wild pheasant in NY

[mike rossi]

Monitoring Pheasants in the Genesee Valley Focus Area

Farmers in the 13 counties that comprise the Lake Plains of New York have partnered with DEC since 1945 to help survey wild pheasant populations. This effort continues in the newly established "Pheasant Habitat Focus Area" in the Genesee Valley (portions of Livingston, Genesee, Wyoming and Monroe counties). The focus area was created as a part of DEC's recently completed 10-year management plan for ring-necked pheasants. The goal of the focus area is to concentrate the efforts of public and private habitat conservation programs to benefit pheasants and other grassland birds. The surveys will help DEC monitor pheasant populations and evaluate the success of habitat management efforts in the focus area.

Those who farm land in Livingston, Genesee, Wyoming or Monroe counties can consider participating in the Farmer-Pheasant Inventory. No special observations are required; just those made during normal spring and summer farming activities. To join, contact DEC at (518) 402-8886 or by e-mail ([email protected], write "Farmer-Pheasant Inventory" in the subject line).

Those who do not farm, but would like to contribute their pheasant observations from Livingston, Genesee, Wyoming and Monroe counties can join the Summer Pheasant Sighting Survey. During the month of August, survey participants record the sex and age of all pheasants observed during normal travel. A Summer Pheasant Sighting Survey form can be printed from the DEC website or call (518) 402-8886 for further guidance.

Additional information is available on the DEC website:

Summer Wild Turkey Sighting Survey

Pheasant Habitat Focus Area & Pheasants Surveys

Citizen Science: Wildlife Observations Data Collection

DEC Regional Office Contact Information

[Doc]

I have mixed feelings about any DEC resources that are used to maintain or manage the numbers of a species that is non native to the state and that seems to require such a specialized habitat. It really doesn't seem to be a place where they are getting the biggest bang for their buck. I'm not sure ho many additional licenses are sold annually for the express purpose of hunting pheasants, but I wouldn't be surprised if the return on that forcing a population is miniscule compared to the costs. I would love to see credible numbers and be proven wrong. And I am not talking about game preserve birds either.

[mike rossi]

I don't think you are looking at this through the correct lens.

It is not specialized habitat for one introduced species. The wild pheasant program is part of a broader effort to restore imperiled native grassland species such as Henslow's sparrow and many others, as well as maintain biodiversity. That is a very appropriate use of DEC resources. Conservation organizations and federal agencies partner with the DEC and provide additional resources. There is also a variety of grassland specific funding, that is grants to be used only for grassland habitat and grassland species.

Grasslands themselves provide great ecological services, second only to wetlands. This has been quantified into a dollar amount but I don't have the figures. One example of the ecological services that grasslands & wetlands exceed woodlands in, is carbon sequestration.

I am not insisting this is the plan, but it is not novel to use a game species to generate funds and political support to conserve less charismatic species, such as Henslow's sparrow or dozen other mammals, herps, and birds dependent on grassland habitats. Investing in wetlands and grassland actually does provide the greatest bang for your buck.

As far as licenses sold to hunt pheasant, that really doesn't take into account the interest & desires of the non shooting public and dollars and hours donated by conservation organizations. Off the top of my head the following organizations have a stake in grassland conservation: Audubon NY; Nature Conservancy NY; Pheasants Forever; Ducks Unlimited (most ducks actually nest in grass)' the Ruffed Grouse Society (woodcock need grassland clearings for mating displays); and the Wild Turkey Federation.

As far as credible pheasant population estimates, ask the DEC. But its not only about how many birds, but also in how many acres of quality grassland.

I hope this puts things in a different perspective for you.

[Doc]

Actually it is the "put and take" approach to pheasant maintenance that I have issue with. Whatever the DEC wants to do with habitat improvements may very well be useful to the environment, but I see that as a separate issue that should be approached in an honest and up-front fashion without reliance on a foreign, non-regenerating species as their "poster child".

[Doewhacker]

Ah yes the classic anti hunting approach from hunters them selves. Next lets get rid of the trout stocking program too. To hell with something you don't partake in.

[growalot]

I have to say...we don't have much "grass Lands " around here...and the pheasants are adapting well...we routinely see them in our drives and some times on our lands...and what they are living in is dense scrub brush and 2nd generation forest growth...I had some I watched...to my delight living in our oak flats amongst the honey suckle brush...no different than the grouse do...

[G-Man]

Any stocking program that ends up being put and take is a bad idea. do what nwtf did. trap and transfer , close season, let game get established, open season as populations permit.  this is a study area and it holds the best habitat for pheasant. so it habitat can hold them stock, close season and see if they make it. its the same as moose in adk park. season is closed when big enough population hunting will be opened on limited basis. trout, salmon, pheasant all should follow that plan, or reduce limits so populations can grow. a little self sacrifice will allow a self sustaining population to be used in a responsible manner. (deer and bear were established the same way in this state and hunting opend when populations were big enough). and cut our taxes and fees by $$  I ve tried for years to get phesants to stock at my place to see if they could become established, the answer I get is oh we can stock them and then we'll hunt them... not what I'm looking to do at all. I've even offerd to buy the birds but wont sell them as they are for stocking and hunting... guess I need to find a private person and pay to raise them properly and soft release into the wild.

[genesee_mohican]

The wild ones do adapt well and are tough birds. Farming practices have changed a lot in my area here in the last 30 years and has had a big impact on survival. The small farms of the past left a lot of prime pheasant habitat untouched. I have sure seen a lot of hedgerows, grass fields and brush lots go by was of the bulldozer and plow.

[mike rossi]

I support put and take pheasant hunting, however it doesn't belong in the same discussion as wild pheasant restoration. Social and economical arguments can be made to support both pheasant stocking AND wild pheasant restoration. The neighboring states of New Jersey and Pennsylvania; which both have put N take stocking programs; also have wild pheasant restoration programs similar to New York. As a matter of fact, NJ, which ironically traded wild pheasants for Missouri wild turkeys in the 1980s, is presently doing trap N transfer of its own wild birds from the Bergen Meadowlands to farmland and grassland areas within its borders. There is no benefit to trap N transfer of wild stock when there isn't enough suitable habitat and there is not sufficient regulatory mechanisms to preserve, if not expand suitable habitat. Besides,when habitat is restored, it isn't always necessary to use trap N transfer anyway, because the birds stock themselves. Suitable habitat is essential. The decline in wild turkeys the last 10 to 20 years very well might be linked to the population contracting after it expanded temporarily into marginal habitat. In the past wild turkey habitat was characterized as deep woodland, especially mountainous areas. Birds were released in those habitats based on that belief. It turns out that todays knowledge indicates wild turkeys thrive in broken farm land or mixed grassland/woodland habitats. The birds may have maintained temporarily good populations in the mountains, but populations may have began to contract. The moral of the story is the first step is increase habitat, second protect it with regulations, third maintain it by brush hogging, mowing, logging, grazing, prescribed fire, and possibly planting desirable vegetation. Until all that is in place and the birds are given time to repopulate on their own, it is premature to think about trap N transfer...

NY stocks brown trout and rainbow trout. Both do not reproduce well, are not native, spread diseases, compete with with native fish, and probably (?) hybridize with relatively rare, native brook trout. (Hybridization of a struggling species contributes to its decline). I don't believe I have ever heard anything from sportsmen about the negatives of stocking non native trout...

Edited August 7, 2013 by mike rossi

[mike rossi]

Ah yes the classic anti hunting approach from hunters them selves. Next lets get rid of the trout stocking program too. To hell with something you don't partake in.

You had better stay up on this, we may be fighting for it in a few years...

[Doewhacker]

 

You had better stay up on this, we may be fighting for it in a few years...

History will repeat itself I am sure. I do my best to stay informed, even though I don't go after the stocked birds a whole lot.

[G-Man]

fish stocking, so many cases of whirling disease in hatcherys, its on its way out as well. hate to say.

[landtracdeerhunter]

We don't have the people raising the pheasants from chicks in our area. We always released 90+ birds at 15 weeks, ( with a game warden), through the 4H club. So did several neighbors within 4 mile radius. Pheasants were common to see. The modern generation don't participate in 4H, as much, and it shows going to the local fairs. The few birds that do get released, don't have as much of the wild in them, nothing more than hunting chickens.

Edited August 8, 2013 by landtracdeerhunter

[SteveB]

Wild - yes. Put and take - no.

Fish and game both.

Habitat restoration and preservation - yes.

The raised pheasants are hardly game animals with little/no skills for survival.

Even without hunting them, few survive a year.

Far better places to put the money and effort.

 

[Doewhacker]

Pheasant survival rate even in the midwest is realy low, something like 30% make it a year I beleive.

We talk about hunter recruitment all the time but would cut a great way to get new hunters into our sport in a heart beat.

Reguarding Wild birds, how do you think the wild birds got here and are restocked acrossed the country? Certainly not by relocating wild birds.

There is far more to hunting and conservation than just deer.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

 The moral of the story is the first step is increase habitat, second protect it with regulations, third maintain it by brush hogging, mowing, logging, grazing, prescribed fire, and possibly planting desirable vegetation...

 This is something NY has sucked at as long as I can remember. The resources in the ADK and Cat parks should be managed in such a manner as well. Tall mature forests can be a virtual desert for wild life.

 

In areas that I hunted grouse as a kid you can barely find a bird anymore.

[Cabin Fever]

Some of my fondest memories of hunting as a kid was pheasant hunting with my Dad! I haven't seen or heard of a wild pheasant in my entire area for the past 25+ years! Very sad...

 

I hope the turkey population doesn't meet the same demise...

[greybeard]

I agree with Mike Rossi in that put and take vs wild birds and restoration are different issues.

 

My opinion.. I'm in favor of put and take, There are economic benefits because many more hunters spending money on licenses, equipment, etc. However, I think that the biggest issue is keeping more hunters in the game.

 

I used to hunt those birds in various locations and saw so many hunter's afield, that at times there were no spots available to hunt..Look at Cranberry Mt., or Sterling Forest, there are many hunters chasing those birds. Also, if they stopped stocking the coop on LI there'd be almost no small game hunter's on LI

 

Hunter numbers are declining,especially young hunters.  I say, the more hunting opportunity the better.

 

As far as stocked fish(since that was brought up).. There is no question in my mind.. Keep it !! I have fished stocked trout since the mid 60's. I've fished them on LI, the Catskills, and the Adirondacks. It's a winner. It's just fun.

 

They have fishing festivals every year that bring hundreds of young kids to teach them.about fishing. How bad is that !

 

I have a friend who used to say that fishing for stocked trout is not real fishing. One fall, as we were bailing in Striper after striper from the beach, I asked if if this was real fishing ..  He had No answer.... It's all fishing, and all of it creates outdoor sportsmen and women.

 

[Doewhacker]

 

This is something NY has sucked at as long as I can remember. The resources in the ADK and Cat parks should be managed in such a manner as well. Tall mature forests can be a virtual desert for wild life.

 

In areas that I hunted grouse as a kid you can barely find a bird anymore.

 

This is where NY falls short IMO, just imagine what resources we have in un harvested lumber in these areas. Logging , when controlled and managed is the best thing for wild life. I wish NY would follow Maine's blue print, allow logging which in turn makes access easier, provides habitat, creates hunting oppoutunities, increases revenue ect. We have Moose, Bear, Deer and Grouse in NY, just think how well they could do given better habitat.

I recently saw a plan to help Spruce Grouse in NY, while it is important to address the issue I feel the regular Grouse population is far more important for us.

For now I will raise my own birds and hunt preserves and out of state, at least I know there are birds and good cover to hunt.

[mike rossi]

Did you guys see the post on here a couple days ago someone made about the habitat management on Three Rivers Multiple Use Area? That is being done all the time on WMAs by the DEC. That practice certainly does maintain habitat characteristics needed by a variety of game and non game species. It wont benefit wild pheasant however, because they need vast areas of contiguous habitat. The DEC has identified a grassland focus area within several counties which have the potential to sustain wild pheasant. Maintaining 30% or so of a 1,000 acre land tract in grassland and early successional forest, as in Three Rivers,  pays huge dividends for a variety of wildlife, but pheasant and some other grassland species need millions of acres or at least hundreds of thousands of acres, of contiguous habitat. The pheasant plan and the grassland focus area plan is a larger scale and is a viable strategy for pheasant, however.

 

There are many funding sources for wildlife management and private organizations do as much wildlife management as the DEC and FWS. It frustrates me that CFAB and the NYSCC interfere with the appropriate us of the conservation fund and thereby also prevents the DEC from taking full advantage of up to $20 million annually from the Pitman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson Acts. As a matter of fact, those organizations supported Cuomo's proposal to reduce sporting license fees under the rational that the conservation fund was too large...  Despite that, there are a variety of other funding sources which (Thankfully) CFAB and the NYCC have no say so about. (Although they try at least with the EP Fund). Besides work on state WMAs, there are many projects on private lands and federal lands within the state.

 

As far as survival & recruitment, I would say Doe Whacker's estimate of 30% is way high for any bird whether it is a turkey or a robin. Also as far as I know, the original birds stocked in the US were in fact wild birds from Asia.

 

Doe Whacker also mentioned Spruce Grouse and I believe he was alluding to funding. Sportsmen have this misconception about the statutory mandates of the DEC only covering game species. The DEC is required by law to conserve all species, not just game species. There is as much, or more funding - and staff, for nongame, threatened, and endangered wildlife as there is for game species.

 

Hopefully we established the distinction between wild pheasant restoration and stocking birds. Either bird is an introduced species, but a beneficial introduced species not a deleterious introduced species. As for the sporting qualities of released birds, it depends on the skill of the persons raising them; how, where, and when they are released; and to the ethics practiced by the hunters.

Edited August 8, 2013 by mike rossi

[Doewhacker]

http://www.pheasantsforever.org/page/1/stocking.jsp

From the link...

What kind of survival rate can be expected from pheasants stocked in the summer or fall at 8-14 weeks of age?

On average, only 60 percent will survive the initial week of release. After one month, roughly 25 percent will remain. Over-winter survival has been documented as high as 10 percent but seldom exceeds 5 percent of birds released

[mike rossi]

http://www.pheasantsforever.org/page/1/stocking.jsp

From the link...

What kind of survival rate can be expected from pheasants stocked in the summer or fall at 8-14 weeks of age?

On average, only 60 percent will survive the initial week of release. After one month, roughly 25 percent will remain. Over-winter survival has been documented as high as 10 percent but seldom exceeds 5 percent of birds released

In my opinion, and people (the ones I spoke to anyway) in the DEC do NOT agree with me, is that they will all die. The survival rate will be zero... Even if 5 or 10 percent over-wintered, what percent reproduction do you think you would get from those survivors? Point is, even if they do over-winter, but cant raise a brood, what good is it?  Only way to know for sure is with a telemetry study.  Wildlife science has new tools to follow animals. Radio Telemetry was once done with an antenna. Then it was done by satellite. The latest is by using cellular signals. I think its been done so many times nobody wants to keep repeating experiments yielding the same results - the birds die...

[mike rossi]

A couple more things came to mind about Doe Whacker's link to the PF article. I am not sure if all hunters know that NY pheasant stocking has two different programs. There is a program which the state stocks adult birds on lands open to public hunting. I like this program.

 

The other program called the day old chick program or something like that I don't care for. This seems to be more related to Doe Whacker's PF link. In some states, and perhaps NY, the chick program in theory would be more than put N take hunting, and restore or create self sustaining populations. This program,  as indicated in the article, does not work in sustaining populations.

 

Besides the fact it does not work in establishing sustaining populations;  I don't have faith in the program entrusting members of the public in raising and releasing the birds they obtain for free on areas open to public. The potential for abuse of the agreement is great and there is also an equity problem -  suburban and urban hunters do not have the facilities to participate in the program, unless some gracious rural hunters tell them where the birds they raised all summer have been released, how likely is that?

 

So I have to restate my position. I still support put N take pheasant hunting, but not the day old chick program. It also occurred to me that one reason some hunters are not favorable about the state pheasant stocking program, might very well be because they are only familiar with the day old chick program. Pheasant stocking by the state of adult birds on WMAs as well as private and public cooperator lands, is much different, if you have not tried it give it a shot. 

 

Now we have three distinctions:

 

1. Wild pheasant restoration, which may or may not include transplanting wild hatched birds

2. State pheasant release of farm hatched birds immediately before and during hunting season

3. Day Old Chick Program  

 

I support number 1 and 2, but not number 3.

Edited August 9, 2013 by mike rossi

[phade]

I'm not sure what is considered wild but I have what I consider wild ones around in low numbers my house sit on a old preserve in the 50s dedicated to the bird. No stocking now.

Amazing bird to see. Had a cam pic of one behind my house but it was in transition and not color.

[mike rossi]

I'm not sure what is considered wild but I have what I consider wild ones around in low numbers my house sit on a old preserve in the 50s dedicated to the bird. No stocking now.

Amazing bird to see. Had a cam pic of one behind my house but it was in transition and not color.

My definition of a wild bird is one that was hatched in the wild rather than an incubator. Handled correctly, Incubator hatched birds can be sporting and quite challenging to hunt, but they are not wild birds from an ecological perspective...