"hunt migratory birds with the aid of bait, or on or over any baited area
hunt over any baited area until 10 days after all baiting materials have been removed"

I know a guy that dug out part of his land about 3 feet deep, creating dikes all around it. He planted a bunch of stuff in the Spring. He never harvested it. Just left it there. In the fall he flooded that area. It was GREAT for Duck Hunting, and he was never accused of baiting.

You will need to check with your local ag extension on when the earliest date you can put in a winter grazing plot is. For example, in Jefferson County, Texas, it is like the 14th of September. Therefore if I put in a winter grazing plot on our property in the central zone in the 3rd week of August and hunted over the broadcasted seed on September 1 it would be considered baiting. If I put in a winter grazing plot on September 20 on my central zone stuff and hunted over the broadcasted seed it would be considered baiting because dove season had already started. Now since the south zone starts September 20 or something around there, I could put in a winter grazing plot on the 14th and hunt over the broadcasted seed because it falls under a normal agricultural practice.

I looked into this about 5 years ago and I believe that is how that process works...

Planting and flooding as long as the crop is not manipulated is 100% legal.

Depends on the GW. I have a feeder that is about 300yds away. In WTX, it's just right over there. I let it run out in August because I have a tank that I dove hunt over...Don't want any issues. Especially since we are getting a rookie GW this year.

I understand the intent of the law and the reason for keeping it somewhat vague. What I have a huge problem with is TPWD leaving the term "intentionally or knowingly" out of the wording of the statute. With this type of violation it's impossible to truly have an offense if the person doesn't know someone is baiting a field on another property. I support the heck out of our game wardens, but IMO this law is absolutely overreaching and unreasonable on the state's part.

When not defined by law as in this instance, then whether the hunter was hunting with the aid of bait is a question to be answered by a jury.

With most things in life, if you have to think twice about whether it is ok or not, the answer usually is NOT.

And yet if you have the only water source around for two miles it's perfectly legal to hunt over it.

if you have to ask if a situation falls into the baiting category I suggest you lock the gate behind you. That way when the GW shows up and writes you a ticket at least you made him/her hike all the way in, that will supply some satisfaction.

and dont cave and give them a ride back to the gate, they can walk back

Yes, for a jury to decide if it comes down to it. GW's can write tickets all day long, doesn't mean you're guilty. I've never had an issue with a GW, but I wonder how likely a DA would be to take a case to court on something like a dove being shot in proximity to a deer feeder. DA's don't like to take cases to court and loose, they get elected based on win/loss. I'd bet a DA would toss it.

But then again, you can beat the wrap, but not the ride.

The GW's I've known were pretty good at knowing your intent and responding accordingly. Have you seen the spotting scopes some of these officers use?