DuckSouth.com

Interesting. http://www.mdwfp.com/media/192546/may_1 ... inutes.pdf

I was really hoping you would weigh in on this. I know I'm the sob, but whats your take on the oxbow? I think this is the definition of a public oxbow situation that you have outlined for years. People consider you the regional expert to which questions should be asked.......What say you?

But you do realize that the link you provided only covers one end of a two part drainage..... Another drainage come from tallahatchie tippo that drains through six mile to Macentire lake.Its the larger flow of the system. Ill show you the whole system if you like. its complicated if you dont know it.

I'm obviously missing something, that link was from 2010. How does that have anything to do with what's being discussed right now?

I guess that Wingman wasn't here to weigh in on this subject. I guess its just a circle the wagons response.

LODI QUACKER wrote:I guess that Wingman wasn't here to weigh in on this subject. I guess its just a circle the wagons response.

I have not talked to him, but I know Wingman can't really voice his opinion on this subject as it applies directly to his job. He has been chastised in the past for participating in such discussions.

teul2 wrote:

LODI QUACKER wrote:I guess that Wingman wasn't here to weigh in on this subject. I guess its just a circle the wagons response.

I have not talked to him, but I know Wingman can't really voice his opinion on this subject as it applies directly to his job. He has been chastised in the past for participating in such discussions.

Which is a crock in and of itself. You ask a GW a question and they tell you to "call jackson" for fear of getting in trouble. All I want to know is the answer and I dont want to talk to someone behind a desk, but the GW in my area that would be the one that could potentially write a ticket. "Hunting"(for lack of a better term) has become a legal course these day and the fun is getting sucked out of it daily. You can "hunt" deer in plain site of a feeder now. These kids would never make it if they had to. Most of the kids these days dont know what good a draw or hardwood bottom is. But you can bet your sweet ass they'll get the book thrown at them for making a mistake when they make a small mistake on one of the 50-11 punishable by death rules the MDWFP has imposed. Hunting...ha, yeah right, its shooting these days, everyone gets a participation trophy, and no one will shoot you straight on the laws. $$$$$$ is the motive.

Wingman wrote:Somebody post a link that'll open.

http://www.msnewsnow.com/story/29825950 ... ge-hunting
if your on your phone, it may redirect you back to their main mobile page. Their site has done that to me in the past.

Good ole ms politic BS. Get used to it. It happens up and down the river everyday all day all year. GW say this is posted because Mr. So and So said so. Its a load of poop and won't ever change.

I would gladly give up a few hundred acres of Six Mile for the construction of the weir, which would quadruple the amount of huntable acreage that was lost in Six Mile deal. Anyone who is familiar with this area as a whole should see the big picture here. The benefits of the weir highly outweigh what was lost in Six Mile. The state acquiring this portion of Six Mile is allows for justification for the building of the weir.

meatcutter wrote:I would gladly give up a few hundred acres of Six Mile for the construction of the weir, which would quadruple the amount of huntable acreage that was lost in Six Mile deal. Anyone who is familiar with this area as a whole should see the big picture here. The benefits of the weir highly outweigh what was lost in Six Mile. The state acquiring this portion of Six Mile is allows for justification for the building of the weir.

The two things are not the same.
Killing the refuge doesn't mean killing the weir.

teul2 wrote:

meatcutter wrote:I would gladly give up a few hundred acres of Six Mile for the construction of the weir, which would quadruple the amount of huntable acreage that was lost in Six Mile deal. Anyone who is familiar with this area as a whole should see the big picture here. The benefits of the weir highly outweigh what was lost in Six Mile. The state acquiring this portion of Six Mile is allows for justification for the building of the weir.

The two things are not the same.
Killing the refuge doesn't mean killing the weir.

Killing the refuge lessens the likelihood of getting the weir. It was discussed between the two parties in the negotiation that the state acquiring that much underlying land in Six Mile would justify enough acreage to construct the weir to salvage and preserve state owned wetlands in that entire area.

Meatcutter do you know what you are talking about?

The reason I ask is that its is my understanding that the weir is being funded by donated funds, therefore the state doesn't need to justify anything. Also the entire scatters area will be influenced by the weir I would think that would be more than enough property to justify this if there was that need.

LODI QUACKER wrote:I guess that Wingman wasn't here to weigh in on this subject. I guess its just a circle the wagons response.

You are such a jerk.

That said, I couldn't open your link and read what you were talking about, but I gathered it was about the Scatters. I performed a search to try to find it and I found that pdf about a meeting on the same area in 2010. A PDF which I thought was interesting. Which is why I typed "interesting" in my post.

Joel is correct. I am not going to give you my opinion on the subject. I've been called in to the office multiple times for responding on this board, and most of it was for the most ridiculous crap you ever heard of. My chief is on this board. Ask him.

LODI QUACKER wrote:Meatcutter do you know what you are talking about?

The reason I ask is that its is my understanding that the weir is being funded by donated funds, therefore the state doesn't need to justify anything. Also the entire scatters area will be influenced by the weir I would think that would be more than enough property to justify this if there was that need.

Lodi, I don't know the details of the funding, but I do know that in order to do such a project on a state owned waterway there has to be some kind of justification/approval by the state. The donors can't just jump in there and do a major project on a (slowly) moving waterway that large just because they have the money. If you really think about it, its a huge project in terms of how much more huntable water this thing will produce. I know Goose Pond is pushing very hard for this to happen because they have been suffering the past several years without water. I'm all for this, being a lifelong scatters hunter. The areas that will be accessible due to higher water will solve a bunch of problems in the scatters such as creating more holes to spread hunters out (especially between LCHFA and the state) and it will allow access to waters I haven't been able to hunt since they dredged the river 12(ish) years ago. To tie all this together, when the Six Mile deal was being negotiated recently, the state and private parties worked together to create a deal where the Six Mile property would be refuge and in return the state would approve the building of the weir. Essentially, we have a complete restoration project of that entire area to the way it used to be, re-birthing acres on top of acres of water I never thought I would get to hunt again, and the only thing we lose is a couple hundred (average hunting at best) acres.

Wingman wrote:

LODI QUACKER wrote:I guess that Wingman wasn't here to weigh in on this subject. I guess its just a circle the wagons response.

You are such a jerk.

That said, I couldn't open your link and read what you were talking about, but I gathered it was about the Scatters. I performed a search to try to find it and I found that pdf about a meeting on the same area in 2010. A PDF which I thought was interesting. Which is why I typed "interesting" in my post.

Joel is correct. I am not going to give you my opinion on the subject. I've been called in to the office multiple times for responding on this board, and most of it was for the most ridiculous crap you ever heard of. My chief is on this board. Ask him.

Well, I apologize. I "assumed". Cant say as I blame you for not commenting.



Meat, the water got high this year you could and can hunt those places when the water is high it just doesn't stay high but a few days without additional rainfall. The whole point in my opinion is how does the state go to working out this deal on a piece of property that is already owned by the citizens of MS that we can use but when they are finished with the "deal" we cant use. The sound of that is just wrong.

At what level will the weir hold water? Its not going to hold at lake full levels I don't think.