What's new
Forums
Members
Resources
Whopper Club
Politics
Pics
Videos
Fishing Reports
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Members
Resources
Whopper Club
Politics
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General
General Discussion
House Bill 1151- Prohibiting baiting bans
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wct12" data-source="post: 368763" data-attributes="member: 8117"><p>Would I have loved to hunt over that same bait pile my camera takes pictures over before archery season starts again? Absolutely</p><p></p><p>But this was about more then that. For me this was about one 1 way to reign in a</p><p>Government agency that is unaccountable to the people of this state. </p><p></p><p>The same phd holders that they want us to trust because they went to school a couple more years than me stand a podium and say that a bait pile that congregates deer outside of winter months is alot different then a food plot funded by the game and fish that congregates the exact same deer a bait pile does to a small area outside of winter months also is much better. That's not about science at that point. </p><p></p><p>I want some accountability for the same agency that hosted public meetings, but wouldn't let the public ask questions in an open forum because someone in the crowd might have a decent idea that's scientifically backed that they don't have actual data and statistics to dispute. </p><p></p><p>I want the same agency that let a deer population explode to more then double what they claim is sustainable, even though landowners and sportsmen from around the state in the years prior said the population was growing.. all fell on deaf ears because they do population counts and know what's best. (CWD was discovered in nodak the next year)</p><p></p><p>I want the agency that my tag and tax dollars help operate to at least listen with open ears at the advisory board meetings and have an open and honest discussion. (Not just CWD.. I asked about moose populations and was told they don't have an actual plan, they just go by what landowners can seem to tolerate, but then don't listen when those landowners say the population is too high because crops are being damaged, moose/vehicle collisions are up, etc..) </p><p></p><p>They say it's not ethics but the online portion of their Hunter safety says baiting falls into a gray area of ethics. I want them, if they are going to claim science and data, to actually have that science and data.. not possibilities, maybes, or this might work even though it hasn't in other states. Why not try to be proactive instead of reactive. Spend some of that federal money on university or private studies to find something that could actually stop/slow CWD down whether it be genetics, iron, humic acid, or something not thought about yet instead of using it to do the exact same things that haven't worked elsewhere. </p><p></p><p>I want that agency to be open to listening at advisory meetings, not come in with a set agenda and to "inform" but to actually listen, because sometimes landowners and sportsmen who are amongst the wildlife every day know just as much about them as the people with some fancy letters behind their name. </p><p></p><p>That's what I actually want in a very long winded answer.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wct12, post: 368763, member: 8117"] Would I have loved to hunt over that same bait pile my camera takes pictures over before archery season starts again? Absolutely But this was about more then that. For me this was about one 1 way to reign in a Government agency that is unaccountable to the people of this state. The same phd holders that they want us to trust because they went to school a couple more years than me stand a podium and say that a bait pile that congregates deer outside of winter months is alot different then a food plot funded by the game and fish that congregates the exact same deer a bait pile does to a small area outside of winter months also is much better. That's not about science at that point. I want some accountability for the same agency that hosted public meetings, but wouldn't let the public ask questions in an open forum because someone in the crowd might have a decent idea that's scientifically backed that they don't have actual data and statistics to dispute. I want the same agency that let a deer population explode to more then double what they claim is sustainable, even though landowners and sportsmen from around the state in the years prior said the population was growing.. all fell on deaf ears because they do population counts and know what's best. (CWD was discovered in nodak the next year) I want the agency that my tag and tax dollars help operate to at least listen with open ears at the advisory board meetings and have an open and honest discussion. (Not just CWD.. I asked about moose populations and was told they don't have an actual plan, they just go by what landowners can seem to tolerate, but then don't listen when those landowners say the population is too high because crops are being damaged, moose/vehicle collisions are up, etc..) They say it's not ethics but the online portion of their Hunter safety says baiting falls into a gray area of ethics. I want them, if they are going to claim science and data, to actually have that science and data.. not possibilities, maybes, or this might work even though it hasn't in other states. Why not try to be proactive instead of reactive. Spend some of that federal money on university or private studies to find something that could actually stop/slow CWD down whether it be genetics, iron, humic acid, or something not thought about yet instead of using it to do the exact same things that haven't worked elsewhere. I want that agency to be open to listening at advisory meetings, not come in with a set agenda and to "inform" but to actually listen, because sometimes landowners and sportsmen who are amongst the wildlife every day know just as much about them as the people with some fancy letters behind their name. That's what I actually want in a very long winded answer. [/QUOTE]
Verification
What is the most common fish caught on this site?
Post reply
Recent Posts
W
Garden!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Latest: wstnodak
33 minutes ago
.357 VS 10mm
Latest: Lycanthrope
Today at 1:29 PM
S
Morel mushrooms
Latest: scrotcaster
Today at 1:12 PM
Preserving Spool Depth
Latest: Lycanthrope
Today at 9:51 AM
Craftsman 5000-Watt Generator
Latest: Mr.Mike
Today at 8:48 AM
Project ideas for a 13yo
Latest: Wirehair
Today at 8:41 AM
What are you listening to these days?
Latest: svnmag
Yesterday at 10:32 PM
Weather forecast & predictions
Latest: CatDaddy
Yesterday at 10:20 PM
2024 Bis-Man Reel & Rec Flyer
Latest: Honkerherms
Yesterday at 8:35 PM
F
Epic Fail ?
Latest: Fester
Yesterday at 10:53 AM
Applicators license
Latest: Allen
Yesterday at 1:27 AM
S
Giant muskie
Latest: snow2
Saturday at 8:30 PM
Costa Rica Bill fishing
Latest: guywhofishes
Saturday at 6:55 AM
Sak
Thursday 5*16*2024 East End
Latest: Rowdie
Friday at 6:29 PM
Vanguard 257 Weatherby Magnum
Latest: 1lessdog
Friday at 3:46 PM
7
Sak
Newtown 5/17
Latest: 701FishSlayer
Friday at 1:45 PM
Velocitor/Stinger/Interceptor
Latest: svnmag
Thursday at 8:34 PM
RR
Red River 5-16-24
Latest: Captainbrad
Thursday at 9:23 AM
Sak
Sak - New Town Area 5/4
Latest: grumster
Thursday at 9:03 AM
Northern Lights
Latest: Rowdie
Thursday at 7:53 AM
Friends of NDA
Forums
General
General Discussion
House Bill 1151- Prohibiting baiting bans
Top
Bottom