Have corn pond complexes affected your 2018 duck season?

[singleshot12]

I believe in a live and let live approach.  I do not own land but I can't blame people who do for trying to improve their property to attract ducks.  If I had land I would want ducks on it.  I know lots of people on this discussion feel differently but in my opinion, if those guys shell out the money and time to buy land and keep it in good shape for ducks it's okay with me.  I think this season was bad for a lot of reasons - weather didn't help us much.  If lots of ducks were hanging out in these corn ponds then it seems like there should be a bumper crop of birds next year and they should spill out all over the place.  I just think some years are up and some are down.  Can't fault someone for wanting to make a sweet duck hunting pond on their land - that seems okay to me.

Please read the rest of the thread   This is about big operations making big profits on a public resourse leasing thousands of acres and planting corn with water added. Locking up 90% of the ducks to an elite few. Regardless of the weather the ducks will stay in these corn stations.

I wish it was only about the guy planting an acre or two on his land so him and his buddies could have a successful season.

[Samloffler]

There are a lot of numbers being thrown around with nothing to back it up. I'm pretty confident that that relative few who hunt these ranches aren't killing, or even holding, 90% of the ducks. I don't know what the numbers are, but I would bet there are more ducks off the ranches than on them. It just looks like they're all there when you see them concentrated that much.

Obviously there are a few of us that are keeping this discussion going. I'd like to hear exactly what all your issues are. Is it that you think the flooded corn practice should be illegal or is that these clubs are making money off duck hunting?

[KopperBuck]

Flooded corn for me. I want to bait too! Let's open it up.

Remember this? If ole Huey decided to flood his imaginary corn fields he'd probably attract wayyyy more birds, but because they're "feeders" it's much more serious and you can't hunt next to it. LOL

https://missoulian.com/news/local/huey-lewis-others-bait-ducks-to-end-hunting-along-bitterroot/article_032a9d84-d97e-11de-a5a9-001cc4c002e0.html

[hunterednate]

Flooded corn for me. I want to bait too! Let's open it up.

Remember this? If ole Huey decided to flood his imaginary corn fields he'd probably attract wayyyy more birds, but because they're "feeders" it's much more serious and you can't hunt next to it. LOL

https://missoulian.com/news/local/huey-lewis-others-bait-ducks-to-end-hunting-along-bitterroot/article_032a9d84-d97e-11de-a5a9-001cc4c002e0.html

Oh man - as that article shows, the inconsistency of current regulations is ludicrous.

I understand your position: either close the loophole, or allow all forms of baiting.

For the sake of public hunting, I'd suggest closing the loophole. Corn ponds would be replaced with daily dump truck loads of corn into private ponds if all waterfowl baiting were legalized.

[Stein]

"loophole" - (noun), a method of obtaining a result not consistent with the speaker's point of view.   

[GBoyd]

Sorry if this was brought up already, but I wasn't able to read the whole thread because it's reeally long.

I do water rights for a large farm in Oregon. At least down here, it's illegal to retain water without water rights that specifically allow it. If there's a particular operation that you're concerned with and that operation is flooding fields using a gate that closes or some sort of built up berm, then you can look up their water rights and see if it's legal. I would be shocked if these guys are operating legally. I just don't see them getting this much water in a dry region, in a time when there's a lot of concern for river and groundwater levels.

If you care about this: Look it up, find the violations, and put pressure on the water master.

[EagleEye]

I believe in a live and let live approach.  I do not own land but I can't blame people who do for trying to improve their property to attract ducks.  If I had land I would want ducks on it.  I know lots of people on this discussion feel differently but in my opinion, if those guys shell out the money and time to buy land and keep it in good shape for ducks it's okay with me.  I think this season was bad for a lot of reasons - weather didn't help us much.  If lots of ducks were hanging out in these corn ponds then it seems like there should be a bumper crop of birds next year and they should spill out all over the place.  I just think some years are up and some are down.  Can't fault someone for wanting to make a sweet duck hunting pond on their land - that seems okay to me.

Please read the rest of the thread   This is about big operations making big profits on a public resourse leasing thousands of acres and planting corn with water added. Locking up 90% of the ducks to an elite few. Regardless of the weather the ducks will stay in these corn stations.

I wish it was only about the guy planting an acre or two on his land so him and his buddies could have a successful season.

I’ve read the thread. To me there is no difference between a guy with a few acres or a guy with a thousand (owned or leased). These guys love hunting and they decided to make it their business.  No problem.  Live and let live. But you know what really gets me angry is the sewage treatment ponds.  They are packed with ducks.  Elite sewage plant people taking all my ducks.  Hahaha - man it’s tough driving past those sewage ponds after a rough day of hunting. 

[cougforester]

Like the ones in Marysville?  I always hope for a few eagles to fly over and kick them out.

[plugger]

From what I see, and I hunt ducks or am looking for them 3 to 4 days a week, is the amount of hunting pressure that effects duck movements. From what I understand is they rotate the fields they hunt so there not moving the birds. That has a big impact on them staying where they are. They just get shot at way to much on public ground. An example from the last two weeks, I found an area on state ground that was holding, what we figured was 10,000 mallards. all on a big body of water with lots of smaller ponds around. We didn't hunt the large body, just the adjacent ponds, just far enough away as to not spook the area they were all staging in. It was fantastic hunting the first week, but as you could imagine, people started to figure out what was going on. It was still good for a few more days until someone though it would be a good idea to shot at the swarm of birds on the big body, Now I need to go find more birds. they are all but gone. Im convinced those birds would have stayed right where they were if not shot at. Its been this way for several years now. find birds, 2 or 3 good days and there gone from the pressure. then go and try and find them again.

[7mmCoug]

I guess I would fall into the camp that would leave them to their business.  Sure I’m jealous as I am of their good fortune of being able to own property like that and kill all those birds I just don’t think that anybody should be able to tell them what they can do with their property. 

I also don’t see how what they have done doesn’t improve the habitat for the ducks.  Ultimately, for me, I like to see a benefit to the resource, not necessarily for hunters.

Maybe what we should do is lobby the State for some public corn ponds that are managed for better hunting.  Of course that takes money but I’m sure people smarter than me can figure out plenty of ways to make that happen

[Steve Shanewise]

Corn pond hunting is not a private property issue.  The issues are fair chase and the threat to free public hunting.  It makes no sense that knocking the feed down to the water is illegal because it creates an overly attractive condition for hunting but that raising the water up to the feed which creates the same condition is not.  Baiting rules should shift focus to defining what conditions are overly attractive for hunting and move away from focusing on how the condition was created.

And to those who think commercial hunting outfits with large sanctuary lakes can't capture significant portions of the wintering waterfowl in Washington State, you simply do not understand waterfowl behavior.  Waterfowl will move to wherever they find safety and food, and the more you have of both, the more waterfowl you will attract and the numbers will not cease increasing until either the safety or food get maxed-out, or there are no more birds to attract.  All it takes are corn ponds, safety and money.

[ThurstonCokid]

Here is my take on this. I don't own flooded ponds but have paid to hunt on Eagle Ranch once. I'm all for equal opportunity but I'm also against people taking rights away from someone else who is legally doing what they do. How would you like it if you saved up a ton of money to buy your own property to plant corn and then flood it to hunt over privately-then sportsman get something passed where you can't do it? Most guys complaining on here would love to have their own set up of a flooded corn field and would do it if given the chance. Why would you take that right from someone else just because you can't afford to do it yourself? Life sucks but there is all kinds of things I'd like to do but can't afford. I'm not asking for anyone else not to do it because I can't. Flame away but that is my two cents. I know most people on here are complaining about the huge complexes but once government starts to screw things up it will be a small pond surrounded by an acre of corn on a local farmers 20 acres that they ban. Its how it works usually. I'm just tired of losing my rights and I'm not going to ask someone else to lose theirs because I can't do it myself.

Creating a your own little honey hole is one thing but building a huge complex that changes entire flight patterns of a PUBLIC resource is what I don't care for. I don't blame the owners at all but I blame wdfw and whoever else oversees the regulations for not changing the language of the laws regarding corn and baiting. As for the money argument, that means zero to me because I could personally afford to hunt it a few times per year if I wanted but I enjoy more the challenge of having to locate and work for birds then have them spoon fed to me at the buffet line. 

Nailed it!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KopperBuck]

"loophole" - (noun), a method of obtaining a result not consistent with the speaker's point of view.   

I’ve never looked that up. Guess I got swooped in. Thanks for that, seriously.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KopperBuck]

Sorry if this was brought up already, but I wasn't able to read the whole thread because it's reeally long.

I do water rights for a large farm in Oregon. At least down here, it's illegal to retain water without water rights that specifically allow it. If there's a particular operation that you're concerned with and that operation is flooding fields using a gate that closes or some sort of built up berm, then you can look up their water rights and see if it's legal. I would be shocked if these guys are operating legally. I just don't see them getting this much water in a dry region, in a time when there's a lot of concern for river and groundwater levels.

If you care about this: Look it up, find the violations, and put pressure on the water master.

The Basin is either blessed or unblessed with the H20. All about what side you ended up on with the Fed Rec. There is a severe difference.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KopperBuck]

I’m not implying that anyone is over stepping their bounds. Just that it’s easier in some parts of Adams/Grant counties than others to get the liquid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk