MONTHLY WILDLIFE RESEARCH LETTER 
Department of Conservation and Natural History Survey, Cooperating 
Glen C. Sanderson and Helen C. Schultz, Editors 
Urbana, I 11inois 
November, 1971 
Vol. 14, No. II 
1, Pheasant Populations and Land Use 
G. B. Joselyn 
Hunting pressure on the Sibley Study Area during the opening weekend of 
the hunting season in 1971 was the lightest in recent years. However, those 
afield did very well, spending less time to bag a cock than in any of the 
preceding 9 years. The 125 hunters interviewed on the area this year during 
the opening weekend reported spending an average of 1.4 hours in the field to 
bag a cock, compared with 4.7 hours in 1970. Comparable figures for 1962 
through I 969 were 2.2, 2.7, 2.1, 8.0, 6.9, 8.1, 5.0, and 4.3 hours, 
respectively. 
The high success rate this year apparently resulted from two factors: 
the early completion of the corn harvest (and initiation of fall plowing) 
and the presence of a greater number of birds than had been indicated by 
estimates of late-summer population levels. Corn harvest on the study area 
and the attendant fall plowing had progressed further by opening weekend this 
year than in any year since 1964. The result was that pheasants were concen¬ 
trated in unplowed corn stubble, making them more vulnerable to hunters than 
in most years. Standardized counts of pheasant broods on the study area during 
July and August 1971 recorded 23 percent fewer broods than in 1970 (MWRL 14(9): 
1). This index therefore suggested a slight decrease in pheasant numbers in 
late summer, 1971, compared with 1970. However, almost all hunters reported 
seeing ample numbers of pheasants during the opening weekend, which, coupled 
with the high success rate, indicates that late-summer population levels may 
have been somewhat higher than suggested by the brood counts. 
2. Manipulation of Pheasant Habitat G. B. Joselyn 
Because unmanaged control plots represent "typical" roadsides on the 
study area (in that their mowing is not controlled), differences in pheasant 
nest densities between this type of roadside and seeded plots are considered 
the best indicators of the response of pheasants to the seeding of roadsides. 
For the 9 years 1963-71* pheasant nest density on seeded plots (2.7 
nests per acre) was 2.2 times that on all (mowed and unmowed) unmanaged control 
plots (1.2 nests per acre). Nest density on seeded plots was 3.4 times that 
on mowed, unmanaged control plots (0.8 nest per acre), but was only about 1.4 
times greater than the density on unmanaged control roadsides that were unmowed 
(2.0 nests per acre), thus indicating that merely leaving roadsides unmowed 
could result in meaningful benefits to nesting pheasants. 
