Waterfowl Hunter Survey Closes tonight
 

We will be closing the survey tonight at midnight. Thanks to everyone that participated! As of yesterday we have received:

463 from the mail-out surveys (18.5% response rate with some still coming in)
202 from the postcard mail-outs (8.1% response rate)
5,431 from the e-mail contacts (21.7% response rate)
1,720 from the open web survey

So like I indicated earlier, we have more data from more individual hunters than ever before thanks to the e-mail contacts, but the response rates are disappointing.

Thanks for the reminder I forgot to send mine in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I never could find it on the WLF site..

I'm an avid waterfowler who has had the same email address for nearly 10years, had a Lifetime License my entire adult life, participate in the HIP Permit every year, and purchase a Fed Duck Stamp every year. I did not receive the first hint of the survey from LDWF or any other official organization and wouldn't have known to participate if it weren't for a forwarded text message from a friend. Maybe the poor response was an indicator that you're reaching the wrong folk.

It was posted on every outdoor website multiple times

First: There has been a color banner on the front page of the LDWF website for almost 2 months with blue-winged teal and the words "2015 Waterfowl Hunter Survey". It was in the same place you will find colorful banners for the black bear and wildlife action plan today. I don't know how any duckhunter could have missed it.

Second: Of the 95,000 known duck hunters we identified (and I know we missed some), only 25,000 had e-mail addresses. I've bought licenses here for 29 years, but never did it on-line, and my e-mail address is not in the LDWF database.

The vast majority of duck hunters were NOT contacted. That would be a HUGE waste of resources! We selected 2,500 for the random mail-out survey, another 2,500 for the mixed-mode post-card survey, and sent e-mails to about 25,000. The other 65,000 were not contacted. We provided the open web survey on the LDWF website so every interested duck hunter could participate at a fairly low cost to us.

We've got to explore alternative ways of collecting this information that balance the high cost of a mail-out survey where over 80% of your effort is thrown in the trash, and an open web survey that generates biased estimates because the sample is so skewed toward the most dedicated hunters.

I don't know how that is possible. We took a random sample of hunters who registered with HIP that either 1) bought a "duck" license or 2) reported hunting ducks the previous year on the HIP registration questions. That added up to just over 95,000 individuals who were almost certainly duck hunters. We probably missed some lifetime or senior license holders that may not have been asked the HIP registration questions, but all people in our sample database showed solid evidence of being a waterfowl hunter.

Those are the right folks, and you've seen the response rates.

You proved my point perfectly. 95k Duck hunters. 30k contacted for the survey? Where did you see the highest percentage of response? EMAIL. Find a way to access the 95k duck hunter's email(maybe request their email when doing the HIP survey annually) and get the results you're looking for. Email directly contacts the user, their wife cant toss it in the mail while they're at work. Email is much cheaper than snail mail and has an obviously better(not much) response. Focus your resources where they count, this is 2015, even email is almost out of date by the time you click send. Facebook announcement maybe? Just did some scrolling on the LDWF page and I don't recall seeing an announcement/alert on there, 50k followers on there. And sorry about the 21.7% response rate, but this is America, people are just about too lazy to vote for the man that runs the country, it'll be very hard to get them to vote for a law related to a bird that they just started hunting in the last 3 years after they watched A&E.


Keep up the good work and reports, there are a few of us out here that still try to stay in tuned and appreciate all your hard work.

What about surveying them right there the instant they do the HIP. EVERY waterfowler has to have the HIP EVERY year. I don't think it'll put the little cashier at Academy in too big of a bind, its only another 5 questions. Besides, she doesn't take anytime on the HIP anyway, she just hits all zeros, maybe she can take that time to actually do the survey!

The most dedicated hunter's that dug out the survey online deserve to have their voice heard. Not disregarded.

I agree. I would say that the dedicated hunter's surveys aren't biased, they are simply the ones who care most, the ones with the most experience, and the ones with the most knowlege on what actually goes on with the waterfowl in their particular area.

To me, that is more valueable than Joe Blow who hunts 4 times a year and still has an opinion.

A possible outcome of this phase of our research may well be a recommendation requiring e-mail addresses with license purchases. How well that flies with the agency/license-buyers is anybody's guess. For right now, we need to assess the differences in demographics, avidity, and attitudes of e-mail respondents vs random mail-out vs open web.

It was removed yesterday when the survey closed. It had been up for nearly 2 months right where you saw the banners for Recreational Offshore Landings Permit and Louisiana Black Bear Delisting.

Actually, the survey was 30 questions, some with multiple parts. Furthermore, we have constant trouble with retail outlets like Academy and Wal-Mart doing the HIP registration correctly because "it slows down the line" to collect the information. Given that, I don't believe asking them to conduct a survey is even feasible. Getting e-mail addresses, maybe, but no way will they be tasked with conducting a survey.

Hahahah! Dug out? Just own the fact that you were oblivious. ;)

No segment of hunters is being disregarded. The most dedicated hunters are also a part of the random-selection samples in the proportion that they exist in the population of all hunters. Because they are more likely to respond to any survey, even the random mail-out surveys are somewhat biased toward more dedicated hunters.

The problem with online surveys is that respondents are strongly biased toward the more dedicated hunters. In 2010, 2012, and 2013 surveys, respondents to the open-web survey hunted nearly twice the number of days, killed twice the number of ducks, were 3 times more likely to have lifetime licenses, and were 6 times more likely to be members of a conservation organization on average, than respondents to the mail-out survey. Consequently, if we tried to estimate hunter activity and harvest from the open-web survey, we would badly over-estimate because of a non-randomness and lack of representativeness in the sample. One of our primary scientific contributions to date is showing that despite the respondents being very different, the open-web and random mail-out surveys gave almost identical results for questions on satisfaction, preference for regulatory actions, and attitudes toward management activities.

Consequently, we have used the open-web results extensively for those kinds of questions.

Individual surveys can't be biased. What is biased is taking information from only part of the population, and then applying it to the entire population. You don't want to estimate the average weight of people in Louisiana by weighing only fat people, right? That is the foundation for taking "random samples". With a random sample you get the full range of hunters from dedicated to once-a-year guys in the proportion they exist in the population.

Unless they buy more than 1 duck-hunting license, the opinion of a dedicated hunter doesn't mean any more than a casual hunter. In fact, from a hunter recruitment and retention standpoint, it probably means less.

On our surveys, the more dedicated, experienced, invested hunters are always the least satisfied ........ but they never quit. They buy a license year after year no matter what. They are the in-flexible portion of my constituency. So if my goal is to grow the number of hunters or reduce the number of hunters that quit, then the dedicated hunters are NOT the segment of the hunter population that I need to focus on.

So NO group of hunters is any more or less valuable to me (except those who participate , and I when evaluating regulations/management options I would like to have the opinions of a random, representative sample of hunters.

Apparently I was less oblivious and less lazy than the 25k other people you tried contacting. Little FYI about the LDWF website that has a bear banner or whatever on it, very few people view that regularly for leisure if at all.

Since when do we care so much about the people that care so little???? Screw the idiots that were too lazy to vote, they're prolly the ones that are too lazy to hunt second split when the north wind blown marsh is a mud flat and we're out there scraping up our last few birds of the season. They don't want To vote? Great, move on.

My biggest concern about this whole circuis is the idea that we're out there asking a bunch of everyday idiots when they want their seasons and how many birds they want to shoot? What happened to scientific research, analysis, and decisions. Sounds like yall have ran the numbers on people research just as much as waterfowl. Yea.... I do wanna shoot 3 specks a hunt. Why? Bc I'm a wing shooter not a biologist. But in all reality my wants should not have any impact on what the limits should be. If the specklebelly population can handle 95k shooters at 3 birds a day then great, if it can't then make the correct limit adjustment. When should the season open, hell if I know, I'm not a biologist. Tell me when the birds make their migration and I'll be out there bright and early with my gun, dog, and decoys. Some idiot who thinks the next cold front is gonna bring the big push of blue wings to him or that all the birds show up after the season when in all reality they just decide to leave the unhunted field next to his sky busting buddies.

If the population can handle a 10 bird limit make it 10. If it can only handle 2 birds make it 2. If the season needs to open the 9th Tuesday in November, or the 2 Saturday in December, let us know. I'll be out there either way.

Make scientific decisions with scientific based facts, but if you care so much to hear people's opinions then listen to the ones that speak and don't worry about the ones that don't.

So it's a money thing? Goes to show why so many people probably didn't give a **** to vote. They know their seasoned, dedicated waterfowlers opinion ain't worth the post card the survey was mailed on. And as for new hunters in the state for the year. I've asked that question multiple times but it was some story about the last survey was done with Katrina numbers so we can't judge off that. I highly doubt the waterfowl industry is hurting for newcomers or retention. Go check out a public launch at 4am on a Saturday morning in December, do your surveys there. PLENTY of folk their to ask, and plenty of them aren't seasoned or know a mallard from a teal, right up surveyors alley!

You need to chill out. Mr. Reynolds has hustled posting information on various websites, which he does not have to do, so he can try to better accommodate the waterfowl hunters in Louisiana.

I appreciate having him as a regular on this site, so let's not run him off with negative comments. Thanks

Already thanked him for his work in the past. But being told that a veteran opinion is worth less than a rookie opinion is negative, or maybe true, or maybe both, or maybe neither. Same for my posts. He wants to hear opinions he can come here and read them. And I was being drop dead serious about going to the publics launches and doing surveys, not being negative. While jimmy green jeans is checking everyone's shell buckets for lead he can have a tent set up with a clipboard for all that want to fill it out. No more manpower needed than what is already there and all he has to do is set up a tent, a few clipboards, and a drop box.

If you know someone isn't going to quit, regardless of what happens, and that person is also in the minority, would you base your regulations solely on that person? I don't believe so. You are going to find a medium between the seasoned, dedicated guys and the new hunters that you are trying to keep around.

Those seasoned, dedicated guys that y'all are moaning about aren't going to be around forever. If you just cater to them, you aren't going to have any other hunters. I know some of those older guys that, if given the chance, would have the season go to 30/3 again to try and clean out the new "duck dynasty" hunters and the high roller types that are leasing up every piece of land. What good does that do for the future of our sport? Maybe instead of complaining about those young guys, they should try and teach them the right way to do it.

I got the survey by mail, and I gladly answered every question. Saw it posted on several boards, INCLUDING THIS ONE. Hell, he made 4 posts on it.....one when it was released, one when there was a week left, one when they extended the survey answer period, and this one.

Sorry, Nick, but Larry put out plenty of reminders on this one. I think he's doing the best he can with what he's got. Its a survey, he can't pick and choose who he sends it to.

And how do you know who is dedicated and who is a one-timer? I guarantee you I'm more dedicated to waterfowling than a lot of duck hunters I know, but my survey probably showed the same number of days hunted as them because I didn't have the time last year to hunt as much as I would have liked. Doesn't mean I'm not dedicated to waterfowling. So I agree with Larry's stance on how they view the survey, because you can't base dedication solely on numbers.

One hunter is one hunter, doesn't make a difference how seasoned they are. And dedication doesn't mean they know best how to manage something either. Everyone has an opinion on management......doesn't mean they'd know what to do if given the opportunity.

I am not saying he isn't doing the best with what he's got, he said they have to explore better options to get a better response and manage costs. They have their survey information and participation results, they can review and analyze what can be done better next time. I'm sure he has very constraining budgets and resources, that's the tough part of being a government entity.

Went back and looked at the 4 posts, apparently it was still tough for some to find or access, guess you can lead the horse to water but you cant make them drink. I stated that earlier about the lack of voter participation. Possibly not conducting the survey in the dead heat of summer, especially if you're looking to get a less senior vote. All the kids you were looking for participation from are in Destin or Galveston right now celebrating their HS graduation and obviously(from their participation) couldn't care less about waterfowl at this time. Give them another few months, they'll start to pop their heads back in and prod around. You have to go where the people are going to see it AND be most inclined to participate, bottom line. Get them somewhere where you know they will have to be, apparently it wasn't where they tried this time. Maybe the poor participation was due to not knowing it was available, too lazy too participate, or just flat out not caring. Guess they'll have to do a survey on that too.

30/3 or bust

Actually, shut the season down completely for a couple years.

Literally every single website that has anything to do with hunting in Louisiana has had it posted at least twice. Duck hunting chat, refuge forums, LA Sporstman, saltycajun, tigerdroppings, etc. etc.

You do get a chance to voice your opinion. The guidelines are set by the feds and you are getting the chance to voice your opinion on what you want here in Louisiana.

Simmer down

Ban mud boats and get back to hunting with paddles or having to actually work.

We are talking about a survey here. You are never, repeat, NEVER, going to get 100% participation.

With the number of hunters that think the government is "out to get them" or "spying", you will never get 100% participation. I would be surprised if it ever breaks 50%. Even if you post the link in the easiest place to get to. Even if you manage to get e-mails for all 95k hunters. There will still always be that subset that doesn't want to tell the government anything.

Someone mentioned the people at wal-mart not filling out the HIP correctly. I've known people to say that they will tell them all 0 because they don't want the government to know how many birds they are killing.

So, how do you expect people to ever participate even close to what you apparently want, when people just aren't going to take the time to do it? I mean, 25k received the survey by e-mail, and only 5400 responded. That should tell you right there that e-mailing the survey to all 95k would not solve anything.

I received mine in the mail, and was more than happy to fill it out and return it. If everyone had the desire that you and I have to contribute to the information that LDWF has, then you would see that percentage go up.

But hunter attitudes, in my experience, are to the contrary. They don't want to tell the government anything. So until that mindset is changed, it doesn't matter if you question them at the boat launch, they aren't going to answer.

The end user is the duck hunter. Their opinion may not be the sole basis for the decisions, but it has to be taken into account. If you don't have an end user, you have no profit to sell, and thus you have no money to manage that product. In this case, the hunters buying licenses and shells and all the other goodies associated with hunting is the funding source for management and wildlife agencies. No funding = no wildlife agencies = no management = no ducks.

Personally, I wouldn't be so quick to label anyone as an "everyday idiot". I really don't think that someone is an expert on how a species should be managed just because they've been hunting them for 30 days a year for 10 or 15 or 20 years. I know guys that have hunted ducks religiously for longer than I have, kill the hell out of them, and don't know what the damn limits are for a particular species.

Trust me, I don't want that guy setting the regulations, because he doesn't know anything but killing ducks.

I agree with your participation theory, but I'm sure LDWF has a target participation level that they feel is achievable and are aiming for it.

As for the everyday idiot theory, I was referring to every single hunter that is not a biologist, including myself. Just because someone is a successful or passionate hunter does not dually qualify them to be a biologist. I'm sure many successful La hunters have never ventured north of Shreveport and have no idea how hatch rates, predator rates, and the million other factors up north have an impact on the waterfowl the other 10 months out the year. They gauge what they want limits on by how many birds they want to kill, not by what is healthy for the overall big picture.

We pay taxes, licenses, and join conservation organizations to help fund the biologist and research, let them do their job.

Like I said make the limit 2 or 10 and I'll be there either way.

I understand that everyone's opinion should be taken into account, and some of the questions really had little to do with someone's experience level. However, the questions about zones due to populations at certain times of year in certain locations, season dates, and other questions in this same category can't be answered with much credibility from someone who hunts 4-10 days a year vs someone who hunts 40-60 days a year.

Ah, gotcha. That is basically what I was getting at, but my comment regarding end users still applies. They set pretty much every hunting season with some input from the public. After all, it is a public resource and LDWF is a public service agency.


I disagree, and only because most hunters are not moving around within a particular zone. The only difference between a hunter that is afield 4-10 and a hunter that is afield 40-60 days is the number of observations in a given area....in most cases. Now there are some people that move around within a zone, but they aren't all over the zone, and they probably don't spend an equal number of days at different areas within that zone.

There may not be many birds in one part of the zone, but there may be several in another part of that zone, and vice versa. So to say that someone that is afield for 40-60 days knows more about what the season dates should be in a zone because he is spending more time afield is somewhat false, in my opinion. If both are hunting the same area, then yes, he can likely more accurately paint a picture than the 4-10 day hunter. But if both are in different parts of the Coastal Zone, for instance, does the 40-60 day hunter on his private land in Johnson Bayou have more credibility than the 4-10 day hunter on private land in Vermillion Parish east of Freshwater Bayou when commenting on the framework for the entire coastal zone?

What if you have two hunters that both hunt 40-60 days in the Coastal Zone, but one is Cameron Parish, and the other in Terrebonne Parish? What if the Cameron Parish hunter is fine with the current framework and the Terrebonne hunter would like the split to occur later or earlier? What do you do in this situation? Who has more credibility? Neither ventures outside of his parish, so neither knows what the rest of the zone looks like.

Does the 40-60 day hunter have more credibility than the 4-10 day hunter? Sure. But how much more is the real question, and can you quantify that? And does it apply to the entire zone if he is only hunting one small area of it? I don't think there should be any more weight given to that hunter than the 4-10 day hunter, because any one person's experience depends on a number of variables. If you are in the wrong place, you may see things very differently than if you were in a place where there were lots of ducks.

How is someone who hunt's 4-10 days going to know as much about what is going on in their area as someone who hunts 40-60 days? What if the 4-10 day hunter is never out on a cold front, north wind day to see the huge flights of new birds coming in? Not to mention the fact that to get to where most hunters are hunting, they probably drive through other waterfowl habitat and different areas on their way too and from their blind. I understand that different areas are not related, but there are people who hunt 40-60 days in every part of this state. To think that someone who may only be out there a few days a year has just as good of a grasp on what happens in their area as someone who is out there every day is crazy. For instance, I drive down highway 14 from Lake Charles to Gueydan every day of duck season, so I see what is going on in areas much bigger than just the blind that I hunt.

I vote 10/1 :smokin:

they did that in plaqumines parish

They need to just scrap all this electronics crap and go knock on everyone's door.

I do want to remind you that next year there are a couple big elections coming up you may want to vote in. And you need to renew your fishing license if you haven't already. Just looking out for you because they don't send emails about that stuff

No worries slick, I have a lifetime license. Even if I didn't it wouldn't be hard to remember because its the same date every year for a fishing license renewal. The presidential election is every 4 years on the Tuesday between the 2nd and the 8th of November. Pretty easy to learn and remember that one too, if you received and education and are an active contributing member of society.

Now go lather up some more peanut butter on your go nads, and dig up your dead silver lab and enjoy the afternoon.

Maybe since you so smart knowing those dates they will count your vote extra

You drive a Chevy don't you

NO DUCK BUTTER, that's not how it works. Because I know the dates and stay in tuned they only count me for half a vote. They don't care about my vote, they want the least interested person's vote. DUH!!! guess you didn't learn anything on this thread.

And I do drive a Chevy, but only in my wildest most adventurous dreams.

this post has a 20% chance of being a lemon

You got my vote.

Where did I suggest that someone who hunts 4-10 days knows as much as someone that is hunting 40-60 days in the same area? If we are talking about zones, someone that hunts 40-60 days in Cameron Parish doesn't know anymore about Vermilion parish than the guy that hunts 4-10 days in Vermilion Parish.

Now you are introducing an entirely different aspect to this conversation though. Three years ago, I was doing check outs of waterfowl roosting areas. I looked at more land with ducks sitting on it than I bet a lot of hunters do. But, I didn't hunt 40-60 days. Probably more in the range of the 4-10 dayer, because of work and school. Should I have had a greater voice than any other hunter? I saw when the first ducks showed up, and I saw when the last one's left. I guess I should have been on the committee to set the season or something.

I'm sure there are many people that drive up and down Highway 27 in Cameron Parish every day. Probably up and down Highway 14 too. Does that mean they have a better grasp on what the frame work should be in the Coastal Zone, because they are looking at those marshes every day? I bet a lot of them don't even hunt. Slippery slope right there.

If you start giving more voice to a certain group, what do you think is going to happen? As I mentioned before, I know several older, seasoned duck hunters that would very much like to see 30/3 come back, because they think it will thin the competition. Is that what is best for the resource and the sport? Probably not. All it will do is please a few people, and is not at all scientific.

I don't know where you got that I was suggesting that the 4-10 dayer knew as much as the 40-60 dayer. That was not my point at all. My point was, and I wrote it very clearly, most 40-60 dayers are hunting the same area; they aren't hunting across the zone. Are you telling me that what one guy sees in Cameron Parish is the tell-all for the entire coastal zone? There are 40-60 dayers all across the state, we can agree on that, but do you think every 40-60 dayer in the Coastal Zone is going to agree on when the split should be? I seriously doubt that, because the birds show up at different times across the zone, and they leave at different times. I've heard guys in certain parts of the Coastal and Eastern zone say that once you get into January, you might as well hang your gun up.

All I'm saying is, relying on one voice or group of voices more than another is a bad idea. That 4-10 dayer may not hit the conditions you described, but he's still out there.

Everyone better get ready to do a lot more griping in the future with the new method for setting the frame work. At least they could be a little more accurate when they were setting it in August or September. There's going to be some chapped asses when they start setting it with all the other hunting seasons in January or February.

I'll just leave this here. Seems to me like there is a reason the "most dedicated hunters" like Nick aren't the sole target of the surveys, because it would result in overshooting.

Hmmmmm, interesting that there isn't much difference between the open-web (which Larry tells us the dedicated hunters typically take) and the mail-out surveys (which are completely random). So either the only hunters completing the mail-out surveys are dedicated hunters, or the 4-10 dayers know more than people want to admit.

So if the opinions have been almost identical, then what the hell is everyone's problem?

On a different note, the waterfowl survey came out today. Duck numbers are up again.

yeah but scaup numbers are 13% down over the LTA:(:(:cry::cry:

And the spoonies are down from last year.... I contributed to that lol....

12% less ponds this year also jumped out to me.

Green-winged teal are up pretty good.

I saw that too. Do you think thats due to habitat loss? Its not like there hasnt been plenty of rain.

The overall condition of the prairies seems to be lower than last year, based on the figures associated with the report. Reading some of the Survey Reports on DU's website leads me to believe that some areas did not get as much rain and were pretty dry. This is probably why the habitat conditions in the U.S. region of the Prairie Potholes is so poor. I know some areas had snow a lot later too, so that could have something to do with poorer conditions this year.

Maybe Larry knows a little more about that, but it seems like it has a lot to do with less rain in portions of the breeding grounds.

Awesome, now just hope I have enough face paint to make it through the 4-10 days I'll get to hunt this year. Hopefully the season will go until March this year. Can't wait to get my gun barrel sticker ordered....:shaking:

From what I understand most of Canada was very dry which hurts.

If the water on our lease is as high as it was last year I'm screwed either way.

Amen! It's the information from those that participate that will inform our decisions.

We don't care about those who don't participate. You are missing the points, which are how few do participate and how many resources are wasted trying to get a statistically-valid random sample because so few participate.

Those are hunters that buy hunting licenses, just like you. Their opinion counts, the same as yours. The science and research are the same as always, and when something is biologically settled, like NOT hunting into February, then we are NOT interested in hunter-opinion. But often that science and research leads us to biologically-equivalent choices such as:

Do you prefer a 30-day season with a 3-bird bag limit for scaup, or a 60-day season with a 1-bird bag?

This year we will likely have a choice between 107/1 or 88/2 or 74/3 for specklebelly geese.

Zones and splits, season dates, WMA hunting options, regulating spinning-wing decoys, closing shooting hours at noon, are all decisions that are NOT strictly biological and can be reasonably informed by collecting hunter-opinion data. Hunting regulations seem to have a much larger affect on hunters than they do on the population dynamics of ducks.

Yes: money, political influence, and maintaining the institution of waterfowl hunting that has traditionally been the majority support for conservation activities. We want large, sustainable numbers of waterfowl hunters to both support conservation and benefit from it. Certainly you are aware of the declining number of waterfowl hunters nationwide? Despite high waterfowl populations and liberal seasons, the number of waterfowl hunters has fallen.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...b.245/abstract

And you might also be aware that in response, the 2012 revision of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan added a 3rd fundamental objective of "growing numbers of waterfowl hunters, other conservationists and citizens who enjoy and actively support waterfowl and wetland conservation."

http://nawmprevision.org/sites/defau...n-EN-may23.pdf

Absolutely wrong! Everyone's opinion counts that same, and because more dedicated waterfowl hunters are more likely to respond to the survey, the overall results are very likely skewed toward those hunters.

It would be beneficial if you re-read what was said. You are taking offense to something that is not true.

According to our surveys, those hunters that have hunted for more years, hunt more days, and kill more ducks (the more dedicated hunters), are also the least satisfied but do not quit. That last part is the most important: they do not quit. So from a hunter recruitment and retention standpoint, we can't learn much from them about how to recruit or maintain hunters. They are recruited and maintained. That doesn't mean their opinions count any less for informing our decisions. It does mean that you don't want it to count any more than the average guy's.

Actually, that has been done, and it was far more expensive, less representative (how many boat ramps do you have to staff to cover the entire state, and what proportion of our waterfowl hunters don't hunt in those habitats?), and time-consuming than current methods. It is feasible when you have a small geographic focus, like our 2012 survey specific to Catahoula Lake, but even then we spent more for those 400 valid surveys than we spent on any other besides the statewide random mail-out.

I keep warning that it's coming with all the habitat loss in the prairie-pothole region, but with all the water from the past few years, it just keeps on keeping on.

I'm working my way through this thread, so I apologize if someone already posted this, but the population remains in good shape.

http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pd...opulations.pdf