Geese & Corn.... What to plant?

Discussion in 'Habitat Forum' started by DUCKDIGGLER, Apr 20, 2003.

  1. eastwoods

    eastwoods Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    194
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    bottoms
    I disagree beanpole, respectfully of course and I don't know much about anything, but I say if you leave it standing you can flood and hunt it.

    You can even knock it down putting out the dekes and retrieiving birds every day.

    Anybody, Is there one court case where a judge ruled in favor of baiting where someone was hunting a partially harvested field or a nonharvested field?
     
  2. Beanpole

    Beanpole Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    319
    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2003
    Location:
    Grand Prairie, AR
    Yes there is a case in point. In the late 80's, there was a hunting operation near Mer Rouge LA that had a problem. There was to be a group of congressmen who were to meet and duck hunt for a weekend. The fed at the time, Olivarous, (rest his soul) decided that there was too much crop left in the field. He shut down hunting for the rest of the season until a federal judge could sort it out. They lost 2 weeks of duck season and no more waterfowl hunting was allowed on that property.

    I don't know if you know what red rice is, but Olivarous claimed he didn't either. The farmer had harvested whole field and the volunteer red rice came back with a vengence. He had a hell of crop of duck food. He flooded shortly before duck season and had a great season until the congressional hunt. This guy checked them on a regular basis from November until he figured out how to shut them down. The farmer had to show his harvest receipts for the farm, prove that he harvested a crop, and educate a judicary to the facts of farming. By the way, each pit was worth 7500$$ at this time.

    Another operation near Tallulah left a strip of soybeans unharvested along a overflow ditch bank. The plan was to provide food for duck hunting. This field was along the road to Tensas NWR. Just add water and shoot ducks was the plan. A fed in the area determined the area was not a normal agricultural practice since only a partial field was harvested and no effort(ruts, tracks)was present as evidence of attempted harvest.

    Lessson: Don't give a reason to be checked. Be smart about what you do.
     
  3. eastwoods

    eastwoods Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    194
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    bottoms
    I know the gov't aint very logical, but that makes no sense whatsoever.

    Red rice is a weed. They gonna shut down the timber if the oaks produce to many acorns.

    What's the difference in not harvesting any and harvesting some?

    What about all the companies that sell food plot mixes or seeds for duck hunting?

    I bet they dumped some harvested rice in with the red rice field.

    I didn't see anywhere in the Regulation where they say you can't harvest a portion of the field.

    It does say specifically you can hunt flooded standing crops.

    "Intent to harvest" means to me done in the same manner as farmers do when planting, period. I don't think it means litterally you got to intend to harvest it.

    I could be wrong and probably am, but 99% of the Dept of Interior, Fish and Wildlife, think the same.
     
  4. T_870

    T_870 Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    151
    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Location:
    Oregon
    I also agree, if it were so against the law to hunt a half cut corn field wht the heck doesn't it say so loud and clear in my hunting regs? Obviously it isn't a problem, especially since almost any country road you take in my area drives straight passed a duck club with half a corn field left standing and blinds in the tall corn. If it were a big deal feds would crack down on it, which I have not seen done, at least in my neck of the woods.
     
  5. Ron Gilmore

    Ron Gilmore Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    13,113
    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    nd
    Take a look at some cases in Nelson County in ND. Back in the late 90's we had wet falls that prevented harvest of wheat and barley etc. Farmers burned the fields after insurace was settled to remove the excess straw for the next years planting. The waterfowl love toasted wheat. A number of hunters where ticketed for hunting these fields. The result after court was that burning to remove stuble was a ag practice not baiting. Burning of stubble has been a standard but not highly used farming method in ND dating back to the 20's


    So do yourself a favor and check locally as farming practices and crop rules differ region to region. Do not rish the privalge to hunt because of ignorance.
     
  6. ramsey

    ramsey Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    2,915
    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2001
    WITH ALL DUE RESPECT;)

    LMAO x 10,000,000 :l :l :l :l What's so damned funny is that it actually "sounds" like y'all know what in the hell you are talking about!!!!!!! The way you describe it, every single field in the MS that has a pitblind is "baited"! Reckon why all the USFWS LEOs, with whom I used to work, haven't busted every other duck hunter in the state??!!

    Not that you're interested in the facts, but go here:
    http://www.firstgov.gov/fgsearch/in...=true&Submit=Go&menu2=http://offices.fws.gov/

    Believe it or not, there are a few of us around that are actually PAID to know this stuff.:D
     
  7. MALLARD MAGICIAN

    MALLARD MAGICIAN Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    4,941
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2001
    Location:
    Cache River Bottoms, AR
    The way I read this from the USF&WS website, it is saying you CAN hunt a partially unharvested ag field, IF something has keep you from harvesting that portion, and IF the unharvested crop has NOT been manipulated.

    Now that "something" leaves ALOT of gray area for interruption, for both the HUNTER and the FED. Officer.

    Seems most of us have all seen crops left standing & hunted with no problem(even when Feds have knowledge of the situation), but undoubtly there are some that have seen problems arise from the practice. With so much GRAY in the law, you will NEVER get a REAL answer on the subject. You ask 10 different experts in the field, and I would venture to say you get at least 3-5 different interruptions of the law.:rolleyes: All you can do is follow the law as best you feel you can & with what your heart will allow you to do. As for me I will continue to hunt standing crops, but you must answer that question for yourself.


    beanpole, I do not believe nor have I read anywhere in the REGS that anything less then 100% harvest of a field is considered manipuilation of a crop area. If it does read that way, could you please point out or copy& paste that portion of the REGS here? Just looking for some clarity in a mudhole. Thanks, MM
     
  8. eastwoods

    eastwoods Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    194
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    bottoms
    I got buddies that prepare duck fields for a living. They leave about 5 acres of the rice crop standing near the pit. They harvest about 80% of the field and roll all they harvest. They make more money off the ducks than they do off the farming. I think this is legal.

    I got another buddy proffessional that has three pits in a 80 acre rice field. He basically roundups a hole 2 or 3 times per year right in front of each pit for the dekes and a landing zone. He leaves the reast standing and floods. He hasn't cut grain for agriculture purposes in over 20 years. I think he is legal.

    I know others that leave the beans in front of the blind every year and I think they are legal to.
     
  9. eastwoods

    eastwoods Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    194
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    bottoms
    Straight from the feds and if you get a different interpretation than I have explained already we disagree:

    "Planting and Harvesting

    A normal agricultural planting is undertaken for the purpose of producing or gathering a crop. Normal agricultural plantings do not involve the placement of seeds in piles or other concentrations. Relevant factors include recommended planting dates, proper seed distribution, seed bed preparation, application rate, and seed viability. A normal soil stabilization practice means a planting for agricultural soil erosion control or post-mining land reclamation conducted in accordance with recommendations of State Extension Specialists. Lands planted by means of top sowing or aerial seeding can only be hunted if seeds are present solely as the result of a normal agricultural planting or normal soil stabilization practice.

    Wildlife food plots and "goose fields" should be planted early enough to ensure that the seeds germinate prior to 10 days before being hunted over. If the seeds have not germinated by at least 10 days prior to being hunted over, the areas must have been planted in a manner consistent with Cooperative Extension Service recommendations for production of a crop or the area will be considered baited.

    A normal agricultural harvest is undertaken for the purpose of gathering a crop. The arrangement of harvested grain in long rows or piles should raise questions about the legality of the area for waterfowl hunting. A normal post-harvest manipulation first requires a normal agricultural harvest and removal of grain before any manipulation of remaining agricultural vegetation, such as corn stubble or rice stubble. You should be aware that although you can hunt doves over manipulated agricultural crops, you cannot hunt waterfowl over manipulated agricultural crops except after the field has been subject to a normal harvest and removal of grain (i.e., post-harvest manipulation).

    If, for whatever reason, an agricultural crop or a portion of an agricultural crop has not been harvested (i.e., equipment failure, weather, insect infestation, disease, etc.) and the crop or remaining portion of the crop has been manipulated, then the area is a baited area and cannot be hunted for waterfowl. For example, no hunting could occur on or over a field of sweet corn that has been partially harvested and the remainder manipulated. To be considered normal, an agricultural planting, agricultural harvesting, and agricultural post-harvest manipulation must be conducted in accordance with recommendations of State Extension Specialists. However, the Service will continue to make final determinations about whether recommendations were followed. "
     
  10. silvermallard

    silvermallard Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    3,682
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2001
    Location:
    Hawaii
    You guys are, of course, correct. And if you go back and read the entire thread, you will see that's what I said from the outset...taken in context of the whole. And that is what sparked the "debate." Some of you came in late, and don't seem to have read my comments in context.

    I have left unharvested grain every year for the past 4 years on the projects I manage...and will do so again this year (although considerably less due to the difference of habitat in the new areas). And I assure you I am completely legal.

    My point was CHECK WITH LOCAL OFFICIALS WHO ARE ACTUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING THIS DETERMINATION, because the regs vary somewhat by state, county, etc...because of how the fed regs delegate authority for making specific determinations related to timing and acceptable practices. Here's one quick example: you can generally roll rice fields (an accepted ag practice for RICE) but you cannot generally roll corn or wheat stubble (not commonly done for ag reasons).

    In some areas, it is required by the officials that SOME harvest takes place. In some areas, it is not. In some areas, total harvest is the standard...and crops left in the field need to be justified in ag terms. This is largely due to STATE waterfowl management plans, which are reviewed by the feds like once/decade or so. Not all states HAVE such plans, and rules tend to be more strictly interpreted where this is the case (in my experience).

    The REAL point...once again...is that this is NOT a cut-n-dried issue when looked at on a national level, and when someone from an area I am not VERY familiar with asks for advice it is only the responsible thing to do to take the conservative approach and refer them to the proper authorities. That is what they are there for.
     

Share This Page