If Eiders were Mallards you "might be right" Captain Nee.....and I only single you out because you are the one that seems to be most worried most about the human side.......thing is the Sea Duck Tribe ARE NOT Mallards....they don't nest "everywhere there is a puddle" and they don't nest in their first year....they don't mature until their third year and is don't typically have as large a clutch size as "Mallards"........predation, including human, therefore has a much greater impact on the population and given the dynamics of their populations once you pass a threshold it is much more difficult to recover....
A couple of bad years on the nesting grounds with Mallards and Teal and you need to cut back on the season length.....a couple of wet springs and you're back in business.......doesn't work that way with Sea Ducks......put several poor nesting years in a row with the attendant poor recruitment of juveniles and then continue with long season lengths and large limits and all of the sudden you're really hammering your breeders.......you don't know him I don't think cause your name is new to me but I once asked Clint Jeske, (who was a very well know and highly respected Waterfowl Biologist), about the decline of the Scoter populations in Washington, (we experienced the same thing in Washington that you are seeing on the East Coast with an enormous decline in wintering Scoter populations), and his response to me was that he felt that within the Sea Duck tribe that human harvest could rapidly become "additive" to the population decrease......which simply means that "we are shooting too many and that everyone we shoot is one that won't breed"......far different than the "compensatory" harvest when looking at ducks like Mallards.....
I have no doubt that there are things in play that aren't "human related".....I also have NO DOUBT that we are part of the problem.....could something be impacting the food base?....of course but if that's the case then continuing to "add to the lose" of the population base by continuing long seasons and high limits is "screwing the resource".....you might see lowering the limit or reducing season length as "getting screwed" personally but allowing 107 day seasons to continue in the face of the evidence that the populations are declining isn't a particularly intelligent response.......
I feel your pain....I was never a Guide but Sea Duck Hunting was "my thing" for many years in the Pacific NorthWest....did the "bough the equipment thing" and over the years hosted over 50 people from this website on hunts.....most of the people on this site that have killed Harlequins killed them out of my boat and the same can be said of "non East Coasters" for the Scoters and Barrow's Goldeneyes......looking back I accept some of the blame for the decline in Scoter populations in at least some areas in Washington.....Mallards numbers were down for several years and it was my posting on the internet, along with others, both Guides and individuals like myself), who popularized Scoter hunting there.....hunter numbers swelled, harvest burgeoned, and lo and behold populations declined to the point where eventually the limits were reduced to (2) Scoters......Food remained the same, (Scoters like Eiders are mussel eaters and the coves that once held thousands of wintering Scoters remain prime Mussel producers for the market and recreational harvesters), yet there are still those disgruntled hunters that loudly proclaim its a food thing.....
Its the nature of the beast not to accept the blame when things go South, and while I'm not saying that the entire decline should be laid upon the once groaning tailgates of the avid Sea Duckers I do think we have to look at the Sea Duck Tribe as a "different duck" than we do Mallards and assign, and accept, a different management strategy to ensure that we have them in the future.......hurts when you love them over the decoys so deeply, or when you make part of your living from them, but that doesn't change the facts........
As the once near famous Pogo once said......"we have seen the enemy...and he is us"......we can't ignore our impact on this declining species as "inconsequential" nor can we look at decreases as "getting screwed"........at least not IMO......
Steve