DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE OF PHEASANTS IN ILLINOIS* 



FREDERICK GREELEY, RONALD F. LABISKY, AND STUART H. MANNt 



The exotic ring-necked plieasant {Pliasianus cole In- 

 cus) , introduced into Illinois in the 1890's, has suc- 

 ceeded in establishing self-maintaining po])ulations in 

 approximately the northeastern third of the state. When 

 the prairie chicken (Tympanuchus cupido) declined in 

 number with the encroachment of intensified agricul- 

 ture upon the grasslands of Illinois (Yeatter 1943:413), 

 sportsmen found the pheasant to be a suitable substitute 

 as a game bird. The pheasant occupies a variety of 

 habitats within its range in North America, but it is 

 most abundantly associated with intensive farming. In 

 Illinois, as elsewhere, pheasants have become most 

 abundant in tlie intensively cultivated cash-grain areas 

 (Robertson 1958:13), fig. 1. 



Several investigators (Leopold 1931, Marquardt & 

 Scott 1952, Robertson 1958, Greeley 1960) have meas- 

 ured and mapped the distribution of pheasants in Illi- 

 nois. In this report the previous literature is reviewed 

 and new information and maps, figs. 2-8, on the distri- 

 bution and abundance of pheasants in Illinois are pre- 

 sented. Information of this kind is useful in the proper 

 management of the pheasant resource in Illinois, as well 

 as for establishment of hunting regulations. 



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 



Acknowledgments are made to the following person- 

 nel, present or past, of the Illinois Natural History 

 Survey: Thomas G. Scott, Wildlife Specialist and 

 Head, Section of Wildlife Research, who provided ad- 

 ministrative and technical supervision throughout the 

 study; Carl O. Mohr and Ralph E. Yeatter, Wildlife 

 Specialists, who contributed both data and commentary 

 on distribution of pheasants in Illinois; Mrs. Carl Chen, 

 Laboratory Assistant, who compiled and analyzed many 

 of the rural mail carrier reports; Jack A. Ellis, Research 

 Associate, who gave many helpful suggestions through- 

 out the study; James S. Ayars, Technical Editor, and 

 Edward C. Visnow, Assistant Technical Editor, who ed- 

 ited the manuscript (Visnow also prejjared the maps) ; 

 and Wilmer D. Zehr, Assistant Technical Photograijher, 

 who did the photographic work. 



William L. Preno, fJamc Uiologisi, Illinois Dc]jart- 

 nicnt of Conservation, ]jrovidcd new information from 

 state-wide censuses of pheasants. Charles Davis, Secre- 

 tary, Illinois Rural Letter Carriers Association, helped 



* A contribution of Illinois Federal Aid Proicct.s No. 61-R, and No. 

 '*<I-R, the Illinois Department of C:onscrvation, the United States Btircaii 

 of Sport I'islieries and Wildlife, and llie Illinois Natural History Survey, 

 co-operatint?. 



t Frederick Greeley was formerly Research Associate, and Stuart H. 

 Mann is Research Assistant, botft emjjloyed by the Illinois Department of 

 Conservation imder terms of the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act 

 and assi^^ed to the Illinois .Natural History Survey for administrative and 

 technical supervision: Cireeley is now Associate Professor of WiUllife 

 Management. I'niversity of Massaehusells, Amherst. Ronald F. Lahisky 

 H Associate Wildlife Specialist, Illinois Natural History Survey, Urbana. 



organize the rural mail carrier surveys, and nearly 1,000 

 rural mail carriers of Illinois participated in the surveys. 



METHODS 



Maps of regional or continental distribution of 

 pheasants have been compiled by Leopold (1931:106), 

 Walcott (1945:4), Aldrich & Duvall (19.55:21), Mc- 

 Cabe et al. (1956:275), and Wagner & Besadny 

 (1958:5). 



Many sources of data have been used to obtain indi- 

 ces to pheasant populations in large geographic areas. 

 Leopold (1931), who compiled the first comprehensive 

 report on the distribution of pheasants in Illinois and 

 nearby states, obtained data from literature, from inter- 

 views and correspondence with local authorities, and 

 from personal observations. 



Later, as the pheasant became more abundant in 

 Illinois, other workers estimated the annual harvest of 

 cocks from two types of cjucstionnaires filled out by 

 hunters, and mapped the distribution of pheasant popu- 

 lations by counties. 



Questionnaires of the first type, each attached as a 

 stub to a hunting license, were to be filled out at the 

 end of the hunting season by the holders of licenses and 

 mailed to the Illinois Department of Conservation 

 (Marquardt & Scott 1952:4; Carl O. Mohr unpub- 

 lished). About 5 per cent of nearly a half million 

 hunters returned license-stub questionnaires for the 

 1950-51 hunting season, according to Marquardt & 

 Scott (1952:4), who recognized that, in the question- 

 nanes returned, inaccuracies existed both as to the 

 number of pheasants reported taken and the counties in 

 which they were reported taken. 



Questionnaires of the second type, each on a double 

 postcard, were mailed after the hunting season to a 

 small number of license holders whose names and ad- 

 dresses were taken from the records of tlie state agencv 

 issuing licenses to hunt small game. On these posthunt- 

 ing season c]uestionnaires, hunters were asked to report 

 the number of wild cocks they had shot and the counties 

 in which they had killed them but not to report pheas- 

 ants shot in public or pri\ate shooting presenes. The 

 rates of return from these questionnaires (Robertson 

 1958:105) were much higher than those from the 

 license-stub questionnaires. Robertson (1958:106) sus- 

 pected four sources of bias in data derived from the 

 posthunting season questionnaires: "(1) the tendency 

 of the more successful hunters to reply to questionnaires 

 more readily than less successful hunters; (2) the tend- 

 ency of himters to include the kill of other members of 

 the hunting party in their reports: (3) the tendency to 

 include kills made outside the area to which the report 



