Baiting Ban

Phill Latio

Established Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2015
Posts
461
Likes
5
Points
133
Considering ND is 94 or is it 96% privately owned land? Its hard to make an argument comparing to several of the other Western states which offer thousands of acres of public ground. As far as the cap on bird hunter numbers, that only applies to Waterfowl I believe if I remember correctly, and in fact I believe the NR upland bird hunters should be limited as well. Just not enough resource out there anymore, the demand is far exceeding the supply from my perspective. This coming from a person born and raised here and lived my entire life in ND.

I have witnessed first hand the loss of opportunity due to hunting pressure from NR and land leasing and outfitters tying up vast acreage across the state. I believe if you work, live and pay taxes as a full time resident of the State, you sure as hell better come first when it comes to opportunities to hunt and fish in your backyard...
DING! DING! DING! this is the most accurate thing ive read on the internet today
 


wjschmaltz

Honored Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2018
Posts
989
Likes
368
Points
218
Location
Southcentral ND - Southcentral AK
Considering ND is 94 or is it 96% privately owned land? Its hard to make an argument comparing to several of the other Western states which offer thousands of acres of public ground. As far as the cap on bird hunter numbers, that only applies to Waterfowl I believe if I remember correctly, and in fact I believe the NR upland bird hunters should be limited as well. Just not enough resource out there anymore, the demand is far exceeding the supply from my perspective. This coming from a person born and raised here and lived my entire life in ND.

I have witnessed first hand the loss of opportunity due to hunting pressure from NR and land leasing and outfitters tying up vast acreage across the state. I believe if you work, live and pay taxes as a full time resident of the State, you sure as hell better come first when it comes to opportunities to hunt and fish in your backyard...
That's fine. Understand and agree. I'm just trying to connect why a bait ban is the results of trying not to offend nonresidents and how the state caters to nonresidents as far as opportunity.

All of those problems are free market problems. I'm pro capitalism and believe a landowner should be able to sell to and lease to whoever they want. Afterall, they're paying taxes on it just the same. Seems like everyone else here is hardcore republican free market until it affects them. A landowner leasing their land is unlikely to open the gates to the public anyways so I really see no lost opportunity. And again, I thought we were talking about deer and baiting. The bird hunting was just an example of stringent NR restrictions in ND.

I'll add the few people I know that have long leased their land all do it to guys from Bismarck or Fargo. And those guys invite their NR buddies. The land would still be leased if their out of state buddies didn't show up.

I'm all for resident preference, but I do believe in reasonable nonresident opportunity. I've made fun of all kinds of people that are crying about the 90/10 allocation issues going on in Wyoming right now. I'm for them even though it will negatively affect me and cost me money. I've been building points for years only to have the goalline moved on me. Tough shit for me. The residents should have preference. I think Alaska should follow their lead and not give nonresidents free range with OTC tags where there is massive user group conflict. But I stand by the statement that even compared to other midwestern state with similar private land %, ND is one of the most unfriendly states when it comes to nonresident opportunity. Obviously for a number of reasons including land issues and just game population issues. I'm not even saying they should be more friendly to nonresidents. The opportunity is so slim for NR hunters in ND that only step from where ND currently sits is basically closing the doors. I would be careful what you wish for by closing your borders completely to the NR hunter, that's a slippery slope.
 

Fritz the Cat

Honored Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 11, 2015
Posts
4,732
Likes
213
Points
293
CWD update:
Every year Congress appropriates about $10 million to fight CWD. State and federal agencies submit plans to get grant money. On October 22nd USDA announced $9.4 million.

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/newsroom/stakeholder-info/sa_by_date/sa-2022/cwd-funding

Half goes to wild deer management and the other half to farmed deer management. Here is where the wild deer management went:

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_damage/downloads/cwd-funding-wild-cervids-22.pdf

Arkansas Game and Fish Commission CWD Testing Awareness and Outreach Promotion Arkansas Game and Fish Commission $70,000.00

Statewide Surveillance of Chronic Wasting Disease in Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife and Heritage Services $249,944.00

Strengthening Hunter-Agency Partnerships for CWD Monitoring and Management through Sustained Outreach and Engagement Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources $75,780.00

Oregon Chronic Wasting Disease Prevention, Surveillance, and Management Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife $247,261.00

CWD Educational Video Development and Dissemination Through Targeted Communication and Marketing North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission $35,000.00

Shifting behaviors to lower the risk of CWD; a multi-media approach North Dakota Game and Fish Department $96,300.00

Assessing and improving CWD surveillance for wild cervids in Utah - Part 2 Utah Division of Wildlife Resources $108,823.00

Fire as a tool for remediation of prion contaminated landscapes Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency $164,500.00

Assessment, Modeling, and Development of best practices for an alternative CWD landfill disposal concepts for Idaho Department of Fish & Game $101,704.00

Deepening Partnerships, Expanding Access: Reducing CWD Transmission Risks by Supporting Proper Carcass Disposal Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources $150,000.00

Using incentivized harvest to empower hunters and landowners to slow the spread of Chronic Wasting Disease Iowa Department of Natural Resources $146,210.00

Development of self-service CWD sample submission kits for hunters in CWD detected counties in Michigan Department of Natural Resources $57,000.00

Project Title Entity Funding Amount CWD Outreach and Prevention in California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) $48,111.00 Partnering with taxidermists to expand CWD surveillance statewide in Minnesota Department of Natural Resources $250,000.00

Field Evaluation of Trained Canine Detection of Environmental Contamination caused by Chronic Wasting Disease Infection Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency $239,500.00

Increased CWD Surveillance to Inform Management to Contain Spread Pennsylvania Game Commission $250,000.00

Motivations and Social Norms of Hunters Active in CWD Management North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission $34,778.00

Using real-time quaking-induced conversion (RT-QuIC) to detect prion seeding activity in feces from bobcats (Lynx rufus) that have consumed tissues from CWD-infected elk (Cervus canadensis) Wyoming Game and Fish Department $55,591.66

Developing Genetic Approaches for Sustainable Long-Term Monitoring and Modeling CWD Spread in White-Tailed Deer Arkansas Game and Fish Commission $99,635.00

Beta testing pooled sampling thresholds against traditional Chronic Wasting Disease testing Iowa Department of Natural Resources $101,492.22

Multi-media CWD Communications Toolkit Development and Distribution in Florida: Informing Stakeholders of Risks and Regulations The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) $249,475.00

Evaluating novel methods for testing Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) status of elk and assessing impacts of CWD prevalence in the Black Hills of South Dakota. South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks $142,902.00

Proactive development of CWD-related outreach and education for hunters, Tribal communities, and other stakeholders to guide disease management in Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife $115,325.00

Chronic Wasting Disease Policy Toolkit North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission $19,800.00 Investigating Potential Inhibitory Roles of Organic Copper and Zinc in CWD Prion Protein Misfolding and Propagation Texas Parks and Wildlife Department $244,377.00

Applying landscape genomics to infer CWD transmission corridors and inform management activities in western Kentucky and Tennessee Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources $196,106.50

Quantifying the role of intra- and inter-specific interactions in CWD spread Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks $250,000.00

Evaluating the genetic susceptibility of Oregon cervids to chronic wasting disease Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife $125,173.00

Survey of Pennsylvania Residents Activities and Opinions Related to CWD Management Pennsylvania Game Commission $150,000.00 TOTAL $4,074,788.3

The farmed deer plans can be found here:

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_damage/downloads/cwd-funding-farmed-cervids-22.pdf

Anyway, the CWD Research and Management Act passed the Senate. $70 million per year times six years or $420 million. It passed the House Dec. 8th, 2021. Was introduced to the Senate in April 2022. Languished all summer and fall then they stuck it in the Omnibus Spending Bill. You know the one, where they put all the unpopular Bills then pass the shit December 23rd, with no discussion, right before they recess for Christmas.

About $100 million has been spent on CWD in the last 20 years. Now $420 million will be spent in 6 years. If this:

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_damage/downloads/cwd-funding-wild-cervids-22.pdf

and this:

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_damage/downloads/cwd-funding-farmed-cervids-22.pdf

are the recipe............we are in for a big batch of something no one can stomach.
 


Fritz the Cat

Honored Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 11, 2015
Posts
4,732
Likes
213
Points
293
My position has not changed. Have always said some money for research. No money for management and surveillance. Why? Because if the above web-links are the template or recipe how State and federal agencies are going to waste taxpayer money who can support that? The ND game and Fish wrote and received a grant for this below:

Shifting behaviors to lower the risk of CWD; a multi-media approach North Dakota Game and Fish Department $96,300.00

They had three meetings around the State and handed out much printed material or propaganda. They are spending taxpayer money to influence the public's perception of baiting. An embedded message.

My position:
Generations ago smut completely wiped out the barley crop. 100%. An individual was walking through a brown landscape of dead barley. He found one healthy golden ripe barley head standing out there. He found a smut resistant plant, picked the kernels and now most barley has been cross bred back to it.

The same can be done with deer. Place 100 in a pen. If 99 die of CWD..........what about that one which is 9 years old and never got sick living in a heavily infected area? Maybe the answer is in the genomes.

Please watch the video below.



Research is the answer. Millions for surveillance, monitoring and figuring out how to keep deer six feet apart is not.

One last thing, sportsmen should be angry the NDGF is spending money on human dimensions or how to change your thinking.
 

db-2

Honored Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2016
Posts
3,437
Likes
243
Points
268
Location
ND
Fritz
I have try talking to.game and fish.and no way will they listen. Finally.gave up. They and only them have all the answer. Common sense no.where to be found. Db
 
Last edited:

db-2

Honored Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2016
Posts
3,437
Likes
243
Points
268
Location
ND
I was around when smut was present. Learn a lot over years that they could learn from
Db
 

guywhofishes

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Posts
27,297
Likes
913
Points
553
Location
Faaargo, ND
NDGF applied for and then got a grant to manipulate people’s behavior/opinions. Orwell wouldn’t be bit surprised.
 

bravo

Established Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Posts
343
Likes
74
Points
142
It’s the game and fish’s fiduciary duty to manage the deer population. Money going to them to provide information on how to slow the spread of a disease doesn’t strike me as a terrible thing. Should we abolish the game and fish and leave game management in the hand of our genius politicians? I’m sure those in the pocket of the farm bureau have hunters best interest in mind. Also let’s talk about them wasting dollars shall we?

If there is no evidence of their management practice (bait ban) working, then yeah it’s time to re-evaulate. Until then, i trust their knowledge a lot more than our legislature. Sometimes just because it’s not what you want to hear, doesn’t make it false.
 


guywhofishes

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Posts
27,297
Likes
913
Points
553
Location
Faaargo, ND
Fritz is right - we need to fully understand CWD prior to making management decisions. THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED DURING COVID AND 99% OF WHAT WAS DONE TO MANAGE IT WAS A WASTE OR WORSE!!!

Remember the rush to build intubation death machines because the consensus of experts said they were crucially needed?
 

guywhofishes

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Posts
27,297
Likes
913
Points
553
Location
Faaargo, ND
Remember masks? Remember contact tracing? Remember the claim about the jab preventing transmission?

All supported by the majority of DOCTORS (aka experts) who swore an oath to do no harm. Pffft.

Same with the CWD issue. Nobody’s willing to stop the useless spending or shiite policies because they’ll be ostracized.
 


bravo

Established Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Posts
343
Likes
74
Points
142
Let me be clear by saying I don’t believe there is any “stopping” cwd spread. I don’t believe banning baiting would do much since deer congregate and herd up anyway. I don’t believe the federal government handled Covid in a competent matter.

I do believe the G&F is damned if they do, damned if they don’t. It is their job to manage the herd. If they ignore CWD and an outbreak wipes out a population, then everyone will say they’re worthless. Ban baiting and it’s the same thing. My point is I am anti-any square headed schmuck politician taking power from actual professional biologists.

By the way, Google “peer-reviewed CWD management”. Plenty out there to read on management practices around the continent. Some things have had success in controlling the spread, some haven’t. I ask, what is it you would like to see the G&F do?
 

Fritz the Cat

Honored Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 11, 2015
Posts
4,732
Likes
213
Points
293
It’s the game and fish’s fiduciary duty to manage the deer population. Money going to them to provide information on how to slow the spread of a disease doesn’t strike me as a terrible thing. Should we abolish the game and fish and leave game management in the hand of our genius politicians? I’m sure those in the pocket of the farm bureau have hunters best interest in mind. Also let’s talk about them wasting dollars shall we?

If there is no evidence of their management practice (bait ban) working, then yeah it’s time to re-evaulate. Until then, i trust their knowledge a lot more than our legislature. Sometimes just because it’s not what you want to hear, doesn’t make it false.
The people created the North Dakota Game and Fish Department to manage this States wildlife. The people through representative government set the bag limits rules and regs.

There is going to be a Bill to take away authority of the Game and Fish to ban baiting. Legislators can and will ask NDGF personnel to come forward and answer questions.

I think our elected Representatives should ask for an itemized audit of how NDGF is spending that $96,300 federal grant to study sportsmen's behaviors and then demand/manipulate change.

Inquiring minds want to know.
 

bravo

Established Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Posts
343
Likes
74
Points
142
The people created the North Dakota Game and Fish Department to manage this States wildlife. The people through representative government set the bag limits rules and regs.

We set the the limits? Where’s my annual elk and moose tags? It’s up to us how many fish we can keep? Ecology be damned if we want it bad enough i guess.
There is going to be a Bill to take away authority of the Game and Fish to ban baiting. Legislators can and will ask NDGF personnel to come forward and answer questions.
Taking away authority sets a bad precedent. Probably will be challenged in court if the governor even signs it at all. Legislators should also then have to prove their side of the case that baiting doesn’t doesn’t contribute to CWD spread (And I say this as someone who does use bait).
I think our elected Representatives should ask for an itemized audit of how NDGF is spending that $96,300 federal grant to study sportsmen's behaviors and then demand/manipulate change.

Inquiring minds want to know.
That I 100% agree with.
 

Fritz the Cat

Honored Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 11, 2015
Posts
4,732
Likes
213
Points
293
Let me be clear by saying I don’t believe there is any “stopping” cwd spread. I don’t believe banning baiting would do much since deer congregate and herd up anyway. I don’t believe the federal government handled Covid in a competent matter.

I do believe the G&F is damned if they do, damned if they don’t. It is their job to manage the herd. If they ignore CWD and an outbreak wipes out a population, then everyone will say they’re worthless. Ban baiting and it’s the same thing. My point is I am anti-any square headed schmuck politician taking power from actual professional biologists.

By the way, Google “peer-reviewed CWD management”. Plenty out there to read on management practices around the continent. Some things have had success in controlling the spread, some haven’t. I ask, what is it you would like to see the G&F do?
bravo,
Which District do you live in? Did you vote? Which square headed schmuck politician did you help elect?
 

Fritz the Cat

Honored Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 11, 2015
Posts
4,732
Likes
213
Points
293
Taking away authority sets a bad precedent. Probably will be challenged in court if the governor even signs it at all. Legislators should also then have to prove their side of the case that baiting doesn’t doesn’t contribute to CWD spread (And I say this as someone who does use bait).
I believe it was during the 2009 legislative session there was a Bill to ban baiting. It went down in flames. The people have already spoken on this issue.
 


Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 325
  • This month: 134
  • This month: 116
  • This month: 82
  • This month: 78
  • This month: 71
  • This month: 66
  • This month: 61
  • This month: 55
  • This month: 51
Top Bottom