What makes one field better than another, and some general pheasant hunting thoughts/questions..

C

cyclonenation10

Active member
I know this is a pretty open ended question, but something I think about quite often while out hunting. What makes one field better than another? Why do I always see more birds hunting a 20 acre slough of canary grass than I do hunting a 100 acre field of prime nesting habitat just a few miles away? Another example would be this: Why would an otherwise equal field in South Dakota hold 100 pheasants compared to maybe 15 in Iowa? In that scenario, let's assume the surrounding habitat is all the same, and the field is on an island (i.e. no additional nesting or anything else within proximity) and weather is relatively the same? This is just one example of many.

I always used to think certain areas of the state, or country were just "better" than others, but over time I've come to find out you can find great bird numbers wherever there is good habitat (within pheasants prime "range"). One of the best spots I hunt in the state of Iowa is within the lowest bird density region of the state. Most others struggle to even see birds around the area, but can guarantee I will put up 50+ pheasants every time I hunt this particular piece. However, what baffles me in many cases is when I move down the road just a few miles and struggle to see near the numbers on ground that I would argue is even better habitat (and about 2x the land).

Something else I always wonder is why SE Kansas doesn't have pheasants? The few times I've driven through, it looks like there is miles and miles of grasslands that would be very suitable habitat, and clearly fields I would love to hunt were they in Iowa, SD, or NW Kansas.

One last question on the carrying capacity of pheasant populations.. At one point does a property "max out" the number of birds it can support? I know year to year variations will happen due to weather, but how long does it take a property to reach that "average" level of birds that the year to year population will always hover around. If a 200 acre farm with adequate water, food, and shelter is converted from crop ground to CRP, how many years (generally speaking) will it take for the bird numbers to reach the maximum carrying capacity? 3? 5? 10? I ask the question because I hunt alot of ground similar to this, that's only been around for 3-4 years. Are the numbers I'm seeing likely as good as it will get, or is there still room for the population to grow by 50%, 100%, 200%?

Would love to hear everyone's thoughts/opinions on any/all of these questions, or any research or articles you've come across that address these.

Thanks!
 
I will comment on crp.Crp that is 10 years old, is thick, and great pheasant habitat. Unfortunately, it is not seen much in Montana anymore. They changed the law, and the farmers cut most of it down.
 
If there is a wildlife biologist among us, please weigh in here.
 
Lots of questions there! I agree with cyclonenation10, though, that I have been told by biologists that thick cover is not conducive to pheasant population. That is borne-out by my observations in a couple fields that look like they would be great for birds, but never find birds in the thick cover. They are out in the thinner areas, where they can run, and also launch to avoid dogs/coyotes without fighting the cover.

As to why one field is better than another similar field a couple miles away, I'll venture a guess. I have read that pheasant tend to stay within about a mile of where they hatch. I question that, but I also take any blanket statements with a grain of salt. If we believe the biologists that assert that birds don't move far, then the field with few birds may have been hit with hail, or a coyote litter, for instance. Or maybe a large coyote litter and a few large skunk litters. Maybe one field had bad insect population when the chicks needed them.

Why do similar fields in SD and IA hold different populations? I surmise that it is the human population density in IA is harder on the birds. Humans have dogs, and if there are a few farms in an area that have dogs roaming, nests may not be as successful. Farming habits are also different. SD seems to have more shelter belts or fallow areas than IA farms.

SE Kansas seems to have more floods than the rest of the state, so maybe that is part of the problem. Nests may get flooded more often, leading to fewer successful broods.

I think the most-limiting factor to maxing-out a pheasant population is the growing population itself. If a field has more and more birds, I imagine predators (just like human hunters) take note, and hunt that area more frequently. If the pickin's are good, I can see all predators frequenting that area, until it has a balance again. If the above-mentioned biologists are correct, and most birds don't stray more than a mile from the nest, few may migrate into what we feel would be a good field. They just don't explore enough to find a better place to live. But, when I observe birds flying a mile during a single flight (where I hunt you can see for miles), I don't put too much stock in birds not moving more than a mile from where they hatch.

Maybe my answers can give you more to mull over. I am not a biologist, but my dad was, and his specialty was pheasants when he was at Iowa State. I learned to hunt in Iowa, and have been hunting in Colorado where many will say there are no pheasant, and people love to hunt with me, as we get into birds most of the time. I figure if I can find birds, and do it pretty consistently, then I know a little bit about the elusive, smart pheasant. Not lots, but a little bit. Enough to continue to enjoy hunting where there are not that many birds. I would love to go to SD, and see what a real pheasant population looks (and hunts) like!
 
cyclonenation10 said:
That's interest. My understanding that thick CRP is not necessarily a good thing as the debris, etc., collects on the ground rendering it far less inhabitable for nesting/chicks.
Click to expand...
Yeah I get that.Ive never seen young birds in it.Good point.When it gets below zero, it provides shelter.Sharptails burrow into it, under the snow.Its spectacular when they flush from under the snow.
 
Be a good one for Prairie Drifter to weigh in on. Quality and grass make up of crp would play a factor such as warm season vs cool season grasses, typically cool season grasses like brome do not provide the quality that warm seasons do, they get matted down easier from heavy snows and don't provide the thermal protection. Most warm season grasses are bunch grasses that can allow birds and chicks to move for easily then individual stem grasses. Another fact I think that is often overlooked is the amount of herbicide/pesticides that might be applied in the surrounding landscape. Reducing the insect population will have an impact on chick survival and potentially health if they consume insects that have been sprayed, this could also impact adult populations. Position on the landscape for the habitat, is it low lying, not wet, which could be more prone to killing frost as opposed to more upland or higher elevations. This could have impacts on both plant and birds if it is a frost pocket.

Having all the essentials to survive will impact the carrying capacity, much like how many cows/calf can you put on an acre of pasture, the better the quality the greater the number. Ruffed grouse basically need for distinct age classes of habitat to thrive for a breeding pair. The proximity of these age classes to one another will increase or decrease your number of breeding pairs of grouse. I'm guessing it would be similar to pheasants. Been a long time since I was in college and went the forestry route instead of wildlife biologist route.....but I did stay in a holiday inn express last night.
 
I think the most accurate answer may be "who knows ?"

I'll toss this link out: No Pheasants - SE Kansas

They suggest minerals and weather MAY be the reason SE Kansas has so few. Could be a player in the OP's scenario.

"The most obvious reason pheasants don't occupy southeast Kansas is inadequate habitat caused by too many trees, too little high-quality nesting or brood-rearing habitat, intensive agriculture, and urbanization,"...

...Pitman believes that soil-mineral deficiency may be another factor that influences pheasant distribution.

"Calcium, which is important for eggshell development and adult survival, may be deficient in non-range areas," he explains. "Soils in the central, northeast, and western portions of the state are naturally high in calcium. Southeast Kansas soils are naturally low in calcium. While the exact mechanism by which this may limit pheasant distribution is complicated and not entirely clear, mineral deficiencies may play a role in explaining why pheasants are absent."

Another possibility is higher spring temperatures and humidity in the southeast.

"Research has shown that egg hatchability declines with increasing temperature and humidity," say Pitman. "When the temperature holds at 85 degrees and humidity at 80 percent for extended periods, hatchability drops to around 40 percent. Southeast Kansas certainly has much higher springtime temperatures and humidity than parts of the state where pheasants are common."
Click to expand...
 
This is a great topic. I’m no biologist, but I do have some opinions. I think the latest trends in crp and pheasant habitat grasses are great for winter survival, but not so great for nesting. Imagine being a pheasant chick in a switch grass field.

I grew up and still hunt in east central Illinois. We had an unbelievable pheasant population in the late 80s when I was growing up, and my dad others talk about the unbelievable numbers in the 60s and 70s. we had a lot of asparagus fields which are basically weed fields. I never saw switch grass or blue stem until the late 90s. Think back to when you were younger, how many birds did you kill in clover and alfalfa? I think those shorter grasses are much more conducive to nesting. I guess my point is I think you need both. However where I hunt it seems to be switch grass which in my opinion is bad for nesting. My experience says the first couple years of a switch grass field are the best then the population tapers off.

I don’t claim to know anything about the science of habitat. I’m just a guy with a dog who walks a lot, and is grateful to still shoot a few.
 
I have a scenario from a from cover we hunted las year and this year , The brome pasture with spotted pockets of locust trees has stayed the same with some spotted patches of native grass and old farm stead with a fair amount of Fireweed,

Crop feild last year green winter wheat , we moved 3 coveys and saw 3 or 4 pheasants

This year the pasture cover the same the crop field wheat stubble with what the farmer calls” feed” it looks like Egyptian wheat or Sudan was drilled in the wheat stubble and came up any where from knee high to thigh high but wasn’t harvested .

We moved 5 very healthy coveys of Quail and 20 to 30 pheasants .

Nice increase had to be Ideal brood rearing habitat , I think it’s all kinds of potential for Kansas pheasants in the areas of wheat and Milo roatation especially with wheat stubble .
 
Habitat/weather, we hunted a area that last year was awesome and this year only saw a couple birds. Found out the area was hit by heavy rain about chick time. Winter can also be crippling.
 
cyclonenation10 said:
I know this is a pretty open ended question, but something I think about quite often while out hunting. What makes one field better than another? Why do I always see more birds hunting a 20 acre slough of canary grass than I do hunting a 100 acre field of prime nesting habitat just a few miles away? Another example would be this: Why would an otherwise equal field in South Dakota hold 100 pheasants compared to maybe 15 in Iowa? In that scenario, let's assume the surrounding habitat is all the same, and the field is on an island (i.e. no additional nesting or anything else within proximity) and weather is relatively the same? This is just one example of many.

I always used to think certain areas of the state, or country were just "better" than others, but over time I've come to find out you can find great bird numbers wherever there is good habitat (within pheasants prime "range"). One of the best spots I hunt in the state of Iowa is within the lowest bird density region of the state. Most others struggle to even see birds around the area, but can guarantee I will put up 50+ pheasants every time I hunt this particular piece. However, what baffles me in many cases is when I move down the road just a few miles and struggle to see near the numbers on ground that I would argue is even better habitat (and about 2x the land).

Something else I always wonder is why SE Kansas doesn't have pheasants? The few times I've driven through, it looks like there is miles and miles of grasslands that would be very suitable habitat, and clearly fields I would love to hunt were they in Iowa, SD, or NW Kansas.

One last question on the carrying capacity of pheasant populations.. At one point does a property "max out" the number of birds it can support? I know year to year variations will happen due to weather, but how long does it take a property to reach that "average" level of birds that the year to year population will always hover around. If a 200 acre farm with adequate water, food, and shelter is converted from crop ground to CRP, how many years (generally speaking) will it take for the bird numbers to reach the maximum carrying capacity? 3? 5? 10? I ask the question because I hunt alot of ground similar to this, that's only been around for 3-4 years. Are the numbers I'm seeing likely as good as it will get, or is there still room for the population to grow by 50%, 100%, 200%?

Would love to hear everyone's thoughts/opinions on any/all of these questions, or any research or articles you've come across that address these.

Thanks!
Click to expand...
Right off the bat, my thoughts are limited to the Upper Midwest, since that's what I know. And I'll talk about wild birds that DON'T live on pheasant farms, intentionally set up to provide them everything they need. I believe pheasants only stay within a mile of where they hatch if they don't have any other options. Think about it, if they don't have nesting cover, loafing/chilling cover (for all weather conditions), food (available in all weather conditions) & roosting cover (for all weather conditions)....they'll go find it. They don't have a choice. And cover that's good for nesting ISN'T necessarily good for loafing or roosting. And regardless of where a pheasant is, he has to feel SAFE! If he doesn't, he'll go somewhere he does. That's the difference between SD & most other states. Because of the varied types of cover all over the place & because of agricultural practices, the average pheasant in SD has many more options than the average pheasant in another state. They have the ability to move around, both on a long-term basis & within the course of a day. They live easier lives. Consequently, they reproduce more readily.

And it's amazing how closely, at almost all times, a pheasant relates to food. EASY food. And preferred food. Yes, they'll eat all manner of things, but given corn, beans, berries, and other commonly available foods....they'll choose corn over the rest of it. We're often most interested in bird numbers in an area during hunting season. Given 2 identical spots somewhat near each other - one adjacent to corn & the other adjacent to beans...on average pheasants will choose the one by corn. IF...it's easy, they feel safe while feeding, etc. These things change every year, so that's often why it seems like a spot that had birds last year is bare this year. Not really; they just moved or changed their routine.

Now, during the course of a day, if a bird has options & weather permits, he can put on some serious mileage. He'll get up, go feed, & then find stuff to do until late afternoon feeding time. Weather permitting, these daytime activities involve a LOT of walking around. And it could be in trees, sparse cattails near a low area, in the middle of a corn field (picked or not), along a fenceline or terrace, or whatever. And as long as he feels safe, he'll just walk around, all the while staying pretty close to his food source (which could be a 1/2 section or even larger!!). Imagine how far a bird can just walk in a matter of 7 hours, say from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. If they don't have to, they won't fly all day. Until it's time to return to roost, and then only if flying for some reason is a better option than walking.

Also, hunting pressure obviously comes into play. If a bird's options are limited, you may know where they're likely to be during the day, but pressured birds get extremely wary & figure out how to avoid you. But in places where options exist, they'll just avoid hunting ground altogether during the day, particularly roosters. They'll go out to feed in the morning, & then just saunter over to the trees around a farmplace for awhile. Or whatever.

I think the short answer is options. If birds have options (good options), they live easier, longer lives & reproduce more readily. And those available options change from year to year. And that theoretical field on an island in SD that's identical to another one in IA???? It doesn't exist. Because once you get a mile or 2 or 3 away, there are generally more options available near the SD island than near the IA island.

As for nesting, I do NOT believe thick, thick CRP grass is great. And I think if SD lacks ANYTHING, it's nesting cover. I believe Waterfowl & Game Production Areas (at least in the areas I hunt) are becoming thicker & thicker, & fewer & fewer pheasants are nesting on them. It's one of the reasons I don't get too bent out of shape when I pull up to a spot for the 1st time in the season to find it grazed, mowed, or otherwise rendered "poor" for hunting. It gives that place an opportunity to regenerate & hopefully get back to a decent nesting stage, even though that stage may be somewhat short-lived. (Again though, in SD, those birds had options, so they just moved. Whereas in another state, the effect could be more devastating to the surrounding area too.) Conversely, some newer Walk-In Areas & CREP lands are more varied & generally lighter....better nesting habitat. But....these lighter tracts get knocked down & socked in with snow earlier. So....the birds move if they have to. They generally have that option in SD, where in other states they may not.
 
Last edited:
Lots of questions and lots of variables. I think multiple areas for nesting and roosting is important. If your filed is the only field with the necessities for a pheasant I don't think that you will see lots of birds. They need places to escape to when pressured by predators. Second I think water is extremely valuable. Without it I don't see the same amount of birds in a area. Third is food. Pheasants prefer certain food over other options. Corn over beans certainly. But I have hunted in Montana whereall they have is wheat and they do fine on that as a food source. Many variables make this one of those things that make you go HUMMMM?
 
A5 Sweet 16 said:
Right off the bat, my thoughts are limited to the Upper Midwest, since that's what I know. And I'll talk about wild birds that DON'T live on pheasant farms, intentionally set up to provide them everything they need. I believe pheasants only stay within a mile of where they hatch if they don't have any other options. Think about it, if they don't have nesting cover, loafing/chilling cover (for all weather conditions), food (available in all weather conditions) & roosting cover (for all weather conditions)....they'll go find it. They don't have a choice. And cover that's good for nesting ISN'T necessarily good for loafing or roosting. And regardless of where a pheasant is, he has to feel SAFE! If he doesn't, he'll go somewhere he does. That's the difference between SD & most other states. Because of the varied types of cover all over the place & because of agricultural practices, the average pheasant in SD has many more options than the average pheasant in another state. They have the ability to move around, both on a long-term basis & within the course of a day. They live easier lives. Consequently, they reproduce more readily.

And it's amazing how closely, at almost all times, a pheasant relates to food. EASY food. And preferred food. Yes, they'll eat all manner of things, but given corn, beans, berries, and other commonly available foods....they'll choose corn over the rest of it. We're often most interested in bird numbers in an area during hunting season. Given 2 identical spots somewhat near each other - one adjacent to corn & the other adjacent to beans...on average pheasants will choose the one by corn. IF...it's easy, they feel safe while feeding, etc. These things change every year, so that's often why it seems like a spot that had birds last year is bare this year. Not really; they just moved or changed their routine.

Now, during the course of a day, if a bird has options & weather permits, he can put on some serious mileage. He'll get up, go feed, & then find stuff to do until late afternoon feeding time. Weather permitting, these daytime activities involve a LOT of walking around. And it could be in trees, sparse cattails near a low area, in the middle of a corn field (picked or not), along a fenceline or terrace, or whatever. And as long as he feels safe, he'll just walk around, all the while staying pretty close to his food source (which could be a 1/2 section or even larger!!). Imagine how far a bird can just walk in a matter of 7 hours, say from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. If they don't have to, they won't fly all day. Until it's time to return to roost, and then only if flying for some reason is a better option than walking.

Also, hunting pressure obviously comes into play. If a bird's options are limited, you may know where they're likely to be during the day, but pressured birds get extremely wary & figure out how to avoid you. But in places where options exist, they'll just avoid hunting ground altogether during the day, particularly roosters. They'll go out to feed in the morning, & then just saunter over to the trees around a farmplace for awhile. Or whatever.

I think the short answer is options. If birds have options (good options), they live easier, longer lives & reproduce more readily. And those available options change from year to year. And that theoretical field on an island in SD that's identical to another one in IA???? It doesn't exist. Because on the average, once you get a mile or 2 or 3 away, there are generally more options near the SD island than near the IA island.

As for nesting, I do NOT believe thick, thick CRP grass is great. In SD I believe Waterfowl & Game Production Areas (at least in the areas I hunt) are becoming thicker & thicker, & fewer & fewer pheasants are nesting on them. It's one of the reasons I don't get too bent out of shape when I pull up to a spot for the 1st time in the season to find it grazed, mowed, or otherwise rendered "poor" for hunting. It gives that place an opportunity to regenerate & hopefully get back to a decent nesting stage, even though that stage may be somewhat short-lived. (Again though, in SD, those birds had options, so they just moved. Whereas in another state, the effect could be more devastating to the surrounding area too.) Conversely, some newer Walk-In Areas & CREP lands are more varied & generally lighter....better nesting habitat. But....these lighter tracts get knocked down & socked in with snow earlier. So....the birds move if they have to. They generally have that option in SD, where in other states they may not.
Click to expand...
I'll second corn being extremely important. This year several farms I hunt had been forced to plant beans instead of the normal corn due to wet spring conditions. The cover and wood lots were basically the same as last year, but held much fewer birds.
 
dakotasj said:
I'll second corn being extremely important. This year several farms I hunt had been forced to plant beans instead of the normal corn due to wet spring conditions. The cover and wood lots were basically the same as last year, but held much fewer birds.
Click to expand...
Right. And as long as the spring/hatch was OK in the area, once their food choices switched from bugs & stuff in summer to waste grains in fall, they didn't just disappear. They moved, because more than likely, they had options.

Last year, one of the areas in which I hunt was EXTREMELY wet & essentially NO corn or beans got planted ANYWHERE. That was a game changer that I'd never experienced before on such a large scale. I hunted in that area for maybe 2 or 3 weekends & had a devil of a time finding birds & I know they'd been around all summer long. It was amazing. They moved. And they would've had to go several miles to find grains. But when you consider a bird doing that, how hard is it really?? Not very hard. Now this season, the corn & beans are back. So are the pheasants. Not like they had been 2 years ago. But barring any catastrophic events, it won't take long. Because the varied habitat is there.
 
Last edited:
Great discussion. I'll add a couple thoughts to the potpourri.

I hunt a lot of public land, manage some private land specifically for pheasants/wildlife and hunt a western SD ranch with good numbers of pheasants. We all hear the "habitat to the 3rd power", but I think it is easy to over look what that means. I know for a fact that the Western SD Ranch's stellar pheasant numbers are directly attributable one crop - Winter Wheat. It's the perfect height and density for nesting/brood rearing when that time of year rolls around. Yes, there has to be thermal habitat as winter can be a bear, but pheasants are prolific breeders. If they fail, they'll keep trying. Give them the proper tools and they'll succeed.

When land is managed for pheasants, predators and other factors that might make or break quality hunting for a season on a parcel of public land don't really come into play. Again, if pheasants have a place to nest, rest, breed and bundle up in the winter, they'll be fine. I have heard countless times and read studies that soybeans are not as good as corn in terms of energy production for pheasants. I've got a corn food plot on the property I manage and time and time again, I'll shoot pheasants whose crops were filled not by pulling the easy stuff from the stalk, but from scratching through the snow and foraging random soybeans that were waste grains from harvest.

Public land is what I'm most interested in when it comes to "why". I know that there are countless factors and cannot fathom them all. I do know that one year I took a limit from a public parcel on the resident opener and could have shot more, the following year I didn't see a single pheasant. It was the resident opener on the same land, same habitat, same hunter, same dog. It's easy to speculate, but maybe they were chilling next door because it smelled better. Who knows. One thing I try to push on the GFP is for the WPA's that have the nesting grass and thermal habitat is to try to introduce a food source. I know that pheasants love weed seeds. Farming is not as important as pheasant hunting to a jerk like me, so I say add in the kochia, ragweed and hemp, let's feed the birds and make every fall a banger!!
 
Last edited:
As has been noted above, there are so many variables to this topic that you can't have one answer for every situation. If you have read my posts in the past, you'll recognize when I talk about the limiting factor. Every area has on if they don't have a habitat that is at carrying capacity. That limiting factor also changes with the seasons. It may be nesting cover early, brood-rearing cover next, climate some years, food resources at times, and maybe adequate winter cover another. As I have often said before, it is important for you to also look across the fence outside of your management to determine and address the limiting factors at hand because your pheasants may be your neighbor's pheasants in some parts of the year if the limiting factor is on your side of the fence. As stated above, some parts of each state are better at producing robust populations than others. This may be due to farming practices, soil, weather, or any of a multitude of factors. You have to have an aiming point relative to where you are and what can be done. Often on here I show various habitats and the management practices that create them only to hear folks say that the tall, rank pictures are what they want. The problem there is that those habitats are not where the pheasants will nest nor where they will raise their brood. If all you do is manage for "winter" cover, you are missing the mark. It is not unusual for pheasants to move as conditions dictate. They may be on your acreage to nest and move to the legume crops on your neighbor to raise their brood. Maybe the land on the other side of you is the best winter cover, or maybe it is adequate winter cover but provides more security so they select for it. I know on one area I managed the pheasants were there opening weekend and after the first week were impossible to find and hunters quit coming. In January, after the area had seen little pressure for several weeks, I could limit in an hour because the pheasants were coming back to the better habitat due to it being more secure late in the season. Those birds hadn't been there for some time, but again moved due to current needs. A lot of our success in the field is due to what we decide while driving around our prospective hunting acreages. The hunters that are good at judging habitat relative to the part of the season that they are in will have more success than hunters going to the same looking places as they did opening day.
 
Good Stuff, particular PD and his experience in working over a larger geography. One thing I believe we haven't addressed that is important is negative factors or sinks. Lot of alfalfa is a sink or trap crop because the first cutting is generally harvested when hens are on the nest, destroying the clutch. Lots of adjacent pasture land or roost trees often mean a greater predator toll. Adequate habitat can help reduce the impact, but all things being equal, I try to avoid the "sinks".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top