-
https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/6619eeacf3ef9f3782c7b8ee7e843a1e.pdf
eb6804f0388725f5d6699e50c684d9ee
PDF Text
Text
Colorado Mourning Dove Banding Program Update
April 2017
Jim Gammonley
Colorado Parks and Wildlife Avian Research Program
The mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) is the most abundant and most harvested migratory game bird
in the U.S. In 2015, the mourning dove population size in the U.S. was about 266 million at the start of
the hunting season, and an estimated 748,800 hunters harvested approximately 13.1 million mourning
doves (Seamans 2016). Within the U.S., mourning doves are managed in three units where populations
are largely independent of each other; Colorado is located in the Central Management Unit (CMU),
along with 13 other states (AR, IA, KS, MN, MO, MT, NE, NM, ND, OK, SD, TX, and WY). In 2015, the
CMU mourning dove population estimate was 166 million, and 369,800 hunters harvested 7.2 million
mourning doves; in Colorado, 14,200 hunters harvested 204,500 mourning doves (Seamans 2016).
In 2003, the four Flyway Councils (Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, and Pacific) developed and approved a
national strategic harvest management plan for mourning doves (Anonymous 2005). The plan called for
development and continuous improvement of an objective framework for making informed harvest
management decisions. Important elements of informed harvest management included (1) the
establishment of monitoring programs for the collection of mourning dove vital rate information
(primarily survival rates, harvest rates, and an index to annual productivity), and (2) development of
demographic models that use these data to predict effects of harvest management actions and
environmental conditions on population abundance. As part of this plan, the Flyway Councils endorsed
developing and implementing a nationwide, annual banding program for mourning doves to be
conducted primarily by state wildlife agencies.
In 2008, the Flyway Councils and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) adopted interim harvest
strategies for the Central, Eastern, and Western Dove Management Units until managers finalized a
more comprehensive national approach. Harvest management decisions in the interim strategies were
prescribed based on a composite trend in mourning dove relative abundance determined primarily from
roadside surveys. Roadside surveys included the Mourning Dove Call‐Count Survey (doves heard and
doves seen) and the North American Breeding Bird Survey. Prior to the interim strategies, harvest
management decisions were based loosely on trends in mourning dove relative abundance from CallCount surveys. The reliability of roadside surveys to index abundance of doves is unknown, and
opposing trends in doves heard and doves seen in the Eastern Management Unit has caused doubt in
their veracity. Furthermore, trends in relative abundance cannot be used reliably to evaluate and
predict the effects of harvest on dove demographics (Runge et al. 2004).
In 2013 the Service formally accepted a finalized national mourning dove harvest strategy and
implemented the strategy for the 2014‐15 hunting season (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2015). The
objectives of the strategy are to conserve mourning dove populations in the three Management Units,
and to minimize annual regulatory change. The harvest strategy does not use roadside surveys, but
instead relies on mourning dove absolute abundance estimated from band‐recovery and harvest data
and a demographic model that predicts harvest and resulting subsequent year abundance (Lincoln 1930,
Geis 1972, Otis 2006). Consequently, an annual, nationwide banding program is an essential component
of mourning dove management.
1
�In 2007, the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW, now Colorado Parks and Wildlife, CPW) initiated a
new banding program for mourning doves in support of the national harvest management program.
Prior to 2007, the CDOW had not banded mourning doves since a large-scale banding study conducted
in the CMU during the late 1960s and 1970s (Dunks et al. 1982). During this period, Colorado biologists
banded 2,100–5,000 doves per year, for a total of 29,253. A total of 283 of these banded doves were
recovered during subsequent hunting seasons; 52% were harvested in Colorado. After the conclusion of
the study, no dedicated efforts at banding mourning doves took place in Colorado until 2007.
Otis (2009) developed preliminary banding quotas (minimum target numbers of doves banded per year)
for each state, based on desired precision of survival and recovery rates derived from banding data (Otis
2009). Quotas were developed for both adult (After Hatch Year [AHY]) and juvenile (Hatch Year [HY])
age classes. The current minimum banding quotas for Colorado are 302 AHY and 178 HY individuals, for
a total of at least 480 mourning doves. Substantially more doves typically must be captured in order to
achieve the age-specific quotas (e.g., many more than 178 HY doves may be captured in the process of
trying to capture 302 AHY doves). In addition, banding sites should be well distributed across the state,
and given the effort required to maintain banding sites, a minimum target of 50-100 doves at each site
probably makes the most practical sense. Finally, larger samples of banded doves than the established
quotas will contribute to the overall banding effort. Consequently, these banding quotas should be
considered minimum targets, and annual statewide banded samples are expected to be more in the
range of 1,000-1,200 doves.
Although primary interest is in obtaining a representative banded sample and demographic estimates at
the scale of the CMU, distribution of banding effort within a state is an important consideration for
achieving a banded sample that is representative of the overall statewide population. Dove managers
have proposed allocating each state’s banded among different physiographic regions defined by Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs), proportional to the area and the median mourning dove density
(calculated from Breeding Bird Survey data) in the BCRs. In Colorado, there are three BCRs: the
Northern Rockies (extreme northwestern Colorado), Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau (remainder of
the Western Slope and eastern foothills), and the Shortgrass Prairie (eastern plains). The suggested
allocation of banding effort among these BCRs in Colorado is 5% in the Northern Rockies, 15% in the
Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau, and 80% in the Shortgrass Prairie.
Banding Methods
In 2007, limited banding was conducted at three sites in eastern Colorado (Table 1) to assess equipment
and personnel needs, and required trapping effort. Thirty Kniffen-style walk-in funnel traps (Reeves and
Geis 1968) were constructed and distributed among the sites. White millet and commercial wild bird
feed was used as bait. Sites were baited beginning in June or early July, and baiting continued for 1-4
weeks before trapping commenced. All captured mourning doves were aged, sexed, and banded with
standard aluminum size 3A leg bands using established techniques (Reeves and Geis 1968). These
techniques were used at other sites as the number of statewide banding sites was expanded over
subsequent years (Table 1). When a previously banded dove is captured, its band number is recorded.
In 2008, the Service’s Region 6 and Division of Migratory Bird Management purchased a grain bin, and
refuge personnel at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge (RMANWR) erected the bin on
RMANWR. CPW purchases millet and stores it in this grain bin. The CPW dove banding coordinator
transfers millet from the grain bin to plastic, waterproof barrels and distributes bait, traps, and bands to
banding sites around the state in each spring.
2
�To obtain information on banded doves, managers rely primarily on hunters to report the band number
of any banded dove they harvest to the U.S. Geological Survey Bird Banding Laboratory (BBL). Estimates
of band reporting rates (i.e., the probability that a hunter will report a banded dove to the BBL) are
required in order to estimate mourning dove harvest rates, a critical parameter used in mourning dove
harvest management. In 2007 the BBL began producing bands that, in addition to the 1-800-327-BAND
number, have the BBL web address (www.reportband.gov) inscribed on them, rather than the Laurel,
MD mail address that was inscribed on bands in the past. A study on band reporting rates using the tollfree number and mail address inscriptions produced estimated reporting rates ranging from 31-100% in
other CMU states (Otis et al. 2008). It was unknown how providing the web address instead of the mail
address would affect band reporting rates. Numerous states, the Service, and the BBL conducted a
study in which half of the mourning doves captured during annual banding operations were banded with
web address bands, and half were banded with mail address bands, and differences in reporting rates
(from direct hunter recoveries) between the two band types were estimated. In 2008, Colorado banded
373 and 366 mourning doves with mail address bands and web address bands, respectively. In 2009,
Colorado banded 359 and 299 mourning doves with mail address and web address bands, respectively.
Results of the study showed that mourning dove band reporting rates were higher with the web address
(Sanders and Otis 2012). Since 2011 banders have used only bands with the 1-800 number and web
address in annual mourning dove banding programs.
Results
After 10 years, 9,055 mourning doves have been banded under the CPW banding permit. To date,
hunters have reported harvesting 166 mourning doves banded in Colorado during 2007-2016 (Table 2).
Most (70%) hunter recoveries were from Colorado, and most (62%) recoveries were from doves banded
in Prowers County (Table 3). Hunters reported recoveries of doves banded in all areas except
southwestern Colorado (Dolores and Montezuma counties) (Table 3). Through the 2016 trapping
period, banders recaptured 100 mourning doves originally banded in previous years (Table 4).
During 2003-2015, almost 165,000 mourning doves were banded in the 14 CMU states (Seamans 2016).
Estimated annual survival rates during 2003-2015 averaged 0.28 (± 0.01 SE) for HY doves and 0.45 (±
0.01) for AHY doves in the CMU; in Colorado, annual survival rates averaged 0.41 (± 0.04) for HY doves
and 0.57 (± 0.04) for AHY doves (Seamans 2016). Annual harvest rates averaged 0.071 (± 0.001) for HY
doves and 0.056 (± 0.001) for AHY doves in the CMU during 2003-2015; in Colorado, annual harvest
rates averaged 0.013 (± 0.002) for HY doves and 0.028 (± 0.008) (Seamans 2016). Annual estimates of
harvest and harvest rate are used to estimate the abundance of mourning doves in the CMU on
September 1 each year, and managers use abundance estimates to determine appropriate annual
hunting regulations. During 2003-2015, annual abundance averaged 91,099,059, and ranged from
63,286,288 to 132,794,566 (Seamons 2016).
CPW will continue to band mourning doves annually. Banding sites used in 2016 will again be used in
2017, and we will attempt to band at least 1,000 doves.
Acknowledgments
The success of the Colorado mourning dove banding program is dependent on the participation of
numerous CPW personnel. CPW Terrestrial Biologists Brad Banulis (Area 18), Jonathan Reitz (Area 12),
Stephanie Steinhoff (Area 17), Marty Stratman (Area 3), Allen Vitt (Area 11), and Brad Weinmeister
(Area 15) have been instrumental in implementing the banding program over the past 10 years. Mindy
Hetrick (RMANWR) led banding efforts by Service personnel at RMANWR through 2016. RMANWR staff
assisted with maintenance of the grain bin and storage of millet.
3
�Literature Cited
Anonymous. 2005. Mourning dove national strategic harvest management plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Laurel, MD, USA.
Dunks, J. H., R. E. Tomlinson, H. M. Reeves, D. D. Dolton, C. E. Braun, and T. P. Zapatka. 1982.
Migration, harvest, and population dynamics of mourning doves banded in the Central
Management Unit, 1967-77. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report – Wildlife
249.
Geis, A. D. 1972. Use of banding data in migratory game bird research and management. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report---Wildlife 154,
Washington, D.C.
Lincoln, F . A. 1930. Calculating waterfowl abundance on the basis of banding returns. U.S. Department
of Agriculture Circular 18, Washington, D.C.
Otis, D.L. 2006. A mourning dove hunting regulation strategy based on annual harvest statistics and
banding data. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:1302-1307.
Otis, D. L. 2009. Revised draft mourning dove banding needs assessment. Unpublished report.
Otis, D. L., J. H. Schulz, and D. P. Scott. 2008. Mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) harvest and
population parameters derived from a national banding study. Biological Technical Publication
BTP-R3010-2008, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Reeves, H. M., and A. D. Geis. 1968. Mourning dove capture and banding. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Special Scientific Report, Wildlife No. 17. Washington, D.C.
Runge, M. C., W. L. Kendall, and J. D. Nichols. 2004. Exploitation. Pages 303-328 in W. J. Sutherland, I.
Newton, and R. E. Green, editors. Bird Ecology and Conservation: A Handbook of Techniques.
Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Sanders, T.A., and D.L. Otis. 2012. Mourning dove reporting probabilities for web-address versus toll
free bands. Journal Wildlife Management 76:480-488.
Seamans, M.E. 2016. Mourning dove population status, 2016. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management Washington, D.C., USA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015. Mourning Dove Harvest Strategy 2015. U.S. Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Washington, D.C.
4
�Table 1. Numbers of mourning doves banded in Colorado under the CPW banding permit, by age class
(AHY = after hatch year, HY = hatch year).
Age Class
Year
Banding Area
AHY
HY
Unknown
Total
2007 Prowers County
Logan County
Pueblo County
Total
161
25
46
232
138
21
53
212
1
0
1
2
300
46
100
446
2008 Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
18
34
117
43
72
9
293
175
4
83
57
26
94
439
7
0
0
0
0
0
7
200
38
200
100
98
103
739
2009 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
50
8
14
162
63
33
26
356
48
91
9
38
37
4
71
298
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
4
99
99
23
200
100
37
100
658
2010 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Washington counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
92
43
66
125
66
25
417
101
157
34
75
132
20
519
7
0
0
0
1
0
8
200
200
100
200
199
45
944
2011 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
124
26
82
159
83
70
544
65
174
18
41
115
26
439
11
0
0
0
2
4
17
200
200
100
200
200
100
1,000
5
�2012 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
70
50
34
225
62
55
496
29
2
165
75
137
30
438
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
100
52
199
300
200
85
936
2013 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties*
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
18
134
34
6
234
121
63
610
181
13
166
2
66
78
29
535
1
1
0
0
0
1
8
11
200
148
200
8
300
200
100
1,156
2014 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
70
97
94
10
217
127
34
649
116
3
81
33
82
73
61
449
14
0
0
0
1
0
5
20
200
100
175
43
300
200
100
1,118
2015 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
155
16
128
5
145
0
50
499
28
0
78
3
154
1
46
310
16
0
0
0
1
0
3
20
199
16
206
8
300
1
99
829
2016 Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
112
95
237
29
198
127
798
72
105
40
25
101
72
415
16
0
0
0
0
0
16
200
200
277
54
299
199
1,229
6
�*Banding continued after 2013 in Douglas and Jefferson counties under a banding permit managed by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Table 2. Hunter recoveries (through January 2017) of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding
permit in Colorado, 2007-2016.
Year of Number
Year of recovery
banding banded 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
446
739
658
944
1,000
936
1,156
1,118
829
1,229
9,055
4
4
3
3
6
2
8
4
14
1
2
3
6
12
0
1
2
5
13
21
0
3
2
5
6
10
26
0
1
0
2
3
3
12
21
0
0
0
0
1
2
6
15
24
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
10
14
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
3
4
14
24
10
18
11
19
23
17
19
21
14
14
166
Table 3. Hunter recovery locations (through January 2017) of mourning doves banded under the CPW
banding permit in Colorado, 2007-2016. Mex = Mexico, Hon = Honduras.
Number
Recovery location
Banding county
banded
CO
Mex TX NM AZ AL OK CA Hon Total
Prowers
Pueblo
Morgan/Logan/Washington
Adams
Larimer
Douglas/Jefferson
Delta
Mesa
Rio Grande/Saguache
Dolores/Montezuma
Total
2,599
1,499
562
1,398
658
1,098
200
61
664
316
9,055
93
6
8
2
7
0
4
0
0
0
120
8
5
5
3
2
0
0
0
0
0
23
7
2
1
1
4
1
2
0
1
0
0
12
0
1
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
4
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
105
14
14
11
10
6
4
1
1
0
166
�Table 4. Recaptures of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007–2016.
A recaptures is defined as a dove captured during annual banding operations that was banded in
Colorado during a previous year.
Year of
Number
Year of recapture
banding
banded
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012 2013 2104 2015 2016 Total
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Total
446
739
658
944
1,000
936
1,156
1,118
829
7,826
1
1
1
7
8
0
2
5
7
0
2
5
8
15
8
1
0
0
1
6
8
1
0
0
0
4
6
11
0
0
1
2
0
1
10
14
0
0
0
0
1
3
5
12
21
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
4
8
15
4
11
11
11
11
11
17
16
8
100
�
https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/78d5c96f7df30bd5010f2b24036b9c9b.pdf
1c263d70212c52514777a960909a1473
PDF Text
Text
Colorado Mourning Dove Banding Program Update
May 2018
Jim Gammonley
Colorado Parks and Wildlife Avian Research Program
The mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) is the most abundant and most harvested migratory game bird
in the U.S. In 2016, the mourning dove population size in the U.S. was about 279 million at the start of
the hunting season, and an estimated 837,800 hunters harvested approximately 13.5 million mourning
doves (Seamans 2017). Within the U.S., mourning doves are managed in three units where populations
are largely independent of each other; Colorado is located in the Central Management Unit (CMU),
along with 13 other states (AR, IA, KS, MN, MO, MT, NE, NM, ND, OK, SD, TX, and WY). In 2016, the
CMU mourning dove population estimate was 171 million, and 430,400 hunters harvested 7.3 million
mourning doves; in Colorado, 13,100 hunters harvested 141,200 mourning doves (Seamans 2017).
In 2003, the four Flyway Councils (Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, and Pacific) developed and approved a
national strategic harvest management plan for mourning doves (Anonymous 2005). The plan called for
development and continuous improvement of an objective framework for making informed harvest
management decisions. Important elements of informed harvest management included (1) the
establishment of monitoring programs for the collection of mourning dove vital rate information
(primarily survival rates, harvest rates, and an index to annual productivity), and (2) development of
demographic models that use these data to predict effects of harvest management actions and
environmental conditions on population abundance. As part of this plan, the Flyway Councils endorsed
developing and implementing a nationwide, annual banding program for mourning doves to be
conducted primarily by state wildlife agencies.
In 2008, the Flyway Councils and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) adopted interim harvest
strategies for the Central, Eastern, and Western Dove Management Units until managers finalized a
more comprehensive national approach. Harvest management decisions in the interim strategies were
prescribed based on a composite trend in mourning dove relative abundance determined primarily from
roadside surveys. Roadside surveys included the Mourning Dove Call‐Count Survey (doves heard and
doves seen) and the North American Breeding Bird Survey. Prior to the interim strategies, harvest
management decisions were based loosely on trends in mourning dove relative abundance from CallCount surveys. The reliability of roadside surveys to index abundance of doves is unknown, and
opposing trends in doves heard and doves seen in the Eastern Management Unit has caused doubt in
their veracity. Furthermore, trends in relative abundance cannot be used reliably to evaluate and
predict the effects of harvest on dove demographics (Runge et al. 2004).
In 2013 the Service formally accepted a finalized national mourning dove harvest strategy and
implemented the strategy for the 2014‐15 hunting season (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2015). The
objectives of the strategy are to conserve mourning dove populations in the three Management Units,
and to minimize annual regulatory change. The harvest strategy does not use roadside surveys, but
instead relies on mourning dove abundance estimated from band recovery and harvest data and a
demographic model that predicts harvest and resulting subsequent year abundance (Lincoln 1930, Geis
1972, Otis 2006). Consequently, an annual, nationwide banding program is an essential component of
mourning dove management.
1
�In 2007, the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW, now Colorado Parks and Wildlife, CPW) initiated a
new banding program for mourning doves in support of the national harvest management program.
Prior to 2007, the CDOW had not banded mourning doves since a large-scale banding study conducted
in the CMU during the late 1960s and 1970s (Dunks et al. 1982). During this period, Colorado biologists
banded 2,100–5,000 doves per year, for a total of 29,253. A total of 283 of these banded doves were
recovered during subsequent hunting seasons; 52% were harvested in Colorado. After the conclusion of
the study, no dedicated efforts at banding mourning doves took place in Colorado until 2007.
Otis (2009) developed preliminary banding quotas (minimum target numbers of doves banded per year)
for each state, based on desired precision of survival and recovery rates derived from banding data (Otis
2009). Quotas were developed for both adult (After Hatch Year [AHY]) and juvenile (Hatch Year [HY])
age classes. The current minimum annual banding quotas for Colorado are 302 AHY and 178 HY
individuals, for a total of at least 480 mourning doves. Substantially more doves typically must be
captured in order to achieve the age-specific quotas (e.g., many more than 178 HY doves may be
captured in the process of trying to capture 302 AHY doves). In addition, banding sites should be well
distributed across the state, and given the effort required to maintain banding sites, a minimum target
of 50-100 doves at each site makes the most practical sense. Finally, larger samples of banded doves
than the established quotas will contribute to the overall banding effort. Consequently, these banding
quotas should be considered minimum targets, and annual statewide banded samples are expected to
be more in the range of 1,000-1,200 doves.
Although primary interest is in obtaining a representative banded sample and demographic estimates at
the scale of the CMU, distribution of banding effort within a state is an important consideration for
achieving a banded sample that is representative of the overall statewide population. Dove managers
have proposed allocating each state’s banded among different physiographic regions defined by Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs), proportional to the area and the median mourning dove density
(calculated from Breeding Bird Survey data) in the BCRs. In Colorado, there are three BCRs: the
Northern Rockies (extreme northwestern Colorado), Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau (remainder of
the Western Slope and eastern foothills), and the Shortgrass Prairie (eastern plains). The suggested
allocation of banding effort among these BCRs in Colorado is 5% in the Northern Rockies, 15% in the
Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau, and 80% in the Shortgrass Prairie.
Banding Methods
In 2007, limited banding was conducted at three sites in eastern Colorado (Table 1) to assess equipment
and personnel needs, and required trapping effort. Thirty Kniffen-style walk-in funnel traps (Reeves and
Geis 1968) were constructed and distributed among the sites. White millet and commercial wild bird
feed was used as bait. Sites were baited beginning in June or early July, and baiting continued for 1-4
weeks before trapping commenced. All captured mourning doves were aged, sexed, and banded with
standard aluminum size 3A leg bands using established techniques (Reeves and Geis 1968). These
techniques were used at other sites as the number of statewide banding sites was expanded over
subsequent years (Table 1). When a previously banded dove is captured, its band number is recorded.
In 2008, the Service’s Region 6 and Division of Migratory Bird Management purchased a grain bin, and
refuge personnel at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge (RMANWR) erected the bin on
RMANWR. CPW purchases millet and stores it in this grain bin. The CPW dove banding coordinator
transfers millet from the grain bin to plastic, waterproof barrels and distributes bait, traps, and bands to
banding sites around the state in each spring.
2
�To obtain information on banded doves, managers rely primarily on hunters to report the band number
of any banded dove they harvest to the U.S. Geological Survey Bird Banding Laboratory (BBL). Estimates
of band reporting rates (i.e., the probability that a hunter will report a banded dove to the BBL) are
required in order to estimate mourning dove harvest rates, a critical parameter used in mourning dove
harvest management. In 2007 the BBL began producing bands that, in addition to the 1-800-327-BAND
number, have the BBL web address (www.reportband.gov) inscribed on them, rather than the Laurel,
MD mail address that was inscribed on bands in the past. A study on band reporting rates using the tollfree number and mail address inscriptions produced estimated reporting rates ranging from 31-100% in
other CMU states (Otis et al. 2008). It was unknown how providing the web address instead of the mail
address would affect band reporting rates. Numerous states, the Service, and the BBL conducted a
study in which half of the mourning doves captured during annual banding operations were banded with
web address bands, and half were banded with mail address bands, and differences in reporting rates
(from direct hunter recoveries) between the two band types were estimated. In 2008, Colorado banded
373 and 366 mourning doves with mail address bands and web address bands, respectively. In 2009,
Colorado banded 359 and 299 mourning doves with mail address and web address bands, respectively.
Results of the study showed that mourning dove band reporting rates were higher with the web address
(Sanders and Otis 2012). From 2011 through 2017, banders used only bands with the 1-800 number and
web address in annual mourning dove banding programs. Beginning in 2018, bands will have only web
address inscribed on them.
Results
In 2017, 723 mourning doves were banded under the CPW banding permit. Numbers of doves trapped
were down at all sites, and numbers of HY doves were particularly low. A dove died from suspected
trichomoniasis at the banding site in Pueblo County, so that site was shut down.
During 2007-2017, 9,778 mourning doves were banded under the CPW banding permit. Through
January 2018, hunters have reported harvesting 179 mourning doves banded in Colorado during 20072017 (Table 2). Most (72%) hunter recoveries were from Colorado, and most (55%) recoveries were
from doves banded in Prowers County, where 29% of doves have been banded (Table 3). Hunters
reported recoveries of doves banded in all areas except southwestern Colorado (Dolores and
Montezuma counties) (Table 3). Through the 2017 trapping period, banders recaptured 149 mourning
doves originally banded in previous years (Table 4).
During 2003-2016, almost 226,000 mourning doves were banded in the 14 CMU states (Seamans 2017).
Estimated annual survival rates during 2003-2016 averaged 0.28 (± 0.01 SE) for HY doves and 0.45 (±
0.01) for AHY doves in the CMU; in Colorado, annual survival rates averaged 0.40 (± 0.03) for HY doves
and 0.57 (± 0.03) for AHY doves (Seamans 2017). Annual harvest rates averaged 0.070 (± 0.001) for HY
doves and 0.055 (± 0.001) for AHY doves in the CMU during 2003-2016; in Colorado, annual harvest
rates averaged 0.013 (± 0.002) for HY doves and 0.029 (± 0.004) for AHY doves (Seamans 2017). Annual
estimates of harvest and harvest rate are used to estimate the abundance of mourning doves in the
CMU on September 1 each year, and managers use abundance estimates to determine appropriate
annual hunting regulations. During 2003-2016, annual abundance averaged 159,664,386 (Seamons
2017).
CPW will continue to band mourning doves annually. Banding sites used in 2017 will again be used in
2018, and we will attempt to band at least 1,000 doves. We will be seeking to establish additional
banding sites throughout the state as opportunities arise.
3
�Acknowledgments
The success of the Colorado mourning dove banding program is dependent on the participation of
numerous personnel. CPW personnel were instrumental in conducting the banding program in 2017,
including Brad Banulis and Mark Hodges (Area 18), Jonathan Reitz (Area 12), and Allen Vitt (Area 11). In
addition, staff and volunteers from RMANWR (Mindy Hetrick, Susan Horton, Nick Kaczor, Scott Quigley)
continued vital banding operations at RMANWR and assisted with maintenance of the grain bin and
storage of millet, and Jim Jackson assisted with banding in Larimer County.
Literature Cited
Anonymous. 2005. Mourning dove national strategic harvest management plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Laurel, MD, USA.
Dunks, J. H., R. E. Tomlinson, H. M. Reeves, D. D. Dolton, C. E. Braun, and T. P. Zapatka. 1982.
Migration, harvest, and population dynamics of mourning doves banded in the Central
Management Unit, 1967-77. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report – Wildlife
249.
Geis, A. D. 1972. Use of banding data in migratory game bird research and management. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report---Wildlife 154,
Washington, D.C.
Lincoln, F . A. 1930. Calculating waterfowl abundance on the basis of banding returns. U.S. Department
of Agriculture Circular 18, Washington, D.C.
Otis, D.L. 2006. A mourning dove hunting regulation strategy based on annual harvest statistics and
banding data. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:1302-1307.
Otis, D. L. 2009. Revised draft mourning dove banding needs assessment. Unpublished report.
Otis, D. L., J. H. Schulz, and D. P. Scott. 2008. Mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) harvest and
population parameters derived from a national banding study. Biological Technical Publication
BTP-R3010-2008, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Reeves, H. M., and A. D. Geis. 1968. Mourning dove capture and banding. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Special Scientific Report, Wildlife No. 17. Washington, D.C.
Runge, M. C., W. L. Kendall, and J. D. Nichols. 2004. Exploitation. Pages 303-328 in W. J. Sutherland, I.
Newton, and R. E. Green, editors. Bird Ecology and Conservation: A Handbook of Techniques.
Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Sanders, T.A., and D.L. Otis. 2012. Mourning dove reporting probabilities for web-address versus toll
free bands. Journal Wildlife Management 76:480-488.
Seamans, M.E. 2017. Mourning dove population status, 2017. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management Washington, D.C., USA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015. Mourning Dove Harvest Strategy 2015. U.S. Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Washington, D.C.
4
�Table 1. Numbers of mourning doves banded in Colorado under the CPW banding permit, by age class
(AHY = after hatch year, HY = hatch year).
Age Class
Year
Banding Area
AHY
HY
Unknown
Total
2007 Prowers County
Logan County
Pueblo County
Total
161
25
46
232
138
21
53
212
1
0
1
2
300
46
100
446
2008 Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
18
34
117
43
72
9
293
175
4
83
57
26
94
439
7
0
0
0
0
0
7
200
38
200
100
98
103
739
2009 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
50
8
14
162
63
33
26
356
48
91
9
38
37
4
71
298
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
4
99
99
23
200
100
37
100
658
2010 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Washington counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
92
43
66
125
66
25
417
101
157
34
75
132
20
519
7
0
0
0
1
0
8
200
200
100
200
199
45
944
2011 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
124
26
82
159
83
70
544
65
174
18
41
115
26
439
11
0
0
0
2
4
17
200
200
100
200
200
100
1,000
5
�Year
Banding Area
2012 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
AHY
70
50
34
225
62
55
496
2013 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties*
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
29
2
165
75
137
30
438
Unknown
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
Total
100
52
199
300
200
85
936
18
134
34
6
234
121
63
610
181
13
166
2
66
78
29
535
1
1
0
0
0
1
8
11
200
148
200
8
300
200
100
1,156
2014 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
70
97
94
10
217
127
34
649
116
3
81
33
82
73
61
449
14
0
0
0
1
0
5
20
200
100
175
43
300
200
100
1,118
2015 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
155
16
128
5
145
0
50
499
28
0
78
3
154
1
46
310
16
0
0
0
1
0
3
20
199
16
206
8
300
1
99
829
2016 Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
112
95
237
29
198
127
798
72
105
40
25
101
72
415
16
0
0
0
0
0
16
200
200
277
54
299
199
1,229
6
HY
�Year
2017
Banding Area
AHY
HY
Unknown
Total
Adams County
109
45
4
158
Delta County
131
31
0
162
Larimer County
152
23
0
175
Prowers County
154
36
0
190
Pueblo County
16
22
0
38
Total
562
157
4
723
*Banding continued after 2013 in Douglas and Jefferson counties under a banding permit managed by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Table 2. Hunter recoveries (shot or found dead during hunting seasons through January 2018) of
mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007-2017.
Year of
banding
Number
banded
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
Total
446
739
658
944
1,000
936
1,156
1,118
829
1,229
723
9,778
4
4
3
3
6
2
8
4
14
1
2
3
6
12
0
1
2
5
13
21
Year of recovery
2012 2013 2014
0
3
2
5
6
10
26
0
1
0
2
3
3
13
21
0
0
0
0
1
2
6
16
24
2015
2016
2017
Total
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
4
11
14
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
3
4
14
24
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
5
5
13
10
18
11
20
24
17
20
21
14
19
5
179
Table 3. Hunter recovery locations (through January 2018) of mourning doves banded under the CPW
banding permit in Colorado, 2007-2017. Mex = Mexico, Hon = Honduras.
Number
Recovery location
Banding county
banded
CO
Mex TX NM AZ AL OK CA Hon Total
Prowers
Pueblo
Morgan/Logan/Washington
Larimer
Adams
Douglas/Jefferson
Delta
Rio Grande/Saguache
Mesa
Dolores/Montezuma
Total
2,789
1,537
562
833
1,556
1,098
362
664
61
316
9,778
98
9
8
8
2
0
4
0
0
0
129
7
5
5
4
3
0
0
1
0
0
25
7
2
1
1
1
4
2
0
0
1
0
12
0
1
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
0
5
0
1
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
109
17
14
13
11
8
4
2
1
0
179
�Table 4. Recaptures of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007–2017.
A recaptures is defined as a dove captured during annual banding operations that was banded in
Colorado during a previous year.
Year of
banding
Number
banded
2008
2009
2010
2011
Year of recapture
2012
2013 2104
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
446
739
658
944
1,000
936
1,156
1,118
829
1,229
9,055
1
1
1
7
8
0
2
5
7
0
2
5
8
15
8
1
0
0
1
6
8
1
0
0
0
4
6
11
0
0
1
2
0
1
10
14
2015
2016
2017
Total
0
0
0
0
1
3
5
12
21
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
4
8
15
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
7
11
28
49
4
11
11
12
11
11
19
23
19
28
149
�
https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/571abdec70fded10c281e744aa2d24ad.pdf
ecce3adb092226c8adc9893588638506
PDF Text
Text
Colorado Mourning Dove Banding Program Update
May 2019
Jim Gammonley
Colorado Parks and Wildlife Avian Research Program
The mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) is the most abundant and most harvested migratory game bird
in the U.S. In 2017, the mourning dove population size in the U.S. was about 243 million at the start of
the hunting season, and an estimated 709,000 hunters harvested approximately 11.6 million mourning
doves (Seamans 2018). Within the U.S., mourning doves are managed in three units where populations
are largely independent of each other; Colorado is located in the Central Management Unit (CMU),
along with 13 other states (AR, IA, KS, MN, MO, MT, NE, NM, ND, OK, SD, TX, and WY). In 2017, the
CMU mourning dove population estimate was 133 million, and 332,200 hunters harvested 5.5 million
mourning doves; in Colorado, 11,300 hunters harvested 117,600 mourning doves (Seamans 2018).
In 2003, the four Flyway Councils (Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, and Pacific) developed and approved a
national strategic harvest management plan for mourning doves (Anonymous 2005). The plan called for
development and continuous improvement of an objective framework for making informed harvest
management decisions. Important elements of informed harvest management included (1) the
establishment of monitoring programs for the collection of mourning dove vital rate information
(primarily survival rates, harvest rates, and an index to annual productivity), and (2) development of
demographic models that use these data to predict effects of harvest management actions and
environmental conditions on population abundance. As part of this plan, the Flyway Councils endorsed
developing and implementing a nationwide, annual banding program for mourning doves, to be
conducted primarily by state wildlife agencies.
In 2008, the Flyway Councils and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) adopted interim harvest
strategies for the Central, Eastern, and Western Dove Management Units until managers finalized a
more comprehensive national approach. Harvest management decisions in the interim strategies were
prescribed based on a composite trend in mourning dove relative abundance determined primarily from
roadside surveys. Roadside surveys included the Mourning Dove Call‐Count Survey (doves heard and
doves seen) and the North American Breeding Bird Survey. Prior to the interim strategies, harvest
management decisions were based loosely on trends in mourning dove relative abundance from CallCount surveys. The reliability of roadside surveys to index abundance of doves is unknown, and
opposing trends in doves heard and doves seen in the Eastern Management Unit caused doubt in their
veracity. Furthermore, trends in relative abundance cannot be used reliably to evaluate and predict the
effects of harvest on dove demographics (Runge et al. 2004).
In 2013, the Service formally accepted a finalized national mourning dove harvest strategy and
implemented the strategy for the 2014‐15 hunting season (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2015). The
objectives of the strategy are to conserve mourning dove populations in the three Management Units,
and to minimize annual regulatory change. The harvest strategy does not use roadside surveys, but
instead relies on mourning dove abundance estimated from band recovery and harvest data and a
demographic model that predicts harvest and resulting subsequent year abundance (Lincoln 1930, Geis
1972, Otis 2006). Consequently, an annual, nationwide banding program is an essential component of
mourning dove management.
1
�In 2007, the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW, now Colorado Parks and Wildlife, CPW) initiated a
banding program for mourning doves in support of the national harvest management program. Prior to
2007, CPW had not banded mourning doves since a large-scale banding study conducted in the CMU
during the late 1960s and 1970s (Dunks et al. 1982), when Colorado biologists banded 2,100–5,000
doves per year, for a total of 29,253. A total of 283 of these banded doves were recovered during
subsequent hunting seasons; 52% were harvested in Colorado. After the conclusion of the study, no
dedicated efforts at banding mourning doves took place in Colorado until 2007.
Otis (2009) developed preliminary banding quotas (minimum target numbers of doves banded per year)
for each state, based on desired precision of survival and recovery rates derived from banding data (Otis
2009). Quotas were developed for both adult (After Hatch Year [AHY]) and juvenile (Hatch Year [HY])
age classes. The current minimum annual banding quotas for Colorado are 302 AHY and 178 HY
individuals, for a total of at least 480 mourning doves. Substantially more doves typically must be
captured in order to achieve the age-specific quotas (e.g., many more than 178 HY doves may be
captured in the process of trying to capture 302 AHY doves). In addition, banding sites should be well
distributed across the state, and given the effort required to maintain banding sites, a minimum target
of 50-100 doves at each site makes the most practical sense. Finally, larger samples of banded doves
than the established quotas will contribute to the overall banding effort. Consequently, these banding
quotas should be considered minimum targets, and annual statewide banded samples are expected to
be more in the range of 1,000-1,200 doves.
Although primary interest is in obtaining a representative banded sample and demographic estimates at
the scale of the CMU, distribution of banding effort within a state is an important consideration for
achieving a banded sample that is representative of the overall statewide population. Dove managers
have proposed allocating each state’s banded among different physiographic regions defined by Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs), proportional to the area and the median mourning dove density
(calculated from Breeding Bird Survey data) in the BCRs. In Colorado, there are three BCRs: the
Northern Rockies (extreme northwestern Colorado), Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau (remainder of
the Western Slope and eastern foothills), and the Shortgrass Prairie (eastern plains). The suggested
allocation of banding effort among these BCRs in Colorado is 5% in the Northern Rockies, 15% in the
Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau, and 80% in the Shortgrass Prairie.
Banding Methods
In 2007, limited banding was conducted at three sites in eastern Colorado (Table 1) to assess equipment
and personnel needs, and required trapping effort. Thirty Kniffen-style walk-in funnel traps (Reeves and
Geis 1968) were constructed and distributed among the sites. White millet and commercial wild bird
feed was used as bait. Sites were baited beginning in June or early July, and baiting continued for 1-4
weeks before trapping commenced. All captured mourning doves were aged, sexed, and banded with
standard aluminum size 3A leg bands obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey Bird Banding Laboratory
(BBL) and using established techniques (Reeves and Geis 1968). These techniques were used at other
sites as the number of statewide banding sites was expanded over subsequent years (Table 1). When a
previously banded dove is captured, its band number is recorded.
In 2008, the Service’s Region 6 and Division of Migratory Bird Management purchased a grain bin, and
refuge personnel at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge (RMANWR) erected the bin on
RMANWR. CPW purchases millet and stores it in this grain bin. The CPW dove banding coordinator
transfers millet from the grain bin to plastic, waterproof barrels and distributes bait, traps, and bands to
banding sites around the state in each spring.
2
�To obtain information on banded doves, managers rely primarily on hunters to report the band number
of any banded dove they harvest to the BBL. Estimates of band reporting rates (i.e., the probability that
a hunter will report a banded dove to the BBL) are required in order to estimate mourning dove harvest
rates, a critical parameter used in mourning dove harvest management. In 2007 the BBL began
producing bands that, in addition to the 1-800-327-BAND number, have the BBL web address
(www.reportband.gov) inscribed on them, rather than the Laurel, MD mail address that was inscribed on
bands in the past. A study on band reporting rates using the toll-free number and mail address
inscriptions produced estimated reporting rates ranging from 31-100% in other CMU states (Otis et al.
2008). It was unknown how providing the web address instead of the mail address would affect band
reporting rates. Numerous states, the Service, and the BBL conducted a study in which half of the
mourning doves captured during annual banding operations were banded with web address bands, and
half were banded with mail address bands, and differences in reporting rates (from direct hunter
recoveries) between the two band types were estimated. In 2008, Colorado banded 373 and 366
mourning doves with mail address bands and web address bands, respectively. In 2009, Colorado
banded 359 and 299 mourning doves with mail address and web address bands, respectively. Results of
the study showed that mourning dove band reporting rates were higher with the web address (Sanders
and Otis 2012). From 2011 through 2017, banders used only bands with the 1-800 number and web
address in annual mourning dove banding programs. In 2018 the BBL discontinued human operators at
its 1-800 number; callers received a recording referring them to the web address to report bands.
Beginning in 2018 and going forward, mourning dove bands issued by the BBL have only the web
address inscribed on them.
2018 Results
In 2018, 819 mourning doves were banded under the CPW banding permit, including 616 AHY and 199
HY birds. Numbers of doves banded in 2018 increased from 2017 (723), but were still below the 20072017 average (889). Production again appeared to be relatively low, with fewer HY doves than normal
at most banding sites.
During 2007-2018, 10,597 mourning doves were banded under the CPW banding permit. Through
January 2019, hunters have reported harvesting 184 mourning doves banded in Colorado during 20072018 (Table 2). Most (73%) hunter recoveries were from Colorado, and most (61%) recoveries were
from doves banded in Prowers County, where 29% of doves have been banded (Table 3). Hunters
reported recoveries of doves banded in all areas except southwestern Colorado (Dolores and
Montezuma counties) (Table 3). Through the 2018 trapping period, banders recaptured 197 mourning
doves originally banded in previous years (Table 4).
During 2003-2017, 244,269 mourning doves were banded in the 14 CMU states (Seamans 2018).
Estimated annual survival rates during 2003-2017 averaged 0.28 (± 0.01 SE) for HY doves and 0.45 (±
0.01) for AHY doves in the CMU; in Colorado, annual survival rates averaged 0.60 (± 0.06) for HY doves
and 0.50 (± 0.03) for AHY doves (Seamans 2018). Annual harvest rates averaged 0.068 (± 0.001) for HY
doves and 0.053 (± 0.001) for AHY doves in the CMU during 2003-2017; in Colorado, annual harvest
rates averaged 0.012 (± 0.002) for HY doves and 0.029 (± 0.004) for AHY doves (Seamans 2018). Annual
estimates of harvest and harvest rate are used to estimate the abundance of mourning doves in the
CMU on September 1 each year, and managers use abundance estimates to determine appropriate
annual hunting regulations. During 2003-2017, annual abundance averaged 159,676,699 (Seamons
2018).
3
�CPW will continue to band mourning doves annually. Banding sites used in 2018 will again be used in
2019, and we will attempt to band at least 1,000 doves. We will be seeking to establish additional
banding sites throughout the state as opportunities arise.
Acknowledgments
The success of the Colorado mourning dove banding program is dependent on the participation of
numerous personnel. CPW personnel were instrumental in conducting the banding program in 2017,
including Brad Banulis and Mark Hodges (Area 18), Jonathan Reitz (Area 12), and Allen Vitt (Area 11). In
addition, staff and volunteers from RMANWR (Mindy Hetrick, Susan Horton, Nick Kaczor, Scott Quigley)
continued vital banding operations at RMANWR and assisted with maintenance of the grain bin and
storage of millet, and Jim Jackson (CPW, retired) and Derek Danner assisted with banding in Larimer
County.
Literature Cited
Anonymous. 2005. Mourning dove national strategic harvest management plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Laurel, MD, USA.
Dunks, J. H., R. E. Tomlinson, H. M. Reeves, D. D. Dolton, C. E. Braun, and T. P. Zapatka. 1982.
Migration, harvest, and population dynamics of mourning doves banded in the Central
Management Unit, 1967-77. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report – Wildlife
249.
Geis, A. D. 1972. Use of banding data in migratory game bird research and management. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report---Wildlife 154,
Washington, D.C.
Lincoln, F . A. 1930. Calculating waterfowl abundance on the basis of banding returns. U.S. Department
of Agriculture Circular 18, Washington, D.C.
Otis, D.L. 2006. A mourning dove hunting regulation strategy based on annual harvest statistics and
banding data. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:1302-1307.
Otis, D. L. 2009. Revised draft mourning dove banding needs assessment. Unpublished report.
Otis, D. L., J. H. Schulz, and D. P. Scott. 2008. Mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) harvest and
population parameters derived from a national banding study. Biological Technical Publication
BTP-R3010-2008, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Reeves, H. M., and A. D. Geis. 1968. Mourning dove capture and banding. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Special Scientific Report, Wildlife No. 17. Washington, D.C.
Runge, M. C., W. L. Kendall, and J. D. Nichols. 2004. Exploitation. Pages 303-328 in W. J. Sutherland, I.
Newton, and R. E. Green, editors. Bird Ecology and Conservation: A Handbook of Techniques.
Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Sanders, T.A., and D.L. Otis. 2012. Mourning dove reporting probabilities for web-address versus toll
free bands. Journal Wildlife Management 76:480-488.
Seamans, M.E. 2018. Mourning dove population status, 2018. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management Washington, D.C., USA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015. Mourning Dove Harvest Strategy 2015. U.S. Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Washington, D.C.
4
�Table 1. Numbers of mourning doves banded in Colorado under the CPW banding permit, by age class
(AHY = after hatch year, HY = hatch year).
Age Class
Year
Banding Area
AHY
HY
Unknown
Total
2007 Prowers County
161
138
1
300
Logan County
25
21
0
46
Pueblo County
46
53
1
100
Total
232
212
2
446
2008 Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
18
34
117
43
72
9
293
175
4
83
57
26
94
439
7
0
0
0
0
0
7
200
38
200
100
98
103
739
2009 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
50
8
14
162
63
33
26
356
48
91
9
38
37
4
71
298
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
4
99
99
23
200
100
37
100
658
2010 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Washington counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
92
43
66
125
66
25
417
101
157
34
75
132
20
519
7
0
0
0
1
0
8
200
200
100
200
199
45
944
2011 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
124
26
82
159
83
70
544
65
174
18
41
115
26
439
11
0
0
0
2
4
17
200
200
100
200
200
100
1,000
5
�Year
Banding Area
2012 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
AHY
70
50
34
225
62
55
496
2013 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties*
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
29
2
165
75
137
30
438
Unknown
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
Total
100
52
199
300
200
85
936
18
134
34
6
234
121
63
610
181
13
166
2
66
78
29
535
1
1
0
0
0
1
8
11
200
148
200
8
300
200
100
1,156
2014 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
70
97
94
10
217
127
34
649
116
3
81
33
82
73
61
449
14
0
0
0
1
0
5
20
200
100
175
43
300
200
100
1,118
2015 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
155
16
128
5
145
0
50
499
28
0
78
3
154
1
46
310
16
0
0
0
1
0
3
20
199
16
206
8
300
1
99
829
2016 Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
112
95
237
29
198
127
798
72
105
40
25
101
72
415
16
0
0
0
0
0
16
200
200
277
54
299
199
1,229
6
HY
�Year
2017
Banding Area
Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
AHY
109
131
152
154
16
562
HY
45
31
23
36
22
157
Unknown
4
0
0
0
0
4
Total
158
162
175
190
38
723
2018
Adams County
71
23
4
98
Delta County
154
46
0
200
Larimer County
147
24
0
171
Prowers County
177
73
9
250
Pueblo County
67
33
0
100
Total
616
199
4
819
*Banding continued after 2013 in Douglas and Jefferson counties under a banding permit managed by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Table 2. Hunter recoveries, reported to the Bird Banding Laboratory as shot or found dead during
hunting seasons through January 2019, of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in
Colorado, 2007-2018.
Year of
banding
Number
banded
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Total
446
739
658
944
1,000
936
1,156
1,118
829
1,229
723
819
10,597
4
4
3
3
6
2
8
3
13
1
2
3
6
12
0
1
2
5
13
21
7
Year of recovery
2012 2013 2014
0
3
2
5
6
10
26
0
1
0
2
2
3
13
21
0
0
0
0
1
2
6
16
25
2015
2016
2017
2018
Total
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
4
9
14
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
3
4
14
24
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
5
5
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
3
6
10
18
10
19
23
17
21
23
13
21
6
3
184
�Table 3. Hunter recovery locations (through January 2019) of mourning doves banded under the CPW
banding permit in Colorado, 2007-2018. Mex = Mexico, Hon = Honduras.
Number
Recovery location
Banding county
banded
CO
Mex TX NM AZ AL OK CA Hon Total
Prowers
3,039
101
7
2
0
0
1
0
0
1
112
Pueblo
1,637
9
5
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
17
Morgan/Logan/Washington
562
8
4
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
Larimer
1,004
8
4
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
Adams
1,654
2
3
4
1
1
0
0
0
0
11
Douglas/Jefferson
1,098
0
0
2
3
2
0
1
0
0
8
Delta
562
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
Rio Grande/Saguache
664
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
Mesa
61
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Dolores/Montezuma
316
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
10,597
135
24 12
5
4
1
1
1
1
184
Table 4. Recaptures of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007–2018.
A recapture is a dove captured during annual banding operations that was banded in Colorado during a
previous year.
Year of
banding
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
Total
Number
banded
446
739
658
944
1,000
936
1,156
1,118
829
1,229
723
9,778
2008
1
1
2009
1
7
8
2010
0
2
5
7
2011
0
2
5
8
15
2012
1
0
0
1
6
8
8
Year of recapture
2013 2104 2015 2016
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
4
0
1
0
6
1
3
1
10
5
2
12
4
8
11
14
21
15
2017
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
7
11
28
49
2018
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
2
20
23
48
Total
4
11
11
12
11
11
21
24
21
48
23
197
�
https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/8c90a7fa6e5de9157739266dbbaad75f.pdf
be8e8a7185db38e95dcb263918ef9e29
PDF Text
Text
Colorado Mourning Dove Banding Program Update
April 2020
Jim Gammonley
Colorado Parks and Wildlife Avian Research Program
The mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) is the most abundant and most harvested migratory game bird
in the U.S. In 2018, the mourning dove population size in the U.S. was about 249 million at the start of
the hunting season, and an estimated 694,300 hunters harvested approximately 10.4 million mourning
doves (Seamans 2019). Within the U.S., mourning doves are managed in three units where populations
are largely independent of each other; Colorado is located in the Central Management Unit (CMU),
along with 13 other states (AR, IA, KS, MN, MO, MT, NE, NM, ND, OK, SD, TX, and WY). In 2018, the
CMU mourning dove population estimate was 137 million, and 332,900 hunters harvested 4.7 million
mourning doves; in Colorado, 10,000 hunters harvested 121,500 mourning doves (Seamans 2019).
In 2003, the four Flyway Councils (Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, and Pacific) developed and approved a
national strategic harvest management plan for mourning doves (Anonymous 2005). The plan called for
development and continuous improvement of an objective framework for making informed harvest
management decisions. Important elements of informed harvest management included (1) the
establishment of monitoring programs for the collection of mourning dove vital rate information
(primarily survival rates, harvest rates, and an index to annual productivity), and (2) development of
demographic models that use these data to predict effects of harvest management actions and
environmental conditions on population abundance. As part of this plan, the Flyway Councils endorsed
developing and implementing a nationwide, annual banding program for mourning doves, to be
conducted primarily by state wildlife agencies.
In 2008, the Flyway Councils and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) adopted interim harvest
strategies for the Central, Eastern, and Western Dove Management Units until managers finalized a
more comprehensive national approach. Harvest management decisions in the interim strategies were
prescribed based on a composite trend in mourning dove relative abundance determined primarily from
roadside surveys. Roadside surveys included the Mourning Dove Call‐Count Survey (doves heard and
doves seen) and the North American Breeding Bird Survey. Prior to the interim strategies, harvest
management decisions were based loosely on trends in mourning dove relative abundance from CallCount surveys. The reliability of roadside surveys to index abundance of doves is unknown, and
opposing trends in doves heard and doves seen in the Eastern Management Unit caused doubt in their
veracity. Furthermore, trends in relative abundance cannot be used reliably to evaluate and predict the
effects of harvest on dove demographics (Runge et al. 2004).
In 2013, the Service formally accepted a finalized national mourning dove harvest strategy and
implemented the strategy for the 2014‐15 hunting season (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2015). The
objectives of the strategy are to conserve mourning dove populations in the three Management Units,
and to minimize annual regulatory change. The harvest strategy does not use roadside surveys, but
instead relies on mourning dove abundance estimated from band recovery and harvest data and a
demographic model that predicts harvest and resulting subsequent year abundance (Lincoln 1930, Geis
1972, Otis 2006). Consequently, an annual, nationwide banding program is an essential component of
mourning dove management.
1
�In 2007, the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW, now Colorado Parks and Wildlife, CPW) initiated a
banding program for mourning doves in support of the national harvest management program. Prior to
2007, CPW had not banded mourning doves since a large-scale banding study conducted in the CMU
during the late 1960s and 1970s (Dunks et al. 1982), when Colorado biologists banded 2,100–5,000
doves per year, for a total of 29,253. A total of 283 of these banded doves were recovered during
subsequent hunting seasons; 52% were harvested in Colorado. After the conclusion of the study, no
dedicated efforts at banding mourning doves took place in Colorado until 2007.
Otis (2009) developed preliminary banding quotas (minimum target numbers of doves banded per year)
for each state, based on desired precision of survival and recovery rates derived from banding data (Otis
2009). Quotas were developed for both adult (After Hatch Year [AHY]) and juvenile (Hatch Year [HY])
age classes. The current minimum annual banding quotas for Colorado are 302 AHY and 178 HY
individuals, for a total of at least 480 mourning doves. Substantially more doves typically must be
captured in order to achieve the age-specific quotas (e.g., many more than 178 HY doves may be
captured in the process of trying to capture 302 AHY doves). In addition, banding sites should be well
distributed across the state, and given the effort required to maintain banding sites, a minimum target
of 50-100 doves at each site makes the most practical sense. Finally, larger samples of banded doves
than the established quotas will contribute to the overall banding effort. Consequently, these banding
quotas should be considered minimum targets, and annual statewide banded samples are expected to
be more in the range of 1,000-1,200 doves.
Although primary interest is in obtaining a representative banded sample and demographic estimates at
the scale of the CMU, distribution of banding effort within a state is an important consideration for
achieving a banded sample that is representative of the overall statewide population. Dove managers
have proposed allocating each state’s banded among different physiographic regions defined by Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs), proportional to the area and the median mourning dove density
(calculated from Breeding Bird Survey data) in the BCRs. In Colorado, there are three BCRs: the
Northern Rockies (extreme northwestern Colorado), Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau (remainder of
the Western Slope and eastern foothills), and the Shortgrass Prairie (eastern plains). The suggested
allocation of banding effort among these BCRs in Colorado is 5% in the Northern Rockies, 15% in the
Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau, and 80% in the Shortgrass Prairie.
Banding Methods
In 2007, limited banding was conducted at three sites in eastern Colorado (Table 1) to assess equipment
and personnel needs, and required trapping effort. Thirty Kniffen-style walk-in funnel traps (Reeves and
Geis 1968) were constructed and distributed among the sites. White millet and commercial wild bird
feed was used as bait. Sites were baited beginning in June or early July, and baiting continued for 1-4
weeks before trapping commenced. All captured mourning doves were aged, sexed, and banded with
standard aluminum size 3A leg bands obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey Bird Banding Laboratory
(BBL) and using established techniques (Reeves and Geis 1968). These techniques were used at other
sites as the number of statewide banding sites was expanded over subsequent years (Table 1). When a
previously banded dove is captured, its band number is recorded.
In 2008, the Service’s Region 6 and Division of Migratory Bird Management purchased a grain bin, and
refuge personnel at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge (RMANWR) erected the bin on
RMANWR. CPW purchases millet and stores it in this grain bin. The CPW dove banding coordinator
transfers millet from the grain bin to plastic, waterproof barrels and distributes bait, traps, and bands to
banding sites around the state in each spring.
2
�To obtain information on banded doves, managers rely primarily on hunters to report the band number
of any banded dove they harvest to the BBL. Estimates of band reporting rates (i.e., the probability that
a hunter will report a banded dove to the BBL) are required in order to estimate mourning dove harvest
rates, a critical parameter used in mourning dove harvest management. In 2007 the BBL began
producing bands that, in addition to the 1-800-327-BAND number, have the BBL web address
(www.reportband.gov) inscribed on them, rather than the Laurel, MD mail address that was inscribed on
bands in the past. A study on band reporting rates using the toll-free number and mail address
inscriptions produced estimated reporting rates ranging from 31-100% in other CMU states (Otis et al.
2008). It was unknown how providing the web address instead of the mail address would affect band
reporting rates. Numerous states, the Service, and the BBL conducted a study in which half of the
mourning doves captured during annual banding operations were banded with web address bands, and
half were banded with mail address bands, and differences in reporting rates (from direct hunter
recoveries) between the two band types were estimated. In 2008, Colorado banded 373 and 366
mourning doves with mail address bands and web address bands, respectively. In 2009, Colorado
banded 359 and 299 mourning doves with mail address and web address bands, respectively. Results of
the study showed that mourning dove band reporting rates were higher with the web address (Sanders
and Otis 2012). From 2011 through 2017, banders used only bands with the 1-800 number and web
address in annual mourning dove banding programs. In 2018 the BBL discontinued human operators at
its 1-800 number; callers received a recording referring them to the web address to report bands.
Beginning in 2018 and going forward, mourning dove bands issued by the BBL have only the web
address inscribed on them.
2019 Results
In 2019, 964 mourning doves were banded under the CPW banding permit, including 687 AHY, 276 HY,
and 1 unknown age birds. Numbers of doves banded in 2019 increased from 2018 (819), and were
above the 2007-2018 average (883). Production appeared to be improved from the two previous years,
with more HY doves available for banding at most sites.
During 2007-2019, 11,561 mourning doves were banded under the CPW banding permit. Through
January 2019, hunters have reported harvesting 185 mourning doves banded in Colorado during 20072019 (Table 2). Most (74%) hunter recoveries were from Colorado, and 62% of recoveries were from
doves banded in Prowers County, where 21% of doves have been banded (Table 3). Hunters reported
recoveries of doves banded in all areas except southwestern Colorado (Dolores and Montezuma
counties) (Table 3). Through the 2019 trapping period, banders recaptured 237 mourning doves
originally banded in previous years, including one that was originally banded in 2010 (Table 4).
During 2003-2018, 263,137 mourning doves were banded in the 14 CMU states (Seamans 2019).
Estimated annual survival rates during 2003-2018 averaged 0.277 (± 0.007 SE) for HY doves and 0.447 (±
0.005) for AHY doves in the CMU; in Colorado, annual survival rates averaged 0.583 (± 0.056) for HY
doves and 0.483 (± 0.032) for AHY doves (Seamans 2019). Annual harvest rates averaged 0.051 (±
0.001) for HY doves and 0.042 (± 0.001) for AHY doves in the CMU during 2003-2018; in Colorado,
annual harvest rates averaged 0.012 (± 0.002) for HY doves and 0.026 (± 0.004) for AHY doves (Seamans
2019). Annual estimates of harvest and harvest rate are used to estimate the abundance of mourning
doves in the CMU on September 1 each year, and managers use abundance estimates to determine
appropriate annual hunting regulations. During 2003-2018, annual abundance averaged 158,248,012
(Seamons 2019).
3
�CPW will continue to band mourning doves annually. Most banding sites used in 2019 will again be used
in 2020, and we will attempt to band at least 1,000 doves. We will seek to establish additional banding
sites throughout the state as opportunities arise.
Acknowledgments
The success of the Colorado mourning dove banding program is dependent on the participation of
numerous personnel. CPW personnel were instrumental in conducting the banding program in 2019,
including Brad Banulis and Mark Hodges (Area 18), Jonathan Reitz (Area 12), Marty Stratman (Area 3),
Allen Vitt (Area 11), and Brad Weinmeister (Area 15). In addition, staff and volunteers from RMANWR
(Amanda Fox, Nick Kaczor, Jake Roush) continued vital banding operations at RMANWR and assisted
with maintenance of the grain bin and storage of millet, and Jim Jackson (CPW, retired) and Derek
Danner assisted with banding in Larimer County.
Literature Cited
Anonymous. 2005. Mourning dove national strategic harvest management plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Laurel, MD, USA.
Dunks, J. H., R. E. Tomlinson, H. M. Reeves, D. D. Dolton, C. E. Braun, and T. P. Zapatka. 1982.
Migration, harvest, and population dynamics of mourning doves banded in the Central
Management Unit, 1967-77. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report – Wildlife
249.
Geis, A. D. 1972. Use of banding data in migratory game bird research and management. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report---Wildlife 154,
Washington, D.C.
Lincoln, F . A. 1930. Calculating waterfowl abundance on the basis of banding returns. U.S. Department
of Agriculture Circular 18, Washington, D.C.
Otis, D.L. 2006. A mourning dove hunting regulation strategy based on annual harvest statistics and
banding data. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:1302-1307.
Otis, D. L. 2009. Revised draft mourning dove banding needs assessment. Unpublished report.
Otis, D. L., J. H. Schulz, and D. P. Scott. 2008. Mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) harvest and
population parameters derived from a national banding study. Biological Technical Publication
BTP-R3010-2008, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Reeves, H. M., and A. D. Geis. 1968. Mourning dove capture and banding. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Special Scientific Report, Wildlife No. 17. Washington, D.C.
Runge, M. C., W. L. Kendall, and J. D. Nichols. 2004. Exploitation. Pages 303-328 in W. J. Sutherland, I.
Newton, and R. E. Green, editors. Bird Ecology and Conservation: A Handbook of Techniques.
Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Sanders, T.A., and D.L. Otis. 2012. Mourning dove reporting probabilities for web-address versus toll
free bands. Journal Wildlife Management 76:480-488.
Seamans, M.E. 2019. Mourning dove population status, 2019. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management Washington, D.C., USA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015. Mourning Dove Harvest Strategy 2015. U.S. Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Washington, D.C.
4
�Table 1. Numbers of mourning doves banded in Colorado under the CPW banding permit, by age class
(AHY = after hatch year, HY = hatch year).
Age Class
Year
Banding Area
AHY
HY
Unknown
Total
2007 Prowers County
161
138
1
300
Logan County
25
21
0
46
Pueblo County
46
53
1
100
Total
232
212
2
446
2008 Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
18
34
117
43
72
9
293
175
4
83
57
26
94
439
7
0
0
0
0
0
7
200
38
200
100
98
103
739
2009 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
50
8
14
162
63
33
26
356
48
91
9
38
37
4
71
298
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
4
99
99
23
200
100
37
100
658
2010 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Washington counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
92
43
66
125
66
25
417
101
157
34
75
132
20
519
7
0
0
0
1
0
8
200
200
100
200
199
45
944
2011 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
124
26
82
159
83
70
544
65
174
18
41
115
26
439
11
0
0
0
2
4
17
200
200
100
200
200
100
1,000
5
�Year
Banding Area
2012 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
AHY
70
50
34
225
62
55
496
2013 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties*
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
29
2
165
75
137
30
438
Unknown
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
Total
100
52
199
300
200
85
936
18
134
34
6
234
121
63
610
181
13
166
2
66
78
29
535
1
1
0
0
0
1
8
11
200
148
200
8
300
200
100
1,156
2014 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
70
97
94
10
217
127
34
649
116
3
81
33
82
73
61
449
14
0
0
0
1
0
5
20
200
100
175
43
300
200
100
1,118
2015 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
155
16
128
5
145
0
50
499
28
0
78
3
154
1
46
310
16
0
0
0
1
0
3
20
199
16
206
8
300
1
99
829
2016 Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
112
95
237
29
198
127
798
72
105
40
25
101
72
415
16
0
0
0
0
0
16
200
200
277
54
299
199
1,229
6
HY
�Year
2017
Banding Area
Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
AHY
109
131
152
154
16
562
2018
Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
71
154
147
177
67
616
2019
HY
45
31
23
36
22
157
Unknown
4
0
0
0
0
4
Total
158
162
175
190
38
723
23
46
24
73
33
199
4
0
0
9
0
4
98
200
171
250
100
819
Adams County
79
19
1
99
Delta County
59
121
0
180
Dolores County
2
0
0
2
Larimer County
257
45
0
302
Morgan County
3
38
0
41
Prowers County
287
53
0
340
Total
687
276
1
964
*Banding continued after 2013 in Douglas and Jefferson counties under a banding permit managed by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
7
�Table 2. Hunter recoveries, reported to the Bird Banding Laboratory as shot or found dead during hunting seasons through January 2020, of
mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007-2019.
Year of Number
Year of recovery
banding banded 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Total
2007
446
4
3
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
2008
739
3
8
2
1
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
18
2009
658
3
3
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
2010
944
6
5
5
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
19
2011
1,000
13
6
2
1
0
0
1
0
0
23
2012
936
10
3
2
0
2
0
0
0
17
2013
1,156
12
6
0
1
1
0
0
20
2014
1,118
15
3
3
0
0
0
21
2015
829
9
4
0
0
0
13
2016
1,229
14
5
3
0
22
2017
723
6
1
0
7
2018
819
3
1
4
2019
964
1
1
Total
11,561
4
6
13
12
21
26
20
24
13
24
13
7
2
185
Table 3. Hunter recovery locations (through January 2020) of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007-2019.
Mex = Mexico, Hon = Honduras.
Number
Recovery location
Banding county
banded
CO
Mex TX NM AZ AL OK CA Hon Total
Prowers
3,379
102
9
2
0
0
1
0
0
1
115
Pueblo
1,637
9
5
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
17
Morgan/Logan/Washington
603
8
4
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
Larimer
1,306
8
4
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
Adams
1,753
2
3
4
1
1
0
0
0
0
11
Douglas/Jefferson
1,098
0
0
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
5
Delta
742
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
Rio Grande/Saguache
664
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
Mesa
61
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Dolores/Montezuma
318
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
11,561
137
26 11
4
3
1
1
1
1
185
8
�Table 4. Recaptures of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007–2019. A recapture is a dove captured during
annual banding operations that was banded in Colorado during a previous year.
Year of
Number
Year of recapture
banding
banded
2008 2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2104
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Total
2007
446
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
2008
739
7
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
2009
658
5
5
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
11
2010
944
8
1
0
2
0
0
1
0
1
13
2011
1,000
6
4
0
1
0
0
0
0
11
2012
936
6
1
3
1
0
0
0
11
2013
1,156
10
5
2
2
2
0
21
2014
1,118
12
4
7
1
0
24
2015
829
8
11
2
3
24
2016
1,229
28
20
7
55
2017
723
23
12
35
2018
819
17
17
Total
10,597
1
8
7
15
8
11
14
21
15
49
48
40
237
9
�
https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/0c6caa8c3d0b2a470098b566137d41e6.pdf
81ce403e3e9aa9c94c1865dcd3742639
PDF Text
Text
Colorado Mourning Dove Banding Program Update
April 2021
Jim Gammonley
Colorado Parks and Wildlife Avian Research Program
BACKGROUND
The mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) is the most abundant and most harvested migratory game bird
in the U.S. In 2019, the mourning dove population size in the U.S. was about 183 million at the start of
the hunting season, and an estimated 662,900 hunters harvested an estimated 9.98 million mourning
doves (Seamans 2020). Within the U.S., mourning doves are managed in three units where populations
are largely independent of each other; Colorado is located in the Central Management Unit (CMU),
along with 13 other states (AR, IA, KS, MN, MO, MT, NE, NM, ND, OK, SD, TX, and WY). In 2019, the
CMU mourning dove population estimate was 115 million, and 337,700 hunters harvested 5.26 million
mourning doves; in Colorado, 10,700 hunters harvested 106,300 mourning doves (Seamans 2020).
In 2003, the four Flyway Councils (Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, and Pacific) developed and approved a
national strategic harvest management plan for mourning doves (Anonymous 2005). The plan called for
development and continuous improvement of an objective framework for making informed harvest
management decisions. Important elements of informed harvest management included (1) the
establishment of monitoring programs for the collection of mourning dove vital rate information
(primarily survival rates, harvest rates, and an index to annual productivity), and (2) development of
demographic models that use these data to predict effects of harvest management actions and
environmental conditions on population abundance. As part of this plan, the Flyway Councils endorsed
developing and implementing a nationwide, annual banding program for mourning doves, to be
conducted primarily by state wildlife agencies.
In 2008, the Flyway Councils and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) adopted interim harvest
strategies for the Central, Eastern, and Western Dove Management Units until managers finalized a
more comprehensive national approach. Harvest management decisions in the interim strategies were
prescribed based on a composite trend in mourning dove relative abundance determined primarily from
roadside surveys. Roadside surveys included the Mourning Dove Call‐Count Survey (doves heard and
doves seen) and the North American Breeding Bird Survey. Prior to the interim strategies, harvest
management decisions were based loosely on trends in mourning dove relative abundance from CallCount surveys. The reliability of roadside surveys to index abundance of doves is unknown, and
opposing trends in doves heard and doves seen in the Eastern Management Unit caused doubt in their
veracity. Furthermore, trends in relative abundance cannot be used reliably to evaluate and predict the
effects of harvest on dove demographics (Runge et al. 2004).
In 2013, the Service formally accepted a finalized national mourning dove harvest strategy and
implemented the strategy for the 2014‐15 hunting season (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2015). The
objectives of the strategy are to conserve mourning dove populations in the three Management Units,
and to minimize annual regulatory change. The harvest strategy does not use roadside surveys, but
instead relies on mourning dove abundance estimated from band recovery and harvest data and a
demographic model that predicts harvest and resulting subsequent year abundance (Lincoln 1930, Geis
1972, Otis 2006). Consequently, an annual, nationwide banding program is an essential component of
mourning dove management.
1
�In 2007, the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW, now Colorado Parks and Wildlife, CPW) initiated a
banding program for mourning doves in support of the national harvest management program. Prior to
2007, CPW had not banded mourning doves since a large-scale banding study conducted in the CMU
during the late 1960s and 1970s (Dunks et al. 1982), when Colorado biologists banded 2,100–5,000
doves per year, for a total of 29,253. A total of 283 of these banded doves were recovered during
subsequent hunting seasons; 52% were harvested in Colorado. After the conclusion of the study, no
dedicated efforts at banding mourning doves took place in Colorado until 2007.
Otis (2009) developed preliminary banding quotas (minimum target numbers of doves banded per year)
for each state, based on desired precision of survival and recovery rates derived from banding data (Otis
2009). Quotas were developed for both adult (After Hatch Year [AHY]) and juvenile (Hatch Year [HY])
age classes. The current minimum annual banding quotas for Colorado are 302 AHY and 178 HY
individuals, for a total of at least 480 mourning doves. Substantially more doves typically must be
captured in order to achieve the age-specific quotas (e.g., many more than 178 HY doves may be
captured in the process of trying to capture 302 AHY doves). In addition, banding sites should be well
distributed across the state, and given the effort required to maintain banding sites, a minimum target
of 50-100 doves at each site makes the most practical sense. Finally, larger samples of banded doves
than the established quotas will contribute to the overall banding effort. Consequently, these banding
quotas should be considered minimum targets, and annual statewide banded samples are expected to
be more in the range of 1,000-1,200 doves.
Although primary interest is in obtaining a representative banded sample and demographic estimates at
the scale of the CMU, distribution of banding effort within a state is an important consideration for
achieving a banded sample that is representative of the overall statewide population. Dove managers
have proposed allocating each state’s banded among different physiographic regions defined by Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs), proportional to the area and the median mourning dove density
(calculated from Breeding Bird Survey data) in the BCRs. In Colorado, there are three BCRs: the
Northern Rockies (extreme northwestern Colorado), Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau (remainder of
the Western Slope and eastern foothills), and the Shortgrass Prairie (eastern plains). The suggested
allocation of banding effort among these BCRs in Colorado is 5% in the Northern Rockies, 15% in the
Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau, and 80% in the Shortgrass Prairie.
BANDING METHODS
In 2007, limited banding was conducted at three sites in eastern Colorado (Table 1) to assess equipment
and personnel needs, and required trapping effort. Thirty Kniffen-style walk-in funnel traps (Reeves and
Geis 1968) were constructed and distributed among the sites. White millet and commercial wild bird
feed was used as bait. Sites were baited beginning in June or early July, and baiting continued for 1-4
weeks before trapping commenced. All captured mourning doves were aged, sexed, and banded with
standard aluminum size 3A leg bands obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey Bird Banding Laboratory
(BBL) and using established techniques (Reeves and Geis 1968). These techniques were used at other
sites as the number of statewide banding sites was expanded over subsequent years (Table 1). When a
previously banded dove is captured, its band number is recorded.
In 2008, the Service’s Region 6 and Division of Migratory Bird Management purchased a grain bin, and
refuge personnel at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge (RMANWR) erected the bin on
RMANWR. CPW purchases millet and stores it in this grain bin. The CPW dove banding coordinator
transfers millet from the grain bin to plastic, waterproof barrels and distributes bait, traps, and bands to
banding sites around the state in each spring.
2
�To obtain information on banded doves, managers rely primarily on hunters to report the band number
of any banded dove they harvest to the BBL. Estimates of band reporting rates (i.e., the probability that
a hunter will report a retrieved, banded dove to the BBL) are required in order to estimate mourning
dove harvest rates, a critical parameter used in mourning dove harvest management. In 2007 the BBL
began producing bands that, in addition to the 1-800-327-BAND number, have the BBL web address
(www.reportband.gov) inscribed on them, rather than the Laurel, MD mail address that was inscribed on
bands in the past. A study on band reporting rates using the toll-free number and mail address
inscriptions produced estimated reporting rates ranging from 31-100% in other CMU states (Otis et al.
2008). It was unknown how providing the web address instead of the mail address would affect band
reporting rates. Numerous states, the Service, and the BBL conducted a study in which half of the
mourning doves captured during annual banding operations were banded with web address bands, and
half were banded with mail address bands, and differences in reporting rates (from direct hunter
recoveries) between the two band types were estimated. In 2008, Colorado banded 373 and 366
mourning doves with mail address bands and web address bands, respectively. In 2009, Colorado
banded 359 and 299 mourning doves with mail address and web address bands, respectively. Results of
the study showed that mourning dove band reporting rates were higher with the web address (Sanders
and Otis 2012). From 2011 through 2017, banders used only bands with the 1-800 number and web
address in annual mourning dove banding programs. In 2018 the BBL discontinued human operators at
its 1-800 number; callers received a recording referring them to the web address to report bands.
Beginning in 2018 and going forward, mourning dove bands issued by the BBL have only the web
address inscribed on them.
2020 RESULTS
In 2020, 1,089 mourning doves were banded under the CPW banding permit, including 628 AHY, 460 HY,
and 1 unknown age birds (Table 1). Numbers of doves banded in 2020 increased from 2019 (964), and
were above the 2007-2019 average (889).
During 2007-2020, 12,650 mourning doves were banded under the CPW banding permit. Through
January 2021, hunters have reported harvesting 213 mourning doves banded in Colorado during 20072020 (Table 2). Most (74%) hunter recoveries were from Colorado, and 52% of all recoveries were from
doves banded in Prowers County, where 29% of doves have been banded; most other band recoveries
by hunters have occurred in Mexico and Texas (Table 3). Hunters reported recoveries of doves banded
in all areas of Colorado (Table 3). Through the 2020 trapping period, banders had recaptured 284
mourning doves originally banded in previous years, including one that was originally banded in 2010
(Table 4).
During 2003-2019, 279,516 mourning doves were banded in the 14 CMU states (Seamans 2020).
Estimated annual survival rates during 2003-2019 averaged 0.307 (± 0.008 SE) for HY doves and 0.481 (±
0.005) for AHY doves in the CMU; in Colorado, annual survival rates averaged 0.548 (± 0.053) for HY
doves and 0.480 (± 0.029) for AHY doves (Seamans 2020). Annual harvest rates averaged 0.066 (±
0.001) for HY doves and 0.051 (± 0.001) for AHY doves in the CMU during 2003-2019; in Colorado,
annual harvest rates averaged 0.014 (± 0.002) for HY doves and 0.026 (± 0.004) for AHY doves (Seamans
2020). Annual estimates of harvest and harvest rate are used to estimate the abundance of mourning
doves in the CMU on September 1 each year, and managers use abundance estimates to determine
appropriate annual hunting regulations. During 2003-2019, annual abundance averaged 158,248,012
(Seamans 2020).
3
�CPW will continue to band mourning doves annually. Most banding sites used in 2020 will again be used
in 2021, and we will attempt to band at least 1,000 doves. We will seek to establish additional banding
sites throughout the state as opportunities arise.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The success of the Colorado mourning dove banding program is dependent on the participation of
numerous personnel. CPW personnel were instrumental in conducting the banding program in 2019,
including Mark Hodges (Area 18), Jonathan Reitz (Area 12), Marty Stratman (Area 3), Allen Vitt (Area 11),
and Brad Weinmeister (Area 15). In addition, staff and volunteers from RMANWR (Ray Fetherman,
Emily Halsell, Mindy Hetrick) continued vital banding operations at RMANWR and assisted with
maintenance of the grain bin and storage of millet, and Jim Jackson (CPW, retired) and Derek Danner
assisted with banding in Larimer County.
LITERATURE CITED
Anonymous. 2005. Mourning dove national strategic harvest management plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Laurel, MD, USA.
Dunks, J. H., R. E. Tomlinson, H. M. Reeves, D. D. Dolton, C. E. Braun, and T. P. Zapatka. 1982.
Migration, harvest, and population dynamics of mourning doves banded in the Central
Management Unit, 1967-77. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report – Wildlife
249.
Geis, A. D. 1972. Use of banding data in migratory game bird research and management. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report---Wildlife 154,
Washington, D.C.
Lincoln, F. A. 1930. Calculating waterfowl abundance on the basis of banding returns. U.S. Department
of Agriculture Circular 18, Washington, D.C.
Otis, D. L. 2006. A mourning dove hunting regulation strategy based on annual harvest statistics and
banding data. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:1302-1307.
Otis, D. L. 2009. Revised draft mourning dove banding needs assessment. Unpublished report.
Otis, D. L., J. H. Schulz, and D. P. Scott. 2008. Mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) harvest and
population parameters derived from a national banding study. Biological Technical Publication
BTP-R3010-2008, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Reeves, H. M., and A. D. Geis. 1968. Mourning dove capture and banding. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Special Scientific Report, Wildlife No. 17. Washington, D.C.
Runge, M. C., W. L. Kendall, and J. D. Nichols. 2004. Exploitation. Pages 303-328 in W. J. Sutherland, I.
Newton, and R. E. Green, editors. Bird Ecology and Conservation: A Handbook of Techniques.
Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Sanders, T. A., and D. L. Otis. 2012. Mourning dove reporting probabilities for web-address versus toll
free bands. Journal Wildlife Management 76:480-488.
Seamans, M.E. 2020. Mourning dove population status, 2020. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management Washington, D.C., USA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015. Mourning Dove Harvest Strategy 2015. U.S. Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Washington, D.C.
4
�Table 1. Numbers of mourning doves banded in Colorado under the CPW banding permit, by age class
(AHY = after hatch year, HY = hatch year).
Age Class
Year
Banding Area
AHY
HY
Unknown
Total
2007 Prowers County
161
138
1
300
Logan County
25
21
0
46
Pueblo County
46
53
1
100
Total
232
212
2
446
2008 Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
18
34
117
43
72
9
293
175
4
83
57
26
94
439
7
0
0
0
0
0
7
200
38
200
100
98
103
739
2009 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
50
8
14
162
63
33
26
356
48
91
9
38
37
4
71
298
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
4
99
99
23
200
100
37
100
658
2010 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Washington counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
92
43
66
125
66
25
417
101
157
34
75
132
20
519
7
0
0
0
1
0
8
200
200
100
200
199
45
944
2011 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
124
26
82
159
83
70
544
65
174
18
41
115
26
439
11
0
0
0
2
4
17
200
200
100
200
200
100
1,000
5
�Year
Banding Area
2012 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
AHY
70
50
34
225
62
55
496
2013 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties*
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
29
2
165
75
137
30
438
Unknown
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
Total
100
52
199
300
200
85
936
18
134
34
6
234
121
63
610
181
13
166
2
66
78
29
535
1
1
0
0
0
1
8
11
200
148
200
8
300
200
100
1,156
2014 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
70
97
94
10
217
127
34
649
116
3
81
33
82
73
61
449
14
0
0
0
1
0
5
20
200
100
175
43
300
200
100
1,118
2015 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
155
16
128
5
145
0
50
499
28
0
78
3
154
1
46
310
16
0
0
0
1
0
3
20
199
16
206
8
300
1
99
829
2016 Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
112
95
237
29
198
127
798
72
105
40
25
101
72
415
16
0
0
0
0
0
16
200
200
277
54
299
199
1,229
6
HY
�Year
2017
Banding Area
Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
AHY
109
131
152
154
16
562
2018
Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
2019
Adams County
Delta County
Dolores County
Larimer County
Morgan County
Prowers County
Total
2020
HY
45
31
23
36
22
157
Unknown
4
0
0
0
0
4
Total
158
162
175
190
38
723
71
154
147
177
67
616
23
46
24
73
33
199
4
0
0
9
0
4
98
200
171
250
100
819
79
59
2
257
3
287
687
19
121
0
45
38
53
276
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
99
180
2
302
41
340
964
Adams County
39
59
1
99
Delta County
121
79
0
200
Dolores County
45
9
0
54
Larimer County
125
71
0
196
Morgan County
17
83
0
100
Prowers County
238
102
0
340
Pueblo County
43
57
0
100
Total
628
460
1
1,089
*Banding continued after 2013 in Douglas and Jefferson counties under a banding permit managed by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
7
�Table 2. Hunter recoveries, reported to the Bird Banding Laboratory as shot or found dead during hunting seasons through January 2021, of
mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007-2020.
Year of Number
Year of recovery
banding banded 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
2020
Total
2007
446
4
3
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
2008
739
3
8
2
1
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
18
2009
658
3
3
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
2010
944
6
5
5
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
19
2011
1,000
13
6
2
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
23
2012
936
10
3
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
17
2013
1,156
12
6
0
1
1
0
0
0
20
2014
1,118
15
3
3
0
0
0
0
21
2015
829
9
4
0
0
0
0
13
2016
1,229
14
7
3
1
0
25
2017
723
8
1
1
0
10
2018
819
4
5
1
10
2019
964
5
5
10
2020
1,089
7
7
Total
12,650
4
6
13
12
21
26
20
24
13
24
17
8
12
13
213
8
�Table 3. Hunter recovery locations (through January 2021) of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007-2020.
Mex = Mexico, Hon = Honduras.
Number
Recovery location
Banding county
banded
CO
Mex
TX
NM
AZ
AL
OK
CA
Hon
Total
Prowers
3,719
110
10
2
0
0
1
0
0
1
124
Pueblo
1,737
9
5
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
17
Morgan/Logan/Washington
703
9
5
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
Larimer
1,502
8
6
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
16
Adams
1,852
2
3
4
1
1
0
0
0
0
11
Douglas/Jefferson
1,098
0
0
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
5
Delta
942
19
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
Rio Grande/Saguache
664
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
Mesa
61
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Dolores/Montezuma
372
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Total
12,650
157
33
11
4
3
1
1
2
1
213
9
�Table 4. Recaptures of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007–2020. A recapture is defined here as a dove
captured at least once during CPW’s banding operations in a particular year that was banded in Colorado during a previous year.
Year of
Number
Year of recapture
banding
banded
2008 2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2104
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
2007
446
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
2008
739
7
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
2009
658
5
5
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
2010
944
8
1
0
2
0
0
1
0
1
1
14
2011
1,000
6
4
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
11
2012
936
6
1
3
1
0
0
0
0
11
2013
1,156
10
5
2
2
2
0
0
21
2014
1,118
12
4
7
1
0
1
25
2015
829
8
11
2
3
2
26
2016
1,229
28
20
7
5
60
2017
723
23
12
6
41
2018
819
17
11
28
2019
964
21
21
Total
11,561
1
8
7
15
8
11
14
21
15
49
48
40
47
284
10
�
https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/aa0c1282a13f2d74683064d4653f4e99.pdf
57a375a72d0a4fbd53b8b9587e859613
PDF Text
Text
Colorado Mourning Dove Banding Program Update
May 2022
Jim Gammonley
Colorado Parks and Wildlife Avian Research Program
BACKGROUND
The mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) is the most abundant and most harvested migratory game bird
in the U.S. In 2020, the mourning dove population size in the U.S. was about 194 million at the start of
the hunting season, and an estimated 745,600 hunters harvested an estimated 11.7 million mourning
doves (Seamans 2021). Within the U.S., mourning doves are managed in three units where populations
are largely independent of each other; Colorado is located in the Central Management Unit (CMU),
along with 13 other states (AR, IA, KS, MN, MO, MT, NE, NM, ND, OK, SD, TX, and WY). In 2020, the
CMU mourning dove population estimate was 108 million, and 368,200 hunters harvested 5.89 million
mourning doves; in Colorado, 12,700 hunters harvested 124,600 mourning doves (Seamans 2021).
In 2003, the four Flyway Councils (Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, and Pacific) developed and approved a
national strategic harvest management plan for mourning doves (Anonymous 2005). The plan called for
development and continuous improvement of an objective framework for making informed harvest
management decisions. Important elements of informed harvest management included (1) the
establishment of monitoring programs for the collection of mourning dove vital rate information
(primarily survival rates, harvest rates, and an index to annual productivity), and (2) development of
demographic models that use these data to predict effects of harvest management actions and
environmental conditions on population abundance. As part of this plan, the Flyway Councils endorsed
developing and implementing a nationwide, annual banding program for mourning doves, to be
conducted primarily by state wildlife agencies.
In 2008, the Flyway Councils and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) adopted interim harvest
strategies for the Central, Eastern, and Western Dove Management Units until managers finalized a
more comprehensive national approach. Harvest management decisions in the interim strategies were
prescribed based on a composite trend in mourning dove relative abundance determined primarily from
roadside surveys. Roadside surveys included the Mourning Dove Call‐Count Survey (doves heard and
doves seen) and the North American Breeding Bird Survey. Prior to the interim strategies, harvest
management decisions were based loosely on trends in mourning dove relative abundance from CallCount surveys. The reliability of roadside surveys to index abundance of doves is unknown, and
opposing trends in doves heard and doves seen in the Eastern Management Unit caused doubt in their
veracity. Furthermore, trends in relative abundance cannot be used reliably to evaluate and predict the
effects of harvest on dove demographics (Runge et al. 2004).
In 2013, the Service formally accepted a finalized national mourning dove harvest strategy and
implemented the strategy for the 2014‐15 hunting season (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2015). The
objectives of the strategy are to conserve mourning dove populations in the three Management Units,
and to minimize annual regulatory change. The harvest strategy does not use roadside surveys, but
instead relies on mourning dove abundance estimated from band recovery and harvest data and a
demographic model that predicts harvest and resulting subsequent year abundance (Lincoln 1930, Geis
1972, Otis 2006). Consequently, an annual, nationwide banding program is an essential component of
mourning dove management.
1
�In 2007, the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW, now Colorado Parks and Wildlife, CPW) initiated a
banding program for mourning doves in support of the national harvest management program. Prior to
2007, CPW had not banded mourning doves since a large-scale banding study conducted in the CMU
during the late 1960s and 1970s (Dunks et al. 1982), when Colorado biologists banded 2,100–5,000
doves per year, for a total of 29,253. A total of 283 of these banded doves were recovered during
subsequent hunting seasons; 52% were harvested in Colorado. After the conclusion of the study, no
dedicated efforts at banding mourning doves took place in Colorado until 2007.
Otis (2009) developed preliminary banding quotas (minimum target numbers of doves banded per year)
for each state, based on desired precision of survival and recovery rates derived from banding data (Otis
2009). Quotas were developed for both adult (After Hatch Year [AHY]) and juvenile (Hatch Year [HY])
age classes. The current minimum annual banding quotas for Colorado are 302 AHY and 178 HY
individuals, for a total of at least 480 mourning doves. Substantially more doves typically must be
captured in order to achieve the age-specific quotas (e.g., many more than 178 HY doves may be
captured in the process of trying to capture 302 AHY doves). In addition, banding sites should be well
distributed across the state, and given the effort required to maintain banding sites, a minimum target
of 50-100 doves at each site makes the most practical sense. Finally, larger samples of banded doves
than the established quotas will contribute to the overall banding effort. Consequently, these banding
quotas should be considered minimum targets, and annual statewide banded samples are expected to
be more in the range of 1,000-1,200 doves.
Although primary interest is in obtaining a representative banded sample and demographic estimates at
the scale of the CMU, distribution of banding effort within a state is an important consideration for
achieving a banded sample that is representative of the overall statewide population. Dove managers
have proposed allocating each state’s banded among different physiographic regions defined by Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs), proportional to the area and the median mourning dove density
(calculated from Breeding Bird Survey data) in the BCRs. In Colorado, there are three BCRs: the
Northern Rockies (extreme northwestern Colorado), Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau (remainder of
the Western Slope and eastern foothills), and the Shortgrass Prairie (eastern plains). The suggested
allocation of banding effort among these BCRs in Colorado is 5% in the Northern Rockies, 15% in the
Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau, and 80% in the Shortgrass Prairie.
BANDING METHODS
In 2007, limited banding was conducted at three sites in eastern Colorado (Table 1) to assess equipment
and personnel needs, and required trapping effort. Thirty Kniffen-style walk-in funnel traps (Reeves and
Geis 1968) were constructed and distributed among the sites. White millet and commercial wild bird
feed was used as bait. Sites were baited beginning in June or early July, and baiting continued for 1-4
weeks before trapping commenced. All captured mourning doves were aged, sexed, and banded with
standard aluminum size 3A leg bands obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey Bird Banding Laboratory
(BBL) and using established techniques (Reeves and Geis 1968). These techniques were used at other
sites as the number of statewide banding sites was expanded over subsequent years (Table 1). When a
previously banded dove is captured, its band number is recorded.
In 2008, the Service’s Region 6 and Division of Migratory Bird Management purchased a grain bin, and
refuge personnel at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge (RMANWR) erected the bin on
RMANWR. CPW purchases millet and stores it in this grain bin. The CPW dove banding coordinator
transfers millet from the grain bin to plastic, waterproof barrels and distributes bait, traps, and bands to
banding sites around the state in each spring.
2
�To obtain information on banded doves, managers rely primarily on hunters to report the band number
of any banded dove they harvest to the BBL. Estimates of band reporting rates (i.e., the probability that
a hunter will report a retrieved, banded dove to the BBL) are required in order to estimate mourning
dove harvest rates, a critical parameter used in mourning dove harvest management. In 2007 the BBL
began producing bands that, in addition to the 1-800-327-BAND number, have the BBL web address
(www.reportband.gov) inscribed on them, rather than the Laurel, MD mail address that was inscribed on
bands in the past. A study on band reporting rates using the toll-free number and mail address
inscriptions produced estimated reporting rates ranging from 31-100% in other CMU states (Otis et al.
2008). It was unknown how providing the web address instead of the mail address would affect band
reporting rates. Numerous states, the Service, and the BBL conducted a study in which half of the
mourning doves captured during annual banding operations were banded with web address bands, and
half were banded with mail address bands, and differences in reporting rates (from direct hunter
recoveries) between the two band types were estimated. In 2008, Colorado banded 373 and 366
mourning doves with mail address bands and web address bands, respectively. In 2009, Colorado
banded 359 and 299 mourning doves with mail address and web address bands, respectively. Results of
the study showed that mourning dove band reporting rates were higher with the web address (Sanders
and Otis 2012). From 2011 through 2017, banders used only bands with the 1-800 number and web
address in annual mourning dove banding programs. In 2018 the BBL discontinued human operators at
its 1-800 number; callers received a recording referring them to the web address to report bands.
Beginning in 2018 and going forward, mourning dove bands issued by the BBL have only the web
address inscribed on them.
2021 RESULTS
In 2021, 1,019 mourning doves were banded under the CPW banding permit, including 660 AHY, 358 HY,
and 1 unknown age birds (Table 1). The number of doves banded in 2021 decreased from 2020 (1,089),
and was above the 2007-2020 average (904).
During 2007-2021, 13,669 mourning doves were banded under the CPW banding permit. Through
January 2022, hunters have reported harvesting 259 mourning doves banded in Colorado during 20072021 (Table 2). Most (77%) hunter-reported band recoveries were from Colorado, and 58% of all
recoveries were from doves banded in Prowers County, where 30% of doves have been banded; most
other band recoveries by hunters have occurred in Mexico and Texas (Table 3). Hunters have reported
recoveries of doves banded in all areas of Colorado (Table 3). Through the 2021 trapping period,
banders had recaptured 306 mourning doves originally banded in previous years (Table 4).
During 2003-2020, 291,587 mourning doves were banded in the 14 CMU states (Seamans 2021).
Estimated annual survival rates during 2003-2020 averaged 0.270 (± 0.007 SE) for HY doves and 0.451 (±
0.004) for AHY doves in the CMU; in Colorado, annual survival rates averaged 0.528 (± 0.048) for HY
doves and 0.474 (± 0.026) for AHY doves (Seamans 2021). Annual harvest rates averaged 0.066 (±
0.001) for HY doves and 0.051 (± 0.001) for AHY doves in the CMU during 2003-2020; in Colorado,
annual harvest rates averaged 0.014 (± 0.002) for HY doves and 0.029 (± 0.004) for AHY doves (Seamans
2021). Annual estimates of harvest and harvest rate are used to estimate the abundance of mourning
doves in the CMU on September 1 each year, and managers use abundance estimates to determine
appropriate annual hunting regulations. During 2003-2019, annual abundance averaged 162,515,534
(Seamans 2021).
3
�CPW will continue to band mourning doves annually. Most banding sites used in 2021 will again be used
in 2022, and we will attempt to band at least 1,000 doves. We will seek to establish additional banding
sites throughout the state as opportunities arise.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The success of the Colorado mourning dove banding program is dependent on the participation of
numerous personnel. CPW personnel were instrumental in conducting the banding program in 2019,
including Mark Hodges (Area 18), Jonathan Reitz (Area 12), Marty Stratman (Area 3), Allen Vitt (Area 11),
and Brad Weinmeister (Area 15). Christine Rhodes (Senior Farm Bill Biologist, Sterling) provided
valuable assistance with banding in northeastern Colorado. In addition, staff and volunteers from
RMANWR (Ray Fetherman, Emily Halsell, Mindy Hetrick) continued vital banding operations at
RMANWR and assisted with maintenance of the grain bin and storage of millet, and Jim Jackson (CPW,
retired) and Derek Danner (CPW Avian Research technician) assisted with banding in Larimer County.
LITERATURE CITED
Anonymous. 2005. Mourning dove national strategic harvest management plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Laurel, MD, USA.
Dunks, J. H., R. E. Tomlinson, H. M. Reeves, D. D. Dolton, C. E. Braun, and T. P. Zapatka. 1982.
Migration, harvest, and population dynamics of mourning doves banded in the Central
Management Unit, 1967-77. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report – Wildlife
249.
Geis, A. D. 1972. Use of banding data in migratory game bird research and management. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report---Wildlife 154,
Washington, D.C.
Lincoln, F. A. 1930. Calculating waterfowl abundance on the basis of banding returns. U.S. Department
of Agriculture Circular 18, Washington, D.C.
Otis, D. L. 2006. A mourning dove hunting regulation strategy based on annual harvest statistics and
banding data. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:1302-1307.
Otis, D. L. 2009. Revised draft mourning dove banding needs assessment. Unpublished report.
Otis, D. L., J. H. Schulz, and D. P. Scott. 2008. Mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) harvest and
population parameters derived from a national banding study. Biological Technical Publication
BTP-R3010-2008, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Reeves, H. M., and A. D. Geis. 1968. Mourning dove capture and banding. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Special Scientific Report, Wildlife No. 17. Washington, D.C.
Runge, M. C., W. L. Kendall, and J. D. Nichols. 2004. Exploitation. Pages 303-328 in W. J. Sutherland, I.
Newton, and R. E. Green, editors. Bird Ecology and Conservation: A Handbook of Techniques.
Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Sanders, T. A., and D. L. Otis. 2012. Mourning dove reporting probabilities for web-address versus toll
free bands. Journal Wildlife Management 76:480-488.
Seamans, M.E. 2020. Mourning dove population status, 2020. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management Washington, D.C., USA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015. Mourning Dove Harvest Strategy 2015. U.S. Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Washington, D.C.
4
�Table 1. Numbers of mourning doves banded in Colorado under the CPW banding permit, by age class
(AHY = after hatch year, HY = hatch year).
Age Class
Year
Banding Area
AHY
HY
Unknown
Total
2007 Prowers County
161
138
1
300
Logan County
25
21
0
46
Pueblo County
46
53
1
100
Total
232
212
2
446
2008 Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
18
34
117
43
72
9
293
175
4
83
57
26
94
439
7
0
0
0
0
0
7
200
38
200
100
98
103
739
2009 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
50
8
14
162
63
33
26
356
48
91
9
38
37
4
71
298
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
4
99
99
23
200
100
37
100
658
2010 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Washington counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
92
43
66
125
66
25
417
101
157
34
75
132
20
519
7
0
0
0
1
0
8
200
200
100
200
199
45
944
2011 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
124
26
82
159
83
70
544
65
174
18
41
115
26
439
11
0
0
0
2
4
17
200
200
100
200
200
100
1,000
5
�Year
Banding Area
2012 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
AHY
70
50
34
225
62
55
496
2013 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties*
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
29
2
165
75
137
30
438
Unknown
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
Total
100
52
199
300
200
85
936
18
134
34
6
234
121
63
610
181
13
166
2
66
78
29
535
1
1
0
0
0
1
8
11
200
148
200
8
300
200
100
1,156
2014 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
70
97
94
10
217
127
34
649
116
3
81
33
82
73
61
449
14
0
0
0
1
0
5
20
200
100
175
43
300
200
100
1,118
2015 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
155
16
128
5
145
0
50
499
28
0
78
3
154
1
46
310
16
0
0
0
1
0
3
20
199
16
206
8
300
1
99
829
2016 Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
112
95
237
29
198
127
798
72
105
40
25
101
72
415
16
0
0
0
0
0
16
200
200
277
54
299
199
1,229
6
HY
�Year
2017
Banding Area
Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
AHY
109
131
152
154
16
562
2018
Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
2019
2020
45
31
23
36
22
157
Unknown
4
0
0
0
0
4
Total
158
162
175
190
38
723
71
154
147
177
67
616
23
46
24
73
33
199
4
0
0
9
0
4
98
200
171
250
100
819
Adams County
Delta County
Dolores County
Larimer County
Morgan County
Prowers County
Total
79
59
2
257
3
287
687
19
121
0
45
38
53
276
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
99
180
2
302
41
340
964
Adams County
Delta County
Dolores County
Larimer County
Morgan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
39
121
45
125
17
238
43
628
59
79
9
71
83
102
57
460
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
99
200
54
196
100
340
100
1,089
2021
HY
Adams County
31
120
0
151
Delta County
133
66
0
199
Dolores County
41
3
0
44
Larimer County
137
39
0
176
Logan County
18
81
1
100
Morgan County
7
2
0
9
Prowers County
293
47
0
340
Total
660
358
1
1,019
*Banding continued after 2013 in Douglas and Jefferson counties under a banding permit managed by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
7
�Table 2. Hunter recoveries, reported to the Bird Banding Laboratory as shot or found dead during hunting seasons through January 2022, of
mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007-2021.
Year of Number
Year of recovery
banding banded 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
2007
446
4
3
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2008
739
3
8
2
1
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2009
658
3
3
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2010
944
6
5
5
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2011
1,000
13
6
2
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2012
936
10
3
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
2013
1,156
12
6
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
2014
1,118
15
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
2015
829
9
4
0
0
0
0
0
2016
1,229
14
9
3
2
0
0
2017
723
10
1
2
0
1
2018
819
5
8
2
0
2019
964
9
8
4
2020
1,089
11
6
2021
1,019
13
Total
13,669
4
6
13
12
21
26
20
24
13
24
21
9
21
21
24
8
Total
10
18
10
19
23
17
20
21
13
28
14
15
21
17
13
259
�Table 3. Hunter recovery locations (through January 2022) of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007-2021.
Mex = Mexico, Hon = Honduras.
Number
Recovery location
Banding county
banded
CO
Mex
TX
NM
AZ
AL
OK
CA
Hon
Total
Prowers
4,059
137
10
2
0
0
1
0
0
1
151
Delta
1,141
33
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
36
Larimer
1,678
9
6
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
18
Pueblo
1,737
9
5
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
17
Morgan/Logan/Washington
812
10
6
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
Adams
2,003
2
3
4
1
1
0
0
0
0
11
Douglas/Jefferson
1,098
0
0
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
5
Rio Grande/Saguache
664
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
Mesa
61
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Dolores/Montezuma
416
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Total
13,669
200
35
11
4
3
1
1
3
1
259
9
�Table 4. Recaptures of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007–2021. A recapture is defined here as a dove
captured at least once during CPW’s banding operations in a particular year that was banded by CPW during a previous year.
Year of Number
Year of recapture
banding banded 2008
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2104 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
2007
446
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
2008
739
7
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
2009
658
5
5
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
2010
944
8
1
0
2
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
14
2011
1,000
6
4
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
2012
936
6
1
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
11
2013
1,156
10
5
2
2
2
0
0
0
21
2014
1,118
12
4
7
1
0
1
1
26
2015
829
8
11
2
3
2
0
26
2016
1,229
28
20
7
5
3
63
2017
723
23
12
6
1
42
2018
819
17
11
1
29
2019
964
21
5
26
2020
1,089
11
11
Total
12,650
1
8
7
15
8
11
14
21
15
49
48
40
47
22
306
10
�
https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/11df1363165c69a28ca6f95b7ebc1254.pdf
7abb5b48aa19248198545f005635f445
PDF Text
Text
Colorado Mourning Dove Banding Program Update
April 2023
Jim Gammonley
Colorado Parks and Wildlife Avian Research Program
BACKGROUND
The mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) is the most abundant and most harvested migratory game bird
in the U.S. In 2021, the mourning dove population size in the U.S. was about 165 million at the start of
the hunting season, and an estimated 642,800 hunters harvested an estimated 9.2 million mourning
doves (Seamans 2022). Within the U.S., mourning doves are managed in three units where populations
are largely independent of each other; Colorado is located in the Central Management Unit (CMU),
along with 13 other states (AR, IA, KS, MN, MO, MT, NE, NM, ND, OK, SD, TX, and WY). In 2021, the
CMU mourning dove population estimate was 82.1 million, and 368,200 hunters harvested 4.24 million
mourning doves; in Colorado, 9,800 hunters harvested 122,900 mourning doves (Seamans 2022).
In 2003, the four Flyway Councils (Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, and Pacific) developed and approved a
nationwide strategic harvest management plan for mourning doves (Anonymous 2005). The plan called
for development and continuous improvement of an objective framework for making informed harvest
management decisions. Important elements of informed harvest management included (1) the
establishment of monitoring programs for the collection of mourning dove vital rate information
(primarily survival rates, harvest rates, and an index to annual productivity), and (2) development of
demographic models that use these data to predict effects of harvest management actions and
environmental conditions on population abundance. As part of this plan, the Flyway Councils endorsed
developing and implementing a nationwide, annual banding program for mourning doves, to be
conducted primarily by state wildlife agencies.
In 2008, the Flyway Councils and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) adopted interim harvest
strategies for the Central, Eastern, and Western Dove Management Units until managers finalized a
more comprehensive national approach. Harvest management decisions in the interim strategies were
prescribed based on a composite trend in mourning dove relative abundance determined primarily from
roadside surveys. Roadside surveys included the Mourning Dove Call‐Count Survey (doves heard and
doves seen) and the North American Breeding Bird Survey. Prior to the interim strategies, harvest
management decisions were based loosely on trends in mourning dove relative abundance from CallCount surveys. The reliability of roadside surveys to index abundance of doves is unknown, and
opposing trends in doves heard and doves seen in the Eastern Management Unit caused doubt in their
veracity. Furthermore, trends in relative abundance cannot be used reliably to evaluate and predict the
effects of harvest on dove demographics (Runge et al. 2004).
In 2013, the Service formally accepted a finalized national mourning dove harvest strategy and
implemented the strategy for the 2014‐15 hunting season (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2015). The
objectives of the strategy were to conserve mourning dove populations in the three Management Units,
and to minimize annual regulatory change. The harvest strategy did not use roadside surveys, but
instead relied on mourning dove abundance estimated from band recovery and harvest data and a
demographic model that predicts harvest and resulting subsequent year abundance (Lincoln 1930, Geis
1972, Otis 2006). Consequently, an annual, nationwide banding program is an essential component of
mourning dove management.
1
�In 2007, the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW, now Colorado Parks and Wildlife, CPW) initiated a
banding program for mourning doves in support of the national harvest management program. Prior to
2007, CPW had not banded mourning doves since a large-scale banding study conducted in the CMU
during the late 1960s and 1970s (Dunks et al. 1982), when Colorado biologists banded 2,100–5,000
doves per year, for a total of 29,253. A total of 283 of these banded doves were recovered during
subsequent hunting seasons; 52% were harvested in Colorado. After the conclusion of the study, no
dedicated efforts at banding mourning doves took place in Colorado until 2007.
Otis (2009) developed preliminary banding quotas (minimum target numbers of doves banded per year)
for each state, based on desired precision of survival and recovery rates derived from banding data (Otis
2009). Quotas were developed for both adult (After Hatch Year [AHY]) and juvenile (Hatch Year [HY])
age classes. The current minimum annual banding quotas for Colorado are 302 AHY and 178 HY
individuals, for a total of at least 480 mourning doves. Substantially more doves typically must be
captured in order to achieve the age-specific quotas (e.g., many more than 178 HY doves may be
captured in the process of trying to capture 302 AHY doves). In addition, banding sites should be well
distributed across the state, and given the effort required to maintain banding sites, a minimum target
of 50-100 doves at each site makes the most practical sense. Finally, larger samples of banded doves
than the established quotas will contribute to the overall banding effort. Consequently, these banding
quotas should be considered minimum targets, and annual statewide banded samples are expected to
be more in the range of 1,000-1,200 doves.
Although primary interest is in obtaining a representative banded sample and demographic estimates at
the scale of the CMU, distribution of banding effort within a state is an important consideration for
achieving a banded sample that is representative of the overall statewide population. Dove managers
have proposed allocating each state’s banded among different physiographic regions defined by Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs), proportional to the area and the median mourning dove density
(calculated from Breeding Bird Survey data) in the BCRs. In Colorado, there are three BCRs: the
Northern Rockies (extreme northwestern Colorado), Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau (remainder of
the Western Slope and eastern foothills), and the Shortgrass Prairie (eastern plains). The suggested
allocation of banding effort among these BCRs in Colorado is 5% in the Northern Rockies, 15% in the
Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau, and 80% in the Shortgrass Prairie.
BANDING METHODS
In 2007, limited banding was conducted at three sites in eastern Colorado (Table 1) to assess equipment
and personnel needs, and required trapping effort. Thirty Kniffen-style walk-in funnel traps (Reeves and
Geis 1968) were constructed and distributed among the sites. White millet and commercial wild bird
feed was used as bait. Sites were baited beginning in June or early July, and baiting continued for 1-4
weeks before trapping commenced. All captured mourning doves were aged, sexed, and banded with
standard aluminum size 3A leg bands obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey Bird Banding Laboratory
(BBL) and using established techniques (Reeves and Geis 1968). These techniques were used at other
sites as the number of statewide banding sites was expanded over subsequent years (Table 1). When a
previously banded dove is captured, its band number is recorded.
In 2008, the Service’s Region 6 and Division of Migratory Bird Management purchased a grain bin, and
refuge personnel at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge (RMANWR) erected the bin on
RMANWR. CPW purchases millet and stores it in this grain bin. The CPW dove banding coordinator
transfers millet from the grain bin to plastic, waterproof barrels and distributes bait, traps, and bands to
banding sites around the state in each spring.
2
�To obtain information on banded doves, managers rely primarily on hunters to report the band number
of any banded dove they harvest to the BBL. Estimates of band reporting rates (i.e., the probability that
a hunter will report a retrieved, banded dove to the BBL) are required in order to estimate mourning
dove harvest rates, a critical parameter used in mourning dove harvest management. In 2007 the BBL
began producing bands that, in addition to the 1-800-327-BAND number, have the BBL web address
(www.reportband.gov) inscribed on them, rather than the Laurel, MD mail address that was inscribed on
bands in the past. A study on band reporting rates using the toll-free number and mail address
inscriptions produced estimated reporting rates ranging from 31-100% in other CMU states (Otis et al.
2008). It was unknown how providing the web address instead of the mail address would affect band
reporting rates. Numerous states, the Service, and the BBL conducted a study in which half of the
mourning doves captured during annual banding operations were banded with web address bands, and
half were banded with mail address bands, and differences in reporting rates (from direct hunter
recoveries) between the two band types were estimated. In 2008, Colorado banded 373 and 366
mourning doves with mail address bands and web address bands, respectively. In 2009, Colorado
banded 359 and 299 mourning doves with mail address and web address bands, respectively. Results of
the study showed that mourning dove band reporting rates were higher with the web address (Sanders
and Otis 2012). From 2011 through 2017, banders used only bands with the 1-800 number and web
address in annual mourning dove banding programs. In 2018 the BBL discontinued human operators at
its 1-800 number; callers received a recording referring them to the web address to report bands.
Beginning in 2018 and going forward, mourning dove bands issued by the BBL have only the web
address inscribed on them.
2022 RESULTS
In 2022, 1,153 mourning doves were banded under the CPW banding permit, including 879 AHY, 271 HY,
and 3 unknown age birds (Table 1). The number of doves banded in 2022 increased from 2021 (1,019),
and was above the 2007-2021 average (926).
During 2007-2022, 14,822 mourning doves were banded under the CPW banding permit. Through
February 2023, hunters have reported harvesting 308 mourning doves banded in Colorado during 20072022 (Table 2). Most (78%) hunter-reported band recoveries were from Colorado, and 59% of all
recoveries were from doves banded in Prowers County, where 30% of doves have been banded; most
other band recoveries by hunters have occurred in Mexico and Texas (Table 3). Hunters have reported
recoveries of doves banded in all areas of Colorado (Table 3). Through the 2022 trapping period,
banders recorded 355 recaptures of mourning doves that had originally banded in previous years (Table
4).
During 2003-2021, 304,914 mourning doves were banded in the 14 CMU states (Seamans 2022).
Estimated annual survival rates during 2003-2021 averaged 0.271 (± 0.007 SE) for HY doves and 0.457 (±
0.004) for AHY doves in the CMU; in Colorado, annual survival rates averaged 0.532 (± 0.046) for HY
doves and 0.490 (± 0.023) for AHY doves (Seamans 2022). Annual harvest rates averaged 0.066 (±
0.001) for HY doves and 0.052 (± 0.001) for AHY doves in the CMU during 2003-2021; in Colorado,
annual harvest rates averaged 0.014 (± 0.002) for HY doves and 0.030 (± 0.004) for AHY doves (Seamans
2022). Annual estimates of harvest and harvest rate are used to estimate the abundance of mourning
doves in the CMU on September 1 each year, and managers use abundance estimates to determine
appropriate annual hunting regulations. During 2003-2021, annual abundance averaged 156,151,245
(Seamans 2022).
3
�CPW will continue to band mourning doves annually. Most banding sites used in 2022 will again be used
in 2023, and we will attempt to band at least 1,000 doves. We will seek to establish additional banding
sites throughout the state as opportunities arise.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The success of the Colorado mourning dove banding program is dependent on the participation of
numerous personnel. CPW personnel were instrumental in conducting the banding program in 2019,
including Sawyer Morain (Area 18), Jonathan Reitz (Area 12), Allen Vitt (Area 11), Marty Stratman (Area
3), and Brad Weinmeister (Area 15). In addition, staff and volunteers from RMANWR (Ray Fetherman,
Emily Halsell, Mindy Hetrick) continued vital banding operations at RMANWR and assisted with
maintenance of the grain bin and storage of millet, and Derek Danner (CPW Avian Research technician)
assisted with banding in Larimer County.
LITERATURE CITED
Anonymous. 2005. Mourning dove national strategic harvest management plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Laurel, MD, USA.
Dunks, J. H., R. E. Tomlinson, H. M. Reeves, D. D. Dolton, C. E. Braun, and T. P. Zapatka. 1982.
Migration, harvest, and population dynamics of mourning doves banded in the Central
Management Unit, 1967-77. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report – Wildlife
249.
Geis, A. D. 1972. Use of banding data in migratory game bird research and management. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report---Wildlife 154,
Washington, D.C.
Lincoln, F. A. 1930. Calculating waterfowl abundance on the basis of banding returns. U.S. Department
of Agriculture Circular 18, Washington, D.C.
Otis, D. L. 2006. A mourning dove hunting regulation strategy based on annual harvest statistics and
banding data. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:1302-1307.
Otis, D. L. 2009. Revised draft mourning dove banding needs assessment. Unpublished report.
Otis, D. L., J. H. Schulz, and D. P. Scott. 2008. Mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) harvest and
population parameters derived from a national banding study. Biological Technical Publication
BTP-R3010-2008, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Reeves, H. M., and A. D. Geis. 1968. Mourning dove capture and banding. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Special Scientific Report, Wildlife No. 17. Washington, D.C.
Runge, M. C., W. L. Kendall, and J. D. Nichols. 2004. Exploitation. Pages 303-328 in W. J. Sutherland, I.
Newton, and R. E. Green, editors. Bird Ecology and Conservation: A Handbook of Techniques.
Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Sanders, T. A., and D. L. Otis. 2012. Mourning dove reporting probabilities for web-address versus toll
free bands. Journal Wildlife Management 76:480-488.
Seamans, M.E. 2022. Mourning dove population status, 2020. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management Washington, D.C., USA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015. Mourning Dove Harvest Strategy 2015. U.S. Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Washington, D.C.
4
�Table 1. Numbers of mourning doves banded in Colorado under the CPW banding permit, by age class
(AHY = after hatch year, HY = hatch year).
Age Class
Year
Banding Area
AHY
HY
Unknown
Total
2007 Prowers County
161
138
1
300
Logan County
25
21
0
46
Pueblo County
46
53
1
100
Total
232
212
2
446
2008 Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
18
34
117
43
72
9
293
175
4
83
57
26
94
439
7
0
0
0
0
0
7
200
38
200
100
98
103
739
2009 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
50
8
14
162
63
33
26
356
48
91
9
38
37
4
71
298
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
4
99
99
23
200
100
37
100
658
2010 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Washington counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
92
43
66
125
66
25
417
101
157
34
75
132
20
519
7
0
0
0
1
0
8
200
200
100
200
199
45
944
2011 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
124
26
82
159
83
70
544
65
174
18
41
115
26
439
11
0
0
0
2
4
17
200
200
100
200
200
100
1,000
5
�Year
Banding Area
2012 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
AHY
70
50
34
225
62
55
496
2013 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties*
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
29
2
165
75
137
30
438
Unknown
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
Total
100
52
199
300
200
85
936
18
134
34
6
234
121
63
610
181
13
166
2
66
78
29
535
1
1
0
0
0
1
8
11
200
148
200
8
300
200
100
1,156
2014 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
70
97
94
10
217
127
34
649
116
3
81
33
82
73
61
449
14
0
0
0
1
0
5
20
200
100
175
43
300
200
100
1,118
2015 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
155
16
128
5
145
0
50
499
28
0
78
3
154
1
46
310
16
0
0
0
1
0
3
20
199
16
206
8
300
1
99
829
2016 Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
112
95
237
29
198
127
798
72
105
40
25
101
72
415
16
0
0
0
0
0
16
200
200
277
54
299
199
1,229
6
HY
�Year
2017
Banding Area
Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
AHY
109
131
152
154
16
562
2018
Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
2019
45
31
23
36
22
157
Unknown
4
0
0
0
0
4
Total
158
162
175
190
38
723
71
154
147
177
67
616
23
46
24
73
33
199
4
0
0
9
0
4
98
200
171
250
100
819
Adams County
Delta County
Dolores County
Larimer County
Morgan County
Prowers County
Total
79
59
2
257
3
287
687
19
121
0
45
38
53
276
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
99
180
2
302
41
340
964
2020
Adams County
Delta County
Dolores County
Larimer County
Morgan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
39
121
45
125
17
238
43
628
59
79
9
71
83
102
57
460
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
99
200
54
196
100
340
100
1,089
2021
Adams County
Delta County
Dolores County
Larimer County
Logan County
Morgan County
Prowers County
Total
31
133
41
137
18
7
293
660
120
66
3
39
81
2
47
358
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
151
199
44
176
100
9
340
1,019
2022
Adams County
Delta County
139
151
59
29
2
1
200
181
7
HY
�Dolores County
87
6
0
93
Larimer County
102
16
0
118
Logan County
15
85
0
100
Prowers County
346
54
0
400
Pueblo County
39
22
0
61
Total
879
271
3
1,153
*Banding continued after 2013 in Douglas and Jefferson counties under a banding permit managed by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
8
�Table 2. Hunter recoveries, reported to the Bird Banding Laboratory as shot or found dead during hunting seasons through February 2023, of
mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007-2022.
Year of
banding
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
Total
Number
banded
446
739
658
944
1,000
936
1,156
1,118
829
1,229
723
819
964
1,089
1,019
1,153
14,822
2007
4
4
2008
3
3
6
2009
2
8
3
13
2010
1
2
3
6
12
2011
0
1
2
5
13
21
2012
0
3
2
5
6
10
26
2013
0
1
0
2
2
3
12
20
2014
0
0
0
0
1
2
6
15
24
9
2015
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
9
13
2016
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
3
4
14
24
Year of recovery
2017 2018 2019
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
3
2
10
1
2
5
8
9
21
9
21
2020
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
8
11
21
2021
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
4
6
13
24
2022
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
3
3
15
26
49
Total
10
18
10
19
23
17
20
21
13
30
14
15
24
20
28
26
308
�Table 3. Hunter recovery locations (through February 2023) of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007-2022.
Mex = Mexico, Hon = Honduras.
Number
Recovery location
Banding county
banded
CO
Mex
TX
NM
AZ
AL
OK
CA
Hon
Total
Prowers
4,459
166
10
4
0
0
1
0
0
1
182
Delta
1,322
45
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
48
Larimer
1,796
9
6
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
18
Pueblo
1,798
9
5
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
17
Morgan/Logan/Washington
912
13
9
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
23
Adams
2,203
2
3
4
1
1
0
0
0
0
11
Douglas/Jefferson
1,098
0
0
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
5
Rio Grande/Saguache
664
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
Mesa
61
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Dolores/Montezuma
509
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Total
14,822
244
38
13
4
3
1
1
3
1
308
10
�Table 4. Recaptures of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007–2022. A recapture is defined here as a dove
captured at least once during CPW’s banding operations in a particular year that was banded by CPW during a previous year.
Year of
banding
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
Total
Number
banded
446
739
658
944
1,000
936
1,156
1,118
829
1,229
723
819
964
1,089
1,019
12,650
2008
1
1
2009
1
7
8
2010
0
2
5
7
2011
0
2
5
8
15
2012
1
0
0
1
6
8
2013
1
0
0
0
4
6
11
2104
0
0
1
2
0
1
10
14
2015
0
0
0
0
1
3
5
12
21
11
Year of recapture
2016 2017 2018 2019
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
2
2
0
4
7
1
0
8
11
2
3
28
20
7
23
12
17
15
49
48
40
2020
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
2
5
6
11
21
47
2021
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
3
1
1
5
11
22
2022
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
1
1
8
12
23
49
Total
4
11
11
14
11
11
21
26
27
66
43
30
34
23
23
355
�
https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/a87885ec7f97469fc7936b15b90e4df8.pdf
eaac8933db7c9769ce72aad9bfa7a11f
PDF Text
Text
Colorado Mourning Dove Banding Program Update
April 2024
Jim Gammonley
Colorado Parks and Wildlife Avian Research Program
BACKGROUND
The mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) is the most abundant and most harvested migratory game bird
in the U.S. In 2022, the mourning dove population size in the U.S. was about 161 million at the start of
the hunting season, and an estimated 625,000 hunters harvested an estimated 8.3 million mourning
doves (Seamans 2023). Within the U.S., mourning doves are managed in three units where populations
are largely independent of each other; Colorado is located in the Central Management Unit (CMU),
along with 13 other states (AR, IA, KS, MN, MO, MT, NE, NM, ND, OK, SD, TX, and WY). In 2022, the
CMU mourning dove population estimate was 92.6 million, and 281,100 hunters harvested 4.04 million
mourning doves; in Colorado, 8,700 hunters harvested 112,700 mourning doves (Seamans 2023).
In 2003, the four Flyway Councils (Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, and Pacific) developed and approved a
nationwide strategic harvest management plan for mourning doves (Anonymous 2005). The plan called
for development and continuous improvement of an objective framework for making informed harvest
management decisions. Important elements of informed harvest management included (1) the
establishment of monitoring programs for the collection of mourning dove vital rate information
(primarily survival rates, harvest rates, and an index to annual productivity), and (2) development of
demographic models that use these data to predict effects of harvest management actions and
environmental conditions on population abundance. As part of this plan, the Flyway Councils endorsed
developing and implementing a nationwide, annual banding program for mourning doves, to be
conducted primarily by state wildlife agencies.
In 2008, the Flyway Councils and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) adopted interim harvest
strategies for the Central, Eastern, and Western Dove Management Units until managers finalized a
more comprehensive national approach. Harvest management decisions in the interim strategies were
prescribed based on a composite trend in mourning dove relative abundance determined primarily from
roadside surveys. Roadside surveys included the Mourning Dove Call‐Count Survey (doves heard and
doves seen) and the North American Breeding Bird Survey. Prior to the interim strategies, harvest
management decisions were based loosely on trends in mourning dove relative abundance from CallCount surveys. The reliability of roadside surveys to index abundance of doves is unknown, and
opposing trends in doves heard and doves seen in the Eastern Management Unit caused doubt in their
veracity. Furthermore, trends in relative abundance cannot be used reliably to evaluate and predict the
effects of harvest on dove demographics (Runge et al. 2004).
In 2013, the Service formally accepted a finalized national mourning dove harvest strategy and
implemented the strategy for the 2014‐15 hunting season (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2015). The
objectives of the strategy were to conserve mourning dove populations in the three Management Units,
and to minimize annual regulatory change. The harvest strategy did not use roadside surveys, but
instead relied on mourning dove abundance estimated from band recovery and harvest data and a
demographic model that predicts harvest and resulting subsequent year abundance (Lincoln 1930, Geis
1972, Otis 2006). Consequently, an annual, nationwide banding program is an essential component of
mourning dove management.
1
�In 2007, the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW, now Colorado Parks and Wildlife, CPW) initiated a
banding program for mourning doves in support of the national harvest management program. Prior to
2007, CPW had not banded mourning doves since a large-scale banding study conducted in the CMU
during the late 1960s and 1970s (Dunks et al. 1982), when Colorado biologists banded 2,100–5,000
doves per year, for a total of 29,253. A total of 283 of these banded doves were recovered and reported
during subsequent hunting seasons; 52% were harvested in Colorado. After the conclusion of the study,
no dedicated efforts at banding mourning doves took place in Colorado until 2007.
Otis (2009) developed preliminary banding quotas (minimum target numbers of doves banded per year)
for each state, based on desired precision of survival and recovery rates derived from banding data (Otis
2009). Quotas were developed for both adult (After Hatch Year [AHY]) and juvenile (Hatch Year [HY])
age classes. The current minimum annual banding quotas for Colorado are 302 AHY and 178 HY
individuals, for a total of at least 480 mourning doves. Substantially more doves typically must be
captured in order to achieve the age-specific quotas (e.g., many more than 178 HY doves may be
captured in the process of trying to capture 302 AHY doves). In addition, banding sites should be well
distributed across the state, and given the effort required to maintain banding sites, a minimum target
of 50-100 doves at each site makes the most practical sense. Finally, larger samples of banded doves
than the established quotas will contribute to the overall banding effort. Consequently, these banding
quotas should be considered minimum targets, and annual statewide banded samples are expected to
be more in the range of 1,000-1,200 doves.
Although primary interest is in obtaining a representative banded sample and demographic estimates at
the scale of the CMU, distribution of banding effort within a state is an important consideration for
achieving a banded sample that is representative of the overall statewide population. Dove managers
have proposed allocating each state’s banded among different physiographic regions defined by Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs), proportional to the area and the median mourning dove density
(calculated from Breeding Bird Survey data) in the BCRs. In Colorado, there are three BCRs: the
Northern Rockies (extreme northwestern Colorado), Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau (remainder of
the Western Slope and eastern foothills), and the Shortgrass Prairie (eastern plains). The suggested
allocation of banding effort among these BCRs in Colorado is 5% in the Northern Rockies, 15% in the
Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau, and 80% in the Shortgrass Prairie.
BANDING METHODS
In 2007, limited banding was conducted at three sites in eastern Colorado (Table 1) to assess equipment
and personnel needs, and required trapping effort. Thirty Kniffen-style walk-in funnel traps (Reeves and
Geis 1968) were constructed and distributed among the sites. White millet and commercial wild bird
feed was used as bait. Sites were baited beginning in June or early July, and baiting continued for 1-4
weeks before trapping commenced. All captured mourning doves were aged, sexed, and banded with
standard aluminum size 3A leg bands obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey Bird Banding Laboratory
(BBL) and using established techniques (Reeves and Geis 1968). These techniques were used at other
sites as the number of statewide banding sites was expanded over subsequent years (Table 1). When a
previously banded dove is captured, its band number is recorded.
In 2008, the Service’s Region 6 and Division of Migratory Bird Management purchased a grain bin, and
refuge personnel at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge (RMANWR) erected the bin on
RMANWR. CPW purchases millet and stores it in this grain bin. The CPW dove banding coordinator
transfers millet from the grain bin to plastic, waterproof barrels and distributes bait, traps, and bands to
2
�banding sites around the state in each spring. At some banding sites, banders purchase millet from local
sources.
To obtain information on banded doves, managers rely primarily on hunters to report the band number
of any banded dove they harvest to the BBL. Estimates of band reporting rates (i.e., the probability that
a hunter will report a retrieved, banded dove to the BBL) are required in order to estimate mourning
dove harvest rates, a critical parameter used in mourning dove harvest management. In 2007 the BBL
began producing bands that, in addition to the 1-800-327-BAND number, have the BBL web address
(www.reportband.gov) inscribed on them, rather than the Laurel, MD mail address that was inscribed on
bands in the past. A study on band reporting rates using the toll-free number and mail address
inscriptions produced estimated reporting rates ranging from 31-100% in other CMU states (Otis et al.
2008). It was unknown how providing the web address instead of the mail address would affect band
reporting rates. Numerous states, the Service, and the BBL conducted a study in which half of the
mourning doves captured during annual banding operations were banded with web address bands, and
half were banded with mail address bands, and differences in reporting rates (from direct hunter
recoveries) between the two band types were estimated. In 2008, Colorado banded 373 and 366
mourning doves with mail address bands and web address bands, respectively. In 2009, Colorado
banded 359 and 299 mourning doves with mail address and web address bands, respectively. Results of
the study showed that mourning dove band reporting rates were higher with the web address (Sanders
and Otis 2012). From 2011 through 2017, banders used only bands with the 1-800 number and web
address in annual mourning dove banding programs. In 2018 the BBL discontinued human operators at
its 1-800 number; callers received a recording referring them to the web address to report bands.
Beginning in 2018 and going forward, mourning dove bands issued by the BBL have only the web
address inscribed on them.
2023 RESULTS
In 2023, 946 mourning doves were banded under the CPW banding permit, including 675 AHY, 270 HY,
and 1 unknown age birds (Table 1). The number of doves banded in 2023 was lower than in 2022
(1,153), and was slightly above the 2007-2022 average (926).
During 2007-2023, 15,768 mourning doves were banded under the CPW banding permit. Through
March 2024, hunters have reported harvesting 345 mourning doves banded under the CPW banding
permit during 2007-2023 (Table 2). Most (80%) hunter-reported band recoveries were from Colorado,
and 58% of all recoveries were from doves banded in Prowers County, where 30% of doves have been
banded; most other band recoveries by hunters have occurred in Mexico and Texas (Table 3). Hunters
have reported recoveries of doves banded in all areas of Colorado (Table 3). Through the 2023 trapping
period, banders recorded 402 recaptures of mourning doves that had originally banded in previous
years (Table 4).
During 2003-2022, 320,064 mourning doves were banded in the 14 CMU states (Seamans 2023).
Estimated annual survival rates during 2003-2022 averaged 0.270 (± 0.007 SE) for HY doves and 0.450 (±
0.004) for AHY doves in the CMU; in Colorado, annual survival rates averaged 0.539 (± 0.043) for HY
doves and 0.465 (± 0.022) for AHY doves (Seamans 2023). Annual harvest rates averaged 0.060 (±
0.001) for HY doves and 0.046 (± 0.001) for AHY doves in the CMU during 2003-2022; in Colorado,
annual harvest rates averaged 0.011 (± 0.001) for HY doves and 0.024 (± 0.003) for AHY doves (Seamans
2023). Annual estimates of harvest and harvest rate are used to estimate the abundance of mourning
doves in the CMU on September 1 each year, and managers use abundance estimates to determine
3
�appropriate annual hunting regulations. During 2003-2022, annual abundance in the CMU averaged
162,514,637 (Seamans 2023).
CPW will continue to band mourning doves annually. Most banding sites used in 2023 will again be used
in 2024, and we will attempt to band at least 1,000 doves. We will seek to establish additional banding
sites throughout the state as opportunities arise.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The success of the Colorado mourning dove banding program is dependent on the participation of
numerous personnel. CPW personnel were instrumental in conducting the banding program in 2023,
including Sawyer Morain (Area 18), Ashlynn Rhodes (Area 12), Allen Vitt (Area 11), Marty Stratman (Area
3), and Brad Weinmeister (Area 15). In addition, staff and volunteers from RMANWR (Ray Fetherman,
Mindy Hetrick) continued vital banding operations at RMANWR and assisted with maintenance of the
grain bin and storage of millet, and Derek Danner (CPW Avian Research technician) assisted with
banding in Larimer County.
LITERATURE CITED
Anonymous. 2005. Mourning dove national strategic harvest management plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Laurel, MD, USA.
Dunks, J. H., R. E. Tomlinson, H. M. Reeves, D. D. Dolton, C. E. Braun, and T. P. Zapatka. 1982.
Migration, harvest, and population dynamics of mourning doves banded in the Central
Management Unit, 1967-77. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report – Wildlife
249.
Geis, A. D. 1972. Use of banding data in migratory game bird research and management. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report---Wildlife 154,
Washington, D.C.
Lincoln, F. A. 1930. Calculating waterfowl abundance on the basis of banding returns. U.S. Department
of Agriculture Circular 18, Washington, D.C.
Otis, D. L. 2006. A mourning dove hunting regulation strategy based on annual harvest statistics and
banding data. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:1302-1307.
Otis, D. L. 2009. Revised draft mourning dove banding needs assessment. Unpublished report.
Otis, D. L., J. H. Schulz, and D. P. Scott. 2008. Mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) harvest and
population parameters derived from a national banding study. Biological Technical Publication
BTP-R3010-2008, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Reeves, H. M., and A. D. Geis. 1968. Mourning dove capture and banding. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Special Scientific Report, Wildlife No. 17. Washington, D.C.
Runge, M. C., W. L. Kendall, and J. D. Nichols. 2004. Exploitation. Pages 303-328 in W. J. Sutherland, I.
Newton, and R. E. Green, editors. Bird Ecology and Conservation: A Handbook of Techniques.
Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Sanders, T. A., and D. L. Otis. 2012. Mourning dove reporting probabilities for web-address versus toll
free bands. Journal Wildlife Management 76:480-488.
Seamans, M.E. 2023. Mourning dove population status, 2023. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management Washington, D.C., USA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015. Mourning Dove Harvest Strategy 2015. U.S. Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Washington, D.C.
4
�Table 1. Numbers of mourning doves banded in Colorado under the CPW banding permit, by age class
(AHY = after hatch year, HY = hatch year).
Age Class
Year
Banding Area
AHY
HY
Unknown
Total
2007 Prowers County
161
138
1
300
Logan County
25
21
0
46
Pueblo County
46
53
1
100
Total
232
212
2
446
2008 Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
18
34
117
43
72
9
293
175
4
83
57
26
94
439
7
0
0
0
0
0
7
200
38
200
100
98
103
739
2009 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
50
8
14
162
63
33
26
356
48
91
9
38
37
4
71
298
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
4
99
99
23
200
100
37
100
658
2010 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Washington counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
92
43
66
125
66
25
417
101
157
34
75
132
20
519
7
0
0
0
1
0
8
200
200
100
200
199
45
944
2011 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
124
26
82
159
83
70
544
65
174
18
41
115
26
439
11
0
0
0
2
4
17
200
200
100
200
200
100
1,000
5
�Year
Banding Area
2012 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
AHY
70
50
34
225
62
55
496
2013 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties*
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
29
2
165
75
137
30
438
Unknown
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
Total
100
52
199
300
200
85
936
18
134
34
6
234
121
63
610
181
13
166
2
66
78
29
535
1
1
0
0
0
1
8
11
200
148
200
8
300
200
100
1,156
2014 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
70
97
94
10
217
127
34
649
116
3
81
33
82
73
61
449
14
0
0
0
1
0
5
20
200
100
175
43
300
200
100
1,118
2015 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
155
16
128
5
145
0
50
499
28
0
78
3
154
1
46
310
16
0
0
0
1
0
3
20
199
16
206
8
300
1
99
829
2016 Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
112
95
237
29
198
127
798
72
105
40
25
101
72
415
16
0
0
0
0
0
16
200
200
277
54
299
199
1,229
6
HY
�Year
2017
Banding Area
Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
AHY
109
131
152
154
16
562
2018
Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
2019
45
31
23
36
22
157
Unknown
4
0
0
0
0
4
Total
158
162
175
190
38
723
71
154
147
177
67
616
23
46
24
73
33
199
4
0
0
9
0
4
98
200
171
250
100
819
Adams County
Delta County
Dolores County
Larimer County
Morgan County
Prowers County
Total
79
59
2
257
3
287
687
19
121
0
45
38
53
276
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
99
180
2
302
41
340
964
2020
Adams County
Delta County
Dolores County
Larimer County
Morgan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
39
121
45
125
17
238
43
628
59
79
9
71
83
102
57
460
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
99
200
54
196
100
340
100
1,089
2021
Adams County
Delta County
Dolores County
Larimer County
Logan County
Morgan County
Prowers County
Total
31
133
41
137
18
7
293
660
120
66
3
39
81
2
47
358
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
151
199
44
176
100
9
340
1,019
2022
Adams County
Delta County
139
151
59
29
2
1
200
181
7
HY
�Dolores County
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
87
102
15
346
39
879
2023
6
16
85
54
22
271
0
0
0
0
0
3
93
118
100
400
61
1,153
Adams County
155
66
1
222
Delta County
101
24
0
125
Dolores County
12
2
0
14
Larimer County
157
38
0
195
Logan County
52
48
0
100
Prowers County
130
21
0
151
Pueblo County
68
71
0
139
Total
675
270
1
946
*Banding continued after 2013 in Douglas and Jefferson counties under a banding permit managed by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
8
�Table 2. Hunter recoveries, reported to the Bird Banding Laboratory as shot or found dead during hunting seasons through March 2024, of
mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007-2023.
Year of
banding
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
Total
Number
banded
446
739
658
944
1,000
936
1,156
1,118
829
1,229
723
819
964
1,089
1,019
1,153
946
15,768
2007
4
4
2008
3
3
6
2009
2
8
3
13
2010
1
2
3
6
12
2011
0
1
2
5
13
21
2012
0
3
2
5
6
10
26
2013
0
1
0
2
2
3
12
20
2014
0
0
0
0
1
2
6
15
24
9
2015
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
9
13
2016
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
3
4
14
24
2017
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
9
10
21
Year of recovery
2018 2019 2020
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
2
0
1
2
0
5
8
2
9
8
11
9
21
21
2021
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
4
6
13
24
2022
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
3
3
14
25
47
2023
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
6
6
12
12
39
Total
10
18
10
19
23
17
20
21
13
31
15
15
25
26
33
37
12
345
�Table 3. Hunter recovery locations (through March 2024) of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007-2023.
Mex = Mexico, Hon = Honduras.
Number
Recovery location
Banding County
banded
CO
Mex
TX
NM
AZ
AL
OK
CA
Hon
Total
Prowers
4,610
183
10
4
0
0
1
0
0
1
199
Adams
2,425
2
3
4
1
1
0
0
0
0
11
Larimer
1,991
16
6
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
26
Pueblo
1,937
9
6
3
1
1
0
0
0
0
20
Delta
1,447
52
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
56
Douglas/Jefferson
1,098
0
0
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
5
Morgan/Logan/Washington
1,012
14
9
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
24
Rio Grande/Saguache
664
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
Dolores/Montezuma
523
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Mesa
61
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Total
15,768
276
40
16
4
3
1
1
3
1
345
10
�Table 4. Recaptures of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007–2023. A recapture is defined here as a dove
captured at least once during CPW’s banding operations in a particular year that was banded by CPW during a previous year.
Year of
banding
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
Total
Number
banded
446
739
658
944
1,000
936
1,156
1,118
829
1,229
723
819
964
1,089
1,019
1,153
14,822
2008
1
1
2009
1
7
8
2010
0
2
5
7
2011
0
2
5
8
15
2012
1
0
0
1
6
8
2013
1
0
0
0
4
6
11
2104
0
0
1
2
0
1
10
14
2015
0
0
0
0
1
3
5
12
21
11
2016
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
4
8
15
2017
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
7
11
28
49
Year of recapture
2018 2019 2020
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
1
2
3
2
20
7
5
23
12
6
17
11
21
48
40
47
2021
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
3
1
1
5
11
22
2022
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
1
1
8
12
23
49
2023
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
2
4
1
3
12
22
47
Total
4
11
11
14
11
12
21
26
29
66
45
34
35
26
35
22
402
�
https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/cfbdcb9935148da79f9373220d6c7116.pdf
a40339ee74d667998b5f28795e6963c3
PDF Text
Text
Colorado Mourning Dove Banding Program Update
April 2025
Jim Gammonley
Colorado Parks and Wildlife Avian Research Program
BACKGROUND
The mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) is the most abundant and most harvested migratory game bird
in the U.S. In 2023, the mourning dove population size in the U.S. was about 346 million at the start of
the hunting season, and an estimated 1,018,100 hunters harvested 16.8 million mourning doves
(Seamans 2024). Within the U.S., mourning doves are managed in three geographic units where
populations are largely independent of each other; Colorado is located in the Central Management Unit
(CMU), along with 13 other states (AR, IA, KS, MN, MO, MT, NE, NM, ND, OK, SD, TX, and WY). In 2023,
the CMU mourning dove population estimate was 201.9 million, and 487,900 hunters harvested 9.24
million mourning doves; in Colorado, 10,900 hunters harvested 177,700 mourning doves (Seamans
2024).
In 2003, the four Flyway Councils (Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, and Pacific) developed and approved a
nationwide strategic harvest management plan for mourning doves (Anonymous 2005). The plan called
for development and continuous improvement of an objective framework for making informed harvest
management decisions. Important elements of informed harvest management included (1) the
establishment of monitoring programs for the collection of mourning dove vital rate information
(primarily survival rates, harvest rates, and an index to annual productivity), and (2) development of
demographic models that use these data to predict effects of harvest management actions and
environmental conditions on population abundance. As part of this plan, the Flyway Councils endorsed
developing and implementing a nationwide, annual banding program for mourning doves, to be
conducted primarily by state wildlife agencies.
In 2008, the Flyway Councils and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) adopted interim harvest
strategies for the Central, Eastern, and Western Dove Management Units until managers finalized a
more comprehensive national approach. Harvest management decisions in the interim strategies were
prescribed based on a composite trend in mourning dove relative abundance determined primarily from
roadside surveys. Roadside surveys included the Mourning Dove Call‐Count Survey (doves heard and
doves seen) and the North American Breeding Bird Survey. Prior to the interim strategies, harvest
management decisions were based loosely on trends in mourning dove relative abundance from CallCount surveys. The reliability of roadside surveys to index abundance of doves is unknown, and
opposing trends in doves heard and doves seen in the Eastern Management Unit caused doubt in their
veracity. Furthermore, trends in relative abundance cannot be used reliably to evaluate and predict the
effects of harvest on dove demographics (Runge et al. 2004).
In 2013, the Service formally accepted a finalized national mourning dove harvest strategy and
implemented the strategy for the 2014‐15 hunting season (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2015). The
objectives of the strategy were to conserve mourning dove populations in the three Management Units,
and to minimize annual regulatory change. The harvest strategy did not use roadside surveys, but
instead relied on mourning dove abundance estimated from band recovery and harvest data and a
demographic model that predicts harvest and resulting subsequent year abundance (Lincoln 1930, Geis
1
�1972, Otis 2006). Consequently, an annual, nationwide banding program is an essential component of
mourning dove management.
In 2007, the Colorado Division of Wildlife (now Colorado Parks and Wildlife, CPW) initiated a banding
program for mourning doves in support of the national harvest management program. Prior to 2007,
CPW had not banded mourning doves since a large-scale banding study conducted in the CMU during
the late 1960s and 1970s (Dunks et al. 1982), when Colorado biologists banded 2,100–5,000 doves per
year, for a total of 29,253. A total of 283 of these banded doves were recovered and reported during
subsequent hunting seasons; 52% were harvested in Colorado. After the conclusion of the study, no
dedicated efforts at banding mourning doves took place in Colorado until 2007.
Otis (2009) developed preliminary mourning dove banding quotas (minimum target numbers of doves
banded per year) for each state, based on desired precision of survival and recovery rates derived from
banding data (Otis 2009). Quotas were developed for both adult (After Hatch Year [AHY]) and juvenile
(Hatch Year [HY]) age classes. The current minimum annual banding quotas for Colorado are 302 AHY
and 178 HY individuals, for a total of at least 480 mourning doves. Substantially more doves typically
must be captured in order to achieve the age-specific quotas (e.g., many more than 178 HY doves may
be captured in the process of trying to capture 302 AHY doves). In addition, banding sites should be well
distributed across the state, and given the effort required to maintain banding sites, a minimum target
of 50-100 doves at each site makes the most practical sense. Finally, larger samples of banded doves
than the established quotas will contribute to the overall banding effort. Consequently, these banding
quotas should be considered minimum targets, and annual statewide banded samples are expected to
be more in the range of 1,000-1,200 doves.
Although primary interest is in obtaining a representative banded sample and demographic estimates at
the scale of the CMU, distribution of banding effort within a state is an important consideration for
achieving a banded sample that is representative of the overall statewide population. Dove managers
have proposed allocating each state’s banded among different physiographic regions defined by Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs), proportional to the area and the median mourning dove density
(calculated from Breeding Bird Survey data) in the BCRs. In Colorado, there are three BCRs: the
Northern Rockies (extreme northwestern Colorado), Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau (remainder of
the Western Slope and eastern foothills), and the Shortgrass Prairie (eastern plains). The suggested
allocation of banding effort among these BCRs in Colorado is 5% in the Northern Rockies, 15% in the
Southern Rockies/Colorado Plateau, and 80% in the Shortgrass Prairie.
BANDING METHODS
In 2007, limited banding was conducted at three sites in eastern Colorado (Table 1) to assess equipment
and personnel needs, and required trapping effort. Thirty Kniffen-style walk-in funnel traps (Reeves and
Geis 1968) were constructed and distributed among the sites. White millet and commercial wild bird
feed was used as bait. Sites were baited beginning in June or early July, and baiting continued for 1-4
weeks before trapping commenced. All captured mourning doves were aged, sexed, and banded with
standard aluminum size 3A leg bands obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey Bird Banding Laboratory
(BBL) and using established techniques (Reeves and Geis 1968). These techniques were used at other
sites as the number of statewide banding sites was expanded over subsequent years (Table 1). When a
previously banded dove is captured, its band number is recorded.
To obtain information on banded doves, managers rely primarily on hunters to report the band number
of any banded dove they harvest to the BBL. Estimates of band reporting rates (i.e., the probability that
2
�a hunter will report a retrieved, banded dove to the BBL) are required in order to estimate mourning
dove harvest rates, a critical parameter used in mourning dove harvest management. In 2007 the BBL
began producing bands that, in addition to a 1-800-327-BAND number, have the BBL web address
(www.reportband.gov) inscribed on them, rather than the Laurel, MD mail address that was inscribed on
bands in the past. A study on band reporting rates using the toll-free number and mail address
inscriptions produced estimated reporting rates ranging from 31-100% in other CMU states (Otis et al.
2008). It was unknown how providing the web address instead of the mail address would affect band
reporting rates. Numerous states, the Service, and the BBL conducted a study in which half of the
mourning doves captured during annual banding operations were banded with web address bands, and
half were banded with mail address bands, and differences in reporting rates (from direct hunter
recoveries) between the two band types were estimated. In 2008, Colorado banded 373 and 366
mourning doves with mail address bands and web address bands, respectively. In 2009, Colorado
banded 359 and 299 mourning doves with mail address and web address bands, respectively. Results of
the study showed that mourning dove band reporting rates were higher with the web address (Sanders
and Otis 2012). From 2011 through 2017, banders used only bands with the 1-800 number and web
address in annual mourning dove banding programs. In 2018 the BBL discontinued human operators at
its 1-800 number; callers received a recording referring them to the web address to report bands.
Beginning in 2018 and going forward, mourning dove bands issued by the BBL have only the web
address inscribed on them.
2024 RESULTS
In 2024, 1,253 mourning doves were banded under the CPW banding permit, including 819 AHY, 433 HY,
and 1 unknown age birds (Table 1). The number of doves banded in 2024 was a record high, and well
above the 2007-2023 average (928).
During 2007-2024, 17,021 mourning doves were banded under the CPW banding permit. Through
March 2025, hunters have reported harvesting 380 mourning doves that were banded under the CPW
banding permit during 2007-2024 (Table 2). Most (80%) hunter-reported band recoveries were from
Colorado, and 57% of all recoveries were from doves banded in Prowers County, where 29% of doves
have been banded; most other band recoveries by hunters have occurred in Mexico and Texas (Table 3).
Hunters have reported recoveries of doves banded in all areas of Colorado (Table 3). Through the 2024
trapping period, banders recorded 451 recaptures of mourning doves that had been banded in previous
years (Table 4). During 2024, 49 doves were recaptured that were originally banded 2023 (23), 2022
(14), 2021 (6), 2020 (2), 2019 (1), and 2018 (3) (Table 4).
During 2003-2023, 334,804 mourning doves were banded in the 14 CMU states (Seamans 2024).
Estimated annual survival rates during 2003-2023 averaged 0.334 (± 0.110 SE) for HY doves and 0.477 (±
0.072) for AHY doves in the CMU; in Colorado, annual survival rates averaged 0.321 (± 0.095) for HY
doves and 0.490 (± 0.083) for AHY doves (Seamans 2024). Annual harvest rates averaged 0.040 (±
0.032) for HY doves and 0.031 (± 0.023) for AHY doves in the CMU during 2003-2023; in Colorado,
annual harvest rates averaged 0.012 (± 0.005) for HY doves and 0.025 (± 0.010) for AHY doves (Seamans
2024). Annual estimates of harvest and harvest rate are used to estimate the abundance of mourning
doves in the CMU on September 1 each year, and managers use abundance estimates to determine
appropriate annual hunting regulations. During 2003-2023, annual abundance in the CMU averaged
162,514,637 (Seamans 2024).
3
�CPW will continue to band mourning doves annually. Most banding sites used in 2024 will again be used
in 2025, and we will attempt to band at least 1,000 doves. We will seek to establish additional banding
sites throughout the state as opportunities arise.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The success of the Colorado mourning dove banding program is dependent on the participation of
numerous personnel. CPW personnel were instrumental in conducting the banding program in 2023,
including Sawyer Morain (Area 18), Ashlynn Rhodes (Area 12), Allen Vitt (Area 11), Marty Stratman (Area
3), and Brad Weinmeister (Area 15). In addition, staff and volunteers from RMANWR (Ray Fetherman,
Mindy Hetrick) continued vital banding operations at RMANWR, and Derek Danner (CPW Avian Research
technician) assisted with banding in Larimer County.
LITERATURE CITED
Anonymous. 2005. Mourning dove national strategic harvest management plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Laurel, MD, USA.
Dunks, J. H., R. E. Tomlinson, H. M. Reeves, D. D. Dolton, C. E. Braun, and T. P. Zapatka. 1982.
Migration, harvest, and population dynamics of mourning doves banded in the Central
Management Unit, 1967-77. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report – Wildlife
249.
Geis, A. D. 1972. Use of banding data in migratory game bird research and management. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report---Wildlife 154,
Washington, D.C.
Lincoln, F. A. 1930. Calculating waterfowl abundance on the basis of banding returns. U.S. Department
of Agriculture Circular 18, Washington, D.C.
Otis, D. L. 2006. A mourning dove hunting regulation strategy based on annual harvest statistics and
banding data. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:1302-1307.
Otis, D. L. 2009. Revised draft mourning dove banding needs assessment. Unpublished report.
Otis, D. L., J. H. Schulz, and D. P. Scott. 2008. Mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) harvest and
population parameters derived from a national banding study. Biological Technical Publication
BTP-R3010-2008, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Reeves, H. M., and A. D. Geis. 1968. Mourning dove capture and banding. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Special Scientific Report, Wildlife No. 17. Washington, D.C.
Runge, M. C., W. L. Kendall, and J. D. Nichols. 2004. Exploitation. Pages 303-328 in W. J. Sutherland, I.
Newton, and R. E. Green, editors. Bird Ecology and Conservation: A Handbook of Techniques.
Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Sanders, T. A., and D. L. Otis. 2012. Mourning dove reporting probabilities for web-address versus toll
free bands. Journal Wildlife Management 76:480-488.
Seamans, M.E. 2024. Mourning dove population status, 2024. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management Washington, D.C., USA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015. Mourning Dove Harvest Strategy 2015. U.S. Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Washington, D.C.
4
�Table 1. Numbers of mourning doves banded in Colorado under the CPW banding permit, by age class
(AHY = after hatch year, HY = hatch year).
Age Class
Year
Banding Area
AHY
HY
Unknown
Total
2007 Prowers County
161
138
1
300
Logan County
25
21
0
46
Pueblo County
46
53
1
100
Total
232
212
2
446
2008 Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
18
34
117
43
72
9
293
175
4
83
57
26
94
439
7
0
0
0
0
0
7
200
38
200
100
98
103
739
2009 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Mesa County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Washington County
Total
50
8
14
162
63
33
26
356
48
91
9
38
37
4
71
298
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
4
99
99
23
200
100
37
100
658
2010 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Washington counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
92
43
66
125
66
25
417
101
157
34
75
132
20
519
7
0
0
0
1
0
8
200
200
100
200
199
45
944
2011 Adams County
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
124
26
82
159
83
70
544
65
174
18
41
115
26
439
11
0
0
0
2
4
17
200
200
100
200
200
100
1,000
5
�Year
Banding Area
2012 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
AHY
70
50
34
225
62
55
496
2013 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Douglas/Jefferson counties*
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
29
2
165
75
137
30
438
Unknown
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
Total
100
52
199
300
200
85
936
18
134
34
6
234
121
63
610
181
13
166
2
66
78
29
535
1
1
0
0
0
1
8
11
200
148
200
8
300
200
100
1,156
2014 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan/Morgan counties
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
70
97
94
10
217
127
34
649
116
3
81
33
82
73
61
449
14
0
0
0
1
0
5
20
200
100
175
43
300
200
100
1,118
2015 Adams County
Dolores/Montezuma counties
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Rio Grande/Saguache counties
Total
155
16
128
5
145
0
50
499
28
0
78
3
154
1
46
310
16
0
0
0
1
0
3
20
199
16
206
8
300
1
99
829
2016 Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
112
95
237
29
198
127
798
72
105
40
25
101
72
415
16
0
0
0
0
0
16
200
200
277
54
299
199
1,229
6
HY
�Year
2017
Banding Area
Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
AHY
109
131
152
154
16
562
2018
Adams County
Delta County
Larimer County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
2019
45
31
23
36
22
157
Unknown
4
0
0
0
0
4
Total
158
162
175
190
38
723
71
154
147
177
67
616
23
46
24
73
33
199
4
0
0
9
0
4
98
200
171
250
100
819
Adams County
Delta County
Dolores County
Larimer County
Morgan County
Prowers County
Total
79
59
2
257
3
287
687
19
121
0
45
38
53
276
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
99
180
2
302
41
340
964
2020
Adams County
Delta County
Dolores County
Larimer County
Morgan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
39
121
45
125
17
238
43
628
59
79
9
71
83
102
57
460
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
99
200
54
196
100
340
100
1,089
2021
Adams County
Delta County
Dolores County
Larimer County
Logan County
Morgan County
Prowers County
Total
31
133
41
137
18
7
293
660
120
66
3
39
81
2
47
358
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
151
199
44
176
100
9
340
1,019
7
HY
�Year
2022
Banding Area
Adams County
Delta County
Dolores County
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
AHY
139
151
87
102
15
346
39
879
2023
Adams County
Delta County
Dolores County
Larimer County
Logan County
Prowers County
Pueblo County
Total
155
101
12
157
52
130
68
675
2024
HY
59
29
6
16
85
54
22
271
Unknown
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
Total
200
181
93
118
100
400
61
1,153
66
24
2
38
48
21
71
270
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
222
125
14
195
100
151
139
946
Adams County
146
54
0
200
Delta County
94
23
0
117
Dolores County
82
11
0
93
Larimer County
126
130
0
256
Logan County
32
127
0
159
Prowers County
289
52
1
342
Pueblo County
50
36
0
86
Total
819
433
1
1,253
*Banding continued after 2013 in Douglas and Jefferson counties under a banding permit managed by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
8
�Table 2. Hunter recoveries, reported to the Bird Banding Laboratory as shot or found dead during hunting seasons through March 2025, of
mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007-2024.
Year of
banding
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Total
Number
banded
446
739
658
944
1,000
936
1,156
1,118
829
1,229
723
819
964
1,089
1,019
1,153
946
1,253
17,021
2007
4
4
2008
3
3
6
2009
2
8
3
13
2010
1
2
3
6
12
2011
0
1
2
5
13
21
2012
0
3
2
5
6
10
26
2013
0
1
0
2
2
3
12
20
2014
0
0
0
0
1
2
6
15
24
9
2015
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
9
13
2016
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
3
4
14
24
2017
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
9
10
21
2018
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
5
9
Year of recovery
2019 2020 2021
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
1
8
2
0
9
8
4
11
6
13
21
21
24
2022
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
3
3
14
25
47
2023
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
6
6
14
12
41
2024
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
8
5
16
33
Total
10
18
10
19
23
17
20
21
13
31
15
15
25
28
35
47
17
16
380
�Table 3. Hunter recovery locations (through March 2025) of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007-2024.
Mex = Mexico, Hon = Honduras.
Number
Recovery location
Banding County
banded
CO
Mex
TX
NM
AZ
AL
OK
CA
Hon
Total
Prowers
4,952
199
11
5
0
0
1
0
0
1
217
Adams
2,625
3
3
4
2
1
0
0
0
0
13
Larimer
2,247
17
9
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
30
Pueblo
2,023
12
7
3
1
1
0
0
0
0
24
Delta
1,564
55
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
60
Douglas/Jefferson
1,098
0
0
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
5
Morgan/Logan/Washington
1,171
16
10
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
27
Rio Grande/Saguache
664
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
Dolores/Montezuma
616
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Mesa
61
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Total
17,021
302
47
17
5
3
1
1
3
1
380
10
�Table 4. Recaptures of mourning doves banded under the CPW banding permit in Colorado, 2007–2024. A recapture is defined here as a dove
captured at least once during CPW’s banding operations in a particular year that was banded by CPW during a previous year.
Year of
banding
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
Total
Number
banded
446
739
658
944
1,000
936
1,156
1,118
829
1,229
723
819
964
1,089
1,019
1,153
946
15,768
2008
1
1
2009
1
7
8
2010
0
2
5
7
2011
0
2
5
8
15
2012
1
0
0
1
6
8
2013
1
0
0
0
4
6
11
2104
0
0
1
2
0
1
10
14
2015
0
0
0
0
1
3
5
12
21
11
2016
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
4
8
15
2017
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
7
11
28
49
2018
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
2
20
23
48
Year of recapture
2019 2020 2021
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
3
2
0
7
5
3
12
6
1
17
11
1
21
5
11
40
47
22
2022
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
1
1
8
12
23
49
2023
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
2
4
1
3
12
22
47
2024
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
2
6
14
23
49
Total
4
11
11
14
11
12
21
26
29
66
45
37
36
28
41
36
23
451
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Avian Research
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Colorado Mourning Dove Banding Program Update
Description
An account of the resource
<span>Annual Colorado Parks & Wildlife mourning dove banding report that summarizes banding activities and band recovery information. Annual banding of mourning doves is directly used to monitor the Central Management Unit population and make management decisions, including setting annual hunting seasons. CPW has successfully contributed to this cooperative banding program every year since 2007. <br /><br />USFWS annual Mourning Dove Population Status reports can be found <a href="https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/mourning-dove-population-status-reports">here</a>.</span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Colorado Parks and Wildlife
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT - NON-COMMERCIAL USE PERMITTED</a>