posted
For the record, I personally hunt in the CWD zone where baiting is prohibited, and in central Wisconsin farm country. I know that some of my neighbors up there do in fact bait and feed deer. I choose not to and still enjoy pretty good hunting.
I am not taking this stance against baiting in WI for my own purposes - it is not a big factor for me personally.
I take the stance as a director of WTA in support of the many members who have expressed to me their concerns and frustrations with hunting in the north part of the state. I have yet to have a single WTA member contact me asking that we back off on our stance against baiting, while I have had numerous people thank me for what we have done.
Posts: 8767 | From: Lake Mills, WI | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"We certainly don't have the money of the corn growers association or other groups that can hire lobbyists and donate funds to political campaigns to promote their interests."
Most orgs that hire a lobbyist do not donate a dime to political candidates or political parties. I know none of the state orgs I belong to do such a thing.
" In fact, our bylaws would not allow us to do so. We are not a political organization."
That is true of most 501c orgs and all the ones I belong to. I belong to one that is a 501C non-profit that has a lobbyist that donates not one single dime to any candidate or party.
"The sad fact is that money means everything in these fights."
That is a common misconception and suggests illegal activity. The state government accountability board is in place to make sure that buying legislators does not happen.
To be realistic about it, we are a small organization with less than 400 members. Politicians don't listen much to groups like ours.
"How else can it be explained when recommendations from the DNR are turned down in favor of those groups who have made the largest campaign contributions"
Again, this is a bogus claim. There are many recommendations from the DNR that ought to be turned down (and have been) like EAB and deer population goals in which it took legislative intervention to set things right. Some have the uncanny knack to place too much faith and power in an out of control dept. Thankfully there is a new administration that will reign them in.
"Any suggestions on what WTA could do to conteract the way things currently work?"
With 400 members and no lobbyist.................. No.
-------------------- Member: WI Bowhunters Association Member: WI Traditional Archers Member: American Broadhead Collectors Club Member: Sherwood Forest Bowmen Posts: 887 | From: SE WI | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The question is what is the WBH doing to not promote baiting? At recent legislative hearings WBH has testified using "facts" that support baiting. That is not a neutral position. Kinda hard for the WTA to fight against that.
Maybe the WBH could survey their members again if they think that a majority of hunters want to keep baiting? I'm glad the WTA has a solid position in favor of a statewide ban. Too bad this seems like a political arguement rather than what's best for the deer herd, or the deer hunter.
Posts: 260 | From: Roberts, WI | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually MAT, if you go to the thread starters post you will see this.
Who's in favor of a statewide baiting ban?
What is your take?
So I think you will agree with me that the question has nothing to do with WBH But since you asked:
"Maybe the WBH could survey their members again if they think that a majority of hunters want to keep baiting?"
At the 2008 Annual meeting of WBH members, that question was asked. A motion was made to have WBH set its position to one of anti baiting. When the votes were counted, 80% opposed the motion. That was last and most recent official asking of the question. The members (at least those that care enough to attend the annual meeting) seem to preffer the neutral stance.
How about sticking to the subject at hand? Beyond that, there are a few avenues to have real and lasting effect on crossbows. All this energy would be better spend there.
-------------------- Member: WI Bowhunters Association Member: WI Traditional Archers Member: American Broadhead Collectors Club Member: Sherwood Forest Bowmen Posts: 887 | From: SE WI | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I do have to agree that this thread needs to stick to the topic of whether baiting should be banned. Even though you or I may not agree with the WBH stance, this is not the place to get into that.
This is a WTA forum, and we need to stick to what WTA represents. If you are a member of WBH let them know what you think of them through their forum.
I'll leave this thread open for now to allow others to comment if they wish, but let's not let it deteriorate into a battle about other issues.
Posts: 8767 | From: Lake Mills, WI | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think baiting should be banned. Besides the WTA so does the Wi Wildlife Federation that represents 160+ affiliates, the WI Conservation Congress, the WI Farm Bureau, Wi Cattlemens Assoc, the Woodland Owners Assoc, the Wildlife Society, Assoc of County Foresters, and many more.
You'd be hard pressed to name any formal organizations that actually have dues paying members who have voted to support baiting.
Posts: 260 | From: Roberts, WI | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks Whip. Good to get this back on track from silly tangents.
Senator Kedzie was named Chair of Senate Natural resources and Rep Gunderson is Chairing Assembly Fish and Game. Gov. Scott Walker (a bowhunter) will be selecting a new DNR Sec and 3 new members of the NRB. What this means to the future of baiting laws is anybodies guess. My guess is that there are not enough 10 foot poles in Madison.
-------------------- Member: WI Bowhunters Association Member: WI Traditional Archers Member: American Broadhead Collectors Club Member: Sherwood Forest Bowmen Posts: 887 | From: SE WI | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whip, being realistic, I don't think there is a thing that the WTA can do except be there and make sure we are heard.
Our society has changed. People in general are "in it" for different reasons and for different goals nowadays. They don't want to put in the time to be a hunter, to be a part of the outdoors. They want results and they want them ASAP, as easily as can be gotten.
How to prove this ? Open our eyes.
Why else is the compound bow and the crossbow so popular. Why else would someone spend tons of money on scent proof clothing and scent bomb attractants, on gear like range finders that allows you to shoot way out there so you don't have to pass on "your buck" if it walks by at 60-70 yards.
It is easy, it is more efficient, it allows someone to not spend time preparing, practicing, scouting etc.
It allows them to just go out and kill something and reap at least that part of "joy of hunting". They don't get it for the rest.
Of course, the sales money generated is the only reason business is promoting it. Face it, no old school deer hunter is gonna tell everybody else how to get the big ones unless there is a very well greased palm in the process.
Baiting is just another easy way to get er done. It can be rationalized a hundred ways, but the reality is, it is quick, easy and must be generating enough results or it wouldn't be held as so important. Again, greased palms are there as it is another way to sell grain and apples.
Maybe we need to grow brussels sprouts and advertise that they are "the best" and get a piece of the pie.
posted
I think you hit the nail on the head Chuck. I constantly get comments from people who feel the same way. Just today I had an email from a WTA member. Here is an excerpt from his letter:
...Baiting, it’s just ridiculous what goes on up north. I own land in the Park Falls area, two weeks before gun season it’s just a steady stream of people hauling trailers of pumpkins, cabbage, corn and apples! I saw zero deer opening day on 120 acres of private land. Deer just don’t need to browse during the day, fill up at these feed stations and sit tight all day. Pathetic the way our deer hunting culture has gone, everything is fast, easy and efficient....
Letters like that are what keep WTA adamant in our belief that baiting of deer should be banned in Wisconsin. Other states have totally different circumstances, and I won't pretend to know what is best everywhere in the country. But it sure seems clear from the people that I hear from that it is a serious problem here in our state.
Posts: 8767 | From: Lake Mills, WI | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
In Wisconsin, this is one of the topics that creates passionate responses from people.
One of the problems is that up north, so many of the people putting out corn and apples are feeders near their cabins and homes. Many of them do not hunt, and see no reason to stop doing what they are doing as they perceive it as a way to increase opportunities to view wildlife. Almost like an extension to their bird feeders. So to ban baiting would be to ban feeding, which then makes the ban an offense to a much larger voting block. Thus the pole becomes a 'ten footer' politically.
It's also easy to see why the non-baiting hunter is so upset up north. Especially with the stories that you hear of people staking out territory on public land surrounding their bait piles. Then defending 'their spots' with threats or vandalism. I have stated this on other forums, this sounds a lot like the pot growers on public land who threaten others. A sad state of affairs for hunters to do this to each other. Thus I support the ban for this reason, at least on public land.
-------------------- If man were to know everything in advance, there would be no such thing as adventure! Posts: 302 | From: WI | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are ways to address feeding, such as allow feeding only after hunting season closes. But there are other political issues besides this that have prevented baiting ban which a majority of hunters support. It's probably not a coincidence that the biggest supporter of deer baiting, the HRC (which includes the Bear Hunters and State NWTF) was founded by a lobbyist for the WI Corn Growers Assoc. Last I knew he was still a lobbyist for both.
If you hate baiting the only option is to hunt in other states. Just about everyone I know does. That's really sad given how great deer hunting used to be here.
What's also sad is we are raising a generation of new hunters that have no idea how to hunt deer. All they know is walk 100 yards into woods, dump a pile and shoot. Oh, and complain that there are no deer when they don't see anything. They must not know what a deer track looks like because then they would know where all their corn went!
Posts: 260 | From: Roberts, WI | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Perhaps the new DNR head will address the issue.
Stepp, Maroney and Gunderson are in the process of making the dept head appointments. We will have to see where the baiting issue comes in on their to-do list. I know it has been primary enforcement in the last few years to showcase it. We will have to wait to know where the new DNR places the issue on their list of important items. Does anybody have any guesses?
-------------------- Member: WI Bowhunters Association Member: WI Traditional Archers Member: American Broadhead Collectors Club Member: Sherwood Forest Bowmen Posts: 887 | From: SE WI | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ron, are you hinting that the new DNR admisitration, which it seems you support, is going to down play baiting enforcement just to make it look less of a problem? You have no data to show that it was deemed a primary enforcement issue in the first place, no more so that not tagging a deer. It is this type of BS that IS the problem with baiting.
You seem to know a lot of what's happening politically, being the WBH legislative liason, so one can assume you have been talking to these guys behind closed doors. Given your testimony on baiting for the WBH, and because the WTA gives the WBH a donatation every year for protecting our bowhunting rights, this has everything to do with the WBH.
You should put your new disclaimer here otherwise those who know you are a WBH board member might get the idea you are speaking for them. Even though what you say here pretty much reflects what you already said in public for the WBH.
The WTA is united against baiting, and as a member you should respect that and not badger those members who consider this a serious treat to bowhunting. The WTA and WBH disagree on this too, so there is no need to try and brag about how we can't do anything about it. In this case the WTA is not the problem, it's the WBH.
Posts: 260 | From: Roberts, WI | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is the WTA site. I'm not sure why you wish to change the topic. The WTA and its members have a stance. Other groups and there members have a stance. That is what groups of members do but you are getting off topic. As a WTA member, I support the orgs position and right to take the position. I also am a realist not prone to live in a dream world of wishes. Whwn I post here, its as a Bowhunter that uses trad gear. I always and forever have only spoke for me and me alone. You assume too much.
-------------------- Member: WI Bowhunters Association Member: WI Traditional Archers Member: American Broadhead Collectors Club Member: Sherwood Forest Bowmen Posts: 887 | From: SE WI | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
You've both had your say - time to stick to the question at hand and leave the personal grudges out of it. It sure would be nice to get some other opinions out of this. We all know where both Mark and Ron stand.
The facts are that WTA opposes baiting and would like to see the practice banned state wide. WTA withheld a donation to WBH a year ago in protest over their stand on baiting.
Posts: 8767 | From: Lake Mills, WI | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[dead horse]](graemlins/deadhorse.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
