| F&S Article; Plots v. Bait |
|
||
|
Date:21-Feb-12
|
Good article IMO in the February issue about the distinction between plots and bait. Four differences were outlined:
1. Better health is obtained by plots as baited deer are more likely to ingest the urine and feces of other deer-a suspected cause of CWD. Plots spread the deer around and they typically are consuming the top part of the plant which keeps them ingesting less soil.
2. Baiting changes deer behavior due to repeated visits by humans to the bait site to replenish the attractanct.
3. Hunter relations are improved as bait sites on public land along with "squatters rights" are unique to baiting as plots are done almost exclusively on private ground.
4. And the best, Habitat Stewardship- According to the article research conducted by Will Ricks of the University of GA shows "the abundance and diversity of nongame wildlife species was greater in and around food plots." Also mentioned that it is common for food plotters to end up finding other ways to improve the deer habitat-a normal evolution that takes place.
And no, I do not install habitat for profit any longer, just something I am very passionate about. Since there is a lot of debate how plots are not different than baits, (the debate is mentioned in the article) this should provide a better understanding of how they are different. I hope you will read the article. Thanks.
|
By:
jmiller
Date:21-Feb-12
|
Where I hunt in Northwestern WI baiting is very prevelant. The landowner has started food plots, with the largest being ~2 acres. There is no crops in the area, just natural forage. We have noticed more deer on his land, along with bigger body sizes in only 2 years of food plots. They definately are good for wildlife, especially in areas without other crops.
|
By:
guidermd
Date:21-Feb-12
|
i really don't see much difference. both are artificially installed by man, man tends to plots no different than bait sites, and plots certainly change deer patterns and behavior as well. i have both, plots and baits, not apposed to either, but don't see much difference. the article could be written as well with swapping the terms plots and baits throughout the article, and getting the same results.
as for non game species that are attracted to baits.........mr ricks hasn't seen the critters that come to my baits:) good article, thanks for sharing
|
By:
TMA1010
Date:21-Feb-12
|
I love food plots - I'm more excited about getting them in than turkey hunting in the spring. No question they are a benefit to the wildlife on our farm.
|
By:
LKH
Date:21-Feb-12
|
One of the adverse things not mentioned in baiting is the degradation of the surrounding area due to overgrazing near the bait site.
|
By:
keith
Date:21-Feb-12
|
Bait is bait. Plots are plots and sometimes bait.
Bait is always used to hunt over. If you place groceries for other reasons than to hunt over, it is not bait, it is a pile of groceries.
Plots are used for multiple reasons. If the prime purpose to plant it is to hunt over, it is bait. If the prime purpose to plant it is for habitat improvement, etc., it is not bait.
Those that oppose baiting should also oppose plots if the purpose to plant the plot is to hunt over it. If they do not, they are hypocritical.
|
By:
longhunter
Date:21-Feb-12
|
The article is really more of a commentary supporting food plots as it is a short, "one-pager". Depending on the area, we have automatic feeders out and food plots. I have to agree with guidermd in that both are not natural and that both are beneficial to wildlife. We like them both- plots and feeders.
|
By:
Nick Muche
Date:21-Feb-12
|
Wait for it....... Won't be long now... I give it 20 mins.
|
By:
guidermd
Date:21-Feb-12
|
keith,
well said, i like that perspective. habitat improvement might have a generic purpose, but if it is to be hunted over, it is basically bait. i hadn't looked at it that way before, very true.
|
By:
Oakie
Date:21-Feb-12
|
I've done food plots for 5 years and I'm going on year 4 with food stations (baits). Good bait/feed systems can be more beneficial than plots in that with the proper feed, you can offer a more rounded nutritional supplement including minerals that you can't get in a plot, as well as biting insect repellants. Feed stations can be left alone just as well as food plots, so they don't always have to be bait. Also, feed stations can be available regardless of weather or seasonal planting dates. And they aren't dependent upon rain, which in the area I live, makes summer plot hardiness almost nonexistent. But with feed, I can feed year 'round, and my deer will have available food for them no matter the weather conditions. The purpose is not to bait the deer for hunting specifically, but to improve their health and to shorten the time it takes for them to reach their maximum genetic potential, which serves many purposes, and not just my own.
Based upon my reading only the four points above, Will Ricks must have done some poor research about habitat diversity. It causes me to question anything he says because he seems predisposed negatively against feed/bait. I don't have the magazine issue so perhaps his definition of bait is different than what I consider feed/bait.
Around my feed stations, I have seen deer, turkey, quail, dove, as well as foxes, coyotes, racoons, opossum, skunks, crows, a myriad of various types of birds, squirrels, rabbits, mice, bugs, etc. and so on. Pretty much everything in my woods visits the feed at some point or another.
|
By:
Matt
Date:21-Feb-12
|
Splitting hairs IMO.
|
By:
KJC
Date:21-Feb-12
|
Food plots are just high cost, labor intensive bait stations.
|
Date:22-Feb-12
|
Nick,
Just planting seeds here. :)
I guess I have to agree on not much difference between a small hunting plot and a bait station, No argument here.
OTH a pastor friend and I hunted a four acre stand of milo 3 winters ago and watched exactly 40 deer feed on that milo at the same time during a winter storm for 2 nights in a row without any single animal ever offering a shot. We were in a ground blind that had been placed there 4 months earlier. A couple of deer had been taken earlier in the season on the approach routes to the plot, 2-300 yards away.
The most accurate statement in this article for me though is that plotters typically "evolve" into other habitat projects. Creating early succession growth through TSI or edge layering etc allows one to improve the habitat and walk away from it and the wildlife will benefit 10 years or more with no further work. That's a lot different than a bait station IMO.
I also agree that corn may attract a diversity of wildlife that might not be there otherwise, but not nearly as much as plots (invertabrates, reptiles, hummingbirds etc)and for only as long as the corn is replenished. Many use corn at times the wildlife will not benefit as they have migrated or are in hibernation.
FTR, I think there are times when spreading bait is absolutely necessary eg, low densities like the north woods or homogenous habitat like much of TX.
|
By:
guidermd
Date:22-Feb-12
|
you can include all your trace minerals in your crop/plants if you do it right. my neighbor plants high quality/high grade hay and sells it to high dollar horse farms all over the east coast. no need for trace mineral supplements for them, its in the hay.
the only difference between a plot and bait in my opinion is that bait doesn't have roots. beyond that, its basically a feeding area created by man for a specific species of wildlife that they are hunting. attracting many other species of wildlife is a by product of the plot/bait.
|
By:
Nick Muche
Date:22-Feb-12
|
So what are the corn, milo, bean and wheat fields planted by farmers that we hunt over? lmao... You guys crack me up sometimes... Thank you for the comic relief, I can always use a little :)
|
Date:22-Feb-12
|
You don't need bait to kill deer in the northwoods with low densities.
|
By:
12yards
Date:22-Feb-12
|
I hate baiting. I've done it in an area where it was a slam dunk and decided I would never do it again. That said, the only true difference really between the two is one is much bigger than the other. Now that is a significant difference no doubt, but the reason for both are the same, to draw deer in for a shot.
Also, I hunt mostly public land in MN. No baiting is allowed. However, folks who have planted food plots around the perimeter of the land I hunt have definitely made hunting more difficult for me as they have drawn most of the deer to their private land via food plots.
So both really cause issues about effecting natural deer patterns and "squatter's rights". I don't really like either, but if one were legal w/o the other, I would definitely take food plots over baiting. Didn't like how baiting changed the hunting culture where I took part in it.
|
By:
keith
Date:22-Feb-12
|
"You don't need bait to kill deer in the northwoods with low densities." Mike, I agree 100%.
"So what are the corn, milo, bean and wheat fields planted by farmers that we hunt over?" I've never met a farmer that planted crops for the purpose of hunting over.
|
Date:22-Feb-12
|
I do NOT bait now, but did for 3 does I harvested more than a decade ago. Given the access I have to quality habitat, I do not think it is ethical for me to bait. I was trying not to judge others who may disagree with my position.
Mike, I really like your attitude! Having hunted in the UP of MI more than 20 years ago, without success, you are a much better hunter than I am. I would also hunt there today bait free as well, but only because I can feed myself by purchasing groceries, if not, all bets would be off:)
|
By:
Sapcut
Date:22-Feb-12
|
A food plot or farmed field is a habitat 12 months a year. From seed bed preparation, planting, to disking under and on and on. It is a habitat that deer use all year.
It is pretty ridiculous to compare that to pouring out a bag of corn.
Both are an attractant but only one is bait.
|
By:
TD
Date:22-Feb-12
|
They both have the same intended purpose. Deer.
That there may be some collateral benefit to a plot is beside the point IMO. It's like saying squirrels or birds do better that live near a bait site.
If opium poppies was the worlds greatest attractant, there would be fields of poppies.
That a person worked harder on one than what would be required on another is also beside the point. Like somehow brewing your own beer is morally superior to buying it at the store. I can see the "labor of love" thing, kind of like gardening I guess. But that is between you and you, as far as it goes. Nobody else.
For the record, I have no objection to either, never have hunted a food plot and have only hunted bears over bait. But I have no issues with anyone using either or both. Only the when the moral superiority card is played, kind of like trad and compounds.
I mean geez, I hear some folks even hunt out of trees.... =D
|
By:
Matt
Date:22-Feb-12
|
"A food plot or farmed field is a habitat 12 months a year. From seed bed preparation, planting, to disking under and on and on. It is a habitat that deer use all year.
It is pretty ridiculous to compare that to pouring out a bag of corn."
How about comparing a food plot to a feeder that is run 365 days a year?
I won't argue they are the same, but the "how" and "why" are so similar I find it curious that folks attempt to draw vast distinctions over such similar practices.
|
By:
Pat Lefemine
Date:22-Feb-12
|
We planted 6 plots on my 300 acres last year. We killed 3 deer. None on plots even though we hunted the plots often.
I hunted 2 hours over bait last year. I killed a doe on that hunt and had 5 in range.
There is no similarity.
Also. My turnip plots are still being hammered and its almost march.
This is a ridiculous argument.
Pat
|
By:
Sage Buffalo
Date:22-Feb-12
|
+1 Okie.
|
By:
lawdy
Date:22-Feb-12
|
I hunt a low density area, one deer per square mile, and we have huge forests to hunt. Baiting is becoming popular up here in Northern N.H. among the younger hunters, especially after the rut when the bucks are desperate for food. Us older guys grew up when baiting was illegal so we became trackers and still hunters. A good tracker with 3-6 inches of fresh snow is deadly if he can take a good track early in the day. I take a track and go until dark. Alot of times I end up 5 or 6 miles from my pickup. Using a longbow is hard, but I see at least 6 big bucks a season, most of them over 200 pounds. I realize that food plots and baiting are probably more productive, but up here you could sit for a month and probably only see a couple of does. My hat is off to anyone who can sit in a tree stand all day. I have to see what is over the next ridge.
|
By:
guidermd
Date:23-Feb-12
|
my deer is better than your deer because its a plot deer and not a bait deer. i worked harder for my plots than you did for your baits.
also, you don't need baits to kill deer anywhere. you don't need sights either, nor a treestand, nor scent loc, but doesn't mean we can't use them if we want too.
don't forget, my deer is better than your deer because i earned it in a better way. just kill the damn thing is that's what you are out there to do. geeesh.......
|
Date:23-Feb-12
|
For me habitat management is not about deer exclusively, or even mainly. I do see habitat management as part of the evolutionary process of conservation.
Here is why I am convinced habitat management (which food plots are only part of, (a small part!) is totally different than bait, and again I am not against the legal use of bait.
In early 2007 Robin and I purchased our 120 acre farm in MO. It has a two acre pond, and the rest was evenly split between hay field (fescue, K31) and mature timber. Robin actually only wanted the farm to make me happy (great wife!), it was not her dream.
In April of that first year I took her there for the first time. It is a secluded property at the end of a dead end road. I took her into the middle of the farm and we just stood there. After a few minutes she mentioned how quiet it was. I responded by saying "isn't it great?". Her response was no, that it was void of any wildlife unlike the 3 acres we lived on in KS that was completely full of bird noises because of her vast gardens and my "sanctuary". I realized she was correct.
Fast forward 5 years of intensive TSI, edge layering, all fescue pastures replaced by WSNG with some food plots used as burn barriers with only 1 large destination plot of 4 acres, regular rotational burning etc. Our farm is very noisy today. It is impossible to walk the property and not see wildlife. Snakes, toads, lizards, hawks, 1 eagle, river otters, song birds that I can not even identify, grey and red foxes, yotes, scores of rabbits and rodents, deer, turkey, quail, hummingbirds, butterflies and on and on.
I wish each of you the opportunity to see the transformation that takes place. Only this will convince you that baiting and habitat management are totally different. Remember, one of the main points of the article is that plots lead to other habitat management. Out of all of the things we do, plots would be IMO the least effective per dollar spent. I am convinced that creating native browse through encouraging early succession growth works best.
There is no superior attitude here. My only goal is to encourage more habitat management. It is good for the wildlife and good for hunters' image. Thanks.
|
Date:23-Feb-12
|
I started a thread with the following words a couple of weeks ago, and it was deleted for some reason. We have some passionate debates about hunting traditions being lost and life changing for the worse since the days of our grand dads. One of the things this article could have pointed out IMO is that habitat management also allows hunters to reconnect to the land and participate in some of the same traditions and share some of the same emotions of those born before us...
Old people, and by that I mean at least 1 year older than I am, are fond of saying that ‘wait long enough and history will repeat itself-that life circles back’. Now that I am comfortably up in my middle years, I am starting to see the wisdom in such a perspective.
We have all read the obituaries on hunting-that urbanization and a lack of respect for tradition is slowly strangling our passion. Well, those obits are a wee bit premature and about as accurate as the local weather forecast or an economist’s predictions.
Urbanization has certainly caused us some headaches. But, the pain is not from a lack of hunting opportunities for the majority, which is just a symptom of the real problem. Most of us have lost our connection to the land itself, and hence everything that goes along with it-including hunting.
And all the while we are lamenting the old days, here comes a new generation of weekend warriors who are embracing the past. They trailer 40-60 horses out to their hobby farms or leased property on Saturday, away from the concrete jungles. Upon arrival at destination they turn the key and create a noise much sweeter than any soccer field complex ever emitted. Their vocabulary has been immensely expanded with words like ‘3 point equipment’ ‘PTO horsepower’, ‘no-till drills’ etc. And they break dirt, plant things and have the same joy and heart break our forefathers had. They cuss the gods for lack of rain, and then drink a cold one thankfully realizing their next meal does not depend on something they can’t control.
They look knowingly at their first clover plot and realize it is on par with anything Picasso ever painted. The smell of #2 diesel is better than any Channel #7 they ever purchased for their significant others. They drive 2 hours plus just to be able to hear themselves think, but mostly to re-connect to something they knew they had neglected, even though they are not sure what it is.
Yes, be proud you practitioners of the noble cause of conservation. Know the dirt under your nails is your dirt. Your sweat will water your fields. Understand that if the Mayans are right, that next year you will have some newly acquired and useful knowledge about living off the land. You will survive because you took the time to learn an ancient skill.
We came from the land and it is fitting that the pursuit of hunting is taking us back to our roots.
|
By:
Charlie Rehor
Date:23-Feb-12
|
Vote in November! It's really important this time!!
|
By:
lawdy
Date:23-Feb-12
|
This topic really brings out the emotions in people. As I said in a previous post, I live in a wilderness area. We have alot of Federal land where baiting is illegal and in order to bait on paper company land it will cost you over $100. Most baiting is done on private land where a landowner doesn't need a state permit. That leaves several hundred thousand acres to us roamers. I haven't met another hunter in the woods up here in these mountains in 5 years. Besides that, our big bucks won't come in to a bait until dark. Most of our bucks that go over 200 pounds are shot by still hunters and trackers. At almost 70 I don't have to kill anymore, but I sure have to hunt. My son brings me 3 deer a year from Conn. so it's not like I am hurting for venison, and I can hunt the way I like to. Besides that, up here we have a hard enough time keeping food on our own tables, especially living on Social Security and working part-time.
|
By:
Russ Koon
Date:23-Feb-12
|
I think other factors that haven't been included in the discussion so far is the changing land use situation in most areas and the aging hunter population.
As urban and suburban sprawl has gradually enlarged the areas occupied by homes, shopping malls, graveyards and golf courses, and more and more people have escaped their own suburban lawns to that place in the country they always wanted with a few acres for the kids/grandkids to ride their pony or their four-wheelers, our available acreage has become increasingly fragmented and has shrunk in total acreage.
When I was a kid on the farm I could hunt our little 33-acre farm that put a lot of groceries on the family table but didn't produce anything as cash crops for sale, and I could walk on in most any direction until I was tuckered out without much worry about going onto land where I wasn't welcome.
Now, fifty years later, I live about fifteen miles from that farm, and have fifty acres of private land on which I share the hunting with three others who also have permission and a few who don't care about getting it.
I suppose there are a few small clearings where we could share food plots, but the farm fields surrounding the acreage supply the groceries in sufficient quantities most of the summer. I think we could draw more deer from the surrounding cover on acreage unavailable to hunting to bait stations and satisfy our personal desires for an opportunity to take a deer or two for table without harming the resource or the herd health in any way.
The younger hunters will still go walk miles on the public lands or will pay to participate on leased lands while chasing big antlers. Many of us older guys now would just like to satisfy a much less strenuous pursuit of a couple deer for the freezer without the need to purchase membership in a lease to even see a doe.
Lots of hunters who used to wear out hunting boots in a couple years time are now simply unable to put in those miles, or will pay a much higher price in pain and risk of serious trouble if they do, and a good percentage of us are milking the pension checks and SS income and can no longer even consider some of our earlier options.
Baiting can open up some additional opportunities to a group of us in one or more of the above situations on properties unsuitable for plots. Many such properties are in areas where the social acceptance of deer is at a lower level, too. The DNR's have been seeking ways for us to take more of them while fighting the resistance of the same people who complain of the deer eating their ornamental plantings and the car-deer collisions to having Bambi shot in their back yard.
Seems to me like another legitimate tool in management that could and should be utilized in appropriate situations. I doubt that the appeal would be as great for those in less approprite circumstances who still have the ability and testosterone to chase the big racks that they think live in the deepest forest on the highest mountains.
Better management of the deer in our increasingly crowded world, and a few more old hunters who could actually be sitting in a blind or a tree stand overlooking a bait station within reasonable walking distance to their vehicle, rather than sitting in the golf cart up at the gold tees watching the deer crossing the fairway on the seventh hole and whining like an aging beagle on the porch watching a rabbit crossing the lawn.
|
By:
Russ Koon
Date:23-Feb-12
|
|
By:
Oakie
Date:23-Feb-12
|
Bottom line is that there are too many variables for each hunter to really make this an open/shut case.
Pat talked about how his turnip patch is still getting hit. I planted a plot of turnips one year and they were eaten to dead before the plot even matured and formed turnips and way before any first frost made them 'palatable'. Variables that caused mine to fail: deer numbers, alternate available food sources, region of the country, funds for additional plots, etc. and so on.
I hunt Missouri, Kansas and Iowa, as well as Oklahoma. The various land sections I hunt in the Midwest have absolutely no need for either plot or bait. There is not a single parcel that is not within a quarter mile of massive crop fields. People often ask me if I hunt over bait in the Midwest and I say, "Hell yes! Acres and acres of it!" Why bait? Why plant plots? Those are the midwest variables for me. But many in the midwest still choose to bait/plot. They have their needs and reasons. And if I OWNED land in the midwest, who's to say I might not do something entirely different?
In Oklahoma, I lease land to hunt which is on a cattle farm. There are enough cattle there that the natural browse is pretty well hammered in a drought year like last year. The land is not suitable to planting, although it can be done. But to have a plot, you'd have to fence it. And to have a plot in cattle country that will last past late October, you'd have to plant acres and acres to keep the deer from hammering it. And then it would be dead/dormant by July anyway because of the heat. This is unacceptable for MY needs because I want nutrition in their bodies when they're growing antlers and I don't care about hunting over it.
There have been versions of more drought tolerant seeds that I have also tried. The deer wouldn't hardly eat them. Also, hardy forage that would possibly live, would not give nearly the amount of effective nutrition during peak antler growing months, as a simple protein feed station would.
I took these variables into consideration and looked at my success, or lack thereof with plots over several years, and considered: would I like to drive fence posts for a 5 acre plot, then spend a few years digging up rocks and killing weeds, planting, then hoping mother nature won't kill my work? Or do I put up a gravity feeder and fill it with protein feed and put a small fence around it? Another example of why a feeder is more effective than a plot here is that when there is no drought, or the acorns are dropping, the deer only hit the feed as an additional source, and my costs go down. Still, when there is no natural food, I don't have to worry about the deer suffering. There is no need for recovery after a drought year... except for my pocket book. And that's a variable I have to live with.
Many people think the only bait in the world is corn, too. Just ignorant and short sighted. You wouldn't believe all the people I talk to that put corn out during the hunting season and then quit as soon as January cold hits... because season is over. I've shown people photos of up to 12 deer on a gravity protein feeder and had them tell me, "Well don't you think it would be better to have a broadcast corn feeder right there instead?"
It's ridiculous to say that one method is better than another, because to do so is too general for hunters across a vast and sharply different country. Go plant a food plot in the desert. Good luck. Different things work better in different locations. Provided it's legal, then to each his own.
|
By:
guidermd
Date:23-Feb-12
|
i'm not against one or the other, but habitat management is alot different than planting clover. if you take a clover plot alot further, yeah, that can help improve things no doubt.
your property sounds nice, lots of critters around, but did you really think it was void of critters before all the additional work?
its a good article, definately skewed to be about plots though. were there any clover ads with the article?
|
By:
Oakie
Date:23-Feb-12
|
Unfortunately, I don't keep many photos of the non-game animals that hit my feeders...
|
By:
Oakie
Date:23-Feb-12
|
Last post was meant to have this photo:
|
By:
Oakie
Date:23-Feb-12
|
I've had people say, you can't grow plots on rocks, and I did this to show them you could:
|
By:
Oakie
Date:23-Feb-12
|
But they got the last laugh because by June, that plot with it's 10" growth, was dead due to no rain.
|
By:
Oakie
Date:23-Feb-12
|
This is the first plot I ever planted. Was planted in the fall, then it came up with a flourish in the spring and I thought I'd struck gold. I went back in July and it was 3 feet high in grass. Since I didn't have farm equipment, I mowed an acre with a push mower over the course of several days. Then inside of a week it was dead because mowing the grass exposed what little clover was left, to the sun, which baked it.
So for me, high protein plots in my area of Oklahoma are currently a no-go. But if I lived in North Central OK... That might change with a tractor. All variables.
|
By:
Bowfreak
Date:23-Feb-12
|
I have a 1/4 acre foodplot close to my house. I have hunted that plot a total a total of 5 times in 2 years. I killed 3 deer in those 5 hunts. In the past 2 uears i probably hunted 6-8 times over bait. I kiled one deer. My plot is one of the easiest places to kill a deer that i have ever hunted for the first few weeks in september.
|
By:
guidermd
Date:24-Feb-12
|
hey oakie,
how much is that rock clover you are planting? bring us in on the secret will ya!! nice pics
|
By:
Oakie
Date:24-Feb-12
|
Guidermd,
Thanks, but again I have to point out that it was a colossal waste.
The pictures of the clover on rock are a Whitetail Institute sample pack that had an eighth acre planting of their Imperial Clover.
No lime, no tilling, not work at all. I hand broadcast the seed over the top of the rocks right before a rain in April. It continued to flourish through spring rains and died in mid-June with the first 90+ degree days.
|
By:
Will
Date:24-Feb-12
|
Ill say Lawdy's deer is better than any plot or bait deer. I admit that's going to sound obnoxious. But hunting super low density big woods with tough terrain and tracking is just dang hard. Brutal hard. Brutal.
Like him I live where baiting is illegal, I grew up with that being the case so doing it just does not feel fun to me or intriguing. I'm not really against or for it, it just does not appeal to me becuase of what I've experienced.
Plots do seem like they create intangible habitat improvements like edges, forage variability (if someone put a plot in my minimally farmed big woods area, it would create soft browse for the animals, an edge which likely would thicken with shrubby growth and that shrubby growth would supply additional browse. So beyond being a "bait" per se, it directly improves habitat while bait is just concentrated processed food.
That lead's me to believe that although both may serve a purpose that's noble: improving food for the deer and other animals... Plots seem to do more for the environment of those animals overall. They seem to have more positives than negatives to me.
|
By:
Tombow
Date:24-Feb-12
|
So if I plant some oak trees, apple trees, beech, or any other mast tree is it bait or a food plot??? :)
|
By:
nshunter
Date:24-Feb-12
|
Baiting is shopping......what ever happened to scouting, learning your area and hunting. And yes, I hunt the "big woods". You can't pattern wilderness whitetail bucks. Just learn how to hunt!!
|
By:
12yards
Date:24-Feb-12
|
Tombow, it is neither bait nor food plot. It is planting mast/fruit trees.
|
By:
guidermd
Date:24-Feb-12
|
last year after doing a job, a couple weeks later i noticed grass and clover growing in the back of my truck. leftover seed seems to have taken root in some trash, soil and leaves in my truck and did real well, so i tranplanted it at the food plot. i also noticed grass growing on the bottom jamb of my passenger door when i opened it.........maybe my truck needs a cleaning?
|
By:
lawdy
Date:24-Feb-12
|
I found my buck for this fall the other day while running my beagle. Our deer up here yard up but this big boy decided to stay up in the mountains for the winter. He is smart, no coyotes to harass him because they follow the rest of the deer to the feeding yards and the area was logged several years ago so feed is no problem. I saw him walk up a knoll while I watched from another. I will spend this summer checking on him and seeing if I can figure him out. First snow next season he and I will go at it. Two old farts trying to outfox the other. I have an idea he will probably win but it will be fun.I found his run where he comes down to water so I may build a brush blind along it. Scouting is absolutely necessary up here to see deer where they are so scarce. Jim Zumbo from Outdoor life magazine came up here to hunt for a couple of weeks several years ago and never even saw a flag. I talked with him for a long time and he asked me "where the hell are the deer ." I told him where you are lucky enough to find them. You can walk for a couple of miles and never cut a track and then run into a couple of them. If you don't spend alot of time scouting, you will do alot of walking or sitting for nothing. It is a continuous process because our deer change their patterns with the seasons and seem to know when deer season begins. The old wives tale that a buck lives his entire lifespan in a square mile doesn't apply up here. Our deer have been radio-collared and some have traveled as far as 22 miles to yard up.
|
By:
Grounblind
Date:25-Feb-12
|
"Forget the hunt, just bait" ©
|
By:
nearcher
Date:25-Feb-12
|
Few years ago I asked a farmer to cash rent me a small section of his farm (bout 2 acres)that he had always had problems getting good yield crop, so that I could start a food plot, to this I got big NO saying I let you hunt so you can reduce the number of deers in my properties that damage my crops, I don't want you to "ATTRACT" more in. I'm not against either but they do serve for the same purpose.
|
By:
Waterlooboy
Date:25-Feb-12
|
I think the differences are obvious. Even if the desired goal is the same.
Planting a plot requires killing off the weeds, and sweetening the soil. Regardless of the intended purpose, the outcome is that you are removing undesirable, sometimes invasive species, and replacing them with healthy alternatives that should be better for the environment.
Setting out a feeder does nothing more than temporarily add food to the area. The surrounding invasive species are left to thrive and the soil is not improved. Once the feeder is removed any benefits go with it.
|
By:
guidermd
Date:25-Feb-12
|
what exactly is undesireable about natural growth on a forest floor? what's is so good about killing of "weeds".......? those weeds are food for wildlife. they aren't weeds just cuz you can't identify them. "surrounding invasive" species are left to thrive..............? care to name any of those "invasive" species? really reaching on that comment. take some plant tax classes to understand. it ain't healthy for the woods just because it came out of a bag. all due respect, but that way of thinking doesn't justify anything you just said.
this isn't an anti plot comment, but what you said is baseless.
|
By:
Waterlooboy
Date:25-Feb-12
|
Wow? Seriously? No offense but just because YOU say my comment was baseless doesn't mean anything. What I said was spot on.
We cleared a section this past season that had never been planted before. The section was so overgrown with multiflora rose it was nearly impenetrable. The only advantage the multiflora rose provided deer and other wildlife was cover. And to that point its benefits were negligible.
Removing garlic mustard and non native invasive grasses and replacing them with native prairie grasses and switchgrass is extremely beneficial to the environment.
Heres a link to some of the main invasive plant species found in my home state of MI.
|
By:
guidermd
Date:25-Feb-12
|
no harm intended, but anyone can come up with a few weed names after doing some searching. you really have some serious plant invasion going on there. good job.
|
By:
TD
Date:25-Feb-12
|
Huh, I never thought clover and turnips and such were native species?
It's one thing doing a reclamation ala the conservancy and wetlands projects and such. I know several land owners doing just that for tax purposes and they are great projects IMO.
Those projects and food plots are apples and oranges. Not even related. Both in purpose and practice.
Again, if opium poppies or star thistle were the best deer attractants there would be fields of them.... That that there may be collateral benefits to the plot is just that for the most part, collateral.
Sure won't argue on the aesthetics of a plot over bait. Bait is hands down ugly. And I'm one of those guys who think a well maintained golf course is beautiful.
Come to think of it I've hunted over a few golf courses too. I would have no problem hunting over baits nor plots.
|
Date:27-Feb-12
|
I believe his point was that when Europeans arrived here they eliminated much ofthe prairie grasses in favor of cool season grasses brought over and used for live stock purposes. Reversing some of these effects by restoring WSNG is very beneficial and ecologically sound. And a typical evolutionary step of a plotter, but not a baiter:)
|
By:
Sage Buffalo
Date:27-Feb-12
|
I guess I have done enough of both to not care. Even being an AVID fly-fishermen I will still use lures, bait and dynomite.
I guess once I realized purists were people who didn't like vareity in life I left that thinking behind.
I don't mind if someone only wants to use the purist form but don't push the way I like to do things out because you don't agree.
|
By:
guidermd
Date:27-Feb-12
|
how long does a plant or animal have to be in an area to recognize it can be "native", or doesn't it? ringneck pheasants are not native, sika deer are not native, and neither are numerous fish. if a plant was native in another area, why is is noxious in other areas. i can understand if it grow wild and out of control, and eventually destroys existing plants. but that's mot always the case. native vs natural could be argued too. yup, bait sites are unnatural, maybe even ugly too. but what is so natural about a plot int he middle of the woods, other than for human asthetics? i doubt many folks make food plots for the purpose of erradicating non native species........they build them for hunting deer. years ago no one planted crops for deer, they simply hunted farms. just sayin....
|
By:
Oakie
Date:27-Feb-12
|
Sage Buffalo,
Well said.
I once spoke with a man that's been in the general hunting business for 40 years, working with upland bird hunters, waterfowl hunters and deer hunters. He said to me, "Deer hunters are easily the biggest jerks in hunting."
A sad, but telling commentary. There are way too many snobs in deer hunting.
|
By:
Waterlooboy
Date:27-Feb-12
|
So I'm a "snob" because I stated a few facts?
My apologies if I offended anyone. Just bare in mind being a snob goes both ways.
|
Date:28-Feb-12
|
All,
No offense is meant and I hope I am not perceived as a snob hunter with regards to methodology. It is a free country and I 100% support everyone making their own legal choice. I also believe the best choices are made when we have all of the information.
I believe both sides make excellent points here, and I will be watching the new thread asking who baits to view the responses there.
For those that do not believe there is a difference, honestly, I am at a loss to understand that. How about the scientist type add some more information on this. It is my understanding that digestive tracts require bacteria to function, and that live plants provide the proper bacteria whereas corn alone will not do this. Is that correct?
|
By:
Sage Buffalo
Date:28-Feb-12
|
It's not that there isn't a difference but those differences are only important to those individuals who care.
In the end - dead is dead - as long as it's legal.
I know guys who won't hunt deer over bait but will hunt bear over bait. How does that make sense?
There are a lot of other examples that we use in life to convince ourselves that one form we think is wrong but in another environment is ok.
I think you are splitting hairs if you think there is a BIG difference shooting a deer in a field or over bait. In a stand or in a ground blind. Etc.
|
Date:28-Feb-12
|
Sage,
I'm just not communicating well today, my apology. You are probably correct in that there is not much of a difference when "shooting" a deer. I encourage habitat management for the rest of the time-when we are not shooting anything. Compare baiting versus plotting during this time and I think most would see a difference.
Thanks.
|
By:
12yards
Date:28-Feb-12
|
Sage, I hear what you are saying. Bear baiting and deer baiting, what is the difference? Well, to be honest, I killed a bear over bait and didn't really feel like I accomplished a whole heck of a lot. But, I don't know if there is a good other way to kill one, at least in northern forest areas. They may become extremely over abundant and at nuisance levels if baiting were outlawed. With deer, there are many other ways to kill one outside baiting. And MN is a prime example that deer populations can be controlled without baiting.
|
By:
guidermd
Date:28-Feb-12
|
sage,
you just saved me the trouble of having to type it all out. i agree.
|
By:
Oakie
Date:28-Feb-12
|
Habitat for Wildlife,
"Compare baiting versus plotting during this time and I think most would see a difference."
I absolutely see a difference, but it's skewed toward feed (not just corn), not plots.
|
Date:01-Mar-12
|
Oakie,
Your awesome PM received and response sent. Thank you!
|
By:
Oakie
Date:09-Jun-12
|
For me this was too interesting to pass up. So I pulled this post back up due to relevance.
A few days ago, the rancher I hunt on was talking about plans for the hunting this season. We talked some about possibly doing a food plot to hold turkey better, but ultimately agreed it was not worth it.
Then he said, "People that plant food plots are really only interested in baiting deer, not growing them."
I chuckled and he looked at me funny. I just said that reminds me of some arguments I've been in.
Today, I was looking at videos on the Bowsite and was happily perusing Pat's videos on plots. I got to the one of soy beans and peas and noticed that Pat called it a failure or disappointment of some sort. His reason was that it was not quite season, September I think, and the plot was already grazed out, that it would not do any good for hunting season, or something to that effect.
With all due respect, I find it interesting that the plot was deemed a fail because it would not be drawing deer during hunting season. I personally believe that plot was an amazing success, feeding deer through the antler growing summer months, giving them nutrition for increased antler growth. Now Pat just has to go hunt the deer that he fattened up.
I find it interesting that food plots seem to be a failure if they're not around to draw deer during hunting season, which would seem to be the definition of luring or baiting. This example seems to further strengthen the point that the differences between the two (plots v. Bait) are far less than many are willing to admit.
|
Date:09-Jun-12
|
Bait sites are placing our deer herds at great risk due to makeing them susceptable to disease transmition. Hunting baitning deer changes their behavior drastically. Hunting over food plots does not. IMHO food plots are habitat improvement and baiting is not, and given the potential drawbacks and how it changes natural behavior should be outlawed for grazing ruminents.
|
By:
slim
Date:09-Jun-12
|
Gee I wonder how the deer/ wildlife got by before food plots.. Food plots are live bait. People started growing food plots to attract more wildlife to there private properties. In my opinion food plots should be outlawed just the same as bait. Some how food plots got through a loop hole. If food plots were as you say " habitat improvement" then how come state DEC doesn't plant them on state hunting land? I can't imagine how people successfully hunted deer 50 - 100 years ago without the aid of food plots.. Deer have been on this planet for thousands of years so please stop trying to convince people that your food plots are helping sustain their existence. You plant food plots to help grow bigger racks and attract and hold them on your land PERIOD
|
Date:10-Jun-12
|
"then how come state DEC doesn't plant them on state hunting land?"
The state does plant plots on land they manage in both KS and MO where I hunt.
"I can't imagine how people successfully hunted deer 50 - 100 years ago without the aid of food plots"
Maybe they used fire and ran them off a cliff like buffalo? Or maybe there were no deer to hunt 50 years ago?
"You plant food plots to help grow bigger racks and attract and hold them on your land PERIOD"
Absolutely not! In fact, this is the old tired argument we hear most often from people who do not fully appreciate/understand conservation. Typically they are the ones who did not make the sacrifices necessary to control land either through buying or leasing. Go to the KS forums and you will read similar thoughts by those opposed to all of the changes taking place in that state. Yet, when they talk of conservation they limit their discussion to deer and measurements. Go to the QDMA forums and deerbuilder and read what those actually practicing habitat improvements talk about-the diversity of wildlife, which is what true conservation and the NA model is all about.
I will admit that complete habitat management (not just food plots) will help encourage a more diverse wildlife to one's property, and in some cases help retain it there. Habitat management is a normal human reaction for those who want to help reduce the impact of human expansion into wild places and government wildlife regulations that may be driven more by monetary considerations than biological ones. Habitat managers are helping to replace some of the habitat destroyed by our constant expansion into outer areas. Yes, I do admit that it helps to protect the quality of the hunting experience.
Food plots are just a small portion of habitat management. Encouraging native browse that is beneficial is much more important IMO for both food and cover.
|
By:
W
Date:10-Jun-12
|
As for as archery goes, bait gives you a much better chance at killing because they are coming to one specific spot. Other than that, a food plot is just more pleasing to the eye.
|
By:
Lon M
Date:10-Jun-12
|
Sage buffalo said "I guess once I realized purists were people who didn't like vareity in life I left that thinking behind.
I don't mind if someone only wants to use the purist form but don't push the way I like to do things out because you don't agree." I agree, I think this should be true in all scenarios;)lol
|
By:
Oakie
Date:10-Jun-12
|
All I want to know is, if you were unable to hunt over a food plot, would you still plant it?
If that question could be answered honestly, then I think this debate would be put to rest.
|
By:
PAOH
Date:10-Jun-12
|
Plus 1 for Oakie
|
Date:10-Jun-12
|
Oakie,
That is easy, so please end the debate-YES I WOULD PLANT IT EVEN IF I COULD NOT HUNT AT ALL!!!!! I bet a lot of habitat managers would say the same thing-probably most. How many of us contribute to DU or RMEF and never have the ability to hunt any of their improved habitats? It's about conservation, and not just about horns and deer.
Unlike a pile, planting is a much bigger risk. I just came back from our farm. Due to drought we lost 3 acres of beans/corn-all dead. Last fall we lost 3 acres of clover/cereal grain due to no moisture. However, birds go through the soil for insects and turkeys are dusting in it daily. The wildlife still benefits so I am OK with what is happening.
When so many are starting to question some conservation organizations and how their money is spent so they switch gears and start to do things on their own-this is a normal reaction. Please visit some of the sites mentioned and actually read what is going on. The education as one participates in habitat management makes it worthwhile by itself.
With so much habitat destroyed (less than 2-3% of native prairie is still with us) and so much more being fragmented by man's activities, private small size habitat improvements will continue to play an increasing role in conservation. The Progressives in my home state who feel the need to question our motivations and preach how greed is destoying hunting need to start putting as much energy into actual conservation if they really want to make a difference as they do in preaching to everyone who has a different view than theirs.
My apologies for my passion flowing here, but after realizing how much it cost to actually have a crop fail places an entirely new perspective on things. I spent the 2 hour drive home contemplating what to plant in those fields this fall and then make sure I have a solid game plan for proper rotation of my annuals/perennials to continue assiting the wildlife and helping increase diversity as well as carrying capacity. My last thought was not about killing anything but rather making sure the weather did not trip up my rotations enough to change the balance for the wildlife.
|
By:
gobbler
Date:10-Jun-12
|
I have 12 plots scattered over my 560 acres. I have 14 feeders scattered over the land also. The last 8-10 years I've hunted over 1 feeder and in 2 plots. I do it to benefit the game overall.
So yes, I do put out plots and feeders that never get hunted.
|
Date:10-Jun-12
|
Here's what most of my plots consist of, burn barriers. Notice the edge layering on the left side of this picture and the WSNG on the right side. The plots are just to keep the fire out of the woods as we burn 1/3 of the native grass each year on a rotational basis. Obviously there is much more native browse and we turn the barriers into plots to make the most of our property for the wildlife. Honestly, this is a lot of time and money and if it was only about deer hunting, we would not do it!
|
By:
Thornton
Date:10-Jun-12
|
I tried a feeder the first year I bought my farm. I had a few bucks visit it during the rut and a bunch of coons that raided twice daily and that was it. My food plots have been attracting deer by the dozens the last 2 seasons. First year it was wheat, clover, and turnips. Last year it was the soybean fields that brought almost 20 deer out every eve. This pic is 5 of 18 that cam out that particular day.
|
By:
Oakie
Date:10-Jun-12
|
Habitat, I have no doubt you are one who does, as I am one who doesn't hunt some feeders. I am 99% positive you and I are in the minority on both sides.
|
By:
IaHawkeye
Date:12-Jun-12
|
One big difference is that baiting is illegal in many states, while I doubt there are any states that prohibit food plots. Perhaps the Fish & Game depts have reasons. Personally, I don't do either, and wouldn't if I could. I prefer hunting over shooting.
|
By:
NYRON
Date:12-Jun-12
|
First, allow me to appolgize for the exceptionally long post. Below is the text from a 2010 article that I published in Bow and Arrow Hunting magazine. I don't remember the exact issue, but I'm sure you can find it on the web.
I think it's relevant to this topic and will hopefully generate constructive discussion.
"The Great Bait Debate"
by Ron Rohrbaugh
Hunters are usually a pretty supportive bunch, but baiting is one of those divisive topics that will clear the proverbial “big tent” quicker than the after effects of your Uncle Frank’s venison chili! Attitudes about hunting over bait run the gamut from “it’s never acceptable” to “why would you hunt any other way.” As with most controversial subjects, arguments about baiting do not lend themselves to black and white thinking. It’s often a matter of perspective. Try this little exercise. At the same time, soak one hand in a bowl of ice water and the other in a bowl of very hot water. Now, simultaneously move your hands to a single bowl of water at room temperature. To one hand the new water feels warm to the other it feels cold. Your perception is a matter of your experiences and where you come from.
I’ve been on hunts in Florida and Texas where the sound of corn being whorled from an automatic feeder would bring hogs from the brush like fleas from a dead woodchuck’s back. Was this fair-chase hunting? I think so, but it certainly wasn’t very satisfying. This type of “Pavlov’s Dog” habituation to bait, simply short-cuts the most satisfying part of the hunt, which, for me, is learning a species local ecology and behavior to foster a successful stalk or set up that perfect ambush point. Baiting; however, doesn’t necessarily mean shooting fish in a barrel. I’ve been on baited bear hunts in Idaho and Canada that required just as much species knowledge and hunting finesse as many non-baited hunts. So, where does one draw the line? Is baiting okay for some species but not others? Is it okay for a given species in one region or habitat, but not another? Is it okay for one hunter, say a kid or older person, but not another? Let’s examine some issues and arguments about baiting. The intent isn’t to reach any conclusion, but rather to stimulate thought so that each hunter can draw their own conclusions.
Species “X” vs. Species “Y”
The acceptance of baiting is often related to the quarry being baited. For instance, some are perfectly fine with hunting feral hogs over an automatic corn feeder, but would consider the same practice for deer to be downright unethical. By the same token, many are okay with hunting bears over bait, but not other species. Why is this? I think it comes down to human perception and fundamental ecological differences among species. Like it or not, humans place differing values on each animal specie’s life. In our house, a lady bug crawling across the floor gets a careful lift to the outdoors, while a spider gets squashed. In the context of hunting, more value, and hence more scrutiny of hunting practices, is placed on a white-tailed deer than a feral hog. The value placed on each animal is different depending on your personal life experiences and culture. For those steeped in African hunting, the giraffe is often a sought after species, but for many North American hunters the giraffe is a “sacred cow” meant only for viewing, not hunting. For the most part, these value judgments have no basis in biology, but they do play a political role in shaping our views on acceptable hunting practices. A given species’ ecology; however, provides a science-based framework to determine which hunting methods will strike a balance between fair chase and a reasonable expectation of success.
Let’s compare white-tailed deer and black bears. Deer are herbivores with their food more or less evenly distributed across the landscape, but concentrated enough so that savvy hunters can pattern their movements to and from bedding and feeding sties. Furthermore, deer are social animals and with adequate resources can exist at very high densities. Bears, on the other hand, are omnivores. To find an adequate amount of varied food, ranging from grasses to carrion, individual bears range over an extensive area and feed opportunistically. In many cases this means gorging on an abundant but temporary food source, such as a dead elk or ripe blueberry patch, and then moving on to find the next meal. A bear’s home range commonly exceeds 5 square miles within which its movements might seem nearly random to even an experienced hunter. In some western regions, spot and stalk hunting for bears is an excellent strategy, but in most eastern areas with dense timber and little topography for long distance viewing, it’s not a useful method. When spot and stalk isn’t possible, the extremely low odds of a successful bear hunt are unacceptable for most bowhunters with limited time and resources. For many, the solution is baiting, which holds bears in the area and keeps them returning to the same spot for relatively short periods of time—a behavior that’s common to a bear’s typical “boom and bust” ecology. Region and Habitat
What role do region and habitat play in the acceptance of baiting? For an example let’s look at two popular deer hunting states. Texas and Pennsylvania rank near the top when it comes to both numbers of deer and hunters. Yet, the deer hunting culture and methods in these two states couldn’t be more different. In the Longhorn state, where there is precious little public land, the emphasis is on intensive management of massive private ranches. Within the confines of the law, this gives hunters some autonomy to do things in their own way with little impact to other hunters or neighboring landowners. Supplemental feeding, baiting to lure deer from thick brush, and even culling of genetically inferior bucks have all become common practice. In Pennsylvania, public land is abundant and with a little effort deer can be effectively hunted without bait in even the most heavily forested areas. In the Keystone state, deer management is practiced mostly at the state level and most hunting takes place on public land or small farms. The allowance of baiting would likely ignite conflicts among hunters on public land and start baiting wars on small parcels of private property. Differences in culture, land ownership, and habitat across a species’ range dictate whether baiting is an accepted and useful means of hunting in one place versus another. Having successfully hunted whitetails in 7 states over 30 years without bait, I have no desire to use bait for deer hunting. That said, I have never hunted deer in Texas and might find baiting there to be perfectly suitable. I see no reason to condemn another hunter’s approach without a full understanding of his circumstances.
The Food Source Comparison
I often hear deer hunters who are pro-baiting defend their practice by comparing it to hunting over a concentrated natural food source, such as a food plot, apple tree, or corn field. Sorry guys, but for me this line of reasoning falls flat and simply comes off as defensive. The hunter using bait has far more control of the situation than a hunter who is focused on a natural food source. Bait can be positioned to give the hunter every advantage when it comes to wind direction, shot angle and distance, and proximity to important habitat, such as bedding areas. Furthermore, when baiting the presence and amount of food is at the discretion of the hunter. That’s not so with natural food sources. When the acorns from the oak flat are gone, that’s it and when the corn has been cut, you’re done. I just don’t think the comparison between concentrated natural food and bait is legitimate. Hunting a cornfield is like trying to solve a Rubik’s Cube. Hunting a corn pile is more like paint by numbers. Don’t get me wrong, baiting can certainly be challenging, but it’s not the same as hunting a natural food source. Hunters who are challenged to justify the use of bait should focus on their specific situation and not make comparisons to other hunting methods.
Baiting Wars and Disease
The prolonged use of excessive bait can be bad for both hunters and wildlife. Introducing new food sources, such as large bait piles, into the landscape dramatically changes wildlife movement patterns, leaving adjoining landowners wondering why all of the game has disappeared. To compensate, the game-less landowner dumps a huge pile of bait and the war is on. Before long, bickering erupts, often resulting in a loss of hunting opportunity and satisfaction. I cannot tell you how many times I’ve heard bear hunting outfitters talk about sabotaging another outfitter’s or local hunter’s bait by lacing it with raw onions, which bears detest, or by leaving “Hansel and Gretel trails” from the competitor’s bait to their own. More importantly, baiting wars can lead to negative effects on wildlife behavior and habitat, and to disease transmission, especially among deer. Prolonged and excessive baiting causes bears to become habituated to human food and eventually humans, making them potentially dangerous in areas with high human populations. For deer, excessive amounts of bait create artificially high population densities, causing over browsing and increased deer-to-deer contact. As documented by several scientific studies (for example: O’Brien et al 2002 and Palmer et al 2004), this extra contact between individuals and with feeders leads to accelerated transmission of diseases, such as bovine tuberculosis and chronic wasting disease.
Natural vs. “Non-native” Bait
For some hunters and many (maybe most) non-hunters, baiting can be a bitter pill to swallow. One way to sweeten that pill is to use naturally occurring foods for bait. Functionally, there is little difference between a pile of apples and a drum of pastries--both serve to coax bears into range. But, there are differences in public perception and hunter satisfaction. Naturally occurring foods, such as acorns, locust pods, apples, plums, persimmons, pawpaws, and many others can be gathered and strategically placed for attracting hogs, deer, and bears. Hunting over natural bait seems, well, more natural and the process of gathering the foods and learning where to place them provides strong connections among the hunter, his quarry, and the natural world. Moving acorns or apples from one location to another to facilitate a hunting opportunity is less contrived than simply dumping a bag of corn. For hunters used to using bait, the differences might be subtle, but for non-hunters they are substantial. Imagine a hiker deep in a National Forest coming upon a pile of apples neatly covered with sticks versus a steel drum of 10-day old cheese Danishes chained to a tree! Furthermore, using natural food is likely better for wildlife health and less likely to create habituation to humans.
The Bottom Line
It seems to me as hunters and outfitters, we need to make sure a few of the mandatory boxes are checked each time we make the decision to use bait as part of our hunt.
Fair Chase: There is no universally accepted definition of fair chase, but I think most of us recognize what is not fair chase when we see it. If you are in doubt, ask yourself this question: Would my hunting mentor (hero) be proud of what I’m doing right now? If you have any question that what you are doing is not fair chase, then make a change. It’s the respectful thing to do for your quarry and yourself.
Public Perception: When using bait the door is wide open for criticism from anti-hunters and, more importantly, non-hunters who might not understand the ins and outs of baiting. When talking about baiting with non-hunters, or even other hunters, make sure to explain that although bait is being used to attract animals, paramount to any hunt is the rule of fair chase and a general respect for wildlife. Explain why bait is necessary given your quarry’s specific behavior or the presence of insurmountable habitat conditions.
Aesthetics: Part of showing respect for wildlife and habitat is aesthetics. The bad image associated with baiting is sometimes related to the lack of care shown at bait sites. I’ve see some bear bait sites that looked worse than the town dump, with old drums, five gallon buckets, and food containers strewn around and plastic bags hanging from the trees. Bait sites should be free from litter and look as natural as possible. This is especially important on public land or if hunts are going to be filmed. Perhaps I’m an extremist, but I don’t even like to see a drum or bucket at a bait site. If large drums or other containers are used, perhaps they should be painted to blend into the forest and screened with brush. The bears might not care about a tidy bait site, but I think that the public and most hunters do.
Summary For me, there is no simple line in the sand. I prefer non-baited hunts when it’s feasible; however, I am not opposed to baiting under the right circumstances. If I’m hunting over bait it has to be a “do it yourself” hunt or with an outfitter who permits me to get involved. I disdain hunts where I’m expected to sit and wait in a blind or treestand over a bait that someone else has set. I will only hunt with outfitters who give me the flexibility to set my own blinds and stands, and fully participate in the temporal and spatial strategies of baiting. So where does this leave us? If it’s legal, then it’s up to the hunter to decide the appropriate level of challenge they desire and what constitutes fair chase. I have my own lines, but I don’t pretend that one size fits all for every region, every habitat, every species, or every hunter. If your baited hunt is conducted in an ethical, fair-chase manner that is satisfying to you, and you behave in a way that reflects positively on the hunting community, then there is little left to debate…or is there? What is ethical? What is fair chase? These questions are why the Great Bait Debate rages on.
|
By:
Sagittarius
Date:12-Jun-12
|
..."IMHO food plots are habitat improvement and baiting is not, and given the potential drawbacks and how it changes natural behavior should be outlawed for grazing ruminents." ...
I cannot consider foodplots as baiting, nor would I consider my foodplots as habitat improvement. Like the plowed field above ... it might be a foodplot ... but it is certainly not improved deer habitat. ;-)
|
By:
IaHawkeye
Date:12-Jun-12
|
Ron, Well said!!!! I share your views and feelins!
|
By:
Todd1700
Date:12-Jun-12
|
Lets take these anti baiting talking points and expose them for the BS they are one by one.
1. Baiting is illegal because of the risk of disease transmission.
If feeders where causing rampant plagues among game animals there wouldn't be an animal left alive in the whole state of Texas. At least not one that eats corn. Besides, as I have said a dozen times when ever this subject comes up, if disease transmission was the real motivating force behind the baiting ban then why isn't it just flat out illegal to feed animals with feeders period? Do feeders only cause the spread of disease if you hunt over them? Cause that's all that's illegal in many places, hunting over them. You can sling 100 metric tons of corn a year on your place if you want. Just can't hunt near it. Seems like a deer would be at the same risk of disease whether it was January with a hunter nearby or July with no human within 10 miles.
2. Baiting is unethical.
Bull, then so is hunting over a green patch. In both cases it's bait artificially placed in a specific location to attract deer into gun or bow range.
3. But! BUT! green patches are more ethical cause they are harder to create and maintain.
Bull. In the first place anyone that thinks planting a green patch with a tractor is hard work must have spent a lifetime sitting on their @$$ at a pretty cushy job. And second, what difference does it make? Bait is bait no matter how much trouble you had putting it in place. If you hitched yourself to the plow and plowed the field; crawled through it planting each seed with a pair of tweezers and lived by it in a tent watering it daily with your spit; when it grows out of the ground and you sit over it with a weapon; you are hunting over bait. And lastly, maintaining a lot of feeders is way more trouble and expensive than green patches. They constantly need refilling. Corn and protein pellets are not cheap. They have to have batteries checked and recharged routinely. And they have to be repaired or replaced when they break down. Most people spend a few hours planting a green patch and then never touch it again all season. The really meticulous folks will hit it with some fertilizer one more time during season.
4. But! But! Green panutritiousmore nutricious.
Bull. First from an ethics standpoint what difference does that make. It's still bait. If a guy gets written up for hunting over a feeder can he fight the ticket on the grounds that it was lonutritiousreally nutricious bait. LOL! I don't think so. And second it's not even necessarily true that green nutritiouse more nutricious when you consider that you can load feeders with all kinds of pellets besides just corn. I know, I know, most people would just use corn. But most people who plant green patches don't use high dollar Biologic blends of 6 different plants either. Typically they plant rye grass or winter wheat which isn't exactly packed withvitaminsrals and vitamens either.
5. Green patches should be legal cause they last year round.
Bull. Again this has nothing to do with ethics. And furthermore they only last that long if you plant something that grows year round or a blend of seeds that will keep something sprouting at various times of the year. Most people don't. Nor do most continue to fertilize or tend their patches after season goes out.
It is also mystifying to me that you have people who think anyone that would hunt deer over a corn feeder are pond scum and yet will fly up to Canada and shoot a bear over a bait barrel. Or fly out to Wyoming and sit beside the only water hole for 30 miles waiting for an antelope's thirst to overcome his fear of the Double Bull blind he's in. Or more specific to the case at hand they will scramble desperately to dig up some reason why sitting over a 100 yard green patch with a 30-06 is any more difficult or ethical hunting than sitting 40 yards off a corn feeder with the same weapon. Is there any more effort involved? Is either shot really much of a challenge? Aren't both of these examples a food source placed there by man to attract deer?
|
By:
Todd1700
Date:12-Jun-12
|
Sorry spell checker went nuts. Here is how number 4 should have read.
4. But! But! Green patches are more nutricious.
Bull. First from an ethics standpoint what difference does that make. It's still bait. If a guy gets written up for hunting over a feeder can he fight the ticket on the grounds that it was really nutricious bait. LOL! I don't think so. And second it's not even necessarily true that green patches are more nutricious when you consider that you can load feeders with all kinds of pellets besides just corn. I know, I know, most people would just use corn. But most people who plant green patches don't use high dollar Biologic blends of 6 different plants either. Typically they plant rye grass or winter wheat which isn't exactly packed with vitamins and vitamens either.
|
Date:14-Jun-12
|
That plowed field might be habitat. Soon it will sprout weeds/forbs which is not only a significant food item for deer, but many varieties of wildlife including birds, reptiles etc.
In fact, if you view the man made efforts to open the soil and expose dormant seeds to sunlight as well as allowing drifting seeds to find a hospitable area in which to germinate in the same vein as million of hooves of bison once did to the soil as they roamed the Plains, it is not so difficult to argue you are helping the wildlife.
When I can prior to performing edge layering, I spray RU on the areas the trees will fall into, and then disc it before doing the chain saw work.
Sorry guys for beating this dead horse, but habitat work IMO is much different than a bait pile even though I allow for the use of bait piles when deemed approproiate by the hunter. Not looking for a fight, just trying to offer up that things may be different than we think. I always have some disced ground each year that does not get planted except by nature.
