The Obama administration today is expected to recognize the greater sage grouse -- a bird whose protection would conflict with Western energy development -- as needing federal protection, but to delay its entry to the Endangered Species List while devoting attention to higher-priority species.

Interior Department Secretary Ken Salazar is scheduled to make a formal announcement this afternoon of what sources in Congress and elsewhere say will be a delay in a formal Endangered Species Act listing.

The "warranted but precluded" finding would add the sage grouse to the ESA "candidate" list. The bird would join 249 other species on that list, some of which have been there for more than 25 years. The candidate list -- reserved for species that merit listing but are outranked by other, higher priorities -- offers no legal protection for affected species.

Environmentalists, Western politicians and energy developers have feuded for nearly a decade over potential listing of the chicken-sized bird, whose sagebrush habitat also intersects with prime areas for energy development and agriculture across 11 Western states.

Western legislators and industry groups argued that an endangered or threatened listing would complicate oil and gas drilling, wind energy, grazing, mining and other energy development. Environmentalists have said protecting the bird would boost the health of the entire sagebrush steppe ecosystem.

Sage grouse live in California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, North and South Dakota, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Wyoming. More than half of North America's sage grouse are believed to be in Wyoming

The candidate listing is a split decision, a partial victory and partial defeat for both sides in the sage grouse controversy. It acknowledges the decline of the bird but fails to put the full weight of ESA protection on its habitat. Instead, conservation measures will be largely up to the discretion of the Obama administration.

"Obviously, it's progress from where we were before -- they are facing the scientific reality where previously the Bush administration finding was in denial," said John Kostyack, an attorney with the National Wildlife Federation. "The big question is what will they do to stem the decline and reverse it, while they are on the waiting list for ESA protection -- they have to go with a comprehensive strategy now."

Kostyack added, "We don't think this will give them excuses to allow the bird to decline. There is a lot they can do."

The decision ends, for now, a 10-year battle over listing the bird. Environmentalists first petitioned to protect a segment of the sage grouse population in Washington state in 1999. The petition to list greater sage grouse across their range dates back to 2003.

The bird was entangled in controversy over politicization of science during the George W. Bush administration. The Bush administration rejected the listing petition, but Judge B. Lynn Winmill of the U.S. District Court in Idaho ruled that decision had ignored the best-available science and ordered them to reconsider. Winmill said former Interior deputy assistant secretary Julie MacDonald had inappropriately interfered to keep the grouse off the list.

The Obama administration was on a court-ordered deadline to make a decision by today.

A "threatened" or "endangered" listing under ESA would make it illegal to harm or kill sage grouse without a special permit from the Fish and Wildlife Service. It would require federal agencies to consult with wildlife biologists on the potential effects to the grouse before issuing any permits for activities in its habitat -- like oil and gas drilling or wind turbines.

The candidate listing has no legal weight, but leaves conservation measures up to the discretion of the federal government. But the candidate status for the grouse could still affect projects on up to 100 million acres of federal land across 11 Western states.

The Bureau of Land Management, the Agriculture Department and other federal agencies could develop policies to promote conservation of sage grouse habitat.

Mixed reviews

Environmental and industry groups offered mixed reviews about the listing.

"'Warranted but precluded' means we were right, the Bush administration was wrong, and sage grouse are in trouble," said Mark Salvo of the group WildEarth Guardians. "Hopefully, this will serve as a notice to everyone ... that we need to do more, we can do more, to protect the species, and listing would not be required if we did."

But Bob Irvin of Defenders of Wildlife said the bird should have the full weight of ESA protection.

"When the Fish and Wildlife concludes that a species warrants listing, it ought to be listed," said Irvin. "But greater conservation through other programs is always a good idea, taking those initiatives can make the situation less dire, so we welcome any measure that increases conservation for sage grouse and sagebrush habitat."

Cheryl Sorenson, vice president of the Petroleum Association of Wyoming, said her group was disappointed with a "warranted but precluded" decision. There has already been much work done in her state to protect the bird, involving collaboration among all stakeholders, she said. Companies were already committed to research and monitoring efforts and planned to continue no matter the federal decision, she added.

"Wyoming's really stepped up; our population is doing well," she said.

Although the decision may slightly slow BLM's work, Sorenson predicted it would have little impact on oil and gas production in the state. "I don't think it's going to slow it down too much," she said. "I think we're just going to have to continue to watch it."

But the association hopes the Fish and Wildlife Service, when doing its required yearly assessment, will issue a "not warranted" decision in the future, she added.

Kathleen Sgamma, director of government affairs for the Independent Petroleum Association of Mountain States, said energy development and sage grouse already coexist and that introducing uncertainty to the process will negatively affect jobs and economic activity in the West.

"We're concerned that land managers will nevertheless implement this decision by introducing very restrictive policies that constrain companies from investing and creating high-paying jobs in local communities near core areas," she said.