Roost Site Selection and Survival of Pen-reared Northern Bobwhite Quail

8/3/2019 Roost Site Selection and Survival of Pen-reared Northern Bobwhite Quail

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/roost-site-selection-and-survival-of-pen-reared-northern-bobwhite-quail 1/62

Little is known about the covey dynamics o pen-rearedquail. We do know, however, that wild quail interact, orageand roost in groups. We believe this behavior helps themdetect and avoid predators and regulate body temperature,and may help in other behaviors such as orage selection,loang and roosting. There is insucient inormation aboutthe eects o management practices on roosting habitator roost site selection by wild bobwhites, and roost siteselection by pen-reared bobwhites has never been examined.

We began our research by describing the vegetativecharacteristics o selected roost sites and identiying

vegetative attributes that might distinguish these areasrom randomly available sites. We wanted to know, orexample, i a pen-reared quail did a good job o selectinga protective roost site, or i it simply stopped in its tracksat the end o the day, not knowing i the roost site aordedprotection. In addition, our researchers wanted to estimatesurvival o pen-reared bobwhites. Essentially, we tried tolearn i inadequate roosting cover might predispose pen-reared bobwhites to predators and/or inclement weatherimmediately ater being released, thus limiting theirsurvival.

Study AreaOur research was conducted in the Rio Grande Plains

ecological region in Webb County, Texas, where therangeland topography was slightly rolling. Work was doneon a on a 6,931-acre ranch, which was managed or wildlieproduction and a cow-cal livestock operation. The common brush species included black brush ( Acacia rigidula), honeymesquite (Prosopis glandulosa), guajillo ( Acacia berlandieri),cenizo, (Leucophyllum frutescens), lotebush (Ziziphusobtusifolia) and guayacan (Guajacum angustifolium).

Buelgrass (Cenchrus ciliaris), an introduced Aricanspecies, was the dominant grass over much o the ranch.Plains bristlegrass (Setaria leucopila), pink pappusgrass

(Pappophorum bicolor) and other natives were also present.Common orb species included various crotons (Croton spp.),western ragweed ( Ambrosia psilostachya), spiny pricklepoppy ( Argemone sanguinea ), silverlea nightshade (Solanumelaeagnifolium) and pigweed ( Amaranthus palmeri).

MethodsWe purchased 60 adult bobwhites rom a quail arm

and subsequently housed them in a large coop located ina covered pole barn. This provided ample shade and windfow. We ed them chicken scratch and water, using standardpoultry equipment. Aside rom reducing the requency ocontact with the captive quail, we made no other attempts to

prevent their being around people because this is typicallywhat happens with most ranches that release pen-rearedquail.

From this group o pen-reared bobwhites, we ormedthree groups (coveys) containing ve birds each and thenreleased them on the ranch. The remaining bobwhitesserved as a replacement pool or birds killed by predators.Prior to release, quail were sexed, weighed and tted withneck loop radiotransmitters (Fig. 1) . By using a receiverand antenna, we were able to identiy and track individualquail. Each group was released at an assigned location.We relocated each bobwhite group every third night. Allmembers o each group were relocated a total o seven times

over a 62-day period rom August 6 to October 27, 2003;tracking began 30 minutes ater sunset and usually ende by midnight.

Roosting quail were located by homing in on radiosignals. Roosting areas were marked with plastic fagginand with Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates thelp relocate specic roosts or habitat measurements thollowing day. When bobwhites were killed by predatorwe then released the replacement bird(s) at the samelocation as the rst covey.

We placed roost site locations in a GeographicInormation System (GIS) to determine covey movemenand area o use or each group o quail. This enabled

Figure 1. Pen-reared bobwhites we

weighed and fitted with a neck-loop

radiotransmitter prior to release.

Transmitters are about the size and

weight of a quarter.



us to create detailed digital maps o the ranch, allowing themovements o the quail to be plotted over time. Roost sites wereelocated the ollowing morning, and exact roost sites identiedy the presence o ecal droppings. In addition to the actualoost site, we evaluated a random location within 50 yards ohe roost to simulate where a quail might have roosted i it made

no selection based on habitat eatures. Transects 17.5 yards longwere established in the our cardinal directions at the roost andandom sites to measure habitat eatures (Fig. 2). Additionally,

we estimated daily survival o pen-reared quail released on theanch.

ResultsThe probability o the survival o pen-raised bobwhites

declined steadily over time; survival to 61 days was very low.Only three hens rom the original 15 birds initially releasedurvived the entire time. Mortality was highest or group 1,

with 15 birds (including replacement birds) dying. Groups 2nd 3 lost nine and ten birds, respectively. Hawks and mammals

preyed on bobwhites, but because o the lack o remainsetween tracking periods, predators could not be reliablydentied.

Researchers tracked bobwhites and located 40 night roostingites. We ound 19 cases where the birds roosted alone, 13 times

when two birds roosted together and eight times when the roostontained three or more birds. In a given time rame, birds romroup 1 roosted singly 61.5 percent and in coveys 38.5 percent the time. Bobwhites rom group 2 roosted singly 47.4 percentnd in coveys 52.6 percent o the time. Birds in group 3 roostedingly 25 percent and in coveys 75 percent o the time. Birdsrom groups 2 and 3 intermingled with each other, and on sixccasions some roosted communally with wild bobwhites.

Group 1 selected roost sites within an area o 81.94 acreswith minimal brush clearing. Group 2 used 220.4 acres that

verlapped the 82.81 acres used by group 3. Groups 2 and 3were in an area that included treated brush strips and, thus,

ontained more open habitat than group 1 used. Individual birdsused areas o 0.86 to 39.44 acres.

We ound that pen-reared quail selected roost sites that hadess orb cover within a 1-yard radius than the random sites. At4-yard radius around the roost site, pen-reared quail selectedreas having more visual obstruction and more grass cover thant random locations. Beyond 4 yards, vegetative characteristics bobwhite roosts were highly variable, and there was no clear

dierence between habitat values o actual roost sites and theirpaired random simulated sites.

FindingsPen-reared bobwhites apparently selected their roosting

reas based on some habitat eatures in close proximity. Roostites had less orb cover at a 1-yard radius around the roost,nd more grass cover and visual obstruction within 4 yardsround the roost. Forbs were oten single-stemmed and sparselyranched with small leaves. We also ound that some grewelatively fat to the ground, providing little screening protectionrom predators. Many o the grasses, including the dominantuelgrass, grew in clumps or bunches. They oered moreisual obstruction and thus better concealment rom predators.

Pen-reared bobwhites did not stay together in the ve-birdoveys in which they were released, as nearly hal (47.5 percent) the roosts consisted o only one bird. At other times birds

Figure 2. A Robel range pole, which marks the position of the roost site, was us

to measure visual obstruction of vegetation. Line transects were established in

four cardinal directions to asses habitat features surrounding roost sites.

Habitat Featurespercent grass cover

total grass height

percent orb cover

total orb height

percent brush cover

brush height

percent bare ground

percent rock

percent litter

visual obstruction

average area per brush plant

brush basal area

brush diameter at breast height

Table 1. Habitat features measured around actual roost sites of pen-reared bob

quail and simulated roosts at random locations.



oosted communally, occasionally with members o thether pen-reared groups and even with wild bobwhites.

Roosting sites with wild bobwhites were not noticeablydierent in habitat eatures than those selected by pen-eared birds, but sample sizes were small. We were not ableo determine whether bobwhites rom group 1 suered the

highest mortality rate because o their roosting pattern or it was a result o earlier mortality o group members.

Southern Texas is one o the last strongholds o wildobwhites, and the rangeland used in this study wasuccessully managed or production o wild bobwhites.

Even though habitat conditions were good, many pen-eared bobwhites did not survive the rst 9 days o thenvestigation. Mortality in wild bobwhites is high, andoughly 80 percent annual mortality at the population levelan be expected.

However, it is unclear why habitat dierences were notdetected beyond the 4 yards closest to the roost site. Perhapst was because roost sites were readily available throughouthe area, or because survivors learned where to roost orained an advantage by roosting with wild bobwhites. Onlyhree birds survived by the end o the study, and they weren the group that roosted 62.5 percent o the time in coveys.

Pen-reared bobwhites may have some innate survivalnstincts. Also, they can be accepted into wild coveys, whichould oer some survival advantage.

Survival o pen-reared birds is poor compared to that translocated wild or resident native bobwhites. Ourtudy supports one done by the Texas Parks and Wildlie

Department. It ound that hal o pen-reared and rst-eneration bobwhites died within 10 days in southern Texas.

By contrast, wild resident and translocated birds reached 50percent mortality in 72 and 47 days, respectively. Anothertudy by Texas A&M University-Kingsville also oundhat pen-reared birds had lower survival than did wildobwhites in southern Texas.

Wild bobwhites have many advantages over pen-raisedndividuals. They are survivors rom living in the wild.

Unlike pen-raised birds, they are amiliar with the habitatnd ood resources, are t and wary o predators, and haveocial bonds with other members o their species.

Recommendations Landowners and managers should rerain rom

eleasing pen-reared bobwhites or bolstering numbers, asew birds will survive and become incorporated into wildobwhite populations. Pen-reared bobwhites do showome selection or the immediate surroundings o theiroost sites even though they have no prior experience on

which to base their selection. However, mortality o theseirds is extremely high even under relatively good habitatonditions.

Droughts are common in southern Texas, whichmakes range conditions harsh and reduces the number

bobwhites on poorly managed land. Consequently,managers are under pressure to increase quail numbers.Although instant gratication may be gained by releasingpen-reared bobwhites, success will be short-lived. Stockinghas low success in good habitats and will certainly not beuccessul in poor habitats.

Funds and energy would be better used by improvingthe quantity o orbs and grasses at every opportunity.The high reproductive rate o wild bobwhites will restockthe range i their survival rate is improved. Livestockmanagers might consider reduced stocking rates or deerredgrazing. An alternative is to implement a rotational grazingsystem while incorporating prescribed burning andground disturbance (through shallow disking) or brushmanagement (with mechanical or herbicide methods). Theseactions will likely enhance cover or wild bobwhite quailand negate the need to release pen-reared quail.

References

Backs, S.E. 1982. An evaluation o releasing rst generation(F

1) bobwhite quail produced rom wild stock.

Pittman-Robertson Bulletin No. 14, IndianaDepartment o Natural Resources, Indianapolis,Indiana. 17 pp.

Buechner, H.K. 1950. An evaluation o restocking with pen-reared bobwhite. Journal of Wildlife Management 14:363–377.

Brennan, L. 1991. How can we reverse the northern bobwhite population decline? Wildlife Society

Bulletin 19:544–555.___________. 1999. Northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus).

Pages 1-28 in A. Poole and F. Gill, editors. The birds o North America. No. 397, Philadelphia,Pennsylvania.

Baumgartner, F.M. 1944. Dispersal and survival o gamearm bobwhite quail in north central Oklahoma. Journal of Wildlife Management 8:122–118.

Caneld, R.H. 1941. Application o the line interceptionmethod in sampling range vegetation. Journal of Forestry 39:388–394.

Clark, A.L. 1942. Annual restocking—game management or

public relations? Transactions of the North AmericanWildlife Conference 7:179–184.

Church, K.E. and J.S. Taylor. 1992. Management andresearch o northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus)in North America: an overview. Perdix VI in GibierFaune Sauvage-Game and Wildlie 9:787–796.

Church, K.E., J.R. Sauer and S. Droege. 1993. Populationtrends o quails in North America. Pages 44-54in K. E. Church and T. V. Dailey, editors. QuailIII: Proceedings o the Third National QuailSymposium. Kansas Department o Wildlie andParks, Pratt, Kansas.

DeVos, T., Jr. and D.W. Speake. 1995. Eects o releasing pen-raised northern bobwhites on survival rates o wildpopulations o northern bobwhites. Wildlife SocietyBulletin 23:267–273.

Droege, S. and J.R. Sauer. 1990. Northern bobwhite, graypartridge, and ring-necked pheasant populationtrends (1966-1988) rom the North AmericanBreeding Bird survey. Pages 2-20 in K.E. Church,R.E. Warner and S.J. Brady, editors. Perdix V: graypartridge and ring-necked pheasant workshop.Kansas Department o Wildlie and Parks, Emporia,Kansas.



Errington, P.L. 1933. Mobility o northern bobwhite asindicated by banding returns. Bird Banding 4:1–8.

Frye, O.E., Jr. 1942. The comparative survival o wild andpen-reared bobwhite in the eld. Transactions of theNorth American Wildlife Conference 7:168–175.

Gould, F.W. 1975. Texas plants—a checklist and ecologicalsummary. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station,miscellaneous publication 585, revised.

Guthery, F.S. 1986. Bee, brush, and bobwhites: quailmanagement in cattle country. Golden Banner Press,

Inc., Corpus Christi, Texas.___________. 2002. The technology o bobwhite

management: the theory behind the practice. IowaState Press, Ames, Iowa.

Hiller, T.L. and F.S. Guthery. 2005. Microclimate versuspredation risk in roost and covert selection by bobwhites. Journal of Wildlife Management 69:140–149.

Hutchins, A.R. and F. Hernández. 2003. Eects o pen-raisednorthern bobwhite introductions on wild bobwhitesin south Texas. Proceedings of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 57:181-191.

Kaplan, E.L. and P. Meier. 1958. Nonparametric estimationrom incomplete observations. Journal of AmericanStatisticians Association 53:457-481.

Kassinis, N. and F.S. Guthery. 1996. Flight behavior onorthern bobwhites. Journal of Wildlife Management 60:581–585.

Klimstra, W.D. and V.C. Ziccardi. 1963. Night-roostinghabitat o bobwhites. Journal of Wildlife Management 23:202–214.

___________, and T.G. Scott. 1973. Adaptation o pen-reared bobwhites to oods in a natural environment. Journal of Wildlife Management 37:492–494.

Kozicky, E.L. and J.B. Madson. 1966. Shooting preservemanagement – the Nilo System. Winchester Press,East Alton, Illinois.

___________. 1993. The history o quail management withcomments on pen-rearing. Pages 1-7 in K.E. Churchand T.V. Dailey, editors. Quail III: Proceedingso the Third National Quail Symposium. KansasDepartment o Wildlie and Parks, Pratt, Kansas.

Lehmann, V.W. 1984. Bobwhites in the Rio Grande Plains oTexas. Texas A&M University Press, College Station,Texas.

Nestler, R.B. and A.T. Studholme. 1945. The uture o pen-

reared quail in post-war restocking programs.Pennsylvania Game News 16:26-27.

Perez, R.M., D.E. Wilson and K.D. Gruen. 2002. Survivaland fight characteristics o captive-reared and wildnorthern bobwhite in southern Texas. Pages 81-85in S.J. DeMaso, W.P. Kuvlesky, Jr., F. Hernándezand M.E. Berger, editors. Proceedings o the FithNational Quail Symposium, Allen Press, Inc.,Lawrence, Kansas.

Pollock, C.M., S.R. Winterstein and P.D. Curtis. 1989.Survival analysis in telemetry studies: the staggentry approach. Journal of Wildlife Management 53:7–14.

Robel, R.J., J.N. Briggs, A.D. Dayton and L.C. Hulbert. 1Relationship between visual obstruction and weo grassland vegetation. Journal of Range Manage23:295-297.

Roseberry, J.L., D.L. Ellsworth and W.D. Klimstra. 1987.Comparative post-release behavior and survivawild, semi-wild and game arm bobwhites. WildSociety Bulletin 15:449–455.

___________. 1993. Bobwhite and the “new” biology. Pa16-20 in K.E. Church and T.V. Dailey, editors.Quail III: Proceedings o the Third National QuSymposium. Kansas Department o Wildlie andParks, Pratt, Kansas.

Rosene, W. 1969. The bobwhite quail: its lie andmanagement. Rutgers University Press, NewBrunswick, New Jersey.

Stoddard H.L. 1931. The bobwhite quail: its habits,preservation, and increase. Charles Scribner’s S

New York, New York.Stoddard, H.L. 1936. Bobwhite quail and their preerred

cover. Outdoor Florida 1:1-12.

Tobler, S.L. and J.C. Lewis. 1972. A partial bibliography bobwhite quail. Pages 377-390 in J.A. Morrison a J.C. Leis, editors. Proceedings o the First NationBobwhite Quail Symposium, Oklahoma StateUniversity, Stillwater, Oklahoma.

Wallmo, O.C. 1956. Ecology o scaled quail in West TexaTexas Game and Fish Commission Special Repo134 pp.

Williams, K.C., R.S. Lutz and R.D. Applegate. 2003. Opti

group size and northern bobwhite coveys. AnimBehaviour 66:377–387.

Glossarycovey – a group or fock o quail

forb – a broad-leaed plant (other than a grass or woodyvegetation) commonly call a weed

global positioning system – a system o satellites used tdetermine positions on the Earth

homing – the act o steering to a location based on a sign

line transect – a method to assess vegetation characterisat points along a determined path

litter – allen leaves and twigs o grasses, orbs and woovegetation, which orm a layer o decaying matt

pen-reared – animals raised in captivity using animalhusbandry techniques

roost site – place or location where bird(s) rest overnigh

visual obstruction – concealment provided by vegetatioit blocks the view o a quail or roost site



Produced by AgriLife Communications and Marketing, Texas A&M System

Extension publications can be found on the Web at: http://AgriLifebookstore.org

Visit the Texas AgriLife Extension Service at http://AgriLifeextension.tamu.edu

Educational programs of the Texas AgriLife Extension Service are open to all people without regard to race, color, sex, disability, re

age, or national origin.

Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension Work in Agriculture and Home Economics, Acts of Congress of May 8, 1914, as ame

and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture. Edward G. Smith, Director, Texas AgriLife Ext

Service, Texas A&M System.

1M, New

AcknowledgementsThis work is part o a collaborative eort o the Department o Wildlie and Fisheries Sciences atTexas A&M University, Texas Cooperative Extension, and Texas Agricultural Experiment Station.The authors thank Rancho Blanco, Incorporated or unding this work and Drs. Fidel Hernandezand Stephen J. DeMaso or reviewing this manuscript. Animal care was permitted by Texas A&MUniversity, University Laboratory Animal Care Committee AUP # 2003-0254. Photographs wereprovided by D. Lang Alord and James C. Cathey.



o o s t Si t e

S

el e c ti o

n an d

S urviv

a

of P en- R e a r e d N or t h er n B o b w

h i t e

L-5477

08-07

James C. Cathey, Assistant Professor and Extension Wildlife Specialist

The Texas A&M System

Susan M. Cooper, Assistant Professor

Texas AgriLife Research


D. Lang Alford, Texas Parks & Wildlife Department

Dean Ransom, Jr., Assistant Professor

Texas AgriLife Research


N orthern bobwhites (Colinus virginianus) are a valuable natural resource or landowners andsportsmen. They are also an important indicator species o rangeland habitat health, and theirlie history has been well-studied. Despite this and despite intensive management eorts,

obwhite populations have declined over much o the bird’s geographic range (including Texas) ormany decades. The cause o the decline is largely associated with agricultural land-use changes andhe loss o habitat to urban sprawl.

Private landowners, managers and natural resource agencies have worked hard to increaseobwhite numbers over the years. Restocking lands with pen-reared bobwhites began as early ashe 1930s over much o the southeastern United States, where wild populations were diminished orxtirpated. The motive o the restocking years ago was to replenish wild stocks quickly, as naturalecovery was perceived to take a long time. Many states initially embraced production o pen-rearedobwhites, resulting in the release o thousands o pen-reared birds. Poor survival o pen-rearedobwhites and the high cost o production ultimately showed that improving the quantity and

quality o habitat was more cost-eective and more likely to succeed in establishing viable bobwhitepopulations.

It is widely recognized that pen-reared bobwhites do not survive long in the wild. Their naivetyn nding ood and avoiding predators, and their insucient fight speed, could explain their poorurvivorship. Nevertheless, the allure o the bobwhite’s high reproductive potential continues tonterest landowners and managers wanting to increase populations on their property or in huntingnterprises.

Roost Site Selection and Survival of Pen-reared Northern Bobwhite Quail

Documents