Just brought up in another thread.
I think I would go with Invasive Non Native Species.
Why? Because they did come from China that would make them “non native” and if a person could ask any corn, oat, wheat or soybean farmers in the 50’s, I know they would tell about the destruction they did to their corps.
Certainly not so much anymore.
I’m not sure because we like the pretty pheasant it would take that label off of them?
Granted I wasn’t alive in the 50’s, 60’s or remember much of the 70’s I don’t see how pheasants could be considered invasive or cause significant damage at even the high numbers they had back then. My grandpa was a crop farmer in Western MN and I have seen pictures of pheasants on the grain piles, but honestly even he used to joke about how they didn’t do much harm and that was with numbers high enough you couldn’t even see the pile of grain.
invasive species brought to the US in 1881 to Oregon.
Mwal
Since all the pheasants that we now have in the US were born here does that now make them native? Can’t we just call them dreamers like everyone else and accept them. Native or not everyone is invasive IMO.
Definition of invasive: An invasive species is a plant, fungus, or animal species that is not native to a specific location (an introduced species), and that has a tendency to spread to a degree believed to cause damage to the environment, human economy or human health
I don’t see pheasants fitting into this catagory. Certainly they are not native, but far from invasive according to this definition. Heck we can’t even keep them “in stock” here in MN for the most part. Maybe years and years ago when BK was a pup, but not in the last 15-20 years.
Maybe years and years ago when BK was a pup, but not in the last 15-20 years.
And that’s what I was getting at…however who today would want their vehicle hosed down to ensure it wasn’t carrying a “what was” invasive specie now a day.
Too bad they didn’t come back like the honker, mallard or eagle.
What sticker said.
I was gonna say one might consider Hamms an invasive beer. But I resisted.
and that has a tendency to spread to a degree believed to cause damage human health
Can’t argue that!
I would call them non-native, but not invasive.
Anyone else know about our invasive earthworms all across Minnesota? Probably deserves its own thread not to derail this one..
Just brought up in another thread.
I think I would go with Invasive Non Native Species.
Why? Because they did come from China that would make them “non native” and if a person could ask any corn, oat, wheat or soybean farmers in the 50’s, I know they would tell about the destruction they did to their corps.
Certainly not so much anymore.
I’m not sure because we like the pretty pheasant it would take that label off of them?
Bring in a new species and you just don’t know if the population is going to reach nuisance level or not- Smallmouth Bass are not native FYI-Also the experts freak out because the new thing has no predators but that often changes as time goes on.
I agree with the two replies quoted above and that is my whole point in bringing this up in the other thread about pheasants.
The question I asked was “Do you wonder if, in another 50 years, Asian Bighead Carp will be as desirable as the Pheasant is now? Both species came from the same part of the world.”
Carp consumption is common in some areas of the world. Carp fishing tournaments in Europe will rival our Bass fishing tournaments and the anglers are just as secretive as any of us in sharing secrets.
Zeebs are considered invasive but look how the zeebs cleaned up Lake Erie and actually turned out to be a benefit to that lake at the time.
And to add to your point Dave, smoked Silver Carp is awesome…just as good if not better then my fav trout if it weren’t for the bones. If you have the opportunity, try it!
My thought on them becoming as popular as the pheasant… no chance. They are too ugly and although carp has a following now, it’s a very small portion of the fishing population that actually targets them.
But that’s why I would really like to come back in a 100 year.
‘Ell, we’ve had actors for governors and presidents!
Like you said BK, we like them so would be considered a non-native. My uncle in ND is shifting his view slightly from liking them to disliking them. He has noticed that his sharptail population decreased with the increase of pheasants. He would much rather have the sharpys as they are a native species but also does like watching the pheasants in the yard. Its funny how our opinions on things change when they are pretty, mine included.
^ Walleye/catfish.
Like you said BK, we like them so would be considered a non-native. My uncle in ND is shifting his view slightly from liking them to disliking them. He has noticed that his sharptail population decreased with the increase of pheasants. He would much rather have the sharpys as they are a native species but also does like watching the pheasants in the yard. Its funny how our opinions on things change when they are pretty, mine included.
That is an interesting observation by your uncle for sure, but I have to wonder what habitat changes have occurred during that same time? The reason I ask is that pheasants seem to adapt better to the break up in massive amounts of CRP, I mean great expanses of it, toward small pockets provided there are good nesting cover, food sources, and winter cover. Sharpies on the other hand tend to thrive more with wide open grasslands for one reason or another.
Sharpies are an interesting creature too. I don’t have nearly as much experience with them, but if you watch one of them glide for a mile or so you will be impressed. A pheasant will touch down long before a sharpie drops the landing gear.
That is an interesting observation by your uncle for sure, but I have to wonder what habitat changes have occurred during that same time? The reason I ask is that pheasants seem to adapt better to the break up in massive amounts of CRP, I mean great expanses of it, toward small pockets provided there are good nesting cover, food sources, and winter cover. Sharpies on the other hand tend to thrive more with wide open grasslands for one reason or another.
Sharpies are an interesting creature too. I don’t have nearly as much experience with them, but if you watch one of them glide for a mile or so you will be impressed. A pheasant will touch down long before a sharpie drops the landing gear.
Exactly my thoughts on the population change. I would think it has much more to do with habitat loss than with pheasant numbers rising. We all know to well how every square inch that can be farmed is being farmed now days. If it’s wet they tile it, if it has trees they take em down, fence rows are a thing of the past. I guess I don’t blame the farmers, they have to make a living and dead pieces of land don’t make money.
Funny thing, I saw 2 pheasants in Cottage Grove this AM. Never seen them here. Was thinking they’re the king of game birds even though they are an introduced foreign species. Wouldn’t want them eradicated.
I call them, and Rusty Crayfish, delicious! I’ll leave the rest up to you guys to debate…
^ With Lemon Butter!!
@CaptainMusky and @sticker I would agree on the habitat and could very likely be an issue. the property he is concerned about is 400 acre tract of hilly pasture along the Missouri river with most of the surrounding area being the same (too rough to farm). He had sharpys up until a 10 years ago and started a pheasant stocking program beings they were what he wanted at that point in time, and then noticed the decline in sharpys and is now trying to bring them back which he is realizing is easier said then done. So whether it be the pheasants, habitat, or who knows but I do agree there is more than likely more at play than just the pheasants. I just found the change of mind on pheasants being sought after to wishing for more native grouse on his part interesting.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
