Change To Federal Mallard Pop Goal and Impact on Seasons

Eric Patterson

Eric Patterson

Moderator
Staff member
While reading Adaptive Harvest Management documents on the USF&WS page I stumbled across something that surprised me and I'd love to hear an explanation. The population goal of 8.5 million mallards when determining seasons was dropped in the 2023 report calculations. The charts below show the regulatory strategies for 2022 and 2023. Note the large shift in thresholds where the different seasons (Liberal, Moderate, Restricted, Closed) kick in. I have to assume the removal of the 8.5 million goal is the reason for this shift. Someone set me straight if this is not the reason. But this begs the questions 1) why was the goal dropped, and is harvest even less important today than thought just a few years ago?

2022AHM.jpg

2023AHM.jpg



 
Interesting that the objective changed from maximizing harvest AND 8.5 million mallards to maximizing long-term cumulative harvest.

I do not like that the liberal season option can be selected when the mallard population drops as low as 3.5 million.

I saw a chart from USFWS that shows states along the MS River with kill data from 2014 and 2015, then 2021 and 2022. Every state has seen a pretty dramatic decline in harvest; it's a gut punch, honestly. If, for example, Arkansas had dropped from 1 million down to 720,000, but Minnesota, Iowa, and Illinois' harvests rose, then it would bear out the weather/climate...but it isn't. All of them are declining.

Is it a cycle, or a trend? Don't know.

But it bothers me that while we are seeing habitat loss, drought, and other negative factors, the USFWS is modifying the model to keep liberal seasons with fewer ducks.
 
Rick I agree with a lot of your statements, I wonder though if the mallards are getting pushed partway too late. In other words mallards finally make their way only to MO. just as season is closing. Then with the warmer winter trend cycle we are in they do not move much further. I am just throwing out at idea. I know the addition of heated ponds in cities and such is not helping with duck and goose migration. That would be a study worth looking at.
 
Gary Mills said:
Rick I agree with a lot of your statements, I wonder though if the mallards are getting pushed partway too late. In other words mallards finally make their way only to MO. just as season is closing. Then with the warmer winter trend cycle we are in they do not move much further. I am just throwing out at idea. I know the addition of heated ponds in cities and such is not helping with duck and goose migration. That would be a study worth looking at.
Click to expand...
I get it, and again, if Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Illinois were killing more ducks over time, I would shrug and say that the weather/climate is having more of an influence.

Now, thinking about it a little more, and playing on what you said, the northern seasons open earlier and close earlier so they may be in the same relative quandary as Arkansas. The birds that left Canada in September/October and filtered down the flyway aren't coming down until December when the northern states have closed zones. If those zones have open water, no pressure, and food...the ducks aren't going anywhere.

But, I also know that with ducks there isn't a single, magical thing that we can "fix" and BLAM! duck seasons are just like "the good old days". It's a knot of many different threads, and the relative influence of those threads changes year to year.

Edit to add: I think habitat is still the one key factor and the biggest battle we face; for all of our talk about the environment, being stewards, etc., states like Iowa still allow wetlands to be tiled and drained to get that extra couple of acres of corn. My understanding is that the same thing is going on in Canada, especially in drought conditions. And as long as we lose habitat, we lose ducks.
 
I agree with Rick's statement.

"But it bothers me that while we are seeing habitat loss, drought, and other negative factors, the USFWS is modifying the model to keep liberal seasons with fewer ducks."

If you read the attachment below and many others out there, I believe it would become a hardship for many if the fed didn't allow liberal bag limits. I also believe most hunters aren't seeing daily bags numbers that correlate to the current bag limits allowed. As hunter numbers go down I believe states need all the recreational dollars they can get so economically the sport has to look good.

www.splitreed.com

Economic Impacts of Waterfowl Hunting | Split Reed

Hunting stimulates the economy, at scale. Both smaller rural communities and the national economy both receive significant influxes of money thanks to the efforts of sportsmen.
www.splitreed.com www.splitreed.com

Another thing I saw recently is Amy Klobachar and Sen Tina Smith are trying to to give away wetlands in MN that were purchased with help from Ducks Unlimited with funds from federal duck stamp money? Can anyone chime in on this. Seems that could lock a lot of land out of public access but it's all hearsay in my side

www.dl-online.com

White Earth working on agreement with feds over future of Tamarac National Wildlife Refuge

“We’re working out an agreement with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,” said White Earth General Counsel Andrea Kingbird. “I can’t say more until it’s finalized.”
www.dl-online.com www.dl-online.com
 
Eric Patterson said:
While reading Adaptive Harvest Management documents on the USF&WS page I stumbled across something that surprised me and I'd love to hear an explanation. The population goal of 8.5 million mallards when determining seasons was dropped in the 2023 report calculations. The charts below show the regulatory strategies for 2022 and 2023. Note the large shift in thresholds where the different seasons (Liberal, Moderate, Restricted, Closed) kick in. I have to assume the removal of the 8.5 million goal is the reason for this shift. Someone set me straight if this is not the reason. But this begs the questions 1) why was the goal dropped, and is harvest even less important today than thought just a few years ago?

View attachment 55083

View attachment 55084



Click to expand...
Bullseye Ed

Eric, Im on New Jersey's migratory bird council. One trend we are dealing with throughout the flyway is the reduction in Hunter numbers.

Also Hunter harvest is continuing to be seen as a smaller and smaller driver of population numbers. Especially as waterfowl Hunter numbers decline.

This is going to be evident in the near future with a possible raising of the Pintail limits. Even though their population numbers have not increased dramatically.

Hunter retention is one of the overriding goals.


Hope this shed some light.
 
Ed L. said:
Another thing I saw recently is Amy Klobachar and Sen Tina Smith are trying to to give away wetlands in MN that were purchased with help from Ducks Unlimited with funds from federal duck stamp money? Can anyone chime in on this. Seems that could lock a lot of land out of public access but it's all hearsay in my side

www.dl-online.com

White Earth working on agreement with feds over future of Tamarac National Wildlife Refuge

“We’re working out an agreement with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,” said White Earth General Counsel Andrea Kingbird. “I can’t say more until it’s finalized.”
www.dl-online.com www.dl-online.com
Click to expand...
Ed,
In this particular set of circumstances, I don't think I would describe it as "giving away".
 
jode hillman said:
Bullseye Ed

Eric, Im on New Jersey's migratory bird council. One trend we are dealing with throughout the flyway is the reduction in Hunter numbers.

Also Hunter harvest is continuing to be seen as a smaller and smaller driver of population numbers. Especially as waterfowl Hunter numbers decline.

This is going to be evident in the near future with a possible raising of the Pintail limits. Even though their population numbers have not increased dramatically.

Hunter retention is one of the overriding goals.


Hope this shed some light.
Click to expand...
How do we grow and retain hunters without hunting success? I work with our Take One Make One program here in SC. We hunt ducks and turkey so I am all from growing hunter numbers but I'm concerned about retention. How do we retain hunters with dwindling hunting success. I understand what you are saying regarding hunting impact on overall duck population but it seems as if the USFWS has lowered the bar on the benchmark (mallard numbers) in order to maintain the current liberal seasons and framework.

When we are concerned about turkey, deer, bear, fish, etc each State has a faster reaction to biological changes and adjusts seasons and restricts harvest.
 
I want to expand on some of what I referenced earlier...How many big cities are from (lets say Canada border) on flyway to MO. how many of those cities have drainage ponds (rainwater catch basins) in the city. How many are heated, etc. How many waterfowl stay in those cities. So let me make up some numbers. 100 cities that hold 1000 ducks or geese that do not move south until food runs out. That is 100000 birds. I work in Rochester, MN and can say that is a conservative number for here. I do not believe that is the only issue but just one cog in the wheel.
 
Huntindave McCann said:
Ed,
In this particular set of circumstances, I don't think I would describe it as "giving away".
Click to expand...
Perhaps you're right Dave and don't get me wrong, I have no problem with Native Americans regaining federal lands they've lost over the centuries. I wrote it the way I read it from another post on the web. Of course I'm not in the area and can't verify so far that any of the refuge land was in fact purchased or maintained with federal duck stamp money and is the reason I asked if anyone could offer any information.

From another site:
"Senator Amy Kloubuchar is attempting to give away 40,000 acre Tamarac Federal Wildlife Refuge ( 28 Lakes) in NW Minnesota that was purchased 99.9% with money raised by Duck Hunters purchasing federal Duck Stamps. It's not her's to give away"
 
Ed L. said:
Perhaps you're right Dave and don't get me wrong, I have no problem with Native Americans regaining federal lands they've lost over the centuries. I wrote it the way I read it from another post on the web. Of course I'm not in the area and can't verify so far that any of the refuge land was in fact purchased or maintained with federal duck stamp money and is the reason I asked if anyone could offer any information.

From another site:
"Senator Amy Kloubuchar is attempting to give away 40,000 acre Tamarac Federal Wildlife Refuge ( 28 Lakes) in NW Minnesota that was purchased 99.9% with money raised by Duck Hunters purchasing federal Duck Stamps. It's not her's to give away"
Click to expand...
Amy Klobuchar has been a Liberal Pox of Minnesota for far too long and sadly will probably will be with in office with us longer than most of us wish.
 
Jode hit the nail on the head. Less hunters are driving the regs as we saw with the increase of the Black Duck limit upped to 2. Not more Black Ducks, less hunters. Each year there are less waterfowl hunters in all of North America. Unless that trend changes we shall have to deal with the regs. Recruitment of new hunters is more difficult than ever for various reasons. We were once many not so now.

my 2 cents
 
All, thanks for the responses. Regarding those about harvest north vs. south, let's not forget the mid-continent mallard pop has been on a nine-year skid, down around 40%, and certainly correlates with lower harvest wherever you hunt in the Miss or central flyways. Like Rick I certainly hope this is the trough of a down cycle that will rebound, as opposed to a trend that will persist because of breeding habitat loss.

Hunter satisfaction is a curious thing and drives much of the discussions on various platforms we tune in to. On one hand we have the USF&WS applying science to manage populations and satisfy hunter expectations, on a stressed budget. On the other hand, you have the hunters, who I've come to the conclusion, cannot be satisfied. I got into a discussion on IG with a few that were really bashing AHM, and scoffing at science in general, blaming the folks that do that work based on their perception that hunting today sucks. It was PAINFULLY obvious their opinions were based solely on mistrust of anything coming from the government combined with complete ignorance of AHM (I won't waste my energy again with that sort of discussion 🫢). There is no satisfying some folk.

But to my point. Waterfowlers in general have selective memory and that drives expectations, and especially dissatisfaction. Talk to hunters anywhere and they speak GLOWINGLY of hunting 10, 20, 30+ years ago. Ask them about today and you get bitching. If you could take a time machine back and talk to the same hunter, you'd hear bitching about the era now being praised as "glory days." Fess up. We all do it and get up in arms over perceived losses. You can't deny, memories are biased to recollect stellar days afield and forget empty sky days. Nobody admits to this bias but it's huge. I think another term in the dissatisfaction equation is ducks adapt faster than hunters. They change their tactics, but we hunt the same. Or perhaps what brought them to our area is no longer there, so they simply moved on, yet we expect success forever and a day.

One last thought as climb off my soap box. Had the removal of the 8.5 million goal happened during an up cycle, instead of looking like moderate or restricted seasons were in the near future, I think the USF&WS would not have given so much ammo for those that mistrust their every step and are being very vocal about it. Bad optics...
 
Having worked in natural resource management my entire career, I can tell you its a no-win situation.
No matter what USFWS & DNRs do, someone thinks its the best thing ever, and someone else thinks it sucks and is a govt conspiracy to stop all hunting and fishing, with a whole lot of others in the middle are not sure what to think.

Three/four bottom lines:
  • Duck hunter numbers are down,
  • nesting habitat loss is up,
  • wintering habitat is moving north, and
  • migration patterns have changed (I bet nesting patterns as well).
Somehow, duck numbers have remained pretty good since 1997, with some exceptions, such as lesser scaup and pintails.
How to meld all of this into public policy and set seasons & bag limits is a tough task.
I sure as heck don't have the answers.
 
Only one piece of the puzzle, but I believe it's clear that winter comes later and so do the migrations. Here in CT the duck season ended by early January in the old days. It used to be that ice was common on Thanksgiving and everything froze by mid December, now we're fortunate to see it freeze at all. If it happens it's late December or in January. Of course a freeze sees a push of birds, . Nowadays the CT season lasts until around January 20th in the coastal zone, with most hunters arguing it should last until the last day of the month (or whatever is the last possible day by Federal regulation). The CT head biologist argues that mallards pair up by the 20th, so he wants to end the season then. Although spring hunting has been taboo for more than 100 years, I wonder if sliding the Federal end date two weeks into February wouldn't hit the migration a little better and retain hunters? Not exactly spring hunting and it might tend to fit the climate change weather patterns.
 
jode hillman said:
Bullseye Ed

Eric, Im on New Jersey's migratory bird council. One trend we are dealing with throughout the flyway is the reduction in Hunter numbers.

Also Hunter harvest is continuing to be seen as a smaller and smaller driver of population numbers. Especially as waterfowl Hunter numbers decline.

This is going to be evident in the near future with a possible raising of the Pintail limits. Even though their population numbers have not increased dramatically.

Hunter retention is one of the overriding goals.


Hope this shed some light.
Click to expand...
I hope you support raising the pintail limit. It's true that their numbers are much lower than the long term averages but we've had very low pintail limits for 25 years and it hasn't helped at all. And, there are roughly the same number of pintail as there are a lot of other duck species (like wigeon) and the limit is 6 or 7 on all those species. I've seen no logical reason to keep it so low.
 
Since Covid and the nonsense laws concerning non resident waterfowl hunters in Canada pressure on the birds to move south must be considered.

Though it is recent in the number of years (study wise) since waterfowl hunter decline in Canada due to these factors not to add it to the equation makes no sense. If the birds have open water, grit and feed many will stay north with no hunting pressure. We have been through drought, less breeding habitat, low numbers, low bag limits, politics, etc. before. Thus Duck Stamps, DU, Delta, etc. Now we are entering a new phase of conservation and hunting.

I recently read that folks are now hunting due to the high food prices. DUH. Folks that have no hunting family history or frowned upon hunting and hunters. Hunger is a great motivator. Unfortunately poaching is on the increase and enforcement budgets are lower and focus on other areas. The less hunters that are "out there" the less Turn In A Poacher. Hunters have a vast amount of knowledge. Not to tap into that is a waste that we cannot afford.

"Look deep into nature, and then you will understand everything better." - Albert Einstein

my 2 cents
 
This has been interesting and everyone has made some valuable thoughts to ponder. I live on the Mississippi River where the river runs East to West I watch several waterfowling sites as I'm sure you do to. Many state the migration only goes to the snow line these days as winters don't get cold enough to freeze water for long periods of time. For the most part I agree. The Mississippi River on average doesn't freeze hard until the season is in a late season when most ducks and geese have gone through. The one site I watch the most is Forbes Biological Station site located in Havana, IL. It was established in 1894 and per it's site, is the longest continuous running waterfowl biological station in operation. They run Aerial inventory surveys monthly through the hunting season. Their surveys are below me a couple of hours south on the Illinois River and Mississippi River. The numbers of ducks they report are amazing. They are in a convergent area that houses thousands and thousands of duck each year. Everyone here just scratches their heads because these ducks must fly at night because you do not see these numbers during hunting hours. It's not just numbers on paper either. They photograph the surveys. They have a Facebook page. As far as nesting is concerned can you see the goose in the photo? I wish there was a way to rotate with the phone app.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20240404_165231862.jpg
    IMG_20240404_165231862.jpg
    348.8 KB · Views: 18
Kevin Layne said:
I hope you support raising the pintail limit. It's true that their numbers are much lower than the long term averages but we've had very low pintail limits for 25 years and it hasn't helped at all. And, there are roughly the same number of pintail as there are a lot of other duck species (like wigeon) and the limit is 6 or 7 on all those species. I've seen no logical reason to keep it so low.
Click to expand...
This is coming from a federal perspective.

They've essentially said the same thing.
We shoot very few pintails here in the Atlantic flyway area of New Jersey.

But I believe we will see a limits upped three in the next season or two.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top