Westside Pheasant hunting on the chopping block

[Pegasus]

What? There are no Eastern turkeys in Western Washington? The pheasants released are for shooting on the release sites because the hatches can't survive the wet weather. They don't plant them for breeding purposes. Maybe they can open a turkey release site in Western Washington with the money saved from closing the pheasant release sites. So are they closing the eastern sites, also? A place where pheasants can survive naturally year to year and breed? No? They are picking on the Westside to get the large population of hunters that reside here up in arms so that they can get their budget approved when they call their legislative reps. complaining.

[chukar14]

So are they closing the eastern sites, also? A place where pheasants can survive naturally year to year and breed?

The released ones on the east side don't survive either, and they only release roosters so even less chance of reproduction

[AspenBud]

They're not a native bird. Maybe encourage people to hunt ruffed grouse, blue grouse, band tail pigeons, and waterfowl.

I grew up fishing the lakes around here for the stocked rainbow trout. Not sure I'm much in support of that anymore either. Are those rainbow trout native? I don't think so. How has filling the lakes with an artificially high number of a non native fish affected native species? There used to be wild cutthroat trout in one lake I'm familiar with. I'm pretty sure those fish are now gone.

Pheasant in any form are not native. Neither are chukar and Huns and valley quail. I even seem to recall reading that the Rocky Mountain elk people pursue in eastern Washington were imported from Yellowstone. If we’re going to get rid of non-natives we can wipe out a lot of hunting in this state fast.

Band tails you get a whole 9 day season. Our grouse numbers are not that awesome and you are taking a risk with your bird dog if you hunt them in the unending rifle seasons we have.

Waterfowl is the only alternative left and that’s a no go for a lot of upland pointing dogs. Ducks also tend to taste like what they eat.  🤮

That leaves LONG drives to east of the mountains. This is how hunting dies.

The birds you mentioned are able to survive on their own. Pheasants can't survive on the wetside. They have to be stocked. Huge difference. If you feel this strongly about wetside pheasant hunting, make a proposal to the commission on how to pay for it. This isn't how hunting dies. This is how unsupportable programs which serve a tiny fraction of the hunting community yet carry a huge cost die.

Sure, and gun control advocates will stop with just a little more regulation too. First they came for...

[GrampasGuns]

With as many of these birds that are eaten by yotes, poached, killed on the road etc....i hope this program tanks.

[The Marquis]

So are they closing the eastern sites, also? A place where pheasants can survive naturally year to year and breed?

The released ones on the east side don't survive either, and they only release roosters so even less chance of reproduction

In 2 trips out last year, I saw only hens.  I don't understand your math.  If they only release roosters and the released roosters don't procreate or survive at all that means that 100% of the hens are native and a portion of the roosters are native.  We know there are no native pheasants in Washington.

[Pegasus]

So are they closing the eastern sites, also? A place where pheasants can survive naturally year to year and breed?

The released ones on the east side don't survive either, and they only release roosters so even less chance of reproduction

In 2 trips out last year, I saw only hens.  I don't understand your math.  If they only release roosters and the released roosters don't procreate or survive at all that means that 100% of the hens are native and a portion of the roosters are native.  We know there are no native pheasants in Washington.

Those hens  you saw might have opted for a sex change so you couldn't shoot them. I am sure they were all roosters at one time.

[pianoman9701]

They're not a native bird. Maybe encourage people to hunt ruffed grouse, blue grouse, band tail pigeons, and waterfowl.

I grew up fishing the lakes around here for the stocked rainbow trout. Not sure I'm much in support of that anymore either. Are those rainbow trout native? I don't think so. How has filling the lakes with an artificially high number of a non native fish affected native species? There used to be wild cutthroat trout in one lake I'm familiar with. I'm pretty sure those fish are now gone.

Pheasant in any form are not native. Neither are chukar and Huns and valley quail. I even seem to recall reading that the Rocky Mountain elk people pursue in eastern Washington were imported from Yellowstone. If we’re going to get rid of non-natives we can wipe out a lot of hunting in this state fast.

Band tails you get a whole 9 day season. Our grouse numbers are not that awesome and you are taking a risk with your bird dog if you hunt them in the unending rifle seasons we have.

Waterfowl is the only alternative left and that’s a no go for a lot of upland pointing dogs. Ducks also tend to taste like what they eat.  🤮

That leaves LONG drives to east of the mountains. This is how hunting dies.

The birds you mentioned are able to survive on their own. Pheasants can't survive on the wetside. They have to be stocked. Huge difference. If you feel this strongly about wetside pheasant hunting, make a proposal to the commission on how to pay for it. This isn't how hunting dies. This is how unsupportable programs which serve a tiny fraction of the hunting community yet carry a huge cost die.

Sure, and gun control advocates will stop with just a little more regulation too. First they came for...

This isn't a discussion about our Constitutional rights. It's about birds, very expensive ones.

[2MANY]

WDFW has addressed the reproduction flaws in the pen raised birds.

As of 2018 all pheasant pre-release are now required to watch an 8 hour video on reproduction tactics of wild birds.

In 2019 reproduction rates increased however popcorn consumption also increased causing some mating issues and inability to fly in birds who watched the movie more than once.

[Bullkllr]

I'm not sure the "don't plant them because they don't survive" argument is valid unless you also apply it to fish. No one (except maybe WFC) wants to apply it to fish because it would end most fishing for salmonids across the entire state.

You could also argue that many hatchery based fisheries are ridiculously expensive on a "per fish caught/returned basis". Direct user license fees don't come close to covering costs, thus requiring other budget sources.

Westside pheasant hunters have been "paying more" since what...the 80's... when the fee went up to near 100$. I think most would be willing to put more into the pot if it were proposed. There is more than $$ driving this.

I'm more than a little surprised and concerned so many here are not only not supporting, but actually speaking against this program.
 
It seems like more of the "it can go away since I don't do it" attitude. If you don't know where that attitude gets us all in the long run, you have not been paying attention.

Yes, it's low-hanging fruit; but what's next???

First of all, comparing fishing to W.WA pheasant hunting is ridiculous, all due respects. Fisherman contribute about 8 million times more to the WDFW funds than those purchasing pheasant cards. Secondly, another option is to charge what would be needed to support the program. The problem is that would likely mean cards that cost $200-300 each. Then when that happens, 3/4 of the people currently buying would stop. So, then the cards would cost $1000 each and no one would get them.

We pay to play with our hunting and fishing fees. If you get chosen for a multi-season elk permit, you pay and extra $182 because it's worth it to you or you don't because it isn't. Elk hunters support the elk program with their tag dollars and the cost of those tags increases as the cost of the program increases. That's where we're at with the W.WA pheasant program. It's a prohibitively expensive program and if people want it to continue, instead of hunting for native birds on the E. side, they need to pay for it or find funding elsewhere to continue the program. Someone suggested Pheasants Forever and other conservation groups. That might be a great idea. But something needs to give, apparently.

My point comparing the pheasant program with fish planting was maybe more hyperbolic than ridiculous, perhaps.

Have you checked how much it costs to hatch, propagate, and plant one of the "jumbo" trout the WDFW was so proud of? IIRC, the cost was like 1 per license fee. That means that anyone catching more than 1 of them was being funded by other license fee-payers, many of whom may not even fish for planted trout. How is that not at least partly like the way the pheasant program is funded?

I haven't hunted a release site for years; really, I just hate seeing more opportunity gone. How far are we from zero? It seems to be rapidly approaching...

[Backstrap]

Planted bird and planted fish are the same, both are “put and take” opportunity. We depend on put and take because there really isn’t any sustainable populations of native birds or native fish, which can provide meaningful opportunity to the overinflated population we have. Migratory birds and razor clams are possible exception...

They plant birds and fish on the east side too. Lots of planted birds in South Dakota too, and all over. Again, too many people wanting to take, compared to what Mother Nature can provide.

Like it or not, that’s where we’re at, by and large.

[AspenBud]

Planted bird and planted fish are the same, both are “put and take” opportunity. We depend on put and take because there really isn’t any sustainable populations of native birds or native fish, which can provide meaningful opportunity to the overinflated population we have. Migratory birds and razor clams are possible exception...

They plant birds and fish on the east side too. Lots of planted birds in South Dakota too, and all over. Again, too many people wanting to take, compared to what Mother Nature can provide.

Like it or not, that’s where we’re at, by and large.

The number of birds that they plant today is also a shadow of what they used to release.

[Bullkllr]

Planted bird and planted fish are the same, both are “put and take” opportunity. We depend on put and take because there really isn’t any sustainable populations of native birds or native fish, which can provide meaningful opportunity to the overinflated population we have. Migratory birds and razor clams are possible exception...

They plant birds and fish on the east side too. Lots of planted birds in South Dakota too, and all over. Again, too many people wanting to take, compared to what Mother Nature can provide.

Like it or not, that’s where we’re at, by and large.

Well said

[Special T]

For the Release detractors I have this question.  What experiences are the best at recruiting new hunters?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[sidexside]

Biologically like catchable trout there is no argument for it, but recruitment and retention are the name of the game.  I take my son for the youth hunt to the release sites and se all the other young hunters hopefully being imprinted on hunting.  Take a look at most of the general season hunters.  They tend to be up there in age.  Retention.  If you think the release sites are the dumbest most sadistic wastes of money, you should still support them because they recruit and retain constituents to our dwindling numbers and at least provide exposure for those that don't maintain actively hunting so that they are informed voters that dont vote for initiatives that the humane society comes up with.  We hunters all need to stick together and support eachother, but especially when it comes to recruitment and retention.

[jagermiester]

Biologically like catchable trout there is no argument for it, but recruitment and retention are the name of the game.  I take my son for the youth hunt to the release sites and se all the other young hunters hopefully being imprinted on hunting.  Take a look at most of the general season hunters.  They tend to be up there in age.  Retention.  If you think the release sites are the dumbest most sadistic wastes of money, you should still support them because they recruit and retain constituents to our dwindling numbers and at least provide exposure for those that don't maintain actively hunting so that they are informed voters that dont vote for initiatives that the humane society comes up with.  We hunters all need to stick together and support eachother, but especially when it comes to recruitment and retention.

This is a very good point but at some point don't you think that we will just be doing it to do it. What I mean by that is that wouldn't the effort and the dollars be better spent to create habitat for the wild birds and ungulates. I firmly believe that when I bring my youngsters out it is good to have them be successful so that they want to come back, I have even taken them to game bird ranches, (on my dime). I think that we should continue to pay for pheasants but to the people doing the good work, like pheasants forever and such. IMHO pheasants being released with no chance to survive or thrive is an absolute waste of our efforts.