would a noon start help Mn pheasant numbers?

[rundrave]

I remember not too long ago reading an article that discussed the noon start time in a magazine but I can't remember where. (I think it was the Pointing Dog Journal)

Anyway I often wonder why there is such a drastic difference in birds numbers from SD and Minnesota. Yes the states terrain vary, but SE SD is very similar to SW Mn but why such a vast difference in pheasant numbers? If I drive over the border from SD to MN in most areas it looks same. Same terrain, same crops, same cover etc etc....

One of the only differences I can think of is that in SD you have a noon and then 10am start time and Mn its at 9am year round.

Would a noon start time in Mn give birds a better chance to get off roost where they are most vulnerable? Does the earlier morning start time give an unfair advantage to hunters?

Does starting later in the morning or at noon give pheasants the time they need to seek cover before the pheasant hunting is allowed?

I wont speak to why SD is noon etc, as thats not what I am after. I know people have their traditions etc, but do you think moving the start time back to replicate what SD does would help increase birds numbers in Mn and if so would you be in favor of it?

[creepworm]

That makes no difference. Hens are the thing that makes a pheasant population. Seeing hens are not hunted it does not matter when you begin shooting roosters.

Really, there is not much of a difference in bird populations between SW MN and SE SD. Where things differ is when you start heading west further and the population starts to grow. Also, land use practices are different in SD than MN. No-till, shelterbelts, sloughs, CRP, and managing for pheasants are all more prevalent in SD, even SD.

[mwal]

SD late opening time has nothing to do with helping pheasants. Its all about the out of state hunter spending cash at bars and supper clubs. Late start means the imbibers can stay out late and sleep in. Eastern SD is similar in birds to SW MN. As you go west in SD the climate changes every mile west. There is less snow more cover frequent warm spells. You are going up in elevation etc. The environment is different in Aberdeen compared to Marshall. ND starts 1/2 hour before sunup and has good hunting. It is closer to MN in Sn ow and cold and therefore they have more winter mortality than SD.

Mwal

[BirdWhisperer]

IMO tiling plays a big part in pheasant numbers...leaving the temporary wet areas in the field = no planting in that area = a "dirty" area where weeds/cattails, etc. can grow. In turn, that makes the seasonal cover surrounded with a food source, for wildlife to utilize. I know this plays less of a factor for pheasants than waterfowl, but similar idea. But I do really agree with the other posts about land practices from Marshall to Huron or De Smet area. If you take a drive around central SD though, it's clear that the winter wheat fields are playing a pivitol role for pheasants and their success.

[brittman]

It would not make a difference.

[rundrave]

interesting thoughts. What I am missing is how is the De Smet/Huron area different that say Windom or Marshall area?

Yes the grasslands by Pierre etc are a signifincant different area and probably yield more birds. But there are lots of birds in the De smet/Huron area, why much less in the Mn areas I mention?

[carpshooterdeluxe]

interesting thoughts. What I am missing is how is the De Smet/Huron area different that say Windom or Marshall area?

Yes the grasslands by Pierre etc are a signifincant different area and probably yield more birds. But there are lots of birds in the De smet/Huron area, why much less in the Mn areas I mention?

about 50 thousand miles of drain tile is the difference.

[goblueM]

by that logic ND should have no pheasants, since you can start hunting 30 minutes before sunrise

its habitat, bottom line. no ifs ands or buts about it

[rundrave]

its habitat, bottom line. no ifs ands or buts about it

but what habitat is in these SD areas that isnt in SW Mn?

They are both on the prairie, with lots of corn, soybeans, sloughs, grass, cat tails, CRP, shelter belts etc.

Why does Huron, Mitchell etc have a significant difference in bird numbers compared to Luverne, Worthington, Windom, Marshall?

These areas see the same average annual snow falls. They are really not that far apart.

[muc33]

There are way less pure production acres in the Winner area than around Worthington. More habitat acres, grasses ect. Plus many leave crops for the birds, plant milo, ect for the birds, we don't have that here at all.

[rundrave]

Winner is West River SD, not even close to the areas I was refering to.

I am not disputing the further west you go its a much different ball game.

But why such a difference in the areas that I was reffering to?

[mwal]

I have noticed that our WMA are a slough with little grass. In SD sloughs seem to have a huge grass buffer. Perhaps there is a difference in SD due to elevation going up over buffalo ridge. When heading back to MN from SD on 12 you can see the difference. Also there just seems to be more grass period. Unfortunately that is changing there as well. I have Friends in Watertown and there is a difference in snow depth between there and say Granite falls. There is even less as you get to Faulkton or Redfield.

Mwal

[creepworm]

The huge difference is just west of Brookings, say Volga area, you start running into much larger amounts of non-farmed land. Pasture, sloughs, grassland, shelterbelts. I would say Marshall has about 10% of the habitat than that area if even that.

[pureinsanity]

The answer as to why certain areas have more birds than other is simple. HABITAT HABITAT HABITAT!!!!

[castmaster]

IMO MN no longer has the bird #'s to be able to recover from hard winters and springs. Some of those areas in SD that more closely resemble habitat in MN benefit from being adjacent to counties with phenomenal habitat. Those are the areas that still have great bird #'s now. Some of those border/fringe areas benefited from a decade of warm winters and dry springs, and birds were able to spread out and help build populations in areas with lesser habitat. Those are the areas that saw significant drops in bird #'s this year.

personally I'd like to see something done in regards to planting pheasants on public lands. Use some of the pheasant stamp dollars to plant birds in areas with good habitat, both on the public land an on the private land surrounding it. In the present it will give a few more folks an opportunity to harvest a bird or two, while in the long term it may provide enough survivors from year to year to slowly help rebuild populations.

Look at how successful the turkey transplant program was. Since they are no longer running that program take some of that $ and try and help restore pheasant hunting.

[BirdWhisperer]

Although it may seem like a temporary solution to the current temporary problem of a down year in pheasant numbers, "planting" birds on public land would do nothing for long-term sustainable populations. Looking at South Dakota for instance, the state tried a number of times in the 1960s (I believe) to release pen-reared birds into wild, all of which were unsuccessful.

What many people are failing to see, is that pheasant numbers are down in Minnesota this year due to a wet spring. Yes, this past winter was a hard one on all, but if the habitat is there and the spring weather cooperates, surviving hens can rear 12-14 chicks not to mention that one rooster can take care of 10 hens. It's a real stretch to say that MN is too far down on bird numbers to rebound, pheasants often go through big swings like we're seeing now, but as long as there's quality habitat there will be more birds in the near future.

[castmaster]

Go through big swings, when was the last time MN had decent bird #'s? When MN has an average bird count of 1.68 birds per ONE HUNDRED miles on roadside counts its a GREAT difference than parts of SD with over 11 birds per ONE mile on roadside counts.

Believe me I know how few roosters it take to breed hens. The problem is if hen #'s are too low, and nesting habitat isnt sufficient, even in the best of years your not going to get enough of a rebound.

Heck, the 2000's certainly werent stellar bird #'s here in MN, while we were experiencing some of the warmest winters and driest springs on record. If the birds are there to rebound, why such a poor 2010 season after one of the best winter and spring nesting seasons pheasants have ever seen in MN?

And unfortunately, the habitat issue isnt going to change. SD retains quality habitat because they have landowners whose profits come from hunting, not from farming. MN will never have the bird #'s to sustain such operations, and without that no operation will change their farming styles to benefit birds that arent there while reducing income.

[GRA]

Thinking back to when I was growing up in western Mn. in the 50's and 60's and the large number of pheasants. These were the Soil Bank days- land not farmed and seeded down to cover crops like sweet clover. Smaller farms with grassy fencelines seperating them. Farmers had livestock--more alfalfa fields and smallgrains. Corn fields had more grass and weeds with no herbicides avaiable. More farm sites where pheasants would come up into the trees during the winter. Not every little pothole was tiled. All in all--more habitat.

[castmaster]

Another thing I think we are lacking here in MN compared to SD, is fire. I've noticed,as have others I've spoke with, that what grassy cover we do have here in parts of MN id often times sparse "old" grass. We dont have as much of the fire generated new growth that comes up thicker and provides more cover.

As for transplanting/releasing birds...I'm thinking if it wasnt possible to do this then the whole topic would be moot as the Chinese Ringneck Pheasant wouldnt be here in the USA for us to hunt anyway.

[LandDr]

Several years ago I took several trips out to SD to see what the difference was. People asked me and I wondered why as well.

I specifically hunted around Highmore, SD but I have been around De Smet, Mitchell, Aberdeen, etc., etc.

Around Highmore, there are grasslands...but they are almost all intensive pastures so there wasn't a lot of grass out there. There were road ditches...lots of those as well as grassed lanes where there used to be twp roads but not anymore.

There were also huge fields of crops. Mostly small grain but there were huge amounts of land under tillage.

What I noticed the most for differences was the large woodlots, especially the cattle yards. These were often huge plantings of shrubs and conifers to provide protection from drifting snow and windchill. And within these lots were large amounts of food. These yards were full of pheasants!

I think it was the winter of 1996 if I recall correctly where SD had such severe snow and cold that cattle were dieing that were stuck out in the fields, they couldn't even get hay to them. It was devastating and SD was really concerned since pheasant hunting is a major income for SD.

But the birds bounced back and a study revealed that it was these shelterbelts that saved the hens so there was a reproducing population...along with a very good nesting season for the hens that did survive.

Another thing I noticed was that many cattle farmers left hundreds of acres of standing corn and Milo as winter "yards" for the cattle. The cattle would feed on this standing crop thru the winter. These were also full of pheasants as you could imagine! Also, most of the fields were untilled which also left all of the waste grain available to the birds versus our MN fields are usually tilled in some amount.

Another difference is that SD usually has milder winters. The can have the winter storms and such, but they are often followed by mild weather.

Then there is the spring nesting season...usually drier and warmer than MN which is condusive to better nesting conditions.

I figure that we can not control the spring weather, so I focus on what I can control to improve my odds...I simply focus on increasing the number of hens that make it thru the winter to have more nests (that may have less chicks due to MN's spring weather). In other words, I make up for the poor springs by having greater numbers of hens.

If I drive around my hometown area, there is a lot of nesting and brooding cover and lots of cover in general...but it is nothing like the winter cover out in SD. There are very few spots that would compare to a cattle yard shelterbelt of SD and there are certainly no 100s of acres of standing crop left thru the winter.

I remember growing up (1980s) there was this one farmer that never got his crops harvested...he was always late for some reason or another. He had more pheasants than anyone! It was like SD how many pheasants he had. Looking back on it...it WAS like SD the way he left his crops up which ultimately were winter cover and food.

SD farmers and landowners do a lot of predator control as well...both the 4 legged type and the feathered type. They don't discriminate between protected predators and unprotected predators...they are all predators.

Get your hens thru the winter and you will have a lot more birds. But there are a lot of variables as well.

[pureinsanity]

personally I'd like to see something done in regards to planting pheasants on public lands. Use some of the pheasant stamp dollars to plant birds in areas with good habitat, both on the public land an on the private land surrounding it. In the present it will give a few more folks an opportunity to harvest a bird or two, while in the long term it may provide enough survivors from year to year to slowly help rebuild populations.

Look at how successful the turkey transplant program was. Since they are no longer running that program take some of that $ and try and help restore pheasant hunting.

There is a big difference in introducing birds, vs stocking birds.

The pheasant like the turkey has been introduced... It's done, there is no more we can do. Stocking birds will just be a giant big waste of money. It's been tried, researched and failed miserably.

When we improved habitat conditions, wild pheasant populations will increase in response to that habitat improvisations. That is all there is to know about bringing back the # of birds...

Studies have shown that stocked pheasants, no matter when they are released, have great difficulty maintaining self-sustaining populations. Predators take the main toll, accounting for 90 percent of the deaths and at the same time predators become conditioned to the idea that pheasants are an easy target.

You want stocking, go to a game farm and buy the birds and have them planted for you to hunt. That WILL be the only success to stocking birds.

[pureinsanity]

Why does Huron, Mitchell etc have a significant difference in bird numbers compared to Luverne, Worthington, Windom, Marshall?

These areas see the same average annual snow falls. They are really not that far apart.

I hunt Mitchell every year, and I hunt marshall, worthington, slayton area as well. one big difference is there isn't MILES of corn or soy bean fields and then one field of habitat. In South Dakota north of Mitchell, many farm fields have all the necessary habitat needed! In Marshall and Worthington area that is not the case at all. It is flat out fields. Sure some might have a slough, some might have a shelter belt, none of them have all the need in one, unless it is a WMA. And we all know they get pounded by hunters daily so that is why you don't see numbers their.

I can vouch for the private land I hunt in South Dakota. Every parcel we walk on has cover from predators, shelter belts, food and water. It is a 5 star resort for pheasants. Most of the stuff out there is natural cover. Section lines in SD have fence lines and shelter belts. In MN, you don't see this hardly at all. You see farm fields and some cattle ground.

You can compare them back and forth. SD just is that much better at habitat then in MN. Even the little things such as a fence line can make a HUGE difference.

[DRH1175]

Eastern SD is not much better than western MN. Like mentioned earlier as you travel west they increase in Numbers. Honestly i would say Habitat is what is the biggest reasons MN isn't as good as SD, IA or NE. MN mows ditches. Diches are some of the best areas to raise broods. If you get off the main roads in SD Nothing is mowed. MN Farmes also seem to till every inch of land right up to the wetlands. Whereas SD farmers seem to leave those areas and have much better shelter belts.

[mitch]

I wouldn't say IA is better than MN right now. There are very few birds in IA right now too. Cornfields are dominating the landscape, leaving very little habitat for birds. I spent last summer in IA driving gravel roads at sunrise all over the state and didn't see one bird.

I would say bird numbers in IA are hurting much more than MN right now.

[BLACKJACK]

The guy in SoDak that thought up the noon opener should get the 'South Dakota Medal of Honor', just think of all the dollars spent in bars and restaurants by hunters killing time before the noon opener!!