Jump to navigation
BAW--No where did I say your belief is arrogant and childish unless you don't like some humor..If you read my posts you will see that my stance on this is the problem the way the bill is written. Don't worry, I get what HW and Tim are saying, if disease is the ultimate factor, which it can only be, there needs to be more regs put on it than just on us as hunters. I personally don't see a need for a bait ban, but if you are going to limit one, you have to put some regs on another or there is hipocrisy.
"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 was qouting what Hardwater had said. I'm included in that group with you.
From what I've seen there are more deer now on a farmers harvested pea field... right now in natural circumstances... they are herded together.. bunched up... THAN you would find on a September Afternoon when Harry, Joe or Sally have placed their 10 gallons of apples under their tree stand or next to their blind...
Which one is going to have the greater 'chance' of spreading disease? would it be the September evening hunter who maybe has 3-4 deer coming into his set up...
the herd that is yarded up in January.. roughly 200-250 deer pushed onto a harvested field that they are using for their 'food source'.. I'll let you use logic on that one...
If you worried about 'numbers of deer congrating together at a food source... THEN how do you control winter 'herding' of deer... this is where the 'disease' claim floor falls out from under them...
its boiling right down to an ethics issue.. its always been that.... as it is with those who are against any or oppose the increase in the technology of archery and archery products... or blackpowder...
If you don't like to bait just don't do it... PERIOD....
If you want to become a 'good' archer become the BOW, if you want to become a 'great' archer become the ARROW.... BYRON FERGUSON
My bad, didn't read close enough. Yeah, we are "evidently" the ones who don't get it. I am OK with that though. If this bill is going to pass, I just want it to be fair in all aspects. They will be handcuffing a large number of bowhunters young and old. Fairness and equality needs to be brought forth and right now, this bill isn't that. HW doesn't care what the bill states, he just wants to see a pile of food banned. From his posts, I feel he is blinded by his hatred for us "master" baiters as he calls us.
I don't know if logic can be apart of this ban.
Another example of legistlation that was not well thought out. This kind of government waste is what ticks me off. They don't do any kind of research into the topic to educate themselves before proposing this crap. I am not for or against baiting during the hunting season, so I could care less.
I do think that baiting should only be allowed with small food sources: ie, less than five to ten feet in diameter with no container to hold it or protect it from the elements, and only during the entire length of the bow hunting season. Bait should not be put down until the opener.
Feeding deer throughout the winter, spring and summer should be outlawed period. Pheasant feed should be protected by a deer barrier if pheasants are being fed year round. Stizo :)
I'd like to see the gov't ban everything but single-shot rifles and shotguns too. If you can't get it done with the first shot then too bad. It certainly isn't ethical to miss a deer with the first shot and then follow up with a shot to the a$$ while its running away. So lets just keep taking things away here, and maybe we will see what kind of hunters we really are when we have to sneak up on a deer and chuck a spear its way. LOL!!
"Feeding of big game & hunting big game over bait prohibited"... I'd still like to see the "other side of the story"...meaning if I'm a turkey hunter, and have previously put out a small amount of corn for fall turkey. Can I still hunt turkey this way? What happens if don't deer hunt or I've already filled my bow tag, or example my daughter who doesn't deer hunt but is determined to get her first turkey this year. Is that a class B misdemeanor? or ?
Or just go sit by my buddies silage pill? Before some of you freak out! I'm asking these questions, doesn't mean I just can't call them in or wait on a trail without bait. Just would like and official answer. Who determines these rules?
No, you would not be illegal because you are feeding turkeys and deer know that and won't flock to your area. You could fence it off and make it deer proof but then I don't know how the turkeys would get near it. Actually, once deer showed up, according to the bill you'd be illegl. Some think we are grasping at straws but this is reality. Sounds crazy, but it's like Field of Dreams, "If food is available/accessible, deer will come."
Regarding the farmer's harvested pea field- it is true that this field is contributing to the risk of disease because of the natural herding effect that it contributes to. So let us agree that therefore there is an ever present natural risk of disease that is inherent to the actions of people carrying on their normal duties to insure their livelihood,i.e., raising crops for profit. That is exactly where the difference is in this argument. There are already circumstances afield that are contributing to disease risk by virtue of people's actions to make a living. Why then do we want to further increase that disease risk by allowing people to add to the potential mitigating factors that already exist? All of the traditional disease,free methods of harvesting a deer are still in place, much like they always have been. When is enough enough? Baiting deer is a result of the instant gratification that this society and its people desire. Yes, that is me speaking on my ethics soapbox!
Thanks to a food/bait plot beside the highway that doesn't allow hunting and is loaded with a couple hundred deer I was able to drill a doe with my work car tonight, YEA!
Good post stizo and many others. I was with a gathering of a couple hundred hunters this past weekend and I can honstly say that I couldn't find a single person there in favor of the ban. But most agreed that baiting should be limited. And I'd bet that less than 1/2 of 1% of folks who bait put out the anount of grain you see in photos of bait piles that the G&F are showing in the papers. They went and found the worst example and are try to shove that image down everyones throats.
As far as I'm concerned they can ban bait piles because thats something we don't do and couldn't afford to do.
But we do spread a couple gallons across a a wide area, not a pile in site.
Here's my opinion. Its all about ethics if they only want to ban bait piles and not food plots. I am against the ban. I have app. 15 stands set in a 10 mile radius and some need to be baited and some don't. The baited ones bring in 5 to10 deer. On the edge of my hunting area a neighbor has app. 10 food plots set up. During the winter about 90% of the deer in my hunting area winter there. Drawn to the food plots and cover. From these food plots is a triangle of cattle farms each about 1 mile. Every day can watch about 200+ deer walk to these farms and eat together. At one farm a temp fence was set up by the gf but didn't stop the deer. At one other they chase the deer out daily but I still find sheds there every couple days on the piles, in the cattle feeders, and even in open bins. So I don't think my little bait piles are going to spread disease because my 5 to 10 deer all eat together all winter anyway. No matter what the deer herd up in the winter every winter and eat togther. I don't think it is unethical to hunt over bait. I still put in hundreds of hours preseason. I personally only use a bucket or to, but should be up to the hunter, weather they hunt over bait or food plot or nothing. Everyone I know and talk to it about has no problem with hunting over bait. sorry so long T.K.
Banning baiting is not going to cut back on disease transfer in the least, I see deer smelling other deer, rubbing noses and licking there fawns. Right now deer dig a hole in the foot of snow and another deer comes by and checks out that hole 5mins later. Funny how people blame baiting for deer grouping up because every winter deer go to where there is shelter and easy food. They have been doing that since the begining of time, wouldn't you if it was life or death. If this bill passes and the hunter puts a mineral block for the deer he will get fined, but if a rancher puts out a mineral block for his cows and he leaves it in the pasture after he pulls his cows out and the deer use it, he is going to be in the clear. It is funny how ranchers would be worried about the spread of disease and what to ban baiting, when baiting would help the root problem of just to many deer. With out baiting you could just as well close bow season on the opening day of gun season.
Onesr and 7mmshooter
These observations you have made are not scientific so therefore they must be common sense or logical. So in a nut shell we can not use these observations to create regualtions or bait bans.
Get a hold of the lawmakers and let them know how you feel. Let common sense be the rule of the day.
Start making to many rules and ridiculous bans then you open the door for PETA to come in with more stupid ideas. I remember about 15 years ago I think it was in New York where a Bill came about to start birth control for wild free roaming deer, If I remember it right they wanted to adminster it by blow guns with darts like tranquilizers HA!
You bowhunters are the biggest bunch of whinners around. It's time for you to put your personal self interest aside and do what is good for the resource. Do deer concentrate near livestock food sources in though conditions, yep. Is baiting the only way that disease can be transmitted, of course not. But, that doesn't mean we shouldn't eliminate those vectors for disease transmission that we can control. And you call yourselves sportsmen, you should be ashamed.
I think PETA has more of a points against you if you don't ban baiting. Just opposite of your thinking.
I wonder if this data has been considered?
The point is that the disease risks can be controlled by a few simple regulations on baiting. Such as bait site size, distance between bait sites, types of baits used. These things can be enforced just as easily as a total ban.
Why is a total ban necessary?
If you feel that adamant about bow hunters then I surely hope you also are adamant about the 128,000 individuals that said they participate in wildlife viewing (see the link I provided above). I'm sure you are a thinking man so you must admit that many of those people use feed to attract that wildlife to their cameras, their eyeballs and their binoculars. Furthermore, you know full well that more people out there feed wildlife than what is reported in a survey. On an extended example, let's draw a circle with a 20 mile diameter. Put it's center over the city of Bismarck. Now tell me how many people are currently feeding wildlife from their back yards. You'll get a big number. Extend that circle further...heck, include the whole state and tell me how many people are feeding wildlife RIGHT NOW. Take that same Bismarck circle and put it over other metropolitan area. I'm sure you'll be astonished and I'm sure you'll agree that it isn't that difficult to do some research on the subject. Yet, our own NDGF doesn't know. They don't even consider it even though they have a strategic plan that says they are suppose to. For instance, how about Greg Link's comment in the Minot Daily News?
Greg Link, an assistant wildlife chief for the state Game and Fish Department, said his agency has not monitored feeding by animal lovers as closely as baiting.
''That's kind of on the fringe of our responsibility,'' Link said. ''We don't have a good handle on the number of people who do it and for what species. Obviously, there are people out there throwing out feed.''
Here's a couple paragraphs from their Strategic Plan / Mission Statement:
The first three emphasis areas dealt with fishing, hunting and habitat. All three produce outputs in terms of game, fish or access; this emphasis area assists in those areas, but primarily does the nuts and bolts of the business of wildlife management. It also addresses those species of wildlife which are normally not hunted or fished.
The Nongame Wildlife Program actively manages those species not commonly hunted, trapped or fished. Over 80% of our state’s wildlife and fish fall into this category.Point being, why is it the bow hunter that is being targeted when there is many bow hunters who do not bait? Furthermore, there are far more non-hunting individuals that are feeding wildlife (whether they are considered game or non-game) when compared to any hunting group. Just answer that question. While you are doing it, tell me why it's okay for the "feel good" people to feed other wildlife and not be included in this ban? Surely you'll agree that deer are opportunistic animals and will seek out food. You know this is especially true during winters like this.
This bill is hypocritical in many areas. One thing that has bugged me about the whole process is the NDGF involvement. They have had the ability to inflict any type of regulation they wanted in regard to the hunting of big game. Heck, in 2007 one of the main reasons the bill was beat was because the NDGF already have the ability to put any regulation they wanted into the books. Even when confronted about their suspicious involvement in promoting ethics raises questions. I mean, is the NDGF actually our ethic agency? If they are, I think they could definitely take a look at their belief it is okay to drive down a barren pastured section line (for an example). When asked at an advisory meeting, the NDGF said they would remain "neutral" on the ethic discussion. But all that happened is we received pamphlets in our envelops and have a video sitting on their home page which talks more about ethics and hoarding of wildlife than it does about disease.
The smoke screen is there on the ethics. So it is up to everyone to contact the Senate Natural Resource Committee and make your opinion be heard. I don't care which way any of you are leaning on this but make your voice be heard.
Really! You are probably the same type of person that complains when the government puts their nose into other peoples business. So with that said do we want the Government setting a poorly written bait ban, that if, or when it is put in place, will give them a false sense of security? And all along in the background it will fall apart like Fredie Mac and Fannie Mae.
As sportsmen, it is our obligation to make sure that we put our wildlife's best interest first, Yes. Does that mean by eliminating a pile of food, we take care of the disease THREAT! I think if you read the majority of the posts, we as sportsmen would like to see a level field for all if you are going to do anything. You can take away the snacking but if you don't regulate the buffet, you haven't solved anything!
Solocam so in defense of baiting, your position as I read it is that farming practices must be changed and be mandated in a baiting ban bill.
So if I understand your points, no crops could be planted that would attract deer. So farmer could not plant soybeans,corn,alfalfa etc...
That over and over is the argument I keep hearing, I did not count how many times supporters of baiting have asked how the G&F is going to stop deer from yarding up well you are not and you are not going to get anyone to take you seriously if your stance is that all other mitigating factors have to be eliminated as well. We are an Ag state and that is not only impossible but impractical as well.
I offered a suggestion of bait being limited to 2 gal of total bait being available at any one time. Two gal is similar to from my farm experience accidental spills caused by harvest and like an accidental spill once it is gone it does not program an animal to stay in that area for periods of time well beyond normal activity.
But it seems to me that the baiter's want the ablity to dump 5 gal a day even if bait is still present from the day before.
Now someone with a little effort could in essence create a very large pile of bait by putting up barriers restricting access but still allowing enough food to be an attractant then open it up once they have achieved the desired pile they want and then they could easily be dumping more than allowed because it would be almost impossible to tell when it was dumped.
That is why a total ban on baiting needs to take place. I need to apologize to Tim and point out he is correct in that all feeding and baiting needs to be banned including pheasants, unless the feeding is done behind an area that deer cannot access. I had been told that the ban as written would allow the G&F under current law to set standards and requirements regarding that. Seems that this law change would in effect take that power away unless put into the current bill.
A level playing field is where nobody can bait!
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!
Where did anyone say to keep dumping 5 gallons every day? You keep making stuff up to further your agenda.
I say limit the bait site to 5 gallons or less. Is that so hard to understand? Is it that hard to distinguish a truckload of corn compared to 5 gallons? Come on man, if the GNF can't do that we need new people in there who can!
A level playing field? What about all those bait plots?
Heres some questions, and I know how you all love them!
What is the percentage that hunters are responsible for nose to nose wildgame contact?
What is the percentage that farmers/ranchers are responsible for nose-to-nose wildgame contact?
Lets take it one step further if we are soooo concerned with disease transfer between livestock and wildgame:
What is the percentage that hunters are responsible for nose-to-nose contact between wildgame and livestock?
Ah, last question, and here's the kicker!!
What is the percentage that ranchers/farmers are responsible for nose-to-nose contact between wildlife and livestock?
I don't know the actual percentages but someone said that this state is 90% ag practice so i'm guessing the percentages are going to be a bit lopsided. Seems to me that maybe the ban needs to include stringent policies on locking up feed because I can 100% guarantee you that ranchers have more to do with disease transmission between animals than hunters do.
I'm not trying to point fingers or get on the bad side of ranchers but those are simply the facts and if you choose to ignore them than you simply awknowledge that for you, it boils down to your personal beliefs thus making it an ethics argument on your behalf.
If disease is your issue than you need to look at it across a whole spectrum and not limit what one group can do while saying it's okay to the other because "it's common ag practice". That just doesn't cut it in my book!
Like someone said don't take away the snacking especially if your not going to regulate the buffet.
This is my BOOMSTICK!!!
The attitude I'm seeing here is the resource comes first as long as it doesn't affect me and I can do as I want.
Bowhunters were singled out because baiting is done almost exclusively by bowhunters. Very few gun hunters bait.
Outfitters bait, but they do it primarily for thier bowhunting clients. I've been around this hunting game for well over 40 years and the bowhunters have always been a me first group. Rivers of bowhunter tears flowed when the G&F extended the gun season a few years ago because bowhunters had to share the field, thier tears cascaded again this year when they had to share the field for an early September season, they cried when the youth seasons were started because they had to share the field with other hunters, and they still whine about early goose seasons because there is someone else in the field with them.
Get over yourselves, you make all sportsmen look bad.
No one has claimed that banning baiting would eliminate the disease threat, but it will reduce it, and on that basis alone it should be banned. I agree that feeding needs to be eliminated also, but one thing at a time. Hunters need to make sure thier own barn is clean before they start telling someone else how to clean thiers
You didn't answer my question above, why a total ban?
By the way,
I live right in urban Minot, by Burdick Job Corp and saw six deer the other night in my cul-de-sac eating out of my neighbors bird feeder.
I can really see how eliminating baiting for hunters is going to solve this "disease" issue.
You all would stand more of a chance if you argued the ethics of it because then at least it's your personal beliefs and not some smoke screen to hide your personal feelings.
Like some of you on here i live close to mn. I think it is funny that you mention mn. has a baiting ban which they do but go east of lancaster during beet season and tell me why there are semi loads of beets out there. I personaly have seen more baiting in mn. along the red than in n.d. I dont bait but i hunt alot over harvested fields which is basicly the same thing. I would much rather shoot a calm big game animal while it is standing over a field or bait pile. There are alot of people concerned over this and i have seen a couple of petitions.