I worked on the Sichuan pheasant program in Michigan. I have been away now for almost 15 years so I don't know exactly what's going on with the birds in Michigan but I can tell you that the program had multiple goals.
A big part of the reason the Phasianus colchicus strauchii subspecies was chosen was the fact that they were found from about sea level to high elevations, in a variety of habitats, in areas where the local human populations seek and eat everything. Predators like feral cats are everywhere, yet the pheasants survived and thrived.
Secondly, the concern over genetic diversity was/is real. Injecting some genetic variability into the population and creating a type of hybrid vigor was a desirable outcome.
Third, the breeding behavior of the colchicus colchicus subspecies is that of a "rapist", while the strauchii subspecies is more of a "lover". It was thought that, since the females select the males to breed with them, the gentler Sichuan would be more desired by the hens and breeding success would increase.
Habitat preferences are similar although the Sichuan is more likely To be able to survive in grassland areas which are succeeding towards more of an early brushy type of habitat vs. purely I grassland, probably because of the aforementioned predator awareness from being food for so many humans and predators for so long.
It was never thought that there would be a pure, wild flock of Sicuan pheasants running around. We actually took measurements of bag-checked roosters during hunting season to develop methods for determining percentage of ring-necked vs. Sichuan blood and tracked that over time. What we found was through the years there was a smaller and smaller percentage of pure strains of EITHER subspecies, indicating that they were interbreeding and that genetic diversity was increasing.
There was consideration of giving birds to qualified people but then we realized doing that would make our population survey and tracking data completely non-credible. We had a systematic release program each spring based upon releasing a set number of birds in randomized townships so we could track population trends and identify differences in habitat selection and use and how they related to relative abundance. All that, in addition to the very real probability that birds released by the public would just be a put/take proposition.
Just thought this info might be interesting.
A big part of the reason the Phasianus colchicus strauchii subspecies was chosen was the fact that they were found from about sea level to high elevations, in a variety of habitats, in areas where the local human populations seek and eat everything. Predators like feral cats are everywhere, yet the pheasants survived and thrived.
Secondly, the concern over genetic diversity was/is real. Injecting some genetic variability into the population and creating a type of hybrid vigor was a desirable outcome.
Third, the breeding behavior of the colchicus colchicus subspecies is that of a "rapist", while the strauchii subspecies is more of a "lover". It was thought that, since the females select the males to breed with them, the gentler Sichuan would be more desired by the hens and breeding success would increase.
Habitat preferences are similar although the Sichuan is more likely To be able to survive in grassland areas which are succeeding towards more of an early brushy type of habitat vs. purely I grassland, probably because of the aforementioned predator awareness from being food for so many humans and predators for so long.
It was never thought that there would be a pure, wild flock of Sicuan pheasants running around. We actually took measurements of bag-checked roosters during hunting season to develop methods for determining percentage of ring-necked vs. Sichuan blood and tracked that over time. What we found was through the years there was a smaller and smaller percentage of pure strains of EITHER subspecies, indicating that they were interbreeding and that genetic diversity was increasing.
There was consideration of giving birds to qualified people but then we realized doing that would make our population survey and tracking data completely non-credible. We had a systematic release program each spring based upon releasing a set number of birds in randomized townships so we could track population trends and identify differences in habitat selection and use and how they related to relative abundance. All that, in addition to the very real probability that birds released by the public would just be a put/take proposition.
Just thought this info might be interesting.
