To appreciate the merits of FUD decoys all one needs to do is ask "what is the job decoys must do?". Too often the job at hand is overlooked and hunting results suffer from the decoy's appearance, limited working range, and obvious warning signals. To ignore these influences is to hunt according to the model duck syndrome.

Model Duck Syndrome
Traditionally, decoy ownership and use was only available to the affluent, the elite, and to the professional guides who charged their clients to hunt from established blinds over permanent decoy spreads. Decoys were hand crafted, were expensive often costing over $100 each, they were bulky, and were unavailable to the masses. Hand carved decoys set the industry paradigm with model duck equivalents of the target species being hunted.

For over half a century the decoy industry's sole focus was placed on producing that better model duck. Examples can be found today in auction houses and private collections that pay testimony to the detail, the quality, and the value of those decoys from past generations.

Matching hand carved decoys has always been the first consideration of any would-be or aspiring decoy manufacturer ensuring that the decoy's merit was based on the appearance in the hand or in the lounge room. Everyone had lost sight of the fact that to decoy means "to lure game into danger" which is a field activity. It is measured in harvest results alone and to use any other criteria is to concede that the product in question is not a decoy. The rules governing lounge room excellence are very different from field or decoying excellence.

With the arrival of the first comparatively inexpensive plastic blow moulded floaters in the early 1970's, decoy ownership and use changed dramatically. Regular decoys were now within the financial means of the hunting masses and decoys have truly become synonymous with waterfowling. But all brands of plastic floaters followed the accepted hand carver's convention that a decoy must be a model duck. In each case the solution was nothing more than a plastic bottle being used to deliver a model duck solution. Such a solution is a compromise.

After the arrival of the first mainstream plastic floaters little has changed other than the emergence of silhouettes, shells and full body decoys for use away from water, and the more recent introduction of motion decoys. Still today more than 60% of all waterfowl decoy lines sold are plastic floaters of the model duck format. Further, the cost parameters for modern decoys have always been influenced by the high cost of traditional hand carved decoys. This influence still exists today with the vast majority of plastic floaters retailing for in excess of $60 per dozen while being nothing more than drink bottles moulded to an unusual shape and painted.

Many of the model duck failures have been acknowledged by mainstream decoy brands with the release of foam filled unsinkable plastic floaters, or purpose designed and expensive feeders, or decoys with horizontally rotating heads to introduce set variation, or with motion decoys with spinning or flapping wings to create movement within the set. But they are all expensive and reactive gimmicks that compel hunters to buy more decoys of differing styles, all while simply trying to make the model duck something it is not. Model duck decoys are not a total decoying solution.
Index

Decoy Appearance
Decoy appearance is all about portraying what is seen in nature with contented birds to entice game birds in. Appearance is the combination of just four factors. These are,

• Detail - Feather detail and perfect body lines look great in the hand but they cannot be seen past 5 yards. So what is the point of paying for features that have nothing to with those waterfowl outside of shotgun range? These are sales and marketing gimmicks, or decorative selling points that do nothing to improve bag prospects because they have no relevance to the act of decoying.
• Tone - Image tone is the general colour that the decoy portrays. This is important because in the same manner as silhouettes lose drawing power as birds fly closer detecting false shadows and disappearing decoys, tone failures from faded and poorly imaged decoys have exactly the same effect. If a hunter can detect faded or poorly coloured decoys from 100 yards then so can the game birds, but unlike the hunters the game birds have a lot more at stake if paying attention.
• Shadow - A significant portion of the decoy's drawing power is derived from its shadow which can often be seen further out than tone. It is therefore most logical that the shadow or reflection off water is just as realistic as the decoy itself. This is why silhouettes are a compromise when compared to three dimensional decoys like the FUD. Unless the silhouette is at right angles to the light source and the incoming bird it will cast an inaccurate shadow or reflection sending out the clear warning signal "these are decoys!!!"
• Posture - And posture which is the least understood but most important visual aspect of all decoys. It is the posture of decoys that is seen from the longest distance out enticing game birds to come closer. Posture is emphasized by the shadow or reflection, it is seen before tone, and is seen much long before detail and texture. It is the lack of posture variations that sets off those decoy alarm signals making smart birds flare off, it is the lack of posture variations that says in the loudest possible terms "these are decoys!!!", and it is the lack of posture variation that restricts the effective decoying range of a decoy.

Decoying Range
Decoying range is the most fundamental aspect of all decoys yet it is rarely considered. There has never been a product before that was purpose designed to deliver effective decoying range ahead of all other requirements. The market place shows this with a myriad of products with confused sales and marketing messages that ignore or dismiss all notions of decoying range. This is necessary when selling products that have no effective range.

Any sales and marketing message used by a decoy brand can be easily tested in decoying range terms. The simple question is "are the decoy's sales features or product improvements visible outside of shotgun range?" If a feature cannot be seen outside of shotgun range then it has absolutely nothing to do with the art of decoying. It is a sales and marketing gimmick.

It remains the decoy's job to bring in those birds from 500 yards to 5 yards. Not 300 yards before they flare off, not 100 yards still outside of shotgun range, not flaring off at 50 yards being border-line to take the shot, but 5 yards in the hunter's face and fully committed. This is what decoying is all about.

All decoys can claim they will do this. Hunters using the worst decoy possible in front of opening day dumb birds will most likely bag a meal. Against first year juveniles the task of decoying game birds into range is a given. Plastic bottles painted black will do the job, as will house bricks painted up in bird plumage, as will mounted birds costing $500 each. But plastic bottles and house bricks suffer accordingly once that initial 5 minute opening day salvo is over and all the dumb birds have been bagged or given a real decoy education. Those smart birds did not get smart by dropping into the first decoy spread they come across and they can certainly detect the difference between plastic bottles and the real thing.

Decoying range is all about those attributes that bring smart birds from 500 yards away to land right in front of the hunter. These attributes have everything to do with simulating contented pictures of resting and feeding game birds, this picture must be clear of all decoy alarm signals well known to all those smart birds, and this picture must present those posture variations that are visible from the greatest distance out enticing game birds to come closer.

Few hunters understand this and accordingly many decoy spreads are left presenting alarm signals that work against the hunter, or left relying on 5 yard factors that have nothing to do with the act of decoying. Having a higher quality hand painted image, or great carver design, or some new flocked finish will certainly make the decoys look better in the hide but these features miss the point. No 5 yard factor can be called a decoying feature.

Recognizing the difference between field attributes and 5 yard sales and marketing hype is hunting common sense.
Index

Salute Warning
For a product that tries to emulate what is seen in nature it is unfortunate that nearly all plastic decoys are moulded in the salute posture with a horizontal bill parallel to the water or ground. Some salute birds in a spread is most natural but all birds in salute is a clear warning.

In nature all birds adopt this position when they have been threatened. All hunters can recall the picture most often seen with contented game birds found in the wild. They will also recall what happened when they made a noise. The picture changed immediately as up went the heads all at attention looking in all directions for a threat. This is a clear sign of danger yet this is exactly the picture presented by the vast majority of decoying products on the market today.

Having uniform salute postured decoys emulating frightened birds works against the hunter's interests. All decoy brands recognise this and the importance of posture and accordingly manufacture feeders, duck butts, tuck decoys, and motion decoys exist. To add realism is what the manufacturers say. To reduce this warning signal is the reality.

Horizontally rotating heads are another common 5 yard factor often used to promote decoys but horizontally rotating heads do not eliminate the uniform salute posture. Rotating heads makes a spread look more realistic to the hunter but will not fool gun shy birds who have learned the hard way that all birds looking and none feeding is a sure sign of danger. They have a lot more at stake and pay a lot more attention than what most hunters and decoy manufacturers give game birds credit for.

Low head decoys are yet another 5 yard factor attempting to minimize this alarm signal, but they too miss the point in that the low nature of the head likewise cannot be detected until the birds are real close. Even then the low head postures still only portray birds on the lookout.
Index

Clone Warning
All standard decoys are clones that present the same detail, the same tone, the same shadow, and the same posture. Uniform detail, shadow and tone are most desirable as this is exactly what is seen in nature. Identical postures however are the worse alarm signal of all. Is the hunter trying to emulate contented wild game birds or emulate conventional decoys?

Contented game birds are always found in a mixture of resting, feeding, preening, sitting and standing poses, but the minute they sense a threat all birds will adopt the same posture. All birds at attention in salute looking for the threat.

To have the least effective spread one must deploy the most effective alarm posture available. Uniform standard clones send this message. What has always been needed for decoy-smart and gun-shy birds is a single decoy that can emulate resting, feeding, sitting, swimming and standing poses both in water and on land. This is what the NRA FUD does.
Index

Take-Off Warning
All floating decoys have full length keels that keep them upright in water. This inevitably means that the decoys are anchored from the front and centre which results in all decoys pointing into the wind and never moving from that line.

Waterfowl only point straight into the wind when threatened and preparing to fly away. If you want to scare off gun-shy smart birds then use a convoy spread that says "we better get out of here!!!". Again, do you wish to emulate game birds as seen in the wild or conventional floaters as seen on every marsh from coast to coast?
Index

Generic Decoys
The high cost of decoys has always offered an incentive to produce a "low priced" decoying alternative. The market prospects of such a product are clearly understood by all brands.

The origin of generic decoys is found with parties who have recognised this and have pursued decoy manufacture in developing or third world countries. The generic principle is to trade off quality, size, and/or product life span to produce a compelling price point to secure market share from the standard magnum lines.

For those consumers who do not care about size, or quality, or product life span, and only wish Mallards, these generic lines do have a niche market. It is estimated that up to 20% of all decoy sales are now serviced by generic lines. But it is the principles behind generic decoys that are having the greatest impact in blow-moulded decoy manufacture.

More and more brands are making sacrifices in pursuit of price point. As the retail price has dropped so has quality, so has size, so has decoy life expectancy, and most importantly so has customer satisfaction. The original plastic floaters fomr the 70's could reasonably last 5 or more years yet the bulk of today's plastic floaters in both generic and standard lines are often criticized for not lasting one season. Thanks to poor UV stability, poor paint adhesion, being sinkable, and from fading too quickly, more hunters are having to replace more decoys more often, and any negative effect on industry revenues from dropping prices has been easily offset by higher volumes.

The FUD makes no sacrifices in size or quality while offering quality levels, functionality, and value for money not found in any premium magnum line of decoys.
Index

Redundant Decoys
By delivering a total decoy solution in the one product, that can be rigged for field use or for combined field and water use, that can be used anywhere, and that transports and stores easier than any other decoy, the FUD brings attention to the greatest non-hunting nonsense impacting field hunters today.

It has become accepted that the style of decoy owned or chosen on the day governs the hunting locations. This notion is contrary to the nature of hunting and the act of decoying and remains hunting nonsense. For decades decoy industry norms have promoted market segmentation into rigs of floaters for water, silhouettes or full body decoys for field use, and shells for use on ice or land. This notion is not based on any hunting logic, nor was it dreamt up by hunters, it simply stems from the fact that none of the available decoy styles could function in all locations.

Differing decoy styles have also been great for growing sales of largely redundant decoys but it can be argued that the varying styles have in fact worked against hunters by restricting them to just those locations that suited their decoy style used on the day.

The NRA FUD takes this notion of location specific rigs and market segments and throws it all on the scrap heap. What was always needed was a single decoying product that can be used anywhere. This is what the NRA FUD is, it is a floater, it is a shell, it is a silhouette, it is a full body decoy, and it is the only decoy that can make such a claim.

Experienced waterfowlers recognize that there are other issues that need to be considered when sourcing a decoy solution. The failures and contradictions of the model duck format are now being openly challenged as hunters search for more productive and more functional decoying formats. The FUD offers quantum leaps forward in functionality, ease of use, locations that can be hunted, and field realism having encompassed the entire range of desired field decoying attributes into a single product.
Index

Quality Products
All hunters would recognize that decoy quality has fallen in recent years. Cost pressure has impacted decoy manufacturing and sourcing enormously and quality and size have been sacrificed. A downward spiral continues with generic lines that will ultimately result in disposable junk decoys. Real-size decoys have become the norm rather than magnums, UV polymer stabilizers have become less commonplace, as has UV paint protection, as has paint that permanently adheres to the plastic.

For a decoying product to claim excellence it must first deliver the basics in both field and product performance. Quality is not a decoying attribute, it is a prerequisite that should be demanded of any decoying product. The lack of quality amongst decoys today suggests that compromises have been made that all detract from the product's performance, life span, and purchase value of the decoy. All of this must suggest that something is wrong when applying blow-moulded drink bottle technology to decoys. It should come as no surprise that a product like the FUD was invented.

Hunters remain critical of decoys that fail within weeks, that fade, that lose paint at the slightest knock, that crack when exposed to ice or sunlight, and that sink with the first stray pellet. The FUD does not subscribe to the principles of conventional decoys and does not suffer from their common failings. It makes no such sacrifices in quality or size and remains totally suited to the task at hand.
Index