If Texas outlawed feeders today, there wouldn't be a change at all!
There would still be people lined up to lease the properties with no concern if the price increased.

Here's the link to an interesting study on baiting that was done back in 2010 in Pennsylvania. What I found most interesting is that based on a comparison of success rates, it indicates baiting doesn't offer as much as an advantage as some might think. It might be as hard to convince folks like me who believe it does, as it would to convince those who spend a small fortune every year keeping their feeders going.

Link

So if this is true, then that means baiting is ineffective and that eliminating feeders would not soften leases prices because success rates are close to the same.

So you proved your own theory wrong homeboy







I also don’t believe that to be true, baiting is certainly more effective than not baiting, that’s why it’s outlawed in many places

IMO, it's the perception that hunters have towards baiting that matters most. For example, some may view feeders as necessary to keep deer off neighboring properties, while others feel they're necessary to see more deer. Would they spend as much on a lease if they lost what they believe are necessary advantages? No doubt die-hards like me would continue to pay as much as they can afford to hunt. Not sure about those who believe feeding is such a must.

It was sarcasm.....

I guess the deer on my place are not educated yet enough yet to read that research study...stupid deer is what I have....oh well..... I am standing in teh feed pen between the protein feeder and corn feeder...

Keep in mind, my biggest Texas buck was taken on no cost, public land. I've been hunting private leases all my adult life and know how hunters feel about how they can hunt them. For that reason, it would be hard to convince me that just as many Texas hunters would pay what they're paying now for private lease, knowing they would have to follow public land rules.

But then, who knows, maybe there are enough diehards like me to sustain the current demand even with those changes.

That in itself might be good fodder for another debate. Do feeders really offer a strong advantage with studies have found that's not the case.

Until these Texas deer learn how to read research papers, we are stuck with stupid deer here. None of them ever drink water, eat from a small grain food plot, corn field, milo field, alfalfa field, wild clover patch, under a mast tree, respond to a grunt call or rattling horns, etc. Heaven forbid they outlaw the rut..... Yep, hunters in Texas would be screwed. What a

I don’t feel like I’m hunting when I sit in a box blind watching a feeder. But my son does, and that makes it fun.

No one is saying you have to limit yourself.

public land rules is more than just no baiting.

I don’t. I’ll sit in a blind with my youngest son because he loves it. I never cared for blind hunting but sitting with my youngest is fun and he makes me understand why so many people find it interesting. He loves to watch deer and sit still and quiet. My oldest is like me and can’t stand a blind more than an hour.

Then point made earlier concerning the long season and relatively liberal bag limits is a good one and points to two additional forces that help drive lease prices. But here again, they also help drive hunter expectations.

ALL hunter expectations are the same because we/they are hunters you

Differences in hunter expectations always start showing up a few weeks into the season when hunting pressure has pushed deer into survival mode. At least in East Texas, this is when you often hear hunters claim the deer have "disappeared".

In East Texas the Deer disappear in the bed of someones truck...

It’s not just corn though. It is protein and other feed supplements, measured by the ton in some places. Does it not matter? Similar to a period of no hunting, would a period of ending supplemental feeding not have the same effect, or is this mitigated well enough by MLD?

The demand is up because more people want to kill Ch!t.

No, feed supplemental feed is a more recent management practice. Deer lived and did fine before it. Food plots are part of the supplemental feed. Habitat enhancement is part of a management plan...burns, roller chopping, aeration, thinning timber, etc. Farmed crops are also just planted for income and not deer, but deer use more of those crops than they do supplemental feed in some areas. People who do feed tend to manage for more deer, stop feeding and numbers will adjust on their own or hunters will adjust them. Same as years ago.

There is a sub culture in East Texas and many other places, that take “if it’s brown it’s down” to the extreme. Road hunting is regular, etc. In the Ozarks too, same deal but the mountains give better cover. I thought this was common knowledge?

Two ranches side by side in hill country. Both native genetics but one is HF and Feeds protein.

Both have same deer density 1 deer per 7.25 acres
One mature bucks average 180pound on hoof other 120 pounds on hoof. Again Same genetics

What's the difference? One ranch’s deer have a greater impact on native browse and it's deer are having to adapt to environmental conditions, other ranch deer have excess and are able to put excess nutrients into body health/growth.

Think of Antler expression size as a product of excess nutrition.


The hill country has one of the highest densities in TX, it's normally takes a pretty nasty drought for a die off.

Age is a key factor in your equation...as much so as nutrition. Both age and nutrition are driving factors in lease prices. Lower cost leases can manufacture both over their time on the lease. It takes time to implement and then see the results. New leases that have it already are going to cost more due to the management in place at the time of the lease. Some have the time and like the challenge while others like the immediate gratification and pay for it up front.

There are lots of places that are artificially inflating their carrying capacity by the use of supplemental feeding. To say it’s just a size issue alone in every situation is incorrect.

Lot of places were already over CC before they started supplemental feeding. They did not address the major issue before starting to feed. Heck most of the areas in Texas are over CC for their ever changing habitat.