Ethics of hunting at feed stations
- Thread starter tjhands
- Start date
Ron Ankeny
New member
Hunting over a feeder happens to be illegal in my state (Wyoming). So is putting out salt licks, etc. But it's perfectly legal to shoot a migratory elk right off of their winter feedgrounds. In the first case, wholesale baiting is just considered so contrary to fair chase that it was banned. In the second case, it is the method used to manage the herd. When in Rome...
rangermonroe
New member
We are currently having this debate in Georgia. Whether to legalize baiting or not.
I personally have no problem with baiting, but it is harvesting...not hunting.
Even still, I will not condemn the "hunter" who claims his trophy at 200yards under a feeder.
I will, however, have comfort in the Knowledge that I killed my doe in the swamp due to sneakiness.
Kinda like the guy with a can of worms and the guy with a flyrod discussing tactics for trout, and comparing stringers of fish. They both have different mileposts for success.
Or, the buck I patterned for the last two years...watching him grow from a forkhorn to a beautiful 5x6 droptine... to see him in the back of the truck shot by a feeder. Or chasing does...kinda the same thing isn't it?
I hate the thought of "purists" amongst us, dividing us against ourselves.
We are too few.
I would rather have the feeder hunter bag "my" buck than a '04 BMW. Eventually every deer will die.
I personally have no problem with baiting, but it is harvesting...not hunting.
Even still, I will not condemn the "hunter" who claims his trophy at 200yards under a feeder.
I will, however, have comfort in the Knowledge that I killed my doe in the swamp due to sneakiness.
Kinda like the guy with a can of worms and the guy with a flyrod discussing tactics for trout, and comparing stringers of fish. They both have different mileposts for success.
Or, the buck I patterned for the last two years...watching him grow from a forkhorn to a beautiful 5x6 droptine... to see him in the back of the truck shot by a feeder. Or chasing does...kinda the same thing isn't it?
I hate the thought of "purists" amongst us, dividing us against ourselves.
We are too few.
I would rather have the feeder hunter bag "my" buck than a '04 BMW. Eventually every deer will die.
Beating the Dead Horse... AGAIN...LOL
I say as long as its a legal method if hunting folks can do what they want to.
Hunt which ever way you want. Hunting is almost like religion, never bellitle or insult another mans religion is a pretty good rule....a good rule to apply to a lot of things.
I say as long as its a legal method if hunting folks can do what they want to.
Hunt which ever way you want. Hunting is almost like religion, never bellitle or insult another mans religion is a pretty good rule....a good rule to apply to a lot of things.
IMO......
I don't think it is right for a trophy hunter to take a huge buck at a feeder, while sitting in a tree stand a few yards away, and then act like he's actually done something skillful.
Hunting for food, whether you depend on it for survival or not, I would say use every legal means available.
If I depended upon the meat for the survival of my family, I would do whatever it takes, legal or not.
I don't think it is right for a trophy hunter to take a huge buck at a feeder, while sitting in a tree stand a few yards away, and then act like he's actually done something skillful.
Hunting for food, whether you depend on it for survival or not, I would say use every legal means available.
If I depended upon the meat for the survival of my family, I would do whatever it takes, legal or not.
Jack O'Conner
New member
I have mixed feelings about baiting for hunting big game. But I'm not sure there is much difference between baiting and hunting mulies near mountain mahogany thickets. Both situations rely upon ambush techniques and preferred food.
Jack
Jack
How about food plots?
Every outdoor retailer sells seed and planting equipment for food plots. Two things are going to happen. The target species is going to get healthier due to the nutrition. As a result the population will increase and hunters are going to hunt over the food plot that has been carefully cultivated.
Do you find that unethical?
Every outdoor retailer sells seed and planting equipment for food plots. Two things are going to happen. The target species is going to get healthier due to the nutrition. As a result the population will increase and hunters are going to hunt over the food plot that has been carefully cultivated.
Do you find that unethical?
+1 - Just like driving them.
Why don't we just go ahead and allow dynamite fishing, and gatling gun hunting? We could even approve night vision gear, and scopes. Oh and infared might be an option. But this isn't sport, and it isn't hunting. It is gathering, and harvesting. Even if you are one who needs to fill the freezer (which really is far, and few in between these days) this is still harvesting, it is not hunting. Not by definition. But somehow if we alter the meaning of the word it becomes ethical? I don't agree, and that is JMO.
Jack O'Conner
New member
I'm in agreement with stevelyn. Food plots whether planted by the hand of God or man attract animals. Mountain mahagony thickets always produce good shots at mule deer during the mid November rut cycle. Does are hungry for this plant and bucks are, well you know. Same situation with antelope and short budding winter wheat fields. A magnet for game.
In Texas and other places they hunt near corn and other grains. For many years, Michigan farmers sold Deer Bait legally at roadside stands. These large bags contained corn, carrots, beets, and apples.
I'm of the opinion that each state has the authority to govern itself in this matter of baiting. If you dis-believe me, read the 10th Amendment sometime soon. I'm certain that it should be decided by the resident voting citizens of each state to allow or forbid the practise of baiting big game animals.
Jack
In Texas and other places they hunt near corn and other grains. For many years, Michigan farmers sold Deer Bait legally at roadside stands. These large bags contained corn, carrots, beets, and apples.
I'm of the opinion that each state has the authority to govern itself in this matter of baiting. If you dis-believe me, read the 10th Amendment sometime soon. I'm certain that it should be decided by the resident voting citizens of each state to allow or forbid the practise of baiting big game animals.
Jack
The difference I see between hunting over food plots and automatic feeders is in the timer, and the small area of corn dispersal. The timed feeder "trains" deer to be at a pinpoint spot at a specific time.
Food plots tend to be some area in size where the deer can approach from different locations, and the food plot is there 24/7 so the deer can feed at night if they want to.
The closer analogy would be huting over the only water hole within miles in the desert, and for sport hunting I wouldn't do that either. Not quite the same, but closer in analogy.
Jack O'Conner
New member
Although I've not ever been involved with baiting I have given this subject much thought today. I'm wondering when Hunting Ethics began?
Certainly was not a concern when USA was founded. Early colonial hunters took game any way they could and typically easier the better! Jacklighting was a common practise for collecting venison. Dan'l Boone thought nothing of shooting every single deer he could. Davy Crockett never passed up a shot at any bear.
Plains Indians were not concerned about hunting ethics. They commonly lit large prairie fires to drive game. They also used various traps and snares for big game.
During the era of 1870-1905 American big game populations were decimated by Market Hunters. This was a legitimate occupation until state laws protecting game were established.
Please do not mis-understand me. I am in favor of hunting ethics. I'm questioning where they originated simply because I do not know.
Jack
Certainly was not a concern when USA was founded. Early colonial hunters took game any way they could and typically easier the better! Jacklighting was a common practise for collecting venison. Dan'l Boone thought nothing of shooting every single deer he could. Davy Crockett never passed up a shot at any bear.
Plains Indians were not concerned about hunting ethics. They commonly lit large prairie fires to drive game. They also used various traps and snares for big game.
During the era of 1870-1905 American big game populations were decimated by Market Hunters. This was a legitimate occupation until state laws protecting game were established.
Please do not mis-understand me. I am in favor of hunting ethics. I'm questioning where they originated simply because I do not know.
Jack
Deja Vu
I've posted this before, but...
Reading this thread takes me back about 20 years when I was a young hunting guide on the Texas/Mexico border. I have sat and listened to clients vilify everything from timed feeders to smokeless powder.
One gentleman hunted with a single shot, open sighted rifle and was generally derisive of any hunter with a repeating rifle, even a bolt action. Repeaters weren't "fair".
Another refused to let me take him to a draw in the jeep.
Vehicles weren't "fair".
We had no feeders on the property, but sometimes I would bait a road with corn in the morning, hoping to get a shot in the afternoon. My father hated the practice, and said it wasn't "fair".
So here's the deal. Get out of bed in the morning and go hunting naked.
No boots; deer don't have them.
No drawers, not even a jockstrap.
No gun, no rifle, no knife, nothing.
Because the minute you manufacture cloth for those undies, or pick up a rock and start chipping at flint, you are using human intelligence, and beginning the long path up that leads to GPS, night vision, timed feeders, game cameras, and those horrible sacks of corn.
So, skivvies ain't "fair".
I've posted this before, but...
Reading this thread takes me back about 20 years when I was a young hunting guide on the Texas/Mexico border. I have sat and listened to clients vilify everything from timed feeders to smokeless powder.
One gentleman hunted with a single shot, open sighted rifle and was generally derisive of any hunter with a repeating rifle, even a bolt action. Repeaters weren't "fair".
Another refused to let me take him to a draw in the jeep.
Vehicles weren't "fair".
We had no feeders on the property, but sometimes I would bait a road with corn in the morning, hoping to get a shot in the afternoon. My father hated the practice, and said it wasn't "fair".
So here's the deal. Get out of bed in the morning and go hunting naked.
No boots; deer don't have them.
No drawers, not even a jockstrap.
No gun, no rifle, no knife, nothing.
Because the minute you manufacture cloth for those undies, or pick up a rock and start chipping at flint, you are using human intelligence, and beginning the long path up that leads to GPS, night vision, timed feeders, game cameras, and those horrible sacks of corn.
So, skivvies ain't "fair".
Management tools
For myself, a landowner, hunting isn't about sport. It is about management of a resource. By having folks hunt, they reduce the population that the biologist prescribes for us. I don't care if they're killed by a bowhunter in a tree or underneath a feeder. What I care about is: 1. They are killed humanely, 2. The correct number of does are removed, and 3. They don't kill anything the biologist proscribes (young bucks etc...).
They may use any legal means, I only care about the end result. I leave sport to sportsmen.
When I fish in my tanks, I like sport too, but I don't go fishing for sport. Very little of the fish I catch ever get thrown back in unless they are outside the slot limit. I either eat them or I throw them on the bank. Ultimately, I have to live with the results of my management. So long as the bucks and the bass keep getting bigger and the overall population is healthier, I don't care how the end result is achieved.
There are two perspectives: Those who hunt for sport and those who manage the resource.
For myself, a landowner, hunting isn't about sport. It is about management of a resource. By having folks hunt, they reduce the population that the biologist prescribes for us. I don't care if they're killed by a bowhunter in a tree or underneath a feeder. What I care about is: 1. They are killed humanely, 2. The correct number of does are removed, and 3. They don't kill anything the biologist proscribes (young bucks etc...).
They may use any legal means, I only care about the end result. I leave sport to sportsmen.
When I fish in my tanks, I like sport too, but I don't go fishing for sport. Very little of the fish I catch ever get thrown back in unless they are outside the slot limit. I either eat them or I throw them on the bank. Ultimately, I have to live with the results of my management. So long as the bucks and the bass keep getting bigger and the overall population is healthier, I don't care how the end result is achieved.
There are two perspectives: Those who hunt for sport and those who manage the resource.
Most of these were hunting for survival.
There is nothing wrong with using to tools to equate the situation. Animals have hides to keep them warm. Keener senses, faster moving, and generally more athletic. But when you train an animal to walk up to your rifle, and stand there while you drop it, you are harvesting. Not hunting.
rangefodder
Inactive
IMO it's very unethical.
1. because the TV Show wasn't doing it for sport or meat. They were doing it for a TV Show
2. It wasn't a hunt. It was just sitting around filming and waiting for the innevitable.
3. they killed a deer that could've been taken by a real hunter.
Now there's a lot of people who have said that its ok if hunting for meat.
But how is standing around a feeding station "hunting" Don't call it "Hunting", because it's not.
Now the difference in fishing with bait and hook and the above is, 99% of the time the fish is eaten or released. Also, you really can't see the fish. You kinda' sit and hope, not sit and wait.
1. because the TV Show wasn't doing it for sport or meat. They were doing it for a TV Show
2. It wasn't a hunt. It was just sitting around filming and waiting for the innevitable.
3. they killed a deer that could've been taken by a real hunter.
Now there's a lot of people who have said that its ok if hunting for meat.
But how is standing around a feeding station "hunting" Don't call it "Hunting", because it's not.
Now the difference in fishing with bait and hook and the above is, 99% of the time the fish is eaten or released. Also, you really can't see the fish. You kinda' sit and hope, not sit and wait.
Honestly, I never knew there were feed stations that dropped a load of food at a prescribed time. This to me doesnt feel like hunting. That being said I do hunt over a stream thats close to an area where deer feed (not man made ). I dont feel that there is anything wrong with this because the deer has free will, he can get a drink here or go up stream or whatever, I'm not 'training' him to come to my exact location at a certain time. I found this spot after a good bit of preparation, scouting. That to me is using one's intelligence. Feed stations are wonderful technoloy (for a photo op possibly?) and I'm all for advancing technology but it doesnt take much intelligence or hard work(read skill) to be at a certain place at a certain time. Now in an extreme case like for somebody, like a poor person to feed their family, I'd say then go for the feeding station.
This year deer hunting may be a bit more challenging to me because I'm going to use a handgun. A Ruger Super Redhawk in .454 Casull. Since I got the gun several months ago I've put numerous rounds through it so I could find what my limits were and to fine tune loads so I can make a clean humane kill. I've decided on not shooting over about 75 yards even though I"m shooting pretty well out to 100. I think its going to be more fun getting a deer with my revolver than it is with my shotgun (with slugs).
This year deer hunting may be a bit more challenging to me because I'm going to use a handgun. A Ruger Super Redhawk in .454 Casull. Since I got the gun several months ago I've put numerous rounds through it so I could find what my limits were and to fine tune loads so I can make a clean humane kill. I've decided on not shooting over about 75 yards even though I"m shooting pretty well out to 100. I think its going to be more fun getting a deer with my revolver than it is with my shotgun (with slugs).
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Aw, yeah, Big Yac, they have feeder rigs now that are solar powered and computer chipped. And, a barrel about as big as you'd ever want. You can set up to six feeding times per day, and control the length of time the wheel spins.
During the season, generally, you'll see does and little bucks feeding. Usually, any "real" buck won't come out in the open, but hang around in the brush and wait for Sweet Thing to get done with eating and then come play. A smart fella won't put the stand right at the feeder, but find scrapes and rubs near where he's set up the feeder (on account of those scrapes and rubs). Put the stand somewhere in sight of the scrape area.
I've always felt that this is a good method for novices, cripples and Old Farts (Me? ) who can't really get out and either walk miles across country, or play Sneaky Snake in the thick stuff. (I can still do the Sneaky Snake thing.) It also works for those whose time is limited. (Ah, Modern America!) And it's a great thing, a feeder, if you want to cut down on the number of does on the ranch.
Different strokes for different folks. I've always liked open country walking, kicking Bambi out of bed and then busting his little old neck...
, Art
During the season, generally, you'll see does and little bucks feeding. Usually, any "real" buck won't come out in the open, but hang around in the brush and wait for Sweet Thing to get done with eating and then come play. A smart fella won't put the stand right at the feeder, but find scrapes and rubs near where he's set up the feeder (on account of those scrapes and rubs). Put the stand somewhere in sight of the scrape area.
I've always felt that this is a good method for novices, cripples and Old Farts (Me?
) who can't really get out and either walk miles across country, or play Sneaky Snake in the thick stuff. (I can still do the Sneaky Snake thing.) It also works for those whose time is limited. (Ah, Modern America!) And it's a great thing, a feeder, if you want to cut down on the number of does on the ranch.Different strokes for different folks. I've always liked open country walking, kicking Bambi out of bed and then busting his little old neck...
, ArtI think it is more of a matter of perspective.
I enjoy the stalk, trying to get close, watching my chosen game proceeding with their daily habits not knowing I am anywhere around. Just being outdoors enjoying the movement of wind and wildlife around me. Rain or shine I would be out there, stalking my game. I don't really enjoy the kill and hard work processing the game myself afterwards as much, but it is part of the hunting experience. At least to me. I also have the time to pursuse this type hunting the way I enjoy.
My father who run a business, was in rather poor health, had little time, little knowledge of processing game, and few outdoorsman skills enjoyed the hunt also. He would go out the one morning he could work in the time, walk the short distance from his car to the blind, sit over a planted cornfield, shoot his deer, come back get me to help him clean it and take it to the processor to have it cut up and packaged.
He enjoyed the way he hunted as much as I enjoyed the way I hunted. Does that make him any less of a hunter then me? Does the fact someone will not hunt accept when the weather is good make them less a hunter then I was? How many times you not gone hunting because it was raining or snowing to hard? Does that mean you are not a true hunter? What about if someone takes his game in to have someone else process it for them, less of a hunter?
A hunter is a hunter, just as a rose is a rose. We all have different skills and abilities. Just because someone does not have the same skills or abilities as we do does not mean they can not have the same joy in the art as we do.
I have hunted over a feeder, personally it was boring and not really enjoyable to me. But to someone that has little time to enjoy the outdoors, has few outdoorsmen skills or little or no experience it is a good way to maybe start them on the way to being a more involved hunter. Maybe they will never go pass that point or learn anything else, but I believe they are still a hunter.
I enjoy the stalk, trying to get close, watching my chosen game proceeding with their daily habits not knowing I am anywhere around. Just being outdoors enjoying the movement of wind and wildlife around me. Rain or shine I would be out there, stalking my game. I don't really enjoy the kill and hard work processing the game myself afterwards as much, but it is part of the hunting experience. At least to me. I also have the time to pursuse this type hunting the way I enjoy.
My father who run a business, was in rather poor health, had little time, little knowledge of processing game, and few outdoorsman skills enjoyed the hunt also. He would go out the one morning he could work in the time, walk the short distance from his car to the blind, sit over a planted cornfield, shoot his deer, come back get me to help him clean it and take it to the processor to have it cut up and packaged.
He enjoyed the way he hunted as much as I enjoyed the way I hunted. Does that make him any less of a hunter then me? Does the fact someone will not hunt accept when the weather is good make them less a hunter then I was? How many times you not gone hunting because it was raining or snowing to hard? Does that mean you are not a true hunter? What about if someone takes his game in to have someone else process it for them, less of a hunter?
A hunter is a hunter, just as a rose is a rose. We all have different skills and abilities. Just because someone does not have the same skills or abilities as we do does not mean they can not have the same joy in the art as we do.
I have hunted over a feeder, personally it was boring and not really enjoyable to me. But to someone that has little time to enjoy the outdoors, has few outdoorsmen skills or little or no experience it is a good way to maybe start them on the way to being a more involved hunter. Maybe they will never go pass that point or learn anything else, but I believe they are still a hunter.
Jack O'Conner
New member
I feel that so-called hunting ethics can sometimes go a little too far. For example, Pennsylvania outlaws all muzzle-loaders except flintlocks. Only V notch sights. Seems like a handicap to success in this era of modern muzzle loaders.
Crossbows are being looked at closely by the Legislature simply because the urban deer herds are way out of control. Clearly something must be done. The feeling in Harrisburgh is that it takes too much practise time to consider traditional archery equipment as the sole alternative. It is also believed crossbows would be more appealing to females and older hunter. True or not will be decided by license sales.
Pennsylvania also outlaws use of semi-automatic rifles for big game and small game hunting. From what I've learned, this goes back to the days of unrestricted market hunting.
California has many obstacles to success in the field. Seems that this state doesn't really want hunting but goes along with our sport because their jobs in the Legislature depend on widespread support. Not enough bambi-ites to support their campaigns.
I still think that baiting by mechanical devices or otherwise should be left up to each state to decide. Power to the Voting Booth!
Jack
Crossbows are being looked at closely by the Legislature simply because the urban deer herds are way out of control. Clearly something must be done. The feeling in Harrisburgh is that it takes too much practise time to consider traditional archery equipment as the sole alternative. It is also believed crossbows would be more appealing to females and older hunter. True or not will be decided by license sales.
Pennsylvania also outlaws use of semi-automatic rifles for big game and small game hunting. From what I've learned, this goes back to the days of unrestricted market hunting.
California has many obstacles to success in the field. Seems that this state doesn't really want hunting but goes along with our sport because their jobs in the Legislature depend on widespread support. Not enough bambi-ites to support their campaigns.
I still think that baiting by mechanical devices or otherwise should be left up to each state to decide. Power to the Voting Booth!
Jack