Thread: Somethings to just have a look through..

Originally Posted by gqhoon

The idea of banning motorised decoys was put forward last year by the geriatrics at EPCM who want to be seen to be doing something, but are so stuck in the dark-ages they need a torch to find their way. Unfortunately, it was latched onto by David Cocks or Eaun Williamson as a means of garnering support for last year's elections. As Ben has stated, there is no correlation between mechanical decoys and declining populations and was knocked on the head when the regualtions were set for this past season.

Best thing you can do is to get in the ear of those Councillors who want decisions made based on evidence, and not emotion.

That is very cynical. I could counter your comments by simply saying you could have an emotional attachement to the ongoing use/sale of such decoys by aquaintance. I can happily say without knowing either Cocks or Williamson - they have most likely done some investigations with the intent of improving the resource for all. They haven't taken a position to protect their own hunting or anything so selfish I'd suggest.

There is a line of thought that mechanical decoys cause over harvest in the young population resulting in an ageing and less productive breeding population over time. This has been studied. States like California ban the use of flappy ducks until a set time in their season when the migratory ducks arrive in order to protect their resident duck population. Perhaps they have a few misguided emotional councillors also?

There is no correlation between declining duck populations and mechanical decoys in NZ because it hasn't been studied.