Baiting Illegal!

Discussion in 'Deer Hunting' started by maxcam, Aug 25, 2006.

  1. JDMiller

    JDMiller 12 pointer

    10,605
    3,247
    Jun 12, 2005
    " Between the Rivers "

    deadaim......what I was getting at ...... You have one guy with lots of hunting ground and the financial means of putting up multiple feeders , multiple food plots and any other forms of attractants that he can spend his money on. On the other side of this property.....you have the average "joe" hunter......owning a smaller tract of land or possibly scraping up enough money to lease some hunting ground. Maybe he dont have the equipment or financial means to feed and attract ....so he does not do anything but hunt. Which piece of property will attract the deer??? We all know the answer to that.... the deer will migrate to where the food is at.

    Now put into consideration a ban on baiting ..... neither person of each property can bait..... regardless of the size of the farm. The deer have nothing but natural food sources or normal agriculture to impact their feeding patterns. Now..... which person has the advantage???? Pending the natural forage or adjacent crops ...both have the same chance in harvesting deer or deer sightings. Sure..... there will be illegal baiting but on average....I believe most will abide by the law. At least to me this is a level playing field on opportunties to hold or have wildlife using your property. At least you know their not going to a ton of feed piled on your neighbors property.

    As it stands now...... we dont have a year round ban on baiting ....may never for all I know and what or how a person wants to hunt is their own business. My opinion ....well is my opinion. I do not feel as hunters we need to rely on a pile of corn to harvest game. Some people agree ....some dont.... thats ok and I can respect that. I disagree that a foodplot holds the same potential that a pile of bait does but I'm definitely no expert in this area and wont hold out to be. We use food plots and if they are included in the ban.....they can be disked up and not planted. Saves us a lot of time & money. We will just hunt.
     
  2. aceoky

    aceoky 12 pointer

    13,423
    37
    Jul 14, 2003
    W KY
    Well, I'm NO lawyer (and you didn't ask me either) :D

    But it seems to me since the State owns the wildlife they're able to decide what is and isn't in the wildlife's "best interest", even on private property (no different than you can't decide to shoot more than the legal limit on your own private property)? The laws affect private and public property? I think they always have done so?

    I don't think there would be much of a case for that (private property rights), now the fact they find it there and don't have to prove the one(s) cited ARE the guilty party, I think could be an issue??(legally, since it removes in effect the presumption of innocent until proven guilty)

    Just my $.02 worth (and even with inflation maybe worth half of that) :)
     
  3. Multidigits

    Multidigits BBBC Members

    17,760
    0
    Dec 10, 2001
    Vine Grove, Ky, USA.
    Take as example the spotlighting law.....is it in effect 365 days a year or just during the hunting seasons????
     
  4. buckfever

    buckfever 12 pointer

    13,197
    46
    Oct 25, 2002
    Harrods Creek Ky, USA.
    Mike - Here's the statutes relating to the powers of KDFWR. . . .

    http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/KRS/150-00/015.PDF

    http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/KRS/150-00/025.PDF

    The first statute says that one purpose of Chapter 150 is to "to protect and conserve the wildlife" of KY.

    The second statute broadly gives KDFWR the authority to "promulgate any other administrative regulations reasonably necessary to implement or carry out the purposes of this chapter". Thus, if an enacted regulation is "reasonably necessary" to protect wildlife, it is legitimate.

    Arguments might be made that these regulations are too far reaching to be "reasonably necessary" to protect deer and turkeys, but in my opinion, the statute is very broadly written and the regulations will be upheld. I haven't read the proposed regs yet though, so I say this with some caution.

    I believe that any decision made in the last KDFWR commission meeting though could be challenged on the grounds that "the commission" currently only has 6 members and that certain districts were unrepresented at the meeting.

    I'm aware that KRS 150.022 states that "a majority of the commission shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of any business, for the performance of any duty, or for the exercise of any power vested in the commission". On the other hand, that statute also states that The KDFWR commission "shall consist of nine (9) members, one from each wildlife district. . . ."

    The first section clearly allows the commission to conduct business with only a majority attendance (in the case that certain commissioners were absent), but it also presumes (by using the language "the commission") that there were already 9 appointed commissioners. Unfortunately, we have 3 districts which went wholly unrepresented at the last meeting, and I believe a good argument could be made that until the last 3 members are sworn in, thus completing the "nine (9) members" requirement, the commission is not yet "the commission". After all, "the commission" is defined as having 9 members, not 6.

    I think the blame rests with the Governor's failure to appoint the commissioners by August 13th as required by statute.
     
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2006
  5. Feedman

    Feedman Cyber-Hunter

    10,288
    3,009
    May 28, 2003
    In the basement
     
  6. slickhead slayer

    slickhead slayer 12 pointer

    6,517
    384
    Nov 14, 2005
    VP OF ADMIN Development
    This is the issue I brought up earlier.
    Several years ago when KDFW enacted the no baiting 30 days prior to season, the Dept planned on citing people for doing so. And KDFW was told that you can't tell people to not put out a pile of corn on their property, unless its "reasonable necesary" to protect wildlife.
    Being that you were only banning bait for 30 days,and nobody could show any proof of harm to wildlife, most believed that the "reasonable necesary" wasn't close to being met. Its been so long ago that I can't remember if this was an actual court ruling or if the states attorneys just advised them of this.
    So Fish and Wildlife have NEVER been able to cite people for putting bait out anytime prior to turkey season.

    So knowing this past info, fast forward to today. The Dept wants to ban baiting for a said period of time, but knows its not enforceable UNLESS they meet this "reasonable necesary" clause. Which they haven't met in the past.
    So BINGO, this alpha toxin talk starts up. Its their only way to reach a favorable ruling that allows enforcement.

    Buckfever
    I have a quick question for you. I agree with your assesment that the broadness will probably get it passed. But don't you think that they will have a hard time proving this "reasonble necesary" to wildlife when they are only enacting the ban for certain months. And there is really no logical reason why these "certain" months were picked?
     
  7. aceoky

    aceoky 12 pointer

    13,423
    37
    Jul 14, 2003
    W KY
    Now see? THAT makes sense , and I was starting to "see" that could possibly be a reason for the warmer months( though I still don't see August as being much if any better on that front)...
     
  8. Multidigits

    Multidigits BBBC Members

    17,760
    0
    Dec 10, 2001
    Vine Grove, Ky, USA.

    Slick, I think your on to something???? Maybe the KYDFWR imported these alfatoxins along with the elk and rattlesnakes so that they could put a thorn in all the hunters out there and get them back for something yet to be determined???? Good investigative work!!!

    "it has been known for over 100 years that moldy grains consumed by animals or humans could cause serious illnesses, it was not until 1961 that scientists proved that the death of over 100,000 turkey poults was caused by consumption of aflatoxin-contaminated grain."

    http://plantpathology.tamu.edu/aflatoxin/index.htm
     
  9. slickhead slayer

    slickhead slayer 12 pointer

    6,517
    384
    Nov 14, 2005
    VP OF ADMIN Development
    I hate to be put in the same class as all those morons that believe in the stocking of rattlesnakes and wolves. I think this is a tad bit different.

    Fish and Wildlife, as it stands CAN'T site for bait UNLESS they physically view you HUNTING over it. If they want to change that......WHICH IS THE EXPLICIT REASON they gave for wanting this, they have to show that harm to wildlife exist. They weren't able to show that in the past, and they can't now unless they have something different.
    There MAIN reason for this is to help with enforcement, enforcement is not a legitimate reason to uphold this in court. There MUST be reasonable harm to wildlife, and without the alpha toxin issue, they can't make that argument.

    If this alpha toxin is so terrible.......why is august and Sept not included?
    You can't spit out numbers of how terrible and devastating alpha toxins are in hot months, but ALLOW it August and Sept.

    I agree with parts of the ban, and I have no problem with the Dept doing what they have to do to get enforcement rights, I am just saying that I don't see it getting through court.
     
  10. buckfever

    buckfever 12 pointer

    13,197
    46
    Oct 25, 2002
    Harrods Creek Ky, USA.
    Not sure. From what I've read on here, these aflatoxins are most prevalent during the summer months. If so, the restriction would appear to make some sense.

    I think people get confused b/c they normally associate KDFWR with fishing and hunting, not general "wildlife" protection. For example, KDFWR could ostenisbly pass regulations prohibiting the use of bird feeders by citing to the many studies that talk about how bird feeders are not in the birds' best interests. While we all know that such a regulation would result in immediate legislative action to overturn it, I think it's clearly within their province.

    I'm not familiar with the issue you discussed, but I suspect that those regs developed out of KDFWR's power to regulate the taking (i.e. hunting) of all game species. It's possible that they enacted regulations that banned all feeding 30 days before the season, regardless of whether the baiting was for hunting purposes. Assuming that the stated purpose behind the regulation was hunting-related, I speculate that the powers that be told KDFWR that a court would find that ban of all feeding (whether it was for hunting or not) was too broad and not reasonable related to accomplish the intended goal.
     
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2006
  11. buckfever

    buckfever 12 pointer

    13,197
    46
    Oct 25, 2002
    Harrods Creek Ky, USA.
    Interesting article. Do you know whether those 100,000 turkey poults were killed by naturally existing aflatoxin in standing corn/grain? B/c that same article says that aflatoxins also exist naturally, maybe KDFWR should prevent farmers from growing any corn to protect our turkeys?

    It is an axiom of constitutional law that regulations must be reasonably related to suit their intended purpose. The issue here is whether these new regs will meet this standard.

    Actually, I'm starting to ponder some of the arguments, and maybe a good argument could be made that this ban isn't reasonably related to the intended goal of protecting turkeys/deer. . . .We have no CWD in the state (or so we are told), so banning baiting on that ground won't fly.

    In addition, hunters (and other who feed wildlife) put out such a tiny amount of bait relative to cattle/livestock farmers that a regulation directed at them is like taking a teaspoon of water out of a lake. Moreover, hunters have baited in KY for years, and I'm not aware of this practice leading to any adverse impact on our turkey flocks or deer herds. It's also interesting that the person who spoke about the biological need to end baiting at the commission meeting repeatedly referred to this condition as "alfatoxin". One would think if they were going to recommend a controversial regulation on a biological basis that at a minimum, they'd know how to pronounce the condition they were concerned about.
     
  12. Feedman

    Feedman Cyber-Hunter

    10,288
    3,009
    May 28, 2003
    In the basement
    Thanks Ace,

    They origionally wanted August but moved it back to end of July. After 6 to 8 weeks immune statues in young deer and turkeys should be increasing quite rapidly as they age. For example take a baby calf that is just born, This calf must get the first milk from its mother called Colostrum (It can also come from another cow). this Colostrum contains anti-bodies that is absorbed across the lining of the intestines with the first 24 hours after birth. The immunity that the calf gets from this milk last for about 6 weeks and is refered to as passive immunity. The calf then will begin to build up its own immune system.
     
  13. Feedman

    Feedman Cyber-Hunter

    10,288
    3,009
    May 28, 2003
    In the basement
    Buckfever,
    I understand what you are saying, sometimes people are talking about something that they are not comfortable with, they will miss pronounce words, etc, My problem is I can' t spell worth a damn, Don't mean that I am stupid. May look stupid, but I still cannot spell. He could have been nervous from beig up in front of the crowd.
    Alfatoxin is the most common so that may be why they refered to it. I guess the best way to say it is it is not the Mold that is the problem. It is the toxins produced by the mold. I am sure that he did not talk about Don, T1, T2, Zeralerone, etc.

    This can get pretty complicated. He could have probably done a better job. Maybe he was trying to keep it simple.
     
  14. RDL270

    RDL270 Cyber-Hunter

    1,489
    29
    Apr 14, 2003
    Fern Creek KY
    I remember a wildlife management seminar I attended in Frankfort some years ago....I think the guys name was Kroll, I've got his book but a buddy of mine borrowed it and I never got it back or I would get the exact quote. One of his ideas that stuck with me through the years was the one of the most important two times to supplemental feed was right after deer season before spring green up and in the summer before mast and crops became ready to eat. Seems like that would not mix with the dates mentioned.

    Side note, I do plant food plots and to be honest I've seen more non-game species take advantage of my efforts then deer or turkey ever have. Ive never shot a deer in our food plots, but have shot turkeys in the clover fields (raining and I hunt fields in the rain) I would hate to see food plots banned as they benefit all wildlife and not just game animals.

    .
     
  15. rick243

    rick243 10 pointer

    1,474
    0
    Oct 16, 2005
    SouthEast Ky
    The 100,000 dead poults in the study were brooder house Butterballs. Not wild birds.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice