# Tougher duck hunting this season?



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

A post on the refuge forums got me to thinking about this season and what I saw out there. I've talked with many, many people about their experiences this year and the the overwhelming reponse has been about the lack of ducks and the crowding in the marshes. What do you guys think is the cause of the poorer bag counts and overcrowding? This is what I posted:
Phragmites has destroyed the vast majority of roosting and loafing ponds on the GSL marshlands from Brigham to Saltair. The lake is at historic lows, which reduces the area for birds to congregate in large numbers. These two factors result in birds coming into the area, looking around and finding nothing, and moving on. Couple this with increased hunter-days concentrating on what's left of the marsh---you get fewer birds in the bag and fewer birds in the area. Anyone that cares about hunting waterfowl should be concerned about phragmites. *Any dollar spent that is not geared toward phragmites reduction is money that is being unwisely spent.* Any conservation organization that purports to care about Utah's ducks, but refuses to get involved in phragmites eradication is fooling it's members and is not in touch with our unique problems here in Utah. *If you want better duck hunting in Utah, get involved with any organization that is actively fighting phragmites.*
R


----------



## dark_cloud (Oct 18, 2010)

Good post jeff. I think that our problem is here to stay for ever. You might be able to thin it out a little bit, but you will never get rid of it. The problem is up stream, starting at utah lake, if you dont get rid of it there you will never get rid of it. Phrag will grow any where, and spreads everywhere. Your boat spreads it really good :mrgreen: The seed of the phrag travel for miles in a wind storm. I have been out in the middle of the lake on a windy warm day and though it was snowing, but it was just the phrag blowing around. We need to start some where with it though. One of the other problems we have is they only do things inside the dikes of the WMA. It seems like the phrag is doubled at farmington bay in the last 3 years. Its got so thick, that it has seal off two creeks we used to take the boat up, now we walk around a giant patch of it for 1/4 mile to get to our honey hole. I cant ever remember seeing phrag so thick and tall as this year. JUST GIVE ME A GAS CAN AND A MATCH and I will make it all better :mrgreen:


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

I saw a ton of birds this year but there are also a ton of hunters!!!! I see multiple hunters in my last season spots when I used to never see any at all!!! duck hunting is becoming very popular, people are taking it up cause the big game isn't what it use to be and it gives them something to do for a longer period of time...overcrowding is a huge problem, spraying more areas will help but 10 years from now, duck hunting is gonna be a bigger circus than it is now, everyone will have mud buddies runnin all over the place!


----------



## bkelz (Dec 3, 2010)

utahgolf said:


> I saw a ton of birds this year but there are also a ton of hunters!!!! I see multiple hunters in my last season spots when I used to never see any at all!!! duck hunting is becoming very popular, people are taking it up cause the big game isn't what it use to be and it gives them something to do for a longer period of time...overcrowding is a huge problem, spraying more areas will help but 10 years from now, duck hunting is gonna be a bigger circus than it is now, everyone will have mud buddies runnin all over the place!


i couldnt agree more! soooo many hunters, its ashame there isnt more public land. the GSL was swarming with boats. just a week ago or so there were so many, that a couple of hunters were just drive by shooting. (which actually worked out for me)


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

There are thousands fewer hunters now that here has been in the past. Duck hunter numbers are way down, but hunter-days are way up. *We may have fewer hunters, but there is significantly less marsh to spread out in.* This goes for birds too, without the thousands of traditional ponds to loaf and roost in, they have to rely on the large GSL bays (Farmington, Bear River, Willard Spur, and Ogden bays) to get seclusion. With the low water in the GSL, this has been greatly reduced. So what we have is lots of hunters looking for a place to spread out in, and those places just do not exist anymore. Birds, as well as hunters, need room to spread out and be alone. Phrag is the culprit for most of this problem and it CAN be fixed.
R


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

While I will agree there is a huge phragmite problem, I will disagree with this season being a poor one. I have hunted waterfowl for 20 years and this was a banner year for me. I won't say how many birds I harvested, but it was the most wings I have sent to the Department of the Interior since I started doing the survey. Mudmotors and Airboats are here to stay folks so get used to it. Getting rid of the phragmite will open areas back up and allow hunters to spread out more across the marsh. I don't feel this year there was more over crowding than in years past. The late season hunting is generally tougher than the early or mid season and that's just how it is, the birds migrate and their numbers drop. Now back to the phragmite issue, how can WE help fight this invasive plant? My guess is it takes lots of money, so where does the money come from? I hate paying more fees for recreational activities just like everyone else, but maybe an entrance fee or a yearly fee on the WMA's would help raise funds to fight this crap. Or a state duck stamp where the funds go directly towards waterfowl habitat and NOTHING ELSE. I know this won't be a popular idea by most people but the money has to come from somewhere.


----------



## Guest (Jan 16, 2011)

i honestly think this is the best year i have ever experienced as far as numbers of birds i saw as well as birds i harvested. for some reason they decoyed, atleast for me, tons better then they did in past years. especially from mid november until the very end. the ducks are still around, but just like everything else, they change from year to year. where they were in past years, they might not be the next due to frag, hunting pressure, water levels, Etc... something i finally figured out was, the ducks move. you gotta move with the ducks and be where they want to be. if you try somewhere they have no intrest in, you arent going to do very well.


----------



## richard rouleau (Apr 12, 2008)

well i know you guys up north have a problem with pharg. but down here southern utah it is water i hunt clear lake but the last couple of year it seem that water has been gone. it has got worst every year . if do not have water there is no ducks . i will like them to bring back the state duck stamp as long as the money go towards waterfowl habitat across the state . mr. tom alridge retire. does any boady know who is going to be the state waterfowl person going to be? and my be put more feed on the wma to hold the more ducks well help


----------



## nickpan (May 6, 2008)

It was definitely a weird year for sure. Not a whole lot of birds here consistently throughout the season like there usually is. I think that is due to the combo of loss of habitat with the phrag, really really low GSL levels and more and more people hunting them. But like Rjefre said its the low GSL level and the phrag that is really killing us. Just nothing to hold the birds around anymore.

What exactly kills phrag other than spraying and burning? Are there any other ways? I heard once that 'flood' waters could wipe it out ??


----------



## duck jerky (Sep 8, 2007)

it was a good year but not a great year shot about 30% less ducks but had my best goose season. And my boys got their first geese on youth hunt.


----------



## stuckduck (Jan 31, 2008)

It was an interesting year to say the least... I knew going into this season that it would be a struggle with the purchase of a new boat and more area to hunt that I would have a learning curve... It was still in my minds eye good.. yes I think bird numbers were down, many things can contribute to that.. look how warm the first of the season was.. look how it locked up so quick at thanksgiving..then it warmed up and opened back up with all that area and most birds MIGRATED on through.. Weather had a huge roll in it this year... I like others believe that Phrag is the worst thing going on in the marshes..... followed but LOW water levels.. we need to ALL get on board and STOP GSL minerals from doing what they want... that will hurt all areas along the GSL marshes. There are many people in the marsh but I dont think it really that bad.. some area do get more than others, some work a little harder to get away from it and it does pay off. i do think that you will see an slight increase in hunter numbers for years to come.. I like others have become disgusted in the big game and what SFW wants.. I really dont have much of a desire to hunt deer.. which is good just more duck time. 

I agree with you R phrag can be fixed!!! 

Kevin


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

I largely packed it in at new years, but yesterday I decided to carry the boys out for a walk since it was so warm.

I finished out this season with an afternoon beat down of the boot lips, took longer to walk out than to limit. Mojo pulled in a double on the last retrieve in a fitting end to a good year for us. I didn't kill quite as many as last year's stellar season, but I did get into triple digits again, I got a lot more geese this year than last including adding another band to my collection.

It sure was a weird year for weather, but from fighting the skeeters to the below 0 temps, I enjoyed every hunt no matter how many I killed.

That Pharq is really expanding out past the WMA boundaries, sure hope the FFSL gets off their butts and decides to do something about it before the lake is completely covered. 

Like others have said until the masses bring some political power to bear on the FSSL and state legislator Pharq is going to continue to overrun our marshes and choke out our hunting acre by acre due to lack of action on the states part. If that bothers you then join one of those groups out there that are lobbing for the funds to control/remove the pharmities. 

on a side note to those that think banning air and mud boats are the answer to bringing back the bird, that train thought is similar to pissing into the wind, while it may sound feasible at first, neither one will ever give you the results you are looking for.


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

A fair year. Not one to brag about, but not one that I could say was that bad either.

It is interesting that the mud motor/airboat supporters are the ones who brought up the issue. To be honest, despite the supporters, I'd like to see the "experiment" run that folks are so scared of and see what the results would be. 
I don't see it as an experiment when the birds are getting harassed so much and so often....to know the results would be that the birds that were once being blown out of area by so much activity would stick around a while longer before ice and snow pushed them on naturally.


----------



## Guest (Jan 17, 2011)

1BandMan said:


> A fair year. Not one to brag about, but not one that I could say was that bad either.
> 
> It is interesting that the mud motor/airboat supporters are the ones who brought up the issue. To be honest, despite the supporters, I'd like to see the "experiment" run that folks are so scared of and see what the results would be.
> I don't see it as an experiment when the birds are getting harassed so much and so often....to know the results would be that the birds that were once being blown out of area by so much activity would stick around a while longer before ice and snow pushed them on naturally.


theres nothing saying that the birds would stick around longer. the birds do what they want to do when they want to do it. if you watch the birds when they get kicked up by boats, they do a few circles over the area and then go land right back down where they first were. it doesnt bother them one bit. ducks and geese live, for the most part, in water/marsh areas. to get where they live, we need boats to access most of these remote areas. if people want to do away with boat travel for waterfowl hunting, then do away with truck/atv/horse travel with big game hunting also. those are a huge factor when it comes to driving animals out of the country. they dont tolerate it one bit. make every hunting area and mountain range a wilderness area starting at the valley floor or the nearest major highway and make everyone walk in to their honey holes.

you think hunter crowding is bad now?? just try this 'experiment' and see what happens... it will be a disaster from start to finish.


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

kill_'em_all said:


> 1BandMan said:
> 
> 
> > A fair year. Not one to brag about, but not one that I could say was that bad either.
> ...


I can understand your position. I can also see your position in regards to "the big picture" from your handle you go by here as well.
Some critters adapt well to pressure. Others do not. If there is no "SAFE" place for birds to rest the easiest way to adapt is to move away from the area in which they are being pressured. Just moving through skittish birds over and over will push them out.
I've hunted waterfowl for 30+ years and it simply blows me away to see the disrespect for the land and wildlife especially over the past 10 years. Maybe it's a recent trend and/or maybe it's the future, but people simply can't stand to see birds resting anywhere or anytime. Folks don't seem to understand that resting and/or unmolested birds are birds that will return and stay in the area. I've heard em' say that "they aren't huntable anyway so we'll move em' to where they are." I can understand their logic, but it's logic that is very flawed. They'll shoot em off with a rifle or wad cutter, rally through them with their mud and air boats, run like a mad man into the field and shoot them off, do a "drive by" and jump out of their rig and shoot at them at 100+ yards, drive 30+ miles an hour into them with thier ATV and shoot into them, etc. just to get them moving.
There are farther and fewer between areas that are not huntable by ATV, airboat or mud motor, many of these areas once being the roost. Why would someone want to shoot the roost???? The answer: Because they can.

Its not very hard to figure out. Where there are birds, give it 30 seconds to 30 minutes and there will be hunters harassing them somehow by someway.

A lot of these folks "honeyholes" WERE honeyholes for the ducks and geese and weren't accessable by people before now and are now simply another area the birds avoid due to the 30 airboats and 60 mudboats that hunt or cruise through there daily.

Don't kid yourself into thinking that ducks and geese are super resilient or super stupid and will continue to stick around in an area that they can't sit or rest for very long. If this were the case, they would have been an extinct specie long before now at the hand of humans.


----------



## Gaston (Dec 6, 2008)

Toughest year i've had in a long time with very few birds bagged. I hunt mostly Utah lake and just didn't see the numbers of birds this year. Even my late season spot held very few birds.


----------



## Guest (Jan 17, 2011)

Gaston said:


> Toughest year i've had in a long time with very few birds bagged. I hunt mostly Utah lake and just didn't see the numbers of birds this year. Even my late season spot held very few birds.


i dont know which part of the lake you were hunting, but the part i was hunting held LOTS of birds from the opener until ice up. IMO this year had more birds on it then any other year i can remember. the frag is getting bad on that lake also... wont be long until its over run just like every where else in this state.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

1BandMan the birds have rest areas that are just for that "rest" I don't think it matters if MM's, canoes or foot soldiers are hunting an area it will have pressure and birds will move regardless. You can keep blaming boats for all the so called problems but I for one don't buy into it. I hunt some of the heaviest traveled areas and mostly have sucessful hunts and see plenty of birds. What more do you want for rest areas? 

Back to the phrag topic, the areas that were grazed down at FB last summer looked fantastic and opened up a whole new world in places. I hope they graze down a bunch more areas this summer.


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

Fowlmouth said:


> 1BandMan the birds have rest areas that are just for that "rest" I don't think it matters if MM's, canoes or foot soldiers are hunting an area it will have pressure and birds will move regardless. You can keep blaming boats for all the so called problems but I for one don't buy into it. I hunt some of the heaviest traveled areas and mostly have sucessful hunts and see plenty of birds. What more do you want for rest areas?
> 
> Back to the phrag topic, the areas that were grazed down at FB last summer looked fantastic and opened up a whole new world in places. I hope they graze down a bunch more areas this summer.


Your probably right. Pressure (whether it be shooting at or busting them up) has nothing to do with birds staying in or leaving an area . Waterfowl rest areas where birds can go unmolested are huge areas and becoming more and more abundant. 
Roost and rest area's are simply WAY overated. 
Shooting the roost is a tough concept for me, but a practice I guess I'll have to learn to embrace with my fellow waterfowl hunters. I'll just have to scout it out and beat them to it, as much and as often as I possibly can. If a few new birds show up, I'll try to be the first to get out on them before they push out.
I understand that being where the birds want to be is key. The "X" for some weird reason keeps moving so we have to make sure that we can get where the "X" is and set up on them at all costs. If that "X" isn't actually huntable, we'll bust em up and keep em moving giving others opportunity to shoot them where they are huntable.

Makes no sense to me, but one of us will learn and learn real fast(I'm referring to myself being the one that will soon be learning) since airboats and mudmotor propelled boats are the way to get where the birds are and are very much growing in number every year.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

The asinine thing about his argument is he makes it out like boat hunters are selfish uncaring hunters which is in fact not the case at all. They just don’t think that bowing down and appeasing a group like yours is the right thing to do since it benefits no one but your group in the long run.

All we hear is the boats are causing all the problems which is not true at all. Lose of habitat to the pharmities is a huge problem that affects all hunter regardless of your mode of transportation to a hunting spot. I never hear nothing about supporting the anti pharq lobby out of them. To me and a lot others I talk with it just seems like they just want to have their way without regard to the overall picture. They bring nothing to the table beyond the boat ban, when that doesn’t work due to pharq choking out all the open water, who are they gonna blame next? Who knows who it will be, but rest assured that they won’t take credit for wasting time and resources of the groups that actually are fighting that plant. This is a fight that will benefit everyone, even the non hunting resource users

Just think about what all that could have been accomplished on controlling the pharq if our groups didn’t constantly have to stop and debate this with anti MM crowd. Then ask you who the selfish uncaring group that does not get the big picture really is!


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

Didn't go as much this year... when I did, I'd say it was a lot more crowded. With the impending cut of big game tags, we're only going to see more folks picking up shotguns to cram into local marshes and cover up every inch of available shoreline trying to shoot something other than deer and elk. I'd imagine people in the upland areas will probably see more guys doing that too instead of hunting big game. I killed a whopping four birds this year, so yeah, compared to previous years, it was rough.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

Jimmy, you know I love you man and I think you're heart is in the right place, but you're dead wrong about this one!

Yes Phrag is a problem. Yes there are more people in the marsh. Yes there is less water out there to run on due to drought. All these things are problematic when it comes to killing ducks.



> on a side note to those that think banning air and mud boats are the answer to bringing back the bird, that train thought is similar to **** into the wind, while it may sound feasible at first, neither one will ever give you the results you are looking for.


Nobody wants to "ban" air and mud boats. But there needs to be some restrictions on where they can go. Ducks DO NOT stick around when they're constantly being rallied by boat traffic. They need a place to loaf and rest without being run through by another guy in a boat. If they have places in the marsh where they can rest, they stick around. Nobody is saying close all the marshes to motored boats, just a couple strategic places. Think about this. Lets pretend there was no phrag. OK, now there's lots more area for ducks to be. BUT, that also means there's just more surface area to run a mud motor as well. Problem still NOT solved. There HAS to be rest areas where motorized boats cant go. PERIOD!



> To me and a lot others I talk with it just seems like they just want to have their way without regard to the overall picture. They bring nothing to the table beyond the boat ban,


Nothing could be farther from the truth! For the last time,they don't want to "ban" boats. Just make a few places they cant go so the ducks have a place to rest, that's all. This makes the hunting better for ALL of us. Not just the people without boats. When the ducks can rest within the marsh, they don't leave the marsh. They trade around all day giving people chances to harvest them. WALK up to the edge of big lake and shoot your gun. The ducks on the other side just swim away from you. They DON'T leave. Now, DRIVE a mud boat through the middle of that same lake and watch what happens to those same ducks. They flat LEAVE the country and don't come back. Cover all the water up with boat traffic and the ducks *leave* giving NOBODY the chance at harvesting any. Funny how the mud motor crowd makes up 30% of the duck hunting user days, but has access to 95% of all the huntable water. How is that fair to the "majority"?

Mud motors in the marsh is a kin to wheelers in the mountains. You _GOTTA_ have places where they can't go if you want to see wildlife in any good numbers.

That sentiment is anything but selfish. It's smart, wise, conservation minded, stewardship of the resource. Period! To think anything else into it is asinine!


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

Mojo1 said:


> The asinine thing about his argument is he makes it out like boat hunters are selfish uncaring hunters which is in fact not the case at all.
> Boat hunters that hunt the roost, well, yea I would say tht they are selfish uncaring hunters. In what ways aren't they is what I would say the more appropriate question, that is unless you agree that shooting the roost benefits ducks and geese
> They just don't think that bowing down and appeasing a group like yours is the right thing to do since it benefits no one but your group in the long run.
> My group? Who exactly is my group? The group that cares about keeping waterfowl in the valley group? OK, I guess I'm the "Keep the Birds in the Valley" group.
> ...


Phrag not "pharg" is indeed a problem. I don't think anyone disagrees about the issue of habitat loss due to phrag. I also wonder about us being the "human phrag" Where we were once limited to few areas, we've spread out exponentially through our own nifty technology and numbers. I agree the phrag problem is an issue, I'm just wondering which type of phrag is causing the most amount of damage.


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> Jimmy, you know I love you man and I think you're heart is in the right place, but you're dead wrong about this one!
> 
> Yes Phrag is a problem. Yes there are more people in the marsh. Yes there is less water out there to run on due to drought. All these things are problematic when it comes to killing ducks.
> 
> ...


Nothing could be farther from the truth! For the last time,they don't want to "ban" boats. Just make a few places they cant go so the ducks have a place to rest, that's all. This makes the hunting better for ALL of us. Not just the people without boats. When the ducks can rest within the marsh, they don't leave the marsh. They trade around all day giving people chances to harvest them. WALK up to the edge of big lake and shoot your gun. The ducks on the other side just swim away from you. They DON'T leave. Now, DRIVE a mud boat through the middle of that same lake and watch what happens to those same ducks. They flat LEAVE the country and don't come back. Cover all the water up with boat traffic and the ducks *leave* giving NOBODY the chance at harvesting any. Funny how the mud motor crowd makes up 30% of the duck hunting user days, but has access to 95% of all the huntable water. How is that fair to the "majority"?

Mud motors in the marsh is a kin to wheelers in the mountains. You _GOTTA_ have places where they can't go if you want to see wildlife in any good numbers.

That sentiment is anything but selfish. It's smart, wise, conservation minded, stewardship of the resource. Period! To think anything else into it is asinine![/quote:2zhsggha]

Great post Tex.


----------



## deadduckflying (Oct 15, 2010)

State stamp strictly for waterfowl management? Close public areas for periods of resting during the season? 
These and a few other "crazy notions" is what it will take to turn around the issues raised here.

The problem is that there are entirely too many selfish people who wouldn't stand for it. They are far too concerned with banging out bag limits for ~109 days, instead of nurturing the resource.

Scott


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

1BandMan wrote: *"I don't think anyone disagrees about the issue of habitat loss due to phrag. I also wonder about us being the "human phrag" Where we were once limited to few areas, we've spread out exponentially through our own nifty technology and numbers. I agree the phrag problem is an issue, I'm just wondering which type of phrag is causing the most amount of damage." *
I think there is a lot of truth to that statement. There are lots of us out there that go hunting several days per week. This gives birds very little down time. Foot soldiers have access to 100% of the open marshes, it may not seem fair to the boat guys that foot soldiers have ALL the access, but that is how it is. With the roost and loafing areas practically nonexistent anymore, the birds get booted out every time they find a place to land whether it is in place where only foot soldiers can go, or in places better accessed by boats. Banning boats, restricting hunting days, limiting numbers of hunters on WMA's, restricting shotgun shell numbers, ect, are all just band-aid fixes for the real problem of massive loss of habitat. The answer lies in getting the territory back. This can be done in several effective ways, and it can be started immediately, if we had the support of large numbers of waterfowlers. We also need the political will of the legislature and the Division of State LAnds. 
R


----------



## manzquad (Feb 10, 2010)

Is it legal to take a gas powered hedge trimmer into the marsh to cut the phrag? Just a thought if a bunch of people cut a little every time they go out what would happen. Would cutting drop and spread more seed? Would it be better to haul it out on our useless, obnoxiuos boats? Would we be able to do it in the off season before the majority of ducks fly through like when the dwr burns?


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

I just wanted to add another observation about bird numbers and hunting success. Please feel free to let me know if I am not seeing things clearly. If we just go back to the 80's when the lake came up and killed all the marshland vegetation and basically flattened the landscape, we can get a feel for what can become of duck hunting in Utah. The lake receeded and vegetation started coming back, but then in the mid 90's the lake came back up and was lapping at the outer dikes of the WMA's for several years. During this time, the duck hunting was still fairly steady because the WMA's had ton's of territory for the birds to come in from the lake and feed/loaf. Ogden Bay was the king of ducks! That is also when phrag started expanding. The numbers of airboats operating on the GSL have remained fairly constant since then. Although mudmotors have increased in the interiors, the numbers of duck hunters overall have fallen. The number of acres available for birds to utilize since 1997 has been reduced tremendously. As I see it, the main thing that has really affected hunter success is the dramatic reduction in marsh availability for waterfowl. Most of the marsh is now gone, and we have overrun what's left. The answer is getting that acreage back for the birds. People shoot the few ramaining roosts because there is no where else to hunt. I we had those 2000 roost ponds back in the marsh, I feel confident that we would start holding birds again. We would stop fighting about boats vs. foot soldiers, and start enjoying the millions of birds that could be ours to see again. 
R


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

manzquad said:


> Is it legal to take a gas powered hedge trimmer into the marsh to cut the phrag? Just a thought if a bunch of people cut a little every time they go out what would happen. Would cutting drop and spread more seed? Would it be better to haul it out on our useless, obnoxiuos boats? Would we be able to do it in the off season before the majority of ducks fly through like when the dwr burns?


I have been advocating the use of these hedge trimmers for the last few years. Quite a few airboaters now carry these with them and use them to re-open ponds in the phrag. They are great for saving a honey-hole that you are about to lose to phrag. Two guys can re-open a nice pond in a few hours. This helps the ducks and helps the hunting. Don't worry about spreading seeds, a nice windstorm spreads millions of seeds over many miles, and I bet your hedge trimmer is not on par with a strong wind! Each year, the Utah Airboat Association uses these trimmers to keep the navigational flows open outside of the WMA's. The Utah Mudmotor Association also does this for flows that impede navigation. Both organizations also donate to buy spray as well as doante man-hours to the WMA's each fall. The trimmer idea is a small step, but it can have big impacts if a few thousand of us each cut a hole in the phrag or saved a pothole. They can be rented at nearly all rental placers, or they can be purchased for about $00.00-$400.00 each.
R


----------



## nickpan (May 6, 2008)

I agree about the loss of marsh. I remember in the 90's before i could hunt when we'd head out to Farmington there was water on the west side of the main dike, almost all the way to the dike. Now there is just the airboat channel and thousands of acres that is dry. Same with west of Ogden Bay and up near BRBR and Public. It think it would be a real good thing if the lake rose enough again to wipe out everything and start over. Yeah it wouldn't be good for a few years but in the long run it may.

I wonder if the DWR/DNR has ever thought about some incentive programs to help get people to come out in the marsh and help get rid of the phrag. And what i mean by incentives is use things such as bonus points for big game for so many hours worked etc. Something that wouldn't cost them much money and what not. Just an idea


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

I hear people I talk to all the time talk about how overcrowded the marshes are these days. There is a similar vibe on the forums about this subject. Lots of people feel that the marshes are too crowded. There are lots of theories out there on what is causing the birds to leave, and most of them are all opinions at this point. But there is one thing that is a fact that can't be disputed by any group: The amount of waterfowl hunters in Utah has dropped by the thousands over the years. That is a fact, and it's not disputable. But even with that fact, most everyone seems to be seeing what they view as "overcrowding" in the marsh.

I agree with that feeling. There are two spots in particular that in the 90's, and even early 2000's I could go and VERY rarely see another person. In fact, in one of those spots, over a 12-15 year period we saw less than 5 other groups hunt this particular location. The other there was only a handful of times you'd see people there over the years. Now they get pounded. Neither are accessible by boat (motorized or not), BTW. So if the *FACT* is that there are less hunters (by a fairly large number, mind you) out there, but everyone feels that there is much more crowding than in the past, what does that mean? It's not rocket science here. If people want less crowding, there has to be more places to hunt. That may or may not be good for the birds overall. That's something you guys can debate until you're blue in the face if you want. But what can't be debated is the dramatic loss in habitat that has taken place and continues to take place while waterfowlers sit and argue about everything else. My brother and I were talking about this the other day...if there is a bigger group of drama queens who kick and fight more amongst themselves than waterfowlers, we haven't seen it. Pretty sad if you ask me.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

nickpan said:


> I wonder if the DWR/DNR has ever thought about some incentive programs to help get people to come out in the marsh and help get rid of the phrag. And what i mean by incentives is use things such as bonus points for big game for so many hours worked etc. Something that wouldn't cost them much money and what not. Just an idea


I am pretty sure that under the current system that if you are a dedicated hunter and come out and volunteer on the WMA projects you get credit for your hours towards your deer tag.

We always have to fill out the sheets that allow the DNR to track the hours when we do the projects

I do like the idea of a Dedicated Waterfowl hunter program, but I would like it geared to where the majority of water fowlers would be compelled to participate.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

TS30 said:


> I hear people I talk to all the time talk about how overcrowded the marshes are these days. There is a similar vibe on the forums about this subject. Lots of people feel that the marshes are too crowded.  There are lots of theories out there on what is causing the birds to leave, and most of them are all opinions at this point. But there is one thing that is a fact that can't be disputed by any group: The amount of waterfowl hunters in Utah has dropped by the thousands over the years. That is a fact, and it's not disputable. But even with that fact, most everyone seems to be seeing what they view as "overcrowding" in the marsh.
> 
> I agree with that feeling. There are two spots in particular that in the 90's, and even early 2000's I could go and VERY rarely see another person. In fact, in one of those spots, over a 12-15 year period we saw less than 5 other groups hunt this particular location. The other there was only a handful of times you'd see people there over the years. Now they get pounded. Neither are accessible by boat (motorized or not), BTW. So if the *FACT* is that there are less hunters (by a fairly large number, mind you) out there, but everyone feels that there is much more crowding than in the past, what does that mean? It's not rocket science here. If people want less crowding, there has to be more places to hunt. That may or may not be good for the birds overall. That's something you guys can debate until you're blue in the face if you want. But what can't be debated is the dramatic loss in habitat that has taken place and continues to take place while waterfowlers sit and argue about everything else. My brother and I were talking about this the other day...if there is a bigger group of drama queens who kick and fight more amongst themselves than waterfowlers, we haven't seen it. Pretty sad if you ask me.


I find myself in the awkward position of being in agreement with your statement T. But while we all argue over it, a small group of us do in fact do show up to try and do some good, I do wonder where all the others are when it becomes time to put up or shut up.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

Tex, your are my friend so we will have to agree to disagree about it. 

I have said it before, I’ll say it again, I don’t care the reasoning behind their plan until I see a plan that includes restrictions to control overall hunter pressure(all groups) and well as habit lose problem, I am not going to support a plan that targets one single user group. That happens all too often in this country now, and the end result are nothing tangible gets done and we move on to the next victims on the list that are causing our “problems” instead really fixing the problem like it should have been done to began with. This type of behavior is self defeating and a waste of time and resources.

I would love to see a plan that includes more enforcement presence in the marsh, a state duck stamp, a required to hunt online waterfowl ID course and well as waterfowl hunting ethics course that addresses the bad behavior all of us suffer through in the marsh, shell limit restrictions, reduced bag limit in the WMA’s and shortened hunt hours , (end at noon or start at noon), maybe a mix of both that would afford everyone the opportunity to get out and hunt no matter their schedule, we could even throw in a few rest areas if need be but in effect the previous mentioned early stop/start will be defacto rest areas, it works very well back home on the Wma’s and they suffer some of the worst hunting pressure found in the country.


----------



## nickpan (May 6, 2008)

I thought about that for the dedicated hunter program, _but to me_, that isn't very much of an incentive. If those hours went to bonus points for Once in a Lifetime or LE or Premium LE tags then it would be much more appealing than bein able to hunt all 3 seasons, kill 2 deer in 3 years on general units Dedicated tag. I don't know how you could really gear it towards waterfowl, as its about open to all who wants to hunt.

But then again the way things are done here in Utah, you'd probably have all sorts of people cryin that people are getting more points than them etc.

Also if we could get people like the Audubon Society and the groups for the GSL to pitch in there could really be some damage done.

And like what has been stated as far as hunter pressure, it all stems back to loss of habitat. Its putting more people in places that are still holding birds, rather than people spread out. One spot of mine this year on any given morning you see around 10 boat trailers in the parking lot, but on a good water year you NEVER see them other than the ramp. THis year we went out and ran into 5 guys within minutes, and thats because the water was really low.


----------



## nickpan (May 6, 2008)

What about Ducks Unlimited? Couldn't there be funding from them as well. I think its a big enough problem for a good chunk of funding from them.

Another thing too is people need to step back and take hunting out of the picture, and look at the habitat for the birds side of things. A lot of people want nothing to do with it if they don't get a personal "return" for there favors. But to me and i think a lot of people out there, i just miss seeing the wildlife and habitat that was there in the past and now its not. Got to get rid of the greediness. Get the birds and habitat back rather than worry about how many birds you're going to get to shoot next time you're out, because if you have no habitat, then no birds, then a lot of people that get pist when they don't have a good shoot and blame all of the other hunters for overcrowding them, when they are just tryin to do the same thing


----------



## Guest (Jan 17, 2011)

Mojo1 said:


> I would love to see a plan that includes more enforcement presence in the marsh, a state duck stamp, a required to hunt online waterfowl ID course and well as waterfowl hunting ethics course that addresses the bad behavior all of us suffer through in the marsh, shell limit restrictions, reduced bag limit in the WMA's and shortened hunt hours , (end at noon or start at noon), maybe a mix of both that would afford everyone the opportunity to get out and hunt no matter their schedule, we could even throw in a few rest areas if need be but in effect the previous mentioned early stop/start will be defacto rest areas, it works very well back home on the Wma's and they suffer some of the worst hunting pressure found in the country.


im all for everything you said except for shell limit restricitions. limiting a hunter like that is stupid. not everyone is a quality shot. they need extra bullets to shoot their limit and finish off cripples. they are just as entitled to their limit as you and i are. you arent ever going to get rid of the sky busters. they are everywhere, not just utah. 10 shells or 100 shells, they are still going to shoot at ducks way out of range. if you are willing to limit a guy like that, put a restriction on how many decoys a guy can hunt over.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

I deal with the Audubon people, Nature Conservancy, DU others in various groups formed to protect the lake (Friends of the Great Salt Lake for example, or the Coalition to Keep the Lake Great for another example). I do think that Audubon or Nature Conservancy may help out, but DU won't. Much of the phrag fight is within the State govt departments, and DU will not get involved in anything like that. I have asked repeatedly , but they are not allowed to get involved in stuff that involves taking a stand politicaly. If there is anyone that works with DU in this state that thinks they can convince them to help out, PLEASE contact me immediately. Delta Waterfowl has been a bit more willing to get involved with stuff that will help the lake's marshlands (there are a few things brewing right now). Unfortunately, we will need to come together as a group of concerned citizens (not a bunch of in-fighting pansies) and work within the system for the recovery of the massive loss of marsh that has been allowed to occur under the watchful eye of the State Lands Division. We CAN fix our broken marshes, but it will take coordinated efforts, and that is our weakness. The season ends, and most so-called waterfolwers hang up their stuff and show no further interest in doing anything to help out the marsh. Look within yourself and ask if there is something you are willing to do (even if it is small). 
R


----------



## nickpan (May 6, 2008)

That is interesting that DU sits it out. Even if its outside of the WMAs? I think that is where the majority of the problem is. And i've always wondered, is that just state land (??), for example west of Farmington and Ogden and out west of BRBR? I would guess its considered state just because of it being lake bed. But its not technically part of the WMA's is it?


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

[quote="kill_'em_all] im all for everything you said except for shell limit restricitions. limiting a hunter like that is stupid. not everyone is a quality shot. they need extra bullets to shoot their limit and finish off cripples. they are just as entitled to their limit as you and i are. you arent ever going to get rid of the sky busters. they are everywhere, not just utah. 10 shells or 100 shells, they are still going to shoot at ducks way out of range. if you are willing to limit a guy like that, put a restriction on how many decoys a guy can hunt over.[/quote]

I once thought the same thing as you until the G& F shoved it down our throats back home, after a few years I realized that in was in fact working and a was very viable option to somewhat limit sky busting. Interesting it usually goes hand in hand with a reduced bad limit in the affected Wma's. 15 shells with a 4 bird limit is the norm back there. BTW that bag limit $ is in no way linked to population #'s it was strickly chossen by our G&F to limit hunting pressure on the WMA's.

Will it start out unpopular, for **** sure!; will it work here, who knows but it's a start at controlling them.


----------



## Guest (Jan 17, 2011)

Mojo1 said:


> [quote="kill_'em_all] im all for everything you said except for shell limit restricitions. limiting a hunter like that is stupid. not everyone is a quality shot. they need extra bullets to shoot their limit and finish off cripples. they are just as entitled to their limit as you and i are. you arent ever going to get rid of the sky busters. they are everywhere, not just utah. 10 shells or 100 shells, they are still going to shoot at ducks way out of range. if you are willing to limit a guy like that, put a restriction on how many decoys a guy can hunt over.


I once thought the same thing as you until the G& F shoved it down our throats back home, after a few years I realized that in was in fact working and a was very viable option to somewhat limit sky busting. Interesting it usually goes hand in hand with a reduced bad limit in the affected Wma's. 15 shells with a 4 bird limit is the norm back there. BTW that bag limit $ is in no way linked to population #'s it was strickly chossen by our G&F to limit hunting pressure on the WMA's.

Will it start out unpopular, for **** sure!; will it work here, who knows but it's a start at controlling them.[/quote][/quote]
its just like what big game hunting in this state is turning into. people started b!tchin about how hunting sucks, theres too many hunters, no animals and look what happened. they took advantage of that opportunity and made HUGE changes. we allowed them to take the opportunity and right from 13,000 hunters starting in 2012. once we allow officials to get a foot hold on putting more regulations and laws infront of us, it wont stop until they basicly have us hunters by the balls. we need to fight for our rights as hunters. if we let them start, they wont stop. before you know it there will be a drawing every year for spots to hunt on WMAs or even the opportunity to hunt ducks each season! utah is a very unique and special place when it comes to waterfowl hunting. nowhere else in the world do you have the opportunity to harvest 15+ different species of ducks everytime you go hunting. there is plenty of habitat in utah for ducks to go rest on away from hunting pressure. be greatful for the opportunity that we have here. we are extremely lucky. lets not let them change it or take it away from us!!


----------



## richard rouleau (Apr 12, 2008)

well i agree with some of you and disgree some thing . the shell limit well not stop the sky buster. or mybe allow hunting three days a week or every other day . the big problem is lost of wetlands and food how often does the wma reseed there ponds for feed for the ducks . i know you guys up norh have problem with with the frag. i know one wma does not have anything for duck to feed on that is clear lake if they had water and feed it well be a good place to hunt again. they should bring back the state duck stamp agian.


----------



## hamernhonkers (Sep 28, 2007)

Back to the original question....It was not as good of a season due to fewer ducks at the first of the hunt and fewer day's hunted but over all still had a great season on both ducks and geese. Just wish I didn't have to drive two hours back home to get into good goose hunting.


----------



## LOUISIANA BOY (Nov 9, 2009)

It was a little slow at first but we actually had a great year. We killed a variety of birds this year. We really had a good year. We saw lots of birds that we didnt see last year.But I am off during the week alot so we didnt see many hunters. I try not to hunt on the weekends at all bc of pressure. Good year and lots of birds for us. We cant complain at all. We even had two trips of limits of birds. Tons of green heads this year. Even killed a snow goose and several canadians, cinnamon teal and hooded merganser. We didnt see not one of these birds last year huntn, so we cant complain.


----------



## RobK (Jul 3, 2008)

utahgolf said:


> , people are taking it up cause the big game isn't what it use to be


 Thats true . BUT also i just can't haul big game out anymore with a bad back . so duck hunting is somewhat durable for me .


----------



## UtahMarine (Dec 7, 2010)

I hunted a club up north this year and it seemed a lot slower than last year. I did see a lot more geese this year though.


----------



## Donttreadonme (Sep 11, 2007)

I felt like the birds were here today gone tomorrow for most of the season, but when they were in, it sure seemed easier than ever to get them.

This season was my funnest one yet. Lots of birds, lots of laughs, hunts with new friends and no major mishaps made it great. 

Good luck to those of you who will be chasing geese for another couple weeks.


----------



## stuckduck (Jan 31, 2008)

Joel Draxler said:


> This season was my funnest one yet. Lots of birds, lots of laughs, hunts with new friends and no major mishaps made it great.


well put!!!! Fun and Safe... what else good be better!!!!!


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

How long birds stick around is multifactorial. It depends on food availability, habitat quality, habitat quantity, bird disturbance and weather. Some of these we can impact, some we cannot. Weather is beyond our control, and for the most part, so is the water acreage, as it is related to precipitation and water utilization.

Food availability and habitat quality are impacted by the phrag. Phrag also probably robs water, decreasing flooded acreage, so it's impact extends well beyond where it grows. There is no doubt that phrag is a huge problem. Our ecosystem suffers from phrag infestation and low water, and so available acreage is the lowest I have ever seen it. Phrag is a priority, mineral extraction another, seweage another. The many threats all need attention, including bird disturbance.

Bird disturbance is a factor in whether birds stick around or leave, despite what some people say. Hunting disturbs birds, and the disturbance is related to hunters-days. There are fewer hunters today, but the trend is for those hunters to hunt more days. I'm not sure if hunter-days have increased over time, but I don't think they are significantly increased over historic numbers. I would be willing to bet, however, that the average distance traveled in our WMAs has increased since MMs came on the scene. MM enable hunters to go further and faster than ever before, so hunters can go almost anywhere inside our WMAs, thus causing more bird disturbance. It amazes me that MM guys refuse to acknowledge the impacts they have on the marsh and birds.

The acreage inside our WMAs has remained relatively constant, the only recent addition is the Doug Miller unit. Phrag control is possible in the WMAs, and the control effort is doing pretty well now. The phrag problem seems to get worse every year outside our WMAs, however, with no end in sight. That fact, combined with low lake levels, means birds have fewer options outside our WMAs to feed and loaf. It seems obvious that reducing disturbance inside is the logical response to our current habitat trends. MM guys call that selfish, I think it is a rational response that will improve duck numbers and hunter success. I think Tex-O-Bob hit it on the head, as did 1BandMan. Selfish is as selfish does, and insisting that MMs don't disturb ducks, and insisting on the privilege of running your MM whenever and wherever you please in the face of shrinking habitat is selfish. Period.

As an aside, I help spray each year. Randy told me that last year he had the fewest volunteers ever. I think he said he had a total of 20 volunteer days, and many were dedicated hunters, not waterfowlers. It's important to do what you can, when you can, where you can. Please help in the coming years.


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

crowding low water,gas prices. No body want to travel farr away because they got to be home by 1030 so they can sit on there lazy boy chair and drink beer and watch the football games.So every one is staying close to home. My honey hole I seen more boats there one weekend then I have ever seen there.But the next weekend there was not another boat for half of the morning.Seen plenty of birds.Get the water up and get the phrag out of there and you will see less people in one area.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

mojo...all this talk of restriction from you these days. Maybe we should do blind draws, tags that allow you to hunt only so many days per year that you have to punch, or maybe just do away with hunting all together?


----------



## Guest (Jan 20, 2011)

paddler213 said:


> Bird disturbance is a factor in whether birds stick around or leave, despite what some people say. Hunting disturbs birds, and the disturbance is related to hunters-days. There are fewer hunters today, but the trend is for those hunters to hunt more days. I'm not sure if hunter-days have increased over time, but I don't think they are significantly increased over historic numbers. I would be willing to bet, however, that the average distance traveled in our WMAs has increased since MMs came on the scene. MM enable hunters to go further and faster than ever before, so hunters can go almost anywhere inside our WMAs, thus causing more bird disturbance. It amazes me that MM guys refuse to acknowledge the impacts they have on the marsh and birds.
> 
> The acreage inside our WMAs has remained relatively constant, the only recent addition is the Doug Miller unit. Phrag control is possible in the WMAs, and the control effort is doing pretty well now. The phrag problem seems to get worse every year outside our WMAs, however, with no end in sight. That fact, combined with low lake levels, means birds have fewer options outside our WMAs to feed and loaf. It seems obvious that reducing disturbance inside is the logical response to our current habitat trends. MM guys call that selfish, I think it is a rational response that will improve duck numbers and hunter success. I think Tex-O-Bob hit it on the head, as did 1BandMan. Selfish is as selfish does, and insisting that MMs don't disturb ducks, and insisting on the privilege of running your MM whenever and wherever you please in the face of shrinking habitat is selfish. Period.


leave the MMs out of this. they are in no way responsible for it being a tough year. this is another angle you are trying to go from to support your whole motorless ideas and to get people to side with what YOU think is going to be the best option, when it really just benefits you and the common foot soldier. you and your canoe scares birds when you paddle too close to them. what do you think shooting at birds does?? im sure it doesnt persuade them to stick around any longer!! they probably decide to leave in a hurry! i promise everytime you shoot into a flock of ducks you are scaring them way more then i do when i run my boat near them.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

kill_'em_all said:


> leave the MMs out of this. they are in no way responsible for it being a tough year. this is another angle you are trying to go from to support your whole motorless ideas and to get people to side with what YOU think is going to be the best option, when it really just benefits you and the common foot soldier.


Isn't that what we all are doing? Trying to get support for what we think is going to be the best option? Even though Paddler and I have gone the rounds and he knows I disagree with his ideas on this, can't fault a guy for trying to get people to see his way on things. Even if I don't think he's right, at least he's stayed consistent. It's the folks that balk at the thought of a MM restriction and then advocate for shell restrictions and bag limit reductions that I worry about!

But all this brings me back to my original post in this thread...People can keep worrying about all the outlier issues that may be small contributors...or they can focus on the meat of the issue. Habitat loss is the single most threatening matter to our way of duck hunting in Utah. Period. The rest is just details in my opinion.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Actually, Jimmy broached the issue of MM on this thread, so blame him.  I was late on this thread, but like I said, it amazes me that some refuse to believe they have any impact on the marsh, the birds, etc. Seems like you have blinders on, kill_'em_all. Refusing to entertain the possibility that MMs cause bird disturbance, and so may be a factor in lower hunter success is convenient and self-serving. Less disturbance means more birds hanging around, and more birds mean better hunting for everybody.


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

Be care full what you guys wish for guys. Im Happy with the way things are right now.Putting the mm debate away from this.WE ALL KNOW IT NOT THE MMS THE SHOOTING AND ALL THAT SCARING BIRDS OUT OF HERE.IT THE DAM LOST OF HABITAT AND THE LAKE GOING DOWN. FLAT OUT .So let fight the phrag right now and let only worry about fighting that and fighting to keep more marsh land for us to hunt.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

TS30 said:


> mojo...all this talk of restriction from you these days. Maybe we should do blind draws, tags that allow you to hunt only so many days per year that you have to punch, or maybe just do away with hunting all together?


Tyson, 
I don't believe that one small group should have to bear the burden of restriction for everyone.

I believe in spreading the restrictions wealth throughout the overall problem user group......which is all hunters. Everyone contributes to the problem so everyone should be willing to give up something to make things better.

If it takes all those restrictions I mentioned to make hunting better for all those who are complaining about it being so bad so be it, but it will be interesting to see if their low success rates drastically increase after any rule changes, I'm willing to bet that it will not, in the end, ability, skill, respect, and success cannot be imposed by rules.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Mojo1 said:


> TS30 said:
> 
> 
> > mojo...all this talk of restriction from you these days. Maybe we should do blind draws, tags that allow you to hunt only so many days per year that you have to punch, or maybe just do away with hunting all together?
> ...


Jimmy, you and I agree on something. There must be something wrong in the space-time continuum.  Actually, I'm all for shell restrictions. I see no reason why it should take a guy more than a box to shoot a limit. I don't recall ever shooting a box in one day. Restricting shells should reduce skybusting and crippling, so should benefit the birds and hunting. Doing that, plus MM restrictions, would make for a more peaceful hunt and increase success. I don't think drawing for blinds is feasible, and limiting hunt days would be extremely unpopular.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Mojo1 said:


> If it takes all those restrictions I mentioned to make hunting better for all those who are complaining about it being so bad so be it, but it will be interesting to see if their low success rates drastically increase after any rule changes, I'm willing to bet that it will not, in the end, ability, skill, respect, and success cannot be imposed by rules.


Seriously....you want restrictions just so that those who are complaining can be made happy? Wowsers...that's a scary friggin' thought that we are going to punish everyone so a very vocal minority can be placated. Shoot Jimmie, if I didn't know better I would have thought Obama wrote that post. Let's just throw out some restrictions because there are people who aren't happy...and we'll see what happens. Scary stuff right there....scary stuff.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

paddler213 said:


> [I don't think drawing for blinds is feasible, and limiting hunt days would be extremely unpopular.


 :roll: 
Since when has society started letting feasibility and popularity get in the way of parity for all?

Seems to me the water fowling world as well as the other hunting sports are mirroring the way our society now operates. Judging from the responses there seems that while quite a few hunters adapted to the changing conditions and still managed to be successful, there were an equal number of others who just seem to be destined to wallow in mediocrity while laying the blame for their lack of success solely on others.

We are setting a very dangerous precedent when you bend over backwards to accommodate the latter to the point of inhibiting innovation and the drive to suceed, this country was not made great by accepting mediocrity.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

TS30 said:


> Mojo1 said:
> 
> 
> > If it takes all those restrictions I mentioned to make hunting better for all those who are complaining about it being so bad so be it, but it will be interesting to see if their low success rates drastically increase after any rule changes, I'm willing to bet that it will not, in the end, ability, skill, respect, and success cannot be imposed by rules.
> ...


Tyson sees the point I was making (although it was not by my usual route of bluntness  ), wonder how many more folks actually do get it? It is easy for people to ignore society's trend to reward those who wallow in mediocrity unless it is presently in a way that directly affects them and usually unless it makes them upset they will still ignore it.


----------



## Guest (Jan 20, 2011)

you guys are missing the big picture here. dustin was right when he said becareful what you wish for. if we start complaining about things, the people in charge of this whole sport we all love and enjoy, will see this as an opportunity to make HUGE changes! they are looking for us to complain about things so they can step in and put more regulations and laws infront of us. just like they did with the big game hunting starting 2012. hunting ducks is never a guarantee. they are so unpredictable! so most people had a bad season this year, i didnt. i thought it was an awesome year. i killed alot of birds and i hunt some very popular places that most of you guys hunt yourselves. every one has different methods and techniques of hunting ducks, which will result in different out comes. plus you throw random luck into the mix you never know how things are going to turn out. next year will be a completely different story and who knows what will happen. a majority of the people might knock the crap out of them while others struggle to even get shots off. you never know! dont complain about how bad things are and how "you think" would make things better. we live in an amazing place. nowhere else in the world would you find waterfowl hunting opportunities that utah has to offer. we are so lucky. be greatful for what you do have.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

TS30 said:


> Isn't that what we all are doing? Trying to get support for what we think is going to be the best option? Even though Paddler and I have gone the rounds and he knows I disagree with his ideas on this, can't fault a guy for trying to get people to see his way on things. Even if I don't think he's right, at least he's stayed consistent. It's the folks that balk at the thought of a MM restriction and then advocate for shell restrictions and bag limit reductions that I worry about!
> 
> But all this brings me back to my original post in this thread...People can keep worrying about all the outlier issues that may be small contributors...or they can focus on the meat of the issue. Habitat loss is the single most threatening matter to our way of duck hunting in Utah. Period. *The rest is just details in my opinion.*


I must disagree with that. Habitat loss is a huge issue, nobody will deny that. But many factors that cause the loss are presently beyond our control. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to increase habitat, only that it's an uphill battle. If we had unlimited habitat, all the other things may indeed be mere details. But we don't, so the other things we can do to provide respite and food for birds are important. And the more habitat we lose, the more important they become.

The rational response to shrinking habitat is to tread lightly on that which remains. When you consider the options for increasing success, as measured by birds/hunter day, only MM and shell restrictions do so without mandating decreased opportunity. Designating more rest areas inside our existing WMAs would decrease huntable acreage, blind draws mandate reduction in hunter numbers, limiting days does also. Shell restrictions would reduce skyblasting, at least theoretically, and maybe encourage hunters to improve shot selection and their skills, while MM restrictions will definitely reduce bird disturbance. IMO, these are our best options, with MM restrictions perhaps being more important and certainly more easily enforced. And you are correct, I have been very consistent in delivering this message. I think it's starting to be heard.


----------



## Guest (Jan 20, 2011)

paddler213 said:


> I must disagree with that. Habitat loss is a huge issue, nobody will deny that. But many factors that cause the loss are presently beyond our control. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to increase habitat, only that it's an uphill battle. If we had unlimited habitat, all the other things may indeed be mere details. But we don't, so the other things we can do to provide respite and food for birds are important. And the more habitat we lose, the more important they become.
> 
> The rational response to shrinking habitat is to tread lightly on that which remains. When you consider the options for increasing success, as measured by birds/hunter day, only MM and shell restrictions do so without mandating decreased opportunity. Designating more rest areas inside our existing WMAs would decrease huntable acreage, blind draws mandate reduction in hunter numbers, limiting days does also. Shell restrictions would reduce skyblasting, at least theoretically, and maybe encourage hunters to improve shot selection and their skills, while MM restrictions will definitely reduce bird disturbance. IMO, these are our best options, with MM restrictions perhaps being more important and certainly more easily enforced. And you are correct, I have been very consistent in delivering this message. I think it's starting to be heard.


i cant take my MM anywhere i want! but my airboat is a different story...  they have made places with boat restrictions. the doug miller unit is a good example. theres plenty of areas where i cant run a boat where birds can go sit all day long without being disturbed. but if you want to push to have my rights taken away as far as MMs are concerned, im gonna push to have all boat access taken away, including boats without motors. you cant just decide to target only one group of hunters and put restrictions on them. p.s. you might want to look into all the good that guys with MMs and airboats do every year as far as projects and donations and volunteer hours. they sure put in a hell of alot more effort into helping utahs wildlife and wetlands then the common foot soldier does.


----------



## Skye Hansen (Mar 23, 2009)

paddler213 said:


> The rational response to shrinking habitat is to tread lightly on that which remains. When you consider the options for increasing success, as measured by birds/hunter day, only MM and shell restrictions do so without mandating decreased opportunity. Designating more rest areas inside our existing WMAs would decrease huntable acreage, blind draws mandate reduction in hunter numbers, limiting days does also. Shell restrictions would reduce skyblasting, at least theoretically, and maybe encourage hunters to improve shot selection and their skills, while MM restrictions will definitely reduce bird disturbance. IMO, these are our best options, with MM restrictions perhaps being more important and certainly more easily enforced. And you are correct, I have been very consistent in delivering this message. I think it's starting to be heard.


I have listened to this argument for quite some time. I can see both sides of the argument to a point. I do think that motors have an effect on the birds. I think that shooting/pressure is the ultimate reason that birds do not stick around. I have looked at multiple walk-in accesses that are getting pressure at least four times a week. This is just as bad as an area that is getting constant pressure from boats. The argument that boats allow us to go places where we have not been before is very true. However, by this argument we would have to look at limiting the use of lay-out blinds because they allow us to hunt in ways that were not possible years ago. The fact is there are technologies that are going to make the hunting more enjoyable as well as more effective. With that being said, I agree with Dustin that we need to be careful on what we get excited about to change. I am just curious as to if anyone has ever thought of making the current and future (if it happens) motorless areas open to the use of electric motors. This to me would allow people to use a boat that is maybe a little hard to paddle in some of these areas. Electric Motors are no more damaging to the environment or birds than paddling. Again, I would caution that we be careful on these changes so that we don't lose the valuable resources that we have.
-Skye Hansen


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

paddler213 said:


> I think it's starting to be heard.


Or ignored? I'm not going to get into another MM discussion with you Paddler. You know how I feel. Show the me the facts, and we'll talk. Until then, I'm focusing on what I *KNOW* is a problem...even if it is going to be harder to accomplish. I guess I've always believed that if something is so easy it probably isn't worth doing anyway. I'm not scared of an uphill fight. I hope the majority is like me and not scared either. Otherwise, I'll be selling all my duck hunting gear because I will have no more use for it in the not so distance future.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

paddler213 said:


> [ And you are correct, I have been very consistent in delivering this message. I think it's starting to be heard.


Maybe it's being heard John, but it's starting to sound like more of your audience is not buying entirely into what your selling, but by all means keep engaging the populist, we need all the support that can be drummed up, without mustering that political clout, sportsman's will never get the funding for the habitat battle.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Mojo1 said:


> paddler213 said:
> 
> 
> > [ And you are correct, I have been very consistent in delivering this message. I think it's starting to be heard.
> ...


Some are slower to come around, Jimmy, but there's plenty of time. I'm not tired.

Which approach to politicians and other groups interested in the GSL do you think would garner more support:

A) Dear Sirs,

We are concerned about the GSL ecosystem, which faces many challenges. Inundation by invasive _Phragmites_, reduced inflows because of increasing demand with a growing population, expansion by mineral expansion companies, and sewage inflows all pose a threat to resident and migrating waterfowl. We understand that hunting also causes bird disturbance, and are studying the impact of motorized access in this equation....

or,

B) Dear Sirs,

_Phragmites_ is taking over our marshes. Please help us control it, as it's really putting a damper on my using my mud motor boat and killing ducks....

One approach seems more selfish than the other, can you pick which it is?


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

> Some are slower to come around,


 -_O- !


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

-O\__-


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

I hate to sound so gloom and doom, but being careful for what we wish for may not be an option and by the time action may come, it won't be proactive, it will be picking up the pieces and trying to salvage whats left. I don't think we're far off from having to make some adjustments or we'll not have a bunch to talk about because by then no one will care.


Pressure on the birds is to me that issue. How we relieve it is the key.

If we don't let the birds roost, rest and eat by giving them a place to do it, the problem will continue.


My bias and I'll admit my bias is that if there isn't more designated spots (areas that are actually desireable for birds to go) and areas off limits to people hunting (by foot, atv,paddle boat, outboard motor boat, mud motor,air boat, bicycle, anything). Bird numbers will continue to decline and decline substantially. 

The reason I "pick on" mud motors and airboats are that areas that were once unaccessable are now accessable...... 
Hear me out now after reading the previous sentence. 
There have been both mud motors and airboats for a very long time, but the numbers of these crafts have grown exponentially over the past 10 years. Before then the birds could rest randomly and naturally in areas that weren't being hunted or cruised through by the now floatilla of these types of crafts, which is a huge difference from what was once semi natural and the other option of artificially concentrating birds. Limiting access also limits instating a number of other alternative methods in reducing pressure. 

Bottom line: Some areas aren't meant to be hunted, period.


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2011)

1BandMan said:


> The reason I "pick on" mud motors and airboats are that areas that were once unaccessable are now accessable......
> Hear me out now after reading the previous sentence.
> There have been both mud motors and airboats for a very long time, but the numbers of these crafts have grown exponentially over the past 10 years. Before then the birds could rest randomly and naturally in areas that weren't being hunted or cruised through by the now floatilla of these types of crafts, which is a huge difference rather than the alternative in limiting other methods and attempting to have "designated" spots that artificially concentrate birds.
> 
> Bottom line: Some areas aren't meant to be hunted, period.


10 years ago, there were airboats, there were mud motors and there were foot soldiers. there were MORE duck hunters (foot soldiers, boat hunter, Etc.) then there is today. whats changed? PHRAG!! 10 years ago there wasnt hardly any to speak of. it has eaten up our wetlands more and more every year, now we dont have near the amount of huntable ground that we use to. which has caused more crowding and less room for birds. there are miles upon miles or rivers and open water for the birds to rest/feed on. they arent shot to hell everywhere they go. just a few certain places. 
heres what we should do to keep it fair for everyone if they want change to our system in an effort to keep the birds here:
-maximum of 5 decoys allowed per group of hunters
-no boats of any kind allowed for bird hunting, including layout boats
-no use of ATVs on WMAs, foot or bicycle traffic only
-dog(s) and waders required for every hunter
-15 shell limit per hunter
-every hunter must use a 12 gauge shotgun with shells no larger then 3" #1
-hunting only allowed on WMAs monday, wednesday and saturday
-no duck or goose calls of any kind
-no hunting on private property unless you or your family owns it
-3 bird daily bag limit 
-6 geese total per person for the entire season (drawing for tags)
-drawing for spots on WMAs to hunt each season. once successful in a drawing, you need to complete 20 hours of service, nesting boxes, trash clean up, Phrag control, on that particular WMA before a permit is issued
i think that would pretty much take care of every type of hunter out there and even it up for everyone. you guys willing to do all that in order to make an effort for birds to stay here a little longer each season?

bottom linehrag is what we need to target to keep the birds here longer, not place more restrictions on the hunters.


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

kill_'em_all said:


> 1BandMan said:
> 
> 
> > The reason I "pick on" mud motors and airboats are that areas that were once unaccessable are now accessable......
> ...


You for got a couple let throw in there No decoys and no guns. how about you have to wear bright Orange and you cant hid behind any cover. That way the ducks and geese will never leave.That means even when every thing is frozen.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

[quote="1BandMan"
The reason I "pick on" mud motors and airboats are that areas that were once unaccessable are now accessable...... 
Hear me out now after reading the previous sentence. 
There have been both mud motors and airboats for a very long time, but the numbers of these crafts have grown exponentially over the past 10 years. Before then the birds could rest randomly and naturally in areas that weren't being hunted or cruised through by the now floatilla of these types of crafts, which is a huge difference from what was once semi natural and the other option of artificially concentrating birds. Limiting access also limits instating a number of other alternative methods in reducing pressure.

Bottom line: Some areas aren't meant to be hunted, period.[/quote]

In the interest of accuracy, there are not any more airboats now than there were 10 years ago or even 15 years ago. I just looked at my airboat directory from 1994 and it has 20 more members in it than the 2010 directory has. Just a clarification...carry on.
R


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

rjefre said:


> [quote="1BandMan"
> The reason I "pick on" mud motors and airboats are that areas that were once unaccessable are now accessable......
> Hear me out now after reading the previous sentence.
> There have been both mud motors and airboats for a very long time, but the numbers of these crafts have grown exponentially over the past 10 years. Before then the birds could rest randomly and naturally in areas that weren't being hunted or cruised through by the now floatilla of these types of crafts, which is a huge difference from what was once semi natural and the other option of artificially concentrating birds. Limiting access also limits instating a number of other alternative methods in reducing pressure.
> ...


In the interest of accuracy, there are not any more airboats now than there were 10 years ago or even 15 years ago. I just looked at my airboat directory from 1994 and it has 20 more members in it than the 2010 directory has. Just a clarification...carry on.
R[/quote]

20 more MEMBERS. Do you have to be a member to run an airboat??


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

I totally understand why you would want to protect your investement in your mudmotors and airboats rather than investing in the future of waterfowling. It would make sense to me as well if I was one of the few folks left hunting the roosts and getting decent shoots on what was left of the waterfowl in the valley.


If more waterfowl hunters understood that hunting and running through the roosts is a really, really bad thing to do, they'd want to raise all kinds of hell with every mud motor and airboat runner out there.

I'll comprimise with mm and airboat owners and I'll blame the phrag 100% with you and state instead:
With the limited area left to hunt with all the phragmite infestation, there isn't the room necessary for the mm and airboat owners to operate in the area they currently are.
My comprimise probably doesn't make you folks and I friends, but its the way it is.
The thing is, if you could click your heels together and make phrag go away, we still have numbers of people who insist in hunting the roosts and pushing birds off. It doesn't take that many boaters to push birds on.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

I keep clicking and nothing happens. I also think it is poor form to shoot birds off the roost. There are very few roost ponds left on the GSL, and fewer still in the WMA's. The GSL has acted as the big roost for the last 6-7 years as phrag has destroyed all the rest of them. Now the lake is small and getting smaller, so the birds move on. People that intentionally disrupt roost areas are making it tougher for everyone. I don't know how many places in the WMA's that boats can actually "run through the roosts", and I only know of about 4 or 5 real roost ponds on the GSL from Brigham to Saltair. Of these, only one or two are accessable by airboat. If you consider running a boat on the open waters of the GSL as running through the roost, then the only solution would be to ban all boating on the GSL. I choose to keep clicking my heals and hoping to repair some of our lost marshland habitat. We have the technology, we can get our marshes back, we just need the money and the political will to get it done. 
R


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

1BandMan said:


> we still have numbers of people who insist in hunting the roosts and pushing birds off. It doesn't take that many boaters to push birds on.


In the interest of accuracy not everyone who hunts the roost ponds accesses or hunts from a boat, plenty of foot soldiers contribute to the pressure on the roost ponds.


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

Mojo1 said:


> 1BandMan said:
> 
> 
> > we still have numbers of people who insist in hunting the roosts and pushing birds off. It doesn't take that many boaters to push birds on.
> ...


What's this "In the interest of accuracy" horse****?

Are you serious???
Any pond that is accessable by foot (and still be any kind of a threat as a predator to a duck or goose) isn't nor wasn't a roost pond (unless your talking about lobbing a wad cutter in on them or packing in your .338 mag)on public ground. Roosts could be somewhat smaller if there are no predators visiting it.
Are you sure you understand what the roost is???


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

rjefre said:


> The GSL has acted as the big roost for the last 6-7 years as phrag has destroyed all the rest of them. Now the lake is small and getting smaller, so the birds move on.


Why?


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Why? Lots of reasons, 1BandMan. rjefre hit it on the head. The lake is getting smaller, but MM are becoming more numerous. Hunter success is lower now than before the rise of the MM in the late 90's. If birds can't roost on the lake, and MM blow them out of the WMAs, they leave. It's pretty easy to grasp the concept.

The first part of the attached video was shot the shortly before the general opener this season. It shows the effects of MM traffic on duck utilization, as the WMAs were open to MM between the youth opener and the general opener. It also shows the impact on submerged aquatic vegetation, better known as duck food. Just think as you view this, consider the claims by MM users that they don't impact the habitat or cause bird disturbance. As I have said before, MM should be banned everywhere their use is not absolutely necessary. They are bad news for the marsh, ducks, and hunter success.

The 73% of Utah waterfowlers who don't access the marsh using motors should, after seeing this video, demand the DWR take decisive action regarding MMs on our public marshes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZBz7d05 ... r_embedded


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2011)

1BandMan said:


> I totally understand why you would want to protect your investement in your mudmotors and airboats rather than investing in the future of waterfowling. It would make sense to me as well if I was one of the few folks left hunting the roosts and getting decent shoots on what was left of the waterfowl in the valley.
> 
> If more waterfowl hunters understood that hunting and running through the roosts is a really, really bad thing to do, they'd want to raise all kinds of hell with every mud motor and airboat runner out there.
> 
> ...


last time i checked, we werent hunting turkeys, so hunting the "roost" isnt illegal as long as we are staying within legal shooting hours. i'll be the first one to admit that if i know where a bunch of ducks are flying into each afternoon to spend the night, you can bet your arse im gonna go set up for them! i dont go hunting to sit in the bushes and not shoot ducks. i go to kill birds! if sitting in a certain area is gonna give me more success, and its legal, im gonna go there!! its stupid not to! but if its so frowned upon, you should make scouting illegal because thats how people find these roost areas, is to watch and see where the birds go.

the ducks have plenty of areas to go rest and get food... have you not ever been to a city park pond?? theres hundreds of wild birds there that spend the winter each year there. as far as i have found there has only been one park pond i have found in utah that permitted hunting on a certain part of the pond that was out of city limits... since this discovery, they have annexed that section of pond into city limits which made hunting there of any kind, including archery hunting, illegal... 

guys get off your high horse for a second. you need to realize that if you hunt waterfowl in utah, no matter how hard you try not to pressure the birds, if you set foot in the marsh or shoot your gun off just once at a duck, you are pressuring the birds, which is causing them to leave. we are all responsible and we all contribute in some way. WE ARE ALL GUILTY! RELAX! :roll: just be greatful we have the freedom (for now atleast) to go out and hunt these fascinating creatures in a beautiful area. we are all truely blessed!


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

kill_'em_all said:


> last time i checked, we werent hunting turkeys, so hunting the "roost" isnt illegal as long as we are staying within legal shooting hours. i'll be the first one to admit that if i know where a bunch of ducks are flying into each afternoon to spend the night, you can bet your arse im gonna go set up for them! i dont go hunting to sit in the bushes and not shoot ducks. i go to kill birds! if sitting in a certain area is gonna give me more success, and its legal, im gonna go there!! its stupid not to! but if its so frowned upon, you should make scouting illegal because thats how people find these roost areas, is to watch and see where the birds go.





Mojo1 said:


> The asinine thing about his argument is he makes it out like boat hunters are selfish uncaring hunters which is in fact not the case at all. They just don't think that bowing down and appeasing a group like yours is the right thing to do since it benefits no one but your group in the long run.


There you go, my point made perfectly clear or should I say "In the interest of accuracy."

mm users in general are indeed selfish uncaring hunters who shoot the roost and are proud of it.

Again, if general waterfowl hunters understood what you guys are doing, and shooting the roost they'd be so pizzed off at you instead of a mm debate their would probably be a mud motor lynching.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

1BandMan said:


> kill_'em_all said:
> 
> 
> > last time i checked, we werent hunting turkeys, so hunting the "roost" isnt illegal as long as we are staying within legal shooting hours. i'll be the first one to admit that if i know where a bunch of ducks are flying into each afternoon to spend the night, you can bet your arse im gonna go set up for them! i dont go hunting to sit in the bushes and not shoot ducks. i go to kill birds! if sitting in a certain area is gonna give me more success, and its legal, im gonna go there!! its stupid not to! but if its so frowned upon, you should make scouting illegal because thats how people find these roost areas, is to watch and see where the birds go.
> ...


 :roll:

I'm calling Horse**** on your statement 1band,

for every boat hunter who sets up for an afternoon shoot there are usually a equal number of dike/foot hunters who hunt those same areas. I see it nearly every day I'm out there regardless of whether I ride in a boat or I walk.

What's the difference in how you got there got to do with it?


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

> I'm calling Horse**** on your statement 1band,
> 
> for every boat hunter who sets up for an afternoon shoot there are usually a equal number of dike/foot hunters who hunt those same areas. I see it nearly every day I'm out there regardless of whether I ride in a boat or I walk.
> 
> What's the difference in how you got there got to do with it?


You can call whatever you like mojo, but again, if fellow waterfowlers knew and better understood what you mm runners are doing, this wouldn't be a debate.

Again, do you really know what a roost is????
If I can walk to a roost and hunt it, it isn't and wasn't a roost to begin with.

If I could walk to where the mudmotors go, why would you or anyone else invest $12,000+ in a mm set up?


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2011)

1BandMan said:


> kill_'em_all said:
> 
> 
> > last time i checked, we werent hunting turkeys, so hunting the "roost" isnt illegal as long as we are staying within legal shooting hours. i'll be the first one to admit that if i know where a bunch of ducks are flying into each afternoon to spend the night, you can bet your arse im gonna go set up for them! i dont go hunting to sit in the bushes and not shoot ducks. i go to kill birds! if sitting in a certain area is gonna give me more success, and its legal, im gonna go there!! its stupid not to! but if its so frowned upon, you should make scouting illegal because thats how people find these roost areas, is to watch and see where the birds go.
> ...


the only thin i can figure out is you are probably just jealous that you dont have a fancy MM?? and if you dont have one and cant shoot lots of ducks every time out, no one else should??... once more, its NOT illegal to hunt the roosts. im not even sure that you know what a roost is!! :?: just so you know, everytime ive hunted a roost, ive had to walk in ON FOOT from my truck. no boats were involved during the whole process.


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2011)

1BandMan said:


> Again, do you really know what a roost is????
> If I can walk to a roost and hunt it, it isn't and wasn't a roost to begin with.


 :roll: yep! heres the proof right here that you dont know what you're talking about. you have no clue what a roost is or where it CAN be located... o-||


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

kill_'em_all said:


> 1BandMan said:
> 
> 
> > [quote="kill_'em_all":2l7p3g1q]
> ...


the only thin i can figure out is you are probably just jealous that you dont have a fancy MM?? and if you dont have one and cant shoot lots of ducks every time out, no one else should??... once more, its NOT illegal to hunt the roosts. im not even sure that you know what a roost is!! :?: just so you know, everytime ive hunted a roost, ive had to walk in ON FOOT from my truck. no boats were involved during the whole process.[/quote:2l7p3g1q]

Bwhaahaaaahaaha.

Roosts are areas void of predators. Roosts are areas that predators can not or should not be able to access thereby molest or "fowl" birds sleeping or resting.
Roosts are medium or large bodies of water that predators have little chance of pursuing. They may be also areas where ducks find coves or other natural cover and/or waters that are less rough when the wind blows to sleep and rest.

If you shoot or scare birds off a pond at all, its not a roost anymore, its just another huntable pond.

Put the lid of your glue bottle back on, take a couple steps back from the computer and rest for a little while.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

1BandMan said:


> > I'm calling Horse**** on your statement 1band,
> >
> > for every boat hunter who sets up for an afternoon shoot there are usually a equal number of dike/foot hunters who hunt those same areas. I see it nearly every day I'm out there regardless of whether I ride in a boat or I walk.
> >
> ...


Do I know what a roost is, that's a **** funny question for you to be asking since you keep brought it up in the first place, but don't seem to entirely grasp the concept yourself. 
The only true roosts out here is far out on the lake and the rest areas in the Wma's & Refuges because any area in the WMA's with the exception of the Doug miller unit (no way I know of to get a boat over in it) that is not otherwise posted as a rest area that you could possibly call a roost can be reached by hunters no matter how you choose to get there. 
In fact at ob during freeze up the boat access froze out first while a few holes remained out on the big ponds, do you think the birds that remained in the areas got to use those for long? No way, folks hiked in off the dikes and shot those holes every day until the birds moved so far out on the GSL no one could locate or reach them. It didn't seem to matter it was over a 2 ½ mile walk out to the spots (from the parking lot) either.

So again I ask what is the difference in how you access it to hunt those areas

You plainly do not want to accept that the hunting pressure is not just created by the boaters. And to set you straight yet again I don't own a mm and do the majority of my hunting on foot or out of my little old stealth paddle boat.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

1BandMan said:


> [Put the lid of your glue bottle back on, take a couple steps back from the computer and rest for a little while.


Are you offering advice based on personal experience???? :lol: :lol:


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

Mojo1 said:


> 1BandMan said:
> 
> 
> > > I'm calling Horse**** on your statement 1band,
> ...


Hunting pressure is hunting pressure I agree, but the most damaging pressure pushing birds off isn't coming from foot soldiers.

I don't know what your referring to, but how did those foot soldiers get off the dikes out in the middle of a big pond and hunt them? Did they swim a ways?

I'd still also like to know why you or anyone else would invest big bucks in a mm rig if you can walk to the same spots on foot????


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2011)

1BandMan said:


> Roosts are areas void of predators. Roosts are areas that predators can not or should not be able to access thereby molest or "fowl" birds sleeping or resting.
> Roosts are medium or large bodies of water that predators have little chance of pursuing. They may be also areas where ducks find coves or other natural cover and/or waters that are less rough when the wind blows to sleep and rest.


hahahaha! some people... ok let me try to explain this to you. what would you consider a medium or large body of water? to me, any one of the units inside of a WMA is a medium body of water. dont know how much time you spend hunting ducks at a WMA each year, but yes, you infact can access any one of those units BY FOOT. people do it every day. AKA the common foot soldier. i thought there was a thing called the "morning hunt" and the "evening hunt". turns out im wrong. its called the "morning hunt" and the "shooting the roost" hunt. heres a side not for you. the center dike at FB, to the ducks, is considered to be an area of predators. but every time ive walked down it coming back from an evening shoot on the roost, i have kicked birds off the dike that were resting on it. im not the only one who has seen this either. lots of people kick birds off it in the morning when they walk out to go hunting. a large body of water would consist of the GSL or Utah Lake just to name a few. now ive hunted UT lake for a long time, and you can infact walk into the areas that they roost. i have done it many times and have found that what you claim to be true is infact false. yes they do spend much time out on the lake parts, but utah has regular storms that come through every year which causes rough water out in the open. so they go somewhere thats calmer where they can "find coves or other natural cover and/or waters that are less rough when the wind blows to sleep and rest" guess what buddy! predators live in that natural cover  geese are they same way. i know of a "roost" where 300+ geese fly into a small pond every evening to spend the night. its 150 yards X 75 yards. thats not a big or medium body of water. i have shot coyotes off this pond alot and even still with all the predators in the area, the ducks and geese keep coming back.

so before you decide to throw out there that you know everything there is to know about ducks, you need to understand that there are always exceptions to the "rules". they are birds. they do what they want when they want to.


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2011)

1BandMan said:


> I'd still also like to know why you or anyone else would invest big bucks in a mm rig if you can walk to the same spots on foot????


who the hell wants to walk when they can drive there??


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

The large, open areas inside our WMAs are potential roosts, indeed birds use them as such after hours when they are not disturbed by MMs. Very little disturbance in those areas are caused by anything other than MM, and predators cannot reach them. This is what the MM issue boils down to, they just make it a whole lot easier to blow ducks off what would otherwise be roosting/loafing/feeding areas.

Did you MM guys enjoy the video??? I know that people in decision-making positions were impressed.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

1BandMan said:


> [Hunting pressure is hunting pressure I agree, but the most damaging pressure pushing birds off isn't coming from foot soldiers. There is no difference, disturbing them is disturbing them, birds don't care if gunshots come from boats or foot soldiers, they still flee them.
> 
> I don't know what your referring to, but how did those foot soldiers get off the dikes out in the middle of a big pond and hunt them? Did they swim a ways? Walked over the ice to the open water, I have seen guys wade out to the reed island clumps out there and at FB & BRBR too. So much for that theory that foot soldiers don't hunt that open water!
> 
> I'd still also like to know why you or anyone else would invest big bucks in a mm rig if you can walk to the same spots on foot????


Because they want to, besides it's not your place to tell someone what to do with their money!


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

paddler213 said:


> The large, open areas inside our WMAs are potential roosts, indeed birds use them as such after hours when they are not disturbed by MMs. Very little disturbance in those areas are caused by anything other than MM, and predators cannot reach them. This is what the MM issue boils down to, they just make it a whole lot easier to blow ducks off what would otherwise be roosting/loafing/feeding areas.
> 
> Did you MM guys enjoy the video??? I know that people in decision-making positions were impressed.


 :lol: 
I can't count the number of evenings I watch tons of birds pour into Unit 1 at OB after shooting hours.

The birds have learned to avoid the place during daylight. You shouldn't have to be a rocket scientist to know why that is because apparently even those small brained ducks long ago figured out that if you fly over anywhere out there, no matter water or land, someone is shooting at you if its shooting hours, often times before and after hours.

As far as people in decision-making positions go- all those Rac members sure wondered where you guys were????? when you failed to show up.

Sounds like you are continuing with your back door approach that circumvents the established system of public input (going direct to the wildlife board) to impose your will on all hunters, sounds an awful lot like what SFW has been doing to the big game hunters.


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2011)

paddler213 said:


> The large, open areas inside our WMAs are potential roosts, indeed birds use them as such after hours when they are not disturbed by MMs. Very little disturbance in those areas are caused by anything other than MM, and predators cannot reach them. This is what the MM issue boils down to, they just make it a whole lot easier to blow ducks off what would otherwise be roosting/loafing/feeding areas.
> 
> Did you MM guys enjoy the video??? I know that people in decision-making positions were impressed.


ITS NOT JUST THE MMs THAT ARE PRESSURING THE DUCKS!! ITS EVERYONE!

your video did nothing to help your side of the fight. sept. 29 2009?? come on! the ducks have only had 1 day of hunting when that video was taken. they hadnt had a chance to be run around by boats yet. the reason there is lots of feed in some units and hardly any in others, is because of your local DWR refuge managers who control when, where and how much water is in the units at different times of the year. that has nothing to do with MMs. the video went through and showed the different units and the ducks that were on them. but on nov. 3rd, the video only showed a few seconds of one pond, which the video pointed out so well, MMs had been running in it and there were still birds in this unit. if you are going to try and prove your point, you are going to need more then a 6 min. video to do it.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

I don't know who you are, kill_'em_all, but you seem a slow study. Or, as you may say, ignurnt. The video was shot well after the youth opener, which was only one day of hunting. The day it was shot was just days before the general opener. The WMAs were open to boats between the youth and general openers, so the difference in those two areas demonstrates the negative impacts of MM in both the short and long term.

The NW pond at Harold Crane requires a portage, which most guys won't do, especially before the general opener. The main pond, however, is easy to access and joyride in. The long term effects include prop scars, damage to SAV,increased turbidity, which restricts plant growth, an spreading phrag. The short term impact is just running ducks off to places they're undisturbed. Take off your MM blinders. It continues to amaze how MM proponents deny any impact from using them.


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

Mojo1 said:


> 1BandMan said:
> 
> 
> > [Hunting pressure is hunting pressure I agree, but the most damaging pressure pushing birds off isn't coming from foot soldiers. There is no difference, disturbing them is disturbing them, birds don't care if gunshots come from boats or foot soldiers, they still flee them.
> ...


Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. There is no difference in the places you can access with a mud motor vs. foot soldier. Can't you even smell the stuff your shovelin'?


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Mojo1 said:


> paddler213 said:
> 
> 
> > The large, open areas inside our WMAs are potential roosts, indeed birds use them as such after hours when they are not disturbed by MMs. Very little disturbance in those areas are caused by anything other than MM, and predators cannot reach them. This is what the MM issue boils down to, they just make it a whole lot easier to blow ducks off what would otherwise be roosting/loafing/feeding areas.
> ...


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

For the guys that support motorless access, what units inside what WMA's do you want for motorless and rest areas? Please give examples for all the WMA's along the Wasatch front. I keep hearing we need more motorless access and more rest areas, so what areas/units do you suggest changing to motorless/rest areas? Just curious as to your thoughts.


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

kill_'em_all said:


> 1BandMan said:
> 
> 
> > Roosts are areas void of predators. Roosts are areas that predators can not or should not be able to access thereby molest or "fowl" birds sleeping or resting.
> ...


A small pond, canal or slough can be a roost as long as there are no predators/hunters. If someone hunts it, IT IS NOT A ROOST ANYMORE, Its simply another huntable pond where birds are scared to land and or stay for very long if at all unless they come in after you guys can't shoot at them any more.

For you to openly admit that you shoot the roost will definitely gain you some real "kudo's" and "atta boys" from me and it definitely should from others. 
If you motor heads can't leave at least some areas alone,.......again, the numbers will dwindle to the point that a conversation like this one won't happen anymore and you and folks like you will have moved on to the next limited resouce to ruin claiming that its okee dokee and everything is fine the way it is.


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2011)

paddler213 said:


> I don't know who you are, kill_'em_all, but you seem a slow study. Or, as you may say, ignurnt. The video was shot well after the youth opener, which was only one day of hunting. The day it was shot was just days before the general opener. The WMAs were open to boats between the youth and general openers, so the difference in those two areas demonstrates the negative impacts of MM in both the short and long term.
> 
> The NW pond at Harold Crane requires a portage, which most guys won't do, especially before the general opener. The main pond, however, is easy to access and joyride in. The long term effects include prop scars, damage to SAV,increased turbidity, which restricts plant growth, an spreading phrag. The short term impact is just running ducks off to places they're undisturbed. Take off your MM blinders. It continues to amaze how MM proponents deny any impact from using them.


im the guy who digs big trenches in the mud with my prop, ruins vegitation, drives birds out of the area and flys past you and your canoe headed to the "secret" honey hole for a roost shoot. and i think the word you are looking for is "ignorant"?? and not "ignurnt"??... anyways, its not illegal to run my boat in most parts of WMAs. i have just as much right as you do to be there or anywhere else that is open to public hunting. if you dont like me running my boat in certain areas, that sucks. me and many others have and will run it for many more years to come in the marshes and wetlands.


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2011)

1BandMan said:


> kill_'em_all said:
> 
> 
> > 1BandMan said:
> ...


predators are hunters. they move with the food! ducks are never safe in the same place twice. thats a risk they are taking when they go back there day after day. we cant go everywhere in our boats. not near as many places as guys can go on foot. you may not support roost shooting, which is fine. but i do as long as its legal. if it were so wrong, it would be illegal. ducks are smart. they know what time of the day they get shot at and which time of the day they dont. go out after hours on a "roost" they have been shot at before. sure they dont come it a half hour before shooting light is over, they come in well after shooting hours. they figure it out in a hurry.


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

kill_'em_all said:


> paddler213 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know who you are, kill_'em_all, but you seem a slow study. Or, as you may say, ignurnt. The video was shot well after the youth opener, which was only one day of hunting. The day it was shot was just days before the general opener. The WMAs were open to boats between the youth and general openers, so the difference in those two areas demonstrates the negative impacts of MM in both the short and long term.
> ...


Thats right and you and folks like you and thier $h!tty ****ing attitudes about protecting the resource are *poster boys *for why this discussion exists and the reason why mud motors as a whole should be shut down from operating in ANY area period.


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2011)

1BandMan said:


> kill_'em_all said:
> 
> 
> > paddler213 said:
> ...


good luck with convincing people to shut down the use of MMs 
 its not gonna happen any time soon...........


----------



## Skye Hansen (Mar 23, 2009)

Fowlmouth said:


> For the guys that support motorless access, what units inside what WMA's do you want for motorless and rest areas? Please give examples for all the WMA's along the Wasatch front. I keep hearing we need more motorless access and more rest areas, so what areas/units do you suggest changing to motorless/rest areas? Just curious as to your thoughts.


I would like to know as well. It seems like I have never heard this answer. Also, I asked if the motorless people have thought about adding electric motors to this proposal. I would like to hear some input on this.


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

kill_'em_all said:


> 1BandMan said:
> 
> 
> > [quote="kill_'em_all":2aa1s8wo]
> ...


good luck with convincing people to shut down the use of MMs 
 its not gonna happen any time soon...........[/quote:2aa1s8wo]

*YO, MUD MOTOR GUYS......ANY OF YOU NOW CONVINCED AND NOW UNDERSTAND THAT FOLKS LIKE THE ABOVE WITH A MUD MOTOR ARE GOING TO GET YOUR RIGHTS TERMINATED IN THE MARSH?????*

And if so, so be it since there are way too many like him.


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2011)

:shock: uh oh... hes using big type and red lettering... o-|| haha dude get a boat of your own. they're alot of fun! :twisted:


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

skyline11 said:


> Fowlmouth said:
> 
> 
> > For the guys that support motorless access, what units inside what WMA's do you want for motorless and rest areas? Please give examples for all the WMA's along the Wasatch front. I keep hearing we need more motorless access and more rest areas, so what areas/units do you suggest changing to motorless/rest areas? Just curious as to your thoughts.
> ...


I don't see electric motors causing problems environmentally or having the ability to do what mm's do (tearing things up and running great expanses of the marsh).

As far as access and closures to mm's, I'll go big and pray they do enough....ban em' all from everywhere.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

paddler213 said:


> [The birds have learned to avoid the place during daylight. You shouldn't have to be a rocket scientist to know why that is because apparently even those small brained ducks long ago figured out that if you fly over anywhere out there, no matter water or land, someone is shooting at you if its shooting hours, often times before and after hours.*It sounds like you're saying they're smart enough to avoid the MM disturbance. BINGO, WE HAVE A WINNER!!!*


John, you might want to read a little closer on that statement of fact above. It sure is strange that the birds will not even come into the areas outside the impoundment dikes (where no boats can venture) until dark either, that could never have anything to do with dozens of idiots on the dikes blasting away at them. Those birds avoid every area of the WMA that is until everyone leaves out for the night.

Both you and your mini me still are in a state of denial about the undisputed fact that all hunters put pressure on the birds. I can't wait until your heads finally pop out of your asses, it should register on the USGS seismic sensors!


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

1BandMan said:


> *YO, MUD MOTOR GUYS......ANY OF YOU NOW CONVINCED AND NOW UNDERSTAND THAT FOLKS LIKE THE ABOVE WITH A MUD MOTOR ARE GOING TO GET YOUR RIGHTS TERMINATED IN THE MARSH?????*
> 
> And if so, so be it since there are way too many like him.


Pot met kettle!

In fact they can and do police their own ranks, now if we could just get you non MM guys to do the same to your fellow foot soldiers, the marsh would be a much better place.


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

Mojo1 said:


> paddler213 said:
> 
> 
> > [The birds have learned to avoid the place during daylight. You shouldn't have to be a rocket scientist to know why that is because apparently even those small brained ducks long ago figured out that if you fly over anywhere out there, no matter water or land, someone is shooting at you if its shooting hours, often times before and after hours.*It sounds like you're saying they're smart enough to avoid the MM disturbance. BINGO, WE HAVE A WINNER!!!*
> ...


Ehhhhhhhh......and what do you think of YOUR "mini me" Mr. "Kill em' all"?

Poster boys I'll tell ya, poster boys.


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2011)

Mojo1 said:


> John, you might want to read a little closer on that statement of fact above. It sure is strange that the birds will not even come into the areas outside the impoundment dikes (where no boats can venture) until dark either, that could never have anything to do with dozens of idiots on the dikes blasting away at them. Those birds avoid every area of the WMA that is until everyone leaves out for the night.
> 
> Both you and your mini me still are in a state of denial about the undisputed fact that all hunters put pressure on the birds. I can't wait until your heads finally pop out of your asses, it should register on the USGS seismic sensors!


WE HAVE A WINNER!  someone finally gets it!! everyone in the marsh puts pressure on the birds! we are all to blame! _(O)_


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

Mojo1 said:


> 1BandMan said:
> 
> 
> > *YO, MUD MOTOR GUYS......ANY OF YOU NOW CONVINCED AND NOW UNDERSTAND THAT FOLKS LIKE THE ABOVE WITH A MUD MOTOR ARE GOING TO GET YOUR RIGHTS TERMINATED IN THE MARSH?????*
> ...


Yup, foot soldiers with Shiz for brains can and do cause some damage.
But you guys and $15,000+ worth of motorized destruction are far, far more impressive....far, far more impressive.


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2011)

1BandMan said:


> Mojo1 said:
> 
> 
> > paddler213 said:
> ...


1bandman, i have one question for you. do you honestly believe you dont put any pressure AT ALL on the birds when you step into the marsh?


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

kill_'em_all said:


> 1BandMan said:
> 
> 
> > Mojo1 said:
> ...


Are you sure you want to keep going?? If I were a fellow mud motor guy, I'd personally find your web ip and physical address and stuff a sock in your mouth and cut your fingers off so you couldn't type on the computer any more.

Or........you can join our side and continue to enlighten us with you and your fellow mud motor heads, mud motor creed and nifty goals to us all.


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2011)

1BandMan said:


> Are you sure you want to keep going?? If I were a fellow mud motor guy, I'd personally find your web ip and physical address and stuff a sock in your mouth and cut your fingers off so you couldn't type on the computer any more.
> 
> Or........you can join our side and continue your banter, mud motor creed and nifty goals to us all.


hmmm.... sounds somewhat like a threat to me...? haha wow i really pissed you off! o-|| :mrgreen: haha ya ill continue to share my opinion. if people dont step up and fight for what they think is right, people walk all over them. im not one to let people tell me what is wrong or right when its clearly just an opinion of a single track minded person. im not a bad guy. im the first one to help someone out if they need it. i dont rally birds or harass them. i respect wildlife and the places they call home. but dont tell me my methods of hunting and my way of transportation is wrong when its completely legal!


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

kill_'em_all said:


> 1BandMan said:
> 
> 
> > Are you sure you want to keep going?? If I were a fellow mud motor guy, I'd personally find your web ip and physical address and stuff a sock in your mouth and cut your fingers off so you couldn't type on the computer any more.
> ...


I'm no threat to you. Your helping in proving a point. I said that your fellow mud motor heads might be.

Keep going, this is excellent. 
And....changing your position back and forth whether your for the birds or just trying to kill them all is also revealing in that you represent so many other mud motor heads and what they really stand for and the lies that they hide behind.


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2011)

1BandMan said:


> I'm no threat to you. Your helping in proving a point. I said that your fellow mud motor heads might be.
> 
> Keep going, this is excellent.
> And....changing your position back and forth whether your for the birds or just trying to kill them all is also revealing in that you represent so many other mud motor heads and what they really stand for and the lies that they hide behind.


well in a way you are a threat to me. you are a terrorist in a way. kinda like PETA. you are all for putting more restrictions on something i am extremely passionate about. i dont hide behind lies. ill be completely up front with you on what i stand for. in my opinion, waterfowl hunting is the best kind of hunting there is. there is something about a flock of ducks right at first light pouring into your spread, wings locked, feet down. theres something special about watching a bull pinner screaming over head and watch him glide through the air. theres something about hearing those distant gunshots echo through the marsh on a cold morning. its truely amazing to sit in the dark and listen to thousands of swans. not many people understand why we do what we do. sometimes i wonder why i really do it, because sometimes its just miserable. i cant really explain what keeps me coming back, other than i love it. some incredibly strong bonds are built between people in the duck marshes. i was introduced to hunting ducks when i was 6 by my father. since then i have not missed an opening day of the season and dont plan to until i die. ive hunted ducks and geese every way possible thats legal. from dike hunting to laying in coffins on the GSL to hunting fields in canada, ive done it all. i have a mudbuddy with a blind on my boat that i have had for 7 years. in those 7 years we have killed countless numbers of birds out of it and have made some memories that cant be made anywhere else. we now have an airboat. if you want to ever try something that is a blast, go for a ride in one of those things. they are a riot! do i kill more birds with the airboat then i do the MM? no. but its just as, if not more fun to hunt out of. i believe in ethics. people should not shoot at every bird that comes over with in 100 yards of them. people should pick up their trash while out hunting. it is not our marsh to destroy. it belongs to the birds that call it home. we are visitors. people should not harass birds just because they can. that is wrong. but sometimes birds our in the way of our travel and we kick them up to get to our designation. everyone who hunts knows that it puts pressure on the birds. they are not very tolerable when it comes to humans hunting them. they go to where they arent pressured. which causes places that were once good, to be less productive in the future. but the birds dont generally leave until there is no more food available. they are still in the area, you just have to find them. i am all for protecting their habitat. without our help, there is not future in waterfowl. we need to be careful on what we do to make sure they will be here in the future. but for those 3 short months, when the food is done growing, its getting colder, when the migration is in progress, we aren not hurting anything by driving our boats to and from where we hunt. if you dont like the boat traffic, then go to a motorless area. theres plenty of them out there. and thanks to us ******* motorheads, we push more birds into your areas for you to hunt. we all have opinions. we all have views on what we think is right or wrong. but for the last time, IF ITS LEGAL, IF ITS IN SEASON AND IF ITS WITHIN RANGE, IN GOING AFTER IT 100%! not you or anyone else of you "mini me's" is going to stop me. everytime you try to, you can bet im gonna share my opinion(s) on how i feel.

not all of us MM guys are bad people. i have met alot of great guys over the years of hunting who would do anything for anyone. we dontate lots of time and money every year to ensure that we give back to something that is so important to us. we do more for waterfowl then 80% of the foot soldiers out there in utah.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

I don't think you're a bad guy, kill_'em_all, though your moniker could be off-putting to some. And you even know how to spell ignorant, which as you know, means someone who ignores things. In your case, you ignore the impacts MMs have on the marsh. Jimmy's a good guy, too, he just disagrees with reality. 

All hunters pressure birds. MMs make it far easier to disturb them, and as you say, they damage the habitat to a far greater degree than the non-motorized hunter.

We'll see how this plays out. As for questions asked above, I would limit MMs to only those areas where practicality mandates their use. I would leave the Turpin open, for instance, as it's 4.5 miles long. You don't need a MM to hunt Unit 1 at FB, so I would close it. I might leave the main unit at Salt Creek open, as it's difficult to access because of current flow, etc. I would close all of PSG, as Hull Lake, the largest, is less than 2 miles long. I think any unit where the furthest walk or paddle is two miles or less should be closed. Oh, and motorless means just that, no motors, gas, electric, etc. If you allowed electric motors, Noble, et al, would figure a way to get 70HP out of one. I realize my view is not exactly mainstream, but I'm sure the marsh and ducks would be better off if my recommendations were implemented.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

I assume unit 2 at FB would be on your list for motorless access as well as unit 3 at Ogden Bay? I think this would just cause more over crowding with boats/people on the Units that would be left open, and part of this debate is about over crowding. I spend the majority of my time hunting 1 WMA and there are places a paddle boat can go that no others can, you can easily jump dikes and drop your canoe in canals that no one else can get to. I spent many hours this season walking the impoundments at some of the WMA's and found a bunch of new areas I could hunt with a small paddle boat, hell I'm thinking about purchasing a stealth or carston just so I can get to some of these places. Right now I believe the birds still have plenty of rest area in the units that were made rest areas on the WMA's. The way things are now a paddle boat and a MM boat can use the same units together to access the marsh, I don't think it would be fair to say only paddle boats are allowed on a specific unit and no other boats. I really believe the true fight is and should be against the phragmite problem, that if destroyed would open up more areas for the ducks and hunters to spread out over. JMO!


----------



## Skye Hansen (Mar 23, 2009)

paddler213 said:


> Oh, and motorless means just that, no motors, gas, electric, etc. If you allowed electric motors, Noble, et al, would figure a way to get 70HP out of one. I realize my view is not exactly mainstream, but I'm sure the marsh and ducks would be better off if my recommendations were implemented.


I can't see how anyone could suggest that electric motors hurt the environment any more than paddling. Everyone understands that there are limitations to electric motors. There are some big ones but lets get real they cannot produce a 70 hp. I have listened to the argument and it always suggests that it is "what hurts the environment." This is why I asked the question. I wanted to know if this argument was to protect the environment or if it was motor vs motorless. We know that all hunters pressure the birds that cannot be argued. The real proprosal seems to be, shut down an area because if we do then people will not go and hunt it. Therefore it will turn into a chunk of public land that I have to myself. This is the part that I cannot handle.



Fowlmouth said:


> I assume unit 2 at FB would be on your list for motorless access as well as unit 3 at Ogden Bay? * I think this would just cause more over crowding with boats/people on the Units that would be left open*, and part of this debate is about over crowding. I spend the majority of my time hunting 1 WMA and there are places a paddle boat can go that no others can, you can easily jump dikes and drop your canoe in canals that no one else can get to. I spent many hours this season walking the impoundments at some of the WMA's and found a bunch of new areas I could hunt with a small paddle boat, hell I'm thinking about purchasing a stealth or carston just so I can get to some of these places. Right now I believe the birds still have plenty of rest area in the units that were made rest areas on the WMA's. The way things are now a paddle boat and a MM boat can use the same units together to access the marsh, I don't think it would be fair to say only paddle boats are allowed on a specific unit and no other boats. I really believe the true fight is and should be against the phragmite problem, that if destroyed would open up more areas for the ducks and hunters to spread out over. JMO!


That is exactly what will happen.


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

kill_'em_all said:


> 1BandMan said:
> 
> 
> > I'd still also like to know why you or anyone else would invest big bucks in a mm rig if you can walk to the same spots on foot????
> ...


Same reason I wouldn't drive up and park next to my tree stand with my 1979 Chev truck with the muffler removed, replaced with dual exhaust and cherry bomb glasspacks.
I also wouldn't do it with my 2011 Dodge Ram Diesel.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

The MM discussion is in part about bird disturbance, and allowing electric motors would cause more disturbance that non-motorized access. I would not allow them. And yes, I would close Unit 2 at FB, Unit 3 at OB, and probably Unit 1 at OB. I'd close most of our WMAs to MM.

The argument about overcrowding in the remaining units is irrelevant. Hunters want to be successful, and will do what it takes to kill birds. If that means they have to work harder, they'll do it. Don't underestimate what waterfowlers will do to get into birds. We need to turn the clock back to the time before MMs, as they are hard on the marsh and, in the long run, decrease hunter success.


----------



## Skye Hansen (Mar 23, 2009)

paddler213 said:


> The MM discussion is in part about bird disturbance, and *allowing electric motors would cause more disturbance that non-motorized access*. I would not allow them. And yes, I would close Unit 2 at FB, Unit 3 at OB, and probably Unit 1 at OB. I'd close most of our WMAs to MM.
> 
> The argument about overcrowding in the remaining units is irrelevant. Hunters want to be successful, and will do what it takes to kill birds. If that means they have to work harder, they'll do it. Don't underestimate what waterfowlers will do to get into birds. We need to turn the clock back to the time before MMs, as they are hard on the marsh and, in the long run, decrease hunter success.


Please explain how so.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Because electric motors allow one to travel farther and faster than one could by non-motorized means.


----------



## Skye Hansen (Mar 23, 2009)

:lol: That is technology.


----------



## Guest (Jan 22, 2011)

paddler213 said:


> The MM discussion is in part about bird disturbance, and allowing electric motors would cause more disturbance that non-motorized access. I would not allow them. And yes, I would close Unit 2 at FB, Unit 3 at OB, and probably Unit 1 at OB. I'd close most of our WMAs to MM.
> 
> The argument about overcrowding in the remaining units is irrelevant. Hunters want to be successful, and will do what it takes to kill birds. If that means they have to work harder, they'll do it. Don't underestimate what waterfowlers will do to get into birds. We need to turn the clock back to the time before MMs, as they are hard on the marsh and, in the long run, decrease hunter success.


well thank god youre not in charge! MMs have been around for A LONG TIME. they arent a new invention. you said it yourself, we will do what we have to in order to be successful. hunter crowding is extremely relevant. by solving one problem, you cause another one... a much bigger problem. which in turn, will require us hunters drawing for spots on WMAs, which will be a disaster.

something i have noticed on this thread, you dont hear guys with MMs complaining about how the hunting sucked last season. everyone of them said it was a great year for many other reasons other then killing ducks. times are changing, technology is getting more advanced. once again, its legal. no laws are being broken. deal with it!!


----------



## Guest (Jan 22, 2011)

1BandMan said:


> kill_'em_all said:
> 
> 
> > 1BandMan said:
> ...


well if youre dumb enough to put a treestand right off a designated road or trail (cuz off roading is illegal in utah of course), then i can see why you want to walk miles upon miles for a duck... its a completely different concept with ducks then it is with big game. but, then again i see and hear of people shooting deer and elk off the road every year, so maybe you outta give it a try. you might kill something


----------



## diverfreak (May 11, 2008)

We'll see how this plays out. As for questions asked above, I would limit MMs to only those areas where practicality mandates their use. I would leave the Turpin open, for instance, as it's 4.5 miles long. You don't need a MM to hunt Unit 1 at FB, so I would close it. I might leave the main unit at Salt Creek open, as it's difficult to access because of current flow, etc. I would close all of PSG, as Hull Lake, the largest, is less than 2 miles long. I think any unit where the furthest walk or paddle is two miles or less should be closed. 

HAIL HITLER!!! I think your a good person Paddler but i thank God you are not in charge of waterfowl in Utah.

DiverFreak


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

paddler213 said:


> I would close Unit 2 at FB, Unit 3 at OB, and probably Unit 1 at OB. I'd close most of our WMAs to MM. This isn't practical or ethical to discriminate against 1 user group by eliminating them from using the resource
> 
> The argument about overcrowding in the remaining units is irrelevant.


It is relevant and would create more problems than we have now

Another question I have is, how much does it cost to license a canoe or non-motorized boat in the state of Utah? 
I know what I and others pay for registration fees on our duck boats and it is a substantial amount. I really don't think the state would be willing to lose this revenue by closing down all of the areas you have mentioned. If our "use" areas are limited, the states funds will be limited. No where to run a boat, no need to pay a registration fee. Get my drift?


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

diverfreak said:


> HAIL HITLER!!! I think your a good person Paddler but i thank God you are not in charge of waterfowl in Utah.
> 
> DiverFreak


Don't worry, Tony, it won't happen. I said above that my views aren't exactly mainstream. It would benefit the ducks and marsh if they closed most areas, but that will never fly. I think it's time we did something to take the pressure of the ducks so they stick around longer, though.

Don't you think it would be cool to do an all paddle layout hunt? I'm game if you are. I've been known to chase down cripples and "paddle" them in my canoe.


----------



## wileywapati (Sep 9, 2007)

Oh good God, again with this crap???


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

paddler213 said:


> I Jimmy's a good guy, too, he just disagrees with reality.


That's pretty funny that you lecture me on reality when I'm not the one with my head stuck up my ass ignoring the biggest threat facing the birds.

I'm not even gonna bother mentioning your other issues!


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

Paddler I'm glad you don't run our waterfowling in Utah. We all would be ****ed.I know tons of place that you can't get mm or air boats.You have to walk to. 

This hole topic about mms and air boats doing this is bull **** man. let fight the phrag and in joy hunting ducks.


----------



## Guest (Jan 24, 2011)

dkhntrdstn said:


> Paddler I'm glad you don't run our waterfowling in Utah. We all would be **** know tons of place that you can't get mm or air boats.You have to walk to.
> 
> This hole topic about mms and air boats doing this is bull **** man. let fight the phrag and in joy hunting ducks.


so true. people need to tackle the biggest issues we face first before we start fighting something so small in threat.


----------

