# Pheasant Stamp for Put/Take



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

RCA DOGS said:


> Why is anyone talking about survival? This Initiative has nothing to do with survival it’s shooting opportunities is all


The inquiry was in Zappers post.And yes it is strictly about shooting.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

RCA DOGS said:


> Why is anyone talking about survival? This Initiative has nothing to do with survival it’s shooting opportunities is all


That is absolutely true.

To Go further, it’s a tacit acknowledgment that none of the properties where these birds are going to be released, can produce and sustain natural reproduction.

There is just too much demand, and too great of pressure on those properties, to support natural reproduction.

Truthfully it makes no real sense to make any large scale habitat investment other than the plowing of strips and seeding them with easy to walk dwarf Prairie species.
Like any other shooting preserve does.

They could cut down the amount of habitat dollars spent a substantial amount if they would just admit that they’re getting into the preserve business.


----------



## UPaquariest (May 13, 2010)

Gamekeeper said:


> That is absolutely true.
> 
> To Go further, it’s a tacit acknowledgment that none of the properties where these birds are going to be released, can produce and sustain natural reproduction.
> 
> ...


I have seen a couple different lists of release sites, the one I pulled this morning doesn't list them but earlier versions did list at least on SGA that currently has wild pheasant on it.


----------



## Mi. Chuck (Jun 12, 2018)

Gamekeeper said:


> That is absolutely true.
> 
> To Go further, it’s a tacit acknowledgment that none of the properties where these birds are going to be released, can produce and sustain natural reproduction.
> 
> ...


----------



## Bonz 54 (Apr 17, 2005)

I am with the ones who are tired of being nickle and dimed. I haven't Waterfowl hunted in years, but I but both Duck stamps every year. First it was $7.50 and then it started to spiral. Now it's $25. Now add on your regular Small Game license, State Duck Stamp, NOW a Pheasant stamp? I have been around quite a while and remember Put n Take, the Sichuan Black-necks and other failed programs. If I saw improvement for our investment, I'd say okay lets try it for a couple of seasons. However, the success rate is pretty dismal. Show me some success before you stick your hand out. FRANK


----------



## FISHMANMARK (Jun 11, 2007)

We hunt pheasants for "free" under our base license which is required to purchase any other hunting license. Yeah, adding a pheasant stamp is a no brainer.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

FISHMANMARK said:


> We hunt pheasants for "free" under our base license which is required to purchase any other hunting license. Yeah, adding a pheasant stamp is a no brainer.


Base liscense is what was previously known as the small game license.
In all honesty when will it stop heading this direction.Will we be required to have a stamp for everything.A rabbit,squirrel,or grouse stamp.
Hey wait a minute why is there not a sharptail stamp?Where did they find the funds for that.I would think a stamp for sharptail hunting is more warranted than pheasants.We have way more pheasants than sharpies.
I need too many licenses to hunt as is.Combo deer tags,doe tag,Turkey tag,state waterfowl,federal waterfowl,base license,combo fish,orv,recreation passport,metropolitan stickers.
Then the cost of goods to go hunting these days and it's quite obvious why recruitment is low and add low wages that have been stagnant for decades and here we are.
Shall we get a walleye stamp and a perch stamp going to generate revenues.

The state gains a ton of tax revenue from fishing and hunting,we pay sales taxes,and state income tax from a ton of outdoorsmen and women.1 in 10 basically and that means that 10% of taxes come from this group not to mention generated revenues associated with hunting and fishing by way of goods and services.

The state claims that it depends upon the licensing fees for wildlife management and yet again they go after more money for funding.It really isn't fair that state tax money does not make it back to our interests considering how much of our economy is connected to our passions.


----------



## Mi. Chuck (Jun 12, 2018)

birdhntr said:


> Base liscense is what was previously known as the small game license.
> In all honesty when will it stop heading this direction.Will we be required to have a stamp for everything.A rabbit,squirrel,or grouse stamp.
> Hey wait a minute why is there not a sharptail stamp?Where did they find the funds for that.I would think a stamp for sharptail hunting is more warranted than pheasants.We have way more pheasants than sharpies.
> I need too many licenses to hunt as is.Combo deer tags,doe tag,Turkey tag,state waterfowl,federal waterfowl,base license,combo fish,orv,recreation passport,metropolitan stickers.
> ...


You hit the nail on the head. Sad part is that little positive comes out of the stamps despite the issuers claims that it would be worse without it. Come on, that's like the game of proposing a 20% increase and then settling for 10%, and claiming it was a huge tax CUT. It's past time far a part time government here in "Pure Michigan", but that's for another discussion. Bitch to your reps. Sometimes they even listen.


----------



## Hackman (Aug 13, 2008)

if snowshoe hare populations rose in lower northern michigan I would pay for a rabbit stamp. I had good times in the 70,s running a beagle. DNR hear me get er done. Dec, Jan Feb Mar beagle music would be my retiremnt plan.


----------



## Canvsbk (Jan 13, 2013)

It appears this is intended to be an exact repeat of the last time. I don’t understand why the DNR continues to repeat old mistakes over and over.
I find it interesting how many old friends have been in touch of late and then ask if I’ve herd about this pheasant release deal. If you’ve got dogs you know what I’m talking about. 
Indiana does a pretty good job with their put and take. I’m not sure what the current fee is but in the past with a 2 bird limit I think you paid $15 a day. It was and still is very successful. Michigan DNR should take a couple minutes and see how they do it.


----------



## kingfisher 11 (Jan 26, 2000)

We need to control predators. I know most hawks and owls are protected but they do serious harm. Coyotes and foxes need to be controlled, maybe a bounty on coyotes?

I am believe some of these fees have a reverse effect. Once you get to a point these fees nickel and dime a weekend hunter. He will just pass on tags and take a chance of getting caught. I have heard rumors of a few who do that around me on deer. They don't buy a tag until the deer is shot now.


----------



## Josh R (Dec 4, 2010)

kingfisher 11 said:


> We need to control predators. I know most hawks and owls are protected but they do serious harm. Coyotes and foxes need to be controlled, maybe a bounty on coyotes?
> 
> I am believe some of these fees have a reverse effect. Once you get to a point these fees nickel and dime a weekend hunter. He will just pass on tags and take a chance of getting caught. I have heard rumors of a few who do that around me on deer. They don't buy a tag until the deer is shot now.


We need great habitat, good quality habitat will keep pheasants around with or without predators. I hunt plenty of areas where I see an occasional fox, coyote and plenty of Raptors, I always see plenty of pheasants. Good quality habitat will give the birds plenty of escape routes. 
Getting quality habitat is the issue tho, to get a good healthy population we need large tracts, 100s of acres, or a bunch of good quality smaller tracts with good connectivity

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Josh R (Dec 4, 2010)

Canvsbk said:


> It appears this is intended to be an exact repeat of the last time. I don’t understand why the DNR continues to repeat old mistakes over and over.
> I find it interesting how many old friends have been in touch of late and then ask if I’ve herd about this pheasant release deal. If you’ve got dogs you know what I’m talking about.
> Indiana does a pretty good job with their put and take. I’m not sure what the current fee is but in the past with a 2 bird limit I think you paid $15 a day. It was and still is very successful. Michigan DNR should take a couple minutes and see how they do it.


Hearing a few of the higher ups in the DNR and listening to some good friends whom have had good conversations with the biologists they all same similar things, the biologists and the heads of the DNR aren't really in favor of this. A politician got involved and made a bill that MUCC got on board with and that's why we have this going on

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Mi. Chuck (Jun 12, 2018)

Josh R said:


> Hearing a few of the higher ups in the DNR and listening to some good friends whom have had good conversations with the biologists they all same similar things, the biologists and the heads of the DNR aren't really in favor of this. A politician got involved and made a bill that MUCC got on board with and that's why we have this going on
> 
> Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


I believe you are correct. PF was not in favor of it either. Too bad Pheasants Forever sold out to get a portion of the Stamp money, even though it is tagged for habitat. Apparently they chose not to take a stand on one of there key priorities: Do not release birds. Politics, politics, it infects everything.


----------



## Josh R (Dec 4, 2010)

Mi. Chuck said:


> I believe you are correct. PF was not in favor of it either. Too bad Pheasants Forever sold out to get a portion of the Stamp money, even though it is tagged for habitat. Apparently they chose not to take a stand on one of there key priorities: Do not release birds. Politics, politics, it infects everything.


I think tho originally the stamp had more money going to the release then towards habitat. PF, if I'm thinking right, now wants at least half the money going towards habitat which is better then nothing I guess. At least that's what I thought I read

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## kingfisher 11 (Jan 26, 2000)

I have seen quite a few dead rabbits and birds while in the woods, picked clean. Those are from flying predators. I disagree about predator populations. You need both habitat and predator control to go hand in hand. At one time bounties were in place on many of them. Raccoons and opossums can get into any cover you want to build and it won't stop them from raiding nests.


----------



## rmw (Feb 21, 2006)

Hackman said:


> I hate being nickel and dimed, also. The stamp is no surprise because the whole program is being modeled after some of the other states like I think Wisconsin, being one. Hey, DNR personnel needs their fat checks and benefits, too. I'll gladly pay my license fees and keep my mouth shut as long as they leave me and my lab alone while i"m out in the field.


I just got my license today and when I told her I wanted woodcock and sharptail on it she asked me if I wanted pheasant also , you gotta check the box


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

I find the predator debates interesting.
To want game animals to hunt in good numbers to pursue because we enjoy it but to have the feel good leave the predators unchecked is laughable.

When trying to reestablish game one would think predator control would be paramount.The game animals need to reach a tipping point in which they
Out produce the losses.In areas without substantial populations where reestablishing is the goal it is hard to accomplish it with predation pressure until a population reaches numbers of sustainability.Its a numbers game.
I like the narrative that coyotes are beneficial to pheasants.lol.If so then why with all the coyotes we currently have do we also have all these raccoons,skunks,possums also.The population of these animals are all high and game is low.

We have limits,seasons,tags,rules in taking game or fish so it is sustainable because we are predators.The predators go all year unchecked for balance and should be so we can have more opportunities for us hunters.
They did a study in the pothole duck factory to determine why duck populations were stagnant and showing no growth in numbers and even declining.They discovered that the number one factor was nest raiders.
I think this is crucial with pheasants especially when they don't live long.Most hens might nest once or twice if lucky in a lifetime so success is critical.


----------



## Big Frank 25 (Feb 21, 2002)

Check the correlation of bird numbers as to when the furbearers were removed from the small game license. 

When small farms existed chicken hawks were targets.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

If you were going to attempt to treat wild game like it’s a crop then the public should develop them for its own use, and you might as well go all out and embrace the preserve concepts.


----------



## Chessieman (Dec 8, 2009)

Gamekeeper said:


> If you were going to attempt to treat wild game like it’s a crop then the public should develop them for its own use, and you might as well go all out and embrace the preserve concepts.


I agree, but being that I have put in Pheasant habitat every year for the past 30 years I guess that is what I have been doing. My local PF had to change the seed and fertilizer cost this year which I do agree with. There was so much demand for the limited supplies due to the no baiting for deer this year. Many more people were putting in fields for Whitetails utilizing the PF habitat supplies. So what would the state PF use this money for when the local PF supplies all the seed and fertilizer for their area? Sounds like a money grab by the state PF just like what is happening with the Boy Scout camps they are selling here in the lower.


----------



## NbyNW (Jun 30, 2012)

Im all for another stamp. Lets be real hear, if a $30 stamp is keeping you from getting into upland hunting, this probably isn't the sport for you. Upland hunting is an expensive hobby, gear, guns, dogs, ammo, gas, kennels, gps, training collars, boots, etc.

Im also all for reducing license/stamp fees for new hunters regardless of age. First three years reduce the fees so new hunters(adults) have fewer hurdles, once they become established hunters they pay regular fees. There are studies out there showing the wastefulness of money being spent on our youth and retention rates being extremely low. We need to target 18 to 30 year olds to get them into the sports. They have disposable income and time for hobbies.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

NbyNW said:


> Im all for another stamp. Lets be real hear, if a $30 stamp is keeping you from getting into upland hunting, this probably isn't the sport for you. Upland hunting is an expensive hobby, gear, guns, dogs, ammo, gas, kennels, gps, training collars, boots, etc.
> 
> Im also all for reducing license/stamp fees for new hunters regardless of age. First three years reduce the fees so new hunters(adults) have fewer hurdles, once they become established hunters they pay regular fees. There are studies out there showing the wastefulness of money being spent on our youth and retention rates being extremely low. We need to target 18 to 30 year olds to get them into the sports. They have disposable income and time for hobbies.


I don't think it is just the cost of a stamp. It is everything above that you mentioned and more.The cost of hunting and the amount of disposable income is a problem.Most of the people in my circle do not hunt and fish like when we were young and everytime I try to get people to go money seems to be the first subject.I have a hard time convincing them to go even when I guarantee a good hunt.

I started bird hunting with no gear,a borrowed gun,and a license that I paid for with rolled pennies.Then a free dog and then after maybe five years I finally got my own gun.
I sometimes wonder if the truth is that most people that would take up hunting are generally from the lower income brackets.It seemed that way in the 80's.
I do agree that a stamp for habitat is good but it's a fools game releasing birds with that money.The stamp should be optional.One for habitat and another for release of birds.Then we will see how people truly feel about the subject,the true passion,and then be able to recognize facts.
As the old but truthful saying goes "put your money where your mouth is"stands true and always thins the crowd. Lol.


----------



## Mi. Chuck (Jun 12, 2018)

NbyNW said:


> Im all for another stamp. Lets be real hear, if a $30 stamp is keeping you from getting into upland hunting, this probably isn't the sport for you. Upland hunting is an expensive hobby, gear, guns, dogs, ammo, gas, kennels, gps, training collars, boots, etc.
> 
> Im also all for reducing license/stamp fees for new hunters regardless of age. First three years reduce the fees so new hunters(adults) have fewer hurdles, once they become established hunters they pay regular fees. There are studies out there showing the wastefulness of money being spent on our youth and retention rates being extremely low. We need to target 18 to 30 year olds to get them into the sports. They have disposable income and time for hobbies.


Agreed, the stamp cost whatever it is, will not deter hunters. However regardless of how their Put N Take hunt goes, they will be facing reality when they try to find wild birds. If there was a huntable population of pheasants, the state would not be sponsoring this program and the MPRI. Whatever the costs, I don't think these "new" hunters will be retained after this program dies like it did before. There are many "pay as you go" shooting preserves that they can go to then, as they could today, if they want a shooting experience. Bottom line: we need enough wild pheasants to entice "new" hunters and retain existing hunters.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

Mi. Chuck said:


> Bottom line: we need enough wild pheasants to entice "new" hunters and retain existing hunters.


The world is never returning to 1950 again.

There are too many people chasing a fantasy and too few recognizing reality.


----------



## Mi. Chuck (Jun 12, 2018)

Gamekeeper said:


> The world is never returning to 1950 again.
> 
> There are too many people chasing a fantasy and too few recognizing reality.


I'm not greedy, I'd settle for the 80s. In my areas the birds dropped off the cliff starting in about 2005. I'd seen drops in the 70s, but they always returned. Not now.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

Mi. Chuck said:


> I'm not greedy, I'd settle for the 80s. In my areas the birds dropped off the cliff starting in about 2005. I'd seen drops in the 70s, but they always returned. Not now.


The world changed.

It’s not going to unchange.

While it doesn’t have anything to do with this new effort at put and take, I sometimes wonder if the steady parsing and stamp issuance by species isn’t just a way to increase revenues to “pay as you go”.

It’s kind of irrelevant, because it will fail, and because as soon as the money dries up the latest put and take effort will fail as well.

You can’t expect a teenager to willingly drop near $100 to maybe get a shot at something in the uplands.

It’s already about $50 before you ever shoot at your first duck.

And people wonder why there isn’t any recruitment.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

Gamekeeper said:


> The world changed.
> 
> It’s not going to unchange.
> 
> ...


A teenager can hunt until they are 16 for free. Meijer gives out free licenses the weekend before the tourh hunt every year. Even if they miss that weekend deal they still get the $11 base license discounted to like $6. Doesnt cost them at all to duck hunt.

Hunting in this state is incredibly cheap compared to just about any state when you are talking license cost. Our licenses are cheaper than they were when I was a kid when you factor inflation. When I was a teenager I worked in a fast food restaraunt for $2.89 an hr to buy my hunting equipment. I also baled hay an entire day for $20. These days $11 an hr is nothing for aTeenager to earn if he wants to.


----------



## NbyNW (Jun 30, 2012)

You guys do realize South Dakota purchases the majority of their pheasants each year. 100’s of thousands of birds are purchased and released annually to help accommodate the hunting pressure.
Estimates believe well north of 50, maybe even 75 % or more of all birds shot in SD are pen raised and released.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

NbyNW said:


> You guys do realize South Dakota purchases the majority of their pheasants each year. 100’s of thousands of birds are purchased and released annually to help accommodate the hunting pressure.
> Estimates believe well north of 50, maybe even 75 % or more of all birds shot in SD are pen raised and released.


Not true.I posted the facts on this last year in this same debate.The state does not release birds.There are preserves that release birds and the numbers are negated from the harvest report from the state.You can shoot as many birds as you are willing to pay for at these places.http://m.startribune.com/debate-is-on-about-hunting-pen-raised-pheasants-in-south-dakota/500758651/


----------



## NbyNW (Jun 30, 2012)

I disagree. Many of the “wild” birds are simply birds that escaped the preserves. I also never stated that the state purchases birds, I am not aware if the state does or does not purchase birds, but preserves purchase 100s of thousands annually.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

NbyNW said:


> I disagree. Many of the “wild” birds are simply birds that escaped the preserves. I also never stated that the state purchases birds, I am not aware if the state does or does not purchase birds, but preserves purchase 100s of thousands annually.


The article explains it best.


----------



## NbyNW (Jun 30, 2012)

Yea, I read it, the article makes my point. 100s of thousands of birds are brought into SD annually to sustain the hunting pressure. 
It doesn’t matter if it is preserves or the state itself.
Stop bringing in those birds and the hunting pressure on only wilds wouldn’t be sustainable.


----------



## Bonz 54 (Apr 17, 2005)

Here is another option, STOP shooting all the birds that you need to breed the next years chicks. Get rid of the December season. And don't tell me 1 rooster can service 100 hens. That's just foolishness. IF a rooster could run from 1 hen to another he couldn't cover the ground he would need to to find the 100 hens, he'd starve to death or get picked off by one of the predators that we have too many of. FRANK


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

Bonz 54 said:


> Here is another option, STOP shooting all the birds that you need to breed the next years chicks. Get rid of the December season. And don't tell me 1 rooster can service 100 hens. That's just foolishness. IF a rooster could run from 1 hen to another he couldn't cover the ground he would need to to find the 100 hens, he'd starve to death or get picked off by one of the predators that we have too many of. FRANK


I’d just for a moment ask the public land hunters to consider reducing their take.
They won’t.

People still believe there is some kind of well on public lands that generates enough pheasants for unlimited harvest.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

Gamekeeper said:


> I’d just for a moment ask the public land hunters to consider reducing their take.
> They won’t.
> 
> People still believe there is some kind of well on public lands that generates enough pheasants for unlimited harvest.


When have we ever had an unlimited harvest in Michigan?


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

DirtySteve said:


> When have we ever had an unlimited harvest in Michigan?


You’re allowed two per day, from October 20 to November 14, and then the late season. So about 60 days With no restrictions you could shoot 120 If you could find them

In reality the law of diminishing returns applies so once someone has found a brood they tend to keep working them until they can’t find them anymore.

It’s pretty problematic on public land in the southern peninsula, because the pressure is high and the same people sift the fields day after day.

Because I live walking distance from a sizable upland habitat project manage by the state, I go down there in the early morning to record broods.

If one gunner takes six or eight birds off that property that’s about 90% of the years hatch. 

But you see the same cars with the same dogs down there all the time. It will only get worse when they start dropping birds in the weeds down there.


----------



## Mi. Chuck (Jun 12, 2018)

birdhntr said:


> Not true.I posted the facts on this last year in this same debate.The state does not release birds.There are preserves that release birds and the numbers are negated from the harvest report from the state.You can shoot as many birds as you are willing to pay for at these places.http://m.startribune.com/debate-is-on-about-hunting-pen-raised-pheasants-in-south-dakota/500758651/





birdhntr said:


> Not true.I posted the facts on this last year in this same debate.The state does not release birds.There are preserves that release birds and the numbers are negated from the harvest report from the state.You can shoot as many birds as you are willing to pay for at these places.http://m.startribune.com/debate-is-on-about-hunting-pen-raised-pheasants-in-south-dakota/500758651/





Gamekeeper said:


> You’re allowed two per day, from October 20 to November 14, and then the late season. So about 60 days With no restrictions you could shoot 120 If you could find them
> 
> In reality the law of diminishing returns applies so once someone has found a brood they tend to keep working them until they can’t find them anymore.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mi. Chuck (Jun 12, 2018)

Glad someone is counting birds. So are you saying that you think there are only about 10 cocks on that acreage? I don't know how large the area is, but that sounds pretty bad. Is it one of the MPRI projects? We had a fairly good population on about 4500 acres of state land until they started planting treated corn for ducks. The last time I was scouting it in the snow, I never saw a single track. Treated seed?????


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

Mi. Chuck said:


> Glad someone is counting birds. So are you saying that you think there are only about 10 cocks on that acreage? I don't know how large the area is, but that sounds pretty bad. Is it one of the MPRI projects? We had a fairly good population on about 4500 acres of state land until they started planting treated corn for ducks. The last time I was scouting it in the snow, I never saw a single track. Treated seed?????


Go down there in the winter, look along the edges of traditional winter habitat, see if you can find any tracks.


----------

