The WI DNR is hysterical and in the process of creating more hysteria in order to pass their bait ban.NR 10.007(2)c 5
Scent may be used for hunting deer or elk provided the scent is not placed or deposited in a manner that it is accessable for consumption by deer or elk and non-liquid scents shall be removed daily at the end of hunting hours for deer established in s. NR 10.06(5), Tow ounces or less of liquid scent may be placed or deposited in any mannor for hunting game.
This covers all use in the 22 county ban and allows the DNR to create new counties at will as they deem necessary. Scent has been banned folks and food plots are next.
Agreed. "Sportsmen's pressure against bait?" The whittling has commenced. It's a toll free call in Wisconsin, folks.WI DNr announces NRB approval of 22 county bait ban.
The media is reporting that CWD and Bovine TB have been found in all 22 counties.
Bovine TB has never been found in Wisconsin's wild population. Only 7 counties of 22 have had CWD found in their borders.
The emergency rule is in violation of its own drafting and proves the DNr has too much power.
After lies, misconception and, cheap parlor tricks the WI DNR has mastered the art of deception using old information restructured to sway the public and demonize bowhunters.
To reverse decision:
We must have the measure brought up for review by the JCRAR again. Sen. Lepham chair of the committee will not bring up for reveiw due to sportsmen presure, (cannibals) against bait. Our only chance is to call co-chair Rep. Grothman at 608-264-8486 or 1-888-534-0058 and demand reveiw.
I spoke with Sen. Welch's office this a.m. he serves on committee and it is agreed that this media release will devestate the economy of counties. Hopefully his media personel can reverse the reports that non infected counties are just that and that TB is not in our wild population.
The DNR boycot appears to be back and stronger than before as The Wisconsin Concerned Hunters Association is encouraging hunters to turn in their licenses and ask for reimbursement as well as refuse to buy gun deer licenses. I will be sending several backtag holders that I collected in the previous boycot to Rep. Grothman's office as example of tags that will not be bought.
It's time to stand or fall folks!-TM
I disagree. There is no scientific proof, not one shred of evidence, that baiting causes the disease or its spread. Common sense tells us otherwise. Don't believe the hype.peashooter said:Baiting has been disputed, but there are logical reasons to think about the effects of baiting due to CWD.
(sigh) Complacency sucks, I must say. Yet again.I know it makes a lot of people angry, but I don't bait anyway so it won't affect me.
There ya go. If it cannot be placed where it can be consumed, just where might it be legally placed? Now the scent police are gonna measure the amount of pee in your bottle. This doesn't bother you? If not, do nothing.Anyway, I haven't heard anything on this scent issue. It might be true but I'd like to see a little more proof before I believe it.
I don't either. I just know this... Once it's banned, you won't get it back. FYI - Anytime a form of legal hunting is on the chopping block in the USA, it concerns me.madarchery said:OF COURSE I ALSO DON'T HAVE MONEY TO LOSE SINCE I DON'T SELL THE STUFF!!
By your reaction, it is obvious that you are one of the anti-baiters previously referred to. I have asked the source of the information I posted to reply in response to your accusations. Stand by.UpNorth_hunter said:You know, your reaction typifies the reaction of half the pro-baiters in Wisconsin... going off all half-cocked without any idea where the information came from.
First, there is no law banning the use of scents outright that I'm aware of. Second, the reference to the WI Administrative Code (the law of the land) you gave is totally bogus... there is NO NR 10.007, and the NR 10.06(5) referred to in your "source" pertains to hunting hours, not baiting or scent.
Two ounces or less. In other words, you may be cited for putting out more than 2 ounces. Also, you cant put it where it may be ingested. That means no licking branch, no drags accross leaves & such, etc... Is that really necessary? Do you really believe that will stop or slow the spread of CWD? What kind of anti hunting legislation is this? It hasn't been shown to be possible to pass CWD through urine anyway, yet the DNR wants to restrict your use. Nice! That's how you get more hunter participation, alright. <--(sarcasm)Third, even in the last part of your information, the "law" states:
"Tow ounces or less of liquid scent may be placed or deposited in any mannor for hunting game."
In which if course, the word "two" is spelled incorrectly, indicating this was not a direct quote from the Admin Code, AND this sentence alone would allow almost any type of commercial, bottled scent to be used. If anything, this information refers to the TEMPORARY emergency CWD rules from last year, which I believe no longer are in effect after sept. 30 (except the baiting/feeding rules, which were handled seperately).
WI or TX, I promise you that I will always call for scientific proof before jumping to conclusions and enacting new RESTRICTIVE legislation when it pertains to CWD. As far as ANYONE KNOWS right now, it is a naturally occurring disease. The "erradication zone" as I understand it, is heavily overpopulated with whitetails. Could just be nature's way.Finally, maybe you'll feel different if/when CWD shows up down in Texas.
That is a myth and you know it is. There is not one single shred of evidence that CWD is spread through nose-to-nose contact. However, let's entertain that theory for a moment. Deer, in their normal daily lives, have nose-to-nose contact, bait or no bait. This is an absolute fact. If this is how CWD is spread, the herd is already doomed. Frankly, I don't believe it because it has not been scientifically proven. Hell, they just recently (in the last couple of weeks) proved that it could be spread by from deer to deer by live deer eating infected brain matter from another CWD infected deer. Wow. That happens a lot in the wild. Deer eating deer brains.The problem is we don't know a lot about the disease, have no 100% proof on how it is spread, although all the research pertaining to transmission shows it is spread through close nose-to-nose contact.
Research has not shown what you profess and the amount of dollars spent prove nothing. Scientific facts are what I will believe. Until they are presented, I will not buy into the hype. But that's me.However, it is unfortunate that no matter what the research shows, no matter how many people and how many dollars are spent indicating the route of transmission, there will be people who will refuse to see what is staring them in the face, either because they are extremely selfish, extremely stupid, or a combination of both.
We don't NEED baiting to kill deer. We don't NEED bows and arrows, either.Not to mention, deer hunting in Wisconsin is a world of difference compared to Texas... we don't need baiting up here to kill deer, as last season showed.
CWD is not new. It's been around for decades. Yet lately, the WI DNR created mass hysteria. First, game farms were blamed. BAN GAME FARMS! No conclusive proof, though. In fact, the majority of cases are found in free range deer. Then the WI DNR decides to erradicate all the deer in the "Erradication Zone." 25 square miles, wasn't it? That was doomed from the beginning. The anti-baiting argument holds as much water. No conclusive proof. Yet, new RESTRICTIVE laws are proposed and implimented.The ban right now is again a TEMPORARY ban, put in place in counties with positive cases of CWD (not "at the DNR's will)...and they have the authority to enact an immediate ban in any county with new cases of CWD... same as Michigan and probably half a dozen other midwest states. Hopefully we'll know more in another year, we just need to be patient. Quality research doesn't happen overnight, especially with a disease that may take one or more years to show symptoms.
If an erradication zone of 25 square miles aint mass hysteria in WI, I've never seen it. Especially when only about 2% of all deer tested in that zone tested positive.Next time, I would suggest getting your facts straight before accusing the DNR in another state of mass hysteria and trying to take away hunters rights.
Wrong. Supplimental feeding can, and does, greatly increase the body weights, antler quality, and overall health of the herd. We learned that in Texas long ago. You can't sell that one here, pal.I'll ask you this (as I've pointed out many other times). We, as hunters are supposed to do our best to manage and preserve our natural resources. As such, the DNR and almost any professional (NOT BARSTOOL) biologist will tell you that baiting and supplemental feeding are NOT in the long-term interests of deer.
As shoes mentioned, POLITICS. There is a group of hunters in our midst who are "elitists." I prefer the term, "cannibal." Their way is the only way. I believe that is what is driving the current hysteria in WI right now. It is at the very least, fueling it.Now there are dozens of reasons for this, but if this were NOT the case, what possible reason would the DNR have for wanting to ban baiting? WHY WOULD THEY (universally) WANT TO ELIMINATE BAITING IF IT WERE NOT IN THE INTERESTS OF THE DEER HERD?
I don't trust politicians to know what is best for me. I certainly don't trust em to know what's best for the deer. You can trust me when I say that for every biologist you find condemning baiting as a viable means of game management, I'll find you two who will refute him.They are hunters and fisherman jsut like you and me, the only difference is they spend all day, every day studying what is best for the deer herd... I think I'll trust them over my own personal observations.
Bladder problem... LOL! I'd like to hear what you've learned sometime. Share it when you can. Thanks.Siefrj said:I typically bring an 8 once spray bottle with me filled to the hilt. I don't use it all on one hunt, but I do use it liberally on my way to and from stand. I call it the "bladder problem doe trail" and it works .... sometimes it is too strong though and will spook deer. I'm still experimenting with my scent distribution system.... more on that in a later thread.
The irony screams loud, don't it!I'm with DeerTexas (as always) in that any form of restriction is typically a loss of freedom for ever. Now don't take that sentence to the extreme... I write it in general context as it pertains to this thread. Limiting you to two ounces of scent to be placed where it can't be eaten (spraying on leaves and limbs would violate this law) seems over the edge to me. I haven't heard of a case where Tinks 69 caused CDW?!
Exactly. Thanks, Siefrj.The point is just be careful in your passiveness. To allow a restriction to be approved because it doesn't affect you isn't the high road... it's the high risk road. I think that is Deer Texas' point. If the code/law is as stated by DT, I'd be concerned.
CWD is to deer what scrapie is to sheep.BHNTR1 said:The biggest common denominator they have come to is sheep. Yes sheep, they belive that wild animals are getting it from sheep scrapie(spell).
That's all I'm saying. Well, that, and "don't let it happen." Be heard. Foolish anti-hunting policy like this has no place in this country.So please dont be fooled by this scent ban, this is not the problem and will not fix it.
If you are financially set enough to spread around 8 oz. of deer scent every time you go in the woods... more power to ya. But at $6-10/oz., I'll stick to minimal amounts thank you.Tow ounces or less of liquid scent may be placed or deposited in any mannor for hunting game.
Does published, peer reviewed scientific research by experts in their field qualify as "scientific fact" in your book?I disagree. There is no scientific proof, not one shred of evidence, that baiting causes the disease or its spread.
...There is not one single shred of evidence that CWD is spread through nose-to-nose contact.
Research has not shown what you profess and the amount of dollars spent prove nothing. Scientific facts are what I will believe. Until they are presented, I will not buy into the hype.
...WI or TX, I promise you that I will always call for scientific proof before jumping to conclusions and enacting new RESTRICTIVE legislation when it pertains to CWD.
I should have clarified more... I might agree, when done correctly, i.e., a proper program implemented year round to meet the varying nutritional needs of the deer. However, most people's idea of "supplemental feeding" is dumping a bunch of corn or hay on the ground... fine if they keep doing it all winter long, but that is rarely the case up here. For this reason, many Northern states at least have taken stances AGAINST supplemental feeding (and baiting in MN)... , mainly because the local armchair biologist don't have degrees in deer biology...Wrong. Supplimental feeding can, and does, greatly increase the body weights, antler quality, and overall health of the herd. We learned that in Texas long ago. You can't sell that one here, pal.
MaineUnder most conditions winter feeding is of no value in maintaining deer populations during the winter stress period and may be detrimental to both deer and their habitat. Winter feeding concentrates animals, but provides only a portion of their nutritional requirements.
And FINALLY, you stated...Maintaining deer feeders from October through December is a common practice on many ranches to attract deer to hunting blinds during the hunting season. Unfortunately most of these baiting efforts cease just before additional feed is really needed by the deer....
...Supplemental feeding of deer is expensive, and unless properly done [i.e., not just dumping a bunch of corn or hay on the ground], it is of little or no benefit to the deer.
I couldn't agree more with the first part... and that is the problem, if you only really knew what the situation was up here. The problem is the scientists, i.e., the DNR, made recommendations based on the best available scientific evidence (which you refuse to acknowledge exists anyway), to temporarily ban baiting and feeding until more is known about CWD. It was the POLITICIANS in MADISON (one of whom owns a grocery store in the North Woods and who himself makes a substantial amount of $$ in the fall selling 50# bags of corn) who refused to listen to the experts, and instead based their decisions on a few very vocal hunters and feedmill owners.I don't trust politicians to know what is best for me. I certainly don't trust em to know what's best for the deer. You can trust me when I say that for every biologist you find condemning baiting as a viable means of game management, I'll find you two who will refute him.