Scaup proposal draws plenty of fire

[h2ofwlr]

Almanac: Scaup proposal draws plenty of fire
Minnesota is part of a group that opposes a plan to reduce limits on scaup hunting this fall.

Doug Smith
Last update: June 16, 2007 ? 12:58 PM
http://www.startribune.com/outdoors/story/1249564.html

A proposal by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to reduce the bag limit or hunting season length of scaup this fall because of the duck's declining population has ruffled some feathers.
Minnesota is among several states and conservation groups that oppose the move, saying there is no evidence that hunting is causing the downward spiral in the population of scaup -- also called bluebills.

Opponents also are concerned that the hunting restrictions will hurt duck hunting and possibly deter some hunters from going afield at a time when groups and wildlife agencies are trying to retain hunters.

"We're opposed to it, and our [Mississippi] Flyway is opposed to it," said Steve Cordts, waterfowl specialist with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.

North Dakota and South Dakota also oppose the plan.

The proposal would either reduce the current two-scaup bag limit to one, or it would reduce the scaup season, now 60 days, to 30 days and still allow the two-scaup bag.

That restriction could have broad implications for many Minnesota duck hunters, Cordts said, because many have difficulty distinguishing scaup from ringneck and redhead ducks.

That could mean citations for hunters who mistakenly shoot scaup.

"It's a huge concern," he said. "Scaup, ringnecks and redheads are very similar, and it's not uncommon to have mixed flocks of divers. And we know duck hunters are very poor at identifying diver ducks."

And ringnecks comprise a large part of the duck harvest in Minnesota.

Tighter regulations, confusion and more citations could be problematic.

"The fear is you'll lose hunters," Cordts said.

Rob Olson, president of Delta Waterfowl, also strongly opposes the proposed changes and says the rich tradition of diver duck hunting could be lost.

"We believe further reducing the scaup limit is unnecessary and the wrong decision for scaup and scaup hunters," he said in a statement.

The decline of the scaup population has been well-documented. The spring breeding population hit a high of almost 8 million birds in 1972 and has dropped steadily since 1984. It hit an all-time low of 3.2 million last year.

Wildlife biologists still don't know the cause, but they say hunter harvest isn't the reason. "There's just no evidence," Cordts said.
Still, the bag limit was cut from six to three in 1999, and then to two in 2005. And the population has continued to decline.

Said Cordts: "I think the scaup population will continue to decline."

Which means if the bag limit is cut this fall, "it will be pretty much a permanent decision," Cordts said, because there's no indication the population is going to recover.

"There's nothing wrong with harvesting a population that is declining. They're still the third most abundant duck most years," Cordts said, behind only mallards and blue-winged teal.

Meanwhile, there are an estimated 1 million breeding ringnecks, "yet we shoot a half-million of them," he said. "We shoot more ringnecks than scaup. The only difference is their population seems to be increasing while scaup is declining."

Added Cordts: "I want to know why they [scaup] are declining and see if there's something we can do about it."

The Fish and Wildlife's Service's regulations committee meets with the flyway representatives, including Cordts, this week. The scaup issue will be among those on the agenda. Final waterfowl regulations will be issued later this summer.



Bird numbers decline

The report from the National Audubon Society last week wasn't good. A new analysis shows that populations of some of America's most familiar and beloved birds have taken a nose dive over the past 40 years, with some down as much as 80 percent. On the list are northern bobwhites, red-headed woodpeckers, northern pintail ducks and Eastern meadowlarks, all of which are present in Minnesota. The dramatic declines are caused by the loss of grasslands, healthy forests and wetlands and other critical habitats from multiple environmental threats such as sprawl, energy development and the spread of industrialized agriculture.


Doug Smith is at dsmith@startribune.com.


--------------------


Important parts are highlighted above

Well for once, the MN DNR is taking a stance for the right reason, and they are doing it with the Bluebills.

Want to vioce your opinion on the prosal by USFWS for Bluebills? Tell the 3 key people in the MN DNR. So write a polite email and send it to: Steve Cordts, Jeff Lawerance, and Wildlife Chief Tim Bremicker
Steve.Cordts@state.mn.us
Jeff.Lawrence@state.mn.us
Tim.Bremicker@state.mn.us
I recomend putting all 3 in the "to" line of 1 email.  Include your full name and address.  Remember to be to the point and courteous.  They are on our side, so show them some support that we hunters are not for 2 BB bag limit or a 30 day season for them.


Interstingly, I have been calling the farming in MN an industry now for a couple of years now. The "family farm" is now a corporation running 2-5K acres in MN. Long gone are the 200-480 acre true family farms of 40-50 years ago. So lets call it what they are: Big AG businesses. From the big players like Cargill and ADM, to the ethynol plants, to the farmers them selves, they are business men out to make $. So forget the nostalgia of the "family" farm, as what we have now are "indistialized farming" in America now as noted above by the NAS. Us sportsmen and outdoors people are battling a legion of well paid loobyests paid for by the Big AG concerns.