Jump to navigation
I think it would be interesting to have the Wisconsin Game & Fish come aboard this thread. In my opinion, they have a lot of explaining to do in regard to baiting and the feeding of wildlife. They have the biggest concern or one of the biggest concerns when it comes to TB. Yet, they some how find it okay to allow baiting and feeding in one county but the adjacent county s banned. I don't see the logic.
Furthermore, it doesn't matter what time of the year a crop is standing. Deer will use it heavily. You being from the eastern portion of the state should fully understand that. Heck, even the NDGF understands it and it is obvious because they extended deer season a couple years back because standing crops kept deer harvest at a low. Crops come down but food/bait plots do not. And when they don't, deer will remain. It's really a simple concept. Another simple tool to get the point of food/bait plots is to simply ask the landowner why he would take the time to plant them. The answer will be nothing more or less than I have supplied all throughout my posts. I suppose some will add that they like the feeling they are supplying wildlife food, some will say it is for viewing. We raised food plots for the same reasons but the benefit of hunting cannot be ignored.
Anyway, goosefisher, I will most definitely send comments to Olafson and all of the Natural Resource committee. In fact, my intention is to do that today when I get a moment. I first need to build an email contact list. Whether I send my so called "bill" I don't know. I'm not a bill writer but I do think it covers many more concerns that Olafson communicated to me by email. Oh and I'd love for nothing MORE than he and other legislators to read the comments here. I believe there has been a very good discussion from both sides. Talk about a wealth of information from folks that live, breathe and sleep the outdoors. We should be the audience that has the most influence. Of course, it still comes down to us participating in this discussion (reading or posting) to contact our respected representatives and senators.
If things are not adopted similar to what I have communicated above then I'm sorry, we are only left to believe this bill is not about disease but about false presumptions (or at the minimum very questionable beliefs) on ethics or the "hoarding" of a public resource. With that being the case, in no way shape or form can I support this bill.
Hoarding of birds and animals wouln't be a problem if we all got our bush hogs going and eliminated all of our wildlife habitat projects. Elinimate the winter cover and get rid of the high dense grass nesting cover some idiots have planted ovr the years!
First off, there would be no collection of wildlife there anymore, and more importantly there would be no wildlife left for anyone to hoard! With no wildlife left at all, there would be no problems with hoarding, ever. A permanent solution!
So maybe I'll contact my representatives and demand a law making planting new or manitaining old winter habitat projects, summer habitat or winter food plots, absolutely illegal! Heavy penalties, too! Then all of us hunters will be on the same page, with no one having ANY advantage over anyone else! Makes sense! This wildlife "HOARDING" (a new concept) HAS to stop!
Danged 'green environmentalist Liberals' with their selfish wildlife projects!! The nerve........
Thanks for extending my point. This is how crazy a guy can take it and that's why I say it's foolish to draft a bill with anything other than the intent to reduce disease.
Since I know you enjoy increasing habitat and planting food plots and I also know you are honest. Tell us how much more wildlife frequents your property. I already know the answer because my dad has done it himself but some seem to want to ignore it and wish to only blame baiting.
I was opposed to baiting initially, but with some consideration I would not support a baiting ban. The outfitters are accused of luring deer from public land for their clients with bait piles. And a semi load of beet tops or corn does attract wildlife. Now if that same outfitter (whom obviously has access to land) plants 10 different 5 acre food plots around his lease not only with the deer feed there they will bed there too. I think by stopping baiting and allowing food plots more deer will end up hoarded onto certain land.
It would also affect the guys that hunt their own small acreages. My dad is in his 60's. He owns 11 acres around his farmstead and bow hunts it exclusively. He will put out apples or corn to attract deer. What is wrong with that he is staying off public land and though neighbors offer to allow him to hunt their land he declines so others can have access to it.
Tim if given the option, the WI DNR would have stayed with the complete state wide ban that was first implemented. What happened is that the issue of baiting got buggered up in the Leg and now you have the goofy rules that allow baiting in one area of no more than a small amount of food and across the county line or Highway it is completely banned.
Had the G&F in ND, taken the approach and banned baiting as a method of take which they have the power to do, the baiting issue would have ended up just like WI.
MI with the TB issue had the DNR issue a state wide ban on baiting along with the Ag Dept supporting it. Word from MI is that the Leg is sticking its nose into the issue again to placate outfitters and high rollers.
So like it or not, the way this is being introduced, and who is supporting it, bodes well for a decent piece of legislation to pass that will remove one risk factor of disease like TB spreading statewide. I do not disagree that the Leg focus should be on disease but we all know that it is more than that. For some it is about ethics, others it is about opportunity etc....
The point I have been making is that there is enough evidence of disease risk that all the other nonsense arguments wane in importance. Like it or not that is a reality and it is obvious from some of the child like posts that many do not want to admit it.
For some removal of baiting is going to cause a drop in revenue if they are a commercial operation. There loss is peanuts compared to the losses that the state as a whole will take if TB becomes wide spread. I have no doubt that within a few years the north east corner of the state or the south west corner will have verified TB cases. Movement of antelope and deer will be a factor, but may not be the cause.
You want better wording, then send in your suggestions, I have, and hope that those placed in charge of crafting this law if it passes take the advice and apply the good information that can be gleamed from these types of conversations.
In my lifetime I have seen fence row to fence row farming and the return of CRP and game to the landscape.Now we face again the prosepect of fence row to fence row again! Sportsman are our own worst enemy in that we fail to look forward and focus to much on the now!
Tim - you are going have a heart attack - I can only imagine how red your face is and see the veins sticking out of your neck. Easy now!
The baiting ban will not end the world.
It is just plain obvious that baiting congregates wildlife. It is a fact that saliva/contact spreads disease. It is a fact that there are folks out there that put out tons of feed as a means of attacting wildlife.
Should it not be our main focus as hunters and conservationists to diminish the chances of spreading of disease? People mention the lack of disease but I would content it is not if rather than when. Look to our fishing waters for example.
Should it not be our responsibility to protect wildlife to the extent we can? I do not know of one single individual that continues to bait beyond the time they get their deer. The result can be devistating as, believe it or not, deer will migrate to a location that has good winter cover if they do so early enough.
I guess I don't care if someone baits or not but the comparisons and arguments for it are sometimes just plain retarded.
This is stupid! Doesn't everyone know that disease is only spread during hunting season!!!! Duh!
BAW's high fence around cattle operations is a fine idea. Where do you think these deer are feeding during the winter, especially a winter like this, unless there is still standing crop available for them. These operations have piles of sileage/corn & hay, of course these deer are going to feed on this along with the cattle. Can't stop it without a high fence. How many ranchers gut shoot these deer and let them runoff and die???
The little guy is the one who is going to get the shaft here. The guy who doesn't own land. The guy who hunts marginal land.
Start taking things away and just wait and see what else follows, its a slippery slope all you ethical non-baiting purist hunters need to keep in mind.
Ha ha whitesmoke, you are missing a lot of what I am saying.
If you have read my posts I said ban baiting but ban it, feeding and emergency feeding in the accordance of a theory disease is spread by hunters. But don't ban it because of the other cheap shots on baiting over a bucket.
So not sure where you are saying I am not considering disease as a reason for a ban. I have said it above and I even wrote my own bait ban bill.
passiton, You bring up a intersting point. How many of the little guy's are able to have food plots? First they do not own land or have the equipment to do it.
Here is my issue with banning baiting and not artificial feeding of wildlife (except pretty birds). We all know whitetails to be creatures of habit. They also follow travel corridors and funnels to get from bed to feed. Anyone disagree so far? How many people continue to dump big piles of food and simply hunt along the trail or funnel hundreds of yards away. Now what has been solved? Just a thought.
"When we step into the outdoors, we have the privilege of standing in the presence of God through the power and majesty of His creation. That makes hunting more than a sport or a hobby. It's a calling to something greater. And that transforms the places that we stand into something more than a cropfield or a pasture or a mountain. It makes that place Hallowed Ground."
I have said the same things as passiton. Maybe not directly but surely indirectly. Including the issues with feeding of cattle. It is silly for us to have to burden the rancher like that but if we are going to do things in the name of disease spread we have to be open minded. I say this so I don't get my ranching friends, neighbors and fellow comrades thinking I am anti-rancher.
A helped a couple kids dug a tunnel in the huge snow bank in my yard yesterday. This morning there were rabbit tracks and turds in the tunnel.
Don't tell me I haven't created winter habitat.
Ha! wrong thread.
Still relevant though. Nothing wrong with creating winter habitat but some would like to think it doesn't have anything to do with attracting wildlife to their property :-)
Crust - that was the rabbit's way of saying thanks for nothing, AH! He didn't need a tunnel in the snow he could do that himself. It would have been nice to have a carrot and a leafy lettuce salad. Come on, step up!
Tim's bill is pretty basic and straight forward.
I do think he needs to include a definition of "wildlife food plot
To the point of high fences for cattle feed so deer don't get disease is a little off base. Most feed deer are eating has never come in contact with cattle at all. MN deer have TB, deer swim river all the time, largest deer pop. in state is next to red river, baiting can cause faster spread of disease. TB can have huge impact on wild life and livestock industry in state. Today, cattle moving in and out of state must be tested for TB, deer are not. I bait every year, yes, sugar beets, corn, apples, pumpkins, alcohol byproduct... all work good, but not being a TB free state would be bad for not just me but the state.
If a person does a search of states with CWD you will see that most of the affected states don't allow baiting. The disease is very capable of spreading w/o bait. I drive in from the country to Bismarck everyday. I see deer eating out of cattle troughs all the time. They both feed at the same dinner table. I have both food plots and run a pile of corn for the wildlife, both get used heavily. The disease issues are being used as a cover to accomplish a goal. The goal is to stop some from hoarding wildlife or shooting deer over bait because some don't believe its ethicial.
I have a new idea- how about letting each person decide what they are comfortable with. If you don't want to bait don't, if you like to bait-bait. To each their own, but don't bring the unproven disease issue as the reason why we shouldn't bait. It's a bogus arugement.
I spend about $1500 each year in corn and about $1500 to do food plots. If baiting is ban I will just put all the money in food plots. Did I mention that I have planted an apple orchard around my stand and the funny thing is rarely do we hunt the ground. We just like the wildlife around. So much of some's life is spent in trying to control other's behavior. Instead I would offer that time spent controlling ourselves is much better spent.
Once again the "whiners" are trying to speak. I think the real reason most of the Anti baiters are whining isn't because of disease or anything it is because someone may shoot "their" deer. Who really cares if someone uses bait to enhance their hunting experience!! I for one think baiting is a very good way for beginning bow hunters (kids) to experience wildlife. It keeps them interested since there will most likely be plenty of game around, not only to shoot, but to watch and study. So if you don't like baiting don't do it and leave the rest of us alone!!!
Why do we always end up with baiting being a disease issue?? If it is true disease threat every penned deer,elk, or cow in ND should be dead. If you think there's no animal contact in the wild you need to get out of town and take a look at the deer herds this winter. How do we explain this to the buck during rut??
I view this issue the same as the high fence issue, if you don't like it - don't do it! We can't legislate morals.
"We can't legislate morals!" You are correct, but the act can be deemed unsuited for society and thus made illegal with a penalty for committing the act.
This is a disease issue for the most part. Yes there are supporter of a baiting ban that see it as an ethics issue and some that see it as both.
But it always seems whenever this subject comes up, that those who want to scoff at the disease issue never offer any studies or science to back up their claims that baiting especially places where bait is placed repeatedly are not elevating the risk of disease being transmitted.
Nor do most who understand the disease issue from my experience think that this action will keep any disease from spreading once in the herd. It will delay its arrival and it will slow the spread, but not eliminate the entire risk.
Thus taking a preventive action now makes the most sense before we have a crisis and not attempt to shut the door once the crisis occurs!!!!!!
I said so the deer do not give the cattle TB or Disease. Like lets say a herd of deer goes into a stack of hay bail and munch, all of the sudden their saliva is on the hay bail and farmer brown gives the tanted hay bail to his cattle and BAM! the cattle are infected.
If this passes, how are they going to determine what a bait site is or not?
Let's say I scout and find a good shelterbelt near a corn field, put my treestand up near the edge of the field and when the farmer harvests the corn field he parks his truck near my stand and inevitably spills some corn there. Will I be busted for baiting?
Look at all of the problems that arise from the waterfowl baiting laws. Look at the no tolerance policies in our schools. Innocent people are going to be punished for doing absolutely nothing wrong.
That is why I support restrictions but not an all out ban!
Hunt keep grasping for lame what ifs! If passed the way it is written, you would be OK, because normal Ag practice is not baiting and spillage is part of the game. From trucks that run over during loading to a operator forgetting to shut off the unloading auger or when switching crops forgets to close the clean out etc....
This things happen, but once again you are grasping because you have no defense against the risk of disease spread. Move on or bring something real to the table instead of these lame what if's!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You say they are lame what if's, doesn't mean they are.
So how are you going to know if I dumped that bucket of corn there or not?
And as far as your stupid risk of disease spread, you still fail to answer how your going to stop other risk factors? Until your willing to do that I'm going to continue to dump my bucket of apples!
Wow, I have five pages written as comments on this bill. Trying to whittle it down but this is just too complex of an issue to not give it due process.
Just last year I started developing a rare breed of Cotton Wood tree it produces apples, corn and peas. If this ban goes through I will probably be able to benefit by producing and selling this rare breed of tree. I think I shall call it the Apcornpea tree!
This is a complex issue and I'm glad we are seeing the comments come in dumb as some may think they are. If and when they ban baiting, there just needs to be a cut and dry written law without any gray areas. We all want to think it will be strictly over disease but you all know that won't be the case. All we can do is send our concerns into the legislature and hope they listen.
Tim this is not a complex issue. A simple straight forward ban on feeding and baiting is clean. Complex is dragging habitat into the mix,trying to justify restricted use of bait or feed etc...
Hunt for the last time, nobody and nothing short of elimination of all deer will remove the risk of disease transfer between animals. You have been answered over and over on this, and that is why your response and claims are becoming lame. The first time you ask it is a relevant question, the second,third etc... they become redundant and lame.
One only needs to look at WI,MI as just two examples to see what works and what does not in keeping this simple and clean both from enforcement and understanding without the creation of possible loop holes.
I have issues with baiting from an ethics point of view, but my position and view of this is about disease and the risks that baiting or feeding elevate.
Today the Forum had a piece on MN TB efforts being successful so far. They as a state have spent $6 million so far to protect the cattle industry but other states still require every animal be tested before it can be brought in.
Yet both of you continue to try and spin this issue into something more than it really is. I say this because neither of you I am sure sat in on the meetings held up in the NE corner of the state last spring and listened to the concerns of the cattlemen in that area.
I'm sorry, it is much more complex than what Olafson put down on paper. Seriously, you think my comments are not right? If it wasn't for us giving input we'd have a ban on feeding and baiting of big game and nothing else. It is complex. Email me at email@example.com and I'll send you my comments. If you don't think anything I have to say is with complete merit and respect then I'll slap myself silly and call me shirly...errr something :-)