

































Ohio follows the same policy of state-wide distribution regardless of 
historic evidences of success.” Iows is thé ‘only state so far encount- 
ered which has discontinued @istribution +6 those regions obviously un- 
suited to support pheasants in 4 wild state.Map E would indicate that it 
is futile to continues distribution in the southern counties and at least 
of doubtful advisibility to continue distribution in the loess prairie 
type except on the large river bottoms. 
Farm Sentiment Throughout Illinois one encounters the impression that the 
majority of farmers are opposed to the establishment of pheasants.iIn some 
k 
eases the reason given is fear of crop damage,in others alleged interfer- 
ence with quail.No allegations of ac tual damage which seem substantial 
were encountered,although there was some complaint in northeast DeKalb 
County.It is evident,however,that adverse sentiment on the part of farmers 
is more important than the doubli ing or tripling of stocking » operations ,be- 
cause outside of the Lake region and the”Tllinois River bottoms it would 
pe easy for any farmer to exterminate the*birds if he wished to.The exist- 
ence of this advers sentiment emphasizes the urgency of am impartial and 
scientific investigation of pheasant food habits and relation to native 
species.The results would carry the mostweight if conducted by an agricul- 
tural college. 
Factors of Productivity The, only new information obtained on factors af 
71 
fecting pheasants was on damage by floods in the Illinois bottoms .Phelp 
{2 
says that pheas pat were very numerous on salle of the bottoms below Beards- 
towmm until the flood of 1926 broke the dykes and drowned them out. He 
that the birds do not try.to fly to the adjacent uplands,but simply sit on 
a high place until forced off bythe water, after which they hop into a tree 
a r hawks.A similar report offlcod 


where they either starve or are chased out by 
