As a Wyoming Department of Game and Fish official points out in a recent Capser Star-Tribune article, much of the elaborate physical display of the male sage-grouse (what is usually referred to as "strutting") is actually about generating the sound. According to the article, researchers from the University of California-Davis are studying the accoustics of sage-grouse courtship at various lekking grounds in Wyoming. There are previous studies that established that the amplitude of the sounds a male sage-grouse makes is an important factor in mate selection. In fact, some of the "dancing" movements of the males are apparently attempts to focus their sounds in certain directions (i.e towards particular females) and at certain amplitudes (incidentally, one of the ways that Gunnison sage-grouse are distinguished from greater sage-grouse is their different pattern of vocalizations).

All dumb jokes aside about how the right sweet nothings whispered at the right time make all the difference in sage-grouse courtship, this also means that writers attempting to capture the look and feel of a sage-grouse lek site are often left trying to convey some sense of the sounds the males make. Some of those sounds can be powerful and complex. The booming noises males make with their air sacs can be heard a mile away. As the Star-Tribune story points out, the stage upon which the male performs also is also likely a significant influence on the sound quality:

“Environmental acoustics – the soil type and topography of the lek itself – probably play a significant role, too.”

This hints at some reasons why lek sites are so important to protect if we want to conserve this highly imperiled species. As the Star-Tribune story also points out, it may also provide a clue as to why sage-grouse are particularly sensitive to disturbance at these mating sites:

“How the sound carries at a particular site may be a big reason why the birds return to the same lek year after year – or possibly why they abandon a lek if a noisy road or energy development pops up nearby.”

So if the sound of a courting sage-grouse is important, how do those who write about sage-grouse try to capture it?

Well, most don’t. I wouldn’t either, if I could avoid it. The most common sidestep is to refer to it as “booming” (exactly as I did a few paragraphs earlier) or “popping.” A few have even gone so far as to nickname the birds “thunder cluckers.” In general, there is a fine tradition of valiant attempts to characterize the sound of a sage-grouse, often with humorous results:

“a bubbly popping noise…”

“a sort of drawn-out burbling that sounds uncannily like someone gulping underwater…”

“swishing sounds, hoots, and pops. Both sexes makes clucking and cackling noises…”

“when flushed, [sage-grouse make] a course ‘wut’ or ‘kak, kak, kak” call. Males also coo and make popping vocalizations by expelling air through esophageal pouches during courtship…”

This last description is not the most technical out there. That prize has to go to one of the authors of the above-mentioned acoustical studies, who noted that the “explosive use of dual anterior air sacs is unique to the Centrocercus grouse strut display.”

For those brave enough to try to actually spell the sound of a sage-grouse, the results can be wonderful fun. As one author noted dryly after attempting it himself, “it’s a sound not easily put into words.” Among my favorites from articles around the Web:

“Glumph… Glumph… Glumph…”

“Ba-loomp… Ba-loomp… Ba-loomp…”

And my all time favorite: “swish-swish-coo-oopoink!”

As for me, I hope to hear the, er, booming of the sage-grouse myself this spring, but I think I’ll refrain from trying to describe the sound to you.

If you want to hear and see sage-grouse dancing for yourself, try these videos and sound clips (and another).

By the way, given our heavy snowfall this winter, the anecdotal reports from around Colorado are that many lek sites are still under snow and strutting activity may get started a little later this year than usual. We’ll hope that most sage-grouse survived the winter and will still show up eventually, and on the up side the conditions may allow viewing later into the season than is normally possible.

The 'Dear Colleague' letter to the Interior Appropriations Committee leadership that Sen. Salazar signed and Senators Crapo (R-ID) and Lieberman (I-CT) initiated, calls for a modest 2.5 percent increase in funding for endangered species programs over what the President called for in his 2009 budget. According to the letter's cover, "More than 200 already-listed species are on the verge of extinction primarily because too little attention and funding is available for recovery activities." The letter continues, "Failure to provide adequate levels of funding for endangered species operations will only ensure that species slide closer to extinction, decreasing chances for recovery while increasing the costs."

Although underfunding of endangered species programs has been a historic problem, the Bush administration has been overtly hostile to endangered species issues like no other administration: It has extended protections to far fewer endangered species than any other administration, and has then only done so when compelled by courts. It has attempted to undercut effective endangered species policy and hired industry hacks to oversee endangered species programs who then illicitly altered scientific findings to favor industry over conservation. When all these attempts fail or are exposed by the  Washington Post, the Administration's handiest and perhaps most effective tool is failing to fund endangered species programs. We thank  Sen. Salazar, environmental champions like Sen. Wyden (D-WA) and fellow Dear Colleague letter-cosigners (Sens. Crapo, Cardin (D-MD), Lieberman, Kennedy (D-MA), Kerry (D-MA), Sanders (I-VT), Stabenow (D-MI) and Wyden), for their efforts to restore adequate endangered species funding. 

Excerpted from Senate Dear Colleague Letter: "The number of candidate species awaiting protection under the Act, many of which have been candidates for years, totals 280. The number of projects reviewed under the consultation program has increased dramatically, from 40,000 in 1999 to more than 67,000 in 2006. Development and implementation of Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs), which allow activities to proceed while still protecting species, continues to grow, with funding critically needed to help ensure timely and effective development and monitoring of 500 existing and more than 350 new HCPs that together will cover more than 70 million acres when complete."

Core Endangered Species Programs

The four Fish and Wildlife Service endangered species operating accounts are key to effective implementation of the Endangered Species Act. All four program areas are currently experiencing at least a 30 percent staffing shortage due to budget constraints, an unacceptable vacancy rate.

1. Listing – This account funds the protection of new plants and animals under the Endangered Species Act, as well as habitat critical to recovery. Currently, more than 280 species sit on the candidate waiting list for protection. Candidate species wait an average of 19 years to be listed and since 1975, 64 have gone extinct while waiting – seven times the number of speicies that have disappeared under the full protection of the ESA.
2. Recovery - While the Endangered Species Act has been extremely successful at preventing wildlife from going extinct, the purpose of the Act is to protect and recover endangered and threatened fish, plants and wildlife.
3. Consultation – The consultation program is an important part of the checks and balances system to ensure that endangered fish, wildlife, and plants are protected on the ground. There has been a dramatic increase in demand for consultations recently, jumping from 40,000 in 1999 to 67,000 in 2006. Shortage of personnel in this program area causes delays of project reviews thus creating conflicts between agencies. The consultation budget also funds the Service’s work with non-federal entities for permitting and development of Habitat Conservation Plans; lack of funding prevents the Fish and Wildlife Service from ensuring that these plans are properly developed, implemented and monitored.
4. Candidate Conservation - This program protects species before they are actually listed, thus in theory averting the need to ever list them at all. As mentioned above though, fish, plants and wildlife on the candidate list go extinct at a much higher rate than those with full protection – in part because of severe understaffing for this program.

Additional Endangered Species Programs

Cooperative Endangered Species Fund – This fund provides grants to states for wildlife and habitat conservation activities on non-federal lands for listed and candidate species. At least 65 percent of federally listed species are found on non-federal land. Without the proposed increases states will fall further behind in their ability to independently work to protect at risk species. Crucial conservation activities funded by these grants include: research, species status surveys, habitat restoration, captive propagation and reintroduction, planning assistance, and land acquisition by states for Habitat Conservation Plans and recovery.

Landowner Incentive and Private Stewardship Grants – These grants provide funding for voluntary conservation actions taken by landowners to conserve at-risk plants and animals on private lands, which benefits us all. The Landowner Incentive program awards competitive grants to state and tribal conservation agencies for their work with private landowners and tribal lands, while the Private Stewardship program provides funding directly to individuals and groups implementing private land conservation actions. In 2007, funding was awarded to efforts in 46 states. Regrettably, neither program was funded in the FY ’08 Interior appropriations bill due to budget constraints; these important programs should be re-started in FY ’09. The demonstrated need for these programs has far outstripped available funding in the past – the amount requested for worthy projects on average totaled two to three times the yearly available funding.

BLM Threatened and Endangered Species Management – The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) controls habitat that supports more than 300 federally listed or candidate species. This program, along with their Fisheries and Wildlife Management program, funds inventory and monitoring, habitat restoration, endangered species recovery, and other proactive conservation activities vital to maintaining healthy, functioning ecosystems and fish, wildlife, and plant populations. Recently, an average of 30 percent of these funds have been used to pay for the compliance activities of the BLM’s energy, grazing, and other non-wildlife related programs.Traditionally, funding for compliance work has come from benefiting programs. In addition, the programs are substantially understaffed. For example, the BLM has only one biologist per 591,000 acres of land, and more than $60 million is needed annually just to implement actions assigned to BLM in recovery plans for listed species.

Many of Center for Native Ecosystems' campaigns have recently made headline news. From the white-tailed prairie dog to the fragile desert  habitat of eastern Utah, lately we've celebrated important milestones for many of our target species and ecosystems. Yet for every high-profile news story there are countless folks behind the scenes, doing the daily work of saving species from extinction. Behind every landmark legal victory we celebrate stands a corps of dedicated activists, donors, pro-bono lawyers, volunteers and staunch supporters that saw the process through to the very end.

Though we could never adequately thank all those who deserve our gratitude, we at Center for Native Ecosystems would like to recognize a few of our own "unsung heroes" - people and organizations without which our work would simply not be possible. We feel so fortunate to be part of a progressive community of conservation-minded individuals and groups, and the below-mentioned people have given their time, energy, expertise and patient counsel to ensure that our work continues in a robust, forward direction.  Thank you all.

Trey Beck - Trey has provided sustained and generous pro bono support on our web site and our computers for as long as we can remember.

Mindy Harm Benson - Mindy was our crackerjack attorney on the legal action that resulted in a huge, precedent-setting oil and gas ruling last December.  Although the ruling was in 2006, 2007 was the year we converted that ruling into hundreds of thousands of acres of important wildlife habitat withdrawn from oil and gas leasing.

Colorado Division of Wildlife  - The Colorado Division of Wildlife has been an incredibly important wildlife advocate over the past year.  They deserve a special mention for their assertive efforts to keep oil and gas drilling out of core habitat for sage-grouse.

 Naseem Munshi and Mike Tupper - Naseem and Mike have been incredible supporters of our conservation work since the early days. We are so completely thankful for their generosity. 

Jeremy Nichols - Jeremy is doing amazing work with his new Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action cleaning up Colorado's air (and reducing pollution impacts to native plants and wildlife along the way).  He also moonlighted as our Staff Biologist Pinch Hitter while Erin Robertson was on maternity leave.

Bob Spertus - Bob and his family's foundation stepped up to help us years ago when we were in a pinch and have been among our best, most consistent, and most gracious supporters ever since. 

Todd Hagenbuch - As the vice president of Rocky Mountain Farmers Union and a rancher in northwestern Colorado, Todd has been a terrific partner in our efforts to enhance incentive programs that help landowners improve conservation practices.  Our relationship has been especially fruitful during the current Farm Bill renewal process. 

Jay Tutchton - Jay has served admirably on our board of directors and has been one of our most fearless, finest, and successful attorneys in our work to protect imperiled species like the white-tailed prairie dog, Graham's penstemon, porter feathergrass, Preble's meadow jumping mouse, boreal toad, Douglas County pocket gopher, and many others.

Alison Wright - Alison is an awesome member of our exceptional volunteer corps. She's reliable, hard-working, and helping us dig through some of the least exciting but most important work in the office.  All of our volunteers deserve a special mention for their dedication and effort. 

Senator Ron Wyden - Senator Wyden was a key hero in our campaign of the past two years to restore integrity to science at the Interior Department.

Other Colorado electeds supporting the Endangered Species Recovery Act (HR 1422) are Senators Salazar and Allard and Representatives DeGette, Udall and Perlmutter. If passed, ESRA wold provide some $400 million a year in tax credits and incentives to landowners to conserve habitat for imperiled species on their land, where the majority of habitat for threatened and endangered species exists in the U.S. The last several years Center for Native Ecosystems has been working closely with Colorado agriculture groups, ranchers and farmers, conservationists and sportsmen to  improve programs that provide helpful support to  landowners in conserving some of our most imperiled wildlife.

Other conservation priorities for the House/Senate 2007 Farm Bill conference include:

Ensuring adequate funding for conservation in the Farm Bill. The $6 billion over six years for conservation programs designated by the Senate should remain in the final Farm Bill. Even with this modest increase, many conservation programs will be funded far below farmer demand. According to the NRCS, only 27% of all conservation contracts in Colorado were funded in 2004. NRCS turned away 3,874 landowners who volunteered to take measures to improve Colorado’s environment. In 2006, 449 Colorado EQIP applications (representing $11,597,495 in requests for cost-sharing to improve the environment) were unfunded. In2005, 123 Grasslands Reserve Program (GRP) easement applications went unfunded, leaving a total of 437,281 acres of Colorado grasslands without the protection of conservation easements.

Keeping the Senate provision that includes riparian areas on the conservation goals of the Wetlands Reserve Program. Given the relatively larger amount of riparian habitat in Colorado versus areas currently considered wetlands under this program, this change could particularly advance conservation in our state.

Keeping the House funding increase for the Grasslands Reserve Program, a vital program in Colorado in the West for preserving shrinking grasslands ecosystems. The House Farm Bill’s funding increase for the Grasslands Reserve Program should be maintained. This is one of the most important conservation programs in Colorado – both for our ranchers and producers and for protecting and restoring grasslands.

Keeping the Senate Farm Bill provision that provides assistance for proactive non-lethal predator deterrence. This provision assists landowners in putting into place proactive, non-lethal predator deterrence measures through the EQIP program. This provision would help such Colorado producers as sheep growers and ranchers, as well as our native wildlife.

Rejecting any proposals that would impose lower Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) eligibility limits on participants in conservation programs. Lowering AGI limits for conservation programs will undermine the ability of these programs to help farmers, ranchers and forest landowners effectively produce environmental benefits by excluding landowners who might be best positioned to have the greatest positive environmental impact from participating in conservation programs.

Clearly the Farm Bill could do much more to ensure that farmers and ranchers in Colorado and around the country are supported when they offer to share in the cost of improving water quality, improving wildlife habitat and becoming better stewards of their land.  Both our landowners and the natural resources that we all enjoy are depending on it.

For the sixth year in a row, conservation organizations like Center for Native Ecosystems and cities in Colorado and New Mexico have celebrated Prairie Dog Day.  Prairie Dog Day is inspired by Groundhog Day, which also took place this year on February 2nd.  While prairie dogs may not be as skilled at predicting the weather as the renowned Punxsutawney Phil, their fate is closely tied to the fate of the entire prairie ecosystem: as the prairie dog goes, so goes the swift fox, the burrowing owl, the ferruginous hawk, and the critically imperiled black-footed ferret.

There are five species of prairie dogs, and all five are keystone species.  The fate of hundreds of other species, in addition to entire ecosystems, depends in complicated ways on the fate of the prairie dogs.  One species, the Utah prairie dog, is already protected under the Endangered Species Act, yet the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service allows the continued destruction of significant numbers of animals and significant habitat every year.  The Mexican prairie dog is also protected under the Act but occurs entirely outside of the U.S.  The other three species, all occurring in the United States, face continued threats and continued declines from oil and gas drilling, overgrazing, and habitat loss.

Joined by Biodiversity Conservation Alliance, the Denver Zoo, Forest Guardians (now WildEarth Guardians), the Prairie Dog Coalition, and others, we hope Prairie Dog Day helps bring increased attention to these ecologically-critical wildlife species and the ecosystems of which they are such a vital part.

In case you missed it, our friend, the black-footed ferret was recently associated with a plagiarism scandal.  No, the black-footed ferret was not the guilty party.  It seems as though romance novelist, Cassie Edwards, used pieces from a story about black-footed ferrets to enhance her novel "Shadow Bear," about a Lakota chief who finds love with a feisty pioneer. 

Okay, so the passages don't actually enhance the story at all.  They are quite scientific compared to the rest of the romantic story line, which only helps to lend credence to the plagiarism accusation.  Judge for yourself.  This is a scene from "Shadow Bear" where the two main characters discuss black-footed ferrets:

"They are so named because of their dark legs," Shadow Bear says, to which Shiona responds: "They are so small, surely weighing only about two pounds and measuring two feet from tip to tail."

Shiona then tells Shadow Bear how she once read about ferrets in a book she took from the study of her father. "I discovered they are related to minks and otters. It is said their closest relations are European ferrets and Siberian polecats," she says. "Researchers theorize that polecats crossed the land bridge that once linked Siberia and Alaska, to establish the New World population."

Not quite the stuff of fairy tales.  Here is the corresponding passage from Paul Tolme's article entitled "Toughing It Out in the Badlands":

Black-footed ferrets, so-named because of their dark legs, weigh about two pounds and measure two feet from tip to tail. Related to mink and otters, they are North America's only native ferret (and a different species than the ferrets kept as pets). Their closest relatives are European ferrets and Siberian polecats. Researchers theorize polecats crossed the land bridge that once linked Siberia and Alaska to establish the New World population.

Hmm... Either way, all of us at Center for Native Ecosystems are just happy that one of the most endangered mammals in North America is getting the attention it deserves.

Listen to as interview with Paul Tolme on NPR's Talk of the Nation.