[2] In 1750 the English naturalist George Edwards included an illustration and a description of the sharp-tailed grouse in the third volume of his A Natural History of Uncommon Birds.

Edwards based his hand-coloured etching on a preserved specimen that had been brought to London from Hudson Bay by James Isham.

[4] The sharp-tailed grouse is now placed in the genus Tympanuchus that was introduced in 1841 by the German zoologist Constantin Wilhelm Lambert Gloger for the greater prairie chicken.

These markings distinguish sharp-tailed grouse from lesser and greater prairie chickens which are heavily barred on their underparts.

[11] Following European settlement the sharp-tailed grouse has been extirpated from California, Kansas, Illinois, Iowa, Nevada, and New Mexico.

The males display on the lek by stamping their feet rapidly, about 20 times per second, and rattle their tail feathers while turning in circles or dancing forward.

[11][12][16] Selection of specific habitat characteristics and vegetation communities is variable among the different subspecies of sharp-tailed grouse.

[24][25] Other habitat types utilized for leks are cultivated lands, recent burns, mowed sites, grazed hill tops, and wet meadows.

[26][27][12][11] Manske and Barker (1987) reported sun sedge (Carex inops), needle and thread grass (Hesperostipa comata), and blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis) on lekking grounds in the Sheyenne National Grassland in North Dakota.

[21][19] Moyles (1981) observed an inverse relationship of lek attendance by males with an increase in quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) within 0.8 km of arenas in the Alberta parklands.

[18] Hamerstrom Jr. (1939) found the majority of prairie sharp-tailed grouse (T. p. campestris) nests occupied dense brush and woods at marsh edges.

Plains sharp-tailed grouse (T. p. jamesii) selected nest sites with dense residual vegetation and a shrubby component.

Sharp-tailed grouse are a precocial species, meaning that they hatch with their eyes open, are self-reliant, and do not require the mother to feed them.

The shrub component in brooding habitat provides good canopy protection from direct sunlight and avian predators.

[18][17] Hamerstrom (1963) and Goddard et al. (2009) both observed the greatest number of sharp-tailed grouse broods present in open, rather than wooded landscapes.

Both hypothesized this use of open landscape was due to an abundance of insects for the chicks and green herbaceous cover for the hen to feed on.

Manske and Barker (1987) noticed a similar trend in winter habitat usage in North Dakota, noting that sharp-tailed grouse in small flocks joined together to form larger packs in severe weather.

As snow depth increases, habitat selection shifts from cropland and prairie to shelterbelts and woody vegetation.

Habitat fragmentation has been one of factors driving the decline of all subspecies of sharp-tailed grouse across its entire range throughout North America.

Fire suppression, tree plantings, limiting logging practices, and an increase of invasive woody species have also led to habitat fragmentation.

The habitat of sharp-tailed grouse was severely affected by early settlers before cattle grazers understood the impact to the environment from overgrazing.

[34][30] During the drought years of the 1930s, these agencies re-vegetated some of these areas with non-native highly competitive vegetation such as smooth brome (Bromus inermis) and crested wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum).

Cover boards and Robel poles were developed to measure visual obstruction (VO) and create habitat indices.

Robel et al. (1970) found that VO measurements taken at a height of 1 m and a distance of 4 m from the pole gave a reliable index of the amount of vegetation production at a location.

These key aspects can now be assessed using the Robel pole, Nudds cover board, and Limb et al. digital photography method effectively and efficiently.

The United States Forest Service (USFS) uses visual obstruction readings (VOR) to set stocking densities for cattle based on the current years standing residual vegetation .

Similarly, Clawson and Rottella (1998) observed that 58% of nests (432 of 741) in Southwestern Montana were located in sites with an average VOR of 24 cm.

The use of the Robel pole to assess habitat for sharp-tailed grouse has given managers a target height of vegetation structure to have at the end of the grazing season.

Lekking habitat can be managed by burning, mowing, clear cutting, and grazing across the entire range of the sharp-tailed grouse subspecies.

Similarly, Moyles (1989) found a negative correlation with increased in aspen trees (Populus tremuloides) on lekking sites and the number of displaying males present.