Elite Refuge Member
- Jan 8, 2002
- Reaction score
- Othello, WA
Great question, as I said my opinion evolved. The first thing was the realization that “legal definitions” made a regulatory fix even at the state level impossible. The second was the upper Basin for decades wintered 2 million plus mallards at peak migration, now that number is 200-300K total ducks (think 1.7 million more mallards in the upper basin might change things?). The 3rd thing was historical data. The percentages of where waterfowl are found hasn’t changed much over the decades, the total numbers however are dramatically lower.I’m with you about not really wanting to bring anything to this state. It’s the worst. I mentioned that article in outdoor life earlier in this thread. I really think this commish is looking for a way to shut down hunting every chance they get.
Dr. Dux I do understand making artificial flooded crops would take away public land, which I’m not a fan of. I would a like to apologize about Paul’s pond, they made a video with DU about two years and I just rewatched and they never said they did a project there. They just said DU was a part of his life. I guessed I just assumed they were working together when I first watched it. I read your comments about your opinion have changed on flooded crops. This really interests me and makes me wonder if I’m missing something. My biggest concern is I feel like every year waterfowling is becoming a rich man’s games and driving out the average guy. Now all you see are pretend hunters with huge pile pictures in front of a corn pond. Then you go out to your local marsh and see 40 birds. It just makes you wonder where all the birds went when they were there just 5-10 years ago.
I don’t love corn complexes by any means but I came to realize there isn’t a regulatory path for change with them so I focused my efforts elsewhere. Local duck production and low density, highly managed, quality public hunting opportunities being bigger concerns.