Fire up your robo ducks!!!!!!!!!

[Double R 2]

[GulfCoast]

I posted similar data 2 years ago out of the Minnesota studies, and got chewed out by the collective members of this board who said "bogus study, what do those PhD's know, pry my spinner from my cold dead fingers....."

[Po Monkey Lounger]

GC, its just hard for a southern man to trust those whiny Minnesotans

Also, I don't think that study actually made much of a case for banning the robo ----not like these that ramsey has posted. In terms of extra ducks killed per hunter with the robos on, if I remember correctly the Minnesota study indicated it was less than 1 duck per daily bag difference---not very compelling. Plus, those Minnesotans can't shoot either --they just like to complain about stuff.

[Po Monkey Lounger]

BTW, before anyone makes me the whipping boy for the spinners again, just for the record ---like I said 3 years ago --- I AM FOR BANNING the spinners. Carry on.

[Soybean Man]

I wonder if they made sure the white under wings were not showing when they were turned off. It would seem to me that ducks would flare if the white was turned up when not in use.

[mudsucker]

[iron grip]

[MsBowMan]

[Drake-MS]

[MsBowMan]

[Po Monkey Lounger]

Oh lordy. MSBowMan, ya better stick to bows. Math just isn't your thing.

[Cotten]

[quote="MsBowMan"]I was the one that said "pry my spinner from my cold dead hands". And I mean it![/quote]

Yea, and you're for that Timer Operated Corn Feeder bill too ain't cha? FRIGGIN WIMPS!!!

P.S. We're taking our youngens to NYC early in the morning and will be back Sunday. So hold your rebuts and defenses of being a FRIGGIN WIMP needing a Spinner and a Timer Operated Corn Feeder until then!!!

[sportsman450]

[Steel 3's]

1.9 TIMES MORE LIKELY THAN WHAT? WHAT IS THAT 10%?

I can understand how it can be a little confusing because the paper didn't include much of the raw data. They tell us, for example, that ducks killed per hour was 5 times higher with spinner "on" compared to spinner "off" on MARSH hunts, but they don't give us the real value. So maybe it's 1 duck per hour with spinner "off" and 5 with spinner "on" ...... or maybe it was 3 ducks per hour with spinner "off" and 15 per hour with spinner "on" or who knows.

Everything is comparing spinner "on" vs spinner "off". So what that quote above means is during the MARSH hunts, the probability that a mallard or group of mallards flying within 300 yards of the decoy spread would come within gun range was 1.9 times higher if the spinner was "on" than if it was "off".

I don't know of that means 10% of the mallards seen within 300 yards of the decoys came into shooting range while the spinner was "off", but 19% came into shooting range when the spinner was "on"..... or if it was 2% vs 3.8% ..... or if it was 25% vs 47.5%. All of those show us that mallards were 1.9 times more likely to come within shooting range with the spinner "on" than with it "off" because 19/10 = 1.9, 3.8/2 = 1.9, and 47.5/25 = 1.9

Here's an example where the raw data IS in the paper: If hunters in the MARSH crippled and lost 29.1% of the ducks they hit while hunting with the spinner was "off", and 17.3% while hunting with the spinner "on", then the crippling rate is 1.7 times lower with the spinner on compared to when it's off . ie 29.1/17.3 = 1.68 or about 1.7.

[crow]