IDNR PROPOSAL - Migratory birds and waterfowl

Woody Williams
Administrator

Posts: 58,266

IDNR PROPOSAL - Migratory birds and waterfowl Mar 29, 2006 8:56:37 GMT -5

Quote

Post by Woody Williams on Mar 29, 2006 8:56:37 GMT -5

I’ve been informed by the IDNR that all of these proposals that I have posted are in a DRAFT ONLY version and are subject to change before the final proposal is presented to the Natural Resources Commission in May.

The IDNR is working together on finalizing a proposal and we will be informed as soon as they have done that. That will probably be mid-April.

I will repost that FINAL proposal at that time for more discussion.

In the meantime we can discuss these DRAFT proposals, but just be aware that our discussion might be moot on some proposals as they might not make the final cut.

Interesting discussion, none the less…

Carry on….

The IDNR is proposing to eliminate the use of “electronically powered or controlled decoys’ for both waterfowl and migratory birds.

Items in BOLD are new..

As soon as I am made aware of the input process I will post that. In the meantime – we can discuss it..

312 IAC 9-4-2 Migratory birds and waterfowl
Authority: IC 14-22-2-6
Affected: IC 14-22

Sec. 2. (a) The restrictions in this section supplement state statutes and federal laws that protect migratory birds and waterfowl.
(b) A person must not hunt migratory birds and waterfowl, except for mute swans (Cygnus olor), unless the person:
(1) is registered with; and
(2) possesses an identification number issued through;
the Harvest Information Program
(c) A person must not take or possess a Virginia rail.
(d) The use of electronically powered or controlled decoys to take migratory birds and waterfowl is prohibited. (Natural Resources Commission; 312 IAC 9-4-2; filed May 12, 1997, 10:00 a.m.: 20 IR 2708; filed May 28, 1998, 5:14 p.m.: 21 IR 3714; readopted filed Jul 28, 2003, 12:00 p.m.: 27 IR 286)

Last Edit: Mar 31, 2006 8:52:45 GMT -5 by Woody Williams

We are not Human beings going through a temporary Spiritual experience,
but Spiritual beings going through a temporary Human experience.

chicobrownbear
Major Contributor

Posts: 4,635

IDNR PROPOSAL - Migratory birds and waterfowl Mar 29, 2006 13:16:00 GMT -5

Quote

Post by chicobrownbear on Mar 29, 2006 13:16:00 GMT -5

I really don't care one way or the other. I personally don't hunt over one unless the people I am hunting with wish to use one. I do just as well without Ecoys. I do think that they have become a crutch for many who wouldn't bag as many birds without them. I don't think that there have been enough long term studies with reproduceable results for me to make a decision one way or another.

My $0.02.

aekdb

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen. -- Samuel Adams

ActionPoint
Major Contributor

Posts: 205

IDNR PROPOSAL - Migratory birds and waterfowl Mar 29, 2006 15:29:46 GMT -5

Quote

Post by ActionPoint on Mar 29, 2006 15:29:46 GMT -5

Like anything else, there are times they work and times they don't. And of course there are a lot of variables that play into their productivity. I certainly don't feel they are a threat to waterfowl populations.

duff
Global Moderator

Posts: 12,648

IDNR PROPOSAL - Migratory birds and waterfowl Mar 29, 2006 16:17:08 GMT -5

Quote

Post by duff on Mar 29, 2006 16:17:08 GMT -5

Indiana harvest is about or is dead last in the MS Flyway. Even if we doubled our harvest we still don't have close to the effect of many other states on a bad year. Why would we pass this, if the feds pass it great but give me a break. If we think Indiana is going to set some standards for the rest of the flyway we'd better think again. We can not even keep a waterfowl biologist to prove or disprove anything, why would we be pushing this?

ActionPoint
Major Contributor

Posts: 205

IDNR PROPOSAL - Migratory birds and waterfowl Mar 29, 2006 17:27:36 GMT -5

Quote

Post by ActionPoint on Mar 29, 2006 17:27:36 GMT -5

Me personally, I feel it's pressure from the Southern states. LA, MS, MO, AR, have always battled it out over the quotas. Their politicians bring pressure from the federal level and it makes it's way to Indiana. Anything that might take some birds from their harvests is going to get their attention. They firmly believe that electronic decoys will make our harvests greater and thus their harvests lower. It's no secret they don't like sharing birds. And they certainly don't like seeing mild winters. I'm not aware of any studies or info that support their claims. If someone has some harvest info share, I will try to check some stuff myself. I hope our DNR doesn't buy into this. I would atleast like to know the reasoning behind it.

duff
Global Moderator

Posts: 12,648

IDNR PROPOSAL - Migratory birds and waterfowl Mar 30, 2006 10:06:42 GMT -5

Quote

Post by duff on Mar 30, 2006 10:06:42 GMT -5

Why would Indiana be concerned? The only other MS flyway state to do anything with spinners has been AR. If the feds would support this by deeming electronic decoys illegal nation wide I'd support it, but definately not pushed by our own state.

Besides without my "crutch" as some of the elite type hunters want to call them I'd have to rely on my calling, or making better blinds cause we all know that if you put a spinner out all the ducks just dive right in. Really I don't set many dekes out, just about 6 robo ducks and sit back and slaughter everything that flies. Wear hunter orange so I don't get shot by the neighbors to boot. I use my old crow call while I am at it, they make a good feeding chuckle, but really is not important cause I have my flock of spinners. I really like the hum.

shootsa410
Major Contributor

Posts: 1,517

IDNR PROPOSAL - Migratory birds and waterfowl Mar 30, 2006 10:25:23 GMT -5

Quote

Post by shootsa410 on Mar 30, 2006 10:25:23 GMT -5

I don't really mind them taking away my robo duck, since Duff said he'll buy them from me at top dollar. But to take my robo dove, now that really hurts. I'm already working on development of a wind-up spring to replace all those electric motors.

buster
Major Contributor

We Aim to Please!

Posts: 827

IDNR PROPOSAL - Migratory birds and waterfowl Mar 30, 2006 15:15:07 GMT -5

Quote

Post by buster on Mar 30, 2006 15:15:07 GMT -5

actionpoint said:

Me personally, I feel it's pressure from the Southern states. LA, MS, MO, AR, have always battled it out over the quotas. Their politicians bring pressure from the federal level and it makes it's way to Indiana. Anything that might take some birds from their harvests is going to get their attention. They firmly believe that electronic decoys will make our harvests greater and thus their harvests lower. It's no secret they don't like sharing birds. And they certainly don't like seeing mild winters. I'm not aware of any studies or info that support their claims. If someone has some harvest info share, I will try to check some stuff myself. I hope our DNR doesn't buy into this. I would atleast like to know the reasoning behind it.

For the first time, I'm gonna have to agree with you, Actionpoint!