Vol. 19, No. 6 
Page 3 
SS=£Onses of Prairie Chi ckens to Habitat Manipulation 
R* L. Westemeier, 
D. R. Vance 
and visited the pra i'r ie°ch Icken boomer ^h "" 9 374 pe ° ple made '•••rvation. 
season for visitation by the pubUc ^ 2 ?^ K 'V aSPer Count V- We «*rted the 
April; a total of 24 mornings were involved term,aated ‘he season on 23 
universities and colleges represented K ^ Staff fr ° m 14 diff erent 
and 13 Audubon or ornithological societies supplied pb* t0ta ' number of individuals, 
including newswriters, scou? troops! a^dpersonnet of ' ? th * P 9r ° UpS 
private environmental agencies made un 1 ? no r f tate a 9 en cies, museums, and 
individuals represented 9 percent P ° f the t0ta,; various °ther 
Illinois supplied 44 percent of the visitors in 1 Q 7 A nhir, oL 
21 percent, and lesser numbers came from TpnnL J 976 ’ ° h '° 24 P ercent > Indiana 
Iowa, New Jersey, Michigan, and Rhode island. M ' SSOuri ’ Pennsylvania, Kentucky, 
observations during 46 bl?nd morninas lon/ho/- research P ro J e ct b y recording their 
least 2 hours by one or~^ 7 I • mmg gr ° Und under observation ?or at 
began visiting the bo^i^g gr^unl on ,8 M^-h^ "T b ' l " d$ P * r 
March through 7 April. The^irst of 4 f) H ^ h, . w,th P eak numbers noted from 28 
on 29 March; a pea’k in bJeedM^a! ev^r^H ^ Sae " 
breeding activity occurred after 9 April p!.m Apr,! ; and a sharp decline in 
indicate one of the earliest breeding « ' Preliminary analyses of these data 
one would expect in view of the earl! snri !" 5 °’ ' ecord > although not so early as 
about 6 April, thus the s ril « ' 9 ', ^ usual peak in breeding occurs 
phenology of prairie chicken breeding ac!!v!! y y w!s b °c U on!e!!Id. ear,y inS ° far 35 ^ 
by limrSn oi^harassment^by^natural S fa' f 9 ° f ' 97 S Characterizad 
Harriers were the most common source* If / f ctors on the booming grounds. 
flushing of prairie chickens on only 17 pe^en!'!f’the'bl'T rap '° rs caused 
contrast to 78 percent of the bl ind mornings "J \l 7 l m m m ° rn ! n 9 s in W 
to the presence of a short-eared owl r^A ? •, , ? , M d rea ctions were noted 
blind morning each. No interaction wa- "noted b-t ^ ’ / Ue jay ’ and co V ote on one 
on six blind mornings (when both species w-re present/ b ^ pralrie ch ' ckens 
resulted from two white-tailed deer bounding Ic^LTboX" Vou ^''" 9 ° f 
