Bob white quail in ON

I may be wrong but it is my understanding that pen raised bobwhite quail can not be released in ON, due to concerns about their effect on wild bob whites. ( NOT talking about conturix quail)

I was reading a study in another forum that seemed to say that released, pen - raised quail did not effect the survival of wild quail. I haven't seen any actual studies in ON.

Thoughts?
.....................................

Texas Parks & Wildlife Dept did a study "Survival and Movement Behavior of Captive-Raised, Wild and Wild Bred First Generation Bpbwhites in the Coastal Plain of Texas".

They did a study on a 500 acre study area releasing 200 birds in 10 birds per unit from 4 groups of quail:

1. Captive-Raised quail from wild parents
2. Captive-Raised quail from the game bird farm
3. Resident wild quail trapped from the study area
4. Translocated wild quail trapped 35km from study area

Flight speed of birds released was recorded and wild bird avg speed was 29mph and captive raised birds avg speed was 19mph.

Mortality to 50%- Both groups. Captived-raised birds reached 50% in 8 days. Resident wild birds in 47 days and translocated wild quail 32 days.

Captive-Raised quail from wild parents ranged 500 yards from release site whereas Captive-Raised from game farm ranged 100 yard from release site.

Mammalian predation was leading cause of mortality in all groups. Over 60% for both captive-raised groups and translocated wild quail and 40% for resident wild quail.

Only 1 Captive-raised bird intergrated with wild quail and moved off the study area.

8 Captive-Raised from wild parents intergrated with wild birds and moved to surrounding pastures and

7 Captive-Raised from wild also intergrated with wild bird and remained on study site.
These birds flushed easily and were difficult to distinguish from wild birds.

My understanding was that the pen raised(farm ) if added to the wild population would introduce new diseases and kill off or weaken the native population. Since the native population would be the hardier bird based on survival rates by naturally thinning out the weaker birds . The pen raised birds are a mixed bag of strong and weak and would not adapt as well as the native population. This would weaken the native population breeding genetics and could wipe out any last remaining native population. Pen raised birds (large scale) produce high numbers in comfortable living conditions for the purpose meat for human consumption. They are not being raised for hardiness to a high degree.

My understanding that licenced game farms can still release Bob White quail. It would be assumed by the MNR that the released birds are put and take and there would be no surviving birds to transit diseases.

Are there still any active wild colonies of Bob White quail still in Ontario?

There is still some scatting colonies of Grey Partridge (Huns) and Pheasants but I have not heard of any in Ontario for many years.

While in the Midwest I was advised that they release many pen raised pheasants that mix with the wild. The idea is to keep the population up for the pheasant hunting programs. Since only co cks can be harvested the weaker birds would be harvested first, or become predator food, if the pen raised survived until spring it had proven its adaption to the wild and would capable of breeding.

I see a release program in my back yard that still has surviving birds make it through to the spring and small clutch's of birds hatch. Unfortunately , not enough survive to make the population increase. I believe it is the lack of four season habitant. Farmers like to keep tidy land , no grassland. Possibly if we were to harvest only the co ck birds as is the practice in the west we may see a increase in population.

I believe wild birds in Ontario now only exist in Niagara and the season there is co cks only for one week.

My apologies on changing from quail to pheasants, but this MNR biologists theory of diseased birds escaping into the wild, spreading the disease while has merits is over emphasised and to my readings yet proven. I would endorse releasing numerous healthy pen raised birds in quality habitant and allowing them to adapt, then propagate on their own.


Dick

Dick,
You are spot on with the above post. I have discussed this concept with numerous MNR who still endorse the view that wild populations will be adversely affected. I ask for data on populations but they are unable to respond.
The bottom line is that there is such a minimal population here in Ontario to base that premise on. We'd be far better to have an expanding population of both quail and pheasants then worry if...if there are adverse health issues because for most of the folks in Ont., they don't exist now.
Fish stocking in Lake Ontario is a prime example. They have introduced various strains of Lake trout into the main stream, they have no data as to adverse effects on whatever is the current strain if there is such a thing.Consistency?????

Wapole Island has the last remaining native species left to my knowledge. I did happen to come across a few last year while hunting an area around the Alvinston area. I would love to be part of a release program in designated areas but believe many would be thinned out not just based on the introduction of possible disease theory but loss of overall genetic hardiness. I would find it hard to believe that the many generations of penned raised birds bred for meat production would be of the same genetic hardiness. A good friend of mine who is also a biologist had this discussion at the hunt camp with us a few years back. Again if it could be done i would jump right in to be a part of it.

Re pheasants, Nova Scotia discontinued the release of pen-raised birds in the 1960s when they determined it was harming wild populations. After they stopped the releases, their wild bird numbers actually improved.

That the release of pen-raised birds is bad for wild populations is well established. You can see why in the study Sharon quoted; you don't want those slower, stupider birds interbreeding with the wild birds. And we can't assume that all the pen-raised birds will be shot first and won't interbreed with wild birds. The results of a single study of a single release in Texas do not establish that as a universal principle.

It's time to stop complaining about releases and start thinking about the real problem: habitat.

You are spot on Welsh well said.:)

[QUOTE=BDH;868600]My understanding that licenced game farms can still release Bob White quail. It would be assumed by the MNR that the released birds are put and take and there would be no surviving birds to transit diseases.

Are there still any active wild colonies of Bob White quail still in Ontario?

There is still some scatting colonies of Grey Partridge (Huns) and Pheasants but I have not heard of any in Ontario for many years.

While in the Midwest I was advised that they release many pen raised pheasants that mix with the wild. The idea is to keep the population up for the pheasant hunting programs. Since only co cks can be harvested the weaker birds would be harvested first, or become predator food, if the pen raised survived until spring it had proven its adaption to the wild and would capable of breeding.

I see a release program in my back yard that still has surviving birds make it through to the spring and small clutch's of birds hatch. Unfortunately , not enough survive to make the population increase. I believe it is the lack of four season habitant. Farmers like to keep tidy land , no grassland. Possibly if we were to harvest only the co ck birds as is the practice in the west we may see a increase in population.

I believe wild birds in Ontario now only exist in Niagara and the season there is co cks only for one week.

My apologies on changing from quail to pheasants, but this MNR biologists theory of diseased birds escaping into the wild, spreading the disease while has merits is over emphasised and to my readings yet proven. I would endorse releasing numerous healthy pen raised birds in quality habitant and allowing them to adapt, then propagate on their own.

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

My feelings also which is why I posted the study. Obviously one study, ( although there may be more I'm not aware of ), isn't sufficient from which to draw national conclusions
. Nothing in SW On is going to change as far as habitat goes , which is why I also think we need to reconsider whether released pen- raised birds really are a problem.

Anyone know where I can see the study the MNR assumedly conducted, before they made their decision to not allow pen- raised bob white to be released?

When wild populations are pretty much non existent I sure wouldn't be worrying about the effect of pen raised birds being released. We don't have enough wild ones for it to affect negatively. Release programs would only benefit both quail and pheasants

No habitat .But the fox and Coyotes would benefit.:)

I believe Cass is not referring to a sustainable population but rather being able to release birds for training purposes, trials /tests.

I haven't come across any recent studies to determine current populations in this neck of the woods. I remember clearly in the 1970's hunting with my brother in law in the Thamesville Ontario area putting up large numbers. Yes extreme winter weather conditions in the 70's and 80's along with habitat loss reduced the population . It's really sad farming practices played a huge role in the devastation of this species.

There is no doubt in my mind that releasing pen raised birds will eventually weaken wild gene pools. But as many have said they are near non existant so you have to decide what exactly you want out of it. Other than hunting, quail really have little commercial value. Families in Volvos and minivans won't flock to sanctuaries to see quail in the Spring. The only people who ever actually see a Bobwhite are likely those looking to kill them, and the few landowners that have a population of them. They aren't especially magnificent birds to look at. So, with basically no money available for any serious targeted reintroduction programs my guess is the anti hunters would quickly kill any reintroduction efforts. Changing or improving habitat is quite expensive and the reality is the MNR is near the bottom of the list when governments budget borrowed money.
That leaves you with a user pay situation and has to be almost entirely done on private property in fairly restricted geographic area. Pelee is a pretty good business model. Perhaps something similar could done with quail?

Not magnificent I guess , but a beautiful bird. I love their call too. They are definitely a challenge for a bird dog as they hang out in coveys and love to run.


http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/...ps7b4b4445.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xx9JWlSaBY

I agree. Quite beautiful

i have been hunting the southwestern ontario area hard for the last 8 years. we have yet to see a wild pheasant or bobwhite. i personally know the owner of a game farm, he had a pheasant hatch eggs on his property and the little ones survived. if they closed the pheasant season for a year or 2 after a release program, then set a male only harvest rule they might stand a chance.

I have flushed wild Southern Ontario bobwhites but it was about six years ago haven't been back to the spot since the place had good bird cover and food.

The challenges are many. At the fore-front, "hunting" is a bad thing. This is followed by farming practices that clear every last hedge-row. They till in the fall too, so there is virtually no sustainable winter habitat. The real wide spectrum killer in my opinion is herbicides, pesticides, insecticides. I don't think it's a leap to wonder where the quail/Huns/pheasants have gone when you compromise their habitat, leave no winter shelter, have them ingesting chemicals and kill off their food source. Hmmm.....???? Some of my best friends are farmers - it is what it is.
Feral cats are THE #1 predator of game birds, song birds, rabbits, etc. I have visited local farms only to see 5-25 of them breeding freely, roaming around.
Our hunting dollars do not go towards developing the sport as a resource. It goes into the "general coffers". ;)
The basic model for hunting is something like this: $$$$$$$$$ in - virtually 0 out, oh....and cut-backs are eminent.
The basic premise in this province at least is to tap on the users for $$$$$ until the natural resource is annihilated. I told you, "Hunters are bad!" At that juncture, it's up to the organized user groups such OFAH, etc. to represent hunters. Odd that those that are collecting the $$$$$$ from hunters don't have an interest of their own in seeing as a resource. I guess it's easier to collect the $$$$$$ and then leave it to those BAD groups that represent evil hunters to fight the fight. Otherwise, it could compromise re-election votes from the majority (antis).
I last saw a covey of wild quail around 1975 in the Dunnville area. I had no idea it was the first and last covey of wild quail I would see. Although I did not return immediately, I have since been back there MANY times never to see any sign of them.
Thank goodness we're not introducing sub-standard Bobwhites into the environment!
Show me the money!!!!!

I don't buy into the theory with weakening the gene pool. You might introduce desease and it will take a few years until released birds become "wild", but that is something that you can take care of if one would stock proper and sufficient birds.
The truth is that there's no money for doing it right!
Habitat and predation are what needs to be foremost considered if you want to see long term succuess. It's great if someone plants a hedge and shoots a yote, but until you plaster half a county with traps and significantly change agricultural practices in the same area, it is like planting flowers in your backyard - something to enjoy for the season, but next to nothing left for the coming year.

It is a question of priorities - not for us, but for farmers who would have to "pay" for it (the general public is unlikely going to spend a cent more in the grocery store)
I guess in a few years (and a bunch of publications to come) the gene pool thing is completely off the table. The problem with founding and lack of habitat would remain. Luckily by that time, there are likely so few wild birds left that the fuss about keeping them for hunting will be long over; money saved and fewer areas in Southern Ontario hunted - a complete political success...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by huntinaddict

if they closed the pheasant season for a year or 2 after a release program, then set a male only harvest rule they might stand a chance.

---

This is a truth not many people want to acknowledge. We re-established turkeys and elk by keeping the season closed for years while working to restore their numbers. Releasing a bunch of birds and then declaring open season each fall (and shooting hens) is not going to achieve anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ugo

I don't think it's a leap to wonder where the quail/Huns/pheasants have gone when you compromise their habitat, leave no winter shelter, have them ingesting chemicals and kill off their food source. Hmmm.....????

---

+1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waftrudnir

I don't buy into the theory with weakening the gene pool.

---

Whether you buy into it or not, it's well established by repeated studies and real world experience. I'll take that over armchair theory any day.

Obviously you have to release something to re-establish a wild population, but the pen-raised offspring of pen-raised parents ain't it. You'll be feeding predators weak birds and potentially screwing up any wild population you do manage to establish over the years. The best way to do it is to trap and release wild birds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

... it's well established by repeated studies and real world experience...
Obviously you have to release something to re-establish a wild population, but the pen-raised offspring of pen-raised parents ain't it. You'll be feeding predators weak birds and potentially screwing up any wild population you do manage to establish over the years. The best way to do it is to trap and release wild birds.

---

a few generations in captivity will not change genes - that is a fact! captivity is not an evolutionary driver capable of changing genes in a couple of years. that does not mean that breeding couldn't speed that up tremendously, but why would anyone breed intentionally poor quail?
of course, you are right that pen-raised birds have a significant lower survival rate (has not anything to do with genetic set-up). there are numerous ways to off-set this off (one you mentioned) - all cost money!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

This is a truth not many people want to acknowledge. We re-established turkeys and elk by keeping the season closed for years while working to restore their numbers. Releasing a bunch of birds and then declaring open season each fall (and shooting hens) is not going to achieve anything.



+1



Whether you buy into it or not, it's well established by repeated studies and real world experience. I'll take that over armchair theory any day.

Obviously you have to release something to re-establish a wild population, but the pen-raised offspring of pen-raised parents ain't it. You'll be feeding predators weak birds and potentially screwing up any wild population you do manage to establish over the years. The best way to do it is to trap and release wild birds.

---

This is what I asked for earlier. Let's see the studies. What study did the MNR use to reach their decision? The only one I've seen is the one I posted in my thread/first post to start a discussion but which doesn't clarify many issues.

The problem is you don't have enough native wild stock to do a trap and re-introduce program I would think. And there is absolutely no money for any kind of hunting initiative in Ontario right now. Scarce money will go to species that return votes like moose and deer. Realistically how many people would benefit from a quail program in South Western Ontario? Private property and predominantly bird dog guys. Pretty small vote return on your investment. An enterprising guy could duplicate the Pelee pheasant hunt model on an Island like Amherst Island near Kingston or possibly even Manitoulin. Pure put & take but done right I bet it would sell.
As for MNR studies, no money for that not for a long time. Even fish stocking which doesn't really offend most tree huggers is near non existent any more and tens of thousands of GTA people fish. If you want a quail program you need to be prepared to finance it privately.

A sustainable wild population of quail may not be achievable in today's environment for many reasons but chiefly due to subsidized predators, habitat loss within historical ranges and changes in agricultural practices.

The first management decision to be made by the ministry would be; are we trying to re-establish a sustainable wild population of individuals (ON turkey, ON elk, James Bay geese, Yellowstone wolves, etc) or are we trying to manage a recreational resources (brown trout fishery, former Conestoga pheasant release program, etc)? The two approaches are not synonymous yet they both aim to increase the number of individuals but with different end goals.

In terms of a government program the re-establishment of a sustainable wild population is very expensive, very long term and serves more than just the recreational hunting community. The metrics that would need to be established to measure the success and guide the management of the re-establishment program would take years to develop and refine as they would need to mesh with existing legislation. Not to mention a hunting season would be a very distant possibility (ie, turkey reintroduction or james bay geese).

The re-establishment of a population primarily as a recreational resource would be much less onerous and several quasi successful case studies exist to use a model. Similar to the many pheasant release programs or even the fish hatchery programs, community based volunteers or conservation groups (quail forever) would be used to run government subsidized "hatcheries", care, tend and release the quail, whose main purpose is for recreational hunting. Put and take if you will. Like many other put and take schemes, proper care would be required to prevent the spread of agricultural diseases among a very small (if even present) wild population. Intermixing between native and pen raised birds will always be a possibility, but that has not prevented the ministry from using this model with other species.

All comes back to the original management question; are we looking to re-establish a sustainable wild population or are we looking to establish a recreational resource?

To Sharon's original post, I believe if you have a release permit you can release Bob White. There are certainly producers raising thousands of Bob White each year in Ontario. From a personal training point of view, I hate using quail. If they get the slightest bit wet they don't fly worth a damn and I don't know of any other pen-kept bird that is more susceptible to wasting diseases.

Didn't realize that Conestoga wasn't doing the pheasant program anymore? But agreed, that type of scenario can be successful with minimal Provincial funding.

The problem with recreational programs is they're very expensive. Folks talk about our licence fees paying for things when in fact your small game licence only pays for about one limit of birds or fish. So these programs, while not necessarily a bad thing, are a poor long-term model.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

The problem with recreational programs is they're very expensive. Folks talk about our licence fees paying for things when in fact your small game licence only pays for about one limit of birds or fish. So these programs, while not necessarily a bad thing, are a poor long-term model.

---

Some do quite well but that is only because of the volunteers who run them. As they age out or lose interest you definitely have a risk of deterioration of the programs. The other thing is they are not "inexpensive" so that will turn some away. Although I guess Hullett can actually be hunted for free which amazes me. Can't see that going on forever.
But yes, it comes down to what the real intent for the program is? Hunters will finance some type of program if they eventually can expect to use it. Not so sure bird watchers would be prepared to contribute much for a small secretive bird that is rarely seen? Migrating waterfowl is very visible and grand to observe. You can take your kids or school group to a marsh in the Spring and enjoy it. Can't see many birders or schools having Bobwhites on the radar. I see them as a put & take scenario just like pheasants now.

Conestoga did a pheasant hunting program this year. I went several times and did very well. It can get crowded in there so i personally don't go on weekends.

As for sustainable pheasant/quail programs; if anyone was actually worried about the effect of recreational hunting, they could introduce the birds to areas that simply do not allow hunting such as Conservation areas, provincial parks, or even urban or suburban parks. Non-hunters would likely love to see these birds on their nature walks. Even if these areas had suitable habitat, the sad fact is that the increased numbers of predators like red-tailed hawks and coyotes would destroy the introduced birds quickly.

You would have to use wild birds, then you run into prohibitive costs. :(