Some sites offer migration information--accurate to within hours--which will help you decide where and how to hunt.

Cyber-scouters. Spot-stealers. Unethical, lazy, rotten, duck-nabbin' so-and-sos! They're known by myriad names, these computer-literate scoundrels who, rumor has it, lurk along the fringes of popular waterfowl-hunting websites where they can electronically discover the location of your favorite duck hole and then go there. Repeatedly. But is that all there is to this cyber-scouting? Supposed high-tech thievery? Can the Internet and its wealth of information riches actually help you become a better, more efficient waterfowler? Where does traditional scouting--for lack of a better word--stop, and spot-nabbing begin? Climb aboard the information superhighway, and let's take a look at the Internet's waterfowling community, where at times hard drives and hardcore clash.

Cyber-Scouting = Spot-Thievery?
In December 2005, the Washington State forum (part of "The Duck Hunter's Forum" at duckhunter.net), featured a thread--a story title, that is--specifically addressing Internet scouting. Does it happen? Is it detrimental? And the biggie: Has anyone been burnt, or had their favorite duck hole ravaged and pillaged by an unscrupulous public as a result of information posted on a website?

The results, which you can view for yourself, varied widely. Comments ranged from "I've been burnt" to "It's bad," "It's not prevalent," "What's the difference?" and my personal favorite, "If you're going to post photographs of dead ducks with recognizable landmarks of a public location on a public forum, then you should expect an increase in the popularity of that particular spot." In other words, if you're going to sit in the middle of the train tracks, there's an awfully good chance you and Burlington Northern will have a negative experience.

What was perhaps more interesting than the comments themselves was the amount of attention this particular subject garnered. Throughout its run, the Internet scouting thread mustered seventy-three full-fledged responses and an astonishing 2,382 views; this particular story was opened and read almost 2,400 times! President Bush's "State of the Union" address won't be read that many times online, so obviously, there's something of importance to the waterfowling public here.

Overcast, misty rain and a ten-mph wind spell good bluebill shooting. This is all information you can gather from the Internet before you plan your hunt.

Perhaps the biggest question here--I wish to get this out of the way so we might move on to the more positive aspects of cyberspace as it relates to the waterfowler--is whether Internet scouting is ethical. For our purposes, let's define Internet scouting as viewing a photograph voluntarily posted on a public forum (website) and subsequently using the information extracted from observing this photo to place yourself in the identical or approximate location for the purpose of waterfowl hunting.

Some would call such a tactic underhanded. Others, like me, feel that an entertaining and informative story can be told and photographs displayed without revealing the whereabouts of the hunt, but...that information made public goes into a well known as "public information," and from this well, waterfowlers around the globe may draw.

The bottom line is this: If having your spot identified through Internet scouting bothers you, don't post revealing information. If you can sleep well after cross-referencing and researching a public image you've uncovered on the Internet, which leads you to a formerly unknown public waterfowling location, so be it.