Status of Gunnison Sage Grouse discussed at state level

Local population would not be considered

The Colorado Division of Wildlife is considering added protections for the Gunnison Sage Grouse, which has several populations around Colorado and Utah, including one locally, that the County has worked to bolster for more than a decade.

According to DOW Area Wildlife Manager J Wenum, DOW managers didn’t consider the Gunnison Basin population of the Gunnison Sage Grouse to be in need of state protection that isn’t already provided. Currently the entire population of birds is listed as a State Species of Concern, which is not a statutory category.
Until recently, Gunnison County thought it would be June before it might have to deal with added protections for the Gunnison Sage Grouse, but not anymore. The DOW’s decision could come as early as May.
“Did anyone see this coming?” asked County Commissioner Hap Channell.
Gunnison County Wildlife Coordinator Jim Cochran shrugged. “There was no consultation with anybody outside the Division, as far as I know,” he said. “I have no idea why they chose to do it at this time.”
Wenum says the DOW has not consulted the county about the division’s plans yet, “because it has basically been an internal review, but we will be opening [the possible listing] to public comment in March.”
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced Friday, March 5 that the Greater Sage Grouse would not be getting protection under the Endangered Species Act. That decision has no effect on the local population of Gunnison sage grouse or efforts to protect it.
Gunnison County has been involved in taking measures to protect the Gunnison Sage Grouse species since 1995, when a working group of local stakeholders started looking at ways of preserving the species.
The county has been active in sage grouse conservation for several reasons. Beyond the “concern for the future of the species,” as the county states on its webpage, there would be real implications for how business is conducted in the county if the birds received federal protection. However state protection for the bird would probably have a less severe impact.
Likely outcomes to a listing, according to Cochran, would be increased penalties for killing the birds or a redistribution of state money spent on conservation efforts.
He says there has so far been no coordinated effort between municipalities in the basins that hold Gunnison Sage Grouse, and across the board the response from municipalities has been varied, from the response of the Gunnison and San Miguel Basins, which have hired full time wildlife coordinators to handle the issue, to the Dolores basin, where less has been done.
“This is a concern for us, because if we just sit back and don’t do anything, then it can impact us,” Cochran says.
Colorado has a three-step process to determine if a species should be listed as endangered or threatened. The first step took place in January, when the Colorado Division of Wildlife opened the book on species that could be considered for listing.
“The [state] Wildlife Commission, by statute, is supposed to review the regulations for additions or deletions every five years. We were told that they hadn’t been reviewed for 11 years,” Cochran said, adding that the Gunnison Sage Grouse is the only species being considered for listing after the review.
The next step will be taken on March 11, when the Wildlife Commission hears testimony from stakeholders on the species that could potentially be added or removed from the list, and Cochran will be there. The BOCC asked staff to draft a several-page letter detailing the county’s position on the listing that has to be sent to the state commission before February 25.
After March 11, Cochran says the commission will take the information and consider the listing without consulting anyone before making a decision in May.
Wenum says the DOW managers who will advise the Wildlife Commission are considering a recommendation to list the six populations of Gunnison Sage Grouse outside the Gunnison Basin as “threatened” and not list the Gunnison Basin population at all.
“Just like the federal government, the state can divide endangered species into different ranges and it could be that this is the only range where the population isn’t endangered or threatened,” County Attorney David Baumgarten told the commissioners.
But, he said, by having the Gunnison Basin population listed, or not, could change the way the federal government views the local population of sage grouse when the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) makes a decision on a possible listing of its own in June.
And that might be where the similarities between the federal and state listings end. Cochran said that the DOW could manipulate the amount of money the county receives for its conservation efforts.
“In the case of the Gunnison Sage Grouse in the Gunnison Basin, right now [the county] gets a good chunk, if not the majority, of funding that goes to sage grouse conservation in the state. So it’s hard to go higher,” Cochran said. “In some cases we’d like to see some of that money go to help the smaller populations for acquisition of habitat and so on. But they can’t give us much more money even if the sage grouse is listed.”
The state also has a hand in the legal ramifications, like fines or jail time, for poaching or impacting a protected species. The FWS can also take over land use regulation in an area where endangered species are found and the state cannot.
But the county commissioners still want to draft a letter stating the county’s position for the Wildlife Commission to consider the scientific data Cochran and others have compiled when making their decision, whether or not the local population of sage grouse is listed as endangered or not.    
“There’s evidence that the Gunnison population is stable, if not increasing.” Baumgarten said. “So they should come up with the same conclusion after their analysis.”