Originally Posted By: 49er
You're not the only one who will interpret the words of the rule like that.

The key to the confusion is the "rebuttable presumption" language. That means that the game warden can present evidence that you were using the bait to attract deer or hogs for hunting, even if it is more than 100 yards away, and you can be found in violation.

The commissioner's motive, according to those who have quoted him in news articles, was to exempt people who engage in ongoing supplemental feeding practices from the penalties of the baiting law.

The words of the rule do not reflect that exemption, but I'm sure the game wardens have been told not to enforce the law under certain circumstances described by the commissioner.


Bottom line:

If you can afford year round supplemental feeding, the commissioner will exempt you from the penalties of the law. If you can't, get ready to pay up if there is bait anywhere around where you hunt.


long story short, we are in the same boat as before, but just more BS to sift through to get there. AND some poor, naive suckers that will end up getting a ticket even though they thought they were following the "new law". Just a mess all the way around