STRATEGIC PLAN FOR WILD TURKEY MANAGEMENT February 19, 2008

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Division of Hunting and Game Management MyFWC.com

WILD TURKEY STANDING TEAM Sponsors:

Nick Wiley, Director Division of Hunting and Game Management Tim Breault, Director Division of Habitat and Species Conservation Gil McRae, Director Fish and Wildlife Research Institute

Sponsor Representative: Paul Schulz, Section Leader Division of Hunting and Game Management Team Leader:

Larry Perrin, Wild Turkey Program Coordinator Division of Hunting and Game Management

Team Members:

Jimmy Conner, Division of Habitat and Species Conservation Chuck McKelvy, Division of Habitat and Species Conservation Fred Robinette, Division of Habitat and Species Conservation Grant Steelman, Division of Habitat and Species Conservation Victor Echaves, Division of Habitat and Species Conservation David Nicholson, Division of Habitat and Species Conservation John Miller, Division of Law Enforcement Joy Hill, Office of Executive Direction and Community Relations Roger Shields, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute

Team Associates:

Tim O’Meara, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute Bill Marvin, National Wild Turkey Federation Brian Zielinski, National Wild Turkey Federation

Team Facilitator:

David Arnold, Office of Policy and Stakeholder Coordination

ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) has a long and rich history with respect to conducting wild turkey research and management, and providing associated recreational opportunities. The continuation of these activities, and maintenance of Florida‟s wild turkey populations, will require increasing effort from the FWC, along with assistance from various state and federal agencies, non-governmental organizations, private landowners, and citizens. To be successful in these continuing and future endeavors, it is critical that appropriate planning occur. The preparation of the Strategic Plan for Wild Turkey Management stems from previous planning efforts of the FWC‟s Wild Turkey Management Program (WTMP) through an initial, 1990 planning document (Eichholz and O‟Meara 1990; revised in 1995). This current planning exercise has benefited greatly from participation, input, and assistance provided by the members and associates of the Wild Turkey Standing Team (WTST). This team was intentionally created to provide a broad spectrum of viewpoints from selected individuals who have demonstrated a key understanding and interest in Florida‟s natural resources, and most particularly that of the wild turkey. While the bulk of this team was comprised of FWC employees, representatives from the National Wild Turkey Federation (NWTF) were also included as a means of obtaining external stakeholder input. The goal statement and the four stated objectives identified in this strategic plan were developed through a facilitated process involving members of the WTST. The strategies and tasks associated with the individual objectives are those identified activities necessary to achieve these objectives and plan‟s goal. The individual sections on each objective presented in this report were primarily developed by subgroups of WTST members. Each individual planning element was then reviewed by the entire WTST prior to their compilation into the overall strategic plan. Once the objective sections of this report were completed another facilitated exercise was conducted to prioritize all tasks into three priority levels (i.e., high, medium, or low priority). Team members emphasized that all tasks should be considered as important to achieve the plan, regardless of their ranking level (i.e., a low ranking does not indicate that a task need not be accomplished). Thus, in some cases, lower priority tasks may need to be completed prior to higher priority tasks because of logistics or other reasons. Accomplishment of the tasks identified within this strategic plan exceeds the staffing capabilities of the WTMP. Therefore, full implementation of this plan will require the assistance, and in some cases lead-role participation, by various FWC entities (Divisions or Offices) and/or other non-FWC agencies, groups, or stakeholders. Additionally, the success of this plan will depend on considerable intra-agency coordination and inclusion of those tasks within annual operational

iii

plans of each responsible entity. Furthermore, general time-lines to complete each task have been included at the end of each task description. As with any long-term planning effort a certain amount of flexibility is essential in order to accommodate changing conditions associated with agency directives, staffing, funding, or other issues. As such, this plan should be considered a “guiding tool”, and should be altered as conditions necessitate.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

iii

LIST OF TABLES

1

LIST OF FIGURES

1

INTRODUCTION Taxonomy Life History and Management Distribution and Population Status Ongoing Conservation Efforts

2 2 3 5 9

PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Population Objective Habitat Objective Compatible-use Objective Outreach and Education Objective

10 11 15 17 21

IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY

23

LITERATURE CITED

33

LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Task rankings and groups within the FWC Divisions, Offices, and Institute, and the National Wild Turkey Federation, whose assistance will be required to accomplish the various Strategies and Tasks outlined in the Strategic Plan for Wild Turkey Management.

25

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. The nesting season of 121 Florida turkey hens on Fisheating Creek and Lochloosa study areas. Figure 2. Statewide turkey distribution and relative abundance values for 2001. Figure 3. Comparison of 2001 statewide turkey distribution to turkey distribution during the mid 1970‟s.

1

4 7 8

INTRODUCTION This strategic plan was primarily developed to replace the previous planning document for the WTMP. This previous plan, which was completed in 1990 and subsequently amended in 1995, had become substantially outdated. In this regard, many of the original tasks identified in the earlier plan had been completed, and new and emerging issues were occurring that the former plan did not adequately address. Additionally, reorganization of the FWC on July 1, 2004 established a new era for the FWC, and with it the need to consider and address planning from an “agency perspective,” rather than the more narrow confines of the WTMP alone. With this new direction, the plan now includes perspectives from all FWC Divisions and Offices (DO). It also includes input from FWC “stakeholders”, i.e., those individuals or groups that have an interest or concern with respect to the Florida‟s fish and wildlife resources, specifically the state‟s wild turkey resources. The WTST is a permanently established “steering committee” comprised of FWC personnel from various DO and representatives of the NWTF. This group compiled the plan, and the development process included facilitated meetings, conference calls, and the creation of four “working groups” (one for each of the plan‟s objectives). Facilitated meetings were essential to identify and develop the goal statement and objectives. The resultant four planning objectives were created relative to perceived future information and management needs, and public use of Florida‟s wild turkey resources. Scheduled conference calls with WTST members were conducted to discuss and obtain input on each of the objectives, strategies, and tasks which were drafted by the individual working groups. The initial draft of the strategic plan was reviewed by the WTST following compilation of all report sections into a single document. Another internal review was conducted by the WTST sponsors and an agency planner. A final draft was then prepared and submitted to agency stakeholders for comment. Comments from all entities were considered and changes were made to the strategic plan as appropriate. Taxonomy The wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) is a member of the order Galliformes, a group of fowl-like, ground-dwelling birds. Members of this group share characteristics such as heads that often possess colored, bare areas or wattle-like structures; short, rounded wings capable of rapid flight for a limited distance; strong legs and feet that provide excellent mobility and assist with the procurement of food via scratching; a large crop for temporary food storage; sexual dimorphism; and precocial young. Turkeys are further classified within the large Phasianidae family (pheasants, quails, partridges, peafowl, jungle fowl, and turkeys) and the subfamily Meleagridinae (turkeys).

2

There are five subspecies of wild turkey that inhabit much of North America, including most of the United States, parts of southern Canada, and northern Mexico. Two of these subspecies occur in Florida; the eastern subspecies (M. g. silvestris) and the Florida, or Osceola subspecies (M. g. osceola). The Osceola subspecies tends to be darker in appearance than the eastern subspecies with the most notable characteristic being its darker primary feathers. The white barring on these feathers tends to be narrow in width and they usually do not extend across the vane of the feather. The Osceola subspecies also tends to weigh less than the eastern subspecies. This may be due to its geographic location relative to Bergmann‟s Rule (i.e., many warm-blooded animals tend to be larger in colder climates than their relatives in warmer climates), habitat conditions, genetics, or other factors. Compared to the Osceola subspecies, white wing-barring on primaries of the eastern wild turkey is more prominent, extending across the vane of the feather and being nearly as wide as the dark barring. With respect to the two subspecies of turkeys occurring in Florida, the Osceola subspecies is distributed throughout the peninsular part of the state. The eastern subspecies occurs in north Florida and through the panhandle portion of the state, but this area is really an “intermix zone” between these two subspecies. In other words, because there is not any physical barrier between the two subspecies, a wide zone exists where the two subspecies meet such that the blending of physical characteristics of these subspecies occurs. Life History and Habitat Ecologically, wild turkeys are considered to be a “prey species” and have evolved as a common food source for numerous animals. In Florida, turkey eggs, young, and adults are preyed on by such animals as bobcats (Lynx rufus), raccoons (Procyon lotor), skunks (Mephitis mephitis and Spilogale putorius), opossum (Didelphis virginiana), fox (Vulpes vulpes and Urocyon cinereoargenteus), coyotes (Canis latrans), armadillos (Dasypus novemcinctus), crows (Corvus spp.), owls, hawks, bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), and a variety of snakes. Wild turkeys have adapted to being a prey species in part by having a high reproductive potential. Hens have the capacity to lay large clutches of eggs. In an extensive Florida study, the average clutch size was found to be 10.3 eggs (Williams and Austin 1988). If a nest is destroyed, the hen will quite often renest. Turkeys are also polygamous, with males capable of breeding a number of females, which further aids in reproductive potential. The breeding season of the wild turkey begins in mid winter and lasts through the spring. It is triggered by increasing day length and the advance of warmer weather. Males often start gobbling and displaying in January and February and will generally continue into May. Females are apparently not receptive for breeding at the initial onset of male breeding activities (Williams and Austin 1988; Healy 1992). Also, while gobbling may begin earlier in south Florida than other parts of the state, Williams (1991) reported that nesting chronology for 3

the peninsular part of the state is generally the same, and that the nesting season is probably only about a week later in the Florida panhandle and along the Georgia/Florida line. The nesting season in Florida is generally mid March through June (Williams and Austin 1988; Fig. 1). Turkey hens create a slight depression on the ground in thick vegetation in which to lay their clutch of eggs. Laying takes place for about two weeks, followed by an incubation period of 26-28 days. Hens provide the sole care for nests and successfully hatched broods.

Figure 1. The nesting season of 121 Florida turkey hens on Fisheating Creek and Lochloosa study areas. Brood rearing begins with the hatching process, which also results in the poults being “imprinted” to the female, creating a strong social bond (Healy 1992). The female, with her brood, normally leaves the nest within 24 hours of hatching. As a further adaptation to the threat of predation, turkey poults develop limited flight capability by the time that they are eight days old and normally begin roosting in trees at about two weeks of age (Williams and Austin 1988, Healy 1992). Roosting in trees affords young turkeys greater protection from predators and by three weeks of age their chance of survival increases considerably. Feeding comprises the bulk of their activity with insects making up the majority of a young poult‟s diet. However, exceptions have been reported such that in some cases plant material has been the dominate food source suggesting that food availability and abundance may be a significant factor (Hurst 1992).

4

Brood-range size increases over time and is quite variable, but will generally encompass 100 to 200 ha during the summer (Healy 1992). Seasonal and annual home ranges of wild turkeys are also quite variable and largely depend on habitat quality relative to the abundance and availability of food. Annual home ranges may vary from 140 to 550 ha (Brown 1980), but may exceed 800 ha in poor quality habitat (Williams 1991). High mortality is a significant aspect of turkey life history, and its role as a prey species is well illustrated by the fact that approximately 70% of poults will not survive beyond two weeks of age (Williams and Austin 1988). While their survival increases substantially after three weeks of age, their overall life expectancy is still only about 18 months. Reports exist, however, of banded turkeys living beyond 10 years of age. The primary habitat components for the wild turkey are: nesting, roosting, foraging, brood rearing, and escape-cover habitats. Roosting habitat consists of forested areas that generally provide a “screening effect” such that turkeys are not readily observable or approachable by predators, and are protected somewhat from adverse weather. Nesting habitat is normally composed of fairly dense groundcover vegetation, approximately one meter in height, which provides concealment for an incubating hen in all directions. For brood rearing, hens seek grassy, open areas with abundant insects and nearby escape cover. Foraging habitat is similar to brood rearing habitat, but the proximity of nearby escape cover is not as important as turkeys attain adult size and mobility. Escape cover is comprised of moderately dense vegetation and/or trees that a turkey can run, or fly to, to disappear from view or escape predators. While these habitat components occur in a wide variety of vegetative communities, their proximity and arrangement relative to a turkey‟s daily and seasonal home range, and their three-dimensional structure associated with a turkey‟s ability to see and easily move, ultimately determines overall habitat suitability. In Florida, brood habitat is often the most limiting habitat for wild turkeys (Williams 1991). However, roosting habitat can also be limiting. Nesting and escape cover are usually not limiting in Florida due to the nearly year-round growing season and numerous varieties of plant species that provide these habitat needs. Distribution and Population Status The wild turkey is considered a generalist species in that it can eat a wide variety of foods and survive in various habitat types and climates. Its wide distribution throughout much of North America is evidence of its generalist traits. At the time of European settlement, wild turkey populations occurred in most forested habitat of the eastern United States. However, by the nineteenth century, wild turkeys had been eliminated or greatly reduced in numbers throughout most of 5

this range (Williams 1981). Over-hunting was believed to be the principle cause for this decline, as habitat changes associated with deforestation and early agriculture practices came after local turkey populations had been eliminated and these landscape practices would likely have been beneficial for improving wild turkey habitat (Williams 1981). Florida was unique during this early decline in turkey populations because inaccessible swamps, inhospitable insects, and colonial history did not favor development of forested habitats as in other states (Eichholz and O‟Meara 1990). The absence of widespread agriculture and the abundance of forested swamps and uplands provided natural refuges for Florida's wild turkey populations, and Floridians enjoyed turkey hunting when most of the country had few, if any, turkeys to hunt (Eichholz and O‟Meara 1990). While wild turkeys persisted in Florida, liberal hunting seasons and bag limits, and limited law enforcement during the first half of the 20 th century, resulted in low, or absent, turkey populations throughout much of the state. In 1947-48, the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (now the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission) initiated a habitat and turkey population study that was the forerunner of a successful turkey restoration program. The results of this study, conducted by Newman and Griffin (1950), documented that Florida had indeed experienced significant turkey population declines such that 21 of Florida's counties reported no (six counties) or few turkeys (15 counties with estimates of 50 or fewer turkeys) present and a statewide population estimated at approximately 26,000. Consequently, the Commission directed the restocking and establishment of turkey populations on private lands and on public wildlife management areas (WMAs) where suitable habitat existed. During the period 1949 through 1970 (completion date for the statewide turkey restoration project), more than 6,000 wild-trapped birds were banded and released into suitable habitats throughout Florida (Williams and Austin 1988). Since that time habitat management and protection have become a primary focus for maintaining or improving Florida‟s turkey population. During the past 30 years or more, Florida's human population and related development have increased at an unprecedented rate. Urbanization, intensive forest management, and agricultural development have contributed to loss and degradation of turkey habitat. Habitat fragmentation resulting from these pressures has further stressed Florida‟s turkey populations (Landers and Sanders 1988). However, the extent to which human growth and development have impacted Florida‟s turkey population is not well understood. To help evaluate these concerns the Commission‟s WTMP conducted a statewide turkey distribution assessment in 2001 (Fig. 2; Nicholson et al. 2005). In comparison to a similar survey conducted in the mid 1970‟s (Fig. 3), the statewide turkey distribution largely remained the same, with some loss of presence mainly near urban centers.

6

Figure 2. Statewide turkey distribution and relative abundance values for 2001.

7

Figure 3. Comparison of 2001 statewide turkey distribution to turkey distribution during the mid 1970‟s. However, population expansion since the 1970‟s also occurred with an overall increase of 19,335 km2 of occupied turkey habitat for 2001 (100,700 km 2 total occupied habitat; Nicholson et al. 2005). It therefore appears that adverse impacts to Florida‟s wild turkey populations from the increased human population, and associated habitat losses, have been offset to some degree. In this regard some potentially beneficial aspects occurring during the past 30 years that may have helped offset detrimental impacts associated with significant human growth and development include:

8

1. improved and increased wildlife management on public and private lands, 2. changes in hunting regulations which helped protect the female component of the turkey population, 3. specific interest in wild turkey management associated with the apparent nationwide popularity in turkey hunting, and 4. improved protection of the wild turkey resources via increased law enforcement and the “locking-up” of most large tracts of private lands having suitable turkey habitat. However, continued offsetting activities will not be likely in the face of future human population expansion, and thus, reductions in Florida‟s wild turkey population and distribution are expected. Ongoing Conservation Efforts Fish and wildlife conservation efforts in Florida are numerous and quite varied in their approach. However, they generally fall within the broad categories of habitat management and protection, applied research, and law enforcement. The interrelationships of these conservation aspects are critical to the wellbeing of Florida‟s fish and wildlife resources. The wild turkey, within Florida and across most of North America, is a classic example of where these conservation disciplines resulted in the restoration of this species from near extinction to the point that they now occur in 49 states with an estimated population of more than seven million. The Commission is involved with, and provides management for, more than 2.2 million ha of land associated with Florida‟s public WMA system. Much of this land contains substantial wild turkey resource values, and in many cases management activities are specifically directed toward improving these values. Additionally, the FWC and State of Florida have been involved in numerous conservation efforts outside of the public WMA system that have provided substantial benefits for Florida‟s wildlife, including the wild turkey. Most notably, Florida's land acquisition program, Florida Forever, which is the largest and most aggressive in the country, allocates $300 million annually to purchase environmentally sensitive lands. This program encompasses a wide range of goals, including: restoration of damaged environmental systems, water resource development and supply, increased public access, public lands management and maintenance, and increased protection of land by acquisition of conservation easements. Considerable wildlife management and enhancement efforts are also directed toward wildlife management on private lands through various state and federal programs. The FWC has taken an active role in this process through our Landowner Assistance Program. With respect to specific conservation efforts for Florida‟s wild turkeys, the 1985 Florida Legislature passed the Florida Wild Turkey Stamp Act (Chapter 372, 9

S. 5715, Florida Statutes) for the purposes of expanding research on and management of the wild turkey, and to increase wild turkey populations in the state. This statute requires that all Florida turkey hunters purchase an annual turkey permit, or a license that includes this hunting privilege. Generated revenues from these permit sales gave rise to the creation of the Commission‟s WTMP. An early task of the WTMP was to develop a wild turkey conceptual management plan (Eichholz and O‟Meara 1990) to use as a guiding tool for this program. As previously mentioned, many of the tasks outlined in this early plan have been completed. However, other tasks outlined in the 1990 conceptual management plan, and its 1995 amendment, led to several ongoing WTMP activities. These activities primarily included: 1. conducting an annual mail survey of spring turkey hunters to estimate turkey harvest, hunter effort, and hunter satisfaction, 2. conducting turkey restoration projects where appropriate, 3. participating in and conducting turkey research projects, 4. providing technical assistance to agency personnel, other governmental agencies, landowners, hunters, non-governmental organizations, etc., 5. conducting an annual survey of Special-Opportunity Turkey Hunts to determine hunter effort, success, and satisfaction on these “high quality” WMAs, 6. providing oversight for the FWC‟s Wild Turkey Registry program, 7. conducting a statewide wild turkey assessment project designed to identify and direct future WTMP management, regulatory, and/or restoration efforts in order to sustain or expand turkey populations, and 8. implementing an annual cost-share program involving the WTMP and the Florida Chapter of the National Wild Turkey Federation. The following goal statement, objectives, strategies, and tasks of this strategic plan were compiled by the WTST and are designed to help direct future research, management, and public use of Florida‟s wild turkey resources. These plan elements were crafted in consideration of expected and continuing environmental impacts (largely associated with human growth and development), the need to ensure a social understanding and commitment for natural resource management, and associated demands (consumptive and nature-based recreation) on one of Florida‟s fish and wildlife resources, the wild turkey. PROGRAM GOAL AND OBJECTIVES The goal of the wild turkey strategic plan was developed through a facilitated process involving WTST members. The resultant goal statement is: “Ensure healthy and sustainable wild turkey populations throughout the state while providing and promoting compatible uses of the resource.”

10

Four objectives were identified as primary planning elements important for achieving the program goal. Generally, these objectives address wild turkey population issues, habitat issues, compatible uses, and public outreach and education. Each objective is addressed in the following, individual sections, which also identify and include specific strategies and tasks necessary to accomplish each objective. Anticipated completion times are in brackets at the end of each task description. Phase 1 tasks are those that are expected to be completed within the first five years of this plan. Phase 2 tasks are those that should be completed within the second five years of this plan. In some cases other task completion designations are given if so warranted (i.e., task completed annually, or task completed at a specified time). However, it is recognized that these proposed time lines are general in nature and intended to be flexible in order to accommodate continuous change associated with new information, societal demands, the work environment, etc. Population Objective: Maintain distribution in all 67 counties and maintain or increase the amount of acreage identified as having moderate to high wild turkey abundance index values as determined by the 2001 statewide wild turkey distribution survey (Nicholson et al. 2005). Based on the results of a 2001 statewide wild turkey distribution survey, wild turkeys are located in all 67 counties of Florida and 61,200 km 2 are indicated to have a moderate to high abundance of wild turkeys (Nicholson et al. 2005). Wild turkey populations provide for a wide range of recreational uses for citizens and visitors of Florida. Increasing human population and associated development will negatively impact the state‟s wild turkey resource and habitat. As such monitoring turkey populations will be more critical for identifying factors affecting populations and identifying potential corrective measures. To compensate for the inevitable loss of wild turkey habitat, particularly in the vicinity of large human population centers, wildlife and land managers must work to improve habitat and turkey populations within other areas of the state. A. Strategy: Monitor distribution and relative abundance of the statewide wild turkey population. 1. Task: Conduct statewide spring turkey mail survey annually to provide reasonable estimates of harvest and hunter effort at the county level. Conduct in association with Strategy B, Task 1, Compatible Uses Objective. [Conduct annually]

11

The FWC administrative region will serve as the defined constant for comparison purposes such that the 95% Confidence Interval for harvest is within 10% of the mean. However, these data will be collected at the county level such that various groupings of counties can be utilized as required. To the extent possible, methodologies for conducting and analyzing the survey should not be modified if comparability with previous results is jeopardized. Any changes made should be noted in detail. 2. Task: Annually compare spring turkey hunter success (i.e., harvest per hunter-days of effort) as derived in task 1, to the previous 5-year‟s results to determine trends at the state and FWC administrative region level. [Conduct annually] 3. Task: Repeat the Statewide wild turkey distribution survey as conducted in 2001 (Nicholson et al. 2005) at ten-year intervals (i.e., 2011, 2021, etc.) and compare results with those obtained in 2001 to determine whether Population Objective was met. [Conduct in 2011] The results of the 2001 survey will serve as the baseline for future comparisons. During future years (i.e., 2021 and beyond) it will be useful to compare with all previous surveys such that changes can be determined through time. In addition to comparing statewide changes, locations of change should be noted, especially those where decreases are observed, such that future management efforts can be directed to these areas as warranted. B. Strategy: Develop a wild turkey disease monitoring system and response plan. 1. Task: Determine diseases which need to be monitored and develop a disease monitoring and response plan. [Phase 1] The plan should group diseases based on potential impacts to humans and wild turkey populations. Those diseases that have potential human health ramifications (e.g., avian influenza) should receive high priority, while those diseases with no human health issues and minimal turkey population level threats (e.g., avian pox) should receive low priority. With respect to monitoring, the plan should include elements for: a. Passive sampling—sick or emaciated birds reported to the agency b. Active sampling—turkeys captured for research, hunter checkstations, etc.

12

2. Task: Prepare a wild turkey disease fact sheet that can be used by field biologists, posted at check stations, and placed on FWC‟s website. Conduct in association with Strategy B, Task 1, Outreach and Education Objective. [Phase 2] C. Strategy: Evaluate and/or develop methods to survey wild turkey populations that are scientifically acceptable and useful for management purposes on WMAs where deemed necessary. 1. Task: Identify which WMAs currently conduct population surveys, the methods used, and how the data are used. [Phase 1] 2. Task: Ensure that wild turkey monitoring efforts on WMAs are being conducted consistently and that efforts are providing meaningful data that is usable for management purposes. If the data isn‟t useable, then recommend discontinuance or appropriate modifications of surveys. [Phase 1] 3. Task: Determine when, where, and what type of wild turkey population surveys are needed with respect to various WMAs (e.g., special-opportunity, high-quality, maximum opportunity, etc.). [Phase 2] 4. Task: Review prior studies to determine gaps in research concerning population survey techniques. Further evaluate wild turkey survey techniques as required. [Phase 1] 5. Task: Review current protocol for conducting infrared camera surveys on WMAs and adjust accordingly based on recent research findings (Olson 2006). [Phase 1] D. Strategy: Restore/enhance turkey populations where suitable habitat occurs and wild turkeys are absent or significantly below capacity. 1. Task: Complete comparison of 2003 wild turkey suitable habitat and 2001 statewide wild turkey distribution data. Prioritize areas where turkey populations are absent but contain suitable habitat and conduct site inspections to determine validity of data. [Phase 1] 2. Task: Evaluate most recent data on population distribution (Nicholson et al. 2005) and habitat suitability (Modified Cox model and 2003 FWC Landcover) to identify focal areas where population expansion or increase may occur through habitat management or direct stocking and where work is needed to ensure connectivity of existing population centers. [Phase 1]

13

3. Task: Develop a wild turkey restoration plan that defines criteria for the consideration of restoration requests and for prioritizing areas identified in Task 1 & 2 above. [Phase 1] The restoration plan should identify minimum suitable acreage, distant to/connectivity of established populations, etc. A wild turkey trapping protocol and details for the full conduct of restoration programs (i.e., birds/acre released, sex ratio of release, etc.) should be included. 4. Task: Based on Task 3 above, begin turkey relocation efforts, or habitat management as appropriate, to restore turkeys to “significant” areas of suitable habitat. These are areas of the state where turkeys currently do not occur or occur at low numbers. Restoration of turkeys to smaller acreages that have “barriers” that are preventing natural repopulation from surrounding areas may be suitable in some cases. [Phase 2] E. Strategy: Develop response protocols for nuisance turkey, depredation complaints, and overabundance issues. 1. Task: Assemble stakeholder group to define issues associated with nuisance turkey complaints and to determine appropriate responses. [Phase 2] Guidelines for responding to nuisance turkey complaints should include “best practices” for altering nuisance behavior, appropriate timing, and level of involvement of state personnel. If trapping is an option, proper handling of captured turkeys for relocation, restocking, and/or euthanasia should be defined. 2. Task: Assemble stakeholder group to define issues associated with depredation complaints and to determine appropriate responses. [Phase 2] Guidelines for responding to turkey depredation complaints should include “best practices” for altering turkey behavior in these situations and defining the role of state personnel. 3. Task: Develop procedures / protocol for addressing reports of areas with an overabundance of turkeys. [Phase 2]

14

F. Strategy: Continue research on population dynamics, management practices, monitoring, and other species management that can benefit wild turkeys. 1. Task: Identify and prioritize turkey population/management information needs and initiate research efforts. [Phase 1] 2. Task: Review prior studies to determine gaps in research concerning population survey techniques. Further evaluate wild turkey survey techniques as required. (Strategy C, Task 4) [Phase 1] 3. Task: Conduct research and/or evaluate recent restoration projects (i.e., Everglades National Park, Guana River WMA) to determine suitable habitat size and configuration to sustain turkey populations long-term. When data is available incorporate into the wild turkey restoration plan. (Strategy D, Task 3) [Phase 2] Habitat Objective: Maintain or increase habitat quantity and quality necessary to meet the population objective of maintaining wild turkey distribution in all 67 counties, and maintain or increase acreage identified as having moderate to high wild turkey abundance index values as determined by the 2001 statewide wild turkey distribution survey (Nicholson et al. 2005). Generally speaking, wildlife management proceeds under the premise that habitat exists, that the habitat for a particular species or group of species can be defined along some continuum ranging from low-quality to high-quality, and that population density increases as their habitat quality increases. If the assumption holds, then efforts should be directed at increasing the quality of wild turkey habitat through properly applied land management practices, thereby increasing its suitability for wild turkeys, and subsequently increasing wild turkey populations in Florida. Moreover, implementing the following habitat and land management tasks should contribute favorably to achieving the population objective of this strategic plan. A. Strategy: Promote improved habitat management for wild turkeys on FWC-managed areas. 1. Task: Establish/maintain wildlife openings (planted and non-planted) where appropriate to improve wild turkey habitat. [Conduct annually] 2. Task: Review the Objective Based Vegetation Management (OBVM) process on WMAs and define beneficial community types for turkeys and ranges of conditions that would provide optimum turkey habitat for use when managers are defining desired future conditions. [Phase 2]

15

3. Task: Establish multi-year cost-share projects that improve wild turkey habitat. [Conduct annually] 4. Task: Provide wild turkey habitat management guidelines that are specific to Florida and distribute to WMA managers. [Phase 1] 5. Task: Identify opportunities to benefit the wild turkey in projects conducted under the Florida Wildlife Legacy Initiative. [Phase 2] 6. Task: Evaluate the ongoing FWC/NWTF cost-share program relative to its continuation and appropriateness for conducting wild turkey management or research on WMAs. [Phase 1] B. Strategy: Promote improved wild turkey habitat management on other public lands. 1. Task: Seek additional partners (federal, state, county, water management districts, universities [e.g., University of Florida‟s Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences], etc.) and increase the acreage influenced by cost-share partnerships. [Conduct annually] 2. Task: Provide wild turkey habitat management guidelines that are specific to Florida and distribute to other public land managers. [Phase 2] C. Strategy: Promote improved habitat management of private lands, both corporate and non-corporate, for wild turkeys. 1. Task: Increase the amount of acreage benefited through FWC assistance by 5% annually. [Conduct annually] 2. Task: Identify areas with low turkey populations and provide technical assistance to landowners in these areas to improve habitat management. [Phase 1] 3. Task: Distribute information to private landowners promoting the availability of assistance for wild turkey habitat and population management. [Phase 1] 4. Task: Assess the value of wildlife corridors for wild turkeys within developing areas. If wildlife corridors are determined to be valuable and feasible, work with county governments to encourage the establishment and linking of wildlife corridors. [Phase 2]

16

5. Task: Develop demonstration areas on public and/or private lands that provide an example of realistic and economically viable timber/land management that can be applied to non-industrial private lands. [Phase 2] 6. Task: Provide wild turkey habitat management guidelines that are specific to private lands in Florida and make available to landowners. [Phase 1] 7. Task: Develop partnerships with industrial forest companies. Work with these companies to upgrade Sustainable Forestry Initiative measures for wildlife, specifically wild turkeys. [Phase 2] D. Strategy: Continue research on habitat requirements, management practices, and other species management that can benefit wild turkeys. 1. Task: Identify and prioritize turkey habitat/management information needs and initiate research efforts. [Phase 1] 2. Task: Determine methods for assessing wild turkey habitat on FWC lead-managed WMAs using available data such that changes in quantity and quality can be monitored. [Phase 1] 3. Task: Repeat the statewide wild turkey distribution survey as conducted in 2001 (Nicholson et al. 2006) at ten year intervals to determine changes in wild turkey distribution and abundance index levels, and to measure the achievement of the habitat objective. [Conduct 2011] 4. Task: Within five years evaluate Upland Ecosystem Restoration Project activities that have been successfully implemented to determine their impact on wild turkeys. [Phase 1] Compatible-use Objective: 1) maintain the quality of wild turkey hunting opportunities such that annually 50% of hunters surveyed rate their spring hunting experience as excellent or good and fewer than 15% of hunters rate it as poor, 2) maintain or increase the number of turkey hunters and the quantity of hunting opportunities, striving for no net loss of acreage open to turkey hunting and an equitable distribution of the wild turkey resource to a maximum number of hunters, and 3) enhance opportunities for other nature-based recreational enjoyment of the turkey resource.

17

Part of the agency‟s overall mission is to manage wildlife resources for the benefit of people. Historically, the largest user constituency of wild turkeys has been hunters, although increasingly the agency is giving attention to other resource users. As the human population in Florida grows, associated development continues to remove land from production as wildlife habitat. This places increasing demand on remaining recreational lands and greater pressure on these areas to provide satisfying outdoor experiences. As such, maximizing opportunity and maintaining a net balance of lands open to hunting and other recreation will be key to managing the resource for the benefit of people. A. Strategy: Review and evaluate the current season format and hunting regulations in the context of hunter preferences and biological data on life history traits of wild turkeys in Florida. 1. Task: Review past studies and conduct new surveys as needed (e.g., every 5-10 years) to determine current attitudes, characteristics, demographics, and levels of satisfaction of turkey hunters toward wild turkey hunting and management issues. [Phase 2] 2. Task: Consider regulation changes designed to increase opportunity and hunter satisfaction. [Conduct annually] Changes would be pursued only when compatible with biological constraints for sustainable harvest and desired population objectives, and where regulatory enforcement is feasible. Data compiled under Strategy E, Task 2 may provide insight on effectiveness of current regulations and identify regulations in need of change. Examples of topics that might be reviewed include: i. quota permit, ii. season opening dates, iii. bag limit, iv. legal to take. 3. Task: Conduct appropriate research to fill data gaps when biological information necessary to evaluate current or proposed regulations for wild turkeys is lacking. [Phase 1] B. Strategy: Monitor harvest and hunter participation and satisfaction trends. 1. Task: Conduct statewide spring turkey mail survey annually to assess the level of participation among eligible hunters, level of satisfaction, frequency of turkeys harvested per hunter, and harvest success in the form of hunter-effort per turkey harvested. Conduct in

18

association with Strategy A, Task 1, of the Population Objective. [Conduct annually] Data will be collected at the county level, as prescribed in the Population Objective, such that estimates for the above metrics can be computed statewide and at other appropriate scale(s) through various groupings of counties. The FWC administrative region will nevertheless serve as the defined constant for comparison purposes. 2. Task: Develop a wild turkey hunting status report to annually report on recent trends in the above hunter-associated metrics and to determine whether the first Compatible Use Objective was met. [Conduct annually] 3. Task: Determine whether WMA turkey harvest data as provided through “Deernet” can be made reliable and if such an effort is warranted as a tool for looking at harvest and hunter success trends. [Phase 1] 4. Task: If the data associated with Strategy B, Task 3 above is determined to be reliable, annually review harvest and hunter success data for the previous 5 years for all Special-Opportunity Turkey Hunt areas and WMAs having these data. This review would be used as a means of further evaluating hunt quality and to identify public areas that may have potential wild turkey population problems (e.g., consistent decline in harvest and/or hunter success). [Phase 1; annually thereafter if database is reliable.] C. Strategy: Encourage and support new turkey hunting participants. 1. Task: Review prior surveys to compile information and existing data regarding attitudes and characteristics of various non-hunting groups (e.g., never hunted but not anti-hunting; only hunted a few times; used to hunt but haven‟t in past five years; eligible turkey hunter but didn‟t hunt) and the reasons why they do not turkey hunt. Further survey appropriate non-hunting groups as required to fill data gaps. [Phase 2] 2. Task: Work with stakeholders to develop strategies to advance recreational participation by the above-mentioned non-hunting constituencies. [Phase 2] 3. Task: Evaluate the Youth Hunting Program of Florida (sponsored by the Division of Hunting and Game Management) and determine ways to expand or increase participation in mentored turkey hunting offered through the program if warranted. [Phase 1]

19

4. Task: Work with stakeholders to identify other programs or methods designed to encourage and increase mentoring by seasoned hunters. [Phase 2] 5. Task: Continue to recognize youth hunters that bag their first gobbler and hunters that harvest an exceptional gobbler (judged by beard and spur lengths) by maintaining the Wild Turkey Registry. [Conduct annually] D. Strategy: Strive to maintain the total acreage currently open to turkey hunting. 1. Task: Annually assess acres of public land available for turkey hunting based on state agency reports to the Florida Legislature as required by Florida Statute 372.0025, No net loss of hunting lands. [Conduct annually] 2. Task: Cooperate with other government agencies and stakeholders to open additional public lands to turkey hunting. [Phase 1] 3. Task: Investigate the feasibility and efficacy of monitoring acres of private land open to turkey hunting. [Phase 2] 4. Task: Work with stakeholders, private landowners, and corporations to identify effective strategies and incentives for maintaining lands open to turkey hunting and to open new areas of private land to turkey hunting. [Phase 2] E. Strategy: Increase hunter compliance with turkey regulations. 1. Task: Work with the National Wild Turkey Federation‟s Florida Chapter to provide or replace “robo-turkeys” as needed to ensure each administrative region has adequate numbers of decoys at all times for enforcement activities, and publicize their use as an enforcement tool. [Conduct annually] 2. Task: Compile a report of turkey-related violations during the past five years and then continue to monitor the number and type of turkeyrelated citations by season issued by Division of Law Enforcement officers on an annual basis to identify trends and focus areas for planning purposes. [Phase 1]

20

3. Task: Continue to address hunt clubs and interested groups relative to turkey biology and to promote understanding of and compliance with hunting regulations. [As opportunities arise] F. Strategy: Identify, document, and increase other nature-based recreational uses of the wild turkey resource. 1. Task: Identify types of non-hunting nature-based recreation and document their occurrence. [Phase 2] 2. Task: Determine metrics and techniques for gauging the level of nature-based recreational use of the resource and monitor this use. [Phase 2] 3. Task: Identify the major nature-based constituencies and determine their attitudes, characteristics, and levels of satisfaction with available nature-based recreational opportunities. Conduct in conjunction with Stategy C, Task 1, above. [Phase 2] 4. Task: Educate groups of nature-based recreationists on opportunities and tactics for observing wild turkeys and their behaviors (e.g., spring breeding behavior). [Phase 2] 5. Task: Develop and promote approaches to enhance turkey viewing and other nature-based recreation on FWC-lead areas, other public lands, or private lands. [Phase 2] Enhancements might include establishment of trails, viewing towers, or driving tours supplemented by food plots or in natural high-use habitats. Outreach and Education Objective: Promote internal and external outreach and education about wild turkey conservation in support of all the objectives of this strategic plan. Outreach and education will serve to increase internal and external awareness of Florida‟s two subspecies of wild turkey, and the related research, restoration projects, management, and partnership activities of the FWC. Outreach and education efforts should provide appropriate and continued support to the FWC‟s WTMP and the individual objectives of this strategic plan. A. Strategy: Develop a communications plan within six months from the date of approval of the wild turkey strategic plan. The communications plan will by necessity be flexible and will outline a general approach to providing FWC personnel, stakeholders, and others information about

21

the implementation of the strategic plan and other significant, new and emerging issues relating to wild turkey management in Florida. 1. Task: Identify appropriate personnel needed to develop this plan (internal and external). [Phase 1] 2. Task: Identify projects that will benefit from proactive outreach, education and media expertise, and prioritize as appropriate. [Phase 1] 3. Task: Identify potential issues that may require a more immediate, reactive approach to communications (e.g., turkey die-off). [Phase 1] B. Strategy: Promote internal and external awareness and outreach for specific tasks included within this strategic plan (e.g., habitat management guidelines, disease fact sheet, nuisance turkey protocols, etc.), and address other issues that may arise. Work with partners (i.e., National Wild Turkey Federation, the University of Florida‟s Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences) and others in the development and distribution of this information. 1. Task: Review strategies and tasks of the other objectives of this plan (population, habitat, and compatible uses objectives) to determine outreach needs for each (e.g., develop habitat management guidelines and distribute as appropriate via brochures, website, etc.), and prioritize these needs. [Phase 1 and Ongoing] 2. Task: Identify opportunities for presentations and/or exhibitions that may provide appropriate internal and external outreach and educational opportunities. [Phase 1 and Ongoing] 3. Task: Create and/or obtain promotional materials such as exhibits and displays to assist in wild turkey outreach efforts. [Ongoing] 4. Task: Use Thanksgiving as an opportunity to promote wild turkeys (e.g., develop an annual Thanksgiving-related-event). [Phase 2] C. Strategy: Promote wild turkey education and outreach through outdoorrelated media. 1. Task: Identify and target specialty publications, web-based, or broadcast media (not general mass media). [Phase 1] 2. Task: Develop magazine articles and news releases. [Ongoing and as necessary]

22

3. Task: Develop and/or acquire turkey and turkey project-related audio and visual aids such as photographs, recordings, video, etc., for media relations purposes and make these available in an agency accessible location and format. [Ongoing] D. Strategy: Expand educational opportunities and resources. 1. Task: Support existing and seek partnerships with NGOs and other non-FWC entities. a) Participate with NWTF in their boxes for education program b) Incorporate a wild turkey management message wherever appropriate (e.g., FWC‟s private lands section). [Phase 1] 2. Task: Support existing and seek additional opportunities to use volunteers. a) Research types of organizations that might provide volunteer opportunities. b) Explore funding sources for volunteer incentives. [Ongoing] IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY This strategic plan is designed to provide general direction for wild turkey management, research, education, and other associated activities for a 10-year period from the date of its approval. Accomplishing the tasks identified for each of the stated objectives will require the combined effort and cooperation of numerous entities within the FWC‟s divisions, offices, and institute, as well as others outside FWC, such as the NWTF. Work on specific strategic plan tasks will therefore depend on their relative importance to competing work responsibilities, and the availability of funding and staff. Of necessity, certain tasks will need to be completed before other tasks can be addressed. To provide guidance in implementation of the strategic plan elements, tasks were prioritized and ranked according to their relative importance and temporal urgency (Table 1). A facilitated process, involving WTST members, was used to determine general prioritization categories for each task. Three category levels were selected: Level 1 denoted high priority tasks, Level 2 moderate priority, and Level 3 lower relative priority. Team members emphasized that accomplishment of tasks within all three priority levels is important and that a high priority ranking does not necessarily preclude accomplishment of lower ranked tasks prior to higher ranked tasks. Table 1 also identifies the various entities (internal and external) that are most likely to be involved in accomplishing each task, including identifying the 23

“primary” entity responsible for its accomplishment. Each entity listed in Table 1 should consider the priority level of those tasks that specify their involvement relative to development of their annual operational plans. To the extent possible, these tasks should be accomplished within the time-lines indicated for each of the task descriptions (i.e., Phase 1 – first five years of the plan, Phase 2 – second five years of the plan, annually, or other specified time-line). This strategic plan addresses specific strategies and tasks identified through a formal planning process relative to continuing and expected threats to, and societal demands on, Florida‟s wild turkey resources. Significant effort was given to identifying potential issues that may affect wild turkeys in the coming decade. However, a certain amount of flexibility needs to be available to handle emerging issues and opportunities that may not have been addressed in this plan. Although this approved document is designed to direct ongoing activities, it should not preclude timely response to new and unforeseen issues.

24

25

National Wild Turkey Federation

Recreation Services Office

Licensing and Permitting Office

Community Relations Office

LE -- Land and Water Patrol

Office of Policy & Stakeholder Coordination

Population Objective Strategy A – Monitor distribution and relative abundance Task 1 L1 Xc x Task 2 L1 X x Task 3 L1 X x x x x Strategy B – Develop a wild turkey disease monitoring system and response plan Task 1 L2 x x x Task 2 L2 x Strategy C – Develop methods to survey local wild turkey populations Task 1 L2 X x x Task 2 L2 X x x Task 3 L2 X X x Task 4 L2 x X Task 5 L2 X x

FWRI –Ecosystem Assessment and Restoration -- Fish and Wildlife Health

FWRI -- Information Science and Management -- Center for Spatial Analysis

FWRI -- Wildlife Research Section

HSC – Habitat Conservation Scientific Services

HSC -- Terrestrial Habitat Conservation and Restoration Section

HGM -- Hunter Safety and Ranges Section

HGM - - Public Hunting Areas

HGM -- Wild Turkey Management Program (WTST)b

Task Rankinga

Table 1. Task rankings and groups within the FWC‟s Divisions and Offices, and the National Wild Turkey Federation, whose assistance will be required to accomplish the various Strategies and Tasks outlined in the Strategic Plan for Wild Turkey Management.

x x

x

x x X X

x

x X

x

Strategy D – Restore/Enhance turkey populations Task 1 L1 x x Task 2 L1 x Task 3 L1 X x Task 4 L2 X x Strategy E – Develop response protocols for nuisance Task 1 L3 X x Task 2 L3 X x Task 3 L3 X x Strategy F – Continue research Task 1 L1 X x Task 2 L2 x Task 3 L2 x x

26 x

HSC – Habitat Conservation Scientific Services

HSC -- Terrestrial Habitat Conservation and Restoration Section

HGM -- Hunter Safety and Ranges Section

HGM - - Public Hunting Areas

HGM -- Wild Turkey Management Program (WTST)

Task Rankinga

X X x x x

X X X x x x x

x x

x x x x x x X X x x x x

Recreation Services Office

Licensing and Permitting Office

Community Relations Office

National Wild Turkey Federation

x

Office of Policy & Stakeholder Coordination

x x x

LE -- Land and Water Patrol

FWRI -- Ecosystem Assessment and Restoration -- Fish and Wildlife Health

FWRI -- Information Science and Management -- Center for Spatial Analysis

x x

FWRI -- Wildlife Research Section

x

x

x

Habitat Objective Strategy A – Promote improved habitat management Task 1 L1 x X Task 2 L3 X X Task 3 L1 x X Task 4 L1 X x Task 5 L3 x X Task 6 L2 X x Strategy B – Promote improved habitat management Task 1 L1 X x Task 2 L2 X x

27 x

x x x x

X

x x x X

x

x x

x x x

National Wild Turkey Federation

Office of Policy & Stakeholder Coordination

Recreation Services Office

Licensing and Permitting Office

Community Relations Office

LE -- Land and Water Patrol

FWRI -- Ecosystem Assessment and Restoration -- Fish and Wildlife Health

FWRI -- Information Science and Management -- Center for Spatial Analysis

FWRI -- Wildlife Research Section

HSC – Habitat Conservation Scientific Services

HSC -- Terrestrial Habitat Conservation and Restoration Section

HGM -- Hunter Safety and Ranges Section

HGM - - Public Hunting Areas

HGM -- Wild Turkey Management Program (WTST)

Task Rankinga

Strategy C – Promote improved habitat management Task 1 L2 x Task 2 L1 X Task 3 L1 X Task 4 L3 x Task 5 L3 x x Task 6 L2 X Task 7 L2 x Strategy D – Continue research Task 1 L2 X x Task 2 L2 x x Task 3 L2 X x Task 4 L2 x x

28 x

x X X x X x x

x x

X x

x

x X

x x x

x x

National Wild Turkey Federation

Office of Policy & Stakeholder Coordination

Recreation Services Office

Licensing and Permitting Office

Community Relations Office

FWRI -- Ecosystem Assessment and Restoration -- Fish and Wildlife Health

FWRI -- Information Science and Management -- Center for Spatial Analysis

FWRI -- Wildlife Research Section

HSC – Habitat Conservation Scientific Services

HSC -- Terrestrial Habitat Conservation and Restoration Section

HGM -- Hunter Safety and Ranges Section

HGM - - Public Hunting Areas

HGM -- Wild Turkey Management Program (WTST)

Task Rankinga

LE -- Land and Water Patrol

X x x x X x X x x x

x x x

x

x x

Compatible Uses Objective Strategy A – Review current season format and hunting regulations Task 1 L2 X x X Task 2 L2 X X x Task 3 L2 x x x X Strategy B – Monitor harvest and hunter participation and satisfaction trends Task 1 L1 X x Task 2 L3 X Task 3 L3 X X x Task 4 L3 X x Strategy C – Encourage new turkey hunting participants Task 1 L3 x Task 2 L2 Task 3 L1 x X x x Task 4 L3 x X x x Task 5 L2 X

29 x x

x

x x x

x

X x x x X x x

x

x x x

National Wild Turkey Federation

Office of Policy & Stakeholder Coordination

Recreation Services Office

Licensing and Permitting Office

Community Relations Office

LE -- Land and Water Patrol

FWRI -- Ecosystem Assessment and Restoration -- Fish and Wildlife Health

FWRI -- Information Science and Management -- Center for Spatial Analysis

FWRI -- Wildlife Research Section

HSC – Habitat Conservation Scientific Services

HSC -- Terrestrial Habitat Conservation and Restoration Section

HGM -- Hunter Safety and Ranges Section

HGM - - Public Hunting Areas

HGM -- Wild Turkey Management Program (WTST)

Task Rankinga

Strategy D – Ensure no net loss of acreage open to hunting Task 1 L1 x X Task 2 L1 x X x Task 3 L3 X Task 4 L2 x X x x Strategy E – Increase hunter compliance Task 1 L2 Task 2 L3 x Task 3 L2 x x x Strategy F – Other nature-based recreational uses Task 1 L3 x Task 2 L3 x Task 3 L3 Task 4 L3 x x Task 5 L3 x x

30

FWRI -- Ecosystem Assessment and Restoration -- Fish and Wildlife Health

FWRI -- Information Science and Management -- Center for Spatial Analysis

FWRI -- Wildlife Research Section

HSC – Habitat Conservation Scientific Services

HSC -- Terrestrial Habitat Conservation and Restoration Section

HGM -- Hunter Safety and Ranges Section

HGM - - Public Hunting Areas

HGM -- Wild Turkey Management Program (WTST)

Task Rankinga

x x x

X X x x x X x

x x X X

X X X x X

National Wild Turkey Federation

Office of Policy & Stakeholder Coordination

Recreation Services Office

Licensing and Permitting Office

Community Relations Office

x

LE -- Land and Water Patrol

x x x

x x x

x x x x

Outreach and Education Objective Strategy A – Develop a communications plan Task 1 L1 x Task 2 L1 x Task 3 L1 X x x x Strategy B – Promote outreach for specific strategic plan tasks and address other issues that arise Task 1 L1 X Task 2 L2 x x x x Task 3 L2 x x x x x x x x x Task 4 L3 x Strategy C – Promote wild turkey education and outreach through outdoor-related media Task 1 L1 x Task 2 L2 x x x x x x x Task 3 L3 x x x x x

31 X X x

x X X X

X X X

x x x

x x x

x x

x x x x x x x

x x x

National Wild Turkey Federation

Office of Policy & Stakeholder Coordination

Recreation Services Office

Licensing and Permitting Office

Community Relations Office

LE -- Land and Water Patrol

FWRI -- Ecosystem Assessment and Restoration -- Fish and Wildlife Health

FWRI -- Information Science and Management -- Center for Spatial Analysis

FWRI -- Wildlife Research Section

HSC – Habitat Conservation Scientific Services

HSC -- Terrestrial Habitat Conservation and Restoration Section

HGM -- Hunter Safety and Ranges Section

HGM - - Public Hunting Areas

HGM -- Wild Turkey Management Program (WTST)

Task Rankinga

Strategy D – Expand educational opportunities and resources Task 1 L1 X x x x Task 2 L3 X x x

a

b

32 x x x x x x

Task rankings include L1 = highest priority, L2 = moderate priority, and L3 = lower priority. Within the HGM column, the Wild Turkey Standing Team is also included since this team may, as a working element of HGM, address several of the listed tasks in this capacity. c Bold „X‟ denotes the lead or primary responsible entity for accomplishment of the task.

x x

National Wild Turkey Federation

Office of Policy & Stakeholder Coordination

Recreation Services Office

Licensing and Permitting Office

Community Relations Office

LE -- Land and Water Patrol

FWRI -- Ecosystem Assessment and Restoration -- Fish and Wildlife Health

FWRI -- Information Science and Management -- Center for Spatial Analysis

FWRI -- Wildlife Research Section

HSC – Habitat Conservation Scientific Services

HSC -- Terrestrial Habitat Conservation and Restoration Section

HGM -- Hunter Safety and Ranges Section

HGM - - Public Hunting Areas

HGM -- Wild Turkey Management Program (WTST)

Task Rankinga

LITERATURE CITED Brown, E. K. 1980. Home range and movements of wild turkeys; a review. Proceedings of the National Wild Turkey Symposium 4:251-261. Eichholz, N. F. and T. E. O‟Meara. 1990 (amended 1995). Conceptual management plan of the Wild Turkey Management Program. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. Tallahassee, Florida, USA. Healy, W. M. 1992. Behavior. Pages 46-65 in J. G. Dickson, editor. The wild turkey: biology and management. Stackpole Books, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, USA. Hurst, G. A. 1992. Foods and feeding. Pages 66-83 in J. G. Dickson, editor. The wild turkey: biology and management. Stackpole Books, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, USA. Landers, J. L. and J. S. Sanders. 1988. An investigation into incidences of declining wild turkey populations in northwestern Florida. Tall Timbers Research Station, Tallahassee, Florida, USA. Newman, C. C. and E. Griffin. 1950. Deer and turkey habitats and populations of Florida. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission Technical Bulletin 1. Nicholson, D. S., L. S. Perrin, C. Morea, and R. Shields. 2005. The distribution and relative abundance of wild turkeys in Florida. Proceedings of the Ninth Wild Turkey Symposium 9:101-106. Olson, J. T. 2006. Evaluation of remote, infrared-triggered cameras as a population survey technique for wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo). Thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA. Williams, L. E., Jr. 1981. The book of the wild turkey. Winchester Press, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA. . 1991. Managing wild turkeys in Florida. Real Turkeys Publishers, Gainesville, Florida, USA. , and D. H. Austin. 1988. Studies of the wild turkey in Florida. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission Technical Bulletin 10.

33