Iowa Water Fowlers Forum banner

This angers me in so many ways

7779 Views 41 Replies 18 Participants Last post by  PrairieBelle

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.
1 - 12 of 42 Posts
Sorry for my choice of words but this is complete bs
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.
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.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
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.
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.
See less See more
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.
Personally I don't have a dog in this fight and the outcome effects me not. I do hope this guy is treated fairly in the process no matter the findings. If he's found not guilty- I hope that he sticks his neighbors #1 hit list buck this year.

It doesn't exists. Straight from page 22 of the 2015-16 regs:

"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.​

As it's already stated, it's a very grey area.

Notice that it also doesn't state the distance you have to keep from it to be considered hunting over it. As it's written- if anyone puts trail cameras out during the summer over mineral licks anywhere on the property they plan on hunting in the fall, you are hunting over bait. Or should I say...the law doesn't explicitly state that what is/isn't considered "OVER" the bait.

I would like to know how the DNR can prove that the mineral was placed on/in the ground after the deer was shot? Without accurate measurements of the initial amounts, taking in total rain saturation(including run off), the average number of digestion and the exact date of placement.....any lawyer with his salt should be able to hand that deer back in his living room. If they can accurately determine that with so many variables...........then they sure as hell should be able to figure out how to start holding ducks in this state!
Your a smart man duckaholic
Exactly, like i said earlier a 150 inch deer would not even been pursued by the dnr.
Mallardman, do you have some information that proves this guy is innocent and the DNR is wrong? Or are you just assuming?
You can't assume anything even related to this when the evidents speaks for its self. It's pretty obvious that the neighbor was jealous (after they had become friends) that he wasn't the one who killed the deer.
My thoughts exactly.
Does corn grow naturally without humans planting it? Or how about beats, do foods plots just grow naturally?
Food plots are needed to increase survival of many species, hunted or not. Most corn planted on state and county land requires certain amounts left for feeding animals. Arresting this guy for baiting is stupid because the DNR knows illegal baiting is rampant. There must be more here than meets the eye. I can't even remember seeing newsprint where anyone has been arrested for baiting deer in my areas. Of course, we are all squeaky clean. Being ethical and honest isn't a requirement anymore. Anyone know when the trial begins?
I believe this coming week, but rumor has it he will plead guilty to one fine and get his deer back, just a rumor don't know if that's true
1 - 12 of 42 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.