Simnple yes or no.... New question - Bill introduced to allow baiting for 65+ year olds

[hockeybc69]

Dave

We get your point for cripes sakes. You voted Yes (in not so many words). So you are not allowed to post any more in this topic.

Everyone gets one post(vote).

[Big Dave2]

Dave

We get your point for cripes sakes. You voted Yes (in not so many words). So you are not allowed to post any more in this topic.

Everyone gets one post(vote).

You and others have posted multiple times, why are you only singling me out and why do you get to make forum rules?

[BPBOB]

No

[flipper]

I vote NO. Over 100 I'd say ok.

[hockeybc69]

Quote:

You and others have posted multiple times, why are you only singling me out and why do you get to make forum rules?

I posted once but had to post a second time to set expectations of MY topic.

[mainbutter]

No.

Age discrimination is already too prevalent in our lawbooks.

My above 'no' isn't a declaration of a dislike of baiting, but rather a dislike of benefits based on age.

[lakevet]

NO

because:

1) Enforcement nightmare.

2) Grandkids not being able to hunt near/with their grandparent or even his stand even if he is not there. What grandparent would want that?

3) All the other reasons listed over and over by the DNR /Fish and Game departments of multiple states, including most of the great western hunting states.

lakevet

[certified jumbo]

no

[jay83196]

Lmao! In the northwoods, that was great ! I agree these jiggy jack laws trying to pass are just stupid! Make it legal or completely illegal not in between!

[Gordie]

UMM... NO will always be NO

I dont get it either I guess the spread of disease wont happen when the hunter hits 65yrs old

[brakedancer]

If it makes no sense our government will do it with no questions asked...but if something makes sense they study it to death..

simply no

[WalleyeChamp]

IMPOSSIBLE to enforce any baiting laws then. There will be bait piles all over the place and the DNR would need to hire another 40,000 agents to sit by each pile each day carding the fellow that walks to the stand! Hunting isn't a nightclub, let's not treat it that way.

[Muskie456]

No

[mallardnwalleye]

No. This generation is already taking on the whole more than they put into Social Security. Why the entitlement to take deer by baiting? Sounds like more Demographic welfare.

[Musky Buck]

Again, No, put that older man or woman in the best possible place for success, give them the best stand or spot, set up a heated ground blind for them or whatever it takes and like the rest of us, hope for the best.

[Kdog10]

No, enforcement nightmare!

Here's the scenario I see: Grampa baits at his stand and shoots a deer. Grandchild likes Grampa's stand and wants to sit there. Grampa says alright I got my deer. CO comes along and cites the Grandson for hunting over bait.

[Musky Buck]

Could anyone even hunt that land that grandpa pa is baiting ? Can you have multiple bait spots ? bait or not being retired 25 or 32 gun days is enough in the rut. It's funny kinda, baiting must work well or no 1 would push this bill. My 65 year old dad just said cmon no, never, dumbest idea this state has ever thrown around the use of bait. He agrees in urban areas where deer densities are out of hand yes, that's the best way to line them up and reduce the population with safety of people in mind.

[Bear55]

why do you get to make forum rules?

Lots of assumptions going on here...........

[Double D]

Another vote here for NO!!

DD

[smnduck]

No.

[Spike76]

I'm past 65 and I say no.

[Stcloudangler]

No Way

[corncob]

NO!......I agree with just pushing the 65 and older down the hill, they have had their fun and need to just step aside for the young and dumb!

[x1957x]

I will be 56 this year and I say no also!! I live in SW Mn. and another thing I see that irritates me is leaving 5 acres in OR MORE of corn around some cover and the day after gun season BANG the corn is gone!! They dont leave it in for the deer though, just ask them!!

[Bear55]

No thanks