Ok something has been bothering me and i just have to talk about it. I have heard sooo many people say hunting over a feeder is not ethical hunting. ??? . Then they make their way to their stand and hunt over a food plot. Thats ethical hunting??? I dont see ANY difference between a food plot and a feeder. If hunting over a feeder isnt ethical why is a food plot ethical?!?!?!?!?!?!? I just had to get that off my chest.

i use a feeder i see nothing wrong with it

If it's legal, I don't care how you/they/anyone hunts.

People are too self righteous these days.

I agree. If it's legal, it's ethical.

A guy in Texas can't have a 300 to 600 pound feeder but some places out of state can have corn fields 100ac WTH????

I hunt primitive (corp. property), all a feeder or plot does is improve your odds of seeing a animal. Everything else still has to go right, like being able to hit the target, find it, and all the little things that go into them.

Wild predators lay in wait near water holes and areas there prey like to graze or congregate. I say all means legal, its not like your having a new idea.

had a conversation with 3 guys from Iowa yesterday night about feeders, it started bad - ended better . I explained that most places I hunt don't have the agriculture they do , and that being said they don't congregate at very many places here.

I don't hunt over a feeder or even hunt from a stand but I don't think it's unethical if you do. You pays your money...you hunts how you wants.

I been around for a while now and have learned that their are elitists behind every rock. You don't shoot their caliber, you're an idiot. You want to shoot a crossbow, you're lazy. The most important thing is that you feel confident that what you're doing is the right thing for you. Once you get there, inane things like this will quit bothering you. On the other hand, everybody is entitled to an opinion.

This thread is basically about baiting vs not baiting.

I've been in the North Eastern United States, and the state I was in, baiting was illegal. However, with that said, people would still plant food plots, hunt corn fields, and put out scent strips. To me, this is all baiting. I even knew people that would complain about baiting, however when they went out in the field, they took a couple of 5 gallon buckets filled with apples. They always came back to camp without those apples, just to repeat the same thing the next day. People in the North East bait, they just do it a little different. I even knew one farmer that planted corn near woods line just to shred it 2-3 days before rifle season. From his deer stand, he could hit every corner of that field with his rifle easily.

Now in Texas, since I am allowed to have a feeder out, you bet, I put one out. Actually I own FOUR (4) feeders and I'm proud to say that I use them, two at each deer blind. They aren't against the law in Texas and I use them because if I don't, my odds of seeing deer on the lease with everyone else that has them out would be much less.

This discussion keeps coming up. I always state, if it is legal, then use it. Just like fishing, you want it "Natural" again? Go fishing at a lake without a boat. Sure you can catch fish from the shore, but you won't catch as many and as easily if you had a boat with a fish finder. I used to use the arguement with one of my friends from the North East who thinks baiting shouldn't be allowed. I tell him he shouldn't use a modern rifle with modern ammo. He probably should use a flintlock with patch/ball, open sights or a recurved bow with handmade arrows using only his fingers to draw the bow (no release).

Like I said, if it is legal, use it, and don't complain because someone is actually following the law.

99% of hunters bait in one way or another. They hunt over food, water, or in the rut/mating season. To me this is all a form of baiting. Don't tell me hunting over a feeder is wrong, then go climb into your stand over your 10 acre food plot!!!

I bait them by allowing them to think they are safe on our place.

Without feeders, lots and lots of people in Texas would not be killing deer. Hunting over feeders makes sense when most of the land is privately owned and most of the land is divided into smaller plots. You can take a 500 acre place and have maybe 6 good spots with feeders. Without feeders, there might be 2 good places. With as many deer as Texas has, there would be a tremendous die off every few years without people hunting over feeders because if they are not harvested by hunter means, disease will take its toll every few years to keep the population in balance.

As long as your within the bounds of the laws set forth by your state then your ethically right, period. Nothing wrong with hunting over a feeder here in Texas. Other states may very in the way they write thier laws. When hunting another state just know thier laws. As for other hunters that think they have a right to impose thier ethical views one you, well you should just get a laugh out of that.

There are many cases where something may be legal but not ethical. For example, there is no law against shooting a dove that's resting on a branch. Still, most bird hunters would shy against doing it.

As for shooting deer that have come to eat at a feeder or food plot, I myself don't see it as unethical. In fact, with deer being such elusive creatures, I don't see harvesting a deer by ANY legal means as unethical. IMO, the issue of ethics comes more into play afterwards. The primary reason for shooting a deer SHOULD be to provide a meal. If someone wants to use a feeder or food plot to provide a true harvest, I applaud them. And likewise, I take issue with those who take a deer by ANY legal means and care only for the horns, rather than the meat.

Does using food plots and feeders make it easier to shoot a deer. Absolutely it does. But again, if the primary purpose is to provide a meal, easy isn't a bad thing. Otherwise, we would all be growing our own meat and vegetables.

Still, I wish the more mature and experienced hunters would not depend on food plots and feeders so much and spend more time and effort to actually "hunt" the animal. With it now being so easy to harvest deer, all the skill and tactics that deer hunters carried 30 or 40 years ago are quickly disappearing.

Why is shooting a bird on a branch unethical? Many people consider it unethical to shoot at a moving deer, but its unethical to shoot a stationary bird. I may give someone a hard time for shooting a perched bird, but its not unethical, just easier.

I have to disagree. Ethics are moral rules of conduct to one's self and community(culture). Laws are for governing society for the supposed good of all the society.
On this issue it is one of personal choice. To each his/her own. You can use a feeder and not break the law, but if you want to track a deer all over your place with nothing but your tracking skills cause you feel it is wrong.Knock your self out.

above was in reponse to Payne's post
"I agree. If it's legal, it's ethical."

Good question.

IMO, hunting ethics are most often linked to "fair chase", which I feel most would define as giving the animal or bird a "fair chance" to elude the hunter and survive. Naturally, a bird that is sitting still on a tree branch doesn't have near as much chance at surviving a hunter's shot, than when flying past him/her.

The isssue of "fair chance" becomes much more clouded when you throw feeders and food plots into the dicussion. And it can also lead to heated debate. For example, in other states where food plots are legal and feeders are not, you might have a fight on your hands when telling someone who hunts over a food plot, that it's just like hunting over a feeder. And IMO, it is. Oh, they may try to defend their egos by saying that food plots provide greater nutritional value. But that being true or not, it doesn't take away from the fact that they're just waiting for something to show up and eat so they can shoot it. It's why I try to avoid such debates that only divide hunters and focus more on the use of the animal as a resource. And that even applies to the dove sitting in a tree. While some may take issue with it ethically, all issues are resolved once it's eaten. Besides, I've known guys who shoot a lot of doves on wing, only to later throw them away. That is CLEARLY not ethical.

If a person buys a license, stays within bag limits, and consumes the resource, I say go for it by whatever legal means they choose. Finding a preferred method is most often just an effort to satisfy the male ego and/or have to the woods more to oneself. If the decision were mine, there would just one deer season every year and it would be open to ALL legal means of taking them, including rifles, shotguns, bows, and muzzle loaders. Heck, I might even throw spears in there as well for the greatest die-hards.

IMO, creating separate seasons in an effort to sell more equipment and license tags has divided hunters and hurt this sport more than anything else.

Dan, you kinda skirted the question. If it is "fair chase" to shoot a bird only when moving, should we not give deer a "fair chase" and only shoot them while they are running?

IMO, ethics can also come down to respecting the animal, and giving yourself the highest percentage chance of killing the animal cleanly. However, you opinion if fair chase does not transfer when wing shooting vs shooting a deer.

If a dove sits in a tree in front of me, I'll blast it to get the skunk off. And if that means taking a bit of a razzing, I'm willing to put up with it, as I would do the same to someone else, but I'd hardly call it unethical.

You make a valid point. Heck, I know guys who can't hit a deer standing still while sitting in a office chair 50 yards away from it. For them, any deer they take a shot at has a "fair chance" of running off without injury.

Yes, the most ethical shot is the one that is most likely to create a clean kill, based on the "solid and proven" capabilities of the shooter.

Again, good point.

how bad would it be if you somehow managed to not drop it?

I don't even want to think about it. I'd probably claim to be scaring it off the branch first.

All I know is that I set up feeders, been checking game cameras, had the deer patterned and picked out and so far zero kills! It's not like we are leading the deer to slaughter, feeders don't always mean you will see a deer when its legal to shoot. I have seen more deer on public land with no feeders so far this year. People who have a problem with feeders probbaly don't have much exprience hunting over one.

I agree Having a feeder, food plot, game camera or a GUN do not make it unethical. I guess tying a deer to the feeder might be unethical. If it is legal then in most peoples minds it will be ethical. With that said if a person does not like feeder, food plots, etc then hunt public land. Most of us need to decide on our own what we consider ethical.

If we want to make it completely fair give the darn Deer a gun and see what happens.