-
Help Support TNDeer:
Baiting Bill HB1618/SB1942
- Thread starter bjohnson
- Start date
no body cares what you think 
I've heard about a new "Peaches and Cream"award being given for bucks taken over bait.
deerhunter10
Well-Known Member
You obviously don't read or cant comprehend. I do own land. And so do the bulk of the people on here that are opposing it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2017
- Messages
- 59
- Reaction score
- 125
What I was trying to illustrate from my post is that it seems like a lot of "experts" (very experienced deer hunters, wildlife LEOs, deer biologists, experienced land owners, etc. etc.) seem to come to very different conclusions about the baiting issue. Partly because you can look at it from many different perspectives with many different goals in mind. Which is partly why you have some of the states allowing it in some way and others prohibiting it. Maybe someone at some point will do a comparative analysis of exactly WHY each state (and their the wildlife management agencies) take different positions on this controversial issue. One thing is for sure. If you don't think baiting is good for wildlife and don't see it as "fair chase" then you personally don't have to do it. Or hunt near or around where people are doing it.
bigtiller
Member
I think it's a bad idea.
DoubleRidge
Well-Known Member
While its true "if you dont like baiting then you dont have to" and nobody likes being over regulated on their own property...but the reality is there are all kinds of things we are not allowed to do on private property....Also if your surrounded by those who bait you understand that they are propping up nest raider populations, racoons love corn and in this hot humid climate pouring out "deer corn" is at a high risk of developing aflatoxin and during hot and humid time periods, here in middle Tennessee, is when we have poults running around....I've said it before and will say it again...spend that corn money on some chainsaw gas and improve natural healthy forage, improve fawning cover, improve nesting habitat and actually do something to help wildlife. (But this plan does require a little work vs. driving to walmart for some deer corn)...there are just so many healthier options for wildlife than baiting.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
I would add to this that the average rut range of a TN whitetail deer many be a couple miles in any direction, from one day to the next. And wild turkeys may "winter" flock several miles from where they spend much of the spring/summer.
So again, the large "free-roaming" range of wildlife was one of the reasons our wildlife was deemed owned by the citizenry, not by any particular landowner.
One square mile is 640 acres, while deer & turkey range over much larger areas than that, year round, even greater ranges during their mating seasons. Average private property owner owns how many acres?
So again, the large "free-roaming" range of wildlife was one of the reasons our wildlife was deemed owned by the citizenry, not by any particular landowner.
One square mile is 640 acres, while deer & turkey range over much larger areas than that, year round, even greater ranges during their mating seasons. Average private property owner owns how many acres?
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
I was just reviewing this "hunters' corn discussion" up in Kentucky, where killing deer over corn bait piles is legal.
Main thing I got out of it is that most KY deer hunters now feel compelled to do it, simply because most think everybody else is doing it, therefore, they MUST do it too just to compete with their neighbors.
Next thing, they are on average spending somewhere between hundreds and thousands of dollars per person on deer corn.
If you'd like more insight . . . . . . . . .
www.kentuckyhunting.net
As a side note, looks like there is a ton of money being made via selling "deer corn" and feeders,
and for the most part, that money is not being made by the farmers growing the corn.
Main thing I got out of it is that most KY deer hunters now feel compelled to do it, simply because most think everybody else is doing it, therefore, they MUST do it too just to compete with their neighbors.
Next thing, they are on average spending somewhere between hundreds and thousands of dollars per person on deer corn.
If you'd like more insight . . . . . . . . .
Corn,corn and more corn
Anyone get to their local feed store to see how the first legal weekend of feeding helped their corn sales. I checked at local feed mill in my area. They said they sold 3 ton of corn Saturday.
www.kentuckyhunting.net
As a side note, looks like there is a ton of money being made via selling "deer corn" and feeders,
and for the most part, that money is not being made by the farmers growing the corn.
ROB
Well-Known Member
I'm a former TN resident & currently serve on the Board of Commissioners for the Ky Dept of Fish & Wildlife, representing the 14 westernmost counties. It might be helpful for some who are interested in this issue to look at baiting from a Commission standpoint.
The Commission, just like any committee, is going to have a difficult time dealing with any issue where there is no consensus among constituents. That is exactly the case with baiting. Unlike TN, KY has allowed baiting for many years. Many younger KY deer hunters have never hunted without bait. With any proposed changes to regulations, there are winners & losers. Let's look at each of those, where baiting is concerned.
The District I represent is primarily rural and has a good many folks who are economically disadvantaged. Those constituents who are in favor of baiting seem to be primarily deer hunters. Over and over, I hear stories that go like this: "I own a house trailer on 5 acres. That's the only place I have to easily hunt On the back side of my property, I have a deer stand. There is nothing on the property to hold deer but, if I can pour out a bag of corn in front of my deer stand, I can harvest a couple does to help feed my family. I won't be able to do this if baiting is banned." In my mind, this is a sincere concern. To make matters more complicated, the District I represent is severely overpopulated with deer, despite hunters being allowed to harvest unlimited does for many years. Deer/auto collisions are high & farmers commonly experience significant crop damage due to deer. Proponents of baiting insist that any ban will significantly worsen these situations.
Those constituents who oppose baiting & want it banned seem to be primarily turkey hunters. Their concerns are mainly the effects of aflatoxins on a turkey flock that is already struggling is some areas and the fact that baiting both subsidizes and concentrates nest predators. These seem like serious concerns as well.
Now, let's look at the Commission itself. Chances are some members are dedicated deer & turkey hunters, who baiting would effect, but other members may primarily fish or small game hunt such that baiting has little effect on them & those they represent. Now, say the Commission does recommend a change to allow or disallow baiting. The "losers" as a result of this change will complain long & loud & may even get their State Rep or Senator involved. While the "winners" may be appreciative, they won't be vocal or take action. Absent some crisis, these two factors strongly encourage the Commission to simply go with the status quo. While constituents may not be thrilled with the way things are, a bunch of them aren't pissed off, as would be the case with any change.
So what does the future hold? Believe it or not, data gathered in KY as a result of CWD may have an impact. Baiting is now banned in 8 counties in westernmost KY, the CWD Surveillance Zone counties. Because baiting was previously allowed in these counties for many years, but is now disallowed, this will give the Dept a chance to look at what impact a baiting ban would have on deer harvest numbers and the health of the turkey flock.
The Commission, just like any committee, is going to have a difficult time dealing with any issue where there is no consensus among constituents. That is exactly the case with baiting. Unlike TN, KY has allowed baiting for many years. Many younger KY deer hunters have never hunted without bait. With any proposed changes to regulations, there are winners & losers. Let's look at each of those, where baiting is concerned.
The District I represent is primarily rural and has a good many folks who are economically disadvantaged. Those constituents who are in favor of baiting seem to be primarily deer hunters. Over and over, I hear stories that go like this: "I own a house trailer on 5 acres. That's the only place I have to easily hunt On the back side of my property, I have a deer stand. There is nothing on the property to hold deer but, if I can pour out a bag of corn in front of my deer stand, I can harvest a couple does to help feed my family. I won't be able to do this if baiting is banned." In my mind, this is a sincere concern. To make matters more complicated, the District I represent is severely overpopulated with deer, despite hunters being allowed to harvest unlimited does for many years. Deer/auto collisions are high & farmers commonly experience significant crop damage due to deer. Proponents of baiting insist that any ban will significantly worsen these situations.
Those constituents who oppose baiting & want it banned seem to be primarily turkey hunters. Their concerns are mainly the effects of aflatoxins on a turkey flock that is already struggling is some areas and the fact that baiting both subsidizes and concentrates nest predators. These seem like serious concerns as well.
Now, let's look at the Commission itself. Chances are some members are dedicated deer & turkey hunters, who baiting would effect, but other members may primarily fish or small game hunt such that baiting has little effect on them & those they represent. Now, say the Commission does recommend a change to allow or disallow baiting. The "losers" as a result of this change will complain long & loud & may even get their State Rep or Senator involved. While the "winners" may be appreciative, they won't be vocal or take action. Absent some crisis, these two factors strongly encourage the Commission to simply go with the status quo. While constituents may not be thrilled with the way things are, a bunch of them aren't pissed off, as would be the case with any change.
So what does the future hold? Believe it or not, data gathered in KY as a result of CWD may have an impact. Baiting is now banned in 8 counties in westernmost KY, the CWD Surveillance Zone counties. Because baiting was previously allowed in these counties for many years, but is now disallowed, this will give the Dept a chance to look at what impact a baiting ban would have on deer harvest numbers and the health of the turkey flock.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
And, this is also much part of the issue here in TN.
As some would say, there is merit in the old saying,
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Ironically, two adjoining states may come to totally opposite conclusions with that same thought.
Rob, appreciate your coming here and making this inciteful post for us.
If you want to move back to TN, our commission could benefit from your service.
CrossVolle
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2017
- Messages
- 596
- Reaction score
- 656
Guy beside us in Ohio had a $10,000 feed bill last year. I about hit the floor when he told me.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
When hunting over bait is legalized, shooting over bait becomes more or less a new pissing contest, diverting from the former sport of hunting.
Starting to see why the KY duck hunter said duck hunting isn't any more expensive than KY deer hunting, but he couldn't afford to do both, so he quit deer hunting. Perhaps there's part of why they're having trouble killing enough doe in West KY?
CrossVolle
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2017
- Messages
- 596
- Reaction score
- 656
I can't do it. I haven't hauled the first kernel in there. That's my getaway and it turns into work real fast.
I was just reviewing this "hunters' corn discussion" up in Kentucky, where killing deer over corn bait piles is legal.
Main thing I got out of it is that most KY deer hunters now feel compelled to do it, simply because most think everybody else is doing it, therefore, they MUST do it too just to compete with their neighbors.
Next thing, they are on average spending somewhere between hundreds and thousands of dollars per person on deer corn.
If you'd like more insight . . . . . . . . .
Corn,corn and more corn
Anyone get to their local feed store to see how the first legal weekend of feeding helped their corn sales. I checked at local feed mill in my area. They said they sold 3 ton of corn Saturday.
As a side note, looks like there is a ton of money being made via selling "deer corn" and feeders,
and for the most part, that money is not being made by the farmers growing the corn.
That is exactly the situation in Ohio. I still refuse to bait. Every buck I've killed in recent years had corn in his gut. Neighbor even had a pile of corn right next to the line with a ladder stand right behind it looking straight into my property. That's what it's like hunting in a bait legal state.
tdt5446
Well-Known Member
I have enjoyed this thread, it has been both serious and comical. Posters have agreed both ways, for and against spreading bait. There has been name calling, slandering, ridicule, challenges, etc. Statements about land ownership, having to hunt public land, can't afford to buy land or can't afford to lease land, all these tied into whether or not we should be able to bait in TN. One poster even wrote, "We don't care about your opinion"(that may not be the exact quote). We should care, because all those folks that are "anti-hunters" are loving the fact that we are fighting against each other, instead of enjoying a basic privilege. You may not want my opinion, but here it is, I DON'T CARE either way about baiting. This sport is too great for us to argue over such a trivial thing as this. I respect you all, and look forward to possibly meeting some of you face to face someday, Have a great day and may God continue to bless you all!
I posted no one cares about his opinion because he is a troll just looking to argue about anything and spread his stupidity as always
dont take that post out of context i do care about everyones opinions on all the topics we duscuss here, just not his
So because you own you property, you should be able to murder someone on your because the law doesn't apply to you. Got it.
Headhunter
Well-Known Member
There is a democrat, liberal answer. You don't like it, so you try to turn it to something that has nothing to do with what he is saying. When it comes to game laws, I do not own a large amount or any amount of land large enough to hunt, but I do agree that landowners, to a large extent, can do what they want on land they own.
Example, landowner digs a pond, or owns land with a pond that is not connected to any waterway. He stocks the pond or it had fish when he obtained the land. TWRA says that fishing laws apply to the pond. Nope, they do not, if the landowner wants to keep all the fish he catches or not, it is up to him how many fish are kept or not kept. Don't agree, I know of several judges that do and if a game warden goes to court with something like that it is thrown out.
If the landowner does not want a particular animal on his land, then either the state can come and get them or he can get rid of them as he sees fit. And no, the landowner does not have to ALLOW hunting. Landowners should have control of their land and what they do or do not want to do with it.
So you done the same thing with fish and a pond
baiting is illegal bottom line whether you own the land ir not, but what if's
So laws don't apply to you either.
