Motorized Decoy banned by MN legislature!

[deacon]

Where is our state's priorities, I just read a news released by MN house passed a ban on motorized decoys for waterfowl hunting.

I have never used a motorized decoy and probably never will, however, MN needs to solve the lack of ducks issue and hunter access and this type of legislation is not a long term solution.

It is all about habitat and hunter access for me. If the ducks have habitat they will stay in MN and nest successfully and if there is hunter access, hunters that are not willing and cannot pay to hunt they will have opportunities. Why can't these people solve the problem, it is just frustrating to see what our neighboring states of SD and ND do for ducks and hunters and MN continues to ignore. I could go on all day but I would just get more frustrated.

Restore habitat and make public access a requirement to get CRP payments for land!

[jlm]

I agree with most of what you said, we need habitat. You had me hooked until your last statement about CRP being open to the public. I completely disagree. It is private land and controlled access is needed. I say this for several reasons. First, if we opened up all the land (CRP and other government based programs), we would have numerous complaints and CO's are busy enough. Second, private land keeps the numbers of all wildlife up on public land. Most private land owners control access and limit access. This in turn assures that a population of any given game animal is not depleted. However, some critters will cross the controlled area into public land so you now have a chance to harvest something. Third, CRP is a great asset to our environment for air and water quality. Many farmers will take their land out of CRP if it is considered "public" and will again farm it...that will hurt everyone, hunter or non-hunter. Our non-access to CRP and other government land is the only thing that keeps many game animals at a population that is huntable because of the pressure some areas get. In my eyes, CRP is the best thing that has happened to our state as far as wild life goes. Just my 2 cents!

[Farley]

Couldnt agree with you more jlm. Keep CRP private and have a seperate "Walk In" program similar to Kansas.

[lawdog]

Quote:

---

Where is our state's priorities, I just read a news released by MN house passed a ban on motorized decoys for waterfowl hunting.

---

I don't think this has passed and been signed by the Governor has it? Where did you see this???

[tealitup]

This has been passed by the house, but not the sen. and the gov. has not weighed in on the issue. The House File is 0847 - for search purposes ... HF0847

http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/bldbill.php?bill=H0847.4&session=ls84

Copy and paste the link if you would like to look at it.

Here is the status of the bill as it works its way along. Green means what has been done, blue are the next steps.. as you can see the bill can still be changed before a joint session.

http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/revisor/pages/search_status/status_detail.php?b=House&f=HF0847&ssn=0&y=2005

If you need anymore assistance with how gov. works or what you should do, please do not hesitate to ask.

[jblabsnduck]

It has passed the house and the gov. is in favor and rumors say he will sign it.

Bye bye robos.

I could care less either way but I say if you ban them here it needs to be done all the way down the flyway.

[doser]

Agreed Jblabs. I think it needs to be consistant down the flyway on the ban if they are going to do it.

Doser..aka Swampcollie

[lawdog]

teal, that's good general advice on where to look (or at least start), but if people aren't familiar with bills at all they wouldn't get much from looking at that. You should also note to them that underlined language is proposed to be added to the statutory section while struckout language is to be deleted. So if you want to know what the bill would do, read the language without the struckout and with the underlined and that is what it would then say in statute if the bill was adopted by both houses and signed into law by the Governor. This bill's language is actually not a complete ban, but pretty close to it...

[jlm]

I doubt it will pass! The only way it will pass is if it is a complete ban along the entire flyway. If it passes only here in MN, you will see some seriously PO'ed hunters.

[GullGuide]

It's just like anything else, it will take a few states do ban it and then the rest will fall in line.

I quit using mine last year because it seemed to have lost it's effectiveness over water. I was against them from the beginning but had to get one to compete with others on the lake. Every year they work less and less and in many cases scared birds off.

I will not loose any sleep over this at all.

[fishermann222]

Gullguide I would agree with you that it does scare some birds off. In my hunting adventures I have noticed that Geese, Tundra Swans, and Sandhill cranes really really dislike robo.

I use robo in the fall up here in alaska and it is incredible iwth ducks in the fall. I live in an eskimo village where federal subsistance hunting is allowed in the spring as well. The robo duck in the spring is not effective at all. It scares all the birds away. I am going out on a limb and guessing here: I would say it has to do with them becoming "conditioned" to their use. I think it is just like any other once new idea. It works great for a while until ducks get accustomed to it, then it looses its effectivness.

[2 DA GILLS]

I do not know what the exact wording is in the bill, but I would love to see a ban on motorized spinning wing decoys (actually any motorized decoy). Yes, habitat and access are very real concerns, but this ban could be a small step that costs nothing. Spinners have been proven to increase harvest rates and do nothing for promoting real growth and development in the sport of waterfowling.

Arkansas has already banned their use, why can't MN be the next to take a step in the right direction. The longer they are allowed, the more they become a part of waterfowling history and the harder they will be to regulate later. As others have stated, they are not as effective as they once were. What do you think the next step is? More advanced technology. I know that in 10 years, I do not want to have to remember to charge the batteries on my "flying flock" the night before every hunt, just so I can compete with the other hunters. Let's draw the line at this point.

Get rid of the spinners, that is easy. Then we need to see some real results regarding habitat and access.

[tealitup]

You are right Lawdog, my post was for informational purposes about the proposed legislation. It should be noted that I think some people are confused about this...

Please look at the entire bill. This is not a piece-meal style bill. Meaning, all of the props. are encased in this one bill. So YOUR leg. (reps, sen.) vote on the bill as a whole which includes motorized spinning wing decoys as a part. There are numerous other parts of the bill which some are good and some are bad. I see the house bill and senate are different so either the Senate or the House can concur with the other body’s amendments to the bill. If either body does not concur, the bill is sent to a conference committee. Otherwise, the bill is sent to the

governor.

I do think that the changes between the two are not very different and might one might concur with the other.

The senate file 0789 is more specific to what they are going for: Subd. 4a. [RESTRICTIONS ON CERTAIN MOTORIZED DECOYS.] From

14.34 the opening day of the duck season through the Saturday nearest

14.35 October 8, a person may not use a motorized decoy on public

14.36 waters with visible, moving parts that are above the water

15.1 surface, or other motorized device designed to attract migratory

15.2 birds, to take migratory waterfowl, other than geese. During

15.3 the remainder of the duck season, the commissioner may, by rule,

15.4 designate all or any portion of a wetland or lake closed to the

15.5 use of motorized decoys or motorized devices designed to attract

15.6 migratory birds. On water bodies and lands fully contained

15.7 within wildlife management area boundaries, a person may not use

15.8 motorized decoys or motorized devices designed to attract

15.9 migratory birds at any time during the duck season.

My computer will not copy strickouts or underlined. So you should access the site to view for yourself. http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/bldbill.php?bill=S0789.2&session=ls84

[cmoredrakes]

Now, I heard that this law will only be effective on Wildlife Management areas and NOT on public lakes or on private land. But, ya' Know that it is always good to have movement in your spread. And most guys who don't have access to private land might just want a robo in the spread. Plus alot of guys aren't gettin' alot of ducks in Minnesota anymore due to wetland and farm destruction where the ducks nest and feed to put in more houses !! No wonder we don't have any ducks anymore we should take a stand and try to put a stop to all of this destruction of duck habitat and being replaced by housing developments. But, I hope this all comes through on the good side for us Waterfowlers.

[minniwinni91]

I agree with every thing cmore said just cause you have a robo isnt going to guarante that you'll get your limit it's just another edge. Just like regular decoys it just another edge.Like calls IT'S JUST ANOTHER EDGE that we have over the ducks I've hunted with cmore and robo ducks work great we didnt get out limit but it helped a little and for the guys who go out to get some tasy meat and have some fun while there at it.

you may not agree with my opinion but motorized shoulnd be banned I know that gives the guys at carlos avery a big advantage so what ever you think great but this is what I belive

[walleyewacker]

I will agree that birds have become shy of spinning wings, over water......fields are a different story. We would have a much tougher time killing numbers in the fields, sometimes we have eight or so in a spread, but this is mostly what we do. And I agree that if one state bans them everyone needs to. I can see both ways on banning them but I disagree with banning them because of the advantage. If we are going to ban things that give us a big advantage over game, why dont we ban deer hunting with rifles that will knock a deer cold a a few hundred yards away without them even knowing you are there? Why dont we ban underwater cameras, because 90% of fishin is finding them in the first place. At least with spinning wing decoys, weather you choose to use them in your situation or not, it still requires the scouting and concealment to fool the birds in the first place. Spinning wing decoys can help or hurt you and it is a skill in itself to know when and how to use

them. I think this should be a federal issue rather than a state.

[wooduck26]

I couldnt care less of they are banned, it will just make us guys who can call ducks effectively even more deadly to the Ol Mallards.......

[jblabsnduck]

jlm, you might see some PO'ed hunters but IMO those will be the guys that live or die by there spinners. I am not bashing anyone in any way for using one, I have friends that have them. But, like my friends that have them they said if the are banned then they are banned but we will still kill ducks.

I think the real Po'ed people will be the weekend warrior who can't use his robo any more and now he actully has to scout, learn how to call and know good decoy placement. He will be PO'ed because he can't kill a bird without that robo.JMO

I used them back when they first came out but I got rid of them about 4 years ago and haven't used one since.

You want to use them, fine by me but I don't want to hear people cry when they get banned and they are not killing any birds. It will be time to learn how to really hunt.

[jlm]

Well, I kind of agree with you I guess. However, there are more than weekend hunters who use them. There are numerous guides and pro waterfowl guys who use spinners. I personally could care less either way, I use them from time to time but when I am guiding a group of guys, its just more to lug around, particularly when it is in a remote area. I prefer to go light and mobile myself. What I was trying to imply in my first post is that people will be more upset that the entire flyway does not follow the same rules. I personally believe that the entire flyway should play fair. However, that just my opinion I guess. Lets just wait and see what happens I guess.

[GullGuide]

If I read the bill right,

Quote:

---

a person may not use a motorized decoy on public waters with visible, moving parts that are above the water surface, or other motorized device designed to attract migratory birds, to take migratory waterfowl, other than geese.

---

ALL motorized devices will be outlawed, this would include ANY device with a motor even those vibrating pucks, the dekes that spit and kick up water, or those devices suspended under the dekes to bubble the water(using old trolling motors)....Just playing Devil's Advocate, but it is something to ponder and is open to interpretation.....

[jblabsnduck]

jlm, first, I am glad that you didn't take my post the wrong way.

Second, my friends that use them are hardcore fowlers such as myself only difference is I don't use one.

I know that guides use them and I have no problem with that, they have a paying customer so of course they want to use what they legaly can to make the paying customer happy. Not to mention that people that go with guides are not always the best shots in the world so the guide likes to have the birds in as close as possible and spinners help do just that. I would rather see a good close clean kill shot than a far cripple shot.

I have said it before that I WILL NOT bash someone who uses one or how many ever he wants to. I just think there are a lot of people out there that think they HAVE TO HAVE ONE to kill ducks.(the people that will be very PO'ed)

I think the serious fowlers that use them will say " o'well, we will still kill birds with out one like we did before they ever came out."JMO.

But, yes if they do not ban them all the way down the flyway you will have people saying that is a bunch of talk and I can see there point.

Keep'em all or get rid of them all I don't care either way.

When my friends hunt with me they know we will not be using one and when I hunt with them I know they might be using one but that hasn't happened yet.

[lawdog]

Just to clarify. I finally had a second to look at this. The House File was substituted for the Senate file and referred to committee. So there is no point in looking at the Senate file language anymore. The House file (HF 847) language is a straight up ban everywhere and it does say ALL motorized decoys as mentioned above, not just spinners.

[Rost]

What's the skinny on this? Any breaking news?

[lawdog]

The skinny Rost, is that you need to get here and buy my spinner!!!

[Rost]

Funny! Yeah, I will be in your area sooner or later.

If MN actually goes through with this, it'll be an hsolist Spinning Wing Bananza!