what has Ducks Unlimited done for you?

[Special T]

Well i was also "told" that it is a lat easier to "manage" an estuary than actually figure out to how to make a pice of ground productive.
At least i'm not point the finger at DU! 

[Stilly bay]

I know a few Westside Farmers and they are always looking for land to use, more land to work equals more money for them. perhaps these opportunities are not being made readily available or perhaps they aren't be advertised properly to those would make use of them.

[DR. DUX]

Well i was also "told" that it is a lat easier to "manage" an estuary than actually figure out to how to make a pice of ground productive.
At least i'm not point the finger at DU! 

That's pretty funny. I like that one.

[Ned]

. perhaps these opportunities are not being made readily available or perhaps they aren't be advertised properly to those would make use of them.

Now we are starting to get somewhere 

[Special T]

My buddy on the WAG (Waterfowl Advisory Group)has pushed this issue with the WDFW as to why  Stillwater and others are not being planted like in the past, but his inqueries have been blown off.

Part of my personal hostility with the WDFW and DU (oops got to point that finger again  ) is that in our state all ESA related activity trumps any common sence, and any other kind of game. Unfortunalty DU does not see the large local differnce a food source in say the Carnation valley playes vers a resting spot, when there are plenty of those near by.

[DR. DUX]

T, I'm on the WAG and been so since the group started(even chaired). The issue you are talking about has been explained and reviewed multiple times. Not sure if your buddy is new or have been there from the beginning but that would impact his perception of things.

After making the same presentation with the same explanation 7 years in a row I will tell you the WDFW folks do become a tad more abrupt over time. That issue has been well explained and the issue is the state doesn't have the money by a mile to do it nor have they found anyone willing to share crop it with them.

About the ESA driving stuff, well that's a bit of a nobrainer. The ESA issue is where all the money is. If the only option you have to trying to manage your waterfowl property is to make your property salmon friendly, that's what you are going to do.

Easy way to fix this, drive the narrative through public policy changes but very very few are active in this area. A few more voices would go a long way. Unfortunately the guys I see doing this are the same guys most waterfowlers demonize for having private clubs. Now how willing do you think those guys are to champion the group which regularly toss them under the bus? Actually a lot more than you'd believe.

[Special T]

Since you know about this permitting/share crop issue with the WDFW and why it costs so much I would love to hear your take on it. Especially since you have seen/ heard the whole story.

[DR. DUX]

I don't think the cost is the issue the harvest date and the length of the growing season is. To share crop with the state you have to harvest your fields by a particular date or leave it. As I understand it it's way to small a window for most folks to risk. To boot your required to wait for the Spring migration to finish before you start working the land. This makes that window even smaller.

Also the problem with it is things are a lot more predictable on the Eastside of the state (where there is a waiting list) vs WWa where they can't get anyone.

[Special T]

"your required to wait for the Spring migration to finish before you start working the land. This makes that window even smaller."
This is the kind of example where i just  . Which is better? letting a feild turn to canadian thissle and blackberry brambles (Stillwater) or making an excemption to a rule that may work some places but sure as hell not in W WA? This kind of one rule covers all makes no logical sence.... Does this share cropping cost the state any $? If not.... wouldn't it be better to have corn, and stubble for only the fall than not at all?

[DR. DUX]

Wow, now see that's a great question. Even more shocking, I have an answer. About 5 years ago a study was done W WA carrying capacity. The time when nutritional needs are at there highest and actually below the amount needed vs number of birds is Spring. The #1 food source in the Spring is protein (bug larva in shallow wetlands). This is a huge problem. Most of the private farms are drained and the ground is heavily worked at the time of greatest need. So those flooded public projects and estuaries are beyond critical at that time. To boot we are really the last stop before the breeding grounds so the condition ducks return there will determine how many come through next fall. It's a big deal.

The other thing I have learned about obstructive rules. They usually are put into place because someone heavily abused the program. We all usually pay for the actions of a misguided fee.

[Special T]

BTW i appreciate you answereing questions on this forum I think more good has been done by you at others "in the know" on issue by answering basic info. That has alwasy been a huge criticism of mine for the WDFW and most nonprofits.

Excellent point about spring and bugs... I still fail to see the logic for this location, and likely many others, since there is less farm ground and more standing water... I'm not sure where you are located, however  many of the birds here on the west sidehave LOTS of small standign water availabe to them in the spring. Mostly in the form of water retention ponds. I see this all the time up and down the HWY 167From tacoma to Renton. It once was farm ground but is now concrete jungles with water retention ponds EVERYWHERE! Your example may n\be important ofr E wa but does not fit the bill of what makes sence for this area In the spring time LOTS of land floods in the carnation valley. Even still water unit has LOTS of low land that is not farmed that floods in small shallow areas... I know i harp on stillwater unit but it is a common thread and i know the area well.

I realize that some of things necessary require REAL time and MGT and that time is at a premium right now. But when the WDFW or anyone else that does things that defy common sence it REALLY bothers me and other hunters.  I am not a bio or a Game Mgr but when i have a hard time understanding the logic and don't get good straight answers it really bothers me.

Not that long ago many in the WDFW were more than hunters, they wer sturats that were in love with waterfowl, elk, deer etc. they instinctlvy KNEW what was needed because they LIVED it... Dedicated waterfowlers can learn a bunch from the sudies but the local knowledge of what is needed seems to be glossed over.

[DR. DUX]

Now lets take this the next step. Lets ignor what we agree and disagree with and just  do this as an educational exercise and assume budget cuts have decimated land management and there really isn't any current fund sources or organizations that can come in and provide funds for land management. How and what can be done?

Lets also ignor estuary creation since that's the route chosen by the current powers that be. I'm just looking for something new I've never considered.

[Special T]

You may nned to give me some kind of idea of what your talking about its a lttle vauge... Do you mean as far as land Mgt goes?

Well the first part is something is better than nothing. And while they may have been some rules put in place in the past because of problems, having a less than ideal outcome is better than no benefit...

I would say that a "no cost" benifit to waterfowl in our area is the creation of storm water retention ponds all through out urban areas. It is nothing new but creates the kind of spring bug production you ask for... It is also an alternative to estuaries...

Obviously the share crop can work even with some limitations here on the est side, however that means that broad cover all rules are not approperate if you need to maximise gains and min $$$ spent.

[DR. DUX]

How about finding ways to increase waterfowl funding?


Do you think the waterfowl community would accept higher fees or taxes if it was guaranteed to be spent completely on public hunting opportunities?

How about a percentage of the gas tax going to a dedicated fund?

Might there be another type of fund waterfowlers could advocate for?

How about some new type of funding I hadn't considered?

[Special T]

NO! and here is why. We have been down this road before in this state. Take the ORV fund, or the Lic plate fees "dedicated" to WDFW... Look at the Discover pass and how they stroke sportmen to support something else. TRUST is a key issue in this state.... My old man has a saying that "trust is earned not given", so what has aany agency in the state done for sportmen? We are sacrificed at the alter everytime DNR or the state has a run in with the tribes. Sportsmen fund the WDFW to take care or wildlife related problems for those who hate sportsmen.

Accountability for the Pitman Roberts funds MAY bring wome credibiity back to an angency that failes us.... Its hard to try and get some where positive with an agency that seems uninterested in developing a positive relationship except how to bilk us for more $$$