If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS June Giveaway ***Keltec SUB2000***
In a lawsuit, the groups said the federal agency was violating its own policy that prohibited the stocking and releasing of non-native and exotic wildlife within the national park system where natural resources and wildlife can potentially be impacted.
Trout you say? Brown trout are not native to north America they were introduced from Europe.........and they stock those everywhere. Rainbow trout are not native to new England or the east coast.......they came form the pacific originally until they got stocked pretty much everywhere. The lawsuit should be dead on arrival.It's not a lie. If their policy is to not introduce a non-native species, don't introduce a non-native species.
Granted, I'm not worried about RNP's competing for resources. They'll not last a single year in this area of the country. But I'm just some yokel. What do I know? They could potentially impact for sure.
But in all of this "why won't the government follow it's own rules" crap, why are we complaining when they. . . . follow their own rules?
Although I'm biased. Deer are a renewable resource. Good to spend $ on them. Turkey - same. Trout? I think. Bass? For sure! RNP's??? No. One has to wonder if they were to release buffalo in the AO to be shot same-season if we'd feel the same about them releasing pheasants. Their job is to preserve the resources. This isn't protecting resources.
First off...Pheasants are native to China, they were never native to the US......they are not from South Dakota, or Kansas, or Nebraska, although they thrive there. This program has been going on since the 70's, yet now...the treehuggers decide to sue to stop it. WTF. This article is over blown and written to say that there all hunters sit there and follow trucks, and shoot the birds off the truck. While a small amount of this happens, its not the majority of hunters doing it. Most guys I know would rather the birds sit a while/day or two before they hunt them, the dog work is better and it is more sporting.
Since F&W's job just been to save resources????? Thier job is to provide as many hunting opportunities as possible in budget, and keep the resources in check with our native species so they aren't over hunted. Additional opportunited like Pheasant hunting and Trout stocking are put and take programs paid for by our licenses and fees, and excise taxes. Why anyone would want to take them away, is beyond me, and if you do, your not a hunter, or for the future of hunting.
The MA pheasant program is probably one of the best programs going in this state. My club, which is in a network of clubs in the program each pays 2400 dollars a year to feed, raise and purchase these birds. I just wrote the check this month for my club.
Many clubs also have pens and buy and raise these birds. The state buys and raises these birds as well, usually in the prison system, they take care of the birds. This is all done either with private club monies, or monies from HUNTING licenses an excise tax on sporting items. The same thing is done with trout fishing, except the state deals with all the raising, feeding and stocking. Again paid for by Sportsmen.
Some hunting and fishing here is native species where it can be supported....other opportunities are put and take because either the species cannot thrive here, or the habitat is not condusive to the species, or the habitat that once was is gone by development, or the increase in predation is now taking a huge toll The Ruffed Grouse is a perfect example of what is happening here with loss of habitat, and predation by all sorts of predators.
The ruffed grouse will be next on the list if the state isn't careful on management of this species. Pheasant hunting takes some of the pressure off of the Grouse, as if there were no pheasant hunting, most people would grouse and woodcock hunt.
The idea behind paying for a hunting license is to have lots of opportunities for all, federal lands play a partner in this by giving land to hunt. People may not like the idea of put and take pheasant hunting, but the idea of decreasing land to hunt in this state by taking away federal lands is dumb. Its playing into the Anti's hands big time, the last thing we need to have happen.
I also personally feel that RNP hunting is a very popular thing in my area, take it away and you lose hunters, revenue and new hunters. I personally teach and help run the youth pheasant program, and a lot of kids love getting their first bird, stocked or not its a fun experience.....its not just shooting the bird, its the dog work, the comraderie, learning to shoot safely......take it way and we lose a lot of youth. Guaranteed. Deer hunting is a totally different thing, and alot of them don't like it, or find it boring. We need as many different experiences as possible to keep our youth and ourselves hunting.
Put and take may not be for you...understood. But agreeing as a hunter that its OK to take it away...well, maybe your type of hunting will be the next thing taken away.
First off...Pheasants are native to China, they were never native to the US......they are not from South Dakota, or Kansas, or Nebraska, although they thrive there. This program has been going on since the 70's, yet now...the treehuggers decide to sue to stop it. WTF. This article is over blown and written to say that there all hunters sit there and follow trucks, and shoot the birds off the truck. While a small amount of this happens, its not the majority of hunters doing it. Most guys I know would rather the birds sit a while/day or two before they hunt them, the dog work is better and it is more sporting.
Since F&W's job just been to save resources????? Thier job is to provide as many hunting opportunities as possible in budget, and keep the resources in check with our native species so they aren't over hunted. Additional opportunited like Pheasant hunting and Trout stocking are put and take programs paid for by our licenses and fees, and excise taxes. Why anyone would want to take them away, is beyond me, and if you do, your not a hunter, or for the future of hunting.
The MA pheasant program is probably one of the best programs going in this state. My club, which is in a network of clubs in the program each pays 2400 dollars a year to feed, raise and purchase these birds. I just wrote the check this month for my club.
Many clubs also have pens and buy and raise these birds. The state buys and raises these birds as well, usually in the prison system, they take care of the birds. This is all done either with private club monies, or monies from HUNTING licenses an excise tax on sporting items. The same thing is done with trout fishing, except the state deals with all the raising, feeding and stocking. Again paid for by Sportsmen.
Some hunting and fishing here is native species where it can be supported....other opportunities are put and take because either the species cannot thrive here, or the habitat is not condusive to the species, or the habitat that once was is gone by development, or the increase in predation is now taking a huge toll The Ruffed Grouse is a perfect example of what is happening here with loss of habitat, and predation by all sorts of predators.
The ruffed grouse will be next on the list if the state isn't careful on management of this species. Pheasant hunting takes some of the pressure off of the Grouse, as if there were no pheasant hunting, most people would grouse and woodcock hunt.
The idea behind paying for a hunting license is to have lots of opportunities for all, federal lands play a partner in this by giving land to hunt. People may not like the idea of put and take pheasant hunting, but the idea of decreasing land to hunt in this state by taking away federal lands is dumb. Its playing into the Anti's hands big time, the last thing we need to have happen.
I also personally feel that RNP hunting is a very popular thing in my area, take it away and you lose hunters, revenue and new hunters. I personally teach and help run the youth pheasant program, and a lot of kids love getting their first bird, stocked or not its a fun experience.....its not just shooting the bird, its the dog work, the comraderie, learning to shoot safely......take it way and we lose a lot of youth. Guaranteed. Deer hunting is a totally different thing, and alot of them don't like it, or find it boring. We need as many different experiences as possible to keep our youth and ourselves hunting.
Put and take may not be for you...understood. But agreeing as a hunter that its OK to take it away...well, maybe your type of hunting will be the next thing taken away.
Pheasant put and take is also not my thing. I do.....as you put it......agree that it is a program that gets young folks and keeps some folks into hunting. That's all good and the program should be increased....not removed Imo.First off...Pheasants are native to China, they were never native to the US......they are not from South Dakota, or Kansas, or Nebraska, although they thrive there. This program has been going on since the 70's, yet now...the treehuggers decide to sue to stop it. WTF. This article is over blown and written to say that there all hunters sit there and follow trucks, and shoot the birds off the truck. While a small amount of this happens, its not the majority of hunters doing it. Most guys I know would rather the birds sit a while/day or two before they hunt them, the dog work is better and it is more sporting.
Since F&W's job just been to save resources????? Thier job is to provide as many hunting opportunities as possible in budget, and keep the resources in check with our native species so they aren't over hunted. Additional opportunited like Pheasant hunting and Trout stocking are put and take programs paid for by our licenses and fees, and excise taxes. Why anyone would want to take them away, is beyond me, and if you do, your not a hunter, or for the future of hunting.
The MA pheasant program is probably one of the best programs going in this state. My club, which is in a network of clubs in the program each pays 2400 dollars a year to feed, raise and purchase these birds. I just wrote the check this month for my club.
Many clubs also have pens and buy and raise these birds. The state buys and raises these birds as well, usually in the prison system, they take care of the birds. This is all done either with private club monies, or monies from HUNTING licenses an excise tax on sporting items. The same thing is done with trout fishing, except the state deals with all the raising, feeding and stocking. Again paid for by Sportsmen.
Some hunting and fishing here is native species where it can be supported....other opportunities are put and take because either the species cannot thrive here, or the habitat is not condusive to the species, or the habitat that once was is gone by development, or the increase in predation is now taking a huge toll The Ruffed Grouse is a perfect example of what is happening here with loss of habitat, and predation by all sorts of predators.
The ruffed grouse will be next on the list if the state isn't careful on management of this species. Pheasant hunting takes some of the pressure off of the Grouse, as if there were no pheasant hunting, most people would grouse and woodcock hunt.
The idea behind paying for a hunting license is to have lots of opportunities for all, federal lands play a partner in this by giving land to hunt. People may not like the idea of put and take pheasant hunting, but the idea of decreasing land to hunt in this state by taking away federal lands is dumb. Its playing into the Anti's hands big time, the last thing we need to have happen.
I also personally feel that RNP hunting is a very popular thing in my area, take it away and you lose hunters, revenue and new hunters. I personally teach and help run the youth pheasant program, and a lot of kids love getting their first bird, stocked or not its a fun experience.....its not just shooting the bird, its the dog work, the comraderie, learning to shoot safely......take it way and we lose a lot of youth. Guaranteed. Deer hunting is a totally different thing, and alot of them don't like it, or find it boring. We need as many different experiences as possible to keep our youth and ourselves hunting.
Put and take may not be for you...understood. But agreeing as a hunter that its OK to take it away...well, maybe your type of hunting will be the next thing taken away.
If mass seriously wanted to increase the ruffed grouse populations there is a way.......its called clear cutting timber! Ruffed grouse prefer early successional forests......aspen, birch and thickets that grow soon after a clear cut...
re: grouse
A few state forests in western Mass have been cut in recent years. A "buffer" of unmolested trees is maintained along roadways, to keep the citizenry from witnessing the carnage. The DCR has some of the info posted here: Forest Management Projects
Pheasant put and take is also not my thing. I do.....as you put it......agree that it is a program that gets young folks and keeps some folks into hunting. That's all good and the program should be increased....not removed Imo.
While I say it's not my thing.......I'll admit that if I'm in the woods or power line close to a stocked wma hunting rabbit and squirrel...and a pheasant wanders into my AO.......I will take it......I paid for the license like everyone else.,...... But I don't specifically target pheasant.
They usually turn around to me and embarrassed but smiling ear to ear. I know that's better than any video game they've ever played.
I've seen my best trained kids, crack shooters that are busting 20+ at skeet, miss multiple times on points that are sitting 5 feet in front of them under a dogs nose, when the bird flushes, they just lose their shxt.