House Bill 1151- Prohibiting baiting bans

[Devildogg]

Is there anyone that can find the propaganda video the ndgf released back in 2012 when they tried to ban baiting then? The last attempt they used the ethics angle.

 

[Mr. Pike]

I bet John Arman is behind this.

 

[NPO_Aaron]

I bet John Arman is behind this.

He is not, but he does support it.

Unless by behind it, you mean he supports is then which yes.

 

[John Arman]

I bet John Arman is behind this.

Mr Pike, I have no skin in this game. I have been in a no baiting unit since the start of this. Banning baiting would only help hunters like myself who do own land and have the ability to put in food plots and habitat. Yes I have helped put out information on CWD. But it has never been one sided. I think there is always two sides of the story and the more information you have the better off you are in making an educated decision. The side I take on this is science and data. That is what our Game and Fish is supposed to do and at this time I don’t see that. I understand CWD is on the landscape and has been since the 60s. At this point in time there is no data at all that shows that baiting spreads the increase of CWD. So if there is no data on this why are we looking at taking away opportunities for all hunters which include the youth, disabled, veterans, elderly and the average Joe. Isn't there other things that are more important that taking away baiting? I think so. Maybe landowner relationships and habitat would be a good place to start. It just seems that this is a big pissing fight that doesn’t need to happen and from what I have seen in other states won’t change a thing.

 

[bravo]

You do have skin in the game, you laid it out clearly in your YouTube video and your show uses bait to get bucks on camera. Not faulting you one but for that. It actually almost only benefits landowners like yourself and I who can bait since the average Joe is usually stuck to public land where it’s not legal, or on someone else’s property where baiting would need to take place regularly in order to work. And how many youth, veteran, or disabled hunters are you taking out since you care about them so much. Why haven’t you put out any information from the other side that shows that CWD has been shown to spread via saliva (here)? Seems relevant unless you are just looking to push an agenda. A purely science and data based approach would actually be to ban all artificial baiting and food plots (against that as well) in order to reduce the risk of all disease, wouldnt it? They obviously shouldn’t and haven’t done that. We can agree that habitat is more important. But as far as landowner relations go, do you ever give the average Joe permission? If not, how do we fix that?

John I’m not against baiting, but I am against bills of dubious origin making game regulations instead of appointed agencies.

 

[yellowlab]

No skin in the game but sponsored by Big and J,

interesting.

 

[NPO_Aaron]

You do have skin in the game, you laid it out clearly in your YouTube video and your show uses bait to get bucks on camera. Not faulting you one but for that. It actually almost only benefits landowners like yourself and I who can bait since the average Joe is usually stuck to public land where it’s not legal, or on someone else’s property where baiting would need to take place regularly in order to work. And how many youth, veteran, or disabled hunters are you taking out since you care about them so much. Why haven’t you put out any information from the other side that shows that CWD has been shown to spread via saliva (here)? Seems relevant unless you are just looking to push an agenda. A purely science and data based approach would actually be to ban all artificial baiting and food plots (against that as well) in order to reduce the risk of all disease, wouldnt it? They obviously shouldn’t and haven’t done that. We can agree that habitat is more important. But as far as landowner relations go, do you ever give the average Joe permission? If not, how do we fix that?

John I’m not against baiting, but I am against bills of dubious origin making game regulations instead of appointed agencies.

Hey bravo, I like the passion, however, I challenge you to produce a piece of science that excludes speculative language. "May" is a hypothesis, it isn't science. A ban on baiting using the CURRENT data is not one based on science, it's based on speculation.
Just note that I said current, because I believe that if there were ever studies done that show a definitive increase in CWD, above the rate of natural spread, that happened as a result of baiting, I would instantly call for it to be done.
I have only ever seen one study that tested transmitting CWD through saliva and in that study they orally injected fawns with 50ml of saliva from infected deer and they did transmit cwd. But where in baiting deer do you see deer literally drinking measurable amounts of saliva, it just doesn't happen.
If you have a free minute, check out this document. It was edited by 2 PHD and 2 DVM and PHD. It's not made by slouches like myself.

https://texasdeerassociation.com/wp...05/CURRENT-SCIENTIFIC-KNOWLEDGE-ABOUT-CWD.pdf

I have spent a lot of time researching both sides because I want to know exactly what the consequences of my actions would be. Currently, the actual, published science shows no statistical significance of if baiting affects CWD negatively or positively.

Finally, I would love to know what makes the bills origin dubious? It was created out of the frustration of being completely ignored and disregarded by the game and fish. I am 95% in support of the game and fish and honestly, I am quite happy with how they manage our resource. However, I do not agree with regulations being made based on theories, especially when those regulations play a roll in gatekeeping the outdoors to differently-able bodied people.
I'm not being confrontational. I have no desire to argue things, just share information. If you can give me some studies that tell me I am incorrect, I will change my mind. I care about our resource and maintaining it for my children just as much as anyone else. All I want is one piece of evidence that says baiting certainly increases the rate at which CWD spread.

 

[NPO_Aaron]

No skin in the game but sponsored by Big and J,

interesting.

Did you know that I could currently spread out as much Big and J and take pictures of big bucks as I want right now and it not be a problem? I could put down as much bait as my heart desires for as many reasons as I can think of and as long as I don't hunt a deer (I can still hunt turkeys over bait), everything would be perfectly legal. How does that make sense?

 

[yellowlab]

Did you know that I could currently spread out as much Big and J and take pictures of big bucks as I want right now and it not be a problem? I could put down as much bait as my heart desires for as many reasons as I can think of and as long as I don't hunt a deer (I can still hunt turkeys over bait), everything would be perfectly legal. How does that make sense?

I am very aware of that. It makes about as much sense as someone who has a hunting show, is sponsored by a bait company, and openly talks about using it and how great it is saying they have no skin in the game.

 

[bravo]

Hey bravo, I like the passion, however, I challenge you to produce a piece of science that excludes speculative language. "May" is a hypothesis, it isn't science. A ban on baiting using the CURRENT data is not one based on science, it's based on speculation.
Just note that I said current, because I believe that if there were ever studies done that show a definitive increase in CWD, above the rate of natural spread, that happened as a result of baiting, I would instantly call for it to be done.
I have only ever seen one study that tested transmitting CWD through saliva and in that study they orally injected fawns with 50ml of saliva from infected deer and they did transmit cwd. But where in baiting deer do you see deer literally drinking measurable amounts of saliva, it just doesn't happen.
If you have a free minute, check out this document. It was edited by 2 PHD and 2 DVM and PHD. It's not made by slouches like myself.

https://texasdeerassociation.com/wp...05/CURRENT-SCIENTIFIC-KNOWLEDGE-ABOUT-CWD.pdf

I have spent a lot of time researching both sides because I want to know exactly what the consequences of my actions would be. Currently, the actual, published science shows no statistical significance of if baiting affects CWD negatively or positively.

Finally, I would love to know what makes the bills origin dubious? It was created out of the frustration of being completely ignored and disregarded by the game and fish. I am 95% in support of the game and fish and honestly, I am quite happy with how they manage our resource. However, I do not agree with regulations being made based on theories, especially when those regulations play a roll in gatekeeping the outdoors to differently-able bodied people.
I'm not being confrontational. I have no desire to argue things, just share information. If you can give me some studies that tell me I am incorrect, I will change my mind. I care about our resource and maintaining it for my children just as much as anyone else. All I want is one piece of evidence that says baiting certainly increases the rate at which CWD spread.

John let me just state that I have no interest in being confrontational or argumentative for no reason. I’m sure we have more in common than not. I will read the study you posted later. Did you read mine? Anyway if your looking for a 100% cause and effect study on CWD spread in ND, you’ll never find it. Same can be said for literally every disease know to mankind. Science is, in fact mostly just theories. Electricity is an “unproven” theory, but I’m sure you believe in it. Same with gravity. Hell, same with concrete. There is plenty of analysis our there that may not definitively prove anything about baiting, but there’s enough that the G&F felt backed their decision. It’s easy to pick and choose case studies that suit your agenda. It’s even easier to dismiss an opposing view as biased or untrue based on the source.

 

[NPO_Aaron]

Hey man, it was me that posted that. I’m telling you, im not picking research that fits my agenda. I’ve been asking to research that disproves it, no one can produce it.

I am willing to change my stance instantly. I just need real data.

 

[bravo]

Hey man, it was me that posted that. I’m telling you, im not picking research that fits my agenda. I’ve been asking to research that disproves it, no one can produce it.

I am willing to change my stance instantly. I just need real data.

My bad Aaron, read that wrong.

 

[NPO_Aaron]

My bad Aaron, read that wrong.

No worries

 

[jdinny]

Id like to see baiting allowed, but set reasonable limits. Maybe you cannot put down more than 1 gallon total volume / day or something, enough to draw a few animals in, without pulling in all the deer from a 5 mile radius for guides to exploit....

Do you really think that putting a huge bait pile down will draw deer for 5 miles and if so that these monster bucks traveling 5 miles will make it durning daylight???! Your kidding yourself man bait or no bait if your not within 150 to 200 yards within a mature bucks bed you will NOT consistently kill big buck. The notion that you throw corn out and every big buck on the property uses it day on and day out if fkn asinine

 

[jdinny]

Like guys that kill big deer yearly over bait know there shit spend time finding where they bed and use bait as a tool to secure a close ethical shot. My gosh some of the thoughts how effective bait is in unreal

 

[guywhofishes]

I like passionate debate threads like this.

 

[Slappy]

But as far as landowner relations go, do you ever give the average Joe permission? If not, how do we fix that?

John I’m not against baiting, but I am against bills of dubious origin making game regulations instead of appointed agencies.

Good discussion, Bravo.

As an average Joe, I appreciate the first comment above. Demand far exceeds opportunity for big game on land readily accessible to the average Joe, and it will absolutely get worse here as population continues to grow.

Regarding the second comment: Were you on board with appointed agencies forcing and coercing injections, mandating face coverings, publicizing personal health information, and pursuing injection passports? Because it took a bill in the most recent special session of the state legislature to stop most of that, and some glaring holes were still left by our elected officials. This is why the science must stand on its own regardless of the entity making the rules.

 

[John Arman]

You do have skin in the game, you laid it out clearly in your YouTube video and your show uses bait to get bucks on camera. Not faulting you one but for that. It actually almost only benefits landowners like yourself and I who can bait since the average Joe is usually stuck to public land where it’s not legal, or on someone else’s property where baiting would need to take place regularly in order to work. And how many youth, veteran, or disabled hunters are you taking out since you care about them so much. Why haven’t you put out any information from the other side that shows that CWD has been shown to spread via saliva (here)? Seems relevant unless you are just looking to push an agenda. A purely science and data based approach would actually be to ban all artificial baiting and food plots (against that as well) in order to reduce the risk of all disease, wouldnt it? They obviously shouldn’t and haven’t done that. We can agree that habitat is more important. But as far as landowner relations go, do you ever give the average Joe permission? If not, how do we fix that?

John I’m not against baiting, but I am against bills of dubious origin making game regulations instead of appointed agencies.

Bravo please send me your email as I would like to send you some information. jarman@teamuoa.com
As to your comments. You are right, as a land owner I am able to use supplemental feed. I believe that deer are no different than us humans and the healthier you are the better chance you have at handling disease. Again I am in a no baiting unit so we are not allowed to hunt over bait. However I can feed wildlife all year long without any laws being broke.
Now for your comment insinuating I do nothing for others. We have and continue to help the youth, veterans, and disabled. We work with the Outdoor Adventure Foundation an organization that is dedicated to young people under 25 with life-threatening illnesses and combat-disabled veterans. We have also taken vets hunting through the Injured Military Wildlife Project of North Dakota. Along with this I have over the years taken many youth hunters on their first hunts, more than I can count. I also have been part of Raised At Full Draw bowhunting camp for kids for the past 12 years and run my own camp in Bismarck. In the last 3 years I have had close to 90 kids complete our camps where they are certified in Bowhunters Education. This is all done on my own time, my own dime and the money I raise.
So again I will say I do not have skin in this game, if the Game and Fish bans baiting it will not affect me. However it does affect a lot of others. I am no biologist or anyone special but in the research I have done and the experts I have talked to, I don't believe the banning of baiting will slow down the spread of CWD but will only limit hunters.

 

[bravo]

Bravo please send me your email as I would like to send you some information. jarman@teamuoa.com
As to your comments. You are right, as a land owner I am able to use supplemental feed. I believe that deer are no different than us humans and the healthier you are the better chance you have at handling disease. Again I am in a no baiting unit so we are not allowed to hunt over bait. However I can feed wildlife all year long without any laws being broke.
Now for your comment insinuating I do nothing for others. We have and continue to help the youth, veterans, and disabled. We work with the Outdoor Adventure Foundation an organization that is dedicated to young people under 25 with life-threatening illnesses and combat-disabled veterans. We have also taken vets hunting through the Injured Military Wildlife Project of North Dakota. Along with this I have over the years taken many youth hunters on their first hunts, more than I can count. I also have been part of Raised At Full Draw bowhunting camp for kids for the past 12 years and run my own camp in Bismarck. In the last 3 years I have had close to 90 kids complete our camps where they are certified in Bowhunters Education. This is all done on my own time, my own dime and the money I raise.
So again I will say I do not have skin in this game, if the Game and Fish bans baiting it will not affect me. However it does affect a lot of others. I am no biologist or anyone special but in the research I have done and the experts I have talked to, I don't believe the banning of baiting will slow down the spread of CWD but will only limit hunters.

I appreciate the response John. And I acknowledge that I came in a bit hot with that comment. Good on you for helping out. I think it’ll all boil down to you and I agreeing to disagree. I see the game and fish doing their job based on the info they have; and a bill that threatens to take management out of their hands and into a percentage of hunters. And like we both said, it really only stands to benefit them. All the while setting a precedent that could derail game management in the future.

 

[bravo]

Good discussion, Bravo.

As an average Joe, I appreciate the first comment above. Demand far exceeds opportunity for big game on land readily accessable to the average Joe, and it will absolutely get worse here as population continues to grow.

Regarding the second comment: Were you on board with appointed agencies forcing and coercing injections, mandating face coverings, publicizing personal health information, and pursuing injection passports? Because it took a bill in the most recent special session of the state legislature to stop most of that, and some glaring holes were still left by our elected officials. This is why the science must stand on its own regardless of the entity making the rules.

In short, hell no. I thought the Covid response of masks and social distancing was like a lot of others called it: theatre. We all saw what the mandates did to small businesses. I agree, but if the science on CWD was so clear, there wouldn’t be any arguments in the first place.