A pile of corn and a 100 acre cornfield are the same only to someone who has never seen either and can't picture it in their mind. They might also be the same to someone who simply wants to be contrary.
I go back to my litmus test (same one I use on high fences). Kill over bait. Set up the picture. Is the bait pile in the picture or not? Your answer reveals your most honest opinion of a deer killed over bait. By the way, this is very concrete for me regarding deer but I admit to being torn about bears. Also, because I consider exotic hogs a blight on the natural landscape I'd support any (legal) method of getting them dead.
Last year when hunting with my best friend in Indiana I hunted stands bordering a picked cornfield that was about 160 acres. I saw three of the largest bucks I've ever seen during a few of those days - the closest @ 38 yards. I was hunting with a compound. This year I won't hunt the edges of this corn field because the trails are so profuse one can't predict where the deer will enter and then move away from predator(Me)- hiding cover. So, becaue I'm using a recurve and have knocked 10 yards off my effective range I will hunt the woods for closer-funneled-shots.
There seems to be nothing new under the sun when it comes to defending, offending or letting live opinions on baiting. The only thing I see that comes from these threads is that they bring out the worst behavior among many of us. None of us like to be attacked for our hunting choices and I understand that. Even though many of these posts don't directly aim to cricize or judge another hunter's methods, that's how these questions usually come across and end up. I definitely think it is improper to get all puffed up and "demand" others make the same choices (to bait or not, recurve/longbow, far/close, heavy/light, camo/goodwill, etc.) that you make.
It would be recreation for me to read a post that pits recurve shooters vs. longbow shooters. But, I'm sure not going to start one just for fun because my mind is made up on that personal decision and I don't need any back-up for the choice.
I'm a retired wildlife biologist (KY Wildlife Director) but I started as a bowhunter and, God-willing, I'll end as one. I know the hazards to the resource (many are unproven by the way)and that matters to me. Some of these diseases that can be transmitted nose to nose, etc. are nearly impossible to get rid of once in the population. Baiting doesn't cause any of these diseases -- but the pile technique of attracting many animals to the same few square feet may sure help them spread if an infected animal is around. We don't want these diseases. If you don't live in WI or MI or haven't read about the impacts (CWD in WI and TB in MI), you should. The most common reaction of a wildlife agency to do battle with these diseases is to hammer the deer herd -- to as close to zero as possible and start over.
For me, the only scenario I could see myself using bait would be if I hunted small tracts surrounded by small tracts and the neighbors were baiting. In such a case, no matter the quality of your small acreage one might have to join the fray in order to share the fun. I know some of you deal with exactly this situation and I feel for you. I'm not saying I would and I'll do everything I can to keep my options (and mind) more open.
When I watch outdoor tv the only thing that will cause me to turn the channel quicker than evidence of tightly scattered bait is a high fence. The film directors are masters at hiding the fences in these shows but they don't mind pouring a bag of C'mere Deer on the ground for all to see -- especially as the sponsor shells out the motivativion. I even saw in a commercial the other day (because I'd never watch their show)a self-promoting celebrity eating the stuff.
Topic: Baiting pole (Read 2064 times)
