This is just me, but it sounds like he may have been giving you instructions on where you could put the feed and be legal for your particular location. Think of it as "...put that feed 50 yards further into the woods and then you'll be fine to hunt here." However, I wasn't there so I don't know this for a fact.

This is how I explain it to folks...If the feed is helping or you think the feed is helping you kill a deer then you are not hunting legal.

Some guys try to push the limits all the time, but most folks still put it 20 yards or less from their stands.

I saw the feild he was hunting on when I went down to help him put up stand. I used my rangefinder to measure whole feild. I know it was around 110 -115 yards were he went in the woods. HERE IS MY point = GW had no rangerfinder OR know GPS. SO if bait was not able to be seen AND is over 100 yards why was a ticket issued. THIS crap about how far it was from feild? GW could NOT have measured it IF it had been 5, 10,20, 50 , OR 100 yard off the greenfeild WITHOUT rangefinder or GPS AND give legal testamony in court, correct???? I thought in this country , you were innocent untill proven guilty ? IF IT was me. I would fight it all the way to the Supreme Court if neccessary just to prove a point! Waring that badge , dont make you right!

With all due respect. How can each warden interpret it different than the above picture. The ones in my county said if it's over 100 yards away and said hunter can not see it. Then it is legal. Which is how I understand the picture Hogwild put up. So what does "attracting" deer have to do with it. I mean if it's not thier for that purpose, then why put it out??? Honest question.

Gray areas are an area where it is hard to win. The GW is sworn to uphold the law and for better or for worse, his statements are probably seen as carrying more weight in the court of law.

There are some folks in Lowndes County that would probably disagree with this.

The thing to me is that there shouldn't be any grey area as the law is written and explained with the map picture. No law should ever be written for an LEO to have room to interpret it the way he sees it. It should be factual for everyone to understand it. This one is well defined by the map. So why are we all getting different information from various areas in the state on how the law is to be enforced?

Because 1 picture/diagram is not an exact copy of every stand situation you or we see in the field. Each situation is vastly different.

The purpose of the feed regulation is to allow supplemental feeding not to aid anyone in killing a deer. The law prohibits hunting by the AID of bait.

I've heard Cuck Sykes say several times that he doesn't have a single GW that can read a deer's mind. I guess he was wrong.

Over 100 yards and out of line of sight. Seems pretty clear to me. Chuck sure seemed to think it was clear, also.

Great comeback. Truly you countered my point with that one.

The OP stated the bait was only 3-5ft out of sight. How is it not baiting if he could see the butt of the deer that would be eating the bait?

You're not suppose to be able to see the deer, while they're eating the feed. Deer going to and from the feeding sites is what I'm referring to.

This is the issue I have with the current law. Why would people put corn and other feed out? Isn't it to help the deer herd and keep deer on your property? Whether folks want to admit it or not, the whole idea of "supplemental feeding" is to give them a greater opportunity to harvest a deer. Thus, any "feeding" helps us kill deer.

Why do we split hairs on the "how" it helps us kill deer?

you should go to court and let the judge decide. I'd tell the judge I wasnt hunting anyways, So how could he get me for hunting over bait.

Baiting with corn needs to be legalized and then all this horse s##t could just be put to rest. I knew when they added this supposed "Clarification" to the law it wasn't going to do anything but get people written up "Thinking" they were in compliance with the supposed "New Guidelines".

If you leave it at the GW's discretion to determine if the feeder is positioned in a way to assist your hunt then your ass is likely going to get written up for being anywhere near it. Even if it's more than 100 yards away and not in direct sight.

This BS needs to end. Hopefully the state is on a path to legalize it. The current situation is highly hypocritical. You can hunt over corn if you plant it. You can hunt over green fields. You can hunt over white oak trees. But not a feeder. It's all bait people. And you aren't any more skilled or more ethical a hunter for sitting over a green patch than you are a corn feeder. Both are exactly the same activity and the law is wrong for not recognizing this fact.

I believe I understand what you are saying...
I'll go back to every stand is different. When I recommend putting the feed further into the woods it's not because I can read a deer's mind, it's because I Know that if that Hunter puts the bait __ yards further into the woods then there is no way he would be in violation of the law/rule. Could he put it 40 yards further and still be legal? yep. 30 yards? Yep. 5? Maybe. Timber types, thickets, hills, hollers, ect make each situation different.

So Jon if I have a feeder a 101 yards out of site out of line behind thick brush and timber in the woods and I shoot a deer crossing a field while maybe he was going to or from that feeder but I don't know because I didn't see it eat any feed is it a legal kill?

First of all there is not enough information in that hypothetical situation for me to make a decision.

Second, I will NOT start going into each and every possible situation. Too many variables come into play. I won't be taking the bait today...pun intended.

Translation, there is no set rule. It's completely up to the GW. And therefore all that crap about 100 yards and out of sight is meaningless horses##t.

I understand and no problem. Be safe out there!