Mow it all down
- Thread starter Acemac
- Start date
It's my understanding that the adjacent landowner pays property taxes on the right of way ditches. With that said I think they should do what ever they want to the ditches. If the law is going to regulate mowing any more than they already do they should take the ditches out of the tax base. I personally think that leaving the ditches unmowed would be a good way to increase habitat, but than I don't own property and don't have to suffer the consequences.
3car
Active member
Some of the WIA's (walk-in-areas) that you don't think are that great of habitat are usually round outs. The landowner wants all of his land in the program or non. So the state may pay little or nothing to add cropland acres. It still gets used tho. Some have wetlands in the middle or waterfowl guys can set up decoys on them. Plus its Private land so they don't manage those properties.
3car
Active member
There is already a state law that prohibits mowing of the ditches until July 10th of every year for nesting habitat. Its not enforced unfortunately.
In Iowa you in theory own the ditches, but you dont pay taxes on them. A bare 80 for example may have only 78 acres tillable due to roads, you would bid accordingly and taxes are figured accordingly.
They are a public right of way. Folks who think they have control of the ditches because they own the adjoining land in my opinion are being a little obsessive.
It is considered good form to ask the land owner if you can hay his ditch though.
I'm aware of the restriction on mowing until July 10. I think I read that the GFP recommended restricting until sometime in August but it was not adopted. I have a hard time with government telling someone what to do with property they pay taxes on. I get spraying for some kinds of invasive weeds. But mowing shouldn't be any bodies business except the land owner. Just my opinion.
conservation minded folks get it.........
ford
New member
Should I "mow it down" ? I will for sure next year! I left almost 2.5 miles not mowed this past season and wow the garbage in the ditch(mainly beer cans) was unbelievable! I also did a little experiment with some trail cams from one side of the road to the other. The side I didn't mow I had 487 pics of people trespassing, and by trespassing I mean they wer hunting not retrieving a down bird. And the side I mowed I only had 9 pics of people trespassing. Is that a reason to mow my ditches? Hell yes it is! I work hard and spend a lot of money every year to improve my habitat for friends,family and my personal use. So say what you want I will mow every square inch of my ditches next year!Im thinking of burning them instead of mowing!
Gone Catch'N
New member
Good information.
Send those pics to your state prosecutor at SDstatesattorneys.org. 1. They will prosecute those individuals 2. They need to be aware of this big problem. Many of these attorneys are landowners and have been violated also.
Report back next year if you notice any changes in rooster to hen ratio. A lot of roosters are wounded, poisoned by lead or killed by ditch pickers and those trespassing.
Send those pics to your state prosecutor at SDstatesattorneys.org. 1. They will prosecute those individuals 2. They need to be aware of this big problem. Many of these attorneys are landowners and have been violated also.
Report back next year if you notice any changes in rooster to hen ratio. A lot of roosters are wounded, poisoned by lead or killed by ditch pickers and those trespassing.
wow!
if you do the math, that's on average 6.5 hunters trespassing on you EVERYDAY of the past season....you must have been asleep not to catch some of them in the act?wow!
That's right h94 it's the landowners fault people trespass there property. I guess you should spend your time on guard protecting your land.
1pheas4
Moderator
Catch'N-- A year or two ago a South Dakota study came out regarding pheasants/consuming lead shot. There didn't seem to be a connection between lead consumption and poisoning within pheasants. Maybe something new has come out since then
I know they wanted to extend the study to look into whether or not lead shot effects egg production and chick development, etc. As far as I know nothing has come out regarding such yet. If so, can you please let me know. I would like to study up on their findings, or if you have contradicting information regarding SD's study please fill us in.
Thank you.
Nick
sdviking
Active member
not a fan of mow it down...
I understand the need to reduce snow drifts on township and county roads to reduce maintenance costs and allow to get to work in the winter time, so mowing some of the grass along the roads has a function. BUT, Over mowing grass patches just to clean things up drives me nuts, especially where hunting revenue helps the local businesses. We have a neighbor that just can't help himself from mowing and baling every inch of ditch grass or areas dry enough to do so around sloughs. Then he leaves the majority of the bales to rot. Not a fan. Yes I know the land owner can do what ever he wants with his land and it's his right to do what he wants.
I guess once I retire I can keep trying to educate folks the benefits of good habitat and small areas help too.
ok that was a rant. sdviking
I understand the need to reduce snow drifts on township and county roads to reduce maintenance costs and allow to get to work in the winter time, so mowing some of the grass along the roads has a function. BUT, Over mowing grass patches just to clean things up drives me nuts, especially where hunting revenue helps the local businesses. We have a neighbor that just can't help himself from mowing and baling every inch of ditch grass or areas dry enough to do so around sloughs. Then he leaves the majority of the bales to rot. Not a fan. Yes I know the land owner can do what ever he wants with his land and it's his right to do what he wants.
I guess once I retire I can keep trying to educate folks the benefits of good habitat and small areas help too.
ok that was a rant. sdviking
Logical
Member
1pheas4, I am going to speculate that the lead poisoning is from wounded birds, not birds eating the lead.
I wounded a bird in a treeline last year. I don't recall now why we couldn't find him (I was not hunting with a dog that day). But, about three weeks later, I was hunting the same treeline, and a rooster runs out from the trees. I shot him, and when I cleaned him, he had all kinds of gangrene in his body, on the same side I had shot (assumed to be) him a few weeks earlier. He was very scrawny, too.
I would say that was lead poisoning, and it didn't come from him eating pellets. I hate losing wounded birds, and he was an example of why. The coyotes don't get all of them, as much as we would like to think they do.
I wounded a bird in a treeline last year. I don't recall now why we couldn't find him (I was not hunting with a dog that day). But, about three weeks later, I was hunting the same treeline, and a rooster runs out from the trees. I shot him, and when I cleaned him, he had all kinds of gangrene in his body, on the same side I had shot (assumed to be) him a few weeks earlier. He was very scrawny, too.
I would say that was lead poisoning, and it didn't come from him eating pellets. I hate losing wounded birds, and he was an example of why. The coyotes don't get all of them, as much as we would like to think they do.
gunflint charlie
Member
Sounds like infection, not lead poisoning.
Logical
Member
Okay, it may have been. Point is, it was wounded by shot. I guess it does make a bit of a difference to us, whether it was lead poisoning. If it was an infection, and not the result of lead, that would alter the discussion.
But, this tells me that, unless a bird ingests lead (which is why waterfowl hunters must use non-toxic shot), it won't get lead poisoning. It may die of infection from lead, tungsten, copper, etc., but lead would not be the culpable cause.
But, this tells me that, unless a bird ingests lead (which is why waterfowl hunters must use non-toxic shot), it won't get lead poisoning. It may die of infection from lead, tungsten, copper, etc., but lead would not be the culpable cause.