# Duck numbers



## Anas Strepera (Nov 10, 2004)

What did you guys think of the duck numbers this past season? Do you think a liberal season was justified in regards to amount of the ducks you saw?:run:


----------



## recker (Oct 12, 2003)

From what I saw not way at all. Even when I saw numbers where going to be done I thought it was a bad idea.Of course not many of us shot alot of ducks so it probably did not matter anyway.Dennis Anderson has a good article in sundays paper today about our problems here in Minnesota at www.startribune.com under the outdoors section. It is a good read.


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

Great article. Talk about telling it like it is. I remember the helicopter fund and how it was supposed to help crack down on poachers down by the gulf. I never heard much about that whole deal since has anyone else? I'm sure the aircraft is out there now doing us all justice. :eyeroll: The 150 year plan is pretty encouraging. :roll: Isn't it just fitting that at the bottom of the page there is an advertisement for duck hunting in Mexico? Nice.

I just happened to notice the time of this post of mine. Fits better than Cinderella's slipper.


----------



## slough (Oct 12, 2003)

The area I hunted this year seemed to have as many or more ducks as the past few years, but I guess I probably did more scouting this year than other years. Not disagreeing that it was poor in some areas, just saying what I saw.


----------



## hoosier dhr (Jul 24, 2003)

I saw more ducks in ND this year than the past 3  
However I saw less geese  
Here in IN the season was good early but the birds seem to get smart and would not decoy the last 2 weekends. :******: 
It is supposed to be in the 20's at night this week so im hoping to get some divers on sat and sun (the last day is sun)


----------



## maple lake duck slayer (Sep 25, 2003)

After the season closed in MN, about two weeks later I saw greater numbers of ducks than I did all season. Saw a group of about 1,000 circling a field and were using the ice to roost on. All huge mallards. Real disappointing season for me. Numbers aren't everything, but I do keep a log. Last year, we got about 45. I hunted way more days this year and got about 25-30. Huge decline.


----------



## maple lake duck slayer (Sep 25, 2003)

This is a great article. I just read it and e-mailed Dennis Anderson. Us waterfowl hunters in MN need to do something, and fast. I hope this rally gets organized, as I would definately be there. As much as this article ****** me off, it hurts me even more. What we are doing, or not doing is horrible, and needs to be changed. I have wanted to do something for a long time, and I believe the time is now. Does anybody know how I can get more involved in issues related to waterfowl and waterfowl hunting? I am very interested in this, and want to get involved.


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

Dennis Anderson: Empty skies 
Dennis Anderson, Star Tribune 
December 12, 2004 ANDY1212

Now, in the twilight of 2004, Minnesota has accomplished what only a few decades ago would have been considered impossible: It has run out of ducks.

For a long while, the state got by, losing numbers of birds -- but only some -- as it lost habitat. As this occurred, sore feelings among waterfowlers were soothed by reassurances of biologists, state and federal, who insisted any drop-off in duck numbers was temporary -- "And besides," the biologists would say, "though hunting generally was spotty, some hunters had some good shooting somewhere."

All of which was bogus then and remains bogus now.

In Minnesota, there are no ducks.

Worse, there is no realistic plan to regain the lost birds and the habitat they require, or even stem the state's continuing losses of wetlands and associated uplands.

As previously noted in this space, duck management in Minnesota is the province of a handful of Department of Natural Resources employees who collectively call themselves the "Waterfowl Committee."

Given the state's decline in duck numbers, one would think membership on this panel would signal the end of a professional's career. Not so: At last check, these folks are prepared to meet again -- and again and again -- apparently unaware that the birds they are managing are gone.

"But some hunters had some good shooting somewhere."

The question now is what to do. It's a given that many people are apathetic and, even in the face of catastrophe, will do nothing. Or little. Duck hunters are no different.

Yet it is also true that duck hunters -- most of them -- are passionate about their sport and about the opportunities in autumn it affords them to pass a good time at sunrise, in marshes, among friends.

These people, I believe, will go a long way -- perhaps much farther than anyone in the DNR or the administration of Gov. Tim Pawlenty imagines -- to save ducks and duck hunting.

Options for initiating positive change are few. What is known is that with each passing duck season the chance that state and federal wildlife agencies will undertake the kind of work necessary to save ducks is slim, if not nonexistent.

Also known is that any good will those agencies and their biologists once had with duck hunters is gone.

Minnesota duck hunters, therefore, must initiate the changes necessary to save ducks and duck hunting, or risk losing both.

How serious is the problem?

Last week, in an e-mail message to Minnesota waterfowl activist Lance Ness, DNR wetland wildlife habitat program leader Ray Norrgard said:

"Moderate success [in restoring mallard numbers] will require an additional 1.5 million acres of prairie wetlands and at least that much grassland in long-term protection. At our current rate of wetland restoration, that will take about 150 years, assuming we stem the loss of existing wetlands. The long and short of it is that we are in trouble and have been for a long time."

What's remarkable is not so much Norrgard's proclamation that a century and a half will pass before a few more greenheads fly over Minnesota, but that someone in the DNR actually acknowledges the gravity of the situation -- until recently a novelty among that agency's employees.

What to do? We begin by gathering in numbers large enough to impress upon Pawlenty, DNR Commissioner Gene Merriam and the Legislature that action is demanded -- and expected.

Call it a march if you will. Or a rally. At the Capitol. Perhaps in January. Perhaps February.

Though Minnesota has 120,000 duck hunters, nearly all of whom are angry, it's unknown whether they will show up in numbers large enough to impress upon public officials the seriousness of their concerns.

I do know this: In 1988, Minnesota duck hunters raised $650,000 to purchase a helicopter to curb poaching on the Gulf Coast. Therefore it would seem reasonable that in 2005 many of the same waterfowlers would join to demand changes on Minnesota's landscape. Changes that not only benefit waterfowl, but people.

In the U.K., more than 1 million people marched in London to support hunting when it was threatened.

In St. Paul, we should be able to put together a few thousand -- and perhaps a few thousand more -- supporters of wetlands and wetland wildlife to demand action in a state where both have played important roles in the state's history.

To succeed, supporters will have to come to St. Paul from the north, the south and the west, joining at the Capitol with Twin Cities residents who rally when rallying isn't really what they do.

Someone must organize the gathering. Someone must pick a date. Everyone -- or as many as possible -- must come. Write me at the e-mail address below with ideas.

Dennis Anderson is at [email protected]


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

Hopefully Dennis can get something organized. It's about time someone did something. :roll:


----------



## Dunk221999 (Sep 11, 2002)

give me the date and I'll be there.... Our conservation practices are unacceptable


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I (Dec 2, 2003)

Wow, no wonder the MN boys flock so heavily to ND.


----------



## Storm (Dec 8, 2004)

I believe the limit on ducks is to liberal. I'm always amazed how the Fed's and state officials try to maximize the number of ducks that can killed each day. Do they do this for any other game bird, such as pheasant or quail? I don't think so, at least not in Kansas or Nebraska. I've haven't ever heard the state of Nebraska say, "oh we had a great pheasant hatch so lets Move the limit up to5 pheasants a day." Or "it was a bad hatch so lets lower the limit to two pheasants a day. Why isn't this done for waterfowl? Instead of saying you can kill 6 ducks a day, because the numbers are good, why don't they keep it at a lower number like 4 a day and then regulate what you can shoot. Like one hen mallard a day, or one pintail and so forth. A six duck limit is too much in my humble opinion. I think Delta Waterfowl has done a good job of promoting voluntary restraint and even going as far as saying your don't have to kill 6 ducks every chance you get. We have had a pretty bad year here in Nebraska, but on one hunt the mallards were coming in. I took one widgeon and four mallards. I called it a day with 5 ducks and said thats enough. I could of waited around and shot one more duck, but thought, the numbers are down this year and we haven't seen nearly as many as in the past. Killing more ducks in good years, just makes it harder for the ducks to recover in lean years. Just something to think about.


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

What MN really needs is an Etree.

Look at how organized the sportsmen are in ND compared to MN and consequently how much more pull they have in the state legislature. MN has the hunter numbers to accomplish a lot at the state level but every year it seems like nothing is done. I get the feeling that there's a lot of guys who dump a couple hundred bucks at a DU banquet and think they've done their part. When in all reality the guy who takes five minutes to write their representatives has done more to put habitat on the ground.

I think this rally is a good idea, but then what? Let's say Dennis can get 10,000 people to rally at the capitol; what's going to happen after that? There needs to be a plan in store to harness the attention that this rally would bring. An Etree could do that. If people had an easy way to stay on top of legislative issues and to contact their reps they would. It's worked in ND and I don't see why it wouldn't work in MN.

First things first, get a source of permanent funding passed for conservation.


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

I hear ya Matt, Mn. was so bad for action this year we were tempted on black birds, gulls, snipe, coot, pretty much anything with wings. We held back but my god how much does a guy have to put up with hunt after hunt. I'm all for the fresh air outings filled with the BS in the blind but I've had about enough fresh air outings for 10 lifetimes. It's pathetic. I salute the guys who can restrain themselves but I was at the point this year where it didn't matter what the hell it was, if in range it was getting poked at. The time and money invested for what I've been getting out of it is just ridiculous. I'll be ready for next year but I'm looking forward to bowhunting more and more every year the way it's been. When you do get a flock of mallards to commit your so fricken excited it's like your a teen again and vacation hunts out of state are really all there is to look forward to. Pretty sad. Empty skies is a great headline for the article. Great idea about the action, one difference is ND has their sh!t together, we don't. Just E-mail the MN DNR and it takes a week for a response. Banging your head against the wall is about as productive.


----------



## Shu (Oct 21, 2003)

Absolutely not. The limits are way too liberal. There is no way most sportsmen are in favor of 2 hen mallards. Or 3 scaup given their recent troubles. Even canvasbacks should probably be protected longer. Makes you wonder where some of these limits come from.

In my opinion, the trouble with MN is the water control/quality, not necessarily the habitat. The area I hunt had fantastic hunting in the late 90s and early 2000 (whose didn't?). Then the water came way up and wiped out most of the cover. Tiling has done its damage and is running rampant. Now it looks like a lake instead of a large slough, the carp have invaded, and the ducks are mostly gone.

Since I did more pheasant hunting this year, I noticed there is surprisingly good nesting cover, but the water conditions are poor.

This year weather was a larger factor than most years, but the water conditions have to increase greatly for the ducks to come back in big numbers.

I agree with Matt Jones. Somehow we need to organize the masses.


----------



## recker (Oct 12, 2003)

I never though of it that way with roosters but that is true. They dont raise the limit when the hatch it just awesome like it has been before. I have written the us fish and wildlife many times the last few years and always get the same political bs about the model they follow. Well it is time to do away with that crap. They are going to ruin it for all of us in the long term just to satisfy a few.


----------



## gaddyshooter (Oct 12, 2003)

I agree completely with some on here who are saying scrap the liberal/moderate season models that are in use. From what people have been saying on here and other hunting sites that I frequent, as well as from first hand hunting this year, there was in no way enough ducks coming down the flyway to support a 6/60 season. Shorten the season length or the number of birds a day, or both IMO. I have been hunting only five days this year because it has been so bad and not even worth getting out of bed for. Five days of hunting, and have gotten two ducks total for the entire season. Out of the five days of hunting, I have fired a total of two shots. Nothing even in the sky to call at or even get excited about. I am with ya on this one Goldy. I will be breaking out the bow next season after it has been untouched for many years. All of our hunting areas down here are way behind what they normally do by this time of the year. I have been reading the threads on how bad Minn is and how hunters are getting tired of the empty skys. Let me tell ya folks, from someone farther south down the flyway, our ducks our in trouble and something needs to be done. I have been only hunting since about 1988, so am in no way an expert, but this is by far the worst I have ever seen as far as duck numbers coming south.

And I agree with whoever pointed out that just because there is a good hatch, that they raise the season to kill more of that good hatch. Leave the numbers alone. What is wrong with letting more of those hatched ducks return north next year so they can breed. If we kill off all of those new ducks each year, will the poplulation ever increase???


----------



## recker (Oct 12, 2003)

I probably shot 60 ducks this year in about 30 days with half being in south dakota with two trips totally seven days. So in 23 days in minnesota I shot 30 ducks which is not very good given all the driving and scouting i did. Not to metion I think 10 of them were on opening weekend.I am glad something if finally getting organized here in minnesota. Do I think anything will be done? Probably not much but at least we are not sitting back on our hands anymore with this bs. I liked the idea in this sundays paper in closing the season here for one year to show the dnr that we are serious. I know not everyone would go along with it but maybe enough would not by licenses to make them take a look at things.


----------



## recker (Oct 12, 2003)

Before you all jump on me we ate ducks on both trips so i was withing my 12 ducks limit to bring home each time.


----------



## jd mn/nd (Apr 8, 2004)

I beleive that the MN DNR should close the season for three years and do some mallard transplants like they did with the wild turkeys in MN, lookat how successful that has been!! The MN DNR has done a few things correctly over the years however they have made more mistakes than anything. Hence the reason that I personally have not hunted waterfowl in MN for the past three seasons. Duck hunting in MN simply SUCKS!! For me the only in state hunting that I have done is for deer hunting and pheasant hunting, even our grouse population is at an all time low. And that is from a friend who is a wildlife biologist for the leading grouse and woodcock habitate association, yes it is a private organization not state run. He tells me about how every time they try to work with the state on a project all that they get is the political run around!! Even if the MN DNR will not close the season every MN waterfowler should consider not buying a lisc for a season or two and the sportsmen and woman of MN could flex a little of our own political muscle, maybe they would get the drift if their budget suddenly took a huge digger. I know that in all of the years that I have hunted in ND that there was not one single day that I hunted there, that saw more game waterfowl included than I could have seen in an entire season here in MN. Here is another suggestion to the MN DNR, they should split MN into four zones and open each one at a different time for waterfowl as the waterfowl migrate further south open up a season hence extending the season dates so that at least MN waterfowlers had a chance at migrating waterfowl. The season closed in MN before the migrators even went through this year. I mean really what's the reason for opening up duck huting in September? All anyone is really going to shoot are a couple of local ducks anyway and they get pushed out after the first two weekends and then it is dead until the migrators come through. Open the season on October 15th and let it run til Dec 15th completing the 60 day season. Then if they want to they could have a real late season goose hunt to finish pushing the geese to the south. Well any way I will climb down off of my soap box now. I simply do not believe that anyone in MN will do anything about our natural resources because our state is not geared to meet those needs there are too many tree huggers that have passed laws that get in the way of doing good things, for our resources. MN is a much to liberal state when it comes to conservation issues they turn their backs on MN sportspeople, and ignore the issues. For instants a portion of every lottery dollar is suppose to go to the DNR to be used for restoration projects, since the inceoption of the lottery in the late 80's in MN only about 2 million has actually made it to the MN DNR and the original agreement was that about 35% of all lottery proceeds were to go there. Since the inception every tom, dick, and harry that thought they needed money has tapped into the funds and depleeted the bank. hence once again the MN sportspeople took it in the shorts and NO ONE did anything about!! What makes anyone think that the MN sportspeople stand a chance of ever succeeding, when every time we try we get chopped off at the knees!! This state needs a major overhaul and there is no way to get it done!!


----------



## slough (Oct 12, 2003)

jd,

You have some good ideas.

A couple of mine: Mallard transplants won't work very well if there isn't good habitat for them. They'd just leave.

They could close the season for 10 years and the population wouldn't get that much larger, because the habitat in MN for the most part sucks. It's not overhunting that's ruining the hunting in MN, it's the loss/degradation of habitat. Without habitat, there's never going to be many ducks.


----------



## tealeye (Mar 14, 2004)

Thank you Slough -- you hit the nail on the head, it is now and always will be a habitat issue. The hunting season framework, as well as what the DNR does or doesn't do in MN really has little bearing on the situation. The reason there is such a stark contrast between MN and ND waterfowl numbers is -- habitat. ND still has the numbers and types of wetlands waterfowl need to breed and raise broods -- MN does not. MN now contains mostly deep, stable ponds with minnows and few invertebrates -- just the opposite of what a hen is looking for. The next part of the equation though is ag impacts, not DNR management or hunter harvest. Ag programs which encourage wetland drainage, and a landscape which allows drainage, such as that in MN and Iowa, have done more harm to waterfowl populations than hunters or game managers ever can or will.

I'll go one further and suggest if the prairie pothole region in ND was better farmland, ND would be saddled with the same problem Iowa found itself in 30 years ago and MN has found itself in now. God bless rocks and glacial deposits!

Instead of focusing on these habitat issues, seems an inordinate amount of energy is spent pointing fingers and spreading blame. You want ducks? Then focus your efforts on providing thin water and thick grass, and the ducks will take care of the rest. Doing anything else, with respect to duck production, is largely and exercise of urinating into a stiff NW wind. I hope Anderson's march on the capital is a success, and we make progress -- on the habitat front.


----------



## Shu (Oct 21, 2003)

Great post tealeye


----------

