A little or a lot, the saga of hard and fast rules!

I guess I can tolerate something that moves inches or feet by expanding into a thicket. It's another thing when things move miles by animals, wind, or water transporting their seed. The key any young folks need reading this is to take care of the problem species early or you'll spend your entire career dealing with them.

Unfortunately, working in government, you will always be under budgeted, under staffed, and dealing with folks giving you tasks that compete with what they told you were your core responsibilities. Funny thing is they rarely take away responsibilities, but they sure like to add more. For instance, when I started I was almost 100% land/wildlife management. They the top decided we should also be law enforcement, 15% gone from management. In 2010 they decided we needed cabins on my area, 7% gone from management. At one point they wanted survey cards/permits for all users that hunted, 7% gone from management. The difference between 100% and 71% leaves a lot of room for species to escape. Maybe I listed this earlier, but my problem species include: Siberian Elm, Black Locust, Sericea Lespedeza, Johnson Grass, Fescue, Smooth Brome, Phragmites, Multi-flora Rose, Crown Vetch, Rough-leafed Dogwood, Eastern Red Cedar, Purple Loosestrife, Cattail, and others. If you start putting a time and money ledger against that, you can't make it balance out.

I guess to put it into perspective, if you look east to west, the same problem is happening in the west now as has already happened in the east. Forestation is advancing. As the seed source increases, the coverage does also in what we'll probably find to be a logarithmic manner. Somewhere there is a tipping point. Evidently Missouri has met it in many areas. Those 2-4 million quail aren't going to happen without a landscape sized effort toward setting back plant succession. Where is that money going to come from?
 
oldandnew said:
Are these planting invasive, create a disruption to the natural order which spawns some other ecological nightmare? Simply we don't know! We thought we had those answers many years ago, but we were mistaken. Cedar trees can provide shelter in icy conditions, I believe like carry enough ice without breaking to provide wind and overhead cover. A lot of pheasant deaths are from ice-beak from having to turn into wind in icy conditions to avoid freezing to death. I have quail roost under them repeatedly in winter, according to them, better accommodations than the prairie grass pasture adjacent, second would be under, you guessed it multi-flora! I agree to much of it all a nightmare. But with quail we have to manage anyway, I assume U-Guide does, and Prairie Drifter. We can all agree, that billiard pool table crop ground is vacant, I would submit vast sweeping prairies are limited as well. Food and checkerboard agricultural quarter sections increased the carrying capacity of game on the prairies. Food and water. It's not food or water which impacts the highly tilled farmlands it's space. As stated before Missouri became quail central because it was about 1/2 pine timber, rough ground, another 1/2 prairie grasslands, which were then put to the plow. The rough ground was left unaltered creating increase in quail population. The pines were succeeded by oaks, again prized, and harvested, creating open spaces, now global warming replaces the oak with soft maple. Un-native aggressively planted K 31, super seeded the prairie, lespedeza not very aggressive, fell pray to tar spot, and higher yielding legumes in favor with the K 31 and cool season imports. Native Quail were and are hear, just not in a cornucopia bounty of population. My thoughts are that pheasants, ducks, geese, deer, turkey are all easy prospects to create habitat for in my opinion. Deer and turkey respond to whim of modern agriculture and sprawling suburbia, as do geese. Ducks are a seasonal issue, and we have a long head start in rescuing the breeding grounds, with a fore front organization, and multi government intervention, at a time of cheap land. Pheasants are barnyard birds, small amounts of nesting cover, winter cover, and eat almost anything, if they are planted, with a chance of decent habitat condition they will reproduce. More complex, more costly are habitat for quail and prairie grouse. These log heads with mining, oil exploration, agriculture practices, and agricultural advise from universities. We all know about Canadian rye, devastating to dogs, could be easily supplanted by less dangerous grasses, yet all states in the Midwest use it. Including Pheasants Forever! No acknowledgement from all the above and no fixes. Again are we wrong before or are we wrong now? What else are we wrong about? I think we have seen the enemy.....and he is Us! Me like watch the birds and they tell me what to do.
Click to expand...

I think your next to last sentence is most of the answer. We created the change and though that land may now support more humans, we have devastated many of our indigenous wildlife species and are making it hard on introduced exotics as well (pheasants etc.). What I think I'm saying and you may or may not be hearing is that if you are seeing birds under cedars and rose and those were replaced with comparable species of plants that don't have the invasive tendencies, the birds would still be there using those less invasive plants. Frequently on this board we see folks that think thick NWSG patches are THE answer to raising pheasants because that is where they find them during the season. However, we know in much of their range that a lot of the CRP patches where we find them in great numbers during the winter, we don't find them in significant numbers in nesting season. The preferred nesting cover in much of Kansas is green wheat. If we replaced the wheat with CRP across the board, we probably wouldn't end up with the same results because the wheat and CRP are not parallel habitat types. Switching out a rose thicket for a plum thicket of similar size are more parallel.
 
All great conversation and information. In Michigan the DNR own roughly 4.59 million acre most is forested, 4 million. Our forested lands are dual certified SFI and FSC and one of the issues we run into when managing our wildlife openings is making sure we are planting only native species and non genetically altered grains. This has been a big issue prior to certification and exotics and invasives were used and in some area choking native species and in some cases choking out the tree regeneration. We are working with our partners like RGS, Wiild Turkey Fed, etc to ensure that the species they are donating are compliant with our cerification. We have the same issues as Kansas in regards to the invasives and are doing what our budgets allow to remove them. We have been doing a lot of burning for phragmities in the winter time. Some mentioned earlier the roll of fire had on our landscape, it is a great tool. However, it is one of the most costly tools to use in habitat management, at least here in my neck of the wood. Many of our forested species benefited greatly from frequent fire on the landscape, from oak to pine to aspen. We have been trying to get rid of scotch pine from our area but does little good when a seed source in on neighboring properties.

I think often the need for quick establishment of cover wins out over other nativ species that take longer to become established. Will wildlife use it, yes but long term impact of those invasives may not sustain the wildlife as it spreads and removes other suitable habitat like nesting cover. Just the ranting of a guy who started in wildlife in Nebrasaka and know deals with timber Michigan. I learned in Nebraska that a quality walnut grove was viewed as an invasive to the farmer who wanted that acreage in beans.....One persons weed is another persons gold mine.
 
All good stuff. I used to say that MDC needs to catch on to what KDWP is doing out west. Because the public areas look better and produce more wildlife than the big plots in missouri. It seems like in Missouri they are thinking "the thicker the better". Some areas you cant even move through. But I have learned that what is good in one area may not be good for another depending on the lay of the land. But you can go to any quail emphasis area in Missouri and none of them look as good as any random wildlife area that surrounds one of those reservoir lakes out in Kansas. If an area floods in Missouri, they leave it for that year. If one floods in Kansas they still manage it. They didnt get to put the crops in but they still mow strips in the weed patches to make the area be as good as it can be for the species of wildlife.
 
PheasantWhisperer said:
All good stuff. I used to say that MDC needs to catch on to what KDWP is doing out west. Because the public areas look better and produce more wildlife than the big plots in missouri. It seems like in Missouri they are thinking "the thicker the better". Some areas you cant even move through. But I have learned that what is good in one area may not be good for another depending on the lay of the land. But you can go to any quail emphasis area in Missouri and none of them look as good as any random wildlife area that surrounds one of those reservoir lakes out in Kansas. If an area floods in Missouri, they leave it for that year. If one floods in Kansas they still manage it. They didnt get to put the crops in but they still mow strips in the weed patches to make the area be as good as it can be for the species of wildlife.
Click to expand...
I refer to it as the Missouri Commission of Fish, Deer, & Turkey. Wait and see what they do with the access of private lands like WHIP. I lobbied for it originally 5 years ago....was told that it wasn't feasible because there was not a "no fault" liability for landowners, beside which they were more comfortable managing the existing conservation lands! Read that as existing! not actively looking for more! There still is no law to hold harmless landowners from liability, from the legislature, I assume they got private insurance now to solve this, could have done that 5 years ago. Oklahoma got on board this year too! Mark my word, Missouri will have less ground at a higher rate of cost as apposed to all adjacent states! Mentioned $10.00+ an acre! It will be slanted toward deer, turkey, and duck hunting. The Conservation Commission is financed by separate taxes, have independence from the legislature. It's unique. Hunters and fishermen were the lead in making it law. Other states are marveling about it 20 years later. They pay equal taxes for all conservation lands to the county for road work etc. which is why they don't want anymore ground, instead we have the interpretive centers in major cities, to educate the general population. It's a fine idea, definitely plus in my view, but all other state agencies do it too! Most of our "public" ground is in the southern half, (along distance from population centers), rugged, forested, and geared to Deer, Turkey, and now the Elk herd! Looks like we are sort of giving up on the prairie chicken, already gave up the ruffed grouse several years ago. Interesting, I assume the pheasant populations to get better in the traditional Missouri habitat areas, by semi-accident. Sorry for the rant. I am getting old, I don't have another lifetime to see progress, and I feel bad that I didn't see it coming, and do more when I could. Dollars spent back in the 60's through the 80's would have bought volumes of habitat, as supposed to dollars spent today! I envy D.U. as an upland hunter. I feel that the constant do this, don't do that, create distractions to the "main thing". We know controlled fire IN MODERATION, is a positive, we know fescue is a universal problem. We need to educate the farmer, provide technology which focus on the bird, clean water, erosion, with programs which are at least neutral dollar-wise to current practices. I believe we can go to war with that, and succeed. I believe that the vast majority of farmers are willing to make changes, heck they have already. I hear from farmers daily who tell me about seeing quail, deer, other forms of wildlife. If it can be made better without a huge loss in income, they will signup. The fear I have is the only thing more endangered by extinction is the family farm and farmer! Quail and the family farm maybe in-separately linked. Technology create habitat! Success will produce more habitat in a broad stroke if it has merit. The chemical and seed giants sponsor and benefit from the research of our universities. Why don't we have grant money to show a non-chemical way? Fescue eliminated by a better alternative? Trust me, if you have ever raised livestock, fescue limitations are visited upon you daily in life! Abraham Lincoln at Gettysburg says, (para-phased)"because our case is new, we must reach for a different and new solutions, the generations will judge each and every one us, based on our decisions." Prairie Drifter in Kansas, do you use Canadian rye? Why? What about butting heads with K-state about burning the entire flint hills annually based on their research? Can't we find a better solution, air quality, (I live in K.C. our air quality is yellow for weeks in the spring.) Not to mention the prairie chicken, meadowlark, (state bird), countless other examples. I am not picking on you, I admire your grasp of the subject, and the fact your in the fight so to speak. Please, I am not singling you out, and I respect what you can or can't say here. Can we use these ideas to form some momentum? I got my chainsaw sharpened up with cedar and multiflora diet, assuming that I can replace them with a new non invasive replacements......after my quail pair off and the new berries and insects germinate! I noted on the Kansas forum, a member had a great time hunting cedar hedgerows in western Kansas in the snow! ironic isn't it?
 
oldandnew said:
I refer to it as the Missouri Commission of Fish, Deer, & Turkey. We know controlled fire IN MODERATION, is a positive, we know fescue is a universal problem. We need to educate the farmer, provide technology which focus on the bird, clean water, erosion, with programs which are at least neutral dollar-wise to current practices. I believe we can go to war with that, and succeed. I believe that the vast majority of farmers are willing to make changes, heck they have already.

Prairie Drifter in Kansas, do you use Canadian rye? Why? What about butting heads with K-state about burning the entire flint hills annually based on their research? Can't we find a better solution, air quality, (I live in K.C. our air quality is yellow for weeks in the spring.) Not to mention the prairie chicken, meadowlark, (state bird), countless other examples. I am not picking on you, I admire your grasp of the subject, and the fact your in the fight so to speak. Please, I am not singling you out, and I respect what you can or can't say here. Can we use these ideas to form some momentum? I got my chainsaw sharpened up with cedar and multiflora diet, assuming that I can replace them with a new non invasive replacements......after my quail pair off and the new berries and insects germinate! I noted on the Kansas forum, a member had a great time hunting cedar hedgerows in western Kansas in the snow! ironic isn't it?
Click to expand...

Forgive me for picking and choosing the parts that I'll use of your quote. Had to pare it down to something I could bite off. I see the same problem in Kansas as you do in Mo. Many of our wildlife managers have focused on deer, turkey, and waterfowl to the demise of our upland species. Where many of our wildlife areas are riparian centered, plant succession is rampant. To keep the quality upland habitat, we have to fight the natural bent to move forward in succession. Not all our managers have and many won't. Some of that has to do with a history of miniscule budgets and limited manpower. Some just a bias. My own area was developed with the mentality that we needed lots of woody cover for "wildlife".

I realize we're both cheering for the same side, we just have different viewpoints. We continue to butt heads with the EIS grazing in the Flint Hills and it's like the ant trying to move a concrete bridge, once the concrete sets, things get tough to move. There are threads of change showing. Have a video somewhere of a producer in the Flint Hills that has switched to patch burn/patch graze. Neighbors watching over the fence will probably try it soon as he proves it's worth. However, we do need to protect the fire heritage on the prairie because you cannot maintain a prairie in the absence of fire. The longer the clock ticks before the next burn, the less effective it will be. We both realize that game like and use cedars, rose, and many of the other problem plants. However, if you back up and look at the big picture, using problem habitat species will be very expensive to control and prairie obligate species themselves will be squeezed out as they replace the prairie. As a group we, as upland hunters, are too quiet. We need to join together and rail against many of the problems that our precious upland species are forced unnecessarily to tolerate. A grassroots effort is what will push this ball forward. It is what gave us CRP in the first place.
 
Troy and Pete for President!! You two should lead the effort. Period. That would put you on the same page! I have done the patch-burn-grazing at my own property. The cows do well on it. It holds birds. And the amount of native flowers in the spring is amazing. Even after the cattle stomp it down, it comes right back in the spring. And its well fertilized! The problem I have in my experiments is weather. The weather seems to be a little more unpredictable and volatile than it used to be. In my own research efforts, I've found that the quail brood does well until they get about and inch and a half tall, and the parent cant quite get them all under their wings. Thats when we suffer the most deaths. Drown or get too cold in the rain. I think I got lucky this year. By the time the heavy rains started they were 4-5 weeks old. from my cameras and pictures I didnt have many mid summer broods. But had some late broods. Seems like they have started to move into the cedar patches more. But I think they use it as escape cover only. And I believe the tall ragweed and plum work just as well. My problem is I dont have any cover in the places that are patch burn grazed. But I do have escape cover within 150 yards. But its cedars. Been cutting down the big cedars and leaving the small ones until I figure out how to manage escape cover. Right now the cedars do well. The farmers around here are starting to let their cows graze the native grass. It took a couple of drought years for them to figure that out though. When the fescue croaks because of drought, the native grass did fine. Some even hayed it. So some are starting to see the value of native prairies.
 
I should have read this conversation earlier

Great discussion. I have 2 acres of rocky ground with a draw running through it on one corner of my crop land. I just ordered 50 cedars, 50 Lilocs and 50 short bushes to cover this area. Goal was to establish a small watering hole with good short cover to give the wildlife a break from hunting pressure. Now I wish I wouldn't have ordered the cedar trees and just went with bushes... sdviking
 
PheasantWhisperer said:
I think honeysuckle fits in that category too. Look at the hills in the winter time driving through Missouri. Its the only thing green and looks like really good cover. Ive seen quail escape to such cover too. But its really invasive. I see it driving through the eastern part of kansas too. But somewhere in the neighborhood of topeka, you stop seeing it. Or seeing so much of it. It almost looks like a break in habitat. Will it not grow in the flinthills?? My dads place in eastern missouri is so overgrown with it that every time im home I go clear a patch out of his woods for him. Cut and spray. And it seems like a lost cause.
Click to expand...

Honeysuckle grows fantastic in the flinthills. At my house, if it can't be mowed, it's about to be honeysuckle. :eek:

I greatly enjoyed reading these posts. We're putting in an outdoor wood furnace this Spring. Hopefully my propane bill will go down along with at least 90% of the cedars on my property. I'm almost giddy thinking about it.
 
I am thinking about this thread again with the wildfire near Medicine Lodge. This would be a good year to take a drive through that area and see what this fire has done to the status quo from a habitat perspective. This should be a great classroom for us to watch wildlife respond to a huge shift in the ecological niche available. These grasslands that had been dominated by Eastern Redcedar will once again be dominated by grassland species and the wildlife that depend upon that type of habitat will fill it. You should be able to drive the perimeter of the fire and compare new to old. Maybe you can take a walk on both sides and compare. I am planning to go down and give it several looks.
 
I agree Troy, the amount of info we c an gather and learn following any wildfire event is endless. I've often thought we need a photo station to document how the site recovers and what spec.es are coming back for but flora and fauna. Hopefully this fire occurred prior to nesting season. Fire is such a great management tool, just not always use friendly. Hope the weather changes in the foivor of the firefighters an no more structures lost.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top