Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 41

Thread: Sad!!!!

  1. #21

    Default

    This sums up my previous post:

    PF should consider itself as VERY temporary with the shorter-term job of truly, permanently, restoring pheasants..........FOREVER!!!!!!!

    PF temporary. Pheasants forever. Job done!

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    central california
    Posts
    4,580

    Default

    How would you propose this land is managed? 60 million acres will take a lot of management. Maybe 60 million acres would be better suited to restoring prairie grouse and buffalo populations.
    "The happiest man is he who learns from nature the lesson of worship"

    -Ralph Waldo Emerson

  3. #23

    Default

    Can anyone really say that habitat and numbers in the eastern states hasn't been on a steady decline for the past 40+ years despite the efforts of PF and others to stop the inevitable?

    It's a cost-benefit issue. There simply isn't enough vast, open, unpopulated areas in the east to provide a secure and sound foundation to significantly restore numbers.

    Oh, you may postpone it on continually smaller and smaller pockets but it will constantly be under the tremendous pressure of encroachment.

    Basically I think of it like this: It's us OR pheasants. Consider this:

    Michigan has 13 million people.

    SD has about 800 thousand.

    ND has about 600 thousand. Less than 1/20th of Michigan's!

    In the east, WE occupy the would-be habitat!

    Just recently, with CRP, SD made a tremendous recovery to "hey day" status from 2006 to 2010. Why? Because they had the "raw material" to build on. Lots of unpopulated, lower cost land as far as the eye can see.

    On the contrary, even with CRP available to the eastern states, the decline continued in a straight line from the inception of the CRP program in 1985 until now. Why? Because its foundation is BAD. Shoddy and flimsy. Why didn't CRP take hold in the eastern states? Because the land is way to costly to simply grow grass on it. Have to farm the hell out of it or build a sub-division on it.

  4. #24

    Default

    An apartment building with lots of rowdy, non-paying tenants takes a lot of management and maintenance.

    On the contrary, a field of grass isn't completely maintenance-free, but it's about as low as it gets. In the soil bank years, we didn't have all these fancy grasses that CRP requires - it was just left fallow - weeds and grass grew tall and birds flourished. How fancy does it need to be?

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    1,471

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by quail hound View Post
    How would you propose this land is managed? 60 million acres will take a lot of management. Maybe 60 million acres would be better suited to restoring prairie grouse and buffalo populations.
    Yep an Ivy League prof. wanted to turn all of this into a Buffalo Commons--reduce the population to around 2000 for the Dakotas, KS, OK, NB, eastern CO, and others I forget ----I didn't think much of that idea either.
    Pheasants Forever Life Member

  6. #26

    Default

    Quail Hound.......

    The eastern states are a HUGE money pump for PF. They preach the "gospel" of restoring birds there to keep this pump going strong. Meanwhile, since their inception in 1982, they have had 32 continuous losing seasons in the east. "But if you just keep sending us money, don't worry, we're going to restore birds in the east to the "hey day' level. You simply aren't sending us enough money". Since us easterners have such a nostalgic attraction to the days long gone, we buy it.

    It's been VERY clear for MANY years that the decline in the east is CERTAIN to continue. Short of removing 80% of the people and planting 15% of it to grass, it will not happen.

  7. #27

    Default

    PF should be more upfront, honest, and realistic about the situation in the east.

    "Look, we can't restore birds in the east but we CAN create a HUGE pheasant paradise out west. We CAN expand "pheasantland" way beyond the core of SD and ND to anywhere that has a good foundation to build numbers on - now that's doable but we need your support to accomplish it".

    If they made this directional shift with a time frame to get it done, my pocket book is open.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    central california
    Posts
    4,580

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SDJIM View Post
    Yep an Ivy League prof. wanted to turn all of this into a Buffalo Commons--reduce the population to around 2000 for the Dakotas, KS, OK, NB, eastern CO, and others I forget ----I didn't think much of that idea either.
    I said that tongue in cheek Jim. I'm just trying to figure out how RK's plan would work. Large tracts of prairie grass would be easier to implement and manage but less effective as pheasant habitat. Field edges, marginal areas, creek buffers, wetland areas in smaller tracts would make for better habitat but would be harder to implement with public access in mind.
    "The happiest man is he who learns from nature the lesson of worship"

    -Ralph Waldo Emerson

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    central california
    Posts
    4,580

    Default

    In other words. 60 million acres in 10-80 acre tracts would equal lots of good pheasant habitat but a nightmare to effectively manage where as a few huge tracts of prairie would be easier to take care of (once established) but would be better suited as grouse and bison habitat.
    "The happiest man is he who learns from nature the lesson of worship"

    -Ralph Waldo Emerson

  10. #30

    Default

    There needs to be a checkerboard mix of about 10-15% grass(in 100 to 600 acre parcels) together with 85-90% cropland. NOT just a few HUGE parcels of native prairie - that won't work.

    The "management" of fields left fallow or even seeded can't be that extensive. Let's not make that part of it more complicated than it is. If it stops soil erosion and hens can nest there, it's good to go.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •