Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

IBA supports feeding baiting bill

Fishbonker, was there any research presented that showed a direct link between feeding (corn piles, mineral, ect.) and the spread of disease like CWD that lead the IBA to support this legislation? I would sure like to see the research if there was. I personally don't think this will in anyway protect the future of deer hunting in Iowa. I think it will risk a significant portion of our membership at a time when we can't really afford to. We have much bigger issues to worry about rather than spliting up our membership with issues like this. We need all members of the IBA joining forces to take on the big special interest groups not argueing about some mineral site or corn pile. The local PF chapters put out corn for people to spread for the pheasants all the time in NW Iowa when the snow and ice gets too much for the birds to handle. This legislation would ban this practice. Several years ago pheasants and deer were dying all over from starvation after ice storms hit the State. I think this issue should have been sent via email to the IBA members for a survey before the board decided to vote. I think this sounds like the IBA throwing the IDNR a bone more than protecting the future of bowhunting in Iowa. Please enlighten us!
 
Fishbonker,just setting here on the computer checking out some kool trailcam pics,i am worried that next year at this time i will be on the dnr's most wanted list.
 
Fishbonker said:
I'm sorry to hear the Critter. But can you tell me one advantage to wildlife feeding except you want to?
Click to expand...

It's not really about me Bonker, it's about the fact that the bill doesn't make any sense. How can you allow individuals to feed deer as long as they're closer than 50 yards to their residence, but make it illegal for anyone who feeds them farther out than 50 yards. That's been my complaint since it's inception. What does the DNR say when you ask them why this loophole would be added to the bill.
Who exactly did you listen to before voting Bonker? Do you have any numbers........I'd like to see them if you do.
 
On a personal level i don't like the ban but...I do understand the reasons for it. Michigan had a brucellosis a outbreak some years back that had far reaching effects on the cattle industry and whitetails. It's nose to nose contact...that's the danger...because diseases of all kinds are spread rapidly in those situations. As someone who spent much of his life in the cattle business I know how these things work and I understand the the IDNR taking what to us is a drastic measure.

In regards to enforcement...they won't hire more people, they won't be walking the timber looking for salt or corn...they are going to expect us to respect their judgment and do the right thing. Some won't, some will get away with it...a few will get caught and probably pay a small fine.

The IBA is an extremely important and vital force that represents us when no one else will...some decisions are difficult but I trust those people willing to put there own interests aside and attend meetings to do the best they can...knowing they may lose a few friends in the process.

I'm going to miss the summer cam pics over salt...no question, I wish it didn't have to come to this but I also know Willie well enough that he wouldn't push for something like this if he didn't have grave concerns.

I hope everyone will understand that there are things we don't know, things we don't fully understand but this wasn't done to cause us hardship but rather protect a resource that each and every one of us is passionate about....;)
 
I guess my thoughts would be, if we are banning minerals and corn piles, then get rid of the food plots too. Especially if its nose to nose contact we are worried about, as in late season, all of the deer herd up and are in contact there anyways. It would make no sense to ban one, and not the other. I know, people will argue the food plots, and that they are beneficial. But if its herd safety we are worried about, then away with them too IMO
 
It is going to be hilarious this summer when people are posting pics left and right of deer on mineral licks and not even know a law like this went into affect. If I wasn't on this board, I wouldn't know. I think it is a bunch of BS personally. If they are worried about the resource, quit selling so many doe tags.
 
Liv4Rut said:
It is going to be hilarious this summer when people are posting pics left and right of deer on mineral licks and not even know a law like this went into affect. If I wasn't on this board, I wouldn't know. I think it is a bunch of BS personally. If they are worried about the resource, quit selling so many doe tags.
Click to expand...


BINGO!

FTR I'm not against banning hunting over a food/nutrition source that isn't planted in that location (ie Food Plot) but it should not be illegal to put certain supplements out for wildlife. I don't want our deer hunting to look like the black bear hunting you see where they put out those garbage cans full of whatever scraps they can come up with to lure them in. Sorry but that's not hunting to me.
 
if we are banning minerals and corn piles, then get rid of the food plots too
Click to expand...

In order for it to make sense, they will have to do this as well. No more paying the farmer to leave in a little crop, or cleared out timber for a honey hole food plot as all are going to concentrate deer just as the feeder would.

I'll continue to support the IBA but would rather see their efforts and time spent on the issues that affect bowhunting in the state....this does not.
 
Dbltree said it perfectly. The DNR knows they are stepping in front of a bus here, but think it is important enough to pursue. We can just put our "trail" cams on trails instead of salt blocks. It will make a pic of a big buck more special cause it's tougher. Also, think of the extra rush of seeing a buck under your stand that you didn't know was out there, instead of "here comes Number23 and look, old Number 7 is right behind him!" Diverse food plots help all wildlife, not just deer, so I hope they stay. Everyone can decide for themselves how they want to lobby their legislators on this bill, but let's not pull support for the IBA and all they do on much more important bills that are going to come up this year. Friends of Iowa would love that.
 
I don't think the IBA spent ANY time on this bill, other than letting the DNR present their position. The IBA board didn't propose it. They were at this meeting and I wasn't. It must have been a convincing argument or they wouldn't have endorsed it.
 
Frankly, I have yet to see any reliable scientific evidence that deer feeding/baiting is a cause of the spread of disease. There are a lot of knee-jerk reactions going on without much data to back it up.

FOr example the MN DNR wants to ban deer winter feeding because of the possibility of the spread of cwd. Look at it this way: There is a 40-acre corn field a few miles from my house ad it has 75 deer pounding it every night. They are walking the same trails, eating off the same ears of corn, nibbling on the same branches, eating each others droppings, etc etc etc. If there were a dozen landowners nearby who had a little corn out, that would spread the deer way out and REDUCE the contact wth other deer. Am I wrong?
I see this as just another bad law to take away something that really isn't bad, based on a public panic. Just like the albino deer law. Bad law.
 
I guess while we're on the subject I'll throw in my two cents. Thanks to the doe/shed buck season we've pretty much reduced the herd to the point where if an outbreak did occur, I have serious doubts that it would have a large impact, so I don't really see how they could use nose to nose contact as a legitimate argument. I've had trail cams over salt for the last 5 years and have never gotten a pic of two deer touching noses (maybe the deer in my area like to take turns? :D) although I'm sure they do. That being said, deer don't need a mineral to touch noses. Does and fawns, and even bucks clean eachother up all the time, licking faces, licking butts, licking privates, etc. etc. etc.... Contact is going to occur no matter what.

I can just see what will happen next: Ban food plots. That's fine, but what about in the winter when the deer pack up and all furiously feed together on a secluded cut corn or bean field? Are we going to ban farming? If you realistically think about this whole thing its just pretty dumb. It's like saying I don't have contact with the IT guy in my office who picks his nose and goes around fixing computers after 5:00. I don't think I have contact with him, but in reality I do, and if he's sick, I'm going to get sick. I don't need to go shake his hand or go have him sneeze on me to get what he has. My point is, if there is a sick deer, they will all get sick no matter what, mineral or not. You can't ban farming, so it doesn't make sense to ban food plots because farm fields ARE food plots. Besides, if this law passes, people will still put out mineral, they just won't post their pics online where everyone in the world can see them. They just should toss this bill in the fire, it's dumb.

As for the IBA supporting this, meh...it sucks but they do more good than bad so they will still have my support. I'm more concerned about keeping non-residents out than a ban on mineral sites.
 
I agree with Bonker somewhat that our responses need to be fact based and informed, but it is impossible when we don't know the agenda of the board and who they are getting their backs rubbed by? They do not have the full support of the IBA members, so this is the opinion of a few guys that could end up effecting us all. This is an absolute travesty, and could potentially end with the loss of membership by a large group. This is the wrong time to be losing numbers and voices. It is our duty to question and guide elected officials, and it is apparent that there is a definative need for that at this juncture. This is a baseless law that has absolutely no factual evidence supporting it whatsoever. It will take away revenue from local COOP's, farm fleet stores, seed companies, farmers, and will increase the output from our officers in monitoring it.

Bonker, you are correct that this will not ruin deer hunting, and MIGHT prevent some of the nose to nose contact that takes place between SOME of the captive and non captive cervids, but it is bigger than that. This is the perfect example of how a snowball starts. It will begin with the banning of one of our hunting rights, and then lead to another, and another and another,and so on. And guys like you will say " it's no big deal, it won't be a major detriment to my hunting", when in fact, it is just another infringement on the rights of hunters and outdoorsmen. I for one am so sick and tired of these meaningless regulations and ignorant laws that only serve the purpose of satisfying a few good Ol boys who feel they have a sense of entitlement.

Divided we stand I guess. SAD if you ask me!
 
Last edited:
Maybe this is one of those Pick and choose your battle bills. Maybe the IBA was thinking well if the DNR wants this and we support it with them maybe when it comes time to increase NR tags by 6000 they will support us in not supporting it. Like everyone says we don't know ALL the facts yet but it is easy to speculate.
 
I wonder how much money iowa hunters spend each year on food to put in front of there trail cameras.I know in the summer and late winter months i buy the deer hundreds of times the amount of corn that my whole family eats in a year.And now instead of eating from my corn pile they will make up the difference by eating more crops.Im sure alot of that corn came from iowa farmers.I dont know if it will be financialy significant or not,but there is alot of people in the state that put food in front of there cameras.
 
Brock said it all IMO, if you take away my mineral sites, fine. But that is not really the issue that I am worried about, what will be taken next? It only makes sense to outlaw feeders/loose corn and eventually foodplots. Now I'm really frustrated but still hunting as it is my passion. I then learn that hunters will not be allowed within 100 yards of agriculture, simply so a few deer won't rub noses? Something they do naturally, you have to be kidding me???

IBA is a group of I have supported for as long as I can remember, but if there aren't better answers then the ones above how can you not consider removing your support?

Sure, there are a lot bigger "fish to fry" but if they take the mineral sites, what's next...
 
This may not be pertaining to this particular subject, but this is an example of the snowball effect that I referenced earlier. A good read and interesting analogy.

Cannibals and Useful Idiots

The following is real, and it’s here now. Joe Hunter goes to a cocktail party, nothing fancy, just a holiday gathering in Anytown, USA. A conversation begins with Bob Peta, it goes something like this.
Bob Peta: Say Joe, didn’t you go deer hunting this year?
Joe Hunter: Sure did Bob.
Bob: Man, that’s great, did you get one?
Joe: Yep, I sure did, a nice six pointer.
Bob: Hey, that’s great. Say listen Joe, you’re a true hunter, a “real” hunter are you not?
Joe: I sure am.
Bob: Say, I hear tell of a kind of hunting where people can go kill animals in fenced areas. You’ve never done that, have you?
Joe: No, no I haven’t.
Bob: Well, I wouldn’t call that real hunting, would you Joe?
Joe: Well, that’s not the way I hunt.
Bob: I know Joe, but there are people who hunt in fenced areas. I don’t think that’s really hunting, do you Joe?
Joe: well, uh, I guess not.
Bob: Great. Say, listen Joe, a group of us concerned “real” hunters are trying to get that method of hunting done away with. We feel it is unethical, will you help us?
Joe: Sure, because that is not the way I hunt, and I’m a real hunter.
Bob: Thanks Joe. Here is what we need you to do. As a real hunter the big boys in Congress and the Senate will listen to you. They know that any “real” hunter only hunts the way you do, and that’s the only real hunting there is. What we need you to do is get out there and get petitions signed, people will sign them because you are a real hunter, and they know that only your way of hunting is the “real” way.
So Joe diligently goes after the goal, to ban, and outlaw any kind of hunting that Bob suggest is not real hunting. He gathers up signatures, petitions courts, and makes meetings. He is really cleaning up this unethical way of hunting, he’s got a lot of support. He is gathering “real” hunters from all over, and finally, after much hard work, they get a legal way of hunting banned.

Bob: Joe, you did great and we sure appreciate your hard work, but let me tell you what I heard. There is another type of hunting that we think is not right. Could you help us again?
Joe: Well I guess so Bob. I don’t hunt like that, so it’s not real hunting anyway. How can I help?

It’s the same old story. It’s odd how Bob Peta keeps adding to the list of what “real” hunting is. However, Joe goes at it hard and heavy, and in the end, he helps get that type of hunting banned. Bob and his friends are happy. Joe is a “real” hunter, and these other guy’s aren’t, because the way they hunt is different from Joe, and Joe does not like that way of hunting. So what’s the harm in getting rid of that type of hunting. Joe is a “real” hunter after all, not like those other guys. He even goes to sportsmen’s organizations and recruits from within, it’s easy because they are all “real” hunters too.
Time passes, and more and more legal ways of hunting are banned. Bob and his friends are real happy with Joe, he’s been a real help. So after all the unethical ways of hunting are gone, Bob and his friends decide that it is time to get Joe’s way of hunting banned, the final chapter.

Joe: Bob, hey buddy, this is Joe. I know I helped you get rid of all those other forms of legal hunting, but now there is a move to get rid of the way I hunt.
Bob: Well Joe, I know. My friends and I are spearheading that movement.
Joe: But Bob, I thought you liked the way I hunt, and it was OK for me to do that type of hunting?
Bob: Well Joe, no, any and all types of hunting are bad, the poor defenseless animals never have a chance, and we dislike, actually we hate hunters.
Joe: But I thought the way I hunted was “real” hunting to you?
Bob: Joe, it was all real hunting, but we at PETA and HSUS hate you. Thanks for all your help, we greatly appreciate it.

You see, what Joe became was a “Cannibal”, a“Useful Idiot” to the anti-hunters at HSUS and PETA . They don’t give a rats backside how you hunt, what you hunt, or where you hunt, they just want all hunting done away with. The sad thing is that they use hunters against hunters for their causes. If you do not support any and all forms of legal hunting, or voice any dissent about the way someone else legally hunts, you my friend, are a “Cannibal”, and a very “Useful Idiot” to the enemy. Think twice the next time you mouth off against another hunter’s methods, they could be coming after you next
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom