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

IBA supports feeding baiting bill

On private property I'll continue to use corn & salt for trail cams. I don't care what they pass. The biggest problem with this state is the DNR. They have way too much power. I think the head of the DNR should be an elected position anyway.
 
  • Deleted by N/A
Show…
Pretty obvious that the VAST MAJORITY of bowhunter oppose this bill and the IBA is doing a great injustice to its DUES PAYING MEMBERS by supporting it.

You can't dismiss this by saying "yes, but look at all the good the IBA has done". The IBA leadership should not take things upon themselves using the resources provided by the membership support to further an agenda the membership does not agree with.
 
Question for you guys that ONLY use grain and/or mineral for your trail camera pics, how do you feel about the guys' that have the resources, still getting to use cameras on their small food plots? Do you feel like you are being singled out? If this passes, are you going to visit the trail camera section of this forum still, and express excitement for their pics over the plot, meanwhile you only get an occasional blurry pic of the rear of a deer as it walks down a trail, because your camera triggers too slow?
 
  • Deleted by N/A
Show…
Hardcorehunter said:
Question for you guys that ONLY use grain and/or mineral for your trail camera pics, how do you feel about the guys' that have the resources, still getting to use cameras on their small food plots? Do you feel like you are being singled out? If this passes, are you going to visit the trail camera section of this forum still, and express excitement for their pics over the plot, meanwhile you only get an occasional blurry pic of the rear of a deer as it walks down a trail, because your camera triggers too slow?
Click to expand...

Seriously?:rolleyes: That's the "sarcasm" emoticon in case you weren't aware.
 
For the record, I really have no issues with guys enjoying looking at deer pics at mineral or grain piles. I have an issue with the guy patterning an early season, trophy buck, over an un natural food source food plot with trail cameras...ESPECIALLY the ones sending images directly to the the computer or smart phone.
 
SquirrelBoy said:
In this age of technology, with a hot button issue like this, it would be easy to survey the members to find out where they stand. From the online survey done here, its pretty obvious.
Click to expand...

I agree.

I have yet to see a reason I feel is valid for supporting it.

For the record I used some attractants for the first time ever this past summer to get deer in front of trail cameras. Yes, I bought cheap trail cameras with lousy triger speeds so the attractants worked wonders for getting more pics. This had absolutely no effect on my hunting however.
 
I would like to talk to the Kansas Dept of Wildlife, and to their biologists. How can "Experts", from different States,, interpret things so differently?
 
[QUOTEI would like to talk to the Kansas Dept of Wildlife, and to their biologists. How can "Experts", from different States,, interpret things so differently? ][/QUOTE]


Midwest Deer & Turkey Group

This group is made up of the Midwestern DNR deer and turkey biologists and meets annually to discuss current program status, management strategies, and current management issues. This allows the biologists to discuss successes and failures, discuss methodologies to achieve goals, and to cooperate in addressing regional issues. The states that are members of this group include: IA, IN, IL, KS, KY, MI, MN, MO, ND, NE, OH, SD, and WI, and the province of ON.

During their August 2010 meeting, with the states of IA, IL, KS, MI, MN, ND, NE, OH, SD, and WI in attendance, the biologists unanimously adopted a resolution that member states and provinces who have feeding and baiting bans should maintain them and those states and provinces who currently allow one or both of these activities should work towards banning these practices.

I was hoping to have a hard copy that I could post, but won’t be out until Apr. or May. When this resolution is made public I will definitely post it.
 
Last edited:
I have heard nothing of any bait ban talk at the KDWP's committee meetings. I can promise you one thing. Hunting over bait here has been going on a long time and will not be taken away without pissing off a whole lot of folks. I for one, would love to see bait being banned to hunt over, but wouldn't want to give it up for my cams. Banning bait here would go over about as well as banning party hunting up in Iowa. I will see Lloyd Fox at the end of Feb at the KBA banquet and will chat with him about it then.
 
Didn't think you were trying to stir anything up. Thanks for the info. If Kansas is going to work towards banning baiting, I would be happy to see it, but think they have a huge battle in front of them...just like in Iowa.
 
Iba facts

1 - IBA members who have an e-mail address posted with the Association were sent an e-mail approximately two weeks before the last Board Meeting with the language of the Baiting and Feeding Bill. Less than 12 responses were received, from approximatly 500 addresses, with a 50/50 split for and against.

2 - All IBA members receive a Bowhunter. The meeting dates and locations are listed in the Bowhunter months in advance. These are open meetings.

3 - All Board Members and their e-mail addresses are listed in the Bowhunter and on the Web Site (http:/www.iowabowhuntersassoc.org).

4 - If you agree or disagree with what the Board did you should contact your Representative and Senator and let them know how you feel. How to contact your legislators is also on the web site.

5 - If you are not receiving information from the IBA and wish to forward your e-mail address to Tommy Thompson, President - thompsontm@netins.net you will be added to the contact list.

This is not intended to be an argumentative thread and if you have questions contact someone on the board.

Remember contacting your legislators is the important part of this message.
 
Critter said:
. Is this something you're really that passionate about Tom, or is it something you're trying to tie into the CWD portion of your efforts?
Click to expand...


If you remember waaayyyyyy back on like page 9 or something I said there were two bottom lines, one on spreading disease and one on enforcement. When they shared the pics of the tree stands with bait in front of them I became incensed. I was pissed off. I felt like I had been personally violated. Who has the balls to do that and get away with it? Don’t you wanna see them busted? Don’t you wanna see the poachers that are thumbing their noses at the rest of us who hunt within the law get their comeuppance? I want those jerks busted, fined and hunting privileges gone. IN MY OPINION the new law will help the CO bust these poachers back to the stone age. So yes, I am quite passionate about it. I am not trying to tie enforcement into disease spreading. It just happens that some of the pics are of grain/hay and some are mineral.

My whole point about disease spread, take it or leave it, is mineral licks are a convenient way for diseases to spread.

There is information out there on both sides. The Petersen article, which I did not read so I hesitate to reject it out of hand, was in a magazine that gets a lot of income from companies that sell minerals. There is a potential for a biased article, but again, I have not read the article.

The term “stands to reason” keeps haunting me. It is the same as “empirical knowledge”. It “stands to reason” (Bonker reason) that minerals will help develop a deer herd even though there is evidence that it may not. It also “stands to reason” (again, Bonker reason) that diseases are spread through several deer licking the same area over and over even though there is evidence it may not. So how do I reconcile the two reasonable possibilities of mineral licks? I wanna believe there is no risk of disease spread by mineral licks, but I just can’t. Shredder I know you’re a veterinarian and have a solid knowledge base in regard to spread of disease so I respect your opinion. I’m a nurse so I too have a basic understanding of how diseases are spread and I see a mineral lick as a petri dish full of agar just waiting to grow germs. Germs, viruses and prions just waiting for the next healthy deer to come along and get whatever disease the last deer to visit that site had.

Back to the enforcement part, I don’t get angry easy or often but those pictures just push my button. So it is out of anger in the guise of passion that I want the poachers to be caught by the most efficient and effective means possible and banning wildlife feeding, to me, is the most efficient and effective means possible.

Couple of other things, earthscratcher, thanks for setting me straight on who controls what as far Dept of Ag and DNR. THA4 thanks for sharing your conversations with your CO. I’m sure there are other posts I need to rely to but those two I can remember.
 
  • Deleted by N/A
Show…
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom