Baiting, I know this has been discussed and discussed this is just my rant....LOL

[Howboutthemdawgs]

I did receive a response back from the deer program coordinator in Kentucky when questioned about baiting and why it's not removed. Here's his response:

That’s amazing!!! Basically our hunters are so incompetent that without bait they would either be highly unsuccessful (proving my point that baiting is exponentially easier) and/or just quit hunting if they didn’t have that crutch. Wow this is an A+ response and super glad you wrote him. Thank you. They never responded to my bait inquiry.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

Also could bait be part of the problem to the deer numbers issue, not the solution. Bait has been around for a long time in Kentucky. Yet they still have a deer problem. It could definitely be artificially keeping the carrying capacity too high. Seems like if numbers are too high and not coming down to where they want, seeking alternative path would be wise.

 

[omicron1792]

Also could bait be part of the problem to the deer numbers issue, not the solution. Bait has been around for a long time in Kentucky. Yet they still have a deer problem. It could definitely be artificially keeping the carrying capacity too high. Seems like if numbers are too high and not coming down to where they want, seeking alternative path would be wise.

If true, that path would include starving deer. Not sure the public would be for that.

 

[BenA]

Also could bait be part of the problem to the deer numbers issue, not the solution. Bait has been around for a long time in Kentucky. Yet they still have a deer problem. It could definitely be artificially keeping the carrying capacity too high. Seems like if numbers are too high and not coming down to where they want, seeking alternative path would be wise.

I think it's more that hunters want to shoot a buck rather than a doe. Kentucky had 82,264 bucks killed last year but only 63,220 does. Populations are controlled by killing does. More does need to be killed. People are spoiled by seeing deer all the time, every time they go hunting or drive around.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

I think it's more that hunters want to shoot a buck rather than a doe. Kentucky had 82,264 bucks killed last year but only 63,220 does. Populations are controlled by killing does. More does need to be killed. People are spoiled by seeing deer all the time, every time they go hunting or drive around.

For sure. Lots of factors on why that is. Not as exciting, won’t get as many likes on social media, processing fees are insane, tons of work to process yourself, etc.
Doe killing being the factor in population, it’s seems like once again, bait is a social crutch and not a management tool like people try to say.

 

[BenA]

For sure. Lots of factors on why that is. Not as exciting, won’t get as many likes on social media, processing fees are insane, tons of work to process yourself, etc.
Doe killing being the factor in population, it’s seems like once again, bait is a social crutch and not a management tool like people try to say.

How do you figure that baiting is not a management tool? Weapons are a management tool, food plots are a management tool, seasons are a management tool. If you don't want to disturb your property, but still need to take does off of it, baiting off in a corner or where there's easy access can be a very efficient management tool.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

How do you figure that baiting is not a management tool? Weapons are a management tool, food plots are a management tool, seasons are a management tool. If you don't want to disturb your property, but still need to take does off of it, baiting off in a corner or where there's easy access can be a very efficient management tool.

I mean I guess everything related with shooting an animal can be considered a management tool. Hell camouflage can be a management tool if it helps you kill deer. My point is, if one of the states justifications for bait is to keep the population down, and it’s not going down, to the contrary it’s going up, then bait as a management tool seems ineffective at best and possibly detrimental at worst.
This graph isn’t exactly a feather in cap to that theory.

 

[omicron1792]

I mean I guess everything related with shooting an animal can be considered a management tool. Hell camouflage can be a management tool if it helps you kill deer. My point is, if one of the states justifications for bait is to keep the population down, and it’s not going down, to the contrary it’s going up, then bait as a management tool seems ineffective at best and possibly detrimental at worst.
This graph isn’t exactly a feather in cap to that theory.
View attachment 90223

Wouldn’t dwindling hunter numbers also play into that chart?

 

[SwampCat]

I mean I guess everything related with shooting an animal can be considered a management tool. Hell camouflage can be a management tool if it helps you kill deer. My point is, if one of the states justifications for bait is to keep the population down, and it’s not going down, to the contrary it’s going up, then bait as a management tool seems ineffective at best and possibly detrimental at worst.
This graph isn’t exactly a feather in cap to that theory.
View attachment 90223

So are you now saying hunting over bait is not very effective?

 

[BenA]

I mean I guess everything related with shooting an animal can be considered a management tool. Hell camouflage can be a management tool if it helps you kill deer. My point is, if one of the states justifications for bait is to keep the population down, and it’s not going down, to the contrary it’s going up, then bait as a management tool seems ineffective at best and possibly detrimental at worst.
This graph isn’t exactly a feather in cap to that theory.
View attachment 90223

Population increases are happening in places where baiting is not allowed. Population increases happen because deer are being added to the herd at a higher rate than they're being taken out.

 

[BC Buck]

QDM put out info no average time for hunters to harvest a deer per state. In MO was like 12 days and I cry BS. Thinking because everybody is a trophy hunter. If they want to control deer population need to go to earn a buck harvest.

 

[Brian662]

QDM put out info no average time for hunters to harvest a deer per state. In MO was like 12 days and I cry BS. Thinking because everybody is a trophy hunter. If they want to control deer population need to go to earn a buck harvest.

Earn-a-buck was not a popular regulation but it was incredibly effective.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

So are you now saying hunting over bait is not very effective?

no. Human behavior is the issue. We don’t want to shoot does. What I’m saying if the state says it’s to help with managing the herd, the facts don’t show that.
It’s refreshing to see them admit it’s a crutch

 

[SwampCat]

QDM put out info no average time for hunters to harvest a deer per state. In MO was like 12 days and I cry BS. Thinking because everybody is a trophy hunter. If they want to control deer population need to go to earn a buck harvest.

The earn a buck program worked well in the past with physical check stations. With today’s online harvest, i can online check a doe from my bed at night and be legal to buck hunt the next morning.

 

[Mortenson]

With high priced beef, I find it surprising people aren't shooting does.

 

[BenA]

no. Human behavior is the issue. We don’t want to shoot does. What I’m saying if the state says it’s to help with managing the herd, the facts don’t show that.
It’s refreshing to see them admit it’s a crutch

Correlation does not imply causation

 

[Barndog56]

With high priced beef, I find it surprising people aren't shooting does.

But with the cost of processing, venison has become high priced as well, unless you can process yourself.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

Wouldn’t dwindling hunter numbers also play into that chart?

I am a firm believer that numbers are not falling. There’s not a single property I know of that is lacking for hunters. This chart shows that it has been growing consistently as an overall trend. The one thing that nobody ever mentions is how much land is lost every single year. Now, when you overlay that with the upward trend in hunter numbers, never mind the boom in hunter participation by license holder from things like work from home, cell phone connectivity, traveling made easier, I would argue we actually have too many hunters on the landscape as evidenced by vocal displeasure on how crowded places are and lack of quality experience.



Absolutely staggering-

• From 2017–2022, Kentucky lost about 546,000 acres of farmland.
• That equals roughly:
  • 109,000 acres per year
  • ~290 acres per day

I’m a believer that the narrative about declining Hunter numbers is being pushed by organizations who seek to benefit financially from more hunters. Or at least benefit from the existing hunters donating/supporting for fear that we are losing hunting pushed by these organizations.

 

[SwampCat]

no. Human behavior is the issue. We don’t want to shoot does. What I’m saying if the state says it’s to help with managing the herd, the facts don’t show that.
It’s refreshing to see them admit it’s a crutch

Do you think if baiting was not allowed there would be no appreciable difference in number of deer killed?

There are so many variables. I have three small acreage landowners on whose property 12 deer were killed this year - every one of those deer killed on bait. It is difficult to attract that many deer to ten acre tracts of land without using bait.

I have two 1000 acre neighbors where hunters use bait and not a single deer was killed. South AR is commercial timberland, very few oak trees - baiting is a way of life. North AR is mostly hardwood and open pastures - easier to kill a deer in that environment with acorns on the ground and green grass and clover in the pastures. The 4000 acre lease I used to be on saw most of their deer killed using dogs. Eastern AR is agriculture and shooting a deer in a bean or cornfield is a popular option.

I find my food plots a much better spot for killing a mature buck than a bait pile. But if I only owned ten acres and wanted to deer hunt and had no food plots, I would hunt over a feeder and kill all the deer I wanted.

I think a lot of people consider that if deer do xyz on my land, that is what they do everywhere. That line of thinking is far from the truth.

No - baiting is not the death of deer - as Kentucky has proven and many of us have been saying.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

Do you think if baiting was not allowed there would be no appreciable difference in number of deer killed?

There are so many variables. I have three small acreage landowners on whose property 12 deer were killed this year - every one of those deer killed on bait. It is difficult to attract that many deer to ten acre tracts of land without using bait.

I have two 1000 acre neighbors where hunters use bait and not a single deer was killed. South AR is commercial timberland, very few oak trees - baiting is a way of life. North AR is mostly hardwood and open pastures - easier to kill a deer in that environment with acorns on the ground and green grass and clover in the pastures. The 4000 acre lease I used to be on saw most of their deer killed using dogs. Eastern AR is agriculture and shooting a deer in a bean or cornfield is a popular option.

I find my food plots a much better spot for killing a mature buck than a bait pile. But if I only owned ten acres and wanted to deer hunt and had no food plots, I would hunt over a feeder and kill all the deer I wanted.

I think a lot of people consider that if deer do xyz on my land, that is what they do everywhere. That line of thinking is far from the truth.

No - baiting is not the death of deer - as Kentucky has proven and many of us have been saying.

I don’t know, none of us do. Hell the state doesn’t cause they don’t have a way to measure the alternative.
And for the record I never have thought bait would decimate the herd. I think it ruins the age structure.