Geology topics

Wendy C. Vreeland

Publications and source records attributed to Wendy C. Vreeland.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2016

Retention of riveted aluminum leg bands by wild turkeys

In order for mark–recapture models to provide unbiased estimates of population parameters, it is critical that uniquely identifying tags or marks are not lost. We double-banded male and female wild turkeys with aluminum rivet bands and estimated the probability that a bird would be recovered with both bands <1–225 wk since banding (mean = 51.2 wk, SD = 44.0). We found that 100% of females ( n = 37) were recovered with both bands. For males, we recovered 6 of 188 turkeys missing a rivet band for a retention probability of 0.984 (95% CI = 0.96–0.99). If male turkeys are double-banded with rivet bands the probability of recovering a turkey without any marks is <0.001. We failed to detect a change in band retention over time or differences between adults and juveniles. Given the low cost and high retention rates of rivet aluminum bands, we believe they are an effective marking technique for wild turkeys and, for most studies, will minimize any concern about the assumption that marks are not lost.

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management↗

USGS2016

Timing of spring wild turkey hunting in relation to nest incubation

State wildlife agencies are often requested to open spring wild turkey ( Meleagris gallopavo ; hereafter, turkey) hunting seasons earlier to increase hunter satisfaction by hunters hearing more gobbling male turkeys. Timing of spring turkey hunting season in several states, including Pennsylvania, has been established to open, on average, near median date of incubation initiation of turkey nests. This is believed to reduce illegal and undesired hen harvest and possibly nest abandonment, while maintaining hunter satisfaction of hearing male turkeys when most hens are incubating eggs. However, Pennsylvania’s spring season structure was established in 1968. Given earlier spring phenology, and potentially more variation in spring weather due to climate change, there is concern that timing of nest incubation for turkeys in Pennsylvania could be changing. Therefore, our objective was to determine if nest incubation and opening of spring turkey hunting in Pennsylvania have continued to coincide. We attached satellite transmitters to 254 female turkeys during 2010–2014 and estimated median incubation initiation date to be 2 May, which was 2 days earlier than median date during a statewide study during 1953–1963 and 9 days earlier than during a smaller scale study in south–central Pennsylvania during 2000–2001. However, incubation initiation varied greatly among years and individual hens during all 3 studies. During 4 of 5 years of our study, Pennsylvania’s spring season opened 3 to 8 days prior to median date of incubation initiation. Over the 5 years, estimated initiation of incubation for first nesting attempts, measured from earliest date of incubation initiation to latest, was >2 months and maximum proportion of hens beginning incubation at any one time differed by several days to >1 week. Consequently, in years of late incubation, a constant season opening date set near the long-term median date of incubation initiation exposes few additional hens to risk and hunter satisfaction is likely maintained at greater levels than would be seen with a more conservative approach of opening the season later. Long-term and large scale studies using GPS transmitters that provide precise determination of incubation initiation will be useful to study environmental influences on initiation of incubation.

Pennsylvania↗

USGS2011

Variation in spring harvest rates of male wild turkeys in New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania

Spring harvest rates of male wild turkeys ( Meleagris gallapavo ) influence the number and proportion of adult males in the population and turkey population models have treated harvest as additive to other sources of mortality. Therefore, hunting regulations and their effect on spring harvest rates have direct implications for hunter satisfaction. We used tag recovery models to estimate survival rates, investigate spatial, temporal, and demographic variability in harvest rates, and assess how harvest rates may be related to management strategies and landscape characteristics. We banded 3,266 male wild turkeys throughout New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania during 2006–2009. We found little evidence that harvest rates varied by year or management zone. The proportion of the landscape that was forested within 6.5 km of the capture location was negatively related to harvest rates; however, even though the proportion forested ranged from 0.008 to 0.96 across our study area, this corresponded to differences in harvest rates of only 2–5%. Annual survival was approximately twice as high for juveniles as adults . In turn, spring harvest rates for adult turkeys were greater for adults than juveniles . We estimated the population of male turkeys in New York and Pennsylvania ranged from 104,000 to 132,000 in all years and ranged from 63,000 to 75,000 in Ohio. Because of greater harvest rates for adult males, the proportion of adult males in the population was less than in the harvest and ranged from 0.40 to 0.81 among all states and years. The high harvest rates observed for adults may be offset by greater recruitment of juveniles into the adult age class the following year such that these states can sustain high harvest rates yet still maintain a relative high proportion of adult males in the harvest and population.

New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania↗