The Madduck

W

Worth Mathewson

Active member
My guess is that a lot of you follow the Madduck page. www.madduck.org. While I don't totally agree with all that is written by various authors, there are certainly some worthwhile opinions stated. Several new articles have just been posted. Both "The Mythical Flight" by Charles Potter, and "Worse Season Ever" by George Reiger are interesting. If you haven't seen this page before, you should take a look. And I am certain they will welcome articles if you care to write one. Worth Mathewson
 
Worth,
That is a very interewting site. Thanks for letting us know about it. Nice meeting with Dave today, as always. And yes he ask if I was working on the Daffy........
 
Thanks Worth!

I'm a big fan of Madduck, but I didn't get the email notification for these articles.

I would also add that I don't agree with all of their articles, but by and large they are on the mark.

NR
 
I have read George Reiger for at least 30 years and always thought that he is thought provoking and devoted to waterfowling. I think the philosophical points of the "Worst Season Ever" are more important, as while it was a pretty lousy season here in NJ this year, 2-3 years ago it was great, so I don't think we're at the bottom of a long term decline in waterfowl. I think addressing the use of data crunching as the only means of managing waterfowl makes the point that that type of analysis becomes one dimensional, and is also built from the beginning on assumptions that can be flawed at the very core. I also like the fact that he addresses how some people hunt snow geese and the attitude they take toward the birds, and the fact that it really degrades the sport and treats the birds as a statistic, and does not foster respect of quarry.
 
While the current management of snow geese might foster disrespect of the quarry...how would you manage a population the needs reducing and so far has not responded to the current strategy with any significant decline? I think George should also address that issue with a bent towards constructive criticism......

The sad fact of the bubba shooter is that they will always remain with us in some form.....I wish that was not so...I would also postulate that many younger shooters become ethical hunters as they age......some of us may relate to that..
 
Never read that site before and I wont be bookmarking it to go back.

"The Conscience of Waterfowl Conservation"
What a joke.

IMO: Just lots of bable, finger pointing and BS.
 
First time ever witnessing this site. Some interesting articles, especially the Reiger and Potter articles. The editor, Philips sure missed the mark with his article. It rather looks like "fill" at print deadline. Perhaps he has also attacked the coasts for their separate big water regs, as the upper midwest try to regulate fresh inland seas that are seeing large increases in various diver and seaduck numbers.

I don't have the statistics at hand, but Wisconsin, a state with high numbers of duck kills, also has a very low hunter success rate. And as different organizations posture with proposals to address these issues, a state with a continues record of conservation, doesn't need articles that smack more of jealousy, over who gets to kill the most ducks.
 
Check out the "Super Hens" articles by Mickey Heitmeyer and also the articles by Norm Seymour.

NR
 
Carl, I found it interesting that the Madduck page caused you such irritation. But on the other hand, there are indeed some very strong opinions expressed on the page. The following, by and large correct, I think, might give you some background to the page: From 1983 until ? James Phillips published a folded 12 page newsletter titled WILDFOWLING. It started out as an interesting publication, containing opinions, news items, hunting locations and guides etc. I enjoyed it. But then Phillips increasing used the publication to blame the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service for everything short of the holocaust. At the same time George Reiger was at the height of his vindictive rant against game enforcement officers, including those not yet born. I canceled my subscription.

I have noticed since Madduck was first sent to me that both men are still expressing their opinions, thus guess Madduck is a spinoff from the old WILDFOWLING. Only this time around I think things are better balanced. For example, Norman Seymour has contributed, and that is one man who we all should fall into close formation behind. His book, Living A Dream, is a must read for all waterfowlers. While I am certainly not defending some of the opinions expressed on Madduck, I will always take the time to read anything by those concerned with our waterfowl.

Also, on a subject discussed on another post, I find it puzzling that those of us who question the duck counts are pictured as individuals who are accusing the actual counters of padding the numbers. At least in my case, that isn't so. As I have posted before, I have two close personal friends who were involved in the flying counts. One is retired, the other still flies and counts. There is no question in my mind that these men, and ALL the others, record what they see. Period. But at the same time I feel strongly we don't have the numbers of ducks we are told we do. And this view is shared by one Federal waterfowl biologist and two State waterfowl biologists I know and have discussed the matter with. In other words, something, somewhere just ain't correct. Worth
 
Also, on a subject discussed on another post, I find it puzzling that those of us who question the duck counts are pictured as individuals who are accusing the actual counters of padding the numbers. At least in my case, that isn't so.
Click to expand...


Worth,

As a biologist and a public servant in a state natural resources department, this is exactly what bothers me about these types of articles: they all seem to imply that the guys on the ground and in the air are purposely screwing up the counts or they don't know what they are doing. But dont provide any proof to these allegations.

I am glad to hear that you are not in that group. I have a couple of your books and have read a number of your articles. As a sportsman, conservationist and author, you definately have my respect.
 
Worth,
Thanks for the heads up. I do enjoy Dr. Seymour's work and his book opened my eyes to some things I had not considered. I'd revisit the site just to read more of his thoughtful work. As to the website (Madduck). I read a dozen or more articles and generally found some of the authors just as concerned with their strained prose as with the topic at hand. Talk about hyperbole overload. The actual subjects they are writing about are all well worth discussing. I just don't like my conversations to be "in your face" especially when laced with opinions. Its the old saying "don't raise your voice, when you should reinforce your argument"
One thing remains clear, waterfowl biology is a very tricky thing. A lot of different forces at hand. I did find it ironic that on the same home page there is a call for better modeling of wildfowl population density in one article while another dismisses the computer as a possible tool to conduct such modeling. The former is a worthy conversation the later is Luddite factionalism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top