USGS Science⌕ Search

Geology topics

Michael A. Schroeder

Publications and source records attributed to Michael A. Schroeder.

7 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2026

Range-wide population trend analysis for greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus )—Updated 1960–2025

Greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ; hereafter sage-grouse) are at the center of State and national land-use policies largely because of their unique life-history traits as an ecological indicator for the health of sagebrush ecosystems. This updated population analysis provides State and Federal land and wildlife managers with the best available science to help guide management and conservation plans aimed at benefitting sage-grouse populations and the ecosystems they inhabit. This analysis relied on previously published population modeling methodology from Coates and others (2021, 2022a) and incorporates population lek count data for 1960–2025. Included in this report are methodological updates to period terminology, expanded reporting of trends across all nadir-to-nadir combinations, and revised extirpation probability estimation that utilizes every historic population nadir to forecast abundance. Each of these updates are detailed under individual Modification sections. Additional updates include simulation analyses that evaluate the effects of progressively longer exclusions of Wyoming lek count data (Wyoming Game and Fish Department has not provided access to a complete lek count data set since 2023) on trends, extirpation probabilities, and targeted annual warning system signals. State-space models estimated a 2.7-percent average annual decline in sage-grouse populations between 1966 and 2021 (Period 1–7, six population oscillations) across their geographical range. The average annual decline among climate clusters for the same number of oscillations ranged between 2.0 and 3.5 percent. Cumulative declines were 42.4, 61.7, and 77.9 percent range-wide in Period 5–7 (19 years [two oscillations]), Period 3–7 (36 years [four oscillations]), and Period 1–7 (55 years), respectively. Between 2024 and 2025 (1-year, non-trend timeframe), range-wide population size declined 1.9 percent ( 95-percent credible interval [CRI]= −4.71–1.48). Simulations of missing data from Wyoming showed that progressively longer gaps produced more negative trend estimates and higher extirpation probabilities, predominantly within Wyoming. Effects on targeted annual warning system signals were more nuanced, with missed warnings occurring inside and outside Wyoming and false warnings occurring predominantly within Wyoming.

California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Nort↗
USGS2024

Persistence of pesticide residues in weathered avian droppings

Avian droppings (combination of fecal matter and urates) provide a non-lethal and non-invasive matrix for measuring pesticide exposures. In the field, droppings may be collected days or weeks after excretion and the persistence of pesticide residues in weathered droppings is not known. Thus, we studied the effects of weathering on pesticide residues in droppings. Domestic chicken ( Gallus gallus domesticus ) hens were used as a representative species for Order Galliformes. We collected droppings from hens before they were exposed to the pesticides (reference or pre-dose droppings ). Thereafter, the hens were orally administered encapsulated wheat seeds coated with Raxil® PRO Shield (containing the active ingredients imidacloprid, prothioconazole, metalaxyl, and tebuconazole) for consecutive 7 days. During this time, their droppings were collected on days 3, 5, and 8 from the start of the exposure period (post-dose droppings ). The pre-dose and post-dose droppings were weathered for up to 30 days in autumn and spring in shrubsteppe habitat. Droppings were analyzed using HPLC coupled to triple quad LC/MS for parent compound and metabolite residues. No pesticide or its metabolite residues were detected in the weathered reference droppings. No parent pesticide compounds were detected in weathered post-dose droppings but imidacloprid metabolites, imidacloprid-5-hydroxy and imidacloprid-olefin, and the prothioconazole metabolite, desthio-prothioconazole, were detected in all post-dose weathered samples from both seasons. The active ingredients metalaxyl and tebuconazole and their metabolites were not detected in any of the samples. Our results suggest that, depending on the pesticide, its concentration, and the environmental conditions, residues of some pesticides can be detected in droppings weathered for at least 30 days. Knowledge of pesticide persistence in weathered droppings can help refine the quality and quantity of fecal samples that are collected for monitoring pesticide exposures to birds.

Environmental Research↗
USGS2011

Factors associated with extirpation of sage-grouse

Geographic ranges of Greater Sage-Grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ) and Gunnison Sage-Grouse ( C. minimus ) have contracted across large areas in response to habitat loss and detrimental land uses. However, quantitative analyses of the environmental factors most closely associated with range contraction have been lacking, results of which could be highly relevant to conservation planning. Consequently, we analyzed differences in 22 environmental variables between areas of former range (extirpated range), and areas still occupied by the two species (occupied range). Fifteen of the 22 variables, representing a broad spectrum of biotic, abiotic, and anthropogenic conditions, had mean values that were significantly different between extirpated and occupied ranges. Best discrimination between extirpated and occupied ranges, using discriminant function analysis (DFA), was provided by five of these variables: sagebrush area ( Artemisia spp.); elevation; distance to transmission lines; distance to cellular towers; and land ownership. A DFA model containing these five variables correctly classified 80% of sage-grouse historical locations to extirpated and occupied ranges. We used this model to estimate the similarity between areas of occupied range with areas where extirpation has occurred. Areas currently occupied by sage-grouse, but with high similarity to extirpated range, may not support persistent populations. Model estimates showed that areas of highest similarity were concentrated in the smallest, disjunct portions of occupied range and along range peripheries. Large areas in the eastern portion of occupied range also had high similarity with extirpated range. By contrast, areas of lowest similarity with extirpated range were concentrated in the largest, most contiguous portions of occupied range that dominate Oregon, Idaho, Nevada, and western Wyoming. Our results have direct relevance to conservation planning. We describe how results can be used to identify strongholds and spatial priorities for effective landscape management of sage-grouse.

Book chapter↗
USGS2011

Conservation of greater sage-grouse- a synthesis of current trends and future management

Recent analyses of Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) populations indicate substantial declines in many areas but relatively stable populations in other portions of the species? range. Sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) habitats neces-sary to support sage-grouse are being burned by large wildfires, invaded by nonnative plants, and developed for energy resources (gas, oil, and wind). Management on public lands, which con-tain 70% of sagebrush habitats, has changed over the last 30 years from large sagebrush control projects directed at enhancing livestock grazing to a greater emphasis on projects that often attempt to improve or restore ecological integrity. Never-theless, the mandate to manage public lands to provide traditional consumptive uses as well as recreation and wilderness values is not likely to change in the near future. Consequently, demand and use of resources contained in sagebrush land-scapes plus the associated infrastructure to sup-port increasing human populations in the western United States will continue to challenge efforts to conserve Greater Sage-Grouse. The continued widespread distribution of sage-grouse, albeit at very low densities in some areas, coupled with large areas of important sagebrush habitat that are relatively unaffected by the human footprint, sug-gest that Greater Sage-Grouse populations may be able to persist into the future. We summarize the status of sage-grouse populations and habitats, provide a synthesis of major threats and chal-lenges to conservation of sage-grouse, and suggest a roadmap to attaining conservation goals.

Book chapter↗
USGS2008

Range-wide patterns of greater sage-grouse persistence

Aim: Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus), a shrub-steppe obligate species of western North America, currently occupies only half its historical range. Here we examine how broad-scale, long-term trends in landscape condition have affected range contraction. Location: Sagebrush biome of the western USA. Methods: Logistic regression was used to assess persistence and extirpation of greater sage-grouse range based on landscape conditions measured by human population (density and population change), vegetation (percentage of sagebrush habitat), roads (density of and distance to roads), agriculture (cropland, farmland and cattle density), climate (number of severe and extreme droughts) and range periphery. Model predictions were used to identify areas where future extirpations can be expected, while also explaining possible causes of past extirpations. Results: Greater sage-grouse persistence and extirpation were significantly related to sagebrush habitat, cultivated cropland, human population density in 1950, prevalence of severe droughts and historical range periphery. Extirpation of sage-grouse was most likely in areas having at least four persons per square kilometre in 1950, 25% cultivated cropland in 2002 or the presence of three or more severe droughts per decade. In contrast, persistence of sage-grouse was expected when at least 30 km from historical range edge and in habitats containing at least 25% sagebrush cover within 30 km. Extirpation was most often explained (35%) by the combined effects of peripherality (within 30 km of range edge) and lack of sagebrush cover (less than 25% within 30 km). Based on patterns of prior extirpation and model predictions, we predict that 29% of remaining range may be at risk. Main Conclusions: Spatial patterns in greater sage-grouse range contraction can be explained by widely available landscape variables that describe patterns of remaining sagebrush habitat and loss due to cultivation, climatic trends, human population growth and peripherality of populations. However, future range loss may relate less to historical mechanisms and more to recent changes in land use and habitat condition, including energy developments and invasions by non-native species such as cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) and West Nile virus. In conjunction with local measures of population performance, landscape-scale predictions of future range loss may be useful for prioritizing management and protection. Our results suggest that initial conservation efforts should focus on maintaining large expanses of sagebrush habitat, enhancing quality of existing habitats, and increasing habitat connectivity.

Diversity and Distributions↗
USGS2003

Teetering on the edge or too late? Conservation and research issues for avifauna of sagebrush habitats

Degradation, fragmentation, and loss of native sagebrush ( Artemisia spp.) landscapes have imperiled these habitats and their associated avifauna. Historically, this vast piece of the Western landscape has been undervalued: even though more than 70% of all remaining sagebrush habitat in the United States is publicly owned, <3% of it is protected as federal reserves or national parks. We review the threats facing birds in sagebrush habitats to emphasize the urgency for conservation and research actions, and synthesize existing information that forms the foundation for recommended research directions. Management and conservation of birds in sagebrush habitats will require more research into four major topics: (1) identification of primary land-use practices and their influence on sagebrush habitats and birds, (2) better understanding of bird responses to habitat components and disturbance processes of sagebrush ecosystems, (3) improved hierarchical designs for surveying and monitoring programs, and (4) linking bird movements and population changes during migration and wintering periods to dynamics on the sagebrush breeding grounds. This research is essential because we already have seen that sagebrush habitats can be altered by land use, spread of invasive plants, and disrupted disturbance regimes beyond a threshold at which natural recovery is unlikely. Research on these issues should be instituted on lands managed by state or federal agencies because most lands still dominated by sagebrush are owned publicly. In addition to the challenge of understanding shrubsteppe bird-habitat dynamics, conservation of sagebrush landscapes depends on our ability to recognize and communicate their intrinsic value and on our resolve to conserve them.

The Condor↗