Big Blue Stem

BRITTMAN

BRITTMAN

Well-known member
I have been hunting across a broader range of Minnesota the past week to 10 days. I have not visited some of these areas for a year or two (maybe longer).

I have noticed that the Minnesota DNR has gone crazy in planting huge areas of big blue stem grass in most of their "managed" WMAs. In central and west central MN - some of these tracts are 20 - 60 acres of continuous 4 - 5+ foot high grass.

These areas are difficult to hunt because there are little edges or changes in cover and the grass is too high to enjoy watching dogs work. If you had a youngster or most women along with you, the grass would often be at or above their eyes for m most of time.

Minnesota DNR needs to step back and start planting their WMAs in a more diverse pattern of grasses, forbes and native flowering plants. If you look at the diversity in most (not all) CRP acreage - you will see a much greater variety of grasses including areas of sweet clover. There are a few CPR plots planted in continuous big blue stem, but that seems localized in certain areas of the state.

No issue with have some "patch work" areas of the prairie in big blue stem, but planting the entire area in this mono-diverse ecosystem seems like either a poor decision or a cheap decision.
 
Totally agree, the same for any tall grass.

However I will say this; I have seen places around here planted to bluestem for three or four years then they set it back and go with a more diverse seeding, including more forbs.

I’m on pretty good terms with the local DNR guys and they indicated its so they can burn once or twice and work on controlling the weeds. Big seed bank of native grass and little weed pressure. I’ve seen some very weedy forb plantings and if Canada thistle gets in there it’s lost.

They will also use soybeans in a similar fashion but folks complain about lack of habitat. Remember cost isn’t a big concern for them.

Most likely isn’t your situation but maybe.
 
I believe your comment on thistle and other weed infestations is probably why the DNR plants big blue stem. Deep root system, fairly drought tolerant, tall (shadows light below) all help big blue stem grow well and prevent weed infestations. DNR can plant it and forget it.

Many years ago - most every MN DNR WMA area (except those in S and SW MN main pheasant areas) were "infected" with thistle. I am fairly sure I commented about that on this site too. I am also sure neighboring farmers (next to these infested WMAs) were more than a little irritated if left untreated or not redone.

Yes, walking through thistle is worse than blue stem. All that said, majority of private land CRP is just so much nicer.
 
when i find bluestem, i get a warm feeling inside;) I guess I cant say I've come across an area that was "choked" with bluestem, just good patches. If its the only alternative for the dnr for management on the WMA's, I'll take it 10 out of 10 times-just because of the pheasant production value and other value for other birds and deer, beats driving to a wma full of ankle high brome which seems too often of a scenario.
 
Last edited:
Is there a shortage of traditional good winter cover around? Might be the best option the DNR has to provide nesting, brood rearing & protective cover for the birds on those parcels?

I will take the big blue over the brome grass that is still present on too many MN public parcels any day. Can be a real bird magnet as you approach roosting hour for many weeks into the season. Takes some pretty big snows to fill it in and keep the birds from using it......
 
In "middle MN" pheasant range there is no shortage of cattail and willow swamps - so I do not believe it is designated primarily as winter cover.

No issue with Big Blue Stem when planted in say 5 - 10 acre blocks and is mixed with other grasses, forbes, and wildflower blocks. Edges are always good. 40 acres or more of continuous big blue stem is simply to big and too mono-culture. Big blue stem does provide good cover for pheasants and deer, but becomes coarse and almost inedible (for deer) is fall / winter.

There are blue stem varieties that grow to about 2 - 3 feet high also.

Also interesting that the big blue stem is not used as often in MN core S & SW pheasant counties. It is more north and east of those counties.

I kill a lot of pheasants in 1 - 2 foot high grass. They are there too.
 
Here is a link to managing grasslands for wildlife out of the Purdue.

https://www.purdue.edu/fnr/extension/blog/2017/02/22/native-grasses/


When biologists and land managers talk about managing native warm-season grasses (NWSG) they are really talking about managing early-successional plant communities. Early-successional vegetation (i.e., stands of annual or perennial grasses and forbs [broadleaf plants]) provide benefits for a variety of game and non-game wildlife species. Songbirds, northern bobwhite, and ring-necked pheasants use these areas to build nests and raise broods in the summer and for escape and thermal cover in the winter. White-tailed deer also use these areas heavily for bedding, to hide fawns from predators, and the forbs provide deer with excellent nutrition during the summer.

However, as these stands age their value to most wildlife species decreases drastically! Most stands of planted NWSG have little value, for species such as bobwhite, within 3-5 years of establishment. As the stands age, the tall perennial NWSGs (big bluestem and indiangrass) become thicker; eventually crowding out all the forbs in the stand and creating a monoculture of grass. In the winter, the grasses fall over or “lodge”, as in the picture, and provide little to no cover.

This is why programs such as the Conservation Reserve Program require Mid-Contract Management (MCM) during years 4, 5, or 6 of the contract. MCM is aimed at maintaining or enhancing the wildlife value of NWSG stands by thinning the NWSGs providing room for planted and volunteering forbs to grow. These forbs act as supports for the grasses, helping them stand tall all winter, attract pollinators and insects important to foraging songbirds and game birds in the summer, and provide seed throughout the winter. Additionally, thinning the grasses and providing more room for weeds or forbs to grow will make it easier for ground dwelling wildlife to move and forage.

For most early successional wildlife species, you want the field to be from a 50/50 to 70/30 percent mix of forbs and grasses (favoring forbs). The field should be split into portions and managed on successive years. For larger fields, split the field into 4-5 acres sections. If you have multiple fields on your property you can manage the whole field. The key is to ensure that some cover is left on your farm throughout the winter.
 
Actually they do, but often lack the resources (money) to complete them. If you look at the US F&W service, they have gone all in on allowing grazing and even some farming on ND Waterfowl Production Areas. I have noticed now that a few MN WPAs and even one MN DNR WMA is being actively grazed. Burning is another option.

I have commented, requested and even complained more than once to the MN DNR to burn the WMAs that are in the Prairie Chicken range (old Agassiz shore line). These WMA were often thistle infested and even worse the amount of volunteer cedars growing on some WMAs was really high (and troublesome). Have not been there now since 2016 - so I am hoping next time I visit the cover has resumed to prairie and not some crazy cedar succession.

As the MN DNR increases the amount of land they manage, they also need to better manage the properties they already own. Clubs can help by providing free labor and/or money to get things done right. An example is the MN Sharptail Grouse Society has winter and late spring brush cutting events. Local chapters of PF should continue to strive to help resource proper management of public land.

Again I have visited WMAs in atleast (or about) 30 MN counties. By far the best managed acres are those in the prime (core) pheasant range of S & SW Minnesota.
 
It has been a few years but have seen PF burn crews in western MN south of Ortonville. Not sure if they were sponsored by PF or if PF actually bought the equipment and staffed the crews with PF employees & volunteers? The couple of WMA's I saw them burn looked really good a couple years later.

Often thought PF should allow/encourage a statewide chapter for public land hunters. Various banquets & fundraisers could be held in regional locations and the $$ would be used to improve the habitat on public lands vs. some of the private land projects that go on in the current county chapter system. Statewide chapter could also raise funds for lobbying efforts and for efforts to secure Lands & Legacy matching funds for public land habitat improvements.
 
Agree. Will add PF should not spend any dollars on private land if there is any public land requiring active management unless the private land spot is a key strategic spot in a township or county for holding wildlife.

PF can certainly provide "free" consulting to private land owners on conservation practices and "farming with wildlife" in mind strategies. They should charge a base rate on any active private land management (seed, burning, etc...) services. These services could certainly be done at cost.


DU has alienated many (former members) via some of their private land practices. I can tell you all my former DU dollars goes to RGS and PF now. Both spend $ lobbying for better government strategies and spend money locally. PF land has the added benefit to ducks in most circumstances.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top