Aldeer.com Forums Alabama Deer Talk Serious Deer Talk Forum Definition of Area Rule

So as it stands now, you might get a ticket in Henry county or Lowndes county, but not get one in Bullock county or Tuscaloosa county (just examples) for doing the same feeder thing. It just depends on the interpretation by the game warden and the judge?

I believe Augustus has already answered that question if it's for him:



Our judges are elected and are members of different political parties with differing political views.

Only the good ones can put politics aside and interpret and apply the law fairly.

Only the good ones who honor their oaths to support our constitutions. The good ones are getting fewer and fewer.

The Judge has clearly explained how things will work, at least in his county, and why the law/reg/rule/whatever, is worded as it is. INTERPRETATION is a learned skill that comes from PRACTICING LAW, not just having an opinion on how it could affect a hunter based on his plans to bait/feed or not. It is unrealistic to expect that every law on the books would be interpreted and ruled upon in the exact same manner in every courtroom in the state. Why should game laws be any different? Discretion is a two edged sword, and the responsibility that goes along with that is enormous. I think too many people in life get hung up on defining fairness. Fair does not mean equal, fair means getting what you need, as an individual. The guy down the road gets busted for ‘baiting’. You do the exact same thing and you don’t get busted. Is that fair to you? Is it fair to him? Would it be fair if you got busted and he did not? GWs get paid to be the first line of defense to help interpret and apply game laws on the spot, right now when it happens. Maybe his decision doesn’t seem fair to you, but he’s the one getting paid to take the heat and make a tough call, often amid people with loaded weapons, who are in a less than agreeable mood.
Fun4all said it best, “Whether bait is within 100 yards, or outside of 100 yards, in sight, or out of sight any reasonable person knows if they are hunting over bait or not.” If you have the money to buy enough corn to “bait” an “area” then you probably have enough money and resources to move your ladder stand to a suitable location so that it fits the new law.

New baiting law?

When did that pass thru the legislature?

The Code of Alabama 1975 shows the following was the last act of the legislature that amended the baiting law:

Acts 1991, No. 91-591, p. 1093, §1

I've read a lot of good post, but as a hunter i will follow the rules but I should not have to ask every gw in every different county that i hunt in how they "interpret" the law & i will not! that's not my job period....

If we truely cared for all wildlife, they would only allow the use of FDA approved corn. Some of this cheaper "Deer Corn" is killing alot of turkeys.

CAB February 7, 2009


23 At this time is there any old
0007
1 business that we need to take up at this time?
2 DR. MAY: I do --
3 CHAIRMAN HATLEY: Dr. May?
4 DR. MAY: I do have something
5 that I -- I consider old. It's been eight months
6 since I requested it. If you remember I was going
7 to make a motion on supplemental feeding to correct
8 the area in which feed could be so the judges and
9 all law enforcement people would know what area
10 meant.
11 And I believe the Department was
12 supposed to let me know something within two or
13 three weeks of their ruling and whether they
14 thought that motion was legal, and I haven't heard
15 from them.
16 But since they didn't notify me, I
17 put it upon myself to visit a few attorneys and get
18 their opinion and they assured me it was nothing
19 illegal about it. I even talked to one judge. He
20 said anything you can clear up in the regulation or
21 law that will help me make an honest ruling that's
22 what I want.
23 I'm in the process of making a couple
0008
1 of appointments with some other judges to get their
2 opinions. So I would like to know what all legal
3 requirements are.
4 CHAIRMAN HATLEY: Who would like
5 to respond to Dr. May? Gary? Allen?
6 MR. SELF: Mr. Chairman --
7 CHAIRMAN HATLEY: Yes.
8 MR. SELF: I don't understand the
9 question.
10 CHAIRMAN HATLEY: Dr. May, would
11 you clarify that for Mr. Self, please?
12 MR. SELF: What is the question?
13 DR. MAY: At the time I wanted to
14 make a motion at the last meeting. The
15 Department -- members of the Department decided my
16 motion may be illegal, so they wanted to discuss it
17 with the legal department to decide if it was or
18 was not, and they were going to let me know in two
19 or three weeks, and I haven't heard from them. Now
20 I'm asking if they do have it.
21 CHAIRMAN HATLEY: Dr. May, for
22 everyone's clarification, what was your motion, if
23 you don't mind repeating it, please?
0009
1 DR. MAY: The purpose of my
2 motion was to eliminate making the decision as to
3 what the area means for the honor and law
4 enforcement personnel. I asked the Advisory Board
5 to approve the motion to amend the current
6 supplementary feeding regulation, 220-2-11,
7 Paragraph 7.
8 The motion reads -- no hunter and/or
9 hunting stand, climbing, shooting house, ladder,
10 ground, and so forth is allowed within natural
11 sight -- "sight" meaning blocked by natural
12 vegetation from rain and so forth -- or within
13 one-eighth mile radius of any city official, and
14 the animal to be harvested must be at least
15 one-eighth mile away from any feed or feeder.
16 MR. ANDRESS: Dr. May?
17 DR. MAY: Yes, sir.
18 MR. ANDRESS: Yes. David Dean
19 and I did get together and work up a report on
20 that. I understood that you had it. But if you
21 don't, I have do have a copy of it here. If you
22 would like it, I will --
23 DR. MAY: I appreciate it.
0010
1 CHAIRMAN HATLEY: Allen, do do you
2 have a copy for everyone on the board?
3 MR. ANDRESS: I do not, sir.
MR. COLES: Ms. Nummy, could we
5 get -- do you have access to a copy machine?
6 CHAIRMAN HATLEY: Mr. Coles, if
7 you don't mind, address the Chair, please, sir.
8 MR. COLES: Mr. Hatley, do we
9 have a copy machine?
10 (Audience interference.)
11 CHAIRMAN HATLEY: (inaudible) we
12 do not have access to a copy machine at this time?
13 MS. NUMMY: I can come back in a
14 little while. Is that okay, or we could get it out
15 to you-all?
16 CHAIRMAN HATLEY: No. You can
17 just hand it out. It'll be fine. Thank you.
18 Dr. May, have you had an opportunity
19 to look at that?
20 DR. MAY: No, sir. I haven't.
21 I'm getting old.
22 Would you like me to?
23 CHAIRMAN HATLEY: Well, we'll
0011
1 proceed, and then we'll come back to you at
2 whatever point you would like to address this group
3 again. Okay?
4 DR. MAY: Thank you.

1 Dr. May?
2 DR. MAY: I'd like to get clear
3 on what -- if you-all agree if Allen, the legal
4 department, the way I read it they agree with me
5 that I what I have stated is legal?
6 MR. ANDRESS: The conclusion was
7 that it is legally feasible to define an area for
8 the purposes of that statute. Yes, sir.
9 DR. MAY: But you-all would
10 prefer that it be designated to for what species of
11 animals?
12 MR. ANDRESS: Due to the
13 differences in daily movement, food habits, hunting
14 practices, and those sorts of things, it would have
15 to be done species-specific. And I think my
16 comments were that I felt like deer, turkey, and
17 feral swine were similar enough in those things to
18 be considered together.
19 DR. MAY: They could be
20 complicated in --
21 MR. ANDRESS: Yes.
22 DR. MAY: In other words, I could
23 be prepared to bring a motion at the next meeting?
0155
1 MR. ANDRESS: It is legally
2 possible to define area, it was our conclusion.
3 Yes, sir.
4 DR. MAY: Okay. I appreciate
5 it.
6 One other thing I had, Mr. Hatley,
7 was we will probably -- either I or Mr. Johnson

8 will bring some type of motion on Choctaw County
9 that we heard from Mr. Smith today.
10 So if there's any more discussion on
11 it, or if there's any that anybody wants to discus
12 the area situation on the supplemental feeding,
13 I'll be glad to answer any questions.
14 CHAIRMAN HATLEY: Thank you,
15 Dr. May. So noted.
16 Mr. Jones, do you have something?
17 MR. JONES: I was going to ask
18 Dr. May in particular on the defining the area.
19 Dr. May, are you going to present at
20 the next meeting what your definition, or what your
21 recommended definition of area is for us to


22 consider for the vote in May, or would it be for --
23 DR. MAY: Yes. That's what I
0156
1 want. I want it on the agenda that we will discuss
2 it, and I will bring a motion to recognize what I
3 say is the area -- what Allen has agreed and the
4 Department has agreed.
5 MR. JONES: But we would actually
6 vote on that in May, is that what you are saying?
7 DR. MAY: March.
8 MR. JONES: Okay. Is there any
9 way that we can see the language prior to that
10 meeting is what I would like to --
11 DR. MAY: You can see it today.
12 MR. JONES: Okay. In order to
13 give public -- you know, they need to be able to
14 see that as well.
15 CHAIRMAN HATLEY: You got that
16 clear, Mr. Jones?

CAB March 2009

4 DR. MAY: Yes. I mentioned last
5 week -- last month that I would bring a motion to
Page 70


6 describe the area around supplementary feeding, to
7 define it. But after some discussion with Chief
8 Andress and other Board members, I'm going to hold
9 off until we get something that's more satisfactory
10 to everyone, something that's easy to enforce, and
11 something that's understood by everyone. That's
12 the problem we have now, and I don't want to make a
13 motion that's just as bad as what we've got on the
14 record now.

CAB Meeting Feb 2010

page 72


12 DR. STRICKLAND: So you're
13 interesting in baiting?
14 MR. PERKINS: If you want to
15 call it baiting. Not too much like I've
16 seen it on television where they drive down
17 the road and turn the feeders on.
18 CHAIRMAN MOULTRIE: Dr. May?
19 DR. MAY: I have a
20 question.
21 Do you know what the area means
22 for the regulation?
23 MR. PERKINS: I've yet to
0135
1 see it defined, unless they've done it this
2 year.
3 DR. MAY: I agree with you.
4 I've been asking everybody, and I can't
5 find how they --
6 MR. PERKINS: I can't
7 either. So no, sir, I don't know.
8 DR. MAY: Yes, I agree with
9 you. We need to do something to get back
10 to where it's defined. I don't know how it
11 got in the regulations and there's log out,
12 somebody recognizing that area means from
13 here to eternity.
14 MR. PERKINS: I mean, every
15 man has got his own definition of the word.
16 DR. MAY: Yes, I agree with
17 you. We need to do something about that.
18 MR. PERKINS: Thank you.

CAB March 2010

Page 92
1 CHAIRMAN MOULTRIE: Thank
2 you, Mr. Yeargan.
3 Okay, that was our last
4 speaker. The next order of business is Old
5 Business.
6 Is there any open issues from
7 the previous meetings?
8 Dr. May -- Dr. May, before you
9 start because of some of the issues that
10 will probably arise, I'd like to call on
11 Bill Hatley to chair this section of the
12 meeting.
13 Look at him, he's so happy he's
14 floating across the stage getting over
15 here.
16 And the reason is there could be
17 some controversial issues with some of what
18 I did prior to this. I will not
19 participate in any -- I also will not
20 participate in any of the debate that goes
21 on today in Old Business and will return
22 promptly upon new business.
23 Mr. Hatley.

[break in subject matter]

Page 95
19 Second order of Old Business, I
20 will recognize Dr. Wayne May.
21 DR. MAY: Thank you,
22 Mr. Chairman. We've discussed several
23 times trying to define the area where

Page 96
1 supplemental feeding can be carried on.
2 Now, the purpose of this
3 following motion is in no way intended to
4 relax the prohibition against hunting over
5 a baited area or hinder enforcement of the
6 Alabama Code 911-244.
7 To the contrary, this proposal
8 is made for the express purpose of
9 providing clarity to both the hunting
10 public and enforcement officers, which
11 include the judges.
12 The motion is the area over
13 which a hunter is attempting to harvest a
14 protected species, and therefore the area
15 which must be free from bait, is any area
16 in which the hunter is legally entitled to
17 harvest a protected species.
18 And "A" -- the Letter A -- any
19 area within 100 yards of the location of
20 the hunter in any direction, whether or not
21 such area within the 100-yard range is
22 visible from the hunter's location.
23 An example of that is it is a

Page 97
1 violation of this statute if any bait is
2 located 100 yards or less from the hunter.
3 "B", any area within the
4 obstructed line of sight from the hunter,
5 up to a maximum distance of 400 yards from
6 the location of the hunter.
7 Example, any bait over 100 yards
8 from a hunter, but less than 400 yards from
9 the hunter, must be out of sight from the
10 hunter or the hunter will be in violation
11 of the statute.
12 "C", any area beyond 400 yards
13 from the location of the hunter where
14 protected species is specifically located
15 at the time a hunter affirmatively acts in
16 an effort to kill or take a protected
17 species by shooting, firing, or otherwise
18 discharging or using the hunter's firearm
19 or other harvesting weapons or mechanisms.
20 Example, a hunter is in
21 violation of this statute if the hunter
22 attempts to shoot a protected species which
23 is over 400 yards from the hunter and is in
Page 98
1 the specific location of the bait.
2 And that's my motion.
3 MR. HATLEY: Is there a
4 second to this motion?
5 MR. B. JONES: I second it.
6 MR. HATLEY: We have a
7 second by Mr. Brock Jones, motion by
8 Dr. Wayne May.
9 Discussion?
10 Mr. Gaines Smith?
11 DR. SMITH: For
12 clarification, Dr. May, you said 100 yards,
13 or what's the minimum on that that is in
14 your regulation?
15 DR. MAY: Any area within
16 100 yards of the location of the hunter in
17 any direction which are not -- whether or
18 not such area within the 100-yards radius
19 is visible from the hunter's location.
20 An example of that is the
21 violation of this statute any bait is
22 located 100 yards or less of the hunter.
23 MR. HATLEY: Do each of us

Page 99
1 not have a copy of this?
2 COMMISSIONER LAWLEY: Well,
3 we do, but they're conflicted copies.
4 Dr. May, I think the latest
5 revision of that was 200 yards, and what
6 you've got is the first one. But it was
7 revised again to 200.
8 DR. MAY: No, sir, it's a
9 misprint if it is.
10 MR. HARTZOG: It's supposed
11 to be 200.
12 DR. MAY: No, it's supposed
13 to be 100.
14 MR. HARBIN: Is it 100 or
15 200 yards?
16 DR. MAY: It's 100 yards.
17 Let me explain that. Let me explain why
18 it's 100.
19 If you're in the woods at 100
20 yards, you're not going to see a deer from
21 100 yards from where you are, in most
22 cases.
23 And now, 100 yards -- now, if
Page 100
1 you are 100 yards, you cannot shoot that
2 deer, if the feeder is closer than 100
3 yards.
4 The example is it's a violation
5 of this statute if bait is located 100
6 yards or less from the hunter.
7 MR. HATLEY: Mr. Smith, does
8 that clarify anything for you?
9 DR. SMITH: I guess, the --
10 okay, yes, I think that's what we meant
11 before. That's the motion and the second.
12 MR. HATLEY: Right. Is
13 there any other discussion on this?
14 Mr. Self?
15 MR. SELF: Yes,
16 Mr. Chairman, I would like to say that I
17 believe this to be the single-most
18 important issue that's ever come before
19 this Board and that I believe that if
20 Dr. May's motion passes that we will see an
21 explosion in the amount of supplemental
22 feeding in this state.
23 And in my opinion and the

Page 101
1 opinion of many wildlife biologists,
2 supplemental feeding of wildlife is not a
3 good thing. In fact, it's detrimental.
4 Also, there's a legal issue.
5 The legislative crafters of 911-244, the
6 baiting law, wisely did not define the
7 area. This was done intentionally. To try
8 and define the area, I believe will be
9 illegal, because it fails to take into
10 account the words "directly" or
11 "indirectly". And of course the movement
12 of deer and turkey and other animals will
13 be affected indirectly.
14 Supplemental feeding unnaturally
15 concentrates animals to a particular area,
16 and they remain in close proximity to the
17 feed and can come from miles away. This is
18 a proven fact.
19 If you were to place bait out or
20 feed out -- if you place out -- place feed
21 out or your neighbor places feed out, one
22 or the other would have to follow. Because
23 if your neighbor is putting feed out, he's
Page 102
1 going to have -- it's a situation where if
2 one of you is putting feed out, then the
3 other one must too, or the one that puts
4 the feed out is the one that's going to
5 have the animals.
6 Alabama law is not unique. It
7 mirrors Federal Law 50CFR20.21, prohibition
8 of bait relating to water fowl and
9 migratory birds. There is no distance
10 specified in the federal statute, and state
11 law cannot supercede federal law.
12 Defining the area would create
13 an inconsistency with federal law regarding
14 baiting, if duck hunting occurred on
15 adjoining property.
16 Now I would like to bring your
17 attention to -- from our Web site, Outdoor
18 Alabama, there is an article by one of our
19 wildlife biologists, Kevin
20 Holstenback(sic).
21 He states "studies have shown
22 that supplemental feeding can increase the
23 population of deer; however, food makes up

Page 103
1 only a part of the equation that determines
2 carrying capacity. So even if the amount
3 of available food increases, the amount of
4 water, shelter, and space remains the
5 same. This keeps the deer in closer
6 proximity to one another, increasing the
7 chances of disease being transmitted from
8 sick animals to healthy animals.
9 Research has also revealed that
10 deer remain in the area with feed, which
11 increases browsing on native vegetation.
12 It's been shown that deer actually over-
13 browse high quality vegetation near
14 supplemental feeding areas.
15 Long-term feeding in areas can
16 result in significant damage to wildlife
17 habitat for deer and other wildlife.
18 Supplemental feeding deer also attracts
19 nontarget animals, such as raccoons,
20 possums, wild turkeys, and other birds and
21 small mammals.
22 Those species can be more
23 susceptible to disease than deer. High
Page 104
1 levels of alfatoxin, a byproduct of certain
2 molds associated with small grains, have
3 been found in bags of deer corn in several
4 states. This can be toxic to wildlife,
5 especially the smaller species.
6 It is becoming clear that
7 supplemental feeding can do more harm than
8 good. Let's keep the deer healthy and wild
9 so that many generations of hunters and
10 wildlife watchers can enjoy them."
11 MR. HATLEY: Anything else,
12 Mr. Self?
13 MR. SELF: Yes, I also got
14 an article here from Mississippi State
15 University Extension. It states that "the
16 consequences of supplemental feeding can
17 affect the physical health in individual
18 animals and entire populations. The
19 quality and quantity of a habitat can also
20 be impacted."
21 It more or less states the same
22 thing that our own biologists have stated.
23 MR. HATLEY: Mr. Self, we're

Page 105
1 getting a little off of the point here in
2 the fact that we're defining an area. We
3 already do supplemental feeding, but what
4 Dr. May -- what I assume he is trying to
5 do -- is to define the area of supplemental
6 feeding.
7 Am I correct?
8 MR. SELF: Yes, that's
9 correct. But my point is that we will have
10 an explosion. We will have far more
11 supplemental feeding occurring once that is
12 defined.
13 MR. HATLEY: Point well
14 made.
15 MR. HARBIN: And no green
16 fields to plant, is my worry.
17 MR. SELF: Well, that's a
18 worry -- I will get to that as well.
19 MR. HATLEY: Hold it, guys.
20 If you-all want to talk, address me.
21 Mr. Jones?
22 MR. B. JONES: Yes, there
23 was some confusion on my end about -- my
Page 106
1 intent was to second a motion for 200
2 yards, versus 100 yards.
3 I don't know if David wants to
4 help clarify or what as far as what I can
5 do to withdraw my second on 100 yards, but
6 would be acceptable with 200 yards.
7 MR. SELF: Would you please
8 let me finish?
9 MR. HATLEY: I thought you
10 were finished.
11 MR. SELF: I'm not through.
12 This is from Idaho State Fish and Game
13 Department. "Most wildlife are well
14 dispersed across the countryside, but
15 supplemental feeding concentrates wildlife
16 populations in a small area near feeding
17 sites.
18 When wildlife congregate in a
19 small area, disease outbreaks are more
20 prevalent. Overabundance of wildlife is
21 determined by habitat quality and quantity.
22 Food is the factor that most often limits
23 wildlife abundance.

Page 107
1 When humans provide food,
2 reproduction and survival rates increase,
3 resulting in over population. The Idaho
4 Game and Fish Commission recognizes that
5 big game populations should be maintained
6 under natural conditions and by natural
7 available forage.
8 Winter food is the major
9 limiting factor which determines the basic
10 size of the big game population. That must
11 be maintained if these animals are to
12 prosper and propagate."
13 Alabama Wildlife Federation --
14 the evidence that deer baiting causes the
15 spread of disease is well documented, and
16 this is about a five-page document which I
17 don't want to bore you with.
18 This is from the Safari Club.
19 They basically state the same thing.
20 "In 1993 a Southeastern
21 Cooperative Wildlife Disease study survey
22 of bait piles in North and South Carolina
23 revealed that over 50 percent of the piles
Page 108
1 tested contained excessive levels of
2 alfatoxin.
3 Animals are attracted to
4 artificial feed in higher densities than
5 would otherwise naturally occur. This
6 attraction to such feed results in more
7 frequent contact among individuals, thereby
8 facilitating the opportunity for disease
9 transmission among individuals."
10 Pennsylvania, same thing.
11 Maryland, same thing -- "Feeding Wildlife,
12 You May Be Doing More Harm Than Good".
13 The evidence is overwhelming.
14 Now, this is from the Wildlife Society --
15 "relevant literature indicates that
16 manipulating animal behavior through
17 baiting or supplemental feeding may largely
18 impact the current stability and future
19 subsistence of natural wildlife
20 populations."
21 Maine, they say "Supplemental
22 Feeding, Just Say No".
23 And this is from Bill Gray and

Page 109
1 Chris Cook, which are two biologists from
2 our own department, "supplemental feeding
3 can have the effect of promoting unnatural
4 increases in survival, reproduction, and
5 recruitment.
6 A larger deer population is
7 contrary to the management objectives of
8 the Wildlife & Freshwater Fishery statewide
9 deer management plans and is not in the
10 best interest of the resource or the
11 general public.
12 Research indicates providing
13 supplemental feeding can alter natural
14 movement patterns, distribution, and
15 behavior of deer and other wildlife
16 species." More and more of the same
17 thing.
18 I am going to end this pretty
19 quick. I got one further thing here I want
20 to reed. This is from Dr. Robert Brown.
21 He's a professor and head of the Department
22 of Wildlife and Fishery Sciences at Texas
23 A&M.
Page 110
1 "Supplemental feeding does not
2 prevent malnourishment. It usually just
3 increases the population size at which
4 malnourishment occurs.
5 Forty percent of the sampling of
6 100 bags of deer corn sold in Texas last
7 year had the had levels of alfatoxin that
8 were illegal, and 20 percent had levels
9 that would be toxic to birds and other
10 nontarget species, as well as deer if
11 consumed over a long period of time.
12 Blackhead in turkeys is
13 transmitted by consuming contaminated feed,
14 water, or soil."
15 He states in this paper that --
16 before I wrap this up -- "we need to look
17 at the influence of intensive management on
18 deer hunting. As many as of you know, we
19 at Texas A&M has been involved in the
20 effort to address this very issue in our
21 state.
22 Hunting is a very important
23 issue in our state, as well as it is in

Page 111
1 Alabama."
2 MR. HATLEY: Mr. Self, are
3 you finished?
4 MR. SELF: I don't think
5 many folks want to hear the rest of this.
6 I think most everybody --
7 MR. HARBIN: Mr. Chairman --
8 MR. HATLEY: Mr. Self is not
9 through. He still has the floor.
10 MR. HARBIN: I'm sorry.
11 MR. SELF: I want to make
12 just a couple of more comments and quit
13 reading. There is a preponderance of the
14 evidence against supplemental feeding.
15 In my opinion we should be
16 trying to prohibit supplemental feeding for
17 everything except for the trapping of feral
18 swine. Our current law works well.
19 I think we have -- Alan, don't
20 we have about a 95 percent conviction
21 rate?
22 MR. ANDRESS: That's
23 correct, yes, sir.
Page 112
1 MR. SELF: I think if we
2 define the area and concentrate the deer,
3 all you do is have to position yourself
4 upon a trail leading to the bait and shoot
5 the animal.
6 There's also an argument that
7 "everybody else is doing it, why can't I"?
8 Well, why do we have speed
9 limits? Why do we want to outlaw
10 marijuana? Everybody is doing it. This
11 just -- it just doesn't make good sense
12 that we can use that as an excuse.
13 I have also heard the argument
14 that "we want bigger deer, so let's feed
15 them". Well, deer size is a function of
16 geographics. If you look at the deer in,
17 say, the Key deer down in south Florida,
18 he's not much bigger than a dog.
19 If you come up through central
20 Florida, the deer get a little bit bigger.
21 If you come to Alabama, they get bigger.
22 If you go to Illinois, they're going to get
23 even bigger. Until finally you get up in

Page 113
1 Canada, and that's where the largest
2 whitetail deer are. And the deer size is a
3 function of cold weather. The colder the
4 weather, the bigger the deer.
5 I believe this will hurt what I
6 call the food plot industry. There's a lot
7 of people will give up planting food plots
8 and simply put out supplemental feeding
9 where they can shoot within 100 yards or
10 200 yards of it.
11 In the early '90s Alabama had
12 the largest deer herd per acre of any state
13 in the union, and then we started DMAP and
14 got the deer herd under control. It was --
15 now we now have a better balanced herd
16 because of public education, and we have
17 much bigger racks.
18 In closing, I'd like to say that
19 Alabama Wildlife Management Programs have
20 been the envy of the nation for a number of
21 years. This Board should be trying to ban
22 supplemental feeding, with the exception of
23 its use in the control of feral hogs, and
Page 114
1 only then when deer and turkey season is
2 closed.
3 I ask my fellow Board members,
4 don't kill the goose that laid the golden
5 egg. Vote no to define the area.
6 MR. HATLEY: Wait a minute.
7 We need to clarify a point. We had a
8 motion and a second, Mr. Dean, and the
9 second wishes to be withdrawn.
10 That is permissible, is it not?
11 MR. DEAN: Yes, sir.
12 MR. HATLEY: Therefore, we
13 do not have a second Dr. May's motion.
14 Would anyone care to second that
15 motion at a 100 yard figure?
16 (No response.)
17 MR. HATLEY: Dr. May, would
18 you care to -- that motion fails due to
19 lack of a second.
20 MR. DEAN: I think it would
21 be good for Mr. Jones just to go on record
22 that he withdraws his motion.
23 MR. HATLEY: Mr. Jones?

Page 115
1 MR. B. JONES: I withdraw
2 that second.
3 MR. HATLEY: Mr. Jones has
4 gone on record officially withdrawing his
5 second to Dr. May's motion; therefore, if
6 no one else would like to second that
7 motion, Dr. May's motion fails.
8 Dr. May, would you have another
9 motion?
10 DR. MAY: No, sir, but I
11 would like to clarify some of the stuff
12 that Mr. Self has said. And if I had known
13 we was going to have a debate, I would have
14 brought my library with me, too.
15 But you mentioned the toxin that
16 they found in piles in South Carolina. If
17 you would have read that paragraph a little
18 further, you would have told the crowd that
19 they also found it out there in the fields
20 at that corn was standing in the fields.
21 I worked for the U.S. Department
22 of Agriculture right out of vet school in
23 Raleigh, North Carolina. North Carolina
Page 116
1 was accredited for TB at that time. That
2 was in 1956.
3 Michigan was not accredited to
4 be TB-free until 1979. And that story on
5 TB and the deer in Michigan has been some
6 of the problem that people are scared of
7 supplemental feeding.
8 The TB didn't start in the
9 deer. It started in cattle. When all the
10 states were accredited, I think Michigan
11 was the last. I know they had 30 percent
12 of all the TB in the nation.
13 And when I know they had this
14 problem with TB in the early '90s, they
15 blamed the deer and supplemental feeding
16 for it.
17 What did Michigan do? They
18 stopped for a while. But they have been
19 back at it for two or three years now,
20 feeding and supplementing -- feeding and
21 baiting. And it didn't -- the TB came from
22 the cattle originally.
23 In 1975 they found one deer, and

Page 117
1 everybody thought it was just a casual
2 thing that happened, it had gotten a deer,
3 but it was already spread in the deer from
4 the cattle. So they didn't investigate it
5 any further until it all got out of hand.
6 Same thing happened in Minnesota
7 recently, and they found it in the cattle
8 first. And they only found it in a few
9 deer later, but it had spread into the
10 cattle.
11 So I hate to see the
12 supplemental feeding get blamed for the
13 spread of disease when most of the time
14 it's poor management on the Department of
15 Agriculture or the Wildlife Department not
16 keeping a check on the cattle.
17 MR. HATLEY: I thought you
18 were finished. Go ahead.
19 DR. MAY: I was just going
20 to say, Mr. Self has quoted a lot of stuff,
21 and I could have brought him a lot of stuff
22 that I could have read off to him, too.
23 But if you talked to any animal
Page 118
1 (inaudible) person, just like if you ask a
2 real estate person where property is worth,
3 this, he's going to say "location,
4 location". If you ask an animal
5 (inaudible) person, he's going to say
6 nutrition, nutrition, nutrition.
7 And that's what bothers me when
8 someone gets up and talks on this stuff and
9 he's really not familiar with what he's
10 talking about.
11 MR. HATLEY: Thank you,
12 Dr. May.
13 Mr. Lynch?
14 MR. LYNCH: It seems to me
15 that the issue here gets sometimes
16 separated. The supplemental feeding that
17 goes on year-round becomes a different
18 issue during deer hunting season and turkey
19 hunting season, other seasons where you
20 could take an animal that is in the general
21 vicinity of a supplemental feeding
22 station.
23 I know that while Alan says that

Page 119
1 we're at a 95 percentile conviction of
2 people that we go after for baiting an
3 animal and taking that animal, we are
4 having difficulty with some of our DAs on
5 lawyers being slick enough to use the area
6 so that the convictions doesn't occur.
7 So whether it's 100 yards or 200
8 yards, I think this Board needs to
9 understand that what we're talking about
10 here is not allowing baiting of animals,
11 which is different from supplemental
12 feeding.
13 We also need to be cognizant of
14 the fact that there are forces in this
15 state who politically would like to have
16 this state opened up to baiting, and there
17 have been some bills that were tried to
18 pass in the Alabama Legislature that would
19 do, in my mind, just that.
20 So I think Mr. Self is right.
21 This is a very important issue, and I think
22 we need to be working in conjunction with
23 our enforcement group and with our
Page 120
1 biologists to understand what the great big
2 ramifications are.
3 Because if we change our state
4 to where it is more readily available to
5 people to put out feed and bait and take
6 our wildlife, that would be a wrong move
7 for us to make.
8 And I'm not saying we don't
9 study it, and I think we should. And we
10 may need to work with our group and
11 everybody to redefine the area. And if
12 that's the case, then I think at that time
13 we might have something we'd have more
14 acceptance of.
15 MR. HATLEY: The chair
16 recognizes the fact that we were trying to
17 do just that today, but I think the problem
18 was that we did not have an agreeance
19 amongst themselves on how these parameters
20 will be established.
21 So what you're suggesting,
22 Mr. Lynch, is that we work toward that goal
23 by the May meeting or at some point?

Page 121
1 MR. LYNCH: Yes, and I'd
2 like to make sure that we understand the
3 differences in what we're talking about
4 here.
5 And as a point of clarification,
6 for one thing that Mr. Self said, I am
7 somewhat confused when you're talking about
8 supplemental feeding of wild hogs for the
9 purpose of taking them.
10 Okay, to me, you know, you're
11 talking about being able to put out feed
12 for hogs and then you could reduce the
13 population.
14 MR. SELF: In a trap.
15 MR. LYNCH: Okay, but you're
16 right. I think that's what we ought to
17 have for May if we want to move forward to
18 this, be more connected on what we're going
19 to do at that meeting.
20 MR. HATLEY: We're talking
21 here about two different issues when you
22 get into the feral hogs and to other things
23 else, but I agree that we should clarify
Page 122
1 what we want to do. Because it sounds like
2 we didn't have an agreeance amongst
3 ourselves as to what Dr. May's motion was
4 going to be.
5 And I think at this juncture,
6 since we don't have a motion before, then
7 the Chair would like to see, along with
8 staff and Board members, to try to reach
9 some agreement and clarification on what we
10 can or cannot present as a motion at the
11 May meeting.
12 MR. SELF: As a point of
13 clarification, Mr. Lynch, baiting is
14 defined as when hunting is occurring near
15 supplemental feeding.
16 MR. HATLEY: It's why we
17 need the definition, Mr. Self.
18 MR. SELF: The professional
19 biologists, they define it that way.
20 MR. HATLEY: The Chair
21 recognizes the commissioner.
22 COMMISSIONER LAWLEY: The
23 only thing I want to say is to emphasize to

Page 123
1 the Board that seven years ago in Midway
2 Corky Pugh, Alan Andress and myself met
3 with the circuit judge and the direct
4 attorney at that time, recognizing the
5 problem that the area was not defined and
6 the problem it caused in the court system.
7 At that time Corky and Alan
8 promised that they would come up with a
9 definition of area. And I'm not saying
10 they ignored that, but they have been
11 working -- all of us have been working on
12 it for seven years. It's not an easy thing
13 to define. This is the closest thing that
14 I've seen that we -- you know, that will.
15 And if all of you-all will read
16 this closely, there's a supreme court
17 ruling that drastically affects the statute
18 that was written and that has to be taken
19 into consideration.
20 And I don't know how many hours
21 Alan's worked on it, but he's come up with
22 a couple of things that just weren't where
23 everybody could understand what they meant.
Page 124
1 But it is a serious problem so I
2 wish between now and the next Board meeting
3 everybody would give it their full
4 attention.
5 MR. HATLEY: I think the
6 Chair recognizes the fact that something
7 needs to be done in this area. The Chair
8 also thinks that there's been some blunders
9 made today and -- by staff and by this
10 Board -- that we didn't have this clarified
11 and defined the way it should have been
12 when we have a second and it has to be
13 withdrawn because of misunderstanding.
14 I think by the 25th meeting, we
15 need to get this clarified, or we can put
16 it behind us and go on to something else.
17 Is there any other Old Business
18 that needs to come before this Board?

Lawley remarks about promise to define "area".

CAB Meeting
March 2010



22 COMMISSIONER LAWLEY: The
23 only thing I want to say is to emphasize to

Page 123
1 the Board that seven years ago in Midway
2 Corky Pugh, Alan Andress and myself met
3 with the circuit judge and the direct
4 attorney at that time, recognizing the
5 problem that the area was not defined and
6 the problem it caused in the court system.
7 At that time Corky and Alan
8 promised that they would come up with a
9 definition of area. And I'm not saying
10 they ignored that, but they have been
11 working -- all of us have been working on
12 it for seven years. It's not an easy thing
13 to define. This is the closest thing that
14 I've seen that we -- you know, that will.
15 And if all of you-all will read
16 this closely, there's a supreme court
17 ruling that drastically affects the statute
18 that was written and that has to be taken
19 into consideration.
20 And I don't know how many hours
21 Alan's worked on it, but he's come up with
22 a couple of things that just weren't where
23 everybody could understand what they meant.
Page 124
1 But it is a serious problem so I
2 wish between now and the next Board meeting
3 everybody would give it their full
4 attention.

...The appellants' argument that the regulation of the Department of Conservation is unconstitutional because it does not define the terms fresh and salt water appears to have merit.

"It is also settled law that `In enacting a criminal statute, there is an obligation on the State to so frame it that those who are to administer it and those to whom it is to be administered may know what standard of conduct is intended to be required and legislation may run afoul of the due process clause because of a failure to set up any sufficient guidance to those who would be law-abiding, or to advise a defendant of the nature and cause of an accusation he is called on to answer, or to guide the courts in the law's enforcement.'...

"And a person is not required to speculate as to the meaning of a statute at the peril of his freedom. Lanzetta v. State of New Jersey, 306 U.S. 451, 59 S.Ct. 618, 83 L.Ed. 888 [1939]." 1091*1091 Bolin v. State, 266 Ala. 256, 260, 96 So.2d 582, 585-86 (1957). There is a fundamental principle of statutory construction that "where there is nothing to indicate to the contrary, words in a statute will be give the meaning which is generally accepted in popular, everyday usage." Holloway v. State, 262 Ala. 437, 440, 79 So.2d 40, 42 (1955). Even the application of that principle results in confusion in this particular case because of the testimony that the river is considered to consist of fresh water on some occasions and salt water on others. This unconstitutional infirmity could have been precluded by the adoption of a regulation by the Department of Conservation in accordance with the Alabama Administrative Procedure Act specifically defining which waters will be considered fresh water and which will be considered salt water.

Although the issues of the sufficiency of the evidence and the constitutionality of the regulation are intertwined, we need not answer the constitutionality question. "The rule is clear that the constitutional validity of a statute will not be considered unless essential to a disposition of the cause." Knox v. State, 365 So.2d 349 (Ala.Cr.App.1978). Each of the appellants' convictions for fishing illegal commercial gear must be reversed because the prosecution failed to prove whether they were fishing in fresh or salt water as a matter of fact.

Clopton's conviction in case number DC-90-3737 and White's conviction in case number DC-90-3741 for fishing with illegal commercial gear are reversed. Clopton's conviction in case number DC-90-3735 for commercial fishing without a license in fresh water is reversed. White's conviction in case number DC-90-3740 for failing to identify his fishing gear is reversed. Under Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1, 98 S.Ct. 2141, 57 L.Ed.2d 1 (1978), those convictions are rendered.

REVERSED AND RENDERED.
All Judges concur.

Clopton v. State, 601 So. 2d 1087 - Ala: Court of Criminal Appeals 1991

How is cheap corn killing turkeys?

the question is WHERE and WHEN did it actually KILL any turkeys??

You know what I meant by that. Stop being a smartass.