TOPIC 3 CONIFER ENCROACHED SYSTEMS: RESOURCES

Key Literature

Sage Grouse Initiative. 2014. Conifer removal restores sage grouse habitat. Science to Solutions Series Number 1.

Great Basin Factsheet Number 4, 2015. “Conifer Removal in the Sagebrush Steppe: the why, when, where, and how.”

Miller, R.F., J.D. Bates, T.J. Svejcar, F.B. Pierson, and L.E. Eddleman. 2005. Biology, ecology and management of Western Juniper. Technical Bulletin 152, Oregon State University, Agricultural Experiment Station.

Chambers, J.C., D.A. Pyke, J. Maestas, M. Pellant, C.S. Boyd, S.B. Campbell, S. Espinosa, D.W. Havlina, K.E. Mayer, and A. Wuenschel. 2014. Using resistance and resilience concepts to reduce impacts of invasive annual grasses and altered fire regimes on the sagebrush ecosystem and greater sage-grouse: A strategic multi-scale approach. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-326. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 73 pp.

Miller, R.F., J.C. Chambers, and M. Pellant. 2014. A field guide for selecting the most appropriate treatment in sagebrush and piñon-juniper ecosystems in the Great Basin: Evaluating resilience to disturbance and resistance to invasive annual grasses, and predicting vegetation response. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-322-rev. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 68 pp.

Baruch-Mordo, S., J.S. Evans, J.P. Severson, D.E. Naugle, J.D. Maestas, J.M. Kiesecke, 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.

Miller, R.F., Bates, J.D., Svejcar, T.J., Pierson, F.B., and Eddleman, L.E. 2007. Western juniper field guide: Asking the right questions to select appropriate management actions. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1321.

Tausch, R.J., Miller, R.F., Roundy, B.A., and Chambers, J.C. 2009. Piñon and juniper field guide: Asking the right questions to select appropriate management actions. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1335.

Sage Grouse Initiative. 2015. Sagebrush songbirds benefit from sage grouse habitat restoration. Science to Solutions Series Number 9. Sage Grouse Initiative.

Supplemental Literature

Bourne, A., and S. Bunting. 2011. Guide for quantifying post-treatment fuels in the sagebrush steppe and juniper woodlands of the Great Basin. Technical Note 437. Bureau of Land Management, Denver, CO, BLM/ID/PT-11/003+2824. 115 pp.
Davies, K.W., C.S. Boyd, J.L. Beck, J.D. Bates, T.J. Svejcar, and M.A. Gregg. 2011. Saving the sagebrush sea: An ecosystem conservation plan for big sagebrush plant communities. Biological Conservation 144:2573-2584.
Knick, S.T., S.E. Hanser, and M. Leu. 2014. Ecological scale of bird community response to piñon-juniper removal. Rangeland Ecology and Management 67(5):553-562.
Maestas, J.D., S.B. Campbell, J.C. Chambers, M. Pellant, and R.F. Miller. 2016. Tapping soil survey information for rapid assessment of sagebrush ecosystem resilience and resistance. Rangelands 38(3):120-128.
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. In Greater Sage-Grouse: Ecology and conservation of a landscape species and its habitats, edited by S.T. Knick and J.W. Connelly, 145–184. Studies in Avian Biology, vol. 38. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
Neilson, R.P., J.M. Lenihan, D. Bachelet, and R.J. Drapek. 2005. Climate change implications for sagebrush ecosystems. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 70:145-159.
Roundy, B.A., R.F. Miller, R.J. Tausch, K. Young, A. Hulet, B. Rau, B. Jessop, J.C. Chambers, and D. Eggett. 2014. Understory cover responses to piñon–juniper treatments across tree dominance gradients in the Great Basin. Rangeland Ecology & Management 67(5):482-494.
Stebleton, A., and S. Bunting. 2009. Guide for quantifying fuels in the sagebrush steppe and juniper woodlands of the Great Basin. Technical Note 430. Bureau of Land Management, Denver, CO, BLM/ID/PT-09/002+2824. 81pp.

Video Interviews

View the full, un-edited video responses from our interviews with Rick Miller and Jeremey Maestas.

Jeremy Maestas
Rick Miller

What are habitat requirements for GRSG, and what other species are affected by conifer removal?

What are your thoughts about how managers design projects on sagebrush ecological sites versus juniper ecological sites?

What do we know about the effects of conifer removal on other wildlife species?

What do we know about the effects of conifer encroachment on GRSG?

Could you describe some examples of partnerships which have resulted in meaningful conservation success for GRSG?

What are some tools and resources from the SGI which could be useful to land managers?

How quickly do GRSG respond to conifer removal treatments? What suggestions do you have related to treatment techniques? (0:00 – 2:35); Is there value in treating phase III conifer encroachment? (2:46 – 3:27); What are considerations related to prescribed burning in conifer encroached areas? (3:39-4:51)

Describe the ecological problems caused by conifer encroachment into sagebrush ecosystems?

Could you describe trends in conifer expansion in the Great Basin over past millennia?

Define “old-growth” juniper? (:38 – 2:05); Define resistance and resilience, and applications of the concepts? (2:16 – 3:48); What tools are available to managers to address conifer expansion? (4:00 – 5:48)

Describe the problem of the encroachment of juniper in the Great Basin? (:33 – end)

Describe the phases of encroachment, and why it is a useful communication tool? (0:00 – 2:30); What are thresholds used to distinguish the phases of encroachment? (2:42 – end).