Bowsite.com

I've still yet to read any convincing argument that hunting elk over a pile of apples is any different from hunting bears over a bait barrel? OR over a water hole or wallow for that matter?

Hoping perhaps someone from a the anti-hunting elk over a pile of apples community will chime in. Seriously not looking to bash on either side, just curious to see the reasoning behind how one feels it is different.

I think more than anything it is just a difference in hunting preference.

On the other hand, you can walk around the woods and find elk.

Furthermore, if you've hunted elk and called them in, the idea of interacting with the animal on their turf is really what makes elk hunting so special. Losing that element is probably what people object to.

If you don't like it and don't want to partake - ok, don't.

There are MANY outfits in the SW that hunt elk over waterholes. If you think that's ANY different than hunting over bait you are just flat wrong.

Again, I have no prob if a guy likes to run in loin cloth with his hand made bow and flint chiseled arrows smelling like an elk in heat. More power to you.

Just don't diss another guys way of hunting. I have done it all and what I have learned is that for the most part nothing is as easy as it sounds whether baiting for bears, chasing hogs with dogs, baiting WT, working a food plot, etc.

BTW where you see a lot of passion are usually guys who haven't left their corner of the world to see how other guys hunt. Once you have, you realize the good and different.

There is no difference between baiting elk or bears. It does seem weird to sit over a pile of apples for elk, but I have planted my butt over salt licks and wallows many times and I was just fine with it. Apples should make no difference!

That's not what I said.

First off, I could care less if people hunt over bait, no matter the animal. It's not how I hunt, but I don't care what other people do.

What I said, is that some people feel that an element of the hunt is lost when you give up that way of hunting that animal.

Just like using power bait instead of a fly rod. The fly rod is a special way of interacting with the fish that requires a certain skill set.

It's the same way with calling in elk.

"We use the urban stand locations for our clients that are not seasoned elk hunters and have not taken the steps to make themselves sent (scent) free or are just noisy. The elk that live in urban areas are willing to eat apples under someone's apple tree in their front yard therefore they are use to a certain amount of human sent (scent) and noise. This makes them easy to kill and the stand location is great for children and noise (noisy) adults that smell like the city..."

I'm sorry, but this isn't elk hunting...it's elk shooting. For someone who's handicapped and has no choice, this offers a great opportunity for them to kill an elk. I applaud that.

On the other hand, if someone uses this treehouse simply because they're too lazy to get in shape, or don't care enough about elk hunting to at least TRY to be scent free, or at least TRY to learn to be less noisy, this isn't hunting. It may be legal, but it certainly isn't hunting.

As far as stand locations away from someone's front yard, I have no problem with baiting where it's legal.

Its really not the baiting itself that gets some hunters wound up, its the baiter believing that he is 'hunting' at the same level or degree as the guy who is using learned and practiced skill beyond bait gathering and bait packing and bait placing.

If you want to bait and its legal, go for it and enjoy what you like to do. What ever blows your hair back! Baiting elk with apples is not the same as using natural wallows, water, or food sources and your living in a fantasy if you think they come running every time you blow on a call.

I know I wouldn't pay someone a hundred dollars to hunt like that, let alone thousands. I know some great hunters sometimes hunt like that and that's ok where legal. But I bet you all those same hunters what their most rewarding hunt was, I doubt they would say " on one hunt in Washington, I showed up at --- offers where he placed 30k pounds of apples and I sat in a stand next to a house with a dog and small children playing in the yard. Then a 4x4 walked up and I shot him. What a rush!"

Animals don't have to come into bait but they ABSOLUTELY have to water and if you are hunting the only water for a mile on private ground. The animals will come.

It's one reason I love to antelope hunt. Lots of animals and fun. I consider that hunting.

There have been many elk killed in here sitting over a water hole or even a water tank.

Again, not arguing calling elk in or S&S in loin cloth.

I have zero interest in sitting a bait pile for Elk as it doesn't seem as fun as calling/chasing after them... but I'm not naive enough to claim it wrong in comparison to my baited deer and waterhole antelope hunts of the past.

I have no qualms about hunting food sources, even hunting in proximity to agricultural fields. I just don't have an interest in putting out bait and looking at my alteration all day.

One property that I hunt has an old fence running about 2/3 the way across it separating a little less than 1/4 of the property. I have no problem hunting off the funnel created where a large tree crushed a section of the 5' fence. It would feel wrong to me to put up 400 yards of fence, leaving a section out to create my own funnel.

I get twitchy thinking about Montana and Wyoming this fall with screaming elk. I can't imagine a pile of bait in that scenario.

Yet, I have no problem planting some apple trees on my buddy's property to help improve the property.

I haven't hunted bear, so I can't wrap my head around that right now.

I'm sure that everybody here was just holding their breath hoping that I'd chime in with my opinion...

Hunt legally, whichever way makes you happy. JUST DON'T SHOOT THE WRONG BROADHEAD!

Whew, I can breath now.

All that being said, I would fight tooth and nail to prohibit baiting in Montana. Not because of supposed ethics or other issues.

I would oppose it based on comments of my friends in other states where baiting is allowed. It become competitive to the point of almost taking quasi -ownership of wildlife. It becomes necessary to bait, just to prevent all the animals from being habituated to other properties that bait heavily.

As it is today, where they live, you have to bait more and more every year to keep animals nearby. If you don't bait, the animals will be elsewhere, though prior to baiting being legal deer were dispersed based on quality of habitat.

Their experience is that baiting seriously disrupts that natural patterns of wildlife, in their case, whitetail deer. Again, for those who say such is not the case, then why incur the effort and expense?

I know wildlife patterns are influenced by agriculture activities and if you have a chance, it is a good idea to consider that in your strategy. Even out west, elk and deer are impacted by such. Yet, that is the operation of a landowner who has other incentives to produce ag products, other than to attract wildlife. If anything, wildlife can be a hindrance to their ag operations.

As an avid elk hunter, I don't care to have the natural patterns of elk be disrupted/altered any more than they already are. Some may not agree.

Congregated animals, as found in baiting and winter feeding, are proven vectors for disease transmission. The most worrisome at this point is brucellosis, a disease that has increasing incidence in congregated elk herds. Baiting would only add to that problem, at least in MT/WY/ID, where brucellosis is a problem.

In MT, we have the largest amount of inaccessible PUBLIC lands in the country. We have a lot of wildlife that is off limits to hunters, which is every private landowners right to do so.

If baiting became legal, the amount of baiting that would occur would be enormous with elk. Just too much money involved in leases by outfitters and other private parties. It would create a baiting contest to keep elk on your property/lease, the unintended (or maybe intended) result is that elk are then not on public where they can be managed and hunted.

If the public land issues were anything like the public lands where some of my friends have to bait to attract any deer, I can see some major issues with elk hunters on public land. If we think we have elk hunter conflict issues on public lands now, imagine what it would be if elk baiting were allowed.

To argue for/against baiting in the context of ethics, such as the original post, is a waste of time. It is merely a personal preference issue, none being more right or more wrong than the other. It results in continually lowered level of dialogue, something a friend refers to as "Mental Midget Wrestling."

To debate the topic on other issues such as disease transmission or negative impacts of altered animal patterns and resulting difficulties altered patterns create in terms of proper game management/crop damage/hunter conflicts, seems to be a more valuable discussion.

In the case of elk on western public lands, or the private/public interface that already has serious conflict/competition, I see baiting of elk to carry a large number of very complex problems, none of which are ethics-related, even if the original post seems to imply it is an ethic issue.

Carry on ......

are just a few.

I suppose the easy answer is "its not for me so I don't like it," and I think that is totally fine and probably where a lot of guys are coming from. But for those who said things like "it simply isn't hunting." Does this sentiment then also carry over into other species where baiting is more "mainstream" like for bears (and some have said a baited bear hunt is just not for them). Or are they just as against sitting water or natural attractants as well? Or perhaps tree standing hunting elk just isn't "mainstream" enough yet, despite being a fairly successful approach (apple piles aside).

I think Big Fin, AdyllwildArcher, Link, Sage Buffalo, orionsbrother all make great points as to why or why not. Big Fin especially in his regard for the bigger "complex problems" baiting may or may not bring about.

Comparing hunting water to bait is also apples and oranges: The animals were already going to go to the water. Putting out bait is altering where they would have gone to feed. They also have, in most cases, choices on where to water, when to water, and for how long (couple minutes) as opposed to bait where they have one bait choice, and have to eat a large part of the day.

Your average herbivore hits water once, often times at night, for 5 minutes, whereas they eat for several hours per day.

And I said herbivorous animals, not just elk.

But do you have any proof that elk water numerous times a day? The same elk? I'm sure some do. Maybe more so in the summer. I've seen where people have mentioned that they do, although it's all been anecdotal. From what I've seen, they go to bed in the AM and stay there till night.

Still speculation unless you can show me where someone has radio collared elk and documented them hit water multiple times a day.

The fact remains that the time spent watering is a tiny fraction of the time spent eating. So this whole thing is slicing hairs.

The deer around where I hunt (hot, southern california) never ever ever water during the day but can be seen for a short time in the AM eating.

The fact remains that they still were going to hit the water that was already there, but the food alters their natural movement. Evidenced by the fact that no one puts out a 55 gal drum of water for the day and then hunts over it.

Sounds like about 90% of WT hunting to me. Food plots, cutting shooting lanes, clearing approach routes, etc. Not to mention placing cameras to help determine where to hunt.

"The elk that live in urban areas..."

Again, how is this different from the vast majority of WT hunting. Except in a very few locations, they ALL live in proximity to people, farms, roads, all manner of human activity.

"...water that was already there, but the food alters their natural movement."

So what. Calling alters their movement also, but you seem OK with that.

The fact is, most of what we consider to be acceptable is just based on what we are accustomed to, often from long tradition. Justifying one over another, OBJECTIVELY, makes one question other methods, or similar methods for different animals.

It sure is different these days. As much as people didn’t like Chuck Adams, you can’t argue the fact he got his Super Slam the old fashioned way.

Spot and Stalk Coues deer, Typical spot and stalk/calling for Rosie elk, spot and stalk sheep the list goes on and on. He mentioned in his book that Coues deer are one of the hardest animals to hunt ( he was doing it spot and stalk). Now we have baited Coues deer hunts, baited Rosie Hunts, water hole only Desert sheep hunts. It is what it is I guess.

Oh, Ziek, we both live in CO and I think yard elk (think St. Vrain, Lookout mountain, Evergreen, Estes)are so conditioned to people it would be harder to kill a cow in a pasture. I've never seen "yard" Whitetails act that way, especially big bucks. I've seen big 6x6 elk stand there while you throw pine cones at them.

The bottom line is our organizations such P&Y, B&C, really need to sit down with their senior members to re-hash out just what “Fair Chase” is as we’re really letting this slide as a hunting community. Even if that means going back and re-defining practices that are now legal.

But they have bazillions of them and they don't keep forever. 100s of thousands of pound a year get tossed. I've read the labels. Some came from New Zealand and all over the globe. You can get them by the pallet for free. Or... if you want to let the manager come shoot an elk, by the truckload and delivered even. Therefore.... there is no expense. In other states, maybe not the case. You'd bait with whatever was available or native to the area I suppose.

I never actually hunted elk or deer over bait. Bears once but passed on most as they were small and never shot one. They were VERY wary around the bait. Not of me but of other bears. The big boy showed up every night at 1:30 on trail cam. He was smart. I'm thinking it would be tough to bow hunt bears by spot and stalk in the lower 48.

I have no qualms with states not allowing baiting, as well as states allowing baiting. I just think it's silly to act like it's ok to sit a stock tank for pronghorn or barrel of cereal and grease for bears, but scoff at the idea of someone hunting an apple pile for the almighty elk.

Again, I've never bear hunted over bait. I've never elk hunted period (can't wait to go this fall, and it sure as heck won't be over bait)... but I have no problems with others doing it. I've sat cattle water tanks trying to kill a pronghorn, even parking my vehicle at other tanks to divert the activity there... Sue me.

That said, I don't care what others do, as long as they are not breaking any rules. To each their own.

Treeing lions with hounds is similar. The shot is easy and anticlimatic. I ran hounds and only ever killed one. Took lots of pics and video and walked away from all the rest happy with no regrets.

Ha ha Elkman... you can't resist liking me can you. I'm no fan of baiting... except for fish, but in my travels I have learned a thing or two about it. For the record.... I'd trust you to shoot an apple off of my head with a Rage broadhead any day. :-)

I've never cared for the baiting concept, or the box blind thing. Just not for me. Probably a regional/tradition thing. Some places that's the way they've always done it and I don't have a problem with it. I participate in deer drives every year, and I know some people think that's not fair, or sporting. But it's a tradition here. The past few years I see more and more of those box blinds popping up in the Midwest and I admit it annoys me. That's not the way you are supposed to hunt here. I personally wouldn't go on a baited elk hunt, or a texas whitetail hunt if they were free. I have zero desire to shoot an elk over apples or a deer in the sendero eating corn that was in a truck a few days ago. But that's because I'm stubborn and bullheaded. Not because it's wrong. I'm just set in my ways. To each their own. I fall into it myself sometimes, but we all need to show a little more tolerance for other guys methods.

Big Fin did have some very valid points. He made the best argument against bait I have heard yet.

Since then, this thread has gone full retard.

To the "no baiters" Where I live I can bait any game animal except bears and waterfowl. The province next door can bait bears, but nothing else. And on it goes. I can easily shot more bears than ole' Jeremiah Johnson could skin, but not so easy for ungulates. Some of you guys see twenty plus deer under your stand every evening, while I see that many bears just going for a drive. So maybe it's better if I let you bait bears 'cause that's the only way you have a chance. And maybe you should let me bait a few deer so I have the same chance to get a deer as you do to get a bear.

You know, kinda get along instead of pissing in each other's pockets.

Can I ask my question again? Do the apple orchards in WA sustain a lot of damage from the elk? If they are there eating the apples do they also rub the trees? Just wondering if the apple growers dislike the elk as much as farmers dislike the deer.

"....and your living in a fantasy if you think they come running every time you blow on a call."

Nobody ever said elk come running every time to a call. But they often will come running to a call and you are living a fantasy if you don't think calls make elk hunting easy (compared to not using a call).

As much as some would imply that calling elk is trivial, dumping apples in a pile, no matter how much work it involves, will never involve the level of skill it takes to use a musical instrument to make an elk think you are another elk, much less the effort involved to go into a wild elk's backyard, call to him, and then haul him out of a place that cannot be driven to.

NEW RULE REGARDING ETHICS DISCUSSION

After a thorough review Bowsite.com has decided to limit ethical discussions to our new BLOG features only. Public submissions which criticize other hunters for what they hunt, where they hunt, or how they hunt are no longer allowed.

Bowsite.com understand and value the role that ethics play in the field. This decision does not reflect a diminished view on ethics.

Our decision was based on 10 years of observations regarding 'ethics' topics. Inevitably, every discussion on ethics results in heated disagreements which had far more negative than positive outcomes. In addition, over half of the time they required the entire topic to be removed by our editors. Heated ethical discussions contribute to a negative perception of Bowsite.com on both sides of the ethical argument. This Lose-Lose prompted us to re-examine these types of discussion and ultimately, this decision.

Our visitors are expected to comply with this new rule immediately. Thank you for your cooperation.

BTW this rule was posted in 2006

Got it. Thanks.

As far as calling an elk and having them come running in, wow. If hunting out of a stand in someone's back yard over a couple thousand pounds of apples ids equal, then I had it all wrong. My bad.

The temptation to use a play on words in crude humor in response to this post was almost all I could bear.

You have taught me well, Charlie.

Even so, if it's legal in Washington I am fully supportive of people who choose to utilize this method of harvesting game (and yes, I would consider it hunting if the animal is wild bred and free roaming).

Similarly, I support states that allow high fence "hunting". This, I do not consider "hunting", but think it should be supported just the same provided the state's law allows this type of method used to harvest meat.

In NM there is currently a major debate going on regarding the slaughtering of horses for human consumption. The whole thing is a mess. So far the HSUS and PETA (anti's) are winning. IMO, if we should be allowed to slaughter/eat cattle, then why not horses? If horses are "better" or deserve more "rights" than cattle, when will that debate effectively debilitate the perspective we as hunters often take against the anti's?

Wild horses are a real problem in NM. I would actually like to see a hunting season implemented. The reasons I have for this opinion are identical to the reasons any hunter would likely argue as a reason to hunt an excessive population of any other ungulate.

I know I've deviated from the topic here. My point is two-fold: 1) States should have a strong influence on "their" game management practices 2) Hunters would benefit from maintaining the basis of their argument against anti-hunters when discussing many topics relating to wildlife management

I never intended in my original post to make this an ethics question, I have stated this twice. It was merely a question about elk hunting tactics and the reasons behind it...trying to figure out why some would consider one way different from another. There have been some great responses with valid answers and like most threads on here these days, some have taken it in differing directions, not really a big deal, sort of the norm with so many differing opinions and people posting. Yet in the majority of the responses, I haven't seen this turn into an "ethics" discussion and it has remained fairly civil. If the mods see otherwise obviously they can delete it.

I think what ZIEK and then LINK said (though perhaps somewhat opposing views) most recently sort of sum up the discussion pretty well. Hunting elk over bait is definitely an option when done legally, though it may not be the way in which each individual goes about harvesting an elk. I have shot bulls both by calling them in and having them come running and from a treestand when they are coming to water. Both were equally rewarding to me and yet both presented very different and sometimes challenging tactics. I wouldn't say either was easy, if it was, we would see 99 to 100% success rates on archery elk kills each year.

I think hearing the differing opinions on here (particularly when folks remain civil) is no different than sitting around the camp fire with my hunting buddies, discussing/debating the pros and cons to different methods. Sometimes it opens us up to new ways of thinking and other times it further instills our own methods and tactics.

If you can wade through some of the overly negative posts or side trials, there have been some really good posts on this thread both in favor and against.

First off, you're right that states should make their own rules in this regard, but I'll add, that I think "states" should mean the biologists and DFG depts making sound game mgmt decisions for their states, not ballot box measures by uneducated whimsical voters when it comes to things like game management that should be based on science and the scientific decisions by people who know WTF they're doing.

"State" decisions have resulted in very poor decisions here in CA.

Secondly, it's funny you bring up wild horses in NM. My family and I have watched this subject with interest as it's unfolded. It's a huge issue.

So many people, not just PETA folks, hold horses in such high regard, that it complicates the issue. So many people personify animals and elevate them to human status and the extension to horses includes many conservative folks who could not be counted among the PETA ranks.

Still, you have a large animal that needs to be managed.

During the latest bit that we watched on the news about this, I commented to my wife that I would absolutely bowhunt wild horses and I would also eat my kill. My wife and kids agree. My friends, who expect a piece of any elk or deer I take, thought I was crazy when I brought up the same discussion.

I would absolutely come to NM and bow hunt a horse and I'd eat it. Unfortunately, I doubt it'll ever become a reality and instead, a stressed arid environment will continue to be stressed by too many cattle/horses competing for thin resources.

You're absolutely right when you say we should be maintaining the basis of our argument.

P.S. If I hunted horses, I would not use apples.

I agree with you 100%. Because laws are passed by the Legislature and not by Game and Fish (DNR) agencies, it's critical for State's to have adequate representation from sportsmen/women. That's where State Bowhunting Organizations are so critical. California has some great groups. Unfortunately, the per-capita ratio of hunters/non-hunters is so radical it's a tough gig there. There are so many anti's in California that the California anti's have effectively supported the stoppage of some coyote hunting competitions in NM!

Just as many folks hold horses in such high regard, canines are also a very "elite" species in the eyes of many irrational individuals. I see "Wolves Belong" bumper stickers every day. I love dogs, but I enjoy calling, hunting and killing wild coyotes. I love horses, but would eagerly hunt and eat a wild one. I own and love pack llamas, but would still hunt and eat a wild, free-ranging camelid if the opportunity presented itself.

Back to the baiting issue, I've never killed an antelope at a water hole. Even so, I support my fellow NM's who choose to hunt that way. I would fight tirelessly to preserve that right for them. I have only been in a treestand once...at a 3D tournament. Baiting elk is not my preference. I would prefer to keep that method of hunting Wapiti entirely out of NM.

If the people (hopefully influenced by hunters) of Washington State support that method of hunting though, then I support their right to choose to utilize it.

Now back to our regular program.....

Habitat for Wildlife: If I could have answered your question I would. The time I spent in Washington was only on the west side along the coast. I didn't really see many if any orchards. It is sooooo wet over there I don't think it is the ideal place to grow them. I could be wrong. The elk there commonly have hoof rot from standing in mushy bogs their entire life. I would imagine root rot would also occur. The place they call the land of fruit was over near Yakima. It's much drier over there. There were orchards for miles and miles along the highways right next to all of the storage facilities. No elk at all in the area. Sorry I wasn't able to help with your question.

Yes, I saw apples on the west side. But not like the massive amounts to the east. Before the apple connection the method was to see an apple tree or 3 in a yard, ask permission to "pick a few" then pull the garbage cans out of the van and have two young kids climb the tree and shake the hell out of it taking every single apple. The result was, as you said, barely enough apples to keep the elks attention.... and the landowner coming out of the house totally irate yelling "you said a few" as the van sped away with the driver laughing his butt off.

As far as opinions on baiting.... or broadheads, or anything, my New Year's resolution is to go with "to each his own"! As long as we can sleep fine at night with our own decisions that's all that counts I suppose.

However, I have hunted antelope for YEARS! Rarely does it rain 2" during the season. 95% of the time it's hot and dry. If you have an isolated waterhole you will see more animals then ANY bait pile will ever afford you.

You can keep telling yourself it's very different but the reality is it isn't. Especially the guys who are hunting livestock tanks - which are many.

The difference, and it's a major difference, is that the water is part of their life, part of their backyard, one of usually many possible watering locations, and something they do all year round as a normal part of their life cycle.

Bait is placed specifically for a hunt, usually is not there year round, usually is in one spot not several, is not part of their daily routine, is not part of their usual backyard. All of these things increase the artificial feel of hunting over bait, which is largely a human invention, as opposed to hunting over water which was invented by predators long before the first human ever did it.

Comparing sitting water to sitting bait is apples and oranges. Sitting water is no different then sitting a game path or natural food/cover. You're catching the animal in it's natural movement as opposed to putting an artificial substance in to keep and hold them.

And it's not just getting them there. Eating a pile of something gives the bow hunter an advantage that you wouldn't otherwise have in a normal hunting situation, say, on a game path, because you can place it at the distance you want and have them distracted long enough to get a shot.

And again, comparing the baiting of elk with the baiting of bears is apples and oranges just like comparing sitting water for elk and sitting water for pronghorn. The majority of the elk on this continent live at elevations or areas with multiple options when it comes to drinking.

And I hate to beat a dead horse because it's a silly point, but elk do not spend the majority of their time drinking and a minority of their time eating. They're not freaking manatees. All ruminants spend the bulk of their waking hours eating and a small minority of their time drinking.

It's a stupid point though because my point is that water is a natural thing to hunt and bait isn't.

And don't come back with the "hunting a field of grass is food too." It's natural food and it's not in a convenient pile to pick something off at close range.

This has nothing to do with anything other than some people wanting to defend their chosen method of hunting from being looked down upon by people who hunt differently and lets face it, there's a lot of people out there that talk crap on baiting. That's what this is about.

So what? Hunt how you want. If you want to bait, go ahead. But don't make it out to be something that it isn't.

So you went to a region that allows baiting for bears and sat over bait to hunt bears. And while you sat there waiting did you think it was wrong or unethical? Did you get excited when bears came in. If you killed a bear [I hope you did] was it disappointing?

I'm not even sure how many bears I've killed, but none over bait. Should I view you as "less" of a hunter than myself? No, and I don't! Some people compare shooting bears over bait to shooting raccoon out of dumpsters. Is that how you felt while doing it?

The idea of hunting elk over huge piles of rotting apples doesn't fit my romanticized ideal of a Rosie hunt. But then neither does sitting 20 yards from a barrel of stinking, fly covered meat and doughnuts meet my expectations of bear hunting. But it is a legal, ethical, and sometimes the only efficient method of providing a hunting experience with a reasonable chance of success.

Last August, I drove 28 hours to hunt Wyoming antelope, for the first time in over thirty years. I should have brought my waders. The whole place was a waterhole. Do I wish I had the only "liquid bait" within miles in front of my blind. You bet I do!! But if I lived in good 'lope country and could hunt them whenever I wanted then I wouldn't have as much at stake.

Usually local state/provincial conditions, terrain and game populations dictate when, where and what should or shouldn't be baited. Science should normally trump "ethics" and emotion. At least I hope so, or we've lost to the anti's.

first off, I don't consider hunting over bait to be unethical.

My point has always been that they just don't equate. And not just on the simple level that they're different, but on a deeper level in that ambushing an animal using something that is there 365 days a year, is different than ambushing an animal with something that has been placed very recently that is not part of the natural environment.

Again, people don't take a 5 gal pale of water out and and put it 20 yards from the tree they're in, but if they did, that would be the same as putting out food, IMO.

Taking advantage of things like the rut are different in many ways, but the main three ways are that

1) they would be rutting anyways, naturally. To hunt that animal, you're actively chasing the animal on it's terms as opposed to hunting over bait where you're hunting on your terms.

2) There is a specific skill set involved with hunting elk in the rut, if you're talking about calls. Now, I'm not going to say that it doesn't take skill to run a bait site for bears, nor am I saying that it doesn't take a lot of work; I assume even more work than spotting and stalking a bear. But I will never be convinced that baiting elk is more difficult (skill) than chasing and killing elk in the rut using calls. Calling in elk could even be 1000 times more successful than baiting elk and it would still be more difficult.

You could take an eastern hunter and give him a call and point him towards elk in the woods. What's going to happen? Failure. You could put the same guy on a pile of apples in a stand and... He's now got a shot at killing an elk.

3) You have to get out there! Granted, most bear bait sites are way out there, but that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about tons of apples delivered by truck. Even comparing this to bear baiting just does not equate. It's apples and oranges.

You may be able to point to a pond here or a cattle tank there, but for the most elk on this continent, their water is in BFE, is varied, and could be any one of many seeps, creeks, springs, rain puddles, etc.

Baiting also has the very real potential to habituate wild animals to "hand-outs". When used to attract herd animals it can also facilitate disease transmission. So unless it's perceived to be the only realistic way to hunt, the drawbacks outweigh any advantage it gives.

As for baiting I suppose I'll chime in on that as I do it and I live in Washington.

I started putting out trace mineral salt last year. Its a 4 1/2 hour drive round trip to the place I hunt in the Blues. I start in April or May (depending on when the roads are passable) and go up every 3 weeks to re salt and check camera's. Now from what I learned last year, from when I start until about the middle of August I get between 4500-5000 pics and videos.

Slam dunk, right?? not quite.. about the middle of August they seem to taper WAY off the salt and by September (when we can hunt) with just a speck of pressure elk do what they do. They vanish into the deepest darkest hole they can find....

As for apples, I started out trying them but the only one eating them were bears so I gave up on them because its illegal to bait bears here.

Now I did sit my tree stand for 4 straight days and never seen an elk, so off to that deep dark hole I went. Now calling bulls is fun and I do it but its very unproductive in Eastern Washington because if you dont draw a special permit you are chasing spikes or cows.

Not much to debate about there. I will say I think it's a great opportunity for people with physical limitations who would not and could not otherwise have an opportunity to take such an animal and enjoy such great meat. But it's nothing to call a great or challenging experience for most of us. It's not an elk hunt. it's not like people can't and don't kill elk in western Washington without bait. In fact that's how 99% of hunters do it so it is not apples to apples when comparing it to bears in the bush.

Trkytrack.... what's that smell? Man you did it again buddy, burnt the popcorn!

"I absolutely concur idyllwildarcher. None of the water tanks in southern Arizona were man made. The wells and pumping systems were all done during the extinction of the dinosaurs. Nobody knows for sure how the tanks and wells got there."

Thinking about AZ specifically which holds a small fraction of the elk population on this continent, I said,

"...but for the most elk on this continent, their water is in BFE, is varied, and could be any one of many seeps, creeks, springs, rain puddles, etc."

In a prior post, I said this,

"And again, comparing the baiting of elk with the baiting of bears is apples and oranges just like comparing sitting water for elk and sitting water for pronghorn. The majority of the elk on this continent live at elevations or areas with multiple options when it comes to drinking."

So you see, I specifically eluded to AZ tanks because I figured you might bring them up since they're man made. The White River/Routt National forests in CO alone hold more elk then the entire state of AZ, in multiples. I've hunted the White River ntl forest. There's water everywhere. But you continue to argue minor points and ignore my main point, which I again posted in my last post:

"My point has always been that they just don't equate. And not just on the simple level that they're different, but on a deeper level in that ambushing an animal using something that is there 365 days a year, is different than ambushing an animal with something that has been placed very recently that is not part of the natural environment."

Even your paleolithic AZ guzzlers are there 365 days a year and the elk are hitting them year round as a water source, but it's such a minor point because you're talking about 35000 elk in the entire state when I specifically mentioned the bulk of the continent's elk herd, numbering around a million animals, that are not drinking out of guzzlers.

You want to argue about AZ elk drinking from tanks, if elk drink once a day, twice a day... it's all irrelevant.

It is more than safe to say that the vast majority of elk spend a very small part of their day drinking water from natural sources that vary from week to week.

That is worlds different in comparison to a pile of apples in a single field before and during hunting season.

As a steward for wildlife, I would hate to see CWD, Brucillosis or any other disease/ pathogen spread, especially due to my personal actions.

The "that's not hunting" arguing is ages old and benefits no one in the hunting community. Bowhunters have berated their fellow hunters on numerous methods of take and types of equipment used over the years.

If you think "your" way is immune to this argument think again. If you have wheels on your bow or a sight or use a release, folks have argued "that's not hunting". If you use an ATV, if you drive game towards the hunter, if you use radios, these have all been argued "that's not hunting" at some point.

I could sit here and list many many more examples. My point is the hunting community is constantly under attack by others that want to abolish it and effectively does so one small step at a time. We need to support each other in any legal method and stand united.

At the heart of what I'm trying to get across here, is when someone says that baiting is "no different" then sitting water or many other means of hunting, is my own perspective on the very subject of debate here: Coastal Roosevelt Elk.

I called in and killed one. I tromped through the nastiest jungle vegetation up and down near vertical draws, I ambushed trail crossings, I checked out higher elevation water sources, and I finally called in and shot one.

I can't put into words the difficulty of that hunt. Truthfully, I wasn't going to bring it up because I didn't want to appear to be patting myself on the back - I'm sure that's how it'll appear.

But I'll be damned if I'm going to sit by and let anyone insinuate that the subject matter here, driving to a stand and sitting over a pile of apples, has any level of comparison to what I experienced. The only thing those two hunts have in common is the shooting of a Roosevelt Elk. The rest of the hunt has zero comparison. Even ambushing an elk over water or a trail crossing would have been leaps and bounds different just based on how difficult it is to find the elk, get to the elk, find a good place to hunt the elk, and then get the elk out up cliffs with 8 foot ferns on them.

Going after and getting them on their terms is as different a hunt then sitting on apples as apples are to oranges. Even sitting water on public ground would be leaps and bounds more difficult than sitting in a stand over apples.

left to it's own devices and made very legal - you reap what you sow...

"Hi, my name is Jack- and yes I have hunted over a corn pile". While it can be fairly exciting on late season near-starvation hunts watching 10 wary does come in on a string, I for one would rather see it abolished because it's not good at a Macro level but may be fun for some at a micro level.

Fortunately - other than a few does, 95% of my hunts don't involve bait and still have enough spots where I can do it the "old fashion" way.

I also said that I don't think it's unethical.

I said on the other thread that I have no problem with people baiting elk.

My whole point is that baiting is what it is: Baiting. And it is not the same hunt as going out and chasing elk and calling to them or finding and sitting on their natural water. It's a completely different hunt, just as hunting elk coastal Roosevelts is different then hunting your average American Elk.

Of one thing I am certain: Chasing Roosevelts on the coast is a very difficult hunt and to somehow equate it to sitting over apples that you can drive to is disingenuous and betrays true motive, which is to try and justify baiting when it needs no justifying, other than to maybe make someone feel better about themselves for doing it.

DConcrete: "I'd rather shoot one at a bait than launch a Hail Mary shot at 70+ yards."

I applaud you for that. FYI, my Roosie was shot at 21 yards.

Gary@home. Well said, Thank You

Poor wordage on my part, rereading, sounds like I have a chip on my shoulder, but I don't.

What I meant, was not wanting misinformation to just slide, which we also see eye to eye on.

Sorry to hear that yours came with some ground shrinkage though. Maybe it's true that the big ones avoid bait.

But don't search "Bowsite dumbass" you'll get 10 pages of search results! lol

As an expert I thought I might have something to say on the subject. I do not think elk should be baited in the mountains of Washington, Oregon or anywhere else on public land in their natural setting. But on private land a fella should be able to hunt anyway he sees fit as long as it is legal to do so. If a rancher, farmer or Outfitter or just plain land owner has an elk herd on their property destroying it, eating their crops or just giving them a place to live for most of the year. During hunting season you only have a short time to harvest a few animal you would want to make sure you used every means necessary to keep the herd in check and the freezer full or in my case the clients happy. I do realize there are states with wide open spaces that this method is not necessary. But in western Washington and north western Oregon the brush is so thick and dense. It becomes a great tool to have in your arsenal of tactics. As an outfitter of Western Washington for the last 17 years it has become my best weapon. Shot opportunities have become kills instead of deflection or worse. If anybody would like a great tree stand elk hunt with a bow over bait I highly recommend the guided elk hunt at Olympic Mountain Outfitters in western Washington. Mike Vaughn Olympic Mountain Outfitters....Feel free to Email me at [email protected] or.. text or call me 360 470-8708

And hopefully everyone on here will AVOID turning this conversation into the one going on on the other thread.

I started a new thread for a reason.

I have sat water holes for pronghorn, and will again. There is literally ZERO skill involved (other than resisting suicide as you sit there for 14+ hrs during 100 degree days)... And no not all water is natural. Many, many ranches only have stock tanks left as standing water sources by the time season rolls around. These are metal tanks placed by ranchers to keep cattle alive and used by wildlife to stay alive as well. I guess my point is sitting over the only water sources in a desert environment is even more unfair than adding a pile of food to an environment already rich with food. It's ok to be honest.

Again, I don't have a chip on my shoulder. I have zero interest in EVER hunting elk over bait. I'm just real enough to call a spade a spade and not trip over my own ego on the way I hunt being the right way...

Most landowners in the area don't have "crops". Just grass fields or more accurately, yards. In areas where elk and deer hunters employ the use of tree stands, which is everywhere including MT & WY, they do so the same as any eastern or midwestern hunters do, scouting and learning the habits of the animals they are hunting, and putting in the time needed to be successful and.... enjoying their labor of love.

To suggest that baiting has anything to do with lessening the chance of bad shots or "deflections" due to thick cover is hogwash. So is saying that the outfitter is assisting in reducing crop damage when none of his leases are farms, ranches etc. Even if they were, killing a couple elk would not solve or even reduce the damage.

Baiting makes hunting, or killing an animal easier period. It is used as much or moreso to bait in clients with the thought of guaranteed success as it is elk.

So as far as any affects on habitat or damage incurred on private land, there is no point to be made. Many of the properties barely see an elk all year and if they do they are along the hills in the timber well away from the yards.

With regards to different methods of legal hunting: I was talking to Rut Nut about the things we are thankful to see while out hunting. About the fact that we only actually kill a buck one day each year, if lucky enough, and that if we were only there for the kill we most likely would last as hunters for very long. I think most everyone on here has enjoyed other aspects of hunting than the kill. To see a rare animal or to interact with them in anyway. The "almosts" that happen to us. Bulls and gobblers hanging up just out of range. Like Rut Nut I have lots of pictures that are near and dear to me. I have sat in a stand over bait for bears. There were fun moments watching cubs play or seeing how bears go about approaching a bait site. But there were no impressive views or any other things that made it a joy. Much of the time it was like work.

Like I said, to each his own but to try to say a baiter is helping the landowner, saving the habitat, or anything other than trying to kill animals with their efforts is a joke. To say we enjoy the standard ways of hunting is something all of us probably agree on including people who bait. Although, I know 1 or 2 who have never tried it any other way ever. Here are some of my "trophies" By the way... I treed this little kitty, two other kits, and their mother by bawling like a hound with my voice. No dogs. I'll ever forget that day.

Stringunner, I hope you don't feel these posts were to far off track. You mentioned that baiting, more than anything, is just a different hunting preference. I agree, but who would prefer that over this? To each his own. ;-)

Atleast here in Colorado where I hunt. There are water sources all over the place. Sitting on a waterhole will better your chances but the Pronghorn had the option of different waterholes. It's far from unfair in my opinion. But I'm not hunting a place that had only one waterhole.

I see it as just another tactic for being successful for a bow. Much like sitting in a treestand over a trail that a whitetail walks on. That's unfair right? Guys should have to sit on the ground and not on a trail that the deer use often.

In Colorado we can't bait anything. So baiting doesn't appeal to me at all anyways.

I think a benefit of bear baiting is the abilty to decifer a sow with cubs vs a boar. When hunting bears the they way. You might be presented with a quick shot on a bear. And not have time to size it up and be presented with a nice shot. Elk on the other hand are pretty easy to tell what is a female and what is a male...without the use of bait

Elk would be baited easily I think. Just look in te winter at elk eating ranchers hay. It's crazy they flock to it.

I've live in W WA and have bowhunted ELK since 1985. WA regs require that you select E side or W side for an tag so you are locked in if you apply for a E side tag. So. of the 15 years +/- I hunted W Wa I've taken one elk. I've had much better success in E OR, E WA and NW CO. I hunted MT with MulePower one time and saw some ELK along with several wolves.

Thanks for the pic. I heard about Devil's Club from an Alaska Outfitter that bought our gear several years ago. Always wanted to see it up close.

Sorry to see this thread now getting taken over. We have had some very productive posts...

Thank you to all whom have answered the question either directly or indirectly.

I don't really feel like I'm hunting when I'm sitting over a carcass waiting for coyotes....that doesn't stop me from doing it though, and it is still fun....feels more like shooting. Sort of like shooting prairie dogs.....you don't really hunt them....you shoot them.

I couldn't ever see wanting to bait big game animals, but to each their own. I'm glad its illegal here not over ethics big fin brought up some really good points. i guess i dont see the need and it can complicate things

Having said that, if it's legal where you hunt, and you don't have the skills or time or effort, go bait !

And before you ask me about scents, spray, mineral blocks etc., No ,I don't use them.!