Interesting thoughts! Turkeys have made a huge comeback in New England, but they are still very dispersed and a forest bird there; however, it is not unusual to see them foraging beside the highway (perhaps a new predator emerging?) I think you have a very valid concern about their activity given that they are probably around in greater numbers than previously, and perhaps more concentrated as well, as you surmise. Their actions on the leaf litter, when combined with the effects of non-native worms in some areas (these worms are decimating the duff layer, eating it at an amazing rate - many understory plants rely on it), might be very damaging to understory plants. This is a graduate project waiting to happen...

I hadn't thought about understory - my comment is that they seem pretty dumb about vehicles. I saw my first wild turkey three years ago and now we see flocks to 15-20. But we have to slow down when driving on our dirt road, as they don't seem to recognize the danger of cars. Will they become another hazard as deer are? They're not yet prevalent enough to be near highways.

Numbers in New Jersey have exploded in the past 15 years. In the southwest part of the state you can occasionally see flocks of close to 100 birds. A few years ago during a Christmas Bird Count we flushed something like 80 out of corn stubble. It was quite something to see so many of these huge birds flying up into an oak tree. One downside that comes to mind is peach growers are reporting crop damage from these ravenous butterballs and testy toms will occasionally block traffic.

I can only guess that the abundance of cropland as a food alternative to more natural and more limited sources is the key here. The very young birds have LOTS of predators here, and excepting bobcats, mountain lions and possibly bears (assuming they would be opportunistic feeders and take eggs and very young poults when they could), our predators are doing well in numbers. It surely comes down to nutrition.
We live in a core area of +- 200 acres, which is centered around a stream corridor and its remaining tree cover, which is perfect for turkeys as they are drawn to water and oaks. The two hens that we were most "in touch" with both raised broods of about 11 chicks and must have nested somewhere quite close to the house as we saw them nearly every other day, with one hen roosting her brood about 40 yards off the back steps once they were old enough to make it up into the trees. There are now about 9-10 birds in this flock alone, and I am wondering if it is the remains of just one brood (down from 11) or if it is a combined flock consisting of the remnants of both of our spring broods (down from approx. 22-24, a loss of over half)
I guess it really makes no difference-the turkey population is leaping ahead at an astounding rate!

I was concerned when they introduced turkeys [never native here] to our eastern montane ecosystems and native plant communities because of our oak woodland. I knew turkeys consumed acorns, which is food for native deer, birds and small mammals. Overall, our native oak trees are not doing well in California. This is another concern.

What do all of you think about THAT ecologist [eco-illiterate] who wants to transport and introduce displaced African species, many of which are predators. Talk about an ecological disaster!

We all know that most recorded extinctions occurred on Earth's islands when European explorers and fisherman introduced non-native European rats and the domestic cat to the island ecosystems. This was a massive spasm of extinction in birds and small to mid-sized native wildlife. The domestic cat caused over twice as many of these extinctions as the second agent, the European rat.

When fishermen introduced domestic cats to Guadalupe Island, three birds fell extinct and at least, one lizard. This was just ONE, tiny island.

Well, this ecologist met with Ted Turner [at his ranch] to mull over his idea of introducing African lions to the western USA. I hope Turner is ecologically savvy enough to thwart this potentially ecological pandora's box. Couldn't believe this! The introduction of alien, non-native species is a primary cause of extinction globally and historically.

Tessyt, if I'm thinking of the guy you're thinking about, his argument is a little deeper than you realize - many of the plants and animals extant on our continent did evolve in conjuntion with lion and elephant species (sabertooths and mammoth/mastodon species) and it was humans that played a role in wiping out the original North American megafauna. He's therefore arguing that it would be interesting to reintroduce the closest living approximations to what used to roam this continent.

It would be a fascinating experiment, but I couldn't support it, because African elephants are not mastodons, and African lions are not sabertooths. If you can't bring back the species that belonged here, don't mess things up more by bringing in substitutes that evolved elsewhere. However, it is worth bearing in mind that there are plants now lacking their original dispersal mechanisms because of the extinction of the North American megafauna (for example, Osage oranges are believed to have been dispersed by mammoths).

If he's really serious, he should think about reintroducing cheetahs to the west - they evolved here in conjunction with pronghorns (ever wonder why they can run as fast as they do? Now you know!). I'm just kidding - mostly...

Actually, isn't the jaguar almost extinct in the U.S.? He is native to the Southwest.

In San Diego, where I live, we had jaguars, pronghorns, condors and grizzly bears. Grizzlies would comb the beaches looking for dead whales. They say that when the first explorers to California showed up, pronghorns were everywhere and greeted the explorers as they pulled into San Diego's natural harbor.

There is another arguement for that great mammal die-off. Some believe it was not caused by human hunters but climate change. Most of Earth's vast spasms of extinction were caused by climate change.

By the way, didn't the American bison survive the great mammal die-off as he is the oldest mammal in North America? If they are going to introduce a predator in the West, why not the jaguar as his disappearance is fairly recent. Oh, well.

I sit at my computer and stare out the window to the mesa in the distance and dream of seeing a jaguar there. Wouldn't be too bad to see a Grizz too. take care

The extinction of the North American megafauna was almost certainly not due to any one event or cause - major factors likely included increased human predation; novel diseases introduced by humans and other animals crossing land bridges; and climate change (which would have altered flora, as well). No one would necessarily have been enough to wipe out the megafauna, but the combined effects were too much to survive. The bison was the largest herbivore to survive the event, and the grizzly the largest predator. There were much larger animals on this continent at one time. We also had an impressive range of big cats.

Jaguars did once range as far north as Washington state and Nebraska, but no later than the Pleistocene (for those not familiar with geologic time periods, the Pliocene was from approx. 5 MYA to 1.6 MYA and the Pleistocene from 1.6 MYA to .01 MYA. From .01 MYA to the present is known as the Holocene). Jaguars were typically found where North American lions were absent (which had reached Peru by the Pleistocene). Both were also larger than their surviving modern day counterparts. We also had tigers in Alaska during the last 100,000 years!

Sabertooth cats were present in many parts of North America during the Pliocene and Pleistocene. These included Dinofelis, Nimravides (over 3' tall at the shoulder), Machairodus (almost 4' tall at the shoulder), Homotherium and Smilodon (the famous La Brea fossils are S. fatalis). Smilodon populator, larger than the La Brea specimens, was the size of a large lion (4' tall at the shoulder).

The cheetahs that populated North America (Miracinonyx) were larger than African cheetahs, and less specialized for speed; there were also European cheetahs that were larger as well and were believed to have had the heavier coats of a northern animal (like a snow leopard or Siberian tiger). They would have done fine in Wyoming in the winter. Alas, African cheetahs would not.

Still, imagine what our continent would be like if these big cats were around today! Alan Turner's "The Big Cats and their Fossil Relatives" is a great (if technical) read about the living and extinct great cats.

Thank you Jillmcm: I knew the bison survived but did not realize the Grizz survived as well. I enjoyed reading all the information of great mammals that were here during Earth's periods.

Thank you for sharing with me,

One big point that is being overlooked is that although you can sometimes bring back particular ANIMALS that once occupied a given area, the ENVIRONMENT those animals once belonged in is no longer the same, the chemistry has changed! We have groups of people here locally that want to bring back elk, which were plentiful here when the state was prairie and woodland. Look around...how much of those complex ecosystems survive today? And those forest and prairie fragments that DO survive are actually inherently different from their predecessors. You can't just plop down a bunch of elk into a completely different scene and think you know what the consequences/interactions will be. The same goes for my turkeys. On the surface things seem all well and good and a native has been brought back to us. But what intricate changes are occurring?
I view reintroduction of species as a wonderful notion and wish it could be done, but in reality any time h. sapiens goes about trying to 'fix' things I tend to take a step back.

Just reminded of a classic example last night while watching a rerun of Strange Days on Planet Earth (that was the name wasn't it? Ed Norton hosted...) island gets rats from people. SO....people bring in monitor lizards to eat rats, which ignore rats and instead eat people's chickens. People then bring in cane toads(sigh), which are toxic and yes, kill lizards but unexpectedly are also toxic meals for the cats on the island (hmmm, another nonnative) which up to then WERE the best control method for .......the rats.

I'm not ignoring the ecosystem issue on purpose - I just think it goes without saying! :)

But on a positive note, the reintroduction of wolves to Yellowstone has actually resulted in the recreation of habitat that had been lost when elk were free to browse wherever they wanted. When elk could forage wherever they wanted (and whenever they wanted), they tended to completely strip riparian areas of their normal shrubby cover. Beavers disappeared and so did the birds and animals that used that cover. Bring back the wolves, and the elk stopped foraging so brazenly - the cover came back, so did the beaver and so did the rest of that riparian community. Coyotes were also brought under control as the wolves would kill them whenever they could.

Sometimes species reintroduction works, but I think we need to think in decades-long time spans of absence, not centuries... The RE is key, too - you have to replace exactly what was lost, and not just what you think is a close approximation. The example you mentioned is all about the introduction of exotics, not animals that were there and were extirpated.

I think the idea to keep in mind is that we have no idea what will happen when we fool with an ecosystem. Natural systems are incredibly complex, almost beyond our ability to comprehend. It's always wise to be cautious. The stuff about all the consequences of the reintroduction of wolves to Yellowstone is fascinating, not least because the scientists who conducted the experiment seem to have had no idea in advance that the consequences would be so wide-ranging.

Elaine is right that there were some surprises with the reintroduction of wolves but the reintroduction was the result of careful thought and planning. Far more of the introductions and reintroductions in this country have been conducted without much thought about the consequences.

Thanks, jillmcm, for the information on cheetahs. I assumed there were significant differences between the extinct American species and the modern African species. Introducing African cheetahs to America seems shortsighted. It seems that the new environmental pressures would be different enough to change cheetah evolution.