Will Wild Pheasants Benefit from CA Drought?

S

Sporting Days

Member
It sounds crazy on its face......BUT....I am reading and hearing a lot about all the farms leaving a lot of fallow fields this year because they don't have water to farm. There hasn't been this much open, uncultivated farmland in CA in quite some time and may provide a lot of wild pheasant habitat.

Now...a few well-timed late spring rains, even if they're not enough to get us out of this drought mess, may actually help wild pheasant and chick production and survival with all the additional habitat. What do you think? Any reason to be optimistic about this drought situation and its impact on wild pheasants?
 
Around here fallow means tilled black to create dust storms on purpose to prove a point about water. One good thing that could come of it is west valley farmers realising that permanent crops don't have a place out there.
 
Bummer...I have seen some of that as well -- with a sign to boot to maker the farmer's point!! Still....maybe they won't be as inclined to keep those fields "clean" if there's no intention to plant crops. A guy can hope...
 
I'm going to take a drive out to Mendota and Los Banos where I hunt and see if I notice any difference in farming practices this year. I imagine not but like you said we can hope. I'll say I've seen more range land that's never been plowed converted to almond orchards in the last two years than I've ever seen in my life, as long as the farmer can sink a deep well and pump good ground water unchecked no drought will deter them. The only reason they don't do it in the Westland water district is that salinity is too high in th he ground water out there.
 
The whole water situation is very interesting and at times mind boggling. Reading about and understanding our states water delivery history is confusing at times. Being a country boy with lots of farming friends and family and a conservation minded hunter/ fisherman/ outdoorsman with an admitted tree hugging side puts me in a very weird position in the argument not being able to see eye to eye with either sides extreme views on the issue.
 
I'm with you on the mind-boggling part of this QH. I'm perplexed that we all subsidize discounted ag water for farmers who are producing crops that are (depending on the crop) predominantly going overseas. In the north it is flood irrigated nuts and rice, and in the south it is flood irrigated livestock feed (Sudan grass, Kline grass, bermuda, alfalfa, etc.), much of it sold Asian buyers/markets before the fields are even planted.

The gist of my concern is that I have no issue with subsidizing crops for domestic sale and consumption, but not for overseas markets.

Worse, thousands of arable acres in southwest Imperial Valley are being converted into solar "farms."

The situation is grim IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top