Editorial
Waterfowl Regulations –
Education, Revision and Uniform Enforcement is needed
This is my 34th waterfowl season and I am enjoying another season of great outdoor fellowship with friends and family. I have been a waterfowl biologist for 24 years and Executive Director of the South Carolina Waterfowl Association for 21 years. With all that experience you would think I could provide you with a black and white answer to any waterfowl regulation question you could ask. You also probably think that I or any other waterfowl biologist can provide you with sound biological reasoning (backed up by scientific data) for every waterfowl regulation. Unfortunately you would be wrong.
Each year I field many questions about waterfowl regulations as they relate to hunting techniques, habitat management and waterfowl biology in general. I also get many calls from hunters who are confused about the wording of regulations or what a game warden may tell them about a regulation. In an effort to bring clarity to waterfowl regulations the SCWA Board hired an experienced Washington attorney to prepare a review of waterfowl regulations with examples of court rulings pertaining to each. We then sent this review to the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR) and to Jim Gale, Special agent in charge with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Southeast Region. We requested a meeting with both agencies to discuss the regulations and work toward bringing clarity to waterfowl regulations and to encourage uniform enforcement of regulations by all state and federal game wardens. Prior to our efforts the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources was already working with law enforcement and biological staff to develop a written pamphlet on waterfowl regulations to help clear up confusion among waterfowl hunters, habitat managers and game wardens regarding regulations. We applaud this effort.
Over the past several months we have had numerous telephone conversations, two very productive meetings with SCDNR and one productive joint meeting with SCDNR and the USFWS. During these meetings we covered many topics including baiting, wanton waste, live decoys, possession limits and tagging of ducks. As a result SCDNR is working on a more detailed version of their existing pamphlet that will be distributed to duck hunters and published in a future issue of waterfowl and wetlands. We applaud SCDNR and the USFWS for this effort. It is easy to get frustrated with law enforcement personnel when hunters do not understand the need for certain regulations or the confusing wording on some regs, however, it is important to remember that these regulations have been on the books for many years, with layer upon layer of regulations that have been added since the 1920’s before most law enforcement professionals were even born. Hunters should also remember that Law enforcement personnel are charged with enforcing existing law as it is written and under the guidelines of court case law. The courts in turn are charged with interpreting the law and developing case law precedent in the application of statutes and laws. The challenge for waterfowl resource professionals and law makers is to develop biologically sound and common sense regulations that protect the resource and allow for the maximum sustainable harvest of ducks and geese while also ensuring that unreasonable regulations do not make criminals out of honest people. This only serves to drive people out of the sport and create a divide between hunters and wildlife agencies.
As we work to enhance waterfowl resources we must remember that recruitment of hunters into our sport is very important. Over 90 percent of all the money spent on wildlife conservation comes directly or indirectly from hunters. Since the 1970’s we have lost hundreds of thousands of duck hunters in North America. As I talk with hunters many tell me that duck hunting is just too complicated. Many hunters stay away from duck hunting because it is just too easy to make an honest mistake that results in an embarrassing fine.
To say the least waterfowl regulations are the most complicated of any hunting regulations. Unfortunately and to the detriment of waterfowl hunting and conservation many of the regulations that are on the books are based on personal preference and sentiment and not sound biology. Ray Prunty Holland (1884-1973), the former federal game warden who arrested the attorney general of Missouri for Spring shooting – a test case that went all the way to the Supreme Court and established the federal governments primacy in migratory bird management and past editor of Field and Stream magazine said it best in his 1945 book - Shotgunning in the Lowlands “It is my belief that game management should always be kept on a sound business basis. There is no room for sentiment. Game is a crop. It is raised in the Spring and Summer and harvested in the Fall and Winter. An adequate stock of ducks and geese must be returned to the breeding grounds each spring. Rules by which we play the game are necessary to that end. Regulations made because this group or that group think certain practices are not sportsmanlike are always dangerous. “ Mr. Holland was referring to many laws that were added to restrict hunting over bait, live decoys and from sink boxes. The chapter provides an interesting perspective on the history of waterfowl regulations from someone who was involved from the beginning and had a great concern about the future of waterfowl resources and hunting.
It is essential that we do everything possible to clarify and simplify waterfowl regulations. We must work to educate hunters and game wardens on regulations and encourage law enforcement agencies to uniformly enforce the law with a common sense approach. The future of the waterfowl resource and waterfowl hunting depends on it.
