www.rangenet.org/projects/grouse.html.
  15. Braun, C.E. 1999c. Historic and present distribution of sage grouse in North America. Presentation given to the Western Sage Grouse Status Conference, Jan. 14-15, 1999, Boise, ID. Online. Available: http://www.rangenet.org/projects/grouse.html.
  16. Braun, C. E. and M. A. Schroeder. 1999. What is the size of a viable sage grouse population? Presentation given to the Western Sage Grouse Status Conference, Jan. 14-15, 1999, Boise, ID. Online. Available: http://www.rangenet.org/projects/grouse.html.
  17. Braun, C. E., T. Britt, and R. O. Wallestad. 1977. Guide- lines for maintenance of sage grouse habitat. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 5:99-106.
  18. Bush, K. L., C. K. Dyte, B. J. Moynahan, C. L. Aldridge, H. S. Sauls, A. M. Battazzo, B. L. Walker, K. E. Doherty, J. Tack, J. Carlson, D. Eslinger, J. Nicholson, M. S. Boyce, D. E. Naugle, C. A> Paszkowski, and D. W. Coltman. 2011. Population structure and genetic diversity of greater sage-grouse (<i>Centrocercus urophasianus</i>) in fragmented landscapes at the northern edge of their range. Conservation Genetics 12: 527–542.
  19. Call, M.W. and C. Maser. 1985. Wildlife habitats in managed rangelands - the Great Basin of southeastern Oregon: sage grouse. USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management, General Technical Report PNW-GTR-187.
  20. Clark, L., J. Hall, R. McLean, M. Dunbar, K. Klenk, R. Bowen, and C.A. Smeraski. 2006. Susceptibility of greater sage-grouse to experimental infection with West Nile virus. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 42(1): 14-22.
  21. Coates, P. S., B. G. Prochazka, S. T. O'Neil, S. C. WEbster, S. Espinosa, M. A. Ricca, S. R. Mathews, M. Casazza, and D. J. Delehanty. 2023. Geothermal energy production adversely affects a sensitive indicator species within sagebrush ecosystems in western North America. Biological Conservation 280: 109889.
  22. Coates, P. S., M. A. Ricca, B. G. Prochazka, S. T. O’Neil, J. P. Severson, S. R. Mathews, S. Espinosa, S. Gardner, S. Lisius, and D. J. Delehanty. 2020. Population and habitat analyses for greater sage-grouse (<i>Centrocercus urophasianus</i>) in the bi-state distinct population segment - 2018 update: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2019–1149, 122 p. doi: 10.3133/ofr20191149.
  23. Coates, P. S., M. C. Milligan, B. G. Prochazka, B. E. Brussee, S. T., O’Neil, C.G. Lundblad, S. C. Webster, C. L. Weise, S. R. Mathews, M. P. Chenaille, C. L. Aldridge, et al. 2024, Status of greater sage-grouse in the Bi-State Distinct Population Segment—An evaluation of population trends, habitat selection, and efficacy of conservation actions: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2024–1030. 74 pp. doi: 10.3133/ ofr20241030.
  24. Coates, P. S., M. L. Casazza, B. E. Brussee, M. A. Ricca, K. B. Gustafson, E. Sanchez-Chopitea, K. Mauch, L. Niell, S. Gardner, S. Espinosa, and D. J. Delehanty. 2016. Spatially explicit modeling of annual and seasonal habitat for greater sage-grouse (<i>Centrocercus urophasianus</i>) in Nevada and Northeastern California—an updated decision-support tool for management. USGS Open-File Report 2016-1080. doi: 10.3133/ofr20161080
  25. Connelly, J. 1999a. Sage grouse management. Presentation given to the Western Sage Grouse Status Conference, Jan. 14-15, 1999, Boise, ID. Online. Available: http://www.rangenet.org/projects/grouse.html.
  26. Connelly, J. 1999b. What do we know about sage grouse needs? Presentation given to the Western Sage Grouse Status Conference, Jan. 14-15, 1999, Boise, ID. Online. Available: http://www.rangenet.org/projects/grouse.html.
  27. Connelly, J. W., C. A. Hagan, and M. A. Schroeder. 2011. Characteristics and dynamics of greater sage-grouse populations, chapter 3. Pages 53-67 in: Knick, Steven T.; Connelly, John W., eds. Greater sage-grouse: Ecology and conservation of a landscape species and its habitats. Studies in Avian Biology 38. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
  28. Connelly, J. W., H. W. Browers, and R. J. Gates. 1988. Seasonal movements of sage grouse in southeastern Idaho. J. Wildl. Manage. 52:116-122.
  29. 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 28:967-985.
  30. 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, Wyoming.
  31. Connelly, J. W., T. E. Rinkes, and C. E. Braun. 2011. Characteristics of greater sage-grouse habitats: A landscape species at micro- and macroscales, chapter 4. Pages 69-83 in: Knick, Steven T.; Connelly, John W., eds. Greater sage-grouse: Ecology and conservation of a landscape species and its habitats. Studies in Avian Biology No. 38. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
  32. Connelly, J. W., W. J. Arthur, and O. D. Markham. 1981. Sage grouse leks on recently disturbed sites. Journal of Range Management 34:153-154.
  33. Connelly, J.W., W.L. Wakkinen, and A.D. Apa. 1991. Sage grouse use of nest sites in southeastern Idaho. Journal of Wildlife Management 55(3):521-524.
  34. Conover, M. R., and A. J. Roberts. 2017. Predators, predator removal, and sage-grouse: a review. The Journal of Wildlife Management 81(1): 7-15.
  35. Copelin, F. F. 1963. The Lesser Prairie Chicken in Oklahoma. Oklahoma Wildlife Conservation Department Technical Bulletin 6.
  36. Cross, T.B., D.E. Naugle, J.C. Carlson, and M.K. Schwartz. 2016. Hierarchical population structure in greater sage-grouse provides insight into management boundary delineation. Conservation Genetics 17(6): 1417–1433.
  37. Cross, T.B., D.E. Naugle, J.C. Carlson, and M.K. Schwartz. 2017. Genetic recapture identifies long-distance breeding dispersal in greater sage-grouse (<i>Centrocercus urophasianus</i>). The Condor 119(1): 155–166.
  38. Doherty, K., D.M. Theobald, J.B. Bradford, L.A. Wiechman, G. Bedrosian, C.S. Boyd, M. Cahill, P.S. Coates, M.K. Creutzburg, M.R. Crist, S.P. Finn, A.V. Kumar, C.E. Littlefield, J.D. Maestas, K.L. Prentice, B.G. Prochazka, T.E. Remington, W.D. Sparklin, J.C. Tull, Z. Wurtzebach, and K.A. Zeller. 2022. A Sagebrush Conservation Design to Proactively Restore America’s Sagebrush Biome: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2022–1081: 38 pp.
  39. Drut, M. S., J. A. Crawford, and M. A. Gregg. 1994a. Brood habitat use by sage grouse in Oregon. Great Basin Nat. 54:170-176.
  40. Drut, M. S., W. H. Pyle, and J. A. Crawford. 1994b. Technical note: diets and food selection of sage grouse chicks in Oregon. Journal of Range Management 47:90-93.
  41. Dunn, P. O., and C. E. Braun. 1985. Natal dispersal and lek fidelity of sage grouse. Auk 102:621-627.
  42. Dunn, P. O., and C. E. Braun. 1986. Summer habitat use by adult female and juvenile sage grouse. J. Wildl. Manage. 50:228-235.
  43. Ehrlich, P. R., D. S. Dobkin, and D. Wheye. 1992. Birds in Jeopardy: the Imperiled and Extinct Birds of the United States and Canada, Including Hawaii and Puerto Rico. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. 259 pp.
  44. Fischer, R. A., A. D. Apa, W. L. Wakkinen, K. P. Reese and J. W. Connelly. 1993. Nesting-area fidelity of sage grouse in southeastern Idaho. Condor 95:1038-1041.
  45. Gates, R. J. 1985. Observations of the formation of a sage grouse lek. Wilson Bulletin 97:219-221.
  46. Giesen, K. M. 1991. Population inventory and habitat use by Lesser Prairie-Chickens in southeast Colorado. Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Report W-152-R, Colorado Division of Wildlife.
  47. Giesen, K.M. 1998. Lesser prairie-chicken (<i>Typanuchus pallidicinctus</i>). In A. Poole and F. Gill, editors. The Birds of North America, No. 364. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 20 pp.
  48. Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). 2025. Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) data portal. Online. Available: https://www.gbif.org/ (accessed 2025).
  49. Gregg, M. A., J. A. Crawford, and M. S. Drut. 1993. Summer habitat use and selection by female sage grouse (CENTROCERCUS UROPHASIANUS) in Oregon. Great Basin Nat. 53:293-298.
  50. Gregg, M. A., J. A. Crawford, M. S. Drut and A. K. Delong. 1994. Vegetational cover and predation of sage grouse nests in Oregon. Journal of Wildlife Management 58:162-166.
  51. Hagen, C. A. 2011. Predation on greater sage-grouse: facts, process, and effects, chapter 6. Pages 95-100 in: Knick, Steven T.; Connelly, John W., eds. Greater sage-grouse: Ecology and conservation of a landscape species and its habitats. Studies in Avian Biology, No. 38. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
  52. Hanser, S. E., P. A. Deibert, J. C. Tull, N. B. Carr, C. L. Aldridge, T. D. Bargsten, T. J. Christiansen, P. S. Coates, M. R. Crist, et al. 2018. Greater sage-grouse science (2015–17)—Synthesis and potential management implications. Open-File Report 2018-2017. doi: 10.3133/ofr20181017
  53. Harrison, C. 1978. A Field Guide to the Nests, Eggs and Nestlings of North American Birds. Collins, Cleveland, Ohio.
  54. Homer, C. G., G. Xian, C. L. Aldridge, D. K. Meyer, T. R. Loveland, and M.S. O’Donnell. Forecasting sagebrush ecosystem components and greater sage-grouse habitat for 2050: learning from past climate patterns and Landsat imagery to predict the future. Ecological Indicators 55: 131-145.
  55. Horkel, J. D. 1979. Cover and space requirements of Attwater's prairie chicken (TYMPANUCHUS CUPIDO ATTWATERI) in Refugio County, Texas. Ph.D. Thesis. Texas A&M University, College Station. 96 pp.
  56. Howe K. 2012. Resource selection by common ravens in sagebrush-steppe. M.S. thesis. Pocatello: Idaho State University.
  57. Jahner, J. P., D. Gibson, C. L. Weitzman, E. J. Blomberg, J. S. Sedinger, and T. L. Parchman. 2016. Fine-scale genetic structure among greater sage-grouse leks in central Nevada. BMC Evolutionary Biology 16: 127.
  58. Johnsgard, P.A. 1983b. The grouse of the world. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE. xvi + 413 pp.
  59. Johnson, G. D., and M. S. Boyce. 1991. Survival, growth, and reproduction of captive-reared sage grouse. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 19:88-93.
  60. Johnson, K. H. and C. E. Braun. 1999. Viability and conservation of an exploited sage grouse population. Conservation Biology 13:77-84.
  61. Kirol, C. P., K. T. Smith, N. E. Graf, J. B. Dinkins, C. W. Lebeau, T. L. Maechtle, A. L. Sutphin, and J. L. Beck. 2020. Greater sage-grouse response to the physical footprint of energy development. The Journal of Wildlife Management 84(5): 989–1001.
  62. Klott, J. H., and F. G. Lindzey. 1990. Brood habitats of sympatric sage grouse and Columbian sharp-tailed grouse in Wyoming. J. Wildl. Manage. 54:84-88.
  63. LeBeau, C. W., G. D. Johnson, M. J. Holloran, J. L. Beck, R. M. Nielson, M. E. Kauffman, E. J. Rodemaker, and T. L. McDonald. 2017. Greater sage-grouse habitat selection, survival, and wind energy infrastructure. The Journal of Wildlife Management 81(4):690–711. doi: 10.1002/jwmg.21231
  64. LeBeau, M. D. Strickland, G. D. Johnson, and M. S. Frank. 2017. Landscape-scale approach to quantifying habitat credits for a greater sage-grouse habitat conservation bank. Rangeland Ecology & Management 71(2): 149-158. doi: 10.1016/j.rama.2017.10.004
  65. Leu, M., and S. E. Hanser. 2011. Influences of the human footprint on sagebrush landscape patterns: Implications for sage-grouse conservation. Pages 383-405 in: S. T. Knick and J. W. Connelly, eds. Greater Sage-Grouse: Ecology and conservation of a landscape species and its habitats. USGS Publications Warehouse.
  66. Manier, D. J., D. J. A. Wood, Z. H. Bowen, R. M. Donovan, M. J. Holloran, L. M. Juliusson, K. S. Mayne, S. J. Oyler-McCance, F. R. Quamen, D. J. Saher, and A. J. Titolo. 2013. Summary of science, activities, programs, and policies that influence the rangewide conservation of greater sage-grouse (<i>Centrocercus urophasianus</i>), [Online]. Open-File Report 2013-1098. Reston, VA: U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey (Producer). 151 pp. [+ supplementary information]
  67. Meyerpeter, M. B., P. S. Coates, S. R. Mathews, K. D. Lazenby, B. G. Prochazka, D. K. Dahlgren, and D. J. Delehanty. 2024. Brood translocation increases post release recruitment and promotes population restoration of <i>Centrocercus urophasianus</i> (Greater Sage-Grouse). Ornithological Applications 126: duae013.
  68. Miller, R. F., and L. L. Eddleman. 2001. Spatial and temporal changes of sage grouse habitat in the sagebrush biome. Technical Bulletin 151. Oregon State University Agricultural Experiment Station, Corvallis. 35 pp.
  69. Miller, R. F., S. T. Knick, D. A. Pyke, C. W. Meinke, S. E. Hanser, M. J. Wisdom, and A. L. Hild. 2011. Characteristics of sagebrush habitats and limitations to long-term conservation. Pages 145-184 in: S. T. Knick and J. W. Connelly, editors. Greater Sage-Grouse: Ecology and conservation of a landscape species and its habitats. Studies in Avian Biology 38.
  70. Musil, D. D., K. P. Reese, and J. W. Connelly. 1994. Nesting and summer habitat use by translocated sage grouse (CENTROCERCUS UROPHASIANUS) in central Idaho. Great Basin Nat. 54:228-233.
  71. National Geographic Society (NGS). 1983. Field guide to the birds of North America. National Geographic Society, Washington, DC.
  72. Naugle, D. E., C. L. Aldridge, B. L. Walker, T. E. Cornish, B. J. Moynahan, M. J. Holloran, K. Brown, G. D. Johnson, et al. 2004. West Nile virus: pending crisis for greater sage-grouse. Ecology Letters 7(8): 704-713. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00631.x
  73. O'Neill, S., P. Coates, B. Brussee, P. Jackson, K. B. Howe, A. Moser, L. Foster, and D. Delehanty. 2018. Broad-scale occurrence of a subsidized avian predator: reducing impacts of ravens on sage-grouse and other sensitive prey. Journal of Applied Ecology 55(6): 2641-2652. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12349
  74. 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.
  75. 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(1): 23-47.
  76. Pelren, E. C. 1996. Blue grouse winter ecology in northeastern Oregon. Ph.D. Dissertation, Oregon State University, Corvallis.
  77. <p>NatureServe's Rapid Analysis of Rarity and Endangerment Conservation Assessment Tool (RARECAT). 2025. Version: 2.1.1 (released April 04, 2025).</p>
  78. Prochazka, B. G., P. S. Coates, C. L. Aldridge, M. S. O'Donnell, D. R. Edmunds, A. P. Monroe, S. E. Hanser, L. A. Wiechman, and M. P. Chenaille. 2024, Range-wide population trend analysis for greater sage-grouse (<i>Centrocercus urophasianus</i>) - Updated 1960–2023 (ver. 1.1, April 2024): U.S. Geological Survey Data Report 1190, 18 p. doi: 10.3133/dr1190
  79. Prochazka, B.G., P. S. Coates, C. L. Aldridge, M. S. O'Donnell, D. R. Edmunds, A. P. Monroe, S. E. Hanser, L. A. Wiechman, and M. P. Chenaille. 2024, Range-wide population trend analysis for greater sage-grouse (<i>Centrocercus urophasianus</i>)—Updated 1960–2023 (ver. 1.1, April 2024): U.S. Geological Survey Data Report 1190. 18 pp. doi: 10.3133/dr1190.
  80. Prochazka, B. G., P. S. Coates, M. A. Ricca, M. L. Casazza, and J. M. Hull. 2017. Encounters with pinyon–juniper influence riskier movements in greater sage-grouse across the Great Basin. Rangeland Ecology and Management 70: 39–49.
  81. Pyke, D. A. 2011. Restoring and rehabilitating sagebrush habitats, chapter 23. Pages 531-548 in: Knick, Steven T.; Connelly, John W., eds. Greater sage-grouse: Ecology and conservation of a landscape species and its habitats. Studies in Avian Biology 38. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
  82. Reese, K. P. and J. W. Connelly. 1997. Translocations of sage grouse CENTROCERCUS UROPHASIANUS in North America. Wildlife Biology 3:235-241.
  83. Remington, T. E. and C. E. Braun. 1985. Sage grouse food selection in winter, North Park, Colorado. Journal of Wildlife Management 49:1055-1061.
  84. Rich, T. 1985. Sage grouse population fluctuations: evidence for a 10-year cycle. USDI Bureau of Land Management Idaho State Office Technical Bulletin 85-1, Boise, ID.
  85. Rich, T. 1993. Beacons in the sage. Birder's World, August 1993, pp. 12-17.
  86. Ritchie, M. E., M. L. Wolfe, and R. Danvir. 1994. Predation of artificial sage grouse nests in treated and untreated sagebrush. Great Basin Nat. 54:122-129.
  87. Roberson, J.A. 1986. Sage grouse-sage brush relationships: a review. Pages 157-167 in E.D. McArthur and B.L. Welch, editors. Proc. Symposium on the biology of ARTEMISIA and CHRYSOTHAMNUS. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, General Technical Report INT-GTR-200, Ogden, UT.
  88. Robertson, M.D. 1991. Winter ecology of migratory sage grouse and associated effects of prescribed fire in southeastern Idaho. M.S. Thesis, University of Idaho, Moscow. 88 pp.
  89. Rosenberg, K.V, A.M. Dokter, P.J. Blancher, J.R. Sauer, A.C. Smith, P.A. Smith, J.C. Stanton, A. Panjabi, L. Helft, M. Parr, P.P. Marra. 2019. Decline of the North American avifauna. Science. Published online. 19 Sep 2019.
  90. Row, J. R., K. E. Doherty, T. B. Cross, M.K. Schwartz, S.J. Oyler-McCance, D.E. Naugle, and B.C. Fedy. 2018. Quantifying functional connectivity: the role of breeding habitat, abundance, and landscape features on range-wide gene flow in sage-grouse. Evolutionary Applications 11(8): 1305-1321.
  91. Ryser, F.A. 1985. Birds of the Great Basin a natural history. University of Nevada Press, Reno, NV.
  92. Saab, V.A., C.E. Bock, T.D. Rich, and D.S. Dobkin. 1995. Livestock grazing effects in western North America. Pages 311-353 in T.E. Martin and D.M. Finch, editors. Ecology and management of Neotropical migratory birds. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
  93. Schoenberg, T. J. 1982. Sage Grouse movements and habitat selection in North Park, Colorado. M.S. Thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins. 86pp.
  94. Schrag, A., Konrad, S., Miller, S., et al. 2011. Climate-change impacts on sagebrush habitat and West Nile virus transmission risk and conservation implications for greater sage-grouse. GeoJournal 76: 561–575.
  95. Schroeder, M. A. 1991. Movement and lek visitation by female greater prairie-chickens in relation to predictions of Bradbury's female preference hypothesis of lek evolution. Auk 108:896-903.
  96. Schroeder, M. A. 1999. Monitoring and assessment. Presentation given to the Western Sage Grouse Status Conference, Jan. 14-15, 1999, Boise, ID. Online. Available: http://www.rangenet.org/projects/grouse.html.
  97. Schroeder, M. A., and C. E. Braun. 1993. Partial migration in a population of greater prairie-chickens in northeastern Colorado. Auk 110:21-28.
  98. 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.
  99. Schroeder, M. A., D. W. Hays, M. F. Livingston, L. E. Stream, J. E. Jacobson, and D. J. Pierce. 2000. Changes in the distribution and abundance of sage grouse in Washington. Northwestern Naturalist. 81:104-112.
  100. Schroeder, M. A., J. R. Young, and C. E. Braun. 1999. Sage Grouse (<i>Centrocercus urophasianus</i>). In A. Poole and F. Gill, editors, The Birds of North America, No. 425. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA.
  101. Smith, K. T., J. R. Levan, A. D. Chalfoun, T. J. Christiansen, S. R. Harter, S. Oberlie, and J. L. Beck. 2023. Response of greater sage-grouse to sagebrush reduction treatments in Wyoming big sagebrush. Wildlife Monographs 212(1): e1075 doi: 10.1002/wmon.1075
  102. Stiver, S. J. 1999. Hunting seasons. Presentation given to the Western Sage Grouse Status Conference, Jan. 14-15, 1999, Boise, ID. Online. Available: http://www.rangenet.org/projects/grouse.html.
  103. Sveum, C. M., J. A. Crawford, and W. D. Edge. 1998. Use and selection of brood-rearing habitat by sage grouse in south central Washington. Great Basin Naturalist 58:344-351.
  104. Tack, J.D., D.E. Naugle, J.C. Carlson, and P.J. Fargey. 2011 [2012]. Greater sage-grouse <i>Centrocercus urophasianus</i> migration links the USA and Canada: a biological basis for international prairie conservation. Oryx 46(1): 64–68.
  105. Taylor, M. A., and F. S. Guthery. 1980a. Fall-winter movements, ranges, and habitat use of lesser prairie chickens. Journal of Wildlife Management 44:521-524.
  106. Taylor, M. A., and F. S. Guthery. 1980b. Status, Ecology, and Management of the Lesser Prairie Chicken. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM-77, 15 p. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO.
  107. Taylor, M. A., and F. S. Guthery. 1980c. Dispersal of a lesser prairie chicken (TYMPANUCHUS PALLIDICINCTUS). Southwestern Naturalist 25:124-125.
  108. Terres, J. K. 1980. The Audubon Society encyclopedia of North American birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
  109. United States Department of Agriculture and United States Department of the Interior. 2015. Greater sage-grouse Bi-state Distinct Population Segment Forest Plan amendment. United States Department of Agriculture. 283 pp.
  110. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 12 January 2005. 12-month finding for petitions to list the greater sage-grouse as threatened or endangered. Federal Register 70(8):2244-2282.
  111. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2000. 90-day finding and commencement of status review for a petition to list the Western Sage Grouse in Washington as Threatened or Endangered. Federal Register 65:51578-51584.
  112. U.S. Fish and Wildlife service (USFWS). 2003. Candidate assessment and listing priority assingment form: <i>Centrocercus urophasianus</i>, greater sage grouse (Columbia Basin distinct population segment). 27 pp.
  113. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2010. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; 12-month findings for petitions to list the greater sage-grouse (<i>Centrocercus urophasianus</i>) as threatened or endangered. Federal Register 75(55):13910-14014.
  114. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2013. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Status for the Bi-State Distinct Population Segment of Greater Sage-Grouse With Special Rule and Designation of Critical Habitat. Federal Register 78(245):77087-77089.
  115. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2013. Greater sage-grouse (<i>Centrocercus urophasianus</i>) conservation objectives: Final report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, CO.
  116. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2020. Species report - Bi-State Distinct Population Segment of Greater Sage-Grouse. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 239 pp.
  117. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2023. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Status for the Bi-State Distinct Population Segment of Greater Sage-Grouse With Section 4(d) Rule and Designation of Critical Habitat. Federal Register 88(81):25613-25616.
  118. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2023. National Listing Workplan. Online. Available: https://www.fws.gov/project/national-listing-workplan
  119. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 7 May 2001. 12-month finding for a petition to list the Washington population of western sage grouse (<i>Centrocercus urophasianus phaios</i>). Federal Register 66(88):22984-22994.
  120. Wakkinen, W. L. 1990. Nest site characteristics and spring-summer movements of migratory sage groude in southeaster Idaho. M.S. thesis, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID.
  121. Wakkinen, W. L., K. P. Reese, and J. W. Connelly. 1992. Sage grouse nest locations in relation to leks. Journal of Wildlife Management 56:381-383.
  122. Wallestad, R. 1971. Summer movements and habitat use by sage grouse broods in central Montana. Journal of Wildlife Management 35:129-136.
  123. Wallestad, R. 1975. Male sage grouse responses to sagebrush treatment. Journal of Wildlife Management 39:482-484.
  124. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 1995. Washington State Management Plan for Sage Grouse. Wildlife Management Program, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. 101 pp.
  125. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2000. Changes in the sage grouse range throughout western North America. February 18, 2000, draft map of current and historic sage grouse distribution, produced by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
  126. Welch, B. L., F. J. Wagstaff, and R. L. Williams. 1990. Sage grouse status and recovery plan for Strawberry Valley, Utah. U.S. Forest Serv. Res. Pap. INT-430. 10 pp.
  127. Western Sage Grouse Working Group (WSGWG). 1998. Minimum viable populations for sage grouse in Washington. Draft working document of the Western Sage Grouse Working Group.