New York stinks.. No feeding

Let me be clear... There is NO difference in off season feeding and in season feeding. You are still feeding the deer, no matter what time of the year it is. The amount you feed might change, the type of feed might change, but it is still feeding.

Also, I'm not sure if you are aware but the 'genetics' of deer does not change the way a deer reacts to disease. The only difference is that pen raised deer ALL feed out of the same baiting sites. So it causes diseases to spread quicker.

And on the point of the DNR. If you go back and read my previous comments, I mention many times that there is right way and a wrong way to feed. In no way am I saying that you personally don't know how to properly feed a deer herd. I am saying that the average guy does not know how to do it properly, without doing more harm than good. So by restricting feeding laws, the state can cut down on the number of people out there throwing bait on the ground and causing more harm than good.

Whether you agree with studies or not is beside the point. The information is out there. It has been proven time and time again that baiting can be detrimental to a deer herd. That's why you will start to see regulations get stricker and stricker.

You are also not backing your argument with anything but an opinion.

 

That is very true. However, when you introduce a supplemental food source into a deer, the deer are going to flock to it. That is an abrupt change in their diet.

This spring, when everything starts to green up and bud out. Start paying attention to how deer dropping turn to mush. This is a sign that their bodies are adapting to new food sources.

I'll reiterate, I am not saying that you are going to wipe out your entire deer herd by putting out some corn. But the facts are there, supplemental feeding done incorrectly is bad for a herd.

Everyone that has opposed that is not backing their opinion with facts. They are simply stating things that they have heard, or grew up hearing. You have to keep in mind that the little piece of ground you hunt, limits you to seeing the big picture. Disease is spreading across the US like wild fire.
People need to start looking at what is better for the herd and population long term. That's what true conservation is about.

 

Reading this thread has brought to light some things I didn't consider prior to reading it. Everyone seems to have valid points to their comments and has made me think of a few questions. I will admit I am one of the frustrated hunters in a state where I can't plant food plots or feed deer. Technically I suppose I can, I just can't hunt within 400 yards of it per CA DFG. Please ignore my ignorance if these sound dumb but I'm all for conservation and trying to preserve populations everywhere.

So here's my questions.
1. Is there a difference, positive or negative, to a food plot vs. a pile of corn from a bag for the population? (I think this has been answered but I might have to read the thread again)

2. Is the difference because a food plot is a natural growing food source and spread out over a large plot and a pile of corn is more manufactured, with a 10 foot radius and from a bag?

I see the point of disease not spreading as quickly if you don't give them a trough to eat from. But if the same deer consistently use the same food source, plot of pile, one sick deer will eventually infect many right?

 

You are doing nothing but stating your opinion but evidently because of your "qualifications" and what you parrot from people you agree with you feel your opinion is the only correct opinion.

 

My 'opinions' have been proven. I'm not coming up with this off of the top of my head just to argue with people. The article I posted in the earlier comment was just an article, not a study. When I have time to sit down and paste the links to every actual study, I will.

 

Corn was just an example. Corn doesn't have the same nutritional value as per say, soybeans, protein pellets, or a few others. It's just the cheapest, which makes it preferred.

But to answer you questions best, yes, disease is going to spread no matter what. A bait pile or feeding site is just going to speed the process up. Putting these restrictions in place wasn't done with the goal of eliminating the threat of disease. It was done to slow it done.

 

Your opinions have been "proven" by reading studies you agree with. The whole QDMA organization is based on the belief that it is possible to manage a herd of animals that are not in a fence. I would be willing to bet that if QDMA came up with a commercial feed that was available for sale many would flock to purchasing it because a study said it was so great. I agree in areas where CWD is an issue feeding can lead to problems, however you can completely ban feeding but CWD will still spread. No organization can play god or change the fate of animals in the wild.

 

That's true, it is still going to spread. Disease is just one issue, though.

When you have a whole population feeding out of one bait sight, you run into dominance issues. Does are dominant over yearlings, and yearlings are dominant over fawns. So then you get into aggression and deer running other deer off of the feed sites. Everyone has gotten that picture or does standing up fighting over food. This causes the forage around that bait site to become over browsed.

It's also obvious that supplemental feed congregates deer to a smaller area than food plots do. Which makes predation easier.

High numbers of deer feeding in the same area also causes stress among the herd.

I don't feel like we need to go on and on arguing our points. It's clear we are both sticking to our guns. I believe this restrictions will continue to pop up throughout the United States. CWD is spreading into new states every year. State officials are going to start doing everything they can to slow it down their states.

 

almost all of the spreading of CWD in WI at least is a result of captive herds, and browsing of farm fields.

Now this is just my opinion, but as the DNR has increased the banning of feeding, one thing has happened. the use of small food plots has increased. And there is a ton more money to be made through food plots than feeding. Banning baiting at least in WI because of the restriction that was already on place for volume allowed won't reduce the spread. It will likely increase it because of the increase of food plots causing the deer to herd up even more.

 

I ask this question every time this comes up and have yet to got an answer except one it's illegal in "blank" state or two deer don't mix with cows. But if these states are so worried about the spread if disease or its suck a big problem then why can you put out the same amount and types of mineral or feed for cattle but throw it out for deer and it's suddenly a problem. It's pretty much the same stuff except one has a deer on the package and one has a cow. Not really meaning so much feed but you throw out salt block, mineral feeders, or the big mineral tubs.

 

It is not the product itself that causes the disease, that is not the issue.

The feeding of cattle is in a controlled environment and is the disease outbreak would be limited to your herd.

Once you start putting it in the woods you are increasing the risk of spreading a disease to potentially the entire county. Like a lot of counties in the Midwest are dealing with right now. Also, I don't pretend to be a cattle expert, so I'm not even sure CWD effects cows. I'm not really sure what diseases they have to contend with. So I can't go in depth on feeding for cows... Lol

 

And by controlled environment I mean: If a cow gets sick it can be removed from the herd, or feeding can be suspended until the disease is under control.

 

I'm not talking about the product really, I'm saying they regulate what you can put out for deer but the same things are put out for cattle and your fooling yourself if you don't think deer get into the minerals or salt blocks. So basically the stuff out there anyway so why is it suddenly gonna have a huge impact on deer when they already have access.

Like look at our state, baiting is anything put out other than agricultural use. So there's certain things you can do to toe the line with legal and illegal but that depends on a individuals moral compass as to if they do it.


Idk I get both sides of subject I guess I just don't see a difference.

 

I see what your saying, in some cases deer could get into cattle feed or salt blocks. But take my property for example. There is not a cattle farm, or farm for that matter, for miles and miles. So the deer have no chance to get into it. I'm sure in certain areas that have high farm populations that would be an issue.

 

I am a little surprised at the lack of knowledge going on in this thread. Guys some of these points have be scientifically proven - they are no longer opinion. Daryl isn't stating his opinion he is providing information that has been proven time and time again. He isn't attacking your opinions he is just providing the information behind your states bans on baiting.


Just because you don't agree with the laws doesn't mean the state is clueless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Hit me up with some links to this proven research... I am interested after reading through this thread.

Does this apply to mineral as well? Deer flock to those in great numbers throughout the entire year yet they are not mentioned here.

 

Most states view minerals the same as they do putting out bait.

 

I think it is more about the laws being hypocritical when it comes to food plots. yes baiting and feeding increases the likelihood of CWD being spread when there is a sick animal. but the same can be said for food plots.

 

What happens when there is 3-4' of snow on the ground and the deer can't move very far without burning a huge amount of energy?

 

That very true, it would really only effect certain areas and I'm sure it's probably not even that much of a concern for states or DNR to even consider worrying about. Heck even around here there aren't that many cattle that aren't in feed lots or something besides just free range might say. Either way it would be a hard balance of negative or reward. Sure there's ways it can be done that would be beneficial and there's ways that it would cause major problems. I'm not sure some of these states would have a herd decimated if it suddenly became legal, but it could kind of easily I guess.