Robo

[DCICE]

Is this a 'too sensitive' topic online? I sure wish I had at least one after time on Marsh Lake last season.
We did have some good shooting reguardless of
our lack of Robo. Are these things here to stay? dc

[Duck-o-holic]

DC--

It's a bit controversial, but it was talked about in much detail during on the site last season. Pull up some of the old threads, and see what everyone had to say about them! Both Gull and I wrote some reviews on them, and others also gave some mixed field reviews on their effectiveness.

I believe that the motion to make them illegal in MN was recently denied... at least for now. It wouldn't bother me a bit if they were made illegal, however.

Just found out who you are the other day. Amazing that after reading most of your posts, that we've actually hunted together and I didn't even realize it! Kudo's to the good old (diver) days!!!

Good Gunnin'

Duck-o-holic

[DCICE]

'DUCK-
Thanks for your response. I am just easing my

way into this site(better late than never)

Its great to keep the 'fire going' even after seasons pass! take care dc

[DCICE]

'DUCK-
Thanks for your response. I am just easing my

way into this site(better late than never)

Its great to keep the 'fire going' even after seasons pass! take care dc

[Guest]

I dont know much about the Robo Duck, meaning i have never used one. But i see in todays Star/Tribune that a politician wants to ban it. Its the same fool that supported banning underwater cameras when his buddy who is next to his district proposed to ban them. What the hell are these two guys trying to protect? Could it be the lakes they live on? Has the fishing population been reduced since the underwater cameras have been on the market? They keep saying "whats next?" Well whatever is next, iam ready for it. I thought the DNR was supposed to control out natural resources? I dont know the DNR's position on Robos, but i didnt ever hear them say anything about the cameras? Why dont you politicans support a bill to hire more CO's or toughen our littering laws? Isnt it the poachers and garbage that really reduces our fish and game? Iam cant say i support or deny a robotic duck decoy, but jumping up and spending my tax dollars on banning something that hasnt had sufficant evidence to reduce the duck population is ridiculous. By buying a hunting and fishing license am i not entitled to the limit of game i pursue that the same lawmakers gave to me that also want to keep it from me? Quit wasting our time with these B.S bills and go after the poachers and folks who ruin our natural habitat with garbage. Jeeez wake up already

------------------
MILLE LACS AREA GUIDE SERVICE
651-271-5459 http://fishingminnesota.com/millelacsguide/

[Sartell Angler]

here is the simple solution i think people should realize:
They should--
A. Ban them, throughout North America
B. Announce a plan of action and stick with it, whether that being saying they won't ban them withing the next 5 years, etc.

If they announce that they're no longer legal throughout North America, I'd be happy. I just don't want to see them ban them in our state, while the guys in the south still get to use them and get even more ducks than they already do. If they propose not to ban them for a given number of years, I will buy one to even the odds. I just don't want to buy one, use it one year, and then have it turn worthless when they ban them in MN. They should solve this problem quick, and do what D-MAN said by going after the poachers, etc.

S.A.