So when will we find out if this bill passes?

If we are lucky, never.

X2

X3

You will officially find out by the time the legislative session closes which is usually around the last week of March or first week of April. They usually have two meeting days a week (Tues/Thurs) and committee meetings between those days. 30 total meeting days.

Read this website and learn to use Alison, its not just deer hunting the legislature messes with. http://www.legislature.state.al.us/
Remember this quote and remember it well "No mans land or life is safe when the legislature is in session"

I can only add is no truer words have been spoken!

Now try and figure who first said that.

A very wise man by the name of Gideon Tucker.

^^^^ Some say Mark Twain, but I think it goes back to the founding fathers, Ben Franklin maybe ?

I first heard it from George Wallace when I was a boy, but its properly attributed to Thomas Jefferson and sometimes attributed Andrew Jackson.

Sounds like something TJ might have said.

Just out of curiosity how does this line of sight thingy work?

Does that mean only when you pull the trigger that you cannot see the feeder?

Does it mean no matter where you are past 100 yards from the feeder it cannot be seen?

Does it mean that if your gun is not loaded that you can sit and watch the feeder from anywhere, but if you are going to shoot that yuo have to be 100 yards away, get in a position to where you cannot see the feeder, load you gun and then shoot?

Does it mean that you cannot have a gun loaded or otherwise when you go fill the feeder?

Does it mean that you can place a gravity feeder (like those stump looking things in a low spot to where you cannot see the feeder but you can still see the deer over the feeder and can "legally" shoot it? Does it mean that if you are hunting out of a climbing stand that you have to stay just low enough on the tree that you cannot see the feeder?

Does it mean that only the person designated as the "shooter" cannot see the feeder, but the non-hunting friend can from a different position and can text message the "shooter" that a deer is at the feeder?

Does it mean that the "hunter" cannot see the feeder, but the live feed video camera placed at the feeder sight transmitting images to the "hunter" is ok since it is not in the "hunter's" line of sight?

Does it still allow GW discrection in determining if the "hunter" is following the intent and the letter of the law? If yes, how is this any different than the term "area" in the current regulations because GW discrection is still involved? And for the conspiracy theorist, will the game wardens show favoritism to their buddy's or will they still not be able to give tickets out to people breaking the baiting law because they were not looking through the "hunter's" scope when they pulled the trigger so there is no way to actully prove the "hunter was breaking the law.

So actually in the end this baiting law does not define what can and cannot be done nor is it any more enforcable than the current regulation.

^^^ you just gonna make your head hurt!

F4A,


The DCNR's defintion of hunting covers a lot of ground. Walking down a railroad right-of-way carrying a rifle slung over your shoulder with an empty chamber and scope covers in place can get you at ticket. Whether that defintion is overbroad or not has not been litigated yet.

You've got to watch out for some of the language in their defintion:



You don't want to worry any animals when you're outdoors or do anything that might disturb them. Just walking thru the woods with no weapons at all may put you on shaky ground if you was to scare a bird or something.

All of this looks more like the government is "doing something FOR us", when in realtiy "they are doing something TO us". Basically, they will have created more garbage that is just as arbitrary and vague as the existing regulations and decided that private land hunters should get an added advantage(perceived or not) over public land hunters. Should the government just allow all hunters the same opportunities to succeed or fail?

actually fun4all, this legislation undoes something that the gubberment did to us. Who decided that baiting was a bad thing for deer but an ok thing for fish?

and to add to your other point about private land owners. Private land owners have privilege in the USA. Keep in mind that private ownership is part of what this country was founded on.
I got running water and a toilet or three in my house, that doesnt mean I have to let any vagrant come in and take a sh1t.

Yep, private land ownership allows the privilege to control what happens on your property and who has access. However, free roaming animals, as I understand it, are State resources that you are allowed to reduce to your possession by meeting the States requirements. Public land does not provide the public the privilege of controling what happens on public land or who has access. I anticipate that you would agree that the private land hunter has a significant advantage over the public land hunter that is pursuing the same free roaming State resource, so why should the private land hunter be provided additional advantages (privilege) for the same resource?

I am glad you have indoor plumbing and the neighbors probably are too! Again being a private land owner allows you to control who has access to you potty. Now, if there was a public right-of-way that came into your house (since you have indoor plumbing and all) and covered the area where the (notice I didn't say your, since that would confer ownership) potty sits, well that would be another story on who could have access.

Again should the government select one segment of it's citizen to receive additional benefits to reduce the State's resources to an individual's possession over another segment of it's citizens? Or, should the government allow equal OPPORTUNITY (with the understanding that private land already has inherent privilege that public land does not) for all citizens to partake of the State's resources.

Well, I guess that the State has the Right to fence my property off AND the obligation to reimburse me for any damage THEIR wildlife does to my property as well.

You can't just have it one way.......

Nope, your property, you property rights to control what does or does not come onto YOUR property. If you don't want the State's resources there you fence YOUR property off. However, I do understand the "government should do something for me" train of thought versus being self reliant and figuring out another way to skin the cat.

When I was much younger and did not have access to private land through connection, family, or otherwise all I had access to hunt was public land. At that point in time only buck were legal in gun season except for the 2 or 3 "doe DAYS" on private and public land, however, you could kill does with archery equipment. So instead of sitting around whining about not being able to shoot deer and never seeing bucks to shoot on public land I decided to hunt strictly with archery equipment on public land. Problem solved! Did I just start slaughtering deer by doing that? No, but I did change the way I was going about hunting to increase my opportunities and was not begging the government to help me out.

Currently in the State of Alabama you can legally feed deer year round and you can place bait out and hunt over it legally, the ONLY thing a person has to do is place the "bait" by thinking far enough in advance, you know that thing called planning, to plant the agricultural seed/grain so that it can grow and produce hundreds of times more feed/bait than that sack that you planted. Now is that so hard to figure out? Or, is it just so much easier to whine to the government to help you out because you are unwilling to help yourself out? Or, because "everybody else is doing it anyway"? Or, any other excuse that can be thought up to get the government to give you a little more advantage to kill a deer.