# What about thist



## huntingbuddy (Sep 10, 2007)

Mormonboi's post about introducing native species made me wonder. Why doesnt the DWR do smart planting of gamebirds. Instead of planting couple dozen pheasants in a field a day before season why not release them earlier. And allow them to adapt to the habitat. I read something a while ago that when you release say a pheasant at like 14 weeks old (I am not sure if thats the age, I just throwing out a number.) they are able to adapt. They have a much higher sucess rate as opposed to the birds that are planted later.


----------



## vdogs (Sep 22, 2007)

I don't have any stats to back this up but, released birds do not fair well in areas where there is no significant wild population. Pen raised birds that can mingle with wild birds tend to have a much higher survival rate due (I'm sure) to "learning" from the wild birds. Where and when to feed, what cover to loaf in, how to evade predators, etc. etc. If the DWR were to release birds early as you describe, chances are..all would be dead within ten days of release. 

In areas like South Dakota, released birds are immediately running with wild ones and tend to match the behaviour of the wild population. 

Rick


----------



## huntingbuddy (Sep 10, 2007)

its kinda hard for released birds to assimilated with a wild population when there is none. I am saying we release birds when they are old enough to survive in the wild but not so old that when we do release them they act like a city boy in the woods, and do have much of a chance of surviving.


----------



## vdogs (Sep 22, 2007)

huntingbuddy said:


> its kinda hard for released birds to assimilated with a wild population when there is none. I am saying we release birds when they are old enough to survive in the wild but not so old that when we do release them they act like a city boy in the woods, and do have much of a chance of surviving.


I know what you're saying but, without wild birds to "learn" from..the younger they are..the quicker they die!

If the DWR was going to "plant" birds, it would be far more productive to work out a deal with the DWR from one or both of the Dakotas to purchase "trapped" wild birds and then re-introduce them here. Same poblems would still exist locally, specifcly lack of habitat due to developement.

Wild chukar were introduced to Utah in the 50's and 60's and then numbers were "bolstered" with pen raised birds each year. The BIG difference between sucessful transplanting of pheasant and chukar is available Habitat.

Rick


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

I have certainly thought about the same issue. From reading Pheasants Forever articles I recall that transplant animals achieve approximately zero % success as habitat and predation are already stacking the odds against the uneducated young birds. I think the first steps would be to take care of predation, habitat and then animals, but without that order the birds would simply strengthen the predator population.


----------



## huntingbuddy (Sep 10, 2007)

GSPman said:


> The BIG difference between sucessful transplanting of pheasant and chukar is available Habitat.
> 
> Rick


I totally agree, we do need to work on habitat first. I think the reason pheasants do so well in the dakota's is because it is the pairie pot hole region which ducks unlimited has done immense work in making sure nesting cover doesnt disappear. Someone was telling me that the hay they grow in south dakota is far different from the hay grown here as in it uses less water, and can be mowed later in the season giving the birds time to do their thing.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

On a similar note, I am a little surprised that the DWR dedicates so much in resources to phragmite; it appears to be an impossible battle. I will guess that the Feds help out there a little bit. I wonder if we could ever take a bite out of the raccoon population. At Desert Lake WMA, a few years ago the manager told us that they trap like crazy there and catch about 75 animals between, *****, skunks, cats and fox. I wonder if we could ever really make a dent in the population of those worthless ***** :?:


----------



## InvaderZim (Sep 7, 2007)

huntingbuddy said:


> Mormonboi's post about introducing native species made me wonder. Why doesnt the DWR do smart planting of gamebirds. Instead of planting couple dozen pheasants in a field a day before season why not release them earlier. And allow them to adapt to the habitat. I read something a while ago that when you release say a pheasant at like 14 weeks old (I am not sure if thats the age, I just throwing out a number.) they are able to adapt. They have a much higher sucess rate as opposed to the birds that are planted later.


Planting pen reared birds is a numbers game, plain and simple. And planting them for "public consumption" is also a numbers game.

Yes, planting birds at 14 weeks would probably yield insignificantly lower mortality rates...IN THE LONG TERM. The younger birds (provided they are not too young) "adapt" to the conditions and predation better the less time they are under human care.

BUT as far as the DWR is concerned the majority of these birds are placed in easily accessible areas that are frequented by sportsman. They are meant to be killed within a few days. Nearly all the rest die and a scant few live to procreate.

The DWR does not plant chukar in hopes of "reviving" populations. These birds are planted for "political" or "consumptive" reasons.

Leastwise that's my understanding of it.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

Good post Zim,

It's just like the fish stocking program. "Put and take", it's that simple. Pen raised birds released into the wild are DOOMED. They never do well in the long run. All they end up being if they don't get harvested is fox and hawk bait.


----------



## Gumbo (Sep 22, 2007)

InvaderZim said:


> The DWR does not plant chukar in hopes of "reviving" populations. These birds are planted for "political" or "consumptive" reasons.


Zim, what do you mean by "political or consumptive" reasons?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Gumbo said:


> InvaderZim said:
> 
> 
> > The DWR does not plant chukar in hopes of "reviving" populations. These birds are planted for "political" or "consumptive" reasons.
> ...


I may be off here, but I take it as political in doing things to 'appease' the public for PR purposes, and consumptive because the birds are either consumed by hunters in a very small window of time or are consumed by predators/weather. I agree with this on pheasants and somewhat on chukars, but I believe the DWR is doing some great things for other birds like sharp tails.


----------



## InvaderZim (Sep 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Gumbo said:
> 
> 
> > InvaderZim said:
> ...


Pro by and large nailed it. And yes I was only refering to pheasant and chukar.


----------

