The Gunnison's prairie dog (GPD; Cynomys gunnisoni) plays an important role as potential keystone species in maintenance of the sagesteppe and prairie ecosystems. They are also important prey items for other SGCNs including kit foxes, burrowing owls, and ferruginous hawk. Due to a number of reasons, GPD have declined in distribution and abundance throughout their range. The objective of state and federal agencies involved in GPD management is to conserve and maintain viable prairie dog populations and the sage-steppe and prairie ecosystems they inhabit. The viability of GPD, along with White-tailed prairie dogs (WTPD) was brought into question by petitions to list them under the Endangered Species Act (ESA; Center for Native Ecosystems et al. 2002; Forest Guardians 2004). Both petitions cited habitat loss/conversion, shooting, disease, a history of eradication efforts, and inadequate federal and state regulatory mechanisms as threats to long-term viability of these species. After the petitions were submitted, the states took the lead role in establishing a Prairie Dog Conservation Team (PDCT) and completing multi-state Conservation Assessments that evaluated the status of both species throughout their ranges and impacts to both species. Based on the assessments, a Conservation Strategy was written to provide management and administrative guidelines to assist state and tribal agencies in managing prairie dogs and their associated ecosystems, and to allow for continued management by these entities. The Utah Gunnison's Prairie Dog and White-tailed Prairie Dog Conservation Plan was written in 2007 to guide management in the state. A key action in the Conservation Strategy and State Plan was to identify and monitor the distribution and status of both species. Utah began monitoring GPDs and WTPDs following the agreed upon protocols in 2007 and 2008 respectively. We repeated surveys every 3 years and found stable occupancy and distribution. A 12-month status review completed in 2013 determined that GPD were stable and not declining,"due largely to conservation efforts by State Game and Fish agencies that recognize the crucial role that prairie dogs play in the health of North American prairies". Data gained through the rangewide implementation of the monitoring protocol for WTPDs was used as the best available science in the 2017 Species Status Assessment, which supported a not-warranted finding. The surveys for white-tailed prairie dogs not only showed stable occupancy and distribution over time, but also showed that oil and gas development was not negative impacting WTPD occupancy in Utah. All states within the ranges of the GPD and WTPD have committed to continue monitoring efforts. Because of not-warranted findings and the stability in occupancy measures from 2008 -- 2016, it was determined that surveys could switch from a 3-year interval to 6 years and surveys for both species occurred in 2022. Although trends for WTPD were stable across the range in 2022, GPD were found to be declining in all states within the range, except for Utah. These declines have prompted all states within the GPD range to commit to resurvey for them at the original shorter 3-year interval. Given the declines in other states, it is very important for Utah to accomplish these surveys in 2025. Continuing collection of the strong dataset will support the states' assertion that GPD continue to not warrant ESA listing. As we have seen with the threatened Utah prairie dog, the lack of flexibility under federal management can erode public tolerance for the species and consequently make conservation much more difficult and costly. Stable occupancy has supported management that allows private landowners to control prairie dogs on their properties year-round without permits.

Our goal is to conserve Gunnison's prairie dog (GPD) populations sufficiently to ensure long-term viability and to preclude the need for protection under the Endangered Species Act. A key objective is to Identify and monitor the distribution and status of GPD, along with subsequent white-tailed prairie dog surveys in 2028. Tasks include: 1.) Prepare maps, landowner contact lists, data forms, and make other preparations for survey. 2.) Contact landowners for permission to do surveys on private property where necessary. 3). Conduct field surveys. 4.) Analyze data and prepare reports. 5.) Submit data to Prairie Dog Conservation Team for range-wide analysis.

Surveys will occur in the range of Gunnison's prairie dogs at previous surveyed plots. We will conduct surveys during late/spring and summer months when prairie dogs are most active and likely to be observed above ground. The specific survey year has been agreed upon by all states within the species' range.

Utah Wildlife Action Plan - Gunnison's prairie dogs (GPD) are SGCNs Utah Gunnison's Prairie Dog and White-tailed Prairie Dog Conservation Plan - lays out management recommendations for both species in Utah. Management actions are triggered by a 40% decline in occupancy. White-tailed Prairie Dog and Gunnison's Prairie Dog Conservation Strategy- This Strategy identifies both short and long-term objectives, and sets various time frames for completing activities. It incorporates a rangewide view for long-term species persistence and an ecosystem management approach for habitat conservation. A key objective is to Identify and monitor the distribution and status of both species.

Not Applicable

Not Applicable

UDWR has the authority to carry out this project. We will make necessary contacts to access private lands.

At broad spatial scales, species distributions and their dynamics can be quantified using occupancy modeling. Over one season, occupancy modeling allows estimates of occupancy and detection probability. Over multiple sampling seasons robust-design occupancy modeling also provides site level probabilities of local extinction and colonization, which can be linked to specific large-scale, long-term anthropogenic impacts (MacKenzie et al. 2006; Tingley and Beissinger 2009). Occupancy modeling has been widely and commonly used over the last decade to track populations and their responses to management (Hagen et al. 2016, Tempel et al. 2016). This study is conducted throughout the ranges of the WTPD and GPD in Utah (though our ask is specific to GPD for 2025). Past colony mapping, soils, and vegetation data was used to model predicted habitat (Figures 1, 2, 4). The modeled habitat was divided into 500X500m sampling plots with 115 selected for GPD. Plots will be visited twice between April and July. First and second visits can be made by either 2 observers at the same time (preferred) or 2 visits within a week. The visit protocol is to spend 5 minutes at each corner of the 500 m X 500 m plot looking with binoculars and listening for prairie dogs. A visual observation is required to classify a plot as occupied. We will use program PRESENCE to estimate occupancy and detectability to compare to past years. We will also submit data to Arizona for inclusion in the rangewide analysis.

Members of the PDCT have committed to completing GPD and WTPD surveys at a minimum of every six years to assess occupancy trends. As described above, declining GPD occupancy trends across much of the range have necessitated surveys in 2025, only 3 years after the previous rangewide effort.

WAFWA Prairie Dog Conservation Team including: Colorado Division of Wildlife, Arizona Game and Fish Department, New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks. We are also in discussions with biologist from the Navajo Nation. Moab, and Monticello Field Offices of the BLM.

Members of the PDCT have committed to completing GPD and WTPD surveys at least every six years to assess occupancy trends, or more frequently as trends dictate. The team meets yearly to management needs across the range. Management in Utah is guided by the The Utah Gunnison's Prairie Dog (GPD) and White-tailed Prairie Dog Conservation Plan, which is due for updating.

Not Applicable

04/01/2025

06/30/2025

2025

We followed the same methodology as previously used in the rangewide surveys for Gunnison's prairie dog (GPD; Cynomys gunnisoni). Past colony mapping, soils, and vegetation data was used to model predicted habitat for GPD and define our sample frame. The modeled habitat was divided into 500X500m sampling plots with 115 selected for GPD (representing the same 115 as in most survey years). Visits were made by either 2 observers at the same time (preferred) or 2 visits within a week. Plots were visited twice between April and mid-August. Observers spent 5 minutes at each corner of the 500 m X 500 m plot looking with binoculars and listening for prairie dogs as well as searching while walking between plot corners. A visual observation was required to classify a plot as occupied.

We conducted surveys from April through Mid-August. In total, 106 plots of the 115 selected plots were surveyed, with 81 of those occurring in FY25 (the remainder were surveyed in July and August of FY26). GPD were found on 26 of 106 plots (~25%). Using program Presence version 2.13, and factoring in estimated detection probabilities, 2025 estimated occupancy was found to be similar to the two previous survey efforts in 2022 and 2016. As in previous seasons, the majority of GPD detections occurred on private land. A draft analysis is attached.

Members of the PDCT have committed to completing GPD and WTPD surveys every six years to assess occupancy trends. As previous stated this survey year occurred halfway through that cycle as declining rangewide occupancy trends from precious surveys triggered this interim action. The PDCT will continue to assess trends across the range and meet yearly to determine what actions or management may be necessary based on efforts in 2025. Management in Utah is guided by the The Utah Gunnison's Prairie Dog and White-tailed Prairie Dog Conservation Plan.