Bird Watcher

After our talk Today I went and looked it up. I found this interesting, well, because I'm a dork. When I was younger, you'd get ridiculed if you called a Richardson's a cackler by other bird dorks. That always referred to the dark breasted minimas that live out west. It now appears they are grouped together. What is the “Cackling Goose”? First, to clear up some confusion about the names of the species and subspecies: The former broad Canada Goose has been divided into a large-bodied, interior- and southern-breeding species, and a small-bodied tundra-breeding subspecies. The large-bodied group is still known as Canada Goose (Branta canadensis) while the small-bodied group takes the name Cackling Goose (Branta hutchinsii). This means that the English name Cackling Goose, which has in the past been more or less restricted to the smallest subspecies (the far western B. c. minima) is now the species name for all four of the small subspecies. This new species takes the scientific name of the earliest-named subspecies and becomes Branta hutchinsii. Cackling Goose Branta hutchinsii – Small-bodied group – 4 subspecies breeding mainly in tundra B. h. hutchinsii – Richardson’s (or Hutchins’s) Cackling Goose – reportedly intergrades with parvipes throughout range in NWT and Nunavut, but this is uncertain. Small and rather light, pale breast. B. h. taverneri – Taverner’s (Alaska) Cackling Goose – may intergrade with parvipes in interior AK. Merged by Palmer with parvipes but has unique mtDNA. Similar to leucopareia but slightly larger and lighter in color, with rounder head. Similar to parvipes but breast slightly darker. B. h. minima – Cackling Cackling Goose – Smallest, with small bill and short neck but relatively long legs; variable color and pattern but typically quite dark brown with purplish cast on breast, bill stubby, straight to convex culmen, nail less elongated than leucopareia, white cheeks more extensive than leucopareia. B. h. leucopareia – Aleutian Cackling Goose – includes asiatica (extinct). Larger than minima, with paler breast usually gray-brown to dark brownish; white collar usually complete and rather thick with blackish feathering at base of neck; head rather square profile; bill short, tapering to narrow tip and somewhat pointed nail; white cheek patches somewhat more restricted, nearly always black throat stripe.

I went walleye fishing on a different highland reservoir because of this report, well sort of. This report was an enough of an excuse to get me on the water on a 60 degree day in January. I didn't catch any, but I talked to a couple guys that were catching them so I don't really know where that leaves us with your experiment. Pretty funny btw.

I was the one that informed everyone about umbrella rigs and jigs with plastic worms. Once the bass fisherman read about it, they started calling them A rigs and Ned rigs and tried to tell everyone they invented them.

I was about to say...Flicker shad? You mean the FnF crank? I'll go along with every thing else, but Berkley should probably make FnF the Mid South director of marketing. He's probably done more to promote that bait than they have.

Good times BH. The streak is alive. 3 years and counting. That was another one for the memory bank. I forgot to tell you, when I was getting nervous about the skunk it was 4:33. My phone picture is stamped 4:48. We had all of our action in 15 minutes. That happened fast! I guess that's what happens when you have a few hundred ducks finish 10 yds from your toes. Makes me an you look like a couple sharpshooters. Oh well, at least we were able to have a nice visit before hand. Always nice when it works out like that. Chew the fat, shoot the bull, then shoot the ducks.

Awesome. It never seems like a wasted vacation day when you have a pile of ducks after the hunt.

You have my utmost respect. A well planned and intentional field traffic hunt for local Canadas that resulted in a full limit. It's a sign of a goose hunter that has studied and intimately learned the stimulus, habits, and tendencies of his quarry. IMO, there is nothing in Canada goose hunting more satisfying than shooting them someplace they weren't planning on going.

Whatever BH! I'm not the master of anything except my domain. I have the OL making me a sammich as we speak. I sure am glad she doesn't log in here like your's does. Z's pond will be done. They've done that before. One or two good volleys and get out the baitcasters. I bet the birds end up at that lake I told you about SE of there about 5-6 miles.

Always cool when you can hunt the family farm. Nice job.

Last paragraph of this article is interesting. It makes me think Phil is on to something. Proposed legislation targets Missouri Department of Conservation Pre-filed bills seek changes in agency’s funding, commission Jesse Jorgensen, left, and Cole Peters, right -- participants in the annual Winter Day Hike at Runge Nature Center in Jefferson City -- climb on trees Friday afternoon after practicing to build an emergency shelter. Photo by Kile Brewer. By Kris Hilgedick Sunday, January 4, 2015 Favorite story Your favorited articles Discuss Comment, Blog about More Sharing ServicesShare The Missouri Department of Conservation could face serious funding shortfalls if bills pre-filed in the General Assembly wend their way through the legislature this spring. Two of the bills require voter-approved changes to the state’s Constitution. One seeks to ask voters if they want to eliminate a sales and use tax, dedicated for conservation purposes, by July 2017. A second would increase the number of people serving on the Conservation Commission from four at-large members to eight regional representatives. A third bill, filed by Sen. Brian Munzlinger, R-Williamstown, would dramatically reduce the fees the department charges for the acquisition of hunting, fishing and trapping permits. If Munzlinger’s bill becomes law, the department would be prevented from charging such fees and would be limited to service fees, customer convenience fees or replacement fees, each limited to $2 for Missouri residents. If passed by lawmakers, two of those bills could seriously erode the department’s funding sources, opponents have said. Deputy Director Tim Ripperger estimated hunting, fishing and trapping license fees typically generate $41 million for the department. Of that amount, $20 million is related to the sale of the actual permits and the rest is derived from federal excise taxes on sporting goods, which — since 1938 — have been collected and shared among the states using a formula based on the number of licensed permit buyers and each state’s size. “Hunters and anglers have a legacy of supporting conservation through permit sales, and they are proud of that,” Ripperger said. “In Missouri, we look at conservation holistically. Hunters and anglers … they are our first conservationists. “And we have some of the most reasonable permit fees in the nation.” Munzlinger said he sees the permit fees as “double taxation.” “We do pay a sales tax to conservation,” he said. “But when we want to partake in one of the outdoor sports, we have to pay again.” Ripperger also noted outdoor sports are an economic force in Missouri. “From a national standpoint, hunters and anglers spend $76 billion … creating an economic ripple of $192 billion in the economy,” he said. And while interest in outdoor sports might be declining in other areas of the United States, they are holding strong in Missouri, he said. “In many of our rural communities, the money spent by hunters and anglers is enough to keep some small businesses afloat for a year. It’s the lifeblood of some communities. “So, if you look at it, the conservation sales tax generates money for Missouri. It’s a tax that has a positive economic effect on our state in a number of ways.” Not only does Missouri see a revenue stream from hunting and fishing licenses, the department also has a dedicated revenue stream, a 1/8th of 1 percent sales tax enacted by citizens through the initiative petition process in 1976. “Missouri voters passed the amendment to the Constitution,” Ripperger said. It is that revenue stream state Rep. Craig Redmon, R-Canton, wants voters to re-examine. Redmon did not return calls for this story. The funds raised — about $110 million annually — are earmarked for Missouri conservation efforts. Ripperger argued, at the Missouri level, such robust economic activity ultimately generates $507 million in state and local taxes. The return on the collected tax dollars is more than the tax is costing in the first place, he said. Ripperger said the sales tax, permits sales and federal reimbursements make up 80 percent of the department’s revenue sources. He added they comprise less than 1 percent of the state budget. He said if these funding streams are interrupted, numerous programs — such as the Runge Nature Center, the Scrivner Road shooting range, school educational programming and landowner assistance — will be in jeopardy. Although Munzlinger didn’t introduce the bill asking voters if they want to eliminate the state’s conservation sales and use tax, he said he supports doing so. “Half the people in Missouri haven’t voted on it,” Munzlinger said. “We probably ought to vote on it every 10 years. … I don’t think any tax should be permanent.” Munzlinger said he supports putting the ideas to voters — not eliminating the tax entirely. Munzlinger also proposed expanding the Conservation Commission from four to eight members. According to the state Constitution, the commission — which is appointed by the governor with the consent of the Senate — is charged with appointing the department director, setting policy, approving Wildlife Code regulations, planning strategically and making major budget decisions. Munzlinger pointed out Missouri is a diverse state in terms of its landscape and wildlife. “It’s been over 35 years since someone from Northeast Missouri has served on the commission,” Munzlinger said. He said he feels the state would be better served by having more people represent various regions of the state, which is why his bill recommends increasing the number of commissioners from four to eight. Currently, of the four, no more than two may be from the same party. “I’m not really meaning to change anything dramatically. It will still have an equal number of Republicans and Democrats,” he said. “I’m just giving Missourians better representation on the commission.” Some observers believe the three bills possibly were filed as retribution following a bruising legislative debate last session over the ability of landowners to raise captive deer on their property. In that debate, wildlife biologists argued raising captive deer could exacerbate the state’s problem with chronic wasting disease; farm groups defended their ability to raise captive deer as a private property right. In the end, Gov. Jay Nixon — pointing out that the Missouri Constitution gives the commission sole regulatory authority over wildlife — vetoed the captive deer legislation. Ken Babcock, a wildlife biologist from Jamestown who retired from MDC as an assistant director and who led Ducks Unlimited’s southern regional office for more than a decade, noted many diseases that run rampant through wild populations tend to start in captive groups. Duck viral enteritis did, he said. “The department is right to have concerns about this,” he said. Babcock — who was serving in the department in 1976 when voters approved the sales tax — witnessed how it was implemented. He said, back in the early 1970s, people realized permit fees alone weren’t enough to support the conservation programs the state needed. Today, Babcock said Missouri has one of the most professional departments in the nation. “It’s second to none. With all of the economic challenges the state is facing, why would we use the precious time of the General Assembly to destroy something that works very well?” Babcock asked. “Our state is not flush with money.” Babcock argued in favor of keeping four at-large representatives and noted the commission was originally designed in 1936 to keep politics out of hunting and fishing. “One of the things that makes our state’s conservation department so good is that the commissioners represent the whole state, not a single region,” he said. “My hope is these bills won’t take a lot of time from the Legislature.” Munzlinger also has introduced a bill legalizing the sale of captive cervid (deer) meat commercially raised for food. The bill suggested regulation of the practice would be done by the U.S. and Missouri Departments of Agriculture and the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services. This bill also limits the number of animals to seven per acre and requires each animal to have federal ID tags to be processed. Munzlinger on Tuesday was not ready to talk about the new bill. “That’s a separate issue,” he said.

I'd highly recommend a reconnaissance of your favorite late season spot.

No, "your" birds. I said If I was you, I'd shoot my mallards. As in the four mallard limit in your possession napping at the top of page. I'd never take possession of God's creatures. I might be a little secretive about where I saw them, well, unless it was one of my good buddies. Then I'd tell them.

lol. that place looks really familiar. Deja vu maybe? C'mon man, I wasn't calling you an idiot. More like, "Plan? What do you mean make a plan? If I was you my plan would be to go grab a mojo and shoot my mallards", lol. Good going BH.

there was one at mutton creek for years. I believe it closed a couple years ago, but I might be wrong

I have no idea where the Kansas City Star falls politically. I don't know if they lean left or right. Perhaps someone on here might know a little more than me about that.

Interesting article from the Kansas City Star on this issue. I found some things I assumed about the MDC were untrue according this article. I'm not going to fact check it. I assume it's true. Cash flow never stops for Missouri Conservation Department http://www.kansascity.com/news/article295015/Cash-flow-never-stops-for-Missouri-Conservation-Department.html Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/article295015/Cash-flow-never-stops-for-Missouri-Conservation-Department.html#storylink=cpy Because of state cutbacks, 300 low-income parents in Missouri lost health-care coverage this year. The Grandview School District had to cut 60 positions, including 30 teachers. About 30 beds sit empty at the Western Missouri Mental Health Center in Kansas City because of staff reductions, 94 in June alone. At the same time, the Missouri Department of Conservation is flush with cash. Its reserve fund alone could restore all those budget cuts and more. Related The agency had enough money to hire a New Age pianist from Oregon to entertain small crowds, spend half a million dollars to run ads promoting itself on television and pay an additional half million for better time slots for its own TV show. “They've got more money than they know what to do with,” said Robert Eck of Rolla, who donated land to the agency in 1989 but now regrets it. “It is time that the public be made aware of the amount of money that the Conservation Department is receiving and spending on some unnecessary projects simply because they have so much money to spend.” Most of that money comes from a never-ending 1/8-cent sales tax that has been untouchable ever since voters narrowly passed a constitutional amendment in 1976. Supporters said it would provide $25 million a year, enough to complete the department's “Design for Conservation” plan within about 20 years. But tax money keeps pouring in. Next year it is expected to hit $97 million. The tax is so old that a 2000 Gallup poll showed only half of Missourians realize they're paying it. But the Conservation Department's director said residents are happy with the results. “Missouri is a great conservation state,” said John Hoskins, who became director in 2002. “If we're not number one, we're certainly in the top three to five. Do we want to be 40th or 45th?” Indeed, the Gallup poll showed 81 percent of Missouri residents think the department is doing a good job. There is much to praise. The agency has brought deer and turkey populations back from the brink to turn the state into a hunting paradise. It stocks lakes and streams with millions of fish each year from its 11 hatcheries. It has built a half-dozen nature centers across the state and publishes an award-winning magazine. “This is awesome,” said Suzy McGarrah of Oak Grove as she helped her 7-year-old son, Kyle, make a bear print while visiting the agency's two buildings at the Missouri State Fair last month. “We love Missouri conservation.” Not on the list It's understandable that Missourians would support a tax that protects their parks. But what may surprise them is that their Conservation Department doesn't do that. Many other conservation departments maintain state parks, but not Missouri's. That's the job of the Department of Natural Resources. In fact, some legislators speculated back in 1976 that the conservation tax wouldn't have passed if voters had realized that. Many still don't. Lindsay Cundiff and a dozen other men fishing one day this month at Fleming Park, a Jackson County park, assumed the Conservation Department was responsible for their pleasant outings. “I don't mind paying the tax,” said Cundiff, who was fishing on Blue Springs Lake. “They just need to keep the trash picked up around here.” The Conservation Department doesn't maintain that lake or many of the other Missouri lakes and forests. Those are overseen by a number of agencies, such as counties, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Forest Service. Instead, the Conservation Department has its own set of projects, many of them laid out in the agency's 1976 Design for Conservation plan. The $1.5 billion that taxpayers have put into the agency's coffers since 1976 has allowed it to meet those goals — and then some. For example, the department has bought at least 150,000 more acres of land for public hunting and nature enjoyment than it proposed in its 1976 plan. The sales tax has helped replenish the deer population so effectively that some people now complain there are too many. “We have more deer today than when Lewis and Clark came up through Missouri,” Sen. Dan Clemens, a Marshfield Republican, said at a legislative hearing. The plan called for adding five state forests, or conservation areas, within 50 miles of urban centers. Instead, the department has acquired 22 conservation areas, totaling 68,000 acres. They include Maple Woods Nature Preserve in Gladstone and Burr Oak Woods Nature Center in Blue Springs. Under the plan, the department also was to build and operate 43 public lakes throughout the state. It has built 64. “They will never admit that we've reached a conclusion to the Design for Conservation that was presented to us in the '70s,” said Rep. Bob Johnson, a Lee's Summit Republican. “Conservation could continue to do a legitimate job, still remain an outstanding conservation department, without having to create reasons to waste taxpayers' money.” Johnson and others want Missouri residents to have the chance to vote on the tax again, as they do regularly on some other taxes. But Hoskins said those who proposed the tax deliberately left out that option. “They recognized that meaningful accomplishments take decades, not years,” he said. The permanent sales tax is often referred to as “The Missouri Plan” by other states' envious conservation agencies. “That's kind of the dream of all state agencies, to get ahold of something like that,” said Mike Miller, editor of Kansas Wildlife & Parks magazine. Only one other state — Arkansas — has a never-ending sales tax dedicated to conservation. But the tax is split with state parks, bringing Arkansas conservation about $80 million less each year than Missouri's agency. “Everybody talks about The Missouri Plan,” said Scott Pengelly, spokesman for the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, which includes conservation. The tax transformed Missouri's agency from one primarily funded by licenses for anglers and hunters. Next year, the Missouri Department of Conservation will have a budget of more than $160 million, with 60 percent coming from the sales tax. The agency now has the third-highest conservation budget in the country, behind only those of Florida and California, according to the U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance, a conservation advocacy group. That much money makes Missouri's Conservation Department different from other Missouri agencies, said state Auditor Claire McCaskill, a candidate for governor who wants another vote on the sales tax. “It really is a stark juxtaposition,” McCaskill said. “It really is the haves and the have-nots.” But Hoskins said the conservation sales tax has paid for itself by generating economic activity in Missouri. Besides, he said, the agency is frugal — although the department's budget has continued to increase. Officials have delayed some construction projects, he said, and held dozens of jobs vacant for up to two years. “We have made a series of reductions,” he said. Food bills But a Kansas City Star examination of department spending revealed a number of programs and expenses that seem far removed from managing fish and wildlife. For example, the review showed the agency spent $600,000 last year feeding employees and guests. That's as much as the Department of Natural Resources and Department of Social Services spent combined. Each of those departments is bigger than conservation. The Conservation Department spent $400,000 alone on meals that employees ate on the road while on business. Although the department has no agencywide cap on food spending, it has tightened rules for on-the-road meals, said Carter Campbell, the department's chief financial officer. In other employee costs, the department spends an average of more than $10,000 a year to embroider uniforms and other items, The Star found. Over the past five years, the agency also spent $4 million on hotel bills for a steady cycle of seminars and conferences. Of that, nearly $323,000 went to Tan-Tar-A, a resort on Lake of the Ozarks, and $102,000 to Lodge of Four Seasons, another Ozarks resort. Much of that money went for conferences that gave supervisors a chance to meet and employees a way to network with businesses and universities, conservation officials said. In the past three years, the department also spent more than $300,000 on motivational training for employees. Conservation officials said the money was well-spent. “That's what we do to make our employees more and more effective,” said Cynthia Metcalfe of St. Louis, the conservation commission chairwoman. “Good human resource policies are an important part of running the agency.” But McCaskill said other departments can't afford that luxury. “I guarantee you there's no other state agency spending that kind of staff money on that kind of warm and fuzzy staff development,” she said. Tom Goodner, a former security guard at the Discovery Center in Kansas City whose position was eliminated this year, said training sessions wasted time and money because they were not specific to employees' jobs. Even custodians had to take classes, including “Awakening the Creative Spirit,” a course so childish it was embarrassing, he said. “They had Play-Doh on each table that you make stuff out of,” Goodner said. “They had some Pick-Up Sticks, pipe cleaners, candy and cookies lying around.” Robert Gaiser, another former security guard, said some social gatherings were presented as training seminars, such as a firearms safety and training day in March near Parkville. “Now, what do 50 secretaries, foresters, custodians and education specialists need with firearms training?” Gaiser said. “We got out there and had a 30-minute class about locking up your gun in your house, and then there was a barbecue.” Hoskins said he wasn't aware that all those employees had attended the training, but he defended the event. Whether they use guns in their jobs or not, he said, “They're around people who have guns and they probably need to understand something about them.” Sunfish and pianos The department's bountiful funds also allow it to lavish perks on state residents that flabbergast conservation officials outside Missouri. For example, each year the agency spends $200,000 to give 18,000 students “positive fishing experiences.” Employees will locate ponds for school class trips and, if needed, even stock them with hybrid sunfish and channel catfish purchased from commercial sources. If students need fishing gear, the agency provides that, too. Other states have fishing events for children, but not like that. In Minnesota, Pengelly said, game employees stock a fishing pond for children at Cabela's in the spring and stock one for handicapped children at a hatchery. “But it's just one fishing day,” he said. Among other spending: In May, John Nilsen, a pianist and recording artist from Oregon, performed at nature centers in four Missouri cities, including Kansas City's Discovery Center. “It looks like we're going to get our pick of seats,” said one woman as she headed toward the front of the 250-seat auditorium. Although the concert was free, fewer than half the seats were occupied. The tour's cost to taxpayers: About $4,000, including $1,400 to rent grand pianos. Commissioners didn't know about the event but defended it. “I have confidence in our nature center management that they are going to put on programs that are appropriate and compatible with the nature center and will bring people in there,” Metcalfe said. The head of the outreach division said the department has been hiring musicians with nature-based messages for years. “There are many paths to connecting to the natural world,” Lorna Domke said. Officials at other state conservation agencies chuckled when asked whether they sponsored similar events. “We don't get a lot of concert pianists,” said Diane Tipton of Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks. Gift shops sell books, videos, computer games and many unusual items, including pewter paddlefish pins, ornaments shaped like tree leaves and CDs such as “Fiddles and Forests.” But they've gone in the hole to do it. An internal audit evaluating the agency's gift shop costs showed that in fiscal year 2001, only three of the 30 centers that sold merchandise made a profit. Add in fringe benefits, and the department lost $350,000 on trinkets. Total sales increased in 2002, but a department spokesman said expenses were not available, and no figures at all existed for more recent years. Hoskins said the department wasn't trying to make a profit but no longer sells merchandise in some locations. The Conservation Department has bumped up its already surging construction schedule. It has built nine nature, education and visitors centers across the state at a cost of $21 million since the sales tax began. Now an additional $44 million worth of projects are in the works, including an education and service center to be built in Kirksville for more than $5 million and several new buildings on the state fairgrounds for $1.4 million. About $5.5 million is going toward a conservation campus at Cape Girardeau that includes 50 acres of forest and a 75-seat amphitheater. And $2.3 million has been approved to tear down or renovate a complex of historic buildings nestled in a secluded forest on the Current River. The Jerry J. Presley Conservation Education Center offers workshops for teachers and others who want to learn more about Missouri ecosystems. Department officials said the Presley center and others provide conservation education, which residents have asked for in numerous surveys. Living color Of all the department's projects, one of the most popular is the magazine. Open the glossy Missouri Conservationist and you'll find remarkable shots of wildlife — a close-up of a looming bald-faced hornet, for example — and articles on everything from the migration of salamanders to how turkey hunting helped a cancer survivor cope. Every quarter it includes an insert for young readers called “Outside In” with stories such as “Homecoming Deer,” written by a high school homecoming queen who killed her first deer. Readers rave, and no wonder — the Conservationist is distributed free each month to almost 500,000 Missouri residents. The publication costs taxpayers $2 million a year. Most states charge for their magazines, and still they publish less often than Missouri. Montana, for example, charges $9 for six issues a year. Kansas distributes its magazine six times a year for $11. Arkansas charges $8 for the six issues it publishes a year. “You've got to weigh your costs on getting the word out,” said Steve Wilson, spokesman for the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission. Some states, such as New Jersey and Michigan, have even killed their magazines because of budget restraints. Missouri's Conservation Department doesn't charge for its magazine because “the people are paying for it already with the sales tax,” said commissioner Anita Gorman of Kansas City. Besides the magazine, the agency gives away thousands of copies of the 900 other publications it produces every year, with titles such as “Tempting Trout Recipes” and “Bat House Plans.” You can pick up a brochure at one of the nature centers and check up to 20 titles that the department will mail to you free. “Wow,” said Dawn Flinn, education coordinator for the Minnesota Natural Resources Department. “We create educational posters and things that are free in limited quantities, but nothing like that.” The Missouri agency also spends $500,000 a year to produce and broadcast 13 episodes of its 30-minute “Missouri Outdoors” television program, which includes such segments as choosing a canoe and preparing a dish of parmesan squirrel. The episodes run in rotation every week on stations across the state. In comparison, Arkansas invests $20,000 a year in its weekly 30-minute television program. Minnesota's short TV show was killed last year because of budget cutbacks. But next year, Missouri plans to spend even more on its TV show — an additional $500,000 to buy better time slots for it. Land rush In July, about 70 persons packed a community hall in Oregon, Mo., many to protest how much land the Conservation Department and federal government have bought. “The Missouri Department of Conservation is one of the biggest landowners in the county,” said Don Holstine, a Holt County commissioner. “It's time for them to stop buying land.” The department doesn't pay full taxes on all the land it owns — in Holt County, it's 60 percent of what private landowners pay. That creates a financial strain on rural counties, critics said. Conservation officials say they are paying their fair share of taxes and, at any rate, have shifted their focus away from buying more land. Critics have their doubts. “They say they're not going to buy any more unless it's next to them,” said Rep. John Quinn, a Chillicothe Republican. “Well, at some point, everything is next to them.” Already, critics say, the department has so much land it can't use it all. For example, the agency bought land on Lake of the Ozarks more than four years ago that it still hasn't developed. The $375,000 property was intended to become a public access to the lake, but that would require up to $750,000 more to build a paved road, a 50-vehicle parking lot, a double-lane ramp, docks and toilet facilities, according to an agency memo. “The only thing that they've done, and I think they did that just to please some of the people that were squawking about it, is pushed over a few trees and dumped a little gravel for a parking lot for a few cars,” said Fred Long, who owns land next to the property. The department defended the project and said work was delayed by lack of funds. It should begin soon, Hoskins said. “There's been a long-standing perceived need for an access in that area,” he said. “Lake of the Ozarks is a place where facilities like this will get used.” But James Steele, a former real estate agent who used to sell property in the area, said the department's estimates that 50,000 to 80,000 people a year would use the property were preposterous. He said the land is remote and could never handle that much traffic, even with roads. “That sales tax is a wonderful thing, it has done a lot of things, they've bought a lot of properties that our children and their children can enjoy as years go by,” Steele said. “But it really tears me up when I see them mishandling it.” Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/article295015/Cash-flow-never-stops-for-Missouri-Conservation-Department.html#storylink=cpy

That is a nice one. Congrats.

I'm going to the TX/LA Gulf somewhere in February, just haven't decided where yet. I might have my Dad with me, but I'd probably be in on this deal if it's not an exclusive trip.

Morton's tender quick. It makes it salty, and it's full of nitrates, but it will tenderize it. Do you have a picture of the deer?

I'd like to catch the musky out of Pomme or Hazel Creek someday on a day when they were biting. maybe late fall? I don't really know.

Nope. corner of the mouth where the top bill meets the lower bill is wrong. motttleds have a large black patch there. It's not a mexican mallard either. I'll beat you to the punch on that one.

I'd agree with these two. It did take me a long time to get accustomed to the auto heading. I've learned to just leave it alone and not over correct it, make little adjustments and let it catch up if that makes any sense.

Here's all you could want to read on the subject. Probably even more confusing, but if it's TL;DR skip to pages 8-13 for pictures of wing identification http://pubs.usgs.gov/bsr/2000/0002/report.pdf

I will not be wearing any type of shoes that destroy my red blood cells.

Girls don't have yellow bills JD