Interesting Quail Study

All fires are not created equal. The fires in the flint hills have long ago turned from good to bad. Since they started using early intensive grazing where they burn every year and double stock for the first half of the season, quail populations have tailed off. Quail need cover to both nest in and escape predators in. With no cover left over hundreds of thousands of acres, depredations is greatly increased and nesting success is greatly decreased. Further, many of their burns are late in the season, multiplying the problem. SE Kansas went from tall-grass native prairie in the first half of the 1900's to fescue predominantly in the last half. Forestation increased some 30% or more in that part of the state since the '80's. Add in changing ag practices, less dependence on wood for cooking and heat, and any number of variables ( urbanization, neonicotinoids, roundup everything) and it gets us to where we are today.
Is there any way to act on this knowledge? Maybe fund small fenced off "islands" where cattle and fire are excluded every 1,000 acres or so?

Of course, one might argue that intense pasturing and burning are driven by the need to feed the multitudes. But that is not actionable (or at least, would most likely lead, correctly so, to future war crime trials). As should any forced moves to veganism - but that's just my opinion, of course.
 
I spent the better part of my 20s and 30s helping my dad with about 800 acres of far northern Greenwood county. We aren't a farming or ranching family. When we bought it, the land was mostly pasture with about 100 acres of tillable. The previous owner was an active producer, but was retiring. For a variety of reasons we converted the grazed ground to hay production and removed as much interior fence as we could.

Over time the quail hunting went from great to dismal. The turkey and deer hunting went from good to great. What's probably obvious to Prairie Drifter (and at this point, to me) is that the conversion from grazed land to hayed land was a direct cause of the decline in quail. Another direct cause was not enough fire. At time the we looked at the margins of cover around the timber and in the un-hayable areas and asked ourselves "this is great cover, why aren't there any quail here?" We didn't notice that from a quail's point of view what was excellent winter survival cover was poor nesting and brood-rearing cover. We didn't notice the natural succession in some of those areas from young trees and brush to mature, dense canopy. The quail hunting recovered a little in the last few years we owned it. We didn't connect the dots that we were coming out of a severe drought that had thinned out some of the too-thick cover. We didn't connect the dots that the places where we were now seeing quail that had been vacant for 10+ years were the same areas that burned for the first time in 15 years when a neighbor's fire escaped containment.
 
If you have been around farmers or ranchers much, you will notice that they do what makes them a reasonable income and what they can do with the machinery and manpower that they have. The burning in the flint hills is expansive because the land is not broken up by roads and other easy fire breaks. Therefore, owners group together and burn everything they can to established fire breaks. The use early intensive grazing because it results in 60# of additional gain per head. The thing that wildlife managers would glean from what is going on there is, any time you do the same thing every year, is that you are selecting both for and against a variety of species of plants and animals. The original "natural" forces that influenced the development of the native warm-season grasslands were diverse over time with limited repetition. Similarly, continued rest (management of a sort) is not conducive to maintaining grasslands in the long term. The time since fire has significant influence on keeping grasslands stable. The forestation seen in SE Kansas to a strong extent and everywhere else at varying levels of increase is a combination of not having fire in the ecosystem as well as having a number of non-native tree species out-competing native species. There also (personal observation) seems to be some symbiosis in non-native species benefiting each other. If you ever look under Siberian Elms, generally as they get bigger the only thing that grows beneath them is downy brome (cheat). Humans are not real good on average imitating nature's diversity. Even the patch burn/patch graze method I use in my management has a limited number of diverse methods compared to long-term natural systems.
 
Really good podcast on the subject.

I am currently in the habitat first program for tree removal. Its insane the amount of trees that poor management by the previous owner let start. In 1981 there was one tree on the place. I have removed thousands and reintroduced fire, killed out fescue and planted nwsg, planted milo food plots, got the sericea somewhat controlledand I am currently trapping predators.
I am going to split my place this year. Ill burn the south part this spring and the north part around sept 1 for sericea control. After this year I hope to get on a 3 year rotation.
 
You know.... I read that and just scratch my head. QF publicity resulted in our western WMAs getting absolutely POUNDED in 2015-17. Beaver WMA had license plates from almost every state in 15-16.
 
You know.... I read that and just scratch my head. QF publicity resulted in our western WMAs getting absolutely POUNDED in 2015-17. Beaver WMA had license plates from almost every state in 15-16.
QF and PF do not care about anything other than padding corporates pockets. They are poorly run.

Now I'll duck and run for cover as there are a # of QF and PF homers on here that refuse to see the obvious. Maybe they do some good around their HQ - KS, OK, TX etc - they just want your money and for the corporate fellows to come hunt something they've gotten their name associated with for free.
 
If you have been around farmers or ranchers much, you will notice that they do what makes them a reasonable income and what they can do with the machinery and manpower that they have. The burning in the flint hills is expansive because the land is not broken up by roads and other easy fire breaks. Therefore, owners group together and burn everything they can to established fire breaks. The use early intensive grazing because it results in 60# of additional gain per head. The thing that wildlife managers would glean from what is going on there is, any time you do the same thing every year, is that you are selecting both for and against a variety of species of plants and animals. The original "natural" forces that influenced the development of the native warm-season grasslands were diverse over time with limited repetition. Similarly, continued rest (management of a sort) is not conducive to maintaining grasslands in the long term. The time since fire has significant influence on keeping grasslands stable. The forestation seen in SE Kansas to a strong extent and everywhere else at varying levels of increase is a combination of not having fire in the ecosystem as well as having a number of non-native tree species out-competing native species. There also (personal observation) seems to be some symbiosis in non-native species benefiting each other. If you ever look under Siberian Elms, generally as they get bigger the only thing that grows beneath them is downy brome (cheat). Humans are not real good on average imitating nature's diversity. Even the patch burn/patch graze method I use in my management has a limited number of diverse methods compared to long-term natural systems.
Great read and you obviously have vast knowledge of the topic. Can this be translated into action? e.g., any merit in attempting to structure a reward system for ranchers willing to create "quail ponds" or small fenced off habitat islands among the vast areas of cow dining rooms?
 
QF and PF do not care about anything other than padding corporates pockets. They are poorly run.

Now I'll duck and run for cover as there are a # of QF and PF homers on here that refuse to see the obvious. Maybe they do some good around their HQ - KS, OK, TX etc - they just want your money and for the corporate fellows to come hunt something they've gotten their name associated with for free.
Tend to agree but I'm probably biased by the bad taste left by QU and the turkey criminals (both out of Edgefield SC). It does seem that their primary activities are asking for your money directly and indirectly (by lobbying for taxpayer funded "programs"). Is DU any better? Seems like they've had some success in helping protect and nurture nesting areas but that could be illusory. Also, just a nit, but FWIW I think PF is actually headquartered in Minnesota of all places.
 
Tend to agree but I'm probably biased by the bad taste left by QU and the turkey criminals (both out of Edgefield SC). It does seem that their primary activities are asking for your money directly and indirectly (by lobbying for taxpayer funded "programs"). Is DU any better? Seems like they've had some success in helping protect and nurture nesting areas but that could be illusory. Also, just a nit, but FWIW I think PF is actually headquartered in Minnesota of all places.
Yes they are in MN -- I dont even need to look up annual pheasant harvest figures to see how successful PF has been in creating pheasant habitat in the state their HQ'd in :rolleyes:

The more I hear about how they operate the more I do not like the non profit.


I've personally witnessed more positives from Ducks Unlimited as far as creating habitat and creating quality habitat in KS that is accessible to the public. PF and QF get a gigantic FAIL in that category in KS. I doubt it's much different in states outside of KS.
 
Great read and you obviously have vast knowledge of the topic. Can this be translated into action? e.g., any merit in attempting to structure a reward system for ranchers willing to create "quail ponds" or small fenced off habitat islands among the vast areas of cow dining rooms?
On the private side, a landowner has to "want" to work for wildlife in order to invest in practices that benefit wildlife that may well cut into his bottom line. Not all landowners have that interest. In the advent of "precision agriculture", I would hope that more landowners find out exactly what land is not providing them profit and they take those acres out of production. Read an article once that spoke about a farmer finding via the GPS harvest monitor on his combine that an island of soil in a particular field eliminated the profit of the entire field. He put those acres into CRP and farmed the profitable acres with the added CRP acres, which returned all the acres into productive income producers. It is this mentality that we need to get into a system through the farm program, putting those non-productive acres into permanent habitat that provides both income for the owner and useable space to the farmer. Changing CRP from a maximum of 25 million acres to a minimum of 50 million acres would go a long way to satisfying that ideology. Pressure to get CRP guidelines that only include "native" covers would also make sure that the modified acres were conducive to supporting wildlife populations. There are many ideas out there. We, as voters need to make the government aware of what we want to see in those programs.
 
On the private side, a landowner has to "want" to work for wildlife in order to invest in practices that benefit wildlife that may well cut into his bottom line. Not all landowners have that interest. In the advent of "precision agriculture", I would hope that more landowners find out exactly what land is not providing them profit and they take those acres out of production. Read an article once that spoke about a farmer finding via the GPS harvest monitor on his combine that an island of soil in a particular field eliminated the profit of the entire field. He put those acres into CRP and farmed the profitable acres with the added CRP acres, which returned all the acres into productive income producers. It is this mentality that we need to get into a system through the farm program, putting those non-productive acres into permanent habitat that provides both income for the owner and useable space to the farmer. Changing CRP from a maximum of 25 million acres to a minimum of 50 million acres would go a long way to satisfying that ideology. Pressure to get CRP guidelines that only include "native" covers would also make sure that the modified acres were conducive to supporting wildlife populations. There are many ideas out there. We, as voters need to make the government aware of what we want to see in those programs.
Good stuff - but don't see expanded government programs as a realistic solution in the era of the national debt accumulating at the rate of trillions per milli-second. And a primarily urban/suburban political constituency, to boot. You hit on a good point, in particular, that good farming practices and good wildlife habitat are NOT competing interests, or shouldn't be. Personally - it beats the hell out of me why I get paid not to till unproductive and/or easily eroded soils. I'd do that for nothing and believe many, make that most, would do the same.

Maybe what we need is an active cooperative program with, e.g., John Deere to make farmers aware of circumstances like the ones you described. Farmers aren't dummies, or they'd long have been out of business - education and information upon which to base better informed judgements might be the most cost effective approach. Precision farming may be the cure, or at least go far to mediate the problem.
 
Its almost unbelivable how much habitat is coming out around here. With the dry fall the bulldozers have been busy. I have a spot I drive by everyday on the way to work. It was grown thick with cedars that were only 3-4 ft tall. A hot burn last spring caught them. They ran cattle in it and have it grubbed down to nothing. 2 weeks ago I see they terraced it. Its going back into production. Another guy just rerouted a creek. Drove by a spot last saturdaythat was always a standby for quail. That fencerow is gone, it was done sometime in the last month.
 
Its almost unbelivable how much habitat is coming out around here. With the dry fall the bulldozers have been busy. I have a spot I drive by everyday on the way to work. It was grown thick with cedars that were only 3-4 ft tall. A hot burn last spring caught them. They ran cattle in it and have it grubbed down to nothing. 2 weeks ago I see they terraced it. Its going back into production. Another guy just rerouted a creek. Drove by a spot last saturdaythat was always a standby for quail. That fencerow is gone, it was done sometime in the last month.
I didn't know you could kill cedars that easily, but that's a good thing - right? Wouldn't want to be the guy that re-routed a creek, we got threatening letters from The Man for just clearing the brush out of a creek bed to reduce the amount of soil erosion and attendant water pollution.
 
I start getting riled this time a year. Why isn't there a huntable population of quail near me in west central Missouri. It was great until 1994, it crashed thru the 90's, and by 2000 it was gone. It's an event to see or hear a quail around here. what happened, did our great habitat turn into a desert wasteland? are predators killing birds, or decimating the birds ability to pair and mate? Are modern farming practices killing birds, or just taking away all the nesting or brooding cover? Are insecticides eliminating the standard chick diet? Is there a parasite, virus, or fungus killing the birds? Missouri dept. of conservation ( MDC) has argued for years that changing the seasons and limits would not effect quail populations, because they have the ability to repopulate by larger broods and re-nesting for extra broods with decent weather. The MDC has done a great study on grassland vs standard farming habitat, but they are unwilling to make the study public. What results they will make public ( from an earlier post) showed burning or grazing CRP was beneficial to Quail, and they mate earlier than we thought. They are unwilling to show high predation, and extremely low number of attempts at re-nesting. Most of us are from or hunt differing habitats, from desert, to sand hills, to flint hills, to intensively farmed ground, and CRP. We all want more Quail. If you haven't already, look up the Rolling Plains Quail Research Foundation. They are looking hard at any and all reasons for Quail decline in Texas, not just the easy standard QF, PF, MDC reason, "its up to the landowner" habitat. Texas has a problem with eye worms and gut worms. in Missouri, MDC told us "if you build it they will come" , then you didn't build it right, then you didn't maintain it. I'm hopefull that "farm the best, habitat the rest" will take hold, and that scientific study will allow us to define and quantify the problem for each of our areas, so it can be addressed by willing land stewards.
 
I didn't know you could kill cedars that easily, but that's a good thing - right? Wouldn't want to be the guy that re-routed a creek, we got threatening letters from The Man for just clearing the brush out of a creek bed to reduce the amount of soil erosion and attendant water pollution.
Just so it's out there for folks who, like you, may not understand the difference between deciduous trees and evergreens, there are a few differences. First, evergreens do not go dormant come winter or drop their leaves. Second, deciduous trees store their reserves in their roots where evergreens store theirs above ground. Hence, when you kill the above ground portion of an evergreen, they are dead! Whether that is by fire, heat, or cutting them below the lowest green limbs, they are done. Deciduous trees vary in the strength of their resprouting capabilities, but most all of them can resprout when the top is damaged, removed, or killed.
 
I start getting riled this time a year. Why isn't there a huntable population of quail near me in west central Missouri. It was great until 1994, it crashed thru the 90's, and by 2000 it was gone. It's an event to see or hear a quail around here. what happened, did our great habitat turn into a desert wasteland? are predators killing birds, or decimating the birds ability to pair and mate? Are modern farming practices killing birds, or just taking away all the nesting or brooding cover? Are insecticides eliminating the standard chick diet? Is there a parasite, virus, or fungus killing the birds? Missouri dept. of conservation ( MDC) has argued for years that changing the seasons and limits would not effect quail populations, because they have the ability to repopulate by larger broods and re-nesting for extra broods with decent weather. The MDC has done a great study on grassland vs standard farming habitat, but they are unwilling to make the study public. What results they will make public ( from an earlier post) showed burning or grazing CRP was beneficial to Quail, and they mate earlier than we thought. They are unwilling to show high predation, and extremely low number of attempts at re-nesting. Most of us are from or hunt differing habitats, from desert, to sand hills, to flint hills, to intensively farmed ground, and CRP. We all want more Quail. If you haven't already, look up the Rolling Plains Quail Research Foundation. They are looking hard at any and all reasons for Quail decline in Texas, not just the easy standard QF, PF, MDC reason, "its up to the landowner" habitat. Texas has a problem with eye worms and gut worms. in Missouri, MDC told us "if you build it they will come" , then you didn't build it right, then you didn't maintain it. I'm hopefull that "farm the best, habitat the rest" will take hold, and that scientific study will allow us to define and quantify the problem for each of our areas, so it can be addressed by willing land stewards.

Having never hunted Missouri for quail, it always baffled me that there isn't a decent quail population there.
My fiance's parents live in Southern Missouri next to a golf course in a small town. It was winter, and I ran my pointers on the golf course to let them burn off some steam. I was shocked when they found a strong covey there. Just don't understand why Missouri doesn't have good numbers.
 
Just so it's out there for folks who, like you, may not understand the difference between deciduous trees and evergreens, there are a few differences. First, evergreens do not go dormant come winter or drop their leaves. Second, deciduous trees store their reserves in their roots where evergreens store theirs above ground. Hence, when you kill the above ground portion of an evergreen, they are dead! Whether that is by fire, heat, or cutting them below the lowest green limbs, they are done. Deciduous trees vary in the strength of their resprouting capabilities, but most all of them can resprout when the top is damaged, removed, or killed.
Thanks, good to know. In my experience, much more limited than yours I am certain, once you got 'em - they always come back but from your excellent information above, I surmise the "replacements" are transports from, maybe, seeds in bird poop from other cedars in the general neighborhood. Now for the $64 question - how do you make a honey locust go away and never come back without the application of world-class carcinogens to the "stumps"!

And by the way - you are an excellent example of what I'm talking about when I refer to very high knowledge/skills/dedication of the KDWPT professionals at the ground level.
 
Last edited:
Having never hunted Missouri for quail, it always baffled me that there isn't a decent quail population there.
My fiance's parents live in Southern Missouri next to a golf course in a small town. It was winter, and I ran my pointers on the golf course to let them burn off some steam. I was shocked when they found a strong covey there. Just don't understand why Missouri doesn't have good numbers.

A DVD that I think you might find to be both informative and useful at a practical level, as continues to be for me, is titled "Private Land Care". I got it from the Missouri Department of Conservation. Time blurs for me, so it may have been several years now - hope it is still available, good stuff.

It fear it will be an uphill battle for quail for many reasons. But IMHO it is one worth fighting.
 
Thanks, good to know. In my experience, much more limited than yours I am certain, once you got 'em - they always come back but from your excellent information above, I surmise the "replacements" are transports from, maybe, seeds in bird poop from other cedars in the general neighborhood. Now for the $64 question - how do you make a honey locust go away and never come back without the application of world-class carcinogens to the "stumps"!

And by the way - you are an excellent example of what I'm talking about when I refer to very high knowledge/skills/dedication of the KDWPT professionals at the ground level.
The answer to the Locust question is, have another drought like we had in 2012! That killed a lot of my locust on the area. Otherwise it is Pathway herbicide. Thanks for the compliment on my work. Have almost 36 years in with KDWPT and am getting more done that ever. Helps to be a scrounge. Helps to have folks adding to the accomplishment list. I've hired nearly 100 seasonal employees over the years and one of my favorite stats are how many of them have gotten full time jobs with this department or others. Probably several more than I know about.

As for Missouri, I think a lot of what is going wrong in eastern Kansas is the same problem in Missouri. The advance of forestation and the maturing of the forests over time is part of it. Fescue is also a part of it. Ag practices sure have to take some blame and the shift of people off the land and into the city is part of it. To make a living on a 40 acre farm is impossible these days with commodity crops. Small fields are almost a thing of the past. Weeds have become enemies and insects are getting sprayed whether it is financially prudent or not at times. It's just dang hard to get from egg to vest for a quail! Add in the newly discovered eye and cecal worms and things with global warming that we may not have figured out yet. Diversity doesn't seem to matter to the human animal and we fight tooth and toenail against it when the Good Lord built the place balanced with diversity. We have to be the little engine and keep working on the places we have control of. Some videos here might fill in some voids. https://ksoutdoors.com/KDWPT-Info/Locations/Wildlife-Areas/South-Central/Byron-Walker
 
Last edited:
Drifter,
That did it, now I really must go check out Byron Walker, soon. Looks like SOMEONE is doing a hell of a job there.

In the "its small world" department - have you ever run across a fellow wildlife management professional that, last I knew, was working in SE Colorado? Patty Moore by name. Extremely dedicated professional with a real passion for restoring quail in VA. Despite the many frustrations, she went at it full tilt and non-stop until she married a G-Man and ran away to CO. Much could be learned of slowing the decline of quail/habitat from her (and no doubt you could return the favor). She knew her stuff and told it the way it was - PC not a factor.
 
Back
Top