Photo by Peter Knapp

Prepared by: Kirsten Winter (kwinter@fs.fed.us)

Cleveland National Forest

10845 Rancho Bernardo Road

Suite 200

San Diego, CA 92127

RECOMMENDED CITATION:

Winter, K. 2002. Mountain Quail (Oreortyx pictus). In The Coastal Scrub and Chaparral Bird Conservation Plan: a strategy for protecting and managing coastal scrub and chaparral habitats and associated birds in California. California Partners in Flight. http://www.prbo.org/calpif/htmldocs/scrub.html

SHORTCUTS:

range map

action plan summary

references

SUBSPECIES STATUS: Five recognized subspecies (AOU 1957). Some authors have found subspecies distinctions dubious as they are based on poorly defined characters (Grinnell and Miller 1944).

0.p. palmeri (Oberholser, 1923 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999): Occurs in western coast ranges from Washington south to San Luis Obispo County, California. Back is dark brown, with dark brown color often extending forward to obscure the gray of the upper back and nape. Forehead is dark, belly pale.

O.p.pictus (Douglas 1829 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999): Distributed in California from the central Sierra Nevada and interior Coast Ranges of northwestern California north to west Cascade Range of Oregon and Washington. Back is medium brown, sometimes extending forward as a buff tint to gray of upper back and nape. Forehead medium, belly pale.

O.p. eremophilus (van Rossem 1937 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999): Found from the southern Sierra Nevada and central coast ranges (south of San Luis Obispo County) of California south through the Transverse, Peninsular and Coastal Ranges of southern California to the Mexican border. Brown of upperparts is pale, contrasting with slate gray of upper back and nape, forehead medium, belly dark.

O.p. russelli (Miller 1946 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999): Found in the Little San Bernardino Mountains of California. Brown of upperparts is gray, forehead pale, belly dark.

O.p. confinis (Anthony 1889 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999): Found in Baja CaliforniaNorte, in the Sierra Juarez and Sierra San Pedro Martir. Brown of back medium (more grayish than northern populations), breast darker gray than eremophilus.

MANAGEMENT STATUS: No special status. California Harvest Species.

Conservation groups filed a petition with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in March 2000, seeking endangered species status for the northeastern populations of Mountain Quail. The Mountain Quail is the only quail native to Idaho, northern Nevada, Washington and Oregon. It has virtually disappeared from all portions of this vast interior landscape. Destruction of riparian shrub plants due to livestock grazing, dams, cheatgrass, weeds, and brush clearing are cited as reasons for the decline in these populations of mountain quail (Brennan 1994 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

DISTRIBUTION:

HISTORICAL DISTRIBUTION:

California: Populations in the the Sierra Nevada and in coastal ranges of California appear to be stable. According to Grinnell and Miller (1944) describe a historical distribution for this species that closely parallels the current distribution, although they also mention localized extirpations of Mountain Quail in Sonoma County and near desert springs. Roberson and Tenney (1993) found little change in the distribution of Mountain Quail in Monterey County compared with records from 1906.

Outside of CA: Historical data on distribution is lacking for most areas. Mountain Quail are known to have declined precipitously in Idaho since 1938 (Brennan 1990 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999) and have declined elsewhere in the intermountain west (Brennan 1994; Vogel and Reese 1995 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

CURRENT BREEDING DISTRIBUTION:

Primary range is Sierra Nevada, Cascade and Coast ranges, with substantial disjunct populations in the intermountain west and in Baja California, Mexico (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Mountain Quail are common to uncommon residents in most montane regions of California (Zeiner et al. 1990). Gaines (1975) found a density of 2 Mountain Quail in a 13.7 hectare plot in Napa County. Barrows (1979) reported a density of 0.5 Mountain Quail per 8.1 hectare plot in Solano County. Fromer (1981) reported densities of 3.7 Mountain Quail per mile of transect in appropriate habitat within the Agua Tibia Wilderness, Cleveland National Forest, San Diego County. Fromer (1981) reported densities of 3.7 Mountain Quail per mile of transect in appropriate habitat within the Agua Tibia Wilderness, Cleveland National Forest, San Diego County.

Breeding Bird Atlas:

San Diego BBA - Found throughout mountain areas of San Diego County. Between 1997 and 2000, breeding was confirmed in many areas within the Laguna and Palomar Mountains. The highest daily counts of Mountain Quail (more than 10 per day, in an 9 sq. mile atlas square) and the areas with the most records of confirmed breeding, were concentrated in the the mountains at elevations of 1000 to 2000 meters (P. Unitt, pers. comm.).

Los Angeles BBA – Preliminary data, from surveys between 1995 and 1999, show that Mountain Quail are found throughout the mountainous areas of Los Angeles County, with breeding confirmed at many locations. Estimated densities ranged from 1-9 to 100-999 per 10 sq. mile block (L. Allen, pers. comm.).

Monterey BBA – Found throughout the mountains of Monterey County (Roberson and Tenney 1993).

Washington State BBA - Smith et al. (1997) reported that Mountain Quail are currently found along the Columbia River in southwestern Washington, on the west side of Puget Sound in northwest Washington, and in the southeast corner of Washington in the Blue Mountains. The Columbia River and Blue Mountain populations may be native. Puget Sound populations are introduced. Mountain Quail have formerly been introduced in other parts of Washington but these introductions have not been successful.

WINTERING DISTRIBUTION:

Overall wintering distribution of CA subspecies: Same as breeding range, with downslope migration in areas that receive snow. Winters in shrub-dominated habitat.

ECOLOGY:

AVERAGE TERRITORY SIZE:

Not known. McLean (1930, in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999) reported that 6 coveys occupied a 10 sq. km. area with little overlap in home ranges over a period of 10-15 years. Line transect sampling during the breeding season in four areas of California detected 8.9 individual/100 ha in the Modoc Plateau, 21.0/100 ha in the Coast Range, 27.6/ha in the northern Sierra Nevada, and 30.0/100ha in the Klamath Mountains (Brennan and Block 1986 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Roberson and Tenney (1993) reported that nesting pairs occupy territories of 2 to 20 hectares each in Monterey County.

TIME OF OCCURRENCE AND SEASONAL MOVEMENTS:

Mountain Quail make seasonal altitudinal migrations, apparently in response to snow levels. No other New World Quail so consistently makes seasonal movements between breeding and wintering areas (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Seasonal movements may occur over distances up to 32 km. (Zeiner et al. 1990).

ARRIVAL DATE ON BREEDING GROUNDS:

Migration timing and routes are not known for any population (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Egg dates are between April 7 and August 15 (Grinnell and Miller 1918).

FOOD HABITS:

FORAGING STRATEGY:

Mountain Quail forage in shrub and forest communities under the canopy and at the edge of shrub or tree cover; average distance from protective cover when foraging was 1.5 meters in central coastal California (Gutierrez 1977 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999, Gutierrez 1980).

DIET:

Primary foods are plant materials throughout the year, with 0-5% of the diet composed of invertebrates (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Invertebrates rarely exceed 20% of the diet, and are most important in the diet of young quail (0-8 weeks) and adult females (Ormiston 1966 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Consumes seeds, fruits and flowers of perennial and annual plants (Gutierrez 1977). Laying females will eat bone fragments (Grinnell and Storer 1924). Food items include acorns, pine nuts, fruits and seeds of shrubs (Ceanothus, Arctostaphylos, Toxicodendron radicans), bulbs, seeds and leaves of weeds, forbs, and legumes (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Mountain Quail will specialize on locally available food so diet may vary considerably between areas.

DRINKING:

Under dry conditions, requires free water, and drinks frequently (Rahm 1938, Miller and Thompson 1948 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Drinks an average of 9.8 cubic cm. of water per drinking episode, and drinks 2-3 times per day (Rahm 1938). Does not require free water when moist vegetation is available (Gutierrez 1980).

BREEDING HABITAT:

Typically found in shrub-dominated communities such as chaparral or desert scrub, at elevations ranging from 700 to 3000+ meters. In coastal areas in northern California, may occur near sea level. Also found in mixed conifer/ hardwood, redwood, pine, white fir, red fir, pinyon-juniper, and hardwood forests. May occur in foothill woodlands if shrubs are present, in aspen stands associated with sagebrush, and in riparian and oak woodlands. Associated with dense vegetative cover (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

NEST SUBSTRATE:

Needs study. Nest is placed on ground, on bare mineral soil or in grass or leaf litter, usually under a very dense overhead cover of shrubs or tree limbs (Bent 1932).

NEST CONCEALMENT:

Nest is typically well-concealed and cannot be seen until it is approached at a distance of 0.5 meters or less (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

VEGETATION SURROUNDING THE NEST:

DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES IN CANOPY:

Often under pine saplings, pinyon limbs, or shrubs (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Often nests on steep hillsides or adjacent to a steep bank in second-growth forest or chaparral, usually under or against protective cover. Nest records from the Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology report 63 nests with the following placements: 35 under shrubs, 14 against logs, 6 against rocks, 4 under brush piles, 2 under tree limbs, and 2 in grass.

AVERAGE SHRUB COVER:

Average cover was 45.8% in one study (Gutierrez 1980).

DOMINANT SHRUB SPECIES:

Varies by habitat type.

SLOPE:

Usually associated with steep slopes or rugged areas, but these are not habitat requirements (Brennan et al. 1987).

ASPECT:

No information. In arid zones, vegetation cover is typically denser, and more favorable for Mountain Quail, on north and east-facing slopes.

DISTANCE TO WATER:

Broods usually were found no more than 0.8 km from water (Miller and Stebbins 1964). Availability of water is a limiting factor in the drier portions of the range, and reproduction is strongly linked to the amount of rainfall in arid regions (Guteirrez and Delehanty 1999).

NEST TYPE:

Nest is a rough bowl constructed on the ground, lined with vegetation from the immediate vicinity of the nest such as grass, feathers, and pine needles (Harrison 1979, Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

BREEDING BIOLOGY:

TYPICAL BREEDING DENSITIES:

Not well understood. McLean (1930 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999) reported that 6 coveys occupied a 10 sq. km. area with little overlap in home ranges over a period of 10-15 years. Line transect sampling during the breeding season in four areas of California detected 8.9 individual/100 ha in the Modoc Plateau, 21.0/100 ha in the Coast Range, 27.6/ha in the northern Sierra Nevada, and 30.0/100ha in the Klamath Mountains (Brennan and Block 1986).

DISPLAYS:

Aggressive interactions may take the form of sparring, pecking, or chasing. (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Male and female may perform "sideways throwing" of nesting material for each other, which is thought to be part of a ritualized nest-building display (Harrison 1967). Also performs other displays common to many galliformes, including fanning of wings and tail, raising of contour feathers and tidbitting behavior, which are usually associated with courtship (Johnsgard 1973, Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Captive adults perform a ritualized appeasement behavior, the Stand/Crouch display (Delehanty 1997 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). In this display, one quail crouches on the ground while the dominant quail stands over the head and neck of the crouching quail. This display is used to resolve aggressive interactions and to establish dominance. Male/female pairs may also perform the display as part of courtship. A "broken-wing" display may be used to distract a predator from nests or young (Roberson and Tenney 1993).

MATING SYSTEM:

Little information. Usually described as monogamous, but degree of polygamy and role of each parent in care of young is not well understood (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

CLUTCH SIZE:

Few data. In California, twenty-nine clutches contained an average of 9.9 eggs with a range of 6 to 14 (Miller 1950 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

INCUBATING SEX:

Both sexes incubate and develop brood patches (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

INCUBATION PERIOD:

Approximately 24 days (Heekin et al. 1994 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

DEVELOPMENT AT HATCHING:

Precocial.

NESTLING PERIOD:

Young fledge within a few hours of hatching.

PARENTAL CARE:

Needs study. An unaided male has been observed rearing a brood, as has an unaided female (Delehanty 1997 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Broods of young are commonly observed being tended by one or two adults, and anecdotal accounts indicate that the male may raise the first brood while the female raises the second brood (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999)

POST FLEDGING BIOLOGY OF OFFSPRING:

Fledglings are precocial and leave the nest within hours of hatching. Coveys of 1-2 adults and many juveniles, which are presumed to be family groups, remain together until the next breeding season (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

POST BREEDING SOCIAL BEHAVIOR:

Migrates downslope during winter; may form mixed flocks with California Quail during winter season (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). In a sample of 18 coveys of Mountain Quail in Joshua Tree National Monument, the average covey size was 9 with a range of 3 to 20 (Miller and Stebbins 1964).

DELAYED BREEDING:

Both sexes are believed to breed as yearlings in the wild, but there is little direct documentation. In captivity, both sexes regularly breed as yearlings (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

NUMBER OF BROODS:

Single-brooded (Zeiner et al.1990).

BROOD PARASITISM:

No information. Not expected to be a factor since Mountain Quail young are precocial. Parents would not care for altricial brood-parasites such as cowbirds. Where the species co-occur, Mountain Quail and California Quail may deposit eggs in each other’s nests (Grinnell and Miller 1918).

LANDSCAPE FACTORS:

ELEVATION:

Suitable habitat is present in areas between sea level and 3,000 meters or greater (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Quail may occur near or at sea level in the northern portion of their range. In Orange and San Diego counties, Mountain Quail are typically found at elevations between 700 meters and 2000 meters (Unitt 1984, Hamilton and Willick 1996).

FRAGMENTATION:

No specific studies; however Mountain Quail avoid edges. Fragmentation of shrub habitat may have an adverse effect on this species by making it more vulnerable to predation.

PATCH SIZE:

No detailed information. McLean (1930) reported that 6 coveys occupied a 10 sq. km. area with little overlap in home ranges over a period of 10-15 years.

DISTURBANCE (natural or managed):

Timber harvest may benefit Mountain Quail by converting forested areas to shrublands (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Effects of wildfire need additional study. Fires may have short-term adverse effects due to temporary removal of habitat. Over the long term, Mountain Quail may benefit from fires and colonize new areas as the plant communities recover (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Intense grazing prevents the maturation and development of food plants (Belding 1878, Miller 1950 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Hunting is not thought to be a major source of mortality due to the difficulty of hunting this secretive bird in rugged terrain (Grinnell et al. 1918, Bent 1932).

ADJACENT LAND USE:

Habitat is increasingly threatened by development, particularly in the Sierra Nevada foothills (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

SENSITIVITY TO HUMAN-INDUCED DISTURBANCE:

Results from several studies indicate that Mountain Quail are tolerant of manipulation of adults and observation of nests (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

PESTICIDE USE:

Mortality from poisoned grain has been reported (Linsdale 1932).

PREDATORS:

Cooper’s Hawks (Accipiter cooperi) and other accipiters are major predators of adults and young (Rahm 1938, Miller and Stebbins 1964, Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). Other predators include Great Horned Owl (Bubo virginianus), coyote (Canis latrans) bobcat (Lynx rufus), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), weasels, and rattlesnakes (Kellogg 1916, Mclean 1930, Pierce 1933, Miller and Thomson 1948, Miller 1950 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999, Miller and Stebbins 1964).

EXOTIC SPECIES INVASION/ENCROACHMENT:

Type-conversion of shrublands to non-native grasslands in the intermountain west is one of several factors believed to be responsible for the decline of Mountain Quail populations in that region (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

DEMOGRAPHY AND POPULATION TREND:

AGE AND SEX RATIOS:

No information. Sexes are not readily distinguishable in the field (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

PRODUCTIVITY MEASURE(S):

Needs study. Heekin et al. (1994 in Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999) found that 10 of 13 clutches hatched. Reproductive success is strongly influenced by the amount of winter and spring rainfall in deserts and in areas with Mediterranean climates (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999). In years with below-average rainfall, Mountain Quail may forgo breeding attempts (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

SURVIVORSHIP:

Data are lacking. Fluctuation in age ratios from year to year suggests that there is rapid turnover of populations (Gutierrez and Delehanty 1999).

DISPERSAL:

No information.

POPULATION TREND: http://www.mbr.nbs.gov/bbs/

In California, Sauer et al. (1999) report an increasing trend of 1.16% per year between 1966 and 1998. The p-value for this trend is not significant and there is potential ambiguity with BBS data from montane races.

MANAGEMENT ISSUES:

Development of private inholdings could fragment habitat and introduce non-native predators (dogs, cats). Timber harvest may have both adverse and beneficial effects.

Type conversion of chaparral and scrub habitats adversely affects the quail.

Effects of wildfire are not well understood.

Hunting pressure may have contributed to declines in the Great Basin. Hunting is banned in some areas.

Grazing and agriculture may damage or destroy habitat.

ASSOCIATED SPECIES:

Fox Sparrow, Sage Sparrow, Bewick’s Wren, Western Scrub Jay, Wrentit, California Thrasher, Spotted Towhee

MONITORING METHODS AND RESEARCH NEEDS:

1. Support and encourage ongoing breeding bird atlas efforts in Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and California. Integrate results from these atlases to provide information on the species distribution and breeding and wintering habitat requirements. Encourage Quail Unlimited to get involved in and support these efforts.

2. Design studies to evaluate the effects of wildfire, grazing, and timber harvests on Mountain Quail populations.

3. Design studies to acquire additional information on natural history of the species.

4. Investigate taxonomy and clarify subspecies status based on morphological and genetic characteristics.

5. Investigate productivity of populations and mating systems.

ACTION PLAN SUMMARY

SPECIES: Mountain Quail, Oreortyx pictus

STATUS:

No special status at this time. California Harvest Species.

Five recognized subspecies. See full species account for details.

BBS trend data (1982-1991) for California, Oregon, and Washington found stable populations although the sample size may have been too small to estimate trends. Appears to have been extirpated from Idaho. Large population declines have occurred in eastern Washington, eastern Oregon, and Nevada due to degradation of riparian and brush habitat by grazing, exclusion of fire, and water extraction. Conservation groups filed a petition with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in March 2000, seeking endangered species status for the northeastern populations of Mountain Quail.

HABITAT NEEDS:

Mountain Quail are resident in the mountains of far western North America including the Cascades, Coast Ranges, Sierra Nevada, Transverse, and Peninsular Ranges. Desert populations occur in the White, Inyo, Panamint, Grapevine, Coso, and Argus Mountains of eastern California. In Nevada, populations occur in the Toiyabe, Desatoya, Jackson and Santa Rosa Ranges and there are disjunct populations in northeast Oregon, southeast Washington and southwest Idaho. The northernmost population is on Vancouver Island, Canada where this species was introduced. Seasonal altitudinal migration seen in some populations to avoid snow. These seasonal migrations may cover distances of up to 32 kilometers.

Typically found in shrub dominated communities such as chaparral or desert scrub, at elevations ranging from sea level to 3000+ meters. Also found in hardwood, mixed conifer hardwood, and hardwood forests. Associated with dense vegetative cover.

Investigators have provided various estimates of population densities ranging from 9 to 30 individuals per 100 hectares.

Feeds on seeds, fruits and flowers of perennial plants and annual grasses and forbs. Plant material constitutes 80-95% of the diet. Also eats grit, and laying females will consume bone fragments. Forages under canopy and at edge of forest and shrub communities.

Nests on the ground in a concealed location, usually with overhead cover of shrubs or trees. Average clutch size is 10 eggs in California.

CONCERNS:

Much of the habitat occupied by the Mountain Quail in California is under state or federal management and protection. The US Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and National Park Service are the primary landowners.

Possible concerns include:

1. Support and encourage ongoing breeding bird atlas efforts in Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and California. Integrate results from these atlases to provide information on the species distribution and breeding and wintering habitat requirements. Encourage Quail Unlimited to get involved in and support these efforts.

2. Design and implement studies to evaluate the effects of wildfire, grazing, and timber harvests on Mountain Quail populations.

3. Encourage local planning authorities (cities, counties) to protect habitat through appropriate zoning such as "open space".

4. Design and implement studies to acquire additional information on natural history of the species.

5. Investigate taxonomy and clarify subspecies status based on morphological and genetic characteristics.

6. Investigate productivity of populations and mating systems.

SCIENTIFIC REFERENCES:

Allen, Larry. 2000. Personal communication. Coordinator for the Los Angeles Breeding Bird Atlas, Los Angeles Natural History Museum, Los Angeles, CA.

American Ornithologists Union. 1957. Check-list of North American birds. 5^th edition. Lord Baltimore Press, Baltimore, MD.

Anthony, A.W. 1889. New birds from Lower California, Mexico. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci. Ser.2, 2: 73-82.

Belding, L. 1878. A partial listing of the birds of central California. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1: 388-462.

Bent. A. C. 1932. Life histories of North American gallinaceous birds: order Galliformes and Columbiformes. U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 162.

Brennan, L.A. 1990. What happened to the Mountain Quail in Idaho? Quail Unlimited Magazine 9:42-43, 69.

Brennan, L.A. 1994. Broad-scale declines in four species of North American quail: an examination of possible causes. Pp. 160-169 in Sustainable ecological systems: implementing an ecological approach to land management. GTR RM-247. Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experimental Station, Fort Collins, CO.

Brennan, L.A. and W. M. Block. 1986. Line transect estimates of Mountain Quail density. Journal of Wildlife Management. 50:373-377.

Brennan, L.A., W. M.Block, and R.J. Gutierrez. 1987. Habitat use by Mountain Quail in northern California. Condor 89: 66-74.

Delehanty, D.J. 1995. Incubation and brood-rearing by a wild male Mountain Quail. Western Birds 26:46-48.

Delehanty, D.J. 1997. Mountain Quail reproduction and restoration in the Great Basin. Ph.D. dissertation. Univ. of Nevada. Reno.

Douglas, D. 1829. Observations on some species of Tetrao and Ortyx, natives of North America, with descriptions of four new species of the former and two of the latter genus. Phil. Mag., new ser. 5:73-74.

Edminster, F.C. 1954. American game birds of field and forest. Castle Books, New York, NY.

Fromer, P.S. 1981. Agua Tibia Wilderness Area Wildlife Survey. Prepared by RECON Consultants for Cleveland National Forest. Unpubl. report, 64 pp. plus attachments.

Garrett, K. and J. Dunn. 1981. Birds of southern California: status and distribution. Artisan Press, Los Angeles, California.

Grinnell, J. and A.H. Miller. 1944. The distribution of the birds of California, pp.367-369. Pacific Coast Avifauna no. 27.

Grinnell, J. and T.I. Storer. 1924. Animal life in Yosemite. Univ. of Calif. Press, Berkeley, CA.

Grinnell, J., H.C.Bryant, and T.I. Storer. 1918. The game birds of California. Univ. of Calif. Press, Berkeley. CA.

Gutierrez, R.J. 1977. Comparative ecology of the Mountain and California Quail in Carmel Valley, CA. Ph.D. diss., Univ. of California, Berkeley.

Gutierrez, R. J. 1980. Comparative ecology of the Mountain and California Quail in Carmel Valley, CA. Living Bird 18:71-93.

Gutierrez, R.J. and D. J. Delehanty. 1999. Mountain Quail (Oreortyx pictus) In the Birds of North America, No. 457 (A. Poole and F. Gill, eds.). The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA.

Hamilton, R.A. and D.R. Willick. 1996. The birds of Orange County: status and distribution. Sea and Sage Press, Sea and Sage Audubon Society, Irvine, CA. 150 pp plus appendices.

Harrison, C.J.O. 1967. Sideways-throwing and sideways-building in birds. Ibis 109:539-551.

Heekin, P.E., C.A. Vogel, and K.P. Reese. 1994. Uncovering the elusive habits of Mountain Quail in Idaho. Quail Unlimited 12(2):8-11.

Linsdale, J.M. 1932. Further facts concerning losses to wild animal life through pest control in California. Condor 34:121-135.

McLean, D.D. 1930. The quail of California. Calif Div. of Fish and Game. Game Bull. No. 2.

Miller, A.H. 1946. Endemic birds of the Little San Bernardino Mountains, California. Condor 48: 75-79.

Miller, A. H. and R.C. Stebbins. 1964. The lives of desert animals in Joshua Tree National Monument. Univ. of Calif. Press, Berkeley, CA.

Miller, E.V. 1950. The life history and management of Mountain Quail in California. Final Prog. Report, Project W-19-R. Calif. Dept. of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA.

Oberholser, H.C. 1923. Notes on the forms of the genus Oreortyx Baird. Auk 40:80-84.

Ormiston, J.H. 1966. The food, habits, and movement of Mountain Quail in Idaho. M.S. thesis, Univ. of Idaho, Moscow.

Rahm, N.M. 1938. Quail range extension in the San Bernardino National Forest. Progress report, 1937. Calif. Fish and Game 24:133-158.

Roberson, R. and Tenney, C., Eds. 1993. Atlas of the breeding birds of Monterey County, California. Monterey Peninsula Audubon Society, Carmel, CA.

Sauer, J.R., J.E. Hines, G. Gough, I. Thomas, and B.G. Peterjohn. 1997. The North American breeding bird survey results and analysis. Version 96.4. Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD.

Smith, M.R., P.W. Mattocks Jr., and K.M.Cassidy. 1997. Breeding birds of Washington State – Location Data and Predicted Distribution. Volume 4 in Washington State Gap Analysis – Final Report. Seattle Audubon Society Publications in Zoology No.1, Seattle, 538 pp.

USDA Forest Service. 1997. Chaparral bird study. Cleveland National Forest files, San Diego, CA.

Van Rossem, A.J. 1937. A review of the races of Mountain Quail. Condor 39: 20-24.

Vogel, C.A. and K.P. Reese. 1995. Habitat conservation assessment for Mountain Quail (Oreortyx pictus) Unpubl. Report to Idaho Dept. Fish and Game, Boise. ID.

Zeiner, D.C., W. Laudenslayer, Jr., K. Mayer, and M. White, eds. 1990. California's wildlife, Vol. 2: Birds. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, 732 pp.