This month’s BLOG is not only late – it is short and to the point.
I am proud of our Private Lands Wildlife Biologist team. We have become known as the “Quail team” but this group of biologists is so much more than that. Their capabilities have grown to include a wide array of habitat management skills across a wide range of ecosystems. And they continue to improve and broaden their capabilities. It is hard to believe they have been working with us for almost 8 years now. Many of them are playing key roles in the quail world.
Most recent examples include leading a major marketing strategy for the Communications Subcommittee of the National Bobwhite Technical Committee, and playing key roles in the design of the Natural Resources Conservation Service’s Working Lands for Wildlife Program’s new Cattle and Quail Initiative for Virginia – providing a template for many other states involved. They called themselves the B.I.G. Team – for Bobwhites in Grasslands. The link provided with this BLOG will take you to their latest edition of the Bobwhite Bulletin. It speaks for itself. We hope you enjoy it.
This year our team was lucky enough to be able to attend the Quail 8 Symposium in Knoxville, Tennessee. It was held in conjunction with the annual meeting of the National Bobwhite Technical Committee and heavily supported by the National Bobwhite Conservation Initiative, the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency and the University of Tennessee, Knoxville (a nice job to all involved!). The Quail Symposium Series is held only once every 5 years. It is said that the bobwhite quail is one of the most studied animals in the annals of wildlife science. I don’t know how to verify that, but in this year’s symposium series there are 94 manuscripts from 72 authors. Most of the general public and most quail hunters do not know about all this work. But it is the job of project leaders like me all across the bobwhite’s range to read, participate and understand the latest in quail science and get it to you.
Translocating Wild Quail
I am often asked why we do not actively translocate bobwhite quail like we have done with turkeys, deer, bears and other species to speed up re-population efforts. The truth is we have tried it here in Virginia back in the late 1990s. And it has been tried in multiple states with varying degrees of success (or failure in many cases). Over a 50- year period about 900 wild turkeys were relocated in Virginia. This took a lot of work and it was successful in many cases.
One of the first differences between quail and turkeys is that there were millions of acres of turkey habitat into which to transport turkeys. Another big difference shown by modern research is that it takes far more quail to engender a response than it does turkeys, or deer, or bears. The synthesis of the best information available today states that in order to successfully repopulate an area with quail: 1) the area must be at least 1,500 acres of very good quail habitat; 2) target bobwhite population at the end of the translocation period should be about 800 quail. This is accomplished by translocation of 100 wild quail per year for 3 years and then hoping for good reproduction from those translocated individuals, 3) some wild quail should be present on the site before any translocation occurs, 4) and source populations should be disease free and obtained from as close a source as possible (Martin et.al – 2017).
There is more, but I hope this illustrates that translocating wild quail effectively will be an intense process that will only work well in select settings. We are exploring the possibilities in Virginia, and it is in our future, but we will do it right or not at all.
Many landowners struggle with assessing their quail populations. Traditionally, some form of June whistling male counts are used to track trends. In the last decade the practice of using fall morning covey counts became the gold standard. This method allowed a very solid assessment just prior to hunting season, and could be used to adjust harvest levels on individual properties.
The fall method tends to be more time and labor intensive than June whistle counts. A study was conducted to assess whether June whistling male counts could be correlated to fall density (Sisson and Terhune. 2017). The study showed that: “Peak number of males heard in spring and number of coveys heard in autumn were strongly correlated for all points combined; indicating that spring whistle counts are a reliable tool for assessing bobwhite relative abundance on sites where autumn covey counts are precluded or the information is needed before autumn.”
Landowners who are interested in learning how to do June call counts on their properties should contact us. It is fairly simple and we can talk you through it.
Finding Quail in the Field
One often hears quail hunters lamenting how tough it is to find quail, even in areas where they know there are quail. A study using radio-collared quail coveys, led by Tall Timbers Research Station, showed that, on average, good pointing dogs only cover enough area within a given property to have a chance of detecting about 52% of available coveys (Terhune et al. 2017). The overall probability of a dog finding a covey is about 38%. I interpret this to mean hunters should more thoroughly cover the grounds they hunt, particularly when they believe “quail should be there.”
I understand to train and keep a dog in birds now-a-days often means hunting pen-raised quail. But a study conducted in Kentucky suggests that when hunters have become accustomed to hunting pen-raised quail, their expectations when hunting wild quail may be unrealistic (Orange et al. 2017). Using radioed wild coveys and pen-raised coveys on public lands, it was demonstrated that hunters found only 29% percent of wild coveys. And they were 8.6 times more likely to find pen-raised coveys. This suggests that hunters pursuing wild quail must be educated about the differences in detection rates and expectations should be realistic to maintain support for wild quail restoration on public hunting lands.
And what about eye worms? No, they do not look like eyes, but they are often found in a quail’s eyes, especially in Texas. Over the last few years there has been a great deal of publicity surrounding eye worms being detected at high levels in Texas quail. Our quail hunters often asked me about eye worms in Virginia’s quail, so we reached out to Dr. Dale Rollins and his team in Texas to help us examine some Virginia quail. Their study, surprisingly, did find some eye worms in Virginia’s quail (Kubečka et al. 2017). Eye worms were detected at rates of 59.1% in Texas, 52.1% in Oklahoma, 14.8% in Virginia (4 out of 27 submitted – low sample size) and 1.6% in Alabama. They were non-existent in other states tested. There were also many more eye worms per quail in Texas. Of the 4 that had eye worms in Virginia, only 1 or 2 worms were detected, where as many 109 were detected in one Texas quail. While at Quail 8, Dr. Rollins team (THANKS!) gave us a hands-on class in how to examine quail for eye worms and we will be examining about 250 more heads collected by hunters here last year But currently we do not believe eye worms are an issue in Virginia. Texas is still working on the situation there.
… just some of what we learned at Quail 8 while working 12 to 14 hour days on behalf of bobwhites.
Sources all came from this year’s Quail 8 Proceedings.
- Martin, R. Applegate, T. Dailey, M. Downey, B. Emmerich, F. Hernández, M. McConnell, K. Reyna, R. Ruzicka, and T. Terhune, II. 2017. Translocation as a population restoration technique for northern bobwhites: a review and synthesis.
- Clay Sisson and Theron Terhune, II. 2017. Use of spring whistle counts to predict northern bobwhite relative abundance.
- Terhune, II, D. McGrath, S. Wood, and J. Martin. 2017. Hunter-Covey interactions using pointing bird dogs.
- Orange, J. Yeiser, D. Baxley, J. Morgan, and B. Robinson. 2017. Evaluating hunting success of pen-reared and wild northern bobwhite in a reclaimed Kentucky mineland.
- Kubečka, A. Bruno, and D. Rollins. 2017. Geographic survey of Oxyspirura petrowi among wild northern bobwhite in the United States.
The federal farm bill’s Conservation Title provides the nation’s single largest source of money and technical assistance for quail habitat restoration. The periodic reauthorization of the federal farm bill provides an opportunity for quail enthusiasts to advocate for improved bobwhite habitat on private lands. The 2014 farm bill is scheduled to be reauthorized in 2018 and our elected leaders are already making decisions about its conservation features.
Thanks to support from Park Cities Quail, a Texas-based sportsman’s conservation organization, the NBCI is engaged actively in advocating three top farm bill priorities for quail habitat restoration and management:
Natives First – NBCI’s signature, game-changing initiative would establish a native vegetation standard as the default choice for all USDA conservation programs. Natives First would curtail the longstanding USDA practice of subsidizing invasive exotic forages and other introduced vegetation, such as K-31 fescue, Bermuda grass, and old-world bluestems.
Short-term rotational CRP –this concept, a variation of which is already being piloted as an Iowa SAFE practice, would establish a habitat management technique for CRP that would foster better quality quail brooding habitat over a longer portion of CRP contracts. This concept also would also relieve landowners of the need to implement “mid-contract management” provisions on affected acres in many CRP contracts.
Forest thinning/burning incentives – Across the majority of bobwhite range, forest management provides some of the best bobwhite habitat restoration opportunity. Incentives are needed to assist landowners to thin forests to allow development of a native grass understory followed by frequent prescribed fire to create ideal bobwhite savanna habitat in forested landscapes.
The NBCI is taking every opportunity to inform Congress about these quail-friendly policies that should be included in the farm bill. So far, we have advocated them at the following meetings and events.
- Testimony for the record of a June 29 US Senate Agriculture Committee hearing concerning conservation and forestry.
- A June 30 NBCI—hosted Congressional tour of quail habitat management, aimed at informing decision makers about farm bill policies needed to achieve quality habitat restoration for quail, grassland birds and pollinators. Congressional staff, wildlife conservation organizations and USDA officials attended the tour, at Chino Farms on the Eastern Shore of Maryland, the site of the state’s highest bobwhite density. They now have a high degree of awareness about the value of native grassland restoration enabled by farm bill programs.
- Dale Rollins spoke to the July 31 US House of Representatives farm bill listening session in San Angelo, Texas. Dr. Rollins, representing NBCI and the Rolling Plains Quail Research Foundation, began his testimony with the “Bob-White” call, followed by very pointed comments referring to the bobwhite as the “canary of the prairie.” Dr. Rollins explained to the Chairman of the House Agriculture and other Representatives that the bobwhite is a surrogate for many other species of wildlife and pollinators that are indicators of quality habitat. He emphasized the importance of a native vegetation policy and the need to make CRP and the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) more beneficial to quail and other wildlife.
So the NBCI is working diligently to spread the word about bobwhite needs on private lands and as elements of the farm bill. We urge all who care about wild quail and quail habitat to reach out to your elected representatives and support NBCI’s farm bill priorities. Contact information for all Members of Congress may be found at the following link: https://www.c-span.org/congress/members/
Producing one to three million seeds per acre and remaining viable for what is thought to be up to 20 years in the soil, the seed rain alone creates an ever-abundant seed bank. Once established, plants will reduce or eliminate competing vegetation through shading, competition for water and nutrients and allelopathy. Introduced in 1896 at the North Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station to be tested as an agricultural crop, sericea lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata) also known as Chinese lespedeza or Chinese bushclover, made its first recorded entry into the United States. In 1924, the US Department of Agriculture, using seed from Japan, planted it at the Arlington Experiment Farm in Virginia. Sericea lespedeza was commonly used for ground cover in mine reclamations and road construction particularly due to its adaptability to poor soil conditions. In the 1940’s USDA and many state agencies promoted sericea for forage, hay and wildlife food and cover. Reported in 2005, by C.A. Duncan, et al, Invasive plants of range and wildlands and their environmental, economic, and societal impacts, the estimated coverage of sericea lespedeza was 8.6 million acres in 2003. The authors also reported from a study site in Kansas that between the years 1989 – 2003, sericea had increased at a rate of 24% annually. I do not contend that the rate of increase is 24% annually range-wide, but it does demonstrate that sericea lespedeza has the capacity to overwhelm natural systems rapidly. Sericea is best adapted to areas of 30 inches of rainfall or greater and is tolerant of minimum temperatures down to -15◦ F. Figure 1 shows the approximate area of adaptation, though it is known to exist outside of the area indicated, however in limited distribution.
If you don’t have sericea your best strategy is to be diligent about scouting and treat it as soon as you see it. You can’t do much about the natural source of spread by animals, but be mindful of the human sources of spread. Cars, trucks, farm equipment all can capture seeds in the nooks and crannies then fall out to infest unoccupied areas. Mowing and haying equipment are particularly susceptible, miles and miles of highway rights of way have been contaminated by mowing after seed set. Thoroughly clean any equipment that has been in sericea infested fields. Pay attention to hay being hauled in, when buying, insist that it be sericea free. Don’t buy cattle from sericea infested pastures or farms. Seeds can be entangled in their coats and also pass through their systems to be deposited with manure.
When buying forage or habitat seed, relying on the seed tag analysis may not be enough. Depending upon what state you are in, sericea lespedeza may or may not be listed. It is a state noxious weed in Kansas and Colorado so it is required by law to be listed. Other states, under the “Weed Seed” section of the tag, may list it while in other states it may just be part of the percentage of unknown “Weed Seed” and unlisted. Also check the “Other Crop Seed” section of the tag as some seed companies commercially sell it. It is best to specifically ask if the seed vendor guarantees it to be free of sericea lespedeza seed. I would avoid buying native grass or other seed from any vendor who sells sericea lespedeza seed for fear of cross contamination.
If you have sericea lespedeza, controlling it is a challenge and a never-ending task. Even if you can eliminate established plants and seedlings, one study deduced that spring germinating seed may only represent 1% of the total soil-stored seeds. Based on that estimation, once you have it, you can plan on having it essentially forever.
Grazing, mowing, burning, hand weeding and herbicide provide varying degrees of control, better called suppression. In most instances an integrated approach will yield the best results.
Grazing – For the most part, livestock do not graze sericea due to its high tannin content, or it is among the least preferred so last to be grazed. The regrowth of sericea following a burn is palatable and grazed but quickly grows beyond palatability, likewise early emerging plants are grazed too, however if residual stems from the previous year persist, cattle are less likely to graze it. Some exceptions are in high stock density grazing systems, when cattle are forced to graze it – and may be a good strategy for management. Most studies report that sericea does not increase under grazing. Also, note that goats and sheep seem to do fine with sericea.
Mowing – Mowing during bloom does nothing to weaken the plant but it does prohibit it from going to seed, for the most part. Often, mowed plants will re-bloom and attempt to produce seed. If you have a late frost, they may produce viable seed. Mowing when carbohydrate reserves are low can help reduce vigor and annual mowing can reduce the stand, assuming you are also mowing during bloom to prevent seed-set. Lowest carbohydrate reserves are typically early-summer, after green up in spring. Continued mowing during the summer will continue to stress the plants and reduce their vigor.
Burning – Timing of prescribed fire has varying impacts on sericea lespedeza and can increase plant density and vigor. Spring burning stimulates sericea, which if done by itself is not a good strategy. Burning helps scarify seeds and stimulate germination, however if done in conjunction with other methods such as herbicide, grazing or mowing, can be effective. Burned plants are more palatable and burning removes residual stems which inhibit grazing. Because burning stimulates a flush of new seedlings, herbicide treatments following can help reduce the seed bank pressure while also eliminating established plants. The same principles for mowing following burning apply as listed above. Recent research conducted in the Great Plains have shown a reduction in sericea lespedeza with repeated annual growing season burns conducted when sericea is in peak bloom. It should be noted that successive burns may not be possible with heavy infestations of sericea due to lack of ground level fuel to carry the fire.
Hand weeding – Hand weeding is only effective for new seedlings. Established plants have a significant tap root and are next to impossible to pull out of the ground. Hand weeding would only apply to very minimal plant infestations on a very small scale due to the labor intensity.
Herbicide – Herbicide as a stand-alone practice is probably the most efficient but it has its drawbacks. Herbicides that are specific to sericea lespedeza do not exist. The common and less expensive broadleaf herbicides, (2,4-D, dicamba, picloram) are not effective. Glyphosate can be used but is not recommended because it is non-selective. Triclopyr, metsulfuron and triclopyr plus fluroxypyr are the most effective and cost efficient, but still expect chemical cost to be between the upper teens to low twenties per acre. All three have slightly different specifics about their use in relation to their rate and timing of application. In many cases broadcast applications are not desirable due to the presence of other favorable forbs and off-target damage, while spot applications are more targeted they can also result in off-target damage and are more time consuming. Broadcast applications are best suited for heavy infestations or in stands without forbs. Spot application works well for scattered plants or where other sensitive, desirable plants occur such as remnant prairie or in pollinator plantings.
An integrated approach to sericea suppression provides the best results. Combining burning with grazing, mowing or herbicides significantly reduces the population. In organic systems, burning with grazing and/or mowing can provide acceptable results.
The “take home” points:
- If you don’t have sericea lespedeza do everything you can to keep from getting it.
- If it shows up, get on it immediately, don’t wait for it to get to a threshold level before implementing management.
- Once you have sericea lespedeza, you are always going to have it.
- Be diligent in your sericea management strategy, don’t skip a year. You may be able to lessen effort in certain years based on plant population but don’t skip a year.
- Use an integrated approach for best results.
Get mad, no, get angry at sericea lespedeza and attack it with a vengeance and don’t let up. It certainly isn’t going to let up on its invasion. Heinous invader.
Hot cannon metal under my hands, I peered down the barrel and across the open lands to where the Union troops under General John Pope poured from the wood line and into the hail of artillery from 36 Confederate cannons on Battery Heights not far from the Brawner House. It was on the afternoon of the 3rd day of the battle, on August 30th, 1862, that these cannon played the decisive role in the Second Battle of Manassas, (Bull Run). On this day, August 1, nearly 155 years later, I stood on the ground where over 3,000 men died in combat all those years before.
I had slipped away from our group of biologists, having seen a rail fence on the ridgeline, my one moment of digression during this quail habitat monitoring workshop. Once there and seeing the cannon I had to take a closer look. I don’t believe in ghosts, but I do believe in souls. Closing my eyes for a brief moment a chill went down my spine and my eyes misted. I believe wherever we travel a small part of us stays behind forever. For an instant I felt the same fear and exhilaration those men on that fateful day felt. What goes through a man’s mind when he charges headlong into such carnage? The rest as they say is history and what is arguably one of the most important events in the story of humankind ended 100 miles to the south in Appomattox less than 3 years afterwards (though we are still trying to heal some of those old wounds).
I doubt those men could have had even the slightest inkling of how much change would occur over those next 150 years. The constant sounds of commercial airliners approaching Dulles International Airport, or Reagan National Airport served as the backdrop for most of our day in the field. Traffic on the nearby highways was never ending. Yet Manassas National Battlefield Park (NBP) serves as a unique oasis for wildlife in the middle of a metropolis. With over 5,000 acres of habitat, wildlife thrives. And yes, even the bobwhite quail remains – largely due to the extraordinary efforts of the Manassas NBP staff.
Think about that for a second. In one of the most human dominated landscapes in America, with enough land and the right habitat management, bobwhite quail can find a way to win. If this does not give you hope for bobwhites, or convince you that habitat does work, there is not much more I can say to you, or is there?
And this was one of the primary reasons our group of about 25 biologists gathered at Manassas NBP earlier this week. We were there to practice conducting habitat monitoring as part of the National Bobwhite Conservation Initiative’s Coordinated Implementation Program (CIP). Developed by the science subcommittee of the National Bobwhite Technical Committee among others (our own Jay Howell played a key role), the CIP will prove to be the largest coordinated monitoring effort ever undertaken for bobwhites (and several songbirds, too.) Virginia was proudly one of the first seven pilot states. The number of states now involved has soared to 21 and at some point we hope all 25 NBTC states will come on board.
But why do all this?
No matter how hard biologists stress that while other factors may play a role in bobwhite decline habitat loss is still the driving factor, many people simply did not believe us. Further, though many states did have evidence of habitat’s effectiveness, each state did their own thing and trying to compare survey results was like comparing anvils and kitchen knives. Beyond being made of metal, they do not have much in common.
All states participating in the CIP will be using the same methods to monitor habitat and bird response. Further, they will use the CIP to layout and design their focal areas. The monitoring protocol is designed to work across the vast array of ecoregions where quail occur. Take a deep breath and then think about the power of this program. Potentially 25 or more focal areas across 25 states all replicating the same methods and analyzing their results to form a massive data set that will answer this question once and for all. But the CIP is more than a monitoring program; it is a catalyst for quail habitat work and partnerships.
Witness how the National Park Service (NPS) has embraced this program (along with others like the U.S. Forest Service). The first official NPS CIP Focal area was Pea Ridge National Military Park in Arkansas and they are smack in the middle of implementing their focal area. Their staff came to Virginia this week to help their peers at Manassas NBP. In addition to the Pea Ridge staff, our group this week included key national staff from NBCI, national level NPS staff, Manassas NBP key staff and field biologists, staff from Chickasaw National Recreation Area in Oklahoma, a West Virginia DNR quail program biologist, a Quail Forever coordinator from South Carolina who is leading their focal area, a biologist from Virginia Working Landscapes, a teacher (our instructor this week) from Northwest Arkansas Community College, and our own VDGIF staff.
Ours was the second of such training workshops, the first being in Kentucky last year and more are already scheduled. I won’t ramble on anymore today about the CIP, but I hope that for those of you who feel not enough is being done for quail, we are doing more for them now than at any time in history. You will be hearing more about the CIP and I believe it will lead to you hearing more quail in the future.
Having been an infantry soldier, I know what those Civil War soldiers were thinking about when they were baking with sweat streaked faces in the hot summer dust, or freezing to death in the dank winter mud, the only intangible thing holding them to that particular spot on earth being their own honor. They thought about simple things … a home-cooked meal shared slowly around a table with good conversation, a clean, dry and safe place to sleep, the rhythmic sounds of summer katydids on a moonlit night or the sound of a bird coming from the fence lines at least as peaceful as the call of the mourning dove. Softly at first, “bob-BOB-WHITE,” …“bob-BOB-WHITE,”…”it’s ALL RIGHT,”…it’s ALL RIGHT” – I’m still breathing in and out.