would a noon start help Mn pheasant numbers?

[castmaster]

So will those birds travel 2 miles? 3 miles? 10 miles? in search of better habitat?

Not sure why you keep bringing up Chukars. We could just as easily talk about just how well Quail reintroduction programs have been doing in parts of the South where habitat has been restored.

[pureinsanity]

The point I am trying to show you is all wildlife move many miles in search of habitat. So yes a pheasants will travel. If it is with in their specific range, they will find it.

When the pheasant was imported, do you think it just decided to stay where it was and call that its range???

[castmaster]

So please explain then why there was the need for the trap/transplant program to restore the wild turkey to its traditional range, and now well beyond. Seems those birds should have spread out and did that all on their own correct? The habitat that currently supports them was there was it not? How about those elk in NW MN, were they placed there, or did they migrate from Montana? Seem to be doing alright in that habitat.

How about those quail reintroduction programs in parts of the south. Once that habitat was restored those birds should have moved back in all on their own, right?

And on the notion that its been proven in the past not to work so lets not try any further....using that same logic, everything they have tried to stop the spread of asian carp has been a failure, should they stop spending that $$ and just learn to live with the problem? How about zebra mussels, VHS, CWD etc etc etc.

Or as technology improves do you try again? Do you try different methods than whats been tried in the past. Wonder where we'd be if every time an idea failed we just abandoned it altogether.

[castmaster]

Please dont take my last post to be confrontational! After rereading it I can see where one might get that impression. I am enjoying discussing this and dont want to offend in anyway.

[pureinsanity]

First off I am not offended at all. When it comes to pheasants I'm confident I know my stuff. I have been around PF since I was born, and I am still a part of it.

If the trap and transplant program you are talking about the Pittman-Robertson Act in 1937???

The problem back then was unsuitable habitat. The Pittman-Robertson Act put a tax on sporting arms and ammunition so that wildlife restoration programs had money to use to restore wild turkey habitat, which then restored wild turkeys. They trapped turkeys with a net gun, and then relocated them to a suitable habitat. The turkeys then were able to thrive and come back from 30,000 to over 7 million birds.

I see your point here, and where you are taking it with them relocating it. And I do agree with you. However, if there is habitat between point A and point B, they will make it to point B as long as its in their range and habitat is near. Will it happen over night? no, will it happen in a few years? who knows.

Most new plantings of habitat take several years to take off and grow to become adequate habitat.

Technology and research are two different things in my eyes. When it comes to invasive species. You can use technology and research. When it comes to habitat management, the research is done, we know what we need to do and technology won't really up the game in my opinion

[Tom7227]

Perhaps some scientific studies are in order:

http://ddr.nal.usda.gov/bitstream/10113/38969/1/IND44319045.pdf

http://pubstorage.sdstate.edu/wfs/thesis/Kuck-Thomas-L-M-S-1968.pdf

[castmaster]

The turkey trap/transplant program started in MN in the 1960's. I believe there were 2 initial plantings of Merriams subspecies in the Whitewater WMA. The Merriams didnt seem to do well in Minnesotas forested habitat. Then in the early 1970's they did 2 transplant of Eastern subspecies birds in Houston Co. The Easterns did much better, and the program continued until the late 90's if memory serves me. The habita that has seen them turn into something akin to rats in NYC was there, the birds werent. It was there traditional range, problem was there wwere no birds close enough to travel and move into that habitat.

No different than the Quail reintroduction programs going on in parts of the south. Or the wolf reintroduction programs etc.

I dont think its a stretch to say that in parts of southern MN one can definitely go at least a few miles with no habitat of any kind around let alone pheasant habitat. I have relatives near Fairmont who have done habitat restoration of 600 acres over the past 5 years, and still have yet to see a single pheasant. My guess is its because you can drive for several mile radius around there farm place and see nothing but black fields, ditch to ditch. I would bet my favorite gun there isnt a pheasant within at least a 3 mile radius, and probably even further.

Its also my opinion that there are areas in which bird #'s are low and remain low because what birds there are can just maintain existing population. Numbers can drop to a point where average mortality keeps pace with average "production" and the population stays at a relatively even level. When numbers are that low they arent able to really take advantage of good/great years to build higher populations.

These are merely from my rudimentary understanding of biology (and I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express in Winner SD!) and anecdotal observations such as the one I mentioned at the U of M "Research Center" near Rosemount MN. Like I said prior to 1965 you could drive though there and have to stop while 200 pheasants milled in ht roadway. After that you were lucky to see a couple dozen birds all year. This is a "habitat" that at that time stretch from Dakota Cty Rd 42 on teh north, so Cty Rd 66 on the south. And from Hwy 52 on the east to Hwy 3 on the west. Easily 25 sq miles of more of some of the best quality habitat around at that time. Those bird numbers just never recovered, and the habitat didnt change for at least 20 years.

[pureinsanity]

You mentioned that the habitat didn't change, but was it managed?

With a few places I hunt and usually have no problem seeing birds, its hard to see even a track. Now the bad winters and spring play a major part of this. However as I walked around and looked at the habitat, I realized it is in need of some major maintenance.

Creating a habitat is essential, maintaining it is key.

If you do not maintain your grasslands, they can go into whats call grass land succession. Woody vegetation and trees become

prevalent, and over a period of time you lose your most important pheasant habitat components.

Too much brush can be an issue, or having your shelter belts planted to close together that the trees start choking each other out and they die.

There is much more to habitat then just creating it. That is why we see the DNR doing burn offs, clearing brush, planting new things all the time.

Habitat is an on going process. You can look at it the same as you do your yard. Our habitat is to have a nice green lush lawn with no weeds, a beautiful patio for sunning, and a nice trail through the woods or to your neighbors. You maintain this constantly because its appealing and keeps you outside in that area.

Same goes for pheasant habitat. You create the perfect habitat, they stay, when it gets out of control, or doesn't suffice to their needs its time to move on.