Species Type
Bird
Status1
Key Dates
- Proposal for listing issued: Dec. 11, 2012
- Comment period reopened and proposal for listing with special rule issued: May 6, 2013
- Submit comments on proposed listing and a draft rangewide conservation plan by: June 20, 2013
Important Updates
- May 6, 2013 – Reopening of Comment Period on Proposal for Listing; Proposed Listing as Threatened with Special Rule; Request for Comments on a Draft Rangewide Conservation Plan
- Draft Range-wide Lesser Prairie Chicken Plan – Opportunity for Public Comment
- Mar. 28, 2013 – Lesser Prairie-Chicken Aerial Survey Set to Begin Again
- Mar. 21, 2013 – Cornyn Fights Premature Listing of Texas Species
- Mar. 6, 2013 – Our View: Extending Time for Prairie Chicken Comments Was a Good Decision
- Mar. 4, 2013 – Texas Comptroller Comments on Proposal to List Lesser Prairie-chicken
- Mar. 4, 2013 – Inhofe Applauds Fish and Wildlife Extension on Lesser Prairie Chicken Listing
- Mar. 4, 2013 – FWS Publishes Final Agricultural Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances for the Lesser Prairie Chicken in Oklahoma
- Feb. 28, 2013 – Rep. Conaway: Lesser Prairie Chicken Comment Period to be Reopened
- Feb. 21, 2013 – Cornyn Requests Extension on Decision to List Lesser Prairie Chicken as Threatened Species
- Feb. 21, 2013 – Cornyn Requests Extension on Decision to List Lesser Prairie Chicken as Threatened Species
- Dec. 3, 2012 – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to Begin Consideration on Threatened Status for Prairie Chicken
- Nov. 30, 2012 – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Announces Proposed Rule to List Lesser Prairie-chicken as Threatened
- Oct. 25, 2012 – Public Comment Sought on Effort to Develop a Range-wide Conservation Plan; Public Hearings Scheduled
- Oct. 12, 2012 – Multi-State Group Reports Range-Wide Population Estimate For Lesser Prairie Chicken
- Oct. 3, 2012 – First Ever Statistically Valid Range-wide Population Estimate for Lesser Prairie-chicken.
Review the final survey report. - Sept. 25, 2012 – FWS Requests 60-day Extension to Determine Whether to List the Lesser Prairie-chicken
- July 16, 2012 – Bipartisan, Bicameral Letter Urges FWS to Make ‘Not-Warranted’ Decision on Lesser Prairie Chicken
- June 2012 – The first range-wide aerial survey to assess lesser prairie-chicken populations detects previously unknown breeding areas –
The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department in collaboration with state fish and wildlife agencies and other partners surveyed lesser prairie-chicken booming grounds across Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Kansas. - June 26, 2012 – FWS Publishes Draft Candidate Conservation Agreement With Assurances for the Lesser Prairie Chicken in Oklahoma.
Proposed Listing Information
Potential Range
United States:3
- Colorado
- Kansas
- New Mexico
- Oklahoma
- Texas
Texas Counties:2
- Andrews
- Bailey
- Carson
- Castro
- Cochran
- Collingsworth
- Deaf Smith
- Donley
- Gaines
- Gray
- Hemphill
- Hockley
- Lamb
- Lipscomb
- Moore
- Ochiltree
- Oldham
- Parmer
- Randall
- Roberts
- Swisher
- Terry
- Wheeler
- Yoakum
Economic Region(s)4
- High Plains
- West Texas
Key Economic Sectors5
- Agriculture
- Oil and Gas
- Ranching
- Transportation
- Wind Energy
- Energy Transmission
- Construction
Background
- 2011: Species is included in the the FWS multi-district litigation settlement for proposed listing and critical habitat designation or candidate withdrawal in fiscal 2012.6
- 2009-2011: FWS maintains listing priority of two in its annual candidate reviews. 7
- 2008: FWS increases the listing priority from eight to two, due to FWS’ determination that threats to the species are ongoing and imminent.8
- 2000-2007: FWS maintains the listing priority of eight in its annual candidate reviews.
- 1998: FWS determines in a 12-month finding that listing is warranted but precluded; species is added to the list of candidate species with a listing priority of eight.9
- 1997: FWS determines in a 90-day finding on the petition to list the lesser prairie-chicken that listing as threatened may be warranted.10
Research
Texas Tech University – Research documents Lesser Prairie-Chickens
Public Comment
Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts (Mar. 4, 2013)
Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts (July 19, 2011)
See the official docket folder for additional public comments and documents.
Conservation Programs and Activities
- Collaborative Conservation Strategies for the Lesser Prairie-Chicken and Sand Dune Lizard in New Mexico (2005) – Findings and recommendations of the New Mexico Lesser Prairie-Chicken/Sand Dune Lizard Working Group, a multi-party group of stakeholders with interests in conservation management and land use decisions regarding these species.
- Lesser Prairie-Chicken Initiative – Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) – Works with landowners to improve voluntary practices to conserve lesser prairie-chicken habitat and benefit the sustainability of agricultural operations.
- Partners in Flight North American Landbird Conservation Plan – Offers priorities and objectives to guide landbird conservation actions at national and international scales.
- Strategic Habitat Conservation: Targeting Acres for Lesser Prairie-Chicken Programs – Playa Lakes Joint Venture – Designed to conserve lesser prairie-chicken habitat and associated wildlife through strategic enrollment of land into Farm Bill conservation programs.
- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Final Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines 2012 – Guidelines to help wind energy project developers avoid and minimize impacts of projects on wildlife and their habitats, including migratory and prairie and sage grouse.
- Western Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies - Lesser Prairie Chicken Interstate Working Group – This group monitors the current status of the species and its habitat, implements management practices to conserve the species and habitat, provides technical assistance, and identifies research needs. Website includes information on a draft range-wide conservation plan and 2012 aerial surveys.
Voluntary Conservation Agreements
Texas Candidate Conservation Agreement (CCAA) with Assurances for Lesser Prairie-Chickens – Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) and FWS (June 26, 2006):
An agreement between FWS and TPWD whereby landowners voluntarily commit to conservation actions that will help stabilize or restore the species, with the goal that listing will become unnecessary.
- For more information about this CCAA, visit www.LesserPrairieChicken.org.
- Contact the TPWD representative in your county to learn more about the CCAA and how to sign up.
For information about other conservation agreements for the lesser prairie-chicken, visit the FWS website.
Learn More About This Species
- Dorothy Marcille Wood Foundation (LesserPrairieChicken.com) – Web portal for information of interest to landowners about the lesser prairie-chicken including the Texas CCAA.
- Ecology and Management of the Lesser Prairie-Chicken – Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service – Assessment of the ecology and management of this species.
- Lesser Prairie-Chicken Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Leaflet – USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service (September 1999) - Designed to serve as an introduction to the habitat requirements of the lesser prairie-chicken and to assist landowners and managers in the development of a comprehensive lesser prairie-chicken management plan.
- Lesser Prairie-Chicken Overview – National Audubon Society – Provides general information about the lesser prairie-chicken.
- Lesser Prairie-Chicken Technical Conservation Assessment – U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (USFS) (March 31, 2005) – Produced to support the Species Conservation Project of the Rocky Mountain Region of the USFS due to its designation as a sensitive species by USFS Region 2 and the submission of a petition for listing.
- TPWD Lesser Prairie-Chicken Information Portal
Economic Impact Analysis on Key Economic Sectors
- Impacted Economic Sector is based on information from the Federal Register notice.11
- Economic impacts measured in this analysis focus on changes in output/production12 and employment resulting from a $1 million reduction in output13 from each of the impacted economic sectors.
- The impacts in this analysis pertain to changes that occur within a single year in the above listed counties.
Agriculture (NAICS 111)
| Impact on Industry Output | -$1,000,000 |
|---|---|
| Impact on Supplying Industries’ Output | -$403,648 |
| Impact on All Other Local Industries’ Output | -$126,581 |
| Total Estimated Output Impact | -$1,530,229 |
| Impact on Industry Jobs | -7.14 |
|---|---|
| Impact on Supplying Industries’ Jobs | -4.19 |
| Impact on All Other Local Industries’ Jobs | -1.14 |
| Total Estimated Employment Impact | -12.47 |
Ranching (NAICS 11211)
| Impact on Industry Output | -$1,000,000 |
|---|---|
| Impact on Supplying Industries’ Output | -$767,660 |
| Impact on All Other Local Industries’ Output | -$77,499 |
| Total Estimated Output Impact | -$1,845,159 |
| Impact on Industry Jobs | -5.08 |
|---|---|
| Impact on Supplying Industries’ Jobs | -4.95 |
| Impact on All Other Local Industries’ Jobs | -0.70 |
| Total Estimated Employment Impact | -10.73 |
Oil and Gas (NAICS 211)
| Impact on Industry Output | -$1,000,000 |
|---|---|
| Impact on Supplying Industries’ Output | -$200,736 |
| Impact on All Other Local Industries’ Output | -$136,163 |
| Total Estimated Output Impact | -$1,336,900 |
| Impact on Industry Jobs | -1.41 |
|---|---|
| Impact on Supplying Industries’ Jobs | -1.04 |
| Impact on All Other Local Industries’ Jobs | -1.23 |
| Total Estimated Employment Impact | -3.68 |
Wind Energy (NAICS 221119)14
| Impact on Industry Output | -$1,000,000 |
|---|---|
| Impact on Supplying Industries’ Output | -$154,033 |
| Impact on All Other Local Industries’ Output | -$106,177 |
| Total Estimated Output Impact | -$1,260,210 |
| Impact on Industry Jobs | -2.26 |
|---|---|
| Impact on Supplying Industries’ Jobs | -0.63 |
| Impact on All Other Local Industries’ Jobs | -0.96 |
| Total Estimated Employment Impact | -3.85 |
Transportation (NAICS 2373 & 2379)
| Impact on Industry Output | -$1,000,000 |
|---|---|
| Impact on Supplying Industries’ Output | -$248,198 |
| Impact on All Other Local Industries’ Output | -$200,393 |
| Total Estimated Output Impact | -$1,448,591 |
| Impact on Industry Jobs | -8.88 |
|---|---|
| Impact on Supplying Industries’ Jobs | -1.50 |
| Impact on All Other Local Industries’ Jobs | -1.81 |
| Total Estimated Employment Impact | -12.19 |
Impact Analysis Data Descriptions
TxCPA Calculations based on data from the IMPLAN Input-Output Model for the above listed counties.
Assumptions:
- This analysis is based on the primary assumption that the impacted industry(ies) will be forced to cut back its (their) operations and lay off workers. This approach was taken since there is no information at the present time concerning a number of variables that could mitigate the economic impacts of a reduction in firm/industry production. These variables are:
- Number (and value) of acres of land that will be taken;
- The cost of fees that will be needed to mitigate the taking; and,
- The costs (in terms of jobs and production loss) that the firm will incur while on work stoppage.
Impact Table Details
Output Impacts:
Impact on Industry Output: $1 million output reduction from the impacted industry/sector in the region under consideration.
Impact on Supplying Industries' Output: Estimated output reduction from industries in the region that provide inputs to the directly affected industries.
Impact on All Other Local Industries' Output: Estimated output reduction from industries in the region that provide for the household needs of workers in the directly affected and input supplying industries.
Total Estimated Output Impact: Estimated output reduction from all industries in the region under consideration. This is the sum of the direct, indirect and induced effects.
Employment Impacts:
Impact on Industry Jobs: Estimated number of jobs adversely impacted in the directly impacted industry/sector per $1 million of output reduction in the impacted sector/industry.
Impact on Supplying Industries’ Jobs: Estimated number of jobs adversely impacted in industries in the region that provide inputs to the directly affected industries per $1 million of output reduction in the impacted sector/industry.
Impact on All Other Local Industries’ Jobs: Estimated number of jobs adversely impacted in industries in the region that provide for the household needs of workers in the directly affected and input supplying industries per $1 million of output reduction in the impacted sector/industry.
Total Estimated Employment Impact: Estimated number of jobs adversely impacted in all industries in the region under consideration. This is the sum of the direct, indirect and induced effects.
1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “Species Profile,” ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0AZ. (Last visited March 20, 2012.)
2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “Species Profile.”
3 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “Species Profile.”
4 Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, “Texas EDGE Data Center,” www.texasahead.org/texasedge/map_tool.php. (Last visited Feb. 12, 2012).
5 75 Fed. Reg. 69243 (Nov. 10, 2010).
6U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Exhibit B: Listing and Critical Habitat Work Plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 and 2012 (May 10, 2011), www.fws.gov/endangered/improving_ESA/MDL%20Exhibit%20B_Final.pdf. (Last visited March 30, 2012.)
7 76 Fed. Reg. 66432 (Oct. 26, 2011).
8 73 Fed. Reg. 75235 (Dec. 10, 2008).
9 63 Fed. Reg. 31400 (June 9, 1998).
10 62 Fed. Reg. 36482 (July 8, 1997).
11 75 Fed. Reg. 69243.
12 This represents the dollar value of intermediate and final goods and services produced by industries in the area economy. All monetary values are presented in 2007 dollar terms. This is the default valuation in the IMPLAN model.
13 It is presumed that an endangered species ruling leads to regulations that serve to reduce industry output.
14 Valuation Resources, LLC, “Wind Power Companies and Utilities,” http://valuationresources.com/Reports/SIC4911WindElectricPowerGeneration.htm. (Last Visited Sept. 16, 2011).
2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “Species Profile.”
3 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “Species Profile.”
4 Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, “Texas EDGE Data Center,” www.texasahead.org/texasedge/map_tool.php. (Last visited Feb. 12, 2012).
5 75 Fed. Reg. 69243 (Nov. 10, 2010).
6U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Exhibit B: Listing and Critical Habitat Work Plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 and 2012 (May 10, 2011), www.fws.gov/endangered/improving_ESA/MDL%20Exhibit%20B_Final.pdf. (Last visited March 30, 2012.)
7 76 Fed. Reg. 66432 (Oct. 26, 2011).
8 73 Fed. Reg. 75235 (Dec. 10, 2008).
9 63 Fed. Reg. 31400 (June 9, 1998).
10 62 Fed. Reg. 36482 (July 8, 1997).
11 75 Fed. Reg. 69243.
12 This represents the dollar value of intermediate and final goods and services produced by industries in the area economy. All monetary values are presented in 2007 dollar terms. This is the default valuation in the IMPLAN model.
13 It is presumed that an endangered species ruling leads to regulations that serve to reduce industry output.
14 Valuation Resources, LLC, “Wind Power Companies and Utilities,” http://valuationresources.com/Reports/SIC4911WindElectricPowerGeneration.htm. (Last Visited Sept. 16, 2011).