Post by: boneaddict on January 01, 2011, 04:11:58 PM
http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/white-tailed_deer/ (http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/white-tailed_deer/)
Post by: alwinearcher on January 01, 2011, 04:33:02 PM
Lot of interesting stuff!
Post by: Sneaky on January 01, 2011, 04:48:34 PM
Post by: denali on January 01, 2011, 05:18:57 PM
did some reading as well, I know hard winters and habitat changes play a significant role in lower WT harvest, but you can not ignore the correlation between lower cougar harvest and lower WT harvest numbers. - (not a Biologist or a mathematician)
Post by: PolarBear on January 01, 2011, 05:22:55 PM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 01, 2011, 10:59:36 PM
Post by: boneaddict on January 02, 2011, 08:51:56 AM
Post by: grundy53 on January 02, 2011, 09:18:18 AM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 02, 2011, 10:07:07 AM
The plan was put together nicely I thought. I haven't had time to read it all, but I sure liked the format.
It is definitely well put together. I was impressed to see the WDFW has put this much consideration into managing Whitetail Deer. Apparently they have been limited by funding on some things they would like to do.
Post by: huntnnw on January 02, 2011, 06:14:01 PM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 02, 2011, 07:57:08 PM
Put together nicely ...does it matter? When I see this all i think blah blah ...appease the minions of the state.All non sense to me..they do nothing ultimately with whitetail management in this state. A 4pt min would be a first in this state..all about the money.
Shane, I have to disagree with you on this one. I think the whitetail herd is managed more effectively than anything else in the state.... Could it be better? I would say without a doubt. Overall I think we have one of the better herds in the nation despite winter kill. A lot of the big buck states like Illinois are poorly managed yet produce big bucks because of private management of the herds. We can't really claim that here. I do wish their management regions were a little smaller. They could probably increase doe harvest in some area and decrease it in others. The AR's would be nice. The AR's won't be popular with everyone but I am sure many people will look at them differently after a few years.
There does seem to be a big push from WDFW and hunters (who have their own ideas about what constitutes hunting) to remove baiting. It seems like it is under constant scrutiny and they will likely remove it as soon as they get majority support. For 14 years (that I know of and probably more) they have been asking us if we want baiting to be allowed. Now, in this study they show that they are budgeted to study the effects of baiting. I find it kind of ridiculous that it has taken this long. Isn't this something they should have figured out after all these years?
If doing nothing = what they are doing now then I hope they keep doing it. I have hunted quite a few states and I don't know many that I can find 4-6 150+ bucks per year to hunt and mostly on public lands. One small area I was in this year had three bucks of that caliber (that I know of) in less than a square mile. In that same areas there was 5-6 other 130-145 inch bucks. I consider that outstanding and would be near (if not) impossible in a poorly managed whitetail herd.
Post by: RidgeRunner_07 on January 02, 2011, 08:10:42 PM
Post by: Cougeyes on January 04, 2011, 09:47:15 AM
Post by: boneaddict on January 04, 2011, 02:10:46 PM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 04, 2011, 02:17:09 PM
I liked that they included they would research the effects baiting has on harvest and deer herds. Curious how they plan on attempting to get this information. If baiting may become illegal those that hunt over bait may chose to lie if WDFW ever did a survey or however they attempt to get at the question at hand. Just by the photos and stories on here and elsewhere i think there is a high success hunting over bait and personally believe it should be illegal :twocents:
I am interested in how they will go about their methods also. I am quite surprised they have taken this many years to do it. There are plenty of studys showing the effects of baiting on deer herds so I am not quite sure why they need to spend money on a new study that will probably not likely answer or address questions that haven't already been answered.
I don't think there is anything for those of us that bait to lie about. Baiting can and often does lead to higher success rates. I see far more does and young bucks over bait than I do when I don't bait. I also have deer present better shot opportunities over bait.
I think high success rates would be a mighty weak and inaccurate argument for making baiting illegal. I have found hardcore scouting can lead to a much higher success rate than baiting alone. Should we make scouting illegal? I have found that compound bows with sights lead to higher success rates. Should we make those illegal? The list of things that may increase success rates signigicantly can go on and on; trail cameras, tree stands, hunting during the pre-rut/rut (especially rifle hunting during that time period) etc. Hunting experience can also lead to a higher success rate..maybe for every year of hunting experience we should get one less day per year of experience. Ok..I admit I am being facetious to make a point that increased success rates should probably not be a big factor in making baiting illegal.
Then there is the question of what are we comparing the higher success rates against? It can't be the overall average because that doesn't really tell you much and isn't a fair comparison.
What does matter about baiting is this...and I am saying this as a person that baits. I can make almost no biologically sound argument for baiting....but.... I can make several biological arguments against baiting and it's possible effects on herd health..... but then if we are going to make baiting illegal for those reasons we must stop the winter feeding stations for the same biological reasons. From what I have researched and observed, those negative effects appear to be rarer and smaller than people make them out. These effects are not even close to the negative effects on a herd due to the stress created by hunting itself. Shed hunting during winter months is another thing that can put great stress on a herd but I am sure many people that are against baiting do not want that to end either.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 04, 2011, 02:18:38 PM
I've never been a fan of baiting for deer and elk. I have been for bear, mostly for the fact that you could tell much more easily ( get to observe longer) and be able to differentiate between a sow with possible cubs or not. I don't think I have ever spoke out against deer baiting, except maybe some of the salt damage done to areas to people who don't have a CLUE what it does. Mostly because I tend to be that conservative mind, if it doesn't effect me, leave it alone.
:yeah:
I wish everyone had your mindset.
Post by: Cougeyes on January 04, 2011, 02:37:07 PM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 04, 2011, 03:05:15 PM
I just think it would be more rewarding to scout your butt off, pattern the deer whether with your own eyes or a trailcam, chose a trail that you feel will produce a buck and stick it out in a tree stand without the aid of luring them in with food. It doesn't seem real sporting to me. This is a very controversial topic. To me a person hunting over bait doesn't necessarily do their "homework". A lot of people just pick a spot and dump bait out in hopes something comes in. They restock it to keep the animals persistence up in hopes of harvesting them. And I would bet money that people who hunt over bait vs not over bait but still in a stand have a higher success rate overall and a higher success rate of trophy animals.Your bring out a very key point of why I believe another hunter shouldn't permenantly vote away another hunters right to bait (or any other right for that matter) when you say "I just think it would be more rewarding to scout your butt off, pattern the deer whether with your own eyes or a trailcam, chose a trail that you feel will produce a buck and stick it out in a tree stand without the aid of luring them in with food." When you say that you drive home a point that I bring up constantly on this site in the fact that people want to make it illegal primarily because it doensn't appeal to their sense of hunting. It is literally the first point that most people bring up and the point they defend the most when they make an argurment against baiting. We all hunt for different reasons and have our own beliefs about things but we shouldn't take the anti-hunters side and give away hunters rights simply because it doesn't appeal to our personal sense of hunting. Trail cameras do not appeal to other people sense of hunting. Tree stands don't appeal to many other peoples sense of hunting.. and so and and so forth.
Just because a person baits it doesn't mean they don't scout their butt off. When I bait it's not like I ignore everything else I ever learned about hunting and ignore my "homework". There is plenty of homework to be done and I think that is one thing that many people who don't bait do not understand. I and many other people that bait spend far more time in the field glassing, scouting and setting up bait than most people I know. I know because I am out there and I hardly see anyone (aside from other people who bait) until right before the season..then suddenly you have guys popping up everywhere that you have never seen in the field before despite the fact you are practically living in the mountains.
Post by: Cougeyes on January 04, 2011, 05:09:03 PM
Post by: huntnnw on January 04, 2011, 05:20:25 PM
On a side note about baiting ..I bait deer alot...most of my time baiting is in the summer to see what caliber of bucks are in the area. The 3 biggest whitetails I have ever killed were never off a bait or near one. Its not as easy as some think on here to Just dump feed and shazaam big bucks everywhere. Ask alwinearcher about my year. :chuckle: I spent hundreds of hours And 5 cameras from July to mid December to come up with no real giants. Its not easy and spendy
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 04, 2011, 07:47:15 PM
You're absolutely right, what i say it just my :twocents: my opinion and nothing else. I shouldn't let it bother me, but it still does. I know some people that hunt over bait and they have spent countless hours in the woods, checking cameras figuring out where to hang their stands so not all that hunt over bait haven't done their "homework". This topic could and probably will always be debated. People always argue are food plots considered baiting? Are scent lures? There are good arguments on both sides and this has already been debated on here and we dont need to get into details anymore.
I definitely know what you mean, find your :twocents: to be very valid and agree their are strong arguments for both.
Post by: Hangfire on January 04, 2011, 08:50:47 PM
There are those who are baiting bear and turkey saying they are placing bait for deer.
I know one senior in high school who's senior project has revolved around deer baiting. He has purchased 4 cameras and recorded activity on random trails, how it changed when bait added, how different baits draw animals, and how long until normal behavior resumes after baiting ceased.
I think that baiting in areas of development can attract deer to a safe spot for harvest,
and possibly provide a means for elderly, handicapped, and youth to harvest a animal. Bait can also attract deer to a area where animals can be taken, from areas where hunting is not safe, allowed, or heavily posted by nonhunters. They all complain when the roses get eaten.
All the parameters of baiting are being looked, at we need to know what we want and how we feel. There are to many factors to baiting, to cover in this posting.
Post by: huntnnw on January 04, 2011, 09:56:24 PM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 04, 2011, 10:01:47 PM
That is another reason I have baited, as Spokane county is almost all private. To bring deer to the little chunks that you can hunt, that otherwise are not very good areas to hunt if you were trying to ambush.
Funny you mention that. It is the sole reason I started baiting. I had a 15 acre property that the deer were using but I wanted them to spend a little more time in the area. It really brought the does in heavy and in a small one week window of late season that place was magical!!
Post by: bobcat on January 04, 2011, 10:20:50 PM
Post by: huntnnw on January 04, 2011, 10:21:25 PM
Post by: huntnnw on January 04, 2011, 10:25:09 PM
Post by: bobcat on January 04, 2011, 10:28:41 PM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 04, 2011, 10:30:22 PM
how is an electric feeder or someone dumping feed different?. If you have used any of the electric feeders u would know that they dont even come close to the all u can eat buffet that happens when u dont use feeders. There is no control over the amount, its a free for all till its gone and u have to keep feed there constantly. People who dont use feeders, feed triple the amount as those who do use feeders.
Triple the amount...that would be me... it isn't cheap... I tell people that my venison is the most expensive meat they will ever eat so they better enjoy it.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 04, 2011, 10:33:52 PM
I've never had anything against baiting, but then I never really thought it was that prevalent either. If it were really having a negative effect on deer numbers I could see myself changing my opinion. But I don't know. There are certain "degrees" of baiting that might rub me the wrong way. Like baiting with an electronic feeder, on a small parcel of private property, drawing all the game off of adjacent public land. I think what I really don't like, is when outfitters bait deer (and elk) for their clients to just come in and make a quick and easy kill. It's not so bad in my mind if a hunter is doing all the work, because I know baiting does take a lot of time and effort- but for an outfitter to do it so his clients can have an easy hunt, for some reason it seems "wrong" to me.I think the larger pieces are the ones you would need to worry about. On the smallest pieces they regularly travel on and off the property. I had a property like that and the bucks were always coming off of and going back to the public land.
Post by: huntnnw on January 04, 2011, 10:34:52 PM
That is my point to draw deer off.. some of us dont have the luxuries of private,alot of the chunks we can hunt around here are timber land, which usually means it has been logged and is very open and doesnt hold the deer.
Post by: bobcat on January 04, 2011, 10:47:34 PM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 04, 2011, 11:01:03 PM
Well, as I said, I never really thought baiting was as prevalent as it seems to be now. I always thought this was how Texans hunt. But if I had the place to do it I'd probably give it a shot. Actually I think what I'd prefer is a food plot that would be more of a permanent food source.
Without a doubt brother...a food plot, orchard, or high quality crop field is what I would prefer too. In the deep woods mountainous terrain we hunt it is nice to have the option of placing a bait pile since we can't have the others (short of owning land or having permission to prime private lands). I think baiting is a huge benefit for public land users since our mountains just don't have the crop fields of the midwest. There are some nice natural food sources in the mountains but they are usually not as concentrated and more beneficial to a rifle hunter than a bowhunter trying to pattern an animal (one of the funnest parts of hunting a big whitetail..the game of chess) and get within 20-30 yards.
Post by: BeeMan on January 04, 2011, 11:18:21 PM
And most hunters have no problem using agricultural areas (alfalfa and grain fields, orchards, etc...) to their advantage while chasing big game. Those agricultural areas are not "natural" and are "baiting" those animals, but no one seems to see it that way!
I guarantee there are way more "lazy hunters" that sit in their trucks and drive the back roads and never walk more than a few feet from their trucks to shoot a deer (I see dozens of them every year!) than there are that use bait to harvest an animal, but no one seems to complain about them. :dunno:
I will bet that allot of us that use bait have more time, money, and effort invested in the harvesting of our animals than many of those that use other methods. Not to mention the hundreds of tons of free food that is dumped into the woods for these animals to fatten up on before winter, not only benefiting the animals, but also the rest of the hunting community that will harvest deer that otherwise would not have built up enough fat reserves to survive the winter (i.e... bucks that just came out of the rut and ran off all of their winter reserves chasing does, especially on heavy snow years like this!)
I think that most (not all) who are against baiting are simply jealous of the results they see from that method. :'( They see it as an unfair advantage and because it doesn't conform to their idea of "hunting" they line up in opposition to it!
I have no problem with anyone using any legal method that they choose to harvest an animal, wether I agree with it or not. I simply ask for the same respect in return. We are all sportsman and should have the utmost respect for the animals we persue, we just employ different methods in obtaining the same end.
Post by: huntnnw on January 04, 2011, 11:24:03 PM
Post by: PolarBear on January 04, 2011, 11:33:40 PM
Post by: huntnnw on January 04, 2011, 11:36:03 PM
Post by: BeeMan on January 04, 2011, 11:37:19 PM
Baiting is huge in NE WA for whiteys. I dont even know a bowhunter around here that doesnt bait and I know lot of bowhunters!
You ask most any one of them and they will tell you that the conditions this year were perfect for getting decent bucks, This year was abnormal in that regard. Most bow hunters hunt for years and never kill 150+ bucks. Usually end up taking a small one at the end of the season. I will probably hunt for the next 30 years and never get one as big as I did this year! Baiting had a role but in other years it doesent play as big of a factor as it did this year!
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 04, 2011, 11:39:35 PM
That is funny, I know a lot of bowhunters in the 101 unit and none of us have to cheat, I mean use bait.
Take them out with your bare hands do you?
Post by: huntnnw on January 04, 2011, 11:39:44 PM
Post by: BeeMan on January 04, 2011, 11:42:23 PM
lately the winters have been big in the late, been several winters in the last 5 years that dumped alot of snow in the late
true but not as early as it did this year! And in a few of those years it melted off within a few days of coming down
Post by: PolarBear on January 04, 2011, 11:44:50 PM
Nope, just with my bow, a treestand and many years of experience.That is funny, I know a lot of bowhunters in the 101 unit and none of us have to cheat, I mean use bait.
Take them out with your bare hands do you?
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 04, 2011, 11:49:18 PM
Plenty of guys I know think our treestands are cheating too.Nope, just with my bow, a treestand and many years of experience.That is funny, I know a lot of bowhunters in the 101 unit and none of us have to cheat, I mean use bait.
Take them out with your bare hands do you?
Post by: Elkslayer on January 04, 2011, 11:52:29 PM
Just by the photos and stories on here and elsewhere i think there is a high success hunting over bait and personally believe it should be illegal :twocents:
This statement can go both ways as with any other argument on here. "Just by the photos and stories on here this year alone I think there is a higher success rate in hunting during the late rifle season during the rut." We could argue that maybe that season should be illegal to! :dunno:
Post by: PolarBear on January 04, 2011, 11:52:54 PM
Post by: BeeMan on January 04, 2011, 11:53:14 PM
Plenty of guys I know think our treestands are cheating too.Nope, just with my bow, a treestand and many years of experience.That is funny, I know a lot of bowhunters in the 101 unit and none of us have to cheat, I mean use bait.
Take them out with your bare hands do you?
Dont forget about our rangefinders...deffinately cheating. :chuckle:
Post by: BeeMan on January 04, 2011, 11:56:19 PM
Post by: huntnnw on January 05, 2011, 12:03:10 AM
Post by: BeeMan on January 05, 2011, 12:07:37 AM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 05, 2011, 12:09:40 AM
There is a world of difference between sitting in a tree waiting for a buck to walk by and conditioning it to come to a certain spot altering it's natural feeding habits. I've shot them from a tree without a treestand as well as from the ground.
Of course there is a difference just like with any other methods. I too have shot them from a treestand, from the ground, with bait, without bait, from a blind, stalking, used cameras, haven't used cameras and on and on. They all have their various challenges and I never found one so effective as to deem it cheating.
I have also conditioned deer to travel certain spots by cutting/fixing fences or opening/closing gates on a family farm, downing trees and altering terrain. I have fertilized oak trees, apple trees and kudzu.
I have made mock scrapes, I have added artificial scent to scrape lines and literally conditioned bucks to come into an area.
There is a world of difference in all of these methods just like there is between sitting in a tree and using bait. From treestands to stalking in my socks...it all happens to give me a slight edge, an advantage with a limited range weapon. If I considered those things cheating I couldn't hunt. You are simply choosing one method that you prefer not to use because of whatever advantage it gives great or small and call it cheating.
If you have a problem with disrupting natural feeding habits then why do you hunt??? Almost nothing has a greater impact on natural feeding habits than hunting.
Post by: huntnnw on January 05, 2011, 12:13:47 AM
Post by: BeeMan on January 05, 2011, 12:16:17 AM
There is a world of difference between sitting in a tree waiting for a buck to walk by and conditioning it to come to a certain spot altering it's natural feeding habits. I've shot them from a tree without a treestand as well as from the ground.
Of course there is a difference just like with any other methods. I too have shot them from a treestand, from the ground, with bait, without bait, from a blind, stalking, used cameras, haven't used cameras and on and on. They all have their various challenges and I never found one so effective as to deem it cheating.
I have also conditioned deer to travel certain spots by cutting/fixing fences or opening/closing gates on a family farm, downing trees and altering terrain. I have fertilized oak trees, apple trees and kudzu.
I have made mock scrapes, I have added artificial scent to scrape lines and literally conditioned bucks to come into an area.
There is a world of difference in all of these methods just like there is between sitting in a tree and using bait. From treestands to stalking in my socks...it all happens to give me a slight edge, an advantage with a limited range weapon. If I considered those things cheating I couldn't hunt. You are simply choosing one method that you prefer not to use because of whatever advantage it gives great or small and call it cheating.
If you have a problem with disrupting natural feeding habits then why do you hunt??? Almost nothing has a greater impact on natural feeding habits than hunting.
:yeah: Well said Sir!
Post by: gjbruny on January 05, 2011, 12:21:10 AM
I have been looking at the baiting of deer as done in other states for a few years. I have contacted all the western states except Texas plus a few states from the great lakes region.. After moving back to the N.E. corner after having been gone for 25 years, I was originally against baiting. Things have changed in the N.E. corner, baiting is prevalent and there are a number of abuses. The access to private land or any land has become difficult. I now feel there is a case for legal baiting but, I feel some regulations are do. I would like to see the time that bait for hunting can be limited to some thing like 48 hours before a season the early to mid November. Deer patterns and possibly migration can be influenced by baiting. Deer baiting has been outlawed in the lower peninsula of Michigan because of Bovine Tuberculosis and C.W.D. Other states have regulations pertaining to the type of bait, amount of bait, outlawing bait in Grizzly bear recovery areas.
There are those who are baiting bear and turkey saying they are placing bait for deer.
I know one senior in high school who's senior project has revolved around deer baiting. He has purchased 4 cameras and recorded activity on random trails, how it changed when bait added, how different baits draw animals, and how long until normal behavior resumes after baiting ceased.
I think that baiting in areas of development can attract deer to a safe spot for harvest,
and possibly provide a means for elderly, handicapped, and youth to harvest a animal. Bait can also attract deer to a area where animals can be taken, from areas where hunting is not safe, allowed, or heavily posted by nonhunters. They all complain when the roses get eaten.
All the parameters of baiting are being looked, at we need to know what we want and how we feel. There are to many factors to baiting, to cover in this posting.
now that is a fantastic post!!!!!.... while i don't hunt over them, i don't despise baiting but i think regulating it or eliminating it for a while to help the herd could be a great thing.... especially if it meant that we could keep the days we currently have or even get back the days that we have lost in the season.
some people "think" (here we go again) that what is good for one is good for all and that mind set is dangerous... i see it all the time in the Trad circles and it comes off as an elitest attitude to those outside that circle.... not good.
when the discussion of baiting comes up, the argument comes up of "what if we took decoys away from duck hunters.... or baiting away for bears.... or hounds away from lion hunting.... or bait away from fishing.... the thing is, like a solid management plan, all species are different and micro management is critical. in this situation, what works for one, doesn't necessarily apply to others.
for instance, how many times does everyone here see bears in the woods? now how often do those that do see them, see them within bow range or can get within bow range? bait hunting bears is one of the few ways to truly hunt them and especially with a bow..... partly because there are so few of them compared to other species as well as them not being an animal that is particularly patternable. If this were prince of whales island, it would be a different story…. But here?
now take whitetails.... how many times do we see them (other than every single day). and with a little homework, how often can we get within bow range without bait (other than every singe day :)). deer are creatures of habit and are patternable. not to mention that there are tons of them. are baits as essential to deer hunting as they are to bear hunting?
another example is the use of dogs for lions. hounds are legal in a number of states to hunt deer. how many here would like to see them legal in WA for deer hunting..... imagine sitting in complete silence or still hunting and then a pack of dogs comes barreling through the woods with deer blowing out in every direction and shots are ringing out everywhere.... sound like fun? i can attest that the few states that still allow dogs for deer don't have very good deer hunting.... or i should say good quality deer hunting. but i am guessing that most here would be for bringing back dogs for Lion hunting to get them under control and keep them there right? so would it be safe to assume that these same people would be happy to see the use of dogs in deer hunting here? If not, well isn’t that like taking baiting away from fishing and taking baiting away from deer hunting? (sarcasm)
the fact is, different species have different habits and require different tactics. bears are different from lions, lions are different fromj deer and elk. to say that baiting bears or fish is the same as baiting deer and elk is a silly analogy.
the comment above about baiting changing deer's natural movements is so very true. 2 of the farms i hunt are comprised of about 9k acres. deer in the summer months are very very patternable up until about 2 weeks prior to the early archery season when the few that now know about the adjacent timber CO. land start baiting.... then about 1/3 of the deer are seen on that section of the farm. the same is very true of the late season and now i am worried about the deer that live where my home is this year. the deer were up here hot and heavy but as soon as late gun ended, two guys that bowhunt had baits set up just above the river.... and A LOT of bait sites. the deer were gone almost instantly..... and now they are snow locked down on the river with very very little food as compared to up here around the house where there are Ag fields that they could have wintered on.... and the winter is starting to take it's toll down there now... it is sad to see.
most arguments amongst us wouldn't even exist if it weren't for the element of selfishness. there is no question that baiting increases the odds of either killing animals or killing big animals depending on what the hunter is after. we can talk about how much work it is, how much it costs ect ect. but the bottom line is, you can buy consistently better success rates with baiting vs. hunting without the use of baits..... and hunting without baits IS more work, and more time consuming to keep the success rates up to the levels of baiting. but for some species, it can be next to impossible to hunt them without the use of baits. for some animals such as bears or fish it may be the only realistic way of taking game.... you want to kill a Leopard? your only choice for that hunt is with baits and that includes with a rifle..... and a red light. for other more numerous animals like deer or elk, bait may be desireable... but not neccesary. so if it is ok to use lights on Leopards, should we allow them on deer or elk (ok, some of you please don't answer that LOL).
So it comes back to selfishness…… those that are staunch supporters of baiting deer or elk get upset at the thought of losing that tactic because they know that their success rates will more than likely go down, be it trophies or consistent kills. Those that say it has no place in hunting are upset that it exists because they feel that it is an “easy way” (example) to take animals and think their standard of hunting should be everyone’s. Outfitters in our state will hate it because they know that client success rates will not be as high and they are going to have to work harder to get clients on animals. WDFW will have a hard time getting rid of it because they know that higher success rates generally mean more tags sold and especially more Non-res tags. Everyone has their reason for either wanting or refuting the use of baits and all of them are for selfish reasons…. Instead of thinking about how does it help or hurt the herd.
the argument for or against baiting could go on forever..... it is kind of like technology in hunting and where do we finally draw the line?
Regardless of what happens with baiting….. if it means giving it up for a while (even for using baits to do buck inventories with trail cams) so that we can maintain days or even gain back days in the field, I am all for it…… more importantly, if there is a pilot period and/or units used, and they provide sound evidence that it proves to work to increase the quality of the herd I am even more for it…… and I would hope all of us could put away the selfish cards for a while to let it work if there is evidence that it will.
Post by: PolarBear on January 05, 2011, 12:21:24 AM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 05, 2011, 12:24:52 AM
You guys are funny. Seems like a few folks are overly defensive. I don't really care what you do, if that is what it takes for you to get your deer then have at it. It ain't for me. You don't need to get your panties all in a wad. :rolleyes:
No panties in a wad. Just refuting your weak logic.
I do need to do it because I am not as awesome and experienced of a hunter as you. Please don't vote it out.
Post by: PolarBear on January 05, 2011, 12:29:37 AM
Post by: BeeMan on January 05, 2011, 12:32:49 AM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 05, 2011, 12:34:58 AM
There is the overly defensive thing that I was talking about. I will never vote or push to have it made illegal, I just refuse to participate in it even though It could benefit me due to the fact that I live 400 miles from my "honey hole" and usually only get less than 3-4 days per year to hunt it. Like I said, do what you want as long as it is still legal, I personally don't see any challenge in baiting, it just ain't for me.
Well of course it's defensive. I am defending a position. That is what it is supposed to be. "Overly" defensive. I disagree, it is a calculated response to your commensurate remarks.
Post by: PolarBear on January 05, 2011, 12:36:00 AM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 05, 2011, 12:48:53 AM
I have been looking at the baiting of deer as done in other states for a few years. I have contacted all the western states except Texas plus a few states from the great lakes region.. After moving back to the N.E. corner after having been gone for 25 years, I was originally against baiting. Things have changed in the N.E. corner, baiting is prevalent and there are a number of abuses. The access to private land or any land has become difficult. I now feel there is a case for legal baiting but, I feel some regulations are do. I would like to see the time that bait for hunting can be limited to some thing like 48 hours before a season the early to mid November. Deer patterns and possibly migration can be influenced by baiting. Deer baiting has been outlawed in the lower peninsula of Michigan because of Bovine Tuberculosis and C.W.D. Other states have regulations pertaining to the type of bait, amount of bait, outlawing bait in Grizzly bear recovery areas.
There are those who are baiting bear and turkey saying they are placing bait for deer.
I know one senior in high school who's senior project has revolved around deer baiting. He has purchased 4 cameras and recorded activity on random trails, how it changed when bait added, how different baits draw animals, and how long until normal behavior resumes after baiting ceased.
I think that baiting in areas of development can attract deer to a safe spot for harvest,
and possibly provide a means for elderly, handicapped, and youth to harvest a animal. Bait can also attract deer to a area where animals can be taken, from areas where hunting is not safe, allowed, or heavily posted by nonhunters. They all complain when the roses get eaten.
All the parameters of baiting are being looked, at we need to know what we want and how we feel. There are to many factors to baiting, to cover in this posting.
now that is a fantastic post!!!!!.... while i don't hunt over them, i don't despise baiting but i think regulating it or eliminating it for a while to help the herd could be a great thing.... especially if it meant that we could keep the days we currently have or even get back the days that we have lost in the season.
some people "think" (here we go again) that what is good for one is good for all and that mind set is dangerous... i see it all the time in the Trad circles and it comes off as an elitest attitude to those outside that circle.... not good.
when the discussion of baiting comes up, the argument comes up of "what if we took decoys away from duck hunters.... or baiting away for bears.... or hounds away from lion hunting.... or bait away from fishing.... the thing is, like a solid management plan, all species are different and micro management is critical. in this situation, what works for one, doesn't necessarily apply to others.
for instance, how many times does everyone here see bears in the woods? now how often do those that do see them, see them within bow range or can get within bow range? bait hunting bears is one of the few ways to truly hunt them and especially with a bow..... partly because there are so few of them compared to other species as well as them not being an animal that is particularly patternable. If this were prince of whales island, it would be a different story…. But here?
now take whitetails.... how many times do we see them (other than every single day). and with a little homework, how often can we get within bow range without bait (other than every singe day :)). deer are creatures of habit and are patternable. not to mention that there are tons of them. are baits as essential to deer hunting as they are to bear hunting?
another example is the use of dogs for lions. hounds are legal in a number of states to hunt deer. how many here would like to see them legal in WA for deer hunting..... imagine sitting in complete silence or still hunting and then a pack of dogs comes barreling through the woods with deer blowing out in every direction and shots are ringing out everywhere.... sound like fun? i can attest that the few states that still allow dogs for deer don't have very good deer hunting.... or i should say good quality deer hunting. but i am guessing that most here would be for bringing back dogs for Lion hunting to get them under control and keep them there right? so would it be safe to assume that these same people would be happy to see the use of dogs in deer hunting here? If not, well isn’t that like taking baiting away from fishing and taking baiting away from deer hunting? (sarcasm)
the fact is, different species have different habits and require different tactics. bears are different from lions, lions are different fromj deer and elk. to say that baiting bears or fish is the same as baiting deer and elk is a silly analogy.
the comment above about baiting changing deer's natural movements is so very true. 2 of the farms i hunt are comprised of about 9k acres. deer in the summer months are very very patternable up until about 2 weeks prior to the early archery season when the few that now know about the adjacent timber CO. land start baiting.... then about 1/3 of the deer are seen on that section of the farm. the same is very true of the late season and now i am worried about the deer that live where my home is this year. the deer were up here hot and heavy but as soon as late gun ended, two guys that bowhunt had baits set up just above the river.... and A LOT of bait sites. the deer were gone almost instantly..... and now they are snow locked down on the river with very very little food as compared to up here around the house where there are Ag fields that they could have wintered on.... and the winter is starting to take it's toll down there now... it is sad to see.
most arguments amongst us wouldn't even exist if it weren't for the element of selfishness. there is no question that baiting increases the odds of either killing animals or killing big animals depending on what the hunter is after. we can talk about how much work it is, how much it costs ect ect. but the bottom line is, you can buy consistently better success rates with baiting vs. hunting without the use of baits..... and hunting without baits IS more work, and more time consuming to keep the success rates up to the levels of baiting. but for some species, it can be next to impossible to hunt them without the use of baits. for some animals such as bears or fish it may be the only realistic way of taking game.... you want to kill a Leopard? your only choice for that hunt is with baits and that includes with a rifle..... and a red light. for other more numerous animals like deer or elk, bait may be desireable... but not neccesary. so if it is ok to use lights on Leopards, should we allow them on deer or elk (ok, some of you please don't answer that LOL).
So it comes back to selfishness…… those that are staunch supporters of baiting deer or elk get upset at the thought of losing that tactic because they know that their success rates will more than likely go down, be it trophies or consistent kills. Those that say it has no place in hunting are upset that it exists because they feel that it is an “easy way” (example) to take animals and think their standard of hunting should be everyone’s. Outfitters in our state will hate it because they know that client success rates will not be as high and they are going to have to work harder to get clients on animals. WDFW will have a hard time getting rid of it because they know that higher success rates generally mean more tags sold and especially more Non-res tags. Everyone has their reason for either wanting or refuting the use of baits and all of them are for selfish reasons…. Instead of thinking about how does it help or hurt the herd.
the argument for or against baiting could go on forever..... it is kind of like technology in hunting and where do we finally draw the line?
Regardless of what happens with baiting….. if it means giving it up for a while (even for using baits to do buck inventories with trail cams) so that we can maintain days or even gain back days in the field, I am all for it…… more importantly, if there is a pilot period and/or units used, and they provide sound evidence that it proves to work to increase the quality of the herd I am even more for it…… and I would hope all of us could put away the selfish cards for a while to let it work if there is evidence that it will.
GJ; well written. I do disagree with you on several points but thank you for making a well thought out biological argument against baiting.
I strongly disagree with "and hunting without baits IS more work, and more time consuming to keep the success rates up to the levels of baiting."
and
"there is no question that baiting increases the odds of either killing animals or killing big animals depending on what the hunter is after." In the state of WA..with or without bait I have never seen a time where killing a legal whitetail within a few days would be an issue. With big animals I see an ever so slight advantage but there is also an advantage to hunting in areas where baits are non-existent.... Whitetail hunting in ID and Montana is great without baiting and I haven't noticed any lower success rates on big bucks than we see here.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 05, 2011, 12:50:51 AM
:chuckle:
I know you are enjoying yourself. It's easy to get me started. :chuckle:
Post by: BeeMan on January 05, 2011, 12:55:34 AM
I have to disagree that its a bad analogy. You are right that all animals are different and have different habits but no matter what tactic you use the end goal is the same. To suggest that baiting is ok for one because there is less of that species and they are a harder to hunt (bear) doesn't hold any weight with me. If you hunt hard enough you can kill a bear or deer without bait, but u can also kill them with bait and it doesn't mean its any less ok in either situation. (legality permitting) And I'm sorry I don't see it as being selfish if I'm trying to defend a preferred hunting method. You would also see success rates go down if u took scopes off of rifles and to suggest that rifle hunters would be being selfish if they got upset over it is absurd. The selfishness comes into play when people get jealous about something someone else is doing that they feel gives the other person an advantage and that's exactly what is happening here.
Post by: gjbruny on January 05, 2011, 01:40:17 AM
as far as the analogy thing goes..... rifles and scopes are a totally separate issue. modern firearms are just that.... modern.... anything goes..... and remember, telescopic sights were around before modern cartridge guns.... so we could make the argument that they should be used on muzzys. while i do agree that limiting rifles to open sights would decrease success to some degree, do you think the percentage would be as great as when bear baiting was outlawed? we'll never know any hard numbers but i think we know the answer.
the bear thing was brought up as an example..... i do consitently kill bears..... with a bow...... without baits..... by stalking.... in WA. trust me when i say..... i am not jealous of anyone or what they do. i can and do kill big animals very consistently in multiple states. i'm not trying to be pompous, just stating a fact.
so would you be for or against the use of hounds in deer hunting here in WA?
Post by: jager on January 05, 2011, 01:54:06 AM
No one asked but here is my :twocents: ......
I am neither for or against baiting whitetails. Never done it but...ya never know
Based on what I have seen on this forum ....this year I would say that the guys doing the baiting seem to have an advantage....let me rephrase that.
The guys baiting seemed to have a much higher success rate on Mature....I'm talking 150 inch bucks or better. Granted, there may be other factors involved, such as the weather this year.
Regardless....there were a bunch of big whiteys killed. That is what is being hunted here...big bucks.
The big bucks have to be there to begin with but I don't think that you can't deny....concentrating (attracting) the deer into certain area does up your odds...considerably
As was said earlier..camo, scents, hunting the wind, etc. up the odds. That's what we try to do. I think it's human nature to try and get to the end result in the best way possible.
I used to bait bear when it was legal. It was a lot of work! I did it because I could be selective and it upped my odds of seeing a large boar.
If that's what a guy wants to do have at it.
The only negative thing that t think that may occur in the future is, if the baiting becomes to prevalent is the influence on migration and winter health of the deer...if that becomes a factor then, I hate to say it....it may need to be regulated.
When the hound hunting, baiting, trapping initiatives went through. It was because the general public didn't understand AND because the sportsman didn't understand what this would lead to.
We need to stick together or we are screwed!
Post by: boneaddict on January 05, 2011, 05:11:03 AM
Post by: BeeMan on January 05, 2011, 06:38:07 AM
beeman- sure it is selfish.... we all are by nature. defending a "preferred method" is being selfish if it is for a want of yours. it is hard to convey the tone in my voice through a keyboard so please don't think what i am saying is like me calling you a selfish prick (that is an example, not what i am actually saying LOL). the reason you are defending it is because YOU like it..... not because of what it may or may not do for the herd.
as far as the analogy thing goes..... rifles and scopes are a totally separate issue. modern firearms are just that.... modern.... anything goes..... and remember, telescopic sights were around before modern cartridge guns.... so we could make the argument that they should be used on muzzys. while i do agree that limiting rifles to open sights would decrease success to some degree, do you think the percentage would be as great as when bear baiting was outlawed? we'll never know any hard numbers but i think we know the answer.
the bear thing was brought up as an example..... i do consitently kill bears..... with a bow...... without baits..... by stalking.... in WA. trust me when i say..... i am not jealous of anyone or what they do. i can and do kill big animals very consistently in multiple states. i'm not trying to be pompous, just stating a fact.
so would you be for or against the use of hounds in deer hunting here in WA?
First off, If its selfish to want to defend my right to use a certain method than I guess I'm guilty! :)
I happen to believe that every other sportsman would do the same if their methods were being attacked.
(Not so much by you but by the approach most take when they cite their arguments against baiting.)
I guess we are all selfish then.
Second I know that rifles and scopes are a completely different issue that's the point. I may not use that method but just cause I don't use it doesent mean I'm out to get it banned! Rifles have a much more negative impact on deer populations than baits so why no fuss over their use? ;)
I know the bear thing was an example, so was my comparisons to other methods, I'm not saying it cant be done without bait, it obviously can. Just don't agree that it should be ok for one animal (Bear) and not for (Deer)!
And I would be against hounds for hunting deer, It would be too hard getting the deer out of the tree after I killed it!..... :chuckle:
I know there are plenty of hunters that have great success using different methods, nothing against any of them, why not the same courtesy in return? :dunno:
Post by: huntnnw on January 05, 2011, 06:43:39 AM
Post by: gjbruny on January 05, 2011, 12:25:07 PM
I guess we are all selfish then.
that was my point exactly.... and yes.... we all are if we are defending something that may prove to go agains the greater good (increased herd quality). i'm not saying that baiting does or doesn't, just that if there is evidence that the herd would bennefit from bait restrictions, then why not give it a try..... especially if it give all hunters more days in the field? kind of a win win.
Second I know that rifles and scopes are a completely different issue that's the point. I may not use that method but just cause I don't use it doesent mean I'm out to get it banned! Rifles have a much more negative impact on deer populations than baits so why no fuss over their use? ;)
i don't see the WDFW ever doing anything too drastic, but actually, many midwest states have done just that. some counties in Iowa and Wisconsin are only allowed to use shotguns during their "gun" season while other units are allowed rifles with scopes. this was employed for the reasons you mentioned and it has worked..... but just like different species require different tactics, different terrain may require a different firearm choice. ;)
Just don't agree that it should be ok for one animal (Bear) and not for (Deer)!
And I would be against hounds for hunting deer, It would be too hard getting the deer out of the tree after I killed it!..... :chuckle:
i'm with you on not wanting hounds during deer or elk season..... but is that not another hunting strategy that some others seem to enjoy? yet many of us would love to see it back in the mainstream for lions and bears right? so what gives?
the fact is that some animals, as much as we want to admit it or not, require different tactics to properly manage them ( kill them) and keep their numbers in check. the "Average Joe" as well as the seasoned bear hunter is FAR less successful and as a result less tags are sold without the use of baits.... a perfect example to that fact is how bear and lion tags are now sold vs. how they used to be sold before dogs and baits were outlawed. the WDFW makes sure they get their money by their tag sales structure.
deer and elk are infact different in the way that they can be hunted. turkeys are no different. do we need baits to kill them? definately not.... but could baiting them be effective in getting numbers of them back in check? i think so.
personally, i think that if used as a management tool, that baiting can be a great method to control herds or flocks. Turkeys are a prime example.... we have so many in certain areas that it is borderline rediculous and i truly think theiur numbers have an adverse effect on the carrying capacity for deer and elk in certain areas. for instance, where i live, we have 3-500 birds at any given time around the house.... you should see what they can do to a winter wheat field in a week's time. if they were managed properly, we could get the flocks down to more controlled numbers in a season or two. instead of lumping turkey hunters into the late archery season (here is my selfishness) and or giving them the last few days of september that used to be early archery season.... lets give all hunters 6 tags in the spring and bait the hell out of them. once numbers are back in check, we eliminate baiting again.
i'm not saying baiting is bad by any means.... and in many cases i think it is great for a management tool. but if it came down to having less days in the field and no baiting or a few days in the field with baiting, i know where my vote will firmly be.
Post by: BeeMan on January 05, 2011, 09:52:45 PM
Baiting doesn't guarantee that you will kill an animal. All of the bow hunters that I know that use bait would still kill their deer every year if baiting was banned, we simply use the method because we enjoy the experience that it provides. If it were not an option we would use a different method and still kill the same number of animals.
And I quite frankly don't see any evidence that it is detrimental to heard health, in fact I see it the exact opposite. Baiting is the only hunting method that I know of that actually gives something beneficial back to the very animals we are targeting. You cant tell me that alfalfa, corn, grain, mineral blocks etc... don't boost whitetail health and increase their survival rates going into winter. The deer obviously recognize this as well, otherwise they wouldn't show any interest in the baits. They go to the baits because they recognize it as a great food source, just as they recognize alfalfa fields etc.. as a great food source and they utilize them all year long. Any given bait can have as many as 20-40 deer coming in on a regular basis, of these only 1 (and in many cases none) are killed and the rest reap the benefits of free food and fatter bellies. Yes it alters their natural feeding habits, (temporarily!) As soon as the baits are gone they go right back to their old patterns, habits and wintering areas! (fatter and happier i might add.) These animals have survived all that nature has thrown at them and thrived for thousands of years and I don't think that a few bails of hay put out for them to eat a few weeks out of each year has any negative impact on their future prospects of survival.
And, lastly my response concerning hounds was meant to get a chuckle. Not my true feelings on the issue. I would have no problem letting someone use hounds for hunting Bear, Cougar, and Deer if it were legal. Using hounds for hunting deer is still legal in other places (Arkansas for example) and has been for decades. I don't look on those hunters any differently for using that method. The few that do it obviously enjoy it and have used that method for years, probably since this country was founded and I'm sure Arkansas still has healthy deer populations. Just because I wouldn't use hounds doesent mean that I would try to take that right away from others if they are doing it legally.
Post by: jager on January 05, 2011, 10:21:34 PM
Posted by: BeeMan
Quote
And I quite frankly don't see any evidence that it is detrimental to heard health, in fact I see it the exact opposite. Baiting is the only hunting method that I know of that actually gives something beneficial back to the very animals we are targeting. You cant tell me that alfalfa, corn, grain, mineral blocks etc... don't boost whitetail health and increase their survival rates going into winter. The deer obviously recognize this as well, otherwise they wouldn't show any interest in the baits. They go to the baits because they recognize it as a great food source, just as they recognize alfalfa fields etc.. as a great food source and they utilize them all year long. Any given bait can have as many as 20-40 deer coming in on a regular basis, of these only 1 (and in many cases none) are killed and the rest reap the benefits of free food and fatter bellies. Yes it alters their natural feeding habits, (temporarily!) As soon as the baits are gone they go right back to their old patterns, habits and wintering areas! (fatter and happier i might add.) These animals have survived all that nature has thrown at them and thrived for thousands of years and I don't think that a few bails of hay put out for them to eat a few weeks out of each year has any negative impact on their future prospects of survival.
I'm not knocking the practice baiting....but here's an fyi.
January 9, 2008
KLAMATH FALLS (AP) — Humans who feel sorry for the deer in the winter can do more harm by feeding them, say some wildlife experts.
Six deer found dead in the Klamath Falls area recently probably died because they were fed an improper diet by humans, officials say.
“Looking at some stomach contents, I’m seeing grain and alfalfa and things they’re not supposed to be eating this time of year,” said Liz Diver, who operates the nonprofit Badger Run Wildlife Rehabilitation Center. “I’ve also run into people in the feed store buying grain for the deer, which can be fatal.”
She said people believe they’re helping deer by feeding them during the winter, she said.
“When you give them apples, carrots, alfalfa and grain, their gut cannot handle it,” Diver said. “They get something very similar to colic.”
Tom Collom, district wildlife biologist with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, agreed.
He said deer have complex digestive tracts that depend on proper levels of vitamins, minerals and bacteria to digest food.
“If they are subjected to a quick change in diet it takes their system quite a while to change that bacteria makeup to be able to digest that food,” Collom said. “It sets the stage where animals can starve to death on a full stomach.”
A rapid change in diet actually inhibits the deer’s ability to use the food they take in, he said.
Collom said feeding wildlife other than birds is against the law in the city of Klamath Falls under an ordinance approved in the 1990s.
Diver said she’s trying to spread the word that feeding deer might end up killing them.
“Sometimes it’s accidental,” Diver said. “The deer are getting into people’s hay barns where they’ve got it stashed for their horses.
“But you can also walk into feed stores and find people buying sacks of grain and things with the intent of feeding the deer because they feel sorry for them.”
AND.....
http://wdfw.wa.gov/living/winter_feeding/wildlife.html (http://wdfw.wa.gov/living/winter_feeding/wildlife.html)
If you read this you will see they are talking about feeding throughout the winter....not feeding for a few weeks then when the season is over....no more free food.
Also, I would imagine it would be different if the deer were near naturally occurring agricultural fields, not in heavily forested areas with no supplimental feed.
Post by: huntnnw on January 05, 2011, 11:38:43 PM
Post by: buck man on January 05, 2011, 11:40:01 PM
I guess its time to come out of hiding and let the lead fly. I love reading the posts so I guess I will post my first. To respond to mater post on feeding the deer and the K-falls or study those are all mule deer and the biologist is correct when stating that the deer couldn't assimilate the feed. Whitetails and mulies may be related and even eat similar food but whitetails will and almost always adapt go a new food source very rapidly. I happen to feed deer all winter and have for 7 years now and my "local" herd has grown from about a.dozen animals to a little over thirty with a buck to doe ratio of about 2.5 to 1. I realize not everyone can do what I do for the deer but winter mortality in my area is nill and we have great rut action just like its supposed to be. I only manage about three hundred acres with several pieces of state around me so not only do I benefit during bow season but other hunters on the sate land do to. I must say that alot of the posts don't bold water in my humble opinion but alot do. I must echo what many have said in the past though is we are all hunters and must put our differences aside cause if we don't we will soon lose all our hunting privileges.
Post by: huntnnw on January 05, 2011, 11:44:12 PM
Post by: buck man on January 06, 2011, 12:06:44 AM
feeding whitetails smack in the middle of a bad winter is too late. Read what happened in MI years ago, spent millions to feed the deer during one of their worst winters ever, thousands of deer died with full bellys of alfalfa. When deer get to the point of starvation, enzymes in their stomachs change to ba able digest woody browse things otherwise they would never eat, spring and summer.. u introduce leafy green alfalfa and they cant break it down, bloat and diemy point exactly. I feed all winter and don't stop untill the deer quit coming to the feed sometime in march. That MI fiasco was sad though. UT had a similar experience also years ago. As far as baits go they are not out usually long enough to do any harm.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 06, 2011, 12:07:52 AM
:yeah:
Posted by: BeeManQuoteAnd I quite frankly don't see any evidence that it is detrimental to heard health, in fact I see it the exact opposite. Baiting is the only hunting method that I know of that actually gives something beneficial back to the very animals we are targeting. You cant tell me that alfalfa, corn, grain, mineral blocks etc... don't boost whitetail health and increase their survival rates going into winter. The deer obviously recognize this as well, otherwise they wouldn't show any interest in the baits. They go to the baits because they recognize it as a great food source, just as they recognize alfalfa fields etc.. as a great food source and they utilize them all year long. Any given bait can have as many as 20-40 deer coming in on a regular basis, of these only 1 (and in many cases none) are killed and the rest reap the benefits of free food and fatter bellies. Yes it alters their natural feeding habits, (temporarily!) As soon as the baits are gone they go right back to their old patterns, habits and wintering areas! (fatter and happier i might add.) These animals have survived all that nature has thrown at them and thrived for thousands of years and I don't think that a few bails of hay put out for them to eat a few weeks out of each year has any negative impact on their future prospects of survival.
I'm not knocking the practice baiting....but here's an fyi.
January 9, 2008
KLAMATH FALLS (AP) — Humans who feel sorry for the deer in the winter can do more harm by feeding them, say some wildlife experts.
Six deer found dead in the Klamath Falls area recently probably died because they were fed an improper diet by humans, officials say.
“Looking at some stomach contents, I’m seeing grain and alfalfa and things they’re not supposed to be eating this time of year,” said Liz Diver, who operates the nonprofit Badger Run Wildlife Rehabilitation Center. “I’ve also run into people in the feed store buying grain for the deer, which can be fatal.”
She said people believe they’re helping deer by feeding them during the winter, she said.
“When you give them apples, carrots, alfalfa and grain, their gut cannot handle it,” Diver said. “They get something very similar to colic.”
Tom Collom, district wildlife biologist with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, agreed.
He said deer have complex digestive tracts that depend on proper levels of vitamins, minerals and bacteria to digest food.
“If they are subjected to a quick change in diet it takes their system quite a while to change that bacteria makeup to be able to digest that food,” Collom said. “It sets the stage where animals can starve to death on a full stomach.”
A rapid change in diet actually inhibits the deer’s ability to use the food they take in, he said.
Collom said feeding wildlife other than birds is against the law in the city of Klamath Falls under an ordinance approved in the 1990s.
Diver said she’s trying to spread the word that feeding deer might end up killing them.
“Sometimes it’s accidental,” Diver said. “The deer are getting into people’s hay barns where they’ve got it stashed for their horses.
“But you can also walk into feed stores and find people buying sacks of grain and things with the intent of feeding the deer because they feel sorry for them.”
AND.....
http://wdfw.wa.gov/living/winter_feeding/wildlife.html (http://wdfw.wa.gov/living/winter_feeding/wildlife.html)
If you read this you will see they are talking about feeding throughout the winter....not feeding for a few weeks then when the season is over....no more free food.
Also, I would imagine it would be different if the deer were near naturally occurring agricultural fields, not in heavily forested areas with no supplimental feed.
This is the strongest biological argument against baiting. The biological arguments are really the only reason we should end baiting at all. However if we are going to end baiting for these reasons then we must stop the state sanctioned feedings for the exact same reasons because it is worse for the animals than baiting during the hunting seasons. I will explain.
It is the change in diet that is the killer. Deer are ruminants, they have four stomachs with microbes that are great at breaking down browse (woody vegetation). When a deer eats things like alfalfa in the late summer they acquire specifically adapted microbes to digest a specific type of food. When they eat foods that are not part of their diet the microbes will not be present to help in digestion. If they are provided a diet they cannot digest they can starve to death with a full stomach.
The case in Oregon is a perfect example of that. It is in January. The weather is crappy. People feel bad and think they are helping out the deer so they throw a buffet of foods at them that the deer have not been eating. (the state does this to with it's emergency feeding) As a result the deer can't digest it and they starve to death. You see the feed was provided at a time when the animals have been feeding on low quality browse for many weeks. Suddenly they are provided an easy and high quality food source. They eat it but they cannot digest it.
Here is the scenario of baiting for hunting here in WA. You have your serious baiters and your not so serious baiters. Both sometimes do things that are bad for the deer.
First the not so serious baiters:
The bad thing I have noticed about the not so serious baiters is that they will wait until the deer are on a low quality diet, the snow flies, the weather turns to crap and they will throw some bait out because it's a great time to kill an animal over a bait. Obviously this ends up being the same scenario as described in the article. The good thing about this is that it is highly unlikely to kill a deer if a guy throws one or two bags of corn or alfalfa on the ground. There really isn't enough feed there for that to be the animals primary diet for very long and make any huge changes...but it isn't good for them because it will disrupt their digestive tracks going on and off bait.
With the serious baiters you have two kinds.
1. The guys that bait year round... This is probably the best of all scenarios. If the deer can keep a consistent diet they will have the microbes to handle what they need to and shouldn't run into too many issues.
2. The guys that bait from spring/summer until the last day of the season or until the antlers drop. When you stop feeding them at antler drop the deer can run into issues because you suddenly cut off their food supply and they have to depend on low quality browse in the dead of winter...not good. The same can be said for stopping baiting at the end of the season in some cases depending on weather that year. I do think it is best to wean the animals off the bait. I think electronic feeders can be a safe way to limit what the animals get and not have as much of an impact on their digestive tracks.
The animals shouldn't have much of and issue if baiting is allowed in early season but in late season I can see why some guidelines or limitations could be called for in favor of the health of the herd.
I definitely do not think that baiting should be completely made illegal. There are many other things that happen that are much worse for the health of the herd than baiting. If we are going to address baiting we need to address those other things first or in addition to.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 06, 2011, 12:32:09 AM
feeding whitetails smack in the middle of a bad winter is too late. Read what happened in MI years ago, spent millions to feed the deer during one of their worst winters ever, thousands of deer died with full bellys of alfalfa. When deer get to the point of starvation, enzymes in their stomachs change to ba able digest woody browse things otherwise they would never eat, spring and summer.. u introduce leafy green alfalfa and they cant break it down, bloat and die
Yep..that's a great way to kill a lot of animals quick and as you mentioned is nothing like baiting during the hunting season. That is why this article doesn't really apply to this conversation. It is biologically sound but it isn't the same scenario as we are discussing.
I am however happy that people are coming up with biological arguments instead of the "well I don't do it because I am such a great hunter yet have no idea what I am talking about when it comes to baiting so I think it's wrong and should be illegal" arguments that we hear most often.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 06, 2011, 12:44:45 AM
:yeah:feeding whitetails smack in the middle of a bad winter is too late. Read what happened in MI years ago, spent millions to feed the deer during one of their worst winters ever, thousands of deer died with full bellys of alfalfa. When deer get to the point of starvation, enzymes in their stomachs change to ba able digest woody browse things otherwise they would never eat, spring and summer.. u introduce leafy green alfalfa and they cant break it down, bloat and diemy point exactly. I feed all winter and don't stop untill the deer quit coming to the feed sometime in march. That MI fiasco was sad though. UT had a similar experience also years ago. As far as baits go they are not out usually long enough to do any harm.
Buck I think you are spot with what you said about baiting. I think it is a rare and quite possibly non-existent occurrence that baiting during the hunting season does any harm.
My biggest worry is people that start baiting when the weather turns to crap or feeding them a lot of food and then going cold turkey on them in the dead of winter.
There are some strong biological arguments against baiting during the dead of winter; drawing deer to wrong wintering locations, congregating deer in an area that can't support the numbers, drawing the deer through deep snow and away from thermo cover to feed; that is why I say the state feeding is worse than baiting during hunting season. All in all I think the deer are helped more often than hurt by winter feeding...it is those circumstances of changes in diet in the dead of winter that are the worst offender.
Post by: jager on January 06, 2011, 01:18:08 AM
:yeah:feeding whitetails smack in the middle of a bad winter is too late. Read what happened in MI years ago, spent millions to feed the deer during one of their worst winters ever, thousands of deer died with full bellys of alfalfa. When deer get to the point of starvation, enzymes in their stomachs change to ba able digest woody browse things otherwise they would never eat, spring and summer.. u introduce leafy green alfalfa and they cant break it down, bloat and diemy point exactly. I feed all winter and don't stop untill the deer quit coming to the feed sometime in march. That MI fiasco was sad though. UT had a similar experience also years ago. As far as baits go they are not out usually long enough to do any harm.
Buck I think you are spot with what you said about baiting. I think it is a rare and quite possibly non-existent occurrence that baiting during the hunting season does any harm.
My biggest worry is people that start baiting when the weather turns to crap or feeding them a lot of food and then going cold turkey on them in the dead of winter.
There are some strong biological arguments against baiting during the dead of winter; drawing deer to wrong wintering locations, congregating deer in an area that can't support the numbers, drawing the deer through deep snow and away from thermo cover to feed; that is why I say the state feeding is worse than baiting during hunting season. All in all I think the deer are helped more often than hurt by winter feeding...it is those circumstances of changes in diet in the dead of winter that are the worst offender.
What I was trying to get at was...yes there is a difference between feeding for months as opposed to throwing out 100 lbs of corn and some hay for the deer in november then it dumps snow on them... probably/possibly not a good scenario. Lots of factors involved, weather, location, among others......
I too have a good chunk of property.... I used to feed/bait on...it wasn't for hunting purposes but for finding antlers....I'd put out a few bales in early november before the snows hit and by mid December I'd have at least a dozen sets. Prior to feeding I'd find them in this general area already....still do! This is in a wintering area....there was good thermal cover etc. I wasnt bringing them far maybe a mile...maybe less.
As I said before I am neither for or against this. I just think it needs to be done in a resopnsible manner. There's a lot of yahoos out there that do *censored* willy nilly just because they can.
he he..... I said yahoo AND willy nilly in the same sentence :chuckle:
Again we need to stick together not necessarliy agree but stick together...... and there seems to be a lot of debating on here lately.....
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 06, 2011, 01:48:19 AM
Here is what I think is the best management for Whitetail in this state. I am not biologist but whitetails are my passion and I know what has worked out best for other states.
1. Get rid of user groups.
2. Archery season Sep 1 - Dec 15 anybody can hunt it even if they draw other tags and it goes through all seasons (season rules like blaze orange apply)
3. Limit the number of firearm tags and make them for specific units.
4. Shorten the firearm season slightly but not much. (Mid Oct - First week in Nov. at latest.
5. Place Antler Restrictions on all whitetail (preferably spread...aside from being able to age a deer it is the preferred method and it has been done successfully by Georgia....but point restriction is better than nothing)
6. Micromanage the doe harvest as much as possible at a state level.
7. Limit the muzzleloader tags but open access statewide. If someone has an extra doe tag for a certain unit they should be able to use this weapon/season also. Season Dec 1 - Dec 15
8. Keep the one buck limit unless it is shown that the herd could handle more.
Some people argue that this is about big bucks but it's about a healthy herd. Some people argue about winter kill/wolves getting them instead of hunters... completely invalid.. how would killing more deer during the hunting season equal better for the herd if they are being taken out by winter or wolves..it can't (unless the herd is overpopulated and dying from starvation in the winter due to the overpopulation...not a highly likely scenario.. especially if the wolves are there) You give a program like this a few years and hardly anyone would want to go back to the way it used to be. Obviously adjustments may need to be made for season dates.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 06, 2011, 02:00:39 AM
:yeah:feeding whitetails smack in the middle of a bad winter is too late. Read what happened in MI years ago, spent millions to feed the deer during one of their worst winters ever, thousands of deer died with full bellys of alfalfa. When deer get to the point of starvation, enzymes in their stomachs change to ba able digest woody browse things otherwise they would never eat, spring and summer.. u introduce leafy green alfalfa and they cant break it down, bloat and diemy point exactly. I feed all winter and don't stop untill the deer quit coming to the feed sometime in march. That MI fiasco was sad though. UT had a similar experience also years ago. As far as baits go they are not out usually long enough to do any harm.
Buck I think you are spot with what you said about baiting. I think it is a rare and quite possibly non-existent occurrence that baiting during the hunting season does any harm.
My biggest worry is people that start baiting when the weather turns to crap or feeding them a lot of food and then going cold turkey on them in the dead of winter.
There are some strong biological arguments against baiting during the dead of winter; drawing deer to wrong wintering locations, congregating deer in an area that can't support the numbers, drawing the deer through deep snow and away from thermo cover to feed; that is why I say the state feeding is worse than baiting during hunting season. All in all I think the deer are helped more often than hurt by winter feeding...it is those circumstances of changes in diet in the dead of winter that are the worst offender.
What I was trying to get at was...yes there is a difference between feeding for months as opposed to throwing out 100 lbs of corn and some hay for the deer in november then it dumps snow on them... probably/possibly not a good scenario. Lots of factors involved, weather, location, among others......
I too have a good chunk of property.... I used to feed/bait on...it wasn't for hunting purposes but for finding antlers....I'd put out a few bales in early november before the snows hit and by mid December I'd have at least a dozen sets. Prior to feeding I'd find them in this general area already....still do! This is in a wintering area....there was good thermal cover etc. I wasnt bringing them far maybe a mile...maybe less.
As I said before I am neither for or against this. I just think it needs to be done in a resopnsible manner. There's a lot of yahoos out there that do *censored* willy nilly just because they can.
he he..... I said yahoo AND willy nilly in the same sentence :chuckle:
Again we need to stick together not necessarliy agree but stick together...... and there seems to be a lot of debating on here lately.....
I hear you on the sticking together. I think debate is good. I have definitely mulled things over and even had slight changes in ideas or been made to do further research on a subject due to these debates.
Post by: huntnnw on January 06, 2011, 06:29:11 AM
Post by: BeeMan on January 06, 2011, 06:31:17 AM
Post by: buck man on January 06, 2011, 07:27:04 AM
1. Get rid of user groups.
2. Archery season Sep 1 - Dec 15 anybody can hunt it even if they draw other tags and it goes through all seasons (season rules like blaze orange apply)
3. Limit the number of firearm tags and make them for specific units.
4. Shorten the firearm season slightly but not much. (Mid Oct - First week in Nov. at latest.
5. Place Antler Restrictions on all whitetail (preferably spread...aside from being able to age a deer it is the preferred method and it has been done successfully by Georgia....but point restriction is better than nothing)
6. Micromanage the doe harvest as much as possible at a state level.
7. Limit the muzzleloader tags but open access statewide. If someone has an extra doe tag for a certain unit they should be able to use this weapon/season also. Season Dec 1 - Dec 15
8. Keep the one buck limit unless it is shown that the herd could handle more.
Some people argue that this is about big bucks but it's about a healthy herd. Some people argue about winter kill/wolves getting them instead of hunters... completely invalid.. how would killing more deer during the hunting season equal better for the herd if they are being taken out by winter or wolves..it can't (unless the herd is overpopulated and dying from starvation in the winter due to the overpopulation...not a highly likely scenario.. especially if the wolves are there) You give a program like this a few years and hardly anyone would want to go back to the way it used to be. Obviously adjustments may need to be made for season dates.
:brew:
Its nice to see someone out there that can put down in writing what I have been thinking and have written in my hunting journals. I think your proposals are spot on. Its also not as easy to post from my droid as from my lap top so i like it when someone writes what i think. Thanks and good job! :)
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 06, 2011, 07:38:38 AM
People need to realize that the deer that attend these baits don't rely on them as their only source of food. It is intended and is an appealing supplement to their natural food sources. I have watched deer from my stand come to the bait and stop 40 yds away and spend 30 minutes feeding on fir needles and moss. They never came all the way in because they were too cautious for whatever reason, but they didn't leave hungry either. Small doses of feed in late fall don't have as big of an impact on our whitetails digestion as is being portrayed in my opinion. That damage occurs as has been pointed out in the later harsher months. Not during the time baiting is happening. As I said earlier if anything those baits are making those animals have a better chance at survival in the months ahead, benefiting all hunters not just those doing the baiting. If baiting (during hunting season) was hurting deer I would quit in a heartbeat! Ive only seen evidence to the contrary in our area!
:yeah:
This is exactly why I say the cases of a deer having issues from this are much rarer (and possibly non-existent) than opponents to baiting often argue. Obviously they don't bait or have cameras over bait so they can't see that the deer often don't spend that much time at the bait. Now...I will admit occasionally you have a deer (usually the some of the younger ones) that hit the bait pretty heavy. But it is rare for me to have a deer completely gorge themselves on bait. In addition..like you said... we as hunters aren't throwing it at them in the most difficult times for winter survival.
Post by: gjbruny on January 06, 2011, 07:48:52 AM
from a selfish standpoint.... i like having a choose your weapon state. it gives me a lot more of the woods to myself vs. having all the other predominantly gun/muzzy guys out there with me putting more pressure on deer. having said that, it would give everyone A LOT more days in the field and i have seen how well it works in other states.
i'd be all over that plan if we could get it to a vote. the only thing that has me concerned is the hunter to deer ratio..... i would hope that it wouldn't end up reducing the days in the field in the long-run...... but if it is micromanaged, that shouldn't be a problem. maybe even something along the lines of an A and B Tag like Idaho has for elk.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on January 06, 2011, 07:58:12 AM
DB- that is pretty much how the midwest works...... and it has worked!
from a selfish standpoint.... i like having a choose your weapon state. it gives me a lot more of the woods to myself vs. having all the other predominantly gun/muzzy guys out there with me putting more pressure on deer. having said that, it would give everyone A LOT more days in the field and i have seen how well it works in other states.
i'd be all over that plan if we could get it to a vote.
I hear you about the user groups. I always say the limited hunting pressure (at least while whitetail hunting with a bow) is the only thing that I like about the user groups. I think ultimately it will be alright. There will be a lot of guys that won't even bother if they don't draw the rifle tag and then there will be the guys who won't hit it that hard. Most states that have whitetail have them statewide and since we don't there could come a case where we even have to draw for archery tags. Colorado does this but so far the draw process for archery tags has been 100%. I am in favor of getting rid of the user groups because I can see how much they divide us as hunters.
Post by: huntnnw on January 06, 2011, 08:26:29 AM