# DNR: Deer baiting has hit new high



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

*DNR: Deer baiting has hit new high*

Dozens of firearms seized over opener 
ST. PAUL â€" An â€œunprecedentedâ€


----------



## HUNTNFISHND (Mar 16, 2004)

Bob Kellam said:


> What more could be done to discourage hunters from baiting?
> 
> One policy that has been floated is to make deer feeding and baiting illegal from Sept. 1 through the end of December. That change would require legislative approval.
> 
> â€œIf you put on a feeding ban, it would put everyone on a level playing field,â€


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

> the end of December. That change would require legislative approval.
> 
> â€œIf you put on a feeding ban, it would put everyone on a level playing field,â€


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Hey, look at the bright side, at least they aren't in the news for a record number of people being shot.


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Also shows you how impossible it is to enforce


----------



## Duckslayer100 (Apr 7, 2004)

g/o said:


> Also shows you how impossible it is to enforce


I dunno...looks like they did quite a bit of "enforcing" according to the article: "In District 1, which includes Roseau, Baudette and Thief River Falls, nine conservation officers made 28 deer baiting cases over the weekend and seized 25 firearms, according to Lt. Pat Znajda, the district supervisor."
At fines of $385 a pop, combined with losing their guns, I'd say that's 28 less people who will bait next year. 
It's not going to stop over night, but if they hammer it long enough, eventually the practice will drop or possibly cease.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

Duckslayer100 said:


> g/o said:
> 
> 
> > Also shows you how impossible it is to enforce
> ...


28 out of how many actually doing it though? Im betting a lot!


----------



## Colt (Oct 25, 2007)

About two weeks ago I was grouse hunting in a state forest in MN. When I came back to my truck at the trail head some coonazz looking ******* with the worlds ugliest wife came rolling in with a trailer and two ATV. As I loaded my dogs into their kennels I saw they had several large bags of sunflower seeds in the pick up. I asked if they were baiting deer and they replied no, they were baiting for bear. Bear season had been closed for over a week. I called the DNR on the way out and gave details but don't know if whatever came about.

The DNR has in the past spotted piles of corn from the air. A lot of hunters are catching on to this and are now using sunflower seeds. No matter how hard the DNR tries to stop this, I don't think they will.

Northern MN is full of coonazz ******** that have their "own way" of living.


----------



## Duckslayer100 (Apr 7, 2004)

I think baiting is so counterproductive. Spend a ton of money to buy seed or bait or whatever to shoot a deer. There goes any argument for hunting to feed the family. If the cost comes out to more than $3 a pound, you might as well buy beef.

Barebackjack,
But that's still 28 peole that probably won't be doing it next year. 28 that most likely will spread the word to their baiting buddies to watch out because they got slapped with a big fine and lost their gun. 
Saying it's not successful because they didn't get everyone is unrealistic. It's just like drunk drivers or speeders. Cops don't catch all of them, but they catch enough where the average citizen knows to be careful.
And heck, if it is discovered it's that ineffective, keep raising the fines and penalty until something sticks. In the future, if a baiter gets a $2,000 fine, loses his gun and hunting priveleges for a few years, maybe people will be less inclined to poach (which is what is happening when people are breaking hunting laws such as baiting).


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

Duckslayer100 said:


> I think baiting is so counterproductive. Spend a ton of money to buy seed or bait or whatever to shoot a deer. There goes any argument for hunting to feed the family. If the cost comes out to more than $3 a pound, you might as well buy beef.
> 
> Barebackjack,
> But that's still 28 peole that probably won't be doing it next year. 28 that most likely will spread the word to their baiting buddies to watch out because they got slapped with a big fine and lost their gun.
> ...


Some perhaps. The fact is, they busted ALOT of people baiting in one weekend. The law already forbids it, yet these people (and by the sounds of it quite a few) poo pood it to begin with. Im not saying all the people that got busted arent going to go right back to baiting, but im betting, considering they already blatantly broke the law once, the majority will go right back to doing it again, and this time, theyll most likely be alot more careful about it.

And good luck on fines becoming more of a deterrent. I could go out today and kill a truck load of deer, get busted, get my slap on the wrist and be back at it tomorrow morning. Theyve NEVER been a fan of coming down on hard on game vilations. That goes for MOST states. Its ridiculous. I agree with you, pin their a**es to the wall and hit em where it really hurts.


----------



## Duckslayer100 (Apr 7, 2004)

You're probably right, but that doesn't mean they should give up. In time, yes it may get worse, but it could also get better.

You might be able to tell that I'm against baiting. Always have been. I realize in N.D. it is legal, and that's fine. This is mostly because there is so much food in the fields I honestly can't see baiting actually doing a heap of good for a hunter unless he does it late in the year when snow and ice have covered up the crops (and when there are years like this year and last when most of the corn and sunflowers stay up all year, I'd laugh my butt of if I saw someone trying to bait. Good lucke with that!)

On a side note, didn't anyone see the pics that accompanied that story? Hilarious! One guy got busted with one of those big motorized stand feeters. How blantantly obvious is that?! I mean, seriously, complete disregard for the regs. Too funny...


----------



## bearhunter (Jan 30, 2009)

Duckslayer100 said:


> You're probably right, but that doesn't mean they should give up. In time, yes it may get worse, but it could also get better.
> 
> I honestly can't see baiting actually doing a heap of good for a hunter unless he does it late in the year when snow and ice have covered up the crops (and when there are years like this year and last when most of the corn and sunflowers stay up all year, I'd laugh my butt of if I saw someone trying to bait. Good lucke with that!) :bart: --- I would bet MOST of the bigger bucks killed in n.d. are over bait. just look at all the trail photo's of big deer. i don't think they pull the bait before they hunt. i personally have no disrespect for those that do hunt over bait as it is legal, but when i see hero photo's of such deer taken it really turns my gutt.


----------



## dc240nt (Sep 20, 2006)

Baiting isnt that big of a deal in states/provinces where its legal to do. Very few really big bucks get taken over bait. They learn early on that is a place to visit after dark only.

How do you curtail baiting where illegal? How about a friggen fine! $385.00? What a joke. If its against the law then prop up the fine to $1000.00, lose the gun, lose hunting lisence for 3 to 5 years. Thats how you stop it.

Leave it to the MN DNR to not be able to figure it out.


----------



## oldfireguy (Jun 23, 2005)

Baiting has/had a recent history in Michigan (still exists in the UP) and it has created a nightmare of controversy. The argument of disease control is still not settled. And the deer don't care under which circumstances they are shot (although the deer are against all methods).

As a retired public land manager of hundreds of thousands of acres, I had to deal with the ugly side of baiting, including.
The hauling of one ton (by the baiters claim) of bait to each stand he set.
Placement of portable blinds that were not removed.
The creation of 4-wheeler trails to facilitate the movement of bait.
Posting of public lands.
Armed confrontations between hunters.
The hospitalization of one hunter from the assault of his brother-in-law for "Hunting my bait pile".

The territoriality of deer hunters seems significantly greater, if not unique, to that particular season.

I've never seen someone post a public boat launch as "private".
Nor have I seen a fisherman approach a boat and say "Hey, you're fishing off the point where I fish......move on."
I've never seen a pheasant hunter spot a vehicle at a WPA or state lands chase after the hunter already there and order them to leave.

I've deer hunted for over 40 years, and will be out before the sun rises on Sunday morning......but baiting is a headache that one just doesn't need. Again, not from a biological standpoint.

By the way, this thread so far seems to have a good civil discussion going. No name-calling or accusations, just a sharing of opinion/perspective. Congratulations to those participating.


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

bearhunter said:


> i personally have no disrespect for those that do hunt over bait as it is legal, but when i see hero photo's of such deer taken it really turns my gutt.


 :beer:


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

dc240nt said:


> Baiting isnt that big of a deal in states/provinces where its legal to do. Very few really big bucks get taken over bait. They learn early on that is a place to visit after dark only.
> 
> How do you curtail baiting where illegal? How about a friggen fine! $385.00? What a joke. If its against the law then prop up the fine to $1000.00, lose the gun, lose hunting lisence for 3 to 5 years. Thats how you stop it.
> 
> Leave it to the MN DNR to not be able to figure it out.


No the MN DNR has it figured out perfectly. At $385 it doesn't deter too many people but it allows them to collect a lot of money. More people baiting = more money for the DNR. I am not a cynical old hunter but for anyone to believe this has anything to do with ethics or disease control is missing the boat here. It has everthing to do with money! You can bait deer in neighboring states, you can bait bears here, you can shoot up to 5 deer in some areas and you can plant food plots..... but baiting is an ethics question to protect the resource?

I do not bait deer, never have and never will. However, I know a lot of people in my area that bait a lot. Over the past week the DNR "air force" has been hovering over many of my students stands looking for bait. What a waste of time and money. Why not spend that money on enforcing meaningful laws like over limits and safety issues?

BL- Your reference to safety and hunting in MN.....I have yet to have someone glass me with their scope, see someone shoot from a vehicle, feel a need to post signs where I am hunting so I don't get shot at or see anyone stop on the interstate to shoot a deer.........so who is the unsafe ones here?


----------



## ruger1 (Aug 16, 2006)

bearhunter said:


> I honestly can't see baiting actually doing a heap of good for a hunter unless he does it late in the year when snow and ice have covered up the crops (and when there are years like this year and last when most of the corn and sunflowers stay up all year, I'd laugh my butt of if I saw someone trying to bait. Good lucke with that!) :bart:


You are thinking like a guy from farm country. A lot or even majority (i'd say) of MN is heavy timber and farm country. Deer here do not have crops to feed on. So things like apples, corn, pumpkins, etc. are a prized food item for our deer.

That's why baiting may be effective in Northern MN.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Gooseguy10 said:


> BL- Your reference to safety and hunting in MN.....I have yet to have someone glass me with their scope, see someone shoot from a vehicle, feel a need to post signs where I am hunting so I don't get shot at or see anyone stop on the interstate to shoot a deer.........so who is the unsafe ones here?


Which state has people shot out of deer stands?

I hunted deer one day in MN and I was so scared because of all of the gunfire, I didn't leave the stand until night and I was making as much noise as I could.

I asked a couple guy what they shot because I heard so much shooting over that way and they said, "nothing, we were sound shooting" Sound shooting is when you here a sound and shoot at that sound. Yeah, MN is real safe.


----------



## Duckslayer100 (Apr 7, 2004)

Gooseguy10 said:


> I do not bait deer, never have and never will. However, I know a lot of people in my area that bait a lot. Over the past week the DNR "air force" has been hovering over many of my students stands looking for bait. What a waste of time and money. Why not spend that money on enforcing meaningful laws like over limits and safety issues?


So you know a lot of "hunters" who are illegally baiting in Minnesota, yet you say nothing? These are your students, yet you do nothing to deter them from breaking the law? As a teacher, shouldn't you be a role model and set the example by standing up for the regulations, whether you believe in them or not?


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

I really don't want to get into a R vs. NR debate here. Unsafe hunting happens in every state by a very select few.

For reference, I did a quick search and found in 2007. (the most recent year I could find in a two minute search)

ND: 20 incidents, 0 fatal (bismarck news)
MN: 25 incidents, 2 fatal (MN DNR)

I know that could change year to year but it seems rather comparable considering the number of people in each state.

It is too bad you had a (rare) bad experience while hunting in MN. I have hunted in Minnesota for 18 years and never had an issue.

Back to the topic at hand....
Maybe we are more unsafe b.c we shoot deer over bait?


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Rare, that is quite common and why many people avoid deer hunting in MN.


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

If sound shooting "happens all the time" as you claim, why isn't there more fatalities? As I pointed out, there were two total fatalities and 25 "incidents" in 2007 according to the MN DNR.

As far as people avoiding hunting in Minnesota. Nearly 500,000 people hunt deer alone in Minnesota......to put it another way.....that would be over 75% of ND's total population. Apparently not too many people are avoiding hunting deer in MN for any reason.

As a general rule, it is not wise to generalize a half a million people based on one bad experience.


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

Duckslayer100 said:


> Gooseguy10 said:
> 
> 
> > I do not bait deer, never have and never will. However, I know a lot of people in my area that bait a lot. Over the past week the DNR "air force" has been hovering over many of my students stands looking for bait. What a waste of time and money. Why not spend that money on enforcing meaningful laws like over limits and safety issues?
> ...


They know my oppostion to breaking the law. While I don't agree with the regulation, I still toe the line and explain to my students why it is important to follow the law, even if you don't agree. In fact, in my outdoor ed class we spend a considerable amount of time on hunting regs and ethics. Including bring in a CO to do Q and A. The bottom line is that baiting is accepted by families up here that it is hard to make any inroads. So besides me being a vocal proponent of following the law and leading by example, what else should I do to be a better role model?


----------



## Duckslayer100 (Apr 7, 2004)

I commend you for what you do in your classroom, however the "everyone up here does it anyway" baiting attitude is spineless. It's along the same lines as the other excuse so often heard: "my neighbor baits so I HAVE to bait, too."
Both are excuses that show no warrant. If you honestly know of students or families that bait, and openly admit to baiting, call the DNR. They may be your students, and maybe you won't be known as the "cool" teacher anymore, but I'd think you'd gain more respect as a law-abiding hunter than one who tells his students one thing, but does nothing to back it up. 
Bottom line: whether you believe it to be an ethical practice or not, baiters in Minnesota are poachers. Plain and simple.
Treat offenders as such.
Again, I think what you do in your classroom is exceptional. I wish I had been able to take a class like that in school at some point. I did have one teacher, Mr. Fiedler, who was an awesome biology teacher. He even got me and a friend to start volunteering for the Minnesota Deer Hunters Association with Hides for Habitat. I can't even tell you how many hides we cut, salted, and prepared for the MNDHA. Tough but rewarding work.
Anyway, good discussion. :beer:


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y (Sep 23, 2004)

Ahhh the baiting debate... Once again... they gotta outlaw all "baitpiles" if they are going to make a law.


----------



## dogdonthunt (Nov 10, 2005)

well if you look at the whole picture isnt everything you use to atract deer 'baiting'.. whether its food, a deer call, rattleing antlers, etc etc.... I know the response is gonna be only the food issue but your still baiting that deer to come to you... :stirpot:


----------



## HUNTNFISHND (Mar 16, 2004)

dogdonthunt said:


> well if you look at the whole picture isnt everything you use to atract deer 'baiting'.. whether its food, a deer call, rattleing antlers, etc etc.... I know the response is gonna be only the food issue but your still baiting that deer to come to you... :stirpot:


Exactly! :wink:


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

If you know illegal activity is taking place and you do nothing about it then you are no better than those breaking the law no matter what you tell your students


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

laite319 said:


> If you know illegal activity is taking place and you do nothing about it then you are no better than those breaking the law no matter what you tell your students


By that rationale, anytime you have ever heard of any of your buddies who have driven after having one too many beers and not turned them into the authorities makes you a criminal. Or known anyone who has ever been paid cash for work and not paid taxes, yet not turned them into the IRS, guilty of tax evasion.

I will continue to be open to my students about my belief to respect the laws of the land and continue to follow the laws and lead by example. As far as turning my students in, the DNR will have to do their own leg work.


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

Great attempt to justify your actions, but it is still wrong. If you think your friends are DWI you shouldn't be letting them drive any way!


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

laite319 said:


> Great attempt to justify your actions, but it is still wrong. If you think your friends are DWI you shouldn't be letting them drive any way!


But by your rationale, if they do drive you should turn them into the police.....which almost no one would.

I don't have to justify anything....I am not the one breaking the law.


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y (Sep 23, 2004)

dogdonthunt said:


> well if you look at the whole picture isnt everything you use to atract deer 'baiting'.. whether its food, a deer call, rattleing antlers, etc etc.... I know the response is gonna be only the food issue but your still baiting that deer to come to you... :stirpot:


Exactly what I am saying... Heck I love building food plots... I have way more deer come into a food plot then a pile of corn..... is that illegal? Are the bales in the farm yeard illegal? Nope... not unless you hunt over them... More deer die on corn piles in farm yards then in the woods.....


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

> I don't have to justify anything....I am not the one breaking the law.


But you are doing just that, poorly, but trying to justify it none the less!! Must be some thing there that you don't feel quite right about.

If you are curious, yes, I will tell a friend if I thought they were intoxicated, and yes, if they still drove I would call them in. If some one died because of my lack of action that would haunt me for the rest of my life.

By YOUR logic you wouldn't turn in your friends if they were cooking meth next to the school you teach at either.

I have shown this to the 5 teachers in my family, and they all think it is quite sad. I am not a teacher so my opinion may not matter, but they suggested you take this to your school board and see what they think of your lack of actions.

As far as the baiting goes, I think sitting next to water, or crop, or using scents/calls/decoys, is baiting just like a food plot or bucket of apples.


----------



## oldfireguy (Jun 23, 2005)

Earlier in life I had occasion to be a certified hunter safety instructor for the States of Minnesota and Missouri. The topic of "ethics" would always come up. I tried to explain it as follows:
"Ethics" are personal values and constraints that we impose upon ourselves. When enough people share the same standard of "ethics" and feel strongly about them, they may go through the legislative process to impose those ethics on others by creating a "law".
Examples (Missouri) that give pause for thought.....If you hunt pheasant, quail, ducks, or rabbits using a dog, you are considered a "sportsman". If you hunt deer with a dog you are a criminal.....unless you drive 15 miles south into Arkansas where you are once again a "sportsman".
Shooting at a goose, quail, pheasant etc standing in a field is largely considered "unsportsmanlike", one should flush the bird.
Shooting at a turkey that has been flushed is also considered by many as "unsportsmanlike". A standing bird ensures a more certain kill.

"Ethics" can be confusing and vary by individual values. When passed into "law" however, it should become vastly clearer.

Our society is governed by laws. Those laws that we disagree with, we are welcome to challenge in court, or to change through legislation. To teach our children to ignore the laws we disagree with is destructive.

Still a great discussion going on here, passionate but civil.


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

laite319 said:


> > I don't have to justify anything....I am not the one breaking the law.
> 
> 
> But you are doing just that, poorly, but trying to justify it none the less!! Must be some thing there that you don't feel quite right about.
> ...


So let me get this straight, I am supposed to bring rumors about a game violation, and my lack of willingness to turn my students into law enforcement, to my school board? Should I also bring up the fact that I have seen a student speeding once too and not turned them in to the police? Maybe at that meeting I should give a list of students who are working for cash? Because everyone knows that a job of a teacher is to make sure everyone is up holding the laws?

After that meeting I will meet with the local DNR CO and discuss the troubles I am having trouble in one of my classes?

And before you claim that I am missing the point, I get it, you feel that my school board would frown upon my lack of willingness to turn in my students based on rumors. If I was teaching in the suburbs, maybe they would. But in rural Minnesota, they would laugh and the community trust I have built up over the years would be in the toilet. Call it sad, but it is true.

It is the difference between reality and theory based on annoynomus internet ethics "policemen".


----------



## Duckslayer100 (Apr 7, 2004)

Wait...I'm confused.

First, you said "I *know a lot of people* in my area that *bait a lot*. Over the past week the DNR 'air force' has been hovering over *many of my students stands* looking for bait."
Now you say "*rumors about a game violation*."
So what is it...facts or gossip? You backtracking?

All I know is if I heard someone talking up about how much they bait in Minnesota, I'd be the first one on the phone to the DNR. It'd be the same if I heard someone at the local watering hole spouting off about their big buck they shot using their .223 and trusty 2,000,000 candlewatt spotlight. Screw your reputation. People who blatently break hunting laws should get pinched, plain and simple. I only hunt with safe, ethical, law-abiding hunters. If they don't fall into those criteria, they never hunt with me again.

As far as contacting the school board, as laite319 suggested, I think that's a bit overboard. As far as anyone knows, you're an exceptional teacher. Why should the schoolboard be involved? However, and you do realize you can make a phone call anonymously to the DNR..that way the "community trust I have built up over the years" wouldn't "be in the toilet."
Food for thought anyway...


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

Duckslayer100 said:


> Wait...I'm confused.
> 
> First, you said "I *know a lot of people* in my area that *bait a lot*. Over the past week the DNR 'air force' has been hovering over *many of my students stands* looking for bait."
> Now you say "*rumors about a game violation*."
> ...


----------



## gst (Jan 24, 2009)

So for all you guys suggesting everyone turn everyone else in when you are passed on the highway by a car going over the posted limit, do you pick up your cell phone and call in the license plate number to the Hiway patrol? Breaking the law is breaking the law. How about you ethical purists, if you look down and find yourself going a few miles over the speed limit, do you have the Hiway patrol on speed dial to turn yourself in?

So here's a question for all you abide by the law regardless folks. If they passed a law tommorow saying you had to turn in every single gun you own, would you do it even knowing there were some with no paper trail the law wouldn't have any idea you owned? Would you turn in your family friends or neighbors for not handing over theirs???


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

Gooseguy 10, you are changing every thing with your new statements.

If you KNOW a lot of people who are baiting, then as a supposed law abiding, ethical, teacher you should turn them in.

If you have just HEARD of people doing it that makes things completely different, it isn't the statement you made at the beginning, and if I misunderstood you I do apologize.



> The state of our DNR would be laughable if it wasn't so sad.


Do you think the lack of willingness of the people to cooperate with them has any thing to do with it? Or the poor attitudes many folks seem to share toward the DNR??

gst, it sounds like you feel you only need to follow certain laws when they suit your needs. I think if some one were an ethical purist they wouldn't allow themselves to be a few miles over the speed limit as it would be unethical. 

I think it is well understood that no one can follow every single law to the letter every time, but it seems some of you scorn a person if they try.

If you get called in don't be mad at them for calling, be mad at yourself for breaking the law!!


----------



## bearhunter (Jan 30, 2009)

me thinks this thread has run to long :-?


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y (Sep 23, 2004)

I just put a huge pile of beats under one of my stands tonight! :beer:


----------



## dogdonthunt (Nov 10, 2005)

good job hunt4p&y ..... and dont forget your corn and seeds... I guess the deer are really hittin on that stuff.... make sure you post up pix of that huge monster your sure to get as it seems according to the non baitors  :beer:


----------



## gst (Jan 24, 2009)

Heres my point. I will bet that many of the hunting ethically pure individuals on these sites find themselves over the speed limit on more than an odd occassion. If you are willing to turn someone else in for "breaking the law" you had better be willing to do the same for yourself. If you are going to turn someone in for illegally baiting a deer and critisize those that don't , then you better turn that fella passing you over the speed limit as well or you are hypocritically picking and choosing what laws you think need to be followed.

For many years ND had a law on the books stating you couldn't have sex without being married. How many of you ethical purists followed the letter of the law on that one???

The founding fathers of this country rose up against unfair, unjust laws. It is the basis upon which this country was founded. I'm pretty sure if they were alive today they would be fairly disgusted at the level in which govt has taken over dictating how we can live our lives.

Now lets see who answers the turn in your gun question??


----------



## Duckslayer100 (Apr 7, 2004)

Gooseguy,
I find myself agreeing/understanding a lot of what you said in you last post. Thanks for clarifying. It's been fun debating this with you.

GST,
I was wondering when you were going to come out of the woodwork.
Let's see...ethical purists...well, if that's what you want to label law-abiding hunters that's fine by me. 
You are comparing speeding with poaching? Do you have any idea how many hunters would flood the MN DNR with calls if they knew a record buck had been taken over a pile of bait in Minnesota? The outcry would be huge. Just look at that big 8 point that was poached/allegedly poached in southern MN. The guy who shot it might as well have raped a 13 year old girl with the way hunters have come down on him. To some people, harvesting a trophy buck through fair chase is up there with having your first child or shaking God's hand. It's amazing one quadropod has that much pull on our society.
You have to look at the severity of the law. A policeman is a lot more likely to follow up on a call about a suspected homicide than a speeder (unless said speeder is driving like a D-Bag and running people off the road...) I'm saying, for some Minnesotans baiting is a pretty severe offense. To them, their neighbor/hunter who is baiting is taking away opportunity from them. If that's the case, of course they'll call them in. Just like if said neighbor/hunter bragged about a big buck they killed at night while shining off the side of the road. There's a good chance someone will call them in.
So you can't just lump all regulations together. There is severity to the crime which is reflected in the severity of the punishment. If, ethically, you believe speeding a couple miles over the limit is equal to that of baiting, well that's your prorogitive. I'm willing to be there are a lot of hunters in Minnesota who are would beg to differ...
And then you compare baiting with a gun law. Again, severity of the crime. You have a few "hunters" now who bait regardless, but there wasn't a huge outcry when the ban was put in place. A gun ban on the other hand, well I think the reprocussions would reverbarate much, much farther...
As far as turning over my guns if a ban was instilled, they could come get them whenever they wanted...but they'd have to pry them from my cold, dead fingers :wink:


----------



## gst (Jan 24, 2009)

I try to stay in the woodwork until someone pushes the level of hypocracy. Why is a speed limit put in place. Several reasons but primarily to protect the SAFETY of people. People have actually been killed because someone was speeding. How many people have been killed because someone baited in a deer. But yet you suggest turning in someone for baiting is more important than turning in someone for speeding, both of which are a violation of the law. You equate the illegal taking of an animal, something that affects peoples RECREATIONAL activity to the rape of a 13 year old girl!!!!!!!!!!????????????????? I would venture a guess that the highway patrol believes speeding is a much more serious offense and risk to the safety of the public than baiting a deer. And I'd bet most all my money that anyone involved in law enforcement as well as anyone qith a little common sense believes rape is significantly more serious than poaching a deer!

You guys come on here saying that you must turn in any law breakers when it come to hunting laws, but it's ok to look the other way on other laws. If that is not justifying a position of hypocrisy I really don't know what is.

I'm not coming on here suggesting anyone turn in anyone any more for one offense than the other. And there is a difference between ethical purists and law abiding citizens. The refference was made of it being illegal to run deer with dogs in Missouri, but step across the line into Arkansas and it is legal. An ethical purist won't run deer with dogs anywhere, a "law abiding citizen" will in Ar. but not Mo. and some folks really won't see a problem with their dog running a deer across an imaginary line somewhere a couple of miles.


----------



## Duckslayer100 (Apr 7, 2004)

Way to twist my words...I said SOME people. Never did I say I thought what he did was as bad as raping a girl. SOME people think whitetail hunting is the epitimy of hunting. It was a metaphor...but apparently sarcasm is lost to you (I'm a meat hunter first, so a poached trophy whitetail gets me riled up about as much as rush hour traffic).

Try to stay focused...

Just look how worked up you're getting on this thread? If it was for something other than deer hunting, would you be as passionate about it? Hunting, in general, seems to be something you voice your opinion about regularily. I'd say you have strong feelings about various hunting subjects. That was my point, there are people who take their hunting (specifically trophy whitetail deer hunting) to such extremes they're willing to put someone in jail for an extended periods of time because they poached a record whitetail.

You show up when hypocracy reaches a certain level? Do you know me personally? How do you know I'm being a hypocrit? I've called in a drunk driver before. I've also called RAP to report hunting violators. Do you think I should start calling in every speeder I see? I spose I should...I hate speeders, especially in city limits and school zones. But I think the dispatcher eventually would screen my calls if I called in all the speeders I saw on a daily basis (I can honestly say, after growing up in the Twin Cities, the Fargo-Moorhead area is on par with my home area's "quality" of drivers)

Again, you're comparing hunting whitetail with dogs vs. baiting. I'll bite...

The "law abiding citizen" has the OPTION of running dogs as a means to hunting in Arkansas, but doesn't have to. He cannot, however, use them in Missouri. The "law abiding citizen" has the OPTION of baiting on private land in North Dakota, but doesn't have to. He cannot, however, bait in Minnesota. You may have your own personal ethics, but if they differ with the law of the land to the point where they violate policies, you can get in trouble. If baiting is against someone's ethical standards, then they don't have to bait. If you think it ethically is OK to bait and you bait in Minnesota, you can beg and plead your case all you want, you'll still get a fine and your gun confiscated. Comparing speeding to hunting violations. Are you saying following a traffic law comes down to ethics? Is that why you are making the analogy?


----------



## gst (Jan 24, 2009)

I really don't care if it is you or someone else, using the analogy wether sacastically or not of poaching a deer to the rape of a 13 year old girl is lame. The fact you think SOME may think that way is indicative of how out of touch SOME people may be.

I'm not really getting worked up, I could care less wether you do or don't call in anyone for anything, you see that is the individuals choice to make. Thats kinda my point people come on here all indignant that someone won't report a game violation, but then sit back themselves and don't do anything about other law violations. To me that is "hypocritically" picking and choosing yourself what personal standards to follow while slamming some one else for do exactly what you are doing, picking what offense they think warrant them calling in. Kinda the "focas" behind my comments it you take the time to comprehend. If this fits you, then indeed I think you are being hypocritical, if it doesn't then it is not directed towards you.

The speeding analogy was made to show that SOME people care more about a violation that affects a RECREATIONAL activity than they do about a violation that has the potential to actually kill of harm someone. To me that is kinda warped.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> The founding fathers of this country rose up against unfair, unjust laws. It is the basis upon which this country was founded. I'm pretty sure if they were alive today they would be fairly disgusted at the level in which govt has taken over dictating how we can live our lives.


I find it interesting you go back to the founding fathers. When I mention that wildlife is the property of all equally you say it's socialist, but it's those same founding fathers that did that. They were sick of the European aristocrats that wanted to hog game for themselves. Now we no longer call them aristocrats, we call them outfitters. 



> The speeding analogy was made to show that SOME people care more about a violation that affects a RECREATIONAL activity than they do about a violation that has the potential to actually kill of harm someone. To me that is kinda warped.


It's not warped if it doesn't agree with you gst. We all have priorities and some may think speeding is worse, some may think poaching is worse, and some may think neither are important. Our laws are decided by the majority, much like the high fence operations will be decided by a majority.

For example I see people on here that think baiting is bad, but high fence operations are ok. I think that totally blows logic out of the water. It's like comparing fishing in a wide open lake with bait to shooting fish in a barrel. I think they are screwed up in the head, but evidently they have some other logic in their thinking. I don't understand it, but the laws will determine what I have to live with.


----------



## Duckslayer100 (Apr 7, 2004)

gst said:


> I really don't care if it is you or someone else, using the analogy wether sacastically or not of poaching a deer to the rape of a 13 year old girl is lame. The fact you think SOME may think that way is indicative of how out of touch SOME people may be.


Sorry if the analogy was in poor taste (as a writer I sometimes look at ways to get a point across in the most thought-provoking way...apparently I should have thought that through a bit more), but at least we can agree that the people who put whitetail deer on such a high pedestal are "out of touch." That is what I was getting at, too.



> I'm not really getting worked up, I could care less wether you do or don't call in anyone for anything, you see that is the individuals choice to make. Thats kinda my point people come on here all indignant that someone won't report a game violation, but then sit back themselves and don't do anything about other law violations. To me that is "hypocritically" picking and choosing yourself what personal standards to follow while slamming some one else for do exactly what you are doing, picking what offense they think warrant them calling in. Kinda the "focas" behind my comments it you take the time to comprehend. If this fits you, then indeed I think you are being hypocritical, if it doesn't then it is not directed towards you.


The way Gooseguy originally came on here made it seem like he was surrounded by people talking up their baiting practice and scoffing at the DNR. When confronted by that many blantant cases of poaching, it seemed odd that he didn't do anything to remedy the situation, espcially since he was a teacher. I don't think anyone meant to "slam" him, but it was odd that he apparently knew of many hunters who were open about their baiting practice in a state where baiting was illegal. Upon further discussion, it was realized that his remarks weren a bit of an exaggeration. I think that was cleared up earlier.

I don't think its hyprocritcal to call in some law breakers and not others. It depends on the severity of the crime. If a speeder going 5 mph over the limit zooms down 13 ave (which is just about everyone) I doubt a policeman would give a rats behind if you called it in. On the other hand, they'd be much more inclined to follow up on a drunk-driving call.

If you see baiting as more of a "speeding" offense than a "drunk driving" offense, that's your opinion. Some would view it differently, especially if a trophy whitetail was involved (which I eluded to earlier). And yes, speeding can kill. Then again, so can driving 5 mph under the posted speed limit...especially if the speed limit is 75. To say a person is no better for not calling in a speeder because it has the potential to kill someone is pretty obtuse...you're grasping. And unless you have a radar gun mounted to your dash, how can you even call in a speeding offense?

To say we are hypocritcal, compare apples to apples. Then again, as I said, if you believe a baiting law to be such a small offense, maybe you are comparing apples to apples in your mind... The DNR doesn't see it that way, however, as reflected by the severity of the punishment: $385 fine and confiscation of firearm for baiting deer. A speeding fine in Minnesota for 10 mph over the posted limit is about $150. So, obviously, baiting to them is a more serious offense than speeding.


----------



## Duckslayer100 (Apr 7, 2004)

hunt4P&Y said:


> I just put a huge pile of beats under one of my stands tonight! :beer:


Good luck! Hope you shoot a big boy :beer:


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y (Sep 23, 2004)

It's crazy how this subject causes such a stir... Honestly something like speeding is far worse then baiting. I would say 100% of hunters are using some form of baiting.. Lets look it up...

bait 1 (bt)
n.
1.
a. Food or other lure placed on a hook or in a trap and used in the taking of fish, birds, or other animals.
b. Something, such as a worm, used for this purpose.
2. An enticement; a temptation.
3. Archaic A stop for food or rest during a trip.
v. baitÂ·ed, baitÂ·ing, baits
v.tr.
1. To place a lure in (a trap) or on (a fishing hook).
2. To entice, especially by trickery or strategy.
3. To set dogs upon (a chained animal, for example) for sport.
4. To attack or torment, especially with persistent insults, criticism, or ridicule.
5. To tease.
6. To feed (an animal), especially on a journey.
v.intr. Archaic

So when you sit in the trees waiting for that buck to walk by on his journey towards the corn field... was he baited? Did you trick him into walking by?

Also, I don't think many people die from someone baiting...

Speeding on the other hand? yep every day.

I have talked with a few officers on this issue from both ND and Minn. I haven't really gotten a "good" answer from either sides. Most common answer is.. "well it causes disease.. or it makes it unfair to the person on land next door. Well I am beating a dead horse on this but... there is many other situations where there is more nose to nose contact then a "bait" pile.

I was kidding about my baiting. I hunt ND so I could, but I don't no need to when you build plots.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> 2. To entice, especially by trickery or strategy.





> 4. To attack or torment, especially with persistent insults, criticism, or ridicule.





> 5. To tease.


OH, oh, der be a lots a baitin a goin on deez here parts.


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y (Sep 23, 2004)

Plainsman said:


> > 2. To entice, especially by trickery or strategy.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thats what I thought!


----------



## Duckslayer100 (Apr 7, 2004)

hunt4P&Y said:


> It's crazy how this subject causes such a stir... Honestly something like speeding is far worse then baiting. I would say 100% of hunters are using some form of baiting..


I don't do any of the things you listed in the dictionary definition of the term, so I guess I'm in the minority in your assessment.

And you're right, it is crazy this subject causes such an uproar. But the same can be said about non resident licenses, high fenced hunting, slot limits, season dates, etc. etc. If you don't think its a big deal, that's your opinion. Other people think differently. Then again, some people just like to argue.



> So when you sit in the trees waiting for that buck to walk by on his journey towards the corn field... was he baited? Did you trick him into walking by?


Not that I can think of. I sit on the ground in a funnel area and wait for deer to come through. No trickery. No calling. No smells. No bait. Just patience and hope that something will come through the woods. It's all about chance, timing and luck. Is it baiting if you wait in a known travel route hoping for a deer to walk by? I'd think that would be the same as putting a net in a stream and hoping a fish swims into it. No baiting there.



> Also, I don't think many people die from someone baiting...
> 
> Speeding on the other hand? yep every day.


Why the generalization? I don't even know why speeding was brought up in the first place. OK, someone can die from it and the chance of a person getting killed by baiting is nill. The argument holds no water. That doesn't counteract the fact that in Minnesota baiting is against the law.



> I was kidding about my baiting. I hunt ND so I could, but I don't no need to when you build plots.


Well then, good luck over your plots :beer:


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y (Sep 23, 2004)

Duckslayer100 said:


> hunt4P&Y said:
> 
> 
> > It's crazy how this subject causes such a stir... Honestly something like speeding is far worse then baiting. I would say 100% of hunters are using some form of baiting..
> ...


So in that funnel area are they just walking around for fun... Or are they heading somewhere?

I pulled the speeding part out of one of your posts... or I guess I could go to the rape comment...


----------



## wingaddict (Sep 16, 2009)

hunt4p&y, what kind of food plots do you plant?


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y (Sep 23, 2004)

wingaddict said:


> hunt4p&y, what kind of food plots do you plant?


I have tried just about everything. I work with a guy that makes all my grass seeds for lawns.. He has made me a mixture of grasses, alfalfa, chickery a kind of a hodge podge.. Works awesome. There is always something that is green.

I have also tried a few varieties of short growing corn.. 3-4 feet, with grasses, alfalfa in it. Makes for a kick a$$ bedding area! At night they will stand up and just start feeding! I have gone away from that as it makes it hard to pattern them.


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y (Sep 23, 2004)

Honestly one of the best things you can do is go into the woods... right now or in early spring... if it is dry enough, rake everything up cut brush down... thin out trees... allow sunlight to forest floor, and just plant a variety of green grass..... or simply leave it clean.. It will make for a area that is green and lush... they will come!


----------



## Duckslayer100 (Apr 7, 2004)

GST started the speeding stuff. But yes, I bantered and fed into it.

Again with the rape comment, poor analogy, my apology. I beg for your forgiveness. I was merely putting into perspective how some people view poachers. Have you looked at the threads about the guy who poached that supposed record 8-point buck? If you looked at it from the outside and didn't know his crime, you'd think he murdered someone by the way people lashed out at him. I mean, good grief. It's a freakin' deer for kripes sake. Then again, the price of a deer's life is going up and up every day...especially if it has a big rack.

I have no idea why the deer walk through where they do. Maybe they like the cover? Setting up on a feeding or bedding route is a basic deer hunting principal. I'm not in any way manipulating their wishes to go through the area. They go through wether I am there or am not there. Then again, they might not go through there and instead decide to walk the ridge behind me. Just a game of chance...


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Again with the rape comment, poor analogy, my apology. I beg for your forgiveness. I was merely putting into perspective how some people view poachers.


I completely understood the point you were making. I also understood that you really were not making a comparison of people. Some people want to be offended, some want others to think you were being offensive, and some people don't understand hyperbole.


----------



## Duckslayer100 (Apr 7, 2004)

Thank God! At least someone does


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Duckslayer100 said:


> Thank God! At least someone does


This is the way it goes. In debate a person can pretend to be offended in the event someone not smart enough believes you were offensive. The pay off is They garner sympathy, and perhaps an ally. He doesn't have to be a genius since in the event something comes up for a vote a high school drop outs vote is as valuable as a vote from Einstein.

If you can't dazzle with brilliance baffle with bs.


----------



## DG (Jan 7, 2008)

Plainsman,

The other day I was in Jamestown. Saw a car with a bumper sticker that said, Hung like Einstein smart as a horse, wasn't you was it?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

DG said:


> Plainsman,
> 
> The other day I was in Jamestown. Saw a car with a bumper sticker that said, Hung like Einstein smart as a horse, wasn't you was it?


I know horses, how familiar are you with Einstein?


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

Plainsman said:


> > The founding fathers of this country rose up against unfair, unjust laws. It is the basis upon which this country was founded. I'm pretty sure if they were alive today they would be fairly disgusted at the level in which govt has taken over dictating how we can live our lives.
> 
> 
> I find it interesting you go back to the founding fathers. When I mention that wildlife is the property of all equally you say it's socialist, but it's those same founding fathers that did that. They were sick of the European aristocrats that wanted to hog game for themselves. Now we no longer call them aristocrats, we call them outfitters.


Our founding fathers were brilliant for their time in history. Why so many people try to view today's world through their glasses is beyond me. They had no idea our society would evolve into something as complex as it is and to think they'd have a better idea of how to solve our problems or run it is extremely naive.

Furthermore, they would be appalled by our modern society and it's values.

But you know what? The same is also true. If you hopped in a time machine you could hear Jefferson talk about how all men are created equal...and then watch him go out back and rape and beat slaves. I bet there's hardcore white supremacists that would be disgusted at the brutality many of them inflicted in their daily lives.

Truth be told, we'd be just as appalled of them as they would be of us. Which is why anyone who asks the question, "What would our founding fathers think?" is an idiot.


----------



## DG (Jan 7, 2008)

How sad. I find this post disturbing. Written by someone with deep issues.



> Our founding fathers were brilliant for their time in history. Why so many people try to view today's world through their glasses is beyond me. They had no idea our society would evolve into something as complex as it is and to think they'd have a better idea of how to solve our problems or run it is extremely naive.
> 
> Furthermore, they would be appalled by our modern society and it's values.
> 
> ...


----------



## dogdonthunt (Nov 10, 2005)

Im goin back to number 5 on the list of definitions of baiting... I think we should 'tease' them..... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## gst (Jan 24, 2009)

Plainsman, the socialist comment was sarcasm based off reading your political threads. I thought perhaps you would have been sharp enough to "completely understand your point".

I did "completely understand your point" about the analogy of SOME people comparing poaching a TROPHY deer on the same level as the rape of a thirteen year old girl, just thought it was in poor taste, and someone writing something they reread before posting it probably could have caught that.

The speeding analogy was brought into this discussion because it was suggested that if anyone commited an illegal act while hunting they would be turned in and anyone that didn't turn someone in for this was as unethical as the person that did the act. So I merely assumed that if one was this particular about following the letter of the law, they would also turn in anyone for breaking other laws. But apparently some on here reserve the right to chose what is a reportable offense while chastising others for not agreeing with them. Maybe that isn't hypocritical!!!! I used speeding because most everyone does it, but it is still in violation of the law. And it does have far greater potential negative consequences than does baiting a deer. But some on here don't "get it" as they are so wrapped up in the hunting side of things that they may very well be not to far off the mentality of the comparison that was used in the analogy of a poahed deer. I would guess if the society that you claim will dictate FC, baiting ect..... was polled as to what is the greater issue, someone ( a person) killed because of someone speeding, or a "trophy buck" killed over bait, I would guess the former would win out time and again.

Matt Jones, take my statement about the founding fathers and tell me what part of it is not true.


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

Wow this topic has really come a long way.....deer baiting, ethics, rape comparisons, analysis of our founding fathers behavior, white supremcist's values, food plots, time machines, meth labs, speeding laws, bumper stickers......

The deer harvest is going to be way down this year....people must not have been as successful using their bait around their stands


----------

