# NRC proposes lifting ban on deer baiting and feeding in Lower Peninsula



## terry

NRC proposes lifting ban on deer baiting and feeding in Lower Peninsula

By Steve Griffin for the Daily News | Posted: Sunday, May 15, 2011 7:00 am


http://www.ourmidland.com/sports/article_b13a6779-69c3-54aa-84cf-d1fa30e8547b.html



D. Baiting and Feeding of Deer in the Lower Peninsula Wildlife Conservation Order Amendment No. 10 of 2011............................24-30



http://www.michigan.gov/documents/dnr/agnJune11_354207_7.pdf




with more and more science showing the environmental exposure and infection there from via CWD shedding etc, and of course the environmental risk factors of TB, in my opinion, to legalize any sort of baiting again, in my opinion is absurd. but i suppose those recreational hunters that need the bait to have their kill walk right up on them, i suppose there voices may be louder, and their pocket books bigger, and they may win out. if so, a tough loss for Michigan, and another step backwards. ...


kind regards,
terry




Saturday, May 14, 2011

Modeling Routes of Chronic Wasting Disease Transmission: Environmental Prion Persistence Promotes Deer Population Decline and Extinction


http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2011/05/modeling-routes-of-chronic-wasting.html



CWD, GAME FARMS, BAITING, AND POLITICS


http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2009/01/cwd-game-farms-baiting-and-politics.html




Thursday, May 26, 2011

Travel History, Hunting, and Venison Consumption Related to Prion Disease Exposure, 2006-2007 FoodNet Population Survey

Journal of the American Dietetic Association Volume 111, Issue 6 , Pages 858-863, June 2011.

http://transmissiblespongiformencep...11/05/travel-history-hunting-and-venison.html




Topics in Current Chemistry, 2011, 1-28, DOI: 10.1007/128_2011_161

Atypical Prion Diseases in Humans and Animals

Michael A. Tranulis, Sylvie L. Benestad, Thierry Baron and Hans Kretzschmar

Abstract

Although prion diseases, such as CreutzfeldtJakob disease (CJD) in humans and scrapie in sheep, have long been recognized, our understanding of their epidemiology and pathogenesis is still in its early stages. Progress is hampered by the lengthy incubation periods and the lack of effective ways of monitoring and characterizing these agents. Protease-resistant conformers of the prion protein (PrP), known as the scrapie form (PrPSc), are used as disease markers, and for taxonomic purposes, in correlation with clinical, pathological, and genetic data. In humans, prion diseases can arise sporadically (sCJD) or genetically (gCJD and others), caused by mutations in the PrP-gene (PRNP), or as a foodborne infection, with the agent of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) causing variant CJD (vCJD). Person-to-person spread of human prion disease has only been known to occur following cannibalism (kuru disease in Papua New Guinea) or through medical or surgical treatment (iatrogenic CJD, iCJD). In contrast, scrapie in small ruminants and chronic wasting disease (CWD) in cervids behave as infectious diseases within these species. Recently, however, so-called atypical forms of prion diseases have been discovered in sheep (atypical/Nor98 scrapie) and in cattle, BSE-H and BSE-L. These maladies resemble sporadic or genetic human prion diseases and might be their animal equivalents. This hypothesis also raises the significant public health question of possible epidemiological links between these diseases and their counterparts in humans.

Keywords Animal - Atypical - Atypical/Nor98 scrapie - BSE-H - BSE-L - Human - Prion disease - Prion strain - Prion type


http://resources.metapress.com/pdf-preview.axd?code=f433r34h34ugg617&size=largest




Monday, May 23, 2011

Atypical Prion Diseases in Humans and Animals 2011

Top Curr Chem (2011)

DOI: 10.1007/128_2011_161

# Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011


http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2011/05/atypical-prion-diseases-in-humans-and.html





TSS


----------



## ridgewalker

With all due respect, I disagree.

No transference has been documented between CWD specifically and humans. There has been no specific documentation as to how limited baiting specifically relates to CWD or Btb. Furthermore there is no data, to my knowledge as to whether the rate of the spread of disease differs between natural deer behavior and the influence of limited baiting.

Granted, I would always use proper gloves as protection when field dressing or processing a deer. I would do that whether the deer was diseased or not. (If I observed any sign of disease, I would not field dress the animal.)


----------



## terry

ridgewalker said:


> With all due respect, I disagree.
> 
> No transference has been documented between CWD specifically and humans. There has been no specific documentation as to how limited baiting specifically relates to CWD or Btb. Furthermore there is no data, to my knowledge as to whether the rate of the spread of disease differs between natural deer behavior and the influence of limited baiting.
> 
> Granted, I would always use proper gloves as protection when field dressing or processing a deer. I would do that whether the deer was diseased or not. (If I observed any sign of disease, I would not field dress the animal.)





i respect your views there ridgewalker, and agree to disagree. ...


have a safe Memorial Day Weekend. ...


kind regards,
terry


----------



## terry

MINUTES NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 7, 2011 Lansing Center 333 E. Michigan Avenue, Lansing, MI



PUBLIC APPEARANCES

Terry Reeves, Mecosta County, spoke in favor of discontinuing the ban on deer baiting. He was representing J & H Family Stores, J & H Oil Corporation and Exit 76 Corporation, which operate 37 convenience store locations primarily in southwestern Michigan. Reeves said they believe Michigan has fulfilled its 2002 plan and determined that CWD does not exist in the state of Michigan; that science is insufficient to be conclusive regarding baiting; that hunter participation would increase if the ban was lifted; and that businesses would receive a badly needed boost if the ban was lifted.

Phil Tymes, Byron Center, Michigan, said he is in favor of keeping the ban on deer baiting. He has been a land owner for deer hunting for over 30 years in central Lower Michigan. He works on habitat improvements on his own land and has found hunting deer without baiting more rewarding and enjoyable  deer are moving in a more natural way. Tymes is a member of the National Rifle Association, Quality Deer Management Association, North American Hunting Club, and the Southern Mecosta Whitetail Management Association. Tymes agrees with biologists that baiting elevates the risk of TB spreading and is concerned that land values will plummet if CWD or other diseases are found in Michigans wild herd. He also is concerned it would have a huge negative impact on Michigans economy.

Larry Burcz, Mason, Michigan, speaking for himself and on behalf of Canada Creek Ranch, an association with 13,600 acres and approximately 1,500 families located in the extreme northwest corner of Montmorency County, opposes deer baiting. Burcz said that he and the association are opposed to any level of legalized artificial feeding and baiting for deer in the Lower Peninsula. Protecting the health of the deer herd is their first priority. They believe the concerns of veterinary science should prevail in making the decision regarding baiting. Speaking for himself, Burcz said the social economic issues might be considered but should not trump biology. Burcz trusts the Commission will base its decision on a weighted evaluation of the facts and rationale, not just on a poll of the for and against. Burcz supports Commissioner Wheatlakes suggestion for large, agricultural-size plantings on public land.


http://www.michigan.gov/documents/dnr/NRC_Minutes_352840_7.pdf


TSS


----------



## beer and nuts

> Larry Burcz, Mason, Michigan, speaking for himself and on behalf of Canada Creek Ranch, an association with 13,600 acres and approximately 1,500 families located in the extreme


 Hahaha I know one family he doesn't represent that are members of CCR.


----------



## captjimtc

Amen to that! The ban was all hogwash anyway with no scientific background to back it up.


----------



## bassdisaster

The baiting ban was a knee jerk reaction to a controlled situation(fenced deer), So some no bait people seen it as an opportunity to oppress law abiding citizens who do bait, in effect turning a LARGE portion of Michigan's hunters into potential criminals, hogwash exactly!

BD


----------



## anon12162011

Knowone abided by the 2 gallon rule before and nobody will now! I laugh at the guys that say..."Ya see hear, if they were to limit it to 2 gallons, then it can be regulated" ......as if it was some new thought, when it was like that FOR YEARS and it just showed the ignorance of the people and the obviousness that they were breaking the law for years. I hope they align baiting violations with snagging violations, where they are state mandated and people get the hell knocked out of them if they don't follow the rules and the local courts can't influence the fines or punishments. If you want to bait, great, but I say, follow the rules or feel the repercussions to follow of the law.


----------



## Threefish

I can see the fines for baiting being extreme if it has been proven to cause Cwd. But it hasn't. What i would like to see are the punishment and fines for the person or persons that sell or transport cervids dead or alive and are going to be the cause of Mich. getting CWD that will infect are wild cervids. There are a lot of hunters that obey the laws on baiting; not all are violators. We need to come together as hunters and fisherman and respect are fellow sportsperson, Weather they hunt with bait or over a food plot in a tree stand or on the ground or stalk there game. hunt with a muzzle loader,bow,crossbow,rifle,shotgun, hunt for meat or trophy's. Its all hunting and and its all good. No one person should be able to tell another person how he or she should hunt or what they can shoot as long as its legal. We as hunters have to many people that don't want us to hunt at all,and should be slapping our fellow hunters on the back instead of across the face.


----------



## bassdisaster

Threefish said:


> I can see the fines for baiting being extreme if it has been proven to cause Cwd. But it hasn't. What i would like to see are the punishment and fines for the person or persons that sell or transport cervids dead or alive and are going to be the cause of Mich. getting CWD that will infect are wild cervids. There are a lot of hunters that obey the laws on baiting; not all are violators. We need to come together as hunters and fisherman and respect are fellow sportsperson, Weather they hunt with bait or over a food plot in a tree stand or on the ground or stalk there game. hunt with a muzzle loader,bow,crossbow,rifle,shotgun, hunt for meat or trophy's. Its all hunting and and its all good. No one person should be able to tell another person how he or she should hunt or what they can shoot as long as its legal. We as hunters have to many people that don't want us to hunt at all,and should be slapping our fellow hunters on the back instead of across the face.


Well put, theres no logical reason for 1 hunter to be soo against another hunter when the ANTI's are sitting there lapping it up, some bait some dont, wanting to persecute fellow hunters only fules the ANIT's fire!

BD


----------



## anon12162011

Yea and baiting doesn't give hunters a bad name in the eyes of the Anti Hunters or better yet, the non hunting community....Only a very small percent of the population are "anti" hunters, however, about 80% of the population are non-hunters, neither for or against necessarily...try to explain to them the ethics of dumping a few bags of carrots out and blasting a deer over it...I am sure they will completely understand it. I have no problem if restrictions are put on baiting and people want to bait and follow the rules...seems simple enough to me.


----------



## anon12192013aazz

The "ban" didn't keep many folks from baiting last year so if it's lifted, I'm not sure it will make much of a difference, either way. Furthermore, the DNR never has had the resources to really enforce the law; as noted, folks were exceeding the 2-gal limit BEFORE the ban, and will continue to do so.

In the southern part of the LP, deer numbers are out of control. I drove 27 from Lansing to Gaylord twice last week and thought I was in an Uncle Ted-produced slasher flick! The cervid carnage was worse than I'm used to seeing, even during the rut. Insurance agents must be jumping out their office windows down south.  

I've never noticed much difference in success rates, one way or the other, when baiting, but if it helps control the population, that would be a good thing. A lot of people claim that if you bait, you must not be a very good hunter. Truth is, if you're not a good hunter, all the bait in the world isn't going to put a deer on the ground for you. Furthermore, criticizing someone else's hunting techniques only causes divisions among the ranks. They might not approve of the deer drives you use, or the dog-hunting down south, or the long-range sniping out west. Judge not, lest ye therefore be judged.

As the rule is written, it requires you to spread out no more than 2 gallons over a given area, to help avoid that nose-to-nose contact. Makes sense to me and results in a feeding situation that is not unlike the way deer feed naturally. (Think of an oak or apple tree that is dropping fruit.) If you put in food plots instead of baiting, as my family is starting to do, the only difference is that the "given area" is quite a bit larger. Then again, maybe you don't approve of food plots, either? I mean, they're just another way of "cheating", right? 

Maybe we should all go back to hunting exclusively from the ground, with hand-made bows and turkey feather-fletched arrows, wearing buckskin shirts and coonskin caps. The deer population would explode and crash ever 3-5 years, but at least we would be giving them a sporting chance, huh? Think about it.


----------



## Threefish

IMO---Most of the baiting issues are brought up by other hunters for and against. The general non hunting public don't even know or care about are hunting issues unless its brought to there attention through the media.newspaper internet or radio. Most of the non hunting public live in city's or near city's and could care less. But you take rural non hunting public and that's a different story. Most of them live there because they enjoy the wildlife. So most of them like to feed the animals and when they take the baiting away it takes away the recreational feeding away. So i would say they would be for the baiting. Its natural for people to feel sorry for the animals in the winter when the snows are deep and there in there yards eating there bushes and shrubs. A lot of non hunters like the viewing of wildlife. Ideal with them on a regular basis and most ask can we feed the deer yet.


----------



## DFJISH

broom_jm said:


> The "ban" didn't keep many folks from baiting last year so if it's lifted, I'm not sure it will make much of a difference, either way. Furthermore, the DNR never has had the resources to really enforce the law; as noted, folks were exceeding the 2-gal limit BEFORE the ban, and will continue to do so.
> 
> In the southern part of the LP, deer numbers are out of control. I drove 27 from Lansing to Gaylord twice last week and thought I was in an Uncle Ted-produced slasher flick! The cervid carnage was worse than I'm used to seeing, even during the rut. Insurance agents must be jumping out their office windows down south.
> 
> I've never noticed much difference in success rates, one way or the other, when baiting, but if it helps control the population, that would be a good thing. A lot of people claim that if you bait, you must not be a very good hunter. Truth is, if you're not a good hunter, all the bait in the world isn't going to put a deer on the ground for you. Furthermore, criticizing someone else's hunting techniques only causes divisions among the ranks. They might not approve of the deer drives you use, or the dog-hunting down south, or the long-range sniping out west. Judge not, lest ye therefore be judged.
> 
> As the rule is written, it requires you to spread out no more than 2 gallons over a given area, to help avoid that nose-to-nose contact. Makes sense to me and results in a feeding situation that is not unlike the way deer feed naturally. (Think of an oak or apple tree that is dropping fruit.) If you put in food plots instead of baiting, as my family is starting to do, the only difference is that the "given area" is quite a bit larger. Then again, maybe you don't approve of food plots, either? I mean, they're just another way of "cheating", right?
> 
> Maybe we should all go back to hunting exclusively from the ground, with hand-made bows and turkey feather-fletched arrows, wearing buckskin shirts and coonskin caps. The deer population would explode and crash ever 3-5 years, but at least we would be giving them a sporting chance, huh? Think about it.


----------



## terry

Online commentary: Keep the ban on deer baiting

4:37 PM, Jun. 7, 2011

The state Natural Resources Commission is expected to vote this week on rescinding its ban on baiting. But to allow baiting for deer again would be a reckless decision, and a sign of the commission caving to a clamorous minority.

Currently, 28 states prohibit the use of bait while hunting deer. Eight other states place heavy restrictions on this practice.

In 2008, Michigan banned the use of hunting deer over bait throughout the entire Lower Peninsula, after the discovery of a deer with chronic wasting disease at a game ranch in Kent County. This action was taken according to a comprehensive 2002 plan created to respond to such an outbreak. It is reinforced by the fact that most wildlife experts believe that unnatural concentrations of food products (bait) could serve as vectors in the transmission of this and other diseases.

In spite of these regulations, the "baiting ban" has been largely ignored by legions of hunters who have callously ignored the risks associated with this 100% fatal disease.

The NRC has reached out to experts in order to guide them in the process of crafting policy -- with science being the only rudder -- as it should. That practice was solidified with Proposal G, the 1996 ballot proposal that put game management in the hands of the commission with a requirement for science-based decision-making. To date:

 Not one of our scientists has stated that they favor baiting.

 Very few of our scientists have come out as even being neutral on baiting.

 Virtually all of our scientists and all of our experts have been resolute in voice. They are whispering a single word in to the NRC's ear: Danger!

For the NRC to ignore them is to say, in essence, that our own scientists, whom we pay for this counsel, are wrong. To ignore them is to render Proposal G as somewhat meaningless.

For the record, I have no hidden anti-baiting agenda. Prior to the ban, I regularly placed carrots and sugar beets on my hunting property, and I still have two 55-gallon spin feeders, which now have become a vibrant retirement community for about 4 zillion hornets.

My better angels tell me that the NRC understands the terrible threat associated with CWD. And, while we do not have all the answers, our only response must be to err on the side of caution. No cases of CWD have emerged in Michigan during the past three years, but the disease has been discovered a mere 100 miles from Michigan's borders in McHenry County, Illinois.

The bottom line is this: The risk is too great, and the resource is too precious.

The NRC seems to believe that this decision will affect only the 6% of the population who happen to be hunters. That is folly. These matters touch all citizens who love and respect the abundant resources within our state. The commission should not be responding to a minority so entrenched in a practice that it is willing to risk the resource.

Maintaining the ban on baiting will not be a popular decision for the NRC, but it is the right decision. And, while new cases of CWD may ultimately emerge, 100 years from now citizens will be able to look back at the right decision that the NRC took this year and say; "At least they did their part."

Bill Audette of Lake Orion is an avid outdoor enthusiast and owner of Orion Automotive, LLC, a marketing and financial products consulting agency.

http://www.freep.com/article/201106...baiting?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|p


----------



## terry

CWD, GAME FARMS, BAITING, AND POLITICS


http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2009/01/cwd-game-farms-baiting-and-politics.html


http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2008/08/cwd-feeding-and-baiting-piles.html


Thursday, February 17, 2011

Environmental Sources of Scrapie Prions

http://scrapie-usa.blogspot.com/2011/02/environmental-sources-of-scrapie-prions.html


Saturday, May 14, 2011

Modeling Routes of Chronic Wasting Disease Transmission: Environmental Prion Persistence Promotes Deer Population Decline and Extinction

http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2011/05/modeling-routes-of-chronic-wasting.html


Monday, February 14, 2011

THE ROLE OF PREDATION IN DISEASE CONTROL: A COMPARISON OF SELECTIVE AND NONSELECTIVE REMOVAL ON PRION DISEASE DYNAMICS IN DEER


NO, NO, NOT NO, BUT HELL NO !


Journal of Wildlife Diseases, 47(1), 2011, pp. 78-93 © Wildlife Disease Association 2011

http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2011/02/role-of-predation-in-disease-control.html


Friday, February 25, 2011

Soil clay content underlies prion infection odds

http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2011/02/soil-clay-content-underlies-prion.html


Wednesday, January 07, 2009

CWD to tighten taxidermy rules Hunters need to understand regulations

http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2009/01/cwd-to-tighten-taxidermy-rules-hunters.html


Monday, February 22, 2010

Aerosol and Nasal Transmission of Chronic Wasting Disease in Cervidized Mice

http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2010/02/aerosol-and-nasal-transmission-of.html


AS THE CROW FLIES, SO DOES CWD

Sunday, November 01, 2009

American crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos) and potential spreading of CWD through feces of digested infectious carcases

http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2009/11/american-crows-corvus-brachyrhynchos.html


Monday, July 13, 2009

Deer Carcass Decomposition and Potential Scavenger Exposure to Chronic Wasting Disease

http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2009/07/deer-carcass-decomposition-and.html


Sunday, December 06, 2009

Detection of Sub-Clinical CWD Infection in Conventional Test-Negative Deer Long after Oral Exposure to Urine and Feces from CWD+ Deer

http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2009/12/detection-of-sub-clinical-cwd-infection.html


THEN YOU have water that has been contaminated from a CWD-endemic area ;

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Detection of protease-resistant cervid prion protein in water from a CWD-endemic area

http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2009/10/detection-of-protease-resistant-cervid.html


ALSO, NOTE MINERAL LICKS A POSSIBLE SOURCE AND TRANSMISSION MODE FOR CWD ;


http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2009/08/third-international-cwd-symposium-july.html


http://www.cwd-info.org/pdf/3rd_CWD_Symposium_utah.pdf


Thursday, May 26, 2011

Travel History, Hunting, and Venison Consumption Related to Prion Disease Exposure, 2006-2007 FoodNet Population Survey

Journal of the American Dietetic Association Volume 111, Issue 6 , Pages 858-863, June 2011.

http://transmissiblespongiformencep...11/05/travel-history-hunting-and-venison.html



UPDATED DATA ON 2ND CWD STRAIN

Wednesday, September 08, 2010

CWD PRION CONGRESS SEPTEMBER 8-11 2010

http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2010/09/cwd-prion-2010.html




kind regards,
terry









terry said:


> Online commentary: Keep the ban on deer baiting
> 
> 4:37 PM, Jun. 7, 2011
> 
> The state Natural Resources Commission is expected to vote this week on rescinding its ban on baiting. But to allow baiting for deer again would be a reckless decision, and a sign of the commission caving to a clamorous minority.
> 
> Currently, 28 states prohibit the use of bait while hunting deer. Eight other states place heavy restrictions on this practice.
> 
> In 2008, Michigan banned the use of hunting deer over bait throughout the entire Lower Peninsula, after the discovery of a deer with chronic wasting disease at a game ranch in Kent County. This action was taken according to a comprehensive 2002 plan created to respond to such an outbreak. It is reinforced by the fact that most wildlife experts believe that unnatural concentrations of food products (bait) could serve as vectors in the transmission of this and other diseases.
> 
> In spite of these regulations, the "baiting ban" has been largely ignored by legions of hunters who have callously ignored the risks associated with this 100% fatal disease.
> 
> The NRC has reached out to experts in order to guide them in the process of crafting policy -- with science being the only rudder -- as it should. That practice was solidified with Proposal G, the 1996 ballot proposal that put game management in the hands of the commission with a requirement for science-based decision-making. To date:
> 
>  Not one of our scientists has stated that they favor baiting.
> 
>  Very few of our scientists have come out as even being neutral on baiting.
> 
>  Virtually all of our scientists and all of our experts have been resolute in voice. They are whispering a single word in to the NRC's ear: Danger!
> 
> For the NRC to ignore them is to say, in essence, that our own scientists, whom we pay for this counsel, are wrong. To ignore them is to render Proposal G as somewhat meaningless.
> 
> For the record, I have no hidden anti-baiting agenda. Prior to the ban, I regularly placed carrots and sugar beets on my hunting property, and I still have two 55-gallon spin feeders, which now have become a vibrant retirement community for about 4 zillion hornets.
> 
> My better angels tell me that the NRC understands the terrible threat associated with CWD. And, while we do not have all the answers, our only response must be to err on the side of caution. No cases of CWD have emerged in Michigan during the past three years, but the disease has been discovered a mere 100 miles from Michigan's borders in McHenry County, Illinois.
> 
> The bottom line is this: The risk is too great, and the resource is too precious.
> 
> The NRC seems to believe that this decision will affect only the 6% of the population who happen to be hunters. That is folly. These matters touch all citizens who love and respect the abundant resources within our state. The commission should not be responding to a minority so entrenched in a practice that it is willing to risk the resource.
> 
> Maintaining the ban on baiting will not be a popular decision for the NRC, but it is the right decision. And, while new cases of CWD may ultimately emerge, 100 years from now citizens will be able to look back at the right decision that the NRC took this year and say; "At least they did their part."
> 
> Bill Audette of Lake Orion is an avid outdoor enthusiast and owner of Orion Automotive, LLC, a marketing and financial products consulting agency.
> 
> http://www.freep.com/article/201106...baiting?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|p


----------



## Threefish

Baiting was always legal in Michigan until they put restrictions on it because of BTB. Then they banned baiting because of a deer in a pen in Kent county known to have CWD. They said they need time to test for further CWD. Three years later no more infected deer have been diagnosed to have CWD and scientific evidence has not been proved that baiting caused Cwd. So if baiting is such a vector in transmitting CWD. why haven't we had more cases of CWD. if baiting has been rampant as stated by some? IMO. The NRC does have to make a decision but it is not the toughest one there going to have to make. When or if more cases of CWD make it to Michigan the baiting issue will be like a bump in the road compared to what they are going to have to do to really keep it contained. At least they can say they did there part for now. I don't think the NRC is going at it blindfolded and that they will take in all the input that they need to make there decision. What ever the decision we will know shortly.


----------



## terry

Threefish said:


> Baiting was always legal in Michigan until they put restrictions on it because of BTB. Then they banned baiting because of a deer in a pen in Kent county known to have CWD. They said they need time to test for further CWD. Three years later no more infected deer have been diagnosed to have CWD and scientific evidence has not been proved that baiting caused Cwd. So if baiting is such a vector in transmitting CWD. why haven't we had more cases of CWD. if baiting has been rampant as stated by some? IMO. The NRC does have to make a decision but it is not the toughest one there going to have to make. When or if more cases of CWD make it to Michigan the baiting issue will be like a bump in the road compared to what they are going to have to do to really keep it contained. At least they can say they did there part for now. I don't think the NRC is going at it blindfolded and that they will take in all the input that they need to make there decision. What ever the decision we will know shortly.




***When or if more cases of CWD make it to Michigan the baiting issue will be like a bump in the road compared to what they are going to have to do to really keep it contained.***



you said a mouth full there Threefish.

i hope it is a sound decision, based on what science they have to date. in my opinion, there is enough science showing a major risk factor there from. however, if they go ahead and allow two pounds, three pounds, or some sort of limited baiting/feeding, they may as well open it up to a full truck load, because allowing deer/elk to congregate over 2 pounds, three pounds, or a truck load, allows the CWD agent to spread via this congregation. and if pray tell, they make the right decision and ban baiting/feeding across the board, they then must be held to enforce this ban. because putting it on paper does not necessarily mean it is being enforced i.e. case in point, the infamous partial and voluntary mad cow feed ban of August 4, 1997, which we now know was nothing more than ink on paper. 10 years post partial and voluntary feed ban 2007 and in one mad cow feed ban recall alone there were 10 MILLION pounds of suspect banned mad cow protein that went to be fed out in commerce. my point, if DNR/NRC is going to have a ban on feeding and baiting, they then should enforce that ban. one more thing, just because testing has not found CWD in Michigan yet, does not mean it's not already there in the wild. you have only been lucky to date with one farmed CWD case. you must not be complacent. CWD is spreading in North America, this is a fact. ...


----------



## dialed-in

I do not bait myself but have no problem with anyone who hunts over bait. It never should have been banned from the beginning and I feel bad for those who have always hunted that way. (Its like making stretches of rivers have gear restrictions.) Who cares what method is used. My main hate for the ban in the first place is not just the hunting aspect, but rather those who like to feed deer year round and watch them. This helps many deer make it through the winter and also recreational viewing for many!


----------



## Munsterlndr

terry said:


> CWD is spreading in North America, this is a fact. ...


And CWD will continue to spread across North America regardless of whether or not there is baiting. That is also a fact.... [/quote]


----------

