-
Help Support TNDeer:
Baiting Bill HB1618/SB1942
- Thread starter bjohnson
- Start date
Snake
Well-Known Member
Probably alot of places in Tennessee......
Across the country, the number of hunters has been trending upward since a record low 14.4 million hunting licenses were issued in 2010, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This year, there were more than 15.5 million licensed hunters across the country, but Tennessee has not seen the same uptick.
In 2019, there were 679,038 licensed hunters in the state, down from a record high of 780,053 in 2008 and the third consecutive year to see fewer people apply for a license, according to fish and wildlife data
As I've said, I've dealt with the issue for years since I'm close to my cousin who hunts in MS where we grew up. From a biological standpoint the first thing you learn about whitetails is that they're browsers, not grazers, so they're certainly not like livestock on a farm. Lately I've learned a lot of stuff from MSU Deer Lab just as LBL Man suggested, though, like the fact that critters God made to browse get more nutrition from browsing than on feed. Who would have thunk it, right?
Then again, maybe some folks don't have a clue what it means when biologists call deer browsers or that they're even called that, let alone the huge amounts of leaves, buds, and woody browse that deer thrive on. A lot of us here already knew before this thread, though, that feeding deer isn't all that good and that baiting sure isn't. Didn't need to contact TWRA or consult with anyone before stating my position but the thread did prompt me to do some searches to learn of other negatives I wasn't even aware of.
It's been too long since I took the Hunters Ed course with my son and I can't remember if deer corn is covered but since our state is one of the last holdouts on the issue, the TWRA should have an article in the Hunting Guide dealing with it every year. I think a lot of folks just don't know how long the list of possible negatives is. I know I wasn't.
Last edited:
Honestly, we baited in Michigan with carrots, apples ,and sugar beets. I don't think it changed the odds much if any.
ImThere
Well-Known Member
Can't be? Another member said that's the only way to see deer on millions of acres?
Hence another reason to not bait. No upside. IMHO.
Madbowh
Well-Known Member
Hey look at me I'm a browser
To Bait or not to Bait? That is the question! Feed them and they will come. 
Headhunter
Well-Known Member
Many I talk to say the same thing. Where you used to see orange in vehicles, vehicles parked in places that you can be pretty be sure they are hunting, they are no longer parked there, etc. Yep, seen a pretty large decline of just seeing hunters in a few places the last few years.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
Obviously, Headhunter is referring to big-game hunting, presumably mostly deer hunting in TN.
I have observed same, but will add one caveat:
Some areas, especially where deer have expanded into more recently, see an increase in deer hunting, while areas deer have been established longer tend to have seen more decreases in deer hunting.
Talking strictly about TN here.
But it is a mistake to assume the number of big-game licenses possessed annually is a reflection of whether deer hunting in TN is on the increase or decrease.
The average deer hunter in TN has been progressively hunting less, getting older, and they are in fact dying out faster than they've been replaced. Somewhat the opposite may have been happening with waterfowl & turkey hunting.
Another mistake is thinking legalizing killing deer over bait recruits new hunters.
All it does is legalize killing deer over bait, which is mostly done in backyards,
unless baiting were to be legalized on larger acreage public hunting areas.
Yes, there already is a high incidence of currently illegal deer killing over bait in people's backyards. Similar can be said for illegal spotlighting deer at night, then shooting them. Making either legal only increases those activities.
Usually, legalizing any activity seen more as an overall problem than benefit, just greatly increases that activity? Greatly increases the problem?
Unfortunately, like most "issues", killing deer over a bait pile is neither a totally wrong nor totally right activity, hence all the controversy. We see similar with whether particular drugs like cocaine & marijuana should be totally legal & available, or only somewhat legal & available.
Killing deer over a bait pile seems to be an "issue" of more overall problems than benefits.
Legalization would increase killing; it will not increase hunting.
mike243
Well-Known Member
I tried to see how many lifetime License have been sold , without all of the numbers it's impossible for anybody to say hunting has decreased, as many leases as there are ect not seeing folks hunting places is only a piece of the puzzle, I have bought 3 lifetime and at some point that number will impact twra operating budget. Anybody have all the numbers? baiting is a bad idea to get new hunters imo, might as well put them in a barrel with livescope 
MickThompson
Well-Known Member
The decline of huntable land ( more troublingly known as habitat) has far outstripped any decline in hunters. Feed isn't a surrogate for usable space and no amount of feeders or piles can fix this.
If we want to recruit hunters or protect our way of life we first need to "recruit" (manage) and protect habitat
If we want to recruit hunters or protect our way of life we first need to "recruit" (manage) and protect habitat
Are hunters using the landowner exemption factored in every year? I'd bet there's way more hunters who've bought smaller parcels and use that in lieu of a license every year. That 500 acre farm that had a couple of guys hunting it has been divided and it now has a couple of guys on each 50 acre tract, and at least one will use landowner exemption I'd bet.
What about lifetime licenses? Is that a one-and-done count, or is it figured as a new license sale every year?
Maybe it's a regional thing, but Middle Tennessee public land is way more crowded from what I've seen in the last decade.
What about lifetime licenses? Is that a one-and-done count, or is it figured as a new license sale every year?
Maybe it's a regional thing, but Middle Tennessee public land is way more crowded from what I've seen in the last decade.
Last edited:
MidTennFisher
Well-Known Member
Every state in the country has seen an increase in hunting pressure. And I wish I could find that graph again but it showed the breakdown of age brackets of hunters in 2020. That completely threw out the notion that old hunters are dying and not being replaced by younger ones.
There is no shortage of teenagers through 30-somethings in the woods. That's who makes up the majority of the social media hunting content. You think it's 60 year olds putting pics of dead duck bills in their mouth on Instagram?
There is, however, a shortage in available acreage to hunt per acre as related to the number of hunters. Whether that be publicly accessible land or private land. Thus the increase in crowding that makes for frustration and a decrease in the overall hunter satisfaction.
So my point remains - R3 is outrageously irresponsible and should cease immediately. Even if baiting were a good recruitment tool for hunters, which it isn't, we need to get away from the idea that we are in desperate need of more hunters in the first place.
Once we have more access, we can handle more hunters. "Build it and they will come". Not, "Pay THP thousands of dollars to make TN hunting pressure even worse".
There is no shortage of teenagers through 30-somethings in the woods. That's who makes up the majority of the social media hunting content. You think it's 60 year olds putting pics of dead duck bills in their mouth on Instagram?
There is, however, a shortage in available acreage to hunt per acre as related to the number of hunters. Whether that be publicly accessible land or private land. Thus the increase in crowding that makes for frustration and a decrease in the overall hunter satisfaction.
So my point remains - R3 is outrageously irresponsible and should cease immediately. Even if baiting were a good recruitment tool for hunters, which it isn't, we need to get away from the idea that we are in desperate need of more hunters in the first place.
Once we have more access, we can handle more hunters. "Build it and they will come". Not, "Pay THP thousands of dollars to make TN hunting pressure even worse".
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
While I am in general agreement, especially about "feeding not fixing",
I will argue the sky hasn't fallen, and isn't falling on the future of deer hunting because of habitat losses.
True hunting has been decreasing for many, many reasons, one of which is habitat losses in some areas, but not in all areas.
In my youth, most TN counties were not open for deer hunting. Many of the WMAs we have today hadn't yet been created, and deer were relatively few statewide. TN had a 1-buck limit, later a 2-buck limit, before later going to that 11-buck limit.
But most noteworthy in my youth, most TN hunters didn't deer hunt all. More squirrel hunted than deer hunted, while today, the reverse is true. Never mind we have plenty of places to squirrel hunt, and, in fact, most our public WMAs are better squirrel hunting opportunities today than in my youth.
What has most dramatically changed is simply being able to easily get permission to small-game hunt on just about any stranger's land. The expansion of deer & deer hunting had a lot to do with that.
Just saying, there are plenty of good deer hunting opportunities today in TN, more than in my youth in TN, and many of them are relatively low-cost, at least compared to other forms of outdoor recreation. We tend to unnecessarily make deer hunting more expensive than need be.
And you need not go back to my youth, as most WMA are less crowded with hunters today (during deer season) than they were during the 1980's & 1990's, or even the early 2000's.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
Simply not true.
Certain areas of every state have seen an increase in hunting pressure,
for particular game species.
Hunting pressure has definitely generally increased for waterfowl & turkeys,
but not necessarily for deer.
I'm sure finding hunting access for most anything around the Nashville metropolitan area is more challenging now than it was even 5 yrs ago. Same for most areas very close to major metro areas.
But go to a place like the monstrous acreage Cherokee National Forest (more acreage than the entirety of Davidson County/Nashville area), and you will see fewer hunters than in most any time past. It's even ironic, that in times past, our East TN National Forests were heavily crowded with hunters, and hunting for not just deer, but for squirrels as well.
Headhunter
Well-Known Member
Not in Kentucky. I know of several places where no where near as many are hunting. Crazy thing is, the land is tied up by hunters, they just don't hunt much if at all.
MidTennFisher
Well-Known Member
All my friends in Tennessee are in unison saying that pressure has increased significantly in the last 5 years. Shoot I've seen it here in SC and I've only been here for just over 4 years now. And our hunting isn't even good like Tennessee is. Especially on public land.
Spots I used to hunt when I first got here I have abandoned after going from zero or very few other hunters to being crowded enough that I just left it alone totally.
In about 6 weeks I'll see for myself how bad it is. Last time I hunted turkeys in TN was in 2016. Pressure wasn't unbearable but I certainly wasn't the only guy in the woods. I'll be visiting family and trying to kill a turkey. If their land isn't productive then I may venture onto a nearby WMA and see what kind of fun I can get into.
Spots I used to hunt when I first got here I have abandoned after going from zero or very few other hunters to being crowded enough that I just left it alone totally.
In about 6 weeks I'll see for myself how bad it is. Last time I hunted turkeys in TN was in 2016. Pressure wasn't unbearable but I certainly wasn't the only guy in the woods. I'll be visiting family and trying to kill a turkey. If their land isn't productive then I may venture onto a nearby WMA and see what kind of fun I can get into.
Buzzard Breath
Well-Known Member
I agree, but these areas used to be logged and had good deer habitat. They aren't logged anymore and haven't been for a long time. As a result, the deer population isn't a fraction of what it was. If you like going and staring at mature trees, it's a good place to hunt.
MickThompson
Well-Known Member
Yep. Management matters. Hiked in Frozen Head this weekend. Saw dying red oaks and zero wildlife. Not even a squirrel in the park.
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2019
- Messages
- 1,108
- Reaction score
- 936
I think as passionately as some speak against it they may not want to give up their advantage of baiting when it is made legal. Who cares if their feathers are ruffled? Also, people with great property to hunt seem to be the most vocal anti baiting.This has been an interesting topic ...been told I need to learn how to hunt just because I voted yes . I'm 70 killed hundreds of deer , 11 or 12 mounted bucks no Booner though but I don't need no one to tell me how to hunt . I would take pointers though if I'm hunting ground you've hunted and know and would appreciate it . Baiting could probably help some people who are having trouble seeing deer with the property they have to hunt . Even if is made legal don't think I would do it but will put salt and trophy rock out . I do appreciate every one that participated in this thread even though it has ruffled some feathers but all in all I think we all want what's best for the wildlife because if it's gone they'll be nothing to argue aboutSo everyone have a good night and God Bless !
