Smith: Spinning-winged duck decoy controversy has faded

  • Updated: October 23, 2012 - 6:26 PM

Once controversial, the spinning-winged duck decoy now is widely used and the DNR is considering removing the final restrictions on the devices.


Ben, a black Labrador, charged into a marsh after a downed duck, felled with the aid of a spinning-winged decoy.

Photo: Dennis Anderson, Star Tribune

CameraStar Tribune photo galleries

Cameraview larger

Any doubts I had about the effectiveness of spinning-winged duck decoys were erased late one fall afternoon when I gazed at thousands of mallards funneling magically into a harvested South Dakota cornfield.

Friends and I were hunkered nearby at a small wetland with a couple of dozen floating decoys. It was a beautiful decoy spread, but it couldn't compete with the single battery-powered mechanical decoy two hunters had in that cornfield.

They quickly shot their limits of mallards, then departed.

Now -- more than a decade after Minnesota considered banning the contraptions and wildlife managers and hunters debated whether their use would hurt duck populations and violate "fair-chase'' ethics -- spinning-winged duck decoys are ubiquitous.

The controversy has mostly faded.

The Department of Natural Resources this winter will consider removing the last restrictions on the devices, including their prohibition the first two weeks of the duck season and their use on state wildlife lands. Any changes would have to be made by the Legislature.

"It may be time to look at whether the restrictions we have are necessary,'' said Dave Schad, Department of Natural Resources deputy commissioner and an avid waterfowler.

"They've become just another piece of equipment, another option for hunters,'' he said. "They are not the threat that people thought they might be.''

That's a major shift in thought, considering the DNR once led opposition to the devices, which mimic the flash of wings of a landing duck.

Agency officials tried and failed to get the Mississippi Flyway Council to restrict their use. And they asked the Legislature to impose a two-year moratorium on the mechanical decoys in 2001, an idea that eventually died due to opposition from hunters.

"When they first came out, we were concerned whether it would increase harvest and create population issues, and about whether people who didn't use them would be at a disadvantage to those who did,'' Schad said.

Since then, he said, those concerns have diminished. Bag limits and season length ultimately control harvest, he said.

The idea of removing the last restrictions has support.

"We're in favor of getting rid of the spinner limitations,'' said Brad Nylin, executive director of the Minnesota Waterfowl Association.

Do they work?

Studies, including a $78,000 project done in Minnesota for the DNR in 2002 by Louisiana State University, show the spinning decoys work -- at least some of the time on some ducks.

Overall, 71 percent of the 510 ducks killed during the study were shot when the spinning-winged decoys were operating, and 29 percent were killed when they were turned off. Mallards seem to be most susceptible to the tomfoolery.

Researchers also found that mallards were almost three times more likely to approach within shooting range with the spinning-winged decoys.

The study found no evidence they reduced crippling or allowed hunters to harvest relatively more drakes than hens -- long an argument for their use.

"Some days they seem to work, and some days they don't,'' said Nylin, who owns one. "I think it's helped for mallards, and not so much for other species.''

Al Afton is a former Minnesota DNR waterfowl biologist and now an LSU researcher who worked on the robo-duck study.

"Hunters who use them kill more ducks than those who don't, but the real question is, what's been the effect on the duck population?'' he said.

Banding studies of mallards show no long-term impacts, he said. In fact, this year, for the first time since 1999, the North American mallard population exceeded 10 million.

"Personally I don't think they are as effective as when they first came out,'' Afton said.

It's difficult to know how prevalent the decoys are.

The DNR conducted a survey of hunters after the 2010 season and found 27 percent used spinning-wing decoys, up from 10 percent in 2000.

Clearly, not everyone embraces them.

"I don't use 'em,'' said Dave Zentner, 76, of Duluth.

In 2003, Zentner created a Concerned Duck Hunters Panel. Among their recommendations: Outlaw spinning-winged decoys.

"We thought doing things the old-fashioned way made sense instead of using technology to limit-out as soon as possible,'' Zentner said.

Several of the legendary waterfowlers on that panel have since died -- as has the push to outlaw spinning-winged decoys.

Zentner is ambivalent.

"You still have to be where the ducks want to go,'' he said.

Doug Smith • Twitter: @dougsmithstrib

  • get related content delivered to your inbox

  • manage my email subscriptions

Click here to send us your hunting or fishing photos – and to see what others are showing off from around the region.


Tampa 6 FINAL
Philadelphia 2
LA Clippers 96 FINAL
Chicago 86
Cleveland 103 FINAL
Houston 105
Golden State 106 FINAL
Boston 101
Philadelphia 74 FINAL
Indiana 94
Portland 110 FINAL
Sacramento 99
Charlotte 98 FINAL
Orlando 83
Oklahoma City 108 FINAL
LA Lakers 101
New Orleans 99 FINAL
Denver 92
Los Angeles 2 FINAL
Winnipeg 5
Tampa Bay 3 FINAL
Florida 4
Columbus 3 FINAL
Pittsburgh 5
Toronto 0 FINAL
Washington 4
Anaheim 3 FINAL
Dallas 1
St. Louis 5 FINAL(SO)
Vancouver 6
Connecticut 81
Quinnipiac 65 FINAL
Manhattan 69
Fairfield 56 FINAL
Niagara 57
Marist 49 FINAL
Rider 59
Iona 60 FINAL
Saint Peters 68
Oregon State 56 FINAL
California 73
South Florida 55 FINAL
Houston 72
Marquette 66 FINAL
Providence 77
Michigan State 61 FINAL
Wisconsin 68
Siena 57 FINAL
Monmouth 63
Pittsburgh 66 FINAL
Wake Forest 69
Oregon 73 FINAL
Stanford 70
Purdue 61 FINAL
Ohio State 65
Arizona State 81 FINAL
Colorado 87
Washington St 67 FINAL
Georgetown 66 FINAL
Providence 81
Binghamton 50 FINAL
Elon 65 FINAL
Hofstra 58
Virginia Tech 47 FINAL
Boston College 49
(8) Louisville 59 FINAL
Virginia 75
Texas 69 FINAL
West Virginia 76
Creighton 53 FINAL
Villanova 61
Seton Hall 85 FINAL
Butler 76
UNC-Wilmington 76 FINAL
Coll of Charleston 65
(5) Maryland 69 FINAL
(25) Northwestern 48
Saint Josephs 67 FINAL
La Salle 55
Louisiana Tech 53 FINAL
TX-San Antonio 60
Rhode Island 70 FINAL
Massachusetts 78
Richmond 55 FINAL
VA Commonwealth 49
Davidson 46 FINAL
Fordham 54
St Bonaventure 43 FINAL
Duquesne 51
George Mason 45 FINAL
(22) George Washington 80
Indiana 60 FINAL
(20) Rutgers 71
(12) Texas A&M 63 FINAL
LSU 80
Ole Miss 47 FINAL
(11) Miss State 55
Clemson 56 FINAL
Pittsburgh 61
Maine 47 FINAL
New Hampshire 61
Vermont 48 FINAL
Albany 76
Quinnipiac 87 FINAL
Monmouth 48
Saint Peters 47 FINAL
Siena 64
(4) Notre Dame 67 FINAL
NC State 60
Wisconsin 62 FINAL
Penn State 56
Stony Brook 49 FINAL
Hartford 56
Northeastern 47 FINAL
William & Mary 62
St Johns 61 FINAL
Xavier 74
James Madison 74 FINAL
Delaware 71
Towson 45 FINAL
Drexel 50
Illinois State 50 FINAL
Bradley 60
Southern Ill 74 FINAL
Loyola-Chicago 70
Northern Iowa 54 FINAL
Wichita State 66
Minnesota 76 FINAL
(17) Iowa 92
(15) North Carolina 80 FINAL
(16) Duke 81
Alabama 73 FINAL
Auburn 80
(9) Florida State 69 FINAL
Miami-Florida 55
Arkansas 41 FINAL
Missouri 57
Georgia 52 FINAL
Florida 45
Dayton 95 FINAL
Saint Louis 68
Drake 57 FINAL
Missouri State 86
Colorado 46 FINAL
(10) Arizona State 59
(19) Stanford 55 FINAL
Oregon 62
Marquette 82 FINAL
DePaul 99
Southern Miss 66 FINAL
Texas-El Paso 60
Vanderbilt 49 FINAL
(6) Tennessee 79
(2) South Carolina 56 FINAL
(13) Kentucky 67
Utah 41 FINAL
Arizona 64
Ohio State 78 FINAL
Nebraska 60
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters





question of the day

Poll: Should the lake where the albino muskie was caught remain a mystery?

Weekly Question