Pheasant Nesting on Soil Bank Land in Northern Utah

Abstract

Pheasant (Phssiarlus colchicus) nesting use of soil bank land was observed on a 37719-acre dryland study area in northern Utah during 1964 and 1965. A projected 85 percent of all successful nests were produced on 43 percent of the area retired under the Conservation Reserve Program of the Soil Bank. Absence of nests both years on sample plots in grainfields suggests low nesting use of this type which, together with summer fallow, comprised 41 percent of the area. Recommendations for future land retirement programs in similar dryland situations include early developing plant species and provision for residual cover carry-over for early nesting, long-term contracts, and emphasis within established pheasant range. 1020 Journal of Wildlife Management, Vol. 33> No. 4, October 1969 the Maritime Provinces. Forest Research Branch, Canada Dept. Forestry, Ottawa. 167pp. MAcDoNALD, D. R. 19%. Summary statements on the entomological assessment of the 1966 spruce budwoIm aerial spraying program in New Brunswick and forecast conditions for 1967. Unpublished report. Forest Research Lab., Dept. Fisheries and Forestry, Fredericton, New Brunswick. 12pp. Mimeo. RITCEY, R. W., AND R. Y. EDWARDS. 1963. Grouse abundance and June temperatures in Wells Gray Park, British Columbia. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 27 ( 4 ): 604-606. SIIVONEN, L. 1957. The problem of the shortterm fluctuations in numbers of tetranoids in Europe. Finnish Game FoundatioIl Papers on Game Research 19, Helsinki. 44pp. SNEDECOR, G. W. 1956. Statistical methods applied to experiments in agriculture and biology. The Iowa State University Press Ames. 534pp. WRIGHT, B. S. 1960. Woodcock reproduction in DDT-sprayed areas of New Brunswick. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 24(4):419420. . 19B5. 50me effects of heptachlor and DDT on New Brunswick woodcocks. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 29(1 ) :17b18S. Received for publicatuvn July 8, 1968. In Utah, the Conservation Reserve Program of the Soil Bank resulted in 215,657 acres of cropland being retired from pro1 Study financed by the Utah Division of Fish and Game, Utah State University, Wildlife Management Institute, and the Bureau of Sports Fisheries and Wildlife through the Utah Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit. 2 Present address: Little Hills Game Experiment Station, Meeker, Colorado 81641. duction and placed in alternate uses primarily grasses and legumes (U. S. Department of Agriculture 1964:21). Nearly all of this land was dry-fanned, and although Utah's pheasant range aligns closely with irrigation, there is overlap onto adjacent dry-farm areas. During 19 and 1965, pheasant nesting on soil bank land was investigated in a dryLITERATURE CITED DANE, C. W. 19(36. Some aspects of breeding biology of the blue-winged teal. Auk 83(3): 38>402. DORNEY, R. S., AND C. KABAT. 1960. Relation of weather, parasitic disease and hunting to Wisconsin ruffed grouse populations. Wisconsin Conserv. Dept., Tech. Bull. 20. 64pp. EDMINSTER, F. G. 1947. The ruffed grouse its life story, ecology and management. The Macmillan Company, New York. 38Spp. FINLEY, R. B.> JR. l965. Adverse effects on birds of phosphamidon applied to a Montana forest. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 29(3):580-591. HALE, J. B., R. F. WEN1Wr, AND G. C. HALAZON. 1954. Sex and age criteria for Wisconsin ruffed grouse. Wisconsin Conserv. Dept., Tech. Wildl. Bull. 9. 24pp. HALLIDAY, W. E. D. 1937. A forest classification for Canada. Dept. Mines and Resources, Ottawa. Forest Serv. Bull. 89. S0pp. HOFFMAN, R. S., R. G. JANSON, AND F. HARTKORN. 1958. E:ffect on grouse populations of DDT spraying for spruce budworm. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 22(1):9b93. LARSEN, J. A., AND J. F. LAHEY. 1958. Influence of weather upon a ruffed grouse population. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 22(1 ) :6>10. LOUCKS, O. L. 1w2. A forest classification for This content downloaded from 157.55.39.223 on Wed, 24 Aug 2016 05:05:37 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms PHEASANT NESTING ON SOIL BANK LAND * Bartmann 1021 farming district to provide a basis for recommendations concerning future landretirement programs in portions of the intermountain region. Previous studies of pheasant-soil bank relationships were made by Schrader ( 1959 ), Fouch ( 1983 ), and Trautman ( Ross 1965 ) . Appreciation is extended L. H. Davis, J. M. Neuhold, and A. W. Stokes, Utah State University, for suggestions during the study, and to J. B. Low and J. J. Spillettn Utah Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, for editorial assistance.