I don't disagree with your idea.

I do disagree with you using ideas just as weak or weaker than his to oppose an amendment to a law that would allow him to use his own ideas.

Barry, I completely agree with both these statments. I also agree that it would be good to actually define the area in regards to feeding during hunting season.

Will I hope you read this post and pass this info along to Austin AND Senator Scofield. I have spoken with both. I spoke to Austin about this after the CAB meeting a month ago. Feeding year round is supplemental feeding. Feeding during deer season is baiting. You're misleading people by claiming otherwise. The AVERAGE hunter in Alabama (including landowners) don't have the resources to feed year round. Those that choose to feed during deer season will likely STOP planting food plots. That will not benefit deer one bit.

There is little doubt in my mind that providing a complete deer ration (not corn only) is more beneficial than planting a winter food plot. HOWEVER, the food plot, regardless of how it's taken care of, continues to feed deer after 1/31 each year. Even a poorly fertilized, poorly maintained winter annual plots are better than an empty feeder in February.

If "WE" are doing this for the benefit of the deer herd, then the ability to legally feed during the season needs to be tied in with the addition of having a food plot like the crap Democrat bill did. That was one thing I could support in that bill.

Well, pardon me please.

Why is "area" such a hard concept to grasp. It seems pretty simple, you put "supplemental feed", bait, out during hunting season you chose to put yourself into a situation where you could be ticketed. Don't put "supplemental feed", bait, out and there is no problem.

See not the first word about "area" and you retained your right to choose how and where you wanted to hunt.

Oh yeah, it's not about supplemental feeding during season, it's about baiting, by pouring bait out of a bag during the season.

If you want the state to legalize it say you want every hunter in the State to have the opportunity to hunt deer over bait and leave it at that. Otherwise, all of the other is calculated BS anticipating that there are enough legislators dumb enough (unfortunately this is true) to think it's about saving the poor starving little Bambi and it's only to make the deer healthy. Of course right before a 30 caliber bullet blows a fist size hole through them.

If you want those folks making decisions on matters they have no knowledge of then its just a matter of time that somebody else comes along and blows warmer air up the skirt and they stop hunting all together, because those mean old hunters that are shooting all of those little Bambis over a pile of corn that was placed there to keep those little old deer from starving to death.

Is it currently legal to bait deer inside an enclosure in Alabama? If no, I'd like to see Will pushing for a bill specific for enclosures. CD.

Thanks Barry for posting on this thread.... Saved me a lot of time from saying the same thing you said, I appreciate it.

When you get a ticket and have to spend your money, court costs etc because the nearest feeder is over a 1/4 mile away from where you are hunting.

It that what has happened in other states where baiting has been legal for years?

I'm not a fan of baiting, but with it legal in so many states it is a hard fight to win.

Barrys right or wrong is based on morality!!!!!

Dreambucks right or wrong is based on immoraliy.

If a man has to use a lie to further his agenda then it is wrong!! Dreambuck wants to bait so that he can generate a profit. He does not care to help the herd. He would not be playing FRANKENSTEIN with wildlife if he cared about the deer herd.

Our entire Wildlife management system is based upon the premise that the WILDLIFE belongs to the people. Wildlife life stewards do not HIGHFENCE and inject steroids/growth hormones into wildlife or advocate shooting deer at 100 yards at bait piles. It is an impossibility to mske A LIE right.

Morality and ethics just matter.

respectfully,

Allen

Allen, then get some representatives to outlaw high fencing in the name of "public safety" but be careful not to outlaw residential privacy fencing. Cant have folks nude sun-bathing in full view of children.

Skinny

Game management typically is not manipulated by osmose.

The difference may be that ignorance makes decisions that everybody gets to live by. That is not the way I believe the wildlife resources should be managed. Obviously, there are some that prefer stupidity over knowledgeable decision making. Yes, I understand that people can have an opinion and try to yell louder about the mean ole DCNR having personal agendas, but government is best when it does nothing! When government does something everybody gets screwed at one point or the other and when unknowledgeable people are making decisions you can bet everybody gets it without a kiss a whole lot quicker!!

I don't know how the other States came to the conclusion to bait, so I will not answer a blanket queston with a blanket statement. Thanks for bring the point up though.

Just one other question.

You introduced yourself as being a member of BHA. Did you mean to imply you were there to represent the group? If not, I'm not sure why you thought that mattered one way or the other.

I'm not trying to be smart. I just want to know if the BHA opposes the bill as a group.

First off let me point out to you that I said Might and underlined it because I did not know about Illinois and Iowa, other than the fact that they kill big bucks there like they do in Texas and KY. I have said on here many times that my experience with shooting over bait in KY, over the past 11 year 3 or more trips a year, has shown me that the big bucks do not come to the feeders during the day time(usually). In those 11 years we have killed many large bucks and I don't recall a single one being killed at a feeder.
That being said, if baiting is legalized if one does not wish to one does not have to use it. I doubt that baiting on private property will pull many bucks off the unbaited public property.

Barry did step forward as the BHA representative.

I guess I am having a hard time following you. You seem to want the government to keep people from baiting deer on their land, and at the same time you state it is best when government does nothing?

Seem to be contradicting yourself.

Fur Flying,
I appreciate your interest in wildlife management. Using that logic then planting green fields year round(warm and cool) is supplemental feeding and planting them in the fall is baiting. Cause your using it as an attractant, right? I been fortunate to learn a lot from a lot of different biologist. Some of the lessons i've learned are that you need a year round approach to land management. Included in that are habitat management, warm and cool seasons plots, and supplemental feeding. The reason the bioloigist give for one of the main benefits is what
they call filling in the "nutritional gaps" Nutritional gaps is when the native browse and what you have planted are not sufficient to keep the deer healthy. This can be caused by a lot of factors, one example is a drought that limits your greenfields doing well, along with native browse suffering as well. Another example that is relevant to this bill is the winter months when native browse is mostly gone. These are the times supplemental feeding is beneficial to wildlife and really i would argue they need it during these times. The problem most honest landowners have is they will not feed during hunting season because of a horrible law that doesn't define area, and you could argue this is the time they need it most.

Allen,
We base our management program on 4 cornerstones(Age, nutrition, genetics, and stress) We try to manage all 4 of these well. We have never used steroids, hormones or anything else.
As far as wildlife belonging with the people, i generally agree with you. Since you have an issue with people raising deer, do you have an issue with the 1,000,000 plus released quail in south georgia plantations, or the hundreds of thousands of pheasant released in South Dakota Ranches and Public land, or the bass being raised to be put in ponds, what about ducks, chukar, buffalo, elk, etc. I know great stewards that own high fences and some that don't.
Moral and Ethics do matter, and I'm the one spreading facts about wildlife management, not lies about someone business

I want to make this clear, their are a lot of people that want this bill to pass(lease holders, hunting clubs, land owners), i am amazed just at the support we have received today from people on this site through emails and phone calls.

Any chance that you're driving this because you have or want more deer inside your enclosure than what the carrying capacity of the enclosed property would support under normal, free range circumstances?

Not accusing, just asking.

Not us, our habitat and management plan sustains itself except during nutritional gaps.

Will, you are doing yourself a disservice by talking, sometimes silence is a useful strategy.

Regardless of the fancy talk ... Is there anyone here that thinks that "Area" ahould not be explicitly defined?