Mallard Machine [Archive] - Benelli USA Forums

Webfoot

03-28-2005, 03:50 PM

That's a nice pile Idaho. You're so right about finding/watching the birds and being where they want to be. Sometimes I need to be more patient.

I hunt primarily public wetlands that the conservation department manages (Four Rivers) for a couple of reasons. Ducks and more ducks. The downfall is that also attracks a lot of hunters.

From the very begining of the season the ducks were really wary. I hunted with a lot of variation in my spreads. I usedanywhere from 10 dozen decoys to 1 dozen throughout the season. I also used anywhere from none to four mojo-ducks. Calling is not so much an issue. I'm a decent caller but on public land it does little good to compete with knuckleheads who don't stop and use the hail call all day. Don't get me wrong, it has its place but I only use mine when the birds need just a little encouragement. Sometimes it works other times doesn't. I found no consistent patterns and everytime I changed my setup or position it seem to be wrong. I only had two good days when my buddy and I each got our limit. I know its not about what you kill but the time you have and who you are with, but its more fun when they are dumping into your spread. It would be nice to have a little edge.

I'm also curious of how well they like it. How well it functions, it's durability, etc?

Southpaw

03-30-2005, 10:33 PM

Four Rivers huh. Excellent hunting. I went to college in Warrensburg and we hunted Montrose and Grand Pass all of the time. Grand Pass definately holds the most ducks, but it also holds the most hunters. I would take a nice quiet day at Ralph and Martha Perry CA any day.

By the way Tank, learn the feed call, blow the hail, use everything that you have to get the ducks down. Don't get me wrong, I love to sit in the blind or right in the marsh, but I also love to have to ducks and geese right in my face and don't want to have to wait all day for the opportunity.

I try to be as respectful as possible while hunting public land, but if soft calling and infrequent calling isn't getting it done, you will hear the hail very loud and if the ducks are flying, very often. The guy in the next blind will just have to deal with it. He should have plenty of chances to blow his call while I am loading my boat with a limit of greenheads.

Webfoot

04-05-2005, 05:02 PM

I usually hunt the open area. Although not as intensively managed, A lot of ducks find their way into the flooded Pecan trees in the early afternoon and evening.

I lived in Columbia for several years and hunted Eagle Bluffs a lot. Like you said, lots of ducks equals a lot of hunters. I never made it to Grand Pass, but I put my name in the drawing every year.

tank

04-05-2005, 08:32 PM

Everyone has their own ideas about calling so find what works for your area.
The feeding call's the most difficult to learn. Concentrate on one call at a time and let your decoys do most of the work (mallards). I do use the feeding call but think it's not as productive as the greeting call and the come back here you bums call.
Late in the season the ducks have heard it all and then less is better, and if you just have to make a noise, I use a soft feeding call.
Again this is for my area.

sprigsss

05-30-2005, 04:11 PM

Roboducks, mallard machines, and other motorized decoys are for losers that can't hack it on public land when other real hunters are nearby. All of these things are bad for the sport and should be outlawed.

tucker301

05-30-2005, 08:38 PM

sprigsss,
Were it not for technologial advances, you'd be duck hunting with a stick, so think twice before knocking them.

tank

05-30-2005, 11:18 PM

Thank you for that tucker, I couldn't have come up with anything that nice.
tank

sprigsss

05-31-2005, 01:56 PM

I have thought not twice about them, but each and every time I've seen them work on public land. If there is 1 blind with a robo and 4 around it with no robo, the 1 blind with robo will do almost all of the shooting. I have been in the blind with robo and in the blind without robo and its the same thing every time. The times I did hunt with robo, it wasn't hunting, I could blow the most obnoxious sounding sound on my call and stand outside of the blind and the ducks still come in. I wasn't hunting, I was just loading and shooting, no fun to me. At the same time while I was using robo, I watched my buddies do little to no shooting only 100 yards away. When we swapped scenarios and I was the one hunting without robo, I watched them shoot all morning long, while I never even pulled the trigger.

No other technological advantage has as great a negative affect on other nearby hunters than robo. If you want to negatively affect nearby hunters and pull ducks from them, do it with your calling skills, not some battery operated robot.

Robo's should be illegal for the same reasons live deocys, electronic calls, and baiting are illegal.

Again, robos are for losers that can't hack it with their hunting skills.

If you don't like to hunt and all you're worried about is shooting your gun, robo is probably for you. But hunters don't use robots to attract the game for them, they attract them with their hunting skills, or use their hunting skills to get closer to them.

Dozens upon dozens of studies have been completed on robo, all of them say the same thing, twice as many ducks are killed when robo is on than when its off. This equates to one thing, as more and more hunters begin using these crutches to shoot more ducks, the limits and seasons will be reduced. But its ashame too many people aren't worried or concerned about the future, all they care about is how many ducks they get to brag about right now.

Sure the older ducks are slowly catching on, but the first year ducks are getting slaughtered by these things. So why the people are looking for an easy way out, they are in fact creating an older population and will make it even more difficult to shoot a duck in the future and will see horrible consequences down the line when these older ducks begin to die off.

I for one welcome the challenge to hunting smarter ducks, as its the challenge I enjoy most, not just the shooting part. I believe shooting is only a small percentage of the actual hunting.

I'm more concerned about where these things are taking the "sport" of hunting and what it will do to the duck populations in the long run.

People keep saying it doesn't matter as long as you don't shoot over your limit. If this is the case we wouldn't need any restrictions except limits and seasons. We would be able to use live decoys, electronic calls, and bait our ponds.

And if the amount of ducks killed by hunters is negligible to the overall population when compared to starvation, disease and predation, we wouldn't need individual limits on canvasbacks, scaup, black ducks, etc.

Robo's suck and people that use robo are not hunters.

SAY NO TO ROBO
http://members.cox.net/hpwiggins/nospinner2.JPG
and YES TO HUNTING!

[ 05-31-2005, 02:22 PM: Message edited by: sprigsss ]

rch 3030

05-31-2005, 03:36 PM

Now those are the words from a true hunter. I must say I couldn't agree more WELL SAID!!

tucker301

05-31-2005, 08:18 PM

Originally posted by sprigsss:

Again, robos are for losers that can't hack it with their hunting skills.
F'ing A, good buddy!

In fact, if we're going on pure skills, with no help from technology, then let's also say that camo clothing (ANY clothing!), blinds, shotguns, shells, dogs, boats, calls, waders, GPS's, flashlights, heaters, and all the other crap we use to take game is for losers as well.

If I see some other guy getting all the shooting because he's using a roboduck, you bet your Benelli I've got sense enough to even the score by using one as well.

Toss away all of the above listed equipment and use just your "skills"....
Welcome to duck-free hunting experience that you'd remember for a long time were it not for the fact that you froze or drowned trying to swim naked to your little piece of the marsh.

[ 05-31-2005, 08:20 PM: Message edited by: tucker301 ]

sprigsss

05-31-2005, 08:42 PM

Well if you don't see the difference between camo. calls, waders, GPS's, flashlights, and a robotic decoy attracting the ducks for you, I'm sorry you were never taught what hunting is all about.

The truth is it doesn't matter what pattern of camouflage I wear or don't wear, the decision you make to use camouflage will have no affect on my hunt.

Whether you use a GPS to get to your blind or not, will not affect my hunt.

Whether you use waders or choose to get wet, it will have no affect on my hunt.

If you choose to use a crack barrel single shot, or a SBE, it won't affect my hunt.

If you choose to use a robo duck, it will affect my hunt and every other person around you. If you want to affect someone else's hunt, do it with your duck call and decoy placement, not a robot.

If you can't see the difference, its because the only thing you're concerned about is killling and then bragging about how many you did kill.

All of the items you compared robo to are like golf clubs. You buy a set of Pings, instructional tapes, and get some lessons, and I use my Dunlops. You will probably shoot a lower score than me. However, I will still shoot 100 whether you use Dunlops or Pings. You may beat me, but your game will have no effect on my game. If I'm shooting a single shot, it doesn't matter whether you shoot a single shot as well or a 10 gauge auto. You may shoot more than me, but I will shoot the same.

You are comparing *****s to Oranges. I do use a GPS now for safety, but I've arrived at my blind for 10+ years with no GPS and did just find. The GPS has no affect on the duck population. I work my but off building thick blinds of natural vegetation. I don't need camo in my blinds, so camo will have no affect on the duck populations. I rarely use a flashlight when walking to my blind. I look at the oil rigs in the gulf to get the direction I need to walk so I spook as few ducks as I can while I'm making the 350 yard walk to my duck blind.

Once again the facts are out there and more hunters are shooting twice as many ducks because of robo. Yet many still choose to ignore the facts and take a stand for robo. These are the individuals that could care or less about hunting, the future of the sport, and the future of the ducks. These individuals are selfish people that are only interested in "how many ducks can I kill now".

SAY NO TO ROBO
http://members.cox.net/hpwiggins/nospinner2.JPG
and YES TO HUNTING!

[ 05-31-2005, 08:52 PM: Message edited by: sprigsss ]

tucker301

06-01-2005, 12:21 AM

Originally posted by sprigsss:
Well if you don't see the difference between camo. calls, waders, GPS's, flashlights, and a robotic decoy attracting the ducks for you, I'm sorry you were never taught what hunting is all about.
Son, I was taught what hunting was all about before your mamma met your daddy.
and I was probably slogging through cattails and muck while you were still mucking in your pampers.

Whenever I have had the opportunity to improve my chances of getting my limits, through improved technologies, I have done so. I suspect that you have too, whether consciously or not.

1. Because it's in my nature. This is how my kind made its way to the top of the food chain, through ingenuity and technological advancements.

2. Because I don't get to hunt as much as I'd like to, so I optimize my chances for success by using the best equipment I can afford.
And before you say something noble like, "Success isn't measured by the number of ducks; it's the fellowship, the outdoors, the challenge of calling 'em in close", let me just ask you why it bothers you so much that the ducks are passing you up and going for the robos?
Why don't you just go out and do your calling in the off season, unarmed?

My camo, my gun, everything I do to take my limit definitely affects the next blind. And the next, and the next, and the next.

If three mallards pass my spread and I dump two with my autoloader, hevi-shot, and $80 choke tube, that doesn't leave two for my neighbor's blind, now does it? So my three shot is a definite instrument for lesser hunters to take more ducks.
Is yours? Or are you just on the Benelli boards for fun?

My noisy 12 ga. scares ducks away from the next blind, but a bow and arrow wouldn't bother the next guy's calling one bit.

I'm pretty sure the roboduck issue has been and will continue to be looked at by skilled and knowledgeable management experts.
I would dare say that their impact on populations has been considerably less than the impact of pump action and autoloader shotguns have been.

I'd also bet that when man first began using duck calls and decoys, some poor purist in the next blind felt rather defeated. Or maybe he was smart enough to realize that if he wanted to keep up with the times, he'd better step up his game as well?

Baiting. Now that's an interesting comment indeed.
I wonder how many WMA's and refuges there are in Texas? I wonder how many ducks and geese would make the trip and bother holding over if the 'conservationists' weren't providing them with room and board?
WMA's and refuges are organized baiting designed for no other prupose than to hold in close proximity millions of fowl for $pending $portsmen.

The golf analogy was nice, but completely wasted on me.

I stopped golfing years ago, when all these newfangled graphite and alloy clubs, carts, exotic turf grasses, chemicals, fertilizers, aerators, range finders, shoes, gloves, driving ranges, putting greens, and club pros just ruined it for me.
I'm a purist. I played back when real men washed their own balls!

Actually, just kidding about that part. I've tried cooking them little white balls every way I know how, and I still can't get the shells off.

sprigsss

06-01-2005, 08:34 AM

Well when the season is closed there's usually few ducks hanging around and then its time to start fishing. However, before the season begins after building our blind we usually spend nearly the entire day in the blind videotaping.

Sure I agree every duck you take is one less that others can't shoot. But I've hunted along side other hunters ever since i started hunting and never had a problem with other's calling or the shotgun that they used. I started out with a single shot 20 gauge and did just find next to pumps and automatics.

I usually hunt with 3-4 buddies and we hunt two blinds about 150 yards away from each other. On almost every single occaission both blinds always had similar success. We'd both limit out, or both do poorly. Then when we tried hunting with robo it was much different. The blind with robo often limited out while the blind without robo would shoot nothing or 1 duck.

We always do a ton of scouting on low tides to put our blinds in areas that hold water when the tide bottoms out. I remember one particular weekend when group of guys set up next to us in a red bass boat. You could see the boat from our blind, it was not camouflaged well at all. When the tide bottomed out at 7:00 that morning they were sitting in the middle of a huge mudflat with no water, and all the decoys laying on their sides. But they had a robo and the 3 of them continued to blast away at mallards, grays, and Teal all morning long. We shot at 1 Teal that weekend. It was the same result both mornings. Now I've always believed location was the most important factor, but those guys were not where the ducks wanted to be. I've yet to see ducks decoy to open mudflat, well unless theres a robo there inviting them in. When you're hunting near other hunters, it doesn't matter if they shoot 1 time or they shoot 6 times the ducks are gone. The difference is both blind will still get ducks if the type of gun is the only difference between the two. If one blind has a robo, the other will get little to no ducks.

I on the other hand, welcome the challenge to hunt next to robo, I don't care if people pull ducks away from me with it. Its more of a challenge for me. But I will be having my first child this september. And 5-6 years from now I may be taking that child on his/her first duck hunt. Or there may be another father out there taking his child on his/her first duck hunt, I would not want to pull ducks away from that child with a robot. Now if I happen to pull a few with the duck call, then he'll probably learn something from that. But pulling them in with a robot, teaches that kid nothing other than its all about how many you kill, not the actual hunting part.

I choose not to hunt with robo because:
1. I believe it will have negative effects on the population as more and more people are using them.
2. Robo in the long run will only create more intelligent older birds that won't decoy anywhere (I watch them now circle live ducks dozens of times only to fly off, this never happened before robo)
3. I don't want to negatively affect other hunters with a robot.
4. Hunting isn't a challenge between hunters, its a battle between hunter and duck where you use your hunting skills to get them in. I did not feel like I was hunting when I used robo.

If you disagree with me on these points, then you don't care about the duck population, you're not worried about what its doing to the ducks and you're success or your children's success in the future, you could care or less about the hunters next to you, and you aren't interested in hunting, only shooting.

You said you stopped golfing when all of these advancements came out, the truth is these advancements had no affect on you. You could choose to ignore all of these advancements while others took advantage and your handicap would not change. If other hunters take advantage of robo your hunting success will be affected.

SAY NO TO ROBO
http://members.cox.net/hpwiggins/nospinner2.JPG
and YES TO HUNTING!

[ 06-01-2005, 11:18 AM: Message edited by: sprigsss ]

rch 3030

06-01-2005, 10:42 AM

I think the duck decoy issue has been well covered. It's great to live in a free country where we have choices. Tucker as far as your comment about baiting in TEXAS I'll just say again we all have a choice. I have never hunted over a baited area nor will I ever. I notice you don't list your home state?

tucker301

06-01-2005, 11:16 AM

sprigss,
"If you disagree with me on these points, then you don't care about the duck population..." is just about the dumbest thing I've read on these boards in a while. And there has been some pretty dumb stuff tossed around here!

Also, the saying is "couldn't care less", not "could care less". And it's "just fine", not "just find".
And if you don't care enough about the English language to take the time to use it correctly, then you don't care about the future of America!

_______________
I'm in VA.
Most of my waterfowl hunting is done within a few miles of a refuge. We don't bait, but the VDGF plants two huge ponds in grain and floods them each Fall on the refuge.
This holds the waterfowl in the area.
Most leave the refuge from time to time and venture into other feeding and holding areas.

We also see quite a few heavily financed groups who lease land adjacent to the refuge, plant corn and then flood it. That whole issue is being carefully reviewed for its legalities and there may be something done to stop it, but so far, they continue to get most of the shooting.

We too work hard on our blinds and have hunted these areas for years and years without a problem.

[ 06-07-2005, 02:03 PM: Message edited by: tucker301 ]

sprigsss

06-02-2005, 08:35 AM

Tucker,

Stop being a prick. Its obvious from your corrections you knew exactly what I was saying. I'm in graduate school for chemistry so I'm in the lab almost all day. I only get a few minutes every now and then to browse the internet. When I make a post, I don't write a rough draft, proof read, make corrections, and then type up a final draft. I do that enough with the manuscripts I'm publishing, I don't have the time to sit here and do it on this forum or the many other forums I participate in.

Maybe I should have been clear on one other point. When I said they outlawed baiting, I should have said they outlawed hunting over bait. We have WMA's throughout the state of LA, but none of them act as bait stations because every single one of them is hunted.

If you want to get a robot, good for you buy you one. Its just not for me. I don't want to set up a robo and have the blind next to me scratch because I was too lazy to call in the birds myself. See next year when I get a big flock to decoy, I'll know it was my calling and hunting skills that got them in. You may believe it was your hunting skills, but you will never actually know.

As far as hijacking the thread, I think this has everything to do with the thread. He was asking about mallard machines. In my opinion they are in the same category as robo, all robotic decoys should be illegal.

tucker301

06-02-2005, 11:49 AM

I was merely showing you how wrong it is to stereotype and to generalize.
Looks like you got the message, or at least part of it.
Good luck in grad school and in the upcoming season.

[ 06-02-2005, 12:57 PM: Message edited by: tucker301 ]

sprigsss

06-06-2005, 12:00 PM

I'm not sure what message you are talking about, but I didn't learn anything new from your post, other than you can't back up your opinion with facts so you attack me for a few small typos.

I believe in some cases its wrong to generalize. Like a guy with brown hair breaks into my home, so all brown haired men are robbers. Yeah thats wrong.

But I stand by my opinion that all mechanical decoy users are simply looking for an easy way out and can't compete with hunters on public hunting grounds with their hunting skills only. Why else would they use robo? If they were interested in the sport they would welcome the challenge. Instead they are only worried about how many they can kill now.

tucker301

06-06-2005, 01:40 PM

You don't get it because you won't allow yourself to see beyond your own opinions.
Hopefully, you're not applying the same short-sighted mindset to your studies.

I'll try once more.
The roboduck and mojo decoys are still decoys. They are different from the decoys that you yourself use only in that their motion more closely emulates the natural appearance of live ducks.
If you didn't believe that better decoys improved your chances, you wouldn't be so careful to make sure that the strings are not visible and that the paint jobs are accurate and bright on the decoys you now use.
Put a brand new set of decoys out in one blind, and put an old worn out set in the next blind. With equal callers, the ducks will be more likely to go to the more natural looking decoys.

Your real problem is that the robotic decoys are proving to be a better a draw than all the calling you can muster. It's not that it's unfair. It simply negates all of the time and effort you have invested into learning to call well.

If you were a truly skilled caller, you wouldn't need the aid of a man-made device to make your calls seem more lifelike and realistic.

When I turkey hunt, I use no man-made locators because I can effectively emulate crows and owls with my own voice. This means I'm a more skilled caller than others who can't do this, but they make up for it by the use of artificial devices. I harbor no ill feelings towards them, even though I know that if their artifical calls were illegal I would have the upper hand, because of my advanced skills.

A truly skilled hunter is the one who uses whatever is legally available to him to gain the advantage over his quarry. The fact that other hunters in your area use the robos while you refuse to merely proves to me that they are more skilled than yourself, because they have recognized the vast adavntage of using the motion decoys and adapted accordingly.

I don't know how to debate the point any further with you, so unless you bring something new to the table, I'm finished with this discussion.

[ 06-06-2005, 01:45 PM: Message edited by: tucker301 ]

dagrizz

06-06-2005, 01:46 PM

Originally posted by tucker301:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by sprigsss:

Again, robos are for losers that can't hack it with their hunting skills.
F'ing A, good buddy!

In fact, if we're going on pure skills, with no help from technology, then let's also say that camo clothing (ANY clothing!), blinds, shotguns, shells, dogs, boats, calls, waders, GPS's, flashlights, heaters, and all the other crap we use to take game is for losers as well.

If I see some other guy getting all the shooting because he's using a roboduck, you bet your Benelli I've got sense enough to even the score by using one as well.

Toss away all of the above listed equipment and use just your "skills"....
Welcome to duck-free hunting experience that you'd remember for a long time were it not for the fact that you froze or drowned trying to swim naked to your little piece of the marsh. </font>[/QUOTE]Just thought that I would add sonme fuel to the fire on this one. From the 2004-2005 Washington State Migratory and Upland Game Seasons pamphlet:

"DECOY RESTIRCYTIONS

It is unlawfull to hunt waterfowl with the use
or aid of battery powered or other electronic
devices as decoys."

Mike :D tongue.gif

sprigsss

06-06-2005, 02:18 PM

I understand your point totally but again totally disagree. You're saying that hunters that are more successful are more skillful. I totally disagree.

Putting out a robo and flipping on a switch requires no skills. This means the kids that showed up in a red bass boat, in a poorly brushed blind, and naively tossed out 2 dozen decoys in 6" of water when the tide was about to start dropping, and find themselves on dry mudflat 30 minutes later were more skillful hunters than me and my buddies. Although we built a well-brushed blind out of natural vegetation located around the pond we were hunting, placed out 5 dozen decoys in small groups as we have observed many of the duck flocks around us, in a location that the ducks were using for the past several days, in a spot with 14" of water that would still have 6" of water after the tide finished dropping. We do know how to blow a duck call, these people never touched a call.

So by putting our a robo the need for several other hunting skills and factors was negated:
1. concealment
2. location
3. calling skills

Although they didn't have these three skills/factors, they are more skillful because they had a robo. That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard of.

I do agree with one of your comments, "If you were a truly skilled caller, you wouldn't need the aid of a man-made device to make your calls seem more lifelike and realistic."

My point exactly! I don't need a robo to shoot ducks, but some of you people do! Maybe you finally understand what I'm trying to say.

Forget our opinions on the matter just look at the facts. Limits and seasons are set assuming hunters will kill "x" amount of ducks. As more and more people begin using these decoys, more ducks will get killed, and the seasons and limits will have to be reduced. Once again your decision to use robo will affect all of those that do not use robo.

mudhen

06-06-2005, 03:33 PM

Sprigsss - your replies show your true motivation - and that is your own personal success.

As far as facts go, your knowledge of duck population facts is as lame as your selfish greedy replies.

Maybe crack a book or read up on the scientific facts before you go spouting off your self-centered drivel?

It's all about the habitat & weather stupid:

http://migratorybirds.fws.gov/reports/status04/duck_trend_report_bw_map_04.pdf

Robo is slaughtering grays? Funny, gadwall are up +56% over the LTA.

Robo is death to teal? Green-wings are up +33% & most of us (except your area) never get to see a blue-wing so robo is not the likely cause of their -10% drop.

Shovelers are up +22% ove the LTA.

Sprig are just dead in the water, robo or not, it's all about habitat and the breed's refusal to relocate to better breeding habitat. Plus the season has been shortened and the bag reduced so robo it moot with sprig.

Scaup are also in trouble and robo has nada to do with divers.

Don't know what to say about widgeon, they are a broken duck right now. They do fall for robo, but I know few that target them. Much more likely a habitat issue.

Mallards were at all time lows in the late 80's & early 90's before robo existed, so there goes the robo argument there. Here in Cali, we raise a ton of local mallets. Our F&G merely regulates the mallets taking into consideration robo. Good idea letting biologists set seasons no?

The fact is that your dislike of robo is a personal choice matter to you, not based on any scientific facts. And from what I have read of your posts, that is exactly what I would expect from an over-emotional phony.

If the feds find robo to be a threat, it will die by federal migratory game bird law, just as live decoys, electronic calling, bait, etc. did.

You are just as greedy as the rest of us and you want what's yours, it's all plain and simple greed.

You can't stand watching someone bag birds, totally legally, if you ain't gettin' yours.

You don't give a crap about ducks and the science involved in making a duck, you just care 'bout the braggin.....

So who's the prick now you greedy punk?.....

I bet your chem profs are real proud, all fluff, no substance..... I hope the U's lab is well insured....

mudhen - CA

sprigsss

06-06-2005, 04:02 PM

This has nothing to do with my success. The first year I hunted next to robo, yes my success was down. But overall it made me a better hunter. I didn't cry or complain, I adjusted, scouted harder and payed more attention to the ducks that were on the water.

This past year I made 15 hunts and I killed 60 ducks, right at 4 ducks per hunt, I'm in no way complaining that I didn't shoot 90 ducks and limit out everytime. I would have been greatful had I killed 30, 20, or even 10 ducks. Killing ducks is just a bonus of being out there.

I've read a ton of scientific data. Why don't you find me one report about robo's that showed they were less effective. I have spoken with Biologists that are doing research on this very issue. The number of ducks killed and the size of the flock responding to calls and decoy spreads are significantly higher when robo is on than when it is off. I've yet to find one report that says other ways.

Maybe its just a coincidence on those graphs that you show that many of the populations peaked around the 2000-2001 season and then decreased substantially from then and this was the same time robo was introduced into the sport. Am I so naive to think it was only robo? No. I understand drought and the condition of the praries is the predominant factor. But to ignore the effects robo is having is stupid.

mudhen

06-06-2005, 04:17 PM

Ok, I get your point.

But in the long run, and I mean the very long run, what is more important to the overall duck population:

Habitat?

or

Robos effect on the population of juvenile mallards?

So many ducks are unaffected by robo as their populations naturally ebb & flow depending on habitat & weather.

I think, and science supports me for now, that to focus on robo as a scientific population limiting factor is shortsighted and tends to merely mirror emotion as opposed to solid scientific research.

If and when the feds find robo to be an improper harvest tool, they will regulate by statute as they always have.

In the meantime, you just have to let states decide on their own based up their own methods to setting bag limits and seasons.

mudhen - CA

sprigsss

06-06-2005, 07:02 PM

Hey we do agree on something. I believe Habitat is the #1 most important thing to help/hurt the duck population.

But should we only take into account the most important aspect and ignore all others?

I have a manuscript at school that was forwarded to me by one of the researchers. They conducted over 1 thousand studies. After everything was said and done 2.3 times as many ducks were killed when robo was on than when it was off. Will this cause the waterfowl population to plummet? No! But they also report the numbers of people using the decoy has increased in every state. In some states it has been found that 69% of the hunters use these decoys and the percentages are constantly increasing. So while it might not cause the population to plumment it will have a great effect on the total harvest. As more hunters become more successful the limits and length of season will be reduced. Is that what we want? Less time to enjoy our sport that already lasts only a few months out of the year?

I also believe robo causes first year ducks to commit suicide. We won't see the results at first. But as less and less young ducks arrive to the breeding grounds and the older ducks begin to die, we will see the effects in the "very long run."

I have no problems with state managing their wildlife as they see fit when it comes to deer and other non migratory species. But the ducks hunted in Minnesota at the beginning of the season are the same ducks we'll be hunting in January. One state's actions or inactions effects the rest of the states in this country. We'll never see results if they are banned in a few states. They need to be banned nation wide.

If robo is banned, the only people that will suffer are those that refuse to learn how to hunt. Its not difficult to shoot birds without robo.

tucker301

06-06-2005, 07:31 PM

Originally posted by sprigsss:
the only people that will suffer are those that refuse to learn how to hunt. You are still defining "hunting" selectively, by accepting the technologies which have benefited you to this point, yet denouncing those which have diminished your advanatages over others in recent years.
I know you don't see it that way, or can't, or won't, but the fact remains nonetheless.

Technological advances have always affected hunting by lessening the degree of inherent skills and abilities in humans required to attract game into range and to take game once in range.

It began with the rock, and it now includes EVERY device and EVERY instrument YOU use to take ducks in your so called skilled hunting experiences.
Every item of concealment, every item which prolongs your exposure to the elements, every single thing from the rock up is a tool which you have utilized to increase your chances of taking game.
Your refusal to use the latest innovation merely shows your inability or unwillingness to evolve beyond your present state.
In a true "survival of the fittest" situation, YOU would be the only endangered species here.

[ 06-06-2005, 07:35 PM: Message edited by: tucker301 ]

mudhen

06-07-2005, 12:33 AM

This would be fine if decades of science supported your contention:

"I also believe robo causes first year ducks to commit suicide. We won't see the results at first. But as less and less young ducks arrive to the breeding grounds and the older ducks begin to die, we will see the effects in the "very long run."

But science has proven that we can't stockpile ducks. Did you even glance at the 19 pages of data on the link? Typical know-it-all college/grad student (which most of us were in your shoes and acted the same way!).

I'll tell you what chem student, it's fine to hate robo, many do, but I think hate should bear a reasonable relationship to the source of the hate.

Robo may kill too many young ducks, but smart states regulate or eliminate robo to protect those young ducks. Here in Cali, we can't use robo until Dec 1st, by then all the young are usually long gone or found safer haven than a duck club.

Ask your profs about how important the facts are....

mudhen - CA

sprigsss

06-07-2005, 11:51 AM

Originally posted by mudhen:

But science has proven that we can't stockpile ducks. Did you even glance at the 19 pages of data on the link? Typical know-it-all college/grad student (which most of us were in your shoes and acted the same way!).

Ask your profs about how important the facts are....

mudhen - CA Sure I read the entire 19 pages of that report 3-4 months ago and read it again. What does it state that the duck population is over their long term averages? But the populations have also been decreasing over the last several years. I agree habitat loss and drought are the main reasons for this.

My point is when is it going to end? When my dad hunted as a child there were no limits. As more people began hunting and hunters became more successful, the limits and seasons were decreased. Sure our seasons are longer now with higher limits because of the huge population increase at the turn of the century. But the numbers are decreasing from their peak. As we keep using more and more technology to shoot ducks, such as these mechanical decoys, more hunters will continue to be more successful and eventually we'll have a 10 day season and if you're lucky you'll get to purchase 10 or so duck tags. I think we should stop it before it gets to this point.

Anyone with any hunting skills can shoot a duck without robo. I absolutely disagree that someone that flips a switch and shoots ducks have hunting skills.

I began hunting with a single shot 20 gauge, I upgraded to a Rem 1100 12 gauge, and now shoot a SBE. Sure I shoot more ducks now than I did then, but it had nothing to do with any of the technological advancements. If I would go back to using all the tools I used when I first started hunting I would be as successful as I am today. I'm a better hunter today, because I stopped listening to duck calling champions and began mimicking the ducks, I do more and more scouting and stopped just setting up in the same spot year in and year out, I build much better blinds now than I used to as I figured out that more time spent building a blind meant more ducks later on, I scouted out areas that not only held ducks but would also hold water on low tides. Sure I own neoprene waders, a gortex jacket and a GPS. The GPS is strictly a safety device in case I get fogged in, it does not help me shoot more ducks. The gortex jacket keeps me dry and warm, but I always stuck it out if I was cold and wet (unless I was dangerously cold and wet) so that doesn't help me get more ducks, I also wear neoprene waders, but before I had waders I used a pirogue and pushpoled my way to my blind, so the waders do not help me shoot more ducks. At the same time if I used all of these products, it would have no effect on other hunters. If I used a robo, it would have an effect on other hunters.

I don't care if you use your robo, they are legal. I don't care if you set up right next to me, I welcome the challenge to get the ducks in. But thats why people use robo, its no longer a challenge between them and the ducks, they believe as long as they shoot more ducks than the guys next to them, they had a good day. Well if you want to make it a challenge between hunters, do it with skills, not the pocket book and some robot.

I listen to these guys every single weekend at the campgrounds, brag on how the ducks drop straight in to robo, while others near them without robo shoot nothing. They think its funny that this robot allows them to be more successful, and therefore they believe they are better hunters.

I know exactly how important facts are. I've used nothing but facts to make my decision. Although I knew the sport was headed in the wrong direction the first time I seen one of these things at the sporting goods store. I didn't know if it would work or not, but I knew robots attracting ducks wasn't hunting and would do nothing but detract from the sporting and fair chase element. I've read dozens upon dozens of studies that have been conducted on robo. They all state that at least twice as many ducks are killed when robo is on than when its off. So when more and more people begin using robo, get ready for reduced limits and shorter seasons, that is also a fact. But since thats what the robo users are asking for I guess they'll be happy. Because if the limit is reduced to 3 ducks, they'll be able to say they limited out more often.

Again the robo hasn't hurt me, its only made me a better hunter. I continue to be successful so my success has nothing to do with my opinion. It was everything to do with a robot ruining the sport. In my opinion hunting is using your hunting skills to get close enough to the game to shoot them. Using robo does not require you to use any hunting skills and therefore it IS NOT hunting. You might as well go to the local city park and blast away at some tame ducks that are running to you for some bread.

tucker301

06-07-2005, 01:07 PM

Originally posted by sprigsss:

If I would go back to using all the tools I used when I first started hunting I would be as successful as I am today.

Could I get a shovel, please?

Sure I own neoprene waders, a gortex jacket and a GPS. The GPS is strictly a safety device in case I get fogged in, it does not help me shoot more ducks.

Of course it does. It gives you the confidence to go out and stay in conditions that would otherwise make you stay home.

The gortex jacket keeps me dry and warm, but I always stuck it out if I was cold and wet (unless I was dangerously cold and wet) so that doesn't help me get more ducks,

Duh! What do you think keeps you from getting dangerously cold and wet?!

I also wear neoprene waders, but before I had waders I used a pirogue and pushpoled my way to my blind, so the waders do not help me shoot more ducks.

pirogue = technological advancement = artificial advantage
Why are you not getting this?

At the same time if I used all of these products, it would have no effect on other hunters.

The fact that you're there at all affects other hunters, so I don't want to hear that.

I don't care if you use your robo, they are legal. I don't care if you set up right next to me,

Then why have you been bichin' about it for days and days?

I know exactly how important facts are. I've used nothing but facts to make my decision.

BS! The only fact you're concerned with is the fact that one newbie with a robo can pull in ducks all day long while you're quacking and cackling your butt off trying to sweet talk a duck into your spread.
You say it doesn't bother you, but it obviously does bother you quite a lot.
In fact, my diagnosis is, "obsession".

You might as well go to the local city park and blast away at some tame ducks that are running to you for some bread.

Now THAT sounds like some fun!

http://www.sdplastics.com/dedhorse.gif

[ 06-07-2005, 01:07 PM: Message edited by: tucker301 ]

sprigsss

06-07-2005, 01:26 PM

You might as well go to the local city park and blast away at some tame ducks that are running to you for some bread.[/b]

Now THAT sounds like some fun!

http://www.sdplastics.com/dedhorse.gif [/QB]Enought said, you aren't interested in hunting at all.

The GPS does not give me the confidence to go out in unsafe conditions. If its foggy I do not leave the campground. I only use my GPS if I'm in the blind and it gets foggy. If I see the fog coming I try to hurry up and leave before it gets too close. So, no, it doesn't help me shoot more ducks.

A pirogue is a technological advantage? Sure maybe if you compare it to the caveman days.

Before the gortex jacket, I kept black garbage bags in my dry box. So I've always stayed out in the rain before. The gortex hasn' t allowed me to hunt in any conditions I haven't hunted in before I got the Gortex jacket.

I'm not doing any bichin as you put it. I'm stating my case to outlaw robo. Those that are afraid to lose it are the ones crying and bichin. As long as it is legal, I don't care what you're doing. But nothing will stop me from trying to get these things banned.

Well yes you're partially right about one thing. It does bother me that individuals that know nothing about duck hunting can toss out robo and shoot a few ducks. This leads to uneducated people shooting illegal ducks. I see it all the time. If they had to spend time to learn how to hunt, they'd probably learn some identification skills as well. I wish I could tell you how many times I've watched these inexperienced people shoot mottled ducks and pintails during the Teal season and dozens of pintails the duck season. If these people would learn to hunt from other hunters, they'd pick up these skills. The other facts come from every report I've ever read about robo. Fine me one report that says hunters using robo shoot less ducks than hunters without robo.

I'd love to participate in a study comparing the effect of nearby hunters on other hunters. I gaurantee you from personal observations, my success has always been the same whether there are people next to me or not. The only time my success decreased when another hunter set up near me was when a robo was used. I don't care what gear, decoys, or gun you have, you will have no effect on my hunt. You may shoot more, but you won't affect my hunt.

Its obvious this isn't a dead horse. If this was a dead horse, you wouldn't participate in the discussion, studies wouldn't be conducted on them, and individual states wouldn't be outlawing them.

The states that outlawed them outlawed them because of FACTS. There is NO reason they should not be banned nation wide.

So quit crying about losing your precious crutch and why don't you learn how to hunt in case they are outlawed nationwide. Its obvious that you are terrified they will be banned and then you won't be able to shoot a duck by simply using the few hunting skills necessary to shoot a defenseless duck.

tucker301

06-07-2005, 02:00 PM

clueless wrote:

So quit crying about losing your precious crutch and why don't you learn how to hunt in case they are outlawed nationwide. Its obvious that you are terrified they will be banned and then you won't be able to shoot a duck by simply using the few hunting skills necessary to shoot a defenseless duck.

I never once indicated that I use a motorized decoy in my hunts, so I'm not sure where that came from.
I've duck hunted for over 25 years without it, and will more than likely continue to do so. My whole problem with you, A-G-A-I-N is that you are using the technologies that suit you and griping about the ones that don't.

******************************************
WEBSTER'S NEW UNIVERSAL UNABRIDGED DICTIONARY
******************************************
hypocrite:
1. a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.

2. a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, esp. one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.

sprigsss

06-07-2005, 02:24 PM

Its clear that you are blind and cannot see the picture. You are comparing *****s to oranges when you compare robo to other forms of technology. The other forms of technology that you mention do not have nearly the effect robo has on the ducks and other hunters. A-G-A-I-N you are comparing *****s to oranges.

I agree electronic calls should be illegal. I guess that makes me a hypocrite because I believe manual calls that you blow into should be legal?

I also believe an electronic device that can be mounted onto a shotgun on a tr**** that tracks and sights in the ducks on its own and pulls the trigger when the duck is in the kill zone should never be legal, but since I have no problem with a semiautomatic weapon, I guess that makes me a hypocrite?

I'm sorry but you are dead wrong on this one buddy. What you see is what you get. I do exactly as I say. If I would state robo should be illegal and then turn around and use robo, that would be a hypocrit. But I do not hunt with robo and will never hunt with robo in the future.

Also according to your Webster's definition, a hypocrit is someone who "feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude" you think I speak out against robo because that's what everyone wants to hear?

I completely understand the meaning of the word hypocrite, maybe you should reread the definitions. Just being against one form of technology does not make one a hypocrit by using other forms of technology. It depends on the effect each product has on the ducks and other hunters.

If you can't see the difference between a robotic animal decoy and a GPS for safety, Gortex for comfort, you're missing the boat and will never catch on. I'm afraid you have tunnel vision and only care about shooting ducks and shooting more ducks now, now about the future.

Once again you cannot come up with any facts to back up your arguement so you repeatedly try to assinate my character. The first sign of someone fighting a losing battle refusing to admit defeat when he is defeated.

"So robo allows hunters to shoot twice as many birds as hunters without robo? Oh, yeah, well yo' mamma' so fat...................."

That's what your posts sound like.

mudhen

06-07-2005, 03:07 PM

"What you see is what you get."

Agreed.

By your own admission you are, at least; a jealous, petty, and bitter shooter of ducks (not to be confused with a true hunter), that is only concerned with his own personal bag.

That's about all I see at this point.

You choose to ignore the real waterfowl population facts, and continue to do battle with Tucker, sadly not realizing that the battle has long been over.....

mudhen - CA

tucker301

06-07-2005, 03:20 PM

I think the initial troll was all about the battle anyway.
In some ways, his actions and tactics are no diferent than those of PETA.
Attack the other side. Nothing open to discussion. Completely inflexible and oblivious to facts.

Hunters don't kill ducks, robots kill ducks!

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

sprigsss

06-07-2005, 03:52 PM

Mudhen, this has nothing to do about my own personal bag but everything to do with where these decoys are taking the sport. My "personal bag" has not suffered and robo has made me a better hunter if anything else. I don't care if you use robo next to me, you are using a legal tool to shoot ducks. But it would bother me if you used robo to suck in every flock of ducks that came by and you were next to some kid making his first duck hunt.

I don't ignore the real waterfowl population facts. I have read them time and time again. I understand the populations now are above the long term average. I also understand that the population has been decreasing steadily over the past several years. I also understand this has more to do with habitat and weather conditions than anything else.

You're missing my point, or just choosing to ignore it. The feds gather harvest data from each year. They then compare this data with the populations. Then they take into account hunter success and the current populations and set limits. If they determine that 1 million birds can be killed without hurting the overal population and set the limits accordingly and 50% of hunters use robo and shoot twice as many ducks, then what will happen when 1.5 million birds are killed? Sure it won't affect the population much as a whole, but as hunter success increases the feds will take this into consideration in the future. As more and more people use robo the percentage using robo will increase and the total harvest will increase. Therefore the seasons and limits will be reduced? What part of this do you disagree with? One thing I noticed is there hasn't been a huge increase or decrease in duck harvest. However the populations have been decreasing, therefore with fewer opportunities hunters' success is increasing. We can't keep shooting the same number of ducks each year while the population is decreasing. I am in no way jealous or bitter towards others that use robo as it is legal. I've hunted with them twice before and I didn't enjoy it, it wasn't hunting. I got to shoot my gun, but I didn't feel like I was hunting. We just turned on robo and waited. It was as simple as that. Location, calling, decoy spread, and concealment were no longer important. So I am in no way jealous of people using robo.

Tucker, my tactics are quite different than PETA. I treat all the people that use robo near me the exact same way as I treat anyone else. I do not sabotage their hunts or show them any disrespect in the field whatsoever. I have good friends that hunt with robo, we just disagree on the issue. They readily admit that they don't care what happens in the future, they just want to kill as many ducks as they can right now. While I don't have a problem with them personally, I do have a problem with that attitude. They readily admit they're not in it for the sport, they just want to shoot ducks. If baiting, live decoys, and electronic calls were legal, they'd begin using them immediately. I just don't think that's hunting.

The facts are always open to discussion. But while I present my opinion, facts, and personal observations you continue to resort to bashing me personally when you don't know me. Give me some facts and we'll discuss them. You've shown me the population facts, and I've interpreted them, where am I wrong on my interpretation of the facts you presented? Now show me some facts showing that robo has no effect on hunters success rates.

[ 06-07-2005, 04:00 PM: Message edited by: sprigsss ]

mudhen

06-07-2005, 04:33 PM

"You're missing my point, or just choosing to ignore it."

I can't ignore what doesn't exist.....

You don't like the device for mostly personal reasons + the fact (one that no one argues otherwise) that robo tends to draw young mallets into range at roughly twice the clip than without robo.

Ok, I'll agree with you on the young mallard issue. And here in Cali, our F&G agrees with you also and regulates robo to preserve the mallard balance. F&G reads the robo studies and limits when robo can be used and how many mallets can be shot, etc. I'll take F&G science over your emotion anyday.

Now, as to the rest of the dux, most are either: not attracted to robo, not a desired species, or are seemingly not affected by whatever increase in harvest robo may or may not cause. That's why you have to read the surveys, that's why you have to know what you are talking about, otherwise your points are moot.

Soooo, I'll agree with you on the mallet issue, but I'll defer to the biologists on setting seasons & bag limits.

As to grays, sprig, teal, divers, etc., it would be better to pray for: timely rains, changes in breeding behaviors, CRP, farmers to do well, the slowdown in the land development surge, and mother nature.

These 69% robo guys spend much $$$ to keep the sport going for now.

Let's hope the ducks can hang on until things get better.....

mudhen - CA

Jon Ramsey

06-29-2005, 12:30 PM

You all suck for even having this argument!!! tongue.gif

For the record I don't shoot ducks, or any birds for that matter. I have 2 parrots at home that call me me daddy, ask to be let out of their cages when I get home from work, they're both potty trained, and they love to be petted and played with. Some how I don't think I could look either of them in the eye after shooting a bird. I feel bad enough bringing home a bucket of KFC. :rolleyes:

However, I bet Robo Duck would make a great target for target pratice. :D :D :D

[ 06-29-2005, 12:31 PM: Message edited by: Jon Ramsey ]

Butch-M

07-01-2005, 11:54 AM

“When in Rome ... do as the Roman's do." (Or you ain’t shooten no ducks) sprigsss you may have the moral purist’s high ground if we assume the “technological” line in the sand was drawn before the advent of motorized decoys ... but either way, Tucker is surely real world right. As long as everyone is working within the same parameters of the pertinent game laws, it's hard to fault the guy who keeps up with technology. Besides ... big picture flyway game limits don’t care who is killing the ducks only the overall harvest quantity. Rather than investing a lot of energy and emotion admonishing the guy killing all the ducks using a legal robo on ethical grounds; you should turn your ire and effort to the people who can tailor those game laws to a level playing field ... made of course according to you and like minded people’s criteria. Since this thread has degenerated to name calling, accusations & grammar/punctuation castigating already ... if you can’t put together a majority of motivated hunters who agree that they don’t want robos out there ... you can always do like the Liberals do; find a sympathetic judge and sue to inflict the will of the few on the many. Of course ... Tucker & lot can sue to keep the Robos they’ve come to know and embrace. Personally, I see it more as a financial and therefore in turn a civil liberties issue. If Tucker is Robo-ing ... I’m being forced to Robo. He’s forcing me to go out and spend a couple of hundred bucks on this mechanical aberration ... or be resigned to go horse throated and cross eyed blowing away on the previous ultimate techno advancement ... to no avail. I think perhaps it’s a form of economic segregation. The “haves” getting over on us “have nots” again. Might even work “profiling” and mental anguish in here somewhere. Perhaps an onerous tax on Robos, quickly followed by registration & annual permit fees ... ostensively to subsidize Robo free only hunting zones for the antis. Tax em out of the marshes? And Jon ... is that “target practice” comment a thinly veiled advocacy of firearms violence as a means to an end??? Or ... are you so far up on the “haves” curve that you have enough money to use Roboducks for skeet?

I haven’t duck hunted in a few years and want to get back into it with my Benelli. I have a few coil spring mounted decoys that gyrate around on top of ½" pipes I sink in the creek mud in my spread, but no Robo. I can see the written on the wall already ... anyone got a link for a good price on one?<smile>

Butch

tucker301

07-01-2005, 05:55 PM

Originally posted by Butch-M:
... anyone got a link for a good price on one?<smile>

Butch You bet I do!
And you're WAY off on the price... if you shop wisely ;)

I just picked up a new mojo, remote, et al for less than $100.

I got the mojo on Ebay (http://search.ebay.com/mojo_Decoys_W0QQcatrefZC2QQfromZR41QQfsooZ1QQfsopZ 1QQsacatZ36249), and I found the best price on the remotes at LL Bean (http://www.llbean.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?categoryId=38517&storeId=1&catalogId=1&langId=-1&parentCategory=3954&cat4=1115&shop_method=pp&feat=bc) using Froogle. (http://www.google.com/froogle?q=mojo+remote&btnG=Search+Froogle)

Butch - Thanks for the sensible post on this subject.
I wasn't even thinking about buying a mojo until I got into this fray; which got me thinking about them quite a bit.

A Robo-Mojo tax?
Sure, but only if there's also a special tax on GPS's, Gore-tex, neoprene waders, high-end shotguns, mudbuddy motors, inflatable decoys, and so on, and so on....

tucker301

07-01-2005, 05:58 PM

...Almost forgot.
If you do get a mojo, PM me and I'll show you some mods on mine to improve the design and functionality a bit. They're pretty shoddy from the factory. Considering all the Peking Duck those folks have eaten over the years, I would have expected better :D

Butch-M

07-03-2005, 11:14 AM

Can Do ... LOL

sprigsss

07-12-2005, 01:47 PM

Originally posted by tucker301:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Butch-M:
[qb]
A Robo-Mojo tax?
Sure, but only if there's also a special tax on GPS's, Gore-tex, neoprene waders, high-end shotguns, mudbuddy motors, inflatable decoys, and so on, and so on.... Once again you're comparing *****s to oranges. There is a huge difference between between all of these items and robo. If you can't see the difference, I'm sorry you were never taught what hunting is all about.

Butch,

I am no liberal, and therefore will never contact any politician in an effort to get them banned. I would only support a ban if the majority of the hunters wanted to ban them or if data showed we need to ban them. And so far the data is showing too many juvenile ducks are being killed by robo. My opinion is based on the lines of fair chase hunting, and I believe they should be illegal for the same reasons electronic calls are illegal. The problem is the majority of the people out there care only about the numbers, they don't care about the sport. The only thing they are interested in is watching ducks fold and then bragging about how many they killed afterwards. what they don't realize, is by using robo they are only educating the ducks even farther and in the long run it will be 10x as hard to get a duck in whether they have robo or not.

I refuse to do anything because everyone else is doing it. I'm sure the sportsman that took a stance to ban electronic calls and live decoys, received the same criticism I'm receiving now. The difference is some of us would like to keep it a sport as we are duck hunters and enjoy the challenge of matching our skills against the ducks wits, and then there are others that don't give a rats azz about the sport and only care about shooting more ducks.

However, I don't believe robo should be banned because I don't like it. I have never and will never contact my legislator and ask him/her to ban robo. A ban by politicians will be a significant setback to hunters, because what will be next. But if hunters step up to the plate and do what's right, then I believe it is a win for the hunters. So rather than contact a politician, I choose to reach out to the hunters and convince them they don't need robo.

After all if robo is banned, only those that refuse to learn how to hunt or put in the work to shoot a few ducks will be affected. Maybe this is why Tucker is so terrified they'll be banned. I on the other hand will continue to shoot ducks without robo. I was able to shoot around 50 ducks in 12 hunts last year all on crowded public hunting grounds, so this has nothing to do with my success, but everything to do with where this sport is going.

First we had robo, then we had the mallard machine, then quiver magnets, then remote controlled decoys, then the vortex.................When will it end? At what point will hunters wake up and say, OK this isn't hunting anymore. The robots are doing all of the work and all the hunters have to do is sit back and wait then blast away. THAT IS NOT HUNTING. Its already gone too far and its time the real sportsmen take a stance and get rid of these things before it goes even further. Its only a matter of time before someone develops a remote controlled decoy that flies around grabbing ducks attention and then can be guided into the decoy spread with a flock of ducks right behind it. Sure that would be a fun contraption to play with, but it doesn't belong in hunting.

If you're using robots to bring in the ducks for you, you AREN'T hunting.

Butch-M

07-14-2005, 08:49 AM

I guess what the hunting fraternity considers ethical & unethical is similar to what individuals in a society consider right & wrong. One would probably say it's a "sense" or "feel" ... an internal, inherent instinct. (Less the lawyers of course)

BUT ... What the ancient Greeks or Romans (quite civilized societies) considered acceptable; has evolved today into what we "feel" is barbaric. (Like feeding Christians to lions for example {being Christian, I can identify with that one})(Or stealing surreptitiously into Troy inside the worlds biggest Robo-ized decoy) I wonder where Achilles thought THAT decoy was going to lead his hunting in the future?) Next thing you know EVERYBODY is going to have to have one; or be left sitting bored at the gates. Soon after that you'll be killing nothing but young, and/or stupid enemies. You'll find your enemies flare and keep running. Long shots, cripples ensued, etc, etc. I'm sure given the chance ... Hector would argue & debate the ethics of the Greek's lure; same as you do about Tucker's Mojos. (You don't mind me using you as the focal of Robo users for literary impact ... do you Tucker??)

At one time the samurai considered gunpowder and guns as unethical ... they all got shot in battle by ignominious farmers wielding firearms! Using and/or defending heroic & honorable traditional methods of course. Adaptation or extinction. Try as they may ... the samurai couldn't convince the farmers of the error of their ways ... to put down their guns and take up a sword like a real man ... wonder why? I'm afraid you may be a Samurai among Musketeers. Noble; holding your own for now ... but archaic. The native American (Indian) comes to mind too.

Hold your ground. Continue your articulate crusade ... perhaps ... like we honor the old ways of the ancient primitive bow & arrow ... and the less primitive and more technologically advanced blackpowder rifle (but still acceptably "old ways" right?); with their own seasons ... there may be a swing of the pendulum to old fashion decoy waterfowl hunting. (Less the punt guns no doubt) Until then ... the ignominious modern waterfowlers will be ruling the marshes.

Personally ... it doesn't mater to me either way as long as we're all playing by the same rules, and we're adjusting bag limits to keep the waterfowl population strong.

Butch

tucker301

07-14-2005, 09:48 AM

Originally posted by Butch-M:
(You don't mind me using you as the focal of Robo users for literary impact ... do you Tucker??)
Not at all.
In fact, in many ways I'm the perfect specimen, as this year will be my first as a Mojo user.
I also bought a dozen of the screen-printed inflatable decoys to add more movement and realism to the spread.
Can you hear the master carvers of a bygone era as they cringe and reposition themselves in their places of eternal unrest?

Butch-M

07-14-2005, 11:07 AM

God ... I can't wait to get back in the swamps. So much new stuff to try out since my last foray. New gun, new chokes, new ammunition ... and yes ... new types of decoys!!! Got my "old" duck boat engine running again last week. Changed lower unit lubricant ... purrs like a kitten. Say ... what are you hearing about the acceptance of those new screen painted inflatables??? My bay boat is loaded to the gunwales with carrylites right now ... but if a little bit is good ... a lot is better ... right??? I have a canoe I could tow. I have to pay more attention to the waterfowl section of Cabelas from now on. By the way, speaking of decoys ... ethically ... do you think it's a good thing ... or a bad thing ... to anchor bouys at 30yds, 40yds, 50yds marking ranges?

dagrizz

07-14-2005, 12:18 PM

By the way, speaking of decoys ... ethically ... do you think it's a good thing ... or a bad thing ... to anchor bouys at 30yds, 40yds, 50yds marking ranges? [/QB]When I was hunting ducks we used to put the farthest decoy at about 30 yards as a marker. Then wwe would not shoot unles they were inside of that farthest decoy.

So why not just use your decoys as a marker.

tucker301

07-14-2005, 05:45 PM

We do similarly. We fille the spread from 40-50 out and leave the inside 40 as the landing hole for the real ducks.
We do hunt small waters, so I've never set up for big water spreads.
Ethically? I see no problem with marking ranges.

My biggest concern regarding the inflatables is that my blindmate chews tobacco incessently, so I'll be doing all the inflating :rolleyes:

Butch-M

07-15-2005, 07:49 AM

Can there be a more despicable habit than chewing tobacco??? They dribble, drool, spit ... and the clumps of what certainly could pass as feces were it not for the fierce stench ... coming out of their mouths??? There's nothing like turning to your buddy and seeing that blood brown stain on the front of their shirt to make you wonder what in the world could you possibly have in common with this guy??? What thought process, what corrupted logic, could possibly lead someone to think that stuffing your mouth with a foul smelling carcinogen that produces prodigious amounts of vile liquid which has severe disposal problems ... has merit??? Now ... just picture being the poor woman who has "that" coming at her with intentions of intimacy!!! LOL It's a miracle that they get to pass on their genes. What an unpleasant habit. Addiction is a terrible thing. Well, I'm sure he's a great guy aside from that foible ... just keep to the upwind spot in the blind ... and make him buy a pump to inflate his share.

Anyway ... I usually set up my spread in sort of a "U" shape with the blind between the open legs. Have a few confidence decoys on shore and a few ducks in front of the blind kind of closing up the "U" a little. Leaves a big hole for them to land at around 30 yards. I add three or four goose decoys up wind separated from the ducks a little ... and have some crows sitting on the boat. My flying decoys on pipes are down wind as if coming to land into the wind. Seems to work pretty well. For some reason, I rarely have ducks landing out of range on the outside of the spread. What I do have happen surprisingly often is to have ducks swim un-noticed into the spread. I guess you watch the skies so intently ... unless they're using subs? Sneaky little ... I find myself counting decoys, but of course can never remember how many I put out. LOL Problem around here is where I usually go in a river; we get about 3 or 4 foot tides. At low tide the boat is high & dry in the swamp mud. Retrieving a downed bird is done with some pretty primitive poling & levering; and with great effort. And if we've had any storms ... huge mats of meadow weeds can come floating by taking "X" number of decoys with it. Results in a Navy seal like scramble to launch the boat & get em back. It is fun though!

Butch