# New Pheasant specific license



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Hackman said:


> Come on guys, really $25 a year for at least next five years. At least you would be given some recreational enjoyment. When our leader with the stroke of pen takes away thousands of dollars eventually from U.S. citizens. Life is too short for me squabble over $25 and stop hunting spots I have in past seasons


25 dollars is not much to most people I agree.
Now for many of my friends who live check to check paying 25 dollars to go out and hunt over my dogs once maybe twice a year to possibly get a that year or the next isn't worth it to them.
The also are not interested in pen birds.If they wanted to hunt released birds and spend their money they would be asking me to go to a preserve.No one has asked to yet.


DirtySteve said:


> Winged Predators are usually territorial I think. They don't tolerate each other too well...
> 
> The last time we had the releases there wasnt much opportunity for predators. The field in my area was getting 40 birds once per week (1 per 2 acres and it was an 80 acre field). The hunters did a pretty decent job of gettting the birds within 2 days. A few 2-3 man groups show up at once and get their limit they go quick.
> 
> I hunted 6-7 times and didnt see any signs of predator success. Only found birds twice I think.


True but back then predators were not around like today as trapping lost popularity and the fact at one time coyotes were extremely rare.In fact almost extinct.
Coyotes cruise game preserves nightly these days and the predation is witnessed by the carcasses.
At highland field trail grounds they will have a trial and put down 200 birds in a weekend and within a couple days they are gone.Eventually some will manage to stick around.
One day I went there and the dogs found a ton of chukars and the next day not one but I found plenty of remains.I see coyotes and hawks there on a regular basis all year.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

DirtySteve said:


> I agree.
> 
> I don't have an issue necasarily with the bird release program. I saw the loads of hunters who came out to try it and I think there might be some merit to the program. I also believe if you are going to charge everyone that money needs to benefit everyone. If the $25 wasnt enough to share with habitat programs they should have raised it to $40 and split it. Duckhunters pay that much between state and federal licensing and alot of that funding doesnt go to michigan or even warerfowling for that matter. It isnt the price that is the issue it is the way it is being spent.


They release ducks?
Apple's to orange's.
The money goes towards managing waterfowl,habitat,research,and land acquisitions at times.
What is the future (end game)for hunting.Will we be releasing other game to hunt in the future when habitat loss and degradation takes it toll?
What are we teaching the next generation on conservation,the ecosystems,and the environment?


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

birdhntr said:


> 25 dollars is not much to most people I agree.
> Now for many of my friends who live check to check paying 25 dollars to go out and hunt over my dogs once maybe twice a year to possibly get a that year or the next isn't worth it to them.
> The also are not interested in pen birds.If they wanted to hunt released birds and spend their money they would be asking me to go to a preserve.No one has asked to yet.
> True but back then predators were not around like today as trapping lost popularity and the fact at one time coyotes were extremely rare.In fact almost extinct.
> ...


I live a mile from a game preserve. Their pheasants make it to my place all the time. My dog has had a fun time chasing a chucker that has been in my year 3 nights out of the last 7 days. 

I see alot of predator kills on these pheasants in the winter time. On the 25 acres behind my house I typcially count 5-7 per winter. All of them have been fox tracks. We get an occasional coyote coming through and I do hear them across the road from us all the time.....but i have never seen a coyote track on a pheasant kill around my property. I have been here 21 yrs now. Coyotes do get the turkeys occasionally and an occasional deer. 

All that being said I cant see how an occasional pheasant for a short season will increase the carrying capacity of the land for coyotes. Coyotes naturally control their own population. They push their own out of the area. There was a great study a few years ago about how their behavior in suburbs created a population of 2000 coyotes living in Chicago city limits.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

DirtySteve said:


> I live a mile from a game preserve. Their pheasants make it to my place all the time. My dog has had a fun time chasing a chucker that has been in my year 3 nights out of the last 7 days.
> 
> I see alot of predator kills on these pheasants in the winter time. On the 25 acres behind my house I typcially count 5-7 per winter. All of them have been fox tracks. We get an occasional coyote coming through and I do hear them across the road from us all the time.....but i have never seen a coyote track on a pheasant kill around my property. I have been here 21 yrs now. Coyotes do get the turkeys occasionally and an occasional deer.
> 
> All that being said I cant see how an occasional pheasant for a short season will increase the carrying capacity of the land for coyotes. Coyotes naturally control their own population. They push their own out of the area. There was a great study a few years ago about how their behavior in suburbs created a population of 2000 coyotes living in Chicago city limits.


Coyotes carry them off and take with.
Here's a little information about duck stamps and where the money goes to be clear on the subject


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

birdhntr said:


> They release ducks?
> Apple's to orange's.
> The money goes towards managing waterfowl,habitat,research,and land acquisitions at times.
> What is the future (end game)for hunting.Will we be releasing other game to hunt in the future when habitat loss and degradation takes it toll?
> What are we teaching the next generation on conservation,the ecosystems,and the environment?


Apples oranges.... Well they both grow on trees and are farmed by farmers for profit. So yeah they are different but the fruits have their similarities. The pheasant release program and habitat program are a different "fruit" with a shared goal in hunter recruitment. You might be right that habitat is better. I would probably agree with that argument. I do think there is some some merit to the release program. Atleast I hope so. We suffer from a huge lack of pheasant hunting interest by the vast majority of hunters. We have a ton of hardcore hunters that dont give two hoots about pheasants. They just dont believe there is opportunity.


----------



## Cheeseman (Apr 14, 2016)

I’m trying to remember how they worked the put and take program in the 70’s. As I was a kid I wasn’t paying for it my Dad was. I believe it was a stand alone program whereby you bought into it to participate. I believe you got 10 stickers per put and take license and were supposed to put one of those on the leg of a shot bird. You definitely shot hens and roosters. There were lots of issues with the program and specifically remember my Dad knew a guy, who knew a guy, who was always in the know as to when the state was planting the birds. Wild pheasant hunting license was covered by your small game license and you did not HAVE to buy a specific license to hunt wild birds on state land except at the release areas (I.e. Barry County State Game area). Pay to participate makes sense to me. But not forcing all hunters who enjoy “wild” bird hunting at places like the Fennville/Allegan Todd farm to HAVE to pay to participate. If I want to “hunt” at a game preserve and spend the money, I do. I don’t force others to pay for my recreation.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

birdhntr said:


> Coyotes carry them off and take with.
> Here's a little information about duck stamps and where the money goes to be clear on the subject
> View attachment 761269
> View attachment 761270


The michigan duck stamp is no longer what it once was. We now have a $12 waterfowl license. They sell the the duck stamp seperately for $6 and most of that money goes towards shipping and handling. If you buy the $12 license $1.20 goes into the old stamp money habitat fund and the rest goes to the general licensing funds that fishing or deer hunting go into. 10% of your $12 goes to habitat. Buying the $12 license qualifies you for a free stamp.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

Cheeseman said:


> I’m trying to remember how they worked the put and take program in the 70’s. As I was a kid I wasn’t paying for it my Dad was. I believe it was a stand alone program whereby you bought into it to participate. I believe you got 10 stickers per put and take license and were supposed to put one of those on the leg of a shot bird. You definitely shot hens and roosters. There were lots of issues with the program and specifically remember my Dad knew a guy, who knew a guy, who was always in the know as to when the state was planting the birds. Wild pheasant hunting license was covered by your small game license and you did not HAVE to buy a specific license to hunt wild birds on state land except at the release areas (I.e. Barry County State Game area). Pay to participate makes sense to me. But not forcing all hunters who enjoy “wild” bird hunting at places like the Fennville/Allegan Todd farm to HAVE to pay to participate. If I want to “hunt” at a game preserve and spend the money, I do. I don’t force others to pay for my recreation.


Things were alot different back then. We had hundreds of thousands of pheasant hunters in this state. The last time we had releases 2 yrs back every person I talked about it with had no idea it was even going on. 

1970 we had something like 600k small game licenses sold. I bet pretty much all of them hunted pheasants.


----------



## Cheeseman (Apr 14, 2016)

DirtySteve said:


> Things were alot different back then. We had hundreds of thousands of pheasant hunters in this state. The last time we had releases 2 yrs back every person I talked about it with had no idea it was even going on.
> 
> 1970 we had something like 600k small game licenses sold. I bet pretty much all of them hunted pheasants.


Yep there was a big number of Pheasant hunters in 70’s. Unfortunately that’s when the demise of private hunting land really accelerated. Put and take was probably trying to help retain hunters. It was incremental and voluntary though. By memory, you could still hunt pheasants on most public lands and all private lands under your small game license. Put and take was limited to certain areas and you paid to play.


----------



## aphess223 (Aug 1, 2001)

DirtySteve said:


> Things were alot different back then. We had hundreds of thousands of pheasant hunters in this state. The last time we had releases 2 yrs back every person I talked about it with had no idea it was even going on.
> 
> 1970 we had something like 600k small game licenses sold. I bet pretty much all of them hunted pheasants.


That is about the time ag policy changed and habitat on farm land started going away, now when crops are harvested there is just waste land, until ag policy changes and urban sprawl is contained pheasant hunting is dead as is hunting in general, I doubt that is going to happen anytime soon. 
aphess223


----------



## GrouseHntr (Nov 2, 2008)

birdhntr said:


> At highland field trail grounds they will have a trial and put down 200 birds in a weekend and within a couple days they are gone.


I train regularly at the Highland grounds and have had a red tail swoop down to take out training chukar while I am in the field with my dog. Also saw an eagle circling the grounds on a couple occasions last year. 


The pheasant stamp is garbage. I will pay the fee because I want to hunt birds on public land this year, but I am not happy about it. I was in support when the stamp also went towards habitat but the current program helps absolutely nothing.


----------



## aphess223 (Aug 1, 2001)

You know that to hunt Ruff Grouse you DO Not need to purchase the pheasant stamp.
aphess223


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

aphess223 said:


> You know that to hunt Ruff Grouse you DO Not need to purchase the pheasant stamp.
> aphess223


What's the narrative here with your statement.
Let me try this.
You know that going after a bird that's been in captivity for its whole life and has no survival experience or understanding of being a prey animal isn't actually hunting per say.


----------



## aphess223 (Aug 1, 2001)

birdhntr said:


> What's the narrative here with your statement.
> Let me try this.
> You know that going after a bird that's been in captivity for its whole life and has no survival experience or understanding of being a prey animal isn't actually hunting per say.


To hunt Ruff Grouse you just need the base license, can't shoot pheasant on public land no need to spend the $25.00
if you want to shoot pheasant then you need to spend the money.
I'm not saying I agree with the pheasant stamp.


----------



## milmo1 (Nov 9, 2005)

On the fence about buying the stamp. Its not the money (can't do anything for $25 anymore). Its the principle. I have no desire to hunt for the released birds. Nor to hunt alongside a bunch of people looking to cash in on a windfall. I'm pissed that I have to pay to hunt wild birds at sites that will probably see no released birds. If they want you to pay to hunt dedicated sites which receive released birds, I could support folks having that option. But to force me to pay to purposely hunt areas not receiving the "benefits" of the fee is insulting at the least.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

aphess223 said:


> To hunt Ruff Grouse you just need the base license, can't shoot pheasant on public land no need to spend the $25.00
> if you want to shoot pheasant then you need to spend the money.
> I'm not saying I agree with the pheasant stamp.


*We took many pheasants on public land the last few years.
Here is just a few picks from last year.




































*


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

First off I my tenure at MPHI has run its course and I am no longer with the group, in other news I am working with PF again..I guess they like my fighting spirit because I fight to win and I never back down from a good fight.

Second, the uproar about to release or not to release that we see on this forum is a symptom of cancel culture, everyone thinks their own view is righteous therefore other views are not and must be squelched and canceled. There are two sides to look at, the first is the plant the seeds and the hunters and birds will come, the second is to introduce the birds and the hunters will come. I personally think it is between the two. 

Here is the bottom line, the stamp as we see it is here to stay, I lost a few of my own provisions in the deal which was that habitat component of the fee which I also think is detrimental. But now that the ink is dried where do we go from here? I think the answer is to make lemonade from what you perceive as lemons. Take your people hunting just like you always have and then show them where release sites are so they can figure it out on their own.

Or you can cancel and accomplish nothing.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

I don't believe that the cancel culture narrative is correct.
I think that a stamp to pay for someone else to do a preserve hunt when they could have just gone to a preserve and pay to do the same thing is a big part that resonates with many.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

birdhntr said:


> I don't believe that the cancel culture narrative is correct.
> I think that a stamp to pay for someone else to do a preserve hunt when they could have just gone to a preserve and pay to do the same thing is a big part that resonates with many.


What do you call a square strip planted with food and grasses for the sole purpose of hunting? Who has been paying that bill?


----------



## Mark4486 (Oct 14, 2015)

Howitzer said:


> First off I my tenure at MPHI has run its course and I am no longer with the group, in other news I am working with PF again..I guess they like my fighting spirit because I fight to win and I never back down from a good fight.
> 
> Second, the uproar about to release or not to release that we see on this forum is a symptom of cancel culture, everyone thinks their own view is righteous therefore other views are not and must be squelched and canceled. There are two sides to look at, the first is the plant the seeds and the hunters and birds will come, the second is to introduce the birds and the hunters will come. I personally think it is between the two.
> 
> ...


Congrats on the new job. Knowing what you know now would you have pushed for the bill knowing the habitat part would've been dropped?


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

Mark4486 said:


> Congrats on the new job. Knowing what you know now would you have pushed for the bill knowing the habitat part would've been dropped?


It's all coulda shoulda woulda and like anything in politics, nothing ever goes as planned. The answer is probably no because I think the habitat component is a selling point for more stamps and is fairer to the non-release area hunters.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

But it's all good, I am still friends with the MPHI crowd and PF seems to be happy with me stepping out of the fight.


----------



## milmo1 (Nov 9, 2005)

Howitzer said:


> First off I my tenure at MPHI has run its course and I am no longer with the group, in other news I am working with PF again..I guess they like my fighting spirit because I fight to win and I never back down from a good fight.
> 
> Second, the uproar about to release or not to release that we see on this forum is a symptom of cancel culture, everyone thinks their own view is righteous therefore other views are not and must be squelched and canceled. There are two sides to look at, the first is the plant the seeds and the hunters and birds will come, the second is to introduce the birds and the hunters will come. I personally think it is between the two.
> 
> ...


I disagree with this being a cancel culture approach. Cancel culture states: "I personally find this to be offensive, so no one may participate in this activity". My view was not to cancel it, but I would simply not participate. That's the more traditional method of objecting to a situation. I believe in time it will not have the recruitment they seek, and the stamp sales will not be enough to sustain the program. Eventually, it will run its natural course and then maybe we can fund habitat to re-establish a fair enough wild population to hunt. My main objection was being charged to hunt a planted bird when I'd prefer to seek wild birds. If they said: "Released birds will be at xyz locations throughout the season. Hunters must have the Pheasant stamp to hunt these areas." I'd find that to be fair. But, if I'm going to be charged regardless of the areas I hunt - well then I'm probably sitting this out.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

Nobody admits to being a part of cancel culture and nobody realizes when they are doing it, think about all of the Pittman Robertson and farm bill funds being dumped into habitat that only very few can enjoy especially projects on private land with no public hunting easements, Michigan is the only state that does this that I know of. Based on judgements made on this board like a person that said they are/were a hunter safety instructor that somehow knew what kind of people hunted released birds and somehow their own values were better than the others. On the other side of the debate, the people against released birds have no problem hunting square strips which are planted for the sole purpose of holding birds for pursuit by hunters and somehow think they are on moral high ground. 

The chances of me using the release sites are almost zero but I did purchase the stamp because I think it will be a long term success and if it helps someone to bag a bird it's a good bank for the buck in my opinion. If people don't buy the stamp out of spite it will relieve pressure on wild birds in established areas which will make room for others. 

WHAT DOES CANCEL CULTURE MEAN?
Cancel culture refers to the popular practice of withdrawing support for (canceling) public figures and companies after they have done or said something considered objectionable or offensive. Cancel culture is generally discussed as being performed on social media in the form of *group shaming*.


----------



## Cheeseman (Apr 14, 2016)

Howitzer said:


> Nobody admits to being a part of cancel culture and nobody realizes when they are doing it, think about all of the Pittman Robertson and farm bill funds being dumped into habitat that only very few can enjoy especially projects on private land with no public hunting easements, Michigan is the only state that does this that I know of. Based on judgements made on this board like a person that said they are/were a hunter safety instructor that somehow knew what kind of people hunted released birds and somehow their own values were better than the others. On the other side of the debate, the people against released birds have no problem hunting square strips which are planted for the sole purpose of holding birds for pursuit by hunters and somehow think they are on moral high ground.
> 
> The chances of me using the release sites are almost zero but I did purchase the stamp because I think it will be a long term success and if it helps someone to bag a bird it's a good bank for the buck in my opinion. If people don't buy the stamp out of spite it will relieve pressure on wild birds in established areas which will make room for others.
> 
> ...


Square shaped strips (food plots) planted to feed wild birds do somewhat congregate them, but they are still wild and act like it. You still need to assume they will run out the other end or will be unpredictable. On the other hand food plots with pen raised birds (hunt preserves) often have birds that think like pseudo tame animals and thus often do not act like a wild bird. They often stand around and don’t hide. Food plots for wild birds vs pen raised birds are apples and oranges imho.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Cheeseman said:


> Square shaped strips (food plots) planted to feed wild birds do somewhat congregate them, but they are still wild and act like it. You still need to assume they will run out the other end or will be unpredictable. On the other hand food plots with pen raised birds (hunt preserves) often have birds that think like pseudo tame animals and thus often do not act like a wild bird. They often stand around and don’t hide. Food plots for wild birds vs pen raised birds are apples and oranges imho.


Yup.Hunt all day around food plots and crp plantings and move 25 birds and luckily bag one.
Then go to a preserve with food plots and planted crp and bag 25 in less than a couple hours.
Wilds fly like a jet and pen birds like a cesna.Been there done that.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

My purist friends say that hunting ruffed grouse and woodcock in the woods is the only form of pure upland hunting in Michigan I think they're right. My point is that everyone has their own definition of a pure hunt, I don't judge as to what is pure and what is not the type of hunting that someone takes part in is their own business as long as it's legal. In England anyone not wearing a tie and knickers is downright barbaric. 

I also don't see the fascination with SD, it's a chicken shoot as well all those barns you see on the side of the highway with bag fans are not for chickens, Iowa and Nebraska offer more challenging hunts, and if you really think you have the right stuff go to Montana.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

I think it's pretty purist to bag a wild Michigan Pheasant but I do understand your statement somewhat.
I also remember a day in North Dakota where we worked a section to have a thousand Pheasants root out way beyond the gun and never fired a single shot.
I don't believe that if that was released birds it would have went that way at all.


----------



## fowl (Feb 15, 2003)

There are plenty of put and take pheasant farms around. No need for public resources and land to infringe on that. If that’s what works for you, head to one of the existing pheasant farms and shoot as much as you want. 


Sent from my iPhone using Michigan Sportsman


----------



## milmo1 (Nov 9, 2005)

milmo1 said:


> *On the fence about buying the stamp.* Its not the money (can't do anything for $25 anymore). Its the principle. I have no desire to hunt for the released birds. Nor to hunt alongside a bunch of people looking to cash in on a windfall. I'm pissed that I have to pay to hunt wild birds at sites that will probably see no released birds. *If they want you to pay to hunt dedicated sites which receive released birds, I could support folks having that option. *But to force me to pay to purposely hunt areas not receiving the "benefits" of the fee is insulting at the least.





Howitzer said:


> Nobody admits to being a part of cancel culture and nobody realizes when they are doing it
> 
> WHAT DOES CANCEL CULTURE MEAN?
> Cancel culture refers to the popular practice of withdrawing support for (canceling) public figures and companies after they have done or said something considered objectionable or offensive. Cancel culture is generally discussed as being performed on social media in the form of *group shaming*.


I'm not sure you read my statements. Perhaps you aren't referencing me. Or, maybe you're just trolling.

I'm also not sure where your definition of "cancel culture" came from, and by your definition, every person (including yourself) would be members of the cancel culture on one subject or another. Sooner or later, as consumers, we have all said "Nah, I'm not choosing to pay for that. It is not what I want to support with my disposable income".
Here is the definition from Merriam-Webster: 

*Definition of cancel culture*

*: *the practice or tendency of engaging in mass canceling (see CANCEL entry 1 sense 1e) as a way of expressing disapproval and exerting social pressure

My objection is I can't hunt areas without released birds and the crowds that will certainly follow without paying for released birds. If there were designated areas where one could hunt released birds and therefore must purchase the stamp to hunt said areas, have at it. If it got kids into the field and away from the screens, fantastic. So long as they understand hunting may not always be as easy as this. 
I do not believe the program will receive enough sales to sustain it. It may survive for 3 years, 5, maybe 10 years or more. I believe it was tried before. I'm not calling for its cancellation. But, I believe it will be cancelled by the powers that be once it shows unsustainability. That is more capitalism than anything else. No different than when PBS stopped airing (or aired very sporadically) Michigan-out-of-doors. I stopped donating because that was the only show I watch on PBS. I didn't call for PBS to be disbanded. But I'm not contributing to a channel I no longer watch. It's just that simple. And if I'm wrong, and this program catches its wind, and lasts for decades, well then the people got what they wanted and should continue. (And PBS has since aired MOOD regularly, and I again contribute regularly)


----------



## MILONEWOLF (Oct 28, 2013)

I recently bought my licenses online, in which I saw the $25.00 license for Pheasants. I will not be hunting for pheasants, at least not in Michigan. If it helped enhanced the habitat and secured more land, then I would be up for it. Might as well have people go to a shooting preserve and let them shoot a bird subsidized by the State of Michigan. Also, read that the MUCC was a proponent of this measure. Lost respect for them, will not join them. We will lose more pheasant hunters than those that will be recruited through this program.


----------



## Hackman (Aug 13, 2008)

MILONEWOLF said:


> I recently bought my licenses online, in which I saw the $25.00 license for Pheasants. I will not be hunting for pheasants, at least not in Michigan. If it helped enhanced the habitat and secured more land, then I would be up for it. Might as well have people go to a shooting preserve and let them shoot a bird subsidized by the State of Michigan. Also, read that the MUCC was a proponent of this measure. Lost respect for them, will not join them. We will lose more pheasant hunters than those that will be recruited through this program.


I understand your right to oppose stamp, but I question your desire by giving up pheasant hunting for such a small amount. Heck everybody just got $1400.00 stimulus. Pay your $25.00 get on enjoy life.


----------



## Josh R (Dec 4, 2010)

When you believe something is wrong do you do it anyways because it is only a small a mount?


----------



## trucker3573 (Aug 29, 2010)

You only have to buy the license if you actually see one?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Hackman (Aug 13, 2008)

Josh R said:


> When you believe something is wrong do you do it anyways because it is only a small a mount?


Heck, stop eating to protest stamp if your beliefs are so strong, this battle is over. You got to bend a little in life.


----------



## Hunters Edge (May 15, 2009)

That maybe, then again maybe not? There are many battles or skirmishes in a war. It is fairly conceivable that this war has just begun. 

Especially when there is far more private property in southern Michigan than there is state land. To add to this there are far more birds on private than state owned lands. The biggest issue has and will be gaining access.

For this and not having any money going to habitat I foresee many passing on the additional $25. I do foresee more effort and networking to gain access on private property. Possibly even leasing using it not just for pheasant hunting but additionally for other small game, waterfowl, and deer hunting. Only time will tell how the additional squeeze for $25 will go over.

It may just be the straw that broke the camel's back. One often forgets this nation came about resisting taxation.


----------



## Josh R (Dec 4, 2010)

Hackman said:


> Heck, stop eating to protest stamp if your beliefs are so strong, this battle is over. You got to bend a little in life.


I was bending until they pulled the rug out we were standing on, when they pulled a fast one and left the habitat out of the stamp I had enough....

They had a lotta different ways they could have done it but this was not a good choice. If we lose the same amount of hunters that we gain thru the stamp for the release sites is that a win or a loss? To me it is a loss but that is just 1 persons opinion, I hope they considered that thought


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

The way this thread is sounding I am excited to head up to verona and have the entire SGA to myself!


----------



## ccavacini (Mar 9, 2005)

Indiana has a game bird habitat stamp that cost the hunter 6.00. That money is to be used for habitat restoration and the buying of property for Lottery Draw hunts.
If you're lucky enough to win a lottery draw, you will have access to some of the best pheasant hunting any place. Most of the properties are in Indiana's pheasant range (North Western counties), centered around Benton County and are groomed for upland hunting.


----------



## Mark4486 (Oct 14, 2015)

Hackman said:


> I understand your right to oppose stamp, but I question your desire by giving up pheasant hunting for such a small amount. Heck everybody just got $1400.00 stimulus. Pay your $25.00 get on enjoy life.


something looked very familiar with your posts so i looked at the last time we had this conversation(last year). you seem to be really stuck on the cost concept. nobody cares about the money. its what they are doing with the money. no matter what anybody says you go back to that. i dont get what you dont get. all last year you called everybody cheap and said "its just $20" now a whole year later its the same story.


----------



## fordman1 (Dec 12, 2015)

MILONEWOLF said:


> I recently bought my licenses online, in which I saw the $25.00 license for Pheasants. I will not be hunting for pheasants, at least not in Michigan. If it helped enhanced the habitat and secured more land, then I would be up for it. Might as well have people go to a shooting preserve and let them shoot a bird subsidized by the State of Michigan. Also, read that the MUCC was a proponent of this measure. Lost respect for them, will not join them. We will lose more pheasant hunters than those that will be recruited through this program.


Yes and just today I get an email from MUCC, pushing people to buy the stamp and how great it will be, No thanks.


----------



## fordman1 (Dec 12, 2015)

As of last week 1500 have been sold.


----------



## Hackman (Aug 13, 2008)

Mark4486 said:


> something looked very familiar with your posts so i looked at the last time we had this conversation(last year). you seem to be really stuck on the cost concept. nobody cares about the money. its what they are doing with the money. no matter what anybody says you go back to that. i dont get what you dont get. all last year you called everybody cheap and said "its just $20" now a whole year later its the same story.


Whats your point? All you guys are pissed off about paying $25.00 , so pissed off that you say you are not paying the stamp and giving up pheasant hunting.. Well yea $25.00 if that stops you from pheasant hunting than yea I believe you got a screw loose. Like a member stated earlier, sounds like there will be alot of good areas vacant because you and others will be out of hunting the public areas.


----------



## Mark4486 (Oct 14, 2015)

Hackman said:


> Whats your point? All you guys are pissed off about paying $25.00 , so pissed off that you say you are not paying the stamp and giving up pheasant hunting.. Well yea $25.00 if that stops you from pheasant hunting than yea I believe you got a screw loose. Like a member stated earlier, sounds like there will be alot of good areas vacant because you and others will be out of hunting the public areas.


My point is nobody cares about the cost. They care about the use of the money which you don’t seem to get. I don’t know how else to spell this out for you. I would happily pay double that amount if I knew the money was for habitat.


----------



## Hackman (Aug 13, 2008)

Mark4486 said:


> My point is nobody cares about the cost. They care about the use of the money which you don’t seem to get. I don’t know how else to spell this out for you. I would happily pay double that amount if I knew the money was for habitat.


Like I said earlier, the battle is over. The Stamp program is good for the next 5 years I believe, get over it. I guess you can organize a political group and complain, go for it. Good luck .No one complained when the one year it was free 2019.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

fordman1 said:


> As of last week 1500 have been sold.


I imagine that's from people who are purchasing the combo license and Turkey license so far..
In Pennsylvania in 2016 the stamp was free and they had 75000 Pheasant hunters.
In 2017 _The stamp was 29.60 and they dropped to 43000._
It's early and more will be sold.
Currently at 1500 that is 37500 dollars in revenue and would buy 2500 birds.Im sure the dnr will take a cut again and some Hens may be mixed in a little and then figure in the amount of birds that are not recovered or end up on private to be accessible and were looking at maybe 2000 birds possibly.Everyone gets one bird.
People do not need a stamp to hunt private property so I imagine private property next to release areas will be just like private next to a game preserve and they will be hunting for free of someone's dime.
I will buy the stamp because I do ok hunting wild birds but I know many of the people who I take out once maybe twice a year are probably not going to go from what I see and hear from them.
I guess I won't be taking friends with me like before.
There goes the memories.


----------



## Chessieman (Dec 8, 2009)

Hackman said:


> Whats your point? All you guys are pissed off about paying $25.00 , so pissed off that you say you are not paying the stamp and giving up pheasant hunting.. Well yea $25.00 if that stops you from pheasant hunting than yea I believe you got a screw loose. Like a member stated earlier, sounds like there will be alot of good areas vacant because you and others will be out of hunting the public areas.



I think of what these bird hunters are complaining about is paying for the released birds on state land that DOES NOT have birds released. How are you going to fight a ticket if you are Woodcock or Partridge hunting on these non released state game lands? Birdhunter, hens released by the state would be illegal to shoot even if they are released by authorized personnel.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

Chessieman said:


> I think of what these bird hunters are complaining about is paying for the released birds on state land that DOES NOT have birds released. How are you going to fight a ticket if you are Woodcock or Partridge hunting on these non released state game lands? Birdhunter, hens released by the state would be illegal to shoot even if they are released by authorized personnel.


Yes.I was stating that if they release some hens that would be taken away from the amount of birds available to harvest


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

Chessieman said:


> I think of what these bird hunters are complaining about is paying for the released birds on state land that DOES NOT have birds released. How are you going to fight a ticket if you are Woodcock or Partridge hunting on these non released state game lands? Birdhunter, hens released by the state would be illegal to shoot even if they are released by authorized personnel.


That seems easy. If you didnt shoot a pheasant or at a pheasant you can fight that ticket. No different than being accused of duck hunting or deer hunting while I am grouse hunting. If i didnt do it no issue.


----------



## Hackman (Aug 13, 2008)

With the $25 Stamp and Release Program probably has brought a lot of attention to the elusive wild Michigan pheasant. Younger hunters may have never even seen a wild pheasant. So this program could work to increase overall awareness which would lead different/better management of money in future.


----------



## Tomfive5 (Dec 15, 2015)

Hackman said:


> With the $25 Stamp and Release Program probably has brought a lot of attention to the elusive wild Michigan pheasant. Younger hunters may have never even seen a wild pheasant. So this program could work to increase overall awareness which would lead different/better management of money in future.


Ive never seen a 10 point buck, but that doesnt make me want to hunt a high fence operation.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

DirtySteve said:


> That seems easy. If you didnt shoot a pheasant or at a pheasant you can fight that ticket. No different than being accused of duck hunting or deer hunting while I am grouse hunting. If i didnt do it no issue.


The logic of the confusion is baffling, there are also turkeys, deer in the woods with grouse yet they don't get tickets for hunting turkey so long as they don't shoot a turkey. If I am antelope hunting and see a mule deer or elk I don't shoot them, it's a pretty simple concept that people can't seem to grasp.

On the numbers, I would hate to break some bad news to opponents but 1500 is way over early projections because most licenses are purchased in September and October don't quote me on it but I think it's over 90% I don't have the time or the energy to look it up or ask so I will leave it to the gang prove me wrong.

Last but not least, to me "habitat" is the land that the way God created it, not square grasslands to promote the existence of an invasive species. I just got back from Montana fishing and spent some time on the ranch and noticed the pheasant are not in creek bottoms (hay bottoms) like they use to be, they have moved to the prairie in the sagebrush I am speculating because the raptors and vermin have increased in the creek bottoms so they moved to better cover.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

Tomfive5 said:


> Ive never seen a 10 point buck, but that doesnt make me want to hunt a high fence operation.


Well in this case it would be never seeing a buck period not a 10pt buck. Not a great analogy. 

It would be more like saying you have never caught a musky and you wont fish in a public lake where the DNR releases musky.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

DirtySteve said:


> Well in this case it would be never seeing a buck period not a 10pt buck. Not a great analogy.
> 
> It would be more like saying you have never caught a musky and you wont fish in a public lake where the DNR releases musky.


This analogy isn't the best either.
Fish stocking is very cost effective and the return is high.The survival rate is well documented with the fisheries.They live long and survive for years.How long does a fish live to become a 30 inch brown trout, a 8 pound coho or a 35 pound salmon.
A released Pheasant is lucky to make it a few weeks.
If fish stocking was 15 dollars a fish the program would not exist.
Apple to orange's comparatively speaking.The fish also have the neccessary habitat for success.

We don't even have the land and habitat to expand this Pheasant release program because we lack in the habitat needed for it.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

What is a habitat? If you did nothing with the millions spent on pheasant habitat it would turn into productive woodland/wetland and the fittest animals would find their place in that ecosystem. Pheasant habitat as we know it in Michigan is square sections of grass to hold pheasant for the pleasure of running with dogs and killing.... nothing more. Those who get their soapbox and claim themselves to be more sporting are usually the ones that roust pheasant in the off-season for pleasure while putting more pressure than what is needed on wild birds.

If I do one thing more with the Michigan DNR it's to stop running dogs in areas with dedicated pheasant habitat and restrict them to reserves and private land. Like you guys said we have preserves and they're cheap so use them and leave the habitat and wild birds alone and you want a real hunt go to Montana as I do.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

birdhntr said:


> This analogy isn't the best either.
> Fish stocking is very cost effective and the return is high.The survival rate is well documented with the fisheries.They live long and survive for years.How long does a fish live to become a 30 inch brown trout, a 8 pound coho or a 35 pound salmon.
> A released Pheasant is lucky to make it a few weeks.
> If fish stocking was 15 dollars a fish the program would not exist.
> ...


Splake have been stocked for decades and they do not reproduce. They are entirely for fisherman to catch for sport and are not used for any sort of conservation reason. Their survival rate varies by the size and amount of years they are raised before stocking..... also time of year released. Tiger muskies are another but those are typically used for a specific purpose in an ecosystem.


----------



## birdhntr (Jan 25, 2014)

DirtySteve said:


> Splake have been stocked for decades and they do not reproduce. They are entirely for fisherman to catch for sport and are not used for any sort of conservation reason. Their survival rate varies by the size and amount of years they are raised before stocking..... also time of year released. Tiger muskies are another but those are typically used for a specific purpose in an ecosystem.


They live is my point and fish stocking costs are nothing compared to the Pheasant stamp cost and return values.I didn't mention reproduction.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

Comparing fish to pheasant is not logical but if you must compare some math might enlighten you. The DNR spends $7,242,118 per year to raise 21M fish. If that amount were spent on a pheasant that would be roughly 482,000 pheasants and how much revenue and hunter interest would that create for habitat projects? 

Next MPRI has spent roughly $8M in the last 5 years, have hunter and pheasant numbers gone up or down with that expenditure, where is the ROI? The bottom line is Michigan needs both the MPRI and MPHI to get the pheasant populations, hunters, and funding on the rise. I 100% guarantee PF will back me on that statement.


----------



## Josh R (Dec 4, 2010)

Pen-Raised Pheasants as a Hunter Recruitment Tool? | Outdoor Life


Montana will spend up to $1 million on rearing and releasing pen-raised pheasants for youth hunting days to help with hunter recruitment




www.outdoorlife.com













Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk


----------



## shaffe48b (Oct 22, 2019)

Howitzer said:


> Comparing fish to pheasant is not logical but if you must compare some math might enlighten you. The DNR spends $7,242,118 per year to raise 21M fish. If that amount were spent on a pheasant that would be roughly 482,000 pheasants and how much revenue and hunter interest would that create for habitat projects?
> 
> Next MPRI has spent roughly $8M in the last 5 years, have hunter and pheasant numbers gone up or down with that expenditure, where is the ROI? The bottom line is Michigan needs both the MPRI and MPHI to get the pheasant populations, hunters, and funding on the rise. I 100% guarantee PF will back me on that statement.


I think the fish stocking analogy is valid for people who seem to be against bird releases no matter what in any form. At the end of the day it really depends on how effective the fish or bird stocking is. I fully believe that if pheasant stocking was able to achieve a wild or breeding population most people would be all over it. Of course there are probably fish stocking programs that don't meet this criteria either and I hope they receive equal amounts of scrutiny.


----------

