Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2014 17:13:59 GMT -5
By Bob Frye Saturday, Nov. 8, 2014, 8:27 p.m. Updated 21 hours ago
You're not going to find many ruffed grouse at the local strip mall.
Some species of wildlife — white-tailed deer, Canada geese, squirrels, raccoons, even black bears — can do well on suburban landscapes.
Grouse don't fit into that category.
They're a "habitat specialist" that requires a particular mosaic of forest types to thrive, said Lisa Williams, grouse biologist for the Pennsylvania Game Commission. They need mature woods for their acorns, stands of pole timber to nest with their back to a tree and conifers for winter cover.
But more than anything, grouse need early successional habitat or brushy forests up to about 12 or 15 years old, she said.
"I always say a good grouse forest lasts about as long as a good grouse dog," Williams said. "You get about 12 years of real good habitat after a timber cut."
The problem is that kind of woods has declined by about 30 percent statewide since the mid-1980s, Williams said. Public and private forests aren't being cut as often or on as big a scale, she added.
That's meant tough times for grouse and grouse hunters. Hunters shot almost 273,000 birds across Pennsylvania in 1993, according to commission statistics, and nearly 109,000 as recently as 2008.
Last year's harvest was closer to 40,000.
The good news is there's a chance better days might be ahead, thanks in part to America's run on guns and ammunition.
The commission does about 6,000 acres of commercial timber cuts on state game lands each year, said Ben Jones, chief of the habitat planning and development division for the agency.
Those are ones where the agency identifies an area where it wants to create habitat and loggers interested in the lumber pay to get at it.
Since 2010, the commission has paid loggers to cut another 10,000 acres that weren't commercially valuable — like older aspen stands — specifically for the sake of grouse and other wildlife, Jones said.
It has gotten some money to do that from groups such as the Ruffed Grouse Society and National Wild Turkey Federation.
But much of it has come from the record amount of Pittman-Robertson funding flowing into the agency, he said.
That's money, collected in the form of a tax on the sale of firearms, ammunition and other sporting goods, that's redistributed to the states.
According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pennsylvania got nearly $28 million in funding in fiscal year 2014, more than every state but Texas and Alaska.
The money is likely to keep flowing, too.
According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, there were 6.95 million background checks for gun purchases in the first seven months of this year. That was the second highest for such a time period.
The resulting cutting has been terrific for grouse, Jones said.
"As soon as you start getting growth back in there, like blackberry brambles and greenbriar and Hercules club, the grouse start moving in. And those areas are really prime seven to 12 years post cut," he said.
"When they're really hard to get through, when they're literally tearing the shirt off your back, that's when it's really good."
It's not only the commission that has been cutting trees. The state bureau of forestry also timbers to the tune of 6,000 to 8,000 acres annually, said Scott Miller, chief of its silviculture section. Locally, there have been about 5,030 acres cut on the Forbes State Forest in Westmoreland, Fayette and Somerset counties since 2000, said Corey Wentzel, its forest assistant manager.
The emphasis recently has been on linking those cuts with the other kinds of habitat grouse need throughout the year, said Emily Just, a biologist with the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources.
That's key, she said.
"Traditionally, we've seen a lot of habitat in small, isolated patches," Just said. "That's pretty hard for grouse to find and use."
Whether all of that will boost grouse populations remains to be seen.
The impact of habitat work on public lands is blunted, to a degree, if nothing similar is occurring on surrounding private land or if there's just no other forest nearby, Jones said.
There is evidence grouse impacted by West Nile virus in the early 2000s haven't completely recovered, Williams added, though that's something she hopes to study further. Suburban sprawl is also a problem, she said.
If those and other factors preclude a return to the grouse's heyday, the passion hunters feel for the birds remains, William said.
"They are a thoroughly wild and skittish bird, sort of a symbol of what's still wild. If you want them, you have to go and find them," she said.
"But that's sort of the romance of ruffed grouse. It's why there are so many paintings and books and magazine covers about them
So what does this year's grouse season figure to be like?
Not as good as the one that preceded it.
Last fall's hunting was pretty good, at least by recent standards.
According to reports provided to the Game Commission by cooperating hunters, the northcentral region accounted for 1.64 grouse flushed per hour of hunting in 2013.
That was up 6 percent over the previous year and 7 percent over the long-term average, and continued the region's reign as the top grouse area in the state.
The northwest region of the state ranked second in flushes at 1.47 per hour — though that was down 20 percent over the prior year — and the southwest region saw 0.86 flushes per hour, the northeast 0.85, the southeast 0.57 and the southcentral 0.43.
This fall's hunting figures to be "more modest" everywhere, said Lisa Williams, the commission's grouse biologist.
This past summer — the "summer that wasn't," she called it — didn't do grouse populations any favors. Williams said cold, wet weather impacted reproduction, and brood observations and individual bird sightings were down.
"I'm expecting that we're going to have an average or maybe a little below average season," Williams said.
She suggested hunters concentrate on areas of thick cover close to food sources.
At this time of year, that means places with abundant berry-producing shrubs and vines.
"You'll want to look for forests that are so thick you aren't sure you want to walk through them or areas that have some big trees and a lot of smaller ones and bushes growing underneath," said Samara Trusso, regional biologist in the commission's Bolivar office.
"Grouse like aspen stands, young oak stands, and areas that have a lot of blackberry, dogwood, viburnum, elderberry, and grape."
As the weather gets colder and the season later, grouse also will hang out in areas where food exists near pockets of dense conifers, Trusso added.
Grouse season is open through Nov. 29 statewide.
It goes out long enough for deer hunters to take over the woods, comes back Dec. 15-24 and winds up Dec. 26-Feb. 21. The daily limit is two birds.
— Bob Frye
Read more: triblive.com/sports/outdoors/7084512-74/grouse-habitat-commission#ixzz3Ic0UY7TD Follow us: @triblive on Twitter | triblive on Facebook
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2014 14:03:36 GMT -5
Grouse have vanished from my county. It used to be really good.
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Nov 20, 2014 18:59:56 GMT -5
Grouse have vanished from my county. It used to be really good. Once you lose them, there is almost no way of getting them back.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2014 19:03:40 GMT -5
Grouse have vanished from my county. It used to be really good. Once you lose them, there is almost no way of getting them back. Couldn't we put our effort into restoring grouse numbers instead of other things?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2014 19:06:17 GMT -5
I went out for pheasant twice so far and there was one guy each time who flushed a grouse there. I was surprised to hear they were there.
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Nov 20, 2014 19:16:01 GMT -5
The other year, we had a ton of grouse. I walked a log road into a ladder stand, and flushed 15 in a 60 yd section.
I climbed up the ladder stand, and I looked behind me, as I sat down, a HUGE buck jumped up out of the briars.
What a great memory.
BTW, the next year, I walked into that same stand, but this time, I waited a while to sit down, as I watched those briars. When I turned around, yet another huge buck went out of the same spot. Or maybe he was the same one from the year before.
I think I heard him laugh as he ran off.
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Nov 20, 2014 20:19:40 GMT -5
Once you lose them, there is almost no way of getting them back. Couldn't we put our effort into restoring grouse numbers instead of other things? Grouse need timber cuts along with mature forest. More timbering would help them. The problem is that once they are gone, you can timber all you want, and if there are no birds to repopulate, you will have no birds. Keep a mosaic of habitat on the ground, and they have a chance. If West Nile is an issue, well, not much anyone can do about that. Where I hunt, we have timbercuts, reverting meadows, crabapples, beech brush, and multiflora. We have grouse, in good numbers.
|
|
|
Post by redarrow on Nov 20, 2014 21:42:13 GMT -5
The old strip mine sites that were growing back were great for grouse for many years. The mix of aspen, pines, devils club and some grape vines and thorns was a perfect place for them to live and nest. Most of these places that I hunted in the seventies through the 90s are grown past the thick grouse habitat and now are more likely to hold deer and turkey than grouse. The grouse population was always cyclical, but now I often flush few or no grouse where it was fairly common to flush more than a dozen and sometimes many more.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2014 22:02:01 GMT -5
Dutch, if the habitat was recreated, could grouse be successfully stocked?
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Nov 20, 2014 22:13:22 GMT -5
From what I understand, they are to high strung to be trapped and released.
And how do you trap grouse, anyway?
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Nov 20, 2014 22:16:10 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2014 22:54:36 GMT -5
Interesting. It doesn't inspire confidence for the birds future.
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Nov 21, 2014 6:18:37 GMT -5
My brothers have had many discussions about the changes in the woods over the past 30 years. We think "something" is going on out there. From the lack of mice and voles, to the decline of grouse. Chipmunks seem to be declining. A lack of birds. Just seems that over the last 30 years, numbers of just about everything in the woods, is declining. Is our ecosystem healthy? Are there so many predators, avian and ground, that they are balancing nature now? Are hunters needed and will populations of game species decline to the point where hunting will need to be curtailed? Good case is the turkey population. For years the PGC has said it was cold, wet springs, yet, across the country, turkey populations are in decline. Not every state has those cold, wet springs, right? Something to think about.
|
|
|
Post by bud16057 on Nov 21, 2014 7:06:20 GMT -5
My brothers have had many discussions about the changes in the woods over the past 30 years. We think "something" is going on out there. From the lack of mice and voles, to the decline of grouse. Chipmunks seem to be declining. A lack of birds. Just seems that over the last 30 years, numbers of just about everything in the woods, is declining. Is our ecosystem healthy? Are there so many predators, avian and ground, that they are balancing nature now? Are hunters needed and will populations of game species decline to the point where hunting will need to be curtailed? Good case is the turkey population. For years the PGC has said it was cold, wet springs, yet, across the country, turkey populations are in decline. Not every state has those cold, wet springs, right? Something to think about. If you're worried about a lack if chipmunks, let me know. I have enough at my place we can set up a trap and transfer program that would be mutually beneficial. . I think the number of predators, avian in particular, do a pretty good job of thinning out small game and bird populations.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 7:45:08 GMT -5
My brothers have had many discussions about the changes in the woods over the past 30 years. We think "something" is going on out there. From the lack of mice and voles, to the decline of grouse. Chipmunks seem to be declining. A lack of birds. Just seems that over the last 30 years, numbers of just about everything in the woods, is declining. Is our ecosystem healthy? Are there so many predators, avian and ground, that they are balancing nature now? Are hunters needed and will populations of game species decline to the point where hunting will need to be curtailed? Good case is the turkey population. For years the PGC has said it was cold, wet springs, yet, across the country, turkey populations are in decline. Not every state has those cold, wet springs, right? Something to think about. My wife and I have been saying the exact same thing for years. The songbirds aren't as plentiful as they once were as well as everything else you mention. Heck, I can't even find rabbits to hunt anymore.
|
|
|
Post by GlennD on Nov 21, 2014 8:45:58 GMT -5
In order: 1) Predators; 2) Habitat; 3) clean farming; 4) modern farming insecticides
Just my opinion..
I don't think most people realize how efficient predators can be, and what animals prey on small game.
Hawks and Owls obviously are king. Yes, they do eat mice and voles, but also catch and kill rabbits, quail, pheasants, Grouse, squirrels, snakes, robins, doves, etc.. Probably the most interesting observation I have made is when my Son acquired 6 Buff Orpington Roosters. Those Roosters were formidable characters! He had a hen house for them to stay in at night, but they roamed around the house during the day. They were smart enough to not walk around in the middle of the yard and had a favorite weed patch they liked to peck around in. The weeds were about waist high and an area about a half acre.
They started to disappear. Just about every other day one more would be missing. One day I was walking over to my Son's house and saw a Redtail fly up out of the weeds. I went and looked. Freshly killed Buff Orpington Rooster!! AHA! Now we knew who the thief was!
Within about 10 days all of the Roosters were gone. .
Another example. I live in a rural area with lots of farms and woods. Several years back, it was not uncommon to see several red foxes at once around the farm. My Son saw about 10 of them one night around his house looking with the handheld spotlight.
The Fox season had been closed in MD for years catering to the Horse and Hounds gang. Someone finally saw the light and opened the season. My Son and I gave permission to a Trapper to trap foxes. Within just a couple of weeks he trapped about 30 foxes around our houses.
Guess what? The next year we actually had a nice covey of quail around the farm. The sad news is, over the last several years those quail have disappeared again. I wonder why? Maybe it is related to a change in chemicals the grain farmers are using? I know some of that stuff they put down is a powerful witches brew of weed killer and insecticide. And, a lot of the application is accomplished around these parts with crop dusters.
And it is not just the Foxes and Hawks and Owls, it is the increased number of ground predators like Skunks, Raccoons, Coyotes. Anti-fur and Rabies caused a significant reduction in trapping allowing those species to increase in number. And let's not leave out feral cats and dogs, and the modern day Velociraptor called the Wild Turkey!
??
Two other things that are a mystery. There are still a lot of pheasants in the midwest. They also do a lot of farming and the predators are there too. ??
Grouse seem to be doing well in the northern states and in Canada. Why? Lack of big grain farms and chemicals?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 9:26:37 GMT -5
Could weather / climate change both regional and national be changing the home ranges of some animals and we perceive this as a decline?
|
|
|
Post by redarrow on Nov 21, 2014 15:58:00 GMT -5
I believe GlenD's assessment of the use of pesticides is a major factor in the decline of much of the bsae in the food chain.
I also believe that the number of pest that are killing so many of our trees, from asian beetles to the hemlock wooly adelgid will become more and more of a major problem in our lifetimes. If we lose our beech, maples, ash, hemlocks, ect....... what will replace them? ..............And will the control measures have to be more pesticides?(there was an old lady who swallowed a fly) I don't like to think about it.
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Nov 22, 2014 6:31:07 GMT -5
We lost our chestnuts, which were a constant mast crop, to be replaced by oak and beech, which is generally spotty.
Someday, well into the future, I hope the Chestnut returns due to the work being done on them today. It will be a boon for wildlife.
|
|
|
Post by wentzler on Nov 22, 2014 7:26:41 GMT -5
Hmmmffm, he said. You know, the guy who's been saying for about 30 years now the planet isn't HAPPY!! Seems there's this single species on the planet insists on, persists in breaking all the rules of evolution, ecology, and common sense (instinct) they were supposedly imbued 'with'
|
|
|
Post by wentzler on Nov 23, 2014 7:56:05 GMT -5
Sorry lads and ladies...I take a MUCH different view of 'predators' as well There have always been predators, always will, er, should be. Period. It's part of a balancing act that is critical to life as we 'best', (meagerly) understand? it. Main difference between the predators what can't 'talk' about other predators, and them what can is the ones what can't talk about it..are seldom if ever greedy, and seldom 'harvest' more than they can EAT. And for them it IS all about eating. Not so much the 'other, self proclaimed, top predator. I'll re-iterate a sentiment expressed here, and other places as long as I've been yappin' about such things. When 'conducive' habitat, cover, and water is good order, this planet produces 'plenty' for all it's inhabitants. (Not my rule BTW, fwiw.... in nature, the very most patient predator is the best predator..and usually the one whose genes stay in the pool
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Nov 23, 2014 12:06:38 GMT -5
I disagree Ed.
There is no balance when some predators are given complete protection.
From the 30's to the 70's, predators were controlled, maybe to much, but controlled.
The Feds took all control away, and the PGC also allowed some classes of pred to increase.
In the 70's, we had trapper controlling coon, skunks, possums, foxes, etc. We had very few bears, almost no bobcats, and darned few hawks and owls. Coyotes were a rarity.
In the span of 30-40 years, preds have been protected and set on a pedestal, especially by the greenie and anti-hunter types. Why? Because they knew that when pred increase, game populations decrease. In that case, hunting and hunter numbers decrease.
The data on the PGC website shows the incredible decrease in the hunting of almost every species in this state, except maybe deer, since 1990.
My brother and I hunted some of the most God awful cover for pheasants yesterday. I mean nasty thick weed fields. Had it been the 1970's and we'd have gone thru that, we'd have kicked up hundreds of pheasants. Yesterday, 3 stockies. On the way home, we asked ourselves if it would be worth it for a young kid to do that every weekend. Some might, VERY few would.
My brothers took a 3 mile walk in the snow on the Tioga State Forest last weekend. Not a SINGLE deer track, and very few tracks of any sort. This was not all the mature forest everyone claims is all over the northcentral, this was areas that had been cut. No tracks.
How do we convince kids to hunt that and how do we find the time, to explore new areas where more deer might exist? And if we simply move 10 miles, to another section of SF and see 4 tracks in 3 miles, is that really worth it?
Frankly I'm tired, very tired of people giving us the song and dance about to many deer, forest regen, etc.
Interesting article in the last PON with quotes from Dr Duane Dieffenbach and how he now admits, "it ain't all deer", whereas 12 years ago, placed almost all the blame on deer.
Put me down as one thats just tired of people with "degrees" blowing sunshine up our butts. Get out in the woods and see what the hell is happening.
|
|
|
Post by redarrow on Nov 23, 2014 17:01:11 GMT -5
I believe coyotes are enough of a factor in fawn mortality that antlerless license need to be cut in some areas. There are still some places where deer are still overpopulated, but I believe that is because of very light hunting pressure due to posting and safety zone problems.
Control measures for 'yotes is not effect enough to reduce their number in a significant way. This past summer I saw many groups of deer with two or three adult does and only one or two fawns. I would expect that many of the missing fawns were taken by coyotes-I didn't say all of them.
The ground nesting birds and small game have an even tougher row to hoe. 'Coons, skunks, 'possums all have increased. And eggs and young rabbits in the nest are easy picking for these critters. Add hawks and owls preying upon both adults and the young and it's little wonder hunters can have a hard time finding enough small game to make hunting them worthwhile.
|
|
|
Post by grouse28 on Nov 23, 2014 20:40:07 GMT -5
The Game Commission at one time sponsored hawk shoots. Now they are sacred. All predators have increased. The chemicals and pesticides are not a factor in the State Forests, no wait they actually spray herbicides to make logging easier. I believe these are all factors, but there is something more insidious and systemic going on in the wilds.
|
|
|
Post by redarrow on Nov 24, 2014 6:09:42 GMT -5
Do they still spray the beech to kill it?
|
|