# Why stick around here I'm starving.



## eaglehead6 (Nov 6, 2005)

What if we could read the minds of waterfowl?. What if hunters 50 years ago realized if birds found a field or multiple fields that held a type of food source, close to sufficient water, that they could eat undisturbed for an entire hunting season that the birds would stick around an area regardless of the amount of water hunting they did throughout the season? What if hunters long ago realized that occupying the fields that the birds want to feed in day after day after day with 500 decoys or more forces waterfowl to feed in fields farther and farther away that hold less desireable, nutritional feed and thus pushes the birds out of a hunting area or state faster than hunting birds on a single roost?. What if waterfowl feel so frustrated that every time they go out to eat breakfast or dinner at Tony Roma's they instead end up eating at Arby's because a group of hunters are sitting on they're X?. This might be enough to drive them to extremes , this might be enough to make them pack up and move on to a different feeding ground and it could be far, far away from your favorite hunting area. Just a thought ?what do you guys think? Maybe hunting has evolved backwards due to the amount of money to be made on decoys , field blinds and such that major hunting company's have drilled into our heads that this is the right way to hunt. I don't know for sure this is just a thought. I know I prefer field hunting but also enjoy DECOYING ducks on the water sometimes.


----------



## scissorbill (Sep 14, 2003)

Yea I agree those hunters 50 years ago were total morons,what a bunch of losers ,most of these idiots only had a few wooden or paper mache decoys and would only hunt a few weekends and then it was over water friggin roostbusters is what they were. Most of these clowns were not even on a "field staff" and didn't even have a trailer to say nothing about having stickers and ads all over it. Old tan jacket and a tan "jones style" cap wonder how many ducks they scared into the next state with this $hi%% camo? Like you say it is a good thing Nodak outdoor guys were't around cuz thses guys would get a good a$$ chewin for not knowing how to hunt the "right way". Even though they did kill thousands with these poor methods there is more duks now then ever before even though we only go back to the 70's to compare.


----------



## sameyer (Aug 22, 2007)

Well put guys. I am a NR lowlife so don't try to say much on this site (although the warm reception as a hunter I received in SE ND this fall suggests the locals are more than happy to see NR hunters) but this roostbusting thing seems to be a driving force on this site and yet it seems nearly impossible to define what it is. A roost, at least in my experience is a large body of water where ducks find refuge in. They are sitting out in the middle of big water and unless you parachute in on them, you aren't going to get close. I guess if folks are driving boats out into the middle of those places and trying to shoot ducks out of them it might cause more problems than normal hunting pressure. I have seen that happen here a couple of times and it does force birds out but they typically return in a few days much like they do when pressured on a given field or slough.

I believe it was Mr. Acker that said it is hunting pressure, not a particular type of hunting pressure, is what causes birds to change locations. Well of course it is, it isn't rocket science. You shoot at ducks at a given place often enough and they leave the area. And if they get shot at the next place they go to, field or water, and the next place.......then they will probably leave the area for good. On the other hand if you shoot at ducks and then leave them alone for a bit they return. As is always said, be where they want to be and you shooting at them a little bit doesn't change where they want to be. If there are hunters pass shooting ducks coming off their night roost that might change the direction of travel and they may go to a different field and so yeah, it may mess up someone's field hunt for that morning. Just as if they are shot at in a field they change fields and who is to say how long they remain in an area when they get shot at everytime they land on a field.

I started viewing this site when I decided to return to ND after a 30 year absence. Wanted to see what was up and how things have changed and what to expect. I spent a week in SE ND, I saw more ducks there each day than I see here all season. In six days I shot six ducks and one goose. Much of that had to do with not having being able to bring decoys and not having the right set up and a reluctance to set up in areas that were "roosts" for fear of doing something wrong in the eyes of other hunters. I had a great time there, hunted everyday from sunup to sundown, had some great pheasant hunting during midday and was completley satisfied with my return to my homeland. The people were great, everywhere we went there were signs saying "welcome hunters." Wish the peopel in Alaska were so hunter friendly.

After making the trip I can see that much of the dissent about all of this does come from guys who have "team names" are "pro-staff" whatever that means and clearly have made duck hunting and kill numbers a competition. When I first saw the things referenced in the previous post, the trailers and the stickers and the slogans and the pictures with piles of dead birds it struck me as something, but not really about the hunting I grew up appreciating. It isn't illegal for guys to do that anymore than it is illegal for guys to "roostbust" but neither are particulalry appealing to hunters who just want to go out, get wet and miserable, have a chance to see some ducks coming in, get the dog some work while shooting a few and mostly, just be out doing it.

So for you young guys who are just getting started, do like most of us do and get out there and hunt ducks where you find them. Follow the regulations, and don't worry about all of these special interest tactics that are attempting to be imposed. Don't worry about getting your limit everytime or even getting anything everytime, that's not what its about. Experience every environment you can in the world of the things you are hunting. You will learn more and be a better hunter by taking every opportunity to be in the field and observe, even if you don't fire a shot. The joy of hunting, not just shooting, is a priceless gift that you folks in North Dakota, perhaps more than anywhere left in this country, have.


----------



## JBB (Feb 9, 2005)

Well said.


----------



## CuttinDaisies (Nov 15, 2007)

FINALLY, someone with some common sense, no blind arrogance, just an open mind to what is best for the future of the sport. Well said.


----------



## Lardy (Oct 15, 2007)

I must agree with the hunting club deal. I bought falling skies 4 and have watched it several times. Everytime it becomes less and less enjoyable when I see giant greenheads getting blasted ten yards away just for entertainment purposes. Then foiles goes and picks up the pieces with a big grin on his face. With all the ducks the guy shoots you think he could take the chance and let the bird get out a little further instead of blowing it away for the fun of it. Thats not duck hunting to me. I dont see how it could be for anyone that appreciates the sport enough.

I was also wondering if a large majority of hunters down through the flyway hunted more fields like everyone says they should, how many birds would even make the migration with sufficient nutrition. Maybe we should try it. Just like every other human impact weve had on wildlife it would probably result in a negative outcome. It seems like common sense to me.

If everyones so obsessed with how many birds they shoot concentrate on spring snow goose hunting and do the waterfowl a favor.

This is only my second post on this site and I hate to add to the controversy in a heated topic like this but it bothers me too much not to say anything.

Lardy


----------



## greenwinger_13 (Oct 6, 2005)

You guys dont know what your talking about


----------



## eaglehead6 (Nov 6, 2005)

Greenwinger, you had to add your negative comment to the thread. I do know what I am talking about, hunters for generations hunted waterfowl on water, then many hunters changed over to hunting in the fields, why ? probably a majority of the reason is due to habitat lose, less huntable water. If it wasn't for some concerned farmers that left enough waterfowl habitat alone for the birds to use during the fall and spring migrations and organizations like DU, Wetland Care Projects, an intellegent person could argue that ALL hunters on the North American Continent would be setting up they're field and water spreads on or near the larger bodies of water in they're province/ state, one of them being Devils Lake to use as an example. For the sake of auguement lets say that a farmer has 5 roosting sloughs on a property, and he has 10 fields 5 of which hold nutritional feed that waterfowl need to survive the long fall migration the other five hold less nutritional feed that they do not prefer and will never been seen in those fields. This farmer lives in central/ SE Sask. and the amount of birds that use his area are very , very many. If a farmer only allowed field hunters to hunt his land and those 5 fields were occupied with spreads ( sometimes more than one spread because some one down winded you) day in and day out , on the X or off the X and at times even the fields that never hold birds have spreads or pass shooters in them because all the prime fields are taken, I truly feel this would have a similiar effect on waterfowl as hunting the 5 roosting sloughs. After some time of this pressure the birds would simply move to a different feeding location many , many , many kilometers away due to the fact that they could never find a suitable field to "roost" on. Well they would come back to the water roost right? maybe for a short period of time but after awhile the waterfowl would search for a more suitable "water roost" to occupy farther down the migration. Besides unless everyday was a bluebird day and the waterfowl could tornado into the "water roost " from 5000 feet they would eventually choose not to run the gauntlet of spread hunters trying to shoot them as they proceeded into the water roost at very low and dangerous altitudes. In fact the only realilistic way that the farmer could keep the birds around even in this truly ideal waterfowl scenerio is to strictly enforce a rotational hunting practice that allows only 1 or 2 fields a day to be hunted. That may eliminate you from ever hunting those 10 fields in your life time. I believe if he choose to let only water hunters on his land that he would also have to have a rotational hunting practice in play. Take it as you will Greenwinger here is some logic , here is a well thought out hypothisis and remember that a strictly rotational hunting situaiton as described above possibly involves outfitters leasing vast amounts of property and having sole rights to that land which means strike two for you and me and Jim and Bob and Dick and the weekend hunter and Leo and Tim and Johns children who he wants to teach to hunt ect ect. Hunting is what it is and there are different methods some which everyone has different oppions about but the best part of hunting is the variety and what does not work for you might work for someone else. As long as a hunter is ethical and safe and does not do illegal activities they should be able to hunt the way thay want to hunt. Ethics play a huge part of how I view fellow hunters who I hunt with , Saftey , and just plain respect for the sport. Hunters are other hunters worst enemies at times.


----------



## dfisher (Oct 12, 2007)

I really like these posts. They are well thought out, and well written, with deep thought and passion for the true sport of waterfowl hunting. Posts like this one point to the digression of man in the new millennium. Driven by money and prestige to look quicker and be slicker then the next fella. Fight for you right to party&#8230;or make your million&#8230;or, sadly, kill limit after limit of ducks and geese. Money and mass marketing have contaminated much of what is good and right and true in the world today. Is it any surprise that greedy, thrill kill attitudes would finally catch up with the hunting world?

I use to like to watch waterfowl hunting videos. Back when the Duck Commander first came on the scene, with his Sweet 16 and hunting clothes that looked a lot like mine, I thought he and his burly colleagues were the most. Sure, he pushed his calls to the video world, but that was fine, as his hunting was more normal than commercial. I could even relate to some of the early Whistling Wings stuff, as it fell close to what my buddies and I done, and even showed some camaraderie in the field. Hell, a bird even got away now and then and you could, sometimes, even pick up a hunting tip.

Lately though, I've had to shy away from the hunting genre videos. When I see shot after shot of ducks or geese coming into the decoys and getting busted up, while heavy metal plays in the background, I can't help but think that waterfowl hunting, as a whole, has seriously departed from what it once was, or should be. Leaf through any Cabela's or Mack's catalog and just look at the gimmicks that are out there to lure the hunter and make the dough. Mass marketing gurus and video wizards have found their quotient for success in a generation of waterfowl hunters who want the latest and greatest blinds, deke's, guns, clothes, bullets&#8230;the list goes on. Nowadays, it's almost like the old adage of: "Keeping up with the Jones'." Kill, kill, and kill!

I find that I really like this site for the interesting topics and the often colorful and humorous commentary. It makes me wonder, though, when I read about the space race for prime fields and the constant bashing of the non-resident hunter or the resident roost buster, or the jump shooter, or the&#8230;again, sadly, the list goes on. This isn't a sport of exclusivity. The birds do not belong to anyone in particular, nor are they bound by highways or time schedules like we humans. Neither should waterfowl hunters be labeled by the arena in which they choose to play their game.

I think a good deal of this animosity comes from today fast paced life styles. Fifty years ago, which was only 1957 guys, things moved at a little slower pace than they do nowadays. World War II and Korea were distant memories and Vietnam was still some years down the road for the vast majority who served in that theater. While the cold war waged on, and the baby boomers were booming away, hunters in old brown hunting coats and rubber waders plied the marshes, fields, and sloughs with the best they had. Winchester Model 12's, ushered in the magnum era, but Browning, Remington, High Standard, and others were in hot pursuit. Many a set of Herter's, Quack, or Victor decoy lay snuggled inside of real burlap bags. Full bodied Herter's, foldout Johnson silhouettes, or various, early, paper mache goose shells graced grain fields, while men in WWII camouflage or brown duck coveralls crouched in pits, or under sheets of burlap and guarded them. A stout load of lead shot, often housed in swollen paper hull, was the fodder of the day. Aside from a few waterfowl hunting was, for the most part, a weekend affair.

Not anymore. Four wheel drive pickups pulling trailers full of the latest and greatest decoys on the market are pulled out into farm fields and deployed. Comfortable, hinged door layout blinds of super camo patterns are dug in and laced with stubble. Calls made of super plastics, guns stuffed with super shot, and flags, kites, spinning-wing decoys, and this and that adorn the field to lure in the geese that are coming there to feed anyway. After the hunt digital photographs are shot of grinning hunter's grouped around a pile of dead waterfowl, and its high fives all around.

This is good. There is nothing wrong with using good equipment and having a successful hunt. What is wrong, are many of the attitudes that this success fosters towards other hunters. When others, by choice or circumstance, don't follow the lead of their fellow hunters or fall under the "pro staff" voodoo, they are labeled as being wrong, or being the bane of all poor days spent in the field by the Shadow Grass disciples of the video magic world of duck and goose hunting. Anyone who hunts over a body of water that has a duck or goose sitting on it, surely can't know what they are doing. They obviously don't know what they're doing or how they are damning the birds with excessive pressure. My gosh the KW-1 clan may not be able to kill a limit of birds without a few grand sitting a mile or so away on a roost pond, no matter that they are set up where the birds have been feeding.

I agree that pressure moves birds and that continual pressure pushes them out of an area. But that's sorta the challenge of hunting. It's not to go out and shoot a limit day after day after day. Don't make any mistake about it. Our forefathers knew that being on the X was a pretty dang good way to guarantee success during the hunt. We've evolved from them and we know this too. The question is, in this day and age, why must kill birds to be so happy and successful in the field. Why don't we test ourselves and the super duper equipment and hunt the hard birds. Why not hunt the "traffic" birds, or use two dozen decoys instead of 20 dozen. See how good you really are at calling and decoying. Most of all, though, cut your fellow waterfowlers a break. As long as they are ethical and legal, they have as much right to hunt as anyone else. How they choose to hunt is, likewise, their decision.

Good luck,
Dan


----------



## eaglehead6 (Nov 6, 2005)

Exellent post, dfisher.


----------



## scissorbill (Sep 14, 2003)

Dan,
Outstanding post, That is what I said but you said it better. Could not agree more on the heavy metal music and filming yourself and posting on youtube,makes me puke. Jeff Foiles makes me puke as well. uke:


----------



## coolrider (Sep 28, 2007)

Excellent posts guys.

I agree 100%.


----------



## Bucky Goldstein (Jun 23, 2007)

Good posts guys.

And yes, Foiles deserves a Chuck Norris throat punch.


----------

