# Roosters and Hens



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

Ok, it seems to me that the DWR and the general public agree that Utah just doesn't sustain pheasants. Further, I think everybody would agree that the pen raised birds being released have an abysmal survival rate. 

Ok, since the DWR releases roosters and hens, why wouldn't we allow the harvest of hens as well? Seems to me that every hen released is basically tax-payer subsidized hawk food. Why not allow people to take the hens that are just going to die anyway?


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

It would be impossible to tell the difference between a wild hen and a pen raised hen. We need the wild hens for future broods.


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

Interesting question - in my oversight in reading the articles about the DWR releasing birds, I assumed they were only releasing roosters. Releasing hens seems like a waste of money. I know I'm going to get different responses for this next comment, but oh well. If the dual objective of releasing birds is to provide hunters with opportunity and trying to bring back somewhat of a pheasant population, why not release wild birds taken from another state (i.e. Dakotas, Kansas, Nebraska)? These wild birds would come with the instincts required to find food, shelter, and how to avoid predators. 

Never heard of "pen" raised bighorns, deer, elk, or any other big game species released into the wild in an effort to assist in building a sustainable population.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

Fowlmouth, I get that. I guess I wasn't clear enough. I guess I'm saying that since the overall success of pheasants (or lack thereof) would support throwing in the towel and just allowing the harvest of any pheasant wouldn't have a measurable effect on the population.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

I think that when it comes down to it some of the released birds just may survive by luck or whatever. So if a few hens and roosters survive they may just help out what wild birds are left. But then that is just my opinion. 

I personally believe that the money that is spend on raising pheasants and then releasing them could be spent in other areas such as helping out the turkey and chucker populations.


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

pheasant stamp that goes towards nothing but releasing pen raised birds the day before the hunt. If some hens and roosters survive, that just means a few more for next years hunt. Wish we'd get it to 50,000 birds being released each year. As far as chukars, not many people hunt them and turkeys are doing quite well. More pheasants please!


----------



## Tl23life21 (Sep 29, 2015)

I would love a pheasant stamp that helps out on predators and plowing some fields and making more public pheasant habitat because we do have wild pheasants in Utah I get into them every year I hate when I read that we don't like I have access to some good private hooper fields and Willard and guess what most of what we get up is wild big spur and tail birds but the thing people don't realize is if you don't have a great dog them wild birds will run run run and snake your mediocre dog everytime we got smart birds and I've killed multiple birds with 24inch plus tails hell today I went out and jumped 5 big roosters and 6 hens just in the morning then came home and watched football the rest of day I don't take part in hunting the pen raised birds but I also don't disagree with it it gives people with no access to where wild birds are a opportunity and also it gives people with not very good dogs still get some birds up!! Sorry for the vent it just gets to me when people say we have no wild birds as I hunt them every year and watch them breed every spring in spare time I enjoy it I love pheasants!!!!! Have a wonderful day good hunting get em up!!!!


----------



## Fowl_faith (Aug 27, 2015)

I'd be a supporter of things I'd even run traps if that's what it takes I have seen more skunks then roosters this year.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

"Intensive agriculture, use of pesticides, removal of fencerows and odd areas, suburban sprawl, and commercial development have had detrimental effects upon pheasant populations,"

Read more at http://www.toledoblade.com/StevePol...asants-does-not-work.html#mTDB58l8fEoHblvU.99

Its a fair amount more complicated than just this, but "back in the good ol' days" when we had lots of deer, we had lots of pheasants as well.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Bullshi+! 

As you have been told time and time again when you bring up this pesticide crap. 

Back east pesticides are used and they have plenty of pheasant and deer.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Iron Bear said:


> Bullshi+!
> 
> As you have been told time and time again when you bring up this pesticide crap.
> 
> Back east pesticides are used and they have plenty of pheasant and deer.


Iron Bear, can you read? Read the reference article, the folks back East disagree with you, and that goes for deer as well.

Don't believe me on the deer? read this: http://www.northamericanwhitetail.c...ssroads-crops-contributing-whitetail-decline/

Your batting average when it comes to supporting your claims is about as low as it gets around here.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Support the upland and waterfowl slams, that's basically a stamp for state conservation.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Support the upland and waterfowl slams, that's basically a stamp for state conservation.


Conservation and releasing pheasants are two very different things, and that difference is why we have these conversations.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Tl23life21 said:


> I would love a pheasant stamp that helps out on predators and plowing some fields and making more public pheasant habitat because we do have wild pheasants in Utah I get into them every year I hate when I read that we don't like I have access to some good private hooper fields and Willard and guess what most of what we get up is wild big spur and tail birds but the thing people don't realize is if you don't have a great dog them wild birds will run run run and snake your mediocre dog everytime we got smart birds and I've killed multiple birds with 24inch plus tails hell today I went out and jumped 5 big roosters and 6 hens just in the morning then came home and watched football the rest of day I don't take part in hunting the pen raised birds but I also don't disagree with it it gives people with no access to where wild birds are a opportunity and also it gives people with not very good dogs still get some birds up!! Sorry for the vent it just gets to me when people say we have no wild birds as I hunt them every year and watch them breed every spring in spare time I enjoy it I love pheasants!!!!! Have a wonderful day good hunting get em up!!!!


Nothing beats pheasant hunting with a dog that can find pheasants.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Lonetree said:


> Your batting average when it comes to supporting your claims is about as low as it gets around here.


Common sense doesn't need support.


----------



## Avery Cook (Jul 31, 2014)

The DWR does not purchase or release hens. All of the DWR releases are rooster only.

However, some sportsman's groups release hen pheasants on public lands.


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

Thanks Avery:!:


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Iron Bear said:


> Common sense doesn't need support.


Common sense is based on experience. What may be common sense to you will not be common sense to someone else.

There is some truth to your predator control argument and there is truth to the pesticide argument.

There is truth to the amount of pheasant habitat destruction via housing and industry in Utah.

It all plays a part.


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

what about making some of these pheasant areas motorless areas?


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

Avery, good to know. I had just seen photos with DWR personnel (the first year of the program) and seemed to recall statements from the DWR that both hens and roosters were being released.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Iron Bear said:


> Common sense doesn't need support.


What guys like you call "common sense" is why our wildlife management is not scientifically based. Which is why we don't have pheasants like we use to. Which is why the sage grouse is one step from the endangered species list. Which is why deer numbers have been suppressed for decades. Which is why there is the continued decline of hunters. Which drives more radical infiltration and agendas against the institutions that have in the past supported wildlife, wild lands and the hunting they provide. All the while destroying wildlife and hunting.

Your common feelings on things are just one more part of this problem.

And just to reiterate how wrong your "common sense" is, read the provided articles, or at least look at the charts in them if reading is too hard. Pheasants and deer back East have declined. You claim otherwise, and then call that common sense???? Seriously?

And do you know why I get pissed about this kind of ignorance? Because it directly affects my ability and opportunity to hunt. And if hunters are not concerned about those things that are destroying wildlife and hunting, then we might as well just give up now.

Sort of getting back on track, releasing pen raised pheasants is not a long term sustainable conservation strategy: http://www.pheasantsforever.org/Habitat/Why-Habitat/Pheasant-Facts/Pheasant-Stocking.aspx

But then again, common sense probably says otherwise.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

The area i hunt has a stable population of wild pheasants and was also an area where birds were released. I would hate to see wild hen pheasants shot just because some pen birds were released. 

I also wonder how we have a nonnative population of wild oriental pheasants if transplants don't work? It is my belief that past practices of complete predator control allowed released pheasants to become wild. Now we have hawks, eagles, falcons, skunks, raccoons, cats, coyotes, ravens, foxes, dogs, etc. and those are not going away. The. The habitst has changed drastically. We have changed regs to allow people to run dogs all summer and kick hens off nests. Pheasant hunting in Utah is a token hunt for most people, myself included.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Packout said:


> The area i hunt has a stable population of wild pheasants and was also an area where birds were released. I would hate to see wild hen pheasants shot just because some pen birds were released.
> 
> I also wonder how we have a nonnative population of wild oriental pheasants if transplants don't work? It is my belief that past practices of complete predator control allowed released pheasants to become wild. Now we have hawks, eagles, falcons, skunks, raccoons, cats, coyotes, ravens, foxes, dogs, etc. and those are not going away. The. The habitst has changed drastically. We have changed regs to allow people to run dogs all summer and kick hens off nests. Pheasant hunting in Utah is a token hunt for most people, myself included.


Transplanting of good Chinese ring neck pheasants in the early days, and stocking 15 varieties of pen raised pheasant crosses from all over the place are two very, very different things.

Not only are pen reared birds not as thrifty as wild birds, fall releases verses spring releases have very abysmal success rates. Then you have the problems of disease transmission to wild birds, and the loss in genetics of the wild birds that were tried and true survivors.

Look at Chukars for example, the best way to establish new coveys is to translocate wild birds, not release pen reared dumbies. Same goes for grouse: http://peregrinefund.org/subsites/conference-gyr/proceedings/313-Braun.pdf and just about everything else.

From the previously provide link: http://www.pheasantsforever.org/Habitat/Why-Habitat/Pheasant-Facts/Pheasant-Stocking.aspx

* "stocking worked initially, why wouldn't it work now?*

When pheasants were first transplanted (different than stocking) and introduced to the U.S., the landscape was far different from the one we have today. Farming techniques were primitive, field sizes smaller and crops more diversified. These habitat conditions created a situation ideally suited for the introduction of a farmland species like the ring-necked pheasant."

* "with HIGH MOrTALITY RATES, SHOULDN'T WE CLOSE THE SEASON?*

For the most part, hunting has little to do with poor survival. Predators take the real toll on _pen-raised pheasants_, accounting for more than 90 percent of all deaths. _The reason being pen-raised birds never had a chance to learn predator avoidance behavior._ Starvation can also be a problem. Some newly-released pheasants take up to three weeks to develop optimal foraging patterns essential to survival in the wild."

Not because we suddenly have predators that we never had before.

* "With improved habitat, where will pheasants come from?*

Because of their high productivity, wild pheasants in the area can quickly populate newly-created habitats. In unpopulated areas of suitable habitat, transplanting wild birds or their offspring (F1 generation) appears to be the best solution. The first step should be an investigation of factors that have limited pheasant populations in the past-for example a lack of winter habitat or increased pesticide use."


* "Is there harm in releasing birds?*

Though not proven, there is cause for concern. Genetic dilution may be occurring. Even with minimal survival, the release of thousands of pen-raised birds over many years may be diminishing the "wildness" of the wild stock. Another concern is that, by releasing hundreds of birds in a given area, predators may start keying on pheasants. This may result in wild birds incurring higher predation. Finally, there is the potential of disease transmission from released birds to the wild flock."

But I'm sure common sense says otherwise, and makes recommendations to the DWR about wildlife based on said common sense.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

utahgolf said:


> what about making some of these pheasant areas motorless areas?


ALL of Carr Fork in Tooele is motorless.


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

Fowlmouth said:


> ALL of Carr Fork in Tooele is motorless.


We can thank paddler!


----------



## USMARINEhuntinfool (Sep 15, 2007)

I'd like to see them trap some of these wild city birds that are around my place. During the winter it's common to see 20-30 in the same pasture. Seems like they would do a lot better than pen raised birds, best if released in the spring. Does the DWR still check out traps to catch quail for transplants, why not do similar for pheasants?


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> Bullshi+!
> 
> As you have been told time and time again when you bring up this pesticide crap.
> 
> Back east pesticides are used and they have plenty of pheasant and deer.


Not true where I come from (western Illinois). Pesticide and herbicide use has risen exponentially in the last decade. No one fall plows any more, no one cultivates weeds in the crop fields anymore. They just spray chemicals on it at the expense of the upland game. Most of the waterways and a lot of the ditchbanks are being mowed. The fence rows have disappeared, plowed up to grow corn and beans. The pheasants, quail, and rabbits are all but gone....fewer songbirds, no milkweed for the monarch butterflies.

Changes in the USDA PIK Program (Payment in Kind) and high grain prices have farmers and ranchers plowing up more ground and leaving little lie fallow for upland game.

Since they built all the big ethanol refineries in Iowa/Illinois I quit going back to bird hunt.

On the bright side, there's still a ton of Fox Squirrels.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Don't know why I get an email a week nearly for upland hunts in the Dakotas Iowa Nebraska and Kansas. 

I guess it's just false advertising.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Iron Bear said:


> Don't know why I get an email a week nearly for upland hunts in the Dakotas Iowa Nebraska and Kansas.
> 
> I guess it's just false advertising.


Depends on where you are talking about. Are there places with pheasants? Yes, kind of like here. Look at the trend lines though, it is not what it used to be. Pheasants and deer have declined *everywhere.*

It is armchair hacks like you with no reference for the real world, that make all of us as hunters look ignorant, while making it easier and easier for the powers that be to chip away at hunting.

I'm still trying to think of a single time you have been able to support one sentence that you have ever typed here with something other than here say and conjecture.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

I am what I am. Never posed as anything but.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Iron Bear said:


> I am what I am. Never posed as anything but.


I never said you were posing, that's the problem.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> Don't know why I get an email a week nearly for upland hunts in the Dakotas Iowa Nebraska and Kansas.
> 
> I guess it's just false advertising.


Not false advertising but advertising none the less. The land that those hunts are on are managed for just that; bird hunting, not crop production. Most of the bird hunters "back east" don't hunt on bird farms, we hunt ordinary Ma and Pa grain farms.

I work on the road; all over the place. The Dakotas are good, especially North Dakota. Eastern Nebraska and eastern Iowa are hurting. Still, farming with chemicals has negatively impacted game bird populations in the grain belt. I use to work in Kansas every year but don't get back there much anymore.

I can do without the pheasants, but I miss the quail and it's sad to see a native game bird like the Bobwhite disappear from it's home range.

.


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

To echo what has been said about chemicals from Lonetree and Goob:

An immediate family member of mine purchased a large ranch in South Dakota as a retirement location after spending his entire career living in big cities. The area of the state where the ranch is located is not particularly known for massive amounts of upland birds. Wanting to improve the habitat on his ground, he reached out to Pheasants Forever and the local biologist. The advice he was given - use as little chemicals as possible, don't spray along fence rows, don't spray along ditch banks, and plant food for them in shelter belts. I can honestly say that in five years, his ground has turned into a mecca for pheasants, sharptails, and huns with limits of all these birds possible on a daily basis.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

In all fairness the decline of upland gamebirds back where I come from can not be blamed entirely on changes in farming practices from "mechanical farming" to "chemical farming." Coyotes, fox and raccoons are taking a considerable hit on upland game on the east side of the Big River.

There just weren't any coyotes when I was growing up and fur prices were good enough that trapping and varmint hunting kept the ***** and foxes under control.....somewhat. When the Mississippi froze in the winter of 1978/79 the coyotes came over from Iowa and Missouri. Most of the land was tied up in small Ma and Pa farm operations back then. Most of them had chickens and geese and ducks and pigs, you know, all those farm animals that fox and coyotes love. Farmers helped considerably with predator control back in those days.

Fur prices went bad in the early 80s and remain bad. The small Ma and Pa farm operations are gone. Many of the "devices" we used back in the day to keep predators in check are now illegal. So now there's coyotes and fox everywhere in western Illinois where at one time there was an abundance of rabbits, pheasants and quail. Can't blame it all on chemicals.

.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Let me add it's not fair to compare the change in pheasant populations in say in the Dakota's to say eastern Iowa/western Illinois.

Farming practices between the two places are vastly different and, in most cases, are driven by economics. With 300 bushel an acre of corn in Illinois vs 100 bushel an acre in the Dakotas guess who's going to be first to tear down the fence rows and plow up the weed patches when grain prices spike?


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

wyogoob said:


> In all fairness the decline of upland gamebirds back where I come from can not be blamed entirely on changes in farming practices from "mechanical farming" to "chemical farming." Coyotes, fox and raccoons are taking a considerable hit on upland game on the east side of the Big River.
> 
> There just weren't any coyotes when I was growing up and fur prices were good enough that trapping and varmint hunting kept the ***** and foxes under control.....somewhat. When the Mississippi froze in the winter of 1978/79 the coyotes came over from Iowa and Missouri. Most of the land was tied up in small Ma and Pa farm operations back then. Most of them had chickens and geese and ducks and pigs, you know, all those farm animals that fox and coyotes love. Farmers helped considerably with predator control back in those days.
> 
> ...


Where I grew up hunting pheasants and chukars, we had foxes, coyotes, skunks, raccoons, bobcats, badgers, lions, weasels, everyone forgets weasels. Now we have coyotes, foxes, raccoons, and skunks, but not as many as we had back in the '80s, with the exception of raccoons.

The chukars declined in the same areas as the pheasants, at the same time, as did the deer, porcupines, badgers, weasels, lions, and bobcats. This area has one massive source of pesticide use. North, South, and East of there you can still find lots of chukars, but not as many pheasants. And there are striking correlations to what goes on with deer in the area.

The thing about predation, is that it is usually driven by other factors, introduced predators(as mentioned), disease, habitat changes, etc. So yeah, while you can't blame it all on pesticides, I can show you case after case where it is one of, if not THE biggest driving force, right down to predation, parasites, and disease.

It is no different with birds than it is with biggame, induce disease, parasites, and weakness, and you will drive an increase in predation. Example: Whiskey mountain big horn sheep experienced high rates of predation because they were weakened by mineral deficiencies, AND because they altered there pattern of movement to reach minerals. So predation increased, and so predator control increased, but....the sheep kept declining.

What the folks at Pheasants forever understand, is what was known back in the sixties about sage grouse, spray sagebrush with 2,4-D and you will find it in the brains of sage grouse, and you will see them decline, just as they are doing now as we "improve" their habitat.

But I would guess that PF is up against the same road blocks I am as far as getting those test results that show pesticides in the bodies of pheasants. Not only were there far fewer pesticides to test for back in the day, yo can't hardly get it done these days, and when you have over 200 being used, you better know what you are testing for, or it could cost you $1000 per test, and you still won't find what you are looking for.

Of the 3 big labs that use to test tissue samples for pesticides, one is shut down, one became privtae(bought by a small agro-chem company) and the other(UC Davis) won't conduct them now that Monsanto is their biggest funder. I have two toxicologists working on getting me testing, and so far to test for some of the compounds we are looking at, it does not currently look possible.

Because of these changes a private lab was opened just to focus on two pesticides in humans. The little I know says that what they are finding is very scary. When I asked if I could get deer tissue tested, I was told that was last thing I should be worried about.


----------

