DNR updates??????

[ahoude23]

Am I just inept in accessing the DNR's website or are they not giving frequent updates. I would assume they would have up to date info on the first page of their website but I cant find the latest info.

[ridgewalker]

They only update when there is new information on an issue, have a new poll out, or new minutes and agendas are available. Legislative news is changed when there is a change. Often these things take time and there is nothing that can be done about that. It can be frustrating but most government is as slow as watching a tree grow. Just the way it is, unfortunately.

[Liver and Onions]

On the right hand side of the DNR site there is a column entitled "quick Links". Press releases can be found there. About 15 so far this month. You can also look at previous month releases also. I did not see any that dealt with the depopulating of that 2nd deer farm. Does anyone know where that kind of info can be found ? I agree, there should be more updates on test results and action taken regarding the CWD story.

L & O

[ahoude23]

This is such an important issue, they should give a new release every day or two. I'll check the press release area. thanks

[ahoude23]

Just checked press releases, only 5 in September in relation to CWD, none about updates on disease management, actions taken, ect. I am by no means anti DNR, however, this issue seems to not be at the forefront of information reporting with the DNR.

[blahblah]

I agree, it doesn't seem like there is much in the way of news of test results but I guess the rule of thumb would stand that if there was bad news we would hear about it very fast. No news I assume means no more CWD cases.

[MaryDettloff]

This is Mary Dettloff, the DNR's press officer, posting. I just want to let you know that any news we have about CWD is posted immediately. We have made test results available to the media on a continuous basis. And, yes, we only plan on putting out information if we get another positive. So far, *knock on wood* we have not had another positive. However, we still do not know how the first deer became infected.

Feel free to send me an email at the DNR (easier for me to answer than the 500 phone calls I get every day!). I am happy to answer any questions, or find someone who can.

My email there is dettloffm1@michigan.gov.

Mary Dettloff

[Liver and Onions]

Dang, the DNR press officer on our site ! Many thanks for the reply. I still have an interest in finding out more about the 2nd deer farm that was depopulated even though none of the deer were CWD positive. Things like number of deer, how many trades with the deer farm with the CWD positive animal, were there any criminal charges brought against anyone, etc. Is that info available anywhere on the DNR site and I am just not spotting it anywhere ?
L & O

This is Mary Dettloff, the DNR's press officer, posting. I just want to let you know that any news we have about CWD is posted immediately. We have made test results available to the media on a continuous basis. And, yes, we only plan on putting out information if we get another positive. So far, *knock on wood* we have not had another positive. However, we still do not know how the first deer became infected.

Feel free to send me an email at the DNR (easier for me to answer than the 500 phone calls I get every day!). I am happy to answer any questions, or find someone who can.

My email there is dettloffm1@michigan.gov.

Mary Dettloff

[kristie]

In the case where an investigation is still ongoing, information will not be released until the investigation is completed, including trace-in and trace-out information. Criminal investigations are not discussed while investigations are being carried out, or even in court for obvious reasons. Press pieces may be released after a judgement is reached. This is why you have not heard much information about the second facility except that all the deer tested came back negative for CWD. The number of deer at that facility was less than 50.
Very cool that Mary is on the site now....she's a great press officer. Thanks Mary.
Also, with the high volume of deer being tested, both from the wild herd and captive herds, both MDNR and MDA are doing best to share testing info. as we go. If there are any suspects or positives there will be a press release.
Kristie
CWD Surveillance Central
Wildlife Disease Lab.
MDNR

[Ninja]

This is Mary Dettloff, the DNR's press officer, posting. I just want to let you know that any news we have about CWD is posted immediately. We have made test results available to the media on a continuous basis. And, yes, we only plan on putting out information if we get another positive. So far, *knock on wood* we have not had another positive. However, we still do not know how the first deer became infected.

Feel free to send me an email at the DNR (easier for me to answer than the 500 phone calls I get every day!). I am happy to answer any questions, or find someone who can.

My email there is dettloffm1@michigan.gov.

Mary Dettloff


Thanx Mary.
Based on another post here, is it correct that a criminal investigation is being conducted on the 2nd facility that was depopulated???

Also, why is there no information on the Michigan CWD deer on the Aphis site, the USGS site or any info to be found from the National Vet Lab???
Is this also due to an ongoing criminal investigation?

[swampbuck]

This is Mary Dettloff, the DNR's press officer, posting. I just want to let you know that any news we have about CWD is posted immediately. We have made test results available to the media on a continuous basis. And, yes, we only plan on putting out information if we get another positive. So far, *knock on wood* we have not had another positive. However, we still do not know how the first deer became infected.

Feel free to send me an email at the DNR (easier for me to answer than the 500 phone calls I get every day!). I am happy to answer any questions, or find someone who can.

My email there is dettloffm1@michigan.gov.

Mary Dettloff

Thank you for the information, And Welcome to the site. I hope that you join the fine DNR employees already here in providing us with trustworthy and reliable information and answers.

[ahoude23]

Thanks to both Mary and Kristie for contributing to this thread. I think the vast majority of the hunting public would be less skeptical of the DNR if they had easy access to current info on this subject. I have used the ask the DNR portion of their website to ask questions that still have not been answered. I do not have distrust for the DNR, just would like more information.

[Thor_77]

Thank you for the information, And Welcome to the site. I hope that you join the fine DNR employees already here in providing us with trustworthy and reliable information and answers.

Trustworthy and reliable is in doubt on this issue. Your " trained professionals " can't tell you how a 3 year old plus deer in an enclosure got the disease and none of it's pen-mates tested positive for the disease , none of a feed tested positive for the prion contamination.No soil tested positive for the disease according to published accounts. It's as if this one deer had a genetic disposition to trigger a human made testing routine. Without additional contamination you have a case similar to spontaneous human combustion. Science can't explain this CWD case and they can't explain spontaneous human combustion.

Nowhere in this case can you say sound scientific evidence was employed , only trained guessimates.

Nowhere can the DNR make the connection between bating and CWD and at the same time give food plots a free ride.

Even on this web site individuals promoting QDM , chirp about their success of having over a hundred deer on their property eating their food plots. Sounds like a disease brewing environment waiting to happen.

[fairfax1]

Thank you, Mary Detloff.

I, for one, think it is a prudent move by you to occasionally offer an insight.

This forum site, like other web sites, is simply another media outlet....like Freep, like LSJ.

You are welcome here......tho as you can readily observe there are any number of 'grassy-knoll" conspiracy-philes about, and too many DNR-phobes.

But also some thoughtful and insightful contributors.

[e. fairbanks]

Perhaps Mary and Kristi could give us some updates on our hunters who bring venison from CWD positive deer and elk back to Michigan. If our DNR REQUIRED that hunters (who shoot deer and elk in states and provinces where CWD is present in the wild) bring back the carcass or parts thereof only from animals that are tested negative for CWD, THEN we could honestly say we are "protecting the health of our herd" for present and future generations.

[Hamilton Reef]

This is Mary Dettloff, the DNR's press officer, posting.Hi Mary, good to hear from you. I haven't seen you since the MOWA meeting at Baldwin.
I'm thrilled to see Mary at this site. I've posted dozens of her DNR announcements. You may notice that I try to link updated notices with older articles or announcements when ever possible. Example may be a DNR boat launch closing repair/upgrade announcement, a local article covering the progress, and the announcement that the boat launch has reopened. Mary's DNR announcements and press articles are of great service to the public.

[Biggsy]

I also am having a hard time finding info. So much for the CWD plan saying to keep the public updated. I still would like to know the results of the 300 eradicated free ranging deer from the hot zone that the "plan" called to be immediately eradicated and according to the plan if none tested positive then we could be 95% sure +/-1% that CWD was not in our free ranging deer herd. This is in fact what we are all wanting to know. :rant:

[MaryDettloff]

So far, none of the wild deer we have culled from Kent County, or that hunters have harvested from Kent County -- or any county -- have tested positive.

Does this mean we can relax? No, unfortunately. What it does mean is that we still do not know how the first deer became infected. The first deer was born at the facility in Kent County. It was not imported from another farm or another state (popular rumor). All the deer at that facility were culled and tested, and none turned up positive.

We have tested more than 300 deer from Kent County now, and all are negative so far. We will continue testing any deer we can get our hands on this fall, so please pass the word to hunters to bring their deer to a DNR check station this fall. It will help us collect an adequate number of samples for our testing.

Mary Dettloff
DNR Public Information Officer

[Ninja]

Mary,
Any info on my questions above???

[MaryDettloff]

Dang, the DNR press officer on our site ! Many thanks for the reply. I still have an interest in finding out more about the 2nd deer farm that was depopulated even though none of the deer were CWD positive. Things like number of deer, how many trades with the deer farm with the CWD positive animal, were there any criminal charges brought against anyone, etc. Is that info available anywhere on the DNR site and I am just not spotting it anywhere ?
L & O


Yes, there is an ongoing investigation at the second facility, so I can't offer much comment on that at this time.

Also, I will get some updated information on the number of deer tested and post it to our web site. The link on our front page to the CWD information contains all the latest news. We get results back every day on deer, and it's been an issue of whether or not I want some kind of "deer test results meter" on the web site. I will issue a release if/when we get another positive, of course.

I am not sure why USDA and APHIS have no information on their sites. I can ask their media folks the next time I talk to them, though.

I believe in being pro-active with DNR media. I know there are some here who probably think that is bull. We are doing our best. Remember I am a one-man office for press stuff...and sometimes that is like drinking from a firehose.

I've read the threads here for a while. I am well aware that some of our critics are here, and that some of our supportive folks are here too. We have worked hard to open up our public information process since I came here. I think the DNR is a lot more open than it used to be, but we still have some thing we can improve upon.

Again, feel free to send me an email if you have specific questions I can answer, or if I can find answers for you.

Mary Dettloff

[MaryDettloff]

Perhaps Mary and Kristi could give us some updates on our hunters who bring venison from CWD positive deer and elk back to Michigan. If our DNR REQUIRED that hunters (who shoot deer and elk in states and provinces where CWD is present in the wild) bring back the carcass or parts thereof only from animals that are tested negative for CWD, THEN we could honestly say we are "protecting the health of our herd" for present and future generations.

We will have a press release out this week, I am hoping, about this. It currently is law in our state that you can only bring back deboned meat, antlers and the cape. You cannot bring back the entire animal from another state with CWD. Do we have 100 percent compliance on that? No. And it is a problem we are trying to address from both a public education and a law enforcement angle.

Mary Dettloff
DNR Public Information Officer

[kristie]

Thanks Mary

Kristie

(looks like I have some data to send you)

:D

[e. fairbanks]

Found in my voluminous and disorganized files; DNR's Dr. Steve Shmitt on CWD positive carcasses or parts thereof brought back by hunters (2004?)
"all hunters were contacted, most gave meat to Wildlife Disease Lab for incineration, others used licensed landfill. of 29 deer and 1 elk (including 1 illegally imported carcass not to mention CWD infected venison brought back by NRC commissioner) 7 hunters could not be reached"
7 divided by 30 = 23%
In the past I have contacted the DNR, the MDA, the governor, the USDA, AND YOU, MARY, ARE THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THIS SITUATION. (THE OTHER WAS A POLITICIAN)

[ahoude23]

Mary,

Thank you, this is the type of information I believe the public (both hunting and non hunting) would like to hear. I hope the DNR website gets frequent updates. This would help eliminate some of the BS we all hear. Don't think it would help with some of the anti-DNR skeptics though.

[Direwolfe]

There are some questions on this site that haven't been answered:

Where does the DNR keep the cougars they periodically let roam free?

How many of those black helicopters does the DNR have?

Where in the UP will the DNR be planting the next CWD positive deer to finally get baiting banned there too?

You can tell us, we'll keep it secret.;)

[old school]

Its very odd that one deer in a pen out of the whole fenced in herd had CWD. Makes one wonder again, with almost 1000 deer tested and no CWD what is going on?? Is it not transfered as easily as it is said to be?? Seems other deer in contact with that infected deer that one if not more would have been infected seeing it was a closed in area.

[William H Bonney]

Mary,

Thank you, this is the type of information I believe the public (both hunting and non hunting) would like to hear. I hope the DNR website gets frequent updates. This would help eliminate some of the BS we all hear. Don't think it would help with some of the anti-DNR skeptics though.

With all due respect to Mary and yourself,, none of this information is something we wouldn't have heard otherwise. The problem that "DNR skeptic's" have is with the "decision's",, not the mode that they get relayed to us.

[kristie]

good point

[Munsterlndr]

It currently is law in our state that you can only bring back deboned meat, antlers and the cape. You cannot bring back the entire animal from another state with CWD.

In light of the fact that research has demonstrated that prions exist in both muscle tissue (Infectious prions discovered in deer muscle. The Lancet, Quirk) and blood (Infectious Prions In The Saliva And Blood Of Deer With Chronic Wasting Disease, Science, Mathiason et. al.) and that blood is a possible vector for transmission, Michigan's current policy seems somewhat arbitrary and inconsistent in allowing blood bearing tissues that could potentially be harboring prions into Michigan from an animal harvested in States where CWD is found. I realize that you don't make policy but perhaps you could pass this along and get a comment from somebody regarding why the current policy has not been modified in light of recent discoveries about the presence of prions in tissues other than brain, lymph and spinal cord tissues.

[ahoude23]

With all due respect to Mary and yourself,, none of this information is something we wouldn't have heard otherwise. The problem that "DNR skeptic's" have is with the "decision's",, not the mode that they get relayed to us.


Good point, I think the point I was trying to make is that silence from the DNR or lack of easily obtainable info directly from the DNR breeds the conspiracy theories. I am not a skeptic of the DNR by any means. I work in a public service job and the decisions my co-workers and I make on a daily basis are frequently questioned by people who no not understand the tactics and stragety used in my profession. I think we should hear this information from DNR, via the E-Mails I recieve or via CWD updates on the web. That lends a lot of credability to the information I have heard. My father in law once told me the DNR established the TB area so they could kill off the deer and make more room for elk. Obvious BS however, that is the type of stuff out there. Direct DNR info could help with this type of stuff.

[Hamilton Reef]

I've had many personal conversations with DNR & DEQ staff from the directors to field technicians. I've always stress the importance of getting the correct information to the M-S site directly or through and others at this site. I may not like or agree with every decision announcement, but that is normal and I can accept that.

[Liver and Onions]

Yes, there is an ongoing investigation at the second facility, so I can't offer much comment on that at this time.
....................
Again, feel free to send me an email if you have specific questions I can answer, or if I can find answers for you.
Mary Dettloff

Thanks.

L & O

[solohunter]

I was part of a conversation with a DNR bioligist who admitted ( during grilling) that the reason they do not TB check button buck/yearling heads was that while they might be infected they had not had it long enough to show up in the lymph glands for testing ?? could this be the same thing for CWD as well??

[markbarth]

Yes, there is an ongoing investigation at the second facility, so I can't offer much comment on that at this time.

Also, I will get some updated information on the number of deer tested and post it to our web site. The link on our front page to the CWD information contains all the latest news. We get results back every day on deer, and it's been an issue of whether or not I want some kind of "deer test results meter" on the web site. I will issue a release if/when we get another positive, of course.

I am not sure why USDA and APHIS have no information on their sites. I can ask their media folks the next time I talk to them, though.

I believe in being pro-active with DNR media. I know there are some here who probably think that is bull. We are doing our best. Remember I am a one-man office for press stuff...and sometimes that is like drinking from a firehose.

I've read the threads here for a while. I am well aware that some of our critics are here, and that some of our supportive folks are here too. We have worked hard to open up our public information process since I came here. I think the DNR is a lot more open than it used to be, but we still have some thing we can improve upon.

Again, feel free to send me an email if you have specific questions I can answer, or if I can find answers for you.

Mary Dettloff


In the first case of the poc facility, the deer was tested twice on aug. 22nd at msu diagnostic lab. then confirmed by Aug 25th from NVLS in Ames, Ia. ban imposed on Aug. 26th. On Sept, 9th Drs. Scmitt & Halstead presentented a comprehensive power point presentation to the Tourism,Outdoor Recreation&Natural Resources Committee. That's just 2 weeks after the results! so, why now is there still an "on going investigation" that has been oblivously going on more time than the original case? is it because of foia info or is because the dnr knows the results and doesn't want to make them public for fear that it does make it look like over reaction and will evenmore hurt their credibility with the public?

[William H Bonney]

In the first case of the poc facility, the deer was tested twice on aug. 22nd at msu diagnostic lab. then confirmed by Aug 25th from NVLS in Ames, Ia. ban imposed on Aug. 26th. On Sept, 9th Drs. Scmitt & Halstead presentented a comprehensive power point presentation to the Tourism,Outdoor Recreation&Natural Resources Committee. That's just 2 weeks after the results! so, why now is there still an "on going investigation" that has been oblivously going on more time than the original case? is it because of foia info or is because the dnr knows the results and doesn't want to make them public for fear that it does make it look like over reaction and will evenmore hurt their credibility with the public?

If I had to guess,, I'm pretty sure that "on going investigation" is code for "criminal investigation". I don't think anyone wants to tip their hand just yet.

[kristie]

I was part of a conversation with a DNR bioligist who admitted ( during grilling) that the reason they do not TB check button buck/yearling heads was that while they might be infected they had not had it long enough to show up in the lymph glands for testing ?? could this be the same thing for CWD as well??

pretty sure you are on the right track,
I'll see if I can find the research paper to site, regarding date of infection time/migration of abnormal prions to lymph tissue, just may take a few, as I'm a bit slammed cutting on deer heads........:D

Kristie

[Ninja]

In the first case of the poc facility, the deer was tested twice on aug. 22nd at msu diagnostic lab. then confirmed by Aug 25th from NVLS in Ames, Ia. ban imposed on Aug. 26th.

Are you sure about this?
I believe the DNR received the head of the infected deer well before Aug. 22nd.

[Munsterlndr]

I was part of a conversation with a DNR bioligist who admitted ( during grilling) that the reason they do not TB check button buck/yearling heads was that while they might be infected they had not had it long enough to show up in the lymph glands for testing ?? could this be the same thing for CWD as well??

Yes, very likely.

"The youngest animal diagnosed with clinical CWD was 17 months old, suggesting 16-17 months may be the minimum natural incubation period. Among deer and elk residing in facilities with a long history of CWD, most natural cases occur in 2-7 year-old animals." CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE: IMPLICATIONS AND CHALLENGES FOR WILDLIFE MANAGERS. Unpublished paper presented at the NAWNRC. Elizibeth Williams, Michael Miller, E. Thom Thorne)

I have a PDF of this paper if anyone is interested.

[kristie]

thanks Munster :D

[markbarth]

Are you sure about this?
I believe the DNR received the head of the infected deer well before Aug. 22nd.
ninja, this info was testified by drs. halstead and scmitt that the deer was tested on aug. 22nd at msu

[Ninja]

ninja, this info was testified by drs. halstead and scmitt that the deer was tested on aug. 22nd at msu

It was tested well before that.....they picked up the head in early August.
The type of test done at MSU takes a little more time than the testing done at the National Vet Lab.

I have a recorded interview which aired on WXYT with the 2 Dr.'s you mentioned stating the same....head was tested early August, confirmed by Ames late August.

[markbarth]

It was tested well before that.....they picked up the head in early August.
The type of test done at MSU takes a little more time than the testing done at the National Vet Lab.

I have a recorded interview which aired on WXYT with the 2 Dr.'s you mentioned stating the same....head was tested early August, confirmed by Ames late August.
did they give the day they said they received it or the day it was tested? and after talking with the msu facility, the lead pathologist informed me that they have the same testing as the nvls . the ich method. so the length of the test should be the same at both facilities.

[solohunter]

pretty sure you are on the right track,
I'll see if I can find the research paper to site, regarding date of infection time/migration of abnormal prions to lymph tissue, just may take a few, as I'm a bit slammed cutting on deer heads........:D

Kristie

health and resistance might also play a factor in it? just an uneducated guess :) and with that thought the one in kent county might have been weak and it just showed up sooner,, so other might have been infected and not had it show up in lymph Gland testing??
( my deer head I turned in to Mt clemens on the 6th was claimed to be arriving at rose lake today the 24th :confused::confused::confused: - keep your mask on its a 452 deer,,)

[kristie]

hope it didn't go to Rose Lake (disease lab aka "we", aren't there anymore, we're south of MSU campus):evil:

PM me your disease tag # or name and I'll look it up in the database to see if it arrived.......

and as to your other comments......resistance is something that is being researched in alot of species regarding TSEs and genetics.....so you might be onto something there......it's ongoing research, so I won't go into details here, I got alot of work to do......

carry on........:D

Kristie

[e. fairbanks]

"In order to prevent the unintentional spread of CWD, THE ONLY PARTS OF A DEER HARVESTED IN THE 9 TOWNSHIP CWD AREA (KENT CO.) ALLOWED OUTSIDE THE AREA WILL BE BONED MEAT, CAPES AND ANTLERS THAT HAVE BEEN CLEANED OF ALL SOFT TISSUE, UNLESS THE ANIMALS, TEST NEGATIVE.
No different from hunter killed deer elk from states and provinces where CWD is present in the wild and the carcasses or parts thereof brought back to Michigan except for "unless the animals test negative"
where are the press releases on this subject, Mary

[solohunter]

hope it didn't go to Rose Lake (disease lab aka "we", aren't there anymore, we're south of MSU campus):evil:

PM me your disease tag # or name and I'll look it up in the database to see if it arrived.......

and as to your other comments......resistance is something that is being researched in alot of species regarding TSEs and genetics.....so you might be onto something there......it's ongoing research, so I won't go into details here, I got alot of work to do......

carry on........:D

Kristie

jean mentioned Jon Curtis, as maybe the driver, sorry i didnt know the shop had moved, I will wait and check the results later in the week,, slowly watching the mud viens freezer burn :(

So in acuallity,, ( I used this on elaine C. ) a deer infected during the rut with TB and fully possessing the virus would show negitive for a lymph gland test in november during the rifle hunt, So the testing would not show positive untill the deer is in stage 2 where it attacks the lymph glands and reladed areas of the body? - in short testing isnt nearly 100% :SHOCKED:

[hunterdude772]

The Natural Resources Commission on Thursday voted
unanimously to approve a permanent ban on deer and elk baiting and
feeding in the Lower Peninsula.

This is part of an article posted on 10-16-08 at the link below.

Any truth to this?

weeklychoice.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&catid=1:latest-news&id=345:dnr-affirms-deer-baiting-ban

Sorry I can't post urls yet but just put the www in front of it.

[solohunter]

I am wondering who they represent? (NRC) and why the DNR has such a high factor of infuence on thier voting and actions???? I do not beleive all the facts have been released or studied to base a permenant ban in place!

[Ninja]

did they give the day they said they received it or the day it was tested? and after talking with the msu facility, the lead pathologist informed me that they have the same testing as the nvls . the ich method. so the length of the test should be the same at both facilities.

Did they do an ELISA test and an IHC test at MSU?

[hunterdude772]

I am wondering who they represent? (NRC) and why the DNR has such a high factor of infuence on thier voting and actions???? I do not beleive all the facts have been released or studied to base a permenant ban in place!


Couldn't agree more! If anyone is interested I will give you the link to the most recent study on baiting that I could find. It was done by the DNR in 1999. If you read this you can clearly see how the majority of hunters use bait and how the small minority has the OPINION that it is unethical to bait. That is not scientific at all. It is only an opinion.

By the way is anyone aware of any group or petition or anything involved in fighting this? I am of the opinion that if the majority does not band together to fight, this will get ugly. I don't think the non-baiter's have stopped to think how much effect, long term, this will have on them also. By reducing the number of hunters and with the bitterness this has caused this state will be easy pickings for the anti-hunters. Then the non-baiter's will feel exactly as we feel now. I hope they don't fantasize that this can not happen. That is what baiter's have said for 10 years. "They can never ban baiting". If we can join together and forget about taking choices away from fellow hunters, using the method that each individual chooses, then maybe we can protect this sport from disappearing all together.

I have prepared a letter to lawmakers. If anyone is interested I will post it. The biggest problem I see with this approach is you can only send it to your Representative in your district. For me that is 3 people out of (I think) 110. Pretty low odds to try and get anything done. I really want to fight this because if it is this way next year I and 22 of 26 hunters I have talked to will not buy licenses and obviously not hunt. In fact where I own my land all the other hunters in that square mile have said they will not hunt and will not allow hunting on thier property. That leaves about 40 acres in one square mile of hunt-able land. I am certain this is not just them. There is so much bitterness this could fuel anti hunting. I shutter to think of the real out come of this considering that (DNR study) 70% of archery and 50% of rifle hunters use bait. This was in 1999 and it said that the use of bait was increasing every year so now those numbers could be far larger.

Sorry for the ramble but in 52 years I have never seen one agency do more harm to the people it represents or the resources it is suppose to protect.

Here is the link. I can't post urls yet so add the www
dnr.state.mi.us/publications/pdfs/huntingwildlifehabitat/Issue_Reviews/99baiting.pdf

[Pinefarm]

That is what baiter's have said for 10 years. "They can never ban baiting".

Who's said that? Baiting being banned was always a matter of when, not if. Just as crossbows in the future and some type of changes like earn a buck and/or OBR.

The days of anyone just going to the counter, buying a buck tag and then hunting bucks the same day will be a thing of the past someday. And my guess is, the likelyhood of some type of earn a buck will be implemented sooner than later. Probably as soon as they figure out the best way to register antlerless deer, without fraud and it not costing too much money.


Sorry for the ramble but in 52 years I have never seen one agency do more harm to the people it represents or the resources it is suppose to protect.

The NRC/MDNR represents the interest of the entire states natural resources, from flowers to oil to bass to insects to deer. They don't make decisions for what voters think they want, to the detriment of the natural resources.

[yoopertoo]

By the way is anyone aware of any group or petition or anything involved in fighting this?
Here is a recent group. I don't know anything about them to be honest other then what is on their site.

http://www.deerfeedinglegalaction.com/index.html

[Munsterlndr]

Couldn't agree more! If anyone is interested I will give you the link to the most recent study on baiting that I could find. It was done by the DNR in 1999.


Here is a more recent MDNR study from 2002, although it's specific to area 452. 68% of those surveyed supported baiting.

http://www.michigandnr.com/publications/pdfs/HuntingWildlifeHabitat/Reports/deer_baiting_NElower.pdf

Note the results that indicated the impact of baiting on hunter success rates.

Success rates among hunters in area 452

Archery Baiters 41%
Non-baiters 13%

Firearms Baiters 50%
Non-baiters 40%

Yeah, baiting doesn't impact hunter success rates! :lol:

[hunterdude772]

Wow!! It is great to see that not everyone wants to gut me like a Pinefarm fresh killed deer.:D

Pinefarm, I would love to debate these issues with you (and get any support I can from others). But being new to this board I first want to make sure this is the right venue to do this in. So give me a shout Mr. Moderator and let the debate begin.:corkysm55

[fairfax1]

Sorry, 772, but not all here will sign a petition to rescind the ban. In fact, I believe not a few (50% of hunters?) will sign a petition to keep it in place. The ban was long overdue. Kudos to the DNR for responding quickly with the implementation of the interim order. .......And then mega kudos to the NRC for making the ban against baiting a permanent ban in the lower peninsula.

Look, we feel your pain. If I owned 10 acres of jackpine sand and got my deer each year by luring it in to a pile of beets.....and now I can't ....well, I'd say my investment in 'up North' has just been de-valued. That's tough.

But life moves on. And so should the baiting practioners. There is a greater good in protecting the entire herd rather than just ensuring that some hunters on a square mile get their deer via bait.

Fight it all you want. Sign the lists you want to sign. Call your Rep and your Senator. That's the American way. But realize that there is more at stake than a pile of beets or "taking choices away from fellow hunters" as you colorfully described it. Know also that those of us on the other side of the bait argument have long written our congressmen and pleaded with the DNR to ban baiting......and will continue to keep the pressure on.

Professional biologists, published veterinarians, the overwhelming opinion of the scientific community, have long been against baiting of deer for recreational viewing or hobby hunting. Finally an event of sufficient magnitude occurred to motivate our government to finally move against the practice that has long been recognized as a ticking time-bomb.

[old school]

Really at this point, it doesn't matter either way. They have made their decision, because they have the power to do so and that's it. The fact that there is no real reason, don't matter. This is what they have decided and that's it. The fight against baiting is over and there will unfortunatly be that many more deer that run out infront of that many more cars, and possibly cause injury to that many more people that we call friends and family. Just a fact, there are numerous car hits now as it stands, and its going to get alot worse.

[fairfax1]

The good and the bad, Oldschool, is that I agree......and disagree..... with your post.

Specifically, yes, you are right....."t doesn't really matter". Baiting will fast becoming a song nobody sings anymore.

But, I will take issue with your the-sky-is-falling prediciton that "many more deer (will) run out infront of that many more cars, and possibly cause injury to that many more people that we call friends and family

Oh, please. Is the baiting constituency claiming their pile of turnips has kept our families safe from predatory deer?

Talk about Chicken-Little.

Look, if, as some claim, this years' bait ban does cause some identifiable reduction in the deer harvest and therefore a few more deer survive into next year than what normally would........well, big deal. It is an issue that can be remedied readily.
MORE deer can rather quickly and efficiently become LESS deer.

Us white-guys-with-guns have a long track record of slaughtering wildlife when given half a chance.....read that as---passenger pigeon, buffalo, wolves, elk, any number of predators and raptors, and on and on and on.

So this hand-wringing over 'too many deer will surely kill old Aunty" is a bunch of boogeyman/Nancy-man hysteria.

It ain't gonna happen. Fuggedaboutit.

[hunterdude772]

fairfax1 never did I imagine that everyone would share my view. That is what America is about. But your comments only prove my point. Because YOU don't believe in baiting YOU want to put pressure to stop all from baiting. That is not what America is suppose to be about.

If your claim is that "not a few (50% of hunters?) will sign a petition to keep it in place" then tell me this. Why in a study done by your experts at the DNR in 1999 said that 71% of archery and 50% of rifle hunters used bait and was increasing each year? That does not sound like the few you speak of.

Will I have to quote your words back to you when hunting is banned by the efforts of the antis that "continue to keep the pressure on" as you say? Will life just move on then?

You know as well as I that CWD has nothing to do with this so please don't use the same insulting spin that your DNR friends use. This started long before CWD. This boils down to YOU don't think it is ethical to use bait as a method. YOU would like to push YOUR values on others instead of YOU hunting the way YOU choose to hunt and letting others hunt how they choose. If you are an educated individual (sounds like you are) then you know that "Professional biologists & published veterinarians" all have their own agendas. For each biologist that says baiting *COULD* spread disease there is another that says there is no evidence of that. I guess we are back to opinions.

Enough about the fictitious reason for the baiting ban. Why do you want to ban baiting? Do you also want to tell people what church they can go to? What school their children can go to? I know this sounds extreme but measure it against what you are doing. The study said 29 percent believed that deer baiting in Michigan should be banned. And Fifty percent of those who were opposed to baiting felt the statement “Baiting is unethical.” was a very important reason for their position. This a quote. So the desire to ban baiting by the minority appears to be about greed. Is that your reason too? Someone else is seeing and shooting YOUR deer because they use bait?

Let's look at the future, (as pinefarm likes to do). What will this look like for you. When enough hunters have dropped out because your values were forced upon them. And very few new hunters are joining the ranks. The DNR starts crying because they don't have enough money (and no mysterious 20 million shows up). Oh no now your license will double or triple or more. That's OK because YOU can afford it. But again even more hunters drop out. So up they go again. Until the numbers of hunters is as insignificant as you say the baiter's are. Then in moves the antis....but that is a whole different story.

And what happens to pinefarms business? Fewer hunters......less goods sold. Oh crap I'm out of business. But at least those darn baiter's are gone. And that is the best case scenario if the DNR doesn't screw up anything else in the mean time.

All I'm saying is why can't we all get along? The antis know that to divide and conquer is the way to do it. We need to support each other and respect that our beliefs and methods may differ but we stand united. If baiting is so popular the antis know to get the majority of those that bait to drop out is the fastest and surest way of dividing us.

BTW if you anti baiter's could please address each thing I've said and dispute it that would be appreciated. I've notice a trend to pick one or two things and leave the most important things not addressed.

[solohunter]

So lets figure in this- anyone one who gives a rats A*& does not buy a license next year, talk about a tea party??? if 75% of the bow hunters take a year off in protest, take two years off,,, No cash income???? let the DNR wake up and listen to the hunters, not the NRC puppets they employ! I for one will not be hunting next year. I am sick of the early seasons, and special hunts screwing it up and making the deer nocturnal for bow hunters, in seven days I saw 1 F)_*(&*(,,, deer in daylight, 3 cameras were marking movements from 10pm to 3am, I am tired of some educated in a classroom Ja(&*A&* DNR Official telling me what the deer will and will not do. and how to hunt!!! I do not have the time to scout and pattern the deer on my property anymore, I would love to have the time to sit and watch, focus on the huge 160 class bucks everyone knows is hiding just out past the bait piles, I do scout with what little time I have, its just not enough when six days of rifle season preceed my bow season,,,,, season on the DNR wallet is about to begin,,,, any other hunters??

[hunterdude772]

You know from all my years of owning a business (that will not be affected one bit by this dumb DNR unlike others....right pinefarm) the one thing I've seen to be very effective is to "Vote With Your Wallet". I believe I said before that 22 of 26 hunters I know will not be hunting next year if things remain the same. They will "Vote With Your Wallet".

With that said please do not give up the fight. The web site earlier in this post seems to be the best thing going now. If you buy into the anti baiting doomsayers propaganda then they have already won the fight. Do not give up. Take all the money you would have spent on bait and spend it to take these phonies to court or partition their resignation or what ever we can do. Believe me we are the majority and we don't have to just roll over and die. I am seeing my attorney to see if they are really protected by the bulletproof shield they think they are.

If the baiting represented between 30 & 50 million dollars, that could buy some serious legal action. Agreed?

In the meantime do what one of the anti's in another post suggested and take up golf. DNR can't mess that up.

[hunterdude772]

Thanks Scott. Unite Unite Unite!!!!!

[6inchtrack]

Here is a recent group. I don't know anything about them to be honest other then what is on their site.

http://www.deerfeedinglegalaction.com/index.html

Thanks for the link.
Hunterdude, I think you are correct when you said that "someone is seeing and shooting your deer because they use bait"
Thats the opinion that I have been seeing, most of the people who approve of this ban have their own land with food plots, (a few dont, the Danial Boones who seem to have enough time to live in the woods)
I feel the pro anti baiting people are motivated mainly by greed.
And when they start whining about the increases of licenses fees, I intend to give some of their sarcasim back to them.

[6inchtrack]

Just where can we find the petition?

[6inchtrack]

I have prepared a letter to lawmakers. If anyone is interested I will post it.
Please post your letter.
Hope that they will let you.
Sometimes things are a little one sided around here.

[e. fairbanks]

This term is bring used to show what caused the present financial crisis, along with the lack of any government oversight or government regulation of financial institutions.
In essence, they were buying and selling "something that was'nt there" and there was no record of the magnitude of the product.
Is the dnr trying to sell us hunters "something that is'nt there" (cwd) with the baiting ban ? The legislature is the body that can overturn regulations made by dnr and nrc. Legislators are elected by the voting public. Proposal g (1996) granted the nrc exclusive authority to regulate the taking of game in this state. 68.7 % of voters were in favor.

[traditional]

So lets figure in this- anyone one who gives a rats A*& does not buy a license next year, talk about a tea party??? if 75% of the bow hunters take a year off in protest, take two years off,,, No cash income???? let the DNR wake up and listen to the hunters, not the NRC puppets they employ! I for one will not be hunting next year.

If you don't like what is going on, the best way to stop what concerns you is to stop supporting it. That is what it will take though (Less Money), plain and simple. CWD is of great concern make no mistake. But, is making a law that affects all Lower Michigan Hunters make sense when the problem came from one deer within a deer farm? No possitives in the wild and Hunters are punnished. One possitive in a pen and Cervid Farming is slowly going back to buisness as usual. This Hobby Hunter will not be buying a license for a while, if ever.

[fairfax1]

Wowsa, 772, let me echo SK..."you will be good to have around".

You pitch hanging curve-balls.

You noted the following:

Because YOU don't believe in baiting YOU want to put pressure to stop all from baiting. That is not what America is suppose to be about.
So, being in support of the NRC's ban on baiting in the Lower Peninsula is un-American? Who woulda thought?

"Will I have to quote your words back to you when hunting is banned by the efforts of the antis that "continue to keep the pressure on" as you say?"
Here we go again, baiting is the salvation of fair-chase hunting. Anti-baiters are the doom of it. Yadda, yadda, yadda.
I think some of the baiters are taking themselves and their practices a tad too seriously.

"You know as well as I that CWD has nothing to do with this so please don't use the same insulting spin that your DNR friends use."
Really? CWD is irrelevant? Unconnected? Not linked? Is what, a figment of imagination?

"This boils down to YOU don't think it is ethical to use bait as a method. YOU would like to push YOUR values on others instead of YOU hunting the way YOU choose to hunt and letting others hunt how they choose."
Well, what I think about the ethics of baiting or not baiting is irrelevant. Particularly so now that the practice is officially and permanently outlawed. I think snagging salmon or nesting bass is unethical...but my view there too, is irrelevant. The practice is illegal. So is baiting.


"............ you know that "Professional biologists & published veterinarians" all have their own agendas. For each biologist that says baiting *COULD* spread disease there is another that says there is no evidence of that. I guess we are back to opinions."
OK, by your rules then.......it is opinion. But, there are far far more professionals who hold the opinion that baiting is a risk enhancer for the spread of disease. Don't kid yourself, or others, that for "each there is an opposite". Nope. The vast majority of professionals believe it unnecessarily and unreasonably puts our wildlife resource at risk. Fortunately, our DNR and our NRC agree with the prevailing scientific opinion.

Why do you want to ban baiting?
Do you also want to tell people what church they can go to?
What school their children can go to?
Well, of course I do, what fun is it just livin' my life if I can't make you improve yours?
No disrespect, 772, but are you really worried that some anonymous poster on an internet chatboard is gonna make your kids' go to Sunday school? ........and that is somehow linked to baiting? You really believe that?

.
"So the desire to ban baiting by the minority appears to be about greed.
Is that your reason too?
Someone else is seeing and shooting YOUR deer because they use bait?"
Ah, well, no.
For me, personally, I'm pretty darn sure greed ain't anywhere on the radar screen. My DMU and my farm are buried under deer. So being fearful someone is gonna shoot one ain't really what keeps me up at night.


When enough hunters have dropped out because your values were forced upon them. And very few new hunters are joining the ranks.................. Until the numbers of hunters is as insignificant as you say the baiter's are. Then in moves the antis....but that is a whole different story.
Hopefully a truer story than what you are making it.
All due respect, but is there a slight hint of paranoia in the above paragraph?

"All I'm saying is why can't we all get along? The antis know that to divide and conquer is the way to do it. We need to support each other and respect that our beliefs and methods may differ but we stand united. If baiting is so popular the antis know to get the majority of those that bait to drop out is the fastest and surest way of dividing us."
All due respect, but this mongering about the "anti-hunters" is nonsense. "Anti's", as you call 'em, are a fake boogeyman. They best serve to boost the circulation of the hookn'bullet media and spur donations to ad hoc 'sportsmen's' organizations. The anti's are mostly urban, mostly East Coast, mostly worried about rabbits & beagles being tortured for 'scientific advancement'. Whether some fat girl with a "Save the Whales" t-shirt objects to you blasting deer off a pile of vegetables ain't really something reality-based hunters worry about.

"BTW if you anti baiter's could please address each thing I've said and dispute it that would be appreciated. I've notice a trend to pick one or two things and leave the most important things not addressed."
I tried 772, I really tried....but you serve an awfully lot over a small plate. So many hanging curve balls....so little time.

[mtw290]

Fairfax, I agree on most points, but I caution you that while "antis" are generally on the east coast, they have had substantial impacts on wildlife management policy. The New Jersey bear hunt cancellation and Massachusetts ban on trapping with conibear and leg-hold traps are the first that come to mind.

As for 772's rant about us "all getting along," save it. You have your values and are trying to sway policy-makers, just as the anti-baiting contingent has. It IS the American way, on both sides, just on different ends of the spectrum. To say the anti-baiters are pushing their ethics on you, is to say that you are pushing your's on them. And, this is a very important point, the wildlife code is rife with ethical judgements. Do you feel that because you cannot fish with dynamite, that someone else's values are being imposed upon you? Likely not, because the policy is better for the resource - just like the baiting ban. In fact, hunting without bait is more defendable to anti-hunting positions, which focus on any perception of the lack of fair-chase, such as baiting. This is not an ethical judgement, just the way things are.

For all you who want to boycott next year's hunting season - good luck. The only result will be an empty freezer. :yikes: It's time to learn how to hunt, boys and girls.

[markbarth]

hunterdude, 6inch, sk,traditional-- WE MUST UNITE!!! On Wed. Oct. 29th from 6:30p.m. to 8:30p.m. there will be a town hall meeting,sponsored by the DNR, at the Grayling High School Auditorium. We must show up in force to voice our concerns. I invite all and any to attend this meeting. I started the deerfeedinglegalaction group and plan to continue in efforts. I invite all of you and all and any of your fellow hunters,friends and neighbors to join in our cause. IT IS TIME FOR PROPOSAL G TO GO!!!!!!!!!

[6inchtrack]

... my farm are buried under deer....

Fairfax
Sorry to hear about your problem.
I offer my services free of charge.
But I could only remove two for you.
I'm sure that others would offer their help also.

[Ninja]

Fairfax
Sorry to hear about your problem.
I offer my services free of charge.
But I could only remove two for you.
I'm sure that others would offer their help also.


Why only 2???

[fairfax1]

6 Inch.....thanx for the offer.

But, between myself, nephews, BIL's, and the guy who does coon trapping on the farm I'm setting the bar at 16 to 18 adult does .......by using their private land antlerless permits and the authorized DMAP's.

We took about 10 adult does last year. No bucks have been shot on the property in '06 and '07 and none will be shot this year until at least 16 does are tagged. That's my version of earn-a-buck.

[yoopertoo]

Well, what I think about the ethics of baiting or not baiting is irrelevant. Particularly so now that the practice is officially and permanently outlawed.

It is relevant. The motivations of all parties are relevant.

It makes no logical sense baiting in the far northen most counties is banned based on a CWD discovery in Kent county. It was a completly arbitray determination. If it can be shown that there is no CWD science behind this geographic choice then it would make sense to reinstate baiting in some counties in the NLP. Unless of course there were other reasons for wanting the ban.

[6inchtrack]

I have prepared a letter to lawmakers. If anyone is interested I will post it. The biggest problem I see with this approach is you can only send it to your Representative in your district. For me that is 3 people out of (I think) 110. Pretty low odds to try and get anything done.

Proposal G is on the ballot as a result of Public Act 377 of 1996 (Senate Bill 1033), which provides that Public Act 377 cannot take effect unless it is approved by a majority of the electors. If a majority of the electors cast "yes" votes on Proposal G, it will amend the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act. It could be amended at any time by a majority vote of the Legislature.

Yes, The legislature could do something.
Tell them!
Dude, post your letter.

[yoopertoo]

As for 772's rant about us "all getting along," save it. You have your values and are trying to sway policy-makers, just as the anti-baiting contingent has. It IS the American way, on both sides, just on different ends of the spectrum. To say the anti-baiters are pushing their ethics on you, is to say that you are pushing your's on them. And, this is a very important point, the wildlife code is rife with ethical judgements. Do you feel that because you cannot fish with dynamite, that someone else's values are being imposed upon you? Likely not, because the policy is better for the resource - just like the baiting ban. In fact, hunting without bait is more defendable to anti-hunting positions, which focus on any perception of the lack of fair-chase, such as baiting. This is not an ethical judgement, just the way things are.

We can all agree game laws are needed, but not all game laws are based on ethical judgments. The illegality of dynamiting fish is justifiable for many reasons that have nothing to do with ethics, but let's take something simpler like slot limits on fish. This is not about ethics. It is clearly good for the reproductive success of some species to have slot limits on certain heavily fished waters. No ethics involved.

The baiting ban as it is today is a completely different story. A 2 gallon quantity distributed in the same fashion as would be found in normal foraging is no different then if I planted a food plot or an apple tree in that same spot. This is not bad for the resource - plain and simple.


For all you who want to boycott next year's hunting season - good luck. The only result will be an empty freezer. It's time to learn how to hunt, boys and girls.

Yes, and we all know that any TRUE deer hunter would never use a tree stand or rut scents or scent free technology. It is obviously unfair and a crutch for poor hunters. :lol:

[markbarth]

Dude, post it. BTW it takes 304,100 valid signatures on a petition to get a ballot proposal. first collect sigs, then it goes to the state board of canvassers. If it is accepted there, then it goes before the senate and house where they have 40 session days to act on it. It would have to pass by majority(i believe it is 56 in the house and 20 in the senate)if passed it would go to the governor, if vetoed goes back to the house and senate where it needs 2/3rd votes to pass . if not, then goes to vote at the next general election. The NRC/DNR needs to be reminded that they represent ALL the people of MICHIGAN and not just the groups that support them.

[hunterdude772]

fairfax1

Hats off to you. I appreciate the attempt to address the issues! I must comment if I may.

So, being in support of the NRC's ban on baiting in the Lower Peninsula is un-American? Who woulda thought?
You can't be serious. You can't really attempt to spin what I said. What it is "America was built on freedoms" Forcing your values on others is not the American way. You not only support the ban.....You and your kind caused the ban. No BS.

"Will I have to quote your words back to you when hunting is banned by the efforts of the antis that "continue to keep the pressure on" as you say?"
Instead of debating this with facts you choose to go off in a rant of crap that never addresses this comment. Is that because you don't believe this could happen and have facts to back that up? Or did I simply stump you?

CWD is irrelevant? Unconnected? Not linked? Is what, a figment of imagination?
Never said that or implied that. Simply put you antis have been trying to force your values for more than 10 years. Long before you knew what a CWD or TB was. Now answer that.

Well, what I think about the ethics of baiting or not baiting is irrelevant. Particularly so now that the practice is officially and permanently outlawed
Wow so typical of children and sheep alike. Ha Ha I have it now and you can't have it. You weren't talking like that when baiting was legal and your kind was whining because "baiter's" didn't deserve to share this world with you. Adult conversation please.

But, there are far far more professionals who hold the opinion that baiting is a risk enhancer
And I'm certain that you have spoke with EVERY professional and have the numbers and documentation to back up that statement......or is that what the DNR told you?

No disrespect, 772, but are you really worried that some anonymous poster on an internet chatboard is gonna make your kids' go to Sunday school? ........and that is somehow linked to baiting? You really believe that?
Instead of the answering you choose to go off in a rant of crap that never addresses the question. Is that because you don't know why? Or did I simply stump you again? Lets try again:
Why do YOU want to ban baiting?

When enough hunters have dropped out because your values were forced upon them. And very few new hunters are joining the ranks.................. Until the numbers of hunters is as insignificant as you say the baiter's are. Then in moves the antis....but that is a whole different story.
Hopefully a truer story than what you are making it.
All due respect, but is there a slight hint of paranoia in the above paragraph?
Instead of debating this with facts you choose to go off in a rant of crap that never addresses this comment. Is that because you don't believe this could happen and have facts to back that up? Or did I simply stump you one more time?

All due respect, but this mongering about the "anti-hunters" is nonsense.
If you don't know the power that these people have then you had better do some homework. They count on that kind of ignorance and will someday rub your face in it.

Lastly I will assume that the following comments you agree with as you said nothing about them. Last chance:

When enough hunters have dropped out because your values were forced upon them. And very few new hunters are joining the ranks. The DNR starts crying because they don't have enough money (and no mysterious 20 million shows up). Oh no now your license will double or triple or more. That's OK because YOU can afford it. But again even more hunters drop out. So up they go again.

And what happens to pinefarms business? Fewer hunters......less goods sold. Oh crap I'm out of business. But at least those darn baiter's are gone. And that is the best case scenario if the DNR doesn't screw up anything else in the mean time.

If you would like further education in what happened in Wisconsin and how their lawmakers overturned the baiting ban go to this website. It may just take the cocky out your comments that it is "done and permanent". hmmmm.
www2.jsonline.com/news/state/cwd/

[hunterdude772]

I will post the letter.

This is not for the faint of heart!

There is some emotion in the letter but I tried to keep it factual.

Oh boy the antis and DNR butt kissers are going to have a hay day with this.

Here comes.

[hunterdude772]

I am finally sitting down to put my disgust of the Michigan DNR in writing. This has been a long time coming. Everyone already knows that the baiting ban has not one thing to do with CWD. Also everyone should know that the movement to ban baiting has been happening since the '90's. What we have is a minority that, like so many, wants to push their values on others. These are the same people that, if it weren't protected by the Constitution, would ban religious practices that differ from theirs.

Baiting has a long history in this state and has never been scientifically proven to be a determent to anyone, including our precious deer herd. In fact some biologists say baiting COULD spread disease while other say baiting has NO effect on the spread of disease. Instead it has allowed hunters the opportunity to view and harvest deer to help with population management, put food on the table, bring revenue to the state along with a host of other benefits. It always amazes me to see the propaganda by DNR and others who oppose baiting. They always want to talk about how "really the harvest rate is no better with baiting verses non-baiting". The thing they fail to talk about with their tunnel vision is: IT IS NOT JUST ABOUT KILLING DEER! I don't think anyone in their right mind would argue that bait allows the hunter to see far more deer. It is about getting away from it all, watching the deer come and go and maybe harvesting one if you choose. So stop the ridiculous spin. I see well over 150 deer per year. I harvest one or two. A little common sense goes a long way.

Let us pretend for one moment that this is really about CWD. Let's look at the facts. Colorado has had CWD in their state for 40 years. Did I say 40 years? And their herd has not been decimated or wiped out. Hmmm, then why would ours? And what about Wisconsin? Their DNR had to be reined in by legislators. As with Michigan, they had a disease worse than CWD. They had CPD, Chronic Panic Disease. Wisconsin's law makers had to step in and attempt to reverse the damage done by these doomsayers. Now 6 years later, although CWD still exists, the deer population is fine. Even in the Hot Zone they have had population stabilization in spite of the fact that they tried to eliminate all deer in that zone. To read about what happened in Wisconsin go to www2.jsonline.com/news/state/cwd/. This is how Mother Nature works. When there is an over population of anything it is normally disease that corrects the problem. Pure and simple, that is the way it works. The DNR can try to play God, but guess what folks, although they think they are, they are not. It would be wonderful if there were no diseases in the wild. In reality there are thousands of diseases and somehow nature manages to take care of things herself, right? In fact all the bad things in the animal kingdom. that I can think of, were done by humans. A little common sense goes a long way.

Then why the panic? As a very wise person once said "Fear makes people small". Think about it, if any leader (in this case the DNR) is able to keep you afraid they will succeed in making you small and in need, thus allowing them to manipulate you any way they choose. Just think about all of the other things in your lifetime that you were told were going to be devastating and disastrous. They never were, right? They were exaggerated to make you small. It is once again the special interest groups, for their own greedy and personal reasons, that want to rob us of our rights. The cycle must be stopped before they take away every right we have. Imagine non-baiting hunters the day when, by not supporting your fellow hunters, you have greatly reduced the number of hunters in the state. Great, more woods and deer to myself right? NO WAY. You will be easy pickings for the special interest anti-hunters, and you too will have someone else’s values forced upon you. How will that make you feel? Don't think it can't happen. A little common sense goes a long way.

Now for the so-called DNR and NRC. In their effort to bow down to the special interest groups they must be blinded to the effects this will have on their little world. The last study, that I could find, done by the DNR, on baiting was in 1999. The report stated that over 70% of the bow hunters and over 50% of the gun hunters used some form of bait. This can be found at dnr.state.mi.us/publications/pdfs/huntingwildlifehabitat/Issue_Reviews/99baiting.pdf. Now if they go against the majority of hunters to please the special interest groups what do you think will happen? I'm thinking a 3rd grader could figure this one out. Your license sales, not the deer herd, will have the potential to be decimated. At a time when they are crying for more money, (oh I forgot about the lost and found 20 million dollars), this kind of decision would not be wise. And in fact in the business world this would be called a dumb move. A little common sense goes a long way.

In closing I can only ask that lawmakers take action. Not only to stop this blatant attempt to steal the rights of the majority while serving the opinions of a minority but to investigate the abuse of power that this agency has been able to wield for years. In 52 years I have never seen one agency do more harm to the people it represents or the resources it is suppose to protect. What about the 20 million dollars that they just mysteriously found after they couldn’t secure the “desperately needed” doubling of license fees? I am very certain that if I used the same accounting method for my income tax filing I would be under criminal investigation. So why are they not under criminal investigation? These people, from the director to the board, need to be forced to step down. They need to resign now! A little common sense goes a long way.

[solohunter]

[quote=mtw290;2364720For all you who want to boycott next year's hunting season - good luck. The only result will be an empty freezer. :yikes: It's time to learn how to hunt, boys and girls.[/quote]

Acually I think I will be eating rather well without hunting, as in,,,
cost of traveling to property 3 times @$ 300
cost of rye and fetilizers @$100
new arrows 1/2 dozen @$45
new camo,,,,, @$175
new broadheads, @$45
scent free soaps, sprays @$ 40
bar tabs while up north before
and during season @$200
Lic. fee,s combo/sm game/PP doe @$60
and I know i missed alot of extras,,,,,
But,,,,
I think I can eat rather well with the approx $960 I will save not hunting next year!!!! and three-four saved vacation days I can cash in at the end of the year?? And I do feel my tally is well on the low side not including tractor gas, trail camera batteries, ect, ect ,ect and I have made four trips up just gettnig the place ready, trails opened up, food plots worked in, two trips up hunting, in seven days saw one deer- killed it, I guess the extra grand in my pocket will buy enough food to offset the lost deer meat. I will take a picture of a pile of cash and send it to Becky H. with no reguards to her and her band of idiots

[6inchtrack]

Dude, post it. BTW it takes 304,100 valid signatures on a petition to get a ballot proposal. first collect sigs, then it goes to the state board of canvassers. If it is accepted there, then it goes before the senate and house where they have 40 session days to act on it. It would have to pass by majority(i believe it is 56 in the house and 20 in the senate)if passed it would go to the governor, if vetoed goes back to the house and senate where it needs 2/3rd votes to pass . if not, then goes to vote at the next general election. The NRC/DNR needs to be reminded that they represent ALL the people of MICHIGAN and not just the groups that support them.

It all starts with the first signature.
But that would be for reversing proposal G. or changing it so that the commission would have to be elected by you and me, and they should be.

But the legislature by a majority vote could amend proposal G so that decisions that the commission make that have such an powerful impact on so much of the states people and economy could be curtailed by the veto process.
(Proposal G is on the ballot as a result of Public Act 377 of 1996 (Senate Bill 1033), which provides that Public Act 377 cannot take effect unless it is approved by a majority of the electors. If a majority of the electors cast "yes" votes on Proposal G, it will amend the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act. It could be amended at any time by a majority vote of the Legislature.)

The legislature passed a resolution asking the commission to modify the ban, and have further discussions. Then commission simply ignored our elected officials, that needs to stop.

Right know, the commission only answers to GOD.

[markbarth]

Well said hunterdude!!!!!!!! Now let me give you 23.5 million more reasons why.
Accordingto the 2003 cwd financial assistance act, the dnr will now receive federal monies.
So it does have something to do with cwd, just not the way they want you to beleive.
This has been a well thought out plan involving the dnr and their special interest groups.
Does anyone not think that mdnr was not in close contact and kept an eye on wdnr's actions, knowing of all the federal monies they were receiving.
The dnr has satisfied their needs, by circumventing the actions of the legislature for not letting them raise license fees, and the wants of their key supporters. The dnr doesn't care now about the license sales, their getting a very nice yearly payment.
As for their supporters -bait banned.
If this had anything to do with cwd than answer these questions. If
this is such a rampaging, spreading disease that will wipe the herd out then why were no other deer infected at the facility were there was so much close contact?
For all you scientist on here,if the prions can live in the ground and be transmitted by this method, then why bury the deer in the ground at the facility? Doesn't seem to be sound scientific management to me!
Why are hay bales, silage piles and other grains on farms immuned? Satisfies farm bureau
food plots? (over glorified bait piles) satisfies qdma
only deer found, poc facility, let's blame them. Satisfies mucc. They've wanted poc facilities banned for years.
Cattlemans assoc.- see farm bureau
mba-we'll support you, as long as you don't let crossbows in. Kind of you scratch my back i'll scratch yours.
And don't let me forget the tribes. They receive 3 million in federal money for joining in on the fun.
So now everyone in their little circle is satisfied
the ones being screwed are the people of this state!
By a bureaucratic committe that has to answer to no one.as long as they have that power they will continue to abuse it. Proof of abuse, commissioner wheatlake has been quoted that they already have a plan in place to stop baiting and feeding in the u.p. In january '09. How? "find" another cwd deer,my bet is that they will find it in the 50 mile buffer zone,i'm guessing wi. So they can split this years federal monies.canada would be better though now that the dollar has risen,wouldn't cost as much.
Where's the governor in all this? Oh, thats right she's too busy sucking up to obama worrying about her next political appointment, all the while the people of this state are suffering from the economic impact of this ban. But she'll have a job,in the meanwhile, from the farmers to the wholesalers to the business owners(motel,restuarant,conveinent store,bar and all other businesses)and the people that lost their jobs who worked in the bait and feed iindustry are facing economic hardships.
Remember,the wildlife of this state belong to the people of this state, not 7 people on a committe and their special interest freinds!
By having cwd, it gave them the oppurtunity they needed to accomplish their goals. They can put the blame on something else for doing what they have wanted to for years. It takes the spotlight off their supporters, puts a little heat on them, but that is why they have spin doctors to deflect the underlying reasons. They have now gotten what they always wanted, pitting hunter(baitor or non-baitor)against one another because of it's ethics.
Remember baiting and feeding was legal in the lp and it was your right to choose to do so. Just as it is your right to grow food plots. Does(or did) it make you less or more of a hunter because of the method you chose?no. It was(or is) your right.
All you bait haters, think of a relative or freind that chose to feed wildlife in their backyard just for the pure pleasure for veiwing . Remember that was their right. They had a choice and if chose to do so that was their right. Remember it's their wildlife also.
As stated by dr. Terry kreeger(state vet.) of the wyo. F&w , who by the way contradicts michigans expert,mike miller,( kreeger is an expert also)
that this is hype and hysteria and is all driven by the research dollar. So for all hunters of this state don't get the wool pulled over your eyes by a bureaucratic committe that should be accountable for it's action.a committee that should be the voice of you & i not a voice of political influence. If the dnr prevails, what's next on the agenda of their supporters? Just ask yourself, if we as citizens stood up to their bullish ways last time would we be pushed around this time!

[Nick Adams]

It all starts with the first signature.
But that would be for reversing proposal G. or changing it so that the commission would have to be elected by you and me, and they should be.

You and me and every non-hunter and every anti-hunter in the state?

-na

[mtw290]

772, you may want to hit that with spell-check, son. It won't pick out the punctuation errors or flawed logic, but at least your spelling will be proper. I'm not sure that I'd start with the "DNR is out to get us" argument, either. In general, your letter will find the garbage bin before anyone of consequence gets through the first paragraph. There is no vast conspiracy against you, 772. Get ahold of yourself. You claim that the DNR is fear-mongering, but your letter is clearly doing the same. Quote: "[The DNR's regulations] want to rob us of our rights...You will be easy pickings for the special interest anti-hunters, and you too will have someone else’s values forced upon you." That is the definition of the "chicken-little" argument. The truth is: hunting is perceived as more tolerable by the non-hunting public when baiting is not involved. It is accepted as "fairer" to the game. That, in essence, makes it more stable as a socially-acceptable activity. As such, I see the baiting ban enhancing the long-term viability of hunting as a past-time.

BTW, your claim of disease being the major controlling device of overpopulation is inaccurate without some serious qualification. At times disease can bring a population back in check, but predation and competition (both intra- and inter-species) for resources are more often the vehicles by which populations are reduced to a more reasonable level for the available resources.

Question of the day: How far does "a little common sense go?"
Answer to be revealed tomorrow.

[hunterdude772]

mtw290
Spin, Spin, Spin

So typical. If you cannot discredit the facts then discredit the writer. Or in this case the writing. Ha Ha.
Move the focus to spelling, punctuation and what ever will take the focus off the facts.

It amuses me that you can primarily pick fear mongering as your topic to dispute. Wow, strong statement. FYI my intention was not to fear monger at all. I am stating what appears to be a likely scenario of events that will take place without exaggerating the facts. DNR should try that huh? Do you think this could never happen? Please provide the basis for your theory. I'm glad you are wiser than all things proven. Like "United we stand, Divided we fall" and "Strength in numbers" and "Divide and conquer". Maybe someday they will coin your phrase "That is the definition of the "chicken-little" argument".

The truth is: hunting is perceived as more tolerable by the non-hunting public when baiting is not involved. It is accepted as "fairer" to the game. That, in essence, makes it more stable as a socially-acceptable activity. As such, I see the baiting ban enhancing the long-term viability of hunting as a past-time.
Who in the heck said this is the truth? The DNR? I am so glad to be talking to an expert on this subject. Is this not simply an opinion again? Speaking from personal experience the non-hunters I know (which is many) either think hunting is stupid or they simply don't care what method someone uses to harvest a deer. It really isn't a priority to them like it is a hunter. Only MY personal experience mind you. What they do seem to care about is the idiots that shoot at anything moving, shoot in any direction with disregard of what is behind, drive around looking for something to shoot and on and on. This is the real black eye. But feel free to spin it to what best fits your situation. At least you have the freedom to choose to do that.

your claim of disease being the major controlling device of overpopulation is inaccurate
Spin again. The statement was simply based on history. I do not have a direct connection to Mother Nature so I cannot ask her why this is. It just seems to happen. I guess that may be the difference between you and I (or the DNR for that matter). I don't claim to have all the answers. I don't have a personal agenda to take from others to benefit myself. I am just trying to use common sense to discern the real reason the majority would have a practice that has a long history taken from them. It is a practice that has had no concrete proof that it ever has done any evil in the many, many years that it has been used. It would appear that banning it gets support from the minority because they have opinion that it is "unethical". It has the support of the DNR because they will profit financially. And this is dead wrong!

The system is flawed. No government agency should go without checks and balance. That needs to change now!

Just imagine for one minute, if you can put your own personal agenda aside, that if the baiter's rallied to make you bait. You shoot too many trophy bucks and there just aren’t enough of them to do that. We know that big bucks will not visit a bait pile, right? So if you had to hunt over a bait pile we could save the bucks for breeding. This is ludicrous so please don't quote me and rip it apart. What I am showing is that the reasons for banning baiting is just as ludicrous.

It may surprise you to know that we also have food plots and 50% of the hunters on our property do not use bait. Although they do believe there is nothing wrong with it and it is just another method to choose from. They also do not support the ban. But then again they don't belong to QDM, could be a link.

Lastly, the letter went through 2 spell checkers. So please provide me a list of misspellings as even computers are not perfect. Grammar and punctuation have never been my strong points so according to you anything I say is invalid for those reasons. Correct? Very small thinking. By the way Word says your grammar stinks too. And there is no hyphen in socially acceptable, past time or fear mongering, but that’s OK. Sorry.

[fairfax1]

Hunterdude 772...........

I must steal again that line I stole earlier .. from poster Scott Kavanaugh...."you are good to have around".

This Bait Ban debate had grown tedious. Then, thankfully, you emerge on the scene and breathe a new kind of life into the argument. Waytogo!

But, having said that I must say your observations in posts #79, #81 and #89above are, well, distinct.

You ask of me........ "Or did I simply stump you....?"

Yes. Indeed, yes. You most assuredly can stump me. And I'm definitely stumped after reading your observations.

Good luck, I'm sure the Anti-Ban constituency is delighted to have you on the team. Sic 'em!

[farmlegend]

Dude, post it. BTW it takes 304,100 valid signatures on a petition to get a ballot proposal.

A ballot proposal on whether deer hunters should be allowed to bait?

Now, THAT would be rich!

Does the expression snowballschanceinhell seem appropriate? It do to me!

Amongst the non-deer hunters that comprise 93% of our population, I'd expect something like 80+% would come down against baiting.

Bring it, please!

[markbarth]

let's see how quick you change your your opinion when food plots are banned next, because one of their experts say they "could" be a form of transmitting cwd. wouldn't take you long to jump on board then would it.
that scenario would sure make you wish you had stood up for rights!

[Bob S]

let's see how quick you change your your opinion when food plots are banned next, because one of their experts say they "could" be a form of transmitting cwd.Neither the DNR nor the NRC have the authority to regulate or ban food plots. That is not my opinion, that is from Rod Clute. It doesn't matter what their experts think about it.

[Munsterlndr]

Neither the DNR nor the NRC have the authority to regulate or ban food plots. That is not my opinion, that is from Rod Clute. It doesn't matter what their experts think about it.

However, if it's demonstrated that food plots can serve as a vector for the transmission of disease due to concentrating deer unnaturally, I'm sure that such a socially conscious organization that places so much emphasis on stewardship, like QDMA, would cease to support a practice that poses a threat to the resource, regardless of whether the DNR has jurisdiction over it or not, right? :SHOCKED:

[mitchk2007]

it never ends

[markbarth]

Neither the DNR nor the NRC have the authority to regulate or ban food plots. That is not my opinion, that is from Rod Clute. It doesn't matter what their experts think about it.


BUT YET THEY INCLUDE THEM AS BEING LEGAL IN THE 2008-2009 DEER AND ELK FEEDING AND BAITING BAN
michigan.gov/documents/dnr/2008-2009_deer_and_elk_feeding_and_baiting_reGS

[swampbuck]

scott and mark ,

You guys should go for it!!!!! Get baiting and food plots(make it hunting within say 300 yds of food plots for enforcement ability) on a ballot proposal. that way there will be a final decision on both. Make it real simple......Should you be able to use bait or hunt within 300 yds of foodplots for deer in michigan? That should settle it. You could get it in time for the 2010 vote.

[hunterdude772]

Hey gang!
I just made my first vote with my wallet and it felt so good!!
I called and canceled my subscription, and got a refund, to Michigan Outdoor News.
When asked why, I told them "I thought they were a news reporting publication and not an extension of DNR propaganda. And that I did not want to support DNR propaganda".
The poor girl sounded depressed like this wasn't the first call she had gotten.
If you get this publication, and have read it, the blatant bias should be obvious.
If you believe the same way, I encourage you to call 1-800-535-5191 and get a refund.

Just a side note:
Here is a headline on the front page.
"Rule changes could affect deer harvest"
Really?
Who would have guessed?
DUH!

[north-bound]

Hey gang!
I just made my first vote with my wallet and it felt so good!!
I called and canceled my subscription, and got a refund, to Michigan Outdoor News.
When asked why, I told them "I thought they were a news reporting publication and not an extension of DNR propaganda. And that I did not want to support DNR propaganda".
The poor girl sounded depressed like this wasn't the first call she had gotten.
If you get this publication, and have read it, the blatant bias should be obvious.
If you believe the same way, I encourage you to call 1-800-535-5191 and get a refund.

Just a side note:
Here is a headline on the front page.
"Rule changes could affect deer harvest"
Really?
Who would have guessed?
DUH!
You are right she has heard it before. Me and about 5 other guys i know called and canceled it.

[Bob S]

With groups and individuals managing to stockpile deer, despite what the dnr wants.
Scott, since 2000 I have killed 15 does. How have your population control efforts been during that time?
They are a small little misguided blemish the majority of hunters are not proud of.The majority of hunters wish they could have the quality of hunting we do. The rest of you just can't seem to hide your jealousy.

[north-bound]

The majority of hunters wish they could have the quality of hunting we do. The rest of you just can't seem to hide your jealousy.[/quote]
We do?? Jealousy??:lol::lol::lol:

[Thor_77]

O K , Lets talk politics , trust me it will fit in. I'm not concerned right now with the baiting public , or the nonproperty owners turning on the food plot Gomer's. Maybe that's part of the plan to get one group hunters attacking another. We should fight another time.

I don't give a rats A** what some biologist has to say about the legal powers of the DNR , that could change overnight with or without Mr. Clutes understanding.
What I do find alarming is the fact that the Legislature is stepping in to some of these issues and are being ignored by an oversight committee ( NRC ). Okay here's where the politics start . If Obama wins , Ms. Granholm will probably get appointed to some office on the federal level. That means Mr. Cherry will be the next governor , while he does have a hunting and gun rights supportive background , you might want to go look it who his friends are , MUCC and individuals like fat Bob Garner. Also Mr Cherry isn't just another pretty face , so his ability to get reelected will come in the question. The point is where does the new governor stand on these issues about DNR mismanagement and the absolute outrageous behavior of the NRC. Does he continue to have nitwits running the asylum in the DNR and on the natural resources commission or does he make changes.

Pardon the pun , but there's enough ammunition indicating that you have a large group of unqualified individuals involved with resource management in the state and their track record is absolutely hideous.

[William H Bonney]

Scott, since 2000 I have killed 15 does. How have your population control efforts been during that time?
The majority of hunters wish they could have the quality of hunting we do. The rest of you just can't seem to hide your jealousy.

Ahhhh, finally... the attitude come's out......:lol:

This is the biggest downfall of the whole organization.... glad to see you're keeping up the tradition,,, Bob.

[Gulbrandsen]

I have been doing a lot of reading on this site and getting everyones veiws on all of this baiting ban. Sad to see hunters against hunters and it seems there is more and more of it all the time. PETA must be thrilled about hunters being divided, after all it makes things a lot more easier to ban our methods if half the hunters agree with them. I am not from Michigan but I hope we in Ontario never have to go through this. We are regulated to death already and everything and any descion made is politically driven. In some cases science isnt a study any more its a personal opinion or hidden agenda. In my opinion and I am no biologist , disease transmission is not the reason for bait being banned . Whitetails are a social animal and they just like being amongst each other, there is no way to prevent them from interacting with each other. They share to many things . I am surprised that QDMA support this ban, if baiting is a thing of the past now, just where is the next target where deer group up and meet and is it a possable risk for disease transmission ? The anti's and PETA will not stop with just the baiting , I am sure they have a long list of other hunting practices they are eventually going after. If they can divide the hunters first that makes there job easier. I am not going to jump on the PETA band wagon and help there cause.

[farmlegend]

Scott, since 2000 I have killed 15 does. How have your population control efforts been during that time?
The majority of hunters wish they could have the quality of hunting we do. The rest of you just can't seem to hide your jealousy.

Bob, you're a great steward, but a piker!;) We've taken over sixty does and exactly ONE buck since 2000 on my farm(wonder why I get such a kick out of guys that accuse QDM'ers of being antler-obsessed?). Yeah, we're really stockpiling deer. Some guys should be embarassed to keepmakingassesof themselves on here.

[swampbuck]

Scott, since 2000 I have killed 15 does. How have your population control efforts been during that time?
The majority of hunters wish they could have the quality of hunting we do. The rest of you just can't seem to hide your jealousy.

How many additional deer were added or protected due to fawn recruitment and protection from your neighbors. Due to habitatat improvement?

since 2000 how many additional deer have lived on your land compared to pre 2000 numbers?

[Munsterlndr]

The anti's and PETA will not stop with just the baiting , I am sure they have a long list of other hunting practices they are eventually going after. If they can divide the hunters first that makes there job easier. I am not going to jump on the PETA band wagon and help there cause.

Bowhunting will be the next target for PETA/Anti's to go after, under the guise of too many wounded/maimed deer, especially with bait being banned. One of the major justifications for bait is that it allows archers to lure deer within range and position them for a clean kill. Bowhunting being a potential target for the anti's is a major reason that full inclusion for crossbows is a good idea, it would both increase the bowhunting ranks providing a larger lobby with more political clout and also deflect claims that bows are not accurate enough to humanly harvest deer. Of course, being from Ontario, you guys are already light years ahead of us on that issue. ;)

[glockman55]

I have been doing a lot of reading on this site and getting everyones veiws on all of this baiting ban. Sad to see hunters against hunters and it seems there is more and more of it all the time. PETA must be thrilled about hunters being divided, after all it makes things a lot more easier to ban our methods if half the hunters agree with them. I am not from Michigan but I hope we in Ontario never have to go through this. We are regulated to death already and everything and any descion made is politically driven. In some cases science isnt a study any more its a personal opinion or hidden agenda. In my opinion and I am no biologist , disease transmission is not the reason for bait being banned . Whitetails are a social animal and they just like being amongst each other, there is no way to prevent them from interacting with each other. They share to many things . I am surprised that QDMA support this ban, if baiting is a thing of the past now, just where is the next target where deer group up and meet and is it a possable risk for disease transmission ? The anti's and PETA will not stop with just the baiting , I am sure they have a long list of other hunting practices they are eventually going after. If they can divide the hunters first that makes there job easier. I am not going to jump on the PETA band wagon and help there cause.

Good Post. While everyone tries to push their way of doing what's right, we do make easy targets for PETA..keep fighting over stupid issues and maybe none of us will hunting in the future.
There's always GOLF.:SHOCKED:

[mitchk2007]

I hardly think you represent the QDM majority and 60 does in 8 yrs LOL, try 30 to 50 per year along with 12-18 3.5 yr plus bucks every year.

[Gulbrandsen]

PETA doesnt like any killing of animals period. They dont care how we are killing them , they dont want us doing it all. Those who think that the way they hunt or the methods they use are not in jeopardy had better give there head a shake. PETA wants to ban those sticky glue traps for mice , do you think there ok with some of our hunting practices. There should be no issues or debates between hunters such as Bait vs. no bait , food plot vs. no food plot, rifle hunters vs bow hunters,etc. In the eyes of PETA we are all looked at in the same catagory. Its ok to compare or discuss different ways of hunting but to join PETA and applaud what once was a legal practice is now illegal? It would be nice for once when a ban of any kind of any hunting practice surfaces that all hunters would oppose it. Let the anti's and PETA know its not going to be easy. They are very clever on how they do things and chip away a little bit at a time. They are outthinking us and winning. Are there people out there that actually think that without baits there will be no more disease?

[moabhunting]

Don't take this as a personal bash

Peta keeps outhinking us and winning. :lol: They don't even need to try with all of the Liberal's and Democrats that we elect.
Nevermind excuse's after excuse's Granholm.....Look which party controls Michigan all throughout this welfare-bailout State.

This lazy handout state is so hard up for money it has a political agenda for everything that can hustle up some $$$$. So tired of hearing about PETA....research which party is in Bed with Peta and has more in common with them. But you are right we are our own worst enemy.
Vote Democrat....it is easier than getting a Job!

[Bob S]

How many additional deer were added or protected due to fawn recruitment and protection from your neighbors. Due to habitatat improvement?My neighbors don't do any habitat improvements. Both of my neighbors practice traditional management. I have State land on the other two sides of my place with no public land antlerless permits. My hunters are shooting more does than any property that borders my place.

since 2000 how many additional deer have lived on your land compared to pre 2000 numbers?I bought my place in 2000. That is why I used that as a beginning number. Also, I have 42 acres, no deer live on my property. They only use my land as part of their range.

Improving the habitat will put does on my land for longer periods of time where I can attempt to remove more of them from the population. Otherwise they would spend more time on the surrounding land where no one will shoot them.

[Bob S]

Bob, you're a great steward, but a piker!;) We've taken over sixty does and exactly ONE buck since 2000 on my farm(wonder why I get such a kick out of guys that accuse QDM'ers of being antler-obsessed?). Yeah, we're really stockpiling deer. Some guys should be embarassed to keepmakingassesof themselves on here.Dan, that is my personal harvest number, not what others have taken on my place. You also get help from DMAP's, I can't get them. Some years I would love to shoot more does but have been out of permits. Last year my antlerless permits were gone on November 16, and I still ended up with more does killed than all 4 hunters on my neighbors place combined.

I agree with you, I do really get a kick out of these guys who think us doe killers are stockpiling deer. There was a time a few years ago on this board where QDMA was called a doe killing organization. I guess that argument no longer fits an agenda, so now we are deer stock pilers.

[hunterdude772]

Bob S
I must assume that as a Certified QDMA Deer Steward, Level I member for MQDM that you represent the doctrine of your organization. Which by your posts must be childish and immature at best. The mentality of your posts would be disgusting to any group whose members are over 4 years old.

Neither the DNR nor the NRC have the authority to regulate or ban food plots.
Where you wiping your brow as you said this? Because you feel exempt from the DNR's mindless games. Don't be so sure.
There no ethical difference between your food plots and someone’s bait pile. See if you can follow me.

Both are deliberately placed by humans for the following purposes: To attract, feed, view and harvest wild deer. The one and only difference is how they start. Yours is placed below the ground and theirs is placed on the ground. Once yours pops out of the ground you are no better or worse that a baiter. Do you understand that or do I need to draw you some pictures?

farmlegend (in his own mind)
Your connection to QDM was not hard to quess. Your know it all, arrogant posts are a joke. You can never present facts that can be documented. Only ignorant, worthless foam from the mouth. You can't even respect a fellow QDM'er. "Bob, you're a great steward, but a piker"! Try a little diplomacy and maybe someone here could take you seriously.

scott kavanaugh
I know these meatheads can really get on your nerves but I'd suggest not even wasting your breath on these clowns. The more they ramble the more they give MQDM (Michigan Quacks Deer Management) a bad name. Our time may be better spent studying the web page: www2.jsonline.com/news/state/cwd/
We don't need to reinvent the wheel. We can learn from what happened in Wisconsin and how they got their baiting back. That will leave these guys chewing on their cud. Just a thought buddy.

[mitchk2007]

It does seem that the same group have an answer for everything but there answers are limited by there own experience.

[mitchk2007]

Its not likely that QDM will be effective on 42 acre next to state land, less deer with no quality. Heavy harvesting of anterless deer does not make more and bigger bucks.

[Tom Morang]

freep.com

October 30, 2008

Deer licenses steady despite ban

This one is a stunner. All those who claimed that the Lower Peninsula baiting ban would produce a big decrease in the sale of deer licenses should get ready to issue a big "never mind."

As of Sunday, year-to-date sales of deer licenses for 2008 compared with 2007 show a minuscule decrease of 0.6% (941,835 in 2007 compared with 936,246 in 2008).

And when you factor in what was happening at this time last year, and the fact that most firearms hunters buy their license in the week before the Nov. 15-30 season, Michigan could be among the few states to reverse a trend of steady decline in deer licenses in recent years and wind up with a modest increase.

Mary Dettloff, a spokeswoman for the Department of Natural Resources, said, "Last year, at lot of people rushed to buy deer licenses early for two reasons. One, they were afraid there was going to be a license increase and they wanted to get in ahead of that.

"Second, there was the big scare that, because of the budget crisis, state government would shut down on Oct. 1, the opening day of the archery season. That got a lot of hunters to buy licenses early to make sure they wouldn't get shut out hunting if the shutdown lasted awhile."

The reason for the predictions of drastic increases in license sales was the baiting and recreational feeding ban that Michigan imposed in August after a single deer at a breeding facility in Kent County was found to be infected with chronic-wasting disease (CWD).

The ban was required under a CWD response plan promulgated in 2003, and it brought angry denunciations from many of hunters who use bait (about 50% of all hunters).

Those hunters also predicted the ban would cause an enormous drop in license sales and a consequent drop in the number of deer killed. But those predictions weren't supported by interviews with shops that sold deer licenses or processors who butcher deer for hunters.

Jack Clark, who processes deer at his facility on King Road near Grayling, said he had seen a slight decrease in the deer brought in this year but added, "I think that's due as much to the economy and the weather" as due to the baiting ban.

"The high gas prices and tight money make it less likely that people are going to drive up here to hunt, and the weather at the beginning of the (archery) season was so warm that a lot of people didn't bother to hunt," Clark said. "But I think it will be pretty good now that it's cooling down some. I'm expecting about the same season as last year."

Like most of the nation, sales of nearly all hunting licenses in Michigan have been declining modestly for some time. The recent history of the annual sales of all deer licenses in Michigan shows 1,760,560 in 2004, 1,623,248 in 2005, 1,591,856 in 2006 and 1,588,826 in 2007.

"By the time the year ends, I expect we'll be right around where we were last year," Dettloff said. "If we're down a little, that's not anything new. We've been tracking every category of deer licenses for some time, and we generally see a 1-2% decrease every year.

"The downward trend has been happening nationally, and Michigan is actually doing better than most other states."

The DNR's license research also showed an unexpectedly high "churn" among hunters in the past decade, without about 40% of the people who call themselves deer hunters buying a license one year and then skipping the next year or two.

Contact ERIC SHARP at 313-222-2511 or esharp@freepress.com.

[6inchtrack]

Well for us, we allways only bought the combo tags.
This year there was a anterless lottery and then over the counter tags.
So each of us have 4 tags. Thats double that we normally have.
And the extra tags for the hot zone.
Yea, I guess that their numbers should still probably look good.
Our processer shut down until firearm season, He told me if I called that he would cut one up for me.

[farmlegend]

farmlegend (in his own mind)
Your connection to QDM was not hard to quess. Your know it all, arrogant posts are a joke. You can never present facts that can be documented. Only ignorant, worthless foam from the mouth. You can't even respect a fellow QDM'er. Try a little diplomacy and maybe someone here could take you seriously.


:lol::lol::lol:
Okay for you, Mr. 12postsemptyprofile! So much anger!

What exactly was your previous username, anyway? I gots a couple guesses. :lol:

[traditional]

You must just like watching them eat your neighbors crops



:lol: :lol: Farm A verses Farm B :lol:

Sorry, an old Joke. Carry on.

[Munsterlndr]

It would certainly be refreshing if the DNR PR bureau spent more time issuing press releases about what is actually going on with the CWD investigations instead of trying to put out spin to deflect criticism of the baiting ban. :rolleyes:

The baiting ban was not put in place until just before the archery season started, most archers had already purchased their tags. We'll see if there is a drop in firearms licenses sold, as many of them are a last minute purchase. More importantly, we'll see whether the harvest, especially the archery harvest, is down significantly. From reading the posts on MS it sure seems like guys have harvested fewer deer than years past and there are a number of reports of processors being slower than normal. Anecdotal, true but no more anecdotal than the processor interviewed for this article who admitted that he had seen a decrease but somehow knows that it's not due to the ban but due to weather and the economy. :lol:

[Hamilton Reef]

Don't take this as a personal bash. Peta keeps outhinking us and winning. :lol: That's right moab. Your REPUBLICAN Senator Gerry Van Woerkom voted to support PETA with his Anti-dove hunting campaign in the last election while he supported destroying the DNR funding for the COs to catch his violator buddies. VanWoerkom then used his AG Chair position to support the spread of CWD on behalf of his cervid farm buddies and he supports the spread of CWD by supporting unrestricted farm bait sales. On the other hand the Granholm administration supports protecting the state deer herd.

[moabhunting]

:coolgleam

[fairfax1]

Mods & Admin-guys: Please do not shut down this thread.

This has been great fun.

I absolutely luv some of the, ah, intensity.....by some of the posters. And so far the worst name calling has been really really polite ("Mr.Empty Profile", "meathead")....... We're tough guys and we can take more of a lickin' than that.
Hell, my 93-year old mother used stronger language when swattin' flies. ("Gotcha you lil' prick!)

Fx1



(ps.....I realize I'm not the brightest candle on the cake, but.....am I detecting a little hint of bias about Qualaity Deer in poster Scott's observations? I'm probably paranoid but I thought I detected some sort of lean in his opinions.

[Bob S]

Its not likely that QDM will be effective on 42 acre next to state land, less deer with no quality. Heavy harvesting of anterless deer does not make more and bigger bucks.

You're entitled to your opinion, even if you are wrong.

http://www.hunt101.com/data/504/158092006_11_point_pic_3.JPG

[old school]

The good and the bad, Oldschool, is that I agree......and disagree..... with your post.

Specifically, yes, you are right....."t doesn't really matter". Baiting will fast becoming a song nobody sings anymore.

But, I will take issue with your the-sky-is-falling prediciton that "many more deer (will) run out infront of that many more cars, and possibly cause injury to that many more people that we call friends and family

Oh, please. Is the baiting constituency claiming their pile of turnips has kept our families safe from predatory deer?

Talk about Chicken-Little.

Look, if, as some claim, this years' bait ban does cause some identifiable reduction in the deer harvest and therefore a few more deer survive into next year than what normally would........well, big deal. It is an issue that can be remedied readily.
MORE deer can rather quickly and efficiently become LESS deer.

Us white-guys-with-guns have a long track record of slaughtering wildlife when given half a chance.....read that as---passenger pigeon, buffalo, wolves, elk, any number of predators and raptors, and on and on and on.

So this hand-wringing over 'too many deer will surely kill old Aunty" is a bunch of boogeyman/Nancy-man hysteria.

It ain't gonna happen. Fuggedaboutit.

Your going to go on a rant to me about chicken little and nancy this.... How about chicken little and CWD. Why it isn't to alot, becuase it is a fact. There is CWD in places, not our deer herd as of now, and it is a fact that a very high number of deer are taken over bait, look at the stats. Percentages have been posted all over this site, and Im just making a point, that more deer with no bait, will infact lead to more car accidents! In relation to that, yes there is a very good chance that more people will be injured by these accidents. So as most would say forget about it, its a true statement. No different to emphasize the increase in car accidents than to do the same with CWD.

[mitchk2007]

Thats what I'.m talking about. I just finished my left sock and starting on my right. Good deer. Is that your once in a life time or every year. We have been on track with qdm before there was qdm on 4000 acres and we only see a few like that every year. If that deer is the result of your management of 42 acres we could sure use a guy like you.

[mitchk2007]

Where is your pic farmlegand

[Munsterlndr]

So Fairfax, are you saying that there is no correlation between deer populations and numbers of car/deer accidents and fatalities? :confused:

[fairfax1]

No, I'm not.

[Munsterlndr]

So then why do you consider it hyperbolic to suggest that a potential population increase caused by the baiting ban could result in an increase in car/deer accidents? It seems more like logic than hyperbole to me.

[traditional]

hunterdude, 6inch, sk,traditional-- WE MUST UNITE!!! On Wed. Oct. 29th from 6:30p.m. to 8:30p.m. there will be a town hall meeting,sponsored by the DNR, at the Grayling High School Auditorium. We must show up in force to voice our concerns. I invite all and any to attend this meeting. I started the deerfeedinglegalaction group and plan to continue in efforts. I invite all of you and all and any of your fellow hunters,friends and neighbors to join in our cause. IT IS TIME FOR PROPOSAL G TO GO!!!!!!!!!

Just wonder if anyone went to this meeting? Any feedback?

[north-bound]

Just wonder if anyone went to this meeting? Any feedback?
I am wondering the same thing. I would be willing to bet though it was no different than any other meeting we hear about. The minute you say something to contradict them (DNR/NRC) they will ignore and spin it.

[ahoude23]

I haven't checked this thread lately, but it seems this discussion my be getting off base a little. It's supposed to be about the frequency and quality of updates on CWD by the DNR.

[Munsterlndr]

I haven't checked this thread lately, but it seems this discussion my be getting off base a little. It's supposed to be about the frequency and quality of updates on CWD by the DNR.

Nature abhors a vacuum and it's been a long time since any updates were posted. The last several questions that were posed to the DNR in this thread have gone unresponded to.

[solohunter]

kinda sums it up, we are devided and tooooooooo opinionated,,

[solohunter]

:16suspect ( avitar will not play :( )

[Nick Adams]

Then I remembered what jokes the Deer managment meetings were.

The disconnects at the deer management meetings are a result of the DNR and (most) deer hunters having entirely different objectives when it comes to deer.

The Wildlife Management Division is tasked with managing deer numbers on a wide scale, having healthy wildlife populations, limiting damage (agricultural, vehicular) casued by those populations and providing a recreational opportunity to residents of the state.

The typical deer hunter just wants better deer hunting in his spot and wants to know what the DNR is going to do to make that happen.

The WMD can't do much about the deer hunting in your particular spot. They don't try. Not part of their job. Many hunters interpret this (mistakenly) as incompetence, corruption, etc. What it really is a focus on managing wildlife rather than a focus on managing individual hunting experiences.

This is one of the reasons I think they take a shine to the QDMrs. They see QDM as hunters begining to take responsibility for their own hunting experiences rather than bitching about the DNR not doing it for them.

I think this disconnect on objectives also goes a long way toward explaining the DNR's attitude and respone to CWD. CWD in the herd probably won't have a huge effect on deer hunting. That's all most hunters really care about: "Why the big over-reaction? We will still be able to hunt." From the perspective of the WMD, however, who are directly responsible for healthy deer, a herd containing CWD is a big deal and a huge professional black eye. This is why I think they will do everything in their power to prevent it from occuring and from spreading, regardless of the effect of those measures on deer hunting. A healthy deer heard is unequivocably their responsibility. Deer hunting experiences are only indirectly their responsibility and then only on a macro rather than a micro level.

-na

[hunterdude772]

Hey Nick

In reference to your comment. "regardless of the effect of those measures on deer hunting"

Who do you think pays for all of this so called management?
Who do you think gets out and executes this so called management?

That would be the hunters.

This is part of an article from 2002 in Wisconsin:
Sales of deer hunting licenses down by a third

The Department of Natural Resources is reporting a sharp drop in deer hunting licenses sold so far this year - the latest example of how chronic wasting disease has cast uncertainty over this year's deer hunt.

Sales of bow hunting licenses are down nearly 34% from the number sold at the same point last year.

Resident gun-deer license sales have plummeted 32%, from 109,941 to 74,515, and non-resident gun-deer licenses are down 28%, from 8,368 to 6,050, compared with the same point last year.

Do you think it will be any different in Michigan next year?

Do the math, this could be an easy 10 million dollars. Who is going to pay for that?

I don't doubt that you are right. I'm sure they want to cover their political hind-ends. But what a black eye it will be when they have to go to lawmakers and ask for huge license increase because of their actions. Especially when lawmakers have already asked them to lift the ban except in the infected county.

[farmlegend]

But what a black eye it will be when they have to go to lawmakers and ask for huge license increase because of their actions. Especially when lawmakers have already asked them to lift the ban except in the infected county.

Black eye in whose eyes? Don't know what the numbers are in your state, but here in Michigan, 93% of the population does not hunt deer. Right now, Michigan has the least expensive deer licenses in the nation (fifteen bucks), and is, by any objective measure, past due for a substantial increase. Were our deer licenses to have kept pace with inflation since 1972, they'd be priced at a bit over $39 today.

What we have is a Department of Natural Resources. Not a Department of Deer Hunter Satisfaction.

Nick summed it up nicely.

[Ninja]

Black eye in whose eyes? Don't know what the numbers are in your state, but here in Michigan, 93% of the population does not hunt deer. Right now, Michigan has the least expensive deer licenses in the nation (fifteen bucks), and is, by any objective measure, past due for a substantial increase. Were our deer licenses to have kept pace with inflation since 1972, they'd be priced at a bit over $39 today.

What we have is a Department of Natural Resources. Not a Department of Deer Hunter Satisfaction.

Nick summed it up nicely.

Since your response refers to the poster concerning the "lawmakers", take out all the citizenry who are unable to vote and I think the percentage of non-hunters will be much lower.

[Beavervet]

The disconnects at the deer management meetings are a result of the DNR and (most) deer hunters having entirely different objectives when it comes to deer.


I think this disconnect on objectives also goes a long way toward explaining the DNR's attitude and respone to CWD. CWD in the herd probably won't have a huge effect on deer hunting. From the perspective of the WMD, however, who are directly responsible for healthy deer, a herd containing CWD is a big deal and a huge professional black eye. A healthy deer heard is unequivocably their responsibility. Deer hunting experiences are only indirectly their responsibility and then only on a macro rather than a micro level.

-na

Funny that you mention macro vs. micro. If you calculate the amount of deer fed at bait piles it equates to 0.2% of the social interactions of deer. Compare that to the 30-40 fold eaten by deer from farmers crops. And managing a disease in the wild requires looking at all of the parameters, and overpopulation will often lead to disease, so in the DNR's mad dash to stop one deer from spreading a disease that has never wiped out any population in the wild they antagonized there #1 weapon to control the population the hunters of the state of Michigan. Argue pro's and con's of baiting all you want, purist and non-purist, whatever, if you look at the Michigan Outdoor News poll, 48% of hunters say they will hunt less or not at all as a result of the ban.

[fairfax1]

Well, Nick Adams, the clarity and plain common sense of your postings continues to impress. I'd ask permission to put ALL of post #147 into my signature line....but it would take up too much space.

I look for your posts.


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

The Curmudgeon-trainee inquired of my thoughts on the number of deer & car crashes.

My posting that dismissed an alleged connection to the bait-ban being the cause of more people..specifically, friends & family..... to die or be injured in deer/car crashes I'll let stand. I maintain it was, in my opinion, fear-mongering and Chicken-Littlism.

Adding only that if any poster can direct us to a vetted study accepted by a substantial segement of the scientific community demonstrating that baiting has kept deer crashes down; and or, that eliminating baiting will cause more crashes ......... Well, I'll read it and consider it. My mind is open.

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

Then, one has to smile over the poster who vehemently & frequently castigates the DNR and the QDMA......but dismisses an opportunity to hear...and participate....in a discussion between the DNR AND varied constitutencies involved with Michigan's deer issues....specifically the Ban that he has so stridently criticized. ................ You gotta luv the internet chatboards, it allows one to pontificate with minimal effort and investment in homework, preparation, or dedicated attempt to be comprehensively informed.

[fairfax1]

BV..........referencing your above quote: "if you look at the Michigan Outdoor News poll, 48% of hunters say they will hunt less or not at all as a result of the ban.

Time will tell. As will the annual survey published near July. Let's see. I'll bet you a Stroh's that "48%" is a grossly misleading statistic. A 'survey' of opinions is one thing........actual action is quite another.

Betcha

[Munsterlndr]

FF-

I think your being intentionally obtuse on this one. You admitted that there is probably a correlation between deer populations and the number of car/deer crashes.

There have been a number of surveys/studies taken by wildlife management departments and the majority of them indicate that baiting bans decrease hunter success rates and hunter participation.

A decrease in hunter success rates / participation is likely to result in an increase in deer populations.

Increased deer populations are likely to result in an increase in the number of car/deer accidents.

Help me out here, where is the flaw in that chain of logic? Do you really need a vetted, peer reviewed study to confirm that?

If so, then please provide the vetted, peer reviewed study that shows that baiting directly contributes to the spread of CWD. Trust me, it does not exist, so don't waste your time. The basis for banning bait is predicated on the same sort of logical sequence, baiting congregates deer unnaturally, concentrations of deer potentially result in fecal contamination of the soil, CWD may be spread through deer eating and contacting contaminated soil, ergo baiting might increase the potential for the spread of CWD. Nothing verified, just a logical progression of independent facts that lead to a conclusion.

It seems kind of arbitrary that your comfortable with the DNR's use of this type of logic in the case of CWD but demand some sort of higher standard of proof when assessing the potential impact that the baiting ban may have on increasing car/deer accidents. Btw, no record exists of any humans dieing as the result of CWD, around 11 people a year in Michigan die due to hitting deer in a motor vehicle, so which poses a more realistic threat to human public safety? ;)

[markbarth]

I went to the townhall meeting in grayling. You had to submit questions to a moderator than she sorted out the questions to ask the panel. A lot of questions went unanswered.
We can at least put to rest the car/deer crash debate.
Question- do you think that without baiting, there will be less hunters,meaning less deer being harvested and an increase in the deer population and that will lead to more car /deer accidents?
Answer- (dr. Dan o'brien) there will be more car/deer accidents because deer with cwd are more susceptible to getting hit.

Crowd laughs.

It's answers like these that hunters should be proud that that the dnr uses sound scientific management

[Hamilton Reef]

Question- do you think that without baiting, there will be less hunters,meaning less deer being harvested and an increase in the deer population and that will lead to more car /deer accidents?
Answer- (dr. Dan o'brien) there will be more car/deer accidents because deer with cwd are more susceptible to getting hit.
It's answers like these that hunters should be proud that that the dnr uses sound scientific management
The answer given was an absolute correct true statement. Mortally sick deer with CWD confused and staggering in the road are not as agile to avoid vehicle traffic. The crowd knew that answer was so obvious is why they were laughing.

[Ninja]

The answer given was an absolute correct true statement. Mortally sick deer with CWD confused and staggering in the road are not as agile to avoid vehicle traffic. The crowd knew that answer was so obvious is why they were laughing.

It may be a correct statement, (even without any "studies"), however, in no way did it resemble any type of answer to the question(s) that were asked.

[William H Bonney]

FF-

I think your being intentionally obtuse on this one. You admitted that there is probably a correlation between deer populations and the number of car/deer crashes.

There have been a number of surveys/studies taken by wildlife management departments and the majority of them indicate that baiting bans decrease hunter success rates and hunter participation.

A decrease in hunter success rates / participation is likely to result in an increase in deer populations.

Increased deer populations are likely to result in an increase in the number of car/deer accidents.

Help me out here, where is the flaw in that chain of logic? Do you really need a vetted, peer reviewed study to confirm that?

If so, then please provide the vetted, peer reviewed study that shows that baiting directly contributes to the spread of CWD. Trust me, it does not exist, so don't waste your time. The basis for banning bait is predicated on the same sort of logical sequence, baiting congregates deer unnaturally, concentrations of deer potentially result in fecal contamination of the soil, CWD may be spread through deer eating and contacting contaminated soil, ergo baiting might increase the potential for the spread of CWD. Nothing verified, just a logical progression of independent facts that lead to a conclusion.
It seems kind of arbitrary that your comfortable with the DNR's use of this type of logic in the case of CWD but demand some sort of higher standard of proof when assessing the potential impact that the baiting ban may have on increasing car/deer accidents. Btw, no record exists of any humans dieing as the result of CWD, around 11 people a year in Michigan die due to hitting deer in a motor vehicle, so which poses a more realistic threat to human public safety? ;)

Please feel free to read and re-read this post,, paying special attention to the bold/italic statement. Think about it for a minute or two,,, this statement is true for just about everything,, not just deer car crashes.

[markbarth]

The answer given was an absolute correct true statement. Mortally sick deer with CWD confused and staggering in the road are not as agile to avoid vehicle traffic. The crowd knew that answer was so obvious is why they were laughing.
so 1 deer in a penned facility,not in the wild, qualifies the scientific basis that there will be "MORE" car/deer crashes?

[hunterdude772]

BV..........referencing your above quote: "if you look at the Michigan Outdoor News poll, 48% of hunters say they will hunt less or not at all as a result of the ban.

Time will tell. As will the annual survey published near July. Let's see. I'll bet you a Stroh's that "48%" is a grossly misleading statistic. A 'survey' of opinions is one thing........actual action is quite another.

Betcha

fairfax1

Let me tell you what I've seen so far this year. This is not an opinion.

1. Hunting party to the east. 15+ hunters in the party:
Two 3 days hunts consisting of 4 hunters.
This group has many retired gentleman in it. They were there in numbers for 80% of Oct. in the past.

2. Hunting party to the east across the road. 7 hunters in the party:
One 5 day hunt consisting of 2 hunters. One 2 day hunt consisting of 2 hunters.

3. Hunting party across the road. 3 hunters in the party:
Have not even hunted.

4 Our group. 87% less hours in the stand compared to previous years. Two hunters haven't even hunted and will not for archery.

5. My drive to the property. Past years always seen 8 to 12 cars parked on or next to state land.
This year the most was 3. By far most of the time it is 0 to 1.
(Did see one CO and he looked very lonely and bored.)

I'm sure my observations are not unique. And these are not opinions.

Here is a potential opinion (or simply logic):
This isn't about people like me that are PO'd about the senselessness of these actions by the DNR. This is about people not enjoying the quality of their hunts and just dropping out. If they don't see deer and don't have harvest opportunities then they don't buy licenses in the future.

Betcha

[markbarth]

Ham, were you at the meeting? Maybe if you were, you could comment on the crowds reaction. It was the proverbial "LAUGHING AT THEM NOT WITH THEM".
The room was filled with hunters who were not overly pleased with the DNR's sit there and shut up and listen to our propaganda of sound scientific theories. All responses were
filled with maybe's,could,might, and ifs.

[markbarth]

Dude, right on track again!

Hunters in our area have almost been non-existent. Met alot of hunters at the dnr meeting on wed. and they were saying the same thing you just pointed out. they might have gone out once or twice and they might not go back out.

FACT- prevalence rate for cwd is positive cases divided by the number tested.( i.e. michigans rate) 1 divided by 1500(that number comes from dan o'brien) = .0006%

THEORY- prevalence rate for CHD (cancelled hunting disease) 3 divided by 10=30%

[hunterdude772]

Yeah for instance I would have been out hunting instead of typing in this forum.:lol:

I guess they will have to feel the pain before they smarten up.

But remember these are the people doing the math that didn't know they had an extra 20 million (Yeah right) until after their request for a large license hike was denied.:confused:

Hopefully lawmakers come through in Michigan the way they did in Wisconsin.

Right now I'm researching my 2009 hunt out of state. Looks like some good options. Now that will be a true trophy hunt.:D

[hunterdude772]

Black eye in whose eyes? Don't know what the numbers are in your state, but here in Michigan, 93% of the population does not hunt deer. Right now, Michigan has the least expensive deer licenses in the nation (fifteen bucks), and is, by any objective measure, past due for a substantial increase. Were our deer licenses to have kept pace with inflation since 1972, they'd be priced at a bit over $39 today.

What we have is a Department of Natural Resources. Not a Department of Deer Hunter Satisfaction.

Nick summed it up nicely.

farmlegend

I'm not talking about inflation or if Michigan licenses are good value. I've heard all this spin before.

Fact is, if there ends up to be 30 to 40 percent fewer hunters because of this senseless action then the finger points right in the eye of the DNR. Thus resulting in a big shiner.

Just a side note with no disrespect meant. If you are concerned about non-hunting public opinion then I sure would tone down your bragging about how many does you've slaughtered. Do you think that Joe Public Non-hunter would be more offended by knowing that people actually use food to attract deer for viewing and harvest OR that you killed 60 Bambi's mommas.:confused:

Get in touch with reality.

[yoopertoo]

This is one of the reasons I think they take a shine to the QDMrs. They see QDM as hunters begining to take responsibility for their own hunting experiences rather than bitching about the DNR not doing it for them.

I suspect this "shine" has more to do with the fact that QDMrs are for the most part a private land affair and regulating the growing of food plots would be an unimaginable mine field.


From the perspective of the WMD, however, who are directly responsible for healthy deer, a herd containing CWD is a big deal and a huge professional black eye.
You are saying that this is nothing more then a pride thing, ah ... if that is true it is scary and disappointing all rolled into one.

Doesn't seem the western states are as "prideful" I guess. :lol:

[yoopertoo]

Question- do you think that without baiting, there will be less hunters,meaning less deer being harvested and an increase in the deer population and that will lead to more car /deer accidents?
Answer- (dr. Dan o'brien) there will be more car/deer accidents because deer with cwd are more susceptible to getting hit.

This answer smacks of arrogance if you ask me. As stated, it evaded the question.

[yoopertoo]

The answer given was an absolute correct true statement. Mortally sick deer with CWD confused and staggering in the road are not as agile to avoid vehicle traffic. The crowd knew that answer was so obvious is why they were laughing.
Maybe "mortally sick deer with CWD confused and staggering " don't travel as much and don't end up on roads as often, or maybe they do not make those crazy dashes like healthy deer and are more easily avoided by drivers. Who knows. The point is that was not the question..

[hunterdude772]

Maybe "mortally sick deer with CWD confused and staggering " don't travel as much and don't end up on roads as often, or maybe they do not make those crazy dashes like healthy deer and are more easily avoided by drivers. Who knows. The point is that was not the question..

The other point is if there were any sick deer!:tdo12:

[solohunter]

This answer smacks of arrogance if you ask me. As stated, it evaded the question.

maybe the good doc knows of a link between CWD and auto,s????? if not then the DOC has shown the link between his A(* and his mouth, and as usual no real grasp on reaility, but rather book learning,,,,,

[Bob S]

We have bob who has 42 acres, bordered on two sides by neighbors and two sides by state land. Says himself "NO DEER LIVE ON MY PROPERTY"
Plants food plots to enhance his propertyPretty presumptuous of you Scott. Where have I ever stated I have food plots on my property? My last food plot was in 2003 when I was given a bag of Buck Forage Oat seeds by Dan Timmons. I guess dealing in facts doesn't fit your agenda of criticizing those who are having more success than you are.

By the way, how many does have you shot since 2000? Or are you one of those guys stockpiling deer?

[Bob S]

and off his neighbors that is traditional and doesn't shoot everything thats brown and doesn't have horns.

Now QDMA calls this managing, my people call this being a glutton, legal poaching being fosterd by ignorence.My neighbors to the south shot 3 bucks last year on their 40 acres, along with a doe and a buck fawn. Obviously I am not drawing all of the deer from their property as you claim. Shooting 3 bucks off of 40 acres and somehow I am the one being a glutton, hmmm. Maybe you should learn all of the facts before you accuse someone else of ignorance.

[6inchtrack]

Does anybody know what department of the US government is responsible for the funding where our DNR is supposed to receive the monies because of our one and only famous CWD deer?

I would like to make the suggestion to this department that federal scientist make a core sample of the deer burial site for testing by federal or foreign (maybe French) scientist before releasing any money.

I still have a doubt that this deer had CWD.
I'm not going to argue that the head that MSU received had this disease, but I would like to see the body and soil tested.

[hunterdude772]

Does anybody know what department of the US government is responsible for the funding where our DNR is supposed to receive the monies because of our one and only famous CWD deer?

I would like to make the suggestion to this department that federal scientist make a core sample of the deer burial site for testing by federal or foreign (maybe French) scientist before releasing any money.

I still have a doubt that this deer had CWD.
I'm not going to argue that the head that MSU received had this disease, but I would like to see the body and soil tested.

A BILL
To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to make grants to State and tribal governments to assist State and tribal efforts to manage and control the spread of chronic wasting disease in deer and elk herds, and for other purposes.

Does Michigan qualify?


SEC. 3. STATE CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE MANAGEMENT CAPACITY BUILDING GRANTS.

(a) GRANTS AUTHORIZED- The Secretary of the Interior shall make grants to State wildlife management agencies to assist States in developing and implementing long term management strategies to address chronic wasting disease in wild cervids.
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There are authorized to be appropriated $7,500,000 to carry out this section.



SEC. 4. GRANTS FOR STATES WITH CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE OUTBREAKS.

(a) GRANTS AUTHORIZED- The Secretary of the Interior shall make grants to State wildlife management agencies to assist States in responding to chronic wasting disease outbreaks in wild cervids.
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There are authorized to be appropriated $10,000,000 to carry out this section.

See the whole thing at:
http://www.cwd-info.org/pdf/HR2636%20-%20Chronic%20Wasting%20Disease%20Financial%20Assis tance%20Act%20of%202003.pdf

Everything says WILD CERVIDS.

Wow I see why the DNR had a rapid response plan. They have to already be getting part of this hand-out.


I just don't get this:
$7,500,000 split among every state with or bordering a CWD state, that has a plan, can not be a lot of money????
And $10,000,000 split among states that have CWD in wild deer????

If the DNR would cause 50 million dollars of damage to the economy, farmers and sellers just to get that small piece, that is criminal.

[6inchtrack]

I'm real interested to see what happens after election day.
Who has been quite because they were running for office?
I have a hunch that legislation will be written so our law makers will be able to react when decisions are made that so intensely effects Michigan’s economy and so many people.
Not just ignored.

[north-bound]

I went to the townhall meeting in grayling. You had to submit questions to a moderator than she sorted out the questions to ask the panel. A lot of questions went unanswered.
We can at least put to rest the car/deer crash debate.
Question- do you think that without baiting, there will be less hunters,meaning less deer being harvested and an increase in the deer population and that will lead to more car /deer accidents?
Answer- (dr. Dan o'brien) there will be more car/deer accidents because deer with cwd are more susceptible to getting hit.

Crowd laughs.

It's answers like these that hunters should be proud that that the dnr uses sound scientific management
Why doesn't any of this suprise me?? Is there a list of where and when these meetings are happening?

[swoosh]

So what is it exactly, do you think your accomplishing? neighbors # pretty good to me. They didn't shoot 5 does, which would be like taking 15 deer out of the woods. Then say, we need to lace up our bootstraps and make habitat improvements so we can kill more does next year. Hee Hee.


Dude do you drive a car from the 50' also:lol:

BTW I love how when a law goes against the "norm" here in MI how it becomes consiprcy. I think it happen way to fast IMO, but after talking to local DNR biologist I see their point.

As for MI hunters who care, well they are far and few between. It is what it is, most in MI care about killing and seeing deer. Just look how we have reacted to doe permits, TB and what the DNR has suggested. Everything is a conspircy to stop hunters in MI from killing deer. It's the Insurance company's, it's QDM, it's aliens, LOL.

Here is my suggestion, just hunt and have fun.

[Bob S]

It's just habitat improvements, that allows you to deplete the surrounding area of deer.

neighbors # pretty good to me.So which is it Scott? How can my neighbor's numbers look so good if I am depleting the surrounding area of deer?

[MaryDettloff]

As of Oct. 31, the Diagnostic Center for Population and Animal Health has tested 2,396 wild deer statewide for chronic wasting disease. Of those, 2,204 have tested negative for CWD. We are awaiting results on 192.

As you may understand, these numbers change daily. We are going to start posting them weekly and by county on our Web site.

Again, if you have questions, feel free to email me at dettloffm1@michigan.gov.

Mary Dettloff
Public Information Officer
Department of Natural Resources

[swoosh]

As of Oct. 31, the Diagnostic Center for Population and Animal Health has tested 2,396 wild deer statewide for chronic wasting disease. Of those, 2,204 have tested negative for CWD. We are awaiting results on 192.

As you may understand, these numbers change daily. We are going to start posting them weekly and by county on our Web site.

Again, if you have questions, feel free to email me at dettloffm1@michigan.gov.

Mary Dettloff
Public Information Officer
Department of Natural Resources

I have some questions

Do you get to work in a black Helo?

What have you done with Elivis?

Where's waldo?

Just so you know, not all of us are nuts jobs;) Keep up the good work

[Beavervet]

Sorry I didn't get back to you about going Markbarth, I knew it would be a scham. Thanks for trying.

So I don't get it. Was he saying that there was going to be cwd in our deer because they banned baiting, does he think this is a joke, was he trying to make it a joke, do they already know theres cwd in our wild deer, did they not care what the questions were that was being asked?:yikes:

So Ferg, you think I was passing on some great opportunity to gain knowledge and insight into this situation. Hell, I think I'd learn more sitting down with you, and listening to stories about your mom swearing.:lol:
To shed light on the great car crash CWD relationship I called Wisconsin where they have spent 35 million dollars and tested 140,000 deer for CWD and have not been able to find a higher percentage of positive deer in the car crash deer. Actually very, very few of the positive CWD deer in Wisconsin are clinically sick at all. I don't know if our DNR biologists took the time to call Wisconsin's before expressing their theory

[6inchtrack]

Mary Dettloff
Public Information Officer
Department of Natural Resources

Mary

The deer that was found with CWD was in an incloser with 5O other deer, all these remaining deer were killed and tested and no other deer tested positive. Now 2,204 have tested negative for CWD.

I read that the body of the suspect deer was buried at the site, and that the DNR did not want to remove it for fear of releasing prions, Could a core sample of the burial site be taken and tested.
Could you talk with Steven L. Halstead, State Veterinarian and sugest this.
At one point he was under the impresion that there was not a test for soil, but there is;
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/84/i09/8409prions.html (http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/84/i09/8409prions.html)

http://www.cosis.net/abstracts/EGU20...08-A-03029.pdf (http://www.cosis.net/abstracts/EGU2008/03029/EGU2008-A-03029.pdf)

[solohunter]

I think this might be a factor in the lack of positive cwd deer in the testing of the facility, Health of the deer will also play a factor in this also.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solohunter http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2356813#post2356813)
I was part of a conversation with a DNR bioligist who admitted ( during grilling) that the reason they do not TB check button buck/yearling heads was that while they might be infected they had not had it long enough to show up in the lymph glands for testing ?? could this be the same thing for CWD as well??

Yes, very likely.

"The youngest animal diagnosed with clinical CWD was 17 months old, suggesting 16-17 months may be the minimum natural incubation period. Among deer and elk residing in facilities with a long history of CWD, most natural cases occur in 2-7 year-old animals." CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE: IMPLICATIONS AND CHALLENGES FOR WILDLIFE MANAGERS. Unpublished paper presented at the NAWNRC. Elizibeth Williams, Michael Miller, E. Thom Thorne)

I have a PDF of this paper if anyone is interested.

__________________
Munsterlndr

[solohunter]

Quote:
Originally Posted by kristie http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2357079#post2357079)
pretty sure you are on the right track,
I'll see if I can find the research paper to site, regarding date of infection time/migration of abnormal prions to lymph tissue, just may take a few, as I'm a bit slammed cutting on deer heads........:D

Kristie

health and resistance might also play a factor in it? just an uneducated guess :) and with that thought the one in kent county might have been weak and it just showed up sooner,, so other might have been infected and not had it show up in lymph Gland testing??

[solohunter]

testing for TB and CWD might only be effective if the animal has been infected for maybe 16 months!!! ouch!! so how many positives have been missed??

[Nick Adams]

testing for TB and CWD might only be effective if the animal has been infected for maybe 16 months!!! ouch!! so how many positives have been missed??

Given that they have to kill the deer in order to test it, none. ;)

-na

[Ninja]

I think this might be a factor in the lack of positive cwd deer in the testing of the facility, Health of the deer will also play a factor in this also.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solohunter http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2356813#post2356813)
I was part of a conversation with a DNR bioligist who admitted ( during grilling) that the reason they do not TB check button buck/yearling heads was that while they might be infected they had not had it long enough to show up in the lymph glands for testing ?? could this be the same thing for CWD as well??

Yes, very likely.

"The youngest animal diagnosed with clinical CWD was 17 months old, suggesting 16-17 months may be the minimum natural incubation period. Among deer and elk residing in facilities with a long history of CWD, most natural cases occur in 2-7 year-old animals." CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE: IMPLICATIONS AND CHALLENGES FOR WILDLIFE MANAGERS. Unpublished paper presented at the NAWNRC. Elizibeth Williams, Michael Miller, E. Thom Thorne)

I have a PDF of this paper if anyone is interested.

__________________
Munsterlndr


But wait....this obviously is not true, as new scientific information has come to light, according to the man who gets most of his information from the world's Leading Authority on CWD, Dr. Mike Miller.
Here is an excerpt from the NRC Meeting held in September.

Dr. Schmitt said that baiting and feeding perpetuates disease transmission. Within 42 hours of contact with CWD, disease detection can occur. Tissue samples have been collected from all depopulated animals and DNA traces can be conducted. He indicated that the disease was not likely a result of spontaneous mutation.

:confused::dizzy::confused:

[swoosh]

No, I try to walk It's better for the enviorment. Great suggestion, I have one for you. If you hold your deer a little farther in front of you, the rack will seem bigger.;)

When you shoot them in the 170's you don't have too:lol:

What's better for enviorment or what's better for you;) Funny we have heard 0 from folks about disease until baiting was banned.

I will ask you what I ask B & N:

What group have you joined that helps out the enviorment before the ban?

How much money out of your pocket have you spent to help the enviorment?

How much time have you spent improving the enviorment before the ban?

[solohunter]

Given that they have to kill the deer in order to test it, none. ;)

-na

they do have a live testing method, but it involves a blood draw, I saw a paper on it a while back they tried about 5 diff testing of blood draws on captured wild cervids in the TB core area, collared them and ear tagged them for later killing if they came back positive. the later "depopulation" of positives didnt go well,,, the testing of netted deer is risky at best,, plus they must have baited them into a group:yikes:,,,

[solohunter]

But wait....this obviously is not true, as new scientific information has come to light, according to the man who gets most of his information from the world's Leading Authority on CWD, Dr. Mike Miller.
Here is an excerpt from the NRC Meeting held in September.

Dr. Schmitt said that baiting and feeding perpetuates disease transmission. Within 42 hours of contact with CWD, disease detection can occur. Tissue samples have been collected from all depopulated animals and DNA traces can be conducted. He indicated that the disease was not likely a result of spontaneous mutation.

:confused::dizzy::confused:




I think Dr sh(* need to re read millers research papers,, maybe munster can refresh his memory with the PDF.

[Bob S]

There are no doe permits on the state land. (Obviously because numbers are low.)

Deer numbers can't be all that low. Private land antlerless permits have risen for the second consecutive year and the 2008 limit is double the 2006 limit. It looks like there need to be more land owners aggressively shooting does like we are.

[Scout 2]

Hey Bob S you need to open your gate. The last 2 days there were deer standing in front of it. I guess they wanted in.;)

[swoosh]

Wow - oooh, 170Lbs is that why they gave you that shinny cup???????

It would be the same wouldn't it? You trying to trick me????

Dude hello, have you been listening to the stories of the decimation of the deer heard & economy in northern michigan by the DNR in the name of TB. Where have you been? If you mean QDM being involved, people have been talking about the untouchable pockets of heavy concentrations created by them for years.

Whats a B&N - a sandwich? - I'll take TWO.

I'm a democrat. Actually I think thats a party.;) I work well independently and with groups, I seldom agree with everything a group stands for, so I don't join.

1000.00 a year easy.

80 hrs a year easy.

Do I get the job???????????:lol:

Nope:lol:

To whom does this 1000.00 dollars go?
80 hours doing what?

BTW that is Mitch Rompala in my avatar(not me), LOL You really are that clueless:lol:

[swoosh]

Deer numbers can't be all that low. Private land antlerless permits have risen for the second consecutive year and the 2008 limit is double the 2006 limit. It looks like there need to be more land owners aggressively shooting does like we are.


Bob if these great and terrific hunters cannot see any deer, the numbers must be low;)

It's not their hunting skills:lol:

[swoosh]

:lol:

Your starting to make me nervous, your asking more questions than my wife. You do understand I'm married and have a child, right?:lol:

So all I know about Mr. Rompala is he supposedly shoots his huge bucks off game preserves/farms and claims their wild bucks. Sounds like he's practicing QDMA. He's obviously some sort of hero of yours. Sorry I didn't recognize your idol, that's just not an accomplishment to me. I do remember briefly reading about him when he got caught though.


Mitch is the man, someday you'll shoot a full size deer;)

I did not expect any answers for obvious reasons.

[glockman55]

Mitch is the man, someday you'll shoot a full size deer;)

I did not expect any answers for obvious reasons.

I agree, He got a raw deal, I really don't think he cared if anyone believed his record book Buck or not. He's shot more Book Bucks than anyone will see in a life time.:evil:

[mitchk2007]

So when are you going to shoot a nother nice buck there swoosh.

[swoosh]

So when are you going to shoot a nother nice buck there swoosh.

I hope on Saturday:) Shooting one is not as important as the chase to me;)

[solohunter]

AH yes, the Mitch Rompola deer again,, the DNR now has a data base of DNA families from all counties to identify deer that may be passed off as from other areas, or Ranchs,,,,, If the DNR gets involved then the record may stand or get tossed, while he could be related to fred bear, or related to my cousin who I doubt has ever shot a deer in daylight:lol: