Document text
Robo-ducks could be on their way out The state might ban electronic decoys because some think they make hunts less sporting By MARK FREEMAN Oregon wildlife managers will consider this fall whether to ban all mechanical and electrical hunting decoys used to help shoot everything from waterfowl and turkeys to elk and bears. Spurred by concerns that increasingly popular electronic "robo-duck" decoys cheapen waterfowl hunting, the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission decided Friday in Medford to look into a sweeping policy governing all wildlife decoys available now as well as those not yet invented. Robo-ducks are duck decoys with electric motors that attempt to attract waterfowl by spinning their wings, swimming or diving. While studies show they can improve hunters' ability to shoot more ducks at some times, their use is not considered a biological issue but one of social acceptability. Though robo-ducks have grown in popularity since surfacing in sporting-goods stores five years ago, similar decoys have yet to catch on among other segments of the sport-hunting community. State wildlife managers want to settle the issue of technology's place in Oregon's woods and wetlands before the products start flying off store shelves. "We are going to see if we can draft something broad and general enough to cover waterfowl, upland game birds and big game," said Ron Anglin, wildlife program administrator for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. "This way, the commission is looking at everything as a total package, not just one type of hunting or one type of decoy." The commission is scheduled in October to decide whether to ban some or all of the decoys, and no bans would take place until the 2003-04 hunting seasons. Between now and October, agency biologists will take the public pulse about the specific decoys and species as well as the big picture about how much technology is too much in a sport exceedingly concerned about fair chase. "The sooner we deal with these things and, if we have to make judgment on the ethics of fair chase, the easier it is for people to accept it," said Commissioner Jeff Feldner of Logsden. "If we wait for 60 percent of people to own a robo-duck, it'll be hard to talk them out of it. "We'll have some heated discussions on this." Pennsylvania already bans all electronic devices for hunting, while Washington bans them just for waterfowl and California limits them for just part of its waterfowl season. Federal authorities have not decided whether to set a national policy for electronic decoys for waterfowl. Studies conclude that robo-duck use can increase success at times and for different species, but no evidence is available to suggest that their use has any impact on overall waterfowl populations, said Brad Bales, who runs the ODFW's waterfowl program. The issue comes down to whether their use is socially acceptable, and hunters contacting Bales recently appear evenly split. "You either hate these things or love them," Bales said. "There's really nothing in between." Last winter, 70 percent of the hunters used some version of a robo-duck while hunting on Sauvie Island, a popular public waterfowl area near Portland, Bales said. Commissioner John Esler, a Portland duck hunter who does not like electronic decoys, said waterfowl hunting is more about the ability to call in birds, set a good cluster of traditional decoys and devise an effective blind. "It's not about killing as many birds as fast as possible," Esler said. "That's about going to the store and buying ducks." Esler wanted to speed up the process and consider a robo-duck ban in time for enacting it next season. Other commissioners, such as Don Denman of Jacksonville, preferred a slower approach to ensure a more comprehensive policy instead of one species at a time. Reach reporter Mark Freeman at 776-4470, or e-mail [email protected] Mail Tribune Home | Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. | Dow Jones & Co., Inc. | Privacy | Contact Us Copyright � 2001 Mail Tribune, Inc.