67 



quantities to attract waterfowl. In the years prior to the imposition 

 of Federal baiting restrictions, some duck clubs were putting out an 

 estimated 6 million bushels of corn per season. I think most water- 

 fowl hunters would agree that depositing food in such quantities or 

 in areas where it was not grown is and should be prohibited. 



Mowing wetland vegetation with developed seed does not create 

 the same kind of attraction as dumping bushels of corn, wheat, or 

 other grain. The waterfowl experts I have consulted agree. Dr. 

 Frank Bellrose, the father of modern waterfowl biology, who is also 

 an Aldo Leopold Award recipient and recognized worldwide as a 

 pioneer in waterfowl research, in his long career as a waterfowl sci- 

 entist, he tells me that he has seen no evidence to suggest that 

 mowing moist soil plants will increase waterfowl harvest. He be- 

 lieves that mowing openings around hunting blinds is a sound 

 practice that should be continued and aids in the retrieving of 

 downed birds. 



Dr. Lee Fredrickson of the University of Missouri, also a most re- 

 spected leader in the field, believes that under certain cir- 

 cumstances, dabbling ducks select unmowed areas over the mowed 

 areas. It is his opinion that it should be continued, that mowing 

 mid to late summer does not necessarily make natural seeds more 

 available in a way that would attract waterfowl. In Illinois, we 

 compared hunters' success rates on 13 public hunting areas over 

 the 10-year period from 1983 to 1992. Hunters on one group of 

 those sites were required to mow around their blinds, while hun- 

 ters on the other were not. We found no difference statistically in 

 the number of ducks harvested per hunter trip. This suggests to 

 me that mowing did not create a lure or attraction characteristic 

 of a baited area. And it is interesting: this practice was allowed for 

 30-some odd years, yet in 1994, it was declared baiting through a 

 change in "the interpretation." 



Again, I am not, as I have suggested, an advocate of baiting. If 

 I believed for one minute that mowing natural vegetation created 

 an unnaturally attractive condition for waterfowl, I would not sup- 

 port it. I do advocate changing the law to clarify which practices 

 are truly baiting and which are not. We need consistency, clarity, 

 and above all, common sense. 



In summary, I wish to go on record in support of the regulations 

 that protect our natural resources. However, I believe that such 

 regulations should be based on common sense and science. And I 

 am aware my time is up; I thank you very much for this oppor- 

 tunity. 



[The statement of Mr. Manning may be found at end of hearing.] 



The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Manning, and before I get to the 

 next witness, I read your testimony, and if you can put down in 

 different form what you suggest should be done, I would gladly ac- 

 cept that and work with it, because you have come up with some 

 good suggestions that go beyond, and I showed it to my staff too. 

 But as the gentleman from California and the gentleman from Min- 

 nesota, I want to solve this problem, and you bring up some good 

 ideas. And you are in this; anybody knows you should know it. 



Mr. Taylor, you are up. 



