Do you see Texas doing away with baiting for deer? After reading this article, be sure to click the link on the right to discuss this article. Some interesting points made there.

Baiting Deer - more harm than good?

Hope so. It is getting expensive at $5.25 to $5.50 for a 50 lb bag!

I think this would be impossible in Texas unless everyone can create food plots with enough rain (yeah right) or we have more ag and get rid of cows.

food plots are out on my lease. All we grow are rocks!

Texas in a lot of places needs numbers of deer killed every season. Feeders throwing corn help Texas to accomplish this feat. Feeders are a big business in themselves and I just cannot see it helping the Texas deer herd. I think doing away with baiting would hurt the Texas deer herd more than it would help it.
Food plots are basically baiting, it is just in a more natural way. Really it is just a play on words.
Small plots of land that most people own depend on drawing deer in by use of the feeders. If you do away with feeders, you make it pretty hard for Texas to have a harvest of any number that will keep the deer population in check.

After reading this It seems that the harm that is being done is being done to the person baiting.If this is the case then why is it an issue ?I think this is just another ploy to try to pit hunters against eachother.To be honest we thank the lady that feeds the deer next door.and she knows we hunt them .On that land we dont feed at all but the deer come through there like clock work to hit the feeders on the land next door.All this BS about stopping baiting is just that BS. Next your going to tell me that I cant put bait on my hook when I fish . Now about hunting or baiting being ETHICAL, come on now..in AMERICA, LAND OF THE FREE , ethics has always been a personal choice. That shouldnt even be an issue unless you plan on infringeing on my rights as an AMERICAN .

Just my two cents

I don't disagree, but I find two things to be real interesting. First, is how the article points out that hunters who choose to hunt over feeders are not hunters, but killers. Heck, in Texas, we not only hunt over feeders, but also in large fenced in areas. How can we not call ourselves hunters? Secondy, wouldn't hunting public land and WMA's become more productive. After all, it's illegal to feed on public land in Texas, but not private.

Interesting article. I don't foresee Texas ever banning baiting for deer or other native wildlife, simply because it has been an accepted method for years. As far as ethics, how many Texans think hunting deer with dogs is ethical? As far as the non-hunting public hunting goes, nothing about hunting to them is ethical. Also, what is the difference between baiting with corn, and planting a forage patch, or putting our minerakl rocks.

People in states that have more Public Land, smaller private acreage tracts, and no history of baiting are going to look at this differently.

I think what folks need to do, is take a long realistic look at what is actually possible to do on the average lease in Texas.

Can 6 or 8 people on say 500 acres realistically get out and look for bedding areas to set up on or game paths that are used enough to set stands on, or get out and still hunt with out shooting each other. Very few states have the variation in habitat types as we do in Texas. No state has the population of deer that we do in Texas. No state has the amount of private land ownership as we do in Texas. There are too many variables in Texas to say that we could start doing things like they do in South Carolina or Michigan.

This is another of those issues where I say that hunters do not support each other but want to fragmentize and support only their method or belief. JMO

Quote:

---

Now about hunting or baiting being ETHICAL, come on now..in AMERICA, LAND OF THE FREE , ethics has always been a personal choice.

---

Only to a point.

According to Webster, ethics deals with: 1: the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation 2 a: a set of moral principles: a theory or system of moral values b: the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group c: a guiding philosophy d: a consciousness of moral importance 3: a set of moral issues or aspects.

Since nearly every definition includes the word moral, we should define it as well. 1 a : of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : b : expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior c : conforming to a standard of right behavior d : sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgment e : capable of right and wrong action 2 : probable though not proved 3 : perceptual or psychological rather than tangible or practical in nature or effect

What does this mean for the hunting community? At the very least, it means anything against the law must be considered unethical, as you can’t possibly consider disobeying the law to be moral. Does this mean that what’s ethical in one state would be considered unethical in another state? For example: it’s legal to feed corn in Texas, but not in Minnesota. Therefore, feeding corn is clearly unethical in Minnesota, but what makes it ethical in Texas? Or, even within our own state, where we have different laws and policies for each county. What makes shooting a 6 point buck with a 10” spread ethical in West Texas when it’s clearly unethical in East Texas?

What about a contract, lease agreement, verbal agreement, or even a handshake? If an individual or group of individuals voluntarily agrees to certain conduct or behavior, and then acts or behaves differently, wouldn’t this be considered unethical? Of course it would.

Beyond the scope of the law or any type of agreement, ethics are determined by the conduct and morals of each hunter or hunters as a group. Actions found to be wrong or immoral by one individual may be considered right or just by another. Some hunters may consider rifle hunting from a box blind to be immoral or unethical while other hunters consider it to be an ethical form of hunting.

The perception of the public is not going to change. Hunters are still going to be portrayed as killers whether deer are shot over a pile of corn or a pile of acorns. Deer hunting is such a large business in Texas that I think lots would have to change before baiting becomes very much of an issue.

on some of the WMA's they do let you bait with corn, when myself and daughters went to Enchanted rock they let us place out corn for the deer to eat. So Parks and wildlife does let you bait. At Kerr they recommend you do that so that you can harvest your Deer and Exotics.

As for the article by Dr. Dave Samuel I totally disagree with it and his statements. As Biologist myself baiting gives the animal some type of eatable food during the lean times, I believe that supplemental feeding helps the herd and gives you a better chance of harvesting a more healthy deer. A Hunter is one that chooses his game and a killer is someone that kills everything that walks in front of him

Doc

Sure it is ethical if it is legal and a generally accepted practice. It is a circular argument and that is why we have laws so the courts can decide did a person break the law or not. The courts don't argue ethics (except the Supreme Courts when they make the laws in the first place) so why should we unless we want to do more harm than good for the sport of hunting? I am sure some hardcore duck hunters think pond jumping is unethical but it is still hunting and 100% legal. Same with skillet shots on quail, etc. Don't partake in it if you don't like it. You can argue everything. Might as well have a Miss Manners book on hunting if hunters start arguing ethics on legal practices.

Using feeders can be the best strategic play in the woods if your land lacks deer activity without one. One of the places I have to hunt is a 20 ac. place that adjoins a large ranch. If I didn't have a feeder, I would probably see a deer once or twice for every five or six times I went hunting. They will cross there, but not very often. If I put a feeder up, I will see several deer almost every time I hunt. On the other hand, my lease in Oklahoma is much larger, has game trails, wheat, and milo. I really don't need a feeder at all, however, I do have several there to increase the odds since I will be bow hunting 90% of the time. Plus, I all ready own the feeders, so I might as well put them to good use.
I don't like being looked down upon for using a feeder, but I don't feel that it is wrong to use one. I've only killed one big buck under a feeder. They usually don't come in unless a hot doe brings them by. I would feel bad about shooting a bear with his head in a 55 gallon barrel though.

Quote:

---

As Biologist myself baiting gives the animal some type of eatable food during the lean times,

---

The problem here is that most deer feeders stop throwing corn by the end of December. How does this help the animals during the leanest times of January and February?

Don't get me wrong. I have 5 feeders that run year around and 5 food plots that we plant in the Spring and Fall. And, I totally understand how Texas is different than other states, in that it is made up of mostly private lands.

The point that really got to me was how you can't call yourself a hunter when your sitting in a box blind waiting for deer to show up at corn. Now, I spend many days during the season doing just that. So, I'm not attacking anyone here. I just thought it would make for an interesting discussion.

Interesting that some of you guys think that hunting on WMA's and SP's cannot have baiting involved.

In the last 3-4 years hunting at some very high traffic SP's, Guadalupe River SP in particular, they've gone from allowing campers to bait in the camping area and not allowing the Lottery Hunters TP&W biologists who are charged with reducing the over population of alien and native animals to be baited...to just the reverse. No longer can campers offer bait to draw in deer and other non natives but the biologists are now allowing Lottery Hunters to bait because the MuckityMucks in Austin finally recognize that the purpose of the hunters is to be used as a control mechanism for the over population problams that are rampant.

I had a series of conversations with the Park Manager, Mark Abolafia-Rosenzweig, at GRSP over a 3 year period - was drawn twice in the period for GRSP for a GDE & a GDA hunt in '02 & '04, about the amount of hog and deer damage specifically. The last Hunt in '04 the enlightened attitude changed dramatically about baiting...and the hunter success percentages since then have reflected that change in the use of baiting as management tool.
Mark was still complaining about the lack of success in hog removals after the '04 Hunt, but when I asked where the damage was occuring he said down in this one eco sensitive area but that the hunters were not allowed there as it was used as a childrens teaching area when there were no hunts scheduled...HUH? What does that have to do with anything I asked! He had the same old attitude of "we can't allow this or that but we have this major problem" as had been the case before and after the change in baiting regulations.
In '04 I was astounded to hear during the Hunters Orientation Talk by the biologists to hear Rex the biologist say "PLEASE knock down EVERY non native animal of any size you see...and PLEASE knock down every WT you are allowed regardless of size as we have 4 times or more animals on the property than the property can carry, and even if all of you guys limit we will not have made a serious dent in the problem".

Mark was not happy about the poor hog kill in '04 and teased me about it again, when I simply stated that if he wanted to move the hogs off this eco sensitive area area then hunters would be have to have access to do the job in that area too....but I think he has his hands tied by some other political BS going on in TP&W and is tired of getting roasted from both sides, and letting the Austin crowd fight it out with the biologists last I heard. IMO Mark is a super nice guy but not in total control of his own environment's ability to properly manage the resource he charged with.
I am usually bored silly sitting in a fixed blind looking at a baited place whether it be a bean field somewhere in the south or an agricultual field in the Midwest and would much rather go "sneakin' an peekin" but without access to the kind of acreage available in the West or elsewhere in the world it is impossible to do over 98% of the time in Texas. JMHO
Ron

I believe baiting is ethical -- although I would prefer not to do it -- and won't next year.

I also suspect the author of that piece to be biased against baiting. He insinuates that baiting doesn't work -- which is clearly nonsense. But, that's a common argument used by opponents of some activity. "Not only do I not like it, but it doesn't even work, so you might as well stop doing it."

I can see that on small plots of land you might have to bait in "self defense" so to speak. Of course, you wouldn't have to hunt over your feeders, but it *would* be annoying to have to spend all that money for feeding when you don't even approve of it!

Ethics is not the issue, imho. If you look at the ethical view, that’s when it all gets squirrelly. Any region can have its own set of ethical values. Cannibals, for example, deem it quite ethical to slice off another person’s leg and have a picnic on the ground with their family. I, for one, couldn’t tolerate such behavior. I’ve known several hunters that think hunting with firearms is immoral and disgraceful. Only bows and arrows, spears, snares and such is the mark of a true hunter to them.
And whether something is legal or not should have no bearing on whether or not it’s ethical. Killing unborn children is legal in some states, but is it ethical? We could go on and on about ethics and never get anywhere. Like Mike (TxDM) said - it’s a circular argument.

Can feeders or food plots help the deer? I don’t think it can as a stand-alone effort. But, I do think they supplement their diet if done properly, which again, is a matter of opinion. A hunter (and that is posted in the strictest sense) will do whatever it takes in cramped areas to pull deer into his arena so that he can harvest his lot. Sometimes, though, he has to push the limits in order to do so. That is when a hunter should consider whether or not his actions are ethical – even though it perfectly legal.

Why do people always come up with this baiting thing I guess we will have to e-mail every person in Iowa never to plant a corn feild again b/c the people in TX can't have a 55 gallon drum of deer corn. Give me a break people get all upset b/c it's on a timer and it goes off and (DEER COME RUNNING) what's the diffrence in a 100 ac track of planted corn or oats or any other food plot the deer will be there all times of the day it's not like the have a fence that's on a timer and the deer can't get in the food plot. The guy that posted BS is right that is all a bunch of BS. I guess next we can't plant sunflower b/c all the dove will be there and it's not right to hunt over baited fields what ever!!!!!!!

Do you have any of that $5.50 corn left?

Since we have way too many deer in most of the state - any means possible is the best way to hunt and harvest deer. This is just another anti-hunter pitch to cause ripples within the hunting ranks.

JR

In 2006 when this post was created there was plenty.LOL

I think we do! I opened a truck we store corn in and saw something slithering on the seat! That corn might stay there another 10 years.

Why are these old threads being opened though??? Of course it isn't ethical. I learned the ways of the Indian.

Indian Corn???
Lets see if that thread gets dug back up again too.

I swear HOF all you do is dig up old dead threads.