Low Pheasant Numbers.... why?

[muc33]

I will allow this to go as a discussion on why you feel habitat is or is not the reason for lower pheasant numbers. Maybe it is weather, maybe it is predators. Discuss, be open, if you feel you must win this conversation, I will end the discussion. Be civil, keep and open mind and respect others opinions. We are adults and lets prove we can follow adult like standards. Thanks, Chad

[CaptainMusky]

Without proper habitat the best weather doesnt matter. By best weather I mean mild winters and mild dry springs for nesting.

We have seen this year in an year out.

The predominantly "best" areas in MN for pheasants are the West Central and SW. Why? Because habitat is abundant. This year those areas (as well as the rest of the range for the most part) took a huge hit because last winter was harsh AND the nesting conditions were terrible.

If we have a mild winter and decent nesting next spring those areas will rebound at a much faster rate than the rest of the range. Its fact, its been proven over and over.

[brittman]

A good read is the MN DNR long range plan which can be found on the Pheasant Page of their HSOforum. Better than antecdotal coffee shop bantor.

Good discussion on the changes in agricultural practices which totally transformed the SC and SE regions away from pheasants. Good discussion on the need for grass and the need for winter cover on each section of land if bird numbers are to build and hold.

In parts of ND and SD working ranch yards (cattle, feed, and hay yards) carry an amazing amount of pheasants, turkeys and deer through the rougher winters. Regions of the Dakotas that lack these working winter ranches often have much poorer carry over.

[creepworm]

As far as PF not increasing the population of birds from the other thread. At first I thought this was a completely irrational statement and could not possibly be true, but then I gave it some thought. Have they really increased bird numbers? Probably not, but what they have done is keep them fairly stable. Imagine where we would be without them. You think the souther third of MN is a black desert now, without PF lobbying and creating habitat it would be a lot worse. Given situation of fighting an uphill battle, PF probably has not moved up hill, but they have not lost ground, which is an amazing feat with the high opportunity cost of habitat projects compared to raising costs.

[LandDr]

Over 90% of wildlife are born and raised on private land. Although it is nice that we have all the public land and some think even more land should be bought for public land...fact is that enough land could never be bought to make an impact on overall wildlife populations. The vast majority of wildlife will always be born and raised on private land.

So were should you focus "your" efforts? I am talking about you as an individual, a group or a club. What can you do?

Take your $300 or $500 that you spend each year and put it towards winter cover and food to get more hens thru the winter. Once you have the Winter Core Areas developed and going, then put your investment towards nesting and brooding cover. In my area, which may be different than your area, there is a lot of nesting cover...the limiting factor is food associated with thick dense winter cover. That is not a limiting factor on my farm however since I have feeders and food plots all over associated with my conifers and other dense cover. My pheasant numbers are slightly down this year but not even close to what I have seen and heard around the area and state.

There has been some mention of cattle lots and farm sites in SD...why do these hold so many birds in the winter? Because they have great thermal cover and abundant food. Create that on your property or where you hunt or where you have a willing landowner to work with...you will see a lot more hens making it to spring. Unfortunately spring weather is one of the variables we can not control.

[CrappiesNCats]

part habitat, part roosters are very tough on hens during bad winters, also nesting was terrible this year with the wettest spring on record.

as far as habitat goes I know a wma that had a great cove of pine trees that the pheasants could hide in during the worst winter could bring at them. it was a fabulous area for them to get out of the wind. This year? the pines were taken out because "they weren't natural" now the pheasants are out one of their main winter hiding areas. my problem....why does it matter if the pines aren't natural? pheasants aren't either.

[CaptainMusky]

part habitat, part roosters are very tough on hens during bad winters, also nesting was terrible this year with the wettest spring on record.

as far as habitat goes I know a wma that had a great cove of pine trees that the pheasants could hide in during the worst winter could bring at them. it was a fabulous area for them to get out of the wind. This year? the pines were taken out because "they weren't natural" now the pheasants are out one of their main winter hiding areas. my problem....why does it matter if the pines aren't natural? pheasants aren't either.

I know you said it was a WMA, but are you generalizing and it was actually a WPA? Just curious. I know the goals of those who manage WPA's are considerably different and in many cases they will cut down all trees because their focus is not pheasants and only concerned about nesting areas for ducks. Just a thought.

I wish they would actually cut down some of the larger trees (not pines) because they are a good roosting spot for birds of prey and this leads to a lot of predation on pheasants.

Im heading out in the morning for the first hunt this year. I am very eager to see first hand a year over year comparison on an area I hunted often last year. Quite a few birds there last year, normally flushed 20 to 30 birds. Im expecting it to be around half of that, but we will see. I drove around in several times in December last year and most of the grass cover was weighed down by the snow and only cattails remained. I do fear the worst because that isnt the best winter cover for them and from Dec to Mar was some brutal weather in there.

As to the PF topic of them personally boosting bird populations. I have said it before, there is more to what they do than just putting birds on the ground. They are not primarily a land acquisition organization and I dont think they should be. They work to provide the best balance of habitat which means different mixes of grasses, etc.

If you have hunted the same areas for more than 20 years, just look at the makeup of the areas from when you first started to now. I would bet the types of grasses (and diversity of cover) is much greater now than it was then. At least in my experience and I have hunted from Montevideo area to Benson, Hutchinson to Glenwood, etc. And things are drastically different now than they were 20 years ago. Sure the MN DNR may implement these practices, but PF was a large contributor in the practices employed today.

These diverse grasslands are important for nesting cover, winter cover, food sources. They build strong biomass that wasnt there 20 years ago.

[IceAge@work]

Brittman is correct every MN pheasant hunter would benefit from reading the MN DNR Long Range Pheasant Plan.

Cliff notes on the plan are this. The plan's goal is to establish an average population of 3-million birds in the known pheasant range. Not 3-million birds every year but a healthy bird population that would in fact flucuate bewteen 1.5 million birds in tough years and 4.5 million birds in prime years. Pheasant populations will always be fluid and weather impacts matter year-to-year but good habitat always gives the birds the opportunity to recover and pheasants have the capability of recovering very fast.

There is approximately 30-million acres in the MN pheasant range and in order to produce 3-million pheasants the DNR estimates that there needs to be 3-million acres (10%) of undisturbed grass. Undisturbed grass can loosely be defined as grass or other grassy type cover that is bio-diverse (contains forbs etc.), at-least 10" tall by April 15th and would remain undisturbed until at least August 1st each year. Given those requirements areas of pasture land, hay fields, winter wheat etc. while somewhat abundant don't consistently contribute much to pheasant production. Especially in the last couple of decades when changes in farming practices have removed almost all of the bio-diversity present in small grain & hay production.

A lot of the DNR analysis outlined in the plan is based on looking at pheasant habitats in 9 square mile blocks. In order to maintain the stable population levels represented in the goals each 9 square mile block would require 600 acres (10% ot total land mass) of undisturbed grass land and one block of wintering cover that is within at least 1/4 mile of a viable food source. A viable block of wintering cover is defined as an emergent wetland of at least 10 acres in size that is predominantly cattails and low brush (willows etc.). Wetlands are the prefered winter habitat but 3-5 acre shelterbelts can be substituted if they are least 10 rows wide and consist of low conifers and shrubs. Winter cover with tall woody cover is not ideal because it gives airborne predators a vantage point to single out prey.

My point in the other thread was that grasslands are the key to increasing and stabilizing pheasant populations. Winter cover is very important to pheasant survival but the quantity of winter cover required is relatively small. If you drive through West Central & S.W. MN it is not difficult to find mutiple 10-acre blocks of wintering cover in almost any 9 square mile area. A lot of this winter cover could use some improvements (tall trees cut, food plots planted etc.) and some TLC but adequate quantities are usually present. What is not consistently present in those 9-square mile areas is the 10% (600 acres) of undisturbed grasslands.

That shortfall of productive nesting and roosting cover is why increasing acreage in CRP and other conservation programs will be vital going forward. In addition land use dedicated to hay, pasture & small grain production is getting transferred to into corn & soybean production at a rate of about 6% a year. What that means going forward is conservation programs will carry an even heavier the load in regards to water quality and soil conservation. CRP, CREP etc. need to stay if we want to maintain some sembalance of water quality and bio-diversity in our farmland ecosystems. A nice secondary benefit to that purpose would be better pheasant populations.

[LandDr]

I will go back to "if we are not shooting hens...where do they go?

We are not shooting them...or actually a small percentage is shot accidentally but it is not much. Predators get some and so do agriculture activities such as haying. Some die of disease or accidents. But the vast majority of our hens do not make it through the winter.

Therefore all of the grasslands don't really mean a hill of beans because there are fewer and fewet hens to use all of the grass if we don't have the proper winter habitat and food sources.

It's kinda like you and me...build 1,000 apartments in central MN and people move in. But if you don't have any heat and food thru the winter...there will not be very many people left in the spring. These people will reproduce, but eventually there will be less and less. On mild winters the people will fair better and there probably will be more people the next year and so on and so on.

Not much difference between what pheasants need and what people need to survive and grow a population.

Bottom line is "Dean Hens Don't Lay Eggs". You absolutely have to have the winter cover and food to get the hens thru the winter if you are going to have a reproducing population. Mild winters will reduce the risk...but we live in MN and inevitably there are bad winters. You can preach the grasslands but it's pretty quite out there when the hens didn't make it thru the winter.

The great thing about building winter cover is that it actually doesn't take 10's of acres...just a few acres of thick cover (prefered spruce with a shrub row to act as a living snow fence to keep the drifting snow out)and your consistent food source. There are many good areas out there that just need the food...identify them and make sure to get the food in there by the end of October or not too far into November.

Or you can just let the hens that are still left fair for themselves this winter and hope we have a mild one. Not me...my feeders are getting filled right after deer season like they do every year. No school today so I took my 9 yr old out...we kicked up hens all over and we even flushed a covey of 7 roosters out of one thicket. My bird numbers are down a little because it was a really bad winter...but I got a lot of hens thru the winter and I hope to do it again this year.

[pureinsanity]

As far as PF not increasing the population of birds from the other thread. At first I thought this was a completely irrational statement and could not possibly be true, but then I gave it some thought. Have they really increased bird numbers? Probably not, but what they have done is keep them fairly stable. Imagine where we would be without them. You think the souther third of MN is a black desert now, without PF lobbying and creating habitat it would be a lot worse. Given situation of fighting an uphill battle, PF probably has not moved up hill, but they have not lost ground, which is an amazing feat with the high opportunity cost of habitat projects compared to raising costs.

PF has done wonders. If it wasn't for PF making habitat for the birds we'd likely see less and less. Not only that they have been climbing "up" the hill since their start. If it wasn't for them a numerous amount of WMA's that I hunt, you hunt, and your children's children will hunt are out there. just sayin, whoever doesn't support PF SHOULD specifically if they like hunting period.

[pureinsanity]

I just read the comments about PF. I understand your frustration Tom. Put it this way. On my way out west for opener I am use to seeing birds galore! Section gravel roads usually have a few birds gathering gravel. This year I saw NONE of that. The whole way to the hunting land I hunted I NEVER saw a bird, and my whole ride back home I also NEVER saw a bird. But during the day hunting, I flushed more birds, and saw more roosters then I normally would on opener. I was discouraged, I was upset, I even had a negative attitude that we weren't going to see much because of our harsh winter and really wet spring.

To my surprise, the day was more then beneficial to me and my expectations.

Tom, just because you don't see them, doesn't mean they are not there. The ones we "usually" see are usually youngsters that do not know any better.

You and I have talked about PF before. One thing you have to realize that regardless what PF does, mother nature can take ALL of it away in one winter and/or one wet spring. Just because the food is out there, and the cover is there, DOESN'T mean they are OK. It also doesn't mean they are goners too.

With out many of the local chapters purchasing and habitation programs we would not have many of our local WMA's around here. In Scott county PF has had 12 Land Acquisitions, equaling nine - WMA's. 586.07 acres of public hunting land and have completed 629 projects impacting 5,524 acres.

To me that is AMAZING! Does that mean its going to increase the population? or ensure survival of winter/spring? NOPE! But it is going to give every bird out there a fighting chance! Which is pretty amazing that these birds can fight and make it through harsh elements. And its all because of habitat, you, myself, many other people out there. It wouldn't even be possible if it wasn't for you!

Tom, no offense to you but don't give up and not hunt because you haven't seen anything, or because you feel pf hasn't done much in Sibley. Fight back! Get out there and show yourself there are birds out there, get back into the chapter and do something about it. Not everyone will have the guts or drive to do what you have already done.

I know my father has done wonders for the chapter we belong too. Im at a time in my life where I just do not have the time to help other then be sure I donate to PF, attend the banquet, and buy the Pheasant Forever shotgun shells. Maybe some day I will have the time and money to go that extra step.

I have been to many of the chapter meetings and banquets. I am seeing a lot of new faces, fewer old faces. But the one thing I noticed that differs from the starting days to today's day is there are less and less kids involved, and you are seeing less and less of the same faces at the banquets and only people there wanting to win stuff.

We are all spoiled by the efforts of the DNR and PF. We have locked in hunting grounds for you and I and our grand kids. But the one thing we don't do anymore that we use to is spend that extra cash donating to an awesome organization like PF. Todays day and age, specifically younger people just care about themselves and having the best of the best with out sparing a dollar to an organization like PF.....

Nough said. The next time you step foot on a WMA, check and see who donated it? Or next time your dog brings you back a rooster. Say thanks to the PF. If it wasn't for those people volunteering their time and money, you might not even see half of the birds you do today........

[IceAge@work]

Landdr -

Pheasants die. Their whole life is a killing field. They are born to be eaten in one form or another by all sorts of life forms.

I provided information compiled by wildlife professionals and you counter with an analogy between pheasants and apartment dwellers in central Minnesota.

Pheasants and people are not the same. Pheasants don't live 80 years like people can. One rooster pheasant and 10 hens can successfully produce 40 or more juvenile chicks in a matter of weeks. One human male (assuming he is not Shawn Kemp) can produce 1 offspring in nine months. The analogy is not valid.

The Minnesota pheasant range had many more acres of wetlands and shelterbelts in the late 1970's and 80's than it does now. Why was the pheasant population in MN on life support during that time?

During the 1950's & 60's wetlands were being drained at a very high rate yet the pheasant population exploded with the Soil Bank program. The Soil Bank increased nesting and brood rearing cover not winter cover.

The evidence directly correlating healthy pheasant populations and healthy grass lands is overwhelming. Healthy nesting and brood rearing cover is what allows pheasants to overcome high natural mortality.

You say your area has lots of nesting cover. Is it good brood rearing cover? Is it a rank brome grass monoculture? Non-native cool season grasses are only useful pheasant habitat for about 5-years.

Once hatched Pheasant chicks need a diverse grassland with good insect production to survive. Brome grass used in early CRP plantings or left over from abandoned pasture land may be OK for nesting at this point but really doesn't produce many healthy broods.

Current CRP contracts require diverse plantings and mid-contract maintenance. These acres if managed as required will produce good pheasant numbers throughout the contract cycle.

[harvey lee]

Pure

I still attend the annual banquets. I agree that there is more public land one can hunt due to the efforts of PF.

25 years ago, I really wanted to help the birds and was willing to do whatever it took to see an increase in the bird population in our area.

I agree that not all birds are seen at the roadside but, one typically can see enough to know if the population is up or down. Seems to me that is how the DNR does the roadside counts.

Pf is one of the best programs out there for the sportsman to see their dollars going back to the area hunters in regards to increased wildlife.

I simply have questioned that in the past years if the dollars spent has increased the birds. Maybe one has to look at it in a way that it could be worse I guess.

I believe we all know the key to succes for the birds is habitat and with the price of land, that will be harder and harder to get done. It will come down to our Gov seeing that there is enough setaside and programs like CRP to help our birds.

In regards to the chapters, I think it is good that they have a high turnover in board members as new people bring in newer ideas so the chapter does not get stuck in a rut.

As far as me bird hunting this fall, that is not going to hasppen. Our crops are about 90% out and all week every morning I have taken a 45 minute drive through the countryside looking for some birds. I have yet to see one bird in the past week.

[LandDr]

Iceage...the anology was in reflection of "survival" to be able to reproduce...not on reproduction rates.

All mammals require the same basic things for survival...that is what it similar between humans and pheasants as well as almost all other animals.

Bottom line is that if you don't get the hen thru the winter, then the nesting grasslands will not be of any benefit.

If you look back at the years you noted, there are most likely incredibly severe winters and or very wet springs that can be linked with those low bird numbers. I wasn't very old in the 1970s but I recall 2 or 3 winters in a row that my birthday party was canceled due to severe storms...I recall one year, and we have photos of it, that our family car could not be seen due to the snow and it was almost up to the roof of the house.

Soil Bank is an interesting program...from what I understand, they actually allowed landowners to plant the fields into crops such as millet, milo, clover, etc. Wow! Wouldn't that be amazing to be able to plant a larger portion of our CRP acres into a stand of millet or Milo! Especially Milo...it would be great winter cover, great food sources and provide descent brooding. Today's CRP only allows foodplot the size of 5% of the total CRP not to exceed 5 acres...that is so underprovided for what wildlife need in MN to make it thru the winter.

My brooding cover...I own Prairie Land Management (PLM) so almost all of my cover is native prairie and it is managed. However, if I didn't have my woody cover, food plots and feeders, I wouldn't have any pheasants just like the other areas. There is a reason why I have more birds...I get the hens thru the winter so my grasslands have hens to nest in them.

We used to do over 10,000 acre a year in prairie seedings...now we do more around 3 to 5 thousand a year because there are more people out doing that kind of work. We also used to do up to 200,000 trees per year and numerous wetland restorations, food plots and feeders. I am well aware of all the programs and seeding mixes and I used to work for USDA at the NRCS office. I also served two terms on the MN Pheasant Oversight Committee for the DNR. So I have a little bit of experience with this stuff.

Speaking for MN, due to the severe winters we have, we have to get our hens thru the winter in order to have a reproducing population. MN just has too severe of winters. When we have 3 or 4 mild winters in a row, everyone is happy because there are lots of birds around...thus why we had the great harvest numbers a couple years ago, because we had 3 or 4 mild winters in a row. Then we have two bad winters in a row and the population drops dramatically. Is it because of less grasslands? You can argue there are less grasslands in some areas, but in my 9 square mile area there is more grassland...so why are our numbers down also since we actually have more grassland? By plan I have more of what pheasants need on my farms since that is what I do for a living...I design habitat...specifically winter cover with food sources to get the hens thru the winter and then the nesting brooding cover to be utilized by the surviving hens. The more hens you have...the more nesting and brooding you will have.

It is all about the survival of the female.

[LandDr]

Just to give some credit to all of the private companies out there that do habitat management. When there was over 400,000 acres of CREP to be planted in the MN River watershed, the private companies were there to get it done and did a great job with very high success rates. I would guess there are more acres of habitat planted by private companies in MN each year if if they are doing as much or more than we are. Private companies just don't have the marketing to publish everything they do eahc year nor the promotion from the govt and non-profits so everyone knows about it.

Each year there are thousands of acres of prairie burned for management and enhancement, thousands of acres of prairie seeded down, thousands of trees planted, wetlands restored, etc. by private habitat companies. These companies put in VERY long hours and are very passionate about what they do. I would encourage everyone to look them up and give them a big thank you because they rarely get any credit or mention. Most if not all of them are not doing what they do for credit or mention, so they would be very surprised and humbled to hear from you.

Thank you!

[gspman]

Quote:

Low Pheasant Numbers.... why?

An early winter that was snowy, cold and long followed by a long, wet, cold spring. That's why. We've been lucky the last 10-12 years with mild winters and/or good springs. Either we've had good carryover or good hatches or both. This year we had high winter mortality and a lousy hatch.

[BLACKJACK]

Interesting read, especially since I just got back from pheasant hunting in South Dakota, where even in a down year, we saw and shot a lot of birds. Five of us shot 60 birds, we limited out every day except one high wind day. How long would it take the five of us to track down 60 roosters in Minnesota???!

Some random thoughts:

Every time I make the drive on 12 from Aberdeen to Ortonville to Benson, I wonder why MN doesn't have more pheasants? We can pull up to a small 2 acre patch of grass/weeds in SoDak and flush 5-50 birds, yet the same or bigger patch in MN holds nothing. MN has habitat but no birds.

The landscape in SoDak is changing. Where we hunt SW of Aberdeen, 10 years ago you had a hard time finding a cornfield, anything that was there was chopped for cattle feed, now you see whole sections - 640 acres - of corn and soybeans. Fences are getting pulled, rocks picked, and more crops are getting planted. Thank you ethanol. Our rancher is also going out of cattle, he used to have 3000 head in his feedlot. Its easier to crop farm. Consequently, in the long term, pheasant hunting in SoDak will decline. No food in those feedlots in the winter time. And heaven forbid if they'd leave a food plot, even though they're charging us to hunt their land.

Side note, I've never seen so much water out there!!! And seeing all the ducks gave me a &*())!!!

I agree with Landr, all grassland is not the answer, you need winter food and cover. I live in an area with thousands of acres of WPA's, but most of them are worthless for pheasants because there is no winter cover or food around. Hunting them is a nice nature hike but not very productive. I know they are designated as WATERFOWL Production areas but a five acre food plot and 3 acre shelterbelt in each one would produce twice as many pheasants in MN.

Even with cover and food plots and grasslands, we're always going to have less pheasants than SoDak because of the weather. Watch the winter temps in Redfield, SoDak vs. Montevideo. Some winter days they'll get up to 40 degrees while we're at 28. That makes a difference in food requirements.

One big item that PF does for us is lobbying in Washington, it gives sportsman a voice in the Farm Program and maintaining CRP and other conservation programs. Buying another 200 acre wildlife area is small potatoes vs. keeping millions of acres of CRP.

I could go on and on because I love to hunt pheasants but this is getting too long already. I'll still get out pheasant hunting in MN because I love watching the dog work but its a head shaker when you walk for two hours and see only one hen.

[pureinsanity]

Thanks for the report on SD, it is always great to hear a positive report, well half positive! One has to be optimistic when heading out there. Even thought numbers are down here and they say equally in SD as well. It is still probably a few million more birds then Minnesota.

Having hunted Aberdeen before I know what the landscape looks like, and what you are talking about. There is a lot of barren land, and it can be hard to find a crop field. I wouldn't complain about some farm fields showing up. They are few and far between in some of those areas. I would like to see more, a lot more in fact. I remember road hunting some section roads in Aberdeen and stopping at a 100' x 100' slough. (estimate in size, but it was small.) It was on the edge of a corn field and one of the only fields around for a mile or so.

Needless to say I sent the dog in there and for 20 minutes bird flushed out of there. I am not kidding, 20 straight minutes. I saw more pheasants in that 20 minutes then our whole 5 day trip.

What am I getting at? Let the crops go up! More feed for them, more fields for them to pick at. What you should do is talk to the farm owner and educate him on what they need to survive a long winter, and a wet spring. Perhaps convince them to leave a small food plot. convince them to leave that shelter belt, or that small patch of dog woods in the middle of their field. Don't drive through that dried up slough and chop and bail the grass on the surrounding edges.

I am heading out to Mitchell Friday night with great expectations. We have been going back to the same farm for over 20 years and we helped educate him on what keeps the birds around. We benefit from birds being around, and he benefits more as he charges other people to hunt his land.

Every land he owns has a food plot, has shelter belts, sloughs, and has some type of CRP and water source near by whether it be the neighbors property or their own.

Hopefully they wouldn't take offense to it, some might, some might not. But if it means potential increased pheasant numbers, or keeping more birds around which then generates revenue to that farmer from hunters. Those farmers have nothing to lose by listening to you and your suggestions.

You can give it a try! I know we did to our private land owners and now every year they make sure there is the essentials for basic survival of the pheasant. The benefit of them doing this extra step will also benefit you in knowing whats there before you go out there. Every year he tells us what crop he has planted, if the grass or crp was mowed, which sloughs he trudged through with the combine. It makes it easier knowing where to start and what places not to hit.

[CaptainMusky]

I think the one thing that will happen though if you start seeing a lot more crops in SD is that the areas that generally have the most successful nesting (high and dry) would tend to be the most desireable for farm land. So I could see it cutting into the productive nesting land and then pushing the nesting to lower areas that are more prone to being wet. So basically in cool/wet years now they can still nest decently because of the higher areas, but in the future it may not be that way.

I am saying all of the above with no general experience with the landscape in Aberdeen, so maybe its not valid, but something to think about.

[pureinsanity]

It is a valid point you state. The biggest things with land is, if you make it all farm field and take away the habitat, nothing good will happen. If you cut that field in half and leave the natural habitat that would be a lot better.

[raymondk]

There is one positive thing less hunters more enjoyable hunting there still is birds I have been seeing at least 1 rooster every outing with quite e few hens the way this forum sounds like there isn't any birds left in minnesota .I only hunt state land about 90% of the time .There roadside counts might be right but i think it is a little low.I have been seeing almost the same numbers of birds as last year but most of the crops are out which changes things .We did lose alot of birds last year most of the problem came with the heavy wet snow that fattened the cattail sloughs trapping alot of birds and giving them no cover . While everybody is trying to be experts i will be out hunting and enjoying the state land by my self. Thanks

[pureinsanity]

I agree with you Ray! I may have not seen birds like I normally do while driving. But I have seen way more in the field then normal. So I do agree with you

Make you wonder too with the weather we had maybe the road side counts are off... Maybe the pheasants changed their pattern due to the slow wet cold spring? A friend of mine said he saw what he appeared to see as a hen cackling while flying away. There is definitely a late brood. So maybe the roadside counts were done too early.

[lawdog]

I didn't read all the threads but I've lived here in pheasant country for many years and can tell you that without habitat there is no point in thinking about pheasants. With Habitat, then you need to worry about predation and about weather. Both can be very detrimental to bird numbers. We had a perfect storm the last couple years around here to knock our numbers down. We've lost habitat, we've had horrible winters, fur prices suck and controlling predators isn't done much, AND we've had horrible winters and then a terrible spring this year. Why are pheasant numbers pathetic right now? D -- ALL OF THE ABOVE!!!!

[brittman]

As far as me bird hunting this fall, that is not going to hasppen. Our crops are about 90% out and all week every morning I have taken a 45 minute drive through the countryside looking for some birds. I have yet to see one bird in the past week.

Really?

Well I guess each of us reaches a time when one type of hunting just does not fit our style any longer. I know your passion is deer hunting.

The grouse road hunters say the same thing when we are at the bottom of the cycle ... there are just no grouse when I drive around the trails in the evening.

The guys willing to wear down their boots continue to see and kill birds. Some actually prefer lower bird populations because the trail heads and parking lots at public spots are occupied with much less fequency. Always nice to be the first one to walk a property that day ... if not even that week.

[brittman]

Just to give some credit to all of the private companies out there that do habitat management. When there was over 400,000 acres of CREP to be planted in the MN River watershed, the private companies were there to get it done and did a great job with very high success rates.

I would encourage everyone to look them up and give them a big thank you because they rarely get any credit or mention. Most if not all of them are not doing what they do for credit or mention, so they would be very surprised and humbled to hear from you.

Thank you!

Question: Do "for profit" private companies work for credit and mention or do they work for income?