Author Archives: kelcyboettcher

George F. Shrake – Lake Poygan Decoy Carver

Posted on by

A Decoy Corner Article

By Bruce Urben, WWA President

All photos courtesy the author

George Shrake Bluebill

There have been quite a few great decoy carvers that nave lived on or near Lake Poygan, which lies in Waushara and Winnebago counties in Wisconsin. Poygan is a waterfowler’s lake, part of the Winnebago chain just north and west of Little Lake Butte des Morts and the City of Oshkosh. Poygan, with its shallow depth and emergent vegetation, is a stopover rest spot for migrating waterfowl. Wild rice and wild celery were historically found in Poygan but have since been all but eliminated. The village of Tustin is one town on the northwest end of Lake Poygan that was home to several great carvers – George Shrake and August Moak.

George F. Shrake was born in 1906 and grew up hunting, fishing and trapping on Lake Poygan. In the 1930’s, George purchased several decoys from August Moak, his neighbor in Tustin. George used these decoys as patterns to make his own hunting rig of decoys. A year later George had assembled a large rig of decoys for his own use on Poygan. He carved mainly bluebill and canvasback; very few other species are known to have been carved by Shrake.

George began using cedar to fashion his bodies, and basswood or pine for his heads. His decoys were all hollowed and he used glass eyes in the heads. As you might guess, George’s decoys closely resembled Gus Moak decoys and have many times been confused with Moak’s work. One identifying feature is the method of attaching the head on Shrake’s decoys. George used a wood dowel extending through the top of the head, while Moak used a double threaded screw from inside the body to connect his heads.

Shrake also took less time in smoothing the bodies on his decoys. All are much rougher than Moak’s and show clear rasp marks. George’s painting was very similar to Moak’s, oil paint with simple realistic patterns and little shading. Many of George’s bluebill decoys have flattened eye pockets rather than eye grooves and his bodies were carved with a noticeable hump back, again much like Moak.

The bottom of the author’s George Shrake Bluebill was originally mistaken for a Gus Moak decoy

Very seldom will you see a signed or labeled decoy by Shrake. Later in George’s career he carved a number of decoys with a balsa body, which was more available after WWII.

George’s total decoy output was quite small, estimated to be less than 100 decoys. As you might expect, collectors highly value Shrake decoys. Identification is the key to differentiating a Shrake from a Moak, which many times comes down to an X-ray to confirm the head attachment.

George passed away in 1986 at the age of 80 while living in Waushara County near his childhood home.

I am honored to have one of George’s early humpback bluebills… and yes, this one was originally misidentified as a Gus Moak!

Rights and Obligations

Posted on by

By Bruce Ross, Executive Director bross@wisducks.org

This article originally appeared in Wisconsin Waterfowl Association’s November, 2024 Newsletter edition.

Three weeks ago, you got an email from us, asking that you reach out to the bi-partisan legislators sitting on the Sandhill Crane study committee that are considering whether a hunt is appropriate here in Wisconsin.  Over 2,000 of you responded!!!  

An additional 1000 or more emails came in from our partners like Delta Waterfowl, Safari Club International, Back Country Hunters and Anglers, and Wisconsin Wildlife Federation. (By the way, this volume of emails would not have been possible without technical support from our friends at Delta Waterfowl.)

Your emails flooded the inboxes of those legislators to let them know that you’re counting on them to follow the science, apply common sense, and uphold the state’s constitutional right to hunt by concluding that a sustainable and ethical sandhill crane hunt is justified.  This number of emails far, far, far surpasses the number of communications these offices routinely receive, on any topic.  Well done – your voice is heard.

Even if you never intend to hunt sandhill cranes, this is a hunting rights issue.

Hunters make up less than 10% of the Wisconsin population – a small minority – but carry a lion’s share of the conservation work and funding that have led to the recovery of migratory species like the crane.

Today’s hunting heritage includes the expectation that hunters “leave it better than they found it.”  And we do.

This obligation of shouldering a significant conservation burden is ours for life because we harvest a public resource. And with that obligation comes another: to protect this hunting heritage for the next generation. With our small numbers, we must continue to earn our conservation credibility every day with those who simply don’t understand today’s hunter conservationists… or our voice will be weakened and eventually stilled.

It is this hunting ethic that allowed Wisconsin’s right to hunt constitutional amendment to pass overwhelmingly in 2003 – over 82% of voters approved it.  While this certainly does not give hunters a free pass to shoot anything in sight, it’s a pretty high threshold for anti-hunters to overcome.  Especially for a game bird like the crane that is hunted in 18 other states, stands at twice its maximum population target, and whose numbers create significant agricultural damage. But that constitutional right doesn’t mean a thing if we are not defending it when it is challenged.

So when an organization trots out a poll (that they sponsored, designed, tabulated, and reported on) that says less than a majority of state residents support a crane hunt, we need to provide a context to those who don’t share our hunting ethic.  That what I hoped to do when I presented to the crane legislative study group last month.

I am personally sick that some non-hunting conservation groups are lined up against us on this crane hunting issue.  I reached out to their leaders several years ago to try to avoid this circular firing squad that only hurts our cooperation on bone fide conservation issues.

Especially since this is NOT a bird conservation issue. Those groups stood by for over a decade while 10,000+ cranes were killed and left to rot in agricultural fields – none stepped forward to help fund a seed treatment that could have saved many of those birds.  And despite these wasted birds and those that are hunted elsewhere, the population continued its historic rebound.

But now, let a sandhill crane hunt even be considered – with an annual harvest that would fall below the level of these depredation kills – and birding groups trip over themselves to protest. While no man can know another’s motivations, it’s not reasonable to believe bird conservation is at the heart of that protest.

I’m proud to be a hunter conservationist and helping to lead a coalition of like-minded organizations such as the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation, Delta Waterfowl, Safari Club International, and Backcountry Hunters and Anglers on this issue.  It will be a long road, but with your support, WWA will stay with it… respecting the science, following the data, and trusting the federal migratory bird managers who have allowed the crane to make its remarkable comeback.  And defending the constitutional respect your hunting heritage and conservation efforts have earned.

Thanks to you for your support, and special thanks to those who followed through on our invitation to reach out to the legislators.  As a mentor once told me, “if you don’t use your voice, you might as well not have one.”

Of Wetlands and First Hunts

Posted on by

By Anna Rzchowski, Public Lands Ecologist – arzchowski@wisducks.org

This article originally appeared in Wisconsin Waterfowl Association’s November, 2024 Newsletter edition.

Anna in her blind on the morning of the hunt

The last Sunday in October, I paddled with my mentors across the silent marsh to set up in a little bay on the Trempealeau National Wildlife Refuge. As the sun rose, the marsh slowly came alive. A pair of eagles chattered in a nearby dead tree. Mallards, wood ducks, pelicans and more flew overhead. Seeing and hearing the marsh wake up that morning was an incredible experience that I can’t wait to repeat. I didn’t grow up in a hunting family and, thanks to a great team of mentors at WWA’s Waterfowlers Academy By Women For Women Learn to Hunt Waterfowl, getting out in the marsh again this fall feels totally doable.

As a wetland enthusiast, it was especially cool to have the opportunity to experience the Trempealeau National Wildlife Refuge through this hunt. The refuge is situated at the mouth of the Trempealeau River where it meets the Mississippi. A mosaic of sandy prairies, bottomland forests and marshes support astounding numbers of waterfowl and other wildlife. It’s staggering to consider the acres upon acres of wetlands and uplands within its watershed.

Thinking on a watershed level helps to understand what’s happening in the wetland. Are there nutrient inputs upstream? Where is the water coming from and where is it going? These answers will help or hinder restoration efforts and can guide goals for the site.

The sun sets on Trempealeau National Wildlife Refuge

Not all wetland restorations will be great waterfowl habitat or result in a pristine native wetland. Some protect stream systems from activities in the surrounding uplands by capturing nutrients and improving the health of downstream wetlands. Some will create great hunting spots. Others provide a refuge for rare and imperiled plant and wildlife species.

WWA has a number of wetland restorations in the works with three out for bid this fall. These projects won’t look like the Trempealeau National Wildlife Refuge when all is said and done. Each project provides different benefits that reach far beyond the property boundaries. Ditch plugs at Meadow Valley Wildlife Area and Necedah National Wildlife Refuge will not only restore wetland acres and more productive waterfowl habitat, but also reduce impacts to downstream roads and infrastructure by increasing water storage capacity in these wetlands. A restoration in Waushara County will create a bit of habitat for wood ducks, support the native plant community, and restore sub-surface water flow from springs on the site, lowering the temperature of the water entering the stream and improving conditions for trout.

Thinking at a watershed level makes wetlands restoration and management feel a little less intimidating. Improving a part of the system improves the whole. By restoring wetland acres within the watershed, we’re improving the health of the many acres of wetlands and waterfowl habitat downstream, too. And that’s encouraging!

Your 2025 Wisconsin Duck Stamp

Posted on by

The 2025 Wisconsin Duck Stamp

In late August, at the Waterfowl Hunters EXPO, next year’s duck stamp art was selected by a panel of judges.  This contest is run under the auspices of the DNR, and we are fortunate to add the selection to the EXPO’s list of activities..  Artist Jon Rickaby’s  swimming Wood Duck pair was chosen chosen to grace the stamp in 2025.  This is Jon’s third time to win the state duck stamp contest hosted for the past four year’s at the EXPO.    Jon is non-denominational when it comes to stamp art—he’s also won the pheasant stamp (twice!) and inland trout stamp.

The State Waterfowl Stamp program generates millions of dollars for habitat restoration that is important to waterfowl.  WWA received some funding every biennium for the public and private land restorations undertaken by our team of ecologists. Here’s an article we published five years ago that summarizes 35 years of WWA’s duck stamp funding accomplishments.

Peter Helland Wildlife Area – Another Public Lands Project is Underway!

Posted on by

By Mark Pfost, Public Lands Ecologist – mpfost@wisducks.org

This article originally appeared in Wisconsin Waterfowl Association’s November, 2024 Newsletter edition.

At the end of October, WWA ecologists met with contractors at Peter Helland Wildlife Area. It was an opportunity for WWA to walk the proposed project area with contractors and to explain the project and answer contractors’ questions. This was the most recent step in WWA’s efforts to restore and enhance wetland habitat on approximately 125 acres.

As a recap, in April of last year, using various aerial imageries, I identified a complex of ditches on Peter Helland that was worthy of further investigation. I first walked the prospective area with a DNR employee; shortly afterward, he and WWA’s Project Director, Peter Ziegler, surveyed the site. Analyzation of that data revealed knowledge gaps that required more trips to gather additional elevation data. More analysis followed. That led to multiple iterative meetings, first internal to WWA, and then between WWA and the DNR; eventually everyone agreed on a restoration plan. With that accomplished, WWA submitted the wetland permit application and other requirements. The last of the permitting requirements were approved in August. With that done, we wrote a Scope of Work for the project and sent it to a number of contractors.

Now we’re in a waiting game. Interested contractors have until the middle of November to submit bids. We’ll notify the selected contractor by the end of November. After that? Work can’t start until gun-deer season ends. Then? It all comes down to suitable weather conditions and the contractor’s schedule.

Little Yellow River Project – We’re Getting Closer!

Posted on by

By Mark Pfost, Public Lands Ecologist – mpfost@wisducks.org

This article originally appeared in Wisconsin Waterfowl Association’s November, 2024 Newsletter edition.

Peter Ziegler answers contractor question as Pfost and Darren Ladwig (DNR) look on.

In mid-October, we met contractors in the Visitors’ Center at the Necedah National Wildlife Refuge to further plan for this large-scale habitat project in the Little Yellow River Watershed Area. While most of the project work will be on Meadow Valley, the last of it will be on Refuge. Brad Strobel (USFWS wildlife biologist) and I led the scoping meeting in which we provided an overview of the area’s drainage history and more in depth project details.

Afterward, all WWA ecologists, DNR staff from Meadow Valley, and the contractors toured the project area. Sometimes this meant stopping at locations where the ditch could be seen from the road, and other times it meant hiking away from our vehicles to give contractors a better feel for variations in ditch characteristics and timber volumes. We had good conversations and contractors asked the questions they needed answers for as they write their bid proposals.

Pfost, Strobel, Zak Knab (DNR) and contractor discuss access to ditch plug locations.

Bids will have been received by the time you read this and WWA will notify bidders by the middle of November. Work cannot start until at least the end of gun-deer season. If it stays as dry as it has been the past few months, work could start shortly thereafter.

Waterfowl Parasite Research Published!

Posted on by

By Dr. Sarah A. Orlofske, University of Wisconsin – Stevens Point

This article originally appeared in Wisconsin Waterfowl Association’s November, 2024 Newsletter edition.

Dr. Sarah Orlofske(L) and her research assistants (Roxanne, Rianna, Tyler) gave WWA President Bruce Urben and VP Todd Schaller a tour of their lab earlier this year.

Over the past few years, we have contributed several waterfowl parasite and disease related articles to this newsletter, but this is the first time we get to share some newly published research featuring contributions from your WWA!

In the latest issue of the Journal of Parasitology, this article: https://meridian.allenpress.com/journal-of-parasitology/article/110/5/445/503075/AVIAN-HAEMOSPORIDIANS-IN-GREATER-SCAUP-AYTHYA reports new results related to avian blood parasites from Greater and Lesser Scaup as well as other diving and sea ducks collected from Green Bay, Wisconsin. There were also a couple samples from Wood Ducks  from a site adjacent to the Bay. Highlights of the research include detection of 14 unique types of avian blood parasites including 4 that have never been detected by scientists before! Lesser Scaup were more infected than Greater Scaup particularly females. Every species of waterfowl collected had at least one infection and dual infections – two different types of parasites in the same duck – were also present. Overall percent of ducks infected was ~27% which was slightly lower than previously published research on female Lesser Scaup collected from the Mississippi River area during a spring survey (Merrill et al. 2018). Studies of blood parasites in waterfowl are relatively rare compared to research from other types of birds like songbirds, and among waterfowl studies diving ducks are even less studied. This paper helps address this gap in our knowledge of these parasites particularly in the unique geographic area of Green Bay, WI.

Many collaborators were involved in the successful completion of this project, but we want to highlight WWA president Bruce Urben for contributing the waterfowl specimens for this project as well as writing portions of the methods.

Second author Gina Magro also wanted to share her story about this research:

Being in Dr. Orlofske’s lab brought me a better understanding of our waterfowl populations, presented opportunities for me to grow as a scientist, and provided me with the elements needed to continue my career. As a hunter myself, I have enjoyed learning how such a wide range of factors and conditions of the wetlands are affecting these birds’ health and how our parasitology research can reflect that. I feel grateful to work with so many local hunters to collect samples and get the chance to show them how impactful their contribution was through presentations and a publication. Being a part of Dr. Orlofske’s lab taught me how to reach opportunities such as my summer internship REU (Research Experience for Undergraduates) in Oregon and ending with the honor of being published. I believe this list of qualifications made the difference in my application to graduate school and helped elevate my application as a student from a small, state school, above those who attended bigger universities. This lab has shaped my career and built my confidence to work hard, learn as I go, and always say yes to opportunities even if you feel underprepared. I would like to thank the WWA and our community members for helping create the opportunities given to me during my time in Dr. Orlofske’s lab.

If you have questions about this published paper or on-going waterfowl parasite projects, please contact Dr. Sarah Orlofske (sorlofsk@uwsp.edu).

Charlie Corbin – A Bay of Green Bay Waterfowler, Decoy Carver and Boat Maker

Posted on by

A Decoy Corner Article

By Bruce Urben, WWA President

All photos courtesy the author

The Bay of Green Bay is located on the northwest side of Lake Michigan. Major tributaries to Lake Michigan, including the Fox, Oconto, Peshtigo and Menominee Rivers, all flow into Green Bay. Green Bay is a relatively shallow arm of Lake Michigan and it has been, and continues to be, a highly productive waterfowl area, a historic waterfowl breeding area and a stop-over spot for migrating waterfowl.

This article is about another of the many Bay of Green Bay decoy carvers from the turn of the century.

Charles Corbin was born in 1872 and was married to his wife, Maggie, in the early 1900’s. Corbin was a passionate and avid waterfowler on the Bay, as was his wife, who accompanied him on many hunts. The Corbins had a hunting cabin near the mouth of the Suamico River, about 15 miles north of the City of Green Bay. His cabin was located near the present day location of the Barkhausen Wildlife preserve. Louis Barkhausen was a local industrialist, avid waterfowler and early supporter of Ducks Unlimited nationally.

Charlie Corbin retired from his job as a saw tooth filer for the J.L. Lumber Co. sawmill in Menominee, Michigan. In retirement, Charlie was able to continue his passion of waterfowling on Green Bay. In the early 1900’s, Charles began to carve his own decoys and later in the 1920’s he began selling his decoys to local “sports”. In addition to decoy carving Charlie was known for making quality boats and skiffs.

Charlie’s decoys were typical of those used on the Bay of Green Bay. Large bodied, solid and hollow decoys with high heads that rode the rough waters of the Bay extremely well. All of his decoys were carved of wood harvested locally. They had glass eyes and his bodies were carved in two pieces with the seam well above the waterline. His heads had some detail carving and most had carved separation of the of the bill from the head. He used a simple paint scheme with quality oil paint that was specific to the species.

No one seems to know the number of decoys that Charlie carved, but it is known that his favorite species were all divers, including canvasbacks, buffleheads, redheads and bluebills.

Charlie Corbin, another original decoy carver and waterfowler who made his living on the Bay of Green Bay after retirement. Charlie passed away at the age of 84 in 1956.

Green Bay Chapter Holds 16th Annual Waterfowlers Academy Learn to Hunt

Posted on by

By Bruce Urben, President

This article originally appeared in Wisconsin Waterfowl Association’s November, 2024 Newsletter edition.

The students and their mentors

On the night of Friday, October 11th, WWA’s Green Bay Chapter began their 16th annual Learn to Hunt (LTH) waterfowl program ran through our Waterfowlers Academy. Eight students attended this year and each started their LTH experience with  several hours in the classroom at the Pittsfield trap club. Instruction included presentations by certified Hunter Safety instructor Jeremy VanSistine, hunter ethics and conservation laws by Conservation Warden Logan Woods, duck identification by WDNR Regional Biologist Steve Burns and duck and goose calling by VanSistine and Bryan Urben of the GB Chapter. The students enjoyed a pizza dinner with soft drinks and sampled duck sausage, hotsticks and good Wisconsin cheese.

After dinner the students were paired up with their mentor team for some time on the trap line, shooting clay pigeons in the positions they would encounter the next day at their mentored hunt. A number of our adult students had not previously fired a firearm!

A student and her mentor in the field

Saturday morning started early for the mentors and students, with some on the raod as early as 4:00 am to meet their mentors at the scouted hunting sites. The hunt concluded by late morning and all met back at the trap club for a picnic lunch, more demos and certificate presentation. According to the mentors, all of the students had some opportunities – some successful and some not. Nine ducks were harvested and the WWA GB Learn to Hunt team demonstrated cleaning their harvest and shared their favorite recipes.

A USDA tech sampled for Avian Influenza

A representative from United States Department of Agriculture was present to swab the throat and cloacal areas of each duck in their effort of monitoring Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI). A short presentation was given and a discussion followed on the need for this continued monitoring.

All of the participants had a great time during our closure meeting, and several are planning future hunts this year! All students left with a goody bag that included a WWA Waterfowlers Academy hat and a duck or goose call to commemorate their attendance.

This year, students attended from all over Wisconsin, including Stevens Point and Madison.

A special thanks to all of our Learn to Hunt mentors, including Mike Keeler, Bryan Urben, Jeremy VanSistine, Logan Sincoular, Mark Wilcox, Ken McNamer, Jesse Nickels, Hank and Dave Voakes and Bruce Urben. We cannot hold this type of event without these experienced and avid waterfowlers who gave up a day of hunting for these students! Also thank you to Pittsfield Trap Club near Pulaski for the use of their facilities and all of our presenters and behind the scenes help, and of course, the donations of food and soft drinks from our valued sponsors.

Students and mentors show off their successful harvest

If you are interested in attending a Learn to Hunt waterfowl program in the future, please contact Todd Schaller, our WWA Education Chair at 920-379-1704 or email at tschalt@charter.net.

Farmers And Hunters: Don’t Get Caught in Bypassed Crop Fields Tilled Into Illegal Bait

Posted on by
An article from WWA’s Words From The Wardens.

This article originally appeared in Wisconsin Waterfowl Association’s November, 2024 eNewsletter. 

By DNR Warden Nicholas Hefter

A traditional agricultural practice of prepping fields for the next growing season may look like a buffet for hundreds of hungry migratory birds traveling overhead and potential violations for waterfowl hunters taking aim from below.

Why the potential violations? Because such plowed or tilled fields may be legally viewed as baited and, therefore, off-limits for legal hunting.

However, not all fields of meals are off-limits to waterfowl hunters. For example, fields with standing dry corn stalks or other brittle-looking crops left untouched from their growing seasons are legal to hunt. Also, normal post-harvest manipulation is also legal to hunt. It’s all about manipulation of the fields before versus after the harvest.

If you are scratching your head about now, I understand.

The federal and state regulations address post-harvest manipulation. The regulations are connected to what farmers refer to as ‘bypassing’ or ‘a pass-over’ and is seen regularly in central Wisconsin counties where I serve on the Wisconsin River Team.

Travel through the central Wisconsin area and you’ll see canning companies. These companies pay area farmers to grow certain crops for canning products. Once companies get enough of the crop from farmers, the remaining crops are left on the fields. Farmers call it bypass because it means the company is bypassing taking the crop from the fields.

The farmers then perform a common ag practice which is to plow or till or disc the field, returning the crop into the soil. The federal and state laws define this practice of returning the crop into the soil as manipulation.

These manipulated fields will attract thousands of migratory birds, including ducks and geese, that will eat the crop after it’s been returned to the soil. By definition, that field is now a baited area when it comes to hunting waterfowl – and doing so is illegal in all Wisconsin counties.

Conversely, a post-harvest manipulation is when the crop was fully harvested before the field is worked. A field like that is legal to hunt.

What about flooding a field? You can waterfowl hunt a flooded field, but hunters should ensure they know how it’s been managed. The minute the crop is plowed into the ground, that field transforms into a baited field and is subsequently illegal to hunt waterfowl over.

One final note: The law only deals with migratory waterfowl. The federal law is Title 50, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20.21(i). The state version is under NR10.12(1)(h). It applies to ducks, geese, swans, coots and cranes.

As you prep for your waterfowl hunting, take the time to review the federal and state regulations. Another best practice is to ensure the status of the property you’d like to do your waterfowl hunting on and the federal and state regulations that would apply.

Know before you go and have fun in our great Wisconsin outdoors.