Str8Shot

My apology ... Tyler ... I did not see the post from bowhunerforever prior to yours .... Well Obama might be proud he has one supporter on this site Totally cool man! The RUM is doing good thanks to you man way back when! Waiting for it to put a few more couseys on the wall (we'll see come friday) and burn out the remington barrel so we can get down to some real tach pushing. Those Remington Barrels do not burn out that fast unless your pushing a lot of hot loads in short sittings ... what unit this year you hunting ?

My apology ... Tyler ... I did not see the post from bowhunerforever prior to yours .... Well Obama might be proud he has one supporter on this site

Tyler ... go back and look .... whoever 123456 is he or she had input on that thread too... I just supplied this information since it was asked and I had already supplied it ... not interested in debating the issue any further on a second thread hence why I only gave the direct info asked about ... to imply that I and 123456 may be one in the same is a bit narrow minded remember over 50 % of hunters do not support baiting or hunting over bait ... so you are taking a simpleton approach to make us who do not care a small minority ... funny, that you had no issues soliciting information from me when you first got your 300 RUM and had questions on the gun, bullets and loads

Huntlines ... Here is the info on those states and the link I posted for all states from the previous discussion ... Illinois NOT legal to feed or bait anything for deer. Kansas Legal to feed and bait deer except state land. Bait must be removed 10 days prior to hunting. Liquid scents and sprays are exempt. Maryland No restrictions on private land. It is legal to feed deer anything, anytime on private land with the exception of the CWD management zone in Allegany County. Michigan (lower) From Oct. 1 to Jan. 1. hunters may place any type of bait, no more than two gallons at a time, across a 10-foot by 10-foot area per hunting location. Recreational Feeding: Property owners may place two gallons of bait on their property within 100 yards of their residence year-round. Baiting and feeding will still be prohibited in Deer Management Unit 487 which includes Alcona, Alpena, Iosco, Montmorency, Oscoda and Presque Isle Counties. 517-373-2329 Regulation (pgs 3-4) Michigan (upper) Legal to bait deer with less than 2 gallons. You can feed deer the rest of the year with in 100 yards of a house. Lucky Buck Mineral is legal as either feed or bait. 517-373-2329 Regulation (pgs 3-4) Nebraska Legal to feed deer. Cannot hunt over anything within 200 yards that was placed within 60 days. 402-471-5442 Regulation New York Not legal to feed deer or bait deer. 518-402-8883 Regulation (pg 20) West Virginia It is legal to feed deer anything with the exception of parts of Hardy & Hampshire County north of State Highway 55. This is a CWD containment area and it is not legal to feed or bait in this area. The rest of the state is legal to feed deer on private land anything including Lucky Buck Mineral. On public land feed/bait must be removed from September 1st - December 31st. 304-558-2784 Regulation (pg 12) Wisconsin It is legal to feed and bait deer with anything including Lucky Buck Mineral (with a 2 gallon limit), in all counties EXCEPT the following: Adams, Barron, Burnett, Calumet, Columbia, Crawford, Dane, Dodge, Grant, Green, Iowa, Jefferson, Juneau, Kenosha, Lafayette, Manitowoc, Marathon, Marquette, Milwaukee, Polk, Portage, Racine, Richland, Rock, Sauk, Sheboygan, Vernon, Walworth, Washburn, Waukesha, Waushara, and Wood. National forest areas usually follow local state regulations on baiting. Check with your local DNR office for more information. 888-936-7463 Regulation (pg 30-34) if you want to find out more on all states ... http://www.lucky-buck.com/baitinglaws.html

Safe travels ... and have a heck of a good hunt ... I will be helping my Bro and friends in 23 this year for some Muleys

Sorry what I meant to say was you can hunt Archery OTC and still hunt Rifle Draw but you are only allowed 1 deer a year... In NM, we don't have OTC tags so you need to choose your weapon and season.. you can't hunt with different weapons until you kill... I bet this really contributes to the overall harvest... Of course it contributes, but it would be pretty hard to figure out exactly how much the impact is. Plain common sense tells you, that the more time you spend in the field with a tag and weapon allowing you take game the greater your individual odds of success will be . It is still no guarantee but neither is using BAIT ... but Bait does improve odds at quantity of game, quality of game, and quality of shots, if it did not then far fewer people including guides and outfitters would not be so vocal... I do not think Steve really thinks this is the beginning of the end of hunting ( easy to plant the seeds of fear in those who may not agree with the practice) , but he does realize it can have an impact on his business and he has a right to be vocal about his opposition to it... I respect his stand regardless if I support it or not.

Jamaro ... as it is now you can only take 1 deer per calender year ... January 1st - Dec. 31st .... with archery, what many individuals seem to get confused about, is when someone takes a Buck in Dec, and then another in Jan. this is two deer in two separate years and results in a a long wait until the next Jan. ...

Tyler .... I was making the statement because You and I both know that when doing research and papers, use of validated sources are an important part of the process, and studying ecology that there is a good chance that you have used sources and studies that were based in different states ,or even countries because through an educated consensus they have been validated. This type of validation is the case with pretty much all the studies that are out there when it comes to forms of transmission of disease in wildlife as well as livestock though ongoing research should be done. I have read much on the subject and the majority of findings by many states and counties that have done the research and do not feel that one can claim the research and studies as non valid. I do not agree with G&F on everything but would not go so far as many on this website to belittle the department as a whole and disparage them the way many do. This type of BS does not help anyone's case and creates fear in the less educated. The wording in the amendments are not as gray as many here like to Say... When it comes to access and waterholes the word "intentionally " is used, common sense would say that use of blinds, trail cams, and tree stands would by in no way an intentional attempt for a hunter to restrict access as this would defeat the reason and purpose for the device being there, also would be pretty hard for a G&F department to show that the use was in an explicit attempt to intentionally restrict access. As for decreased populations what solution are you going to offer that is not going to stir up as much controversy... Less general tags, cutting out archery hunt dates, going to draw for archery in a majority of units or whitetail units since they are the majority of deer that baiting is impacting? There is no one solution that would not have hunters up at arms and blaming G&F for taking away something, while they are doing their job trying to maintain herds and our rights to harvest from our lands. For me the change in behaviors and limiting the forage areas and movement of deer ( especially in hunting hours by making many nocturnal feeders) is the primary reason I do not support the practice, and I have first hand knowledge of a couple natural feeding areas that harvested quality deer for decades then a few years back it seemed the numbers were way down and nothing was coming in ... after the second year of seeing the same type of activity, it only a few miles of hiking the surrounding area to find a number of bait sites a bit further out( less than 1/4 mile circling the original spot), most sites were set on or near game trails and travel corridors that could be tracked into the original area... These sites also had a very arrogant small group of hunters who attempted to muscle and chase off any other hunters, they claimed they had been baiting the area for the last four years and do not want others hunting their area. That is when the line was drawn for me when it comes to baiting ... it is just as much about hunters whom do bait trying to affect the hunters who don't mentality and it seems much the same by many on this site... I have posted many times studies to not show much of an increase in success if any at all, but they do show the impact on limiting forage areas, amount of foraging during hunting hours and an increase in nocturnal feeding... As hunters we are a part of a bigger process.A process that has seen many changes since the days of Teddy Roosevelt, some for the betterment, some that have been questionable, and some that have been plain wrong, but when it is an attempt to conserve our herds and preserve our privilege to hunt as a part of that process, I am not going to disparage those who know more about the data than any single on of us do on this site.

Tyler .... Since you know it all, at least more than the G&F people that have been doing it for decades .... Please share with all of us, all your Data that disproves all of their numbers .... I mean you are basing it off actual data and not just a theory.... right ? Seriously .... you know that tag numbers have always been based off historical harvest data and heard studies and many times in many units G&F has had to drastically change tag numbers available after unusually high success rate in certain years. Not sure where you are getting 79 pages of rule changes but sounds like Obama math ... The page count for all articles is 49 which is does not constitute new law or changes, but however the previous articles with amendments ... parts stricken out or changes added( as with the baiting) ... You talk about almost having Your B.S., I would love to see all of your studies and sources for the work you have done through the education process, as I am certain you did not use any sources or studies not specific to Arizona since, as others and yourself have stated, they are not valid for G&F to use in their decision making process at least to satisfy your beliefs. Those individuals that bait, feel that those individuals, who do not agree with the practice, should change to support their cause.... yet not the other way around ... kind of hypocritical if you ask me.

The 300 savage is still available $325... it is posted for my Brother who may also be interested in trade for a good predator call or shotgun

I am putting up a few rifles for sale... message me with contact details or if requesting additional information... Not looking for trades and I am located in the East Valley Mesa/Queen Creek... Will listen to reasonable offers, but will give a first come-first gets priority at listed prices ... (480) 262- 0409 #1 Remington .300 RUM 700 BDL ... black synthetic stock and stainless steel barrel with Nikon buckmaster 3-9x40... minimal wear - SOLD #2 Remington 722 in 300 Sav ... Nice vintage good shooting gun, has weaver k4 ( El Paso) scope with pivot mount system good condition with working compass still in stock - $325 obo #3 Marlin 30as in .30/.30 ... great little gun and in good condition - $200 SOLD

After 6 posts I am sure the feeling is farily mutual.............we buy beef, well, at least me and the mouse in my pocket. I think most have stated that if there was substanial information, data, etc regarding this measure here in the state of Az they would listen to the proposal. From your post it is more of a "have it your way." approach. I suspect tat Jbird and Str8snot are related .... Posibly cousins! Two tools sharing a box! Wow! another almost intellectual comment from from even a bigger, rusted tool, and a dull one at that ... Sorry to inform you< Riflemanwannabe... I have no relatives on this thread, but you see other hunters who do not share the same support for baiting as you and other baiters may have ... keep in mind this is an issue that nation wide has hunters spit almost right down the middle on ... I even posted a field and stream poll from Feb of this year on baiting being Fair chase in which 51% did not believe it was fair chase... Like it or not that is the way it is but and your shallow BS remarks do nothing to help your side gain any empathy or support ... If I am a tool I am a much stronger and sharper tool than your dull lame butt... Tyler it is cool that you like this ... just keep in mind this tool helped you out when you needed help and had questions on your RUM and loads ... Shows a bit of Hypocrisy on your part, but it is all good , I may have a different position than you on this topic, but I am not going to hold that against you If you can not use a search engine to find reports and studies on this topic (and yes, maybe none specific from AZ G&F, but there is plenty of data out there on the topic) ... it is no surprise that you need bait to find deer ... keep up the good fight and like I said several times before If it passes... no big deal to me, if it does not pass ... no big deal to me either...

And we may have little disease and no CWD in our herds now ..... But What if????? What if they never transplanted Elk from Yellow Stone in 1913 after hunting Took out the last of the Native Elk in AZ..... I am sorry but I have a little more faith that the majority of those in G&F that they are trying to their job to manage our herds and keep our sport and right to harvest for meat Alive... That does not mean I agree with everything, and many things that have happened within the political realm of commission when it comes to revenue, the general fund, to the wolf program I disagree with... But if regulations were not put in place in the early 1900's the then current trends in hunting would have destroyed most big game herds and we would all be playing golf today and not enjoying the ability to harvest from our beautiful forest lands. PLEEZ GO PLAY GOLF YOU FIT IN THERE!!!!! Wow... I am sure it is too much to ask for a smart intellectual commit from someone as ignorant as you come off to be, and not for just this one thread... It is this kind of ignorant arrogance that is as much as a disease in the Hunting community as the idea that a new regulation and ban might create a divide amongst hunters... I am sure that you would be a better bowler .... bigger ball and a much shorter lane .... kind of the same reason you probably need Bait ... not so good at long shots and smaller target

And we may have little disease and no CWD in our herds now ..... But What if????? What if they never transplanted Elk from Yellow Stone in 1913 after hunting Took out the last of the Native Elk in AZ..... I am sorry but I have a little more faith that the majority of those in G&F that they are trying to their job to manage our herds and keep our sport and right to harvest for meat Alive... That does not mean I agree with everything, and many things that have happened within the political realm of commission when it comes to revenue, the general fund, to the wolf program I disagree with... But if regulations were not put in place in the early 1900's the then current trends in hunting would have destroyed most big game herds and we would all be playing golf today and not enjoying the ability to harvest from our beautiful forest lands.

# 1 there are plenty of published studies from many other states, biologist and federal DNR , that baiting does increase the spread of disease , and not just CWD ... just because we do not worry about CWD in AZ yet does not mean we wont or that there will not be some other disease we do have to deal with in the future, Plenty of studies that show that baiting limits Range, migration patterns, Forage behaviors , and leads to less Hunting light foraging making herds and Mature Bucks primary nocturnal feeders... Most these studies also show little correlation to increased success rate. ... Would like Amanda to refute this if there is data that she knows of that does not support, since she is the only wildlife biologist I know on the site #2 ... read your statement and tell me again you do not deal with What ifs... You do not check your tires before long road trips? You do not have life insurance to protect your family of a tree falls you out in the field leaving them to fend for themselves , If you have teenage kids, you are good with them having unprotected sex and do not worry talking to them about drug use ? Come on every decision is a what if , that is if you take any responsibility for the choices you make in life ( maybe your an Obama supporter thus making the latter an accurate representation of how you think ) Teddy Roosevelt created the ideals of conservation in this country that allow us to practice the sport of hunting today in a manner that protects our freedom to be part of a system that also protects our herds... Dealing with what ifs may have kept Mirriam Elk from being hunted to extinction (the only native ELK to AZ) ... Or the buffalo herds being hunted to near extinction ... With out rules and regulations through a managing agency that makes necessary changes ( such as bringing Elk from Yellow Stone in 1913) as the herds change and the sport changes, we may not even be able to hunt as we do today. A state record Bass was taken from Canyon lake in the 80's with the use of dynamite ... Maybe that bass record should stand and everyone should be able fish with dynamite and nets ... I may not like everything the G&F has done ( such as the Wolves) but they are there to do a job and a good majority Hunt and/or fish , and know much more about the status of our herds and populations than the us Hunters and they do have a job to do... They are not taking away hunting and this idea is not the first step to do so... And the fact that so many here take personally and attack hunters who do not agree with baiting and thus do not support their opposing of the ban shows what you are real morals and ideals are made of... I do not oppose the ban ... I do not support baiting ( main reason for me, I have seen areas where baiting has changed long time foraging sites and decreased daytime movement while increasing nocturnal behaviors) .... I do not think any less if you do oppose and do bait (it is still a form of legal hunting in this state) ... But I am not going to be fearful nor upset if this passes .... some of the top hunting states either out right Ban or Ban hunting over/.during season but none have passed significant laws restricting the sport and practice of hunting

try finding others that may be in small group ... if you are going to be absolute Solo ... try upper yellow jacket road right off Ruby road .. Always good number of camps several that will usually stay through Hunt duration ... Open area with good BP concentration ... may get a bit of road noise and dust but not too bad... should not see any issues .... plus good ranges to hunt not too far from you

Not sure who you are talking to when referring to the statement above... But, can you please supply us official statements or documents with individuals that support your above statement and what gives you the ability to know what others believe when it comes to intent. oh and answer a simple question ? If baiting deer did not improve you chance at all for quality and quantity ... would you do it ? I for one would love to have access back to some large areas of Public land ( that Arizona hunters once had open access too) that has been land locked by private land owners and ranchers whom shut off access to a majority but allow access to a select small few of their friends and such (guides and outfitters who worked out deals) in some good areas of some good units, units where hunters are denied access to public lands " by a small group or an individual stating it is about land owners rights" ... I am pretty sure you are familiar with such areas, and do you not feel that this is even a smaller group (some even fellow hunters, guides, and outfitters) infringing the rights of access to public hunting lands? Talk to any game biologist in southern AZ and they will tell you that deer numbers are down and every year they ask for tag reductions. It rarely happens. As for your question. The answer is yes I would continue supplementing the animals. As for access in southern AZ it is a major issue!!! In some cases I agree with the land owner and in others I don’t. Please supply us with the findings of these few Biologist that disprove the numerous other findings and actual published researched by numerous Biologist through out the country that , baiting can spread disease ( though, I too think this is being over sold as the primary issue, but one that could be a factor in the future), baiting leads to changes in migration patterns and range, Baiting increases nocturnal feeding and limits both foraging range and daytime foraging activity... As for you spending $$$$ on feeding and supplementing I do not believe you are being honest, but it is my right to believe so and I base it off the fact that it is an intricate part of your Business model in helping you maximize your success rates to maintain clients and gain new ... I also do not completely believe you about the land locked public land since it is something that you personally benefit from as well in UNIT 32 which you highly promote for hunters ... I will share from your own site the information that I base my decision to not believe off of. On success and quality and opportunity.... "Our firearms success rate On Coues Deer is 100% with most animals scoring 95 inches or better. Hunters can expect to see four to eight Coues bucks a day." "We specialize in archery hunting and have very high success rates. • 99% archery and 100% rifle mule deer • 100% archery elk and 99% rifle elk • 100% opportunity on archery Coues and 99% rifle coues" quotes courtesy of http://www.wardsoutfitters.com Now to actually be 99% success that would mean first it would have to be on over 100 hunts , now if you round up then maybe you have gone 67 out of 68 which would get just over that 98.5 needed to round up either way if you are going to claim that using private plus land locked Public lands plus bait to achieve such numbers I and probably the majority of other hunters who have hunted this state for any time will call BS on it ... On land locked public lands "This year was different. We had no problem obtaining Oct. tags for Unit 32 and made our way down to AZ again in search of those little gray ghosts of the desert mountains. Through Ward's Outfitters (Steven Ward) We managed to gain access to several sections of landlocked forest service land via a private ranch with extremely limited access....sorry, I can't give any more details on location...sworn to secrecy. " Quote courtesy of http://www.wardsoutf...ng-stories.html This shows you utilize the benefits of using Public lands as a guide that we all should have equal access to , but do not ... I understand you are defending your business model but you have no place talking about taking away hunters rights when you benefit from Use of lands our rights have been taken from by a smaller number of people who are restricting where on OUR public lands we can hunt by restricting access that was open to all when I was a young kid, teen and young adult. You are saying pay me the $$$$ and I will get you the access to low pressure high quality Coues wilderness Also using the " slippery slope" and fear tactics about changing a regulation as being the catalyst of ending all hunting is absurd at the best and also unsupported by any proof from the states that have had banning restrictions and laws for many many years ... Amanda is a wildlife biologist , maybe she has the data to refute or at least openly voice whether or not all the others are wrong that baiting can spread disease , baiting leads to changes in migration patterns and range, Baiting increases nocturnal feeding and limits both foraging range and daytime foraging activity...

Not sure who you are talking to when referring to the statement above... But, can you please supply us official statements or documents with individuals that support your above statement and what gives you the ability to know what others believe when it comes to intent. oh and answer a simple question ? If baiting deer did not improve you chance at all for quality and quantity ... would you do it ? I for one would love to have access back to some large areas of Public land ( that Arizona hunters once had open access too) that has been land locked by private land owners and ranchers whom shut off access to a majority but allow access to a select small few of their friends and such (guides and outfitters who worked out deals) in some good areas of some good units, units where hunters are denied access to public lands " by a small group or an individual stating it is about land owners rights" ... I am pretty sure you are familiar with such areas, and do you not feel that this is even a smaller group (some even fellow hunters, guides, and outfitters) infringing the rights of access to public hunting lands?

ttt

what's stopping anyone from doing that with the current rules? 50 piles of corn per square mile of public land and a blind or treestand at every pile! where the heck do you see this? I sure as heck don't see any corn piles in the units I hunt. Take a walk around unit 23 in august. Like Stephen said above, that's BS. And if it is true they don't know what they're doing. Deer in August will rarely come to feed when given the natural food that's around. I'd like to see pictures of this so called 50 corn piles per square mile. He cant support his comment with pictures because he is just RUNNING HIS NECK. While, I highly question the 50 piles a square mile, I find it disturbing that just because someone does not agree with your practice of baiting and does not care if this Ban is passed, that others here would belittle them in such manners with taunting... I do not agree with baiting because it is how I was brought up as a Native born Phoenician by a grandfather and father who did not practice baiting, and though I am not sure when the regulation changed baiting was prohibited in AZ for many years and at least through my late Teens.. I also do not agree with Baiting because it is putting something ( many types that are no different than putting a bowl of candy in front of your kids) that does not exist in that spot in the games natural habitat. This practice uses the games own biology and behaviors against them by form of conditioning. Much the same way your kids can get addicted to drugs ( and I think most here see illegal drugs as a bad thing) Now before someone starts talking about calls and scents such as Estrus ... guess what ... they occur in nature and can minimize opportunity as much as they maximize depending on conditions, how many bulls come running to a call in those Dec. Hunts ? and even the proposed change does not inhibit use of call or scents ... so it is kind of a mute point Technology in the tools for method of take only effect each hunter and his personal Ethics , though it may create advantage, that advantage is limited by the Ethics and abilities of each hunter , which we all know are not the same from one to the other I also have read numerous studies from many states(most with better herds populations and opportunities for hunters) that have shown that Bait can increase the spread of disease whether one chooses to believe it or not there is no real evidence stating it does not increase the spread of disease ( we may not worry about CWD here now but what would you think of the possible risk of baiting if the Kaibab Herds suddenly showed cases of CWD or some other disease that could wipe out the herds ) If you were in a locked room for 3 days with 500 people, knowing that 50 had a disease spread by saliva, with your hands tied behind your back and the only option to eat was face first from a trough of food shared by everyone .... would you dive in face first or try to starve out the 3 days? The beauty of that scenario is that as humans we can Think about that choice.... wild game does not have that luxury. Some studies show Bait can affect heard feeding behaviors, times, movement and even seasonal migrations ... Now anyone can argue with the details of any study but on the flip side there is no conclusive study that confirms baiting public populations of game does not affect any of these findings nor supports that baiting is more beneficial to the herd than to the Hunters. I do believe in closed populations on private land that baiting can allow for proper culling, taking of does, and mature bucks before degress in order to make a stronger herd population, but lets be real, this is not why it is practiced in AZ on Public land where we are not culling out genetics, does or over abundance of smaller bucks. Once again if it did not increase your odds for both quality and opportunity , no one would be spending the $$$ and doing it ... It is as much about increasing your odds over the number of hunters in the field that are not doing it and if every tag holder were to put out multiple bait sites in each unit then you may see that 50 piles of bait per square mile and the advantage would be lost just as much as if you dropped slurry bombers from border to border letting it rain down your bait on the unit... If it Passes , no sweat of my chest ... if it does not pass , no sweat of my chest , but to create and idea that every new regulation or change is some conspiracy theory to further take away a freedom, or liberty is a stretch.... And if you can refute this with evidence from the states that have banned baiting for decades taking away our freedom to hunt.... please do ... Still waiting for a response on the actual numbers of states that have the same baiting laws as AZ ... If I was wrong please share with me where you found different

If you are going to put numbers you should put facts ... 6 - States allow baiting year round on public land and allow hunting over bait ( with minimal restriction of national monuments and/or National wildlife Refuge), this includes Az ( possible plus 1 since Wyoming has no specific written info) 12- states allow baiting on private land or with heavy regulation of types of bait, area/units, and dates 10 - additional states Allow Feeding but not baiting and all bait must be removed either within 10 days of hunt open or is only allowed through specific Calender dates i.e. No bait from Sept 1st - Dec 31st here is the link if you want more details and numbers http://www.lucky-buc...aitinglaws.html Info was accurate as of 08/2012 The fact is you would not be baiting and using supplements if it did not improve your success and quality of hunts that you offer a client, but even with a change that would not make you any less of a guide or outfitter or any less valuable... but making a blanket statement that 20 states offer the same type of baiting as AZ does is absolutely false. P.S. February 2012 field and Stream had a survey where 51 % of hunters, even some that admitted to using bait said they even believed that hunting over bait was not fair Chase

What people like you fail to see is the BIG picture. Your, and others narrow mindedness on the situation will only negatively effect other hunters. What I mean by that is when you start opening doors for them to banning things, they (who ever the purposing entity might be) will never be happy. For instance, if WE allow liberals,government whom ever ban automatic weapons next thing you know they are going after 30 round mags, then 20 round mags eventually leading to all AR-15 having to be shot as single shot rifles, one bullet at a time. Basically, if you let them get their foot in the door WHO KNOWS if/when they will be content with what they have been banned! Even if baiting isn't your thing (it's not mine but I have NOTHING against it), the fact of the matter is it is a form of hunting so we ALL should support it no matter what! Show me details or facts about top US hunting destinations where baiting has been illegal ( many states for decades) where an attempt to take away the rights to hunt ? p.s. it is narrow minded to assume so much that everything that the g& f does as some future attack on civil liberties and not about them doing their jobs.

I find it outright silly when so many complain about G&F doing their job , hunting and the rights to do so have always been centered around conservation and management of our herds. This means as time changes so may the rules and regulations. For those that constantly cry foul and blame environmentalist I believe you are self diluted. A large percentage of hunters in this state understand such changes and their roles in the process of conservation and do not feel that baiting during the open season is necessary nor needed ... Fact ... of the top 15 hunting destinations in the US only 2 allow baiting on public lands during the open season and while hunting ( Arizona and Utah) and one, Texas only allows baiting on private land with owners permission... the other 12 it is illegal to bait period or any type of bait must be removed a minimum of 10 days prior to hunting season. I am no environmentalist, and I support This move as I am sure many hunters out there do... Hey at least you can still have livestock salt licks still if it passes

I personally see no problem with the proposal and it is pretty specific to edible so I do not see elk calls being in any kind of danger, plus calls can spook off just as much as they attract just look at all the post from guys blaming hoochie mama calls in the middle of their pursuit by other hunters for blowing their chance.

300 RUM is Sold ... 300 sav. Still available