Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

IBA supports feeding baiting bill

nannyslayer said:
Just think about a few things before you write the IBA off, such as I did not 24 hours ago. A good nights sleep, a few beers and a can of chew later, I've gotten clear thoughts back into my head.
Click to expand...

Yeah my lip is a little soar this morning! This is going to be an ongoing battle folks. I believe the DNR will have to do some fine tuning before this actually gets passed. It has way to many negatives right now to even be considered. As stated before now is the time to get involved and make phone calls and send emails. If the numbers truly are leaning to the side of "not in favor" than you will see that in final results.

A suggestion to the moderators is to post when these meetings are, they are not on the IBA website.

Dbltree I think you are way to quick to assume that people are not informed and are not active. Be careful with what you assume because there are alot of people on this site that take your word as gospel. My reply to your Brucellosis post was a simple act to let people know that you misinformed them, and the smart ass reply was unneeded. You seem to be part of this "good ol' boys" club" and it is easy for you to say that these guys are all good hard working guys that are volunteering for us. The question of them being good guys, I don't believe ever came into question. They know that being on the board is going to come with criticism as well as accolades. I would love to run to be on the board of the IBA if ever given the opp. My point is that it is easy for some to sit back and agree with the decisions being made because you are friends or think they have your best interest in mind. I don't have the luxury of knowing these guys so my opinion is unbiased. I just don't see this bill helping in any way. The arguments given do not hold water in most cases and I am truly concerned that there is hidden agenda for the future here. I don't like when new laws are enacted without just cause, and this is pretty sketchy if you ask me. I have spoke to my local CO's as well as some law enforcement officers and they all think the less work argument is bull. I just don't get it! I took a wait and see approach last night to see if we would receive clear and concise answers today and we haven't. I will probably purchase a life membership this year to the IBA, but they will not have my support on this. As I said before, "divided we stand" and it is alarming!
 
Very well said DannyBoy. It is the duty of every citizen according to his best capacity to give validity to his convictions in political affairs, and I don't feel we are receiving much validity!
 
From the International Society of Infections Disease 1/18/11:

http://www.promedmail.org/pls/apex/..._BACK_PAGE,F2400_P1001_PUB_MAIL_ID:1010,86702

From the Casper (WY) Journa 1/18/11l:

http://www.casperjournal.com/articles/2011/01/19/news/news50.chronic%20wasting%20disease%20study%201-19.txt



Believe me when I say I understand the desire to maximize the potential of the deer in your area. I had a mineral site on my ten acres of heaven for a couple of years. I started with Antler King mineral and eventually just used a bag of sheep mineral and a bag of livestock salt with trace minerals. There were even pics on this site of deer using it. Then reality hit me. Someday my ten acres will be all I have to hunt and can I legally hunt here if there is a bait/mineral site on the ten acres? I didn’t want to chance it so I went out, removed all of the residual mineral that I could, filled it in with bagged top soil and mixed it with dirt from the surrounding area. Grass still won’t grow on the roughly 4 square feet of earth but the deer don’t touch it.

I also had a camera on the site (any of you remember St. Francis? He is still in the same spot). I had many different deer using the site. I did not have an “Ah Ha” moment per se, but rather a gradual awareness to what the deer were really doing. Sure they were getting, what I thought at the time, were extras of the essential minerals it would take to grow monsters but at the same time they were sharing each other’s saliva and therefore each other’s germs, viruses and prions.

Think of it this way, you send your child off to daycare or school, you don’t want to, you would rather they stay at home so you and your wife could bring them up right, but the grim reality is that in today’s economic times it takes two incomes to make ends meet. So off they go to be with other kids, to share the toys, the sippy cups, the water fountains and perhaps even a pacifier or two.
.

Your child comes home one day from daycare or school and has the sniffles. The next morning they have a cough. That afternoon you get a call from daycare or the school that your child has a fever and needs to go home. The next day you or your wife has to take off work to take your child to the doctor. The doctor prescribes a ten day course of amoxicillin to cure whatever it was they contracted at daycare or school. In the mean time you drink from a glass or touched something your child has coughed, sneezed or drooled on. Now you too have whatever they brought home from what is basically a germ factory. By the way, I don’t think they spread the disease by grooming each other, but hey, what happens at daycare stays at daycare.

I know a lot of you are frustrated because you think I don’t get it. Believe me I do understand what you are trying to achieve by supplemental feeding. I just hope you are willing to suffer the consequences of the practice. After all, the prescription for disease in deer isn’t a ten day course of antibiotics; it is a 150 grain ballistic tipped piece of lead to the head fired by a government sharpshooter.


 
Bonker, I've got a lot of respect for you, which says something because aside from this site, we've never made any kind of contact that I'm aware of. I'm glad there are guys out there willing to put themselves in the line of fire while taking a stance on something important to them. Please don't take this as a personal attack.

I could go to the CDC website and link cases of cwd, tb, etc., etc., until I've peeled away my own fingerprint, and that doesn't even touch the amount of information out there in scientific journals, periodicals, etc. How does that pertain to Iowa, though? Just because another state has issues, we will as well? Although the information in those links does bring to light a very real scenario, one that could very well happen in Iowa, it's still not the 'missing link' of info that many of us feel must be out there for some of those big names to take this stance.

Has a stance such as, "the arrival of [said disease] into the state of Iowa's wildlife population is inevitable, so we are forced to fight it now," been taken?

It's almost like the DNR was pushing to find a CWD positive example from all the testing they've done recently.

And to straight up HALF-ASS the bill!? I'm about as hard-headed as they come but I've put a lot of thought into this and I can't for the life of me understand how its proponents could support it, even as a newly worded bill, when the final ruling would still allow feeding/baiting in a certain scenario, which is exactly what it is trying to eliminate. "We have to start somewhere" or "it's a start" does NOT fly with me, not with a black or white issue like this.

The government is already too big and they tell too many of us too often what to do and how to do it. Now, they are trying to "start somewhere" in telling me (us) specifically how to go about hunting. Maybe I'm being too harsh?
 
Last edited:
DannyBoy said:
Has a stance such as, "the arrival of [said disease] into the state of Iowa's wildlife population is inevitable, so we are forced to fight it now," been taken?
Short answer, yes.

Long answer, I was at a meeting on December 1st 2009 of the Iowa Deer Study Committee held at Bass Pro Shop in Des Moines. This is the same Committee that met several times in the fall and winter of 2008 to make a report to the governor and legislature about deer and deer hunting in Iowa. The report was turned over to the governor and legislature in January of 2009.

This meeting was to help the DNR Wildlife Bureau set their legislative goals for the 2010 session. Several topics were discussed including the ban on wildlife feeding. I asked the question “Is it a matter of IF diseases or WHEN diseases come to Iowa” and the answer was WHEN. I cannot prove this as I did not receive a copy of the minutes if there were any minutes taken. I don’t have it in my notes either, but it was such a sentinel moment for me I’ll never forget it. With that information the committee voted to support the ban.

I’m not sure one can draw an inference here, but how many cities in Iowa are cutting down ash trees now because it isn’t a matter of IF the EAB kills them, it is a matter of WHEN EAB kills them.

It should also be noted that to my knowledge the Committee hasn’t met again since 12/01/09
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I keep harping on my Mich experience, but I believe it is inevitable some disease will eventually be found in Iowa. The same road will be taken as was in MI. and other states. More deer will have to be sacrificed. For the good of the Ag business,,for the good of the human population,,,"Swine Flu" type hype, and of coarse ,for the good of the deer herd. No matter what legislation is proposed, that is the road we are going down. I hope this is not the case. To this day, Officials in N. MI are happy with the deer pop, they have now. My buddies there are not. Every season is always going to be better than the last,,so They say....
 
With all the landowners on here that are are making ground payments I can't believe that nobody has commented that if a major diesease were to go through those high priced hunting farms would be worth a lot less then they are now. In my opinon if this helps prevent the spread of a major disease outbreak I'm for it. Will deer get through winter if you don't put out an Antler King mineral block yes they will and if the genetics are there they will still grow a big rack this summer I am more concerned about the health of our heard and the longevity of my investment then I am about putting out a trophy rock and taking a picture.
 
If we already had CWD here I would not have a problem with this bill. However, banning bait sites will not keep it from arriving. How about a compromise that the ban is contingent on having the diseases arrive in Iowa. It may be 1yr , 5yrs, or 10yrs before it arrives. In the meantime you would not be denying the recreational enjoyment derived from mineral/bait sites. Also as has been mentioned before there is a big market for materials used for mineral/bait sites and some small enterprises may go out of business.
Making the CO's job easier is not a valid reason for this bill. That is how we got party hunting. It used to be illegal but everyone did it so it was easier to just make it legal.
 
Rut Nut said:
If we already had CWD here I would not have a problem with this bill. However, banning bait sites will not keep it from arriving. How about a compromise that the ban is contingent on having the diseases arrive in Iowa. It may be 1yr , 5yrs, or 10yrs before it arrives. In the meantime you would not be denying the recreational enjoyment derived from mineral/bait sites. Also as has been mentioned before there is a big market for materials used for mineral/bait sites and some small enterprises may go out of business.
Making the CO's job easier is not a valid reason for this bill. That is how we got party hunting. It used to be illegal but everyone did it so it was easier to just make it legal.
Click to expand...

Contact your rep. and send Nannyslayer your email address so we can get you added to the petition. :way:
 
Whoever is opposed to this bill, I urge you to contact your reps and to send Nannyslayer your email address and name. Also the petition will be on the counter of some of the sporting goods stores in NE Iowa if you are around and would like to sign. I hope that some of you other guys that are close to your local archery shop or farm fleet store to try to get them to put the petition on their counters. Explain to them the possible implications and present yourself in a positive manner and it will get us a long ways. Get out there guys!:way:
 
If we already had CWD here I would not have a problem with this bill. However, banning bait sites will not keep it from arriving.
Click to expand...


That's the problem. It's just a matter of unknown time before it arrives and we most likely won't know exactly when it arrives. That is why having some form of protection in place now may help slow transmission rates.
 
Rut Nut said:
If we already had CWD here I would not have a problem with this bill. However, banning bait sites will not keep it from arriving. How about a compromise that the ban is contingent on having the diseases arrive in Iowa. It may be 1yr , 5yrs, or 10yrs before it arrives. In the meantime you would not be denying the recreational enjoyment derived from mineral/bait sites. Also as has been mentioned before there is a big market for materials used for mineral/bait sites and some small enterprises may go out of business.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately by the time we detect it, it will be too late.

CDW is a chronic disease the may take years to manifest itself so there are years that the infected animal can be spreading the disease and we wouldn’t know it. The easiest way to stop the spread of disease is prevent it in the first place. Not being able to prevent it you take away its reservoir and that will be every deer in the area. How many more mineral sites will be established between now and the time CWD is found? That is thousands of more transmission sites.

For those who would let the disease run its course and do nothing about it you need to read the link to the Wyoming study. The herd they are studying is in decline and it appears, at this early stage of research, that CWD is slowly killing the herd even with reduced hunting pressure.
 
If we already had CWD here
Click to expand...
People tend to be a little myopic on CWD. Most diseases are more readily transmitted when a population congregates (EHD and brucelosis, for example). Anybody ever get sick because the kids brought home the latest bug going around school? Why artificially encourage this with baiting/licks?
 
The study is being led by Melia DeVivo, a Ph.D. veterinary student from the University of Wyoming, and hopes to answer whether or not the high CWD infection rate is playing a primary role in the reduction of this particular deer herd. Suspicion has fallen on the disease because other nearby deer herds living in similar habitats with similar amounts of predation, winter severity and other factors, but lower CWD infection rates, aren’t experiencing the same level of population reduction.
"We know one of the primary concerns is poor habitat conditions, especially in mixed mountain shrub communities," explained Binfet. "This deer herd underwent severe drought in the early part of this decade which caused drastic reductions in fawn production which started the decline. However, the drought has essentially subsided since 2006 and fawn production hasn’t improved and in fact, it’s gotten worse. Habitat conditions are almost as poor in adjacent herd units of similar habitat types and yet those areas haven’t experienced the levels of population decline that this herd has. To our knowledge, the primary difference between herds is the extraordinarily high prevalence of CWD in the South Converse herd. The other herds do have CWD, but at a much lower prevalence."

Let's compare apples to apples here, not a 40 head herd of mule deer in one area of Wyoming. If this is what the Iowa DNR is basing there reasoning on then we are in trouble. What's next? No children are allowed outside from May 1st through Oct 1st because they MIGHT get bitten by a mosquito and get encephalitis? No more walking your dog outside because they could interact with another dog with fleas and the fleas could bite you causing Murine Typhus? No more planting shrubs and bushes and trees on your property because they will host ticks who carry lymes disease and will bite and infect Iowas deer herd? No more allowing of rabbits and deer to nibble on the same forage for fear that the deer will contact Tularemia and die? Yes this sounds rediculous, because it is! Just like this proposed bill! Since when did the deer herd become a priority of the DNR any way? Seems to me they haven't cared the last couple of years, so why now? I truly believe this is an enforcement bill based strictly on saving the DNR money, and if that is the case then just say it!

You get my point. There are so many things that happen in nature regardless of mineral licks and supplemental feeding. Unless the DNR is going to ban animals from interacting and ticks and mosquitos to stop biting we are all screwed and all of our animals are going to die! Give me a break!
 
Wow this is hard for me to believe, 22 pages of mostly self justification and attacking the people that you elected to make these kind of decisions for you on a volunteer basis. There have been many issues brought up that were a part of this decision to support this bill and many of you are picking those reasons apart with your own reasoning so as to make your practices acceptable. I have read all of these posts and all the complaints about not polling the members and asking what they thought before voting at the meeting where the board members, that you elected, got much or most of the information used to make that decision. Many of those complainers didn't care enough before to make sure that their names and addresses were on the mailing list and now are upset because they weren't asked their thoughts before the vote, well how was that supposed to be accomplished? How many times has you legislator actually came to you and asked your opinion on a new law that they were about to vote on? If any governing body of any group had to poll the members on every issue there would be nothing accomplished and at least half of the members would still be upset because their view point wasn't the one accepted, and threaten to with draw. That is not how things get done!

I do happen to believe that this will help curtail the spread of many different diseases, and even if it actually doesn't how has it harmed the deer any? I like the example of the little children and day care. How many parents would allow their 2 year old child to eat from a large bowl of ice cream with 30 other 2 or 3 year olds at the same time with the same spoon or their hands for 30 minutes while someone took pictures to post on the Internet to show how great that daycare was and why everyone should take their children there? We all know that children need dairy products to grow big and healthy so that they can be football or basketball stars as they get a little older. Isn't that what we call supplemental feeding? Maybe we could even add extra minerals and vitamins to aide that process. I know that sounds a little sarcastic or smart as*, but to me that is how many of you sound.

Can some one please tell us how this will REALLY IMPACT their deer hunting, just because they can't get pictured of deer that are artificially lured to an area by food or minerals? Almost everyone has said that the deer don't use the mineral sites after September any way so there is no way of knowing if that buck you got the picture of is still hanging around in November or if he is 10 miles away or just in the neighbors pasture or if the kid 2 roads over killed him during the youth season. If you are basing your decision whether to shoot the buck under your tree on the fact that you had pictured of a larger buck at the salt block, then maybe you are really missing something and doing that buck a disservice, at lest in my eyes. I understand that some of you just enjoy getting these pictures but wouldn't you still be able to get them with different camera placement on trails and such rather than just doing the easy thing and putting out a salt block or a few bushels of corn in a convenient spot? There are many people who would also enjoy being able to shoot big bucks with rifles at 300 yards in November during the rut just like many other surrounding states allow. Should we also indulge them just because they can show that it really doesn't hurt the deer herd and it should be their right to do this and that Iowa is really backward for not allowing it?

I would have to doubt that any healthy deer has ever starved to death in Iowa and especially not now. We are currently so far below the carrying capacity that that idea is shear folly. Even 4 or 5 years ago when the deer herd was at it's peak there was never any danger of starvation, no matter what weather we had here in Iowa. If that were a real danger, how have deer survived for hundreds of years in much harsher environments that we have here? Supplemental feeding is not needed for the deer in Iowa, other wise explain how the deer herd was able to expand, and in some view points over populate, in the years before we had such things as trail cams, deer minerals, and supplemental feeds? These are just part of the over commercialization marketing plans that have exploited the deer and deer hunters in the last 10 or 15 years. I guarantee you that in 1980 that anyone putting out minerals (salt blocks) or corn piles were doing so for only one reason, to shoot deer and often times with high power rifles.

This has taken a long time to write, what with getting interrupted with work and all, so I will quit, but I will also applaud the IBA board members for taking an unpopular stand on something that hopefully we will all see the wisdom of in the near future and good wishes to them, and this just might make me rejoin after several years absent.
 
Bowmaker is right, Not being able to get trail cam pics as easy, may be a small thing. And maybe Individuals with the best interest of Deer Hunters and the deer, are doing what they think is best. IMO, this deer disease issue is part of a bigger sell job, to keep the pressure on, thinning deer down more. If you buy into the fear, you will agree on other tactics. Wisconsin has had the CWD, for some time now. Is it wiping out the herd? I know hunters were encouraged to,,in areas,,just like MICH. Disease comes and goes ,it is nature's way. The "Unatural" practice that supposedly started alot of this was keeping private deer herds, in fenced areas like cattle. Now I think that should have been stopped, but that's another debate. The idea of more and more, being told what you can and cannot do is valid. I want to fight this progress of BIG BRO, as much as possible, but I realize in an ever more crowded world this is probably inevitable also. I for one just don't buy the disease threat. As I said, I saw the propoganda machine crank this out first hand. I talked to Biologists, who told me the true agenda,,not in Iowa. I remain a skeptic.
 
I am posting a response from Representative Mary Jo Wilhelm from this morning. This is a direct quote from her email to me.

Dedgeez,

"I did not know anything about this bill. I did talk to Senator Dearden who is the chair of Natural Resources and Environment. He did say that this is something that the DNR wanted, but he also said that no bill has been filed and he did not feel that any will be."


I guess all we can do is keep them abreast of what we know and educate them as fairly as possible when things start happening.

Thanks for reading.
 
dedgeez said:
The study is being led by Melia DeVivo, a Ph.D. veterinary student from the University of Wyoming, and hopes to answer whether or not the high CWD infection rate is playing a primary role in the reduction of this particular deer herd. Suspicion has fallen on the disease because other nearby deer herds living in similar habitats with similar amounts of predation, winter severity and other factors, but lower CWD infection rates, aren’t experiencing the same level of population reduction.
"We know one of the primary concerns is poor habitat conditions, especially in mixed mountain shrub communities," explained Binfet. "This deer herd underwent severe drought in the early part of this decade which caused drastic reductions in fawn production which started the decline. However, the drought has essentially subsided since 2006 and fawn production hasn’t improved and in fact, it’s gotten worse. Habitat conditions are almost as poor in adjacent herd units of similar habitat types and yet those areas haven’t experienced the levels of population decline that this herd has. To our knowledge, the primary difference between herds is the extraordinarily high prevalence of CWD in the South Converse herd. The other herds do have CWD, but at a much lower prevalence."

Let's compare apples to apples here, not a 40 head herd of mule deer in one area of Wyoming. If this is what the Iowa DNR is basing there reasoning on then we are in trouble. What's next? No children are allowed outside from May 1st through Oct 1st because they MIGHT get bitten by a mosquito and get encephalitis? No more walking your dog outside because they could interact with another dog with fleas and the fleas could bite you causing Murine Typhus? No more planting shrubs and bushes and trees on your property because they will host ticks who carry lymes disease and will bite and infect Iowas deer herd? No more allowing of rabbits and deer to nibble on the same forage for fear that the deer will contact Tularemia and die? Yes this sounds rediculous, because it is! Just like this proposed bill! Since when did the deer herd become a priority of the DNR any way? Seems to me they haven't cared the last couple of years, so why now? I truly believe this is an enforcement bill based strictly on saving the DNR money, and if that is the case then just say it!

You get my point. There are so many things that happen in nature regardless of mineral licks and supplemental feeding. Unless the DNR is going to ban animals from interacting and ticks and mosquitos to stop biting we are all screwed and all of our animals are going to die! Give me a break!
Click to expand...


I do believe the research can be extrapolated to white tail in that they are looking at CWD and reproduction rates. The habitat has remained the same for several years but fawn recruitment continues to fall. Why? CWD? That is why they are doing the research and I’m sure this will cross cervidae taxonomic lines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom