Field Crops Considered as Bait

  • kooty
    Keymaster
    1 hour 15 mins to the Pond
    Posts: 18101
    #213486

    This is interesting…

    Quote:


    Some lands considered baited and off limits to waterfowl hunters

    The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) reminds waterfowl hunters that some fields are considered baited and off limits to waterfowl hunting.

    Due to the wet and cold spring, some farmers were not able to plant a normal crop for harvest. Instead they worked with their insurance companies or the U.S. Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources Conservation Service office to plant a cover crop.

    “These cover crops were never intended for harvest and are now being disced, tilled or plowed. The food sources such as oats, which were a common cover crop, are now an attractive food source for ducks and geese,” said Lt. Dean Olson, DNR enforcement district supervisor in Rochester. Olson noted these fields are considered baited and off limits to waterfowl hunting.

    Federal regulations define a baited area “as any area on which salt, grain, or other feed has been placed, exposed, deposited, distributed, or scattered, if that salt, grain, or other feed could serve as a lure or attraction for migratory game birds to, on, or over areas where hunters are attempting to take them.”

    “Any such area will remain a baited area for 10 days following the complete removal of all such salt, grain or other feed,” Olson said.

    Hunters are encouraged to talk with the farmers about fields prior to hunting to assure none of them were planted as a cover crop.

    Find more information on waterfowl hunting on agricultural lands at: http://www.fws.gov/le/waterfowl-hunting-and-baiting.html.


    fishthumper
    Sartell, MN.
    Posts: 11917
    #133877

    I don’t see how that is any different than foodplots which are planted with no intent to harvest. If anything I think it is not as near to baiting as food plots are. Just my .02 worth

    corey_waller
    hastings mn
    Posts: 1525
    #133890

    Federal definition of baiting (waterfowl are Federally controlled) vs state definition of baiting (for state controlled critters)

    jcthorson
    Austin, MN
    Posts: 200
    #1350992

    Quote:


    Federal definition of baiting (waterfowl are Federally controlled) vs state definition of baiting (for state controlled critters)



    Not trying to argue with you but if federal controls waterfowl why is it that some states you can purposley plant corn and flood it and pound the crap out of mallards. While in some you cant.. Either way i think that is ridiculous that we cant hunt them fields. Its not like the farmer didnt want to plant his corn/ beans. Its a farming practice in my eyes. Just like when a sweet corn field gets chopped because they didnt pick it in time. Its illegal to hunt that because its baited they say. It aint like the farmer chopped thousands of dollars of sweet corn just so the average joe can shoot a few geese.. Well theres my rant for the day..

    cougareye
    Hudson, WI
    Posts: 4145
    #1351732

    Late to the party here, but that is a definition of baiting I’ve not seen before. Most regs state farm fields that have been worked as normal agricultural practice are not considered baited. If a farmer plants a cover crop, is that not a normal agricultural practice. They didn’t plant the cover crop to attract waterfowl.

    ET

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.