A Decade of Progress, A Decade of Frustration

The past decade has seen tremendous research progress for the northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus). Research conducted during the 1990s advanced our understanding of bobwhite breeding biology, habitat relationships, long-term population trends, and genetics, among other things. Technological advances allowed improvements in censusing techniques, tracking broods, assessing population status in relation to broad scale land use changes, and identifying nest predators. The 1990s also saw the development of a National Strategic Plan for Quail Management and Research, the emergence of the Southeast Quail Study Group, and a renewed interest in National Quail Symposia. Despite this recent renaissance in research and related activities, bobwhite population declines continued throughout much of the southeastern United States and elsewhere. There is a palpable level of frustration among quail hunters, resource agency managers, and other quail enthusiasts who feel that: (1) seemingly nothing is being done to reverse the bobwhite population decline, and (2) that the scientific community has not developed a meaningful or realistic research agenda. It is an amazing paradox that we have made great bobwhite research progress during the past decade, but virtually none of the new insights gained from research have been successfully applied, on the ground, to improve bobwhite numbers. I hypothesize that the disconnect between recent scientific advances, and management applications to reverse the bobwhite decline, is a function of numerous cultural and economic factors that will be difficult to overcome. These factors include: (1) broad scale land use trends that are hostile to the production and maintenance of wild bobwhite populations, (2) habitat management and maintenance costs that are beyond the reach of most resource agencies and individuals, and (3) lack of incentives to motivate individuals and organizations to tackle bobwhite management on a meaningful scale. Whether land use planning, land management policy, and/or market incentives can conspire to provide useable habitat space through time for bobwhites (and other quails) on a scale that will be sufficient to reverse widespread population declines, is one of the most vexing wildlife management problems for the next century

Strategic Planning Update

This paper is a snapshot assessment of what has been achieved in quail management and research since the first national strategic planning workshop was organized at Quail III in 1992. In general, interest in quail remains strong and in many cases is increasing, among a diverse community of managers, researchers, and hunters, despite the continued population declines of several species of quails, and widespread loss of quail hunting opportunities on both public and private lands. Several regional interest groups who serve as advocates for quail have emerged in both the southeastern and western U.S. Some potentially promising opportunities for broad scale habitat improvement have emerged from Farm Bill legislation (such as subsidies for planting longleaf pine [Pinus palustris] in the Southeast). Whether such incentives will serve to reverse the broad scale northern bobwhite decline, remains to be seen. Several states in both the Southeast and Midwest have either reaffirmed or renewed their commitment to quail research and management. They fully realize that reversing declines and local extinctions will be extremely difficult given the incompatibility between most modem agricultural and forestry land use practices and the habitat needs of wild quail. How, and if, wild quail will be able to fit within the ever-tightening constraints of modem land use by our prodigal society is one of the most challenging questions currently facing anyone interested in these birds

Appendix A: Strategic Plan for Quail Management and Research in the United States: Introduction and Background

I assessed the current, broad-scale status of populations, research, and management for 6 species of quail in the U.S., and used this information as an introduction, background, and justification for a national strategic planning effort for quail management and research. Long-term (1960-89) trends determined from Christmas Bird Count data indicate that California quail (Callipepla californica), northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus), and scaled quail (Callipepla squamata) populations have undergone (P \u3c 0.05) declines. Geographic distribution of mountain quail (Oreortyx pictus) has contracted dramatically in the northeastern portion of this quail\u27s range. Neither Gambel\u27s (C. gambelii) nor Montezuma quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) showed evidence of long-term increases or decreases. Wildlife professionals have apparently paid scant attention to quail in the U.S. during the past 10 years. A recent survey of Wildlife Review indicated \u3c0.2% of the publications pertained to quail. During 1990, \u3c 1.0% of Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration funds were allocated to quail-related projects. Habitat management by the private sector is apparently having little broad-scale impact on bobwhite populations. Contemporary quail management efforts in the U.S. are clearly in the doldrums and in dire need of leadership from professionals with a creative vision for solving problems caused by changing land-use practices. These factors point to a critical need for a national strategic planning effort to develop a comprehensive, coordinated program for quail management and research. An outline of the structure of the Strategic Planning Workshop that was held at Quail III is provided. Specific management and research problems and associated strategies for solving them are available in Issues and Strategies, which follows (page 181)

Does lower lifetime fluoridation exposure explain why people outside capital cities have poor clinical oral health?

Abstract Background Australians outside state capital cities have greater caries experience than their counterparts in capital cities. We hypothesized that differing water fluoridation exposure was associated with this disparity. Methods Data were the 2004–06 Australian National Survey of Adult Oral Health. Examiners measured participant decayed, missing and filled teeth and DMFT Index, and lifetime fluoridation exposure was quantified. Multivariable linear regression models estimated differences in caries experience between capital city residents and others, with and without adjustment for fluoridation exposure. Results There was greater mean lifetime fluoridation exposure in state capital cities (59.1%, 95% confidence interval = 56.9, 61.4) than outside capital cities (42.3, confidence interval = 36.9, 47.6). People located outside capital city areas had differing sociodemographic characteristics and dental visiting patterns, and a higher mean DMFT (capital cities = 12.9, non‐capital cities = 14.3, p = 0.02), than people from capital cities. After adjustment for sociodemographic characteristics and dental visits, DMFT of people living in capital cities was less than non‐capital city residents (regression coefficient = 0.8, p = 0.01). The disparity was no longer statistically significant (regression coefficient = 0.6, p = 0.09) after additional adjustment for fluoridation exposure