# Dalton talked about Pheasant Stamp



## Hackman (Aug 13, 2008)

On Avery radio program this Sunday K. Dalton who started the Michigan Pheasant Stamp discussed key points. 1)21 States have a pheasant release program. 2) Even S. Dakota has a release program. 3) For recruitment of new hunters and to revitalize interest. 4)Will expanded as stamp sales increase. 5)Will put dollars back into Michigan economy 57 day season that otherwise would go out of state. 6) Same high quality birds from game breeders that are used at game farms. 7) Stamp needed for public land pheasant hunting only. 8) Private land hunter hopefully will see the benefit of stamp and will utilize resource and purchase stamp also. 9) In Senate now which should pass, will start 2021 season. 10) Pennsylvania has built a 1 million dollar hatchery producing 42,000 birds per season. In my opinion the stamp will be a plus, plus for Michigan bird hunters and want to thank Mr. Dalton for his persistence in pushing this program along.


----------



## Josh R (Dec 4, 2010)

Pen raised vs wild raised...... HUGE difference....

Stamp for pen raised released on certain public land sites only
Stamp for any other piece of land open to Pheasant hunting
Neither stamp allows you to do the other, I don't wanna be paying for pen raised birds plain and simple and most don't wanna do it either

Sent from my SM-G981U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


----------



## Hackman (Aug 13, 2008)

Josh R said:


> Pen raised vs wild raised...... HUGE difference....
> 
> Stamp for pen raised released on certain public land sites only
> Stamp for any other piece of land open to Pheasant hunting
> ...


Looks like you will be hunting private land or will pay a 100 when you get a dnr ticket. i thought it was for all public land i guess i will have to re check it.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

I'm still waiting for you to produce any information on SOUTH DAKOTA having a release program which is a flat out lie.I already proved this.
The state does not have a release program.
It has stipulations for extended season game ranches,including excessive harvests and that they can't be within certain distances.
Here you are its private similar to our private game farms.
https://gfp.sd.gov/shooting-preserves/
Lying accomplishes nothing but loss of integrity and trust.At least be honest.Stick with the facts!


----------



## Hackman (Aug 13, 2008)

birdhntr said:


> I'm still waiting for you to produce any information on SOUTH DAKOTA having a release program which is a flat out lie.I already proved this.
> The state does not have a release program.
> It has stipulations for extended season game ranches,including excessive harvests and that they can't be within certain distances.
> Here you are its private similar to our private game farms.
> ...


I was stating what K. Dalton said on the radio program, he stated S. Dakota releases pheasants even though they do have a huge wild population. Look you are the one that will have to bend with the times. Michigan will use 75% of the stamp money for releasing pheasant and 25% for habitat improvement. Things will be all right, every major organization is supporting the stamp, take a chill pill. your dogs will love the release birds.


----------



## Hackman (Aug 13, 2008)

I listen again to radio podcast PA releases 220,000 birds a season.


----------



## skidoojc (Aug 28, 2006)

Hackman said:


> I listen again to radio podcast PA releases 220,000 birds a season.


Cool deal, I’m not paying for there release birds either.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Hackman said:


> I was stating what K. Dalton said on the radio program, he stated S. Dakota releases pheasants even though they do have a huge wild population. Look you are the one that will have to bend with the times. Michigan will use 75% of the stamp money for releasing pheasant and 25% for habitat improvement. Things will be all right, every major organization is supporting the stamp, take a chill pill. your dogs will love the release birds.


And I have already proven to you the facts on gene dilution and the importance of genetics diversity with the thesis's on the subject including how difficult it is to save endangered species with a reduced gene pool.Wilds had a 16 marker and mcfarlane the biggest pheasant hatchery had two or three and almost a 0 percent survival rate in the first 6 months.Where on earth are you going to find the space do do this program with screwing up our wild birds areas and populations if it is to expand.
For me personally I get nothing out of hunting a pen raised bird.It's just silly and gay to hunt something that has no survival instincts or experience.Same with high fence hunts!


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

birdhntr said:


> I'm still waiting for you to produce any information on SOUTH DAKOTA having a release program which is a flat out lie.I already proved this.
> The state does not have a release program.
> It has stipulations for extended season game ranches,including excessive harvests and that they can't be within certain distances.
> Here you are its private similar to our private game farms.
> ...


South dakota has alot of private hunt clubs for tourism. Those clubs are required by the state to release at least as many birds as they harvest. Most recent years they release twice what they harvest. Harvest numbers are typically close to 250k birds and they release 450-500k pheasants. 

It is completely different than michigan hunt clubs. South dakota clubs are massive, they do tons of habitat work and they shoot wild birds as well as pen raised and they have to account for both. If a club wants to extend their season beyond the regular hunting season they are required to release a minimum of 600 additional rooster pheasants on top of their harvest.

So you can say the state themselves doesn't do any pheasant releases and that would be accurate. The state does however have a release program that is in place. A plan that creates 250k additional pheasants yearly. Their studies show that 7.8% of those birds survive beyond 1 yr. About 3.5% of the hens released have a brood the following year. They dont require public land releasing. All releases are on private lands.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

DirtySteve said:


> South dakota has alot of private hunt clubs for tourism. Those clubs are required by the state to release at least as many birds as they harvest. Most recent years they release twice what they harvest. Harvest numbers are typically close to 250k birds and they release 450-500k pheasants.
> 
> It is completely different than michigan hunt clubs. South dakota clubs are massive, they do tons of habitat work and they shoot wild birds as well as pen raised and they have to account for both. If a club wants to extend their season beyond the regular hunting season they are required to release a minimum of 600 additional rooster pheasants on top of their harvest.
> 
> So you can say the state themselves doesn't do any pheasant releases and that would be accurate. The state does however have a release program that is in place. A plan that creates 250k additional pheasants yearly. Their studies show that 7.8% of those birds survive beyond 1 yr. About 3.5% of the hens released have a brood the following year. They dont require public land releasing. All releases are on private lands.


Did you read my link and remember the survival rates and that these businesses don't throw money away.They are in for profit.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

And as a side note I know a group that does this and they find dead birds all over the ranch.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

birdhntr said:


> Did you read my link and remember the survival rates and that these businesses don't throw money away.They are in for profit.


Admittedly i didnt read your link until now. But i am now confused. Why are you arguing that south dakota doesnt have a release program when the stats in your link from the state themselves shows they do. It shows that clubs released 499k birds the last two seasons and harvested 305k. 

That equals 194k birds across the state. It also euals about 1/4 the states harvest not including preserves.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

birdhntr said:


> And as a side note I know a group that does this and they find dead birds all over the ranch.


Without a doubt predators get most released birds that are not shot. I live 2 miles as the crow flies from a huntclub. The vast majority of theirs get hit by cars. The mile stretch of road i live on is littered with dead pheasants during busy times. I see 10-12 pheasants along the road pecking gravel at night. We get lots of pheasants that make their way down to my house. I see the feather piles througout the winter that the fox get. 

That being said i have roosters chasing hens in my back yard every spring. We also dont have the habitat those clubs out west have to help birds survive.


----------



## Hackman (Aug 13, 2008)

birdhntr said:


> I'm still waiting for you to produce any information on SOUTH DAKOTA having a release program which is a flat out lie.I already proved this.
> The state does not have a release program.
> It has stipulations for extended season game ranches,including excessive harvests and that they can't be within certain distances.
> Here you are its private similar to our private game farms.
> ...


Well there goes your S. Dakota no release theory. There is plenty of land in Michigan with very few birds and if you did get one it is probally a bird that meets your standards, you still will need to purchase a stamp, it is for a good cause


----------



## Bucket-Back (Feb 8, 2004)

Hackman said:


> Looks like you will be hunting private land or will pay a 100 when you get a dnr ticket. i thought it was for all public land i guess i will have to re check it.


How about just pay for native species


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Hackman said:


> Well there goes your S. Dakota no release theory. There is plenty of land in Michigan with very few birds and if you did get one it is probally a bird that meets your standards, you still will need to purchase a stamp, it is for a good cause





DirtySteve said:


> Admittedly i didnt read your link until now. But i am now confused. Why are you arguing that south dakota doesnt have a release program when the stats in your link from the state themselves shows they do. It shows that clubs released 499k birds the last two seasons and harvested 305k.
> 
> That equals 194k birds across the state. It also euals about 1/4 the states harvest not including preserves.


You both are wrong! They regulate it.The state does not release birds they regulate it.Last year I provided the information(link) and they do not count released birds in the state harvest report.They are two separate numbers.The states harvest report for example sake says 800000 birds and then game preserves shoot 300,000then you would add the released bird number to the states number to have a total harvest for both.They do NOT do that .The state does not buy the birds and just recently started having state employees be more involved with the releasing to make sure the game farms are honest and following the regulations.The people I know already came back from South Dakota and their hunt.Seasons not even open but you think they counted their birds in the state harvest.lol.Seriously think about that.
Sept 1st until march!


----------



## anticipation (Jun 5, 2008)

Hackman said:


> I was stating what K. Dalton said on the radio program, he stated S. Dakota releases pheasants even though they do have a huge wild population. Look you are the one that will have to bend with the times. Michigan will use 75% of the stamp money for releasing pheasant and 25% for habitat improvement. Things will be all right, every major organization is supporting the stamp, take a chill pill. your dogs will love the release birds.


Pretty sure the 25% doesn’t go directly to habitat


----------



## gundogguy (Oct 5, 2008)

https://www.pheasant.com/

Macfarlane Pheasants have been supplying S.Dakota pheasants for some 30 yrs. And they are just one of the suppliers. Check out their site.

Hal


----------



## Chessieman (Dec 8, 2009)

3) For recruitment of new hunters and to revitalize interest.* - Probable, but how many will not bird hunt private land anymore due to cost of stamp for a one afternoon field hunt with their buddies. We go to my land then go to yours afterwards, nope!*

4)Will expanded as stamp sales increase. *- At the cost of decreasing hunters on private land.*
5)Will put dollars back into Michigan economy 57 day season that otherwise would go out of state *- Yep, into the pockets of the state.*
6) Same high quality birds from game breeders that are used at game farms.* - These are high quality birds? Do you have to kick them harder to make them fly?*
7) Stamp needed for public land pheasant hunting only*. - Stamp needed unless you are the landowner. This will probably change knowing or DNR. I just got done brush hogging, spraying, plowing and discing two acres for next years PF winter seed mix planting this coming spring. How much money have you all put out for Pheasant habitat?*
8) Private land hunter hopefully will see the benefit of stamp and will utilize resource and purchase stamp also. *- Who needs to hunt state land? *
10) Pennsylvania has built a 1 million dollar hatchery producing 42,000 birds per season.* - That's $23.81 per bird so if half are roosters they are pricey? *
*
As I preached before, we should (and I would buy into it) be raising birds in the vast wastelands (make habitat) of Detroit, trapping and releasing these EXTREMELY strong genetics birds. Do not tell me that Detroit does not like the idea of trapping these. We have our (DNR) hands in your pockets with Belle Island!*


----------



## P. colchicus (Oct 4, 2019)

Hackman said:


> I was stating what K. Dalton said on the radio program, he stated S. Dakota releases pheasants even though they do have a huge wild population. Look you are the one that will have to bend with the times. Michigan will use 75% of the stamp money for releasing pheasant and 25% for habitat improvement. Things will be all right, every major organization is supporting the stamp, take a chill pill. your dogs will love the release birds.


The senate version, as voted out of committee, directs 100% of funds to stocking and 0% to habitat. Here’s the text of the bill:


SENATE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 4313
A bill to amend 1994 PA 451, entitled
"Natural resources and environmental protection act,"
(MCL 324.101 to 324.90106) by adding section 43525c.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:
Sec. 43525c. (1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, an individual 18 years of age or older shall not hunt pheasants without a current annual pheasant hunting license issued by this state. The annual pheasant hunting license requirement is in addition to the requirements for a base license. The fee for the pheasant hunting license is $25.00. The following individuals are not required to obtain an annual pheasant hunting license under this section:

(a) An individual only hunting pheasants at a game bird hunting preserve licensed under part 417.
(b) An individual hunting pheasants on private land, except for individuals hunting on land enrolled in the hunting access program.
(c) An individual hunting pheasants on public land in the Upper Peninsula.

(2) If issued as a stamp, a pheasant hunting license must be affixed to the base license of the individual and signed across the face of the stamp by the individual to whom it is issued.

(3) A collector may purchase a pheasant hunting license, if it is issued as a stamp, without being required to place it on a base license, sign across its face, or provide proof of competency under section 43520(2). However, a license described in this subsection is not valid for hunting pheasants.

(4) From the fee collected for each pheasant hunting license, the department shall deposit 100% of each license fee in the pheasant subaccount of the game and fish protection account for the purposes stated in subsection (5).

(5) The pheasant subaccount is created in the game and fish protection account. The state treasurer may receive money or other assets from any source for deposit into the subaccount. The state treasurer shall direct the investment of the subaccount. The state treasurer shall credit to the subaccount interest and earnings from subaccount investments. Money in the subaccount at the close of the fiscal year remains in the subaccount and does not lapse to the game and fish protection account or the general fund. Money in the subaccount on January 1, 2026 is transferred to the game and fish protection account. The department is the administrator of the subaccount for auditing purposes. The department shall expend money from the subaccount, upon appropriation, only to release live pheasants on state-owned land suitable for pheasants.

(6) This section is repealed effective January 1, 2026.


----------



## woodwise (Sep 14, 2009)

Hackman said:


> I was stating what K. Dalton said on the radio program, he stated S. Dakota releases pheasants even though they do have a huge wild population. Look you are the one that will have to bend with the times. Michigan will use 75% of the stamp money for releasing pheasant and 25% for habitat improvement. Things will be all right, every major organization is supporting the stamp, take a chill pill. your dogs will love the release birds.


----------



## woodwise (Sep 14, 2009)

Ok. I drive 2 hours with my two children to hunt released birds. When I get to the bird field there's already two/three groups in the field hunting and 3 cars waiting on the road. This whole proposition is dangerous. 
A older fella (retired most likely) pipes up and says the game farm who released birds got all his friends and everyone he knows hunting birds right after he released them during the week. So, back to me and my kids, so I have 1/2 a day into driving to a designated spot and I realize I'm not putting my kids into that dangerous situation with all these hunters in a bird field. Wouldn't it be safer for the state to give me a voucher for 2 free birds at a game preserve where I can reserve a field by appointment, so when I arrive I know when I go the field with my kids we'll safe experience..


----------



## Chessieman (Dec 8, 2009)

(b) An individual hunting pheasants on private land, except for individuals hunting on land enrolled in the hunting access program.

That's great, I would support it for that. This concerns state land only so make it state land only. Do not interfere with the private landowners trying to improve and control their own land. Back to the 20 (?) year old put and take again.


----------



## Gsphunteronpoint1 (Mar 8, 2018)

Why should I be forced to support a program I don’t believe in? Another fine example of our government at work. Dalton is a corrupt individual who’s just trying to make a name for himself. I work with some of his family members I hear the stories. Total joke of a program. I’m all for a pheasant stamp but not for his B.S. If this somehow passes the year 2026 can’t come fast enough to end it.


----------



## P. colchicus (Oct 4, 2019)

gundogguy said:


> https://www.pheasant.com/
> 
> Macfarlane Pheasants have been supplying S.Dakota pheasants for some 30 yrs. And they are just one of the suppliers. Check out their site.
> 
> Hal


Saying South Dakota has a release program, and attempting to equate it to MPHI, is outright misleading at best. All SD has is policy regulating the release of pen-raised birds on private hunting preserves, just like MI. The state of SD does not procure the birds, doesn’t dictate where they’re released, and doesn’t play a roll in releasing them. Additionally, these birds aren’t available to public land hunters except for those that escape to public land that happens to be nearby. So if you’re going to say that SD has a “release program”, you need to be honest and say that MI has effectively had the same program for decades - our own network of private preserves. The only difference is the SD preserves typically shoot a mix of wild and pen-raised birds. South Dakota’s policies just allow them to make a bit more money by releasing birds so their clients can pay more to shoot more than their 3/day limit.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

Don't forget BIRD flu destroyed most of the PA subsidized bird rearing program. NJ too.

He careful what you wish for.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

birdhntr said:


> You both are wrong! They regulate it.The state does not release birds they regulate it.Last year I provided the information(link) and they do not count released birds in the state harvest report.They are two separate numbers.The states harvest report for example sake says 800000 birds and then game preserves shoot 300,000then you would add the released bird number to the states number to have a total harvest for both.They do NOT do that .The state does not buy the birds and just recently started having state employees be more involved with the releasing to make sure the game farms are honest and following the regulations.The people I know already came back from South Dakota and their hunt.Seasons not even open but you think they counted their birds in the state harvest.lol.Seriously think about that.
> Sept 1st until march!


Michigan also wont release the birds. They will "regulate it" with rules and collect fees similar to south dakota. Hunt clubs also released the birds that michigan released last year. The state set the guidelines for where. The difference here is our hunters will pay directly to the state for it instead of paying the hunt club which in turn pays for the bird and pays the licensing fees per acre etc...


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

woodwise said:


> Ok. I drive 2 hours with my two children to hunt released birds. When I get to the bird field there's already two/three groups in the field hunting and 3 cars waiting on the road. This whole proposition is dangerous.
> A older fella (retired most likely) pipes up and says the game farm who released birds got all his friends and everyone he knows hunting birds right after he released them during the week. So, back to me and my kids, so I have 1/2 a day into driving to a designated spot and I realize I'm not putting my kids into that dangerous situation with all these hunters in a bird field. Wouldn't it be safer for the state to give me a voucher for 2 free birds at a game preserve where I can reserve a field by appointment, so when I arrive I know when I go the field with my kids we'll safe experience..


I took my kids to the release sites 4 times. Not once did I witness anything that was remotely dangerous. Quit trying to to equat the act of hunting as a dangerous activity on a hunting site. I went to state land last weekend and saw dozens of people out bird hunting, duck hunting, deer hunting, hiking, atv riding wood cutting etc. I ran into bird hunters while hunting. 

Not once did i ever think anyones life was in danger.


----------



## RCA DOGS (Sep 24, 2011)

This subject has become a never ending cycle. At some point hunters (bird hunters ) need to compromise and work together for the longevity of the sport. I personally have no problem with a release program on state land. Its state land for all to enjoy. If a portion is used for this, so be it. It’s public land and could increase hunter numbers theoretically. I just prefer to not pay for programs I’m not going to use. With today’s technology things could be done to pay to play and increase safety. 
Prebuy a daily tag to hunt the put n take You buy a daily tag and that way the amount of hunters in a area are regulated also. 
Have a separate Pheasant Stamp for habitat that all pheasant hunters need. Public/ private and put n take. 
With such a small group of people being bird hunters we should really strive to come together and compromise. Debating is fine but in the end we all are a declining minority


----------



## ryan-b (Sep 18, 2009)

For the most part bird hunters can be bird huntings worst enemy.
Ill never understand the whole wild vs pen thing with pheasants. Specially seeing most all states original birds came from pens anyway.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

RCA DOGS said:


> This subject has become a never ending cycle. At some point hunters (bird hunters ) need to compromise and work together for the longevity of the sport. I personally have no problem with a release program on state land. Its state land for all to enjoy. If a portion is used for this, so be it. It’s public land and could increase hunter numbers theoretically. I just prefer to not pay for programs I’m not going to use. With today’s technology things could be done to pay to play and increase safety.
> Prebuy a daily tag to hunt the put n take You buy a daily tag and that way the amount of hunters in a area are regulated also.
> Have a separate Pheasant Stamp for habitat that all pheasant hunters need. Public/ private and put n take.
> With such a small group of people being bird hunters we should really strive to come together and compromise. Debating is fine but in the end we all are a declining minority


I cant argue at all with anything you said. I would have no issue with pay to play. 

Unfortunately They will regulate this like a snowmobile trail permit system or orv..... If you never drive your vehicle on a trail you will pay to drive it off your land. Never understood it but it is how they do it. I am sure it is all about generating funds for the program.


----------



## Soignie (Aug 23, 2019)

anticipation said:


> Pretty sure the 25% doesn’t go directly to habitat


It would be interesting to know how much will be spent "administering" the program


----------



## Chessieman (Dec 8, 2009)

RCA DOGS said:


> This subject has become a never ending cycle. At some point hunters (bird hunters ) need to compromise and work together for the longevity of the sport. I personally have no problem with a release program on state land. Its state land for all to enjoy. If a portion is used for this, so be it. It’s public land and could increase hunter numbers theoretically. I just prefer to not pay for programs I’m not going to use. With today’s technology things could be done to pay to play and increase safety.
> Prebuy a daily tag to hunt the put n take You buy a daily tag and that way the amount of hunters in a area are regulated also.
> *Have a separate Pheasant Stamp for habitat that all pheasant hunters need*. Public/ private and put n take.
> With such a small group of people being bird hunters we should really strive to come together and compromise. Debating is fine but in the end we all are a declining minority


Joint Pheasants Forever, the state wil*l NEVER* be able to match them!


----------



## RCA DOGS (Sep 24, 2011)

View attachment 585037
View attachment 585037



Chessieman said:


> Joint Pheasants Forever, the state wil*l NEVER* be able to match them!


I do a with and for PF


----------



## Tomfive5 (Dec 15, 2015)

Is there really going to be a significant amount of hunters who cancel out of state trips for this program? I find that highly doubtful. Its very upsetting to me that the MPHI continues to promote things like this with 0 data to back up anything they say. If 21 states have release programs than they should be sharing the economic impact that a release program has in these states. 
Some of the sites were these birds released are also a absolute joke, has anyone checked out the Pinconning SGA? Lots of you have probably driven past it, as it borders I-75. Nothing like bird hunting along a busy expressway. Perfect place for people who might be "getting back into the sport" with less than experienced dogs. 
I am not necessarily against the program if it can succeed in bringing in new hunters, I am 32 and my friends that hunt are few and far between. However, the fact that there is no way to show new hunter data from the 2019 pilot season speaks volumes. I would just like the MPHI to back up their statements with facts and real data instead of random anecdotal statements from people who support the program.


----------



## fishstruction (Aug 7, 2014)

I just listened to the episode on Mike Avery. I have a question Mr. Dalton said they were given 260,000 dollars last year to start this program. He then stated they had 12000 birds but didn’t want to turn them all loose so only turned 5800 birds loose. Why? And where are the remaining 6200 birds. Also I understand there may be some staffing fees etc to pay for releasing these birds but if 260,000 bought 12000 birds so 21.66 a bird. At 21.66x5800 is 125,628 was spent just on birds. There is 134,372 dollars missing where did this money go? He also said they lost funding for this year so why don’t they use the remaining 6200 birds and 134,372 for this year since they had it? I’m not in favor of the program but they are just reasonable questions I have to clarify the missing numbers. If I’m missing something please help to clarify this.


----------



## brdhntr (Oct 1, 2003)

RCA DOGS said:


> This subject has become a never ending cycle. At some point hunters (bird hunters ) need to compromise and work together for the longevity of the sport. I personally have no problem with a release program on state land. Its state land for all to enjoy. If a portion is used for this, so be it. It’s public land and could increase hunter numbers theoretically. I just prefer to not pay for programs I’m not going to use. With today’s technology things could be done to pay to play and increase safety.
> Prebuy a daily tag to hunt the put n take You buy a daily tag and that way the amount of hunters in a area are regulated also.
> Have a separate Pheasant Stamp for habitat that all pheasant hunters need. Public/ private and put n take.
> With such a small group of people being bird hunters we should really strive to come together and compromise. Debating is fine but in the end we all are a declining minority


It's almost like those that want to go hunt pen raised birds can't just call up a local pheasant ranch and do what your are proposing they do with this daily tag, or with the pheasant stamp for that matter. This is a solution looking for a problem and a piss poor use of licensing money.


----------



## Hackman (Aug 13, 2008)

fishstruction said:


> I just listened to the episode on Mike Avery. I have a question Mr. Dalton said they were given 260,000 dollars last year to start this program. He then stated they had 12000 birds but didn’t want to turn them all loose so only turned 5800 birds loose. Why? And where are the remaining 6200 birds. Also I understand there may be some staffing fees etc to pay for releasing these birds but if 260,000 bought 12000 birds so 21.66 a bird. At 21.66x5800 is 125,628 was spent just on birds. There is 134,372 dollars missing where did this money go? He also said they lost funding for this year so why don’t they use the remaining 6200 birds and 134,372 for this year since they had it? I’m not in favor of the program but they are just reasonable questions I have to clarify the missing numbers. If I’m missing something please help to clarify this.


The money alotted for program was split up so it would be a two year program, The first year was 2019 fall. This year was cancelled due to Covid, the State I guess took back the money?


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

brdhntr said:


> It's almost like those that want to go hunt pen raised birds can't just call up a local pheasant ranch and do what your are proposing they do with this daily tag, or with the pheasant stamp for that matter. This is a solution looking for a problem and a piss poor use of licensing money.


Well said!


----------



## triplelunger (Dec 21, 2009)

birdhntr said:


> And I have already proven to you the facts on gene dilution and the importance of genetics diversity with the thesis's on the subject including how difficult it is to save endangered species with a reduced gene pool.Wilds had a 16 marker and mcfarlane the biggest pheasant hatchery had two or three and almost a 0 percent survival rate in the first 6 months.Where on earth are you going to find the space do do this program with screwing up our wild birds areas and populations if it is to expand.
> For me personally I get nothing out of hunting a pen raised bird.*It's just silly and gay *to hunt something that has no survival instincts or experience.Same with high fence hunts!


Did you say hunting pen raised birds is gay?
I'm gonna have to have a difficult discussion with my dad...


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

fishstruction said:


> I just listened to the episode on Mike Avery. I have a question Mr. Dalton said they were given 260,000 dollars last year to start this program. He then stated they had 12000 birds but didn’t want to turn them all loose so only turned 5800 birds loose. Why? And where are the remaining 6200 birds. Also I understand there may be some staffing fees etc to pay for releasing these birds but if 260,000 bought 12000 birds so 21.66 a bird. At 21.66x5800 is 125,628 was spent just on birds. There is 134,372 dollars missing where did this money go? He also said they lost funding for this year so why don’t they use the remaining 6200 birds and 134,372 for this year since they had it? I’m not in favor of the program but they are just reasonable questions I have to clarify the missing numbers. If I’m missing something please help to clarify this.


The state took 80,000 to cover the costs burden for them.Go figure!
I believe the birds were around 14.50 a piece as discussed last year.


----------



## RCA DOGS (Sep 24, 2011)

brdhntr said:


> It's almost like those that want to go hunt pen raised birds can't just call up a local pheasant ranch and do what your are proposing they do with this daily tag, or with the pheasant stamp for that matter. This is a solution looking for a problem and a piss poor use of licensing money.


I think the idea of a preserve doesn’t set well with some. But the fact of being Public land helps justify it with some. I have been on preserve hunts where people swear a bird they shot had to be “wild”. Justification in there mind for the reward. 

And like I said earlier it’s public land for all to enjoy. If they pay their own way I have no gripe. A few extra hunters exposed to bird hunting, even better. I’m not a fan but I am willing to seek middle ground. Is the majority complaint, taxation of the mass for the few, or the use of public grounds? 

BROAD PICTURE what’s the real issue? 
For me it’s the cost of funding others hunts and on a larger scale, when non hunters and anti hunters start publicizing that the government is involved in raising birds for us ******* to shoot up for our enjoyment, that’s not public opinion hunters need.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

Tomfive5 said:


> Is there really going to be a significant amount of hunters who cancel out of state trips for this program? I find that highly doubtful. Its very upsetting to me that the MPHI continues to promote things like this with 0 data to back up anything they say. If 21 states have release programs than they should be sharing the economic impact that a release program has in these states.
> Some of the sites were these birds released are also a absolute joke, has anyone checked out the Pinconning SGA? Lots of you have probably driven past it, as it borders I-75. Nothing like bird hunting along a busy expressway. Perfect place for people who might be "getting back into the sport" with less than experienced dogs.
> I am not necessarily against the program if it can succeed in bringing in new hunters, I am 32 and my friends that hunt are few and far between. However, the fact that there is no way to show new hunter data from the 2019 pilot season speaks volumes. I would just like the MPHI to back up their statements with facts and real data instead of random anecdotal statements from people who support the program.


This isnt about getting people to cancel out if state trips. This is about getting people tononce again think about hunting pheasants that completely gave it up.....or never tried.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

Hackman said:


> The money alotted for program was split up so it would be a two year program, The first year was 2019 fall. This year was cancelled due to Covid, the State I guess took back the money?


Yes. Lots of programs that had money set aside in the budget were taken away this year. It was a 2 year program cut to one year. Just go read the waterfowl threads and the wetland wonder issues if you want to hear crying about hunting monies being robbed for covid budget issues.


----------



## Mark4486 (Oct 14, 2015)

Give the state your money and they will let you know how much you can have back. I have yet to see any state or federal program work without corruption. Not to mention this is money spent on birds nobody can actually count. I’ll buy the stamp like I pay my taxes but in no way will I hunt those areas and I will continue to teach my kids why you don’t take low hanging fruit. Being a sportsmen is about more then shooting fish in a barrel.


----------



## gundogguy (Oct 5, 2008)

Well excuse me. All I said was that MacFarlane Pheasants and other producers have been selling pheasants to someone in South Dakota literally thousands of them for many years. If you thought I was implying the State of South Dakota well to bad!
Concerning the current bird hunting and stamp program i'm on the fence if I will even but a small game license this. We have young dog that will be competing in trials this year and we are going to be spending a lot of time on the road following her career. 
After 35 years of Spaniel Trials this little dog is our last project so we are very interested in seeing how she competes. 

Hal



P. colchicus said:


> Saying South Dakota has a release program, and attempting to equate it to MPHI, is outright misleading at best. All SD has is policy regulating the release of pen-raised birds on private hunting preserves, just like MI. The state of SD does not procure the birds, doesn’t dictate where they’re released, and doesn’t play a roll in releasing them. Additionally, these birds aren’t available to public land hunters except for those that escape to public land that happens to be nearby. So if you’re going to say that SD has a “release program”, you need to be honest and say that MI has effectively had the same program for decades - our own network of private preserves. The only difference is the SD preserves typically shoot a mix of wild and pen-raised birds. South Dakota’s policies just allow them to make a bit more money by releasing birds so their clients can pay more to shoot more than their 3/day limit.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

Hackman said:


> I was stating what K. Dalton said on the radio program, he stated S. Dakota releases pheasants even though they do have a huge wild population. Look you are the one that will have to bend with the times. Michigan will use 75% of the stamp money for releasing pheasant and 25% for habitat improvement. Things will be all right, every major organization is supporting the stamp, take a chill pill. your dogs will love the release birds.


As a guy that shoots pheasants all over the country, I hate it when people broadcast absolute falsehoods on sportsman shows.

It's pretty obvious a released bird costs 20$ to dump.
for the life of me, I cannot understand why these people are taking the long way around the barn on this.
I'm a NO on the stamp.
and I live right down the road from one.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Gamekeeper said:


> As a guy that shoots pheasants all over the country, I hate it when people broadcast absolute falsehoods on sportsman shows.
> 
> It's pretty obvious a released bird costs 20$ to dump.
> for the life of me, I cannot understand why these people are taking the long way around the barn on this.
> ...


Same vehicles there often?Trying to get more bang for their buck at others expense?
I remember the countless number of folks talking about how they were scamming put n take.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

birdhntr said:


> Same vehicles there often?Trying to get more bang for their buck at others expense?
> I remember the countless number of folks talking about how they were scamming put n take.


No mystery there.
Same guys there every day.
Dumping pheasants out at two properties adjacent to I-75 definitely increases pressure. LOL

I have a philosophical problem with that.
It would be different if it were kids.
It's not.
It's geezers in New pickups.

I would much prefer this was a straight up p-n-t, and you bought tickets on-line.

Michigan hasn't been this broke since 1980.
I wonder what these guys are thinking.


----------



## Hackman (Aug 13, 2008)

Gamekeeper said:


> As a guy that shoots pheasants all over the country, I hate it when people broadcast absolute falsehoods on sportsman shows.
> 
> It's pretty obvious a released bird costs 20$ to dump.
> for the life of me, I cannot understand why these people are taking the long way around the barn on this.
> ...


Before you start slandering the guy take your time get your facts that he is wrong have them certified that they are correct. It's obvious you are against it, then don't buy the stamp, hunt your private land, case closed.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

Hackman said:


> Before you start slandering the guy take your time get your facts that he is wrong have them certified that they are correct. It's obvious you are against it, then don't buy the stamp, hunt your private land, case closed.


You might say the same thing to your radio partner.
My best friends wife owns an enormous preserve outside of Woonsocket, SD. Since I have worked and shot, there many times, I'm pretty sure of the SD facts.
The state of SD does not release birds.
People should quit saying they do.
If you don't believe me, the wildlife division phone number for SD fish and game is freely available.
Call them and ask.


----------



## Hackman (Aug 13, 2008)

Gamekeeper said:


> No mystery there.
> Same guys there every day.
> Dumping pheasants out at two properties adjacent to I-75 definitely increases pressure. LOL
> 
> ...


I am older, but I drive a very old pickup. The reason this will work is because it is being contracted out to the game breeders which can do it much cheaper than the State can. Put-N-Take was handled 100 percent by State employees. The cost of a hatchery, the employees and equipment was reported too expensive back then. I did Put-N-Take early 80's. I think it ended fall of 82. No internet to complain on. Why would you perfer a Put-N-Take?, still have to pay a fee, put -n-take wasn't free. Gave you six tags for so much money. I still have my License and unused tags from back then, I'll look at what they cost and post it later.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Gamekeeper said:


> You might say the same thing to your radio partner.
> My best friends wife owns an enormous preserve outside of Woonsocket, SD. Since I have worked and shot, there many times, I'm pretty sure of the SD facts.
> The state of SD does not release birds.
> People should quit saying they do.
> ...


Exactly but that truth doesn't give them leverage so misinformation is the way to get what you want.Sly and cunning with the minipulation.Whats better than saying the pheasant capital of the USA does so why not us at the Capitol.As grandmother said" The bitter truth is better than the sweetest lies!
I am beside myself with this big lie.


----------



## P. colchicus (Oct 4, 2019)

fishstruction said:


> I just listened to the episode on Mike Avery. I have a question Mr. Dalton said they were given 260,000 dollars last year to start this program. He then stated they had 12000 birds but didn’t want to turn them all loose so only turned 5800 birds loose. Why? And where are the remaining 6200 birds. Also I understand there may be some staffing fees etc to pay for releasing these birds but if 260,000 bought 12000 birds so 21.66 a bird. At 21.66x5800 is 125,628 was spent just on birds. There is 134,372 dollars missing where did this money go? He also said they lost funding for this year so why don’t they use the remaining 6200 birds and 134,372 for this year since they had it? I’m not in favor of the program but they are just reasonable questions I have to clarify the missing numbers. If I’m missing something please help to clarify this.


The original allocation of money for this program was tacked onto


gundogguy said:


> Well excuse me. All I said was that MacFarlane Pheasants and other producers have been selling pheasants to someone in South Dakota literally thousands of them for many years. If you thought I was implying the State of South Dakota well to bad!
> Concerning the current bird hunting and stamp program i'm on the fence if I will even but a small game license this. We have young dog that will be competing in trials this year and we are going to be spending a lot of time on the road following her career.
> After 35 years of Spaniel Trials this little dog is our last project so we are very interested in seeing how she competes.
> 
> Hal


My criticism was aimed at Mr. Dalton using South Dakota’s “release program” to sell MPHI to people who don’t know any better. Your post just happened to be the most recent one that referenced released birds in SD. Just lazy replying on my part.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

Hackman said:


> I am older, but I drive a very old pickup. The reason this will work is because it is being contracted out to the game breeders which can do it much cheaper than the State can. Put-N-Take was handled 100 percent by State employees. The cost of a hatchery, the employees and equipment was reported too expensive back then. I did Put-N-Take early 80's. I think it ended fall of 82. No internet to complain on. Why would you perfer a Put-N-Take?, still have to pay a fee, put -n-take wasn't free. Gave you six tags for so much money. I still have my License and unused tags from back then, I'll look at what they cost and post it later.


P-N-T should be paygo.
If the concept can't be accepted by the market, then it shouldn't be done.

Straight up P-N-T is win-win for the growers and the participants and everybody else.
Buy 2 tags online for 20$ and go hunting. They expire that day at sunset.
Release 125% of prior sale just like SD.

I like straight up things.
Don't try to hide your desire behind half truths and complete fabrications.

Our public land cannot produce enough pheasants near population centers to meet demand naturally.
Setting parcels aside for straight up p-n-t can be a reasonable use of public lands near bigger populations.


----------



## shaffe48b (Oct 22, 2019)

Can I get to be the guy who starts the pheasant stamp debate next month???? Please please pretty please.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

shaffe48b said:


> Can I get to be the guy who starts the pheasant stamp debate next month???? Please please pretty please.


LOL!
People don't understand where the money comes from in all these states that have release programs. Michigan has been through this previously.
It might be modestly less expensive buying reared birds, but the tax payer is still going to be paying half the bill. That won't last.

I'm not a big fan of making the same mistakes over and over.


----------



## Hackman (Aug 13, 2008)

shaffe48b said:


> Can I get to be the guy who starts the pheasant stamp debate next month???? Please please pretty please.


I'll lay low on this issue for a while, but it's obvious some of you fellow sportsmen or sportswomen were were still wet dreams of your parents when others were out bird hunting. Fall of 82 Put-n-Take 13.25 for 5 seals, plus 7.25 small game and 1.00 public access stamp. Minimum wage probally was only 2.00/ hr then. I look up to Mr. Dalton for the work he has done, thank you. To all you internet gangstas who can't fork over $25 dollars, stay home and play with your Xbox.


----------



## Mark4486 (Oct 14, 2015)

Hackman said:


> I'll lay low on this issue for a while, but it's obvious some of you fellow sportsmen or sportswomen were were still wet dreams of your parents when others were out bird hunting. Fall of 82 Put-n-Take 13.25 for 5 seals, plus 7.25 small game and 1.00 public access stamp. Minimum wage probally was only 2.00/ hr then. I look up to Mr. Dalton for the work he has done, thank you. To all you internet gangstas who can't fork over $25 dollars, stay home and play with your Xbox.


Your words don’t match your actions and you should be more polite it only reflects your own character. What kind of old truck you got? I have one myself!


----------



## Gsphunteronpoint1 (Mar 8, 2018)

Honestly I don’t understand why people compare Michigan to South Dakota. It just doesn’t even come close to comparing. Michigan doesn’t hold a candle to any of the Midwest states and a put n take program is not going to fix it or save it. Put n take should be paid for by the people who use it. Dalton just doesn’t have the gas in his tank anymore to pursue wild Michigan roosters so he’s looking for the easy way for him and his buddies to be able to go out and shoot their limits at the expense of everyone else. Kind of funny him and his buddies know the release dates and locations. Coincidence? I don’t think so....


----------



## anticipation (Jun 5, 2008)

Keep 


Hackman said:


> I am starting to see your point. But the State is trying to cater to a large segment of hunters and then that will give them there return on there money.


Keep in mind this was not a dnr program it was thrown in the lap and they had to figure out how it i was going to work .


----------



## anticipation (Jun 5, 2008)

Howitzer said:


> BS. Plain and simple. I have handled thousands of farms birds and the only ones that let you pick them up are dead.


I visited one of the sites last year we got 2 birds and never fired a shot dog got them for me .not much of a challenge .


----------



## Gsphunteronpoint1 (Mar 8, 2018)

Howitzer said:


> BS. Plain and simple. I have handled thousands of farms birds and the only ones that let you pick them up are dead.


I have been on enough preserve hunts where I’ve picked birds up just to throw them in the air to give them a sporting chance because they wouldn’t fly. You’re missing the point of why people are upset about this bill. 
1. It is being forced on everyone who wants to hunt pheasants on public land even the guys who don’t support the program or participate it. 

And the fact is was written up by Howell who is buddies with Dalton. It was basically “ Hey bud I can’t get enough financial support for this so can you help me out and make it a law so people can fund my program” 
It should be a pay as you go. Plain and simple. In my opinion It doesn’t garner the attention they thought it would. So they had to come up with a band aid. And this was it.


----------



## Gsphunteronpoint1 (Mar 8, 2018)

Howitzer said:


> Uh no, $260,000 was a pilot. $80K of that went to enforcement. Which they never gave back BTW.


That still doesn’t explain why they feel they need so much money? If it managed to handle what it got before it can do it again.


----------



## Hackman (Aug 13, 2008)

I am conservative, but cost of living goes up what 3 to 4 percent every year. Taxes are never going down in my opinion. State workers are never going to see their paychecks decrease. It great to see people talk about trying to cut the budget. Big Brother has to get paid to an extent, I am not letting a few extra dollars stress me out in my later years.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

anticipation said:


> I visited one of the sites last year we got 2 birds and never fired a shot dog got them for me .not much of a challenge .


Next time stay in the truck and let the dog get dinner.Drive thru pheasant hunting!


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

anticipation said:


> Keep
> 
> Keep in mind this was not a dnr program it was thrown in the lap and they had to figure out how it i was going to work .


And they did, and Al Stewart supports it.


----------



## RCA DOGS (Sep 24, 2011)

Howitzer said:


> And they did, and Al Stewart supports it.


I would like to hear that from Al without his superiors listening.


----------



## Tomfive5 (Dec 15, 2015)

DirtySteve said:


> Really? I can think of al sorts of deer regulation and season changes to recruit, retain and reactivate new hunters.
> 
> Crossbow legalization, youth hunt, antler point restrictions etc...


Yea, I couldnt have been more wrong regarding that. The point I tried to make (unsuccessfully) was that a new program should have high satisfaction levels, Deer season is a entirely different beast.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Tomfive5 said:


> Yea, I couldnt have been more wrong regarding that. The point I tried to make (unsuccessfully) was that a new program should have high satisfaction levels, Deer season is a entirely different beast.


All the extra means to harvest a deer including extended seasons and numbers still are declining for deer hunting.


----------



## Mark4486 (Oct 14, 2015)

Well if this is to recruit new hunters how many of you took out a new hunters to these places where pheasants where planted?


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

Mark4486 said:


> Well if this is to recruit new hunters how many of you took out a new hunters to these places where pheasants where planted?


I think the purpose is to recruit people to pheasant hunting specifically not necasarily new hunters. We have a ton of hunters in this state...like over 600k. From 2015-2018 23k people pheasant hunted. This program is designed to spark an interest in a relativlely dead sport and I think that is what most are missing here.

When you look at it in those terms I took 3 people. All had a great time. All of them have hunted other species.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

DirtySteve said:


> I think the purpose is to recruit people to pheasant hunting specifically not necasarily new hunters. We have a ton of hunters in this state...like over 600k. From 2015-2018 23k people pheasant hunted. This program is designed to spark an interest in a relativlely dead sport and I think that is what most are missing here.
> 
> When you look at it in those terms I took 3 people. All had a great time. All of them have hunted other species.











The site keeps evolving for narrative but it is still part of it.
I'd like to see economic impact statistics
View attachment 587667

Maybe those guys by game keeper were renting a hotel for the month they were there and eating out.
A hunt of a lifetime! Well that's a sales pitch.


----------



## RCA DOGS (Sep 24, 2011)

I guess personally I just wish the supporters of this would come out and admit that the big draw for them is it’s much cheaper to hunt planted Pheasants if everyone has to pay for it then to pay for it themselves. 
Spin it as trying to draw in new hunters or whatever. They want to shoot preserve birds and let others pay. 
I’ve said this over and over. I could care less if birds are dumped on state land and people go shoot them. It is public land. I don’t think that’s the image hunters should portrait. But that is my opinion. But requiring everyone else to pay is the way they bring down there cost. $7.50 to habitat was only incorporated to try to make peace.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

If the state wants designated PnT properties, do it the best way modern technology allows.
phone app. Phone reservations, to decrease crowding and increase safety
Buy 2 tags for 20.00, and if there's an opening, go.
Tags expire at sunset.

All a la cart.

Taking public land pheasant hunting away from base license purchaser's is wrong.

I can't be any clearer than that.

I drive past the parking lot of 1 of the units several times per day. 

Obviously the daily folks are smart enough not to fill out the survey.


----------



## Mark4486 (Oct 14, 2015)

DirtySteve said:


> I think the purpose is to recruit people to pheasant hunting specifically not necasarily new hunters. We have a ton of hunters in this state...like over 600k. From 2015-2018 23k people pheasant hunted. This program is designed to spark an interest in a relativlely dead sport and I think that is what most are missing here.
> 
> When you look at it in those terms I took 3 people. All had a great time. All of them have hunted other species.


That’s great you did that. If all 23k took out three every year and half those stuck we would have tons of new hunters and the money that comes with it. Unfortunately that’s not the case.


----------



## Mark4486 (Oct 14, 2015)

Gamekeeper said:


> If the state wants designated PnT properties, do it the best way modern technology allows.
> phone app. Phone reservations, to decrease crowding and increase safety
> Buy 2 tags for 20.00, and if there's an opening, go.
> Tags expire at sunset.
> ...


This is such a good idea. It makes everyone happy. But like “RCA dogs” says they want everyone to pay for the hunts.


----------



## anticipation (Jun 5, 2008)

DirtySteve said:


> I think the purpose is to recruit people to pheasant hunting specifically not necasarily new hunters. We have a ton of hunters in this state...like over 600k. From 2015-2018 23k people pheasant hunted. This program is designed to spark an interest in a relativlely dead sport and I think that is what most are missing here.
> 
> When you look at it in those terms I took 3 people. All had a great time. All of them have hunted other species.


I’ think they started pitching the recruitment thing when they figured out they could get pitman Robertson money from recruitment or the three r,s as they call it


----------



## anticipation (Jun 5, 2008)

Howitzer said:


> And they did, and Al Stewart supports it.


That wasn’t the vibe I got when I spoke with him about the program.of course that was before it was shoved down there throat


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

anticipation said:


> That wasn’t the vibe I got when I spoke with him about the program.of course that was before it was shoved down there throat


Your vibes are wrong, Al is a very close friend and I will vouch for the fact that he very much supports it.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

Wr


anticipation said:


> I’ think they started pitching the recruitment thing when they figured out they could get pitman Robertson money from recruitment or the three r,s as they call it


Wrong again, it was the general fund.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

anticipation said:


> Keep
> 
> Keep in mind this was not a dnr program it was thrown in the lap and they had to figure out how it i was going to work .


Wrong again, Al has been working on this for several years the surprise was getting the money so suddenly.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

RCA DOGS said:


> I guess personally I just wish the supporters of this would come out and admit that the big draw for them is it’s much cheaper to hunt planted Pheasants if everyone has to pay for it then to pay for it themselves.
> Spin it as trying to draw in new hunters or whatever. They want to shoot preserve birds and let others pay.
> I’ve said this over and over. I could care less if birds are dumped on state land and people go shoot them. It is public land. I don’t think that’s the image hunters should portrait. But that is my opinion. But requiring everyone else to pay is the way they bring down there cost. $7.50 to habitat was only incorporated to try to make peace.


I am one of the biggest supporters and I am going to SD next week, then Montana (3rd time this year) I don't give a rip about cheap anything. Frankly, I think the people getting the cheap way out is the PF Elite they are collecting millions from the federal government, making people think it's their own money and then trash a program that has the potential to take money from them. Bill Vander Zowdens BIGGEST complaint is the amount, not the released birds, not the added fee but he wants a bigger cut of the pie and the exemption for landowners to be exempt.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Howitzer said:


> I am one of the biggest supporters and I am going to SD next week, then Montana (3rd time this year) I don't give a rip about cheap anything. Frankly, I think the people getting the cheap way out is the PF Elite they are collecting millions from the federal government, making people think it's their own money and then trash a program that has the potential to take money from them. Bill Vander Zowdens BIGGEST complaint is the amount, not the released birds, not the added fee but he wants a bigger cut of the pie and the exemption for landowners to be exempt.


Why go there when you can hunt a game farm or released birds to kick around.Stimulate the economy in michigan while getting the youth out and have a hunt of a lifetime in Michigan.
I hope you enjoy the benefits of conservation in the west.


----------



## anticipation (Jun 5, 2008)

Howitzer said:


> Wr
> 
> Wrong again, it was the general fund.


I stand corrected


----------



## Zeboy (Oct 4, 2002)

I'll never forget the day that one of my best friends from college turned to another guy, looked him in the eye, and uttered the epic phrase. . . . "ya know, you'ld probably bitch if you got hung with a new rope".


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

Zeboy said:


> I'll never forget the day that one of my best friends from college turned to another guy, looked him in the eye, and uttered the epic phrase. . . . "ya know, you'ld probably bitch if you got hung with a new rope".


The DNR Is being forced by a group of people with friends in the legislature to embark on a project that is known to have failed repeatedly.
This new canard represents a structural change in how pheasant hunting will be forever more pursued in Michigan after almost 100 years of public land pheasant hunting.

That's not a new rope.


----------



## Expert (Sep 16, 2017)

My dad has photos of pheasants he shot just north of our house at 11 and Van **** around 1960. Pheasants were extremely plentiful not long ago. Even if it was $100 I don't mind paying for a stamp that might bring them back to the point where they were worth the time to hunt.

Step one should be studying what states like KS, NB, and SD do to maintain pheasant populations. It is a huge money making industry for them, why not tap into that. I'd rather hunt ditch chickens than fighting the woods for a chance at hitting a grouse.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

Gamekeeper said:


> The DNR Is being forced by a group of people with friends in the legislature to embark on a project that is known to have failed repeatedly.
> This new canard represents a structural change in how pheasant hunting will be forever more pursued in Michigan after almost 100 years of public land pheasant hunting.
> 
> That's not a new rope.


Seems a bit dramatic. Comparing something done 50 yrs ago when there were hundreds of thousands of pheasant hunters in this state vs today where we have 20k. You cant tell me we cant make it work when so many states do the same thing.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

DirtySteve said:


> Seems a bit dramatic. Comparing something done 50 yrs ago when there were hundreds of thousands of pheasant hunters in this state vs today where we have 20k. You cant tell me we cant make it work when so many states do the same thing.


What does “work”mean?

For almost a century, we had public land pheasant hunting as a part of the small game license.
Evidently the well-connected game bird breeders have managed to snatch that away from the public.

Taking that away, forcing people to buy an expensive tag, so that other people can go to a put and take location and snatch birds as often as they can drive there, is wrong.
It is the tragedy of the commons.

Put intake should be a separate program operated separately from wild pheasant habitat projects.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Expert said:


> My dad has photos of pheasants he shot just north of our house at 11 and Van **** around 1960. Pheasants were extremely plentiful not long ago. Even if it was $100 I don't mind paying for a stamp that might bring them back to the point where they were worth the time to hunt.
> 
> Step one should be studying what states like KS, NB, and SD do to maintain pheasant populations. It is a huge money making industry for them, why not tap into that. I'd rather hunt ditch chickens than fighting the woods for a chance at hitting a grouse.


Minnesota is the model state for a restoration/ recovery plan.It has a large population of residents like Michigan and experienced a large population drop in pheasants in the past.Those low resident states are not a good model with a totally different environment.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

birdhntr said:


> Minnesota is the model state for a restoration/ recovery plan.It has a large population of residents like Michigan and experienced a large population drop in pheasants in the past.Those low resident states are not a good model with a totally different environment.


Stop that.
Nobody involved with this wants to hear about parking lot hunting in states with wall to wall people.

Only a complete dumbass (there seem to be some in our legislature) thinks a state with a grassland population density of near Zero, has anything in common with Southeastern Michigan.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

birdhntr said:


> Why go there when you can hunt a game farm or released birds to kick around.Stimulate the economy in michigan while getting the youth out and have a hunt of a lifetime in Michigan.
> I hope you enjoy the benefits of conservation in the west.


Are you kidding me? I go to the preserve every chance I get I think that running dogs non stop on wild pheasant grounds is irresponsible and hurtful to habitat and birds. Oh wait...sorry if that struck something.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

DirtySteve said:


> Seems a bit dramatic. Comparing something done 50 yrs ago when there were hundreds of thousands of pheasant hunters in this state vs today where we have 20k. You cant tell me we cant make it work when so many states do the same thing.


They reach back to anything that will support their preconceived notions. They refuse to assimilate their position with others, they want exclusive ground that was mostly paid for by *taxpayers* _not pheasants forever_ while bashing anything ort anyone that has a different idea.

The battle lines are drawn and the government grants for PF are dried up and they should think about their own future and what might help their cause.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Howitzer said:


> Are you kidding me? I go to the preserve every chance I get I think that running dogs non stop on wild pheasant grounds is irresponsible and hurtful to habitat and birds. Oh wait...sorry if that struck something.


Nope I'm not kidding at all.
Hurtful to birds and habitat?
Provide data please.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Howitzer said:


> They reach back to anything that will support their preconceived notions. They refuse to assimilate their position with others, they want exclusive ground that was mostly paid for by *taxpayers* _not pheasants forever_ while bashing anything ort anyone that has a different idea.
> 
> The battle lines are drawn and the government grants for PF are dried up and they should think about their own future and what might help their cause.


Release animals to hunt without the skills to survive now that's humane isn't it.At least at a preserve you go right after them.
When hunting wild game they have survival skills and rates that carry them year after year.Explain all the dead birds people found last year.What was the cause?


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

birdhntr said:


> Minnesota is the model state for a restoration/ recovery plan.It has a large population of residents like Michigan and experienced a large population drop in pheasants in the past.Those low resident states are not a good model with a totally different environment.


I would be all for doing what minnesota did. The issue is we are going to need alot more than 20k pheasant hunters in this state to convince 10million voters to pass a sales tax specifically for a pheasant program. 

We have double their population and alot more non hunters.


----------



## RCA DOGS (Sep 24, 2011)

You are pretty much the only one bringing up PF in this. Your biased discontent for Bill is obvious. You have not listened to anyone but your own self thumping your chest. I have said since the beginning I could care less that you wish to plant birds on state land. But those that use the birds should be the ones paying for that


Howitzer said:


> They reach back to anything that will support their preconceived notions. They refuse to assimilate their position with others, they want exclusive ground that was mostly paid for by *taxpayers* _not pheasants forever_ while bashing anything ort anyone that has a different idea.
> 
> The battle lines are drawn and the government grants for PF are dried up and they should think about their own future and what might help their cause.


----------



## 22 Chuck (Feb 2, 2006)

In the late 60s I belonged to a club that bought 150 roosters and 'released; them several times, in the dark, night before opener, Thanksgiving and Sat after Thanksgiving were most popular release dates.

Two birds released next to a brush pile at 9PM would be within a couple feet of that brush pile at 9AM the next day.

Any that were not shot might still be around in a week or so, the next spring I doubt it. By spring they were probably ate by some n eigjbors cat, fox/owl which have exploded in pop lately.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

DirtySteve said:


> I would be all for doing what minnesota did. The issue is we are going to need alot more than 20k pheasant hunters in this state to convince 10million voters to pass a sales tax specifically for a pheasant program.
> 
> We have double their population and alot more non hunters.


It was the legacy act and not a pheasant tax.Pheasants are a by product from the program and pheasants forever supported it because it is a broad conservation program that benefits all wildlife and people.
I believe Minnesota has around 60,000 pheasant hunters if memory serves me well.Read up on the legacy act and what it entails.Wildlife,soil,land,and water.Pheasants are a small part of the bid picture.
The crp program has been on the rise there also.
The population density in southern Minnesota is similar to lower Michigan.The state is larger however there is vast wilderness to the north along Canada


----------



## RCA DOGS (Sep 24, 2011)

birdhntr said:


> It was the legacy act and not a pheasant tax.Pheasants are a by product from the program and pheasants forever supported it because it is a broad conservation program that benefits all wildlife and people.
> I believe Minnesota has around 60,000 pheasant hunters if memory serves me well.Read up on the legacy act and what it entails.Wildlife,soil,land,and water.Pheasants are a small part of the bid picture.
> The crp program has been on the rise there also.
> The population density in southern Minnesota is similar to lower Michigan.The state is larger however there is vast wilderness to the north along Canada


More than a dozen states have moved forward with their own Legacy Act since the inception. Come on Michigan it’s not just for birds. Clean water, more public recreation, undisturbed soil, and in Minnesota it supports the arts also.


----------



## Soignie (Aug 23, 2019)

Expert said:


> My dad has photos of pheasants he shot just north of our house at 11 and Van **** around 1960. Pheasants were extremely plentiful not long ago. Even if it was $100 I don't mind paying for a stamp that might bring them back to the point where they were worth the time to hunt.
> 
> Step one should be studying what states like KS, NB, and SD do to maintain pheasant populations. It is a huge money making industry for them, why not tap into that. I'd rather hunt ditch chickens than fighting the woods for a chance at hitting a grouse.


"This plan is not for repopulation", resistance to the stamp might be different if the intent was to bring back the wild pheasant population but it is not.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

Yeah, it's one hell of a deal.

"You are forbidden in perpetuity, under penalty of law, from shooting wild pheasants on public land, unless you tithe to the Gamebird breeder's Association of MI".


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Gamekeeper said:


> Yeah, it's one hell of a deal.
> 
> "You are forbidden in perpetuity, under penalty of law, from shooting wild pheasants on public land, unless you tithe to the Gamebird breeder's Association of MI".


And politician's


----------



## FNC (Jun 5, 2007)

Expert said:


> My dad has photos of pheasants he shot just north of our house at 11 and Van **** around 1960. Pheasants were extremely plentiful not long ago. Even if it was $100 I don't mind paying for a stamp that might bring them back to the point where they were worth the time to hunt.
> 
> Step one should be studying what states like KS, NB, and SD do to maintain pheasant populations. It is a huge money making industry for them, why not tap into that. I'd rather hunt ditch chickens than fighting the woods for a chance at hitting a grouse.


I grew up near there and even after the area was developed, we saw abundant numbers of pheasants until mid-1970's. Was pretty cool to see them year-round as a kid. I miss seeing them so close to home!


----------



## FNC (Jun 5, 2007)

DirtySteve said:


> I would be all for doing what minnesota did. The issue is we are going to need alot more than 20k pheasant hunters in this state to convince 10million voters to pass a sales tax specifically for a pheasant program.
> 
> We have double their population and alot more non hunters.


Land acquisition and habitat management for public hunting has many benefits beyond only pheasants and pheasant hunting. Green space preservation, pollinators, all sorts of wildlife, air/water/soil quality, etc. With so many benefits I am sure the general population could get behind supporting this (as in Minnesota). Partnerships work as well to generate funding for a common cause (Ducks Unlimited, PF, QF, etc.). At the risk of sounding overly optimistic perhaps non- or anti-hunters might support something like this if pitched as wildlife/pollinator habitat. I do think what they've done in Minnesota could work well here.


----------



## Stand By (Jan 23, 2015)

Agreed. And one side effect might be tripping over grouse and woodcock, while looking for that pheasant. Also, if the stamp keeps enough hunters content to stay with those stocked sights and to occupied for grouse, woodcock, or wild pheasant, then all the better. Kinda like how golfing helps us fishermen.


----------



## FNC (Jun 5, 2007)

Stand By said:


> Agreed. And one side effect might be tripping over grouse and woodcock, while looking for that pheasant. Also, if the stamp keeps enough hunters content to stay with those stocked sights and to occupied for grouse, woodcock, or wild pheasant, then all the better. Kinda like how golfing helps us fishermen.


Very true. Back in the 80's (pre-bird dog for me) it wasn't unheard of to shoot a mixed bag (pheasant, grouse, woodcock and even quail) on both public and private land. Good times!


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

FNC said:


> Land acquisition and habitat management for public hunting has many benefits beyond only pheasants and pheasant hunting. Green space preservation, pollinators, all sorts of wildlife, air/water/soil quality, etc. With so many benefits I am sure the general population could get behind supporting this (as in Minnesota). Partnerships work as well to generate funding for a common cause (Ducks Unlimited, PF, QF, etc.). At the risk of sounding overly optimistic perhaps non- or anti-hunters might support something like this if pitched as wildlife/pollinator habitat. I do think what they've done in Minnesota could work well here.


Something along those lines was an idea I pitched the MUCC last spring and they like it, I think I even spoke with Bill V from PF to partner up on it and both had a warm reception to the idea, and then Covid hit so many ideas went in the crapper. The problem today is most people are so polarized they cannot put themselves in a position that might benefit something they don't believe in. An example is non-hunters would struggle with anything that they think would benefit hunters and some hunters would be up in arms if there were a dedicated no-hunt preserve using funds they helped generate. 

Personally, I think that pollinator habitat and protection are vital to national security to protect the food supply which is why so much money is pumped to and from the farm bills for habitat. My problems that are well known here are certain groups are taking credit for this money that is really federal taxpayer money given to the state.

Now on the topic of the "stamp", the idea is that people will use local state game areas that are near the population areas will be more apt to use the state game area if there are ample opportunities to shoot something, that sounds harsh but that's the cold truth. A release program in Verona would be futile because it is not within an hour of most Michiganders, but the benefit to Verona would be they get the funds from the people purchasing the stamp throughout the state.

One thing I would like to add is while I am not a fan of her Debbie Stabenow has been instrumental in getting the federal grants for habitat improvement, she will not be there forever and the funds as we know it are drying up. What are we going to do next?


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

Another thing I would like to add is the land acquisition aspect, when looking at these issues you have to look at it from every angle and the state never gets a bargain on the property nor is it always necessary. The state needs to improve on the land they own which is now 4.59 Million acres so there is plenty of lands to improve without blowing money on acquisition.


----------



## ESOX (Nov 20, 2000)

Josh R said:


> Pen raised vs wild raised...... HUGE difference....
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G981U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


All wild birds come from stock that was released at some point. Releasing birds may help repopulate with wild birds in subsequent years.


----------



## Josh R (Dec 4, 2010)

ESOX said:


> All wild birds come from stock that was released at some point. Releasing birds may help repopulate with wild birds in subsequent years.


Not without habitat, nope not happening

If the habitat is there the birds will find it

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gsphunteronpoint1 (Mar 8, 2018)

Y


ESOX said:


> All wild birds come from stock that was released at some point. Releasing birds may help repopulate with wild birds in subsequent years.


You have to release birds at 6 weeks of age just when they’re starting to fly to get any kind of survival rate. Fully matured birds will get annihilated upon release.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Howitzer said:


> Another thing I would like to add is the land acquisition aspect, when looking at these issues you have to look at it from every angle and the state never gets a bargain on the property nor is it always necessary. The state needs to improve on the land they own which is now 4.59 Million acres so there is plenty of lands to improve without blowing money on acquisition.


How much land is suitable for pheasants that is owned by the state.
Land that is not forest and the southern half of Michigan's lower.
The lands in lapeer and holly for example have lost their fields.lands I would find pheasant at are now woods.The habitat goes and the pheasant fades away..
The legacy act is a solid program that is always expanding by land acquisitions and restoration. It has a slow growth but is always gaining ground.a long term solution with benefits way beyond pheasants


----------



## ESOX (Nov 20, 2000)

I think some may be shortchanging pheasants regarding their ability to adapt to various habitats. The number of birds on the lower east side of Detroit is astounding. I was at Mt Elliott and E Forest and I could hear no fewer than three cocks crowning at 11:00 in the morning. See birds all day long in the area.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

ESOX said:


> All wild birds come from stock that was released at some point. Releasing birds may help repopulate with wild birds in subsequent years.


With pheasants being bred for so long in captivity the genomes have been reduced.According to the thesis's and science I have read.A raised pheasant had a marker of 3 I believe and a wild is 16.Raising domesticated game birds requires medicated feed,water and supplements similar to farm fowl.
I posted links to this previously in past threads on this topic.The genetics of a pheasant released a 100 years ago was not diluted from China at the time.The eggs are bought from the same producer's in general today.
A Chinese pheasant,a wiid pheasant,and a domestic pheasant have entirely different genetic characteristics and diversity under a scope.
The survival rate for domestic is pretty much 0%.I did provide a link showing that F 1 and F 2 (first generation second generation) wild eggs hatched had a success rate for survival in other threads.F3 and f4 was not productive.
Genetic and behavioural changes arising from the rearing process is a reality and documented.
Pheasants tend to return to the pens at game farms.Once diluted they are like chickens.Just like chickens they don't have the ability to go back to the wild.Here is one of the many downloads I have saved.Plenty of information on this topic.


----------



## RCA DOGS (Sep 24, 2011)

ESOX said:


> All wild birds come from stock that was released at some point. Releasing birds may help repopulate with wild birds in subsequent years.


They only release roosters


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

RCA DOGS said:


> They only release roosters



That will change, hen's were taken out of the idea for cost and we did not want to get people conditioned on released hens are OK to shoot.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

All habitat and no birds is a folly, all birds and no habitat is a canned hunt. There needs to be *both...and don't forget both of those need hunters.*


----------



## Stand By (Jan 23, 2015)

In the 90's, I believe I read the state had started giving a subsidy to farmers to continue to farm, rather than sell off their land as real estate prices were rising? Not sure if that's still in play? Otherwise, maybe the state could by some farmland as well. Lease it back for farm use, with added guidelines of leaving areas of cover? The lease price could reflect the lower production coming out of the acreage. I'm sure there are plenty of farmers that would like to add to their tillage without adding to their property taxes. Also, regarding Howitzer mentioning the need for pollinators, throw some honey bee language I to these acquisitions. Last I heard, the bee population was still down? 

Sidenote- Hey Howitzer. Use to be a Forward Observer, myself. 13F


----------



## FNC (Jun 5, 2007)

Howitzer said:


> Something along those lines was an idea I pitched the MUCC last spring and they like it, I think I even spoke with Bill V from PF to partner up on it and both had a warm reception to the idea, and then Covid hit so many ideas went in the crapper. The problem today is most people are so polarized they cannot put themselves in a position that might benefit something they don't believe in. An example is non-hunters would struggle with anything that they think would benefit hunters and some hunters would be up in arms if there were a dedicated no-hunt preserve using funds they helped generate.
> 
> Personally, I think that pollinator habitat and protection are vital to national security to protect the food supply which is why so much money is pumped to and from the farm bills for habitat. My problems that are well known here are certain groups are taking credit for this money that is really federal taxpayer money given to the state.
> 
> ...


You bring up good points. Thanks for pushing something like this pre-COVID. We need to consider other opportunities as well. For example, one PF program provides a way for landowners to donate a portion of their land as part of their Will. I think they call it the Legacy Program or something like that. Land is put into permanent set-aside and (I think) PF works with local DNR to organize/fund habitat management of same. The other thing is, if strategically considered, I don't think it would take a huge amount of land to have a positive impact. A continuous 160 acre piece of set-aside in a 1-mile section would provide a nice boost to bird numbers.

Frank


----------



## fordman1 (Dec 12, 2015)

Hackman said:


> I'll lay low on this issue for a while, but it's obvious some of you fellow sportsmen or sportswomen were were still wet dreams of your parents when others were out bird hunting. Fall of 82 Put-n-Take 13.25 for 5 seals, plus 7.25 small game and 1.00 public access stamp. Minimum wage probally was only 2.00/ hr then. I look up to Mr. Dalton for the work he has done, thank you. To all you internet gangstas who can't fork over $25 dollars, stay home and play with your Xbox.


You sure picked the right name for this site, you are a Hackman.


----------



## FNC (Jun 5, 2007)

birdhntr said:


> With pheasants being bred for so long in captivity the genomes have been reduced.According to the thesis's and science I have read.A raised pheasant had a marker of 3 I believe and a wild is 16.Raising domesticated game birds requires medicated feed,water and supplements similar to farm fowl.
> I posted links to this previously in past threads on this topic.The genetics of a pheasant released a 100 years ago was not diluted from China at the time.The eggs are bought from the same producer's in general today.
> A Chinese pheasant,a wiid pheasant,and a domestic pheasant have entirely different genetic characteristics and diversity under a scope.
> The survival rate for domestic is pretty much 0%.I did provide a link showing that F 1 and F 2 (first generation second generation) wild eggs hatched had a success rate for survival in other threads.F3 and f4 was not productive.
> ...



Interesting article, thanks for sharing. It's tough being a pheasant - especially pen raised.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Howitzer said:


> All habitat and no birds is a folly, all birds and no habitat is a canned hunt. There needs to be *both...and don't forget both of those need hunters.*


Explain the need for hunters in this manner.Pheasant farms need hunters.Most farms don't have the habitat needs for wild birds.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

Stand By said:


> In the 90's, I believe I read the state had started giving a subsidy to farmers to continue to farm, rather than sell off their land as real estate prices were rising? Not sure if that's still in play? Otherwise, maybe the state could by some farmland as well. Lease it back for farm use, with added guidelines of leaving areas of cover? The lease price could reflect the lower production coming out of the acreage. I'm sure there are plenty of farmers that would like to add to their tillage without adding to their property taxes. Also, regarding Howitzer mentioning the need for pollinators, throw some honey bee language I to these acquisitions. Last I heard, the bee population was still down?
> 
> Sidenote- Hey Howitzer. Use to be a Forward Observer, myself. 13F


It's a subsidy model more than ever now with the China tariffs and I don't think any tampering with that is in sight for either party. 

11B and 25C here!


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

birdhntr said:


> How much land is suitable for pheasants that is owned by the state.
> Land that is not forest and the southern half of Michigan's lower.
> The lands in lapeer and holly for example have lost their fields.lands I would find pheasant at are now woods.The habitat goes and the pheasant fades away..
> The legacy act is a solid program that is always expanding by land acquisitions and restoration. It has a slow growth but is always gaining ground.a long term solution with benefits way beyond pheasants


From what I gather from my DNR friends Michigan is a wooded swamp and everything evolves to that, one of the problems is we create the habitat and without prescribed burns, it evolves back to a wooded swamp. The money and fame are in creating habitat because that is what people can see, fires are messy and are a hot potato for the DNR since forestry has the burn personal and do their own work before anyone else and it's often too late to do anything for wildlife. I ask why wildlife can't get funds for burns but I have never had a conclusive answer to exactly why that is. 

One last note before I head west, I think a problem is people reminisce about days gone by, the fact of the matter is hunting in Michigan will never be like it was in the 60's and never will be, so what can we do for hunting and fishing now? I appreciate helping future generations but we need to keep the life in what we have today because once the funds deplete to a certain point 600,000 hunters will become 100,000 and what will we do then? I am all for a program like the legacy act but how do you get there? I do know that all of one extreme or the other is not going to get it done.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Howitzer said:


> From what I gather from my DNR friends Michigan is a wooded swamp and everything evolves to that, one of the problems is we create the habitat and without prescribed burns, it evolves back to a wooded swamp. The money and fame are in creating habitat because that is what people can see, fires are messy and are a hot potato for the DNR since forestry has the burn personal and do their own work before anyone else and it's often too late to do anything for wildlife. I ask why wildlife can't get funds for burns but I have never had a conclusive answer to exactly why that is.
> 
> One last note before I head west, I think a problem is people reminisce about days gone by, the fact of the matter is hunting in Michigan will never be like it was in the 60's and never will be, so what can we do for hunting and fishing now? I appreciate helping future generations but we need to keep the life in what we have today because once the funds deplete to a certain point 600,000 hunters will become 100,000 and what will we do then? I am all for a program like the legacy act but how do you get there? I do know that all of one extreme or the other is not going to get it done.


A crp I hunt was cut last year while in the program.I believe maybe Joshr said they are required to do this every so often to control pulpy plant life to keep eligibility to that effect. I have noticed that the property is risked in sections occasionally as well.Hunted there for twenty years and still is ideal habitat.Seems to be working there.In fact it seems to be better now than before.


----------



## micooner (Dec 20, 2003)

Stand By said:


> In the 90's, I believe I read the state had started giving a subsidy to farmers to continue to farm, rather than sell off their land as real estate prices were rising? Not sure if that's still in play? Otherwise, maybe the state could by some farmland as well. Lease it back for farm use, with added guidelines of leaving areas of cover? The lease price could reflect the lower production coming out of the acreage. I'm sure there are plenty of farmers that would like to add to their tillage without adding to their property taxes. Also, regarding Howitzer mentioning the need for pollinators, throw some honey bee language I to these acquisitions. Last I heard, the bee population was still down?
> 
> Sidenote- Hey Howitzer. Use to be a Forward Observer, myself. 13F


I think the subsidy program your referencing was a green space plan. All it accomplished was making landowners overnight millionaires. No access to any michigan taxpayer was ever given on any of these acres nor will it ever be. Over by saline there is over 1000 acres protected this way.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Howitzer said:


> This is why. If you don't know what I mean you have not been in the west much. This is what happens when you take the habitat habitat habitat approach. You need habitat habitat and hunters.
> 
> https://www.americanprairie.org/


I have spent plenty of time out west.
Why is it you and hackman always go below the belt with statements.For almost three years I have brought the conservation side up.To be like you I could say you haven't taken in anything that I've brought then you don't know what I meant.
Habitat creates hunters or do hunters create habitat.We have great deer,waterfowl,squirrel,rabbit,and turkey habitat but the hunting population is shrinking in these areas.
I think access is different today and may be contributing to some degree.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

birdhntr said:


> I have spent plenty of time out west.
> Why is it you and hackman always go below the belt with statements.For almost three years I have brought the conservation side up.To be like you I could say you haven't taken in anything that I've brought then you don't know what I meant.
> Habitat creates hunters or do hunters create habitat.We have great deer,waterfowl,squirrel,rabbit,and turkey habitat but the hunting population is shrinking in these areas.
> I think access is different today and may be contributing to some degree.


I am sure you are a nice guy and I apologize if I come off like an a-hole. It's not intended in your case. So my apologies for the past and future dickhead remarks I make we are just miles apart on how we think things should be.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

birdhntr said:


> A crp I hunt was cut last year while in the program.I believe maybe Joshr said they are required to do this every so often to control pulpy plant life to keep eligibility to that effect. I have noticed that the property is risked in sections occasionally as well.Hunted there for twenty years and still is ideal habitat.Seems to be working there.In fact it seems to be better now than before.


Darn that spell check."disc" was the intended words.


----------



## i am- i hunt (Feb 10, 2012)

Hackman said:


> I was stating what K. Dalton said on the radio program, he stated S. Dakota releases pheasants even though they do have a huge wild population. Look you are the one that will have to bend with the times. Michigan will use 75% of the stamp money for releasing pheasant and 25% for habitat improvement. Things will be all right, every major organization is supporting the stamp, take a chill pill. your dogs will love the release birds.


75% here, 25% there.... where's ALL the MONEY for "ADMINISTRATION"?


----------

