I do agree that it may create additional risks possibly but compared to what.
PF as an organization does not "require" the seed it is the Gov't.
Is the risk measurable.Is there data to support this risk.
I know that when it comes to forestry that everytime they clear cut areas it creates additional risk by leaps and bounds by way of puncture but it also creates habitat for grouse.
In addition to that clear cuts also induce the growth of grasses including Canadian rye.
My moms place was logged two years ago with a majority being giant pines with no ground floral in the front that is now full of grasses and looks like a CRP field.
There was some Canadian rye I believe in it unless it was a different rye.
I also see it on hap lands which are not seeded.
On a side note they do pulpy brush management along fence rows and wood lots so trees don't take over and creep into crp fields.
This leaves spikes in the ground and in three outings we have had two dogs puncture a foot.
My point was that back in the pheasant heyday in Michigan that Canadian rye was more common with the type of habitat back then.
The attack on an organization that creates pheasants to hunt and restoration of wildlife habitat is ridiculous considering that the larger argument is we don't have pheasants in Michigan anymore which upsets a lot of people.
Yesterday we saw around 20 roosters and at least that many hens in the late season and I for one am greatful for the work they have done.
Thank you Pheasants Forever
You have earned my lifetime membership along with my other yearly contributions and keep up the good work!