Gunnison County spearheads sage-grouse conservation efforts

We can’t say, “We’re fine here. Leave us alone.”

Gunnison County met with the Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) Commission last week to update CPW commissioners on efforts to keep Gunnison sage grouse conservation in local hands. The county has been partnering with a consortium of 10 other counties to circumvent the species’ federal listing as endangered, and while the final decision rests with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the chance to meet with top conservation officials was key in an increasingly collaborative process.
According to county wildlife conservation coordinator Jim Cochran, CPW director Rick Cables, Department of Natural Resources executive director Mike King, and Commissioner of Agriculture John Salazar all attended the meeting and spoke favorably of the county’s efforts.

“Director Cables talked about the fact that Parks and Wildlife doesn’t normally advocate for a position as far as an Endangered Species listings, but in this case felt like the Fish and Wildlife Service listing didn’t agree with the science,” Cochran said.
Although the final decision is not CPW’s to make, that sentiment was significant to Cochran. The 11 Colorado and Utah counties partnering on Gunnison sage grouse conservation—known as the Memorandum of Understanding group (MOU group)—are also working with two states: Colorado and Utah. Cochran believes state participation could lead to increased participation from CPW in the group’s development of a conservation agreement that steps up local conservation measures.
“We’ve received the clear message from the Fish and Wildlife Service that they believe there needs to be a state-sponsored or supported plan,” Cochran said, adding that measures in Gunnison County are not likely to increase. Instead, measures already taken in the Gunnison area will be applied to other regions.
Patt Dorsey, area wildlife manager for CPW in Durango, sees the CPW role in that process as one of advisor. “It’s not our place to tell local government what to do, so our role would be more advisory. I think Colorado Parks and Wildlife will always be available for technical expertise,” she said.
That could mean providing region-specific information or reviewing the conservation agreement to make sure it provides adequate protections for sage grouse across the counties. Whatever form it takes, Dorsey was highly complimentary of the group’s efforts so far.
“Everything to date has shown that the counties have good intentions, and with Gunnison County in the lead, they have the best interests of the sage grouse and the best interests of their citizens in mind,” she said. “This is really a landmark effort and the way it should be, with local communities having a real investment in what’s good for the species.”
From Gunnison County’s perspective, working together creates the best odds of keeping conservation management local. “There is, in the Endangered Species Act, the possibility of designating specific populations as distinct population segments and treating them differently,” Cochran said. “But we feel that right now the best thing we can do is work with the entire sage grouse community and not just draw back to the Gunnison Basin and say, ‘We’re fine here. Leave us alone.’ That’s not the best thing we can do for the sage grouse and it’s not the best thing we can do for the community.”
A final listing decision has been court-mandated by September 30 of this year, making speed—not just cooperation—essential. The MOU group meets Thursday, June 13 to review a draft of the conservation agreement. The State and the Fish and Wildlife Service are also reviewing the document, and Dan Ash, director of the Fish and Wildlife Service, will meet with the group in Gunnison this July.
Cochran also expects the group to file a formal request with the Fish and Wildlife Service to extend the September 30 deadline. He said, “We feel [it’s necessary] because of the complexity of what we’re working on and the opportunities it presents for the species.”