Them Changes

BritChaser

BritChaser

Well-known member
I began hunting NW KS in the mid-90s. Hunting was so good. I had good luck hunting without a dog for five years and then it got even better when I got my first bird dog. My hunting partner and I sometimes had our four-bird limits before lunch.

This opening weekend we hunted what was an ideal pheasant habitat. It was a large grassy, weedy draw with some stranding water in the middle of a quarter and was surrounded exclusively by wheat stubble and corn stalks. Moreover, it was private ground.

No pheasants. Just a small covey of quail. Why?
 
It’s not a simple answer, it’s complex! Nebraska and Iowa were like that too and Kansas was like that until 2011 or so. It was unusual to not kill your limit and see many more that you could have killed! I for one didn’t appreciate what we had, I didn’t think it would ever go away!

Some of the things I believe that are the cause and while not scientifically proven include:
Large clean farming, with loss of small fields, fence rows, tree lines, etc,
Loss of habitat, a great deal of CRP has been taken out when corn was $8 bushel,
Weather, rain during nesting, drought and hail in the summer and ice and bitter cold in the winter,
Increased use of pesticides and herbicides,
Increased predators like coyotes, raccoons, fox and skunks. My buddies killed 20 coyotes in 3 nights with their thermal scopes in 3 contiguous sections,
Diseases like bird flu and screwworm in quail.

Nebraska and Kansas don’t farm for pheasants like South Dakota does. There’s habitat and farms leave food and they control predators better.

I don’t know the answer but I sure like to see it go back to how it was……..
 
I heard a big change is Kansas was the switch to a different type of wheat. It doesn't grow all tall so less susceptible to wind damage. After harvest it has shorter stubble and is not good habitat like the old stuff.
 
Bob Peters said:
I heard a big change is Kansas was the switch to a different type of wheat. It doesn't grow all tall so less susceptible to wind damage. After harvest it has shorter stubble and is not good habitat like the old stuff.
Click to expand...

That and the elimination of Milo. In the seventies most wheat stubble was left high and there were many miles of Milo. It was rare to see a corn field in many parts of the state. Soon the Milo disappeared and corn started to take over. There was a resurgence when CRP made sense then corn and weather took care of that. South Dakota has also had down years due to weather, but it bounced back because the structure was there. It will take several years to come back at all but it will never be what it was as long as the state only cares about deer and how many worthless acreage they can sign up
 
The only time in Iowa I can remember low bird numbers was after severe winters. Back in the early 2000s the bird numbers were so low, I didn't hunt them, and I had a dog. The few surviving birds were mostly around building sites with good conifer shelterbelts and active bins sites or livestock facilities. I don't think predators really have much to do with bird numbers.
 
Yes, I do believe that. I don't think they have a huge effect on the numbers. I think weather is the number one thing that effects the population....as long as you have the habitat. I think the raptors get more pheasants in my area than the furry ones.
 
carptom1 said:
It will take several years to come back at all but it will never be what it was as long as the state only cares about deer and how many worthless acreage they can sign up
Click to expand...
Here is some quality Nebraska acres that you can come hunt upland in thanks to Nebraska Game and Parks! Let me know how you do?

IMG_1572.jpeg
 
Brentbullets said:
Remy, do you really believe predators don't affect the population?
Click to expand...
I also do not think predators have that much to do with it. When southern Iowa was at it's peak, you would not believe the number of predators. It's mostly farming practices and loss of crp. Another thing people don't think about is field tiling. When you do away with waterways you do away with habitat.
 
birddude said:
I also do not think predators have that much to do with it. When southern Iowa was at it's peak, you would not believe the number of predators. It's mostly farming practices and loss of crp. Another thing people don't think about is field tiling. When you do away with waterways you do away with habitat.
Click to expand...
 
airmedic1 said:
Here is some quality Nebraska acres that you can come hunt upland in thanks to Nebraska Game and Parks! Let me know how you do?

View attachment 12302
Click to expand...
I don’t know how the state goes about signing up average and would hope situations like this are done due to taking all available acreage and some other land in the lot is better. I do think if they want it fixed it can be done.

1. Increase license fees and add a habit stamp for upland.
2. Lower enrolled acres.
3. Add enhanced payment options targeting permanent cover/crp. Add money for food plots or buffer strips. The more farmers provide the more they are paid. Make it to where it makes more sense to take a guaranteed check every year instead of farming. Especially when added to CRP payments. If a guy can bundle them together it might make sense to take it on a portion of their land. I would rather see less land but better quality.
 
I have paid for habitat stamps in other states I think if Ks had an Upland habitat stamp and the wildlife and parks did manipulate for anything else but habitat , I can say the wild life and parks seem to be doing a good job on state owned lands / habitat work / on staff pheasant forever biologists.
 
1) habitat
2) weather

Severe drought in several states in recent years is not helping #2.

Predators do not have a significant affect on upland bird populations. Nothing near the two items mentioned above.
 
carptom1 said:
I don’t know how the state goes about signing up average and would hope situations like this are done due to taking all available acreage and some other land in the lot is better. I do think if they want it fixed it can be done.

1. Increase license fees and add a habit stamp for upland.
2. Lower enrolled acres.
3. Add enhanced payment options targeting permanent cover/crp. Add money for food plots or buffer strips. The more farmers provide the more they are paid. Make it to where it makes more sense to take a guaranteed check every year instead of farming. Especially when added to CRP payments. If a guy can bundle them together it might make sense to take it on a portion of their land. I would rather see less land but better quality.
Click to expand...
Didn’t I see that SD GF&P used habitat stamp money to build boat ramps and other improvements for fishing?
 
Chestle said:
Didn’t I see that SD GF&P used habitat stamp money to build boat ramps and other improvements for fishing?
Click to expand...
It wouldn’t surprise me. But there is no comparison between the efforts Kansas puts in compared to SD. Every time an increase in license fees gets brought up people cry poverty or that it will keep people out of the sport. What keeps people out of the sport is pathetic success. It is 27.50 to hunt for a year in Kansas as a resident. I don’t remember but seems to me it was 20 bucks 15 years ago. I would gladly pay 75 or more for a chance at good hunting prospects. If you can’t afford that you should probably be working instead of hunting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top