Estimating crippling loss from hunting with multistate models: a case study on northern bobwhites

Hunting as a recreational pursuit provides an important ecosystem service worldwide. Harvest management plays a vital role in regulating wildlife take to ensure long‐term population sustainability and meet value‐based objectives (e.g. hunter satisfaction). However, managers rarely have complete control or observability of harvest mortality. A particularly uncertain component is the number of animals killed but not recovered, known as crippling loss. We examined this issue in a commonly hunted species in the USA, the northern bobwhite Colinus virginianus , which shares life‐history traits with many game birds. Using an extensive dataset spanning three hunting seasons across four sites, we parameterized a multistate survival model to estimate survival, hunter‐recovered mortality, and crippling loss. We also explored field‐observed crippling rates to estimate the difference between realized and perceived rates of crippling. Estimated total mortality from harvest was 0.11 (95% CrI = 0.10–0.13). The probability of a bobwhite being harvested and recovered was 0.08 (95% CrI = 0.07–0.09), while the probability of being shot but not recovered (i.e. crippled) was 0.03 (95% CrI = 0.02–0.05). Crippling represented 29% (95% CrI = 22–38%) of total harvest. For field‐observed crippling, the average observer reported that 25% of total harvest was due to crippling loss, though this was underestimated compared to the multistate model for some sites and years. This may reflect the limited ability of hunters/observers to detect birds that were wounded but died later. Our findings demonstrate that crippling loss can represent a substantial and overlooked component of total harvest mortality. If unaccounted for, this source of mortality may lead to overharvest. The modeling framework presented here offers an approach for estimating crippling loss for species lacking direct estimates. In the absence of species‐specific data, our estimates may serve as provisional values to support conservative harvest management.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Wildlife Biology
Published
2026-04-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01631
Primary Topic
Avian ecology and behavior
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Estimating crippling loss from hunting with multistate models: a case study on northern bobwhites

Holly Lott, Geoff Beane, Justin Rectenwald, Nicole M. Nemeth et al.
Wildlife Biology
Avian ecology and behavior
article

Estimating crippling loss from hunting with multistate models: a case study on northern bobwhites

Holly Lott, Geoff Beane, Justin Rectenwald, Nicole M. Nemeth, W. J. Lewis, Alexander L. Jackson, Melanie R. Kunke, Michael A. Hazelbaker, Amanda S. Cramer, D. Clay Sisson, James A. Martin
article en

Abstract

Hunting as a recreational pursuit provides an important ecosystem service worldwide. Harvest management plays a vital role in regulating wildlife take to ensure long‐term population sustainability and meet value‐based objectives (e.g. hunter satisfaction). However, managers rarely have complete control or observability of harvest mortality. A particularly uncertain component is the number of animals killed but not recovered, known as crippling loss. We examined this issue in a commonly hunted species in the USA, the northern bobwhite Colinus virginianus , which shares life‐history traits with many game birds. Using an extensive dataset spanning three hunting seasons across four sites, we parameterized a multistate survival model to estimate survival, hunter‐recovered mortality, and crippling loss. We also explored field‐observed crippling rates to estimate the difference between realized and perceived rates of crippling. Estimated total mortality from harvest was 0.11 (95% CrI = 0.10–0.13). The probability of a bobwhite being harvested and recovered was 0.08 (95% CrI = 0.07–0.09), while the probability of being shot but not recovered (i.e. crippled) was 0.03 (95% CrI = 0.02–0.05). Crippling represented 29% (95% CrI = 22–38%) of total harvest. For field‐observed crippling, the average observer reported that 25% of total harvest was due to crippling loss, though this was underestimated compared to the multistate model for some sites and years. This may reflect the limited ability of hunters/observers to detect birds that were wounded but died later. Our findings demonstrate that crippling loss can represent a substantial and overlooked component of total harvest mortality. If unaccounted for, this source of mortality may lead to overharvest. The modeling framework presented here offers an approach for estimating crippling loss for species lacking direct estimates. In the absence of species‐specific data, our estimates may serve as provisional values to support conservative harvest management.

Wildlife Biology
University of Georgia (US), Tall Timbers Research Station and Land Conservancy (US)
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 20%
Avian ecology and behavior
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.