Jump to navigation
HW - If disease transmission is you sole reason for not wanting baiting why doesn't every penned deer and elk in the state have a disease??? The high fence iniative went down based on a moral issue - should the main issue in that debate been disease also?
Where can I find good scientific evidence on baiting and disease transmission?
Ever wonder how many people you've been near that have TB??
Food plots will be the next target for regulation which will continue to cause debate amongst the have and nhave not split. From an economic standpoint you are probably ahead on the average buying corn vs spending $200-$250 per acre on plots and depend on moisture for your yield.
If GF is that concerned about disease why is it not already banned since they have the power to do so.
Parahunter.. thats exactly the argument I've been talking about... get er done if its so terrible and threatening....
reading the bill..
a person who has an apple orchard could hang a stand in that stand on a tree that is dropping apples to the ground.. and hunt there LEGALLY... now if he takes those apples in a 5 gallon bucket and walks across the road into his pasture and places them there and hunts its ILLEGAL....
I don't get it.. is this for real?
If you want to become a 'good' archer become the BOW, if you want to become a 'great' archer become the ARROW.... BYRON FERGUSON
Yeah, that is a very good question. The NDGF could put all sorts of regulations in place.
Believe it or not I am not too worked up. I doubt I will be able to make the hearing. If you go, I'd be interested to know if they raise questions based off my comments or anyone else's comments. Would be nice to know the hours I spend at home after work are worth something! And yes, I know we agree on more things but this one...well I think we'll be fighting to the death. Although, I am already in support of bait bill...just one that is fair and would offer some compromise with feasible regulation. Or hell, I'd say ban it all together but don't be leaving any hypocrisy open. It looks bad to the public eye and will sour many folks. Me included.
hunternd, my neighbor back home raises elk. He has well built fencing,but not for the reason of keeping the animals in as much as to keep the wild animals out. In the past years a number of wild elk have been destroyed because they are fighting to get into the enclosure.
So there is the reason why. The animals in the fence are disease free and remain so because they are not mingling with wild animals.
In regards to food plots yours is a real reach and the biggest reason is that while it does put animals in close proximity to each other it does not elevate nose to nose or saliva transfer any higher than other normal food sources and in many cases if not over run like this winter is causing can and do actually reduce the rate of contact. You are barking up the wrong tree on this.
But if you had done any reading on this subject you would know this to be the case.
I welcome someone like you to come and address the NRC on this subject and make these statements, it will just reinforce the science factor in these debates!!!!!!
For those that think this is a issue of have's and have not's, you are off base. I could be using bait next to some of the best deer habitat to lure them off. I do not because of my ethics. However I also would not do it because of my experience of seeing how soiled an area gets when deer are concentrated unnaturally over the top of a food source. Urine,feces,saliva all being mixed up with the food.
Humans would reject eating soiled food, deer do not have the capacity to make that rational choice.
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!
If this is about disease the bill needs to be very clear about feeding or baiting of wildlife of any kind, including food plots (Bait Plots)or Cattle Feed Lots. We can not risk the cattle industry getting infected with disease from deer that have been congregating in these areas. To further insure that deer do not come in contact with cattle don't you think it should also include High Fence around Cattle Feed Lots and Feed storage areas? You in so many words said its not if disease comes its when it comes. So if this is about disease we need to take every precaution necassary to prevent the disease from spreading and nip it in the bud. Hypothetically speaking lets say you have other issues like you are a farmer/rancher with your own little refuge somewhere and someone nextdoor is pulling deer with a baitpile from you? Then the bait ban passes and you plant food plots (bait plots) and hoard all the deer is that someone's agenda. If it is not THEN WRITE THE BILL CRISP AND CLEAR AS TO PREVENT THE SPREAD OF DISEASE!
Tell them that at the hearing. See how the Leg reacts, you want to make this about something it is not in hopes of causing distrust and deception, I do not think it will happen this time especially with TB just miles from our border.
Like I asked someone else bring to the table any documents that show food plots spread disease at a greater rate than any other natural food source. I will listen and so will the Leg. But if you do not have that evidence to prove the point, then it is nothing but conjecture and hollow words spoken by someone who baits and wants to continue and is attempting to make things appear in a way they are not.
Food Plots do not elevate the risk of disease spreading, bait piles do. Maybe you can convince them to ban the planting of corn,soybeans alfalfa and a host of other crops that deer like to browse on at the same time.
Bring your childish rant to the NRC hearing, I look forward to it!
I have said this before, but here is the problem with the bill as written.
It is unlawful for an individual to engage in the feeding of big game and it is unlawful for an individual to hunt big game over bait.
Fine and dandy. I will not have feelings one way or another about the outcome of the bill but you need to ban the artificial feeding of wildlife in general. Why? For all the reasons already presented. Bird feeders, squirrel feeders, pheasant feeders (like to see the deer proof pheasant feeder by the way) llama feeders, etc.. because deer are opportunisits and will find it and began to feed. Once that happens, bingo you are illegal. Sounds dumb and far fetched, but call me a liar the way this bill is written. As for food plots, they attract more deer PERIOD!
As Lee Lakosky said today on his hunting show regarding food plots, "If you want manage your deer herd for producing and keeping big bucks year round food plots are a must." Check out the Tecomate boys in Texas also.
So, Hardwaterman and Whitesmoke, you are correct this is a disease issue but this bill needs modifying and expansion to alleviate all doubt. The rancher will also have to make some changes to ensure the mingling of cattle and deer is eliminated and you all know how easy that will be. With all respect.
"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."
Then find someone to modify the bill and carry an amendment to the floor to include all wildlife and place a burden on ranchers and see if you get it done.
Right now as it sits this bill is passable and enforcable without making people who are not feeding or baiting deer violators.As Dick said you can make pheasant feeders deer proof. Heck we did it back in the 70's with rolled up round bales of oats that where put out for pheasants.
Heck they set up feeders down south and make it impossible for hogs and turkey to get into the feeding area I think we can come up with inexpensive ways to keep the deer out of pheasant feeders!!!!!
Should we bring photo's of deer in Cattle Feed Lots? Is that enough evidence! Or am I grasping at straws and making that up. I could care less if they ban baiting but if we are to Prevent Disease from spreading shouldn't we take all precautions. If the spread of disease is as serious as your saying then I'm not being childish by taking it serious and wanting precautions set in protecting the deer and cattle populations of ND. I am an outdoorsman and I do not want are deer population infected or a personal rancher friend of mines cattle herd infected. I guess I'm not getting my point across and I'm being childish. I guess if the disease is coming the bait ban will save us like it saved Wisconson because I'm sure the deer in the hay bails at the ranch won't have disease when they tare into them.
The unfortunate part is that the party presenting this bill was informed with these issues before it came to be. I personally saw the emails and believe me, little or none of these ideas were used so how do you even go about changing it. Man, I'm all for a disease free deer and cattle herd as a person and outdoorsman. I just don't like to see things done half arse which I believe the wording of this bill to be. It could be so much more and you know it. From reading your posts, you are an intelligent and informed guy.
BAW I can assure you that anyone that has ever been on or around a feed lot with cattle has seen a deer with his head in the trough. A ban can and will reduce the incidents of that happening though!!!!! And there is science to back that statement up!!!!!!!!
But keep the don't do it at all or do it way over the top mentality going it is getting fun to watch!!!!!!!
A number of ranchers I know have built or are building deer resistant feed storage areas and many are changing the way they feed to be more efficient and cut down on waste or spilled grain. These practices will continue to expand as cattlemen realize the need. We will not see that change come from the baiting side of the issue.
Solocam what good does it do to introduce a bill loaded with obstacles that will not pass vs getting a bill passed which will help but may not solve all the issues?
I know which one I would bring to Bismarck!!!!!!
HW - What specific diseases are of concern?
Made the front page: http://www.minotdailynews.com/page/content.detail/id/523607.html?nav=5010
Here's a quote from Olafson: ''Personally, I'm definitely opposed to it,'' he said. ''If there's one chance in a thousand to spread any disease because of baiting, the risk is just too great.''
So, Paul Speral is saying there is less than 1 and a 1000 chance that cattle infected with TB or CWD aren't going to come in contact with deer in a feed lot or a deer comes in contact with cattle? Must be 1 to 1001 huh?
If there is a ban everyone must share the burden. Period.
What is the penalty. Because baiting deer in pheasants in my mind is just fine.
One Big Ass Mistake America !
Look at the photo in the link Tim posted. It's pretty darn easy to see that that pile is more than 5 gallons.
Why is it so hard for the GNF to distinguish the difference between a 5 gallon bait pile and one like that?
Tim I will ask again which is better? Doing nothing at all or doing something and working to get other things in place as we move forward?
We can wrangle about what should be added but if it does not or creates a bill that does not have the support for those actions, then the best bet is to move forward with legislation that will pass and work in getting the other pieces added down the road.
The all or nothing mentality is exactly what opponents are banking on happening. This is a good piece of legislation that starts the ball rolling towards getting all sides in a mode of thinking that will help both the cattlemen and wildlife long term.
I have said before that forwarding of ideas to the NRC and to the carriers of this bill is a good idea. But to want this piece of the puzzle tossed out simply because you did not get all of the puzzle pieces this time is poor choice in my opinion.
The photo is one of a feeding that was done on a winter like this. All deer season were closed when this picture was taken. Game and fish even admidts this, propaganda only
Are you kidding me! Why pass a bill that is written in the name of disease that would not stop or cure the disease from spreading way to many holes in the bill. If we are to pass a bill that doesn't prevent the spread of disease then what good is it? Think about it you say pass it to get the ball rolling good one and how many years will pass before they amend it to really prevent the spread of disease? The year after TB or any other disease is detected in ND deer herds then its to late!
"We can wrangle about what should be added but if it does not or creates a bill that does not have the support for those actions, then the best bet is to move forward with legislation that will pass and work in getting the other pieces added down the road."
Sounds alot like what PETA, HSUS and gun control advocates do too!
I was always taught to do it right or not at all. You don't start building a house with a crappy foundation!
Tim - I have been to Parshall many times.
So a food plot is better than a bait pile? I grew up on a ranch and we always combined our oats and fed the calves because we thought it would be easier for them to eat.
Now you are suggesting that it would be better to leave it in the field or the equivalent of a food plot?
Gorsh, we even baled the hay. I assume you think it would also be better in the field.
I realize what your argument but I just cannot figure that out. I do agree food plots are 'better' than bait for the wildlife in that it provides cover and food for a greater period of time. Also, I agree a food plot will attract wildlife. Food plots are more expensive and more work and also many landowners are not willing to let someone create a food plot unless they hunt it themselves. Hardwater has already addressed the disease and I agree with him on that.
As for livestock or natural food (apple trees), I really think someone is just looking for an excuse to complain. Those instances are certainly going to happen but the intent is not the same.
Tim - I know what you are saying and I agree with some and disagree on the rest. I don't have a real beef with baiting and have do so myself. There will be folks that will just give up bowhunting altogether without the ability to bait. Also, regardless of what anyone says, there will be fewer big bucks harvested - especially early in the season.
I don't see any need for me to argue with you Tim. We just disagree and there is no way you could convince me otherwise. I have 'been there, done that' way to many times over way to many years.
over & out
If you have been to Parshall then the argument should be over. There are ten times more deer in that food plot than any bait pile could ever sustain or even attract.
Heard from the master baiting crowd again and it is obvious that to kill this legislation they want to burden it down to a point it will not have any support. In the Leg that is called Hogging a Bill to make it look way different than what the intended legislation was drafted for.
So to all that claim it will not stop disease!!!! NEWS FLASH!!!!!!!!!!!! No one is claiming it will stop disease, what it will do is lower the possibility of the disease spreading. Big frigging difference and one that the master baiter's are unwilling to admit and try and cover over the fact by claiming the bill is intended to stop it.
The act of dumping food on the ground or into containers increases disease transfer. There is absolutely no denying this no matter how you attempt to spin it. That is the key to this issue and will be the focus I am sure as to what the Leg pays attention to!!!!!!!
Elminate this and you have now taken a big step in being able to control and also prevent the spreading of disease if and or when it enters the wild herd!!!!!!
How does it reduce disease when it does nothing to stop the source of disease itself?
A ban on baiting did nothing to stop the tranfer from cows to deer in Minnesota. Banning baiting will have the reserve effect. More deer will spend more time in a cattle feedlot eating.
Look at a map of states with CWD most don't allow baiting, but the disease spreads fine without it. TB spread fine in Minnesota without baiting.
If a deer is on a bait pile or a feeding station he is not in a cattle feedlot.
I can tell from your comments about master baiters Hardwaterman that this is more to do with you thinking baiting is not ethical and less about disease. If you were hard pressing for Ranchers to deer proof their operations it would give you more creditability. But I think I know what your agenda is.
Like whitesmoke I really don't care if a ban is placed but let's make a ban that does what it is suppose to. I don't understand how adding just three or so more words to the bill is going to be devestating to it. Although, I think it should have strengthened text in many reas. Then again, the NDGF has always had the ability to regulate baiting as they so wished. I think they simply wanted to let the ND Legislature take the black eye. Maybe my thoughts are wrong on that but heck, it doesn't matter. I'll support the ban if it is done so with a share of burden. We all care about the wildlife but I don't want to give it a half hearted attempt like some seem to want. In any regard, voice your OWN opinion to the ears that matter most. The bill goes to committee on Feb. 12th. Below are links to help you with contact information, etc.
For those of you wanting to know who to contact I'd suggest starting with the folks that voted two years ago and then seeking out the "newbies" on the block. Here's how it happened in 2007:
SECOND READING OF HOUSE BILL HB 1039: A BILL for an Act to amend and reenact subsection 2 of section 20.1-02-04 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to the duty of the director of the game and fish department to adopt rules regarding the baiting of big game.
The question being on the final passage of the bill, which has been read, and is PLACED ON THE CALENDAR WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION, the roll was called and there were 42 YEAS, 49 NAYS, 0 EXCUSED, 3 ABSENT AND NOT VOTING.
YEAS: Aarsvold; Belter; Berg; Carlisle; Carlson; Clark; Dahl; DeKrey; Delmore; Dosch; Ekstrom; Glassheim; Gruchalla; Hanson; Hawken; Kaldor; Karls; Kasper; Keiser; Kelsch, R.; Klemin; Koppelman; Kretschmar; Kroeber; Martinson; Meier, L.; Metcalf; Monson; Mueller; Myxter; Pietsch; Porter; Skarphol;Solberg; Sukut; Thoreson; Thorpe; Vig; Wall; Weiler; Wieland; Williams
NAYS: Amerman; Bellew; Boe; Boehning; Boucher; Brandenburg; Charging; Conrad; Damschen; Dietrich; Drovdal; Froelich; Froseth; Grande; Griffin; Gulleson; Haas; Hatlestad; Headland; Heller; Herbel; Hofstad; Hunskor; Johnson, D.; Johnson, N.; Kempenich; Kerzman; Kingsbury; Klein; Kreidt; Meyer, S.; Nelson; Nottestad; Onstad; Owens; Pinkerton; Pollert; Potter; Price; Ruby; Schmidt; Svedjan; Uglem; Vigesaa; Wald; Wolf; Wrangham; Zaiser; Speaker Delzer
ABSENT AND NOT VOTING: Kelsh, S.; Schneider; Weisz
HB 1039 lost.
Respected Senator/Representative LinksHow to Contact Your LegislatorsRepresentatives (Alphabetical)Senators (Alphabetical)
Make sure you're contacting your senators on this. That last one was a House bill.
Ah yes, good catch HUNT. Sorry about that folks, in 2007 it was written by a representative. This year it was written by a Senator. Just click on the Senator link above and that will give you the contacts. I'd probably start with these folks:
It seems silly to me that the man introducing this bill would stand there and say if there is a chance baiting could spread a disease we have to ban it.
But he says nothing about the very actions that cause the outbreak in Minnesota. So ban baiting that MIGHT SOMEDAY spread a disease, but let ranchers do what they want even though we know for sure that they spread disease with their current practices.