|
|
Post by Roosterslammer on Jan 27, 2014 13:33:37 GMT -5
The most recent survey taken by the PGC showed 85% of hunters support a wild pheasant recovery program and only 5% against. Amazing how loud the 5% can be sometimes. Also 78% support the game farm pheasant program and only 6% are against. The difference in the total being those who are neutral. Both programs have very high support.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Jan 27, 2014 14:59:32 GMT -5
Lynn, of course when you ask someone if they want ice cream, they will say "yes".
Most hunters think that wild pheasant restoration is easily accomplished, when given the facts, what do you think the percentages would be?
When told that only ONE WPRA is seeing good success, and after much habitat manipulation and that it will not be easily recreated, what would the numbers be?
That is the question. Can you reproduce the Montour WPRA here in Lancaster County or Lebanon or Franklin or Cumberlnd?
|
|
|
|
Post by Roosterslammer on Jan 27, 2014 16:35:54 GMT -5
Lynn, of course when you ask someone if they want ice cream, they will say "yes". Most hunters think that wild pheasant restoration is easily accomplished, when given the facts, what do you think the percentages would be? When told that only ONE WPRA is seeing good success, and after much habitat manipulation and that it will not be easily recreated, what would the numbers be? That is the question. Can you reproduce the Montour WPRA here in Lancaster County or Lebanon or Franklin or Cumberlnd? Here I go again, dealing with the 5%. If you see the latest report, you'll see that Hegins/Gratz has good numbers after only one release and Somerset has just under the 9 hen/per square mile on some of the WPRA there. Much habitat manipulation has not been done that produces high pheasant numbers. Now we know what works, we have only started to make improvements 2 years ago and will only reach the 3 year growth we need on the switchgrass. We only have two areas where the habitat is suitable to high numbers. The habitat work for high populations has just started and won't kick in till next year. I am not familiar with other areas so unlike you, if I'm not informed I don't comment. I am very familiar with Central Susquehanna and I know this WPRA can produce a high number of huntable pheasants. I think Bradford would be a good bet considering the amount of CREP. It would need some switchgrass interseeding but it should be looked at next in my opinion. Where this program will be in 10 or 20 years depends on habitat issues which are unknown by us all. |
|
|
|
Post by bawanajim on Jan 27, 2014 17:15:34 GMT -5
If money spent is the only reason some of you don't like this program, where would you like to see this money spent?
we all no the money will be spent some where, as government agencies never "don't spend money".
|
|
|
|
Post by rober on Jan 27, 2014 18:52:09 GMT -5
Lynn, of course when you ask someone if they want ice cream, they will say "yes". Most hunters think that wild pheasant restoration is easily accomplished, when given the facts, what do you think the percentages would be? When told that only ONE WPRA is seeing good success, and after much habitat manipulation and that it will not be easily recreated, what would the numbers be? That is the question. Can you reproduce the Montour WPRA here in Lancaster County or Lebanon or Franklin or Cumberlnd? Here I go again, dealing with the 5%. If you see the latest report, you'll see that Hegins/Gratz has good numbers after only one release and Somerset has just under the 9 hen/per square mile on some of the WPRA there. Much habitat manipulation has not been done that produces high pheasant numbers. Now we know what works, we have only started to make improvements 2 years ago and will only reach the 3 year growth we need on the switchgrass. We only have two areas where the habitat is suitable to high numbers. The habitat work for high populations has just started and won't kick in till next year. I am not familiar with other areas so unlike you, if I'm not informed I don't comment. I am very familiar with Central Susquehanna and I know this WPRA can produce a high number of huntable pheasants. I think Bradford would be a good bet considering the amount of CREP. It would need some switchgrass interseeding but it should be looked at next in my opinion. Where this program will be in 10 or 20 years depends on habitat issues which are unknown by us all. You should know where it should be in 10-20 years. That is EXACTLY where the problem is for me!! Take away the MONEY from all the private landowners(CRP) and you have no habitat and you have no birds. That is money wasted. If it was all on PUBLIC land, it could be maintained for however long it takes. As soon as the season starts(if it ever does) all this private land now becomes un-huntable to the average hunter. Unless of course, he wants to pay. It happened for deer and geese and it will happen for pheasants |
|
|
|
Post by bawanajim on Jan 27, 2014 19:28:21 GMT -5
Well that's a valid point, to a point, how much money was spent on private property in the elk range?
I do see where the majority of game lands are made up of less desirable lands, keeping taxes and conflicts to a minimum. Yet pheasant habitat is made up of more valuable and accessible land adding to this dilemma. While I do see the appearance and availability to abuse the success of this program for personal gain, it seems to be the price has to be paid for even a chance at success.
And I fully admit if I lived in one of these areas I would try hard to own land for my own personal pleasure as much as my dogs, much like I have done here for deer hunting.
Like every thing else in life, you will only get out of it, what you venture to put into it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 19:34:21 GMT -5
Lynn are you going to do any research at the Hegins one anytime soon? I live ten minutes from there and would love to see how the program is going.
|
|
|
|
Post by cspot on Jan 27, 2014 19:48:16 GMT -5
My only complaint is that pheasants are a non-native species. I just don't see spending that much money on a stocking program. That being said many enjoy doing it and it does get a lot of kids involved, so I won't be picketing the stocking trucks.  . I would love to see a stamp to fund the program. |
|
|
|
Post by bawanajim on Jan 27, 2014 20:04:19 GMT -5
The only problem I see with a stamp is the division it causes, I brought this up before, I feel we already have to many "licenses", its just more division, we have bear license's, archery license's, muzzle loader license's, we need a "hunting license" figure the cost across the board, one cost for us all.
|
|
|
|
Post by TusseyMtman on Jan 27, 2014 20:20:22 GMT -5
The survey was a bit biased. I don't remember the exact ratio. But, some of the sample was random and some was from a confirmed pheasant hunter database. I'm not saying the majority still would not have approved, just not so overwhelmingly.
I think if more facts were brought to light about the program, the opinions of many may change.
|
|
|
|
Post by bawanajim on Jan 27, 2014 20:32:20 GMT -5
I think we as Americans are so used to failures when it comes to government programs that naturally we are pessimistic, if more people could see the terrible conditions that these birds are capable of not only enduring but prospering in, even after devastating losses in the tens of thousands these birds rebound in remarkable numbers.
These birds not only fly fast but they fly miles with ease they roost miles from where they feed, they are nothing like what most of this states residents think pheasants are.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roosterslammer on Jan 27, 2014 20:41:55 GMT -5
Lynn are you going to do any research at the Hegins one anytime soon? I live ten minutes from there and would love to see how the program is going. You just missed it. They flushed Hegins/Gratz Saturday. |
|
|
|
Post by Roosterslammer on Jan 27, 2014 20:45:52 GMT -5
Dutch,
I have joined the proud ranks of those who have been banned at HPA. I have a two week suspension for sticking to some of the unbelievers. Not sure if the other side of the argument got a ban too but I'll be checking it out.
|
|
|
|
Post by rober on Jan 27, 2014 20:50:41 GMT -5
Well that's a valid point, to a point, how much money was spent on private property in the elk range? I do see where the majority of game lands are made up of less desirable lands, keeping taxes and conflicts to a minimum. Yet pheasant habitat is made up of more valuable and accessible land adding to this dilemma. While I do see the appearance and availability to abuse the success of this program for personal gain, it seems to be the price has to be paid for even a chance at success. And I fully admit if I lived in one of these areas I would try hard to own land for my own personal pleasure as much as my dogs, much like I have done here for deer hunting. Like every thing else in life, you will only get out of it, what you venture to put into it. Not sure how much was spent in Elk Country on private lands. But Elk can survive in other areas of the state without creating habitat for them. I believe they could survive where I hunt in Potter Co. However, move the pheasants out of the WPRA's and they will not survive to be able to establish a breedable population. It costs a lot of money for this program, from the state and local level. And then lets not forget what it costs on the Federal level with the farming rights being purchased by the farm bill(CRP) |
|
|
|
Post by bawanajim on Jan 27, 2014 21:01:53 GMT -5
When the government quits wasting tax dollars I will quit supporting the spending of those wasted dollars on some thing I love.
Until then, keep planting switch grass !
|
|
|
|
Post by rober on Jan 27, 2014 22:00:00 GMT -5
Dutch, I have joined the proud ranks of those who have been banned at HPA. I have a two week suspension for sticking to some of the unbelievers. Not sure if the other side of the argument got a ban too but I'll be checking it out. Sticking to some un-believers?? All that was asked is that you post a link to your survey. You then chose personal attacks, hence the thread was removed. Sorry, no vacation for me. I took the high road bye |
|
|
|
Post by Roosterslammer on Jan 28, 2014 0:04:48 GMT -5
Well that's a valid point, to a point, how much money was spent on private property in the elk range? I do see where the majority of game lands are made up of less desirable lands, keeping taxes and conflicts to a minimum. Yet pheasant habitat is made up of more valuable and accessible land adding to this dilemma. While I do see the appearance and availability to abuse the success of this program for personal gain, it seems to be the price has to be paid for even a chance at success. And I fully admit if I lived in one of these areas I would try hard to own land for my own personal pleasure as much as my dogs, much like I have done here for deer hunting. Like every thing else in life, you will only get out of it, what you venture to put into it. Not sure how much was spent in Elk Country on private lands. But Elk can survive in other areas of the state without creating habitat for them. I believe they could survive where I hunt in Potter Co. However, move the pheasants out of the WPRA's and they will not survive to be able to establish a breedable population. It costs a lot of money for this program, from the state and local level. And then lets not forget what it costs on the Federal level with the farming rights being purchased by the farm bill(CRP) Wrong again Rober. CREP is a soil conservation program. The pheasants are riding along for free. A large part of the program is funded by the Mellon Foundation and PF chapters. You'll have to make something else up. |
|
|
|
Post by Roosterslammer on Jan 28, 2014 0:08:13 GMT -5
Dutch, I have joined the proud ranks of those who have been banned at HPA. I have a two week suspension for sticking to some of the unbelievers. Not sure if the other side of the argument got a ban too but I'll be checking it out. Sticking to some un-believers?? All that was asked is that you post a link to your survey. You then chose personal attacks, hence the thread was removed. Sorry, no vacation for me. I took the high road bye I'm sure that was the reason. Comments about the survey being given to those standing next to the stocking truck ring a bell. Give me a break. You clowns just wanted to hide the survey cause you look bad. |
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Jan 28, 2014 6:13:21 GMT -5
Lynn, sorry ya got a suspension, but calling people clowns sure ain't the right path either, but carry on. LOL
I bet the suspension notice you got said as a former mod you should know the rules, right?
Problem is the rules over there are so vague they allow the owner to play God and play favorites. On top of that, he's influenced by his alter ego, the guy that reads people's PM's, 4C Gamechaser.
|
|
|
|
Post by bawanajim on Jan 28, 2014 9:29:38 GMT -5
Getting banned over there is like finding a loosing lottery ticket, not much effort at all.  |
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Jan 28, 2014 9:46:38 GMT -5
Well that's a valid point, to a point, how much money was spent on private property in the elk range? I do see where the majority of game lands are made up of less desirable lands, keeping taxes and conflicts to a minimum. Yet pheasant habitat is made up of more valuable and accessible land adding to this dilemma. While I do see the appearance and availability to abuse the success of this program for personal gain, it seems to be the price has to be paid for even a chance at success. And I fully admit if I lived in one of these areas I would try hard to own land for my own personal pleasure as much as my dogs, much like I have done here for deer hunting. Like every thing else in life, you will only get out of it, what you venture to put into it. Not sure how much was spent in Elk Country on private lands. But Elk can survive in other areas of the state without creating habitat for them. I believe they could survive where I hunt in Potter Co. However, move the pheasants out of the WPRA's and they will not survive to be able to establish a breedable population. It costs a lot of money for this program, from the state and local level. And then lets not forget what it costs on the Federal level with the farming rights being purchased by the farm bill(CRP) I'm not an expert on the elk program but I live on the bottom edge of the elk range so I know the area fairly well.We had a herd of 14 move in on our property and my neighbors this past fall.To my knowledge,I don't think much money if any was spent of private land.The habitat work that I've seen has all been on state forest and state game lands.There aren't many areas suitable for elk in Pa.They need big wide open meadows that aren't close to agriculture.Northern Potter has way too uch ag and southern potter doesn't have the open space needed. |
|
|
|
Post by Roosterslammer on Jan 28, 2014 12:19:12 GMT -5
Lynn, sorry ya got a suspension, but calling people clowns sure ain't the right path either, but carry on. LOL I bet the suspension notice you got said as a former mod you should know the rules, right? Problem is the rules over there are so vague they allow the owner to play God and play favorites. On top of that, he's influenced by his alter ego, the guy that reads people's PM's, 4C Gamechaser. I'll try to control myself in the future. After six years of answering the same questions and negative comments it's getting old and I'm getting old and crotchety I guess. Things are looking better now than ever with the wild pheasant plan. It will take time but we didn't lose them overnight and it will take some time to get them back. The habitat it PA is very poor for grassland species in particular. Any effort we make to improve grassland habitat will be a plus for lots of wildlife. |
|
|
|
Post by rober on Jan 28, 2014 12:28:42 GMT -5
Not sure how much was spent in Elk Country on private lands. But Elk can survive in other areas of the state without creating habitat for them. I believe they could survive where I hunt in Potter Co. However, move the pheasants out of the WPRA's and they will not survive to be able to establish a breedable population. It costs a lot of money for this program, from the state and local level. And then lets not forget what it costs on the Federal level with the farming rights being purchased by the farm bill(CRP) I'm not an expert on the elk program but I live on the bottom edge of the elk range so I know the area fairly well.We had a herd of 14 move in on our property and my neighbors this past fall.To my knowledge,I don't think much money if any was spent of private land.The habitat work that I've seen has all been on state forest and state game lands.There aren't many areas suitable for elk in Pa.They need big wide open meadows that aren't close to agriculture.Northern Potter has way too uch ag and southern potter doesn't have the open space needed. Exactly, the work has been on Public Land. That is my issue with the pheasant program. If it was all on Public Land, no problems for me. Our area in Potter could sustain a small Elk herd, we have some ag. around but a lot of meadows and grassland. |
|
|
|
Post by rober on Jan 28, 2014 12:31:40 GMT -5
Sticking to some un-believers?? All that was asked is that you post a link to your survey. You then chose personal attacks, hence the thread was removed. Sorry, no vacation for me. I took the high road bye I'm sure that was the reason. Comments about the survey being given to those standing next to the stocking truck ring a bell. Give me a break. You clowns just wanted to hide the survey cause you look bad. You could post the link to your survey here. You must have seen it somewhere so tell us where it is if you can not post it. Sure, I made the comment about giving it to the hunters standing next to the stocking truck but for I know that is what happened. Who did they survey, and what were the parameters |
|
|
|
Post by rober on Jan 28, 2014 12:37:14 GMT -5
Not sure how much was spent in Elk Country on private lands. But Elk can survive in other areas of the state without creating habitat for them. I believe they could survive where I hunt in Potter Co. However, move the pheasants out of the WPRA's and they will not survive to be able to establish a breedable population. It costs a lot of money for this program, from the state and local level. And then lets not forget what it costs on the Federal level with the farming rights being purchased by the farm bill(CRP) Wrong again Rober. CREP is a soil conservation program. The pheasants are riding along for free. A large part of the program is funded by the Mellon Foundation and PF chapters. You'll have to make something else up. Ok, get rid of the CREP Program and the pheasants do not survive. I could be wrong but I don't think so but CRP and CREP, are all paid by the same people!! Not the Mellon Foundation and not PF. The Mellon Foundation and PF are both good organizations and both do a lot to enhance wildlife. If this was ALL on Public land, I would support this effort. UNLESS, you can tell me there are easements tied to pheasant hunting that these lands will always be opened to pheasant hunters. Then I have a change of attitude |
|
. I would love to see a stamp to fund the program.