# Dnr releasing phez



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

The areas are just too small. Unless there are major changes on what is taking place on private property, nothing is going to change.


----------



## Josh R (Dec 4, 2010)

Last spring in the areas I hunted had a tremendous hatch it appeared, way more flushes and kills last year by far then any of the past years. We've been at it on a serious basis since 2011. It's either my dogs are really good or the numbers were just really really good. We hunted areas that I've never hunted before or even told about and 1 area we hunted we could've killed Pat's and pheasants but it was still a little too warm to be running thru the thick woods that was in the middle of some great pheasant habitat, we will be definitely be spending more time in that area next year

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## John Singer (Aug 20, 2004)

DecoySlayer said:


> They talk about dove hunting fields as well. One, this is Michigan, ain't gonna happen. Two, I hunted a public dove field on opening day in Ohio last year. It was a nice field, well done, but SO crowded it was dangerous. Never again.
> 
> It was about as safe as the old Put-n-Take hunts in Michigan were. Those were just stupid.


A lot of opening day experiences on public property are crowded. 

People say the same about some popular public duck hunting areas in Michigan.

Did you try dove hunting there on a day other than the opener?


----------



## John Singer (Aug 20, 2004)

birdhntr said:


> This is why we have game farms.They are safe and predictability of game is guaranteed.They are private and not state run or funded.One might ask the question of why with all the pheasant farms available to hunt that it is not promoting hunter interest and recruitment which would expand the number of pheasant farms.Bottom line is that some would prefer it to be free.
> I will add a second strong point to this that when you go and seed birds in this manner that the recovery rate is half at best so the cost of a bird is double respectively.At a farm the recovering rate is close to a 100% as you get after them in a timely manner and anything under a 100% recovery is typically related to missing your opportunity.
> 
> At highland birds get seeded and within a few days the predators will have cleaned them all out.The kills are scattered around and I watch the hawks fly off with them.They are trained to the area for an easy meal and adapt.
> Once they learn that food for easy pickings is at a known location they will come.


Are you advocating for the privatization of upland hunting? 

Is that not the situation in England? Is that what we really want?

Not everybody can shell out the cash for game farms.

I am not saying that a release program is the answer. The article that I cited does make that argument that habitat restoration and the supply of wild game birds does not meet the demand near urban population centers.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

John Singer said:


> Are you advocating for the privatization of upland hunting?
> 
> Is that not the situation in England? Is that what we really want?
> 
> ...


If you have read my many posts on this subject you would know I am a supporter of land acquisitions and conservation for habitat for all wildlife.
England's lands are owned by the wealthy and access is very limited.
The article states the economical impact would be beneficial but you state the fact that some can not afford to hunt a game preserve.
If so then how can they afford the dog,the gun,ammo,gas,and also afford to burn a better part of a whole day chasing a two bird pheasant limit instead of spending that day earning revenue to better their life and then after working that day go to a pheasant farm that's within reasonable distance and buy two birds and still be better off than a random quest to harvest two released birds that may not be there.
If I run a tab on my last year quest for wild pheasants in which we harvested 20 this is what it entails,a full tank of gas,mileage depreciation of vehicle, a lost day of wages(income)and an uncertain harvest.For estimate purposes let's go with 20 dollars an hour times 8 and the gas for the day.Thats 220 to 240 a day times 14 days afield.3000 to 3500 I spent and it would not be any different searching for released birds.If I worked instead and just hit a preserve a couple times that amount at half would by 60 birds and increased my income to live on.

Most land in southern Michigan is private so it is somewhat like england.
Secondly Michigan actually would have a much higher pheasant harvest but access is very hard to get.I know so many deer hunters that tell me all the time about the pheasants they see while bow hunting but they refuse to go and hunt them or let me because it will screw up the deer hunting and they want that big buck and won't jeopardize it.Times have changed and especially due to the growth of bow hunting since the eighties.

I read some studies including Pennsylvania on how far away released birds travel.And it suggests that they don't stay where you plant them if they even get to live longer than a couple weeks if they venture off the public areas which are limited for us then you don't have access to them on the private property.


----------



## gundogguy (Oct 5, 2008)

birdhntr said:


> If you have read my many posts on this subject you would know I am a supporter of land acquisitions and conservation for habitat for all wildlife.
> England's lands are owned by the wealthy and access is very limited.
> 
> Most land in southern Michigan is private so it is somewhat like england.
> to them on the private property.


That's laughable, I live in southern Michigan and have trained dogs, shot game, driven and rough shooting, here in the states and in England,Wales Scotland. Southern Michigan is nothing like the UK.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

John Singer said:


> A lot of opening day experiences on public property are crowded.
> 
> People say the same about some popular public duck hunting areas in Michigan.
> 
> Did you try dove hunting there on a day other than the opener?



No, could only afford a 3 day licence and I had to work after that.

It was beyond crowded. The field was around 500 yards long and about 75 yards wide. It was nice, sunflowers on both sides of the mowed field. They had corn planted as well.

There were hunting parties, both sides of the field, every 30 to 40 yards. I REALLY did not like sitting directly across from other hunters that were that close. 

I walked down to the far end of the field, away from the planted crops, just to get away. It was amazing to me that no one was hit.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

gundogguy said:


> That's laughable, I live in southern Michigan and have trained dogs, shot game, driven and rough shooting, here in the states and in England,Wales Scotland. Southern Michigan is nothing like the UK.



You got that right. Southern Michigan is nothing like the UK.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

birdhntr said:


> If you have read my many posts on this subject you would know I am a supporter of land acquisitions and conservation for habitat for all wildlife.
> England's lands are owned by the wealthy and access is very limited.
> The article states the economical impact would be beneficial but you state the fact that some can not afford to hunt a game preserve.
> If so then how can they afford the dog,the gun,ammo,gas,and also afford to burn a better part of a whole day chasing a two bird pheasant limit instead of spending that day earning revenue to better their life and then after working that day go to a pheasant farm that's within reasonable distance and buy two birds and still be better off than a random quest to harvest two released birds that may not be there.
> ...


The comments about the cost aren't real in my opinnion. You calculated losing a days wages. Most people hunt when they have time off. If they don't and they are actually taking time off and costing themselves money they are doing this regardless of where they hunt be it public or private farm.....or even if they hunt at all and do something else for recreation. The tank of gas and depreciation aren't exactly real costs as you state them. I burn gas and put miles on my truck every day of the week. Doesnt matter if I am going to work, driving the kids carpool to school, attending kids sporting event or taking them to practice etc... Often the days I hunt are the days I have the least fuel costs and least vehicle depreciation so I never figure that into my hunting expenses. Vehicles and gas are just an expense of living like eating and heat for your home for most. Sometimes when I hunt it is with friends and we are taking 1 vehicle and splitting gas expenses etc..

The guys who got me into bird hunting are more hardcore than most. They keep 3-4 dogs most years and train them all on their own. They get their dogs from bulletin board listings in party stores. No papers and from people desperate to get rid of their last couple pups. They Typically spend less than $100. They snickered when I paid $250 for my dog and I trained him on my own with suggestions from friends and a ton of free video watching. I hunt ducks with my great grandfathers 12 ga and I upland hunt with my grandfathers 16 ga. I have never purchased a shotgun in my entire lifetime for myself. My biggest expense for bird hunting other than the purchase of my dog was an $80 beeper collar and second was probably the $50 i spent on a plastic crate for when the dog is too muddy to ride in the backseat. I did buy myself a nice pair of brush pants one year. 

My point to all this rambling is I cant imagine spending $200+ for a half day hunt at a game ranch. If that were my main choice I would only hunt grouse and woodcock. The idea seems like cheating to me and I cant get past it. I have considered doing it just for the extra dog work but I could just never get myself to do it. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

DirtySteve said:


> My point to all this rambling is I cant imagine spending $200+ for a half day hunt at a game ranch. If that were my main choice I would only hunt grouse and woodcock. The idea seems like cheating to me and I cant get past it. I have considered doing it just for the extra dog work but I could just never get myself to do it.



There is no need to spend $200 for a half day hunt. It is just no that expensive. Do it right, and it's half that for a full day.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

DecoySlayer said:


> There is no need to spend $200 for a half day hunt. It is just no that expensive. Do it right, and it's half that for a full day.


Well I suppose you are probably right. If I seriously looked into ranch hunting I could probably find a bargain somewhere if I wanted to travel. At that point I would have to figure out how to get past the feeling of cheating. 

I live really close to two hunt clubs. 1 is just over a mile away. Their costs are staggering to me. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


----------



## gundogguy (Oct 5, 2008)

DirtySteve said:


> Well I suppose you are probably right. If I seriously looked into ranch hunting I could probably find a bargain somewhere if I wanted to travel. At that point I would have to figure out how to get past the feeling of cheating.
> 
> I live really close to two hunt clubs. 1 is just over a mile away. Their costs are staggering to me.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


Very curious? What are the staggering costs?
The operator of those clubs may also think his capital improvements, bird costs, feed, labor cover planting expenses, utilities, and property taxes are staggering as well. The old adage if You want to play you will have to pay.
Hal


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

DecoySlayer said:


> There is no need to spend $200 for a half day hunt. It is just no that expensive. Do it right, and it's half that for a full day.


I just looked up the two closest places to me that dont require memberships. One was $24 a pheasant and 5 bird min per person for a half day hunt. If you go alone it is a 10 bird min so $240 for a half day. 

The other place had an option for 2 person hunt for 4 hrs with a 3 bird min per person for $85. That is $28 a bird....but you have have a min 2 hunters for that price. If you go alone it is $170 for 4 hrs and 6 birds. The price per bird went down the more birds you buy. 

It looks like if you just wanted to shoot chukars you could do it considerably cheaper. 



Sent from my SM-G950U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

gundogguy said:


> Very curious? What are the staggering costs?
> The operator of those clubs may also think his capital improvements, bird costs, feed, labor cover planting expenses, utilities, and property taxes are staggering as well. The old adage if You want to play you will have to pay.
> Hal


I dont have a brochure for the club down the road from me anymore but the last time I checked the membership was around 2k yearly. Then everything you did there cost more than what you would pay at a non membership facility each time you went. Even shooting trap there was about twice the cost as going to local gun range and doing the same thing. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

gundogguy said:


> That's laughable, I live in southern Michigan and have trained dogs, shot game, driven and rough shooting, here in the states and in England,Wales Scotland. Southern Michigan is nothing like the UK.


It is when it comes to access


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

birdhntr said:


> It is when it comes to access



It's not quite as bad here, as it is in the UK, yet. We are headed in that direction, and fast.


----------



## Mark4486 (Oct 14, 2015)

I think the real argument here is getting lost and it should be a science based answer. 1. DO RELEASED BIRDS UP THE NUMBERS OR NOT? 2. IS IT WORTH THE COST TO RELESE IF NOT WHAT IS THE REAL REASON FOR DOING IT(political)?


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

Mark4486 said:


> I think the real argument here is getting lost and it should be a science based answer. 1. DO RELEASED BIRDS UP THE NUMBERS OR NOT? 2. IS IT WORTH THE COST TO RELESE IF NOT WHAT IS THE REAL REASON FOR DOING IT(political)?


The real reason for doing it is to fulfill the childhood fantasies of retired baby boomers that remember the 1960s and 70s, where just about anybody could go out and hunt on rural property. That isn’t the world we live in anymore. But they’ve got political clout and so they get our tax dollars. In fact the link article clearly states it’s a an effort to fulfill demand as opposed to any kind of conservation effort.

They stated their anxiety over lost funds due to lost interest.
There is no meaningful demand from young adults for these programs.

My view then became that they want to preserve their jobs more so than improve my upland experience.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

Back then there was game on private property, not now. 

This "boomer" is 100% opposed to a new put and take program. 

If you want new hunters, open up dove hunting. Of course, this is Michigan, ain't gonna happen, the antis are in control


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

Mark4486 said:


> I think the real argument here is getting lost and it should be a science based answer. 1. DO RELEASED BIRDS UP THE NUMBERS OR NOT? 2. IS IT WORTH THE COST TO RELESE IF NOT WHAT IS THE REAL REASON FOR DOING IT(political)?


Realeased birds will not increase numbers at all. The idea behind it is to get people interested in pheasant hunting again. 

The idea of creating interest in the sport to increase future dollars towards pheasant hunting is very debatable as to its effectiveness.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

#1 is no
#2 is yes.


Mark4486 said:


> I think the real argument here is getting lost and it should be a science based answer. 1. DO RELEASED BIRDS UP THE NUMBERS OR NOT? 2. IS IT WORTH THE COST TO RELESE IF NOT WHAT IS THE REAL REASON FOR DOING IT(political)?


If releasing increased the numbers of would be commonplace but it only increases shooting not population dynamics.PA releases every year and has been for some time now.Well over 4 million dollars worth of birds(200,000) and half gets harvested.A tagged bird study showed that birds can travel up to ten miles from release site.
Of 2,073 banded pheasants recovered in the study, which attached bands to the legs of 5,566 pheasants, only five were documented kills by predators and 14 were killed on roads. Another 43 were found dead, but without a definitive cause of death.

Although more than half of the banded pheasants were never heard from again, hunters connected with the vast majority of the recovered pheasants – 2,011 – which is the commission’s aim with its stocking program.


----------



## Mark4486 (Oct 14, 2015)

I myself am guilty of indulging in the put and take cause I planned on taking my daughter and my girlfriends son (12&11) to get an easy bird. But if those birds will not up the presents of phez its kinda useless. The cost will not out way the benefits. I think we all know that. From what I have read over the last year it’s a habitat issue. And no one is willing to budge cause we can force farmers to leave land for wild life nor wood I want to try to enact a law that would. These are a sign of the times hopefully we can find a middle ground or another past time will be lost.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

Oh by the way, the UK rears and releases 100’s of thousands of pheasants and partridges annually.

There is no native reproduction to speak of.

You wanna shoot. You gotta pay


----------



## John Singer (Aug 20, 2004)

You know, as I think about it, hunting a game farm is boring to me. At best they are a poor substitute for wild birds. For that reason, when I lived in Michigan, I tried to make annual trips to Iowa for wild birds.

BTW, the last two years, in Michigan, my pheasant hunting, mostly on public land was very good. I had 79 flushes in 2017 and 103 flushes in 2018.

There is a lot of talk in farm country of low commodity prices due to tariffs. There are also some rumblings of government financial relief for farmers.

It would be wonderful if that financial relief included grassland and wetlands restoration incentives that benefit upland birds and other wildlife.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Gamekeeper said:


> Oh by the way, the UK rears and releases 100’s of thousands of pheasants and partridges annually.
> 
> There is no native reproduction to speak of.
> 
> You wanna shoot. You gotta pay


35 million they release


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

It has been hypothesised that the efficiency of releasing is lower on sites that release higher densities of pheasants; this study does not support this hypothesis. Annual variation in the density of birds shot in the absence of releasing (1960–1990) was closely correlated with a measure of annual gamebird chick survival. After this date, the relationship was no longer significant, consistent with a decline in wild pheasant stocks and coinciding with the declines in other farmland birds. We highlight increased fox abundance, genetic and behavioural changes arising from the rearing process, and increased shooting in late winter as possible causes for the observed decline in releasing efficiency. We consider the general increase in rearing, habitat changes, increased disease or losses to protected predators as unlikely to have been important causes of the changes in releasing efficiency. Pheasant releasing results in increased numbers for shooting, but has not prevented the wide-scale decline of wild pheasant numbers.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

birdhntr said:


> It has been hypothesised that the efficiency of releasing is lower on sites that release higher densities of pheasants; this study does not support this hypothesis. Annual variation in the density of birds shot in the absence of releasing (1960–1990) was closely correlated with a measure of annual gamebird chick survival. After this date, the relationship was no longer significant, consistent with a decline in wild pheasant stocks and coinciding with the declines in other farmland birds. We highlight increased fox abundance, genetic and behavioural changes arising from the rearing process, and increased shooting in late winter as possible causes for the observed decline in releasing efficiency. We consider the general increase in rearing, habitat changes, increased disease or losses to protected predators as unlikely to have been important causes of the changes in releasing efficiency. Pheasant releasing results in increased numbers for shooting, but has not prevented the wide-scale decline of wild pheasant numbers.


When I read that kind of stuff, I am reminded of Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned.
Self justifying bureau speak.
There is no need to care about insignificant rearage increases when a tax/subsidized faux marketplace needs to provide hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, of birds in an environment that can’t possible produce them.
It’s pen or none.

Sure someone can hunt down local broods and crow here about it, but individual success on a dying resource is not landscape wide reproductive success.

I can assure you, to recreate prior population densities, you would have to see birds graveling all through farm country, and I don’t see that. We are never going to see that.

There is neither the will nor the resources to change the environment that we live in to create any form of natural reproduction of pheasants to meet the demand from retiring baby boomers.

I advocate farmers that want huntable pheasants on their lands to set some acreage aside, and rear their own. It’s not hard.

As soon as our economy slows a bit, the money dumped on this will stop.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Gamekeeper said:


> When I read that kind of stuff, I am reminded of Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned.
> Self justifying bureau speak.
> There is no need to care about insignificant rearage increases when a tax/subsidized faux marketplace needs to provide hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, of birds in an environment that can’t possible produce them.
> It’s pen or none.
> ...


Exactly.That statement was from a UK article.They had also mentioned that 21million birds were not recovered out of 35million (est).The more they stocked and a documented downward cycle of natural reoccurring birds.

There is to many obstacles to overcome for pheasants let alone the short life cycle.
Lack of habitat,farming practices,un disturbed nesting areas,natural predation,herbicides,pesticides,winter cover,as well as spring cover.

At highland in the spring the quail don't last long,no cover,few insects or food.
Late summer they last much longer with ample cover,seeds,and insects but when winter hits they dont have the skills or knowledge to survive because they were not born in the natural world and have no natural occurring birds to show them the ways of the natural world.
Natural wild bird stocking is the only way and success is a roll of the dice.They however do have the genetics.The Sharptails are a good example of how a wild transplant can work.This program is a fools game and short sighted at best.


----------



## RCA DOGS (Sep 24, 2011)

I haven’t been keeping up on this thread because all this has been hashed over multiple times. It is what it is, it will work or be abandoned. But nowhere in this Initiative is the release for helping pheasant populations. It’s all about shooting opportunities that’s it.

One last thought. This is the monument for the release sight of pheasants in Michigan. They aren’t here naturally


----------



## Tomfive5 (Dec 15, 2015)

Josh R said:


> Last spring in the areas I hunted had a tremendous hatch it appeared, way more flushes and kills last year by far then any of the past years. We've been at it on a serious basis since 2011. It's either my dogs are really good or the numbers were just really really good. We hunted areas that I've never hunted before or even told about and 1 area we hunted we could've killed Pat's and pheasants but it was still a little too warm to be running thru the thick woods that was in the middle of some great pheasant habitat, we will be definitely be spending more time in that area next year
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


Man I hope you haven't found my spot!


----------



## Josh R (Dec 4, 2010)

Tomfive5 said:


> Man I hope you haven't found my spot!


Well there's always a chance!!
Hunted 4 new areas last year, shot birds in 3 of the 4. The field that I didn't shoot anything in I thought was the best cover. 
Shot or had opportunities to harvest birds in all the other fields I have hunted for the past 5 or 6 years.
Hope this year is the same or better!!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Mark4486 (Oct 14, 2015)

https://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7-350-79134_81684_81685_81746---,00.html
Dnr emailed me this. Thought this might be valuable to some that own land. It’s basically a grant for land management for public and private parties.


----------



## UPaquariest (May 13, 2010)

Mark,
I met with a DNR Biologist late April to begin this process with the hopes of a grant in 2020 to work on some of my property. 

If anyone has done this in the past and has some pointers they would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Mark4486 (Oct 14, 2015)

UPaquariest said:


> Mark,
> I met with a DNR Biologist late April to begin this process with the hopes of a grant in 2020 to work on some of my property.
> 
> If anyone has done this in the past and has some pointers they would be greatly appreciated.


Interesting... I don’t own property but let us know how it goes.


----------



## RCA DOGS (Sep 24, 2011)

UPaquariest said:


> Mark,
> I met with a DNR Biologist late April to begin this process with the hopes of a grant in 2020 to work on some of my property.
> 
> If anyone has done this in the past and has some pointers they would be greatly appreciated.


I am doing this right now.


----------



## Mark4486 (Oct 14, 2015)

RCA DOGS said:


> I am doing this right now.


So they are matching the money u put in to restore your property or somebody else’s? Are you hiring contractors or do they help you?


----------



## RCA DOGS (Sep 24, 2011)

Mark4486 said:


> So they are matching the money u put in to restore your property or somebody else’s? Are you hiring contractors or do they help you?


Mine is through our MPRI CoOp. We applied for a grant and we are using it to do work on three different properties. Most work is contracted out.


----------



## Mark4486 (Oct 14, 2015)

RCA DOGS said:


> Mine is through our MPRI CoOp. We applied for a grant and we are using it to do work on three different properties. Most work is contracted out.


And you own the properties? I know it sounds like a dumb question. Just wondering if you found state land that you thought would be good for game and asked for a grant to restore it.


----------



## RCA DOGS (Sep 24, 2011)

Mark4486 said:


> And you own the properties? I know it sounds like a dumb question. Just wondering if you found state land that you thought would be good for game and asked for a grant to restore it.


Two of the properties are privately owned, one of which is mine, the third is a county park we have a large field we planted in a crp wildflower mix that we did a burn on and removed brush.


----------

