It's a question of Quail vs Pheasant

[Deleted]

Should the Pennsylvania Game Commission spend less time and money raising pheasants and focus at least partially on producing bobwhite quail?

Commissioner Ron Weaner of Adams County said some hunters have suggested that, believing quail are less expensive to raise and more likely to stay in areas where they're released.

It's not something that can happen overnight, he was told.

Bob Boyd, who heads up the commission's propagation program, said “we just can't add quail on top of a pheasant farm” because of disease issues. The commission would have to create a separate quail farm, which would be very expensive, he said.

Commissioner Jay Delaney of Luzerne County said he wouldn't be opposed to taking on that cost, but only down the line.

The commission recently embarked on a bobwhite quail recovery effort, aimed at seeing if any wild quail exist in the state and, if so, what can be done to promote their survival. He wants to give that attempt at going “the wild route,” time to succeed, he said.

If that doesn't work, a 50/50 split of pheasant and quail production might be in order, he said. But not now.

“I just don't think the timing is right,” Delaney said


Read more: triblive.com/sports/outdoors/6713996-74/quail-commission-pennsylvania#ixzz3CrygZebM
Follow us: @triblive on Twitter | triblive on Facebook

[Dutch]

Ok, and these are the people who want to charge and access fee to the SGL's in order to help pay for maintenance?

Then they want to spend MILLIONS on a quail program?

Not to mention the millions already spent on a WPRA program that may fail?

[grouse28]

"The commission recently embarked on a bobwhite quail recovery effort, aimed at seeing if any wild quail exist in the state"
Really! If these idiots would get off their butts and take a walk they would know. Issue is the same as pheasants, where is the cover? Our farms are biological deserts. I keep saying this, if we put the money into woodcock and grouse habitat we could rival the Great Lake states.
We need to cut, slash and burn gamelands and State Forests on a regular basis.

[Dutch]

At least the burning would kill the ticks.

I agree about the biological deserts. Where is a pheasant or quail to hide and prosper? They can't.

Even with super human efforts and the money of the CREP program, the WPRA's have not been stellar successes.

Can we create an artificial environment where some pheasants and quail reproduce? Yes, of course. Can it be done over a wide landscape, no. And at what cost?

[Deleted]

It has been well over ten years since we heard quail calling in the meadow below the house. It has been well over ten years since the annual audubon bird count included a single bob white quail. They are gone, as are the wild pheasants. Until farming methods change, and don't hold your breath for that to happen, there will continue to be no cover for game birds like pheasants and quail. There are no fence rows, and fields are harvested right down to the ground so that they are as bare as a baby's behind. Blame it on predators if you wish, but as is the case with deer, predators ain't at fault for this one either. Habitat, folks. Habitat is the key. You don't have habitat you don't have game birds.

[Dutch]

That's what I don't get, it is obvious to almost anyone that restoration, except on a small scale, is a near impossibility. Yet, they want to throw money at it?

Meanwhile, they want to create this new access fee, and thus allow others to dictate SGL policy, for $250,000? The $250,000 is needed to help balance their budgets?

[Deleted]

Sept 9, 2014 21:28:15 GMT -5 grouse28 said:

"The commission recently embarked on a bobwhite quail recovery effort, aimed at seeing if any wild quail exist in the state"
Really! If these idiots would get off their butts and take a walk they would know. Issue is the same as pheasants, where is the cover? Our farms are biological deserts. I keep saying this, if we put the money into woodcock and grouse habitat we could rival the Great Lake states.
We need to cut, slash and burn gamelands and State Forests on a regular basis.

I would rather see the PGC spend money on habitat than on raising quail or pheasants.
Small game hunting used to be a cooperative venture on the part of hunters and farmers.  The fact that today's farms are biological deserts as you put it is more the fault of the USDA than of the PGC.  Farmers are doing what they are told will make them a living.  Mostly we raise a surplus of food so as to keep the poor among us fat and happy (so there will not be food riots in the streets).  Today, we farm fence to fence, and have removed fence rows so as to avoid shading out a single corn or alfalfa plant.  After the harvest, nothing in the way of cover exists, and following major storms, much of our valuable soil washes into the Chessapeake Bay.  Efforts at soil conservation are a joke.  We need to deal with these problems before pouring money into raising game birds for put and take shooting enjoyment.  You want that, game farms will do it.

[gobblerhunter]

1) there should be a pheasant stamp as it is. I know that isn't up to the PGC but all hunters shouldn't be paying 4+ million for a few.
2) Jay would never cut pheasants in half and or any amount and add quail. Fact I wouldn't be shocked if he was for the GL's user fee to use the money for more pheasants instead of "maintenance"
3) If they did want to raise quail i would want a stamp for that also

[Deleted]

I'm a big Pheasant guy. With that said this Quail idea might have merit. It piques my interest and there is some public land that has well maintained habitat. SGL 145 comes to mind. Its currently a pheasant paradise and has carryover from year to year as well as sild broods. I wonder if quail would work there?

[johns]

gobblerhunter, this is a weak poor argument "all hunters shouldn't be paying 4+ million for a few".
First of all, all hunters are not paying 4 million dollars, they are paying a few dollars. The same can be said about those who don't hunt turkey, or deer, or rabbits, etc. There is money spent on all species, whether it is raising for stocking, or research, or habitat work. If a quail restoration was started there would be a lot of help from Quail forever and Quail unlimited. There are species I don't hunt, that is my choice and I have no problem with my license cost paying for them. Think of all the things that could be accomplished if so many people did not stand around and say it can't be done, instead of helping. BTW, I am in favor of a pheasant stamp, just not for your reason.

[gobblerhunter]

Johns – I don’t think it is a weak poor argument at all. Millions of dollars are spent yearly for put and take pheasants that only a few take advantage of. That huge amount of money would/could/should be spent elsewhere. Ideally pheasant hunters should pay for that expense but that would never happen so they should at least kick down some to ease that cost some. Think of all the things that could be accomplished with all of that money. I’m sure you’ll come up with the great plan of “a habitat stamp” or “small game stamp” but all that will be is another way of paying for the pheasants since it is the largest expense there is. When you cut trees that create habitat for a lot of species it’s a money maker. No farms to raise animals, no feeding them, not transporting them just cash coming back and habitat on the ground.

What would be your reason for a stamp?

As for “restoration” for quail I would be in favor of it just like I am with the pheasant one. PF does pay for most of it and even though now I see my doubts of it even being worth it so be it. if ever opened up to hunting 1) there won’t be many areas for the average hunter to go hunt them and 2) if a bad winter happens it could get shut down for a year or two. I still keep my fingers crossed that I will be a success but have my doubts now. That would be the case with quail also.

[johns]

My reason is it would be a way for the PGC to get revenue. I am not to cheap to pay my way, even if it is for a species I don't hunt. There are also more than a few people who hunt pheasants. The pittance that we pay for a license in this state makes it ridiculous to complain about a few dollars coming from your license fee to fund a program even if you do not take advantage of it that would be your choice.

[Deleted]

I wish only a few people took advantage of pheasant hunting. The first day of small game reminds me of the trout opener where I hunt.

[cspot]

Sept 10, 2014 13:54:02 GMT -5 johns said:

My reason is it would be a way for the PGC to get revenue. I am not to cheap to pay my way, even if it is for a species I don't hunt. There are also more than a few people who hunt pheasants. The pittance that we pay for a license in this state makes it ridiculous to complain about a few dollars coming from your license fee to fund a program even if you do not take advantage of it that would be your choice.

Don't think it is ridiculous at all, as we are spending money on a non-native bird that is strictly put and take species. I am more in favor of the WPRA's as the habitat improvements help all wildlife. Let me say that I also don't have a problem paying for species that I don't hunt, but we should be spending money on our native species first.

[Dutch]

90,000 pheasant hunters in the state.

About as many grouse hunters.

[galthatfishes]

Sept 10, 2014 4:22:58 GMT -5 @muttleysgone said:

It has been well over ten years since we heard quail calling in the meadow below the house. It has been well over ten years since the annual audubon bird count included a single bob white quail. They are gone, as are the wild pheasants. Until farming methods change, and don't hold your breath for that to happen, there will continue to be no cover for game birds like pheasants and quail. There are no fence rows, and fields are harvested right down to the ground so that they are as bare as a baby's behind. Blame it on predators if you wish, but as is the case with deer, predators ain't at fault for this one either. Habitat, folks. Habitat is the key. You don't have habitat you don't have game birds.

AMEN

[Roosterslammer]

Love the banner! A little surprised it's not of a grouse :-)

Dutch, your comment about the WPRAs costing millions is not accurate and I'm pretty sure I have corrected you on this matter before. Most of the WPRA costs have been paid by Pheasants Forever chapters and not the PGC. And the chapters have not spent millions either. Also CREP grass mixes in the past CREP plantings did not provide adequate winter cover. These deficiencies are known and steps to correct old CREP and corrections to new CREP seed mixes have been made. Government wheels turn slow but we're making progress. As I'm busting my butt trying to make this program successful, I really enjoy reading your continued and incorrect BS. Your time would be better spent with a chainsaw in hand making grouse habitat than tearing down other programs on this board.

[Dutch]

Lynn, the simple fact is that without CREP, there pretty much is no chance for pheasants, over a large landscape. Quail are having a lot of trouble in the southern states where they were king, and now, losing ground, in a hurry.

We can create islands, but they will be surrounded by deserts.

Everytime a timbercut is made in the northcentral, potential grouse habitat is created, at no charge. With a mosaic of cuts, grouse will be here a long time.

Take CREP away, and the pheasants fold.

[Deleted]

Oct 1, 2014 23:01:35 GMT -5 Roosterslammer said:

Love the banner! A little surprised it's not of a grouse :-)

Dutch, your comment about the WPRAs costing millions is not accurate and I'm pretty sure I have corrected you on this matter before. Most of the WPRA costs have been paid by Pheasants Forever chapters and not the PGC. And the chapters have not spent millions either. Also CREP grass mixes in the past CREP plantings did not provide adequate winter cover. These deficiencies are known and steps to correct old CREP and corrections to new CREP seed mixes have been made. Government wheels turn slow but we're making progress. As I'm busting my butt trying to make this program successful, I really enjoy reading your continued and incorrect BS. Your time would be better spent with a chainsaw in hand making grouse habitat than tearing down other programs on this board.

Lynn, Keep firmly in mind that this is Dutch's board and he uses it to expound on his erroneous beliefs and biases. smileys-whistling-823718

[bud16057]

Oct 2, 2014 5:26:28 GMT -5 Dutch said:

Lynn, the simple fact is that without CREP, there pretty much is no chance for pheasants, over a large landscape. Quail are having a lot of trouble in the southern states where they were king, and now, losing ground, in a hurry.

We can create islands, but they will be surrounded by deserts.

Everytime a timbercut is made in the northcentral, potential grouse habitat is created, at no charge. With a mosaic of cuts, grouse will be here a long time.

Take CREP away, and the pheasants fold.

I think Dutch came back with a relatively polite and reasonable response. How about everyone else does the same? No need for any personal jabs, just a gentle reminder for everyone to act like responsible adults.

[fleroo]

Lynn, Keep firmly in mind that this is Dutch's board and he uses it to expound on his erroneous beliefs and biases.

rofl stirthepot

[Roosterslammer]

Oct 2, 2014 5:26:28 GMT -5 Dutch said:

Lynn, the simple fact is that without CREP, there pretty much is no chance for pheasants, over a large landscape. Quail are having a lot of trouble in the southern states where they were king, and now, losing ground, in a hurry.

We can create islands, but they will be surrounded by deserts.

Everytime a timbercut is made in the northcentral, potential grouse habitat is created, at no charge. With a mosaic of cuts, grouse will be here a long time.

Take CREP away, and the pheasants fold.

Jeff, I don't disagree, but we do have CREP and it was renewed in the new farm bill and now payments are adjusted for inflation. You don't decide not to do something because things can change down the road. Death and taxes are the only thing guaranteed. Grassland habitat is important to lots of wildlife. We are also seeing a decline in bees and butterflies due to a lack of pollinator habitat. It's all about the habitat and CREP is key to grassland species. The last three birds to be placed on PAs endangered list are all grassland birds. Quail are PA natives and deserve some attention. The good thing about quail is that they can live in much smaller pockets of cover and we should be able to create habitat on a smaller scale. If there is a possibility to establish quail in PA we should try.