George A. Hurst

Habitat use of eastern wild turkeys in central Mississippi

Most past studies of wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) habitat use were limited to 1 spatial scale. were of short duration, and had not simultaneously examined habitat use by both sexes. We used compositional analysis to describe habitat use of an castern wild turkey (M. g silvestris) population in central Mississippi at 3 spatial scales (study area, home range, within home range). We conducted the study on the 14,410-ha Tallahala Wildlife Management Area (TWMA), which was composed of hardwood, pine, and pine-hardwood stands of various ages. Overall, turkevs of both sexes preferred pine and hardwood sawtimber most, and poletimber stands least Throughout the vear, females primarily used hardwood sawtimber stands, but males tended to use pine sawtimber. Habital use by females during preincubation may have influenced subsequent nest success. Habitat use at 3 spatial scales was similar and was reflective of the adaptable nature of wild turkeys and the high degree of habitat heterogencity on the study area.

Habitat selection models for eastern wild turkeys in central Mississippi.

Few quantitative models of habitat use exist for eastern wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo silvestris). We used logistic regression to build and cross-validate sex- and season-specific multivariate models of habitat selection for wild turkeys in central Mississippi. We examined 4 models: successfully nesting and unsuccessfully nesting females during preincubation, spring males, and summer males. Preincubation females were associated with riparian corridors, perhaps to travel from bottomland areas to upland nesting sites. During preincubation, successfully nesting females were more closely associated with potential nesting habitat than unsuccessfully nesting females. Habitat selection by males during spring corresponded with habitat use of females. During summer, males were nonselective in their habitat choices. Models developed were consistent with and complemented data from previous studies on this area. Our modeling procedure may be useful for other studies of wild turkey habitat selection. We recommend using habitat models in conjunction with habitat use analyses (e.g., use versus availability) to maximize information gained from habitat selection studies. Habitat management for turkeys in a predominantly forested area should include maintenance of riparian corridors and habitat diversity, with a preponderance of mature (>40-yr-old) timber stands, and a 3-4-year burning rotation in mature pine stands.

Survival rates of wild Turkey hens in loblolly pine plantations in Mississippi

Information on survival rates of wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) hens in the Southeast is limited particularly on areas dominated by pine (Pinus spp.) plantations. Because wildlife managers are concerned about the effect of increasing pine plantation acreage in the Southeast and the implications of autumn either- sex harvests on turkey populations, we determined annual and seasonal survival rates of 111 transmitter- equipped hens from 1 January 1987 until 31 December 1990 in Kemper County, Mississippi. Annual survival averaged 68.3% and ranged from 49.9 to 81.0%. Seasonal survival averaged 92.5 (SE = 0.24), 81.4 (SE = 0.37), 96.7 (SE = 0.18), and 93.8% (SE = 0.27) for winter (Jan-Mar), spring (Apr-Jun), summer (Jul-Sep), and autumn (Oct-Dec), respectively

Survival and cause-specific mortality of wild turkey hens in central Mississippi

Most studies of hen survival of eastern wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo silvestris) have been of short duration ( 0.05). During years of high survival, survival rates of NRA and RA hens did not differ (P > 0.05). Preincubation and fall-winter interval survival rates did not differ within years (P > 0.05). Predation was the primary mortality factor, whereas illegal kill was low. Nesting hens experienced higher predation than NRA hens during years of low (P = 0.009) and medium survival (P < 0.021). Survival cost of reproduction associated with nesting was low but unknown for brood-rearing hens.

Reproductive characteristics of a wild turkey population in central Mississippi

Long-term investigations into wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) reproduction are needed to allow for annual fluctuations, illuminate trends not evident from short-term data, and provide data for effective sustainable management of the wild turkey resource. We used 13 years (1984-96) of continuous data to estimate reproductive parameters of a wild turkey population in central Mississippi. Mean rates of reproductive parameters were 72.3% for first-nest initiation rates, 27.9% for first-nest success, 34.8% for renest initiation, and 24.6% for renest success. Median date of incubation ranged from 12 April to 1 May. Juvenile hens did not contribute to reproduction. Hen success declined significantly over time and reflected a decreasing population. Most (51.1%) nest failures were attributed to predation. Poult survival until late July-August was 25.5%. Winter weather did not influence reproductive parameters, and hen experience did not increase nest success. Mean hen success for this population was the lowest reported for any eastern wild turkey (M. g. silvestris) population. Low hen success via lack of productivity from renest attempts, lack of juvenile hen reproduction, and low nest success may have contributed to the population decline. A simplistic population model indicated that, given current reproduction and hen survival, maintaining wild turkeys as a closed population on our area is doubtful.

Chronology of Wild Turkey Nesting, Gobbling, and Hunting in Mississippi

Setting dates of spring hunting for wild turkey (Meleagris gallopaco) gobblers often is based on the belief that 2 peaks of gobbling occur, with the second peak occurring during peak incubation by hens. The second peak offers hunters opportunities to hear gobblers while protecting hens from inadvertent kill. We examined chronology of gobbling, hunter numbers, harvest and nesting within the framework of a long, liberal spring gobbler-only hunting season in central Mississippi during 1984-95. Distribution of gobbler harvest versus initiation of incubation, and hunter numbers versus incubation initiation differed in all years; distribution of gobblers heard versus initiation of incubation differed during all years except 1995. Distributional relations among hunter numbers, harvest, and gobblers heard varied among years. Gobblers heard versus harvest, and hunter numbers versus harvest were distributed differently during some years. Only 1 gobbling peak occurred. This lone peak of gobbling was not associated with peak of incubation. Gobbling activity may have been influenced by break up of winter flocks, initiation of egg-laying, and mating opportunities.

Determining effective study area size from marked and harvested wild turkey gobblers

Study area boundaries often are delineated by subjective methods without considering animal movements and behavior and may result in inaccurate density estimates and incorrect research conclusions. Consequently, we delineated study area boundaries for use with capture-recapture models to calculate density estimates of wild turkey gobblers (Meleagris gallopavo). From january to March, 1984-89, 189 gobblers were captured by cannon-net or drug at 38 permanent bait sites in central Mississippi. Fifty-six marked gobblers were harvested from 17-19 March to 1 May 1984-89. As distance from bait sites increased, proportion of unmarked gobblers to marked gobblers increased