# tilled under corn



## n_108_nd (Oct 13, 2004)

I have seen way too many of last year's corn fields all across the state. Each one I have walked out into has been full of corn. The birds love it. Unfortunately, I think someone might not be thrilled with me hunting those fields. Does this qualify as baited? The baiting regs are so imprecise.


----------



## Kris brantner (Sep 22, 2009)

not if its a result of natural harvest.


----------



## Goosehauler23 (Apr 7, 2008)

It isn't harvested. It is manipulated according to the Game and Fish. The state G&F said if it was last years crop you could hunt it. The first two federal wardens I talked to had to go higher up and I finally got the answer that it is technically baited under federal guidelines.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Been down this road a few years back when we got an early frost. Lots of rolled corn that fall. Then again it was an issue come spring. Thought it was over after that!

Well low and behold we run across a field north of Jamestown not to far from Arrowood. Ducks and geese all over 80 acres! Farmer did not get it rolled down the fall before and it was so wet he took the Preventive planting and did not till or disk it down until mid July. Lots and lots of corn on the ground. He had posted signs all around the field. When we talked with him he told us that the Fed Wardens suggested he post it, because they considered it a baited field and it would remain baited until the corn was gone.

So now the question arises, with the rolled down corn from this spring was but was planted into beans and now the beans are off. Still a ton of corn on the ground and birds using it heavily! I have recieved conflicting info on the status of this type of field and await a definitive answer.

But any field that has been rolled down without harvest and no new crop planted is going to be a baited field!


----------



## shiawassee_kid (Oct 28, 2005)

tilled under should be legit as long as it was natural practice. could be a lot of gray area i suppose as described by Ron, but if it was a crop that failed and got tilled...should be huntable.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

shiawassee_kid said:


> tilled under should be legit as long as it was natural practice. could be a lot of gray area i suppose as described by Ron, but if it was a crop that failed and got tilled...should be huntable.


Any crop not harvested in some manner then tilled down is considered baited by the Feds. Even swathed grain that spoils in the field is considered baited if it is not harvested. To to the USFWS web site and read the Q&A section regarding baiting. They spell it our pretty clear!

I threw them a curve ball in regards to the fact that it was tilled and planted and a new crop had been harvested. One guy told me there is no time limit on how long an area can be baited. He then transfered me to another person who said he thought that since the second crop was planted and is now harvested it would be legal, but was not sure. Hope to get a call Tuesday to have a straight answer!!!!!


----------



## Old Hunter (Mar 8, 2002)

Ron if you talk to the feds again about baiting would you ask them why they allow people to plant crops, flood them, and then hunt the flooded crops. These people are hunting unharvested crops and we cant hunt 2 year old corn that was plowed down. What a bunch of crap.


----------



## pinfeather (Nov 3, 2007)

My advise is stay out, because one warded says one thing and another says something else....5 years ago was in Cando and there was such a field, there was a group hunting it, (and pounding the mallards), then a warden showed up and bag things happened. We talked to the guys at a local pub later(they were NR also) and said guns, decoys, birds, sickening fines, etc were taken and they might even take trailer and truck...Never heard how it all ended, but we took note of that field and what happened....Its your call....Good luck!


----------



## shiawassee_kid (Oct 28, 2005)

pinfeather said:


> My advise is stay out, because one warded says one thing and another says something else....5 years ago was in Cando and there was such a field, there was a group hunting it, (and pounding the mallards), then a warden showed up and bag things happened. We talked to the guys at a local pub later(they were NR also) and said guns, decoys, birds, sickening fines, etc were taken and they might even take trailer and truck...Never heard how it all ended, but we took note of that field and what happened....Its your call....Good luck!


yep. its a huge interpretation thing.



Old Hunter said:


> Ron if you talk to the feds again about baiting would you ask them why they allow people to plant crops, flood them, and then hunt the flooded crops. These people are hunting unharvested crops and we cant hunt 2 year old corn that was plowed down. What a bunch of crap.


this is a great point, we here in michigan hunt flooded corn quite a bit.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Greg I have many a time! Same response is you can to as long as you do not manipulate the grain either mechanically or by hand to dislodge the seeds. I am in full agreement, I have argued that this is normal Ag practices for the area. The FSA/USDA also agrees, but the rule makers at the Fed level are not in agreement!

You may remember back in the fall of 93 when it turned wet in late Aug and we had wheat and durum fields swathed and unharvested growing green. Lots of acres where burned off to remove the straw and we had Fed wardens writing tickets on those fields. Judge tossed a lot of them because the local Ag offices said burning of stubble is a normal practice in ND dating back to the start of record keeping.

Couple years later the Feds amended the wording and rules declaring swathed grain that has sprouted to now constitute a baited field, but still will allow you to hunt a swathed field that has not sprouted!

We fully agree on this!

Have not heard back as of yet, will call in the morning if they have not contacted me!


----------



## kingcanada (Sep 19, 2009)

my understanding is that anything resulting from typical agricultural procedures is not baiting. a good example follows: several years ago there were a large number of insurance claims on hail damaged wheat were i hunt snow geese. the insurance companies required the farmers to windrow and burn these crops before payment would be rendered. this resulted in lots of roasted grain for the birds since the stalks burn away quickly, leaving behind much of the grain. the USFWS put bulletins on the radio asking goose hunters not to hunt these for "ethical" reasons but said that the hunters could not be ticketed for doing so. why would they want to reduce the snow goose harvest? some of you likely remember this, it was not very many years ago. but who knows, in this era of federal nonsense, they may have changed the law. if people abide by the bag limits and other restrictions that are actually set forth clearly in the regulations published by the state, then what is their big concern? gotcha mentality i guess.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Prime example King of what others have said about interpetation! You hunt a hailed out field that has been burned you will likely get a ticket from the Feds in this area!!!!!


----------



## n_108_nd (Oct 13, 2004)

Some of the fields we have experienced have been tilled after they tried to harvest them. Some of the fields, they plowed under before trying to harvest.

Unfortunately, I think it is a federal crime if someone doesn't agree with your interpretation of what is baited and what is not.

I see a lot of posts on here indicating people are doing well in last year's corn fields. it just seems like too big of a risk to me without some sort of interpretation by the feds.

If it stays as wet as it is now, they will not get the corn out again this year.


----------



## Chaws (Oct 12, 2007)

Why banter about this? The Federal Waterfowl regulations state exactly what is considered a baited field.

http://www.fws.gov/le/huntfish/waterfowl_baiting.htm :eyeroll:


----------



## texcl (Oct 6, 2007)

What a bunch of crap, crop failure is a normal part of farming bad luck for the farmer good luck for the hunter. I see the federal govt' is restricting that now, to make matters worse it's up to the warden, who most likely knows nothing about local ag operations, what a bunch of garbage. You have to be a da-- lawyer to go hunting now adays.


----------



## Chaws (Oct 12, 2007)

texcl said:


> What a bunch of crap, crop failure is a normal part of farming bad luck for the farmer good luck for the hunter. I see the federal govt' is restricting that now, to make matters worse it's up to the warden, who most likely knows nothing about local ag operations, what a bunch of garbage. You have to be a da-- lawyer to go hunting now adays.


Calm down hot head and think about it before getting your panties in a wad.

The reason to not allow hunting over failed crop and identifying that as natural occurrence is due to federal wardens not knowing whether the field was purposefully tilled under or if it actually was destroyed by wind, hail, etc. Show me a local ag operation that as part of its normal practices tills under or rolls a perfectly fine crop.

From my knowledge, hunting over these same type of termed "baited" fields has been the ruling for many years.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Plowing standing corn is a normal practice. If you don't get it off in the fall, winter, or spring.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Just to be clear! A hailed field can be hunted until the standing grain sprouts or it is tilled down. Same for a swathed field. Like I said the only real question that they have not answered in regards to this field is the fact that the corn was knocked down in the process of planting a new crop for harvest. In reading the regs, to me this makes the field open to hunting, but I am not willing to run the risk without a statement from someone from the USFWS.

But even if this field is off limits other opportunities are available!!


----------



## Traxion (Apr 16, 2004)

Too many different interpretations on some of this. For example, I got shut down on a hailed field earlier this year. Half harvested, half not. Federal crop insurance had been taken on the field. The Fed warden told me if a Fed crop insurance claim was put on the field, it was not legal to hunt for baiting reasons. I asked him about situations where the insurance adjusters say there is hail but 20% of the crop is recoverable. He said still no dice.

I asked what the verdict would have been if no insurance claim would have been on the field. I was told that I still could not hunt and that hunting the harvested area could be a zone of influence type of violation. Worst part of all of this is the field was a traffic field, only a few birds using it on occasion. I didn't want to fight it so I just moved on.

Still, answers were hard to come by and several calls were made to the supervisor.

Bottom line IMO is the crop has to be planted AND harvested before you can hunt it. If any manipulation takes place (other than swathing to harvest, etc.) before the harvest, or if the crop is not harvested then manipulated, it can be deemed baited.


----------



## ReeceCampbell (Sep 23, 2009)

• No one shall take migratory game birds by the aid of baiting, or on or
over any baited area, where a person knows or reasonably should
know that the area is or has been baited. You may hunt migratory
game birds, including waterfowl, on, over or from standing crops or
fl ooded standing crops; fl ooded, harvested cropland; lands where
grain has been scattered solely as a result of a normal agricultural
planting, harvest or post-harvest manipulation; or from a blind or place
of concealment camoufl aged with vegetation from agricultural crops,
provided that use of such vegetation does not expose, deposit or
scatter grain or other feed.

Straight from the 2009 ND waterfowl hunting giude.

Youre good to go! Good luck!


----------



## just ducky (Apr 27, 2005)

language in the law or not, I would love to see a judge who would convict you for this, unless they could somehow prove the field was "manupulated" for the purpose of hunting. Huge gray area.

No...better yet...I'd love to be the lawyer who got the case to represent you. Pretty easy money IMO. Do ya think Jonny Cochran can come back from the dead for this one?


----------



## ReeceCampbell (Sep 23, 2009)

just ducky said:


> language in the law or not, I would love to see a judge who would convict you for this, unless they could somehow prove the field was "manupulated" for the purpose of hunting. Huge gray area.
> 
> No...better yet...I'd love to be the lawyer who got the case to represent you. Pretty easy money IMO. Do ya think Jonny Cochran can come back from the dead for this one?


Ive been tryin to think how to spin his quote "if the glove doesn't fit, you must aquitt" into some field hunting related joke but i can't do it. :beer:

Youre right tho, i think it would be an easy fight to win.


----------



## Jmnhunter (Feb 9, 2009)

how does a guy tell if the corn is taken under normal harvest or manipulated out of normal agricultural harvest? I know a farmer who said I could hunt his potholes and fields, and I know hes been starting to take corn out (chopping it down I think :huh: )


----------



## shiawassee_kid (Oct 28, 2005)

Jmnhunter said:


> how does a guy tell if the corn is taken under normal harvest or manipulated out of normal agricultural harvest? I know a farmer who said I could hunt his potholes and fields, and I know hes been starting to take corn out (chopping it down I think :huh: )


chopping leaves a whole lot less corn spillage than actual harvest.


----------



## Jmnhunter (Feb 9, 2009)

I think thats what hes doing right now, theres a few inches of stalks and thats it. So i take it that would be an illegal field to hunt then since its not "normal harvest" :-?


----------



## tclark4140 (Aug 8, 2006)

"NORMAL" that in itself is quite a word. whats normal to some may not be normal to others. round baling and leaving the bales in the field, is that normal??? would be to some and not to otheres.
but chopping corn for silage would have to be "NORMAL" farming practice


----------



## poutpro (Mar 8, 2006)

Chopping corn is a very normal practice. Cattle farms do this for silage for their cattle.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Birds love chopped corn.


----------



## 9erfan (Oct 18, 2007)

_if the corn's on the ground, you're not goin' down._ or
_the farmer did pick it, you won't get no ticket_, then there's 
_hunt after the combine, you'll be just fine._

please stop me!!


----------



## Gonzo403 (Sep 23, 2009)

now thats funny :rollin:


----------



## Hunter_58346 (May 22, 2003)

From the USF&W Enforcement site:

What is Illegal?

Some examples of areas where you cannot hunt waterfowl include:

•Areas where grain or seed has been top-sown and the Cooperative Extension Service does not recommend the practice of top sowing (see section on wildlife food plots).
•Crops that have been harvested outside of the recommended harvest dates established by the Cooperative Extension Service (including any subsequent post-harvest manipulations).
•Unharvested crops that have been trampled by livestock or subjected to other types of manipulations that distribute, scatter, or expose grain.
•Areas where grain is present and stored, such as grain elevators and grain bins.
•Areas where grain is present for the purpose of feeding livestock.
•Freshly planted wildlife food plots that contain exposed grain.
•Croplands where a crop has been harvested and the removed grain is redistributed or "added back" onto the area where grown.

So the second point sends a lot of corn fields up here off limits because it was not harvested until this summer,,,,outside the "normal" harvest dates.


----------



## shiawassee_kid (Oct 28, 2005)

Hunter_58346 said:


> From the USF&W Enforcement site:
> 
> What is Illegal?
> 
> ...


why isn't this information on the main rules sheet. i mean if they are detailing it out like this, it should be more accessible. couple of the above are kinda kinda reaching.


----------



## Hunter_58346 (May 22, 2003)

we are talking feds here


----------



## Jmnhunter (Feb 9, 2009)

and how do we find out these normal harvest dates? cant find it on the usda site.. as mentioned the Federal Gov't :-?
well if i get a ticket for hunting a corn field that was chopped for silage; then i'll be going to court


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Just got off the phone with the USFWS! Guidelines for hunting corn fields from last year! If the field was tilled down without harvest even if a new crop was planted and taken off it will be classified as baited. Any fields where harvest of all the field occurred regardless of when, will be deemed huntable. They highly encourage all hunters to talk with landowners to find out what has taken place on the field to avoid issues.

I was not sure if having planted and harvested a new crop would allow one to hunt this fall which is what my question was.

Traxion also any naturally occurring event such as hail,wind or fire from lightening etc.. to a field does not rule out it being open to hunting. If it is still standing state rules of hunting a unharvested crop apply. Landowner permission is needed. It is also good to go if it has been harvested, either by combining or cutting for feed, like baling. The field becomes baited if no harvest is done and it gets worked down. Payment from Fed Crop does not play into it at all!

Keep in mind that grazing or running of cattle does not constitute harvest activity.

So it is very simple, if the field was rolled down this spring or summer with no harvest done, it is baited and remains baited until all scattered seeds are gone and then can be hunted 10 days after that point.

Hailed crops again have to have been harvested or remain standing, tilled down fields again without harvest are baited.

So find out from the landowner what has taken place!

Simple straight forward not a lot of confusion. If you have a question contact the USFWS 701-250-4419 They will get you connected to someone to answer your questions!


----------



## Jmnhunter (Feb 9, 2009)

thanks Ron :thumb:


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Jmnhunter said:


> and how do we find out these normal harvest dates? cant find it on the usda site.. as mentioned the Federal Gov't :-?
> well if i get a ticket for hunting a corn field that was chopped for silage; then i'll be going to court


You can hunt a chopped field.


----------



## kingcanada (Sep 19, 2009)

a good point was made about the feds not knowing if a field was manipulated or just lost. i think it would be easy enough to prove. did the farmer make a loss claim? they usually have crop insurance and insurance companies document things real well. if nothing else, you should be able to rely on that claim/documentation in a court of law. the courts are there to determine whether to determine intent to commit a crime. of course that is a debate for another time and place.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

King I talked with the head of Enforcement in ND with the USFWS, one of the other wardens had refereed my question to the regional office as well. Both the ND and the regional enforcement supervisor out of Denver I do believe gave me the exact information.

They are going to talk with the farmer. What he tells them will determine what takes place. That is why it is so important to speak with a landowner or the person operating the field. They tell a warden it was hail damaged but they ran it through to salvage what they could, no issue. They tell the warden they destroyed the standing crop with no harvest. You best get out the check book!!!!!!


----------



## Hunter_58346 (May 22, 2003)

The person I spoke to stated that the "normal" harvest dates would be looked at. 80 day corn is 80 day corn, not harvested 445 days after plant. Seems some interpret laws differently.


----------



## kingcanada (Sep 19, 2009)

it is amazing how a guy can get into trouble without even intending to these days. our government has developed a tremendous ability to split hairs. wasn't hunting supposed to be a simple, relaxing activity?


----------



## Maverick (Mar 4, 2002)

Another question to ponder?
If there is a slew (an established slew with cattails) in the middle of the field (that is considered baited) is that off limits as well? Can a body of water be considered baited or does it only imply fields?


----------



## jcnelsn1 (Oct 28, 2008)

Even if the water is not baited you cannot hunt anywhere that is within the zone of influence of the baited field. They technically could close down adjacent fields or fields in the flight path. The regs are ridiculous.


----------

