Previously, Maryland law – unlike federal law – did not require criminal intent as a condition of violating the state’s migratory bird baiting law. In Maryland, as in many states, baiting for deer is legal, while baiting for waterfowl is illegal. Under the previous law, individuals could have been charged with baiting for waterfowl simply because elsewhere on the property someone was baiting for deer, regardless of whether the waterfowl hunter was aware there was bait nearby.
In response to this issue, the bipartisan Maryland Legislative Sportsmen’s Caucus leadership introduced a pair of bills to ensure that in order to be charged with baiting for waterfowl it must be demonstrated that the hunter knows, or reasonably should know, that the area is baited. SB 88 was introduced by Past National Assembly of Sportsmen’s Caucuses (NASC) Executive Council President and Maryland Caucus Co-Chair Senator John Astle on January 26. Its companion bill, HB 170, was introduced on January 29 by Caucus Co-Chair and NASC Executive Council member Delegate Wendell Beitzel. Both bills passed their respective chambers unanimously, and SB 88 was signed into law by Maryland Governor Larry Hogan on May 12 at a ceremonial bill signing in Annapolis.
For more information on the Maryland “Strict Liability” issue, click here to read a detailed analysis submitted by the Maryland Hunting Coalition.
Share this page
Your opinion counts
Which of these considered changes do you believe would have the most positive impact on management of the recreational red snapper fishery in the Gulf of Mexico?Vote Here
- Granting full management authority (stock assessments, management of both commercial and recreational sectors, etc.) to the five Gulf states. (30.43%)
- Extending the states’ current 9-mile management jurisdictions to 25 miles. (17.39%)
- Permanently allow each state to manage its recreational sector allocation out to 200 nautical miles. (26.09%)
- Use of more appropriate management models, such as rate of harvest, rather than the commercial hard-poundage quota system currently in place. (21.74%)
- Inclusion of additional, non-federal data in stock assessments. (4.35%)