0 The Facts On PHEASANTS MAYNARD M. NELSON The Department's Upland Game Bird Specialist Tests Your Knowledge Of the Wily Ring-Neck Those who know pheasants best tell us that the man with the gun is not the most important of Mr. Ringneck's problems and, furthermore, many of us who hunt are not able to out-maneuver this gaudy immigrant. Of the millions of immigrants new to our continent during the last century, few have found a more welcome spot in the hearts of Midwesterners especially, those who hunt than that capable and crafty Oriental, Phasianus colchicus; alias, the ring-necked pheasant. Unlike the native prairie chicken and quail which retreated before the advances of the plow and the cow, this hardy Oriental bird came prepared to stay. Yet, even for nature's hardiest, life in the wild is not without problems. Let's briefly review some of the questions commonly asked about Minnesota ringnecks and see how you score in the "Hunter's Hot Stove League." Q. When were pheasants first introduced into Minnesota? A. Records of the Conservation Department show that pheasants were brought into the state as early as 1905. Successful establishment, however, dates back to 1915 when the Game Protective League began raising birds on Big sland in Lake Minnetonka. The first legislative appropriation for propagation was in 1917. Q. n what year did we have our first hunting season and how many birds were shot? A. Approximately 300 cocks were bagged in the first open season in 1924 in Hennepin and Carver counties. The pheasant liked it here and made 34
a phenomenal increase. Only seven years later (in 1930) 49 counties were open to hunting and the calculated kill (based on hunter report cards) was over 1,000,000 cocks. Q. What is the largest pheasant harvest we have had in Minnesota? A. n 1941, 1,790,000 birds were bagged, but it should be pointed out that a hen was permitted in the bag that year. The best year for a cocks-only season was 1942 when /,749,000 roosters were taken by hunters. Our best year since then was 1958 when 1,562,000 cocks were bagged, n an average year Minnesota gunners take home a little over 1,000,000 cocks. The take in 1962 was 900,000. Q. When did we have our last hen season? A. 1943, when one hen was permitted in the daily bag. Prior to that, a hen was also permitted in the bag in '31, '33, '35, '36, '37 and '41. Q. How do Minnesota pheasant populations compare with those in other states? A. The Midwest Pheasant Council, which is composed of technicians from 13 midwest states and two Canadian Provinces, has some interesting figures on this subject. For the past five years, Minnesota pheasant hunters have bagged an average of 1,164,000 cocks compared to about 800,000 for the other eleven states where the pheasant is considered one of their top game birds. n only two other states, South Dakota and Nebraska, have hunters regularly taken more pheasants. The pheasant kill in owa is about the same as ours while hunters in the seven other states all bag fewer pheasants than do Minnesotans. Q. How about length of the hunting season? A. Minnesota's seasons have usually been shorter than those in other states in the principle pheasant range of the midwest. n 1962, Nebraska had 93 days, South Dakota had 61, North Dakota had 37,owa had 35 and Wisconsin had 26. n 1962 the average length of the hunting season for the 11 other "pheasant" states that make up the main pheasant range in the Midwest was 38 days. We had 30 days. Our 36-day season this year will probably come quite close to the average for midwestern states. Q. But isn't it true that the other states have less hunters than we do? A. This isn't easy to figure since most states don't have a record of the proportion of their license buyers who are pheasant hunters. However, based upon the sale of small game hunting licenses for the past five years, Minnesota is slightly below average for midwestern states in number of hunters. Since 1958 there have usually been about 350,000 small game hunters in Minnesota. n 1962, about 200,000 of these hunted pheasants. 35
36 CONSERVATON VOLUNTEER Sept.-Oct. Q. How is it that pheasant seasons are longer now than they were 20 years ago? A. Pheasant research was in its infancy 20 years ago and there was little scientific information on the effect of hunting upon pheasant populations. Since that time, however, research in Minnesota and in other states has demonstrated that state-wide hunting has little effect upon pheasant abundance the following year if the regulations prohibit hen shooting. We now know, for example, that there are still at least twice as many roosters left in Minnesota after the hunting season as are needed for breeding purposes. Spring breeding populations typically consist of one cock for each three hens. Heavier hunting in other states leaves one cock to 6 to 8 hens, yet egg fertility there is as high as it is in Minnesota. Nesting studies in Minnesota have shown that infertile clutches of eggs are extremely rare. Furthermore, pheasant hunters to a great extent regulate their own hunting. The number of hunters afield declines rapidly after the barrage on opening week end. n fact, about 50 per cent of the roosters taken by hunters during a 30 day season are shot on opening week end and 85 per cent of the harvest is obtained by the time the season is half over. Although long seasons do not greatly increase the total kill of pheasants, they are of value for they provide hunting opportunity to those more active sportsmen who enjoy a brisk fall outing after many others have put away their shotguns. Q. From what you have just said it sounds like you don't expect the number of pheasants taken by hunters to increase much this year even though the season has been extended to 36 days. A. That is true. After several weeks of hunting the cocks that have succeeded in dodging hunters become extremely wary and are not an easy target. During the last week of a 30 day season, the cocks taken are only about 5 per cent of the total bag for the season. Thus it seems likely that the additional six days allowed this year will increase the total take by less than 5 per cent. Q. How about illegal hen shooting? That's what bothers me about long seasons. A. This has been a concern to most of us but, fortunately, studies since 1954 have been reassuring. Hens are killed but these studies show that only about 6-11 per cent of the total hen population is killed accidentally or otherwise during a 30 day hunting season. This is a low loss compared to that for female animals of most other kinds of game. As far as hen pheasants are concerned it accounts for only a small part of the deaths throughout the year. Pheasants, like most upland game birds, have a high rate of "population turnover." That is, the survival of adult birds from one year to the next is usually quite low, generally 30 to 35 per cent. As expressed another way the total annual mortality is usually
1963 THE FACTS ON PHEASANTS 37 between 65 and 70 per cent. By comparing these last figures to those shown above for illegal shooting (6 to 11 per cent) you can see that by far the greatest loss of hens is from causes other than illegal shooting. Q. t sounds like hunting has very little affect on the pheasant crop from one year to the next. A. This is true. Furthermore, the fact that pheasants have a high reproductive rate and live a short life requires annual hunting seasons if the birds are to be used. Most of the cocks die throughout the year anyway and with no hunting the sportsmen would be the loser. Most of the pheasants we now have can not be saved or "stockpiled" for hunting next fall. By that time they will be dead. Q. Well, if most hens succumb to natural mortality why don't we permit a hen in the bag? A. During the breeding season hens are more vulnerable than cocks to non-hunting mortality. For example, about 15 per cent of the breeding hens are destroyed by hay mowers. However, it is possible that a small percentage of the hens could be legally harvested during some years without hurting the brood stock. This might be done, for example, by use of a tag distributed with each license, the tag being intended for use on one "mistake" hen for each licensee. Such a technique would legalize a hen shot by mistake and probably wouldn't substantially increase the kill beyond the present illegal kill. However, legalizing the shooting of hens, unless carefully regulated, might also result in overshooting. More study on this subject seems advisable before a hen season can be considered. n the meantime, it should be emphasized that we are still underharvesting cocks and here is an obvious opportunity for additional hunting opportunity. Q. O.K., if hunting of cocks doesn't have much effect on the number of pheasants next year, what does? A. Briefly, it is a matter of land use patterns and weather. Changes in land use in the main pheasant range since about 1940 have resulted in substantial loss of pheasant cover, especially of grassy types needed for nesting. Even small grain acreages, which are our most productive nesting cover, have declined 40 per cent since the early 1940 s. Mowing of hayland starts at such an early date that only about 5 per cent of the nests in hay hatch. Twenty years ago the figure was closer to 30 per cent. Nesting studies in south central Minnesota during the period 1958-62 showed that only 35 to 50 per cent of the hens were successful in hatching a nest. Along with the long term but gradual decline in habitat, there is considerable variation in weather conditions from year to year. A warm and diy spring may produce a good hatch one year whereas the opposite may
40 CONSERVATON VOLUNTEER Sept.-Oct. occur the following year when the spring is wet and cool. Because of the short life span and high rate of population turnover, pheasant numbers vary considerable from one year to the next because of differences in the hatch and survival of both young and adults. Weather is especially important in determining population changes from one year to the next. PHEASANTS THER UPS AND DOWNS 400-500- 4 5 46 4 ' 7 48 4 9 50 5 ' 52 5 ' 3 54 5 ' 5 56 5 ' 7 58 59 6' 0 61 6'" YEAR Pheasant numbers fluctuate considerably from year to year. August roadside counts have proven quite reliable as a means of forecasting the harvest of cocks. Census figures shown above are based upon counts made each year along about 4000 miles of route in 65 counties. Harvest figures are calculated from report cards sent in by hunters. Note that the cock harvest in 1948 iviw below that of 1946 even though there was no hunting season in 1947. Populations declined in 1947 because of a poor hatch and protection from hunting in the fall of 1947 did not increase the hunters' bag in 1948 over that in 1946.