People who supposedly know what they are doing when it comes to wildlife say that migratory birds can't be baited because the available food source slows/stalls the migration. Similar scenario for elk and mule deer throughout certain parts of the rockies. If this is in fact the case how can these ice eating machines that keep ponds thawed be legal? Makes absolutely no sense. That seems to me like it would stall them out worse than someone sprinkling some corn in their pond.

so a "cheap" ice machine is un-fair to yeti owners, too?

You can bait all you want, you just can't hunt over it.

not sure how cheap and yeti owners are relevant to this. and I get the fact that you can do it but not hunt over it which once again does not support the reasoning behind it. Hunting over the thawed ice is legal though. But then again, since when have the feds made any sense.

Ice eaters and flooded corn were not thought of in 1918

I thought baiting was illegal to keep from overkill. Allow baiting and bag limits would go to 1. IMO

Quack Quack
Dinner's ready!

I can't imagine baiting an area would have any effect on the migration. It may cause a very small population of birds to hang in a area longer than they normally would but effect the migration, I doubt it. Now, the refuges up and down the flyways being loaded with food is another subject.

Not sure where you think that the reason behind baiting laws has to do with altering migration. Its an unfair advantage.

You have a valid point about ice eaters though.

There is some epic duck slaughtering on small pockets of water kept open with ice eaters.

I seem to recall seeing ponds in southern Colorado that would freeze overnight and the next morning would exhibit some duck down lined depressions or holes. There would be fox/coyote tracks in the snow coming and going to these depressions.