I kind of agree. I mean sitting in a ground blind or tree stand over a pile of corn technically puts a person in the outdoors, but personally I don't think I could call myself an outdoorsman if I did it. Wait...how far away is the parked truck?
I looked back and can't find your questions, other than "who holds F&G accountable?". Sorry, I'm not looking up and reading the ND state constitution. Everyone reports to someone. That isn't the question though. The question is who do you want making the decisions and how should they be based, best known science or the whims of the masses?
Regarding CWD, very knowledgable people have already posted a ton of info for you. You do not like the answers, so why should anyone else waste their time?
Our state constitution literally gives the legislature the authority to do things like this. IT states by "law and regulation".
I will be talking about some data that the Game and Fish has been collecting from unit 3F2. CWD was first found in state in 2009 in 3F2, with the Game and Fish implementing a ban on hunting over bait through their 2010 CWD Proclamation, even after a bill to ban baiting introduced into the legislature in 2007 and 2009 was shot down.
70 positive CWD cases have been found in North Dakota in 13 years of testing. 48 of these cases have come from 3f2, or 68.6% of all positives. In the last 3 years of released data, 2019-2021, 34 of 52 positives have come from 3F2, or 65% of positives from that time frame, even though the baiting restriction had been in place for 9 years prior.
In North Dakota since 2009 there has been 1 deer found dead our state where they say CWD was the possible cause of death, but are unable with 100% certainty to say that CWD was the direct cause. This deer was found dead, then tested positive.
After running through those numbers and remembering a baiting restriction has been in place now for 12 years total in 3F2, has that restriction the Game and Fish implemented been effective at impacting spread beyond a normal, natural deer to deer interaction, especially after the drastic spike the last 3 years?
At a Minot CWD meeting this past year, the Game and Fish Department stated they are moving away from data collection in 3F2. This has been the data collection site in the state that could back up the science they want us to believe… That a baiting restriction slows the spread of CWD, yet they are moving away from data there, specifically after the huge leap in positives the last 3 years. Perhaps the data and science does NOT match the narrative and agenda.
That is a condensed version of the written testimony I submitted.. my longer version contains the links and more data and all of that fun jazz, but I have yet to have any one answer the couple of questions that have been asked in there. Why are we going away from results in 3F2? Where are all the dead deer at? Where is the accountability for the game and fish department when they eradicated 50 something deer by Williston, with out a single positive, just to dump them in the garbage and not even donate the meat?
Who gets to hold the game and fish accountable? This was attempted twice through the legislature previously. "We the People" spoke out and got it shot down, and then the game and fish wrote a CWD specific proclamation to back door a baiting restriction after going 0 for 2. I have sat through advisory board meetings and CWD specific meetings where sportsmen's concerns were turned on deaf ears on this topic and a vast amount of others. There has been 0 accountability for a government branch that is headed by an appointed position that has literally chosen to ignore what the people of the state spoke for and has literally shown their inability to manage the deer herds in the past, having to give out a surplus of tags (100,000 +) after not listening to people that see these herd every single deer for multiple years at a time at advisory board meetings.. the only thing that saved their tail was a winter where literally hundreds or thousands of dead deer were killed by the elements.
My family has deer hunted the last few years with out the ability to bait and have had success.. This is due to our habitat implementation practices that we have done, but others aren't as fortunate. It might pain me to see it but there is way more tree rows and sloughs and habitat disappearing from our area then there is going in. Spot and stalk is fun, heck.. It's a blast. But on our flat land with 0 cover it's not feasible. I have enjoyed watching many youth and other folks set out and harvest deer, many first deer, off of our property.. including 100+ folks that fall mother nature intervened.. all while only losing 1 animal due to a bad shot.. With out a bait pile as a tool for those people, and to help remove 100+ deer out of our yard.. how many more deer would have perished to the elements?
There are lots of valid concerns on both sides, but unless they can prove with out a doubt.. no maybes, can or can not, no possibles.. why should a tool that has been so helpful, for myself and others, be targeted.. all while the game and fish funds programs meant to congregate deer themselves.
That's my initial post. Then some follow up questions.
Who holds them accountable?
Why are they moving away from 3F2 for data collection?
Does banning baiting with out a doubt slow the spread of CWD.. Not Maybe, Not could. Does it?
Where are all the dead deer in Nodak the game and fish talks about? There has been 1 possible death.
Is over population worse for disease spreading, or a bait pile?
I have said it before.. If they can prove without a doubt a pile of corn will spread CWD at a higher rate then natural deer interactions that happen every day (and in food plots), I will change my opinion. This has 0 to do with ethics on my side of the argument.. but opposition always goes back to ethics. My numbers posted have proved that after 10 years a baiting restriction didn't slow the spread, those numbers are straight from the Game and Fish website, but yet they are ignored at advisory board meetings. Look at tag trends in Nodak. The Game and Fish want's to maintain 75,000 rifle tags.. they went from 140,000 something tags down to a rapid decline into the 40,000s (Mother nature played a big roll in this) but the habitat in north dakota has changed rapidly, with their deer number counts still coming from the same areas making them inaccurate... Their management strategy on moose tags is "a population that landowners are willing to deal with" (straight from Jeb Williams at the Minot advisory board meeting last year).. That seems like a solid management strategy to me.
I just want the agency that has 0 accountability back to the people, who put in their constitution the specific words law and regulation, to realize that its not their way or the highway. "We can fund programs to congregate deer, We can run an intercept feeding program, we can do herd eradications and then perform wanton waste" all with no accountability. All the Game and Fish has to do is prove that a baiting restriction slows the spread and the legislators will side with them. If enough doubt or proofs are posed on the other side, well then maybe there is some of that accountability back to the people they are supposed to be serving.
