The story of the Experimental Wildlife Area near Wanamingo Wildlife Experiment So. Goodhue County EDWIN W. GOPLEN & ROBERT S. ANDERSON The South Goodhue Experi- ^ Xj mental Wildlife Area near Wanamingo had its inception in anuary 1949. The idea was proposed by Roy E. Bennett, assistant state conservationist, Lee K. Moore, area conservationist, and Bobert S. Anderson, work unit conservationist. All are SCS men who were called in by the South Goodhue Soil Conservation District to help with its annual work plan. Their idea was to select an area in which practices beneficial to wildlife could be applied together with existing soil conservation practices to determine the effect on wildlife populations. At the suggestion of the district supervisors Edwin W. Goplen, Conrad Clementson, Zumbrota; Alvin B. Steberg, Wanamingo; Loyal Jacobsen, Ole Bomness, Kenyon; the plan was enlarged to include the possibility of improving the farmer-sportsman relationship in the surrounding communities. So much enthusiasm for the idea was shown, that before the planning meeting was over, a two-square mile area was selected for the experiment. EDWIN W. GOPLEN is a district supervisor of the South Goodhue Soil Cons. Dist. in Goodhue County, Minn. ROBERT S. ANDERSON is the Soil Cons. Service form planner in the district. Early in the spring of 1949 a joint meeting was held by the interested wildlife authorities, which included the Soil Conservation Service; the State Conservation Department including its Pittman-Bobertson Unit; University of Minnesota; and the Wildlife Management Institute. At this time the area was thoroughly appraised and a plan drawn up which would be of greatest benefit to wildlife. This plan called for coordinating the principles of wildlife management with soil conservation practices so as to benefit both programs through the application of proper land use. The two square miles chosen includes 11 farms. The topography is typical of 80 per cent of the district and consists of all types of soil capabilities from level Class I cropland to the steep slopes known as Class VII land. A small stream runs from south to north through the area. A considerable number of evergreens had been planted by the Civilian Conservation Corps in 1939-1940, but most of the fences protecting the areas from livestock had not been maintained. The result was that cover for ground nesting birds was almost non-existent. Pheasants in the area were building their nests in the adjoining alfalfa fields and many 8
WILDLIFE EXPERIMENT 9 nests were ruined and the hens injured during the annual haying operations. Most of the supporting conservation practices such as terracing, contour strip cropping, and pasture improvement, were already in effect. Farmers were urged to complete the layout of their remaining terraces and contour strip cropping as soon as possible. This work is now 90 per cent completed. To protect the wildlife areas from livestock, a considerable amount of fence had to be rebuilt. To assist in the experiment, the Pittman-Robertson Unit agreed to supply the necessary posts and 4-strand barb wire. All wildlife areas were to be fenced out of the pasture land and into the cropland. Upon arrival of the fencing materials, the farmers set all corner posts around the three planting areas. To improve the farmer-sportsman relationship the members of the Zumbrota Chapter of the Izaak Walton League volunteered to complete the remaining fence. To utilize manpower efficiently, the Chapter membership was divided into pairs. Each pair was asked to enlist the help of eight other men and to see that they arrived ready for work at the appointed time. These crews of Edwin W. Goplen standing beside trees planted in former gully in pasture, and fenced to exclude livestock.
10 THE CONSERVATION VOLUNTEER ten men each worked one hour, from 6:00 to 7:00. An excellent job of fencing by inexperienced help was accomplished. The first year two areas of four and four and one-half acres were protected by the construction of 160 rods of four-strand barb wire. During the following summer the grass within these protected areas afforded excellent nesting cover for pheasants. One week's grazing by cattle would have completely denuded these slopes of grass for the rest of the year. By renovating and reseeding the surrounding pasture, enough good forage was available to keep the cattle from breaking into the wildlife areas. This point should probably receive more emphasis. It is well known by farmers that cows generally break through fences because there is more food on the other side. In pastures where there is plenty of good forage, fences need less maintenance. So pasture improvement not only produces a higher income through increased milk production, but also reduces the cost and labor of maintaining fences. Besides nesting cover, pheasants and other wildlife need winter protection from ice and snow storms. Producing more pheasants will not help unless enough of them survive for breeding stock. This protection is provided by groups of 8 to 12-foot spruce and pine strategically located throughout the entire two-square mile area. This was one of the factors considered in selecting the experimental area. Additional plantings during the past four years will eventually provide all the cover necessary for a maximum desirable wildlife population. One part of the original plan caused considerable discussion before specific recommendations were made. In livestock farming areas, pheasants get most of their winter food from corn and grain left in the manure spread during winter months. While picking up this grain in open fields they are exposed to predators such as hawks and owls. One group of technicians advocated the planting of shrubs in the fence rows for travel lanes and escape cover. Although this is a good practice in some areas, it was decided that in this case the wildlife areas are near enough to each other to afford sufficient escape cover. AN INTERESTING DEVELOPMENT in the area is the inter-relationship of wildlife species. After wildlife areas were fenced to exclude livestock the native grasses grew very thick, making an ideal environment for field mice. Soon the mice increased so much that they were seriously damaging newly planted trees. During the winter of 1949-50 field mice killed 125 hackberry trees in one planting area. Since mice are one of the principal natural foods of the fox, red foxes moved into the area. In the fall of 1951 a red fox was observed to catch 12 field mice in about ten minutes. By the winter of 1951-52 the foxes had controlled the field mice so that only negligible damage was done to tree planting stock.
WILDLIFE EXPERIMENT 11 Although local sportsmen claimed that foxes were the main factor limiting pheasant population, pheasants were increasing at a very satisfactory rate in spite of a greater number of foxes. Cottontail rabbits, too, were increasing to further ease the predator damage to pheasants. In the near future the South Goodhue Experimental Wildlife Area will be posted with signs which will read, "Hunting by Permission Only." These signs will not mean that hunting is prohibited in the area. They will mean that sportsmen hunting in the area will be asked to report to the landowner the number of game birds and animals taken. This information, together with an annual census, will tell us of the progress we have made. Before we can draw definite conclusions on the increase in wildlife on the project, we must collect data over a number of years. However, at this time, we can report a trend that is very encouraging. During the 1952 hunting season cock pheasants shot in the area amounted to 21 per square mile. In comparable areas in the district the harvest was between four and five pheasants per square mile. In other words, the experimental area produced four times more pheasants than the surrounding territory after only four years. But better hunting is not the onlv reward for improving wildlife conditions. The increase in the number of pheasants and other birds has, we are sure, had a controlling effect upon insects which damage farm crops. The increase in the wild bee and bumblebee population will no doubt help in the production of seed from alfalfa and clover. ( In recent years the press and other media have kept the public well informed on all phases of the soil and water conservation program. But the gap between information and action is still too large. Only a program of action on the land will provide the necessary results. An action program has been applied to this small test area to show by demonstration the value of applying and maintaining our conservation knowledge directly on the land. By this experiment it is hoped that programs applying our conservation know-how will in the future become as common throughout our State and Nation as the knowledge of this great conservation need is today. Soil conservation districts have a great opportunity in the promotion of this program since it is their function to direct the land-use program of their areas. The soil conservation district supervisors' intimate knowledge of land conditions in the district gives them an ideal opportunity to outline a wellbalanced wildlife plan for their district without hindrance to practical and profitable farming. Such a program will add greatly to the aesthetic value and the scenic beauty of the area, as well as increase profits from the land. Let us remember that the purpose
12 THE CONSERVATION VOLUNTEER of a well balanced wildlife is not merely to provide an increase in game birds and animals. It must also return to agriculture the very necessary balance of wildlife so beneficial to successful farming; a balance lost by the destruction of the wildlife habitat originally provided by nature. The supervisors and personnel of soil conservation districts generally hold monthly meetings to conduct the districts' business. If at least one of these meetings each year were devoted to the promotion of wildlife, it would be a great benefit to the district. To promote the application and efficient administration of wildlife programs, we recommend that representatives of the State Conservation Department, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Izaak Walton League Chapters, and other organizations which can help be invited to attend planning meetings. The help of educational organizations should not be overlooked in seeking to promote this important program. A project such as outlined above would be applicable throughout most of the State of Minnesota. But do not expect to increase the hunting potential of any area overnight. Plan carefully and plan, not for the months, but for the years ahead. The results being produced in the South Goodhue Soil Conservation District's experiment can be duplicated many, many times throughout the State. ALBERT KLANCKE RETIRES Albert Klancke, veteran employee of the Division of Game & Fish, retired August 15th after 35 years of service. In recent years Mr. Klancke has been employed as license clerk for the Division of Game & Fish, but his years of experience include positions as Assistant Director of Game & Fish, supervisor of commercial fishing, secretary of the state Conservation Advisory Committee, chief clerk in the old Game & Fish Department. Now 69, Mr. Klancke was born and raised in Norwood, Carver County, Minnesota. "It is with sincere regrets that I accept Mr. Klancke's resignation," said Frank D. Blair, director of the Division of Game & Fish. "No other individual has served so long in the department, and so well."