Free: Contests & Raffles.
Total Members Voted: 84
Voting closed: September 30, 2017, 10:03:13 AM
Just my two cents. But I believe for the westside, aerial spraying, of 2,4-D has done more damage to grouse populations, than any other factor. I know private timber companies do it, not sure of DNR or the USFS. And private timber company land is where I draw this conclusion from. Having been raised hunting on Pope & Talbot land, I have personally seen the grouse populations plummet. Which just so happens to coincide with aerial spraying, that started heavily in the 70's. But what do I know... like I stated, it just my
Quote from: Hilltop123 on September 01, 2017, 07:49:53 AMJust my two cents. But I believe for the westside, aerial spraying, of 2,4-D has done more damage to grouse populations, than any other factor. I know private timber companies do it, not sure of DNR or the USFS. And private timber company land is where I draw this conclusion from. Having been raised hunting on Pope & Talbot land, I have personally seen the grouse populations plummet. Which just so happens to coincide with aerial spraying, that started heavily in the 70's. But what do I know... like I stated, it just my I agree. Too many chemicals are sprayed, ruining much grouse habitat.