I agree that CWD is a risk that we do not want to exacerbate. I was just throwing out some suggestions which in certain circumstances can improve the quality of deer pops in some areas which are extremely deficient in numbers. The cwd is a threat in food supplies only if that food supply was grown and harvestedfrom contaminated soil. In almost all cases those who supplement feed are doing so with foods grown locally to that location. If the risk of CWD is there it already has affected the local population and will spread whether food is supplemented or not.
I am notsuggesting this forthe guy dumping a 100 lbs of corn a week before season and expecting mature buck to be drawn to that new alien source. Mature deer will check out these dump piles but are on alert when doing so. Yes, it will create a more efficient kill in some cases, but no more than planting apple trees and hunt plots where the soil allows. The risk of cross contamination of cwd among deer feeding in the same area is just as serious among common watering sources.

There is also this to consider....This supplemented feeding will help those who manage or own private lands or lease lands. The club I belong to spends $500 a month supplying deer with feed added with nutrients they wouldn't otherwise be able toconsumefrom just crops alone. So, those who spend this kind of money and put this kind of work into the deer herd are able to increase the odds of keeping the "preferred" AR legalbuck around to survive another year to become those in the 130" class and above. Some who do not have the desire to put this amount of effort and money into increasing the quality of the bucks dislike clubs having the ability to do this. I understand that mindset. But I also believe you deserve to get out of something what you put into it. I know these types of hunters who spend this kind of $ are a minority, however we should have the ability to manage the deer on our properties the way we determine to be most beneficial. (speaking food, not shooting whatever whenever we want)

I do not like the idea of allowing any stringed weapon to be considered archery. The majority of archers list one of the reasons for archery hunting as having less slob hunters in the woods. Less hunters in the woods keeps the deer at relative ease until the influx of rifle hunters invade the woods turning most of the deer nocturnal. Allow crossbows and you'll see as many deer in archery as you do in rifle.

Legislation is currently being considered to allow crossbows to be considered archery weapons. If it has a scope, trigger and a rifle style stock-it is not a truearchery weapon.Let those with disabilities have the advantage, they need it not the rest of us. I also like the idea of having to get a deer close in order to shoot it. Some crossbows have the ability of hitting targets at 60 yds. It takes the stealth and need of overcoming the deer's survival instincts out of the scenario. In my mind a crossbow is too similar to being a rifle in the way it shoots and more hunters will lose theirpride in and sense oftradition in archery hunting opting to choose another easier method. Then we the true archers will be the minority.

I do agree with going back to the old doe season after rifle. It worked and didn't need to be changed. Since it has things have gotten worse.
I agree weapons like the TC Encore should be included as a muzzleloader instead of just the flintlock. When it comes to a rifle I believe in increasing the accuracy of the shot. I wouldn't mind if the state went to muzzleloader only for deer. One shot one kill, not 5 shots in one deer to drop it. If it takes you more than 2 shots you belong on the range not in the woods.