Baiting: A possible solution?

[grundy53]

Can anyone honestly tell me that these rules are not workable for your hunting?

Bait must:
- be at least 1/4 mile from a public maintained roadway if visible from that roadway
- not come in contact with a lake, pond, stream, or seasonal stream
- have no more than 8 cubic feet of material placed within a 16 hour period

That's better. I think we should shorten the quarter mile though.

With these rules if your bait is out of site it could be closer. Do you want baits that are visible from the road to be closer to the road?

I agree. My only concern would be a LEO claiming they could see it when you know they can't.

I would say show me! 

I think more than anything this will encourage baiters to keep their bait out of sight so it's not a public eyesore. Some people simply are not smart enough to do that without being told. 

I agree.

[jrebel]

Can anyone honestly tell me that these rules are not workable for your hunting?

Bait must:
- be at least 1/4 mile from a public maintained roadway if visible from that roadway
- not come in contact with a lake, pond, or running stream
- have no more than 8 cubic feet of material placed within a 16 hour period

I eliminated seasonal stream!

Makes sense to me.  Pretty easy to follow those rules.   

[bearpaw]

Can anyone honestly tell me that these rules are not workable for your hunting?

Bait must:
- be at least 1/4 mile from a public maintained roadway if visible from that roadway
- not come in contact with a lake, pond, or running stream
- have no more than 8 cubic feet of material placed within a 16 hour period

I eliminated seasonal stream!

Makes sense to me.  Pretty easy to follow those rules.   

Baiters I know in Idaho use a rangefinder to make sure they are far enough from streams, roads, etc. For that reason I think maybe we should change the distance to yards.

Bait must:
- be at least 400 yards from a public maintained roadway if visible from that roadway
- not come in contact with a lake, pond, or running stream
- have no more than 8 cubic feet of material placed within a 16 hour period

While it's important to get bait sites out of public view, I think it's very important that these rules do not prevent small landowners from baiting. Is there anyone who could not bait on their property or even on public land with these rules?

[Brad Harshman]

Why are we even capitulating on this?

A person looking to find a problem can find one in just about anything a person does, demonize it - and get another "rule" or law passed.

I'm sick of it, just leave us the heck alone 

 
I agree. There is not really a need for the law. The restrictions are proposed by anti hunters and they get people who hunt to agree with them by playing on their emotions.

Today at the WDFW meeting, it was NOT anti-hunters wishing for baiting restrictions.  It was fellow hunters.  But they didn't want to see total outlaw of baiting, they wanted to see the excessive baiting to be put in check. 
It sounds like it's the guides in the Okanogan that are causing the ruckus.  Other hunters are sick of it.  The guides are making money from our state's deer without regulation (unlike fishing guides).  The guides are altering migration routes with these dump truck loads of snicker bars (apples).  They're pulling deer from other hunter's property. 
It's a big enough deal for them to start calling out this baiting practice.  I heard it first hand today.

Are the complaints mostly coming from private land baiting or public land baiting?

Private Land.  It's mostly a hand full of guide services.  They're hauling dump truck and semi truck loads of apples and dumping them.  Apparently you can get truck loads of apples for free In fall. 

[Brad Harshman]

BearPaw.  Let's slow down here.  It's not where you what, it's what you bait with that's the issue.  Apples are bad.  Scientifically speaking, the deer don't need more protien in the winter fall, and apples don't provide that.  If guys want to bait, let them, but require them to bait with quality nutritional foods.  If they use salt they should be required to use mineral blocks that contain selenium, which is necessary for does to carry full term. 
It'd be easier to enforce, apples dump = ticket.  Simple.

[bearpaw]

BearPaw.  Let's slow down here.  It's not where you what, it's what you bait with that's the issue.  Apples are bad.  Scientifically speaking, the deer don't need more protien in the winter fall, and apples don't provide that.  If guys want to bait, let them, but require them to bait with quality nutritional foods.  If they use salt they should be required to use mineral blocks that contain selenium, which is necessary for does to carry full term. 
It'd be easier to enforce, apples dump = ticket.  Simple.

So at the commission meeting most of the complaints boiled down to using apples? Prohibiting apples will be opposed by many hunters who bait!

Why are we even capitulating on this?

A person looking to find a problem can find one in just about anything a person does, demonize it - and get another "rule" or law passed.

I'm sick of it, just leave us the heck alone 

 
I agree. There is not really a need for the law. The restrictions are proposed by anti hunters and they get people who hunt to agree with them by playing on their emotions.

Today at the WDFW meeting, it was NOT anti-hunters wishing for baiting restrictions.  It was fellow hunters.  But they didn't want to see total outlaw of baiting, they wanted to see the excessive baiting to be put in check. 
It sounds like it's the guides in the Okanogan that are causing the ruckus.  Other hunters are sick of it.  The guides are making money from our state's deer without regulation (unlike fishing guides).  The guides are altering migration routes with these dump truck loads of snicker bars (apples).  They're pulling deer from other hunter's property. 
It's a big enough deal for them to start calling out this baiting practice.  I heard it first hand today.

Are the complaints mostly coming from private land baiting or public land baiting?

Private Land.  It's mostly a hand full of guide services.  They're hauling dump truck and semi truck loads of apples and dumping them.  Apparently you can get truck loads of apples for free In fall.

In your opinion, from what you heard, would these rules help resolve the problem?

Bait must:
- be at least 400 yards from a public maintained roadway if visible from that roadway
- not come in contact with a lake, pond, or running stream
- have no more than 8 cubic feet of material placed within a 16 hour period

(While it's important to get bait sites out of public view and resolve issues, it's very important that these rules do not prevent small landowners from baiting. Hunters want to be able to bait on their properties and on public land under these rules?)

[Skillet]

Quick question - how did you arrive at 16 hour intervals instead of 24 hour intervals?

[bearpaw]

Quick question - how did you arrive at 16 hour intervals instead of 24 hour intervals?

Good question that i should have explained!
If a guy baits in the afternoon he might also want to bring more bait again in the morning before hunting. I almost went with 12 hours but early in the archery season a person could more easily place bait twice the same day. Trying to word it the best for most hunting situations and still have some restrictions that address the most serious concern which seems to be bait quantity.

[Brad Harshman]

BearPaw.  Let's slow down here.  It's not where you what, it's what you bait with that's the issue.  Apples are bad.  Scientifically speaking, the deer don't need more protien in the winter fall, and apples don't provide that.  If guys want to bait, let them, but require them to bait with quality nutritional foods.  If they use salt they should be required to use mineral blocks that contain selenium, which is necessary for does to carry full term. 
It'd be easier to enforce, apples dump = ticket.  Simple.

So at the commission meeting most of the complaints boiled down to using apples? Prohibiting apples will be opposed by many hunters who bait!

Why are we even capitulating on this?

A person looking to find a problem can find one in just about anything a person does, demonize it - and get another "rule" or law passed.

I'm sick of it, just leave us the heck alone 

 
I agree. There is not really a need for the law. The restrictions are proposed by anti hunters and they get people who hunt to agree with them by playing on their emotions.

Today at the WDFW meeting, it was NOT anti-hunters wishing for baiting restrictions.  It was fellow hunters.  But they didn't want to see total outlaw of baiting, they wanted to see the excessive baiting to be put in check. 
It sounds like it's the guides in the Okanogan that are causing the ruckus.  Other hunters are sick of it.  The guides are making money from our state's deer without regulation (unlike fishing guides).  The guides are altering migration routes with these dump truck loads of snicker bars (apples).  They're pulling deer from other hunter's property. 
It's a big enough deal for them to start calling out this baiting practice.  I heard it first hand today.

Are the complaints mostly coming from private land baiting or public land baiting?

Private Land.  It's mostly a hand full of guide services.  They're hauling dump truck and semi truck loads of apples and dumping them.  Apparently you can get truck loads of apples for free In fall.

In your opinion, from what you heard, would these rules help resolve the problem?

Bait must:
- be at least 400 yards from a public maintained roadway if visible from that roadway
- not come in contact with a lake, pond, or running stream
- have no more than 8 cubic feet of material placed within a 16 hour period

(While it's important to get bait sites out of public view and resolve issues, it's very important that these rules do not prevent small landowners from baiting. Hunters want to be able to bait on their properties and on public land under these rules?)

The biggest problem with the above proposed rules, in my opinion, is the enforceability.  And again, it's not antihunters that we need to keep baiting out of sight from, it's the hunters.  We aren't tolerant of other's legal choices.  I'm sure most hunters are against excessive baiting that alters migration routes, and pulling heards off others or public lands.  But that shouldn't take away the opportunity for the regular guys, both on public and private lands. 
Let's regulate the commercial aspects.  Let's regulate the biological affects that can harm or disrupt the heards.  Let's NOT regulate our legal opportunity to hunt over baits that provide quality nutrition and salts. 

[singleshot12]

We didn't have any of these problems before becuase you know why? Hardly anyone baited! Back in the day 20 yrs ago most hunted the traditional way for their venison.

I say we educate the general hunting population away from the baiting norm instead of more laws to keep it. Deer and elk DON'T don't need to be baited for a successful hunt.

 OR make it simple and only allow baiting for the handi-cap and over 65 

[bearpaw]

BearPaw.  Let's slow down here.  It's not where you what, it's what you bait with that's the issue.  Apples are bad.  Scientifically speaking, the deer don't need more protien in the winter fall, and apples don't provide that.  If guys want to bait, let them, but require them to bait with quality nutritional foods.  If they use salt they should be required to use mineral blocks that contain selenium, which is necessary for does to carry full term. 
It'd be easier to enforce, apples dump = ticket.  Simple.

So at the commission meeting most of the complaints boiled down to using apples? Prohibiting apples will be opposed by many hunters who bait!

Why are we even capitulating on this?

A person looking to find a problem can find one in just about anything a person does, demonize it - and get another "rule" or law passed.

I'm sick of it, just leave us the heck alone 

 
I agree. There is not really a need for the law. The restrictions are proposed by anti hunters and they get people who hunt to agree with them by playing on their emotions.

Today at the WDFW meeting, it was NOT anti-hunters wishing for baiting restrictions.  It was fellow hunters.  But they didn't want to see total outlaw of baiting, they wanted to see the excessive baiting to be put in check. 
It sounds like it's the guides in the Okanogan that are causing the ruckus.  Other hunters are sick of it.  The guides are making money from our state's deer without regulation (unlike fishing guides).  The guides are altering migration routes with these dump truck loads of snicker bars (apples).  They're pulling deer from other hunter's property. 
It's a big enough deal for them to start calling out this baiting practice.  I heard it first hand today.

Are the complaints mostly coming from private land baiting or public land baiting?

Private Land.  It's mostly a hand full of guide services.  They're hauling dump truck and semi truck loads of apples and dumping them.  Apparently you can get truck loads of apples for free In fall.

In your opinion, from what you heard, would these rules help resolve the problem?

Bait must:
- be at least 400 yards from a public maintained roadway if visible from that roadway
- not come in contact with a lake, pond, or running stream
- have no more than 8 cubic feet of material placed within a 16 hour period

(While it's important to get bait sites out of public view and resolve issues, it's very important that these rules do not prevent small landowners from baiting. Hunters want to be able to bait on their properties and on public land under these rules?)

I thought these rules were easy for enforcement?

- be at least 400 yards from a public maintained roadway if visible from that roadway
measurable from a public road with a rangefinder

- not come in contact with a lake, pond, or running stream
If a warden sees bait in the water! 

- have no more than 8 cubic feet of material placed within a 16 hour period
If someone is spotted unloading a truck load or dump truck or semi load of bait!

I sent a message to WDFW and the Commission to ask for their input.

Dear WDFW and Commissioners,

I am an outfitter in NE Washington and I own a popular hunting forum, Hunting-Washington. I’m aware of some of the complaints about baiting and the areas where the complaints are coming from. I wanted to make the Moses Lake meeting but was too busy. I’m trying to determine some minimal rules which are acceptable to most hunters that will address the major concerns that WDFW and the commission have with baiting. Could some of you please reply back to me with a summation of the major concerns that you feel need resolved. I would like to be able to say on the forum that I received correspondence from at least one commissioner or from WDFW (no name need be mentioned) and this is a list of major concerns. Using that list of concerns I would like to discuss it on the forum to establish some simple rules which are acceptable to most hunters. I look forward to any help you can provide.

Please feel free to follow the conversation and comment if you wish: http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,172226.html

Best Regards,
Dale

[jrebel]

We didn't have any of these problems before becuase you know why? Hardly anyone baited! Back in the day 20 yrs ago most hunted the traditional way for their venison.

I say we educate the general hunting population away from the baiting norm instead of more laws to keep it. Deer and elk DON'T don't need to be baited for a successful hunt.

Make it simple and only allow baiting for the handi-cap and over 65 

Using this argument...we should be able to bait bear and run dogs on cougars too.    We could also say that because the natives used long bows, spears and other primitive weapons....that we should also outlaw all firearms.  It worked back int the day, therefor we should not allow new methods now. 

 

[bearpaw]

We didn't have any of these problems before becuase you know why? Hardly anyone baited! Back in the day 20 yrs ago most hunted the traditional way for their venison.

I say we educate the general hunting population away from the baiting norm instead of more laws to keep it. Deer and elk DON'T don't need to be baited for a successful hunt.

 OR make it simple and only allow baiting for the handi-cap and over 65 

Hunting is needed in close proximity to towns/cities, baiting is arguably the most successful and safest way to hunt on small private lands in close proximity to urban areas, especially areas with significant deer problems where animals need hunted the most. 

[singleshot12]

Baiting bear and running dogs was tradition and the only successful way to manage preditors.That was a major mistake when voted away.

Designated areas for baiting deer and elk should be seriously considered also

[jrebel]

Baiting bear and running dogs was tradition and the only successful way to manage preditors.That was a major mistake when voted away.

Designated areas for baiting deer and elk should be seriously considered also

That was my point....but then we should outlaw modern firearms because natives were very successful with traditional weapons. 

My only point is why restrict a method of hunting because it wasn't used by our elders / past generations.  Times change and methods evolve.  What works for me may or may not work for you (or others).