LifeNRA Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 I am not a waterfowler, just thought you all should read this! 11250 Waples Mill Road Fairfax, Virginia 22030 800-392-8683 - GrassrootsHotline Monday, June 13, 2005 Hunters in the upper Midwest have something to worry about. The Upper Mississippi National Wildlife Refuge is reviewing their comprehensive conservation plan. Right now the new plan would put incredible restrictions on hunters. This enormous refuge follows the Mississippi River through Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa and Illinois. Among the proposals being considered are: Limiting the number of shells a waterfowl hunter can carry to 25. This limitation is unnecessary and would unfairly target youth and beginner hunters who are not expert shots. Complete closure of hunting in some areas of the refuge. Such closures should not be done unless absolutely biologically necessary. Electric motor only areas that would make hunter access to these areas very difficult. Limited permit only hunts and daily fees for hunter access. Hunters should speak up now and protect hunting on this enormous refuge. But, this is also a good lesson for hunters. If we don’t speak up and make our voice heard we will be shut out. We need to take every opportunity we get to comment on forest plans, conservation plans and all the other regulatory steps that are taken on state and federal lands. If we don’t speak up the only voice that is heard will be that of the anti-hunters. For more information you can visit the refuge website, or the river rats website setup by a grassroots organization. http://www.fws.gov/midwest/planning/uppermiss/ http://www.upriverrats.org/ To make your voice heard contact the U.S. Forest Service today, and if you can attend one of the upcoming public meetings. Send your comments to: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Upper Mississippi River National Wildlife and Fish Refuge Attention: CCP Comment 51 East 4th Street Room 101 Winona, MN 55987 Or by email at: [email protected] Attend the meetings: Winona, Minnesota Monday, June 13 Winona Middle School Cafeteria, 1570 Homer Road Wabasha, Minnesota Tuesday, June 14 Wabasha/Kellogg High School, Cafeteria, 2113 East Hiawatha Drive Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin Thursday, June 16 Prairie du Chien High School Cafeteria, 800 East Crawford Street Savanna, Illinois Tuesday, June 21 House of Events, 108 Main Street Stoddard, Wisconsin Wednesday, June 22 American Legion Post 315, located at 414 Broadway Onalaska, Wisconsin Thursday, June 23 Onalaska Middle School, 711 Quincy Street Lansing, Iowa Tuesday, July 12 Lansing (Kee) High School, 569 Center Street Cassville, Wisconsin Thursday, July 14 Cassville High School, 715 E. Amelia Street POSTED BY: Dawson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Covehnter Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! Some steps must be taken, limiting the number of shells (if properly inforced) i believe could improve hunting on some heavily hunted areas. Many waterfowl populations are still steadily dropping, bag limits and season lengths must be seriously considered, if it's not already too late! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lil hunter Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! i say drop the season down to 40-45 days instead of 60. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palssonater Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! only takes me 8 shells for ducks and 5 shells for geese. I WISH! I think this could be an effective method, if properly managed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
too_pointer Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! We have a shell limit in our reserve hunts for years. Not in the public. This wouldn't really both me personally, but losing something else does too_pointer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Covehnter Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! I'll be pushing for the 30 day 3 duck limitations, it's tough to swallow but this is something that needs to be done for the sake of waterfowl. But this will only happen if the right things are considered. . . which seldom is ever the case. . . the money always talks louder and wins out. Dropping the season would hurt too many pockets, thats why it hasnt happened already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTF Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! Boy 30 days to hunt ducks ? NY only gets 7 days in October. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LifeNRA Posted June 15, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! [ QUOTE ] Some steps must be taken, limiting the number of shells (if properly inforced) i believe could improve hunting on some heavily hunted areas. [/ QUOTE ] You mean to tell me you gonna have some Game Offical walking around checking and counting the number of shells your carrying? Thats CRAZY! Why not lower the bag limits and season. Would be a lot cheaper for the Game Officials! I am not a waterfowl hunter, but what is next? Doves??? Like the post also says, what about the less expirenced hunter? The hunter that gets his or her first chance to hunt waterfowl? Opps! Thats too bad, your done now because your out of ammo! This would be a great way to lose future hunters! This a knucklehead law! Something the ANTI'S are just trying pass so they can continue thier adgenda! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Covehnter Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! I dont think that the limited number of shells is such a "knuckhead" law. The game wardens ride around to check for license, bag limits, and proper shot. . . what would be the big deal with checking the number of shells while they're there? How could this be any more of a problem than the steel shot only requirement? They ride around to make sure no one is using lead. . . doesnt seem so crazy. As for the first time hunters, something has to be done for the betterment of hunting conditions on public waters and limiting shells has been used as an option. These limitations are going to effect everyone, i cant think of a way that takes special consideration for first timers. . . but that doesnt mean we shouldnt try to better what we have already. If an option arises that accurately accounts for the "first timers" then may it be successful, but i dont see how you are goin to prove you are a first timer rather than a seasoned pro. These types of rules/laws are already being exercised. For instance, here in Ga we have counties with antler restrictions. A deer has to have a 15 inch spread or a certain number of points before it can be taken. This applies to everyone, doesnt matter if its your first time in the woods or your 30th season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LifeNRA Posted June 16, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! [ QUOTE ] A deer has to have a 15 inch spread [/ QUOTE ] I like antler restrictions! But to have a length restriction is also crazy. At 100 yards that could be very hard to do! I know if the antlers are at the ears tips its about 14-16 inches. But I seen ten pointers that never went pass the ears tips! Ok, I got off topic! LOL! I could tell you if I were a waterfowler this would make me very upset. If the numbers are dwindling. Then maybe its time to shorten the season, but not cut back on the amount of shells you can carry. This is just another way the ANTI'S are getting thier agenda though. Period. Like I said, what will be next? Small game? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Covehnter Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! I agree, with the way the waterfowl populations are dwindling a shorter season has to be inforced but like i've mentioned earlier that would hurt to many pockets but i really hope it comes through. I believe the shell limit is more due to the increasing complaints about the public hunting grounds being over run with "sky blasters" and the like though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
too_pointer Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! If this get passes, you can bet that the water and shorelines will be littered with spent shells that people are gonna hide too_ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CuzTheyFly Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! I can see your pain, but man if you can not kill a limit of ducks with 25 rounds while hunting a public refuge, just start throwing rocks at them...lol, The shell limitation is very popular nationwide. We duck hunted it in California ,at public lands with good results. But then any increase in regulations makes things worse... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carbonhunter Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Some steps must be taken, limiting the number of shells (if properly inforced) i believe could improve hunting on some heavily hunted areas. [/ QUOTE ] You mean to tell me you gonna have some Game Offical walking around checking and counting the number of shells your carrying? Thats CRAZY! Why not lower the bag limits and season. Would be a lot cheaper for the Game Officials! I am not a waterfowl hunter, but what is next? Doves??? Like the post also says, what about the less expirenced hunter? The hunter that gets his or her first chance to hunt waterfowl? Opps! Thats too bad, your done now because your out of ammo! This would be a great way to lose future hunters! This a knucklehead law! Something the ANTI'S are just trying pass so they can continue thier adgenda! [/ QUOTE ] But it WOULD stop the same knuckleheads from skybusting every bird they see no matter how high. It would make those future hunters pick there shots better. I hunt some very very hard hunted lakes and its not un-commen for guys to shoot at birds as high as 80 yards up and do it all day long. From what I understand that is a problem in that area as well. If I remember right most of that area in the Iowa/Wisc./Minn triangle is closed to hunting anyway......its also where the Fabled 19 pool is(i think...lol) I never have more than 25 shells with me in the field anyway, unless im dove hunting(as you point out) with a total of 8 birds (geese/ducks) here in Ohio I never saw the need for more. I also shoot a O/U so that cuts down on my shell use alot also. If it wasnt for skybusters Id say its a a knucklehead law as well, but the number of birds I've seen wounded from this practice makes me sick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LifeNRA Posted June 20, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! [ QUOTE ] If it wasnt for skybusters Id say its a a knucklehead law as well, but the number of birds I've seen wounded from this practice makes me sick. [/ QUOTE ] I guess I never knew that these im-morral hunters were doing this. Well, since it doesnt effect me at this time, maybe it will cut down on the SLOB hunter! I just hope it doesnt go any farther than waterfowl! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest benelli_man_84 Posted June 22, 2005 Report Share Posted June 22, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! I can see both sides, but they oughtta allow youth hunters an exemption on the shell limit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palssonater Posted June 23, 2005 Report Share Posted June 23, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! good suggestion benelli_man! Although I can see a number of adults ensuring they have youth with them to bring along extra shells. Skybusters are terrible. They can ruin a whole day on public marsh. This might not be the right approach, but I sure hope it is hunters making the decisions and that they make the right ones. However, I fear this is not the way it is. Darn city slickers... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gastj Posted June 28, 2005 Report Share Posted June 28, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! Limiting the number of shells is maybe part of the answer, but not the whole one. Numbers are dwindling, but cutting Canada and Mexico's season limits would be a great start. We know that ain't going to happen ! Here in OHIO a few yrs ago they restricted slug guns to three and I started hunting gun week again. I know guys that would buy cases of pumpkin balls to throw around. Now they mainly stand hunt like me and it is a "little safer" out there! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palssonater Posted June 28, 2005 Report Share Posted June 28, 2005 Re: Limiting the number of shells for waterfowl! The number of Canadian waterfowlers in the major flyways is just a blink of an eye compared to the number of American Waterfowlers. Although our season is liberal, our harvested numbers are a fraction or American birds. Check with Ducks and Delta for official numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.