Another Australian state falls

[Margaret]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/20 ... 434480.htm

[David]

Thats what peta wants for us. We need to stay informed and active to keep them at bay.

[scotton]

I don't understand why they felt compelled to ban something for which they only issued 376 licenses. Sounds like it was doing a pretty good job banning itself. They adopted this legislation because they knew there wouldn't be a fight, and it makes them look "extra-green".

[Casper]

"But overwhelmingly most people concentrated on the cruelty, describing duck and quail shooting as this unnecessary barbaric pastime."

Is that why people look at me funny, cause I look barbaric and I am living in the past?

Oh well at least I have one good quality going for me

[gunner]

David,
It can happen here.
Just this week our IDNR enlisted the help of PETA and HSUS to stop preserve hunting of ungulates and exotics here.
HSUS is crowing about it.....

08/11/2005

WASHINGTON – The HSUS praised the Indiana Department of Natural Resources for its decision to ban the hunting of deer and exotic animals in high-fenced facilities—also known as "canned hunts"—starting in 2006. The announcement was made at a press conference today held by Department of Natural Resources director Kyle Hupfer. There are approximately 225 deer or elk farms in the state with 125 farms also permitted to have other exotic species.

"The Indiana Department of Natural Resources has taken the lead in outlawing this unsporting and inhumane practice and we hope that other states will follow," said Heidi Prescott, senior vice president for The HSUS. "Tens of thousands of animals in Indiana will be spared from being shot behind fences with no chance of escape. Hunters and animal advocates agree that there's nothing sporting about shooting a tame animal trapped behind a fence."

Although advertised under a variety of names—most frequently "hunting preserves," "game ranches," or "shooting preserves"—canned hunts violate the hunting community's standard of "fair chase" by confining animals to cages or fenced enclosures. The types of exotic animals killed can include zebras, Corsican rams, blackbuck antelope, and water buffalo. The HSUS estimates that there are more than 1,000 hunting ranches scattered across more than 25 states, offering "no kill, no pay" opportunities to kill confined exotic animals. The animals are bred in captivity, purchased from animal dealers, or, in some cases, retired from roadside zoos and circuses, so they do not fear contact with humans and make easy targets.

Federal bills S. 304 and H.R. 1688--The Sportsmanship in Hunting Act--have been introduced in the U.S. Senate and the House to prohibit the interstate commerce of exotic animals who are destined to be killed for trophies at canned hunting facilities.

For more information on canned hunting, please visit: www.StopCannedHunts.org.

The Humane Society of the United States is the nation's largest animal protection organization representing more than 9 million members and constituents. The non-profit organization is a mainstream voice for animals, with active programs in companion animals and equine protection, disaster preparedness and response, wildlife and habitat protection, animals in research and farm animal welfare. The HSUS protects all animals through education, investigation, litigation, legislation, advocacy, and field work. The group is based in Washington and has numerous field representatives across the country. On the web at www.hsus.org.

[kninebirddog]

Great....SO now these animals will either be slaughtered for teh meat ...with the people loosing their lively hoods

Yes I do not agree with those who have a 30 acre pasture where the animal can not escape BUt at the same token A person who has put that much time and effort in to raising these animals for people to hunt why shouldn't they be allowed to have a high fence compound for people so hunt in also to protect their investment of feed and other things to get an animal to trophy type size if it wasn't high fence the neighber woulfd make the money I know plenty of places in texas have 200 acre high fence and it is anything but easy

HSUS and People Executing Tame Animals...these people though the have lots of money are about the most CLUELESS people there are...I don';t agree with animal abuse either but these people are whacked in the head if we left our game animals in their management they would have these animal dying of disease and stravation in a few years for no one to enjoy :shock:

[versatileguy]

So what if they ban canned hunts of exotic animals and whitetails? :roll: Anyone who does isn't really a hunter or hunting anyway. It is like shooting cows that come to the bell when it is feeding time. It gives hunting and real sportsman a bad name. You want to shoot an exotic, go to Africa. If you want to shoot a whitetail, then get out and hunt. The whitetail is all over in the USA, real hunting opportunties for them abound. :thumbright: There are trophy bucks in sight of many city lights.

[Casper]

Its not so much how you hunt or where you hunt its the fact that they are taking away something that you love to do. If a person wants to hunt behind an enclosure so be it. I wouldnt do it but if I new of a person that was say crippled in some way and this was the only way for him/her to enjoy a hunt I would pat that person on the back and wish them luck.

From what little I know about some plantations or preserves is realy nothing more than a "canned hunt". Correct me if im wrong but dont they release quail to supplement the wild population and the demand of the hunters with memberships? Dont they try and make it as much of a "real" hunt as possible.

Hunting over a bait pile is almost a gimmie but this is done all over N. America and there are no fences but still a canned hunt if that is how you look at it.

To each their own but the people that go that route shouldnt be badgered by other like minded idividuals (ie: other hunters)

JMO

[kninebirddog]

Sure and you might as well ban field trials also...cause that will be the next step as they are not natural to the terrain your holding the trials on.....

The ie canned hunts that give exotics hunts a bad name are jokes ...but those who have done it right the hunts can be just as hard if not harder then sitting in a tree stand on the edge of a corn field

It all comes down to being at the right place at the right time...and you still have to hit what you aim at and I ahve seen people miss whitetail at 10 yards in a low fence area and also on the Ie mangement areas when deer can right under there stands

many people are so busy that they can not afford to spoend the time as they have to work...but they still like to do what they can ,.....and in the waet archery deer hunts in arizona are about a joke and the rifle and everything else is a draw not like back east...

again here it should be freedon of choice and those that do spend the time to make hunts a fair as possible should NOT be punished and put in the same league as those who have pen raised pets for targets There is a difference...

But this is america and if we let HSUS and PETA people keep chipping away like this passing here we will ALL LOSE

[Casper]

and in the waet archery deer hunts in arizona are about a joke

[kninebirddog]

and in the waet archery deer hunts in arizona are about a joke

Oops rented fingers WEST

I hate it when i do that no only transposed but missed the letter also

[ezzy333]

I agree! Hunting farms or preserves or whatever you want to call them are fulfilling a need so why are we trying to stop them?

So what if they ban canned hunts of exotic animals and whitetails? Anyone who does isn't really a hunter or hunting anyway

Why do you feel a need to deny someone the opportunity to hut a preserve? As you said it isn't hunting to you so why do we care?

Like knine said, there are some good ones and some bad ones. I don't want to kill a penned or better stated, a caged animal, but if that animal has a couple of hundred or a couple of thousand acres to run in then it is just as good and hard as any other hunting many times.

There needs to be regs and maybe some changes, but it isn't our concern to stop a viable business that fulfills a need in this country. After all we are a capitalist country that promotes private enterprize to fulfill and needs they can find. Someone found one!

Ezzy

[llewgor]

There needs to be regs and maybe some changes, but it isn't our concern to stop a viable business that fulfills a need in this country. After all we are a capitalist country that promotes private enterprize to fulfill and needs they can find. Someone found one!

Ezzy

Well said Ezzy

[snips]

I guess I just have a hard time understanding the need to shoot fenced corn fed animals. What kind of thrill is that? I drive by these places and get a little ill thinking about it. Thas just me, something of a soft touch I guess.

[kninebirddog]

That is where the exotic hunt get a bad name are those UNETHICAL farmers who have small areas....that the animal has no chance to escape or are like a pen raised horse persay for the tameness.....
We take alot of people over to Texas and have scouted for the ethical ranches and I to have been appaled at places that have a 30 acre fenced area where it is a pick and shoot operation those are awful but when you get on those ranches with 1000 2000 plus acres wide open with cover and the animal run away from you ...your talking a different story...I have even seen a 500 acre in the cedar country which was very hard hunting as there was a ton of cover and the animals didn't come to you they saw you they were GONE.....
as with anything trying to do stuff as ethically as possible is the Key....matter a fact Texas is a leading exporter of animal back to there native territories if it wasn't for these ranches alot of these animals would be extinct...the pere david the barashinga the Black buck the Axis and the list goes on.....

there are people who love the meat and the mount on the wall but they work to much to be able to go to india africa south america for the major hunts But guess what alot of those are compounds also...New Zeland has a red stag population in one area which is mountain but high fence and very hard to hunt ...so whats the difference if they fly there or spend the money here in america. with these hunts there is food and a person making a living at the taxidermy work and alot of the hunters even donate their meat to the feed the hungry programs the processors make a living...cabela and bass pro make money from selling the camo gear and the the ammuntion company who makes those bullets and cartrides the hunters shoot...and then the feed stores make money with the added nutrition the rancher has to feed these animals so that the antlers grow.....So this hurts more then just the rancher who has opened his land for this opportunity.
Back to freedom of choice choice here is/was your able to go and hunt something different or Not

I mean we can put a person out of business for offering another the opportunity to hunt a trophy animal but we will let the cigarette companies keep on killing the public ...so where is the ethics in that....

[gunner]

Snips,
A number of years ago the media was filming one of the NSTRA championships at Amo.
The news photographer had footage of buckets of dead quail rotting.
Thank god it was never televised.
Something that may bother some, those folk may not consider that they themselves participate in something that others have issues.

[mountaindogs]

....offering "no kill, no pay" opportunities to kill confined exotic animals. The animals are bred in captivity, purchased from animal dealers, or, in some cases, retired from roadside zoos and circuses, so they do not fear contact with humans and make easy targets.

Federal bills S. 304 and H.R. 1688--The Sportsmanship in Hunting Act--have been introduced in the U.S. Senate and the House to prohibit the interstate commerce of exotic animals who are destined to be killed for trophies at canned hunting facilities. .

I have never been to keen on high-fence facilities - got a bad taste in my mouth for them when I was working at a wildlife rehab facility in Africa and we were offered $40,000 (by a high fence game ranch) for two male lions born in captivity and raised by hand. These lions licked my hand for crying out loud! They were not "fair chase!"
However, it does not seem a big leap to ban hunting pen-reared game birds and this frightens me. I am generally against all out bans of things. Make a minimum acrage or something and restrict buying of animals from zoos and such, but banning? That seems like one giant step towards a future that bans field trials, hunt tests and pen reared quail all together. Worrisome!

Laurie

[portsider44]

I am not a big fan of the high fence operations, but at the same time I think they fill a need. For some hunters they may have the money to go on a hunt but not have the time to do it right. Finding a lease, setting up stands, working food plots and or keeping feeders full & working, takes a lot of time.

For some they would not be able to hunt if they had to make this type of time commitment. Where as the high fence places take care of all of that for them. Plus the operators know what there game movement is doing & can help put folks in the right spot.

My biggest concern would be the size of the fenced in area & the type of cover it allows.

WHat I would think the key issue for us (those that hunt) is that they are using unfair chase to take this action. Which could affect bird hunters down the road. For a brief move think like the folks at PETA/HSUS:

A field full of hunters walking in line with another group at the end of the field. Now throw in several highly trained dogs with e-collars on. Plus don't forget the guns. Autos & double guns with custom chokes & ammo designed at making it easier to hit kill & sometimes cripple birds.

What about the peserve hunts? Feeling good about your recent raise you decide that you can afford 30 birds today. So you have 30 turned out in the south field of your favorite perserve. After waiting 30 mintues, it's time to unload the dogs & load up the shotgun. You go out to the south field & start hunting. Guess what you found birds there lots of them, must have been 20-30 in that covey. It reminds you of the old days when flushing double digit coveys happend all the time.

For the non-hunter how fair of a chase is that? Plus considering PETA & HSUS how do you think they feel about the use of e-collars? Not only to they hate the fact that we hunt, they hate that we use e-collars to force dogs (not saying I think they are used for that) to do what we wish. Plus what about the dogs that get shot or medical issues cause by us hunting them (heat, snakes, barb wire fences, run in with other wild animals).

SO any attack on the freedom to hunt is an issue that should be near & dear to our hearts, because we could be next.

[gunner]

Perserve hunting has never floated my boat, but I'm aware of the steps that the anti's are working within the system to chip away at all recreational hunting...and fishing.

Turn sportsman against one another, form allegiences with government agencies. work activilly against the sportsman thru the media. What we're seeing is a text book study from "The Friends of Animals" anti-hunting group of twenty or more years ago.

Here's another of this weeks "them against us"
Not my cup of tea, again, but I can feel for those traditional houndsmen.

Posted on Sun, Aug. 14, 2005


S.C. agency looks to end bear baying

Associated Press


COLUMBIA, S.C. - For years, hunters have engaged in a practice called bear baying, in which they tie a captive bear to a stake and allow hunting dogs to bark at it as part of a training exercise.

Animal rights groups say the practice is cruel, and now the state Department of Natural Resources is taking steps to end it.

One section of state law states that bear baying with captive bears is allowed. But another law, which hasn't been actively enforced in the past, makes the ownership of captive bears illegal without a state permit.

The Natural Resources Department now is requiring the owners of all captive bears to get permits for those animals. No new permits will be allowed after this year, meaning no new bears can be adopted.

If a captive bear is pregnant, its owners can get a permit for the cub after its birth. Birth control methods will be required for the bears after the permitting process is done.

The change means bear baying in the state will last only as long as this generation of captive bears lives, about 25 or 30 years.

"This is the best way we know to handle it," said Skip Still, who manages the bear program for the state. He expects to process about 30 bear permits.

Hunters in South Carolina have been using captive bears to train dogs to flush out and corner wild bears for decades. Bear hunter Dennis Chastain said he found a reference to bear baying in writings from the early 1700s.

But animal rights groups decry the use of live animals to train hunting dogs.

"This isn't the 1800s anymore," said Ledy Vankavage, an attorney for the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. "Hopefully, civilization has progressed in its compassion for animals since then."

Vankavage was encouraged that South Carolina officials are trying to end bear baying, even if the method might take a while.

"If that's what they're trying to do to stop this in a politically correct way, more power to them," Vankavage said.

Hunting dogs also train by chasing foxes and rabbits in large fenced enclosures in South Carolina, but there have been few complaints about that practice, hunters say.

"They've isolated us," said Robert Chapman, who keeps a bear behind a Pickens County hunting lodge mainly to use for training dogs. "There's something about bears. People see them as cute and cuddly."

Dog hunts for bears are limited to six days each October in South Carolina, and are only allowed in Oconee, Pickens and Greenville counties. Hunting bears without dogs also is allowed for six days in those mountain counties, where wildlife surveys show the bear population is growing.

Houndsmen aren't satisfied with running their bear dogs for a six-day season. They plan to ask state legislators to introduce a bill calling for a separate "running" season, when their dogs would be allowed to chase bears in the wild, but the hunters wouldn't be allowed to shoot the bears.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information from: The State, http://www.thestate.com

Stick around. I predict they will go after the wing shooting preserves and "shoot to retrieve trialing and testing" very shortly.

[ezzy333]

I am going to suggest that we forget that PETA/HSUS exist when making a decission on right or wrong but rather use your own common sense. Trying to appease the anti group will gain you nothing. They will still find fault with it. The general public has a little more sense than they are given credit for. Do what you feel is right as long as it is humane and then stand behind your choice without backing down from it. That will gain you more respect than anything else you can do. Listen to your fellow hunters when trying to judge your actions It will be much more realistic than a group that will find fault with whatever you do.


Ezzy

[kninebirddog]

SCI and other Hunting type organization are trying to help self control these hunting ranches...having rules for fair chase ....WE need to band together an not let these antis win
We need to check out what is ethical and what isn't support those that are doing the best and the most right of things...we do not need more government regulations

[Boids!]

It's not good when Peta or HSUS gains a victory as it weakens responsible sportsman who are the premier stewards of the land. "Remember, looking at land, the home owner likes that nice clean look. You, me and the biologist? We like weeds, tangles and over grown brush." (author unknown) It's all in the eye of the beholder some would say. You and I know it's all about habitat, and the home owner needs to get on the same page. There may be a trend begining in this direction... we'll see.

Hunting surves a purpose as does maintaining wildlife habitat. The two are interrelated, or linked if you will. These canned hunts serve what purpose? Managing the biomass per acre? I don't think so. Harvesting wild game is our duty, as it's part of the management equation. To some of us, it's a religion. Killing exotic animals in closed quarters is beneth me. I would never do it. In fact, I would have to find something else to do with my time. Wild game, habitat management, harvesting that game to manage the bio mass per acre is the way to go. To me, there's value, purpose, nobility and good that comes from it, inspite of the killing. It's because of us hunters, liberals like Peta get to see wild game. Without us, the wild game disapears. I truely believe this. Look at DU, QU (kind of) and FF. Hunters as I define us should put these canned hunting preserves out of business and focus our energies on establishing native local habitat and bring back the quality hunting on what's left for us to roam freely in pursuit of wild game.
Doing so weakens these dummies like Peta and HSUS.

My 2 cents
Biods![/i]

[ezzy333]

But why do you want to put all hunting preserves out of business? If you do that there won't be any place for me to train my dog or hunt for 6 months out of the year or a place to hold out trials within a 100 miles of here.

If they have customers then there must be a demand for such places. And there are rules on how they are to be run. If you see things that just isn't right then lets try to change those things without everyone being considered quilty.

Ezzy

[kninebirddog]

If you put what people THINK are canned hunts which yes there are unethical people in ANY facet we do...But to ban and blanket preserves which is what it will boil down to you'll put many people out of business .....pretty much most of Texas ranchers make their living on hutners and Not the beef and sheep..
My lively hood is a pheasant preserve..you want to me out of business also...Thanks

[Boids!]

I may have struck a nerve here. I have to do the math, and arrive at the answer that best suits me, the land, and others who, I suppose, pursue wild birds.

Seems to me that so long as there are these preserves out there, there's no need to focus on habitat in general. For quail to increase in numbers, they need 8000 + acres of habitat. That's a tall order. If you have less than that, you will see populations dwindle over time. I believe it was Fred Guthrey - Okla. State Univ that provided this info.

Having a preserve pretty much takes away the incentive to convert to the required habitat. Why bother? It takes several landowners to accomplish this in many cases. If the alternative to the real deal is a preserve, then all you are doing in my opinion is setting us all up. You can run your preserves, but please don't ignore the real issue, habitat, and continue expliot the lack of habitat by planting birds (isnt that what this is all about?). If you ingnore putting energy against habitat, then the equation says you should find other work...sorry.

Focus on habitat. Maryland used to havest millions of wild Bobs. Maryland of all places..... Think about it. Oklahoma was once considered marginal quail country... Now it's reliably one of the best. Habitat.

Do the math.

[ezzy333]

Boids, I'm not sure I follow just what you are trying to say. And some of the numbers seem out of line. I have to think if 8000 acres is required for a bird that doesn't travel we are in trouble. Do you realize that is 12 square miles? I think if you want an area that would hold enough quail to be really good hunting that figure may be accurate. Otherwise you could pretty much eradicate them with a good dog and many days of hunting a smaller area.

I'm also confused about your connection between habitat and preserves. Can you explain how one interferes with the other.


Maybe I'm just dense but I do need help.

Ezzy

[Margaret]

Ezzy, there is a big debate going on in NZ now about gamefarms.

Our F&G regulations state that no wild gamebirds or trout can be "sold" for hunting (not the wording but you get the idea I'm sure), yet there are game bird farms now.

People are concerned that this is another Govt ploy to take hunting, once one of the main pursuits of outdoors people here until it was advertised as politically incorrect to our youth, from
the people of NZ and this ties in with taking away our guns.

Our Govt is labour party like Australia.

People are suspicious that it may end up the only places we can "hunt" are gamefarms, and shooting pen raised feeder fed
gamebirds is absolutely no way like getting out into our countryside and hunting wild birds that are wary and cunning and
test both hunter and dog admirably.

Also the majority of us couldn't afford the price.

Now figure if people are encouraged to hunt gamefarms then
there is not so much the incentive for the Govt to put funds into
managing habitat. They have you all boxed up where they can manage you; they can cut back on managing the habitat, and probably cut back on the public land you used to hunt.

That's what they have done here. Every year there is some Govt or local body taking away our public hunting access, but it appears youths screaming around on trail bikes are OK. from what I observe, heck I saw a ute drive into the dog exercise area towing a trailer with a trail bike today so they can scream around the forest walking tracks and flatten a few dogs and people.

Sorry, grumpy tonite

[Boids!]

Ezzy,

8000 acres is what Guthrey noted. Quail numbers have fallen off percipiticiously since the 1980's. You look around and think you see plenty of habitat, but you don't see enough to "grow birds." A section (640 acres) of killer habitat will sustain a population birds for a while, but year after year, the population will fall. I'm not a biologist. I do trust these guys as they are the experts. If we listen to their conclusions, follow their science, we can at least attempt to get our quail back to sustained huntable populations.

Think about the previous post... Game farms are a perfect ploy for the gov't. You (we) are being duped based on our "here and now desires." Why put forth the effort to improve habitat when you can hunt today in artifical environments (game farms wouldn't hold the numbers of wild brids for a lack of habitat). Keep that going and what does the next 10 years hold for us? Seems to me it'll only get worse, leading to an ever increasing lack of interest in habitat management by those with the power to do something.

I think if you had your druthers... you would rather run your dogs on good habitat chasing good population of wild birds.

It's not going to be easy. I've spent the last 5 years in AZ. As Web Parton put it... "The lower 2/3rds of the state is one massive strip of unbroked quail habitat." When the rains come, and grazing is kept in check... lot's of birds for everyone.

All we need to do is change the perception of land owners from land that is characterized by fields of fescue to land that is full of weeds, brush, smaller fields with plenty of edge. Then elect officials that get it, and will do something about it. Environmentalist, Conservations and hunters alike should be on the same page. We need to stop electing officals that are not on the same planet as you and me too.

Boids

[ezzy333]

I don't know where to start. You are living in a different world than I. I live in a state that has no or very little public land. Our habitat or lack of it is private ground. If it is to improve we have to educate our neighbors and not the government. The further away we can keep government the better off we will be. They are incapable of providing or protecting the habitat from Washington. Always have been and always will be. We the hunters and fishers will have to protect and provide our own and that is the way it should be in a free society.

How many game farms there are has no bearing on government provided habitat. And I hope there always will be game farms as long as there is a need. Again that is called free enterprise. I am going to go look at one this afternoon as the one I belonged to last year as been sold and is changing it's focus to providing a spot for hunters from the city.

I can think of no better place, at least in this area, to train puppies or to have a place to work with your dogs for 8 months a year at a reasonable cost. We here in this area will never see a large number of birds again because we are planting corn and beans from road to road. Land is too expensive to let it lay idle which would help the bird population.

If we are to survive it will be through our efforts. Efforts to work with our farmers, who are the worlds greatest conservationist, and the conservation agencies and specific clubs that are trying to help also. And in your country it it is pretty much the same. If you want something done and done right then do it locally with your friends and neighbors. Waiting or relying on government to solve your problems will be a disaster as it always has been.

I have found through many years of living the less government you have the better off you will be. I can't think of a single thing they can do better in our sporting world than we can do ourselves. Why would any intelligent person think a government official is smarter or more capable than yourself/

If there is a demand for game farms lets hope someone is smart enough to provide them. At the same time if there are other conservation issues you are concerned about then its up to you to work on those and not the government. The government is here to provide defense for our country and most anything else they try to do they mess up. No ones fault but you can't do the job from a desk in Washington. It must be done from the field you are in.

Ezzy

[llewgor]

Boids
I love to hunt the way you what it . Only problem is a lot of other people what to do that too and there's not enough areas to do it your way. Maybe where you live but not here in Sacramento.
You can't turn farm land into weeds. So you can't leave ditches with weeds in them, that will send seeds out into the fields. You can't move the water in a ditch when it's full of weeds. We have enough water issues here you can't add to them. Elected Officials wouldn't last trying to change that.
There are areas where you can hunt wild, but if you took all the people who hunt on clubs there, you would wipe it out. I have a friend with 800 acres, but his 2 boys hunt that alone.(as they should)
The season here for wild is from the 2nd week of Nov. to the 2nd week of Dec. That would shorten and maybe you'd have to have a draw for areas, like you do Deer.
At the club it's 3rd week of Sep. to 3rd week of Mar. The club is only close the month of Jun. The rest of the year you can train, hunt test, trial and fish.
So i guess what I'm trying to say here, if you take away the game farm you just took away any pheasant hunting for me. If you've leave it up to an elected official I will lose both and my friend will lose the farm because they have been trying to take that away for years to turn it into a natural habitant area.( with NO hunting)

[Boids!]

Why don't farmers leave any edge? Fence Rows? Native Grass..? Why do ranchers graze the public lands to the bare dirt??

Gov't doesn't help? Ever hear of CRP?

The Conservation Reserve Program reduces soil erosion, protects the Nation's ability to produce food and fiber, reduces sedimentation in streams and lakes, improves water quality, establishes wildlife habitat, and enhances forest and wetland resources. It encourages farmers to convert highly erodible cropland or other environmentally sensitive acreage to vegetative cover, such as tame or native grasses, wildlife plantings, trees, filterstrips, or riparian buffers. Farmers receive an annual rental payment for the term of the multi-year contract.

What about initiatives for Quail?

The Northern Bobwhite Quail Habitat/Upland Bird Initiative, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm Service Agency Conservation Reserve Program, aims to create 250,000 acres of essential upland bird habitat in 35 states nationwide. In Ohio, the goal is 14,200 acres. The new program seeks to create nesting and brood-rearing cover along cropland field borders, while establishing travel corridors.

Grassland buffers along crop fields enhance the movement of existing quail coveys and are a critical component of this restoration program. The program will provide a much-needed habitat niche that is lacking in counties within the existing quail range.

This is just the begining.... This needs to get executed on a MASSIVE SCALE. Unless private land owners are truley good stewards of the land, they'll either need a gov't subsidy, or they will continue to plant fescue or disc the entire plot of land they farm.


Call local officials and find out what they are doing about this...your help is needed. Then maybe in 10 years, you'll have suitable land to hunt both public and private leases... Yes you'll see good quality leases come out of this.. for probably what you pay for pen raised brids....

Biods

[Ayres]

I've read a limited amount of all the information in the past few posts (every one of them is very long) and I've only got a couple things to say on the topic since I'm not very well educated on this specific subject.

First, I see no reason why a population of quail can't live on 640 acres of land and survive. If they can live there for awhile, why must that population dwindle into extinction rather than stay at a constant level that the acreage can handle? A study can be quoted but I'd like to see the data to make such a determination and reasoning behind it, not just the determination. This is not a flame, it's a legitimate request.

Secondly, here in Illinois we do have programs that encourage farmers to leave buffer zones and fencerows for extra wildlife habitat. We even have prairie restoration projects dotted through the State that encourage native grass growth. I always thought these programs were a good thing and a sign of turning things around from the "till fencerow to fencerow" mentality that destroyed survivable habitat for a lot of native wildlife. From what I've read I don't see any disagreement with that.

Ranchers grazing the public lands to the bare dirt, though, that's a whole different can of worms that I'd rather not get into. It has to do with grazing and water rights, early settler laws, money, and "the way it's always been." Those things make anything hard to change when every one of them are adverse to the cause.

[ezzy333]

Farmers plant every acre they can because they are trying to make a living. They are still selling there produce for the same prices they were 30, 40, or 50 years ago but are paying the higher cost of gasoline and all other commodities they use.They dont need fence rows when they have no livestock. Native grasses are almost worthless for grazing or hay production and you can't use or sell the hay. And I've not seen public land grazed to bare dirt. If they did that they wouldn't have any pasture next year. What they do is take long term leases on the public ground and improve it by constructing dams and ponds that provide water for all of the wildlife and the cattle grazing every year do keep most of the brushy plants from getting a foot hold and ruining the environment for the birds.

Yes, Ive heard of CRP. It is a program that allows a farmer to take some of his marginal ground out of production and still get some income off of that land through government payment that we the tax payer pays. One of the side effects has been more land that is somewhat better environment for the game birds. But it wasn't designed to help in that way. It has been a bonus to us and if the government would just let the local people make the rules maybe we could let the CRP ground stand without mowing if a weed rears its ugly head. Then we would really have some improved areas for the birds,

Each ore the programs you mention sound really good and i hope they are implmented again with local control. For you see there is no reason to spend millions of dollars for quail habitat here in Northern IL since there are no quail. Some place that could support quail and needs more habitat it sounds great. But remember this is all coming out of your pocket and mine too and I'm not going to push or support a quail habitat fee when I don't get any benefit from it.

There is just no way one size fits all and that is what the federal government is and does. We will never be able to take the thousands of acres you are talking about out of private hands and make it public land. That again takes the land out of the tax base and puts into a catagory of tax supported land. There go the schools and the county governments that it will absolutely break.

I think if you really think about it, the things you are talking about sound wonderful to us sportsmen. But I don't see how we can get the rest of the country to support increased taxes, higher food prices, and many less jobs for a larger work force so we can feel good about our wildlife. And one thing I do know since you are talking about my life work is that most farmers are the worlds best conservationist since their living comes directly from the land and they need it tomorrow if they are going to live year after year on that land.

Improved haitat on a local limited basis is a wonderful idea and I think doable. Massive redesignation of private and public groumds will just be more than we can handle with all of the side problems it would cause. Lets all work for what we need to improve our local situations and see what we can get done.

Ezzy

[Addict]

I love to hunt on CRP ground. There is quite a bit around here. The biggest problem with it is the farmer's post it and use it for their own little hunting preserve. I even know of farmers with CRP who participated in pheasant's forever. PF would plant birds on their land and provide feeders.

It's sad when all these programs are available but it seems the only one's reaping the benefits of hunting the land are the landowners themselves.

Anyone landowner that has been good to me always gets a gift card to a nice local resturant. I like to keep them happy so that I can come back.

Don't get me wrong I don't think because my tax dollars go towards programs like the CRP that I should automatically get access. I just wish the landowners around here where more willing to let people hunt on their property.

Addict

[Margaret]

When someone with a lot of money offers the farmer a few thousand dollars to give them sole hunting rights, what is that
farmer going to do?

We get that here now too.

You are lucky though because I am sure that areas of public land for hunting bring a big boost to the smaller towns with the hunters visiting in the season.

A huge country like America and a state with little public land?
Who took it away?