"Even the federal warden admitted that the huge flooded corn pond complexes in the lower Columbia Basin are much more like baiting in efffect.....but they are legal to hunt and a rototilled corn maze is not."
Well there is a big difference in chopped up corn kernels all over the ground, and standing corn. I wonder how many people who constantly complain about corn have actually hunted it. The state has some standing corn, go hunt it; you're not going to have green head limits.
I hunted flooded crops last year with an outfitter last year. We shot a seven-man limit in 3 hours. Grain + water + roosting ponds gives ducks everything they need.
Flooding corn is undoubtedly a huge advantage for those who can hunt it. If it wasn't....why are guys who hunt flooded corn so opposed to any rule changes that would ban it? If it is basically the same as moist soil management, why keep building more and bigger flooded corn complexes with each passing year?
I'm not against the guys who hunt flooded corn. Most of them (especially the outfitters and guides) are better waterfowlers than I will ever be, and I have no doubt that they would still get limits for their clients every year without flooded crops. But I am convinced that huge complexes of flooded corn are a net loss for public land duck hunters.
Prior to flooded corn, the majority of ducks would feed on dry grain on private land fields, then pour into adjacent public land water in the Columbia Basin. Now, many of those same dry fields are have been converted to flooded corn, and the ducks have no reason to seek water on public land. Fewer thirsty birds means fewer mallards killed for public hunters.
