Post by Woody Williams on Jun 29, 2007 10:47:08 GMT -5
Article from Arkansas paper:
Arkansas Sportsman: Gadgetry takes us away from hunting’s core values - spinning/motion decoys
By Bryan Hendricks (Contact)
LITTLE ROCK — Although it hasn’t been proposed formally, the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission is strongly considering a ban on all motion decoys for hunting migratory fowl.
This will include all forms of shaker decoys, bobbing decoys and swimming decoys. It also will include all present and future technologies that simulate motion, such as flashing, lightemitting diodes (LEDs) that simulate wing movement and holographs. It might even include spinning wing decoys for doves and crows.
This actually sprung from a discussion last month between AGFC commissioners and Doyle Shook, chief of the AGFC’s wildlife division, over the future of the spinning wing decoy ban. It started when Commissioner Freddie Black played a video taken by some friends during a duck hunt in Canada. Even though they were hunting over a dry field with no water in sight, their spinning wing decoy attracted thousands of ducks. They came in such great waves the hunters marveled at the spectacle for quite some time before they fired a shot.
A couple of commissioners expressed frustration with other states for not joining Arkansas in banning those decoys and asked if any support might be forthcoming.
Shook took an uncharacteristically solemn tone and asked if he could address the commission while sitting. He then recommended that the AGFC not only remain steadfast on this issue, but issue an even bolder statement to the rest of the Mississippi Flyway Council by banning all motion decoys.
Shook cited a number of reasons for such a proposal. He said the video demonstrated just how effective spinning wing decoys are for attracting ducks. Motion decoys are simply variations on the same principle and should be regarded in the same manner, partly because it’s difficult to justify banning one type of motion decoy and not another.
However, his main reasons were philosophical. For example, the moral code that governs the behavior of all sport hunters is the “Fair Chase” Doctrine, which essentially dictates that game should have the advantage to elude or evade a hunter. A device that decidedly tilts the advantageto the hunter violates the spirit of fair chase, Shook said. Motion decoys probably fit that description.
In the same vein, Shook asked if sport hunting is becoming so product-oriented that we’re in danger of losing the traditional hunting ethic. Or, more simply, are the hunting fields becoming just another marketplace instead of a place that appeals to sportsmen on a spiritual, introspective level?
“To me, it’s not a question of biology, really,” Shook said. “There’ll come a day when the science is going to support our decision to ban the spinning wing. It’s more of a fair chase, hunting tradition question. We all know about advances in technology, and new things are being invented that we’ve never even dreamed of. If we let electronic gadgetry into the sport, we openreal wide a door that we don’t really know how wide it is. Do we want our sporting traditions to be potentially changed that drastically, or do we want to maintain the traditions of the sport?”
All of us sometimes wonder where the line is that separates hunting from killing. Scouting for sign, food sources and animal movements is hunting. Fooling a duck or a turkey with a realistic call is hunting. We admire those who do those things skillfully, and we all desire to do them more skillfully ourselves.
When a product essentially does the work for you, allows a hunting party to bag several limits of ducks without a single note blown from a call, that’s not hunting. That’s killing.
I’ve hunted over various motion decoys, and I know they work, but I’ve never bought one. I do know spinning wing decoysseem to be fixtures in every televised duck massacre I see, but never shaker decoys. On the other hand, a stationary decoy with flashing blue LED wingpatches, or a holograph, would probably eclipse the spinning decoy for lethality.
Those who argue loudest against such a ban seem to be commercial duck guides who feel tremendous pressure to produce birds for their clients. They believe a motion decoy ban will make it harder for them to be competitive.
That seems to go back to the core of Doyle Shook’s question.
In these modern times, is hunting nothing more than a body count? If so, then let’s not hinder progress.
If we value hunting for more traditional reasons, then maybe we could live with a little less temptation.
Arkansas Sportsman: Gadgetry takes us away from hunting’s core values - spinning/motion decoys
By Bryan Hendricks (Contact)
LITTLE ROCK — Although it hasn’t been proposed formally, the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission is strongly considering a ban on all motion decoys for hunting migratory fowl.
This will include all forms of shaker decoys, bobbing decoys and swimming decoys. It also will include all present and future technologies that simulate motion, such as flashing, lightemitting diodes (LEDs) that simulate wing movement and holographs. It might even include spinning wing decoys for doves and crows.
This actually sprung from a discussion last month between AGFC commissioners and Doyle Shook, chief of the AGFC’s wildlife division, over the future of the spinning wing decoy ban. It started when Commissioner Freddie Black played a video taken by some friends during a duck hunt in Canada. Even though they were hunting over a dry field with no water in sight, their spinning wing decoy attracted thousands of ducks. They came in such great waves the hunters marveled at the spectacle for quite some time before they fired a shot.
A couple of commissioners expressed frustration with other states for not joining Arkansas in banning those decoys and asked if any support might be forthcoming.
Shook took an uncharacteristically solemn tone and asked if he could address the commission while sitting. He then recommended that the AGFC not only remain steadfast on this issue, but issue an even bolder statement to the rest of the Mississippi Flyway Council by banning all motion decoys.
Shook cited a number of reasons for such a proposal. He said the video demonstrated just how effective spinning wing decoys are for attracting ducks. Motion decoys are simply variations on the same principle and should be regarded in the same manner, partly because it’s difficult to justify banning one type of motion decoy and not another.
However, his main reasons were philosophical. For example, the moral code that governs the behavior of all sport hunters is the “Fair Chase” Doctrine, which essentially dictates that game should have the advantage to elude or evade a hunter. A device that decidedly tilts the advantageto the hunter violates the spirit of fair chase, Shook said. Motion decoys probably fit that description.
In the same vein, Shook asked if sport hunting is becoming so product-oriented that we’re in danger of losing the traditional hunting ethic. Or, more simply, are the hunting fields becoming just another marketplace instead of a place that appeals to sportsmen on a spiritual, introspective level?
“To me, it’s not a question of biology, really,” Shook said. “There’ll come a day when the science is going to support our decision to ban the spinning wing. It’s more of a fair chase, hunting tradition question. We all know about advances in technology, and new things are being invented that we’ve never even dreamed of. If we let electronic gadgetry into the sport, we openreal wide a door that we don’t really know how wide it is. Do we want our sporting traditions to be potentially changed that drastically, or do we want to maintain the traditions of the sport?”
All of us sometimes wonder where the line is that separates hunting from killing. Scouting for sign, food sources and animal movements is hunting. Fooling a duck or a turkey with a realistic call is hunting. We admire those who do those things skillfully, and we all desire to do them more skillfully ourselves.
When a product essentially does the work for you, allows a hunting party to bag several limits of ducks without a single note blown from a call, that’s not hunting. That’s killing.
I’ve hunted over various motion decoys, and I know they work, but I’ve never bought one. I do know spinning wing decoysseem to be fixtures in every televised duck massacre I see, but never shaker decoys. On the other hand, a stationary decoy with flashing blue LED wingpatches, or a holograph, would probably eclipse the spinning decoy for lethality.
Those who argue loudest against such a ban seem to be commercial duck guides who feel tremendous pressure to produce birds for their clients. They believe a motion decoy ban will make it harder for them to be competitive.
That seems to go back to the core of Doyle Shook’s question.
In these modern times, is hunting nothing more than a body count? If so, then let’s not hinder progress.
If we value hunting for more traditional reasons, then maybe we could live with a little less temptation.
