Diefenbach D.R.,U.S. Geological Survey |
Casalena M.J.,Pennsylvania Game Commission |
Schiavone M.V.,NY Environmental Conservation |
Reynolds M.,60 East State St. |
And 4 more authors.
Journal of Wildlife Management
Spring harvest rates of male wild turkeys (Meleagris gallapavo) influence the number and proportion of adult males in the population and turkey population models have treated harvest as additive to other sources of mortality. Therefore, hunting regulations and their effect on spring harvest rates have direct implications for hunter satisfaction. We used tag recovery models to estimate survival rates, investigate spatial, temporal, and demographic variability in harvest rates, and assess how harvest rates may be related to management strategies and landscape characteristics. We banded 3,266 male wild turkeys throughout New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania during 2006-2009. We found little evidence that harvest rates varied by year or management zone. The proportion of the landscape that was forested within 6.5km of the capture location was negatively related to harvest rates; however, even though the proportion forested ranged from 0.008 to 0.96 across our study area, this corresponded to differences in harvest rates of only 2-5%. Annual survival was approximately twice as high for juveniles (S = 0.64- 0.87) as adults (S = 0.30- 0.41). In turn, spring harvest rates for adult turkeys were greater for adults (H = 0.35-0.39) than juveniles (H = 0.17- 0.27). We estimated the population of male turkeys in New York and Pennsylvania ranged from 104,000 to 132,000 in all years and ranged from 63,000 to 75,000 in Ohio. Because of greater harvest rates for adult males, the proportion of adult males in the population was less than in the harvest and ranged from 0.40 to 0.81 among all states and years. The high harvest rates observed for adults may be offset by greater recruitment of juveniles into the adult age class the following year such that these states can sustain high harvest rates yet still maintain a relative high proportion of adult males in the harvest and population. Copyright © 2011 The Wildlife Society. Source
National Wild Turkey Federation | Date: 1998-02-04
National Wild Turkey Federation | Date: 2012-10-16
Magazines featuring articles for the education and entertainment of those who support conservation of the wild turkey and preservation of a hunting heritage.
National Wild Turkey Federation | Date: 1998-05-05
Crimmins S.M.,West Virginia University |
Crimmins S.M.,University of Wisconsin - Madison |
Edwards J.W.,West Virginia University |
Campbell T.A.,East Wildlife Foundation |
And 4 more authors.
Management strategies designed to reduce the negative impacts of overabundant Odocoileus virginianus (White-tailed Deer) populations on forest regeneration may be influenced by changes in both population density and timber harvest. However, there is conflicting evidence as to how such changes in per capita resource availability influence home-range patterns. We compared home-range patterns of 33 female White-tailed Deer from a low-density population at a site with abundant browse to patterns of a sample of >100 females prior to a 75% reduction in population density and a doubling in timber harvest area. Home-range and core-area sizes were approximately 3 times larger than were found prior to population decline and timber harvest increase, consistent with predictions related to intraspecific competition. We also observed greater site fidelity than previously exhibited, although this may be an artifact of increased home-range sizes. Our results support previous research suggesting that White-tailed Deer home-range size is inversely related to population density and is driven, in part, by intraspecific competition for resources. Relationships among population density, resource availability, and home-range patterns among female White-tailed Deer appear to be complex and context specific. Source