Thursday, November 25, 2004
Bill Cochran's Outdoors: Grouse survey reveals a downward trend
Bill Cochran is a Roanoke Times outdoors columnist.
Bill Cochran's Outdoors
Recent columns
- Hunters and anglers still in the conservation business
- Drum fishing on Virginia’s Coast comes in two colors
- Elk advocate finally gets his day
- Turkeys are plentiful, so why are hunting regulations so tight fisted?
- Column archive
Bill's Mailbag
Bill's Field Reports
- Eagles are up; black rail are down
- A. Willis Robertson great name for new DGIF headquarters
- Field reports archive
Resources
More than 30 years ago, Bill Treadwell, Joe Coggin and I got together and established a grouse hunter survey that remains in use today by the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries.
Tredwell was a teacher at William Fleming High School. He and I were weekly grouse hunting partners and active members of the Ruffed Grouse Society. Coggin was a wildlife biologist for DGIF who pioneered in grouse research.
The survey was simple. Get grouse hunters to keep a record of the hours they hunt, the birds they flush and the sex and age of the birds they kill. Over time, this data would offer an important index of grouse population trends.
The flush survey continues to provide some of the best trend data available. The trend it reveals, unfortunately, is downward. Various data suggest a two-percent annual decline in the state’s grouse breeding population levels over the past 15 years.
Since the 1973-74 season, when the survey began, hunters have reported an average flush rate of 1.16 grouse per hour of effort. For some reason, that leaped to 1.61 during the 2001-02 season, the highest in the history of the survey.
I know that grouse suddenly started showing up in surprising abundance in the places I hunted that season. My flush rate soared to better than two birds per hour. Had the good-old days returned? Hardly.
The next season, the state flush rate dropped to 1.11, and last season it sank to 0.92. That was the fourth lowest on record. The worst occurred in the 1976-77 season when it sank to 0.72. Anytime you drop below one bird flushed per hour of effort hunters are going to be unhappy. On a scale of 1 to 7, grouse hunters rated their satisfaction of the 2003-04 season at 2.7, well below recent years when the rating has ranged from 3.2 to 4.
What can be expected this season? It’s too early to tell, because the bulk of the grouse hunting effort doesn’t come until after the Virginia general firearm’s deer season in the west, which ends Saturday. But an early look doesn’t hold much promise from where I stand. I’m not seeing many grouse and won’t be surprised if the flush rate remains below the one per hour rate.
Gary Norman harbors a somewhat brighter outlook in his annual grouse population status report. He is the DGIF grouse biologist in charge of the flush survey and other grouse research.
“Breeding population levels stabilized in 2004 and mast conditions are generally good throughout grouse range in Virginia this year,” he said.
The breeding population reflects reproduction success, and good mast conditions translate to improved health of the birds. On the down side, Norman said, the weather conditions during the spring often were wet and cold, and that could have been harmful to young grouse.
The grouse survey will help sort out all of this.
Grouse numbers aren’t the only thing in decline. So is the number of hunters participating in the annual flush survey. Norman is looking for volunteers. Hunters can contact him for a survey packet at Gary.Norman@dgif.virginia.gov.
There still is another troublesome decline.
When I started grouse hunting more than 30 years ago, much of the best cover was found on national forest land. Surveys now reveal a higher flush rate on private land. Grouse populations are dropping on the national forest because of a decline in timber cutting.
A major research effort, called the Appalachian Cooperative Grouse Research Project, indicates that grouse do best when a variety of forest habitats are maintained, including generous applications of clear cuts. This kind of management pretty well has been shut down on national forests by preservationists who have a goal to halt all timber cutting on public land.
“The future for grouse habitat and grouse hunting on national forest land is uncertain,” said Norman.
