That's exactly right. Call it a baiting bill and drop the BS. No distance or sight restrictions. Just make baiting legal. Someone said, "it would change the way we hunt all together" or something like that. That's right too. Would be more like hunting in KY, Texas, Illinois, Iowa, (where they kill those big bucks) and any place else that might allow baiting.

In the US, we aren't required to prove our innocence. We are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. That's the way it is supposed to work anyway.

Neither Illinois nor Iowa allow baiting.

I agree Big Jack. Allow baiting. Shorten the gun season to two weeks or less and allow any type of bait you want. Now I'd be all for that.

Heck, why we are at it, let's load up and drive about 1 million dump trucks to any of those states and bring back millions of yards of their soils. I know I'd love to have some of that soil.

good post..

like someone else said, make it 200-250 yds from feeder and out of line of sight and make it mandatory to feed year around. Now that would be a supplemental feeding bill. This bill is enough of a baiting bill that a lot of people are supporting it b/c they intend to hunt over a feeder (or 100 yds from a feeder). If it was just a supplemental feeding bill you would not see very much support or opposition b/c very few properties feed 9 months a year and those of us that don't want bait piles or hunting over feeders legalized wouldn't care either.

just call the bill what it really is BUT if you really just want to make it legal to supplemental feed during the season then push for a bill that is not a baiting bill. No one would care and thus it would be easier to pass.

By the way, I do see and acknowledge that there are quite a few supporters for a baiting bill, BUT I would be willing to bet a large sum of money that way more than half of the deer hunters in Al. are opposed to it. The pro-baiters are just more vocal for the most part. Just my opinion though... I'm sure others would argue the opposite.

I agree area needs to be addressed, but this bill is not doing in the true spirit. If you can hunt over it, it is baiting. All rifles and most muzzleloaders can shoot well over 100 yards. Area should be defined in a manner by which the feed can not be hunted over, then I will agree that it is truely supplenmental feeding.

One of the pro baiting bill guys stated the same thing, he said IL has big bucks because they have corn all over the place. BS, IL has big bucks because they don't have a rifle season period and a very short shotgun and muzzleloader season, with a 2 buck limit.

Let AL go to that and see how things change.

I think you might be missing the point that some are making. This bill is at least "perceived" by so many as a baiting bill that you have strong support and strong opposition. Your opinion that this is truly just a bill to define area and has nothing to do with baiting is not shared by many.

The reason a lot of people would want to see the bill mandate year around feeding is b/c this bill will significantly increase the use of feeders and corn during JUST hunting season. Not trying to be smart but step out of your box for a minute and pretend you are in a club and the $1000 per year dues are already killing you wallet. Now introduce this bill and what would you do? start feeding 12 months out of the year or just bait during hunting season? You might also have to make the decisions to quit planting foodplots or plant fewer foodplots b/c after spending $200 per feeder, plus permit, plus feed you've run out of seed money. If this bill wasn't perceived as a baiting bill then these concerns wouldn't exist. By the way, not feeding probably really isn't an option if you want to keep your members, assuming your neighbors are baiting.

You have to understand that very few landowners can afford to feed 12 months out of the year plus establish and maintain foodplots. I'm not in a club and my family is fortunate enough to own land but we don't need to feed deer out of feeders 12 months out of the year or 9 months out of the year. Through native browse, acorns and foodplots and killing does we have plenty of food year round and our deer are in excellent shape. If the bill is passed those of us that don't have fences will have to make a choice to bait or not bait. If neighbors bait and we don't they have an advantage. If we all bait we all spend more money and no one has an advantage, so what's the point?

This is why it's my opinion that those that hunt in a fence shouldn't try to make changes for people that don't hunt in a fence.

Also,

One of the pro baiting bill speakers commented that young hunters need to be able to kill big bucks so they will be hooked into hunting. He said that the bill would assist in that. I almost puked. I have had the pleasure of helping many young hunters take their first deer. None have started with a big buck and ALL were very happy and excited.

Can you bait in Illinois and Iowa?

What good reason is there against you doing it your way and him doing it his way?

Government is not a pawn for people to force their preferences on others:

Truedouble,

Great point. And it is one I have said many times.

If everyone is baiting, then why do it? The deer is faced with the same decision as before baiting. It will just cause everyone to spend more money to play the game.

Did I use the word money? Sure is funny how that continues to come up isn't it.

49er,

You really crack me up sometimes. My point was that it does not require a young hunter to kill a monster buck to get hooked. I would sure be happy if they did kill a big one, but they do not have to become a horn porn addict on their first kill.

td,


That's called "freedom" and "liberty". People died so that you and I might enjoy them.



Now you are against other people making choices for you ... unless it's the government of course.

LOL at the comment about killing big bucks with bait. Corn and other forms of bait might do a lot of different things but making a big Buck slayer out of an average hunter ain't one of them.

Barry,

You still didn't give a good reason why your idea of what's right or wrong should prevail over his.

When you get thru cracking up over me, think about answering my question.

49er, what's your position on legalizing dope and other drugs?

I didn't say his was wrong, I said it is not necessary for a young hunter to kill a big buck to get hooked. Surely, you can't disagree with that?

Lots of drugs are already legal. You probably have some in your medicine cabinet. Some of them are possibly the very same drugs that other people are in prison for possessing.

If you use those drugs in a manner that causes harm to others, your actions should be punished. There are plenty of laws that punish wrongful behavior that causes harm to others. The mere possession of a chemical is not likely to cause anyone harm.

It's much like the possession of firearms or acholic beverages. It's the behavior of the one who possesses those arms or beverages that should be regulated... not the possession in and of itself.

That don't have much to do with the baiting issue and legislating ethics though, does it?