Time to re-define food plots. ?

[FixedBlade]

If you look at the DNR web site under food plots and baiting you will find this paragraph. "Food plots, naturally accurring foods, standing agricutrural crops, or food placed as a result of using normal agricultural practices are not considered to be feeding".

Now if you go to the thread "difinition of food plot and argicultural crops" you will see that many think that food plots are not planted as a commodity or for income.

The DNR guidlines lumps food plots with agricultural practices. I think we all know that a planted food plot is not "natural" and we do not look at it as an "agricultural field". Food plots are planted to provide a better source of nurishment for deer and other animals.

So should food plots be placed under the "Feeding" heading in the DNR guidlines? I think so.

[Munsterlndr]

Bad idea! Why pass laws that are virtually un-enforcable? Are you going to prevent somebody from planting a garden on their private property? Just think of all the non-hunters who have gardens that would be subject to the "feeding" laws.

I can see it now,

"Honest officer, I planted the corn, turnips, carrots and apple trees for my families personal consumption, I can't help it that those darn deer get into my garden plots!"

If anything, I think the recreational viewing rules need to be relaxed. To classify mineral supplements as "food" makes no sense at all.

Why is it all right for somebody to put out bait for recreational viewing within 100 yards of their residence year round but it's not ok for me to put out bait for my trail cam between Jan. 1st and October 1st?

If you are really worried about the spread of disease than ban all of it, period. Allowing baiting some of the time, for some people but not for others makes no sense at all. By the way, I am not opposed to amount limits on baiting, I think the 2 gallon limit is reasonable, but the time of year restrictions seem pretty illogical.

[lyndon43]

Why would you want it changed. As you posted, it clearly states that food plots are not considered feeding?

[FixedBlade]

lyndon. My post shows that food plots are planted for feeding animals. That is why I think it should be changed and placed under the feeding guidlines.

munster. Were talkin food plots not gardens.

[KrazyKletus]

FixedBlade,
What is you point? Why change this? Guess I'm not following you here.
Are you against food plots?

[lyndon43]

What I Understand is that the dnr has exempted food plots from their baiting & feeding regulations. And that it is your view that they should be considered feeding.

Again I ask why? Bait piles & feeders concentrate deer in a area much smaller than my smallest food plot. This is what they are trying to regulate.

[Ferg]

Except in certain counties in the UP.

So you want to make food plots = feeding - so they would be against the law too????

I'm not following your train of thought on this one....

ferg....

[30pointer]

It should be lumped in with agriculatural practices. Look at a food plot and compare it next to an agricultural field and a feeding pile. Which of those two does the food plot more closely resemble? There are more similarities between a food plot and an agricultural plot than there are between a food plot and a feeding pile.

"My post shows that food plots are planted for feeding animals."

Actually most agricultural plots are planted to feed animals too. They are planted to feed the animals that we eat. Same as food plots.

[Munsterlndr]

munster. Were talkin food plots not gardens.

The point is that in many cases the two are interchangable. Who is going to determine whether my plot is a garden plot or a food plot? I plant turnips for deer but I harvest and eat some of them. I have apple trees that are primarily for deer but I also harvest and eat some of the apples. There would be no way to enforce a law banning food plots unless you also ban gardens. That is not going to happen, so the whole discussion becomes kind of pointless.

[NorthJeff]

I wish I could get those stinking deer off my food plots!:rant:

Here I have all these natural greens planted for partial consumption by my family or friends, am attempting to improve the soil for future building sites on my property and play areas for my children, trails that are planted for less sandy walking, and these stinking deer get in there and eat them all up and leave their little "milk-duds" all over the place. Well, I guess I'm just going to have to shoot those rascels!

[NorthJeff]

I think they should take it one step further to include limiting any hunter that hunts over a food source to harvest an animal because after all...if it's a sin, it's a sin, doesn't matter if someone else planted it for other purposes, only what you are using it for. Kind of like some religous groups riding in a vehicle as long as it is not titled in their name..shoot they will even buy one and is long as they don't own it, it's O.K. So, that means no hunting over ag crops, food plots, oak flats, orchards, even a singe apple tree, beech ridges, wildlife openings, clearcuts,gardens...you get the picture.

There you go, let's get it passed and we can all go hunting under the comfort of whether you own land or not, we are all equal in our ability to harvest animals whether we pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to own hunting land....or hunt public. Equality.

[FREEPOP]

If you look at the DNR web site under food plots and baiting you will find this paragraph. "Food plots, naturally accurring foods, standing agricutrural crops, or food placed as a result of using normal agricultural practices are not considered to be feeding".

Now if you go to the thread "difinition of food plot and argicultural crops" you will see that many think that food plots are not planted as a commodity or for income.

The DNR guidlines lumps food plots with agricultural practices. I think we all know that a planted food plot is not "natural" and we do not look at it as an "agricultural field". Food plots are planted to provide a better source of nurishment for deer and other animals.

So should food plots be placed under the "Feeding" heading in the DNR guidlines? I think so.


Wow, come up for air, there can't be that much oxygen where you came up with that :dizzy:

So you plant alfalfa or a pasture mix and the DNR catches deer eating in there so you can be prosecuted for baiting??

God forbid the farmer that didn't harvest his crops in time because if someone were hunting too close to the field, they could be hunting over bait. He better make that corn and bean picker more efficient, because he's losing too much crop on the ground and baiting.

I think I better take a vacation from here for a while :sad:

[FixedBlade]

I posted this because many on here think that food plots draw deer and hold them in a area, giving the hunters who use them an unfair advantage. I have seen them refered to as bait. It really has caused a divide in hunters if you look at all the posts. Just look at some of the nasty responces on here. I saw a concern so I simply addressed it. Is it time to address the issue? Could the DNR give their scientific reasoning for placing food plots with agricultural fields? Does everyone that replied use or have food plots? I would like to get this into the whitetail hunting forum so more members can see it. I believe there is to narrow a group to be representitive here.

[NorthJeff]

"posted this because many on here think that food plots draw deer and hold them in a area, giving the hunters who use them an unfair advantage."

Exactly. This has always been an issue primarily of those that have land, those that don't, those that can plant food plots, those that can't, those that have planted food plots before and have experience with them...and those that don't.

It's just the way it is. I can leave my stands up year round, I can cut any tree I want, can create trails, roads..and for that privelage I am taxed, carry a large of amount of debt, and have to carry liability insurance so if some tresspassing peice of trash comes on my property, falls out of one of my treestands, gets hurt, and their family sues, me...I'm "covered". Nothing in life is fair, to compare a bait pile to a food plot is not the issue because anybody who knows better wouldn't even to begin to consider the two the same...the real differance is like a lot of things..jealousy, envy, and a differance between those that have, and those that don't..maybe even those that choose not to.

I hunt on public land every year in two states and don't wish for a food plot...don't wish to be using bait either, you just go out and hunt and accept the fact that when you don't own the land, you don't have ownership rights, when you do own the land, you recieve certain privelages that come with a huge price and are not free....just the way it is.

To take it a step further..why not limit the number of treestands someone can own, the number of guns, hunting clothes, vehicles, ATV's...even hunting time for that matter, everyone can hunt for 10 total day...you decide what 10 days and that way we can all be fair because shame on those that have the ability to hunt 40 days, instead of only 5 days.

Bottom line..why own hunting land if it's the same as public land? There are those that don't like "NO Tresspassing" signs as well...but like this issue, I find most of them don't own land either.

[KrazyKletus]

Yes, you are correct my food plots do draw deer. So does the alfalfa and Corn my dad plants on our dairy farm every year. So does most of ag. land in SLP. In fact these fields draw a lot of different wildlife (Woodchucks, Squirrels, Raccoons, Birds, Waterfowl, etc). I'm still not sure where you're going with this, however, I think you would like to have food plots restricted or banned by law? Is this correct?
Do I have an unfair advantage? I don't think so. My neighbors seem to love my property improvements as I've noticed that most of them have conveinently moved their stands closer to my property lines. I know they kill deer coming in search of my food plots. I guess thats the price I have to pay. Instead of getting off of their lazy butts and improving their property, it's easier to move a stand closer to mine (Easy & Instant gratification).
I've accepted that since I own a small piece of land. My foodplots help wildlife throughout the year. It's a hobby that I enjoy and get satisfaction out of (just like hunting) Sometimes I hunt over them, sometimes I don't. Similar to what NJ stated, I am in debt and I pay plenty of taxes so I guess that gives me the right to manage my property how I want to.

[30pointer]

"giving the hunters who use them an unfair advantage."
Are there really a lot of hunters who think the food plot advantage is "unfair"? I would think few hunters would classify it as an unfair advantage.

[KrazyKletus]

FixedBlade,
Can you please help me understand your concern a little bit better? With my foodplots, how do I have an unfair advantage over someone who consistantly dumps bait Oct thru Dec.?

[lyndon43]

"I posted this because many on here think that food plots draw deer and hold them in a area, giving the hunters who use them an unfair advantage."

Now why didnt you just come out and say that with your first post??

[Luv2hunteup]

The majority of deer hunters in this state think that bow hunting prior to November 15th is an unfair advantage. Maybe you are right, our game laws should all be based on fairness, lets make opening day the same for all weapons and lets have a 16 day season, that would be the icing on the fairness cake. :corkysm55

I guess that I don't understand the unfairness part. Everyone in this state has the can buy hunting land plus put in food plots if they choose to do so. Another case of food plot envy. :dizzy: :bash:

[FixedBlade]

I guess I am asking questions and putting up post like this is because of what I saw in some other posts. Posts in the whitetail forum.There seemed to be more objection to food plots there. Is this because only those who have the opertunity to improve habitat on their land are the only ones looking at the habitat forum? I though by opening up a dialog about these issues we could get the opinions from both sides of the fence and help each other understand the law/reason why better. I do feel that food plots are a form of feeding and or baiting. If there was to be a baiting ban then I think food plots should get a second look to. Otherwise the current baiting and food plot regulations suit me just fine.

[Pinefarm]

If baiting is ever banned, look for MDNR to actively promote overall herd improvement through habitat work and food plots. In fact, I'd assume we'll see the promoting of better habitat becoming MDNR policy sooner than later. One person with one food plot benefits all for over a mile around. All public land hunters within a mile of any food plot also benefit.

[cpichan]

I wish I could get those stinking deer off my food plots!:rant:

Here I have all these natural greens planted for partial consumption by my family or friends, am attempting to improve the soil for future building sites on my property and play areas for my children, trails that are planted for less sandy walking, and these stinking deer get in there and eat them all up and leave their little "milk-duds" all over the place. Well, I guess I'm just going to have to shoot those rascels!
They had signs that said these are not bait piles they are compost piles and any deer trying to steal compost will be shot on sight.

[QDMAMAN]

Food plots are planted to provide a better source of nurishment for deer and other animals.

So should food plots be placed under the "Feeding" heading in the DNR guidlines? I think so.


Over the Christmas holidays my mother and two 92 year old grandmothers asked what I had planted in the field next to the driveway. I informed them that it was turnips and they quickly dipatched me out there to pick some for them. I haven't stopped hearing how good they thought those turnips were.
Soooo...if they're deamed illegal I guess a bunch of old ladies will starve to death. Who in there right mind would want to have to live with that the rest of their life.:lol:

[beer and nuts]

FixedBlade, I understand your point and it does have a valid reasoning but coming on here and trying to discuss anything of this sort that goes against the grain in this forum is useless. Food plots are planted for food for wildlife(heaven forbid call it baiting on here), any type of agricultural is simply that ...for agricultual..definination of the word we all know. if food plots would EVER be known to carry/spread disease this forum would dispute it, much like other dispute carrot piles carry/spread disease...just they way it is. Baiting and food plots have never been known to carry or spread diseases...period. If any disease can be spread via a 10 foot bait pile than your fooling yourself to think a year-round 1/2 acre clover field can't either, especially when its a primary and at times only food source come spring attracting very close feeding and socializing contact for deer...you guys with well-managed food plots are seeing right now.

Ask your this: IF food plots were ever proven to possibily help in the process of spreading disease(no matter how small), would you guys stop planting?

I'm not against food plots or baiting and carefull consideration has to be given to ban food plots if baiting was ever banned.

[4x4_Hunter]

Even though I agree with 99% of the people posting here, I am going to jump over on the other side for just a minute. Let's just say that we realize that food plots are a form of baiting. I think is some aspects, sure it is. However, now I would say, Why do we catagorize between baiting, feeding, or such? Because the DNR wants to regulate it? Ok, why do they want to regulate it? Well, because of the TB and other diseases that can be spread from deer to deer by touching noses or what have ya. Fine then, the question then is: Do food plots need to be managed as to not spread diseases amongst wildlife. I think that the answer is really clear there. You tell me the last time you saw two deer eating at the same blade of clover with their noses touching (assuming they were in a properly maintained clover plot with plentiful clover). And finally then, if you do believe that they need to be managed for disease spreading, then it comes back to the other posts as to how to distinguish between a food plot and a garden, crop production, etc.?

I guess I just don't see the necessity to manage food plots whether you consider it "baiting" or not!!!

[Ferris_StateHunter]

fixed

I guess I do not see your point. Baiting an animal does not really provide quality nutrition for the deer, unless the bait it touched up often, and thats only a handful of animals (depending on the size of the pile)

Where as foodplots help a lot more than that. most provide good nutrition and if a planter does it right helps provide food year round. That can only be good things for the deer. I guess I just dont understand why anyone would want to take away a good thing from the deer we hunt

[olliek]

The federal government not only approves foodplots, they will pay landowners for planting them!

Through counter-cyclical programs, the FSA(farm service assn.) pays certain amounts depending on past agricultural practices, size of plantings, crops planted ect, for the benifit of wildlife.

There are sign-up dates, planting deadlines and crop reporting to do, but there are funds available. My 4- 40`s averaged $70 each last year.

There is also the CRP program possibility also administered through the FSA.

See your local FSA office for more details--------- Dave.

[swampbuck]

FixedBlade, I understand your point and it does have a valid reasoning but coming on here and trying to discuss anything of this sort that goes against the grain in this forum is useless. Food plots are planted for food for wildlife(heaven forbid call it baiting on here), any type of agricultural is simply that ...for agricultual..definination of the word we all know. if food plots would EVER be known to carry/spread disease this forum would dispute it, much like other dispute carrot piles carry/spread disease...just they way it is. Baiting and food plots have never been known to carry or spread diseases...period. If any disease can be spread via a 10 foot bait pile than your fooling yourself to think a year-round 1/2 acre clover field can't either, especially when its a primary and at times only food source come spring attracting very close feeding and socializing contact for deer...you guys with well-managed food plots are seeing right now.

Ask your this: IF food plots were ever proven to possibily help in the process of spreading disease(no matter how small), would you guys stop planting?

I'm not against food plots or baiting and carefull consideration has to be given to ban food plots if baiting was ever banned.

AGREED. I.M.O. they are the same especially when people boast about holding deer so somebody else cant get one.

[FREEPOP]

AGREED. I.M.O. they are the same especially when people boast about holding deer so somebody else cant get one.

:gaga: :gaga: :gaga:

[fairfax1]

I'm not tryin' to hijack this lively thread of yours.

But B&N posed an interesting hypothetical: "..... IF food plots were ever proven to possibily help in the process of spreading disease...... would you guys stop planting?"

Now that's food for thought ( I punned, my bad.)

It's an interesting question I'll need to to chew on a bit (I can't help myself).

Seriously, B&N, yeah, I'd hafta quit doin' it, although I gotta tell ya, it would probably kill me. But, of course, I'd quit.

I'd probably go running to my local extension office for advice on what I could grow that wouldn't aid in spreading disease. Fooling around with plantings for wildlife habitat is just too much fun. I'd turn over every book in the library to find out what would be the best and safest alternatives to clover, alfalfa, turnips, etc.

Would it be crabapples? or dogwoods? mulberries" or should I pour all my energy into hinge-cutting, edge-feathering, and fertilizing the native stuff?

As Mike Ditka use to print on the team T-shirts "Find a way, or make a way".

I'd find a way to continue to safely grow stuff for wildlife.

[Ferg]

Until you get the DNR/NRC to change these:

http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153-10366_37141_37705-31604--,00.html


definitions, all we are doing is creating another point to fight about - it's just meaningless -

ferg....
(and we all know how fast they can make decisions) :yikes: :yikes:

[NorthJeff]

Until you get the DNR/NRC to change these:

http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153-10366_37141_37705-31604--,00.html


definitions, all we are doing is creating another point to fight about - it's just meaningless -

ferg....
(and we all know how fast they can make decisions) :yikes: :yikes:

What....doesn't everyone love food plots? :eek: :D

[FREEPOP]

I'm not tryin' to hijack this lively thread of yours.

But B&N posed an interesting hypothetical: "..... IF food plots were ever proven to possibily help in the process of spreading disease...... would you guys stop planting?"

Now that's food for thought ( I punned, my bad.)

It's an interesting question I'll need to to chew on a bit (I can't help myself).

Seriously, B&N, yeah, I'd hafta quit doin' it, although I gotta tell ya, it would probably kill me. But, of course, I'd quit.

I'd probably go running to my local extension office for advice on what I could grow that wouldn't aid in spreading disease. Fooling around with plantings for wildlife habitat is just too much fun. I'd turn over every book in the library to find out what would be the best and safest alternatives to clover, alfalfa, turnips, etc.

Would it be crabapples? or dogwoods? mulberries" or should I pour all my energy into hinge-cutting, edge-feathering, and fertilizing the native stuff?

As Mike Ditka use to print on the team T-shirts "Find a way, or make a way".

I'd find a way to continue to safely grow stuff for wildlife.


Then will they shut down the small crop farmer, and then the large crop farmer, and then it begins to rain.............Noah!

[farmlegend]

I just plan on making my thick cover better and better; it's already about the best in the county. I'm planting 3 acres of corn this year, 2 acres of soybeans, 2 acres of wheat, and have another 3 acres in clover/alfalfa, just for the deer. Half my property is "sanctuary". I've now clearcut a 25 yd swath around my entire perimeter, the neighbors cannot even see onto my place. I'm gonna get 20 DMAP tags, me and all my guests are gonna take down a ton of does once again this fall. We're continuing to really pull them in from all the adjacent land for my personal enjoyment - guys that hunt nearby me (who don't do squat in the way of habitat work) are really bitchingupastorm, since they and their kids hardly ever see any deer at all. And no, don't ask, you cannot hunt my farm. It's mine, all mine. Stay out!

Don't like it? Write a check and buy your own land!:lol: :lol: :lol:


AGREED. I.M.O. they are the same especially when people boast about holding deer so somebody else cant get one.

Someone swallowed the bait/hook/line/sinker.

[Pinefarm]

Time to re-define year round nutritional plots?...ah, no.

[Swamp Ghost]

I myself have pulled the reigns back a little bit with the plots, due to time constraints, family and various other commitments. I have concentrated efforts towards security cover and preferred browse species.

If you want to hold and attract deer, nothing works better than a chainsaw.

But then someone may want to classify my Husky as providing an unnatural habitat and ban it.................:rolleyes:

[swoosh]

I myself have pulled the reigns back a little bit with the plots, due to time constraints, family and various other commitments. I have concentrated efforts towards security cover and preferred browse species.

If you want to hold and attract deer, nothing works better than a chainsaw.

But then someone may want to classify my Husky as providing an unnatural habitat and ban it.................:rolleyes:

Good thing I own a STIHL:lol: You cheaters and your Husky's

[NorthJeff]

If you want to hold and attract deer, nothing works better than a chainsaw.

In ag land ;)

[Swamp Ghost]

In ag land ;)

LOL!

[NorthJeff]

Man I wish our WI landowner would let us get a little destructive with the chainsaw!!! :mad: We do fairly well with out "shooting lanes" but that's pushing it. Although, we can't do without our cool-season plantings!

[Pinefarm]

It's been said that a land managers most important tool is the chainsaw. I agree. Plots are nice, we have a bunch. But the deer are at our place for the jungle thick bedding cover we've created where there was once barren mature row pines.
To use Las Vegas as an analogy, food plots are like the affordable package deals to get there, but the main reason for going is still the gambling and the shows, which is the thick bedding cover.
It all depends where you're at. But I can tell you, in Newaygo county, which has the most hunters and most pressure every year (check the survey data), it's thick cover that is a managers or hunters greatest assest if pulling deer to his land is the goal, not food plots. Not by a long stretch.

[deathfromabove]

Good thing I own a STIHL:lol: You cheaters and your Husky's


Whats a Husky????..:lol: ..........

STIHL 026 Pro, 18" bar, 1/2 doz. chipper chains ........her name is Sassy.......

:evil: Hinge cuttin machine:evil:

[oldrank]

deer have to eat something........passing any laws that outlaw foodplots or baiting......would only be another victory for the facist animal rights terrorist.........and i see no difference in hunting a 50 lb bag of corn on the ground or a 200 acre corn feild........hunting the pile of corn gets alot more flaq......yet hunting a 200 acre baitpile is ok........hunting in an apple orchard is ok....hunting over a 25 lb bag of apples...not ok.......thats a bunch of BS.....its all ok....

[farmlegend]

I just have to point out that comparing hunting near a pile of shelled corn with hunting near 200a. of standing corn is...well, nothing but plain, unadulteraded BS.

[Pinefarm]

Farm, I'll add that nothing so quickly establishes inexperience than arguing that a hunting a pile of corn is the same as hunting a corn field.
If I was at the store and someone said that at the counter, at that very point I'd lose concentration of what they were saying. :)

You know that point where you see a persons lips moving but you really aren't listening anymore and you nod in "hum, huh, no kidding" while you try to find a way out of the conversation and you look over your shoulder for any reason to leave because the other person revealed he's clueless or "out there"? ;) (if he was clueless about fishing, I helped him. But guys talk about all issues at a sport shop. Being behind the counter is very much like being a good listening bartender)
Well, any person that tries to argue that sitting over a pile of corn is the same as attempting to cover the trails leading into a field has revealed that he is either quite inexperienced or simply "out there". And he's defensive about his inexperience. Like many here, I've hunted both bait and natural many, many times. There is zero compare except that both involve deer, a hunter and a weapon.

[Luv2hunteup]

Has anyone done an experiment on spreading a 50lbs bag of corn on 200 acres to see if there is indeed a difference? Logic dicates that there is a difference but is there really proof.

We can do the math on that real quick, that's a quarter pound per acre or .000006lbs of corn per square foot.

Besides that hunting over a 50lb bag of corn is not legal anywhere in this state. Food plots and AG crops are legal everywhere is this state. Food plots and AG crops are subsidized by our DNR & USDA, the same can not be said for baiting with a 50lb bag of corn.

[Pinefarm]

Interesting take from Minnesota...

From Minnesota DNR...

"Hunters can make a difference. And they should, because baiting hurts those who follow the rules," Heidebrink said.

THE BASICS OF THE NEW RULE

It is currently illegal to place or use bait for the purpose of taking deer. The new rule:

- maintains the baiting prohibition and states that a person may not hunt deer with the aid or use of bait

- clarifies that it is unlawful to hunt where the person knows or should have known there is bait

- clarifies that it is unlawful to hunt where the person has placed bait or caused bait to be placed within the previous 10 days

- prohibits the transportation and placement of food items that are capable of attracting or enticing deer (vs. for the purpose of attracting deer).

Bait does not include liquid scents, salt or minerals placed for deer. Bait also does not include food resulting from normal or accepted farming, forest management, wildlife food plantings, orchard management, or other similar land management activities.

These new provisions are intended to close some of the loopholes associated with baiting. Such issues as "I'm feeding the pheasants not the deer," or "I didn't know there was bait here," or "I didn't know there was bait placed here last week" will no longer work.

More...


Proponents of baiting claim that it is an age-old hunting technique. They believe that baiting allows hunters to see more deer and other wildlife, and that it improves the chances of harvesting a deer and of making quick, clean, kills at short range. They also claim that baiting is necessary to compete with other hunters, and that it will help insure the future of deer hunting by attracting the next generation of hunters who have grown up in a results-oriented society.

The 1990’s have seen a steady increase in deer feeding, the legal use of bait for deer hunting and the illegal use of bait for hunting and poaching. The opponents of deer baiting are concerned about these growing problems and the future of deer hunting.

Bait causes deer to feed close together increasing the likelihood of infecting each other and transmitting disease to livestock. Farmers in Michigan became so concerned about the transmission of bovine tuberculosis via nose-to-nose contact of deer at bait piles, that all forms of deer feeding were banned in several counties in that state. Another disease of concern in Minnesota is chronic wasting disease. Captive elk from infected herds have been found in Minnesota. If this disease ever escapes into our wild deer population it could be quickly spread by deer in close contact at feeders with devastating results to Minnesota’s deer herd. Baiting restrictions would help reduce this threat.

Deer baiting can change deer feeding habits and movements. Deer concentrate in areas with bait piles and travel less than they do when feeding on natural foods. Deer who live most of the year in an area may be enticed away during the hunting season by bait on adjacent lands, thus pre-empting hunting opportunity of those who don’t bait. This leads to competition between hunters who start baiting to compete with neighboring hunters or try to outdo their neighbor’s bait piles. Baiting on private property may move deer off public lands where most hunters don’t have access to the deer. This may also make it more difficult for the state to manage and control deer populations.

Baiting decreases the quality of the sport of deer hunting. The ethical deer hunter practicing fair chase is at a disadvantage. Baiting favors those hunters who are more concerned about killing something than having a quality hunting experience. A true hunter must acquire the skills of reading deer sign, scouting, and patiently waiting at a stand or stalking to pursue unrestrained animals living in a natural environment. Baiting allows hunters to easily take deer without learning these skills or investing much time into the sport. Baiting also makes it difficult to defend the sport of deer hunting against criticism from non-hunters and anti-hunters by discrediting the hunter’s claim of giving animals a fair chance.

Deer baiting has also led to an increase in illegal hunting activity. Conservation officers are finding more and more cases of hunters illegally taking deer directly over bait piles during the hunting season and poaching deer at night over lighted bait piles, often right at their deer shacks. The ease of attracting deer to bait and seeing trophy deer tempts hunters to illegally take deer. The current baiting regulation makes it very difficult for Conservation Officers to enforce illegal baiting because deer feeding and legal baiting is so prevalent.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Minnesota Division of the Izaak Walton League of America, in convention April 28, 2002, at Detroit Lakes, Minnesota, supports an improved deer baiting regulation that is enforceable and that has much greater restrictions on the timing and placement of bait than currently exists. We believe that the future of ethical deer hunting is at stake. The Minnesota Division supports the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources in its effort to strengthen deer baiting regulations. We support a ban on the use of deer bait or deer feed by deer hunters from two weeks prior to until the end of Minnesota’s deer hunting seasons (September through December). Hunters should also be required to hunt a substantial distance (500 feet or more) away from food piles, deer feeders or other wildlife feeders to hunt legally.

We believe that hunter ethics and the concept of fair chase are critical to maintaining the future of the deer hunting sport and urge the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to take a leadership role in preserving the tradition of true deer hunting in Minnesota.

McCabe Chapter
MN Division of the IWLA

[M1Garand]

FixedBlade, I understand your point and it does have a valid reasoning but coming on here and trying to discuss anything of this sort that goes against the grain in this forum is useless. Food plots are planted for food for wildlife(heaven forbid call it baiting on here), any type of agricultural is simply that ...for agricultual..definination of the word we all know. if food plots would EVER be known to carry/spread disease this forum would dispute it, much like other dispute carrot piles carry/spread disease...just they way it is. Baiting and food plots have never been known to carry or spread diseases...period. If any disease can be spread via a 10 foot bait pile than your fooling yourself to think a year-round 1/2 acre clover field can't either, especially when its a primary and at times only food source come spring attracting very close feeding and socializing contact for deer...you guys with well-managed food plots are seeing right now.

Ask your this: IF food plots were ever proven to possibily help in the process of spreading disease(no matter how small), would you guys stop planting?

I'm not against food plots or baiting and carefull consideration has to be given to ban food plots if baiting was ever banned.

You raise a good question if food plots were ever to be found to transmit disease but it would be unenforceable. You would also have to ban every farm crop, oak stand, apple orchared, etc. There's no way. What about farmers who plant clover, alfalfa or timothy for baling for livestock? TB is caused by bacteria that is transmitted through air and close contact with infected animals. The spread is enhanced when infected animals are crowded together. How close are animals in a 1, 2 or 5 acre food plot as compared to a 10 foot square bait pile? How many times do you think that noses of infected animals are being rubbed around along with saliva that other deer at that bait pile will be in contact with? Can it happen at a food plot? Sure it can but the likelyhood if far greater with baiting and that is the issue. A veternarian for the the MDNR stated that the maintenance of TB in MI is directly related to supplemental feeding.

[8nchuck]

I say we propose a Food Plot stamp. Yes, thats it, a new tax ...oh ....eh ...I mean wildlife investment stamp.

Oh Genny, Genny.........are you listening.

All kinding aside, They, the DNR, can't enforce a baiting ban, just arn't enough officers and I think their time is best spent enforcing other enfractions.

They, DNR, should look at a way to get someting out it. I.E a Bait stamp ($5 .00) (but not a food plot)

[swampbuck]

pinefarm,

the Minnesota is very accurate and well written, just what michigan needs, however if we replaced bait with foodplot in this part we would have the issue that I have with plots


Deer baiting (food plots) can change deer feeding habits and movements. Deer concentrate in areas with bait piles(food plots) and travel less than they do when feeding on natural foods. Deer who live most of the year in an area may be enticed away during the hunting season by bait (food plots)on adjacent lands, thus pre-empting hunting opportunity of those who don’t bait(plant food plots). This leads to competition between hunters who start baiting(planting plots) to compete with neighboring hunters or try to outdo their neighbor’s bait piles(food plots). Baiting (food plots)on private property may move deer off public lands where most hunters don’t have access to the deer. This may also make it more difficult for the state to manage and control deer populations.

see what I mean? now how about this

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Minnesota Division of the Izaak Walton League of America, in convention April 28, 2002, at Detroit Lakes, Minnesota, supports an improved deer baiting (plotting) regulation that is enforceable and that has much greater restrictions on the timing and placement of bait (foodplots) than currently exists. We believe that the future of ethical deer hunting is at stake. The Minnesota Division supports the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources in its effort to strengthen deer baiting (food plotting)regulations. We support a ban on the use of deer bait or deer feed(foodplots) by deer hunters from two weeks prior to until the end of Minnesota’s deer hunting seasons (September through December). Hunters should also be required to hunt a substantial distance (500 feet or more) away from (foodplots)food piles, deer feeders or other wildlife feeders to hunt legally.

[nessenswamper]

so when this snow finally melts, and i get a ton of lime, buy about 25# of rye, and plant the area i am trying to improve.so that i can plant an orchard next year. deer or any other wild animal eats in this it would be baiting and be illegal. come on! find something else to b!*#h about.

[Luv2hunteup]

.........or we could make it illegal to hunt deer in Michigan if you don't plant food plots. Food plots are not baiting.

[Pinefarm]

I'll add another major difference.
When hunting over bait, when you see that first sign of a deer in the distance, typically that deer is headed your way, to the bait. No scouting skill or knowledge of deer behavior is needed.
When hunting natural, when you see that first sign of a deer in the distance, typically that deer is not headed your way and could be coming or going in any direction, on any trail, or casually feeding. Even complete scouting and vast knowledge of deer behavior does not mean that the deer will go where you planned on that day.

As far as a tax/license, I've strongly suggested a baiting tag to the NRC/MDNR for the last 2 years. I've suggested a very simple system. KISS. For each baited location, you buy a $5 baiting tag. The license machine then spits out 2 tags. The baiting tag and a duplicate tag. You keep the first on your person and you hang the duplicate over your bait. The tag would remain there, until the bait is gone. That way, if over the limit, a CO knows who you are. This hampers the guys from dumping 6 bags of beets on Sunday to hunt the following Friday. If you are hunting over bait without a tag, it's illegal.
There would be no limit to baiting tags, but it's $5 for each tag/location.
Bait would be any food placed by a person that is meant to attract wildlife and that food is no longer growing and has been harvested. Naturally occuring foods like acorns or apples would not be bait, as long as they were not picked up and moved by a person.

[swampbuck]

I think there is a difference between food plots for habitat improvement and hunting over a food plot.

as far as the post I made above I inserted "food plots" into the Minnesota document to illustrate a point. I believe that if your read that portion of the document with "food plots" used instead of "bait" it is logical and quite frankly the same as statements that have been made on this board. If we were to ban hunting over bait on those points they should also apply to hunting over food plots. notice I said "hunting over" not planting food plots

[Pinefarm]

Swamp,
Let's see...
#1, fields change movements in that deer may skirt the edge or stay back 100 yards instead of crossing it. Fields are stationary and never move. You can dump corn onto the top of a 3 story pile of dirt and deer will change their path to climb the hill. The next day you can dump it in a wet bog and the deer will go into it for the bait when they would otherwise go around it.
#2 deer biologists research has shown that fields SPREAD feeding deer out, not congregate in a 10' area. like bait. And the more fields, the more spread out the feeding deer become.
#3 food plots are in exactly the same place 1/2 the year, at least, or all year. Many fields, like clover, could be in the same exact place for 1/2 decade, plus. That's longer than the average lifespan of the deer themselves. Bait abruptly starts in any given location Oct. 1, could pop up anywhere from there and abruptly ends on Jan. 1 and comes and goes as the bait is eaten and replaced.
#4 fields are more of a casual attractant and mostly used for year long nutrition as opposed to the strong attraction of placed bait. Fields are most often meant to slowly nutritionally benefit the deer, year round. Bait is most often used to kill the deer. Naturally occuring foods on public land hold as much or more attraction to deer as any given field.
#5 it's clear that it's been baiting on private land that has made it difficult to control deer populations.

The Minnesota biologists knew exactly what they were doing when they did this rule, that's why this is so very clear...

"Bait also does not include food resulting from normal or accepted farming, forest management, wildlife food plantings, orchard management, or other similar land management activities."

Very clear and with purpose and intent.

Let's face it, even our own MDNR people say that baiting is a practice that's days are numbered.
Some 15 years from now, signs saying "deer carrots for sale" will seem as odd as cigarette machines everywhere, waist only safety belts, 3 fingers of scotch in a plastic cup for everyone leaving the party as 'one for the road', a non-smoking section being 2 small tables near the kitchen, DDT and lead paint.

[beer and nuts]

When hunting over bait, when you see that first sign of a deer in the distance, typically that deer is headed your way, to the bait. No scouting skill or knowledge of deer behavior is needed.
Really? And planting food plots requires scouting skill and knowledge of deer behavior more than baiting how?? Realistically if all deer hunters now and in the future scouted and had knowledge of deer behavior etc.. baiting and food plots would not be needed period.

When hunting natural, when you see that first sign of a deer in the distance, typically that deer is not headed your.... Are you talking about food plots now vs. a bait pile?? I'll give ya natural movement but we were talking about food plots compared to bait pile!

That's longer than the average lifespan of the deer themselves. Bait abruptly starts in any given location Oct. 1, could pop up anywhere from there and abruptly ends on Jan. 1 and comes and goes as the bait is eaten and replaced.
And your point is...????

When hunting over a food plot, the deer you see pretty much are within 10 yards of the food plot already or in it.

Food plots do not change deer movements? OR should we say food plots permenantly change deer movement where bait piles change it temporary. But I fail to see what scientific reasoning makes that negative. But if proper scouting and deer knowledge is used very very little deer movement is changed using bait piles. But cutting away 10, 20, 30 acre food plots can change deer movements dramatically.

Maybe a study needs to be done and see how much nose to nose/close feeding takes place on a quality 1-3 acre food plot over a 8-month period(April-Nov.) COMPARED TO a 2 gallon bait pile placed over 5 days spread out over 10 yards. 5 days being the average time a bait pile lasts.

When these food plots start showing through with the melting snow in 2 yard patches how are close are those deer feeding-we can drop that bait pile vs. food plot arguement. I see every year in my very small rye patches and see does every food plotter.

[RIVERAT]

I'm afraid too many of you guys are getting a knot in your tail over nothing. No one is going to ban legal farm practices, food plots, or gardens.

Find somthing else to talk about.


Yours Truly, Thread Buster :dizzy:

[farmlegend]

as far as the post I made above I inserted "food plots" into the Minnesota document to illustrate a point. I believe that if your read that portion of the document with "food plots" used instead of "bait" it is logical

Perhaps the old Irving Copi text should be re-read before tossing around words like "logical". You may as well insert the phrase "hockey stick" instead of "bait". After all, deer do occasionally browse on hardwoods.

I used to wonder what it was that bothered certain individuals so much about something so inocuous as wildlife food plots. I wonder no more, and it sure has nothing to do with concern for the resource.

Some 15 years from now, signs saying "deer carrots for sale" will seem as odd as cigarette machines everywhere, waist only safety belts, 3 fingers of scotch in a plastic cup for everyone leaving the party as 'one for the road', a non-smoking section being 2 small tables near the kitchen, DDT and lead paint.

PF, I think 15 years is on the high side. I'd be stunned if baiting weren't banned in this state by 2012.

[Swamp Ghost]

This thread makes me laugh........:lol:

Some folks are hopelessly irrational

[fairfax1]

Ah, Pinefarm, our Jedi Knight, from your lips to God's ears: " Some 15 years from now, signs saying "deer carrots for sale" will seem as odd as cigarette machines....."

Then, FL piles on with.....baiting "banned in this state by 2012." (that's 5 years for those who don't do math on Saturdays.)

Would that it be so.

..................................

A comment on another post in this thread (which has somehow morphed into baiting vs plotting).........a poster states: "the DNR, can't enforce a baiting ban, just aren't enough officers and I think their time is best spent enforcing other infractions."

I'd Tee that one up. Yes, the DNR can enforce a baiting ban. It doesn't take an army of officers. It takes a few well publicized cases where the violator is soundly spanked with fines and loss of priveleges. As the Chinese say: Kill the chicken to scare the monkey. A few chickens losing their hunting lisence for 2 years and fined $1,500 and spread all over the news will have a chilling effect on the practice. Aim a media blitz, a 4-man task force with a low flying plane against baiting....and see what happens.

Once CWD hits the State border and thus triggers the 'no-baiting' ban....it will take that task force to rein in the practice. But, I'd bet my 401k that it can happen.

[Whit1]

A comment on another post in this thread (which has somehow morphed into baiting vs plotting)

Every now and then the mods let threads such as this to get off tangent just to let you guys vent a bit on the topic at hand. This easing of eruptive pressure will hopefully lessen the chances for a catastropic explosion on the boards sometime in the future.

[Pinefarm]

No, this thread was always bait vs fields. The first post is about fields falling under bait/feed rules. :rolleyes:
But maybe we'll just close it, since children know the difference between the two (and every state DNR) and these types of threads are usually set or kept aflame by those who despise anyone getting between them and thier carrot baited yearling bucks.