Application of Pheasant Census Methods in Cache County, Utah

An inventory of the stock on hand is a basic step in management. This is true whether the field be business, land, or wildlife management. It is a marginal business man who ignores the basic step of inventory. In the history of wildlife management, however, it has not been unusual to find the cart before the horse. This is not to say that the wildlife manager is, or has been, marginal. His business was inherited ready-made, but often in a bankrupt condition. The problems were there, but not the background of records, techniques, or methodology to cope with them. Often management, like Topsy, just growed. The management of the ringneck pheasant (Phasianus colchicus Linnaeus) in Utah has been in much the same state as Topsy. We can suppose that the first release of ringnecks near Salt Lake, in about 1895, was made without preliminary study of the bird\u27s needs. Happily, the pheasant was right at home in the irrigated valleys, and by 1917 a surplus of birds were available for the hunters. This, and other small releases in similar habitats throughout the state, spread the bird to its present range. The Game Management Division of the Utah Fish and Game Department aided the speed of this spread by releases from its game farm, and also, set seasons and limits for the harvest of birds in the fall. In 1939 a system permitting posted hunting areas was established to meet the problem of increased hunting pressure. These steps constituted the cart of management in Utah. The horse has been gradually getting increased attention. By way of several food habit studies and a comprehensive life history, many of the pheasant\u27s requirements in Utah were learned. To initiate a real pheasant management program, the basic step of inventory, or a pheasant census, was still needed. Aware of this need, the Utah Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit established a project in 1946 to check various pheasant census methods under Utah conditions. The basic nature of game inventories as a prerequisite to management provided ample justification for this project. The objectives were equally sound and of a practical nature. Before any census method could be used by the state, many questions had to be answered concerning the technique. Is it an index of population, or an enumeration? Will it give the number, composition and condition of the population? Which one, or ones? What is the procedure to follow? What time of the year should it be applied? What time of day? What factors of weather, animal behavior, vegetational changes, etc. affect the method? Can it be used to set hunting regulations? What expenditures of time and personnel are required? How often? Two years of application to the project answered some of these questions, afforded leads toward others and, in common with many investigations, raised new questions. To check the answers, follow the leads, and seek answers to the new questions, the study was continued