MONTHLY WILDLIFE RESEARCH LETTER 
Department of Conservation and Natural History Survey, Cooperating 
Glen C. Sanderson and Helen C. Schultz, Editors 
1. Pheasant Populations and Land Use c ■ c. 
S * L * Etter 
For the past five hunting seasons the proportionate harvests of cock pheasants 
ave been estimated from the return of tags from cocks marked during October and 
th "method year ; *" an att «*' t0 determine the degree'of accuracy of 
this method, a comparison of the proportionate returns of tags from cocks taqqed 
and after October 21 was made for the years 1962 through 1964 * because 
a different proportionate harvest was recorded in each of the 3 yea's,'data ?or 
each year were treated separately. The data for 1963 revealed only a slight 
difference, not statistically significant. In 1962 and 1964, however, considerably 
mailer percentages of the cocks tagged prior to October 21 were bagged during th e Y 
of he'dL hU f k s ® asons th a n of those tagged after that date. Chi-square tests 
0.05 level ^ md,cated significance at the 0.10 level but not at the 
of mor^!?tC 0 nr COnC ^ SiVe ' ^ 6Se data Stron 9iy suggest that a significant amount 
somTyears jttZl hT ? l ° Ct °* er N ° vember trappln 9 period in at ,east 
returns frAm V ,' nto consideration, it appears that in some years tag 
5 fr ° m Juvenile cocks tagged during the entire October - November trapping 
period may underestimate the proportionate harvest of cocks actually alive at the 
beginning of the hunting season. y at tne 
2 . 
Manipulation of Pheasant Habitat 
G. B. Joselyn 
Thirty-nine percent of the pheasant nests established on seeded roadsides 
( ibley Study Area) in I 963 were successful, compared with 21 percent in 1964 29 
percent .n 1965, end 23 percent in 1966. Success rates of nesu established on 
managed control plots were 17, 13, 24, and 32 percent during 1963 , 1964, I 965 and 
nc rea seethe 'last? ThUS ’ ° f " eStS " a " a 9 ad cont?o. plots noi only' * 
plots In iq 66 HoJ V 't was „ 9 p6rCent higher than 5uccess »f nests on seeded 
sides exceeded the k' becauaatbe "umber of nests established on seeded road- 
s TrZ*, ** " established on managed control plots, seeded roadsides 
Still produced the greater number of successful nests. 
control ™ 6 *!! e P r °P° rtionat ® number of successful nests on managed 
ouanti „ I ^ l5e5 guest ion of the feasibility of attempting to improve the 
’ ! * of nesting cover on roadsides solely by delaying mowing until late summer 
increased ^ ^ ' 963 ' ° ne ax P' a "etion, asyet unsubstantiated for the' 
possible bu ^f rate °" unseeded roadsides may lie in vegetative changes made 
a°d «k of t Lr; n9 - ( ' nCrea5eS in broad - |ea f a « *eeds, etc). Presence of weeds 
t ^ l ! a ™ °P erators - "*V be possible, however, to employ 
te atl spra y ng techniques and fertilization to make roadside vegetation both 
relatively secure for nesting pheasants and acceptable to farm operators. 
