This thread makes me think a lot of people posting hunt around agriculture. Come to the mountains and bait deer….they most definitely will come.
-
Help Support TNDeer:
Baiting Bill HB1618/SB1942
- Thread starter bjohnson
- Start date
I asked how hunting over bait benefits the wildlife. Key word is wildlife, not deer. You're getting hung up on deer as if they are the only animal that eats the bait.
And to be very clear, again, I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm only asking for a reasonable explanation for why hunting over bait should be legal. What benefit does it offer WILDLIFE?
We can agree to disagree. You're apparently emotionally involved in the conversation and once that happens it's no longer coherent or reasonable. I'll wish you luck in your hunting endeavors whichever legal methods you choose.
This is one of the best posts I've seen on this thread yet. YES to the entire season being archery!! Of Course, we know that will never happen.
That being said, I'll add to your line of thought. I grew up hunting when there were no ATVs, no trail cameras, no fancy deer stands (most were homemade or a Baker stand...lol), no crossbows (heck, even compound bows were new and HIGHLY controversial), and no cell phones to monitor no cell cameras, etc. Some of you remember those days. Now, THAT WAS DEER HUNTING! While none of those things I've mentioned are detrimental to the health of our deer population, they certainly have largely contributed to the increase in our success. So speaking strictly to those whose argument is that we need to "Learn To Hunt" or "It's Hunting Not Killing", and so on...I say you might want to check your own ways of hunting that you've adapted in the past decades. If you've begun using an ATV to access remote hunting areas better, you're using trail cameras to better pattern your deer habits, and you've transitioned from still hunting to a comfortable hang-on or ladder stand from a 20-foot elevation, then you're just as guilty as I am for making it easier to bring home the venison...yet, I'm still just as passionate about it and love it just as much as when we did it like Indians...lol, well, almost anyway.
The point is, YES, a pile of corn will add to the list of making it easier to bring home venison, but so have many other things we ALL do know and take for granted. Excluding the argument that it's detrimental to the health of deer, turkeys, etc. (which apparently isn't an issue in the many other states that allow it, but maybe TN will be different
), it will no doubt add to the list of making it easier like many other things have...primarily easier to bag does and small bucks if that's the way you roll. I echo his last statement, "I don't care how others choose to hunt as long as it's done legally." Legalize it or don't; we'll be okay, guys. You'll add it to your already long list of ways that make it easier to bag a deer, or you won't. Meanwhile, my wife and I are about to head to Hopkinsville, KY for the weekend to move some of those 21' tall ladder stands and make them ready for summer, while riding across 1,000 acres on our SXS, and checking trail cameras for the last inventory check of the season to see which bucks survived...none of which I could have done in my younger years because they didn't exist. They dang sure make it easier to get to the best spots and on the bigger bucks, and we're going to love every second of it. And, when season arrives, if there's corn involved (since it is legal), it will likely enhance the hunting experience just like the ATVs, trail cameras, crossbows, in-line muzzleloaders, fancy deer stands, and all the other ways we've chosen to increase our chances at bagging the smartest animal in North America over the decades. But hey, I'd vote in a heartbeat to go to an archery only season...imagine what that thread would sound like...LOL!
DoubleRidge
Well-Known Member
Not to argue...but some information about natural browse or forage I found interesting and applicable to the conversation.
Dr Craig Harper and his team have shown where 3% sunlight to forest floor will generate 120lb of forage per acre. (closed canopy)
Then with 30% sunlight to the forest floor the forage will increase to 750lb per acre!
And at 50% sunlight to the forest floor the forage will increase to 1200lb per acre!
So removing trees like sweet gum, etc. or any tree thats over abundant can dramatically increase natural forage. Also...release oaks that are crowded and increase acorn production while allowing more sunlight to forest floor to generate hundreds of pounds of healthy forage...and improve fawning and nesting habitat as well...win-win-win.
So with a gallon or two of chainsaw gas we can generate 750 to 1200lb of forage per acre by opening the canopy.
Much more cost effective and healthier than feeding corn or purina deer chow from a bag.
wildside
Well-Known Member
Apparently dead in senate...will not be voted on
Such an easy concept but an inconvenient truth if you like baiting.
IMO it's both ignorant and arrogant of man to believe he is benefitting deer or any wildlife by feeding them. Deer specifically are designed by God to be selective browsers that roam and nibble on bud tips and leaves, not stand 20min at a pile of corn. The flip side is that selective browsing effectively prunes trees and plants for healthier, better formed growth. Again it's the way God designed it. We call it a symbiotic ecosystem, as in each organism fits like a puzzle piece. We're selfish fools to think we are benefitting anything but ourselves by pouring out bait.
Ok, I'm painting a target on my back by saying this out loud...so let the darts fly...lol.
Other things we do that make us selfish fools because they don't benefit anything but ourselves, in no particular order...
1) The use of trail cameras
2) The use of cellular trail cameras
3) The use of compound bows
4) The use of crossbows
5) The use of long-range rifles
6) The use of fancy deer stands
7) The use of ATVs and SXSs to access remote areas
8) The use of various doe and buck lures
9) The use of Beagle dogs to chase rabbits
10) The use of Bird dogs to locate quail
11) The use of Coon dogs to tree a coon
12) And don't get me started on the selfish tools we use to locate fish...lol
I wonder if God looks at those any differently than the legal use of corn. Just food for thought.
Other things we do that make us selfish fools because they don't benefit anything but ourselves, in no particular order...
1) The use of trail cameras
2) The use of cellular trail cameras
3) The use of compound bows
4) The use of crossbows
5) The use of long-range rifles
6) The use of fancy deer stands
7) The use of ATVs and SXSs to access remote areas
8) The use of various doe and buck lures
9) The use of Beagle dogs to chase rabbits
10) The use of Bird dogs to locate quail
11) The use of Coon dogs to tree a coon
12) And don't get me started on the selfish tools we use to locate fish...lol
I wonder if God looks at those any differently than the legal use of corn. Just food for thought.
You obviously have not read this thread.
Making it easier was not a concern.This is one of the best posts I've seen on this thread yet. YES to the entire season being archery!! Of Course, we know that will never happen.
That being said, I'll add to your line of thought. I grew up hunting when there were no ATVs, no trail cameras, no fancy deer stands (most were homemade or a Baker stand...lol), no crossbows (heck, even compound bows were new and HIGHLY controversial), and no cell phones to monitor no cell cameras, etc. Some of you remember those days. Now, THAT WAS DEER HUNTING! While none of those things I've mentioned are detrimental to the health of our deer population, they certainly have largely contributed to the increase in our success. So speaking strictly to those whose argument is that we need to "Learn To Hunt" or "It's Hunting Not Killing", and so on...I say you might want to check your own ways of hunting that you've adapted in the past decades. If you've begun using an ATV to access remote hunting areas better, you're using trail cameras to better pattern your deer habits, and you've transitioned from still hunting to a comfortable hang-on or ladder stand from a 20-foot elevation, then you're just as guilty as I am for making it easier to bring home the venison...yet, I'm still just as passionate about it and love it just as much as when we did it like Indians...lol, well, almost anyway.
The point is, YES, a pile of corn will add to the list of making it easier to bring home venison, but so have many other things we ALL do know and take for granted. Excluding the argument that it's detrimental to the health of deer, turkeys, etc. (which apparently isn't an issue in the many other states that allow it, but maybe TN will be different
I've read the thread myself, and some have considered it a concern. I was addressing that concern.
Concerning Turkeys, I don't hunt em, never have, don't have the interest in it.
But talking to the different taxidermist that I have used over the last 30 years, the one's who will talk about it, they've told me how the vast majority of turkeys that come through their studio have corn in em from baiting. Furthermore, I've been told by them that game wardens who come through their studio from time to time laugh aloud about the corn in the birds when they see it, as if they careless. And they probably don't care.
But talking to the different taxidermist that I have used over the last 30 years, the one's who will talk about it, they've told me how the vast majority of turkeys that come through their studio have corn in em from baiting. Furthermore, I've been told by them that game wardens who come through their studio from time to time laugh aloud about the corn in the birds when they see it, as if they careless. And they probably don't care.
DoubleRidge
Well-Known Member
Agree...baiting making it easier for hunters is way down the list of reasons I'm against baiting.
There's a "long" list? I guess I missed that. After reading this thread, I'm just hearing it's either a detriment to their health and/or it makes it too easy to kill them. There are some variations on how and to what extent it's a detriment, but that's still one item on the list. But then I tend to read too fast so I guess I missed the list.
DoubleRidge
Well-Known Member
I never said "long" list? I said way down "the list" and this list includes:
Concentrating deer in a tight area promoting the possible spread of disease.
Propping up nest raider populations.
Aflatoxin poisoning of baby poults.
Aflatoxin poisoning of song birds.
Concentrating deer in s tight area making it easier for predators to attack.
Waste of money...money that could be spent on more benifical habitat projects that actually help wildlife.
Could go on...but its clearly pointless.
But "making it easier for hunters" is way down the list for me...honestly, I'm not sure it ever made my list?...my focus has been more on whats truly best for wildlife.
There's at least a few items one could list why not to bait and/or even feed deer besides questions of ethics or sportsmanship. Here's several:
Turf wars between hunters, reduced daylight deer movements, increased competition between deer at bait sites, susceptibility to predation, increase of spreading diseases to deer and other wildlife, mold toxins in corn and grains.
Ok, my bad. I interpret "way down the list" as a "long list." It seems synonymous, but that's just me. As I stated, almost everything you mentioned falls under the category of determent to wildlife. I do see one that could be a separate list item. I can see your point about easier for predators to attack, so I guess we'll call it a very short list. And just because your personal list doesn't include "making it easier for hunters", or that you even give it any credibility, doesn't mean it's not a real issue for some on here, as it's been expressed several times. My post was directed at those. Clearly, this is something that would be on the list on everything in this thread, and from what I've read, it would be #2 or #3 on the overall list. I'm not critiquing your argument of the detriment to wildlife, though I believe, generally speaking, that argument is given too much strength...I'm just speaking to those who feel it should not be legal because it gives hunters too much advantage. So, just ignore my post entirely, it's definitely not directed at you. You have made great arguable points to the detriment of wildlife; it's appreciated.
Ok, so two of the six you've mentioned fall under "detriment to the health of wildlife" as I've stated. I've acknowledged the "susceptibility to predation" is a separate list item. "Turf wars between hunters"? I've been hunting, and/or managing leases since they first became a thing in TN in the 80s. Since the era of ATVs, trail cameras, leasing of land, etc...turf wars between hunters have become the norm, unfortunately. I hunt in KY, where it's legal to bait. Feeding corn doesn't even hit the list of what creates "turf wars." "Reduced daylight deer movements"? As many have mentioned here, deer don't live by corn alone, and in fact, when the acorns hit the ground, they won't be at your corn pile much at all...and the same applies to your food plots. By far and away, the number one thing that reduces daylight movement is when the hunters hit the woods over and over. "Increased competition between deer at bait sites"? I'm not sure of your intended meaning here, but if I'm interpreting it correctly, then it would equally apply to mineral licks and food plots. I don't see how your first three belong on that list.
Last edited:
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
But, some "issues" have more to do with ethics than legalities?
Let me pose this question to everyone, and no one in particular.
Let's say your 18-yr-old daughter comes to you this afternoon, and says . . . . . . .
"Dad, I've decided what I'm going to do when I graduate high school!
I'm going to Nevada to start out making 6 figures working in a LEGAL brothel!"
To what extent would it matter to you, that prostitution was "legal"?
My point here is there is much more about this baiting issue than just "legalities",
a lot more about this than whether or not any wildlife if "harmed" or "not harmed".
What about the future of "sport" hunting?
90% of Americans currently don't participate in this "sport",
but we're told we live in a democracy, where majority rules?
What happens when 90% decide ALL hunting is UNETHICAL, CRUEL,
and HURTS animals, so therefore all hunting should be made "illegal"?
Most non-hunters already think killing animals over bait is unethical,
and should be illegal.
"Sport" hunting will not be outlawed over-night because of baiting issues.
But I am certain, the amount of hunting for which you will have "legal" opportunity
will decrease due to the legalization of killing game over bait.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
Two states that currently allow "legal" killing of deer over "bait" are Texas and Kentucky.
From an overall perspective, would you personally prefer to be a resident of either Texas or Kentucky,
and be limited to only being able to deer hunt in your resident state?
If you say "no", why not?
Just making a couple more points, 1st, the grass always seems greener on the other side of that fence, but often isn't.
Secondly, Texas & KY have some significant differences compared to TN.
In Texas, their very arid, non-humid climate greatly decreases the risk of aflatoxin.
In Kentucky, they have firearm (gun & muzzleloader) deer seasons that are less than half as many days to hunt as what we have in TN.
Texas has a 2-buck annual limit; KY as a 1-buck annual limit.
Compared to Tennessee, what does it cost to lease hunting land in either Texas or Kentucky?
Am here to tell you, one reason hunting leases are more expensive in both Texas & Kentucky is due to their legalizing killing deer over bait.
I suspect part of the political push to legalize killing over bait in TN comes from some well-connected wealthy land-owners (and middlemen leasing agents & real estate brokers of "hunting" lands) trying to increase prices for hunting leases for some large land owners.
As always, "follow the money".
From an overall perspective, would you personally prefer to be a resident of either Texas or Kentucky,
and be limited to only being able to deer hunt in your resident state?
If you say "no", why not?
Just making a couple more points, 1st, the grass always seems greener on the other side of that fence, but often isn't.
Secondly, Texas & KY have some significant differences compared to TN.
In Texas, their very arid, non-humid climate greatly decreases the risk of aflatoxin.
In Kentucky, they have firearm (gun & muzzleloader) deer seasons that are less than half as many days to hunt as what we have in TN.
Texas has a 2-buck annual limit; KY as a 1-buck annual limit.
Compared to Tennessee, what does it cost to lease hunting land in either Texas or Kentucky?
Am here to tell you, one reason hunting leases are more expensive in both Texas & Kentucky is due to their legalizing killing deer over bait.
I suspect part of the political push to legalize killing over bait in TN comes from some well-connected wealthy land-owners (and middlemen leasing agents & real estate brokers of "hunting" lands) trying to increase prices for hunting leases for some large land owners.
As always, "follow the money".
Last edited:
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
And if you said, "No", to having to exclusively deer hunting in either TX or KY,
instead of TN,
part of your reason was likely, directly or indirectly, attributed to the fact killing over bait is legal in those two states.
Being "legal" to kill wild game over bait simply overall spawns more negatives than positives to most hunters?
instead of TN,
part of your reason was likely, directly or indirectly, attributed to the fact killing over bait is legal in those two states.
Being "legal" to kill wild game over bait simply overall spawns more negatives than positives to most hunters?
