I don't care if it's legalized or not. But, I do have a couple of observations...
Calling it "feeding" or "supplemental feeding" vs calling it "baiting" is silly. Feeding/supplemental feeding is 100% legal right now. You can put whatever you want in your feeder right now to help your deer herd, and you can have as many feeders on your property with whatever magical concoction you choose to put in them as you desire to have. There are exactly zero laws against having feeders on your property now...they simply have to be 100+ yards and out of sight from where you're hunting. If you desire to call hunting over food plots "baiting" too, have at it. But, to have the stance that you're not able to provide your deer what you feel they need, then that's simply a falsehood...and not a valid argument for legalizing baiting.
I see several stating "less laws/regulations" as their stance on wanting baiting legalized. I see some of those same people wanting the state to limit the doe harvest statewide. Sounds a bit hypocritical to me. If the state legalizes baiting but doesn't limit the doe harvest, how do you feel that will affect the state's deer herd? Not all "brown it's down" hunters are outlaws. But, they WILL use every legal means to continue with their "brown it's down" quest. No one talks about that gorilla in the room.
The EXTREME argument of the "against baiting" crowd saying that those "for baiting" obviously need a pile of corn to kill a deer is just stupid. The EXTREME counter-argument of the "for baiting" crowd that those "against baiting" should be running around in a loincloth with a spear is equally stupid. Just stop...both sides.
Like I said...I don't care either way. In proof-reading my post, it may appear as if I'm against it, but I'm really not. I just don't see any validity in the "I'm not allowed to feed my deer" argument, nor do I feel that it's ok to use "less laws" as an argument FOR baiting, but also be in favor of limiting doe harvest. You either feel that folks should be able to do what they want on their own property, or you don't. If you don't want to shoot does on your property, then don't. That's how you CHOOSE to manage your property...and how your neighbor CHOOSES to manage his property should be of no concern to you. Quite honestly, I don't mind a brown it's down neighbor. Deer don't seem to hang around there very often, and they see my place as a nice, unpressured spot to hang out.
Lots of good points there. I have been pretty consistent in wanting less regulation, but I don't think it's inconsistent to want the dcnr to restrict the doe harvest enough that some areas don't become completely devoid of deer. If one guy owns a section of land and kills 5 does per season, that is probably sustainable. But if that section is owned in 16 blocks of 40 acres by 16 different people, and each one kills just one doe, then that is probably not sustainable.
The dcnr has a function and I think they have dropped the ball with the liberal doe harvest in areas with a lot of small landowners. This isn't complicated; Charles Kelley showed them how to do it for decades, and he did with limited regulations.
There is so much corn in the woods now that I don't think making it completely legal would make much difference to the deer. But I sure wish they would just make it either legal or illegal. The system now is confusing, and requiring a baiting license is politics of the worst sort.
I just hope they never make it legal to bait turkeys. They will have to radically shorten the season if they do.
PCP makes good points. The doe harvest needs working but I cant think how to make it work unless they tied total does removed from a parcel based on acerage but that would be a logistical nightmare. I would guess if anything was done that it would be tied to the licence insead of the property. Probably 3 bucks and 3 does. I hunt in a very poor area of the state and many of the locals kill more than 6 deer a year but they eat what they kill. It is more of subsistence hunting. I personally know of one man (with a small family) who the man and wife have very low wage jobs but refuse to get on any government assistance. Their meat diet is what he kills, be it deer, hogs or fish from the tombigbee. They have an impressive garden every year. We talked about the possibility of a doe limit and he said he would just have to eat more hogs. They are much more plentiful anyway.
Regarding the baiting\feeding law, I just want them to make it simple. No gray areas where some people think they are doing right and get a ticket because the GW looks at it differently. Black\white with no gray areas.
