Corn ponds and duck patterns

[hunterednate]

Interesting topic.

I don't think I'd want to restrict a landowners rights to plant.........   but the plant and flood on purpose does seem a lot like baiting.   It essentially accomplished the same thing as just baiting.

Right. Dumping corn in water is illegal - but dumping water in corn is not. Either way you end up with a corn soup duck magnet.

[singleshot12]

Interesting topic.

I don't think I'd want to restrict a landowners rights to plant.........   but the plant and flood on purpose does seem a lot like baiting.   It essentially accomplished the same thing as just baiting.

Right. Dumping corn in water is illegal - but dumping water in corn is not. Either way you end up with a corn soup duck magnet.

And the guys with the most bucks get the most ducks. It ain't right.


Lately there are lease clubs doing this. They basically control and change 90% or more of the migratory waterfowl off of their natural routes which would normally spread them out.  Condensing these birds not only takes away opportunity from most duck hunters but also could spread disease(bird flue). Not right

[hunterednate]

Interesting topic.

I don't think I'd want to restrict a landowners rights to plant.........   but the plant and flood on purpose does seem a lot like baiting.   It essentially accomplished the same thing as just baiting.

Right. Dumping corn in water is illegal - but dumping water in corn is not. Either way you end up with a corn soup duck magnet.

And the guys with the most bucks get the most ducks. It ain't right.


Lately there are lease clubs doing this. They basically control and change 90% or more of the migratory waterfowl off of their natural routes which would normally spread them out.  Condensing these birds not only takes away opportunity from most duck hunters but also could spread disease(bird flue). Not right

Well said. I have a hard time believing this is still legal in ten years. Declining license purchasers will force the game dept to take action on a number of fronts - and eliminating this practice through legislation is an easy, cost effective way to increase opportunity on public land and recruit/retain more hunters.

Guys on leases will still get their birds - but they'll have to do it over dry crops or natural wetlands. The controlled hunting pressure and other forms of habitat improvement will still allow them to enjoy a higher quality of hunting than they'd have on public land, but without changing migration patterns.

[emac]

In my opinion just another debate putting hunters against other hunters drawing a bigger line in the middle. There is a reason hunters can never accomplish anything as a whole.
Just like the baiting and hound initiative. Alot of of hunters voted for it cause they didnt have the time or money to bait or run hounds or it didnt fit into there ethics. They figured it would give them more opportunity as boot hunters. Look where that has got us.
Same with the die hard archery, muzzy, and rifle guys. Always arguing about season lengths dates and tags. Until everybody can find some common ground with each hunting is just going to continue going down hill

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[aaronoto]

I've got mixed feelings on this topic...

By the letter of the law a guy that leaves a standing corn crop and floods it is technically not baiting, but everyone knows his intentions basically amount to baiting.  Just because he doesn't manipulate the crop doesn't mean a duck doesn't know there's a corn field there.

On the other hand, I believe these properties are beneficial to everyone in that they provide necessary habitat for wintering waterfowl.  If you take the hunting part of it out of the equation, how can you rag on a guy for leaving hundreds of acres of standing crop as food?  Ducks sure aren't going to find that much food on public lands.

But where do you draw the line?

Standing crops are OK as long as not artificially flooded?  What constitutes artificially flooded?  A lot of ways a guy can get around that by not allowing water to drain rather then not pumping water in.

Would a guy be able to artificially flood a field if it didn't have a standing crop in it?  How would one justify that as OK when ducks need water to survive just as they need food?

These questions aren't directed at anyone in particular, just food for thought.  I've read the baiting regs quite extensively and there's a lot in there that doesn't necessarily make sense, but they've got to draw the line somewhere.

[EagleEye]

I don’t see the corn ponds as a problem.  I’ve spent most of my time on public land but occasionally been invited to hunt some private flooded corn ponds.  Both are great.  Washington has tons of birds and I think it can support all kinds of hunters with different setups and methods.  Public lands have plenty of habitat that ducks love and whenever I put in a little effort to get away from the crowd I usually have a pretty good day.  I’ve punctured a few pairs of waders fighting through brush to get to hidden public ponds that hold A LOT of birds.  Last season I spent one morning hunkered down in the middle of a public hunt by reservation field when over a thousand mallards bombed in all around me.  There were private corn ponds in the area but I did just fine. 

[hunterednate]

I've got mixed feelings on this topic...

By the letter of the law a guy that leaves a standing corn crop and floods it is technically not baiting, but everyone knows his intentions basically amount to baiting.  Just because he doesn't manipulate the crop doesn't mean a duck doesn't know there's a corn field there.

On the other hand, I believe these properties are beneficial to everyone in that they provide necessary habitat for wintering waterfowl.  If you take the hunting part of it out of the equation, how can you rag on a guy for leaving hundreds of acres of standing crop as food?  Ducks sure aren't going to find that much food on public lands.

But where do you draw the line?

Standing crops are OK as long as not artificially flooded?  What constitutes artificially flooded?  A lot of ways a guy can get around that by not allowing water to drain rather then not pumping water in.

Would a guy be able to artificially flood a field if it didn't have a standing crop in it?  How would one justify that as OK when ducks need water to survive just as they need food?

These questions aren't directed at anyone in particular, just food for thought.  I've read the baiting regs quite extensively and there's a lot in there that doesn't necessarily make sense, but they've got to draw the line somewhere.

Great questions, actually, but I think you're right: the baiting regulations as they exist now are already complex and subjective - moving the line to outlaw flooded crops won't remove the complexity or subjectivity, but just focus the questions at a different line in the sand.

[hunterednate]

I don’t see the corn ponds as a problem.  I’ve spent most of my time on public land but occasionally been invited to hunt some private flooded corn ponds.  Both are great.  Washington has tons of birds and I think it can support all kinds of hunters with different setups and methods.  Public lands have plenty of habitat that ducks love and whenever I put in a little effort to get away from the crowd I usually have a pretty good day.  I’ve punctured a few pairs of waders fighting through brush to get to hidden public ponds that hold A LOT of birds.  Last season I spent one morning hunkered down in the middle of a public hunt by reservation field when over a thousand mallards bombed in all around me.  There were private corn ponds in the area but I did just fine.

The question isn't whether you can still kill birds on public land or not - it's whether outlawing flooded crops will improve the public land hunting opportunity. If birds stop using private corn ponds (because they are outlawed), where will those birds go for food and/or water?

And keep in mind, we've been enjoying historically high duck numbers since 2014. What if a dry spring puts the breeding duck population below the long-term average? I think public land hunters will feel the pinch much more sharply when that happens.

[vandeman17]

I don’t see the corn ponds as a problem.  I’ve spent most of my time on public land but occasionally been invited to hunt some private flooded corn ponds.  Both are great.  Washington has tons of birds and I think it can support all kinds of hunters with different setups and methods.  Public lands have plenty of habitat that ducks love and whenever I put in a little effort to get away from the crowd I usually have a pretty good day.  I’ve punctured a few pairs of waders fighting through brush to get to hidden public ponds that hold A LOT of birds.  Last season I spent one morning hunkered down in the middle of a public hunt by reservation field when over a thousand mallards bombed in all around me.  There were private corn ponds in the area but I did just fine.

The question isn't whether you can still kill birds on public land or not - it's whether outlawing flooded crops will improve the public land hunting opportunity. If birds stop using private corn ponds (because they are outlawed), where will those birds go for food and/or water?

And keep in mind, we've been enjoying historically high duck numbers since 2014. What if a dry spring puts the breeding duck population below the long-term average? I think public land hunters will feel the pinch much more sharply when that happens.

We also need to look beyond our own hunting success and look at the long term effects this has on overall hunter recruitment. If these big operations continue to buy up and flood more corn, that will inevitably draw more birds there and away from public land. This is on top of an already shrinking amount of quality public land hunting opportunities. Youth, new hunters, novice hunters etc could easily get turned off from bird hunting after a few poor experiences along with the increasing costs of hunting licenses, stamps etc.

[Guzman]

Let’s say you start with 1 million ducks. 20 years ago area AB and C held 2,000 ducks. Now they hold 200,000 ducks. Simple math says that yes it affects migration. Corn ponds aren’t producing more ducks just holding more ducks.

Legal yes... should it be legal? In my opinion no.

I don’t see it changing though. I don’t think we should get into a big argument over it. It is what it is.

[EagleEye]

Respectfully, I just see it differently.  Sure, if the corn ponds went away those ducks would fill into all of the available water.  But food and water are both plentiful in the northwest.  Tons of those places are 100% safe (no hunting).  How many times have you left public land with great ponds only to see a 2 foot wide irrigation ditch along the side of the road filled with ducks?  A nice puddle plus nobody shooting at them makes a home for a duck. A small percentage of water is on public hunting land so, sure there would be a few more ducks around without the corn ponds but there are so many places for them to go, I can't imagine it would make a huge difference.  From my perspective, plenty of ducks want to get down on public land but for all the well-discussed reasons they get blown out (people arriving late and walking around, setting up too close to each other, too much calling, loud calling, sky busting, etc.).  Eliminating corn ponds isn't going to make a duck bomb down if things look and sound unnatural.  The first thing to do to get more ducks on public land is help each other out a little.  I'm not defending the super-rich people, I'm just saying, as public land hunters we can do a lot to make things better ourselves.  Good seasons on public land have been happening long before 2014.  I have friends starting up all the time and meet lots of new guys in the parking lots - recruitment seems okay to me.  I can see your perspective and respect your opinions.  I just have a slightly different one.

[EWUeagles]

Respectfully, I just see it differently.  Sure, if the corn ponds went away those ducks would fill into all of the available water.  But food and water are both plentiful in the northwest.  Tons of those places are 100% safe (no hunting).  How many times have you left public land with great ponds only to see a 2 foot wide irrigation ditch along the side of the road filled with ducks?  A nice puddle plus nobody shooting at them makes a home for a duck. A small percentage of water is on public hunting land so, sure there would be a few more ducks around without the corn ponds but there are so many places for them to go, I can't imagine it would make a huge difference.  From my perspective, plenty of ducks want to get down on public land but for all the well-discussed reasons they get blown out (people arriving late and walking around, setting up too close to each other, too much calling, loud calling, sky busting, etc.).  Eliminating corn ponds isn't going to make a duck bomb down if things look and sound unnatural.  The first thing to do to get more ducks on public land is help each other out a little.  I'm not defending the super-rich people, I'm just saying, as public land hunters we can do a lot to make things better ourselves.  Good seasons on public land have been happening long before 2014.  I have friends starting up all the time and meet lots of new guys in the parking lots - recruitment seems okay to me.  I can see your perspective and respect your opinions.  I just have a slightly different one.

So land that held none to very little ducks now holding hundreds of thousands because of flooded fields aren't making a difference but meeting other public land hunters will? Umm okay. Also just because you meet new people or have friends starting up doesn't mean recruitment is good. If you look at license sells I believe we are on a downward trend.

[hunterednate]

Respectfully, I just see it differently.  Sure, if the corn ponds went away those ducks would fill into all of the available water.  But food and water are both plentiful in the northwest.  Tons of those places are 100% safe (no hunting).  How many times have you left public land with great ponds only to see a 2 foot wide irrigation ditch along the side of the road filled with ducks?  A nice puddle plus nobody shooting at them makes a home for a duck. A small percentage of water is on public hunting land so, sure there would be a few more ducks around without the corn ponds but there are so many places for them to go, I can't imagine it would make a huge difference.  From my perspective, plenty of ducks want to get down on public land but for all the well-discussed reasons they get blown out (people arriving late and walking around, setting up too close to each other, too much calling, loud calling, sky busting, etc.).  Eliminating corn ponds isn't going to make a duck bomb down if things look and sound unnatural.  The first thing to do to get more ducks on public land is help each other out a little.  I'm not defending the super-rich people, I'm just saying, as public land hunters we can do a lot to make things better ourselves.  Good seasons on public land have been happening long before 2014.  I have friends starting up all the time and meet lots of new guys in the parking lots - recruitment seems okay to me.  I can see your perspective and respect your opinions.  I just have a slightly different one.

So land that held none to very little ducks now holding hundreds of thousands because of flooded fields aren't making a difference but meeting other public land hunters will? Umm okay. Also just because you meet new people or have friends starting up doesn't mean recruitment is good. If you look at license sells I believe we are on a downward trend.

Exactly. New guys are starting up, but not nearly to replace the number of old guys hanging up their calls or simply getting frustrated that some of their favorite public spots are more competitive and less productive than they used to be.

Ducks are a finite resource. If corn ponds are drawing and holding thousands of birds (like the outfitters brag that they are to entice clients), then NECESSARILY that means public land is drawing and holding fewer birds. Simple math - addition somewhere mean subtraction somewhere else. MASSIVE addition somewhere (e.g. corn ponds) means MASSIVE subtraction somewhere else (public lands).

[beninchelan]

I run my own propertys and design / do consulting for others ( some for hunting, some not) my thing is mostly moist soil habitat with some oats, buckwheat, and barley at times.

      Moist soil habitat is much less Expensive especially if you harvest your own seed, but can be more labor intensive and theirs research, biology and trial & error each area & every property and area is diffrent. 

      Corn is more of a catch-all  it  takes little research understanding, & habitat knowledge, just money. Flooding corn with pump systems and draw downs to expose new food is somthing quite diffrent. Again its money..



   I think you can offer alternatives that often ducks prefer over corn ( unless its really cold) that said you can also find public land that offers wonderful hunting,  A frend shot 10 limits in 10 days on A well known public spot that  just offers overgrown grass as habitat and is  surrounded by clubs.

  Those clubs hold birds in areas, providing more birds in a area overall. The clubs in the monroe valley keep thousands of birds in the area all season "short stopping" them which benifits everyone in the valley.

    My concern is the impact on new hunters who dont have the experence to do well. A few epic hunts help new hunters "catch the bug"

   I  think perhhaps a idea is the really  big clubs could donate or buy land at a percentage of every new large parcel they devolope, like the wetlands banks devolopers have to make per the acres of wetlands  they distroy.

 ( but their midigation propertys are closed to hunting and 90% are overgrown which is a fail in my book)
   The birds are here, with more than enough food,  just in diffrent locations than the past

   New hunters just need mentors and places, that they buy into more than just killing birds.

[hunterednate]

I run my own propertys and design / do consulting for others ( some for hunting, some not) my thing is mostly moist soil habitat with some oats, buckwheat, and barley at times.

      Moist soil habitat is much less Expensive especially if you harvest your own seed, but can be more labor intensive and theirs research, biology and trial & error each area & every property and area is diffrent. 

      Corn is more of a catch-all  it  takes little research understanding, & habitat knowledge, just money. Flooding corn with pump systems and draw downs to expose new food is somthing quite diffrent. Again its money..



   I think you can offer alternatives that often ducks prefer over corn ( unless its really cold) that said you can also find public land that offers wonderful hunting,  A frend shot 10 limits in 10 days on A well known public spot that  just offers overgrown grass as habitat and is  surrounded by clubs.

  Those clubs hold birds in areas, providing more birds in a area overall. The clubs in the monroe valley keep thousands of birds in the area all season "short stopping" them which benifits everyone in the valley.

    My concern is the impact on new hunters who dont have the experence to do well. A few epic hunts help new hunters "catch the bug"

   I  think perhhaps a idea is the really  big clubs could donate or buy land at a percentage of every new large parcel they devolope, like the wetlands banks devolopers have to make per the acres of wetlands  they distroy.

 ( but their midigation propertys are closed to hunting and 90% are overgrown which is a fail in my book)
   The birds are here, with more than enough food,  just in diffrent locations than the past

   New hunters just need mentors and places, that they buy into more than just killing birds.

Interesting idea with the land donation/opening land to hunters proposal. That could help recruit new hunters, perhaps, but wouldn't solve the larger problem of re-distributing ducks back to public lands.

The example of your buddy who shot ten limits in ten days on public land isn't necessarily relevant to this discussion. There are certainly still ducks to be killed on public land, but there could be MORE ducks to be killed if there were fewer ducks using private corn ponds (and more ducks in more places on public lands - which would reduce competition and help out new hunters, especially).

Also, if public land hunting is as great as all the corn pond guys say it is right now, why don't they just save some money, drain their corn ponds, and shoot an easy limit on public land every Saturday instead??? (sorry, I tried my best, but the sarcasm just slipped out)