Waterfowl Hunter Survey Closes tonight

[Bluechip]

Originally Posted by meaux fishing

yeah but scaup numbers are 13% down over the LTA

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

[Smalls]

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

Green-winged teal are up pretty good.

[meaux fishing]

Originally Posted by Smalls

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.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by meaux fishing

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.

[Shawn Braquet]

Originally Posted by ckinchen

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

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....

[ckinchen]

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.

[Lreynolds]

Originally Posted by Nickt87

Since when do we care so much about the people that care so little???? Screw the idiots that were too lazy to vote

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.

Originally Posted by Nickt87

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.

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.

[Lreynolds]

Originally Posted by Nickt87

So it's a money thing?

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

Originally Posted by Nickt87

They know their seasoned, dedicated waterfowlers opinion ain't worth the post card the survey was mailed on.

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.

[Lreynolds]

Originally Posted by Nickt87

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.

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.

Originally Posted by Nickt87

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.

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.

[Lreynolds]

Originally Posted by Spunt Drag

30/3 or bust

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

[Spunt Drag]

Originally Posted by Lreynolds

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

And I'll be thrilled. It will bring the overcrowded refuges back to bearable and drive these ridiculous lease prices down.

When a garhole $hit blind is going for $6k, it's gotten outta hand. I saw a blind advertised the other day for $2,500 FOR TEAL SEASON!!! Duck hunting is a REALLY big fad right now. It's time to separate the wheat from the chaff.

[Lreynolds]

I've appreciated the discussion, guys! It has provided the opportunity to expose what we are seeing and learning as well as the adjustments we are making to gather the most representative data in the most cost-effective way. It will certainly evolve in the future.

I got my first look at the e-mail and open-web survey data this afternoon, and at first glance, I'm really excited about the e-mail survey. The open-web respondents averaged about 60% more hunt days and nearly twice the duck kill as the e-mail respondents. So, it looks like the e-mail survey might provide results more similar to the random mail-out survey, which would be great!

We will provide a preliminary summary presentation of the survey results at the August 6th Commission meeting.

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

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



You drive a Chevy don't you

DuckButter meant to post this from his burn handle, LMAO

I knew you were DaPointIsDaBomb

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by Goooh

DuckButter meant to post this from his burn handle, LMAO

I knew you were DaPointIsDaBomb

Damn iPhone

[Bluechip]

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

Damn iPhone

It was fun while it lasted..... You hammered them for a while.

[noodle creek]

Originally Posted by Smalls

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.

You said "the only difference between a hunter who is afield 4-10 days vs a hunter afield 40-60 days is their observations" or something along those lines. Don't you think 40 extra days afield is a lot more to learn from?

I understand that most people hunt the same area for the most part. All I'm saying is that there are people who hunt more days than not in every area throughout the state, and there are people who hunt just a few days in every area throughout the state. The guys who hunt everyday clearly have a much better understanding of what happens throughout the course of a season compared to someone who isn't even out there.

[Goooh]

[QUOTE=noodle creek;762047

The guys who hunt everyday clearly have a much better understanding of what happens throughout the course of a season compared to someone who isn't even out there.[/QUOTE]

"The guys who hunt everyday clearly have a much better understanding of what happens throughout the course of a season compared to someone who isn't even out there."


In their very small area, maybe a couple hundred acres and what's around it. That's nothing when you look at it.

Does a guy fishing west cove for 40-60 days have more understanding of what's going on at commissary point or Turners than a guy that fishes those two areas 10 times?

[noodle creek]

I was referring to their area, not the whole state haha. I'm over this argument, like I said in my first post, lots of the questions had little to do with how much time someone spends in the field anyway.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by noodle creek

You said "the only difference between a hunter who is afield 4-10 days vs a hunter afield 40-60 days is their observations" or something along those lines. Don't you think 40 extra days afield is a lot more to learn from?

I understand that most people hunt the same area for the most part. All I'm saying is that there are people who hunt more days than not in every area throughout the state, and there are people who hunt just a few days in every area throughout the state. The guys who hunt everyday clearly have a much better understanding of what happens throughout the course of a season compared to someone who isn't even out there.

"Don't you think 40 extra days afield is a lot more to learn from?"

Yes, that's why I said their observations were the only difference. Does that mean the 40-60 day guy knows better for the entire zone? No. And that was my point. Seasons aren't set for one small area. They are set for 3 large zones.

Its all moot anyway, because it sounds like most of the respondents have pretty similar views anyway.

[noodle creek]

Originally Posted by Smalls

"Don't you think 40 extra days afield is a lot more to learn from?"

Yes, that's why I said their observations were the only difference. Does that mean the 40-60 day guy knows better for the entire zone? No. And that was my point. Seasons aren't set for one small area. They are set for 3 large zones.

Its all moot anyway, because it sounds like most of the respondents have pretty similar views anyway.

Right, and I never said anyone knows what it happening in an entire zone. Break the zones down into separate areas, because there are people in each small area who hunt more days than not. Each of those people has more knowledge of what happens than the guy who hunts the same area just a few days. That was my original point, guess we had a misunderstanding.