IBA supports feeding baiting bill

[Scott]

So I can have a salt lick if its 50 yards from my house but not in the middle of my farm? CWD cant be contracted if within 50 yards of a house? Another prime example of why the people in these jobs would never make it in the private sector. Focusing on something that matters so little in the grand scheme of things when there are so many other things wrong in this state. Dont try to pull the line that this is protecting the herd when you are allowing it in certain circumstances and not others. The IBA shouldnt even form an oppinion and should be insulted the DNR is wasting their time with this crap. If its true the IBA is supporting this then my respect for them has gone out the window.

 

[Thinkin Rut]

Quite the contrary. They are trying to free up the Conservation Officers time by making it illegal to feed wildlife. If this bill passes the CO will not have to stake out a tree stand or blind for days, weeks or months to catch a poacher breaking the law. Instead they will have more time to pursue other investigations.

The ‘Bonker

Bonker...I have to know, Did they feed this to you or are you trying to feed this to us?

 

[hotshott2289]

I dont use anything during the season, but early and late season having food or mineral in front of the camera is pretty much the only way to get them to stop so you can get a couple good pics and see what you have, also late season its a great way to get them to drop sheds in an area where you can find them. Personally i think they should spend more time dealing with poachers, trespassers, and the guys who hunt from trucks. that just seems like they could accomplish something and make iowa a better hunting state for all, instead of some bogus feeding ban

 

[nannyslayer]

Bonker...I have to know, Did they feed this to you or are you trying to feed this to us?

Very true, its illegal now to hunt from a baited area, so why will this free up any agents? Its still going to be illegal.

 

[dedgeez]

Think about all the companies in Iowa that base all or part of thier livlihood off of the products that this bill will ban.
- Hunters Specialties has pages of products in their catalog dedicated to deer feeding and mineral products - Iowa based company!
- Iowa Gold - Talked with a very nice gentleman out of Indianola with similar products - more Iowa jobs on the line
- XWT out of Grinnel (bought out by someone I can't remember exactly)
- Lots more I'm sure I've not heard of or forgot

All Iowa based companies, paying wages to Iowans, keeping jobs in our area. Many would be put out of business with this new law.
Do we really want to put that many Iowans out of work and prevent them from making an honest living? Especially with the unemployment and economy issues we already have????

To add to this...... It will also effect the inventory of what you and other sporting goods stores will be able to stock. There will be no need to carry Wildgame Innovations supplements, trophy rock, lucky buck, etc, which are major revenue producers for all of the mom and pop stores as well as Scheels, Bass Pro, Cabelas, etc. I do not think this was very well thought out by this group. Regardless of whether a certain individual utilizes these products, we need to look at the overall picture here. It is an infringement on a method that alot of people incorporate into their trail cam usage, supplemental feeding, and overall property management. These products are going to become the "black market" of hunting products and will continue to be used by many. What is to say that a person couldn't spread his corn over a bigger area, still put a cam on it and call it "summer no till". Rediculous efforts will have to be made to enforce this law.

I agree that it will have little effect on the actual harvest of whitetails, and I do not condone hunting over bait, but unlike many other laws that benefit us in our day to life, this one I can find no rhyme or reason for.

 

[Thinkin Rut]

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

Hmmm....I wonder who we could substitute for Joe as the true hunter, the "real" hunter?

 

[fatboy]

If they want to ban feeding the deer, then ban the homeowners from doing it also.

The suburb I live in, you cannot feed the deer. You will receive a fine if caught.

 

[risto2351]

The suburb I live in, you cannot feed the deer. You will receive a fine if caught.

I think in the bill is that people can feed animals as long as it
is within 50 yards of a inhabited building. Thus birdfeeders are exempt.

Unfortunately I have seen deer within 10 yards of a inhabited building and also 2 or more eating out of a bird feeder.
If CWD is a problem it still will be spread this way.

As far as hunting over bait I agree with Nanny on this one they already have a law for that.

 

[dedgeez]

The suburb I live in, you cannot feed the deer. You will receive a fine if caught.

Guys, I don't think the issue they are talking about has to do with feeding deer in your back yard. The verbage was put in so that people could still feed birds in their yards. It just so happens that ends up being a loophole in putting out feed. This was probably a way to cover their asses from being attacked by the Audubon society.

Sorry Risto, looks like you beat me to this one.:way:

 

[dedgeez]

Also, does the law address travel routes to said bait pile?

read the proposed bill and you will have a better understanding. :way:

 

[magnus]

The problem I have with food plots is when they are on private land that is adjacent to public hunting land. Essentially giving the private land owner a huge advantage to control the movement of the deer herd and ruin public hunting in that area.

But the point of this proposed bill, 481A.41, is supposedly to protect/preserve the health of the entire deer herd statewide ... right? Whether foodplots on private land that is located next to public land effects the herd movement, etc. is irrelevant. No different than if one private landowner decides to leave 20 acres of rowcrops stand for winter deer feed, while his nextdoor neighbor can't afford to do that and harvests all of his. Both are equally passionate deer hunters. The guy who has to take all of his down is going to be envious of the guy who decides to leave 20 of his standing. No different in your example, that I can see.

On this baiting bill ----- it seems clear to me, at least from this thread, that nearly all of bowhunters hearing about the details of the bill (especially, that mineral licks in offseason would now be illegal) are very much opposed to it. The fact that the IBA's board would vote unanimously to support it, without polling their membership first, is very disturbing. The fact is that this bill has HUGE implications for trophy management. Mineral sites are great camera locations for watching developing bucks, which many of us like to do in Spring & Summer. Plus, evidence is very strong that providing mineral supplementation is of great benefit in helping a whitetail buck reach his trophy potential .... another thing that most of us are very passionate about trying to do. I would like to see some SCIENTIFIC evidence that congregating deer to a mineral site has ever been PROVEN to increase risk of CWD, hoof & mouth disease, lung worm, or any other serious disease. I don't think you'll find it, because I don't think it exists.

There is more at play here than the health of the deer herd. We need to get to the bottom of what's really going on.........................

 

[nannyslayer]

If anyone is a pheasants forever member or board member, I would truely like to hear what their stance is on this bill. IBA does nothing as far as bird hunting, so I would like to hear a 3rd party stance. Also would like to hear from NWTF board member as well on the bill.

I know in hard winter times, especially last winter, we saved more than enough pheasants and turkeys from starvation due to our supplimental winter feeding. But its all about the deer I guess.

 

[sureshot]

I'm old school and like the idea of knowing what u have in the woods by ACTUALLY seeing it with your own eyes, or a farmer letting you know he saw a buck. Hunting early season in a food plot, because your camera's timer shows a buck there everyday at 3 pm, just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Also if a mineral or bait pile has some major trails leading to it, and you setup 200 yds away on a trail leading to the camera setup/bait pile, arent you in fact, using bait as an advantage? I never bought or was interested in trail cams, BUT, they are called trail cams and NOT bait cams, arent they?

HA!!!! You of all people consider yourself old school? No offense, but you're not old school. You own more hunting equipment (and top end @ that) than anyone I know!

Oh, and I can tell you haven't ever used a trail camera, because if you did then you would realize that 99.9% of the time your 'trail camera scenario' that you posted about above doesn't play out. Iot seems I rarely ever see bucks that I have pictures of.

But yes, let the homeowner bait the deer. Take away from the hunter. Is this law in effect to eliminate the minimal amount of baiting that goes on by poachers? I think so. However, why punish me for what criminals do?

I'm glad we really think things through before acting........or wait, did we? No. Let's just push this recreational feeding bill through because Bonker says so. Oh yeh, we will catch more poachers that way AND stop the spread of disease (HA), because deer have no interaction with one another except when they are eating from a feed pile (not drinking from the same puddle, or breeding, or giving birth, or LIVING AND INTERACTING).

 

[singlecoyote]

I support the IBA and I'm supporting the ban. :way:

 

[dedgeez]

I support the IBA and I'm supporting the ban. :way:

You're more than entitled to, but as of others have done here, give us some logic. The IBA is a great organization, just lacking some leadership at the moment. As some one else stated if they truly are for the good of the Iowa Bowhunter, than this thread alone should show that the Iowa Bowhunter is not backing them on this one. Seems like everyone that is for this won't tell us why, or present factual evidence as to why it should pass.

 

[dedgeez]

As was stated earlier in this post by Dbltree, awhile back Michigan had an outbreak of Brucellosis that effected some cattle and some CAPTIVE whitetails. What he didnt tell you though is there are multiple reasons for the spread of these diseases.
[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Description

Brucellosis is a highly contagious disease of many animals and is caused by bacteria of the genus Brucella. Brucella abortus most commonly affects cattle; B. Suis is most common in swine; B. melitensis is most common in goats. Although infections may occur in other species, including man, such situations are rare. B. abortus is the species of most concern to wildlife workers.

Distribution

Brucellosis has been reported throughout the world since its discovery in the latter part of the nineteenth century, and has long been considered an important disease in man, cattle, goats and swine. It has been found in bison, elk, moose, Dall sheep, caribou and several species of deer. It has been diagnosed in dogs, foxes, hares, mice, rats, ticks and fleas. The disease is relatively rare in deer in the U.S., slightly more significant in elk, bison and moose. Hares in Europe have been afflicted with the disease for many years, but it is not felt that they play an important part in maintaining brucellosis in domestic animals. In Michigan, brucellosis has never been identified in any wildlife species.

Transmission and Development

Brucella infections are usually transmitted by oral exposure, but susceptible animals can also be infected by contamination of the eyes, wounds and the genital tract. Males can transmit brucellosis during copulation, either by contaminated semen, or by genitals contaminated by an infected female.


My point is that unless we can stop the ticks from biting, deer from breading and socially interacting, or a wild infected European Hare from running ramped in Iowa, I do not think this Bill is going to accomplish much.

[/SIZE][/FONT]

 

[nannyslayer]

I support the IBA and I'm supporting the ban. :way:

Glad somebody is, cause there is a heck of alot more not backing that there was 12 hours ago. I have spent all day sending emails, and making phone calls, I'm really not getting much "work" done today.

 

[dominator]

Aren't there bigger fish to fry out there?

 

[SaskGuy]

In reading this whole thing it sounds like it'd just be easier to lift the ban on baiting then the DNR wouldn't have to decifer what food is there for what.

 

[dedgeez]

Glad somebody is, cause there is a heck of alot more not backing that there was 12 hours ago. I have spent all day sending emails, and making phone calls, I'm really not getting much "work" done today.

I hear ya. I have been on the phone and internet all morning trying to find not only, someone that supports this, but also some evidence to back the justification of this bill besides personal opinion. Haven't found any yet, but I'll keep you updated.