III

I

III!
‘ 1* .

II

t
1

145
915
THS

 

EWECKED PHEASAN? AfiUNDAN‘CE AHD
F009 AVAEMEILE'FY is": CUN'E'ON AND
CASS COUNYEES, MICHIGAE

T’hcsis for the 99555-00 of M. S.
MICHEGAN STAfi CQLLEGE
C, Récharé Térman
195$

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled
Ringnecked Pheasant Abundance and FOOd Avail-
ability in Clinton and Cass Counties,
Michigan

presented by

C. Richard Terman

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Me So ZOOIOg

degree in

I .

,/

. I". ’l/ I] ’
/~g.,u L (5-37 (.1 “are;

L erajor professor

Date November 29, 1951+.

 

 

 

RINGNECKED PHEASAKT AB”NDANCE AND FOOD AVAILABILITY
IN CLINTON AND CASS COUNTIES, MICHIGAN

BY

C. RICHARD TEBMAN

A THESIS

Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan
State College of Agriculture and Applied Science l
in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Department of Zoology

1954

{His-us

 

ii

ACK‘NOI‘JLEDGI-E ITS

The author wishes to express his sincere thanks to
Drs. G. A. Petrides, P. I. Tack, and M. D. Pirnie of the
Departments of Fisheries & Wildlife and Zoology, for their
helpful advice and criticism. He is also greatly indebted
to Mr. Ralph Blouch of the Game Division, Michigan Depart-
ment of Conservation, who made available data on pheasant
abundance and assisted in many other ways.

Grateful acknowledgments are also due Drs. W. D. Baten
of the Agricultural Experiment Station, and Don W. Hayne,
of the Zoology Department, for their considerable aid in
statistical analyses, to Drs. G. W. Parmelee and G. Steinbauer,
of the Department of Botany, for advice in plant and seed
identification, to Aelred D. Geis and Robert Housedorf,
graduate students in the Department of Fisheries & Wild-
life, for assistance in field sampling and for other help,
and to Mrs. B. R. Henderson, secretary in the office of the
Department of Zoology, who aided in many ways.

During the investigation, the author was employed by
Michigan State College as a graduate teaching assistant
in the Department of Zoology. He is grateful for the
financial support, facilities and materials provided.

Deepest gratitude is due the author's wife, Phyllis
McAdam Terman, who aided in the typing and preparation of

the paper and provided encouragement throughout the study.

3 1:, (31.13133

RINGNECKED PHEASANTIABUNDANCE AND FOOD AVAILABILITY
IN CLINTON AND CASS COUNTIES, MICHIGAN

By
C. Richard Terman

AN ABSTRACT

Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan
State College of Agriculture and Applied Science
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Department of Zoology

1954
I “ x” V. '”'j _ .. _._‘—__‘_’_

.Approved i~9171jr é (r’tazzax;l,

RINGNECKED PHEASANT ABUNDANCE AND FOOD AVAILABILITY
IN CLINTON AND CASS COUNT ES, MICHIGAN

ABSTRACT

Clinton and Cass counties of Michigan differ greatly
in populations of the ringnecked pheasant with Cass having
very few birds. Samples of the winter foods available to
the pheasant were taken from these two counties during the
winter of l953-l954 with the aim of ascertaining if there
existed differences in quantity of food available to pheas-
ants during this critical period of their annual cycle.

The samples were selected systematically in fields
bordering the crowing count survey route for each county.
The crop types sampled were corn (mechanically picked),
wheat stubble, hay (all types), fallow fields, herbaceous
field borders, and shrubby field borders. Four fields of
each crop type were sampled in each county. A one foot
square quadrat was used and the area sampled was one foot
square extending two feet above the surface of the ground.
The food materials (seeds and fruits) included within the
quadrat were gathered in sacks, sorted, dried uniformly,
and weighed to the nearest milligram. The tedious nature
of the collecting, sorting, and weighing processes became
evident as this phase of the work was undertaken. Time
limitations resulted in comparisons being available only

for November, December and March.

The weights of food collected for each crop type during
each month were totalbd and comparison of counties under-
taken. nalysis of variance tests for each crop type by
months between counties showed that significant differences
at the five per cent level occurred in four of the eighteen
comparisons made. In December these were hay, fallow fields,
and herbaceous field.borders. There was also a significant
difference between herbaceous field borders sampled in Nov-
ember. Where differences occurred, Cass had the largest
quantity of food available.

Analyses of variance were completed on the pooled total
weights of samples from corn, wheat, hay and fallow fields,
and on the entire set of data. In each case significant
difference was found to exist in the quantity of food avail-
able along the census routes in Cass and Clinton counties
with Cass having more food available.

Since Cass county has a low pheasant population the
availability of food does not seem to be a causative factor

for the difference in pheasant abundance in these two areas.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgments . . . . .
List of Tables . . . . .
I. Introduction . . . .
II. Study Areas . .. . .
III. Experimental Studies .

A. Field Procedure .

1. Preparation and Background

2. Sampling Techniques

B. Laboratory Materials and Methods

1. Sorting . . .
2. Drying . . .
3. Weighing . . .
IV. Results and Discussion
A. Data Analyses . .
B. Weather Factors .
C. Future Research .
V. Summary . . . . . .

References Cited . . . .

iii

Page

A» ,i
4 1*

\OKO-xl-P-P-P-‘NH

u) re n) i4 F4 l4 F‘ +4
\N +4 o m) n) ro <3 0

iv

LIST OF TABLES

Page
Indices of Pheasant Populations in Clinton
and Cass Counties . . . . . . . . . . 2
Percentages of Crop and Field Border Types. . 6

Weight of Food Material Collected (in Grams)
by Fields . . C O O . . . C O O O 14

Crop per Month-County Analysis of Variance. .15 ,16
Total Food Weights in Grams for Crop Fields

(Corn, Wheat, Hay, Fallow Field) by Route

Portions o o o o o o o o a o o o 17

Total Food Weights in Grams for all Fields by
Route Portions o o o o o o o o o o o 18

Snow Cover on Collecting Days . . . . . . l9

I. INTRODUCTION

The ringnecked pheasant (Phasianus colchicus Linnaeus)
is distributed through portions of northern and western
United States. In Michigan, the species is confined chief-
ly to the southern half of the lower peninsula although
abundance within this area varies locally. The purpose
of this study was to examine two localities differing
markedly in pheasant population size and to ascertain if
there existed a significant difference between these local-
ities in the quantity of food available for pheasants dur-

ing the critical winter season.

II. STUDY AREAS

Due to the great difference in pheasant population
levels, study areas were selected in Clinton and Cass coun-
ties. Indices of pheasant abundance in these two counties
are shown in Table 1 (Anonymous, 1952, 1953, 1954; Blouch,
1953b. 1954).

 

 

TABLE I
INDICES OF PHEASANT POPULATIONS IN CLINTON AND CASS COUNTIES
1951 1952 1953
Clinton
Growing count 14.9 24.2 16.3
Broods (mail carriers) 8.8 9.2 7.5
Kill
Total 17,176 16,009 24,199
Birds per pheasant
hunter 2.8 2.7 2.9
Cass
Growing count (none made) (none made) .8
Broods (mail carriers) 1.7 .6 1.2
Kill
Total 2,599 2,673 3,104
Birds per pheasant
hunter 1.5 1.5 1.3

 

The crowing count is the average number of pheasant calls
heard per two minute stop along a twenty mile route (Kimball,u A
1949). In this study, the routes were those adopted by
the Game Division, Michigan Department of Conservation (Blouch,
1953a). Maps of the crowing routes are in the pocket of the

back cover and the fields studied border these routes.

County pheasant populations are estimated from numbers
of broods seen per ten day period by rural mail carriers
and from kill figures which indicate the total kill and
the number of cocks bagged per hunter as tabulated from

the hunter reports.

III. EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES

A. Field Procedure

1. Preparation and background. Pheasant foods and

 

food habits have been studied by Allen.(1938), Dalke (1934,
1935, 1943), Fried (1940), Green (1938), Grimmer (1940),
Leedy (1936), Trautman (1952), Wright (1941), and others
through analysis of crop, gizzard, or fecal materials.

Despite the large quantity of literature available
concerning food habits, relatively little work seems to
have been done on the field availability of pheasant foods.
Allen (1941) collected random samples of grain and weeds
on meter square plots at the Rose Lake Wildlife Experiment
Station near Lansing, Michigan, from October to March,
1940. Only seeds on stems were collected and the number
of samples taken varied from one to five for each field.
Fields sampled were corn, wheat, oat stubble, fallow land
and gardens, and lespedeza.

Dalke (1934) studied the food available for pheasants
in selected counties of southern Michigan during the fall
and_winter by sampling stubble fields, wild herbaceous
areas, and fence rows. Grains and seeds on sample plots
four feet square were collected and weighed, and the rel-

ative availability by species determined. Leedy (1939)

in WOod County, Ohio, sampled weeds by using rod square
plots and soybeans by foot square quadrats.

In Colorado, Sandfort (1949) sampled six major crop
types between September 15, 1948, and March 31, 1949.
These included corn (stalks and stubble), wheat stubble
(disked and undisked), barley stubble (undisked), and cat
stubble (undisked). Six fields of each of these types
were selected and sampled, using plots one foot square.
Five samples were taken in each field during each of four
collecting periods. The seeds collected were cleaned and
weighed and relative seasonal abundance was determined.

In the summer of 1953, a Michigan State College field
class in wildlife management made surveys of the acreages
of crops grown in a square section of land surrounding
five systematically selected observation stations along
the crowing routes in Clinton and Cass counties (Petrides,
unpublished). A roadside crop tally was also made by the
class, in which only those fields which bordered the routes
were tabulated and field borders which were perpendicular
to the routes classified according to plant growth. The
percentages of occurrence of major crop types were com-
puted for each census route. Some of these data are sum-
marized in Table 2 which also gives crop acreage percentages
for each county (Hill, 1953). From the roadside field and
field border tally, four field habitat types and two field

border types were selected for sampling.

TABLE 2

PERCENTAGES 0F CROP AND FIELD BCRDER TYPES __~_

Herba- Shrubby

Corn Wheat Hay Fallow ceous Field
Field Border
Border

 

 

Clinton
*1950 Mich.
Agri. Census 13.9 12.3 17.2
**Section
survey 15.1 21.8 17.3 8.1
***Roadside
tally 11.2 14.0 19.0 10.5 59.0 20.5

Cass
*1950 Mich. '
Agri. Census 14.6 9.3 16.2
*“Section
survey 16.2 10.4 7.0 8.3
***Roadside
tally 16.7 9.7 13.0 23.2 49.5 21.1

 

* Per cent of total acres farmed in county.
** Per cent of total acres tabulated on census routes.
*** Per cent of total fields tabulated on census routes.
The four crop types decided upon as best representing
the two county census routes were corn (mechanically pick-
ed), wheat stubble, hay (all types), and fallow ground
(fields which were uncultivated for at least the pre-
ceding year). The field bordors were herbaceous, in which
the height of the predominant vegetation did not exceed
three and one-half feet and trees and shrubs did not occupy
more than 25 per cent of the area, and shrubby field bor-
ders in which the vegetation ranged in height from three

and one-half to ten feet with tall trees not occupying more

than 25 per cent of the area.

2. Sampling techniques. Soon after the counties

 

were selected, letters explaining the problem and the pro-
posed method of attack were delivered to the owners of
land along the study routes and permission to go on the
land was requested. The problem was of interest to many
of those contacted and permission was given by almost all.

Sampling was begun in November, 1953. and continued
once a month in each county through.March, 1954. In order
to eliminate bias, a systematic procedure was followed
in the selection of fields to be sampled. The twenty-mile
census routes were divided into four equal portions and
the first field of each of the six selected cover types
in each five mile portion of the route was sampled.

Due to limitations of time it was decided that five
samples would be taken from each cover or crop type with
the exception of corn. Since corn has a predominating
influence in the pheasant diet (Dalke, 1934; Green, 1938;
Leopold, 1933, p. 259; Nelson, 1940) ten samples were taken
from corn fieldsbeginning with the December sampling. In
November, five plots had been sampled.

The materials used in the field were as follows: a
one foot square metal quadrat, a small pointed trowel,
for scraping up seeds, numerous ten-pound size paper sacks
in which materials from each quadrat were placed, a ruler
to measure snow depth, a hand axe for cutting and clearing
debris around and in the quadrat, and heavy rubberized.gloves

when snow was present,

The sampling in each field was done along a line per—
pendicular to the road and beginning at a point approxi-
mately at the center of the field along the road border.
The first sample was taken ten paces from the fence or edge
of the field or fifteen paces from the road, whichever was‘
more obvious. Ten paces were left between plots in all
fields except corn, where five paces separated the plots.
The total distance the sample series extended into each
field was equal. The collector paced into the field to
each sample site and then held the quadrat at arm's length
in front of him, after which it was dropped. Care was
taken not to influence the exact placing of the quadrat.
This was done by looking away or closing the eyes. The
seeds and plant materials in the circumscribed areas and
on the vegetation two feet above that area were placed in
a bag. The two foot height was selected as approximately
that which could be reached by a pheasant.

Field borders were sampled similarlm.though due to
the density of the vegetation the quadrat had to be forced
into the field border. This was particularly frequent in
the shrubby borders. This caused some disturbance of the
area, but care was taken to collect as closely as possible
these food materials which would ordinarily be found in
the quadrat.

Monthly samples were taken in approximately the same

area of each field. Correction had to be made for the

sampling technique in the field borders when it was obvious
that the quadrat would fall on the same spot as the previous
sample. When this occurred, the quadrat was placed near

by in an undisturbed part of the field border.

In individual samples, care was taken to gather all
food materials visible. When snow was present, it was
removed as much as possible and seeds and fruits visible
were taken. The maximum depth of snow encountered was
about five inches, and it never crusted sufficiently to
deter the pheasants in their search for food.

The December sampling in Clinton county had to be
done in two parts due to a blizzard which prevented back-
road travel. This postponement of sampling with its re-
sultant change in snow cover, temperature, and other en-
vironmental factors, did not appear to have appreciably
affected the weight of the food.

Samples taken over the five month period totaled 1,360
but only 800 could be analyzed. Of this number, 200 were
from corn fields while 120 samples represented each of the

other five cover types.
B. Laboratory Materials and.Methods

1. Sorting. Soil screens were used to sift separately
the material collected from each plot. (All waste plant
material, gravel, and dirt were discarded and only food

materials such as seeds and fruits were saved. Most of the

10

work was slow and tedious with some samples taking as long
as 5% hours to complete. After the material was sorted,
all the food was placed in small envelopes which were fold-
ed, stapled, and filed.

2. Drying. The seeds and fruits were left in the
envelopes and put in an electric oven at 80°C for 48 hours.
All the same crop collections were placed in *he even to-
gether to insure identical preparation for weighing. After
the 48 hour period, the envelopes were placed in glass des-
iccators, and kept there until they were individually weighed.

3. Weighing. Weighin" was done on a chain-o-matic

."‘
v

 

balance and the gross weight recorded to the nearest mil-
ligram. The food material vas removed from the envelopes
for the weighing, but plant species were not separated.
Each plot sample was weighed separately and samples were in
the open air only during the actual weighing. The occur-
rence of seeds of he following four species also were re-
corded: foxtail (Setaria sp.), common ragweed (Ambrosia

elatior), giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida), and wild carrot

 

(Dau us carota).

 

Gross sample weights were used as an indication of
food availability since work by Dalke (1934) and Leedy (1940)
indicate that pheasants eat a very wide range of foods. As
an extreme example, Nelson and Jansen (1949) reported find-
ing pheasants which had been killed by automobiles, with

their crops and gizzards full of pheasant flesh, feathers,

11

and bones. These birds were well fleshed and in good con-
dition during a period of observation which followed a
heavy storm in South Dakota. From tame data, it seems rea-
sonable to conclude that practically all weed and crop seeds
taken by the present sampling method would be used as food
by pheasants, at least if a shortage of normal foods de-

veloped.

12

IV. .FSULTS AND DISCUSSION
A. Data Analyses

Due to the great amount of time found to be involved
in sorting and processing the data, only three complete
monthly samples could be analyzed for this report. These
samples are for November, December, and March. The weight
of food from each field was totaled and is recorded in
Table 3. Since only five quadrats were taken from each
cornfield in November, the total of each was doubled to
permit direct comparisons with the later corn data. With
the data thus arranged, an analysis of variance test was
performed between counties for each crop, each month. This
test is summarized in Table 4. With six degrees of freedom,
an F value of 5.99 or higher is significant at the 5 per
cent level. Of the eighteen tests made, only four fields
provided samples which differed significantly in weight
from their counterparts in the other county. These were
herbaceous field borders for November and hay, fallow fields,
and herbaceous field borders for December. In all cases
these differences were due to a greater quantity of food
in Cass county.

After completion of the month by month analyses, analyses

of variance were made for the lumped data excluding field

13

borders ( able 5) and for the total data including all types
sampled (Table 6). Although significant differences by
months occurred in only feur of the eighteen crop-month

tests (Table 4) the analyses of lumped data (Tables 5 d 6)
did reveal significant differences in total food availability
between the two counties at both the 5 per cent and l per
cent level of significance.

A record of the occurrence of foxtail, lesser rag-
weed, giant ragweed, and wild carrot in the crop fields
was kept. With a total of 24 fields sampled in each county,
percentages of field occurrence were recorded. Little
difference existmibetween counties. The largest difference
was in the occurrence of foxtail. In Cass county, this
species was found in 16 fields; in Clinton county in only
11. For all weeds combined, Cass county had the greatest
percentage occurrence.

From all these data, it appears that pheasant food
abundance is higher along the route in Cass county than in
Clinton county. In view of sampling difficulties, perhaps
the more suitable conclusion would be that there is no
evidence of lower food availabilities in the Cass county

area of low pheasant abundance.

l4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 3
WEIGHT OF FOOD MATERIAL COLLECTED (LNLGRAMS) BY FIELDS
November December March

Field Clinton Cass Clinton Cass Clinton Cass
Corn 1 8.384 5.908 6.783 1.461 6.886 4.285
2 1.968 8.408 .668 20.295 .011 9.683

3 8.690 7.824 14.455 8.683 2.866 10.440

4 3.274 6.226 .487 6.504 1.695 15.981

Total 22.316 28.36’ 22.393 36.943 117458 30.389
Wheat 1 .208 1.442 .096 1.294 .117 .349
2 2.749 2.123 3.038 2.348 3.810 .736

3 2.143 .984 1.218 .782 .191 .076

4 1.234 1.692 .414 .479 .639 1.006

Total 6.334 6.241 4.766* 4.903 4.757 2.167
Hay l .000 .000 .043 .081 .000 .001
2 .037 .116 .040 .764 .234 .074

3 .011 .226 .030 .891 .277 .033

4 .002 .102 .001 .577 .001 .283

Total .050 .444 .114 2.313 .512 .391
Fallow 1 .582 .718 .058 .810 .819 .104
Field 2 .571 2.114 .722 1.574 .010 .836
3 .726 9.633 .676 1.939 1.235 2.819

4 .102 1.088 .121 2.06 .123 1.300

Total 1.981 13.553 1.577 6.38 2.137 5.059
Shrubby 1 4.421 .059 1.031 1.039 .882 3.174
Field 2 7.426 1.403 .222 1.595 3.328 7.535
Border 3 .320 .639 .514 .222 .818 .368
4 g9.684 2.631 .816 2.226 5.133 1.319“

Total 21.851 4.732 2.583 5.082 10.161 12.396
Herba- 1 .277 4.986 .311 4.194 3.580 2.716
ceous 2 .126 .273 .032 .893 .106 .553
Field 3 .424 3.656 .183 1.406 .319 1.460
Border 4 .108 3.45 .001 433023 1056 2.325
.935 12.3 8 .527 9.516 4:061 7.054

 

o a O
o a s
V a o
- c o
0 w c
I I I

 

.l‘l if ‘I

15

TABLE 4

CR0? PER MONTH-COUNTY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

 

Source Degrees Sum

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean F
Crop Month 0 f o f o f
Variation Freedom Squares Square Value
x Total 7 44.895
0 Between Counties 1 4.575 4.575 .681
V. Error 6 '0.32 6.72
ID Total 7 347.263
Corn E Between Counties 1 62.463 62.463 1.316
C. Error 6 284.80 47,467
M Total 7 96.496
A Between Counties 1 44.798 44.798 5.199
R. Error 6 351.698 8.616
N Total 7 4.367
0 Between Counties 1 .002 .002 .003
V. Error 6 4.365 .728
D TOtal 7 70235
Wheat E Between Counties 1 .003 .003 .003
C. Error 6 7.232 1.205
M Total 7 10.664
A Between Counties 1 .838 .838 .512
R. Error 6 9.826 1.638
N Total 7 .046
0 Between Counties 1 .019 .019 4.2
V. Error 6 .027 .0045
D Total 7 0987 *
Hay E Between Counties 1 .605 .605 9.45
C. Error 6 .382 .064
M Total 7 .117
A Between Counties 1 .002 .002 .105
R. Error 6 .115 .019

 

TABLE 4 (continued)

16

 

 

Source Degrees Sum

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean F
Crop Month of of of O 0
Variation Freedom Squares Square Value
N Total 7 70.003
0 Between Counties 1 16.739 16.739 1.886
V. Error 6 53.264 8.877
D Total 7 4.224
Fallow E Between Counties 1 2.893 2.893 13.032
Field C. Error 6 1.331 .222
I4 TOtal 7 5 0995
1A Between Counties 1 1.031 1.031 1.247
R. Error 6 4.964 .827
N Total 7 89.543
0 Between Counties 1 36.633 36.633 4.154
V. Error 6 52.910 8.818
Shrubby D Total 7 3.326
Field E Between Counties 1, .781 .781 1.842
Border C. Error 6 2.545 .424
M Total 7 43.994
A Between Counties 1 .625 .625 .086
R. Error 6 43.369 7.228
N Total 7 28.388
0 Between Counties 1 16.34 16.34 8.137*
V. Error 6 12.048 2.008
Herba- D Total 7 17.028 *
ceous E Between Counties 1 10.1 10.1 8.745
Field C. ,Error 6 6.928 1.155
Border
M TOtal 7 12 071
A Between Counties 1 1.119 1.119 .579
R. Error 6 11.591 1.932

 

* Indicates significance
F: 5% :

5.99

it

17

TABLE 5

TOTAL FOOD WEIGHTS IN seams FOR oaor FIELDS
(COINLWHEATLHAY, FALLON FIELD) BY ROUTE PORTIONS

—_

 

Clinton County

 

 

 

 

 

Portion
November December March Total
1 9.174 6.98 7.822 23.976
2 5.325 4.468 4.065 13.858
3 11.570 16.379 4.569 32.518
4 4.612 1.023 2.458 8.093
Total 30.681 _ 28.850 18.914 78.445
Cass County
1 8.068 3.646 4.739 16.453
2 12.761 24.981 11.329 49.071
3 18.667 12.295 13.368 44.330
4 9.108 9.625 8.570 27.303
Total _48.604 50.547 38.006 137.157

 

TABLE 5 (continued)
ANALYSIS 0r VARIANCE FOR TOTAL OF FOL. one? WEIGHT.

 

 

Source Degrees Sum Mean F
of of of
Variation Freedom Squares Square Value

Total 23 716.889
Between sections 6 345.887 57.648
Between months 2 41.892 20.946
Between counties 1 143.629 143.629 9.339*
Counties x months 2 .934 .467
Error 12 184.547 15.379

 

* Indicates significance
F: 5% - 4.75
1% = 9.33

 

T

TOTAL FOOD WEIGHTS IN GRIYS FOR ALL FIELDS BY ROUT

AB

6

E

PORTIONS

 

Clinton County

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Portion
November December March Total

1 13.872 8.322 12.284 34.478

2 12.877 4.722 7.499 25.098

3 12.314 17.076 5.706 35.096

4 14.404 1.84 7.647 23.891
Total 53.467 31.96 33.136 118.463

Cass County

1 13.113 8.879 10.629 32.621

2 14.437 27.469 19.417 61.323

3 22.962 13.923 15.196 52.081

4 15.192 14.874 12.214 42.280
Total 65.704 765.145 57.456 188.305

TABLE 6 (continued)
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF TOTAL FOOD WEIGHTS
Source Degrees Sum Mean F
of of of ,
Variation Freedom Squares Square Value

Total 23 735.381
Between sections 6 188.943 31.491
Between months 2 56.087 28.044 *
Between counties 1 202.394 202.394 3299
Counties x months 2 27.642 13.821
JError 12 260.315 21.693

 

* Indicates significance

F: 5%
1%

4.75
9.33

19
B. Weather Factors

Regulation of the weather factors involved in a study
of this type is impossible. From the United States Weather
Bureau (1953; 1954) detailed weather averages were obtained
for the two counties. Stations selected to represent each
county were St. Johns, in Clinton County and Three Rivers
in Cass County. Inspection of these averages showed that
the total snow, sleet, and hail for the entire winter period
differed only slightly between counties with Clinton having
4.5 inches more. However, during the three months studied,
Cass had a total of 2.1 inches more than Clinton. Table 7

shows depth of snow on collecting days.

TABLE 7
SNOW COVER ON COLLECTING DAYS

 

 

Clinton County Cass County
Nov. 25 Trace snow, Nov. 27 Five inches
ground frozen. and less as

day progressed.

Dec. 22 Three to five Dec. 21 Rain, no snow.
inches, blizzard.

Dec. 29 Snow spotty, two
to three inches

and less.
March 29 One to six inches March 22 No snow,
progressively, ground soft.

blizzard conditions,
ground frozen.

 

 

20
C. Future Research

In any study sufficient manpower to permit adequate
sampling is a necessity. Yet the return of knowledge ob-
tained for effort put forth is a practical consideration.

The following suggestions are made in the event that
further research in this problem is undertaken. In corn
fields, a quadrat large enough to include one row in every
sample would perhaps eliminate the effect of a possibly
abnormal distribution of corn seeds due to row planting,
growth, and picking techniques. This variable might be
controlled if samples in corn fields were taken across the
field perpendicular to the rows.

The great variation within plant populations in field
borders was a problem encountered in this sampling. hrubby
field borders tend to offer the greatest difficulty in
this respect. It may be that a more extensive survey be-
fore sampling begins would enable the investigator to control
more adequately this variable and compare two areas which

_are more nearly alike.

21

v . 51. am Y

Clinton and Cass counties of Michigan differ greatly
in populations of the ringnecked pheasant with Cass having
very few birds. Samples of the winter foods available to
the pheasant were taken from these two counties during the
winter of 1953-1954 with the aim of ascertaining if there
existed differences in quantity of food available to pheas-
ants during this critical period of their annual cycle.

The samples were selected systematically in fields
bordering the crowing count survey route for each county.
Six crop types were sampled. Four fields of each crop type
were sampled in each county. A one foot square quadrat was
used and the area sampled was one foot square extending two
feet above the surface of the ground. The food materials
within the quadrat were collected, processed, and analyzed.
These operations were so tedious that comparisons were made
only for November, December, and March.

The weights of food collected for each crop type dur-
ing each month were totaled and comparison of counties un-
dertaken. Analysis of variance tests for each crop type
by months between counties showed that significant differences
at the five per cent level occurred in four of the eighteen

comparisons made. In December these were hay, fallow fields,

22

and herbaceous field borders. There was also a significant
difference between herbaceous field borders sampled in
November. ‘nere differences occurred, Cass had the largest
quantity of food available.

Analyses of variance were completed on the pooled
total weights of samples from corn, wheat, hay and fallow
fields, and on the entire set of data. In each case signif-
icant difference was found to exist in the quantity of food
available along the survey routes in Cass and Clinton counties
with Cass having more food available.

Since Cass county has a low pheasant population the
availability of food does not seem to be a causative factor

for the difference in pheasant abundance in these two areas.

23

REFERENCES CITED

Allen, D. L. 1958. Ecological studies on the vertebrate
fauna of a 500-acre farm in Kalamazoo County, Michigan.
Ecol. Monog. 8:347-436.

1941. Rose La} {e Wildlife Experiment Station, second
annual report, 1940- 41. Rich. Dept. Cons., Game Div.,

Lansing. 365 pp.

Anonymous. 1952. Hunting and trapping information and
kill records, 1951-52. Mich D pt. Cons., Game Div.,

Lansing.
1955. F.unting and trapping information and kill records,
1952-53 Mich. Dept. Cons., Game Div., Lansing.

1954. Hunting and trapping information and kill records,
1953-54. Mich. Dept. Cons., Game Div., Lansing.

Blouch, R. I. 1953a. Unpublished. Growing count survey
routes. Pittman Robertson project WESR. Mich. Dept.
.Cons., Game Div., ansing.

1:53b. Unpublished data. Pittman Roocrts n project
WEBR. Mich. Dept. Cons., Game Div., Lansing.

1954. The 1954 pheasant breed'ng season. Reporti o. 2021.
Mich. Dept. Cons., Game Div., Lansing.

Dalke, P. D. 1934. Food habits of the pheasant in southe ern
Michi an. Tnpublished Ph. D. thesis, Univ. of Michi-
gan. 102 numb. leavec

1935. Dropping nalyses as an indication of pheasant
food habits. Trans. Amer. Game Conf. 21:337-391.

1943. Effect of winter weather on the feeding habits
of pheasants in southern Michigan. Journ. Wildl.

Fried, L. A. 1940. The food habits of the ring-necked
pheasant in Kinnesota. Jour. Wildl. Hgt., 4:27-36.

Green, W. E. 1938. The food and cover relationship in
the winter survival of the ring—necked pheasant
Phasianus colchicus torquatus Gmelin, in northern
Iowa. Iowa State Coll. Jour. Sci., 12:285-315.

Grimmer, W. F. 1940. Food habits of the pheasant in
Wisconsin. Wisconsin Cons. Bull., 5(4) 10-13.

Hill, E. B. 1953. 950 Census of agriculture for Michigan
by counties and minor civil divisions (Townships).
Information provided by U. S. Dept. of Commerce,
Bureau of the Census. Agri. Economics Dept., Michigan
State College, East Lansing, Mich., 141 pp.

Kimball, J. w. 1949. The crowing count pheasant census.
Jour. Wildl. Mgt., 13:101-120.

Leedy, D. L. 1936. Food habits of the ring-necked pheas-
ant. Ohio Wild. Research Sta., Release No. 36, l~6.

1939. Some land use factors related to pheasant re-
productions. Ohio Wildl. Research Sta., Release
No. 106, 1-8.

1940. Natural pheasant production in relation to
agricultural land use. Abstracts of Doctoral Dis-
SertationSo, NO. 33, 115-1240

Leopold, Aldo. 1933. Game management. Charles Scribner's
Sons, New York. 423 pp.

Nelson, B. A. and R. G. Janson. 1949. Starvation of
pheasants in South Dakota. Jour. Wildl. Mgt.,
13:308-309.

Nelson, U. C. 1940. Winter observations of pheasants
in southeastern Minnesota. Jour. Wildl. Mgt., 4:369-372.

Petrides, G. A. Unpublished. Land use surveys in Michigan
farmlands.

Sandfort, W. W. 1949. Game food volume and availability
during winter on agricultural land in Colorado.
Colorado Cooperative Wildl. Res. Unit, Quarterly
Report 2(3):3-2l.

Trautman, C. G. 1952. Pheasant food habits in South t
Dakota and their economic significance to agriculture.
South Dakota Deot. Game, Fish, and Parks, Tech. Bull.
N0. 1:1'890

U. S. Weather Bureau. 1953. Climatological data. Michi-
gan section. 68(10-12):l37—184.

1954. Climatological data. Michigan section. 69(1-4):l-64.

Wright, Thomas, Jr. 1941. A study of the fall food supply of
the ring-necked pheasant and the bob-white quail in wash-

ington County, Rhode Island. Jour Wildl. Mgt., 5:279-27

 

 

84"- 20’

CRATIOT . RM
Ma RIver State Game Area

CLINTON COUNTY

\_/\
DISTRIBUTED av

MICHIGAN
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION

YOU COULD NOT ENJOY THE CLEAN WHOLESOME RECREATION OF THIS COUNTY
IF
ITS FORESTS WERE BURNED OVER
ITS STREAMS WERE POLLUTED

ITS CAMP SITES WERE UNSANITARY

 

BOUNDARY LINES ARE SHOWN TO DESIGNATE THE
LIMITS OF CONSERVATION PROJECTS.

ONLY COLORED AREAS ARE PUBLIC LANDS.
UNCOLORED AREAS ARE PRIVATE LANDS.

AND IF

THERE WERE N0 GAME 0R FIFE-i

KEEP MICHIGAN CLEAN AND GREEN
REPORT FOREST FIRES AND RETURN NEXT YEAR

CROI’I’ING CENSUS ROUTE

. STATE LANDS DEDICATED FOR STATE FORESTS. PARKS
AND OTHER PUBLIC CONSERVATION USES.

t t S

LEGEN

 

UNDEDICATED STATE LANDS SUBJECT TO SALE OR
: EXCHANGE APPLICATION.

 

_BOUNDARY STATE FORESTS. PARKS. ETC. *

4 3... oo'—_——II._—

. PUBLIC FISHING SITES. Q SITE NOT USABLE

OWOSSO
TO IONIA

 

IT IS THE POLICY NOT TO DISPOSE OF STATE LANDS IN
STATE 0R NATIONAL PROJECT AREAS. EXCEPTIONS MAY BE MADE
IN CERTAIN CASES WHERE THE LANDS ARE DESIRED FOR AGRICUL-

 

 

TURE OR TO CONSOLIDATE OWNERSHIP.

TION INOUIRE LANDS DIVISION.

LANSING I3.SMICHIGAN.

FOR FURTHER INFORMA-

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION.

TATE OWNERSHIP JUNE 1, 1953
BASE BY MICHIGAN STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT

LEGEND

ROADS

PRIMITIVE ROAD
UNIMPROVED IOAD

ORADED AND WINED ROAD
SOIL SURFACED ROAD
METAL SURFACED ROAD
BITUMINOUS MFACED ROAD
PAVED ROAD

ROAD SYSTEM DESIGNATION

UNITED STATES NICHWAY [223

STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM

FEDERAL AID MIDWAY SYSTEM FA
FEDERAL AID SEWY HIGHWAY
SYSTEM FAS

ENDOF FEDERAL AID 4m
DESIGNATED ROUTE fli—
AIRWAYS

___+.,_-_.

ANNYNAVY on MARINE CORPS FIELD ©
DEHANTMENT OF COMMERCE
INTERMEDIATE FIELD
COMMERCIAL OR MUNICIPAL FIELD O
MARKED AUXILIARY FIELD
AIRPLANE LANDING FIELD MARKED

ON EMENCENCY Y

RAILROADS

RAILROAD (ANY HUMDER TRACKS) -*—4—-*-
USED DY sINCLE OPERATING COMPANY
RAILROAD (ANY NUMDER TNACNS) I-i-I-fi-w-h-I
USED DY MORE THAN our. OPERATING
COMPANY ON SAME on ADJACENT
RIGHTS OF WAY moT TNACNACE mm

AIR ROUTES

 

RAILROAD {mm M + + +
PRIVATELY OWNED III-Io- mu "- —.—- "—
RAILROAD sTATION —I—o-—I—
RAILROAD GRADE CROSSING —I—It—I—
RAILROAD ADOVE ROAD

RAILROAD DELOW ROAD -+-3|I(-+-
RAILROAD TUNNEL —I-)r:'1—I—

HIGHWAY BRIDGES
(20 To 300 FT LENGTH)
GENERAL fl:
DNAWDRIDOE =fi=
000 FT. LENGTH ON OVER)
GENERAL ‘ zip-Ac:
DNAWDNIDCE =¥IOI£=
wsPENEION 45%
ARCH z“:
muss on GIRDER =fi$k=
DAMS

DAN WITH ROAD 4—
DAN WITHOUT ROAD #-

CITY AND VILLAGE
ETATE CAPITOL

COUNTY EEAT .
OTHER CITIES AND VILLAOEE O

IWTED CITY on VILLAOE §§
UNINCONPOIIATED COMPACT %
J

WATERWAYS
OPERATED SHIP AND BARGE ' 3&1,
LINES m

DOCK. PIEN OR LANDING w
a

FREE FERRY 21414::

TOLL FERRY :H’F-{Z

HEAD OF NAVIGATION (”was

NAVIGABLE STREAM u
_§

GENERAL CULTURAL FEATURES

FARM UNIT

DWELLING (OTHER THAN FARM)

NOW: on GROUPS OF DWELLINOE
(CLOSELV SPACEO)

STORE on SMALL DUEINEE:
ESTACLISHMENT

SEASONAL DWELLING

SEASONAL DWELLINOC MELY
sPACEO)

POET OFFICE

TOWNHALL. CNANOE OR
COMMUNITY HALL

HOTEL

CHURCH OTHER RELIGIOUS
INSTITUTIONS)

SCHOOLHOUSE (OTHER
EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS)
CORRECTIONAL INCTITUTION
HOSPITAL

FACTORY ON INousTNIAL PLANT
sAWMILL (STATIONARY)

POWER PLANT

RADIO sTATION

sTATE ROAD CANAOE
SEASONAL INDUSTRY

MINE SHAFT

OPEN MINE

GRAVEL PIT

STONE QUARRY

STOCN YARD

OIL on CA! WELLs

WELL GRIND

TANHs

CLuas (CC—COLF 0R COUNTRY am.
HC.-WN‘TING CLUB. F.C.-FI$HINO
CLUD, Ec.-OUN CLUI)

ATHLETIC FIELDS ON AMUSEMENT
PARKS, PLAYONOUNDC. ETC
INTENSIVE RECREATION AREA:
EMALL PARKS (SP-"ATE,
C.P.-COUNTY, mil-MUNICIPAL)
FAIR CROUND. RACE couRsE.
SPEEDWAY

CEMETERY

ETATE POLICE SUISTATION
INDIAN RESERVATION

CAMP on LODGE

CAMP OROUND

TOURIST CAMP

PICNIC GROUNDS on WIDE TABLE
DATHINC BEACH

SCENIC SITE

DINO SANCTUARY

CAME FARM

CAME PRESERVE

FISH HATCHERY

C C C — CAMP

LIOHT OIAUTICAL)

LICHTHOUSE

AIRWAY DEACON LICHT
LANDMANN LIGHT BEACON
FOREST NANOER sTATION
FOREST SERVICE LOONOUT STATION
CAUCINC on PUMPINO STATION
ROADSIDE sPRINO

FOREST NURSERY—EXPERIMENTAL
sTATION

U.s.C.C. sTATION

U.s. LIFE sAVINC sTATION

PIPE LINE. GAS

PIPE LINE. OIL

7?”.

DEC D‘DI‘HD

D11>§Braubk+sr I r- .- [up I- ..

° ‘5
°O

O
I

OEINFIE

I

COO Noemi-ANFJCINBOIDIMPPNM I». L;

~~~°II~IIQ

a—u— °|L Dan-4

To CR
A)” “AP
103

 

 

$2.50

CURTIS
5 L

FREE DISTRIBUTION
Complete set all countIes

 

 

 

@ AL'APD L.

H
0'
.z

“955 L. 1° “NT

 

SHIAWASSEE

CO.

Io
4N

7'o
L

5"! ANSING
INGHAM ° frog

7‘ F

ENREST

EATON
R4 w. R 3 w.

PREVENT

95‘“.

CROWI NG CENSUS
CLINTON -

 

FIRES ROUTE

 

 

CASS COUNTY . I VAN BUREN R'GW'

DIsTRIaUTEO BY CO. I
«00wa NAG/am I
MICHIGAN - :: .... '
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION ' "'
t S l

YOU COULD NOT ENJOY THE CLEAN NHOLESOME RECREATION OF THIS COUNTY

%:

IF
ITS FORESTS WERE BURNED OVER
ITS STREAMS WERE POLLUTED
ITS CAMP SITES WERE UNSANITARY
AND IF

THERE HERE N0 GAME 0R FISH

KEEP MICHIGAN CLEAN AND GREEN

REPORT FOREST FIRES AND RETURN NEXT YEAR 42'-oo'

t t D

"O
GROWING LOUD ROUTE‘°¢(4
’9

 

   

y‘égSTATE LANDS DEDICATED FOR STATE FORESTS. PARKS
'Mfifi AND OTHER PUBLIC CONSERVATION USES.

33::

 

  

DOWA l
:UNDEDICATED STATE LANDS SUBJECT TO SALE OR . G ‘3
gEXCHANGE APPLICATION. .3.- 1
WILD CAT
u—u—BOUNDARY STATE FORESTS. PARKS. ETC. *

CIIIIIIIII set all

. PUBLIC FISHING SITES. Q SITE NOT USABLE ALLEN'

IT IS THE POLICY NOT To DISPOSE OF STATE LANDS IN
STATE OR NATIONAL PROJECT AREAS. EXCEPTIONS MAY BE MADE
IN CERTAIN CASES WHERE THE LANDS ARE DESIRED FOR AGRICUL-
TURE OR TO CONSOLIDATE OWNERSHIP. FOR FURTHER INFORMA-
TION INOUIRE LANDS DIVISION. DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION.

LANSING l3. MICHIGAN.

STATE OWNERSHIP JUNE 1, 1953
BASE DY MICHIGAN STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT

LEGEND

ROADS

PRIMITIVE ROAD ::::::
DNIMPROVID ROAD

ORADED AND DRAINED ROAD
SOIL SURFACED ROAD
METAL SURFACED ROAD
DITUHIMUS SURFACE!) ROAD
PAVED ROAD

ROAD SYSTEM DESIGNATION

UNITED STATES HIGHWAY ES

STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM

FEDERAL AID HIGHWAY SYSTEM FA
FEDERAL AID SECONDARY HIGHWAY
SYSTEM FAs
END OF FEDERAL AID 4w
DESIGNATED ROUTE fir—

A I RWAYS

AIR ROUTES -—-I.—0---

ARMY.NAVY 0R MARINE CORPS FIELD (3)

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
INTERMEDIATE FIELD

COMMERCIAL OR MUNICIPAL FIELD

MARKED AUXILIARY FIELD
AIRPLANE LANDING FIELD MARKED
DR EMERGENCY

RAILROADS

RAILROAD (ANY NUMDER TRACKS) -F--+—t—
USED DY SINGLE OPERATING COMPANY
RAILROAD «NY mMDER TRACKS) P-fi-P-H-H
USED SY MORE THAN ONE OPERATING
COMPANY ON SAME OR ADJACENT
RIGHTS OF WAY MT TRACKAGE RIGHT$

4 +00

RAILROAD nun-Pow“ -I- -I- ~4-
PRIVATELY OWNED {nu-GI no" "- q- “-
RAILROAD STATION —I—-O—+-—
RAILROAD GRADE CROSSING —I——N—+—
RAILROAD ABOVE ROAD

RAILROAD DELOW ROAD -¢—I|II—-I-

RAILROAD TUNNEL
HIGHWAY BRIDGES

(20 To 300 FT. LENGTIo

GENERAL
DRAWDRIDGE

(300 FT. LENGTH OR OVER)
GENERAL
DRAWDRIDGE
SUSPENSION
ARCH
TRUSS DR GIRDER

DAMS

MM WITH ROAD
DAM WITHOUT ROAD

CITY AND VILLAGE

STATE CAPITOL
COUNTY SEAT
OTHER CITIES AND VILLAOES

 

Imm CITY m VILLAGE

UNINCORPORATED COMPACT

RIP-P *I IIIIII II I

WATERWAYS

OPERATED SHIP AND SARGE fl ’
LINE, “5‘.
DOCK. PIER OR LANDING 9"
a

FREE FERRY :IFH:
TOLL FERRY fi-TFI:
HEAD OF NAVIGATION Gun-IL) “a?“
NAVIGADLE STREAM an!!!”
.

GENERAL CULTURAL FEATURES
III. In

FARM UNIT

DWELLING (OTHER THAN FARM)

ROWS OR GROUPS OF DWELLINGS
(CLOSELY SPACED)

STORE OR SMALL DUSIHESS
ESTADLISHMENT

SEASONAL DWELLING

SEASONAL DWELLINGS WELY
SPACED)

POST OFFICE

TOWNHALL, GRANGE OR
COMMUNITY HALL

HOTEL

CHURCH oTNER RELIGIOUS
INSTITUTIONS)

SCHOOLHOUSE (OTHER
EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS)

CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION

HOSPITAL

FACTORY OR INDUSTRIAL PLANT

SAWMILL (STATIONARY)

POWER PLANT

RADIO STATION

STATE ROAD GARAGE

SEASONAL INDUSTRY

MINE SHAFT

OPEN MINE

GRAVEL PIT

STONE QUARRY

STOCK YARD

OIL OR GAS WELLS

WELL GRINQ

TANKS

CLUSS (DC-GOLF OR COUNTRY OLUD.
HC.-HUNTING CLUO. F.c.-FISHING
CIJUD. SC.-GUN CLU

ATHLETIC FIELDS OR AMUSEMENT
PARKS. PLAYGROUNDS, ETC.

INTENSIVE RECREATION AREAS

SMALL PARKS (SP—STATE.
C.P.-COUNTY. IAN-MUNICIPAL)

FAIR GROUND. RACE COURSE.
SPEEDWAY

CEMETERY

STATE POLICE SUSSTATION
INDIAN RESERVATION

CAMP OR LODGE

CAMP GROUND

TOURIST CAMP

PICNIC GROUNDS 0R ROADSIDE TAGLE
DATHING DEACH

SCENIC SITE

DIRD SANCTUARY

GAME FARM

GAME PRESERVE

FISH HATCHERY

C C C - CAMP

LIGHT (NAUTICAL)

LIGHTHOUSE

AIRWAY DEACON LIGHT
LANDMARK LIGHT DEACON
FOREST RANGER STATION
FOREST SERVICE LOOKOUT STATION
GAUGING OR PUMPING STATION
ROADSIDE SPRING

FOREST NURSERY-EXPERIMENTAL
STATION

U.S.C.G. STATION

U.S. LIFE SAVING STATION

PIPE LINE, GAS ~~~¢.......
PIPE LINE. OIL ~~OIL ~—

7? fl.

DISG‘ D‘DI'PD

93§D11>§ufauIL+ar I» p. .- PF! I. ..

SO
.I
'0

'OBPPE

\
m
II
L:

COD '1 Domhhtmhmcooa Db DID) D I

T.6$.

5
DAILEY

4I°—so’

JDR INC
0

4
C 00! R7!

BERRIEN

 
     

ST JOSEPH )k BOUNDARY LINES AR SHowN TO DESIGNATE THE LIMITS OF . COUNTY ELKHART
CONSERVATION PROJECTS. ONLY COLORED AREAS ARE PUBLIC LANDS.

UNCOLORED AREAS ARE PRIVATE LANDS. I R-ISW-

HELP PREVENT

BROWNS-
VILLE

R. I4 W.

FOREST

 

HR

CROWI NG WISU S

F I RREIITE

TO FABIUS

Rivers
Game Area

T.7S.

O

 

  

CASS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

'JICPJGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LlFfiR/LWIES

3: : : ‘ ; ‘ I If I ‘r
I l‘ g I "I ‘7 I j ! w ‘ I
‘t ‘r';“"‘ ‘Iu:‘~ "5H ‘
541', ‘ ”I: ”ll I‘ll ‘4 "1“? ‘ _, E ‘
3

1293 03175 0833