Written by Amanda
Gobeli, Extension Associate, Texas A&M Natural Resources Institute
Edited by Dr. James Cathey, Associate Director,
Texas A&M Natural Resources Institute
The end of 2017 had quail enthusiasts across the state of
Texas holding their breath. Years 2015 and 2016 had been remarkable for quail
with record numbers of birds heard, seen and hunted, and the highest values yet
recorded in the Texas Quail Index monitoring program. While 2017 wasn’t a bust
by any means, we saw a levelling off of the meteoric rise in quail numbers in
many parts of the state. High carryover from the preceding years ensured that
there were still plenty of birds around at the start of hunting season, but it
felt like our rollercoaster was nearing its apex and preparing to plummet down
the other side.
 |
| A male and female bobwhite pair. Photo courtesy of TPWD. |
By several accounts, that’s exactly what happened. Texas
Parks and Wildlife’s longstanding quail monitoring program, which includes 14
years of roadside count data, reports
a nearly 80% drop off in bobwhite sightings this year versus last year
in the Rolling Plains (average of 26.72 birds seen per route in 2017, 5.43 in
2018). Scaled quail fared worse, with counts falling more than 90% this year in
the same ecoregion (average of 3.67 birds seen per route in 2017, 0.30 in 2018).
The graphs for each species paint a startling picture of this rise and fall,
with peaks representing the recent record highs dropping off starkly to near
2013/14 levels. The
Rolling Plains Quail Research Ranch has also reported disappointing
trapping numbers and a lack of quail this hunting season.
 |
| Bobwhite roadside counts in the Rolling Plains dropped starkly this year. Graph from the TPWD 2018-19 Quail Forecast. |
Quail Index Roadside Count Data show similar trends. While
data collection efforts in some areas were once again hampered by (much-needed)
rain, we saw a drop in average bobwhite counts from 1.36 birds per mile in 2017
to 0.38 birds this year. Among cooperators in scaled quail country—namely the
Edwards Plateau and Trans Pecos ecoregions—the “blues” appeared to weather the
bust better with numbers even increasing slightly from an average of 1.29 birds
per mile in 2017 to 1.36 this year. Because our Rolling Plains cooperators
report only on bobwhites, we cannot offer any input on the scaled quail decline
reported in the Rolling Plains by Texas Parks and Wildlife.
 |
| Roadside count results for the 2018 Texas Quail Index. Error bars represent standard error of the mean. |
Roadside counts are typically conducted in late summer, but
the TQI begins monitoring quail populations in the spring (April/May) with call
counts. Judging by call count data alone, it seemed like quail populations
might have stabilized after all. Counts for both species were about on par with
2017, averaging slightly higher for bobwhites (3.4 roosters per mile marker
this year, 3.1 last year) and slightly lower for scaled quail (1.5 this year,
1.8 last year). This is likely attributable to the holdover from the previous
year. While some parts of the state, such as the panhandle, were already
experiencing severe drought conditions during this time, the dry spell wouldn’t
really take its toll on most Texas quail country until the summer—i.e., peak
quail breeding season.
 |
| The U.S. Drought Monitor from June 26 shows several parts of the state in moderate to extreme drought. |
The disparity between call count and roadside count numbers
suggests that quail faced serious challenges over the summer. One of the ways
that the Quail Index attempts to gauge breeding season challenges is through
the use of “dummy nests”—stand-ins for quail nests, constructed using 3 chicken
eggs, which can be monitored to estimate rates of actual nest predation. This
year, our dummy nest survival rates were the lowest they’ve ever been for the TQI,
averaging only 41%. While it may seem defeatist to mark a <50% success rate
as satisfactory, quail nests experience such naturally high rates of predation
that anything above 40% is generally considered acceptable. However, the change
relative to last year (average dummy nest survival was 49% in 2017) may be
worth paying attention to. Some of this might be attributable to human factors,
such as differences in volunteers or cooperating properties, but it’s also
possible that it’s a symptom of increased predation pressure or reduced habitat
quality.
The TQI includes protocols for monitoring predators as well,
using eggshell evidence from dummy nests and game cameras. In the case of
nests, the two most commonly identified predators were raccoons, which have a
tendency to tear shells into large chunks, and coyotes, which typically crush
shells into tiny fragments. These two together made up more than half of our
“candidates of destruction” for dummy nests. Game camera evidence suggests that
one nest predator may be underrepresented, however: feral hogs. The number of
hogs caught on camera rose dramatically this year (199), more than doubling
last year’s count (72) and totaling more than coyotes and raccoons combined (83
and 85, respectively). Overall, we saw more total predators photographed this
year, but less species diversity with the feral hogs dominating the counts.
 |
| Feral hogs were especially abundant quail predators this year. Photo courtesy of USDA. |
The TQI’s habitat evaluations further clarify why quail may
have struggled this summer. These scores have always trended high, with
properties rarely falling below the “good” or “excellent” ranges, but our
average overall Evaluation Value this year—0.62—was the lowest it’s been over
the course of the Index. That score follows precedent and places in the “good”
category, but the limiting factors that contribute to it are a departure from
the norm. “Limiting factors” are aspects of the habitat that restrict its
usability for a species (bobwhite or scaled quail in this case) and nesting
cover has almost always been limiting. This year however, the most significant
factors were availability of food and diversity of woody cover species, both of
which may have been exacerbated by lack of rain.
In short: it looks like we’ve finally hit a bust. Some may find this disheartening after the great resurgence of 2015 and 16, but it’s important to remember that boom and bust cycles are simply how quail populations operate. Ups and downs are normal, and even the most expertly managed, quail-friendly properties will have them. Data collection and continued monitoring are just as important in bust years as they are in boom years, as we learn which conditions produce fewer birds and maintain long-term data sets to detect trends over time.
 |
| TQI cooperators with the Rolling Plains Texas Master Naturalist group. |