gladesman60
Well-Known Member
I have 90 acres and I oppose it 100%.
-
Help Support TNDeer:
Baiting Bill HB1618/SB1942
- Thread starter bjohnson
- Start date
Headhunter
Well-Known Member
Unlike people who think like you and democrats, well actually most all politicians, yes laws apply to me.
If I owned land, there are several things that would be challenged in court. Actually, several times a good bit of what the TWRA tries to enforce has been tried in court and the TWRA lost.
If the animals are truly not wanted by the landowner, especially deer that damage property and crops, then if the state or TWRA will not do anything about it, then yes do what is needed to take of your property and if applicable, your way to make a living. If needed go to court, and most, if not all judges will side with the landowner.
Dean Parisian
Well-Known Member
Big $$$$ trumps anything benefiting wildlife. Who is paying the freight on this bill? What lobbying firm has its wallet out?
I made a fair amount of money on Wall Street in a 40-year career. One thing you can take to the bank is, "FOLLOW THE MONEY".
I made a fair amount of money on Wall Street in a 40-year career. One thing you can take to the bank is, "FOLLOW THE MONEY".
MickThompson
Well-Known Member
Your example is moot. TWRA issues depredation permits for deer. What do you expect them to do about wild animals, living in the wild, eating things that are being grown in the wild?
You're as ignorant as trkhunter lol. How far was that buck from the feeder in your profile pic?
Headhunter
Well-Known Member
No different than the people who own land and are for it. Actually I don't care what anyone does for the most part on their own property and when I am blessed enough, I follow what the landowner asks.
I am against baiting, never have been for it, I have hunted several places where it is legal to bait, I don't bait there either.
But to me the landowner, to some extent, has more say about what happens or does not happen on his or her land.
One example, I had permission to hunt a farm in Clarksville til it sold to be developed. My first hunt there, with a percussion muzzleloader, I almost lost permission. I killed 2 coyotes and a doe. The landowner raised cattle to sell quickly. Lots of calves. He did not say anything about what to kill or not to kill and I for sure did not pass the coyotes when I saw them. I drove by his house to show him and he said "you sure are lucky". No clue until I realized how upset he was I had killed coyotes. He said if I had not killed a deer I would not have been allowed to come back. He told me to never shoot another coyote, he said they helped get rid of the deer, there were a lot of deer on this farm. I killed a pile of deer but I also let a lot of coyotes walk in the years I hunted there. That is what the landowner wanted so that is what I did.
And yes, sounds like democrats, democrats want to control you, your land and what you do on your land. I for sure disagree with that.
For those of you that want to be a liberal and make comments that do not even apply to the discussion (you should be allowed to commit murder, etc.) no someone cannot just do any and everything they want because they own land.
But when it comes to hunting and fishing, IMO the landowner should have the discretion to make decisions about what happens on it, and I believe if they want to bait (again I am against baiting) then that is up to them. It is not going to affect my hunting. Actually I would rather them bait than plant a great food plot or have a harvestable crop. A great food plot or harvestable crops is much better at attracting deer than bait IMO.
A CWD is not even a factor to me when it comes to baiting or mineral licks. Until a way is figured out to control the movements of coyotes, hawks, eagles and buzzards, CWD will be spread by them until it is everywhere. Well, if what the TWRA said was true. At one of the CWD meetings, a TWRA person stated that buzzards and coyotes spread CWD through their feces after eating from a animal with CWD. What was crazy is I ask about eagles and hawks spreading CWD the same way, he said NO, that eagles and hawks could not spread it that way. Me and several others who at the question session after the meeting told him he was crazy. Banning baiting and mineral licks may or may not slow down the spread, but with the animals being capable of spreading it through their feces, nothing will stop it.
Headhunter
Well-Known Member
That is funny and beyond sad. Doesn't even deserve a reply, but that is my daughter and I do take offense to that.
I am sure you would be happy of someone accusing your daughter of killing deer near a feeder, when you never used one, owned one, or hunted near one.
I am against baiting, very much so, but I believe a landowner should be allowed to make that call.
As for depredation permits and the TWRA, the TWRA is a dumpster fire and the dumpster is melting. They have lost so much credibility they are becoming just like the federal government, well the leadership of the TWRA (I support the game wardens and wish there were more of them) but the leadership of the TWRA is useless.
Headhunter
Well-Known Member
If the landowner is truly having issues with wildlife, especially if they negatively affecting the landowners way to make a living, either help relocate or get rid of them or let the landowner kill them, no permits needed either.
Just thought of another example, otters. He passed away several years ago, but a good friend had a large farm and dug several large ponds and stocked them. Had some awesome fishing, and really big fish. Otters showed up, not sure if they were stocked or naturally expanded to the area, but they cleaned the ponds out. He asked for help from the TWRA and they offered none except told him he could only "legally" kill them. He paid zero attention and bought a nice rifle and wiped the otters out and when asked by the game warden, he told him what he did and if he had a problem, he would gladly go to court. Never heard from the warden about the otters again.
ROB
Well-Known Member
How ironic, my wife & I ARE considering moving back to TN. My daughter, Olivia Faye, with whom I am very close & hunt with a lot, lives in Nashville where she is pursuing a career in entertainment. We really miss seeing her & would love to live closer to her.
I really enjoy my work on the Kentucky Dept of Fish & Wildlife Commission but doubt I could get on the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Commission. My first step in getting on the KDFW Commission was being elected by fellow sportsmen. It is my understanding the members of the TWRC are appointed by the Governor.
I have been fortunate to be able to use you, BSK, Ruger, & other folks here on TNDeer as my "Brain Trust" in setting policy for the KDFWR, since we face many of the same issues as the TWRA. For example, I would strongly oppose wholesale slaughter (AKA "targeted removal") of deer to prevent the spread of CWD because I've seen how poorly that was received by sportsmen in TN. So, now you know that you've has a significant impact on wildlife management, just not in your own state!
Last edited:
CrossVolle
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2017
- Messages
- 549
MickThompson
Well-Known Member
So they told him he could legally kill them and he did... cool story
Headhunter
Well-Known Member
Nope, not a cool story. That meant only during season, etc. He shot them year round, any way at all he could kill them. He did not pay attention to any law for killing otters and if I was in the same situation, I would not either. He had a pile of money and time in those ponds and the fish. I would have went to "war" with the otters to.
MickThompson
Well-Known Member
The only question here might be whether or not stocked fish in a pond are considered personal property or not. I would argue they are indeed private property if the pond is completely contained within the bounds of the land in question and the landowner bought the fish that are being destroyed by otters.
You can't kill them just because, but if they are in the act of causing damage, the law is pretty clear. Sorry, your outlaw buddy doesn't sound like an outlaw after all.
Headhunter
Well-Known Member
He didn't kill the fish, of course the ponds were completely on his property, he didn't dig ponds that would be on or end up on neighboring properties. And he killed the otters, any opportunity he got, year round, and the game warden told him not to kill them. He laughed at him. Since he died I am not sure what has happened there, but I believe he finally believed he had killed all the otters at some point. He said they got smart, he said they knew when opened the door to his cabin. He said they got to hard to see, much less kill.
You own the property, you do not own the wild animals on your property. That is where your argument becomes invalid.
MickThompson
Well-Known Member
Yep.
It's uncanny how many internet lawyers and constitutional scholars we have on this tiny little sliver of the internet....
That have apparently never bothered to read, much less research, the statutes, case law, or Constitution they claim to be experts on.
MickThompson
Well-Known Member
Whoever smelt it, dealt it
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2017
- Messages
- 56
Landowners and public proponents of wild/natural wildlife existing on the same land areas often have very different perspectives on what should be "natural" and left to be undisturbed by man to "roam the earth" because they may have very different goals. I was many years ago on an IT consulting project in a big city staffed with a team of different people from around the country. One of those individuals was a computer programmer from Idaho. So, I said to her "It must be nice to know that the feds and state agencies in that region are restocking grizzly bears to restore their natural place in those wild areas." She said "Hell NO! We have a cabin in those mountains and I don't want any damned grizzly bears anywhere near there because our grandchildren play in the front yard there!"
