Have corn pond complexes affected your 2018 duck season?

[hunterednate]

JBG made a good point do we start banning hunting from boats because it effects shore hunters.
  Like he mentioned hunt around point X. I'm not a waterfowler so this doesn't effect me as much as some of you but what does effect all of us is the let's ban it because I can't or don't agree with the way someone is doing it way of thinking

JBG comparing corn complexes to owning a boat is the dumbest argument I have ever heard. Most people who boat hunt still hunt from shore haha. Boat hunting only allows you to get to a spot faster and maybe with less work. It doesn't physically draw ducks to you or keep ducks in an area because you are using a boat. I'm not saying I'm against corn complexes but his points are all pretty bad. Ducks do move their migration patterns because of these complexes. Last year there was a huge duck die off because ducks changed their natural migration patterns and stayed in one area because they had food and water. It made it a perfect breeding ground for Avian Cholera.

Personally I'm not really for limiting what other hunters can do just because I can't afford it but I do believe they have an unfair advantage. It would be nice to see the playing field a little more equal. Also JBG dry field duck hunting is way different than a flooded field.

You're actually missing the point

Maybe not being a waterfowl hunter you don't really understand what's going on. Let's say you hunt elk. All year elk feed and breed on hunt able land but then come hunting season LARGE land owners put out some feed or whatever that draws most of the elk to that one land. The herd you used to hunt year after year is now 1/5, 1/10 or maybe even less than it used to be. This feed isn't "illegal" but it marches a very tight line of being legal or not. How would you feel? Would you want people talking about it? Would you do anything?

And my original point of comparing boat hunting to corn complexes is dumb. I get JBG was trying to say it's the have not's trying to take from the the haves but I don't believe this is the case here at all.

Not being a waterfowler I still understand what's going on and your elk example is spot on and that would suck but there would still be elk in the area and actually might bring more in therefore I would just hunt the area different.
  That looks like what is going on with this corn complex and so I understand people's feelings about it but once again back to the bigger picture we cannot keep trying to take away legal hunting practices regardless of how we feel.
  Look at hound hunting/baiting bears how about the baiting deer and elk changes that just took place

I never said there would be more elk. There would be more less elk for the same amount of people who hunted it. Would you as an individual still harvest an elk? Probably but would the size of the success rate go down for you? Very likely. The success rate the whole would also go down. That's what I believe corn complexes are doing.

I think limiting the size of your bait for deer and elk isn't a bad thing. I have never hunted over bait so maybe I'm missing something.

I believe that in your elk scenario that more elk may travel thru public land to get to the private ranch which in many areas they already do and the feed helps.
   I actually agree with you about the corn complex you guys are talking about it doesn't seem fair but this is a big but  it's legal and once again we cannot take away legal hunting practices from others just because we don't like it.
  Private lands benefit all wildlife.
  Here's a really stupid example but it might make sense.
  Say the whole basin you guys hunt dried up and the only place that has water were these corn complexes do we take away their ability to attract waterfowl to the area which would keep them coming into the area or just make it so no birds come in at all.
  I know that is a really stupid and impossible scenario but I think it makes point. So don't laugh too hard at me for that😆😆

In general, I agree with that statement 100%. An exception, though, would be banning previously legal hunting practices that are the result of new advances in technology or innovation.

For example, drone scouting for big game. Previously legal...because drones weren't invented! These corn ponds are not a natural resource hunters are taking advantage of. They are MASSIVE infrastructure undertakings - made with heavy equipment, the size of major ag crop circles, flooded with fresh water through regulated irrigation, and kept ice-free all season long through the use of hard wired aerators.

Game laws need to keep pace with advances in technology - especially those advances that concentrate a public resource on private land and reduce opportunity for public hunters.

[greenhead_killer]

The difference too, if this was Johnny bravo and he had his private field that he was doing whatever in, that’s his deal. This situation is very different. They are making very good money off a public resource. Changing and/or stopping natural migration patterns. Creating a monopoly of a public resource by finding a legal loophole. Bait is bait, doesn’t matter if you add water before or after. It’s still baiting.

[Tbar]

I don't think many people have a good understanding of waterfowl laws and regulations. @Bigtex, the MBTRA, CFR along with flyway frameworks.

[huntnfmly]

JBG made a good point do we start banning hunting from boats because it effects shore hunters.
  Like he mentioned hunt around point X. I'm not a waterfowler so this doesn't effect me as much as some of you but what does effect all of us is the let's ban it because I can't or don't agree with the way someone is doing it way of thinking

JBG comparing corn complexes to owning a boat is the dumbest argument I have ever heard. Most people who boat hunt still hunt from shore haha. Boat hunting only allows you to get to a spot faster and maybe with less work. It doesn't physically draw ducks to you or keep ducks in an area because you are using a boat. I'm not saying I'm against corn complexes but his points are all pretty bad. Ducks do move their migration patterns because of these complexes. Last year there was a huge duck die off because ducks changed their natural migration patterns and stayed in one area because they had food and water. It made it a perfect breeding ground for Avian Cholera.

Personally I'm not really for limiting what other hunters can do just because I can't afford it but I do believe they have an unfair advantage. It would be nice to see the playing field a little more equal. Also JBG dry field duck hunting is way different than a flooded field.

You're actually missing the point

Maybe not being a waterfowl hunter you don't really understand what's going on. Let's say you hunt elk. All year elk feed and breed on hunt able land but then come hunting season LARGE land owners put out some feed or whatever that draws most of the elk to that one land. The herd you used to hunt year after year is now 1/5, 1/10 or maybe even less than it used to be. This feed isn't "illegal" but it marches a very tight line of being legal or not. How would you feel? Would you want people talking about it? Would you do anything?

And my original point of comparing boat hunting to corn complexes is dumb. I get JBG was trying to say it's the have not's trying to take from the the haves but I don't believe this is the case here at all.

Not being a waterfowler I still understand what's going on and your elk example is spot on and that would suck but there would still be elk in the area and actually might bring more in therefore I would just hunt the area different.
  That looks like what is going on with this corn complex and so I understand people's feelings about it but once again back to the bigger picture we cannot keep trying to take away legal hunting practices regardless of how we feel.
  Look at hound hunting/baiting bears how about the baiting deer and elk changes that just took place

I never said there would be more elk. There would be more less elk for the same amount of people who hunted it. Would you as an individual still harvest an elk? Probably but would the size of the success rate go down for you? Very likely. The success rate the whole would also go down. That's what I believe corn complexes are doing.

I think limiting the size of your bait for deer and elk isn't a bad thing. I have never hunted over bait so maybe I'm missing something.

I believe that in your elk scenario that more elk may travel thru public land to get to the private ranch which in many areas they already do and the feed helps.
   I actually agree with you about the corn complex you guys are talking about it doesn't seem fair but this is a big but  it's legal and once again we cannot take away legal hunting practices from others just because we don't like it.
  Private lands benefit all wildlife.
  Here's a really stupid example but it might make sense.
  Say the whole basin you guys hunt dried up and the only place that has water were these corn complexes do we take away their ability to attract waterfowl to the area which would keep them coming into the area or just make it so no birds come in at all.
  I know that is a really stupid and impossible scenario but I think it makes point. So don't laugh too hard at me for that😆😆

In general, I agree with that statement 100%. An exception, though, would be banning previously legal hunting practices that are the result of new advances in technology or innovation.

For example, drone scouting for big game. Previously legal...because drones weren't invented! These corn ponds are not a natural resource hunters are taking advantage of. They are MASSIVE infrastructure undertakings - made with heavy equipment, the size of major ag crop circles, flooded with fresh water through regulated irrigation, and kept ice-free all season long through the use of hard wired aerators.

Game laws need to keep pace with advances in technology - especially those advances that concentrate a public resource on private land and reduce opportunity for public hunters.

Understood
With the technology of keeping the corn ponds ice  free doesn't that benefit the waterfowl?
Where would they go if all waterways were froze up?

[vandeman17]

JBG made a good point do we start banning hunting from boats because it effects shore hunters.
  Like he mentioned hunt around point X. I'm not a waterfowler so this doesn't effect me as much as some of you but what does effect all of us is the let's ban it because I can't or don't agree with the way someone is doing it way of thinking

JBG comparing corn complexes to owning a boat is the dumbest argument I have ever heard. Most people who boat hunt still hunt from shore haha. Boat hunting only allows you to get to a spot faster and maybe with less work. It doesn't physically draw ducks to you or keep ducks in an area because you are using a boat. I'm not saying I'm against corn complexes but his points are all pretty bad. Ducks do move their migration patterns because of these complexes. Last year there was a huge duck die off because ducks changed their natural migration patterns and stayed in one area because they had food and water. It made it a perfect breeding ground for Avian Cholera.

Personally I'm not really for limiting what other hunters can do just because I can't afford it but I do believe they have an unfair advantage. It would be nice to see the playing field a little more equal. Also JBG dry field duck hunting is way different than a flooded field.

You're actually missing the point

Maybe not being a waterfowl hunter you don't really understand what's going on. Let's say you hunt elk. All year elk feed and breed on hunt able land but then come hunting season LARGE land owners put out some feed or whatever that draws most of the elk to that one land. The herd you used to hunt year after year is now 1/5, 1/10 or maybe even less than it used to be. This feed isn't "illegal" but it marches a very tight line of being legal or not. How would you feel? Would you want people talking about it? Would you do anything?

And my original point of comparing boat hunting to corn complexes is dumb. I get JBG was trying to say it's the have not's trying to take from the the haves but I don't believe this is the case here at all.

Not being a waterfowler I still understand what's going on and your elk example is spot on and that would suck but there would still be elk in the area and actually might bring more in therefore I would just hunt the area different.
  That looks like what is going on with this corn complex and so I understand people's feelings about it but once again back to the bigger picture we cannot keep trying to take away legal hunting practices regardless of how we feel.
  Look at hound hunting/baiting bears how about the baiting deer and elk changes that just took place

I never said there would be more elk. There would be more less elk for the same amount of people who hunted it. Would you as an individual still harvest an elk? Probably but would the size of the success rate go down for you? Very likely. The success rate the whole would also go down. That's what I believe corn complexes are doing.

I think limiting the size of your bait for deer and elk isn't a bad thing. I have never hunted over bait so maybe I'm missing something.

I believe that in your elk scenario that more elk may travel thru public land to get to the private ranch which in many areas they already do and the feed helps.
   I actually agree with you about the corn complex you guys are talking about it doesn't seem fair but this is a big but  it's legal and once again we cannot take away legal hunting practices from others just because we don't like it.
  Private lands benefit all wildlife.
  Here's a really stupid example but it might make sense.
  Say the whole basin you guys hunt dried up and the only place that has water were these corn complexes do we take away their ability to attract waterfowl to the area which would keep them coming into the area or just make it so no birds come in at all.
  I know that is a really stupid and impossible scenario but I think it makes point. So don't laugh too hard at me for that😆😆

In general, I agree with that statement 100%. An exception, though, would be banning previously legal hunting practices that are the result of new advances in technology or innovation.

For example, drone scouting for big game. Previously legal...because drones weren't invented! These corn ponds are not a natural resource hunters are taking advantage of. They are MASSIVE infrastructure undertakings - made with heavy equipment, the size of major ag crop circles, flooded with fresh water through regulated irrigation, and kept ice-free all season long through the use of hard wired aerators.

Game laws need to keep pace with advances in technology - especially those advances that concentrate a public resource on private land and reduce opportunity for public hunters.

Understood
With the technology of keeping the corn ponds ice  free doesn't that benefit the waterfowl?
Where would they go if all waterways were froze up?

They would continue south until they found open water like they had been doing previously.

[JBG]

Can anyone point to some public land harvest statistics that show the negative impact of the corn complexes?  It seems all the stats are both public/private self reporting.  I'd bet more and more ducks are killed on public land each year or they at least mirror overall duck numbers in the area.  It would be great to see some historical data that would show a significant drop off in public land hunter success at the same time corn complexes started. 
I feel that if the complexes werent there neither would the ducks.  Each area only has so much carrying capacity its not like the birds concentrated on Eagle Lakes would magically show up at the Winchester QHA or Desert Unit.  They would probably just not be as many ducks. 

[huntnfmly]

JBG made a good point do we start banning hunting from boats because it effects shore hunters.
  Like he mentioned hunt around point X. I'm not a waterfowler so this doesn't effect me as much as some of you but what does effect all of us is the let's ban it because I can't or don't agree with the way someone is doing it way of thinking

JBG comparing corn complexes to owning a boat is the dumbest argument I have ever heard. Most people who boat hunt still hunt from shore haha. Boat hunting only allows you to get to a spot faster and maybe with less work. It doesn't physically draw ducks to you or keep ducks in an area because you are using a boat. I'm not saying I'm against corn complexes but his points are all pretty bad. Ducks do move their migration patterns because of these complexes. Last year there was a huge duck die off because ducks changed their natural migration patterns and stayed in one area because they had food and water. It made it a perfect breeding ground for Avian Cholera.

Personally I'm not really for limiting what other hunters can do just because I can't afford it but I do believe they have an unfair advantage. It would be nice to see the playing field a little more equal. Also JBG dry field duck hunting is way different than a flooded field.

You're actually missing the point

Maybe not being a waterfowl hunter you don't really understand what's going on. Let's say you hunt elk. All year elk feed and breed on hunt able land but then come hunting season LARGE land owners put out some feed or whatever that draws most of the elk to that one land. The herd you used to hunt year after year is now 1/5, 1/10 or maybe even less than it used to be. This feed isn't "illegal" but it marches a very tight line of being legal or not. How would you feel? Would you want people talking about it? Would you do anything?

And my original point of comparing boat hunting to corn complexes is dumb. I get JBG was trying to say it's the have not's trying to take from the the haves but I don't believe this is the case here at all.

Not being a waterfowler I still understand what's going on and your elk example is spot on and that would suck but there would still be elk in the area and actually might bring more in therefore I would just hunt the area different.
  That looks like what is going on with this corn complex and so I understand people's feelings about it but once again back to the bigger picture we cannot keep trying to take away legal hunting practices regardless of how we feel.
  Look at hound hunting/baiting bears how about the baiting deer and elk changes that just took place

I never said there would be more elk. There would be more less elk for the same amount of people who hunted it. Would you as an individual still harvest an elk? Probably but would the size of the success rate go down for you? Very likely. The success rate the whole would also go down. That's what I believe corn complexes are doing.

I think limiting the size of your bait for deer and elk isn't a bad thing. I have never hunted over bait so maybe I'm missing something.

I believe that in your elk scenario that more elk may travel thru public land to get to the private ranch which in many areas they already do and the feed helps.
   I actually agree with you about the corn complex you guys are talking about it doesn't seem fair but this is a big but  it's legal and once again we cannot take away legal hunting practices from others just because we don't like it.
  Private lands benefit all wildlife.
  Here's a really stupid example but it might make sense.
  Say the whole basin you guys hunt dried up and the only place that has water were these corn complexes do we take away their ability to attract waterfowl to the area which would keep them coming into the area or just make it so no birds come in at all.
  I know that is a really stupid and impossible scenario but I think it makes point. So don't laugh too hard at me for that😆😆

In general, I agree with that statement 100%. An exception, though, would be banning previously legal hunting practices that are the result of new advances in technology or innovation.

For example, drone scouting for big game. Previously legal...because drones weren't invented! These corn ponds are not a natural resource hunters are taking advantage of. They are MASSIVE infrastructure undertakings - made with heavy equipment, the size of major ag crop circles, flooded with fresh water through regulated irrigation, and kept ice-free all season long through the use of hard wired aerators.

Game laws need to keep pace with advances in technology - especially those advances that concentrate a public resource on private land and reduce opportunity for public hunters.

Understood
With the technology of keeping the corn ponds ice  free doesn't that benefit the waterfowl?
Where would they go if all waterways were froze up?

They would continue south until they found open water like they had been doing previously.

Understood.
 But you missed my point

[vandeman17]

JBG made a good point do we start banning hunting from boats because it effects shore hunters.
  Like he mentioned hunt around point X. I'm not a waterfowler so this doesn't effect me as much as some of you but what does effect all of us is the let's ban it because I can't or don't agree with the way someone is doing it way of thinking

JBG comparing corn complexes to owning a boat is the dumbest argument I have ever heard. Most people who boat hunt still hunt from shore haha. Boat hunting only allows you to get to a spot faster and maybe with less work. It doesn't physically draw ducks to you or keep ducks in an area because you are using a boat. I'm not saying I'm against corn complexes but his points are all pretty bad. Ducks do move their migration patterns because of these complexes. Last year there was a huge duck die off because ducks changed their natural migration patterns and stayed in one area because they had food and water. It made it a perfect breeding ground for Avian Cholera.

Personally I'm not really for limiting what other hunters can do just because I can't afford it but I do believe they have an unfair advantage. It would be nice to see the playing field a little more equal. Also JBG dry field duck hunting is way different than a flooded field.

You're actually missing the point

Maybe not being a waterfowl hunter you don't really understand what's going on. Let's say you hunt elk. All year elk feed and breed on hunt able land but then come hunting season LARGE land owners put out some feed or whatever that draws most of the elk to that one land. The herd you used to hunt year after year is now 1/5, 1/10 or maybe even less than it used to be. This feed isn't "illegal" but it marches a very tight line of being legal or not. How would you feel? Would you want people talking about it? Would you do anything?

And my original point of comparing boat hunting to corn complexes is dumb. I get JBG was trying to say it's the have not's trying to take from the the haves but I don't believe this is the case here at all.

Not being a waterfowler I still understand what's going on and your elk example is spot on and that would suck but there would still be elk in the area and actually might bring more in therefore I would just hunt the area different.
  That looks like what is going on with this corn complex and so I understand people's feelings about it but once again back to the bigger picture we cannot keep trying to take away legal hunting practices regardless of how we feel.
  Look at hound hunting/baiting bears how about the baiting deer and elk changes that just took place

I never said there would be more elk. There would be more less elk for the same amount of people who hunted it. Would you as an individual still harvest an elk? Probably but would the size of the success rate go down for you? Very likely. The success rate the whole would also go down. That's what I believe corn complexes are doing.

I think limiting the size of your bait for deer and elk isn't a bad thing. I have never hunted over bait so maybe I'm missing something.

I believe that in your elk scenario that more elk may travel thru public land to get to the private ranch which in many areas they already do and the feed helps.
   I actually agree with you about the corn complex you guys are talking about it doesn't seem fair but this is a big but  it's legal and once again we cannot take away legal hunting practices from others just because we don't like it.
  Private lands benefit all wildlife.
  Here's a really stupid example but it might make sense.
  Say the whole basin you guys hunt dried up and the only place that has water were these corn complexes do we take away their ability to attract waterfowl to the area which would keep them coming into the area or just make it so no birds come in at all.
  I know that is a really stupid and impossible scenario but I think it makes point. So don't laugh too hard at me for that😆😆

In general, I agree with that statement 100%. An exception, though, would be banning previously legal hunting practices that are the result of new advances in technology or innovation.

For example, drone scouting for big game. Previously legal...because drones weren't invented! These corn ponds are not a natural resource hunters are taking advantage of. They are MASSIVE infrastructure undertakings - made with heavy equipment, the size of major ag crop circles, flooded with fresh water through regulated irrigation, and kept ice-free all season long through the use of hard wired aerators.

Game laws need to keep pace with advances in technology - especially those advances that concentrate a public resource on private land and reduce opportunity for public hunters.

Understood
With the technology of keeping the corn ponds ice  free doesn't that benefit the waterfowl?
Where would they go if all waterways were froze up?

They would continue south until they found open water like they had been doing previously.

Understood.
 But you missed my point

What was the point then? honest question

[EWUeagles]

Can anyone point to some public land harvest statistics that show the negative impact of the corn complexes?  It seems all the stats are both public/private self reporting.  I'd bet more and more ducks are killed on public land each year or they at least mirror overall duck numbers in the area.  It would be great to see some historical data that would show a significant drop off in public land hunter success at the same time corn complexes started. 
I feel that if the complexes werent there neither would the ducks.  Each area only has so much carrying capacity its not like the birds concentrated on Eagle Lakes would magically show up at the Winchester QHA or Desert Unit.  They would probably just not be as many ducks.

I might be wrong but all the waterfowl surveys I have ever filled out it never asks if it was public or private. You can find harvest records by county but you would be making assumptions and I don't know if those surveys even ask big ranches like Eagle Lakes.

[huntnfmly]

JBG made a good point do we start banning hunting from boats because it effects shore hunters.
  Like he mentioned hunt around point X. I'm not a waterfowler so this doesn't effect me as much as some of you but what does effect all of us is the let's ban it because I can't or don't agree with the way someone is doing it way of thinking

JBG comparing corn complexes to owning a boat is the dumbest argument I have ever heard. Most people who boat hunt still hunt from shore haha. Boat hunting only allows you to get to a spot faster and maybe with less work. It doesn't physically draw ducks to you or keep ducks in an area because you are using a boat. I'm not saying I'm against corn complexes but his points are all pretty bad. Ducks do move their migration patterns because of these complexes. Last year there was a huge duck die off because ducks changed their natural migration patterns and stayed in one area because they had food and water. It made it a perfect breeding ground for Avian Cholera.

Personally I'm not really for limiting what other hunters can do just because I can't afford it but I do believe they have an unfair advantage. It would be nice to see the playing field a little more equal. Also JBG dry field duck hunting is way different than a flooded field.

You're actually missing the point

Maybe not being a waterfowl hunter you don't really understand what's going on. Let's say you hunt elk. All year elk feed and breed on hunt able land but then come hunting season LARGE land owners put out some feed or whatever that draws most of the elk to that one land. The herd you used to hunt year after year is now 1/5, 1/10 or maybe even less than it used to be. This feed isn't "illegal" but it marches a very tight line of being legal or not. How would you feel? Would you want people talking about it? Would you do anything?

And my original point of comparing boat hunting to corn complexes is dumb. I get JBG was trying to say it's the have not's trying to take from the the haves but I don't believe this is the case here at all.

Not being a waterfowler I still understand what's going on and your elk example is spot on and that would suck but there would still be elk in the area and actually might bring more in therefore I would just hunt the area different.
  That looks like what is going on with this corn complex and so I understand people's feelings about it but once again back to the bigger picture we cannot keep trying to take away legal hunting practices regardless of how we feel.
  Look at hound hunting/baiting bears how about the baiting deer and elk changes that just took place

I never said there would be more elk. There would be more less elk for the same amount of people who hunted it. Would you as an individual still harvest an elk? Probably but would the size of the success rate go down for you? Very likely. The success rate the whole would also go down. That's what I believe corn complexes are doing.

I think limiting the size of your bait for deer and elk isn't a bad thing. I have never hunted over bait so maybe I'm missing something.

I believe that in your elk scenario that more elk may travel thru public land to get to the private ranch which in many areas they already do and the feed helps.
   I actually agree with you about the corn complex you guys are talking about it doesn't seem fair but this is a big but  it's legal and once again we cannot take away legal hunting practices from others just because we don't like it.
  Private lands benefit all wildlife.
  Here's a really stupid example but it might make sense.
  Say the whole basin you guys hunt dried up and the only place that has water were these corn complexes do we take away their ability to attract waterfowl to the area which would keep them coming into the area or just make it so no birds come in at all.
  I know that is a really stupid and impossible scenario but I think it makes point. So don't laugh too hard at me for that😆😆

In general, I agree with that statement 100%. An exception, though, would be banning previously legal hunting practices that are the result of new advances in technology or innovation.

For example, drone scouting for big game. Previously legal...because drones weren't invented! These corn ponds are not a natural resource hunters are taking advantage of. They are MASSIVE infrastructure undertakings - made with heavy equipment, the size of major ag crop circles, flooded with fresh water through regulated irrigation, and kept ice-free all season long through the use of hard wired aerators.

Game laws need to keep pace with advances in technology - especially those advances that concentrate a public resource on private land and reduce opportunity for public hunters.

Understood
With the technology of keeping the corn ponds ice  free doesn't that benefit the waterfowl?
Where would they go if all waterways were froze up?

They would continue south until they found open water like they had been doing previously.

Understood.
 But you missed my point

What was the point then? honest question

My point is without the open water the waterfowl will just continue on the migration and not even stop in the area.And the corn complex should be looked at as additional carrying capacity

[HaydenHunter]

Do you also want to ban (water in corn) the practice on public land?  Why not get WDFW to do a much better job of making good habitat on public ground?

Last I heard, WDFW wasn't charging $350 a gun for waterfowl hunts and had budget strains.

[JBG]

Yea it would be pretty simple for them to put a box saying public or private land.  Anyhow this horse seems dead.  I think everyone who is a public land hunter needs to support the groups and politicians who have their best interests at heart.  (Dems are a pain in the ass but I am sure there are very few Republicans that support expansion of government for sportsman benefits in addition to imposing regulations on private entities)

Also as an aside I have access to private land (a west side version of a corn complex)all season long but I am currently boat shopping so I can hunt the big rivers and bays, I guess the grass is always greener 

[JBG]

Do you also want to ban (water in corn) the practice on public land?  Why not get WDFW to do a much better job of making good habitat on public ground?

Last I heard, WDFW wasn't charging $350 a gun for waterfowl hunts and had budget strains.

Maybe they should start!

[KopperBuck]

JBG made a good point do we start banning hunting from boats because it effects shore hunters.
  Like he mentioned hunt around point X. I'm not a waterfowler so this doesn't effect me as much as some of you but what does effect all of us is the let's ban it because I can't or don't agree with the way someone is doing it way of thinking

As many have stated it's a bigger problem than what's fair.  It could potentially be very detrimental in several ways, one being disease.  A huge threat when you congregate any species.

They congregate in large numbers already  along thier migration so I don't see that as a valid argument.
  What this really comes down to is people feeling that it's not fair so let's stop somebody else that's only going to shoot all sportsman in the foot

https://www.yakimaherald.com/news/state_news/disease-killing-hundreds-of-ducks-other-birds-near-tri-cities/article_d92fe75e-e416-11e6-bafd-1b0d4df39e88.html

Thanks for the link but that makes a point that they congregate in great numbers already

Actually, the point is that they were congregating in harder numbers because of the winter causing the problems. In theory, you'd like the birds spread out a little more on the open water.

Whereas you get enough ice eaters going, you're concentrating birds in a much smaller area than would normally occur because they would spread out looking for big water.

[EWUeagles]

Yea it would be pretty simple for them to put a box saying public or private land.  Anyhow this horse seems dead.  I think everyone who is a public land hunter needs to support the groups and politicians who have their best interests at heart.  (Dems are a pain in the ass but I am sure there are very few Republicans that support expansion of government for sportsman benefits in addition to imposing regulations on private entities)

Also as an aside I have access to private land (a west side version of a corn complex)all season long but I am currently boat shopping so I can hunt the big rivers and bays, I guess the grass is always greener 

The state doesn't care where the birds are shot. They want to brag about harvest rates going up even if it is all on private land, that way they get to pat themselves on the back. No politician is good, especially Washington Dems. Just look at the gun laws that get passed every year.

You don't really think hunting fees should be 350 bucks to shoot ducks?