Survival and productivity of eastern wild turkey females in contrasting landscapes in Wisconsin

Abstract

Eastern wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo silvestris) have colonized the entire state of Wisconsin, USA since being successfully reintroduced in the 1970s. Recently, conservation groups have expressed concerns regarding habitat quantity and quality in association with population plateaus and declines in local abundance in some portions of the state. Estimates of survival and productivity are needed to identify the current population status and for drafting effective management plans. We evaluated female eastern wild turkey demographic parameters and the relationship of these parameters to landscape composition between townships that were forest-dominated and those that were primarily open (e.g., cropland, pasture) in southwest and west-central Wisconsin. We radiomarked 129 female eastern wild turkeys during a 2-year field study (2010)(2011)(2012). Seasonal variation and landscape effects on survival were important components in our top models, which accounted for >98% of the relative support. Seasonal survival (AESE) was lowest during spring ( Management of eastern wild turkeys that enhances female and poult survival during the nesting and brood-rearing periods can greatly influence population growth, particularly in forest-dominant landscapes.

Eastern wild turkey demography: Sensitivity of vital rates between landscapes

“…However, we found that the effect of either nest or poult survival on λ was 2.3–3.2 times greater than fall‐winter survival in both landscapes. Fall harvest rates of radio‐marked female turkeys were low (<5%) during our field study (Pollentier et al ) and likely had less influence on survival than harvest rates modeled in other studies (≥10%; Vangilder and Kurzejeski , Alpizar‐Jara et al ).…”

“…Apparent nesting and renesting rates are typically biased low, but we used a Horvitz–Thompson estimator (Dinsmore et al ) to account for nests that may have failed before discovery. Disturbance of nesting females was kept to a minimum as we only flushed females once to confirm nesting and determine clutch size; only 4 of 82 (5%) confirmed nesting attempts resulted in abandonment (Pollentier et al ). Our estimates of poult survival may have been biased low, but flush counts were not performed until broods were approximately 14 days of age and we excluded data if a radio‐marked female was lost or died prior to an initial flush count.…”

“…We chose to vary the most important lower‐level vital rates, nest survival, renest survival, and poult survival, within our fecundity function (above) a posteriori as determined from rankings of our VSS prospective sensitivity analysis. We derived female harvest rates from Pollentier et al (), and assumed harvest mortality was additive to nonharvest mortality (Rolley et al , Pack et al ). Because few female turkeys were harvested during our radio‐telemetry field studies, we used fall permit success data from 2003–2012 (Dhuey et al ; B. Dhuey, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, personal communication) as a proxy to the average age composition (i.e., % ad) of females harvested during the fall either‐sex season.…”

Female wild turkey habitat selection in mixed forest‐agricultural landscapes

“…We conducted our research in 4 separate townships (Fairchild, Hale, Stark, and Westford; 9,300 ha each) within the Central Sand Plains and Western Coulees and Ridges ecological landscapes in southwest and west‐central Wisconsin, USA (Fig. ; Pollentier et al ). We collected data on female turkey habitat selection during 8 April–24 July, 2010–2011, which we defined as spring and corresponded to biological events of turkeys in our study areas (Wright et al , Pollentier et al ).…”

“…1; Pollentier et al 2014b). We collected data on female turkey habitat selection during 8 April-24 July, 2010-2011, which we defined as spring and corresponded to biological events of turkeys in our study areas , Pollentier et al 2014b. We categorized study townships based upon dominant, aggregated land cover types within each township.…”