AHM?

[Rubberhead*]

Good point cajunwannabe. The harvest rate could certainly be from fewer hunters. I could cobble something together from past reports. (I'll have to put some duct tape on my tinfoil hat, now) the USFWS used to keep a long record of these reports available in .pdf format but now it only goes back 3 years. I wish I had downloaded more of the earlier reports.

I'd like to see how many hunters we lost between 1976 and 1991. It makes sense that the first hunters that drop out aren't the ones killing 12-15 ducks per year but the ones killing only 3 or 4. So, it's not a straight-forward linear look at things. Suffice to say, that when we had a similar trailing off of harvest in prior centuries, the MANagement decision makers made and owned the tough choices. That hasn't happened on this side of the year 2000.

[cajunwannabe]

Personally, every year I am seeing fewer ducks and more hunter pressure on less and less desirable habitat, that in an off itself is mind boggling. Can our hashtag "feet hanging we banging" social media continue to drive retail marketing to sustain this trend with declining hunter numbers and waterfowl numbers?

I will reach out to a retired USFWS fella and see if he has access to at least the last 30 years of hunter numbers.

[coot nasty]

Personally, every year I am seeing fewer ducks and more hunter pressure on less and less desirable habitat, that in an off itself is mind boggling. Can our hashtag "feet hanging we banging" social media continue to drive retail marketing to sustain this trend with declining hunter numbers and waterfowl numbers?

I will reach out to a retired USFWS fella and see if he has access to at least the last 30 years of hunter numbers.

The hashtags and marketing helps get new hunters right? Or does it just ruin the ones that are hunting now? And when people say numbers I don’t believe them. I hear all the time DNR writing tickets for no stamps. And I’m sure it happens everywhere. No telling how many people hunt ducks and never buy a stamp. I bet in the midlands here probably 150 tickets wrote a season for no stamp.

[cajunwannabe]

There's no doubt social media and marketing encourage kids to duck hunt but if the hunter numbers are truly declining, is it sustainable? Are folks into the gadgetry and gimmicks of duck hunting stuff enough to spend billions for so little a reward or is the social status of being a "duck hunter" reward enough? Definitely a great thesis for a Psych or Sociology topic.

[coot nasty]

There's no doubt social media and marketing encourage kids to duck hunt but if the hunter numbers are truly declining, is it sustainable? Are folks into the gadgetry and gimmicks of duck hunting stuff enough to spend billions for so little a reward or is the social status of being a "duck hunter" reward enough? Definitely a great thesis for a Psych or Sociology topic.

Idk but I see people who don’t spend much on gadgets kill and I see them that have every gadget out there and kill where I hunt. I’m sure the other 40 something states do the same thing. I can’t base my knowledge on stuff I don’t see only where I do see. I’m sure thousands of let’s just say jackets are sold how do we know who actually kills in those jackets?

[cajunwannabe]

Idk but I see people who don’t spend much on gadgets kill and I see them that have every gadget out there and kill where I hunt. I’m sure the other 40 something states do the same thing. I can’t base my knowledge on stuff I don’t see only where I do see. I’m sure thousands of let’s just say jackets are sold how do we know who actually kills in those jackets?

I know you're talking about me in your first statement, I'm cheap, I kill. LOL

Not everyone that duck hunts kills ducks, which is fine, but if we continue to see diminished duck numbers / harvest, how long will folks continue to spend billions of dollars on a sport with a diminishing resource / return? It's like playing golf and never sinking a putt to finish the hole.

I think as long as duck hunting is the "in thing" folks will continue to spend billions regardless of harvest success. Regardless of harvest, waterfowl population, lack of migration, folks are still going to hunt.....the buzzword is "hunter opportunity", not hunt quality nor hunt success. As per the OG post on here, personally I'm afraid the 60 / 6 liberal season will continue, as waterfowl population goals seem to be adjusted to accommodate "hunter opportunity" which fuels a billion dollar industry.

[cajunwannabe]

Good point cajunwannabe. The harvest rate could certainly be from fewer hunters. I could cobble something together from past reports. (I'll have to put some duct tape on my tinfoil hat, now) the USFWS used to keep a long record of these reports available in .pdf format but now it only goes back 3 years. I wish I had downloaded more of the earlier reports.

I'd like to see how many hunters we lost between 1976 and 1991. It makes sense that the first hunters that drop out aren't the ones killing 12-15 ducks per year but the ones killing only 3 or 4. So, it's not a straight-forward linear look at things. Suffice to say, that when we had a similar trailing off of harvest in prior centuries, the MANagement decision makers made and owned the tough choices. That hasn't happened on this side of the year 2000.

I believe we're in a climate cycle but as a kid I remember -40 in the late 70's and hundreds of inches of snow and lakes with 2-3 feet thick ice. (I hope I'm not dead and gone before things turn around but I doubt they will in my lifetime)

Regarding the Atlantic Flyway, besides declining hunter numbers / ducks, could milder winters also be responsible for declining duck and hunter numbers?

https://www.clickondetroit.com/featu...m_content=wdiv