Geology Reports⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70028188

Effects of spinning-wing decoys on flock behavior and hunting vulnerability of mallards in Minnesota

M.L. Szymanski·A. D. Afton
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Waterfowl managers in Minnesota and other states are concerned that increased kill rates associated with the use of spinning-wing decoys (SWDs) may negatively affect local breeding populations of mallards (Anas platyrhynchos). Accordingly, we conducted 219 experimental hunts to evaluate hunting vulnerability of mallards to SWDs during the 2002 duck season in Minnesota. During each hunt, we tested 2 SWD treatments: 1) SWDs turned OFF (control), and 2) SWDs turned ON (experimental) during alternate 15-minute sampling periods that were separated by 5-minute buffer periods. We found that mallard flocks (???1 duck) were 2.91 times more likely to respond (i.e., approach within 40 m of hunters), and sizes of responding mallard flocks were 1.25 times larger, on average, when SWDs were turned ON than OFF. Mallards killed/hour/hunter/hunt averaged 4.71 times higher (P < 0.001) when SWDs were turned ON than OFF. More hatch-year (HY) and after-hatch-year (AHY) mallards were killed when SWDs were turned ON than OFF; however, AHYs were relatively less likely than were HYs to be killed with SWDs turned ON. We found no evidence that SWDs reduced crippling or allowed hunters to harvest relatively more drakes than hens. Using a worst-case scenario model, we predicted that if 47% and 79% of Minnesota hunters had used SWDs in 2000 and 2002, respectively, Minnesota mallard harvests would have increased by a factor of 2. However, increasing use of SWDs by northern hunters may result in a partial redistribution of annual mallard harvests if nai??ve ducks are harvested upon initial exposures to SWDs, and those ducks that survive become habituated to SWDs, as suggested by our results. Our study was confined to a single hunting season in Minnesota and thus did not assess whether vulnerability of mallards to hunters using SWDs varied among years or geographically. A multi-year, flyway-wide study is needed to make stronger and more rigorous inferences regarding potential changes in harvest distribution and annual harvest rates of mallards due to increasing use of SWDs by hunters in North America.

Explore related subjects

Wildlife Society BulletinArticle

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M.L. Szymanski, A. D. Afton. 2005. Effects of spinning-wing decoys on flock behavior and hunting vulnerability of mallards in Minnesota. https://doi.org/10.2193/0091-7648(2005)33%5B993%3Aeosdof%5D2.0.co%3B2

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Considerations for using autonomous recording units to monitor northern bobwhite occupancy at large spatial scales

Northern bobwhites ( Colinus virginianus ) have experienced widespread declines across their range, increasing the need for population monitoring across broad spatial and temporal scales. Yet large-scale monitoring of post-breeding bobwhites remains limited by the time-intensive nature of fall (i.e., autumn) covey counts. Passive acoustic monitoring with autonomous recording units (ARUs) and automatic detection software may help overcome these constraints but requires further study. From 2017 to 2021, we paired in-person observer point counts with ARU surveys during the fall in southern Iowa, USA to 1) evaluate how ARU detections compare to observer detections, 2) assess the accuracy of automatic classification software for covey calls, 3) gauge the influence of weather and ordinal date on detection, and 4) offer best practices for processing ARU acoustic data. We found high correspondence (89.2%) in detection and non-detection outcomes between paired ARU and observer surveys. Across manually processed recordings, 95.7% of covey call detections occurred within a 35-min window (50–15 min before sunrise). Increasing wind speed and cloud cover were associated with reduced detection probabilities. Wind speeds ≥5 m/s resulted in detection probabilities <0.5. The cumulative probability of detecting bobwhites at a site exceeded 0.995 (95% Credible Interval [CrI] = 0.987, 0.999) after 4 survey days when technicians processed the files. Manual processing had the highest mean detection probability (0.75, 95% CrI = 0.66, 0.82) compared with automatic detection software with 2 different confidence thresholds (0.46 [95% CrI = 0.39, 0.53] and 0.45 [95% CrI = 0.36, 0.55]). Automatic detection software allowed for substantially faster processing with relatively few false positives (false positive rate of 0.014 to 0.038). Autonomous recording units coupled with automatic detection software provided a promising alternative to in-person observer point counts of bobwhite covey calls for determining site occupancy and have the potential to greatly increase capacity for landscape-level bobwhite monitoring.

Iowa↗
USGS2026

Developing a low-cost drone-based method for deploying and retrieving autonomous recording units in inaccessible areas

Autonomous Recording Units (ARUs) are increasingly used in research to support passive acoustic monitoring, but deployment in remote or inaccessible locations remains logistically challenging. Traditional manual placement is labor-intensive, time-consuming, potentially hazardous, and often limited to habitat edges, creating sampling biases and restricting spatial coverage. To address placement limitations in wetland systems, we developed and field-tested a low-cost, lightweight floating platform paired with a drone-based deployment and retrieval system. The drone-deployable ARU platform, constructed from inexpensive, off-the-shelf materials (~US $21 per unit), weighed ~560 g and was mounted with an ARU (AudioMoth) at ~1.2 m above water. The platform was designed for stability, portability, and compliance with Federal Aviation Administration Part 107 regulations. Field trials were conducted across 50 operations in various types of historical rice-field impoundments along the South Carolina coast, which provide critical habitat for secretive marsh birds such as rails (e.g ., Rallus, Laterallus , and Porzana ) and bitterns (e.g ., Botaurus and Ixobrychus ). All 50 deployments and retrievals were successful, demonstrating the robustness of the method under diverse hydrologic and vegetative conditions. Deployment times were significantly shorter than retrieval times (median 6 vs. 9 min), with retrieval requiring greater precision for hook engagement. Operation times scaled predictably with distance: deployment increased by 0.93 min/100 m (R 2 = 0.94) and retrieval by 1.17 min/100 m (R 2 = 0.95). No platform damage or displacement was observed, as emergent vegetation was likely providing natural anchoring. Our approach offers an affordable and effective solution for expanding ARU coverage in large, inaccessible wetlands, reducing sampling bias and enhancing biodiversity monitoring. With continued advances in drone payload capacity, battery endurance, and beyond-visual-line-of-sight flight regulations, our workflow could be adapted for deploying multi-sensor platforms (e.g., ARUs, eDNA samplers, water and air quality sensors, plant sample collectors, insect traps, and trail cameras) to support integrated biodiversity monitoring in challenging landscapes worldwide.

South Carollina↗