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

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.

Review of range-wide vital rates quantifies eastern wild Turkey population trajectory

Recent declines in eastern wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo silvestris) have prompted increased interest in management and research of this important game species. However, the mechanisms underlying these declines are unclear, leaving uncertainty in how best to manage this species. Foundational to effective management of wildlife species is understanding the biotic and abiotic factors that influence demographic parameters and the contribution of vital rates to population growth. Our objectives for this study were to (1) conduct a literature review to collect all published vital rates for eastern wild turkey over the last 50 years, (2) perform a scoping review of the biotic and abiotic factors that have been studied relative to wild turkey vital rates and highlight areas that require additional research, and (3) use the published vital rates to populate a life-stage simulation analysis (LSA) and identify the vital rates that make the greatest contribution to population growth. Based on published vital rates for eastern wild turkey, we estimated a mean asymptotic population growth rate (λ) of 0.91 (95% CI = 0.71, 1.12). Vital rates associated with after-second-year (ASY) females were most influential in determining population growth. Survival of ASY females had the greatest elasticity (0.53), while reproduction of ASY females had lower elasticity (0.21), but high process variance, causing it to explain a greater proportion of variance in λ. Our scoping review found that most research has focused on the effects of habitat characteristics at nest sites and the direct effects of harvest on adult survival, while research on topics such as disease, weather, predators, or anthropogenic activity on vital rates has received less attention. We recommend that future research take a more mechanistic approach to understanding variation in wild turkey vital rates as this will assist managers in determining the most appropriate management approach.

Behavioral strategies during incubation influence nest and female survival of Wild Turkeys

Females must balance physiological and behavioral demands of producing offspring with associated expenditures, such as resource acquisition and predator avoidance. Nest success is an important parameter underlying avian population dynamics. Galliforms are particularly susceptible to low nest success due to exposure of ground nests to multiple predator guilds, lengthy incubation periods, and substantive reliance on crypsis for survival. Hence, it is plausible that nesting individuals prioritize productivity and survival differently, resulting in a gradient of reproductive strategies. Fine-scale movement patterns during incubation are not well documented in ground-nesting birds, and the influence of reproductive movements on survival is largely unknown. Using GPS data collected from female wild turkeys (n = 278) across the southeastern United States, we evaluated the influence of incubation recess behaviors on trade-offs between nest and female survival. We quantified daily recess behaviors including recess duration, recess frequency, total distance traveled, and incubation range size for each nest attempt as well as covariates for nest concealment, nest attempt, and nest age. Of 374 nests, 91 (24%) hatched and 39 (14%) females were depredated during incubation. Average nest survival during the incubation period was 0.19, whereas average female survival was 0.78. On average, females took 1.6 daily unique recesses (SD = 1.2), spent 2.1 hr off the nest each day (SD = 1.8), and traveled 357.6 m during recesses (SD = 396.6). Average nest concealment was 92.5 cm (SD = 47). We found that females who took longer recess bouts had higher individual survival, but had increased nest loss. Females who recessed more frequently had lower individual survival. Our findings suggest behavioral decisions made during incubation represent life-history trade-offs between predation risk and reproductive success on an unpredictable landscape.

Nesting season, nest age, and disturbance, but not habitat characteristics, affect nest survival of Chinese grouse

Nest survival is a vital component of breeding success, and affects population dynamics, as the loss of nests is the main cause of reproductive failure in birds. To identify key factors for the conservation of Chinese grouse Tetrastes sewerzowi, we tested the effects of nest concealment, nest age, nesting season, and habitat edge on nest daily survival rate (DSR) of Chinese grouse using 54 nests found at Lianhuashan Nature Reserve, Gansu, China, 2009–2012. Moreover, we controlled for the effect of research activity by testing the effect of nest checks on DSR. Overall, mammal predation caused 93% of nest failures. DSR was 0.986 ± 0.0038 in the constant model and the probability of a nest with a full clutch of 6 eggs surviving the entire 40-day nesting period was 0.526 ± 0.090. DSR decreased with nest age and nesting season (from 19 May to 3 July). Mammals instead of avian predators being responsible for most nest failures suggest that nest sites might be selected to avoid visual avian predators, but not olfactory mammalian predators, and the decreasing trend of DSR with nest age and nesting season could attribute to an additive exposure effect. Moreover, nest checks conducted by investigators significantly lowered nest DSR, especially during the late period of nesting season and for older nests. Mammalian predators might locate the nest site by following the investigator’s odor. Based on our results, we suggest that the late incubation stage is a particularly vulnerable period for nest survival of Chinese grouse and those researchers should adjust their activities around nests to balance the need of acquiring accurate data and decreasing nest predation risk.

Timing of vegetation sampling does not influence associations between visual obstruction and turkey nest survival in a montane forest

Evaluating relationships between ecological processes that occur concurrently is complicated by the potential for such processes to covary. Ground-nesting birds rely on habitat characteristics that provide visual and olfactory concealment from predators; this protection often is provided by vegetation at the nest site. Recently, researchers have raised concern that measuring vegetation characteristics at nest fate (success or failure) introduces a bias, as vegetation at successful nests is measured later in the growing season (and has more time to grow) compared with failed nests. In some systems, this bias can lead to an erroneous conclusion that plant height is positively associated with nest survival. However, if the features that provide concealment are invariant during the incubation period, no bias should be expected, and the timing of measurement is less influential. We used data collected from 98 nests to evaluate whether there is evidence that such a bias exists in a study of wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) nesting in a montane forest ecosystem. We modeled nest survival as a function of visual obstruction and other covariates of interest. At unsuccessful nests, we collected visual obstruction readings at both the date of nest failure and the projected hatch date and compared survival estimates generated using both sets of vegetation data. In contrast to studies in grassland and shrubland systems, we found little evidence that the timing of vegetation sampling influenced conclusions regarding the association between visual obstruction and nest survival; model selection and estimates of nest survival were similar regardless of when vegetation data were collected. The dominant hiding cover at most of our nests was provided by evergreen shrubs; retention of leaves and slow growth of these plants likely prevent appreciable changes in visual obstruction during the incubation period. When considered in aggregate with a growing body of literature, our results suggest that the influence of timing of vegetation sampling depends on the study system. When designing future studies, investigators should carefully consider the type of structures that provide nest concealment and whether plant phenology is confounded with nest survival.

Do movement behaviors identify reproductive habitat sampling for wild turkeys?

Selection of habitats has regularly been suggested to influence species demography at both local and broad scales. The expectation is that selection behaviors have positive benefits via greater fitness or increased survival. The current paradigm of habitat selection theory suggests a hierarchical process, where an individual first selects where they choose to live (e.g., range) and then searches and selects locations within this range meeting life history needs. Using high‐frequency GPS data collected from reproductively active Rio Grande (n = 21) and Eastern (n = 23) wild turkeys, we evaluated a long‐standing theory for ground‐nesting galliformes, in that movements during the prenesting period are behaviorally focused on sampling available habitats to optimize the selection of nesting sites. Contrary to expectations, we found no evidence that reproductively active females engage in habitat sampling activities. Although most nest sites (>80% for both subspecies) fell within the prenesting range, the average minimum daily distance from nest sites for Rio Grande and Eastern wild turkey females was large [1636.04 m (SE = 1523.96) and 1937.42 m (SE = 1267.84), respectively] whereas the average absolute minimum distance from the nest site for both Rio Grande and Eastern wild turkey females was 166.46 m (SE = 299.34) and 235.01 m (SE = 337.90), respectively, and showed no clear temporal reduction as laying approached. Overall, predicted probability that any female movements before laying were initiated intersected with her nesting range (area used during incubation) was <0.25, indicating little evidence of habitat sampling. Our results suggest that the long‐standing assumption of hierarchical habitat selection by wild turkeys to identify nest sites may be incorrect. As such, habitat selection may not be the proximate driver of nest success and hence population‐level fitness. Rather, based on our results, we suggest that wild turkeys and other ground‐nesting species may be fairly plastic with regard to the selection of reproductive habitats, which is appropriate given the stochasticity of the environments they inhabit.

Impacts of Short-Rotation Early-Growing Season Prescribed Fire on a Ground Nesting Bird in the Central Hardwoods Region of North America

Landscape-scale short-rotation early-growing season prescribed fire, hereafter prescribed fire, in upland hardwood forests represents a recent shift in management strategies across eastern upland forests. Not only does this strategy depart from dormant season to growing season prescriptions, but the strategy also moves from stand-scale to landscape-scale implementation (>1,000 ha). This being so, agencies are making considerable commitments in terms of time and resources to this management strategy, but the effects on wildlife in upland forests, especially those dominated by hardwood canopy species, are relatively unknown. We initiated our study to assess whether this management strategy affects eastern wild turkey reproductive ecology on the Ozark-St. Francis National Forest. We marked 67 wild turkey hens with Global Positioning System (GPS) Platform Transmitting Terminals in 2012 and 2013 to document exposure to prescribed fire, and estimate daily nest survival, nest success, and nest-site selection. We estimated these reproductive parameters in forest units managed with prescribed fire (treated) and units absent of prescribed fire (untreated). Of 60 initial nest attempts monitored, none were destroyed or exposed to prescribed fire because a majority of fires occurred early than a majority of the nesting activity. We found nest success was greater in untreated units than treated units (36.4% versus 14.6%). We did not find any habitat characteristic differences between successful and unsuccessful nest-sites. We found that nest-site selection criteria differed between treated and untreated units. Visual concealment and woody ground cover were common selection criteria in both treated and untreated units. However, in treated units wild turkey selected nest-sites with fewer small shrubs (<5 cm ground diameter) and large trees (>20 cm DBH) but not in untreated units. In untreated units wild turkey selected nest-sites with more large shrubs (≥5cm ground diameter) but did not select for small shrubs or large trees. Our findings suggest that wild turkey have not benefited from the reintroduction of prescribed fire to the WRERA.