What a shame

emusmacker

Senior Member
The food plots are legalized baiting arguments are ignorant. There is only way that "food" can be grown in Iowa, and hunted over in Georgia, and that is via illegal baiting. That is it. Every type of food that can be legally hunted over, including moist soil, aquatic plants, agricultural left overs, green tree reservoirs, flood corn ponds, planted water lilly, japanese millet around a pond edge, and so on is hunted in the location in which it was grown. Every legal method has that in common regarding of whether is was hardwood bottom naturally flooded, a GTR intentionally flooded by Arkansas, or a person's own private "food plot" pond. Baiting is completely different, and arguing otherwise is, again, ignorant. It is also typically made by the guys stuck on public land somewhere who should spend more time worrying about getting their own private spot and less time complaining about someone else's.

So then if it's legal it's ok? So please define the difference then other than being illegal.I own my own property. I also think that a food plot is just legal baiting. Which I'm fine with. Enforce the limits. Once you get your limit, go home.
 

across the river

Senior Member
So then if it's legal it's ok? So please define the difference then other than being illegal.I own my own property. I also think that a food plot is just legal baiting. Which I'm fine with. Enforce the limits. Once you get your limit, go home.


I did in the post you quoted, but a simple way to remember it is "If you take the water to the corn, it is legal. If you take the corn to the water, it is illegal." If it grows in the spot you hunt it, it isn't baiting, nor should it be. If it doesn't grown in the spot you hunt, and you transported it from somewhere else, it is baiting. I don't understand how people don't get that concept.



You have private land, so lets say you have a acre pond on your place. You plant it in corn or millet, and that little bit of food doesn't last long once the ducks, black birds, etc... find it. The number of ducks that you will be able to kill off of a place that small will be pretty low, because the food won't last. Now if you take a 55 gallon drum of corn there grown in Iowa every week and keep replenishing it, you can hunt it all season. The birds dive bomb a small area, you and two buddies kill 8 or 9 a weekended. You have taken a bunch of birds off of habitat that wouldn't support anywhere near that number of birds without baiting, and you wouldn't come close to that. Baiting adds no habitat whatsoever. Planting food plots does.

So what do you not consider baiting? If I plant oak trees, smartweed that comes back year after year that I can manipulate, drain and control water to promote moist soil habitat, have harvested agricultural fields to hunt, have banana water Lilly that I planted and promoted, etc...., is all that baiting as well since it was"human induced".
No.

Again, hunting it where it is grown is, and should be legal. Hunting food many miles from where it came out of the ground is not.
 

mattuga

Banned
So then if it's legal it's ok? So please define the difference then other than being illegal.I own my own property. I also think that a food plot is just legal baiting. Which I'm fine with. Enforce the limits. Once you get your limit, go home.

I think you are missing the point others have tried to make about baiting vs planting...but I'll try again. Planted food provides habitat, it is not a swimming pool with corn in it. A corn pile is there for you to kill ducks easily. No one would plant or go thru the effort of planting to provide SEASON long food and cover for ducks if they could throw a pile of corn out and slay their limit.

I think pressure is a main mover of ducks during hunting season. Corn piles, my word.

I get the point against farming for ducks with agriculture practices as a cover to what is going on, essentially unharvested food for ducks in water. That ain't cheap but we are fighting against loss of wetlands for ducks so providing flooded crops along the flyway is essential. That is a long discussion that can be had to the pluses and minuses. I think weather pushes ducks, but not like it used to bc of free food up north (MS Flyway). Bait piles would not help hunting ducks but for a brief period.
 

across the river

Senior Member
I think you are missing the point others have tried to make about baiting vs planting...but I'll try again. Planted food provides habitat, it is not a swimming pool with corn in it. A corn pile is there for you to kill ducks easily. No one would plant or go thru the effort of planting to provide SEASON long food and cover for ducks if they could throw a pile of corn out and slay their limit.

I think pressure is a main mover of ducks during hunting season. Corn piles, my word.

I get the point against farming for ducks with agriculture practices as a cover to what is going on, essentially unharvested food for ducks in water. That ain't cheap but we are fighting against loss of wetlands for ducks so providing flooded crops along the flyway is essential. That is a long discussion that can be had to the pluses and minuses. I think weather pushes ducks, but not like it used to bc of free food up north (MS Flyway). Bait piles would not help hunting ducks but for a brief period.

The amount of unharvest n the United States and Canada this year that was specifically planted for ducks, likely doesn't equal the acreage that existed in a single county in North Dakota. Well over half of the states corn wasn't harvest by December, and much of it got naturally flooded. That is one state, one. This notion that people "planting for ducks" is short stopping birds is ludicrous. It is such a minimal amount of acreage in the grand scheme of things, that it is essentially insignificant. There was soooooo much food and habitat for ducks this year up north it was crazy, and much of it "never froze over." Most ducks aren't leaving unless they have to. The guys with corn ponds in the bootheel of Missourri had nothing to do with people not seeing ducks in Georgia.
 

mattuga

Banned
The amount of unharvest n the United States and Canada this year that was specifically planted for ducks, likely doesn't equal the acreage that existed in a single county in North Dakota. Well over half of the states corn wasn't harvest by December, and much of it got naturally flooded. That is one state, one. This notion that people "planting for ducks" is short stopping birds is ludicrous. It is such a minimal amount of acreage in the grand scheme of things, that it is essentially insignificant. There was soooooo much food and habitat for ducks this year up north it was crazy, and much of it "never froze over." Most ducks aren't leaving unless they have to. The guys with corn ponds in the bootheel of Missourri had nothing to do with people not seeing ducks in Georgia.

Not to get off topic from baiting but...

I think we are largely on the same page but large unhunted planted refuges areas are a problem keeping ducks localized and feeding at night knowing they have large areas to go between to be unhunted. Heck, California rotates refuges, how do they have that right? This goes for mainly public refuges. Loss of overall habitat is a bigger issue than anything we are discussing so some private holes planted for ducks ain't gonna effect the flyway but multiple large duck refuges planted with unharvested food can hold a boat load of ducks all season. That has its pluses and minuses but I am no expert to delve much further than than other than speculation.

The lack of commercial harvest from flooding will always affect the middle flyways in bad years like the last 2, so much food left and no snow. The Canada bred Mallards aren't coming too far south if they have open water and no snow covering food. The small ducks aren't around like I recall, where did the shovelers go? They avoid the pressure from the lower MS flyway (yes, I am part of that pressure)

I also do not think the duck counts are accurately presented. They are made by companies that benefit financially from good news. Just my 2 cents. If the #'s were as high as claimed we'd be kiling more ducks. They are roosting on refuges and feeding at night on easy to eat food nowadays.
 

across the river

Senior Member
Not to get off topic from baiting but...

I think we are largely on the same page but large unhunted planted refuges areas are a problem keeping ducks localized and feeding at night knowing they have large areas to go between to be unhunted. Heck, California rotates refuges, how do they have that right? This goes for mainly public refuges. Loss of overall habitat is a bigger issue than anything we are discussing so some private holes planted for ducks ain't gonna effect the flyway but multiple large duck refuges planted with unharvested food can hold a boat load of ducks all season. That has its pluses and minuses but I am no expert to delve much further than than other than speculation.

The lack of commercial harvest from flooding will always affect the middle flyways in bad years like the last 2, so much food left and no snow. The Canada bred Mallards aren't coming too far south if they have open water and no snow covering food. The small ducks aren't around like I recall, where did the shovelers go? They avoid the pressure from the lower MS flyway (yes, I am part of that pressure)

I also do not think the duck counts are accurately presented. They are made by companies that benefit financially from good news. Just my 2 cents. If the #'s were as high as claimed we'd be kiling more ducks. They are roosting on refuges and feeding at night on easy to eat food nowadays.


I have no problem with a refugee, public or private, and I think they are very beneficial. I don't understand this thinking that they are "bad." Is the Savannah NWR a good thing overall, absolutely, and if you gave me the option to build an impoundment to hunt close to the NWR, or the same one in the middle of nowhere, I'm picking by the NWR every time. The more ducks you can draw to an area the better, and the more habitat overall the better.

The FWS doesn't have a goal of getting limits for hunters. They are there to manage wildlife, and I would never have the expectation that they wouldn't build or maintain a refuge in Illinois, Minnesota, or Michigan because hunters in the Deep South don't think they are killing enough ducks. The refuge benefits far more species than just the ones that get hunted, and I think they help hunters, especially the ones in the area of the refuge.

As far as the surveys go, why would they lie. Again, they don't really give a rip about hunters. There is no benefit to the FWS or a state agency inflating the numbers. Do they inflate the woodcock, sandhill crane, and song birds surveys too? A lot of state surveys were terrible this year, so there is not basis to the believe that they artificially inflating them. As far as why you aren't seeing as many ducks as you expect, think if it like this. There are tens of millions of people living along the coast of Georgia, Florida, and, South Carolina, and if you live in say Waycross or Albany, you really don't know that that many people exist. However, you let a hurricane swing in toward the coast and people from everywhere will fill up every hotel and restaurant in the town. The last couple of years, there haven't been any hurricanes, so the ducks have had no reason to leave the coast. That doesn't mean they aren't there.
 

mattuga

Banned
#1
Is the Savannah NWR a good thing overall, absolutely, and if you gave me the option to build an impoundment to hunt close to the NWR, or the same one in the middle of nowhere, I'm picking by the NWR every time.

#2
As far as the surveys go, why would they lie. Again, they don't really give a rip about hunters. .

#1
Yes, exactly my point. A refuge concentrates ducks that know where they are unhunted. I'm not saying open season on refuges, but hunt them on a rotation annually. The WMAs can't do that because of $$ allocation, all the good $$ is spent on the refuge while the hunted land sucks.

#2
You answered your own question but left out "they still need their money and use outdated science that benefits their efforts and #'s". The birds are more concentrated due to loss of habitat but the same areas are researched for the #'s.
 

across the river

Senior Member
#1
Yes, exactly my point. A refuge concentrates ducks that know where they are unhunted. I'm not saying open season on refuges, but hunt them on a rotation annually. The WMAs can't do that because of $$ allocation, all the good $$ is spent on the refuge while the hunted land sucks.

#2
You answered your own question but left out "they still need their money and use outdated science that benefits their efforts and #'s". The birds are more concentrated due to loss of habitat but the same areas are researched for the #'s.



Why is everything around ducks thought to be a conspiracy?

A refuge is handled by the US Fish and Wildlife. WMA's are managed by the state. Again, the feds don't care what the hunter in Georgia killed last season, and they don't give a rip about your hunting opportunities here. That is not their purpose. They are federally funded via the budget, and get nothing from you or anyone else's hunting hunting license. They don't get money for salaries or gas for the airplanes from duck stamps either. Over half of the FWS's budget actually goes to the states to support state wildlife and conservation. The money goes from the feds to the state, not the other way around. You do pay for the federal surveys via your federal income tax, but they are going to get that money regardless of the what the duck numbers are or as Steve Harvey would say, "the survey says." The amount of nesting habitat that they survey is primarily due to how wet the winter was, and numbers are numbers regardless. They survey the same area each year, primarily via the air, and the land itself doesn't disappear even if the nesting habitat decreases. They just fly over more fields and less ponds and count less ducks.

Your local public hunting opportunities, WMA's etc...are all state controlled. The hunting and fishing opportunities that do exist on national refuges are generally run by the state they are in. And news flash, the refuges don't hold birds because the "good $$ is spent on the refuge while the hunted land sucks." The hunted land sucks because yahoos are constantly bothering the birds on the hunted land. The birds are sitting on the refuges because the yahoos can't bother them there. The difference has less to do with money and more to do with idiots ( and the pressure they put on the birds).
 

across the river

Senior Member
What if I said duck counts were wrong and there were not as many ducks as they think?

You or anyone else saying overall duck populations are down, because of what you see in you local area, is the equivalent of someone in some small town in Georgia saying the U.S. economy is in recession, because the local manufacturing plant closed down and they got laid off. Everyone wants to draw a conclusion on something based on there own personal experience. Just because the economy is down in one localized area, doesn't mean it is down overall across the country. Heck the company may be doing really well and may have shut the plant down to build a newer more modern one somewhere else with a more skill labor pool, but the local guy still thinks the economy sucks, because he doesn't have a job. In the same way, people in Georgia or Louisiana haven't seen as many ducks as they have in the past, so now of course the survey counts are wrong. Some of the best years I ever had were in years when the survey population were down in the 90's, where they wrong then too? No, there were just other factors like the weather, hunting pressure, habitat, etc.... that made those really good years.
 
I have no problem with a refugee, public or private, and I think they are very beneficial. I don't understand this thinking that they are "bad." Is the Savannah NWR a good thing overall, absolutely, and if you gave me the option to build an impoundment to hunt close to the NWR, or the same one in the middle of nowhere, I'm picking by the NWR every time. The more ducks you can draw to an area the better, and the more habitat overall the better.

The FWS doesn't have a goal of getting limits for hunters. They are there to manage wildlife, and I would never have the expectation that they wouldn't build or maintain a refuge in Illinois, Minnesota, or Michigan because hunters in the Deep South don't think they are killing enough ducks. The refuge benefits far more species than just the ones that get hunted, and I think they help hunters, especially the ones in the area of the refuge.

As far as the surveys go, why would they lie. Again, they don't really give a rip about hunters. There is no benefit to the FWS or a state agency inflating the numbers. Do they inflate the woodcock, sandhill crane, and song birds surveys too? A lot of state surveys were terrible this year, so there is not basis to the believe that they artificially inflating them. As far as why you aren't seeing as many ducks as you expect, think if it like this. There are tens of millions of people living along the coast of Georgia, Florida, and, South Carolina, and if you live in say Waycross or Albany, you really don't know that that many people exist. However, you let a hurricane swing in toward the coast and people from everywhere will fill up every hotel and restaurant in the town. The last couple of years, there haven't been any hurricanes, so the ducks have had no reason to leave the coast. That doesn't mean they aren't there.
Exactly and on the coast there is so much water it is hard to find large concentrations of ducks.
 

Big7

The Oracle
Sure hope they didn't just dispose of all those ducks. Hope they were given to folks that will eat them.
That's what I was thinking. Someone should make use of the meat. Plenty of folks down there can't afford to eat. Much less something like that..

And yeah... Those fools need do some jail. And then some serious public service (or whatever it's called now) working on public land. Maybe they could learn a little about the damage they have done. Oh yeah.. Waterfowl license.... Kiss that goodbye for at least 5 years, maybe10.???
 

Duckbuster82

Senior Member
You or anyone else saying overall duck populations are down, because of what you see in you local area, is the equivalent of someone in some small town in Georgia saying the U.S. economy is in recession, because the local manufacturing plant closed down and they got laid off. Everyone wants to draw a conclusion on something based on there own personal experience. Just because the economy is down in one localized area, doesn't mean it is down overall across the country. Heck the company may be doing really well and may have shut the plant down to build a newer more modern one somewhere else with a more skill labor pool, but the local guy still thinks the economy sucks, because he doesn't have a job. In the same way, people in Georgia or Louisiana haven't seen as many ducks as they have in the past, so now of course the survey counts are wrong. Some of the best years I ever had were in years when the survey population were down in the 90's, where they wrong then too? No, there were just other factors like the weather, hunting pressure, habitat, etc.... that made those really good years.

I get around a little bit and have friends that hunt from Canada to Mexico, California to Carolina. Same report bird numbers are down. This year was one of the lowest number of birds that i saw for the year, but it was the highest number of birds I have killed In a year. I’m not saying bird numbers are up down or anything just saying maybe it’s a factor in the issues we see.
 

Mexican Squealer

Senior Member
I just hope things get back to normal....lack of cold, duck numbers down or whatever is going on we all look forward to the ducks coming back. Makes me think about the way “imprinting” depleates and how long that takes to become a factor.. I had a bunch of mallards on my place the past week. Was
A welcome site, season or not.
 

emusmacker

Senior Member
LOL so planting a 1/2 acre plot of winter wheat is gonna really benefit the deer all year? That's so much different than planting a small 1/2acre corn plot and flooding it? lol that's funny.
 

Duckbuster82

Senior Member
LOL so planting a 1/2 acre plot of winter wheat is gonna really benefit the deer all year? That's so much different than planting a small 1/2acre corn plot and flooding it? lol that's funny.

Who plants a half acre of corn for ducks? That’s not going to hold many birds or attract many birds. I don’t think that you can really compare deer to ducks. Since deer are already existing on a track of land. Food plots can help supply the right nutrition, it can also concentrate them but it’s not bringing them to the property. Now as far as impoundments are concerned I believe that they are becoming more and more important every year. With thousands of acres of natural wetlands being loss or stripped of vegetation there is an issue for migrating birds that rely on the nutrition that was natural. Now people that plant a true impoundments 30+ acres and multiple ponds they are helping. Now you may say that’s baiting ect. I Promis the average hunter would still struggle to take advantage of one if they had it. Unlike deer hunting over a half acre food plot that you can shoot the entire area, In an impoundment you still have to convince ducks to come within range. Now that’s where pouring corn out is not fair. They will dive into that specific area the corn has been placed, no calling, decoys or scouting needed.
 

across the river

Senior Member
OK I will say it cause no one else will. 7 hunters can take 6 ducks a piece. That is 42 ducks. They only had 38. Yes it appears they were baiting. So it is okay to shoot deer over bait? It is okay to manipulate a dove field? It is okay to flood a corn field? Moral: flood don't throw. To me it is this simple: ALL baiting should be illegal or baiting should be legal and the limits strictly enforced. $500 per bird over the limit and loose hunting privileges for 5 years. WOULD THAT DETER YOU? How many of us can afford to purchase tractors, planters, seed, fertilizer, and buy the land? We know who benefits from the law that allows flooding corn fields, the plantation owners, the wealthy. They have the resources and the connections. So the rest of us, working class rednecks can pay these ridiculous lease prices and hope we have a good hunt maybe once or twice a season. I choose not to bait, but at my age the number of birds taken is not the reason I go. The whistling wings, the site of a wood duck dancing thru the trees, the cupped wings and feet down of a ring neck or bluebill. And oh yea, these folks did not impact anybody's hunting season but their own. Last couple of years nesting pairs are down and the projected migration numbers are down.

Yet how many "working class rednecks" have a $40,000+ pickup towing a $20,000+ boat or a $15,000 Polaris, with a $30,000+ camper sitting in the yard. I know a bunch of them. For what most guys spend on depreciable assists, and the interest the pay financing them, they could have easily bought their on piece of land with a beaver swap, built a pond on it, etc....., and had their own "plantation."
 
Top