Jump to content
  • GUESTS

    If You  want access  to member only forums on FM, You will need to Sign-in or  Sign-Up now .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member.

MN Pheasant Summit?


Bureaucrat

Recommended Posts

I am all for getting new land enrolled into some sort of program because we continue to lose so many acres. But how about address some of the aging WMA's, etc that are public ground and do some management to them? We already have the land, it would be far cheaper to help these lands out then to have to purchase additional land or pay some farmer to enroll his land, etc.

This land we already have and it only makes sense.

I have noticed considerable differences between WMA's that are only a couple miles apart in the number of birds present regardless of time of year. The ones that have the fewer birds are typically full of huge "roosting" trees for hawks, etc and the grasslands are dump grass without any diversity in the variety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 101
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • LandDr

    29

  • creepworm

    16

  • brittman

    11

  • IceAge@work

    5

LandDr - Do you really think your 30 hens will stay and nest on that 20 acres? Its highly unlikely they will all stay on your property. They will also relocate in the spring from your large woody cover habitat and food plot to seek out nesting habitat. Roosters will relocate to find their own territories as well. Then they will reproduce on those large high diversity sites..raise their broods..and then relocate back to your "winter paradise". It takes the right mix and while you are pretty certain 55% woody cover and food plots are the golden ticket. I really have a hard time buying that. Look at the loss of CRP and compare it to the drop in bird numbers...It follows right in line. That grass must have some impact on pheasants..There is no woody cover and food plots with CRP..just grass and forbs... I think that right there shows you how humorous it is to compare the carrying capacity of cropland and grassland.

Just out of curiosity, what acreage is your property? I'll assume 30% is in woody cover...and 25% is in food plots, but are their multiple woody areas/ food plots and how large are they? What seed mix do you favor for the grassland portion? What portion of surrounding habitat within 5 sq. miles is woody cover/CRP/range/hay and alfalfa/crops? I'm guessing and could be way off that you are providing a mass majority of the cover that would attract pheasants during Oct-March, but maybe not April-Sept.

The point of that would be that you have a much higher carrying capacity for your woody cover and food plots than what your grassland could actually produce in pheasants. On a landscape scale the percentage is probably closer to 90% nesting/brood rearing and 10% woody cover/food plots. Now if you took your large area of winter cover/food plots and split it up into smaller percentages for each nesting/brood rearing area and cut out the need to travel mortality would drop, but if you took 50% of the cover out of each of these nesting/brood rearing areas and turned it into woody cover/food plots..the carrying capacity would drop...winter survival would go up...but nesting success and brood rearing success would drop dramatically.

The population would likely stay a little more stable instead of boom and bust periods, but you never would get those really big boom years that come with mild winters and a lot of nesting habitat available to take advantage of it.

Your PLM by thirds works great because it attracts birds to those landowners property during hunting season and provides winter cover that is otherwise lacking..but over a larger scale it would quickly become apparent that it just isn't the ideal mix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C.Musky...I have posted exactly the same thing. WMAs are the low hanging fruit...easy to get. Just as you stated, we already own them and have them to use. I have made that exact point in many other discussions. Sounds easy enough right?

Not so easy. I have tried numerous times to offer a "makeover" of an existing WMA and even more times offer to help with a plan for a newly acquired WMA. Shot down ever time for one excuse or another. This gets back to the "agenda" that the govt and nonprofits have...grass, grass, grass. And not the grass that stays standing in the fall for good hunting cover and not the grass that stays standing through the winter for better winter cover.

Trying to change a WMA design is like moving a semi by hand...but with enough hands putting the pressure on, it will move. Easiest way to put pressure on is to stop supporting them. Talk and citizen input does nothing...stop going to their fundraisers and stop other ways of support...that will get their attention fast.

G.Hunter...I never said the hens would all stay on that property to nest...but they might if that is the best nesting cover. DNR research shows you can have up to 4 or 5 hens per acre on properly designed and manage nesting\brooding habitat. By design and research data, they might stay there...and they might go elsewhere...really doesn't matter to me where they nest...what matters the most IS THAT THE HEN MADE IT THROUGH THE WINTER TO BE ABLE TO NEST. "Dead Hens Don't Lay Eggs"

"relocate in the spring from your large woody cover habitat and food plot"...wait a second, by design the woody cover would only be 8 acres of the 40 and the food source would only be 4-8 acres with feeders incorporated. That leaves and equal or greater share as nesting\brooding cover. Please don't make the 40 acre model as a forest since that is not what it is. smile

You are starting to think about the numbers. I have three farms and they are very different due to management goals. The best one has approx 30% woody cover with approx 25% food sources (plus 10 feeders strategically placed) and the balance is prairie grass and other grasses. You are pretty close in your estimates. This farm withstands the tough winters and still have fantastic birds...I have had people describe it as a "mini South Dakota" due to bird numbers. Hens can nest up to 6-9 miles from their WCA area...so are all the birds nesting on my 160ac farm...most likely not. But I have HUGE hen numbers and I get most of them through the winter for higher nesting populations. This farm is very close to the middle of PLM's Management by Thirds. This farm also carries about 60+- does and 15+- bucks of which one or two are always in the 170+ range.

My other farm, has been great pheasants and poor pheasants. Yep...it is mostly grass and is subject to MN weather. When we have mile winters, my numbers go up. When we have tough winters, my numbers go down. It does not have PLM's Management by Thirds percentages but I do have cover developing that should get it there in 8 to 10 years.

My other farm has parts of it that are close to PLM's Management by Thirds and other parts of it that are not. Very good bird numbers but the birds are definitely concentrated to the east half that is more in line with Management by Thirds.

Yes my woody cover, food sources and prairie are spread out. On the first farm above, I am actually managing every 15 to 20 acres into PLM's Management by Thirds...really intense management to test what I can do with it and how far I can go with it.

What you need to consider is that I put my bet on more hens with Winter Cover Areas rather than more hens with nesting cover. More hens with nesting cover ONLY happens when you have mild winters. More hens with WCAs happens no matter what. For example...if you have three bad winters in a row, my WCA has more hens than your grassland. If we finally have a mile winter, my WCA has more hens to kick start the "boom" versus your grass has less. Eventually your grass will catch up and maybe ever pass up my WCA...WHAM!...band winter followed by another. Now how we sitting? My WCA is still holding well while your grassland took a beating and you are starting all over again. What I am getting at is that even with less nesting, I have more hens. I will take more hens any day over better nesting cover. smile

PLM's Management by Thirds attracts birds in the fall hunting season...yes it does! And landowners\hunters love it. Because they love it...they want to do it...and they want to do more of it. Is there any better way to get landowners on board to do more of a good thing than to provide the numbers? There is no better way to get landowners on board then to show them the results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any better way to get landowners on board to do more of a good thing than to provide the numbers? There is no better way to get landowners on board then to show them the results.

That is assuming that every landowner cares what the pheasant population does. Most don't.

I think you are thinking of pheasant populations in a micro sense, while I am thinking of pheasant populations in a macro sense. PLM's ideals will increase pheasant populations in small areas. Which is good for those that can use those areas. However, this slow developing, expensive, resource consuming management style will not be able to raise the total pheasant population noticeably at the state level, there is not enough money, resources, and willing participants.

Grassland on the other hand is cheap, easy, and will have many willing participants while in a short term program such as CRP. There will be swings in the pheasant population, but the floor will be higher and the ceiling increased by an exponential amount.

Also, when comparing grassland vs. croplands carrying capacity, you use an undisturbed grassland with no crops around it. That would be like me comparing grassland in SD to management by thirds land in northern Saskatchewan and asking which has more pheasants. Neither would be realistic comparisons. CRP will never create sections upon sections of continuous undisturbed grassland. It creates buffers and small areas of grassland, maybe up to 40 acres or so, that are generally surrounded be crops on all sides. Therefore, your comparison makes no sense whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pheasant Summit Prediction: They will come out of it with the conclusion that we need more habitat. They will make some 50 year plan that they do not have the ability to execute. Farmers will continue to burn, tile and mow the habitat and the DNR can't do a darn thing about it because they are an ant in comparison to Big Ag.

Pheasants need close access to crop land. Those large expanses of grassland in ND, SD and NW MN is grouse and prairie chicken land. smile

Completely false. The areas with the highest concentrations of Pheasants in ND are the areas with the most grassland. These areas are west of corn country so the farmers do not tile, burn and mow every last tree and blade of grass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fowlski,

You are wrong or do not understand what I mean by expansive. I am talking multiple sections of grassland. The Sheyenne grasslands in SE ND hold very few pheasants. The Dakota Prairie grasslands in western ND hold very few pheasants unless you work edges along cropland or get down along the Little MO.

The higher concentrations of pheasants in ND are driven more by the warmer / drier climate than where the grass is more prevalent. There is still plenty of crop land in these areas of SC, SW, and NW ND. The land in this part of ND can have poorer soil and the weather arid. CRP is holding on a little better there.

When winter does set into SW ND the pheasants flock to the farm and ranch yards with crop land nearby. Without these working farms (food and shelter) the pheasant population would be much worse off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I designed a property south of Steele, ND a few years ago...it was all grass and he had a few birds. "Total Makeover" of the property and now he has more pheasants than he knows what to do with. Also shot a trophy huge whitetail last year and is eyeing up another this year.

Designed a property north of Watertown, SD a few years back...same thing, birds everywhere and the landowner just smiles now. He says the county uses his property every year for their annual conservation tour.

If you want to keep planting grass, then go ahead. That's what they have been doing since 1984 or when ever CRP started. All that grass and yet there is still discussion about what is wrong with the pheasant population. Is there a chance that maybe grass isn't the answer?

My pheasants are doing great and my customers pheasants are doing great, if they implemented the plan. Is it chance that those farms just are isolated small areas...or could it be that the plan actually works?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LandDr, I agree 100% with your idea's, If you can't get the birds through a bad winter or two I don't care how much nesting land you have it will do no good if the hens aren't there, BUT along the way we have to start doing something about the predator population. I am not just talking about the ground predators but also the winged predators. I like to use the example of how twice I have witnessed a large seagull fly up behind a (in this case hen mallard) and in the first case swallow 4 little chicks that were following her, and in the second case swallow 3 little chicks. Now this is just an example but think of how many times this is happening on a daily basis without being seen. You combine this with the nest mortality of the crows and other egg eating birds and animals and the pheasant cannot produce enough hatchlings to stay ahead of the game. I am all for habitat but I think needs to be addressed as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C.worm

I wonder where you get your data from when you say "management by thirds takes a ton of money"?

Have you done Management by Thirds and know the actual cost? Have you worked with me to know the actual cost?

You seem to just throw out opinions without any experience with it or facts. Why?

I have a busy day so I gotta get going...but just in summary, there are many, many, many programs out there of which many of them are up to 90% cost share and some even 100% cost shared as well as good annual incomes to get done what needs to be done. You seem to think the money is not out there...but it is...you just have to know where to go get it.

For an immediate example, I just put a plan together for a landowner near Plankinton, SD. I was not able to get all the trees I wanted, but very close...and the food sources and native prairie will also be very close. I expect there will be around $60,000 plus of minus in projects of which all of it should be covered with the program options I have selected to fit the property and the landowner's objectives. My cost...also payed for in the increased income and increased cost share to cover the "what would have been" out of pocket cost. This is 240 acres...it will be planted this coming spring.

Food plots? Who said it had to all be food plots? Again you are assuming everything while not having the first had experience regarding it.

Also...can you show me exactly where I said "cropland will raise more pheasants than grass"? Pretty sure I didn't say that since all along I have been describing a balance of woody cover, crop and grass.

Change can be done landscape wide...but it requires the people delivering the programs to change also. That isn't happening because the people above are training the people below to push grass. We have had a lot of CRP since 1984 and the pheasant population has ALWAYS been at the mercy of MN weather. CRP could be so different if just the people delivering the programs would understand what it takes to get a hen through the winter in MN. Again...we don't shoot hens so where are they all? On average, 50% of a brood are hens. Therefore we should see exponential growth of our hen population up to the "carrying capacity". Reality is that the carry capacity is so low due to the design that we actually do have all the hens we are going to have...unless there is change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jigger

Yes...I believe the number is something like 35% mortality from predators. I believe I read a study where they had intensive trapping during the nesting season and were able to reduce predation down to something like 15%+-. It was an interesting study.

But trapping is a VERY expensive service during the nesting and brooding season when fur is worth nothing.

Here is something to think about. Predation can go up or down based on the cover as well. Also, there "safety in numbers".

I get the predator question a lot, especially at seminars. Consider this...if you have 20 pheasants and predation takes 35%, you are left with 13 birds of which half are hens...and your nesting population drops.

If you design your property for higher carrying capacity and get to 200 birds on 160 acres...and there is the same predation of 35%...you have 130 birds left of which 65 are hens to produce 4 chicks on average to the hunting season...and you still either a stable population or even slightly growing population. Also consider that predation may actually go down with the thicker cover and associated food sources immediately adjacent.

Don't get me wrong, trapping during the nesting and brooding season can provide great results...I just haven't figured out how to do it cost effectively for landowners. So the second best option is to provide a better design for increased carrying capacity for safety in numbers and reduced predation due to better cover...tougher for them to hunt in and more escape cover.

Good question jigger and thank you for understanding the importance of getting hens through the winter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you done Management by Thirds and know the actual cost? Have you worked with me to know the actual cost?

I have a busy day so I gotta get going...but just in summary, there are many, many, many programs out there of which many of them are up to 90% cost share and some even 100% cost shared as well as good annual incomes to get done what needs to be done. You seem to think the money is not out there...but it is...you just have to know where to go get it.

I met with you about creating habitat. You mentioned all of these cost share programs that I would be eligible for. After speaking with a family member who is a legitimate expert at these habitat programs, I found out many of these cost share programs were not available.

Also, just because the landowner does not have to pay for the this out of pocket does not mean there is no cost. I noticed you refused to answer my question on cost of management by thirds vs. grass, so I can only assume I was right. So, we can put in a relatively small amount of ground in management by thirds, or a considerably larger area into native prairie. I will take the larger amounts of habitat every time, much much better for the environment as a whole and as a by-product creates habitat for pheasants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Compsensatory vs. additive mortality theory.

Compensatory mortality says that hunters take part of the population that would die anyways. The hens die from predators, weather (exposure), hay cutting/ditch mowing, vehicles .... Juvenile animals are especially vulnerable to mortality in their first year. If hunters killed hen pheasants - would it make a difference ? Not so sure. Ruffed grouse, geese, most duck species all have near equal hunter mortality between male and hen. Yet their populations are sustainable where habitat is available to support them.

Ever notice all the hawks in western MN and the Dakotas along the powerlines in the fall ? Vast majority of those birds are juvenile birds that will likely starve and die before reaching the first year of age.

You cannot stockpile upland game birds. In a balanced ecosystem, you cannot stockpile any animal or plant. Sure, populations will ebb and flow (cycle) with their predators and prey and with weather. In cases where the population does explode, disease usually takes over the population plummets and starts over.

Pheasants also disperse and may disperse quite far in the Spring. If the area around a super "preserve" is void ... the birds will move out and disperse during nesting season. It is in their genes to do this ... that is how the population expands. Birds that disperse to areas without suitable habitat will either move on or die.

Predators are the same way. If you have an area that is intensively trapped near areas that are not ... the predators in the higher density areas will naturally move into the voided area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"family member who is a legitimate expert"

I have no idea who this is so I will not comment on that person's expertise...and I wouldn't anyway.

I can comment on myself however. I worked for MPCA, DNR, FSA, NRCS and SWCD and am a program specialist. Not many know the programs better then me and how to use them. Not bragging...just giving my "expertise".

What is your name so I can look up your file to refresh my memory? PM it if you would like.

"Where do all the hens go" (referencing 100% hens and no roosters)...13 minutes later..."35% mortality from predators" (roosters and hens AND in grassland, not PLM's Management by Thirds, since the research was done in grassland).

I did not "refuse" to answer anything. You seem to be attacking and also ax grinding. Why?

I referenced a cost for implementation on the project in SD. On average, tree plantings cost $450\ac without fabric and $900\ac with fabric. High diversity native prairie plantings can cost $150-$250\ac depending on what is required of the mix and for what program. I however prefer a good amount of the thicker cover which would cost around $80-$100\ac or less depending on the mix and program.

Congress has already allocated the money for these programs...it will be spent. It can either be spent in NE, IA, OH, etc....or how about in MN to the best design with increased carrying capacity we can get. OR...let it slide with just grass and let some other state use the money congress has ALREADY allocated.

Brittman...Ruffed grouse are native and have their own population cycle that is hard to understand...we discussed this deeply in your wildlife classes...just a different bird. Ducks and geese are migratory and leave during the winter...there are also restrictions on how many hens you can shoot...there is a reason for that...they give you one or two just in case you shoot one or two by accident...but you are encouraged to not shoot hen ducks for a reason. Good points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only mallards have a lower limit on hens than the total limit for that species. No other duck species has a protective limit on the hen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that is mainly due to the difficulty of identification between the male and female in flight and since they often fly in tight groups.

I was at a meeting last year were there was discussion of not allowing any hen mallards to be harvested, but the discussion quickly went to needing one or two for the mistake of shooting one or two. If possible, they would rather that no hen mallards be shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Creepworm...are you going to provide me with your name so I can look up your file to review what programs you are saying are not eligible?

What is VERY important for everyone to understand and appreciate is that there are a lot of "no you can't do this" and "no you can't do that" out there...lip service. Fact is that you can. Just because someone verbally says you can't doesn't mean that you can't. There are a lot of opinions and personal bias depending on where you go to search out options and opportunities. I would encourage everyone to get additional reviews, opinions and recommendations to help you make the best decisions. I have been told numerous times "no you can't do that" and "we don't have that program here" and "that doesn't qualify"...but I work through the practice standards, job sheets and program eligibilities and almost always end up getting it enrolled. Make sure you review your options...especially when some of these programs are for 10 or 15 years or more...it is best to get it right the first time because it is a LONG wait to get it right the next time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that is mainly due to the difficulty of identification between the male and female in flight and since they often fly in tight groups.

I was at a meeting last year were there was discussion of not allowing any hen mallards to be harvested, but the discussion quickly went to needing one or two for the mistake of shooting one or two. If possible, they would rather that no hen mallards be shot.

Have to call no-truth on that comment. There has been a one or two hen limit on Mallards for a long time. The population is high and we are in the midst of a long running series of USF&WS "liberal" seasons. Losing those hens to hunters will make no difference in the next fall flight. Any biologist that wants to argue otherwise needs to go back to school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LandDr:

You seem to missing the whole point on the hen argument. While I do not advocate shooting hen pheasants ... protecting them does not ensure that next fall's bird population will be any bigger. If protecting hens or limited harvest of hens worked then we should be overrun with mallards, pheasants and turkeys. There is so much more to it.

Specie after specie have equal hunter harvest on the hen (female) of the species, yet they do just fine. Geese, grouse, ducks (except mallards).

Most species disperse after winter and before/during nesting season. Those birds that disperse to poor habitat usually die (vehicle, predator, exposure). Those birds that move into decent habitat will successfully raise their young and the population will increase and expand.

On the flip side - people should appreciate your habitat areas because they are the source of "restocked" pheasants for the township (maybe beyond) after a couple of bad winters knocks back those birds attempting to live in marginal areas die off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I guess you needed to be at the meeting of which DNR Commissioner Tom Landwehr , Bud Grant, Dennis Anderson, DNR biologists, etc were present and making the comments.

Why do so many groups advocate not shooting hen mallards. They don't know what they are talking about?

Why do so many hunt clubs or groups have "hen jars" where the shooter has to put $5 in it or whatever amount if they shoot a hen.

Why do they say if you shoot a hen, you have eliminated something like 6 generations of duck reproduction from that hen?

Yes...there is so much more too it. I have never said, get the hen through the winter and that is all that needs to be done. Pretty sure I included the nesting\brooding component as well.

But fact still remains...if you can't get the hen through the winter, then the rest of the program is done...won't happen..."dead hens don't lay eggs".

PLM Management by Thirds works, it has been tested, it can be demonstrated, it is feasible, it is sellable, there is funding for it, it can be done on a large scale, etc. If you can sign up 40ac in CRP grass, you can certainly sign up 40ac in PLM Management by Thirds.

Loran Kardahl, Redwood MN, once told me, just ask the landowner how many many pheasants they want...if they want 20 or 30, then do the same old same old, if you want a lot more, then do PLM's Management by Thirds.

It has been several years now that I designed Loran's property, but the spring of the first year he got a call from the DNR asking if he had released a bunch of pheasants. He said no, why? The DNR recorded a 410% increase in crow counts along his road and wondered why. 410% increase!!

Now, that is not all from reproduction of course. Pheasants were also attracted due to the better cover design. But...the better cover design also contributed to more hens making it through the winter to disperse through the countryside and produce on average 4 birds to the hunting season of which on average 50% are roosters. Results speak for themselves.

Do what you want. I am just happy I got you thinking about it more. FYI...just got the contracts signed today on that Plankinton, SD project. It is going to be a half section of AMAZING design. This could be done with EVERY grass program enrollment...just take a little more time to design it right and a little more time to design it. That is hardly anything when you consider it will be enrolled for 15+ years. Do it right the first time...because the next opportunity is a long time away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PLM Management by Thirds works' date=' it has been tested, it can be demonstrated, it is feasible, it is sellable, there is funding for it, it can be done on a large scale, etc. If you can sign up 40ac in CRP grass, you can certainly sign up 40ac in PLM Management by Thirds.

/quote']

LandDr

Truly curious here as I have not kept up with the Farm Bill since the last two year debacle surrounding it's reauthorization.

What programs are currently active in MN and how many acres are remaining that could be enrolled? What is the typical $$ per acre being offered with each program?

If fully enrolled will the current available acres be able to keep up with the expirations happening over the next 3-4 years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I guess you needed to be at the meeting of which DNR Commissioner Tom Landwehr , Bud Grant, Dennis Anderson, DNR biologists, etc were present and making the comments.

Why do so many groups advocate not shooting hen mallards. They don't know what they are talking about?

Why do so many hunt clubs or groups have "hen jars" where the shooter has to put $5 in it or whatever amount if they shoot a hen.

While I do not shoot hens there is little biological evidence that shooting hens makes any difference as long as the impact on the population is compensatory.

Canada has no hen mallard protection. You can shoot eight hen mallards in one day. Albeit, the pressure is lower than MN and other MS flyway states.

Mallards are the most highly pressured duck and their population dynamics are weighted heavily in determining USF&WS fall hunting regulations. Protecting hen mallards seems like the right thing to do, but not sure data supports it when the population is high.

Mallard hens do return to where they were born so in Minnesota where they are trying to keep the breeding population stable - they try to protect the resident ducks.

Interestingly many other duck species do NOT have that homing instinct (ie teal).

But in the end, MN breeding pairs is not governed by restricted hunting regulations in Minnesota the fall before ... but habitat conditions that meet the returning ducks that spring.

If the habitat conditions are not right, even homing hen suzy will not stick around and attempt to nest and raise her brood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ON MN WMAs - it would be great to see management by thirds.

The DNR rarely manages their land well (I get it - budgets), but seeing grassland with individual cedar trees moving in via succession is troublesome.

CRP - moving crops into grass. You are not going to have most landonwers wanting to plant trees there. The vast majority of land is still owned by farmers and not sportsman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CRP - moving crops into grass. You are not going to have most landonwers wanting to plant trees there. The vast majority of land is still owned by farmers and not sportsman.

You obviously have not been reading what Landdr has been typing. Everyone wants to plant trees and shrubs, and everyone cares that the pheasant population is the highest it can possibly be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ice Age...there are many program options available. I usually use between 5 to 10 when putting a plan together but it is dependent on the property and the landowner's objectives.

Cworm...I'm still waiting for a PM for your name so I can look up the plan you said I put together and none of the programs qualified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Landdr,

I could give you my name, but you will find nothing in your records under my name, seeing I was 17 at the time. Also, there is no plan period for the land we were thinking of creating wildlife habitat on. We met with you at a sportsman show and after explaining what we were looking to do you starting naming off programs that "everyone" that you work with qualifies for. (very similar to what you are doing on here) After talking to the people that count (USDA,FSA) we found out very few people qualify for these programs and we were not part of the very few.

I don't know if you are familiar with a herbicide called Spike 20P but it kills shrubs and trees. You apply it on the ground near trees and shrubs at 5 lbs per acre and it gets rained into the soil and eventually kills the trees and shrubs. It is not easy to get, is very expensive, and requires an applicators license in order to apply it. In other words it is a pain. So far this fall, I have ordered 150 lbs of it for farmers, and a vast majority of that is being spread on CRP ground. Generally the trees that they are trying to kill in this region of SD is cedar trees. When I mention cedars make great pheasant habitat they reply by saying "may be great for pheasants, but they will not be so great if I take that piece out of CRP". See what I am saying here? Management by thirds is awesome, but a majority of the landowners want nothing to do with it. That majority is the ones we will need if we are to substantially increase pheasant numbers.

Continue on with the sales pitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cworm...so you are declaring that none of the programs I planned for your property qualify even though I actually did not put a plan together for your property? That isn't really fair to declare that my recommendations don't work when I actually didn't make any recommendations for your specific farm (in regards to an actual plan) now is it?

When I talk to people at sport shows or anywhere else, and I don't have their aerial photos, soils overlays, etc, then I have to "generalize" about program options. There is NOW WAY I could provide you with actual program options for your property at a sport show.

To take the high road with you, I will offer you a review of your property and provide a map with options for you to consider. Just provide me with your Township, Range and Section.

To everyone that is reading this...don't think for a second that what the govt and non-profits tell you is fact. If I map out options for you and then they tell you nothing qualifies...that is almost always not true. For example, and not my project, a landowner in Douglas Co SD applied for a program options. County said "no, those don't qualify". He contacted me to see what I thought and I definitely thought they qualified. To prove the point and to set a precedent, he appealed and took them to court. He won and everything did qualify. This is just one of many many many examples.

Cworm...I never said EVERYONE is going to do PLM Management by Thirds and I never said everyone is even going to look at habitat options. The farmers you describe will not sign up for CRP any more than they will sign up for PLM's plan...so please compare apples to apples. What I am saying is to offer the design options to people that come in to look at habitat options. That is not being done...they are just pushing grass. Those people that are looking at habitat options should be offered all of the options and given the pros\cons so they can make decisions. That is not happening. "The majority of the landowners" that you are referring to probably don't want any habitat program. But the ones that do should be offered all of the options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me the big key here is that it needs to be designed as a multi-purpose conservation plan that benefits all wildlife and all conservation needs (clean water, soil conservation etc.) and then sold to the general public as a benefit to all stakeholders. Making an effort like this solely about pheasants, ducks, hunting etc. will just alienate people who don't share those interests but whose tax dollars will be needed to fund the programs.

Thats exactly the point, restoring PRAIRIE for pollinators and prairie birds like meadowlarks is all the controlling agencies think about anymore!!! If they have a 400 acre parcel, taking out 20 acres for a shelterbelt and foodplots would allow plenty of acres for the prairie species AND would allow other species like pheasants and deer to survive.

Someone in an earlier post mentioned that 10% of the landscape needs to be in grass. On a big scale, thats not going to happen, if there is more money in corn and soybeans, thats what you and I and most farmers are going to do. On a smaller scale, we do have areas where 10% of the land is in grass, mainly public hunting lands, but they still don't have half the pheasant they could have because there isn't any winter cover or food.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the harvest now if full push and such a dry fall, there will little residual food around many WMAs and WPAs - just black dirt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Your Responses - Share & Have Fun :)

    • leech~~
      Nope not me.  May want to go nextdoor and ask around?  
    • smurfy
      Looks to me like Leech brought his chair home!!😅😆
    • Brianf.
      I'm not there, so I can't tell exactly what's going on but it looks like a large area of open water developed in the last day with all of the heavy snow on the east side of wake em up Narrows. These two photos are from my Ring Camera facing north towards Niles Point.  You can see what happened with all of snow that fell in the last three days, though the open water could have been wind driven. Hard to say. .  
    • SkunkedAgain
      Black Bay had great ice before but a few spots near rockpiles where there were spots of open water. It looks like the weight of the snow has created a little lake in the middle of the bay.  
    • LakeofthewoodsMN
      On the south end...   Thanks to some cold spring weather, ice fishing continues strong for those still ice fishing.  The bite remains very good.  Most resorts have pulled their fish houses off for the year, however, some still have fish houses out and others are allowing ATV and side by sides.  Check social media or call ahead to your favorite resort for specifics. Reports this week for walleyes and saugers remain excellent.   A nice mix of jumbo perch, pike, eelpout, and an occasional crappie, tullibee or sturgeon being reported by anglers. Jigging one line and using a live minnow on the second line is the way to go.  Green, glow red, pink and gold were good colors this week.     Monster pike are on a tear!  Good number of pike, some reaching over 45 inches long, being caught using tip ups with live suckers or dead bait such as smelt and herring in 8 - 14' of water.   As always, work through a resort or outfitter for ice road conditions.  Safety first always. Fish houses are allowed on the ice through March 31st, the walleye / sauger season goes through April 14th and the pike season never ends. On the Rainy River...  The river is opened up along the Nelson Park boat ramp in Birchdale, the Frontier boat ramp and Vidas boat ramp.  This past week, much of the open water skimmed over with the single digit overnight temps.   Areas of the river have popped open again and with temps getting warmer, things are shaping up for the last stretch through the rest of the spring season, which continues through April 14th.   Very good numbers of walleyes are in the river.  Reports this week, even with fewer anglers, have been good.  When temps warm up and the sun shines, things will fire up again.   Jigs with brightly colored plastics or jigs with a frozen emerald shiner have been the desired bait on the river.  Don't overlook slow trolling crankbaits upstream as well.   Good reports of sturgeon being caught on the river as well.  Sturgeon put the feed bag on in the spring.  The bite has been very good.  Most are using a sturgeon rig with a circle hook loaded with crawlers or crawlers / frozen emerald shiners. Up at the NW Angle...  Ice fishing is winding down up at the Angle.  Walleyes, saugers, and a number of various species in the mix again this week.  The bite is still very good with good numbers of fish.  The one two punch of jigging one line and deadsticking the second line is working well.   Check with Angle resorts on transport options from Young's Bay.  Call ahead for ice road guidelines.  
    • CigarGuy
      With the drifting, kind of hard to tell for sure, but I'm guessing about a foot and still lightly snowing. Cook end!
    • PSU
      How much snow did you get on Vermilion? 
    • Mike89
      lake here refroze too...  started opening again yesterday with the wet snow and wind...  very little ice left today...
    • Hookmaster
      A friend who has a cabin between Alex and Fergus said the lake he's on refroze. He texted me a pic from March 12th when it was open and one from 23rd when it wasn't. 🤯
    • SkunkedAgain
      I don't think that there has been any ice melt in the past few weeks on Vermilion. Things looked like a record and then Mother Nature swept in again.   I'll give my revised guess of April 21st
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.