# ...Beer & TB video...Mason Building, Lansing.....



## fairfax1

4th Floor ---- Mason Building, Lansing

The video clip from Saginaws NBC 25 contained within in this link: http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?t=350439
is cringe-worthy at many levels; hunters as boozy clueless violators being one. 

But, trying to salvage some positives out of this damaging media exposure.perhaps, trying to make a silk purse outta this sows ear.it is my hope that the TV news story clearly rings the bell on the 4th floor of the Steven T.Mason building. That it signals to the DNREs leadership that their fight against disease and the tactic of baiting may be stalling out.

What responsible hunter was not taken aback by the video of those huntersmultiple hunters.tossing bags of carrots into vehicles while another volunteers that he doesnt believe TB exists in deer while he buys bait for the TB Zone? Wow! Unsettling.

*So, to the DNRE and NRC on this issue: *

You implemented the long signaled restrictions in late summer of 2008. That created a lot of publicity & controversy because of the popularity of baiting. But you stuck to your guns. The first season under the restrictions gave us hope that this practice would eventually decline.like the restrictions on snagging salmon eventually reduced that practice.

To be sure, there was pushback by the special interests.the bait producers & merchants, and their elected representatives. The concerns over CWD likely left the politicos concerned with being saddled with abetting the spread of this disease and they seemingly backed off after huffing & puffing. But, the controversy simmered within the ranks of those hunters who relied on baiting as their favored method for killing a deer.

Then the 2009 seasons came with anecdotal reports of merchants seeing sales of their stuff begin to creep back up after 2008s shock. And various internet chatrooms .a venue for heated debate more accessible than the pages of the traditional hooknbullet press.kept the pot stirred with sometimes thoughtful opposition to the bait ban, but also with much misinformation that the bait community grasped at as justification to continue the banned practice.

And now we come to the 2010 hunting seasons with bait in evidence in a gazillion Lower Peninsula retailers. Then witness the disturbing scenes as shown in the video clip; and increasing anecdotal stories of the threat of disease not being taken seriously.

*What is the DNRE & the NRC going to do about it?* 

Clearly, your warnings buried in the black&white pages of the Hunting Guides or on your own website are insufficient to drive the point. So, as I posted in a nearby thread in the Disease Forum..the governmental stewards of our wildlife resources must step up their game the communication game. At the very least mount the bully-pulpit and be more forcefulcertainly more prolific.in efforts to inform all hunters, and non-hunters, of the dangers and the consequences.

There is evidencethat video is one instance.that our official stewards may lose the current battle in a similar fashion to the way the practice of baiting emerged in the 1980s. It happened then by defaultas the DNR failed to speak out or institute timely controls. In short, it got away from the Department because of a failure to recognize its growing popularity and its implications. It could be happening again.

I ask the Department and the NRC to more assertively speak out in your publications and your public meetings. At a minimum, you can mount an enhanced campaign to place posters ala the DO NOT BAIT FOR OUR SAKE illustration.. into the outdoor sports venues such as hunting license outlets; appropriate retailers, or highway rest-stops, and the internet.

There are honorable folks within the hunting community who are dismayed by the scofflaws that seem endemic to baitingas they were in snagging. Much more importantly, there are more folks who fear what deer vectored diseases could do to our broader economy. In my opinion, the DNRE and the NRC are not doing enough to inhibit the practice that is so widely believed to pose an unnecessary risk to the health of our free-range deer.and its threat to our long valued hunting culture.

That *NBC25* news story not only gave a black-eye to the hunting community..it also gave a black-eye to the DNRE and its efforts to promote adherence to and enforcement of .....our game laws.


----------



## Tom Morang

It stalled out a long time ago FF.


Too many claim they can't kill a deer without it and without it they will not hunt.

For years we begged for an I&E section within the DNR and the "budget" would not allow it. 

Once again we get what we pay for. Not much.


----------



## Direwolfe

We can't snag anymore?


----------



## 6inchtrack

And how did all that surprise you guys?
In a recent short-lived poll right here in these pages almost 1/4 of the hunters who answered the questions admitted that they still use bait. The questions were only directed at the Lower Peninsula.
Another percentage of nearly 50% said that they used bait while it was legal but wouldn't while the ban was in effect. I was in that last 50%.
That poll ran in the off season, I wish that the Mod&#8217;s would have just kept the nasty stuff out of it and let it run instead of deleting it, I bet that the traffic picks up in the whitetail forums when the seasons are opened. Who knows, that 1/4 could have dropped.
I oppose the ban because I am nowhere near the disease areas.
But I couldn't believe it when the guy being interviewed said that he was buying bait and going to the TB area. I support the DNRE actions for a bait ban in areas where there is confirmed disease.


----------



## Justin

I believe a lot more hunters would take it serious if they saw an effort to clean up the sloppy farming practices and the elimination of foodplots.


----------



## fairfax1

Poster &#8216;Jason&#8217; offers in a post #5 above: _&#8220;I believe a lot more hunters would take it serious if they saw an effort to clean up the sloppy farming practices and the elimination of food-plots.&#8221;_

Jason, I believe you believe. I don&#8217;t doubt your sincerity one bit.

However, I don&#8217;t find it persuasive that the referenced efforts ---or lack thereof--- would or do have any impact on bait-ban compliance.

Whether farm practices are sloppy or not is a fact and an observation that is well beyond most hunters&#8217; comprehension. &#8220;Sloppy&#8221; would likely mean to most that the equipment is old and scattered around the farmstead instead of barned-up. If you mean &#8216;sloppy&#8217; in that round-baled alfalfa is lined up for storage along a remote fence-line without poly-wrap&#8230;&#8230;I&#8217;m pretty positive near-none of our hunting peers would offer that up as sloppy practice.

I would say that the construct that &#8216;sloppy farming is a reason for non-compliance&#8217; is almost wholly an internet chatroom phenomenon. A talking-point offered on the pro-bait side of the debate, nothing more. I don&#8217;t believe it is a real-world perception by those who continue to illegally bait.

As far as the suggestion that the existence of &#8216;food plots&#8217; negates in a significant degree a desire to comply with the no-bait game laws&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..again, in my opinion, that is primarily an internet chatroom hot-button; not a real-world reason why most illegal baiters choose to violate.

Think about it&#8230;&#8230;let&#8217;s say all round bales and all open-to-access wire corn cribs were securely fenced up; and, no deer-goaled forages were planted&#8230;&#8230;..do you honestly think those characters in that infamous NBC25 news clip would quit loading up their SUV&#8217;s with carrots? Honestly?

In my opinion, those who choose to violate the baiting ban are doing it because that is their preferred way&#8230;or only way&#8230;..to bag a deer. And they simply don&#8217;t want to give it up.

Whether or not I left my rolled alfalfa in the back 40 or you are planting turnips just for deer&#8230;.has absolutely zero bearing on the motivations of the vast vast majority of illegal baiters.

They ain&#8217;t baiting as a protest of my alfalfa &#8230;&#8230; or your turnips.


----------



## beer and nuts

> I believe a lot more hunters would take it serious if they saw an effort to clean up the sloppy farming practices and the elimination of food-plots.


 there is something to this...never thought of it that way. 

Really, the fact of the matter is DNR bio are going around claiming "baiting" is the problem the real evil with Tb and all diseases. All the while, more food plots are being integrated in the deer herd FOR the deer herd congregating the herd to small feeding patterns and areas. I have seen it qute a bit, if "baiting" is the real problem, the farming practices where corn is spilled over, sugar beet "scrap" is dumped back into the field, etc... and deer feed on them should be addressed as well. I can see where hunters that bait or baited, view that as laughable...especially when you view it from a bigger picture and eyes wide open.

Its a good point and perspective.


----------



## Direwolfe

"Its a good point and perspective."

Errrr.... no. The guy in the film is justifying his baiting by saying he doesn't believe there's tb in the herd. That level of denial ain't going to be overcome by policing ag practices.


----------



## Justin

Direwolfe said:


> "Its a good point and perspective."
> 
> Errrr.... no. The guy in the film is justifying his baiting by saying he doesn't believe there's tb in the herd. That level of denial ain't going to be overcome by policing ag practices.


You are right about the guy in the video. I doubt that anything will change his mind. So what? I'm sure there are a few that feel that way but I'm also sure there are some that would drop the bait if they see an effort being made by others (non-baiters).


----------



## Munsterlndr

Direwolfe said:


> "Its a good point and perspective."
> 
> Errrr.... no. The guy in the film is justifying his baiting by saying he doesn't believe there's tb in the herd. That level of denial ain't going to be overcome by policing ag practices.


I don't disagree with what you said about denial but let's keep in mind that from a deer hunting perspective, bTB is a pretty minor threat. Approx. 300 - 400 deer out of 1,800,000 is not exactly the Black Death.

The only reason that we have turned this situation into such a huge deal is because of the potential impact on the cattle and dairy industry. It's within the power of that industry to take steps to mitigate that risk, including enhanced bio-security measures and implementation of a vaccination program. 

I'm not saying that hunters should not care about the bTB issue in Michigan but if a solution is ever going to occur, it's not going to be the result of either action or inaction on the part of hunters, it's going to be up to the agricultural community to step up to the plate and create a solution to the problem. If you could wave a magic wand tomorrow that permanently stopped every ounce of bait from hitting the ground in the lower Peninsula in perpetuity, we would still have a bTB problem 5, 10 15 years from now. The ultimate solution does not rest with deer management policies, it rests with farm management policies.


----------



## William H Bonney

Direwolfe said:


> We can't snag anymore?




Yeah,, geez,, when did that happen?


----------



## beer and nuts

The guy NEVER said he was baiting, nor was he the guys buying the bait in the picture. I have no idea who he is, but you guys are making this crap up, your worse than the media. YOUR watching the film and listening to the newcaster and HER narration...but alot fo people think the media is gospel!?>

Plus direwolfe, just like your assumption of the guy in the film, you misused my "good point and perspcetive" which was pointing out the quote I used in my post.


----------



## fairfax1

_"The guy NEVER said he was baiting, nor was he the guys buying the bait in the picture."_

B&N.....really?

You think that slow-leak in front of the camera was not gonna bait in the TB zone? that he was just offering his opinion 'cause....well, 'cause he was asked?

OK. If that's what you believe....well, that's what you believe.

But........wanna bet?


----------



## Justin

fairfax1 said:


> Poster Jason offers in a post #5 above:
> Jason?....really?


----------



## fairfax1

_"The only reason that we have turned this situation into such a huge deal is because of the potential impact on the cattle and dairy industry."_

That's a bingo!

........because that's what's for dinner!

Hell, without beef & dairy how much would we care if a few thousand whitetail deer harbored TB? 

We'd discard the ones that had obvious signs....and make chili out of the rest.

But if that's all we had to eat....... we'd likely starve. ('cept of course, the chicken eaters out there.)

If memory serves, we did a quick google search a few months back and came up with the calcs that if we replaced all of our beef consumption with deer meat......well, it would last about 5-days. Total.

Then we'd all hafta learn tofu recipes.

That's how important beef & dairy is.


----------



## fairfax1

Justin......."_Jason?....really?"_

J....forgive me.  That was careless. Was in a hurry. No intention to offend. Hell, I luv your thoughts on turkey hunting....so don't wanna needlessly offend.

fx


----------



## Justin

No problem. I just couldn't let that one get away.:lol:


----------



## Munsterlndr

fairfax1 said:


> That's how important beef & dairy is.


Which certainly begs the question, if the beef & dairy industry is as vital as you say, and I'm not disagreeing with that premise, why has the industry not taken a more active role in solving the potential problem of bTB? 

Why do producers tolerate others not making their stored feed totally inaccessible to deer and other potential wildlife vectors? Bovines consuming feed that has been potentially infected by free ranging deer is the most likely way that a producer would face having his herd depopulated, so why would they not take every reasonable measure that they could to insure that deer can't access stored feed? 

Why would they risk leaving hay sitting in fields for weeks or months at a time? 

Why would they feed cattle in fields instead of in enclosures with deer proof fencing? 

Why would they not insist that USDA implement a uniform vaccination program for all cattle & dairy herds within the MAZ? 

Why would they use live bulls originating from within the TB zone for breeding and transfer them from farm to farm, given that TB testing is only about 85% accurate. That means that despite a bull being tested and showing a negative skin test, 15 out of 100 bulls could still be bTB carriers capable of infecting an entire herd, as an Emmet Co. producer found recently. Given that potential, wouldn't AI be a better, safer route to take instead of taking the chance of using an infected bull within the bTB zone?

Instead of focusing on trying to enforce a ban that has little popular support and which ultimately won't be the deciding factor in eradicating bTB in Michigan, maybe the powers that be should shift their focus a little and pursue avenues of risk mitigation that might actually result in a tangible solution to the problem of bTB in Michigan.


----------



## fairfax1

I think I can answer that in a fashion, Munster. 
Even though don't farm for a living, I'm darn close to it all and the folks who do. And tho I can't speak for any of 'em....I can offer my frank perspective.

Why don't they do all that you suggest? 

Because these guys are trying to make a living off of the land. And oftentimes, for the little guys...especially _'up North'_.....it's a close thing. Fencing, seperate feedlots, feedlots instead of pasturing, testing, isolation, a neighbor's bull rather than vendored semen straws.....all that factors into 'cost' calculations. And their lives...their 'ag' lives..... are often more focused on containing costs than, say, maximizing sales. So the emphasis is defensive rather than offensive.

That is why round bales are stored along fencerows....instead of housed in a barn that is costly to erect; and polywrapped only if it is percieved reduced spoilage will cover the cost of wrap. 
See the shape of it?

Then, you add the 'life-style' cultural differences. 

They view themselves as hard-working folk attempting to provide a safe and quality lifestyle tied to the land while maintainting the tradition of the "American family farm"....vs....guys who are just out to have a little fun at deer camp. 

And, again, peculiar to the north country ...and tellingly, it is 'city' guys in the deer woods. The hunters are just having fun.....but the farmers are making a living. When the season is over...the hunters leave; but the farmer, and his local responsibilities, is still there. 

So, it is a cultural thing. Easily comprehended. 

I want to be clear here, I am not saying that the hunting community is not made up of hard-working fellas who also want to provide for their families. They are and do. But, many, if not most, come up on recess -vacation -- here briefly for fun, then gone. 
So, to go to the farm community and require them to add costs to their year-long operations so that seasonal hobbyists won't be inconvienced in a hunting tactic is....as you can imagine......a tough sell.

As I've said and repeated in these threads....baiting is a risk enhancer. And it is an obvious and prominent risk-enhancer that is easily and relatively painlessly corrected. Much easier than requiring every hay-producer to barn-up or poly-wrap his hay; or every potato/carrot/beet producer to land-fill his discards; or every corn producer to store-up in solid steel. 
Personally, as can clearly be observed, I am sympathetic to the farm producers. For them to incur more costs when, for the little guys, everything is already tight.....just so I can have a little November fun......well, it seems selfish. I am too embarrassed to ask for it.

As far as the 'food plot' activity goes. I'm not sure how much of that goes on in, say, the TB zone. What I gather from these threads is that it is a significant component of the bigger operations of 'club country'........which, if true, is certainly an improvement over the oft-reported 'bait-mountains' they use to build. But, even if better than before, does it go far enough to reduce concentrations of deer? 

I don't know for sure. I surely agree with poster Munster, that plots do, indeed, offer some conentration. It is though, a question of degree. At what point is the 'degree' unreasonably enhanced in intensity or longevity over natural browse? I don't know a quantifiable answer to that. At this point, given the information I try to secure and/or the State and scientific community provides it is still OK. When it is not...I will stop. And am confident that responsible practioners will stop also. 

In the meantime, baiting in the LP is illegal. Is a violation of our game laws. The cluelessness of the slow-leaks in the video clip notwithstanding.


----------



## Justin

Fairfax, I agree with your last post. I lived and worked on family farms most of my life. I do have a question though. If baiting came to a complete stop today, 100% compliance, do you think btb would disappear?


----------

