History of Prairie Chickens in Iowa

The peak period for prairie chickens (Tympanuchus cupido pinnatus) in Iowa was about 1880 when 69% of the state was in farms. They were found in prairie areas throughout the state. Hunters found this grouse ideal game and bags of 25 to 50 per day were easily taken. Market hunters frequently killed 200 or more per day. Farmers trapped and shot the birds to sell or to eat. As long as marginal prairie areas were only lightly disturbed by agriculture, the prairie chickens held on, but when intensive farming began, the birds nested in hayfields or in over-grazed pastures where brooding was unsuccessful. By 1900, 90% of the state was in farms and birds were vanishing. A few remained until 1954 in a poorly drained portion of Appanoose County. Since then only occasional strays have been reported

Lesser prairie-chicken demographics in Texas: survival, reproduction, and population viability

Lesser prairie-chickens (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus) have declined throughout their range because of overgrazing and loss or fragmentation of habitat from conversion of native prairie to agricultural cropland. Lesser prairie-chickens were radio-marked (n = 225) as part of 2 separate field studies in the Texas Panhandle (2001–2003, 2003– 2007). These data were used to evaluate whether differences in demographic parameters existed between populations occurring in 2 areas dominated by different vegetation types (sand sagebrush [Artemisia filifolia] versus shinnery oak [Quercus havardii]) in the Texas Panhandle from 2001–2007. A model-selection approach was used to test hypotheses explaining differences in survival and reproductive success of lesser prairiechickens. Additionally, a population viability analysis was constructed using the above demographic parameters to evaluate effects of harvest and no harvest scenarios on viability and population persistence of lesser prairie-chickens in Texas. Overall, survival, reproduction, and population viability were lower in the shinnery oak compared to the sand sagebrush vegetation type. Lesser prairie-chicken survival differed between breeding and non-breeding periods. I estimated annual survival of lesser prairiechickens at 31% in the shinnery oak and 52% in the sand sagebrush vegetation type. Nest success was (41%, 95% CI = 25–56%) in the shinnery oak population compared to the sand sagebrush population (75%, 95% CI = 54–94%). Population viability analysis predicted continued declines in lesser prairie-chicken populations in Texas. Estimates of local occupancy indicated lesser prairie-chicken populations would go extinct in the southwestern shinnery oak vegetation type more quickly compared to the northeastern sand sagebrush vegetation type (approximately 10 years compared to 30 years, respectively) without changes in population vital rates. Harvest at all levels increased risk of extinction. Results suggest that differences in survival and reproduction of lesser prairie-chickens within sand sagebrush and shinnery oak vegetation types throughout the Texas Panhandle should be evaluated, especially during the breeding season. Improvements to vegetation conducive for successful nesting are important to the viability of lesser prairie-chickens. Conservation and recovery strategies for lesser prairie-chicken populations should address variables that increase survival and nest success and consideration of no harvest

Color Plates

32–35. Sage Grouse • 36–39. Blue Grouse • 40–43. Spruce Grouse • 44–46. Willow Ptarmigan • 47–49. Rock Ptarmigan • 50–51. White-tailed Ptarmigan • 52–54. Ruffed Grouse • 55–58. Pinnated Grouse • 59–60. Sharp-tailed Grouse • 61. Downy Young of Grouse and Partridges • 89. Long-tailed Tree Quail • 90. Bearded Tree Quail • 91. Mountain Quail • 92. Barred Quail and Scaled Quail • 93. Elegant Quail • 94. Gambel Quail • 95. Scaled Quail • 96. Gambel Quail • 97. Hybrid Gambel x Scaled Quail • 98. California Quail • 99. Bobwhite Quail • 100. Spotted Wood Quail • 101. Masked Bobwhite • 102. Black-throated Bobwhite • 103. Buffy-crowned Tree Quail and Singing Quail • 104–6. Harlequin Quail • 107. Chukar Partridge • 108–9. Gray Partridge • 110. Downy Young of Quail

6 Population Ecology and Dynamics

Like other animals, grouse and quail exist as natural populations dependent upon particular habitats and vary in population density between the absolute minimum populations that have permitted past survival to fairly dense populations that may approach or even temporarily exceed the carrying capacity of the habitat. Each species may also have an upper limit on the density of the population, or a saturation point, which is independent of the carrying capacity of the habitat but is determined by social adaptations. Within the population as a whole, individual birds or coveys may have home ranges, geographical areas to which their movements are limited and within which they spend their entire lives. Part of the home range may be defended by individuals so that conspecifics of the same sex are excluded for part or all of the year; such areas of localized social dominance and conspecific exclusion are called territories. Among species lacking discrete territories and in which the social unit is the covey or flock rather than the pair or family, dominance hierarchies, or peck orders, may serve to integrate activities in the flock. These behavioral adaptations and habitat relationships play important roles in population ecology, and will be considered in detail in the individual species accounts. However, a preliminary survey may help to provide generalizations that will be useful to keep in mind when considering individual species

Index

Index of vernacular and scientific names English vernacular names indexed here are for the most part those used in this book for species or larger groupings. Vernacular names for subspecies as well as alternative vernacular names for species are included only if they are in general usage or have been referred to in the text discussions. Plates and figures are identified by number, and pages containing major discussions of each species are indicated by boldface. Scientific Names: Names indexed here are restricted to those of subspecies, species, or larger groupings of galIinaceous birds mentioned in the text. Technical names of other animal groups and plants are not indexed. Entries shown here are for the major page references; the index to vernacular names should be consulted for secondary references and references to illustrations

AERIAL SURVEY TOWNSHIP AREAS

In the year 1946, two townships of experimental work in aerial censusing. technique for obtaining complete counts during the winter months. The aerial survey proved to be very satisfactory when snow conditions are right. At I available cover must be well filled with snow, with very few bare spots in fields or other parts of the area. The birds tend to congregate on such bare places where it is very difficult to see them from the plane. In 1951 a total of 40 townships were laid out as census plots in different parts of the state. In 1952 six new townships were added in the better pheasant areas in the southeastern and southwestern counties. Two townships were also relocated in order to give a more representative coverage to that region. It is planned to census the townships in the heaviest pheasant areas each year if snow conditions are favorable. Other townships will be covered every two or three years

Endoparasites of Northern Sharp-tailed Grouse, Tympanuchus phasianellus phasianellus, as Related to Age and Position on the Lek

The only indication of endoparasites found in male sharp-tailed grouse collected during the breeding season from the western James Bay region of northern Ontario, Canada, were nematode eggs of an unknown species. Nematode egg loads of male sharp-tailed grouse that occupied central territories on leks (mating areas) were not significantly different from those of birds in peripheral territories, nor were they different between adult males and yearlings. Future studies of endoparasites in northern sharp-tailed grouse should consider nematodes, which have been shown to be important to survivorship of other grouse species.Des œufs de nématodes provenant d'une espèce inconnue constituaient le seul indice de la présence d'endoparasites chez des mâles du tétras à queue fine prélevés durant la saison de reproduction dans la partie ouest de la baie James, au nord de l'Ontario (Canada). Il n'y avait pas de différence significative entre la biocontamination par les œufs de nématodes du mâle du tétras à queue fine occupant les zones au centre des leks (arènes de pariade) et celle des oiseaux occupant les parties périphériques, ni de différence notable entre les mâles adultes et ceux d'un an. De futures études menées sur les endoparasites du tétras à queue fine des régions nordiques devraient se pencher sur les nématodes, vu leur importance attestée pour la survie des autres espèces de tétras

SEASONAL SURVIVAL, REPRODUCTION, AND USE OF WILDFIRE AREAS BY LESSER PRAIRIE CHICKENS IN THE NORTHEASTERN TEXAS PANHANDLE

Lesser prairie chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus) numbers have declined considerably in Texas since the early 1900s. Conversion of native prairie to cropland has been the major cause of the decline. I trapped and monitored 115 (66 males, 49 females) lesser prairie chickens in the Rolling Plains of the Texas Panhandle from 2001 through 2003. I used an information-theoretic approach to model selection as implemented in program MARK to evaluate factors contributing to variation in survival and differences in nest success. I found breeding season survival of both males and females was lower compared to non-breeding season survival. Annual survival was 0.52 (95% CI: 0.32? 0.71). Model selection indicated higher nest success (70%) in the sand sagebrush (Artemisia filifolia) vegetation type as compared to the shinnery oak (Quercus harvardii) type (40%). I also evaluated post-burn habitat alterations and plant succession (1 year and 2 years after burning) as potential lesser prairie chicken habitat. After spring rainfalls stimulated re-growth of herbaceous plants, male lesser prairie chickens moved to the site, feeding on new-emerging forbs throughout the summer. A female lesser prairie chicken with a brood used the burned site during the first summer after the burn. A year later, males established a lek on the burned site. Two female lesser prairie chickens with broods used the burned site during the second summer. Burned sites had more forbs than nonburned sites and probably had more insects available which are an important food source for chicks during their first 4?5 weeks of age

THE PRAIRIE NATURALIST Volume 6, No.1. March 1974

AVIAN MORTALITY FROM COLLISIONS WITH OVERHEAD WIRES IN NORTH DAKOTA ▪ G. L. Krapu NOTES ON THE BIOLOGY OF THE OLIVE-BACKED POCKET MOUSE PEROGNATHUS FASCIATUS ON THE NORTHERN GREAT PLAINS ▪ J. E. Pefaur & R. S. Hoffman NOTE: Swans Resting on the Surface of A Dry Lake ▪ D. S. Gilme

Lesser prairie-chicken demographics in Texas: survival, reproduction, and population viability

Lesser prairie-chickens (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus) have declined throughout their range because of overgrazing and loss or fragmentation of habitat from conversion of native prairie to agricultural cropland. Lesser prairie-chickens were radio-marked (n = 225) as part of 2 separate field studies in the Texas Panhandle (2001–2003, 2003– 2007). These data were used to evaluate whether differences in demographic parameters existed between populations occurring in 2 areas dominated by different vegetation types (sand sagebrush [Artemisia filifolia] versus shinnery oak [Quercus havardii]) in the Texas Panhandle from 2001–2007. A model-selection approach was used to test hypotheses explaining differences in survival and reproductive success of lesser prairiechickens. Additionally, a population viability analysis was constructed using the above demographic parameters to evaluate effects of harvest and no harvest scenarios on viability and population persistence of lesser prairie-chickens in Texas. Overall, survival, reproduction, and population viability were lower in the shinnery oak compared to the sand sagebrush vegetation type. Lesser prairie-chicken survival differed between breeding and non-breeding periods. I estimated annual survival of lesser prairiechickens at 31% in the shinnery oak and 52% in the sand sagebrush vegetation type. Nest success was (41%, 95% CI = 25–56%) in the shinnery oak population compared to the sand sagebrush population (75%, 95% CI = 54–94%). Population viability analysis predicted continued declines in lesser prairie-chicken populations in Texas. Estimates of local occupancy indicated lesser prairie-chicken populations would go extinct in the southwestern shinnery oak vegetation type more quickly compared to the northeastern sand sagebrush vegetation type (approximately 10 years compared to 30 years, respectively) without changes in population vital rates. Harvest at all levels increased risk of extinction. Results suggest that differences in survival and reproduction of lesser prairie-chickens within sand sagebrush and shinnery oak vegetation types throughout the Texas Panhandle should be evaluated, especially during the breeding season. Improvements to vegetation conducive for successful nesting are important to the viability of lesser prairie-chickens. Conservation and recovery strategies for lesser prairie-chicken populations should address variables that increase survival and nest success and consideration of no harvest