2014 TSSRM President John Walker and Dr. Timothy Fulbright

Texas Section Society for Rangeland Management U2014 Publication Award – Special Category

Fidel Hernández and Fred S. Guthery

Special Category: Fidel Hernández and Fred S. Guthery “Beef, Brush, and Bobwhites Quail Management in Cattle Country”

S3 -

'=+

5

a

CD

TABLE 1.2. Population trends (%/year) of northern bobwhite for select areas

REGION 1966-1979 1980-2007 1966-2007Examples Trend No. routes Trend No. routes Trend No. routes

MIDWEST

IllinoisIowaMissouri

SOUTHEAST

GeorgiaFloridaSouth Carolina

SOUTHWEST

KansasOklahomaTexas

TEXAS

Red RollingPlainsSouth TexasBrushlands

-6.8

-1.4

-2.5

-2.0

-1-5

-2.7

-1.2

-0.4

3-3

2-7

5-9

56

27

37

54

3520

34

33

97

11

17

-1-7-2.8

-3-7

-5-2-4.1

-5-2

-2.O

-3-2

-4-3

-2.8

-3-5

90

2964

77

75

35

58

59

173

25

30

Based on Breeding Bird Survey data of the U.S. Geological Survey,

-1.9

-3-4-2.6

-4-4-3-6

-4-9

-1.6

-1-5

-2.3

-0.5

-1-5

1966-2007.

92

3166

78

78

39

5860

178

26

30

Red Rolling PlainsSouth Texas Brushlands

120 -

100 -

o 80 -

o 60 -

f 40 '

20 -

0 •

120 -Ia

\0 -

™ a 9 3 80 -Y . A N is, , /' I

\ \ \ \ / \^ , \ 60

^ ^ ^ V ^ ^^ ^° ? 40 -B <

20 •

n .

9

/\ V\A, A M ,y \ ka / ̂

id °

1967 1972 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002 2007 1967 1972 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002 2007

(b) Year (c) Year

Figure 1.4. Population trends of northern bobwhite for (a) United States, (b) Red Rolling Plains (Texas and Oklahoma), and (c) SouthTexas Brushlands. (Breeding Bird Survey, U.S. Geological Survey)

22 C H A P T E R T W O

75% of the food eaten. Although food generally is not limiting for bobwhitesunder normal circumstances, these food species can become scarce because ofdrought, overgrazing, or undergrazing. Then your bobwhites' condition maybecome poor, or they will maintain lower numbers than you desire. This possi-bly occurred in the Rio Grande Plains during the fall of 2007. Abundant rainfallduring the spring and summer created lush conditions that promptly becamedense, rank vegetation during fall when drought began. Few bobwhites werefound during that fall and winter in pastures with such dense vegetation, par-ticularly those where grazing had been light. Most bobwhites harvested fromthese areas had little or no visible fat around the crop area.

In general, however, bobwhites will be well fed in most years if your rangeprovides 4 or more of the following foods.

Ragweeds

A biologist once developed a bobwhite management plan for a small ranch innorth-central Texas. While touring the pastures with the owners, he asked themto stop at a "hotspot" where a pile of mesquite trees had burned. A good stand ofwestern ragweed had developed on the burned area.

"Here," the biologist said to the owners, "is one of the best bobwhite foodplants in Texas."

Figure 2.10. (a) Ragweed is an important food-producing plantfor bobwhites throughout Texas, (b) It produces a lantern-shopedseed that is high in energy. (Photograph a by Forrest 5. Smith;h by Jimothy E. fulbright)

44 C H A P T E R F O U R

V ' -. '** , ' .

Figure 4.2. These drawings give a bird's-eyeview of 1 acre that has 5% coverage by brushcanopies. The acre on the right has more smallbrush plants and thus appears "brushier"than the acre on the left. Either pattern maybe acceptable to bobwhites. Their minimumrequirement is about 5% brush coverage ifgrasses and forbs provide good screening cover.

•

Figure 4.3. These drawings give a bird's-eyeview of 1 acre that has 15% coverage by brush.Pastures with 15% coverage can be grazed moreheavily and still be usable for bobwhites thanpastures with 5% coverage. This occurs becausethe functional value of brush and herbaceousvegetation is somewhat interchangeable.

Figure 4.4. These drawings give a bird's-eyeview of 1 acre that has 25% coverage by brushcanopies. This coverage is suitable for bobwhites,but it may be too much cover for hunters andranchers alike. However, small patches of denserbrush are useful to bobwhites.

flushed, landed at points with about 2o%-6o% brush cover. The brush coversurrounding the points from which they flushed also fell within this range. Inaddition, research has indicated that the percentage of brush cover within a bob-white's home range can be about io%-i5%.

The fact that bobwhites use this higher amount of brush does not mean thatyou have to provide this amount across the entire pasture for them to exist. ValW. Lehmann reported densities of i bobwhite/2 acres where brush covered only2.5%-5.o% of the pasture. We have measured i bobwhite/2 acres in a pasturewith about 1.5% brush coverage and ample mid- to tall grasses. Recall that theamount of brush that bobwhites need varies according to a variety of factors.

Brush Management 49

this case, the block simply transforms into a rectangle and begins looking morelike a strip the longer the block becomes.

If you must treat larger areas in square dimensions that exceed 0.25 miles perside, it is important to leave mottes within blocks or intersperse new treatmentswith old treatments and untreated areas. Scatter the treatments in different pas-tures throughout the ranch. This may not be best for bobwhites, but it will main-tain a diversity of habitats and, depending on the condition of your ranch beforebrush control, may result in slightly increased numbers of birds.

During the late 19905, Dale Rollins introduced a new term relative to brushmanagement and wildlife: brush sculpting. Brush sculpting requires a finer-res-olution approach to brush management than do strips or blocks. It involves thesculpting of a landscape from one with general brush coverage to one that fitsthe specific needs of wildlife, in our case, bobwhites. Humans find brush sculpt-ing more aesthetically appealing than strips or blocks.

A good brush-sculpting pattern for bobwhites may be to have smaller, moreclosely spaced coverts (e.g., clusters of individual lotebushes [Ziziphus obtusi-folia]) interspersed within a matrix of larger, farther-spaced brush mottes (e.g.,chittam thickets). The smaller coverts can be about 3-4 yards in diameter, eachspaced every 50 yards; and the larger mottes can be about 10-20 yards in diame-ter spaced every 300 yards. Brush sculpting tends to be more expensive than themore coarse-resolution brush patterns. Under usable-space management, how-ever, there is no reason to expect higher densities of bobwhites under sculptingin comparison with less aesthetic methods if the resulting brush pattern of eitherapproach meets the needs of bobwhites.

Figure 4.8. Different brush patterns can meet the habitat needs of bobwhitesbecause of slack. However, some brush patterns may be easier to implement,less expensive, or more useful in livestock or wildlife operations. Examplesof brush patterns include (a) strip motte, (b) strip motte in a checkerboardpattern, and (c) brush sculpting. (Photographs by Marc Bartoskewitz)

Water, Predators, and Pen-Raised Bobwhites 103

Figure 7.2. Bobwhites often can be observed drinking from standing water, particularly during hot summer days. However, researchindicates that bobwhites are able to meet their water demand from diet alone. (Photograph by Steve Bentsen)

that the answer again is yes. Even during droughty years in the Rio GrandePlains (6o%-8o% of annual average rainfall), water in forbs may average about75%-/8% of mass and exceed the preformed water needs of bobwhites.

The astute reader will recognize that the mere presence of sufficient pre-formed water in vegetation during drought does not guarantee that bobwhitesare able to meet their water demand. If the water-intake rate of bobwhites is lim-ited because the summer heat limits their foraging time or low density of forbsdecreases their efficiency in finding food, then bobwhites may still be waterrestricted despite there being adequate amounts of preformed water in vegeta-tion. A field test of the merit of waterers would address this possibility.

During the 19805, Fred S. Guthery and Nancy E. Koerth conducted a 4-yearfield study to evaluate the population response of bobwhites to waterers. Theymonitored bobwhite density and reproductive development between a site withwaterers (i waterer/io acres) and a control site. Of the 4 years during their study,2 were droughty, receiving less than 80% of the annual average rainfall.

The work of Guthery and Koerth documented that bobwhite density wassimilar between the site with waterers and the control site across all years. Inaddition, waterers failed to reverse drought-induced reproductive failure. Noneof the hens collected on the site with water were reproductively active duringone of the drought years. In the other drought year, only 38% were reproduc-tively active.

BEEF,Quail Management BRUSH, and

in Cattle Country BOBWHITES

TEXAS ASM U N I V E R S I T Y PRESS EDITION FIDEL HERNANDEZ AND

F R E D S . G U T H E R Y

Foreword by Wyman Meinzer

TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY PRESSCollege Station

Contents

FOREWORD by Wyman Meinzer ixPREFACE xiiiACKNOWLEDGMENTS XV

1. The Colin Cosmos i

2. General Ecology 15

3. Principles of HabitatManagement 33

4. Brush Management 43

5. Grazing Management 65

6. Food Management 81

7. Water, Predators, and Pen-RaisedBobwhites 101

8. Cover Management 119

9. Population Counts 135

10. Sex and Age Ratios 157

11. Harvest Management 177

12. Management Examples 193

13. The Business of BobwhiteManagement 209

14. Bobwhites and OtherWildlife 223

EPILOGUE 235

INDEX 237