baiting in Tennessee

[Hillbilly Hunter]

I'd rather invest my time and money into habitat improvements that actually benefit wildlife...food plots, when done correctly, can feed and benefit wildlife year around....verses a corn pile that can spoil and have a negative effect on wildlife.....sure grabbing some "deer corn" at Walmart is easier than making long term habitat improvements....but working on the land can give you a much better return on your investment....and with CWD slowly moving across the state I wouldn't think now would be the recommended time to concentrate deer on a bait pile.

Exactly

 

[Hillbilly Hunter]

Comparing Food plots to corn piles is ridiculous. A food plot can sustain and be a benefit to wildlife all year long.

 

[holstonangler]

I still have yet to see any of the negatives pan out to be true on a broad scale and see most of out neighboring states continue to allow it. Let's go till up 50 acres of natural habitat to till and plant corn which supports very little wildlife as a whole. Makes zero sense to me.

 

[FTP]

Comparing Food plots to corn piles is ridiculous. A food plot can sustain and be a benefit to wildlife all year long.

I haven't jumped into this argument about the sustainability, but from experience, in areas where there is no agriculture, keeping feeders full of corn OR some high protein pellets year round can absolutely sustain the deer in that area. And will keep mature bucks near these feeders during daylight hours not nocturnal. They get hungry during daylight hours as well and will prefer these feeders over sweetbriar, acorns, or other browse. I've watched it happen for years.

 

[DoubleRidge]

I still have yet to see any of the negatives pan out to be true on a broad scale and see most of out neighboring states continue to allow it. Let's go till up 50 acres of natural habitat to till and plant corn which supports very little wildlife as a whole. Makes zero sense to me.

I'm all about improving the natural habitat....better to spend money on chainsaw gas than bags of "deer corn" ....open the canopy allowing sunlight into the forest floor...improve diversity and sustainability of the property....as for 50 acres of planted corn verses a bait pile....I'd rather see a variety of wildlife spread out over 50 acres feeding verses packing in tight to a bait station.....wanting to concentrate wildlife into a confined space doesn't seem like the best idea......and if we are going to be honest in this conversation.....most people (not all) buying deer corn at Walmart are not operating a year around feeding program with a focus on herd health....their focus is on them killing a deer.....where most (not all) land managers who have invested in a food plot program are actually focused on benefiting a variety of wildlife....again, when done correctly...a food plot can provide a healthy source of food for a variety of wildlife...as well as fawning ground, nesting ground, etc.

 

[timberjack86]

Comparing Food plots to corn piles is ridiculous. A food plot can sustain and be a benefit to wildlife all year long.

Maybe large food plots planted to sustain wildlife, most people I know plant small kill plots and use them to "bait" deer.

 

[Deer Assassin]

Maybe large food plots planted to sustain wildlife, most people I know plant small kill plots and use them to "bait" deer.

yep

 

[megalomaniac]

The semantics game of fishing vs. hunting is ridiculous, IMO. Fishing is fishing. Hunting is hunting. Conflating the two unnecessarily distracts from a direct exchange of perspectives.

Baiting absolutely works. Feeding, not as much. There's a difference. It's a tactic like any other and if used properly in the right context, it's dynamite. Or if used wrongly can be a dud. On a well managed property with plenty of food already available, especially in variety, baiting is going to be less of a draw. In an environment where it's the easiest food source then heck yeah the deer will hammer it. If it's a feeder with persistent, predictable production then it becomes like a plot where mature bucks only come after dark. But throw out a random bag of corn in an area where deer aren't used to it, and they'll compete to get it. Context is everything.

I could care less one way or the other. I personally don't care for it but I certainly don't push my beliefs on anybody else or think ill of somebody who disagrees with me. But to say it's an ineffective tactic is ridiculous. Even here in midTN pallet loads of deer corn are sold at Wal-Mart every season. Nobody's buying all that corn if they're not killing deer over it. Not only is it an expense, but it's also a risk of trouble with the law. Hardly worth the expense & trouble for an ineffective tactic. It works. That's why people break the law to do it.

Im being totally serious, I want to know the technique to use bait to kill big bucks since it's legal here in MS.... I'm not opposed to trying it (unless it involves pouring feed on the ground- that IS illegal here in MS). But clearly, running a feeder and keeping it filled for 4 months does not work here. I just don't have much experience trying it other than when it was legalized 4 or 5 years ago, and it was a total waste of time and $$$ doing it the way I did it. Also, the other members on my lease who are hunting over bait are less successful than my friend and I who do not hunt over it (but they area also hunting over stationary spin-cast feeders).

 

[Ski]

Ski, please explain how the"Semantics" of hunting vs fishing is ridiculous. My very simple point at the beginning was that to use bait in one sport and not refer to it as the same thing in another does not hold water in an argument using Logic and reason. Minnows, crickets or worms for fishing AND Apples, Corn or whatever for deer hunting is the SAME THING. It is irrational to argue that they are different. I have gotten an appreciation of different hunters on here and there thoughts of hunting over corn- "bait"

First of all, the entire premise of fishing is to entice the fish into biting a hook. That requires bait, real or artificial. The fisherman doesn't get to pick & choose which fish bites, but can release any unwanted fish.

The premise of hunting is to find and kill an animal. The hunter very much picks & chooses which animal to take, and a dead animal cannot be thrown back.

Conflating the two, regardless of similarities or parallels, is ridiculous as it pertains to debating the ethics of baiting deer with corn.

I'm not here to argue because I really couldn't care. But I do find the topic interesting. As a genuinely interested consumer of the conversation I prefer to hear thoughtful conveyances of every perspective, not tangents. But as a consumer I get what I pay for, and I didn't pay anything for this so I suppose can't expect much.

 

[FTP]

Im being totally serious, I want to know the technique to use bait to kill big bucks since it's legal here in MS.... I'm not opposed to trying it (unless it involves pouring feed on the ground- that IS illegal here in MS). But clearly, running a feeder and keeping it filled for 4 months does not work here. I just don't have much experience trying it other than when it was legalized 4 or 5 years ago, and it was a total waste of time and $$$ doing it the way I did it. Also, the other members on my lease who are hunting over bait are less successful than my friend and I who do not hunt over it (but they area also hunting over stationary spin-cast feeders).

Do you have a lot of agriculture around you? The farm I had permission to hunt for about 25 years until the owner sold it, anyways there was ZERO agriculture over those years, nothing for miles. Had good water source, had some feeders that were full year round. The deer come to them.

 

[Dodge Man]

This is my local Lowes last fall. I have a hard time believing a lot of people are not already baiting.

 

[FTP]

First of all, the entire premise of fishing is to entice the fish into biting a hook. That requires bait, real or artificial. The fisherman doesn't get to pick & choose which fish bites, but can release any unwanted fish.

The premise of hunting is to find and kill an animal. The hunter very much picks & chooses which animal to take, and a dead animal cannot be thrown back.

Conflating the two, regardless of similarities or parallels, is ridiculous as it pertains to debating the ethics of baiting deer with corn.

I'm not here to argue because I really couldn't care. But I do find the topic interesting. As a genuinely interested consumer of the conversation I prefer to hear thoughtful conveyances of every perspective, not tangents. But as a consumer I get what I pay for, and I didn't pay anything for this so I suppose can't expect much.

Bait is Bait... no matter whether it's fishing or deer hunting. Bait by it's very definition supports my opinion.

 

[megalomaniac]

Do you have a lot of agriculture around you? The farm I had permission to hunt for about 25 years until the owner sold it, anyways there was ZERO agriculture over those years, nothing for miles. Had good water source, had some feeders that were full year round. The deer come to them.

zero ag... all pine trees (burned every 3 years, so lots of browse in them), few hardwood bottoms with water oaks and a handful of whites/ reds... but they are cleaned up FAST. Approx 18 acres of foodplots on 2000 acres total.

When I ran feeders, deer were using them... at night. Be easy to kill all you wanted with a spotlight if you were so inclined. But worthless for daytime hunting in my personal experience.

 

[knightrider]

Then it sounds like you need to address the easy meal across the road .

How would you suggest fixing that? After multiple calls, giving pictures, plate numbers, addresses and even phone numbers it gets old and aggravating never seeing a green truck show up to help fix it!!!

 

[Gravey]

Just let the deer know it's not for them and there are consequences for their actions. Carry on!

 

[DMD]

First of all, the entire premise of fishing is to entice the fish into biting a hook. That requires bait, real or artificial. The fisherman doesn't get to pick & choose which fish bites, but can release any unwanted fish.

The premise of hunting is to find and kill an animal. The hunter very much picks & chooses which animal to take, and a dead animal cannot be thrown back.

Conflating the two, regardless of similarities or parallels, is ridiculous as it pertains to debating the ethics of baiting deer with corn.

I'm not here to argue because I really couldn't care. But I do find the topic interesting. As a genuinely interested consumer of the conversation I prefer to hear thoughtful conveyances of every perspective, not tangents. But as a consumer I get what I pay for, and I didn't pay anything for this so I suppose can't expect much.

But, as it relates to baiting, hunters do throw back many animals. They bait to attract, kill what they want and the rest are "thrown back". It's the same principle as fishing. You use bait to lure fish/animal in, keep the ones you want, let the rest go. It's really not much different, imo. The only factor that is different - with fishing, you are only using a single piece of bait, baiting deer a person is generally putting out a bunch of bait.

 

[Ski]

Im being totally serious, I want to know the technique to use bait to kill big bucks since it's legal here in MS.... I'm not opposed to trying it (unless it involves pouring feed on the ground- that IS illegal here in MS). But clearly, running a feeder and keeping it filled for 4 months does not work here. I just don't have much experience trying it other than when it was legalized 4 or 5 years ago, and it was a total waste of time and $$$ doing it the way I did it. Also, the other members on my lease who are hunting over bait are less successful than my friend and I who do not hunt over it (but they area also hunting over stationary spin-cast feeders).

To clarify, I don't do it so I cannot speak from experience. However, both my brother and brother-in-law do it in completely different ways and get completely different results.

My brother feeds year round and deer use it a whole lot like a plot. By far it's mostly does, fawns, and yearling bucks. Cruiser bucks come by to check during rut but otherwise what little action it gets from mature bucks is nighttime. This is on a 40acre property with two plots and intense habitat work. For his deer the feeder is just another type of food, not the big draw.

My brother-in-law throws out a pile of corn during the first couple weeks of October and year after year my niece bags a P&Y quality buck from a blind. She doesn't hunt any other time of year and has zero clue or care. He is more selective in looking for giants and about every other year it works out for him. His property is open hardwoods, no plots or habitat work, and he doesn't hunt anything else outside of pouring corn out. This all happens within eyesight of his back door.

I've seen it go on like this for years. My brother has run his feeder year round for probably 20yrs. My BIL has poured out corn for probably 10yrs. Not a huge sample size but it's enough to see a pattern and note the factors. Both properties produce big deer and everybody seems to find success, but it's in different ways. I've surmised that running a feeder long term is akin to having a plot, and that it's attractiveness largely relies on environmental factors. Likewise, baiting also relies on environmental factors. If food is otherwise scarce, a bait pile will attract any hungry deer. In my BIL's situation, the land is completely unpressured EXCEPT for while they're pouring bait for deer. My brother's place is hunted from squirrel season until rabbit season ends.

 

[Pilchard]

Bait is Bait... no matter whether it's fishing or deer hunting. Bait by it's very definition supports my opinion.

At least you recognize it's an opinion

Ski's post is spot on.

 

[megalomaniac]

To clarify, I don't do it so I cannot speak from experience. However, both my brother and brother-in-law do it in completely different ways and get completely different results.

My brother feeds year round and deer use it a whole lot like a plot. By far it's mostly does, fawns, and yearling bucks. Cruiser bucks come by to check during rut but otherwise what little action it gets from mature bucks is nighttime. This is on a 40acre property with two plots and intense habitat work. For his deer the feeder is just another type of food, not the big draw.

My brother-in-law throws out a pile of corn during the first couple weeks of October and year after year my niece bags a P&Y quality buck from a blind. She doesn't hunt any other time of year and has zero clue or care. He is more selective in looking for giants and about every other year it works out for him. His property is open hardwoods, no plots or habitat work, and he doesn't hunt anything else outside of pouring corn out. This all happens within eyesight of his back door.

I've seen it go on like this for years. My brother has run his feeder year round for probably 20yrs. My BIL has poured out corn for probably 10yrs. Not a huge sample size but it's enough to see a pattern and note the factors. Both properties produce big deer and everybody seems to find success, but it's in different ways. I've surmised that running a feeder long term is akin to having a plot, and that it's attractiveness largely relies on environmental factors. Likewise, baiting also relies on environmental factors. If food is otherwise scarce, a bait pile will attract any hungry deer. In my BIL's situation, the land is completely unpressured EXCEPT for while they're pouring bait for deer. My brother's place is hunted from squirrel season until rabbit season ends.

Perhaps the problem in south MS is 3 out of 4 hunters hunt over cornpiles... so they are everywhere... Maybe that's what keeps the older deer nocturnal? Or keeps them nocturnal around the feeders... me and a friend kill them in daylight away from the cornpiles near the thick stuff.

 

[Ski]

Bait is Bait... no matter whether it's fishing or deer hunting. Bait by it's very definition supports my opinion.

As I said, semantics. You asked me to specify he difference and I did. Completely different applications, purposes, and procedures, but a shared descriptive word. By that logic we should equate a grunt tube with a tube bait. Both are artificial, effective attractants, but who do you know would be on board for outlawing grunt calls because they're bait? I don't even care if you're right or if you're wrong. I'm only saying I'd like to see hunting topics discussed on the terms of hunting, not fishing. Arguing petty nonsense like this does zero to advance the conversation toward fruition.