Brood counts

B

BigRand

Active member
See they eliminated doing the late summer brood counts today at the commission meeting. Can't say I ever paid a lot of attention to them because as a resident I still go every day I can. Find it funny that they eliminate them after they started showing decline in population for the last decade. Instead deciding to spend 700K in advertising. That 700K would do a lot more for habitat than it will for attracting hunters. As the movie said "if you build it they will come". Thus if you have habitat, the birds will be there. In turn leading to hunters showing up. They'd rather attract more hunters with advertising than actually producing more birds and returning this state to a pheasant mecca where no advertising was needed.
 
I think this could potentially backfire on them. So you advertise and all the nonresident hunters come to South Dakota claiming “ birds are everywhere“! Guys come out and only shoot a few birds for the group or they find a public place and it’s loaded With other hunters. If they have a poor experience do you think they’re ever coming back?
I look forward every year to the brood reports. Yes I know that they are not totally accurate but at least it gave you something to get excited about. I’m counting on you haymaker for my reports LOL
 
We would never let the Brood counts determine if we were coming or not but always enjoyed seeing the numbers just to see how they compared to prior year. Also was always a sign that season was getting closer.
 
the reports' veracity was always questioned anyway, that is was just a marketing ploy...I'm OK with this...Ive been out there 3 times so far in the past 2 months, I know what I need to know!
 
It’s a government agency. Less hunters their job is in jeopardy. I think it’s crap they aren’t doing surveys. Keep raising the license fees for out of staters like they have been. I’ve started hunting Iowa and found its better than I expected. I’m from Omaha.
 
benelli-banger said:
the reports' veracity was always questioned anyway, that is was just a marketing ploy...I'm OK with this...Ive been out there 3 times so far in the past 2 months, I know what I need to know!
Click to expand...
I assume you understand that not everyone can get out there at all much less the frequency that you do? It wasnt a perfect science but it certainly helped some guys decide which general part of the state
 
UplandHntr said:
I assume you understand that not everyone can get out there at all much less the frequency that you do? It wasnt a perfect science but it certainly helped some guys decide which general part of the state
Click to expand...
For sure, was being a wise guy....I just always had to muzzle myself when the debates start every late August after the report comes out, and much skepticism would surface about gfp's motives...I have never doubted the #'s, they usually were in line with what I saw that fall...
 
There are some terrific computer tools out there relating to the weather that are very helpful to pinpoint how to determine how the hatch fared. They are a look-back at temps, precip, etc.... i swear by them. Based out of nebraska.. current climate summary reports....i focus on june primarily, july a close second...i look at May as well...
 
Last edited:
also, UGUIDE posts terrific real-time data weekly about his 5-6 camps...still there...use that as a rough tool for different parts of the state...
 
Weather has been favorable for nesting conditions. If we can get some timely rains and stay away from the severe weather we should see a decent batch.
 
Imagine this. The state takes the 700K they're using for advertising and the 500K they're using for the useless bounty program and put it into habitat. 1.3 million a year for habitat. Imagine what good that could do for the pheasant population. If the numbers were good I can almost guarantee that advertising wouldn't be needed.
 
I agree in large part with BigRand. The money that the state has funneled to the programs Rand mentioned could be put to much better use in securing additional lands, either short or long term leases. Many rural folks in SD already take every opportunity to snipe nest predators. $5 bounties won't make near the impact that adding grasslands will make as it relates to helping pheasants. The state needs to really examine adding a dedicated habitat stamp where money goes directly to the land pheasants need to survive. Word of mouth will make sure license sales are through the roof if the birds numbers are strong. Things are changing in SD and we didn't raise near the waterfowl in 2019 that we normally do. I attribute that to the lack of grasslands across the countryside (that weren't flooded) but I sure have been wrong before. Prioritization of habitat should be the number one thing on the SD GFP's brain right now!
 
labrador said:
I agree in large part with BigRand. The money that the state has funneled to the programs Rand mentioned could be put to much better use in securing additional lands, either short or long term leases. Many rural folks in SD already take every opportunity to snipe nest predators. $5 bounties won't make near the impact that adding grasslands will make as it relates to helping pheasants. The state needs to really examine adding a dedicated habitat stamp where money goes directly to the land pheasants need to survive. Word of mouth will make sure license sales are through the roof if the birds numbers are strong. Things are changing in SD and we didn't raise near the waterfowl in 2019 that we normally do. I attribute that to the lack of grasslands across the countryside (that weren't flooded) but I sure have been wrong before. Prioritization of habitat should be the number one thing on the SD GFP's brain right now!
Click to expand...

this is exactly the problem i have with the decisions to piss away money on ads......and a predator bounty.
where the hell are those bright, overpaid game biologists?? do they think these programs make sense??
i guess there is money to be made in the buddy system, that's how most of these programs evolve.
 
just a guess, the predator bounty made the governor look good, at least the governor thought it would, anyway...didn't they have a pheasant summit a few years ago?
 
All that summit was just a bunch of hot air. Nothing ever came out of it. Just the former governor, do nothing for the outdoors Daugaard, and his attempt to make it appear like he gave a crap about wildlife. Much like our current governor trying to make it appear as if they care about the outdoors. Most of these decisions are made by the game commission and not actually the biologist that know what they're talking about.
 
Unfortunately in SD like every other state the biologists are farther down the food chain than the politicians. As a result the policies are usually made by the biggest contributor to the governors election. I do know in AK even the upper tiered biologists take their marching orders from political appointees and they dammed well better do as they are told or they get sent to the worst post doing the worst job imaginable. I can't imagine that it is any different in SD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top