Bag limit of ducks

Main forum for general non waterfowl discussions as well as general duck hunting information about travel, rules and regulations, and other duck hunting info along with the general topics.

Moderators: Tealer, Indaswamp, Dep6, Preacher1011, steve-o, La. Hunter, lostpup, #1wingnut

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby REM1100 » Wed Feb 02, 2011 9:35 pm

In Canada the migratory birds are Federal. and Federal applies on the Federal permit. In Saskatchewan they had upped the possession limit to three times the daily limit. Suppose you went hunting also in Alberta where the possession limit is twice the daily limit and you live in Alberta you cannot hunt ducks because of the Federal law if you limited out in Sask. Is that right??
on the X in Saskatchewan
User avatar
REM1100
Provincial Moderator
 
Posts: 1277
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:14 pm
Location: Western Canada


Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby assateague » Thu Feb 03, 2011 9:42 am

i didn't realize you had laws in canada. Couldn't you just tell the warden they were to feed to the polar bears? :lol3:
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby Sandman3400 » Thu Feb 03, 2011 4:10 pm

Preacher1011 wrote:That law most likely has to do with the lethality to others. A shotgun isn't lethal at a long distance. Pistol and rifle rounds can be lethal for miles and they will ricochet off the water and keep going. You use your bow, I'm going to stick to killing ducks. I miss, my shell costs $1, you miss and you're out 5 or more. Plus hunting with a bow, if you shoot one and it flies off with an arrow stuck in it and winds up in a park (which happens a lot) you give us all a black eye. I think I'll stick with my shotgun, there's a reason people hunt with guns now.


Okay, the bow bit was a joke, but what about nets and snares? I don't think there are any lethality issues there. If I sneak up on them and drug them, I don't think that would effect anyone either. Maybe that is to prevent people from growing wacky tobaccy in their duck fields? The list of prohibited methods is long and nonsensical. If you try to inject any sense of logic into it than you are just spinning your wheels. The reason it is all so ridiculously complex is because it is done by our government and they are simply not capable of doing anything simply.
Real men hunt with Chessies!
User avatar
Sandman3400
hunter
 
Posts: 578
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 4:46 pm
Location: Denham Springs, LA

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby jcnelsn1 » Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:08 pm

Its amazing how often this comes up.

The answer is clear from the federal regs (50 CFR 20). A state can have more restrictive, but not less restrictive regs on waterfowl possession.

Possession includes birds in whatever form and the possession limit applies to birds in your freezer (whether whole birds, breasted birds, bird sausage, etc.) (obviously will be proof issues with processed birds) (See 50 CFR 20.33). Taking birds to your pemanent residence does not terminate possession.

Possession is only terminated when you eat them or gift them or send them to someone else (See 50 CFR 20.39). Whoever you gift birds to must also comply with the possession limits. The regs set forth the rules for properly gifting and possessing birds belonging to another.

You do not have to leave a wing or head on when the birds get to your personal residence (See 50 CFR 20.43)

With that being said your odds of getting busted for having to many birds in your freezer are low, but if you have more than the possession limit in whatever form you are in violation of the law. There is no disputing that.
jcnelsn1
hunter
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 8:37 am
Location: Bismarck, ND

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby Lreynolds » Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:23 pm

Indaswamp wrote:O.K. people...try this one...
Snow geese have a regular and a conservation season.
regular season there is a possession limit-same as all other waterfowl.


Not true. Please look at the waterfowl regulations pamphlet for our State at:

http://www.wlf.louisiana.gov/publicatio ... egulations

There you will see that there is no possession limit for light geese during the regular season.

You guys are correct that there are many inconsistencies and enforcement difficulties with possession limits, but there is no need to misconstrue facts to make that point.
Last edited by Lreynolds on Fri Feb 04, 2011 12:03 am, edited 2 times in total.
Lreynolds
hunter
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:27 pm

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby Lreynolds » Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:44 pm

Sandman3400 wrote:Bag limits are determined based on a worst case scenario so that the harvest will not hurt the population. We can all shoot a limit every day of the season and it won't do any damage to the duck population (beyond the next breeding cycle).


Among many of your contentions, I think this is the biggest misconception. Just do the math. If every duck hunter killed a limit of ducks every day of the season, we would kill more ducks than we estimate there are in North America.

Atlantic Flyway: 200,000 hunters(60 days)(6 ducks per day) = 72,000,000 ducks

Mississippi Flyway: 500,000 hunters(60 days)(6 ducks per day) = 180,000,000 ducks

Central Flyway: 250,000 hunters(74 days)(6 ducks per day) = 111,000,000 ducks

Pacific Flyway: 150,000 hunters(107 days)(7 ducks per day) = 112,000,000 ducks

That comes to a total of 475 million ducks, and you don't think that would do any damage to the population of ducks when the ACTUAL harvest last year was 13.15 million?

That is NOT the basis for bag limits ..... not even close.

The basis for our harvest regulations is our experience with similar regulations over time. Using the MS Flyway as my example, we have a decent chance of predicting the harvest from a 30-day season with a 3-duck limit vs a 45-day season with 6 duck limit vs a 60-day season with a 6 duck limit because we have some experience with those seasons from the past. If something changes (limitations on methods, technology, hunter participation, etc.) that changes the harvest under those same season length/bag limits, then the regulations need to be adjusted to keep harvest within acceptable bounds.

HOW we kill those 6 birds per day is important to maintaining the predictability of the kill under particular regulatory packages.
Lreynolds
hunter
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:27 pm

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby Indawoods » Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:29 pm

for those who may be wondering, lreynolds is the head waterfowl biologist at Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries. He knows his $4!+.

As for game wardens not needing search warrants... BS! They absolutely have to have a search warrant to search your home or any locked compartment of your vehicle in your driveway or on the road unless you consent to a warrantless search. (different legal standards apply for evidence in plain sight)

The confusion is due to the "open fields doctrine" which allows for game wardens to cross property lines without warrants to do their job OUT IN THE FIELD. They are allowed to search your boat and vehicle on WMAs and such because you presumptively consent when you enter the WMA, etc... Game Wardens love the fact that this confusion exists, as it makes their job easier.

They can also LIE to you as a suspect, legally, in the performance of their duties to enforce the law (so can cops). The Supreme Court has held that Law Enforcement is not bound to the truth except under oath, and is not required to inform you of any rights except at the time of your arrest or if you are taken into custody (miranda). The only other exception I'm aware of is entrapment, though others probably exist. (interestingly, you can not lie to them, because it is a crime, but you can ignore their questions under the fifth amendment.)

So they can appear at your door, ask for your permission to come in, and browbeat you into giving permission by claiming they can come in anyway without a warrant. In sales this tactic is called "assuming the sale". Once you acquiesce, you have consented to a warrantless, legal search and have no recourse, anything they find is admissable. "we can do this the easy way or the hard way" means the hard way is hard for them, because they have to go get a warrant. (which they can do)

All of the above is correct to my knowledge. If someone with a law degree spots any mistakes, please correct them.
(but, but, Indaswamp said... is not a defense FYI so do your own legal research or consult an attorney!)
Last edited by Indawoods on Fri Feb 04, 2011 12:19 am, edited 2 times in total.
assateague wrote:I'm not THAT cheap.


-on the viability of Pabst Blue Ribbon as a thirst quenching barley pop.
User avatar
Indawoods
hunter
 
Posts: 6446
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 10:08 pm
Location: Gonzales, LA

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby Lreynolds » Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:56 pm

Sandman3400 wrote:The reason for the law is really very simple. They want to limit the number of ducks that we kill to a sustainable amount. Now, you might ask, "Why not just make one law that limits the number of ducks we kill in a day or a year?". If you were to ask such a question, then you would simply be showing how naive you really are. If you pay any attention to the workings of your government, than you would know that they never settle for one rule or law or regulation when they can create 500 (or 5000) that do the same thing.


I used to think the same thing until I became an active participant in creating and deciding upon waterfowl hunting regulations. Now I KNOW that isn't true.

Please don't think I'm picking on you Sandman, but this is something that's really starting to bug me, and your post provides a nice jumping-off point for this pet-peeve of mine. I don't mean it toward anyone in particular.

Pay attention to the workings of your government when it comes to setting hunting regulations and you will see very clearly that it is HUNTERS, and not government that desire complex regulations. Why? Because they are looking for any and every way to kill more ducks (or deer or whatever) AND they want to make sure nobody else has any kind of advantage over them. How do they do that? By petitioning their political representatives to make it happen.

Just look at the silly array of licenses we have at LDWF. All inclusive Senior licences for $5 (for the group with the most disposable income on average), Military licenses, Louisiana Native licenses, Deferral licenses, etc. Something for every special group that gets the right politician to push it through. Government didn't think it up; they respond to the wishes of the private citizens they represent.

You should see all the hunter-input on zones, splits and season modifications I'm currently looking at including a half-dozen from legislators who are petitioning on behalf of their constituents. A "tidally-influenced coastal zone" so they can hunt all day whenever the tide is best, while the rest of the State can close at 12:00 noon everyday because that will improve everybody's hunting. Divide the state into 4 zones and stagger the 60-day straight seasons so that the season is open somewhere in the State from October 15 to January 31. Within the East zone, have earlier seasons on the reservoirs, lakes and large ponds where we kill ducks in the early season, and later seasons in the flooded woods along river systems and ricefields for the mallards. Among others, these are proposals private citizens are going to their government to get implemented.

How about the youth waterfowl hunting regulations in our state? The age limit is 15 or younger for the Youth Waterfowl Weekend (which is outside the 60-day regular duck season), but pressure from hunters who don't want to leave their 16 and 17 year olds at home during youth hunts pushed LDWF to increase the age to 17 and under for any youth hunts that occur during the regular duck season. Hell, I've got handicapped hunters pushing the Commission to approve their participation in the Youth Waterfowl Weekend or to allocate additional days for them to hunt without competition from other hunters.

You think the government is driving complication? Oftentimes it's the private citizens they represent. One example of government resisting additional restrictions on waterfowling was refusing to ban spinning wing decoys ...... at least so far ..... but I'd bet many of you would support that restriction on how to kill ducks.

Sandman3400 wrote: I just looked over my 2010 regulations. They tell me that I can shoot 6 ducks per day from Nov. 20 through Jan. 30 with a 13 day split in the middle. Then there is another 7-7/8 pages that tell me how many different ways that I can or cannot kill 6 ducks per day.


C'mon now :fingerpt: ..... It's only an 8-page pamphlet, and the front and back page don't say a thing about how you can or cannot kill ducks.
Lreynolds
hunter
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:27 pm

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby WTN10 » Fri Feb 04, 2011 12:04 am

Lreynolds wrote:
Sandman3400 wrote:The reason for the law is really very simple. They want to limit the number of ducks that we kill to a sustainable amount. Now, you might ask, "Why not just make one law that limits the number of ducks we kill in a day or a year?". If you were to ask such a question, then you would simply be showing how naive you really are. If you pay any attention to the workings of your government, than you would know that they never settle for one rule or law or regulation when they can create 500 (or 5000) that do the same thing.


I used to think the same thing until I became an active participant in creating and deciding upon waterfowl hunting regulations. Now I KNOW that isn't true.

Please don't think I'm picking on you Sandman, but this is something that's really starting to bug me, and your post provides a nice jumping-off point for this pet-peeve of mine. I don't mean it toward anyone in particular.

Pay attention to the workings of your government when it comes to setting hunting regulations and you will see very clearly that it is HUNTERS, and not government that desire complex regulations. Why? Because they are looking for any and every way to kill more ducks (or deer or whatever) AND they want to make sure nobody else has any kind of advantage over them. How do they do that? By petitioning their political representatives to make it happen.

Just look at the silly array of licenses we have at LDWF. All inclusive Senior licences for $5 (for the group with the most disposable income on average), Military licenses, Louisiana Native licenses, Deferral licenses, etc. Something for every special group that gets the right politician to push it through. Government didn't think it up; they respond to the wishes of the private citizens they represent.

You should see all the hunter-input on zones, splits and season modifications I'm currently looking at including a half-dozen from legislators who are petitioning on behalf of their constituents. A "tidally-influenced coastal zone" so they can hunt all day whenever the tide is best, while the rest of the State can close at 12:00 noon everyday because that will improve everybody's hunting. Divide the state into 4 zones and stagger the 60-day straight seasons so that the season is open somewhere in the State from October 15 to January 31. Within the East zone, have earlier seasons on the reservoirs, lakes and large ponds where we kill ducks in the early season, and later seasons in the flooded woods along river systems and ricefields for the mallards. Among others, these are proposals private citizens are going to their government to get implemented.

How about the youth waterfowl hunting regulations in our state? The age limit is 15 or younger for the Youth Waterfowl Weekend (which is outside the 60-day regular duck season), but pressure from hunters who don't want to leave their 16 and 17 year olds at home during youth hunts pushed LDWF to increase the age to 17 and under for any youth hunts that occur during the regular duck season. Hell, I've got handicapped hunters pushing the Commission to approve their participation in the Youth Waterfowl Weekend or to allocate additional days for them to hunt without competition from other hunters.

You think the government is driving complication? Oftentimes it's the private citizens they represent. One example of government resisting additional restrictions on waterfowling was refusing to ban spinning wing decoys ...... at least so far ..... but I'd bet many of you would support that restriction on how to kill ducks.

Sandman3400 wrote: I just looked over my 2010 regulations. They tell me that I can shoot 6 ducks per day from Nov. 20 through Jan. 30 with a 13 day split in the middle. Then there is another 7-7/8 pages that tell me how many different ways that I can or cannot kill 6 ducks per day.


C'mon now :fingerpt: ..... It's only an 8-page pamphlet, and the front and back page don't say a thing about how you can or cannot kill ducks.


I like you. You need to post more.
2014 Season Totals:
Mallards: 243
Redheads: 114
Woodducks: 119
Grebes: 36
Blue Geese: 134
Snow Geese: 178
Hawks: 4
User avatar
WTN10
hunter
 
Posts: 14016
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 1:02 pm
Location: Western Tunisia

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby Indaswamp » Fri Feb 04, 2011 7:19 am

thank you Larry for the details and getting it straight... :thumbsup:
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Image
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 56102
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby Papachessie » Fri Feb 04, 2011 7:33 am

Indaswamp wrote:thank you Larry for the details and getting it straight... :thumbsup:

:ditto: It's about time someone who actually has some correct info puts in their $.02.
Jarbo03 wrote:Those two are nothing but life support systems for vaginas
User avatar
Papachessie
hunter
 
Posts: 4294
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 12:05 pm
Location: Northern Indiana NOT Notre Dame

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby Indaswamp » Fri Feb 04, 2011 7:40 am

@Larry,

Can you explain the thought process behind the possession limit applying to one's residence after the birds have been transported and processed? Seems pointless to me for the possession limit to apply once they are in the freezer.
Thanks.
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Image
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 56102
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby Indaswamp » Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:21 am

Lreynolds wrote:
Indaswamp wrote:O.K. people...try this one...
Snow geese have a regular and a conservation season.
regular season there is a possession limit-same as all other waterfowl.


Not true. Please look at the waterfowl regulations pamphlet for our State at:

http://www.wlf.louisiana.gov/publicatio ... egulations

There you will see that there is no possession limit for light geese during the regular season.

You guys are correct that there are many inconsistencies and enforcement difficulties with possession limits, but there is no need to misconstrue facts to make that point.

then what about the possession limit for teal? during the teal season the possession limit is 4, but it jumps to 6 during the regular season.
square that one for us.
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Image
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 56102
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby quackerattacker » Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:26 am

Larry's point on waterfowl regulations reflecting the demands of the special interest groups within the total hunting populace itself says it all. If the average duck hunter in our flyway (Mississippi) kills roughly twelve ducks per season, then the average duck hunter has no problem with possession limits.

Inda, this means only your special minority group of bloodthirstin', duck-slayin' savages would be catered to by raising possession limits. Now don't you feel special? :hi:

By the way, noticed it wasn't even our flyway council recommending possession limits be raised. Credit the Pacific and Central Committees. :bow:
uhmmmm...ya sure that's a duck...i dunt see no green head
User avatar
quackerattacker
hunter
 
Posts: 1131
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 8:19 pm
Location: NE Arkansas

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby Indaswamp » Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:31 am

quackerattacker wrote:Larry's point on waterfowl regulations reflecting the demands of the special interest groups within the total hunting populace itself says it all. If the average duck hunter in our flyway (Mississippi) kills roughly twelve ducks per season, then the average duck hunter has no problem with possession limits.

Inda, this means only your special minority group of bloodthirstin', duck-slayin' savages would be catered to by raising possession limits. Now don't you feel special? :hi:

By the way, noticed it wasn't even our flyway council recommending possession limits be raised. Credit the Pacific and Central Committees. :bow:

What can I say quacker-I like eating ducks! And as long as it's legal I'll continue to do so. I know people that shoot well over 100 birds a season and the birds do not go to waste. I'd just like an explanation for the reasoning behind the way the law is written-that's all.

Still waitin on that spoonie story... :rolleyes:
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Image
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 56102
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby quackerattacker » Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:55 am

I'm with ya, Inda. Duck huntin' is equally part of our heritage here and no explanation will change my way of doin' things. I'm known to occasionally speed at times, too.

I'll post a story o Papa's visit first time I can sit at my home 'puter long enough. :thumbsup:
uhmmmm...ya sure that's a duck...i dunt see no green head
User avatar
quackerattacker
hunter
 
Posts: 1131
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 8:19 pm
Location: NE Arkansas

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby Sandman3400 » Fri Feb 04, 2011 9:42 am

Lreynolds wrote:
Sandman3400 wrote:The reason for the law is really very simple. They want to limit the number of ducks that we kill to a sustainable amount. Now, you might ask, "Why not just make one law that limits the number of ducks we kill in a day or a year?". If you were to ask such a question, then you would simply be showing how naive you really are. If you pay any attention to the workings of your government, than you would know that they never settle for one rule or law or regulation when they can create 500 (or 5000) that do the same thing.


I used to think the same thing until I became an active participant in creating and deciding upon waterfowl hunting regulations. Now I KNOW that isn't true.

Please don't think I'm picking on you Sandman, but this is something that's really starting to bug me, and your post provides a nice jumping-off point for this pet-peeve of mine. I don't mean it toward anyone in particular.

Pay attention to the workings of your government when it comes to setting hunting regulations and you will see very clearly that it is HUNTERS, and not government that desire complex regulations. Why? Because they are looking for any and every way to kill more ducks (or deer or whatever) AND they want to make sure nobody else has any kind of advantage over them. How do they do that? By petitioning their political representatives to make it happen.

Just look at the silly array of licenses we have at LDWF. All inclusive Senior licences for $5 (for the group with the most disposable income on average), Military licenses, Louisiana Native licenses, Deferral licenses, etc. Something for every special group that gets the right politician to push it through. Government didn't think it up; they respond to the wishes of the private citizens they represent.

You should see all the hunter-input on zones, splits and season modifications I'm currently looking at including a half-dozen from legislators who are petitioning on behalf of their constituents. A "tidally-influenced coastal zone" so they can hunt all day whenever the tide is best, while the rest of the State can close at 12:00 noon everyday because that will improve everybody's hunting. Divide the state into 4 zones and stagger the 60-day straight seasons so that the season is open somewhere in the State from October 15 to January 31. Within the East zone, have earlier seasons on the reservoirs, lakes and large ponds where we kill ducks in the early season, and later seasons in the flooded woods along river systems and ricefields for the mallards. Among others, these are proposals private citizens are going to their government to get implemented.

How about the youth waterfowl hunting regulations in our state? The age limit is 15 or younger for the Youth Waterfowl Weekend (which is outside the 60-day regular duck season), but pressure from hunters who don't want to leave their 16 and 17 year olds at home during youth hunts pushed LDWF to increase the age to 17 and under for any youth hunts that occur during the regular duck season. Hell, I've got handicapped hunters pushing the Commission to approve their participation in the Youth Waterfowl Weekend or to allocate additional days for them to hunt without competition from other hunters.

You think the government is driving complication? Oftentimes it's the private citizens they represent. One example of government resisting additional restrictions on waterfowling was refusing to ban spinning wing decoys ...... at least so far ..... but I'd bet many of you would support that restriction on how to kill ducks.

Sandman3400 wrote: I just looked over my 2010 regulations. They tell me that I can shoot 6 ducks per day from Nov. 20 through Jan. 30 with a 13 day split in the middle. Then there is another 7-7/8 pages that tell me how many different ways that I can or cannot kill 6 ducks per day.


C'mon now :fingerpt: ..... It's only an 8-page pamphlet, and the front and back page don't say a thing about how you can or cannot kill ducks.


I will buy your argument about establishing limits based on overall harvest data as opposed to the effect of everyone killing their limit every day. You have better access to numbers than me. However, If I am not mistaken, the limits are based on the assumption that the harvest is additive just to be on the safe side even though most biologists believe that mortality from hunting is compensatory, so regardless of what data is used to determine, the harvest limit is still very conservative.

As far as managing harvest by methods, if this is really crucial, then how about a simple statement that waterfowl hunting is ONLY permitted with a shotgun of 10 ga. or smaller instead of paragraph after paragraph listing what we can't use? Save some of my tax dollars spent in the printing of the regulations. You haven't completely won me over here, but you have made some progress.

I will also concede the point about the regulations. I did not look at the wasted space on front and back, merely counted the pages and looked at the space actually devoted to seasons and bag limits. As you stated, there is only 6-7/8 pages of gobbledy gook. My most sincere apology for this error :yes: .

I am completely with you about the silly array of licenses, but I firmly believe that several of those are only there to increase revenue for LDWF. Examples are Saltwater Fishing (that first requires that you buy a basic fishing), big game license (that first requires purchase of a basic hunting license), archery license (that first requires purchase of a basic hunting license), etc. There are no special interest groups asking for these separate licenses. They appear to be there merely there to provide additional revenue. If I am wrong, please give me the facts, as I have an open mind despite my very negative outlook on our government in general. I would love to see it reduced to a hunting license and a fishing license, period. This would save some more of my tax dollars by cutting some more out of the hunting regulations printed every year.

I think your points about regulations being driven by hunter demand only reinforce my argument that everything the government does is overly complicated. Waterfowl harvest should be managed by the wildlife biologists, not the constituency of every politician with a dog in the hunt. That is just an example of government trying to be all things to all people in my opinion. Every hunter wants something different, so if the wildlife agencies allow them to manage the resource, than it will certainly be all over the map. When a group asks for a special license, or a special hunting day, or anything else just for their little group, Just Say No!!! Don't allow the insane to run the asylum!!! :biggrin:
Real men hunt with Chessies!
User avatar
Sandman3400
hunter
 
Posts: 578
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 4:46 pm
Location: Denham Springs, LA

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby Lreynolds » Fri Feb 04, 2011 12:05 pm

Sandman3400 wrote: ..... as far as managing harvest by methods, if this is really crucial, then how about a simple statement that waterfowl hunting is ONLY permitted with a shotgun of 10 ga. or smaller instead of paragraph after paragraph listing what we can't use? Save some of my tax dollars spent in the printing of the regulations. You haven't completely won me over here, but you have made some progress.


For the exact same reason I have already stated .... because HUNTERS want complicated regulations so that they can kill as many ducks as possible AND nobody else can have an advantage over them in doing it.

Here is an example that I was involved with:

In 1985 when Federal and Mossberg teamed up to introduce the 3 1/2 inch Magnum 12-gauge shotgun/shotshell, there was an outcry from HUNTERS in the Central Valley of California that the rules had now changed, and 10-guage shotguns should now be allowed on the public hunting areas. I was working on a waterfowl research project funded by Delta Waterfowl at the time, and was involved in the conversations. Winchester got involved and made it clear that they could produce a fully-functional 5-inch magnum shell, and brought one to a meeting to prove it. So rules were passed, AT THE INITIATION OF HUNTERS, that limited the length of shotshells to 3.5-inches.

This process has repeated itself many times starting from the very beginning: live decoys, 3-shot plugs, punt guns, etc. It wasn't the government that decided those things needed to go for the conservation of the waterfowl resource. Many in the government saw market hunting as commerce, jobs, and part of the economy. IT WAS HUNTERS. Likewise, what is the impetus for banning spinning-wing decoys? HUNTERS. What was the impetus for the Limited Access Areas on 4 coastal WMAs in Louisiana? HUNTERS. Hunters who want to maximize THEIR ability to kill more ducks AND not be at a disadvantage to other hunters that have SWDs or mud-motors.

Sandman3400 wrote:I will also concede the point about the regulations. I did not look at the wasted space on front and back, merely counted the pages and looked at the space actually devoted to seasons and bag limits. As you stated, there is only 6-7/8 pages of gobbledy gook. My most sincere apology for this error


Yer killin me, man :lol3:

8 minus 2 means there is only 6 pages of total space: a half a page is dove regulations, over 1 page is the table summarizing the season lengths and bag limits, and some of the remainder ain't about methods.

So it can't be 6-7/8 pages either. Just give up the exaggerations. It's bad enough that I am FORCED to reprint the "summary of federal regulations" in our pamphlet and it takes up so much space. Don't hit me with over-statements about it. The truth is bad enough as it is.

Sandman3400 wrote: I am completely with you about the silly array of licenses, but I firmly believe that several of those are only there to increase revenue for LDWF.


All of the special-interest licenses COST LDWF MONEY, they don't make it. They are cheaper and are only in place to provide benefits for a special interest. Hell, the biggest loser for LDWF is one of the biggest benefits for hunters: the lifetime license. It was implemented during an economic period when interest rates were high, and our funding was solid. Since the 2 market collapses in the 2000's, shrinking budgets, and NO license fee increases in nearly 15 years, we are losing money on every lifetime license sold.

The other array of licenses you mentioned are NOT for special-interest groups, and were put in place to "earmark" that funding for particular purposes because it comes from specific user groups regardless of their age, address, place of birth, or hunter-education background. The "duck" license, for example, funds wetland aquisition, creation, enhancement, and management in our state. Duck hunters provide that money; so it goes for duck-related purposes. The same is true for "Big game", "turkey", "salt-water fishing", etc. We are looking at ways to simplify that while providing current levels of funding to each program.

Sandman3400 wrote: I think your points about regulations being driven by hunter demand only reinforce my argument that everything the government does is overly complicated. Waterfowl harvest should be managed by the wildlife biologists, not the constituency of every politician with a dog in the hunt. That is just an example of government trying to be all things to all people in my opinion. Every hunter wants something different, so if the wildlife agencies allow them to manage the resource, than it will certainly be all over the map. When a group asks for a special license, or a special hunting day, or anything else just for their little group, Just Say No!!! Don't allow the insane to run the asylum!!!


You are still trying to blame government for doing what they are supposed to do ....... represent and act for those they represent. You can NOT fault government for regulatory complication DEMANDED by hunters ...... period.

Those "insane" you talk about are citizens and voters who employ the politicians, and when they don't get what they want from us professional wildlife managers (who they also employ via license purchase) ...... they turn to their politicians. It's a fact of my life, and I can't count the number of times I've said "no" professionally only to be forced to do something else from my politically-driven leaders. The upcoming zones/splits discussion is just one example of UN-necessary complication being pushed by hunters because they think it will allow them to kill more ducks. Come to the LWF Commission meeting on Tuesday, and see for yourself all the "complications" that hunters (through their political contacts) are pushing in resident game hunting rules. That stuff wasn't LDWF biologist's ideas.
Lreynolds
hunter
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:27 pm

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby Indaswamp » Fri Feb 04, 2011 12:16 pm

Lreynolds wrote: Winchester got involved and made it clear that they could produce a fully-functional 5-inch magnum shell, and brought one to a meeting to prove it. So rules were passed, AT THE INITIATION OF HUNTERS, that limited the length of shotshells to 3.5-inches.


Larry-I"d love to be able to shoot a 5" shell for turkeys... :yes: I don't care if it decapitates 'em... :thumbsup:
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Image
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 56102
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby Lreynolds » Fri Feb 04, 2011 12:37 pm

Indaswamp wrote:@Larry,

Can you explain the thought process behind the possession limit applying to one's residence after the birds have been transported and processed? Seems pointless to me for the possession limit to apply once they are in the freezer.
Thanks.


Possession is possession. What is the difference between birds in your trunk and birds in your freezer? What is the difference between birds on your duck strap and birds in your trunk? You have reduced those birds from public ownership to private ownership by killing them using legal methods during a legal hunting season. You are allowed to do that by a process (the regulatory process) whereby ALL owners of those birds (every citizen of this country whether an anti or a non-hunter or a hunter) agree to allow you to take private ownership of that which once belonged to all of us collectively. It does not matter where that bird is, and what shape it is in, or what you have mixed it with ..... you possess it until you dispose of it or gift it.

Collectively, through the regulatory process, the owners of that resource have dictated that you can convert to private ownership only 2 times the daily bag limit at a time. You must dispose or gift those birds before you can "reduce to private property" any more of that publicly-owned resource.

THAT is the way the public owners have decided to control the privatization of their resource. I don't know why 2 times the daily bag limit was chosen as opposed the an infinite number of other choices. I don't know how we draw enforceable lines in what is a fairly simple concept ....... kill and possess 2 times the daily bag, but use them before killing more.

I've had dozens of discussions with Law Enforcement about this issue since we have proposed to raise the possession limit to 3 times the daily bag limit, which they are against. Why? Because it takes a tool from their arsenal in combating over-limits. They KNOW, and so do you, how many guys are out there double-dipping. I personally talked with 6 of them on Catahoula Lake in the afternoon of the opening day while hunting myself as they complained about only killing 3-4 birds that afternoon after having such an outstanding morning hunt. The possession limit is the biggest tool for catching those guys with such limited Law Enforcement presence and the lack of manpower to observe specific individuals throughout the day. They know possession limits are difficult to enforce and thus are enforced inconsistently, but they value that tool and are willing to fight politically for it.

I have problems with that kind of mentality because I'm thinking that easing the possession limit would be a good thing for our hunters ..... but I don't deal with law-breakers all the time. I don't have good answers for you.
Lreynolds
hunter
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:27 pm

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby Indaswamp » Fri Feb 04, 2011 12:41 pm

Larry, Thank you for taking the time to address my post. :thumbsup:
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Image
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 56102
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby HNTFSH » Fri Feb 04, 2011 12:54 pm

Indaswamp wrote:Larry, Thank you for taking the time to address my post. :thumbsup:


Ditto Larry - thanks much for your time.

Out of respect and appreciation - I won't ask you if speeding to work is more or less egregious than group limits. Have already defined that with those I hunt with. :lol3: :beer:
No such thing as a stupid question, only stupid people
User avatar
HNTFSH
Mr. Plond
 
Posts: 18453
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 5:33 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby WTN10 » Fri Feb 04, 2011 12:55 pm

This is thoroughly enlightening.
2014 Season Totals:
Mallards: 243
Redheads: 114
Woodducks: 119
Grebes: 36
Blue Geese: 134
Snow Geese: 178
Hawks: 4
User avatar
WTN10
hunter
 
Posts: 14016
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 1:02 pm
Location: Western Tunisia

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby quackerattacker » Fri Feb 04, 2011 12:56 pm

That's a very clear answer, Larry. Couldn't ever understand how anyone, especially GW's, would have a problem interpreting anything so clearly written as a possession limit. I'd guess it's the same thinking involved by those who misinterpret the Second Amendment and would take our guns away. Just read it.

Oh, is everyone now in agreement with Larry's view that birds in your freezer, in any form, are, and were always intended to be, counted towards your possession limit? Clean 'em out boys, or turn in your ethics police badges... :hammer: :yes:
uhmmmm...ya sure that's a duck...i dunt see no green head
User avatar
quackerattacker
hunter
 
Posts: 1131
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 8:19 pm
Location: NE Arkansas

Re: Bag limit of ducks

Postby HNTFSH » Fri Feb 04, 2011 12:58 pm

Eatin' em is the easy part!
No such thing as a stupid question, only stupid people
User avatar
HNTFSH
Mr. Plond
 
Posts: 18453
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 5:33 pm
Location: Ohio

PreviousNext

Return to The Honey Hole

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 15 guests