The burn debate and the Decline of Turkeys

[HogBiologist]

Link to the Buffalo Road Self Tour.

http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/ouachita/home/?cid=fsm9_039692

[HogBiologist]

Wild Turkey
Wild Turkeys are not as tightly linked to southern pine forests as many of the other species treated here, but wild turkeys ben- e t from lightning-season burning if the burns help to achieve consistent two-to-three-year  re frequencies on managed areas. Wild Turkeys prefer to forage in southern pinelands burned within the past two years (Palmer and Hurst 1998, Sisson et al. 1990, Juhan 2003), and maintaining a two-to-three-year  re frequency may be easier to accomplish when some acreage is burned in May and early June in addition to the acreage burned earlier in the year.
Lightning-season  res applied to areas that have not been burned recently also are not likely to threaten many nests. Sisson et al. (1990) found that 62% of all nests occurred in mature pine forests that had been burned within the past two years. Moore et al. (2005) monitored 22 hens in areas subject- ed to lightning-season  res and found only 2 nests destroyed by the burns, and one of these hens re-nested. Similarly, for 64 turkey nests monitored in Mississippi (National Wild Turkey Federation 2006), only four were located in areas sched- uled to be burned and only two nests were actually destroyed by lightning-season  res. Allen et al. (1996) also found that areas not burned within the past two years were almost en- tirely avoided by hens.

Lightning-season burns also may improve brood-rearing habitats by diversifying plant growth and seed and insect abundances (Provencher et al. 1998).  e average number of insects on sites treated with lightning-season  res exhibits a sharp increase in the  rst year after burning (Hardy 2003). Jones (2001) suggested the availability of good brood-rearing habitat might limit turkey populations on large, unbroken expanses of mature pine forest, and the grasses and forbs favored by lightning-season burns could lead to higher insect abundances for poults. Native legumes important to Wild Turkey also are promoted by lightning-season burning, and Komarek (1969) noted that Wild Turkeys frequently foraged in areas soon after prescribed burns were conducted. Sisson and Speake (1994), on the other hand, found little bene t in terms of food resources when lightning-season  res were ap- plied to small (10-acre) plots.

Potential benefits include (1) improved habitat conditions in subsequent breeding seasons and (2) improved brood-rearing habitat. More research is needed.

[HogBiologist]

The low poult survival in the first 2 weeks was consistent with previous studies (Glidden and Austin 1975, Lehman et al. 2001, Spears et al. 2007). Poult loss after 14 days post-hatch decreased significantly, since after 2 weeks broods could fly and roost in trees (Barwick et al. 1971). Survival within the first 30 days (17%) was greater compared to other studies in coastal plain pine forests (9%, Peoples et al. 1995; 13%, Exum et al. 1987; 10%, Sisson et al. 1991). Poult loss was largely due to predation, with 22% of brood females lost as well; however, 1 brood was lost to a growing-season prescribed fire just after hatch. This is the first documented brood loss attributed to growing-season prescribed fire, and is likely unimportant from a management perspective.

[HogBiologist]

Negative effects of growing-season prescribed fires on wild turkey nest success and poult survival should be considered before their use, as the long-term effects on wild turkey populations are still somewhat uncertain. However, studies have shown that growing-season fires may improve turkey brood-rearing habitat by increasing insect abundance, adding variety to the seed bank, and enhancing plant growth (McGlincy 1985, Landers and Mueller 1986, Exum 1988, Provencher et al. 1998). Therefore, as long as growing-season fires are used in a rotating, small-scale (< 20 ha) application the effects on wild turkey populations will be minimal and the benefits to the entire ecosystem will be great. Mesopredator removal, at least during the wild turkey nesting season, should be considered as a potential management tool as it has been concluded that wild turkey nest success can improve after intensive predator control (Miller and Leopold 1992). Invasive hardwood removal in the longleaf pine ecosystem should also be considered to further reduce nest predator refugia (Atkenson and Hulse 1953, Sanderson 1987, Leberg and Kennedy 1988, Gehrt and Fritzell 1998).

[Strick9]

Hog,

It would seem that the Ouachita has a very well managed and applied plan with a specific goal announced as compared to what I am up against at the moment.

Are you currently working directly on that project and if so in what parameter? If you would rather not say publicly feel free to pm me.

I can't disagree with the excerpts you posted except for pointing to my area where the same areas that once held suitable nesting habitat are burned year after year thus not allowing the desired habitat for nesting to ever be utilized by the Turkey, or other ground nesting birds, low brush nesting birds etc.

In other words right about the time the habitat has regenerated for desirable nesting habitat it is burned yet again. If it was a three year rotation I wouldn't even be worried in the slightest, well maybe with the non detailed application as to various rare habitats. We have very little semi mature hardwood stands and bottoms and these are being burned as well at the same rate and cycle in the areas of which I am speaking.   

I can get behind the Ouachita plan no doubt as it specifies a goal, includes concern for many species and has an established goal set with described steps. Honestly if that plan is being followed then I say Outstanding.

Its all in the leadership and follow through.

Are there any members that have experience with that area and observations of the plan in action in this area?

Thanks for making this a sticky Shannon. Your Big Cypress point concerning massive fuel loads left un managed which resulting in large scale fire is a key point to the importance of a well planned prescribed burn. Is it classified as a Class 1 Wilderness area by chance as this would explain the lack of prescribed burns?

I want to be perfectly clear on my stance that well prescribed spring burns are an absolutely invaluable tool and beneficial to many species including the Eastern Wild Turkey. However in my area the prescribed burns are of the same size, same intensity or close to that of a true Forest Fire, not so good. I am pooling resources and currently have a soil expert that says he is willing to walk with me through some of these blocks. It is evident that the carbon layer has been burnt to the soil substrate in vast areas within these 2500 acre burns, again not good.

The blocking of the public use is another point as well in that not only birders but also wildflower enthusiasts as well as hunters, hikers and so on are blocked from entering the forest during spring burns which would fall under the multiple use sustained yield act.

At this time I can not stand behind timber sales as being important for generating funding for the USFS. I do still stand behind timbering for the alone reason of creating diverse habitat. The USFS has lost millions in timber sales to the negative.  http://www.ti.org/sa23.html  This is the earliest link I can find and it dates to 1995 there are a slew of much newer articles that one can easily find. Timber sales from NF do however mean that someone is making money but at the taxpayers expense. I am working on getting the accounting numbers for my areas but I honestly don't see those numbers being released accurately at least. 

[HogBiologist]

http://www.academia.edu/505770/Reproduction_in_a_declining_population_of_wild_turkeys_in_Arkansas

[HogBiologist]

http://www.firescience.gov/JFSP_consortia.cfm

[HogBiologist]

Hog,

It would seem that the Ouachita has a very well managed and applied plan with a specific goal announced as compared to what I am up against at the moment.

Are you currently working directly on that project and if so in what parameter? If you would rather not say publicly feel free to pm me.

I can't disagree with the excerpts you posted except for pointing to my area where the same areas that once held suitable nesting habitat are burned year after year thus not allowing the desired habitat for nesting to ever be utilized by the Turkey, or other ground nesting birds, low brush nesting birds etc.

No, it is one county north of my area. But I have been on a guided tour of it twice. I was also at a conference just a week or so ago about Rx fire for managing lands. This was one of the field tours.

[GobbleNut]

Great debate and discussion, gentlemen.  I think we all would agree that properly timed and implemented prescribed fires are beneficial to wildlife in most cases.  It should also be quite obvious that the reverse is true, as well,...poorly timed and improperly staged fires can have significant negative impacts on some species. 

What matters here is that there are individuals that care and want to make sure that things are done right,...and are willing to make the effort to be sure that happens, or at a minimum, let those in charge know that they are watching and will question actions that appear to be counterproductive.  It is refreshing to see that some folks here are paying attention and are trying to make a positive contribution to the management of our wildlife resources. Kudo's to you guys!

[Strick9]

Gobble,

Can you imagine how many dollars would be lost , how much voice would be lost and how much pull the conservation and land habitat movement would loose without the voice of the hunter?

Obviously I am an avid Whitetail, Turkey and Duck hunter. I have been at it for over 40 years and have certainly hit that mark where its not about the kill for me whatsoever.

I hear over and over again how even young hunters are frustrated and hanging up their gear for good due to unsuccessful hunts or even sightings or hearings of their intended species.

Now I know there is a part of me that says good, less pressure and more for me but in age have learned that we as hunters are fighting not only a battle against gun haters but animal lovers.

Each and every hunter that returns to the field represents a part of a motor which in effect protects the land and conservation through his spending and voice more than any other group combined.

Thank you for keeping up to date as well and Hog thanks for the many excerpts the last of which very much strikes home as our coyote population which was non existant in the mid 90s is now way out of control and with no controls offered other than soft verbage.

I am just going to step out on a limb and say that after cruising a tract where a land owner says he wants a consult plan that generates more wild turkeys on his property the very first on the list is predator removal.

And onto another limb, the same should be allowed in our NF, currently in the Francis Marion no trapping is allowed by any private citizen and the only subcontracted removals are of feral swine.

But back to your article if we know that 70% of nest destruction are from predators don't you think we should pay special attention to not burning the remaining 30%?

[DC1.]

Having been on a USFS burn crew and a biologist, this OP has no understanding of Rx burning and the dynamics of it. The Ping Pong ball ignition is used in remote area where personal are hard pressed to reach remote areas. With short burning weather Windows, and large areas that need rotational burning, they must employ all available techniques to get burns on the ground. Also, the forest service is in the business of forestry. No in the business of wildlife. That is the USFWS. They are burning for forest production. Managing for good timber often contradicts good wildlife management. Just look at timber companies.

In your post you say the forest service is not in the business of wildlife so why are there wildlife management areas inside the National Forrest?

[nativeks]

Having been on a USFS burn crew and a biologist, this OP has no understanding of Rx burning and the dynamics of it. The Ping Pong ball ignition is used in remote area where personal are hard pressed to reach remote areas. With short burning weather Windows, and large areas that need rotational burning, they must employ all available techniques to get burns on the ground. Also, the forest service is in the business of forestry. No in the business of wildlife. That is the USFWS. They are burning for forest production. Managing for good timber often contradicts good wildlife management. Just look at timber companies.

In your post you say the forest service is not in the business of wildlife so why are there wildlife management areas inside the National Forrest?

The forest service is not in the wildlife business. That is their problem. They have to pander to everybody. Off road atv users, loggers, nature lovers, hikers, hunters, fisherman, wilderness folks, etc.
I worked 5 years on a USFWS prescribed fire crew. I also burn a bunch with friends in the spring. USFWS mission is simple and makes it easy to accomplish that mission. We put alot of fire on the ground.

Helicopters don't use a napalm like substance. The balls are filled with pottasium permaganate and injected with ethylene glycol to set off an exothermic reaction. We used to play hand ball with them on severity assignments. Delay time is the amount of glycol injected. We used the chopper twice. Both times it was unsafe to put people interior so we lit the edges and allowed the helicopter to burn out the interior. One burn was 12k acres and the other 3k.

Kansas is considered a top turkey state correct? A large portion burns every year. This year in a few county are 2.5 million acres were lit. I burn my place every year. Next year will be a burn as late as I can get it into May if I think it will still carry fire. Late growing season burns are the best for killing brush in my experience.

[DC1.]

Having been on a USFS burn crew and a biologist, this OP has no understanding of Rx burning and the dynamics of it. The Ping Pong ball ignition is used in remote area where personal are hard pressed to reach remote areas. With short burning weather Windows, and large areas that need rotational burning, they must employ all available techniques to get burns on the ground. Also, the forest service is in the business of forestry. No in the business of wildlife. That is the USFWS. They are burning for forest production. Managing for good timber often contradicts good wildlife management. Just look at timber companies.

In your post you say the forest service is not in the business of wildlife so why are there wildlife management areas inside the National Forrest?

The forest service is not in the wildlife business. That is their problem. They have to pander to everybody. Off road atv users, loggers, nature lovers, hikers, hunters, fisherman, wilderness folks, etc.
I worked 5 years on a USFWS prescribed fire crew. I also burn a bunch with friends in the spring. USFWS mission is simple and makes it easy to accomplish that mission. We put alot of fire on the ground.

Helicopters don't use a napalm like substance. The balls are filled with pottasium permaganate and injected with ethylene glycol to set off an exothermic reaction. We used to play hand ball with them on severity assignments. Delay time is the amount of glycol injected. We used the chopper twice. Both times it was unsafe to put people interior so we lit the edges and allowed the helicopter to burn out the interior. One burn was 12k acres and the other 3k.

Kansas is considered a top turkey state correct? A large portion burns every year. This year in a few county are 2.5 million acres were lit. I burn my place every year. Next year will be a burn as late as I can get it into May if I think it will still carry fire. Late growing season burns are the best for killing brush in my experience.

They should call them Timber Management Areas then!

[HogBiologist]

Having been on a USFS burn crew and a biologist, this OP has no understanding of Rx burning and the dynamics of it. The Ping Pong ball ignition is used in remote area where personal are hard pressed to reach remote areas. With short burning weather Windows, and large areas that need rotational burning, they must employ all available techniques to get burns on the ground. Also, the forest service is in the business of forestry. No in the business of wildlife. That is the USFWS. They are burning for forest production. Managing for good timber often contradicts good wildlife management. Just look at timber companies.

In your post you say the forest service is not in the business of wildlife so why are there wildlife management areas inside the National Forrest?

The forest service is not in the wildlife business. That is their problem. They have to pander to everybody. Off road atv users, loggers, nature lovers, hikers, hunters, fisherman, wilderness folks, etc.
I worked 5 years on a USFWS prescribed fire crew. I also burn a bunch with friends in the spring. USFWS mission is simple and makes it easy to accomplish that mission. We put alot of fire on the ground.

Helicopters don't use a napalm like substance. The balls are filled with pottasium permaganate and injected with ethylene glycol to set off an exothermic reaction. We used to play hand ball with them on severity assignments. Delay time is the amount of glycol injected. We used the chopper twice. Both times it was unsafe to put people interior so we lit the edges and allowed the helicopter to burn out the interior. One burn was 12k acres and the other 3k.

Kansas is considered a top turkey state correct? A large portion burns every year. This year in a few county are 2.5 million acres were lit. I burn my place every year. Next year will be a burn as late as I can get it into May if I think it will still carry fire. Late growing season burns are the best for killing brush in my experience.

They should call them Timber Management Areas then!

It is in the name.

US FOREST Service.
The agency's mission is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation's forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations. - See more at: http://fs.fed.us/about-agency#sthash.WD5RgT3o.dpuf

[oleman59]

Well written! Well written but I think turkeys are having a lot of problems now being avid turkey hunter for the past 40 years mainly ( North& Middle ga ) In my oberservations Turkey numbers here in the North Ga area peaked in the mid 90ss. Since then have saw a steady decline in numbers in the farming areas it used to be I would see several flocks in must of the big cattle farms around this area. But with  increase in Poultry farms& spreading of chicken litter on the fields for fertilizer I started noticing a decline in the turkey numbers.Also in this area of  Northeast ga started seeing a high numbers of predators Coyotes. and a big increase in wild hogs thanks to these rednecks turning them loose all over the state which are also nest predators. Just these past season found evidence of 3 nest destroyed by predators.

I hunt mostly on public lands and places in years gone by on a good morning could hear as high as 4 or 5 toms sounding off your are luckily to hear one same goes on private lands also.On the usfs land for the past few years have been a lack of timber cutting which has hurt a lot of species of game animals as well as non game turkeys & grouse also song birds need some young growth timber areas for nesting and brooding areas. You want have very high nesting success in big mature forests.Plus Ga  has been to liberal with its Turkey season and increased the bag limit to 3 birds without any real data to speak of  with this new  check in system you can see that Turkey numbers are low all across the state. But this is happening all over the Southeast turkey numbers are on the decline. Getting back to the burning I have noticed in this  especially on the Lake Russell WMA that USFS  seem to be burning the same places  instead of changing locations some of these areas have been burned so much that you can see 300 400 yards  thru the woods before green up. IN conclusions I will list the problems I am seeing and the decline in turkey numbers. 1Spreading of chicken litter ( which can spread Black head disease to turkeys) 2 lack of habiat diversity on most public lands. 3 In the Southern part of the state were deer baiting is allowed turkeys can contract Aflatoxions from moldy grain  research on file to back this up on number 1 2& 3  4 High numbers of predators which when turkey numbers are as low as they are today can have real effectes on the existing Turkey numbers  > Our Wildlife agencies should look at the data from Delta waterfowl on nesting areas that are trapped for nest predators they have found they have a 60 to 70 % nesting success compared to 20% on areas not trapped. Doubt seriously that the Turkey nesting success is 15% percent in this area due to high predators numbers. ( Just my observations from rambling the Ga woods