[mallardman]

http://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=http...M_BiBb_rEv1nxG-HojUO-sXiRubNB3ye4N60hQa9o&s=1

I know all about this story, the dnr took samples of dirt yes dirt and there was a mineral supplement found in 3 spots but no sign of a actual mineral block. It is legal to put a mineral block out or any food to get trail cam pics and that is exactly what he did. The dnr trespassed on his property with no rhyme or reason, just walked out there and took samples, there was no issues with him shooting the deer until a douchebag of a neighboring property trespassed as well and said he saw mineral blocks which were taken off the property before hunting season started. Mineral blocks do dissolve in rain and the liquid obviously goes Into the ground otherwise known as dirt, Iowa dnr are nothing but a bunch of idiots who do nothing to help hunting and just want to steel hunters prize possessions to hang on their own wall.

 

[mallardman]

Sorry for my choice of words but this is complete bs

 

[mark l]

I had a mineral block on my land that I put a trail camera over. After the block was gone I had a hole about a foot deep and six foot in diameter. The deer kept coming to this spot for a long, long time after it was gone. Yes, it was bare dirt that they were coming to.

 

[mallardman]

I had a mineral block on my land that I put a trail camera over. After the block was gone I had a hole about a foot deep and six foot in diameter. The deer kept coming to this spot for a long, long time after it was gone. Yes, it was bare dirt that they were coming to.

Exactly the reason they say it was shot illegally. If you watch the video of him shooting the deer, it will show that deer never went to a single human supplied sorce of food other then a legal food plot.

 

[1100 Remington Man]

I will tell you Baiting is Baiting and its against the law in Iowa. It is not in some States as Baiting is allowed. So for me it's a regulation and Law but not some high moral ground.
Like it or not it's how the Law is written, even after it has been removed it still can constitue baiting.
Now here the real question when food plots are legal and Baiting is Illegal, where is the moral ground for fair chase ?
A stand of corn in the Timber or a 5 gallon pail of apples ? What's the moral difference.
Both are a lure to attract Deer. The same as a Mineral Block.

 

[mallardman]

I will tell you Baiting is Baiting and its against the law in Iowa. It is not in some States as Baiting is allowed. So for me it's a regulation and Law but not some high moral ground.
Like it or not it's how the Law is written, even after it has been removed it still can constitue baiting.
Now here the real question when food plots are legal and Baiting is Illegal, where is the moral ground for fair chase ?
A stand of corn in the Timber or a 5 gallon pail of apples ? What's the moral difference.
Both are a lure to attract Deer. The same as a Mineral Block.

I'll give you that baiting is baiting, but no law states that mineral blocks must be removed a certain time before season opens. If your hunter and looking for the best possible Hunt why would you remove your mineral block other then a day before season opens, the deer are used to coming to it and its legal so why not leave it out as long as possible, believe it or not I know joe very well and he is completely innocent. Trophy pursuit would not of been there filming had anything illegal been going on. The dnr just want that deer for their wall, funny how the neighboring trespasser gets no charges for tresspassing.

 

[mallardman]

Had it been a 150 inch deer eyes would of just been batted and nothing done, but they are just looking for ways to keep him from his prize, he had to sell that land in which some doe have been bread by that buck just to fight for whats right and legal, complete bs. Iowa dnr are a joke.

 

[jbg1219]

Had it been a 150 inch deer eyes would of just been batted and nothing done, but they are just looking for ways to keep him from his prize, he had to sell that land in which some doe have been bread by that buck just to fight for whats right and legal, complete bs. Iowa dnr are a joke.

What land did he sell??? It is my understanding that the guy had bought and sold many parcels of land trying to buy the perfect tract to shoot a trophy on. I am pretty sure that he has not sold the land that the deer was shot on. If so that has happened in the last week or so.

I hope that out of all this the baiting laws and grey areas are cleared up, and he gets to keep his deer. I do think that the guy had no intent on breaking any law, nor did the guys from TP think that there was any kind of potential wrongdoing here. However, in Iowa, it is illegal to bait and mineral blocks are to be removed 30 days prior to hunting season. I was told with mineral or salt blocks that to be legal you are to dig a 3 foot diameter by 1 foot deep hole where the block was located and remove the dirt from the area.

Keep a cool head on this and try to remember that, while it is unfortunate that the guy is going thru all of this, we are not 100% sure he was not baiting... He is innocent until proven guilty, and the DNR I am sure did not break the law to obtain any evidence here. If they did, then shame on them and I am sure there will be questions to answered.

I find it a joke that not all the fact are out on this and already there are people jumping to conclusions about the DNR being joke or the man who shot the deer is a joke. My thoughts are let it work out so you don't wind up being the one that is a joke.

 

[mallardman]

Joe sold a partial piece of that exact property the buck was killed on and partial of some other land he had just to fight the dnr, if you want the real story joe basically bought the land he killed that deer on to kill that deer, that ground was sold with trailcam pics already taken of that deer as a 3, 4 and 5 yr old, killing him as a 7 yr old. If you can find that law of removing salt or mineral blocks 30 days before season let me know and be sure to post it, not saying your wrong but I've never in my 15 yrs of deer hunting ever came across that law. Like I said had It been a 150 inch buck nobody would of cared and the trespasser would of been persecuted but instead "in the dnrs eyes" he's a hero. Joe went by all the laws, trophy pusuit would of never been there had they new there reputation was going to be on the line.

 

[Matt]

Joe sold a partial piece of that exact property the buck was killed on and partial of some other land he had just to fight the dnr, if you want the real story joe basically bought the land he killed that deer on to kill that deer, that ground was sold with trailcam pics already taken of that deer as a 3, 4 and 5 yr old, killing him as a 5 yr old. If you can find that law of removing salt or mineral blocks 30 days before season let me know and be sure to post it, not saying your wrong but I've never in my 15 yrs of deer hunting ever came across that law. Like I said had It been a 150 inch buck nobody would of cared and the trespasser would of been persecuted but instead "in the dnrs eyes" he's a hero. Joe went by all the laws, trophy pusuit would of never been there had they new there reputation was going to be on the line.

Antlers make people stupid. Do people deer hunt anymore just to enjoy the hunt?

 

[bpalmer85]

I'll give you that baiting is baiting, but no law states that mineral blocks must be removed a certain time before season opens. If your hunter and looking for the best possible Hunt why would you remove your mineral block other then a day before season opens, the deer are used to coming to it and its legal so why not leave it out as long as possible, believe it or not I know joe very well and he is completely innocent. Trophy pursuit would not of been there filming had anything illegal been going on. The dnr just want that deer for their wall, funny how the neighboring trespasser gets no charges for tresspassing.

Iowa does not allow baiting, period. I am not sure what you are supposed to do if you have a place that baiting was used on your property before you bought it, but I am sure the DNR would give advice on this. Also, the reason that you would remove a mineral block is because it is illegal to hunt over it.

As for the bucket of apples compared to a food plot, theres a difference between dumping apples on the ground to shoot a deer over it and planting apple trees for deer to have food. One is baiting, the other is providing habitat. Surely sportsmen can see the difference in that.

 

[Delfate16]

Antlers make people stupid. Do people deer hunt anymore just to enjoy the hunt?

Short answer: no.

Same stupid crap has happened to my group a few times to me when I've been in a good spot, shooting mallards. I've had the DNR actually drive out, check my boat because they got a tip from another group that we were over limit, and didn't have proper safety equipment in the boat. I've also had someone call me in to the local PD saying that I was trespassing while hunting out on the Mississippi.

Jealousy is a stinky cologne.

 

[Capt. Dave]

It's always easiest when we look at the actual law, from the IDNR handbook...

“Bait” means grain, fruit, vegetables, nuts, hay, salt, mineral blocks, or any other natural food materials, commercial products containing natural food materials, or by-products of such materials transported to or placed in an area for the purpose of attracting wildlife. Bait does not include food placed during normal agricultural activities."



I think the following Rules on waterfowl baiting is what most COs would use to determine if a violation may have taken place...be it waterfowl, deer or turkeys.

"Baiting is the direct or indirect placing, exposing, depositing, distributing, or scattering of salt, grain, or other feed that could lure or attract waterfowl to, on, or over any areas where hunters are attempting to take them.

A baited area is any area on which salt, grain, or other feed has been placed, exposed, deposited, distributed, or scattered, if that salt, grain, or feed could serve as a lure or attraction for waterfowl."

The 10-Day Rule - A baited area remains off limits to hunting for 10 days after all salt, grain, or other feed has been completely removed. This rule recognizes that waterfowl will still be attracted to the same area even after the bait is gone.



If minerals detected in the soil where the buck was killed are traceable to mineral blocks, and there are witnesses willing to testify blocks were there, then "all traces" of bait, whether used for game pics before the season or otherwise, were not COMPLETELY removed.

I grew up in Texas. I understand the reasons some people want to use bait as well as the reasons why some people are against baiting. Iowa law is pretty clear on this matter and any hunter whose activities "appear" to skirt the intent of the law will likely run a 50:50 chance of having to defend himself in court if those activities are reported. That seems to be what is happening here.

 

[14ducks]

I never thought I would say this but I now think Iowa law is violated so much and baiting is so common and most hunters don't even know they are violating the law, that Iowa should legalize all baiting of deer. But!! if you take a deer over or around ANY baited area, the harvested deer would not count toward ANY antler record. I have experience when I was on the local county conservation board of an individual having adjacent land but putting deer cocaine just over on the county property. It took years and years before that area was "clean". With the current law you could sneak into someones property and spread salt or other stuff and could keep the person from hunting his own property for years. I doubt if this court case will clear up anything.

 

[mharrington]

If you have a block out and remove it so you can hunt the area, you also have to remove the dirt where the block was placed. Ever seen cattle lick a 2 foot deep hole in the dirt months after the salt block is gone? Deer do the same thing because all that salt dissolves on the block when it rains and soaks into the ground. Big antlers, big egos, and TV shows are ruining the sport.

 

[mallardman]

I've never heard of a 10 day rule, if there is a legit law please copy paste and post it. What people aren't understanding is the deer was killed during muzzle loader season, not bow season where he tried to pursue him first, there is no law that states you must dig up all the dirt where a mineral block was placed, Google and look up more of the story and his lawyer makes some valid points and has some great questions for the iowa dnr. Their first concern should be trespassing and further investigating as to how someone saw the blocks (before any season started) on a property they weren't supposed to be on, it shouldn't be that easy to break a law and blame someone else for breaking the law.

 

[CRDUCKER]

What land did he sell??? It is my understanding that the guy had bought and sold many parcels of land trying to buy the perfect tract to shoot a trophy on. I am pretty sure that he has not sold the land that the deer was shot on. If so that has happened in the last week or so.

I hope that out of all this the baiting laws and grey areas are cleared up, and he gets to keep his deer. I do think that the guy had no intent on breaking any law, nor did the guys from TP think that there was any kind of potential wrongdoing here. However, in Iowa, it is illegal to bait and mineral blocks are to be removed 30 days prior to hunting season. I was told with mineral or salt blocks that to be legal you are to dig a 3 foot diameter by 1 foot deep hole where the block was located and remove the dirt from the area.

Keep a cool head on this and try to remember that, while it is unfortunate that the guy is going thru all of this, we are not 100% sure he was not baiting... He is innocent until proven guilty, and the DNR I am sure did not break the law to obtain any evidence here. If they did, then shame on them and I am sure there will be questions to answered.

I find it a joke that not all the fact are out on this and already there are people jumping to conclusions about the DNR being joke or the man who shot the deer is a joke. My thoughts are let it work out so you don't wind up being the one that is a joke.

Is this 3' by 3' deal in a statute written into law by the sate house and signed by the governor? If not then its total BS and nobody is obliged to follow the dictates of some pencil pushing money wasting bureaucrats in the government, which is the biggest problem this once free country has. they can just t say they have that rule, and you could have 10 guys form the DNR or wherever come on here and you would get 10 different rulings. If the state statute has this I stand corrected otherwise he's probably just a loud mouthed Republican like myself getting put in his place by a over powerful bunch of clerks:stirthepot:

 

[14ducks]

In fact, based on existing laws, gun hunters hunting/driving deer on "baited" property could be violating existing laws too. Law doesn't say YOU baited but just that the AREA ISaited. And the 10 day removal law doesn't apply because it takes years for the traces that attract deer to go away or be COMPLETELY removed. Based on these fact, I reached my conclusion that baiting should be legalized to even have a LEGAL deer season.

 

[14ducks]

Every state /county/city agency has OFFICIAL rules and regulations that are enforced and have penalties just like the stuff the legislature does. A lot of it is not published either. Obama does new ones every day that are not even published. Just legalize baiting and move on. Hunting has no future anyway. Hunting as we know it will be greatly changed by confiscation and mandatory hunting gun control like $100 per yearly tax and regustration. That's the way it is in other countries and what the demorats are pushing in their agenda for the President.

 

[GrnHead13]

Why doesnt the link work