

\ f 
298 1,590 52 
BANDINGS 868,737 
| 
RECOVERIES 9822 
Fig. 14, Numbers of mourning dove bandings and recoveries used 
in the Central Management Unit banding analysis. 
outnumber females in wild populations, the sex ratio of the 
trapped sample in this study was probably biased toward 
males because (1) much of the trapping success occurred 
during morning hours and late evening hours when adult 
males were free from nest duties and (2) most birds classi- 
fied as unknown sex probably were females. Despite these 
influencing factors, the number of male mourning doves 
probably exceeds that of females. 
The overall age ratio of the trapped sample was 121:100, 
immatures to adults. This ratio is low and probably not 
representative of the true age ratio of the preseason popu- 
lation because some trapping was done each year before 
substantial numbers of young had been produced. Other 
possible causes for the relatively low proportion of imma- 
tures include differential vulnerability to trapping and dif- 
ferential movements. 
Distribution of Band Recoveries 
Band recoveries from migratory game birds reflect har- 
vest patterns during hunting seasons which, in turn, reflect 
migration patterns. Distribution of band recoveries from 
mourning doves banded in the CMU were tabulated by five 
age and sex categories (immatures, adult males, adult 
females, all adults, and total doves) and two recovery cate- 
gories (direct and indirect), The resulting 20 tables illus- 
trate the harvest locations by numbers of doves (Tables A-14 
to A-23) and by their percentages (Tables A-24 to A-33). 
The percentages in Tables A-24 to A-33 require further 
clarification. For a particular State of banding, these data 
15 






heeded 

























Cad 
— 
oad 
mz 
UE. 
nana 
oe 
_— 
D ecmmeted 
a 




= 
| | 
ha 
Some 
= 
Be 
ry 
¥ 




= 
Bd VER 
| ee 
7 a. 
pS 
= 
a 
a 


















UE =i 7 SEE 
fe 7 . My Ps, NY 



| woe eo 










W eneaawe 
i 

SUN us 
ARE 
mle 
NUMBER OF DOVES BANDED 
> 2000 a 
1001-2000 a 
501-1000 te 
101-500 8 
<101 a 
NO BANDING O 
Fig. 15. Distribution of Central Management Unit mourning dove 
bandings by 10° block. 
are straightforward and precise. However, the reader is 
cautioned that direct comparison of distribution patterns 
between adjacent banding States in these tables can be mis- 
leading because some States allowed hunting during the 
study and others did not. For banding States that allowed 
hunting, there is a disproportionately high in-State recovery 
which affects the proportions of birds recovered in other 
States. As an example, comparison in Table A-28 of the re- 
covery proportions in Texas from North Dakota (non- 
hunting) and South Dakota (hunting) would show 41 and 
17%, respectively. One could erroneously infer that pro- 
portionately more doves from North Dakota migrated to 
Texas than those from South Dakota. To correct for this 
problem, we chose to express distribution patterns through 
relative recovery rate indices (Tables A-34 to A-36). This 
treatment of the data projects the approximate probability 
of an individual bird being recovered in specific areas and 
allows for quick comparisons among States. 
The distributional analysis was restricted to direct re- 
coveries because these records best reflect migratory path- 
ways from specific breeding areas. Use of indirect recoveries 
could be misleading because some doves do not return from 
southern wintering sites to their natal or prior breeding 
areas: subsequent recoveries would thus reflect distribution 
of some birds from entirely different areas than those in 
which they were banded. 
