Duck Hunting Forum banner

Duck Hunting Near Pittsburg

5K views 18 replies 12 participants last post by  kwacksmacker 
#1 ·
Hey all I am new to the forum but have been hunting all my life. Currently I am deer hunting some private ground around Pittsburg and while sitting in the stand this past Saturday I was watching thousands of mallards and hundreds of geese flying over in the morning and evenings. Now that deer season has come to a close I was wanting to kill some mallards and being from Arkansas we do a lot of duck hunting there but the environment is different. I was looking for some advice on how to kill ducks around Pittsburg since public ground is somewhat scarce. I keep hearing dry ground is good and they were flying fairly low right over the large soybean field I was deer hunting. I didn't know if full body decoys and ground blinds would be effective or not in this field or am I just wasting my time? Any advice would be appreciated.
 
#2 ·
You don't need full body to kill ducks on a field, but its is nice. We use floaters and 1 mojo and limit out. The key is the mojo and hiding the blinds. You can try putting the decoys out about 20yd from the blinds, or try to dig down the blinds and put decoys around you. Remember to let the birds work you they might circle 5 time before they come in. Good luck
 
#3 ·
browninggoldhunter24 said:
I didn't know if full body decoys and ground blinds would be effective or not in this field or am I just wasting my time? Any advice would be appreciated.
Since the birds were not actually landing in that field at this point, the effectiveness of decoys is in question. You might check that field every morning, and if/when you see birds on the ground, plan to hunt the next day with the full-bodies and ground blinds you have. They should be effective then.
Best tip I can give you is this: when you think you have the blind camo'ed enough, put twice as much on.
 
#8 ·
Also we have the 2nd least amount of public land acreage in the US the #1 is Rhode Island and it is only as big as our biggest city. That is why we get so Bu++Hurt about things like this. Arkansas is overran with local hunters let alone all the OOSRs that come down there because they watched some Hunting show about blowing up fat head mallets in the timber. Kansas is becoming the same way and we have less acreage to handle it.
 
#9 ·
Ive heard the stats about the 2nd least public land in the U.S. and I always wonder if part of that is because our rivers and streams are private. Does anyone know if they count stream/river access in the total amount of public land statistics? And how many others states deny public access to rivers and streams?
 
#10 ·
EcatMagoo said:
Ive heard the stats about the 2nd least public land in the U.S. and I always wonder if part of that is because our rivers and streams are private. Does anyone know if they count stream/river access in the total amount of public land statistics? And how many others states deny public access to rivers and streams?
Very few states recognize navigable water as personal property. A quick Google search provides Kansas as the only violator for retarded water rights.

The way I understand it is that ,federally, public water access off navigable water (US Title Code 33) pre-dates property deeds. And the Supreme Court has upheld numerous times the navigable bodies of water be held for public trust by the state. HOWEVER, Kansas Constitution deems navigable water adjacent to personally property, IE land, as part of that property. Much of that has to do with farming, and there has been much debate over the validity and controversy over this, but as a States Constitution is approved by Congress after ratification, its recognized by the federal government and is extremely hard to be force into changing.

I'm unaware of Kansas being challenge in Supreme Court over this. In addition I have no background in law, except that I'm the kinda weird guy that reads law reviews for fun. This is just a very cloudy topic. Maybe if there is a real lawyer on this forum he can shed some real light on the topic, but I doubt it :hammer:

Interesting reference though http://www.adventuresports.com/river/no ... w-menu.htm
 
#11 ·
Ok..so Kansas is one of the only states that denies access to rivers and streams. Maybe that's why Kansas is 2nd to last in regards to public land access. This being the case the notion that Kansas has so much less public water-fowling land than other states is kind of misleading.
 
#13 ·
EcatMagoo said:
Ok..so Kansas is one of the only states that denies access to rivers and streams.
Kansas doesn't deny access to "rivers and streams" as much as it gives ownership of those rivers and streams to the private owners of the land bordering them. Navigable rivers excepted, of course.
It's the private owners who deny access.
 
#14 ·
http://www.kdwpt.state.ks.us/news/KDWPT ... ams-Access:

Rivers and Streams Access
There are more than 10,000 miles of streams and rivers in Kansas

Missouri River View

Most streams and rivers in Kansas are privately owned. The public rivers are the Kansas, Arkansas and Missouri (shown at right). They are open to the public between the ordinary high water marks on each bank. This is the line that can be seen where high water has left debris, sand, and gravel during its ordinary annual cycle. When these rivers flow through private land, permission is needed from adjacent landowners to access the rivers as well as when picnicking, camping, portaging or engaging in any other activity on the adjacent private lands.

Doesn't this mean that all areas between the high water marks on the 3 navigable rivers are open to public use for the length of the river? I thought that as long as access was via public access point, that you could still hunt (unless w/in city limits) or fish the river bordered by private property between the high water marks. Is that not correct?
 
#15 ·
dklaus1201 said:
Doesn't this mean that all areas between the high water marks on the 3 navigable rivers are open to public use for the length of the river? I thought that as long as access was via public access point, that you could still hunt (unless w/in city limits) or fish the river bordered by private property between the high water marks. Is that not correct?
That is correct, but only on those three rivers. The problem that is kinda being discuss is that its only 3 rivers. Even though there are many other navigable water ways, since by definition set forth by the corp of engineers is a small boat or canoe can access it. But back to what I was saying about KS Constitution and public vrs private property. Any other State I've been too/hunted/boated is completely different. Idaho for example has hundreds of public streams and rivers that are adjacent to private property.

I rather enjoyed when cattle ranchers fence off medium size creeks (specially on leased BLM land). My dad and I used to pack wire cutters in the canoe. We'd open the public water and stream bed back up and just call the local sheriff afterwords to inform him of the illegal fence.
 
#18 ·
EcatMagoo said:
Ive heard the stats about the 2nd least public land in the U.S. and I always wonder if part of that is because our rivers and streams are private. Does anyone know if they count stream/river access in the total amount of public land statistics? And how many others states deny public access to rivers and streams?
Virgina does in some places. Goes back to King's Grant land from before the revoluntionary war. Some of these places are the some of the best trout fishing in the state :mad:

Ohio - Land owners on some streams and small rivers OWN the bottom under the water. You can't even anchor your boat!!!
 
#19 ·
public land was home to 8 different states and one canadian province over the weekend. evidently johnson counties population went down as well as the all migrated. do they have a duck sticker factory there? definitely in the presence of excellence :yes:
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top