1. 1 Dr. Jeffrey J. Lusk, Nebraska Game & Parks Commission

2. Outline  Captive propagation  The Surrogator  : What is it?  The Pheasant Decline  Objectives and Methods  Results  Conclusions  Caveats 2

3. Captive Propagation  Dilutes genetic diversity  Introduces diseases  Low survival rate  Reproduction lower among survivors  Costly 3

4. The Surrogator   What is it? Provides food, water, shelter, and warmth Bobwhites & Pheasants  How does it work? 1 day old chicks Minimum human contact Release pheasants at 4 weeks old ~$1800.00 + s/h 4

5. The Surrogator   What is it supposed to do? Keeps birds in “wild” state ○ Avoid predators ○ Improve survival Imprints chicks on a location ○ Chicks stay in area ○ Available for later harvest 5

6. The Surrogator   Does it work? Developers’ research Georgia study with bobwhites ????? 6

7. The Pheasant Decline 7 1955-2007

8. Nebraska Surrogator  Evaluation  Objectives Evaluate survival of pheasants after release Determine return to bag 8

9. Study Sites  2 Controlled Shooting Areas Jefferson Co. Gosper/Frontier Co.  2 Public Hunting Areas Sherman Reservoir WMA Sacramento-Wilcox WMA 9

10. Approach  Our approach was to deploy the Surrogator  system following the instructions as closely as possible.  We used multiple marking methods to help insure Surrogator  birds were identifiable among harvested birds.  We radio tagged a subset of birds placed in Surrogators  and followed the fate of these birds until the season opener. 10

11. Study Methods 11  Select site for Surrogator   Purchase rooster chicks  Mark chicks with patagial tags  Implant radio transmitters for survival rate estimation on 20 birds at each site  Mark all released chicks with expandable, coiled leg bands  Add chemical marker (deuterium) to water for last 2 weeks in unit

12. Site Preparation and Set Up 12

13. Site Preparation and Set Up 13

14. Patagial Tagging 14

15. Radio Transmitter Attachment 15

16. Radio Transmitter Attachment 16

17. Leg Banding 17

18. Radio-tracking & Recovery 18

19. Aviary Study  Implanted 20 pheasants with radios  Pheasants held in aviary at Sac-Wilcox WMA  Determine direct impact of surgery on survival  Banded birds to determine retention  Most pheasants released prior to hunting season 19

20. Harvest Wing Collection 20

21. Survival  Overall Survival from 30 July release For every 100 released pheasants, 14 survived until 25 October Of the 14 that survive, on average 6 would be expected to be harvested 21

22. Survival Site Number expected to survive until opener per 100 released Number of released birds returned to bag (25 OCT – 31 JAN) CSA1181 CSA200 Sac-Wilcox12 Sherman273 22

23. Return to Bag  Return to bag estimated from harvested birds with leg or patagial bands 11.5% of reported harvest were marked Hunter bag returns were 5.4%  One banded bird was a late release from the penned bird study  Cost/pheasant = $36.21 ($3.50 w/o Surrogator  )  Cost/pheasant returned to bag = $331.98 ($32.14 w/o Surrogator  ) 23

24. Aviary Study Results  Pheasants implanted on 3 September  3 pheasants died within week of surgery  17 pheasants survived until 27 October  14 of 17 surviving pheasants had both leg bands  2 surviving pheasants had one leg band  1 surviving pheasant had slipped both leg bands  1 pheasant lost its radio 24

25. Conclusions  Survival rates were generally low at all sites  Retention of tags and radios was high  Mortality from surgery in aviary birds low  Return to bag of Surrogator  pheasants low 25

26. Caveats  1 year study  Variability in survival among sites  Transmitter effects beyond mortality 26