8 CALIFORNIA’S TURKEY STOCKING PROGRAM* Harold T. Harper and Walton A. Smith ABSTRACT Wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo) have been stocked in California since 1877. From 1938 to 1951, 3,350 game-farm turkeys were stocked on 71 sites in 23 counties. Turkeys were successfully established in three areas from these introductions of game-farm stock. One release of 23 wild-trapped birds, obtained from Arizona in 1949-50, became established in the Brush Creek area of Kern- ville. The turkey stocking program was temporarily terminated in 1951. In 1958, 62 wild-trapped turkeys from Texas were flown to San Diego for release. These birds were established near Pine Valley, San Diego County. From 1959 to 1969, wild-trapped turkeys have been released in 35 areas of the state. These birds were obtained from established flocks in San Luis Obispo and San Diego counties, three western states, and Texas. Excellent reproduction has been reported for most of the areas stocked. Potential turkey habitat is mainly found on private lands, with more than 9 million acres of hardwoods, woodland-grass, woodland, chaparral, pine forests, and mixed conifers holding promise for wild turkey stocking. Some Forest Service lands located mainly in the northern part of the state are also suitable for stocking. The wild turkey was not a part of the fauna when the first settlers arrived in California. Fossil remains of a turkey-like bird (Parapavo californicus) have been preserved from the asphalt pits at Rancho La Brea in Los Angeles County (Schorger 1966: 64). Skeletal remains of a turkey (M. richmondi), similar to our present type, have also been found near Mission San Jose in Alameda County (Schorger 1966: 65). These birds lived during the Pleistocene or Ice Age and disappeared during more recent times for unknown reasons. There may have been many reasons for the absence of the present-day wild turkey from California as well as other western states. It is our belief that ecological or geographic barriers, in the form of the deserts of the southwestern United States and the high north-south mountain ranges, prevented the spread of wild turkeys to the westernmost states. These western states, formerly devoid of wild turkeys, evidently possessed the prerequisites for good turkey habitat, as evidenced by the recent successful introduction (Burger 1954). EARLY INTRODUCTIONS On the premise that California’s habitats were suitable for wild turkeys, the first known introduction of Mexican turkeys (M. g. gallopavo) was made in 1877 on Santa Cruz Island by private ranchers (Phillips 1928). The Depart- ment of Fish and Game reared about 1,240 Mexican turkeys from stock ob- * A contribution of Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Project W-47-R, Upland Game Investigations. 55 56 Wild Turkey Management tained in western Mexico-specifically from Sonora and Sinaloa-between 1888 and 1918. Of these, 22 were released in the San Bernardino Mountains of San Bernardino County in June 1908. In October 1908, 26 turkeys were received from Mexico and retained on the game farm for breeding stock (Phillips 1928). Burger ( 1954: 124) stated: “Due to the extreme difficulty of raising birds of pure wild ancestry in captivity, the game farm stocks of turkeys were of hybrid origin, resulting from crosses between the domestic turkey and one or more of the wild subspecies. Apparently the latter were mainly the Mexican turkey (Meleagris gallopavo gallopavo) and the Merriam’s turkey (M. g. mer- riami) of the Southwest.” About 1928, the Department began a series of exten- sive releases of these hybrid turkeys from state game farms. This program con- tinued until 1951, with a total of 3,350 turkeys stocked in 71 different sites in 23 counties (Figure 11). Three areas in California were successfully established with hybrid game- farm turkeys-one near Cloverdale in Sonoma County, one in Santa Clara County southeast of Gilroy, and the most successful in San Luis Obispo County. + Wild-trapped Merriam’s - 23 released • Game-form hybrid - 3,350 released Hybrid = domestic x Mexican x Merriam’s Total Release Sites - 71 Figure 11. Release sites of game-farm turkeys in California, 1928-1951. 23285540, 1973, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.1973.tb00038.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License Restoration and Introductions 57 Figure 12. Established game-farm turkey populations in California, 1969. These areas were considered established by 1954 (Burger 1954) and are shown in Figure 12. In 1949 and 1950, 23 wild-trapped Merriam’s turkeys were obtained from Arizona and released in the Brush Creek area near Kernville on the west slopes of the Sierra Nevada Mountains (Burger 1954). This planting was an almost immediate success, and by 1955 about 200 to 300 birds were present in the area. After the apparent failure of game-farm stock in most areas planted, in- terest in the program was lost, and turkey stocking was temporarily terminated in 1951. RECENT INTRODUCTIONS In the late 1950’s, renewed interest was generated by the San Diego sports- men’s groups, and their county fish and game commission requested in May 23285540, 1973, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.1973.tb00038.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 58 Wild Turkey Management 1958 that the Department cooperate in a program of introducing wild turkeys into San Diego County. The San Diego County Commission and the Department began negotiations with the King Ranch and the Texas Game Department for Rio Grande turkeys (M. g. intermedia). Also, the Arizona Game and Fish Department was contacted for wild-trapped Merriam’s turkeys. The request to Texas was fulfilled when 23 toms and 34 hens were trapped near Kingsville, Texas. These were picked up and flown in the Department’s airplane to San Diego for release near Pine Valley, San Diego County, on November 13, 1959. Only six birds died in transit. One year after liberation, biologists of the Department of Fish and Game reported up to 100 birds in the release area. In 1960, 10 toms and 16 hens were sent from Arizona and released on Volcan Mountain northeast of Wynola, San Diego County, between February 16 and 19, 1960. These birds apparently were placed in undesirable habitat since no reproduction was reported and the birds have disappeared. The Department again in 1960 became interested in stocking turkeys but using only wild-trapped birds either transplanted from established flocks in Figure 13. Releases of wild-trapped turkeys in California, 1959-1969. 23285540, 1973, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.1973.tb00038.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License Restoration and Introductions 59 California or obtained from other states. Studies by Leopold (1944) and Knoder (1959) have shown that game farm-reared turkeys released into the wild have little chance of surviving and becoming established. From 1959 to the fall of 1969, wild-trapped turkeys have been released in 35 areas of the state (Figure 13). Of these, 368 were descendants of game-farm turkeys trapped in San Luis Obispo County, 89 were Merriam’s turkeys obtained from Colorado, Wyoming, and Arizona, 348 were Rio Grande turkeys from Texas, and 49 were trapped from flocks in San Diego County. Table 19 shows the source and stocking sites since 1959. Releases have been more numerous in the northern half of California, where the largest blocks of turkey habitat are located. Most of the releases are too recent to determine ultimate success. How- ever, excellent reproduction occurred the first year after release on most of the areas stocked. The release in March 1969 of 7 hens and 7 toms (wild-trapped California hybrids) on the Mt. Hamilton range resulted in an actual count, by biologists, of 28 birds after the first breeding season. The 1961 release of wild- trapped hybrids in the Huasna district of San Luis Obispo County increased from 36 birds to about 100 after the first breeding season, and the population was estimated to be 250 to 300 birds after the breeding season of 1965. POTENTIAL HABITAT By far, most of the better habitat in California for wild turkeys is found on privately owned ranches and farms. U.S. Forest Service lands, primarily in the northern counties, hold promise for stocking wild-trapped birds from estab- lished populations and out-of-state birds. Forest Service lands along the western slopes of the Sierras may be suitable, but private lands with light human activ- ity have the greatest potential. Habitat along the foothills of the Sierras in many areas is too densely populated with people to have much value for wild turkeys. It has been estimated that California’s potential acreage for wild turkeys amounts to 14,697,239 acres of habitat, of which 369,540 are in hardwoods; 4,602,241 woodland-grass; 758,094 pine (Pinus spp.) forest; 2,822,443 mixed conifers; 2,150,432 Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) when associated with pine forests; 341,764 pinion pine-juniper (P. cembroides-Juniperus spp.); 1,977,929 woodland-chaparral; 632,410 grassland-meadow; and 1,042,386 less valuable habitat (Harper 1970). Wild turkey release sites have been selected within the boundaries of the potential habitat delineated by Figure 13 on the basis of remoteness from human habitation, abundance of water-natural lakes, streams, rivers, springs, or man-made reservoirs and stock ponds-degree of landowner cooperation, and vegetative composition. The habitat generally conforms to the vegetative types described by Jensen ( 1947). Before the state stocks privately owned lands, the landowner must agree to a trapping and transplanting program when biologists of the Department determine that the turkey population is sufficient to allow the removal of surplus birds. The population is judged to be sufficient for live- trapping when the population has tripled the original numbers stocked, which usually occurs in 3 to 5 years. Hunting season recommendations, based on population counts by field bi- ologists, are submitted to the Fish and Game Commission for approval. Future hunting season recommendations have been set forth by Harper (1970). FOOD HABITS The Department’s knowledge of turkey requirements was enhanced through the collection of 59 wild turkeys for food-habit studies in San Luis 23285540, 1973, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.1973.tb00038.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License Table 19. Wild turkey stocking program, 1959-1969, in California. Number Stock Area Stocked County Date of Release Toms Hens Source of Stock Wild-trapped California hybrid Huasna San Luis Obispo March 1961 Black Butte River Mendocino Indian Dick Guard Trinity Station Foxen Canyon Santa Barbara Lake Cachuma Santa Barbara French Gulch Shasta Tularcitos Canyon Monterey Watts Valley Fresno Greenhorn Mt. Kern Raymond (5 mi SE) Madera Raymond (7 mi NE) Madera Mt. Hamilton Santa Clam Plaskett Ridge Monterey Wild-trapped Merriam’s Volcan Mountain San Diego Cinder Cone Shasta Doyle Lassen Middle Ridge Tehama Wild-trapped Rio Grande Corte Madera San Diego Snobel Valley San Diego Spenceville W.A. Yuba-Nevada Bear Valley Colusa Duncan Creek Shasta (Ono) Millville Shasta Bear Mountain Calaveras Frenchtown El Dorado Frenchtown El Dorado Williams Colusa Williams Colusa Stonyford Glenn Stonyford Glenn Bangor Butte Bangor Butte Manton Tehama Manton Tehama Platina Shasta Platina Shasta Glennville Kern Elderwood Tulare Elderwood Tulare Raymond(5miSE) Madera Raymond(5miSE) Madera. Raymond(7miNE) Madera Raymond(7miNE) Madera Paynes Creek Tehama Paynes Creek Tehama Cuyamaca San Diego Catalina Island Los Angeles March 1962, 1964,1965 January 1963, 1965 October 1965 October 1965 October 1965 October 1965, 1966 October 1967 October 1968 March 1969 March 1969 March 1969 September 1969 Subtotal 15 16 18 18 19 14 10 21 San Luis Obispo County 40 33 24 18 12 7 5 4 2 2 7 18 148 20 16 - 7 22 - 220 February 1960 10 16 Arizona December 1966 4 10 Colorado January 1967 10 24 Wyoming February 1967 4 11 Arizona Subtotal 28 61 November 1959 November 1965 February 1967, 1969 February 1967, 1968.1969 February 1968, 1969 January 1969 January 1969 January 1969 January 1969 January 1969 February 1969 February 1969 February 1969 February 1969 February 1969 January 1969 January 1969 January 1969 January 1969 January 1969 January 1969 January 1969 January 1969 January 1969 January 1969 January 1969 January 1969 January 1969 January 1969 February 1969 Subtotal 23 34 Texas 11 2 San Diego County 7 16 Texas 7 27 6 23 4 2 - 2 4 - 3 - 3 - 2 San Diego County b Texas 2 4 1 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 3 4 96 12 12 15 - 8 9 12 - 12 - 12 11 - 12 14 - 11 - 12 15 - 13 San Diego County b Texas San Diego County b Texas San Diego County b Texas San Diego County b Texas San Diego County b Texas San Diego County b Texas San Diego County b Texas San Diego County b San Diego County Total 272 582 19 Texas 301 a California hybrid males used to balance sex ratios in Rio Grande plants. b Rio Grande males from San Diego County used to balance sex ratios. 23285540, 1973, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.1973.tb00038.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License Restoration and Introductions 61 Obispo County in 1966. The collection included 15 birds taken in February, 16 in May, 14 in August, and 14 in November. Of these, 44 were adult males, 9 adult females, 3 immature males, and 3 immature females (Smith and Brown- ing 1967). It was determined that wild oats (Avena fatua and A. barbata) were the single most important food item taken on a year-round basis. In all, 53 plant and 12 animal items were found to be eaten by the turkeys collected. Through the knowledge of the distribution of wild oats and oak forests, the Department calculated that approximately 9 million acres hold promise as habitat for wild turkeys. This acreage does not include the ponderosa pine-oak (Pinus ponder- osu-Quercus spp.) belt in the northernmost counties. MANAGEMENT POSSIBILITIES AND IMPLICATION Turkey management is not basically different from the management of other species of wild birds, but habitat needs of turkeys are often more demand- ing than those of other species, and greater attention must be given to disease prevention and maintenance of pure strains. Some populations of turkeys have undoubtedly made adjustments to their environments that have permitted them to survive under what seem to be new circumstances for turkeys. The adjustment to their environment and their abil- ity to survive, may have contributed to the success of a cross between wild and game-farm birds in the San Luis Obispo area. Lindzey (1967b:549) stated: “Experience suggests that subtle behavioral changes which appear to have taken place in some populations of birds may be successful adaptations to assure ad- justment to new environments. We now find these birds surviving even in farm woodlots and other habitats considered foreign to those occupied by the original wild turkey.” Now, after many generations, a wild California hybrid turkey may have developed (Figure 14). This is not to say that another stocking program using game-farm birds should be initiated, but we should recognize that we have three established flocks in California from releases of wild strain, game-farm birds. These stocks should be perpetuated and maintained in the wild to ensure that these populations remain as virile and wild as possible. Within two or three successful breeding seasons-the exact times to be determined by biologists in those areas where releases have been made-the Department will embark on a trapping and transplanting program to hasten the spread of turkeys within selected habitats. Within three to five breeding seasons after a release, a hunting season should be considered if successful reproduction occurred during the previous years. Eight counties are being considered by the Fish and Game Commission for the 1970-71 turkey season; these are in addi- tion to San Luis Obispo County, which was open in 1968 and 1969. The eastern wild turkey (M. g. silvestris) may fit into California’s north coastal belt where rainfall and vegetation compare more closely with that on the eastern seaboard, and thus may establish populations in areas that the Mer- riam’s and Rio Grande turkeys will not tolerate. Future stocking plans depend upon availability of wild-trapped birds, both from within the state and out of state. Trapping will continue on flocks already established in California, not only from those in San Luis Obispo County but from other areas as well. The California hybrid turkey established in San Luis Obispo County has been successfully established in northern California and has proven to be a hearty, wily bird. Also, some birds from plantings made within the past 2 years should be trapped and transplanted to adjacent areas, if pro- duction during 1970 equals or exceeds that of 1969. Utah has offered wild- trapped Merriam’s turkeys to aid us in our program (personal communications), 23285540, 1973, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.1973.tb00038.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 62 Wild Turkey Management Figure 14. Wild California hybrid turkeys on the Eagle Ranch, San Luis Obispo County, October 15, 1969. Oak woodland interspersed with grassland is preferred habitat for both Rio Grande and California hybrid wild turkeys in California. and Texas has consented to another stock of wild-trapped birds from the Aransas National Wildlife Refuge and also from other flocks on private lands (personal communications). HUNTING SEASONS Two turkey-hunting seasons have been held in California-one for 1 day on November 23, 1968, and the other for 2 days on November 22 and 23, 1969. Hunting was allowed in San Luis Obispo County both years, with one turkey of either sex as legal game. Legal weapons were shotguns and bows and arrows; shooting hours were from one-half hour before sunrise to one-half hour after sunset. There were no restrictions on hunter numbers, and a special license or tag was not required. During the 1968 season, Department personnel at six check stations con- tacted 213 hunters who bagged 29 turkeys for a 13.6 percent success. In 1969, field checks by Department personnel resulted in contacting 124 hunters who bagged 32 turkeys for a 25.8 percent success. Holbrook and Lewis (1967:364) gave statewide hunter success as about 5 percent in Tennessee and Kentucky. The results from the first hunt held in Oregon indicated a 14 percent hunter success (personal communication), and Idaho indicated a 16.3 percent hunter success (personal communication). Less than 1 percent of the estimated turkey population in San Luis Obispo County was killed during each of the first two seasons. Mosby (1967:127) sum- 23285540, 1973, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.1973.tb00038.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License Restoration and Introductions 63 marized the estimated percentage of the population taken in hunting in four states as 12.8 percent for Florida, 24.5 percent for West Virginia, 29.3 percent for Virginia, and 10 to 50 percent for Pennsylvania. The kill of 29 turkeys in 1968 consisted of 20 adults, 8 immatures, and 1 unclassified. In 1969, the kill of 32 turkeys consisted of 10 adults, 17 imma- tures, and 5 unclassified. Adult birds accounted for 66 percent of the bag in 1968 and 30 percent in 1969. Both seasons were enthusiastically endorsed by the hunters and the De- partment. Consequently, it is anticipated that the season will continue, with more areas opened as turkey populations increase in other areas throughout the state. 23285540, 1973, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.1973.tb00038.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License