Coming from the days of regular 20-40 flushes....going for a limit was never an issue to question....Be it two in Pa or 4 or 5 in other States...

Seems to be Birds are on the rise in some States...but far from some past historic highs. However, I realize some places do have what seem to be abundant numbers. Let's accept that and only consider those places were that is not the case.

So, if one is only getting 4-10 flushes a day....Is going for a daily bag limit still a priority?

Nope. The bag limit is a maximum, not a quota, and hunting is not a job. When I was at work, I had to make a quota. Hunting is my day off.

I don't find it particularly hard to shoot a limit the last few years. But I'm fine going home empty handed as well. Enjoying these beautiful birds, getting outside, and taking in the sights and sounds is more important.

Perhaps I need to make a clarification. I’m not concerned with the often mentioned soul lifting benefits of a great day out with Dogs.

The question isn’t about us, but the Birds. In times of plenty we can kill many, however should we do the same in lesser years.

The peaks are great, however historically the peaks have shown to be a downward trend….while historically the daily limit has remained the same.
West Nile Virus is being said to be a problem with Bird survival, yet some they are saying have genetic resistance. Are the extra Birds we kill because of the legal limit, some which may be Birds that can pass on the same….and some for sure can….worth it during years of fewer Birds?
And especially late season winter Birds. They are survivors that made it thru a hunting season, predators and maybe even beat WNV.

And don’t be fooled by the old line of good year/bad year and they balance out. I had the chance to talk with some of guys who were old back in the 70’s. Their peaks were crazy higher than our best.

Habitat? We have a lot of it. The decline is not always because of it.

Taking a species down to numbers were it can’t repopulate a large area has happened more than once.

Wild Ruffed Grouse are the King….killing the King should be done with consideration of who replaces him.

Take from it what you want....but there are some significant population decreases for our east coast States....

And there is a point, where reduced numbers will result in no amount of increased habitat bringing them back....

https://timberdoodle.org/news/ruffed-grouse-decline-linked-loss-young-forest

Good point Battue. Here in WI the county forests in Central to Northern WI (possibly MN too) are usually the best populations due to considerably more timber harvesting, thus improved habitat for grouse (and deer). Turkeys thrive about anywhere up here.
The tree huggers interfere with the Forest Service doing any TSI the most, the state a bit less, the counties not at all as the County Parks & Forestey Committees tell the huggers to pound sand, they want the revenues.

I totally agree and understand what you are asking battue. It's a real conversation that we need to be having. I'm pretty lucky here in Maine as we have plenty of habitat and WNV isn't bad here yet. But my fear as things continue to worsen in Southern New England and mid Atlantic states, is increased hunting pressure. Which is already been seen and felt. We really have the last stronghold of good populations and habitat on the east coast. Last year was a banner year for birds and from what I'm hearing as numbers are extremely high again this year. Dry springs have been highly beneficial for young survival.

To answer your question. No I don't think we should be killing 4 grouse a day when populations are low here in the state of Maine. But the bag limit has been that for a long time so I don't see it changing.

I saw the GC watch it happen in Pa. Hunters told them Birds were in a major decline…their response was habitat deterioration. Many knowledgeable hunters told them we have great covers with few to no Birds. And for years were ignored….The GC had the degrees, the hunters only boots on the ground.

Finally they went out-with some of the same hunters- and were shown many great covers that should hold Birds.

They ignored the situation for at least 15 years. All the while bragging about their Deer program. Well, great Deer and Grouse covers are almost identical. It should have been obvious to any that had a couple clues re Grouse….something was going on.

And finally????? "Oh look here what we found....West Nile Virus."

Yet they practically had to be spoon fed to acknowledge they had fumbled the ball.

You could make the limit 10….but if you have no Birds what difference would it make.

The Pa GC became a TV show....It was all about Deer, Turkey and archery....


Take it back another couple decades and the picture would look even worse....

It is much the same in the southeast with quail. Apparently the habitat has remained bad in eastern NC for almost 30 years now. It's been about that long since we had enough birds to make having a bird dog to hunt with worthwhile. According to the textbooks, the habitat in the '60s and '70s was worse; but yet, somehow, we had birds back then.

Not intending to hijack the thread to discuss the quail situation here, but just to reinforce the fallibility of the wildlife establishment.

Believe it or not, NV has some good ruffed grouse habitat. NDOW has introduced them into isolated and not so isolated areas. They completely screwed the pooch when they introduced them into heavily used creeks and canyons. The ruffies get clobbered by road hunters during deer season, and NDOW is too lazy to get into the hard to reach habitat. They'd have to get out of their new trucks and walk.

We have large pockets of choke cherries, wild roses, wild currents, and wild gooseberries in many remote canyons that have permanent water sources.

West Nile has our sagehen and blue grouse populations struggling.

There are sagehen, blue grouse, and ruffed grouse 15 miles from this deserted ranch.

The NC mountains also had some marginal Ruffed Grouse hunting....It wasn't for the non-dedicated or those not willing to take on a challenge....

Given a chance, a decent Ruffed Grouse population will fall shuffle into other available good covers....

Yep. Never hunted them there, but I understand there are still a few to be had. The tree huggers have caused timber harvests to decline in the Pisgah and Nantahala NFs, which has hurt the habitat...according to the biologists. Maybe someone from up there will chime in.

Deer and grouse cover are almost identical? Not even close up here in the big woods. In fact all of the timber harvesting in the North Maine Woods has greatly hurt the deer population but greatly benefitted moose and grouse populations. Deer here need mature softwood overstories to survive the winters.

And that graph shows 2020 being a bad year for Maine? Where is this data coming from? 2020 was one of the best years in the past decade and the graph should indicate that. I don't disagree that grouse populations as whole are seeing a downward trend. But at least portray accurate representation of upward ticks as well.

Shows how different places make things change....Here our best overwinter Deer covers are often recent cuts or new growth that allows easy access to food and thermal protection...Gets cold here, but the snow usually doesn't pile up all that high during most winters, and they usually are close to easy low lying browse.

That graph came from a place i stumbled across previously...I'll try to relocate the source..

So Battue, is the WNV the primary reason over the years for the decrease in grouse numbers across the NE in your opinion? Or is that too simplistic?

My opinion here in Pa is it must be a significant contributor. In more ways than being only a disease factor.

I know we have more than enough good covers. I know the hunting pressure on them has dropped. Not only in the number of hunters, but the season has also been shortened by 3 weeks. Later I can post a video of why, the GC scientist studying them makes the case for disease.

My main concern is that populations in most areas have gone so low that natural repopulation may be unlikely.

You need Birds to make a Dog…and you need more than a few Birds to bring Birds back. Read in another report were some fear they have completely “winked out” in some places.

Some go down the path thinking they never could never completely wink out. That’s been proven wrong more than once.

That’s bad news for the greatest game bird I’ve never hunted. There were some outdoor shows on TV here this summer on which there were some RG hunts in northern Wisc and the implication was there were plenty birds, enough to make a hunting camp excursion worth while.

Of course, you are never quite sure where the truth lies.

One case for disease....although I don't necessarily agree with the methodology... you inject developing embryos with a virus...I would think more than often the results may not be a perfect birth...

Wisconsin, Minnesota, Maine, Michigan and the some of the Canadian provinces still produce good hatches on certain years...It seems they are holding on the further North one goes...And this year the reports seem to be very good.

That is my belief here as well. Sad.

eta: Given enough time, natural repopulation may happen, but not in any adult's remaining lifetime.

Might as well make those my first post!

I went out last weekend in North Central Minnesota, I heard zero drumming and only had 2 flushes the first evening. Granted that was in about an hour with a dog (red setter) new to grouse. I decided to check with my neighbor. He said the DNR guy had been over and reported that he had talked to 30 different hunters and combined they had 3 flushes. Hard to believe. My mind kept going to the lack of drumming.

The next day in the evening I started in an area new to me of older growth, nothing. It was hot and dry and the dog needed a break so I waited until evening to go out again. I started in an area that was primarily a pretty dry cedar bog, 20 flushes. Next I went to an area that was clear cut about 10 years ago, it's hard to hunt because of tree density, I hit a covey of 8 right away. Seems like a normal year except you may have to change where you hunt.

I follow the grouse cycle pretty closely in my hunting area and the difference between the highs and lows are extreme. People can really make a difference simply by improving the habitat. It's noticible even during the low years.

You folks are lucky who still have them. I've had the crap scared out of me when getting to a Deer stand when a Grouse would bust out of a Cedar right next to my ear. I miss them. We haven't had them in rural northwest NJ for quite some time.

I run into a lot more ruffed grouse hunting western states at lower elevations than in Maine or the mid west states. I grew up in WI and have hunted grouse there over 40 years.

, Got 3 in a few hours flushed up more

We have done very well so far on grouse on the west side this year as well Ribka. No trick to find a couple easy limits while bouncing around to a few spots we like to get chanterelles from. Mushrooms have been crazy good for us as well this year.

Going for a daily bag limit has never been a priority for me. I always pass on bumped birds. To me the joy of hunting isn't the success rate.

Battue your question reaches far beyond Grouse.

We intrust quota's and our Biologist, but for states it is a money game! State Management even by the best of the best isn't accurate down to the specific season or seasons in question. Big Game animals in my opinion are easier to justify, they tend to rebound better and have a better management system in place. Birds are another story. Lets look at Duck numbers historically not good, and yet we still killem. I myself am guilty.

I don't rely on biologists to determine what is acceptable, neither should you or any hunter. What they post is a max legal limit to prevent the kill crazy from going too far. Like drinking we have to self impose our cutoffs based on the intimate knowledge of the ground we hunt. We know what the game in our special spots can take. Stewardship is the responsibility of everyone every time we pick up a gun and enter the field. A true hunter has a heart that tells him it's time to stop, whether in a duck blind with a half dozen others or walking miles of grassland alone. It changes hour to hour and day to day. A biologist in the employ of the game departments can't possibly be expected to do that.

I just got home recently from a 3 day trip in the North Maine Woods along the Quebec border. My buddy and I were breaking in his 9 month old German wired hair pointer. We flushed 68 grouse, and 2 woodcock in those 3 days. Shot 20 grouse. Road hunters have been complaining about no birds this year. You look at all the crops in the birds we shot and most were full of mushrooms. No grit needed. Plenty of birds if you were willing to get into the coverts. We noticed this year a lot of really, really big bodied birds. A lot larger than normal.

There’s an article in the new issue of Gun Dog magazine about ruffed grouse. Haven’t read it yet though

The grouse/ quail situation seems to be one that can’t be solved. Lots of ideas as to why populations struggle. Ask about the reductions in quail down here and you will get lots of differing opinions. I really miss the quail hunting traditions that we had down here. The dogs, the guns, the stories etc. It is good to know that the grouse is fairing some better. I’d love to see both species thrive once again.

Truth.

I'm not too awfully far from you. Back in the 80's a couple or 3 of us would spend an afternoon with our housedog............an American Cocker that would flush and retrieve anything that had wings............and have 30+ flushes as the norm.

Truth be told.........today, our grouse cover is BETTER than what it was then due to timbering and habitat improvement efforts on our part. I have not seen a ruffed grouse on our 285 acres in probably 5 years and I haven't seen 3 in the last 10 years.

Every year we get a gang of guys together for the opening day of bear season. Usually between 12 and 20 guys. We push out the best (nastiest) thickets you can imagine. IDEAL bear, whitetail and grouse cover. EVERY year for the last decade....... at the end of the day, I ask the whole group if they saw a grouse. I am still waiting on my first "yes". So, that's (conservatively) 800 man hours in ideal grouse habitat with zero flushes.

In my part of PA 2D the ruffed grouse is functionally extinct.

These pics are from three weeks ago in NW Wisconsin. A couple of days of hard hunting and put on a lot of miles in the thick stuff. 25 flushes a day or more, but of course very few of those did we ever get a shot at.

That's good to hear. The bird numbers where I hunt in Vermont have been terrible.

Yes. Agreed, in the NEK at least. Really sparse.

^This^ ...... I shot a limit of grouse here one day last week. That's the 1st time I've done that since moving here in 1985. If I get one or two, I'm just as happy.

Nothing better than a nice October day out with the dog roaming the old homesteads no matter how many birds you see.

habitat is most certainly the biggest reason for a decline in grouse populations. they NEED early successional growth forests, especially new aspen growth.

This is true, but there has to be a reasonable chance of contact with birds. I could have continued to keep a dog to quail hunt with; but with little likelihood of finding birds, it becomes nothing more than walking the dog. To be hunting, there has to be something to hunt ("I kill in order to have hunted"...Jose Ortega y Gasset).

Just like wetting a line in a swimming pool isn't fishing.