VITA Jason Leo Isabelle, son of Donald and Carolle Isabelle, was born in Newport, Vermont on 15 August 1980. In 1998, Jason graduated from Otter Valley Union High School in Brandon, Vermont, after which he attended Paul Smith's College in Paul Smith's, New York and earned his Associate of Science degree in Ecology and Environmental Technology in 2000. Jason later attended the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry in Syracuse, New York where he majored in Environmental and Forest Biology, and received his Bachelor of Science degree in 2002. Following graduation, Jason later worked as a research technician for the Wildlife Conservation Society, Adirondack Ecological Center, New York State Museum, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and the Max McGraw Wildlife Foundation. Jason began graduate school at Stephen F. Austin State University Arthur Temple College of Forestry and Agriculture in 2006 and graduated with the degree of Master of Science in August 2010. Permanent Address: P.O. Box 418 Pittsford, VT 05763 315 SURVIVAL, HOME RANGE SIZE, HABITAT SELECTION, AND REPRODUCTIVE ECOLOGY OF EASTERN WILD TURKEYS IN EAST TEXAS by Jason Leo Isabelle, Bachelor of Science in Environmental and Forest Biology Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Stephen F. Austin State University In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements For the Degree of Master of Science STEPHEN F. AUSTIN STATE UNIVERSITY August 2010 UMI Number: 1487324 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMT Dissertation Publishing UMI 1487324 Copyright 2010 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 © Copyright by, Jason Leo Isabelle 2010 All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT Historically, eastern wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo silvestris) occupied an estimated 12 million ha in east Texas, but overharvesting of both turkeys and timber led to their near extirpation from the region by 1900. Despite >70 years of restoration efforts, including translocation of >7,000 wild-captured eastern turkeys from >10 states since the late 1970s, estimated east Texas turkey densities remain low. Moreover, regional research has reported poor reproductive performance of translocated turkeys, heightening concerns regarding long-term stability, expansion, and permanence of turkey populations in east Texas. Although previous restoration attempts have involved traditional block-stocking and supplemental-stocking approaches (i.e., release of 15 - 20 turkeys per site), the use of larger release sizes (i.e., 'super-stocking'; 70 turkeys per site), may be more successful. During 2007 and 2008, 37 resident female turkeys were captured at two sites within the region, fitted with transmitters, and released at respective capture sites. An additional 347 eastern wild turkeys were captured in South Carolina and Tennessee and translocated to four sites in east Texas to evaluate the effectiveness of super-stocking in regional turkey restoration. Prior to release, 178 (115 females/63 males) turkeys were fitted with radio-transmitters and divided among sites; release sizes varied from 83 - 94, with approximately 45 transmittered turkeys per site. Specifically, the objectives of this i research were to quantify survival, home range size, habitat selection, and reproductive ecology of both resident and translocated wild turkeys. Annual survival of resident female turkeys ranged between 0.38 - 0.68. Annual survival of translocated turkeys during the release year ranged from 0.55-0.71 (x = 0.63) and from 0.73 - 1.00 (x = 0.85) among sites for female and male turkeys, respectively. Female survival tended to increase in the second year following release (range: 0.63 - 0.82; * = 0.73), while male survival tended to decrease (range: 0.47 - 0.66; x = 0.54). Most mortality of resident and translocated females occurred during spring; male mortality was nearly evenly distributed throughout the annual cycle. Resident turkey home ranges averaged 1,146 ha in spring and mean summer home range size ranged from 628 - 1,118 ha between sites. Spring home ranges of translocated turkeys ( I = 901 ha) were larger than summer (* = 443 ha), and female (* = 846 ha) and male (7 = 498 ha) home range sizes were similar. Burned and/or thinned pine forests, mixed forests, and herbaceous openings were preferred spring and summer habitats, whereas pre-thin pine forests and forested wetlands were used less frequently by both resident and translocated turkeys. Twenty-five and 74 nests were initiated by resident and translocated hens, respectively. Nesting and renesting rates of resident hens averaged 0.66 and 0.29, respectively. Nesting rates of translocated turkeys varied substantially (range: 0.15 - 0.77) among sites during the release year, but tended to increase the year following release (range: 0.69 - 0.92). Renesting rates of translocated hens were considerably ii lower, averaging 0.21 across sites and years. Most nests of resident and translocated hens were located in thinned and/or burned pine forests, with nests generally having greater ground/screening cover and greater living woody vegetation (%) <1 m than random sites. Overall initial nest success and hen success rates of resident hens averaged 0.26 and 0.30, respectively, with 0.26 overall poult survival. Overall initial nest success and hen success rates of translocated turkeys were 0.38 and 0.40, respectively; overall poult survival was 0.35. Herbaceous openings and recently-thinned and/or burned pine forests were important brood habitat. Due to low initial nest success and poult survival of resident females, management efforts should focus on creation and management of quality nesting and brood-rearing habitats. With proper release age-structure (at least 50% adult males) and adequate nesting and brood-rearing habitat, it appears that super-stocked turkeys possess survival and reproductive characteristics conducive to population establishment and expansion. Due to low renesting rates, however, maintaining quality nesting habitat and minimizing disturbance of nesting habitats during spring will be extremely important in future potential super-stocking efforts. Moreover, rigorous evaluation of potential release sites will be needed as only sites with highly suitable nesting and brood-rearing habitats will likely result in success. in ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to give a special thanks to my major professor, Dr. Warren C. Conway for his guidance and support throughout my time as a graduate student at SFASU. I would also like to thank my committee members, Dr. Christopher E. Comer and Dr. Daniel G. Scognamillo for their edits and suggestions, which greatly improved the quality of this thesis. I am forever grateful to the many research technicians and graduate students that worked long hours in less than ideal field conditions while assisting with data collection; I specifically thank Chris Alford, Brad Clark, Chris Davis, Paul Day, Dave and Jody DeMeyere, Curtis Greene, Chance Kimbrough, Clint Mabrey, Covin Mauritzen, Haemish Melville, Justin Shelby, Allan Rainey, Ryan Scott, Sarah Saalfeld, Sabrina Seidel, Jack Wallace, Regan White, and Matt Wright. A special thanks to Ryan Bass for introducing me to east Texas wild turkey research and showing me what it takes to catch turkeys in the Pineywoods. I would also like to extend a special thanks to Helen Marx for sharing her plant expertise and for her willingness to work extremely long hours during the hot and humid east Texas summers; without her help, a large portion of this thesis would not have been possible. I would like to thank Dave and Sarah Saalfeld and Chris Frey for their helpful suggestions and assistance during data analysis. Special thanks also to Dr. iv Gerald V. Cammack for his support of my research and for providing his time, resources, and assistance. I would like to thank the Campbell Group LLC, Forestar Group Inc., Hancock Forest Management Inc., Temple Inland Inc., and the U.S. Forest Service for granting access to their property and for providing assistance with research; I specifically thank Bill Bartush, Stan Cook, Mike Curry, Jason Engle, Jason Garrett, Jonathan Grace, Charles Hamilton, Jamie Sowell, and Eddie Taylor. I would also like to thank the many private landowners who allowed my technicians and I access to their property and made us feel welcome while we conducted research; I specifically thank the Mitchell family (owners of the Cooks Branch Conservancy, Montgomery, Texas), Stanley Graff, Larry Hornbeck, and Simon Winston. Special thanks to the Mitchell family and to Stanley Graff for being gracious enough to provide lodging for my research technicians. I would also like to thank Mike Garcia, Kathy Hutson, and Jeff Pennington for making my technicians and I feel welcome, assisting with research coordination, and offering a helping hand (and a chain) when unfavorable weather conditions rendered our field vehicles immobile. I thank the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and the National Wild Turkey Federation for providing funding and support for my research. A specific thanks to Vernon Bevill, Gary Calkins, Nathan Garner, Jason Hardin, Scotty Parsons, Dr. T. Wayne Schwertner, and Rusty Wood. I would also like to thank Ross Carrie, Allison Leavitt, and Raven Environmental for providing assistance with research. v A very special thanks to my family, Donald and Carolle Isabelle and Ashley Bergeron, for their love and support and for instilling in me a love of wildlife at a very young age. Lastly, I would like to extend a most special thanks to my fiancee, Abby Davis, for her love, support, and also for her patience while enduring more stories about wild turkeys in the past two years than she probably ever wanted to hear in her lifetime. To my family and Abby; for all that you've done for me that has made the completion of this thesis possible, I am forever grateful. VI TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iv LIST OF FIGURES xiv LIST OF TABLES xix CHAPTER I: SURVIVAL, HOME RANGE SIZE, HABITAT SELECTION, AND REPRODUCTIVE ECOLOGY OF RESIDENT FEMALE EASTERN WILD TURKEYS IN EAST TEXAS 1 INTRODUCTION 2 METHODS 7 Study Area 7 Angelina National Forest . 8 Cottingham/Rocky Mount Hunting Clubs . 9 Capture and Handling. . 1 0 Radio-tracking. . 1 1 Home Range Calculation . 1 3 Habitat Selection . 1 5 Nest Discovery and Location. . 1 8 Nest Site Selection . 1 9 vii Poult S u r v i v a l Brood Home Range Size and Habitat Selection Data Analysis Survival Home Range Size Habitat Selection Nesting Biology and Nest Site Selection Poult S u r v i v a l Brood Habitat Selection RESULTS Survival Home Range Size Habitat Selection Nesting Biology and Nest Site Selection Nest Site Selection among Study Sites Poult Suvival Brood Home Range Size and Movements Brood Habitat Selection DISCUSSION Survival Home Range Size viii Habitat Selection . 4 1 Nesting Biology and Nest Site Selection . 4 2 Poult Survival, Brood Home Range Size and Movements, and Habitat Selection 47 MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS 50 CHAPTER II: SURVIVAL, HOME RANGE SIZE, AND HABITAT SELECTION OF TRANSLOCATED EASTERN WILD TURKEYS IN EAST TEXAS 78 INTRODUCTION 79 METHODS 83 Study Area 83 Bobcat Ridge Hunting Club . 8 4 Cooks Branch Conservancy . 8 5 Hornbeck Ranch . 8 5 Winston 8 Ranch . 8 6 Capture and Handling. . 8 6 Super-stocking Releases . 8 7 Radio-tracking. . 8 8 Home Range Calculation . 9 0 Habitat Selection 92 Data Analysis . . 9 5 Survival . 9 5 ix Home Range Size . 9 7 Habitat Selection . 9 7 RESULTS 98 Site-specific Annual Survival. . 9 8 Bobcat Ridge Hunting Club . 9 8 Cooks Branch Conservancy . 9 9 Hornbeck Ranch . 9 9 Winston 8 Ranch 100 Annual Survival . 1 0 1 Seasonal Survival . 1 0 2 Supplementally-stocked Annual Male Survival . 1 0 3 Home Range Size . 1 0 3 Home Range Size across Study Sites . 104 Home Range Size within Study Sites . 105 Seasonal Home Range Size 105 Habitat Selection . 1 0 6 Bobcat Ridge Hunting Club . 1 0 6 Cooks Branch Conservancy 108 Hornbeck Ranch 109 Winston 8 Ranch . 1 1 1 DISCUSSION 114 x Survival . 1 1 4 Home Range Size . 1 1 9 Habitat Selection 120 MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS 124 CHAPTER III: REPRODUCTIVE ECOLOGY OF TRANSLOCATED EASTERN WILD TURKEYS IN EAST TEXAS 191 INTRODUCTION 192 METHODS 198 Study Area 198 Bobcat Ridge Hunting Club . 1 9 9 Cooks Branch Conservancy 200 Hornbeck Ranch . 2 0 0 Winston 8 Ranch 201 Capture and Handling. . 2 0 1 Super-stocking Releases 202 Radio-tracking. 203 Nest Discovery and Location . 205 Nest Site Selection . 2 0 6 Poult Survival. 209 Brood Home Range Size and Movement Calculation. 209 Brood Habitat Selection . 2 1 0 xi Data Analysis . 213 Nesting Biology and Nest Site Selection 213 Poult Survival 214 Brood Home Range Size, Movements, and Habitat Selection 214 RESULTS 216 Nesting Biology . 2 1 6 Median Initial Nest Initiation Date 216 Nesting Rate 216 Renesting Rate 217 Initial Nest Success 218 Hen Success 218 Clutch Size and Egg Fertility/Hatchabilitv . 2 1 9 Nesting Biology among Study Sites . 2 1 9 Bobcat Ridge Hunting Club . 2 1 9 Cooks Branch Conservancy 220 Hornbeck Ranch 220 Winston 8 Ranch . 2 2 1 Nest Site Selection . 2 2 1 Nest Site Selection among Study Sites 223 Poult Survival. 223 xii Brood Home Range Size and Movements 224 Bobcat Ridge Hunting Club . 2 2 5 Cooks Branch Conservancy 226 Hornbeck Ranch 227 Winston 8 Ranch . 2 2 7 Daily Brood Movements in Relation to Cover Type . 228 Brood Habitat Selection . 2 2 8 DISCUSSION 230 Nesting Biology and Nest Site Selection . 2 3 0 Poult Survival, Brood Home Range Size and Movements, and Habitat Selection 235 MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS 240 LITERATURE CITED 273 APPENDIX 284 VITA 315 xin LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1.1 Eastern wild turkey capture/study sites in the Pineywoods Ecological Region of Texas, 2007 and 2008 53 1.2 Angelina National Forest located in Angelina, Jasper, Nacogdoches, and San Augustine counties, Texas, 2007 and 2008. 54 1.3 Angelina National Forest study site with wild turkey capture locations, Angelina and Jasper counties, Texas, 2007 and 2008. 55 1.4 Cover types of Hancock Forest Management property encompassing the Cottingham/Rocky Mount Hunting Clubs study site, Nacogdoches, County, Texas, 2008. . 56 1.5 Cover types of a minimum convex polygon encompassing 95% of all wild turkey radio locations on the Angelina National Forest study site in Angelina and Jasper counties, Texas, 2007 and 2008. 57 1.6 Cover types of a minimum convex polygon encompassing 95% of all wild turkey radio locations on the Hancock Forest Management (HFM) property encompassing the Cottingham/Rocky Mount Hunting Clubs study site in Nacogdoches County, Texas, 2008. 58 1.7 Ninety-five and 50% fixed kernel home range, nest location, and early (days 1-14 post-hatch) and late (days 15-28 post-hatch) brood locations of hen ID 40099 with cover types at the Angelina National Forest study site in Angelina and Jasper counties, Texas, 2007. 59 1.8 Ninety-five and 50% fixed kernel home range, nest location, and early (days 1-14 post-hatch) and late (days 15-28 post-hatch) brood locations of hen ID 40056 with cover types at the Cottingham/Rocky Mount Hunting Clubs study site in Nacogdoches County, Texas, 2008 60 xiv LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) Figure Page 1.9 Ninety-five and 50% fixed kernel home range, nest location, and early (days 1-14 post-hatch) and late (days 15-28 post-hatch) brood locations of hen ID 40005 with cover types at the Cottingham/Rocky Mount Hunting Clubs study site in Nacogdoches County, Texas, 2008 61 1.10 Ninety-five and 50% fixed kernel home range, nest location, and early (days 1-14 post-hatch) and late (days 15-28 post-hatch) brood locations of hen ID 40081 with cover types at the Cottingham/Rocky Mount Hunting Clubs study site in Nacogdoches County, Texas, 2008 62 2.1 Eastern wild turkey superstocking release sites in the Pineywoods Ecological Region of Texas, 2007 and 2008 127 2.2 Cover types of the Bobcat Ridge Hunting Club, Anderson County, Texas, 2007 and 2008 128 2.3 Cover types of the Cooks Branch Conservancy, Montgomery, County, Texas, 2008 129 2.4 Cover types of the Hornbeck Ranch, Houston County, Texas, 2007 and 2008 130 2.5 Cover types of the Winston 8 Ranch, Nacogdoches County, Texas, 2007 and 2008 131 2.6 Property boundary of the Bobcat Ridge Hunting Club (BRHC) (Anderson County, Texas), and cover types of a minimum convex polygon encompassing 95% of all wild turkey radio locations, 2007 and 2008. 132 2.7 Property boundary of the Cooks Branch Conservancy (CBC) (Montgomery County, Texas), and cover types of a minimum convex polygon encompassing 95% of all wild turkey radio locations, 2008. 133 xv LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) Figure Page 2.8 Property boundary of the Hornbeck Ranch (HR) (Houston County, Texas), and cover types of a minimum convex polygon encompassing 95% of all wild turkey radio locations, 2007 and 2008. 134 2.9 Property boundary of the Winston 8 Ranch (W8R) (Nacogdoches County, Texas), and cover types of a minimum convex polygon encompassing 95% of all wild turkey radio locations, 2007 and 2008. 135 3.1 Ninety-five and 50% fixed kernel home range, nest location, and early (days 1-14 post-hatch) and late (days 15-28 post-hatch) brood locations of hen ID T2544 with cover types of the Bobcat Ridge Hunting Club study area in Anderson County, Texas, 2007.. 244 3.2 Ninety-five and 50% fixed kernel home range, nest location, and early (days 1-14 post-hatch) and late (days 15-28 post-hatch) brood locations of hen ID T2575 with cover types of the Bobcat Ridge Hunting Club study area in Anderson County, Texas, 2008.. 245 3.3 Ninety-five and 50% fixed kernel home range, nest location, and early (days 1-14 post-hatch) and late (days 15-28 post-hatch) brood locations of hen ID 40474 with cover types of the Cooks Branch Conservancy study area in Montgomery County, Texas, 2008. 246 3.4 Ninety-five and 50% fixed kernel home range, nest location, and early (days 1-14 post-hatch) and late (days 15-28 post-hatch) brood locations of hen ID 40473 with cover types of the Cooks Branch Conservancy study area in Montgomery County, Texas, 2008. 247 3.5 Ninety-five and 50% fixed kernel home range, nest location, and early (days 1-14 post-hatch) and late (days 15-28 post-hatch) brood locations of hen ID 40491 with cover types of the Cooks Branch Conservancy study area in Montgomery County, Texas, 2008. 248 xvi