Upland bird population will never fully rebound.

W

Waterfowler2001

Member
I will probably get lambasted by saying this, but let's face it. The way the state of Kansas has been steering the wheel, the way farming has been going into the modern age. The pheasants and quail populations will never be like it was, nor will it probably get much better anytime in the near future. Yes, a day of hunting is always better than a day at work, but knowing what Kansas was, and seeing what it is now, is quite depressing. Yes, there are "localized" populations, but even those pockets are starting to dwindle. I'm usually an optimist, but I don't see it improving. Yes, the weather determines some of the outcomes for the fall population, but the spraying, not leaving just a little bit of cover on the side of the field, definitely goes a long way. Yes, I get the farmer needs to make a living, I come from a family that has an agricultural interest. What are the solutions? Are we doomed? Does the state need to get more involved? All opinions are wanted!
 
I've never been hunting in Kansas before, but any post about the state I've read in the last three years seems to echo your sentiments. Maybe listen to a PF report about your state, the tint in their glasses can make anything look rosey!
 
I hate to say it, but short of the government stepping-in with some programs to allow acres to be taken out of production, I think you are right. If this is done FOR THE THE WILDLIFE, no emergancy grazing or hayiing should be allowed on these tracks. Maybe offering long term easements that would allow public huntung access for select tracts. I still believe if filter strips were mandatory on all waterways, bird numbers would not be an issue and there would be so much of this habitat, permission could likely get acheived with a little bit of effort. Not sure if the lay of the land in KS has the waterways we enjoy here in Iowa, so it might not be everyones answer. Cleaner water would be another benefit that even non-hunters would enjoy.

PF is your option if the government isn't getting it done and with the lack of respect and support they get from many here, they can't help much...put nothing in, get nothing back.
 
We have ZERO programs by our Legislature or KDWP that is targeting upland game habitat. South Dakota has the Every Acre Counts Program, Colorado has the Corners Program, Iowa has the IHAP Program, and Kansas offers absolutely nothing. Nothing to try and work with landowners to improve habitat. South Dakota found that most properties has something like 6% of land that is losing money. So the EACP targets that land the way I understand it. Why can't Kansas offer something similar? Their goal is to simply draw as many NR hunters to this state as they can and roll money into the WIHA program. They really could care less about habitat or residents.
 
all levels and branches of KS government are money oriented. upland hunting is done, virtually gone with no long term plan for recovery.
not enough revenue for the effort needed. when its gone it will cost too much to fix. look at Nebraska, it is a shit hole. KS next.
 
This will be the first year since I was 13 that I won't be buying a ks hunting license. F'em, I know they won't notice but I refuse to give them my money anymore. I was going to, to just shoot deer off of a couple places that butt up to ground that hunt clubs have now but I've found enough people to shoot them. So they can have at it and we'll just see how they like 30+ tags getting filled right next door to them . I've talked on here about this til I'm blue in the face so won't get into it again but yes it's doomed the way it is going now.
 
Last edited:
When I began hunting in earnest in the mid-90s the pheasant hunting was excellent. If you could shoot, on opening day you might have your four-bird limit before lunch. Then the drought started. Then corn became dominant. Then chemical farming. Then came the end, pretty much.
 
BritChaser said:
When I began hunting in earnest in the mid-90s the pheasant hunting was excellent. If you could shoot, on opening day you might have your four-bird limit before lunch. Then the drought started. Then corn became dominant. Then chemical farming. Then came the end, pretty much.
Click to expand...
Actually you really are wrong. Corn is a much better food source for pheasants, far better than milo. Yes we had drought, but we always have drought. The drought in 2012 coincided with all the CRP expiring in 2010- 2011. Had that CRP remained, so would the birds. That drought didn't hamper the NW corner anything like it did in the rest of western KS but those birds disappeared. Drought or heavy rain, with habitat, birds thrive. Once people get that through their skull, then maybe we can do something to help maintain a healthy pheasant population. Blaming everything on the weather is ridiculous. It isn't mother nature decimating the bird population, it is man himself.
 
The spring crow counts are out and are down almost to what they were 2012-14. In April 2022 when they were taken we were what 8 months? into the current drought at most. Can you imagine were we are going to be next spring and the following?
Crp acres have declined by almost 50 percent since 2009
 
BrownDogsCan2 said:
The spring crow counts are out and are down almost to what they were 2012-14. In April 2022 when they were taken we were what 8 months? into the current drought at most. Can you imagine were we are going to be next spring and the following?
Crp acres have declined by almost 50 percent since 2009
Click to expand...
Can't continue to throw money away on WIHA. WIHA isn't a conservation program. Its a program investment to gather revenue. It benefits birds in no way.
 
remy3424 said:
PF is your option if the government isn't getting it done and with the lack of respect and support they get from many here, they can't help much...put nothing in, get nothing back.
Click to expand...
I gave for years and quit because I didn't feel I'm getting anything back. I've never seen or heard PF come out against today's mis management of the wildlife department, today's farming practices, land grabs by out of state and sometimes out of country holding groups, etc etc. The day I see them put the things on blast that are killing our sport then maybe my pen will hit a check again.
 
GetTothePoint said:
This will be the first year since I was 13 that I won't be buying a ks hunting license.
Click to expand...

I turned off my auto renew this summer and decided I’d kind of take a “we’ll see” approach to next year. I bought some land in Kansas I plan to retire to for the winters in a few years, or sooner if my job’s residency requirement is lifted, but in the meanwhile there’s less and less draw for me to drive 4-5 hours to hunt my private bird spots in Kansas, when 5.5 hours puts me in southeast SD, where public land is often as good or better than private access in western Kansas now, to say nothing of Iowa, which has been better than Kansas the last couple years on public ground, or southwest Minnesota. I killed a lot of Kansas pheasants last year, but I don’t miss much, and even shooting 3 or 4 most days I could tell I was shooting 4 of the 10 I saw, not 4 of the 100.
 
PF is trying to help habitat and may be steering toward something better in that regard. About eight or nine years ago I was driving along US 24 in central KS and my eye caught a PF sign on a piece of land that had been habitat enhanced quite nicely. But right next to the PF sign was a "NO HUNTING" sign for the same property. Why would the average PF member want to pay for a someone's land to be habitat enhanced and then posted?? I contacted PF which responded that it does not require that a landowner open up to public hunting in order to get habitat improvements. Well, fine but that just didn't pass the smell test. If PF wants to make a difference, it should develop habitat where hunting is open to all and really get with it in this time of fewer CRP acres.
 
BritChaser said:
PF is trying to help habitat and may be steering toward something better in that regard. About eight or nine years ago I was driving along US 24 in central KS and my eye caught a PF sign on a piece of land that had been habitat enhanced quite nicely. But right next to the PF sign was a "NO HUNTING" sign for the same property. Why would the average PF member want to pay for a someone's land to be habitat enhanced and then posted?? I contacted PF which responded that it does not require that a landowner open up to public hunting in order to get habitat improvements. Well, fine but that just didn't pass the smell test. If PF wants to make a difference, it should develop habitat where hunting is open to all and really get with it in this time of fewer CRP acres.
Click to expand...
I've hunted KS for going on 32 years now and I've seen 1 PF field out by Osborne years ago. It looked great but always packed with people and I can't imagine many birds after the first weekend because of the relentless traffic. Conservatively adding up my donations that I remember to PF prior to quitting the last few years, they've taken a few K off of me and I couldn't tell you what my dad and grandpa donated over the years and we never reaped any rewards that I can see. We felt like we were doing the right thing I guess. I've hunted 15 days over the last 2 years in another state and yet to see any PF fields there yet either.
 
Last edited:
I hate to say it but if everyone in Kansas is just going to say "PF hasn't done anything for me, I'm not donating anymore" then nothing will improve. MN has probably the most PF chapters and members (if not most, then 2nd place) and I rarely see a "PF field". I know of some marked with wooden signs but most of those fields have been in place for 20+ years. I don't think PF marks their fields anymore, and what usually happens in MN is PF raises money, buys a tract of land, improves it, and then sells it to the MN DNR where it becomes a WMA. You usually have to dig to find out if the WMA you are hunting was due to PF intervention.

PF is not in the business of owning land anymore, at least not for years. They want to work with that state in obtaining a piece of property, improve it and then turn it over to the state.

I see alot of hands being thrown up about PF on the various KS threads, and sadly, who else is going to improve the situation if not for PF? I fully support grass roots happening in KS but let's face it, PF has the "pull" it needs to make things happen. So either they aren't getting the funds raised in KS to make a dent or the KS legislature is not working with them. Or both.

In regards to putting the KS legislature/farmers etc "on blast", that tactic likely will not work. If anything, PF needs to ass kiss the politicians or else why would they work with PF? I noticed that when the last Secretary of the Interior was named. PF put an article out gushing over Ryan Zinke, who had a flawed track record. Why would they gush over him publicly? Because I'm sure if they made an article that said "f*** that guy" what do you think he's going to do? Work with them? Absolutely not. It's a complicated situation and one that is probably not going to improve soon unfortunately.
 
The Iowa PF must do a ton more than the KS chapters. Here is a link to the Iowa PF. https://www.iowapf.net/history/ They get support and are able to make a difference. Without support, what would you possibly expect them to do??? As far as helping enhance private property, why would anyone have an issue with that? More pheasants is what we are after. When our family started creating habitat, PF brought out manpower, a tree planter and a native grass drill to help us get started, but no signs. If you hunt public land, you have likely reaped some benefit from PF, they do exactly what say Munster said with land acquistions. Maybe they need to create permanent billboards on the tracts they have contributed to in Kansas and then folks could complain about those signs. If you go to a banquit, you might be surprised that many of the attendees and folks spending money are NOT hunters, they just want to see more habitat, they are not crying about what they got for their donations, they know what is happening, they attend the banquits and read the program. I would encourage some of you to try it, but it will be way easier to tell you to keep up with what you are not doing and let hunting in your area die an agonizing death as you sit there and bitch about it on a pheasant hunting forum. Sorry for the rant, I get a little fired-up when folks that act like they know something about PF sing out that PF does nothing, guess most haven't been to the PF website and seen the current national program that they are working toward "https://www.pheasantsforever.org/calloftheuplands " ....don't bother helping, keep doing nothing and wishing it would change. Rant over. Can't wait to get into the flocks of birds the local PF help get established!
 
I drove around today looking for a dove spot and got even more sickened. There are 8 WIHA parcels north of where I live and only 1 still had grass on it. Most of my private spots of CRP were either baled or had cattle on them. I thought early this summer that about 75-80% of my spots were gone but it is about 95% gone at this point. I am disappointed to say the least, but if you are a NR and you come all the way to KS, you are going to waste your money. And what makes it worse is that these landowners are still going to get paid for enrolling in WIHA. This program has to be stopped.
 
I have been saying this for 25 years in Iowa, it's true everywhere. The trends are not in our favor and it's not changing, Be thankful for what we have now.
 
I only Make that trip now cause we have some private corners to hunt. Kill a few every year. I’d never drive up there just for WIHA…and my drive is only 4.5 hours. It’s been a very long time since it was really good. Heading up next weekend to dove hunt. We will see if the corners have been mowed I guess… hope not. There is one thing consistent though… unless I’m going crazy I’ve read this same stuff on here every year for the last decade.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top