Ramping Up for the 2016 SD Pheasant Season

UGUIDE

UGUIDE

Active member
Time for a new thread. It is at this time of year that the habitat work comes to a halt for the most part and what's done is done.

I really never know what's out there until about....December. That's when all the crops are out and the cold weather forces the birds into high quality cover and the cold temps forces them to stay on food for much of the daylight hours.

A warm winter and above average hatch conditions should amount to a very decent amount of birds being produced. In some parts of the state they will be downright thick.

Unfortunately, the Game and Fish Report due out and the end of the month will not reflect the bird numbers in those areas.

I think it is a shame that sportsman will put their hopes on that report and determine to hunt or not hunt.

Some may say "Great, more birds for me" but it doesn't work that way. More birds means more hunters and if you back into that equation your soon realize that the correct equation is more hunters leads to more birds.

I know across the board the cover is excellent vs. a drought year where there is no moisture to grow any vegetation.
 
Yes, I will be one of the thousands of hunters who will decide whether or not to make the 12 hour drive and drop over $1,500 on a 4 day hunt based on the road side count. No need to travel that far and spend that kind of $$$ on treasspass fees, hotels and food only to see a few birds.
However, I'm excited about this years potential. Mild winter, lots of carry over birds, good spring conditions should all mean a great roadside count. And, when it is, I will be planning, packing and getting excited like a kid on Christmas morning.
If counts are very low which I doubt, I'll save that money and hunt pen raised birds near home. My 2 small munsterlanders have yet to be able to tell the difference.
Here's to hoping for a great Roadside count!
 
I would consider not making a long trip if there had been horrific winter/spring mortality due to blizzards, but even then i would probably find another area that hadn't been impacted so hard. For me, the allure of the Dakota's/MT is the landscape, the size of the field's I hunt, and yes, the bird #'s. I did go and hunt a game farm in Mn in February, and I barely had fun...why? It is such a poor substitute as far as what the dogs experience. I know that there are decent or even good game farms out there...I just love to be able to wander a good bit, for my dogs' sake, and mine. Bird #'s were quite poor in 2013 and 2014 in SD, even last year they weren't great by historical standards, but man, we still had great hunting...not the #'s like we had 5, 10, 15 years ago and beyond, but I get all jazzed up over one good piece of dog work followed by a point/flush, whether or not I do my job! Really, things have to be pretty bad to not get decent action each day if you have a good dog or two...or three...but, to each his own!
 
I am really looking hard at where I am going to spend some dollars this fall at hunt some birds. I have had some great years in North Dakota and some okay years in South Dakota. I like to hear about bird counts, but ultimately it is a regional thing and also a crop harvest issue as well. I will keep checking this thread and will be making my decisions within the next month as to where I will spend those dollars this fall.
 
benelli-banger said:
I would consider not making a long trip if there had been horrific winter/spring mortality due to blizzards, but even then i would probably find another area that hadn't been impacted so hard. For me, the allure of the Dakota's/MT is the landscape, the size of the field's I hunt, and yes, the bird #'s. I did go and hunt a game farm in Mn in February, and I barely had fun...why? It is such a poor substitute as far as what the dogs experience. I know that there are decent or even good game farms out there...I just love to be able to wander a good bit, for my dogs' sake, and mine. Bird #'s were quite poor in 2013 and 2014 in SD, even last year they weren't great by historical standards, but man, we still had great hunting...not the #'s like we had 5, 10, 15 years ago and beyond, but I get all jazzed up over one good piece of dog work followed by a point/flush, whether or not I do my job! Really, things have to be pretty bad to not get decent action each day if you have a good dog or two...or three...but, to each his own!
Click to expand...

Come to think of it I NEVER based whether I was going to Iowa or not (the 20 years I hunted there) on the bird counts. I went 4-5 times a year regardless.

My whole point was this: Whether you are free lancing or going with an outfitter and REGARDLESS of the GFP survey counts......if you know what you are looking for and how to find birds.....there will be somewhere in the state every year where the sky will turn black with pheasants at some point during the season. It's not based on GFP analysis and data it is based on habitat management and analysis of THAT data.

The more people come to the state to hunt the more the private landowners will manage for that to collect a dollar to ay their bills. The more that do not come to the state the more the private landowner will find another way to land the dollar and grow more corn and/or beans (this is already happening in eastern SD).

PS. BB this was not necessarily directed at you but the thread reader.:)
 
Last edited:
Uguide is correct more hunters that come to SD the more $$$ for habitat etc & the more land will come into play... That's 1 reason I never really put to much thought into the SD game & fish report they want people hunting SD pheasant so why would they put out bad reports??? they tell u to come hunt SD even in drought years watch the commercials ...

If u can't find pheasant action in SD then u r. Not a very compatint upland hunter or hunted a area after others daily etc. If you are in the core pheasant area or areas of SD there is birds to be had... Just mite not be happy with harvest numbers if u r in big groups... Break into smaller groups & have more action... Birds may not cover the sun flushing in every corner of SD but hunt the habitat in core areas & u will find birds... It gets no better then SD...

I will not let a state bird report determine my hunts I will hunt wild birds no matter what the report say good or bad there is more to upland hunting then ez limits & ez birds let the fair weather high bird #s. Guys 'didnt say hunters' wait for the report I pay more attention to winter die offs or sever hail/rain storms in may-july.... I hear 2-3 guys from MN say every year I don't even hunt MN anymore I just hunt SD poor hunters can even find birds in SD trust me its sad they don't hunt MN any longer but leaves more birds for me lol...

Like benelli banger said I cant hunt them game farms I can tell the birds are not the same as wild birds & I hope to hell my dog can tell them birds are a hell of a lot dumber then them other birds we hunt... Lol. I like to wonder the fields following my dog I can't see me pay $$$ to put out a few pen raised birds & be limited to 1 small field 10 other guys walked through that wk just not the same to me...

We all wanna see birds if we pay for a trip to SD I agree but there is more to the hunt then ez limits if its just about the $$$ per trip & bird numbers game farms are for u KS calls em controlled shooting areas that's a good name because its not really hunting like they call em up here hunting preserves... Its more shooting stuff vs hunting at them places...
 
Last edited:
Some rather weak ag arguments above.

It is the over abundance of corn and beans (thus lower prices) that will possibly drive some farmers back to CRP if they believe that lower prices are becoming the norm. Hunting is a side-bar at best for most SD farmers.

The corn and bean belt has pushed pretty far north and west without a similar push in demand. Global demand weak hampered in-part by a strong US dollar.

Live the local paper said here lately, leaves farmers hoping drought hits another region of the country so that they can make an adequate return.

SD has plenty of pheasant hunters. Why shouldn't 70K - 80K nonresident hunters be the norm ?
 
The first reality is that the residents don't pay the bill for quality habitat OR no state income tax. The tourists do. Also do some simple math on license fees and you will see who carries the day.

In any enterprise cash flow is king.

Markets have always ebbed and flowed so grain, prices, pollution, environment, conservation and wildlife will always complete for high quality private acres. Simple supply and demand.

The only reason more producers don't manage for pheasants and conservation is MARKET whether that market is for grain, beef, conservation or tourists. They all compete and they should in a free market system.

The call for more CRP this year was not able to be answered due to the farm bill caps. The solution to that issue will only be played out in the 2018 new farm bill.

I will say that the optimization and quality of CRP is improving and is producing more than ever and will continue to do so.

Unfortunately the biggest flaw in GFP road counts is their survey routes don't account for the shift in cropping systems (west) and thus their data is ultimately flawed as the golden triangle is shifting.
 
"Golden Triangle"...how would you characterize this area (triangle) now vs what it used to be? Are there different boundaries you would use to describe the area?

Appreciate your insight.
 
The nonresident license fees certainly keep the SDG&F in the black. They depend on that money.

Assume that SD nonresident licenses fees help with the Walk In Access fees paid to landowners, beyond that ??

Towns certainly benefit from the influx of visitors with new cash. Keeps hotels and cafes in the black too...

(IMO) ... That should be the sum of the money influx.
 
Last edited:
Most states see an increase of hunters with pheasant counts and pheasant early reported success. MN pheasant stamp sales cycle too. Likewise deer hunters and waterfowl hunter license sales also cycle.

I would argue that most on this site and most die-hard pheasant hunters go anyways. It is the people with mild interest in pheasant hunting and tag-alongs that make up that variable 20 - 30% swing in license sales.

Mild Interest Hunters

Those people with mild interest in pheasant hunting that visit SD and pay a guide / outfitter big money come and visit when the going is good. If population is down .. they are plenty of other things to do ... big game in another state, waterfowl in Canada, fishing trips, Hawaii with the wife ... or even a big golf trip. They come when the going is really good and move on when things slack.

Some will only come a time or two anyways and often the group they bring along have lost interest first - especially if the bird hunting was average or below expectations.

Again lots of things to do with the $$


Tag alongs
Many times a small (or large for that matter) group of hunters that travel out of state each year will see their group size swell because the birds numbers are up. Some of those people lack the ability or desire to pound the land all day for three birds, but if the perception is limits are easier ... they tag along. Add a friend, neighbor, in-law, uncle, brother, etc... and ...

Again if the hunting is hard and the dog is not theirs ... they will decide to spend their free time doing something else.
 
BRITTMAN said:
(IMO) ... That should be the sum of the money influx.
Click to expand...

Good discussion. Let's continue.

From this article http://pheasantsforever.org/Newsroo...cs-South-Dakota-Tourism-Supports-Pheasan.aspx

"150,000 upland hunters,including 85,000 non-residents, flocked to the state in 2015 to take part in its legendary pheasant hunting opportunities. Those pheasant hunters spent an estimated $170 million".

So 65K residents at $33 a license (2.15 Million$) and 85K non-residents at $121 a license (10.3 Million$) equals a total GFP license take of roughly $12.5 million.

So $170M less 12.5M equals $157.5M coming into the state not related to GFP revenues.

Though habitat on private land accounts for much of the draw of non-residents. The license revenue generated from that land cannot be directed back into that land from GFP by state law. This is a flawed model. Additionally the Dept of Tourism revenue (1.5% of total revenue from hunting) is spent out of state on advertising to draw hunters to SD (especially when birds #'s are down). Would this not be better spent reinvesting in habitat with in the state and let word of mouth do that advertising? More info on the values of tourism to the state (I like the one about saving each SD resident about $1000/year in income tax. ) http://sdvisit.com/tools/facts/index.asp


High quality habitat is expensive!
 
Last edited:
Advertising money (1.5%) spent on all hunting or just pheasant hunting?

I agree - word of mouth probably gets the job done!
 
This discussion has been good to force me to dig into some data I have been wanting to do for some time now.

I find it very intriguing that SD Tourism promotes pheasant hunting when it is convenient but from the literature below I find the word pheasant is never even mentioned. I went to the Gov's tourism conference and found myself to be the only person wearing blaze orange out of 1000 attendees. Lots of awards fro wineries though. Seems odd being that the state bird is a pheasant?

Anywho, look these over and see what you think. My point is there's lots more opportunity here with better management of THE RESOURCE.


2015 Economic Impact of Tourism to South Dakota
http://sdvisit.com/tools/research/_pdf/15TSA_Tourism_Economics.pdf

2014 Economic Impact of Pheasant Hunting to South Dakota
http://www.sdvisit.com/programs/roosterrush/_pdf/2015/toolkit/RR15_econimpact.pdf

Found this on GFP site for 2015 Pheasant impact data by County
http://gfp.sd.gov/hunting/small-game/pheasant-economics.aspx
 
While the number of hunters may have some impact on habitat it is crop prices that have the largest effect.

$150 million sounds like a lot until you look at the billions in difference crop prices can make. When corn prices went up to $7 that was something like a $2 billion increase in ag revenue just from corn. Pheasants can never compete with that. There is a reason you see very few outfitters leasing land in the south east corner of the state. The land is worth too much as cropland to even think about leaving it idle unless crop prices go way down.
Maybe with the crop prices holding steady and not too high now we will start to see some new CRP around here. The difference in the last decade is drastic.

Tim
 
TimJ said:
While the number of hunters may have some impact on habitat it is crop prices that have the largest effect.
Click to expand...

Its the other way around. Habitat has an impact on hunter numbers.

In this thread you will notice discussion about things that have always been and always will be. Things like:

- Cyclical crop prices (high, low, repeat)
- Level of intensity or seriousness of hunters
- Farm Bill CRP acres
- Why not add that hunters bring Semi automatic, pumps and O/U shotguns?

I am talking about managing the tourism sector call "pheasant hunting" differently. Organizations like GFP and PF have very little impact on the private sector and frankly their .org non-profit status limits them from being too involved in private and/or commercial sectors, by law).
 
Pheasant Impact by County -

Interesting numbers; wonder how the GFP knows where the hunters hunt?? Some of the hunters report their harvest via survey. Maybe they extrapolate from a few surveys?

It appears about 50% of the hunters are in 9 counties, with a lot of pressure and success in five...

Current corn price - $3.36 / bushel...40% of all corn production is for ethanol production. This number from a web site.
 
Last edited:
Maybe we should try to convert some of them damn tag alongs & mild interest hunter guys??? And have em join pheasants forever or quail forever with some of that extra $$$ they don't know wear to blow???

The golden triangle is more like a golden rectangle there wear the habitat is there's lots of birds... Go hunt December sometime & it will show u wear the birds are...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top