Corn field question

[Go Blue]

My buddy just contacted me that he has about 300 geese in his field. The field was a corn field which he rolled or rototilled the corn under on Nov 1. He left this little portion of corn standing. We would stand in the standing corn and shoot them as they came in. The field size is about 100 acres. My question is this legal to hunt?

[full choke]

PM me the location, I will go check it out for you and let you know...

[Bucks2Ducks]

As long as its standard agriculture practice its legal. I'm assuming the corn was combined, and the field was tilled after. Shoot away

[Antlershed]

If the corn wasn’t harvested, and he just tilled it up, I don’t believe that is legal. Some guys got busted out Nisqually years ago for a similar situation.

[Antlershed]

As long as its standard agriculture practice its legal. I'm assuming the corn was combined, and the field was tilled after. Shoot away

I would agree with this, just hard to tell from the OP.

[Stein]

Confirm that scattered seeds or grains on agricultural lands are present solely as the result of a normal agricultural planting, normal agricultural harvesting, normal agricultural postharvest manipulation, or normal soil stabilization practice by consulting the Cooperative Extension Service.

[Go Blue]

The corn was not harvest it was just rototilled under.

[Bucks2Ducks]

If the corn wasn’t harvested, and he just tilled it up, I don’t believe that is legal. Some guys got busted out Nisqually years ago for a similar situation.

Yeah I've heard of similar scenarios. Farmers collecting crop insurance, and then burning or mowing a field to destroy it. I don't believe that's considered a standard agriculture practice, despite making for some good hunting.

[Bucks2Ducks]

The corn was not harvest it was just rototilled under.

I would recommend getting in touch with WDFW before hunting, I wouldn't think that would be legal to hunt.... I've seen guys pick all the cobs off corn just to mow a duck hole

[Mfowl]

The corn was not harvest it was just rototilled under.

I would not hunt it based on the baiting laws in the regs. Worth a try to talk with WDFW but it sounds like it falls in the description of a baited site.

[LDennis24]

What was the purpose of the planting if it was not harvested?

[Dan-o]

Hunted a field of "failed" corn last year. 

Legitimately planted for harvest, but irrigation failed.

I think I was legal. 

[metlhead]

I'd hammer the place until nothing ever came back, and not worry one bit. If folks can get away with flooding the fields, using electric ice eaters, and charging cash, then I'd say 'my property, my rules'. Getting to where I don't give a rat's A anymore.

[full choke]

I'd hammer the place until nothing ever came back, and not worry one bit. If folks can get away with flooding the fields, using electric ice eaters, and charging cash, then I'd say 'my property, my rules'. Getting to where I don't give a rat's A anymore.

I agree 100% ! 

[Caseyd]

Was it planted with the intention of not harvesting to attract birds? Yes= don’t hunt No= hammer away

[greenhead_killer]

Thought after 10 days it didn’t matter regardless.

[Stein]

10 days after all the bait is gone.

[Bucks2Ducks]

I'd hammer the place until nothing ever came back, and not worry one bit. If folks can get away with flooding the fields, using electric ice eaters, and charging cash, then I'd say 'my property, my rules'. Getting to where I don't give a rat's A anymore.

Big difference between standing corn, and chopping up kernels to leave scattered across the ground. 

[Sandberm]

It was probably a field of sweet corn that the processor who had a contract with the farmer to buy, passed up. They do that sometimes if the corn is no good or it freezes making the corn bad. Neighbors sweet corn tasted like crap according to my brother because of all the smoke we had in September. Wine grapes also got tainted because of the smoke.

[Jingles]

Go harvest the geese no difference between this and hunters that park their butts on the edges of alfalfa fields for deer.

[vandeman17]

Go harvest the geese no difference between this and hunters that park their butts on the edges of alfalfa fields for deer.

Wdfw regulations disagree with you

[pianoman9701]

  If you want the correct answer, call the DFW. Lots of guys sounding off here with nothing to lose because they're not hunting those fields. 

[h2ofowlr]

If any corn remains on the ground from the tilling, it would be considered a baited field.  The field is considered baited until 10 day's after final removal of all said corn.  I know several different groups that have received tickets for the same thing. 
One of the corn fields they created a corn maze and after Halloween, they tilled it all under.  Guys setup and shot a bunch of geese on it and they were all ticketed for hunting a baited field.  Two years loss of hunting priviledges.  Your call on that one.  Best one, would be contact the local warden and see what he thinks as it is up to the discretion of the game warden.  You can also get ticked for hunting adjacent fields if it is the zone of influence.

[Jingles]

Well you sure would never know it was illegal to hunt the edges of alfalfa fields during archery season with the number tree stand and blinds that get put up.

[Antlershed]

Well you sure would never know it was illegal to hunt the edges of alfalfa fields during archery season with the number tree stand and blinds that get put up.

Because it’s not. Baiting ducks is a federal offense, baiting deer/elk is legal.

[bornhunter]

Dont ask just one wdfw officer, ask three or more. Its amazing how often those guys disagree on the game regs and the hunter ends up getting paper dropped on him.

[goody31]

Hunt away! If it was illegal why does the WDFW sponsored hunting areas the plant and "bait ducks" in Skagit at the DU plot of land.  They leave whole corn stalks up, wheat/barley fields and bean fields unharvested.  They also have an island/game reserve they do do the same to in lower Skagit.  It's not wrong to hunt a planted field.  The rule states if it was harvested within 10 days then it is illegal.  Outside those first 10 days, it's open and fair game.

[Stein]

That’s not what the regs say.  10 days after all bait is removed.

It’s legal to hunt if you leave it, not legal if you knock it to the ground.  WDFW plants and leaves it.

You can hunt a harvested field the next day if you want.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BD1]

 

[pianoman9701]

Well you sure would never know it was illegal to hunt the edges of alfalfa fields during archery season with the number tree stand and blinds that get put up.

An alfalfa field before harvest isn't bait. If you harvested the alfalfa and left piles of it out for the deer, then it's bait. Corn that's been tilled under not as a result of harvesting is bait. If there's standing corn after an actual harvest and you pluck the corn and throw it out in the spread, that is also baiting. This is my understanding from hunting WDFW land with corn grown.

Why not check with the DFW? Nothing to lose. There's a lot to lose without checking. This is one case where asking for permission is far more desirable than asking for forgiveness.

[Go Blue]

What was the purpose of the planting if it was not harvested?

A corn maze for Halloween.

[hunterednate]

The field is baited under the current regulations until 10 after ALL the grain is removed.

Corn mazes are considered agritourism, not agriculture, so rototilling the crop afterward does not legally qualify as "normal agricultural practice" (even though it's standard practice among corn maze owners).

I used to hunt a corn maze in the Puyallup Valley where the farmer did the exact same thing. A federal warden contacted the landowner midway through the season and told him to shut down all hunting on the property because the field was considered baited. If he found anyone hunting the field, both landowner and the hunters would be prosecuted.

So in your case, I wouldn't hunt it until absolutely all the grain is gone. Definitely is unfair considering the prevalence of baited corn ponds in this state, but according to current federal law, that corn maze in unhuntable until 10 days after the last kernel is removed.

[greenhead_killer]

how are the guys getting around having standing corn pockets in flooded fields? is it because 90% of the field was harvested per agricultural practices with only 10% remaining standing? seems like such a fine line to be toeing with some having found the niche loophole. hmmmmm. sucks you cant hunt it apparently

[h2ofowlr]

Well you sure would never know it was illegal to hunt the edges of alfalfa fields during archery season with the number tree stand and blinds that get put up.

Were talking waterfowl and not big game.  It's a federal law and falls under the Lacey Act.  This goes for all migratory waterfowl.

You can bait deer and elk.  Just not ducks, geese, swans, cranes, etc.

[h2ofowlr]

Hunt away! If it was illegal why does the WDFW sponsored hunting areas the plant and "bait ducks" in Skagit at the DU plot of land.  They leave whole corn stalks up, wheat/barley fields and bean fields unharvested.  They also have an island/game reserve they do do the same to in lower Skagit.  It's not wrong to hunt a planted field.  The rule states if it was harvested within 10 days then it is illegal.  Outside those first 10 days, it's open and fair game.

Field wasn't harvested.  It was tilled under.  Big difference, it spreads all those ears of corn all over the place.  He could hunt it, if he went in and picked up every ear of corn left in the field.  Once that was complete, he would have to wait the 10 days.
You can hunt unmolested, unharvested and standing crops.  Once you manipulate it, you break the law.  Fine line and this argument has gone on for a long time.

[3dvapor]

Just flood it problem solved.

[Oldguy]

I would call the US Fish and Wildlife office for information. I've received incorrect answers when WDFW contacted.

[LDennis24]

Ok so I asked a WDFW Warden since everybody wants to argue all the time. LOL!

This was his response in a text word for word:
That would be more of a question for US Fish and Wildlife. The question you have to ask is, was this corn harvested using a normal agricultural process? If the corn was harvested and then tilled under, your probably okay. If the corn was not harvested, and just tilled under, then no. US fish and Wildlife is real strict about bait. If the corn was planted with the intention of being hunted on, then no, that is hunting over bait.

[h2ofowlr]

how are the guys getting around having standing corn pockets in flooded fields? is it because 90% of the field was harvested per agricultural practices with only 10% remaining standing? seems like such a fine line to be toeing with some having found the niche loophole. hmmmmm. sucks you cant hunt it apparently

This is how many of the big fields are harvested.  You plant X amount of acres and pay for X amount to be left up for hunting.  You could cut and harvest every 10-30 rows and leave 10-30 rows etc.  You could cut ponds for flooding as long as harvested and the sections cut are harvested, “removed”.  If you roll it, chop it, till it, spread it, disc it, etc. it becomes baited.  If weather knocks it down, perfectly legal to hunt over.  If the farmer would have just left it up and knocked it down after the season, he could have hunted it.  It’s pretty black and white.  If a farmer, Hunter, etc.  knocks it down, it has to be removed and once removed wait 10 days.  If left alone good to go.

[Stein]

You can question the logic for sure, but there is a pretty good line drawn in the sand that allows for relatively straight forward decisions on what is legal and what is not.  WDFW just mimicked the federal guidelines, it's consistent across the US as was noted.

I think a big part is practicality, if you couldn't hunt harvested fields, that would cut out probably 80% or more of the huntable land in the US.

[BD1]

 
On another note...you are best to have the conversation with the Feds on the phone vs. in the field...they aren't much for conversation 

[hunterednate]

Hunt away! If it was illegal why does the WDFW sponsored hunting areas the plant and "bait ducks" in Skagit at the DU plot of land.  They leave whole corn stalks up, wheat/barley fields and bean fields unharvested.  They also have an island/game reserve they do do the same to in lower Skagit.  It's not wrong to hunt a planted field.  The rule states if it was harvested within 10 days then it is illegal.  Outside those first 10 days, it's open and fair game.

Field wasn't harvested.  It was tilled under.  Big difference, it spreads all those ears of corn all over the place.  He could hunt it, if he went in and picked up every ear of corn left in the field.  Once that was complete, he would have to wait the 10 days.
You can hunt unmolested, unharvested and standing crops.  Once you manipulate it, you break the law.  Fine line and this argument has gone on for a long time.

This is 100% right. If your buddy wants to use his corn maze for hunting, he needs to leave the corn standing until the season is over. That's what the federal warden instructed us to do in the corn maze we used to hunt when I called him to ask some clarifying questions.

It certainly shows the absurdity of the baiting laws as they currently stand. Even the federal warden admitted that the huge flooded corn pond complexes in the lower Columbia Basin are much more like baiting in efffect.....but they are legal to hunt and a rototilled corn maze is not.

[h2ofowlr]

This is 100% right. If your buddy wants to use his corn maze for hunting, he needs to leave the corn standing until the season is over. That's what the federal warden instructed us to do in the corn maze we used to hunt when I called him to ask some clarifying questions.

It certainly shows the absurdity of the baiting laws as they currently stand. Even the federal warden admitted that the huge flooded corn pond complexes in the lower Columbia Basin are much more like baiting in efffect.....but they are legal to hunt and a rototilled corn maze is not.
[/quote]
It's definately a hot topic.  As these clubs get bigger, like Eagle Lakes, they control and swing the migration patterns in many cases.  I guess the feds weight the good vs. the bad these clubs do.  Hunter funded feed for migrating birds which is critical.  Most clubs with grain, corn and other sorts of feed are fairly well managed, so X percentage of birds get harvested, but the remainder get to feed on the resources provided.  If you take all that away, you essentially removal a big portion of feed for migratory birds.  I know many in Oregon and especially California complain about all the corn complexes in WA as it short stops huge numbers of birds.  With ice eaters, plenty of feed and open water, many birds winter in the area until they migrate back up north.

[HikerHunter]

Confirming what a few others have said, what Go Blue has described is illegal to hunt until 10 days after all the corn is gone.

Leave the corn up next year and let the wind knock it over and you can hunt it.

[Mfowl]

This is 100% right. If your buddy wants to use his corn maze for hunting, he needs to leave the corn standing until the season is over. That's what the federal warden instructed us to do in the corn maze we used to hunt when I called him to ask some clarifying questions.

It certainly shows the absurdity of the baiting laws as they currently stand. Even the federal warden admitted that the huge flooded corn pond complexes in the lower Columbia Basin are much more like baiting in efffect.....but they are legal to hunt and a rototilled corn maze is not.

It's definately a hot topic.  As these clubs get bigger, like Eagle Lakes, they control and swing the migration patterns in many cases.  I guess the feds weight the good vs. the bad these clubs do.  Hunter funded feed for migrating birds which is critical.  Most clubs with grain, corn and other sorts of feed are fairly well managed, so X percentage of birds get harvested, but the remainder get to feed on the resources provided.  If you take all that away, you essentially removal a big portion of feed for migratory birds.  I know many in Oregon and especially California complain about all the corn complexes in WA as it short stops huge numbers of birds.  With ice eaters, plenty of feed and open water, many birds winter in the area until they migrate back up north.
[/quote]

The corn complexes aren't doing any favors for the wintering birds. There is ample feed in the regular agricultural crops and plenty of safety on the refuges and big water. Its just about $$$.

[Bucks2Ducks]

 "Even the federal warden admitted that the huge flooded corn pond complexes in the lower Columbia Basin are much more like baiting in efffect.....but they are legal to hunt and a rototilled corn maze is not."

Well there is a big difference in chopped up corn kernels all over the ground, and standing corn. I wonder how many people who constantly complain about corn have actually hunted it. The state has some standing corn, go hunt it; you're not going to have green head limits.

[hunterednate]

"Even the federal warden admitted that the huge flooded corn pond complexes in the lower Columbia Basin are much more like baiting in efffect.....but they are legal to hunt and a rototilled corn maze is not."

Well there is a big difference in chopped up corn kernels all over the ground, and standing corn. I wonder how many people who constantly complain about corn have actually hunted it. The state has some standing corn, go hunt it; you're not going to have green head limits.

I hunted flooded crops last year with an outfitter last year. We shot a seven-man limit in 3 hours. Grain + water + roosting ponds gives ducks everything they need.

Flooding corn is undoubtedly a huge advantage for those who can hunt it. If it wasn't....why are guys who hunt flooded corn so opposed to any rule changes that would ban it? If it is basically the same as moist soil management, why keep building more and bigger flooded corn complexes with each passing year?

I'm not against the guys who hunt flooded corn. Most of them (especially the outfitters and guides) are better waterfowlers than I will ever be, and I have no doubt that they would still get limits for their clients every year without flooded crops. But I am convinced that huge complexes of flooded corn are a net loss for public land duck hunters.

Prior to flooded corn, the majority of ducks would feed on dry grain on private land fields, then pour into adjacent public land water in the Columbia Basin. Now, many of those same dry fields are have been converted to flooded corn, and the ducks have no reason to seek water on public land. Fewer thirsty birds means fewer mallards killed for public hunters.

[Guzman]

So the tilled part was never harvested? If so not legal. If the tilled part was harvested and the standing stuff was only thing not harvested it is ok.