Factors Affecting Productivity in a Northern Wild Turkey Population

Haegen, W. Matthew Vander; Dodge, Wendell E.; Sayre, Mark W.

doi:10.2307/3801072

Cited by 51 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, such nesting rates are not uncommon for Eastern Wild Turkeys (Vangilder 1992). The renesting rate (45%) was similar to rates from established populations in southwestern Wisconsin (55%; Paisley et al 1998), northern Missouri (41%; Vangilder and Kurzejeski 1995), and Massachusetts (50%; Vander Haegen et al 1988). It was lower than the renesting rates reported for expanding populations in southeastern Minnesota (65%; Porter et al 1983) and South Dakota (59%; Lehman et al 2001) but higher than reported for an expanding population in southeastern South Dakota (26%; Leif 2001).…”

Section: Reproduction and Brood Survivalsupporting

confidence: 50%

“…We observed that renest success was not statistically better than initial nest success during our study. Altogether, nest success in our study (50% overall) was higher than nest success of Eastern Wild Turkey populations in New York (38%; Roberts et al 1995), Massachusetts (45%;Vander Haegen 1988), and southeastern South Dakota (41%; Leif 2001) and much higher than populations in Iowa (33%;Jackson et al 1995), Wisconsin (1st nests, 14%; 2nd nests, 21%; Paisley et al 1998), and northern Missouri (<35%; Vangilder and Kurzejeski 1995). Nest success was lower in our study than reported for other expanding populations in northeastern South Dakota (70%; Lehman et al 2001) and southeastern Minnesota (63%; Porter et al 1983).…”

Section: Reproduction and Brood Survivalcontrasting

confidence: 47%

“…Although seasonal survival did not differ statistically during any season of this study, numerically the fall period had the lowest survival. Results of other studies of the eastern subspecies indicate that highest mortality rates typically occur during severe winters (Austin and DeGraff 1975, Wunz and Hayden 1975, Porter et al 1980 or the periods associated with reproduction (Vander Haegen et al 1988, Vangilder and Kurzejeski 1995, Wright et al 1996, Lehman et al 2001. Causes of mortality were only evident in 33.3% (4 of 12) of the deaths recorded during the fall.…”

Section: Survival and Cause-specific Mortalitymentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Other studies of northern populations of Eastern Wild Turkeys indicate that winter mortality can exceed 50% during severe winters (Austin and DeGraff 1975, Wunz and Hayden 1975, Porter et al 1980. Winter losses may, however, be ameliorated to ≤10% by availability of agricultural food sources (Porter et al 1980, Vander Haegen et al 1988, Hubbard et al 1999a and by mild winters (Miller 1990). Milder winters with little snow cover and abundant agricultural foods probably enhanced survival of turkeys during the winter periods of our study.…”

Section: Survival and Cause-specific Mortalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the range for initiation of incubation of 1st nests in our study (24 April-7 June) was similar to the ranges reported in other studies of Eastern Wild Turkeys. Adjusting for an approximate 12-day laying period to estimate onset of incubation (Healy 1992a), 1st-nest incubation initiation dates for other northern turkey populations ranged between 21 April and 17 June (Little and Varland 1981, Vander Haegen et al 1988, Paisley et al 1998, Lehman et al 2001.…”

Section: Reproduction and Brood Survivalmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Survival and Reproduction of Translocated Eastern Wild Turkeys in a Sparsely Wooded Landscape in Northeastern South Dakota

Shields¹,

Flake²

2006

Western North American Naturalist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We studied the survival and reproduction of a newly introduced population of Eastern Wild Turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo silvestris) during 1999 and 2000 to determine the adaptability of this subspecies to a minimally wooded (<10%) region located north of their recorded historic distribution in South Dakota. During 1999 and 2000, the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks (SDGFP) released 111 female and 25 male turkeys from Iowa and Kentucky onto a study area in northeastern South Dakota. We used radio telemetry to monitor survival and reproduction of the females for 2 years after their initial release. Annual survival for 71 females averaged 67%. Seasonal survival was lowest in fall and highest in winter. Mortality agents included avian and mammalian predators, haying equipment, automobiles, and unknown causes. Nesting rate for the 2 years averaged 93%, and renesting rate of turkeys with failed 1st-nest attempts averaged 45%. Nest success for all nests was 50%, and 62% of females attempting to nest each year were successful in at least 1 attempt. Predation was the primary cause of nest failure during both years. Overall, 72% of brooding females successfully raised ≥1 poult to 4 weeks post-hatch while individual poult survival to 4 weeks posthatch averaged 36%. Despite <10% woodland cover, Eastern Wild Turkeys appeared to thrive in a glacial escarpment topography north of their historic range in the northern plains.

show abstract

Section: Reproduction and Brood Survivalsupporting

confidence: 50%

Section: Reproduction and Brood Survivalcontrasting

confidence: 47%

Section: Survival and Cause-specific Mortalitymentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Survival and Cause-specific Mortalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reproduction and Brood Survivalmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Survival and Reproduction of Translocated Eastern Wild Turkeys in a Sparsely Wooded Landscape in Northeastern South Dakota

Shields¹,

Flake²

2006

Western North American Naturalist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Reproductive asynchrony within social groups of female eastern wild turkeys

Ulrey

Chamberlain

Collier

2023

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple ecological and sociobiological processes drive the coordination of timing of reproduction for a wide array of species (Lack, 1968;Perrins, 1970). Matching reproductive activities with optimal environmental conditions is crucial to optimize reproductive success (Ims, 1990a). As such, temporal clustering of reproductively active individuals is typically driven by climatic seasonality (Ims, 1990a), especially when breeding seasons are restricted to shorter temporal periods (Emlen & Demong,

show abstract

Assessing wild turkey productivity before and after a 14‐day delay in the start date of the spring hunting season in Tennessee

Quehl,

Phillips,

Johnson

et al. 2024

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ten state wildlife management agencies in the United States, including six within the Southeast, have delayed their spring wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) hunting seasons since 2017 by five or more days to address concerns related to the potential effects of hunting on wild turkey seasonal productivity. One hypothesis posits that if the spring hunting season is too early, there may be insufficient time for males to breed hens before being harvested, thus leading to reduced seasonal productivity. We conducted an experiment to determine whether delaying the wild turkey hunting season by 2 weeks in south‐middle Tennessee would affect various reproductive rates. In 2021 and 2022, the Tennessee Fish and Wildlife Commission experimentally delayed the spring hunting season to open 14 days later than the traditional date (the Saturday closest to 1 April) in Giles, Lawrence, and Wayne counties. We monitored reproductive rates from 2017 to 2022 in these three counties as well as two adjacent counties, Bedford and Maury, that were not delayed. We used a Before‐After‐Control‐Impact design to analyze the proportion of hens nesting, clutch size, hatchability, nest success, poult survival and hen survival with linear mixed‐effect models and AIC model selection to detect relationships between the 14‐day delay and reproductive parameters. We detected no relationship (p > .05) between the 14‐day delay and any individual reproductive parameter. In addition, recruitment (hen poults per hen that survived until the next breeding season) was very low (<0.5) and did not increase because of the 14‐day delay. The traditional Tennessee start date had been in place since 1986 while the turkey harvest increased markedly until about 2006 and more recently stabilized. Our data indicate that moving the start of the hunting season from a period just prior to peak nest initiation to 2 weeks later, to coincide with a period just prior to peak nest incubation initiation, resulted in no change to productivity or populations in wild turkey flocks in south‐middle Tennessee.

show abstract

Factors Affecting Productivity in a Northern Wild Turkey Population

Cited by 51 publications

References 2 publications

Survival and Reproduction of Translocated Eastern Wild Turkeys in a Sparsely Wooded Landscape in Northeastern South Dakota

Survival and Reproduction of Translocated Eastern Wild Turkeys in a Sparsely Wooded Landscape in Northeastern South Dakota

Reproductive asynchrony within social groups of female eastern wild turkeys

Assessing wild turkey productivity before and after a 14‐day delay in the start date of the spring hunting season in Tennessee

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About