There is no evidence that plant diversity (number of different species) affects bobwhite populations.

There is evidence of strong bobwhite populations under different levels of plant diversity. In these cases, we may deduce that the populations were not responding to plant diversity.

There is evidence that disced strips might increase food supplies for bobwhites, although this outcome is a gamble in semiarid environments.

There is no evidence that disced strips result in more bobwhites on an area.

There is research evidence from Illinois that bobwhites increase with the quantity of edge between woody and herbaceous cover.

There is research evidence from Oklahoma that bobwhites decline with the quantity of edge between woody and herbaceous cover.

There is theoretical evidence that bobwhite populations are indifferent to the quantity of edge on an area; i.e., given an area with certain characteristics, bobwhite populations neither increase when edge is added nor decline when edge is removed, within ordinary limits.

There is a growing consensus among research biologists that the "edge effect" is mythical.

There is evidence that bobwhites with access to feeders or food plots maintain higher body weights (more fat) during winter.

There is evidence that feeders localize coveys, thus making them easier to find by hunters. Food plots might have a similar effect.

There is evidence that, on average, feeders have neutral effects on winter survival and quail abundance at the start of hunting season.

There is evidence that most (up to 99%) of the supplement put in quail feeders goes to non-target animals, including predators such as raccoons.

There is no evidence that half-cutting increases bobwhite abundance. The practice is recommended as a matter of tradition.

However, under some circumstances half-cutting might provide usable cover for bobwhites. The circumstances include single-stemmed trees lacking near-ground cover. Half-cutting could convert such a tree to a suitable mid-day covert. There is evidence that lateral screening cover is a feature associated with mid-day coverts used by bobwhites.

There is evidence that harvest mortality adds to natural mortality from fall to spring, but not in a one-to-one manner.

There is theoretical evidence that if harvest rates are light (<20% of the population), additivity of harvest and timing of harvest are not management concerns.

There is evidence that harvest in states is self-accelerating, meaning the harvest rate goes up as the population goes down. Until recently, harvest in states was thought to be self-limiting.

There is evidence that the skill of the average hunter goes down as quail populations go up.

There is no evidence that limiting harvest to larger coveys has any effect on quail abundance. There is evidence that smaller coveys coalesce to form larger coveys.

There is evidence from South Texas that suppression of mammalian predators might slightly improve bobwhite production in some years.

There also is evidence from South Texas that intensive predator suppression (mammals) has neutral effects on quail populations.

There is evidence of excellent standing densities of bobwhites in the absence of predator control.

There is evidence that predator control can improve production of waterfowl, wild turkeys, white-tailed deer, pronghorn antelope, and other species. It does not follow from these results, however, that predator control will increase bobwhites. The response of prey populations to predator suppression depends on reproduction biology of the prey. More prolific species, like bobwhites, tend not to respond to suppression of their predators.

There is evidence that provision of surface water to bobwhites is a neutral management practice.

There is no evidence that incubating bobwhites dip their bellies in water to carry humidity back to the nest site.

There is evidence that nests placed far from water are just as likely to be successful as those placed near to water.

There is evidence that surface water attracts predators such as raccoons.

There is theoretical and field evidence that the abundance of bobwhites on an area increases with the quantity of suitable permanent cover (paper, downloadable slide show).

There is limited and contradictory evidence that the abundance of bobwhites on an area increases with perceived habitat quality variables, such as plant diversity, cover-type interspersion, patchiness, edge density, and food supplies.

Stocking rate (livestock/area) is the single most important variable in managing ground cover. The method of herd rotation, including no rotation (continuous grazing) is of secondary importance.

There is evidence that grazing management for bobwhites should foster higher successional conditions in western portions of their range trending to lower successional conditions in eastern portions. "Higher successional" implies ground cover consisting of mid to tall perennial grasses, whereas "lower successional" implies disturbance grasses and weeds.

There is ample evidence that thinning of mature eastern forests and prescribed burning on a 2 or 3-year rotation benefits bobwhites.

There is no evidence that prescribed burning benefits bobwhites in the western portions of their continental range.

Reclamation burns (intense burns at high air temperatures) used to reduce dense tree or brush canopies should increase bobwhite abundance be creating more usable space. There is evidence that reducing woody plant coverage when it is dense increases bobwhite abundance.

There is evidence of extremely dense bobwhite populations in the northern Midwest before the arrival of patchwork agriculture (1850s).

There is evidence that patchwork agriculture is not a necessary condition for high-density bobwhite populations.