ABSTRACTWe describe ring‐necked pheasant (Phasianus colchicus) habitat needs, historical U.S. cropland conversion programs (CCPs), research documenting pheasant responses to these programs, and make policy recommendations for programs to more efficiently elicit such responses. Cropland conversion program principles supported in the pheasant literature include establishment of an initial seeding, a multiyear contract structure, prohibition of mowing during the nesting season, promotion of forbs in seedings, provision of large‐block enrollments options, and inclusion of midcontract management. These principles are compatible with the habitat needs of many other grassland bird species. We therefore recommend the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and any future CCPs retain these foundational aspects. Initial plantings of higher diversity seed mixes have become prioritized over time, but we note whatever increase in average habitat quality these standards achieved, it was not enough to prevent widespread pheasant declines following more severe statutory limitations on CRP acreage enrollments beginning in 2008, coupled with long‐term declines in other habitat types (e.g., hay, pasture, small grains). When faced with a trade‐off, we thus recommend emphasis of enrolled area over quality, provided enrolled herbaceous tracts provide adequate structure (≥3 dm of 100% visual obstruction) and canopy cover components (>5% forbs and >5% bare ground). Efficiencies may also be gained by altering initial seeding rates, offsetting program costs using grazing income, allowing more discretion in the use of midcontract management, and prioritizing enrollments in focus areas. Individual states, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and bird conservation joint ventures should work cooperatively to share data and perform return‐on‐investment–oriented research at multiple spatial scales concerning the effects of CCPs on pheasants. © 2018 The Wildlife Society.
Read full abstract