Rules Changes

PeteRevvv said:
I've never figured out what evidence shows CRP produces more birds. This graph is from SD GFP showing bird numbers and CRP acres. They don't relate. CRP is great for hunting opportunities but I've been schooled that pheasants are born in the ditch, raised in the fence line and winter in the cattails.

I wouldn't pin my hopes on stamps in the rule changes for more hunting opportunities either-
$700,000 from stamps predicted
Marginal land in prime pheasant areas at $1,500 an acre
466 acres or 10 quarters added to the current "5 million acres"
Enough for maybe 1 additional WIA per county in east river per year
I've not seen any promise from politicians to add acres anyway- if the budget is short, they are filling potholes, not paving new roads. Paying for current CREP and other programs, not adding to them.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what the graph's details are regarding region.

This is a pretty good read - https://core.ac.uk/reader/188107870

I'm not saying it's the end all be all, but growing up baling squares, it was easy to see where pheasants were nesting and where they weren't. I would agree that a lot of nesting is done in ditches, however, it seems to be when the low lying areas are too wet and the neighboring fields are row crops.
 
I’ve been hunting the same counties in S.D. for 28 years, I’ve seen some National Geographic #’s out there...no surprise, those #’s occurred when CRP was at its max in my areas. Birds need habitat. My dad hunted during the soil bank days in the late’50’s into the ‘60’s...he tells some crazy stories...the age of the stand of grass matters a lot...without burning or haying, it gets pretty sterile after 8-10 years...
 
I don't mean to be antagonistic just for arguments sake but just seek clarity so everyone can make informed decisions about what they support. Either looking at soil bank or CRP years, the numbers just don't support that view. There was 12 million acres grass and 7 million birds in 1963 and then in our time 6 million acres in grass and 9 million birds in 2008. The difference was the weather. Birds don't survive the bad winters in grass- those get snowed in quickly. They go to cattails which stand up in the snow and get insulation from it. Birds were doing well in winter 2019 until snows got heavy enough to even collapse the cattails so weather still controls.

CRP is hunter habitat- so yes, lets have more of that if the cost/benefit is there. Bird habitat is not grass- its ditches, fence lines and sloughs. Those marginal areas are in play due to corn prices driven by government policy. No habitat stamp or group conservation program is going to stand up to that pressure. Only the SD farmer has shown a widespread resilience and long term commitment to not taking out fence, waiting for mid-summer ditch mowing and leaving in sloughs and that alone is why it is the top pheasant producer. They should be supported and applauded for those efforts, not government programs.
 
The difference is when CRP is present it allows the birds that do survive the winter a chance to successfully nest. You seen reticent to understand the importance of grasslands, why?
 
The birds need a variety of habitats...certain types are needed for nesting, certain types are needed for winter survival, etc. certainly weather events could still decimate the birds even with great habitat...stuff happens. Just sharing my own observations...I have seen many fields erupt with 1’000’s if pheasants...all in the period from ‘93-‘99 or so, 2003 was a plentiful year as well. All those years dovetailed with the max CRP acreage in my areas. Could be a coincidence.
 
Just saw an article from MT GFP...their “ideal mix” is 70 % crops, split evenly between row crops and small grains, the rest grasslands, of which at least half thereof should be undisturbed for nesting. So, a full section would be about 450 acres of crops and 190 acres of grasslands...one recipe from one state. They had an interesting graph—their rooster harvest peaked when CRP acres peaked.
 
S.D. GFP data shows an eruption of pheasant #’s starting in 1958, ending in 1963....birds averaged around ten million during those years (soilbank). ‘64 and beyond, at least a decade, they dropped to about 3 million. Oh, looks like #’s peaked in ‘45-46, at around 16 million, guessing lots of acres were idled due to the war. I’m no biologist, but I will bet a good gun that increasing all habitats, including grasslands, will increase bird #’s. Seems like a mix of several habitat types is ideal—crops, grasses, woods/sloughs, etc.
 
If you want the facts, google an article by Christopher Laingen of Eastern Illinois University entitled “historic and contemporary trends of the CRP program and ring-necked pheasants in South Dakota”, dated spring 2011. Very interesting, not at all surprising. One of the reasons the birds crashed in the period starting 1964 is a severe drought occurred in that timeframe, and soilbank acres were allowed to be hayed, then two winters of extreme weather decimated the birds....an 86 % drop, as a large % of grasses had been hayed or converted back to crops
 
PeteRevvv said:
I don't mean to be antagonistic just for arguments sake but just seek clarity so everyone can make informed decisions about what they support. Either looking at soil bank or CRP years, the numbers just don't support that view. There was 12 million acres grass and 7 million birds in 1963 and then in our time 6 million acres in grass and 9 million birds in 2008. The difference was the weather. Birds don't survive the bad winters in grass- those get snowed in quickly. They go to cattails which stand up in the snow and get insulation from it. Birds were doing well in winter 2019 until snows got heavy enough to even collapse the cattails so weather still controls.

CRP is hunter habitat- so yes, lets have more of that if the cost/benefit is there. Bird habitat is not grass- its ditches, fence lines and sloughs. Those marginal areas are in play due to corn prices driven by government policy. No habitat stamp or group conservation program is going to stand up to that pressure. Only the SD farmer has shown a widespread resilience and long term commitment to not taking out fence, waiting for mid-summer ditch mowing and leaving in sloughs and that alone is why it is the top pheasant producer. They should be supported and applauded for those efforts, not government programs.
Click to expand...

Per the graph there was not 12 M acres of grasslands in 1963. Most of that acreage was small grains which is better than corn but still a mono culture which is far from ideal for pheasant production because it doesn't serve all aspects of a young pheasants life cycle from nesting to brood rearing to maturity.

What the graph does show is populations bottoming out when no CRP was present. Undisturbed grasslands (no haying, no cropping) are extremely important for nesting success but plant diversity (forbs/flowering plants) and some bare ground is also important for brood rearing and chick survival.

The brome grass CRP that was planted in the early 90's was good for both nesting & brood rearing as long as the stand was spotty and weedy. Over time the brome grass took over and established another mono culture that wasn't as productive. I saw tons of birds in a lot of the brome grass parcels in 97 & 98 but those areas got way less productive as time went on. Took me some time to stop hunting memories and switch my focus to the newer stands with native mixes that included bunch grasses, more bare ground and more plant diversity. Once those more diverse CRP types became more dominant the populations boomed again in the middle to second half of the 2000's.

Ditches and marsh grass around sloughs do contribute some to pheasant production but are far from ideal. Again not biologically diverse enough to really make a difference even in good weather years. Put 1.5 million + acres of bigger block (1/4 section) CRP in the current stand types back on the landscape for South Dakota and there is a really good chance we would see bird numbers similar to 2004 thru 2008. That is not likely to happen in the current environment so more likely if SD ever gets back to late 90's to mid 2000's CRP acreages it will be smaller parcels with shorter enrollment periods that are targeted to provide the best benefit relative to erosion prevention, water quality and soil health.
 
Last edited:
Agree with so much in the post above. Current CRP practices require spraying to remove problem weeds which also removes many forbs/legumes. Chicks need water within hours of hatching and bugs within days and weeds provide that with broad leaves maintaining morning dew even when there is no rain and attracting insects. This is precisely what dirty ditches and fence lines offer in abundance. Good crop land with few marginal acres will never go into CRP no matter what so ditch and fence are your only options in those areas. Dry years may only have moisture deep in the ditch plus will result in CRP mowing (what some people see as down CRP/bird years is often bad hatches due to dry conditions and then CRP gets mowed). That is why I would put habitat emphasis on ditches/fences/shelter belts promotion that has a chance to be impactful vs blindly supporting stamp money going into any politician/farmer-based CRP program that isn't specifically designed to help hunters.

Just waiting on mowing ditches until July 1 is all that is needed for birds to mature and then move into cover areas. You have to have a cultural acceptance that ditch to ditch farming is a short term gain that hurts wildlife and is poor water/soil management. I also emphasize sloughs not for breeding/rearing but for winter survival. No matter how thick, grass gets snowed in with any sizeable downfall. Cattails stand up far longer and offer insulated roosting out of the cold/wind. Lose that to draining and filling and winterkill can wipe out numbers and year over year growth. Ask a late season hunter where they go first and that will back up this up. Ask a MN duck hunter where all their birds went as they look over field after field of drain-tiled land absent of any pothole sloughs.

Habitat would only be third on my list of impact to bird numbers. #1 is weather conditions, always. Pay attention to any explanation of bird numbers from GFP/DNR or research papers and you will get the obligatory "CRP numbers are down but ..." every time followed by the weather report which is the real reason bird numbers are up/down. You can't control this but one thing you can contribute to is predator control.

Predator management #2. Even if you don't buy my view on CRP you can't avoid the fact that a single racoon finding one nest takes out a dozen pheasants each time, whether the nest is in CRP or a ditch. Day after day, multiplied by foxes, coyotes, badgers, skunk. This another cultural aspect to the Dakotas to shoot these on site when out hunting- you have a small game license and this is legal so use it. But it certainly isn't the mindset promoted in MN or IA that I've seen. That plus ditch and farming practices on ground that should produce the same amount of birds but doesn't is the cultural aspect that is a great difference in my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top