Blue Bill (Scaup) News

[MarshBum]

Saw this floating around out there... thought people here would be interested. It has a California slant, but there's some good information in it. Please don't shoot the messenger... or is it merganser?

The gist is one bird limits for all flyways. Seems odd to me, but like the piece below states, I've been under the impression from what I've read over the last two or so years that there is agreement on the fact that harvest is NOT affecting population. If it was, the fix would be easy.

Anyway, see for yourselves.

Geoff

************************************************** **

CWA eNews Action Alerts
June 13, 2007

****DIVING DUCKS TARGETED FOR RESTRICTED HARVEST****

California Waterfowl Association (CWA) opposes U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) plans to implement overly restrictive harvest limits on
scaup for the 2007-08 hunting season. Scaup are the most abundant diving
ducks in North America, and proposed limits of one per day throughout the
country will not benefit the species. CWA and a majority of the top
waterfowl biologists across the nation oppose these excessive restrictions.

Despite the fact that population models indicate that harvest plays little
or no role in declines, the USFWS model to address scaup population declines
uses harvest as the only variable. The consensus among population dynamics
biologists is that a prolonged period of poor reproduction of young birds is
responsible for the decreases in overall numbers. Habitat degradation – not
harvest – is the cause of population decline.

Hunting waterfowl is one of the most important stimuli for wetland
conservation in North America. Because of this critical relationship between
harvest, hunter satisfaction, and conservation funding, CWA urges that
restrictive harvest strategies be supported by solid scientific evidence.
Working with Delta Waterfowl Foundation and the California Outdoor Heritage
Alliance, CWA asks Western Outdoor News readers to join us in the fight for
your hunting rights and help convince USFWS that excessive restrictions on
scaup harvest are unreasonable and misguided.

The harvest strategy proposed by the USFWS for scaup is not warranted (at
this time) because:
1) Only a relatively small number of hunters pursue diving duck hunting, but
the funding and political support for diving duck habitats will be severely
impacted if hunter incentive is lost.

2) Evidence shows that scaup harvest is not related to population changes
and less hunting will not result in increased breeding populations.

3) Waterfowl scientists throughout North America, including several who work
directly with scaup, strongly disagree with the USFWS on the need for
excessive harvest restrictions.

CWA’s concern over scaup harvest restrictions is based on past experience.
Northern pintails have been subject to highly restrictive harvest for nearly
two decades. As with scaup, Northern pintail harvest is not driving
population fluctuations, and decreases in harvest have not led to increased
breeding populations. The consequence of unreasonable pintail restrictions
has been loss of hunters, loss of dollars for conservation, and shifts in
habitat management to benefit species other than pintails (especially in the
southern half of California).

CWA has enjoyed a long relationship with USFWS, and deeply values their
partnership. USFWS support of CWA’s wetlands restoration work and youth and
education outreach efforts have been outstanding. Regarding waterfowl
hunting, however, they find themselves in strong disagreement with the
recent proposal to reduce scaup harvest because it follows the same
unsupported strategy used to justify restrictive pintail harvest for the
past two decades. CWA urges the USFWS to seek further review and support
from waterfowl scientists throughout North America before implementing these
new harvest restrictions.

Please e-mail Steve Thompson, California’s representative on the USFWS
Service Regulations Committee, at cno@fws.gov, and urge him to delay new
harvest restrictions and to call for more extensive external review of
harvest models.

[lor]

Read it on that other forum this morning.
I've never gotten a bluebill, but I guess I better before it becomes a no bird limit.

[Dr Strangelove]

Man, and I just perfected a two dozen diver pattern. Dang. Duck hunting is turning into a smorgasboard...one diver, one can, one pin, one redhead, blah blah blah. Just wait, it'll be one greenhead soon, and then we'll realize it was all a scam to ban hunting, Australia style.

[Teton]

Geoff has gotten me to think about ducks a little lately. Thanks man!!

I'm not sure how I feel about this one. To put the argument on its head, how can one justify elevated harvest numbers for a species which is in sharp decline, even if harvest is a relatively small drop in the bucket of contributing factors? Don't get me wrong, I like a good bluebill hunt once in a while, and not long ago the limit was 4. All I can do is hope that diligent habitat restoration efforts reverse the trend.

[duckboy]

Boy,

There is something wrong here.

If the scientists and biologists that research Scaup agree that the restricted harvest is not going to make any difference, than I am not clear on why it would be on the table.

This is something which will clearly affect the hunter numbers, and additionally, the money and resources available through licensure of hunters revenue which could greatly benefit not only scaup, but all of the animals that inhabit the places that these funds go to protect.

There is a fox in the henhouse I believe.

I think this needs a good looking into.

[steelheadslayer]

If they could prove that harvesting bluebills was extremely detrimental to the population I'd be all for a total closure. Habitat is something we could be working on all the time even with reduced bag limits. But, when the birds are eating the invasive species such as the zebra mussel which feeds them but provides actually no nutritional value, what can we do.
Evidently, some power figure or group thinks we should just buy our licenses and then watch this awesome bird starve. I want my license fees to feed them something of nutrional value and eradicate the invasive species which are harming their native food sources.

[baltz526]

it is a stopgap measure, if they save 5000 birds for next seasons breeding. it inflates numbers on surveys by a couple points. not a solution, just number crunchers, crunching numbers.